I've been around computers my entire life and have never heard the term "Disclosed Source Code". Sounds like something IBM would say back in the 70s. Disclosed? As in not closed? As in open?
It's almost like the Scottish royal motto, "No one treads on me with impunity". Where impunity means without fear of reprisal. So the the Scottish motto really means, "One treads on me with fear of reprisal", which doesn't sound nearly as sharp.
If you and yours were smart, you would realize how very close you are to victory and stop with the childish infighting that is only serving to bolster the other side. "Open Source" might be your ball. If it is, you're free to take it home with you at any time. Just remember that you're not the only one playing, you don't own the playground and there are other kids that have balls too.
I feel the same way about GPLv3 and the GNU tool chain.
We should think about building this guy a cathedral. He's so great and I completely agree with his definition of Open Source from 15 years ago and also all of the redefinitions since then. He's not the pope people, he's just a saint, so he's not infallible. I'm sure I'll also agree with any of his future redefinitions as he hunts out the apostates amongst the true believers.
Is there a tag for "you become what you hate"? Maybe there should be.
Again, how is Bush responsible? Did he drive the car bomb into the market? Did he put explosives on the minarets in a mosque?
Bush is one powerfull dude, who controls the weather and the minds of fanatics 1/2 way around the world. You should be thankful he hasn't turned his weather and mind control machines on you!
The parade of scandals, lies, coverups & half-truths that you speak of are, point for point, not scandals, lies or coverups.
The truth, or at least half of it, is that the Democrats are using their congressional powers to attack the Republican president. This consists of having a committee investigate something that might be illegal and having news conferences saying how bad that illegal thing would be if it actually did happen.
As an American, I want to know why the entire world is focused on us and why the entire world thinks their opinion about us means diddly squat? Why can't the rest of the world grow up and start taking some responsiblity? Your country sucks and you smell funny, not my problem. Your country is great and so much better than mine, then you should take solace in that.
I'm not really arguing anything. I'm merely pointing out that 3 out of 4 whatevers does not a fact make.
As far as Mr Einstein is concerned, he submitted articles that were rejected for peer review. That is also a part of the peer review process. It is also the part that is most suscebtible to negative influences.
It is more likely that the majority of our ancestors had no opinion either way about the shape of the earth. It can and has been shown that the majority of our ancestors who attempted to discern the shape of the earth arrived at the correct conclusion. The widespread belief in the idea that our ancestors believed in a flat earth originated at the beginning of the twentieth century.
It has also been shown repeatedly that once a scientific theory achieves a certain critical mass of acceptability, peer review reinforces the trend. This has been shown for good and bad theories.
Anywhile, Einstein was just a patent clerk in Bavaria. Today, he would be branded a denier and flamed on public forums.
Apocalypse by global warming would be so much easier to accept if Al Gore wasn't out selling it everyday. I just don't like the man and one of my main arguments is that 'Often Wrong' Al believes in it. This is the same guy who killed the shuttle replacement program and claimed to have invented the internet. He's so smart and yet his only claim to fame is inheriting his daddy's senate seat.
I think I also have more respect for my fellow humans to overcome the changes that GW will bring. It's not all going to be bad news folks. The brief history of this planet shows that humans do quite well in warm weather.
It seems like science has been replaced by sloganeering. Global warming can mean many things to many people. To some it means man-made climate change. For others it means we are between ice ages. Even in the different camps, there is debate. It is perfectly viable to believe that there is man-made warming and to also believe that this is not a bad thing on the whole.
-SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC- And before any of you accuse me of being a flat earther, be advised that the theory that our ancestors ever really believed in a flat earth has been discredited. I think the 'flat earth' comment is a corrolary to Godwins law, with the added caveat that the person is not only the loser but also very likely ignorant.
