A patent is for a given algorithm. If it's known a piece of code in Linux or other OSS violates a given patent, a new algorithm has to be invented or another algorithm has to be added to the code instead of the patented one. As soon as that's done, the issue is gone, as the code added is not covered by a patent plus serves as prior art for future patent filings for that new algorithm.
Keeping the patented algo's in the code can only go wrong in the future.
This character apparently thinks the rest of the world is the same as the USA. *RRRRT* wrong. For example in Europe, societies are organized much different.
So bringing that 'hiphop culture' (which is btw not hiphop culture, at least not the hiphop culture I grew up with like the jungle brothers, 3rd base..) to the games is perhaps wise for the USA market, but the rest of the world will simply not understand it.
Oh, and btw, the biggest game market is still Japan, and sorry to say it, but with a few exceptions (id software, valve) the best game studio's are still located in Japan.
I always say to people wondering why they should use another browser than IE: do you think safe sex is a wise thing to do when you jump into the sack with a stranger? Well, if you think it is, why are you surfing the internet totally unprotected using the most unsafe browser there is: IE?
However, people who say "It's Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' in full effect!" do have a point;)
I live in europe, and we have more liberal laws, more freedom than you up there in the US. Still we also don't have a lot of soldiers in various countries starting wars (we only have soldiers in other countries cleaning up YOUR mess)
So, who is dodging bullets for MY freedom? The US military? And how's that? Because in afghanistan people are planning to kill our freedom? Ever checked the amount of heroin flooding europe and where it comes from?
It is right-wing conservatives like you who kill more parts of your 'freedom' than any terrorist is ever able to.
The point of the both Crossballs and the mock-interviews on The Daily Show is (usually) to be funny. One very effective way to be funny is to ridicule people who take themselves too seriously. No, that's the definition of funny stated by a teen. Mature people don't think that's a 'good' way to be funny.
If you think rediculing people is 'funny' you are as immature as every 12-year old who laughs his ass off when someone says "dick"
50% of the population's going to be "above average" in intelligence, after all. That's not true. Most people (90% I believe) are in the 'average' range of intelligence (around the IQ of 100. I'm not implying IQ is the only intelligence test method). A very small group has f.e. an IQ > 130 and has also creative skills. It's binomial distributed, with N=200
Cntrl-(alt)-break still works in VB and VS.NET
on
Is Caps Lock Dead?
·
· Score: 1
When running in debug mode (VB 5/6) and you want to pause the debug run, you can hit CNTRL-BREAK and the debugger breaks, offering you to have a peek why it isn't leaving that long loop for example:)
In VS.NET it's Cntrl-Alt-Break:) (you can also click the 'pause' button)
When you search on google using our product's name (LLBLGen), you get a lot of pages and at the right side 2 or 3 adds. Most of them are competitors. As google has a set of rules the words used in the AddWords system have to comply with, we got a little annoyed: competitors seem to use our brand as a search keyword for their adds.
One day, a Dutch.NET consultancy firm was also among the adds. This was weird, as they didn't sell a competing product. I contacted them and asked why they used our brand in their AddWords keyword list. They responded that they didn't. It appears as if Google uses keywords from the top search result list entry (or entries) and with those keywords enlist adds.
We contacted Google about this issue and we asked them to remove the brand name from the AddWords wordlists of these competitors. We had to fax information, we did, twice. We asked time and time again when they would take action. They never did.
Being a small company, we don't have the money to start a big lawsuit against a foreign company so they will take action on this.
For the people who think this is a non-issue or similar to a lot of real-life cases: it's illegal to trigger advertisements based on searches for competing products, i.e.: you are not allowed to set a trigger on your add when a brand name of a competitor is used in the search form.
It is also different from yellow pages or searches for the kind of product, like 'Bed' or 'O/R mapper' which then enlists perhaps your product as no.1. and a list of competitor's adds at the right.
