And? I can't play my vinyl albums in a cd player. Should CD manufactures also include an album with each cd sold?
That's because they are fundamentally different media and making them somehow compatible would be practically impossible.
Compare that to digital files which are fundamentally similar and in fact it takes more effort to make them incompatible.
Nobody expects manufacturers to spend time and effort making incompatible things work together, but they do expect them not to spend time and effort on something that makes them incompatible.
There is a good reason why screws are and drill bits are available in different sizes. Some jobs warrant larger screws (shelves that carry more weight, etc.)
Typically the user will decide the size required and drill a hole and buy a screw to match. The user _wants_ differing sizes sometimes.
Now, what is the reason I would _want_ to pay for some music that only works on a subset of playback machines? Or want to pay for a music player that didn't play any of my existing collection?
The people making screws in different sizes are not deliberately limiting what the user can do with them. It's the nature of them that creates a limit. Conversely, the nature of digital data is that it can easily be copied to other devices. It takes interference from the manufacturer to create artificial limitations. This is where the problems lies.
Why can't they release open source drivers that cover as much functionality as possible and provide a close source version optionally that includes the non-oss releasable parts?
The risk/reward model does this fairly well, at least with economic and property crimes, and therefore seems far more likely.
How do you know it does? You know that currently most people don't commit crimes, and you know that currently they have a risk of being caught for committing them, but how do you establish (other than blind assumption) that the risk is what limits the crime rate? You haven't provided any evidence of causality.
It is my belief that this model is in place mainly because people _think_ it works. I believe that while it makes a difference in some ways (both positive and negative) it is not the main reason for peoples behaviour.
I'm not trying to prove you wrong here, and I'm not advocating the immediate removal of large areas of law. I am merely pointing out that your belief and my belief both fit all evidence we have available in recent times (that I know of). I base my belief strongly on how people actually behave, as I assume you do. Buy why they behave that way is hard to establish without experimenting with society in ways that are not really feasible so neither of us are in a position to be provably correct in our beliefs any time in the near future.
Finally (and at risk of opening a whole other discussion) as well as believing that most people choose not to steal from others for moral reasons, and believing that morals are an intrinsic human characteristic rather than a social construct, I believe one major reason for all of this can be explained. This behaviour is the most evolutionary advantageous one for a member of member of a group to exhibit. Where it gets interesting is in how and where individuals draw their group boundaries. Some do it by family, some by class, some by colour, some by nationality. In this increasingly connected world, I think more and more people are drawing it at species level.
I disagree on why people don't break into houses. The reason I don't is because it's wrong, and has nothing to do with the fear of being caught. The overwhelming majority of society believe it to be wrong and I believe that's the main reason they don't do it.
When it comes to so called "piracy", the reason most people either do it themselves or know someone who does, is because society does not see it as unquestionably a wrong thing to do.
I never claimed it was illegal. I implied I didn't know how to get the codecs without breaking the law. Perhaps you have partly answered my question. Can you show me where to freely download them from Microsoft in a format that will work with gstreamer on x86_64 linux?
That's exactly what everyone said when software started coming on CD instead of floppy and suddenly the data sizes got much larger.
Bandwidth is getting faster and cheaper and storage is getting bigger and cheaper. Just give it a couple of years and a 20GB download won't seem that big.
2) I guess a native binary blob is slightly better than a MS coded binary blob.... but frankly, it's still just a binary blob. You have no idea what its really doing.
A few things:
a) It is infinitely better than a windows dll because it works (my machine is x86_64. windows blobs won't work there) b) I don't have windows. How can I get windows binary blobs without buying windows or breaking the law? c) True, I don't know what it's really doing, but it comes down to trust. I have personally met spoken to some of the fluendo/gstreamer folks and I trust them a hell of a lot more than some unknown devs at MS who I'll never even know the names of let alone meet and talk to.
I agree with you that it's not always the OS fault, but a _properly configured_ operating system should not become unstable when it is running crappy code.
This is certainly not FUD. Please stop simply labelling what you disagree with as FUD and instead find something to back up what you are saying.
How is it so clear to you that "writing drivers" constitutes creating a derived work, but using mysql via jdbc does not? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying it is legally unclear and nothing you have presented suggests otherwise. If you have examples from case law to cite, please go ahead.
The GPL does not apply to anybody who is simply using the binaries.
No, it does _not_ just apply to a modification of the original work, but also to any derived works. (see GPL snippet below)
Linking usually constitutes a derived work. Whether using GPL jdbc drivers by putting it in yourl classpath etc. constitutes a derived work is a subject of debate. Seriously, there is legal opinion in both directions on this issue. I have personally discussed this with people at a well known open source java application server vendor who face this exact issue. There is even disagreement between FSF and The Apache Foundation about shipping LGPL classes, never mind GPL ones.
