How large a fraction do you think the "so many cases" constitute?
Do you think it is large enough that people invest money and time in producing books, music or movies because it might become popular after a decade?
In the US, according to the constitution, copyright isn't a reward given to authors because they really deserve it for all their hard. It is a reward given to lure them into doing all the hard work. So the question is, is the chance of producing a "sleeper" large enough to lure additional people into creating stuff?
In fact, the Mozilla UI redesign project, Phoenix, is planning to have fewer options (in the UI) than Mozilla, rather than more. Instead they will focus on making Phoenix "do the right thing" out of the box.
Too many options just confuses ordinary users. Of course, that is only true for options in the UI. You can have as many options in obscure text files as you want, only nerds are going to see those.
In my opinion they should have a "Super advanced options" button hidden somewhere, which gave an UI for all the options, for nerds only. Like the customize fascility in Emacs.
For example, I often use a web pagefor finding the optimal connections for visiting my family by train and bus. Ot I might decide to see a movie after meeting some friends in the city, or we might decide to eat that place we have been recommended, but can't quite remember the location of. In all such cases, web access would be convenient.
And no, I do not carry a laptop with me all the time. Did you just say someone else what in the need of a life?
I do carry a cell-phone though, and WAP might have been the solution, had it worked. My phone has WAP support, but I have yet to make it do anything remotely useful.
I'm posting this with Mozilla 1.2a from 200 MHz Pentium II with 64Mb ram and Windows 98. Mozilla is so fast that additional benefits would not help. It may or may not be faster than MSIE, both react subjectively "immidately", so I don't really care. I do have QuickLaunch enabled, but since I only start Mozilla once (after boot) anyway, it doesn't really matter.
Of course, swapping between large applications is slow, but apart from the browser the only applications I run is an X server and some ssh connections (it is basically an X terminal), and apparently they all fit within the 64Mb, so for normal use it is fine.
But I don't call you a liar for stating that Mozilla feels slow to you. You may have another usage pattern where MSIE feel faster.
Much of the fun from playing games come from being able to trick your reptile brain into believing winning actually matters. If you are unable to do that, much of the fun from playing is beyond you.
Imagine Bill Gates realising that his real cash cow is Microsoft Office, and that MS Windows is just the technology that keep MS Office ahead of the competitors, by having early access to new or secret API's. In that case, it might make perfect sense to license MS Windows gratis in order to keep off any competitors. And of course, not license it gratis to people who worked for companies who contributed to software that compete with Microsoft offereings.
Suddenly, any company that used Linux/Samba/Apache on their servers, and occationally contributed a bug fix to either of these, would have to pay for all their MS Windows desktop licenses, which could be arbitrary high as most customers would not be affected.
In other words, MS could make it arbitrarily expensive for companies to participate in the development of free software that competed with Micosoft products.
The BitKeeper trap would be an excellent way for Bill Gates to kill of the competion from free software. We just have to hope he doesn't realise this, or that he have a higher sense of business ethics than Larry McVoy.
I have some pages ranking various search terms according to google hits (see my home page for links). I noticed that new terms tend to switch between two numbers for some time, but finally they stabilize. I suspect this is a cache effect, Google is a big system, and information may take some time to propagate within it.
The idea of a microkernel is to have multiple seperate servers running on top of it, providing some clear seperation between different parts of the system. Hurd is the only one of the three that does this, MkLinux and Darwin are both implemented as a single monolithic server on top of the Mach microkernel.
Also, they are based on different versions of Mach. I believe Darwin is based on 2.5, MkLinux on 3.0 and Hurd on 4.0 but don't quote me on that.
why is it such a terrible thing if a government office standardize on some license requirements (e.g. only buy free software) allowing any vendor to compete, but not a problem when a government office standardize on a single vendor, and accept whatever license that vendor provides?
Somehow the idea of a government office being unwilling to accept any license is soo evil that even some traditional free software advocates are against it, yet standardizing on a single vendor is so commonn that it rarely get mentioned.
Slashdot Mirror
Who funds OSAF? Kapor himself?
How large a fraction do you think the "so many cases" constitute?
Do you think it is large enough that people invest money and time in producing books, music or movies because it might become popular after a decade?
In the US, according to the constitution, copyright isn't a reward given to authors because they really deserve it for all their hard. It is a reward given to lure them into doing all the hard work. So the question is, is the chance of producing a "sleeper" large enough to lure additional people into creating stuff?
I don't know if the banner companies actually uses referer, but if not checking for it might be an easy way for them to combat such abuse.
In fact, the Mozilla UI redesign project, Phoenix, is planning to have fewer options (in the UI) than Mozilla, rather than more. Instead they will focus on making Phoenix "do the right thing" out of the box.
Too many options just confuses ordinary users. Of course, that is only true for options in the UI. You can have as many options in obscure text files as you want, only nerds are going to see those.
