Windows.Forms really needs to be *the* standard implementation.
Bullshit. Mono supports Windows.Forms via Wine. There is no way this can be "*the* standard". Windows.Forms is tied to the Win32 API, which even MS considers outdated. That is why they are replacing it in Longhorn. From this already discussed article:
And if you're developing a Windows GUI app today using Microsoft's "official" latest-and-greatest Windows programming environment, WinForms, you're going to have to start over again in two years to support Longhorn and Avalon.
Does this account for a significant reductions in spam? At my work account I got less than 15 spam messages between 1 pm EDT on Sunday and 11 am EDT today (Monday). I usually get about 150 spam messages in the same period... I also noticed much less traffic on another spam infested account (signal to noise at about 1%).
Too bad you posted as an AC, since you make a good point.
I admit that I am mixing few different things when I talk about fair use. In addition to fair use as explicitly defined by law, I also look at the following criterea:
The Book criterion
The CD criterion
The book criterion is the fact that if I have a book, I can use it anywhere I want - at home, at the beach, at a friend's house. I can lend the book to others, I can even sell the book. Digital music can satisfy all of these uses, and none of them are copyright infringement. Any additional schemes which limit these uses (whether it is limitting the number of computers on which I can listen to it, or the quality degradation involved in burning CDs) I consider limitting my fair use rights.
The CD criterion adds the option of atually making copies - I can burn a copy of a music CD so that I can listen to it in the car, another copy for the bedroom stereo, one for the living room stereo, and one for the PC at work. This is just satisfying the right to use the content in any place, adjusted for the technology involved.
I believe both of these cases are within fair use rights. If either of these uses is illegal, then I think copyright law is more broken than even people here realise.
The DRM schemes dreamt up by music executives clearly try to limit the ways we can currently use content in the form of books or CDs, even if technically these are not explicitly part of the laws regarding fair use. (IANAL, in case people were wondering - if there are more knowledgable people about the legal standing of the cases I have shown, please post!).
This is the reason for my original comment that the iTMS agreement and DRM in general restrict existing rights.
But it makes sense. Whether you're drawing a contract to protect intellectual property or protect *distribution* of intellectual property, in either case you are deliberately writing a contract that protects some actions and prohibits other actions.
No, it doesn't make sense. Is it really so hard to see that the two are not comparable at all?
Here is why these are completely different: the iTMS agrement is a contract, the GPL is a license. Contracts are based on contract law, and the GPL is based on Copyright law. You can check Groklaw for a decent explanation of the GPL: see the "Copyright and the GPL" section".
Further more, the GPL is a license which grants you rights above and beyond what the law grants you (fair use rights are part of copyright law). The iTMS agreement (and DRM in general) restricts your rights to fewer than granted by fair use. This is why EULAs and such are controversial, and may not really be enforcable.
The expansion of H-1b over the objections of 82% of the American public...
The expansion was temporary, and was not renewed by congress. The cap is back to 65k/year, as it was before the dotcom bubble. The limit for fiscal '04 was reached some time in February.
As others have mentioned, it is much easier to get the "replacement trainees" on an L1 visa (employees of a foreign branch of a multinational corp.)
I haven't thought of it before, but it does indeed seem that the difficulty of hiring H1B's and sponsoring employment-based permanent residents may be one of the reasons for the IT outsourcing boom...
This is how building the SOAP fault is shown, and I don't think it is right. I thought there are plenty of tools in the Java world that will provide you with better ways to handle this - am I mistaken?
Especially with the recent announcements of improved integration between KDE and Gnome, they may be able to do this in the future with little or no effort.
... unless you have read the paper, of course, in which case it will be a pointless answer...
1. There is an explanantion of how X compatibility can be achieved, and it is pointed out that such a compatibility is required for Y to become widespread,
2. Under the requirements, he lists the kernel 2.4 ATI driver, so he is using existing XFree drivers.
3. see other posts in this thread
4. It's a framework, with a working base implementation. The paper is well written, and allows for the real work on Y to commence. Of course it will take more than one year to make it complete, but of all the "replacements" of X, this one seems to be best positioned for a possible success. After all, it took another undergraduate 4-5 months to get his hoby project to a working state to be shared with others, and it took few years before that project took off...
