what you're saying is that the Poincaré conjecture is the supposition that any n-dimensional solid object of uniform density can be deformed by some reversible mathematical translation into an n-dimensional sphere?
True, provided that the solid object doesn't have any holes in it. It's already been proven for n = 1, n = 2, and n > 3; the $1 million prize is for proving the conjecture for n = 3, getting your proof published, and defending the proof for two years.
You don't understand a whole lot about the US electoral system do you?
In the USA, a registered voter can "vote against" up to six candidates for congress: the Republican and Democratic candidates (2) for each of 3 candidates: first senator, second senator, and representative.
>Public domain is NOT the same as Free software. It's nowhere NEAR Free software.
If not, I have never (except on GNU.org) seen such bullshit
I don't see such BS even on GNU.org. According to the FSF, software released as source code under an abandoned copyright (i.e. in the public domain) or under a permissive license is still free software.
Public domain is NOT the same as Free software. It's nowhere NEAR Free software. With public domain, anyone can take my code and change the license and sell it to me with a restrictive license.
Permissive licenses (BSD, MIT, the so-called "public domain", etc.) are still free software licenses. They're just not copyleft licenses.
"Third party" defined; songwriters have no bananas
on
Xandros 1.0
·
· Score: 2
3) The third party is whoever the distributor distributes to.
In contract law, a "third party" is " One other than the principals involved in a transaction". Thus, "any third party" can be taken to mean "anyone other than the author and the person redistributing the software".
the copyright defaults for the author are essentially "do whatever you want".
Not necessarily. If your work is a derivative work of another work, and the author of the other work refuses to license it under reasonable terms, you can't distribute your work. This has nasty implications for songwriters because it can be mathematically proven that every musical work is a derivative of a previous work.
Not that I expect [the release of a video game server daemon independently developed through reverse engineering] to ever happen for a sufficiently complex game
Then what's bnetd? It's a program licensed under GNU GPL that lets anybody set up a competitor to Battle.net service. However, assuming enforceability of shrinkwrap EULAs, the Blizzard EULA specifically prohibits users from running or connecting to bnetd-type services.
(except perhaps the old Lira, which was so worthless as to require several million to buy a mellon)
"Lira" was the currency of Italy until it switched to the Euro. "Melon" is either a fruit or a large female human breast. "Mellon" is either the M in CMU or the Sindarin word for 'friend' (pl. "mellyn") and is the password to the Doors of Durin (topical: the Doors of Durin are in a fantasy world that just hasn't been MMORPGized yet). I assume that you aren't referring to "buy a friend" because as far as I know, slavery is illegal in Italy and the rest of the European Union. Or "buy a friend" as in a campaign contribution on the part of a political action committee?
Disabled people often have to pay for special services. I see no reason a business should be forced to give something away for free, or made to do something that is costly but provides virtually no additional revenue. Yeah, they do have the right to pass on the additional cost.
So if cost is Southwest's major concern, then what costs more: alt= information or phone service?
Not really a valid comparision, since the power company and other utilities tend to be regulated.
Perhaps it was a bad comparison, but unregulated monopolies do exist. Look at the owner of any subsisting copyright or patent.
You're talking about two different things - what a game server admin can do legally, and what conduct the user community is going to accept.
They're not entirely different. If a game flops because of the behavior of the publisher's exclusive server provider, the publisher loses the money it invested in developing and marketing the game and creating the server infrastructure. If the publisher loses too much money, it has its hands tied legally (bankruptcy law).
It is legal for the admin to decide who gets to play, but you have to be careful not to alienate the userbase.
Really? If you're a big company, you reserve the exclusive right to run servers for a game that you publish, and running a server for a given game is no longer profitable, you shut down the game's server. You don't care about alienating a particular game's userbase because alienating the userbase boosts your bottom line, that is, unless the game's userbase decides not to buy your next game.
(oh, and any scheme which is built on trusted clients will be crackable)
Except in the USA, one of the world's largest markets for PC video games.
Any third party
on
Xandros 1.0
·
· Score: 3, Informative
No. The ones that receive binaries from the original customers have the right to get the sources from those customers, not from the company that put it out originally.
