"Future contracts are going to have much tighter provisions about vendor responsibility for unforeseen events"
Is anyone else alarmed by this?
'unforseen events' could be as bizarre as a cosmic ray causing a bit flip in a jump instruction, reversing the logic in part of a program. How can anyone be help responsible for that?
Last night I was walking along the street around midnight and I saw two young boys coming towards me. One was wearing a long black coat. I have to admit this thought crossed my mind: what if he's planning a copycat killing?
Wimp. Instead of assuming they were friendly and saying 'Hello.' you reacted out of fear.
If we all continue to react fearfully instead of treating each other in a civil manner, we will continue to isolate each other.
I've been wearing a black trenchcoat for months, and I will continue to do so. I believe it would be tacky for someone to rush out and buy a trenchcoat in response to Littleton, but I also believe that it would be tacky to react by discarding a trenchcoat I already wear.
My point here is that I will continue to wear my trenchcoat because I had already decided it is what I wanted to wear. I am refusing to become more normal simply so that other people can live in a more comfortable world while clinging to labels and reacting instead of thinking.
We all need to learn to judge people as individuals or not at all. If you don't know enough about someone to make an informed, personal judgement about them you should simply treat them in a civil manner and assume that they are a decent person. You will be right more often than not.
Even if that always worked, it wouldn't be good enough.
With X, it is possible to attache functions to combinations of mouse buttons. If you attach something to left-middle, you will have a hard time using it with only two buttons.
Now suppose I use some APSL code in a mission critical application, without which my business would fail.
Now, if Apple were to violate my patents I would have a difficult choice to make. I could commence an action for patent infringement again Apple, and loose my APSL license, or I could let Apple continue to violate my patents.
I have no idea how this relates to APSL being Open Source, but I don't see how any business with patents could allow themselves to use APSL 1.1 code in anything at all important.
I've been playing the beta for a while now, and I've submitted many bug reports. Someone actually called me at home so we could work on the first one. They released a series of patchs, about 5MB each.
Last week they released a major patch, beta3, which incorperates much of the new code added when Activision pushed their release date. This patch was 30MB, so some of the beta testers may have dropped out. In order to test you need the CD and want all the patches.
If someone makes a habit of posting as AC so that they can moderate as well then they will loose their moderator status because they haven't been posting.
I think the 'post or moderate' choice will tend to reduce the effective moderation. It will create a situation in which each person needs to decide if they want to participate or judge, but with a limited amount of time available to each person, and only the people who participate allowed to moderate I see the whole thing becoming very cyclic.
One of the problems I see with a bounty approach is that the bounty will only be paid to the person/people who 'win'. Everyone else who worked on that project will be completely unpaid. They will have no particular motive to murge their own effort in with the winning code, even if their code is technically superior. There may even be a disincentive if they are bitter they didn't 'win'.
If a bounty system is to work, it probably needs a registration system of some sort, so everyone knows who is already working on the project and how long they have been working on it. This way, if there are already a few people working on a project, new people will know that they would be at a disadvantage if they started now, and perhaps they would be better off picking a different project.
Read/usr/src/linux/Documentation/Changes. This file should give you all the information you need on which packages you need to upgrade, and which versions you need to have installed.
You've never seen the inside of a computer before but you are somehow able to tell that it's the motherboard the dog has just wondered off with? That must be quite a dog.
Somehow enough screws have come loose during shipping that all the parts are rattling around inside the box? You've picked the wrong audience. Anyone who has worked with PC hardware knows this just isn't going to happen unless someone goes out of their way to make it happen. The only way this could make any sense is if it was shipped in that condition.
By the time you get to a line at CompUSA, you are still dropping parts?
I'm having a hard time taking any of this seriously. It is presended as an account of your recent problems, but it sounds more like you've made the whole thing up.
What portion of people who currently have a job working with computers are working on a software program which is intented to be sold as a product?
Personally, the work I do is already a service, not a product. My job title is Programmer/Analyist, but really, I do systems administrator, web development, database administration, network management, help desk type services....
If I release every bit of code I every write, I still provide a service. They still need me. So I'm not threatened by Open Source.
So, first, destingish between service and product.
Now, people working for a software house, on a program which is intended to go to market, they might think they should be threatened by Open Source.
Their fears probably focus on the software house, and the question of how it will make money, and why it would need to employ them.
If they manage to pass this, the new limit should only apply to new copyrights. Anything which was copyrighted before it was passed would have the old 75 year limit.