From the google-user's perspective, it's a great feature. I can also understand that google is not eager to take action as it might result in lower add-sales. From the owner of a brand it's however not that great. If we wouldn't have been in a similar situation (and every brand owner is in the same situation, actually) I probably would think "so what?", however google is a starting point for a lot of people when they want to learn more about a given brand (even if the official site of that brand is easy to find) and the product(s) related to that brand. From a marketing's perspective it's then a little sad when people who are willing to find out more about your product are confronted by adds from competitors at that same spot. If there wouldn't have been a law against this, it would have been 'oh, well, that's life', however there IS a law against this, and until a law is withdrawn, people, how sad it might sound, have to obey it. Also google.
... Iraqi soldiers didn't nor do the people who fight for their safety in their own country (for you: Iraq's not Pat's country nor yours).
Every US soldier has a kevlar vest, none of their opponents has. Oh and please stop the hero crap. He was a US soldier, invaded another country and killed people in their own country. So, how is killing people in Iraq protecting any kind of 'freedom' in the US? Perhaps you should watch some other news channels than Fox news, for example some european news channels.
It's still somewhat buggy on a GF ti4600 with DX9b and 45.23 drivers, (perhaps that's the reason, dunno) as that a lot of shaders are simply not working. (very grey intro, shadows are not correct). For the rest: hats off!:) (and that you all still produce stuff for demoparties:) AMazing)
... a country which forbids to get 2 people married who love eachother and will do no harm to anybody, you know, 2 people of the same gender, now wants all the titties and asses hidden behind curtains and cloths? Gee... I didn't see that one coming.
I'm very happy I live in a country where we've legalized these normal things ages ago.
C is a procedural language..NET is an OO platform. Really using.NET in a C program requires a lot of pointerarithmetic, which will make the C source not that readable.
All languages on.NET have to adapt the OO paradigm set for.NET in one way or the other, OR it requires serious compiler efforts (Eiffel) or just plain slow code (creation of objects behind the scenes and then call the method of choice). Finding static methods which do the same as the methods in stdlib and stdio is doable and will work, the real pain begins when a lookalike method of a stdlib or stdio routine is not static in.net, so a whole object has to be created.
That will not always work in all cases.
And what about interlanguage operability? An assembly in IL can be referenced from any.NET language like VB.NET or C#. How is the C program presented to C#? As 1 class with a very big pile of methods?
It's about not obeying the license. I want my code being acknowledged as the code the application of CodeAse is build on, a very large portion of the code is mine, it is licensed under a simple license so all they have to do is follow indeed the line you quoted:)
I chose this BSD variant because it was restrictive enough so people who would build a new tool based on it would have to produce the copyright but still would be able to sell it eventually.
If it was about money, I shouldn't have had it released as sourcecode in the first place, I think.:) I released the source so others could modify it to meet their requirements, and if they distributed it in binary form, the BSD license would ensure the binary form would show the copyright notice... (in an ideal world that is;))
I'm Frans Bouma and I wrote LLBLGen and I deliberately chose the BSD license because I don't care if someone could use the code for their own product and sell it or whatever. The core of this issue is indeed that they didn't follow the rules of the license I released the code under. This is what hurts: your work is not acknowledged.
What's annoying is that even when you release the code under a very non-strict license (BSD2 has 2 simple rules, 1 applies to the binary version of the work) people think they can even ignore that single, simple rule. This isn't the first time this happens with the code though, although this time it is so extremely obvious (.NET has nice decompilers so you can peek into the code very easily). It's so obvious because their code is non-hungarian coding style and my code in LLBLGen is written in hungarian coding style (which is uncommon in.NET code, because MS wants you to use a different style, ala Java). So all kinds of weird prefixed names are preserved in the compiled version of CodeAse and which makes the CodeAse code easily comparable with the compiled version of LLBLGen 1.x and the sourcecode.