What? Please back up your position with a citation from the GNU GPL or the GNU GPL FAQ.
I'll back up my position. From the GPL (my emphasis):
You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:... b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give
any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange
"Valid for any third party" means that anyone who has the offer is entitled to take you up on it.
If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source code, the GPL says you must provide a written offer to distribute the source code later. When users non-commercially redistribute the binaries they received from you, they must pass along a copy of this written offer. This means that people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer.
The reason we require the offer to be valid for any third party is so that people who receive the binaries indirectly in that way can order the source code from you.
It costs less to have people purchase online than it does to have them talking to expensive phone reps to get their tickets.
It also costs less to build only stairs than it costs to build stairs and a ramp. But does that give Southwest a right to pass on the extra cost to disabled customers?
According to the World Wide Web Consortium, machine-readable text is the most accessible medium. So if the major American motion picture studios provide streaming video of feature films, should they be required to make full screenplays available?
Why should Southwest have to change their website when there is a perfectly good phone number?
Easy. Southwest Airlines tickets sold over the phone are sold at slightly higher prices than the same tickets sold over the web site. To continue your analogy, it would be like making the stairs free as in beer and putting a tollbooth on the ramp.
Indirectly receiving binaries
on
Xandros 1.0
·
· Score: 2
The only people who have a *right* under the GPL to get their hands on your modifications are the ones you give the modified software to.
And the ones they gave the modified software to, and so on. This is why the GNU GPL requires commercial redistributors to make the source code available "to any third party" if they don't include the source code with the binaries.
No, it's not going too far. The game server admins can run the server however they choose fit. If you don't like the rules, don't use the server!
Tell that to your local electric power company. What if the server company with the crappy policy is the exclusive server in your area for a particular game? Do they really want the loss of customers that a policy of "one strike and you buy a new network card, or a new computer if you have onboard networking and the MAC is hardwired" would cause? Do they want the badwill that would inevitably build up as accidental permanent bans force users to put up anti-that-server web sites?
And ban the ~252 other potential hosts on that network?
You have to weigh the damage that a cheater is causing against the damage that loss of about two legitimate players on the same/24 would cause. If a fellow is making a big enough fool of himself, and the service isn't yet popular enough that a ban might cause a financially significant number of cancellations of service, a "Too many cheaters from your ISP" message may be warranted.
>If someone creates a program to easily do the change
what, like ifconfig?!
The following may be considered circumvention devices because they have no significant use other than to circumvent access control to copyrighted software update files:
a GUI wrapper around ifconfig or the Windows registry setting with a "Randomize MAC address" button, or
a script that randomizes the MAC address and then exits, useful in the startup scripts
Exactly how much email do you get that you need to dedicate a 20 inch monitor to it? Are you a spammer?
Exactly how do you jump from "uses a physically large display" to "sends an excessive amount of electronic mail"? For all we know, 4444444 could have vision problems and be running a 20-inch display either at a pixel count that most of us would associate with a 14-inch display or with the Mac equivalent of Windows's "Large Fonts".
Why you sometimes can't "just switch shells"
on
Tackling AGP 8X
·
· Score: 2
But what's wrong with debugging with Emacs and just switching shells between the 3d game being debugged and Emacs?
In some environments (such as Microsoft Windows), a shell switch between the GDI windowed environment and a fullscreen environment forces the video card to clear its memory entirely. This can mask the very problem you're trying to isolate in the debugger.
How 20k votes outweigh 1.5M is one of the small details they don't explain.
Easy. If the state normally votes 55/45 on a given issue, migrating in say 11% of the population who vote the same way can swing the balance.
All your software are belong to Lucent
on
Linux 3.0
·
· Score: 2
take a look at Plan 9
Lucent's Plan 9 operating system has a bug in its license:
The licenses and rights granted under this Agreement shall terminate automatically if (i) You fail to comply with all of the terms and conditions herein; or (ii) You initiate or participate in any intellectual property action against Original Contributor and/or another Contributor.
