Will you stop picking on programmers. If a programmer gives his (expensive) spare time for free to an oss project. It is his god damn right to decide what he writes. If you don't like it, learn to code, join the projekt (or fork) and do it the right way.
Just quit whining when you don't like the stuff you get for free. The glory of oss is that there is no excuse for cry babies like you. You could make a difference if you wanted to, but you obviously don't, and that means noone have to care about your whining.
I don't think you understand this theory at all, do you? You should read it. Einstein was a pretty good writer, and his examples are still used today. Go to your library!
Hasn't this been proved already? What's wrong with those older proofs?
You can't prove anything in physics, you can try to disprove something and fail, and thus you may have reason to believe that the theory was correct. But there is always a posibility that your theory may be disproved later. (Which doesn't mean the theory is rendered useless. Newton's mechanics for example, stood for a very long time, until they were replaced by the theories of relativity. But they are still used, because in most "normal" conditions they work good enought, and the math is easier to work with.)
I also wonder why MPEG-4 is ".mp4". ".mp3" isn't for MPEG-3, after all. Flummory!
Obviously they are trying to get MPEG-4 off the ground by riding on the popularity of the widly known ".mp3" file extention.
They are using a familiar "brand name" name, and mp3 is the "Coca Cola" of computers. Just another marketing trick... ...not supposed to make any sense, just to give people that warm fuzzy feeling inside and get the royalties flowin.
. You want it all, but you don't want to pay, yet you want someone to pay you.
Wouldn't that be an accurate description of the way to success in a capitalist society? Just look at Bill Gates or Jack Valenti...
Re:A GREAT movie, no "bad guy overkill"
on
Review: Insomnia
·
· Score: 2
Excuse me, but I can't sit idly by when you call "The Rock" a good movie. It was utter crap. Sorry. Bad story, reasonably good actors underperforming terribly. Plus an incredible amount of flag waving (Well, to a non american anyway). That movie could have been so much better, but the director just wasted it all away. Strange that so many people liked it.
Anyway, good thing he said he wasn't evil, so you didn't have to make up your mind about it yourself. Because that would have been terrible, wouldn't it...
I've got three letters for you: SVG;-)
No, seriously, you're right of course. The XML-representation of a lossy format like mp3 or jpg for example wouldn't be of much use to anyone. I am a big fan of XML, but it is no magic bullet. It's well suited for some tasks, less well suited for others and absolutly suck at some. I just whish XML never had become so much of a buzzword.
Then, the average web developer is a moron.
The "standards" were so fucked up after the browser war that something had to be done. I know, I've built webapps for a living for years and ECMAscript (JavaScript) is one of the languages I use daily. I know it sucks right now, and a lot of work has to be redone. But better now then later! It has to be done, because the rewards are huge! Client side programming for the web will only get better from now on, we're almost through to the other side.
It's a pain in the ass to rewrite all that code. All the more so since many web programmers (IMHO) are'nt very experienced as coders. (Look at the source of random pages on the net. How often do you see good OO or error handling?)
Seems I strayed a bit into web designer bashing here, but my point is, it's really too late to complain. The changes has been made to help web developers, it took time and pain, but from now on, it's downhill...
. Eventually, Open Source developers will develop only to please themselves. At this point, their products become useless.
Oh, come on... this has always been the case, and I'd argue that it has worked pretty well so far. Developers scratch their own itch, or just want to show off how good they are. It's not like you are paying them to code, they do it in their time, for their own reasons, and you are in no position to demand anything. If you want something changed, and they don't feel like helping you, you'll have to help yourself.
Not a perfect system, but so far a pretty sucessfull one.
You might be right, but IMHO most American remakes are watered down copies of the original.
Examples are: Desperado (El Mariachi), Point of No Return (Nikita), Nightwatch (Nattevagden) and countless others...
Nolan is a great director however, and I personally believe this will be a good flick. But I can understand that people have a healthy dose of skepticism for Hollywood remakes. The director probably have to fight tooth and nail to get the qualities that made the original good past the marketing, investors and test audiences...
No, the worst typ of theft is when they use an illegal number. That's really low! Why should the public be allowed to use copyrighted or otherwise proprietory numbers? It's not like numbers should be free, free numbers would DESTROY THE ECONOMY! Think of the children!
I just don't see the problem. You can use the system to fight the system, so? It's their right. It just happened that a shitload of people decided it was a good idea and joined in.
The current system says we can put any conditions on the use of our copyrighted material, the FSF did just that. They in effect created their own system inside the system(due to the "viral" nature of the GNU GPL), like you said, using those same laws they despise.
In my opinion a clever hack, and a means to an end.
Remember, in a world without strong IP laws, the GPL might not be possible, but the need for it would also be greatly reduced.
Sure, there are restrictions, but since they are less severe than the default restrictions, they really don't restrict anything at all. And, yes, I've read it.
It's existence requires no justification, quit your whining.
