Runtime linking is one such loophole, when the linking is done by the OS and not by the program. The program does not itself link to the other code - the OS is performing the actual linking, so as long as you don't distribute the two pieces of code at the same time, or you can show that it can also call other code, so it's not exclusively dependent on that relationship, you're good to go. Your program can request the code be executed, but it is up to the OS to do the actual loading, jump address calculation, execution, and returning the results.
Second, every program that uses a runtime, since there is no linking in such cases (this includes java class files, since there is no "edit-compile-link" cycle - it's just "edit-compile"). This is easily proven by writing 2 classes, on of which calls the other (for example, to show a dialog). Edit the second class to change the dialog, for example, to be larger, a different color, and have different contents. Now run the first class again - it continues to run fine, but calling the new code instead. This demonstrates that no linking was ever done between the two classes. It's all just the runtime using the classes as raw data.
The third way, of course, is to get the original authors to change their licensing, or, where they have assigned the copyright to either the FSF or gnu, to demand it be returned because of fraudulent inducement. It's easy enough to demonstrate that the benefits Stallman promised have not materialized.
A contract is an agreement that is intended to be enforced by law. A contract of adhesion is a contract where one party sets the terms, and the other party either accepts or reject them - there is no negotiation of the terms. The GPL is a contract of adhesion. It spells out the terms of distribution.
People make distribution contracts all the time - wholesalers, distributors, whatever - none of these has anything to do with the final usage of the product - they're distribution agreements. Contracts. Same as the GPL is an agreement on the terms of distribution.
You really shouldn't make an outright lie to try to make your point. When you claim "that was bulk macaroni" - that is a lie. Here is what you wrote
big box of "Kraft Original Macaroni & Cheese Dinner - 12/7.25 oz" for $26
That is not "bulk macaroni", so your cost comparison is, as I originally pointed out, cherry-picked. It would be the same as me picking a 12-pack of rice to "prove" that 2kg of rice is more expensive than a 2kg box of macaroni.
Do you even cook? Or shop? Because if you think that buying a 12-pack of Kraft Dinner is the same as buying a 2kg box of macaroni, I have a hard time believing it.
Next up:
"Our bodies regulates our sodium content quite precisely by disposing of excess in the urine."
No, they don't. That's why women feel bloated on certain days, and why doctors prescribe diuretics and low-sodium diets to people with high blood pressure. It's also why you can't drink sea water - your body will NOT be able to dispose of the excess salt without becoming dehydrated. There are certain species of aminals, such as desert rats, on the other hand, that excrete urine that is 24% urea. Birds? It's a semi-solid, so even less water is lost. We, on the other hand, to get rid of excess salt, need to pee LOTS of water.
Also, your rice diet will be deficient in vitamin A The milk, being fortified with vitamin A by law, you'd still need to drink 10 glasses a day to get the recommended daily average. Care to throw that number into your budget?
Eating healthy isn't cheap. Your "let 'em eat cheap rice" argument is absurd. Instead of pretending to shop by googling prices, go to a store and check out the real cost of food, especially fresh produce, fish, and meat. Then ask again why poor people have unhealthy diets.
So run yourself - or find someone you trust and convince her to run, and help them campaign. The biggest hurdle anyone who isn't "in on the system" has is garnering support from those "outside the system".
The GPL won't be around in 20 years. Even Linus has said he expects Linux to be replaced with something else. And let's face it, all those other examples you give? Not even 1% of the market, and declining. And Qt IS crap.
Well, I guess 9 out of 10 isn't bad. However, I am going to have to disagree with you, not because of what I wrote, but because you've misinterpreted it, implying something I didn't write.
I didn't say pets were humans... there's a difference between being a thinking, feeling entity, and being, moe specifically, a "human".
My dogs are most certainly living beings with personalities and characters, as well as a few characteristics that many humans would do well to emulate, though we mostly fail. There are thinking, acting, feeling, and to a certain extent self-aware consciousnesses inside those skulls. They don't only just learn behaviours, they've invented a few ways to communicate their wants w/o being shown how, and they most certainly engage in negotiating strategies, so it's not simple mimicry. That makes them pretty much functionally equal to many humans at both extremes of the age spectrum.
