Do you earn you money writing free software. Or do you earn your money writing software to support an other business model for your company?
Both. Companies pay us to write the code and to provide other services.
You see, if the code doesn't exist, it can't be used for free; the company has to pay to get it developed. The GPL doesn't change that.
RMS views on Open Source creates an environment where there are a lot less business models to profit off of software. You can make money off of open source, that part is proven. But what it does is remove business models.
It removes the business model where companies are forced to pay you to reinvent the wheel. It removes wasteful business models. It does not remove the model of charging for the development of actual new code.
I never connected Code with ethics.
Every interpersonal human activity is connected with ethics.
Code is just a bunch of instructions that the computer follows, I am a bigger fan of open specifications, where you can write your own compatible code if you need to. Code itself isn't that helpful.
If they don't think people should pay, why would they care about a person who charged for his software and encourages others to charge as much as they possible can or want? And why would they pay $840 000/year to his organization?
By the way, your post reminded me that I intended to donate to the FSF, thank you.
Adding a status code doesn't support censorship; on the contrary, censorship works better when it's invisible, while adding a specific code tells everyone "this is being censored". Bonus points if the response includes a link to a news article or post about the issue from an internet freedom organization.
While here the service has actually improved over the years (which, as you say, is what you'd expect), I got a VPS in the Netherlands with 300GB/month and 1Gbps up/down (burst) for less than $3/month and now I do all my seeding from there (as well as using it for my email server, hosting some very low traffic websites, etc).
It's "vice versa". And yes, there is. It's an extremely limited language, with no real support for any paradigm, most of the environment is not Unicode aware, it's tied to Desktop Windows and yet it cannot use.NET libraries, and finally most members of its community are brain-dead morons.
Why would BT be harder to cache for a Bittorrent-aware cache?
And obviously you wouldn't have a pure BT solution that had to get its data from "the other side of the world", you'd have an hybrid solution with a location filter on the BT client and an HTTP fallback.
The actual protocol is agnostic - the client can ask for whatever chunk he wants. Most clients follow a (seemingly) random pattern, but nowadays uTorrent has a button you can click to prioritize the first blocks, so that you can start watching the movie while it's still downloading.
Just because Bonamassa can make good music from a $30 guitar doesn't mean the guitar isn't shit. The fact that a good programmer can write a good programing a crappy language doesn't mean the language isn't bad. It just means the programmer is good enough to overcome the warts.
I use 20 virtual workspaces on my 12" 1280x800 screen for that; pressing a simple key combination, and assuming your WM doesn't do useless animations, is as fast as looking to the other side of a big monitor.
That said, I still find the two big displays I have at work useful for some tasks, but I also spend to much time dealing with window focus issues.
Yes, it did match the advertising everywhere, that's why they're being investigated in other countries too.
In Australia, it's misleading, period. Whether Apple did it "intentionally" or by gross incompetence is irrelevant.
And a reasonable person would consider that a disclaimer saying it may not be compatible "with all worldwide networks" would apply in case they traveled abroad, because it'd absurd - or, as in this case, illegal - to make a campaign advertising a feature that doesn't work.
30+ tabs is perfectly manageable. 80+ is too if you use tab groups.
You need to consider different use cases. For example, just reading through my RSS feed in the morning, I regularly open 30+ tabs with the stuff I want to read; then, when reading each one, I might open a few more (for example, pages linked from the article).
That said, I use Firefox too on a system with 2GB total and no swap and it runs fine.
We have also managed to do without the Internet as a whole for years without a problem. Or without computers. Or without electricity. Hell, we've managed to do without toilets for years.
That argument is completely useless. Yes, we did, but that doesn't mean they aren't useful, and if we're upgrading anyway, might as well put them in now because FSM knows we won't have another opportunity like this soon.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I know, I didn't say anything about "GNU/", just that GNU is irrevocably connected to Linux.
I don't have one, but supposedly there's a menu in "Market - Menu - Settings - Open source licenses" that displays the license.
Do you earn you money writing free software. Or do you earn your money writing software to support an other business model for your company?
Both. Companies pay us to write the code and to provide other services.
You see, if the code doesn't exist, it can't be used for free; the company has to pay to get it developed. The GPL doesn't change that.
RMS views on Open Source creates an environment where there are a lot less business models to profit off of software.
You can make money off of open source, that part is proven. But what it does is remove business models.
It removes the business model where companies are forced to pay you to reinvent the wheel. It removes wasteful business models. It does not remove the model of charging for the development of actual new code.
I never connected Code with ethics.
