Accept that you screwed up, and move on. You've already milked Buffy for over twelve years. It's now a shrivelled husk and nobody really cares any more. Please don't do the same with a concept that was mediocre and never compelling to begin with.
You know, maybe you could come up with (gasp) a third idea!
And the killing joke: the rewarmed version UFO Aftermath is a piece of shit in comparison. You can blow through some (some) fences and walls, and that's about it. Also, the fancy pants 3D engine looks like grey sludgy crap compared to the clean, clear fun isometrics of XCOM.
And, after years of whining and in-fighting and bitching and doing nothing constructive FOSS zealots will emulate this new de facto standard. Frankly, I hope MS patent this out the wazoo and make GPL lunixtics beg to be allowed to play.
SCO has intimidated exactly nobody into buying a license, and they are getting their ass bitchslapped all over the courts by both Novell and IBM in the preliminary stages of both cases. The potential is there for abuse, but SCO are illustrating exactly how not to do it.
For us in the FOSS community to finally ditch those FSF lunatics and their insanely restrictive GPL.
Am I joking? No, not really. Everyone else seems to be able to play nicely together. Linus was never that keen on the GPL, he only GPLd the kernel because A) he didn't really mind either way and B) RMS wouldn't have it any other way. But GNU needs Linux a lot more than Linux needs GNU.
2004 might be the year that we see forking between GPL and non-GPL version of the same code base. Or if GNU/Linux based distros want to cut off their noses to spite their faces, I'm sure BSD developers will be delighted to step into the breach and get the job done without the skrieking and tantrums.
An indespensible book for the next generation
on
Practical C++
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
As far as Stallman and his minions are concerned, Free means GPL. Any challenge to the GPL, however theoretical or unintentional, brings the zealots buzzing out of their hive of giant hornets, just spoiling for a fight. And they've been spoiling for this fight for years, purely on personality grounds.
That's the whole story. GPL or go to Hell. Nothing else.
The FSF are a bunch of kids that have build a treehouse and invited the neighbourhood kids to bring their toys round and play. You can bring your own toys in, but you have to leave them there, and you can't even write your name on them, or tidy them away in any particular corner. If you want to play in the treehouse, you must follow the rules exactly, to the letter, no exceptions, no matter how neat your toys are.
Unless, that is, you're called Linus. Then there are different rules. Because back when they were building the treehouse, they forgot about the god damn floor, and Linus built that for them.
The long explanation is, well, long and boring. The simple explanation is that GPL advocates are sexually frustrated social retards who carry around a knife at all times just in case they get the chance to cut off their nose to spite their face.
In this case, they refuse to add "This product includes software developed by The XFree86 Project, Inc (http://www.xfree86.org/) and its contributors" to the end user documentation. That's it. That's the whole story. Make your own judgement about whether my "simple explanation" is hyperbole.
I have read the license, and sir, you are full of shit. What is "no advertising without written permission" meant to mean? What part of the license are you referring to? Can you quote it and explain why it's incompatible with the GPL? Shrieking and asserting isn't helping your cause.
I followed the link and read both the utterly unhelpful Mandrake whine, and the (to me) pretty much unrestrictive XFree86 license, and I still don't see what the big furry deal is.
Perhaps you could get off your high horse and explain why the license isn't GPL compatible, and also why that's a problem when it's being linked to and not compiled together with GPL code.
Please shut the fuck up, you hypocritical assweed. You are the worst culprit among the crud that passes for editors here for posting duplicate stories. Eat shit and die.
Slashdot Mirror
What more do you need to know?
Accept that you screwed up, and move on. You've already milked Buffy for over twelve years. It's now a shrivelled husk and nobody really cares any more. Please don't do the same with a concept that was mediocre and never compelling to begin with.
You know, maybe you could come up with (gasp) a third idea!
Let's see.
Kazaa.
eDonkey.
Gnutella.
MSN messenger.
Yahoo messenger.
ICQ messenger.
Jabber.
Usenet.
FTP.
HTTP.
Email.
Did I miss any? (answer: about a jillion).
If you ever visit here, you should check it out.
