Seen your site. The "free download" requires name, address, company name, address, email, blah blah. And I still don't even know what your software *does*
I often take my laptop into that little room with so much privacy... open a few browser windows, unhook (no wireless LAN!), and keep on reading. I've even downloaded whole books on this basis (see http://steve-parker.org/book/neuromancer.html)
I have a Rocket e-book reader, but never purchased books for that because I didn't want to be locked into a single reader device.
Now that's an interesting statement.... I downloaded the Windoze E-book reader ages ago, but only to see what all the fuss was about - I downloaded Huck. Finn (free, (c) expired) to try it out. That PC's gone now, so I guess I'd have to get another copy, another license, and re-download the book to get it again. If I'd already paid, I'd be sick.
I don't know the Rocket e-book reader, but what do you use an e-book reader for, if not for reading e-books?!
I've got a friend who has the balls to regularly take CDs back saying, "I didn't like it"... he's a jazz fan, goes to a jazz store to buy his CDs, where they are quite happy for you to listen to it a bit before you buy it, and he gets away with it.
Armed with this presumption, he also gets away with it in mainstream stores, too... since his mental attitude is "why not?", they don't seem to argue with him.
How about writing it in Europe - legally - then relasing it anonymously?
That way, it's "out there" and GPL'd. Other people can work on the code (in the USA or elsewhere) without having ever seen the MSFT license, let alone signing it. They've received the code under the GPL, not under MSFT's license.
Hmm... if your intranet and internet sites should be similar in look/feel, etc, why not get them both to collaborate for one "unproductive" month on a library of CSS, JavaScript, templates, and whatever else you need, so that the content can just be "plugged in"?
This may or may not be best done from scratch; I dunno, I've not seen the code, so that's up to you.
That way, you get two developers thoughts on each aspect, not just "I did it this way because I think it's cool", and since they know the requirements of both sites, they will make sure that the library makes their lives easier. Then you can swap them over every week between intranet and internet sites, and they'll not notice the difference, since the APIs (the library of code they've developed) is the same.
try:
lynx -dump http://server:port >/dev/null &
to run it it in parallel - and do try it from another box, not localhost, since the performance will be different (but tell you more about your OS with apache than apache itself, but I guess localhost implementations differ, too)
it's not a for loop... at first glance, I assumed that it was a for loop, but it's not, the example given was just:
main()
{
int i;
i = 0;
i+=1;// or i++; in the other example
}
I work for Sun, and yeah, they're pretty good. As another poster commented, having your app configured on a central server could be a bad thing, but it's configured to a corporate standard. "I want feature x" is often configured by a ~/.x-feature file, but sometimes not. I have to admit, I'd love to have SunRays around my house, so I can keep reading an article whilst on the loo, or cooking.
Of course, the downside, is that if you have 1000 users, 100 of whom are in the office at any time, you still have 1000 sessions active on the server, waiting for them to insert their card at any time.
Once they do, they get their desktop back exactly as it was - eg, half-way through an edit of their 100Mb document - but while they're away, that document is still open, and consuming resources on the server. So the server has to be powerful, but the benefits are great too.
I've been hit by Googlebot pretty regularly (my site's been around for a while) - last about 4h ago.
For March, I've been hit:
1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13th March.
I'm pretty happy with Google. It gets me results, and it searches me pretty often. 225 hits in March. The only thing it doesn't seem to have picked up, is the homepage (/). It changes pretty often (new headlines, whatever I'm thinking about today), but I guess people link to the content.
Seems to be a new thing (only spotted it a week or so ago), but searching for http://slashdot.org/ gives info about that page - links to, about, similar, contain, and the Google cache.
Try The Googlizer - a X-based cut-paste "example" which is hugely useful.
It takes the current clipboard, and opens a Google search for it. Small tweaking (it's only a short amount of code) would, I'm sure, make it work for other sites. Telsa claims it as working with Gnome, but I use IceWM, and it works great. A real boon, and no wasted space in my netscape toolbar.
You may run out of namespace before you run out of servers, and then you have to break convention.
That's the key... never start a convention you cannot finish.
