Again. As long as you capitalize Open Source, you're correct.
However, the insistence on using the most ambiguous language possible to describe an ideology has ultimately resulted in arguments such as this. RMS and co. should have avoided naming their movement using words such as "Free" or "Open," which can be used to mean something quite different.
Granted, part of this is the fault of the English language, which fails to differentiate between "libre," and "gratis," though you'd think that they'd have just sidestepped the problem entirely, considering that RMS has been explaining the difference between "Free Speech vs. Free Beer" since the beginning.
You could also argue that the GPL and BSD license are two very fundamentally different ideologies. Do they both also belong under the same umbrella, or is there room for a third ideology?
Open source means that the source is open. That's it.
You could hypothetically define "Open Source" (with capitals) however you see fit, or be a lot more specific and refer to GPL, BSD, Creative Commons, etc.
However, in this case "open source" is very simply referring to software that has its source code openly available. You cannot simply redefine the meaning of already-existing words, especially when you're not using them as a proper noun. There is absolutely no debate to be had here.
Also, what's the deal? Microsoft seem to be heading in the right direction, and actually seem to be addressing the criticism being thrown at them. Miguel de Icaza has a fantastic track record for being diplomatic, and persuading Microsoft to "do the right thing."
Finally, please don't bring up the extend-embrace-extinguish argument. It's a cynical logical fallacy that can be used against any seemingly-benevolent action undertaken by anybody.
Because we're not attempting to build anything into a moving vehicle, there are already a few practical non-chemical solutions to power storage.
Flywheels come immediately to mind as being extremely simple, well-understood, and refreshingly low-tech.
Alternatively, for heating/AC, you could always just dump your excess generation into some sort of "heat sink" from which you could recover it later in the day (eg. an underground tank of water). A few commercial refrigerated warehouses already implement this by freezing a giant block of ice at night, when electricity is cheaper, and then using the block of ice to keep the fridge cool during the day.
Another more radical solution involves separating electrical devices by their "importance." If there isn't enough power, the Air-Con is the first thing to cut out, followed by the television, etc..... This is already done in some countries to an extent, where residences receive a separate phase that is used only for lighting. This practice is also already implemented in New York City, where a large number of the high-rise buildings will turn off their air conditioning if Con Edison anticipates an impending brownout.
The House agrees with you, and the bill failed to pass by a small margin earlier today.
Democracy actually worked here! The population seemed apprehensive about the bill, and congress decided that it was best to address the problem in smaller steps.
Hopefully this is a sign of things to come, where congress no longer considers these 300-page meta-bills an ethical or acceptable way to propose legislation.
It's also interesting to note that the representatives didn't overwhelmingly side with their parties, making it one of the few recent pieces of major legislation that hasn't encountered outright polarization.
All these things add up to a very promising sign. People seem to have finally woken up, and realized what's at stake.
Sadly, gasoline (trailed slightly by diesel) is still the best fuel for powering wheeled vehicles.
What makes Petrol (Gas) better than Diesel?
Diesel has a greater energy density, and can be converted into power more efficiently (even taking the higher energy density into account). Modern diesel engines are also quite clean, and have pretty ridiculous emission control standards placed on them. The new diesel Volkswagens achieve comparable gas mileage to a gas-powered hybrid, while providing a considerably higher torque/power output.
What's the advantage of gasoline then? Diesel may not be popular in the US for personal vehicles, but it's used almost universally in delivery vehicles, non-electric locomotives, and about half of the personal vehicles in Europe.
Of course, the developer of a reference manager would be the type to take the time to adequately explain his argument, and fully annotate his sources:-)
You need to elaborate more on that "homeschooling ban." As long as the parent/teacher has vaguely reasonable credentials to provide an education, it's still legal.
Also, where have you been for the past 8 years, during which the people in power have been pushing for the privatization of our education system?
I get the impression that people every state make the same exact claim.
If there's one thing more corrupt than the federal government, it's the state governments. There's so little oversight, because so few people pay attention to them.
If NI are writing kernel-level drivers, then perhaps.
However, 99% of "normal" software shouldn't need to access the kernel directly. Even at that, modules seem to remain pretty stable. If NVidia and ATI can keep drivers for their hardware relatively stable, NI should be able to do the same, considering that their hardware appears considerably less complex. Similarly, one would think that a large percentage of NI's userbase would have a pretty strong interest in a Linux version.
Exchange has traditionally had exactly one reason for its popularity: vendor lock-in. If this really is a drop-in replacement without annoying CALs, we'll be Microsoft-free on our servers by Monday.
Not necessarily.
Exchange does exactly what it needs to, just well enough to squeak by.
For better or worse, Exchange has set the bar for groupware. If a competing product isn't at least capable of emulating all of its features, it's simply not going to take off.
Remember how Microsoft Word was capable of acting "almost exactly like WordPerfect 5.1" for years and years, despite the fact that their own product was actually rather superior in more than a few ways? It's sort of like that...
The problem with PAs and NPS (at least, from what I see as an outsider) is that the barriers to entry are still quite high, but not with a correspondingly high "payoff."
