Slashdot Mirror

Don't forget Russell Nelson and the Crynwr Packet Drivers - they were awesome as well.

Windowsers installing Winsock TCP/IP separately...

And we could all pronounce "Crynwr". I remember downloading a wav or au file over UUCP of the correct pronunciation, which was sorta kinda like "Crennew".

It is not compatible with GPLv2. It is very clearly compatible with GPLv3 (at least the problem section pointed in the article).

It is also not done yet. The current license isn't the final call from Google. They are currently looking at license compatibility.
http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:1019:dphgapeaeaahenjiboco

Chris Dibona, Google's open source front man has consistently pushed Apache license hard and campaigned unabashedly against GPL. Alienating good contributers and damaging Google's rep in the process. His imperious attitude does not help a bit.

From the email:

Patent Covenant is however extended to the compilation and use of a compiled version (as Executable) of this software for study and evaluation purposes only, with the exclusion of distribution of compiled code or any other commercial exploitation.

Well, maybe someone is trying to argue that other OSI licenses also don't promise anything regarding royalty-free patent-licenses. But this is because licenses are predominantly about the author's copyright and not about the patents. However if the text of this licenses explicitely deals with patents and uses them to restrict users rights, then it formally violates already item 1 of the Open Source Definition.

Stallman's answer comes to mind

If your software would keep us divided and helpless, please don't write it. We are better off without it. We will find other ways to use our computers, and preserve our freedom.

"what's going to motivate them to follow standards?"

Being left behind.

I actually got that feeling too. More and more businesses see value in Linux, especially in these harsh economic times. They're taking efforts to make it suit their needs. The beauty of the whole open source environment is that everyone benefits. Really, even while a lot of people were sarcastic about linux on the desktop and such, I've been amazed by the growth of open source development in the past few years.

And it looks like that again there'll be more development next year than there was past year, with important hardware companies like Asus, Intel and HP getting more and more involved with linux. I'm interested to see what HP's gonna do with linux (besides making it slow ;) ). I've used hpux in the 90's... At first they had vue, later cde. Neither were bad for the time, though Motiff's really had its time ;p

Actually, I was going to look at the hardware vendor list that Nelson Russel used to keep but now it says:

Linux-supported Hardware

For quite some time, I used to list hardware companies which was supported by Linux in two senses: 1) their tech support people wouldn't quail at being asked about Linux, and 2) they advertised Linux support in a national magazine. There are now so many such firms that I can't keep up. I'm declaring victory and going home.

I have the gut feeling of getting to the point where we're even. Even if development wouldn't grow anymore, Microsoft's gonna bite the dust!

More direct link to piewm since the parent's post ends up in a DNS error: http://www.crynwr.com/piewm/

I saw this interface probably 11 years ago in university. It was clean and quick. Logitech's implementation was slow and heavy (the ui widgets were huge), and didn't sync up with the Start menu, and I didn't miss it when I uninstalled that.

Chris DiBona of Google Inc. has asked the question if the OSI license submission ment that Microsoft would "stop using the market confusing term Shared Source." While I disagree on several things, I think this question deserves a reasonable answer. Rather than answering the question, instead Bill Hilf provided the excuse that "the reasons we continued to call it the 'Shared Source' program was to acknowledge that these licenses had not been approved by the OSI." [1]
.
Based on what was said by Bill Hilf, a project covered under MS-CL or MS-PL should be referred in Microsoft marketing as a "Shared Source" application. But with the Sharedpoint Learning Kit, covered by the MS-CL [2], the term used by Microsoft is "open source application." [3] Independent of approval by the OSI, Microsoft has already pre-approved it's use of "Shared Source" and "open source" as interchangeable terms in a way that appears to be an attempt to purposely confuse. This could even be seen as a method to disrupt the moment that the previous open source terminology had gain in the popular press. Regardless of the intention, Microsoft's use of SS and OS as interchangeable terms is not consistent with Bill Hilf's claim.
.
So, this leads back to DiBona's question which is still left without a reasonable answer. Will Microsoft stop using the marketing term Shared Source as a method to confuse? If Microsoft is serious about working with the OSI, why is SS already used as an interchangeable term before the OSI has even approved the licenses?
.
[1] http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:1338 5:200708:mkohfpmjekmjelobgffa
[2] http://www.codeplex.com/SLK/Project/License.aspx
[3] http://www.microsoft.com/opensource/choice.mspx

using a forged the envelope-from address you are sending unsolicicited email to someone who never initiated any communication with you to begin with.

