All a bit irrelevant anyway as Ath5K code (not the.h file) say:
* Alternatively, this software may be distributed under the terms of the * GNU General Public License ("GPL") version 2 as published by the Free * Software Foundation.
either this thing is TRULY dual licensed, which means anyone can come along and chose either license; Or it means someone just came along and slapped a GPL on top of it, which is illegal because that's relicensing, not merely distributing.
did you not RTFA? the code in question is dual licensed where the same code is licensed under BOTH the BSD AND the GPL and the author specifically said: use either.
You sir are wrong. The BSD license most certainly can be legally removed, stripped and discarded.
Lets take a look at the current BSD license:
Copyright (c) <YEAR>, <OWNER>
All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. * Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
In english what this says:
If you strip the license out of the source it no longer grants you permission to distribute.
So where does that leave us?
There is NOTHING illegal about stripping out the BSD license!
"forcibly transfer wealth from the non-poor to the poor (i.e. welfare state, and America spends a LOT of taxpayer money on that)"
You mean to tell me it spends more on this than on defense? Not even close! Defense used to be 20% of the whole budget in non war years. You know what it is now when we have an unnecessary war entered under false pretenses, which we are coincidentally losing? Does anyone even know what IRAQ cost? What it's going to cost over the next 10 years?
Don't forget a lot of money is wasted on pork projects and things like NASA.
"it's that we've lost our vision of the future"
While I agree with you that true insight of the future is of major importance and among the very top of priorities, I would argue that we never had a vision of the future before. So many gaffes, mistakes and so much idiocy in the American past... Vietnam war, Cuban missile crisis, moonrace, manhattan project, star wars, communist witch hunt, state sponsored foreign dictatorships, wars, our part in genocides...
Sorry but ever since we've been a superpower, we've always been fucked up as a people. We have not as a nation achieved a passing grade for improving ourselves and our world. We should work to obtain and understand clearer visions of the future, then maybe for the first time in our history we won't be a fucked up nation.
"The problem with the "forget all those rocket thingies and research and spend the money on social programs" mindset is that it strips a society of the ability to improve.""
This is not true at all, please explain how dumping trillions into space races and then pointless space stations and shuttle missions has 'enhanced our society's ability to improve itself'. What we have teflon now? It has not. It was waste. It was not efficient. We need accountability for our spending. If that unfathomable wealth had been better spent we could have enhanced our society so much that these programs could now be run with much greater scope and success.
I am a scientist (iaas?) and imho science is not some esoteric thing that we need to pump X amount of dollars into pure research or else. We have to use our brains plenty of science is a waste. Plenty of it is unscientific. Plenty of it is ahead of it's time. We need to prioritize science programs just like anything else.
America as a nation is behaving very much like it's inefficient debt-ridden citizens: it keeps buying things it doesn't need and putting it all on high-apr credit cards while going around littering and driving like assholes in big gas-guzzling SUV with the rudeness of someone who thinks they own the roads.
We need to start holding everything and everyone accountable to the high standards that should have been expected from the beginning. It's all too often we see corporate corruption, inefficiency in government, conflict of interest in science, under-performing all around and just go "oh well what can you expect"
If all this money being wasted in the name of science went to science education we would be miles ahead of other nations. Ditto for defense spending.
Not only this, but because it is clearly stated that you can use either license, if you use the GPL license you can most definitely strip out the BSD license completely (and vice versa) because the licenses don't protect each other.
Sorry Theo, but the author's wishes are there in black and white: use either license and toss out the other if you wish for distribution.
It's really not that hard to understand, if you want the BSD license to always be applicable to derrivatives, license under BSD only; If you want GPL to be applicable to all derrivatives, license under GPL only. If you license under both and specifically state 'use either' then derrivatives can be either or both.
I ain't your pal dickhead. I also ain't part of a cult or a movement.
Dickhead wrote: "The preamble and the FAQ are useless bullshit"
Since you're an ignorant bastard, let me fill you in. The original post was implying the GPL was created to protect the freedom of software. Sorry but software doesn't have freedom and if you are going to argue about WHY the GPL was created you need to read the documents which contain the reason for it's creation as listed by it's creators.
IE. Those are relevant documents when discussing the creation of the GPL. DUH.
As to redefining English? I ain't redefining shit. You can't tell the difference between a 'software user' and a 'software distributor' (the only things I highlight in my post) then you have bigger problems.
By the way, as to your "definition" of the GPL or you telling me what to "accept" in your post, GO FUCK YOURSELF. I already don't like you and think you're a dickhead, you think I'm going to listen to what you tell me to accept?
