Re:The GPL is not properly credited to "open sourc
on
Why I Love The GPL
·
· Score: 1
We have no idea if someone else would have written another compiler, but we do know that GCC is still the chief (if not the only) free software compiler.
TenDRA is a C compiler. It can do C++ code but lacks
C++ libraries.
But the FSF isn't much better. They want to keep information safely behind the fences of public preserves. They do not want people to do with it as they will.
Yes, they want precisely that, and *also* to avoid that someone could prevent other from being able to do the same.
Sometimes you realize that 100% free freedom is impossible, when living in a society at least. We all give up a little of it to cohabit this planet. Else, someone could claim to have the freedom to kill his neighbor, or whatever thing that sounds "stupid" enough to us who are used to respect others' freedom.
Oh, that reminds me some people who fought to prevent freedom misuse - they were communists...
Well, then you love programming less than you love money. Which is not necessarily a bad thing; it's just comparable to loving love less than money. Which is to say, you're a whore.
Huh?!
Haven't you say it to your boss? I see - you have not, 'cause you still work for him...
BTW your comparison does not work - people may not love money but need them, loving their work (whatever it is).
People run around screaming "Communist!" like it's a threat to democracy. It's really not. Soviet Russia suffered under Stalinism. True communism is really not much different than Capitalism, except for the fact that the profits are more evenly distributed to the workers and management gets minimum perks from their position (at least in theory).
Whoa!
You need a bit more information..
Read Orwell's '1984'. Talk to people from former Soviet Union and socialist countries (old enough to remember socialist realities).
Economics under socialism (there were no communism anywhere) was so screwed...
Example - cheapiest cars had price equal to two-three engineer's year salaries (nice!).
Salaries and prices were established by government. Another thing - engineer could not buy a car if he/she had money. They have to wait in line years and years before they got a right to buy it - there were not enough cars for everybody.
And no "threat to democracy"?! Soviet Union had exactly 1 (one) political party. 99.99% of voters voted 99.99% of their votes for the Communist Party. Make your own conclusion regarding their democracy.
I would not say communism is not different from capitalism.
Windows TCP stack was written in Microsoft and had
some idiotic errors and showed clearly non-BSD behavior. It also was rewritten there couple times from scratch (and it is written in C++ or maybe C# now - BSD stack was written in C). Microsoft referenced BSD license because of some BSD network utilities use - like ftp or telnet.
Nobody ever said Microsoft used BSD-licensed Kerberos source. Microsoft just got Kerberos RFC and wrote their own version incompatible enough with Unix.
If you are saying GPL does not allow 'evil' corporations to take and close GPL code - it's nor true. 'Evil' corporations do not disclose their code and nobody knows how much open source code is inside their code. Another thing is just to take cool idea and rewrite program from scratch adding features and some incompatibility.. That's what happened with Kerberos in Windows.
As a long time FreeBSD user and supporter, it should be noted that many of us support the effort with our auto-subscriptions, where we pay $25 for each new release.
You subscribed to FreeBSDMall.
They donate part of your subscription fees to FreeBSD Foundation and from state's point of view FreeBSDMall contribute money, not subscribers...
BTW 5.3 release is first production version.
There is no debugging and tracing stuff and it's
uniprocessor by default. 5.2.1 which you tried
was rather test version with a lot of new not tuned stuff. Just try FreeBSD 5.3 - you'll see performance by yourself.
But if you want security, go OpenBSD, it's the world leader.
FreeBSD and NetBSD could be setup in the same way.
They could be have the same security level.
A close second is NetBSD, which right now is much faster and more stable than FreeBSD 5 (even in many SMP cases, too).
You are trolling, right?
FreeBSD 5.3 was released on November 6, 2004.
And it's first release for version 5.
A lot of things were fixed, imroved, changed. And you are telling NetBSD is better? I belive you did not test anything.
Whatever you are telling is bullshit. If you want
to prove whatever you tell - show test numbers.
