Both GPL and BSD licenses place requirements you must meet in order to redistribute software licensed under it. Copyright is the mechanism by which these licenses are enforced. No software that is governed by copyright is "really free."
The only circumstance I could imagine that would result in "really free software" is if you were to release it to the Public Domain. In that case, or in the unlikely event that the copyright was to expire on your software, people would be truly free to use or distribute it in any manner they see fit without regard for the desires of the author or anyone else who distributes it.
In all other cases, whether you use the GPL, Apache or BSD style license, you are subject to the whims of the copyright holder and therefore not *truly* free.
But given the requirements of these licenses - that you must offer to distribute the source along with binaries, or you must include a copyright notice, list of conditions and disclaimer - software licensed under any of those three licenses is effectively - and equally - "free," especially from the end user's point of view.
That's not to say there are not advantages to choosing one style over the other. To some, the freedom to add additional restrictions or refuse to offer source with binaries is preferable. To others, assurance that some downstream distributor can not hijack a project by modifying it and refusing to provide source with binaries is an enhancement to their freedom, not a restriction.
You may have different values, but that does not make your software, platform or license choices "really free." They just appear so to you because they suit you.
The OP was trolling when he tossed in that carefully crafted, completely unnecessary and utterly ridiculous remark about "really free" software like BSD and "restricted (probably meant to say 'restrictive') license but free source " like GNU/Linux.
If one can call itself "free" while placing, or allowing for, restrictions it's use or distribution, so can the other.
As someone who absolutely hates change, I'm sure I'm not going to like what happens to Slashdot after you depart, but it will still be the default page on any browser I use. Thanks for staying true to your geeky roots, and for all the fish, of course.
Obama would have blamed the Republicans, blue dog Democrats, the Tea Party, people clinging to guns and religion, the Cambridge police acting stupidly, George W. Bush, talk radio, the Canadians, Richard Nixon, Neville Chamberlain, Gavril Princip, Robert E. Lee, James Madison, Charles I, Constantine, Diocletian, Nebuchadnezzar, Hammurabi, Tutankhamen, Imhotep, Abraham, Seth, and Adam.
The study said that the average IQ for IE users was 80. If they'd said 95, then it might have been plausible, but 80 means functionally illiterate and basically unable to function in society.
According to the Wikipedia page on Intelligence quotient, modern IQ tests define the median result of a standard sample as 100 points, with a standard deviation of 15 points. 95 percent of the population have scores that fall within two standard deviations of the mean, meaning they fall between 70 and 130 points.
The ten-year-rule for directors is that, give or take, most directors have about 10 years of truly creative energy.
Lolz...
Well, I guess someone better tell Scorsese, Eastwood, Woody Allen, David Lynch, the Cohen brothers, Cronenberg, Richard Linklater, Errol Morriss, Tarantino, Paul Thomas Anderson, Ang Lee, Gus Van Sant, and Wim Wenders their careers are over.
Oh, and considering Lucas helmed two of the most successful movie franchises of the late 20th century, while founding companies that set the standard for cinima sound (THX) and special effects (ILM), no, I'm not surprised he was considered "an incredible up-and-coming young director." Along with contemporaries like Copola and Scorsese, he has had a dramatic influence on the art and science of making movies.
On the other hand, hacktivists could probably infiltrate intelligence and enforcement agencies too. Not to mention political parties, movements like the Tea Party, news organizations and other large, influential corporations.
If I seriously wanted to bring about change to our socioeconomic system, that's how I'd go about it.
my wifes iPhone kept trying to spell-check/correct my email address. Why the F*** does it do that to *EMAIL ADDRESSES*??????
That's so annoying. Blackberrys do the same thing.
When I activate Blackberrys on our BES, I have to compose an email message first so I can disable 'suretype' and enable 'multitap' or I can't make it halfway through the user's email address thanks to it autocorrecting. Almost as bad as it capitalizing the first letter of every sentance whether you want it to or not.
Why are banks open only from 10-3, the sort of hours they know everyone is at work?
Not all banks have hours like that. My bank is open from 8:00 AM - 8:00 PM Mon - Fri and from 8:00 - 4:00 on Saturdays. Some branches are open on Sunday.
Of course, the only time I take advantage of those hours is when I need something out of my safe deposit box. I use the ATM to withdraw cash and online banking for everything else.
So, can anyone buy one of these? If it's legal for police, then...
