Really bad analogy: Imagine it's your 11 year old daugther.
"Our 11 year old daughter has gone missing and is feared dead. We "TheParents"(TM) feel that our safety system were not compromised, and that the fault lies entirely on the third-party car-ride provider "R.J.Felon" WeRapeAndPillage Company.
Of course, R.J.Felon provided the service at cut-rate prices and we "TheParents" felt we were getting a great deal on the service.
No, you'll get to use Solaris code in CDDL, but not in GPL code, since the GPL does not grant you the rights to the third-party software that's included in Solaris.
On top of that, you should not even look at the source code for Solaris, because copyright violation (rewording is still a copyvio) could be alleged against you should you write GNU GPL software.
If you want to send money to the developers, find out who they are (pick your favorite(s)) and email them, asking what their favorite form of payment is. Then, paypal $50 to this guy, and write a check for $35 for that guy.
There's nothing that says you have to send the money to the Foundation itself.
Of course, if your goal is to get a tax deduction, then you should have said that in your post.
I have AMD processors, and have never had any problems with them. My wife is a professional interpreter/translator and she uses the AMD machine to work on. I have no problem having her use an AMD-based machine.
And yes, it's a K6-500, from 1998. Works beautifully.
The people that do 50 pages per month are web designers that make pages from print-mockup from marketing. Programmers use php/perl/python/java to generate their pages from templates. See most blog software for that.
In my experience, Dreamweaver is more than useless (but just under Frontpage and the Horror that is Word 2003 -> HTML) for programmers.
I output hundreds of pages per month, but I don't code all of them, because I template 1 or 2 and write code in a text editor that automagially creates all the other crap. It even produces valid XHTML1.0 Strict.
In any case: Adobe: Remember Skylarov. I don't buy Adobe software because of how they treated Skylarov. Not that it makes any difference, though, because I didn't buy Adobe software before, or Macromedia for that matter.
Again, I'll repeat: I'm a programmer, not a graphic designer.
The shareholders expect better returns than bank interest rates. The $n billions that microsoft owns is really the shareholders money, because the shareholder own microsoft (that's what holding a share is).
If the shareholders were happy with bank rates, they would be better off buying US treasury bonds: less risks, same return.
No, MS can't just live on the interest. It _has_ to keep making money faster than other equally risky financial instruments to attract investors. Actually, a huge cash hoard is a liability and makes your stock underperform.
Company A: 50 million shares, $1/share , nets $10 million for the year: profit per share: $.20. Annual return per share: 20%
Company B: 50 billion shares, $1/share , nets $10 billion for the year: profit per share : $.20. Annual return per share: 20%
Same performance.
Company C: 5 million shares, $1/share, nets $2 million for the year, profit per share: $.40. Annual return per share: 40%
Better performance than company B.
Which would you rather invest in, risks being equal?
The cost of windows is not the $20, it's the cost of all the little add-ons that are absolutely free in the FOSS world that cost $19 here, $29 there, like cd/dvd burning software, office suites, editors, antivirus, etc.
The other cost, which, depending, can be more, is, comma, the cost of babying the system: Install this, upgrade this, enter validation key here, run ad-aware there, and all the gnarly little tasks that people don't do because they're so freaking boring and tedious that end up making a P4 crawl to a painful stop, making the befuddled l-user call ME on the weekend to "please help me fix my PC cuz it's soo sloww". And then, I have to spend my precious time (not that precious considering/. really) telling them nicely (they're a friend of my wife) that, hum, yes I'm a computer programmer, but that, hum, no, I can't help them because I'm so busy and without sounding like a complete insensitive jerk.
I really want to help them, but I know what happened: They hosed their box and want me to fix it. Well Sherlock, that's the cost of windows: If you install windows, you're gonna have problems, and the geeks around you will just leave you alone, because they don't want to buddy up with a l-user who's gonna ask them supid questions like: "Can you help me stop all the popups?"
Geeks are where the technology curve meets the 1600mph/58,000feet level. Windows people are stuck in a leaky barge on a mucky river full of pirhanas (sp?). Running windows guarantees you're going to hang out with gamers, MSoffice, email, and IE users who think Flash is cool. I'll pass.
