If the student committed a crime, then the teacher, and the software company incited the commission of a crime. If the teacher asked the students to commit a crime, could it not be conspiracy?
At least at my school, the following system applies:
First, there are the head and the teachers. Then there's nothing. Then God. Then nothing times 300. Then maybe a little lower there are the students.
What does this mean? The teachers are always right and it's not possible that they could commit a crime (since they are the law).
If you don't like it, leave.
Since they don't get more money if they would do something for their students, they don't do it.
I'm happy that most of my teachers don't like the system either and give us some freedom back, but they don't have to. If you complain about something too much, they'll revert to teaching-by-law.
That's not exactly true. Darwin can handle multiple forks on file systems that support it, uses a Mach kernel and most importantly has a great innovative driver framework (IOKit), designed for support of Firewire and USB (hotplugging, dynamic loading and unloading), which both don't work well with Linux.
Hm.. I'm programming for eleven years now, and the last time I used goto, it was in Pascal. Maybe 5 years ago. I've never seen any code that couldn't be written without goto.
Re:SICK OF IT! Giving up moderator points to say i
on
BSD to Leapfrog Linux?
·
· Score: 1
everyone knows that/. is sort of "Linux-focused."
Yeah, I once wrote a negative comment about the GPL and got moderated down to -1 in about one hour. It's very interesting that a society that blames others to be lemmings without brains refuses to look one inch next to their own interest and respect others.
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux, but I certainly won't use it just because it's free (speech). I believe that everybody should use the tools that fit their task best.
(My regular machine runs MacOS X, my router FreeBSD.)
Ok, maybe there'll be a different build for server applications, with AppleShare and that kind of things, but fundamentally it will be the same OS.
What does make a user OS a user OS?
First, its GUI. MacOS X does have one, no matter if you like it (I do).
Second, its applications. There are lots of user applications available (Soundjam, Omniweb, PowerMail, Napster, Caracho...), and many more will be released (Photoshop, Office, Mathematica...).
Just because a user OS uses the same kernel as a server OS doesn't make it bad. It's even better, because the user OS is as stable as a server.
Allegro is an easy-to-use multimedia library for game programming in C.
Yes it is, but installing it is a kind of rocket science, at least at the time I tried it (about 3 years ago). After the second try it worked for me, but about half a year later I tried to install it for a friend of mine and failed (all DOS). The libs didn't compile (no binaries available).
But when it worked it was very cool. By using my already installed version my friend was able to program a little jump&run game in a weekend.
The GUI editor is the best text editor every written for DOS.
It's really a good way starting programming games. Maybe a person already knowing C could help.
It sounds to me like it's the duplication you have a problem with, not the modifcation. Would you have a problem if they bought your program, moved one pixel, and didn't give it out? What if they just gave a patch out, allowing other people how have the program to move it?
Yes, that would be ok, since I'd get money for my work.
I write software, and can't imagine having a problem with that...granted, all my software tends to be free anyway.
I wrote free software, too. Small things (less than two weeks of development) aren't worth paying for. But I'm writing a program for half a year now, and this one won't be free.
You didn't get the problem. For example:
I write a program using about 1000h of my rare spare time, and I sell it for $10 per license.
ONE person buys it, moves one interface element for 1 pixel, and redistributes it for free.
Now tell me: How many dollars will I get per hour of work? I'd be very surprised if it will be more than.1 cent.
It's a different case with hardware. You can't duplicate it for free.
Oh, so it's perfectly OK if somebody gives their code to you under a license you like, but morally wrong if they give it to you under a different license?
They can release the code under whichever license they want. This is just an example why the GPL can block development and the freedom of choice.
Sorry, there's a blank inside the link, don't know why. The correct one is:
http://darwin.anu.edu.au/display.cgi?view=/darwin- mail/development/200006/d_users3196T he correct number at the end is '3196' not '319 6'
What would you have done if icqlib did not exist?
Nothing. But if icqlib were LGPL, I would have programmed one.
Actually, I would prefer fuck you posts to your style of posts. An accurate "GPL is bad, because... example 1...example 2..." would contribute to the discussions.
Those two examples are reality.
Here's Apple's statement to Number 1.
And the GPL prevented me to program an ICQ client for MacOS X, this one you have to believe me.
after all, you post inaccurate statements about the GPL without seeming to have read it for yourself
I often make the mistake to believe what layers say.
In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License.
I'd think this says that you're right. But again, IANAL. And that bash is missing from MacOS X Public Beta because of this issue is a fact.
Yes, and the authors decided to place it in what amounts to a permanent public domain. If you don't like that, then use something else.
Yes, I don't use Linux. It's that easy.
It's a shame that your application will be restricted to just one operating system, though. And that the development of Gerry's ICQ looks a lot slower than icqlib's, and that your application will have far less features.
Then don't complain about me stating that it will hurt users.
btw, I find it very interesting that "fuck you" or "first post" is equal to "GPL is bad, because... example 1...example 2..." at slashdot. This is a discussion board after all, not a GPL-praising camp.
