Slashdot Mirror
Slashback: Insectivores, Persistence, Domaination
Mastering the new-domains domain You read earlier this week about the new-TLD discussions in Yokohama; inetwiz writes with several handy links if you want to know more details: "According to a report on EFnet, the ICANN executive board is scheduled to make a ruling on the proposed new top-level domain names. The papers which contain the presentations for the new top-level domains can be found here. The meeting topic paper is here. There are hundreds of URLs (a couple-hundred too many to list here!) at the ICANN Web site. For more information on the whole meeting in Yokohama, including Webcasts (woohoo!), check here. Stay tuned to see the approval!"
Can I see your license, please? backtick writes "The new NIC (ThinkNIC.com) runs on Linux and has lots of Linux/GNU software. But to buy one, you have to agree to a EULA which says amongst other things:
"You shall not reproduce, make derivative works of, distribute, rent or lease the Software. You shall not reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to discover the source code of the Software."Now, I don't know about you, and IANAL, but doesn't the GPL come into play somewhere around here? Maybe I don't understand it as well as I should, but nowhere on the ThinkNIC site or anywhere in any press release have they mentioned the release of any GPL'd updates, etc. Ideas from the legal-type people? (I'd thought about dropping this into Bruce Peren's lap or some of the other savvy people, but thought I'd ask it here instead. I'm sure they read Slashdot!)"
Or is this just boilerplate that legal departments at computer companies sonambulistically [thanks to RealityMaster101, I now know it should be somnambulistically. Thanks! - timothy] slap onto any ol' software release?
The last word is never the last word is never the last advtech writes "Richard Stallman asks BeOpen.com: 'Warwick Allison in your interview says some confused things about the GPL. To prevent the readers from being misled, would you please post the respose?' BeOpen posted his response on their site." Richard M. Stallman simply does not sit still when he disagrees with someone -- and it's nice to see BeOpen willing to post the response.
Please pass the DDT-sauce ... Andrew Welch writes: "I remember some people on /. wanted to track this story when it first appeared here, to see if Ambrosia Software would really go through with it. Well, we are -- we'll be eating bugs as penance for the bugs that were in our software.
Yes, that's right -- the day of reckoning has come, we'll actually be eating bugs at the MacWorld expo, as per our pledge last August! Read the article for the juicy (ick!) details:http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/news/newslette r/
In a nutshell: 3dfx Interactive, maker of high-end 3D video cards, has teamed up with Ambrosia Software, Inc. to host the public spectacle in their booth #1455 at MacWorld/NYC 2000. In what will amount to a modern-day public lynching, users who have been plagued with bugs in software can delight in seeing Marketdroid Jason Whong eat the crunchy critters as penance for the buggy deeds of the software industry."
I guess I'd rather bugs be in the developers than in the software -- but guys, please leave room for dessert.
Next time, read the whole thing.
Anyone tried to hook a hard drive up to this thing?
Look at some of the ideas presented, such as SRI International who wants to:
.geo domain. No other names are anticipated beyond a few administrative domains.
.faq so any answer for blah can be found at blah.faq, 800 & 888 to map toll free numbers (which seems odd to me, you dial 1-800-555-5555 and goto 555-5555.800?) These are just a few of their ideas.
.atm for Automatic Teller Machines, which seems like at least one thing you are going to have to goto physically to make much use of it.
.SUX which is set up by Jerky Networking, not so much for the name, but that Jerky is wanting it, anyone else remember the Jerky Boys?
minutes.degrees.tendegrees.geo. The exact form of the naming convention will be available as a simple downloadable XML schema from the top level
For example, consider a server with DNS name 10e20n.geo. Since it is a server at the second level of the hierarchy (tendegrees.geo), it is responsible for a 10 degree x 10 degree "cell" of the world. The service area of the cell spans from longitude 10 degrees East and latitude 20 degrees North to longitude 20 degrees East and latitude 30 degrees North.
Or VRx who wants
Diebold Incorporated wants
And one of my favorites is
Here's a post on a Debian mailing list in which RMS offers his view on linking apps to Qt. Basically he supports the view that GPL'd code like KDE, which is designed to link against a non-GPL should be considered to implicitly have permission to do so - and thus dosn't require any license modifications.
Now, there is still the issue of GPL'd code from outside sources, but this obviously removes 99% of the problem. So is Debian reconsidering, now that RMS has addressed their primary objection? Not really, as discussed in this kde-licensing thread.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Since 1984, RMS has been working on writing software for, and promoting the GNU project. A project to provide software which is not only royalty free (free like beer), but that allows the user to modify, pass on and generally screw up said software (free like speech).
The GNU project has always had the aim of replacing UNIX with a workalike system (it could be argued that this is the aim of emacs alone). By the early 1990s GNU was providing a complete set of development and user tools to run on top of many commercial operating system. The only part missing was the kernel.
