Although I certainly agree that the SCO case (and everything around it) was quite the circus, I fail to see its relevancy to the matter at hand.
Assume the offending portions of code in 'Linux' are explicitly pointed out - i.e. 'Linux' is given a chance - the 'Linux developers' work around that code with new code, and call it a day. Then they were still in violation in the past.
Isn't that the same as what's being said here? They informed a developer that they were violating the GPL, silly potential legal action followed, the developer comes into compliance with the GPL and call it a day. But they were still violating in the past, which is what is being said now as needing to be resolved somehow; short of timetravelling into the past and coming into compliance from the get-go, I can only imagine that means compensation of some sort.
I understand the SCO scenario isn't the finest of parallels to draw, but I hardly think GP should be modded -2 Troll.
Interesting to read about this and a related post ( http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=308361&cid=20749751 ) I actually did a small project at high school about maglev stuff and, at the time, the Seraphim engine + tech was the 'cutting edge' direction things seemed to be going in.
Rather than having the track be the motor (as per the german tracks), the Seraphim engine had the motor inside the vehicle instead. And instead of relying on full levitation, it mostly used the magnetic forces for propulsion and deceleration (braking), with only some of it used to generate a small amount of lift; leaving conventional wheel systems to do most of the support carrying; claiming that wheel friction is much less of an issue than air friction.
Though my critical note on that system was that the company didn't mention anything about wear&tear to any such wheel systems when going about at 300km/h and above, day in day out.
There is, of course, the translations part.. translating Windows can't be cheap; though it surely can't be -that- expensive either.
Note that Adobe and Autodesk also have vast price increases up to well over 2x as expensive; not including the 17.5% / 19% VAT that gets added on top. With the sucking U.S. dollar, that's only getting worse and worse. It'll be interesting to see if Adobe / Autodesk / etc. will adjust their non-U.S. pricing to adjust for this, as currently it is much cheaper to import from the U.S. -and- risk any import duty fees.
Yes, DVD is convenient/etc. and I buy them aplenty. But the artifacts from the MPEG compression are sometimes simply teeth-gnashingly awful. Compare an S-VHS versus a DVD of movies with lots of water/ocean in them... Waterworld, Titanic, etc. I can nearly guarantee you that you'll prefer the S-VHS in terms of picture quality.. then hug the DVD because you can skip the awful, awful scenes (content-wise) in them.
That said, I'm sure the content mastering teams are to blame there. There's more than enough bits available to compress even the most difficult shots into perfectly good MPEG, switch to an all I-frame build-up if need be. But that actually requires them to do that work, and they tend to be too lazy. Having executives say "stick trailers for other movies, the leaders, the menus, 3 different audio languages, commentaries, cinematic trailer, making of, [voice fades as listing continues].. onto the same DVD", cutting down the amount of space available to the actual movie, doesn't help.
HD-TV suffers from the same problem; Nobody tells the HD-TV broadcasters to actually use the bandwidth they have for a single show. They're perfectly welcome to splitit up into separate channels* and get multiple avenues for revenue; guess what they're more likely to do? So yes, you'll just get the same compression artifacts in high resolution. (* http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=82&article_id=2061&page_number=1&print_page=y )
I'm still curious as to what gmail does when one does try to brute force, but....if the above is true (thanks for the replies, both of you), then Mr. Maris wasn't just not the sharpest tool in the shed.. he was the raggy cloth used to clean up engine grease with.
as what the Windows source code (portions) leak was/is to the F/OSS crowd.
He may very well steer very, very, very clear of all of it, and this entire slashdot story+comments, more so than a devout Harry Potter fan locks themselves up in a vault the week before a book launch. Certainly until the origin is clear, contents have been verified, and -other- lawyers have pored over it to see whether any of it can be used in court cases and what repercussions such use may have.
Although I do hope to see Mr. Beckerman respond in one way or another, I don't expect it. Mr. Beckerman can't easily comment on any events like this lest it affects his current and/or pending cases negatively.
okay, so Mr. Maris wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed in forwarding the stuff to a gmail account.
However... assume the the group/person releasing this did at least have a gmail e-mail address for this guy, he still wouldn't have the password. Now, it's not a very strong password - it can certainly be cracked easily by a dictionary or even a brute force attack.
But if either of those methods are what were used - then what's up with Google apparently not stopping this in one way or another? E.g. maximum of N login attempts in a given time, notifying the rightful account holder of the attempts, etc.?