Along those same lines, Darwin didn't come up with the theory of evolution. He did come up with the theory of natural selection, a worthy accomplishment which should be noted correctly. -END-
The remedy to these types of transgressions is that any evidence obtained from such can not be admitted into evidence. That is a pretty good system. It's not perfect, but then that is the nature of this world, pretty good but not perfect. We can not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
I don't consider this giving up liberty as it is the job of the FBI to investigate crimes. Gathering data is a huge part of that job and as we don't have robot agents yet, human error will always be a factor. That being said, agents that knowingly abuse their power should be investigated and charged.
Those arguing for perfection are naive. It's almost as bad as saying mistakes have been made in the Iraq war. As opposed to those other wars where no mistakes were made. War and mistake are pretty much synonymous, the Vietnam mistake, the Korean mistake, World Mistake II, World Mistake I, the Spanish-American mistake, the mistake of 1812... Get the picture. I won't call the American Revolution a mistake although plenty were made on both sides.
I'm pretty sure that the world cup, in some form or another has used a system just like this.
During qualifications, the hierarchy of geographical areas would be South America, Europe, North America, Carribean, Austalasia, Africa. Topics would be matches played, matches scheduled, standings, statistics, leading scorers. During the actual Cup, the hierarchy would be the entire planet.
I'm pretty sure they put this on a computer some where. If not the world cup, then how about the Olympics. I would be surprised if there wasn't something on AOL or Prodigy prior to 1995 for events like these.
IANAL, but I do speak english fairly well. In what convoluted universe does "version 2 or later" become "version 2 unless later".
This may seem like trolling, but I just don't like or trust RMS. I understand that the FSF has the linux communities balls in a vice, since they own most, if not all, of the tools used to build for linux. I just see this as something like a land grab. Right now they own the tools, tomorrow, they will own it all. Yep, you can copy and redistribute and improve, but they will still end up owning it cause they own the license. Which only RMS and his lackeys can change.
There's a slippery slope argument that someone else made that shows where GPLv4,5,6,etc will go as RMS roots out the non-believers. You can argue that it won't happen but you will be arguing against history and without proof.
What about people who are color blind?...illiterate due to learning ability?...in a coma?
I think we should try to accomodate all people as much as possible. The key word being try. Unfortunately, the 'nice' people of the world have mandated equal access and eventually some John Edwards type will make a nice fortune shutting down sites that don't have the resources to keep up. It's already happening to bricks and mortar companies.
You don't have to visit their sites and if you do, they are perfectly within their rights to distribute anything they wish, so long as they keep the copyright intact and provide updates. Unless they are using a BSD license.
Gee, that's so clever and yet so wrong. I don't watch news on tv. It's worthless and usually many hours old. However, I do remember events that have happened in the past (I like to call it history). I also don't just repeat the same boring things over and over, like most Bush and America haters. I'm also not fickle, like most people. I remember when the majority of Americans were for the war.
Why don't you try responding to something I said? It's not hard. Pick one and run with it. It might work better than idiotic and annonymous personal attacks.
So you think we should wait until the terrorists kill more of us before we do anything? Do you have some upper limit on deaths before we can do anything? I think the same thing could have been said after Pearl Harbor. But then the Japanese declared war on us afterwards and our new enemy doesn't play by our rules, or even their own rules.
I can only imagine what it is you are refering to when you talk about corruption and mismanagement. I suppose you mean the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Try this for some objective perspective...
The rulers of Afghanistan, the Taliban and AQ, blatantly attacked civilian targets in the United States of America. This was for all intensive purposes a declaration of war. Any country attacked in such a manner has a duty to respond.
The ruler of Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his sons, invaded Kuwait, a sovereign nation. A world-wide coalition assembled, led by the USA, and drove the Iraqis from Kuwait. Saddam Hussein surrendered unconditionally. He then spent the next 10 years ignoring the terms that were imposed after his unconditional surrender. He continued to fund terrorism and, in clear violation of the peace, corrupted the UN food for oil program to rearm.
Surely you don't think that the war against the Taliban and AQ in Afghanistan was corrupt or mismanaged? If you do, then you are pretty much clueless. The history of war is brutal, for everyone involved. The war in Afghanistan and even Iraq, pale in comparison to just about every war in history. The only way to paint these wars in a bad light is if you blame the US for all of the deaths, which just isn't the case. Most of the violence has been perpetrated by non-Americans against other non-Americans.