What next - claiming that apes who can communicate with us using sign language and tel jokes are not persons? Or dolphins (whose brains are larger than yours, btw) who pass the mirror test for self-awareness.
That's okay - I've discovered several loopholes in the GPL, including one that allows almost any program to use GPL code w/o violating the GPL license:-)
And no, my problem with Stallman is that he's a liar and a hypocrite.
It was over the sale of proprietary wordpress themes, here, here, here,
There were a bunch of people on one site, many of who obviously never did an edit-compile-link in their lifetimes, who have no clue as to what a linker actually does, and they were making all sorts of silly claims about how proprietary plugins and themes are a violation of the gpl... when of course the running of a plugin is done by the runtime engine at runtime - not the wordpress scripts.
Lots of recent laptops still come with them - it's cheaper to include it than it is to remove it by changing the motherboard design.
Also, the government action is self-defeating. Trying t get back at oil workers on a sit-down strike doesn't get those oil workers back to work - and oil workers are a specialized trade. Firing and blacklisting one group "en masse" just means you now have a smaller pool to hire from. Reagan could do it during the air traffic controllers' strike because there were others available to hire and you can use new technology to fill some of the gap - this isn't the case in an industry where technology has already taken up all the slack it can, and there's a world-wide shortage of oil workers.
A diet of rice, milk, and canola oil is not "healthy". Where are your veggies? The meat? Basics like bread and eggs? To top it off, you're comparing the price of a bulk bag of rice with pre-packaged single units of macaroni, instead of a 2kg or 5kg box of macaroni. That's cheating. I could do the same thing in reverse by looking for expensive single-bag servings of rice. And you'd be eating 6 cups of rice a day to get 1,500 calories.
And the last time I went shopping, a 2kg bag of frozen fries was $1.99. That would be $80 for 40kg, not $864.00., and a lot cheaper, on a poind-for-pound basis, than the 10-pound bag of rice I bought (I made the mistake once of buying a cheap rice - never again - the stuff doesn't just taste and look like crap - even my dogs wouldn't eat it. Next you'll be suggesting that people save money by buying the corn they feed to pigs).
Additionally, you make the mistake of confusing all weight gain with additional fat. There's also excess water, brought on by the high sodium content of soft drinks (and water is heavier than fat).
So, while you're using hypothetical numbers, I'm using real numbers, from the local store. Eating healthy simply costs more, especially in the winter when many stock items are not in season.
The article mentioned ALL the GPL licenses, and specifically cited the AGPL and the acrimonious discussions leading up to it as the likely cause of the fall of ALL the GPL licenses. You really can't cherry-pick in this discussion... but if you can, so can I. I'll then just pick the AGPL branch exclusively. After all, if you can cherry-pick to make your argument, how would it be wrong for me to?
Distribution is most certainly involved in using the software - if you didn't receive it, how can you use it? So, restrictions on distribution most certainly affect use. I'm going to give you a -1 logic fail on that one, just 'cuz:-) but don't take it seriously - after all, the GPL is really an evolutionary dead end, and like the dinosaurs, it might still be interesting, but there's not much practical benefit from using it.
Just based on efficiency, it's quicker, easier, and more transparent to work based on the "charity begins at home" concept.
Also, being forced to acknowledge local needs even exist is a big step. The poor are too often "invisible", because of the shame and stigma that others associate with poverty in North America somehow being the result of a character flaw. Being forced to confront your own prejudices and stereotypes is harder than it is to just give money to some far-away cause.
GPL is about imposing restrictions ON THE USE OF THE CODE for everyone in the distribution chain.
And that is false. There is one restriction on distribution, and none on use. You don't use software when you distribute it. Please remember that.
No, your assertion is what is false. First, the AGPL imposes restrictions on use as well as distribution. (or are you going to claim that the AGPL, which is cited as a major problem in the article, is not part of the GPL license family, as is the LGPL?)
Second, distribution IS one use of code. In fact it's the primary one for anyone who wants to sell or otherwise distribute a product, either for free, or commercially. So yes, distribution IS a use of software. It doesn't take place in some artificial vacuum (or the natural vacuum between RMS's ears).