Aldi isn't really a grocery store - they're more like a large convenience store... i.e. supermarket. And yes, they sell PCs and Notebooks from time to time. And no, they're not crap either. Yes, they tend to be near the lower range, but within that lower range, you can get a great deal on them by going through stores like Aldi. The reason for that is simply numbers.. Aldi buys up thousands for a much lower price than a consumer can get. They then sell these at only slightly above the price they themselves paid... the profit on these machines for them is minimal. The additional turnover they get by luring in customers is what they're interested in mostly.
Their mental model may be based on this simple notion. Take a balloon with a print on it, like a logo. Don't inflate it, just cut the part with the print on it out. Find a small opening somewhere in your house to view this print through. Now take the piece between two fingers, and stretch it apart. What you see through that small opening is the print getting enlarged. The more you stretch, the bigger the tiny detail in the print becomes. This is akin to zooming in.
Put differently, and within the device's context, say you're viewing the Boston area. Now you want to zoom in on Boston Logan Airport. You put one finger at one corner of the airport, and the other at another corner. Keep in mind that the entire Boston area is currently in view, so your fingers will be spaced fairly closely together. Now to zoom in, I - and GP - would simply move the two fingers apart - perhaps all the way to opposite corners of the device's display. Essentially, the rectangle whose opposite corner boundaries were defined by the two fingertips now get re-mapped to the whatever two corners I specify after my fingers leave the display's surface. Now Boston Logal Airport occupies all of the display. That's zooming in - not out.
I'm sure it will feel intuitive enough once you work with it for a while - but I don't think that necessarily means that it is the -most- intuitive option available.
seriously, BBC.. unless the government is twisting your arm to offer your programs online while saying that only UKians should be able to view it for free and the populace complaining that the player won't work on their operating systems and companies telling you to pony up for the bandwidth costs... why don't you just tell them all "screw it, then"; and not offer it at all. There. Everybody happy.
Don't get me wrong, but if "the possibility, however remote, that a device, at the time at which it was used, did not operate according to specification" makes for 'reasonable doubt', then you would never see another speeding ticket, DUI ticket, etc.
Back on-topic.. don't people who get caught with a breathalyzer (is what they're more known as over here) get taken to the station for a more thorough and accurate, possibly blood, test to determine the blood alcohol level, before going through the steps of fining? As far as I know, the breathalyzers for that exact reason are set up to be moderately lax, as false positives would just be a giant waste of time + money on both the part of the government -and- the person who got tested, causing collateral damages everywhere.
Speaking of the Perseids.. might have mentioned that -those- are this week. Specifically, the 12th should be the high point, but from thursday through monday you may catch them. As luck (or stellar physics, I suppose) would have it - it'll be New Moon, so no moonlight interference.
just wanted to take this time to 1. thank you for indeed adding a reply; much appreciated! 2. sharing your story with us (and maybe in the future I can point to it as it being not entirely unheard of, but even with you admitting it's rare) and 3. wishing you many more wonderful years with her - may you grow old together!
...but I hope GP will come back to give an honest answer. The last time I heard somebody exclaim such a statement, the fitting analogy would be that if she asks him to take out the trash, he'll do so - while in his favor, he gets to play computer games, and she lets him.... I didn't have the heart to tell him how f..skewed that was.
Exactly.. which is why I kept my desert storm gear.
Let's see, I have pockets for my... - phone (calling + directory) - TI calculator (durr.. I can do math, me) - PDA (calendar / planning, of course) - iPod (music) - FM radio (talk radio) - blackberry (vroom-vroom e-mail for the hasty world) - Treo (web) - two-way (walkie-talkie for you 80's kids) - flashlight (what? it gets dark!) - camera (digitized *click-CLICK* included) - GPS unit (on the road again... lalala)
Okay, so a single device could conceivably do all of the above and many a current 'smart phone' will cover practically all of the above.. but then what excuse would I have to wear my patriottism on my sleeve?:D HOO-RAH!
but there's everything wrong with doing so irresponsibly. HIV isn't the only STD out there, after all.
If you're one of those people who 'sleep around', do so cleanly, do so safely, keep track of who you sleep with, get tested regularly; and if you do get tested positive for any STD, tell those who you slept with since the previous test (+ some time, due to incubation times) to get tested as well, as it is likely that 1. you got it from one of them* and 2. you gave it to some of them.
If you can't bring yourself to act responsibly, then I'm sorry - I can't bring up much sympathy for you when you do get an STD.
