A friend tried to talk me into using it to send him money for the computer he built me. But I looked at the site and was pretty suspicious. How can they charge my credit card $2500 and give him $2500 -- when credit card companies always charge a commission??? Ads certainly can't pay for all that.
The only thing I can think of is they share all kinds of personal information with all kinds of evil companies. I sent my friend a check.
You obviously haven't been to Latin America. It's not exactly a desert there. Most people there probably eat better than you do.... or at least more nutritiously.
I believe that's only a valid model if the product is a library. Qt does fit the open source definition and can therefore be used for just about anything. But it can't be used for commercial software because its license prevents linking to it (which is NOT prohibited in the OSD).
If your product is a program and is open source, then you cannot prevent its free use in for profit applications.
Yes, that would indeed make it GPL incompatible.:-)
The solution is to require that everyone who wants their patch to appear in the official Qt release assign the copyright to TT, much like RMS begs people to assign copyright the FSF.
If you ask me, it's a no brainer. TT should do this for its own good, because it benefits when KDE succeeeds, and KDE won't succeed unless this license issue is fixed!
That's exactly what I tried to tell you a couple days ago, but he did it more elegantly and with more words. And no one even moderated me up...
I really like KDE, but as I said, it's plain illegal. I think I'm gonna have to switch to GNOME eventually. Now if I can figure out how to reconfigure GNOME to use KDE/Windows keymappings so I don't go insane...
> Doesn't the GPL say that you cannot charge for the right to use to code?
No. You can charge as much as you want. But when someone pays you for the rights to the code (you giving it to them), you can't restrict their rights to do the same.
> I'm pretty sure that LGPL is there for a reason. If the libraries were GPL'ed, then anything linking to them would would automatically become GPL. Hence to problem I mention lower. So if GPL won't work, and LGPL won't work, what's the problem with QPL?
Because QPL+GPL is illegal and will eventually result in the disastrous end to KDE.:-) Other than that, you're right, and that's why I suggested dual or triple licensing. Since the Trolls wrote ALL the code to Qt, they can release it under as many license terms as they want, and everyone would be happy.
And I repeat -- TrollTech should WANT to keep KDE legal. It's the biggest and most popular app that uses Qt, and it does a lot of free advertising for them. They'd have everything to gain and not much to lose!
Very good point. It amazes me how much people will spend, just thinking they can make money by advertising.
Hopefully the successful sites of the future will be started by folks like you and I, just doing it for the fun of it.
I have (what I think is) a good web site idea myself, and I've already implemented most of it (in a couple weekends) and told a few people. The comments so far are positive. Am hosting it at home. Cost to me: Zero. I think it may be able to bring in some revenue at some point, but I'm not worried about it until that becomes practical -- WITHOUT annoying ads.
Almost all the sites I program at work require cookies. But it's more because that's simply the best way to autenticate and track users than for evil marketing reasons.
Of course, I use HTTP authentication on the sites I develop at home. Much better... but tell the PHBs that.
Re:It doesn't look like this will happen but..
on
Akopia Buys Minivend
·
· Score: 1
Not quite. If the company purchased the copyright to ALL the code in the program, they could release future versions under different licenses than the GPL -- even commercial ones.
That will not affect older versions though. Once GPL'ed, always GPL'ed.
> derrived works is the only way for Troll Tech to make money
Commercial licenses for closed source software (which uses the library) are how Troll Tech makes money. Not from derivations of the library.
> As of now, if you want to use Qt for a rofessional app, you have to pay. Troll tech can't do that if Qt is GPL'd.
Wrong. A GPL'd library would cover all GPL'd uses. You'd still have to pay for an exception to the GPL (like Reserfs, as I mentioned) if you wanted to develop a proprietary, closed source application and distribute it to someone else (internal apps could probably get away without paying).
> Also, even in that case, wouldn't LGPL be more appropriate?
That would cause the very problem you were just arguing against! That *would* allow commercial proprietary software to be built on Qt without paying the Trolls.
> GPL'd QT would suck, since that would mean ALL Qt apps would have to be GPL'd.
OK, I'll grant that. Simple solution: Make Qt Free Edition dual licensed by the GPL *and* QPL. That would keep the BSD *and* GPL folks happy. And still charge for the commercial version. What more could you want?
> Why not just have a GPLizer program, that automatically incorporates code into GPL'd programs, thus GPL'ing the code!
Heh, not a bad idea. The GPL is, after all, the only good software license.:-)
OK I'll start by saying that I love KDE and use it on all my computers, home and work. The KDE team has done an excellent job technically.
But the simple fact remains that KDE is *ILLEGAL*. The GPL and QPL are not compatible. I'm really worried that someone who has contributed GPL code that was used in or by KDE will take up the case against it. Worst case (but certainly possible) scenario is that KDE could die a quick but painful death! I would NOT want that to happen.
Since they use code they didn't write, it seems like the ONLY real solution to this mess is for the Trolls to release Qt under the GPL. And it would make sense for them to do so. They might lose control over derivative works, but how many derivative works will there be, and how important could they be? I doubt Qt's derivatives will value nearly as much as having a secure future for KDE, the "flagship app" built on Qt.
