Easy. You chose to smoke. You were born with your genes.
Its not a difficult distinction that someone who decides to buy an expensive car has to pay higher premiums than someone who buys a cheap beater. On the other hand, a black man can't be charged more than a white man for the same car. Genes don't seem to make sense there, do they?
Its perfectly analogous that someone who chooses to smoke should either forfeit their insurance for smoking-related illnesses or pay an extra premium to cover them for it.
Microsoft Action: Set a date to stop selling a product years before you intend to stop supporting it. Slashdot Answer: Why the hell would you stop selling it if you are still supporting it? Stupid Microsoft. I would sell it until the same year as I stopped supporting it, this is just a ploy to get more Vista sales by scaring people.
Microsoft Action: Stop selling a product only a few months before you intend to stop supporting it. Slashdot Answer: Its so irresponsible of Microsoft to be selling a product they don't plan on supporting! This is just a way to milk more money out of the consumer and force upgrades when their OS becomes suddenly outdated next month.
Microsoft Action: Donate $1m to "Save the Kittens" foundation. Slashdot Answer: What about the mice? Microsoft is subverting the poor mouse by an illegal and monopolistic process of buying out a 'charity' that directly kills mice.
Interesting...so what you're saying is that paying developers produces more usable code for the kernel? But I thought we were supposed to hate these companies that profiteer off our beloved egalitarian operating system.
Instead of nitpicking wording in a summary site that was obviously intended to be informational, not legalese, how about you instead come up with an example of someone who was disallowed counternotification because the VeRO takedown was due to "trademark" instead of "copyright"? You probably won't find any, because you're grasping for straws to justify your righteous indignation.
There is no problem with counternotification requiring the person to disclose identity and submit to judicial process. eBay is a US compan and subject to US laws. If you're from Norway and want to use it, deal with it, or use a Norwegian auction house. When someone has their auction removed via VeRO, it means there's an entity out there that has filed -their half- of the legal documentation to challenge the right of the auction to exist. The only proper response, if you really believe you're right, is to file -your half- of the papers, or go cry in a corner about how unfair it is that people have laws and you have to abide by them.
I highly doubt this semantic issue is actually a roadblock to submitting the counternotification. The language, as I read it, suggests that the counternotification form is used for any VeRO takedowns in which the auctioner cannot reach a settlement with the IP holder. So long as the auctioner is willing to take responsibility, in writing, the auction will return.
Of course, another completely misleading headline and article summary.
The VeRO program does not provide direct access to eBay's database to delete items. It is a fast-track for manufacturers to submit deletion requests for items they believe are infringing on their copyrights. Every time an auction is deleted, the VeRO program gives eBay the proper documents holding the manufacturers legally responsible for their claim of copyright infringement.
Taking a simple look at the program's description reveals that ANY auction being deleted through this program can be reinstated, automatically, by the user, within 10 days. They simply have to do the same thing the manufacturer did: claim legal responsibility for their auction, in writing.
Now, there's no doubt that I, as a private individual, would never risk challenging the very well funded battery of lawyers the Church of Scientology has to keep me in line. Even though I know they have no leg to stand on, I can't afford the legal battle. But I wouldn't cry that its eBay's fault, when eBay gave me the option to directly challenge the "manufacturer".
Remembering back to physics, induction is different from resonance energy transfer, right?
So are these technologies distinct from the magnetic resonance transfer used by the MIT lab last year? Resonance transfer seems like the safest and highest efficiency method for wireless transfer over short distances, to me. (In that it doesn't lose much energy to those bothersome things between source and destination...such as human beings)
I haven't read the paper, but the first thought that comes to mind is: how do they know the mouse has no fear of cats? What if the mouse simply isn't getting the cue of a predator's scent in order to react with fear? Fear could still be a higher brain function that responds to lower functions such as scent. If you disrupt the input, of course the mouse isn't going to process it.
Its still interesting that plain sight of a cat wouldn't trigger the same cue, but perhaps mice simply aren't that visually oriented. Different animals prioritize different senses.
I haven't used Virgin's store, so I'm not familiar with the license that users signed. But isn't it reasonable to expect that Virgin has to provide a more direct method for users that have paid for their downloaded content to obtain a permanent copy of it? "Burn it to CD and rip it back" seems arduous and probably not even feasible for the level of computer literacy they should expect from their clients.
