So, do all the BSD players who matter hide their code, or do they contribute it back to the project? My point is not that it needs to be enforced by law, but that if they do it, they hurt themselves, and ultimately the project as a whole.
I certainly would never even consider targetting BSD, or putting my stuff under a BSD license because it's possible for companies to steal my work and sell it back to me. Judging by the available software, it seems like a lot of people agree with me.
Those companies, by not sharing, are killing the goose that laid the golden egg. They have this fantastic piece of software that works well for their needs. It was created using this open process. Taking the software away, and hiding it from that process is making the process that created it for you in the first place significantly less effective, and will ultimately kill it.
They are making stupid business decisions. They don't fight because I bet the people at the FSF are wise, and point this out to them.
Whee, someone was already working on a better version of an idea I had a few months ago. Yay! My idea was much clumsier, and was designed to make buildings look a little like trees, with branches and leaves. But her idea is much more efficient and attractive, and still heliotropic.:-)
It's only a civil matter because the RIAA is choosing not to pursue it criminally for various reasons. I almost wish some group would come along and pursue criminal charges to really bring home to people what's going on.
Then change the law. It's obsolete. It's no longer an acceptable tradeoff to gatekeeper copying in order to reward artists. It was once, and it isn't anymore. Find a different way of doing it.
You're looking at doubling the US prisonm population. We already have the highest prison population of any democracy in the world. Do you really want to be feeding a whole bunch of file swappers with your tax dollars?
Sounds like you're living in a world that no longer exists. At one point in time it would've been considered natural to arrest people for badmouthing the king. Now you consider it natural to arrest people for sharing a file with a friend, an act that doesn't harm anybody, and is well nigh undetectable without extensive and intrusive surveillance. I hope you like the world you want to creat.
I love people who want to force everybody to act in a way they just aren't going to act. Fundamentalist Christians, fundamenalist muslims, and now RIAA apologists.
It took a war to stop the Nazis. Do you really want a civil war against the citizens of the US so you can continue to have a copyright law that will never work? Sounds to me like the law is obsolete.
Actually, if the terminal driver didn't implement backspace, or though the backspace character was ^? (delete) and not ^H, it would happily accept your backspace, and echo it back to your terminal, which would obligingly move your cursor back.
You, you'd be typing along, hit backspace a couple of times and type what you meant, and the letters would stomp over what was there already, and you'd think you were good to go. But, in reality, what happened is that the backspace characters just got stuck in there along with everything else you typed. So, using a display program that properly escaped the backspace characters, you'd see something like this: 'Georeg^H^Hge'.
Very few science fiction writers have ever proprosed purely technological solutions to problems. Heinlein is one of the best examples. All of Heinlein's books are about social problems, not technological ones. They are about different social systems and how they might work. Often the technology was just there as a way of providing a reason for it to be possible to create a new society.
So, in response to your overgeneral, false observation, I'll provide one of my own.
I find the rantings of people who think that technology and science are all about material things and 'useless junk' to be a really disturbing form of reactionary conservative. They don't want a future, and think we're incapable of building one that works unless we somehow radically change human nature to not be as ugly as they think it is.
Re:64bit performance gains...
on
AMD64 Preview
·
· Score: 1
I know about mmapping large files. My big problem with that is that you completely lose all control of when you take the latency hit for a disk read. But, you're right, there are some applications for which it would be a big help to be able to mmap truly huge files.
Re:64bit performance gains...
on
AMD64 Preview
·
· Score: 1
Since most applications do not need a 64 bit address range, will it be possible to still use all the juicy 64 bit number manipulation for 64 bit numbers but still keep 32 bit pointers for most things?
In fact, I think it will be at least 5 years, and probably a decade before the average application needs to use more then 31 bits of address space.
Oh, I think signing each and every message is an excellent idea. I think X.509 and PKI with their central certificate authorities are awful ideas. They aren't one and the same even though many people seem to think they are.
We do present id every time we speak. We normally call it a face or voice.
The 'official' id is the equivalent of certificate signed by a generally accepted authority. And, most people would (rightly) be highly offended if you asked them to present something like that every time you spoke to them, even if it took them no time or effort to present.
Why is central signing needed at all? That's a complete fallacy. How do you decide that someone is who they say they are in the real world? Do you look at their driver's license or passport? That only happens during the minority of communications in which you actually pay someone, and even then it doesn't happen if you use cash. It cetainly isn't appropriate for every email messge.
The bubble was waiting for a pin to pop it. That pin was the Microsoft anti-trust verdict. Microsoft's share prices were highly inflated, I think they still are too high by maybe a factor of 2.
It's both a social and a technological problem. Right now, the technology makes spam very easy, and makes address forgery simple. It should make both of those things hard.
If it made those things hard, the legislation could be more effective. Especially if address forgery were made much more difficult.
I don't care how they write. I care if they are honest, think before they act, and act from long-range adherence to principle instead of from pragmatism or simple expediency.
It sounds like you're saying something like "I expect politicians to write in a particular style, wear three-piece suits, kiss babies, and smile a lot. I won't elect a politician who doesn't do these things.". Seems rather silly and short-sighted to me.
Slashdot Mirror
So, do all the BSD players who matter hide their code, or do they contribute it back to the project? My point is not that it needs to be enforced by law, but that if they do it, they hurt themselves, and ultimately the project as a whole.
I certainly would never even consider targetting BSD, or putting my stuff under a BSD license because it's possible for companies to steal my work and sell it back to me. Judging by the available software, it seems like a lot of people agree with me.
When I communicate with people on the net, they all get a person ID. It's called an email address.
