For example, some guys a few months ago demanded the execution of the people that make cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper.
Specific threat=jail time.
It is completely unnecessary if you ask me, I am sure there are laws before this one that would have applied to trheats of any kind, but governments nowadays think they have to be seen to be doing something, and one of the things they can do is to legislate more.
First of all, 6 billion monkeys are not looking at the software. People are looking at it, using it, finding problems with it, reproducing problems, reporting them.
For sure there are many gaping holes in FOSS, as there are in any complex piece of software.
But in FOSS the interest is to fix them as soon as possible, there is no bottom line to take care off that could compromise doing that kind of work once a problem is found.
WIth closed source software problems may be important or not, according to the needs and whims of the company making the software.
We don't need to look when you feel like we should be looking.
We need to look when, well, we need to. And when somebody does, everybody can benefit. Accumulate all those small effects and it snowballs into a product that is very versitile.
It is like freedom of speech: not everybody uses it, but we need it to advance society.
How many version of Vista do we have? I can think of 4 right now. I am sure there are more.
What is the substantial difference between them? Tehcnically nothing if you ask me. THe differentiation is completely artificial since it costs nothing extra to the company in question to give the same version to everybody.
So basically they are looking after their needs, not mine.
How many current versions of Ubuntu are there? I think they are 3, and in reality all derive from the same one. You are not limited, you can move from one to another, the fixes and direction of the distributions are dictated by people with similar interests to mine.
I know which pair of eyes to trust, specially since is easily demonstrable that people involved in FOSS are as capable as anybody else when it comes to programming and design, they just have chosen a path that benefits them *and* us.
If that is all what they can come up with, let me say I am not impressed.
If Samba, Mono and WIne have to be dropped, I say good riddance. It is high time that other solutions are found that do not ape MS stuff.
As for graphical interfaces and OpenOffice.org, I really want to see MS making fools of themselves here.
I am itiching to see this go to court. That would expose MS as the unethical company they are (not for the first time mind you) and will let us all wondering how a company with so many resources prefers to litigate instead of innovate.
By using open software you have at least a fighting chance to keep some old software running.
With closed software you are completely and utterly at the mercy of the software provider and any problems they may face (software company bankrupt! Ooops!).
.... are prepared to put with inconveniences to keep our computing infrastrcuture under our control, and not under that of external entities.
By extension that keeps the freedoms of people "using the best tool for the job", once they are taken for a ride (they always are) they have a full fucntioning infrastructure to fall back to.
We have to guide our decisions based on the best scientific knowledge available at the time.
Yes, aliens obliterating the dinosaurs is a theory. But it is a bullshit theory with no base in a single shred of evidence. Comparing that against the several theories that exist based on the verifiable fossil record (no matter how incomplete) is a complete no brainer.
Now, the day you find evidence of aliens packing dino burgers in an industrial escale to Proxima Centaury, well, then we may remove the bullshit adjective from your theory, but as it stands, bullshit is because you are pulling it from your a@@.
A gear is a working model of a physical device performing a function, even if it has never been built.
A device is not infinitely reproducible, thus it incours productions costs, which is one of the reasons patents were invented: to give an incentive to the inventors to recoup the production costs of producing their invention in indtustrial, commercial terms.
A piece of software is nothing but an idea. A set of instructions. Speech in its purest sense. We all have ideas all the time. They cost nothing to produce or reproduce as such, and thus should not be patentable for that reason.
The manifestation of an idea in form of a document is protected amply by copyright. If you want to distribute your idea copyright grants you exclusivity on the copies. What is frankly unnaceptable is stopping other people having similar ideas expressed in different terms being punished. It is a quasi fascist practice if you ask me.
Software not being more that one way of expressing ideas should not be patentable on the basis in which you would not patent all novels about Nazis or the sonata muscial form.
Human societies are built on top of sharing knowledge. The more we share, the more we progress.
But then came this idea that people can invent things out of thin air, and should be recompensed for their efforts.
But the people that came first with the compensation idea were not so idiotic as to think that invetiveness deserved ethernal gratitude, after all no invention comes out of thin air, unless standing in the shoulders of giants makes the air an inventor breathes some how more rarified.
Slashdot Mirror
I was able to obtain most of the BBC Music Magazine winners this year on eMusic.
If you are a classical music buff and care about DRM free music you should look at eMusic.
It is to make specific threats.
For example, some guys a few months ago demanded the execution of the people that make cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper.
Specific threat=jail time.
It is completely unnecessary if you ask me, I am sure there are laws before this one that would have applied to trheats of any kind, but governments nowadays think they have to be seen to be doing something, and one of the things they can do is to legislate more.
The Web has been available to all since around 15 years ago, give or take.
This judge would have been in his mid forties, I think the situation is more like others have described, playing dumb for posterity.
First of all, 6 billion monkeys are not looking at the software. People are looking at it, using it, finding problems with it, reproducing problems, reporting them.
For sure there are many gaping holes in FOSS, as there are in any complex piece of software.
But in FOSS the interest is to fix them as soon as possible, there is no bottom line to take care off that could compromise doing that kind of work once a problem is found.
WIth closed source software problems may be important or not, according to the needs and whims of the company making the software.
We don't need to look when you feel like we should be looking.