Finally, I'd like to see one that mandates all laws pass from the books after 10 years. After that, they'd have to be submitted, voted on, and signed into law again
All fine and well, until they're asleep on the job and forget to renew the law that, say... outlaws murder;-)
You break the law three times, and you get life in a federal ***** *** prison.
But if you warp the law in a criminal way and impose your criminal act on an entire nation, you get no punishment until the third time, and then you only lose your job...
Your idea however, has merit. But I think it would be impossible to implement it in a neutral and tamperproof way.
Disclaimer: IMHO the Three Strikes And You're Out principle is barbaric, and a disgrase to any society that implements it.
No, the GPL doesn't take anything away or place any restrictions not already placed by default by copyright. It just grants the user a degree of freedom they wouldn't otherwise have.
Without it every GPL'ed piece of software would be proprietary by default. Which means that noone could do anything without it without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. The GPL is just a way to make your work an exempt from IP-law, and make sure it stays that way.
Of course he didn't read the bloody article. As soon as someone mentions RMS half the/.-ers rush in to tell the world how wrong he is, regardless of what he actually said. A big fat knee-jerk reaction. If they took the time to read it in RMS own words they would probably admit that he sometimes makes a lot of sense. (btw. this is a time like that.)
Not even Bill Gates provoke a similar reaction, only Jon Katz.
If linux succeds with a license similar to MS Windows or Solaris, then why would I see this as a good thing?
There are already excellent commersial unices out there. The thing that makes Linux stand out as a better choice is the freedom granted by the GPL.
Without that freedom, give me one good reason why I would want linux anymore?
(And don't say that the development method is better, because the cathedral doesn't work without the free source.) How is winning more users by destroying the thing that makes linux great a good thing? Let's say a per seat Linux achived market dominance. The situation would be no different then today, one proprietory monopoly replaces another. Another "windows", only *nix based.
No thanks! IMHO we're better off with a free niche OS, than just another Windows...
Sure, your right, a really short copyright would work even better, and in that case the ability to transfer it wouldn't be a problem. But it would be an impossible sell right now. Probably no western government could pull this off even if they wanted to.
Slashdot Mirror
Will you stop picking on programmers.
If a programmer gives his (expensive) spare time for free to an oss project. It is his god damn right to decide what he writes.
If you don't like it, learn to code, join the projekt (or fork) and do it the right way.
Just quit whining when you don't like the stuff you get for free. The glory of oss is that there is no excuse for cry babies like you. You could make a difference if you wanted to, but you obviously don't, and that means noone have to care about your whining.
I don't think you understand this theory at all, do you?
You should read it.
Einstein was a pretty good writer, and his examples are still used today.
Go to your library!
Hasn't this been proved already? What's wrong with those older proofs?
You can't prove anything in physics, you can try to disprove something and fail, and thus you may have reason to believe that the theory was correct.
But there is always a posibility that your theory may be disproved later. (Which doesn't mean the theory is rendered useless. Newton's mechanics for example, stood for a very long time, until they were replaced by the theories of relativity. But they are still used, because in most "normal" conditions they work good enought, and the math is easier to work with.)
"magic" values
Like MIME types?
To determin file type by the extension is getting a little old IMHO.
I also wonder why MPEG-4 is ".mp4". ".mp3" isn't for MPEG-3, after all. Flummory!
Obviously they are trying to get MPEG-4 off the ground by riding on the popularity of the widly known ".mp3" file extention.
They are using a familiar "brand name" name, and mp3 is the "Coca Cola" of computers.
Just another marketing trick...
...not supposed to make any sense, just to give people that warm fuzzy feeling inside and get the royalties flowin.
. You want it all, but you don't want to pay, yet you want someone to pay you.
Wouldn't that be an accurate description of the way to success in a capitalist society?
Just look at Bill Gates or Jack Valenti...
Excuse me, but I can't sit idly by when you call "The Rock" a good movie.
It was utter crap. Sorry.
Bad story, reasonably good actors underperforming terribly.
Plus an incredible amount of flag waving (Well, to a non american anyway). That movie could have been so much better, but the director just wasted it all away.
Strange that so many people liked it.
Anyway, good thing he said he wasn't evil, so you didn't have to make up your mind about it yourself. Because that would have been terrible, wouldn't it...
You can't of course
;-)
I've got three letters for you: SVG
No, seriously, you're right of course. The XML-representation of a lossy format like mp3 or jpg for example wouldn't be of much use to anyone.
I am a big fan of XML, but it is no magic bullet. It's well suited for some tasks, less well suited for others and absolutly suck at some.
I just whish XML never had become so much of a buzzword.
How else would you run Linux on it?
duh!
Then, the average web developer is a moron.
The "standards" were so fucked up after the browser war that something had to be done.
I know, I've built webapps for a living for years and ECMAscript (JavaScript) is one of the languages I use daily.
