I wish you'd login and let me point out how supremely stupid your "opinion" comes across and why people like you are the reason open source and free software are ridiculed and demonized to no end (oh wait, I just did).
Still, here's a free clue for you: you're not helping anyone. So just go away. Go back to that massive underground top secret GNU/Laboratory under the antartic ice shelf where they create drones like yourself and ask to be reabsorbed into the hive. Send postcards.
In Salon. I laughed because I can relate to dealing with people like that (though not necessarily while trying to get hired). And you gotta love the lingo.
The comments in the NewsForge story pretty much tell the tale. The same way things are here in Bashdot. Whenever someone comes out with some insightful or potentially useful proposal or whatever to raise the bar for open source and free software, he/she is attacked virulently by the unwashed masses. Tony Stanco, Miguel de Icaza, etc.
Nothing ever changes. Most of you are more interested in having a good chuckle with your pathetic comments from behind the safety of anonymity than to actually engage and cooperate with the (few) people who are willing to stick their necks out for the values and principles that are so eloquently touted but rarely acted upon. I don't necessarily agree with those ideals, but I respect them nonetheless. What I find sad is the extreme polarization that seems to permeate these debates.
In the end, one thing is certain: you will never give 'M$' a run for their money unless you get off the "oh, but we're so absolutely fucking better than you, eat that" horse and start walking the walk instead of just jabbering hysterically about how evil Microsoft is and trowing hissy fits every time Balmer farts in your general direction.
Re:Another example of WHY the US Patent office suc
on
NCR Patents the Internet
·
· Score: 2, Informative
If jokes get into the US PTO database, that makes the system a joke. After all, if it is a joke and not marked as such, how do I tell a joke? Perhaps the patents referenced from the main story are all jokes?
Well, of course. That's the whole issue, isn't it? Haven't you heard about this?
However, many patents that sound like a joke to most people have turned out to be quite serious, unfortunately.
At this point, I hope you see the folly of your comment.
At this point, I hope you feel pretty stupid for attempting to prove to me that the USPTO is one fucked up nest of clueless bureaucrats, which I really didn't need. But thanks, anyway.
Re:Another example of WHY the US Patent office suc
on
NCR Patents the Internet
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think that's a joke. "Tarzan swing" and "Jungle forestry not required"?
Re:At least they're being frank...
on
Unreal Security Hole
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Didja RTFA? The guy is specifically citing how Epic behaved worse than Microsoft used to before they cleaned up their act.
Seems some trolls have mass-registered Emails and accounts for SLashdot under the name of "CLIT Drone No. (randNum)". Now they are mass-posting some anal gay fantasy at a default of +1.
Whoa. You don't say!!??
Editors are working on it, but the troll engine is still pumping crap in +1
Yes, exercising their legendary thread bitchslapping powers instead of fixing the damn moderation system.
Huh? Many retailers have that policy. It's basically due to the fact that most software can be installed and then used without the original CD's (although that's becoming less common).
You sound like you've never bought software before... oh, wait. I forget where I am.
I agree to a certain extent but I think that there were too many unanswered questions. For example, the background of the Honored Matres. Herbert drops precious few hints about them (the "frame bush" thing; the "weapon and charge" thing; who were the futars and why were there so few "handlers"?). Also, he suggests that Marty and Daniel (which I think were a play on his deeply cynical view of religions) are face dancers. What does that mean as far as the dynamics between the Tleilaxu and the Bene Gesserit? Why was it Idaho the only one that could see them? Did it have anything to do with his ghola condition? The only remaining Tleilaxu master had that nullentropy bin in his chest with cells from just about everyone... the implications! Also, why Sheanna as the "chosen" one specifically? I always thought it interesting that it was her and not Murbella (why stay and save the sisterhood?)
