Someone please mirror this software. No surprise their site is down if a slashdot-sized audience is trying a new translation program on one server:-) I can't get at it.
I hope the word databases and algorithm are easily separable from the implementation. I'm sure they can't have bound it too tightly to PHP and MySQL - the presentation layer should be determined by the user, and use of other databases should be possible.
One thing we might not be considering here is that press is a valuable commodity. I doubt that Eric Raymond would be on the VA Linux board of directors without it, he stands to make tens of Millions of dollars next week when VA goes public. Go look at their filing and see how many shares he has. I doubt I would have been hired for the venture capital company if nobody had ever heard of me, either. And I stand to make money from that, too. But that's not what I set out to do. I do this stuff because I believe in it passionately - often too passionately for my own good.
The under-18 thing is part of a software license that you have to click "yes" through to get my GPL software. If it were an FTP site use license it would be OK. But becuase it's a software license, I think there is a legal problem.
But all of that aside, none of Red Hat, Netscape, Apple, IBM, ATT, etc. felt the need for that restriction. Corel just has this way of pissing the developers of their own system off every chance they get. They need to work on that.
Pixar films are in general not intended for toddlers. A 4-year-old once you've explained that it's just a story, yes. A 5-year-old without so much preparation. Bringing a 2.5 year old to any movie is a chancy thing.
Animator workstations are SGI, Sun is the render-farm: all of those CPUs in two rooms next to each other with the air conditioning running flat out all of the time. You can feel the heat as you walk by the racks.
They don't make much use of Linux yet, although a lot of people there run it at home. They get so much stuff for free or at a discount that Linux would not save them much.
Pixar doesn't really go in for motion capture, they prefer the toony style where an animator controls the parameters.
Remember that A Bug's Life had its own look, and they were doing Toy Story Two with the look established for the original Toy Story, as well as some of the old data. So, being really different in the second movie would have clashed.
The only reason you didn't see adults in Toy Story was because they couldn't make them look good back then. Geri's Game was in part about solving that problem.
The pizza delivery guy's face in Toy Story is also the generic child face. They did very few face prototypes, and changed the parameters around for each kid without changing the basic face. So CT is right that the faces are weak in the first film.
It's not deliberate. John Lasseter has been much too busy to follow OS wars over the past 5 years. Steve Jobs knows what Linux is but doesn't really care (believe me, I've discussed it with him). And there were penguins in the world before Linux.
Yes. I left Pixar during the production. That is my second movie credit, and probably my last as I'm playing venture capitalist these days (you'll hear about that soon enough).
There's not a chance that I'll opt out of the GPL. Businesses have to realize that free software is something we share with them. Red Hat does just fine with this, other businesses have to learn how.
Well, Nick, we have Red Hat stock at over US$200 today from its original $14. That is going to convince some companies that it's worth it. I doubt there is much I can do to stop them.:-)
Point taken - anything I say or do may end up being publicized way out of proportion and I'd better be more careful about it.
I get enough of the spotlight, don't worry about that. There's no chance that I'd miss it at this point - in fact I am fully aware of its disadvantages.
I think that you have to count Red Hat as a major company now.
Point taken. I guess "I screwed up" is no excuse either, but there isn't much more I can say.
Besides, I don't have Ulitmate Karma on Slashdot. Sig11's is higher than mine (I just happened to look at his user record a while back), probably other people as well.
Agree that the witch-hunt mentality is bad for us. I headed it off twice before. I just got too darned frustrated about heading it off yet another time. Stupid me, I didn't realize that one message posted to an obscure Debian mailing list would mean a slashdot headline.
Regarding the GPL, it's not a tear-open license that constitutes a contract like some other Open Source licenses. It's a straight copyright permission. So your objection might not apply.
No, I no longer lead the Debian project, and when I did we didn't count votes. And I got a little too upset this morning and said stuff I should not have.
Oh darn, I have really screwed up this morning. I'd better admit it and control the damage before it gets worse.
I got frustrated with Corel because I have worked to smooth these things out twice before. I sent a message asking if it was time for a lawsuit to a Debian mailing list. I did not expect that message to be posted to Slashdot. The people on the Debian list told me to chill out, which was good advice.
So, Corel folks, I apologize. You need to sort our some issues with the community, but any talk of a lawsuit at this time is way out of proportion.
