If (or when) most of countries around the world outside of US will outlaw software patents, there will be more and more cases of software that cannot be sold or used inside US. Then it will be a pressure on US. Besides it may create a pressure on the offcial level (WTO?).
Forgive my ignorance too, but can't you buy PCs with preloaded Linux from already several national retailers like Walmart? And ain't there many online vendors of Linux-preloaded machines? Did you try at least to call your local Linux User Group to get the number of local Linux companies who will build (or find) the PC (WIHOUT prepaid Windows) and give you the rest of service related to Linux desktop support?
I think many companies in US can save a lot of money too if instead of drooling they will start to think. Here in Canada I know some food store networks and some local retail warehouses just switched to Linux (not only servers - desktops and terminals too) by signing the partnership with local Linux companies. Don't sit and drool - pick up the phone!
You're right. But who cares? I mean I care, and so do you, but the administration doesn't. It cares always only about big corps. And I guess 90% of patents are hold by big ones, am I right? So, untill big corps are beaten by offsore fellows nothing's gonna change the current situation about software patents inside the US. Well, we all now know that US administration may solve offshore problems without any lawyers. But we all hope it won't happen again.
The goal is to outlaw software patents in EU, not to leave the situation as-is. If EU law will override local europian laws and make ALL software patents illigal and obsolete THEN the situation will be improved.
Imagine if Asia, Canada, South America, Africa, Austrilia right after EU will outlaw software patents in principle! The US will have to outlaw software patents as well just to keep being competitive. Otherwise american companies will be easily beaten outside of US.
The source code help only in simple cases. When the project and its environment is complicated then interfaces are also complicated. Adaptation is also a very difficult job. Often your programmer will prefer to write it from scratch rather than to use the code. Of course the source code makes the job of copying and adaptation to be much easier. But it will be still very difficult.
BeanShell is already widely distributed with Emacs
In my life I've downowded and installed hundreds (if not thousands) of Emacs distributions for at least a dozen of platforms. And I had never had a chance to find BeanShell there. Where do hide it? Or is it possible that you have just mistaken Emacs with vi? How dare you! Oh, by the way, what is the model of the wireless phone that has Emacs in it - I want that phone now!
On a serious note, Java is specially designed to be not scripted - statically typed, eager evaluation, run-time only after a compiler. Every attempt to bring scriptability to Java is making it even slower and even requiring more memory. I've tried BeanShell, Jacl, Jython, Kawa - none of them are good for mobile aplications. All by exactly the same reason: Java itself is the worst case of scenario for embedded applications. Of cource due to its resource requirements.
What's wrong to use scripting language directly, without Java? If you are addicted to imperative semantic (let's say you worked too long with C/C++, and Java and "program" for you is a sequence of commands) then use Python: compact, fast (enough for scripting, at least much faster than any scripting exte4nsion for Java), OOP, widely distributed (not with Emacs, but with many operating systems... just kidding). If you don't have such "imperative" addiction then try Erlang: that langauge has been specially designed for being used in mobile (at first in wireless, but now it's not limited to) applications, it's compact (more compact than JVME), fast (faster than JVME, often as fast as C++), high-level scripting (aka functional-logical) language for disctributed and mobile applications. IMHO ideal choice.
At some poit Isaak Newton discovered that an apple falls down due to gravity. Moreover, he describe his idea mathematically. For centures all people use that idea for their work. Do they steal Newton's idea?
For one more time: no one can steal any idea from you as it doesn't belong to you. The historical fact of discovering the idea belong to you. But the idea - not. It has been existing in this Universe always, before you. And it will be existing forever, even after you.
But for one thing I am very glad about your post: you call software as ideas:
"These people are notorious for stealing ideas, and in most cases, modifying them into something better then claiming them as their own".
That's right. Software is just one or another notation of various computer-related ideas. Therefore, it is not possible to steal the software.
So leave them alone. If they want to use software, modify it and even sale modifications - no problem. All they have to do is just follow licenses and copyrights. If they will modify Linux and sell it along with the source code of their modifications - what's wrong with it? RMS will be just happy. And I don't see any reason why they would not want to open source their modifications? Especially in a socialist/communist China, where all IP belong to the People:)
Compare th amount of code IBM has contributed back to BSD to the one they did to Linux? Same with Apple? Exactly! And Using the code from BSD in AIX and OSX doesn't help to save the dying poularity of BSD.
I don't believe that the hype of Linux has nothing to do with the license. I think that companies responsible for Linux hype are doing so b/c of GPL.
Well, besides the license there is also a system architecture. Otherwise why most of conusmer electronics brands decided to choose Linux for their products? In embedded market the end-customer does not see what OS is running. Counting this argument I thing that PostgreSQL can get some recognition on the embedded market.
