Charge for support, and use the money to hire good programmers (including possibly yourself). If you can charge enough to make a profit, other companies may try to get into the business, and eventually provide even more support and project contributions for your users.
If no users of your project will pay, it means that the project wasn't really that valuable to them; they might just be trying to take advantage of your voluntary slave labor. You can keep on supporting your project as an act of charity. Or you can walk away if you prefer to use or contribute your valuable time elsewhere.
There are two operating Babbage Difference Engine No. 2's, one in the London Science Museum, and one on loan to the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, CA. Not sure about today, but yesterday the one at the Computer History Museum was set up to produce actual log table results, and being hand cranked by a docent. The Computer History Museum also has an operating PDP-1 capable of running the original Spacewar! code.
Print the keys out on paper and stick them in a fire proof safe, taking copies to a bank vault far offsite well before shipping a set of backup tapes using that key. It's not like even a 4096 bit key takes more than a page.
If the events are truly genuinely RANDOM, then they also aren't influenced by your "will" whatever the hell THAT means.
If "will" is not determined, can an experiment be designed which would falsify any relationship, such as influence, between "will" and and random outcomes from a system proposed as containing this "will".
If some subconscious process is "making" your decisions prior to your "self" (where "self" is your conscious and self-conscious awareness), you don't really have Free Will, since conscious deliberation on possible actions has no effect on the resulting action you take.
The last assertion is unproven, AFAIK. Conscious deliberation may have an effect on an unconscious decision leading to a taken action. The 7 seconds may only be about a temporary "blind spot" in awareness between when our last effective conscious deliberation was made leading to our decisions and when we are aware of our decided actions. Free will may not depend on one's "reaction time" being zero.
There's a difference between not providing support and using legal means to restrict the usage. Apple isn't just not supporting the SDK (which would be fine), they're saying that you LEGALLY cannot do this with your phone and the SDK.
They own copyright on their SDK. If you want to use their SDK, and distribute code built with their SDK libraries, then you have to comply with their license. Or write your own SDK (and use a jailbreak instead of their store). Just like the GPL. Comply with the license or write your own.
An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any
means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other
frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in
an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Published APIs and built-
in interpreter(s).
As written, that would appear to exclude programmable calculators, games with scriptable characters, sprites or robots, PalmOS sandboxes, game emulators, or even an Apple ][ emulator.
I've worked for bosses like that. Their track record has been such that the fear isn't over one's career, since one can often get another job that will pay just as well, but that one will not live up to those bosses standards of creating products that sometimes achieve great and sustained market acceptance, as well as being a business success. The employee stock from companies with the nice bosses hasn't done nearly as well over the long haul in my small statistical sampling. YMMV.
But obfuscated code is arguably not "source code" as many common copyleft licenses define it.
Remember that the GPL only applies to distributors of the software, not to the copyright holder, who needs no license to distribute any original works.
how do you propose we remove the economic incentive for spam?
The same way governments have killed a lot of small businesses and private enterprises. Tax it to death using the frog boiling method; use the proceeds to pay for bureaucrats to measure and collect even more tax. Tax random intermediaries. Define spam as a criminal activity, then use that to pass laws to wire tap any public networks for spam monitoring. Email to honeypot addresses will have no one fighting for its privacy rights. Tax the owner of the nearest router based on the quantity of spam it outputs. Start with a low tax to keep the operators from complaining too much, then gradually raise the tax as it pays for more monitoring equipment and bureaucrats to run it. The carriers will push the cost back to the ISPs, and the ISPs will start dropping botted customers who cost more in spam tax then they pay for their bandwidth. Or scare botted users to death by having the IRS send them audit letters for spam tax due. The bureaucrats will lobby to raise the tax paying their salaries ever higher. That will eventually raise the cost to spammers of finding systems from which to send their spam. It's the historically tested method of governmental interference in business.
An establishment using passive blocking would still probably need to alert patrons to the blocking and provide an emergency contact number to be completely free of liability.
Passive blocking like locating my restaurant or other business just over the hill from the nearest cell towers so there is no coverage unless one climbs a tree? Or the building happens to be constructed like a Faraday cage? I haven't seen any signs like that, and there are plenty of office buildings and restaurants around Silicon Valley with 0 bars coverage. Haven't seen a sign yet.
