You can't copy (worst word: piracy) these programs. You know how lots of people have expensive programs for free on their home, so they can test it, study, learn, improve. A subscription model won't let you do this (without a heavily software modification by crackers).
I am sorry, I am from Brazil, just a small correction:-D
It's not Curitibo but Curitiba. In fact, a wonderful city. They have one of the lowest crime rates, lots of trees, night life, educated people, it's clean, etc, etc...
Individual corridors for public transportation exist in abundance here on Brazil. On my city, São Paulo, which is the largest south american city, there should be more than 40 of them.
They do aliviate the problem, but I believe subways are better. They are faster, more secure and less intrusive.
No, the Content is the sound file, not the sound wave that flows in the air;-)
That's what I understood from the FAQ. The Player (a software) reads the Content (the files).
I have a new interpretation angle now for it. If the file cannot be displayed to others, and I walk on the street carrying a CD and showing the physical medium of the archives to other people, will this make me a serial copier?
Also, you can't allow Content to be distributed. Well, if someone robs my house and steals my cd's, did I allow this person to do so? Of course not. I infriged this Terms of Service.
Anyway, I am not a lawyer, but if by mistake I had followed this path I would touch these annoying and misleading text interpretations.;-)
IINAL, but it also means that you can play the songs that were not encrypted yet. For example, if you have an inside music industry friend, he can pass to you files that were not encoded.
I wonder if the cops will believe I have that many inside connections when the time comes;-)
No system is 100% secure. TRUE (I hate when people say PERIOD;-)). It's IMPOSSIBLE to design a complex software without security flaw.
The system that have the large userbase will get most of the attacks. As long Windows does, it will.
Sometimes I think people forget what drive crackers. It's not most of the time a pure criminal act, but a social behavior. You want recognition, and you do it.
Perhaps we need to stop worshiping IT figures?
Re:The first Slashdot troll post investigation
on
KaZaa Suspends Downloads
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Oh! When I read your message the first time it got +4 Karma points. Now it has 0. Here's the current breakdown:
Okay, who else will mod this post? It's one of the most modded posts I've ever saw.
Anyway, there are SIX off topic mods, and one ridiculous troll. Troll? That was a high intelligent post. Not one dirty word. It didn't attack anyone else than the moderators themselfs, who seem to get upset when the hard earned karma is discussed and challenge with well formed point of views.
Yes, it's hard to earn karma (for most of 99% people here), and I now see an overreacted protection of this 'work'. That's how some mods see what they do, "I keep the community stronger".
Which complements my second issue with the moderations on this post so far, SIX off topic. Well, yes, it is off topic. But MORE than that, it's insightful. When will the poster have the chance to present this opinion? I have never seen slashdot talking about itself, only when a new slashcode version is released, which is a large period of time for something like this to wait.
MORE than off topic, this post is insightful and interesting. That's how things should get modded, the impact the opinions have. Yes, I have seen, this community protect their interests so highly that I feel strange some of us are advocates of Open Source.
Aren't we 'supposed' to contribute with each other? And isn't healthy discussions about opposing point of views that improve a lot of stuff? It's rare to see someone saying good things about Microsoft. I have seen posts doing so, none got modded up.
Why not?
I feel like *I* am getting slashdotted. Some of the recent talks I had with my friends were about copyright! I have never talked about it so strongly with them.
And the whole community is getting slashdotted. I thought it was better to accept the casual insightful, but off topic, post.
Guess what? The community is only narrowing their opinions with this kind of attitude.
Well, I am ready to lost my hard earned karma, but just as a final note, this topic should be a future article on Slashdot (and please don't let Katz write it!;-)
Wow that's an interesting and provocative question. Sadly I don't have the time tight now to give you a proper answer, when I get back home I will expand some thoughts that now I lay down.
First, obvious to someone who's going to vote, you have how much money the city or the governament scope will save. Then after you PROVE and you do your little MARKETING (hey that's politics) of how you are going to save money, say that this money is going to be used for:
1) Buy schools new computer, hire people to teach computer classes to children (education issues)
2) Build a network among schools, fireman, police, hospital, etc... (health, security, future issues)
3) Found user groups so people can help people (community issues)
Okay, that's enough, my boss is calling me. Anyway, you must find a balance between what people traditionally want from politicians (all the good and the ugly of it) and how using open source will satisfy these needs.