There have been several documented cases of companies "stealing" GPL code and incorporating it into their closed applications (not excluding embedded solutions and so forth). As far as I know, all of these have been settled out of court to the satisfaction of everyone involved. If such a case ever actually makes it to a court of law, do you consider the foundations, ideology and licenses that make up free/open software sufficiently complete and foolproof enough to successfully make a legal stand? Would you be willing to make that stand?
We can go "uh, no, you see, it is about, free, and I mean free as in speech, not beer, uh, if you know what I mean". And they don't. And they won't read this paper. When they can see the source, the source is open enough to them. What more could you ask?
While I agree that your characterization of someone trying to explain "free as in whatever" and "open blah" is accurate, the flaw in your argument is your implicit contempt for the people who will actually be taking advantage (as it were) of "shared source". You're essentially calling them idiots.
Let's assume for a second that you find a company that has the in-house skills to modify, say IIS (unlikely, but humor me). Do you really think for a second that when the programmer-in-chief says "we're going to write a patch for IIS" nobody in the room is going to blink? And that nobody is going to look into the ramifications of doing that, from a legal standpoint?
Shared source is not a particularly bright idea from Microsoft but to think that they're going to sucker everyone with it is a bit extreme.
First of all,.NET doesn't run in OS X. Second, if you're running a rinky web site with 10 pages, it makes as much sense to move it to.NET as it does to move it to JSP or J2EE or ColdFusion..NET is primarily a distributed application framework, which is to say, your infrastructure is made up of more than two boxes.
Finally, if you need to be convinced, then by all means, stay away from it. Contrary to popular belief, Microsoft is not forcing you to use.NET. So do everyone a favor and just ignore it.
Yes. Next year, when a new "Halloween document" is released by ESR, I'll point out how ludicrous they've become (where are we now? the 7th in the series?). The difference is, I'll get flamed and modded as a troll, whereas you get +4, Insightful. Yay Slashdot!
We don't want the Royal Marines raiding the VA Software headquarters looking for alleged terrorists Abdul Hemos and the commander of the cell, Hashish Taco.
Who complains about not having whose participation in what?
Well, let's see. The idea -as I understand it- is that *all* software should be free. Right? So you can do whatever you want with it. No? Isn't one of the "problems" the fact that very few companies do this? So why aren't you happy?
I could not care less about anything called the OSS model, because that is not well defined and the few fuzzy definitions around do not struck a cord with me. I care about free software, preferrably copyleft.
OK then, "free software". It seems that this Watcom thing is free. You can download it and use it, and stuff. Open source you don't like? What part of them releasing Watcom like this don't you like? Or are you basing you complaint on the technical merits of the thing? Have you used it? How is it "useless"? There are dozens of free/open source window managers out there for Linux. Do you think most of them are useless? Or just the ones you don't like? Would you complain as well if yet another one was released?
If I see it as badly done and useless, should not I complain?
If I find it ironic and amusing that you are complaining, should I not point it out?
Slashdot Mirror
Still, here's a free clue for you: you're not helping anyone. So just go away. Go back to that massive underground top secret GNU/Laboratory under the antartic ice shelf where they create drones like yourself and ask to be reabsorbed into the hive. Send postcards.
In Salon. I laughed because I can relate to dealing with people like that (though not necessarily while trying to get hired). And you gotta love the lingo.
Probably because it's spelled wrong. When I first saw it in your post I hated it, too.
Fair enough. I apologize for the snappy comeback.
Nothing ever changes. Most of you are more interested in having a good chuckle with your pathetic comments from behind the safety of anonymity than to actually engage and cooperate with the (few) people who are willing to stick their necks out for the values and principles that are so eloquently touted but rarely acted upon. I don't necessarily agree with those ideals, but I respect them nonetheless. What I find sad is the extreme polarization that seems to permeate these debates.
In the end, one thing is certain: you will never give 'M$' a run for their money unless you get off the "oh, but we're so absolutely fucking better than you, eat that" horse and start walking the walk instead of just jabbering hysterically about how evil Microsoft is and trowing hissy fits every time Balmer farts in your general direction.
