The GPL requires no such thing. The GPL only governs distribution of the software. This is an important semantic distinction, as many of the largest internet companies (Yahoo!, Google, etc.) use GPL'd software extensively to build their services, often with extensive modifications, and yet they do not distribute source code. This is fully in compliance with the GPL, as the software itself is not distributed. This is explicitly addressed in the GPL FAQ.
"The study compared the experiences of three expert administrators on each side, a number that Security Innovation itself admitted was "too small to provide conclusive statistical comparisons."
Conclusive statistical comparisons?!?!? How about any statistical comparisons? Why, I could find 3 "expert" linux administrators who'd say just about anything I wanted them to say. Anecdotes do not evidence make, but they do strike that folksy note so beloved of advertisers.
Tech Support, GUIs, and tools? Sounds like a business opportunity for open-source entrepreneurs to me... Oh wait, Red Hat, Novell, and others are already doing that.
Sounds more like Tommy Hilfiger Corp. got a really good deal on hardware and software in return for being willing to help out on the advertising front. And, of course, the WSJ jumps on the bandwagon as usual.
Well yes, BSD did get some benefit from Windows using the FreeBSD TCP stack - it got an assurance that 95% of the computers in the world would have a functional TCP stack - not a small thing.
The goals of the BSD license and the GPL are different, folks. The BSD license is all about building technology that can be come the standard everywhere. The GPL is about building a permanent ecology of free (as in freedom) code. A GPL project can pick up and use BSD-licensed code, and release said code under the GPL if they wish (provided they retain the copyright notices). The reverse is not true.
The merits of OpenBSD are obvious to anyone who looks closely at it. It's not the right OS for every application, nor does it claim to be. It's Free, Functional, and Secure - and that's exactly what it claims to be.
And FWIW, if you've used OpenSSH - that comes out of the OpenBSD project.
To be fair, most, if not all, of Theo's problem's with Linux probably stem from the design and code of the Kernel. OpenBSD is very, very committed to clean designs and solid code. I've heard other members of the OpenBSD development team rant about how stupid they feel the/proc filesystem is for example, and I'm sure there are many other examples.
No, but I'd challenge you to take a radio apart and then build a duplicate *from raw materials* in the same time it takes to recompile a copy of RHEL from source.
This analogy is fundamentally flawed. Perhaps a more apt anology would be to build a duplicate radio with parts purchased from an electronics supply house. If you really want to compare source code to raw materials in the physical universe, you'd have to start without an os or compiler on the box you're going to compile it on. Hell, when you start talking about formulating plastics and smelting ore, you really should start without a bios to be really fair.
And btw, all the information you need to know about how to smelt ore and formulate plastics is publically available, probably even in your public library.
Hm. Let's see. I used to live in the US, in the Boston area to be precise. Now I live in London. I work in the IT industry.
In Boston, many, many friends who work in IT have spent months looking for jobs. In London, I'm fending off regular cold-calls from recruiters. Admittedly my evidence is anecdotal, but I find it compelling nonetheless.
However, in the interest of fairness, lease explain to me exactly how much easier it is to get a job in IT in the US than it is in England, and where you get your evidence from. I'm sure we'd all be love to hear it.
Actually, I think Keanu is perfect. As much as I love PKD, a lot of his characters have very little affect, and seem detached from their surroundings. This is especially true of Bob Arctor, who spends most of the book taking high doses of Substance D, which has disassociative side efects. Arctors increasing detachment from the world (and from himself) drives most of the story, in fact. Keanu's wooden style seems perfect for the character.
The rigid framework weighs about a tonne and provides great stability. It comprises triangular carbon-fibre frames and three aluminium longerons braced by aramide cables. All the main components of the airship such as cabin, empennage and engines are mounted on this rigid structure. This arrangement ensures that the airship retains optimum manoeuvrability even with a loss of envelope pressure
Burroughs cut up experiments were certainly influenced by the exquisite corpse game, and by Tristin Tzara's technique, but he did change the technique, by reusing words, using cut ups of phrases, pulling from multiple sources, etc. He also did some very interesting cut up experiments involving audio tape. There's a CD out called "Break Through In Grey Room" for those who are interested in such things (and unlike most WSB audio recordings, it's deemed safe by RIAA Radar).