One effect then would be that from 2075-2095 Project Gutenberg would have no new material.
Of course, they will try to enforece it right away, grandfathering it. In that case, expect it to get the supreme court.
Slashdot Mirror
Is anyone else alarmed by this?
'unforseen events' could be as bizarre as a cosmic ray causing a bit flip in a jump instruction, reversing the logic in part of a program. How can anyone be help responsible for that?
Wimp. Instead of assuming they were friendly and saying 'Hello.' you reacted out of fear.
If we all continue to react fearfully instead of treating each other in a civil manner, we will continue to isolate each other.
I've been wearing a black trenchcoat for months, and I will continue to do so. I believe it would be tacky for someone to rush out and buy a trenchcoat in response to Littleton, but I also believe that it would be tacky to react by discarding a trenchcoat I already wear.
My point here is that I will continue to wear my trenchcoat because I had already decided it is what I wanted to wear. I am refusing to become more normal simply so that other people can live in a more comfortable world while clinging to labels and reacting instead of thinking.
We all need to learn to judge people as individuals or not at all. If you don't know enough about someone to make an informed, personal judgement about them you should simply treat them in a civil manner and assume that they are a decent person. You will be right more often than not.
With X, it is possible to attache functions to combinations of mouse buttons. If you attach something to left-middle, you will have a hard time using it with only two buttons.
Now suppose I use some APSL code in a mission critical application, without which my business would fail.
Now, if Apple were to violate my patents I would have a difficult choice to make. I could commence an action for patent infringement again Apple, and loose my APSL license, or I could let Apple continue to violate my patents.
I have no idea how this relates to APSL being Open Source, but I don't see how any business with patents could allow themselves to use APSL 1.1 code in anything at all important.
Last week they released a major patch, beta3, which incorperates much of the new code added when Activision pushed their release date. This patch was 30MB, so some of the beta testers may have dropped out. In order to test you need the CD and want all the patches.
See their beta test page if you want...
This game is going to be very good. I've already pre-ordered a copy.
And it looks like it's frozen anyway, what with the 'no seriuos changes' bit.
isn't it better to set things up so that cooperation leads to profit, instead of the historical alternative (competition leads to profit)?
The trasition of some set of assumptions in the past does not guarentee the trasition of all assumtptions in the future.
What does he say to the exec, which they want to hear?
I think the 'post or moderate' choice will tend to reduce the effective moderation. It will create a situation in which each person needs to decide if they want to participate or judge, but with a limited amount of time available to each person, and only the people who participate allowed to moderate I see the whole thing becoming very cyclic.
If a bounty system is to work, it probably needs a registration system of some sort, so everyone knows who is already working on the project and how long they have been working on it. This way, if there are already a few people working on a project, new people will know that they would be at a disadvantage if they started now, and perhaps they would be better off picking a different project.
Read /usr/src/linux/Documentation/Changes. This file should give you all the information you need on which packages you need to upgrade, and which versions you need to have installed.
This would lead to stories that claim particular features were only added to Linux on 1999-01-25.
That would be very annoying.
You've never seen the inside of a computer before
but you are somehow able to tell that it's the
motherboard the dog has just wondered off with?
That must be quite a dog.
Somehow enough screws have come loose during shipping that all the parts are rattling around inside the box? You've picked the wrong audience. Anyone who has worked with PC hardware knows this just isn't going to happen unless someone goes out of their way to make it happen. The only way this could make any sense is if it was shipped in that condition.
By the time you get to a line at CompUSA, you are still dropping parts?
I'm having a hard time taking any of this seriously. It is presended as an account of your recent problems, but it sounds more like you've made the whole thing up.
Personally, the work I do is already a service, not a product. My job title is Programmer/Analyist, but really, I do systems administrator, web development, database administration, network management, help desk type services....
If I release every bit of code I every write, I still provide a service. They still need me. So I'm not threatened by Open Source.
So, first, destingish between service and product.
Now, people working for a software house, on a program which is intended to go to market, they might think they should be threatened by Open Source.
Their fears probably focus on the software house, and the question of how it will make money, and why it would need to employ them.
As we've seen with encryption laws, the US seems to be able to convince other countries to pass the same dumb laws they have.
One effect then would be that from 2075-2095 Project Gutenberg would have no new material.
Of course, they will try to enforece it right away, grandfathering it. In that case, expect it to get the supreme court.