Well, of course. That's the whole issue, isn't it? Haven't you heard about this?
However, many patents that sound like a joke to most people have turned out to be quite serious, unfortunately.
At this point, I hope you see the folly of your comment.
At this point, I hope you feel pretty stupid for attempting to prove to me that the USPTO is one fucked up nest of clueless bureaucrats, which I really didn't need. But thanks, anyway.
I think that's a joke. "Tarzan swing" and "Jungle forestry not required"?
And you get modded as insightful... oh well.
Whoa. You don't say!!??
Editors are working on it, but the troll engine is still pumping crap in +1
Yes, exercising their legendary thread bitchslapping powers instead of fixing the damn moderation system.
Cheers to you as well.
And of course, troll.
And of course, he's a very important character in the two remaining books
thx.
Thanks. I hadn't read that piece (obviously).
You sound like you've never bought software before... oh, wait. I forget where I am.
I wish he'd had time to write another 6 books!
Anyway, I could go on and on... =)
There have been several documented cases of companies "stealing" GPL code and incorporating it into their closed applications (not excluding embedded solutions and so forth). As far as I know, all of these have been settled out of court to the satisfaction of everyone involved. If such a case ever actually makes it to a court of law, do you consider the foundations, ideology and licenses that make up free/open software sufficiently complete and foolproof enough to successfully make a legal stand? Would you be willing to make that stand?
While I agree that your characterization of someone trying to explain "free as in whatever" and "open blah" is accurate, the flaw in your argument is your implicit contempt for the people who will actually be taking advantage (as it were) of "shared source". You're essentially calling them idiots.
Let's assume for a second that you find a company that has the in-house skills to modify, say IIS (unlikely, but humor me). Do you really think for a second that when the programmer-in-chief says "we're going to write a patch for IIS" nobody in the room is going to blink? And that nobody is going to look into the ramifications of doing that, from a legal standpoint?
Shared source is not a particularly bright idea from Microsoft but to think that they're going to sucker everyone with it is a bit extreme.
Finally, if you need to be convinced, then by all means, stay away from it. Contrary to popular belief, Microsoft is not forcing you to use .NET. So do everyone a favor and just ignore it.
Yes. Next year, when a new "Halloween document" is released by ESR, I'll point out how ludicrous they've become (where are we now? the 7th in the series?). The difference is, I'll get flamed and modded as a troll, whereas you get +4, Insightful. Yay Slashdot!
I'm sure you were thinking "demonized" or "protolized" or... and then you went and had a brain fart.
We don't want the Royal Marines raiding the VA Software headquarters looking for alleged terrorists Abdul Hemos and the commander of the cell, Hashish Taco.
You keep saying that like it's some sort of requirement for software to even exist.
other than being open to hoarding
And you keep saying this like it's somehow akin to hoarding food during a civil emergency or something.
Get over yourself.
Holy crap. Are you RMS' lost child? Do you plan on holding that over BSD's head forever and ever and ever?
Well, let's see. The idea -as I understand it- is that *all* software should be free. Right? So you can do whatever you want with it. No? Isn't one of the "problems" the fact that very few companies do this? So why aren't you happy?
I could not care less about anything called the OSS model, because that is not well defined and the few fuzzy definitions around do not struck a cord with me. I care about free software, preferrably copyleft.
OK then, "free software". It seems that this Watcom thing is free. You can download it and use it, and stuff. Open source you don't like? What part of them releasing Watcom like this don't you like? Or are you basing you complaint on the technical merits of the thing? Have you used it? How is it "useless"? There are dozens of free/open source window managers out there for Linux. Do you think most of them are useless? Or just the ones you don't like? Would you complain as well if yet another one was released?
If I see it as badly done and useless, should not I complain?
If I find it ironic and amusing that you are complaining, should I not point it out?