This effectively gives the Plan 9 contributors an unlimited non-exclusive license to use any copyright, patent, or trademark belonging to any licensee. For instance, if you install Plan 9, the license gives Lucent the right to violate the GPL on all software that you have developed, to pirate music you've written and recorded, and to pass off its products as yours.
Slashdot Mirror
what you're saying is that the Poincaré conjecture is the supposition that any n-dimensional solid object of uniform density can be deformed by some reversible mathematical translation into an n-dimensional sphere?
True, provided that the solid object doesn't have any holes in it. It's already been proven for n = 1, n = 2, and n > 3; the $1 million prize is for proving the conjecture for n = 3, getting your proof published, and defending the proof for two years.
You don't understand a whole lot about the US electoral system do you?
In the USA, a registered voter can "vote against" up to six candidates for congress: the Republican and Democratic candidates (2) for each of 3 candidates: first senator, second senator, and representative.
>Public domain is NOT the same as Free software. It's nowhere NEAR Free software.
If not, I have never (except on GNU.org) seen such bullshit
I don't see such BS even on GNU.org. According to the FSF, software released as source code under an abandoned copyright (i.e. in the public domain) or under a permissive license is still free software.
And the US government wants to take away my freedom to murder other people
Not necessarily. In the United States, homicide is a crime at the state level. Only killing a federal employee is a federal crime.
Public domain is NOT the same as Free software. It's nowhere NEAR Free software. With public domain, anyone can take my code and change the license and sell it to me with a restrictive license.
Permissive licenses (BSD, MIT, the so-called "public domain", etc.) are still free software licenses. They're just not copyleft licenses.
3) The third party is whoever the distributor distributes to.
In contract law, a "third party" is " One other than the principals involved in a transaction". Thus, "any third party" can be taken to mean "anyone other than the author and the person redistributing the software".
the copyright defaults for the author are essentially "do whatever you want".
Not necessarily. If your work is a derivative work of another work, and the author of the other work refuses to license it under reasonable terms, you can't distribute your work. This has nasty implications for songwriters because it can be mathematically proven that every musical work is a derivative of a previous work.
Not that I expect [the release of a video game server daemon independently developed through reverse engineering] to ever happen for a sufficiently complex game
Then what's bnetd? It's a program licensed under GNU GPL that lets anybody set up a competitor to Battle.net service. However, assuming enforceability of shrinkwrap EULAs, the Blizzard EULA specifically prohibits users from running or connecting to bnetd-type services.
(except perhaps the old Lira, which was so worthless as to require several million to buy a mellon)
"Lira" was the currency of Italy until it switched to the Euro. "Melon" is either a fruit or a large female human breast. "Mellon" is either the M in CMU or the Sindarin word for 'friend' (pl. "mellyn") and is the password to the Doors of Durin (topical: the Doors of Durin are in a fantasy world that just hasn't been MMORPGized yet). I assume that you aren't referring to "buy a friend" because as far as I know, slavery is illegal in Italy and the rest of the European Union. Or "buy a friend" as in a campaign contribution on the part of a political action committee?
OK, that was a bad joke.
Disabled people often have to pay for special services. I see no reason a business should be forced to give something away for free, or made to do something that is costly but provides virtually no additional revenue. Yeah, they do have the right to pass on the additional cost.
So if cost is Southwest's major concern, then what costs more: alt= information or phone service?
Not really a valid comparision, since the power company and other utilities tend to be regulated.
Perhaps it was a bad comparison, but unregulated monopolies do exist. Look at the owner of any subsisting copyright or patent.
You're talking about two different things - what a game server admin can do legally, and what conduct the user community is going to accept.
They're not entirely different. If a game flops because of the behavior of the publisher's exclusive server provider, the publisher loses the money it invested in developing and marketing the game and creating the server infrastructure. If the publisher loses too much money, it has its hands tied legally (bankruptcy law).
It is legal for the admin to decide who gets to play, but you have to be careful not to alienate the userbase.
Really? If you're a big company, you reserve the exclusive right to run servers for a game that you publish, and running a server for a given game is no longer profitable, you shut down the game's server. You don't care about alienating a particular game's userbase because alienating the userbase boosts your bottom line, that is, unless the game's userbase decides not to buy your next game.