Doctors make obscene amounts of money, while those working below them seem to have a hard time just scraping by...
The problem is that, if your family makes $101,000, you're fucked. That's all, of course, assuming you can get past their impossibly-high admissions standards.
Higher Ed. in the US puts up huge barriers to middle-class students. These barriers all depend on where you live (in-state tuition, etc.), what you want to study, and whether or not you have parents who are willing to pony up the cash.
Hopefully things will improve, but for now, the middle classes are absolutely getting screwed.
Whether or not there should be, there will be no government bail-out for Detroit. There's simply not enough money in the Fed to do it (take a moment to swallow that).
Recent studies estimate the Fed's reserves to be at about $200 billion. $85bn of that was loaned to AIG this morning to allow them to hopefully save their profitable divisions.
You joke, but that's what they call it, and that's usually how it's made (undergraduates making minimum wage -- they pay us $6.30/hour though, rather than $10)
There's *got* to be a better way to do it. Even after hours on end, the odds of getting a true graphene flake are diminishingly low. There's a reason that Graphene flakes are expensive as hell.
There is still a sizable population of slashdotters who think the scientific process doesn't work when it comes to climate.
There's a sizable population of climate scientists who tend to ignore vast swaths of the scientific method when arriving at their conclusions.
I'm by no means in denial of global warming. However, had we been a little more careful earlier on, there wouldn't be nearly as much controversy.
Similarly, focusing on education, rather than evangalization could improve things. Most people don't realize the tremendous volume of gas that exits your tailpipe over just a few miles. This should be enough to convince most people that, even if global warming isn't caused by human activity, reducing our energy consumption will greatly improve our lives in a number of ways. Taking the "I'm right, you're wrong" stance will never get you anywhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Please don't let this be the new rickroll.....
Again. As long as you capitalize Open Source, you're correct.
However, the insistence on using the most ambiguous language possible to describe an ideology has ultimately resulted in arguments such as this. RMS and co. should have avoided naming their movement using words such as "Free" or "Open," which can be used to mean something quite different.
Granted, part of this is the fault of the English language, which fails to differentiate between "libre," and "gratis," though you'd think that they'd have just sidestepped the problem entirely, considering that RMS has been explaining the difference between "Free Speech vs. Free Beer" since the beginning.
You could also argue that the GPL and BSD license are two very fundamentally different ideologies. Do they both also belong under the same umbrella, or is there room for a third ideology?
No, damnit.
Open source means that the source is open. That's it.
You could hypothetically define "Open Source" (with capitals) however you see fit, or be a lot more specific and refer to GPL, BSD, Creative Commons, etc.
However, in this case "open source" is very simply referring to software that has its source code openly available. You cannot simply redefine the meaning of already-existing words, especially when you're not using them as a proper noun. There is absolutely no debate to be had here.
Also, what's the deal? Microsoft seem to be heading in the right direction, and actually seem to be addressing the criticism being thrown at them. Miguel de Icaza has a fantastic track record for being diplomatic, and persuading Microsoft to "do the right thing."
Finally, please don't bring up the extend-embrace-extinguish argument. It's a cynical logical fallacy that can be used against any seemingly-benevolent action undertaken by anybody.
It would be relatively hard for her to do much worse than "Ich bin ein Berliner"
("I am a jelly donut" -- JFK)
Seriously. These days I'm torn between whether or not he's an asset or a liability to the free-software community.
Go back to making software. The rest of us seem to prefer taking a slightly more moderate approach (Viva Ubuntu!)
Linus comes across as being reasonably "normal," although he clearly shows a preference for actually working on the kernel over being a spokesperson.
Mark Shuttleworth would be a great pick, although he himself lists "public speaking" as one of his personal dislikes.
Well, Snow Crash presents a pretty darn dystopian view of the world. Maybe it's not that far off after all?
Because we're not attempting to build anything into a moving vehicle, there are already a few practical non-chemical solutions to power storage.
Flywheels come immediately to mind as being extremely simple, well-understood, and refreshingly low-tech.
Alternatively, for heating/AC, you could always just dump your excess generation into some sort of "heat sink" from which you could recover it later in the day (eg. an underground tank of water). A few commercial refrigerated warehouses already implement this by freezing a giant block of ice at night, when electricity is cheaper, and then using the block of ice to keep the fridge cool during the day.
Another more radical solution involves separating electrical devices by their "importance." If there isn't enough power, the Air-Con is the first thing to cut out, followed by the television, etc..... This is already done in some countries to an extent, where residences receive a separate phase that is used only for lighting. This practice is also already implemented in New York City, where a large number of the high-rise buildings will turn off their air conditioning if Con Edison anticipates an impending brownout.
The House agrees with you, and the bill failed to pass by a small margin earlier today.
Democracy actually worked here! The population seemed apprehensive about the bill, and congress decided that it was best to address the problem in smaller steps.
Hopefully this is a sign of things to come, where congress no longer considers these 300-page meta-bills an ethical or acceptable way to propose legislation.
