Well, then change it to "if copyright did not exist and if no-copying-clauses were void". I'm not sure how good dongles would work on systems with free kernels.
Nothing is produced in a void. Esp. software - in the free software world, there's a common codebase that can be used and reused. Long copyright terms on literature has severely harmed creativity. Same goes for music - hiphop music was a hell of a lot better when the musicians weren't afraid of getting sued for sampling too much.
You won't write stuff without getting paid? Sure, that's fine by me. Who paid you to write that comment?
I wouldn't mind if someone copied my computer - that way, we have one each. Copying computers is kind of hard, but I can let people use my computer via ssh and ftp, and that's been known to happen.
Everyone could distribute copies of software and run all software for all purposes (freedoms zero and two of FSF fame) and
there would be no economic incentive for not distributing source with your binary - since your binaries can be copied anyway, why lose the advantages that distributing source will give you? (Cross-platform compability, people looking for bugs, a more trustworthy image, happier customers)
and disassemblers would not be illegal.
In a world without copyright, I still think that RMS and FSF would be happy.
Still, totally abolishing copyright is not a stated goal of the FSF. They just want more rights for the users of published software.
If this "Bowie"-character has a lot of fans, he's opinion may well influence them. If a lot of people stops giving a fuck about what the RIAA thinks, things may change.
That's funny. If I believed that everything was milk and honey, and that people would be kind to each other, I wouldn't be opposed to the copyright system because I would think that people wouldn't abuse it as they do now.
These days, people (like the record industry and the software publishing industry) exploit the public by abusing copyright.
These people put their long tentacles of control on everything they publish. You buy that record? Well, sonny, you better not copy it or you're gonna pay!
Your sweetheart asks for a copy? Are you going to be loyal to her/him or to the copyright owner?
Sharing copies with other people shouldn't be a crime, it's a nice thing to do.
These days, everythings not "milk and honey", because the laws are set up to reward miserliness and punish friendliness.
What's up with the hubba-hubba-isms in this topic? It's just not funny anymore.
Back in the day, part of the hacker ethic was that you judged people from their hacking skills, not on unimportant baggage like sex, race or ethnicity.
We oggheads may be really gone, but at least we don't purposely cripple the sound on our own rips like you empeethreepios do. If I've got a CD (mine or a friends) that I want to put on my hard drive, why shouldn't rip it to ogg and enjoy a lot better sound quality (at half the size)?
Snip the first one - I agree with it. Instead of doing this extremely well-designed, non-unixy multiserver microkernel design, Linus was in a hurry and just redid it the unix way. Good job. (I love Hurd!)
"The second hard bit that Linus did which the Free Software Foundation has clearly failed to do is to evolve a development methodology which allows - encourages - very many people to take part, and which manages to integrate and exploit the fruits of all their labours. That's Linus' second achievement: a social achievement, and a big one."
No; RMS did this back with TECO Emacs in the seventies. Larry Wall did it with perl in the eighties. The GNU project was a success partly because the unix toolbox philosophy - every developer could make their own version of the tools.
"But Linus third achievement is the key one, and it is key to your project of making Free Software available to ordinary people all over the world. He has brought the system to critical mass, where it's robust enough and stable enough for many people to use it, and in consequence many people are motivated to port many programs to it. This is Linus' third achievement. It's a cultural achievement, and it is an absolutely critical one without which any Free Software movement is ultimately vacuous and solipsistic."
You need a kernel to boot the system - you need a compiler to make the kernel. RMS wrote the best compiler in the world. Gcc.
A couple of years ago, when RMS started insisting on the (admittedly awkward) name GNU/Linux, there were many people talking about "the Linux system" but not talking about software freedom. RMS figured that adding GNU to the name would remind people of that. (And it'd give him a share of the credit. Everyone likes credit.)
These days, this problem is smaller (but it still exists. The kernel/bitkeeper situation is tragic), and many people already think of freedom when they hear about "linux".
Re:On the posting itself... And ntcompatible...
on
Pacebook Tablet PC
·
· Score: 1
And that's... bad? Listen, this is Slashdot. Of course there are going to be people that monitors the newssites they like and then submit interesting news to/. It's the geek crowd's classic "a thousand eyes" solution.
.. Research regarding technological unemployment is as vital today as further refinement or production of labor saving and comfort giving devices. Among all the marvels of modern invention, that with which I am the most concerned is of course air transportation. Flying is perhaps the most dramatic of recent scientific attainments.
- Amelia
A creepy thing with the "write once, run anywhere" is that it, if successful, removes one of the strenghts of free, open source software. See, with free software, any dimwit with an advanced degree in mad-skills-hax0ring can port it to many platforms, so it's already "write once, run anywhere". With byte code interpreters, (pseudo)-binaries will run anywhere, lessening the incentive to give out source and with it freedom.
That is the reason why I will not give.NET, Java and the new Amiga legitimacy. I will stand proudly with a finger up and say "No thanks" to non-free software.
Massive props to free software writers, and this is not in anyway intended to flame the Mono initiative - just that with it may follow unwanted consequenses.
