Is that I have very little Idea exactly what this is, no pricing, no info on game play, nothing. all because the annoying breakey website is nothing but a holder for some browser plugin that I don't have installed. I assume its flash or somesuch.
Don't you just love that proliferation of un-user friendly, un-usable websites? -
Basically the comments after each section boil down to "we hate nintendo" - I just don't get it. I don't hope any one company succeeds or fails, I will buy a product that appeals to me [unless it made by microsoft:)] I recently got a gmaecube (I haven't purchase any of this generation's consoles till now) and I did so because it beat the others on price, and on games. The games I want to play are on the GC and I think its because I want to play fun games, not games that throw in violence or sex so they can be 'mature'. (although my first few purchases have had some misteps, "Super Smash Bros. Melee" anyone ?)
I also think the GC joystick design blows away the competition and I hope nintendo sticks with it. But if their next system sucks I wont want it, even if everyone else does, and the same goes for sony.
I just don't get why all the press recently has been so anti-nintendo, it is sort-of like the anti-Howard Dean press, where is very obvious the Republicans are pushing the 'un-electable' angle as hard as they can so that it sticks before he even gets the nomination. Why are game writers so anti nintendo? the game cube is a nice little device and the games they put out are typiclly very high quality.
wow, and I clicked on the link assuming that you had decorated a Mac cube, maybe like a gingerbread houes or something. Boy am I happy I don't worrk in a cube farm....:)
I don't use KDE at all so take this with a huge grain of salt. But GNOME is so consistant that usability and consistancy seem to be the driving force for the entire desktop.
Bruce choose GNOME for one reason, the LGPL. This makes it far more palatable for proprietary developers (they get the entire UserLinux platform and don't have to worry about licencing Qt down the road if the want to sell an app).
Also I think GNOMEs unified vision of simplicity and usability gives it more corporate credibility. From what I hear KDE seems to strive to make Konqueror into the next emacs, making sure you can do anything with it that you could possibly want (or in many cases NOT want:)
I am sure KDE is fine, but I use GNOME full time of several machines and it is very friendly and usable, so I can't see the complaints that KDE is "better" I don't claim GNOME is "better" I just happen to like it more
nice products but they don't do what I asked:) I have zero interrest in HD tv, and probably won't switch till it is THE standard... and broadcast digital doesn't help with directv or digital cable.
I would switch to a freevo like program in a second, you point me to the card for my PC that can decode DirecTV, or for that matter digital cable. I have directv and a couple of TiVos the integration is seemless and workds great, my family has digital cable with a stand-alone tivo that automatically changes the channel on the cable box, it is super annoying and I don't know how they put up with it (not to mention the advantage of dual recievers) - I even know someone who has a TiVo that can't change the cable box's channel if the number has consecutive digits (ie 33 or 44) TiVo says its a problem with the box, and vice versa.
The service providers hold thier hardware close to the chest, as long as all I can do with a PC card is standard broadcast or remote IR control I am locked out. The service with a single integrated unit it too good.
I don't even dump video to disc or anything, I don't care about TV enough to do it, but the cable/satellite people don't release PC based decoders because they are afraid of what may happen (I am not really sure why, the ones that aren't content providers shouldn't even care what we do with the feed)
Maybe the "broadcast flag" will give them an excuse to make computer peripherals that work with satellite and digital cable ? (slim chance I know but I can hope:) - either way as soon as I see a PCI card that does directv I'll order it immediately (price factoring in of course)
All these people bitching and complaining about whats wrong. I mean really do you think MS generates this many internal memos constantly beating a dead horse on thier dev model ?
Free Software is done freely by whoever wants, so if they *want* to "scratch the same itch" as others, or fight amongst themselves, I say more power too them. and if businesses can't promote migration correctly then that is thier problem.
The issue is all these "what's wrong" pieces are by so-called Open Source industry people, the fact is the "open source" or "free software" movement, community or whatever is NOT a unified front with commercial interrests. and that is why it doesn't act like one.