Please re-read what I wrote. The article makes the distinction between the more lenient "relative poverty" index, and the "absolute poverty" index. The government uses both - but the figures I cited were for the absolute poverty index, as based on the definition that includes not having enough food.
In fact, one of the biggest problems with nutrition among the poor in the United States is obesity.
A lot of that comes from crappy high-calorie diets because they're the only way for people to make ends meet, because eating healthy means being hungry. A Mac-and-cheese and french fries budget has enough calories to get a body from one day to the next, but over the long term, the obesity you cite is an indicator of the poverty diet.
In the countries you talk about, there's not as much social stigma attached to being poor if everyone is poor. In North America, if you're poor, there's this mental picture that it's your own fault, that you should somehow be able to bootstrap yourself out of poverty, that it's a character flaw, and that you're a failure as a human being. Now throw in a large dose of shame. Your attitude is both typical and unfortunate. It's also one reason why the poor hide the fact that they are poor. They'd rather go hungry than be judged so harshly.
The code on which webit was based (KHTML) was, to put it charitably, fugly. And the rendering broke on most web sites. In retrospect it probably wouldn't have been much harder to do an implementation from scratch, or use a non-gpl core.
As someone who actually tried to use it to browse the web "back in the day", it was garbage. Even IE6 was better (okay, truth be told, even IE5.5 was better).
Besides, the real point is that Apple did, and does, continue to make contributions back to both FreeBSD and the world at large. You're free to use those contributions not just in FreeBSD, but in Linux as well.
BTW - if you download every single package from gnu.org, you STILL don't have a complete working build of an OS, so what are you complaining about, really?
#6 - I included religious groups because people do join them for honorable motives. As a "born-again fundamentalist atheist" (I make Richard Dawkins look wishy-washy, but that's becausehe ultimately waffles on the question), I do hear you when you complain about the negatives (and have experienced them first hand myself), and there are plenty of valid criticisms, but I won't tar everyone with the same brush.
You can do what's called a "directed donation" - they can only use the funds for the purpose you choose. So, for example, if the church is running a soup kitchen, it goes there. Any other use then becomes fraudulent conversion. Or you can ask them about making a donation of goods or services, and even help distribute them.
#8 - Local media is often a lot closer to "the little people"... I've known a few reporters and editors, and they've been, to a fault, human and humane. A lot of people are attracted to the field because they're idealists - which is why the right complains about the "well-known liberal bias" of the media.
#9 - You're much more likely to run into your local politicians, such as your local ward or town council member, at the grocery store. Sure, some are jerks - but in that case, why did you vote for them? There are many who are decent people who first got into municipal politics because they wanted to fix a problem, not because of a lust for power, being a control freak, or greed.
#10 - asking friends or family can be done in a way that doesn't invite abuse.
Now, in your specific case, even if we start off with the premise that they lost their house entirely through their own fault, does that mean that they can't ever learn anything?
I used to be a lot more judgmental... for example, I never in my life smoked *anything* - not the legal stuff, not the illegal stuff. So I would think that people who were hooked on cigarettes were a bit stupid, and really only had themselves to blame.
However, I've seen how hard they struggle to quit, how crappy they feel about themselves every time they fail, and that they desperately WANT to quit.
My attitude was ultimately both demeaning and destructive. Demeaning to them as human beings, and demeaning to me. It sucked. So, one day, I made a conscious decision to change my attitude. To acknowledge that they have a tough time, and that just because they made a bad decision in the past doesn't mean "jack sh*t" today or tomorrow. It makes a difference.
Applying that to your situation, do you really honestly believe that your "family deadbeat" who owes you $750 is happy or proud of that situation, instead of ashamed or embarrassed? And is your "classification" of them as a family deadbeat possibly overshadowing anything positive about them? And how is it affecting your view on life? Positively? Negatively? If negatively, is it worth the "head space" to keep thinking about it? HTH.
Just look at Apple - the company with the most worth in the whole world - selling software that was built upon FreeBSD.
And not contributing anything back to the community. Should Apple fall one day or just discontinue its BSD-based products, all their achievements will be lost. On the other hand, when a big GPL vendor falls or discontinues a product, anybody can come in and keep it alive from the last public release.
Quite the contrary - here's the source. And keep in mind that apple also hired some of the FreeBSD developers, and contributed back to the FreeBSD project with code.
