In the end, the PURPOSE of the GPL is to ensure the freedom of the user of the code, irrespective of the codes "owner".
In fact, the GPL doesn't even properly RECOGNIZE the "owner" or "copyright holder" at all. The only reason it does it only to prevent others from yoinking the code and re-releasing it under a MORE restrictive license - e.g. one that doesn't allow others to resdribute it however they see fit.
Again, to reiterate, the purpose of the GPL is NOT to protect the "rights" of the author and copyright holder, but to protect the "rights" of others to use and modify the code, in perpetuity. Not just one user or programmer, not just one corporation, but EVERY person, in perpitutity.
Just because YOU wrote some clever code does not make you special. We value your code above all else, because that is what is important, not your petty little ego.
The point, is everything will be available in digital for eventually. When that happens, the mountains of garbage legislation the RIAA, MPAA and book publishers have rammed down your throat will have basically made all libraries illegal..
Face it, after reading the crap the RIAA spews about napster, you might be led to think that LIBRARIES are stealing by lending ANY content.
I mean, look at all the money the publishers are losing everytime somebody reads a library book and doesn't buy one at the bookstore.
"ITS ILLEGAL! ITS IMMORAL! ITS PIRACY!"
I am TIRED of their complaints, and I am tired of copyright law.
A totally free information infrastructure is unlikely to spell doom for content. I would more likely predict NOT a dearth of content, but rather a dearth of attention.. there would be SO much content flowing around that people will be competing for eyes and ears.
I've seen this meme over and over again, and I simply don't buy it. What is your honest opinion of 99% the drivel created for profit, tailored for the masses, produced by a committee of ad execs, and endlessly tweaked by marketriods with focus groups in hand?
Titanic? Back Street Boys? Britteny Spears? The Home Shopping Network?
Thanks but no thanks.
The entire ancient, dinosaur-like industry is on the verge of collapse, but honestly, I no longer care... Soon they will be complaining that libraries are equivalent to 'THEFT' and 'PIRACY' because they deprive them of "potential" profit. Cry me a river.
Sorry, i really should have clarified my line of thinking.
I realize copyrights aren't socialist per se, but the line of thought that leads to them is somewhat related... if only as a "solution" to the common good/free rider problem. So technically, I concede the point. Copyrights != socialist basically;)
A truly "socialist" solution to the problem that copyrights "fix" would be to nationalize all inventions and writings and turn ownership/control of them over to the state for "free" distribution, the cost of which would be paid entirely by government subsidies.
Not convinced this would be better than our completely hopeless copyright/patent system, however.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that what you want is truly FREEDOM(tm) and trumpet it as such. You want control over your creations. That is understandable. But that is not a "freedom."
What is your bank account number? I want to exercise my FREEDOM to go withdraw all of your money.
The fact that you wrote that proves you actually understand what I am trying to say.;P
"You've stolen the copyright owners freedom. The freedom to decide how and when the music is distributed"
The freedom to restrict SOMEBODY else's freedom is NOT freedom. NEVER EVER pretend that copyrights and patents are about freedom.. they are socialist in nature. They are considered (by those who support them) a necessary evil, just as my freedom to swing my fist ends at your face.
I am tired of hearing these lame arguments about how if somebody is allowed to restrict MY rights, it is somehow ok, since it is giving THEM the freedom to do so. Don't I have rights too?
With Napster/Gnutella/whatever P2P software, music makers get less money back. So you're *stealing* them.
This is quite possibly the most inane argument I have ever had the misfortune to see.
First off, you have the tendency to used loaded terms like "stealing" and "piracy" to imply that copying bits is somehow fundamentally immoral and evil. Hello? Have you been living in a cave for the past 20 years? The debate is about the difference between information (an unlimited resource with zero marginal cost) and material goods (a limited resource).
Then you have the gall to assert that by depriving somebody of income "potential" is also "stealing".
Let me get this straight (by making a stupid, flawed analogy that you can understand). If I DON'T buy a burger from burger king, I am stealing because they get less money?