Readline is an enhanced facility that's not a standard part of POSIX. Everything you need to develop for any other POSIX-compatible operating system (libc and the like) is LGPL. So if you can develop for any other POSIX-compatible system, you can develop for Linux just as well.
Readline is needed if you want to program an interactive command line program. I'd never program a command line-only app for any OS except Linux (I'd use NSTextField for that kind of task).
The thing that really gets me about most of the anti-GPL rants is that the basic attitude is "I really want to use all this good stuff, but since I want to make money, I should be entitled to use this without giving anything back," as though making money is somehow the highest calling in life and other people should respect that desire and allow you to use their sweat for your proprietary program. That's precisely what the GPL is all about; if you want to use GPL'ed code, you have to play by the same rules.
That's not my philosophy. I think it's perfectly ok that you have to redistribute the source if you alter an opensource-program. But linking to a lib or calling it via exec() is IMO not altering the GPL'ed code.
If someone asks me a question about my app, I answer. If someone asks me to release the source of my app, I probably do that too. But I certainly won't dictate others what license they have to use for their own program!
If you are implying that Apple is restricted from distributing bash because the GPL license forbids redistribution with non-GPLed operating systems, then you are wrong, plain and simple.
IANAL. Apple legal says that this is not allowed, this is a fact. There's been a lot of discussion on Apple mailing lists about this issue.
That's one hell of an exaggeration. Readline is basically the only major GPLed library.
I haven't searched for more, but this is an important one.
As for icqlib, show me a free icq library for any operating system. Don't have one? Then I'm afraid you don't have a reason to choose other operating systems over Linux.
I'm sorry to disappoint you:
The library of Gerry's ICQ is freely available (Mac only).
I suspect that this is a troll, but just in case it isn't, I'll inform you.
If I'd be a troll, I'd post as AC.
So? How does this destroy business and hurt people? If you want it, install it yourself.
Installing = time = money = hurting people Nothing in the GPL prevents you from charging for your software.
AFAIK the person that buys my product is allowed to modify my code and redistribute it. That's not acceptable.
An application doesn't need to be GPLed in order for it to run on a GPLed OS.
I said the exact opposite. The OS isn't GPL and Apple can't ship GPL software with it.
Not true at all, see above.
You need libraries to develop for an OS effectively. But nearly all libraries for Linux are GPL, and I don't have the time nor the money to develop everything myself (readline for example, icqlib for example).
whereas Microsoft tries to take credit for inventing the symbolic link and the GUI.
Those were invented by Apple ("Alias") and partly Xerox.
Re:X wrapper as a 'plugin' for OSX?
on
X On OSX Now Free
·
· Score: 1
You're too late. Tenon has already done this: http://www.tenon.com/prod uct s/xtools/pre-release_beta/ Simultaneous execution of X- and Aqua-based applications is provided. Support for both copy and paste functions is provided between X and native applications. Tenon plans to add full support of OpenGL, as well as more convenient way to close X applications and start remote X clients. Although no widget libraries have been ported, these too are planned.
Ever hear of a little company called Siemens? I'll just tell you a few things they did since the war.
I actually worked for them for one month in the holidays, a summer job for instant. It's a complete mess there. Out of the four weeks, I worked two (Visual Basic, Access), then the boss of my room went on holiday, including every other permanent employee. Two weeks of surfing the Internet:)
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the link, I hope slashcode won't break it:
http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/
Cocoa/Reference/Foundation/ObjC_classic/
Classes/NSUserDefaults.html
Just join those three lines.
At least at my school, the following system applies:
First, there are the head and the teachers. Then there's nothing. Then God. Then nothing times 300. Then maybe a little lower there are the students.
What does this mean? The teachers are always right and it's not possible that they could commit a crime (since they are the law).
If you don't like it, leave.
Since they don't get more money if they would do something for their students, they don't do it.
I'm happy that most of my teachers don't like the system either and give us some freedom back, but they don't have to. If you complain about something too much, they'll revert to teaching-by-law.
That's not exactly true. Darwin can handle multiple forks on file systems that support it, uses a Mach kernel and most importantly has a great innovative driver framework (IOKit), designed for support of Firewire and USB (hotplugging, dynamic loading and unloading), which both don't work well with Linux.
Thanks!
Does anybody know if there's a Linux for a HP48 calculator? It would be rather complicated to get linux into 128k (no disk).
Hm.. I'm programming for eleven years now, and the last time I used goto, it was in Pascal. Maybe 5 years ago. I've never seen any code that couldn't be written without goto.
Yeah, I once wrote a negative comment about the GPL and got moderated down to -1 in about one hour. It's very interesting that a society that blames others to be lemmings without brains refuses to look one inch next to their own interest and respect others.
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux, but I certainly won't use it just because it's free (speech). I believe that everybody should use the tools that fit their task best.
(My regular machine runs MacOS X, my router FreeBSD.)
What does make a user OS a user OS?
First, its GUI. MacOS X does have one, no matter if you like it (I do).
Second, its applications. There are lots of user applications available (Soundjam, Omniweb, PowerMail, Napster, Caracho...), and many more will be released (Photoshop, Office, Mathematica...).
Just because a user OS uses the same kernel as a server OS doesn't make it bad. It's even better, because the user OS is as stable as a server.
