Yes, but I have never in the 20 years I have been writing code found a goto that I could not eliminate. I even eliminated the gotos that were in the original GCC compilers when I ported them to the AMD 29000 when I worked for a company that used them as a co-processor in the MAC II. And I re-wrote the Base 'C' libraries for that Processor based on code we purchased from somewhere. There is never a good reason to use a goto.
I've written code for device drivers and I've even written a quickie OS for an embeded application and I have never used a goto in my C code.
Ignorance of one form and stupidity of another. These guys do evil, they are not inherently evil. Enron was actively evil and many but not all of those guys are being punished, grant you not what I would like but they are.
"I own the copyright to that music, I grant you a license to listen to it and do anything with it you wish as long as you don't give it away or try to sell it". Pretty standard license and actually I think encapsulated in the copyright law itself.
This seems pretty clear to me. The copyright law also says that you must be granted rights explicitly rather than assuming them. If that also applies to advertising my goods then the location of the ones that I am giving away for free for certain purposes (usually promotional to a specific group) is mine to distribute as well.
In order for them to be released to the public domain EMI et al would have to NOT defend the rights to them. I think they also have to explicitly declare them to be public domain but that's a bit fuzzy I think.
Now with physical goods things are a bit different.
In order to properly use your car analogy it would have to be like this.
I have a thingy that makes cars that are here for a short time and then they are gone into the ether. I grant you the use of it to look at the pretty cars it produces. I also don't grant you the right to make copies of this thing and give those away. I don't grant you the right to figure out how to make the cars real and give them away, only I have the right to do that.
Its a bad analogy but I think it applies.
"You can indeed follow a URL link to the actual file and not be presented a EULA or license"
And no simply because it is available on a particular URL for download it is NOT free of licensing nor do you even have permission to download it. If that were true then "making available" would indeed be equivalent to "distributing" and there goes that argument you guys so carefully tried to defend.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
From my point of view this guy's law suit is about him trying to grab shit he don't own and then saying, well you gave it away why can't I.
And they say well you don't have the right to do that.
Define unfair.
Look Mr. Monopolies are unfair, If I invent some new fangled widget and I'm the only one that knows how to make them, I have a monopoly. As long as I can have it I'm going to take steps to keep it. Like copyrighting and patenting and I will actively pursue any legal means to keep that monopoly as long as I possibly can. It's not until I step over the line and begin acting in an illegal manner that my monopoly becomes a bad thing. Incidentally you need to go read the anti-monopoly laws again, they are neither highly limited nor strictly regulated. Commerce itself has regulations as does advertising and there are fraud regulations these are the factors that regulate the monopolies
I am so tired of this whiny bullshit attitude that says that every monopoly is a bad thing just because it is a monopoly.
Who or what is abusing their power. Who is in collusion, and with whom. When does collective bargaining become extortion and vice versa. Who has done the price fixing.
Yes some of those things are truly illegal and if you can convict any one of them (as in the case of Enron) it is a good thing. You still have not negated the fact that as a business I want a monopoly.
I fail to see how enforcing your copyrights amounts to unfair trade practice nor does it amount to "Monopolistic practices". Monopolistic practices are NOT illegal or inherently unfair. In a capitalist society like ours a monopoly is the ideal business situation to find yourself in.
I also doubt that they deliberately "seeded" files to p2p systems, they would have no need. There are enough people that don't want to pay and/or don't understand the law that they only have to look to find these. Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance.
As far as the RIAA goes, they have indeed engaged in some questionable and downright underhanded legal tactics to prosecute their law suits but that hardly amounts to unfair trade practices.
I just stopped driving in Oregon. I'll go around thanks. Don't buy your new car there either cause it'll cost you an extra 200 bucks for that fancy (read crappy) GPS unit they will require. I won't drive through the state, I won't drive in the state I won't live in the state.
I used to be a line supervisor for a company that built these things. Light travels a long distance in glass fiber and we would ping a 3 nanosecond pulse down the fiber and watch the reflections come back from the broken end of the fiber. When I left the company they were building a new one that used a 6 femtosecond pulse. You could find the break within a millimeter.
I don't understand the fanatically rabid reaction to closed technology. It makes loads of money and last time I checked that was the only test of a successful strategy in the business world.
Sarcasm mode on. I suppose that being open source makes it politically correct in this environment but jeez guys lighten up!
I won't say that it is fake because it's very easy to generalize about the composition of a chair of a certain shape. Make that shape out of metal and you will fool the robot, however that's a long way to go to fool a stupid robot!
