Which is why, of course, the PP didn't suggest Switzerland was a huge security risk. It's not the what, it's the why. Americans, he said, have guns because they're scared of other Americans. The Swiss have guns because that's their unique security measure.
Yeah, well with another poster saying that the submitter made the whole thing up, if that's true I'm tempted to redirect Slashdot.org on my computer to Technocrat.net or something more useful so I stop coming here.
Once more, Slashdot's editors demonstrate that they are here solely for adviews and not to provide "news for nerds" or "stuff that matters". The ECGS fork will be nothing like the current fork. ECGS was forked for technical/organisational reasons: GCC was being developed much like a closed-source program with a free licence, which resulted in a stagnating compiler and unhappy would-be contributors. ECGS should the superiority of the "bazaar"/open-source development method of the "cathedral"/closed-source method in this particular context. All of this is well-known information you can find just about anywhere on the web.
Given that GCC development will remain open, this fork cannot be compared. On the other hand, we do have another situation that might be considered similar: The X.org/XFree86 fork. XFree86 was developed under a free software licence, but with 4.4 this was changed to a non-free licence. X.org forked the most recent free version and has basically completely replaced XFree86.
But, of course, this is still not perfectly comparable. XFree86 was using a relatively closed development method, and the X.org fork's more open style saw it rejuvinated: And indeed, this was part of the purpose of the fork. A GPLv2 GCC fork will not see this sort of rejuvination, as GCC has already seen the benefit for it of an open method, and continues to use it. (See: The EGCS fork the article poster referred to.)
In addition, the XFree86 licence was widely regarded as being non-free and some major distributions (e.g. Debian, Fedora) considered it completely inappropriate for inclusion. It was made unilaterally without discussion without relevant stakeholders. The GPLv3, however, has had public draft releases and discussion including many major distributors and producers of free software. Although it removes certain freedoms distributors had with GPLv2 (which, largely, went completely against the spirit of the GPLv2), the GPLv3 has the agreement of the people needed to make it work. There will be basically top-down push for adoption as there was with XFree86/X.org.
My prediction: Any GPLv2 fork of GCC will be largely forgotten in a year or two.
Ah --- quite the opposite. The desired effect was to discourage companies from doing business with Microsoft. And what's happened is that Microsoft's losing its power. If these patent protection deals don't cover GPLv3 software, then there's no point in signing up to one, if all (or most) of your software is GPLv3: and an increasing amount is. Stallman has put down a solid and essentially impenetrable defense around his castle. Now he's hoping to extend it round the entire kingdom.
Microsoft are shooting themselves in the foot now. But it was that, or shoot themeselves in the heart. The GPLv3 was an excellent move.
I had originally said, facetiously, "so you buy another or larger one", which would therefore seem to be right!
Though, in Australia our bottles are 600 mL. I assume this was because they rounded an old pint to the nearest 100 mL. I generally find a 600 mL is a little too much soft drink in one go, but they're useful if you want to have them over an extended period of item.
As another poster has mentioned, cans are 375 mL, being half the standard 750 mL bottles of wine/large bottles of beer. In Europe they have tiny 330 mL cans.
Was there a post there? Funny, I thought that I could only reply to posts and articles, but I can't see anything there. Very strange. Maybe I should report this as a bug in Slashdot?
I don't know about Germany and IANAL, but many countries of the ability to take a person's property (e.g. compulsory acquisition in Australia, eminent domain in the US). Usually they compensate you at the market rate to do so. If they really wanted to, the German government could probably compulsorily acquire the trademark. In this case, public opinion would definitely have an influence.
Re:To all those complainers
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 1
All free software licences say pretty much the same thing too, tho, by that standard. Different free software licences have different precise requirements about what to do if you're reused them, but if they're considered free or open source by the FSF or OSI, you don't have much to worry about. Different proprietry software licences have different precise requirements about e.g. whether you can transfer them from one computer to another or how many CPUs/Cores your computer can have, but as long as you put it on one computer and don't try to transfer/change it (and keep your licence/proof of purchase), you don't have much to worry about.
Please be aware that this is a scam! The New Zealand central bank is in fact called the "Reserve Bank of New Zealand". Don't provide the information the post asks for from him.
Re:To all those complainers
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Real question is, how many proprietary software licences are there? Just about every proprietary software producer has at least one...
Not to be a grammar Nazi, but "hearty" means "brave, has a big heart" and is usually a term applied to people and occaisonally animals. "Hardy" is the word you want, and means "able to withstand harsh conditions" and is usually used of plants (i.e. it is hard to kill).
Hm. First Dell laptop I bought is still alive five years later. I even use it from time to time. First Apple laptop I bought wouldn't even boot two weeks later—just hung during the day and that was it. Then there was the whole issue of that series of iBooks which needed to be clamped to work. No-one's perfect. (I also have an iMac which is going strong three years later, although exclusively running Debian/etch. This was a model where a lot of people had had troubles, although I've never had a problem.)