I believe that the idea of forking the kernel is significantly different than selecting different modules for desktops and servers. Here, the argument is that there should be a fundamentally different ideology to kernel -design- for a desktop than for a server. From the articles linked, the current debate was over the choice between two different schedulers--whereas Torvalds chose one, the first blog believed the second would be better for desktop use.
For a kernel, I don't think its healthy to incorporate multiple versions of everything. At some point, if you want a fast, stable machine, you have to be able to depend on each piece "working as intended". So if it really is true that a wildly different kernel design might make the desktop run better, then a fork is reasonable.
At the same time, a fork would mean two times as many bugs and desktop Linux would be slower to benefit from the advances of server Linux, and vice-versa. Perhaps a necessary evil for Linux to become a viable competitor in the desktop market. (Sorry Slashdot, but it isn't even close, yet)
What in god's name are you smoking? Share the wealth!
$150 per motherboard from an OEM? I'll be surprised if Microsoft pays $50 per motherboard.
Trust a fanboy to take the single most responsible warranty coverage in gaming history and turn it into some justification for why they're $600 short with no games to play. Microsoft may be the embodiment of evil, on Slashdot, but there isn't anything to complain about when a company actually takes responsibility for manufacturing defects and offers full, free repairs to each console for the next 3 years (4 years?).
A billion dollars could go to a number of sources. Parts, labor, shipping. Not all of that money will necessarily be spent, either. It just covers all the consoles that COULD need repairs. The majority of 360's are still sitting happily in home entertainment systems, playing 1080 resolution games for their customers, and will continue to do so.
Back on topic, who honestly didn't expect the popcorn-priced Wii to overtake its bigger, beefier cousins? At today's income levels, parents can buy a Wii for each child to complement their color-coordinated DS.
Except the blog still says that users have to start the refund process, by providing up-to-date information for themselves. So its still in the user's hands.
Mutations do happen, anyway. The point is that mutations that would offer resistance at the target site are VERY VERY LIKELY to be detrimental to the bacteria, when compared to unmutated bacteria. One fictional example: drug A binds to protein B on the cell. Some cells have a mutation in protein B that deforms it, making it more difficult for drug A to bind. However, this deformation also causes protein B to be 50% less effective at binding what it was originally supposed to bind.
In a normal population, the bacteria that DON'T contain the mutation have selective advantage over those that DO. They will grow faster and, like all things, eventually compete their rivals out of the population. The only time said mutation is going to help is when you introduce drug A, and all the cells that don't have the mutation are suddenly unable to survive. Then you kill off all the cells that DON'T have the mutation and are left with a population of cells that do.
Now, remove the drug, and ALL the cells that remain are STILL resistant to it. Over a long period of time, the reverse mutation may accumulate and return the population to "non-resistant" status, but until then, those bugs will be impervious to drug A. If drug A is maintained in widespread use, this is unlikely to ever happen.
I always wondered why people felt antimicrobial soap was worth anything. Here's why:
Bacteria have cell walls. Triclosan, as the summary notes, targets a component of the cell wall that is integral to survival. You know what else is integral to survival? The cell wall. You know what other component of soap targets the cell wall? Soap. Even small amounts of detergent will completely solubilize a cell wall. Imagine the concentration of detergent on your hands when you wash them, with soap.
No bacteria is surviving that, and if it is, it sure as hell is going to survive a tiny concentration of Triclosan.
Also, on a side note, the motion of -rubbing- one's hands together has been shown to contribute at least as much as the soap, to the killing of bacteria. http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?i d=doi:10.1086/502183 has some interesting comparisons of hand washing techniques.
Yes, in fact I believe my post was quite clearly a C++ forever post. Thank you for pointing that out, for anyone who might have missed it. ("...I won't say C++ is the LAST language I'll ever use, I think that there's room for improvement...")
I suppose I hadn't considered the fact that some people, such as yourself, might fall into ALL of the categories, at once. Congratulations! You have bested me.
I have nothing against any of these groups (except perhaps the C holdouts, most of them can crawl back into the cave they code in). I'm simply pointing out the ludicrous nature of their arguments against a very solid language that has been widely adopted for good reasons.
I don't consider C++ to have won or lost anything against Java, VB, C# and I certainly don't consider it to even be competing with scripting languages like the amazing Python or the over-hyped Ruby or the antiquated but venerable Perl. That's like saying "C++ is used for less shell scripts than Bash." They're not even intended for the same purpose.