PS: I ain't part of the software movement. I'm merely someone who laughs at people who comment on the GPL when they're clearly ignorant (the freedom of the software AHAHAHAHA) and likes to flame dickheads like you.
XoXo kisses
I am amazed that the ratio of junk idiotic posts vs. informed posts in this discussion is astronomical.
GPL3 is not designed to stop encryption of data (DRM - Digital Restrictions Management).
GPL3 is designed to stop preventing a user of GPL3 software from using it to the full extent (right to modify and still use the device).
What this white paper proposes is a way to implement DRM and comply with the GPL3.
So where's the beef?
The GPL3 doesn't stop DRM. Woot stop the presses! I could have told you that months ago during the drafting process because it's not designed to stop DRM.
Hear Hear. Mod parent up.
Unfortunately, this is a mistake made all too often by the anti-GPL side and the making of this mistake is a clear sign of their ignorance. If someone truly understands the GPL (which you should if you want to get involved in the relevant discussion) they would have read it, it's preamble and the reason for it's existence.
The license is here to protect the freedom of the software user. Not the software distributer. Not the software developer. Not the sales clerk. Not the lawyer. The user.
If you can't understand this or are plain ignorant, then just don't talk. If you come out with some silly argument as the grand parent post does based on the GPL supposedly protecting the 'freedom of the software' (whatever the fuck that means) you just look like an ass.
Maybe we should change the name from the "free software movement" to the "free software-user movement" to help idiots like that one because they do seem to be quite plentiful.
"John Carmack also said back then that releasing Q3A for Linux saw no profit"
Are you out of your phreaking mind? They released the windows version AGES before the linux version. You could also easily buy the windows version, then download the linux binary right from day 1. There was absolutely no incentive to buy the linux version and every incentive for a linux user to buy the windows version and download a small executable to play on linux. All of those sales counted as windows sales, but were actually run on linux. I know because I bought 2 windows copies myself and they both were used on linux machines. I would rather they released information on how many linux binaries were downloaded and made a guesstimate on that rather than using sales number where there was no competition at all by precondition.
Don't forget that almost every dedicated server out there is also run on linux and this was the case from release day.
GPLv3 affects any hardware that the software is distributed with. I'm pretty sure that this makes it viral *by definition*.
By definition? Sir,
Please see several definitions of "viral" and point out why using the word 'viral' is appropriate in this situation.
As a biochemist and a molecular biologist who works with *real* viruses, I find the use of the word viral to describe anything in the world of Free Software unoriginal, uninformative and propagandist. It was chosen by those with the very motive of associating Free Software with a word that contains negative connotations for the average person (feeling sick, disease etc.) Very similar to using the word "piracy" to describe copyright violation. (with the exception that pirates are cool
Please don't let the corporate pundits dictate the language you use because you taint any chance of having an informative discussion before it is even begun.
I'm sure you can find a simple way to say
"The GPL software license protects the rights of users" or
"If you want to use GPL-covered work, you must abide by the developer's wishes just like any other license" or
I'm sorry but what scooter fucking libby did was to 'out' a CIA field agent on behalf of dick 'the dickhead' cheney. He then lied about it and tried to obstruct the investigation.
Believe it or not, when you 'out' a CIA agent, you could be putting in danger the lives of many potential assets as well as any other agents who have in any way interacted with the one you outed. And then the chain continues, if one of those agents is discovered in connection with her, all of their assets and connections are also in danger of death.
There are pretty serious consequences to 'outing' a CIA agent, even if the agent you out is not of some huge importance. What he did was very illegal, immoral and purely an asshole thing to do to get back at someone 'the dickhead' was pissed off at. People might have died because of it.
Imagine if you decided to do something that risked the lives of our heroes purely because you were annoyed at someone politically... I guess it's also typical of this administration.
Wow! what a great way to spin the GPL2 into the dirt.
It's much simpler than our friend tries to spin the license. It's about freedom of the USER. As a user of GPL2 software, you can do *anything* you want with it and your freedoms are protected.
The minute you turn into a developer and distributor, that's the first time you even have to accept the license! You accept the license because without it you cannot distribute because of copyright. The license then grants the developer & distributor more freedoms than she would have without it. All she has to do is allow her modifications to give USERS all the rights that she had as a USER, nothing more nothing less.
It's a user-centric license and protects ALL freedoms of the user.
Hey Solandri, I'll tell you what, I'll make you a deal:
There are currently 302,230,761 or so people in the U.S. and around 33,390,141 in Canada. Do me a favor and go read a little bit about statistics. When you figure out how to best create randomized sample groups that are large enough to matter at all in any kind of discussion about this, please let us know. We are not amused by your sample sizes of 1.
