Low percentage of Christians using Internet filtering shows ignorance of the dangers." They claim that "Seven out of 10 Christians have Internet access
Strikes me as sickeningly ethnocentric and undemocratic. A democracy shouldn't be making public policy based on what a certain demographic of its citizens want. Their point wouldn't be any less effective or relevant if they had statistics on parents -- not just "Christian" parents. This is the kind of thing you hear in the middle east from islahm. fundamentalists. Now I'm not saying that I'm surprised by this or even really worried (yet), but it does strike me as non-democratic thinking.
If you don't have some sort of management and organization system, then the project is pretty much doomed to failure.
Here's a key difference though. I think from my own experience that programmers often eventually develop a certain sense of style in areas they enjoy and do a lot in. If you look through the Linux source code, and try to match up who did what, you'll see some evidence of that. The ideal in project management is to match who does what well with project tasks. In such a young industry, schools that train for project management do -- frankly, a lousy job of matching that up. Furthermore, a project manager might say in Linux's case that one side of the project is done enough, and say "Alen Cox should work on the GGI team now" -- that kind of switchover can really hamper a project.
With Open Source, it's self adjusting. When you see code, you can get a feel for how you could improvement. In that respect, it does manage itself. The reason that doesn't work well in a corporate environment is that corporations don't work well with a random flow of people wandering around looking at code they think they could improve. Can you tell a client "Well, we might improve that if one of our employees has an itch to improve it." Hence, commercial (free or otherwise) software development and bazaar (which would have to be free) development do have trade-offs.
Short story: in the free bazaar world, project leaders merge code, which is a form of management (very technical management). In the commercial world, project managers map people with tasks.
It's really no surprise. As standards merge more of their styles of doing things (LSB slowly developing), it's easier to switch from one to another. Also, Red Hat has for a long time held the title of being the best for newbies, and with all the other distributions catching up and passing it up in that category, you gotta figure.
Finally, I might note that Corel had really bad timing. It is good in theory and is nice to see Debian-based Linux distros. If only they were to wait for Potato and base it off that. (Actually, I'm typing from a Corel Linux box right now -- it's pretty slick on a work network with Windows'ish stuff flying around allover. Comes shipped with Acrobat, Netsc(r)ape and a slick little Samba browser)
It's not as if American Express won't keep very detailed accounting on your spending habbits. Look at it this way. With a static credit card number, the IRS has a query like this (SQL):
select sum(amount) from debits where account_number =;
to...
selet sum(amount) from debits where name =
hehehe... What I'm saying is that credit card companies have great accounting departments that will be so bored, they'll jump at the chance to draw on their amazing skill to tell the IRS every single purchase you make.:) It was a nice thought though. (BTW, offshore accouts are only illegal to people who don't pay off politicans)
The problem is that they are incompatible with RMS, not GPL. I've read the new license and GPL, and no one in their right mind would think them incompatible. Python's license is more free than GPL, and therefor compatible. Debian just needs to say "RMS is great, but we don't have to worship him" and call itself Debian Linux (not Debian GNU/Linux) and include Python for crying out loud.
It's this kind of stupidity that is holding back free software, not promoting it. Python is free, GPL is free. Get over it.
Below, I refer to Java and Python together. Why? They are very similar in the way they think of classes, objects, and complex datatypes in general.
Objective C is as close as you're going to get. There are always trade-offs: C++ is probably the fastest object oriented language out there (unless you plan to use typedefs a whole lot in C). C++ is also the most restricting object oriented language I can think of. Why? Several reasons, usually relating to C++ wanting to be more efficient. Example: Unlike Python and Java, C++ does not have a sense of a "class type" -- a class only exists at a source code level -- at runtime, it fails to exist. Unlike Java and Python, you can't pass a class as an object or look at it in runtime.
Objective C is a more of a mix. It doesn't have the slickness of automatic references or the safety of Java/Python, but it isn't as irrational and preprocessor dependant as C++. It's all in trade-offs, but I think Objective C might have the right set of trade-offs you want.
