> Seems hard to justify using MIT licensed code in that case? It doesn't.. It's what MS essentially had prior to opensourcing .net proper. They had some parts of it the library that were free, and some parts that were…
> It's a contest Yes, who cares? The bigger picture is advancing the field, not scoring some bigger number in some artificial environment. > This was about as cheating as it gets. Like I said, so was data flow analysis…
..and that's why you get lawyers to plead their clients cases, various chances to appeal a ruling, a separation of legislative and judiciary powers and ultimately even judges that are voted in and given tenure instead…
Meh.. I'm not so sure about this. Didn't people claim "cheating" back when the first compilers started doing data flow analysis too?
Sadly, laws aren't written like executable code. They're something vaguely resembling executable statements that require a lot of judgement by the person (trying to) interpret them to actually get to something that can…
> Seems hard to justify using MIT licensed code in that case? It doesn't.. It's what MS essentially had prior to opensourcing .net proper. They had some parts of it the library that were free, and some parts that were…
> It's a contest Yes, who cares? The bigger picture is advancing the field, not scoring some bigger number in some artificial environment. > This was about as cheating as it gets. Like I said, so was data flow analysis…
..and that's why you get lawyers to plead their clients cases, various chances to appeal a ruling, a separation of legislative and judiciary powers and ultimately even judges that are voted in and given tenure instead…
Meh.. I'm not so sure about this. Didn't people claim "cheating" back when the first compilers started doing data flow analysis too?
Sadly, laws aren't written like executable code. They're something vaguely resembling executable statements that require a lot of judgement by the person (trying to) interpret them to actually get to something that can…