Just gotta love the paragraph at the end of the article:
In its campaign against open-source, Microsoft has been unable to come up with examples of companies being harmed by it. One reason, said Eric von Hippel, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor who heads up a research effort in the field, is that virtually all the available evidence suggests that open source is "a huge advantage" to companies.
Now the only thing that is missing, is Microsoft frankly admitting the fact.
Craig M: Well, all evidence points to the contrary, but Open Source is still a huge threat to all companies even entertaining the thought.
If I'm getting this joke right, Slashdot is not laughing about CNN's tech style reporting, but is making fun of the Pentagon's order in the first place. The overkill of destroying a couple of millions worth of hard disks.
If this is an RPM on a linux box use "--root somedir" to prefix things like/usr with "somdir". Other install methods like SVR4 "pkgadd" have similar relocate facilities.
That would be --prefix somedir, and unfortunatelly it's not always an option, because some RPMs are not relocateable.
I think that Mundie's speech might even have been aimed at destroying the productivity of the Free Software movement. Think about it this way: while MS allocates a few execs to trash Free Software (and really, what else are execs good for?) about a million coders who work on Free Software each write their own 2000 word point-by-point rebuttal of what was more or less an obvious troll in the first place.
Interestingly enough, I think the Slashdot "community" is a very close metaphor to this situation. There are several rather skilled trolls that frequent this site who write essentially inflammatory or unpopular opinions in their comments for the sole purpose of getting exactly the kind of rebuttals that MS is getting now.
Are you talking about yourself? I mean, in all seriousness, do you really think that this much productivity is lost if a couple of hackers write their own 2000-word-rebuttals? I think not.
Since RMS most likely won't get up there and emphasize that there are alternatives to the GPL that may be attractive, I wonder how widely his ideas will be accepted by the people who have the money.
I doubt, that you've ever actually heard a speech by RMS. When he talked at the TU-Berlin, about a year ago, he most certainly said that there are other free software licenses in the world. That being said, it's not surprisingly that he prefers GPL and pushes it. This license was drafted with his specific goals in mind. Now, you might object to these goals and GPL, but not allowing him to argue his case is being a hypocrit.
I see in RMS passionate beliefs, and also unwillingness to compromise. Could it hurt the open source movement in the long run?
Unwilling to compromise? Take a look at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html, where the FSF prominently says, that it's ok to use other Free Software licenses. (Although they obviously prefer GPL-compatible licenses and the GPL above all.)
Secondly, all this trash talking about RMS hurting the Open Source Movement in the long run is plain bullshit. Look at the free software world 15 years ago and look at it now. See?
GPL is a subset of open source; it is not equivalent to open source. It looks to me as though RMS will argue that GPL = Open Source.
I doubt, that RMS will argue that GPL equals Open Source. First of all, RMS doesn't even like the term "Open Source", he rather uses "Free Software". Secondly, even RMS acknowledges that there are more Free Software licenses in the world. Take a look at the GNU pages (http://www.gnu.org/). Heck, they even acknoledge, that some licenses (eg BSD) are freer than GPL.
Re:Copyright holder question
on
GPL FAQ
·
· Score: 2
I have a question. If I am the copyright holder of a program I created, and I accept bug fixes to this program from other people, can I release this program under a dual license later? Do I still own the whole copyright after accepting bug fixes?
I worked at aimster for a few months before deciding they weren't going anywhere (read: yes, i know why it's named what it's named). The reason for "AIM"ster is that you were "AIM"ing for only your buddies. Any semblance to AOL's product offering is entirely coincidental.
Of course! It all makes sense now.
In related news, Linus Torvalds -- creator of the UNIX-look-alike LINUX operating system -- surprised the computer industry today by announcing that "LINUX" is not a clever play of his name and UNIX. In fact, LINUX is XUNIL written backwards, which actually stands for "eXtensible Ultra-cool Network-ready Infrastructure for Lofties".
He then went on to file suit against Microsoft, for their use of the abbreviation XP in their yet-to-be-released new operating system Windows XP. Torwalds was quoted saying: "In today's cut-throat computer market, you have to lure your potential customers by using a kewl name for your software. However, by calling their new OS 'Windows XP', they have clearly violated my intellectual property rights on abbreviating words that start with the letters 'ex' using a capital 'X'. Intellectual property rights are the basis of all civilazation and I will not tolerate this blatant barbary."
As trustworthy sources say, "Windows XP" does, in fact, stay for "Windows Experience".
Microsoft could not be reached for comment, but an anonymous Redmont Drone cried: "This is sooo Un-American. I mean, this guy isn't even from here, he's from Finland. Finland, of all places! I want my Solitaire."