In relation Python? Python's another set of trade-offs: nice since of classes/objects, reasonably efficient for many purposes, a clean syntax, and slick string processing. It's the best of all languages, or depending on your point of view, the worst.:)
What it comes down to is that some people think GPL too restrictive. Python, for example, can be included in proprietary software, similarly to BSD but does have some restrictions BSD doesn't. What I don't understand is why this is suddenly getting all this press? The Python 1.5 license had similar GPL compatibility problems and it didn't stop anyone from using it. Python, is most certainly, free software.
That's probably re reflection of the Internet itself. Google, remember is a popularity contest of references. If you come across a broken link in the early search results, Google probably isn't the only one. Simply put, the popular sites are also the dynamic ones and therefor break links on frequent reorganizations.
Hm. probably not. Anyway, IMHO:
the only real problem is that Google, also, continues to point to non-existent web pages.
Here's what I emailed to the author of the article:
The interesting thing about this is, I'm a KDE user. Your imflamitory
comments make me want to be otherwise.
Your article on Linux Planet was beyond the hypocracy of Microsoft. You
slander Gnome for being commercially backed while silently relying on
TrollTech for your most basic component. Talk about Gnome's leaders
flaming KDE in one long flame of your own, which is far worse than
anything Miguel ever said.
The Gnome Foundation is so terrible because it has corporate backing? That
will somehow corrupt the code, the same way Red Hat corrupts Linux, I
suppose! I would prefer the Gnome Foundation being backed by corporations
than the QT Foundation to plea with corporations not to cut a widget
library loose.
Finally, your biggest LIE is that Gnome was bad to kill KDE. It was made
to be a free alternative. Linux, I suppose was made to kill Unix? Nothing
more? When Unix dies, I'm sure that Linus (who is a "king" --- ooooo) will
stop development.
The extent to which you are full of crap is an ambarasment to the entire
Linux community.
Indeed. It's interesting that usually it's the users, not the developers who are the ones doing the slamming. Developers can't afford to just critisize projects, they are more interested in bringing the ideas they like over. As evidence: the KDE 2.0 panel is a hell of a lot like the Gnome 1.0 panel.
This editorial is a different case indeed. I've never heard a developer call corporate backing "prostitution" before. Say what you will, but I think being paid to write free software is a hell of a lot better than being paid to write proprietary software at work, then coming home to write free software. Tell me: which one was selling out again?
It's always been hard to get good notebooks running a quality operating system. Even if you manage that, they still have the tiny amount of mousebuttons. Perhaps this notebook will run Linux? If so, all you weeenies who critisized Linus for working at Transmeta and signing NDA's should be feeling pretty silly if he managed to bring Linux on to Sony notebooks!;)
What you seem to be missing is that censorware isn't just about filtering "bad" content. It's not what keywords they filter -- that happen to include breast cancer, it's filtering at all. My objection is not with that these programs filter, it's the fact that they filter. Examples that include none-pornographic topics are to show that they aren't all that they're cracked up to be -- but even if they were, they'd be wrong.
And Pepsi is communist because all bottles are the same. No extra sugar or less caffeine. You're likening license agreements to libertarianism? Oh please.
While we are at it: GPL doesn't force you to release YOUR source code it forces you to release OTHERS source code that you modified.
There needs to be something similar for Linux. Although companies that ship Linux have the sense of decency not to inforce spyware, times are changing. With more corporate involvement in Linux, it's just a matter of time before the marketing departments of Corel and Compaq will want to collect data. Are we going to hide behind Linux and claim that it makes us immune to privacy invasion? Free software is by definition worm free? When's the last time you looked at the source of every package in your distro -- or even have to source to every package in your distro. Unless you're on Debian w/ 100% free, you might not!
Exactly. Free software is about civil liberties. Open Source is about a business practice that agrees with civil liberties. While a free software purist will speak of freedom, and open source suit will speak of the usual business tactics in conjunction with free software.
This isn't at all a new conflict. For years, there have been businessmen who follow politics and say whatever is politicaly favorable is good business. This century, the smart companies have realized that hiring ethnic minorities to dealing with labor unions is good business. There have of course been the others, who say it isn't. Ultimately, whether a practice is good business or not, it's good business to be in popular favor. So companies like Nike give to charities while quietly recruiting six year olds in asia. Conversely, companies like Corel publicly endorce Open Source but are nearly in violation of GPL!
In this case, companies feel it is of commercial risk for them to give programmers' their freedom, just as Nike might see it as unprofitable to give a six year old worker a fifteen minute break.
