It seems that MS is also interested in where you come from.
The first time that I went to http://www.msn.com/, I found that the page source had something like this:
You are right in that a particular user or company would be less responsive to those needs than a closed source monopoly. But if you look at all the users and all companies as a group of entities (as oppose to a single monopoly, since they all share the same source code like a single monopoly), then the group as a whole is more responsive. In other words, the free market would respond to what people generally want. It is easy to fork the source, form a new company, and cater to just a particular subset of people, for example like transgaming, lindows, and wine.
ESR:if you two could get a law passed making proprietary licenses illegal, would you do it?
The answer is yes and no. But there could be many reasons for saying yes/no and the reasons do not have to be these two from ESR:
If their answer is "no", then the dispute with Tim is over. Because that will mean they do recognize a right for developers to choose licenses as they will without being killed, jailed, or threatened for choosing the "wrong" one.
If their answer is "yes", then there are many, many other moral questions we could ask them -- and should, if only so that we can get some idea if they're too dangerous to have as neighbors.
I would say "no" if the law is created by FSF and not the consents of the people and "yes" if everyone argees that this is the right(tm) thing to do. Kuhn and Stallman wants people to use GPL. It is their ideals. ESR's question and answers above make it sounds like Kuhn and Stallman force people to use GPL, which is not ture.
The only thing that was left unanswered in this story is which is more important?
The rights of a person who writes software to impose law and rules on the people or the rights of the people to impose law and rules on this person.
I think both rights are important and they need to be balanced. Tim wants more rights to the person and Kuhn and Stallman want more rights to the people. ESR's arguement is just one-sided.
This is good news. If the inner region is empty and our earth explodes someday in the future, we can move our earth there. Even if we can't move the entire earth there, we may build a new one. All it needs are some dirts and lots of energy, anyway.
There is no evidence that Apache is losing the battle.
From netcraft's survey, Microsoft's servers grew from 5.9M to 8M servers, while Apache only lost 0.08M servers. Where do the new IIS servers come from? My theory is that most likely a lot of average joes (with cable/dsl access) are installing full winXP and win2k (which includes IIS) during last month. What do you think?
I don't believe he was arrested because of writing the code or being in the company, etc. BUT he was arrested because he gave a talk on how to circumvent the encryption *while he was in the US*.
This doesn't make sense. Nothing in the law prohibits giving a talk on circumvention. It only prohibits circumvention.
Sec. 1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems
(a) VIOLATIONS REGARDING CIRCUMVENTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL MEASURES- (1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
Not here either,
(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that--
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
Unless, offer to the public means talk to the public and the service is about how to circumvent the encryption. This is unconstitutional under the first admendment.
Does that mean if you want to reverse-engineering anything, you just need to
(1) legally obtain that program,
(2) create at least one new program that is not interoperable with that program
(3) perform the reverse-engineering (what you want)
(4) create a new interoperable program?
If Mandrake were in the service business model, they should call it a service charge for maintaining / improving your Mandrake software. You don't really need to pay the service fee, if you don't want Mandrake to do anything with the software. But others will. And if nobody pays the fee and Mandrake goes under, that is because the community does want them to exist.
2. What examples of fair uses absolutely require access to the work in its most modern, digital, uncorrupted, un-macrovisioned form? The only one that jumped out at me is making a backup copy in case the original is destroyed. But perhaps there are others.
surpose that I don't absolutely require access to the work in its original form, does that mean I have no right to fair use of the original form?
It doesn't matter if there is other form of the copyright material for fair use. What does matter is, legally is there fair use for dvd movie? If there is, who need a reason to use and enjoy better pictures?
The idea to ban human cloning is really resting on the fact that you will get many many defective fetuses who will die on their own, have to be aborted or euthenized, or will live in pain.
That is why we need to study human cloning in the first place, i.e. to prevent such pain from happening. Remember that we already open the pandora's box of cloning. A ban to human cloning means that we will never find out how many of these defective fetuses can be avoided, etc. etc.
accept it won't play games, but play the TV and radio. If Indreama hadn't flop, we could talk about Indreama II or something - a borg box that plays games too!
Technically, GNU/Linux is revolutionary. But to most desktop users who know nothing behind the scene, GNU/Linux is just an ugly unix-like OS with confusing applications available for free. This is how Microsoft sees the picture, i.e. from their customers' eyes who they assume are non-tech consumers.