Several years ago, I benchmark a Palm Tungsten handheld at over 3 megaflops (double precision floats), which was around the linpack performance of a CDC 6600, the first supercomputer designed by Seymour Cray. There are already lots of much smaller cell phones which can beat that.
If common everyday tasks are difficult because a big company like Target didn't spare a little extra expense to resolve the issue, it becomes offensive. "Why is it so frickin hard to build a ramp?! I just want some f'n toilet paper!"
The problem is when the money that is required to be spent on those ramps could have been used more efficiently some other way (perhaps hiring servants for those N people in wheelchairs in the area would have been cheaper), or for some other more beneficial purpose (perhaps the cost of the ramps for N people in wheelchairs could have been spent on delivering stuff to N+1 people who aren't able to leave home at all), etc.
It's a tax that may not be proportionate to the benefit to society as a whole, especially when other greater benefits might be available for the same tax.
The more evil interpretation is that unless one can prove that an internet packet wasn't VOIP content, some jurisdiction will try to tax it as VOIP. The possibility of using a tunnel to hide VOIP will just make all such tunnels taxable.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in other EU countries where unlocking must legally be provided on request, or where it's banned altogether...
Does Apple actually offer the iPhone for sale in these EU countries? If not, then it may be the person who imported the phone to the EU country who's on the hook, not Apple.
Cable debunkers ignore the well documented placebo effect. Thinking that a new drug/cable might cure you/sound better, and perhaps paying a lot of money for it, will actually change something in some percentage of believer's brains. And if this can have an statistically significant effect on things such as cancer remission rates, it can certainly have an effect on some percentage of individual's experience of hearing their fave tunes, if they know their getting the drug/cable. Blind studies won't show this, because not giving the patient the placebo usually doesn't work as well statistically.
'course the actual placebo could be just fancy looking sugar or lamp cord with a good marketing spin.
There's no real need to "uphold" the GPL, it is utterly rock solid.
The GPL can't be rock solid. It's based on federal copyright laws. Laws which can be modified and tilted against "Free" IP by brib^H^H^H^H... donating to a sufficient number of congress critters over time. Stallman's house is built on quicksand.
But the Free Exercise Clause isn't meaningful unless students are allowed to choose between alternatives, even if you think some of the alternatives are really bad choices. It's sort of like the "freedom" to vote in countries where there is only one candidate placed on the ballot. I disagree that teaching ID and Creationism violate the Establishment Clause because they are such bad scientific choices that I doubt that belief in them can be considered a governmental compulsion.
The freedom to believe what you want doesn't mean you have the freedom to not have those beliefs contested.
And in a 1st Amendment based society, that should include even those beliefs that current mainstream science is the absolute truth. Governments that strongly impose any official religion (including atheism) have a long history of abuses. Allowance for sillyness is one antidote to totalitarianism.
Google faces the problem that some of their metrics for detecting junk web sites are heuristic, and rely on "security through obscurity". They don't want to say exactly how obscure text can be before it's considered "hidden text", or exactly what they consider a "link farm", or they'll be spammed right up to the allowed limit. So they can't have full transparency. They're inherently limited by the approach of primarily looking at the web site itself, which the site operator can change freely, to rate the site.
They can solve the problem of transparency while preventing gaming the system by using randomized metrics for setting their heuristic limits. Have a trusted source of random numbers (send a lavarand setup to their CPA) generate and publish those numbers, but publish them a few days too late for anyone to game the system using knowledge of the current heuristic parameters.
We would like to make a profit from open source software and not return anything to the community.
We would like to profit from OSS, but only return something we consider of lesser or equal value, same as with any other rational business exchange. This isn't true, so we end up rewriting stuff.
Or we would like to return stuff, but the source rights to stuff we currently use isn't ours to return (licensed libraries, etc.), so we end up rewriting stuff (of one license or another).
In either case, the GPL causes us to waste time that BSD/MPL type licenses don't.