Then go back and think about a different kind of statistics. Think about how many horror stories you would have to personally hear before changing your mind. Stories of bankrupcy, illness and preventable deaths happening to many people who have paid all their lives into health insurance policies. Being denied their rightful paid-for care because the insurance company knows they can out-muscle them in the courts if the people even live that long or try to fight it. How many? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000? Is that enough stories of absolute nightmares and despair for you? Now think about the 50,000,000 uninsured who also share in this. Many of them work but their employer doesn't provide insurance. Many of them are between jobs. Have you ever realized that if you quit your job and start looking for another you better not get sick or in an accident because you're fucked if you do?
Sometimes, I get really sad about the way the human brain works. It tends to develop models and after that tries to force all observed evidence to fit it, or even appear to substantiate it. It seems some of us fall prey to this more than others.
I fear I've asked too much of our friend Solandri. Just go home and try to figure out why a sample size of 1 is a Homer Simpson effort.
Then when someone in your family gets sick and your insurance company decides to deny the claim with the intent of turning a profit and it causes you to go bankrupt, I will get off my lazy arse and start a website in order to raise $12,000.00 for you to help you out.
If you go see the movie you'll know the inside joke.
Did anyone actually watch the video? Can someone describe to me what 'style' of speaking this guy uses?
He is honest to god harder to understand than 'The architect' character in the matrix.
It's not that he's trying to be precise, he is a lot more formal than precise. Why is it so hard to follow?
I'm completely familiar with the words he uses, however the way he throws them together into a monotone slush is almost like purpose obfuscation at times.
...arguing that $16,000 can never equate to the amount of work/expertise required to find and exploit a hole in the six targeted technologies.
Maybe there are people out there who already have more than one exploit for these and wouldn't mind trading one in for a legal source of quick cash. Who knows? 16k buys very a nice chunk of electronics for people who don't need the money for anything else.
It seems like the last time I heard of this topic the scientists were trying to find any evidence of water on Mars.
Now, they've found a massive amount and the F article states:
Discovered in the early 1970s, layered deposits of ice and dust cap the North and South Poles of Mars.
Scientists have long known that Mars' north polar cap is a massive storehouse of water ice...
So what gives? My vague memory says in the nineties they were still looking for any signs of water and now it's old news?
No kidding I would be so extremely depressed on a caloric restricted diet that I'd probably take my own life. I'll take fine foods, sex, booze, drugs and exercise over adding a few extra years to the shit end of my life anyday.
"The 2005 dividend is $845.76."
Ahahaha. You don't even have to be in alaska all year because they give you 180 days that you can leave and still get paid. You get paid that much to live in alaska for 6 months out of the year!
Sorry but if you think something is a negative effect, you should come right out and explain why instead of implying it.
In this case I think that it's a good thing(TM). Now that there's no percieved scarcity, people are free to watch what they want only when they actually want to. I've experienced this with music and movie downloading as well as netflix. Sometimes I go through periods of watching/listening to these and sometimes i go through periods of doing other things with my life.
Newsflash people are free to set their own priorities. Since when is making this easier a bad thing?
Slashdot Mirror
either this thing is TRULY dual licensed, which means anyone can come along and chose either license; Or it means someone just came along and slapped a GPL on top of it, which is illegal because that's relicensing, not merely distributing.
But wait this is /. no one rtfa's.
Lets take a look at the current BSD license:
In english what this says:
If you strip the license out of the source it no longer grants you permission to distribute.
So where does that leave us?
There is NOTHING illegal about stripping out the BSD license!
It just voids the license.
You mean to tell me it spends more on this than on defense? Not even close! Defense used to be 20% of the whole budget in non war years. You know what it is now when we have an unnecessary war entered under false pretenses, which we are coincidentally losing? Does anyone even know what IRAQ cost? What it's going to cost over the next 10 years?
Don't forget a lot of money is wasted on pork projects and things like NASA.
"it's that we've lost our vision of the future"
While I agree with you that true insight of the future is of major importance and among the very top of priorities, I would argue that we never had a vision of the future before. So many gaffes, mistakes and so much idiocy in the American past... Vietnam war, Cuban missile crisis, moonrace, manhattan project, star wars, communist witch hunt, state sponsored foreign dictatorships, wars, our part in genocides...
Sorry but ever since we've been a superpower, we've always been fucked up as a people. We have not as a nation achieved a passing grade for improving ourselves and our world. We should work to obtain and understand clearer visions of the future, then maybe for the first time in our history we won't be a fucked up nation.
"The problem with the "forget all those rocket thingies and research and spend the money on social programs" mindset is that it strips a society of the ability to improve.""
