I still find it hypocrite. You claim the service is not good enough to pay for, yet you have no qualms about using it anyway. You should try that on a bus or train some time. Just ride it without a ticket, and when asked for your ticket just tell 'm you don't want to pay, because you don't really like taking the bus. See if that works.
Given that BeOS does not support arbitrary-shaped windows, a BeOS port of Sonique will either be using the BeOS port of X11 (which would suck), or it will not be using those cool morphing windows (which would suck too). Sonique and BeOS are both very nice, but I'm afraid a combination of the two won't make anybody happy...
Jesus f'ing Christ, won't you people ever learn??!!!
Read the knowledge base article, and you will see:
A TNEF-encoded message contains a plain text version of the message, and a binary attachment that "packages" various other parts
of the original message. In most cases, the binary attachment will be named Winmail.dat, and may include:
The formatted text version of the message (font information, colors, and such)
OLE objects (embedded pictures, embedded Office documents, and such)
Special Outlook features (custom forms, voting buttons, meeting requests, and such)
Regular file attachments that were added to the original message
So what does this mean? You can communicate with
an MS-user. You will be able to read his/her messages. The only thing you won't see is the formatted text version of the message. This is really no different from someone sending you multipart mime text+html email. You educate them about it, you move on with your life.
The reason being that H1-B workers have to be paid similarly to regular employees, otherwise the visa gets declined. I don't do 60 hour working weeks either. Maybe I'm just lucky.
Nonsense. One of the requirements for getting an H1-B visa is that the compensation for the job must be representative. I am an H1-B worker in Silicon Valley. I make $78000 a year, plus stock options. While there are certainly people who make more, I believe $78000 is above average. A company cannot get "cheap labor" like this, or the visa would be declined. The only drawback for the employee is that the visa somewhat ties you to the company, so you cannot simply quit and get a new job.
As one of those "foreign bastards" you mention, I am somewhat offended by your language, and at the same time amazed at the effectiveness of your reality-distortion field. Yes, there are plenty of people who would like those jobs, but who are apparently also so underqualified that the US needs to import in excess of one hundred thousand "foreign bastards" each year to stop the American high tech economy from coming to a grinding halt.
Of course with this being slashdot, this is going to degenerate into an endless list of postings complaining that "hacking" and "cracking" are two different things, instead of focusing on the real issue at hand.
First of all, there is an easy workaround on BeOS for this minor inconvenience.
Secondly, Mozilla links just fine, it just cannot load all of its add-ons at run time (but as I said, there is a workaround). This has nothing to do with pagesize, but rather with the fact that somebody back in the old days thought that 32 MB of plugins would be more than anybody needed (this was around the time when having 32 MB in your machine was a lot!) Then along came this lumbering hulk called Mozilla, a webbrowser that is almost an operating system by itself, and requires a whopping 50 megs of plugins just to run.
And what you're conveniently overlooking is that people can get it for free online. And yet they pay
The overlap between the group that gets it for free online and the group that pays is very small. You may be in both groups, the majority of people is not. Fortunately the "get it online for free"-group is still small compared to the group that buys stuff the traditional way, however that is bound to change.
So basically you're asking artists to live from charity.
You want the music to be readily available and shareable, but if people end up not paying, well, that's just tough luck for the artist, I guess s/he wasn't good or sympathetic enough.
What you're conveniently overlooking is that obviously the music *is* good enough and appealing to a lot of people. CDs are being sold right now. That does not automatically mean that people would pay for them if they didn't have to, i.e. if they could just get it for free.
Do you think that a "pay only what you think it's worth" supermarket would work? I think not. For the same reason, the music distribution system that you seem to favor will not work.
So Napster went out and bought "large amounts" of the artist's CDs and then resold them? Or did the users do that?
Your analogy is obviously flawed, it should go something like this: Lets say a company A
prints a book, company A thinks the book should be sold in bookshops at a certain price (so the bookshops have a profit). You decide to
copy large amounts of the book and sell them in a store B, call it Walmart, at a lower price.
Unfortunately RMS' stance on this is pretty much "linking is linking". He makes no distinction between link-time or run-time linking, static or dynamic linking. This means that you could not release say a PhotoShop-plugin under the GPL, since it is "linked" run-time with PhotoShop, and since PhotoShop is not under the GPL, this is forbidden.
While for the above case this is obviously a ridiculous restriction, I can see why RMS generally does not want to allow this. After all, if run-time linking of GPL and non-GPL code were allowed, this would pretty much turn the GPL into the LGPL.
Unfortunately, the $118 million figure is wrong, it's $250 million, and judging from mp3.com's stock price in after hours trading, their market cap fell to about $400 today. UMG effectively owns more than 60 percent of mp3.com now.
And this is just the damages for one party. As the article says, mp3.com could end up paying 3.6 BILLION dollars
Wouldn't the GPL license that GPG no doubt is under prevent integration with a lot of programs? Even turning it into a plug-in for a non-GPL app would violate the license if you apply RMS's strict view on linking.
If you are worried about mere technical merit, why didn't you just buy a Solaris or NextStep even a VMS licence?
Because despite all the ideals professed on slashdot, "free software" to most people (uneducated guess: 99+ percent) means "gratis". Most people couldn't care less about about the linux sourcecode or RMS' ideals, they just want their software for free.
Wouldn't this be a clear case of reverse-engineering a product to make it interoperable with something else?
AFAIK that is still allowed
(the reason this defense failed for DeCSS is that it was also
bypassing copy-protection, which is illegal under the DMCA.
This is not the case here).