You can call my attitude all high and mighty, but I guarantee I'd rather read the Dune Series than spend my life running regedit looking for crap keys.
Just because you can do something does not mean you should.
He's a startup in India, and he's already having these kinds of problems. I say he should not havee spent all the dow he did on palm-grease and should have stayed at his produce shop.
If you treat programmers like dirt, they will treat you like dirt. India and China both have the mentality that there are millions of people wanting this job (which there are) so why should they be nice at all to this particualr employees?
So they treat programmers like dirt. And then the programmers steal. And then they what, whip/shoot them? Bad little evil programmers, low-lifes, peasants with a few braincells. No internet for you, no trust, no training. Here's the book, here's the computer, figure it out, or you're outta here.
Where I work we have indian programmers, and they say working in code farms in india was hell, and demeaning as anything else can be. They just use you and throw you away like an old rag.
So, like I said, either this guy closes shop and goes back to his produce stand, or he "behaves" in an ethical, professional manner according to western standards, and then maybe he'll have a shot at the big time.
You can't do that. You can drop them like a bad habit, but you can't give them bad references, you can't sue them for breach of contract. Employment contracts don't include IP clauses. That's why non-disclosure agreements exist. And unless your crap is a trade secret, you're going to have a hard time getting the court to agree with you.
As far as the whole thread: Please tell us the name of your company so slashdotters can make sure never to work there.
If you want great protection, epoxy all your usb ports, put printers and other such in a locked room with a guard in front. Use mini-din mouse and keyboard. Epoxy everything else, cable the equipments to the floor (not the desk, too easy to break)
Other thing: use intranet web-based tools, use linux and setup the users not to have rights to do what you don't want them to. Don't allow the users to save files to their machines. Disable browser cache. Disable password/form remember feature.
Finally, tell us the name of your company so we can steer any decent people away from you.
It just dawned on me that Crapware 3.0 will sell by the boatload if it has a very nice installer, and very friendly wizards. Nevermind that it crashes and is horribly typing intensive. User Joe Sixpack assumes that it's his own fault for not understanding the program, but the program obvioulsy works as advertized since it installed so flawlessly.
To sell to non-geeks: Flashy, expensive, and very clean install. Oh, and don't allow already open software to be returned to the store.
Non-geeks will influence the buying of other non-geeks like this:
Joe: Hey, you've ever heard of Crashalot?
Jack: Yeah, I bought it last week, it's so easy.
Joe: Woah, sounds cool. Was it hard to install?
Jack: Naw, man, it was a breeze, just pop the CD and click "install".
Joe: Is it easy to use?
Jack (won't admit he can't use it): I used it a little, but I've been too busy lately.
Joe (Jack is such a moron, he can't use it, but I'm smarter than him!): Oh, ok.
Jack and Joe leave.
15 minutes later, Joe is buying his very own copy of Crashalot at Best Buy for 69.99 with a $10 mail in rebate which he won't mail in because, let's face it, he doesn't want to be a sucker and give out his home address.
Meanwhile Calvin Pixel is finishing off apt-get install RockSolid 3.4.2 on Sarge, for free, and reading the 12 pages sample config file.
Guess who is going to call who when spyware galore comes to town. I just hope Calvin will charge $100 for running Search&Destroy and Adaware on Joe's box.
Look, I read the article. I don't care how much it cost them to make the free version. It was a business decision on their part. It's perfectly reasonable that the amount of publicity they got from having a free version is sufficient repayment, and that they should not, later, have 'reasonable requests' that infringe on the freedom of american citizens doing things that are not only not immoral, but also not illegal.
They wanted the publicity of being associated with FOSS, but they couldn't hack it, so they took their ball and went home. I understand. Business decision.
I did not take it ouf of context. He was slamming the guy for reverse-engineering.
Yeah, but people who are in the FOSS could not possibly be in the "you can't reverse engineer my stuff" camp, since you can download the source from the net.
Same here. Reverse Engineering is a Good Thing. That's how we geeks figure stuff out and make things better than before. If someone has a problem with reverse engineering, that person must be in the 'proprietary' camp.
