Beyond dubious. I've recently become deeply skeptical of any attempts at "Campaign Finance Reform" or to limit political speech. They all seem aimed at individual finances, forcing more pooling at the party level. And so work to limit the independance of party members.
AFAIK, the US and Japan are the only G10 countries with independant representatives. Mostly because they control their own fates. In all the others, the parties rule and the reps are seatwarmers. That would be a massive change in US politics and remove one check-and-balance.
Very slippery slope. I _might_ agree a commercial enterprise offering lobbying services to all comers might be not protected under the 1st Am (but might be protected as "attorney").
But what about the blogger who just happens to find an appreciative audience, some members of which find her message compelling enough to want to "help get the word out"? So they start paying some expenses?
Just what are the "Federalist Papers" but a pre-electronic version of what we currently call a 'blog? Anonymous free political speech has a long and revered tradition in the US. One which concerns about campaign finance "reform" cannot override.
I didn't say the iPod could only be used for DRM, merely that it was the most commercially successful current implementation. What do you believe is a more sucessful application of DRM than iTunes?
Personally, I find cut'n'paste in VT _easier_ than XTERMs, mostly because the mouse cursor is separate from the text-entry cursor. I just highlight what I want from one screen Alt-Fn to switch, then middle click to paste selection at text cursor. No need to reposition to pasting target. Minimum mousing.
Yes, I'm aware of the argument that DRM subverts the intent of GPLv2. And some people believe it actually violates v2 since the source for all derivative works is also GPL. The TIVO loader might easily be considered a derivative work.
But that's not my point. Linus doesn't enforce the GPL because he doesn't believe there's a good case against nVidia. There may not be. Most of their driver is probably GPU code which it would be hard to claim as a derivative work. RMS doesn't care whether there's a good case or not, he just wants to fight.
One of the most admirable things about Linus is his ability to elevate to meta-thought (thinking about thinking) along with a very healthy dose of self-skepticism. I like that because it's most likely to solve problems. If simple on-topic thinking could solve a given problem, it would have long ago. New -different- ideas and perspectives are needed. Meta-thought is one avenue.
I tend to deplore DRM. But I also agree that GPLv3 won't stop it. The value of the GPL codebase above BSD and above the cost of proprietary code just isn't that great: neoTivo would just go BSD if not MS-proprietary.
DRM will stand or fall one-by-one as users accept the deals offered. Or reject them. The iPOD is currently the biggest successful implementation of DRM. Consumers apparently accept the deal, irrespective of RMS' dire warnings.
Not quite. My $PATH has executables that have been installed. Not "configured" into some menu system where each item will take space and attention.
Menuing systems _do_ teach/remind users as-you-go as a return for this space and attention. But it is a price always paid, and more experienced users might resent continuing to pay for the cost of training wheels. Clicks aren't free.
Navigating GUIs is very spatially dependant. Some people are good at it. But it depends on consistancy: Some people will get livid if you resort their desktop icons! and I don't know how people can navigate MS' "Adaptive Menus".
GUIs have dominated because the bulk of all users (both business and personal) have simple needs and minimal training/retention. There are some purely graphical tasks which are much better accomplished in GUIs (drafting), and some tasks much better in CLI (scripting).
Pictographs have problems which is why they've largely been supplanted by alphabetic systems for natural languages. Or augmented by "Tooltips" on computers. The first is they are difficult to recognize, especially in lo-res. The second is they are difficult to describe to others, like Tech Support over a phone. In some low-required bandwidth settings (like roadsigns), they might have some advantages.
The banner icons seem a little easier to hit, but that isn't the biggest problem. I don't think edges and corners are used well. I'm not an expert on GUIs actual-vs-potential, so I rely upon those who are, like Bruce Tognazzini. I do know there are some GUI interfaces that have given me noticable wrist pain (CTS) after as little as an hour or two steady use.