I don't see why not. I've got one at work. I'm sure any phone dealer would use one to copy people's contacts from their old phone to the new one on the spot.
It's just a tool. It's the cops that are turning it in to something criminal.
And I agree with the comments above to encrypt the data on your mobile devices.
That's great. My favorite line: "the spaceships take an unconscionable amount of time to get anywhere."
Your review reminds me of this Rolling Stone review of the first Led Zeppelin album, which complained about the "weak, unimaginative songs" and concluded that the musicians had "(wasted) their considerable talent on unworthy material."
Years later, the same magazine ranked Led Zeppelin 1 at #29 on their list of the 500 greatest albums of all time.
That, I'm afraid, is called blackmail. It is a punishable offence in many a country. Especially doing it to a court...
Blackmail is extorting payment by use of threats. Telling someone you will not index their web pages unless they stop threatening you with lawsuits is not blackmail.
Kroger has no idea who accessed their email system, let alone whether or not they were hackers. Seems more likely spammers, or perhaps fraudsters, would be interested in gaining accesses to customer names and email addresses.
In fact the word hacker appears nowhere in the article or summary. What is your major malfunction, Timothy?
Yeah, I thought the GNU icon kinda gave it away too.
Mind you, I agree with the general sentiment that it wouldn't kill submitters and editors to at least consider the posibility that some people may need a bit of background information on the subject at hand. But that would require a bit more effort that simply copy/pasting a couple paragraphs from the article and hitting submit.
Yes, I can put my damn sign in my f@cking yard. And you can decide who gets to put their damn signs in your f@cking yard.
But if you allow others to put their damn signs in your f@cking yard, but don't allow me to put my damn sign in your f@cking yard because you don't like the content of my sign, the word that describes that is censorship.
The key here is that you make your yard available to people to put up their signs, but single mine out because you don't like the content of my particular sign.
If a newspaper publishes letters to the editor, but choose to not publish mine (even for a good reason, like to avoid a potential libel suit) they are censoring me. Doesn't make them "bad or evil" (at least in that particular case), but the word that describes that action is "censor."
People censor all the time. You did it yourself when you put the @ in f@cking. Presumably, you believed spelling the word out completely might cause offense to someone, so you censored yourself by replacing the "u" with "@."
I don't get why that damn word causes so much f@cking confusion.
Slashdot Mirror
Both GPL and BSD licenses place requirements you must meet in order to redistribute software licensed under it. Copyright is the mechanism by which these licenses are enforced. No software that is governed by copyright is "really free."
The only circumstance I could imagine that would result in "really free software" is if you were to release it to the Public Domain. In that case, or in the unlikely event that the copyright was to expire on your software, people would be truly free to use or distribute it in any manner they see fit without regard for the desires of the author or anyone else who distributes it.
In all other cases, whether you use the GPL, Apache or BSD style license, you are subject to the whims of the copyright holder and therefore not *truly* free.
But given the requirements of these licenses - that you must offer to distribute the source along with binaries, or you must include a copyright notice, list of conditions and disclaimer - software licensed under any of those three licenses is effectively - and equally - "free," especially from the end user's point of view.
That's not to say there are not advantages to choosing one style over the other. To some, the freedom to add additional restrictions or refuse to offer source with binaries is preferable. To others, assurance that some downstream distributor can not hijack a project by modifying it and refusing to provide source with binaries is an enhancement to their freedom, not a restriction.
You may have different values, but that does not make your software, platform or license choices "really free." They just appear so to you because they suit you.
The OP was trolling when he tossed in that carefully crafted, completely unnecessary and utterly ridiculous remark about "really free" software like BSD and "restricted (probably meant to say 'restrictive') license but free source " like GNU/Linux.
If one can call itself "free" while placing, or allowing for, restrictions it's use or distribution, so can the other.
So what you're saying is that the BSD license restricts you from removing the copyright notice.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Nice troll
As someone who absolutely hates change, I'm sure I'm not going to like what happens to Slashdot after you depart, but it will still be the default page on any browser I use. Thanks for staying true to your geeky roots, and for all the fish, of course.
In this case, he would have been wrong.
According to the Wikipedia page on Intelligence quotient, modern IQ tests define the median result of a standard sample as 100 points, with a standard deviation of 15 points. 95 percent of the population have scores that fall within two standard deviations of the mean, meaning they fall between 70 and 130 points.
The bell curve from the article is here.
Lolz ...