Put simply, anyone vested in Microsoft wants to see the status quo continue. Of course. The court, I assure you, is aware of this. I beleive that in the assumption that Microsoft-OS will want to team up and share trade secrets with Microsoft-APP, the court is forcing Microsoft-OS to reveal its API to everyone, not just Microsoft-APP.
The Offspring's sales is interesting. In the opinions of many, Offspring is a good band, and certainly their record company is enjoying their record sales. For those of us who think that record companies leach both the artists and the fans, this is an interesting update. Should Offspring's record company go after Napster or Offspring for supporting Napster, it would be a good example of record companies acting against, not on behalf of, their artists.
If you want client-side Python, take a look at Grail, a prototype web browser written in Python. It's not very fast, but does have Python client-side applets similar to client-side Java applets. It uses Python's restricted execution module to give the effect of the "sandbox."
I suggest taking a look at this program. Although its features don't make it a world-class browser (slow, older HTML support), it does have some interesting ideas and the program is built with a very solid object model!
Oh, and um... just to troll: I'd like to see a browser in Perl! blah lol... actually, I think there is one.;)
The need/want for an IDE isn't upon thousands of lines of code -- I assure you vi can scale to large files. Emacs too. The Linux kernel, I'm sure, is programmed mostly in vi/m and x/emacs. The point behind an IDE is to integrate the helpsystem, compiler and text editor. None of these components are any less useful when independant.
Now, if you're talking about a GUI prototyper, it's something totally different. From what I've read, this seems as much to be a GUI prototyper as anything else.
I would like to know what the likely technical reasons are. Lately, we've seen a lot of video cards dealing with heat issues.
Interestingly enough, this coorisponds pretty closely with rumors of Nintendo delaying Dolphin (their new game system). Although they are not confirmed, it could be that Nintendo and 3dfx are facing similar technical challanges that they are running to kinks with. Hrm.
We can take care of these problems ourselves. There is no need to have the US government police our networks in this manner.
It's easy to get carried away in this kind of regulation indeed, but consider things for a moment. What about only banning forged email? Don't I atleast have the right to contact who is spamming me? Outlawing the worst-case SPAM cases isn't going to cost you very much liberty.
The idea behind freedom and liberty is doing what you want, so long as it doesn't hurt others. Email SPAM, like the now illegal FAX SPAM, does cost the collectors money. It's only fair that those damages be collected on, and it might be a good idea to encourage the process by offering a reward.
It boils down to using a traditional and effective compensation method (bounty) on an act that infringes on others' rights. What great freedom of yours is being lost?
There are some conflicts of interest and problems with this otherwise good idea:
What about spammers outside US jurisdiction? They often can't be collected from, so who pays the spam-hunter bounty? The US tax payer? I'm paying for SPAM enough as it is in my ISP bill.
If spammers can't be collected from, a bounty hunter could hire them to spam and give them evidence of it, and split the bounty, again picked up on by the tax payers.
Personally, seeing spammers being hosed is reason enough for me to fight them.:-)
It's nice to see that patents are being protected from being used against freedom, but when used in this manner, they are being used to reduce freedom. Openning them up only to free software, much less GPL, infringes on the rights of others. Think about this. I can't even write a public domain program that infringes on these patents? That's bad.
The point of free software is freedom, to promote and incourage innovation, and to respect the rights of the user. Enforced patents, in anyone's hands, work against that very basic concept of freedom. The gesture is nice, but it stands against free software. In the interests of freedom and fairness, open up the patents to all Licenses!
Slashdot Mirror
The other questions probably regard to threaded TCP stacks, software emulation, and POSIX compliance -- but I'd rather talk about something lilo.
- Low percentage of Christians using Internet filtering shows ignorance of the dangers." They claim that "Seven out of 10 Christians have Internet access
Strikes me as sickeningly ethnocentric and undemocratic. A democracy shouldn't be making public policy based on what a certain demographic of its citizens want. Their point wouldn't be any less effective or relevant if they had statistics on parents -- not just "Christian" parents. This is the kind of thing you hear in the middle east from islahm. fundamentalists. Now I'm not saying that I'm surprised by this or even really worried (yet), but it does strike me as non-democratic thinking.-2 cents
-
If you don't have some sort of management and organization system, then the project is pretty much doomed to failure.