And, like Reiserfs, they could still sell exceptions to the GPL. It seems to be a win win situation to me. And it's completely up to the Trolls. The KDE team dug themselves into this legal mess, and they can't get themselves out alone.
Just gave the go-ahead for a friend to build me an Athlon 700 system w/512MB RAM, G400 32MB, two huge IBM HDs, video capture, SB Live, CD-R, etc...
Think it's worth waiting for the Thunderbird? Any idea when I'll be able to buy motherboards/CPUs for it? I really don't want to wait long. Been waiting long enough already! (First planned to buy the thing last October then kept puting it off for a couple months at a time...)
And also because neighboring countries have enough problems of their own to worry about, and are close to the USA.
Nicaragua may have been able to take it (or try to) under Somoza, but Somoza and the US officials were good buddies. Had he tried to take CR, I doubt the USA would be too pleased with him.
And during the 80s, the Nicaraguan Sandanistas had far too much to worry about in their own country without trying to take another.
Panama is/was also closely tied to the USA so they would also be "discouraged".
One of the social work profs from my university (in the USA) was in Costa Rica and was in a meeting between CR gov't officials and US AID (Agency for International Development) staff.
The issue was squatters hogging certain landowner's land. US AID offered to pay to help CR "exterminate" (kill) them!
CR official's responce: "We can't do that - we're a democracy!"
OK, most other L.A. gov'ts *are* corrupt, but there are some exceptions. CR is among them.
If I understand it correctly you don't need them unless you're debugging the kernel. So yeah, most people can safely delete them.:-)
Re:Wishful and unrealistic thinking
on
Lineo Plans IPO
·
· Score: 1
> If anything, a recession would further MS's hold on the market by lowering people's willingness to educate themselves about OS's....
I really don't think that's true, but you can believe it if you want.:-)
I'm citing many different reasons why I believe OSS will take over in a few years. It could look like I'm contradicting myself. In reality, I believe that OSS wins no matter what!
Slashdot Mirror
A friend tried to talk me into using it to send him money for the computer he built me. But I looked at the site and was pretty suspicious. How can they charge my credit card $2500 and give him $2500 -- when credit card companies always charge a commission??? Ads certainly can't pay for all that.
The only thing I can think of is they share all kinds of personal information with all kinds of evil companies. I sent my friend a check.
You obviously haven't been to Latin America. It's not exactly a desert there. Most people there probably eat better than you do.... or at least more nutritiously.
I believe that's only a valid model if the product is a library. Qt does fit the open source definition and can therefore be used for just about anything. But it can't be used for commercial software because its license prevents linking to it (which is NOT prohibited in the OSD).
If your product is a program and is open source, then you cannot prevent its free use in for profit applications.
Yes, that would indeed make it GPL incompatible. :-)
The solution is to require that everyone who wants their patch to appear in the official Qt release assign the copyright to TT, much like RMS begs people to assign copyright the FSF.
If you ask me, it's a no brainer. TT should do this for its own good, because it benefits when KDE succeeeds, and KDE won't succeed unless this license issue is fixed!
Cool, I'm interested!!! Now if I can live there and either get a good Perl/PHP programming job or telecommute from the USA, I say "when can I start"?
see subject
Why would you have a planned power outage, and not just shut the thing down???
That's exactly what I tried to tell you a couple days ago, but he did it more elegantly and with more words. And no one even moderated me up...
I really like KDE, but as I said, it's plain illegal. I think I'm gonna have to switch to GNOME eventually. Now if I can figure out how to reconfigure GNOME to use KDE/Windows keymappings so I don't go insane...
> Doesn't the GPL say that you cannot charge for the right to use to code?
:-) Other than that, you're right, and that's why I suggested dual or triple licensing. Since the Trolls wrote ALL the code to Qt, they can release it under as many license terms as they want, and everyone would be happy.
No. You can charge as much as you want. But when someone pays you for the rights to the code (you giving it to them), you can't restrict their rights to do the same.
> I'm pretty sure that LGPL is there for a reason. If the libraries were GPL'ed, then anything linking to them would would automatically become GPL. Hence to problem I mention lower. So if GPL won't work, and LGPL won't work, what's the problem with QPL?
Because QPL+GPL is illegal and will eventually result in the disastrous end to KDE.
And I repeat -- TrollTech should WANT to keep KDE legal. It's the biggest and most popular app that uses Qt, and it does a lot of free advertising for them. They'd have everything to gain and not much to lose!
Very good point. It amazes me how much people will spend, just thinking they can make money by advertising.
Hopefully the successful sites of the future will be started by folks like you and I, just doing it for the fun of it.
I have (what I think is) a good web site idea myself, and I've already implemented most of it (in a couple weekends) and told a few people. The comments so far are positive. Am hosting it at home. Cost to me: Zero. I think it may be able to bring in some revenue at some point, but I'm not worried about it until that becomes practical -- WITHOUT annoying ads.
Almost all the sites I program at work require cookies. But it's more because that's simply the best way to autenticate and track users than for evil marketing reasons.
