This. We got 7 billion people - probably closer to 10 before it peaks, and as a minimum I should have one IP address at home, at work and for my cell phone. So 3*10 billion is 30 billion, IPv4 can offer 4 billion. And that's not counting every other odd thing I might want, like remote-controlled alarm/heating/whatever at my cabin or my car, servers of various kind and maybe IoT will become good for something.

Of course they probably could have just done it much, much simpler by making a dotted quad a dotted quint:

1.2.3.4.5

For compatibility each host under 1.2.3.4.x is granted 256 ports IPv4 ports mapped from x*256 to (x+1)*256-1 to a designated "IPv4 compatibility ports" like say the last ports from 65279 to 65535. So 1.2.3.4.1 can either be fully addressed by quint-capable equipment or 1.2.3.4:256-511 that'll be mapped to 1.2.3.4.1:65279-65535. And 1.2.3.4.2 will have 1.2.3.4:512-767 mapped to 1.2.3.4.2:65279-65535 and so on. You could use the same technique to provide a virtual IPv4 interface for legacy software, it thinks it is listening to 1.2.3.4:256 but it's really listening at 1.2.3.4.1:65279 - and any application it tells to connect to 1.2.3.4:256 would work.

That would have led to a gradual 256-times expansion of the address space without any hard switch-offs. But instead they decided to solve everything and now 19 years after the IPv6 standard we're still only barely in motion.

The very page you link to says:

What's ICU?

Not sure exactly how much Qt functionality you'd lose, but it's an optional dependency.

Or maybe it's okay if systemd fucks up all the servers running RHEL 7. After all, nothing important runs on that. So let's check, is Red Hat Inc. tanking and considering backtracking? Hell no, they're growing strong both in revenue and profits in the year that's passed since. So if a $14 billion dollar company can make systemd work for them, it probably can't be that bad. Or if it's bad, well then rip out the bad parts like write a non-binary log because how hard could it be to take the binary messages, printf and log the text in addition to/instead of a blob? Sometimes it sounds like the only two options is to drink the kool-aid or nuke it from orbit.

Not sure if you're stoned or trolling or dropped out of a time vortex from the 90s, but

1) GUI installers have been the norm for desktop oriented distros for years, mostly through live CDs.
2) For most of Linux history there's been zero credible competitors to X
3) Wayland is mainly driven by ex-X developers
4) Wayland will still need drivers to have accelerated graphics

5) Neither application developers nor users usually see X, you write against for example Qt and the toolkit takes care of talking to X. They might hate X, but they hide its quirks pretty well.

I think those wanna-be generals aren't really the community, but those who want to exploit the community to achieve their pet goals. To steal an expression from 4chan: The FOSS community is not your personal army. The opposite is less intuitive, but it also means the community isn't going to stand still just because your pet needs have been met while many others feel theirs haven't. For example I haven't heard much shit about PulseAudio in recent years, though initially it was rather crappy but it did add features that didn't exist before. Maybe in ten years time we'll feel the same about systemd.

No.

Careful, the same would imply that someone who can manage projects, manpower and deadlines can manage pointers and complex sets of data safely. The most fundamental difference is that working with people is that your subordinates have a brain and will let you know when something is obviously wrong, non-nonsensical or impossible. I don't mean they're geniuses but the computer isn't even toilet trained and will poop all over the floor if it can't find the bathroom. It'll go in an infinite loop or write full the disk or flood the network or trash the database with total obliviousness.

Half my job is figuring out every conceivable way the system can crap out, take bad input, return junk or be exploited because the system won't deal with any situation on its own. Project management is a lot more about resolving the daily issues your team is struggling with right now, not chasing corner cases that might one day happen. And the software solution is often just throwing some kind of error, if you're aware you've almost trivially dealt with it.

Management problems are typically "soft issues" that doesn't have definitive causes or solutions. Like today we talked about a new reporting solution that is behind schedule and how the estimates were set and causes they're off, consequences, remaining uncertainty, mitigation strategies, if it's possible to free up existing resources or add resources without running into the mythical man-month and how we plan to deal with our needs just not today but going forward. You're not chasing a bug in code that you can patch and declare fixed. It's a constant re-balancing of competing priorities.

