But with GPL software, how am I harmed if someone improves my code but doesn't grant me access to it? I want a serious answer to this question, and not ideological spewage. How has it damaged the software residing on my ftp server? I may not have access to those improvement, but those improvements are not mine. I am in EXACTLY the same situation wether those improvements were made or not made.
The free software movement is about the wider social context. Some people who put their code under the GPL and LGPL do it as part of a strategy to help this cause. For example someone might write a library with features not offered by commercial libraries and release it under the LGPL. This creates a situation where free software developers have an advantage over proprietary developers, and thus users receive more freedom. If a proprietary developer makes unauthorized use of the code and makes improvements without releasing them, this strategy is defeated.
An argument of similar form could be made for proprietary software developers: nothing is stolen if they allow others to download their source code and compile it, but their monopoly on the software is lost. Without their monopoly they can't make a profit through artifical scarcity; they are left with being commissioned to add features to software and get paid for their actual labor as opposed to number of copies made (as is the case with open-source software).
The free software licenses only place restrictions on those who want to make the software proprietary.
Seriouosly. Every once in a while a junior programmer will use some opensource library in the product I'm currently managing. I periodically scrub the code and remove them all, but more often than not we find out due to the horrendous quality of the opensource code.
Here's a hint: open-source software can easily be used in a wider context than the author intended. I generally apporach new open-source software with the expectation of having to make some changes to port it to my machine/compiler (partly because I run a big-endian machine and an old OS).
Yahoo! is facing a $10 million lawsuit that accuses it of cashing in on some disturbing chat rooms. The stations' investigation showed what's really going on in those rooms.
What they found: people typing words to each other. Shocking!
Does it require voice authentication with the proper pronunciation of "SUSE" or something? Reminds me of the whole section on Bjarne Stroustrup's home page on how to pronounce his name.
The year is 2101 A.D. The Milky Way Federation, the galaxy's governing body, has made public its (sic) plans to construct stategic defense bases in eight different locations. The purpose of the bases is protection against intergalactic crime. The Federation's prime concern is a band of space piractes led by Cats, the flamboyant cosmic freebooter who is secretly plotting his biggest performance...
"Its" is correct there. Score one for the translators!
That's just the start! I've seen them selling drugs on the side through eBay. Nothing shows up missing because they are the freakin' computers; they just have to think "nahh, there were only three cases of Vicodin in the storage room" and the record changes.
Protecting copyright is not "old-school" thinking. We live in an IP intense age. The US doesn't produce widgets anymore, it's all intellectual property. There's nothing wrong with protecting your rights, in fact you're a moron NOT to. Apply the same logic to programming and see if you have the same response.
How about charging for your services? Or maybe that's what you meant, that you offer a 90% discount if one simply wants to buy a copy of the prints rather than buy your services and thus get the copyright to the product.
It used to be a site for those curious and wanting to understand things. Now it's just filler for a page covered with fucking advertisements. What a sellout.
I've seen the new WOPR. Not much has changed, except the whole room glows since they replaced the outdated orange LEDs with really cool deep blue LEDs.
I've got several pairs of those nanotech khakis. They don't stain at all, even with coffee spilled on them. It doesn't seem to be "real" nanotech, though, just some kind of nylon polymer treatment for the material that makes it water-resistant.
This incident will teach companies not to use nanotech as a marketing buzzword (especially if it doesn't even use "nanotech").
Slashdot Mirror
But with GPL software, how am I harmed if someone improves my code but doesn't grant me access to it? I want a serious answer to this question, and not ideological spewage. How has it damaged the software residing on my ftp server? I may not have access to those improvement, but those improvements are not mine. I am in EXACTLY the same situation wether those improvements were made or not made.
The free software movement is about the wider social context. Some people who put their code under the GPL and LGPL do it as part of a strategy to help this cause. For example someone might write a library with features not offered by commercial libraries and release it under the LGPL. This creates a situation where free software developers have an advantage over proprietary developers, and thus users receive more freedom. If a proprietary developer makes unauthorized use of the code and makes improvements without releasing them, this strategy is defeated.
An argument of similar form could be made for proprietary software developers: nothing is stolen if they allow others to download their source code and compile it, but their monopoly on the software is lost. Without their monopoly they can't make a profit through artifical scarcity; they are left with being commissioned to add features to software and get paid for their actual labor as opposed to number of copies made (as is the case with open-source software).
