What about
my patent for a "medium-sized length of rope for use in jumping"?
Lets see how much damage they can do to their rep with this piece of immoral and ultimately hopeless litigation. I'd like to just have *5 minutes* with the pointy haired bosses that came up with this business strategy. --
And if Napster, the RIAA, or Her Majesty's Secret Service wanted to harvest track names from FreeDB for their own purposes, how would FreeDB stop
them? How would FreeDB even know the Bad Guys were even in there?
The bad guys are allowed to access the database just like anyone else, that's not the point. This is the point. Anybody at any time can get the complete archive and start their own FreeDB, so if FreeDB ever gets driven underground by legal minions of the evil music distribution monopolies it will just spring back up instantly in a 100 different forms. Probably it will just get better. This is the meaning of freedom. --
I know this will be posted 50 times to this thread, but here it is again anyway: http://freedb.org/. We're rebuilding it, we're rebuilding it better, and cddb can stew in its immoral juices. --
is it so much different than an invention that allows one-button starting of a car? Whether or not either patent would be valid is another story, but the
fact remains that few would have qualms issuing the second patent. The difference is merely the distance between tangible space and electronic space.
No, the difference is, we've woken up to the fact that the patent game is a net drag on the economy and we're saying enough is enough. We've been through the aguments before - if you don't understand by now how patents suck the life out of the development process then you never will.
Can you give one example of a software patent that has tended to speed up progress in a given area instead of slowing it down? No, I didn't think so.
--
Debian is a most wonderful distribution. No commercial distribution can touch Debian's level of care and attention to package building and installation. However. Have you ever looked at those install scripts? They do work, and work well - but the mix of bash, perl and sed is an unholy concoction that could stand replacing. Python can do the work of all three in a way that is readable and maintainable. Python could easily be included in the base distribution - the interpreter and builtin classes come in at around 380 K, considerably smaller than Perl.
ls -l `which python1.5`
Naturally it would take some time to change over those 1,000's of scripts, and why fix scripts that aren't borked. But for new packages...
If you are a debian maintainer, please consider this carefully. --
After all, it's government money that
pays for the work, and they retain the right to do whatever they want with the code...
Whooooaa Nelly! Lets rephrase that: "After all, it's public money that pays for the work, and they retain the right to do whatever they want with the code".
There is no way in hell that the government should even think about getting into the proprietary, closed software business with public money. --
This really is great news for the Palm, if for no other reason than the fact that it carries an open source license.
An equally important reason is speed. Have you tried Java on a PDA? I have it flashed into a helio, a 75 MHz., 32-bit RISC processor with 8 meg or RAM and it takes about 10-15 seconds to switch between apps,. These are *really small* demo apps. Hopefully Python works better. I think it's a safe bet it works a lot better. I'll get a palm now just to use this, and hopefully get this happening on the helio too.
This is finally the point where PDA's get my attention. Coming soon: Python on your cell phone. --
(oops, here it is with the correct code/formatting. Comment to slash coders: your lameness filter is lame. Maybe consider a rewrite in Python?:-/ And can we please have a <pre> tag.)
I now use Python in place of bash in many situations. As a bash freak, that's impressive. I'll type 'python' and do something to a bunch of files now,
among other things. I recently had a request from a support guy, "how can I do this" and I wrote a very short script in Python on paper and gave it to him.
It would have been a PITA in any other scripting language.
I now write my file smashing scripts in a combination of bash and python I call "bashon". This caters to the strengths of both: bash for macro substitution and system commands, python for writing readable code that does nontrivial things.
For example, a bashon script that makes n files (3rd parameter) named "foo###" (2nd parameter) in directory xxx (1st parameter) on test partition hda7:
mount/dev/hda7 $1 -t ext2
mkdir $1/$2
cat <<END | python
for i in range($3):
name = "$1/$2/" + str(i)
print "create", name
open(name, 'w')
I now use Python in place of bash in many situations. As a bash freak, that's impressive. I'll type 'python' and do something to a bunch of files now,
among other things. I recently had a request from a support guy, "how can I do this" and I wrote a very short script in Python on paper and gave it to him.
