rando3826
rando3826 on Hacker News
> I'm talking about the car's ethical choices in crashes, not the ethics of the programmers.
There is no practical difference. Computers do what we tell them to do, whether what I tell it to do has a conditional in code (the computer chooses), or instead always chooses one option because I left that condition out is a completely irrelevant distinction.
> I think the ethical question is greatly overblown.
Not at all. One programmer is going to make choices that affect ~ a billion vehicles one day, so something that doesn't happen 99.9999% per hour will happen 100 times per hour. And it's going to be more mundane things, like programming the speed limit 1 mph slower results in 500 less deaths per year, or using drm/copyright to stop poor people from getting driving software, thus killing thousands of people.
Why use an ANKY in the title? Using an ANKY(Acronym no one knows yet) is bad writing, makes readers feel dumb, etc. Google JUST NOW invented that acronym, sticking it in the title like just another word we should understand is absolutely ridiculous.
Are they accepted upstream? If not, I'd like to see a link to the lkml thread for these.
Nope nope nope. Gpl is a binary decision whether you are in compliance and can distribute or not. So, in this case, it would be negative, not allowed to distribute. Unless the law requires someone to distribute gpl software, which it doesn't, there is no conflict here.
Nope nope nope. My license can say "cannot distribute in places where law x exists." My license can say "no one can distribute. period."
I don't think they are tractable. They break the requirements.
Feedback. I can't get much from your screenshots since I can't expand them and they are too small to read anything. I don't know what a "simulated phishing campaign" is, what results I might get out of it, I just don't really understand the whole purpose / process, and you don't any info other than the phrase "simulated phishing campaign" to explain what the thing does. So, I can create simulated phishing email, I can see who opens them. I can do this easily. But we're missing something. What does a simulated phishing email accomplish? What does a user get out of it? What would one look like? When would I send one?...
Because canonical wants to be the os of light weight vm images and docker images. You can't do that if the first step in distribution is always "boot into a separate filesystem, compile a kernel module, then reboot", and then if you want to distribute your image to anyone outside your organization, be sure to first remove that kernel module, and have them do the same process again.
In linux, there is the immutable file attribute which won't let root rm the file without first changing it with chattr.
Is Apache reporting back to the apache foundation about how you are using your apache software? Maybe your expectations about user tracking are the problem.
> not be based on anything technical, but on how an API is used in practice
Since it's an api, the "in practice" is some other piece of code, so I would still call it a technical issue.
No, no, no. "library" is completely different than "mere aggregation."
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL:
"If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean that any software which uses it has to be under the GPL or a GPL-compatible license?
Yes, because the software as it is actually run includes the library."
Perfectly reasonable to assume they already have gotten NSLs.
Are you kidding? It's not in the first 10 pages of bing or yahoo. Being the #1 result is obviously done artificially.
Posted by
rando3826 on Thursday October 15, 2015 @12:33AM
from the ask-hn dept.
It's been that way since the day it was announced.Google has been promising it doesn't put it's own results first[1]. But this fly's in the face of that, and it feels disrespectful, I'm forced to see a result which deserves no where close to page 1 because google wants to promote it's brand.[1] http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/20/ftc-report-google-search-bias/: "While the FTC didn't sue Mountain...
There is adoption & attraction of development because software has freedom.
There is adoption & attraction of development because software does not have freedom.
They are not mutually exclusive. gnu, debian, etc are fundamentally driven by the goal of making a completely free operating system, and they would have much much less adoption and development if they weren't. We now have and are gaining more hardware which is completely free. If we don't make software distributions which are completely free, we will never have completely free operating systems, and we won't be encouraging people to use completely free operating systems.
Among functional languages, I wouldn't call nix anywhere close to haskell. As for the free software, sounds like a typical baseless meme I've heard many times.
And MS made it hard to change operating systems. On linux, you get live oses, and easy multi-os with a boot menu. With msft making it hard/impossible to change oses with secureboot, it's just not possible to suspend disbelief that your interests have any reasonable parity with msft's own interests.
I don't think so. I just read the tivoization section (section 6), and skimmed the rest. The only thing allowed to prevent modifications is if it is physically not designed to do so.
And of course vendors still need to update the software, so people will just hack that method. Of course you will be violating the DMCA anti-circumvention statue, so it will be a felony. Not to mention this sounds like effectively mandating tivoization which would prevent them from shipping gplv3 code.
Rule by mandating locked down buggy horrible proprietary software? Absolutely ridiculous. And of course people will just hack the proprietary channel of updates, because of course it will still be flashable. The obvious answer is, make it illegal to use software to do illegal things. Don't outlaw software freedom.
> arbitrary code breaks all possible chain-of-trust models
No. The code I get on my router from the store is an arbitrary closed source buggy crap.
The code I load from debian, openwrt, etc. is far more trusted.
re. microsoft: they are, just bundled into a small area. Look closely.
Yes, the whole thing stunk like gamergate imo. I honestly don't care about whatever minor offense pao did, I wanted her to stay just so that the vitriol and misogyny on the front page attacking her would not "win".
Amen. I do fairly decent on a whiteboard given some practice, but I still feel stupid compared to sitting and coding on my own without massive time pressure.
> 1. We are all adults.
Stopped there. We aren't. I've been amazed at finding that code came from a 15 year old.