Looks like you are right - SLT also has article from the Wall Street Journal. Can someone confirm that it actually appeared in a printed copy of the WSJ?
I didn't see anyone pointing this out yet - Microsoft changed their licensing recently to say that if there are IP issues with Microsoft's software, they will defend their customers against SCO-like actions. They also started mentioning that this is something that OSS companies don't do.
With this fund, that particular "advantage" of Microsoft's solutions will be minimized (it won't go completely away, until the fund reaches ~40 billion:-).
Besides the fallacy that sharing files with friends results in lost income (while Napster was operating, CD sales and profits for the RIAA grew, once it shut down, sales and profits went down), there is also the reality of the current copyright laws, which seem to be geared exactly towards keeping creative works from the public domain. 70 years past the death of the owner? Please...
Bring back 14 years of copyright (and don't allow any extensions)!
According to the Intersil Web site the documentation is out, and available under NDA. I don't know if the folks at wlan-ng had to sign an NDA for the Prism 2/2.5 docs, but if they did, I assume that they can do the same for the Prism GT (read drivers could be forthcoming)
Now that's funny:-) Too bad I am out of mod points...
Donald Knuth? Yeah, right (was Re:On fvwm...)
on
fvwm Turns Ten
·
· Score: 1
Nice try though... Of course, prof. Knuth doesn't take graduate students anymore, and if he did, they wouldn't be rewriting fvwm...
Re:Slightly OT: Linking static libs w/GPL'd code?
on
What if SCO is Right?
·
· Score: 1
Closed-source is a nasty can of worms. You have only the vendor's word as to what is in it. If they are incompetent or crooked you can get smacked from behind at any moment.
Bingo! Consider this - do you think if the judgement survives all the apeals, Microsoft will help the MS SQL licensees? And unlike SCO's empty claims, this has gone through the courts already...
I have been hosting with NPSIS since the end of '99, and I am very happy with them. Check out their web site for the different packages (they run FreeBSD).
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit. Mono supports Windows.Forms via Wine. There is no way this can be "*the* standard". Windows.Forms is tied to the Win32 API, which even MS considers outdated. That is why they are replacing it in Longhorn. From this already discussed article:
So it is a vicious Mercedes?
Does this account for a significant reductions in spam? At my work account I got less than 15 spam messages between 1 pm EDT on Sunday and 11 am EDT today (Monday). I usually get about 150 spam messages in the same period...
I also noticed much less traffic on another spam infested account (signal to noise at about 1%).
This was already mentioned before: the source is available
I admit that I am mixing few different things when I talk about fair use. In addition to fair use as explicitly defined by law, I also look at the following criterea:
- The Book criterion
- The CD criterion
The book criterion is the fact that if I have a book, I can use it anywhere I want - at home, at the beach, at a friend's house. I can lend the book to others, I can even sell the book. Digital music can satisfy all of these uses, and none of them are copyright infringement. Any additional schemes which limit these uses (whether it is limitting the number of computers on which I can listen to it, or the quality degradation involved in burning CDs) I consider limitting my fair use rights.The CD criterion adds the option of atually making copies - I can burn a copy of a music CD so that I can listen to it in the car, another copy for the bedroom stereo, one for the living room stereo, and one for the PC at work. This is just satisfying the right to use the content in any place, adjusted for the technology involved.
I believe both of these cases are within fair use rights. If either of these uses is illegal, then I think copyright law is more broken than even people here realise.
The DRM schemes dreamt up by music executives clearly try to limit the ways we can currently use content in the form of books or CDs, even if technically these are not explicitly part of the laws regarding fair use. (IANAL, in case people were wondering - if there are more knowledgable people about the legal standing of the cases I have shown, please post!).
This is the reason for my original comment that the iTMS agreement and DRM in general restrict existing rights.
I am glad my post was helpful. I am also glad I removed some more inflamatory statements before I submitted it ;-)
But it makes sense. Whether you're drawing a contract to protect intellectual property or protect *distribution* of intellectual property, in either case you are deliberately writing a contract that protects some actions and prohibits other actions.
No, it doesn't make sense. Is it really so hard to see that the two are not comparable at all?