Maybe you're talking about Katrina, which I agree is all the fault of GWB and his weather machine. People who live under sea level near the gulf coast shouldn't be expected to learn how to swim or evacuate when the government tells them too. The state and local governments should also not mobilize because after all they don't get paid to run their state and localities.
My second guess would be German, but I hear they actually have developed a sense of humor (after many false starts that ended in utter tragedy). My third guess would be Aspergers but that's not really a place of origin.
They certainly did have weapons of mass destruction. Used them too. First against the Iranians and later against the Kurds. Of course, that doesn't count. Neither do the thousands of munitions found that contained nerve agents.
And I'm sure that the Iraqis were just enjoying a nice vacation in a country whose only real export is yellow cake uranium. I'm not sure why we even sent Joe Wilson, except that his wife suggested it.
I've read the 4th ammendment too. I think it falls under the broad exclusion 'We the people of the United States of America'. Which means, at least for the moment, that being inside our borders is not enough to grant you its protection.
Now, from the site you referenced:
"That searches made at the border, pursuant to the longstanding right of the sovereign to protect itself by stopping and examining persons and property crossing into this country, are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border, should, by now, require no extended demonstration."
Since these calls are crossing our border, I would think they are free game.
Also, from the section on "Electronic Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment", if you read down to the bottom says...
"The question of the scope of the President's constitutional powers, if any, remains judicially unsettled."
The courts have ruled several times on this matter and the current interpretation is about as stupid as can be. The original decision by the court should have stood. I'm pretty sure if it ever does make it to the current SCOTUS, you will not be happy with the results.
If you think the muslim terrorists aren't trying to harm us, maybe you should dig a hole and stick your head in it.
Sorry, but if you read to the end of the story, you find out that the objections were raised and the program was changed. At the end, the AG and all his cronies all signed off on the program.
The acting AG seems a bit mousy to me.
That is exactly the point, only you're too stupid to realize it. The NSA does not know who is talking to whom when a phone call is made. They can only determine where a call might have originated and where it is trying to connect.
ONE point of view is that they can do NOTHING to ascertain who is talking to whom because they MIGHT be breaking the LAW. ANOTHER point of view is that they should do EVERYTHING they can to ascertain who is talking to whom and know for CERTAIN whether listening violates the LAW.
Since the first choice means unfettered communication for anyone inside the border (terrorists, spies, drug lords, etc), I think it is reasonable for the POTUS to tell the COTUS to suck it until SCOTUS says stop.
There appears to be a lot of people who think they have unlimited rights, including the right to line the rest of us up for slaughter. That includes the NYT set that doesn't seem to care if someone breaks the law by releasing details of a classified program, while musing about whether or not it is illegal. Doesn't really matter after they have spilled everything in black and white. Treason, arrogance or stupidity? Hard to tell. If I was Bush, I think I might have pushed for a firing squad. It's not like his approval rating could get any worse.
I can tell you at what point you violate copyright... when a judge says guilty and the gavel bangs. If I were ever sued for something like this, I would definately have a jury trial. From my one time on a jury and code inspections past, I think I'd have better than pretty good odds of beating the rap.
I think General George Patton said it best "Software licenses are a monument to the stupidity of man!" or at least he would have. I think the main purpose of the GPLv3 is to keep RMS and company in the public limelight and perhaps weed out the non-believers. Tivoization is just a smoke screen.
What I can't understand is how 'GPLv2 or later' gets translated into 'GPLv2 unless GPLv3'. IANAL, thank god, but seems to me that those are not equivalent statements.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been around computers my entire life and have never heard the term "Disclosed Source Code". Sounds like something IBM would say back in the 70s. Disclosed? As in not closed? As in open?