And the killing joke: the rewarmed version UFO Aftermath is a piece of shit in comparison. You can blow through some (some) fences and walls, and that's about it. Also, the fancy pants 3D engine looks like grey sludgy crap compared to the clean, clear fun isometrics of XCOM.
Dear god, are we going backwards in game design?
Answers:
#1. Don't you think it's immoral for you to have viewed those pages based on your argument in #2?
#2. Don't you think this is a pointless argument because of what you said in #1?
What they've been selling is revocable licenses to decrypt. When they go belly up, a lot of people are going to find that out the hard way.
And, after years of whining and in-fighting and bitching and doing nothing constructive FOSS zealots will emulate this new de facto standard. Frankly, I hope MS patent this out the wazoo and make GPL lunixtics beg to be allowed to play.
SCO has intimidated exactly nobody into buying a license, and they are getting their ass bitchslapped all over the courts by both Novell and IBM in the preliminary stages of both cases. The potential is there for abuse, but SCO are illustrating exactly how not to do it.
We're not pigs.
Off topic? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA HAAaaaaaaaaaaaaa. Nice one. Just wait until you graduate.
Providing more fuel for further attention grabbing rants.
Film at 11.
For us in the FOSS community to finally ditch those FSF lunatics and their insanely restrictive GPL.
Am I joking? No, not really. Everyone else seems to be able to play nicely together. Linus was never that keen on the GPL, he only GPLd the kernel because A) he didn't really mind either way and B) RMS wouldn't have it any other way. But GNU needs Linux a lot more than Linux needs GNU.
2004 might be the year that we see forking between GPL and non-GPL version of the same code base. Or if GNU/Linux based distros want to cut off their noses to spite their faces, I'm sure BSD developers will be delighted to step into the breach and get the job done without the skrieking and tantrums.
Learn Hindi in 30 Days
As far as Stallman and his minions are concerned, Free means GPL. Any challenge to the GPL, however theoretical or unintentional, brings the zealots buzzing out of their hive of giant hornets, just spoiling for a fight. And they've been spoiling for this fight for years, purely on personality grounds.
That's the whole story. GPL or go to Hell. Nothing else.
Does your message to Kev form part of the product? No, so please stop screaming like a spoiled toddler.
The FSF are a bunch of kids that have build a treehouse and invited the neighbourhood kids to bring their toys round and play. You can bring your own toys in, but you have to leave them there, and you can't even write your name on them, or tidy them away in any particular corner. If you want to play in the treehouse, you must follow the rules exactly, to the letter, no exceptions, no matter how neat your toys are.
Unless, that is, you're called Linus. Then there are different rules. Because back when they were building the treehouse, they forgot about the god damn floor, and Linus built that for them.
>Anyone have an explanation?
The long explanation is, well, long and boring. The simple explanation is that GPL advocates are sexually frustrated social retards who carry around a knife at all times just in case they get the chance to cut off their nose to spite their face.
In this case, they refuse to add "This product includes software developed by The XFree86 Project, Inc (http://www.xfree86.org/) and its contributors" to the end user documentation. That's it. That's the whole story. Make your own judgement about whether my "simple explanation" is hyperbole.
I have read the license, and sir, you are full of shit. What is "no advertising without written permission" meant to mean? What part of the license are you referring to? Can you quote it and explain why it's incompatible with the GPL? Shrieking and asserting isn't helping your cause.
I followed the link and read both the utterly unhelpful Mandrake whine, and the (to me) pretty much unrestrictive XFree86 license, and I still don't see what the big furry deal is.
Perhaps you could get off your high horse and explain why the license isn't GPL compatible, and also why that's a problem when it's being linked to and not compiled together with GPL code.
Really? They didn't shoot real bullets at him? Where do you get this kind of insider information?
Dude, you really, really, really need to move out of your parents' basement.
Please shut the fuck up, you hypocritical assweed. You are the worst culprit among the crud that passes for editors here for posting duplicate stories. Eat shit and die.
Because the Indian programmers currently eating our fucking lunch, well they took the time to learn assembly language, right? Right?
The lazy incompetents that masquerade as "editors" round these parts, would we have to block fewer annoying ads?