The US carpet bombed North Vietnam, including Hanoi, for the best part of 2 years during the Vietnam war.
And don't forget, carpet bombing was *the* major component of the US campaign against the Taliban.
It is not true on both counts. Each time there were military targets. You imply the targets were civilian. It was "collateral damage" whowever high civilian casualties were. Please have facts handy if you want to prove me wrong.
What I find strange is that we're talking about the idea of improving "efficiency" on the battlefield as if it's a good thing. War should be difficult. It shouldn't be a cakewalk to go in and kill a bunch of people. Killing people, especially innocent civilians, SHOULD be difficult, if not because your conscience is stopping you, then maybe because the technology has problems, or it's not practical..
Yeah, I agree.. War should be difficult for ENEMY. Not for us.
Number of bicycles per 100 people in America in the year 2000: 4. In Sweeden: 90.
Did you made up those numbers?
The data from 1998: 100 millions bicycles in US.
On the other hand bicycle use is different here:
Who Is Cycling In America
Ages 6 and up, at least once per year: 54.6 million
Ages 7 and up, twice or more per year: 43.5 million
Average frequency of participation in 1997: 25 days
Primary reasons for bicycle usage:
Recreation: 82 percent
Fitness: 26 percent
Commuting: 10 percent
Racing: 1 percent
Number of bikes stolen annually: Approximately 500,000
Average value of bike stolen: Approximately $260
Numbers are here:
http://www.bicycleretailer.com/bicycleretailer/ima ges/pdf/statistics.pdf
Recognizing that crime is often (not always, but often) a product of personal desperation I vote for candidates who will do things like:
Interestingly enough suicide rates and criminal rates does not correlate in different countries.
Almost all other things you are talking about were implemented in socialist countries. It did not help but led to different problems which eventually have caused socialist system demise.
Who cares? It is done in background when system is fully up. And BSD also uses magic trick Linux users not accustomed for - it is called partitioning. In that case not all partitions would need fsck, partitions which need fsck got it in parallel.
that's like saying being able to kill people increases your freedoms.
it may be true for a minority of people who want to kill, but it means that EVERYONE loses the "freedom" to feel secure against random deadly attack.
Your example is grossly unappropriate.
Let's try another example - with BSD you are free to make babies and free not to. With GPL if you was born you have to give birth to baby, if not your license is revoked and you are eliminated.
Suppose I write a decoder for some funky new music format and BSD licence it. The suppose you take my decoder and write a music player which you decide to sell for $19.99 without making the source available.
Then the only person that benefits from my gift is you. If I GPL the decoder then you are obliged to make the source available (but you can still sell it). Anyone who wants to improve your music player or customize it for themselves or heck, offer a free version, can do so.
Lots of people who don't want to play around with a decoder but would like to play around with a music player have now benefitted.
So there's the GPL - the gift that just keeps on giving.
Let's dissasemle your arguments;)
First - if I can write player with your decoder then anybody else and his dog would write other players using your decoder. They may sell it cheaper, they may give it out for free, they may license it as GPL. And if anybody still would buy it from me it means they like player more then their money (that's how economy works) and other alternatives. The price you quoted is right price for customers and they benefited from free decoder, because if I had to write proprietary one they would pay more and they would not have any other alternative players. Or maybe my sales would be close to zero because of free players abudance. And possibly your decoder would be included into RealPlayer, Microsoft Media Player, Quicktime and
anything else which free for use but not open source. Or it could be used in hardware players.
And if you issue your decoder under LGPL situation would be about the same - I would use decoder as loadable library and give every buyer LGPL and decoder's source code. All other implications are the same.
Things are different in case of GPL. I can't link it, any other proprietary software vendors can't as well. Worse - anybody who want to use your software have to write it using GPL - no BSD, no MIT, no IBM Public License, no Apache License.
So worst case - nobody wants to write player - there is no profit and everybody else is lazy or do not want to use GPL. It means you just wasted your time to write something nobody uses.
