How about at the point where you make a ask a bunch of friends and say "hey, it looks like I'm going to ShucksTown EndOfNowhereState; do you know a good place to go and eat there". Even more so when one of your friends says "never been there and never want to go; but I heard Jake went there; why don't you ask him".
Oh sorry; you meant "on a computer".
Having said that, your comment is generally on topic and in place. People, please learn. Most patents are not about doing something. They are (supposed to be) about a way to do something. The fact that someone makes a patent on "moving from A to B" doesn't make it wrong just because you have moved from A to B. If the patent discloses a new system for teleportation then it's very likely a real and useful patent. The fact that you previously drove from A to B doesn't make the patent on teleportation invalid.
Read through the patent till you get to the claims. Generally the first independent claim of a series of dependent claims will be the outrageous one which you can shout about. Note that all the claims in the patent have been approved as individually valid by the patent office, so you can choose whichever one you want to complain about. Complaining about the title, without specifying an actual claim allows patent lawyers to discredit your argument by claiming that you are ignorant.
I think this is a pretty clever comment. I get other people's comments about bimbos, although I don't think it's literally true (the solution then would be obvious; videos of the act); most of the corruption at higher levels happens in such a way that the people being corrupted themselves don't believe it's happening.
On the other hand, there's a big difference between a guy you know, who's been schmoozing you for years and you know, from past experience, has political weight behind him and another guy who you barely recognise and who you have know knowledge of his political power. Old money obviously is more likely to be known and to know.
The obvious answer to this is to have stable lobbying bodies clearly on our side with people who know how to talk to politicians effectively.
I think that the assasination of Iranian nuclear scientists has already happened. However, I think you should remember that both the CIA and the FSB (among others) are probably also fully capable of having people they don't like assassinated given the right circumstances. This doesn't in any way prove or disprove links with Israel.
Israel assassinates enemies; generally either Arabs or former Nazis. Attacking Russian citizens would be something completely different. They would want a bit more finesse and anonymity than they seem to have achieved recently.
Big Business hires a lot of people who pay a lot of taxes. If they are not happy in your City/State/Country they have the resources to leave and leave a lot of people without jobs and unable to pay for taxes.
The crucial thing to remember here is that the tech industry makes much more money for America than the entertainment industry. It still also employs more people. There has to be something else going on to explain why anti-tech, pro copyright, laws get so much support everywhere (not just in the USA)
But voted out of office in exchange for what? Another one of the same.
Another one of the same who is afraid to go against your wishes on the particular issue you got the predecessor voted out of office for. This is very important. Remember that the rule of American politics is "do anything the corporations pay you to; as long as it doesn't offend the NRA". This is not because the NRA has huge amounts of money (though they have quite a bit); it's because they credibly and effectively make the threat to vote out whoever offends them. If you aren't voted in then you aren't getting your corporate bribes.
There are a bunch of things to learn from the NRA. Things like:
Organise; meet; get together.
Gather money; put it into a fund which is dedicated to your exact issue.
Be extremely focused
Physically protest; be seen
Write actual letters to specific representatives from specific supporters
Very clearly target specific politicians and ensure that you are seen to get rid of them
Be fun and interesting to be part of
These things do not come at once and immediately; the NRA was founded in the 1870s and only got to full success in the 1980s, but if you are patient and keep at it you will win.
The idea that we can do nothing is planted in our minds in an attempt to stop us from doing anything. It's true that most people will still ignore you, but that doesn't matter. Most Americans aren't part of the NRA and they are still the effective rulers of the country for the particular issue they care about.
Fortunately I do not have an inside track to the thinking of specific Microsoft managers (those who know the mind of Cthulhu are liable to insanity, so you can really see that this is fortunate). I can see that the fact that they continue to work on GHC is obviously an exception which tests ("proves") the rule. However, I guess that when you look in detail you will see many possible reasons:
If they are patenting, then Microsoft will later get to block the use of GHC where they wish. The BSD license, unlike the GPLv3 or Apache licenses gives no guarantee that you can use the software.