Since he wasn't hired to write source code, his work is _not_ a work for hire. And I doubt he signed away rights to his IP as part of becoming a trooper. But states have unusual rights (sovereign immunity) that may make it impossible for him to enforce his IP rights.
Of course, they might also abuse "eminent domain" for his code. I wish I were joking.
A simple answer: numbers of neophyte users. And admins, for that matter. GUIs are seductive and make learning to use a computer for simple tasks very easy. The problem comes when the training wheels have to be abandoned.
An ironic comment. I would consider XTERMs to be CLI, and the GUI just used to display them conveniently. Personally, I use VTs for larger, crisper displays with far less hardware overhead. But some people like XTERMs, and I can see tehy sometimes might be preferable, like for log tails.
I had thought GUI seductive disadvantages were welll-known around here. I apologize for that assumption. My reasoning:
All GUIs are fundmentally menuing systems. Limitied choice. You
can only run whatever has been configured. If you can find it. My $PATH has 2823 possibilities. A very crowded menu system might have 100. Forcing additional layers and complexity. Text meuing systems have the same disadvantage.
GUIs are bloated bugfests. Poor use of hardware. A small
example -- I view text 160 cols by 73 rows in crisp
textmode fonts. I can't tune an Xterm to more than 132x50
before the fonts become badly interpolated in bitmode.
GUIs abandon that great IT invention of 7000 years ago --
the alphabet! Icons are cryptic pictographs.
GUIs don't permit pgms to co-operate unless they've been rather specifically designed to do so. How do you do
a pipe | ? The clipboard is a feeble sustitute,
and is available as `gpm` under CLI.
Most GUIs are very poorly implemented, with poor UI
choices, bad ergonomics and excessive mouse precision required.
In fairness, many CLI are also poorly implemented.
MS-Windows COMMAND.COM is horrible, and CMD.EXE is
only marginally better.
Please note I'm not picking out any particular GUI.
MS-Windows, The X Window System, or Mac OS X are all
roughly equally bad.
Agreed. GUIs are detestable for many reasons I will not elaborate here, but it must be also recognized they have some advantages: Attractiveness to first-time/rare computer users and semi-obviousness of how to do simple tasks.
The banner might be more attractive to true first-time users, but will pose a whole new learning hurdle for rare users and much more for users with simple requirements (80+% of all users). The tasks have moved and now are much less obvious.
MS has shot themselves in the foot again. I don't know whether they hit an artery.
A small point but IIRC, anyone can write their Member-of-Parlement a letter and Canada Post will deliver it without requiring any postage stamps.
This is the exact opposite of the US where US Representatives (and maybe Senators?) have the privilege of "franking" -- just signing the upper right corner in lieu of postage for any letters they send their constituents.
My biggest problem with DRM (beyond fair-use) comes for end-of-life and orphaned works. If they are DRM, how can they ever revert to the public domain? Most likely, the file format or keys will be lost, and the work will be forever lost.
This is not the bargain the US Constitution permits as "copyright".
Sure. You can get lots by Googling "nice guys finish last"
Since male reproduction is more variable than female, women are torn between aggressive and nurturing males. Sometimes riskily resolved by cuckoldry. The assumption is that other women's daughters won't find nurturing sons as attractive. Probably an equilibrium thing: too many aggressors don't help enough but there are large rewards if there are too few. A predator-prey cycle.
"Sperm Wars" [Robin Baker] begins to scratch the surface (if you can tolate the lurid examples). But evolution is not about kids. It's about grandkids and beyond.
I have no doubt you are speaking from your personal experience. So be it.
I will speak from mine: I have no doubt. Nerds are actually very attractive to certain women. They like the reliability and equality. Many have been seriously burned being arm candy for jocks & preps.
As for coding on Honeymoon, why not? Are you assuming an absence of pre-marital sex? There is also such a thing as too much togetherness, and some breathing space even on a week-long honeymoon is a good idea for both.