Slashdot Mirror
I still find it hypocrite. You claim the service is not good enough to pay for, yet you have no qualms about using it anyway. You should try that on a bus or train some time. Just ride it without a ticket, and when asked for your ticket just tell 'm you don't want to pay, because you don't really like taking the bus. See if that works.
An obvious question that comes to mind: if it's so bad, why even watch/listen to it?
So basically you are watching stuff that is so bad that it's not even worth paying for? How very very strange...
Given that BeOS does not support arbitrary-shaped windows, a BeOS port of Sonique will either be using the BeOS port of X11 (which would suck), or it will not be using those cool morphing windows (which would suck too). Sonique and BeOS are both very nice, but I'm afraid a combination of the two won't make anybody happy...
Isn't Sonique also closed source? Why would anybody be interested in seeing it on linux then?
Read the knowledge base article, and you will see:
A TNEF-encoded message contains a plain text version of the message, and a binary attachment that "packages" various other parts of the original message. In most cases, the binary attachment will be named Winmail.dat, and may include:
- The formatted text version of the message (font information, colors, and such)
- OLE objects (embedded pictures, embedded Office documents, and such)
- Special Outlook features (custom forms, voting buttons, meeting requests, and such)
- Regular file attachments that were added to the original message
So what does this mean? You can communicate with an MS-user. You will be able to read his/her messages. The only thing you won't see is the formatted text version of the message. This is really no different from someone sending you multipart mime text+html email. You educate them about it, you move on with your life.Between this and Gnutella, it looks like Justin's trying to get himself fired. I guess he's not really happy at AOL.
WHAT paperwork? You can't even start working until you have the actual H1-B paper in hand!
No.
Period
The reason being that H1-B workers have to be paid similarly to regular employees, otherwise the visa gets declined. I don't do 60 hour working weeks either. Maybe I'm just lucky.
Nonsense. One of the requirements for getting an H1-B visa is that the compensation for the job must be representative. I am an H1-B worker in Silicon Valley. I make $78000 a year, plus stock options. While there are certainly people who make more, I believe $78000 is above average. A company cannot get "cheap labor" like this, or the visa would be declined. The only drawback for the employee is that the visa somewhat ties you to the company, so you cannot simply quit and get a new job.
As one of those "foreign bastards" you mention, I am somewhat offended by your language, and at the same time amazed at the effectiveness of your reality-distortion field. Yes, there are plenty of people who would like those jobs, but who are apparently also so underqualified that the US needs to import in excess of one hundred thousand "foreign bastards" each year to stop the American high tech economy from coming to a grinding halt.
Of course with this being slashdot, this is going to degenerate into an endless list of postings complaining that "hacking" and "cracking" are two different things, instead of focusing on the real issue at hand.
First of all, there is an easy workaround on BeOS for this minor inconvenience.
Secondly, Mozilla links just fine, it just cannot load all of its add-ons at run time (but as I said, there is a workaround). This has nothing to do with pagesize, but rather with the fact that somebody back in the old days thought that 32 MB of plugins would be more than anybody needed (this was around the time when having 32 MB in your machine was a lot!) Then along came this lumbering hulk called Mozilla, a webbrowser that is almost an operating system by itself, and requires a whopping 50 megs of plugins just to run.
Somebody is confusing "first patch" with "full SMP support".
UNBIASED news on slashdot? You have GOT to be kidding...
The overlap between the group that gets it for free online and the group that pays is very small. You may be in both groups, the majority of people is not. Fortunately the "get it online for free"-group is still small compared to the group that buys stuff the traditional way, however that is bound to change.
Then I suggest you create a few good albums before the week is over and give them away for free. Can't do it? Gee, I wonder why not...
What you're conveniently overlooking is that obviously the music *is* good enough and appealing to a lot of people. CDs are being sold right now. That does not automatically mean that people would pay for them if they didn't have to, i.e. if they could just get it for free.
Do you think that a "pay only what you think it's worth" supermarket would work? I think not. For the same reason, the music distribution system that you seem to favor will not work.
Your analogy is obviously flawed, it should go something like this:
Lets say a company A prints a book, company A thinks the book should be sold in bookshops at a certain price (so the bookshops have a profit). You decide to copy large amounts of the book and sell them in a store B, call it Walmart, at a lower price.
Notice the difference?
Ah what fun it must be to be a teen still. Raging hormones, pimples, no sex except in your mind. I wish I could do it all over again...
While for the above case this is obviously a ridiculous restriction, I can see why RMS generally does not want to allow this. After all, if run-time linking of GPL and non-GPL code were allowed, this would pretty much turn the GPL into the LGPL.
Unfortunately, the $118 million figure is wrong, it's $250 million, and judging from mp3.com's stock price in after hours trading, their market cap fell to about $400 today. UMG effectively owns more than 60 percent of mp3.com now. And this is just the damages for one party. As the article says, mp3.com could end up paying 3.6 BILLION dollars
Wouldn't the GPL license that GPG no doubt is under prevent integration with a lot of programs? Even turning it into a plug-in for a non-GPL app would violate the license if you apply RMS's strict view on linking.
Because despite all the ideals professed on slashdot, "free software" to most people (uneducated guess: 99+ percent) means "gratis". Most people couldn't care less about about the linux sourcecode or RMS' ideals, they just want their software for free.
Wouldn't this be a clear case of reverse-engineering a product to make it interoperable with something else? AFAIK that is still allowed (the reason this defense failed for DeCSS is that it was also bypassing copy-protection, which is illegal under the DMCA. This is not the case here).