Seriously, if you are building an application that relies on GPL libraries of any kind, you may technically be creating a derived work and you really should talk to a lawyer.
From the GPL:
"b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License."
It depends how it is being accessed from the applications. Are they using the c APIs for example? If so they are linking to the client library which would usually be considered a derivative work and so would be bound by the terms of the license.
If they are doing something like using JDBC it becomes less clear and you would need to talk to a lawyer. (actually, you may want to talk to a lawyer anyway)
It really isn't as simple as just migrating. To be honest MySQL and PostgreSQL are not as good as Oracle for very large databases that require high availability. The can probably do about 90% of what Oracle can do but some places need that extra 10%
This is rather vague. Specifically, what do you require in your application that PostgreSQL does not offer?
So it's okay for some random thieves standing in the doorway of the shop to scan my bags on my way out and know that I've just spend 900 quid on clothes, is it?
Come on, have some imagination. This is wide open to abuse.
Yes, I agree. Actually, its slightly different depending where you live. Under UK law for example (where I live) making what is called a "transient copy" like one in a computers memory is explicitly excluded from the law. So you don't need a licence.
They absolutely need to agree to a license (not sign a contract) to use the software.
The GNU GPL says:
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted
So you do NOT need to agree to ANYTHING to USE the software. The GNU GPL (as with any other copyright license actually, despite what some would have you believe) applies to copying, distribution and modification only.
I've done a fresh install of edgy on my laptop and the network device does not get set up. Previously with dapper it was fine. I now have to do "sudo dhclient eth0" manually. I can't really complain though, since I haven't even raised it as a bug yet.
I disagree. Electronic voting will never be as good.
The good thing about paper voting (apart from the fact that it works and is well tried and tested) is that the general public (who after all have to put trust in the system) can understand how it works and have some idea about the safeguards that prevent tampering. They also understand that there are things like independent observers ensuring the process goes as it should.
Compare that with electronic voting where almost every voter has no idea how the system works, no idea how any independent observers would be able to verify that the system works, and no idea how to determine whether or not they can trust any part of the process.
Slashdot Mirror
Out of interest, are you using AWT or Swing?
And? I can't play my vinyl albums in a cd player. Should CD manufactures also include an album with each cd sold?
That's because they are fundamentally different media and making them somehow compatible would be practically impossible.
Compare that to digital files which are fundamentally similar and in fact it takes more effort to make them incompatible.
Nobody expects manufacturers to spend time and effort making incompatible things work together, but they do expect them not to spend time and effort on something that makes them incompatible.
That's not a good analogy at all.
There is a good reason why screws are and drill bits are available in different sizes. Some jobs warrant larger screws (shelves that carry more weight, etc.)
Typically the user will decide the size required and drill a hole and buy a screw to match. The user _wants_ differing sizes sometimes.
Now, what is the reason I would _want_ to pay for some music that only works on a subset of playback machines? Or want to pay for a music player that didn't play any of my existing collection?
The people making screws in different sizes are not deliberately limiting what the user can do with them. It's the nature of them that creates a limit. Conversely, the nature of digital data is that it can easily be copied to other devices. It takes interference from the manufacturer to create artificial limitations. This is where the problems lies.
Why can't they release open source drivers that cover as much functionality as possible and provide a close source version optionally that includes the non-oss releasable parts?
The risk/reward model does this fairly well, at least with economic and property crimes, and therefore seems far more likely.
How do you know it does? You know that currently most people don't commit crimes, and you know that currently they have a risk of being caught for committing them, but how do you establish (other than blind assumption) that the risk is what limits the crime rate? You haven't provided any evidence of causality.
It is my belief that this model is in place mainly because people _think_ it works. I believe that while it makes a difference in some ways (both positive and negative) it is not the main reason for peoples behaviour.
I'm not trying to prove you wrong here, and I'm not advocating the immediate removal of large areas of law. I am merely pointing out that your belief and my belief both fit all evidence we have available in recent times (that I know of). I base my belief strongly on how people actually behave, as I assume you do. Buy why they behave that way is hard to establish without experimenting with society in ways that are not really feasible so neither of us are in a position to be provably correct in our beliefs any time in the near future.
Finally (and at risk of opening a whole other discussion) as well as believing that most people choose not to steal from others for moral reasons, and believing that morals are an intrinsic human characteristic rather than a social construct, I believe one major reason for all of this can be explained. This behaviour is the most evolutionary advantageous one for a member of member of a group to exhibit. Where it gets interesting is in how and where individuals draw their group boundaries. Some do it by family, some by class, some by colour, some by nationality. In this increasingly connected world, I think more and more people are drawing it at species level.
I disagree on why people don't break into houses. The reason I don't is because it's wrong, and has nothing to do with the fear of being caught. The overwhelming majority of society believe it to be wrong and I believe that's the main reason they don't do it.