A copyright is without a question a property right.
I'm not so sure. Copyright is a creation of statute, specifically included in the US Constitution. It is not a natural right. Copyright also expires (too soon for Disney). A copyright might well be property, but that doesn't make it a property right. Had it been, Disney's extention could have been ruled unconstitutional in Eldred. But it's not a lease which reverts.
My friend, corporations do not equal "Freedom of Association." For one thing, they were not created in this country until long after the Bill of Rights was enacted,
Not quite. The Hudson's Bay Company was operating here under Royal Charter granted IIRC in 1649. I believe there were others, and I find it remarkable that of the exhausting complaints in the Declaration of Independence, none were against the HBC or other companies.
"Ex post" is not valid either. The Constitution is about principles, not details. Wiretap would be legal, new religions bannable, and all electronic media completely govt controlled since none of these things were created until long after the 1st Amendment.
Furthermore, they add the very significant trait of "Freedom from Owner Liability."
Limited Liability is a creation of statute. A convenience mostly related to bankruptcy law. I'm not sure if Limited Liability is all that significant. At the margin, perhaps. IIRC, at one time Austrialian companies were not limited. I don't think it has much effect except upon creditors who of course must know. Torts and third-party liability hasn't taken many corps into bankruptcy (Johns-Manville [asbestos] is the only one which comes to mind) although many have been hurt.
Uhm, BSDL (by which I assume you refer to the BSD license) **IS** open source.
Yes, but it is a weaker form. The source doesn't need to stay open. I believe the stronger GPL is one of the main advantages for Linux. It attracted developers 1991-6 when *BSD was much better established.
Free software is not opposed to anything. It is software.
I meant the Free Software Movement, as opposed to the Open Source Movement. Forgive my abbreviation.
I know that RMS is a dirty leftist hippy and all...
That is a rank ad-hominem that merely detracts from valid arguments. He might well be, but that is irrelevant. What is relevant is RMS values are now apparently quite different from mine, so his actions (particularly GPLv3) must come under closer scrutiny.
but he has some good ideas, and he deserves credit for taking the initiative to have the GPL created.
Without doublt. GCC and even the bletcherous EMACS are to his credit.
Linus deserves credit for his contributions too (and he gets it). I really don't understand the reason for the big divide between the two perspectives. It seems to be a Cult of Personality issue more than anything to do with philosophy. Seriously, the two groups (Linus and everyone else) should just get together and have a love-in or something.
Dismissing differentces as a "Cult of Personality" is ad-hominem. There are real differences. Look for them. RMS will not run closed source. Linus doesn't mind. This is a huge philosophical difference.
Actually, I think the phase-in is quicker: IIRC, all TV's over 27"diag sold in the US after 1 Mar 2007 will have to have an HD tuner. But how quickly does the fleet of US TVs turnover? 5 years?
A bigger question is quality demanded: How many people with HD complain when only NTSC is available? Only a minority, and these are the picky early-adopters.
Yes, an original sole author could relicence to avoid the mooted FSF standing. But not a subsequent collaborator. It's unlikely Linus could
relicence Linux. Or anyone who licenced code GPL or GPLv2 or later.
Even those who have said their code is "GPLv2 or any later version" would not have reasonably intended to grant dual ownership of the
copyright to the FSF at the FSF's option. That's called an "unconscionable" term,
I doubt a court would view it as "unconscionable", especially with FSF presenting itself as defending the licence it wrote and the author
elected to use. What is FSF taking away from the author that the author did not already give away?
That's an interesting hypothetical, but it is not based in reality. If you can point to an email exchange or minutes of a meeting in which RMS
or anyone proposed this, I would be very interested. It is clear that RMS disapproves of what NVidia is doing. However, that doesn't mean that
he or anyone else at the FSF is seeking to steal the copyright out from under authors of open source projects.
