|
|
Women already in Engineering are
They are only one kind. You are excluding people you THINK would not be interested out of hand; why?
There are programmers who like good clothes. Why can't the same be true of women? Here's an amazing thought; perhaps a person can have multiple interests!
The point is, women who are highly interested in being fashion consumers are unlikely, IMO, to be interested in getting involved in the nitty-gritty details of technology
But my point is this line of thinking is at best barbaric, and totally wrong! It's exactly that kind of thinking that is keeping so many women out of engineering because everyone is constantly saying "oh you are interested in X, therefore you cannot possibly be a good programmer of electrical engineer".
I know good male programmers who have good fashion sense and also like good clothes. So why the hell should that not the be the case for some women too?
For whatever reason women are simply less inclined to even try STEM areas of work. So lets not go around building fucking walls to keep even more out than naturally already discard the thought out of hand even though they would enjoy it.
Again, you CANNOT get the size of a group to increase be being highly selective and exclusionary!
If you want to make STEM careers attractive to a larger set of the population, the answer is simple: increase the pay
WHAT THE FUCK. The pay (and job stability) is *already* extremely compelling and just about any STEM field. That's OBVIOUSLY not any kind of solution.
But now people on Slashdot, for some odd reason, want to bring more uninterested people into this career field?
NO you idiot. We want to bring people into STEM that have a natural love of it (and those are the only people that would stay anyway, you cannot force anyone into STEM which is why programs to herd women into STEM en-masse are stupid). But utter morons like yourself are driving them off before they can find out they do in fact like STEM sorts of work, and that means many females are in fact doing something they like far less than they would like working in STEM related fields.
Finally, if this is such a great idea, why don't we use a variation of it to bring more men into STEM careers?
We do, there are tons of things everywhere that make STEM seem interesting to boys. In fact that is a problem in itself though, in that there probably are a significant number of men that also would be happy in STEM that do not pursue it.
It would be so very difficult for someone to write a little program that, when stripping the DRM, randomized a couple of pieces of punctuation to break the hash that the vendor is storing along with the sales record of the individual book.
In which case they just resort to diff, to remove your hacks and restore the hash.
If they own the copyright, they are free to relicense a piece of data
Sorry to be pedantic, but replace "a piece of data" with "a work of authorship". If there isn't the creative work of a human being involved, it's not copyrightable. And then we get to this:
17 CFR 102(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.
And that means that even when the hand of man is involved, a lot of things are still not copyrightable.
This is why you shouldn't work on free software that requires you to hand over your copyright. This includes GNU software as well.
Even where code remains GPL, you have to be a bit careful about selling code. A case in point was Michael Sweet's selling the source for CUPS to Apple. Sure it's still GPL, but the exceptions to link against Apple software have (in some cases) set the clock back for users of Linux and other Unices.
I had always thought CUPS stood for Common Unix Printing System. I was wrong. Apparently it doesn't stand for anything any more.
There was a time when if any printer you bought worked from a Mac, you would be able to use it on any other Unix box, and vice versa. I found out the hard way a few years back when I bought a Fuji/Xerox laser printer that that assumption is no longer the case. After fruitless searches through forums, I ended up having to manually edit the PPD file to get the damn thing working.
Let's look at what Oracle is doing. I'll start the list of moves that appear to be intended to alienate the community around the very software they're promoting and cause the Open Source community to create viable forks that end up absconding with the product and its market. You guys contribute additional examples...
IBM isn't known for dumb moves, but partnering with Oracle on this sure is one.
Bruce
Wouldn't they need the approval of everyone who contributed to the GPL'd version in order to do this?
Dontcha mean FirstPostgre?
I haven't seen a lot of control over buffering levels etc. If it stopped due to insufficient bandwidth, then it would be nice to pause, set it to buffer ahead up to say 20 minutes, take a restroom or snack break, and then come back with more of the movie in the buffer to reduce chance of flow stoppage.
Has this changed?
They shouldn't ask. They should just do it.
Heck, I'm no programmer at all (more a PHB), but I could fake my way through explaining both of those.
Remember this list 15 years ago, when they called it ECHELON instead of PRISM...
Given its constituency, the only thing I expect to be "open" about [the Open Software Foundation] is its mouth. -- John Gilmore