Breaking up MSFT would just create lots of monopolies... That is not what we want/need. Forcing MSFT to open APIs of EVERY product will solve most problems. If I want to sell a product that adds a new file system.. no problem.. no license fees. If I want to integrate my widget with windows, again, no problem.
> would the UK be a democratic state without such values? Yes, it would. Not a very good one, but still democratic. Generally their government has much more power in doing things for the so-called 'common good', like arresting writers who heavily critize the military, for example. Except for the Scandanavian countries, mainland Europe is much the same (Germany's censors are heinous *shudder*). ICQ#2584116
Yeah;) That's what I meant. That and people don't get charged/arrested with sedition and various other non popular speech, like all britain and all her former commonwealth places (canada,australia,new zealand, etc...)
Most citizens of non us countries hate the US to varying degrees, this is just another facet of that. The one good thing about US imperialism, as opposed to say, British, is free speech. At least the internet isn't being censored by the government within our borders.
I'm very pissed that JED isn't one of the editors listed. It totally rocks, and I'm very sure tons of other people think so. Why give the duopoly of vim and emacs money?;)
RMS Euler Tesla Da Vinci Kurt Gödel Alan Turing Frank Herbert Sergey P. Korolyov Carl Friedrich Gauss Richard Philips Feynman (woo!!! go RPF!)
To the trolls who responded: go back to your holes
on
Boris Yeltsin Resigns
·
· Score: 1
What he says is quite true, not some psycho viewpoint. Russia is a truly broken country, little better off now than most corrupt african democracies (if not worse off, the mafia is more organized in it). He is not defending the USSR persay you 37734 idiots. Don't try to defend the West; democracy is good, but imperialism is BAD. Personally, I blame it all on Reagan, without whom, Russia would've joined the rest of europe as a democracy in less than 50 years, instead of getting shock treatment democracy, and huge scale corruption and poverty.
Here's what select smart gave me (I was planning to vote for Bradley anyways): 81 Bill Bradley 69 David McReynolds 62 Ralph Nader 42 Donald Trump 39 John S. McCain 36 Warren Beatty
I'm somewhat between the Green Party, Socialist Party, and Democrats (Libertarians sometimes as well), but Bradley is really my top choice. More federalized education, GOOD health care for all. Ideally I want someone who's against patents, and who thinks Big Business is inherently evil.. and being a big Dune fan wouldn't hurt either.. eh.. I can hope/wish.
What really pisses me off is that all of the articles linked to say it's about piracy. Now, sure DeCSS has made it much easier to make copies, but the main thing is I want to watch Matrix in linux, as do many others. This just another sign that patents are a Bad Thing. All patents should do is require atribution of original authors. Then we don't have to GPL programs anymore:) They all will be open source (unless they're kept secret and not patented). I have much more to say about my fully groked wrongness of patents, but i'm tired and recovering from a nasty cold.. so someone jump in:P
Now some comments: Rambus is bad stuff. i840 too. The best thing to do would be to wait a couple of months so you can get Dual Athlon 800 systems for the same price with PC133 or faster SDRAM.
good GPL drivers from EVERYONE, and a system for them (this is mostly the fault of MS, and patents, causing drivers/specs to be proprietary in the 80s and on)
office suite based on GTK, using gecko
truetype would rock, but is not necessary for world domination (or is it? someone enlighten me then;)
Most Jews belong to the same race, usually anthropoligically referred to as Semitic or Hewbrew. They have been a race/ethnic group for a LONG time, get your head out of your ass.
The way I see it the only good open/free software licenses are GPL and LGPL. The others hurt either the open source community or a business. Case in point: I'm a big corporation (IBM for example), I contribute to bsd/x-licensed(or scsl) project, not taking it into closed source, then some other company comes along, takes my work and everybody elses, add some 'killer' feature steals my service deals, and my investment in the project (company + project both screwed). Or a company just comes into to a bsd/x project takes it closed source, adds killer feature(s), my project doesn't have as many interested developers or businesses. The BSD fanatics are always going "Our license is more business friendly", but I don't see it. With GPL or LGPL, business and community are protected, with BSD, most of the money goes to proprietary solutions. With (L)GPL the money goes to companies actually supporting the project and developers. Granted most BSD projects are doing relatively well, but I don't really see big service contracts and open source co-existing.