When it comes to so called "piracy", the reason most people either do it themselves or know someone who does, is because society does not see it as unquestionably a wrong thing to do.
I just wrote what I thought. It's not from anywhere else.
Claiming it's illegal is just ignorant.
I never claimed it was illegal. I implied I didn't know how to get the codecs without breaking the law. Perhaps you have partly answered my question. Can you show me where to freely download them from Microsoft in a format that will work with gstreamer on x86_64 linux?
A choice between freedom and non-freedom is an illusiory one.
That's exactly what everyone said when software started coming on CD instead of floppy and suddenly the data sizes got much larger.
Bandwidth is getting faster and cheaper and storage is getting bigger and cheaper. Just give it a couple of years and a 20GB download won't seem that big.
2) I guess a native binary blob is slightly better than a MS coded binary blob.... but frankly, it's still just a binary blob. You have no idea what its really doing.
A few things:
a) It is infinitely better than a windows dll because it works (my machine is x86_64. windows blobs won't work there)
b) I don't have windows. How can I get windows binary blobs without buying windows or breaking the law?
c) True, I don't know what it's really doing, but it comes down to trust. I have personally met spoken to some of the fluendo/gstreamer folks and I trust them a hell of a lot more than some unknown devs at MS who I'll never even know the names of let alone meet and talk to.
ulimit -u
$ cat /dev/random > /dev/mem /dev/mem: Permission denied
bash:
As for the forkbomb, have a look at "ulimit -u"
I agree with you that it's not always the OS fault, but a _properly configured_ operating system should not become unstable when it is running crappy code.
How do you do "ulimit -u" on Windows btw?
tIs' ebacsue ilttel neidna si ebttre.
This is certainly not FUD. Please stop simply labelling what you disagree with as FUD and instead find something to back up what you are saying.
How is it so clear to you that "writing drivers" constitutes creating a derived work, but using mysql via jdbc does not? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying it is legally unclear and nothing you have presented suggests otherwise. If you have examples from case law to cite, please go ahead.
The GPL does not apply to anybody who is simply using the binaries.
No, it does _not_ just apply to a modification of the original work, but also to any derived works. (see GPL snippet below)
Linking usually constitutes a derived work. Whether using GPL jdbc drivers by putting it in yourl classpath etc. constitutes a derived work is a subject of debate. Seriously, there is legal opinion in both directions on this issue. I have personally discussed this with people at a well known open source java application server vendor who face this exact issue. There is even disagreement between FSF and The Apache Foundation about shipping LGPL classes, never mind GPL ones.
Seriously, if you are building an application that relies on GPL libraries of any kind, you may technically be creating a derived work and you really should talk to a lawyer.
From the GPL:
"b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License."
It depends how it is being accessed from the applications. Are they using the c APIs for example? If so they are linking to the client library which would usually be considered a derivative work and so would be bound by the terms of the license.
If they are doing something like using JDBC it becomes less clear and you would need to talk to a lawyer. (actually, you may want to talk to a lawyer anyway)
It really isn't as simple as just migrating. To be honest MySQL and PostgreSQL are not as good as Oracle for very large databases that require high availability.
The can probably do about 90% of what Oracle can do but some places need that extra 10%
This is rather vague. Specifically, what do you require in your application that PostgreSQL does not offer?
Shouldn't you be working? :-)
So it's okay for some random thieves standing in the doorway of the shop to scan my bags on my way out and know that I've just spend 900 quid on clothes, is it?
Come on, have some imagination. This is wide open to abuse.
Yes, I agree. Actually, its slightly different depending where you live. Under UK law for example (where I live) making what is called a "transient copy" like one in a computers memory is explicitly excluded from the law. So you don't need a licence.
You said:
They absolutely need to agree to a license (not sign a contract) to use the software.
The GNU GPL says:
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted
So you do NOT need to agree to ANYTHING to USE the software. The GNU GPL (as with any other copyright license actually, despite what some would have you believe) applies to copying, distribution and modification only.
Why would anybody want to do this?
So they can read their email from a linux desktop machine, perhaps?
That's the reason I do it, anyway. (Except I use evolution to connect and not Thunderbird)
I've done a fresh install of edgy on my laptop and the network device does not get set up. Previously with dapper it was fine. I now have to do "sudo dhclient eth0" manually. I can't really complain though, since I haven't even raised it as a bug yet.
I disagree. Electronic voting will never be as good.
The good thing about paper voting (apart from the fact that it works and is well tried and tested) is that the general public (who after all have to put trust in the system) can understand how it works and have some idea about the safeguards that prevent tampering. They also understand that there are things like independent observers ensuring the process goes as it should.
Compare that with electronic voting where almost every voter has no idea how the system works, no idea how any independent observers would be able to verify that the system works, and no idea how to determine whether or not they can trust any part of the process.