On the one side you have the Democrats working to take away second amendment protections and bolstering copyrights to corporations by eliminating fair use and public domain, while on the other side you have the Republicans working to take away those pesky privacy rights and freedom of speech. ... now that you've named the Senate and Count Dooku respectively...?
And re-arranged those damn flags almost every day afterward. I guess at least one of the flipflop decisions was due to elections or change of govt in one of those countries...
So, the next time we write code using FLOSS libraries, we must read every line of code? How productive is that? Where should I stop - 1000 lines, 10k, 100k, or all of the millions of the Linux kernel?
Note, however, that "No problem should ever have to be solved twice." does not imply that you have to consider all existing solutions sacred, or that there is only one right solution to any given problem. Often, we learn a lot about the problem that we didn't know before by studying the first cut at a solution. It's OK, and often necessary, to decide that we can do better. Bah! stop the discrimination, you lofty fscking overlords. Umm..... "You know who you are."
WWI began in 1914, but America didn't get there till April of 1917 (oh yea, and it ended in November of 1918. Of the ~10 million deaths, and 13 million wounded, America's contribution stands at approximately 1% (117k killed, 205k wounded). Cripes, Canada, with a population about 1/12th of the United States at that time, suffered HALF as many casualties (67k killed, 150k wounded)! By proportion to overall population, Canada contributed approximately 24x as much as the USA! Although very important from an administration's point of view, that still is too many families destroyed, too many people killed be they US citizens or anyone else. That's my personal opinion. War is the curse on us humans.
The Americans, after A LOT of wembling about "other peoples' problems", finally joined the war in December of 1941 (having essentially sat-out half of the conflict). To end the British Empire, you first need to remove its strengths. The reluctance was not love of peace, but a perfectly well-defined strategy for global conquest. Hitler acted like Count Dooku and the then US govt like cunning Chancellor Palpatine/Darth Sidious. The whole of Europe acted like the stupid Separatists. That is how it is done, by definition.
The Shah of Iran was an American-backed dictator who essentially pillaged Iran and stayed in power by virtue of the CIA. Similiarly, Saddam Hussein was enabled by support from the American military-industrial complex, as well as the CIA and the DoD. They armed him, paid him, and supported him because he was happy to throw hapless Iraqis lives at Iran on behalf of the ole' US-of-A. Exactly. Read about how sweatshops were run in the past centuries by the British Empire. These things have never gone out of our society and probably never will. The rulers change(or maybe not?). The oppressed change. The names change, the territories change, but history, well, it repeats itself, strife protracted over millenia. That's planet Earth for you in a nutshell.
Given these things, I'm having trouble finding a basis for the self-righteous tone of your message (other than just being completely blind to history, and having swallowed the current propaganda hook-line-and-sinker...) IMO, there's really no point fretting and fuming. It's always been like this. Humans have always been a war with the same evil, devilish and infinitely cruel motivations. That's an essential part of life on this planet. Look back through the centuries. History shouts itself hoarse telling us the same tales again and again and again. Finally, it's the warmongers who don't realize that they are cosmic puppets.
God opened the source 2.5 million years ago, but his documentation was incomplete and confusing. Yeah, but there ain't no cosmic RMS in sight yet. It probably ain't 1953 yet on the Cosmic/Universal Time (UTC) system. So we're pretty far from emacs yet. So, how do you read the code? You need to use punch card readers (or valves?) or something which the Intergalactic Brainless Machine Corp. charges more than your whole (un)fscking life to read even once. So, yes, it's opensource, and yes, it's out there, but no there aren;t any computers to read that as yet, let alone fancy formatted editors. Saint Ignucius, please save us.