Or that by inventing the automobile, I have "stolen" from blacksmiths because they get "less money back" from selling horseshoes?
The music industry is a slow, stupid dinosaur that hasn't figured out it is doomed to extinction BECAUSE people like you have their heads in the sand and can't figure out that this particular form corporate welfare (in the form of copyrights/patents) simply doesn't work anymore.
It is NOT about protecting the artist and the artists rights, or even filling the needs of the consumers. It is about filling the needs of the RIAA to rape you in every possible way they see fit.
That it costs money to produce music is not in question. What IS in question is the method by which we recompensate the artist. Giving them %0.001 of gross album sales is NOT a sign of a functioning system. An "alternative" rock radio station that plays the same 6 songs 24/7 is not the sign of a functioning system. 6 different (but identical) boy bands is not a sign of a functioning system. 6 different (but identical) blond teen singers with fake boobs is not a sign of a functioning system.
Onstensibly, the paper's purpose is to analyze the privacy impact of the registraction procedure; i.e. how much information about YOU Microsoft can glean from the hashed system info.
In this light, the paper itself is relatively benign; enough so that Microsoft shouldn't be overly worried about it.
The fact that it can be used to spoof WAP isn't even mentioned in the paper;)
I can only assume that the programmers of the online video poker games are morons.. all COMMERCIAL video poker machines have net house gain.. tweakable by the individual rules. Video poker machines offer among the WORST payout expectation in casinos, except for certain progressives.
And you don't need a computer to play "perfect" video poker. It is an extremely trivial game.
The ONLY "house" game you can play and WIN at with perfect play is Blackjack. You can learn to do it by counting cards, or you can program a machine to help you do it. Both are against most states' gambling laws. Mathematicians MUCH smarter than you have already analyzed Blackjack to death, and the "counting"/"tens richness" strategies are well documented.
There are no other games, other then the odd progressive jackpot game (when the jackpot becomes high enough, the expected value becomes positive). AND this already assumes "perfect" play, which the average human playing video poker can easily learn and be 100% accurate at. Video poker is an EXTREMELY simple game.
Craps is close with pass/don't pass come/don't come, but it is still negative. There is NO way in hell any gambling machine (unless poorly programmed) would give a statistically postive payout, unless the programmers are complete idiots.
I see so much uninformed BS flying around it is fucking amazing. Slashdot may be a good place to get facts on computer/technology based topics, but when it comes to statistics and gambling.. well this is just plain pathetic.
Dude, I hate to tell you this, but where I work if you don't do upgrades without testing them thouroughly on a control machine, you'll probably find yourself out of a job. It doesn't matter if the platform is windows, linux, mainframe, unix, or the doorlock on the bathroom. If it isn't tested before going into production, you are going to find trouble.
True true. I confess to a bit of hyperbole, but in our experience, the "tests" we do on control machines for linux/unix upgrades are usually successful, as opposed to what happens when you run Service Pack X on your perfectly stable Exchange machine.
The "tests" we do typically end up just being technicalities on the linux/unix boxen.. plus the fact that we can COMPLETELY restore the state of unix box from a tar file (or tape backup) with 100% reliability means the IT dept. sleeps much easier when they tweak a unix box.
I know 2K/NT backup solutions are SUPPOSED to do this, but getting back a PERFECTLY tweaked Exchange server from tape is not exactly painless.
"Microsoft, being a company with salaries and a supervisory hierarchy, has the ability to order someone to work on something he or she doesn't want to work on, but I never recall this happening. People worked on things that interested them and projects still got complete coverage. There is no reason that the same should not be true of Linux, especially given the size of the Linux community."
Wierd. I was just talking to a collegue about this... see, in a company filled with primadonna engineers (myself included, unfortunately), it is impossible to get a project finished on time if the engineer working on it HATES it. Management has to be absolutely sure that the engineers they just assigned to a task actually find it interesting. If there is the odd "unsexy" task that nobody wants to tackle, management already knows it is going to take 3-4x as long to finish, and assign as best they can.
However, I didn't see the connection between this effect and the "unsexy-jobs never get done in OSS" meme.
