IANALEOAL (I am not a license expert, or a lawyer (nor do I sell double-glacing)), so what follows may not be correct anyway;)
I suppose it depends on the difference between the normal and binary only versions. It might make sense to issue the 'core' program LGPL, and then charge for binary-only additions (modules), which the LGPL would cover AFAIK.
Of course this wouldn't make sense if the binary-only one has extra 'core' functionality, in that case can't you just re-license anything that is (c) you, and request that all contributors do the same, to allow the entire thing to be released binary-only.
Personally, I'm not convinced that using (L)GPL'd code like cripple-ware is a Good Thing (tm), and think that a 'free for non-commercial use' clause might be better.
Trolling is what bored 16 year olds do when they are too lazy to do anything else.
Not true. Most of the stuff that gets posted on/. and labelled as 'troll' is not, it's just uninventive crap. There used to be a Usenet FAQ on trolling (anyone got a URL?), that explained what real trolling was. Basically, trolling is posting something in order to provoke a response from clueless people, while at the same time tipping off clued-up people that you are a troll.
Which was the whole reason for all the serious rebuttals. There are people that clueless out there.
Why pander to them? (btw, clueless != newbie, a newbie will get themselves a clue and RTFM before entering into a discusion about something, a clueless person will always be clueless.) --
The Patmos site never really describes their systems as "supercomputers"
Actually, the first paragraph of the Patmos site reads:
The Perpetua(TM) supercomputer/ supersystem by Patmos International Corporation(TM) is state-of-the-art, leading-edge technology
Good point about fp performance though, IIRC K6-II's had poor fp performance anyway (out of interest, how does the fp performance of one node of a proper supercomputer compare to an equivelant x86 chip? --
One thing that we may find, however, is that a certain architecture is emulated better than x86
Or even create a new 'abstract' instruction set that is architecture-independant, hence clean and probably faster to emulate than trying to emulate code optimised for different hardware (hell, we might even see the kernel re-written in Java, so it can run it as byte-code {j/k}). On a side note, do you think code that's been aggressively optimised for a certain architecture will run faster or slower on transmeta than code that's just been 'normally' optimised? --
The only reason to have beowulf at all is that it's more economical than SMP sytems, it's not a better solution than massive SMP IF massive SMP can be made cheaply.
Wrong. SMP relies on shared memory, so doesn't scale as well as a truly parallel (ack, I can never spell that corecktly) architecture.
For SMP, the performance increase as you add extra chips decreases, and tails off dramatically at a relatively small number of chips (12 IIRC) due to the communication bottle-neck (this is for an OS that handles SMP well, Linux doesn't scale at all well... yet). Parallel machines, on the other hand, give a theoretically linear increase in performance as you add more nodes. This is why 'proper' super-computers use parallel transputers, rather than just building big SMP machines.
Actually, the thread does have an interesting point.
The story was misleading -- I read it as any company can re-license GPL'd code as they like, which is not what the discussion was about. Basically, since a company can own copyright on GPL'd code, they can control the distribution of it within the company. Of course, they're still not allowed to distribute binaries without the source, but they can still make money from it, by using modified versions in-house without redistributing the changes in the source.
He then expands this to say that by putting the copyright of new software based on GPL'd code in the name of a 'community', you can choose who to let into the community, and therefore choose who can or can not use/modify the software.
In my opinion, this can be thought of as a "hole" in the GPL, but not as dangerous as the story implied, and was more about what constitutes 'free' and 'fair', than what is legal.
This perpetual attitude of Linux>M$ is kind of annoying. What if Win2K is good? What if it works? What if it's the greatest thing since sliced silicon?
What if it is? The attitude is Linux vs MicroSoft -- not Linux vs Windows. There are far more reasons to... *cough*... dislike M$ than Windows sucking. This is more than products, this is political.;-) --
here's the obligatory 'disecting the Matrix' page, lots of religious/literary/mythological/philosophical references, as well as stuff like:
In the subway showdown, there's an ad on the wall for Sol, a brand of Mexican beer. Sol means "sun" -- as in, the sun was blocked when the sky was scorched. As in, the light of the world (Jesus said, "I am the light of the world." John 8:12). A homonym for "son," as in son of God.
