Oh, sorry. I though they have the same policy. I shouldn't wander away from my waters :)
316 karma · joined March 20, 2014
PS: I'm not very familiar with this expression, but isn't it like.. "co*k blocking"?
The conservatives might want to contribute a little to a FOSS alternative, that might be of lower quality - and benefit all as a result. And cover all their bases as well.
As a rule of thumb, try to use something standardized, with more than one implementations.
By the great american plan I mean sharing the same system of government, signing good' ol' threaties that favor american corporations (TPP, PIPA, SOPA, and whatnot). They did a great job spreading democracy in middle east, while mostly Europe ended up taking the heat. I hope they won't start spreading democracy there as well, because pushing it by force didn't seem very effective.
I know there is a plan, by which they reduce the ammount of nuclear warheads, but to me it seems like they are dragging their feets, looking suspicious on one another. Have they wished it, they would be long gone, serving as fuel in some reactor.
Getting back to North Korea - I don't think something can be done without causing a major conflict. Leaving them be is not safe either, but there must be a peaceful way. If the problem is that Kim Jong-un is paranoid and crazy - he'll die eventually, and if not provoked, I hope things go smooth.
A lot of the world revolves around trust - even if blind, stupid trust. A crazy enough guy could poison the bread in the supermaket, and there's not much one can do about it. I think this is somewhat similar.
About the ambiguity - my feeling about it is that they (Stallman and the lawyers, I suppose) leaned towards the usual way these documents are done, to make the licence more general - which irks us, the programmers. For a lawyer, "the code" is a good enough term.
I agree with you on having a new copyleft licence - but I'm afraid is hard to get something even to match GPL, and worse - you can step in the same, or other subtle traps as the initial versions of the GPL did - that tivoization stuff was nasty as hell. If only some of the licenses would "die" eventually, but the process reminds me of this comic - https://xkcd.com/927/
I like this quote. What I like even more, is how just above it, you smudge the history as if they not detonated nuclear weapon on people, but they just refrained from conquering the world. Read what I said the same thread - in the end, what matter is what you actually do, not what you could have done, or what you claimed you would do.
My arguments was that it doesn't matter what one is claiming - in the end what matters is what you do. The americans are the only ones so far to have nuked other people, and they still get to keep their missiles. Don't you think we are way too forgiving with them?
But not on other humans. On a deserted island. We like to vilify the russians, sure we do - but when you look at the facts as they are, a very different picture comes to your eyes. Don't let those manipulative news stories fool you.
As the author of the article said, it's a tool, and you may or may not use it. Don't downplay the need for a copyleft licence (which a cool hack around copyright, if you ask me): some people use is from a philosophical reason, and some - as the basis for their entire business model.
It still complexity in the end, but you just have to factor it all in - I bet you that 90% of those "big data" problems can fit in a small server's RAM. Most of the time is just people making shit up, so they'll have a job.
At the end of the presentation, he talks about sampling and using transient data, rather than storing and mining it. Are there any academical papers that support his statement, that a little fresh data is better than a lot of it, with a big chunk being "stale"? What's your experience?
Not entirely true. You are only subject to GPL if you distribute the code you modify. If you keep it inside your company, or for yourself, or you run it on your servers, there nothing GPL will do to you.
Don't be so sure. People were saying exactly this several years ago about music. We owe it to Jobs that he realized it's stupid idea, and put an end to it.
> they'd develop their own proprietary application for it instead of providing DRM-free streaming (think of how Netflix has applications for mobile OS's and even consoles, both living room consoles and handheld consoles).
That seems better to me, than poisoning a whole standard just to get their way, or the highway.