I know it sucks right now, and a lot of work has to be redone. But better now then later! It has to be done, because the rewards are huge! Client side programming for the web will only get better from now on, we're almost through to the other side.
It's a pain in the ass to rewrite all that code. All the more so since many web programmers (IMHO) are'nt very experienced as coders. (Look at the source of random pages on the net. How often do you see good OO or error handling?)
Seems I strayed a bit into web designer bashing here, but my point is, it's really too late to complain.
The changes has been made to help web developers, it took time and pain, but from now on, it's downhill...
. Eventually, Open Source developers will develop only to please themselves. At this point, their products become useless.
Oh, come on... this has always been the case, and I'd argue that it has worked pretty well so far.
Developers scratch their own itch, or just want to show off how good they are.
It's not like you are paying them to code, they do it in their time, for their own reasons, and you are in no position to demand anything. If you want something changed, and they don't feel like helping you, you'll have to help yourself.
Not a perfect system, but so far a pretty sucessfull one.
I stand corrected... ;-)
Guess this shows that people can even make a crappy remakes of their own films
I really liked El Mariachi.
You might be right, but IMHO most American remakes are watered down copies of the original.
Examples are: Desperado (El Mariachi), Point of No Return (Nikita), Nightwatch (Nattevagden) and countless others...
Nolan is a great director however, and I personally believe this will be a good flick. But I can understand that people have a healthy dose of skepticism for Hollywood remakes.
The director probably have to fight tooth and nail to get the qualities that made the original good past the marketing, investors and test audiences...
No, the worst typ of theft is when they use an illegal number.
That's really low!
Why should the public be allowed to use copyrighted or otherwise proprietory numbers?
It's not like numbers should be free, free numbers would DESTROY THE ECONOMY!
Think of the children!
I just don't see the problem.
You can use the system to fight the system, so? It's their right. It just happened that a shitload of people decided it was a good idea and joined in.
The current system says we can put any conditions on the use of our copyrighted material, the FSF did just that.
They in effect created their own system inside the system(due to the "viral" nature of the GNU GPL), like you said, using those same laws they despise.
In my opinion a clever hack, and a means to an end.
Remember, in a world without strong IP laws, the GPL might not be possible, but the need for it would also be greatly reduced.
Sure, there are restrictions, but since they are less severe than the default restrictions, they really don't restrict anything at all.
And, yes, I've read it.
It's existence requires no justification, quit your whining.
Finally, I'd like to see one that mandates all laws pass from the books after 10 years. After that, they'd have to be submitted, voted on, and signed into law again
;-)
All fine and well, until they're asleep on the job and forget to renew the law that, say... outlaws murder
- You break the law three times, and you get life in a federal ***** *** prison.
- But if you warp the law in a criminal way and impose your criminal act on an entire nation, you get no punishment until the third time, and then you only lose your job...
Your idea however, has merit. But I think it would be impossible to implement it in a neutral and tamperproof way.Disclaimer: IMHO the Three Strikes And You're Out principle is barbaric, and a disgrase to any society that implements it.
...still hope you are.
But you make a damn good point.
If this is implemented globally, it might actually hurt oss a lot.
damn!
Actually, it is not the first time the man makes sense.
You may or may not agree with his conclusions.
But if you read what he actually says, he often makes a good point.
No, the GPL doesn't take anything away or place any restrictions not already placed by default by copyright. It just grants the user a degree of freedom they wouldn't otherwise have.
Without it every GPL'ed piece of software would be proprietary by default. Which means that noone could do anything without it without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.
The GPL is just a way to make your work an exempt from IP-law, and make sure it stays that way.
Of course he didn't read the bloody article. /.-ers rush in to tell the world how wrong he is, regardless of what he actually said.
As soon as someone mentions RMS half the
A big fat knee-jerk reaction.
If they took the time to read it in RMS own words they would probably admit that he sometimes makes a lot of sense. (btw. this is a time like that.)
Not even Bill Gates provoke a similar reaction, only Jon Katz.
The only way that these companies have a chance of unseating RedHat is to out-RedHat them.
Like Mandrake is trying to do?
If linux succeds with a license similar to MS Windows or Solaris, then why would I see this as a good thing?
There are already excellent commersial unices out there. The thing that makes Linux stand out as a better choice is the freedom granted by the GPL.
Without that freedom, give me one good reason why I would want linux anymore?
(And don't say that the development method is better, because the cathedral doesn't work without the free source.)
How is winning more users by destroying the thing that makes linux great a good thing?
Let's say a per seat Linux achived market dominance. The situation would be no different then today, one proprietory monopoly replaces another. Another "windows", only *nix based.
No thanks!
IMHO we're better off with a free niche OS, than just another Windows...
Sure, your right, a really short copyright would work even better, and in that case the ability to transfer it wouldn't be a problem.
But it would be an impossible sell right now. Probably no western government could pull this off even if they wanted to.
I hope this will change with time though.