I say McVoy was trying to tie his proprietary product to the linux kernel development. Can't fault him, really, he's acting as a suit. The geeks that let him do that: shame. The ones that called his shenanigans: kudos.
It doesn't matter if it's the best tool for the job. What matters is that the tool is not entirely within your control. It's like the chinese buying aircrafts from the americans, and the americans building a remote shutoff switch in the target aquisition radar. (bad analogy, I know... Sowwy.)
It doesn't matter if the license says you can't reverse engineer it, because it could not be enforced. Like I said, you can reverse engineer whatever you want. The only thing stopping it is patents. (and that's what patents were created for, by the way)
Was he an "end user" of the software who thought: "This POS blows chunks, I can do better," and proceeded to write one at home?
Are you saying that because there's a program on your machine you can't reverse-engineer it?
I say the opposite! you have to have the software on your machine (and have clicked the "i accept" of the license) before you can even start reverse-engineering it.
So, you're adding that there exists a contract between Corp B and Citizen C.
I've read some of these licensing contracts (don't ask me which ones or how, can't contractually tell you). They generally state that licensee will protect licensor's IP at least as well as its own IP, and in no case exercise less than customary care.
Now, does customary care include going to your employee's home and figuring out what he's working on after dinner while his wife/girlfriend watches American Idol?
If the licensee did not grant access to the source code to this employee, and the employee has a non-disclosure agreement, then the licensee has most likely exercised customary care.
IANAL, but I have to tell you that BitKeeper is being very nasty on this one.
If their code was so great and their software so advanced, one guy toiling away at night would not be able to even come close to creating a competing product.
And non-disclosure agreement do not injunct against reverse-engineering.
The only thing that protects you from reverese-enginnering is a patent, and only if the reverse-engineer wants to sell or release the product publically for profit.
If someone creates a better mousetrap and give it away for free, forever, I doubt a patent on mousetraps will help you, since you can only recover illicit gains (and there are no gains, because free, so no laywer will take the time).
This is all very silly if you ask me. BitKeeper should just be renamed to BitBuhBye.
The Downside of Being an Officer of a Public Corporation...is that it's very difficult to write a good April Fools blog without feeling the need for serious engagement from the corporate legal team.
And much though I love Sun's lawyers, creative cooperation doesn't seem in keeping with either April Fools day, or our collective fiduciary obligations.
But it's not for a lack of creative ideas. You'll have to trust me on that...
{End Quote}
You'll notice this line:
"And much though I love Sun's lawyers, creative cooperation doesn't seem in keeping with either April Fools day, or our collective fiduciary obligations."
And then your take out the April Fools day bit, you get:
"And much though I love Sun's lawyers, creative cooperation doesn't seem in keeping with our collective fiduciary obligations."
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is Jonathan Schwartz stating that creative cooperation is bad for Sun's investors.
And what is the FOSS movement except creative cooperation? I say JS is full of caca and needs to quit his cushy job, move to the hills, write some wicked software and release it under the GPL before he talks about the GPL again.
>BitMover wrote their free-use license in such a way that the gratis use of their software would benefit the user and not harm BitMover.
Benefit the users? By restricting their freedom to create a tool like BitKeeper?
>What exactly is wrong with that? Its their software, and they don't have to let anyone use it without paying.
Granted. But they can't lie either. They can lie to politicians and the average american, but they can't lie to geeks. Geeks write things down and have long memories.
>Why should they allow someone who freeloads to reverse engineer their software?
If the guy saw the source, he's not reverse engineering, he's copying from memory. If the guy didn't see the source, he's not freeloading.
Again, tell me how a license between Corp A and Corp B can stop US Citizen C from reverse-engineering something?
Slashdot Mirror
The parent is right.
Really bad analogy:
Imagine it's your 11 year old daugther.
"Our 11 year old daughter has gone missing and is feared dead. We "TheParents"(TM) feel that our safety system were not compromised, and that the fault lies entirely on the third-party car-ride provider "R.J.Felon" WeRapeAndPillage Company.