Well, I guess someone better tell Scorsese, Eastwood, Woody Allen, David Lynch, the Cohen brothers, Cronenberg, Richard Linklater, Errol Morriss, Tarantino, Paul Thomas Anderson, Ang Lee, Gus Van Sant, and Wim Wenders their careers are over.
Oh, and considering Lucas helmed two of the most successful movie franchises of the late 20th century, while founding companies that set the standard for cinima sound (THX) and special effects (ILM), no, I'm not surprised he was considered "an incredible up-and-coming young director." Along with contemporaries like Copola and Scorsese, he has had a dramatic influence on the art and science of making movies.
On the other hand, hacktivists could probably infiltrate intelligence and enforcement agencies too. Not to mention political parties, movements like the Tea Party, news organizations and other large, influential corporations.
If I seriously wanted to bring about change to our socioeconomic system, that's how I'd go about it.
Exactly. You don't see ads for the Superbowl on competing networks.
True enough. Courtney Love schooled the RIAA years ago on this very subject.
If the gp's name was bananas, your sentence would have made perfect sense.
The "shit" in "shit my pants" doesn't rhyme with anything in "I took a chance." So shit fits no better than shat, and that's that.
That's so annoying. Blackberrys do the same thing.
When I activate Blackberrys on our BES, I have to compose an email message first so I can disable 'suretype' and enable 'multitap' or I can't make it halfway through the user's email address thanks to it autocorrecting. Almost as bad as it capitalizing the first letter of every sentance whether you want it to or not.
You're right. One is the defined end of the sequence.
One is an odd number, so you multiply it by three and add one for four, which is even, so you divide by two ... and it's turtles all the way down ...
Agreed. Opportunity drove 146.9 meters to reach the 30 Kilometer mark.
Or ...
"Einstein is correct, as usual (so far)."
Or ...
"Enstein is correct, as - so far - usual."
Or ...
"As usual, Einstein is correct. So far."
Not all banks have hours like that. My bank is open from 8:00 AM - 8:00 PM Mon - Fri and from 8:00 - 4:00 on Saturdays. Some branches are open on Sunday.
Of course, the only time I take advantage of those hours is when I need something out of my safe deposit box. I use the ATM to withdraw cash and online banking for everything else.
I don't see why not. I've got one at work. I'm sure any phone dealer would use one to copy people's contacts from their old phone to the new one on the spot.
It's just a tool. It's the cops that are turning it in to something criminal.
And I agree with the comments above to encrypt the data on your mobile devices.
That's great. My favorite line: "the spaceships take an unconscionable amount of time to get anywhere."
Your review reminds me of this Rolling Stone review of the first Led Zeppelin album, which complained about the "weak, unimaginative songs" and concluded that the musicians had "(wasted) their considerable talent on unworthy material."
Years later, the same magazine ranked Led Zeppelin 1 at #29 on their list of the 500 greatest albums of all time.
Is that why point and click cameras play a recording of the sound of a shutter opening and closing by default?
Blackmail is extorting payment by use of threats. Telling someone you will not index their web pages unless they stop threatening you with lawsuits is not blackmail.
Kroger has no idea who accessed their email system, let alone whether or not they were hackers. Seems more likely spammers, or perhaps fraudsters, would be interested in gaining accesses to customer names and email addresses.
In fact the word hacker appears nowhere in the article or summary. What is your major malfunction, Timothy?
Yeah, I thought the GNU icon kinda gave it away too.
Mind you, I agree with the general sentiment that it wouldn't kill submitters and editors to at least consider the posibility that some people may need a bit of background information on the subject at hand. But that would require a bit more effort that simply copy/pasting a couple paragraphs from the article and hitting submit.
Yes, I can put my damn sign in my f@cking yard. And you can decide who gets to put their damn signs in your f@cking yard.
But if you allow others to put their damn signs in your f@cking yard, but don't allow me to put my damn sign in your f@cking yard because you don't like the content of my sign, the word that describes that is censorship.
The key here is that you make your yard available to people to put up their signs, but single mine out because you don't like the content of my particular sign.
If a newspaper publishes letters to the editor, but choose to not publish mine (even for a good reason, like to avoid a potential libel suit) they are censoring me. Doesn't make them "bad or evil" (at least in that particular case), but the word that describes that action is "censor."
People censor all the time. You did it yourself when you put the @ in f@cking. Presumably, you believed spelling the word out completely might cause offense to someone, so you censored yourself by replacing the "u" with "@."
I don't get why that damn word causes so much f@cking confusion.