Microsoft is pushing F# which is the obvious competitor to Haskell; having the inside track to their competitor's thinking obviously helps the F# guys.
There ware a number of discussions of GPL licensing in the Haskell community. This would have protected Haskell's future indefinitely. Moving the Haskell developers to Microsoft keeps Haskell vulnerable.
Microsoft's patents by other people benefit from the increased difficulty in using Haskell as prior art
Microsoft hopes to benefit from FUD by making it difficult for people who don't trust Microsoft or have legal reasons to fear them to cooperate with the Haskell developers.
I'm sure that the real reason is more devious and evil than anything I can come up with, but if I can think of that list in a few minutes I'm sure that a Microsoft manager with billions of dollars of resources behind him, who spends his entire time trying to come up with ways to thwart the progress of the human race can have his own reasons for doing this.
The stability of the current desktop computer market is so important to Microsoft that they will practically never actually innovate. They have an R&D department for two reasons. 1) To keep the ideas away from other companies by patenting them and then not licensing them onward 2) To keep the good people away from other companies by using them to create patents.
The reason not to work for Microsoft R&D is that, whilst you will be comfortable, well fed and well off, you will lead an empty life and they will suck your soul out of you.
Ahh, but then those aren't comparable numbers. Income as used above basically means "profit" (with relations through taxation). Greenpeace is a "non-profit" (net income ==0) so on that argument the original 15 Euro fine becomes unfairly large. Revenue is a much better measure for such calculations since it is much less subject to manipulation and choice than profit.
Hmmm... Fee, fie, foe fum, I smell the stench of a freetard bum:-) (just joking... maybe...)
Oh because saying "you're a fucking retard twat.. maybe" just totally raises the level of debate and shows real communication skills.
You really shouldn't lie in an open forum where it's easy to disprove.
Did you honestly think I went back through your journal entry by entry trying to work out exactly when you actually changed your signature? Is that normal for you? You must be a totally sick fuck. In any case, if your signature is that bad that I felt you had had it around for months then I think I know who that reflects on.
Seriously, if you're going to troll, can't you at least do better than Naughton?
If this was a troll then I have done top notch. I got a rise from the original idiot I trolled. However, neither this, nor the grandparent post, are trolls. This is a flame in the one and true tradition of alt.flame. Responding to a flame correctly requires intelligence and if this post is anything to go by you are losing badly.
No such animal exists. That's just FUD put out by the FSF
The GPLv2 clause 6 says that to get the right to once more re-distribute, they don't have to make an agreement with the complainant - just download a new copy, and conform to the license grant on the new copy. Then they can resume distribution.
When I pointed this out in response to their anti-android FUD a couple of months ago, they tried to "blah blah blah..." but when I pointed out that they were overlooking the rights of the licensee wrt contracts of adhesion, and that the clause MUST be interpreted against the licensor in all cases,... crickets...
Why? Because they're stuck in 1980.
There are so many assumptions behind this pile of crap that I can see why the FSF ignores you. You come across as a forum troll who's just making a stupid point for the fun of it. They have had their license, it's changes and their reasons for doing them analysed by real and pretty effective lawyers. Let's just list some that I, a layman, can pick up in a couple of minutes of reading:
contracts of adhesion are treated differently depending on jurisdiction; what you say is only true in some
clause 4 terminates not the license, but the rights under the license; this is likely to be interpreted as covering all copies of the license
your idea depends on a novel theory about the handling of repeated downloads. For that to be safe I would like to see a precedent for that in every jurisdiction the GPL is valid for; you don't even have one.
your idea would directly override installation limits on many commercial licenses; I simply don't see it becoming valid since it would be opposed by many commercial interests
I don't see how your idea applies to pre-existing derivative works; losing rights to your own input could be a major problem
I'm sure some of those are wrong; in the sense that they won't actually cause a problem in court. The problem is that the fact that they can be thought of and aren't clearly wrong (and are mostly pretty clearly right) means we can't immediately tell what the impact of a GPLv2 violation would be. Deeper analysis will probably bring up many more different problems as well. What this leads to us "uncertainty" which leads to "fear". Moving to the GPLv3 would remove "doubt" and that's hardly a bad thing. That's almost the specific reason it has been created.