* assuming you didn't get the STD through blood contact/kissing** ** yes, the virus involved with a cold sore ( herpes labialis / HSV-1 ) will happily live in those other mucous warm areas, albeit extremely rare for it to travel southward. Similarly, genital herpes ( herpes genitalis / HSV-2 ) will happily nestle in the mouth.
The reason parent post is insightful is because he hits the nail on the head. Who cares if it's technically superior (yeah yeah, multitouch blabla.. no stylus = have fun selecting text with the wacky zoom-in fingerslide position-the-caret action hotness and by all means call it a feature!).. if it doesn't look anywhere near as slick (externally and UI-wise), it's not in the same market as the iPhone.
People need to stop referring to every new smartphone as an iPhone-killer. Call it a BlackBerry-killer or a SideKick-killer or a flavor-of-the-month-HTC/Eten device-killer; unless, again, it looks and acts just as slick as - if not slicker than - an iPhone.
I'm not sure what "you'll won't" is supposed to mean.. in "You'll won't have much success in convincing them - play has to go in one direction for them to move forward". Must be Aussie. Then again, the article is incoherent overall. I'm not entirely sure what the article is about;
is it about the misunderstandings of the GPLv3? If so - then why doesn't it list and address these misunderstandings? He links to a talk by Moglen in the end and recommends listening to it - but doesn't say why beyond saying that Moglen is a demi-god and by jove you should listen to him.
is it about the purported FUD being spread by other 'tech authors'? If so - then why doesn't it give examples of this FUD?
is it about the reasonings behind this purported FUD-spreading - namely that the tech authors feel that they would become less relevant if GPLv3 were to become a 'success' in that it would slow adoption of the GPLv3 (huh?) ? if so - then maybe he could explain -why- he thinks those 'tech authors' are using these reasonings, and how they are flawed in them?
The whole article reads like a bad blog posting.
But goob job on Slashdot for making it front-page material.. must be that 'GPLv3' keyword.
The problem is that computer programs can easily mis-identify things. You should try going over a few of the galaxies they present.. not the tutorial ones.. those are easy.. the actual ones. They're mostly extremely vague, low-res, pixelated jpeg-style-artifacty blobs. In fact, on most of them, I'm having to click "don't know", but on some of them, very vaguely, I can see a spiral.. but to a computer program - that would still be a blob. On the opposite end.. what we clearly identify as a merger, a computer program might think it to be a funky spiral.
That said.. as I mentioned.. most of the actual images are pretty much unidentifiable.. it would be nice if they would concentrate on getting higher resolution images first.. it would make identification easier and more robust. I understand that maybe they can't.. but a database full of "don't know"-unrecognizable blobs.. I'm not sure what the value is.
Well. That'll teach me to use the Preview button. Of course, the fixed variant hits a lame filter about too few characters per line. Go fig. Sorry for the "[anti-lame-filter filler material]" spammage. === In your BSD example, you are essentially stating that 'evildude' (I suppose that'd be 'selfishbastard' after a nick change?) took over the channel of 'developer1' and 'developer2' and essentially removed their control over it. That's not what BSD is.
Here's a slightly more accurate version... as far as one can every distill the crap down to a pseudo IRC log
** now talking in #BSD [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev> Hey look! I have this channel here, want to help me with it? <some-dev> Sure! [anti-lame-filter filler material] ** BSD-dev sets mode +o some-dev ** @some-dev changed nick to @BSD-dev2 ** some-other-dev entered the channel <@BSD-dev2> Hi dude, We've got this cool channel here, want to try helping? <some-other-dev> Sure! [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev> sets mode +o some-other-dev * @some-other-dev thinks this is pretty neat and wonders if he could do the same thing
some-other-dev:/join #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material] <@BSD-dev> dude, did you just fork our channel? <@some-other-dev> hell yeah [anti-lame-filter filler material] BSD-dev:/join #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material] BSD-dev2:/join #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material] ** now talking in #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev> sweet! Mind if we get control as well? <@some-other-dev> as a matter of fact, I do.. * @some-other-dev is now known as @TiVo-dev <BSD-dev> oh.. well that's okay:D [anti-lame-filter filler material] ** BSD-dev has left #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev2> ass. knew we should've gone with GPL... ** BSD-dev2 has left #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material]
** now talking in #BSD [anti-lame-filter filler material] <@BSD-dev2> man, that sucked. [anti-lame-filter filler material] <@BSD-dev> why? That's what the BSD allows - he's free to keep his stuff closed <@TiVo-dev>:D [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev2> yeah, but that means that all those kick-ass things he's doing there aren't coming back to us <BSD-dev> so? more power to them [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev2> and less power to us. [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev> how so? if you want to add the functionality, you're more than welcome to do so yourself <@TiVo-dev>:DD [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev2> wtf. you're an idiot [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev> look, if you disagree with it, you're more than welcome to create your own fork and relicense it under the GPL. Then if somebody forks from that, (and they release it, yadda yadda), they'll have to make their changes available. <BSD-dev2> fine. I will. [anti-lame-filter filler material] <@TiVo-dev> But I can continue to use your BSD code, right? [anti-lame-filter filler material] <BSD-dev> absolutely [anti-lame-filter filler material] <@TiVo-dev>:DDD [anti-lame-filter filler material] <@BSD-dev2> *ugh* [anti-lame-filter filler material]
BSD-dev2:/join #GPLv2 [anti-lame-filter filler mater
In your BSD example, you are essentially stating that 'evildude' (I suppose that'd be 'selfishbastard' after a nick change?) took over the channel of 'developer1' and 'developer2' and essentially removed their control over it. That's not what BSD is.