Of course, R.J.Felon provided the service at cut-rate prices and we "TheParents" felt we were getting a great deal on the service.
Thank you for playing.
No, you'll get to use Solaris code in CDDL, but not in GPL code, since the GPL does not grant you the rights to the third-party software that's included in Solaris.
On top of that, you should not even look at the source code for Solaris, because copyright violation (rewording is still a copyvio) could be alleged against you should you write GNU GPL software.
If you want to send money to the developers, find out who they are (pick your favorite(s)) and email them, asking what their favorite form of payment is. Then, paypal $50 to this guy, and write a check for $35 for that guy.
There's nothing that says you have to send the money to the Foundation itself.
Of course, if your goal is to get a tax deduction, then you should have said that in your post.
Anecdotal.
I have AMD processors, and have never had any problems with them.
My wife is a professional interpreter/translator and she uses the AMD machine to work on. I have no problem having her use an AMD-based machine.
And yes, it's a K6-500, from 1998. Works beautifully.
The people that do 50 pages per month are web designers that make pages from print-mockup from marketing. Programmers use php/perl/python/java to generate their pages from templates. See most blog software for that.
In my experience, Dreamweaver is more than useless (but just under Frontpage and the Horror that is Word 2003 -> HTML) for programmers.
I output hundreds of pages per month, but I don't code all of them, because I template 1 or 2 and write code in a text editor that automagially creates all the other crap. It even produces valid XHTML1.0 Strict.
In any case: Adobe: Remember Skylarov. I don't buy Adobe software because of how they treated Skylarov. Not that it makes any difference, though, because I didn't buy Adobe software before, or Macromedia for that matter.
Again, I'll repeat: I'm a programmer, not a graphic designer.
Mac does not support a lot of hardware too.
Put in a no-name pci nic someday.
>Hollywood Looks to BitTorrent for Distribution
Hollywood is looking for ways to distribute bittorent?
The shareholders expect better returns than bank interest rates. The $n billions that microsoft owns is really the shareholders money, because the shareholder own microsoft (that's what holding a share is).
If the shareholders were happy with bank rates, they would be better off buying US treasury bonds: less risks, same return.
No, MS can't just live on the interest. It _has_ to keep making money faster than other equally risky financial instruments to attract investors. Actually, a huge cash hoard is a liability and makes your stock underperform.
Company A: 50 million shares, $1/share , nets $10 million for the year: profit per share: $.20. Annual return per share: 20%
Company B: 50 billion shares, $1/share , nets $10 billion for the year: profit per share : $.20. Annual return per share: 20%
Same performance.
Company C: 5 million shares, $1/share, nets $2 million for the year, profit per share: $.40. Annual return per share: 40%
Better performance than company B.
Which would you rather invest in, risks being equal?
The cost of windows is not the $20, it's the cost of all the little add-ons that are absolutely free in the FOSS world that cost $19 here, $29 there, like cd/dvd burning software, office suites, editors, antivirus, etc.
/. really) telling them nicely (they're a friend of my wife) that, hum, yes I'm a computer programmer, but that, hum, no, I can't help them because I'm so busy and without sounding like a complete insensitive jerk.
The other cost, which, depending, can be more, is, comma, the cost of babying the system: Install this, upgrade this, enter validation key here, run ad-aware there, and all the gnarly little tasks that people don't do because they're so freaking boring and tedious that end up making a P4 crawl to a painful stop, making the befuddled l-user call ME on the weekend to "please help me fix my PC cuz it's soo sloww". And then, I have to spend my precious time (not that precious considering
I really want to help them, but I know what happened: They hosed their box and want me to fix it. Well Sherlock, that's the cost of windows: If you install windows, you're gonna have problems, and the geeks around you will just leave you alone, because they don't want to buddy up with a l-user who's gonna ask them supid questions like: "Can you help me stop all the popups?"
Geeks are where the technology curve meets the 1600mph/58,000feet level. Windows people are stuck in a leaky barge on a mucky river full of pirhanas (sp?). Running windows guarantees you're going to hang out with gamers, MSoffice, email, and IE users who think Flash is cool. I'll pass.
