The invasion of Iraq isn't just a short-term move, though: the attack either instigated or allowed to happen by Saudi Arabia in 2001* made it necessary to ensure that OPEC couldn't maintain its effective monopoly on oil supply. Expect to see US soldiers and/or large numbers of 'private security' (mercenaries paid by Halliburton?) there for a few decades to come.
*(Don't tell me that at least some members of the Saudi intelligence service didn't know what was going on a few months beforehand -- if that's true, the House of Saud wouldn't have survived for as long as it has).
Is classifying the choice of a developer to use the GPL as either "cool" or religous demonization?
If so, I sincerly apologize.
I'm not saying that you are demonizing the GPL (although I think calling the use of it 'religious' could be considered slightly demeaning, but that's probably because I consider it to be a synonym for "irrational", whereas I think that it makes just as much sense as using BSD, or any other licence -- depending on the wishes of the developer).
A lot of invective does fly back and forth over the use of software licences, though, for whatever reason... and really, if anyone but the author doesn't like it, they only have one choice -- write their own implementation under their own choice of licence.
Hardware-wise, the Amiga was always better -- which shows how poorly the ST was being developed, as the Amiga had CBM's management holding it back:(
Most of the games were ported back and forth, though, at least for a while... did you ever program the ST? What was the OS like? The Amiga's API was really clean and well designed, I thought.
less restrictive licences (BSD type) also ensure that software that a developer has written remains Free (as in speech)
It all comes down to what the author wants; some wouldn't mind others extending on and profiting from their code (while keeping those extensions closed), while others would. With what work I do that I share (and mostly that was on the Amiga, I'm too busy these days) I'm not really comfortable with that. Of course, it's up to the author(s) to choose their licence(s) as they see fit.
The GPL is a tool, nothing more, and it's less restrictive than a traditional proprietary licence (try including someone else's closed source in your work, let word leak out and see how far you get:). It annoys me to see the FSF and authors of GPL software being demonised for their choice of licence, when more often than not the person objecting is upset that an open source solution exists *but* that it's one they can't use.
I can appreciate your iTerm example, but I'd think that for any large body of GPL'd code those people best suited to offer support or custom extensions are those who are most familiar with the code base; the authors or mainatiners. So to a certain extent, that's self-correcting; if the new "leeches" don't offer any benefit for the money, customers have the source and they can go elsewhere anyway.
If you are using the GPL because you believe all software should be free (as in no cost), then you've got the right licence.
I think you mis-state the case there. Authors use the GPL because they believe that the software they have written should remain Free (as in free speech). Nothing prevents people from making money from others' GPL'd source, but they must provide modified sources to their customers on request. Authors of non-GPL software are not forced to link their proprietary software to GPLd code, instead this seems to be done out of greed or laziness... so the use of the GPL by the author of the open source code is not some sort of viral agent poisoning other software, as you imply.
Maybe not murder, but if you could link your boss to financially backing that mugger, and other muggers like him, and with support of a significant portion of your office, then yes, being mugged on your way to the store would be an excuse to go after everybody in your office.
And all you'd need to do then would be to produce some proof. Preferably before you went after everyone in the office, so you could give it to the police instead.
At least it could explain your illegal actions if you produced this proof afterwards.
This should be common practice. Sure, its convenient to upgrade, but if you are browsing slashdot, you should have enough computer savvy to do a proper clean install.
Apple have been building computers and operating systems for, what, 25 years now? Surely they should have enough computer savvy to write install procedures that don't fuck up their own previously installed software.
For the record, I'm staying on 10.2 for at least a couple of months.
I wish it would always stay around as an alternative API.
Wine, wine, wine, that's all you kids ever do...:)
Maybe they'll do a Longhorn port if Microsoft's built-on-VirtualPC Win32 legacy support isn't up to snuff. Or maybe this will all happen in 2010, with standard Microsoft shipping slippage.
Lots of people still seem to take Gartner and their ilk seriously, as well, though -- maybe the credulity of the public is the fault of the public and not of the people speaking crap?
This, again, probably seemed like a good idea at the time, but the net result is that the elite civil servants haven't worked outside it.
Looks like some sort of holdover from feudal times to me.:/ I can understand that they think it's good because the elite civil servants have proved themselves through their skill in climbing that ladder, but it does produce a dangerously insular system.
Of course, democracies seem to degenerate into oligarchies a little too easily... power is a very desirable thing, not that easy to share around in a manner that stays shared.
I believe that they do all the public sector recruitment from a few select government-run schools for public service.
If they stick completely to that (no outsiders), that's pretty dangerous... in the same way that lawyers running a closed shop (i.e. admission to the bar) is. A certain class and group of people can stop anything they want getting organised or passed.
If you're wading in guns blazing, it's a bit cute to then claim it's an "accident" when innocent children die. If they were more honest, they'd admit they didn't really care who they killed as long as they were Palestinian, which strangely enough would seem to be the mirror of the Palestinian terrorist attitude.
If this weren't the case then there would be inquiries, court martials, etc. whenever atrocities like Jenin happened. You can't allow yourself to sink to the same level when fighting terrorism, in the way that the Israelis and the Americans have -- otherwise the things you're supposedly fighting for are thrown away in the process.
