Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Hmmmm (Score 1) 240

Oh, and the Galactic Empire are the good guys. Suck it!

It's not that the Galactic Empire is the good guys. It's that the rebels are causing more damage than their cause is worth.

Even if their claim to be guerilla fighters trying to overthrow a corrupt and unconstitutional government, restoring the representative senate is accurate, the amount of carnage done puts them well into the terrorist category.

Yes, the popular support for the G.E. is low. But that doesn't mean support for the rebellion is high among college educated people, and if you look at the people that do support it, what do you see? Bearded outcasts on desert planets with strange religious beliefs?

Comment Re:GPL Problem (Score 1) 145

Oh, I thought Apple had made it "All server versions from now on can be vitualized".

Only the 10.6.8? Not 10.7.5?

Well, at least you can have a virtual Rosetta :-).

===

As for discarded Enterprise-level stuff: Microsoft, for all it's ... behavior, manages to keep things in Windows long past any reasonable expiration date, because there are things out there that depend on it.

Linux? What part of the OS (and we're talking about distributions at this point) contains enterprise-level tools that cannot be installed on a current system?

===

EOF: EOF used to be a standard part of the operating system. Then, it was bundled as part of Web Objects, again part of the operating system. Then it was moved to Java, and Java was a 'first-class language'. Then the toll-free bridge died, Java became less than first class, and EOF/WO became a pure java library. Then it just ... died.

Later, there came out a Core Data system, which had most of EOF for non-database apps. But ... well, apparently there was no way to actually implement persistent storage, despite Apple providing an API that should have permitted it, but after a couple of years, several developers said it was demonstrably not possible in a real-world application. It isn't clear that Apple ever provided a sample, working, tested usage of that API.

Comment Re:GPL Problem (Score 1) 145

*Warning*

While there is nothing wrong with using Apple's systems to work on, develop, and deploy your systems, *do not use any Apple technology in your system*.

Apple is full of discarded/dead enterprise-level technologies. Just look at Web Objects/EOF. Now consider what came before it. Now consider that you cannot even run those older OS's/systems inside virtual machines -- I think 10.7 was the first one that you could legally license for use in a virtual machine, and every Apple-specific technology was dead by then.

Now, to address the parent:

BTW, this is why Apple never uses the GPL to license it's own F/OSS Projects (of which they have several).

No, it is because of the changes in GPL 3.

In GPL 2, it was possible to have full access to the source code, and the ability to compile it, but be unable to install the new version on the device. This was called "tivoing", after it was discovered that Tivo did this -- the software to be installed had to be signed and approved by the firmware in the box. Since it was not possible to replace the system and update the software, this was technically compliant, but against the spirit of the license.

GPL3 made changes for two major reasons: one, some of the terms used in 2 had legal definitions in some jurisdictions that did not match the intent of the Gnu team (solution: new terms with precise definitions in the license), and two: *making sure that you can actually change the software on a device if that device is using GPL software*. This is the part that Apple, and others, cannot stand.

Comment Re:GPL Problem (Score 1) 145

... It was brought to our attention that Linux is copyrighted under something called the GPL, or the Gnu Protective License. Part of this license states that any changes to the kernel are to be made freely available. Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would now be available at no cost to our competitors.

Furthermore, after reviewing this GPL our lawyers advised us that any products compiled with GPL'ed tools - such as gcc - would also have to its source code released. This was simply unacceptable.

Your Lawyer got one thing right. Yes, if you are using the work done by Torvalds and many, many other people, you are doing so on the condition that your improvements are shared with them, just as their work and improvements are shared with you.

It is a "common work" system. Everyone works together to make the whole thing a little better. If you really improved Linux? Then lots of people around the world -- not just your competitors, but everyone who uses Linux -- will benefit from this.

That's not a "Gnu Protective License", that's a "Gnu Public License".

Now, not only did you get the title wrong, but the whole "it was compiled by gcc, therefore must be made public" is false. If your lawyer told you that, then your lawyer is an idiot.

It simply is not true.

Your improvements to Linux must be shared with everyone else; that's the condition of a no-cost, relatively bug-free, operating system with access to the source.

Your personal programs, even if compiled with Linux tools, are your personal programs.

Recently however, a top online investment firm asked us to do some work using Linux. ... Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would now be available at no cost to our competitors.

YES! That is exactly it.

You were asked by this firm to use Linux.
You did so.
Now your improvements benefit both this firm *and the rest of the world*.

Bill your client for the work that includes helping others. That is the nature of Linux.

Comment The real problem is bad/unwanted ads. (Score 1) 426

A long time ago, I used gmail. GMail had a wonderful little bar: combination of RSS reader (80% of the time) and text one-line ad (20% of the time). That got my eyeball, because the 80% useful rate (this was back when I could use a customized RSS feed/selection).

Later, it dropped to 20%; then it went to non-customizable, one size fits all. Then 0% news, all ads.

Around that time, I installed a webmail blocker.