Money is the first thing someone would think, but you also have Microsoft that may OR may not crumble (even if just a little) with the trials.
Say to people: "Hey, let's not buy software from a company that been accused of doing Bad Things to us. Choose an alternative! Vote for me, bla bla bla".
Politicians do this all the time (playing with what MIGHT happen and exagerating the facts or assumptions).
I don't know how your personality is, if you can play this political game or not. Anyway, you will have to.. and once you start (I don't know your past) you will have to make these little concessions.
Draw on papers what people want and what Open Source can give you. Than separate these two piles of paper and in between go filling the table with the arguments that you will use, topics that you will choose. If you can make a lot, and good, connections, maybe it will work. Just remember to judge stuff from the point of view from someone who's going to vote for you.
Last, go to schools, universities, user groups, star trek meetings around your area and get as many as geeks as is possible to, of course, vote for you and give you more ideas. (think globally, act locally;-))
and they have their best interests (rates) in mind
Yep, like most companies, they are here to make money. Aggregate developers and their work under a coding enviroment is another way to accomplish this goal.
So far, so good. But the problem rises when the money you get is not only getting used to generate more money (of course not), but to prevent other people/companies to earn a share of this pie.
CLR is a way to do so. Develop for me or you are going to get screwed. Enforced by billions on cash and consumer mindshare.
X releases V1 of a project under the GPL.
Y contributes to the development of V2 with changes and new code based on V1.
X wants to convert V2 to a non-GPL license.
Does X need Y's permission?
Yes. Y was required to release its version under the GNU GPL, as a consequence of basing it on X's version V1. Nothing required Y to agree to any other license for its code. Therefore, X must get Y's permission before releasing that code under another license.
That's got nothing to do with the 'right' to copy or anything similar.
IMHO, Philips is just protecting their business and patents by trying to enforce a standard almost entirely made by them (CD-DA).
And do you think that copyright enforcers will care about carrying a logo when millions/billions are lost (or will be in the future) with people copying their stuff?
Looks like Philips will buy a tought fight if they decided to manufacturate such hardware, a fight my dear \. reader, that on my opinion will be inevitabily lost.
BTW, a quick tip, Google can do better translations...
One thing this article did right was to choose Word to attack. It's a common file format, used by thousands of users and companies to do a lot of simple things that usually do not require the 'power' that Microsoft Word gives you.
Yes, Office's Word is the best text editor available (IMHO).
So, from an highly biased Open Source advocate perspective, stopping people from misusing Word has several effects:
1) Prevent them from starting to use OTHER Office applications. Sure, Excel and Access (whatever more) can do pretty nice stuff and there's a lot of people using it. But, pretty much like those badly done anti-drugs campaigns when they try to tell you that Marijuana is a door to hook you up with more potent drugs, so it is Word. People get into it to use as a text editor and suddenly are 'addicted' to other Microsoft apps. They become valuable work tools just for the fact that you started using them;
2) There are a LOT of classes about Word, and Office. A LOT of job offers that requires knowledge of the Office suit. And I am not talking about computer related stuff... To almost anything at other fields. Try to start as an intern (that naturally will have to perform 'lower' tasks, like type other people documents or specs, essays, etc...) or a secretary without knowledge of Word. It's very hard.
With so many companies asking for Word skills, it's natural that schools will teach them. So you are just beggining in the life of work.. You open the classified ads and they are require computer skills... them you look for courses/classes... All of them offer Word/Excel/Powerpoint classes at lower prices because there's simple so much competition among these schools to get students. It's a vicious circle, that makes people who are entering the game attached to a software/format.
3) It's plain simple and easy to use other text file format for almost 100% of your communications. You do not need Word on a daily basis, yet so people use it. Educating them that there are better options (or sometimes just saying "I won't open it, convert it") is effective.
I highly disagree with RMS method of saying "a secret proprietary format", Joe user line of thought goes something like:
"Secret? Everybody uses it!!!"
