I must second that. This seems to be just another processor for todays computers which actually aren't needing more CPU speed... How about spending money elsewhere and get a better performing system that way? The pre-build computers I see in stores these days have 1+ GHz and 64MB RAM, why on earth would I want more processor speed in stead of 512MB RAM (for instance)?
Just because free software is important to you, doesn't make your issues with Disney more important than all the problems of millions around the world who face real loss of liberty due to corporate evil.
Just because some poor schmuck is worse off than me it doesn't mean that I am not allowed to fight for a better world for me. Granted a lot of people suffer injustice because of real evil empires, but that doesn't mean we should all let the lesser evils (you know who *couch* MS *couch*) reign freely on their turfs.
Let me fight the evils I can see and actually feel I can fight (not win against, but at least fight). Then you go and fight the ones you feel you must fight. Maybe on each of our scenes we can make the world a better place, but I cannot fight all the evils at once, and definitely not the biggest ones.
You should know, in the early 20th century book publishers included ex post facto contracts, very similar to the EULA, restricting your right to resell your book among other things. Congress declared that no such contracts will be enforced.
I weren't there to know and I didn't read american history enough to know. You may be right, but why then has it never been mentioned in connection with EULAs before?
What if they included in the EULA that by using the software you give up the right to your first born.
A ridiculous and wrong analogy, but I'll respond to it anyway... If the EULA said I wwas giving up my right to my first born that would be slavery, there are laws against slavery which would invalidate such a license agreement. There are armies of lawyers who make sure that EULAs are not illegal.
I'm not saying the rights which the EULA restricts can not be signed away, but stop making these blanket statements and pretending everything is black and white.
well... I think that in terms that no agreement between two parties which violates the law is legally binding is pretty black and white. I think the fact that you are not buying software but the right to accept the EULA is pretty black and white. Basically you are plain wrong.
Why the hell not? Monopolies on copying something I understand. Monopolies on an invention I understand. Monopolies on a mere fictional character? Completely bogus. Copyright only covers COPYING.
Copyright does indeed cover COPYING. THis means that if you use (in essence copy) a character from the game - or any other material for that matter - then you are violating Copyright.
I'll bite you Troll! You did not buy the software! You paid your hard-earned money get the right to accept the license agreement. The license agreement is the only thing which lets you use the software. You you do not accept it you are a thief - you have not been allowed to use the software. You did not pay for the software. You paid to get the right to accept the license agreement whether or not you should choose to do so. Many software companies are willing to give you your money back if you are not willing to accept the license agreement.
I have to agree that the browser war is most likely over. Most people have chosen the browser they are going to stay with. IE that is. Some, those who did not choose IE are still, mostly, open to alternatives. You all know there actually are quite a few to choose from.
But since AOL has moved over to Mozilla we might actually see some change. I can't say yet, but time will tell.
The sad thing is that you actually have to post this kind of comment! I have been living without windows (and still is) and seeing what it means. It means having load times for starting Star Office whenever some jerk mails you a MS Office document in stead of using text/plain messages even when all the word document contained was text and some.sig
The company I work for use Windows boxes in their administration (Navision Axapta is really the only way to go) but production is strictly windows-less and way better off. It seems that people who use their computers as their single tool at work are mostly more happy without windows while those who could have used some other tool than their computer will mostly prefer windows.
well, it sounds like a move towards having a huge chunk of the OS on chip would speed many everyday things up a lot... this would of cause require an OS that could utilize the "open a connection to this or that host" BIOS command. The idea is basically the same as that of CISC processors.
Aside from this noble idea this is most likely just a publicity stunt and have no real value to anybody.
I just called the people hosting the server park our company use. They didn't know that this was even going to happen. The guy I talked to said he'd know if anything big was about to happen to their network... I'm not terribly reassured. So, maybe everyone's not confident that it won't affect them but rather ignorant of it happening at all.
Micropayments have seemed like such a good idea for so long, why hasn't it happened yet?
...maybe because we need a good way to make people pay without filling creditcard forms all the time. P3Pdoesn't really seem like the way to go. We need micropayments to be neat and easy, otherwise people won't bother. Filling out a credatcard form today is way too complicated. If I could do that just one time and trust my software to keep it secret and keep it safe, then I would be willing to use micropayments.
Again, from clause 7 at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html: "If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations,..."
Read the parent post again, or just the following snippet:
but basically it means that a certain method of doing something in software can now only be done if it's under the GPL - interesting.
What this means is that I can take a software patent and distribute my own patented software under the GPL with the only obligations on my patent that any software that implements my patent must be GPL'ed itself. This would not violate the GPL.
with participation from Microsoft to create a cross-platform, hardware-independent
It's funny how a language which only has a windows compiler (some.exe) can ever be called cross-platform!?!? It seems very much to me like this is NOT cross platform. I haven't actually run the Cg compiler (I couldn't afford a windows license just to try this compiler out...) so I cannot tell if the OpenGL code it generates is so full of nVidia extensions to be all but useless to anyone who wants to make an application that works for more cards than the ones from nVidia. But since the cross-platform statement is an obvious lie how can I trust that it will generate hardware independent OpenGL code?
