@Tim That was a long time ago. I don't remember. And the lecturer didn't really use one anyway. I don't think he was really interested in time series. He just taught the course for some reason.
@Isaac Which they can also do outside academia.
@Tim If that last sounded confusing, I think there was a text listed for the course, but I don't think the lecturer actually used it.
(I saw this, which reminded me of something I was happier to have forgotten. Nice to see something from 10-11 years ago still brings back the feelings I got about it the first time. End of venting, please don't mind.)
@ilkkachu Are the ext4 issues fixed, then? And have you ever tried zfs?
It's got easier for Debian in recent years. In theory, anyway. Since Debian now supports building support for zfs as a module. I've never tried using it.
@StephenKitt It led to a long discussion in the TL yesterday about how to define fair use etc. No conclusion, none of us are lawyers. But yeah, while the fact that the entire answer consisted of nothing but a quote makes it a poor answer by SE standards, I really don't think that quoting a small part of a document, with attribution, really constitutes re-licensing. What it really comes down to is that mods aren't qualified to make this sort of judgement.
If you feel it's worth it, the suggested route is a DMCA take-down notice sent to SE
As prompted by NullUserException อ_อ, I'd like to try get a definitive moderator view on what is the appropriate action when a user spots an obvious copyright violation on Stack Overflow.
To be clear, I have a reasonable understanding of fair use and am myself not averse to posting small extract...
@ilkkachu I tried reading about the issue...I've finally found it, but not before I came across unix.stackexchange.com/questions/316771/… as one of the early duckduckgo hits :P
@terdon yeah, I suspect there were some complicates issues caused by people spouting legal-sounding advice, and others taking it seriously, with the added weight that it was said by a Red Hat employee (whether speaking for Red Hat or not — and that’s another kettle of fish)
@StephenKitt This reminds of a comment in some other stack some days ago. An Intel employee wrote an answer quoting some Intel manuals, and really didn't like it when the answer got called 'misleading'. Not because of the insult to their answer-writing ability, but because of the potential for a legal snag for false advertising.
@StephenKitt No, I think they meant that if someone thought he wrote an answer that would falsely represent Intel products, the company could get in trouble.
that’s something that ends up being weird at Red Hat sometimes, because we work on projects in public, but we still need to be careful not to announce product features ahead of time, or say things which might be construed as promises
but people working on FLOSS rarely want to promise things anyway ;-)
this crowd might have good overlap with a book I just got -- how to, absurd scientific advice for common real-world problems, by Randall Munroe. Enjoyable science :)
arrived yesterday, and I stayed up way too late, getting 1/3 of the way through it
"Fossett and Enevoldson say they could have ridden the stratospheric waves even higher -- they only turned back because the low air pressure caused their pressure suits to inflate so much that they couldn't operate the controls"
next best was: "Next to the mount is an instructional plaque, which features the single best joke in the history of the aerospace industry: ATTACH ORBITER HERE // NOTE: BLACK SIDE DOWN"
I've got a program I've written in bash that uses a number of bashisms. I know there's checkbashism and shellcheck and bash's --posix which are great for manual review. But what I really want is something like python's 2to3 and I'm assuming this exists (if not I'll probably write it).
Essentiall...
@ilkkachu No we're not. We just know there's no such software written. And besides, if it existed, I wouldn't trust it to do the right thing. A shell script that must be portable must be portable in so many other ways than just syntax.