Steal is a strong term. RMS would sue NVidia if he could. He thinks they've done wrong. Maybe they have. See this [wasabisystems.com].
If he "could and would" then that must mean that he "has or will". So why hasn't he, and when will he?
Not quite. It mean he can and wants to. I don't think RMS has much respect for private property, and the GPL is just a tool. A hack. He
certainly doesn't support freedom of association [corporations].
It's the difference between being able to see the source of software you bought (OSS) and being able to alter and redistribute the source
(F/OSS).
No, it is more than that. "Free software" is opposed to any other kind. OpenS is quite happy to co-exist. OpenS also wants to mod &
redistribute, or it would be using BSDL.
I understand and agree that Tivoization DRM [aka Trecherous Computing] is very wrong, and probably a violation of GPLv2. The DRM
checker/loader is the derivative work, just as a cover or table of contents is to a book.
Of course I can see the difference between 480i and 1080p. When I look for it, as in examining pictures. When I'm watching it and immersed in the content, I don't notice. 250 lines is only occasionally disturbing. Sound matters more. YMMV
480i via S-video has alwas seemed very close to Composite when used with decent (paired) S-video cables [not ripoff Monster]. Both worlds better than F [coax] of whatever quality.
What do you expect? A frightened populace and self-serving politicians/administrators are trying to [ab]use the legal mechanism to do what it was not designed to do, and is clearly beyond it's capabilities. Not the only abuse [drug Prohibition].
The law was designed to _deter_ wrongdoing by presenting a credible liklihood of punishment. It was not designed to _stop_ [prevent] any particular thing. That requires a great deal more intrusiveness, and something Anglo-Saxon tradition rejected because of it's chilling effect on society, both personal and commercial development. Contrast with France or Germany, although both have included more civil rights as a results of the 2+ century success of the english.
Sure. You cannot stop people (including government officials) from breaking laws. You can only punish them afterwards. And seldom do officials actually get significantly punished.
However, if a court ruled that there was not sufficient reason to open a letter, it would be an illegal search, and all consequent evidence excluded as "fruit of the poisoned vine". Bye-bye case.
Slashdot Mirror
AFAIK, the US and Japan are the only G10 countries with independant representatives. Mostly because they control their own fates. In all the others, the parties rule and the reps are seatwarmers. That would be a massive change in US politics and remove one check-and-balance.
But what about the blogger who just happens to find an appreciative audience, some members of which find her message compelling enough to want to "help get the word out"? So they start paying some expenses?
I didn't say the iPod could only be used for DRM, merely that it was the most commercially successful current implementation. What do you believe is a more sucessful application of DRM than iTunes?
Cut'n'paste isn't just a GUI tool. Look up 'gpm' or 'selection" for text.
But that's not my point. Linus doesn't enforce the GPL because he doesn't believe there's a good case against nVidia. There may not be. Most of their driver is probably GPU code which it would be hard to claim as a derivative work. RMS doesn't care whether there's a good case or not, he just wants to fight.
I tend to deplore DRM. But I also agree that GPLv3 won't stop it. The value of the GPL codebase above BSD and above the cost of proprietary code just isn't that great: neoTivo would just go BSD if not MS-proprietary.
DRM will stand or fall one-by-one as users accept the deals offered. Or reject them. The iPOD is currently the biggest successful implementation of DRM. Consumers apparently accept the deal, irrespective of RMS' dire warnings.
Menuing systems _do_ teach/remind users as-you-go as a return for this space and attention. But it is a price always paid, and more experienced users might resent continuing to pay for the cost of training wheels. Clicks aren't free.
Navigating GUIs is very spatially dependant. Some people are good at it. But it depends on consistancy: Some people will get livid if you resort their desktop icons! and I don't know how people can navigate MS' "Adaptive Menus".
GUIs have dominated because the bulk of all users (both business and personal) have simple needs and minimal training/retention. There are some purely graphical tasks which are much better accomplished in GUIs (drafting), and some tasks much better in CLI (scripting).
