If I create a secret application based on GPL libraries, I am by no means obligated to post the source code to a public site..
Example scenario: I create a secret application based upon a few GNU libraries. This application is used by the DoD for nuclear research. The people I am going to distribute my application to are going to be people within the DoD. Of course, if two people are within the same org or on the same project, sharing the source is already a given.
We may never know for sure. Next time you consider contributing to an open source project, ask yourself this question: don't you want to make sure your work isn't used for nefarious purposes? Will you risk having blood on your hands?
Proprietary software is quite common in China. In fact, they have the best deals on Windows XP CDs (like $1.00 or so)
I guess anyone who makes a piece of software is a terrorist, since softare is easily copied. Quick, call Tom Ridge and tell him Terrorists and Communists are using pirated Microsoft products!
Re:The real thing that sets Ximian Desktop 2 apart
on
Ximian's Back
·
· Score: 1
Actually, Ximian's OO doesn't use gtk2..
I thought it did when I saw the screenshots, but a little birdy informed me that they only modded OO to use GTK theme info.
Re:HERE HE IS, the bastard
on
I, Spammer
·
· Score: 1
If the West Hall address is correct, I'm about 3 minutes away from him. Maybe I can knock on his door to verify his address.:)
Re:SPAMHAUS Record on Scelson
on
I, Spammer
·
· Score: 1
There is now a DISA complex where the NASA used to be.
Re:SPAMHAUS Record on Scelson
on
I, Spammer
·
· Score: 1
Actually, Slidell is a small city inhabited by many people who have jobs in New Orleans, but don't want to put up with the excessive crime and traffic.
Here's a quote from Wikipedia:
"With the advent of the U.S. space program the 1960s, the New Orleans area became a hotbed of activity. The opening of NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility, a computer center on Gause Boulevard, and the John C. Stennis Space Center in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi nearly tripled Slidell's population over a period of ten years, as Slidell found itself becoming a major suburb."
There's nothing special about Slidell, but there's nothing really wrong with it either.
Pretty neat, actually. You can compile java source to machine or byte code, link to non-java libraries, mix compiled java code with libraries in your class path, and other crazy things..
Redhat has never had this mantra. X11, OpenSSH, Postgresql, and other packages which come with Redhat use non-GPL licenses (although these are considered to be GPL-compatible.)
Redhat's reasoning for not including things like Nvidia drivers is that since they do not have the source and cannot modify and redistribute the drivers, they cannot effectively support their customers. From what I understand, the Sun license permits redistribution, but doesn't allow modifications, which makes it difficult for Redhat to truly support it.
Perhaps this partership means Sun will support the Java items for Redhat, eliminating the concern Redhat has for supporting their customers.
Do you know how big companies handle travel expenses for employees much of the time?
They estimate how much money it would cost for their employee to take the trip, and give them that much money. If they can do the trip by spending less (as in staying in Motel 6 instead of the Hilton), then the remainder is theirs.
Where I work, you're paid to get a job done, not to do busy work.
Of course, if you're a McDonalds-type manager, and you're not used to this type of environment, I can see how you would get upset at the thought of an employee not working exactly 40 hours in a given week.
BTW, Do you make your employees clock out to take a shit?
How much does it cost to upgrade all your servers to Windows 2003? How much does it cost to upgrade everyone's Office suite? It costs $0 to upgrade to Linux if you are already paying for a local support infrastructure, as most businesses are. Just fire all the MSCE's, and hire some RHCE's.
If you don't need all of the MS Office, you don't want to deal with all the EULAs, and you want to be in control of your own software, Linux can be a very attractive upgrade which can save businesses thousands on license fees for Office, Windows, and miscellaneous seats for various servers.
At work we're still using Matlab 5.1, which was written for Redhat 5. I have to install some compat packages (libc5-compat for example) from Redhat 6, but it works fine in Redhat 6, 7, 8, and 9.
Re:Why you gottat go and do a stupid thing like th
on
SCO DOS'ed
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
In fact, I've influenced clients to go with BSD instead of linux for just that reason.
Listen to yourself: You're advocating the use of an OS based on the who is using it.
I'll never understand this way of thinking.. A good product will always attact good and bad people in mass.. Let's just imagine for second that everyone listened to the BSD advocates, and switched to BSD. Where are you going to turn when the idiots follow again? Is there some section in the BSD license that makes it impossible for the kiddies to use it or something?
How are you going to prevent people you don't like from using something that is useful? More imporantly, why do you even care who else uses your software? After all, it is your software.