Getting back to the flame; try to imagine a person who started operating on their own kidney because they thought that the doctor might be slightly wrong about the way the kidney handles environmental toxins. The person might be right in detail, but they are totally stupid overall.
Given Greenpeace at 208M; EDF has annual revenue of 33Billion Euros (according to Reuters) so approximately three orders of magnitude greater. 15Euros seems a bit understated but 1500Euros would be proportionate. That's certainly closer to 15Euros than 1.5M.
Remember this is a first offense fine (as in first time they actually got caught and prosecuted). Whilst it's true that it's not a big enough fine, it's also true that if they repeat exactly the same thing, or more importantly continue the same operation as if nothing has happened the next fine is likely to be an order of magnitude bigger. About the only thing all judges can agree on is that nobody should ignore judges.
Much more important than the fine is the fact that three of those involved in the hacking are actually going to prison for periods of up to a year. Even if we assume this will end up as six months or less, this is going to be a big big shock for some of CxOs who basically assume that if they remain SOX compliant they are immune to pretty much anything.
To be frank this is an amazing result in corporate accountability and I will be totally surprised if they don't get reversed on appeal. (on the grounds that EDF is a major French company and laws don't apply to them)
At the point that you start picking on the mentally ill to try to divide us up you are beginning to look like a pretty sad and pathetic individual.
The Android headers conform to this.
You know this? You have actually checked them all? I mean, I personally believe this. I think Google is a pretty careful and well resourced company which isn't likely to screw up, but
So, where's the problem? Oh, right... people who think that EVERYTHING should be protected when it's their code, and NOTHING should be protected if it's someone elses code.
The problem is pretty clear. People signed up to Linux in the belief that they were putting in to a common pot that everybody would have a chance of having a meal from. Now Google is actively looking for ways to split out the meat into a special strainer and eat from those bits of that pot whilst not letting anyone else.
This fud falls into the same category that Stallman and the FSF were engaged in back in August. Lots of "blah-blah-blah" and no substance - just another attempt to get some attention with a baseless attack on Android.
You think that it isn't a problem that there are thousands of people who have the right to terminate my manufacturers license to give me updates to my phone? But then in fact; we see your signature and realise that this wasn't meant as some thinking, logical attack:
RMS is asking police to investigate a murder attempt. Someone slipped Odor-Eaters into his sandals.
The first time you see this, it's pretty funny. Stupid, immature, but then who doesn't occasionally laugh at a "poo" joke? Potty fart.. HA ha haaa... oh. But this isn't just a joke to you. This is your signature which you have now kept for months on end. This is how you define your personality; by a personal attack on someone else's hygiene "opportunities". At the very least it's the theme you would like to use to link your posts together. I mean fuck sake; what is your problem?? Did RMS take you to Catholic church as a child or something?
Freud said it best - he wasn't worried about the nutcases he treated, but the nutcases who were friends.
Freud was a nutcase himself. What an appropriate post.
Actually, more likely the SFLC which exists specifically to take such cases. But let's be much more specific. I also live in Europe and if you can name a decent sized set of lines of original work which Google has copied without license and you are willing to sue them then I'll give you 500Euro to start it off with.
And please note, there's no reason to go to the US. Google has presence in Europe and if you wrote your code here you can sue them here. Germany is probably quite a good place for that.
If you (the grandparent) can show that Google copied your orignial work. Which I doubt.
If the US became militaristic toward Canada, I think most of the rest of the world would be fairly up in arms about that.
Not to mention the fairly large demographic of Canadians living in the US, and US citizens living in Canada.
Alot of good that did the Czechs in WWII. You do not want to be counting on Military intervention to save you. You want to find some way to help inject some form of sanity into your neighbours.
there are so many companies making so much money off of open source..