As far as I can see, this is the industry consensus definition of spam: http://crynwr.com/spam/definition.html

When somebody forges one email and I bounce one email back to that address, in what POSSIBLE way is that "bulk"? Spam isn't spam unless it's sent in bulk. Undesired email is not spam. Spam has to be sent in bulk, otherwise it's just email. Unwanted, perhaps, but just email.

For starteres there is this page. And there is also an official SDK from Lego.

Also, it's not clear to me what they have actually opened up. They opened Solaris, JES, etc., fine. What else? Compilers? Drivers? SunRay? Is there a list somewhere?

Finally can somebody decipher their license, CDDL? http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:9125 :200412:dmcacncfamieofeochbn
Let's say I take Sun's source code, add some modification and nice packaging, etc., may I sell it to customers?

The submissions mentioned Russ's Slashdot Page, but a lot more info about him can be found at his home page and/or his company Crynwr.

How about this.

The CDDL is similar to the MPL and its derivative licenses (CPL, SPL, etc.) in terms of combination with software distributed under other licenses. As with the MPL, files made available under the CDDL can be linked together with files made available under another license, as long as the other license does not prevent such linkage. This means that (for example) files licensed under the CDDL can be linked together with files licensed under the MPL, SPL, CPL (or other licenses that allow files under different licenses to be linked together) as well as with code released under "academic" licenses such as BSD, AFL, Apache, and X11. In addition, source code licensed under the CDDL can be combined in the same file with code licensed under an academic license, as long as the resulting source file is distributed under the CDDL.

Keither's license-discuss posting.

Yep, Karma whoring all the way except that I was just reading his posting this afternoon.
-russ

Services is a notoriously difficult business model to make money from (or at least, to make a decent amount of money from), especially if you want to do stuff like support Open Source development as well.

Someone who should know explained it better than I ever will though...

I can't seem to find a picture, but imagine a 'dodgy geezer' tooth fairy from London.

Patents on compression are good patents?

You mean like the LZW patent that Unisys has? Yes, I mean this one. See also here. You could have chosen a better type of patent to defend.

An interesting data point. Several years ago from a random sample it was estimated that about 70% of software patents would not actually hold up in court. (It would take me a while to track the quote down. Anyone who wants to troll through the fsb archives looking for it, can.) Some would, but most wouldn't. However portfolios of mostly invalid patents are a useful negotiating weapon since nobody wants to go through the court fees to prove patents invalid. And if you think that you'll get it granted, what incentive do you have to not seek a probably invalid patent? Of course economists are far from convinced that even legally valid patents are economically beneficial to grant.

As long as the system produces such a lopsided ratios of clearly bogus to legally tenable patents, the existence of occasional arguably reasonable patents does not justify the system as it stands.

But why do they do this through public statements on their webpages and/or public mailinglists. Can't these people lookup each other phone number? Really, if I honestly needed an opinion on something which seems so important as this from either the FSF or the Apache Foundation I would call them up (or send a private email) asking to discuss this in person to clear up any confusion that might result from random statements on some website and/or mailinglist. Neither the FSF or Apache did the community as a whole a service by not trying to talk this out first before publishing all these statements about each other.

Like this on a bad day, and sometimes like this.

The consensus is that LEGO probably will not stop production of Mindstorms, though they may drop from 'public' perception and possibly only be available through LEGO educations resellers like Pitsco Lego/Dacta.