It turns out that there are VERY few engineering tasks that EVERYBODY finds unsexy. Interesting...
There you go again, confusing "good" with "really unbelievably crappy".
Exchange is NOT a very good product. It happens to have a TON of *features* that PHBs really like, but nobody in their right mind would consider it stable, let alone good.
We have both sendmail AND exchange running. They both serve their purpose, and they are both stable *in their current state*.
The difference is that I *can* reconfigure the sendmail servers. I *can* perform upgrades. I *can* back it all off, and restore them, and expect them to come up just as they were. I *can* add different virus scanners. I *can* run other services on them.
The Exchange servers are black boxes. You don't run upgrades (of Exchange OR Win2k/NT) without testing them thouroughly on a control machine. You don't run other services on them. You don't expect a restore of the server to come up correctly.
Sure, they are stable, as long as you don't so much as look at them sideways.
Slashdot Mirror
In the end, the PURPOSE of the GPL is to ensure the freedom of the user of the code, irrespective of the codes "owner".
In fact, the GPL doesn't even properly RECOGNIZE the "owner" or "copyright holder" at all. The only reason it does it only to prevent others from yoinking the code and re-releasing it under a MORE restrictive license - e.g. one that doesn't allow others to resdribute it however they see fit.
Again, to reiterate, the purpose of the GPL is NOT to protect the "rights" of the author and copyright holder, but to protect the "rights" of others to use and modify the code, in perpetuity. Not just one user or programmer, not just one corporation, but EVERY person, in perpitutity.
Just because YOU wrote some clever code does not make you special. We value your code above all else, because that is what is important, not your petty little ego.
The point, is everything will be available in digital for eventually. When that happens, the mountains of garbage legislation the RIAA, MPAA and book publishers have rammed down your throat will have basically made all libraries illegal..
Face it, after reading the crap the RIAA spews about napster, you might be led to think that LIBRARIES are stealing by lending ANY content.
I mean, look at all the money the publishers are losing everytime somebody reads a library book and doesn't buy one at the bookstore.
"ITS ILLEGAL! ITS IMMORAL! ITS PIRACY!"
I am TIRED of their complaints, and I am tired of copyright law.
A totally free information infrastructure is unlikely to spell doom for content. I would more likely predict NOT a dearth of content, but rather a dearth of attention.. there would be SO much content flowing around that people will be competing for eyes and ears.
I've seen this meme over and over again, and I simply don't buy it. What is your honest opinion of 99% the drivel created for profit, tailored for the masses, produced by a committee of ad execs, and endlessly tweaked by marketriods with focus groups in hand?
Titanic? Back Street Boys? Britteny Spears? The Home Shopping Network?
Thanks but no thanks.
The entire ancient, dinosaur-like industry is on the verge of collapse, but honestly, I no longer care... Soon they will be complaining that libraries are equivalent to 'THEFT' and 'PIRACY' because they deprive them of "potential" profit. Cry me a river.
Sorry, i really should have clarified my line of thinking.
;)
I realize copyrights aren't socialist per se, but the line of thought that leads to them is somewhat related... if only as a "solution" to the common good/free rider problem. So technically, I concede the point. Copyrights != socialist basically
A truly "socialist" solution to the problem that copyrights "fix" would be to nationalize all inventions and writings and turn ownership/control of them over to the state for "free" distribution, the cost of which would be paid entirely by government subsidies.
Not convinced this would be better than our completely hopeless copyright/patent system, however.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that what you want is truly FREEDOM(tm) and trumpet it as such. You want control over your creations. That is understandable. But that is not a "freedom."
;P
What is your bank account number? I want to exercise my FREEDOM to go withdraw all of your money.
The fact that you wrote that proves you actually understand what I am trying to say.
"You've stolen the copyright owners freedom. The freedom to decide how and when the music is distributed"
The freedom to restrict SOMEBODY else's freedom is NOT freedom. NEVER EVER pretend that copyrights and patents are about freedom.. they are socialist in nature. They are considered (by those who support them) a necessary evil, just as my freedom to swing my fist ends at your face.
