An LED lightbulb, yes. But is that still true of a combination LED/computer/radio? Frankly the whole idea seems to me to be slightly missing the point. Just how much power does this beast draw? I imagine that the LED itself is the smallest part of the load. I think I'll go with a plain, unadorned LED bulb. Geting up to turn on/off the lights is not exactly hard work.
When you're old, providing for your kids and grandkids is motivation! If you don't understand that, then you've obviously never been old, or been close to anyone who was.
Plus, fixed-length is simply the easiest and most fair solution all around. It doesn't put works-for-hire in a separate category, and means that you don't have to sit around guessing when someone's going to die. You know when it was created, so you know when it's going to enter the public domain.
Unless the GIT repository is in your home and not connected to the internet, the NSA can snoop it.
That's assuming they can break the SSH or SSL encryption. Which is possible, I suppose, but hardly a given.
If you're not using SSH or a VPN, then anyone can snoop it. It's about as secure as running a vanilla telnetd.
Yes, and IBM also originally wrote Postfix. Of course, using Postfix with Postgres is easy: http://www.postfix.org/PGSQL_README.html. Or apt-get install postfix-pgsql. I can't address whether than includes support for "hashes and Btrees", since I haven't tried, but seems implausible that it wouldn't. Postfix has been developed as open-source for a long time! OP does seem remarkably confused. But I'm not completely sure whether he's simply blaming the wrong company, or just plain wrong. I suspect the latter, but can't prove it.
Well, considering that AOLserver gives you TCL for free, adding Perl seems like a bit of an impedance mismatch. Aside from that, nothing.
(Note, I only know this because I was the Debian TCL maintainer for several years; which is why I know that AOLServer is A) free software and B) written in TCL. Otherwise, I would have assumed you were joking.)
So authors can't possibly want to provide for their children or grandchildren? Having known many older authors, I assure you that's not true.
If copyright expired at death, what incentive would P.G. Wodehouse or SF Grandmaster Jack Williamson (both of whom continued writing into their late eighties or early nineties) have had?
Which is why I support fixed-length copyright terms, rather than life or life-plus.
Man I love people who offer opinions about language without even checking the most basic references. (Which, in my experience, is about 95% of all self-appointed "grammar nazis").
Collins English Dictionary:
1. (Astronomy) a very small meteoroid that has entered the earth's atmosphere. Such objects have speeds approaching 70 kilometres per second
2. (Astronomy) Also called shooting star or falling star; the bright streak of light appearing in the sky due to the incandescence of such a body heated by friction at its surface
So, you were both right, but insofar as you were trying to suggest that OP was wrong, you were wrong. Heck, his definition was listed first!
I now fully expect you to fall back on the "professional lexicograpers don't know as much about language as my high-school teacher, who is the ultimate arbiter of all matters linguistic!", which is the usual defense of most misguided grammar nazis (a phrase which is very nearly redundant).
Modifications to a GPL-licensed program must be released under terms that allow the modified work as a whole continue to be licensed under the GPL. Any GPL-compatible license makes this possible, including the public domain.
If by "first", you mean, several decades after the highly influential The Weapon Shops of Isher (1951, but based on stories written starting in 1941), then yes. Though that's a funny definition of "first" you've got there.
If someone really wants to, yes, but how likely is that? The problem with the glasses is now it's going to be a trendy thing to randomly film people without them realizing, and all kinds of people are going to find all sorts of embarassing things posted on the internet for the world to see and laugh at.
Chance that someone has gone out and bought a expensive clandestine camera just to follow me around and see if I scratch my balls or try to hit on someone who's out of my league at the local bar: 0.
Chance that some annoying hipster with more money than sense will randomly film me scratching my balls or trying to hit on someone who's out of my league at the local bar. >0 and climbing.
If the Borg is what pops into your head, then I'm guessing you haven't read Snow Crash. Anyone who's read that is going to think "troglodyte"--the annoying, creepy old farts who have wearables so they can make sure that the kids stay off their lawns, and can report any suspicious activity to the proper authorities, along with a full video record.
Basically, the high-tech equivalent of the Curtain Twitcher.
Wolfram Alpha? Seriously, you need an online resource for that?
$ units "45 cm/hour" "furlongs/fortnight"
How is it misdelivered? For years I've used different names for various subscriptions, so I can track who is selling my name, and to whom. If the PO refused to deliver mail just because they didn't recognize the name, I wouldn't have been able to do that. As far as I'm concerned, if it's got my address, it should end up in my mailbox. If it's not one of the names I use, I can always write "not at this address" on it, and send it back, but it was certainly not misdelivered. It went exactly where it was supposed to go.
There are all kinds of reasons why someone might write "return to sender" on something. I've found it far more effective to write "not at this address" on mail that's come to the right address but the wrong person.
If it's got the correct address, then it's not exactly misdelivered, now, is it?
"Return to sender" isn't an informative thing to write on stuff that made it to the right address. What you want to write is "Not at this address". I've found that to be very effective.