That should only take common sense to be understood.
If you allow yourself to be you vs good luck and all the best.
I you are part of the FOSS movement, if you are ever in a situation when you have to confront , then it becomes FOSS vs in many senses, which may include the legal and economical one.
Techies do not understand how important it may be to be part of a movement. It has nothing to do with "hyppieism" or being a good comrade, it is just sensible that people organized in big groups will have big bargaining power.
.... but according to you, it is somehow/.'s fault for not getting it.
When they have a consistent attitude in regard to FOSS, then most reasonable people will sit and listen.
A company that makes unsubstantiated claims regarding patents and clear litigation threats, tries to divide the FOSS community with dubious deals based on those claims and then pretends to be all nice about standards frankly can't expect much sympathy by default.
Other companies that have probed consistently they are in the FOSS field do not get a terse treatment here, MS that is pretty much a declared enemy of FOSS surely can't expect to fare any better.
People that are not prepared to Google for half an hour to find answers to all these questions deserve to be using Windows, pay for it and be told by MS's marketing to enjoy it.
People that need to use regularly a computer have to make a choice: inform themselves about the alternatives, or be at the mercy of whatever is thrown at them.
Oh wait, that is yet another choice to make. My bad.
The only thing Novell needs to do is flush the agreement with MS down the toilet, where it belongs, and behave in the future. After all many people there (SuSe and Mono former people) have contributed to the free software effort and should not be punished if at all possible just because the PHBs had a moment of monumental stupidity.
As for Linspire, they can go to the moon as far as I am concerned.
And lest not forget a worldwide community of developers and users that would dig out any prior art in order to invalidate any MS alleged patents?
Honestly, this is a battle MS should not want ot fight. If they do, they will really do so at their own peril (I don't see much public goodwill towards MS as the monopolist suing the competition, most patents would be invalidated, and the ones with any legal basis would see a US only version of Linux been released with any "infringing" stuff removed, while Europe and other places with sane patent law just ignore the whole issue).
The only thing missing in the equation for the x386 architecture would be drivers, but the considerable muscle of Sun may persuade manufacturers to be more amenable to providing drivers for Solaris, even if it is GPLed v3, thant they have been so far for Linux. Most userland tools have been ported already, are easy to port, or may even run under binary compatibility mode without alterations.
When any company mandates to you (their client, for bunnies sakes!) to upgrade, you upgrade. Period. They play the tune and you dance it or get stuffed.
With FOSS you call all the shots, if a project dies you have options and you dictate the timmings for migration if necessary.
Why is that so many people out there are afraid to be owners of their own computing infrastructure?
With CSS your provider plays the tune and you dance.
With FOSS you play the tune, if you want to, and you may decide to dance, or not. In other words you are in command of your IT infrastructure, but many people and businesses are afraid to take responsibilities for their own technological future.
You are using subjective judgments there. You have no way to know if the guy with the keys for the "safe" datacentre may be bribed to pull your disk and make a runner.
Encrypting cost you little and contributes to your peace of mind, it does not solve all problems, but at least addresses the one where a thief with light feet is involved....
If something is reproducible so easily ....
on
Patents Don't Pay
·
· Score: 1
... it should not be patentable.
Entrepreneurs should contemplate that a new, useful product should sell well during the first bits of its time in the market, because if it is any good, it will be copied.
That is a reality of the market and people should deal with it. The only thing that patents do is getting on the way of an efficient way of producing something.
If you have something novel then you should have your own chinese company lined up ready to make it cheap, pretty much at the same price as your competitors....
Now tell us, which choercive tool is Stallman using to force you to accept FSF's licensing scheme when you write your own software?
If you are talking about other people's software, there is nothing to discuss really, it is other people's software and they can do as they wish with it.
But about yours, how are you being forced to to anything at all?
Because people are falling over themselves to work interminable hours, give their work for free, just for somebody else to reap the benefits and not giving anything back in exchange.
I may be willing to be charitable with a poor sod, but with corporations and conglomerates? Well, I am not that charitable. Or stupid.