That makes you think some people need to get out more often;) --
After year 2000 we get funny movies about the apocalypse. Strange. It's probably post-modern;)
Speaking of Armageddon, I really want to see some of Robert Rankin's stuff filmed, always thought he was funnier than Pratchett (insert flamewar here:) - although I love reading them both. --
No, it's purely fictional (according to Gilliam himself on 'The Big Breakfast'). Brilliant film, can't wait for Good Omens (brilliant book too, much darker than Pratchet's usual stuff). --
He also did a BT (British Telecom) Commercial (sampled in a Pink Floyd song IIRC). According to the article, he got #150,000 for the SpecSavers commercial, I suppose with the cost of his care, he needs all the money he can - more power to him I say;). One thing he did do to improve his cred was appear at the start of Victor Lewis Smith's brilliant (and always tasteless) show 'TV Offal', which proves he can laugh at himself. I doubt TV Offal was broadcast outside of the UK, since most ppl outside of it wouldn't get all the Esther Rantzen refferences... (The gay Daleks were classic though) --
What, didn't you know the original kernel was written in LISP, and ran on emacs?;-) --
Re:Where you can get the source now...
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 1
Man, DNA's a bit too low level for most hackers, I'm waiting for the C compiler for DNA to come out, then I'm gonna compile the Linux kernel on it and see how much like a penguin it really is... --
Hmmm... 'AC' - that's a very unfortunate acronym;-)
I think Alan Cox has enough integrity not to make changes specifically for Red Hat, and I'm sure this has nothing to do with the anouncement that the kernel's now going to be exclusively released in.rpm format... --
I am not American, see the '.co.uk' bit in my URL. Hence the RMS/communist dig. Don't assume things like that, and don't write such patronising crap in your posts (this applies to much of the post).
Firstly, the EU doesn't care if germany censors films, software, etc. They'd be delighted... two reasons: germany is the EU, and the EU stays away from domestic issues as to not piss off any of the member states.
You got the bit about Germany being the EU right at least, but what planet do you live on if you think the EU stays away from domestic issues??? Anyways, W2K is an American product, so if it had been an outright ban (my apologies for that mistake), then it would not be a 'domestic' issue, also I thought the EU liked pissing off members states other than Germany (Not that the UK is at all bitter;)
And why bring up the nazis? The attrocities committed by the nazis are something that should not be forgotten, but that's no reason to treat all "subversive" groups the same way. As dangerous as the Scientologists might be, I don't think they're even in the same league as the nazis.
It doesn't matter anyway, since I got the wrong end of the stick about the 'banning' bit.
Slashdot Mirror
IANALEOAL (I am not a license expert, or a lawyer (nor do I sell double-glacing)), so what follows may not be correct anyway;)
I suppose it depends on the difference between the normal and binary only versions. It might make sense to issue the 'core' program LGPL, and then charge for binary-only additions (modules), which the LGPL would cover AFAIK.
Of course this wouldn't make sense if the binary-only one has extra 'core' functionality, in that case can't you just re-license anything that is (c) you, and request that all contributors do the same, to allow the entire thing to be released binary-only.
Personally, I'm not convinced that using (L)GPL'd code like cripple-ware is a Good Thing (tm), and think that a 'free for non-commercial use' clause might be better.
--
Trolling is what bored 16 year olds do when they are too lazy to do anything else.
/. and labelled as 'troll' is not, it's just uninventive crap. There used to be a Usenet FAQ on trolling (anyone got a URL?), that explained what real trolling was. Basically, trolling is posting something in order to provoke a response from clueless people, while at the same time tipping off clued-up people that you are a troll.
Not true. Most of the stuff that gets posted on
Which was the whole reason for all the serious rebuttals. There are people that clueless out there.
Why pander to them? (btw, clueless != newbie, a newbie will get themselves a clue and RTFM before entering into a discusion about something, a clueless person will always be clueless.)
--
Actually, the first paragraph of the Patmos site reads:
One thing that we may find, however, is that a certain architecture is emulated better than x86
Or even create a new 'abstract' instruction set that is architecture-independant, hence clean and probably faster to emulate than trying to emulate code optimised for different hardware (hell, we might even see the kernel re-written in Java, so it can run it as byte-code {j/k}). On a side note, do you think code that's been aggressively optimised for a certain architecture will run faster or slower on transmeta than code that's just been 'normally' optimised?
--
Wrong. SMP relies on shared memory, so doesn't scale as well as a truly parallel (ack, I can never spell that corecktly) architecture.
For SMP, the performance increase as you add extra chips decreases, and tails off dramatically at a relatively small number of chips (12 IIRC) due to the communication bottle-neck (this is for an OS that handles SMP well, Linux doesn't scale at all well ... yet). Parallel machines, on the other hand, give a theoretically linear increase in performance as you add more nodes. This is why 'proper' super-computers use parallel transputers, rather than just building big SMP machines.