Yet another reason why [L]GPL rocks, for projects and businesses alike.. the business contributes to the actual project, can sell it SUPPORT/SERVICE, not the product, and the project doesn't ever get these kind of problems. Previous post of mine, which I don't feel like pasting
This might be slightly off topic but I feel like posting so here goes... The way I see it the only good open/free software licenses are GPL and LGPL (or something in between, like TGPL;). The others hurt either the open source community or a business. Case in point: I'm a big corporation (IBM for example), I contribute to bsd/x-licensed project, not taking it into closed source, then some other company comes along, takes my work and everybody elses, add some 'killer' feature steals my service deals, and my investment in the project (company + project both screwed). Or a company just comes into to a bsd/x project takes it closed source, adds killer feature(s), my project doesn't have as many interested developers or businesses. The BSD fanatics are always going "Our license is more business friendly", but I don't see it. With GPL or LGPL, business and community are protected, with BSD, most of the money goes to proprietary solutions. With (L)GPL the money goes to companies actually supporting the project and developers. Granted most BSD projects are doing relatively well, but I don't really see big service contracts and open source co-existing.
Just had to scratch my mental itch and form coherent thought.;) Comments? Am I not groking fully?
First of all, I'd like to say I concure with the above poster. Second, Mozilla is a great project which would have gone faster if they started from scratch, instead of deciding what to keep, what to scrap, and what to rewrite, which limited innovation and stifled creativity and the occasional 'itch' hack.
Slashdot Mirror
Breaking up MSFT would just create lots of monopolies... That is not what we want/need. Forcing MSFT to open APIs of EVERY product will solve most problems. If I want to sell a product that adds a new file system.. no problem.. no license fees. If I want to integrate my widget with windows, again, no problem.
ICQ#2584116
Just how dumb does Intel think people are?
ICQ#2584116
>>It's an abusive and immoral institution
>Copyright is abusive? Immoral? Ho ho. To the contrary, it is fundamentally capitalist.
Actually, yes, IP law is anti-capitalist, it provides a government mandated monopoly, just like normal patents.
ICQ#2584116
>Oppressive taxes (stamp taxes, etc)
Yup, we got those, they're called CD prices, among other things.
>Lack of representation in the British parliament.
No customers control the RIAA or the MPAA, just some studio honchos and lawyers.
>Horrible diplomacy on the part of the British
'nuff said
>Heavy-handedness
Did you sleep through all the lawsuits?
So... by your definition it is a revolution indeed.
ICQ#2584116
Absolutely, but they don't infringe on our free speech rights, just other ones ;)
ICQ#2584116
> would the UK be a democratic state without such values?
Yes, it would. Not a very good one, but still democratic. Generally their government has much more power in doing things for the so-called 'common good', like arresting writers who heavily critize the military, for example. Except for the Scandanavian countries, mainland Europe is much the same (Germany's censors are heinous *shudder*).
ICQ#2584116
Yeah ;) That's what I meant. That and people don't get charged/arrested with sedition and various other non popular speech, like all britain and all her former commonwealth places (canada,australia,new zealand, etc...)
ICQ#2584116
Most citizens of non us countries hate the US to varying degrees, this is just another facet of that. The one good thing about US imperialism,
as opposed to say, British, is free speech. At least the internet isn't being censored by the government within our borders.
ICQ#2584116
I'm very pissed that JED isn't one of the editors listed. It totally rocks, and I'm very sure tons of other people think so. Why give the duopoly of vim and emacs money? ;)
Freshmeat entry
Author's homepage
ICQ#2584116
I don't think I could live without this editor, and my rc file for it. It does everything, is tiny, and extremely configurable.
RMS
Euler
Tesla
Da Vinci
Kurt Gödel
Alan Turing
Frank Herbert
Sergey P. Korolyov
Carl Friedrich Gauss
Richard Philips Feynman (woo!!! go RPF!)
What he says is quite true, not some psycho viewpoint. Russia is a truly broken country, little better off now than most corrupt african democracies (if not worse off, the mafia is more organized in it). He is not defending the USSR persay you 37734 idiots. Don't try to defend the West; democracy is good, but imperialism is BAD.
Personally, I blame it all on Reagan, without whom, Russia would've joined the rest of europe as a democracy in less than 50 years, instead of getting shock treatment democracy, and huge scale corruption and poverty.