Of course, I use HTTP authentication on the sites I develop at home. Much better... but tell the PHBs that.
Not quite. If the company purchased the copyright to ALL the code in the program, they could release future versions under different licenses than the GPL -- even commercial ones.
That will not affect older versions though. Once GPL'ed, always GPL'ed.
On September 20, when the #@$%#$@% RSA patent expires, it should be possible to ship OpenSSH as standard in the USA.
YESSSSS!!! That's only 3 more months! Wheee!!! Is anyone planning a party???
> derrived works is the only way for Troll Tech to make money
:-)
Commercial licenses for closed source software (which uses the library) are how Troll Tech makes money. Not from derivations of the library.
> As of now, if you want to use Qt for a rofessional app, you have to pay. Troll tech can't do that if Qt is GPL'd.
Wrong. A GPL'd library would cover all GPL'd uses. You'd still have to pay for an exception to the GPL (like Reserfs, as I mentioned) if you wanted to develop a proprietary, closed source application and distribute it to someone else (internal apps could probably get away without paying).
> Also, even in that case, wouldn't LGPL be more appropriate?
That would cause the very problem you were just arguing against! That *would* allow commercial proprietary software to be built on Qt without paying the Trolls.
> GPL'd QT would suck, since that would mean ALL
Qt apps would have to be GPL'd.
OK, I'll grant that. Simple solution: Make Qt Free Edition dual licensed by the GPL *and* QPL. That would keep the BSD *and* GPL folks happy. And still charge for the commercial version. What more could you want?
> Why not just have a GPLizer program, that automatically incorporates code into GPL'd programs, thus GPL'ing the code!
Heh, not a bad idea. The GPL is, after all, the only good software license.
OK I'll start by saying that I love KDE and use it on all my computers, home and work. The KDE team has done an excellent job technically.
But the simple fact remains that KDE is *ILLEGAL*. The GPL and QPL are not compatible. I'm really worried that someone who has contributed GPL code that was used in or by KDE will take up the case against it. Worst case (but certainly possible) scenario is that KDE could die a quick but painful death! I would NOT want that to happen.
Since they use code they didn't write, it seems like the ONLY real solution to this mess is for the Trolls to release Qt under the GPL. And it would make sense for them to do so. They might lose control over derivative works, but how many derivative works will there be, and how important could they be? I doubt Qt's derivatives will value nearly as much as having a secure future for KDE, the "flagship app" built on Qt.
And, like Reiserfs, they could still sell exceptions to the GPL. It seems to be a win win situation to me. And it's completely up to the Trolls. The KDE team dug themselves into this legal mess, and they can't get themselves out alone.
M16 seems reasonably fast to me. Scrolling is really quick! They apparently fixed the disk cache problem. YES!
I *might* just use it as my main browser now! (OK, I said that after using M15 for a week too...) But anyway, it's getting there.
Of course, since he apparently got in right away after she sent the spam, he would have had to do it without rebooting her computer.
Perhaps he replaced one of the standard Windows EXEs with BO?
PCanywhere is probably a better bet.
In the long run none of that will matter. The cost of switching is in the short run. The long run will only see benefits.
Just gave the go-ahead for a friend to build me an Athlon 700 system w/512MB RAM, G400 32MB, two huge IBM HDs, video capture, SB Live, CD-R, etc...
Think it's worth waiting for the Thunderbird? Any idea when I'll be able to buy motherboards/CPUs for it? I really don't want to wait long. Been waiting long enough already! (First planned to buy the thing last October then kept puting it off for a couple months at a time...)
And also because neighboring countries have enough problems of their own to worry about, and are close to the USA.
Nicaragua may have been able to take it (or try to) under Somoza, but Somoza and the US officials were good buddies. Had he tried to take CR, I doubt the USA would be too pleased with him.
And during the 80s, the Nicaraguan Sandanistas had far too much to worry about in their own country without trying to take another.
Panama is/was also closely tied to the USA so they would also be "discouraged".
Simple.
Breaking away from Microsoft/closed source and standards/licensing hassles will SAVE LOTS OF MONEY in the long run.
Any questions?
OK, gotta reply to that.
One of the social work profs from my university (in the USA) was in Costa Rica and was in a meeting between CR gov't officials and US AID (Agency for International Development) staff.
The issue was squatters hogging certain landowner's land. US AID offered to pay to help CR "exterminate" (kill) them!
CR official's responce: "We can't do that - we're a democracy!"
OK, most other L.A. gov'ts *are* corrupt, but there are some exceptions. CR is among them.
Not having a STRONG military?
They have no military at all. I believe that's been the case for about 50 years.
They DO have high tax rates though. Guess that's what pays for this...
If I understand it correctly you don't need them unless you're debugging the kernel. So yeah, most people can safely delete them. :-)
> If anything, a recession would further MS's hold on the market by lowering people's willingness to educate themselves about OS's....
:-)
I really don't think that's true, but you can believe it if you want.
I'm citing many different reasons why I believe OSS will take over in a few years. It could look like I'm contradicting myself. In reality, I believe that OSS wins no matter what!