I am British and I am totally shocked by this. I always associated this sort of thing with the US and other deeply religious countries. Overt religious observance is rather unusual among Christians in the UK. I am just astounded and appalled by this report.
All copyright licences restrict what you can and can't do with software. The GPL restricts what you can do far less than most licences. Honestly, it really is worth reading around the subject a little bit. For example, you can read pretty much anything that Eben Moglen has written on the subject of the GPL and you're bound to learn something.
IE: if you use GPL software to make YOUR software, you CANNOT DRM your software without being in violation of the GPL. Now how would that play out in court?
Nothing has changed here. In the past, there would have been an argument in court about this. Now there is no doubt at all. Certain forms of DRM make it impossible for a downstream recipient of the code to legally rebuild a usable version of GPLed software. The DMCA means that the downstream recipient who tries to get around this could be prosecuted for trying to circumvent a technical protection measure. The new formulation in GPLv3 simply clarifies that this is incompatible with the aims of the licence, so if you want to incorporate DRM into someone else's GPLed code, you are acknowledging that your DRM does not constitute a TPM so someone who tries to break it doesn't fall foul of the DMCA. There is a lot of hysteria about this, which is not justified in my opinion. DRM backed by the DMCA was always incompatible with the goals of the GPL. In the past they might have had to go to court to argue that the goals of the licence make it clear that DRM is in violation of licence; after GPLv3 there can be no doubt about this issue and it would not require a trip to court to establish the fact. (I am not a lawyer).
For one thing, it insists that software patents should either be made freely usable by everyone, or else not obtained at all. Whether you argue that this is a desirable sentiment or not, the bottom line is that this directive is beyond Stallman's legitimate power to make. The draft tries to decree a similar prohibition against DRM, which again, is beyond its power and will be found unenforcable.
I don't understand what you mean here? Suppose I release some code under the GPL. What the new version is saying is that you can't release a program which incorporates my code into your code if your code is patent-encumbered, unless a licence to use your patent is freely granted to everyone. That's perfectly enforceable because the only thing that allows you to redistribute my code at all is the GPL. If it's GPLv3, you lose the right to redistribute if you've incorporated your patent-encumbered stuff with mine. What is unenforceable about that?
I've said for a while that Stallman's ego and delusions about his own level of authority were getting out of control...to me, this draft fairly conclusively proves that assertion.
Have you ever wondered why nobody pays any attention to you? Incidentally, the cow/milk analogy in the link in your sig is so preposterous that I think it actually sucks the credibility out of your argument.
The problem is that if the GP2X actually does use the security functions of SD media (which they most likely do in order to attract commercial developers), they may have contractual obligations to NOT distribute the source.
No such contractual obligations can exist under the GPL. If there is any impediment to the distribution of the source per the terms of the GPL, GPH's licence to distribute the software is automatically revoked. In other words, the only thing that permits GPH to distribute GPLed software is their willingness to offer the source code for the software in its entirety. If they're not willing to distribute the source (because they'd get sued by A.N.Other company), they don't have the right to distribute the GPLed software.
It's marginally on-topic and since it hasn't been posted before, I thought I'd give a link to Garry Trudeau's brilliant skewering of intelligent design: Doonesbury 18th December 2005.
As a Zodiac owner, though, I have to say that running old NES/SNES/etc. emulators on it isn't such a great experience; I'd much prefer a digital four-way directional pad over an analog joystick. I don't imagine the GP2X experience would be much better.
What are you talking about? The GP2X has an eight-way digital joystick. Why do you think it is like the Tapwave Zodiac? Because they look alike?
The story certainly is not a hoax. He's been all over the news media here in the UK for a long time now. Each time I have visited his page there have been more ads. He's selling ads because of the notoriety of his site. There's no reason to doubt that the story is true.
Jurassic Bark: Oddly enough, I saw this episode today for the first time. I thought it was wonderful in pretty much every way. I loved the ending even if it was very sad in its way. Some of the writing on Futurama is just extraordinary - "The Sting" is a case in point. I watched that episode transfixed and never once guessed what the ending would be.
