Parent post nailed it. The article failed to cite even one occasion where Google said anything about running servers on residential lines much less championed it. Nothing they have done has been inconsistent with anything that they have said previously. Now if they suddenly started throttling netflix or bittorrent, as you say that would be a different story.
I'm not sure how this is inconsistent with there previous position on network neutrality? Certainly if they started throttling netflix or blocking other services that would be one thing, the summary or the article failed to CITE even just one occasion where Google championed running servers on residential lines.
I know why the license was created. It can be rationalized anyway people like, but at the end of the day it is still inconsistent with freedom zero. Any EULA violates freedom zero. AGPL is a EULA because if you don't agree to the terms you cannot USE the software, that is placing an additional restriction on use. If there views have evolved on freedom zero they should retract it or reword it, but as of right now AGPL is inconsistent with the "freedoms" listed on there website.
I call it a EULA, because it is a EULA. If you don't agree to the terms you can't USE the software, that is a EULA. EULA's violate freedom zero. FSF and GNU had been against EULA's since there inception, but suddenly just throw freedom zero out the window.
An "on use" provision makes the license a EULA. Which in my book is a "Bad Thing". AGPL places requirements on how you use the software, which no other endorsed open source license does. Forget the fact that EULA's themselves are of questionable nature and the fact that AGPL is presented in the same clickwrap fashion. FSF and GNU have been against EULA's since inception because they violate freedom zero, and now they created a EULA.
I don't like AGPL for the simple reason that it is a EULA. It is no better than any of the other shrink wrap EULA's of questionable enforcability. Fundamentally it violates freedom zero. GNU should have stuck to distribution licenses instead of wading in to the mess that is EULAs with AGPL.
"TIE Fighter" had a much more developed story line and (accompanying materials) and would be awesome for a movie. Forgive me if you include that game in the "X-Wing series".
code that links against a GPL library can only be distributed under the terms of GPL. You're thinking of LGPL which allows non-GPL code to link, and only requires distributing changes to the LGPL library. That's the entire reason LGPL exists and why libraries like glibc use LGPL, otherwise only GPL code could link glibc which would be bad.
You can't link against GPL libraries unless your code GPL. You can, however, link against LGPL libraries and not be GPL or LGPL. Allowing non-GPL software to link is the entire reason LGPL exists and why libraries like glibc use LGPL.
The name of this particular OS is 'Cumulus Linux'. 'GNU/Linux' is not an operating system, It is a family or stack of software. When you create your own OS distro feel free to name it 'AC's GNU/Linux'. As a corollary, Android is not and has never been 'Android/Linux'. The name of the OS is 'Android'. If you want to use GNU/Linux to describe the software running in a particular OS that is fine, but it is not the name of the OS.
This happened in Thailand not to long ago. Some dude (from the UK I believe) made fun of the king of thailand on his blog, went on vacation to Thailand months later and was arrested for it.
Not disagreeing with you but a point about your Cat6a requirement. You can run 10GbE on standard Cat 6 up to 55 meters which would be plenty for most home usages.
When you're given access to classified information you sign an agreement to protect that information. I fail to see how this is analogous at all. Are you sure your not BadAnalogyGuy in disguise?
It's easy to design computers that are good (or even close to perfect) at FPS, that's why IBM doesn't need to invest in it. I'm not sure what IBM's investment decisions have to do with anything though, are they the deciders of whats a valid mental challenge?
Verizon didn't advertise it as 'unlimited'. I'm a FIOS customer, I checked. No where do they use the word 'unlimited'. For my particular service they describe as FIOS Internet up to 35/35.
Slashdot Mirror
Parent post nailed it. The article failed to cite even one occasion where Google said anything about running servers on residential lines much less championed it. Nothing they have done has been inconsistent with anything that they have said previously. Now if they suddenly started throttling netflix or bittorrent, as you say that would be a different story.
I'm not sure how this is inconsistent with there previous position on network neutrality? Certainly if they started throttling netflix or blocking other services that would be one thing, the summary or the article failed to CITE even just one occasion where Google championed running servers on residential lines.
