Well, people who use the BSD license don't see it the same way. They're happy to contribute their code to be used in any way by anybody.
Personally, I don't think it's wise for anyone who is concerned about "freeloaders" to contribute to any F/OSS project regardless of the license. Note that most users never give anything back and even those who modify GPL'd code don't have to give anything back if they don't redistribute their derived application.
So a particular F/OSS license may change the degree of freeloading but they all allow it.
Regardless of the argument of which is better, your fundamental claim is incorrect - the GPL doesn't offer only symmetric freedoms. The original author of a GPL'd work is not limited by the GPL at all while downstream developers are.
"there is a lot of BSD code that is derivative of other BSD code where the source is unavailable"
Let's clarify our definitions. BSD code is code available under the BSD license just as GPL code is code available under the GPL license. BSD code is just as available as GPL code.
If you combine BSD code and other code and license the combination under a non-BSD license, that combined code is not BSD code and has zero impact on the original BSD code it used.
Thus your statement I quote above doesn't make any sense. If the source code isn't available, it can't be BSD code.
The question isn't whether you can use a different bridging company, but whether you have to. Most people don't want to turn a phone call into a configuration task.
You could attach four smart mechanical arms to someone's brain stem (with an inhibitor chip of course). Those extra arms could make the millisecond adjustments to keep the instabilities in check. I have to admit this sounds familiar...
Re:Decent text editor still not included right?
on
Emacs Hits Version 23
·
· Score: 1
A list of days of the month consists of text, calendars consist of more. The mere fact that a lot of things use text doesn't mean that a text editor is the logical choice to create them.
Hard drives store a lot of text, should Emacs be able to format itself?
It's important to remember that the Findings of Facts you link to was not the final word on the matter. The appeals court rejected some of those "facts".
There's a fundamental difference between appreciating beauty in one of its manifistations and being able to produce beauty in that manifistation.
In addition, poetry is no less beautiful because it was written with poor handwriting just as elegant GUIs are no less beautiful because the underlying code might be considered "ugly".
"It would seem these problem should ultimately be solvable, its just a matter of how long and how much money it will take."
This is essentially the same assumption that AI researchers have had from the start. Perhaps it's time to assume that non-biological AI isn't going to work.
"The GPL guarantees the code and all additions will remain open."
There's a timing problem with your statement. Additions don't start out as open, the GPL requires that they are open. That's OK but the suggestion that the GPL is somehow just maintaining the status quo is misleading.
"The BSD, MIT licenses (even if more open) are for mugs who end up having their code "stolen" ! By this I mean that some half-witted asshat will grab the source tree, make some minor changes to it and then resell it as his own work."
So you're saying that those who put BSD code into GPL'd projects were stealing?
You may have to wade through a lot of "fixes" that are actually worthless before you find a real fix. If you do reasonable unit testing and user interface testing before you release your code, it's not that likely that someone unfamiliar with your code is going to find a bug and fix it properly.
The truth is that the GPL simply allows the original author to control the terms under which derivitive works can be distributed. Absent any moral or ethical self-congratulations, I have no problem with that.
I don't know if these "beliefs" are true (the whole brain scenario sounds like hand-waving speculation to me), but if they are his claim that "Its as simple as that" is wrong.
Some people just don't want to believe any explanation that doesn't allow them to feel morally superior.
In the context of his claim "It's as simple as that" there's no difference between direct and indirect causes. If some calories cause you to eat more, then his simplistic theory is ignoring relevant 2nd order effects.
Actually, I think it's important to understand what "sorting" is and then know how to use the standard libraries (of whatever language) to do the sorting for you.
If someday in the future of your career you need a faster sort, google it up. Chances are the solution you'd find would be better than what you had learned in school (had you been paying attention).
Slashdot Mirror
Well, people who use the BSD license don't see it the same way. They're happy to contribute their code to be used in any way by anybody.
Personally, I don't think it's wise for anyone who is concerned about "freeloaders" to contribute to any F/OSS project regardless of the license. Note that most users never give anything back and even those who modify GPL'd code don't have to give anything back if they don't redistribute their derived application.