I don't think your job is as safe as you think. Sooner or later we'll all be looking for a new line of work. I'm not excited by that propsect...I like writing software, but I'll deal with it.
I don't see any problem. The job market in India is booming. Several friends of mine, all developers and arhitects, have already moved to India, most of them from Cali. They keep saying that the life they buy for THAT salary THERE is much better than it was in California! And the job market there is very demanding US-English speaking project leaders to keep communications with their american headquaters and customers.
Of course it won't work for those who are white fascists. Outside of US you have to be much more tolerant to other skin-colors and other accents, no need to mention to other cultures around you.
My only hope is that PostgreSQL, which is a much superior product to mySQL, will get the publicity it richly deserves.
My only hope that someone in PostgreSQL Inc will read what you are saying. Postgresql ORDBMS needs the same hype as Linux already got. otherwise, sooner on/. we'll see stupid comments "Postgresql is dying" in a same style as they are posted about *BSD.
Seriously, BSD is not that bad, but why it is not that popular as Linux? B/c there is no virtually any publicity around it. Say "open source operating system" to any boss, the reaction will be "Linux?". Now say "BSD". The answer will be "BS-who?". In a same way if you say "open source DBMS" to any boss, the reaction will be "MySQL?". But if you say "Postgresql" the reaction will be "Postgres-who?".
I understand that for piblicity PostgreSQL Inc needs money, and the only way to get a big money is to make PostgreSQL to be interesting for big software corps, like IBM or HP. Why IBM has chosen Linux vs BSD to support? B/c BSDL doesn't protect their source code cotributions. Here might be a key: the license. Perhaps PostgreSQL Inc should reconsider their BSDL license. Well, that might be impossible as most of their core team hate GPL (that's why they usually hate Linux).
MySQL's popularity has absolutely nothing to do with it's ability to replace most commercial databases.
And vice versa: MySQL's ability to replace most commercial databases has absolutely nothing to do with it's popularity. In other words: you can put very smart and well designed features to PostgreSQL, but MySQL has more populariy and more of a critical mass. So, in new open source projects people almost always prefer MySQL, while in commercial organizations technology decision makers always (again almost) consider MySQL for any db server where they don't afraid to save some money on db licenses.
Unless PostgreSQL Inc begin doing something about popularity, all features of PostgreSQL ORDBMS are useless for the most of technology decision makers.
W2k keeps loading its services even AFTER I login. I can change the boot sequence order to Linux time for X11 Login prompt at least half.
Well, I don;t need postfix, Apache, Zope, MySQL, PostgreSQL and many other services at the moment of login. So, Win2k designers has recognized the it and optimized the boot sequence being oriented for a desktop user. In Linux we still keep a server-oriented mentality, that's why XDM/GDM/KDM/EDM is always the last thing to start.
Besides, Win2 boots some services in parallel, while in Linux we still boot all of them sequentially, waiting for [OK] string before starting the next one. The only way to paralelize the sequence is to track dependencies between services. In Gentoo there are some efforts to do the parallel boot.
But as for now, Linux is (by dfault) is oriented for servers, and GUI login is the last (ltterally last) thing you need on your server.
Perhaps the goverment should sponsor R&D in drugs, like it does in the space research. Well, the risk of death from drugs is even higher than from a space ship crashing. Drug production can be taxed, besides, bad drug manufacturers must be fined. Thus - no need for any freeking patents, IMHO.
I think Moore's law says that the number of transisters will double - it says nothing about the pricing unless there is a "Moor's law" that I don't know about.
The original text was about transistors, it's true. But later it was generalized. I'd better cite it from the latest Halloween document:
... the amount of computing power available at a given price point doubles every eighteen months. (This also means that a given amount of computing power -- memory, processor speed, disk drive space, etc -- will generally be half as expensive a year and half later.)
... The effects of Moore's Law on software can be seen by the fact that new versions of the same software come out every few years, and that even spectacularly popular applications like Lotus 1-2-3 and WordPerfect can stop selling a few years after their release unless successfully updated.
...What is the shelf life of a typical high-budget retail game? Not long. Somewhere between two weeks and six months... A typical game will make most of its sales during the first quarter, a few more sales during the second quarter, and end up in the bargain bin in the third quarter. Expect to get one good royalty check, if you are lucky, and if your publisher is honest. Additional royalties will trickle in for the next year, then your game is done. Its life span has ended. If you want an income after that, you have to write another game.
I saw several reports saying that the current patent system slow down the whole drug industry. They either renew existing patents, or slightly modify them and apply again. There is no motivation for big drug companies to invent new drugs. As for small companies they invent new drugs and patent them, then big companies buy their patents and keep in their librarie with no motivation to bring them to the market.
