> "I was also worried about bacteria adapting to alcohol etc.
"
... they do... where do you think all those ugly bacteria come from? Bacteria in bars, seeing other bacteria through beer-bottle goggles, breeding, then trying to gnaw their cilia off the next morning because their mate is coyote-ugly...
Well, bacteria are the most populous living organisms in the world, and they're developing resistance to all our antibiotics, so its only a matter of time before we see stuff like...:
[_] I for one welcome our bacterial scum pond overlords
[_] I have no intestine, you ignorant clod scumbag!
[_] Imagine a beowulf cluster of... oh, they're ALREADY a cluster... and drug resistant - I guess we're cluster-f$cked!
[_] All your base nucleotides belong to us
[_] In Soviet Russia antibiotics kill YOU!
Mind you, we're talking about a culture that still insists on doctor-shopping to get antibiotics for viral infections, and over-indulges in anti-bacterial wipes, plastics, etc., to the point of both compromising our own immune systems, and breeding super-bugs.
Also, its a "moving target", since evolution alters the environment (predators, food chain, etc.), one consequence is the current "solution" is always sub-prime.
> "Actually, whales are fish. They look like fish, smell like fish, and they live in the ocean. And if you have a large enough hook, you can catch them the same way you normally fish smaller fish"
George Bush looks fishy. His politics stink like week-old dead fish. He lives surrounded by an ocean of the clueless. And given a large enough legal hook, he can be caught just the same as smaller fish.
> "Bill Gates gets a fashion makeover - image slideshow"
They already tried that in the '80s. Didn't work then... won't work now.
He was posing for a cover shot for newsweek. He held up something, and you could see the hole in his sweaters' armpit. So they had him take off the sweater. Then you got to see the pit stains on his shirt. They had to literally take the shirt off another Microsoft employee's back to get a "clean shot."
Considering that for most of the last century (gee, it still takes time to get used to saying that..) people were claiming that the BIG difference between humans and animals was tool use...
... and that a large portion of the world still thinks whales are fish, and not mammals with larger brains than humans, personalities, etc.
We're a bunch of hypocrites. Every time we find out that we're not so special, we keep changing the rules.
I'm sure some enterprising smart-aleck (./me raises hand to volunteer if it ever happens in my country) will argue that there's a difference between refusing and being unable to because you can't remember:-)
You're re-writing history. Microsoft proposed.NET so that they could get people off of web-based applications. THAT is why they stopped developing IE after version 6. Talk to people who were in the financial industry, and you'll see the massive push they made to try to get everyone to switch from web apps to.NET apps.
> "Shall we shit on Ford because they'd like to see everyone driving one of their cars?"
We don't have to - their cars are shitty enough already:-)
> "In that case, then everybody should just place their code under a BSD license, and be done with it. Doing this means your code can NOT be legally defended."
there were versions of the BSD license with the "advertising/attribution" clause - they were legally defended. Look at Microsofts' ftp program for an example.
>
"If there is a Legal dispute over the code, we would have to round up EVERYBODY that contributed to the codebase. They would ALL have to travel to Boise, IDAHO, or some place in Egypt, or Australia, or where ever the dispute is filed. Once their, they would EACH have to give a dissertation on what they contributed. If even one person doesn't show up, then you would lose, much like if a football team showed up with not enough players.
"
That's simply not true. Only the person who contributed the section of code in question, and perhaps the maintainer. Also, this would be civil, not criminal, so the rules of evidence are "balance of probabilities", not "beyond a reasonable doubt", so even with large project, you don't need everyone.
Also, the best counter-example to what you're saying is linux itself. Linus doesn't ask anyone to assign copyright to him; neither before the code is merged, nor after. Your code is your code. It stays your code. What's the problem with that?
"for the FSF it's reasonable enough since in return for the assignment they promise to license your contribution as free software."
... you do know that you can license your contribution as GPL on your own, right? You don't need the FSF's approval.
As for Sun, I'd say why not just dual-license it? Sun has made a lot of contributions - if they can make some money off the non-free version, why not? Its a 2-way street.
Actually, she should SFTU. Her statement is defamatory libel. As a lawyer, she should know better (but then again, half of all lawyers graduate in the bottom half of their class).
Not exactly a great recommendation, considering how hard it sucks to have Mono (both the disease and the programming language).
The guy shouldn't have to assign copyright. As long as he's LGPL'ed the code, what's the big deal? And this applies equally to the license nazis at the FSF who insist that code be assigned to them, rather than just licensed under the GPL or LGPL. Control freaks is what it sounds like.