Here's a slightly more accurate version... as far as one can every distill the crap down to a pseudo IRC log
** now talking in #BSD
Hey look! I have this channel here, want to help me with it?
Sure!
sets mode +o developer2
entered the channel
Hi dude, I've got this cool channel here, want to try helping?
Sure!
sets mode +o selfishbastard (...2 seconds pass...) * @selfishbastard thinks this is pretty neat and wonders if he could do the same thing selfishbastard:/join #closed
dude, did you just fork our channel?
hell yeah developer1:/join #closed developer2:/join #closed ** now talking in #closed
sweet! Mind if we get control as well?
as a matter of fact, I do..
oh.. well that's okay:D developer1:/part
ass. knew we should've gone with GPL... developer2:/part ** now talking in #BSD
man, that sucked.
why? That's what the BSD allows - he's free to keep his stuff closed
yeah, but that means that all those kick-ass things he's doing there aren't coming back to us
so? more power to them
and less power to us.
how so? if you want to add the functionality, you're more than welcome to do so yourself
wtf. you're an idiot
look, if you disagree with it, you're more than welcome to create your own fork and relicense it under the GPL. Then if somebody forks from that, (and they release it, yadda yadda), they'll have to make their changes available.
fine. I will. developer2:/join #GPLv2 ** now talking in #GPLv2
there we go. * @developer2 adds some kick-ass features not in the BSD or closed version * @developer2 sets mode +milt #GPLv2 ** now talking in #BSD
woot. Check it out!
niiiiiiice:D
are you going to add his stuff?
can't... he licensed it all under the GPL. If I included any of it, all of our stuff would become GPL as well.:D
yowza. So if I then took it from you.. or if I took it straight from him.. I would have to make all my changes public as well?:DD
That's the GPL for ya * @selfishbastard thinks those changes from developer2 look mighty fine tho'
Well, you're free to implement them on your own:DDD
bah, too much work... * @selfishbastard combs over the GPLv2 license
oooh...:o @selfishbastard:/join #GPLv2 ** now talking in #GPLv2
wtf do you think YOU're doing here? * @selfishbastard just grins ** now talking in #BSD
lol... come watch this in #closed ** now talking in #closed * @selfishbastard sets mode +miltk DRM
whoa hey.. you just took his features. That's GPL man - now all your stuff will have to be out in the open. Not that I mind in principle, but it's not like I'll benefit from it.
ahh, you missed the crucial difference.. I put the stuff that makes things happen behind a DRM key.
huh.... meaning that, sure, I'll give them the code, and they're free to change it as they wish. But without my DRM key, there's not a whole lot they can do with it:D
that's.. sneaky.. pretty sure that goes against the spirit of the GPL
tough shitski for him.. the letter of the license applies, not the spirit
I think I'll just sit here quietly.. I'm not sure what to think of this ** now talking in #GP
Slashdot Mirror
Although I certainly agree that the SCO case (and everything around it) was quite the circus, I fail to see its relevancy to the matter at hand.
Assume the offending portions of code in 'Linux' are explicitly pointed out - i.e. 'Linux' is given a chance - the 'Linux developers' work around that code with new code, and call it a day. Then they were still in violation in the past.
Isn't that the same as what's being said here? They informed a developer that they were violating the GPL, silly potential legal action followed, the developer comes into compliance with the GPL and call it a day. But they were still violating in the past, which is what is being said now as needing to be resolved somehow; short of timetravelling into the past and coming into compliance from the get-go, I can only imagine that means compensation of some sort.