Red Hat, Oracle and IBM are making plenty of money of FOSS Linux. Almost all of Google's future revenue stream would be at threat without Android (since Apple and Microsoft would love to lock them out of the market) I think you would find that there are quite a bit of benefits from controlling the fundamental platform that others build on.
they paid $1.2 billion for WebOS....
The fact that you even mention the money they paid shows that you have no clue. Please look up, learn about and fully accept sunk costs. The existence of Android means that the maximum cost for a mobile phone operating system is just a little more than zero. Further, it means that, in order to sell an operating system for zero you are expected to provide full source access. Companies which use Windows Phone expect to get massive subsidies (e.g. for Nokia, order of billions to tens of billions of dollars).
The value of WebOS for HP is that they are a company which is about to be locked out of a bunch of different markets. Mobile is being divided between Apple and Google, with Microsoft desperately fighting to get a look in. Databases are being divided between IBM and Oracle, with Microsoft taking some of the low end. The embedded interfaces market looks like it's going to go 100% Android with maybe a small exception of the short term US market. PCs and Printers are stagnating. Open sourcing WebOS, probably with an agreement with IBM which knows how to play well in FOSS, would be a play which could disrupt that market and produce a space for HP to sell it's products in future.
What HP needs to do is to make something that is properly guaranteed to stay open source; not like Nokia did where they failed to get others to contribute because clearly controlled the user experience and use that to collect together the Manufacturers who are afraid of Google's level of control of Android and know that collaboration with Microsoft always leads to commoditization and margin squeezes.
People are surprisingly not stupid. When third world parents have a) education about birth control options b) access to birth control options and c) social services to guarantee them care in old age without a need to have many children then they tend to reduce their own birth rate to one appropriate for their local environment.
We need a fundamental change in the way the West gives aid. It should be 100% conditional on setting up good democratic, education, birth control and pension systems.
It's not the lawsuits against Mono everyone is afraid of. We know that won't come openly. It's use of the threat of lawsuits against large customers at the moment of selection of some key components. Deep within NDA'd contract negotiations, someone will say "we don't need to use Microsoft's Active Directory Squizzyfrog, and if we do we will be locked in forever, we can use RedHat's LDAP version instead". Microsoft will say "we don't see your order for Squizzyfrog; we hope you aren't planning to use RedHat LDAP; please remember that needs the Windows compatibility adapter based on Mono and we have a patent on the adaption layer".
Microsoft then uses these small decisions as a base to make the whole IT environment hostile for Linux installs. The best solution is that everything is implemented using the minimum of Microsoft technologies and very thin, commercial if needed, compatibility layers which minimise similarity to Microsoft architectures.
Oh come on. The very fact the astroturfers are out stressing that the language is protected by Microsoft's promises and standards pretty strongly points out the fact that the vast majority of the runtime library needed for compatibility with standard.net applications, which are targeted to Windows, is not.
b) is not in the process of being sued by Microsoft
WTF. Really. Microsoft promises not to sue you over Mono as long as Microsoft isn't suing you. I had really never thought of it that way before, but now I do I am deeply impressed that they ever even managed to get astroturfers to push this as a good idea.
I mean, sure I can see the difference; they need a pretext first (oh, we thought he had a secret Warehouse of illegal Windows installs in his bedroom, we could tell because he never bought a Windows license, how were we to know he was some kind of "Linux User" whatever that is). This isn't exactly the best basis for a relationship is it.
Exactly. This is the same airline that makes new aircraft designs to charge people to go to the toilet (imagine if two people become sick on the same flight!) and/or have standing rather than sitting positions (imagine an evacuation from a plane which will not have been designed for such passenger density) . Their business model is basically that people believe that if the customer service is worse, the flight must be cheaper. They make it quite difficult to compare (they have tickets online for about 10UKP but the price quoted up front never includes baggage or check in (up to 55UKP online + 100UKP at the airport for a standard airline 25kg allowance), for example and in order to get it you have to use their own special card or you will have to pay an additional administration fee.