It's also interesting to note that the representatives didn't overwhelmingly side with their parties, making it one of the few recent pieces of major legislation that hasn't encountered outright polarization.
All these things add up to a very promising sign. People seem to have finally woken up, and realized what's at stake.
Sadly, gasoline (trailed slightly by diesel) is still the best fuel for powering wheeled vehicles.
What makes Petrol (Gas) better than Diesel?
Diesel has a greater energy density, and can be converted into power more efficiently (even taking the higher energy density into account). Modern diesel engines are also quite clean, and have pretty ridiculous emission control standards placed on them. The new diesel Volkswagens achieve comparable gas mileage to a gas-powered hybrid, while providing a considerably higher torque/power output.
What's the advantage of gasoline then? Diesel may not be popular in the US for personal vehicles, but it's used almost universally in delivery vehicles, non-electric locomotives, and about half of the personal vehicles in Europe.
Of course, the developer of a reference manager would be the type to take the time to adequately explain his argument, and fully annotate his sources :-)
You need to elaborate more on that "homeschooling ban." As long as the parent/teacher has vaguely reasonable credentials to provide an education, it's still legal.
Also, where have you been for the past 8 years, during which the people in power have been pushing for the privatization of our education system?
I get the impression that people every state make the same exact claim.
If there's one thing more corrupt than the federal government, it's the state governments. There's so little oversight, because so few people pay attention to them.
If NI are writing kernel-level drivers, then perhaps.
However, 99% of "normal" software shouldn't need to access the kernel directly. Even at that, modules seem to remain pretty stable. If NVidia and ATI can keep drivers for their hardware relatively stable, NI should be able to do the same, considering that their hardware appears considerably less complex. Similarly, one would think that a large percentage of NI's userbase would have a pretty strong interest in a Linux version.
Seriously! How dare they respond to criticism!
It was a stupid thing to do in the first place, but you've got to give them a lot of credit for reacting to the public outcry in a timely manner.
Both Mozilla and Canonical know that there's little point in fostering any sort of "drama" within the F/OSS community.
This guy is some kind of real-world Forest Gump, standing on the sidelines of history...
Seriously, though. That's absolutely uncanny. Where are you now? Should I be avoiding that place?
Exchange has traditionally had exactly one reason for its popularity: vendor lock-in. If this really is a drop-in replacement without annoying CALs, we'll be Microsoft-free on our servers by Monday.
Not necessarily.
Exchange does exactly what it needs to, just well enough to squeak by.
For better or worse, Exchange has set the bar for groupware. If a competing product isn't at least capable of emulating all of its features, it's simply not going to take off.
Remember how Microsoft Word was capable of acting "almost exactly like WordPerfect 5.1" for years and years, despite the fact that their own product was actually rather superior in more than a few ways? It's sort of like that...
The problem with PAs and NPS (at least, from what I see as an outsider) is that the barriers to entry are still quite high, but not with a correspondingly high "payoff."
Doctors make obscene amounts of money, while those working below them seem to have a hard time just scraping by...
The problem is that, if your family makes $101,000, you're fucked. That's all, of course, assuming you can get past their impossibly-high admissions standards.
Higher Ed. in the US puts up huge barriers to middle-class students. These barriers all depend on where you live (in-state tuition, etc.), what you want to study, and whether or not you have parents who are willing to pony up the cash.
Hopefully things will improve, but for now, the middle classes are absolutely getting screwed.
Today, The Onion provided a glimpse into the GMail Inbox of the other major candidate.
Don't forget that Amtrak uses electric locomotives on its busiest routes. That counts for quite a bit.
Otherwise, they're a pretty inefficient operation, in dire need of an overhaul.
Whether or not there should be, there will be no government bail-out for Detroit. There's simply not enough money in the Fed to do it (take a moment to swallow that).
Recent studies estimate the Fed's reserves to be at about $200 billion. $85bn of that was loaned to AIG this morning to allow them to hopefully save their profitable divisions.
We were saying that about Cheney in 2000.
You joke, but that's what they call it, and that's usually how it's made (undergraduates making minimum wage -- they pay us $6.30/hour though, rather than $10)
There's *got* to be a better way to do it. Even after hours on end, the odds of getting a true graphene flake are diminishingly low. There's a reason that Graphene flakes are expensive as hell.
There is still a sizable population of slashdotters who think the scientific process doesn't work when it comes to climate.
There's a sizable population of climate scientists who tend to ignore vast swaths of the scientific method when arriving at their conclusions.
I'm by no means in denial of global warming. However, had we been a little more careful earlier on, there wouldn't be nearly as much controversy.
Similarly, focusing on education, rather than evangalization could improve things. Most people don't realize the tremendous volume of gas that exits your tailpipe over just a few miles. This should be enough to convince most people that, even if global warming isn't caused by human activity, reducing our energy consumption will greatly improve our lives in a number of ways. Taking the "I'm right, you're wrong" stance will never get you anywhere.
With decent batteries/supercaps
People need to stop using this phrase until either one of those two things actually exist, and are remotely affordable.