... willingness to sacrifice backwards compatibility to make a better platform.
It's not the first time they did this... remember when they switched from the 68xxx series CPU to the PowerPC based CPU? That was quite gutsy as well as they had to use emulation to support the old 68xxx for quite some time after those machines ceased production.
I wonder if anyone is masochistic enough to attempt run an old 68xxx application in emulation mode in OS9 while running that under classic mode in OSX:)
This is one of many examples of emergency vehicles actually getting tickets. Should I read the article to you as well if you can't find the information in it?
Apparently, a lot of police cars and other emergency vehicles have been ticketed while they were speeding to answer 911 calls. Although human oversight is supposed to screen out these citations, a lot of cops, firefighters and EMTs found themselves receiving tickets in the line of duty, and the city's appeal process was so complex they couldn't go through the effort to fight them off. The end result is that many of these cops, firefighters and EMTs have been driving the speed limit (usually 25mph) to their calls. It is disgusting that these cameras are now directly endangering peoples' lives.
I used to live near DC, I travel there often still. Given how quite a bit of the city is still a craphole, I can't imagine this money going to any positive use. The DC city council even wanted to assess points to speeders' driving records. However, congressman Dick Armey personally interceded and put a stop to this (because of his privacy concerns). He also wanted to begin congressional hearings into the constitutionality of traffic light cameras in general.
I'm curious about how cable is not a "viable" option
Cable TV itself, much less broadband internet access, just may not be available. In a rural area, this problem is exacerbated by the high costs incurred by a cable company just to set up basic cable TV service. I have many friends in rural areas who have to use satellite just to watch TV because cable TV service isn't available. Unlike with the phone companies, which have to provide phone service to all parts of the USA, there is no such requirement for cable TV providers. Hence, it doesn't look like this problem will "eventually" be solved in the short term.
I believe that the fact Walmart is even selling OS-less PCs is proof that they are trying it already. They most likely didn't ask MS if they could do this, they just saw a market and are trying to make money by filling it. IMO, the best part about Walmart's buying power is that they can dictate to MS (and any other supplier) exactly how much Walmart will pay them for a copy of Windows, Office, etc., instead of the other way around.
would a company still qualify for the MS OEM reduction, if they sold an OS-less pc, but included a cd of a linux distro, without actually installing it?
A mom and pop vendor, or even someone like Gateway and Dell would probably not be able to get away with this, but because Walmart is the world's largest corporation, it can force Microsoft to accept this action. If Microsoft did not like it, then Walmart could threaten to discontinue selling all Microsoft products altogether, which is definitly something Microsoft would not want. I don't know how big Walmart's computer sales are compared to its overall revenue, but I can't imagine that not selling PCs (along with any other Microsoft software and products) would force it out of business. On the other hand, Microsoft would lose a MAJOR distribution channel for its products (not just OS's, but Office, mice, games, etc.) if it pissed Walmart off.
If there were a union, this company would be shut down right now.
Doesn't this defeat the whole point of unionization? If the company is shut down, then everyone would lose their jobs and would then take a 100% pay cut.
if you don'thave any illegal or pirated software, what have you to hide?
This kind of thinking is precisely what the BSA is looking for. If you are stopped by a cop and you consent to a search of your vehicle, then anything illegal that the cop finds can be used against you, because you consented to the search. For example, say you go out of state and purchase a bottle of liquor and you put it in your trunk (out of plain view), on your way back, you get pulled over for speeding in your home state. The cop asks you to search the car, you say yes, and BAM! In addition to a speeding ticket, you are also busted for illegally importing alcoholic beverages (in many states, this is a crime). Yes, you may not have had any idea this is illegal, but you are nonetheless responsible for it because you consented to the search. Unless the cop has actual probable cause to believe you have comitted a crime (e.g., your car/license plates match the description of a vehicle used to commit a crime), they cannot forcibly search your vehicle.
Given this context, and how the BSA is strictly out to get you (whereas the cops are not), they most likely have ways of finding "illegal" things (that you did not know were illegal) and nailing you for them. The only way to prevent this is to not cooperate with them. Bring in the lawyers and make the BSA prove its case against you.
In addition to hiring the pros, you can also do a considerable amount of auditing yourself with the right automated tools. Among these is the program MultiProxy allows you to enter the IP addresses of your machines and quickly see if outsiders can use them to mask their identities during an attack. Its definitly not a substitute for a real audit, but it can help you to get a quick overview of potential problems.
