Immigration and broadband suffer unpopular limitations
And we're moving to France
Letters Lots to get through this week - so let's get right to it and address the burning issues of your day. First up, the old "risky business" attack on open source, as brought up in an article on software compliance:
Oh dear, a rather unfortunately phrased boo-boo in this story. No doubt a small army of malodorous T-shirt clad geeks is clustered at the gate to El Reg Towers, waving pitchforks and torches, demanding your blood for suggesting that using GPL code means one is compelled to release any other source it is combined with. That is of course complete nonsense, but part of the reason for the violent response I suspect you'll be getting is that this is one of the oldest and lamest of canards to be flung at "open source" or Free software, "if you use it, you have to give away all your IP". I won't spell out the specifics, I'm sure others will have done so by now :) and I look forward to reading a correction... cheers \a
quote: Just as you're going for IPO, someone in the community points out that 100 lines of code used within your one million lines were licenced under the GPL. All of a sudden, all your 1 million lines of code have to be covered by GPL - the code has to be made available to anyone, and you cannot apply restrictions on the redistribution of such code - or its modification. You still own the copyright - but that's no use when your customer base and those who you were hoping would invest in you are deserting you in droves. \quote Not this crap again !!!!!!
Do you still want that bacon sandwich? Even after reading this?
Re everything tastes of chicken, I can attest from experience that Crocodile also tastes similar to poultry. I used to be a bush pilot in central africa some years back, and whilst stranded in the rainforest for a few days waiting out bad weather the locals whipped up a (really nice) dish of crocodile tail with chilli sauce, the texture was a bit like those fish stick things you get in crappy restaurants. Appetisers were 3 inch long grubs found in tree bark swimming in palm oil sauce (known as worms in vomit sauce), Can't tell you what they taste of as it was an appetiser too far for me, which is really saying something as I'm usually willing to eat anything no matter how disgusting it looks. (Just ask any of my ex-girlfriends)
Unlimited limits on your broadband, courtesy of Vodafone. The firm explains itself, but you feel there might be room for a little more debate here:
I dont want to open the unlimited debate again but... I have a vodafone "unlimited" data card. I get connection speeds up to 3.4 Mbps, (via HPDSA?) but the "fair-usage" limit is 1GB per month!! Which at that speed i can download by lunchtime on the 1st of the month.
I have greatly exceeded my limit for the first two months so far and i am awaiting a letter telling me how limited unlimited can really be.
Its worth noting that i clock most of my bandwidth usage on voice and video calling and make up the rest via joost!
<rant> Nice of them. Have they not considered that some customers actually have extensive VOIP provisions in house and want to use WiFi connected Nokias for both GSM and VOIP at the same time saving the number of VOIP devices and the training needed for the users to use two phones? The N95 aside, try even talking to customer services about VOIP on other devices e.g. E50, E65 etc. all of which are listed on Nokia's website as supporting the likes of Cisco's VOIP solutions - I was told that the phones didn't do it and when I pointed them at both Nokia's and their own web based literature I was then told to not pay attention to that as it wasn't supported. It is like being sold a Combination Microwave and being told not to use the conventional heating element because it isn't supported.
Come on guys, understand what is going on in corporates and enable us not restrict us. </rant>
The inflight movie is finishing, the cheap, but drinkable red plonk that came with dinner is just about gone, as is the oxygen in the recycled air, but never mind about that now... You can feel sleep pleasantly tugging at your eyelids when Beep beep! Some lunatic's SMS notification goes off. At 30,000 feet. Now that can't be right, can it?
There is an international consortium whose sole purpose on Earth is to make the flying experience as much of an absolute hell as is possible with human technology. - Stupid safety precautions that take hours to resolve and that make you ditch half your luggage - The absolute worst travel experience since the invention of the galley [and those guys had it good!] - Food that is a smirking sneer of derision if it is served at all - Jet lag and thrombosis from extended periods in the same position [I forget what the correct medical term is]. - If your luggage is not shipped to Murmansk it is damaged and/or stolen
This wonderful experience will now be complemented and completed by people yacking at the loudest volume level that the human voice can produce throughout the entire flight, only to be interrupted by the food tray and the occasional onslaught of murderous rage.
If you so much as dare open your mouth to protest the flight will be diverted to the nearest airport, you will be jumped on by a SWAT team and be shipped off to a place where you can be questioned properly, say Guantanamo Bay Naval Station.
When this becomes the standard in air travel, I don't ever want to fly again [unless it's in the backseat of an F-15 trainer, I could live with that].
The mighty power of Google, as seen through a misunderstanding:
I was reading the Google redraws world according to George Bush story you did when my girlfriend, who prides herself on her technical ability and knowledge, stated that she never knew George Bush worked for Google and that she was surprised U.S Presidents could have the time to do proper jobs...
Bless her heart she didnt understand why I didnt stop laughing for nearly 5 minutes and promptly got offended...
Keep up the good work guys,
The UK plans to toughen up border controls. You are not impressed. First we'll deal with the shorter replies, and then hand the floor to Andy for a quality rant:
Anyone for granny tagging?
New Labour's latest proposal is that in addition to tagging prisoners, ex-prisoners, potential criminals, paedophiles, immigrants, children of immigrants, cars and iPods, we should start tagging the elderly.
Tagging politicians would be a better idea - we'd know where to aim.
Ok, so lets restrict economic migrants from the USA and Australia, but allow anyone with a passport to come in from Poland. That's going to be successful for the economy isn't it. Cut the number of migrants from some countries by a few thousand, with a £20m scheme, but still allow 600k people from Eastern Europe.
I don't think I can find words adequate enough to explain why this is probably most unjust, xenophobic, bullshit I've ever heard from someone representing a so-called democratic society.
Immigrants have plenty to offer our country, and just because they don't fall into self serving slots upon entry, shouldn't be used against them by xenophobic public servants.
We're not talking about hardened criminals here, we're talking about people that are just as likely to educate themselves and find jobs as anyone born in this country.
Perhaps we should consider shipping to Australia any Briton that doesn't meet our needs too? You know, get rid of our problem people, like those unfortunate enough to be born in depressed areas, or without the means to buy a university education.
As for the sponsor idea, that is as elitist as the selfish notion that we can cherry pick wealthy or well-educated migrants. The US sponsorship method means keeping families apart if they are unfortunate enough not earn what the government decides is enough for a family of their size. It assumes that because you aren't lucky enough to earn big money, you're immigrant spouse will immediately start claiming benefits.
It also gives the government the power to bill you for those benefits if they claim them within a predefined number of years after entry.
It gives no regard to circumstances, being made redundant, becoming disabled or any number of situations beyond the control of the family.
What we should be doing is considering the immigration policy that the US used to have, before their conservative thinkers decided they were no longer immigrants because at least two generations of their family have lived there - and therefore they would do everything in their power to stop people like their own grandparents from entering the country.
Lets be blunt - having the distinction of being born somewhere like Britain shouldn't mean we turn our backs on those that just want the chance to earn what we've been lucky enough to get at birth. You often find these people are incredibly grateful, hard working and want to give whatever they can back to the communities that accepted them.
In the US for example, I've met people that joined the army, not because they were grateful about being allowed to live there, but because they inherited that gratitude from parents or grandparents that were allowed to live there. The appreciation and hard work doesn't stop with the first generation.
Certainly we can limit numbers (with the exception perhaps that unless they've committed serious crime, every spouse and child should be given residency without conditions), and certainly we can reject the applications of known criminals. But to turn our immigration policy into some kind of self-serving elitism is just plain wrong.