For myself I am quite happen with the community being a disjointed group with various sub-groups re-scratching what they want, when do they expect, for us to form a open source council and if you want to start a project on sourceforge you have to request permission (to make sure the itch hasnt been scratched) ? - I say let the people that want to capitalize on Free and open software continue to try and do so, but let's not berate developers because they don't have the same world commerce view as you.
My cable company's guide channel used to crash a LOT with the Amiga guru meditation message (I never had an Amiga myself and so my biggest expossure to the machine was its error message, long after they had fallen out of comercial favour)
since then they've been bought by cablevision (years back now) and I've switched to satellite:)
You made my point exactly. Your interrested in.Net because your a windows developer. There is no compeling reason to be interrested in.Net if you are not tied to the Microsoft platform.
I hold no ill will toward Ximian or Miguel, they have done great things, but I still am completely unconvinced by Mono.
I've used Mono a little (Dashboard and others) and qutie frankly I am not impressed with C#, and I am not convinced of the "common language" nonsense. What does strike me is how it seems no different or better than the technology Java introduced years ago. Add to that the fact that I don't think anyone can successfully play catchup with MS, and that I think MS patent lawyers will pounce the second Mono looks credible to a.Net or C# developer.
Why not re-implement a Free Java clone with the same resources. Java is more 'open' (maybe not officially with standards but in practice for sure) Java is here NOW, and Java has developers now. Not to mention the stigma of cloning MS wouldn't be there to scare away people like me. - Not to mention the things in.Net that are very windows specific that it is either hard or useless to port to a different platform (who wants a VM language that requires a windows emulator to run? why not just write a windows program and use full on Wine at that point?)
I really hope Mono becomes something great, but I simply don't want to invest my time in a platform that appears will remain a bastard step-son to.Net for the foreseeable future. On the other hand Sun seems to have an interrest in a GNU/Linux desktop at this point, and may be coming around to wanting a full fledged java platform on Linux.
Why does the space station take priority ? they should scrap the ISS and start planning new orbital telescopes. most of the real valid research is done with hubble, and the dmand for time on it is outragous. NASA is a failure because it focuses on money sinks that do nothing.
The constant stream of "will this kill...." everytime MS releases a new product/service/annoyance should wake people up to the dangers of a single homogenous platform for virtually all computers. Of course viruses didn't.
I am shocked that all of these companies (Macromedia, Adobe, Symantec, etc..) aren't trying to expand to other platforms rather than being content to be sharecroppers on microsoft's platform. The day comes for every minor (and some not so minor) developer on the MS platform where MS replaces thier product and kills them (regardless of quality). If they all invested in other platforms those platforms would become more popular (due to support) and then they would have a viable alternative to praying MS doesn't bundle a {virus scanner, firewall, flash player...} in the next Windows release.
When we people relize its a chicken/egg problem and if they start laying the eggs eventually you'll get some chickens?;)
well sorry, but I don't follow game news that much, and got the email from nintendo back the day of the original story when it was still iffy if the "box art" seen was real at all. but now that its official I guess my initial perception of the email was correct.:)
I e-mailed Nintendo's public relations office about this release and was told:
Currently we are considering several premium offers for Nintendo GameCube for the holiday season, and a Zelda bundle is among them. But no decisions have been made yet.
I think you can take this to mean that they probably will do the promotion, but can't say so since retailers would obviously be upset if you told potential customers to wait before purchasing. of course maybe not, either way I am waiting to see what happens before running out for a gamecube.
I remember the simpler days. Back when falmes wars would be fought over the defendability of the GPL in court. Its was interresting conversation then but all speculation. Now we finally may have a chance to see it.
I say good! Let SCO violate the GPL blatently, and let it go to court. Lets put it all on the line and see once and for all what the courts say about the GPL. Of course I believe the GPL is rock solid and will prevail, but even if it doesn't we'll have it settled and know what has to change.
Imagine the insanity if all the code has to be re-licensed! - things like this point to everything that is wrong with our so-called "intellectual property" system. Sane people using common sense can clearly see the intent of the GPL, and if not it can be discussed easily. But we can't do it that way, why? because the world is filled with assholes and degenerates that will do every thing they can to lie and cheat and get away with it.
