I've never had much aptitude for programming. The "programming" (code editing) I do is pretty chunky. I can look at a block of code, go find another example, somewhat understand what THAT block of code is doing and perhaps with a bit of trial and error, come up with the right thing to do. I don't understand the fundamentals. I remember being exposed to programming in earlier years and I just didn't get it. I didn't foresee myself needing it. Maybe if I'd have paid more attention to the preliminary exercises... I don't know, it just seemed pointless because it didn't make sense to me.

So basically, without examples, I'm fucked.

Yes, fair enough. I may be jumping to incorrect conclusions based on the article. "Google refuses to comment". However, IF things are how the article says, it's an evil move of Microsoft proportions. That's similar shit to what they pulled on the PC manufacturers in the 90's (not only IBM)

Google might do that, if they just couldn't get used to the idea of a free software license. They may have meant it to be a private threat (Acer bound by NDA regarding their business dealings with Google?), not counting on the other company to make it public.

Acer should be within their rights, as long as they don't use Google's logos and stuff. From what I understand, Aliyun isn't an exact clone of Android.

Ask Redhat about this... they are good sports about it and don't complain when other distributors use the source rpms (srpms, which are source code packaged up in a convenient layout, with spec files to use Redhat's package building system to compile your own packages. It's practically spoon feeding) from Redhat Enterprise Linux to make an identical distribution. Redhat is charging money for the value of the backing of a big company behind support of the product, knowing you can't take the code back once it's GPL.

Whoosh? (I was hoping you're being sarcastic)

Of course you can "take the source, change it as you see fit and sell it as your own" (your own product, not the source files) as long as you meet the obligations of the license (which would boil down to GPL for most of it). There is no need to italicize the word "sell" either, because free software licenses don't require products based on the source code to be distributed for zero cost.

There is nothing that says you have to meet the obligation of the license right away either, because until you actually distribute your product, you're not even in violation. After such time the bare minimum (assuming GPL) would be to honour written requests to have the source code made available. Even that doesn't have to be for zero cost.

That's an evil move of Microsoft proportions, for Google to threaten Acer like that. It's just like what Microsoft did to IBM over OS/2.

Well, simply close the port if you don't want to upload torrent data. Get pretty much any consumer grade router, turn off "Universal Plug and Play" (or disable "automatic port mapping" or whatever they are calling it in your torrent client) and don't set up port forwarding.

Alternatively, a software firewall could even be configured not to allow the incoming connections.

Most torrent clients allow you to specify a single port to use. Make sure it's not one that is being forwarded to the outside world.

You'll still be able to download (pick torrents with lots of seeders), and you'll pay the same penalties are you are now if there are any "tit for tat" schemes that you are subject to with peers or private torrent trackers. This isn't contributing, but then you aren't right now anyway.

ftp.mozilla.org uses "round robbin" style mirroring. You connect to that host, and it automatically directs you to an ftp server.

That's how I do it, anyway:

230 Login successful.
Remote system type is UNIX.
Using binary mode to transfer files.
ftp> cd /pub/firefox/releases/15.0.1/win32/en-US
250 Directory successfully changed.
ftp> ls
200 PORT command successful. Consider using PASV.
150 Here comes the directory listing.
-rw-r--r-- 1 ftp ftp 17790056 Sep 05 18:41 Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe
-rw-r--r-- 1 ftp ftp 189 Sep 05 18:41 Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe.asc
226 Directory send OK.
ftp> get "Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe"
local: Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe remote: Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe
200 PORT command successful. Consider using PASV.
150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe (17790056 bytes).
226 Transfer complete.
17790056 bytes received in 4.45 secs (3.9e+03 Kbytes/sec)
ftp> bye
221 Goodbye.

Yes they could, and then could just consider the result unofficially, while they look for other evidence. This is the same reason I am opposed to voluntarily submitting a sample. They could retain all of that information, against their word, the law, and our wishes and use it for fishing expeditions.

I would not be bullied into "aiding an investigation" in the sense that I have to prove that it wasn't me. It doesn't work that way, it's up to them to prove that it was me. Since I had nothing to do with it, and wasn't anywhere near it, they would never set out to do that, so why should they need my DNA? I know I didn't do it and I am perfectly capable of telling them to piss off, should they suspect me for some reason.

Refusing to cooperate is NOT obstruction. They can simply move on with their investigation.

Not really a related point, but I recall in the U.S. a case where DNA evidence was used to determine who broke into a child's piggy bank and stole about $20 worth of coin. Way to abuse tax payers' dollars. Thousands of dollars worth of lab work to catch a $20 thief and it was admissible in court because the DNA matched a sample they had on record. "The Law!" is more important than life itself, to those ideological fools in America.

First, read the post I was replying to about Toronto (near where I live) threatening to publish the names of people who didn't cooperate in a similar investigation where people were voluntarily asked to provide DNA.

Second, all of those methods of obtaining DNA are inadmissible in Canada. The police must get a warrant, to get a judge to compel a suspect to provide a DNA sample, only if certain conditions are met. First of all it has to be one of the designated serious offenses that warrant DNA testing for. The police must have DNA evidence from the crime. The police must have other evidence that leads them to believe the accused was party to the offense. They can't just go swab it from an object they think you have handled. That's also inane and subject to error. The DNA at that point is only to be used to match the evidence. Later, after conviction of certain offenses, a judge can order DNA info to be obtained and stored.