Well maybe somebody writes player under GPL license. Again it may not have success because there would be no commercial support - there is player but no files encoded...
OK, so assume everything is fine with GPled player/decoder. And it got under radar of Evil Company. They like it. They do their own check - if anything was patented? If not they use their programmers - maybe ten or maybe hundred and rewrite your decoder and player in, for example C# and include it in their Evil OS. Millions of users of their Evil OS use their program and have no idea who wrote original decoder. Well, that may happen with any software with any license and GPL here is not an exception.
Well, I do not think you write anything under BSD license - you want something in exchange for writing abovementioned decoder - something like player which should be written under same license.
People who write BSD licensed software care only about writing good software and enjoy their software use by anybody regardless of corporate affiliation;)).
PS. There are a bunch different MP3 encoders/decoders (proprietary and open).
PPS. OGG-Vorbis licensed under BSD-like License.
PPPS. Main problem is the software patents - licenses are less an issue - you can rewrite from scratch any piece of software (if you are not infringing any patents).
So you are implying that IBM's lawyers are insane? Right, some of the best IP lawyers in the world are insane? I really can't buy that.
We talked about in-house-use-only software and GPL license. We do not know what IBM uses in-house. And IBM make public software licensed under IBM Public Software License(IPL), Common Public License(CPL), Eclipse Public License and GPL/LGPL. IPL, CPL and Eclipse License are Open Software Licenses but they are not compatible with GPL/LGPL.
So IBM knows what it's doing - they issue software under licenses they comfortable about.
Do you have examples of a bit more known software?
Like Apache, for example. There were at least couple commercial Apache versions - Stronghold and something else. There are Oracle version of Apache and IBM's version. So what? What happened with Apache project? Nothing.
Why didn't Microsoft overtake the Apache project?
Maybe because they do not want to...
Or any of BSDs?
Your arguments do not relate to "real" life. Sorry.
So software can be a true gift without any "strings" attached
Don't you think it's a bigger gift if you ensure that not only your work, but extensions of your work are freely available to the community too?
Gift with strings attached?
For example if I write program and BSD license it I can't link to readline library because it's GPLed.
And I can't because GPL would overtake my code.
What kind of gift it is?
No, it's not almost implied. A great portion of such imported software is for in-house-only use; in such cases, changes can be kept in-house indefinitely.
But you never know what happens tomorrow.
Part of company could be sold or software could mature enough to be put on sale or it would be easier to give that software to contractor to work with it. So any sane lawer if there any choice would say Nay to GPLed software.
Slashdot Mirror
TenDRA is a C compiler. It can do C++ code but lacks C++ libraries.
http://www.tendra.org/
Yes, they want precisely that, and *also* to avoid that someone could prevent other from being able to do the same.
Sometimes you realize that 100% free freedom is impossible, when living in a society at least. We all give up a little of it to cohabit this planet. Else, someone could claim to have the freedom to kill his neighbor, or whatever thing that sounds "stupid" enough to us who are used to respect others' freedom.
Oh, that reminds me some people who fought to prevent freedom misuse - they were communists...
Huh?!
Haven't you say it to your boss? I see - you have not, 'cause you still work for him...
BTW your comparison does not work - people may not love money but need them, loving their work (whatever it is).
Whoa!
You need a bit more information..
Read Orwell's '1984'. Talk to people from former Soviet Union and socialist countries (old enough to remember socialist realities).
Economics under socialism (there were no communism anywhere) was so screwed...
Example - cheapiest cars had price equal to two-three engineer's year salaries (nice!). Salaries and prices were established by government. Another thing - engineer could not buy a car if he/she had money. They have to wait in line years and years before they got a right to buy it - there were not enough cars for everybody.
And no "threat to democracy"?! Soviet Union had exactly 1 (one) political party. 99.99% of voters voted 99.99% of their votes for the Communist Party. Make your own conclusion regarding their democracy.
I would not say communism is not different from capitalism.