I'm getting sick of seeing them considered as fundamentally different. Scarcity is not the only measure. IP and PP are both difficult to produce, and therein lies their similarity. And for your "matter duplicators" read "mass production lines" and maybe you'll see my point.
Then it becomes a political question rather than an economic one; economies of plenty are fundamentally different to economies of scarcity. As a syndicalist anarchist without any respect for the ability of individuals to amass capital grossly beyond their needs, I would say there's something wrong with people who withhold, for example, life-saving medicines in order to increase their profits. Others won't agree...
I'm getting sick of seeing intellectual property and physical property considered as similar; maybe this will be more accurate when matter duplicators are freely available. Argue for the preservation of value of intellectual property through artificially constrained scarcity all you want, but please stop comparing it to my car, house, etc.
Isn't it a lot more likely that if part of were found to be non-enforceable, the whole thing would be null and void? If not, there are a number of other software licenses I'd like to pick and choose my extra restrictions from...
It's always fascinated me how linux advocates will gloat about how microsoft spends millions on Windows security and ends up with an incredibly insecure OS, but are totally unwilling to believe microsoft can spend millions on usability research and wind up with a completely unusable interface.
Not to defend that attitude, but for many people 'usable' is defined as 'I learned it this way, so it must be right.' It's an area where the majority can be right (for some value of 'right') simply by weight of numbers. (This is different from security, which has more objectively specified benchmarks.)
I think the ASIO indefinite detention was actually some sort of eternally renewable 1-month period, but given that they didn't actually have to inform anyone about the person being detained, it's indefinite by any real definition. That part might not have survived the Senate, though...
The American loopholes do stand a chance of being punished in their courts (if not now, then maybe in the future) as they are clearly designed as Constitutional dodges.
New Zealand could be good... might end up that there are more of us over there than Kiwis over here, if Howard stays in much longer:/
Slashdot Mirror
The invasion of Iraq isn't just a short-term move, though: the attack either instigated or allowed to happen by Saudi Arabia in 2001* made it necessary to ensure that OPEC couldn't maintain its effective monopoly on oil supply. Expect to see US soldiers and/or large numbers of 'private security' (mercenaries paid by Halliburton?) there for a few decades to come.
*(Don't tell me that at least some members of the Saudi intelligence service didn't know what was going on a few months beforehand -- if that's true, the House of Saud wouldn't have survived for as long as it has).
Is classifying the choice of a developer to use the GPL as either "cool" or religous demonization?
If so, I sincerly apologize.
I'm not saying that you are demonizing the GPL (although I think calling the use of it 'religious' could be considered slightly demeaning, but that's probably because I consider it to be a synonym for "irrational", whereas I think that it makes just as much sense as using BSD, or any other licence -- depending on the wishes of the developer).
A lot of invective does fly back and forth over the use of software licences, though, for whatever reason... and really, if anyone but the author doesn't like it, they only have one choice -- write their own implementation under their own choice of licence.
Hardware-wise, the Amiga was always better -- which shows how poorly the ST was being developed, as the Amiga had CBM's management holding it back :(
Most of the games were ported back and forth, though, at least for a while... did you ever program the ST? What was the OS like? The Amiga's API was really clean and well designed, I thought.
less restrictive licences (BSD type) also ensure that software that a developer has written remains Free (as in speech)
:). It annoys me to see the FSF and authors of GPL software being demonised for their choice of licence, when more often than not the person objecting is upset that an open source solution exists *but* that it's one they can't use.
It all comes down to what the author wants; some wouldn't mind others extending on and profiting from their code (while keeping those extensions closed), while others would. With what work I do that I share (and mostly that was on the Amiga, I'm too busy these days) I'm not really comfortable with that. Of course, it's up to the author(s) to choose their licence(s) as they see fit.
The GPL is a tool, nothing more, and it's less restrictive than a traditional proprietary licence (try including someone else's closed source in your work, let word leak out and see how far you get
I can appreciate your iTerm example, but I'd think that for any large body of GPL'd code those people best suited to offer support or custom extensions are those who are most familiar with the code base; the authors or mainatiners. So to a certain extent, that's self-correcting; if the new "leeches" don't offer any benefit for the money, customers have the source and they can go elsewhere anyway.
If you are using the GPL because you believe all software should be free (as in no cost), then you've got the right licence.
I think you mis-state the case there. Authors use the GPL because they believe that the software they have written should remain Free (as in free speech). Nothing prevents people from making money from others' GPL'd source, but they must provide modified sources to their customers on request. Authors of non-GPL software are not forced to link their proprietary software to GPLd code, instead this seems to be done out of greed or laziness... so the use of the GPL by the author of the open source code is not some sort of viral agent poisoning other software, as you imply.
Maybe not murder, but if you could link your boss to financially backing that mugger, and other muggers like him, and with support of a significant portion of your office, then yes, being mugged on your way to the store would be an excuse to go after everybody in your office.
And all you'd need to do then would be to produce some proof. Preferably before you went after everyone in the office, so you could give it to the police instead.