The real question is how they make their money at shows. Do they get it directly from the venue, or make it at the merch table? In my experience as a musician, promoter, and recording engineer, most small to midsized bands are lucky to get $100 + free beer from a venue to play a show. Once you split that among the band members, that's not much. You can make a lot more than that at a show, but most of it's likely to come from the merch table.
Not that I think this level of business is at all threatened by file sharing. The fact is, most people will pay $10 for a CD or T shirt at a show, even if they can get the music online. It's a way of supporting a band they like.
But this hasn't changed that much in England in the 21st century. Much of the land is still "sold" as a leasehold, rather than as a freeholding (and I believe freeholdings are ancient in English law as well). Most of the land is still actually owned by titled nobles, and typically leased to the "owner" (leaseholder) for 99 years at a time. There are longer leases than that, some much longer, but the principle still applies. Leases are usually renewed for some nominal fee, but there's no requirement that they be. Technically, the actuall landowner would be within their rights to tell the "owner" to vacate when the lease comes up for renewal. Some land is also given as a "lifeholding", where the lease expires immediately upon the lifeholder's death, and this can't be inherited in the usual way.
Interestingly enough, this is also much the way most real estate works in Hawaii, which shouldn't surprise anyone who has even a cursury knowledge of it's history.
Actually, while the major labels do own some recording and mastering studios, most of the big recording studios and mastering houses are already independently owned and run. The labels are happy with this, since the musicians have to pay for recording costs out of their advance, and the label doesn't have to pay for engineer salaries and equipment maintainence. In that way, it's not much different from the way companies like Nike outsource their manufacturing.
New independent studios aren't a threat to label dominance, anymore than the humble 4 track was 20 years ago. Labels care about distribution, not the mechanics of creation. Mind you, they'd love to make it illegal for musicians to *distribute* their work themselves.
Tools like Cakewalk aren't much of a threat to the big studios or mastering houses, either. Most of what they're selling isn't the equipment, it's the space itself (-96db silence, big rooms, active acoustic environment for live rooms, few reflections in control rooms, etc.) and the ears and skills of the engineers. The average home studio these days has more tracks and effects available than Brian Wilson or George Martin had at their disposal back in 1966, but I defy you to point to many home recordings that rival Pet Sounds or Revolver in audio quality.
Since the 1930s, effective anti-aging treatments (making us effectively immortal) have been predicted. So far, nothing. (Not that this would be a good thing for overpopulation but...)
From the press release: "If IBM were serious about addressing the real problems with Linux, it would offer full customer indemnification and move away from the GPL license."
I'm curious as what exactly SCO's thinking is on these 2 things.
How does moving away from the GPL address "the real problems with linux"
How exactly can IBM "move away from the GPL" in the Linux context? (short of getting written permission from all the linux contributors to dump the GPL, which I very much doubt would be forthcoming)
It's becoming very clear that the goal here is to ban the GPL, as many had suspected.
The linux community will defend itself with more than name calling. If SCO is right, someone will re-implement the encumbered code from scratch, and release that under the GPL. Unless they can prove that all (or at least major portions) of the kernel is a derivative work, then the most they'll get is some subsystems. The copyright to the genuiunely oringinal work which comprises most of the kernel belongs to the authors, all of whom have chosen to release it under the GPL. Even in the unlikely event that they prove large sections of the kernel to be encumbered, the worst they can do is set kernel development back, not stop it entirely.
Nothing can change that under current copyright law. If you write it, you own it, unless it's a work for hire. That's why they don't want to release the supposedly infringing code. If the community doesn't know what needs to be re-implemented, the community can't re-implement it.