You can call my attitude all high and mighty, but I guarantee I'd rather read the Dune Series than spend my life running regedit looking for crap keys.
Does Samsung make anything like what we're talking about? They have fairly cool tech.
Just because you can do something does not mean you should.
He's a startup in India, and he's already having these kinds of problems. I say he should not havee spent all the dow he did on palm-grease and should have stayed at his produce shop.
If you treat programmers like dirt, they will treat you like dirt. India and China both have the mentality that there are millions of people wanting this job (which there are) so why should they be nice at all to this particualr employees?
So they treat programmers like dirt. And then the programmers steal. And then they what, whip/shoot them? Bad little evil programmers, low-lifes, peasants with a few braincells. No internet for you, no trust, no training. Here's the book, here's the computer, figure it out, or you're outta here.
Where I work we have indian programmers, and they say working in code farms in india was hell, and demeaning as anything else can be. They just use you and throw you away like an old rag.
So, like I said, either this guy closes shop and goes back to his produce stand, or he "behaves" in an ethical, professional manner according to western standards, and then maybe he'll have a shot at the big time.
You can't do that.
You can drop them like a bad habit, but you can't give them bad references, you can't sue them for breach of contract. Employment contracts don't include IP clauses. That's why non-disclosure agreements exist. And unless your crap is a trade secret, you're going to have a hard time getting the court to agree with you.
As far as the whole thread: Please tell us the name of your company so slashdotters can make sure never to work there.
If you want great protection, epoxy all your usb ports, put printers and other such in a locked room with a guard in front. Use mini-din mouse and keyboard. Epoxy everything else, cable the equipments to the floor (not the desk, too easy to break)
Other thing: use intranet web-based tools, use linux and setup the users not to have rights to do what you don't want them to. Don't allow the users to save files to their machines. Disable browser cache. Disable password/form remember feature.
Finally, tell us the name of your company so we can steer any decent people away from you.
Nice sig.
It just dawned on me that Crapware 3.0 will sell by the boatload if it has a very nice installer, and very friendly wizards. Nevermind that it crashes and is horribly typing intensive. User Joe Sixpack assumes that it's his own fault for not understanding the program, but the program obvioulsy works as advertized since it installed so flawlessly.
To sell to non-geeks: Flashy, expensive, and very clean install. Oh, and don't allow already open software to be returned to the store.
Non-geeks will influence the buying of other non-geeks like this:
Joe: Hey, you've ever heard of Crashalot?
Jack: Yeah, I bought it last week, it's so easy.
Joe: Woah, sounds cool. Was it hard to install?
Jack: Naw, man, it was a breeze, just pop the CD and click "install".
Joe: Is it easy to use?
Jack (won't admit he can't use it): I used it a little, but I've been too busy lately.
Joe (Jack is such a moron, he can't use it, but I'm smarter than him!): Oh, ok.
Jack and Joe leave.
15 minutes later, Joe is buying his very own copy of Crashalot at Best Buy for 69.99 with a $10 mail in rebate which he won't mail in because, let's face it, he doesn't want to be a sucker and give out his home address.
Meanwhile Calvin Pixel is finishing off apt-get install RockSolid 3.4.2 on Sarge, for free, and reading the 12 pages sample config file.
Guess who is going to call who when spyware galore comes to town. I just hope Calvin will charge $100 for running Search&Destroy and Adaware on Joe's box.
Look, I read the article.
I don't care how much it cost them to make the free version. It was a business decision on their part. It's perfectly reasonable that the amount of publicity they got from having a free version is sufficient repayment, and that they should not, later, have 'reasonable requests' that infringe on the freedom of american citizens doing things that are not only not immoral, but also not illegal.
They wanted the publicity of being associated with FOSS, but they couldn't hack it, so they took their ball and went home. I understand. Business decision.
I did not take it ouf of context. He was slamming the guy for reverse-engineering.
Yeah, but people who are in the FOSS could not possibly be in the "you can't reverse engineer my stuff" camp, since you can download the source from the net.
Same here. Reverse Engineering is a Good Thing. That's how we geeks figure stuff out and make things better than before. If someone has a problem with reverse engineering, that person must be in the 'proprietary' camp.