Windows TCP stack was written in Microsoft and had some idiotic errors and showed clearly non-BSD behavior. It also was rewritten there couple times from scratch (and it is written in C++ or maybe C# now - BSD stack was written in C). Microsoft referenced BSD license because of some BSD network utilities use - like ftp or telnet.
Nobody ever said Microsoft used BSD-licensed Kerberos source. Microsoft just got Kerberos RFC and wrote their own version incompatible enough with Unix.
If you are saying GPL does not allow 'evil' corporations to take and close GPL code - it's nor true. 'Evil' corporations do not disclose their code and nobody knows how much open source code is inside their code. Another thing is just to take cool idea and rewrite program from scratch adding features and some incompatibility.. That's what happened with Kerberos in Windows.
You subscribed to FreeBSDMall.
They donate part of your subscription fees to FreeBSD Foundation and from state's point of view FreeBSDMall contribute money, not subscribers...
This is because you are using the CDMA version of the 650.
IMHO - Sprint and cdma service is not good in comparison to GSM and GPRS data services.
You'd better read technical papers...
CDMA is newer and better then GSM. BTW GPRS
does not relate to vois\ce quality at all.
BTW 5.3 release is first production version. There is no debugging and tracing stuff and it's uniprocessor by default. 5.2.1 which you tried was rather test version with a lot of new not tuned stuff. Just try FreeBSD 5.3 - you'll see performance by yourself.
FreeBSD and NetBSD could be setup in the same way. They could be have the same security level.
A close second is NetBSD, which right now is much faster and more stable than FreeBSD 5 (even in many SMP cases, too).
You are trolling, right?
FreeBSD 5.3 was released on November 6, 2004. And it's first release for version 5. A lot of things were fixed, imroved, changed. And you are telling NetBSD is better? I belive you did not test anything.
Whatever you are telling is bullshit. If you want to prove whatever you tell - show test numbers.
And don't forget, carpet bombing was *the* major component of the US campaign against the Taliban.
It is not true on both counts. Each time there were military targets. You imply the targets were civilian. It was "collateral damage" whowever high civilian casualties were. Please have facts handy if you want to prove me wrong.
Yeah, I agree.. War should be difficult for ENEMY. Not for us.
Check this site out - it's Audio Video Forum with a lot's of info.. http://avsforum.com
The trouble with NTSC is that the colors aren't terribly stable. (Never the Same Color). PAL may be better in this regard.
a re .html
there are some advantages and disadvantages in both systems - here is a comparison:
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Contrib/WorldTV/comp
It seems to me to be a weak case to say that distributing something that dynamically links something GPL becomes an aggregate work.
They claim you have to use GPled include files so you infect you work with GPL..
Did you made up those numbers?
The data from 1998: 100 millions bicycles in US.
On the other hand bicycle use is different here:
Who Is Cycling In America
Ages 6 and up, at least once per year: 54.6 million
Ages 7 and up, twice or more per year: 43.5 million
Average frequency of participation in 1997: 25 days
Primary reasons for bicycle usage:
Recreation: 82 percent
Fitness: 26 percent
Commuting: 10 percent
Racing: 1 percent
Number of bikes stolen annually: Approximately 500,000a ges/pdf/statistics.pdf
Average value of bike stolen: Approximately $260
Numbers are here:
http://www.bicycleretailer.com/bicycleretailer/im
There is Project Evil AKA ndisulator in FreeBSD. I believe it does the same as ndiswrapper.
Interestingly enough suicide rates and criminal rates does not correlate in different countries.
Almost all other things you are talking about were implemented in socialist countries. It did not help but led to different problems which eventually have caused socialist system demise.
It is NOT. You must retain BSD copyright.
Who cares? It is done in background when system is fully up. And BSD also uses magic trick Linux users not accustomed for - it is called partitioning. In that case not all partitions would need fsck, partitions which need fsck got it in parallel.
it may be true for a minority of people who want to kill, but it means that EVERYONE loses the "freedom" to feel secure against random deadly attack.