I will not mourn the loss of the Harry Potter and other movie tie-in crap. Sounds too much like MBA-fodder and not the genius that makes Lego what they are.

A good friend of mine, Russ, has a great and interesting and THOROUGH page detailing everything you could ever want to know about Mindstorms.

His page, at http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics/, discusses the internals in great detail. You really won't believe how ADVANCED his knowledge is, so you've gotta check it out for yourself.

The page contains EVERYTHING about these amazing toys. I can't believe they're being discontinued. It's probably due to kids having too many activities (to beef-up their resumes) and videogames/television/radio taking up their time. No one sits down anymore to spend quality time with their family and build toys like these Mindstorms. We all have our own schedules and stuff, and it's probably NOT good for America in the long term.

Anyway, sorry to jade off a bit there, but here are some other links from my friend's page:
1) Create a Spider Robot
2) LEGO MINDSTORMS Group official SDK

Enjoy these links and much more on Russ's page! I helped him with the HTML code ;-)

This is Darl McBride. He hires bodyguards because people infringing on his "intellectual property", while in fact being very nice and harmless scare him. (There are more of them.) Am I really the only one not surprised?

This is Darl McBride. He hires bodyguards because people infringing on his "intellectual property", while in fact being very nice and harmless scare him. (There are more of them.) Am I really the only one not surprised?

This is Darl McBride. He hires bodyguards because people infringing on his "intellectual property", while in fact being very nice and harmless scare him. (There are more of them.) Am I really the only one not surprised?

This is Darl McBride. He hires bodyguards because people infringing on his "intellectual property", while in fact being very nice and harmless scare him. (There are more of them.) Am I really the only one not surprised?

The problem this causes is: you look up the MX for example.net, and you get the answer: example.net MX mail.bogus.net. So you look up mail.bogus.net, which does not exist, and instead of getting nothing, which is the correct response, you get this craptastic server at VeriSign. See the problem?

Oh c'mon, it's not like he looks like a mental patient every day.

I think to a violation having to do with a video codec or something like that?

Perhaps you're thinking of the Xvid vs. Sigma Designs conflict?

You can also find some interesting exchanges on license-discuss

Xix.

Which totally ignores the fact that the parent wasn't writing software for in house use...

Support and consultation aren't where most of the money is - support and consultation is hard. Check out this informative post from someone who should know (Larry Augustin). If support and consultation were easy to make money with, we wouldn't see people like Mandrake begging for money

Lego encouraged the extensive reverse-engineering and third-party applications for their Mindstorms series of toy robots. Sony wasn't at all happy to see Linux on a PS2.

I hope iRobot follows Lego's lead when it comes to modding the Roomba.

linux code.
-russ

Here's a definition of email spam. A confirmation isn't bulk, so it's not spam. Did anybody make that point to the judge? That spam is not just any old unwanted email?
-russ

Is the RPSL compatible with the GPL? - In most cases, probably not. We have it on the list of "compatible licenses" to make it clear that we have no beef with other people using the license with their code and combining it with ours. Moreover, there are cases where people place exceptions on top of the GPL that may make it compatible with the RPSL. However, standard GPL software probably can't be combined with RPSL software, due to restrictions in the GPL.

Is Helix license compatible with GStreamer? - Yes, when used correctly. GStreamer is under the LGPL, and the RPSL is compatible with the LGPL when used carefully. There are multiple ways of complying with both licenses; the simplest way is to make sure that there's no mixing of licenses within a particular executable file or dynamic library.

Why did RealNetworks create another license - This is addressed in our posting to the license-discuss alias, as well as my response on Linux Weekly News. In short, we're putting out software that we've invested millions of dollars and seven years developing with dozens of engineers. We've carefully studied all OSI-certified licenses, and understand them completely, but we didn't find one that struck the balance we're trying to achieve.

Rob Lanphier
Helix Community Coordinator

Mouse gestures in the form of pie menus have been around for a while now. See, for example:

• piewm -- a tvtwm-based window manager for X.
• Don Hopkins' pie menu site.