FWIW, the OpenBSD project has, for a number of years now, been strictly removing from their distribution any code encumbered by any license more restrictive than the BSD license (including GPL'ed code). While OpenBSD's approach has led to some hard feelings, it proves that it can be done, and done effectively.
Naw, if you were really trying for humor, it would have been a bowl full of lutefisk.
Grits humor hasn't been generally accepted as funny since the mid 1940s (although it survived in pockets until at least the 70s, as witnessed in the carreer of Martin Mull).
Unfortunately, PayPal charges a minimum of 0.7% + $0.30, and that rate requires use of a Paypal debit card. The problem with micropayments continues to be that it's hard to make money off such small transactions until there are millions of them. I still have fond memories of "First Virtual". They were one of the first online payment services, and they aimed squarely at micropayments. Unfortunately there wasn't enough money in it, and they went under.
A working micropayment system would solve a lot of problems in a lot of industries.
It's an interesting idea, a "temporary subscription" in return for viewing some advertising. It seems there's something for everyone. The advertiser gets a forum where people actually have to click through the ad; Salon gets some money from the advertiser; and non-subscribers get access to "premium" content. If this works (and Salon stays in business in part because of this), perhaps other content sites will follow suit.
It's harder to switch that way. The providers subsidise the cost of the phones in return for a system lock.
In Europe and Asia you can buy an unlocked phone, for more money of course. I was also told that some (or all?) providers will also provide the unlock code at the end of the contract period, so the phone can be reused. My experience is that US providers will refuse to issue the unlock code under any circumstances. I also haven't been able to purchase an unlocked phone at any price in the US consumer market.
My experience is with GSM phones, the other protocols may be different.
That would be Dashell Hammett. However, there was only ever one story which starred Sam Spade, The Maltese Falcon. An interesting book, that one, as people always remember Spade being a reoccuring character, even though he only appeared the once. Bogart also played Phillip Marlowe, Raymond Chandler's great private detective, which might be a source of some of the confusion. Marlowe did appear in a lot of books and stories, but was almost the opposite of Spade in character. I've always felt that this showed Bogart's range as an actor, but YMMV.
Hammett is not as good with language as Chandler, and perhaps because of this, his works don't seem to me to stand up as well. Chandler was a master of atmosphere and description, and if you substitute a few words here and there ("Lexus" for "Packard" for example) most of his scenes read like they happened last week.
As for modern writers, sure, some of the ones who survive will be SF writers. Certainly it's been at least as important a genre in the last 20 years as hard boiled detective fiction was from the 30s through the 50s, measured by its impact on society, anyway. On the other hand, there were and are dozens of writers working in that genre whose names are not remembered.
FWIW, I think Samuel R Delaney, Ursula K LeGuin, Neil Stephenson, and Iain Banks are candidates, but that probably says as much about my taste as anything.
There's a fallacy there. "Street level" of an underground movement can be awfully hard to find if you're on the outside. This becomes more true the more underground the movement is. While that's certainly part of the appeal (humans like feeling like they're part of an "elite"), accusing someone of not having a life because they don't devote their spare time to underground music is counterproductive. Wouldn't it be better to applaud the desire to free oneself from the pernicious influence of the Music Industry?
The reality is, that if you don't know where to find a good underground record store, and don't know whose recommendations to trust, sifting through the mass of releases in any genre looking for the good stuff can seem an insurmountable task, even for relatively small genres. A system which makes it easier to sift through the huge amounts of releases out there would benefit listeners and musicians alike.
The economics of being in an independent band really boils down to "how much money do we have to spend this month?" For example, it costs my band, Abunai! $500 every month to pay for our practice space. We rarely get paid more than $150 to play a show, and rarely can play more than one local show in a month (and here in Boston, pay at clubs is going down, apparently because not as many people go out to see live bands as did 10 years ago). The CD's we sell at shows also help, so each band member can pay a little less for rent in a given month. That's not even factoring in the costs of strings, picks, cables, equipment repairs, or what we pay our label for CD's.