The economy's different than it was in 99; people would have 2 webservers, but allow for having 500 (then go bust in 3 months). On the other end of the scale, a small idea you have (like, say, slashdot.org) could turn out to need far more servers than you ever envisaged.
Another thing worth mentioning (which I forgot in my original post) is: what you you call your network gear? Most decent organisations have managed hubs, switches, whatever, which eat IP space and namespace. One answer is not to name them, but it can be useful to know their location from their name...
It's pretty common to use techniques similar to what you describe initially. Often six alpha and 2 digits, eg, abcdef63. This lets you have 100 machines with the "same" name (abcdef), and 6 chars is long enough to have a "decent" project name.
Alternatively, split them into 4+2+2, or 5+1+2. 5+1+2 is pretty versatile, project + code + number.
The trend seems to be going away from "real" names in the past 5-8 years... One customer of mine had all their printers named after Disney characters. I think the problem is keeping to themes; one place I worked had planets and moons for differnet types of boxes, but people started adding stars, or getting confused about what's a moon! It's also limiting in that after the 9th "planet-type" system, what do you do when you order 5 new servers? It may be possible to keep getting more obscure, but you lose the practicality which was the main purpose.
Re:Pursuasive, but I have a question...
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 2
If it's a niche product, then yes, there's a limited userbase, and the customers of the original GPL code will presumably be the target market of this company. Huge overlap if it's, say, control software for an oilrig, smaller overlap if it's accounting software, very little overlap if it's a text editor (unless it's vi or emacs!)
Re:Total obfuscation is not possible
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 2
It'd be a significant challenge - to automatically obfuscate code the the point where indent and a few sed's can't deobfuscate it... in many cases, unless you're taking something huge like the whole of GNOME, it'd be easier (=cheaper) to write your own alternative.
Re:Dirty Pool! But also confusing.
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 2
hen you release something under the GPL, you hand over control of your code to the FSF
This is not true. The FSF recommend handing the (c) over to them, since that would enable their lawyers to prosecute in event of a violation, instead of you having to fork out your own cash for lawyers. The standard lettering of the GPL license says:
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
(my emphasis)
So the GPL-abusing company could use it under whatever version of the license they wanted.
But if you switch to something like StarOffice now, or just start saving as RTF, you can still access your old documents if you're still using Word; each time you open an old doc, you could even replace it with an RTF of itself.
This would help in the (hypothetical) situation 2 years down the line when you decide to dump MSOffice immediately (eg, EULA changes to "All your letters are belong to us")
Hey, 330 Canadian Dollars a week? That's UKP 144!
Check out The UK Rates - Maximum UKP53. So you're getting nearly 3 times what we get in the UK.
In short: Quit bleating.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a practising Christian, and I'm here.
Seen your site. The "free download" requires name, address, company name, address, email, blah blah. And I still don't even know what your software *does*
I often take my laptop into that little room with so much privacy... open a few browser windows, unhook (no wireless LAN!), and keep on reading. I've even downloaded whole books on this basis (see http://steve-parker.org/book/neuromancer.html)
Now that's an interesting statement.... I downloaded the Windoze E-book reader ages ago, but only to see what all the fuss was about - I downloaded Huck. Finn (free, (c) expired) to try it out. That PC's gone now, so I guess I'd have to get another copy, another license, and re-download the book to get it again. If I'd already paid, I'd be sick.
I don't know the Rocket e-book reader, but what do you use an e-book reader for, if not for reading e-books?!
Armed with this presumption, he also gets away with it in mainstream stores, too... since his mental attitude is "why not?", they don't seem to argue with him.
That way, it's "out there" and GPL'd. Other people can work on the code (in the USA or elsewhere) without having ever seen the MSFT license, let alone signing it. They've received the code under the GPL, not under MSFT's license.
The DOS @echo off command is no different from the bourne [again] shell >dev/null 2>&1 ... is that bad, too?
This may or may not be best done from scratch; I dunno, I've not seen the code, so that's up to you.
