Firefox is taking an ethical stand by not allowing a situation like Unisys / GIFs to happen where you have to get sign contacts and pay license fees to host some video on your sites.
Also Firefox would effectively be closed source if it adopted H.264, just like Chrome is. (Chromium, the open source browser that Chrome is based on, DOES NOT support H.264).
It's worth noting none of those formats where ever pushed as an Internet standard. We still use JPEG/GIF even though there are better formats out there for over a decade. Sometimes being "industry accepted" is more important then being "the best".
What makes you think she will end up paying a dime, even if this judgement stands? The civil court system is not designed to put defendants in debt. The RIAA has a time limit to somehow collect the damages, and that is usually no more then a few years. This is why lawyers tend to sue people who have money to begin with.
Civil lawsuits are NOT designed to create indebtedness. There is a time limit to collect a civil judgment ranging from 4 to 7 years in most states. And you can declare bankruptcy before then. Basically if she doesn't have the money laying around before the verdict, it's unlikely the RIAA will get almost anything.
The maximum amount of time a civil plaintiff has to collect damages is 7 years (shorter if bankruptcy is declared). For government debt, the maximum is 20 years. There is no life indebtedness in the USA.
Or YouTube will continue to use Flash. Not everyone hates Flash.
To use H.264 you must get a license. If Mozilla gets a license it only protects Mozilla from lawsuits, NOT the rest of the Internet. It could lead to a situation like when GIF was patented, where if you had a GIF on your website you could be sued if you didn't pay for some $5000 license. I don't know if some of you are old enough to remember that, but it sucked.
H.264 could lead to a situation like when GIF was patented, where if you had a GIF on your website you could be sued if you didn't pay for some $5000 license. I don't know if some of you are old enough to remember that, but it sucked.
Well to use H.264 you must get a license. If Mozilla gets a license it only protects Mozilla from lawsuits, NOT the rest of the Internet. It could lead to a situation like when GIF was patented, where if you had a GIF on your website you could be sued if you didn't pay for some $5000 license. I don't know if some of you are old enough to remember that, but it sucked.
No, it's a really bad option. Do remember when people got threatened with lawsuits for having GIFs on their website? That might happen with H.264 as well.
That's not true. They just haven't gone after the rest of the Internet yet. H.264 is like a new GIF in the making (remember why PNG was created?). People don't realize how dangerous this can be, it's more then just a ethics thing.
A big business is more liable then a small business, they have more assets to lose, assuming they lose a copyright infringement case. Lawyers like to sue people with money.
Big business historically have been the target of GPL lawsuits.
So I don't buy your theory.
GPL is a probably the best open source license for distributing software you actually want to make money from. What you do is charge a fee for people who don't agree to the GPL terms. With BSD, it's not quite as easy to do this. Notice some of the most profitable open source products (eg: SugarCRM, and MySQL) are GPL.
Well lets take this a little deeper. Microsoft was convicted of illegal activity based on the deals they did with OEMs. It's a valid compliant, when you consider the popular choice is probably popular because of criminal activity.
The fact is not EVERYONE needs Office, but some people do. Which baffles me why a corporation wouldn't consider deploying OOo to everyone, and give MS Office to the people who depend on weird MS Office features. This way you save the most money while not slowing your business process!
I definitely think stuff like Turing machines and abstract computer science should be thought at the middle school level as part of science courses. In fact I recently gave a presentation to a bunch of undergraduate MATHEMATICS students and not a single one know who Alan Turing even was.
Article I clearly states some of the federal government's purposes "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States". So where is my universal healthcare again?
The free software community needs someone like Stallman. I mean seeing from all the comments on Slashdot it seems very few people actually care about open source and free software. It's sad, because they like open source/free software for it's features but they don't understand the ideology which enabled this software to exist in the first place.
I've said this before about ATI: When you get a bunch of angry people together and complain about a product, you typically get the results you want.
No company wants to look bad, even to a minority of people. Because it often only takes a minority of people to completely trash a companies reputation, especially in such a competitive market like motherboards.
So if you know of any other manufacturers who have poor Linux support, don't be scared to send them a letter about it and to tell other people who use Linux about your problems with the manufacturer. You might end up afflicting positive change in the long run.
Actually with X11 DRI, most of the heavy lifting is done in kernel space anyways. X11 basically gives you the advantages true network transparency and performance in one. It's really an excellent and well thought out windowing system, arguably better then OS X Aqua or Windows. Not saying it's perfect, but most idea "inspirations" would actually be regressions.
There is some evidence of this in the leaked Windows 2000 source code: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/15/71552/7795
Microsoft seems to put hacks in their kernel to allow certain programs to function instead of the other way around.
Slashdot Mirror
Firefox is taking an ethical stand by not allowing a situation like Unisys / GIFs to happen where you have to get sign contacts and pay license fees to host some video on your sites. Also Firefox would effectively be closed source if it adopted H.264, just like Chrome is. (Chromium, the open source browser that Chrome is based on, DOES NOT support H.264).