Finally, if you find yourself getting worked up about all this, you've missed the entire point of my original post. It is satire, and though it might sting when it happens to be aimed at you, its a valuable skill to learn to laugh at yourself.
And now that I read it, I suppose a mod of flamebait wouldn't be unfair. But it certainly is fun to go through all the other comments and assign them into my categories, see which one wins!
I think you've hit the nail on the head for the majority of programmers out there. There's a reason C++ is so dominant in development of just-about-everything(tm). There are a few reasons for the minority to be upset, over this, and they're usually divided into camps:
(1) The C holdouts. These folks grew up learning C and functional programming. They hold to the misguided belief that C is still a more optimized language and the appropriate choice for most applications. They also believe "struct" is all the OOP you should ever need. Arguments from this camp usually involve how hard it is to make a compiler for C++ ("When I used VC5 back in 1842, it didn't even compile my for loops correctly") and on application size ("I included the entire standard library because I thought it was required and now I can't fit my 2MB executable on my 5.25" floppy").
(2) The Objective-C people. These folks decided to learn Objective-C instead of C++, when growing out of C. Usually because Apple told them to. Their arguments usually focus on how C++ is too flexible and isn't a true OOP language ("Objective-C is far more intuitive and straightforward than C++ ever will be, like my iBook!")
(3) The Java people. These folks believe that, if you're going to get more complicated than C, you may as well go all out. They want all the bells and whistles, and believe that C++ provides all the complexity with none of the features. Their arguments almost always start with garbage collection and proceed on to Objective-C style arguments about being a true OOP language ("Why bother freeing your own memory? Let the computer guess what you want, that's what they're there for.")
(4) The idealists. Finally, these folks believe that there is some other, ideal language that roughly nobody uses for anything but would cure global warming, disarm our nuclear arsenal and mix a mean screwdriver while it was at it. They attack C++ mainly because, if their new order is to take over, the evil giant that currently oppresses them must be the first to fall ("Just because its popular doesn't mean its good! In fact, it means it must be crap and I refuse to use it.")
I hope this provides some insight into this small subset of the programming community. Rest assured that most of us DO use C++ or some extension of it, for many tasks, and are perfectly satisfied with it. I won't say C++ is the LAST language I'll ever use, I think that there's room for improvement and I'm sure there's another language that will replace it, eventually.
Schools in the US and Canada have made it policy to discourage upper-level math. Its only news because other countries are beginning to follow suit.
Who here grew up in a US/Canada high school that actually -required- more than a year or two of math? My high school was one of the best ranked public schools in the nation, and it only required 2 years of Math and Science, but a full 4 years of English and Social Studies.
So what do you think the majority of students did? OPTED to take upper level Math and Science? Hell no. The schools all but said "you don't need to know that."
Is there any way (aside from not patching) that someone can avoid having the functionality turned off? Its one thing to disable it and leave an option to turn it back on, if you understand the security risk involved. Its another to simply turn it off, unilaterally.
Granted, most Apple users won't understand the security risk involved and shouldn't turn it back on until the mothership fixes the problem. But then again, most Apple users are too busy sticking fingers in their ears and yelling "la-la-la" to notice a worm even exists.
Did I miss something? Are IT and web development jobs suddenly a dime a dozen? Has investment in web "2.0" startups been going up? Are we back to hiring high school dropouts and paying them network admin salaries for looking up porn on the internet?
Last I checked, the economy was just barely rebounding from our last bubble-bursting. Hardly charging forward to our next one. If there IS going to be another bubble, its going to be around another new set of technologies that investors don't understand but think must be worth money (*cough*iPhone*cough*). The web won't be it.
Projects that hang in-between just muddle the waters.
Yes, because nobody can think of a project that might not want (or be able) to be "free" but might still want to provide as much source for the community as possible. If its not completely free, it may as well be Microsoft!
Slashdot Mirror
Easy. You chose to smoke. You were born with your genes.
Its not a difficult distinction that someone who decides to buy an expensive car has to pay higher premiums than someone who buys a cheap beater. On the other hand, a black man can't be charged more than a white man for the same car. Genes don't seem to make sense there, do they?
Its perfectly analogous that someone who chooses to smoke should either forfeit their insurance for smoking-related illnesses or pay an extra premium to cover them for it.
