Quantum computing? I was a software/pure-maths undergrad and was investigating a thesis in formal models of quantum computing. It involves lots of algebra (REAL algebra), tensors, modules and funtional analysis. I can't imagine a high school student even being able to read one sentence of anything written about how quantum computing works.
I just don't get it. Open source isn't about taking over the world, but yet a lot of people seem to think that way.
There are no "products"- noone needs to sell anything to anyone. The issue is freedom, as in GNU/RMS."Open source" isn't "about" anything. If you want to download and use whatever software you want, well okay.
What is important is that people are free to do this. Which cannot happen when the defacto standard is a proprietary and secret platform (secret binary plugins, IE only sites etc). Going "open source! open source! FSF are hippies!" is the way to have people lose their freedoms because they're not even aware of the problem.
(Unfortunately) this is also the same reasoning for not transitioning over to Linux
But it's wrong - Windows is broken, in that it restricts your freedom, spys on you and encourages a developer culture of sucking up your money without fixing bugs.
Not that I'm biased or anything. The idea is to monitor the program while it's running and use the call graph to generate sequence diagrams and such. Feedback and ideas for further reasearch welcome:)
You are confused. trademark is a monopoly claimed over the usage of a label (eg - the name "Debian") so that people can't pretend to be you or otherwise create confusion or damage your reputation.
Maybe that's what the guy in the article who said "Email is a business tool, not a personal messaging system" meant, but that particular sentence is totally false. Email is a set of network protocols that can be used for whatever. What is acceptable usage needs to be explicitly defined in company policy.
Yes, I'm unclear as to how the FTA imports affect this sort of thing... are we allowed to copy for the purposes of reverse engineering but not allowed to reverse engineer?
Could you point me towards any relevent literature regarding the ability to sign away these rights via contract/EULA in Australia (eg. see the Blizzard vs bnetd thing in the US)
I have to do much prior art patent searching at work, and point 4 shows some sort of misunderstanding that would afect everything else you've said.
Once you've read enough patents, you realise that all software patents are about concepts and ideas. "A method and apparatus for doing FOO" is not a tangible "invention" like a steam engine is, since software is more abstract. A software patent covers all possible ways of implementing an idea (eg. read an MS one about storing heirachical data in a relational DB the other day), and it's considered sufficient description of the workings of some parts of your "invention" to say "insert a software module that does X", which astronomically increases the scope of the patent.
Do you search thousands of patents, consult lawyers and pay cross licencing fees whenever you write any code to make sure you don't infringe one of the plethora of very broad software patents that cover almost anything people have done in the last few decades? Stop stealing other peoples' IP, you IP stealer, stealing all the time!
Free Software (and Open Source I guess) is about cooperation and working together.
Proprietary software is about not cooperating, and many big businesses seem to be about destroying anything which gets in the way of their profit or control.
Microsoft can't "go open source" until it collectively believes that cooperation is a good idea and stops trying to destroy or control everything. And I'm guessing that won't happen any time soon.
See, the problem is when the users of closed proprietary software want to run it in 5-10 years' time or open their documents that are in a secret format in 5-10 years' time, or use their data in a way you hadn't anticipated.
Are you going to modify your software in any way requested by any user, or disclose secrete data formats? Most companies won't even do more than fix bugs, if that.
So the freedom that users get with their Free/Open-Source software is quite important in a very pragmatic sense.
Rejoice that FC has given you the honour of educating the infrared masses so that they may better serve FC:) Are you saying this doesn't make you happy?
Slashdot Mirror
IIRC, it's Octopodi due to its Greek origins...
http://energybulletin.net/12125.html
Maybe if they establish the appearance of just making wild guesses then they won't be sued again if a "leak" happens to be true ;)
Quantum computing? I was a software/pure-maths undergrad and was investigating a thesis in formal models of quantum computing. It involves lots of algebra (REAL algebra), tensors, modules and funtional analysis. I can't imagine a high school student even being able to read one sentence of anything written about how quantum computing works.
There are no "products"- noone needs to sell anything to anyone. The issue is freedom, as in GNU/RMS."Open source" isn't "about" anything. If you want to download and use whatever software you want, well okay.
What is important is that people are free to do this. Which cannot happen when the defacto standard is a proprietary and secret platform (secret binary plugins, IE only sites etc). Going "open source! open source! FSF are hippies!" is the way to have people lose their freedoms because they're not even aware of the problem.
Join us now and share the software
How to become acclimatised to facism
But it's wrong - Windows is broken, in that it restricts your freedom, spys on you and encourages a developer culture of sucking up your money without fixing bugs.
:D
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine." -- RFC 1925
www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~drt
:)
Not that I'm biased or anything. The idea is to monitor the program while it's running and use the call graph to generate sequence diagrams and such. Feedback and ideas for further reasearch welcome
If i recall correctly, they've filed something like 3000 in the recent past and are accelerating...
The point of the GPL is to benefit everyone, not yourself :/
You are confused. trademark is a monopoly claimed over the usage of a label (eg - the name "Debian") so that people can't pretend to be you or otherwise create confusion or damage your reputation.
If the GPL is "not enforcable", whatever that means, then you are using my copyrighted code without a licence and I sue you :)
Maybe that's what the guy in the article who said "Email is a business tool, not a personal messaging system" meant, but that particular sentence is totally false. Email is a set of network protocols that can be used for whatever. What is acceptable usage needs to be explicitly defined in company policy.
Yes, I'm unclear as to how the FTA imports affect this sort of thing... are we allowed to copy for the purposes of reverse engineering but not allowed to reverse engineer?
Very interesting.
Could you point me towards any relevent literature regarding the ability to sign away these rights via contract/EULA in Australia (eg. see the Blizzard vs bnetd thing in the US)
So embed a Gecko control in an application with no webbrowser buttons or other functionality and call it "remote app client".
I have to do much prior art patent searching at work, and point 4 shows some sort of misunderstanding that would afect everything else you've said.
Once you've read enough patents, you realise that all software patents are about concepts and ideas. "A method and apparatus for doing FOO" is not a tangible "invention" like a steam engine is, since software is more abstract. A software patent covers all possible ways of implementing an idea (eg. read an MS one about storing heirachical data in a relational DB the other day), and it's considered sufficient description of the workings of some parts of your "invention" to say "insert a software module that does X", which astronomically increases the scope of the patent.
Do you search thousands of patents, consult lawyers and pay cross licencing fees whenever you write any code to make sure you don't infringe one of the plethora of very broad software patents that cover almost anything people have done in the last few decades? Stop stealing other peoples' IP, you IP stealer, stealing all the time!
No, you can't have a pony
No, you can't have a pony
Free Software (and Open Source I guess) is about cooperation and working together.
Proprietary software is about not cooperating, and many big businesses seem to be about destroying anything which gets in the way of their profit or control.
Microsoft can't "go open source" until it collectively believes that cooperation is a good idea and stops trying to destroy or control everything. And I'm guessing that won't happen any time soon.
See, the problem is when the users of closed proprietary software want to run it in 5-10 years' time or open their documents that are in a secret format in 5-10 years' time, or use their data in a way you hadn't anticipated.
Are you going to modify your software in any way requested by any user, or disclose secrete data formats? Most companies won't even do more than fix bugs, if that.
So the freedom that users get with their Free/Open-Source software is quite important in a very pragmatic sense.
No, you can't have a pony.
Rejoice that FC has given you the honour of educating the infrared masses so that they may better serve FC :) Are you saying this doesn't make you happy?