Also, if you want to use RHEL without paying you can use CentOS free of charge. Thus, further showing that what RHEL does is not the same as what Mongo is doing.
Why? If I recall correctly, everything you mentioned was at first FREE, and then paid support was tacked on.
Yeah, and all that software is still free. Red Hat isn't changing the license to the code like Mongo is trying to do here. Also, charging for support is perfectly legal under the GPL. Restricting what someone can do with GPL software is not. It violates the very foundational spirit of "free software."
So it's ok for redhat to sell a paid version with support, but mongodb can't? You are being very hypocritical.
Yes, it is perfectly okay what Red Hat does. It's even one of the ways in which Richard Stallman himself says is a perfectly valid way to monetize free software. On the other hand, Mongo is not charging for "support." They are claiming that if you don't use the software in a way that they approve that you have to pay them for a special license. Thus violating this foundation tenet of free software:
Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
Then MongoDB should have been charging from the beginning if they wanted to be paid. Also, you can get RHEL essentially free with CentOS just without any support.
So again, MongoDB should have used a proprietary license from the get go instead of using a GPL license where one of the terms of that "free software" license is:
Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
MongoDB doesn't just get to ride the coattails of free software when they like but when people use the software in full compliance to both the spirit and letter of the license then start complaining.
If AWS were hosting real MongoDB and providing it as a SaaS model, then AWS (and anyone else doing it) should give a cut to the company actually making the product.
AWS is not breaking any rules here, but folks need to seriously look at it from a long term sustainability model and not necessarily go with AWS.
So they are not violating the license at all, but AWS is bad because reasons? It's not the fault of AWS that the Mongo people have no way to make money off their product. If Mongo needed money they shouldn't have released it under the very free software terms that allowed AWS to use so freely.
Seems they should have released the product product under a proprietary license if they wanted to exert all this control. But by doing that Mongo would have lost all the phoney marketing about how they are this great open source company.
But because it's open source, Azure and AWS are going to get the lion share of profits without giving back a line of code.
Boohoo. If they wanted to be paid they shouldn't have made the software available under terms that it could be freely used without being paid. They should have sold it as proprietary software.
They don't get to have their cake and eat it, too.
And yet in the real world they aren't as numerous CVEs can attest. I can also find numerous other causes of security vulnerabilities due to SQL injection, etc. as well. All in software supposedly written by the cream of the crop of these "safe" languages.
It's almost as if the entire base of your argument is bullshit.
So by this logic Java is also not safe for anyone to use either, no?. You didn't forget that the massive Equifax hack was due to a remote code execution vulnerability in Apache Struts which is written entirely in Java, right?
The majority of Americans don't know about the government shutdown.
This is the dumbest thing you've claimed so far. [citation needed]
At the end of the day, the democrats can end this by agreeing to 1/4 of the money they had agreed to spend last year. They aren't because they want to look big and are use to controlling the narrative.
They could but why would they? Toddler has no leverage. It's always funny when Republicans demand bipartisanship but what they really want is that the Democrats give them everything and get nothing in return. Your team lost the House and Pelosi is only standing for what the voters of America wanted. Also, if all this border money was so inpirtamt why didn't he demand the GOP give it to him in either the 2017 or 2018 budgets?
Sorry, but your spin and alternative facts don't change this statement:
So I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it. The last time you shut it down, it didn’t work. I will take the mantle of shutting it down.
What leverage does he have to force them to give in? If he had any leverage he'd be asking for the full $25 billion he was offered last year. That he's asking for substantially less and still hasn't gotten it shows he's the cuck in this fight. Nancy's owning him and the majority of Americans are on the Democrats' side.
Slashdot Mirror
I wish Google still "Don't be evil."
How about you stop being naive instead of falling for an informal motto that was not legally-binding in any way.
Was that supposed to sound inightful?
Crypto-currencies thrive on the "a sucker born every minute" principle. Oddly enough, plenty of people are still dumb enough to fall for the scam.
Please explain to me the exact way that our current money system works and why it is better than crypto currency!
I can walk into any store and buy goods and services with "fiat" currency whilst your buttcoins can not.
With Project Treble now supported by all Android phone makers, in theory updates should roll out to us faster than before.
This is a rather interesting edit of a sentence from the actual linked article which says:
With Project Treble now supported by key Android flagships, in theory updates should roll out to us faster than ever before.
msmash, you do realize that the two versions do mot mean the same thing, right?
No worries. The rest of us were laughing at you and your ghost town.
Do you need a safe space, snowflake?
Also, if you want to use RHEL without paying you can use CentOS free of charge. Thus, further showing that what RHEL does is not the same as what Mongo is doing.
