Since when does a discussion on Slashdot require having actual information?
What don't you believe? That SCOTUS made a good decision for once? Or that you missed First Post by that much?
"I am sorry, but I think what you're asking for here is impossible. I don't feel that forking truecrypt would be a good idea, a complete rewrite was something we wanted to do for a while. I believe that starting from scratch wouldn't require much more work than actually learning and understanding all of truecrypts current codebase.
I have no problem with the source code being used as reference."
They could have said something like "No Such Action should be taken with regard to our code and you Can't Implement Anything based on it. You might Feel Better If you rewrite everything from scratch."
I swear when I read about this when it was first posted that they said there were only 3 judges. Now, the best I can find is this from the Reg:
It would be nice to see exactly how many judges and what the actual conditions were. Fooling 1 person is easy, fooling 10 would be much harder...
I hope they don't shut the project down... abruptly and without warning...
I never said they were rare. They do however almost always result in the person looking at their phone to figure out what happened.
From a different point of view... he possibly increased the likelihood of a distracted driving accident from callers looking at their phone muttering "wtf" to see why the call was dropped instead of keeping their eyes on the road.
My daughter has not learned to read and re-read the chapters in her text. Even if they haven't been specifically assigned as a reading assignment they cover the material in class and she is assigned the problems at the end of the chapter. When she gets stuck and asks me for help the first thing I ask is if she tried to look it up in her chapter. Which is typically followed by a no. If I can find the answer to her question in the chapter, I'll have her read it first. Or at least the section that contains the answer. If she's still stuck then I'll try and explain the material a little better. Of course, how I learned things 25 years ago is completely different from what she is being taught so that really just confuses her even more.
I still can't believe they are teaching that Pluto is not a planet! WTF? And don't even get me started about brontosaurus...
I have an app on Google Play specifically targeted at children 0 to 4 years. One time purchase, no ads and no in-app purchases.
I don't blame Google, I blame the developers taking advantage of the situation. Personally I don't like in-app purchases as I feel it exploits the consumer. Draw you in with a "free" game that you can't really do anything with unless you spend money? WTF?
As the GP said, the password thing is a trade off between security and usability. That said, Google could make the password timeout a configurable option.
No one is targeting that anymore!
OT but I agree it's near impossible to make money from niche open source projects but I'd argue it would still make a good resume item. Anything you've done that you are proud of shows passion, dedication, commitment and says a lot about you as a candidate regardless of how relevant it is to the position.
Actually, the GPL focuses on neither the developer nor the user but only on the software itself. You are free to use the software so long as the software remains free.
My point was that free software has never had any kind of restriction on the "use" of the software. The licenses grant permission for modification/distribution and the terms that apply. The license provides what didn't exist before, forbid and prohibit takes things away.
Currently it's perfectly fine for me to use GCC to build weapon systems or use LAMP to put up a pro-software patents website if I so choose. It's also fine to incorporate GPL code into a new P2P software geared toward distribution of anti- propaganda so long as the sources are available. (Or any number of uses that may be controversial or objectionable in certain groups)
When you start adding arbitrary prohibitions left to the discretion of the individual developers you lose all freedom in a nightmare of restrictions.
e.g. I can use this library in my code as long as I don't eat meat. But now, my code can also only be used by vegetarians. But then to use this other library I have to also hate gays.
I've seen software with restrictions on military applications or use in government organizations. But I don't think they could be considered free.