This is not true at all, please explain how dumping trillions into space races and then pointless space stations and shuttle missions has 'enhanced our society's ability to improve itself'. What we have teflon now? It has not. It was waste. It was not efficient. We need accountability for our spending. If that unfathomable wealth had been better spent we could have enhanced our society so much that these programs could now be run with much greater scope and success.
I am a scientist (iaas?) and imho science is not some esoteric thing that we need to pump X amount of dollars into pure research or else. We have to use our brains plenty of science is a waste. Plenty of it is unscientific. Plenty of it is ahead of it's time. We need to prioritize science programs just like anything else. America as a nation is behaving very much like it's inefficient debt-ridden citizens: it keeps buying things it doesn't need and putting it all on high-apr credit cards while going around littering and driving like assholes in big gas-guzzling SUV with the rudeness of someone who thinks they own the roads.
We need to start holding everything and everyone accountable to the high standards that should have been expected from the beginning. It's all too often we see corporate corruption, inefficiency in government, conflict of interest in science, under-performing all around and just go "oh well what can you expect"
If all this money being wasted in the name of science went to science education we would be miles ahead of other nations. Ditto for defense spending.
Sorry Theo, but the author's wishes are there in black and white: use either license and toss out the other if you wish for distribution.
It's really not that hard to understand, if you want the BSD license to always be applicable to derrivatives, license under BSD only; If you want GPL to be applicable to all derrivatives, license under GPL only. If you license under both and specifically state 'use either' then derrivatives can be either or both.
Dickhead wrote: "The preamble and the FAQ are useless bullshit"
Since you're an ignorant bastard, let me fill you in. The original post was implying the GPL was created to protect the freedom of software. Sorry but software doesn't have freedom and if you are going to argue about WHY the GPL was created you need to read the documents which contain the reason for it's creation as listed by it's creators.
IE. Those are relevant documents when discussing the creation of the GPL. DUH.
As to redefining English? I ain't redefining shit. You can't tell the difference between a 'software user' and a 'software distributor' (the only things I highlight in my post) then you have bigger problems.
By the way, as to your "definition" of the GPL or you telling me what to "accept" in your post, GO FUCK YOURSELF. I already don't like you and think you're a dickhead, you think I'm going to listen to what you tell me to accept?
PS: I ain't part of the software movement. I'm merely someone who laughs at people who comment on the GPL when they're clearly ignorant (the freedom of the software AHAHAHAHA) and likes to flame dickheads like you. XoXo kisses
So where's the beef?
The GPL3 doesn't stop DRM. Woot stop the presses! I could have told you that months ago during the drafting process because it's not designed to stop DRM.
Unfortunately, this is a mistake made all too often by the anti-GPL side and the making of this mistake is a clear sign of their ignorance. If someone truly understands the GPL (which you should if you want to get involved in the relevant discussion) they would have read it, it's preamble and the reason for it's existence.
The license is here to protect the freedom of the software user. Not the software distributer. Not the software developer. Not the sales clerk. Not the lawyer. The user.
If you can't understand this or are plain ignorant, then just don't talk. If you come out with some silly argument as the grand parent post does based on the GPL supposedly protecting the 'freedom of the software' (whatever the fuck that means) you just look like an ass.
Maybe we should change the name from the "free software movement" to the "free software-user movement" to help idiots like that one because they do seem to be quite plentiful.
Please mod that shit down, it's pathetic.
So because you're incapable of applying a social fix to a social problem, you want to see a protocol banned.
(pause while I laugh so hard I piss my pants)
Ok carry on I want to see how this 'Cosmo Kramer' idea turns out!
Hey, :D
Your sense of humor called, he's asking to come back
Are you out of your phreaking mind? They released the windows version AGES before the linux version. You could also easily buy the windows version, then download the linux binary right from day 1. There was absolutely no incentive to buy the linux version and every incentive for a linux user to buy the windows version and download a small executable to play on linux. All of those sales counted as windows sales, but were actually run on linux. I know because I bought 2 windows copies myself and they both were used on linux machines. I would rather they released information on how many linux binaries were downloaded and made a guesstimate on that rather than using sales number where there was no competition at all by precondition.
Don't forget that almost every dedicated server out there is also run on linux and this was the case from release day.
By definition? Sir, Please see several definitions of "viral" and point out why using the word 'viral' is appropriate in this situation.
As a biochemist and a molecular biologist who works with *real* viruses, I find the use of the word viral to describe anything in the world of Free Software unoriginal, uninformative and propagandist. It was chosen by those with the very motive of associating Free Software with a word that contains negative connotations for the average person (feeling sick, disease etc.) Very similar to using the word "piracy" to describe copyright violation. (with the exception that pirates are cool
Please don't let the corporate pundits dictate the language you use because you taint any chance of having an informative discussion before it is even begun.