It is easy to say that I just learn how to get the answer. But when the work becomes more abstract and difficult to solve, memory usually helps. You cannot forever rely on the basics to help you solve all the problems. Sometimes when we learn the concept, it is useful to commit the solution to memory, or some rules to manipulate these solutions. Examples are integration and differentiation rules, Taylor series, graph theory, etc. Or let just say multiplication in hex codes. Since most of us don't memorize these, we cannot do it directly. Imagine that you have to apply it on deriving more difficult concepts. It is like calculating 343 x 89 =? But you forgot what it 9 x 3, 9 x 4, 8 x 3, and 8 x 4. Then, you have to fall back to calculating 3+3+3+... nine times, then 3+3 and so on. At one point, some problems will be too difficult without memorizing things like simple hex multiplications (though I can't think of anything useful).
Usually, when children are asked to memmorize something, they really need that later in life.
1. Transfering of a resource involves a transfering cost, such as packaging, shipping & handling and legal process of exchanging ownership. When transfering occurs, the old owner loses that resource while the new owner gains it. Incompensating for the old owner losing that resource, the new owner PAYs the old owner [something of value, like money]. Duplication of a resource involves a duplicating cost, which includes creation of similar resource and matching the new resource to the old resource. It does not involve a change ownership. For anyone to obtain that resource, a dupe or not, they still have to PAY the owner [something of value, like money], i.e. transfering of a resource.
2. Assume economics still applies, copying anything would waste a lot of resources, like energy.
3. Assume that every work is a new work, soon or very soon. Assume every work is a derived work, such that the derived work can be immediately concluded that it does not infringe on its original work, the curve will never exceed a finite physical ability to conduct the test.
4. PAYing for a flawless duplication by the creator? Fighting against cheap immitations?
5. One should not break-in and access other people's secrets without their permission? One should respect the integrity of other people's products or recipes?
6. Pick up a phone and call technical support and remember to PAY for warranty and support?
...An unmanned U.S. fighter jet fired upon the civilians, killing hundreds of people. The air force spokeperson told the media that an unknown hacker may have jammed the fighter signals at 2600Mhz and took over the entire operations of the jet using the internet...
However, counting bugs is like counting money in today's world and like it or not, we are always being judged by illogical attributes. The fact that there are bugs in the products may indicate a sign of trouble. People or investers who cannot possibly understand the workings of the companies on which they invested hundreds of stocks in, like these indicators to control their risks. For that same reason, the media likes to publish these numbers because some people actually care about the number of bugs.
We see companies flashing or hiding their financial results for the same reason. Bob was hoping that the slashdotters who are considered insiders in linux would not be influenced by the media and stop posting bad comments that may affect his company image.
- pre-install free Linux distro or any other free OS on every new computer.
- provide the option to install Windows with an extra cost of about $200.
- sell an optional a year or two of Linux or Windows service supports.
- advise customers not to install Windows, illegally or before calling Microsoft.
- lobby congress to eliminate "naked computers" and to make free OS the default OS on any new computer.
- politely decline to install free Microsoft Windows or free Microsoft Internet Explorer.
And remember, don't leave your customers in the cold!
and from the link: Leonardo Chiariglione, executive director of the Secure Digital Music Initiative, said "thousands" of people have responded to the SDMI's contest
Do the Cathedral and the Bazaar means two different project management models or two different approaches to software development? Sure the open source projects may have a cathedral model, but it lives in a bazaar environment where competition thrives!
I think this is what ESR meant in The Cathedral and the Bazaar.
Cartoon Network is a Time-Warner company. Your movement of piracy is cutting into our profits. If you do not stop now, we will stop airing the remaining of the DBZ episodes; we will stop those episodes from releasing on DVD and VHS, (except maybe Betamax and divx pay-per-view); we will censor your cartoon network and your tivo too; and we will play the reruns of the worst DBZ episode everyday!
and don't even try to enshrine technology or heighten the sacredness of technology. Technology don't speak. Technology is neutral. It is the people that do the talking.
It's a pitty it also works the other way around, use an Office for Linux as a Bridge from Windows. There is no one way sign on this bridge!
To put a sign on this bridge, just (1) make the windows version much much better and powerful than the linux version. (2) Send out more service pack to fix more windows bugs than Linux bugs. (3) Enchanced documents created in the windows version cannot be opened by the linux version.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems that MS is also interested in where you come from.
...