I understand the SCO scenario isn't the finest of parallels to draw, but I hardly think GP should be modded -2 Troll.
Interesting to read about this and a related post ( http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=308361&cid=20749751 ) I actually did a small project at high school about maglev stuff and, at the time, the Seraphim engine + tech was the 'cutting edge' direction things seemed to be going in.
Rather than having the track be the motor (as per the german tracks), the Seraphim engine had the motor inside the vehicle instead. And instead of relying on full levitation, it mostly used the magnetic forces for propulsion and deceleration (braking), with only some of it used to generate a small amount of lift; leaving conventional wheel systems to do most of the support carrying; claiming that wheel friction is much less of an issue than air friction.
Though my critical note on that system was that the company didn't mention anything about wear&tear to any such wheel systems when going about at 300km/h and above, day in day out.
There is, of course, the translations part.. translating Windows can't be cheap; though it surely can't be -that- expensive either.
Note that Adobe and Autodesk also have vast price increases up to well over 2x as expensive; not including the 17.5% / 19% VAT that gets added on top. With the sucking U.S. dollar, that's only getting worse and worse. It'll be interesting to see if Adobe / Autodesk / etc. will adjust their non-U.S. pricing to adjust for this, as currently it is much cheaper to import from the U.S. -and- risk any import duty fees.
as noted in the comments to the DailyTech article itself. Slashdot editors ftw.
Yes, DVD is convenient/etc. and I buy them aplenty. But the artifacts from the MPEG compression are sometimes simply teeth-gnashingly awful. Compare an S-VHS versus a DVD of movies with lots of water/ocean in them... Waterworld, Titanic, etc. I can nearly guarantee you that you'll prefer the S-VHS in terms of picture quality.. then hug the DVD because you can skip the awful, awful scenes (content-wise) in them.
.. onto the same DVD", cutting down the amount of space available to the actual movie, doesn't help.
That said, I'm sure the content mastering teams are to blame there. There's more than enough bits available to compress even the most difficult shots into perfectly good MPEG, switch to an all I-frame build-up if need be. But that actually requires them to do that work, and they tend to be too lazy. Having executives say "stick trailers for other movies, the leaders, the menus, 3 different audio languages, commentaries, cinematic trailer, making of, [voice fades as listing continues]
HD-TV suffers from the same problem; Nobody tells the HD-TV broadcasters to actually use the bandwidth they have for a single show. They're perfectly welcome to splitit up into separate channels* and get multiple avenues for revenue; guess what they're more likely to do? So yes, you'll just get the same compression artifacts in high resolution.
(* http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=82&article_id=2061&page_number=1&print_page=y )
I'm still curious as to what gmail does when one does try to brute force, but.. ..if the above is true (thanks for the replies, both of you), then Mr. Maris wasn't just not the sharpest tool in the shed.. he was the raggy cloth used to clean up engine grease with.
as what the Windows source code (portions) leak was/is to the F/OSS crowd.
He may very well steer very, very, very clear of all of it, and this entire slashdot story+comments, more so than a devout Harry Potter fan locks themselves up in a vault the week before a book launch. Certainly until the origin is clear, contents have been verified, and -other- lawyers have pored over it to see whether any of it can be used in court cases and what repercussions such use may have.
Although I do hope to see Mr. Beckerman respond in one way or another, I don't expect it. Mr. Beckerman can't easily comment on any events like this lest it affects his current and/or pending cases negatively.
okay, so Mr. Maris wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed in forwarding the stuff to a gmail account.
However... assume the the group/person releasing this did at least have a gmail e-mail address for this guy, he still wouldn't have the password.
Now, it's not a very strong password - it can certainly be cracked easily by a dictionary or even a brute force attack.
But if either of those methods are what were used - then what's up with Google apparently not stopping this in one way or another? E.g. maximum of N login attempts in a given time, notifying the rightful account holder of the attempts, etc.?
Aldi isn't really a grocery store - they're more like a large convenience store... i.e. supermarket. And yes, they sell PCs and Notebooks from time to time. And no, they're not crap either. Yes, they tend to be near the lower range, but within that lower range, you can get a great deal on them by going through stores like Aldi. The reason for that is simply numbers.. Aldi buys up thousands for a much lower price than a consumer can get. They then sell these at only slightly above the price they themselves paid... the profit on these machines for them is minimal. The additional turnover they get by luring in customers is what they're interested in mostly.