It's worth noting none of those formats where ever pushed as an Internet standard. We still use JPEG/GIF even though there are better formats out there for over a decade. Sometimes being "industry accepted" is more important then being "the best".
What makes you think she will end up paying a dime, even if this judgement stands? The civil court system is not designed to put defendants in debt. The RIAA has a time limit to somehow collect the damages, and that is usually no more then a few years. This is why lawyers tend to sue people who have money to begin with.
Civil lawsuits are NOT designed to create indebtedness. There is a time limit to collect a civil judgment ranging from 4 to 7 years in most states. And you can declare bankruptcy before then. Basically if she doesn't have the money laying around before the verdict, it's unlikely the RIAA will get almost anything.
The maximum amount of time a civil plaintiff has to collect damages is 7 years (shorter if bankruptcy is declared). For government debt, the maximum is 20 years. There is no life indebtedness in the USA.
I said "threatened with lawsuits". H.264 is a patented format with participation fees that websites who use H.264 are expected to pay.
Or YouTube will continue to use Flash. Not everyone hates Flash. To use H.264 you must get a license. If Mozilla gets a license it only protects Mozilla from lawsuits, NOT the rest of the Internet. It could lead to a situation like when GIF was patented, where if you had a GIF on your website you could be sued if you didn't pay for some $5000 license. I don't know if some of you are old enough to remember that, but it sucked.
H.264 could lead to a situation like when GIF was patented, where if you had a GIF on your website you could be sued if you didn't pay for some $5000 license. I don't know if some of you are old enough to remember that, but it sucked.
Well to use H.264 you must get a license. If Mozilla gets a license it only protects Mozilla from lawsuits, NOT the rest of the Internet. It could lead to a situation like when GIF was patented, where if you had a GIF on your website you could be sued if you didn't pay for some $5000 license. I don't know if some of you are old enough to remember that, but it sucked.
No, it's a really bad option. Do remember when people got threatened with lawsuits for having GIFs on their website? That might happen with H.264 as well.
That's not true. They just haven't gone after the rest of the Internet yet. H.264 is like a new GIF in the making (remember why PNG was created?). People don't realize how dangerous this can be, it's more then just a ethics thing.
You must be talking of an older version of Bind. Bind9 can use a wide variety of database backends. It's also a complete rewrite.
A big business is more liable then a small business, they have more assets to lose, assuming they lose a copyright infringement case. Lawyers like to sue people with money.
Big business historically have been the target of GPL lawsuits.
So I don't buy your theory.
GPL is a probably the best open source license for distributing software you actually want to make money from. What you do is charge a fee for people who don't agree to the GPL terms. With BSD, it's not quite as easy to do this. Notice some of the most profitable open source products (eg: SugarCRM, and MySQL) are GPL.
Well lets take this a little deeper. Microsoft was convicted of illegal activity based on the deals they did with OEMs. It's a valid compliant, when you consider the popular choice is probably popular because of criminal activity.
Where is this evidence you speak of?
I am interested in your seeing sources about msvc performance advantages over gcc. Where did you get this information from?
The fact is not EVERYONE needs Office, but some people do. Which baffles me why a corporation wouldn't consider deploying OOo to everyone, and give MS Office to the people who depend on weird MS Office features. This way you save the most money while not slowing your business process!
I definitely think stuff like Turing machines and abstract computer science should be thought at the middle school level as part of science courses. In fact I recently gave a presentation to a bunch of undergraduate MATHEMATICS students and not a single one know who Alan Turing even was.
Article I clearly states some of the federal government's purposes "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States". So where is my universal healthcare again?
Not a lot of the population. And really that's a problem, not something to be happy about.
The free software community needs someone like Stallman. I mean seeing from all the comments on Slashdot it seems very few people actually care about open source and free software. It's sad, because they like open source/free software for it's features but they don't understand the ideology which enabled this software to exist in the first place.
This is like the third "suddenbreakoutofcommonsense" today. Is this a sign of things to come? Is the world actually getting better?
I've said this before about ATI: When you get a bunch of angry people together and complain about a product, you typically get the results you want.
No company wants to look bad, even to a minority of people. Because it often only takes a minority of people to completely trash a companies reputation, especially in such a competitive market like motherboards.
So if you know of any other manufacturers who have poor Linux support, don't be scared to send them a letter about it and to tell other people who use Linux about your problems with the manufacturer. You might end up afflicting positive change in the long run.
Actually with X11 DRI, most of the heavy lifting is done in kernel space anyways. X11 basically gives you the advantages true network transparency and performance in one. It's really an excellent and well thought out windowing system, arguably better then OS X Aqua or Windows. Not saying it's perfect, but most idea "inspirations" would actually be regressions.
There is some evidence of this in the leaked Windows 2000 source code: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/15/71552/7795 Microsoft seems to put hacks in their kernel to allow certain programs to function instead of the other way around.