Last I used paypal, and this was a long time ago, I remember earning interest on the money that was in my paypal account.
Microsoft Action: Set a date to stop selling a product years before you intend to stop supporting it.
Slashdot Answer: Why the hell would you stop selling it if you are still supporting it? Stupid Microsoft. I would sell it until the same year as I stopped supporting it, this is just a ploy to get more Vista sales by scaring people.
Microsoft Action: Stop selling a product only a few months before you intend to stop supporting it.
Slashdot Answer: Its so irresponsible of Microsoft to be selling a product they don't plan on supporting! This is just a way to milk more money out of the consumer and force upgrades when their OS becomes suddenly outdated next month.
Microsoft Action: Donate $1m to "Save the Kittens" foundation.
Slashdot Answer: What about the mice? Microsoft is subverting the poor mouse by an illegal and monopolistic process of buying out a 'charity' that directly kills mice.
Interesting...so what you're saying is that paying developers produces more usable code for the kernel? But I thought we were supposed to hate these companies that profiteer off our beloved egalitarian operating system.
Servers and clients do different things with the data. It makes sense that different languages would be employed on either side.
Instead of nitpicking wording in a summary site that was obviously intended to be informational, not legalese, how about you instead come up with an example of someone who was disallowed counternotification because the VeRO takedown was due to "trademark" instead of "copyright"? You probably won't find any, because you're grasping for straws to justify your righteous indignation.
There is no problem with counternotification requiring the person to disclose identity and submit to judicial process. eBay is a US compan and subject to US laws. If you're from Norway and want to use it, deal with it, or use a Norwegian auction house. When someone has their auction removed via VeRO, it means there's an entity out there that has filed -their half- of the legal documentation to challenge the right of the auction to exist. The only proper response, if you really believe you're right, is to file -your half- of the papers, or go cry in a corner about how unfair it is that people have laws and you have to abide by them.
I highly doubt this semantic issue is actually a roadblock to submitting the counternotification. The language, as I read it, suggests that the counternotification form is used for any VeRO takedowns in which the auctioner cannot reach a settlement with the IP holder. So long as the auctioner is willing to take responsibility, in writing, the auction will return.
Of course, another completely misleading headline and article summary.
The VeRO program does not provide direct access to eBay's database to delete items. It is a fast-track for manufacturers to submit deletion requests for items they believe are infringing on their copyrights. Every time an auction is deleted, the VeRO program gives eBay the proper documents holding the manufacturers legally responsible for their claim of copyright infringement.
Taking a simple look at the program's description reveals that ANY auction being deleted through this program can be reinstated, automatically, by the user, within 10 days. They simply have to do the same thing the manufacturer did: claim legal responsibility for their auction, in writing.
Now, there's no doubt that I, as a private individual, would never risk challenging the very well funded battery of lawyers the Church of Scientology has to keep me in line. Even though I know they have no leg to stand on, I can't afford the legal battle. But I wouldn't cry that its eBay's fault, when eBay gave me the option to directly challenge the "manufacturer".
Apple doesn't take kindly to criticism of any kind, constructive or not. Do not anger the Jobs.
"Guys, we're deep in the red, how do we make more money?"
"We could switch to using FedEx..."
"...shut up. Real ideas, people!"
"I know! We could sue our fan clubs so that the few people left who are stupid enough to buy our cars out of brand loyalty might look elsewhere!"
"BRILLIANT!"
Remembering back to physics, induction is different from resonance energy transfer, right?
So are these technologies distinct from the magnetic resonance transfer used by the MIT lab last year? Resonance transfer seems like the safest and highest efficiency method for wireless transfer over short distances, to me. (In that it doesn't lose much energy to those bothersome things between source and destination...such as human beings)
I haven't read the paper, but the first thought that comes to mind is: how do they know the mouse has no fear of cats? What if the mouse simply isn't getting the cue of a predator's scent in order to react with fear? Fear could still be a higher brain function that responds to lower functions such as scent. If you disrupt the input, of course the mouse isn't going to process it.
Its still interesting that plain sight of a cat wouldn't trigger the same cue, but perhaps mice simply aren't that visually oriented. Different animals prioritize different senses.