Too bad the legal system isn't as simple as common sense, then the authors of the code could go to a judge and say "any child with half a brain can see our intent, and that SCO is violating that intent":) - of course the whole reason for the GPL wouldn't exist if it weren't for proprietary software makers exercising the 'rules' in a much harsher way.
I don't really game all that much, and I don't own a current generation console. but with the drop to 99$ I will be picking up a gamecube soon.
Don't underestimate non-fanatical gamers, I see $99 and think even if all I ever do is play mario kart or what ever with my wife and its not that expensive. at $200 or $300 PLUS game price your starting to think "am I really going to play it that much, maybe I should just upgrade my computer..."
I hate ESR. I think hes a pompous windbag. I have no interrest in his suggestion for a logo. His interview in "Revolution OS" explains it all as far as I'm concerned, and lest we forget the insanity with the jargon file. A year from now he'll start promoting a new meaning for the logo and say everyone who has the old interpretation is out of touch.
ESR may have some technical skill, but his "Cathedral and Bazaar" paper is woefully overrated. Simply put it seems like all he does now-a-days is run around trying to act like a "leader" or some amorphous group. He writes things as if he was this great genious that invented the concept when all he did was put it on paper (see his Unix progamming crap)
Quite frankly every time I see something by ESR I get a little taste of what other people claim to see in RMS (pompous, doesn't do anything but stump for his on promotion anymore... etc) While I admit I do not agree entirely with that assessment of RMS, I would gladly take Free Software over "Open Source Software" any day.
That someone felt this study needed to be done? or that someone might be surprised by the results?
or is it that they didn't test the various belief systems against each other? - maybe they were afraid of the results.
obviously to do this pointless study right people would have to be segregated by religion, seeing as most religions feel that the others are wrong, and therefore the praying won't work.
"And although Torvalds released the kernel of his operating system well before GNU produced a reliable one of its own, Stallman insists Torvalds' work should properly be called GNU/Linux, because early contributors adapted GNU components for Linux"
I couldn't image a more incorrect way to describe the GNU/Linux vs. Linux debate. could someone due a little research when writing an article? All the author would ahve to do is read ONE webpage on www.fsf.org to see how biased and wrong this is.
I doubt Linus would agree with that statement. Unles the FSF has recently changed its stance I don't believe they have ever under any circumstances asked that a piece of software written by, or overseen by Linus be called "GNU/Linux".
This is a good reason why everyone involved with designing software should have extensive training in UI design, and accessability. Sure you may say (heck the developer may even say it) that why should they care about altering thier design for a small percentage of the market, and maybe designers shouldn't have to.
But I find that interfaces designed for easy access to all are much better to the "non-disabled" users as well. How hard is it to say "hey maybe we should make it easier to diferentiate widget one from widget two?"
If the designer or developer is dead set on a layout that sucks they can do it... but over all one that is easy for the color-blind, is going to be easier on the color-sited. I am not color blind, but I have actually thought about this recently because I have a son now who may be color blind (simple genetic math:) and althought he is not old enough to test I have read a bit about it and everytime I see pointers on making thing color-blind accessable I say to myself "wow that would make it easier on everyone."
Most design choices that help the 'disabled' are simple, and don't adversly impact the non-disabled audience, I think it is a lack of training in what to look for that causes the problems, not a lack of desire to fix them.
Whether you think so or not this is a very important case. It strikes symbolically at the heart of recent eroding of freedoms via the patriot act and the DMCA. along with various other things. I think there is a good chance for the ruling to stand, any sane person can plainly see the arguement on how it is a iolation of the first amendment to have compulsory pledging "under god". I also think that the more conservative members of the court have actually ruled only similar issues with an eye to protecting rights.
Of course Scalia is a raving lunatic that barely grasps the law (at least in his few public statements) so I bet he'll rule that it should be changed, but to "under the catholic god that favours capital punishment":)
All we have to do is take back the money next, too bad those fights havent faired as well.