But, choosing to attack Word was one of the best options available to change something on the userland level.
Okay, I know this might be perceived as a troll, but 'they' are making me not listen to other stuff.
Just open the newspaper, watch tv news or browse popular sites. You see these boy bands floating here and there, all looking the same, with horrible lyrics and musically weak. All this media coverage dedicated to only a few 'bands'... Makes me wonder "Where's the good stuff?".
Sure, Internet has helped a lot. I have found many new rock and jazz bands, some good, some bad. But I had to actively search, and a lot, for this information.
The central and possible higher issue is that, the music industry (recording companies and the media) do NOT ABSOLUTELY care about music, in its art form. It's only money, sell, buy radio/tv space, sponsor stupid shows, etc...
So, while none is truly really make me listen to N'Sync, I do believe this 'hiding' of whatever might exist out there is a Bad Thing.
I won't get in the detail that it makes harder to find interesting girls to hang out;-)
"Sure, you are pretty. Come here, give me a kiss... oh, you want to put some music, that's fantasic! WHAT? WHAT? N'Sync? AAAAARGH! NOOOOOOOOO"
What are the internal resistances (from upper management, for example) that you face on your daily work to promote Open Source inside Sun?
What arguments are people that work with you using to counter-attack your proposals? And do you feel (or know) that this is also how other big companies react inside their offices to Open Source in general?
Or to say it differently, when most Windows users don't find Windows to be unstable, telling them that you've got a more stable OS isn't going to convince them.
Exactly. And I would add:
In a few years (or right now) telling my mom that she can have Linux for free and hack network admin software sources OR pay a couple hundred (or whatever) dollars for an system that she can do what moms do, what do you think she will prefer?
What Six-pack-Joe-User cares about stability when you can't play the games? Access thousands of websites (badly done, but still...)? Runs multimedia software? (From Adobe to whatever)? Runs the latest app trend? And the list could go on...
The two most important keys to succed on the desktop is Software That People Want To Use And Good Interface.
That would depend of what libraries they are using and what licenses these licenses are released.
And later (if you clicked on the link) you can read:
"I just found out that a company has a copy of a GPL'ed program, and it costs money to get it. Aren't they violating the GPL by not making it available on the Internet?
No. The GPL does not require anyone to use the Internet for distribution. It also does not require anyone in particular to redistribute the program. And (outside of one special case), even if someone does decide to redistribute the program sometimes, the GPL doesn't say he has to distribute a copy to you in particular, or any other person in particular.
What the GPL requires is that he must have the freedom to distribute a copy to you if he wishes to. Once the copyright holder does distribute a copy program to someone, that someone can then redistribute the program to you, or to anyone else, as he sees fit."
So basically... there are several cases:
1) They do not break the GPL and make a true software without using or modifying libraries (could happen, depending on the licenses);
2) They break the GPL, and don't release the source code to anyone outside Lindows.com, so:
a) Without the sources, might be more difficult to know what library they used/modified;
3) The text that I copied and pasted from gnu.org applies. They can modify GPL and do NOT release the sources. "What the GPL requires is that he must have the freedom to distribute a copy to you if he wishes to". Just don't wish:-)
Many more possible cases, but I just pointed a few more likely to happen. Anyway, the usual IANAL surrounds my comment:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Pretzels part of the menu?
You can't copy (worst word: piracy) these programs. You know how lots of people have expensive programs for free on their home, so they can test it, study, learn, improve. A subscription model won't let you do this (without a heavily software modification by crackers).
I am sorry, I am from Brazil, just a small correction :-D
It's not Curitibo but Curitiba. In fact, a wonderful city. They have one of the lowest crime rates, lots of trees, night life, educated people, it's clean, etc, etc...
Individual corridors for public transportation exist in abundance here on Brazil. On my city, São Paulo, which is the largest south american city, there should be more than 40 of them.
They do aliviate the problem, but I believe subways are better. They are faster, more secure and less intrusive.
No, the Content is the sound file, not the sound wave that flows in the air ;-)
;-)
That's what I understood from the FAQ. The Player (a software) reads the Content (the files).