C# was Microsofts' attempt to get people off java, because java is a threat to their platform monopoly. Dodn't work.
When that didn't work, and LAMP made real headway in the server room, they announced there would be no IE7, disbanded the IE team, and said that everything would be.NET. They wanted to pull people away from browser-based apps, again because browser-based apps are a threat to their monopoly. That didn't work either. They had to reconstitute the IE dev team and come out with IE7... they also had to add tabbed browsing, because that was the #1 reason people were switching to firefox.
Mono? Isn't that a disease? It certainly made my linux box sick until I "cured" it.
... and that's the problem with every law that "will only be applied to 'those people'"... one day, you could be deemed to be one of 'those people'. Why? Because!
Its like the mentality some people still have, that if you're arrested, you must have been guilty of *SOMETHING!*
16 years ago, a headhunter called me saying they had a client who was looking for c programmers. I said fine, as long as its not Microsoft. She asked why, and I told her I had heard enough stories about "management by screaming" at Microsoft. They've since "graduated" to throwing things. If I wanted to be around that sort of behaviour, I'd get a job in a daycare or kindergarten.
CFL bulbs lie about their rated lumens. The claim that a 26 watt bulb puts out the same as a 100 watt incandescent is bullshit - unless that 100 watt incandescent is a "long-life" that only puts out as much as a normal 40 watt bulb. Also, CFLs deteriorate in their light output pretty quickly, unlike incandescents.
And those 13 watt CFLs - there is no way in hell they match a 60 watt incandescent.
You and I know that certs are a joke, but obviously there are enough people who believe otherwise that its a key part of Microsoft's lock-in strategy. Get people on the cert treadmill, and they have a vested interest in making it look like certs mean something...
There's no question that products should be improved, but there's a big difference between improving an existing product, and abandoning an existing, working product that you've gotten some of the major bugs fixed, for the next load of crapware/Vista.
There was absolutely no need for either C# or.NET - they're both just there to attempt lock-in. The same goes for Silverlight.
> "Microsoft will come along and tell you what your choice will be."
And they'll change it every three years, so as to make more money off of certifications, software sales, and save money by not having to fix bugs in that "old, obsolete" stuff that was so "shiney new" stuff so recently.
If Microsoft wants to tell me what to do, they'd better be ready to sign a check with 6 figures to the left of the decimal point...
So what about people who are in a hopeless situation financially.
For example, if they have a mound of debt that bankruptcy won't erase, and they know they'll be scrounging for the rest of their lives, homeless because they haven't got the $$$ for a place to live, or a decent meal, etc.
Or what about those who are just sick and tired of the daily grind, see that they'll never get ahead, and that they're falling further behind each year, and don't want to spend another 40 years doing the same old same old, one paycheck away from being on the streets... then ending up homeless, and taking a few years to get back on their feet, only to repeat the cycle...
Are they to be denied the right to make a rational decision?
I know, some people will argue that things can change... but we're entering another recession, and every time we end up with people who commit suicide by cop, or run their cars into bridge abutments, or jump in front of subway trains or buses, or whatever, because they've decided that the fairly slim hope of a better future doesn't outweigh the current and foreseeable pain.
We fool ourselves if we try to say that there aren't a fair number of people leading lives of quiet desperation in North America, trapped in poverty with no way out, ever. We've created disposable people, starting with garbage-pail kids and moving up the age cohorts. For some of them, alzheimers would be a blessing.
CFLs don't save all that much electricity. To replace 1 100-watt incandescent in my office, I have 5 26-watt CFLs.
Similarly, in another room, I have a fixture with 2 40-watt incandescents and 5 13-watt CFLs.
I've tried several brands, and I find that all of them quickly become less than "bright". I suspect that in a lot of cases, people don't notice the gradual dimming. Then again, I can't stand LCDs either - when I have to use someone else's LCD at work, my eyeballs feel like they're being rubbed raw after a half-hour. Even my sister's 21" iMac is a pain to look at long-term... and yet I can go 12 hours at a stretch with CRTs.
Slashdot Mirror
> "I was also worried about bacteria adapting to alcohol etc. "
Well, bacteria are the most populous living organisms in the world, and they're developing resistance to all our antibiotics, so its only a matter of time before we see stuff like ...:
[_] I for one welcome our bacterial scum pond overlords ... oh, they're ALREADY a cluster ... and drug resistant - I guess we're cluster-f$cked!