It would have been a PITA in any other scripting language.
I now write my file smashing scripts in a combination of bash and python I call "bashon". This caters to the strengths of both: bash for macro substitution and system commands, python for writing readable code that does nontrivial things.
For example, a bashon script that makes n files (3rd parameter) named "foo###" (2nd parameter) in directory xxx (1st parameter) on test partition hda7:
mount/dev/hda7 $1 -t ext2
mkdir $1/$2
cat <<END | python
for i in range($3):
name = "$1/$2/" + str(i)
print "create", name
If the government is going to be paying people to produce software, the software should be open for all taxpayers to use. Including closed-source software companies.
GPL'd software *is* open for all taxpayers to use. However when it comes to redistribution there are a few easy conditions that apply, most notably that the source must be made available. I don't see how you can argue that this hurts taxpayers in any way.
--
Seriously, the best suggestions I've seen so far (on linuxtoday, by the way) are:
SHH - Shh! I'm talking to my computer
FRESH - Free Remote Encypted Shell
But coming up with a good name is the easy part, the hard part is determining if it's morally right for the author to attempt to enforce an IP claim on an IEC standard. IMHO, he should have enforced his claim *before* it was accepted as a standard, not after. Letting the standard be accepted without moving to enforce his claim should really be the same, legally, as putting the IP into the public domain.
By the way, are you reading this, Scott, please take note.
--
The reason open sourced software development works so well is because many people can help out on the project and put as little or as much time as they want. With open sourced hardware, not nearly as many people will be able to contribute to the cause due to lack of hardware resources. Don't get me wrong, it's a great idea, but I don't think it will get the same success as open sourced software.
You are wrong, it will succeed to the same extent as open source software for all the same reasons. Remember, this hardware is just a different kind of software, it's software for silicon. It's cost is asymtoticly approaching zero, just like sofware. The design sofware is now free, and fabbing costs a tiny fraction of what it used to, due to competition. You can load it into fpga's if you want to, and especially, you can simulate it. --
Simple, cheap. I paid $140 and they cost less now. 8 MB, 2B flash, re-flashed with linux+kaffee. Specs here. Java is just wrong for this - it takes about 30 secs to start, and 15 secs to load an app. I want to put in Python instead and see if that makes it usable. I can think of a lot of things I'd do with this, with a decent software infrastructure. Java is a dead weight holding this thing down, I hope that Python will be more like wings. --
To fix the patent application vetting process, two things must happen...
Oh sure, fix the patent application process so it doesn't hurt so much when we get screwed. Lets call that the 'KY jelly' approach: it may not hurt as much, but you're still getting buggered.
No, respectfully, forget the KY jelly, it's better if the absurd patents keep getting granted to draw attention to the real issue: you can't own algorithms, they belong to God. The granting of patents on algorithms is the root evil that has to be eliminated, lets not try to sanitize it. --
Go to Eazel's Nautilus demo site , and hit one of the cgi links, which downloads a java applet that gives you a remote connection to an Eazel machine running Gnome/Nautilus that really works. Start browser, surf to slashdot, post comment. *Note*, you will need lots of patience due to high keyboard latency, but actually the screen update rate is tolerable.
Heh, I tried to preview my comment by actually running the applet recursively, but the site was too plugged up. I'll try again later, this will be really demented:-)
Now this is a stunt that's only practical with Java. Oh by the way, after you've played with Nautilus you'll see why Microsoft id doomed. --
Examples: A 750 mL bottle of a decent wine costs you at least $15 here. You can get wines of same quality for maybe FFr 50 (7 Euros), maybe cheaper.
You are guessing. You have obviously not spent time in Europe. A decent bottle of Bordeaux costs DM4-5, about $3, the same stuff you pay $10-15 for.
A computer can be acked in the US for $400. A similar computer will run you an extra 50% or so in some parts of Europe.
