...between hating the destruction of innovation, and not innovating yourself.
By porting Oracle to run under Linux, they gave Linux a major boost. With the right resource management enhancements, Linux could, hands down, be the first choice for Oracle servers, on a performance basis.
We're already on the way, what with the O(1) scheduler, and RCU.
I was surprised when Linux didn't have support in the scheduler for the Xeon's HyperThreading until it was included in Intel's consumer-line CPUs.
Despite the comment about FTP, you have a valid point.
If it doesn't come with Windows, people will have to buy it separately. And open source software packages have severe disadvantages when it comes to producing boxed sets.
However, it would make it more likely that manufacturers would bundle Mozilla or Netscape.
I suppose an important question in an organization like this is: Who's copyright goes in the license? Does the OCM get put in, or does the developer who did the actual work?
Who's to say companies aren't going to pay to have bugs fixed? Or syndicates aren't going to pay to have the code audited for security?
It does, however, bring up an important point. If a developer leaves behind a bug, is he required to fix it without pay, or does he get paid to fix it? There could be some nasty loops in there.
For me, it would be a "it-makes-me-feel-good" job. A lot like the job I have now. I don't tutor in a computer lab because there's a lot of money to it (there isn't. $6/hr), but because I enjoy helping people learn about computers, especially the UNIX classes.
Contributing to OSPs has a similar feel to it. I've grown to love Open Source and what it does for me, and would love to be able to regularly make real contributions to it. Getting paid for it would make that possible.
With the creation of client syndicates, desired features can be had at a fraction of the cost of paying a software house to do it. Several companies can pledge smaller amounts rather than one company paying the lump sum.
The obvious answer is of course that the code can be seen and updated by the OSS community but IMHO most don't see the value in that and would rather stick with their own development team to do their work for them (think the Microsoft argument of having someone to fire).
Actually, I think companies will see a major advantage in paying for new features in free software. Instead of having to bear the full cost of adding a feature to the code, they'll be able to pay only a fraction of it by throwing money into the pot along side other companies.
Assuming the developers are required to adhere to strict coding standards, I can see the code being very, very useful.
However, I have to wonder...what will existing maintainers of a given project do when a company pays someone else to add a feature to their application? I suppose it would depend on the maintainer, but would there be a definate trend?
Anyway, to continue with your analogy, I think the problem is with your expectation of being able to use the DVD/camera/whatever for whatever private purpose you want.
However, it follows that I beleive the DMCA is an improper law because it eliminates that validity of that expectation.
Packet sources are often randomized, so as to hide the attacker. An attempt to reply to the source adds more work to your server. Finally, the biggest problem comes from your internet connection being wasted at full capacity.
If a router were able to know that both the source and destination IP adress lay within a given logical area on the network, maybe it should reject packets that come from the source IP, but from outside the area defined by the souce and destination. This would require the router to be on the border of that region, however.
I suppose IPSec does that sort of thing automatically.
Even if I had a plan that could put the big telcos out of business, I wouldn't. They own and operate too much of the Internet infrastructure. Wouldn't want to risk killing that, now, would we?
Remember when UUNet threatened to only pass traffic of paying customers? That would have cause a severe disruption in the...well...nevermind. But the point is, the same thing could happen if one of the big backbones were to kick the bucket.
Slashdot Mirror
...between hating the destruction of innovation, and not innovating yourself.
By porting Oracle to run under Linux, they gave Linux a major boost. With the right resource management enhancements, Linux could, hands down, be the first choice for Oracle servers, on a performance basis.
We're already on the way, what with the O(1) scheduler, and RCU.
I was surprised when Linux didn't have support in the scheduler for the Xeon's HyperThreading until it was included in Intel's consumer-line CPUs.
Actually, it's kind of interesting. It would let us see into traditionally restrictive places like China.
It would be very interesting to know that a major portion of the Chinese Internet infrastructure went down, when it happened.
Despite the comment about FTP, you have a valid point.
If it doesn't come with Windows, people will have to buy it separately. And open source software packages have severe disadvantages when it comes to producing boxed sets.
However, it would make it more likely that manufacturers would bundle Mozilla or Netscape.