Ryanair, having tricked you into paying more than an equivalent standard airline, will then, typically, dump you at some random airport not even close to the airport you were meant to go to and fail to arrange transport to your original destination.
It sometimes happens that people travel RyanAir because it has a monopoly on a particular route, but it seems to me that it's mostly because they just don't realise how much they are being ripped off. Avoid, or if you do take up with RyanAir, remember that the only form of communication they accept is through the small claims court. Always buy with a credit card and be ready to cancel the charge. Send in your demands for a refund of any additional costs you had to bear (by registered mail; forget the phone), but give a deadline and after they ignore them start with the small claims court. Since the courts know they are a bunch of cheats, if you provide reasonable evidence you will get your money.
Slashdot Mirror
How about at the point where you make a ask a bunch of friends and say "hey, it looks like I'm going to ShucksTown EndOfNowhereState; do you know a good place to go and eat there". Even more so when one of your friends says "never been there and never want to go; but I heard Jake went there; why don't you ask him".
Oh sorry; you meant "on a computer".
Having said that, your comment is generally on topic and in place. People, please learn. Most patents are not about doing something. They are (supposed to be) about a way to do something. The fact that someone makes a patent on "moving from A to B" doesn't make it wrong just because you have moved from A to B. If the patent discloses a new system for teleportation then it's very likely a real and useful patent. The fact that you previously drove from A to B doesn't make the patent on teleportation invalid.
Read through the patent till you get to the claims. Generally the first independent claim of a series of dependent claims will be the outrageous one which you can shout about. Note that all the claims in the patent have been approved as individually valid by the patent office, so you can choose whichever one you want to complain about. Complaining about the title, without specifying an actual claim allows patent lawyers to discredit your argument by claiming that you are ignorant.
I think this is a pretty clever comment. I get other people's comments about bimbos, although I don't think it's literally true (the solution then would be obvious; videos of the act); most of the corruption at higher levels happens in such a way that the people being corrupted themselves don't believe it's happening.
On the other hand, there's a big difference between a guy you know, who's been schmoozing you for years and you know, from past experience, has political weight behind him and another guy who you barely recognise and who you have know knowledge of his political power. Old money obviously is more likely to be known and to know.
The obvious answer to this is to have stable lobbying bodies clearly on our side with people who know how to talk to politicians effectively.
I think that the assasination of Iranian nuclear scientists has already happened. However, I think you should remember that both the CIA and the FSB (among others) are probably also fully capable of having people they don't like assassinated given the right circumstances. This doesn't in any way prove or disprove links with Israel.
Israel assassinates enemies; generally either Arabs or former Nazis. Attacking Russian citizens would be something completely different. They would want a bit more finesse and anonymity than they seem to have achieved recently.
Big Business hires a lot of people who pay a lot of taxes. If they are not happy in your City/State/Country they have the resources to leave and leave a lot of people without jobs and unable to pay for taxes.
The crucial thing to remember here is that the tech industry makes much more money for America than the entertainment industry. It still also employs more people. There has to be something else going on to explain why anti-tech, pro copyright, laws get so much support everywhere (not just in the USA)
But voted out of office in exchange for what? Another one of the same.
Another one of the same who is afraid to go against your wishes on the particular issue you got the predecessor voted out of office for. This is very important. Remember that the rule of American politics is "do anything the corporations pay you to; as long as it doesn't offend the NRA". This is not because the NRA has huge amounts of money (though they have quite a bit); it's because they credibly and effectively make the threat to vote out whoever offends them. If you aren't voted in then you aren't getting your corporate bribes.
There are a bunch of things to learn from the NRA. Things like:
These things do not come at once and immediately; the NRA was founded in the 1870s and only got to full success in the 1980s, but if you are patient and keep at it you will win.
The idea that we can do nothing is planted in our minds in an attempt to stop us from doing anything. It's true that most people will still ignore you, but that doesn't matter. Most Americans aren't part of the NRA and they are still the effective rulers of the country for the particular issue they care about.