A typical household at the poverty line will have clean water, electricity, enough to eat, a car, two TVs and cable, a microwave, and a video game system.
Sorry, but that's an outright falsehood. The definition of poverty is "the threshold below which families or individuals are considered to be lacking the resources to meet the basic needs for healthy living; having insufficient income to provide the food, shelter and clothing needed to preserve health."
And this ignores things like medical needs. There are plenty of people who have to choose between food and medicine.
This "absolute number of poor" (which ignores medical needs, and doesn't count the "relatively poor"), still shows 14% of the population is living in poverty.
"The non-profit advocacy group Feeding America has released a study (May 2009) based on 2005-2007 data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Agriculture Department, which claims that 3.5 million children under the age of 5 are at risk of hunger in the United States. The study claims that in 11 states, Louisiana, which has the highest rate, followed by North Carolina, Ohio, Kentucky, Texas, New Mexico, Kansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Idaho and Arkansas, more than 20 percent of children under 5 are allegedly at risk of going hungry."
Now, you can quibble about the numbers, but the fact is that more than 45 million Americans are on food stamps. And that number fails to account for those who fell through the safety net, and those who are too proud to ask.
The power companies won't mind if solar is used for large-draw things like daytime AC, when they themselves have to buy power at peak rates. They'd actually become more profitable with less demand.
The use for night-time heating is a solved problem - store the heat in something massive during daytime hours - you don't even need to take the losses from converting to electricity and back.
To amend what you are repeating BSD is about freedom of the distributor; GPL is about freedom of the code.
Let me fix that for you: BSD is about the freedom to make choices for everyone in the distribution chain. GPL is about imposing restrictions ON THE USE OF THE CODE for everyone in the distribution chain. Or have you forgotten all those "linking" arguments, including the bogus ones about how loading a template script into a runtime is somehow "linking" (people wouldn't be stupid enough to make the same argument for a spreadsheet or a word processing document, but GPL zealots have never been noted for logic).
First, your statement that "they are getting around the GPL requirements" is factually false. There is no "law" requiring anyone to be a mind reader, and somehow divine "intent" - and in the case of licenses such as the GPL (and other "contracts of adhesion"), any and all "grey areas" are to be interpreted strictly to the benefit of the recipient, and set up against the grantor.
Second, the GPL clearly states that it's okay to profit from GPL'd code - and makes NO additional restrictions about it when you do so, so that case is also covered.
Third, the FSF has, by their head (Stallman) publicly claiming that it's okay to violate copyright on closed source, put themselves in the position where anyone who chooses to vigorously litigate against the enforcement of any copyrights assigned to the FSF or the gnu project, or to demand that code they previously assigned be returned, has a good chance of winning.
The GPL won't be around within a decade or two... the more permissive licenses, such as the bsd and mit, will be, because they better address the real world. 2011 was the year that a LOT of us woke up, smelled the coffee, and realized that the GPL is an evolutionary dead end. Thanks to the GPL, there will never be a "year of the linux desktop", because there's no economic incentive. Just look at Apple - the company with the most worth in the whole world - selling software that was built upon FreeBSD.
Slashdot Mirror
Second, every program that uses a runtime, since there is no linking in such cases (this includes java class files, since there is no "edit-compile-link" cycle - it's just "edit-compile"). This is easily proven by writing 2 classes, on of which calls the other (for example, to show a dialog). Edit the second class to change the dialog, for example, to be larger, a different color, and have different contents. Now run the first class again - it continues to run fine, but calling the new code instead. This demonstrates that no linking was ever done between the two classes. It's all just the runtime using the classes as raw data.
The third way, of course, is to get the original authors to change their licensing, or, where they have assigned the copyright to either the FSF or gnu, to demand it be returned because of fraudulent inducement. It's easy enough to demonstrate that the benefits Stallman promised have not materialized.
People make distribution contracts all the time - wholesalers, distributors, whatever - none of these has anything to do with the final usage of the product - they're distribution agreements. Contracts. Same as the GPL is an agreement on the terms of distribution.