This is exactly why I do not understand why some Free Software makes you click through the GPL when you install it. At least they did in the past when installed on windows (I've never seen this on Debian). Maybe they stopped doing this since I stopped using windows but it always bothered me.
Let's make them click through a licence they don't actually have to agree to. a little strange if you ask me.
You might want to skip reading it because its written by a moron.
First he interchangably uses "Free" and "open Source" which if your not RMS wouldn'ty matter much, but he is interchanging the GOALS of the FSF with open source when he does so. EXACTLY the reason RMS hates being bunched with open source.
Second he paints it as a payoff almost akin to a bribe when someone donates to the FSF in exchange for the FSF helping to defend their intellectual property rights (although RMS would hate me using that term, and I don't like it either) - we the author similarly damn a company for paying a lawfirn to fight the FSF ?
Third, he says that the FSF actions are worse than normal copyright infringements because they don't want royalties, they want license compliance. WELL DUH! - he says this is bad because it scares companies away from free software (although he calls it "open source") - This is exactly the goal of the FSF, to scare you aware from using the GPL if you are going to violate it.
Fourth he refers to the FSF asking you to "burn down your house" by having to free up the code. well the simplefact is if you built your house from stolen lumber, of course you have to disassemble it to return the property. If I stole microsofts source and released a modified version would it be ok for me to pay a simple royalty and then KEEP the code I took for my own comercial persuits? thats insane, MS would say I have no right to continue developement. Its the same with the GPL, only you don't have to pay a royalty or license fee, the cost is that you HAVE to release your derivative works. simple as that.
The companies the FSF are goign after (if they are in fact in the wrong) are violating a license, sonmething I am sure this author would be against if the license fee was money.
The ignorance of this article is so absurd that it is ridiculus. He is saying cisco should be able to use copyrighted GPLed code for free, without having to honour the original authors license, yet at the same time the FSF is wrong becuase they want people to obey a license that lets you use stuff for 'free' my head is spinning.
Slashdot Mirror
Is that I have very little Idea exactly what this is, no pricing, no info on game play, nothing. all because the annoying breakey website is nothing but a holder for some browser plugin that I don't have installed. I assume its flash or somesuch.
Don't you just love that proliferation of un-user friendly, un-usable websites? -
I could easily say a very similar thing. except I use 100% gnome apps and don't even have QT installed on my system.
Basically the comments after each section boil down to "we hate nintendo" - I just don't get it. I don't hope any one company succeeds or fails, I will buy a product that appeals to me [unless it made by microsoft :)] I recently got a gmaecube (I haven't purchase any of this generation's consoles till now) and I did so because it beat the others on price, and on games. The games I want to play are on the GC and I think its because I want to play fun games, not games that throw in violence or sex so they can be 'mature'. (although my first few purchases have had some misteps, "Super Smash Bros. Melee" anyone ?)
I also think the GC joystick design blows away the competition and I hope nintendo sticks with it. But if their next system sucks I wont want it, even if everyone else does, and the same goes for sony.
I just don't get why all the press recently has been so anti-nintendo, it is sort-of like the anti-Howard Dean press, where is very obvious the Republicans are pushing the 'un-electable' angle as hard as they can so that it sticks before he even gets the nomination. Why are game writers so anti nintendo? the game cube is a nice little device and the games they put out are typiclly very high quality.
wow, and I clicked on the link assuming that you had decorated a Mac cube, maybe like a gingerbread houes or something. Boy am I happy I don't worrk in a cube farm.... :)
I don't use KDE at all so take this with a huge grain of salt. But GNOME is so consistant that usability and consistancy seem to be the driving force for the entire desktop.
:)
Bruce choose GNOME for one reason, the LGPL.
This makes it far more palatable for proprietary developers (they get the entire UserLinux platform and don't have to worry about licencing Qt down the road if the want to sell an app).