The free software licenses only place restrictions on those who want to make the software proprietary.
Seriouosly. Every once in a while a junior programmer will use some opensource library in the product I'm currently managing. I periodically scrub the code and remove them all, but more often than not we find out due to the horrendous quality of the opensource code.
Here's a hint: open-source software can easily be used in a wider context than the author intended. I generally apporach new open-source software with the expectation of having to make some changes to port it to my machine/compiler (partly because I run a big-endian machine and an old OS).
I wonder if they will wind up putting little clocks into notebooks... that'd be really cool, I wouldn't have to have a watch anymore!
Where do you live that there aren't already clocks staring you in the face no matter where you turn?
Yahoo! is facing a $10 million lawsuit that accuses it of cashing in on some disturbing chat rooms. The stations' investigation showed what's really going on in those rooms.
What they found: people typing words to each other. Shocking!
Does it require voice authentication with the proper pronunciation of "SUSE" or something? Reminds me of the whole section on Bjarne Stroustrup's home page on how to pronounce his name.
and two and a half since my last reply moaning about people who reply without checking to see if other people have already said the same thing. ;-)
:)
Argh. OK, I need to start checking this. But that's what mods are for, to mod up non-redundant items. Anyway, I'm lame
The year is 2101 A.D. The Milky Way Federation, the galaxy's governing body, has made public its (sic) plans to construct stategic defense bases in eight different locations. The purpose of the bases is protection against intergalactic crime. The Federation's prime concern is a band of space piractes led by Cats, the flamboyant cosmic freebooter who is secretly plotting his biggest performance...
"Its" is correct there. Score one for the translators!
That's just the start! I've seen them selling drugs on the side through eBay. Nothing shows up missing because they are the freakin' computers; they just have to think "nahh, there were only three cases of Vicodin in the storage room" and the record changes.
This reminds me of the section near the bottom of chapter 3 of Reciprocality.
tylersoze -> Tyler Soze -> Tyler [Durden] (Fight Club) + [Kaiser] Soze (The Usual Suspects)?
Protecting copyright is not "old-school" thinking. We live in an IP intense age. The US doesn't produce widgets anymore, it's all intellectual property. There's nothing wrong with protecting your rights, in fact you're a moron NOT to. Apply the same logic to programming and see if you have the same response.
How about charging for your services? Or maybe that's what you meant, that you offer a 90% discount if one simply wants to buy a copy of the prints rather than buy your services and thus get the copyright to the product.
Nice catch.
Luck you! I had them rejecting freakin' accidental shots of the wall, claiming I must be trying to reproduce some expensive abstract modern art.
Try figuring this wonderful navigation out and I'll give you a cookie!
At least it works in Lynx, you insensitive clod!
It used to be a site for those curious and wanting to understand things. Now it's just filler for a page covered with fucking advertisements. What a sellout.
What's next, a mouse with a mini-mouse on top, with a scroll wheel on that?
I've seen the new WOPR. Not much has changed, except the whole room glows since they replaced the outdated orange LEDs with really cool deep blue LEDs.
Google'd get all the "in soviet russia" jokes anyone could ever want, though.
And your message. And mine now. Madness!
Yet another reason to stick with VHS: the damn thing doesn't display goofy "HELLO" and "GOODBYE" messages.
It was really part of my never-ending rant against misuse of "steal". You most likely meant "copy", but that doesn't pack the moral punch of "steal".
it's not clear whether the contents of the CDs are to be transmitted, or just, rather pointlessly, IMHO, held in orbit...
Call the RIAA!!!
one of my larger worries is that my actual comics (not just the sketches on my art site) ... will be stolen [...]
Make copies and lock them in a safe deposit box. This also protects them from fire etc.
[...] but they've let a big mistake slip be.
[...]
Not a terribly serious concern, but their fact's should be straight. [...] Editors: shame on you!
Shame on your editor!
Microsoft charges YOU for infection with Windows.
...written on the blackboard. Teacher: "This is an unsolved problem. It is a good exerci... ... dammit"
I've got several pairs of those nanotech khakis. They don't stain at all, even with coffee spilled on them. It doesn't seem to be "real" nanotech, though, just some kind of nylon polymer treatment for the material that makes it water-resistant.
This incident will teach companies not to use nanotech as a marketing buzzword (especially if it doesn't even use "nanotech").