Yes, we also have a popular open-hardware, open-source indoor air quality monitor that measures CO2, PM, Temperature and Humidity. You can also get an optional TVOC module that can measure chemicals and NOx.
This version we currently only sell as a pre-soldered kit [1] but it is very easy to assemble (no need to solder anything) and you just need to plug a few modules together and close the enclosure with a few screws.
Attention all machine learning and medical imaging enthusiasts! Join us for the upcoming DIPY workshop at Los Angeles on April 24-28 where you'll learn how to use powerful software for analyzing and processing diffusion MRI data. This hands-on workshop is perfect for anyone interested in utilizing machine learning techniques for medical imaging applications. Don't miss out on this exciting opportunity to learn from expert instructors and network with other professionals in the field. Register now at https://dipy.org/workshops/latest
This is a unique 5 days of medical imaging tutorial sessions with guided practice. Students, technologists, researchers, physicists, teachers and radiologists are welcome.
was in a client position (Infosys was contracting for the companied I worked for). Absolute worst processes in the world. At one point they blocked legit dev domains in their firewall and took 3 weeks to unblock a mongo db after vehement protests. DON'T touch Infosys with a 100ft pole
This doesn't really make sense. Akka is a framework/library, not something that could be offered as a service, anymore than you could have "boost as a service" or "numpy as a service".
I think that makes this change worse, though: it means that the new license will infect many more projects--like Spark, for example. And they won't even be making security patches to existing versions available under the old license. "Nice project you got there, it'd sure be a shame if some unpatched security flaw came along and ruined it," they're saying.
edit: I wasn't aware, but Spark stopped using akka several years ago. But the basic point still stands.
> I bet they are doing this to prevent Amazon from deploying a version of Akka as a service on AWS.
Yes, it's pretty clear they no longer want to participate in the Open Source ecosystem, as allowing people to run the software however you see fit is a integral part of Open Source, together with being able to modify and reshare said software.
"Free software for everyone" is precisely what Open Source is
> Honestly I'd love to see a license that was "Apache for everyone but Amazon (or other $100B+ companies and their subsidiaries)"
Yeah, that's basically what the BSL license Akka is moving to is. Only projects earning over X amount per year need the business license, for others it's free.
That's more or less what SSPL is. The problem is the OSI and FSF are basically religious pharisees, so dedicated to their texts, they're missing the actual point. People backing the OSI/Amazon over Elastic/Mongo/etc. are literally killing open source.
> People backing the OSI/Amazon over Elastic/Mongo/etc. are literally killing open source.
AGPL, the license Mongo was originally under, isn't used in reality to prevent deployed applications from hoarding changes; rather, it used to scare commercial entities away from deploying your code. With a commercial CLA providing exclusive code ownership, it allows you a legal club to block others, even other contributors, from competing against your current business interests.
It is licenses like the AGPL and commercial CLAs which have been killing open source and free software, because they destroy motivation for any significant third party contributions and the resulting emergent ecosystem around a project. It reduces the idea of open source and of free software down a lot closer (in my opinion) to source code escrow.
MongoDB didn't want any Amazon changes to be contributed to the project. They wanted to block another commercial entity from offering a service based on their IP. From an open source perspective, I don't take their side any more than I would take Amazon's.
AGPL is an actual FLOSS license though, SSPL is not. And Amazon (or any other entity) would be quite within their rights to publically deploy AGPL software as long as they merely published the changes in the deployed version. There's no requirement for such changes to be accepted by upstream.
While the SSPL should be recognized as a copyleft open source license, since the OSI has refused to accept it, it's not really any different than the BSL at this time. If the OSI did their actual job, and promoted open source and helped foster a business-friendly open source license that prevented Amazon from sherlocking everyone, it'd probably see major adoption.
Copyright/copyleft licenses deal with your ability to publish the original work or derivative works, as well as performances of the derivative work.
SSPL requires you to publish items which may be non-derivative work on certain kinds of performances. Further, it does so specifically to be punitive against certain kinds of use (e.g. use by a competing company).
Because of the requirement to release so much non-derivative work under SSPL, including infrastructure you may not have written yourself or own copyright to, it is likely infeasible for one to be conformant to that provision.
The Problem with SSPL is, it triggers at runtime. Most OpenSource Licensens trigger at compile time. GPL ... you pull in GPL Code, compile it, your code becomes GPL. SSPL? Triggers at runtime if you run it as a SaaS, not really making clear what counts as SaaS, not really making clear what counts as a third party, etc. Thats the reason it should NOT be recognized as a open source license.
If someone starts pinning the (continued) deaths due to the disturbance of social customs and divide-and-rule by the British (Also account for the partition). It may far surpass it
To anyone who thinks this is obvious hyperbole: please look into the causes of the Rwandan genocide. Specifically the ahistorical division of the local population into two competing tribes by the Belgian colonial government. Divide-and-rule is a long standing tradition because it prevents the colonized from unifying and rising up against the colonizers by giving one group preferential treatment over the others.