Most so called 'innocent victims' were in the actual pay of the KGB and the rest were involved in treason without pay.
So everyone who McCarthy accused was in fact a criminal? No doubt you have a wealth of evidence to back this up. Here's a clue: just because someone was accused but was not being paid by the KGB doesn't mean they were "involved in treason without pay" (whatever that means).
It is unbelievable that you can't just say that this library thing is appalling and preposterous. Why not just say that?
The coolest gadget I have seen so far this Christmas is this USB Rocket Launcher. I had picked one up in the shop before I remembered that I live on my own and I've got no-one to shoot them at!
2. The Cell processor described is exactly the processor in the PS3.
Not quite. I heard a talk from a Sony representative and she said that the PS3's cpu has eight SPEs, but only seven of them are enabled. This is to increase yields.
That is absolutely wrong. People who know will tell you that bird flu kills those with healthy immune systems far easier than those with weak immune systems.
Really? Why would that be? Can you give any evidence for this? I'm not doubting you, but I can't understand why that would be true and how we would know as the number of deaths from bird flu is as yet fairly low.
Is this pandemic something that American college students at small schools should worry about? Obviously, there is a much higher chance at a university or much larger school (like Penn State with ~45,000 students from all over the world).
It's impossible to answer this because as yet there is no pandemic. All of these stories boil down to speculation that the earth is due another flu pandemic because: (a) they have happened several times before; and (b) we haven't had one for a long time. People are fixating on bird flu simply because it has made the jump from birds to humans. And of course it seems to be coming from the far east and that is where SARS seems to have originated. In broad terms, the press is lazy and uninformed - sickness stories that have far east angle have more currency at the moment, so you hear more about them.
The seriousness of any pandemic will depend on how deadly the strain is and how readily it can jump from human to human. At the moment, H5N1 can't be transmitted from human to human. In order to be able to, it will have to mutate - what we don't know is how dangerous the mutation will be and how easily/quickly we can manufacture a vaccine. I would suggest that there is not much you can do about it, so don't worry too much. One thing that is fairly certain is that the healthier you are in general, the less vulnerable you are likely to be. Of course that's true of any illness, not just flu!
Slashdot Mirror
I am British and I am totally shocked by this. I always associated this sort of thing with the US and other deeply religious countries. Overt religious observance is rather unusual among Christians in the UK. I am just astounded and appalled by this report.
All copyright licences restrict what you can and can't do with software. The GPL restricts what you can do far less than most licences. Honestly, it really is worth reading around the subject a little bit. For example, you can read pretty much anything that Eben Moglen has written on the subject of the GPL and you're bound to learn something.
Nothing has changed here. In the past, there would have been an argument in court about this. Now there is no doubt at all. Certain forms of DRM make it impossible for a downstream recipient of the code to legally rebuild a usable version of GPLed software. The DMCA means that the downstream recipient who tries to get around this could be prosecuted for trying to circumvent a technical protection measure. The new formulation in GPLv3 simply clarifies that this is incompatible with the aims of the licence, so if you want to incorporate DRM into someone else's GPLed code, you are acknowledging that your DRM does not constitute a TPM so someone who tries to break it doesn't fall foul of the DMCA. There is a lot of hysteria about this, which is not justified in my opinion. DRM backed by the DMCA was always incompatible with the goals of the GPL. In the past they might have had to go to court to argue that the goals of the licence make it clear that DRM is in violation of licence; after GPLv3 there can be no doubt about this issue and it would not require a trip to court to establish the fact. (I am not a lawyer).
I don't understand what you mean here? Suppose I release some code under the GPL. What the new version is saying is that you can't release a program which incorporates my code into your code if your code is patent-encumbered, unless a licence to use your patent is freely granted to everyone. That's perfectly enforceable because the only thing that allows you to redistribute my code at all is the GPL. If it's GPLv3, you lose the right to redistribute if you've incorporated your patent-encumbered stuff with mine. What is unenforceable about that?