This could easily be fixed by commercial entities with enough lobbying clout. It worked for the RIAA/MPAA. Just get congress to defang GPL-type licenses by changing copyright law right underneath it, and not in the way that Stallman would prefer. Congress could do this by simply limiting the maximum judgment amount and injunction rights for OSS copyright infringement to some trivial value (e.g. a multiple of the copyright holders actual market price for their primary distribution mode, or some other legal definition of zero for free beer).
Email doesn't work already (add up the costs to the users and the providers). So the solution doesn't have to work either. It just has to suck slightly less badly.
If someone small creates this list, they might still be subject to costly legal harrasment. If some big news organization reports on these types of lawsuits by spammers, and just happens to maintain a history list, any legal action against them could probably be handled on the level of swatting flies by their legal department. News organizations have pretty strong precedents of First Amendment protection (and internal IT organizations which just happen to need to filter out a lot of spam as well).
Better yet. Run the whole process on virtual machines on a virtual network. Record the virtual state and I/O from outside the virtual machine/network and replay the whole process (including message display and "deletion") at your convenience.
Slashdot Mirror
Charge for support, and use the money to hire good programmers (including possibly yourself). If you can charge enough to make a profit, other companies may try to get into the business, and eventually provide even more support and project contributions for your users.
If no users of your project will pay, it means that the project wasn't really that valuable to them; they might just be trying to take advantage of your voluntary slave labor. You can keep on supporting your project as an act of charity. Or you can walk away if you prefer to use or contribute your valuable time elsewhere.
There are two operating Babbage Difference Engine No. 2's, one in the London Science Museum, and one on loan to the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, CA. Not sure about today, but yesterday the one at the Computer History Museum was set up to produce actual log table results, and being hand cranked by a docent. The Computer History Museum also has an operating PDP-1 capable of running the original Spacewar! code.
http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/
http://www.computerhistory.org/restorations/
Print the keys out on paper and stick them in a fire proof safe, taking copies to a bank vault far offsite well before shipping a set of backup tapes using that key. It's not like even a 4096 bit key takes more than a page.
If "will" is not determined, can an experiment be designed which would falsify any relationship, such as influence, between "will" and and random outcomes from a system proposed as containing this "will".
The last assertion is unproven, AFAIK. Conscious deliberation may have an effect on an unconscious decision leading to a taken action. The 7 seconds may only be about a temporary "blind spot" in awareness between when our last effective conscious deliberation was made leading to our decisions and when we are aware of our decided actions. Free will may not depend on one's "reaction time" being zero.
They own copyright on their SDK. If you want to use their SDK, and distribute code built with their SDK libraries, then you have to comply with their license. Or write your own SDK (and use a jailbreak instead of their store). Just like the GPL. Comply with the license or write your own.
An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any
means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other
frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in
an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Published APIs and built-
in interpreter(s).
As written, that would appear to exclude programmable calculators, games with scriptable characters, sprites or robots, PalmOS sandboxes, game emulators, or even an Apple ][ emulator.
I've worked for bosses like that. Their track record has been such that the fear isn't over one's career, since one can often get another job that will pay just as well, but that one will not live up to those bosses standards of creating products that sometimes achieve great and sustained market acceptance, as well as being a business success. The employee stock from companies with the nice bosses hasn't done nearly as well over the long haul in my small statistical sampling. YMMV.
Remember that the GPL only applies to distributors of the software, not to the copyright holder, who needs no license to distribute any original works.
The same way governments have killed a lot of small businesses and private enterprises. Tax it to death using the frog boiling method; use the proceeds to pay for bureaucrats to measure and collect even more tax. Tax random intermediaries. Define spam as a criminal activity, then use that to pass laws to wire tap any public networks for spam monitoring. Email to honeypot addresses will have no one fighting for its privacy rights. Tax the owner of the nearest router based on the quantity of spam it outputs. Start with a low tax to keep the operators from complaining too much, then gradually raise the tax as it pays for more monitoring equipment and bureaucrats to run it. The carriers will push the cost back to the ISPs, and the ISPs will start dropping botted customers who cost more in spam tax then they pay for their bandwidth. Or scare botted users to death by having the IRS send them audit letters for spam tax due. The bureaucrats will lobby to raise the tax paying their salaries ever higher. That will eventually raise the cost to spammers of finding systems from which to send their spam. It's the historically tested method of governmental interference in business.