Nak. Desktop computers at least are about the same price here as over there. Some things things are cheaper here: Beer. Sausage. Beer. Cheese. Insurance. Beer. Most other things cost more. --
if Intel pulls this off and succeeds in developing these compilers, the first time I run IA-64 compiled software on an IA-64 would give
me goosebumps at the massive amount of computing power at my fingertips in a mid tower case
Oh, I don't know. I was hoping to hell that explicit parallelism would turn out to be a dud technology because it's a pain in the butt to program. Ugly as sin. Stupid, gigantic instructions. I have always been attracted to 'light is tight', and monster instructions just don't sit right with me. At this point, it looks like I'll get my wish. The future is in tight, efficient instruction sets like the, um, hehe, X86, believe it or not. OK, there is ugliness there, but actually the core instruction set is nice and tight. Too bad Intel engineers didn't lean in that direction - since they had the chance to tear up the old instruction set why not replace it with a tighter, more regular one? But oh no.
The future is SMT - Simultaneous MultiThreading (see DEC's new Alpha chips) and that makes the tightness of the instruction set even more important because it reads multiple instruction streams at once. Big fat instructions == kill the cache. --
While I must admit that I enjoyed reading this fascinating memo, personally I don't think it should have been posted. I'd have been more than satisfied with informed-sounding speculation that later turned out to be correct. --
When push comes to shove, I'd guess Microsoft will realize that they've already become the richest fucks in the world via the old ("rampant piracy") system, and
almost certainly back down from rocking the boat.
Microsoft's business model and valuation are both based on continuous growth. They are between a rock and a hard place. They *can't* get by with the revenue they used to - their stock will collapse, and that stock price is their lifeblood. They have to find some way to milk the market for ever more or they are toast. --
Yah, and paying for food sucks too, but you gotta eat.
There's a difference. If you get food from somebody then they don't have the food anymore - you *should* pay them. But if you get sofware from somebody, then they still have it, don't they? You shouldn't pay for the software, you should pay for the effort it took to give it to you.
You have two choices: Go to the grocery store (Microsoft), or plant a garden (Linux, BSD, etc.)
Well, actually writing your own operating system would be like planting a garden. Fortunately for us, Linus Torvalds and friends have already done that for us. Now we can just pick the fruit from the tree:-)
I am not sure why it's such a bad thing for Microsoft to lock their software to a single computer. Of course, customers should be told this *up front* and
they can decide.
Oh yes, entirely agree. This will make it much easier for them to decide to install Linux.:-) --
If you have built a new machine, and need to install it, you've have a toll-free number to call where you can
re-activate the PID.
I had reason to call such a Microsoft number two years ago. I was on the road and I toasted my Windows partition. I had the Windows CD with me but it refused to install without its id code - but gave me a toll free number to call: 1-800-RULEGIT. I am *not* making this up. I felt bad but I called the number anyway. After 5 minutes on hold I hung up in disgust, and have never since installed a Microsoft OS on anything, and I am now the proud owner of a number of unopened Windows OS's, waiting for the day when Microsoft will give me my money back.
This experience turned out to be exactly what was required to move me entirely off windows. Up till that time I had been dual-booting Linux and Windows 98, but my disgust with the way I was treated that day by Microsoft motivated me to solve all the remaining problems I had with Linux that kept me going back to windows: getting online, getting sound to work, usb, etc. Thinking back on it, none of it was that hard (but harder than now, where you basically just stick in the CD and go). But it was psychologically hard to kick the Windows habit. Thanks, Bill, without that one last kick I would have probably continued suffering for another year. --
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know how relevant this is, but NCR seems to have been a little late getting into the game. As if this idea is non-obvious anyway.
--
Lets see how much damage they can do to their rep with this piece of immoral and ultimately hopeless litigation. I'd like to just have *5 minutes* with the pointy haired bosses that came up with this business strategy.
--
The bad guys are allowed to access the database just like anyone else, that's not the point. This is the point. Anybody at any time can get the complete archive and start their own FreeDB, so if FreeDB ever gets driven underground by legal minions of the evil music distribution monopolies it will just spring back up instantly in a 100 different forms. Probably it will just get better. This is the meaning of freedom.
