Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Public road is not for joy riding... (Score 1) 553

by rdnetto (#48617349) Attached to: Economists Say Newest AI Technology Destroys More Jobs Than It Creates

There's a level in risk in life that most people are willing to accept in order to live life the way they want. Just because some people are happy wrapped up on cotton wool and kept away from any possible harm doesn't mean that sort of life should be inflicted on the entire population.

Society as a whole is what decides where on the freedom-safety spectrum it lies. Given that we already have speed limits, it's not unlikely that limits on manual driving may be put in place eventually.

Comment: Re:Piss poor open source (Score 1) 36

by rdnetto (#48595919) Attached to: OpenMotics Offers Open Source (and Open Hardware) Home Automation

For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable.

The wording of the GPL is quite clear - it only requires the Makefiles to be included, and even adds an exception for the compiler when included with the OS as a runtime dependency. It doesn't say anything about the requirement to include the compiler.

Keep in mind that when the GPL was first written, GCC was only 2 years old, and proprietary compilers were unavoidable in many areas. Even today, proprietary compilers are still unavoidable for certain applications. e.g. FPGAs. To require the publishers of open source programs to cover the cost of licensing the compiler for all their users would have been insane, and significantly limited the spread of open source software.

The obvious intent of the GPL is for you to get a code in a way that allows you to work with it and get results.

The intention of the GPLv2, to paraphrase Linus Torvalds, is that in exchange for the ability to modify the software to suit yourself, the changes you make can be merged back into the upstream. The GPLv3 places a greater focus on the ability of the user to generate a useful executable, but the v2 was chosen (possibly intentionally) for this instead. Whatever your opinion on v3, their choice of v2 speaks for itself.

Comment: Re:Keurig's only reason is profit. (Score 1) 269

by rdnetto (#48588177) Attached to: Keurig 2.0 Genuine K-Cup Spoofing Vulnerability

The solution is the same as for the razor blade model - stick with products which accept generic consumables. e.g. coffee grinders that take beans, or double edged razors (all the blades have the same shape and are intercompatible). The difference in cost is usually about an order of magnitude. e.g. DE razor blades are ~30c each.

Comment: Re:Have Both (Score 1) 563

by rdnetto (#48585331) Attached to: The Case For Flipping Your Monitor From Landscape to Portrait

I've rotated my screen 360 degrees :-)

Does it improve the picture now that you have twisted cables?

Make sure you rotate by -360 degress in the Southern Hemisphere or the electrons will get tangled.

Do that and they'll disappear into a singularity (mathematical, not physical). What you really need is to use quaternions, like -ijk.

Comment: Re:This is by design (Score 1) 415

by rdnetto (#48581337) Attached to: Microsoft's New Windows Monetization Methods Could Mean 'Subscriptions'

This feels like a troll, but I'll respond anyway.

There is no standard and free audio API on Linux.

Wrong on both accounts. Both ALSA and Pulseaudio are available on pretty much every Linux distro. Pulseaudio is generally regarded as the standard these days, but you can target ALSA if you really care about supporting the minority of Arch and Gentoo users without Pulseaudio.

Both of these are free (both libre and gratis), with the GPL family of licenses being the FSF's gold standard.

As for your claim about the LGPL, I am not aware of any evidence that supports your interpretation. In fact, the existence of Linux ports for numerous AAA games indicates that many large companies do not consider the risk significant. Furthermore, courts are generally quite conservative, and prefer to avoid disrupting existing arrangements where possible. The idea that the LGPL was explicitly designed to enable the use of libraries by non-GPL'd programs, combined with the number of companies relying on it, means that regardless of ambiguities in the actual wording, the chances of the LGPL being turned into a regular GPL are slim to none.

Comment: Re:Make drivers open (Score 1) 51

by rdnetto (#48541359) Attached to: Samsung's Open Source Group Is Growing, Hiring Developers

Open source hardware isn't viable, though, at least not in its own right. You need to make profit somewhere, and it's usually one of software, hardware, or support. The SoC manufacturers sell hardware - if they just gave it away by open sourcing it, they'd lose their biggest source of revenue. Pretty much all the open source hardware in existence is either bought by a small segment of zealots (e.g. any of the attempts at a completely FOSS tablet), or is sold as a loss leader (e.g. Sparkfun open sources the designs for their breakout boards, because they also sells the parts for them).

Comment: Weird Basis (Score 1) 127

by rdnetto (#48472475) Attached to: Attack of the One-Letter Programming Languages

The premise of the article is just weird - an article about programming languages with single letter names makes about as much sense as an article about operating systems with blue logos. That D is compared to C instead of C++ further demonstrates the author's cluelessness. (Many D programmers regard D as an improved, non-backward compatible version of C++.)

Comment: Re:I'd be happy if 4:3 came back! (Score 1) 330

by rdnetto (#48458237) Attached to: Eizo Debuts Monitor With 1:1 Aspect Ratio

You're conflating aspect ratio and resolution. If the 16:9 monitor is 1600x900, then a 4:3 with equivalent vertical resolution would be 1600x1200.

I use 2x 1280x1024 on my desktop, and 1x 1920x1080 on my laptop. I agree that 16:9 is almost like having dual screens, but it's just not as good. If you're going to use dual screens anyway, then it makes more sense to go with 4:3 and have one window per screen.

A semi-related issue is that Linux HiDPI support isn't quite there yet (KDE5 and Wayland aren't mainstream yet), so there's little reason to upgrade until then.

The idle man does not know what it is to enjoy rest.

Working...