I admit, with the GPL it wouldn't have been any different: people are still able to rip the code and use it as if it is theirs, however with the GPL you have one difference: if the license violation gets out when it is a GPL violation, there are more people who will know this because the FSF / GPL movement will make sure everybody knows it. But I'm glad someone mailed/.:)
The latest news is that there is no news: I haven't heard back from them, after they (him?) said it was acceptable to follow the BSD license after all and after I then replied that it would be ok if they added a Based on LLBLGen 1.x Copyright Solutions Design line to the about box.
Don't get me wrong, I like feeds in RSS formats, use them a lot, however RSS has a problem: bandwith.
If a site exposes an RSS feed, and 50,000 people subscribe to that feed and refresh that feed every 10 minutes, you get 3mil requests for that feed per hour, you can do the math yourself how much bandwith that consumes if the feed is larger than a couple of bytes.
If you crank out an email with the headlines each day to these 50,000 subscribers, you save bandwith in most cases.
What should be done is that the RSS client first asks the rss feed server if the feed has changed past a given date/time. If not, no fetch is done. Correct me if this is already the case, but I fear it isn't (most rss feeds are dynamically produced, (perhaps with cached contents) so a simple HTTP poll won't do.)
Here's your property generator macro for vs.net
on
How C# Was Made
·
· Score: 1
I never agreed to MP3.com to use my music in whatever situation/tool/firm they think sees fit. I don't recall signing a contract which says so.
When MP3.com was sold to cnet, the word was that the files would be deleted. I then thought: ok, fine by me. However now I have to find out that my music isn't deleted but stored somewhere in the dungeons of TruSonic waiting to make them money and I don't know about it. I never signed a contract with TruSonic.
Perhaps you should read some lawbooks. I'm not in the US of A. I don't care what stupid laws they cook up there so a person can sign his whole life away with a click on a webpage button. In my country we have laws which strictly say that clicking an 'Ok' button on a page is not enough to sign an agreement.
Furthermore, It's MY music, so I'm concerned. You may call me stupid for being concerned for being ripped off but that says more about you than about me.
I assume you don't have any locks on the doors of your house, because why bother when someone ripps you off, right?
I first couldn't find my password, then found an old email with the password, but I'm not sure if I've changed that during the years, but anyway I tried the opt-out page as well and also had the feeling I typed it wrong but got the same message. I too thought: "This is pretty fake"
I don't think they check it at that time, because I couldn't login with the same credentials in their new system and they couldn't check if my music was up for a future music set from them. That's pretty close to "we don't have any records about who owns this music, we just have the mp3's".
There wasn't a clause where I signed away my rights to them so they could do whatever they wanted. I'm not in the US of A, so they don't have the right to do so by a silly website, according to Dutch laws.
I didn't agreed to TruSonic to grab my music I put up on mp3.com for commercial exploitation. TruSonic says that they can't say if your music is/will be used. You can only test if your music is in the current set of tunes send to the customers by logging in with your old account. If that fails, your music isn't part of their current set of tunes. However you can't see if your music was selected for future sets. So you can't check if TruSonic rips you off or not.
I don't mind if people play my tunes on whatever device they own, I DO mind if people use my music to earn money without asking me if I agree with that. It's a simple question.
They keep their IP protected as much as Microsoft, if not more. Iow: Dolby is not 'better' for openess or choice, just another company with a very large vault with patents.
Following your analogy: Microsoft Software Dolby Software
"Ahaha, I'm a zealot and that's too funny! *gasp*". MS writes software, the biggest brains are on their payroll, and their research department receives more money per month than dolby spends in a year. You can laugh all you want, but when it comes to software I think MS has a fair chance, in your analogy that is.
Slashdot Mirror
A patent is for a given algorithm. If it's known a piece of code in Linux or other OSS violates a given patent, a new algorithm has to be invented or another algorithm has to be added to the code instead of the patented one. As soon as that's done, the issue is gone, as the code added is not covered by a patent plus serves as prior art for future patent filings for that new algorithm.
