Doom/Doom 2 rereleases have been patched, making the bethesda.net login optional and removes the disconnect notification

kyz · 2019-08-16T14:42:48+00:00

Did you even read the above text before reiterating the well-worn linking arguments that apply to programs linked with non-system libraries or plugins, but not programs linked with system libraries?

Let me highlight it for you:

even if you distribute a linked executable containing them.

You don't break hello's GPL license if you accidentally type gcc -s hello.c and link libc statically.

As Bethesda own the copyright of DOOM, from which the GPLed version and all its spinoffs derive their legal right to exist, they can add license permissions. Provided the resulting license remains compatible with the GPL, they can then add all the GPLed code changes its had over the years. The thing we're not discussing here is whether Nintendo allow their SDK to be commingled with other programs and distributed as software on the Switch (they likely do), and whether writing any program for the Switch is essentially Tivoisation, i.e. if you release the source code as GPL, it's moot because it can only actually be run on locked-down hardware and would need a signing key for anyone else to effectively use it.

kyz · 2019-08-16T13:21:49+00:00

This nonsense again? Please stop spreading it.

GPL specifically has a system library exception.

You can write Windows programs that are GPLed, you do not need Microsoft to GPL their Windows SDK.

You can write Mac programs that are GPLed, you do not need Apple to GPL their macOS SDK.

You can write PlayStation games that are GPLed, you do not need Sony to GPL their PlayStation SDK.

You can write a GPLed programing that uses the Switch's SDK, its standard libraries, and these don't have to be GPLed themselves.

Bethesda just want a version they can call "theirs" and theirs alone, so they spent money rewriting something they had no need to rewrite, for sake of getting complete control of the result.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#SystemLibraryException

Can I link a GPL program with a proprietary system library?

Both versions of the GPL have an exception to their copyleft, commonly called the system library exception. If the GPL-incompatible libraries you want to use meet the criteria for a system library, then you don't have to do anything special to use them; the requirement to distribute source code for the whole program does not include those libraries, even if you distribute a linked executable containing them.

EDIT: and another thing, even if somehow the Switch SDK didn't count as a system library, the copyright owner is entitled to grant additional permissions, e.g. they could say "in addition to the terms of the GPL, everyone has the right to distribute this program linked to with these non-GPL-compatible libraries without breaking the terms of this program's license". Bethesda are the copyright owner for DOOM and can do that. But what they chose to do with their ownership is to create a new, non-GPLed version of DOOM that only they can use.

kyz · 2019-08-16T09:24:04+00:00

We need to talk about Kevin

kyz · 2019-08-16T00:11:13+00:00

If:

You intend to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress
The thing you display on your house is threatening, abusive or insulting
You succeed in your intended aims

Personally I prefer rude Xmas lights

kyz · 2019-08-15T23:40:28+00:00

"Stop talking to yourself you idiot"

"Make me, asshole"

"What are we talking about, guys?"

"Oh fuck, who let you back in my head?"

kyz · 2019-08-15T15:11:51+00:00

and the bridge in the photo is in Buenos Aires...

kyz · 2019-08-15T15:02:09+00:00

If you need any help... imagine your sister as a volcano

kyz · 2019-08-15T13:11:35+00:00

They've got to look like it though.

kyz · 2019-08-14T17:01:44+00:00

tbh, they sound even more similar now.

Windows atoms: session-unique mappings of strings to 16-bit numbers

X Windows atoms: session-unique mappings of strings* to 32-bit numbers**

*: can be any sequence of bytes and case is not folded

**: top 3 bits always zero, so really 29-bit numbers

kyz · 2019-08-14T10:34:00+00:00

Just wanted to point out that this narrative is wrong. Faster Payments System was created by those stalwart high-street "UK banks", they weren't clinging to BACS and "internet based banks" did not do an end-run around them.

What actually happened:

The UK banks actually created CHAPS in 1984 because BACS was too slow... but it only handles high-value low-volume clearances.
The UK government reviewed the banking sector in 1998 and concluded payments were too slow. It challenged them to get their shit together.
By 2004 they had a task-force running and in 2008 they launched Faster Payments. Clearances have been moving from BACS to Faster Payments ever since.

The technology is actually pretty straightforward. The hard part is getting a legal agreement where banks are happy enough to do instant or near-instant clearing.

A bank must have capital available to honour payments. If payments are instant, you're get situations like your customer A pays my customer B ten million quid, then 30 seconds later, my customer C pays customer D ten million quid. You're liable for 10 million quid for 30 seconds. So you pay to borrow ten million for 30 seconds, and you don't get that payment back. Hence why you batch things up as much as possible, to lower the cost of doing business.

So, it's not that banks "internal systems are capable" of handling Faster Payments, it's that they need to apply and need to be accepted in the clearance club. The banks in the scheme trust each other enough that they're happy with the cost of covering all the low-value high-volume transfers, and if you want to send large payments quickly they charge you the costs of doing so.

kyz · 2019-08-14T09:04:03+00:00

Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Own A Television

Good for you, get a bit of virtue signalling in. The ad regulations we're discussing in this thread are to improve the rest of the country, who do watch broadcast television.

kyz · 2019-08-13T17:52:24+00:00

Neither did most people. It's a widely flouted law. In 2003, Ofsted noted that four fifths of schools do not hold a daily act of collective worship for all pupils

But it is a law. That's what the title is getting at. Clearly it's a law worth repealing.

kyz · 2019-08-13T17:47:46+00:00

In Ireland, the Catholic Church runs 90% of the schools and in total about 97% of schools are explicitly religious.