The banner icons seem a little easier to hit, but that isn't the biggest problem. I don't think edges and corners are used well. I'm not an expert on GUIs actual-vs-potential, so I rely upon those who are, like Bruce Tognazzini. I do know there are some GUI interfaces that have given me noticable wrist pain (CTS) after as little as an hour or two steady use.
Of course, they might also abuse "eminent domain" for his code. I wish I were joking.
All GUIs are fundmentally menuing systems. Limitied choice. You can only run whatever has been configured. If you can find it. My $PATH has 2823 possibilities. A very crowded menu system might have 100. Forcing additional layers and complexity. Text meuing systems have the same disadvantage.
GUIs are bloated bugfests. Poor use of hardware. A small example -- I view text 160 cols by 73 rows in crisp textmode fonts. I can't tune an Xterm to more than 132x50 before the fonts become badly interpolated in bitmode.
GUIs abandon that great IT invention of 7000 years ago -- the alphabet! Icons are cryptic pictographs.
GUIs don't permit pgms to co-operate unless they've been rather specifically designed to do so. How do you do a pipe | ? The clipboard is a feeble sustitute, and is available as `gpm` under CLI.
Most GUIs are very poorly implemented, with poor UI choices, bad ergonomics and excessive mouse precision required. In fairness, many CLI are also poorly implemented. MS-Windows COMMAND.COM is horrible, and CMD.EXE is only marginally better.
Please note I'm not picking out any particular GUI. MS-Windows, The X Window System, or Mac OS X are all roughly equally bad.
The banner might be more attractive to true first-time users, but will pose a whole new learning hurdle for rare users and much more for users with simple requirements (80+% of all users). The tasks have moved and now are much less obvious.
MS has shot themselves in the foot again. I don't know whether they hit an artery.
This is the exact opposite of the US where US Representatives (and maybe Senators?) have the privilege of "franking" -- just signing the upper right corner in lieu of postage for any letters they send their constituents.
This is not the bargain the US Constitution permits as "copyright".
Since male reproduction is more variable than female, women are torn between aggressive and nurturing males. Sometimes riskily resolved by cuckoldry. The assumption is that other women's daughters won't find nurturing sons as attractive. Probably an equilibrium thing: too many aggressors don't help enough but there are large rewards if there are too few. A predator-prey cycle.
"Sperm Wars" [Robin Baker] begins to scratch the surface (if you can tolate the lurid examples). But evolution is not about kids. It's about grandkids and beyond.
I will speak from mine: I have no doubt. Nerds are actually very attractive to certain women. They like the reliability and equality. Many have been seriously burned being arm candy for jocks & preps.
As for coding on Honeymoon, why not? Are you assuming an absence of pre-marital sex? There is also such a thing as too much togetherness, and some breathing space even on a week-long honeymoon is a good idea for both.
I'm not so sure. Copyright is a creation of statute, specifically included in the US Constitution. It is not a natural right. Copyright also expires (too soon for Disney). A copyright might well be property, but that doesn't make it a property right. Had it been, Disney's extention could have been ruled unconstitutional in Eldred. But it's not a lease which reverts.
My friend, corporations do not equal "Freedom of Association." For one thing, they were not created in this country until long after the Bill of Rights was enacted,
Not quite. The Hudson's Bay Company was operating here under Royal Charter granted IIRC in 1649. I believe there were others, and I find it remarkable that of the exhausting complaints in the Declaration of Independence, none were against the HBC or other companies.
"Ex post" is not valid either. The Constitution is about principles, not details. Wiretap would be legal, new religions bannable, and all electronic media completely govt controlled since none of these things were created until long after the 1st Amendment.
Furthermore, they add the very significant trait of "Freedom from Owner Liability."
