From what I have read, a supernova occuring within approximately 60 light years of us would be bad news. Obviously the closer it gets the worse for the Earth, but the environmental effects diminish to negligable levels after 60.

The bummer is that we wouldn't know until it hit us.

I pointed it out because it shows one example in law where removing identification numbers that might hide a crime is a criminal activity in and of itself. Other such examples can be found in FAA regulations, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and construction.

You forgot mattresses.

Yet the 1994 Rwandan genocide was a massive murder of hundreds of thousands. Sure, it made for a lot of news, yet the reaction in the Western world was hardly as vocal as was the tragedy of 9/11 or even perhaps as much as the Oklahoma bombing.

The reason that 9/11 was such a big deal to Americans is because it happened to them and not someone else.

Once the rights have been granted to copy, distribute and modify the program any attempt to revoke those rights is imposing further restrictions, which as the quoted section says is forbidden.

Except that the licence is a contract from the copyright holder to the licencee. The copyright holder has the right to change the terms of the licence, or add new licences at any time. It may be possible for Oracle, as the new owner of the MySQL copyright, to revoke the GPL licence.

And who's going to stop them?

Since the FSF doesn't own the copyright, it might not be granted the right to sue Oracle for a breach of the licence. Besides who'd want to take a behemoth like Oracle on in court anyway. It would be like Lionel Hutz standing up against Burn's cadre of high priced on-retainer attorneys. At the very least it would drag on for years while Oracle systematically destroys MySQL. Even if the FSF won, there'd be nothing left.

Browsing the web with just one app is fine, unless you (want to) use Googles Chrome browser. Each tab that Chrome opens is a seperate process and would run afoul of this limitation pretty quickly.

This just looks like a money grab to me. A user will be quickly motivated to upgrade. What's the bet the initial price plus upgrade price will be more than just buying the more capable version in the first place?

Another thought. Official MS software like Office probably won't count towards the app limit. Want cheap capability? Only use official Microsoft software.

You're right. IT doesn't care about a users wasted time until the user starts booking that time to an IT chargecode.

Some of the developers at one company I worked for were getting so pissed off at the amount of time that they were wasting against IT procedures that they started tracking exactly how much time each day they were losing and charged it to IT. That ended up causing quite a stir, and although the developers ended up being told to desist by management, it did get some balls rolling on improvements.

Why begrudge someone a fair price for their hard work?

You're only in it for yourself.

Well of course he is. He's not making games that he doesn't like playing. He's not giving them away because he doesn't care about the power bill and the mortgage. He's doing something that he likes doing and trying to scrape a buck or two together at the same time. Good luck to him to be doing something he loves. Why begrudge him a decent income?

With that high and mighty attitude of yours, I suspect you are in full time charity work and being paid the minimum possible, turning down gifts that could oh so help the poor children of the world?

Perhaps, if that's not the case, then whatever you're doing for a crust you're doing for yourself.