>>To have only one price point is not fair to our artists, and I dare say not appropriate to consumers. The market should decide, not a single retailer, said Mr. Bronfman. Some songs should be $0.99 and some songs should be more. I dont want to give anyone the impression that $0.99 is a thing of the past.
Um yes it is fair. See, a popular song will sell a million times, raising a million dollars. A less popular song will sell 20 times raising 20 dollars. I may not be up to speed with new math, but it seems to me one artist will get compensated more than another.
"If the software is GPL'd, but they don't believe the license to be valid - then how do they go about distributing someone else's code w/o any license?"
I wonder what the legal test will end up being for GPL license "Compliance" My guess is that you won't win a court case if you try and say you were damaged by someone who fully complied with GPL but then turned around and said "GPL is not valid". I'm guessing the courts would want to see a material violation.
>>ALL PATENTS should be abolished. Those who preach "free trade" while at the same time pushing for more and more patents are simply hypocrites (hi, USA!).
1) Make a Sarcastic statement 2) Don't back it up with facts.
Hi MOG.
unencumbered is contextual. unencumbered with respect to the GPL. Meaning, the GPL is riding free and clear because no UNAUTHORIZED copyrights have been shown to exist in Linux to date.
wonderful is contextual as well. GL certainly has raised the ire of SCO and it's supporters. GL has also given the loudes "counter" voice to SCO. There are others now, but GL started the movement.
"he biggest threat Red Hat faces right now is that IBM could settle with SCO and then release its own Linux along with workstations and servers based on the Cell processor. "
Why would IBM have to settle with SCO to release Linux Workstations and servers on the Cell processor? Is there evidence that the SCO suit is having any impact on Linux deployments?
When I go for a one hour run listening to my music, I want to be able to make a cell phone call when I get home.
Of course I am a strange bird in that I buy cell phones based on charge life rather than features. It's possible I could be wrong, but I think I'm on to something.
If you want to call it a "problem", the problem is simple. There is no applied science that comes from evolution. As such, telling the average person that we come from tomatoe monsters, god or apes does not affect them. Now telling the average person that electrons only move when god tells them to move will not get you very far, because the average person can pull out a basic electronics book and tell you the know better.
I say this without judgement, religion fills a void in many peoples lives. Religion fills the void for that which cannot be explained. That is why religion used to explain we are in the center of the universe, until of course applied science blew caused a problem.
I don't have an issue with intelligent designs folks except to say that is no excuse to stop looking. Evolution clearly exists in certain forms, that is a fact. We should not stop looking into how nature works just because it is complex. Scientists should continue to understand how we come about and that means searching. At this point evolution is the strongest theory.
If intelligent design people are serious, their next step would be to figure out how our DNA made it on this planet, or how "we" made it on this planet. I don't see any research from them on that part. Seems like they just want to give up.
For the life of me I cannot understand this "freedom" argument. Why is i that Linux fits the "freedom" model? Is not BSD the truly free software? Linux and GNU applications seem to be shackled by the GPL license.
It really seems that there are degrees of freedom in software.
>You don't attack anyone? Here you are saying that >the problem is no one can FIRE Tridge from the >Open Source community for VIOLATING McVoy's >unilateral condition. How can you not see that as >an attack??!!
Hmmm, maybe my wording was off. Far from making the point that anyone should fire anyone in the OS community. I'm trying to point out that it was foolish of the folks at BitKeeper to think they could enforce this deal with the open source community.
Having said that, I personally do view this as a slap in the face to a company that donated free use of it's code to the Linux Kernel project. I am all for reverse engineering mind you and nobody can force a developer to abide by rules he/she didn't agree too so this is playing out the only way it could. The relationship was based on a bad premise by the company that makes BitKeeper.
Yup, I agree with you. My point is how does one make a "pact" with the open source community? I don't think it's realistic to think you can.
I love how my original post was marked as flamebait. It might make more sense for someone to explain what is wrong with my argument. I'm not personally attacking anyone.
While I agree with your general statements, I believe you are side stepping the issue.