Here's a key difference though. I think from my own experience that programmers often eventually develop a certain sense of style in areas they enjoy and do a lot in. If you look through the Linux source code, and try to match up who did what, you'll see some evidence of that. The ideal in project management is to match who does what well with project tasks. In such a young industry, schools that train for project management do -- frankly, a lousy job of matching that up. Furthermore, a project manager might say in Linux's case that one side of the project is done enough, and say "Alen Cox should work on the GGI team now" -- that kind of switchover can really hamper a project.With Open Source, it's self adjusting. When you see code, you can get a feel for how you could improvement. In that respect, it does manage itself. The reason that doesn't work well in a corporate environment is that corporations don't work well with a random flow of people wandering around looking at code they think they could improve. Can you tell a client "Well, we might improve that if one of our employees has an itch to improve it." Hence, commercial (free or otherwise) software development and bazaar (which would have to be free) development do have trade-offs.
Short story: in the free bazaar world, project leaders merge code, which is a form of management (very technical management). In the commercial world, project managers map people with tasks.
Solaris is availible for i386. Linux for Sparc. What a day to be alive!
Finally, I might note that Corel had really bad timing. It is good in theory and is nice to see Debian-based Linux distros. If only they were to wait for Potato and base it off that. (Actually, I'm typing from a Corel Linux box right now -- it's pretty slick on a work network with Windows'ish stuff flying around allover. Comes shipped with Acrobat, Netsc(r)ape and a slick little Samba browser)
select sum(amount) from debits where account_number = ;
to...
selet sum(amount) from debits where name =
hehehe... What I'm saying is that credit card companies have great accounting departments that will be so bored, they'll jump at the chance to draw on their amazing skill to tell the IRS every single purchase you make. :) It was a nice thought though. (BTW, offshore accouts are only illegal to people who don't pay off politicans)
It's this kind of stupidity that is holding back free software, not promoting it. Python is free, GPL is free. Get over it.
Objective C is as close as you're going to get. There are always trade-offs: C++ is probably the fastest object oriented language out there (unless you plan to use typedefs a whole lot in C). C++ is also the most restricting object oriented language I can think of. Why? Several reasons, usually relating to C++ wanting to be more efficient. Example: Unlike Python and Java, C++ does not have a sense of a "class type" -- a class only exists at a source code level -- at runtime, it fails to exist. Unlike Java and Python, you can't pass a class as an object or look at it in runtime.
Objective C is a more of a mix. It doesn't have the slickness of automatic references or the safety of Java/Python, but it isn't as irrational and preprocessor dependant as C++. It's all in trade-offs, but I think Objective C might have the right set of trade-offs you want.
In relation Python? Python's another set of trade-offs: nice since of classes/objects, reasonably efficient for many purposes, a clean syntax, and slick string processing. It's the best of all languages, or depending on your point of view, the worst. :)
What it comes down to is that some people think GPL too restrictive. Python, for example, can be included in proprietary software, similarly to BSD but does have some restrictions BSD doesn't. What I don't understand is why this is suddenly getting all this press? The Python 1.5 license had similar GPL compatibility problems and it didn't stop anyone from using it. Python, is most certainly, free software.
Hm. probably not. Anyway, IMHO:
- the only real problem is that Google, also, continues to point to non-existent web pages.
s/Google/all search engines/gThe interesting thing about this is, I'm a KDE user. Your imflamitory comments make me want to be otherwise.
Your article on Linux Planet was beyond the hypocracy of Microsoft. You slander Gnome for being commercially backed while silently relying on TrollTech for your most basic component. Talk about Gnome's leaders flaming KDE in one long flame of your own, which is far worse than anything Miguel ever said.The Gnome Foundation is so terrible because it has corporate backing? That will somehow corrupt the code, the same way Red Hat corrupts Linux, I suppose! I would prefer the Gnome Foundation being backed by corporations than the QT Foundation to plea with corporations not to cut a widget library loose.
Finally, your biggest LIE is that Gnome was bad to kill KDE. It was made to be a free alternative. Linux, I suppose was made to kill Unix? Nothing more? When Unix dies, I'm sure that Linus (who is a "king" --- ooooo) will stop development.
