Yes, it's nonsense, because the theoretical creation of a derivative work at run time due to dynamic linking (e.g. shared libraries and kernel modules link at run time) has never been tested in court. Furthermore, the derivative work is not being distributed (I generally programs are not distributed while they are running).
OK, I see it claimed often that linking into a GPL'ed code makes a derivative work. First, I will note that little claim has never been tested in court and I suspect it would not stand. Secondly, APIs and header files are generally not copyrightable. So, I think there is not legal route to call run time linking a derivative work in the legal frame work of US copyright law.
However, let's assume that is wrong, then if it is not a derivative work until it is linked, then the end user is doing the linking and is not distributing "derivative work". So, even in the unlikely case that linking creates a derivative work, the GPL is still not violated because that derivative work is not being distributed.
I suppose I should point out that the US does not implement a purely capitalist economy. There are regulation on many parts of the economy, including how and when labor can organize.
I was replying to the comments about China, not the US. I was responding to the claim that China was a shinning example of capitalism, which I think is a hard claim to support.
I wonder why in many examples of capitalism, all markets are free except labor. If a nation is truly based on capitalist ideas, why not have a market for labor. In this case workers could band together and sell their labor to the highest bidder. For some reason, this is never considered a part of capitalism, which I believe is just a convenient inconsistency by the rich.
Because China does not have a free labor market, it is not a shining example of capitalism. It is a shining example of the powerful taking advantage, which happens everywhere.
No doubt, you have "Clear history when Firefox closes" checked on the options Privacy tab.
Though, I agree with what you have said, I think it might be helpful to look at the definition of justice and just.
Merriam Webster:
Justice (noun)
1 a : the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments
b : judge
c : the administration of law; especially : the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity
2 a : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action (2) : conformity to this principle or ideal : righteousness
c : the quality of conforming to law
3: conformity to truth, fact, or reason : correctness
and maybe the word just also.
just (adjective)
1 a : having a basis in or conforming to fact or reason : reasonable
b archaic : faithful to an original
c : conforming to a standard of correctness : proper
2 a (1) : acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good : righteous (2) : being what is merited : deserved
b : legally correct : lawful
I believe the meaning usually assigned to "Social Justice" is related to definition 1a of Justice and 2a (1) of the Just (or possibly 1a). People are making a moral judgement (or stating what they think is reasonable), which may or may not be tied to any legal precept.
So, the gp may, in fact, be using "Social Justice" is a consistent way that happens to match his morals or reason.
Our government is happy to surveille their own citizens (even with drones and cameras everywhere). So, essentially we can do it, but nobody else should!
I suppose I was confused by your sarcasm and the fact that there is not agreed upon style guide for American writers.
I see you think you know latin and thus assume you under stand "de facto". Just in case, you are confused on this point, let's see what Merriam-Webster says:
1. de facto
adv \di-fak-()t, d-, d-\
Definition of DE FACTO
1: in reality : actually
2. de facto
adj
Definition of DE FACTO
1: actual; especially : being such in effect though not formally recognized
2: exercising power as if legally constituted
3: resulting from economic or social factors rather than from laws or actions of the state
His usage looks good to me.
One must wonder what the MW above the left axis on the chart could possibly mean. Hmmmm
Most of Germany's power is produced by fossil fuel.
http://www.indexmundi.com/germany/electricity_production_by_source.html
Did you look at the chart on your reference, they are producing 9 megawatts during the peek of the day. A small drop in the bucket.
If you have a working set that is larger than 2GB, then the Duron may, in fact, do better on this hypothetical bench mark. Because, if your working set is larger than 2GB, then the i7 machine will be swapping to disk and if the disk is a HDD, then the access time is orders of magnitude slower than the RAM access on the Duron.
Me either
You surely did not read the paper that was submitted. It does not contain any advanced math. It contains a reference to the relevant regulations. It uses simple math, data from the city, and simple street diagrams/pictures to make an argument for the installation of traffic lights. It does not claim to be any sort of engineering.
You also fail to understand what the words "practice" and "offer to practice" mean in the context. So, the Merriam-Webster dictionary provides us with some help. Definition 1.c : to be professionally engaged in .
I think it is clear that he did not claim to be and engineer, did not practice engineering in any professional manner, and thus the law does not apply.
If this law would apply, that would mean any well thought out and researched petition of the government would be unlawful, if done by anyone accept a qualified engineer.
Old programmers never die, they just hit account block limit.