The first time that I went to http://www.msn.com/, I found that the page source had something like this:
...img height="0" width="0" src="http://c.msn.com/c.gif?PS=10215&NA=1154&a mp;NC=10009
&PI=7317&DI=340&RF=http://slashdot.org " alt="" border="0"
However, I cannot reproduce it on any subsequence visit.
You are right in that a particular user or company would be less responsive to those needs than a closed source monopoly. But if you look at all the users and all companies as a group of entities (as oppose to a single monopoly, since they all share the same source code like a single monopoly), then the group as a whole is more responsive. In other words, the free market would respond to what people generally want. It is easy to fork the source, form a new company, and cater to just a particular subset of people, for example like transgaming, lindows, and wine.
ESR: if you two could get a law passed making proprietary licenses illegal, would you do it?
The answer is yes and no. But there could be many reasons for saying yes/no and the reasons do not have to be these two from ESR:
If their answer is "no", then the dispute with Tim is over. Because that will mean they do recognize a right for developers to choose licenses as they will without being killed, jailed, or threatened for choosing the "wrong" one.
If their answer is "yes", then there are many, many other moral questions we could ask them -- and should, if only so that we can get some idea if they're too dangerous to have as neighbors.
I would say "no" if the law is created by FSF and not the consents of the people and "yes" if everyone argees that this is the right(tm) thing to do. Kuhn and Stallman wants people to use GPL. It is their ideals. ESR's question and answers above make it sounds like Kuhn and Stallman force people to use GPL, which is not ture.
The only thing that was left unanswered in this story is which is more important?
The rights of a person who writes software to impose law and rules on the people or the rights of the people to impose law and rules on this person.
I think both rights are important and they need to be balanced. Tim wants more rights to the person and Kuhn and Stallman want more rights to the people. ESR's arguement is just one-sided.
Why nobody gives Linus network access that he has to go to Finland for a week or so to release the kernel?
This is good news. If the inner region is empty and our earth explodes someday in the future, we can move our earth there. Even if we can't move the entire earth there, we may build a new one. All it needs are some dirts and lots of energy, anyway.
What is sol?
There is no evidence that Apache is losing the battle.
From netcraft's survey, Microsoft's servers grew from 5.9M to 8M servers, while Apache only lost 0.08M servers. Where do the new IIS servers come from? My theory is that most likely a lot of average joes (with cable/dsl access) are installing full winXP and win2k (which includes IIS) during last month. What do you think?
I don't believe he was arrested because of writing the code or being in the company, etc. BUT he was arrested because he gave a talk on how to circumvent the encryption *while he was in the US*.
This doesn't make sense. Nothing in the law prohibits giving a talk on circumvention. It only prohibits circumvention.
Sec. 1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems (a) VIOLATIONS REGARDING CIRCUMVENTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL MEASURES- (1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
Not here either,
(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that-- (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; (B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or (C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
Unless, offer to the public means talk to the public and the service is about how to circumvent the encryption. This is unconstitutional under the first admendment.
Does that mean if you want to reverse-engineering anything, you just need to
(1) legally obtain that program,
(2) create at least one new program that is not interoperable with that program
(3) perform the reverse-engineering (what you want)
(4) create a new interoperable program?
If Mandrake were in the service business model, they should call it a service charge for maintaining / improving your Mandrake software. You don't really need to pay the service fee, if you don't want Mandrake to do anything with the software. But others will.
And if nobody pays the fee and Mandrake goes under, that is because the community does want them to exist.
surpose that I don't absolutely require access to the work in its original form, does that mean I have no right to fair use of the original form?
It doesn't matter if there is other form of the copyright material for fair use. What does matter is, legally is there fair use for dvd movie? If there is, who need a reason to use and enjoy better pictures?
The idea to ban human cloning is really resting on the fact that you will get many many defective fetuses who will die on their own, have to be aborted or euthenized, or will live in pain.
That is why we need to study human cloning in the first place, i.e. to prevent such pain from happening. Remember that we already open the pandora's box of cloning. A ban to human cloning means that we will never find out how many of these defective fetuses can be avoided, etc. etc.
accept it won't play games, but play the TV and radio. If Indreama hadn't flop, we could talk about Indreama II or something - a borg box that plays games too!
Technically, GNU/Linux is revolutionary. But to most desktop users who know nothing behind the scene, GNU/Linux is just an ugly unix-like OS with confusing applications available for free. This is how Microsoft sees the picture, i.e. from their customers' eyes who they assume are non-tech consumers.