I am tired of hearing these lame arguments about how if somebody is allowed to restrict MY rights, it is somehow ok, since it is giving THEM the freedom to do so. Don't I have rights too?
With Napster/Gnutella/whatever P2P software, music makers get less money back. So you're *stealing* them.
This is quite possibly the most inane argument I have ever had the misfortune to see.
First off, you have the tendency to used loaded terms like "stealing" and "piracy" to imply that copying bits is somehow fundamentally immoral and evil. Hello? Have you been living in a cave for the past 20 years? The debate is about the difference between information (an unlimited resource with zero marginal cost) and material goods (a limited resource).
Then you have the gall to assert that by depriving somebody of income "potential" is also "stealing".
Let me get this straight (by making a stupid, flawed analogy that you can understand). If I DON'T buy a burger from burger king, I am stealing because they get less money?
Or that by inventing the automobile, I have "stolen" from blacksmiths because they get "less money back" from selling horseshoes?
The music industry is a slow, stupid dinosaur that hasn't figured out it is doomed to extinction BECAUSE people like you have their heads in the sand and can't figure out that this particular form corporate welfare (in the form of copyrights/patents) simply doesn't work anymore.
It is NOT about protecting the artist and the artists rights, or even filling the needs of the consumers. It is about filling the needs of the RIAA to rape you in every possible way they see fit.
That it costs money to produce music is not in question. What IS in question is the method by which we recompensate the artist. Giving them %0.001 of gross album sales is NOT a sign of a functioning system. An "alternative" rock radio station that plays the same 6 songs 24/7 is not the sign of a functioning system. 6 different (but identical) boy bands is not a sign of a functioning system. 6 different (but identical) blond teen singers with fake boobs is not a sign of a functioning system.
"How many bits of 'Metallica - Unforgiven.mp3' can you change out with identical bits before it isn't 'Metallica - Unforgiven.mp3' anymore?"
Onstensibly, the paper's purpose is to analyze the privacy impact of the registraction procedure; i.e. how much information about YOU Microsoft can glean from the hashed system info.
;)
In this light, the paper itself is relatively benign; enough so that Microsoft shouldn't be overly worried about it.
The fact that it can be used to spoof WAP isn't even mentioned in the paper
I am guessing this is entirely intentional.
Oh. Nevermind. It was a hypothetical.
he was using a full T1's worth of bandwith
Urm. Say AGAIN? Or is somebody confusing megakeys per second with kilobits per second?
They also have the "infinite deck" machines where delt cards are rotated into the shuffling machine as they are played.
These are sadly becoming more and more common.
I can only assume that the programmers of the online video poker games are morons.. all COMMERCIAL video poker machines have net house gain.. tweakable by the individual rules. Video poker machines offer among the WORST payout expectation in casinos, except for certain progressives.
And you don't need a computer to play "perfect" video poker. It is an extremely trivial game.
The ONLY "house" game you can play and WIN at with perfect play is Blackjack. You can learn to do it by counting cards, or you can program a machine to help you do it. Both are against most states' gambling laws. Mathematicians MUCH smarter than you have already analyzed Blackjack to death, and the "counting"/"tens richness" strategies are well documented.
There are no other games, other then the odd progressive jackpot game (when the jackpot becomes high enough, the expected value becomes positive). AND this already assumes "perfect" play, which the average human playing video poker can easily learn and be 100% accurate at. Video poker is an EXTREMELY simple game.
Craps is close with pass/don't pass come/don't come, but it is still negative. There is NO way in hell any gambling machine (unless poorly programmed) would give a statistically postive payout, unless the programmers are complete idiots.
I see so much uninformed BS flying around it is fucking amazing. Slashdot may be a good place to get facts on computer/technology based topics, but when it comes to statistics and gambling.. well this is just plain pathetic.
except one tightened by a dude with an exoskeleton on.
ECN causes a ton of problems because most firewall vendors mark them as unknown TCP flag attacks.