Two recent events should give for-profit companies new reasons to re-evaluate the ways in which they use open source software as well as the extent to which they use it. Apache, GPL, BSD, Mozilla and Affero GPL licenses are VERY different things. The only thing common is that they're OSI certified and they do not demand money. But neither do they prohibit dual-licensing. Look, the FSF or anyone cannot force a programmer to release his code under a specific license as long as it is his code - code he has written, not borrowed in part or whole from another exitsing codebase. The fact that TFA does not distinguish between these licenses upfront shows the hopelessly poor knowledge or questionable intent of the author. He's doing an "IP" on the term "opensource" - obfuscation, confusion, deliberately misleading propaganda term. I'll state it nicely for newcomers to the opensource license issue: All opensource licenses are not the same. They are very different and cannot be dealt with in a small one-page treatment.
a round of lawsuits filed by the Software Freedom Law Center against for-profit companies using the software for commercial gain. Four companies to date, the largest of which is Verizon Communications Inc., have been sued for violation of the GPL. Nobody forces you to copy or use GPLed software - please be technically competent to write your own - or take any source code released under other "permissive" licenses so that you are much "freer" - but be aware of the dangers of that "freer" license - lots of fragmentation, inability to borrow from GPLed projects, absence of widespread technical support if things go wrong for you technically, and so on. Another thing is that the GPL does not prevent you from using the code in any way inside your organization - it only disallows arbitrary and source-less redistribution of modified code taken from a previously GPLed codebase. In simpler words, you cant steal from the community's work, add or modify something (please check subtract), sell it using a new name, and also not offer the source. If you offer the source, and attribute correctly, you can pretty much charge anything, a billion dollars as well, for even the binary only. That's what RedHat and Novell do, for example. You can make a lot of money on GPLed software, but you cannot steal, cheat or deprive the end user of modifications just because you made them. Charge or no charge is not a topic here. Clear?
You are free to choose any opensource license.
In the case of ExtJS, the license at the time of downloading the source applies. Simple. ExtJS or any contributor cannot change the license of terms going back in time. He's already released it as GPLed, matter closed. The new version, he may choose to do something else about, provided no other user has contributed - because he owns the new version. Of course, as the new version is dual-licensed, you can always go download the old version and hack it the way you want. If you want the new version's features, then he's the owner of the thing and you have to listen to his conditions. Equally, he should (not "must") keep publicly available the old version of ExtJS that he had GPLed without "dual-licensing" concerns. In any case, no one can prevent an earlier GPLed version to be distributed around freely under the GPL - let us call that "undying" software - software that cannot die or go away. Once GPLed, that piece of source code is a permanent member of this cosmos, available to anyone for redistribution freely - if one of those redistributors gives those copies for zero price, well, the software is also permanently zero-price. IANAL, but programmers should obviously be able to understand this much - provided of course, that you read the license before you start coding using that as a codebase for your project.
Using a program or using source code without reading the license is like voting a dictator to power in the hope that his handsome looks will lead to good governance - dangerous, at the very least.
give us oil or we rob you of bananas give us diamonds or we spread a banana-killer and so on... socio economic warfare that is not scandalous and is highly effective as a threatening weapon
US Gov't should buy some maybe already done... maybe stated design goal... Agreed it sounds too far-fetched, but it's not impossible, given the way most govt secret agencies produce results - through proxies.
1. computers are inseparable part of modern economy 2. programming is everywhere - sms is a command line - so basic programming is inevitable 3. programming projects more than 1000 lines of ocde requires thought organisation and management skills. These skills are not taught as part of all other standard disciplines. 4. programming makes the difference between "where's the any key" people, bad managers, poor project plans. 5. Successful hacking at programs teaches you how to successfully hack around life's problems. For reason 5 alone, programming must be a compulsory part of all vocational education. "Creative vocations" can also take help from markup training. 10-15 years from now, if you want to make any kind of money respectably, you need to have many of the above skills, which means programming and hacking should make it into your brain in some way or the other. [Of course, all my opinions. YMMV.]
well, let's assume I represent the majority voter who's probably not even bothered about foreign policy as long as his son is not fighting in iraq.
Who does he get as choices? 1. mccain, white, war veteran, can protect america from "'em fuckin jihadis" 2. a woman! to hell with color, size, shape, brains, personality, ethics, whatever else.... 3. a goddamn black with a different middle name.
who do you think I'll vote for?
this election is one long drama being played out to perfection. The choices decide the result much before the actual vote. Two-party is an illusion. The last one was stolen, this one is predecided. Wake up guys, we have a huge problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Beware!
your website will be slashdotted!