The extent to which you are full of crap is an ambarasment to the entire Linux community.
This editorial is a different case indeed. I've never heard a developer call corporate backing "prostitution" before. Say what you will, but I think being paid to write free software is a hell of a lot better than being paid to write proprietary software at work, then coming home to write free software. Tell me: which one was selling out again?
Just speculation...
Don't write it.
And Pepsi is communist because all bottles are the same. No extra sugar or less caffeine. You're likening license agreements to libertarianism? Oh please.
While we are at it: GPL doesn't force you to release YOUR source code it forces you to release OTHERS source code that you modified.
There needs to be something similar for Linux. Although companies that ship Linux have the sense of decency not to inforce spyware, times are changing. With more corporate involvement in Linux, it's just a matter of time before the marketing departments of Corel and Compaq will want to collect data. Are we going to hide behind Linux and claim that it makes us immune to privacy invasion? Free software is by definition worm free? When's the last time you looked at the source of every package in your distro -- or even have to source to every package in your distro. Unless you're on Debian w/ 100% free, you might not!
This isn't at all a new conflict. For years, there have been businessmen who follow politics and say whatever is politicaly favorable is good business. This century, the smart companies have realized that hiring ethnic minorities to dealing with labor unions is good business. There have of course been the others, who say it isn't. Ultimately, whether a practice is good business or not, it's good business to be in popular favor. So companies like Nike give to charities while quietly recruiting six year olds in asia. Conversely, companies like Corel publicly endorce Open Source but are nearly in violation of GPL!
In this case, companies feel it is of commercial risk for them to give programmers' their freedom, just as Nike might see it as unprofitable to give a six year old worker a fifteen minute break.
Put simply, anyone vested in Microsoft wants to see the status quo continue. Of course. The court, I assure you, is aware of this. I beleive that in the assumption that Microsoft-OS will want to team up and share trade secrets with Microsoft-APP, the court is forcing Microsoft-OS to reveal its API to everyone, not just Microsoft-APP.
The Offspring's sales is interesting. In the opinions of many, Offspring is a good band, and certainly their record company is enjoying their record sales. For those of us who think that record companies leach both the artists and the fans, this is an interesting update. Should Offspring's record company go after Napster or Offspring for supporting Napster, it would be a good example of record companies acting against, not on behalf of, their artists.
I suggest taking a look at this program. Although its features don't make it a world-class browser (slow, older HTML support), it does have some interesting ideas and the program is built with a very solid object model!
Oh, and um... just to troll: I'd like to see a browser in Perl! blah lol... actually, I think there is one. ;)
Now, if you're talking about a GUI prototyper, it's something totally different. From what I've read, this seems as much to be a GUI prototyper as anything else.
Interestingly enough, this coorisponds pretty closely with rumors of Nintendo delaying Dolphin (their new game system). Although they are not confirmed, it could be that Nintendo and 3dfx are facing similar technical challanges that they are running to kinks with. Hrm.
Just speculation...
- We can take care of these problems ourselves. There is no need to have the US government police our networks in this manner.
It's easy to get carried away in this kind of regulation indeed, but consider things for a moment. What about only banning forged email? Don't I atleast have the right to contact who is spamming me? Outlawing the worst-case SPAM cases isn't going to cost you very much liberty.The idea behind freedom and liberty is doing what you want, so long as it doesn't hurt others. Email SPAM, like the now illegal FAX SPAM, does cost the collectors money. It's only fair that those damages be collected on, and it might be a good idea to encourage the process by offering a reward.
It boils down to using a traditional and effective compensation method (bounty) on an act that infringes on others' rights. What great freedom of yours is being lost?
- What about spammers outside US jurisdiction? They often can't be collected from, so who pays the spam-hunter bounty? The US tax payer? I'm paying for SPAM enough as it is in my ISP bill.
- If spammers can't be collected from, a bounty hunter could hire them to spam and give them evidence of it, and split the bounty, again picked up on by the tax payers.
Personally, seeing spammers being hosed is reason enough for me to fight them.The point of free software is freedom, to promote and incourage innovation, and to respect the rights of the user. Enforced patents, in anyone's hands, work against that very basic concept of freedom. The gesture is nice, but it stands against free software. In the interests of freedom and fairness, open up the patents to all Licenses!