Passive blocking like locating my restaurant or other business just over the hill from the nearest cell towers so there is no coverage unless one climbs a tree? Or the building happens to be constructed like a Faraday cage? I haven't seen any signs like that, and there are plenty of office buildings and restaurants around Silicon Valley with 0 bars coverage. Haven't seen a sign yet.
Several years ago, I benchmark a Palm Tungsten handheld at over 3 megaflops (double precision floats), which was around the linpack performance of a CDC 6600, the first supercomputer designed by Seymour Cray. There are already lots of much smaller cell phones which can beat that.
The problem is when the money that is required to be spent on those ramps could have been used more efficiently some other way (perhaps hiring servants for those N people in wheelchairs in the area would have been cheaper), or for some other more beneficial purpose (perhaps the cost of the ramps for N people in wheelchairs could have been spent on delivering stuff to N+1 people who aren't able to leave home at all), etc.
It's a tax that may not be proportionate to the benefit to society as a whole, especially when other greater benefits might be available for the same tax.
The more evil interpretation is that unless one can prove that an internet packet wasn't VOIP content, some jurisdiction will try to tax it as VOIP. The possibility of using a tunnel to hide VOIP will just make all such tunnels taxable.
Does Apple actually offer the iPhone for sale in these EU countries? If not, then it may be the person who imported the phone to the EU country who's on the hook, not Apple.
'course the actual placebo could be just fancy looking sugar or lamp cord with a good marketing spin.
The GPL can't be rock solid. It's based on federal copyright laws. Laws which can be modified and tilted against "Free" IP by brib^H^H^H^H... donating to a sufficient number of congress critters over time. Stallman's house is built on quicksand.
But the Free Exercise Clause isn't meaningful unless students are allowed to choose between alternatives, even if you think some of the alternatives are really bad choices. It's sort of like the "freedom" to vote in countries where there is only one candidate placed on the ballot. I disagree that teaching ID and Creationism violate the Establishment Clause because they are such bad scientific choices that I doubt that belief in them can be considered a governmental compulsion.
And in a 1st Amendment based society, that should include even those beliefs that current mainstream science is the absolute truth. Governments that strongly impose any official religion (including atheism) have a long history of abuses. Allowance for sillyness is one antidote to totalitarianism.
They can solve the problem of transparency while preventing gaming the system by using randomized metrics for setting their heuristic limits. Have a trusted source of random numbers (send a lavarand setup to their CPA) generate and publish those numbers, but publish them a few days too late for anyone to game the system using knowledge of the current heuristic parameters.
We would like to profit from OSS, but only return something we consider of lesser or equal value, same as with any other rational business exchange. This isn't true, so we end up rewriting stuff.
Or we would like to return stuff, but the source rights to stuff we currently use isn't ours to return (licensed libraries, etc.), so we end up rewriting stuff (of one license or another).
In either case, the GPL causes us to waste time that BSD/MPL type licenses don't.
This could easily be fixed by commercial entities with enough lobbying clout. It worked for the RIAA/MPAA. Just get congress to defang GPL-type licenses by changing copyright law right underneath it, and not in the way that Stallman would prefer. Congress could do this by simply limiting the maximum judgment amount and injunction rights for OSS copyright infringement to some trivial value (e.g. a multiple of the copyright holders actual market price for their primary distribution mode, or some other legal definition of zero for free beer).
Email doesn't work already (add up the costs to the users and the providers). So the solution doesn't have to work either. It just has to suck slightly less badly.
If someone small creates this list, they might still be subject to costly legal harrasment. If some big news organization reports on these types of lawsuits by spammers, and just happens to maintain a history list, any legal action against them could probably be handled on the level of swatting flies by their legal department. News organizations have pretty strong precedents of First Amendment protection (and internal IT organizations which just happen to need to filter out a lot of spam as well).
Better yet. Run the whole process on virtual machines on a virtual network. Record the virtual state and I/O from outside the virtual machine/network and replay the whole process (including message display and "deletion") at your convenience.