Here is why these are completely different: the iTMS agrement is a contract, the GPL is a license. Contracts are based on contract law, and the GPL is based on Copyright law. You can check Groklaw for a decent explanation of the GPL: see the "Copyright and the GPL" section".
Further more, the GPL is a license which grants you rights above and beyond what the law grants you (fair use rights are part of copyright law). The iTMS agreement (and DRM in general) restricts your rights to fewer than granted by fair use. This is why EULAs and such are controversial, and may not really be enforcable.
The expansion of H-1b over the objections of 82% of the American public...
The expansion was temporary, and was not renewed by congress. The cap is back to 65k/year, as it was before the dotcom bubble. The limit for fiscal '04 was reached some time in February.
As others have mentioned, it is much easier to get the "replacement trainees" on an L1 visa (employees of a foreign branch of a multinational corp.)
I haven't thought of it before, but it does indeed seem that the difficulty of hiring H1B's and sponsoring employment-based permanent residents may be one of the reasons for the IT outsourcing boom...
This seems to have happened to fark.com, unless there's another explaination for this.
On the top left it says "This is the Russian section of Fark.com" and links to the original. I don't know if it is really legit though...
Especially with the recent announcements of improved integration between KDE and Gnome, they may be able to do this in the future with little or no effort.
One of Mono's sub-projects is to port VB.NET. It seems it is not very actively worked on at the moment, though...
... unless you have read the paper, of course, in which case it will be a pointless answer...
1. There is an explanantion of how X compatibility can be achieved, and it is pointed out that such a compatibility is required for Y to become widespread,
2. Under the requirements, he lists the kernel 2.4 ATI driver, so he is using existing XFree drivers.
3. see other posts in this thread
4. It's a framework, with a working base implementation. The paper is well written, and allows for the real work on Y to commence. Of course it will take more than one year to make it complete, but of all the "replacements" of X, this one seems to be best positioned for a possible success. After all, it took another undergraduate 4-5 months to get his hoby project to a working state to be shared with others, and it took few years before that project took off...
Looks like you are right - SLT also has article from the Wall Street Journal. Can someone confirm that it actually appeared in a printed copy of the WSJ?
I didn't see anyone pointing this out yet - Microsoft changed their licensing recently to say that if there are IP issues with Microsoft's software, they will defend their customers against SCO-like actions. They also started mentioning that this is something that OSS companies don't do.
:-).
With this fund, that particular "advantage" of Microsoft's solutions will be minimized (it won't go completely away, until the fund reaches ~40 billion
An even bigger surprise was that when I clicked it, Gnumeric started up and opened it without complaints...
Besides the fallacy that sharing files with friends results in lost income (while Napster was operating, CD sales and profits for the RIAA grew, once it shut down, sales and profits went down), there is also the reality of the current copyright laws, which seem to be geared exactly towards keeping creative works from the public domain. 70 years past the death of the owner? Please...
Bring back 14 years of copyright (and don't allow any extensions)!
The second link in the article is to the MozillaQuest site, known for its brain-dead articles about Mozilla...
Though I can't really picture Torvalds doing Martial Arts.
;-).
That's why he married the Finnish national karate champion
In the grand history of well-written technical books, it is also occasionally funny.
I hope the reviewer meant "grand tradition," although I don't see how this cliche fits here...
According to the Intersil Web site the documentation is out, and available under NDA. I don't know if the folks at wlan-ng had to sign an NDA for the Prism 2/2.5 docs, but if they did, I assume that they can do the same for the Prism GT (read drivers could be forthcoming)
Now that's funny :-) Too bad I am out of mod points...
Nice try though... Of course, prof. Knuth doesn't take graduate students anymore, and if he did, they wouldn't be rewriting fvwm...
Closed-source is a nasty can of worms. You have only the vendor's word as to what is in it. If they are incompetent or crooked you can get smacked from behind at any moment.
Bingo! Consider this - do you think if the judgement survives all the apeals, Microsoft will help the MS SQL licensees? And unlike SCO's empty claims, this has gone through the courts already...
I have been hosting with NPSIS since the end of '99, and I am very happy with them. Check out their web site for the different packages (they run FreeBSD).