[_] I have no intestine, you ignorant clod scumbag!
[_] Imagine a beowulf cluster of
[_] All your base nucleotides belong to us
[_] In Soviet Russia antibiotics kill YOU!
Mind you, we're talking about a culture that still insists on doctor-shopping to get antibiotics for viral infections, and over-indulges in anti-bacterial wipes, plastics, etc., to the point of both compromising our own immune systems, and breeding super-bugs.
>"Evolution would have gotten rid of it if this part were useless."
Evolution takes time. Hence the darwin awards
Also, its a "moving target", since evolution alters the environment (predators, food chain, etc.), one consequence is the current "solution" is always sub-prime.
> "Actually, whales are fish. They look like fish, smell like fish, and they live in the ocean. And if you have a large enough hook, you can catch them the same way you normally fish smaller fish"
George Bush looks fishy. His politics stink like week-old dead fish. He lives surrounded by an ocean of the clueless. And given a large enough legal hook, he can be caught just the same as smaller fish.
But Bush isn't a fish - just a lying scumbag.
"There are more bacteria than human cells in the typical body."
So, by the numbers, we're all mostly bags to hold pond scum.
> "Bill Gates gets a fashion makeover - image slideshow"
They already tried that in the '80s. Didn't work then ... won't work now.
He was posing for a cover shot for newsweek. He held up something, and you could see the hole in his sweaters' armpit. So they had him take off the sweater. Then you got to see the pit stains on his shirt. They had to literally take the shirt off another Microsoft employee's back to get a "clean shot."
"Stinkin' nerdz!"
Considering that for most of the last century (gee, it still takes time to get used to saying that ..) people were claiming that the BIG difference between humans and animals was tool use ...
We're a bunch of hypocrites. Every time we find out that we're not so special, we keep changing the rules.
... and its also possible that some who graduate in the top half of their class go directly into other fields, like politics ...
I'm sure some enterprising smart-aleck (./me raises hand to volunteer if it ever happens in my country) will argue that there's a difference between refusing and being unable to because you can't remember :-)
You're re-writing history. Microsoft proposed .NET so that they could get people off of web-based applications. THAT is why they stopped developing IE after version 6. Talk to people who were in the financial industry, and you'll see the massive push they made to try to get everyone to switch from web apps to .NET apps.
> "Shall we shit on Ford because they'd like to see everyone driving one of their cars?"
We don't have to - their cars are shitty enough already :-)
As for Mono, and Microsoft "shared-source" and other licensing in general, this guy is repeating what I said 3-4 years ago http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS3695984068.html
> "In that case, then everybody should just place their code under a BSD license, and be done with it. Doing this means your code can NOT be legally defended."
there were versions of the BSD license with the "advertising/attribution" clause - they were legally defended. Look at Microsofts' ftp program for an example.
> "If there is a Legal dispute over the code, we would have to round up EVERYBODY that contributed to the codebase. They would ALL have to travel to Boise, IDAHO, or some place in Egypt, or Australia, or where ever the dispute is filed. Once their, they would EACH have to give a dissertation on what they contributed. If even one person doesn't show up, then you would lose, much like if a football team showed up with not enough players. "
That's simply not true. Only the person who contributed the section of code in question, and perhaps the maintainer. Also, this would be civil, not criminal, so the rules of evidence are "balance of probabilities", not "beyond a reasonable doubt", so even with large project, you don't need everyone.
Also, the best counter-example to what you're saying is linux itself. Linus doesn't ask anyone to assign copyright to him; neither before the code is merged, nor after. Your code is your code. It stays your code. What's the problem with that?
"for the FSF it's reasonable enough since in return for the assignment they promise to license your contribution as free software."
As for Sun, I'd say why not just dual-license it? Sun has made a lot of contributions - if they can make some money off the non-free version, why not? Its a 2-way street.
Actually, she should SFTU. Her statement is defamatory libel. As a lawyer, she should know better (but then again, half of all lawyers graduate in the bottom half of their class).
Nah, just give Miguel a dose of Mono (the disease, not the code), because it certainly makes my linux boxes sick until I disable it.
Imitate a Microsoft product? Talk about having low expectations!
> "Miguel de Icaza, founder of ... Mono"
Not exactly a great recommendation, considering how hard it sucks to have Mono (both the disease and the programming language).