I have a new interpretation angle now for it. If the file cannot be displayed to others, and I walk on the street carrying a CD and showing the physical medium of the archives to other people, will this make me a serial copier?
Also, you can't allow Content to be distributed. Well, if someone robs my house and steals my cd's, did I allow this person to do so? Of course not. I infriged this Terms of Service.
Anyway, I am not a lawyer, but if by mistake I had followed this path I would touch these annoying and misleading text interpretations.
IINAL, but it also means that you can play the songs that were not encrypted yet. For example, if you have an inside music industry friend, he can pass to you files that were not encoded.
;-)
I wonder if the cops will believe I have that many inside connections when the time comes
No system is 100% secure. TRUE (I hate when people say PERIOD ;-)). It's IMPOSSIBLE to design a complex software without security flaw.
The system that have the large userbase will get most of the attacks. As long Windows does, it will.
Sometimes I think people forget what drive crackers. It's not most of the time a pure criminal act, but a social behavior. You want recognition, and you do it.
Perhaps we need to stop worshiping IT figures?
Oh! When I read your message the first time it got +4 Karma points. Now it has 0. Here's the current breakdown:
;-)
Offtopic=6, Troll=1, Insightful=4, Interesting=3, Informative=2
Okay, who else will mod this post? It's one of the most modded posts I've ever saw.
Anyway, there are SIX off topic mods, and one ridiculous troll. Troll? That was a high intelligent post. Not one dirty word. It didn't attack anyone else than the moderators themselfs, who seem to get upset when the hard earned karma is discussed and challenge with well formed point of views.
Yes, it's hard to earn karma (for most of 99% people here), and I now see an overreacted protection of this 'work'. That's how some mods see what they do, "I keep the community stronger".
Which complements my second issue with the moderations on this post so far, SIX off topic. Well, yes, it is off topic. But MORE than that, it's insightful. When will the poster have the chance to present this opinion? I have never seen slashdot talking about itself, only when a new slashcode version is released, which is a large period of time for something like this to wait.
MORE than off topic, this post is insightful and interesting. That's how things should get modded, the impact the opinions have. Yes, I have seen, this community protect their interests so highly that I feel strange some of us are advocates of Open Source.
Aren't we 'supposed' to contribute with each other? And isn't healthy discussions about opposing point of views that improve a lot of stuff? It's rare to see someone saying good things about Microsoft. I have seen posts doing so, none got modded up.
Why not?
I feel like *I* am getting slashdotted. Some of the recent talks I had with my friends were about copyright! I have never talked about it so strongly with them.
And the whole community is getting slashdotted. I thought it was better to accept the casual insightful, but off topic, post.
Guess what? The community is only narrowing their opinions with this kind of attitude.
Well, I am ready to lost my hard earned karma, but just as a final note, this topic should be a future article on Slashdot (and please don't let Katz write it!
Size of a human hair.
Can it prevent me to going bald?
Every tech should have a very practical use, you know...
Wow that's an interesting and provocative question. Sadly I don't have the time tight now to give you a proper answer, when I get back home I will expand some thoughts that now I lay down.
;-))
First, obvious to someone who's going to vote, you have how much money the city or the governament scope will save. Then after you PROVE and you do your little MARKETING (hey that's politics) of how you are going to save money, say that this money is going to be used for:
1) Buy schools new computer, hire people to teach computer classes to children (education issues)
2) Build a network among schools, fireman, police, hospital, etc... (health, security, future issues)
3) Found user groups so people can help people (community issues)
Okay, that's enough, my boss is calling me. Anyway, you must find a balance between what people traditionally want from politicians (all the good and the ugly of it) and how using open source will satisfy these needs.
Money is the first thing someone would think, but you also have Microsoft that may OR may not crumble (even if just a little) with the trials.
Say to people: "Hey, let's not buy software from a company that been accused of doing Bad Things to us. Choose an alternative! Vote for me, bla bla bla".
Politicians do this all the time (playing with what MIGHT happen and exagerating the facts or assumptions).
I don't know how your personality is, if you can play this political game or not. Anyway, you will have to.. and once you start (I don't know your past) you will have to make these little concessions.
