From Larry McVoy:
I'm trying hard to stay out of this, I think Richard may be trolling,
but I need to make sure that people understand that what Richard is
suggesting is violation of our license and copyright.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 03:51:36PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> I think it would be appropriate at this point to write a free client
> that talks with Bitkeeper, and for Linux developers to start switching
> to that from Bitkeeper. At that point, McVoy will face a hard choice:
> if he carries out these threats, he risks alienating the community
> that he hopes will market Bitkeeper for him.
Our license states that you can't use BK if you are developing a similar
system, i.e., a clone. Without using BK it's impossible to reverse
engineer BK to create the clone. So your message seems to be saying
"it would be appropriate at this point to violate the BitKeeper license
in order to write a free client which talks with BitKeeper".
Are you really instructing people to go out and violate our license?
=========
And more:
=========
From Larry McVoy:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 02:08:32PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> My understanding of the relevant case law in the United States is that
> these types of restrictions are not allowed under copyright law itself.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 10:23:30PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Actually your license is simply irrelevant in most of thre world. You
> aren't allowed to forbid reverse engineering for interoperability.
"Judge, I want to violate this license on this product that I got
for free because it's not free enough".
"Judge, we give it out for free and we also developed technology
to transfer the data out of our product and into a GPLed product,
we do that at our expense and even host the competing GPLed repos
for free and they still want to violate the license"
Who do you think is going to win that one?
Besides, have you considered that it is that license you appear to
dislike so much which provides for the product, the hosting, the free
public machines, the support, all of that? It's a pile of money and
time and I don't see RMS steppng forward with an open checkbook.
The license means we have a revenue stream. We use a significant portion
of that revenue stream to help Linux. If the revenue stream goes away
then so do the services we provide to you for free. They obviously
have value or you wouldn't be using them.
Besides, these days MCI stands for W.O.R.L.D.C.O.M.
I doubt they'd acknowledge that either.
-jim (who started working for MCI in 1984, and actually got slightly fried by an "M" once)
Technology can go too far... Or not far enough.
on
Sports Technology?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
F1 cars are made out of Unobtanium. Is that cool? Sure.
Using a bunch of SGI boxes to make a hockey puck look
like a comet? Uncool.
It all depends on how it's meted out. I mean, we're talking
about the melding of man and machine here, for the most part. I doubt anyone on
Slashdot is going to complain about that, unless you are one of those people
that are freaked out about genetically modified corn seed. But I digress.
I've got a garage full of Kevlar and Carbon fiber, and all sorts of trick
chemicals to do some pretty cool things with it. However, I'm most amazed
at the *design* behind technology in sports. It's not enough to have the
materials to make something that can outperform a lesser material like wood,
metal or even bone. It's the *way* in which it is applied.
My experience is mostly around Motor Sports, and that background is 80 years
deep in my family. Hell, my Mom used to race. My last *name* is Race.
All that, and I race in basically a production class. I make the trick
bits for other people.
Those less technical users who value eye candy like this are the ones that don't know how to turn this thing on and they wouldn't know that such a thing exists, either...
Less technical users perhaps shouldn't be using an alpha product?
Mozilla 1.4 Alpha
This is our latest alpha release. You'll probably find bugs here, so if the idea of filing a bug and making sure it hasn't already been reported is too much trouble, then you'll be happier downloading 1.3 instead.
The problem being though... where are you going to get enough Turkeys (or carbon source of choice) to make enough for a whole country?
"Soylent Green is Peeeeeople!!!"
I'm just sayin'.
Re:Fibre is just a network cable, relax guys...
on
Last-Mile Fiber Optic
·
· Score: 1
Fact is I've got cable internet and it can handle up to 10Mbps
Well, fact is some of "us" like to run a web server from home, or other services. Unless you're lucky, most cable providers block port 80, and some go further.
I've had cable, and I dropped "back" to ADSL. Sure, I missed the extra download speed, but the bullshit I had to deal with the provider just wasn't worth it. Port 80 is not blocked. Plus, with cable I indeed saw transfer rates decline in the evening when the average user came home and logged onto AOL.