If there were a single coherent "underground", maybe a tool like the one suggested wouldn't be useful, but there isn't there are hundreds (or thousands) of disconnected, self-referencing "scenes", which are hardly even aware of each others existence.
Slashdot Mirror
The GPL requires no such thing. The GPL only governs distribution of the software. This is an important semantic distinction, as many of the largest internet companies (Yahoo!, Google, etc.) use GPL'd software extensively to build their services, often with extensive modifications, and yet they do not distribute source code. This is fully in compliance with the GPL, as the software itself is not distributed. This is explicitly addressed in the GPL FAQ.
"The study compared the experiences of three expert administrators on each side, a number that Security Innovation itself admitted was "too small to provide conclusive statistical comparisons."
Conclusive statistical comparisons?!?!? How about any statistical comparisons? Why, I could find 3 "expert" linux administrators who'd say just about anything I wanted them to say. Anecdotes do not evidence make, but they do strike that folksy note so beloved of advertisers.
Tech Support, GUIs, and tools? Sounds like a business opportunity for open-source entrepreneurs to me... Oh wait, Red Hat, Novell, and others are already doing that.
Sounds more like Tommy Hilfiger Corp. got a really good deal on hardware and software in return for being willing to help out on the advertising front. And, of course, the WSJ jumps on the bandwagon as usual.
Well yes, BSD did get some benefit from Windows using the FreeBSD TCP stack - it got an assurance that 95% of the computers in the world would have a functional TCP stack - not a small thing.
The goals of the BSD license and the GPL are different, folks. The BSD license is all about building technology that can be come the standard everywhere. The GPL is about building a permanent ecology of free (as in freedom) code. A GPL project can pick up and use BSD-licensed code, and release said code under the GPL if they wish (provided they retain the copyright notices). The reverse is not true.
The merits of OpenBSD are obvious to anyone who looks closely at it. It's not the right OS for every application, nor does it claim to be. It's Free, Functional, and Secure - and that's exactly what it claims to be.
And FWIW, if you've used OpenSSH - that comes out of the OpenBSD project.
To be fair, most, if not all, of Theo's problem's with Linux probably stem from the design and code of the Kernel. OpenBSD is very, very committed to clean designs and solid code. I've heard other members of the OpenBSD development team rant about how stupid they feel the /proc filesystem is for example, and I'm sure there are many other examples.
No, but I'd challenge you to take a radio apart and then build a duplicate *from raw materials* in the same time it takes to recompile a copy of RHEL from source.
This analogy is fundamentally flawed. Perhaps a more apt anology would be to build a duplicate radio with parts purchased from an electronics supply house. If you really want to compare source code to raw materials in the physical universe, you'd have to start without an os or compiler on the box you're going to compile it on. Hell, when you start talking about formulating plastics and smelting ore, you really should start without a bios to be really fair.
And btw, all the information you need to know about how to smelt ore and formulate plastics is publically available, probably even in your public library.
Hm. Let's see. I used to live in the US, in the Boston area to be precise. Now I live in London. I work in the IT industry.
In Boston, many, many friends who work in IT have spent months looking for jobs. In London, I'm fending off regular cold-calls from recruiters. Admittedly my evidence is anecdotal, but I find it compelling nonetheless.
However, in the interest of fairness, lease explain to me exactly how much easier it is to get a job in IT in the US than it is in England, and where you get your evidence from. I'm sure we'd all be love to hear it.
Actually, I think Keanu is perfect. As much as I love PKD, a lot of his characters have very little affect, and seem detached from their surroundings. This is especially true of Bob Arctor, who spends most of the book taking high doses of Substance D, which has disassociative side efects. Arctors increasing detachment from the world (and from himself) drives most of the story, in fact. Keanu's wooden style seems perfect for the character.