(OTOH, ;-))
you could make it to linux.com front page and possibly every other opensource frontpage (pun not intended...
wish he could reply to you on slashdot...
(I expect an equally witty retort...)
Professor Stephen Hacking....
+5, Insightful
So, the next time we write code using FLOSS libraries, we must read every line of code?
How productive is that?
Where should I stop - 1000 lines, 10k, 100k, or all of the millions of the Linux kernel?
From the Big Fucking Manual:
Note, however, that "No problem should ever have to be solved twice." does not imply that you have to consider all existing solutions sacred, or that there is only one right solution to any given problem. Often, we learn a lot about the problem that we didn't know before by studying the first cut at a solution. It's OK, and often necessary, to decide that we can do better. Bah! stop the discrimination, you lofty fscking overlords.http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html#believe2
Umm..... "You know who you are."
I'm collecting a lot of bad karma these days, but +5, Insightful anyway.
To say it bluntly, Harmony brought about the GPL-ing of Java
Cripes, Canada, with a population about 1/12th of the United States at that time, suffered HALF as many casualties (67k killed, 150k wounded)! By proportion to overall population, Canada contributed approximately 24x as much as the USA! Although very important from an administration's point of view, that still is too many families destroyed, too many people killed be they US citizens or anyone else. That's my personal opinion. War is the curse on us humans. The Americans, after A LOT of wembling about "other peoples' problems", finally joined the war in December of 1941 (having essentially sat-out half of the conflict). To end the British Empire, you first need to remove its strengths. The reluctance was not love of peace, but a perfectly well-defined strategy for global conquest. Hitler acted like Count Dooku and the then US govt like cunning Chancellor Palpatine/Darth Sidious. The whole of Europe acted like the stupid Separatists. That is how it is done, by definition. The Shah of Iran was an American-backed dictator who essentially pillaged Iran and stayed in power by virtue of the CIA.
Similiarly, Saddam Hussein was enabled by support from the American military-industrial complex, as well as the CIA and the DoD. They armed him, paid him, and supported him because he was happy to throw hapless Iraqis lives at Iran on behalf of the ole' US-of-A. Exactly. Read about how sweatshops were run in the past centuries by the British Empire. These things have never gone out of our society and probably never will. The rulers change(or maybe not?). The oppressed change. The names change, the territories change, but history, well, it repeats itself, strife protracted over millenia.
That's planet Earth for you in a nutshell. Given these things, I'm having trouble finding a basis for the self-righteous tone of your message (other than just being completely blind to history, and having swallowed the current propaganda hook-line-and-sinker...) IMO, there's really no point fretting and fuming. It's always been like this. Humans have always been a war with the same evil, devilish and infinitely cruel motivations. That's an essential part of life on this planet. Look back through the centuries. History shouts itself hoarse telling us the same tales again and again and again.
Finally, it's the warmongers who don't realize that they are cosmic puppets.
So we're pretty far from emacs yet.
So, how do you read the code?
You need to use punch card readers (or valves?) or something which the Intergalactic Brainless Machine Corp. charges more than your whole (un)fscking life to read even once. So, yes, it's opensource, and yes, it's out there, but no there aren;t any computers to read that as yet, let alone fancy formatted editors.
Saint Ignucius, please save us.
The fact that TFA does not distinguish between these licenses upfront shows the hopelessly poor knowledge or questionable intent of the author. He's doing an "IP" on the term "opensource" - obfuscation, confusion, deliberately misleading propaganda term.
I'll state it nicely for newcomers to the opensource license issue:
All opensource licenses are not the same.
They are very different and cannot be dealt with in a small one-page treatment. a round of lawsuits filed by the Software Freedom Law Center against for-profit companies using the software for commercial gain. Four companies to date, the largest of which is Verizon Communications Inc., have been sued for violation of the GPL. Nobody forces you to copy or use GPLed software - please be technically competent to write your own - or take any source code released under other "permissive" licenses so that you are much "freer" - but be aware of the dangers of that "freer" license - lots of fragmentation, inability to borrow from GPLed projects, absence of widespread technical support if things go wrong for you technically, and so on.
Another thing is that the GPL does not prevent you from using the code in any way inside your organization - it only disallows arbitrary and source-less redistribution of modified code taken from a previously GPLed codebase.