Only on Slashdot will you ever see children refered to as a programs. And what language would you advise I write a son that makes $10 million a year? COBOL?
Tcl (just pronounce it right, and they'll be rolling on the floor, peeing their pants).
This would be called "talkback", which Mozilla has implemented for some time. In itself it was buggy as fuck for a long time, but seems to rock these days and delivers some brilliant details to developers.
I've been doing SQA for years. I've been a Sr./Lead QA Engineer at a bevy of companies.
QA Engineers (or their management) have to fight. Bottom line. QA is a battle against bad program schedules, crappy design and poor unit testing.
QA can be a hoot. Contracting for QA *can* suck (as I've noticed lately). But good SQA is an excellent job, and something people that don't/can't code should aspire to. It's a pretty noble profession in the software world.
Unfortunately, most companies these days don't want really good SQA Engineers. They'd rather pay minimum wage for drones. In the end, they will indeed pay. During a recession (as we have here in the States) I think software quality degrades at the same rate unemployment goes up.
L.A. gets plenty of snow. See, there are these mountains handy. In fact, I'm guessing if you look in the morning you'll actually see this white stuff at the top of them (unless it's a brutally smoggy day). That would be snow.
-jim
(who used to amuse himself by skiing in Big Bear and surfing in Huntington Beach on the same day)
There aren't a lot of people that are hardcore techs and also like NASCAR. There are even fewer that are hardcore techs, like NASCAR and also race themselves (like myself).
Racing is a weird dance between tech and mental, especially on an amateur scale where you are the mechanic, crew chief, transport driver, racer and the lunch chef.
It is indeed a HUGE mental game, but in my case (motorcycle roadracing) it is mostly played with yourself. The organization I race with (AFM) is stricly road courses, and not a lot of drafting is required but the technical challenges are many and varied during a race weekend.
Give it a shot sometimes before you knock it. Racing requires hugely varied skills and a whole boatload of maturity and perserverance.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoa. Good thing your friend didn't show you goatse.cx
You'd be correct, sir.
From Larry McVoy:
I'm trying hard to stay out of this, I think Richard may be trolling,
but I need to make sure that people understand that what Richard is
suggesting is violation of our license and copyright.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 03:51:36PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> I think it would be appropriate at this point to write a free client
> that talks with Bitkeeper, and for Linux developers to start switching
> to that from Bitkeeper. At that point, McVoy will face a hard choice:
> if he carries out these threats, he risks alienating the community
> that he hopes will market Bitkeeper for him.
Our license states that you can't use BK if you are developing a similar
system, i.e., a clone. Without using BK it's impossible to reverse
engineer BK to create the clone. So your message seems to be saying
"it would be appropriate at this point to violate the BitKeeper license
in order to write a free client which talks with BitKeeper".
Are you really instructing people to go out and violate our license?
=========
And more:
=========
From Larry McVoy:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 02:08:32PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> My understanding of the relevant case law in the United States is that
> these types of restrictions are not allowed under copyright law itself.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 10:23:30PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Actually your license is simply irrelevant in most of thre world. You
> aren't allowed to forbid reverse engineering for interoperability.
"Judge, I want to violate this license on this product that I got
for free because it's not free enough".
"Judge, we give it out for free and we also developed technology
to transfer the data out of our product and into a GPLed product,
we do that at our expense and even host the competing GPLed repos
for free and they still want to violate the license"
Who do you think is going to win that one?
Besides, have you considered that it is that license you appear to
dislike so much which provides for the product, the hosting, the free
public machines, the support, all of that? It's a pile of money and
time and I don't see RMS steppng forward with an open checkbook.
The license means we have a revenue stream. We use a significant portion
of that revenue stream to help Linux. If the revenue stream goes away
then so do the services we provide to you for free. They obviously
have value or you wouldn't be using them.
Besides, these days MCI stands for W.O.R.L.D.C.O.M. I doubt they'd acknowledge that either.