Those companies, by not sharing, are killing the goose that laid the golden egg. They have this fantastic piece of software that works well for their needs. It was created using this open process. Taking the software away, and hiding it from that process is making the process that created it for you in the first place significantly less effective, and will ultimately kill it.
They are making stupid business decisions. They don't fight because I bet the people at the FSF are wise, and point this out to them.
*chuckle* I should've known that you'd be the one to come up with the most realistic and cogent response to this.
Not all 'catches' are unreasonable or underhanded. In this case, HPs 'catch' is perfectly reasonable and to be expected.
You too can have this fantastic birthday card. When you open it, it sings and dances and cries "Halleluiah". The catch, you have to give me $10.
Whee, someone was already working on a better version of an idea I had a few months ago. Yay! My idea was much clumsier, and was designed to make buildings look a little like trees, with branches and leaves. But her idea is much more efficient and attractive, and still heliotropic. :-)
What, exactly, would you do with an ECM unit, 1000 km fullerene cable (possibly long enough for a space elevator), and tactical nuke?
It's only a civil matter because the RIAA is choosing not to pursue it criminally for various reasons. I almost wish some group would come along and pursue criminal charges to really bring home to people what's going on.
Then change the law. It's obsolete. It's no longer an acceptable tradeoff to gatekeeper copying in order to reward artists. It was once, and it isn't anymore. Find a different way of doing it.
You're looking at doubling the US prisonm population. We already have the highest prison population of any democracy in the world. Do you really want to be feeding a whole bunch of file swappers with your tax dollars?
Sounds like you're living in a world that no longer exists. At one point in time it would've been considered natural to arrest people for badmouthing the king. Now you consider it natural to arrest people for sharing a file with a friend, an act that doesn't harm anybody, and is well nigh undetectable without extensive and intrusive surveillance. I hope you like the world you want to creat.
I love people who want to force everybody to act in a way they just aren't going to act. Fundamentalist Christians, fundamenalist muslims, and now RIAA apologists.
It took a war to stop the Nazis. Do you really want a civil war against the citizens of the US so you can continue to have a copyright law that will never work? Sounds to me like the law is obsolete.
Actually, if the terminal driver didn't implement backspace, or though the backspace character was ^? (delete) and not ^H, it would happily accept your backspace, and echo it back to your terminal, which would obligingly move your cursor back.
You, you'd be typing along, hit backspace a couple of times and type what you meant, and the letters would stomp over what was there already, and you'd think you were good to go. But, in reality, what happened is that the backspace characters just got stuck in there along with everything else you typed. So, using a display program that properly escaped the backspace characters, you'd see something like this: 'Georeg^H^Hge'.
Very few science fiction writers have ever proprosed purely technological solutions to problems. Heinlein is one of the best examples. All of Heinlein's books are about social problems, not technological ones. They are about different social systems and how they might work. Often the technology was just there as a way of providing a reason for it to be possible to create a new society.
So, in response to your overgeneral, false observation, I'll provide one of my own.
I find the rantings of people who think that technology and science are all about material things and 'useless junk' to be a really disturbing form of reactionary conservative. They don't want a future, and think we're incapable of building one that works unless we somehow radically change human nature to not be as ugly as they think it is.
I know about mmapping large files. My big problem with that is that you completely lose all control of when you take the latency hit for a disk read. But, you're right, there are some applications for which it would be a big help to be able to mmap truly huge files.
Since most applications do not need a 64 bit address range, will it be possible to still use all the juicy 64 bit number manipulation for 64 bit numbers but still keep 32 bit pointers for most things?
In fact, I think it will be at least 5 years, and probably a decade before the average application needs to use more then 31 bits of address space.
Oh, I think signing each and every message is an excellent idea. I think X.509 and PKI with their central certificate authorities are awful ideas. They aren't one and the same even though many people seem to think they are.
We do present id every time we speak. We normally call it a face or voice.
The 'official' id is the equivalent of certificate signed by a generally accepted authority. And, most people would (rightly) be highly offended if you asked them to present something like that every time you spoke to them, even if it took them no time or effort to present.
You're right, it also does absolutely nothing to stop spam. *sigh*
Why is central signing needed at all? That's a complete fallacy. How do you decide that someone is who they say they are in the real world? Do you look at their driver's license or passport? That only happens during the minority of communications in which you actually pay someone, and even then it doesn't happen if you use cash. It cetainly isn't appropriate for every email messge.
Ahh, now that is a good reason to charge them with being biased. :-)
Since they happen to be correct on every single issue, that means they're biased?
The bubble was waiting for a pin to pop it. That pin was the Microsoft anti-trust verdict. Microsoft's share prices were highly inflated, I think they still are too high by maybe a factor of 2.
It doesn't block all spam. It's easy to forge headers.
The first phrase could be said by half the people modded up for this article. I don't understand people at all.
Please, come over here and rape me again, I like it. Please, commit more felonies you bad boy! I so love it when you're being evil!
Perhaps that's it. Or maybe it's just a pathetic apathy. I can't tell.
It's both a social and a technological problem. Right now, the technology makes spam very easy, and makes address forgery simple. It should make both of those things hard.
If it made those things hard, the legislation could be more effective. Especially if address forgery were made much more difficult.
I don't care how they write. I care if they are honest, think before they act, and act from long-range adherence to principle instead of from pragmatism or simple expediency.
It sounds like you're saying something like "I expect politicians to write in a particular style, wear three-piece suits, kiss babies, and smile a lot. I won't elect a politician who doesn't do these things.". Seems rather silly and short-sighted to me.