I honestly think they need to stop teaching the halting problem to freshmen CS majors. They're just too inexperienced to understand that theory and practice are two different things.. so this whole "limits of computation" thing stifles their enthusiasm.
I'm don't make binary kernel drivers, I do however use hardware which uses binary kernel drivers and I've seen enough of the bullshit.
Wow, really? What's the hardware?
I've been trying to make the Linux community interested in maintaining a list of binary kernel drivers for years now.. but no-one seems interested. So, to be honest, I have no idea how common binary kernel drivers are these days.. I've never had to use one myself.
Dude, I've tried installing drivers for these web cams on 5 different machines running 10 different versions of Windows. The only shit that works is XP SP1 and 2k.. and I'm not that desperate to have them working on Windows.. seeing as they work just fine on my 3 Linux machines.
If you want to maintain your own driver because for any number of reasons you can't, or don't want to open source your drivers or release your specification, then they'll do their damndest to make your life as miserable as humanly possible.
Wow, that's a bit harsh. Seeing as distributing binary-only kernel drivers is considered by just about everyone to be illegal (IBM's lawyers have publicly said as much, and I think IBM have some of the best copyright lawyers available), the kernel developers could be making your life a lot more miserable, but they're not. They prettimuch just ignore binary-only drivers.. if you want to try to keep up with the pace of kernel development, all on your own, then that's your decision, but if you do the small amount of work required to get your code accepted into mainline you're driver will work forever.. that's a pretty good deal!
Your webcams don't work in Windows because the people who made them want you to buy a new one. They work in linux because someone managed to reverse engineer the spec and released drivers. Microsoft can't do that, just like Microsoft can't provide HD-DVD playback without DRM, not because they're not technically capable, but because they're too big a legal target.
I've downloaded every driver I can find. Nothing works after Windows XP SP1. These are Logitech and Labtech web cams. As for Linux support, it's all done by one guy who sniffs the USB packets to figure out the protocol, so why would that imply availability of drivers for an unrelated platform?
Actually, I've downloaded just about every driver I can find for it. None of them work on anything after XP SP1. I really want them to work under Windows, but hey, don't let the truth get in the way of your spite.
Maybe Microsoft should do what the Linux community does. Work with manufacturers to get the drivers written and then maintain the drivers for the manufacturers forever.
Ya, that's likely.
BTW - I own two webcams now. Neither work under Windows since I lost the driver disk (and those drivers were useless under XP64/Vista anyway), but they both work just fine under Linux. What's the world coming to?!
hehe, people use to say that about the overflow in the default php install for apache. "oh, you can only get access to the 'anonymous' account on the web server". There's always a dozen different local exploits you can use to escalate from these accounts. And that's on a platform which actually takes security seriously.
3. b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange;
They need to provide the source with the binary on media commonly used for source code distribution, or they need to provide a written offer to provide source code to any third party.
Yeah, sorry. We've been discussing the GPL on Slashdot for a good decade now. It's required reading material. You wouldn't go to a bible meeting and ask "Who's this Jesus guy you keep talking about?" Ok, bad example, their eyes would light up like Christmas trees.:)
If there's no copyright, I take your binary and, using my knowledge of the majority of the software you copied, reverse engineer your small number of changes and provide source code for them. There's nothing you can do, because there's no copyright.
Slashdot Mirror
People are free to tag any way they want.
People are idiots.
Put one and two together.
I honestly think they need to stop teaching the halting problem to freshmen CS majors. They're just too inexperienced to understand that theory and practice are two different things.. so this whole "limits of computation" thing stifles their enthusiasm.
Does anyone know where/how to get a list of binary-only kernel drivers?
I tried to compile a list a few years ago but in 6 months all the drivers I had discovered had been made free.
I'm don't make binary kernel drivers, I do however use hardware which uses binary kernel drivers and I've seen enough of the bullshit.
Wow, really? What's the hardware?
I've been trying to make the Linux community interested in maintaining a list of binary kernel drivers for years now.. but no-one seems interested. So, to be honest, I have no idea how common binary kernel drivers are these days.. I've never had to use one myself.