After talking to several people working in that industry I've realized that it's true: the drug industry will be developed faster (with a better quality !) if it would not suffer from patents.
Speaking about the concepts. There should be no patent for a concept, instead they should accept only patenting a non-monopolized implementation. If you have a concept and you implement it you can apply for the patent, but youcan get any approval only when someone implement the same concept in an alternative way. So, your first implementation will be protected as you have already applied, but you cannot use the patent to knock down anyone if your implementation is giving you a monopoly over your idea. But once someone implement it differently then you can submit the reference to the alternative and now you can knock down everyone who will try to use your implementation.
Also, software patents (actually all computer related patents!) must expire in 18 months - exactly accordingly to the Moor's law when they worth half of their original. Anyway, the real money comes on a hype, but what's a hype after 18 months?
But the best way to stimulate the industry is to drop all patents at all. Altogether. Monopolies and big corps will be unhappy of that, but they will survive. But we will se several times more start-up companies and new investments to R&D.
Why? I hate product activation - it never works and users are always frustrated.
Besides, the scanning and curing are not complicated operations per se. Virus patterns are the content that I am ready to pay money. Therefore the the other business model: charging for content rather than for software.
Slashdot Mirror
If (or when) most of countries around the world outside of US will outlaw software patents, there will be more and more cases of software that cannot be sold or used inside US. Then it will be a pressure on US. Besides it may create a pressure on the offcial level (WTO?).
I think many companies in US can save a lot of money too if instead of drooling they will start to think. Here in Canada I know some food store networks and some local retail warehouses just switched to Linux (not only servers - desktops and terminals too) by signing the partnership with local Linux companies. Don't sit and drool - pick up the phone!
You're right. But who cares? I mean I care, and so do you, but the administration doesn't. It cares always only about big corps. And I guess 90% of patents are hold by big ones, am I right? So, untill big corps are beaten by offsore fellows nothing's gonna change the current situation about software patents inside the US. Well, we all now know that US administration may solve offshore problems without any lawyers. But we all hope it won't happen again.
32K is only for compiled apps. No scripting available at such level.
The goal is to outlaw software patents in EU, not to leave the situation as-is. If EU law will override local europian laws and make ALL software patents illigal and obsolete THEN the situation will be improved.
Imagine if Asia, Canada, South America, Africa, Austrilia right after EU will outlaw software patents in principle! The US will have to outlaw software patents as well just to keep being competitive. Otherwise american companies will be easily beaten outside of US.
That's why the software should be protected by copyrights and licenses, not by patents.
The source code help only in simple cases. When the project and its environment is complicated then interfaces are also complicated. Adaptation is also a very difficult job. Often your programmer will prefer to write it from scratch rather than to use the code. Of course the source code makes the job of copying and adaptation to be much easier. But it will be still very difficult.
In my life I've downowded and installed hundreds (if not thousands) of Emacs distributions for at least a dozen of platforms. And I had never had a chance to find BeanShell there. Where do hide it? Or is it possible that you have just mistaken Emacs with vi? How dare you! Oh, by the way, what is the model of the wireless phone that has Emacs in it - I want that phone now!
On a serious note, Java is specially designed to be not scripted - statically typed, eager evaluation, run-time only after a compiler. Every attempt to bring scriptability to Java is making it even slower and even requiring more memory. I've tried BeanShell, Jacl, Jython, Kawa - none of them are good for mobile aplications. All by exactly the same reason: Java itself is the worst case of scenario for embedded applications. Of cource due to its resource requirements.
What's wrong to use scripting language directly, without Java? If you are addicted to imperative semantic (let's say you worked too long with C/C++, and Java and "program" for you is a sequence of commands) then use Python: compact, fast (enough for scripting, at least much faster than any scripting exte4nsion for Java), OOP, widely distributed (not with Emacs, but with many operating systems... just kidding). If you don't have such "imperative" addiction then try Erlang: that langauge has been specially designed for being used in mobile (at first in wireless, but now it's not limited to) applications, it's compact (more compact than JVME), fast (faster than JVME, often as fast as C++), high-level scripting (aka functional-logical) language for disctributed and mobile applications. IMHO ideal choice.
At some poit Isaak Newton discovered that an apple falls down due to gravity. Moreover, he describe his idea mathematically. For centures all people use that idea for their work. Do they steal Newton's idea?
For one more time: no one can steal any idea from you as it doesn't belong to you. The historical fact of discovering the idea belong to you. But the idea - not. It has been existing in this Universe always, before you. And it will be existing forever, even after you.