Their mental model may be based on this simple notion. Take a balloon with a print on it, like a logo. Don't inflate it, just cut the part with the print on it out. Find a small opening somewhere in your house to view this print through. Now take the piece between two fingers, and stretch it apart. What you see through that small opening is the print getting enlarged. The more you stretch, the bigger the tiny detail in the print becomes. This is akin to zooming in.
Put differently, and within the device's context, say you're viewing the Boston area. Now you want to zoom in on Boston Logan Airport. You put one finger at one corner of the airport, and the other at another corner. Keep in mind that the entire Boston area is currently in view, so your fingers will be spaced fairly closely together. Now to zoom in, I - and GP - would simply move the two fingers apart - perhaps all the way to opposite corners of the device's display. Essentially, the rectangle whose opposite corner boundaries were defined by the two fingertips now get re-mapped to the whatever two corners I specify after my fingers leave the display's surface. Now Boston Logal Airport occupies all of the display. That's zooming in - not out.
I'm sure it will feel intuitive enough once you work with it for a while - but I don't think that necessarily means that it is the -most- intuitive option available.
seriously, BBC.. unless the government is twisting your arm to offer your programs online while saying that only UKians should be able to view it for free and the populace complaining that the player won't work on their operating systems and companies telling you to pony up for the bandwidth costs... why don't you just tell them all "screw it, then"; and not offer it at all. There. Everybody happy.
is two terms... what part makes it "reasonable"?
Don't get me wrong, but if "the possibility, however remote, that a device, at the time at which it was used, did not operate according to specification" makes for 'reasonable doubt', then you would never see another speeding ticket, DUI ticket, etc.
Back on-topic.. don't people who get caught with a breathalyzer (is what they're more known as over here) get taken to the station for a more thorough and accurate, possibly blood, test to determine the blood alcohol level, before going through the steps of fining? As far as I know, the breathalyzers for that exact reason are set up to be moderately lax, as false positives would just be a giant waste of time + money on both the part of the government -and- the person who got tested, causing collateral damages everywhere.
Speaking of the Perseids.. might have mentioned that -those- are this week. Specifically, the 12th should be the high point, but from thursday through monday you may catch them. As luck (or stellar physics, I suppose) would have it - it'll be New Moon, so no moonlight interference.
just wanted to take this time to 1. thank you for indeed adding a reply; much appreciated! 2. sharing your story with us (and maybe in the future I can point to it as it being not entirely unheard of, but even with you admitting it's rare) and 3. wishing you many more wonderful years with her - may you grow old together!
...but I hope GP will come back to give an honest answer. The last time I heard somebody exclaim such a statement, the fitting analogy would be that if she asks him to take out the trash, he'll do so - while in his favor, he gets to play computer games, and she lets him. ... I didn't have the heart to tell him how f..skewed that was.
Exactly.. which is why I kept my desert storm gear.
:D HOO-RAH!
Let's see, I have pockets for my...
- phone (calling + directory)
- TI calculator (durr.. I can do math, me)
- PDA (calendar / planning, of course)
- iPod (music)
- FM radio (talk radio)
- blackberry (vroom-vroom e-mail for the hasty world)
- Treo (web)
- two-way (walkie-talkie for you 80's kids)
- flashlight (what? it gets dark!)
- camera (digitized *click-CLICK* included)
- GPS unit (on the road again... lalala)
Okay, so a single device could conceivably do all of the above and many a current 'smart phone' will cover practically all of the above.. but then what excuse would I have to wear my patriottism on my sleeve?
n/t
but there's everything wrong with doing so irresponsibly. HIV isn't the only STD out there, after all.
If you're one of those people who 'sleep around', do so cleanly, do so safely, keep track of who you sleep with, get tested regularly; and if you do get tested positive for any STD, tell those who you slept with since the previous test (+ some time, due to incubation times) to get tested as well, as it is likely that 1. you got it from one of them* and 2. you gave it to some of them.
If you can't bring yourself to act responsibly, then I'm sorry - I can't bring up much sympathy for you when you do get an STD.
* assuming you didn't get the STD through blood contact/kissing**
** yes, the virus involved with a cold sore ( herpes labialis / HSV-1 ) will happily live in those other mucous warm areas, albeit extremely rare for it to travel southward. Similarly, genital herpes ( herpes genitalis / HSV-2 ) will happily nestle in the mouth.