The problem being even if DRM does not affect pirates you MUST have a strong anti-piracy message along with the anti-DRM message. The parent is right in nearly every point. Most of the anti-DRM people come across as whiners who didn't get their way and are complaining about it.
In order to appear as an adult movement the complaining and whining must stop and alternate solutions to the problem that DRM tries to solve must be proposed. A dialog is always a better way to solve problems than throwing a tantrum and a tantrum is what the anti-DRM movement looks like to me.
You are in a very small minority that refuses to buy anything DRMed. The rest of us buy it and deal with it. It has occasionally been a problem for me but not a huge one and I can get around it reasonably well anyway.
I'd rather not have to deal with it but until an adult movement appears to solve the problems rather than simply complaining about them I will deal with it.
What is an "RPM" "Distro"? What does this mean "I need a.deb packaged for my Distro."
you completely supported my point while trying to tell me I had no point.
Come again and tell me how I have to worry about which "Distro" of Mac OS X? or which "Distro" of "XP"? You still just don't get it!
I wonder when the Linux community will realize that Linux really doesn't apply. There are really about two dozen different operating systems with Linux and Distro attached all competing with each other.
They also have the desktop manager problem to solve.
When the "Linux" installer just installs the OS and when I can download any executable that says "Linux" and install it without having to track down 3 or 4 other distros libraries or even 3 or 4 other open source projects worth of dependencies. Then and only then will Linux start to be a viable desktop platform.
I have the same pet peeve with open source project software that requires me to find and install other open source libraries or projects before they will run. It's annoying and a waste of my time. So, with all of you guys screaming that closed source software is so bad, at least its self contained and it just installs.
Not only is the iPhone a status symbol, it's an incredibly useful device. I've had several other smart phones and I never used half the features that were in them because either it cost me a dime very time I did or it was simply too difficult to use.
The people I see here complaining about it being closed and how evil Apple is for not making it open source still don't get it. Apple controls the hardware, the software and the channels in which it is sold. This is a good thing for quality control, price control and their margins. Apple makes money, tons of money and they aren't going to start changing a successful strategy.
Grow up people, Apple is a mature company with a good thing going, they aren't here for your amusement. You don't have a right to everything for free. And you certainly don't have the business acumen to do it yourself or you wouldn't be here complaining about the evils of Apple, Microsoft, pick the evil closed company of the week etc. you'd be out making your own fortune.
Open source business plans to date have been a resounding failure with one or two exceptions. Don't believe me, look it up.
If the Psystar counter claim had succeeded it would have put quite a lot of pressure on quite a number of companies. Imagine that you could no longer make printer cartridges that only work in your printer. Or that the cartridges that hold the twine in your weedwacker had to be universal or you could be sued.
The implications of making one part of a system proprietary would go right out the window and many companies would be at a serious disadvantage. That few people understand the nature of a monopoly is obvious. It's even more obvious that they understand the law even less.
It has never been illegal to have a monopoly, it is only illegal when you have such a monopoly that you can merely threaten your competition out of business. Or by withholding your product from people that deal with competitors and thereby seriously impact the entry to the market.
Having a monopoly however brief is the be all and end all of all capitalistic entities not matter who they are. Cheating to keep that monopoly is where companies like MS run afoul of the law. While AT&T was merely so large that they could keep anyone from competing.
Well I've been given the title by managers and CEOs of the companies I have worked for. I have survived for at least 25 years with the working title of "Engineer". I have a patent so at least I can claim inventor as well. So Mr. Asshat you may shut the *$%@ up.
But I admit in Canada I cannot claim to be an "Engineer". I do not have the Iron Ring nor the education required to have that title.
Wow I'm glad my teachers in the classes I did take payed attention to trivialities. I'm glad I payed attention to trivialities when I taught Programming classes.
And I do mean GOOD! I don't have a degree but I worked my way into the position from electronics tech up to test engineer then to software engineer. I have never really been formally an IT person but I work in IT as a systems analyst and developer and often as the only DBA and developer. I mostly work for small start up companies but even then I have 30 years of experience behind me and I still struggle to prove I have the skills to do the job. My advice is get at least an AA and all the certificates you can get. But a BA/BS will open more doors. As an enthusiast you haven't a prayer.
Slashdot Mirror
Like a track team or a bunch of swimmers?
Yes, but I have never in the 20 years I have been writing code found a goto that I could not eliminate. I even eliminated the gotos that were in the original GCC compilers when I ported them to the AMD 29000 when I worked for a company that used them as a co-processor in the MAC II. And I re-wrote the Base 'C' libraries for that Processor based on code we purchased from somewhere. There is never a good reason to use a goto. I've written code for device drivers and I've even written a quickie OS for an embeded application and I have never used a goto in my C code.