--
I know this will be posted 50 times to this thread, but here it is again anyway: http://freedb.org/. We're rebuilding it, we're rebuilding it better, and cddb can stew in its immoral juices.
--
No, the difference is, we've woken up to the fact that the patent game is a net drag on the economy and we're saying enough is enough. We've been through the aguments before - if you don't understand by now how patents suck the life out of the development process then you never will.
Can you give one example of a software patent that has tended to speed up progress in a given area instead of slowing it down? No, I didn't think so.
--
ls -l `which python1.5`
Naturally it would take some time to change over those 1,000's of scripts, and why fix scripts that aren't borked. But for new packages...
If you are a debian maintainer, please consider this carefully.
--
Whooooaa Nelly! Lets rephrase that: "After all, it's public money that pays for the work, and they retain the right to do whatever they want with the code".
There is no way in hell that the government should even think about getting into the proprietary, closed software business with public money.
--
An equally important reason is speed. Have you tried Java on a PDA? I have it flashed into a helio, a 75 MHz., 32-bit RISC processor with 8 meg or RAM and it takes about 10-15 seconds to switch between apps,. These are *really small* demo apps. Hopefully Python works better. I think it's a safe bet it works a lot better. I'll get a palm now just to use this, and hopefully get this happening on the helio too.
This is finally the point where PDA's get my attention. Coming soon: Python on your cell phone.
--
I now use Python in place of bash in many situations. As a bash freak, that's impressive. I'll type 'python' and do something to a bunch of files now, among other things. I recently had a request from a support guy, "how can I do this" and I wrote a very short script in Python on paper and gave it to him. It would have been a PITA in any other scripting language.
I now write my file smashing scripts in a combination of bash and python I call "bashon". This caters to the strengths of both: bash for macro substitution and system commands, python for writing readable code that does nontrivial things. For example, a bashon script that makes n files (3rd parameter) named "foo###" (2nd parameter) in directory xxx (1st parameter) on test partition hda7:
--
I now write my file smashing scripts in a combination of bash and python I call "bashon". This caters to the strengths of both: bash for macro substitution and system commands, python for writing readable code that does nontrivial things. For example, a bashon script that makes n files (3rd parameter) named "foo###" (2nd parameter) in directory xxx (1st parameter) on test partition hda7:
--
PostgreSQL beats SQL server in every way and it's getting better rapidly
--
GPL'd software *is* open for all taxpayers to use. However when it comes to redistribution there are a few easy conditions that apply, most notably that the source must be made available. I don't see how you can argue that this hurts taxpayers in any way.
--
SHH - Shh! I'm talking to my computer
FRESH - Free Remote Encypted Shell
But coming up with a good name is the easy part, the hard part is determining if it's morally right for the author to attempt to enforce an IP claim on an IEC standard. IMHO, he should have enforced his claim *before* it was accepted as a standard, not after. Letting the standard be accepted without moving to enforce his claim should really be the same, legally, as putting the IP into the public domain.
By the way, are you reading this, Scott, please take note.
--
You are wrong, it will succeed to the same extent as open source software for all the same reasons. Remember, this hardware is just a different kind of software, it's software for silicon. It's cost is asymtoticly approaching zero, just like sofware. The design sofware is now free, and fabbing costs a tiny fraction of what it used to, due to competition. You can load it into fpga's if you want to, and especially, you can simulate it.
--
Simple, cheap. I paid $140 and they cost less now. 8 MB, 2B flash, re-flashed with linux+kaffee. Specs here. Java is just wrong for this - it takes about 30 secs to start, and 15 secs to load an app. I want to put in Python instead and see if that makes it usable. I can think of a lot of things I'd do with this, with a decent software infrastructure. Java is a dead weight holding this thing down, I hope that Python will be more like wings.
--
the correct link
--
Oh sure, fix the patent application process so it doesn't hurt so much when we get screwed. Lets call that the 'KY jelly' approach: it may not hurt as much, but you're still getting buggered.
