The conventional interpretation of the GPL considers all code linked to it, either statically or dynamically, to be a
derivative work and consequently that code must be GPLed. The LGPL (Lesser GPL, not Library GPL since it
ain't just for libraries anymore) is intended to address code that gets linked without this restriction.
RMS was originally very adamant about linking resulting in 'derivative works', however this theory has changed in recent times. This was a very volatile question in the early days of Linux, and Torvalds took the opinion that linking did not result in a derivative work (he was talking specifically about the kernel at the time), and this prompted RMS to draft the LGPL (as I understand history).
Generally, it is accepted today that linking does not mean that your program must be GPLed, but you should not (cannot?) distribute the libraries with your app on CD or other media.
IANAL, and this wouldn't be a problem if you used a BSD-type license;)
You saw this coming eventually. AOL, of course everyone's favorite company for so many reasons buys Netscape. Everyone at Netscape jumps ship. AOL continues ahead and sees and sees this great way to gather information on a very large segment of the 'Net; forget doubleclick, AOL gets you first. (Of course, assuming this isn't just sensationalism . . . very little in the article beyond "Netscape/AOL is being sued")
As web browsers become the worlds cross platform solution for programs (not to mention microsoft.net), this has a possibility to spiral out of control unless users become informed and there are laws--especially in the U.S. where many of these companies in question are based and where we have very weak privacy laws--to protect the end user.
Did anyone see this in the EULA? Is this on every platform? Is the smart download part of Communicator in Mozilla somewhere, or is it just a closed part? I think I'm going to have to look at some source soon. . .
Since, when we at slashdot ask for an "unbiased, Non-FUD benchmark" what we really want is something that gives the versimilitude in Linux superiority. Eh, well, here are some links anyway. Take what you want.
First off, some general info (not a benchmark, so it actually contains Truth!)
It may be slightly out of date now that w2k is out, but unix-vs-nt has what appears to be relatively honest benchmarks. Likewise, PC Week did a review last year shortly after the Mindcraft one
I don't believe that it is necessarily a Bad Thing to use computers in educational circumstances, and especially at the older levels.
Nemesys states that "Kids will always know more than the teachers" yet the article is most focused on removing computers from younger kids, pre-seventh grade. As the teachers teaching these students are constantly being replaced by younger teachers, those with a better understanding of this technology, they will be more informed. Though there are certainly students who know more than the teachers even at this early age, by selecting the correct system (perhaps a modified Un*x that targeted for this one purpose, with an easy to use GUI?) the teachers won't have to worry about these students as much (assuming that someone in the school knows how to set it up).
The biggest problem facing educators with their use of technology is that they are teaching students to become reliant on tech and not to use it as a tool. This is part of what the article is getting at when the author states that the students most learn the ideas" first. This is a problem that reaches farther than just computers, however. To often are students taught to "just plug it in to your calculator" without having a clue as to the theory behind it. This is what the author is worried about.
Hell, I thought it was a valid point. Does a console have to remain static throughout its existance, or can the manufacturer leave open upgrade possibilities?
Slashdot Mirror
The conventional interpretation of the GPL considers all code linked to it, either statically or dynamically, to be a derivative work and consequently that code must be GPLed. The LGPL (Lesser GPL, not Library GPL since it ain't just for libraries anymore) is intended to address code that gets linked without this restriction.
RMS was originally very adamant about linking resulting in 'derivative works', however this theory has changed in recent times. This was a very volatile question in the early days of Linux, and Torvalds took the opinion that linking did not result in a derivative work (he was talking specifically about the kernel at the time), and this prompted RMS to draft the LGPL (as I understand history).
Generally, it is accepted today that linking does not mean that your program must be GPLed, but you should not (cannot?) distribute the libraries with your app on CD or other media.
IANAL, and this wouldn't be a problem if you used a BSD-type license ;)
You saw this coming eventually. AOL, of course everyone's favorite company for so many reasons buys Netscape. Everyone at Netscape jumps ship. AOL continues ahead and sees and sees this great way to gather information on a very large segment of the 'Net; forget doubleclick, AOL gets you first. (Of course, assuming this isn't just sensationalism . . . very little in the article beyond "Netscape/AOL is being sued")
As web browsers become the worlds cross platform solution for programs (not to mention microsoft.net), this has a possibility to spiral out of control unless users become informed and there are laws--especially in the U.S. where many of these companies in question are based and where we have very weak privacy laws--to protect the end user.
Did anyone see this in the EULA? Is this on every platform? Is the smart download part of Communicator in Mozilla somewhere, or is it just a closed part? I think I'm going to have to look at some source soon. . .
Since, when we at slashdot ask for an "unbiased, Non-FUD benchmark" what we really want is something that gives the versimilitude in Linux superiority. Eh, well, here are some links anyway. Take what you want.
First off, some general info (not a benchmark, so it actually contains Truth!)
It may be slightly out of date now that w2k is out, but unix-vs-nt has what appears to be relatively honest benchmarks.
Likewise, PC Week did a review last year shortly after the Mindcraft one
Not a benchmark either, but article on LinuxToday about Linux in the Enterprise.
I don't believe that it is necessarily a Bad Thing to use computers in educational circumstances, and especially at the older levels.
Nemesys states that "Kids will always know more than the teachers" yet the article is most focused on removing computers from younger kids, pre-seventh grade. As the teachers teaching these students are constantly being replaced by younger teachers, those with a better understanding of this technology, they will be more informed. Though there are certainly students who know more than the teachers even at this early age, by selecting the correct system (perhaps a modified Un*x that targeted for this one purpose, with an easy to use GUI?) the teachers won't have to worry about these students as much (assuming that someone in the school knows how to set it up).
The biggest problem facing educators with their use of technology is that they are teaching students to become reliant on tech and not to use it as a tool. This is part of what the article is getting at when the author states that the students most learn the ideas" first. This is a problem that reaches farther than just computers, however. To often are students taught to "just plug it in to your calculator" without having a clue as to the theory behind it. This is what the author is worried about.
Hell, I thought it was a valid point. Does a console have to remain static throughout its existance, or can the manufacturer leave open upgrade possibilities?
I can't wait to play Q3 on a HDTV :)