I'm sure you can find a simple way to say
Believe it or not, when you 'out' a CIA agent, you could be putting in danger the lives of many potential assets as well as any other agents who have in any way interacted with the one you outed. And then the chain continues, if one of those agents is discovered in connection with her, all of their assets and connections are also in danger of death.
There are pretty serious consequences to 'outing' a CIA agent, even if the agent you out is not of some huge importance. What he did was very illegal, immoral and purely an asshole thing to do to get back at someone 'the dickhead' was pissed off at. People might have died because of it.
Imagine if you decided to do something that risked the lives of our heroes purely because you were annoyed at someone politically... I guess it's also typical of this administration.
Look up UCITA
Fortunately, most states ended up rejecting UCITA and even passing laws to the contrary.
Somehow though, I have a vague recollection that congress passed it into national law... Maybe it was a bad dream, 1998 was a long time ago.
It's much simpler than our friend tries to spin the license. It's about freedom of the USER. As a user of GPL2 software, you can do *anything* you want with it and your freedoms are protected.
The minute you turn into a developer and distributor, that's the first time you even have to accept the license! You accept the license because without it you cannot distribute because of copyright. The license then grants the developer & distributor more freedoms than she would have without it. All she has to do is allow her modifications to give USERS all the rights that she had as a USER, nothing more nothing less.
It's a user-centric license and protects ALL freedoms of the user.
He also handed M$ their arse, which is a good thing.
There are currently 302,230,761 or so people in the U.S. and around 33,390,141 in Canada. Do me a favor and go read a little bit about statistics. When you figure out how to best create randomized sample groups that are large enough to matter at all in any kind of discussion about this, please let us know. We are not amused by your sample sizes of 1.
Then go back and think about a different kind of statistics. Think about how many horror stories you would have to personally hear before changing your mind. Stories of bankrupcy, illness and preventable deaths happening to many people who have paid all their lives into health insurance policies. Being denied their rightful paid-for care because the insurance company knows they can out-muscle them in the courts if the people even live that long or try to fight it. How many? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000? Is that enough stories of absolute nightmares and despair for you? Now think about the 50,000,000 uninsured who also share in this. Many of them work but their employer doesn't provide insurance. Many of them are between jobs. Have you ever realized that if you quit your job and start looking for another you better not get sick or in an accident because you're fucked if you do?
Sometimes, I get really sad about the way the human brain works. It tends to develop models and after that tries to force all observed evidence to fit it, or even appear to substantiate it. It seems some of us fall prey to this more than others.
I fear I've asked too much of our friend Solandri. Just go home and try to figure out why a sample size of 1 is a Homer Simpson effort. Then when someone in your family gets sick and your insurance company decides to deny the claim with the intent of turning a profit and it causes you to go bankrupt, I will get off my lazy arse and start a website in order to raise $12,000.00 for you to help you out.
If you go see the movie you'll know the inside joke.
He is honest to god harder to understand than 'The architect' character in the matrix.
It's not that he's trying to be precise, he is a lot more formal than precise. Why is it so hard to follow?
I'm completely familiar with the words he uses, however the way he throws them together into a monotone slush is almost like purpose obfuscation at times.
Maybe there are people out there who already have more than one exploit for these and wouldn't mind trading one in for a legal source of quick cash. Who knows? 16k buys very a nice chunk of electronics for people who don't need the money for anything else.
Now, they've found a massive amount and the F article states:
So what gives? My vague memory says in the nineties they were still looking for any signs of water and now it's old news?
a = b
a^2 = ab
a^2-b^2 = ab-b^2
(a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
nulity = nulity
since a = b
b+b = b
2b = b
$200 = $100
*Fixed
No kidding I would be so extremely depressed on a caloric restricted diet that I'd probably take my own life. I'll take fine foods, sex, booze, drugs and exercise over adding a few extra years to the shit end of my life anyday.
"The 2005 dividend is $845.76."
Ahahaha. You don't even have to be in alaska all year because they give you 180 days that you can leave and still get paid. You get paid that much to live in alaska for 6 months out of the year!
Sorry but if you think something is a negative effect, you should come right out and explain why instead of implying it.
In this case I think that it's a good thing(TM). Now that there's no percieved scarcity, people are free to watch what they want only when they actually want to. I've experienced this with music and movie downloading as well as netflix. Sometimes I go through periods of watching/listening to these and sometimes i go through periods of doing other things with my life.
Newsflash people are free to set their own priorities. Since when is making this easier a bad thing?