I haven't used Virgin's store, so I'm not familiar with the license that users signed. But isn't it reasonable to expect that Virgin has to provide a more direct method for users that have paid for their downloaded content to obtain a permanent copy of it? "Burn it to CD and rip it back" seems arduous and probably not even feasible for the level of computer literacy they should expect from their clients.
Would such an argument even hold up in court?
I believe that the idea of forking the kernel is significantly different than selecting different modules for desktops and servers. Here, the argument is that there should be a fundamentally different ideology to kernel -design- for a desktop than for a server. From the articles linked, the current debate was over the choice between two different schedulers--whereas Torvalds chose one, the first blog believed the second would be better for desktop use.
For a kernel, I don't think its healthy to incorporate multiple versions of everything. At some point, if you want a fast, stable machine, you have to be able to depend on each piece "working as intended". So if it really is true that a wildly different kernel design might make the desktop run better, then a fork is reasonable.
At the same time, a fork would mean two times as many bugs and desktop Linux would be slower to benefit from the advances of server Linux, and vice-versa. Perhaps a necessary evil for Linux to become a viable competitor in the desktop market. (Sorry Slashdot, but it isn't even close, yet)
What in god's name are you smoking? Share the wealth!
$150 per motherboard from an OEM? I'll be surprised if Microsoft pays $50 per motherboard.
Trust a fanboy to take the single most responsible warranty coverage in gaming history and turn it into some justification for why they're $600 short with no games to play. Microsoft may be the embodiment of evil, on Slashdot, but there isn't anything to complain about when a company actually takes responsibility for manufacturing defects and offers full, free repairs to each console for the next 3 years (4 years?).
A billion dollars could go to a number of sources. Parts, labor, shipping. Not all of that money will necessarily be spent, either. It just covers all the consoles that COULD need repairs. The majority of 360's are still sitting happily in home entertainment systems, playing 1080 resolution games for their customers, and will continue to do so.
Back on topic, who honestly didn't expect the popcorn-priced Wii to overtake its bigger, beefier cousins? At today's income levels, parents can buy a Wii for each child to complement their color-coordinated DS.
Except the blog still says that users have to start the refund process, by providing up-to-date information for themselves. So its still in the user's hands.
:)
Still, wish I'd bought some Google videos, now.
Mutations do happen, anyway. The point is that mutations that would offer resistance at the target site are VERY VERY LIKELY to be detrimental to the bacteria, when compared to unmutated bacteria. One fictional example: drug A binds to protein B on the cell. Some cells have a mutation in protein B that deforms it, making it more difficult for drug A to bind. However, this deformation also causes protein B to be 50% less effective at binding what it was originally supposed to bind.
In a normal population, the bacteria that DON'T contain the mutation have selective advantage over those that DO. They will grow faster and, like all things, eventually compete their rivals out of the population. The only time said mutation is going to help is when you introduce drug A, and all the cells that don't have the mutation are suddenly unable to survive. Then you kill off all the cells that DON'T have the mutation and are left with a population of cells that do.
Now, remove the drug, and ALL the cells that remain are STILL resistant to it. Over a long period of time, the reverse mutation may accumulate and return the population to "non-resistant" status, but until then, those bugs will be impervious to drug A. If drug A is maintained in widespread use, this is unlikely to ever happen.
I always wondered why people felt antimicrobial soap was worth anything. Here's why:
i d=doi:10.1086/502183 has some interesting comparisons of hand washing techniques.
Bacteria have cell walls. Triclosan, as the summary notes, targets a component of the cell wall that is integral to survival. You know what else is integral to survival? The cell wall. You know what other component of soap targets the cell wall? Soap. Even small amounts of detergent will completely solubilize a cell wall. Imagine the concentration of detergent on your hands when you wash them, with soap.
No bacteria is surviving that, and if it is, it sure as hell is going to survive a tiny concentration of Triclosan.
Also, on a side note, the motion of -rubbing- one's hands together has been shown to contribute at least as much as the soap, to the killing of bacteria. http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?
Yes, in fact I believe my post was quite clearly a C++ forever post. Thank you for pointing that out, for anyone who might have missed it. ("...I won't say C++ is the LAST language I'll ever use, I think that there's room for improvement...")
I suppose I hadn't considered the fact that some people, such as yourself, might fall into ALL of the categories, at once. Congratulations! You have bested me.