Draw on papers what people want and what Open Source can give you. Than separate these two piles of paper and in between go filling the table with the arguments that you will use, topics that you will choose. If you can make a lot, and good, connections, maybe it will work. Just remember to judge stuff from the point of view from someone who's going to vote for you.
Last, go to schools, universities, user groups, star trek meetings around your area and get as many as geeks as is possible to, of course, vote for you and give you more ideas. (think globally, act locally
I would like to see thin computers. It's possible to make the whole thing 2 centimeters tall spreading over a larger plane area.
So it could be attached to walls, doors, etc.. Inside them also.
I think these are unused places, and could save desk and office spaces.
That would be .NET, Hailstorm and Passport, right?
That's where Microsoft is aiming, services.
In a couple of decades we will be able to probaly rearrange molecules. It's scince fiction to predict anything too technical like this to happen.
What will matter distance when our imagination come throught? Nothing at all.
Couple of decades is a long, long time nowdays my friend...
and they have their best interests (rates) in mind
Yep, like most companies, they are here to make money. Aggregate developers and their work under a coding enviroment is another way to accomplish this goal.
So far, so good. But the problem rises when the money you get is not only getting used to generate more money (of course not), but to prevent other people/companies to earn a share of this pie.
CLR is a way to do so. Develop for me or you are going to get screwed. Enforced by billions on cash and consumer mindshare.
But from my perception of this (GPL faq) page, this scenario is highly unlikey to happen. Some pieces of it:
First One:
Can the developer of a program who distributed it under the GPL later license it to another party for exclusive use?
No, because the public already has the right to use the program under the GPL, and this right cannot be withdrawn.
Second one:
Consider this situation:
X releases V1 of a project under the GPL.
Y contributes to the development of V2 with changes and new code based on V1.
X wants to convert V2 to a non-GPL license.
Does X need Y's permission?
Yes. Y was required to release its version under the GNU GPL, as a consequence of basing it on X's version V1. Nothing required Y to agree to any other license for its code. Therefore, X must get Y's permission before releasing that code under another license.
Cnet holds an article about.
That's got nothing to do with the 'right' to copy or anything similar.
IMHO, Philips is just protecting their business and patents by trying to enforce a standard almost entirely made by them (CD-DA).
And do you think that copyright enforcers will care about carrying a logo when millions/billions are lost (or will be in the future) with people copying their stuff?
Looks like Philips will buy a tought fight if they decided to manufacturate such hardware, a fight my dear \. reader, that on my opinion will be inevitabily lost.
BTW, a quick tip, Google can do better translations...
One thing this article did right was to choose Word to attack. It's a common file format, used by thousands of users and companies to do a lot of simple things that usually do not require the 'power' that Microsoft Word gives you.
Yes, Office's Word is the best text editor available (IMHO).
So, from an highly biased Open Source advocate perspective, stopping people from misusing Word has several effects:
1) Prevent them from starting to use OTHER Office applications. Sure, Excel and Access (whatever more) can do pretty nice stuff and there's a lot of people using it. But, pretty much like those badly done anti-drugs campaigns when they try to tell you that Marijuana is a door to hook you up with more potent drugs, so it is Word. People get into it to use as a text editor and suddenly are 'addicted' to other Microsoft apps. They become valuable work tools just for the fact that you started using them;
2) There are a LOT of classes about Word, and Office. A LOT of job offers that requires knowledge of the Office suit. And I am not talking about computer related stuff... To almost anything at other fields. Try to start as an intern (that naturally will have to perform 'lower' tasks, like type other people documents or specs, essays, etc...) or a secretary without knowledge of Word. It's very hard.
With so many companies asking for Word skills, it's natural that schools will teach them. So you are just beggining in the life of work.. You open the classified ads and they are require computer skills... them you look for courses/classes... All of them offer Word/Excel/Powerpoint classes at lower prices because there's simple so much competition among these schools to get students. It's a vicious circle, that makes people who are entering the game attached to a software/format.
3) It's plain simple and easy to use other text file format for almost 100% of your communications. You do not need Word on a daily basis, yet so people use it. Educating them that there are better options (or sometimes just saying "I won't open it, convert it") is effective.