Limited Liability is a creation of statute. A convenience mostly related to bankruptcy law. I'm not sure if Limited Liability is all that significant. At the margin, perhaps. IIRC, at one time Austrialian companies were not limited. I don't think it has much effect except upon creditors who of course must know. Torts and third-party liability hasn't taken many corps into bankruptcy (Johns-Manville [asbestos] is the only one which comes to mind) although many have been hurt.
Uhm, BSDL (by which I assume you refer to the BSD license) **IS** open source.
Yes, but it is a weaker form. The source doesn't need to stay open. I believe the stronger GPL is one of the main advantages for Linux. It attracted developers 1991-6 when *BSD was much better established.
Free software is not opposed to anything. It is software.
I meant the Free Software Movement, as opposed to the Open Source Movement. Forgive my abbreviation.
I know that RMS is a dirty leftist hippy and all...
That is a rank ad-hominem that merely detracts from valid arguments. He might well be, but that is irrelevant. What is relevant is RMS values are now apparently quite different from mine, so his actions (particularly GPLv3) must come under closer scrutiny.
but he has some good ideas, and he deserves credit for taking the initiative to have the GPL created.
Without doublt. GCC and even the bletcherous EMACS are to his credit.
Linus deserves credit for his contributions too (and he gets it). I really don't understand the reason for the big divide between the two perspectives. It seems to be a Cult of Personality issue more than anything to do with philosophy. Seriously, the two groups (Linus and everyone else) should just get together and have a love-in or something.
Dismissing differentces as a "Cult of Personality" is ad-hominem. There are real differences. Look for them. RMS will not run closed source. Linus doesn't mind. This is a huge philosophical difference.
A bigger question is quality demanded: How many people with HD complain when only NTSC is available? Only a minority, and these are the picky early-adopters.
Even those who have said their code is "GPLv2 or any later version" would not have reasonably intended to grant dual ownership of the copyright to the FSF at the FSF's option. That's called an "unconscionable" term,
I doubt a court would view it as "unconscionable", especially with FSF presenting itself as defending the licence it wrote and the author elected to use. What is FSF taking away from the author that the author did not already give away?
That's an interesting hypothetical, but it is not based in reality. If you can point to an email exchange or minutes of a meeting in which RMS or anyone proposed this, I would be very interested. It is clear that RMS disapproves of what NVidia is doing. However, that doesn't mean that he or anyone else at the FSF is seeking to steal the copyright out from under authors of open source projects.
Steal is a strong term. RMS would sue NVidia if he could. He thinks they've done wrong. Maybe they have. See this [wasabisystems.com] .
If he "could and would" then that must mean that he "has or will". So why hasn't he, and when will he?
Not quite. It mean he can and wants to. I don't think RMS has much respect for private property, and the GPL is just a tool. A hack. He certainly doesn't support freedom of association [corporations].
It's the difference between being able to see the source of software you bought (OSS) and being able to alter and redistribute the source (F/OSS).
No, it is more than that. "Free software" is opposed to any other kind. OpenS is quite happy to co-exist. OpenS also wants to mod & redistribute, or it would be using BSDL.
I understand and agree that Tivoization DRM [aka Trecherous Computing] is very wrong, and probably a violation of GPLv2. The DRM checker/loader is the derivative work, just as a cover or table of contents is to a book.
480i via S-video has alwas seemed very close to Composite when used with decent (paired) S-video cables [not ripoff Monster]. Both worlds better than F [coax] of whatever quality.
The law was designed to _deter_ wrongdoing by presenting a credible liklihood of punishment. It was not designed to _stop_ [prevent] any particular thing. That requires a great deal more intrusiveness, and something Anglo-Saxon tradition rejected because of it's chilling effect on society, both personal and commercial development. Contrast with France or Germany, although both have included more civil rights as a results of the 2+ century success of the english.
However, if a court ruled that there was not sufficient reason to open a letter, it would be an illegal search, and all consequent evidence excluded as "fruit of the poisoned vine". Bye-bye case.