There isn't enough lobbying by alternate fuel users groups, there is a good tradition of taxing motorist's fuels, and you still need a drivers licence to drive a car running veggie oil. So the only problem here is difficulty.
i wonder how in the world he got done for it in the first place, surely not enough people are doing this for the government to have crack down on it to protect their precious taxes.
Read the article. Turns out that's exactly what was happening.
(Me? My car runs on LPG, which is practically free down here in Australia. My bike runs on food.)
Just to point what I thought was bleedingly obvious, there wasn't a single case of a word that is correctly spelt "two" in his entire post. So... I think you missed the perhaps not so massive, but certainly intentional mistake in my post.
Um. Patent protection is meant specifically to cover independently invented methods and "interoperability", but at least some (non-software) patents have some value...
The reason we don't like patents is because software patents are much to broad and generic and they repeatedly cover obvious methods, like the Eolas patent Microsoft infringes. Patents are meant to increase innovation, but if software patents had teeth, they would effectively decrease it.
These machines also come with dedicated video cards, as the integrated video isn't supported very well by Ubuntu.
Where did you get this nonsense from? Intel's integrated graphics, at least, is very well supported by X.org. On the other hand, ATi's proprietry drivers are widely regarded to be appalling, and nVidia's drivers, while apparently stable these days, are still non-free, which causes various problems for support and the future I go out of my way to find a laptop with integrated graphics so that I know it will run X.org well (and because I want to use my battery power for important things).
Re:And yes, you can play Theora in WMP
on
Dell Linux Details
·
· Score: 1
Yes! Thankyou evalhalla, that's exactly what I was wanting to say.
Re:And yes, you can play Theora in WMP
on
Dell Linux Details
·
· Score: 1
What's wrong with a command line anyway?
Plenty is wrong a command line (learnability/command discoverability for instance, or any inherently graphical task). Plenty about them is useful (ability to quickly write a one-off program). Some people will be scared away by a command line—even just asking them to type one specific command into a terminal window is enough to turn some people off GNU/Linux completely.
Many common, everyday tasks are just as easily performed by the commandline or through a GUI, but the GUI method is less error-prone and less scary. Even though it's harder to write, most HOWTOs that cover topics most people would want to do should be written with only the GUI in mind.
(Personally, I usually have at least a couple of terminal windows open for various tasks. But they're a poweruser's tool, not a shortcut to a more inclusive interface.)
Re:And yes, you can play Theora in WMP
on
Dell Linux Details
·
· Score: 1
Old habits die hard. It is the curse of GNU/Linux that you can do everything from the command line, so some people will (either through ignorance or what passes for preference). This makes others think that you have to do everything from the command line, when of course you don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is why, of course, the PP didn't suggest Switzerland was a huge security risk. It's not the what, it's the why. Americans, he said, have guns because they're scared of other Americans. The Swiss have guns because that's their unique security measure.
Yeah, well with another poster saying that the submitter made the whole thing up, if that's true I'm tempted to redirect Slashdot.org on my computer to Technocrat.net or something more useful so I stop coming here.
Once more, Slashdot's editors demonstrate that they are here solely for adviews and not to provide "news for nerds" or "stuff that matters". The ECGS fork will be nothing like the current fork. ECGS was forked for technical/organisational reasons: GCC was being developed much like a closed-source program with a free licence, which resulted in a stagnating compiler and unhappy would-be contributors. ECGS should the superiority of the "bazaar"/open-source development method of the "cathedral"/closed-source method in this particular context. All of this is well-known information you can find just about anywhere on the web.
Given that GCC development will remain open, this fork cannot be compared. On the other hand, we do have another situation that might be considered similar: The X.org/XFree86 fork. XFree86 was developed under a free software licence, but with 4.4 this was changed to a non-free licence. X.org forked the most recent free version and has basically completely replaced XFree86.
But, of course, this is still not perfectly comparable. XFree86 was using a relatively closed development method, and the X.org fork's more open style saw it rejuvinated: And indeed, this was part of the purpose of the fork. A GPLv2 GCC fork will not see this sort of rejuvination, as GCC has already seen the benefit for it of an open method, and continues to use it. (See: The EGCS fork the article poster referred to.)
In addition, the XFree86 licence was widely regarded as being non-free and some major distributions (e.g. Debian, Fedora) considered it completely inappropriate for inclusion. It was made unilaterally without discussion without relevant stakeholders. The GPLv3, however, has had public draft releases and discussion including many major distributors and producers of free software. Although it removes certain freedoms distributors had with GPLv2 (which, largely, went completely against the spirit of the GPLv2), the GPLv3 has the agreement of the people needed to make it work. There will be basically top-down push for adoption as there was with XFree86/X.org.
My prediction: Any GPLv2 fork of GCC will be largely forgotten in a year or two.
Ah --- quite the opposite. The desired effect was to discourage companies from doing business with Microsoft. And what's happened is that Microsoft's losing its power. If these patent protection deals don't cover GPLv3 software, then there's no point in signing up to one, if all (or most) of your software is GPLv3: and an increasing amount is. Stallman has put down a solid and essentially impenetrable defense around his castle. Now he's hoping to extend it round the entire kingdom.