This code was donated to the OS community under a "condition". The problem is no one can be "fired" from the OS community and therefore it was only a matter of time before the "condition" was violated. BitKeeper did a tremendous service for the Linux Kernel development community and this is how the community eventually and inevitably paid it back.
Short story: OS can do a lot, but making a "pact" with the OS community that cannot be enforced is probably a foolish choice.
But I want to say it myself (as if this is a vote). I think this is a _really bad_ Idea. I would never release my code under a license like that. I might be willing to write a license like GPL2 + patent clause, but if someone wants to tinker with my code, they don't need to give it back to me unless they release it.
In my view this is a tipping point for open source.
I'd be very curious to know if these guys actually make any money. Then again, I've known people to sell non-working electronics on e-bay, being totally open an honest about the condition, and they still make money.
I think we are going to see a come-to-jesus moment as Peer to peer, and gun lobbying issues get closer to the same point.
As an aside, I overheard, on a right wing radio show, the other day someone laying blame on all these student killers and prosac. Brilliant, blame the killing spree on prosac. I wonder what caliber that prosac was. If you are not going to hold the fact that the kid had access to weapons as a factor in the latest school killing, at least have the balls to be consistent.
Now here is my rant. Our country allows gun ownership and it's mainly based on the second amendment. I am a gun owner and I had no problem waiting 10 days to get my gun. Somehow the NRA believes that making people register guns or go through a background check first is unconstitutional. Why? Why do they not argue that it is also unconstitutional to force demolishion experts to register their TNT? Why do they not fight for my right to own an RPG, plastic explosives, etc. After all, WACO showed that Koresh could not stop an M-1 tank with just bullets.
Now here is my point. The government has a responsibility to keep the peace as well as ensure public safety. Registering TNT is a responsible step in that direction. A gun licenses and registration which helps police track down the history of a gun, in my view, is also a good step. You might argue that registering knives should be next. I'm not sure what to say there. It seems that what level we enforce stricter rules is a matter of opinion, but I will at least argue that no mass killing in our great schools have been carried out with knives.
And now finally back OT. If the majority of Peer to Peer is used for rampant pirating, which hurts the greater economic interest of this contrary, why not allow Peer to Peer, but force members of those networks to register? To be honest, I'm a little wary of IP laws in general. Imagine a world where the government mandates a chip in your head so everytime you sing to yourself a copywrited song, you have to pay royalties. Ug. At the same time though, I think it is absolutely fair for the government to help protect someone who writes a book from someone who copies it and distributes it without permission. So while we are figuring all this out, why not allow Peer to peer networks as long as members are not anonymous. If you don't like IP laws in general, I think that is a different battle.
AOL bought mailblocks which has a US patent on this type of technology. I am not sure if it does apply in this case, but it will be interesting to see if AOL goes after IBM.
In my view, I believe prior art exists with TMDA (Tagged Message Delivery Agent)
I've been using opera forever because of the quickness with which I can resolve the problem. If I hit a site with one of these pop ups I hit the following keys. F12 -> u -> F5. Done.
When I get time I'll look into writing macros that do the same thing for firefox.
AP- In a flash of brilliant marketing, China has given 50 games the kiss of life by banning them. Young students were clamoring to see the list so they could figure out what games they wanted to get ahold of first. One unnamed student was quoted as saying "I've never had a way to find out what games would be good. This list is awesome".
Slashdot Mirror
>>To have only one price point is not fair to our artists, and I dare say not appropriate to consumers. The market should decide, not a single retailer, said Mr. Bronfman. Some songs should be $0.99 and some songs should be more. I dont want to give anyone the impression that $0.99 is a thing of the past.
Um yes it is fair. See, a popular song will sell a million times, raising a million dollars. A less popular song will sell 20 times raising 20 dollars. I may not be up to speed with new math, but it seems to me one artist will get compensated more than another.
Just seems like our concept of constructing space ships, and the logistics change. Not that long space travel will not be possible.
;-)
We need methods to get tonnage of materials into space, that's all.
When that gets solved, we'll get another article on lead poisening and space travel
>>In exchange for doing this, I expect (and receive) a reasonable tolerance of doing personal things (like surfing to slashdot)
...