Also I think GNOMEs unified vision of simplicity and usability gives it more corporate credibility. From what I hear KDE seems to strive to make Konqueror into the next emacs, making sure you can do anything with it that you could possibly want (or in many cases NOT want
I am sure KDE is fine, but I use GNOME full time of several machines and it is very friendly and usable, so I can't see the complaints that KDE is "better" I don't claim GNOME is "better" I just happen to like it more
nice products but they don't do what I asked :)
I have zero interrest in HD tv, and probably won't switch till it is THE standard... and broadcast digital doesn't help with directv or digital cable.
I would switch to a freevo like program in a second, you point me to the card for my PC that can decode DirecTV, or for that matter digital cable. I have directv and a couple of TiVos the integration is seemless and workds great, my family has digital cable with a stand-alone tivo that automatically changes the channel on the cable box, it is super annoying and I don't know how they put up with it (not to mention the advantage of dual recievers) - I even know someone who has a TiVo that can't change the cable box's channel if the number has consecutive digits (ie 33 or 44) TiVo says its a problem with the box, and vice versa.
:) - either way as soon as I see a PCI card that does directv I'll order it immediately (price factoring in of course)
The service providers hold thier hardware close to the chest, as long as all I can do with a PC card is standard broadcast or remote IR control I am locked out. The service with a single integrated unit it too good.
I don't even dump video to disc or anything, I don't care about TV enough to do it, but the cable/satellite people don't release PC based decoders because they are afraid of what may happen (I am not really sure why, the ones that aren't content providers shouldn't even care what we do with the feed)
Maybe the "broadcast flag" will give them an excuse to make computer peripherals that work with satellite and digital cable ? (slim chance I know but I can hope
All these people bitching and complaining about whats wrong. I mean really do you think MS generates this many internal memos constantly beating a dead horse on thier dev model ?
Free Software is done freely by whoever wants, so if they *want* to "scratch the same itch" as others, or fight amongst themselves, I say more power too them. and if businesses can't promote migration correctly then that is thier problem.
The issue is all these "what's wrong" pieces are by so-called Open Source industry people, the fact is the "open source" or "free software" movement, community or whatever is NOT a unified front with commercial interrests. and that is why it doesn't act like one.
For myself I am quite happen with the community being a disjointed group with various sub-groups re-scratching what they want, when do they expect, for us to form a open source council and if you want to start a project on sourceforge you have to request permission (to make sure the itch hasnt been scratched) ? - I say let the people that want to capitalize on Free and open software continue to try and do so, but let's not berate developers because they don't have the same world commerce view as you.
My cable company's guide channel used to crash a LOT with the Amiga guru meditation message (I never had an Amiga myself and so my biggest expossure to the machine was its error message, long after they had fallen out of comercial favour)
:)
since then they've been bought by cablevision (years back now) and I've switched to satellite
You made my point exactly. Your interrested in .Net because your a windows developer. There is no compeling reason to be interrested in .Net if you are not tied to the Microsoft platform.
I hold no ill will toward Ximian or Miguel, they have done great things, but I still am completely unconvinced by Mono.
.Net or C# developer.
.Net that are very windows specific that it is either hard or useless to port to a different platform (who wants a VM language that requires a windows emulator to run? why not just write a windows program and use full on Wine at that point?)
.Net for the foreseeable future. On the other hand Sun seems to have an interrest in a GNU/Linux desktop at this point, and may be coming around to wanting a full fledged java platform on Linux.
I've used Mono a little (Dashboard and others) and qutie frankly I am not impressed with C#, and I am not convinced of the "common language" nonsense. What does strike me is how it seems no different or better than the technology Java introduced years ago. Add to that the fact that I don't think anyone can successfully play catchup with MS, and that I think MS patent lawyers will pounce the second Mono looks credible to a
Why not re-implement a Free Java clone with the same resources. Java is more 'open' (maybe not officially with standards but in practice for sure) Java is here NOW, and Java has developers now. Not to mention the stigma of cloning MS wouldn't be there to scare away people like me. - Not to mention the things in
I really hope Mono becomes something great, but I simply don't want to invest my time in a platform that appears will remain a bastard step-son to
Why does the space station take priority ? they should scrap the ISS and start planning new orbital telescopes. most of the real valid research is done with hubble, and the dmand for time on it is outragous. NASA is a failure because it focuses on money sinks that do nothing.