That way, you get two developers thoughts on each aspect, not just "I did it this way because I think it's cool", and since they know the requirements of both sites, they will make sure that the library makes their lives easier. Then you can swap them over every week between intranet and internet sites, and they'll not notice the difference, since the APIs (the library of code they've developed) is the same.
Uh okay, just tell us your nick...
try: /dev/null &
lynx -dump http://server:port >
to run it it in parallel - and do try it from another box, not localhost, since the performance will be different (but tell you more about your OS with apache than apache itself, but I guess localhost implementations differ, too)
Oops- thought the PRE tag was ok... meant to say:
main()
int i;
i=0;
i++;
}
it's not a for loop... at first glance, I assumed that it was a for loop, but it's not, the example given was just: main() { int i; i = 0; i+=1; // or i++; in the other example
}
Of course, the downside, is that if you have 1000 users, 100 of whom are in the office at any time, you still have 1000 sessions active on the server, waiting for them to insert their card at any time.
Once they do, they get their desktop back exactly as it was - eg, half-way through an edit of their 100Mb document - but while they're away, that document is still open, and consuming resources on the server. So the server has to be powerful, but the benefits are great too.
Great, now I sound like a salesperkin.
For March, I've been hit:
1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13th March.
I'm pretty happy with Google. It gets me results, and it searches me pretty often. 225 hits in March. The only thing it doesn't seem to have picked up, is the homepage (/). It changes pretty often (new headlines, whatever I'm thinking about today), but I guess people link to the content.
Let's see - I've had 279 hits from AV, 4318 from Google, since 31 Jan 2002. Do I care about AltaVista?
Seems to be a new thing (only spotted it a week or so ago), but searching for http://slashdot.org/ gives info about that page - links to, about, similar, contain, and the Google cache.
AOL could be switching from IE to Mozilla - hadn't you better rethink?
It takes the current clipboard, and opens a Google search for it. Small tweaking (it's only a short amount of code) would, I'm sure, make it work for other sites. Telsa claims it as working with Gnome, but I use IceWM, and it works great. A real boon, and no wasted space in my netscape toolbar.
That's the key... never start a convention you cannot finish.
The economy's different than it was in 99; people would have 2 webservers, but allow for having 500 (then go bust in 3 months). On the other end of the scale, a small idea you have (like, say, slashdot.org) could turn out to need far more servers than you ever envisaged.
Another thing worth mentioning (which I forgot in my original post) is: what you you call your network gear? Most decent organisations have managed hubs, switches, whatever, which eat IP space and namespace. One answer is not to name them, but it can be useful to know their location from their name...
Alternatively, split them into 4+2+2, or 5+1+2. 5+1+2 is pretty versatile, project + code + number.
The trend seems to be going away from "real" names in the past 5-8 years... One customer of mine had all their printers named after Disney characters. I think the problem is keeping to themes; one place I worked had planets and moons for differnet types of boxes, but people started adding stars, or getting confused about what's a moon! It's also limiting in that after the 9th "planet-type" system, what do you do when you order 5 new servers? It may be possible to keep getting more obscure, but you lose the practicality which was the main purpose.
If it's a niche product, then yes, there's a limited userbase, and the customers of the original GPL code will presumably be the target market of this company. Huge overlap if it's, say, control software for an oilrig, smaller overlap if it's accounting software, very little overlap if it's a text editor (unless it's vi or emacs!)
It'd be a significant challenge - to automatically obfuscate code the the point where indent and a few sed's can't deobfuscate it... in many cases, unless you're taking something huge like the whole of GNOME, it'd be easier (=cheaper) to write your own alternative.
This is not true. The FSF recommend handing the (c) over to them, since that would enable their lawyers to prosecute in event of a violation, instead of you having to fork out your own cash for lawyers. The standard lettering of the GPL license says:
(my emphasis)So the GPL-abusing company could use it under whatever version of the license they wanted.
This would help in the (hypothetical) situation 2 years down the line when you decide to dump MSOffice immediately (eg, EULA changes to "All your letters are belong to us")
Hey, 330 Canadian Dollars a week? That's UKP 144! Check out The UK Rates - Maximum UKP53. So you're getting nearly 3 times what we get in the UK. In short: Quit bleating.