I'd say that I'd have liked to be asked before my stuff was re-licenced, but everything I worked on and cared about on Wikipedia was deleted for not being notable enough, or something. Oh well.
First of all, I wouldn't name my files with an uppercase extension to begin with. I have some applications that do that. I can also be emailed files or I could download files named by other people.
Second, you can tell grep to be case-insensitive (though I don't know how to do so with shell globbing). Neither do I. cp $(find . -iname '*.jpg')../images or maybe cp $(ls | grep -i '\.jpg$')../images which both have their own issues.
Third, slightly more complicated regular expressions are better than accidentally obliterating files because you copied some with names differing only in capitalization. Therein lies the trade-off. Speaking only for myself, when I use Windows/Cygwin, I've never yet had that problem. On the other hand, I have repeatedly cursed TAB-completion for not "working" because I only remembered a directory name without remembering the case of the first letter, as well as the complication of doing *.JPG "correctly".
A good model to follow could be something similar to Flash files. Commonly seen used in animations, a program inside a flash file can do a lot. Here's a jigsaw puzzle. Here's a simple arcade game. Here's a collaborative document editing system.
Flash implements a full program language, but the program's wings are clipped. Unlike regular executables, a flash program can't interfere with other programs and it can't mess with files it doesn't own. Add a way allowing programs to interact with other components (including the file system) with a strict and manageable protocol, and there's no big need for any program to run unrestricted. (Except the operating system and the occasional device driver, that is.)
Please. I want a PDA with a proper integrated keyboard, just like the Psion 3c I had ages ago.
I can't get the hang of "graffiti" and I don't like typing by stabbing at a tiny on-screen keyboard with a stick. These days, I only use my Palm T3 for Acid-Solitaire, the alarm clock and playing MP3 files.
An awful lot of replies have been made since I last checked in, so I'll try and sum them up here.
Here's a hypothetical situation. This hypothetical is in fact my current situation with this project but simplified. (The simplifications make it hypothetical. I started writing this to show all the twists and turns my work made in reality, but it became a very long article with a lot of irrelevant detail.)
I have an idea for some software. I start developing. I do it in my spare and no-one is paying me to do it.
("Why is no-one paying?" I hear you ask. Perhaps I'm the only one who thinks its worth investing in. Perhaps I don't want to be obligated to anyone to show results.)
After many hours of work, I've got something that people may be interested in. I alone hold the copyright because I alone developed it and I have no obligations to anyone. Now what do I do with it?
The universe splits into two parallel universes. In universe A, I keep it non-free. In universe B, I GPL it.
In both A and B, people with money want a support package, continued development and customisations.
For people who want the complete package including code, training, assistance, etc. Alas, sales, training and assistance isn't my thing.
In universe A, I come to deal with someone who is skilled in this area to sell the complete package. As part of the deal, I demand a cut of the payments. I can do that because I hold the copyright.
In universe B, anyone can sell my software without paying me a penny. My investment of time was for nothing.
People want customisations.
In universe A, I can do the customisation. If I don't want to, I can negotiate with someone who does.
In universe B, anyone can do the customisations. I'm competing on equal terms with others, people who did nothing to develop the software in the first place.
People also want development to continue. Bugs need fixing. My time is limited and there are people out there who can help out.
In universe B, anyone can work from my source code.
In universe A, anyone can work from my source code. You see, I don't have some religious attachment to keeping my code secret. My customers can opt to receive the source if they want to make modifications themselves. If I like what I see, I may negotiate to distribute my project with thier modifications, or negotiate for them to do future work. I could even hand my project over to a more organised organisation in exchange for a one-off payment or a cut of future sales.
"What about free alternatives?" Back in the real world (universe C?), there are no comparable alternatives. I've looked. But you are all quite free to do develop your own free alternative. Don't let me stop you. As yet, no-one has. No-one seems to want to invest the time/money developing a free alternative from scratch when my version is reasonably priced and of a very high quality.
"A lot of people make a living developing free software." Good for them. But why should I?
"You are only in it for the money." No, I do it because I love software development. If I was only in it for the money, I would have become an independent plumber.
Many thanks for reading this message. I hope to read lots more followups.
I can scroll through almost 10,000 "free alternatives" every time I want to add Linux packages, and that's not the complete list of what's available. I'll presume that you weren't responsible for any of that code.
I've looked. The people who supply and support my software would love to keep the bit they pay me for themselves.
This software is incredibly obscure with about 10 possible customers in the world. Its not like I'm developing a text editor.
Alas, I don't do the customisation. I develop and maintain the basis.
Other people sell support contracts and customisations. Because I demand a cut of the support contract fee, I get paid. If I released it under the GPL, I could not make that demand.
Oh yes, I don't want to do the customisations and support myself. My skills lie elsewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say that I'd have liked to be asked before my stuff was re-licenced, but everything I worked on and cared about on Wikipedia was deleted for not being notable enough, or something. Oh well.
He managed to find someone even cheaper than India to outsource?
I guess he's found something to do with Google's money.
First of all, I wouldn't name my files with an uppercase extension to begin with.
../images or maybe cp $(ls | grep -i '\.jpg$') ../images which both have their own issues.
I have some applications that do that. I can also be emailed files or I could download files named by other people.