>>Privacy be damned, as long as it's not abused, I welcome it.
Keep in mind that they will be collecting your passwords, credit card information, etc
The two points that you have brought up seem to conflict.
"If the software is GPL'd, but they don't believe the license to be valid - then how do they go about distributing someone else's code w/o any license?"
I wonder what the legal test will end up being for GPL license "Compliance" My guess is that you won't win a court case if you try and say you were damaged by someone who fully complied with GPL but then turned around and said "GPL is not valid". I'm guessing the courts would want to see a material violation.
>>ALL PATENTS should be abolished. Those who preach "free trade" while at the same time pushing for more and more patents are simply hypocrites (hi, USA!).
Well hello back Europe, how you doin wink wink
One of many methods to remove files:
I had a bunch of remote boxes that I needed to get rid of those pesky "won't go away" trojans.
Fortunately the box had cygnus
I just kicked off
while [ 1 ]
do
rm filename
done
Then I rebooted the box and the file was gone for good.
Geeze if you are not O'gara, it might as well be.
1) Make a Sarcastic statement
2) Don't back it up with facts.
Hi MOG.
unencumbered is contextual. unencumbered with respect to the GPL. Meaning, the GPL is riding free and clear because no UNAUTHORIZED copyrights have been shown to exist in Linux to date.
wonderful is contextual as well. GL certainly has raised the ire of SCO and it's supporters. GL has also given the loudes "counter" voice to SCO. There are others now, but GL started the movement.
How is it that post that was funny has not been moded up, but the post that points it out is modded as funny.
Now that's funny.
"he biggest threat Red Hat faces right now is that IBM could settle with SCO and then release its own Linux along with workstations and servers based on the Cell processor. "
Why would IBM have to settle with SCO to release Linux Workstations and servers on the Cell processor? Is there evidence that the SCO suit is having any impact on Linux deployments?
Two words: Battery life
When I go for a one hour run listening to my music, I want to be able to make a cell phone call when I get home.
Of course I am a strange bird in that I buy cell phones based on charge life rather than features. It's possible I could be wrong, but I think I'm on to something.
"... But I tend to think instead of a parasitic worm that is boring through the eye of a boy..."
Always back to the parasitic worm boring through someones eye.
If I had a million dollars for everytime someone brought that up, I'd be a millionare.
If you want to call it a "problem", the problem is simple. There is no applied science that comes from evolution. As such, telling the average person that we come from tomatoe monsters, god or apes does not affect them. Now telling the average person that electrons only move when god tells them to move will not get you very far, because the average person can pull out a basic electronics book and tell you the know better.
I say this without judgement, religion fills a void in many peoples lives. Religion fills the void for that which cannot be explained. That is why religion used to explain we are in the center of the universe, until of course applied science blew caused a problem.
I don't have an issue with intelligent designs folks except to say that is no excuse to stop looking. Evolution clearly exists in certain forms, that is a fact. We should not stop looking into how nature works just because it is complex. Scientists should continue to understand how we come about and that means searching. At this point evolution is the strongest theory.
If intelligent design people are serious, their next step would be to figure out how our DNA made it on this planet, or how "we" made it on this planet. I don't see any research from them on that part. Seems like they just want to give up.
I have tried yahoo chat and it is aweful. Skype is clearer than my cell phone or land line.
-easy to install
-free
why go anywhere else?
For the life of me I cannot understand this "freedom" argument. Why is i that Linux fits the "freedom" model? Is not BSD the truly free software? Linux and GNU applications seem to be shackled by the GPL license.
It really seems that there are degrees of freedom in software.
>You don't attack anyone? Here you are saying that >the problem is no one can FIRE Tridge from the >Open Source community for VIOLATING McVoy's >unilateral condition. How can you not see that as >an attack??!!
Hmmm, maybe my wording was off. Far from making the point that anyone should fire anyone in the OS community. I'm trying to point out that it was foolish of the folks at BitKeeper to think they could enforce this deal with the open source community.