In simpler words, you cant steal from the community's work, add or modify something (please check subtract), sell it using a new name, and also not offer the source.
If you offer the source, and attribute correctly, you can pretty much charge anything, a billion dollars as well, for even the binary only.
That's what RedHat and Novell do, for example.
You can make a lot of money on GPLed software, but you cannot steal, cheat or deprive the end user of modifications just because you made them.
Charge or no charge is not a topic here. Clear?
You are free to choose any opensource license.
In the case of ExtJS, the license at the time of downloading the source applies. Simple.
ExtJS or any contributor cannot change the license of terms going back in time.
He's already released it as GPLed, matter closed.
The new version, he may choose to do something else about, provided no other user has contributed - because he owns the new version.
Of course, as the new version is dual-licensed, you can always go download the old version and hack it the way you want.
If you want the new version's features, then he's the owner of the thing and you have to listen to his conditions.
Equally, he should (not "must") keep publicly available the old version of ExtJS that he had GPLed without "dual-licensing" concerns.
In any case, no one can prevent an earlier GPLed version to be distributed around freely under the GPL - let us call that "undying" software - software that cannot die or go away. Once GPLed, that piece of source code is a permanent member of this cosmos, available to anyone for redistribution freely - if one of those redistributors gives those copies for zero price, well, the software is also permanently zero-price.
IANAL, but programmers should obviously be able to understand this much - provided of course, that you read the license before you start coding using that as a codebase for your project.
Using a program or using source code without reading the license is like voting a dictator to power in the hope that his handsome looks will lead to good governance - dangerous, at the very least.
to simulate the thing (how novel) and of course, it would run Linux!
give us oil or we rob you of bananas
give us diamonds or we spread a banana-killer
and so on...
socio economic warfare that is not scandalous and is highly effective as a threatening weapon
bah! the feds, the cia, the chinese, the....
who would use a short!!
We're under attack!
Declare War on [insert free power source here]
maybe stated design goal...
Agreed it sounds too far-fetched, but it's not impossible, given the way most govt secret agencies produce results - through proxies.
yeah not to mention the (loop)holes, closed ends, bin junk, and so on that typifies such top-heavy structures...
who's giving this a -1?
makes perfect sense and has very much to do with the second half of the (oxy)moronic term.
in theory, the two can coexist.
But in practice, theory does not work.
Looses Tapes With 4.5 Million...
Why? If you don't like eBay, don't use them. Problem solved.
Except that eBay has a huge presence.So in Soviet eBay, Problem solves YOU!!
1. computers are inseparable part of modern economy
2. programming is everywhere - sms is a command line - so basic programming is inevitable
3. programming projects more than 1000 lines of ocde requires thought organisation and management skills. These skills are not taught as part of all other standard disciplines.
4. programming makes the difference between "where's the any key" people, bad managers, poor project plans.
5. Successful hacking at programs teaches you how to successfully hack around life's problems.
For reason 5 alone, programming must be a compulsory part of all vocational education.
"Creative vocations" can also take help from markup training.
10-15 years from now, if you want to make any kind of money respectably, you need to have many of the above skills, which means programming and hacking should make it into your brain in some way or the other.
[Of course, all my opinions. YMMV.]
they have the balls to take all those eyeballs!
that is was a comprehensively planned war for oil price manipulation!!
1. loot oil
2. scare everyone
3. create shortages globally
4. profit
.. of the numbers for the same crimes.
Oh My God! if those numbers are put together, we will have one mighty embarrassment for all of us non-muslims.
well, let's assume I represent the majority voter who's probably not even bothered about foreign policy as long as his son is not fighting in iraq.
Who does he get as choices?
1. mccain, white, war veteran, can protect america from "'em fuckin jihadis"
2. a woman! to hell with color, size, shape, brains, personality, ethics, whatever else....
3. a goddamn black with a different middle name.
who do you think I'll vote for?
this election is one long drama being played out to perfection.
The choices decide the result much before the actual vote.
Two-party is an illusion.
The last one was stolen, this one is predecided.
Wake up guys, we have a huge problem.
[/conspiracytheory]