Sure, as long as you use some GPL code the requirements apply to the work as a whole. But if you write part A using the GPL license, I can write part B using the BSD license. The GPL license is okay with A+B and if someone wants to use part B in a non-GPL project or replace part A with differently licensed code they can. The point was he doesn't have to use the GPL unless he wants to. He can use a far more permissive "I don't care, use it wherever you want" license for his bits.

The way copyright law defines distribution it essentially means transmit, like over radio and TV or down a wire. There's a very limited exception carved out for passing along transitory copies unaltered so each node on the Internet isn't liable for everything passing through just the source and potentially the sink. Moving a copy physically around never invokes copyright, which is why Apple is on the hook and the post office not. And Apple's software storing it on the user device leads to vicarious and contributory liability if they violate the reproduction right, since they're both materially contributing and profiting from it.

This is pretty much straight up copyright law, not the FSFs opinion. I haven't read up on exactly what beef they have with the app store's terms, but Apple's activity very clearly falls under copyright law.

Oh, how /. has fallen when this is modded up. It must be GPL-compatible, it must not be GPL. The FSF keeps a list of compatible licenses though the general theme is "like GPL or freer", like it doesn't have to be a copyleft license. If he doesn't want to introduce any new license headaches he could just use the modified BSD license which is pretty much as minimal as it gets. Whether it resolves his license problems are another matter, the GPL demands the whole project must be compatible and I'd guess that Apple's code is not. So the lawyer is right it doesn't matter, it's probably a violation either way.

Well even if we change the medium there'll still be a desire for professionally made content, no offence to YouTube ads but it's not likely to produce Game of Thrones or The Hobbit any time soon. That you're stuck with what your cable provider gives you is going the way of AOL though, everyone can use Spotify and once the bandwidth is sufficient you can get all your TV from anywhere too. The only reason we don't have streaming BluRay quality is will, better to pretend 5 Mbit is enough for HD. Oddly enough Netflix recommends 25 mbit for UHD, 5x the bandwidth for 4x the pixels, despite the audio track being the same. But the way things are going with fiber eventually that'll be like 128kbps vs 256kbps AAC, it's not significant.

Unfortunately, that's not really how that swings. If you make for example a movie adaptation of a book it might drive book sales, but your use is primarily a replacement for a commercial opportunity to sell the movie rights. Sun/Oracle was selling Java ME licenses, Android was pretty clearly created to avoid those license terms. If we first assume the API is copyrighted, that does not seem like a typical fair use. The purpose is not interoperability with Java, it's to substitute it so the character of use is also against it and clearly they replicate a substantial amount of the API. The only factor that really speaks in favor of fair use is the nature of the work, which is purely descriptive and necessary to achieve the same functional operation.

Part of me want to agree a little bit with Oracle though, clearly designing an API is a creative effort. It's not merely stating a bunch of facts where somebody else designing an API would have to come up with something very, very similar. But the whole purpose of an API is to have a standardized way to interact with it, like being able to copyright where the brake pedal goes so nobody else can put it in the same spot and have it work in the same way. Like, I can't really think of a non-fair way to use an API which is why it shouldn't be copyrighted in the first place.

You forget the next Bill Gates (if he wants to be) after this ruling: Tim Berners-Lee. Any use of the HTTP protocol from 1991 to date is clearly derivative of the HTTP 1.0 protocol and since he owns the copyright which is life+70 he now can sue every website in existence for royalties.

Because his goals and your interests are now aligned.

Broadly speaking, the Gates Foundation wants to improve the world. It doesn't care about making a profit, it just wants to get the most improvement for the money it has available to spend. It can choose freely what kind of energy production to promote, and it is clearly choosing based on a bang-for-the-buck basis.

When Gates was running Microsoft, his goal was to make Microsoft bigger. Microsoft's mission statement of "enabling people and businesses throughout the world to realize their full potential" was actually subordinate to the goal of growing Microsoft, which is why one-Windows-running-on-everything was promoted over, say, clear standards and interoperability for Office files.

But note that the question wasn't about understand mathematics or computer systems design; it was about diplomas or certificates in programming. It's fairly well understood that those are orthogonal quantities. ;-)