It is easy to say that I just learn how to get the answer. But when the work becomes more abstract and difficult to solve, memory usually helps. You cannot forever rely on the basics to help you solve all the problems. Sometimes when we learn the concept, it is useful to commit the solution to memory, or some rules to manipulate these solutions. Examples are integration and differentiation rules, Taylor series, graph theory, etc. Or let just say multiplication in hex codes. Since most of us don't memorize these, we cannot do it directly. Imagine that you have to apply it on deriving more difficult concepts. It is like calculating 343 x 89 =? But you forgot what it 9 x 3, 9 x 4, 8 x 3, and 8 x 4. Then, you have to fall back to calculating 3+3+3+... nine times, then 3+3 and so on. At one point, some problems will be too difficult without memorizing things like simple hex multiplications (though I can't think of anything useful).
Usually, when children are asked to memmorize something, they really need that later in life.
1. Transfering of a resource involves a transfering cost, such as packaging, shipping & handling and legal process of exchanging ownership. When transfering occurs, the old owner loses that resource while the new owner gains it. Incompensating for the old owner losing that resource, the new owner PAYs the old owner [something of value, like money]. Duplication of a resource involves a duplicating cost, which includes creation of similar resource and matching the new resource to the old resource. It does not involve a change ownership. For anyone to obtain that resource, a dupe or not, they still have to PAY the owner [something of value, like money], i.e. transfering of a resource.
2. Assume economics still applies, copying anything would waste a lot of resources, like energy.
3. Assume that every work is a new work, soon or very soon. Assume every work is a derived work, such that the derived work can be immediately concluded that it does not infringe on its original work, the curve will never exceed a finite physical ability to conduct the test.
4. PAYing for a flawless duplication by the creator? Fighting against cheap immitations?
5. One should not break-in and access other people's secrets without their permission? One should respect the integrity of other people's products or recipes?
6. Pick up a phone and call technical support and remember to PAY for warranty and support?
The journal has a lot of good comments about the article. Some of the comments deserve more +5 moderation than the /. posts here.
Of course, these do not include RMS's GNU/LINUX comment there, which still gave me nightmares at night.
RMS: you said the wrong name! Bang!
However, counting bugs is like counting money in today's world and like it or not, we are always being judged by illogical attributes. The fact that there are bugs in the products may indicate a sign of trouble. People or investers who cannot possibly understand the workings of the companies on which they invested hundreds of stocks in, like these indicators to control their risks. For that same reason, the media likes to publish these numbers because some people actually care about the number of bugs.
We see companies flashing or hiding their financial results for the same reason. Bob was hoping that the slashdotters who are considered insiders in linux would not be influenced by the media and stop posting bad comments that may affect his company image.
- pre-install free Linux distro or any other free OS on every new computer.
- provide the option to install Windows with an extra cost of about $200.
- sell an optional a year or two of Linux or Windows service supports.
- advise customers not to install Windows, illegally or before calling Microsoft.
- lobby congress to eliminate "naked computers" and to make free OS the default OS on any new computer.
- politely decline to install free Microsoft Windows or free Microsoft Internet Explorer.
And remember, don't leave your customers in the cold!
and from the link:
Leonardo Chiariglione, executive director of the Secure Digital Music Initiative, said "thousands" of people have responded to the SDMI's contest
Actually, he meant slashdotted~!
Do the Cathedral and the Bazaar means two different project management models or two different approaches to software development? Sure the open source projects may have a cathedral model, but it lives in a bazaar environment where competition thrives!
I think this is what ESR meant in The Cathedral and the Bazaar.
Cartoon Network is a Time-Warner company. Your movement of piracy is cutting into our profits. If you do not stop now, we will stop airing the remaining of the DBZ episodes; we will stop those episodes from releasing on DVD and VHS, (except maybe Betamax and divx pay-per-view); we will censor your cartoon network and your tivo too; and we will play the reruns of the worst DBZ episode everyday!
and /. interface is a copyright of /.
However, the above acknowledgement interface (wording and stuffs) is mine..
and the above comment about acknowledgement is mine too...
And recursively so...
The one and only legal sig in the future...!!!
and don't even try to enshrine technology or heighten the sacredness of technology. Technology don't speak. Technology is neutral. It is the people that do the talking.
To put a sign on this bridge, just (1) make the windows version much much better and powerful than the linux version. (2) Send out more service pack to fix more windows bugs than Linux bugs. (3) Enchanced documents created in the windows version cannot be opened by the linux version.