You really shouldn't make an outright lie to try to make your point. When you claim "that was bulk macaroni" - that is a lie. Here is what you wrote
That is not "bulk macaroni", so your cost comparison is, as I originally pointed out, cherry-picked. It would be the same as me picking a 12-pack of rice to "prove" that 2kg of rice is more expensive than a 2kg box of macaroni.
Do you even cook? Or shop? Because if you think that buying a 12-pack of Kraft Dinner is the same as buying a 2kg box of macaroni, I have a hard time believing it.
Next up:
No, they don't. That's why women feel bloated on certain days, and why doctors prescribe diuretics and low-sodium diets to people with high blood pressure. It's also why you can't drink sea water - your body will NOT be able to dispose of the excess salt without becoming dehydrated. There are certain species of aminals, such as desert rats, on the other hand, that excrete urine that is 24% urea. Birds? It's a semi-solid, so even less water is lost. We, on the other hand, to get rid of excess salt, need to pee LOTS of water.
Also, your rice diet will be deficient in vitamin A The milk, being fortified with vitamin A by law, you'd still need to drink 10 glasses a day to get the recommended daily average. Care to throw that number into your budget?
Eating healthy isn't cheap. Your "let 'em eat cheap rice" argument is absurd. Instead of pretending to shop by googling prices, go to a store and check out the real cost of food, especially fresh produce, fish, and meat. Then ask again why poor people have unhealthy diets.
So run yourself - or find someone you trust and convince her to run, and help them campaign. The biggest hurdle anyone who isn't "in on the system" has is garnering support from those "outside the system".
The GPL won't be around in 20 years. Even Linus has said he expects Linux to be replaced with something else. And let's face it, all those other examples you give? Not even 1% of the market, and declining. And Qt IS crap.
Please learn the difference between "you're" and "your", mkay?
Well, I guess 9 out of 10 isn't bad. However, I am going to have to disagree with you, not because of what I wrote, but because you've misinterpreted it, implying something I didn't write.
I didn't say pets were humans ... there's a difference between being a thinking, feeling entity, and being, moe specifically, a "human".
My dogs are most certainly living beings with personalities and characters, as well as a few characteristics that many humans would do well to emulate, though we mostly fail. There are thinking, acting, feeling, and to a certain extent self-aware consciousnesses inside those skulls. They don't only just learn behaviours, they've invented a few ways to communicate their wants w/o being shown how, and they most certainly engage in negotiating strategies, so it's not simple mimicry. That makes them pretty much functionally equal to many humans at both extremes of the age spectrum.
What next - claiming that apes who can communicate with us using sign language and tel jokes are not persons? Or dolphins (whose brains are larger than yours, btw) who pass the mirror test for self-awareness.
You know, people used to apply the same flawed "standard" you're applying to humans based on nothing more than skin colour - "if it don't look like us, ain't really a person, and has no rights. Make it a slave." And there have been court judgments within the last century ruling that women are not "persons" within the meaning of the law, and do not have the same rights as "people" (men).
And no, my problem with Stallman is that he's a liar and a hypocrite.
You obviously didn't read the story - they fired all the workers from their jobs earlier this year.
Try again - the GPL is most definitely a contact of adhesion. Licenses are contracts,
There were a bunch of people on one site, many of who obviously never did an edit-compile-link in their lifetimes, who have no clue as to what a linker actually does, and they were making all sorts of silly claims about how proprietary plugins and themes are a violation of the gpl ... when of course the running of a plugin is done by the runtime engine at runtime - not the wordpress scripts.
Lots of recent laptops still come with them - it's cheaper to include it than it is to remove it by changing the motherboard design.
Also, the government action is self-defeating. Trying t get back at oil workers on a sit-down strike doesn't get those oil workers back to work - and oil workers are a specialized trade. Firing and blacklisting one group "en masse" just means you now have a smaller pool to hire from. Reagan could do it during the air traffic controllers' strike because there were others available to hire and you can use new technology to fill some of the gap - this isn't the case in an industry where technology has already taken up all the slack it can, and there's a world-wide shortage of oil workers.
A diet of rice, milk, and canola oil is not "healthy". Where are your veggies? The meat? Basics like bread and eggs? To top it off, you're comparing the price of a bulk bag of rice with pre-packaged single units of macaroni, instead of a 2kg or 5kg box of macaroni. That's cheating. I could do the same thing in reverse by looking for expensive single-bag servings of rice. And you'd be eating 6 cups of rice a day to get 1,500 calories.