(oh, and any scheme which is built on trusted clients will be crackable)
Except in the USA, one of the world's largest markets for PC video games.
No. The ones that receive binaries from the original customers have the right to get the sources from those customers, not from the company that put it out originally.
What? Please back up your position with a citation from the GNU GPL or the GNU GPL FAQ.
I'll back up my position. From the GPL (my emphasis):
From the GPL FAQ:
It costs less to have people purchase online than it does to have them talking to expensive phone reps to get their tickets.
It also costs less to build only stairs than it costs to build stairs and a ramp. But does that give Southwest a right to pass on the extra cost to disabled customers?
According to the World Wide Web Consortium, machine-readable text is the most accessible medium. So if the major American motion picture studios provide streaming video of feature films, should they be required to make full screenplays available?
Why should Southwest have to change their website when there is a perfectly good phone number?
Easy. Southwest Airlines tickets sold over the phone are sold at slightly higher prices than the same tickets sold over the web site. To continue your analogy, it would be like making the stairs free as in beer and putting a tollbooth on the ramp.
The only people who have a *right* under the GPL to get their hands on your modifications are the ones you give the modified software to.
And the ones they gave the modified software to, and so on. This is why the GNU GPL requires commercial redistributors to make the source code available "to any third party" if they don't include the source code with the binaries.
"Sonny Bono is dead." -- Project Gutenberg
"Project Gutenberg is still dead." -- Mary Bono, executor of Sonny Bono's estate
No, it's not going too far. The game server admins can run the server however they choose fit. If you don't like the rules, don't use the server!
Tell that to your local electric power company. What if the server company with the crappy policy is the exclusive server in your area for a particular game? Do they really want the loss of customers that a policy of "one strike and you buy a new network card, or a new computer if you have onboard networking and the MAC is hardwired" would cause? Do they want the badwill that would inevitably build up as accidental permanent bans force users to put up anti-that-server web sites?
And ban the ~252 other potential hosts on that network?
You have to weigh the damage that a cheater is causing against the damage that loss of about two legitimate players on the same /24 would cause. If a fellow is making a big enough fool of himself, and the service isn't yet popular enough that a ban might cause a financially significant number of cancellations of service, a "Too many cheaters from your ISP" message may be warranted.
>If someone creates a program to easily do the change
what, like ifconfig?!
The following may be considered circumvention devices because they have no significant use other than to circumvent access control to copyrighted software update files:
Exactly how much email do you get that you need to dedicate a 20 inch monitor to it? Are you a spammer?
Exactly how do you jump from "uses a physically large display" to "sends an excessive amount of electronic mail"? For all we know, 4444444 could have vision problems and be running a 20-inch display either at a pixel count that most of us would associate with a 14-inch display or with the Mac equivalent of Windows's "Large Fonts".
But what's wrong with debugging with Emacs and just switching shells between the 3d game being debugged and Emacs?
In some environments (such as Microsoft Windows), a shell switch between the GDI windowed environment and a fullscreen environment forces the video card to clear its memory entirely. This can mask the very problem you're trying to isolate in the debugger.
Funny that no one has mentionned Project Gutenberg so far.
Project Gutenberg, unfortunately, has had its hands tied by the late Sen. Sonny "Watch out for that tree" Bono.
Or are you so sure that Eldred will win?
pharm corps spend twice as much on advertising as they do on R+D.
If this is true, why not put a compulsory license on drug patents, for 1/3 or so of the wholesale price of the drug?
How 20k votes outweigh 1.5M is one of the small details they don't explain.
Easy. If the state normally votes 55/45 on a given issue, migrating in say 11% of the population who vote the same way can swing the balance.
take a look at Plan 9
Lucent's Plan 9 operating system has a bug in its license:
This effectively gives the Plan 9 contributors an unlimited non-exclusive license to use any copyright, patent, or trademark belonging to any licensee. For instance, if you install Plan 9, the license gives Lucent the right to violate the GPL on all software that you have developed, to pirate music you've written and recorded, and to pass off its products as yours.
Read more about the bugs in Plan 9