The constant stream of "will this kill ...." everytime MS releases a new product/service/annoyance should wake people up to the dangers of a single homogenous platform for virtually all computers. Of course viruses didn't.
;)
I am shocked that all of these companies (Macromedia, Adobe, Symantec, etc..) aren't trying to expand to other platforms rather than being content to be sharecroppers on microsoft's platform. The day comes for every minor (and some not so minor) developer on the MS platform where MS replaces thier product and kills them (regardless of quality). If they all invested in other platforms those platforms would become more popular (due to support) and then they would have a viable alternative to praying MS doesn't bundle a {virus scanner, firewall, flash player...} in the next Windows release.
When we people relize its a chicken/egg problem and if they start laying the eggs eventually you'll get some chickens?
well sorry, but I don't follow game news that much, and got the email from nintendo back the day of the original story when it was still iffy if the "box art" seen was real at all. but now that its official I guess my initial perception of the email was correct. :)
I think you can take this to mean that they probably will do the promotion, but can't say so since retailers would obviously be upset if you told potential customers to wait before purchasing. of course maybe not, either way I am waiting to see what happens before running out for a gamecube.
I remember the simpler days. Back when falmes wars would be fought over the defendability of the GPL in court. Its was interresting conversation then but all speculation. Now we finally may have a chance to see it.
:) - of course the whole reason for the GPL wouldn't exist if it weren't for proprietary software makers exercising the 'rules' in a much harsher way.
I say good! Let SCO violate the GPL blatently, and let it go to court. Lets put it all on the line and see once and for all what the courts say about the GPL. Of course I believe the GPL is rock solid and will prevail, but even if it doesn't we'll have it settled and know what has to change.
Imagine the insanity if all the code has to be re-licensed! - things like this point to everything that is wrong with our so-called "intellectual property" system. Sane people using common sense can clearly see the intent of the GPL, and if not it can be discussed easily. But we can't do it that way, why? because the world is filled with assholes and degenerates that will do every thing they can to lie and cheat and get away with it.
Too bad the legal system isn't as simple as common sense, then the authors of the code could go to a judge and say "any child with half a brain can see our intent, and that SCO is violating that intent"
I don't really game all that much, and I don't own a current generation console. but with the drop to 99$ I will be picking up a gamecube soon.
Don't underestimate non-fanatical gamers, I see $99 and think even if all I ever do is play mario kart or what ever with my wife and its not that expensive. at $200 or $300 PLUS game price your starting to think "am I really going to play it that much, maybe I should just upgrade my computer..."
I hate ESR. I think hes a pompous windbag. I have no interrest in his suggestion for a logo. His interview in "Revolution OS" explains it all as far as I'm concerned, and lest we forget the insanity with the jargon file. A year from now he'll start promoting a new meaning for the logo and say everyone who has the old interpretation is out of touch.
ESR may have some technical skill, but his "Cathedral and Bazaar" paper is woefully overrated. Simply put it seems like all he does now-a-days is run around trying to act like a "leader" or some amorphous group. He writes things as if he was this great genious that invented the concept when all he did was put it on paper (see his Unix progamming crap)
Quite frankly every time I see something by ESR I get a little taste of what other people claim to see in RMS (pompous, doesn't do anything but stump for his on promotion anymore... etc) While I admit I do not agree entirely with that assessment of RMS, I would gladly take Free Software over "Open Source Software" any day.
very simple, and the address I post to newsgroups rot13'd doesn't recieve very much spam at all.
That someone felt this study needed to be done? or that someone might be surprised by the results?
or is it that they didn't test the various belief systems against each other? - maybe they were afraid of the results.
obviously to do this pointless study right people would have to be segregated by religion, seeing as most religions feel that the others are wrong, and therefore the praying won't work.
either way its a bunch of nonsense.