I have nothing against any of these groups (except perhaps the C holdouts, most of them can crawl back into the cave they code in). I'm simply pointing out the ludicrous nature of their arguments against a very solid language that has been widely adopted for good reasons.
I don't consider C++ to have won or lost anything against Java, VB, C# and I certainly don't consider it to even be competing with scripting languages like the amazing Python or the over-hyped Ruby or the antiquated but venerable Perl. That's like saying "C++ is used for less shell scripts than Bash." They're not even intended for the same purpose.
Finally, if you find yourself getting worked up about all this, you've missed the entire point of my original post. It is satire, and though it might sting when it happens to be aimed at you, its a valuable skill to learn to laugh at yourself.
Procedural. Yes that's what I was looking for. :)
And now that I read it, I suppose a mod of flamebait wouldn't be unfair. But it certainly is fun to go through all the other comments and assign them into my categories, see which one wins!
I think you've hit the nail on the head for the majority of programmers out there. There's a reason C++ is so dominant in development of just-about-everything(tm). There are a few reasons for the minority to be upset, over this, and they're usually divided into camps:
(1) The C holdouts. These folks grew up learning C and functional programming. They hold to the misguided belief that C is still a more optimized language and the appropriate choice for most applications. They also believe "struct" is all the OOP you should ever need. Arguments from this camp usually involve how hard it is to make a compiler for C++ ("When I used VC5 back in 1842, it didn't even compile my for loops correctly") and on application size ("I included the entire standard library because I thought it was required and now I can't fit my 2MB executable on my 5.25" floppy").
(2) The Objective-C people. These folks decided to learn Objective-C instead of C++, when growing out of C. Usually because Apple told them to. Their arguments usually focus on how C++ is too flexible and isn't a true OOP language ("Objective-C is far more intuitive and straightforward than C++ ever will be, like my iBook!")
(3) The Java people. These folks believe that, if you're going to get more complicated than C, you may as well go all out. They want all the bells and whistles, and believe that C++ provides all the complexity with none of the features. Their arguments almost always start with garbage collection and proceed on to Objective-C style arguments about being a true OOP language ("Why bother freeing your own memory? Let the computer guess what you want, that's what they're there for.")
(4) The idealists. Finally, these folks believe that there is some other, ideal language that roughly nobody uses for anything but would cure global warming, disarm our nuclear arsenal and mix a mean screwdriver while it was at it. They attack C++ mainly because, if their new order is to take over, the evil giant that currently oppresses them must be the first to fall ("Just because its popular doesn't mean its good! In fact, it means it must be crap and I refuse to use it.")
I hope this provides some insight into this small subset of the programming community. Rest assured that most of us DO use C++ or some extension of it, for many tasks, and are perfectly satisfied with it. I won't say C++ is the LAST language I'll ever use, I think that there's room for improvement and I'm sure there's another language that will replace it, eventually.
Schools in the US and Canada have made it policy to discourage upper-level math. Its only news because other countries are beginning to follow suit. Who here grew up in a US/Canada high school that actually -required- more than a year or two of math? My high school was one of the best ranked public schools in the nation, and it only required 2 years of Math and Science, but a full 4 years of English and Social Studies. So what do you think the majority of students did? OPTED to take upper level Math and Science? Hell no. The schools all but said "you don't need to know that."
Is there any way (aside from not patching) that someone can avoid having the functionality turned off? Its one thing to disable it and leave an option to turn it back on, if you understand the security risk involved. Its another to simply turn it off, unilaterally.
Granted, most Apple users won't understand the security risk involved and shouldn't turn it back on until the mothership fixes the problem. But then again, most Apple users are too busy sticking fingers in their ears and yelling "la-la-la" to notice a worm even exists.
Did I miss something? Are IT and web development jobs suddenly a dime a dozen? Has investment in web "2.0" startups been going up? Are we back to hiring high school dropouts and paying them network admin salaries for looking up porn on the internet?
Last I checked, the economy was just barely rebounding from our last bubble-bursting. Hardly charging forward to our next one. If there IS going to be another bubble, its going to be around another new set of technologies that investors don't understand but think must be worth money (*cough*iPhone*cough*). The web won't be it.
Projects that hang in-between just muddle the waters.
Yes, because nobody can think of a project that might not want (or be able) to be "free" but might still want to provide as much source for the community as possible. If its not completely free, it may as well be Microsoft!
Now back to the real world.