The reason parent post is insightful is because he hits the nail on the head. Who cares if it's technically superior (yeah yeah, multitouch blabla.. no stylus = have fun selecting text with the wacky zoom-in fingerslide position-the-caret action hotness and by all means call it a feature!).. if it doesn't look anywhere near as slick (externally and UI-wise), it's not in the same market as the iPhone.
People need to stop referring to every new smartphone as an iPhone-killer. Call it a BlackBerry-killer or a SideKick-killer or a flavor-of-the-month-HTC/Eten device-killer; unless, again, it looks and acts just as slick as - if not slicker than - an iPhone.
Another '2-page' article (you're welcome for the ad revenue, mate)
n tent&task=view&id=13525&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=1090
So here's the print version
http://www.itwire.com.au/index2.php?option=com_co
I'm not sure what "you'll won't" is supposed to mean.. in "You'll won't have much success in convincing them - play has to go in one direction for them to move forward". Must be Aussie. Then again, the article is incoherent overall.
I'm not entirely sure what the article is about;
is it about the misunderstandings of the GPLv3?
If so - then why doesn't it list and address these misunderstandings? He links to a talk by Moglen in the end and recommends listening to it - but doesn't say why beyond saying that Moglen is a demi-god and by jove you should listen to him.
is it about the purported FUD being spread by other 'tech authors'?
If so - then why doesn't it give examples of this FUD?
is it about the reasonings behind this purported FUD-spreading - namely that the tech authors feel that they would become less relevant if GPLv3 were to become a 'success' in that it would slow adoption of the GPLv3 (huh?) ?
if so - then maybe he could explain -why- he thinks those 'tech authors' are using these reasonings, and how they are flawed in them?
The whole article reads like a bad blog posting.
But goob job on Slashdot for making it front-page material.. must be that 'GPLv3' keyword.
The problem is that computer programs can easily mis-identify things. You should try going over a few of the galaxies they present.. not the tutorial ones.. those are easy.. the actual ones. They're mostly extremely vague, low-res, pixelated jpeg-style-artifacty blobs. In fact, on most of them, I'm having to click "don't know", but on some of them, very vaguely, I can see a spiral.. but to a computer program - that would still be a blob. On the opposite end.. what we clearly identify as a merger, a computer program might think it to be a funky spiral.
That said.. as I mentioned.. most of the actual images are pretty much unidentifiable.. it would be nice if they would concentrate on getting higher resolution images first.. it would make identification easier and more robust.
I understand that maybe they can't.. but a database full of "don't know"-unrecognizable blobs.. I'm not sure what the value is.
Reminds me of Stardust@Home ( http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/1 1/069248 / http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ )
Funny how human eyes are still needed for these tasks
Well. That'll teach me to use the Preview button. Of course, the fixed variant hits a lame filter about too few characters per line. Go fig. Sorry for the "[anti-lame-filter filler material]" spammage.
/join #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material] /join #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material] /join #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material] :D [anti-lame-filter filler material]
:D [anti-lame-filter filler material] :DD [anti-lame-filter filler material] :DDD [anti-lame-filter filler material]
/join #GPLv2 [anti-lame-filter filler mater
===
In your BSD example, you are essentially stating that 'evildude' (I suppose that'd be 'selfishbastard' after a nick change?) took over the channel of 'developer1' and 'developer2' and essentially removed their control over it. That's not what BSD is.
Here's a slightly more accurate version... as far as one can every distill the crap down to a pseudo IRC log
** now talking in #BSD [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<BSD-dev> Hey look! I have this channel here, want to help me with it?
<some-dev> Sure! [anti-lame-filter filler material]
** BSD-dev sets mode +o some-dev
** @some-dev changed nick to @BSD-dev2
** some-other-dev entered the channel
<@BSD-dev2> Hi dude, We've got this cool channel here, want to try helping?
<some-other-dev> Sure! [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<BSD-dev> sets mode +o some-other-dev
* @some-other-dev thinks this is pretty neat and wonders if he could do the same thing
some-other-dev:
<@BSD-dev> dude, did you just fork our channel?
<@some-other-dev> hell yeah [anti-lame-filter filler material]
BSD-dev:
BSD-dev2:
** now talking in #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<BSD-dev> sweet! Mind if we get control as well?
<@some-other-dev> as a matter of fact, I do..
* @some-other-dev is now known as @TiVo-dev
<BSD-dev> oh.. well that's okay
** BSD-dev has left #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<BSD-dev2> ass. knew we should've gone with GPL...