Yes, I'm aware that saying that 'this technology allows bad stuff so we shouldn't allow it' is chicken-shit, DMCA-style arguing but hey... I just hope everything turns out for the better, okay? Do what you will. I'll just sit here and use free software. Thanks.
Stepping of the preaching, loudmouth advocate-but-really-just-a-wannabee-programmer soapbox,
S.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, then change it to "if copyright did not exist and if no-copying-clauses were void".
I'm not sure how good dongles would work on systems with free kernels.
Ahead of trends? He's still doing orgelkärring-covers.
Yeah, I agree, as long as it's not in an extremely lossy format or one that has disgusting Duplication Restriction Mechanics.
In a world without copyright, I still think that RMS and FSF would be happy.
Still, totally abolishing copyright is not a stated goal of the FSF. They just want more rights for the users of published software.
If this "Bowie"-character has a lot of fans, he's opinion may well influence them. If a lot of people stops giving a fuck about what the RIAA thinks, things may change.
That's funny.
If I believed that everything was milk and honey, and that people would be kind to each other, I wouldn't be opposed to the copyright system because I would think that people wouldn't abuse it as they do now.
These days, people (like the record industry and the software publishing industry) exploit the public by abusing copyright.
These people put their long tentacles of control on everything they publish. You buy that record? Well, sonny, you better not copy it or you're gonna pay!
Your sweetheart asks for a copy? Are you going to be loyal to her/him or to the copyright owner?
Sharing copies with other people shouldn't be a crime, it's a nice thing to do.
These days, everythings not "milk and honey", because the laws are set up to reward miserliness and punish friendliness.
What's up with the hubba-hubba-isms in this topic? It's just not funny anymore.
Back in the day, part of the hacker ethic was that you judged people from their hacking skills, not on unimportant baggage like sex, race or ethnicity.
We oggheads may be really gone, but at least we don't purposely cripple the sound on our own rips like you empeethreepios do. If I've got a CD (mine or a friends) that I want to put on my hard drive, why shouldn't rip it to ogg and enjoy a lot better sound quality (at half the size)?
Snip the first one - I agree with it. Instead of doing this extremely well-designed, non-unixy multiserver microkernel design, Linus was in a hurry and just redid it the unix way. Good job. (I love Hurd!)
"The second hard bit that Linus did which the Free Software Foundation has clearly failed to do is to evolve a development methodology which allows - encourages - very many people to take part, and which manages to integrate and exploit the fruits of all their labours. That's Linus' second achievement: a social achievement, and a big one."
No; RMS did this back with TECO Emacs in the seventies. Larry Wall did it with perl in the eighties. The GNU project was a success partly because the unix toolbox philosophy - every developer could make their own version of the tools.
"But Linus third achievement is the key one, and it is key to your project of making Free Software available to ordinary people all over the world. He has brought the system to critical mass, where it's robust enough and stable enough for many people to use it, and in consequence many people are motivated to port many programs to it. This is Linus' third achievement. It's a cultural achievement, and it is an absolutely critical one without which any Free Software movement is ultimately vacuous and solipsistic."
You need a kernel to boot the system - you need a compiler to make the kernel. RMS wrote the best compiler in the world. Gcc.
A couple of years ago, when RMS started insisting on the (admittedly awkward) name GNU/Linux, there were many people talking about "the Linux system" but not talking about software freedom. RMS figured that adding GNU to the name would remind people of that. (And it'd give him a share of the credit. Everyone likes credit.)
These days, this problem is smaller (but it still exists. The kernel/bitkeeper situation is tragic), and many people already think of freedom when they hear about "linux".
And that's... bad? Listen, this is Slashdot. Of course there are going to be people that monitors the newssites they like and then submit interesting news to /. It's the geek crowd's classic "a thousand eyes" solution.
Please stick with CSS instead of tables.
Abusing tables is not a good thing.
Thanks.
You won't get married.
You might get to be somebody's bitch. We'll see... and you'll starve in your box.
Free software doesn't have to add unnecessary features to get people to upgrade. You're still thinking like non-free software companies.
.. Research regarding technological unemployment is as vital today as further refinement or production of labor saving and comfort giving devices. Among all the marvels of modern invention, that with which I am the most concerned is of course air transportation. Flying is perhaps the most dramatic of recent scientific attainments. - Amelia
A creepy thing with the "write once, run anywhere" is that it, if successful, removes one of the strenghts of free, open source software. See, with free software, any dimwit with an advanced degree in mad-skills-hax0ring can port it to many platforms, so it's already "write once, run anywhere". With byte code interpreters, (pseudo)-binaries will run anywhere, lessening the incentive to give out source and with it freedom. .NET, Java and the new Amiga legitimacy. I will stand proudly with a finger up and say "No thanks" to non-free software.
That is the reason why I will not give
Massive props to free software writers, and this is not in anyway intended to flame the Mono initiative - just that with it may follow unwanted consequenses.
Yes, I'm aware that saying that 'this technology allows bad stuff so we shouldn't allow it' is chicken-shit, DMCA-style arguing but hey... I just hope everything turns out for the better, okay? Do what you will. I'll just sit here and use free software. Thanks.
Stepping of the preaching, loudmouth advocate-but-really-just-a-wannabee-programmer soapbox,
S.