Keeping the patented algo's in the code can only go wrong in the future.
This character apparently thinks the rest of the world is the same as the USA. *RRRRT* wrong. For example in Europe, societies are organized much different.
So bringing that 'hiphop culture' (which is btw not hiphop culture, at least not the hiphop culture I grew up with like the jungle brothers, 3rd base..) to the games is perhaps wise for the USA market, but the rest of the world will simply not understand it.
Oh, and btw, the biggest game market is still Japan, and sorry to say it, but with a few exceptions (id software, valve) the best game studio's are still located in Japan.
I always say to people wondering why they should use another browser than IE: do you think safe sex is a wise thing to do when you jump into the sack with a stranger? Well, if you think it is, why are you surfing the internet totally unprotected using the most unsafe browser there is: IE?
;)
However, people who say "It's Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' in full effect!" do have a point
I live in europe, and we have more liberal laws, more freedom than you up there in the US. Still we also don't have a lot of soldiers in various countries starting wars (we only have soldiers in other countries cleaning up YOUR mess)
So, who is dodging bullets for MY freedom? The US military? And how's that? Because in afghanistan people are planning to kill our freedom? Ever checked the amount of heroin flooding europe and where it comes from?
It is right-wing conservatives like you who kill more parts of your 'freedom' than any terrorist is ever able to.
The point of the both Crossballs and the mock-interviews on The Daily Show is (usually) to be funny. One very effective way to be funny is to ridicule people who take themselves too seriously.
No, that's the definition of funny stated by a teen. Mature people don't think that's a 'good' way to be funny.
If you think rediculing people is 'funny' you are as immature as every 12-year old who laughs his ass off when someone says "dick"
50% of the population's going to be "above average" in intelligence, after all.
That's not true. Most people (90% I believe) are in the 'average' range of intelligence (around the IQ of 100. I'm not implying IQ is the only intelligence test method). A very small group has f.e. an IQ > 130 and has also creative skills.
It's binomial distributed, with N=200
When running in debug mode (VB 5/6) and you want to pause the debug run, you can hit CNTRL-BREAK and the debugger breaks, offering you to have a peek why it isn't leaving that long loop for example :)
:) (you can also click the 'pause' button)
In VS.NET it's Cntrl-Alt-Break
When you search on google using our product's name (LLBLGen), you get a lot of pages and at the right side 2 or 3 adds. Most of them are competitors. As google has a set of rules the words used in the AddWords system have to comply with, we got a little annoyed: competitors seem to use our brand as a search keyword for their adds.
.NET consultancy firm was also among the adds. This was weird, as they didn't sell a competing product. I contacted them and asked why they used our brand in their AddWords keyword list. They responded that they didn't. It appears as if Google uses keywords from the top search result list entry (or entries) and with those keywords enlist adds.
One day, a Dutch
We contacted Google about this issue and we asked them to remove the brand name from the AddWords wordlists of these competitors. We had to fax information, we did, twice. We asked time and time again when they would take action. They never did.
Being a small company, we don't have the money to start a big lawsuit against a foreign company so they will take action on this.
For the people who think this is a non-issue or similar to a lot of real-life cases: it's illegal to trigger advertisements based on searches for competing products, i.e.: you are not allowed to set a trigger on your add when a brand name of a competitor is used in the search form.
It is also different from yellow pages or searches for the kind of product, like 'Bed' or 'O/R mapper' which then enlists perhaps your product as no.1. and a list of competitor's adds at the right.
From the google-user's perspective, it's a great feature. I can also understand that google is not eager to take action as it might result in lower add-sales. From the owner of a brand it's however not that great. If we wouldn't have been in a similar situation (and every brand owner is in the same situation, actually) I probably would think "so what?", however google is a starting point for a lot of people when they want to learn more about a given brand (even if the official site of that brand is easy to find) and the product(s) related to that brand. From a marketing's perspective it's then a little sad when people who are willing to find out more about your product are confronted by adds from competitors at that same spot. If there wouldn't have been a law against this, it would have been 'oh, well, that's life', however there IS a law against this, and until a law is withdrawn, people, how sad it might sound, have to obey it. Also google.