Why? If I recall correctly, everything you mentioned was at first FREE, and then paid support was tacked on.
Yeah, and all that software is still free. Red Hat isn't changing the license to the code like Mongo is trying to do here. Also, charging for support is perfectly legal under the GPL. Restricting what someone can do with GPL software is not. It violates the very foundational spirit of "free software."
So it's ok for redhat to sell a paid version with support, but mongodb can't? You are being very hypocritical.
Yes, it is perfectly okay what Red Hat does. It's even one of the ways in which Richard Stallman himself says is a perfectly valid way to monetize free software. On the other hand, Mongo is not charging for "support." They are claiming that if you don't use the software in a way that they approve that you have to pay them for a special license. Thus violating this foundation tenet of free software:
Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
Sorry, but the two situations are not analagous.
Good for them, but they deserve the middle finger they are getting from people.
Then MongoDB should have been charging from the beginning if they wanted to be paid. Also, you can get RHEL essentially free with CentOS just without any support.
So again, MongoDB should have used a proprietary license from the get go instead of using a GPL license where one of the terms of that "free software" license is:
Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
MongoDB doesn't just get to ride the coattails of free software when they like but when people use the software in full compliance to both the spirit and letter of the license then start complaining.
If AWS were hosting real MongoDB and providing it as a SaaS model, then AWS (and anyone else doing it) should give a cut to the company actually making the product.
Why?
AWS is not breaking any rules here, but folks need to seriously look at it from a long term sustainability model and not necessarily go with AWS.
So they are not violating the license at all, but AWS is bad because reasons? It's not the fault of AWS that the Mongo people have no way to make money off their product. If Mongo needed money they shouldn't have released it under the very free software terms that allowed AWS to use so freely.
Seems they should have released the product product under a proprietary license if they wanted to exert all this control. But by doing that Mongo would have lost all the phoney marketing about how they are this great open source company.
But because it's open source, Azure and AWS are going to get the lion share of profits without giving back a line of code.
Boohoo. If they wanted to be paid they shouldn't have made the software available under terms that it could be freely used without being paid. They should have sold it as proprietary software.
They don't get to have their cake and eat it, too.
[quote]Type errors are unavoidable,[/quote]
And yet in the real world they aren't as numerous CVEs can attest. I can also find numerous other causes of security vulnerabilities due to SQL injection, etc. as well. All in software supposedly written by the cream of the crop of these "safe" languages.
It's almost as if the entire base of your argument is bullshit.
And yet, the Struts vulnerability caused massively more damage to more people.
Oh and even Heartbleed can claim but a small fraction of the damage that the Struts bug did with the breadth of the Equifax breach.
Oh and here's an RCE flaw in 100%-Java-code Apache Tomcat:
https://threatpost.com/apache-...
If even the Apache Foundation can't right secure Java code why should we expect an average-skilled Java coder is able to?
This game is fun. Shall I start listing comparable security bugs in software written in Ruby, Python and other such supposedly "safe" langauges?
Oh and back in August 2018 there was this other beauty of a bug in Apache Struts:
https://threatpost.com/apache-...
I bet the flaws exploited in the 100%-Java-code Apache Struts has caused far more widspread harm to consumers than this WiFi firmware bug.
So by this logic Java is also not safe for anyone to use either, no?. You didn't forget that the massive Equifax hack was due to a remote code execution vulnerability in Apache Struts which is written entirely in Java, right?
https://blogs.apache.org/found...
They've been upgradeable for decades.
Maybe you should have read the summary?
this is one of the most popular WiFi chipsets on the market, being deployed with devices such as Sony PlayStation 4, Xbox One
That alone is more than 100 million devices.
The majority of Americans don't know about the government shutdown.
This is the dumbest thing you've claimed so far. [citation needed]
At the end of the day, the democrats can end this by agreeing to 1/4 of the money they had agreed to spend last year. They aren't because they want to look big and are use to controlling the narrative.
They could but why would they? Toddler has no leverage. It's always funny when Republicans demand bipartisanship but what they really want is that the Democrats give them everything and get nothing in return. Your team lost the House and Pelosi is only standing for what the voters of America wanted. Also, if all this border money was so inpirtamt why didn't he demand the GOP give it to him in either the 2017 or 2018 budgets?
Sorry, but your spin and alternative facts don't change this statement:
So I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it. The last time you shut it down, it didn’t work. I will take the mantle of shutting it down.
The toddler owns this completely.
What leverage does he have to force them to give in? If he had any leverage he'd be asking for the full $25 billion he was offered last year. That he's asking for substantially less and still hasn't gotten it shows he's the cuck in this fight. Nancy's owning him and the majority of Americans are on the Democrats' side.