The guy shouldn't have to assign copyright. As long as he's LGPL'ed the code, what's the big deal? And this applies equally to the license nazis at the FSF who insist that code be assigned to them, rather than just licensed under the GPL or LGPL. Control freaks is what it sounds like.
A little history lesson.
C# was Microsofts' attempt to get people off java, because java is a threat to their platform monopoly. Dodn't work.
When that didn't work, and LAMP made real headway in the server room, they announced there would be no IE7, disbanded the IE team, and said that everything would be .NET. They wanted to pull people away from browser-based apps, again because browser-based apps are a threat to their monopoly. That didn't work either. They had to reconstitute the IE dev team and come out with IE7 ... they also had to add tabbed browsing, because that was the #1 reason people were switching to firefox.
Mono? Isn't that a disease? It certainly made my linux box sick until I "cured" it.
Its like the mentality some people still have, that if you're arrested, you must have been guilty of *SOMETHING!*
Fascism usually starts out this way.
16 years ago, a headhunter called me saying they had a client who was looking for c programmers. I said fine, as long as its not Microsoft. She asked why, and I told her I had heard enough stories about "management by screaming" at Microsoft. They've since "graduated" to throwing things. If I wanted to be around that sort of behaviour, I'd get a job in a daycare or kindergarten.
> "Ah, $100000. In Zimbabwe dollars. (You might have enough there to buy half a loaf of bread)"
Not legal tender where I am. Canadian dollars or Euros, please (and for the next little while, I'll accept US dollars at par to the loonie :-)
CFL bulbs lie about their rated lumens. The claim that a 26 watt bulb puts out the same as a 100 watt incandescent is bullshit - unless that 100 watt incandescent is a "long-life" that only puts out as much as a normal 40 watt bulb. Also, CFLs deteriorate in their light output pretty quickly, unlike incandescents.
And those 13 watt CFLs - there is no way in hell they match a 60 watt incandescent.
You and I know that certs are a joke, but obviously there are enough people who believe otherwise that its a key part of Microsoft's lock-in strategy. Get people on the cert treadmill, and they have a vested interest in making it look like certs mean something ...
There's no question that products should be improved, but there's a big difference between improving an existing product, and abandoning an existing, working product that you've gotten some of the major bugs fixed, for the next load of crapware/Vista.
There was absolutely no need for either C# or .NET - they're both just there to attempt lock-in. The same goes for Silverlight.
Hand in your geek card. Leading zeros are not significant, unless you're filming "Tora Tora Tora!"
And they'll change it every three years, so as to make more money off of certifications, software sales, and save money by not having to fix bugs in that "old, obsolete" stuff that was so "shiney new" stuff so recently.
If Microsoft wants to tell me what to do, they'd better be ready to sign a check with 6 figures to the left of the decimal point ...
So what about people who are in a hopeless situation financially.
For example, if they have a mound of debt that bankruptcy won't erase, and they know they'll be scrounging for the rest of their lives, homeless because they haven't got the $$$ for a place to live, or a decent meal, etc.
Or what about those who are just sick and tired of the daily grind, see that they'll never get ahead, and that they're falling further behind each year, and don't want to spend another 40 years doing the same old same old, one paycheck away from being on the streets ... then ending up homeless, and taking a few years to get back on their feet, only to repeat the cycle ...
Are they to be denied the right to make a rational decision?
I know, some people will argue that things can change ... but we're entering another recession, and every time we end up with people who commit suicide by cop, or run their cars into bridge abutments, or jump in front of subway trains or buses, or whatever, because they've decided that the fairly slim hope of a better future doesn't outweigh the current and foreseeable pain.
We fool ourselves if we try to say that there aren't a fair number of people leading lives of quiet desperation in North America, trapped in poverty with no way out, ever. We've created disposable people, starting with garbage-pail kids and moving up the age cohorts. For some of them, alzheimers would be a blessing.
CFLs don't save all that much electricity. To replace 1 100-watt incandescent in my office, I have 5 26-watt CFLs.
Similarly, in another room, I have a fixture with 2 40-watt incandescents and 5 13-watt CFLs.
I've tried several brands, and I find that all of them quickly become less than "bright". I suspect that in a lot of cases, people don't notice the gradual dimming. Then again, I can't stand LCDs either - when I have to use someone else's LCD at work, my eyeballs feel like they're being rubbed raw after a half-hour. Even my sister's 21" iMac is a pain to look at long-term ... and yet I can go 12 hours at a stretch with CRTs.
I guess it takes all kinds :-)