I'm sure that the real reason is more devious and evil than anything I can come up with, but if I can think of that list in a few minutes I'm sure that a Microsoft manager with billions of dollars of resources behind him, who spends his entire time trying to come up with ways to thwart the progress of the human race can have his own reasons for doing this.
I'd say that's a SPANK ; thanks for playing.
This;
The stability of the current desktop computer market is so important to Microsoft that they will practically never actually innovate. They have an R&D department for two reasons. 1) To keep the ideas away from other companies by patenting them and then not licensing them onward 2) To keep the good people away from other companies by using them to create patents.
The reason not to work for Microsoft R&D is that, whilst you will be comfortable, well fed and well off, you will lead an empty life and they will suck your soul out of you.
Ahh, but then those aren't comparable numbers. Income as used above basically means "profit" (with relations through taxation). Greenpeace is a "non-profit" (net income ==0) so on that argument the original 15 Euro fine becomes unfairly large. Revenue is a much better measure for such calculations since it is much less subject to manipulation and choice than profit.
Hmmm ... Fee, fie, foe fum, I smell the stench of a freetard bum :-) (just joking ... maybe ...)
Oh because saying "you're a fucking retard twat.. maybe" just totally raises the level of debate and shows real communication skills.
You really shouldn't lie in an open forum where it's easy to disprove.
Did you honestly think I went back through your journal entry by entry trying to work out exactly when you actually changed your signature? Is that normal for you? You must be a totally sick fuck. In any case, if your signature is that bad that I felt you had had it around for months then I think I know who that reflects on.
Seriously, if you're going to troll, can't you at least do better than Naughton?
If this was a troll then I have done top notch. I got a rise from the original idiot I trolled. However, neither this, nor the grandparent post, are trolls. This is a flame in the one and true tradition of alt.flame. Responding to a flame correctly requires intelligence and if this post is anything to go by you are losing badly.
No such animal exists. That's just FUD put out by the FSF
The GPLv2 clause 6 says that to get the right to once more re-distribute, they don't have to make an agreement with the complainant - just download a new copy, and conform to the license grant on the new copy. Then they can resume distribution.
When I pointed this out in response to their anti-android FUD a couple of months ago, they tried to "blah blah blah ..." but when I pointed out that they were overlooking the rights of the licensee wrt contracts of adhesion, and that the clause MUST be interpreted against the licensor in all cases, ... crickets ...
Why? Because they're stuck in 1980.
There are so many assumptions behind this pile of crap that I can see why the FSF ignores you. You come across as a forum troll who's just making a stupid point for the fun of it. They have had their license, it's changes and their reasons for doing them analysed by real and pretty effective lawyers. Let's just list some that I, a layman, can pick up in a couple of minutes of reading:
I'm sure some of those are wrong; in the sense that they won't actually cause a problem in court. The problem is that the fact that they can be thought of and aren't clearly wrong (and are mostly pretty clearly right) means we can't immediately tell what the impact of a GPLv2 violation would be. Deeper analysis will probably bring up many more different problems as well. What this leads to us "uncertainty" which leads to "fear". Moving to the GPLv3 would remove "doubt" and that's hardly a bad thing. That's almost the specific reason it has been created.
Getting back to the flame; try to imagine a person who started operating on their own kidney because they thought that the doctor might be slightly wrong about the way the kidney handles environmental toxins. The person might be right in detail, but they are totally stupid overall.
Given Greenpeace at 208M; EDF has annual revenue of 33Billion Euros (according to Reuters) so approximately three orders of magnitude greater. 15Euros seems a bit understated but 1500Euros would be proportionate. That's certainly closer to 15Euros than 1.5M.
Remember this is a first offense fine (as in first time they actually got caught and prosecuted). Whilst it's true that it's not a big enough fine, it's also true that if they repeat exactly the same thing, or more importantly continue the same operation as if nothing has happened the next fine is likely to be an order of magnitude bigger. About the only thing all judges can agree on is that nobody should ignore judges.