I don't feel like re-explaining why I think your way of thinking of WineX is wrong, so I'll post a link to another post I made explaining things: See here
WineX is a niche, and I say this as a Transgaming subscriber. Many games that do run under it run at a performance hit, and this will not be acceptable for companies that value their Linux market. Why do you think Bioware didn't use WineX to port? After all, they started porting to Linux AFTER the game was running in Windows, so if what you say is true, why didn't they cash in on that? Why isn't Id using WineX? The fact is, the only company that has ever relased an actual Linux game that uses WineX was Transgaming themselves.
I don't think WineX is the answer to our problems, but it is definately going to help, in a real way, right now. Your talk about a new distro is fine and all that, but it's just talk and all you seem to be doing is saying that Linux gaming will never happen, which doesn't surprise me as it is comeing from someone who doesn't game under Linux.
If you want to send them the message you want Linux ports, using WineX is doing absolutely nothing to help you. It gives them an excuse to say "We don't need to do a Linux port then." If you really really want them to make games for Linux, then don't buy the Windows games period. If you feel that's unreasonable, then you're going to have to play by their rules.
This is an opinion, and I disagree with it.
The most important thing for Linux gaming is a market.. WineX helps create this market, because it allows people to stay and game under Linux when they otherwise wouldn't be able to. It allows people who are stuck on Everquest to be a Linux gamer. It allows people who are stuck on Counter-strike to be a Linux gamer. And these gamers who use WineX DO have an impact on native oprts, because when a native port for Linux does come out, the company is compensated for their efforts, and it validates Linux as a gaming platform.
I switched to Linux gaming when Half-life ran under Linux. Since I have switched, I have bought all native titles for Linux. If it weren't for the fact that a game of the year title ran under Linux, I may not have made the switch, and the Linux market wouldn't have increased by 1. I'm sure there are many other new Linux gamers who switched because their one addiction ran under Linux, for example, Everquest.
b) we're going to share some of our code. As much as we will borrow from other coders, we will share some of our improvements with the community. As we all know, companies that are reluctant to share source code are frequently shunned by the knowing community.
The only thing that forces a company to play nice is another company, and what happens if this company manages to put itself in a Microsoft-like position and has no real competetion? When this guy cashes in his share of the company and is sipping on a margarita on some beach in Jamacia, who's going to make sure this company operates in the community's best interests?
When the time comes where it is more profitable to close the software and release binary-only, a company will do it. I mean, it has to because we must assume that a company will do whatever makes the most money for it's shareholders. And when this happens, the majority of the world will continue using this new, proprietary software, while the rest of the world has to pick up the pieces of the movement to convince people to use Open, free software..
The binaries include copy-protection code which is licensened from other companies. From what I understand, they are legally bound to keep the source secret.
"# These same Counter-Strike players couldn't play online for some time. Valve had implemented new anti-cheating software which detected Wine users as cheaters."
Actually, that is true. It took weeks before CS players could play the game under Linux successfully.
Still, I agree that this is not a reason to boycott it. If anything, it says that native ports are superior to a game under WineX, which contradicts the anti-wine people's FUD about WineX getting so good that game developers won't develop native ports.
Let me clarify my statement: " We may save some fuss, but we are also telling game developers that we don't want native ports, which is not true."
To give a few examples why WineX applies to native games:
If a company notices a slight surge in sales due to a WineX release, the company may see this, assuming a significant number of people bought the game at that point in time, and make note of a potential audience. Some argue that this can hurt native ports, but I think the pros outweigh cons.
Dual-booting discourages Linux gaming. Why wait to buy Neverwinter Nights from Tuxgames when you can buy it now and play it in Windows? (Hint: Supporting Tuxgames is good, buying the game when it finally runs in Linux says "Linux port worthwhile", and not having access to a game gives Linux gamers plenty of incentive to register in forums and say "Where is that Linux port?")
I got modded down because I asked for him to show some info to back up his claim that OpenBSD is more stable than FreeBSD? I've heard people clammering about it being more secure, which it may be, but stable??
The top 10 uptimes on Netcraft do not list any OpenBSD machines, only FreeBSD.
I'd like to know, specifically, where OpenBSD chugs along where FreeBSD crashes.
Slashdot Mirror
The GPL doesn't matter in this case.
If I create a secret application based on GPL libraries, I am by no means obligated to post the source code to a public site..