MP3s will continue to rein supreme, Iron Chef style, until someone releases a new compression algorythm that saves at least 10x more space
That reminds of back when ARJ came out as a compression format for DOS. ARJ was superior to PKZIP, but only in a numerical sense. Its compression was only marginally better than PKZIP, which is probably the same reason it did not become a compression standard. On the other hand, if you compare GIFs and JPGs, your premise is confirmed, not only did JPGs blow away GIFs in terms of compression of data, but they also beat out GIFs in other respects as well (JPGs having support for more than 256 colors comes to mind). As a result, JPGs eventually replaced GIFs as a dominant standard for reasonably good image presentation.
some limit bandwidth to their users even on this "free" (gov't subsidized) network
Penn State, also part of Internet2, recently imposed similar bandwidth caps (upload speeds of 56K) from dormatory internet connections in response to this problem.
I couldn't agree more on the issue of taxpayer financed networks being "wasted" on private P2P applications instead of being used for the research for which they were originally intended. If so much bandwidth can be given away to subsidize Kazaa, et al., then perhaps I2 could be opened up to private ISPs which could take over some of the costs that various governments are already paying.
Unfortunately, the bandwith caps are the only way the universities will get their research monies worth out of I2.
I find it disgusting that public funds are being handed over to an industry just because it exists.
The worst part of course is that RIAA/MPAA want it both ways. They want us to subsidize them through private taxes on recording media AND to pay them each and every single time we watch and/or listen to content that we go out and purchase.
Someone actually gets royalties for BLANK TAPES?!?!
That is correct, included in the price of every blank audio tape and video tape is a "tax" which goes to the RIAA and MPAA, respectively. The industry's reasoning is that since audio tapes and video tapes are primarily used for pirating, then they should be compensated. The fact that it has always been perfectly legal (the AHR of 1992 was just confirmation) to make copies of your favorite songs from a CD to a tape so you can listen to them in your car was simply glossed over.
If you follow this reasoning, you can say you are prefectly justified in pirating all the music you want since you're paying the record companies anyway in the form of a private tax... if you buy blank audio tapes.
RIAA wanted to impose a similar levy on blank CD-Rs in the USA but it was thwarted by the lobbies for the computer industry who were concerned that such a levy would cut into their profits on CD burners. However, in Canada, I believe such a levy was imposed on blank CD-Rs. Like I said before though, such a levy justifies piracy because the industry is still getting compnesated either way.
I'm waiting for the day M$ includes a clause in the EULA that says anything written with it's office suite is the sole property of M$
Microsoft was beaten to the punch on this. Apple's first shared-source license, which accompanied the release of the first OS X, had a provision (I'm not sure if it still has it) that dictated that any changes made to the source for Darwin became the property of Apple. In order to get the source for Darwin, you were made to agree to that particular license. Also, when Apple came out with virtual "I-Disk" for the Imac, which was basically a storage space on Apple's servers for stuff you had on your Imac, anything that a user would place there would automatically fall into the realm of Apple's intellectual property. They could use stuff you created and stored on that disk for anything they wanted without having to compensate you. I'm pretty sure this is no longer the case either.
I think the "assimilation" part of the shared-source license had been changed, because I do remember Apple getting significant flack for this. I believe now you just have to make any changes you make to Darwin "public" (whatever that is supposed to mean).
Re:Where is the BSA for the GPL?
on
GPL's Strength
·
· Score: 2
free software has never been about taking software from others unwilling to give it
Well you're not really taking any software. Going after GPL violations is simply taking control of what is rightfully yours if you happened to be the person who owned and/or wrote the GPL-ed code.
I think your idea of a BSA-like organization is excellent. Such an organization could help the lone GPL coder(s) go after a huge company that is illegally using their code. Typically, most GPL work is done by individuals without the capacity to take on such companies in court and win. A BSA-like organization may be the only way for such coders to be able to enforce their rights by being able to hire the legal guns on the same par as lawyers on corporate retainer or payroll.
They could do that by coding to W3C standards and letting browser makers do their job - conforming to standards.
I would love it if they did that too... Personally, I always check using the HTML validator to make sure my code is fully HTML 4.01 Transitional compliant (I usually use styles for all my formatting, but the Transitional part lets me get away with some pesky formatting tags if I need to use them). Basically, if it is compliant, I say hey... if a browser can't display it correctly (or at least reasonably close to what was intended), then that browser sucks.
