Next year it would be very interesting to see the "New code defect density" as a separate metric - currently it is "all code defect density" which may not reflect if Open Source is *producing* better code. The report shows that the collection of *existing* code is getting better each year.
This is exactly what I would expect. Odds are that open source and closed source software start out with similar defect densities. The difference is that open source software, over time, is available for more people to inspect and find bugs that weren't found by the original cast of developers.
After reading the article, it sounds like they have a good theory about what happened during the Big Bang, but I didn't see anything in the article that offered proof that something came from nothing.
As mentioned in a different reply, I see non-continuous movement: slider at the left side; slider in the middle; slider at the right side. Three images, replaced in succession, as I said.
Only a lawyer could look at this video and state that Apple's slide-to-unlock is an entirely new invention worthy of tens of millions of dollars in licensing fees just because their animation has a few more frames.
"Filling out a text field with spaces" isn't something that usually gets tested.
Which is why peer reviews of code changes are conducted at many places these days.
In the past, Virtual Reality did not work because the helmets were too heavy, the graphics were too demanding, the screen resolutions and refresh rates were too low, and the motion sensors were too slow. All of these issues combined to create a horrible user experience. But due to many advances made in the past couple of decades, graphics processing is much faster, screen resolutions and refresh rates are much higher, screens weigh much less, motion capture is much faster, and all of these technologies are becoming drastically cheaper. This means that Virtual Reality is quickly approaching a point where it will finally be feasible to provide the proper experience it has always attempted.
With that said, there are still a lot of tasks required to get all of the technologies integrated with each other to provide a smooth user experience, so I don't think that 2014 will be the year of Virtual Reality. But I would be surprised if there wasn't a solid product available by 2016.
Remember how many people tried to tell you Network Neutrality was the road to a heavily regulated internet... Well here you go. If you regulate any aspect, eventually all aspects will fall under a web of regulations.
WTF are you talking about? Level 3 is complaining because they are now being extorted by ISPs who are trying to double-dip and charge them hefty fees for peering agreements. This was not a problem when net neutrality regulations were in place, but after Verizon won their case over net neutrality, it took Comcast only five weeks to go on a rampage and start extorting fees from other providers. So this is exactly what you get when you DON'T have net neutrality and you DON'T have regulation.
It's great for companies like Level 3
It's not great for companies like Level 3 because they are the ones being extorted. The current lack of regulation is great for companies like Comcast who are threatening to throttle connections of their own users if content providers don't pay Comcast an extortion fee. Again, it only took five weeks of the regulations being removed before Comcast started pulling this shit. It may be time for you to admit that moderate and sensible regulation is not a bad thing.
The Library's collections remain in the library. If you wanted to go there, manually duplicate millions of lines of decades-old code, and then redistribute it, that'd be your only option.
At least that provides some option. And if someone did that for code that entered the public domain, they would be free to disseminate it to anyone who wished to host it online.
A return to registration requirements (prohibited under the 1886 Berne Convention) would not solve the issue you seem to have a problem with, which is the refusal of copyright holders to make articles generally available to the public during the copyright term.
It doesn't have to be during the term of the copyright. But after the copyright expires and the work is supposed to enter the public domain, it would be nice to know that there will be a copy available somewhere. Part of the social contract in offering patents and copyrights to creators is that the public will be free to copy those works and the knowledge and culture will persist. Thanks to neverending extensions of copyright terms, it will likely be incredibly hard to get a copy of a work by the time it enters public domain.
but if it's something you can read, then it's something copyrighted
I thought that there were exemptions to things that can be copyrighted such as recipes. Is that true?
You're already talking to one.
And I appreciate your input and the possibility to learn about an important facet of modern society. While I have your attention, can you confirm that source code is in fact covered under trade secret AND copyright law or only one of those? Thanks.