They will lose their jobs, of course. This is after all the whole point of technical progress: let machines do the work of people.
If the overall project of technical progress succeeds, and there is no reason to doubt it, eventually only very few people will need to work. This is a good thing (if your country has decent redistribution policies in place).
I don't think the rest of the world is going to change for free software, I think free software needs to change for the world. If that means that it can't be free anymore, so be it. If something isn't viable, it isn't viable.
Free software is a hobby; it is solely and exclusively done for the fun of it. Nothing more, nothing less. And as the success of free software shows, hobbies like that are very viable indeed. Certainly more viable than your average crooked US corporation.
This decision lowers the value of this kind of products, more companies may go out of business and more people loose their jobs, life-savings etc.
...and many people will get their rendering software cheaper, making them happy, enabling them to acquire valuable job skills, and allowing them to save money for their life savings.
For better or for worse, people in general are used to instant gratification; that's why clippy is on millions of computers, and emacs isn't.
True, and that's why a free Blender (like a free Emacs) is so beautiful: it can continue to be powerful software for intelligent users, and does not have to cater to the billions of idiots out there.
it appears that if everything in the box is vanilla then nothing needs to be distributed.
No. They distribute vanilla Linux in binary form, therefore they are required by the GPL to make vanilla Linux source available. They *cannot* point at someone else's FTP server. If they normally distributed their binary vanilla Linux from their FTP server, then they could offer the source up via FTP. But they don't.
If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place
They don't distribute their object code via FTP; they distribute their object code by shipping a box, so this section doesn't apply.
Furthermore, the "special exception" of the GPL doesn't apply either, since the executable is itself a (vanilla) kernel and doesn't run on any "operating system".
So, even if everything were completely vanilla GPL, they still would have to ship full source. However, it is very likely that they had to make some tiny changes to the vanilla kernel source in order to accomodate their proprietary module, if only to the complilation scripts. So it's not vanilla anymore and full source (not just patches) has to be mailed on demand anyway.
Ok, you're right. Back to the private/public question though: do private colleges utilize significantly less adjunct faculty/teaching assistants than public colleges?
State universities are usually much smaller than research universities. Think "California State University San Bernardino", and not "University of California San Diego".
State universities, unlike research universities, typically don't have any graduate assistants, because they don't have graduate programs. All teaching is done by full-time faculty with a Ph.D.
At small private colleges, your math courses are taught by real, professional mathematicians with Ph.Ds. The Ph.D. is not always directly relevant, but it does give your professor the authority to look far ahead of your current coursework and tell you what is relevant and what is not.
Why is the word "private" there? State universities also focus primarily on teaching and have Ph.D. and research requirements. Compared to private colleges, they charge lower tuition and pay higher salaries to their faculty.
To which they would no doubt reply you can get the source from any Linux disto site on the net. If you read the GPL you will note that it is sufficient to provide an ftp site for the source code.
If you read the GPL you'd know that pointing to someone else's ftp site is not sufficient. They have to mail the sources to any customer who asks for them, for the cost of shipping only.
How would people know that the material on your site is illegal without first looking at it?
Re:Binary Distros Are Dead
on
Is RPM Doomed?
·
· Score: 2
does this mean that commercial developers will abandon Linux and go to platforms that are more disciplined about binary backwards and forwards compatibility?
It's completely obvious to me that a web site is publishing world-wide.
Imagine you print a zine, and when people call you up, you send them a copy. You are then publishing your zine in all those countries that you sent it to. This is exactly what a website does.
If you still don't get it: imagine the zine writer sits in the Netherlands, where pictures of nude children sunbathing are legal. He sends his nudist zine to the US. Is he breaking US law or not?
No you didn't, because had you stolen $1,691.00 from MS, you would be prosecuted for theft.
Had you been a bit more careful, your actions wouldn't even have been a crime: stay below $1000 and copying without profit motive is no crime, just a civil offense. Should MS sue, just declare bankruptcy and they are left with the legal costs on top of the $1,691.
In a couple hundred years, we will obviously have computers powerful enough to simulate some sort of universe. Maybe not as big as ours, maybe not as featureful, but still. Over time, people will get good at coming up with initial conditions which lead to interesting universes, lots of scientists will do nothing but that. Eventually, ever schoolkid will have a universe-simulating computer on their desk, as a science project. Of course, these simulated universes will eventually evolve life, intelligence, computers and their own universe simulations. It is clear that overall there exist therefore many more simulated universes than real ones. In all likelihood, we are sitting in a simulated universe right now. The creator-god is probably some school kid.
Many people have wondered before why the laws of nature are such simple equations. The reason is clear: it's much easier to simulate that way. The simpler and more elegant the laws of physics are, the more likely it becomes that this is not the real universe.