Lawsuits for damages are only reactionary measures. Money can't fix everything, sometimes you need regulation as a proactive measure.
DOS stopped being in the core with WinME. WinNT was based on VMS and never had DOS lineage.
I know why the license was created. It can be rationalized anyway people like, but at the end of the day it is still inconsistent with freedom zero. Any EULA violates freedom zero. AGPL is a EULA because if you don't agree to the terms you cannot USE the software, that is placing an additional restriction on use. If there views have evolved on freedom zero they should retract it or reword it, but as of right now AGPL is inconsistent with the "freedoms" listed on there website.
I call it a EULA, because it is a EULA. If you don't agree to the terms you can't USE the software, that is a EULA. EULA's violate freedom zero. FSF and GNU had been against EULA's since there inception, but suddenly just throw freedom zero out the window.
An "on use" provision makes the license a EULA. Which in my book is a "Bad Thing". AGPL places requirements on how you use the software, which no other endorsed open source license does. Forget the fact that EULA's themselves are of questionable nature and the fact that AGPL is presented in the same clickwrap fashion. FSF and GNU have been against EULA's since inception because they violate freedom zero, and now they created a EULA.
I don't like AGPL for the simple reason that it is a EULA. It is no better than any of the other shrink wrap EULA's of questionable enforcability. Fundamentally it violates freedom zero. GNU should have stuck to distribution licenses instead of wading in to the mess that is EULAs with AGPL.
AGPL is bad EULA, and it violates freedom zero. If they had just changed it to GPL I don't think you'd be seeing this backlash.
"TIE Fighter" had a much more developed story line and (accompanying materials) and would be awesome for a movie. Forgive me if you include that game in the "X-Wing series".
I just wish they'd make a film for Star Wars 5.5 (aka Shadows of the Empire) which had an awesome story line.
code that links against a GPL library can only be distributed under the terms of GPL. You're thinking of LGPL which allows non-GPL code to link, and only requires distributing changes to the LGPL library. That's the entire reason LGPL exists and why libraries like glibc use LGPL, otherwise only GPL code could link glibc which would be bad.
You can't link against GPL libraries unless your code GPL. You can, however, link against LGPL libraries and not be GPL or LGPL. Allowing non-GPL software to link is the entire reason LGPL exists and why libraries like glibc use LGPL.
Since JDK6, Oracle Java is based on OpenJDK. Unless your using one of the specific features oracle tweaks or adds you should be fine.
At the risk of feeding a troll...
The name of this particular OS is 'Cumulus Linux'. 'GNU/Linux' is not an operating system, It is a family or stack of software. When you create your own OS distro feel free to name it 'AC's GNU/Linux'. As a corollary, Android is not and has never been 'Android/Linux'. The name of the OS is 'Android'. If you want to use GNU/Linux to describe the software running in a particular OS that is fine, but it is not the name of the OS.
This happened in Thailand not to long ago. Some dude (from the UK I believe) made fun of the king of thailand on his blog, went on vacation to Thailand months later and was arrested for it.
You'd have to be selling to someone in Germany.
Not disagreeing with you but a point about your Cat6a requirement. You can run 10GbE on standard Cat 6 up to 55 meters which would be plenty for most home usages.
You can export all that data in ODF formats.
When you're given access to classified information you sign an agreement to protect that information. I fail to see how this is analogous at all. Are you sure your not BadAnalogyGuy in disguise?
There are big purse events that are usually invitationals with corporate sponsors and not "pay to play".
It's easy to design computers that are good (or even close to perfect) at FPS, that's why IBM doesn't need to invest in it. I'm not sure what IBM's investment decisions have to do with anything though, are they the deciders of whats a valid mental challenge?
They don't advertise unlimited....
Verizon didn't advertise it as 'unlimited'. I'm a FIOS customer, I checked. No where do they use the word 'unlimited'. For my particular service they describe as FIOS Internet up to 35/35.
Verizon didn't use 'unlimited'. I'm a FIOS customer myself I just checked. The work 'unlimited' doesn't appear anywhere in the service description.