... Iraqi soldiers didn't nor do the people who fight for their safety in their own country (for you: Iraq's not Pat's country nor yours).
Every US soldier has a kevlar vest, none of their opponents has. Oh and please stop the hero crap. He was a US soldier, invaded another country and killed people in their own country. So, how is killing people in Iraq protecting any kind of 'freedom' in the US? Perhaps you should watch some other news channels than Fox news, for example some european news channels.
install these 2, setup subversion and you're done. I use it for all of our .NET code and it works very very very good.
Very great idea :)
:) (and that you all still produce stuff for demoparties :) AMazing)
It's still somewhat buggy on a GF ti4600 with DX9b and 45.23 drivers, (perhaps that's the reason, dunno) as that a lot of shaders are simply not working. (very grey intro, shadows are not correct). For the rest: hats off!
Otis/Infuse project
... a country which forbids to get 2 people married who love eachother and will do no harm to anybody, you know, 2 people of the same gender, now wants all the titties and asses hidden behind curtains and cloths? Gee... I didn't see that one coming.
I'm very happy I live in a country where we've legalized these normal things ages ago.
C is a procedural language. .NET is an OO platform. Really using .NET in a C program requires a lot of pointerarithmetic, which will make the C source not that readable.
.NET have to adapt the OO paradigm set for .NET in one way or the other, OR it requires serious compiler efforts (Eiffel) or just plain slow code (creation of objects behind the scenes and then call the method of choice). Finding static methods which do the same as the methods in stdlib and stdio is doable and will work, the real pain begins when a lookalike method of a stdlib or stdio routine is not static in .net, so a whole object has to be created.
.NET language like VB.NET or C#. How is the C program presented to C#? As 1 class with a very big pile of methods?
All languages on
That will not always work in all cases.
And what about interlanguage operability? An assembly in IL can be referenced from any
CodeAse has updated the tool so it now shows the correct copyright in the about box and in the documentation. :)
Thanks for all the support!
It's about not obeying the license. I want my code being acknowledged as the code the application of CodeAse is build on, a very large portion of the code is mine, it is licensed under a simple license so all they have to do is follow indeed the line you quoted :)
:) I released the source so others could modify it to meet their requirements, and if they distributed it in binary form, the BSD license would ensure the binary form would show the copyright notice... (in an ideal world that is ;))
I chose this BSD variant because it was restrictive enough so people who would build a new tool based on it would have to produce the copyright but still would be able to sell it eventually.
If it was about money, I shouldn't have had it released as sourcecode in the first place, I think.
I'm Frans Bouma and I wrote LLBLGen and I deliberately chose the BSD license because I don't care if someone could use the code for their own product and sell it or whatever. The core of this issue is indeed that they didn't follow the rules of the license I released the code under. This is what hurts: your work is not acknowledged.
.NET code, because MS wants you to use a different style, ala Java). So all kinds of weird prefixed names are preserved in the compiled version of CodeAse and which makes the CodeAse code easily comparable with the compiled version of LLBLGen 1.x and the sourcecode.
/. :)
What's annoying is that even when you release the code under a very non-strict license (BSD2 has 2 simple rules, 1 applies to the binary version of the work) people think they can even ignore that single, simple rule. This isn't the first time this happens with the code though, although this time it is so extremely obvious (.NET has nice decompilers so you can peek into the code very easily). It's so obvious because their code is non-hungarian coding style and my code in LLBLGen is written in hungarian coding style (which is uncommon in
I admit, with the GPL it wouldn't have been any different: people are still able to rip the code and use it as if it is theirs, however with the GPL you have one difference: if the license violation gets out when it is a GPL violation, there are more people who will know this because the FSF / GPL movement will make sure everybody knows it. But I'm glad someone mailed
The latest news is that there is no news: I haven't heard back from them, after they (him?) said it was acceptable to follow the BSD license after all and after I then replied that it would be ok if they added a Based on LLBLGen 1.x Copyright Solutions Design line to the about box.
hehe, maaaaaaaan I did 50,000 * 10 * 6...