Looks like a Zeppelin to me.
Burroughs cut up experiments were certainly influenced by the exquisite corpse game, and by Tristin Tzara's technique, but he did change the technique, by reusing words, using cut ups of phrases, pulling from multiple sources, etc. He also did some very interesting cut up experiments involving audio tape. There's a CD out called "Break Through In Grey Room" for those who are interested in such things (and unlike most WSB audio recordings, it's deemed safe by RIAA Radar).
The real question is how they make their money at shows. Do they get it directly from the venue, or make it at the merch table? In my experience as a musician, promoter, and recording engineer, most small to midsized bands are lucky to get $100 + free beer from a venue to play a show. Once you split that among the band members, that's not much. You can make a lot more than that at a show, but most of it's likely to come from the merch table.
Not that I think this level of business is at all threatened by file sharing. The fact is, most people will pay $10 for a CD or T shirt at a show, even if they can get the music online. It's a way of supporting a band they like.
But this hasn't changed that much in England in the 21st century. Much of the land is still "sold" as a leasehold, rather than as a freeholding (and I believe freeholdings are ancient in English law as well). Most of the land is still actually owned by titled nobles, and typically leased to the "owner" (leaseholder) for 99 years at a time. There are longer leases than that, some much longer, but the principle still applies. Leases are usually renewed for some nominal fee, but there's no requirement that they be. Technically, the actuall landowner would be within their rights to tell the "owner" to vacate when the lease comes up for renewal. Some land is also given as a "lifeholding", where the lease expires immediately upon the lifeholder's death, and this can't be inherited in the usual way.
Interestingly enough, this is also much the way most real estate works in Hawaii, which shouldn't surprise anyone who has even a cursury knowledge of it's history.
-Brendan
Actually, while the major labels do own some recording and mastering studios, most of the big recording studios and mastering houses are already independently owned and run. The labels are happy with this, since the musicians have to pay for recording costs out of their advance, and the label doesn't have to pay for engineer salaries and equipment maintainence. In that way, it's not much different from the way companies like Nike outsource their manufacturing.
New independent studios aren't a threat to label dominance, anymore than the humble 4 track was 20 years ago. Labels care about distribution, not the mechanics of creation. Mind you, they'd love to make it illegal for musicians to *distribute* their work themselves.
Tools like Cakewalk aren't much of a threat to the big studios or mastering houses, either. Most of what they're selling isn't the equipment, it's the space itself (-96db silence, big rooms, active acoustic environment for live rooms, few reflections in control rooms, etc.) and the ears and skills of the engineers. The average home studio these days has more tracks and effects available than Brian Wilson or George Martin had at their disposal back in 1966, but I defy you to point to many home recordings that rival Pet Sounds or Revolver in audio quality.
Since the 1930s, effective anti-aging treatments (making us effectively immortal) have been predicted. So far, nothing. (Not that this would be a good thing for overpopulation but...)
I'm curious as what exactly SCO's thinking is on these 2 things.
- How does moving away from the GPL address "the real problems with linux"
- How exactly can IBM "move away from the GPL" in the Linux context? (short of getting written permission from all the linux contributors to dump the GPL, which I very much doubt would be forthcoming)
It's becoming very clear that the goal here is to ban the GPL, as many had suspected.The linux community will defend itself with more than name calling. If SCO is right, someone will re-implement the encumbered code from scratch, and release that under the GPL. Unless they can prove that all (or at least major portions) of the kernel is a derivative work, then the most they'll get is some subsystems. The copyright to the genuiunely oringinal work which comprises most of the kernel belongs to the authors, all of whom have chosen to release it under the GPL. Even in the unlikely event that they prove large sections of the kernel to be encumbered, the worst they can do is set kernel development back, not stop it entirely.
Nothing can change that under current copyright law. If you write it, you own it, unless it's a work for hire. That's why they don't want to release the supposedly infringing code. If the community doesn't know what needs to be re-implemented, the community can't re-implement it.