** BSD-dev2 has left #TiVo [anti-lame-filter filler material]
** now talking in #BSD [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<@BSD-dev2> man, that sucked. [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<@BSD-dev> why? That's what the BSD allows - he's free to keep his stuff closed
<@TiVo-dev>
<BSD-dev2> yeah, but that means that all those kick-ass things he's doing there aren't coming back to us
<BSD-dev> so? more power to them [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<BSD-dev2> and less power to us. [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<BSD-dev> how so? if you want to add the functionality, you're more than welcome to do so yourself
<@TiVo-dev>
<BSD-dev2> wtf. you're an idiot [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<BSD-dev> look, if you disagree with it, you're more than welcome to create your own fork and relicense it under the GPL. Then if somebody forks from that, (and they release it, yadda yadda), they'll have to make their changes available.
<BSD-dev2> fine. I will. [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<@TiVo-dev> But I can continue to use your BSD code, right? [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<BSD-dev> absolutely [anti-lame-filter filler material]
<@TiVo-dev>
<@BSD-dev2> *ugh* [anti-lame-filter filler material]
BSD-dev2:
In your BSD example, you are essentially stating that 'evildude' (I suppose that'd be 'selfishbastard' after a nick change?) took over the channel of 'developer1' and 'developer2' and essentially removed their control over it. That's not what BSD is.
/join #closed /join #closed /join #closed :D /part /part /join #GPLv2 :D :D :DD :DDD :o /join #GPLv2 .. meaning that, sure, I'll give them the code, and they're free to change it as they wish. But without my DRM key, there's not a whole lot they can do with it :D
Here's a slightly more accurate version... as far as one can every distill the crap down to a pseudo IRC log
** now talking in #BSD
Hey look! I have this channel here, want to help me with it?
Sure!
sets mode +o developer2
entered the channel
Hi dude, I've got this cool channel here, want to try helping?
Sure!
sets mode +o selfishbastard
(...2 seconds pass...)
* @selfishbastard thinks this is pretty neat and wonders if he could do the same thing
selfishbastard:
dude, did you just fork our channel?
hell yeah
developer1:
developer2:
** now talking in #closed
sweet! Mind if we get control as well?
as a matter of fact, I do..
oh.. well that's okay
developer1:
ass. knew we should've gone with GPL...
developer2:
** now talking in #BSD
man, that sucked.
why? That's what the BSD allows - he's free to keep his stuff closed
yeah, but that means that all those kick-ass things he's doing there aren't coming back to us
so? more power to them
and less power to us.
how so? if you want to add the functionality, you're more than welcome to do so yourself
wtf. you're an idiot
look, if you disagree with it, you're more than welcome to create your own fork and relicense it under the GPL. Then if somebody forks from that, (and they release it, yadda yadda), they'll have to make their changes available.
fine. I will.
developer2:
** now talking in #GPLv2
there we go.
* @developer2 adds some kick-ass features not in the BSD or closed version
* @developer2 sets mode +milt #GPLv2
** now talking in #BSD
woot. Check it out!
niiiiiiice
are you going to add his stuff?
can't... he licensed it all under the GPL. If I included any of it, all of our stuff would become GPL as well.
yowza. So if I then took it from you.. or if I took it straight from him.. I would have to make all my changes public as well?
That's the GPL for ya
* @selfishbastard thinks those changes from developer2 look mighty fine tho'
Well, you're free to implement them on your own
bah, too much work...
* @selfishbastard combs over the GPLv2 license
oooh...
@selfishbastard:
** now talking in #GPLv2
wtf do you think YOU're doing here?
* @selfishbastard just grins
** now talking in #BSD
lol... come watch this in #closed
** now talking in #closed
* @selfishbastard sets mode +miltk DRM
whoa hey.. you just took his features. That's GPL man - now all your stuff will have to be out in the open. Not that I mind in principle, but it's not like I'll benefit from it.
ahh, you missed the crucial difference.. I put the stuff that makes things happen behind a DRM key.
huh..
that's.. sneaky.. pretty sure that goes against the spirit of the GPL
tough shitski for him.. the letter of the license applies, not the spirit
I think I'll just sit here quietly.. I'm not sure what to think of this
** now talking in #GP
Oh.. June 2006?
http://www.engadget.com/2005/09/02/hands-on-with-
Oh.. September 2005?
And yes.. yes, they are PocketPC phones, rather than SmartPhones.. then again, what is this OpenMoko 1973 thing?
Yep - sounds like any regular ol' $40 phone to me!