"Unless you have a written agreement with Google Fiber permitting you do so, you should not host any type of server using your Google Fiber connection"
(Emphasis by me). This sounds more like a "it would be nice if you don't" to me. Heck, even RFC 2119 agrees:
4. SHOULD NOT This phrase, or the phrase "NOT RECOMMENDED" mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances when the particular behavior is acceptable or even useful, but the full implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed before implementing any behavior described with this label.
linux-2.6$ ln -sv . linux-2.6.30-bfs.orig
`linux-2.6.30-bfs.orig' -> `.'
Same kernel version as mentioned above.
I applied the patch to v2.6.30 from Linus' git tree at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git (commit 07a2039b8eb0af4ff464efd3dfd95de5c02648c6), and it compiled fine. Had to let patch(1) assume "-R" when it wanted to delete non-existant files, though. Worked for me:
linux-2.6$ ln -sv . linux-2.6.30-bfs
linux-2.6$ patch -p0 </tmp/2.6.30-sched-bfs-209.patch
patching file linux-2.6.30-bfs/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt
patching file linux-2.6.30-bfs/fs/pipe.c
patching file linux-2.6.30-bfs/include/linux/init_task.h
patching file linux-2.6.30-bfs/include/linux/sched.h
The next patch would delete the file linux-2.6.30-bfs.orig/kernel/sched.c,
which does not exist! Assume -R? [n] y
11 expanded comments in this thread, and nearly half of them link to evidence of prior art. WTF are these USPTO people doing at work? How about some investigation before granting the patent, or at least a simple Google search?
Sigh. Utterly useless.
PLEASE NOTE: Microsoft Corporation (or based on where you live, one of its affiliates) licenses this supplement to you. You may use it with each validly licensed copy of Microsoft operating system products software (for which this supplement is applicable) (the ÃoesoftwareÃ). You may not use the supplement if you do not have a license for the software.
(Emphasis by me.) Addidionally, if this is GPL, as they say, they can't demand that you have a MS Windows license to use the software. When you've got a copy of it, you're free to use it as much as you want, with or without a MS Windows license.
"Vår daglige Beatles" (Our daily Beatles) was a daily radio program presenting all 212 recordings by The Beatles in chronological order, presented by Bård Ose and Finn Tokvam. Every presentation lasted about five minutes and contained interesting facts about the song -- what the inspiration for the song was, how it was recorded, some trivia about the period it was recorded, and so on. A very well-produced and informative work. The radio show started January 2007, and every Beatles song was played in its full length. It's believed this is the only time Revolution 9 was played in its entirety on Norwegian radio.
The last episode was aired 2007-12-13, and when christmas 2007 arrived, all 212 podcasts were put out for download at nrk.no as a christmas present for all Beatles fans, with the music removed. A real treasure, even though I had this cron job running every day to download each episode. Still, it was nice to get the complete collection.
This January NRK was planning to release every episode with the music. They got a deal with TONO (the Norwegian RIAA) and everything was OK, but it turned out that the agreement with IFPI and FONO only allowed publishing shows aired the last four weeks, and as mentioned, these programs were aired in 2007, so the podcasts had to be pulled.
And the error message also reads: "An E-Mail has been dispatched to our Technical Staff, whom you can also contact if the problem persists."
They're in for a surprise when opening their inbox tomorrow.
10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.