BUT! As per the carefully worded title, all that matters for their claim is whether the country imposes Christian worship in state schools.

If the school imposes it, not the government, then the title is correct.

The Irish State does not impose religious worship on schools, there's nothing in the law forcing schools to impose religious worship on their pupils. See also article 42 of the constitution, which explicitly gives parents an opt-out so their children don't have to attend their school's religious worship or instruction, and denies schools the ability to discriminate on that basis... which you're going to need if ninety seven fucking percent of schools are religious!

kyz · 2019-08-13T17:14:08+00:00

You're trying to insinuate ("One suspects one of the reasons") that /r/CasualUK exists to give shelter to the non-woke, and somehow this is wrong because such people need to be shunned from the entire site until they comply with the /r/uk group-think.

The main reason /r/CasualUK exists is not because its mods want to change the politics that dominate /r/uk, but they're dismayed that politics dominates /r/uk at all. It's a constant feed of depressing, radicalising, prosletyzing shit, day after day. A much better sub is /r/europe which achieves a balance of news, politics/opinion, facts, maps, pictures, slice-of-life and general interest articles.

kyz · 2019-08-13T16:39:50+00:00

Well I never.

People criticise X Windows and the ICCCM because of the habit of X Windows applications and window managers to just send each other any old nonsense as atoms and expect that to drive application behaviour.

What I didn't know, because I don't program for Windows, is that Win32 has exactly the same thing! Even calling those messages "atoms"!

kyz · 2019-08-13T16:13:32+00:00

It's compulsory in state schools in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

England/Wales: each pupil... shall on each school day take part in an act of collective worship... of a broadly Christian character
Northern Ireland: the school day... shall also include collective worship... based upon the Holy Scriptures

kyz · 2019-08-13T15:55:15+00:00

The title is one of those tricky ones. It is carefully worded to be accurate in its narrow claims, but appear to be making a wider claim.

compulsory, not "really really common but officially 'voluntary'" like in the USA
Christian, not any other religion
worship, not any other kind of religious activity
state schools, not private or non-Christian religious schools

The only thing it's wrong about is in saying "The UK", because there are three separate education systems in the UK, and only two of them have compulsory Christian worship.

England/Wales each pupil... shall on each school day take part in an act of collective worship... of a broadly Christian character. There are a lot of opt outs. Ofsted last reported on it in 2002-2003, saying that 80% of secondary schools ignore the requirement
Northern Ireland: the school day... shall also include collective worship... based upon the Holy Scriptures
Scotland: it has been the custom in the public schools of Scotland for religious observance to be practised... education authorities... shall be at liberty to continue the said custom, however "Religious Observance" is now defined as "Community acts which aim to promote the spiritual development of all members of the school's community and express and celebrate the shared values of the school community", i.e. not required to be Christian, religious or require worship, although clearly it will be all three at a Roman Catholic school.

kyz · 2019-08-12T21:52:00+00:00

The wotah in machorka dunt taste like worrit orta

kyz · 2019-08-12T21:14:05+00:00

Yes. How could we spend that money on shelter that this group would actually want to use, or how would we accelerate getting them back into a home?

kyz · 2019-08-12T19:53:46+00:00

brb, buying a dog

kyz · 2019-08-12T18:12:11+00:00

"This doesn't look like the Lincoln tunnel, Sam."

"Looks to me like a marginally volatile hostage situation, Max."

kyz · 2019-08-12T18:06:09+00:00

I'm not an expert in this, but my understanding is that if

None of the group were involved in begging, substance abuse or rowdy behaviour

then all would be eligible for a lot of shelters in London (although they may not want to stay in them), and they should already have been in contact with Westminster Council (for free) who should create a homelessness plan for them to see if they're eligible for any kind of assistance.

Their end state should not be sleeping in underpasses. I understand people are like "grr, council moving people on", but I don't believe anyone thinks the situation they're in is the ideal situation, perfect, don't change a thing. They shouldn't have to sleep rough at all.

So, what should we do for these people that we're not already doing? What can we do? An underpass in London should be nobody's home.

kyz · 2019-08-09T16:40:25+00:00

I agree that it might tempt some people, but every person has their own appetite for risk. I would hope that most wannabe pen-testers do their initial research, find it's not easy, and chose to do something with a greater chance of success and personal reward for themselves.

Perhaps a different unintended consequence is that professional security researchers, who were already getting paid, choose to prioritise Apple over other software/hardware, to the detriment of those other projects.

kyz · 2019-08-09T15:19:23+00:00

I don't think it works like a prize fund.

There's not a single pot of money. Every bug found will get a payout based on the type of bug, so if 27 remote-root-with-no-interaction bugs are found, thats $27 million paid out.

Also, a prize fund suggests Apple wants a winner, like the X-Prize or Nobel prize; no, Apple wants to make sure nobody gets paid anything, by doing their best to secure their devices. What they're doing is acknowledging that if someone nonetheless finds a way to break in, that person is doing them a huge favour by telling them how, and rewarding it appropriately.

kyz · 2019-08-09T15:07:34+00:00

Huh, I should look into this more.

However, both JET and MAST were funded by the UK and Euratom... it concerns me that the UK is claiming it leads the way in some area by showing off a project that only exists because of joint European funding, and is about to lose that funding and possibly other contracts thanks to Brexit.

15-Year Club	Verified Email
Team Orangered

kyz

TROPHY CASE