|
|
This sounds more like a cop-out for Toyota's design practices than anything. If it's not reliable enough for the road, then don't sell it! (safety laws and all).
What's so wrong with simple and effective that good design philosophy gets thrown out in favor of industry buzzwords?
I was referring to the 24+ hour flight.
I should have clarified, thank you.
This craft is also capable of bombing missions, according to the Military Channel's own documentaries on experimental craft. It DOES have a bomb bay and missile mounts.
The same documentary also said that this craft is capable of completely autonomous aircraft carrier landings, and can even do so in the dark. (a milestone feat in itself, due many factors)
It's also capable of 24+ hour flight, which is awesome for scouting missions waiting for a mobile target, and is capable of mid-air refueling. (this is a living pilot no-no, and potentially keeps the craft up as long as it needs to be).
Eventually, this will be flying more than our own pilots will be, due to the fact that pilots cannot be mass-produced. Eventually, we WILL be putting arms on them, even if only because there might not be a good enough alternative.
Also, rumors about similar tanks are in the works... that are so overengineered that they tried to break it and couldn't (experimental model).
RH didn't give any go ahead, it was the PackageKit upstream that did it without any communication.
Also:
NO documentation about this 'feature'.
Terrible configuration system.
Also, the entire mailing list had to do their own homework about this policy.
Reading the thread itself:
the configuration is difficult to change and not in a traditional location, and even then, most opt for a dirty 'patch' designed to turn PK authentication into a blacklist, instead of getting it to work right.
Uninstalling PK is also a no-go, since it breaks packages.
A regular RH user can:
crash the system by filling up / (root installation of packages, so no 5% wall)
install packages with known security holes
install packages that are automatically enabled (PulseAudio defaults on, as do a few others, and I recall a PulseAudio security hole being exploited recently)
install packages from only enabled repositories (the main one in specific is default)
All in all, this is making RH a lot less secure by default than it should be. I'll shy away from RH this time around, tyvm.
As an alternative to Office, use OpenOffice.
However, it _must_ be pointed out: you'd be making a lot of changes. Some people (especially management) see that as rocking the boat when it's 'going along just fine'.
The best thing to do (from my point of view): Educate your boss, keep a diary of what you're trying to do to be ethical, and do your best to get out of a sticky situation before it gets worse.
Once you're out, of course, you can drop the bomb.
It's not unreasonable to ask for a way to recoup your development/porting costs.
It's also not unreasonable to try to abide by the wishes of the development team.
I'm guessing that the original development team already have stable jobs -- do you? is your freelancing consistent? I'd venture "not completely"
I'm also guessing that this individual developer feels that the only business model for Linux is to make free software, and screw any bottom-line business model.
This specific developer in question sounds like he got burnt by focusing on the development of xpilot at the sacrifice of his finances. While I admire his support of the community to such lengths, it's not fair to think that everyone should make the same mistakes he made.
You can do a multitude of things. The single BIGGEST thing you can do for this project is bring this back into the public eye, which you're doing now. A microtransaction of a few dollars isn't going to break anyone's bank (compare free Linux to commercial UNIX, and it's a very clear distinction). I feel that you're on the right track myself.
DO keep the source code available though. You're looking at this as under a VENDOR paradigm.
There's how many Evil Scientists bent on destroying the world around?
Most people just want money; money that keeps coming.
Augmented humanity vs unaugmented humanity will be a big question of the future.
The way I see it, I'd go along the lines of nonsurgical augmentation (my personal transcriber for the book I'm writing? sure!). It's the sanest balance in my opinion. I can still go outside, hike the mountain, and escape from the Matrix.
I'm a big believer in balanced lifestyle, and whether this means including machines in the decision-making process or saying that I need my space away from them, it's a practical and meaningful way to live.
When a machine can meditate side-by-side with me, I'll consider them a suitable part of all aspects of humanity.
Mieux vaut tard que jamais!