;))..
(what's to blame, beer, not enough sleep, headache..
I stand corrected.
and no exclusion whatsoever, nor do I need a Slash module in my reader.
The feed is also updated more than once per hour, so I think your info is a little out of touch with reality.
Don't get me wrong, I like feeds in RSS formats, use them a lot, however RSS has a problem: bandwith.
If a site exposes an RSS feed, and 50,000 people subscribe to that feed and refresh that feed every 10 minutes, you get 3mil requests for that feed per hour, you can do the math yourself how much bandwith that consumes if the feed is larger than a couple of bytes.
If you crank out an email with the headlines each day to these 50,000 subscribers, you save bandwith in most cases.
What should be done is that the RSS client first asks the rss feed server if the feed has changed past a given date/time. If not, no fetch is done. Correct me if this is already the case, but I fear it isn't (most rss feeds are dynamically produced, (perhaps with cached contents) so a simple HTTP poll won't do.)
My property macro for VS.NET is located here:6 1153.aspx#61172 :)
http://weblogs.asp.net/cnagel/archive/2004/01/21/
I tried to paste it here, but the filters won't let me
I never agreed to MP3.com to use my music in whatever situation/tool/firm they think sees fit. I don't recall signing a contract which says so.
When MP3.com was sold to cnet, the word was that the files would be deleted. I then thought: ok, fine by me. However now I have to find out that my music isn't deleted but stored somewhere in the dungeons of TruSonic waiting to make them money and I don't know about it. I never signed a contract with TruSonic.
Perhaps you should read some lawbooks. I'm not in the US of A. I don't care what stupid laws they cook up there so a person can sign his whole life away with a click on a webpage button. In my country we have laws which strictly say that clicking an 'Ok' button on a page is not enough to sign an agreement.
Furthermore, It's MY music, so I'm concerned. You may call me stupid for being concerned for being ripped off but that says more about you than about me.
I assume you don't have any locks on the doors of your house, because why bother when someone ripps you off, right?
I first couldn't find my password, then found an old email with the password, but I'm not sure if I've changed that during the years, but anyway I tried the opt-out page as well and also had the feeling I typed it wrong but got the same message. I too thought: "This is pretty fake"
I don't think they check it at that time, because I couldn't login with the same credentials in their new system and they couldn't check if my music was up for a future music set from them. That's pretty close to "we don't have any records about who owns this music, we just have the mp3's".
There wasn't a clause where I signed away my rights to them so they could do whatever they wanted. I'm not in the US of A, so they don't have the right to do so by a silly website, according to Dutch laws.
I didn't agreed to TruSonic to grab my music I put up on mp3.com for commercial exploitation. TruSonic says that they can't say if your music is/will be used. You can only test if your music is in the current set of tunes send to the customers by logging in with your old account. If that fails, your music isn't part of their current set of tunes. However you can't see if your music was selected for future sets. So you can't check if TruSonic rips you off or not.
I don't mind if people play my tunes on whatever device they own, I DO mind if people use my music to earn money without asking me if I agree with that. It's a simple question.
Also read about Dolby's Patent trackrecord?
They keep their IP protected as much as Microsoft, if not more. Iow: Dolby is not 'better' for openess or choice, just another company with a very large vault with patents.
Following your analogy:
Microsoft Software
Dolby Software
"Ahaha, I'm a zealot and that's too funny! *gasp*". MS writes software, the biggest brains are on their payroll, and their research department receives more money per month than dolby spends in a year. You can laugh all you want, but when it comes to software I think MS has a fair chance, in your analogy that is.