If you happened to read the rest of the article, it notes that this will work fine on Radeons, in particular.
So it says. If I had a windows box I would try this cross-platform tool which requires windows in order to run and see if it was really true. Then I might compile the OpenGL code it generated and see if that actually worked on my Radeon card. I haven't tried it yet, but since they start out lying why should I believe them now?
with participation from Microsoft to create a cross-platform, hardware-independent,
It's funny how a language which only has a windows compiler (some.exe) can ever be called cross-platform!?!? It seems very much to me like this is NOT cross platform. I haven't actually run the Cg compiler (I couldn't afford a windows license just to try this compiler out...) so I cannot tell if the OpenGL code it generates is so full of nVidia extensions to be all but useless to anyone who wants to make an application that works for more cards than the ones from nVidia. But since the cross-platform statement is an obvious lie how can I trust that it will generate hardware independent OpenGL code?
I would like to only have to carry a single handheld device. And there is no way I'll stop carrying a phone around. Therefore I would like to see the kind of features this device has in a phone rather than in a device that does not obsolete my phone.
I do not know about the United States (I don't live there) but in this country the one driving the car would be accused of commiting a crime. Nobody else. What is it with people these days? Everybody think they can get away with everything and sue their way out of any situation. Basically sueing the bartender (or the bar) or sueing Napster (in this case) when people use it to commit crimes it is the result of people not taking responsibility for their actions. If you commit a crime then do not try to make others take the blame for it!
Having executives read their mails and write their documents on linux boxen will persuade me that linux has finally reached the World Domination that it deserves.
The fact that IBM (and other big ones) acknowledge linux makes it 'not a toy' but we are not where we want to be yet. I want to be rid of word documents in my mailbox. When we reach that point I will be happy.
Slashdot Mirror
I must second that. This seems to be just another processor for todays computers which actually aren't needing more CPU speed... How about spending money elsewhere and get a better performing system that way? The pre-build computers I see in stores these days have 1+ GHz and 64MB RAM, why on earth would I want more processor speed in stead of 512MB RAM (for instance)?
Just because free software is important to you, doesn't make your issues with Disney more important than all the problems of millions around the world who face real loss of liberty due to corporate evil.
Just because some poor schmuck is worse off than me it doesn't mean that I am not allowed to fight for a better world for me. Granted a lot of people suffer injustice because of real evil empires, but that doesn't mean we should all let the lesser evils (you know who *couch* MS *couch*) reign freely on their turfs.
Let me fight the evils I can see and actually feel I can fight (not win against, but at least fight). Then you go and fight the ones you feel you must fight. Maybe on each of our scenes we can make the world a better place, but I cannot fight all the evils at once, and definitely not the biggest ones.
You should know, in the early 20th century book publishers included ex post facto contracts, very similar to the EULA, restricting your right to resell your book among other things. Congress declared that no such contracts will be enforced.
I weren't there to know and I didn't read american history enough to know. You may be right, but why then has it never been mentioned in connection with EULAs before?
What if they included in the EULA that by using the software you give up the right to your first born.
A ridiculous and wrong analogy, but I'll respond to it anyway... If the EULA said I wwas giving up my right to my first born that would be slavery, there are laws against slavery which would invalidate such a license agreement. There are armies of lawyers who make sure that EULAs are not illegal.
I'm not saying the rights which the EULA restricts can not be signed away, but stop making these blanket statements and pretending everything is black and white.
well... I think that in terms that no agreement between two parties which violates the law is legally binding is pretty black and white. I think the fact that you are not buying software but the right to accept the EULA is pretty black and white. Basically you are plain wrong.
Why the hell not? Monopolies on copying something I understand. Monopolies on an invention I understand. Monopolies on a mere fictional character? Completely bogus. Copyright only covers COPYING.
Copyright does indeed cover COPYING. THis means that if you use (in essence copy) a character from the game - or any other material for that matter - then you are violating Copyright.
I'll bite you Troll! You did not buy the software! You paid your hard-earned money get the right to accept the license agreement. The license agreement is the only thing which lets you use the software. You you do not accept it you are a thief - you have not been allowed to use the software. You did not pay for the software. You paid to get the right to accept the license agreement whether or not you should choose to do so. Many software companies are willing to give you your money back if you are not willing to accept the license agreement.
Now go away, troll!
PWPs? I've forgot, please enlighten me.
yep, the germans bombed Perl Harbor, damn those japs for taking all the honour!
I have to agree that the browser war is most likely over. Most people have chosen the browser they are going to stay with. IE that is. Some, those who did not choose IE are still, mostly, open to alternatives. You all know there actually are quite a few to choose from.
