Data was banging Yar
Worf and Riker were banging Troi
Chipotle and Janeway were banging like no tomorrow
That Chinese guy was banging Six of Nine
Kirk was banging every alien race in the universe
and Picard was banging Whoopi Goldberg
If you were really interested in allowing freedom for users, you would release all software into the public domain. This would allow the maximum amount of "freedom" to users. Of course it means that you really are "giving back to the community" instead of some lame attempt at keeping control over the source. The GPL is a worthless license precisely because it forces you to release your changes back into the open.
This guy still cracks me up. Imagine burning off all the built-up goodwill you've been collecting in a single massive non-event. It's really too bad, I enjoyed his books.
How is that different from the GPL? If I read the Linux source code without having read the GPL, then proceed to implement my own non-GPL OS using code that I've taken from Linux, wouldn't the GPL still be applicable to me?
What you are complaining about is the "virus" aspect of the GPL, only it's laid out quite clearly in this license whereas it's only hinted to in the actual GPL.
Actually, IBM stopped in at Microsoft first and asked about an OS. Gates told them to go see Gary Kildall about CP/M. IBM showed up at Kildall's house, NDA in hand, but he was out flying. Whatever the reason, Kildall wouldn't sign any NDA on the spot so IBM went back to Microsoft.
And thus was the beginning of the enslavement of the personal computing world. Tune in next week for Great Turningpoints In Computing History when we discuss Superbowl Sunday, 1984.
CP/M lost because the people who owned it blew off the meeting, believing they had no competition.
I don't know who fed you that revisionist history, but Kildall didn't blow off the meeting for that reason. He simply wouldn't sign IBM's NDA, so IBM packed up their stuff and went over to see Gates who was happy to supply whatever signatures were necessary.
Funny, not signing NDAs is kind of a badge of honor among FSF-types.
PPC chips are not cheap, compared with x86 alternatives. Likewise, as x86 is the default development target, PPC will always be a step behind its i486 cousins.
Not that it's a bad chip, mind you. Just that x86 seems to be the main focus of things right now.
The main reason of my previous support for Rambus was because they still completely control RDRAM which may have become a much more popular RAM architecture some time in the near future. Even after the previous ruling, RDRAM didn't face any obstacles just because Rambus didn't have any control over DDR/SDRAM. However, with this latest ruling, Rambus has been shown to be the bad kid on the block, someone not to be associated with. Rambus itself has hence become the biggest obstacle to RDRAM.
Sure, it's nice to say that a company should "make things". However, the business model that Rambus (and Lucent, et al) uses is not necessarily flawed. A company dedicated to pure tech research can probably churn out ideas much faster than one also burdened with actually implementing those ideas. By licensing these patents to manufacturers, a Rambus or Lucent can focus on improving the technologies they already have and creating new ones along the way.
However, Rambus managed to ire the entire industry and will now suffer from the industry's lack of support. No support == no contracts == no money.
Rambus was a smart idea that was implemented in possibly the worst possible way. They positioned themselves as the 'gatekeepers' to memory production, but through their actions completely turned the rest of the memory industry against them.
The previous ruling pretty much found that Rambus has no rights to DDR/SDRAM royalties. Based on this ruling, the Micron and Hyundai cases will likely be thrown out as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Support Open Source, remain a lowly software contractor. Demand payment for your product, become the world's richest man.
Decisions, decisions.
Dancin Santa
I thought "heroin chic" went out years ago. Or is this "ecstacy chic"?
Dancin santa
I would say that she never got it on with Picard because neither of them wanted to betray her dead husband/his best friend from Academy.
This is not to say that she didn't have fun on shoreleave. That's all undocumented, though.
Dancin Santa
Sounds like Voyager's been cribbing notes from Dallas.
Who shot that Chinese guy?
Dancin Santa
Six of Nine
Heh, chalk that one up to a Blossom flashback.
Dancin Santa
I thought it was clear:
Data was banging Yar
Worf and Riker were banging Troi
Chipotle and Janeway were banging like no tomorrow
That Chinese guy was banging Six of Nine
Kirk was banging every alien race in the universe
and Picard was banging Whoopi Goldberg
Dancin Santa
Will the Klingons have the old-style ridges or the newer 'ass-of-the-universe' head ridges?
Dancin Santa
If you were really interested in allowing freedom for users, you would release all software into the public domain. This would allow the maximum amount of "freedom" to users. Of course it means that you really are "giving back to the community" instead of some lame attempt at keeping control over the source. The GPL is a worthless license precisely because it forces you to release your changes back into the open.
