Re: Contracts? Must be nice.
"If there was any real proof of what Sir Bastard actually DID"
I think you'd find it was the BOFH who held the proof and that it was completely in his favour - or favor for you left-pondians.
42409 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
If your tens of thousands of lines link to the library and it's GPL vX.0 then. yes. If you keep that little program using the GPL library and just pass stuff to it in some way, then no.
It's not bollocks. It was designed to work that way. You want to work some other way; FSF might equally regard your way as bollocks. They're two different ways of looking at the world, both valid. Trying to use somebody else's code in a way they specifically don't allow you to - that's bollocks.
The real joke in all this is even considering Campbeltown peninsular to the north coast option. Avoid the ferry to Larne, take the ferry to Campbeltown and then the bridge.
Seriously, if they want to improve links with NI the first step is to improve the A75 to dual carriageway (I assume a full motorway would be out of the question) and without all those roundabouts on the Dumfries by-pass.
"It's worth noting though that spoofing of the arbitrarily rewritable FROM field is much more common, extremely easy, and seems to be very effective."
Effective not least because so many businesses get marketing firms to send emails "from" them so even those who do check the actual origins of emails are likely to accept them.
Yes, twats are indeed spreading this crap. But is it entirely twatishness or are the twats being used by somebody? It has real-world effects in that there are now reports that vaccine uptake is being affected by the nonsense* about the Oxford/A-Z vaccine even whilst a 3rd wave is on the rise in Europe. Who's pulling FF's strings?
* Yes, the statistics say it's nonsense. Even without the statistics allowing a dubious and remote risk to out-weigh a much larger, real risk is still nonsense.
We've seen decades of start-up activity which has increasingly built a tradition of needing nothing more than a basic idea and maybe the ability to put a proof of concept together because everything else can be out-sourced. The out-sourcing has become the norm so that its inherent risks are ignored. If you're only thinking beyond the basic idea the only way to learn about the rest is going to be the hard way.
Eventually there'll be enough business failures to get the lessons taught in business schools and the MBAs in the VCs might start looking more carefully at these aspects of the start-ups they're asked to support. Until then it's the blind leading the blind and even afterwards there'll be some new category of risks the business schools haven't caught up with yet.
"Support for a whole raft of technology and services takes up alot of space...including stacks to cope with unpopular tech."
The difficulty with this line of argument is that nobody wants or needs the whole set of things a modern operating system is asked to support but the subsets people do need and want can be important. Dropping them is why we find crucial and expensive pieces of technology, for instance in medical applications, dependent on out-of-date and vulnerable versions of Windows and out of production generations of computer to run it.
It's not a matter of engineers looking down the nose at support staff. It's the problem that policy is being made by people who don't know the difference.
One of the interesting points in the article is that post-secondary education, apprenticeships and degree courses, are actually getting more candidates. If they're doing well and the school courses aren't then it shouldn't be too hard to work out where something's going wrong.
One of the problems with maths - to some extent with all subjects but more, I think with maths than most - is that teachers (hopefully) have an aptitude for their subject and find it difficult to comprehend that those who don't are actually having trouble with the subject and aren't just being lazy or deliberately obstructive.