Much more important than the fine is the fact that three of those involved in the hacking are actually going to prison for periods of up to a year. Even if we assume this will end up as six months or less, this is going to be a big big shock for some of CxOs who basically assume that if they remain SOX compliant they are immune to pretty much anything.
To be frank this is an amazing result in corporate accountability and I will be totally surprised if they don't get reversed on appeal. (on the grounds that EDF is a major French company and laws don't apply to them)
freetards
At the point that you start picking on the mentally ill to try to divide us up you are beginning to look like a pretty sad and pathetic individual.
The Android headers conform to this.
You know this? You have actually checked them all? I mean, I personally believe this. I think Google is a pretty careful and well resourced company which isn't likely to screw up, but
So, where's the problem? Oh, right ... people who think that EVERYTHING should be protected when it's their code, and NOTHING should be protected if it's someone elses code.
The problem is pretty clear. People signed up to Linux in the belief that they were putting in to a common pot that everybody would have a chance of having a meal from. Now Google is actively looking for ways to split out the meat into a special strainer and eat from those bits of that pot whilst not letting anyone else.
This fud falls into the same category that Stallman and the FSF were engaged in back in August. Lots of "blah-blah-blah" and no substance - just another attempt to get some attention with a baseless attack on Android.
You think that it isn't a problem that there are thousands of people who have the right to terminate my manufacturers license to give me updates to my phone? But then in fact; we see your signature and realise that this wasn't meant as some thinking, logical attack:
RMS is asking police to investigate a murder attempt. Someone slipped Odor-Eaters into his sandals.
The first time you see this, it's pretty funny. Stupid, immature, but then who doesn't occasionally laugh at a "poo" joke? Potty fart.. HA ha haaa... oh. But this isn't just a joke to you. This is your signature which you have now kept for months on end. This is how you define your personality; by a personal attack on someone else's hygiene "opportunities". At the very least it's the theme you would like to use to link your posts together. I mean fuck sake; what is your problem?? Did RMS take you to Catholic church as a child or something?
Freud said it best - he wasn't worried about the nutcases he treated, but the nutcases who were friends.
Freud was a nutcase himself. What an appropriate post.
Actually, more likely the SFLC which exists specifically to take such cases. But let's be much more specific. I also live in Europe and if you can name a decent sized set of lines of original work which Google has copied without license and you are willing to sue them then I'll give you 500Euro to start it off with.
And please note, there's no reason to go to the US. Google has presence in Europe and if you wrote your code here you can sue them here. Germany is probably quite a good place for that.
If you (the grandparent) can show that Google copied your orignial work. Which I doubt.
I have great difficulty believing that after a China/USA total war there will be much future generation to learn from the past.
If the US became militaristic toward Canada, I think most of the rest of the world would be fairly up in arms about that.
Not to mention the fairly large demographic of Canadians living in the US, and US citizens living in Canada.
Alot of good that did the Czechs in WWII. You do not want to be counting on Military intervention to save you. You want to find some way to help inject some form of sanity into your neighbours.
there are so many companies making so much money off of open source..
Red Hat, Oracle and IBM are making plenty of money of FOSS Linux. Almost all of Google's future revenue stream would be at threat without Android (since Apple and Microsoft would love to lock them out of the market) I think you would find that there are quite a bit of benefits from controlling the fundamental platform that others build on.
they paid $1.2 billion for WebOS....
The fact that you even mention the money they paid shows that you have no clue. Please look up, learn about and fully accept sunk costs. The existence of Android means that the maximum cost for a mobile phone operating system is just a little more than zero. Further, it means that, in order to sell an operating system for zero you are expected to provide full source access. Companies which use Windows Phone expect to get massive subsidies (e.g. for Nokia, order of billions to tens of billions of dollars).