At least it could explain your illegal actions if you produced this proof afterwards.
We're still waiting, Mr. President...
This should be common practice. Sure, its convenient to upgrade, but if you are browsing slashdot, you should have enough computer savvy to do a proper clean install.
Apple have been building computers and operating systems for, what, 25 years now? Surely they should have enough computer savvy to write install procedures that don't fuck up their own previously installed software.
For the record, I'm staying on 10.2 for at least a couple of months.
I wish it would always stay around as an alternative API.
:)
Wine, wine, wine, that's all you kids ever do...
Maybe they'll do a Longhorn port if Microsoft's built-on-VirtualPC Win32 legacy support isn't up to snuff. Or maybe this will all happen in 2010, with standard Microsoft shipping slippage.
Why anyone takes him seriously is beyond me.
Lots of people still seem to take Gartner and their ilk seriously, as well, though -- maybe the credulity of the public is the fault of the public and not of the people speaking crap?
He spent 6 hours espousing the virtue of Open source programming
A regular Open Source Castro.... although RMS ended up with the beard, of course.
This, again, probably seemed like a good idea at the time, but the net result is that the elite civil servants haven't worked outside it.
:/ I can understand that they think it's good because the elite civil servants have proved themselves through their skill in climbing that ladder, but it does produce a dangerously insular system.
Looks like some sort of holdover from feudal times to me.
Of course, democracies seem to degenerate into oligarchies a little too easily... power is a very desirable thing, not that easy to share around in a manner that stays shared.
I believe that they do all the public sector recruitment from a few select government-run schools for public service.
:/
If they stick completely to that (no outsiders), that's pretty dangerous... in the same way that lawyers running a closed shop (i.e. admission to the bar) is. A certain class and group of people can stop anything they want getting organised or passed.
That's pretty disturbing to hear.
Unfortunately, in the real would (which no French government official has ever worked in)
Do the French have some sort of law prohibiting movement from private sector employment into the public sector?
Suicide Is Painless... well, at least according to M*A*S*H.
I read it as official confirmation that Chariots of the Gods was actually correct.
:)
Be right back -- I'm going to add another few layers to my tinfoil hat...
On their current form, the full "unofficial" release of HL2 should be along any day now :/
If you're wading in guns blazing, it's a bit cute to then claim it's an "accident" when innocent children die. If they were more honest, they'd admit they didn't really care who they killed as long as they were Palestinian, which strangely enough would seem to be the mirror of the Palestinian terrorist attitude.
If this weren't the case then there would be inquiries, court martials, etc. whenever atrocities like Jenin happened. You can't allow yourself to sink to the same level when fighting terrorism, in the way that the Israelis and the Americans have -- otherwise the things you're supposedly fighting for are thrown away in the process.
Tell that to the children on both sides... since they're dead, it doesn't make much difference to them.
Fucking evil bastards, Sharon and Arafat both, and anyone who fights alongside them.
The Israelis are just trying to protect themselves against idiots who think targeting children is legitimate warfare.
Shame about the Palestinian children who get shot as "collateral damage", then. Sort of ruins their point, doesn't it?
Get a clue; both sides have their share of homicidal maniacs, and they're the ones in charge.
I'm getting sick of seeing them considered as fundamentally different. Scarcity is not the only measure. IP and PP are both difficult to produce, and therein lies their similarity. And for your "matter duplicators" read "mass production lines" and maybe you'll see my point.
Then it becomes a political question rather than an economic one; economies of plenty are fundamentally different to economies of scarcity. As a syndicalist anarchist without any respect for the ability of individuals to amass capital grossly beyond their needs, I would say there's something wrong with people who withhold, for example, life-saving medicines in order to increase their profits. Others won't agree...
I'm getting sick of seeing intellectual property and physical property considered as similar; maybe this will be more accurate when matter duplicators are freely available. Argue for the preservation of value of intellectual property through artificially constrained scarcity all you want, but please stop comparing it to my car, house, etc.
Isn't it a lot more likely that if part of were found to be non-enforceable, the whole thing would be null and void? If not, there are a number of other software licenses I'd like to pick and choose my extra restrictions from...
It's always fascinated me how linux advocates will gloat about how microsoft spends millions on Windows security and ends up with an incredibly insecure OS, but are totally unwilling to believe microsoft can spend millions on usability research and wind up with a completely unusable interface.
Not to defend that attitude, but for many people 'usable' is defined as 'I learned it this way, so it must be right.' It's an area where the majority can be right (for some value of 'right') simply by weight of numbers. (This is different from security, which has more objectively specified benchmarks.)
-number is how you specify the number of the body part you want to shoot (where the default is in the air)
An improvement on the first version, where the default was the foot.
I think the ASIO indefinite detention was actually some sort of eternally renewable 1-month period, but given that they didn't actually have to inform anyone about the person being detained, it's indefinite by any real definition. That part might not have survived the Senate, though...
:/
The American loopholes do stand a chance of being punished in their courts (if not now, then maybe in the future) as they are clearly designed as Constitutional dodges.
New Zealand could be good... might end up that there are more of us over there than Kiwis over here, if Howard stays in much longer