It's almost like the Scottish royal motto, "No one treads on me with impunity". Where impunity means without fear of reprisal. So the the Scottish motto really means, "One treads on me with fear of reprisal", which doesn't sound nearly as sharp.
If you and yours were smart, you would realize how very close you are to victory and stop with the childish infighting that is only serving to bolster the other side. "Open Source" might be your ball. If it is, you're free to take it home with you at any time. Just remember that you're not the only one playing, you don't own the playground and there are other kids that have balls too.
I feel the same way about GPLv3 and the GNU tool chain.
We should think about building this guy a cathedral. He's so great and I completely agree with his definition of Open Source from 15 years ago and also all of the redefinitions since then. He's not the pope people, he's just a saint, so he's not infallible. I'm sure I'll also agree with any of his future redefinitions as he hunts out the apostates amongst the true believers.
Is there a tag for "you become what you hate"? Maybe there should be.
Again, how is Bush responsible? Did he drive the car bomb into the market? Did he put explosives on the minarets in a mosque?
Bush is one powerfull dude, who controls the weather and the minds of fanatics 1/2 way around the world. You should be thankful he hasn't turned his weather and mind control machines on you!
Covering something because it makes noise - nice.
Complaining that it overheats after covering it - stupid.
I have a dvr that makes a lot of noise, although it's white noise, so you don't really notice it when watching a show or movie.
The parade of scandals, lies, coverups & half-truths that you speak of are, point for point, not scandals, lies or coverups.
The truth, or at least half of it, is that the Democrats are using their congressional powers to attack the Republican president. This consists of having a committee investigate something that might be illegal and having news conferences saying how bad that illegal thing would be if it actually did happen.
As an American, I want to know why the entire world is focused on us and why the entire world thinks their opinion about us means diddly squat? Why can't the rest of the world grow up and start taking some responsiblity? Your country sucks and you smell funny, not my problem. Your country is great and so much better than mine, then you should take solace in that.
I'm not really arguing anything. I'm merely pointing out that 3 out of 4 whatevers does not a fact make. As far as Mr Einstein is concerned, he submitted articles that were rejected for peer review. That is also a part of the peer review process. It is also the part that is most suscebtible to negative influences.
It is more likely that the majority of our ancestors had no opinion either way about the shape of the earth. It can and has been shown that the majority of our ancestors who attempted to discern the shape of the earth arrived at the correct conclusion. The widespread belief in the idea that our ancestors believed in a flat earth originated at the beginning of the twentieth century.
It has also been shown repeatedly that once a scientific theory achieves a certain critical mass of acceptability, peer review reinforces the trend. This has been shown for good and bad theories.
Anywhile, Einstein was just a patent clerk in Bavaria. Today, he would be branded a denier and flamed on public forums.
Apocalypse by global warming would be so much easier to accept if Al Gore wasn't out selling it everyday. I just don't like the man and one of my main arguments is that 'Often Wrong' Al believes in it. This is the same guy who killed the shuttle replacement program and claimed to have invented the internet. He's so smart and yet his only claim to fame is inheriting his daddy's senate seat.
I think I also have more respect for my fellow humans to overcome the changes that GW will bring. It's not all going to be bad news folks. The brief history of this planet shows that humans do quite well in warm weather.
It seems like science has been replaced by sloganeering. Global warming can mean many things to many people. To some it means man-made climate change. For others it means we are between ice ages. Even in the different camps, there is debate. It is perfectly viable to believe that there is man-made warming and to also believe that this is not a bad thing on the whole.
-SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC-
And before any of you accuse me of being a flat earther, be advised that the theory that our ancestors ever really believed in a flat earth has been discredited. I think the 'flat earth' comment is a corrolary to Godwins law, with the added caveat that the person is not only the loser but also very likely ignorant.
Along those same lines, Darwin didn't come up with the theory of evolution. He did come up with the theory of natural selection, a worthy accomplishment which should be noted correctly.