The value of WebOS for HP is that they are a company which is about to be locked out of a bunch of different markets. Mobile is being divided between Apple and Google, with Microsoft desperately fighting to get a look in. Databases are being divided between IBM and Oracle, with Microsoft taking some of the low end. The embedded interfaces market looks like it's going to go 100% Android with maybe a small exception of the short term US market. PCs and Printers are stagnating. Open sourcing WebOS, probably with an agreement with IBM which knows how to play well in FOSS, would be a play which could disrupt that market and produce a space for HP to sell it's products in future.
What HP needs to do is to make something that is properly guaranteed to stay open source; not like Nokia did where they failed to get others to contribute because clearly controlled the user experience and use that to collect together the Manufacturers who are afraid of Google's level of control of Android and know that collaboration with Microsoft always leads to commoditization and margin squeezes.
People are surprisingly not stupid. When third world parents have a) education about birth control options b) access to birth control options and c) social services to guarantee them care in old age without a need to have many children then they tend to reduce their own birth rate to one appropriate for their local environment.
We need a fundamental change in the way the West gives aid. It should be 100% conditional on setting up good democratic, education, birth control and pension systems.
Look up IMEI.
It's not the lawsuits against Mono everyone is afraid of. We know that won't come openly. It's use of the threat of lawsuits against large customers at the moment of selection of some key components. Deep within NDA'd contract negotiations, someone will say "we don't need to use Microsoft's Active Directory Squizzyfrog, and if we do we will be locked in forever, we can use RedHat's LDAP version instead". Microsoft will say "we don't see your order for Squizzyfrog; we hope you aren't planning to use RedHat LDAP; please remember that needs the Windows compatibility adapter based on Mono and we have a patent on the adaption layer".
Microsoft then uses these small decisions as a base to make the whole IT environment hostile for Linux installs. The best solution is that everything is implemented using the minimum of Microsoft technologies and very thin, commercial if needed, compatibility layers which minimise similarity to Microsoft architectures.
Oh come on. The very fact the astroturfers are out stressing that the language is protected by Microsoft's promises and standards pretty strongly points out the fact that the vast majority of the runtime library needed for compatibility with standard .net applications, which are targeted to Windows, is not.
b) is not in the process of being sued by Microsoft
WTF. Really. Microsoft promises not to sue you over Mono as long as Microsoft isn't suing you. I had really never thought of it that way before, but now I do I am deeply impressed that they ever even managed to get astroturfers to push this as a good idea.
I mean, sure I can see the difference; they need a pretext first (oh, we thought he had a secret Warehouse of illegal Windows installs in his bedroom, we could tell because he never bought a Windows license, how were we to know he was some kind of "Linux User" whatever that is). This isn't exactly the best basis for a relationship is it.
It's RyanAir; this is just a publicity stunt
Exactly. This is the same airline that makes new aircraft designs to charge people to go to the toilet (imagine if two people become sick on the same flight!) and/or have standing rather than sitting positions (imagine an evacuation from a plane which will not have been designed for such passenger density) . Their business model is basically that people believe that if the customer service is worse, the flight must be cheaper. They make it quite difficult to compare (they have tickets online for about 10UKP but the price quoted up front never includes baggage or check in (up to 55UKP online + 100UKP at the airport for a standard airline 25kg allowance), for example and in order to get it you have to use their own special card or you will have to pay an additional administration fee.
Ryanair, having tricked you into paying more than an equivalent standard airline, will then, typically, dump you at some random airport not even close to the airport you were meant to go to and fail to arrange transport to your original destination.
It sometimes happens that people travel RyanAir because it has a monopoly on a particular route, but it seems to me that it's mostly because they just don't realise how much they are being ripped off. Avoid, or if you do take up with RyanAir, remember that the only form of communication they accept is through the small claims court. Always buy with a credit card and be ready to cancel the charge. Send in your demands for a refund of any additional costs you had to bear (by registered mail; forget the phone), but give a deadline and after they ignore them start with the small claims court. Since the courts know they are a bunch of cheats, if you provide reasonable evidence you will get your money.
Class man; class. Even if you get a +5 funny for this it just won't be enough.