Having said that, I personally do view this as a slap in the face to a company that donated free use of it's code to the Linux Kernel project. I am all for reverse engineering mind you and nobody can force a developer to abide by rules he/she didn't agree too so this is playing out the only way it could. The relationship was based on a bad premise by the company that makes BitKeeper.
Yup, I agree with you. My point is how does one make a "pact" with the open source community? I don't think it's realistic to think you can.
I love how my original post was marked as flamebait. It might make more sense for someone to explain what is wrong with my argument. I'm not personally attacking anyone.
While I agree with your general statements, I believe you are side stepping the issue.
This code was donated to the OS community under a "condition". The problem is no one can be "fired" from the OS community and therefore it was only a matter of time before the "condition" was violated. BitKeeper did a tremendous service for the Linux Kernel development community and this is how the community eventually and inevitably paid it back.
Short story: OS can do a lot, but making a "pact" with the OS community that cannot be enforced is probably a foolish choice.
But I want to say it myself (as if this is a vote). I think this is a _really bad_ Idea. I would never release my code under a license like that. I might be willing to write a license like GPL2 + patent clause, but if someone wants to tinker with my code, they don't need to give it back to me unless they release it.
In my view this is a tipping point for open source.
I'd be very curious to know if these guys actually make any money. Then again, I've known people to sell non-working electronics on e-bay, being totally open an honest about the condition, and they still make money.
"economic interest of this contrary,"
Should read "... of this contry" freudean slip
I think we are going to see a come-to-jesus moment as Peer to peer, and gun lobbying issues get closer to the same point.
As an aside, I overheard, on a right wing radio show, the other day someone laying blame on all these student killers and prosac. Brilliant, blame the killing spree on prosac. I wonder what caliber that prosac was. If you are not going to hold the fact that the kid had access to weapons as a factor in the latest school killing, at least have the balls to be consistent.
Now here is my rant. Our country allows gun ownership and it's mainly based on the second amendment. I am a gun owner and I had no problem waiting 10 days to get my gun. Somehow the NRA believes that making people register guns or go through a background check first is unconstitutional. Why? Why do they not argue that it is also unconstitutional to force demolishion experts to register their TNT? Why do they not fight for my right to own an RPG, plastic explosives, etc. After all, WACO showed that Koresh could not stop an M-1 tank with just bullets.
Now here is my point. The government has a responsibility to keep the peace as well as ensure public safety. Registering TNT is a responsible step in that direction. A gun licenses and registration which helps police track down the history of a gun, in my view, is also a good step. You might argue that registering knives should be next. I'm not sure what to say there. It seems that what level we enforce stricter rules is a matter of opinion, but I will at least argue that no mass killing in our great schools have been carried out with knives.
And now finally back OT. If the majority of Peer to Peer is used for rampant pirating, which hurts the greater economic interest of this contrary, why not allow Peer to Peer, but force members of those networks to register? To be honest, I'm a little wary of IP laws in general. Imagine a world where the government mandates a chip in your head so everytime you sing to yourself a copywrited song, you have to pay royalties. Ug. At the same time though, I think it is absolutely fair for the government to help protect someone who writes a book from someone who copies it and distributes it without permission. So while we are figuring all this out, why not allow Peer to peer networks as long as members are not anonymous. If you don't like IP laws in general, I think that is a different battle.
Thanks for listening.
AOL bought mailblocks which has a US patent on this type of technology. I am not sure if it does apply in this case, but it will be interesting to see if AOL goes after IBM.
In my view, I believe prior art exists with TMDA (Tagged Message Delivery Agent)
I've been using opera forever because of the quickness with which I can resolve the problem.
If I hit a site with one of these pop ups I hit the following keys. F12 -> u -> F5. Done.
When I get time I'll look into writing macros that do the same thing for firefox.
A real example
This is flexo and even though he did not steal the dimestore tiara, and bender did, he is still considered more evil.
It should be China promoting 50 new games
AP- In a flash of brilliant marketing, China has given 50 games the kiss of life by banning them. Young students were clamoring to see the list so they could figure out what games they wanted to get ahold of first. One unnamed student was quoted as saying "I've never had a way to find out what games would be good. This list is awesome".