Well, it happened -- system reinstall, webmail blocker didn't work, wasn't available for download. But there was a way at the time to tell Google that I didn't want to see a given ad.

Now, I won't say it was easy to do. But it was doable.

After something like 150 blocked ads, guess what happened? I saw stuff I actually wanted to see.

Yea, how about that? Some targeted combinations of keywords and what I was reading actually matched my interests. But they were way, way down on the list of how much they were willing to pay google, so they were not shown until I blocked all of the big money spenders.

Sadly, Google has made it really hard again to block ads, or at least they did the last time I used Gmail. Now, gmail is nothing more than another imap source for me.

Lesson:

** Make it easy for people to say "I don't want to see an ad for ". Make it easy for people to see what other stuff is being pushed by the cheaper people.

Chances are, it's more likely to be of interest.
It might be much more personal / close to home.

In general, the smaller the target audience, the more likely it is to be what you want, and the more likely to be cheap. But it will be a clicked cheap link.

Comment Re:Next up for debunking (Score 1) 330

1. Trump doesn't want to win the election for some unknown reason: wouldn't like the (pressure of the) job, thinks the White House is a shitty place to live, etc.

I have believed this to be true ever since his "I could kill someone and my ratings would go up" line. I think he is totally befuddled by just how ... "easy to sway" (sorry, I don't have a better word that isn't an insult) the American People turn out to be. It's like he is getting a lesson in just how far he can go -- farther than he ever thought possible, so far that it scares and surprises him.

Comment Re:Next up for debunking (Score 1) 330

... US law does currently allow the president by proclamation to deny any group entry into the US the president believes would be detrimental to the United States. ... The Muslim ban would be both Constitutional and legal under US as its generally understood today.

Actually, while it might be *legal* (compliant with the law), it would permit the law to be challenged for constitutional reasons. Specifically, even if the President does have the right to prohibit some people, it may not do so for religious beliefs.

That would make the "Muslim ban" legal and unconstitutional. The courts would be right to overturn it on the grounds of denying freedom of religion.

Comment Re:I wish they could do that for news... (Score 1) 330

Should be boolean

Boolean has_story_been_fact_checked(Object story) {
# Determines if a story has been fact checked before posting
return false;
}

Now, seriously: Taking a reference to story? Taking a reference means that you have the ability to modify the incoming. If you are going to take a reference for efficiency, then at least add "const" to declare that you are not going to alter the news story ...

Ohh, right -- your method is superior, mine doesn't allow the facts to be altered.

Comment Re:I believe it (Score 1) 618

Is the rescue mission a "We will preach Christianity, and you have to accept it" deal?

Is the food bank a "We provide the food you want", or "We know what's best for you, and we'll tell you what you get" thing?

Have you tried to use the food bank to see how it behaves?

The salvation army here is the local food bank. It is "We have a big box of shelf-stable food that you can take with", with lots of carb-heavy food. Worthless for me. And if you want stuff that isn't in the box, it's "we tell you what's good for you". From people with at best a 35 year old nutrition belief.

That's NOT an error. A classic assumption that complex carbs were somehow better for you was never tested until 1982; it was found to be false, massive amounts of assumptions/beliefs that were based on it was invalidated, yet it is still a common belief of the majority.

(The issue is Glycemic Index, or roughly, how quickly the carbs turn into blood sugar. Turns out that complex carbs can be just as high, especially if it is water-soaked and long-cooked. Turns out that fruit really isn't bad for diabetics, because of lower GI's and fiber content.)

Comment Re:I believe it (Score 1) 618

We offered food to someone who said they NEEDED money for food. They rejected the kindness with cursing.

This annoys me two ways.

1: Just because you have an anecdote of someone behaving badly does not mean that everyone behaves badly. "I saw one politician telling lies, therefore all politicians are liars".

2: Did you try to offer to buy food for them, rather than giving them what you thought they needed? Maybe their diet doesn't match yours. I have to be careful about my carb intake, yet even if I tell the people at Salvation Army that I'm diabetic, and even tell them which item I can see on their shelf that I would like, they make a bag of food for me that they insist is good for me -- full of things like rice (Brown, not white, so it's "diabetic safe" -- HA!. They are ignorants, who refuse to acknowledge their ignorance and learn), and, instead of the progressive soup that is actually low enough in carbs to be useful, cans of the cheaper cambells stuff that I can't eat at all, and wound up dumping into a food donation container at the local store. Probably goes right back to the Salvation Army.

3: Did it occur to you that if someone is homeless, they need a steady supply of food, not a large one-time shot. They might need money to buy a little food every day. You want to give them a big lump of food? Where will they put it?

Just because you consider it food, doesn't mean others will. I don't consider bacon, or shrimp, to be food, yet others do. I can't drink milk (even with lactase pills), yet others can. Etc.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Necessity is the mother of invention" is a silly proverb. "Necessity is the mother of futile dodges" is much nearer the truth. -- Alfred North Whitehead

Working...