I say McVoy was trying to tie his proprietary product to the linux kernel development. Can't fault him, really, he's acting as a suit. The geeks that let him do that: shame. The ones that called his shenanigans: kudos.
It doesn't matter if it's the best tool for the job. What matters is that the tool is not entirely within your control. It's like the chinese buying aircrafts from the americans, and the americans building a remote shutoff switch in the target aquisition radar. (bad analogy, I know... Sowwy.)
Yeah, but completely unknown in the big money game: Hollywood. Dr Who is a way to put his name across America, so he can get to the $20M/Flick tier.
It doesn't matter if the license says you can't reverse engineer it, because it could not be enforced. Like I said, you can reverse engineer whatever you want. The only thing stopping it is patents. (and that's what patents were created for, by the way)
Was he an "end user" of the software who thought: "This POS blows chunks, I can do better," and proceeded to write one at home?
Are you saying that because there's a program on your machine you can't reverse-engineer it?
I say the opposite! you have to have the software on your machine (and have clicked the "i accept" of the license) before you can even start reverse-engineering it.
So, you're adding that there exists a contract between Corp B and Citizen C.
I've read some of these licensing contracts (don't ask me which ones or how, can't contractually tell you). They generally state that licensee will protect licensor's IP at least as well as its own IP, and in no case exercise less than customary care.
Now, does customary care include going to your employee's home and figuring out what he's working on after dinner while his wife/girlfriend watches American Idol?
If the licensee did not grant access to the source code to this employee, and the employee has a non-disclosure agreement, then the licensee has most likely exercised customary care.
IANAL, but I have to tell you that BitKeeper is being very nasty on this one.
If their code was so great and their software so advanced, one guy toiling away at night would not be able to even come close to creating a competing product.
And non-disclosure agreement do not injunct against reverse-engineering.
The only thing that protects you from reverese-enginnering is a patent, and only if the reverse-engineer wants to sell or release the product publically for profit.
If someone creates a better mousetrap and give it away for free, forever, I doubt a patent on mousetraps will help you, since you can only recover illicit gains (and there are no gains, because free, so no laywer will take the time).
This is all very silly if you ask me. BitKeeper should just be renamed to BitBuhBye.
On his blog (http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/jonathan) at the April 1 entry he wrote:
...is that it's very difficult to write a good April Fools blog without feeling the need for serious engagement from the corporate legal team.
{Quote}
The Downside of Being an Officer of a Public Corporation
And much though I love Sun's lawyers, creative cooperation doesn't seem in keeping with either April Fools day, or our collective fiduciary obligations.
But it's not for a lack of creative ideas. You'll have to trust me on that...
{End Quote}
You'll notice this line:
"And much though I love Sun's lawyers, creative cooperation doesn't seem in keeping with either April Fools day, or our collective fiduciary obligations."
And then your take out the April Fools day bit, you get:
"And much though I love Sun's lawyers, creative cooperation doesn't seem in keeping with our collective fiduciary obligations."
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is Jonathan Schwartz stating that creative cooperation is bad for Sun's investors.
And what is the FOSS movement except creative cooperation? I say JS is full of caca and needs to quit his cushy job, move to the hills, write some wicked software and release it under the GPL before he talks about the GPL again.
The ultimate user box:
Error!
Ignore - Fix it
They will always click "fix it".
>BitMover wrote their free-use license in such a way that the gratis use of their software would benefit the user and not harm BitMover.
Benefit the users? By restricting their freedom to create a tool like BitKeeper?
>What exactly is wrong with that? Its their software, and they don't have to let anyone use it without paying.
Granted. But they can't lie either. They can lie to politicians and the average american, but they can't lie to geeks. Geeks write things down and have long memories.
>Why should they allow someone who freeloads to reverse engineer their software?
If the guy saw the source, he's not reverse engineering, he's copying from memory. If the guy didn't see the source, he's not freeloading.
Again, tell me how a license between Corp A and Corp B can stop US Citizen C from reverse-engineering something?
How about Jon, or Jayne? Didja think 'bout that?