No, respectfully, forget the KY jelly, it's better if the absurd patents keep getting granted to draw attention to the real issue: you can't own algorithms, they belong to God. The granting of patents on algorithms is the root evil that has to be eliminated, lets not try to sanitize it.
--
Heh, I tried to preview my comment by actually running the applet recursively, but the site was too plugged up. I'll try again later, this will be really demented :-)
Now this is a stunt that's only practical with Java. Oh by the way, after you've played with Nautilus you'll see why Microsoft id doomed.
--
You are guessing. You have obviously not spent time in Europe. A decent bottle of Bordeaux costs DM4-5, about $3, the same stuff you pay $10-15 for. A computer can be acked in the US for $400. A similar computer will run you an extra 50% or so in some parts of Europe.
Nak. Desktop computers at least are about the same price here as over there. Some things things are cheaper here: Beer. Sausage. Beer. Cheese. Insurance. Beer. Most other things cost more.
--
Oh, I don't know. I was hoping to hell that explicit parallelism would turn out to be a dud technology because it's a pain in the butt to program. Ugly as sin. Stupid, gigantic instructions. I have always been attracted to 'light is tight', and monster instructions just don't sit right with me. At this point, it looks like I'll get my wish. The future is in tight, efficient instruction sets like the, um, hehe, X86, believe it or not. OK, there is ugliness there, but actually the core instruction set is nice and tight. Too bad Intel engineers didn't lean in that direction - since they had the chance to tear up the old instruction set why not replace it with a tighter, more regular one? But oh no.
The future is SMT - Simultaneous MultiThreading (see DEC's new Alpha chips) and that makes the tightness of the instruction set even more important because it reads multiple instruction streams at once. Big fat instructions == kill the cache.
--
While I must admit that I enjoyed reading this fascinating memo, personally I don't think it should have been posted. I'd have been more than satisfied with informed-sounding speculation that later turned out to be correct.
--
If you really are a beos fan as you pretend to be, why didn't you say a thing about beos in your posting? You are just a Microsoft astroturfer.
--
Microsoft's business model and valuation are both based on continuous growth. They are between a rock and a hard place. They *can't* get by with the revenue they used to - their stock will collapse, and that stock price is their lifeblood. They have to find some way to milk the market for ever more or they are toast.
--
There's a difference. If you get food from somebody then they don't have the food anymore - you *should* pay them. But if you get sofware from somebody, then they still have it, don't they? You shouldn't pay for the software, you should pay for the effort it took to give it to you.
You have two choices: Go to the grocery store (Microsoft), or plant a garden (Linux, BSD, etc.)
Well, actually writing your own operating system would be like planting a garden. Fortunately for us, Linus Torvalds and friends have already done that for us. Now we can just pick the fruit from the tree :-)
I am not sure why it's such a bad thing for Microsoft to lock their software to a single computer. Of course, customers should be told this *up front* and they can decide.
Oh yes, entirely agree. This will make it much easier for them to decide to install Linux. :-)
--
I had reason to call such a Microsoft number two years ago. I was on the road and I toasted my Windows partition. I had the Windows CD with me but it refused to install without its id code - but gave me a toll free number to call: 1-800-RULEGIT. I am *not* making this up. I felt bad but I called the number anyway. After 5 minutes on hold I hung up in disgust, and have never since installed a Microsoft OS on anything, and I am now the proud owner of a number of unopened Windows OS's, waiting for the day when Microsoft will give me my money back.
This experience turned out to be exactly what was required to move me entirely off windows. Up till that time I had been dual-booting Linux and Windows 98, but my disgust with the way I was treated that day by Microsoft motivated me to solve all the remaining problems I had with Linux that kept me going back to windows: getting online, getting sound to work, usb, etc. Thinking back on it, none of it was that hard (but harder than now, where you basically just stick in the CD and go). But it was psychologically hard to kick the Windows habit. Thanks, Bill, without that one last kick I would have probably continued suffering for another year.
--