So a particular F/OSS license may change the degree of freeloading but they all allow it.
Yes, it seems obvious that the GPL provides asymmetric freedoms, but apparently the GP didn't realize it, so I explained it.
Regardless of the argument of which is better, your fundamental claim is incorrect - the GPL doesn't offer only symmetric freedoms. The original author of a GPL'd work is not limited by the GPL at all while downstream developers are.
"there is a lot of BSD code that is derivative of other BSD code where the source is unavailable"
Let's clarify our definitions. BSD code is code available under the BSD license just as GPL code is code available under the GPL license. BSD code is just as available as GPL code.
If you combine BSD code and other code and license the combination under a non-BSD license, that combined code is not BSD code and has zero impact on the original BSD code it used.
Thus your statement I quote above doesn't make any sense. If the source code isn't available, it can't be BSD code.
Quietly publish the source code in the contract's fine print?
Should we contact Zennstrom or Friis to get our cut?
The question isn't whether you can use a different bridging company, but whether you have to. Most people don't want to turn a phone call into a configuration task.
You could attach four smart mechanical arms to someone's brain stem (with an inhibitor chip of course). Those extra arms could make the millisecond adjustments to keep the instabilities in check. I have to admit this sounds familiar ...
A list of days of the month consists of text, calendars consist of more. The mere fact that a lot of things use text doesn't mean that a text editor is the logical choice to create them.
Hard drives store a lot of text, should Emacs be able to format itself?
They rejected the finding that Microsoft attempted to extend its monopoly to the browser market.
It sounds more like Yahoo is doing the extending.
It's important to remember that the Findings of Facts you link to was not the final word on the matter. The appeals court rejected some of those "facts".
There's a fundamental difference between appreciating beauty in one of its manifistations and being able to produce beauty in that manifistation.
In addition, poetry is no less beautiful because it was written with poor handwriting just as elegant GUIs are no less beautiful because the underlying code might be considered "ugly".
"It shows an innate lack of grace and beauty."
That's very logical - if you're hiring celebrity spokesmodels.
There are still plenty of pseudo-scientific techniques available including lie detection, tea leaves, and palmistry.
If today's geeks were born 100 years earlier, they'd be the "stupid" ones without any useful purpose in society.
"It would seem these problem should ultimately be solvable, its just a matter of how long and how much money it will take."
This is essentially the same assumption that AI researchers have had from the start. Perhaps it's time to assume that non-biological AI isn't going to work.
Isn't that the hip-hop moto? I just love it when rap is added to a great song from my youth.
"The GPL guarantees the code and all additions will remain open."
There's a timing problem with your statement. Additions don't start out as open, the GPL requires that they are open. That's OK but the suggestion that the GPL is somehow just maintaining the status quo is misleading.
"The BSD, MIT licenses (even if more open) are for mugs who end up having their code "stolen" !
By this I mean that some half-witted asshat will grab the source tree, make some minor changes to it and then resell it as his own work."
So you're saying that those who put BSD code into GPL'd projects were stealing?
You may have to wade through a lot of "fixes" that are actually worthless before you find a real fix. If you do reasonable unit testing and user interface testing before you release your code, it's not that likely that someone unfamiliar with your code is going to find a bug and fix it properly.
The truth is that the GPL simply allows the original author to control the terms under which derivitive works can be distributed. Absent any moral or ethical self-congratulations, I have no problem with that.
I don't know if these "beliefs" are true (the whole brain scenario sounds like hand-waving speculation to me), but if they are his claim that "Its as simple as that" is wrong.
Some people just don't want to believe any explanation that doesn't allow them to feel morally superior.
In the context of his claim "It's as simple as that" there's no difference between direct and indirect causes. If some calories cause you to eat more, then his simplistic theory is ignoring relevant 2nd order effects.
Actually, I think it's important to understand what "sorting" is and then know how to use the standard libraries (of whatever language) to do the sorting for you.
If someday in the future of your career you need a faster sort, google it up. Chances are the solution you'd find would be better than what you had learned in school (had you been paying attention).