--
Hopefully it will still run on BeFS as well, I don't want to reinstall windoze just to use BeOS 5 (I've got 4.5 already installed).
--
--
Actually, the thread does have an interesting point.
The story was misleading -- I read it as any company can re-license GPL'd code as they like, which is not what the discussion was about. Basically, since a company can own copyright on GPL'd code, they can control the distribution of it within the company. Of course, they're still not allowed to distribute binaries without the source, but they can still make money from it, by using modified versions in-house without redistributing the changes in the source.
He then expands this to say that by putting the copyright of new software based on GPL'd code in the name of a 'community', you can choose who to let into the community, and therefore choose who can or can not use/modify the software.
In my opinion, this can be thought of as a "hole" in the GPL, but not as dangerous as the story implied, and was more about what constitutes 'free' and 'fair', than what is legal.
--
What if it is? The attitude is Linux vs MicroSoft -- not Linux vs Windows. There are far more reasons to
--
007h: licensed to kill -9
--
Dress Code: Tuxedo ... I know a certain penguin that would be perfect for this.
Hmmmm
--
--
After year 2000 we get funny movies about the apocalypse. Strange. It's probably post-modern ;)
Speaking of Armageddon, I really want to see some of Robert Rankin's stuff filmed, always thought he was funnier than Pratchett (insert flamewar here:) - although I love reading them both.
--
No, it's purely fictional (according to Gilliam himself on 'The Big Breakfast'). Brilliant film, can't wait for Good Omens (brilliant book too, much darker than Pratchet's usual stuff).
--
Could the 'Marilyn Monroe' picture have been an oblique reference to Einstein, or am I just reading too much into it? ;)
--
He also did a BT (British Telecom) Commercial (sampled in a Pink Floyd song IIRC). ;). ... (The gay Daleks were classic though)
According to the article, he got #150,000 for the SpecSavers commercial, I suppose with the cost of his care, he needs all the money he can - more power to him I say
One thing he did do to improve his cred was appear at the start of Victor Lewis Smith's brilliant (and always tasteless) show 'TV Offal', which proves he can laugh at himself. I doubt TV Offal was broadcast outside of the UK, since most ppl outside of it wouldn't get all the Esther Rantzen refferences
--
it's bound to be exploited by people who don't share our and Linus' Christian-Judaic values.
;-P )
Damn them heathens!
IKIHBT,IJLS "Christian-Judaic values"
(anyway, I thought the GPL was inherently communist
--
have you ever used COBOL? ... *shudder*
Unix is elegantly designed (well mostly, ish, sort of, perhaps), COBOL is just hideous.
--
I find 'Bah Humbug' is the most appropriate thing to say ... ;->
--
--
No, it has vi key bindings ;)
--
What, didn't you know the original kernel was written in LISP, and ran on emacs? ;-)
--
Man, DNA's a bit too low level for most hackers, I'm waiting for the C compiler for DNA to come out, then I'm gonna compile the Linux kernel on it and see how much like a penguin it really is...
--
Hmmm... 'AC' - that's a very unfortunate acronym ;-)
.rpm format...
I think Alan Cox has enough integrity not to make changes specifically for Red Hat, and I'm sure this has nothing to do with the anouncement that the kernel's now going to be exclusively released in
--
ahhh, i love americans. (yes, I am american too)
I am not American, see the '.co.uk' bit in my URL. Hence the RMS/communist dig. Don't assume things like that, and don't write such patronising crap in your posts (this applies to much of the post).
Firstly, the EU doesn't care if germany censors films, software, etc. They'd be delighted... two reasons: germany is the EU, and the EU stays away from domestic issues as to not piss off any of the member states.
You got the bit about Germany being the EU right at least, but what planet do you live on if you think the EU stays away from domestic issues??? Anyways, W2K is an American product, so if it had been an outright ban (my apologies for that mistake), then it would not be a 'domestic' issue, also I thought the EU liked pissing off members states other than Germany (Not that the UK is at all bitter;)
And why bring up the nazis? The attrocities committed by the nazis are something that should not be forgotten, but that's no reason to treat all "subversive" groups the same way. As dangerous as the Scientologists might be, I don't think they're even in the same league as the nazis.
It doesn't matter anyway, since I got the wrong end of the stick about the 'banning' bit.