In my opinion they should have a "Super advanced options" button hidden somewhere, which gave an UI for all the options, for nerds only. Like the customize fascility in Emacs.
and only if explicitly specified, and if nothing else is going on (i.e. if you have an active download, prefetch is disbabled).
In fact, the bugzilla item which typeahead find sprang from was named "implement typeahead find (like Emacs isearch)".
And no, I do not carry a laptop with me all the time. Did you just say someone else what in the need of a life?
I do carry a cell-phone though, and WAP might have been the solution, had it worked. My phone has WAP support, but I have yet to make it do anything remotely useful.
I'm posting this with Mozilla 1.2a from 200 MHz Pentium II with 64Mb ram and Windows 98. Mozilla is so fast that additional benefits would not help. It may or may not be faster than MSIE, both react subjectively "immidately", so I don't really care. I do have QuickLaunch enabled, but since I only start Mozilla once (after boot) anyway, it doesn't really matter.
Of course, swapping between large applications is slow, but apart from the browser the only applications I run is an X server and some ssh connections (it is basically an X terminal), and apparently they all fit within the 64Mb, so for normal use it is fine.
But I don't call you a liar for stating that Mozilla feels slow to you. You may have another usage pattern where MSIE feel faster.
Much of the fun from playing games come from being able to trick your reptile brain into believing winning actually matters. If you are unable to do that, much of the fun from playing is beyond you.
I hoped it was classic rogue implement as an ordinary Diablo II quest.
Imagine Bill Gates realising that his real cash cow is Microsoft Office, and that MS Windows is just the technology that keep MS Office ahead of the competitors, by having early access to new or secret API's. In that case, it might make perfect sense to license MS Windows gratis in order to keep off any competitors. And of course, not license it gratis to people who worked for companies who contributed to software that compete with Microsoft offereings.
Suddenly, any company that used Linux/Samba/Apache on their servers, and occationally contributed a bug fix to either of these, would have to pay for all their MS Windows desktop licenses, which could be arbitrary high as most customers would not be affected.
In other words, MS could make it arbitrarily expensive for companies to participate in the development of free software that competed with Micosoft products.
The BitKeeper trap would be an excellent way for Bill Gates to kill of the competion from free software. We just have to hope he doesn't realise this, or that he have a higher sense of business ethics than Larry McVoy.
The study is from Robert Frances Group, not Linux Today. You would have known that if you had read the article before posting.
I have some pages ranking various search terms according to google hits (see my home page for links). I noticed that new terms tend to switch between two numbers for some time, but finally they stabilize. I suspect this is a cache effect, Google is a big system, and information may take some time to propagate within it.
Larry Wall developed Perl while working for JPL. I wonder if Perl would have been free software if it had been developed there today.
I think we lose something when government institutions get commercial.
The idea of a microkernel is to have multiple seperate servers running on top of it, providing some clear seperation between different parts of the system. Hurd is the only one of the three that does this, MkLinux and Darwin are both implemented as a single monolithic server on top of the Mach microkernel.
Also, they are based on different versions of Mach. I believe Darwin is based on 2.5, MkLinux on 3.0 and Hurd on 4.0 but don't quote me on that.
Actually, reading this on a "score 3" threshold is funny. The mesages are almost all people complaining about people complaining about the license.
/., I just don't know what :-)
I'm sure this says something important about
If you want to critizise the FAQ, start by reading it.
> Am i correct in saying that feel charging money for any software in evil?
No, they do so themselves.
> Do they hate the BSD license?
They feel it allows the code to be abused.
Of course, the GNU project is older than Linux, but the first "installations" running GNU tools on a Linux kernel were refered to as "Linux".
And language is not defined by logic, but by popular use.
That should be a link. I really did preview as well. Honestely!
their moral basis is explained here.
How often have we seen that argument against the GNU/Linux name? Someone should write an FAQ to answer it once and for all!
/. posters should start reading the articles before posting... nah, won't happen).
(Alternatively,
Figure out which authors write stories you like, and ignore those whose stories you dislike.
Frank Millers's Batman is not any less brilliant because of the existence of Adam West's Batman.
Worrying that someone, somewhere is doing something you dislike is not a productive use of your time.
The cancel-bots went on a strike to show the magnitude of the problem. Few people noticed the difference.
It is unclear whether this was because the ISP filters already take most of the spam, or because one of the major cancel-bots continued to operate.
In any case, it was a PR failure for the bot operators.
why is it such a terrible thing if a government office standardize on some license requirements (e.g. only buy free software) allowing any vendor to compete, but not a problem when a government office standardize on a single vendor, and accept whatever license that vendor provides?
Somehow the idea of a government office being unwilling to accept any license is soo evil that even some traditional free software advocates are against it, yet standardizing on a single vendor is so commonn that it rarely get mentioned.