Example scenario:
I create a secret application based upon a few GNU libraries. This application is used by the DoD for nuclear research. The people I am going to distribute my application to are going to be people within the DoD. Of course, if two people are within the same org or on the same project, sharing the source is already a given.
We may never know for sure. Next time you consider contributing to an open source project, ask yourself this question: don't you want to make sure your work isn't used for nefarious purposes? Will you risk having blood on your hands?
Proprietary software is quite common in China. In fact, they have the best deals on Windows XP CDs (like $1.00 or so)
I guess anyone who makes a piece of software is a terrorist, since softare is easily copied. Quick, call Tom Ridge and tell him Terrorists and Communists are using pirated Microsoft products!
Actually, Ximian's OO doesn't use gtk2..
I thought it did when I saw the screenshots, but a little birdy informed me that they only modded OO to use GTK theme info.
If the West Hall address is correct, I'm about 3 minutes away from him. Maybe I can knock on his door to verify his address. :)
There is now a DISA complex where the NASA used to be.
Actually, Slidell is a small city inhabited by many people who have jobs in New Orleans, but don't want to put up with the excessive crime and traffic.
Here's a quote from Wikipedia:
"With the advent of the U.S. space program the 1960s, the New Orleans area became a hotbed of activity. The opening of NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility, a computer center on Gause Boulevard, and the John C. Stennis Space Center in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi nearly tripled Slidell's population over a period of ten years, as Slidell found itself becoming a major suburb."
There's nothing special about Slidell, but there's nothing really wrong with it either.
I don't find it funny at all. If things aren't balanced, people are going to find a way to make them balanced.
Ever hear the phrase "Fight fire with fire"?
This guy's post is absolutely NOT a troll, and is inline with what Stallman says.
It's a valid comment which was most likely modded down by people who hate the GPL, for whatever reason.
The GPL is most certainly not restrictive with respect to end users (people.) It is restrictive for corporations.
If you want corporations to have as much power as a person with respect to your software, choose the BSD license. If not, choose GPL.
Have you seen this?
Pretty neat, actually. You can compile java source to machine or byte code, link to non-java libraries, mix compiled java code with libraries in your class path, and other crazy things..
Redhat has never had this mantra. X11, OpenSSH, Postgresql, and other packages which come with Redhat use non-GPL licenses (although these are considered to be GPL-compatible.)
Redhat's reasoning for not including things like Nvidia drivers is that since they do not have the source and cannot modify and redistribute the drivers, they cannot effectively support their customers. From what I understand, the Sun license permits redistribution, but doesn't allow modifications, which makes it difficult for Redhat to truly support it.
Perhaps this partership means Sun will support the Java items for Redhat, eliminating the concern Redhat has for supporting their customers.
Do you know how big companies handle travel expenses for employees much of the time?
They estimate how much money it would cost for their employee to take the trip, and give them that much money. If they can do the trip by spending less (as in staying in Motel 6 instead of the Hilton), then the remainder is theirs.
Where I work, you're paid to get a job done, not to do busy work.
Of course, if you're a McDonalds-type manager, and you're not used to this type of environment, I can see how you would get upset at the thought of an employee not working exactly 40 hours in a given week.
BTW, Do you make your employees clock out to take a shit?
I take it haven't installed service packs on too many Windows 2000 machines.
No, he's right.
How much does it cost to upgrade all your servers to Windows 2003? How much does it cost to upgrade everyone's Office suite? It costs $0 to upgrade to Linux if you are already paying for a local support infrastructure, as most businesses are. Just fire all the MSCE's, and hire some RHCE's.
If you don't need all of the MS Office, you don't want to deal with all the EULAs, and you want to be in control of your own software, Linux can be a very attractive upgrade which can save businesses thousands on license fees for Office, Windows, and miscellaneous seats for various servers.
At work we're still using Matlab 5.1, which was written for Redhat 5. I have to install some compat packages (libc5-compat for example) from Redhat 6, but it works fine in Redhat 6, 7, 8, and 9.
In fact, I've influenced clients to go with BSD instead of linux for just that reason.
Listen to yourself: You're advocating the use of an OS based on the who is using it.
I'll never understand this way of thinking.. A good product will always attact good and bad people in mass.. Let's just imagine for second that everyone listened to the BSD advocates, and switched to BSD. Where are you going to turn when the idiots follow again? Is there some section in the BSD license that makes it impossible for the kiddies to use it or something?
How are you going to prevent people you don't like from using something that is useful?
More imporantly, why do you even care who else uses your software? After all, it is your software.
I guess some people were just born to be bitter..