Javascript is a whole other animal. It would be nice if there was an ANSI Javascript or something like that (I believe there is an ECMA Script, which is an independent JS definition which Microsoft uses in IE), to which all browsers would be able to adhere. Right now, the current situation is like trying to code in C++ without there even being a valid definition, and using many compilers which may not even support the most basic of features. If there was a defined *OPEN* spec for Javascript (maybe set by the W3C?), and all browsers adhered to that bare minimum, we would realize a significant benefit (and major reduction in coding time) even if Microsoft, et al. add their own extensions to the language. Any C coder knows that fairly useful C programs can be developed which can be ported between Linux and Windows (e.g., CGI scripts).
Basically, the bigger problem IS going to be the Javascript. Aside from a few minor things (such as the lack of support for colgroups), Mozilla does a nice job rendering HTML 4.01 Transitional compliant pages. Solve the javascript problem, and it will be great. Unfortunately for me, as nearly 100% of the users of my current project are using IE 5.5 or better (this is an internal web site project), we have to minimize development time by coding the Javascripts only for those versions of IE.
"Have you tried Internet Explorer 6, as that is the most recent and should solve your problem. That is actually what 95% of our Customer's use who access our website. Thank you."
Can you imagine that? Think they were blowing me off?
But you have to appreciate your credit union's point of view. They need to do what they can to keep their costs down. In this context, it means designing their site around what the vast majority of what their users are browsing with. If they had to design, test and maintain the site for every single version of evey single browser under the sun, it would significantly increase their development costs (and keep in mind that such costs have nothing to do with the day-to-day operations of the credit union, it could still operate without a web-banking solution.) which would in turn raise the costs you would be paying to your credit union.
There was another posting in a forum here in which someone was complaining that a certain image-based spam trap was bad since it would not work with Lynx. If this logic is followed, it means every website out there would have to be designed to run under Lynx. Unfortunately, this is not realistic if you want to make money off od your website.
Granted, if everything was designed to run under Lynx, then it would most likely be standards-compliant with every other browser out there:)
Uh, where the fuck do you think the government gets its money? From taxes on the us!!
Exactly... and considering how many problems we have going on in the world right about now, let's see... here's a quick count:
Terrorists crashing planes into buildings
The middle east is about to go to heck
We may have yet another oil embargo
We are fighting a global war against terrorists who will stop at nothing to kill us all
The economy is in the toilet
As much as I personally hate having to sift through spam and press the "Block Sender, Delete, Yes" commands every day, I really don't think something as trivial as fighting spam should be at the top of the government's priority list right now. There are already plenty of resources available to end users to fight spam if they wish to use them. Besides, even as much of a minor inconvenience that spam is, it has never killed anyone.
Can some of the clever folks here at/. come up with a way for Open Source to succeed and pay programmers at the same time?
Apple did it with OS X. The backend of their OS (Darwin) was a BSD-like OS which saved them tons of development costs like you said. They even open-sourced it although they were not required to. However, they added a proprietary part to the OS (which is probably why they went with the BSD base) which was the GUI... Mac OS X has been quite successful since it was released (personally, I've done a lot of backend development with it and I *really* like it...)
Sun also did the same thing with their OS. they took a BSD-like base, closed sourced it, and added their own extensions. In both these examples, programmers working for Apple and Sun did get paid.
Unfortunately though, both these models confirm your premise, that they used soemone else's work to make money. I wonder how the GPL would impact this, because unless a company's proprietary extensions to Linux did not include an GPL code, there would be no way they could sell it without giving up their source code. My assumptions would be that making money with GPL software would be even harder, since a Linux distributor would essentially have to rewrite everything that was GPL-ed. But perhaps if some company could do this, adding their own proprietary GPL-free (now there's an oxymoron) code to GPL software, then maybe it is do-able.
Surely they can't retroactively change that agreement.
Of course they can change the agreement. try to imagine dealing with Darth Vader in The Empire Strikes Back ("I have changed the conditions of our deal, pray that I do not change them again!") That's what all that fine print at the bottom of the contract is:) But seriously, you don't really believe any company adheres to its "privacy policy" do you?:)
These marketing data, as set by the user, could have been a very valuable commodity to sell to other companies. Those companies would have a very good idea of what to market to these users as a result. This makes this kind of information quite valuable. However, in resetting all of the user's preferences to be interested in everything, and given that most users will probably not give a rat's ass and change it, then these data become worthless to 3rd parties because it does not provide them with any new information. So effectively, Yahoo killed off an asset that could have been worth the money to rent and/or sell to others.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not the first time they did this... remember when they switched from the 68xxx series CPU to the PowerPC based CPU? That was quite gutsy as well as they had to use emulation to support the old 68xxx for quite some time after those machines ceased production.