Actually, that's exactly what Greg Kroah-Hartman does.
Dude, I've tried installing drivers for these web cams on 5 different machines running 10 different versions of Windows. The only shit that works is XP SP1 and 2k.. and I'm not that desperate to have them working on Windows.. seeing as they work just fine on my 3 Linux machines.
I can't believe that it's been 10 years and you still post with no capital letters. :)
If you want to maintain your own driver because for any number of reasons you can't, or don't want to open source your drivers or release your specification, then they'll do their damndest to make your life as miserable as humanly possible.
Wow, that's a bit harsh. Seeing as distributing binary-only kernel drivers is considered by just about everyone to be illegal (IBM's lawyers have publicly said as much, and I think IBM have some of the best copyright lawyers available), the kernel developers could be making your life a lot more miserable, but they're not. They prettimuch just ignore binary-only drivers.. if you want to try to keep up with the pace of kernel development, all on your own, then that's your decision, but if you do the small amount of work required to get your code accepted into mainline you're driver will work forever.. that's a pretty good deal!
Your webcams don't work in Windows because the people who made them want you to buy a new one. They work in linux because someone managed to reverse engineer the spec and released drivers. Microsoft can't do that, just like Microsoft can't provide HD-DVD playback without DRM, not because they're not technically capable, but because they're too big a legal target.
You're breaking my fuckin' heart.
I've downloaded every driver I can find. Nothing works after Windows XP SP1. These are Logitech and Labtech web cams. As for Linux support, it's all done by one guy who sniffs the USB packets to figure out the protocol, so why would that imply availability of drivers for an unrelated platform?
Actually, I've downloaded just about every driver I can find for it. None of them work on anything after XP SP1. I really want them to work under Windows, but hey, don't let the truth get in the way of your spite.
I assume you've filed a bug report or two, right?
People really do want to know about this stuff.
Maybe Microsoft should do what the Linux community does. Work with manufacturers to get the drivers written and then maintain the drivers for the manufacturers forever.
Ya, that's likely.
BTW - I own two webcams now. Neither work under Windows since I lost the driver disk (and those drivers were useless under XP64/Vista anyway), but they both work just fine under Linux. What's the world coming to?!
"chaos theory means that they must run amok and kill us all!"
And also happened to be an embellishment of the film.
People should really learn to read again.. the book series was much better than the Hollywood treatment.. as is often the case.
and does this "foreign entity or organization" hang out on 4chan?
A lot of people sandbox Acrobat Reader on Linux and IE7 does it too I think.
Oh, and I meant the 'nobody' account. Wow, it has been years.
hehe, people use to say that about the overflow in the default php install for apache. "oh, you can only get access to the 'anonymous' account on the web server". There's always a dozen different local exploits you can use to escalate from these accounts. And that's on a platform which actually takes security seriously.
The filter is there for people who don't want to bypass it.
The only reason there is no opt out planned for the "illegal material" filter is because a "reasonable person" should not want to opt out of it.
In other words: it's not malice, it's stupidity.
Yeah, good point. But hey, posting on Slashdot is like running in the special olympics......
I'm trying to give you some advice here.
But hey, don't listen to me, go ahead and continue asking geeks questions that are answered already.. see how far you get.
Nah...
3. b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange;
No changes required.
You pay your doctor and your lawyer right?
There's a difference.
If it is a good question. But if you ask a question about the GPL without first reading the GPL, then you're not asking a good question.
They need to provide the source with the binary on media commonly used for source code distribution, or they need to provide a written offer to provide source code to any third party.
Yeah, sorry. We've been discussing the GPL on Slashdot for a good decade now. It's required reading material. You wouldn't go to a bible meeting and ask "Who's this Jesus guy you keep talking about?" Ok, bad example, their eyes would light up like Christmas trees. :)
If there's no copyright, I take your binary and, using my knowledge of the majority of the software you copied, reverse engineer your small number of changes and provide source code for them. There's nothing you can do, because there's no copyright.