I don't feel like re-explaining why I think your way of thinking of WineX is wrong, so I'll post a link to another post I made explaining things:
See here
WineX is a niche, and I say this as a Transgaming subscriber. Many games that do run under it run at a performance hit, and this will not be acceptable for companies that value their Linux market. Why do you think Bioware didn't use WineX to port? After all, they started porting to Linux AFTER the game was running in Windows, so if what you say is true, why didn't they cash in on that? Why isn't Id using WineX? The fact is, the only company that has ever relased an actual Linux game that uses WineX was Transgaming themselves.
I don't think WineX is the answer to our problems, but it is definately going to help, in a real way, right now. Your talk about a new distro is fine and all that, but it's just talk and all you seem to be doing is saying that Linux gaming will never happen, which doesn't surprise me as it is comeing from someone who doesn't game under Linux.
If you want to send them the message you want Linux ports, using WineX is doing absolutely nothing to help you. It gives them an excuse to say "We don't need to do a Linux port then." If you really really want them to make games for Linux, then don't buy the Windows games period. If you feel that's unreasonable, then you're going to have to play by their rules.
This is an opinion, and I disagree with it.
The most important thing for Linux gaming is a market.. WineX helps create this market, because it allows people to stay and game under Linux when they otherwise wouldn't be able to. It allows people who are stuck on Everquest to be a Linux gamer. It allows people who are stuck on Counter-strike to be a Linux gamer. And these gamers who use WineX DO have an impact on native oprts, because when a native port for Linux does come out, the company is compensated for their efforts, and it validates Linux as a gaming platform.
I switched to Linux gaming when Half-life ran under Linux. Since I have switched, I have bought all native titles for Linux. If it weren't for the fact that a game of the year title ran under Linux, I may not have made the switch, and the Linux market wouldn't have increased by 1. I'm sure there are many other new Linux gamers who switched because their one addiction ran under Linux, for example, Everquest.
b) we're going to share some of our code. As much as we will borrow from other coders, we will share some of our improvements with the community. As we all know, companies that are reluctant to share source code are frequently shunned by the knowing community.
The only thing that forces a company to play nice is another company, and what happens if this company manages to put itself in a Microsoft-like position and has no real competetion? When this guy cashes in his share of the company and is sipping on a margarita on some beach in Jamacia, who's going to make sure this company operates in the community's best interests?
When the time comes where it is more profitable to close the software and release binary-only, a company will do it. I mean, it has to because we must assume that a company will do whatever makes the most money for it's shareholders. And when this happens, the majority of the world will continue using this new, proprietary software, while the rest of the world has to pick up the pieces of the movement to convince people to use Open, free software..
The binaries include copy-protection code which is licensened from other companies. From what I understand, they are legally bound to keep the source secret.
"# These same Counter-Strike players couldn't play online for some time. Valve had implemented new anti-cheating software which detected Wine users as cheaters."
Actually, that is true. It took weeks before CS players could play the game under Linux successfully.
Still, I agree that this is not a reason to boycott it. If anything, it says that native ports are superior to a game under WineX, which contradicts the anti-wine people's FUD about WineX getting so good that game developers won't develop native ports.
Let me clarify my statement:
" We may save some fuss, but we are also telling game developers that we don't want native ports, which is not true."
To give a few examples why WineX applies to native games:
If a company notices a slight surge in sales due to a WineX release, the company may see this, assuming a significant number of people bought the game at that point in time, and make note of a potential audience. Some argue that this can hurt native ports, but I think the pros outweigh cons.
Dual-booting discourages Linux gaming. Why wait to buy Neverwinter Nights from Tuxgames when you can buy it now and play it in Windows? (Hint: Supporting Tuxgames is good, buying the game when it finally runs in Linux says "Linux port worthwhile", and not having access to a game gives Linux gamers plenty of incentive to register in forums and say "Where is that Linux port?")
We may save some fuss, but we are also telling game developers that we don't want native ports, which is not true.
... so why's it so hard for you to accept this?
Obviously, playing games under Linux is more important to us than saving a bit of fuss right now.
Hold up a sec..
I got modded down because I asked for him to show some info to back up his claim that OpenBSD is more stable than FreeBSD? I've heard people clammering about it being more secure, which it may be, but stable??
The top 10 uptimes on Netcraft do not list any OpenBSD machines, only FreeBSD.
I'd like to know, specifically, where OpenBSD chugs along where FreeBSD crashes.
No, that's BSD under the Desktop, which Linux could have done as well.