When someone rips a movie, it doesn't affect you watching that movie in any way.
When someone using these drivers beats you 20-2 in UT, especially if he's a lamer who couldn't have done that without cheating, that's a pretty big effect on you.
Personally, I couldn't care less in either case, but then again, with my m4d UT skillz, I'd probably be the lamer in your second scenario.
Adding headers is trivial. Adding headers that make sense, is not. (also, there is no way to delete headers from mail)
Huu? Could you please elaborate, why there's no way of deleting headers from mail? I mean, it's all plain text, isn't it?
I admit, that I don't know RFC 821/822 and I haven't read the sendmail source, but would hinders me from modifying my spamailer, so it deletes some headers and who says that I have to fully comply with the RFCs?
The problem with launching spammers into the sun is, that I would lose some of my dearest friends, who regulary feel the urge to send me one of these stupid chain-mail jokes or -- even worse -- so-called virus warnings.
You really do need to flame someone, now, don't you? While it was obvious that the guy didn't know what he was talking about, it was also pretty clear, that English isn't his native tongue. So instead of giving him the doubt of a simple misunderstandment (?), you just call him ugly and stupid.
You mean, whether Troll Tech could include it with the proprietary license?
Honestly don't know. One could argue, that Troll Tech would need to have the copyright, but, OTOH, one could think that the courts might consider an impliced agreement with the author of the bug fix. IANALBMCS (I am not a lawyer and most certainly stoned.)
Well, I don't want to be nitpicking, but your GPL Inc. is not compatible with the GPL license itself. If I write GPLed code, the copyright remains with me and not with some GPL entity. The result is that I can dual license the code even in a proprietary way.
Now, before you scream, that dual licensing is a Bad Thing(tm), consider that certain amounts of the Linux kernel sources are dual licensed (under BSD, Artistic, X,...) and so is, IIRC, MySQL and the QT libraries. If it wasn't for dual licensing, I couldn't be running my favourite database on my favourite desktop powered by my favourite operating system -- all free software.
Your GPL Inc. would be a reality when every open source developer would assign his copyright to the FSF, which, BTW, is not possible in some countries (e.g. Germany).
Microsoft would expand its sharing initiatives, he said. But he added that the company's
proprietary business model was a more effective way to support industry standards than
the open-source approach, which he said could lead to a "forking" of the software base
resulting in the development of multiple incompatible versions of standard programs.
Easy. I just watched the weekly movie special on MTV, feautiring 30-seconds-or-so clips from the top ten movies here in Germany. I guess, the studios wouldn't like watered down versions of the clip.
Hell, you wouldn't be able to see all the fancy special effects that are supposed to make up for the crappy plot!
And obviously the studios cannot demand from every TV station in the world to register with them for the official, "blessed" copy.
Slashdot Mirror
GnuCash has been double-accounting based ever since. In fact, even xacc -- on which GnuCash is based upon -- did use double accounting, IIRC.
You should definatelly try GnuCash if you already know your way in double accounting.
You'll hear lot's of wops and virtually no foops at all.
This is perfectly legal, just try it out yourself.
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int i;
i = 2;
{
int i;
i = 4;
printf("i in inner scope: %d\n", i);
}
printf("i in outer scope: %d\n", i);
return 0;
}
Just gotta love the paragraph at the end of the article:
Now the only thing that is missing, is Microsoft frankly admitting the fact.
Craig M: Well, all evidence points to the contrary, but Open Source is still a huge threat to all companies even entertaining the thought.
Whatever
Anyway.
Too much pot?
Nice trolling.
Umm, I guess, you're right.
And that's all that I have to say about that. -- Forest Gump
That would be --prefix somedir , and unfortunatelly it's not always an option, because some RPMs are not relocateable.
Why don't you create a minimal chroot environment. Before you install you do a `ls -lR`, as well as after the install.
Now just diff the ls-lR files and you see which files have been modified and which are newly created.
(Just curious, isn't this something for a mailing list rather than an Ask Slashdot?)
Are you talking about yourself? I mean, in all seriousness, do you really think that this much productivity is lost if a couple of hackers write their own 2000-word-rebuttals? I think not.
Nice trolling, though.
I doubt, that you've ever actually heard a speech by RMS. When he talked at the TU-Berlin, about a year ago, he most certainly said that there are other free software licenses in the world. That being said, it's not surprisingly that he prefers GPL and pushes it. This license was drafted with his specific goals in mind. Now, you might object to these goals and GPL, but not allowing him to argue his case is being a hypocrit.
Unwilling to compromise? Take a look at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html, where the FSF prominently says, that it's ok to use other Free Software licenses. (Although they obviously prefer GPL-compatible licenses and the GPL above all.)
