Would you disagree with this logic?
You distribute GPL code to me on a dvd. I give that dvd to someone else. I have not made a copy of the source code, so copyright does not come into this. If instead I copied the dvd and emailed the iso to someone else I would be distributing and copyright comes into it.
No it doesn't. It can not bind someone that has not agreed to it. A failure to agree might mean they are infringing on copy-right and is liable for damages, but it is wrong to say it binds everyone that distributes it.
They are distributing it without the right to distribute it. The only thing that allows them to distribute it is agreeing to the license/contract to do it in a specific way. If they don't do that, they don't have the right to distribute it. The person they got it from saying otherwise doesn't change that.
the license travels with the copy, it is what allows the copy.
if the license does not travel with the copy, then the copy is unlicensed and is a copyright violation. the license carries restrictions and grants rights. those aspects cannot be violated or the license ceases to exist.
you don't know what you are talking about, so stop guessing.
* 12 people are confirmed dead, including 1 gunman. Police described the figures as an evolving situation.
* 29 people have been transported to area hospitals in a range of conditions, but officials described the injuries are serious. That figure includes two police officers.
* Chris Minns and Anthony Albanese described the shooting as a targeted attack on the Jewish community during the first day of Hanukah.
* NSW police commissioner Mal Lanyon has designated the shooting a terrorist incident.
* Lanyon said the gunmen used long arms. Police are investigating what’s believed to be several improvised explosive devices in a vehicle at Bondi beach.
* Both Minns and Albanese have vowed to support the Jewish community and eradicate hate.
For context by number of deaths this is the second worse mass shooting in post WW2 Australian history.
How is Japan's customer protection? Here in Australia it is enshrined in law that the seller, Amazon, must handle warranties and such for the expected life of the product.
Cancelled my subscription. I can't take a risk of installing it and having a paid trial or something mean I'm using the non-commercial version for a bit.
Only downside to this are tools that default to only acting on stuff under version control. Whenever I use rg inside my home directory I'm caught out by this.
The possess creature was in the first game. Have you tried the original with keeperFX? It improves the UX for building rooms so if that was your issue with the first game.
That feature was a "you're kidding!" moment for me when I first played that game. Ok, the first person graphics weren't exactly Doom, but that they were there at all was crazy. First person shooters were a pretty new genre when the game came out! They even were "better" than Doom in some ways, with many monsters having ridiculous graphics filters.
The phase "maybe you should do xyz instead" is active, not passive. Qualifying with maybe doesn't change it from active to passive. Passive would be something like "Maybe XYZ should be done" or "Maybe XYZ would be better".
no it's not - it's assumed by maybe taking the most likely unit (year). But if the conversation is in hospital with your kid having emergency I guess doctor would appreciate to know if they will have to do surgery on 3 months child or 3 years kid.
If the doctor has trouble figuring out the difference between 3 months and years, there are bigger problems than specificity.
There are places specificity is necessary, and there are places the implicit assumptions people make are specific, and only need additional specification if the implication is violated. That's how language works - shortcuts everywhere, even with really important things, because people figure it out. There are also lots of examples of this biting people in the ass - it doesn't always work, even if most of the time, it does.
As long as you construct a strawmen strict enough that can be no ambiguity, and refuses to acknowledge any context where it's not enough, yeah, it always make sense in context.