I wonder if anyone is masochistic enough to attempt run an old 68xxx application in emulation mode in OS9 while running that under classic mode in OSX :)
You really should think before you post.
This is one of many examples of emergency vehicles actually getting tickets. Should I read the article to you as well if you can't find the information in it?
Apparently, a lot of police cars and other emergency vehicles have been ticketed while they were speeding to answer 911 calls. Although human oversight is supposed to screen out these citations, a lot of cops, firefighters and EMTs found themselves receiving tickets in the line of duty, and the city's appeal process was so complex they couldn't go through the effort to fight them off. The end result is that many of these cops, firefighters and EMTs have been driving the speed limit (usually 25mph) to their calls. It is disgusting that these cameras are now directly endangering peoples' lives.
I used to live near DC, I travel there often still. Given how quite a bit of the city is still a craphole, I can't imagine this money going to any positive use. The DC city council even wanted to assess points to speeders' driving records. However, congressman Dick Armey personally interceded and put a stop to this (because of his privacy concerns). He also wanted to begin congressional hearings into the constitutionality of traffic light cameras in general.
I'm curious about how cable is not a "viable" option
Cable TV itself, much less broadband internet access, just may not be available. In a rural area, this problem is exacerbated by the high costs incurred by a cable company just to set up basic cable TV service. I have many friends in rural areas who have to use satellite just to watch TV because cable TV service isn't available. Unlike with the phone companies, which have to provide phone service to all parts of the USA, there is no such requirement for cable TV providers. Hence, it doesn't look like this problem will "eventually" be solved in the short term.
Maybe they should try it then
I believe that the fact Walmart is even selling OS-less PCs is proof that they are trying it already. They most likely didn't ask MS if they could do this, they just saw a market and are trying to make money by filling it. IMO, the best part about Walmart's buying power is that they can dictate to MS (and any other supplier) exactly how much Walmart will pay them for a copy of Windows, Office, etc., instead of the other way around.
would a company still qualify for the MS OEM reduction, if they sold an OS-less pc, but included a cd of a linux distro, without actually installing it?
A mom and pop vendor, or even someone like Gateway and Dell would probably not be able to get away with this, but because Walmart is the world's largest corporation, it can force Microsoft to accept this action. If Microsoft did not like it, then Walmart could threaten to discontinue selling all Microsoft products altogether, which is definitly something Microsoft would not want. I don't know how big Walmart's computer sales are compared to its overall revenue, but I can't imagine that not selling PCs (along with any other Microsoft software and products) would force it out of business. On the other hand, Microsoft would lose a MAJOR distribution channel for its products (not just OS's, but Office, mice, games, etc.) if it pissed Walmart off.
If there were a union, this company would be shut down right now.
Doesn't this defeat the whole point of unionization? If the company is shut down, then everyone would lose their jobs and would then take a 100% pay cut.
Hmm... perhaps too this is debatable? :)
if you don'thave any illegal or pirated software, what have you to hide?
This kind of thinking is precisely what the BSA is looking for. If you are stopped by a cop and you consent to a search of your vehicle, then anything illegal that the cop finds can be used against you, because you consented to the search. For example, say you go out of state and purchase a bottle of liquor and you put it in your trunk (out of plain view), on your way back, you get pulled over for speeding in your home state. The cop asks you to search the car, you say yes, and BAM! In addition to a speeding ticket, you are also busted for illegally importing alcoholic beverages (in many states, this is a crime). Yes, you may not have had any idea this is illegal, but you are nonetheless responsible for it because you consented to the search. Unless the cop has actual probable cause to believe you have comitted a crime (e.g., your car/license plates match the description of a vehicle used to commit a crime), they cannot forcibly search your vehicle.
Given this context, and how the BSA is strictly out to get you (whereas the cops are not), they most likely have ways of finding "illegal" things (that you did not know were illegal) and nailing you for them. The only way to prevent this is to not cooperate with them. Bring in the lawyers and make the BSA prove its case against you.
In addition to hiring the pros, you can also do a considerable amount of auditing yourself with the right automated tools. Among these is the program MultiProxy allows you to enter the IP addresses of your machines and quickly see if outsiders can use them to mask their identities during an attack. Its definitly not a substitute for a real audit, but it can help you to get a quick overview of potential problems.
