I wouldn't call a UDP "forming a cartel and blocking" an ISP. You're simply stopping them from participating in Usenet. It's not like you're blocking them from the Internet.
Also, I would say that if a company doesn't play by the "rules", a lot of little companies crushing them is perfectly fair play.
True. However, last time I checked, a lot of his "donations" were donations to schools to buy Wintel machines. Kind of like Apple's stratigy all those years ago, but he's calling it a "donation", and MS has the popularity to make the brainwashing be somewhat effective. So, a good bit of that $5 billion could probably be considered an investment.
As I understand it, it's just done by the sender to make it easier on the USPS (they just have to scan it for the zipcode instead of doing it manually), thus making the letter generally get to where it's going a bit faster. This is usually done by businesses who send out lots of stuff, and I think you can buy machines/programs+hardware that can do it.
I think this was just another example of someone trying to make GNOME look like this big great thing by making something else look bad.
When I read it, I got the distinct impression that the man really liked CDE, and accepted GNOME a bit grudingly, so I don't think that this is the case.
Sorry, to be pedant, but he was closer. It's actually "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." I looked it up the other day for a report.
I could be wrong (I'm certinly no lawyer), but the way I understand the laws is that a person can license their software however they want. I could code something, release it under the GPL, then, if someone offered me a lot of money, grant that person an exclusive copy of my software that is under a propriety license. I believe this has been done quite often in the past (in several forms), and it seems to be mentioned in the GPL. The point of all this is that if you make an app and release it under the GPL, you could probably still use some of the code to make a library under the LGPL, since you possess an unlicensed version.
I would have to disagree. IMHO, "Free" is actually a good term for it. It's short, it's simple, it carries the point, and it has a language confusion problem similar to "hacker".:) "Liberated Software" isn't a very accurate term, since most of the GPL'd stuff's written from scratch, so it hasn't been "liberated", but was free from birth. "Open", too, has a problem, because it implies that that it is open to use, but not truly "free". Of course, it could be just a personal thing, as I'm partial to talking about "freedom".
I'm certinly no legal expert, but as I understand it, a class action lawsuit is basically a lawsuit where there are a bunch of plantifs. Anyone who wants can usually sign on. It's common in things like harassment suits from obese people who thought their employeer wasn't treating them fairly, and stuff like that.
I can't remember anything in Exodus about killing all gays (there's one to kill all witches, though, which either refers to wiccans or sorcerers...either way it's bizarre and makes one doubt that the Bible was written by anyone divine, but I digress). However, in the first chapter of Romans, Paul of Tarsus (aka, the Lunatic) says that all gay people deserve death.
Companies make little or no profit from the consoles themselves. It's a well known fact that Sony actually sells PSX's at a loss and makes up the money in games. They just want lots of people to have the consoles so they can buy the games. Thus, they'd probably love everyone using Emulators, expessily since it's pretty much impossible to post PSX ROMs on the Internet. CDs are pretty big...
It's been common knowledge for a while that Nintendo lies like hell on the back of their manuals to try and trick people out of their rights. Backup copies of ANYTHING are fair use, and once you buy a license to use a piece of software, you can use it in any form. Therefore, making ROMs of thy own games to play, or downloading ROMs of games you own to play (say, you don't have them with you) is perfectly legal. Nintendo actually does a very good job at scaring morons with this tactic.
Not necessarily. When you purchase commercial, propriety software, you buy a *license* to use the software. Thus, if I buy MS Office, then my CD gets destroyed, my friend can legally lend me his CD so I can make a copy for my use. Of course, most companies will deny this, just like Nintendo denies the right to a backup.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't call a UDP "forming a cartel and blocking" an ISP. You're simply stopping them from participating in Usenet. It's not like you're blocking them from the Internet.
Also, I would say that if a company doesn't play by the "rules", a lot of little companies crushing them is perfectly fair play.
True. However, last time I checked, a lot of his "donations" were donations to schools to buy Wintel machines. Kind of like Apple's stratigy all those years ago, but he's calling it a "donation", and MS has the popularity to make the brainwashing be somewhat effective. So, a good bit of that $5 billion could probably be considered an investment.
As I understand it, it's just done by the sender to make it easier on the USPS (they just have to scan it for the zipcode instead of doing it manually), thus making the letter generally get to where it's going a bit faster. This is usually done by businesses who send out lots of stuff, and I think you can buy machines/programs+hardware that can do it.
Last time I heard, RMS was describing himself politically as an anarchist, I think...
I think this was just another example of someone trying to make GNOME look like this big great thing by making something else look bad.
When I read it, I got the distinct impression that the man really liked CDE, and accepted GNOME a bit grudingly, so I don't think that this is the case.
Sorry, to be pedant, but he was closer. It's actually "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." I looked it up the other day for a report.
I could be wrong (I'm certinly no lawyer), but the way I understand the laws is that a person can license their software however they want. I could code something, release it under the GPL, then, if someone offered me a lot of money, grant that person an exclusive copy of my software that is under a propriety license. I believe this has been done quite often in the past (in several forms), and it seems to be mentioned in the GPL. The point of all this is that if you make an app and release it under the GPL, you could probably still use some of the code to make a library under the LGPL, since you possess an unlicensed version.
Well, if I posted this before, I don't remember it. It's very likely that a similar comment was posted by someone else, though.
Ufies.userfriendly.org and the UF support site are both claimed it was a prank now, so it seems that everything's okay.
I must say, it was the most elaborate one I've seen in a while.
I would have to disagree. IMHO, "Free" is actually a good term for it. It's short, it's simple, it carries the point, and it has a language confusion problem similar to "hacker". :) "Liberated Software" isn't a very accurate term, since most of the GPL'd stuff's written from scratch, so it hasn't been "liberated", but was free from birth. "Open", too, has a problem, because it implies that that it is open to use, but not truly "free". Of course, it could be just a personal thing, as I'm partial to talking about "freedom".
Could be all those Terry Pratchett books...
I'm certinly no legal expert, but as I understand it, a class action lawsuit is basically a lawsuit where there are a bunch of plantifs. Anyone who wants can usually sign on. It's common in things like harassment suits from obese people who thought their employeer wasn't treating them fairly, and stuff like that.
I can't remember anything in Exodus about killing all gays (there's one to kill all witches, though, which either refers to wiccans or sorcerers...either way it's bizarre and makes one doubt that the Bible was written by anyone divine, but I digress). However, in the first chapter of Romans, Paul of Tarsus (aka, the Lunatic) says that all gay people deserve death.
Just set the score level thingie to "1".
Yep, the correct link is http://www.owo.com/
Companies make little or no profit from the consoles themselves. It's a well known fact that Sony actually sells PSX's at a loss and makes up the money in games. They just want lots of people to have the consoles so they can buy the games. Thus, they'd probably love everyone using Emulators, expessily since it's pretty much impossible to post PSX ROMs on the Internet. CDs are pretty big...
It's been common knowledge for a while that Nintendo lies like hell on the back of their manuals to try and trick people out of their rights. Backup copies of ANYTHING are fair use, and once you buy a license to use a piece of software, you can use it in any form. Therefore, making ROMs of thy own games to play, or downloading ROMs of games you own to play (say, you don't have them with you) is perfectly legal. Nintendo actually does a very good job at scaring morons with this tactic.
Not necessarily. When you purchase commercial, propriety software, you buy a *license* to use the software. Thus, if I buy MS Office, then my CD gets destroyed, my friend can legally lend me his CD so I can make a copy for my use. Of course, most companies will deny this, just like Nintendo denies the right to a backup.