For you to commit a crime in country A, you don't have to be physically present in country A; consider for instance a Russian hacker emptying a US bank account. The Russians won't extradite him of course, but as soon as he enters Germany say, the Americans can ask the Germans to arrest him and ship him over. Same thing with Holocaust deniers. It has happened once I believe, with a Dane.
Slashdot Mirror
If your gf is so stupid that she falls for the transparent propaganda of de Beers, junk her and save the money. It won't last anyway.
They will lose their jobs, of course. This is after all the whole point of technical progress: let machines do the work of people.
If the overall project of technical progress succeeds, and there is no reason to doubt it, eventually only very few people will need to work. This is a good thing (if your country has decent redistribution policies in place).
Corporations can't or won't devote the kind of enthusiasm to projects that hobbyists do, and an awful lot of corporations go bankrupt.
Free software is a hobby; it is solely and exclusively done for the fun of it. Nothing more, nothing less. And as the success of free software shows, hobbies like that are very viable indeed. Certainly more viable than your average crooked US corporation.
You have to look at the whole system.
Wrong. The amount of money some people have lost is precisely the amount of money other people have won. Like in any zero-sum scheme.
True, and that's why a free Blender (like a free Emacs) is so beautiful: it can continue to be powerful software for intelligent users, and does not have to cater to the billions of idiots out there.
It seems that then the best option for the guy is to sign up at a small local public university for a class that is taught by a professor.
No. They distribute vanilla Linux in binary form, therefore they are required by the GPL to make vanilla Linux source available. They *cannot* point at someone else's FTP server. If they normally distributed their binary vanilla Linux from their FTP server, then they could offer the source up via FTP. But they don't.
If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place
They don't distribute their object code via FTP; they distribute their object code by shipping a box, so this section doesn't apply. Furthermore, the "special exception" of the GPL doesn't apply either, since the executable is itself a (vanilla) kernel and doesn't run on any "operating system". So, even if everything were completely vanilla GPL, they still would have to ship full source. However, it is very likely that they had to make some tiny changes to the vanilla kernel source in order to accomodate their proprietary module, if only to the complilation scripts. So it's not vanilla anymore and full source (not just patches) has to be mailed on demand anyway.
Ok, you're right. Back to the private/public question though: do private colleges utilize significantly less adjunct faculty/teaching assistants than public colleges?
State universities are usually much smaller than research universities. Think "California State University San Bernardino", and not "University of California San Diego". State universities, unlike research universities, typically don't have any graduate assistants, because they don't have graduate programs. All teaching is done by full-time faculty with a Ph.D.
Bottom line is: if you ship a box that's running Linux, modified or not, then you have to provide access to Linux sources.
That may be your reality, and it is a sad one. Kill your TV and regain your life. Soon you'll be dead. "I wish I had watched more TV!"
Why is the word "private" there? State universities also focus primarily on teaching and have Ph.D. and research requirements. Compared to private colleges, they charge lower tuition and pay higher salaries to their faculty.
If you read the GPL you'd know that pointing to someone else's ftp site is not sufficient. They have to mail the sources to any customer who asks for them, for the cost of shipping only.
In other words, you pay for the movies which pay the evil corporate machine. You have heard about the concept of personal responsibility, right?
But those animators create the income that pays the salaries of the Disney lawyers. Hence they are responsible.
How would people know that the material on your site is illegal without first looking at it?
Let's hope so.
It's completely obvious to me that a web site is publishing world-wide. Imagine you print a zine, and when people call you up, you send them a copy. You are then publishing your zine in all those countries that you sent it to. This is exactly what a website does. If you still don't get it: imagine the zine writer sits in the Netherlands, where pictures of nude children sunbathing are legal. He sends his nudist zine to the US. Is he breaking US law or not?
No you didn't, because had you stolen $1,691.00 from MS, you would be prosecuted for theft.
Had you been a bit more careful, your actions wouldn't even have been a crime: stay below $1000 and copying without profit motive is no crime, just a civil offense. Should MS sue, just declare bankruptcy and they are left with the legal costs on top of the $1,691.
Enjoy the ride!
Can I save $250 if I just use the box for ad filtering and time shifting don't sign up for their spy-service?
The point of publicizing their license agreement, in case you hadn't noticed, is precisely to prevent this from happening.
Many people have wondered before why the laws of nature are such simple equations. The reason is clear: it's much easier to simulate that way. The simpler and more elegant the laws of physics are, the more likely it becomes that this is not the real universe.
For you to commit a crime in country A, you don't have to be physically present in country A; consider for instance a Russian hacker emptying a US bank account. The Russians won't extradite him of course, but as soon as he enters Germany say, the Americans can ask the Germans to arrest him and ship him over. Same thing with Holocaust deniers. It has happened once I believe, with a Dane.