I highly disagree with RMS method of saying "a secret proprietary format", Joe user line of thought goes something like:
"Secret? Everybody uses it!!!"
But, choosing to attack Word was one of the best options available to change something on the userland level.
No one is making you listen to it.
;-)
/me Proceed to the next drinking facility.
:-)
Okay, I know this might be perceived as a troll, but 'they' are making me not listen to other stuff.
Just open the newspaper, watch tv news or browse popular sites. You see these boy bands floating here and there, all looking the same, with horrible lyrics and musically weak. All this media coverage dedicated to only a few 'bands'... Makes me wonder "Where's the good stuff?".
Sure, Internet has helped a lot. I have found many new rock and jazz bands, some good, some bad. But I had to actively search, and a lot, for this information.
The central and possible higher issue is that, the music industry (recording companies and the media) do NOT ABSOLUTELY care about music, in its art form. It's only money, sell, buy radio/tv space, sponsor stupid shows, etc...
So, while none is truly really make me listen to N'Sync, I do believe this 'hiding' of whatever might exist out there is a Bad Thing.
I won't get in the detail that it makes harder to find interesting girls to hang out
"Sure, you are pretty. Come here, give me a kiss... oh, you want to put some music, that's fantasic! WHAT? WHAT? N'Sync? AAAAARGH! NOOOOOOOOO"
It's a lot like bread and circus anyway
Perhaps with enough negative reaction, we can get Anakin to slice Jar Jar in half with that fancy new lightsabre he has
;-)
That's not what I would expect from someone (Anakin) from the Dark Side
After seeing Episode 1 a few more times, he's kind of growing on me, like those cute widdle Ewoks.
:-)
Sorry to bother you, but I actually read and had to re-read so you weren't contradicting yourself this way:
After seeing Episode 1 a few more times, he's kind of growing on me, like those cancers little epochs.
Heh
article here.
What are the internal resistances (from upper management, for example) that you face on your daily work to promote Open Source inside Sun?
What arguments are people that work with you using to counter-attack your proposals? And do you feel (or know) that this is also how other big companies react inside their offices to Open Source in general?
Or to say it differently, when most Windows users don't find Windows to be unstable, telling them that you've got a more stable OS isn't going to convince them.
Exactly. And I would add:
In a few years (or right now) telling my mom that she can have Linux for free and hack network admin software sources OR pay a couple hundred (or whatever) dollars for an system that she can do what moms do, what do you think she will prefer?
What Six-pack-Joe-User cares about stability when you can't play the games? Access thousands of websites (badly done, but still...)? Runs multimedia software? (From Adobe to whatever)? Runs the latest app trend? And the list could go on...
The two most important keys to succed on the desktop is Software That People Want To Use And Good Interface.
Btw mod me down as a troll if you wish so badly.
Cool, force may morally and legally be used to protect one's self from fraud...this could get interesting.
It could cure multiple personalities, but raise suicide rates.
That would depend of what libraries they are using and what licenses these licenses are released.
:-)
:-)
And later (if you clicked on the link) you can read:
"I just found out that a company has a copy of a GPL'ed program, and it costs money to get it. Aren't they violating the GPL by not making it available on the Internet?
No. The GPL does not require anyone to use the Internet for distribution. It also does not require anyone in particular to redistribute the program. And (outside of one special case), even if someone does decide to redistribute the program sometimes, the GPL doesn't say he has to distribute a copy to you in particular, or any other person in particular.
What the GPL requires is that he must have the freedom to distribute a copy to you if he wishes to. Once the copyright holder does distribute a copy program to someone, that someone can then redistribute the program to you, or to anyone else, as he sees fit."
So basically... there are several cases:
1) They do not break the GPL and make a true software without using or modifying libraries (could happen, depending on the licenses);
2) They break the GPL, and don't release the source code to anyone outside Lindows.com, so:
a) Without the sources, might be more difficult to know what library they used/modified;
3) The text that I copied and pasted from gnu.org applies. They can modify GPL and do NOT release the sources. "What the GPL requires is that he must have the freedom to distribute a copy to you if he wishes to". Just don't wish
Many more possible cases, but I just pointed a few more likely to happen. Anyway, the usual IANAL surrounds my comment