You can even find pie menus in real life -- look at home entertainment appliance remotes.

If possible use a mirror.

A directory is good though. Freshmeat or the like would be the obvious place home for it, just another field or so attached to each project's record.

man Phwooarr! Come and look at my weapon

man Phwooarr! Come and look at my weapon

Not everyone who uses the GPL have in mind RMS's software commons. Some use it as a business method, and strategically choose to release some GPL code and some proprietary code, or sell rights to use GPL code in a proprietary way. The argument, by Russell Nelson, was "When I write proprietary software I expect to get paid"; his company, Crynwr, follows this model, as does Aladdin, the company that brought you Ghostscript.

The BSD model is more communist than the GPL model. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", as Marx said. It is the BSD model that asks people to give away their work without restriction: with the GPL, it's a trade: I'll give you mine if you give me yours. I respect people who release their own work under BSD-like licensing (that's the license used for the largest free software project I was part of, Ptolemy), but I have no respect for those who demand that others use BSD-style licensing: these are just people who want a free lunch.

Subscribe to the lego-robotics mailing list.

Only if you make your children fondle THIS MAN'S "-ac branch."

Would YOU trust THIS MAN around your children?

No, the first rule is, DON'T LET YOUR CHILDREN talk to PEDOPHILES LIKE ANAL COX. Or me, for that matter. Would you trust your children to touch this man's "kernel patches"?

I got one of these puppies for Christmas a few years ago. I've got the serial data being pumped into my desktop, and from there I put it up on the web.
-russ

A day in the life of CmdrTaco


Sadly mistaken, CmdrTaco belives this object is a faggot asshole pleasurer and is worshipping it. Strangly enough, the one who looks like a female in the background is really one of CmdrTaco's homosexual high school friends who had an "operation". This was spent with the money CmdrTaco makes whoring himself daily around VA Software's heardquarters.



CmdrTaco, now is not a good time to take out your anal lube grease in order to satisfy you and your homosexual buddy



No CmdrTaco, now is not a good time to play with your anal ramming rods, especially not in public.


One could only imagine what sick, twisted thoughts are going through CmdrTaco's head when these photos were taken...
here and here.

The Poetic License

states that:
"The software covered by this license makes no claims about copyright, copyleft or even copy centre (where you take it down to the copy centre and copy it). Make as many copies as you want, for whatever purpose, even if it is to sacrifice those copies in a great floppy pyre. You may even claim copyright, ownership of trademark, originality or patent. You may even sue the real originator for a breach of your claimed copyright. However, this license can't guarantee that this will be in any way successful."
(har de har har)

The CMGPL
The GPL without a bunch of sections? Which ones, you ask? Mostly the ones that don't count!

The Intel BSD+Patent License
Like BSD, but grants a patent license. Patent license is specifically not granted to use under non-GPL OS's, or with modified versions, although copyright license is the same as BSD.

The Poetic License

states that:
"The software covered by this license makes no claims about copyright, copyleft or even copy centre (where you take it down to the copy centre and copy it). Make as many copies as you want, for whatever purpose, even if it is to sacrifice those copies in a great floppy pyre. You may even claim copyright, ownership of trademark, originality or patent. You may even sue the real originator for a breach of your claimed copyright. However, this license can't guarantee that this will be in any way successful."
(har de har har)

The CMGPL
The GPL without a bunch of sections? Which ones, you ask? Mostly the ones that don't count!

The Intel BSD+Patent License
Like BSD, but grants a patent license. Patent license is specifically not granted to use under non-GPL OS's, or with modified versions, although copyright license is the same as BSD.

Intel modified the BSD license in the following ways:

1. Intel made OPTIONAL the inclusion of a copyright notice (i.e., "Redistributions of source code of the Software may retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer").
2. Intel added certain definitions derived from the patent license in the Common Public License, and added a license grant under certain Intel patents to distribute Intel software contributions, alone or as incorporated in any operating system licensed under the GPL (version 2.0 or later).