Phil Katz might qualify, since he released his libs to the public domain. :)
Well, to be pedantic, many(most?) people refer to "the dark side of the moon" to be the side that always faces away from us.
It's definately misleading, though.
I missed a third option: Pay a different developer to fix the bug. (Not necessarily outside the same OCM, however.)
Who's to say "Mt Nebo" from the Bible is going to be the same "Mt Nebo" of today? Names change, especially if people forget them at any point.
I suppose an important question in an organization like this is: Who's copyright goes in the license? Does the OCM get put in, or does the developer who did the actual work?
Who's to say companies aren't going to pay to have bugs fixed? Or syndicates aren't going to pay to have the code audited for security?
It does, however, bring up an important point. If a developer leaves behind a bug, is he required to fix it without pay, or does he get paid to fix it? There could be some nasty loops in there.
For me, it would be a "it-makes-me-feel-good" job. A lot like the job I have now. I don't tutor in a computer lab because there's a lot of money to it (there isn't. $6/hr), but because I enjoy helping people learn about computers, especially the UNIX classes.
Contributing to OSPs has a similar feel to it. I've grown to love Open Source and what it does for me, and would love to be able to regularly make real contributions to it. Getting paid for it would make that possible.
With the creation of client syndicates, desired features can be had at a fraction of the cost of paying a software house to do it. Several companies can pledge smaller amounts rather than one company paying the lump sum.
The obvious answer is of course that the code can be seen and updated by the OSS community but IMHO most don't see the value in that and would rather stick with their own development team to do their work for them (think the Microsoft argument of having someone to fire).
Actually, I think companies will see a major advantage in paying for new features in free software. Instead of having to bear the full cost of adding a feature to the code, they'll be able to pay only a fraction of it by throwing money into the pot along side other companies.
Assuming the developers are required to adhere to strict coding standards, I can see the code being very, very useful.
However, I have to wonder...what will existing maintainers of a given project do when a company pays someone else to add a feature to their application? I suppose it would depend on the maintainer, but would there be a definate trend?
Sure, there's a way to make the business model effective. Shrink-wrap licenses.
Heh. I'm already enjoying this debate.
Anyway, to continue with your analogy, I think the problem is with your expectation of being able to use the DVD/camera/whatever for whatever private purpose you want.
However, it follows that I beleive the DMCA is an improper law because it eliminates that validity of that expectation.
Ritz has an honest business model, and consumers shouldn't download their own pictures from the camera.
:)
Even if using the DMCA to combat this is morally wrong, so is downloading your own pictures, in this case.
Certainly you have to sign a contract to rent the camera?
Of course, you could place your own favorite pics on the camera, and send it in.
You're both...well, Debian is named after Deb and Ian. :)
Remember that IBM gets to ask him questions, too. And they may be much more open-ended.
Better yet,
dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/nb0
Packet sources are often randomized, so as to hide the attacker. An attempt to reply to the source adds more work to your server. Finally, the biggest problem comes from your internet connection being wasted at full capacity.
Let's say HP and Gateway were extorted several times. They'd suddenly have an incentive to install and support Linux.
Nah...they'd pressure Microsoft to do a rush job with their next "more secure" OS.
Well, it was a good daydream while it lasted.
From random IPs?
If a router were able to know that both the source and destination IP adress lay within a given logical area on the network, maybe it should reject packets that come from the source IP, but from outside the area defined by the souce and destination. This would require the router to be on the border of that region, however.
I suppose IPSec does that sort of thing automatically.
An _old_ cell phone my family used to have had an RJ-11 jack on the bottom, for modem use.
Even if I had a plan that could put the big telcos out of business, I wouldn't. They own and operate too much of the Internet infrastructure. Wouldn't want to risk killing that, now, would we?
Remember when UUNet threatened to only pass traffic of paying customers? That would have cause a severe disruption in the...well...nevermind. But the point is, the same thing could happen if one of the big backbones were to kick the bucket.
No, that's be any vet helping a ewe give birth.
Without the "available" package lists, how do you keep your software up-to-date?
Also, have you looked at a compressed filesystem?