Active FTP looks like a port scan because all the "PORT" activity causes FTP to use many different sequential TCP ports to be used.
You keep using that word "steal".
I do not think it means what you think it means.
Don't you think that "steal" is a tad perjorative?
Why not say "piracy"?
Why not say "pillage, rape, and plunder"?
Have you not been keeping up with the debate over property ownership vs. information ownership?
Been living in a cave for the past 20 years?
Nice troll, though, either way.
You keep using that word "theft".
I do not think it means what you think it means.
Don't you think that "theft" is a tad perjorative?
Why not say "piracy"?
Why not say "pillage, rape, and plunder"?
Have you not been keeping up with the debate over property ownership vs. information ownership?
Been living in a cave for the past 20 years?
Nice troll, though, either way.
You keep using the word "stealing".
;)
Don't you think that is a tad perjorative?
Why not say "piracy"?
Why not say "pillage, rape, and plunder"?
Have you not been keeping up with the debate over property ownership vs. information ownership?
Been living in a cave for the past 20 years?
Or maybe you are just another troll
Yipes i've been trolled.
;(
How sad
You keep using the word "theft".
Don't you think that is a tad perjorative?
Why not say "piracy"?
Why not say "pillage, rape, and plunder"?
Have you not been keeping up with the debate over property ownership vs. information ownership?
Been living in a cave for the past 20 years?
Like it or not, this IS an issue that is important to many Slashdot readers, no matter what side of the fence you are when it comes to copyright law.
Dude, I hate to tell you this, but where I work if you don't do upgrades without testing them thouroughly on a control machine, you'll probably find yourself out of a job. It doesn't matter if the platform is windows, linux, mainframe, unix, or the doorlock on the bathroom. If it isn't tested before going into production, you are going to find trouble.
True true. I confess to a bit of hyperbole, but in our experience, the "tests" we do on control machines for linux/unix upgrades are usually successful, as opposed to what happens when you run Service Pack X on your perfectly stable Exchange machine.
The "tests" we do typically end up just being technicalities on the linux/unix boxen.. plus the fact that we can COMPLETELY restore the state of unix box from a tar file (or tape backup) with 100% reliability means the IT dept. sleeps much easier when they tweak a unix box.
I know 2K/NT backup solutions are SUPPOSED to do this, but getting back a PERFECTLY tweaked Exchange server from tape is not exactly painless.
"Microsoft, being a company with salaries and a supervisory hierarchy, has the ability to order someone to work on something he or she doesn't want to work on, but I never recall this happening. People worked on things that interested them and projects still got complete coverage. There is no reason that the same should not be true of Linux, especially given the size of the Linux community."
Wierd. I was just talking to a collegue about this... see, in a company filled with primadonna engineers (myself included, unfortunately), it is impossible to get a project finished on time if the engineer working on it HATES it. Management has to be absolutely sure that the engineers they just assigned to a task actually find it interesting. If there is the odd "unsexy" task that nobody wants to tackle, management already knows it is going to take 3-4x as long to finish, and assign as best they can.
However, I didn't see the connection between this effect and the "unsexy-jobs never get done in OSS" meme.
It turns out that there are VERY few engineering tasks that EVERYBODY finds unsexy. Interesting...
Exchange is a very good product
There you go again, confusing "good" with "really unbelievably crappy".
Exchange is NOT a very good product. It happens to have a TON of *features* that PHBs really like, but nobody in their right mind would consider it stable, let alone good.
We have both sendmail AND exchange running. They both serve their purpose, and they are both stable *in their current state*.
The difference is that I *can* reconfigure the sendmail servers. I *can* perform upgrades. I *can* back it all off, and restore them, and expect them to come up just as they were. I *can* add different virus scanners. I *can* run other services on them.
The Exchange servers are black boxes. You don't run upgrades (of Exchange OR Win2k/NT) without testing them thouroughly on a control machine. You don't run other services on them. You don't expect a restore of the server to come up correctly.
Sure, they are stable, as long as you don't so much as look at them sideways.
PS. Bill I just piped your SDK through "less". Come and get me.