Or they could arrest people, hold them in jail for a while, charge them, and then before the courts can make a decision, drop charges and let them go with stern warnings.
That way, the courts don't get a chance to shut them down since they have to have a real dispute, but the administration can use it to silence opponents.
Comparable to the number of abandoned open-source projects you see not updated since 2004. Corporate or open source, they fail just the same.
In corparate world projects fail on user side, while in FOSS world projects fail on developer side letting users go free:) Let me explain what I mean. Assume that some company and OS community work on the same big project, that is in high demand.
In FOSS world, if you design software badly, no one will be able to figure out how it works and extend it. If they eventually figure out how it works, they So in this case project is just abandoned. It will never be finished, therefore never used.
In corporate world you can go a very long way with bad design, because you pay people to do the job. And when deadline approaches everyone forgets about design quality. So in this case bad software will actually be shipped and tested by users and fails only if they figure out that software is a crap son enough. If they figure this out much later, when they heavily depend on it, then they are screwed...
* "Infectious" nature: Many open source licences are "infectious", meaning that the original open source licence may apply to:
(a) the original software if re-distributed
(b) any modification of the original software if redistributed
(c) software containing or integrated with the original software, if redistributed
(d) software used in conjunction with the original software to provide a web based service.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know any OSI licenses that enforce (d). Seems like they forgot to add "if redistributed" here too.
With linux the only viable solution I have found is to include all the relevant libraries for the software and have a startup script that specifies LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
Looks like you are asking for extra trouble: now you have to maintain libraries you bundle with your software.
You write an
app for linux and you can never tell what their system is going to be like.
They could be on redhat, or ubuntu, or any of the popular distros.
If your application depend so much on linux _DISTRO_ version, then I think you should double check your code. If you are writing an installer for the app or/and need to check some library version, then yes, this can be a problem. Besides, with my debian box I can "apt-get install" almost any application/library that is missing.
Hey its their service, let them ban whatever they want.
If they get out of hand, people wont use their services. Problem solved. Market forces rule.
Well, when it comes to protecting rights of minorities market forces do not rule by definition, unless other people are concerned. In this case some people try to attract public attention to the issue so it can make a difference.
But, if there's a feature missing that you require, then for certain businesses -- not all -- it may well make sense to add code yourself. A tech company may underutilised coders on the payroll: it may be cheaper to get them to code and support that feature than it is to sack them.
And if the company chooses to donate the code to that application (submit a patch), they wouldn't have to support that feature for the rest of their lives. If the patch gets committed they will receive this feature with all new software versions (updates) and they don't have to worry about recompiling application every time. At the same time, free application receives new feature. Looks like win-win situation to me.
It's time to get over the whole "software patents suck thing:" they already exist, they already affect you, and your failure to patent something doesn't mean someone else won't try to patent it.
It's time to get over the whole "drugs are bad thing": they already exist, they already on the market, they already affect many people and your failure to sell them doesn't mean someone else won't try to do it. It's big money after all.
In a war, you have to shoot people because they are shooting at you. If you don't kill them, they will kill you. This software patent thing is a war.
This kind of reasoning gave the world Afganistan, Iraq and the biggest disaster of all -- George Bush jr.
Most static type systems suck, which is why people don't like them, but people who have used, say, SML or Haskell, tend to agree that static types can be something very natural and useful (the SML community has a saying which goes, roughly, "if it compiles, it's almost certainly correct").
I think that the problem is not static typing itself, the problem is ugly implementations of it people mostly deal with, like in Java, C++ etc. Many people just don't know about "Good" static typing systems as in Haskell or ML.
...teenagers 'value the role of science in society, but feel scientists are "brainy people not like them".' This was according to a recent study by The Science Learning Centre in London
Slashdot Mirror
The same applies to $100 desktop program. You can look at it as a way to fight microsoft on desktop market, gaining a big share in the future.
I'm not protecting Gates in this partucular situation, I'm just a little bit skeptical about this $100 desktop program too.
Or they could arrest people, hold them in jail for a while, charge them, and then before the courts can make a decision, drop charges and let them go with stern warnings. That way, the courts don't get a chance to shut them down since they have to have a real dispute, but the administration can use it to silence opponents.
Note to self: never vote for this guy.
The page showed me an AMD ad with this article. Was enough for me to know "near term future of intel" :)
In FOSS world, if you design software badly, no one will be able to figure out how it works and extend it. If they eventually figure out how it works, they So in this case project is just abandoned. It will never be finished, therefore never used.
In corporate world you can go a very long way with bad design, because you pay people to do the job. And when deadline approaches everyone forgets about design quality. So in this case bad software will actually be shipped and tested by users and fails only if they figure out that software is a crap son enough. If they figure this out much later, when they heavily depend on it, then they are screwed...
I say google should remove perfect10 site completely from index for
...Enterprise features...
Until this, your post was pretty insightful.
This kind of reasoning gave the world Afganistan, Iraq and the biggest disaster of all -- George Bush jr.
I see the last one as an ethical problem, even if those people agreed to undergo experiment.
Your friends would be better off starting a business to provide professional support for one of the FOSS CMS systems.
Exactly. Besides, the lack of support for FOSS is the main reason for choosing non-free software.
The poker hand is like this:
Have you seen the movie? +3
Sorry, couldn't resist...
Those who forget Slashdot posts are doomed to repeat them.
Those who remember are doomed to watch them repeating.
I am glad nobody is jumping to conclusions.
Most of us just don't have that "jump to conclusion mat"
- In TFA1: whipituptitude
- In TFA2 referenced from TFA1: whipuptitude
There must be some disagreement on the concept