I would want my name published, as someone who stood up to that inappropriate request. Once they have your DNA on file, you can't trust them to discard that information.

The thing is, if they take it themselves (e.g. break into people's houses and swab a cup) they can't use that anyway. It was not obtained by lawful means. This means any further evidence they gather based on that, is also unlawful. So they don't do things like that. This is why they formally obtain and store DNA records when someone is convicted of a crime.

They haven't got my fingerprints or my DNA. They can swab their lips when they are finished kissing my ass.

That's "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw#Uses" you clod. Oh wait... it's only a threat. :-)

Or happened on purpose as the case may be. Without evidence one way or another, there's no point to taking a stand on the issue.

Canada has some strange laws that "only Cola soft drinks" can contain added caffeine. There are exceptions it seems, for example Barq's Root Beer has caffeine and of course those foolish energy drinks.

It has prevented us from getting a lot of imported soft drinks on the market. For example, Scotland's "Irn Bru" (nectar of the GODS no less)

I heard some talk of getting that law repealed, to allow importation of beverages but I haven't heard anything more since.

As for making coffee, I'm fairly savage about it. I take a tall cup, put a big heaping table spoon of fine grind coffee beans, then simply pour boiling water and stir for several seconds. Let stand for 5 minutes or so and most all the coffee grounds sink to the bottom and you can drink it. It makes good tasting, strong coffee in my opinion and there is no waste. Certainly better than instant coffee, anyway.

I only drink coffee black, but this method would FAIL when cream and sugar are involved I'd think heheh

... but then, how does anyone get a job? I was already fairly knowledgeable (self taught, online question answering experience in forums and newsgroups, working on a lot of computers in an unofficial capacity etc.) when I went to take courses, to help me think like a Microsoft man. I'm glad I did, I'd have never wrapped my head around Microsoft's idiotic multiple choice questions, at least the way they were in those days, around 1999/2000. There was the world, and then there was the world according to Microsoft. Anyway, apart from that stuff, I could have taught most of the course material myself. In fact I spent most of my time going around the room and helping others instead of getting my own work done. The instructor kicked back and enjoyed the excellent assistance I provided. He bought my fuckin lunch most days lol

What I did not have was job experience in the field. My existing work experience was in industrial maintenance and as a chemist prior to wanting to change careers. I realized it later but that (of course), plus saying I was "MCSE Certified" meant that no company would even look at me. It had to be that, I applied to a lot of places. I was actually a decent technician, a Windows expert, sporting a certification that in itself represented an undesirable mindset. ("Oh sure, fresh out of the Institute, here to tell us how to run our shop"). They had no way of knowing that, because I never got a chance to demonstrate any skills. (I was quite proficient with Linux and had prior Unix experience too). If I'd have NOT said I had the MCSE, then I'd have had nothing to show for wanting a job in IT. Hobbyist experience, and unofficial, unauthorized hands on experience doing Windows NT stuff. (Nothing I could really put on a resume)

I just said fuck it, and went into business for myself. On site services. Very easy to get started, with very little overhead required. All you need are communication services, a PC or two and a laptop, a vehicle and the calls from customers.

I really hate the games you have to play to get a job these days and I'll never go through that shit again. One thing about me, I absolutely refused to lie or exaggerate on a resume or job application. I actually had an "employment counselor" tell me "You HAVE TO lie! Everybody does!" and when I spoke of being held to it, the answer was to bluff and learn quickly on the fly. (I was done talking to that idiot at that point, by the way)

You should not try to put words in people's mouths. Your personal safety is important to me, but I am not responsible for it. You are the one who signed up for the dangerous volunteer work. I never did understand why anyone would do that... it seems a lot to expect of anyone. I wouldn't if I were you and besides... it's BECAUSE people volunteer that communities get away with not paying a fire department. This is not to say I don't appreciate that people volunteer for fire fighting services, quite the contrary. I appreciate it so much that I think they shouldn't do it. It's a job that should pay well for the danger as well as for being "on call" in the cases where it's not practical to have a regular shift.

I don't think I'd like having a backdoor in my networking equipment that would allow police and fire etc. to use my network. If they were to mandate it, I would just add it to the long list of laws that I defy on a daily basis. Sorry, but you'll need to find a better way to conduct emergency communications. This idea will not work very well even without public resistance to it. Moreover, the very circumstances you are facing when there's a loss of communications could make it impossible. (Power outages, infrastructure damage etc.)

I guess I'm going a bit off topic here, but what a thankless job it is, being a volunteer fire fighter, too. I live in Canada, and I know some volunteers and despite the fact that they devote their personal time, sleep, sanity and safety, the bureaucracy they have to put up with from ignorant municipal administrators is ridiculous. Sometimes the entire volunteer fire department resigns in some towns and I don't blame them.

I am talking about moving dedicated web hosting servers where we are either using the DNS at the domain registrar or the hosting company. If you consider that being an "IT task" then I'll leave you to your idiotic buzzwords. As for ISPs and their DNS caching, the stupidity would be to do nothing and let the forum users suffer. What part about caching for days don't you understand?

Moral of the story: The hosts file behaviour will stand, as a defacto standard, and you really don't matter.

Poor choice of wording, you're right. Let's say "The TCP/IP implementation" then. The hosts file is supposed to be honoured... even smart phone OSes do it.