And the last time I went shopping, a 2kg bag of frozen fries was $1.99. That would be $80 for 40kg, not $864.00., and a lot cheaper, on a poind-for-pound basis, than the 10-pound bag of rice I bought (I made the mistake once of buying a cheap rice - never again - the stuff doesn't just taste and look like crap - even my dogs wouldn't eat it. Next you'll be suggesting that people save money by buying the corn they feed to pigs).
Additionally, you make the mistake of confusing all weight gain with additional fat. There's also excess water, brought on by the high sodium content of soft drinks (and water is heavier than fat).
So, while you're using hypothetical numbers, I'm using real numbers, from the local store. Eating healthy simply costs more, especially in the winter when many stock items are not in season.
Distribution is most certainly involved in using the software - if you didn't receive it, how can you use it? So, restrictions on distribution most certainly affect use. I'm going to give you a -1 logic fail on that one, just 'cuz :-) but don't take it seriously - after all, the GPL is really an evolutionary dead end, and like the dinosaurs, it might still be interesting, but there's not much practical benefit from using it.
Also, being forced to acknowledge local needs even exist is a big step. The poor are too often "invisible", because of the shame and stigma that others associate with poverty in North America somehow being the result of a character flaw. Being forced to confront your own prejudices and stereotypes is harder than it is to just give money to some far-away cause.
No, your assertion is what is false. First, the AGPL imposes restrictions on use as well as distribution. (or are you going to claim that the AGPL, which is cited as a major problem in the article, is not part of the GPL license family, as is the LGPL?)
Second, distribution IS one use of code. In fact it's the primary one for anyone who wants to sell or otherwise distribute a product, either for free, or commercially. So yes, distribution IS a use of software. It doesn't take place in some artificial vacuum (or the natural vacuum between RMS's ears).
A lot of that comes from crappy high-calorie diets because they're the only way for people to make ends meet, because eating healthy means being hungry. A Mac-and-cheese and french fries budget has enough calories to get a body from one day to the next, but over the long term, the obesity you cite is an indicator of the poverty diet.
In the countries you talk about, there's not as much social stigma attached to being poor if everyone is poor. In North America, if you're poor, there's this mental picture that it's your own fault, that you should somehow be able to bootstrap yourself out of poverty, that it's a character flaw, and that you're a failure as a human being. Now throw in a large dose of shame. Your attitude is both typical and unfortunate. It's also one reason why the poor hide the fact that they are poor. They'd rather go hungry than be judged so harshly.
As someone who actually tried to use it to browse the web "back in the day", it was garbage. Even IE6 was better (okay, truth be told, even IE5.5 was better).
Besides, the link already proved your original knee-jerk claim was totally wrong.
Besides, the real point is that Apple did, and does, continue to make contributions back to both FreeBSD and the world at large. You're free to use those contributions not just in FreeBSD, but in Linux as well.
BTW - if you download every single package from gnu.org, you STILL don't have a complete working build of an OS, so what are you complaining about, really?
#6 - I included religious groups because people do join them for honorable motives. As a "born-again fundamentalist atheist" (I make Richard Dawkins look wishy-washy, but that's becausehe ultimately waffles on the question), I do hear you when you complain about the negatives (and have experienced them first hand myself), and there are plenty of valid criticisms, but I won't tar everyone with the same brush.
You can do what's called a "directed donation" - they can only use the funds for the purpose you choose. So, for example, if the church is running a soup kitchen, it goes there. Any other use then becomes fraudulent conversion. Or you can ask them about making a donation of goods or services, and even help distribute them.
#8 - Local media is often a lot closer to "the little people" ... I've known a few reporters and editors, and they've been, to a fault, human and humane. A lot of people are attracted to the field because they're idealists - which is why the right complains about the "well-known liberal bias" of the media.
#9 - You're much more likely to run into your local politicians, such as your local ward or town council member, at the grocery store. Sure, some are jerks - but in that case, why did you vote for them? There are many who are decent people who first got into municipal politics because they wanted to fix a problem, not because of a lust for power, being a control freak, or greed.