Look, I'm frustrated because I have tried to help them with this stuff twice and they keep making the same mistake. I sent mail to a Debian mailing list looking to open a discussion, not to be in a Slashdot article about it. Everybody else on the list said it was too soon for a lawsuit and I dropped it there.
Guys, I am having a real bad morning and I spoke too soon. I meant to open a discussion on a mailing list, not to be on top of Slashdot by sending one email. Everybody else on the list said it's too soon for a lawsuit.
That would be true if the license was a license for use of their FTP site. But it's an end-user software license, and you have to click yes to get access to my software.
And yes, I'm frustrated and it shows, because I have tried to smooth out problems with them twice before, once with the beta license and once with an APT linking issue.
I'll chill out now, but I don't think I can help them the way I did before.
I'm not interested in consulting. I have my own company to run and it will soon become a conflict of interest. But you can see I'm frustrated, because I have tried to smooth these conflicts down twice already: once with the beta-test license, and once with an APT linking issue.
A lot of the software contributors were legal minors at the time they contributed the software, and some of them still are, and Corel accepted _their_ licenses. Should those contributors now turn around and say they had no legal right to give Corel those licenses and thus they are void? Or shall we assume that they had the collusion of their parent or guardian and thus the licenses are legal, in which case Corel should make the same assumption in their license?
Nicely stated, but it's already the case. The GPL does not restrict use. It grants you the right to use as a copyright permission, without the actual requirement that you be able to enter into a contract.
Some other Open Source licenses are tear-open contracts, but the GPL is not. It's a straight copyright permission.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope the word databases and algorithm are easily separable from the implementation. I'm sure they can't have bound it too tightly to PHP and MySQL - the presentation layer should be determined by the user, and use of other databases should be possible.
Bruce
Bruce
But all of that aside, none of Red Hat, Netscape, Apple, IBM, ATT, etc. felt the need for that restriction. Corel just has this way of pissing the developers of their own system off every chance they get. They need to work on that.
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
They don't make much use of Linux yet, although a lot of people there run it at home. They get so much stuff for free or at a discount that Linux would not save them much.
Bruce
Remember that A Bug's Life had its own look, and they were doing Toy Story Two with the look established for the original Toy Story, as well as some of the old data. So, being really different in the second movie would have clashed.
Bruce
The pizza delivery guy's face in Toy Story is also the generic child face. They did very few face prototypes, and changed the parameters around for each kid without changing the basic face. So CT is right that the faces are weak in the first film.
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
Point taken.
Bruce
I get enough of the spotlight, don't worry about that. There's no chance that I'd miss it at this point - in fact I am fully aware of its disadvantages.
I think that you have to count Red Hat as a major company now.
Thanks
Bruce
Besides, I don't have Ulitmate Karma on Slashdot. Sig11's is higher than mine (I just happened to look at his user record a while back), probably other people as well.
Thanks
Bruce
Agree that the witch-hunt mentality is bad for us. I headed it off twice before. I just got too darned frustrated about heading it off yet another time. Stupid me, I didn't realize that one message posted to an obscure Debian mailing list would mean a slashdot headline.
Regarding the GPL, it's not a tear-open license that constitutes a contract like some other Open Source licenses. It's a straight copyright permission. So your objection might not apply.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce
I got frustrated with Corel because I have worked to smooth these things out twice before. I sent a message asking if it was time for a lawsuit to a Debian mailing list. I did not expect that message to be posted to Slashdot. The people on the Debian list told me to chill out, which was good advice.
So, Corel folks, I apologize. You need to sort our some issues with the community, but any talk of a lawsuit at this time is way out of proportion.
Bruce Perens
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce
And yes, I'm frustrated and it shows, because I have tried to smooth out problems with them twice before, once with the beta license and once with an APT linking issue.
I'll chill out now, but I don't think I can help them the way I did before.
Thanks
Bruce
A lot of the software contributors were legal minors at the time they contributed the software, and some of them still are, and Corel accepted _their_ licenses. Should those contributors now turn around and say they had no legal right to give Corel those licenses and thus they are void? Or shall we assume that they had the collusion of their parent or guardian and thus the licenses are legal, in which case Corel should make the same assumption in their license?
Some other Open Source licenses are tear-open contracts, but the GPL is not. It's a straight copyright permission.
Thanks
Bruce