-END-
The remedy to these types of transgressions is that any evidence obtained from such can not be admitted into evidence. That is a pretty good system. It's not perfect, but then that is the nature of this world, pretty good but not perfect. We can not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
I don't consider this giving up liberty as it is the job of the FBI to investigate crimes. Gathering data is a huge part of that job and as we don't have robot agents yet, human error will always be a factor. That being said, agents that knowingly abuse their power should be investigated and charged.
Those arguing for perfection are naive. It's almost as bad as saying mistakes have been made in the Iraq war. As opposed to those other wars where no mistakes were made. War and mistake are pretty much synonymous, the Vietnam mistake, the Korean mistake, World Mistake II, World Mistake I, the Spanish-American mistake, the mistake of 1812... Get the picture. I won't call the American Revolution a mistake although plenty were made on both sides.
I'm pretty sure that the world cup, in some form or another has used a system just like this.
During qualifications, the hierarchy of geographical areas would be South America, Europe, North America, Carribean, Austalasia, Africa. Topics would be matches played, matches scheduled, standings, statistics, leading scorers. During the actual Cup, the hierarchy would be the entire planet.
I'm pretty sure they put this on a computer some where. If not the world cup, then how about the Olympics. I would be surprised if there wasn't something on AOL or Prodigy prior to 1995 for events like these.
IANAL, but I do speak english fairly well. In what convoluted universe does "version 2 or later" become "version 2 unless later".
This may seem like trolling, but I just don't like or trust RMS. I understand that the FSF has the linux communities balls in a vice, since they own most, if not all, of the tools used to build for linux. I just see this as something like a land grab. Right now they own the tools, tomorrow, they will own it all. Yep, you can copy and redistribute and improve, but they will still end up owning it cause they own the license. Which only RMS and his lackeys can change.
There's a slippery slope argument that someone else made that shows where GPLv4,5,6,etc will go as RMS roots out the non-believers. You can argue that it won't happen but you will be arguing against history and without proof.
What about people who are color blind? ...illiterate due to learning ability? ...in a coma?
I think we should try to accomodate all people as much as possible. The key word being try. Unfortunately, the 'nice' people of the world have mandated equal access and eventually some John Edwards type will make a nice fortune shutting down sites that don't have the resources to keep up. It's already happening to bricks and mortar companies.
You don't have to visit their sites and if you do, they are perfectly within their rights to distribute anything they wish, so long as they keep the copyright intact and provide updates. Unless they are using a BSD license.
Gee, that's so clever and yet so wrong. I don't watch news on tv. It's worthless and usually many hours old. However, I do remember events that have happened in the past (I like to call it history). I also don't just repeat the same boring things over and over, like most Bush and America haters. I'm also not fickle, like most people. I remember when the majority of Americans were for the war.
Why don't you try responding to something I said? It's not hard. Pick one and run with it. It might work better than idiotic and annonymous personal attacks.
Fortunately, it's not a zero-sum game. I think MS understands this, probably better then the average slashdotter.
So you think we should wait until the terrorists kill more of us before we do anything? Do you have some upper limit on deaths before we can do anything? I think the same thing could have been said after Pearl Harbor. But then the Japanese declared war on us afterwards and our new enemy doesn't play by our rules, or even their own rules.
I can only imagine what it is you are refering to when you talk about corruption and mismanagement. I suppose you mean the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Try this for some objective perspective...
The rulers of Afghanistan, the Taliban and AQ, blatantly attacked civilian targets in the United States of America. This was for all intensive purposes a declaration of war. Any country attacked in such a manner has a duty to respond.
The ruler of Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his sons, invaded Kuwait, a sovereign nation. A world-wide coalition assembled, led by the USA, and drove the Iraqis from Kuwait. Saddam Hussein surrendered unconditionally. He then spent the next 10 years ignoring the terms that were imposed after his unconditional surrender. He continued to fund terrorism and, in clear violation of the peace, corrupted the UN food for oil program to rearm.