MP3s will continue to rein supreme, Iron Chef style, until someone releases a new compression algorythm that saves at least 10x more space
That reminds of back when ARJ came out as a compression format for DOS. ARJ was superior to PKZIP, but only in a numerical sense. Its compression was only marginally better than PKZIP, which is probably the same reason it did not become a compression standard. On the other hand, if you compare GIFs and JPGs, your premise is confirmed, not only did JPGs blow away GIFs in terms of compression of data, but they also beat out GIFs in other respects as well (JPGs having support for more than 256 colors comes to mind). As a result, JPGs eventually replaced GIFs as a dominant standard for reasonably good image presentation.
Programming should not be a dead-end job if you can communicate properly with your users and deliver wha they want in a reasonable time
So in other words, we should all stop reading Slashdot and get back to work? :)
some limit bandwidth to their users even on this "free" (gov't subsidized) network
Penn State, also part of Internet2, recently imposed similar bandwidth caps (upload speeds of 56K) from dormatory internet connections in response to this problem.
I couldn't agree more on the issue of taxpayer financed networks being "wasted" on private P2P applications instead of being used for the research for which they were originally intended. If so much bandwidth can be given away to subsidize Kazaa, et al., then perhaps I2 could be opened up to private ISPs which could take over some of the costs that various governments are already paying.
Unfortunately, the bandwith caps are the only way the universities will get their research monies worth out of I2.
I find it disgusting that public funds are being handed over to an industry just because it exists.
The worst part of course is that RIAA/MPAA want it both ways. They want us to subsidize them through private taxes on recording media AND to pay them each and every single time we watch and/or listen to content that we go out and purchase.
Someone actually gets royalties for BLANK TAPES?!?!
That is correct, included in the price of every blank audio tape and video tape is a "tax" which goes to the RIAA and MPAA, respectively. The industry's reasoning is that since audio tapes and video tapes are primarily used for pirating, then they should be compensated. The fact that it has always been perfectly legal (the AHR of 1992 was just confirmation) to make copies of your favorite songs from a CD to a tape so you can listen to them in your car was simply glossed over.
If you follow this reasoning, you can say you are prefectly justified in pirating all the music you want since you're paying the record companies anyway in the form of a private tax... if you buy blank audio tapes.
RIAA wanted to impose a similar levy on blank CD-Rs in the USA but it was thwarted by the lobbies for the computer industry who were concerned that such a levy would cut into their profits on CD burners. However, in Canada, I believe such a levy was imposed on blank CD-Rs. Like I said before though, such a levy justifies piracy because the industry is still getting compnesated either way.
I'm waiting for the day M$ includes a clause in the EULA that says anything written with it's office suite is the sole property of M$
Microsoft was beaten to the punch on this. Apple's first shared-source license, which accompanied the release of the first OS X, had a provision (I'm not sure if it still has it) that dictated that any changes made to the source for Darwin became the property of Apple. In order to get the source for Darwin, you were made to agree to that particular license. Also, when Apple came out with virtual "I-Disk" for the Imac, which was basically a storage space on Apple's servers for stuff you had on your Imac, anything that a user would place there would automatically fall into the realm of Apple's intellectual property. They could use stuff you created and stored on that disk for anything they wanted without having to compensate you. I'm pretty sure this is no longer the case either.
I think the "assimilation" part of the shared-source license had been changed, because I do remember Apple getting significant flack for this. I believe now you just have to make any changes you make to Darwin "public" (whatever that is supposed to mean).
free software has never been about taking software from others unwilling to give it
Well you're not really taking any software. Going after GPL violations is simply taking control of what is rightfully yours if you happened to be the person who owned and/or wrote the GPL-ed code.
I think your idea of a BSA-like organization is excellent. Such an organization could help the lone GPL coder(s) go after a huge company that is illegally using their code. Typically, most GPL work is done by individuals without the capacity to take on such companies in court and win. A BSA-like organization may be the only way for such coders to be able to enforce their rights by being able to hire the legal guns on the same par as lawyers on corporate retainer or payroll.
They could do that by coding to W3C standards and letting browser makers do their job - conforming to standards.
I would love it if they did that too... Personally, I always check using the HTML validator to make sure my code is fully HTML 4.01 Transitional compliant (I usually use styles for all my formatting, but the Transitional part lets me get away with some pesky formatting tags if I need to use them). Basically, if it is compliant, I say hey... if a browser can't display it correctly (or at least reasonably close to what was intended), then that browser sucks.