But since AOL has moved over to Mozilla we might actually see some change. I can't say yet, but time will tell.
The sad thing is that you actually have to post this kind of comment! I have been living without windows (and still is) and seeing what it means. It means having load times for starting Star Office whenever some jerk mails you a MS Office document in stead of using text/plain messages even when all the word document contained was text and some .sig
The company I work for use Windows boxes in their administration (Navision Axapta is really the only way to go) but production is strictly windows-less and way better off. It seems that people who use their computers as their single tool at work are mostly more happy without windows while those who could have used some other tool than their computer will mostly prefer windows.
well, it sounds like a move towards having a huge chunk of the OS on chip would speed many everyday things up a lot... this would of cause require an OS that could utilize the "open a connection to this or that host" BIOS command. The idea is basically the same as that of CISC processors.
Aside from this noble idea this is most likely just a publicity stunt and have no real value to anybody.
Would you want to use a product from an entity you don't quite trust?
Do I even need to insert the MS bashing here, or can you do it yourself?
Maybe everyone's confident it won't effect them.
I just called the people hosting the server park our company use. They didn't know that this was even going to happen. The guy I talked to said he'd know if anything big was about to happen to their network... I'm not terribly reassured. So, maybe everyone's not confident that it won't affect them but rather ignorant of it happening at all.
Micropayments have seemed like such a good idea for so long, why hasn't it happened yet?
...maybe because we need a good way to make people pay without filling creditcard forms all the time. P3P doesn't really seem like the way to go. We need micropayments to be neat and easy, otherwise people won't bother. Filling out a credatcard form today is way too complicated. If I could do that just one time and trust my software to keep it secret and keep it safe, then I would be willing to use micropayments.
No.
Yes.
Again, from clause 7 at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html: "If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations,..."
Read the parent post again, or just the following snippet:
but basically it means that a certain method of doing something in software can now only be done if it's under the GPL - interesting.
What this means is that I can take a software patent and distribute my own patented software under the GPL with the only obligations on my patent that any software that implements my patent must be GPL'ed itself. This would not violate the GPL.
Conclusion: abolish software patents.
...or patent lawyers! or better yet: lawyers in general!
with participation from Microsoft to create a cross-platform, hardware-independent
It's funny how a language which only has a windows compiler (some .exe) can ever be called cross-platform!?!? It seems very much to me like this is NOT cross platform. I haven't actually run the Cg compiler (I couldn't afford a windows license just to try this compiler out...) so I cannot tell if the OpenGL code it generates is so full of nVidia extensions to be all but useless to anyone who wants to make an application that works for more cards than the ones from nVidia. But since the cross-platform statement is an obvious lie how can I trust that it will generate hardware independent OpenGL code?
If you happened to read the rest of the article, it notes that this will work fine on Radeons, in particular.
So it says. If I had a windows box I would try this cross-platform tool which requires windows in order to run and see if it was really true. Then I might compile the OpenGL code it generated and see if that actually worked on my Radeon card. I haven't tried it yet, but since they start out lying why should I believe them now?
with participation from Microsoft to create a cross-platform, hardware-independent,
It's funny how a language which only has a windows compiler (some .exe) can ever be called cross-platform!?!? It seems very much to me like this is NOT cross platform. I haven't actually run the Cg compiler (I couldn't afford a windows license just to try this compiler out...) so I cannot tell if the OpenGL code it generates is so full of nVidia extensions to be all but useless to anyone who wants to make an application that works for more cards than the ones from nVidia. But since the cross-platform statement is an obvious lie how can I trust that it will generate hardware independent OpenGL code?
well... normally airplanes have wings, this one doesn't...
I must second that, this is not the first library which is unusable and will loose commercial support due to it's license...
For those of us who already HAVE a cellphone
I am among those of us who already have a cellphone, that is why I would like to not carry a second handheld device - hence my original question.
I would like to only have to carry a single handheld device. And there is no way I'll stop carrying a phone around. Therefore I would like to see the kind of features this device has in a phone rather than in a device that does not obsolete my phone.
IIRC Jesus actually did commit a few crimes. He claimed he was the son of God, which was considered blasphemy and thus illegal.
but lockpicks...
aren't either. They're tools for locksmiths. Besides napster made a Wrangler, not a lockpick.
I do not know about the United States (I don't live there) but in this country the one driving the car would be accused of commiting a crime. Nobody else. What is it with people these days? Everybody think they can get away with everything and sue their way out of any situation. Basically sueing the bartender (or the bar) or sueing Napster (in this case) when people use it to commit crimes it is the result of people not taking responsibility for their actions. If you commit a crime then do not try to make others take the blame for it!
Having executives read their mails and write their documents on linux boxen will persuade me that linux has finally reached the World Domination that it deserves.
The fact that IBM (and other big ones) acknowledge linux makes it 'not a toy' but we are not where we want to be yet. I want to be rid of word documents in my mailbox. When we reach that point I will be happy.