FWIW, the OpenBSD project has, for a number of years now, been strictly removing from their distribution any code encumbered by any license more restrictive than the BSD license (including GPL'ed code). While OpenBSD's approach has led to some hard feelings, it proves that it can be done, and done effectively.
Naw, if you were really trying for humor, it would have been a bowl full of lutefisk.
Grits humor hasn't been generally accepted as funny since the mid 1940s (although it survived in pockets until at least the 70s, as witnessed in the carreer of Martin Mull).
FWIW, That's exactly how First Virtual worked. Geez, do I feel old.
"When I was your age we had to carry our packets with our bare hands to the router...It was 5 miles, in the snow, uphill!*cough*"
Unfortunately, PayPal charges a minimum of 0.7% + $0.30, and that rate requires use of a Paypal debit card. The problem with micropayments continues to be that it's hard to make money off such small transactions until there are millions of them. I still have fond memories of "First Virtual". They were one of the first online payment services, and they aimed squarely at micropayments. Unfortunately there wasn't enough money in it, and they went under.
A working micropayment system would solve a lot of problems in a lot of industries.
It's an interesting idea, a "temporary subscription" in return for viewing some advertising. It seems there's something for everyone. The advertiser gets a forum where people actually have to click through the ad; Salon gets some money from the advertiser; and non-subscribers get access to "premium" content. If this works (and Salon stays in business in part because of this), perhaps other content sites will follow suit.
It's harder to switch that way. The providers subsidise the cost of the phones in return for a system lock.
In Europe and Asia you can buy an unlocked phone, for more money of course. I was also told that some (or all?) providers will also provide the unlock code at the end of the contract period, so the phone can be reused. My experience is that US providers will refuse to issue the unlock code under any circumstances. I also haven't been able to purchase an unlocked phone at any price in the US consumer market.
My experience is with GSM phones, the other protocols may be different.
Hammett is not as good with language as Chandler, and perhaps because of this, his works don't seem to me to stand up as well. Chandler was a master of atmosphere and description, and if you substitute a few words here and there ("Lexus" for "Packard" for example) most of his scenes read like they happened last week.
As for modern writers, sure, some of the ones who survive will be SF writers. Certainly it's been at least as important a genre in the last 20 years as hard boiled detective fiction was from the 30s through the 50s, measured by its impact on society, anyway. On the other hand, there were and are dozens of writers working in that genre whose names are not remembered.
FWIW, I think Samuel R Delaney, Ursula K LeGuin, Neil Stephenson, and Iain Banks are candidates, but that probably says as much about my taste as anything.
The reality is, that if you don't know where to find a good underground record store, and don't know whose recommendations to trust, sifting through the mass of releases in any genre looking for the good stuff can seem an insurmountable task, even for relatively small genres. A system which makes it easier to sift through the huge amounts of releases out there would benefit listeners and musicians alike.
The economics of being in an independent band really boils down to "how much money do we have to spend this month?" For example, it costs my band, Abunai! $500 every month to pay for our practice space. We rarely get paid more than $150 to play a show, and rarely can play more than one local show in a month (and here in Boston, pay at clubs is going down, apparently because not as many people go out to see live bands as did 10 years ago). The CD's we sell at shows also help, so each band member can pay a little less for rent in a given month. That's not even factoring in the costs of strings, picks, cables, equipment repairs, or what we pay our label for CD's.
Now, we're among the lucky ones. We're on a supportive (but tiny) label, the press has been nice to us (especially the fanzines), and are able to play out fairly regularly. Even so, most folks not intimately involved in our particular underground community have never heard of us (and probably never will).
If there were a single coherent "underground", maybe a tool like the one suggested wouldn't be useful, but there isn't there are hundreds (or thousands) of disconnected, self-referencing "scenes", which are hardly even aware of each others existence.