Ignorance of one form and stupidity of another. These guys do evil, they are not inherently evil. Enron was actively evil and many but not all of those guys are being punished, grant you not what I would like but they are.
"I own the copyright to that music, I grant you a license to listen to it and do anything with it you wish as long as you don't give it away or try to sell it". Pretty standard license and actually I think encapsulated in the copyright law itself. This seems pretty clear to me. The copyright law also says that you must be granted rights explicitly rather than assuming them. If that also applies to advertising my goods then the location of the ones that I am giving away for free for certain purposes (usually promotional to a specific group) is mine to distribute as well. In order for them to be released to the public domain EMI et al would have to NOT defend the rights to them. I think they also have to explicitly declare them to be public domain but that's a bit fuzzy I think. Now with physical goods things are a bit different. In order to properly use your car analogy it would have to be like this. I have a thingy that makes cars that are here for a short time and then they are gone into the ether. I grant you the use of it to look at the pretty cars it produces. I also don't grant you the right to make copies of this thing and give those away. I don't grant you the right to figure out how to make the cars real and give them away, only I have the right to do that. Its a bad analogy but I think it applies. "You can indeed follow a URL link to the actual file and not be presented a EULA or license" And no simply because it is available on a particular URL for download it is NOT free of licensing nor do you even have permission to download it. If that were true then "making available" would indeed be equivalent to "distributing" and there goes that argument you guys so carefully tried to defend. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
From my point of view this guy's law suit is about him trying to grab shit he don't own and then saying, well you gave it away why can't I.
And they say well you don't have the right to do that.
Define unfair.
Look Mr. Monopolies are unfair, If I invent some new fangled widget and I'm the only one that knows how to make them, I have a monopoly. As long as I can have it I'm going to take steps to keep it. Like copyrighting and patenting and I will actively pursue any legal means to keep that monopoly as long as I possibly can. It's not until I step over the line and begin acting in an illegal manner that my monopoly becomes a bad thing. Incidentally you need to go read the anti-monopoly laws again, they are neither highly limited nor strictly regulated. Commerce itself has regulations as does advertising and there are fraud regulations these are the factors that regulate the monopolies
I am so tired of this whiny bullshit attitude that says that every monopoly is a bad thing just because it is a monopoly.
Open my eyes to what exactly.
Who or what is abusing their power. Who is in collusion, and with whom. When does collective bargaining become extortion and vice versa. Who has done the price fixing.
Yes some of those things are truly illegal and if you can convict any one of them (as in the case of Enron) it is a good thing. You still have not negated the fact that as a business I want a monopoly.
I fail to see how enforcing your copyrights amounts to unfair trade practice nor does it amount to "Monopolistic practices". Monopolistic practices are NOT illegal or inherently unfair. In a capitalist society like ours a monopoly is the ideal business situation to find yourself in.
I also doubt that they deliberately "seeded" files to p2p systems, they would have no need. There are enough people that don't want to pay and/or don't understand the law that they only have to look to find these.
Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance.
As far as the RIAA goes, they have indeed engaged in some questionable and downright underhanded legal tactics to prosecute their law suits but that hardly amounts to unfair trade practices.
I just stopped driving in Oregon. I'll go around thanks. Don't buy your new car there either cause it'll cost you an extra 200 bucks for that fancy (read crappy) GPS unit they will require. I won't drive through the state, I won't drive in the state I won't live in the state.
I used to be a line supervisor for a company that built these things. Light travels a long distance in glass fiber and we would ping a 3 nanosecond pulse down the fiber and watch the reflections come back from the broken end of the fiber. When I left the company they were building a new one that used a 6 femtosecond pulse. You could find the break within a millimeter.
9 women x 1 month != Baby
classic
I don't understand the fanatically rabid reaction to closed technology. It makes loads of money and last time I checked that was the only test of a successful strategy in the business world.
Sarcasm mode on. I suppose that being open source makes it politically correct in this environment but jeez guys lighten up!
I won't say that it is fake because it's very easy to generalize about the composition of a chair of a certain shape. Make that shape out of metal and you will fool the robot, however that's a long way to go to fool a stupid robot!
hey we have broke auto makers looking for a new revenue stream don't we?