Surely you don't think that the war against the Taliban and AQ in Afghanistan was corrupt or mismanaged? If you do, then you are pretty much clueless. The history of war is brutal, for everyone involved. The war in Afghanistan and even Iraq, pale in comparison to just about every war in history. The only way to paint these wars in a bad light is if you blame the US for all of the deaths, which just isn't the case. Most of the violence has been perpetrated by non-Americans against other non-Americans.
Maybe you're talking about Katrina, which I agree is all the fault of GWB and his weather machine. People who live under sea level near the gulf coast shouldn't be expected to learn how to swim or evacuate when the government tells them too. The state and local governments should also not mobilize because after all they don't get paid to run their state and localities.
If you read to the bottom of your post, it reads exactly like the end of the article. Like I said, boring.
My second guess would be German, but I hear they actually have developed a sense of humor (after many false starts that ended in utter tragedy). My third guess would be Aspergers but that's not really a place of origin.
They certainly did have weapons of mass destruction. Used them too. First against the Iranians and later against the Kurds. Of course, that doesn't count. Neither do the thousands of munitions found that contained nerve agents.
And I'm sure that the Iraqis were just enjoying a nice vacation in a country whose only real export is yellow cake uranium. I'm not sure why we even sent Joe Wilson, except that his wife suggested it.
I've read the 4th ammendment too. I think it falls under the broad exclusion 'We the people of the United States of America'. Which means, at least for the moment, that being inside our borders is not enough to grant you its protection.
Now, from the site you referenced:
"That searches made at the border, pursuant to the longstanding right of the sovereign to protect itself by stopping and examining persons and property crossing into this country, are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border, should, by now, require no extended demonstration."
Since these calls are crossing our border, I would think they are free game.
Also, from the section on "Electronic Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment", if you read down to the bottom says...
"The question of the scope of the President's constitutional powers, if any, remains judicially unsettled."
The courts have ruled several times on this matter and the current interpretation is about as stupid as can be. The original decision by the court should have stood. I'm pretty sure if it ever does make it to the current SCOTUS, you will not be happy with the results.
If you think the muslim terrorists aren't trying to harm us, maybe you should dig a hole and stick your head in it.
Then you would be half wrong. Although I'm a 3rd award rifle expert, I don't own a gun. Just a K-bar that I keep near my nightstand.
Sorry, but if you read to the end of the story, you find out that the objections were raised and the program was changed. At the end, the AG and all his cronies all signed off on the program. The acting AG seems a bit mousy to me.
That is exactly the point, only you're too stupid to realize it. The NSA does not know who is talking to whom when a phone call is made. They can only determine where a call might have originated and where it is trying to connect.
ONE point of view is that they can do NOTHING to ascertain who is talking to whom because they MIGHT be breaking the LAW. ANOTHER point of view is that they should do EVERYTHING they can to ascertain who is talking to whom and know for CERTAIN whether listening violates the LAW.
Since the first choice means unfettered communication for anyone inside the border (terrorists, spies, drug lords, etc), I think it is reasonable for the POTUS to tell the COTUS to suck it until SCOTUS says stop.
There appears to be a lot of people who think they have unlimited rights, including the right to line the rest of us up for slaughter. That includes the NYT set that doesn't seem to care if someone breaks the law by releasing details of a classified program, while musing about whether or not it is illegal. Doesn't really matter after they have spilled everything in black and white. Treason, arrogance or stupidity? Hard to tell. If I was Bush, I think I might have pushed for a firing squad. It's not like his approval rating could get any worse.
I can tell you at what point you violate copyright... when a judge says guilty and the gavel bangs. If I were ever sued for something like this, I would definately have a jury trial. From my one time on a jury and code inspections past, I think I'd have better than pretty good odds of beating the rap.
I think General George Patton said it best "Software licenses are a monument to the stupidity of man!" or at least he would have. I think the main purpose of the GPLv3 is to keep RMS and company in the public limelight and perhaps weed out the non-believers. Tivoization is just a smoke screen.
What I can't understand is how 'GPLv2 or later' gets translated into 'GPLv2 unless GPLv3'. IANAL, thank god, but seems to me that those are not equivalent statements.