Microsoft are shooting themselves in the foot now. But it was that, or shoot themeselves in the heart. The GPLv3 was an excellent move.
I had originally said, facetiously, "so you buy another or larger one", which would therefore seem to be right!
Though, in Australia our bottles are 600 mL. I assume this was because they rounded an old pint to the nearest 100 mL. I generally find a 600 mL is a little too much soft drink in one go, but they're useful if you want to have them over an extended period of item.
As another poster has mentioned, cans are 375 mL, being half the standard 750 mL bottles of wine/large bottles of beer. In Europe they have tiny 330 mL cans.
In Australia, Mountain Dew contains no caffeine. I gather it's for regulatory reasons. As for other drinks, I couldn't say.
Was there a post there? Funny, I thought that I could only reply to posts and articles, but I can't see anything there. Very strange. Maybe I should report this as a bug in Slashdot?
I don't know about Germany and IANAL, but many countries of the ability to take a person's property (e.g. compulsory acquisition in Australia, eminent domain in the US). Usually they compensate you at the market rate to do so. If they really wanted to, the German government could probably compulsorily acquire the trademark. In this case, public opinion would definitely have an influence.
All free software licences say pretty much the same thing too, tho, by that standard. Different free software licences have different precise requirements about what to do if you're reused them, but if they're considered free or open source by the FSF or OSI, you don't have much to worry about. Different proprietry software licences have different precise requirements about e.g. whether you can transfer them from one computer to another or how many CPUs/Cores your computer can have, but as long as you put it on one computer and don't try to transfer/change it (and keep your licence/proof of purchase), you don't have much to worry about.
Please be aware that this is a scam! The New Zealand central bank is in fact called the "Reserve Bank of New Zealand". Don't provide the information the post asks for from him.
Real question is, how many proprietary software licences are there? Just about every proprietary software producer has at least one...
Not to be a grammar Nazi, but "hearty" means "brave, has a big heart" and is usually a term applied to people and occaisonally animals. "Hardy" is the word you want, and means "able to withstand harsh conditions" and is usually used of plants (i.e. it is hard to kill).
Hm. First Dell laptop I bought is still alive five years later. I even use it from time to time. First Apple laptop I bought wouldn't even boot two weeks later—just hung during the day and that was it. Then there was the whole issue of that series of iBooks which needed to be clamped to work. No-one's perfect. (I also have an iMac which is going strong three years later, although exclusively running Debian/etch. This was a model where a lot of people had had troubles, although I've never had a problem.)
Thankyou, and certainly!
The real reason is probably a combination of:
There isn't enough lobbying by alternate fuel users groups, there is a good tradition of taxing motorist's fuels, and you still need a drivers licence to drive a car running veggie oil. So the only problem here is difficulty.
i wonder how in the world he got done for it in the first place, surely not enough people are doing this for the government to have crack down on it to protect their precious taxes.
Read the article. Turns out that's exactly what was happening.
(Me? My car runs on LPG, which is practically free down here in Australia. My bike runs on food.)
Just to point what I thought was bleedingly obvious, there wasn't a single case of a word that is correctly spelt "two" in his entire post. So ... I think you missed the perhaps not so massive, but certainly intentional mistake in my post.
What, the editors edit?
/.'s rep.)
(I'm not sure if that's sarcasm or honest surprise, given
I hate to be a spelling/grammar Nazi, but you spelt "two" wrong.
Um. Patent protection is meant specifically to cover independently invented methods and "interoperability", but at least some (non-software) patents have some value...
The reason we don't like patents is because software patents are much to broad and generic and they repeatedly cover obvious methods, like the Eolas patent Microsoft infringes. Patents are meant to increase innovation, but if software patents had teeth, they would effectively decrease it.
These machines also come with dedicated video cards, as the integrated video isn't supported very well by Ubuntu.
Where did you get this nonsense from? Intel's integrated graphics, at least, is very well supported by X.org. On the other hand, ATi's proprietry drivers are widely regarded to be appalling, and nVidia's drivers, while apparently stable these days, are still non-free, which causes various problems for support and the future I go out of my way to find a laptop with integrated graphics so that I know it will run X.org well (and because I want to use my battery power for important things).
Yes! Thankyou evalhalla, that's exactly what I was wanting to say.
What's wrong with a command line anyway?
Plenty is wrong a command line (learnability/command discoverability for instance, or any inherently graphical task). Plenty about them is useful (ability to quickly write a one-off program). Some people will be scared away by a command line—even just asking them to type one specific command into a terminal window is enough to turn some people off GNU/Linux completely.
Many common, everyday tasks are just as easily performed by the commandline or through a GUI, but the GUI method is less error-prone and less scary. Even though it's harder to write, most HOWTOs that cover topics most people would want to do should be written with only the GUI in mind.
(Personally, I usually have at least a couple of terminal windows open for various tasks. But they're a poweruser's tool, not a shortcut to a more inclusive interface.)
Old habits die hard. It is the curse of GNU/Linux that you can do everything from the command line, so some people will (either through ignorance or what passes for preference). This makes others think that you have to do everything from the command line, when of course you don't.