The problem being even if DRM does not affect pirates you MUST have a strong anti-piracy message along with the anti-DRM message. The parent is right in nearly every point. Most of the anti-DRM people come across as whiners who didn't get their way and are complaining about it. In order to appear as an adult movement the complaining and whining must stop and alternate solutions to the problem that DRM tries to solve must be proposed. A dialog is always a better way to solve problems than throwing a tantrum and a tantrum is what the anti-DRM movement looks like to me. You are in a very small minority that refuses to buy anything DRMed. The rest of us buy it and deal with it. It has occasionally been a problem for me but not a huge one and I can get around it reasonably well anyway. I'd rather not have to deal with it but until an adult movement appears to solve the problems rather than simply complaining about them I will deal with it.
What is an "RPM" "Distro"? What does this mean "I need a .deb packaged for my Distro."
you completely supported my point while trying to tell me I had no point.
Come again and tell me how I have to worry about which "Distro" of Mac OS X? or which "Distro" of "XP"? You still just don't get it!
I wonder when the Linux community will realize that Linux really doesn't apply. There are really about two dozen different operating systems with Linux and Distro attached all competing with each other.
They also have the desktop manager problem to solve.
When the "Linux" installer just installs the OS and when I can download any executable that says "Linux" and install it without having to track down 3 or 4 other distros libraries or even 3 or 4 other open source projects worth of dependencies. Then and only then will Linux start to be a viable desktop platform.
I have the same pet peeve with open source project software that requires me to find and install other open source libraries or projects before they will run. It's annoying and a waste of my time. So, with all of you guys screaming that closed source software is so bad, at least its self contained and it just installs.
Nope this one is older it has Tim Thomerson.
Someone didn't RTFA. Oh wait I can't be shocked at that this is /. and morons don't read the articles.
Not only is the iPhone a status symbol, it's an incredibly useful device. I've had several other smart phones and I never used half the features that were in them because either it cost me a dime very time I did or it was simply too difficult to use.
The people I see here complaining about it being closed and how evil Apple is for not making it open source still don't get it. Apple controls the hardware, the software and the channels in which it is sold. This is a good thing for quality control, price control and their margins. Apple makes money, tons of money and they aren't going to start changing a successful strategy.
Grow up people, Apple is a mature company with a good thing going, they aren't here for your amusement. You don't have a right to everything for free. And you certainly don't have the business acumen to do it yourself or you wouldn't be here complaining about the evils of Apple, Microsoft, pick the evil closed company of the week etc. you'd be out making your own fortune.
Open source business plans to date have been a resounding failure with one or two exceptions. Don't believe me, look it up.
>Attention all LISP programmers: there will be no garbage collection this coming Monday.
((Your sig) has a syntax( error, you) forgot to enclose it in (parentheses)))
If the Psystar counter claim had succeeded it would have put quite a lot of pressure on quite a number of companies. Imagine that you could no longer make printer cartridges that only work in your printer. Or that the cartridges that hold the twine in your weedwacker had to be universal or you could be sued.
The implications of making one part of a system proprietary would go right out the window and many companies would be at a serious disadvantage. That few people understand the nature of a monopoly is obvious. It's even more obvious that they understand the law even less.
It has never been illegal to have a monopoly, it is only illegal when you have such a monopoly that you can merely threaten your competition out of business. Or by withholding your product from people that deal with competitors and thereby seriously impact the entry to the market.
Having a monopoly however brief is the be all and end all of all capitalistic entities not matter who they are. Cheating to keep that monopoly is where companies like MS run afoul of the law. While AT&T was merely so large that they could keep anyone from competing.
Well I've been given the title by managers and CEOs of the companies I have worked for. I have survived for at least 25 years with the working title of "Engineer". I have a patent so at least I can claim inventor as well. So Mr. Asshat you may shut the *$%@ up.
But I admit in Canada I cannot claim to be an "Engineer". I do not have the Iron Ring nor the education required to have that title.
Wow I'm glad my teachers in the classes I did take payed attention to trivialities. I'm glad I payed attention to trivialities when I taught Programming classes.
As an engineer with no degree I'm glad not to be part of your organization. What a bunch of bullshit.
And I do mean GOOD! I don't have a degree but I worked my way into the position from electronics tech up to test engineer then to software engineer. I have never really been formally an IT person but I work in IT as a systems analyst and developer and often as the only DBA and developer. I mostly work for small start up companies but even then I have 30 years of experience behind me and I still struggle to prove I have the skills to do the job. My advice is get at least an AA and all the certificates you can get. But a BA/BS will open more doors. As an enthusiast you haven't a prayer.
Wow this went from a 3 funny to a -1 off topic. Somebody takes his NASA a bit too seriously. Lighten up out there NASA shouldn't be a sacred cow.