GNU have been working on their own UNIX like kernel. Built on top of the Mach Microkernel, HURD aims to compete with the most advanced and modern operating system kernels to date. However, development (which of course had to be done using entirely GNU tools) has been slow and even now HURD is not ready for any sort of production system.
In the early 1990s Linus Torvalds, appeared from nowhere with a working rewrite of the Minix kernel written under the GPL, Linux. The Linux kernel is heavily based on tried and tested designs, old technology. However, it works, is fast and incredibly reliable. This was the spark on the arms dump that was GNU. Suddenly there was available a completely free operating system with all source code and a range of user and development tools.
In media terms it appeared overnight. One minute there is a bunch of obscure hackers writing compilers for UNIX, an OS that had not even been heard of by most computer users. The next, there are a few distributions of "Linux", providing the kernel alongside sets of GNU tools.
Linux took off, picked up by many students wanting to get their hands dirty with something that they could work on and learn about it was propelled into teaching institutions, ISPs and the hands of even more hackers. By 1998, Linux was being touted as "the last best hope" against Microsoft just as the Apple Macintosh had been before they went into their long dark period of flaming Powerbooks and buggy Finders.
Linus Torvalds will not be remembered in history as an innovator, he will be remembered as in implementor. As his discussions on Minix with Andy Tanenbaum show, Linus wasn't concerned with new technology, taking advantage of powerful hardware or dealing with the problems of tomorrow. He seized the opportunity to apply textbook principles and build an OS kernel using 60s concepts. Linus should not be hailed as a great hero, who boldy coded where no man had done before. The reason that Linux is now so good is the work of thousands stabilising and improving the system. Linus should, rightly, be congratulated for sitting down and doing a dirty job that nobody in operating systems wanted anything to do with, writing a working system using old technology.
Next came the ugly bits. Industry wasn't interested in an operating system written by "hackers" thrown together from whatever was available. They refused to provide device drivers for Linux, mainly because they were concerned that they might give away trade secrets by providing free source code under the GPL. Throughout the 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 kernels, Linux changed constantly. Providing binary only drivers for it became impossible (was this on purpose). Companies had no choice but to provide code that could be compiled against the a kernel of choice. This meant opening up precious source code.
Source code was released under a variety of licenses. There was GPL code, BSD code, XFree86 code, Apache code, Artisticly licensed code and all sort of other weird things. The only common factor was that each provided source code and allowed users to at least distribute untampered versions of source code and binaries.
So, in an effort to tidy up the situation, the "Open Source Movement" began. Fronted by ESR and Bruce Perens it brought together all code fitting a common denominator of source code availability and freedom of copying under the banner, "Open Source". Initially, opensource.org claimed to, and did, act as a marketing campaign for the GNU project. It generated amazing amounts of publicity.
However, when opensource.org started to class software such as QT under the same banner as GCC and other GNU software, RMS took issue. He denounced open source as not being purely free software and distanced himself from the movement.
Open source is the power hungry brat child of GNU. Concerned with short term publicity and gain, they abandoned the principles that have given GNU such a strong foundation. After RMS split from opensource, there were various other internal squabblings, most visibly over the use of the trademark "Open Source". Next came the talks at Microsoft from ESR and the killing he made by being on the board of VA Linux. In the space of a few months he managed to suddenly move from the editor of the Hacker's Dictionary and hacker icon, to sold out betrayor of GNU in the eyes of many.
In a sense, ESR not only distanced himself from the hacker ideal. But showed software developers and marketeerers just what potential for cash-in existed in open source software. Since then, it seems, open source has been the latest and greatest buzzword. Everyone (even Microsoft) has either released open source software or talked about it. Suddenly, there is a vast amount of code available to normal users.
RMS argues that it is wrong to call the "Linux distributions" "Linux". Instead he favours GNU/Linux, to show that the system is comprised of both GNU tools and the Linux kernel. This will probably never happen as the term "Linux" is so well established in the media now (when HURD comes along, things may be very different though). A much better name for most of today's Linux distributions would be opensource/Linux. For example, Mandrake comprises binary only versions of software such as netscape while providing open-source software with restrictive licenses such as QT. The only distribution which could realistically be called GNU/Linux is Debian (but only if they finally ditch non-free).
Recently there was a Slashdot interview with RMS where questions were submitted by users. The story carried a health warning. RMS is accused by many of being a zealot who wants to see all programmers starve. He is not.
RMS provides a much needed figurehead for the FSF. A group devoted to providing and fighting for free software. Much like Marx, Machiavelli or Neitsche everything he says should be taken with a pinch of salt for life in the real world. But without these people, without the purist ideals they promote we would be stuck in a realistic world of pragmatists ready to sell out at the first opportunity, hardly role models.