#10 - asking friends or family can be done in a way that doesn't invite abuse.
Now, in your specific case, even if we start off with the premise that they lost their house entirely through their own fault, does that mean that they can't ever learn anything?
I used to be a lot more judgmental ... for example, I never in my life smoked *anything* - not the legal stuff, not the illegal stuff. So I would think that people who were hooked on cigarettes were a bit stupid, and really only had themselves to blame.
However, I've seen how hard they struggle to quit, how crappy they feel about themselves every time they fail, and that they desperately WANT to quit.
My attitude was ultimately both demeaning and destructive. Demeaning to them as human beings, and demeaning to me. It sucked. So, one day, I made a conscious decision to change my attitude. To acknowledge that they have a tough time, and that just because they made a bad decision in the past doesn't mean "jack sh*t" today or tomorrow. It makes a difference.
Applying that to your situation, do you really honestly believe that your "family deadbeat" who owes you $750 is happy or proud of that situation, instead of ashamed or embarrassed? And is your "classification" of them as a family deadbeat possibly overshadowing anything positive about them? And how is it affecting your view on life? Positively? Negatively? If negatively, is it worth the "head space" to keep thinking about it? HTH.
Quite the contrary - here's the source. And keep in mind that apple also hired some of the FreeBSD developers, and contributed back to the FreeBSD project with code.
Sorry, but that's an outright falsehood. The definition of poverty is "the threshold below which families or individuals are considered to be lacking the resources to meet the basic needs for healthy living; having insufficient income to provide the food, shelter and clothing needed to preserve health."
And this ignores things like medical needs. There are plenty of people who have to choose between food and medicine.
This "absolute number of poor" (which ignores medical needs, and doesn't count the "relatively poor"), still shows 14% of the population is living in poverty.
"The non-profit advocacy group Feeding America has released a study (May 2009) based on 2005-2007 data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Agriculture Department, which claims that 3.5 million children under the age of 5 are at risk of hunger in the United States. The study claims that in 11 states, Louisiana, which has the highest rate, followed by North Carolina, Ohio, Kentucky, Texas, New Mexico, Kansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Idaho and Arkansas, more than 20 percent of children under 5 are allegedly at risk of going hungry."
Now, you can quibble about the numbers, but the fact is that more than 45 million Americans are on food stamps. And that number fails to account for those who fell through the safety net, and those who are too proud to ask.
The power companies won't mind if solar is used for large-draw things like daytime AC, when they themselves have to buy power at peak rates. They'd actually become more profitable with less demand.
The use for night-time heating is a solved problem - store the heat in something massive during daytime hours - you don't even need to take the losses from converting to electricity and back.
Let me fix that for you: BSD is about the freedom to make choices for everyone in the distribution chain. GPL is about imposing restrictions ON THE USE OF THE CODE for everyone in the distribution chain. Or have you forgotten all those "linking" arguments, including the bogus ones about how loading a template script into a runtime is somehow "linking" (people wouldn't be stupid enough to make the same argument for a spreadsheet or a word processing document, but GPL zealots have never been noted for logic).
First, your statement that "they are getting around the GPL requirements" is factually false. There is no "law" requiring anyone to be a mind reader, and somehow divine "intent" - and in the case of licenses such as the GPL (and other "contracts of adhesion"), any and all "grey areas" are to be interpreted strictly to the benefit of the recipient, and set up against the grantor.
Second, the GPL clearly states that it's okay to profit from GPL'd code - and makes NO additional restrictions about it when you do so, so that case is also covered.
Third, the FSF has, by their head (Stallman) publicly claiming that it's okay to violate copyright on closed source, put themselves in the position where anyone who chooses to vigorously litigate against the enforcement of any copyrights assigned to the FSF or the gnu project, or to demand that code they previously assigned be returned, has a good chance of winning.
The GPL won't be around within a decade or two ... the more permissive licenses, such as the bsd and mit, will be, because they better address the real world. 2011 was the year that a LOT of us woke up, smelled the coffee, and realized that the GPL is an evolutionary dead end. Thanks to the GPL, there will never be a "year of the linux desktop", because there's no economic incentive. Just look at Apple - the company with the most worth in the whole world - selling software that was built upon FreeBSD.