This is bullshit. Every decade after WW2 saw at least one country fall to communism, except one: the 80s. Reagan's decade. Are you saying that's a coincidence?
If the Chinese government competes unfairly, Google is screwed. They can't compete successfully and fairly with a government that's competing unfairly (and they all will, given the chance).
Besides: you have to show Google can improve before you can say something will cause it to improve. There is such a thing as a perfect tool.
You think the Chinese will rise up against blacklisting Google, but not against all the rest of the crap the Chinese government has pulled? Yeah, right.
Go read your grandparent again. This debate is about whether the Chinese government has the right to forbid Google inside China. Which, obviously, they don't.
I should note this is only really true at the corporate level. Most people probably don't have the abstract thinking skills to become even basic code monkeys (i.e., you have to be able to figure out where the patch goes).
I didn't mean we should reconcile ourselves to the RIAA---I meant we should try to get them to reconcile themselves to us. I.e., get them to stop treating us like criminals. It's worth a shot.
Re:Open Source, but not free source.
on
Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
It's a SourceForge project. That means you can download the source for free. Like always. You just get it under a GPL license.
Have you even looked at the code? This no more goes agains the idea of Libre Software than Un*x permissions do.
Re:Admire the hilt on this pig sticker.
on
Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
I don't think they prevent the piping of the output. Nor should they. I agree the system may or may not work---but for our sake, we'd better not make life harder for them. I have an idea: why don't we use olive branches like this to try to reconcile with the media companies, and give them time to adjust their buisiness models?
This system supports license servers; I would guess they'd allow mirroring the aforesaid as well. What it comes down to is there's no more hassle than setting up any other network permission system. You tell the damn thing who you are once, and it works for all resources thereafter. Simple.
Why do you think this will require you to explain any such thing? It looks to me as though the idea is when you buy the file, you also get a license key. Then, every player on the system locates that key automatically, without complaint.
Where can I find a copy of 750.219a? Oh, and in any case, remember DMCA. We'd better have a watertight legal case now, before it passes. Otherwise, there will be those who will find a judge who'll let them hijack it.
That's all well and good, but remember that when the DMCA went to court, it was the most rediculous interpretation that was upheld. I wouldn't count on anything being different this time.
They are deliberately reasonable statements, because M$ is trying to mask their real agenda (and make the other side look unreasonable). Those statements do not reflect M$'s real position. They're just a way to preserve the status quo.
Actually, GNOME's native interface is C, which has a very simple ABI (and is more popular on Un*x anyway). That supposedly makes it easier to make bindings from real languages (Haskell, Scheme, ML, etc.). So, GNOME probably has a good reason for existence. I do love seeing cooperation between the two, though.
I should mention that ``downgrading'' also implies the mistake is being made by management under the misconception that it's an upgrade. As going from Unix to Win95 in ~ 95.
Slashdot Mirror
This is bullshit. Every decade after WW2 saw at least one country fall to communism, except one: the 80s. Reagan's decade. Are you saying that's a coincidence?
If the Chinese government competes unfairly, Google is screwed. They can't compete successfully and fairly with a government that's competing unfairly (and they all will, given the chance).
Besides: you have to show Google can improve before you can say something will cause it to improve. There is such a thing as a perfect tool.
You think the Chinese will rise up against blacklisting Google, but not against all the rest of the crap the Chinese government has pulled? Yeah, right.
Go read your grandparent again. This debate is about whether the Chinese government has the right to forbid Google inside China. Which, obviously, they don't.
I should note this is only really true at the corporate level. Most people probably don't have the abstract thinking skills to become even basic code monkeys (i.e., you have to be able to figure out where the patch goes).
Now that you mention it, it's actually 8.36 KB
I have a philosophical problem with this quote---it assumes it's ever possible for government to differ from legalized crime.
I didn't mean we should reconcile ourselves to the RIAA---I meant we should try to get them to reconcile themselves to us. I.e., get them to stop treating us like criminals. It's worth a shot.
It's a SourceForge project. That means you can download the source for free. Like always. You just get it under a GPL license.
This code does not destroy fair use. How can you think it does? It's a permission system, same as Un*x and GNU have always had.
Let me make one thing clear: nothing on Linux, with or without this system, breaks due to ``who knows what''. That's what source code is for.
Have you even looked at the code? This no more goes agains the idea of Libre Software than Un*x permissions do.
I don't think they prevent the piping of the output. Nor should they. I agree the system may or may not work---but for our sake, we'd better not make life harder for them. I have an idea: why don't we use olive branches like this to try to reconcile with the media companies, and give them time to adjust their buisiness models?
This system supports license servers; I would guess they'd allow mirroring the aforesaid as well. What it comes down to is there's no more hassle than setting up any other network permission system. You tell the damn thing who you are once, and it works for all resources thereafter. Simple.
Why do you think this will require you to explain any such thing? It looks to me as though the idea is when you buy the file, you also get a license key. Then, every player on the system locates that key automatically, without complaint.
Where can I find a copy of 750.219a? Oh, and in any case, remember DMCA. We'd better have a watertight legal case now, before it passes. Otherwise, there will be those who will find a judge who'll let them hijack it.
That's all well and good, but remember that when the DMCA went to court, it was the most rediculous interpretation that was upheld. I wouldn't count on anything being different this time.
You long for the Good Old Days, when our president was an ineffective sex-crazed not-seminal-enough-but-otherwise-qualifying-as-a-m aniac?
It's 34 now.
Then the Catholic church should make bad security practices a sin. That way companies can bring code to them as part of confession.
They are deliberately reasonable statements, because M$ is trying to mask their real agenda (and make the other side look unreasonable). Those statements do not reflect M$'s real position. They're just a way to preserve the status quo.
Actually, GNOME's native interface is C, which has a very simple ABI (and is more popular on Un*x anyway). That supposedly makes it easier to make bindings from real languages (Haskell, Scheme, ML, etc.). So, GNOME probably has a good reason for existence. I do love seeing cooperation between the two, though.
I should mention that ``downgrading'' also implies the mistake is being made by management under the misconception that it's an upgrade. As going from Unix to Win95 in ~ 95.
No, that's backgrading. ``Downgrading'' specifically implies going to an inferior system, as Unix to Win95.