Your example is grossly unappropriate.
Let's try another example - with BSD you are free to make babies and free not to. With GPL if you was born you have to give birth to baby, if not your license is revoked and you are eliminated.
Enjoy !
Then the only person that benefits from my gift is you. If I GPL the decoder then you are obliged to make the source available (but you can still sell it). Anyone who wants to improve your music player or customize it for themselves or heck, offer a free version, can do so.
Lots of people who don't want to play around with a decoder but would like to play around with a music player have now benefitted.
So there's the GPL - the gift that just keeps on giving.
Let's dissasemle your arguments ;)
First - if I can write player with your decoder then anybody else and his dog would write other players using your decoder. They may sell it cheaper, they may give it out for free, they may license it as GPL. And if anybody still would buy it from me it means they like player more then their money (that's how economy works) and other alternatives. The price you quoted is right price for customers and they benefited from free decoder, because if I had to write proprietary one they would pay more and they would not have any other alternative players. Or maybe my sales would be close to zero because of free players abudance. And possibly your decoder would be included into RealPlayer, Microsoft Media Player, Quicktime and anything else which free for use but not open source. Or it could be used in hardware players.
And if you issue your decoder under LGPL situation would be about the same - I would use decoder as loadable library and give every buyer LGPL and decoder's source code. All other implications are the same.
Things are different in case of GPL. I can't link it, any other proprietary software vendors can't as well. Worse - anybody who want to use your software have to write it using GPL - no BSD, no MIT, no IBM Public License, no Apache License. So worst case - nobody wants to write player - there is no profit and everybody else is lazy or do not want to use GPL. It means you just wasted your time to write something nobody uses.
Well maybe somebody writes player under GPL license. Again it may not have success because there would be no commercial support - there is player but no files encoded...
OK, so assume everything is fine with GPled player/decoder. And it got under radar of Evil Company. They like it. They do their own check - if anything was patented? If not they use their programmers - maybe ten or maybe hundred and rewrite your decoder and player in, for example C# and include it in their Evil OS. Millions of users of their Evil OS use their program and have no idea who wrote original decoder. Well, that may happen with any software with any license and GPL here is not an exception.
Well, I do not think you write anything under BSD license - you want something in exchange for writing abovementioned decoder - something like player which should be written under same license. People who write BSD licensed software care only about writing good software and enjoy their software use by anybody regardless of corporate affiliation ;)).
PS. There are a bunch different MP3 encoders/decoders (proprietary and open).
PPS. OGG-Vorbis licensed under BSD-like License.
PPPS. Main problem is the software patents - licenses are less an issue - you can rewrite from scratch any piece of software (if you are not infringing any patents).
We talked about in-house-use-only software and GPL license. We do not know what IBM uses in-house. And IBM make public software licensed under IBM Public Software License(IPL), Common Public License(CPL), Eclipse Public License and GPL/LGPL. IPL, CPL and Eclipse License are Open Software Licenses but they are not compatible with GPL/LGPL.
So IBM knows what it's doing - they issue software under licenses they comfortable about.
Do you have examples of a bit more known software?
Like Apache, for example. There were at least couple commercial Apache versions - Stronghold and something else. There are Oracle version of Apache and IBM's version. So what? What happened with Apache project? Nothing.
Why didn't Microsoft overtake the Apache project? Maybe because they do not want to... Or any of BSDs?
Your arguments do not relate to "real" life. Sorry.
Don't you think it's a bigger gift if you ensure that not only your work, but extensions of your work are freely available to the community too?
Gift with strings attached?
For example if I write program and BSD license it I can't link to readline library because it's GPLed. And I can't because GPL would overtake my code. What kind of gift it is?
But you never know what happens tomorrow. Part of company could be sold or software could mature enough to be put on sale or it would be easier to give that software to contractor to work with it. So any sane lawer if there any choice would say Nay to GPLed software.