We need to look when, well, we need to. And when somebody does, everybody can benefit. Accumulate all those small effects and it snowballs into a product that is very versitile.
It is like freedom of speech: not everybody uses it, but we need it to advance society.
How many version of Vista do we have? I can think of 4 right now. I am sure there are more.
What is the substantial difference between them? Tehcnically nothing if you ask me. THe differentiation is completely artificial since it costs nothing extra to the company in question to give the same version to everybody.
So basically they are looking after their needs, not mine.
How many current versions of Ubuntu are there? I think they are 3, and in reality all derive from the same one. You are not limited, you can move from one to another, the fixes and direction of the distributions are dictated by people with similar interests to mine.
I know which pair of eyes to trust, specially since is easily demonstrable that people involved in FOSS are as capable as anybody else when it comes to programming and design, they just have chosen a path that benefits them *and* us.
235 patents?
In millons of lines of code?
If that is all what they can come up with, let me say I am not impressed.
If Samba, Mono and WIne have to be dropped, I say good riddance. It is high time that other solutions are found that do not ape MS stuff.
As for graphical interfaces and OpenOffice.org, I really want to see MS making fools of themselves here.
I am itiching to see this go to court. That would expose MS as the unethical company they are (not for the first time mind you) and will let us all wondering how a company with so many resources prefers to litigate instead of innovate.
By using open software you have at least a fighting chance to keep some old software running.
With closed software you are completely and utterly at the mercy of the software provider and any problems they may face (software company bankrupt! Ooops!).
.... are prepared to put with inconveniences to keep our computing infrastrcuture under our control, and not under that of external entities.
By extension that keeps the freedoms of people "using the best tool for the job", once they are taken for a ride (they always are) they have a full fucntioning infrastructure to fall back to.
Even then you would have noticed that MS is claiming patents in Linux (and OppenOffice.org).
Moving to Linux is sending a clear message to MS which says "we do not believe your bullshit".
Or words to that intent.
The UK government commissioned an study that emphasizes the cost is most likely to be negligible.
So frankly it is becoming a waste of time to engage in any discussion with deniers of the problem.
What are we suppossed to do?
Sit down and consult a shaman?
We have to guide our decisions based on the best scientific knowledge available at the time.
Yes, aliens obliterating the dinosaurs is a theory. But it is a bullshit theory with no base in a single shred of evidence. Comparing that against the several theories that exist based on the verifiable fossil record (no matter how incomplete) is a complete no brainer.
Now, the day you find evidence of aliens packing dino burgers in an industrial escale to Proxima Centaury, well, then we may remove the bullshit adjective from your theory, but as it stands, bullshit is because you are pulling it from your a@@.
Yep. The computer.
And that runs what? Yup, software.
If that is not important, well, I don't know of many things that could possibly be.
But as shown in recent US elections, many USians do not think that is an important issue.
.... what was the rationale behind such asinine agreement?
....
As we all know, there are no violations, what was the commercial sense of enter in an agreement with somebody that has absolutely no serious claim?
No exxuses frankly, too little, too late, and to wrap it all up people will have to disintangle the Mono based stuff that is creeping in
Microsoft = Lies = Tainted.
MS is seen with suspicion in many high places now.
Pepople are starting to smell the coffee, MS is underestimating the level of resentment that is out there. To their peril.
Why are corporations allowed to donate at all?
They can't vote, so there must be a string attached to the "gift".
Thanks for describing a database input method.
Honestly...
A gear is a working model of a physical device performing a function, even if it has never been built.
A device is not infinitely reproducible, thus it incours productions costs, which is one of the reasons patents were invented: to give an incentive to the inventors to recoup the production costs of producing their invention in indtustrial, commercial terms.
A piece of software is nothing but an idea. A set of instructions. Speech in its purest sense. We all have ideas all the time. They cost nothing to produce or reproduce as such, and thus should not be patentable for that reason.
The manifestation of an idea in form of a document is protected amply by copyright. If you want to distribute your idea copyright grants you exclusivity on the copies. What is frankly unnaceptable is stopping other people having similar ideas expressed in different terms being punished. It is a quasi fascist practice if you ask me.
Software not being more that one way of expressing ideas should not be patentable on the basis in which you would not patent all novels about Nazis or the sonata muscial form.
Human societies are built on top of sharing knowledge. The more we share, the more we progress.
But then came this idea that people can invent things out of thin air, and should be recompensed for their efforts.
But the people that came first with the compensation idea were not so idiotic as to think that invetiveness deserved ethernal gratitude, after all no invention comes out of thin air, unless standing in the shoulders of giants makes the air an inventor breathes some how more rarified.
Legal claims are made in court.
So far they are just spreading FUD, what is their next step is anyone's guess, whatever it is it is ill advised, unnecessary and stupid.
How do I know? Because the shaky base in which any action would be taken.
MS: drop the bullshit and win based on merit. It will hurt but will be good for you in the long term.
Some people here in /. live in a very interesting alternate Universe.
/ 2006pr/aip/related_party/
Check the statistics of your own government:
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release
please tell me which of those industries has anything to do remotely with "IP exports".
And you help companies like MS become rich while providing zilch in return.
No wait, they may sue you.