Second, you can tell grep to be case-insensitive (though I don't know how to do so with shell globbing).
Neither do I. cp $(find . -iname '*.jpg')
Third, slightly more complicated regular expressions are better than accidentally obliterating files because you copied some with names differing only in capitalization.
Therein lies the trade-off. Speaking only for myself, when I use Windows/Cygwin, I've never yet had that problem. On the other hand, I have repeatedly cursed TAB-completion for not "working" because I only remembered a directory name without remembering the case of the first letter, as well as the complication of doing *.JPG "correctly".
From my point of view, its a bad trade, but YMMV.
You say it like its a good thing. *.[Jj][Pp][Gg]
(Two cymbals and a snare drum fall down a canyon.)
(Or do I?)
Selected extract...
A good model to follow could be something similar to Flash files. Commonly seen used in animations, a program inside a flash file can do a lot. Here's a jigsaw puzzle. Here's a simple arcade game. Here's a collaborative document editing system.
Flash implements a full program language, but the program's wings are clipped. Unlike regular executables, a flash program can't interfere with other programs and it can't mess with files it doesn't own. Add a way allowing programs to interact with other components (including the file system) with a strict and manageable protocol, and there's no big need for any program to run unrestricted. (Except the operating system and the occasional device driver, that is.)
Duuuuuh, ug!
Paypal need a competitor.
Thats possibly exactly what SPEWS want to happen.
"Hey, our custimers are leaving us."
"Darn, we'll have to cut the zombies off."
Don't open source. Sell licences to use it.
Dag nabbit!
I can't get the hang of "graffiti" and I don't like typing by stabbing at a tiny on-screen keyboard with a stick. These days, I only use my Palm T3 for Acid-Solitaire, the alarm clock and playing MP3 files.
Isn't that exactly what you are doing? You're stating the nature of the link in relation to the current page.
Then "nofollow" is a poor name. Should I (as someone with a regular browser) also not follow it?
"nofollow" isn't exactly a relationship between two documents. Perhaps "untrusted" would be better.
For example, <A HREF=... REL=next>
Here, the linked to document is defined as being "next" in relation to this document.
(whispering) "psst. whats the password?"
(shouting) "12:34:56:78:90:12 Hope no-one heard me shout that."
Um, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. I can't see anything even close to what I develop in your list. Maybe I'm just thick.
No, it's Godfrey. Don't know where you got that idea.
Here's a hypothetical situation. This hypothetical is in fact my current situation with this project but simplified. (The simplifications make it hypothetical. I started writing this to show all the twists and turns my work made in reality, but it became a very long article with a lot of irrelevant detail.)
I have an idea for some software. I start developing. I do it in my spare and no-one is paying me to do it.
("Why is no-one paying?" I hear you ask. Perhaps I'm the only one who thinks its worth investing in. Perhaps I don't want to be obligated to anyone to show results.)
After many hours of work, I've got something that people may be interested in. I alone hold the copyright because I alone developed it and I have no obligations to anyone. Now what do I do with it?
The universe splits into two parallel universes. In universe A, I keep it non-free. In universe B, I GPL it.
In both A and B, people with money want a support package, continued development and customisations.
For people who want the complete package including code, training, assistance, etc. Alas, sales, training and assistance isn't my thing.
In universe A, I come to deal with someone who is skilled in this area to sell the complete package. As part of the deal, I demand a cut of the payments. I can do that because I hold the copyright.
In universe B, anyone can sell my software without paying me a penny. My investment of time was for nothing.
People want customisations.
In universe A, I can do the customisation. If I don't want to, I can negotiate with someone who does.
In universe B, anyone can do the customisations. I'm competing on equal terms with others, people who did nothing to develop the software in the first place.
People also want development to continue. Bugs need fixing. My time is limited and there are people out there who can help out.
In universe B, anyone can work from my source code.
In universe A, anyone can work from my source code. You see, I don't have some religious attachment to keeping my code secret. My customers can opt to receive the source if they want to make modifications themselves. If I like what I see, I may negotiate to distribute my project with thier modifications, or negotiate for them to do future work. I could even hand my project over to a more organised organisation in exchange for a one-off payment or a cut of future sales.
"What about free alternatives?" Back in the real world (universe C?), there are no comparable alternatives. I've looked. But you are all quite free to do develop your own free alternative. Don't let me stop you. As yet, no-one has. No-one seems to want to invest the time/money developing a free alternative from scratch when my version is reasonably priced and of a very high quality.
"A lot of people make a living developing free software." Good for them. But why should I?
"You are only in it for the money." No, I do it because I love software development. If I was only in it for the money, I would have become an independent plumber.
Many thanks for reading this message. I hope to read lots more followups.
I've looked. The people who supply and support my software would love to keep the bit they pay me for themselves.
This software is incredibly obscure with about 10 possible customers in the world. Its not like I'm developing a text editor.
I can demand to get a cut from support contracts for supplying the basis. I don't want to do the customisations myself.
Other people sell support contracts and customisations. Because I demand a cut of the support contract fee, I get paid. If I released it under the GPL, I could not make that demand.
Oh yes, I don't want to do the customisations and support myself. My skills lie elsewhere.
Bill, holding my breath.