"And although Torvalds released the kernel of his operating system well before GNU produced a reliable one of its own, Stallman insists Torvalds' work should properly be called GNU/Linux, because early contributors adapted GNU components for Linux"
I couldn't image a more incorrect way to describe the GNU/Linux vs. Linux debate. could someone due a little research when writing an article? All the author would ahve to do is read ONE webpage on www.fsf.org to see how biased and wrong this is.
I doubt Linus would agree with that statement. Unles the FSF has recently changed its stance I don't believe they have ever under any circumstances asked that a piece of software written by, or overseen by Linus be called "GNU/Linux".
This is a good reason why everyone involved with designing software should have extensive training in UI design, and accessability. Sure you may say (heck the developer may even say it) that why should they care about altering thier design for a small percentage of the market, and maybe designers shouldn't have to.
:) and althought he is not old enough to test I have read a bit about it and everytime I see pointers on making thing color-blind accessable I say to myself "wow that would make it easier on everyone."
But I find that interfaces designed for easy access to all are much better to the "non-disabled" users as well. How hard is it to say "hey maybe we should make it easier to diferentiate widget one from widget two?"
If the designer or developer is dead set on a layout that sucks they can do it... but over all one that is easy for the color-blind, is going to be easier on the color-sited. I am not color blind, but I have actually thought about this recently because I have a son now who may be color blind (simple genetic math
Most design choices that help the 'disabled' are simple, and don't adversly impact the non-disabled audience, I think it is a lack of training in what to look for that causes the problems, not a lack of desire to fix them.
Whether you think so or not this is a very important case. It strikes symbolically at the heart of recent eroding of freedoms via the patriot act and the DMCA. along with various other things. I think there is a good chance for the ruling to stand, any sane person can plainly see the arguement on how it is a iolation of the first amendment to have compulsory pledging "under god". I also think that the more conservative members of the court have actually ruled only similar issues with an eye to protecting rights.
:)
Of course Scalia is a raving lunatic that barely grasps the law (at least in his few public statements) so I bet he'll rule that it should be changed, but to "under the catholic god that favours capital punishment"
All we have to do is take back the money next, too bad those fights havent faired as well.
This is exactly why I do not understand why some Free Software makes you click through the GPL when you install it. At least they did in the past when installed on windows (I've never seen this on Debian). Maybe they stopped doing this since I stopped using windows but it always bothered me.
Let's make them click through a licence they don't actually have to agree to. a little strange if you ask me.
You might want to skip reading it because its written by a moron.
First he interchangably uses "Free" and "open Source" which if your not RMS wouldn'ty matter much, but he is interchanging the GOALS of the FSF with open source when he does so. EXACTLY the reason RMS hates being bunched with open source.
Second he paints it as a payoff almost akin to a bribe when someone donates to the FSF in exchange for the FSF helping to defend their intellectual property rights (although RMS would hate me using that term, and I don't like it either) - we the author similarly damn a company for paying a lawfirn to fight the FSF ?
Third, he says that the FSF actions are worse than normal copyright infringements because they don't want royalties, they want license compliance. WELL DUH! - he says this is bad because it scares companies away from free software (although he calls it "open source") - This is exactly the goal of the FSF, to scare you aware from using the GPL if you are going to violate it.
Fourth he refers to the FSF asking you to "burn down your house" by having to free up the code. well the simplefact is if you built your house from stolen lumber, of course you have to disassemble it to return the property. If I stole microsofts source and released a modified version would it be ok for me to pay a simple royalty and then KEEP the code I took for my own comercial persuits? thats insane, MS would say I have no right to continue developement. Its the same with the GPL, only you don't have to pay a royalty or license fee, the cost is that you HAVE to release your derivative works. simple as that.
The companies the FSF are goign after (if they are in fact in the wrong) are violating a license, sonmething I am sure this author would be against if the license fee was money.
The ignorance of this article is so absurd that it is ridiculus. He is saying cisco should be able to use copyrighted GPLed code for free, without having to honour the original authors license, yet at the same time the FSF is wrong becuase they want people to obey a license that lets you use stuff for 'free' my head is spinning.