The users of your program are not the freeloaders, people who want to take your code and modify it, keeping their changes proprietary are the freeloaders. They are the ones that need to be punished according to this theory, and by using the GPL rather than a BSD-like license, you have the option to punish them.
For load balancing only, IP level clustering works great. But to allow failover in an application that needs to maintain some state between requests, the app servers also need to be clustered. It is not a competing technology, generally you would use both IP level and app-server level clustering together.
Using free software with a non-free operating system should be viewed as a win, not a loss.
Please show me where RMS calls it a loss? As far as I can see, it is a partial win, and becomes a complete win when the user's experiences with that free software convince them to swtich to a completely free system.
Thawte is not the only provider of certificates out there.
True. IE 5.5 contains a list of 100 root CAs. Of these, 3 have certificates that had expired before IE 5.5 was even released. 93 of the others do not have an Issuer Statement, so we just have to trust them blindly. Of the 4 root CAs that have an Issuer Statement, 3 give 404 errors. The remaining one takes you to a page where you can download a potentially virus carrying MS Word document in Italian.
Emacs 21 for Win32 is available
on
GNU Emacs 21
·
· Score: 1
The Windows port of GNU Emacs is up to Emacs 21, which can be built with gcc (there was also a test release of Emacs 20.7 that could be built with gcc). Emacs 21 also supports the Mac (for the first time in the mainstream release).
It does not yet support some of the new features of Emacs 21 on X(notably tooltips and graphics), but is otherwise functionally the same as Emacs 21 on any other supported platform.
Most Japanese PHS phones have the ability to make calls to other PHS phones without involving the phone company within about a 200m radius. GSM/CDMA phones have a considerably higher signal power than PHS, so the range should be at least that.
IANAL, but I am involved in some FSF projects, so have encountered some of the legal requirements described.
Unless the other people have explicitly assigned their copyright to the original author, then the copyright for their changed does not belong to the original author.
So if the author wanted to provide the software to someone under a different license, they'd need to either get permission from ALL the other copyright holders, or strip out the code that they do not own copyright on.
Also, if they had to defend the code against a GPL violation and it got to court, all the copyright holders would probably have to get involved.
Well I'm damned if I want some script kiddie turning every word on my home page into goatse.cx links. The only progress here will be a change from Outlook virii to IE ones.
Which do you think is more effective, assuming they both link to the same Web site?
Computer feeling sluggish? Time for a replacement? We've got what you need. Click here to enter our online store!
or...
Computer feeling sluggish? Time for a replacement? Visit the Dell Online Store at dell.com to order online!
For Dell, probably the latter is more effective. For the advertising agency, the former, as it will generate more click-throughs (= revenue for them) due to the curiousity factor. Which demonstrates that middlemen work only for themselves, and click-through is bad for advertisers.
Even if vidomi now come up with some scheme where they seperate the GPLed code from their own code sufficiently to comply with the GPL, they have broken the GPL already, which means they no longer have the right to use that code.
From the GPL:
4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License.
Judging by the photos on the AT&T site, they are using touchscreen phones similar to the ones that BT was installing in major railway stations and airports over a year ago. As "unambitious" as BT is (I don't know where this came from, perhaps the original poster meant UNAMERICAN), they have since learnt from this and are now installing phones with metal keyboards (basically overgrown payphone keyboards) all over London and other major cities. I haven't had a close look at one, but I imagine they have a replacable perspex cover over the LCD to protect it from vandalism. Probably also a CCTV in every phone booth, this being the land of public surveillance.
How long ago did you go through the process?
I got my work permit approved in 2 1/2 weeks in March. Six months earlier, a workmate went through the same process as yourself, with months of redoing paperwork.
An immigration consultant I spoke with in February told me that in January they were telling people that it took about 6 weeks to get approved (which was an improvement on early-mid 2000), but by February it was down to 3 weeks.
Slashdot Mirror
The users of your program are not the freeloaders, people who want to take your code and modify it, keeping their changes proprietary are the freeloaders. They are the ones that need to be punished according to this theory, and by using the GPL rather than a BSD-like license, you have the option to punish them.
For load balancing only, IP level clustering works great. But to allow failover in an application that needs to maintain some state between requests, the app servers also need to be clustered. It is not a competing technology, generally you would use both IP level and app-server level clustering together.
True. IE 5.5 contains a list of 100 root CAs. Of these, 3 have certificates that had expired before IE 5.5 was even released. 93 of the others do not have an Issuer Statement, so we just have to trust them blindly. Of the 4 root CAs that have an Issuer Statement, 3 give 404 errors. The remaining one takes you to a page where you can download a potentially virus carrying MS Word document in Italian.
It does not yet support some of the new features of Emacs 21 on X(notably tooltips and graphics), but is otherwise functionally the same as Emacs 21 on any other supported platform.
Most Japanese PHS phones have the ability to make calls to other PHS phones without involving the phone company within about a 200m radius. GSM/CDMA phones have a considerably higher signal power than PHS, so the range should be at least that.
IANAL, but I am involved in some FSF projects, so have encountered some of the legal requirements described.
Unless the other people have explicitly assigned their copyright to the original author, then the copyright for their changed does not belong to the original author.
So if the author wanted to provide the software to someone under a different license, they'd need to either get permission from ALL the other copyright holders, or strip out the code that they do not own copyright on.
Also, if they had to defend the code against a GPL violation and it got to court, all the copyright holders would probably have to get involved.
Well I'm damned if I want some script kiddie turning every word on my home page into goatse.cx links. The only progress here will be a change from Outlook virii to IE ones.
From the GPL:
Judging by the photos on the AT&T site, they are using touchscreen phones similar to the ones that BT was installing in major railway stations and airports over a year ago. As "unambitious" as BT is (I don't know where this came from, perhaps the original poster meant UNAMERICAN), they have since learnt from this and are now installing phones with metal keyboards (basically overgrown payphone keyboards) all over London and other major cities. I haven't had a close look at one, but I imagine they have a replacable perspex cover over the LCD to protect it from vandalism. Probably also a CCTV in every phone booth, this being the land of public surveillance.
How long ago did you go through the process? I got my work permit approved in 2 1/2 weeks in March. Six months earlier, a workmate went through the same process as yourself, with months of redoing paperwork. An immigration consultant I spoke with in February told me that in January they were telling people that it took about 6 weeks to get approved (which was an improvement on early-mid 2000), but by February it was down to 3 weeks.
Hackers huh? Hopefully they'll fix some bugs before they give it back.