Every interpersonal human activity is connected with ethics.
Code is just a bunch of instructions that the computer follows, I am a bigger fan of open specifications, where you can write your own compatible code if you need to. Code itself isn't that helpful.
Both are important.
And absolutely no one runs GNU-free Linux, since it's illegal to distribute the kernel without a copy of the GNU GPL.
If they don't think people should pay, why would they care about a person who charged for his software and encourages others to charge as much as they possible can or want? And why would they pay $840 000/year to his organization?
By the way, your post reminded me that I intended to donate to the FSF, thank you.
I earn my paychecks by writing Free Software. Sucks to be you, I guess.
You're incorrect, those are the semantics of 401 Unauthorized. From the HTTP 1.1 spec:
10.4.4 403 Forbidden
The server understood the request, but is refusing to fulfill it.
Authorization will not help and the request SHOULD NOT be repeated.
Adding a status code doesn't support censorship; on the contrary, censorship works better when it's invisible, while adding a specific code tells everyone "this is being censored". Bonus points if the response includes a link to a news article or post about the issue from an internet freedom organization.
While here the service has actually improved over the years (which, as you say, is what you'd expect), I got a VPS in the Netherlands with 300GB/month and 1Gbps up/down (burst) for less than $3/month and now I do all my seeding from there (as well as using it for my email server, hosting some very low traffic websites, etc).
It's "vice versa". And yes, there is. It's an extremely limited language, with no real support for any paradigm, most of the environment is not Unicode aware, it's tied to Desktop Windows and yet it cannot use .NET libraries, and finally most members of its community are brain-dead morons.
What they "should" have to pay is irrelevant; the reality is that (right now) they do have to pay for bandwidth unless they make deals like this.
Why would BT be harder to cache for a Bittorrent-aware cache?
And obviously you wouldn't have a pure BT solution that had to get its data from "the other side of the world", you'd have an hybrid solution with a location filter on the BT client and an HTTP fallback.
The actual protocol is agnostic - the client can ask for whatever chunk he wants. Most clients follow a (seemingly) random pattern, but nowadays uTorrent has a button you can click to prioritize the first blocks, so that you can start watching the movie while it's still downloading.
How I envy the guy who will have to port your software to another OS or architecture /s
Just because Bonamassa can make good music from a $30 guitar doesn't mean the guitar isn't shit. The fact that a good programmer can write a good programing a crappy language doesn't mean the language isn't bad. It just means the programmer is good enough to overcome the warts.
I use 20 virtual workspaces on my 12" 1280x800 screen for that; pressing a simple key combination, and assuming your WM doesn't do useless animations, is as fast as looking to the other side of a big monitor.
That said, I still find the two big displays I have at work useful for some tasks, but I also spend to much time dealing with window focus issues.
Yes, it did match the advertising everywhere, that's why they're being investigated in other countries too.
In Australia, it's misleading, period. Whether Apple did it "intentionally" or by gross incompetence is irrelevant.
And a reasonable person would consider that a disclaimer saying it may not be compatible "with all worldwide networks" would apply in case they traveled abroad, because it'd absurd - or, as in this case, illegal - to make a campaign advertising a feature that doesn't work.
Just because they're technically right doesn't mean it isn't misleading advertising, which is what they were fined for.
30+ tabs is perfectly manageable. 80+ is too if you use tab groups.
You need to consider different use cases. For example, just reading through my RSS feed in the morning, I regularly open 30+ tabs with the stuff I want to read; then, when reading each one, I might open a few more (for example, pages linked from the article).
That said, I use Firefox too on a system with 2GB total and no swap and it runs fine.
Why do companies outsource their factories to China?
Because it's beneficial for them and for poor Chinese people, not to mention to us who get cheaper stuff? Why shouldn't they outsource to China?
From those comments, one more: do you allow www.google.com? One more proxy! http://www.google.com/gwt/n
Is that really feasible? You'd have to whitelist DNS queries, every single email address (good luck if you need to contact customers), etc.
For example, Google Docs can be pretty useful, right? But allowing it gives an attack a full proxy: http://hackaday.com/2012/01/31/using-google-documents-as-a-web-proxy/
Well, there's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_Deregulation_Act.
I prefer the Freedom Box.
We have also managed to do without the Internet as a whole for years without a problem. Or without computers. Or without electricity. Hell, we've managed to do without toilets for years.
That argument is completely useless. Yes, we did, but that doesn't mean they aren't useful, and if we're upgrading anyway, might as well put them in now because FSM knows we won't have another opportunity like this soon.