Secondly, all this trash talking about RMS hurting the Open Source Movement in the long run is plain bullshit. Look at the free software world 15 years ago and look at it now. See?
Some people sacrifice their life for what they believe in. Now, IHMO, that's just plain stupid, but putting money over your ideals is sick.
Having said that, if you define normal as average, you're probably right. Which is very unfortunate.
I doubt, that RMS will argue that GPL equals Open Source. First of all, RMS doesn't even like the term "Open Source", he rather uses "Free Software". Secondly, even RMS acknowledges that there are more Free Software licenses in the world. Take a look at the GNU pages (http://www.gnu.org/). Heck, they even acknoledge, that some licenses (eg BSD) are freer than GPL.
Short answer: no.
The long answer is given in the FAQ: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-faq.html#Consider.
(I take it that you released the first version under the GPL.)
Of course! It all makes sense now.
In related news, Linus Torvalds -- creator of the UNIX-look-alike LINUX operating system -- surprised the computer industry today by announcing that "LINUX" is not a clever play of his name and UNIX. In fact, LINUX is XUNIL written backwards, which actually stands for "eXtensible Ultra-cool Network-ready Infrastructure for Lofties".
He then went on to file suit against Microsoft, for their use of the abbreviation XP in their yet-to-be-released new operating system Windows XP. Torwalds was quoted saying: "In today's cut-throat computer market, you have to lure your potential customers by using a kewl name for your software. However, by calling their new OS 'Windows XP', they have clearly violated my intellectual property rights on abbreviating words that start with the letters 'ex' using a capital 'X'. Intellectual property rights are the basis of all civilazation and I will not tolerate this blatant barbary."
As trustworthy sources say, "Windows XP" does, in fact, stay for "Windows Experience".
Microsoft could not be reached for comment, but an anonymous Redmont Drone cried: "This is sooo Un-American. I mean, this guy isn't even from here, he's from Finland. Finland, of all places! I want my Solitaire."
Microsoft stock were down on the news.
Personally, I couldn't care less in either case, but then again, with my m4d UT skillz, I'd probably be the lamer in your second scenario.
Huu? Could you please elaborate, why there's no way of deleting headers from mail? I mean, it's all plain text, isn't it?
I admit, that I don't know RFC 821/822 and I haven't read the sendmail source, but would hinders me from modifying my spamailer, so it deletes some headers and who says that I have to fully comply with the RFCs?
The problem with launching spammers into the sun is, that I would lose some of my dearest friends, who regulary feel the urge to send me one of these stupid chain-mail jokes or -- even worse -- so-called virus warnings.
Wouldn't wanna do that.
What are you trying to say with that arguement? Not only are you comparing apples to oranges, but your analogy doesn't even hold true by itself.
Too much pot?
Okay, I'll go ahead and flame myself. What the hell have I been smoking? Even I can't make any sense of the post, anymore.
Dammit, there goes my karma.
You really do need to flame someone, now, don't you? While it was obvious that the guy didn't know what he was talking about, it was also pretty clear, that English isn't his native tongue. So instead of giving him the doubt of a simple misunderstandment (?), you just call him ugly and stupid.
Yeah, that's the way!
You mean, whether Troll Tech could include it with the proprietary license?
Honestly don't know. One could argue, that Troll Tech would need to have the copyright, but, OTOH, one could think that the courts might consider an impliced agreement with the author of the bug fix. IANALBMCS (I am not a lawyer and most certainly stoned.)
Well, I don't want to be nitpicking, but your GPL Inc. is not compatible with the GPL license itself. If I write GPLed code, the copyright remains with me and not with some GPL entity. The result is that I can dual license the code even in a proprietary way.
Now, before you scream, that dual licensing is a Bad Thing(tm), consider that certain amounts of the Linux kernel sources are dual licensed (under BSD, Artistic, X, ...) and so is, IIRC, MySQL and the QT libraries. If it wasn't for dual licensing, I couldn't be running my favourite database on my favourite desktop powered by my favourite operating system -- all free software.
Your GPL Inc. would be a reality when every open source developer would assign his copyright to the FSF, which, BTW, is not possible in some countries (e.g. Germany).
Like Word 2, Word 6, Word 97, and what-not?
(Emphasis mine.)
Easy. I just watched the weekly movie special on MTV, feautiring 30-seconds-or-so clips from the top ten movies here in Germany. I guess, the studios wouldn't like watered down versions of the clip.
Hell, you wouldn't be able to see all the fancy special effects that are supposed to make up for the crappy plot!
And obviously the studios cannot demand from every TV station in the world to register with them for the official, "blessed" copy.