Here's what select smart gave me (I was planning to vote for Bradley anyways):
81 Bill Bradley
69 David McReynolds
62 Ralph Nader
42 Donald Trump
39 John S. McCain
36 Warren Beatty
I'm somewhat between the Green Party, Socialist Party, and Democrats (Libertarians sometimes as well), but Bradley is really my top choice. More federalized education, GOOD health care for all. Ideally I want someone who's against patents, and who thinks Big Business is inherently evil.. and being a big Dune fan wouldn't hurt either.. eh.. I can hope/wish.
What really pisses me off is that all of the articles linked to say it's about piracy. Now, sure DeCSS has made it much easier to make copies, but the main thing is I want to watch Matrix in linux, as do many others. This just another sign that patents are a Bad Thing. All patents should do is require atribution of original authors. Then we don't have to GPL programs anymore :) They all will be open source (unless they're kept secret and not patented). I have much more to say about my fully groked wrongness of patents, but i'm tired and recovering from a nasty cold.. so someone jump in :P
[http://www.penguincomputing.com/niveus-scsi.html
System price: $10,475
Now some comments: Rambus is bad stuff. i840 too.
The best thing to do would be to wait a couple of months so you can get Dual Athlon 800 systems for the same price with PC133 or faster SDRAM.
good GPL drivers from EVERYONE, and a system for them (this is mostly the fault of MS, and patents, causing drivers/specs to be proprietary in the 80s and on)
;)
office suite based on GTK, using gecko
truetype would rock, but is not necessary for world domination (or is it? someone enlighten me then
it has mostly eveything else.
IMHO, geek is an intelligent non conformist, while nerd is a possibly smart conformist
Most Jews belong to the same race, usually anthropoligically referred to as Semitic or Hewbrew. They have been a race/ethnic group for a LONG time, get your head out of your ass.
1. a + c (the matrix, first wave.. :)
2. c
3. b
4. b
The way I see it the only good open/free software licenses are GPL and LGPL. The others hurt either the open source community or a business. Case in point: I'm a big corporation (IBM for example), I contribute to bsd/x-licensed(or scsl) project, not taking it into closed source, then some other company comes along, takes my work and everybody elses, add some 'killer' feature steals my service deals, and my investment in the project (company + project both screwed). Or a company just comes into to a bsd/x project takes it closed source, adds killer feature(s), my project doesn't have as many interested developers or businesses. The BSD fanatics are always going "Our license is more business friendly", but I don't see it. With GPL or LGPL, business and community are protected, with BSD, most of the money goes to proprietary solutions. With (L)GPL the money goes to companies actually supporting the project and developers. Granted most BSD projects are doing relatively well, but I don't really see big service contracts and open source co-existing.
Yet another reason why [L]GPL rocks, for projects and businesses alike.. the business contributes to the actual project, can sell it SUPPORT/SERVICE, not the product, and the project doesn't ever get these kind of problems.
Previous post of mine, which I don't feel like pasting
This might be slightly off topic but I feel like posting so here goes... ;). The others hurt either the open source community or a business. Case in point: I'm a big corporation (IBM for example), I contribute to bsd/x-licensed project, not taking it into closed source, then some other company comes along, takes my work and everybody elses, add some 'killer' feature steals my service deals, and my investment in the project (company + project both screwed). Or a company just comes into to a bsd/x project takes it closed source, adds killer feature(s), my project doesn't have as many interested developers or businesses. The BSD fanatics are always going "Our license is more business friendly", but I don't see it. With GPL or LGPL, business and community are protected, with BSD, most of the money goes to proprietary solutions. With (L)GPL the money goes to companies actually supporting the project and developers. Granted most BSD projects are doing relatively well, but I don't really see big service contracts and open source co-existing.
;)
The way I see it the only good open/free software licenses are GPL and LGPL (or something in between, like TGPL
Just had to scratch my mental itch and form coherent thought.
Comments? Am I not groking fully?
First of all, I'd like to say I concure with the above poster. Second, Mozilla is a great project which would have gone faster if they started from scratch, instead of deciding what to keep, what to scrap, and what to rewrite, which limited innovation and stifled creativity and the occasional 'itch' hack.
Yeah, but we can always find a good lawyer who'll go after them pro bono for the publicity.
nt