Javascript is a whole other animal. It would be nice if there was an ANSI Javascript or something like that (I believe there is an ECMA Script, which is an independent JS definition which Microsoft uses in IE), to which all browsers would be able to adhere. Right now, the current situation is like trying to code in C++ without there even being a valid definition, and using many compilers which may not even support the most basic of features. If there was a defined *OPEN* spec for Javascript (maybe set by the W3C?), and all browsers adhered to that bare minimum, we would realize a significant benefit (and major reduction in coding time) even if Microsoft, et al. add their own extensions to the language. Any C coder knows that fairly useful C programs can be developed which can be ported between Linux and Windows (e.g., CGI scripts).
Basically, the bigger problem IS going to be the Javascript. Aside from a few minor things (such as the lack of support for colgroups), Mozilla does a nice job rendering HTML 4.01 Transitional compliant pages. Solve the javascript problem, and it will be great. Unfortunately for me, as nearly 100% of the users of my current project are using IE 5.5 or better (this is an internal web site project), we have to minimize development time by coding the Javascripts only for those versions of IE.
Is there much difference between the Mozilla 1.0 build and the Netscape 6.11?
One major difference I saw first-hand from a development standpoint is that Mozilla 0.9x has better support for CSS than Netscape 6.2
"Have you tried Internet Explorer 6, as that is the most recent and should solve your problem. That is actually what 95% of our Customer's use who access our website. Thank you."
Can you imagine that? Think they were blowing me off?
But you have to appreciate your credit union's point of view. They need to do what they can to keep their costs down. In this context, it means designing their site around what the vast majority of what their users are browsing with. If they had to design, test and maintain the site for every single version of evey single browser under the sun, it would significantly increase their development costs (and keep in mind that such costs have nothing to do with the day-to-day operations of the credit union, it could still operate without a web-banking solution.) which would in turn raise the costs you would be paying to your credit union.
There was another posting in a forum here in which someone was complaining that a certain image-based spam trap was bad since it would not work with Lynx. If this logic is followed, it means every website out there would have to be designed to run under Lynx. Unfortunately, this is not realistic if you want to make money off od your website.
Granted, if everything was designed to run under Lynx, then it would most likely be standards-compliant with every other browser out there :)
Microsoft seems to be OK with the BSD license.
Of course they are ok with the BSD license, because their entire TCP/IP stack was initially taken from BSD-licensed source code :)
Uh, where the fuck do you think the government gets its money? From taxes on the us!!
Exactly... and considering how many problems we have going on in the world right about now, let's see... here's a quick count:
As much as I personally hate having to sift through spam and press the "Block Sender, Delete, Yes" commands every day, I really don't think something as trivial as fighting spam should be at the top of the government's priority list right now. There are already plenty of resources available to end users to fight spam if they wish to use them. Besides, even as much of a minor inconvenience that spam is, it has never killed anyone.
Can some of the clever folks here at /. come up with a way for Open Source to succeed and pay programmers at the same time?
Apple did it with OS X. The backend of their OS (Darwin) was a BSD-like OS which saved them tons of development costs like you said. They even open-sourced it although they were not required to. However, they added a proprietary part to the OS (which is probably why they went with the BSD base) which was the GUI... Mac OS X has been quite successful since it was released (personally, I've done a lot of backend development with it and I *really* like it...)
Sun also did the same thing with their OS. they took a BSD-like base, closed sourced it, and added their own extensions. In both these examples, programmers working for Apple and Sun did get paid.
Unfortunately though, both these models confirm your premise, that they used soemone else's work to make money. I wonder how the GPL would impact this, because unless a company's proprietary extensions to Linux did not include an GPL code, there would be no way they could sell it without giving up their source code. My assumptions would be that making money with GPL software would be even harder, since a Linux distributor would essentially have to rewrite everything that was GPL-ed. But perhaps if some company could do this, adding their own proprietary GPL-free (now there's an oxymoron) code to GPL software, then maybe it is do-able.
Surely they can't retroactively change that agreement.
Of course they can change the agreement. try to imagine dealing with Darth Vader in The Empire Strikes Back ("I have changed the conditions of our deal, pray that I do not change them again!") That's what all that fine print at the bottom of the contract is :) But seriously, you don't really believe any company adheres to its "privacy policy" do you? :)
These marketing data, as set by the user, could have been a very valuable commodity to sell to other companies. Those companies would have a very good idea of what to market to these users as a result. This makes this kind of information quite valuable. However, in resetting all of the user's preferences to be interested in everything, and given that most users will probably not give a rat's ass and change it, then these data become worthless to 3rd parties because it does not provide them with any new information. So effectively, Yahoo killed off an asset that could have been worth the money to rent and/or sell to others.