-jim (who started working for MCI in 1984, and actually got slightly fried by an "M" once)
Using a bunch of SGI boxes to make a hockey puck look like a comet? Uncool.
It all depends on how it's meted out. I mean, we're talking about the melding of man and machine here, for the most part. I doubt anyone on Slashdot is going to complain about that, unless you are one of those people that are freaked out about genetically modified corn seed. But I digress.
I've got a garage full of Kevlar and Carbon fiber, and all sorts of trick chemicals to do some pretty cool things with it. However, I'm most amazed at the *design* behind technology in sports. It's not enough to have the materials to make something that can outperform a lesser material like wood, metal or even bone. It's the *way* in which it is applied.
My experience is mostly around Motor Sports, and that background is 80 years deep in my family. Hell, my Mom used to race. My last *name* is Race.
All that, and I race in basically a production class. I make the trick bits for other people.
I for one would like to thank you for finally getting around to doing your job.
I don't know why you haven't upgraded to 2003. I did it nearly seven months ago...
I call B.S. on that. Sounds *way* too much like a rather boring urban legend. Cite?
Less technical users perhaps shouldn't be using an alpha product?
From mozilla.org:
Mozilla 1.4 Alpha
This is our latest alpha release. You'll probably find bugs here, so if the idea of filing a bug and making sure it hasn't already been reported is too much trouble, then you'll be happier downloading 1.3 instead.
Perhaps the stories are just being reposted every time they have to reboot his doppleganger.
"Soylent Green is Peeeeeople!!!"
I'm just sayin'.
Well, fact is some of "us" like to run a web server from home, or other services. Unless you're lucky, most cable providers block port 80, and some go further.
I've had cable, and I dropped "back" to ADSL. Sure, I missed the extra download speed, but the bullshit I had to deal with the provider just wasn't worth it. Port 80 is not blocked. Plus, with cable I indeed saw transfer rates decline in the evening when the average user came home and logged onto AOL.
Not my cuppa tea.
Something tells me he likely won't be done by April 1st, so I think the EU is safe for a month or two, at least.
That's rich. Hey Jamie, should we slashdot DNA Lounge next?
Tcl (just pronounce it right, and they'll be rolling on the floor, peeing their pants).
So did the workers that built the railroads in the U.S. back in the 1800's.
It wasn't until lately that this particular perk was abolished. Remember. Beer is good food.
More common is the developers bug/help the site to fix their broken HTML. THAT kind of evangalism for standards support just rocks my world.
Try FreeScan from Qualys. Nice web based tool.
Minus the naggy, intrusive bullshit.
QA Engineers (or their management) have to fight. Bottom line. QA is a battle against bad program schedules, crappy design and poor unit testing.
QA can be a hoot. Contracting for QA *can* suck (as I've noticed lately). But good SQA is an excellent job, and something people that don't/can't code should aspire to. It's a pretty noble profession in the software world.
Unfortunately, most companies these days don't want really good SQA Engineers. They'd rather pay minimum wage for drones. In the end, they will indeed pay. During a recession (as we have here in the States) I think software quality degrades at the same rate unemployment goes up.
-jim
(who used to amuse himself by skiing in Big Bear and surfing in Huntington Beach on the same day)
-jim
Because my main local track (the main one *I* race on) is Sears Point, Ca. It's a road course, of course. And NASCAR races there. :)
Racing is a weird dance between tech and mental, especially on an amateur scale where you are the mechanic, crew chief, transport driver, racer and the lunch chef.
It is indeed a HUGE mental game, but in my case (motorcycle roadracing) it is mostly played with yourself. The organization I race with (AFM) is stricly road courses, and not a lot of drafting is required but the technical challenges are many and varied during a race weekend.
Give it a shot sometimes before you knock it. Racing requires hugely varied skills and a whole boatload of maturity and perserverance.
-jim
I found the same thing after upgrading Windows Media Player. I uninstalled it, and the MS DRM plugin went buh-bye.