Have you ever wondered why nobody pays any attention to you? Incidentally, the cow/milk analogy in the link in your sig is so preposterous that I think it actually sucks the credibility out of your argument.
You do realise that the GPL is being written by lawyers, don't you?
No such contractual obligations can exist under the GPL. If there is any impediment to the distribution of the source per the terms of the GPL, GPH's licence to distribute the software is automatically revoked. In other words, the only thing that permits GPH to distribute GPLed software is their willingness to offer the source code for the software in its entirety. If they're not willing to distribute the source (because they'd get sued by A.N.Other company), they don't have the right to distribute the GPLed software.
It's marginally on-topic and since it hasn't been posted before, I thought I'd give a link to Garry Trudeau's brilliant skewering of intelligent design: Doonesbury 18th December 2005.
Our customers are getting pwn3d.
The device does have tv-out capability. We're currently waiting for the cables to become available.
What are you talking about? The GP2X has an eight-way digital joystick. Why do you think it is like the Tapwave Zodiac? Because they look alike?
I agree with you. I nominate dorkygeek as the first World President as he is so clearly superior to the rest of the world's population.
Please tell us what we should do with our inferior brains, dorkygeek, and we will follow unquestioningly.
The story certainly is not a hoax. He's been all over the news media here in the UK for a long time now. Each time I have visited his page there have been more ads. He's selling ads because of the notoriety of his site. There's no reason to doubt that the story is true.
In short, I don't understand what you don't understand.
Jurassic Bark: Oddly enough, I saw this episode today for the first time. I thought it was wonderful in pretty much every way. I loved the ending even if it was very sad in its way. Some of the writing on Futurama is just extraordinary - "The Sting" is a case in point. I watched that episode transfixed and never once guessed what the ending would be.
So everyone who McCarthy accused was in fact a criminal? No doubt you have a wealth of evidence to back this up. Here's a clue: just because someone was accused but was not being paid by the KGB doesn't mean they were "involved in treason without pay" (whatever that means).
It is unbelievable that you can't just say that this library thing is appalling and preposterous. Why not just say that?
Sorry, I didn't see it in action.
The coolest gadget I have seen so far this Christmas is this USB Rocket Launcher. I had picked one up in the shop before I remembered that I live on my own and I've got no-one to shoot them at!
That's a good point. I hadn't thought of it that way.
Not quite. I heard a talk from a Sony representative and she said that the PS3's cpu has eight SPEs, but only seven of them are enabled. This is to increase yields.
OK, so should we put you down in the "not sure" column?
... of pedants who point out that Britain != England.
Is a charging cradle different from a travel charger? Here is a link to the online Nokia shop. It says that a travel charger is supplied.
Yes, I should have done a google check before responding to your previous message. Very interesting indeed.
Really? Why would that be? Can you give any evidence for this? I'm not doubting you, but I can't understand why that would be true and how we would know as the number of deaths from bird flu is as yet fairly low.
It's impossible to answer this because as yet there is no pandemic. All of these stories boil down to speculation that the earth is due another flu pandemic because: (a) they have happened several times before; and (b) we haven't had one for a long time. People are fixating on bird flu simply because it has made the jump from birds to humans. And of course it seems to be coming from the far east and that is where SARS seems to have originated. In broad terms, the press is lazy and uninformed - sickness stories that have far east angle have more currency at the moment, so you hear more about them.
The seriousness of any pandemic will depend on how deadly the strain is and how readily it can jump from human to human. At the moment, H5N1 can't be transmitted from human to human. In order to be able to, it will have to mutate - what we don't know is how dangerous the mutation will be and how easily/quickly we can manufacture a vaccine. I would suggest that there is not much you can do about it, so don't worry too much. One thing that is fairly certain is that the healthier you are in general, the less vulnerable you are likely to be. Of course that's true of any illness, not just flu!