BSDs ar a micro minority for a reason: contributors know they would not benefit in anyway by releasing their code with this license. GPL is the perfect license in a capitalist society, where greed is the best lubricant to facilitate progress.
Tivo benefits from software they did not write in its entirety, they release it and then block software with changes from running. So in other words they screw the end user by means of hardware contraptions. They are curtailing end user's freedoms.
It is perfectly legitimate t force them to play fair or to ask them to write their own stuff frankly.
But the matter of fact is that Stallman has done the sane thing and protected the software with the help of lawyers, so his opinions are there for all to see in black and white and sanctioned by a lawyers.
Linus built on top of that legal basis and in many occasions has declared he does not care at all about the matters of freedom. I really fail to see how somebody uninformed about the legal implications of writing software would be a suitable leader in matters of freedom and copyright.
There are many applications in many different industries for which Linux does not scale (unless you are Google and have to build a grid OS from scratch to use those "cheap" Linux boxes), with Solaris your machines grow with your solution with little or no changes whatsoever. With Linux that is an impossibility in many cases.
Linux is great, is the best thing that has happened to the computer industry in the last 10 years, but from that it does not follow that it is the only good technology out there.
Solaris 10 is technologically superior in many different levels, and unlike previously, now Sun is backing the OS to run on x386 architecture (which they did not do when Linux was starting. Big mistake but that seems to have been corrected). Sun will go as far as to support their boxes running Linux if so you wish, but in many situations a Sparc machines with SOlaris is he right tool for the job
Slashdot Mirror
That should only take common sense to be understood.
If you allow yourself to be you vs good luck and all the best.
I you are part of the FOSS movement, if you are ever in a situation when you have to confront , then it becomes FOSS vs in many senses, which may include the legal and economical one.
Techies do not understand how important it may be to be part of a movement. It has nothing to do with "hyppieism" or being a good comrade, it is just sensible that people organized in big groups will have big bargaining power.
.... but according to you, it is somehow /.'s fault for not getting it.
When they have a consistent attitude in regard to FOSS, then most reasonable people will sit and listen.
A company that makes unsubstantiated claims regarding patents and clear litigation threats, tries to divide the FOSS community with dubious deals based on those claims and then pretends to be all nice about standards frankly can't expect much sympathy by default.
Other companies that have probed consistently they are in the FOSS field do not get a terse treatment here, MS that is pretty much a declared enemy of FOSS surely can't expect to fare any better.
That will make your coments more credible.
People that are not prepared to Google for half an hour to find answers to all these questions deserve to be using Windows, pay for it and be told by MS's marketing to enjoy it.
People that need to use regularly a computer have to make a choice: inform themselves about the alternatives, or be at the mercy of whatever is thrown at them.
Oh wait, that is yet another choice to make. My bad.
The only thing Novell needs to do is flush the agreement with MS down the toilet, where it belongs, and behave in the future. After all many people there (SuSe and Mono former people) have contributed to the free software effort and should not be punished if at all possible just because the PHBs had a moment of monumental stupidity.
As for Linspire, they can go to the moon as far as I am concerned.
The GPL applies to software.
MP3 files are not software.
And lest not forget a worldwide community of developers and users that would dig out any prior art in order to invalidate any MS alleged patents?
Honestly, this is a battle MS should not want ot fight. If they do, they will really do so at their own peril (I don't see much public goodwill towards MS as the monopolist suing the competition, most patents would be invalidated, and the ones with any legal basis would see a US only version of Linux been released with any "infringing" stuff removed, while Europe and other places with sane patent law just ignore the whole issue).
The only thing missing in the equation for the x386 architecture would be drivers, but the considerable muscle of Sun may persuade manufacturers to be more amenable to providing drivers for Solaris, even if it is GPLed v3, thant they have been so far for Linux. Most userland tools have been ported already, are easy to port, or may even run under binary compatibility mode without alterations.
.... when you distribute code.
It is not as complicated as some make want us to believe.
When any company mandates to you (their client, for bunnies sakes!) to upgrade, you upgrade. Period. They play the tune and you dance it or get stuffed.
With FOSS you call all the shots, if a project dies you have options and you dictate the timmings for migration if necessary.