Dancin Santa
This guy still cracks me up. Imagine burning off all the built-up goodwill you've been collecting in a single massive non-event. It's really too bad, I enjoyed his books.
Dancin Santa
How is that different from the GPL? If I read the Linux source code without having read the GPL, then proceed to implement my own non-GPL OS using code that I've taken from Linux, wouldn't the GPL still be applicable to me?
What you are complaining about is the "virus" aspect of the GPL, only it's laid out quite clearly in this license whereas it's only hinted to in the actual GPL.
Dancin Santa
This message is quite clear. Let's go over it:
/shared/functions.asp, line 666
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server error '80004005'
An error occurred inside of a function. 80004005 is your user ID.
Unknown token received from SQL Server
You have obviously tried to board this train without a valid token, report to the station manager immediately.
Microsoft shares functions with the Devil. This is definitive proof that Bill Gates is *not* the devil. He only fills in on occasion.
Better see that station manager if you have any chance to survive, make your time.
Dancin Santa
It really helps if you squint really hard.
:0)
(It helps when dealing with Ms. Claus, too...
Dancin Santa
With other chips like Hitachi's SHx series, MIPS series, and ARM's series (especially the SA1100s), the PPC is looking a little worse for wear.
You are correct, though, that x86 makes a terrible embedded chip (though some people are using 386 and 486s in their systems.
Dancin Santa
Actually, IBM stopped in at Microsoft first and asked about an OS. Gates told them to go see Gary Kildall about CP/M. IBM showed up at Kildall's house, NDA in hand, but he was out flying. Whatever the reason, Kildall wouldn't sign any NDA on the spot so IBM went back to Microsoft.
And thus was the beginning of the enslavement of the personal computing world. Tune in next week for Great Turningpoints In Computing History when we discuss Superbowl Sunday, 1984.
Dancin Santa
CP/M lost because the people who owned it blew off the meeting, believing they had no competition.
I don't know who fed you that revisionist history, but Kildall didn't blow off the meeting for that reason. He simply wouldn't sign IBM's NDA, so IBM packed up their stuff and went over to see Gates who was happy to supply whatever signatures were necessary.
Funny, not signing NDAs is kind of a badge of honor among FSF-types.
Dancin Santa
PPC chips are not cheap, compared with x86 alternatives. Likewise, as x86 is the default development target, PPC will always be a step behind its i486 cousins.
Not that it's a bad chip, mind you. Just that x86 seems to be the main focus of things right now.
Dancin Santa
In a fit of moderation, someone sent the previous AC post to -1 hell. Here it is in it's entirety (and on-topicness).
RDRAM is also known as Rambus-DRAM. Can't get much more nom-centric than that.
Dancin Santa
You must have missed the memo.
:-)
Just because they aren't laughing at you doesn't mean you're not funny. Or something to that effect.
Dancin Santa
I just assumed the ExtortionFee was a global variable that was manipulated by another thread.
You would also have to adjust for the chance of not winning in court. That may be a little harder to correct for.
Dancin Santa
How would -1G be any more destructive than 1G (except to the contents of the overhead bins)?
Dancin Santa
The main reason of my previous support for Rambus was because they still completely control RDRAM which may have become a much more popular RAM architecture some time in the near future. Even after the previous ruling, RDRAM didn't face any obstacles just because Rambus didn't have any control over DDR/SDRAM. However, with this latest ruling, Rambus has been shown to be the bad kid on the block, someone not to be associated with. Rambus itself has hence become the biggest obstacle to RDRAM.
Dancin Santa
Sure, it's nice to say that a company should "make things". However, the business model that Rambus (and Lucent, et al) uses is not necessarily flawed. A company dedicated to pure tech research can probably churn out ideas much faster than one also burdened with actually implementing those ideas. By licensing these patents to manufacturers, a Rambus or Lucent can focus on improving the technologies they already have and creating new ones along the way.
However, Rambus managed to ire the entire industry and will now suffer from the industry's lack of support. No support == no contracts == no money.
Rambus was a smart idea that was implemented in possibly the worst possible way. They positioned themselves as the 'gatekeepers' to memory production, but through their actions completely turned the rest of the memory industry against them.
Dancin Santa
I think you'd also want to throw in the chance of loss in the courts.
Nice formatting, btw.
Dancin Santa
if ((cost of fighting lawsuit) >= (cost of paying extortion fees))
{
  payment = ExtortionFee;
}
else
{
  payment = 0;
  FightLawsuit();
}
Dancin Santa
The previous ruling pretty much found that Rambus has no rights to DDR/SDRAM royalties. Based on this ruling, the Micron and Hyundai cases will likely be thrown out as well.
Dancin Santa