Yes it is, but installing it is a kind of rocket science, at least at the time I tried it (about 3 years ago). After the second try it worked for me, but about half a year later I tried to install it for a friend of mine and failed (all DOS). The libs didn't compile (no binaries available).
But when it worked it was very cool. By using my already installed version my friend was able to program a little jump&run game in a weekend.
The GUI editor is the best text editor every written for DOS.
It's really a good way starting programming games. Maybe a person already knowing C could help.
I don't think that libraries you link with are a part of a program.
I don't think that linking with a library is equal to modifying it.
Yes, that would be ok, since I'd get money for my work.
I write software, and can't imagine having a problem with that...granted, all my software tends to be free anyway.
I wrote free software, too. Small things (less than two weeks of development) aren't worth paying for. But I'm writing a program for half a year now, and this one won't be free.
I write a program using about 1000h of my rare spare time, and I sell it for $10 per license.
ONE person buys it, moves one interface element for 1 pixel, and redistributes it for free.
Now tell me: How many dollars will I get per hour of work? I'd be very surprised if it will be more than
It's a different case with hardware. You can't duplicate it for free.
Yes, but I'm not the user. Since this software was never written because the required lib is GPL'ed, the user has less choices.
They can release the code under whichever license they want. This is just an example why the GPL can block development and the freedom of choice.
http://darwin.anu.edu.au/display.cgi?view=/darwin
What would you have done if icqlib did not exist?
Nothing. But if icqlib were LGPL, I would have programmed one.
Those two examples are reality.
Here's Apple's statement to Number 1.
And the GPL prevented me to program an ICQ client for MacOS X, this one you have to believe me.
I often make the mistake to believe what layers say.
I'd think this says that you're right. But again, IANAL. And that bash is missing from MacOS X Public Beta because of this issue is a fact.Yes, and the authors decided to place it in what amounts to a permanent public domain. If you don't like that, then use something else.
Yes, I don't use Linux. It's that easy.
It's a shame that your application will be restricted to just one operating system, though. And that the development of Gerry's ICQ looks a lot slower than icqlib's, and that your application will have far less features.
Then don't complain about me stating that it will hurt users.
btw, I find it very interesting that "fuck you" or "first post" is equal to "GPL is bad, because... example 1...example 2..." at slashdot. This is a discussion board after all, not a GPL-praising camp.
Readline is needed if you want to program an interactive command line program. I'd never program a command line-only app for any OS except Linux (I'd use NSTextField for that kind of task).
The thing that really gets me about most of the anti-GPL rants is that the basic attitude is "I really want to use all this good stuff, but since I want to make money, I should be entitled to use this without giving anything back," as though making money is somehow the highest calling in life and other people should respect that desire and allow you to use their sweat for your proprietary program. That's precisely what the GPL is all about; if you want to use GPL'ed code, you have to play by the same rules.
That's not my philosophy. I think it's perfectly ok that you have to redistribute the source if you alter an opensource-program.
But linking to a lib or calling it via exec() is IMO not altering the GPL'ed code.
If someone asks me a question about my app, I answer. If someone asks me to release the source of my app, I probably do that too. But I certainly won't dictate others what license they have to use for their own program!
IANAL. Apple legal says that this is not allowed, this is a fact. There's been a lot of discussion on Apple mailing lists about this issue.
That's one hell of an exaggeration. Readline is basically the only major GPLed library.
I haven't searched for more, but this is an important one.
As for icqlib, show me a free icq library for any operating system. Don't have one? Then I'm afraid you don't have a reason to choose other operating systems over Linux.
I'm sorry to disappoint you:
The library of Gerry's ICQ is freely available (Mac only).
If I'd be a troll, I'd post as AC.
So? How does this destroy business and hurt people? If you want it, install it yourself.
Installing = time = money = hurting people
Nothing in the GPL prevents you from charging for your software.
AFAIK the person that buys my product is allowed to modify my code and redistribute it. That's not acceptable.
I said the exact opposite. The OS isn't GPL and Apple can't ship GPL software with it.
Not true at all, see above.
You need libraries to develop for an OS effectively. But nearly all libraries for Linux are GPL, and I don't have the time nor the money to develop everything myself (readline for example, icqlib for example).
That's simply not true. .
I'm a regular user, now I do nidump passwd
here it is:
root:.B8/f33yykFgk:0:0::0:0:System Administrator:/var/root:/bin/tcsh
(removed the rest)
Those were invented by Apple ("Alias") and partly Xerox.
You're too late. Tenon has already done this:
http://www.tenon.com/prod uct s/xtools/pre-release_beta/
Simultaneous execution of X- and Aqua-based applications is provided. Support for both copy and paste functions is provided between X and native applications.
Tenon plans to add full support of OpenGL, as well as more convenient way to close X applications and start remote X clients. Although no widget libraries have been ported, these too are planned.
I actually worked for them for one month in the holidays, a summer job for instant. :)
It's a complete mess there. Out of the four weeks, I worked two (Visual Basic, Access), then the boss of my room went on holiday, including every other permanent employee. Two weeks of surfing the Internet