Why is that so many people out there are afraid to be owners of their own computing infrastructure?
You can be left in the same situation with a products based on closed source.
The fundamental difference is that with the open solution you have got a fighting chance to keep things going if you really need to.
With closed source you may be completely and utterly in your own with no access to the code and with no rights whatsoever to obtain it.
I utterly fail to see how I would be worst off with a dying FOSS project rather than with a CSS one.
With CSS your provider plays the tune and you dance.
With FOSS you play the tune, if you want to, and you may decide to dance, or not. In other words you are in command of your IT infrastructure, but many people and businesses are afraid to take responsibilities for their own technological future.
You are using subjective judgments there. You have no way to know if the guy with the keys for the "safe" datacentre may be bribed to pull your disk and make a runner.
Encrypting cost you little and contributes to your peace of mind, it does not solve all problems, but at least addresses the one where a thief with light feet is involved....
... where else it is obligatory, mate?
Not the UK btw, and I don't think neither Germany, France or Spain.
Forced voting is a bad idea. If the citizenry can be bothered to vote then they deserve the politicians they get.
And why he was in that place, don't you?
... it should not be patentable.
Entrepreneurs should contemplate that a new, useful product should sell well during the first bits of its time in the market, because if it is any good, it will be copied.
That is a reality of the market and people should deal with it. The only thing that patents do is getting on the way of an efficient way of producing something.
If you have something novel then you should have your own chinese company lined up ready to make it cheap, pretty much at the same price as your competitors....
Now tell us, which choercive tool is Stallman using to force you to accept FSF's licensing scheme when you write your own software?
If you are talking about other people's software, there is nothing to discuss really, it is other people's software and they can do as they wish with it.
But about yours, how are you being forced to to anything at all?
Give us some examples of those wonderful DRM induced markets please.
Because people are falling over themselves to work interminable hours, give their work for free, just for somebody else to reap the benefits and not giving anything back in exchange.
I may be willing to be charitable with a poor sod, but with corporations and conglomerates? Well, I am not that charitable. Or stupid.
BSDs ar a micro minority for a reason: contributors know they would not benefit in anyway by releasing their code with this license. GPL is the perfect license in a capitalist society, where greed is the best lubricant to facilitate progress.
People seem to be wary of somebody with principles and willing to achieve them by all practical means at his disposal.
That is not how a nutjob behaves, Stallman is coherent and consistent. You may not agree with his politics, but that does not make him nut job.
Once you modify stuff in the public domain you acquire rights over the modified product.
So clearly public domain releases are completely unsuitable if you want to preserve full access to new modifications of new contributors.
Tivo benefits from software they did not write in its entirety, they release it and then block software with changes from running. So in other words they screw the end user by means of hardware contraptions. They are curtailing end user's freedoms.
It is perfectly legitimate t force them to play fair or to ask them to write their own stuff frankly.
But the matter of fact is that Stallman has done the sane thing and protected the software with the help of lawyers, so his opinions are there for all to see in black and white and sanctioned by a lawyers.
Linus built on top of that legal basis and in many occasions has declared he does not care at all about the matters of freedom. I really fail to see how somebody uninformed about the legal implications of writing software would be a suitable leader in matters of freedom and copyright.
News at 11.
Sir, you have no idea what you are talking about.
There are many applications in many different industries for which Linux does not scale (unless you are Google and have to build a grid OS from scratch to use those "cheap" Linux boxes), with Solaris your machines grow with your solution with little or no changes whatsoever. With Linux that is an impossibility in many cases.
Linux is great, is the best thing that has happened to the computer industry in the last 10 years, but from that it does not follow that it is the only good technology out there.
Solaris 10 is technologically superior in many different levels, and unlike previously, now Sun is backing the OS to run on x386 architecture (which they did not do when Linux was starting. Big mistake but that seems to have been corrected). Sun will go as far as to support their boxes running Linux if so you wish, but in many situations a Sparc machines with SOlaris is he right tool for the job
What the GPL 3 is trying to address ia a purely technical issue.
The day provisions of the kind you are mentioning find their way on the GPl then we know it would be dead and new arrangemtns would need to be made.