word from the inside that one of the effects this could have will be Microsoft employees being allowed to use open-source software internally, along with the ability to contribute to said projects under this CodePlex Foundation
First, keep in mind, the provisional board of the CodePlex Foundation is only half Microsoft, and they have a mandate to setup a new board within a certain time frame.
Second, they've also said the default license will actually be the Modified BSD license, so none of that untrusted MS-PL stuff going on.
Thirdly, I've caught word from the inside that one of the effects this could have will be Microsoft employees being allowed to use open-source software internally, along with the ability to contribute to said projects under this CodePlex Foundation. With current issues like Microsoft programmers not being allowed to use superior open-source tools over inferior Microsoft ones (for example, Entity Framework versus NHibernate) - this will definitely result in Microsoft's own position changing for the better.
Even though there is the financial aspect, there is really nothing stopping someone from walking in, buying a phone at full price, and getting a month-to-month service.
The problem is that universally, the contracts themselves, are unfair. There is always clear print about the customer's responsibilities - pay X monthly, or pay Y (which is about 5x) to cancel early. But the companies are always covered by a clause that usually reads something like "terms are subject to change without notice". And very few companies offer a trial period that is long enough, and unrestrictive enough, to help the customer.
Its an unfair business practice because there is no alternative that is financially similar. I don't think a bill such as this one would pass, but I do think it would be interesting to see someone sue a cell company over the potential illegality of their contracts.
OpenCyc has really good assertion-making abilities, but it amounts to nothing more than an extremely large database. (A little over 2 million total assertions, some procedurally generated.) If the engine didn't have such a sloppy API, I'd honestly consider tinkering with it myself.
If you could combine ontological assertions from a mass database like that, with an ontology-based Natural Language Parser, with an ability to make random assertions using artificial neural nets, and give the thing a sense of purpose, I can't think it would be too difficult to birth some software that could scan a dictionary, then scan Wikipedia, and then shoot nuclear missiles at us.
Processor and memory requirements may be enormous, but slow or not, it is certainly feasible to program a common-sense reasoning engine with NLP. And then it is a matter of how much data you allow it access to.
Slashdot Mirror
word from the inside that one of the effects this could have will be Microsoft employees being allowed to use open-source software internally, along with the ability to contribute to said projects under this CodePlex Foundation
http://www.hanselman.com/blog/MicrosoftCreatesTheCodePlexFoundation.aspx
First, keep in mind, the provisional board of the CodePlex Foundation is only half Microsoft, and they have a mandate to setup a new board within a certain time frame. Second, they've also said the default license will actually be the Modified BSD license, so none of that untrusted MS-PL stuff going on. Thirdly, I've caught word from the inside that one of the effects this could have will be Microsoft employees being allowed to use open-source software internally, along with the ability to contribute to said projects under this CodePlex Foundation. With current issues like Microsoft programmers not being allowed to use superior open-source tools over inferior Microsoft ones (for example, Entity Framework versus NHibernate) - this will definitely result in Microsoft's own position changing for the better.
well, definitely after the uniform changes color. Its sad, "News For Nerds" doesn't get a ST:VOY reference... tsk tsk tsk...
Even though there is the financial aspect, there is really nothing stopping someone from walking in, buying a phone at full price, and getting a month-to-month service. The problem is that universally, the contracts themselves, are unfair. There is always clear print about the customer's responsibilities - pay X monthly, or pay Y (which is about 5x) to cancel early. But the companies are always covered by a clause that usually reads something like "terms are subject to change without notice". And very few companies offer a trial period that is long enough, and unrestrictive enough, to help the customer. Its an unfair business practice because there is no alternative that is financially similar. I don't think a bill such as this one would pass, but I do think it would be interesting to see someone sue a cell company over the potential illegality of their contracts.
Actually, amazingly very few people have RTFA. But your comment and the comment you replied to seem to be spot on with what M$ is saying.
Mod this person up! This is the first post on this subject that I read that made me feel better!
Seriously!
OpenCyc has really good assertion-making abilities, but it amounts to nothing more than an extremely large database. (A little over 2 million total assertions, some procedurally generated.) If the engine didn't have such a sloppy API, I'd honestly consider tinkering with it myself.
If you could combine ontological assertions from a mass database like that, with an ontology-based Natural Language Parser, with an ability to make random assertions using artificial neural nets, and give the thing a sense of purpose, I can't think it would be too difficult to birth some software that could scan a dictionary, then scan Wikipedia, and then shoot nuclear missiles at us.
Processor and memory requirements may be enormous, but slow or not, it is certainly feasible to program a common-sense reasoning engine with NLP. And then it is a matter of how much data you allow it access to.