But for one thing I am very glad about your post: you call software as ideas:
"These people are notorious for stealing ideas, and in most cases, modifying them into something better then claiming them as their own".
That's right. Software is just one or another notation of various computer-related ideas. Therefore, it is not possible to steal the software.
So leave them alone. If they want to use software, modify it and even sale modifications - no problem. All they have to do is just follow licenses and copyrights. If they will modify Linux and sell it along with the source code of their modifications - what's wrong with it? RMS will be just happy. And I don't see any reason why they would not want to open source their modifications? Especially in a socialist/communist China, where all IP belong to the People :)
Hmm, it seems like Microsoft has some sort of immunization against DMCA: MSN still shows all those links without any worning :)
By the way, what's happened to that file system?
I don't believe that the hype of Linux has nothing to do with the license. I think that companies responsible for Linux hype are doing so b/c of GPL.
Well, besides the license there is also a system architecture. Otherwise why most of conusmer electronics brands decided to choose Linux for their products? In embedded market the end-customer does not see what OS is running. Counting this argument I thing that PostgreSQL can get some recognition on the embedded market.
I don't see any problem. The job market in India is booming. Several friends of mine, all developers and arhitects, have already moved to India, most of them from Cali. They keep saying that the life they buy for THAT salary THERE is much better than it was in California! And the job market there is very demanding US-English speaking project leaders to keep communications with their american headquaters and customers.
Of course it won't work for those who are white fascists. Outside of US you have to be much more tolerant to other skin-colors and other accents, no need to mention to other cultures around you.
My only hope that someone in PostgreSQL Inc will read what you are saying. Postgresql ORDBMS needs the same hype as Linux already got. otherwise, sooner on /. we'll see stupid comments "Postgresql is dying" in a same style as they are posted about *BSD.
Seriously, BSD is not that bad, but why it is not that popular as Linux? B/c there is no virtually any publicity around it. Say "open source operating system" to any boss, the reaction will be "Linux?". Now say "BSD". The answer will be "BS-who?". In a same way if you say "open source DBMS" to any boss, the reaction will be "MySQL?". But if you say "Postgresql" the reaction will be "Postgres-who?".
I understand that for piblicity PostgreSQL Inc needs money, and the only way to get a big money is to make PostgreSQL to be interesting for big software corps, like IBM or HP. Why IBM has chosen Linux vs BSD to support? B/c BSDL doesn't protect their source code cotributions. Here might be a key: the license. Perhaps PostgreSQL Inc should reconsider their BSDL license. Well, that might be impossible as most of their core team hate GPL (that's why they usually hate Linux).
And vice versa: MySQL's ability to replace most commercial databases has absolutely nothing to do with it's popularity. In other words: you can put very smart and well designed features to PostgreSQL, but MySQL has more populariy and more of a critical mass. So, in new open source projects people almost always prefer MySQL, while in commercial organizations technology decision makers always (again almost) consider MySQL for any db server where they don't afraid to save some money on db licenses.
Unless PostgreSQL Inc begin doing something about popularity, all features of PostgreSQL ORDBMS are useless for the most of technology decision makers.
Well, I don;t need postfix, Apache, Zope, MySQL, PostgreSQL and many other services at the moment of login. So, Win2k designers has recognized the it and optimized the boot sequence being oriented for a desktop user. In Linux we still keep a server-oriented mentality, that's why XDM/GDM/KDM/EDM is always the last thing to start.
Besides, Win2 boots some services in parallel, while in Linux we still boot all of them sequentially, waiting for [OK] string before starting the next one. The only way to paralelize the sequence is to track dependencies between services. In Gentoo there are some efforts to do the parallel boot.
But as for now, Linux is (by dfault) is oriented for servers, and GUI login is the last (ltterally last) thing you need on your server.
Perhaps the goverment should sponsor R&D in drugs, like it does in the space research. Well, the risk of death from drugs is even higher than from a space ship crashing. Drug production can be taxed, besides, bad drug manufacturers must be fined. Thus - no need for any freeking patents, IMHO.
The original text was about transistors, it's true. But later it was generalized. I'd better cite it from the latest Halloween document:
I am not sure I understand your English, so I still do not see how patent protect R&D investments in the drug industry.
and how exactly does the current patent system help them to recoup?
After talking to several people working in that industry I've realized that it's true: the drug industry will be developed faster (with a better quality !) if it would not suffer from patents.
Also, software patents (actually all computer related patents!) must expire in 18 months - exactly accordingly to the Moor's law when they worth half of their original. Anyway, the real money comes on a hype, but what's a hype after 18 months?
But the best way to stimulate the industry is to drop all patents at all. Altogether. Monopolies and big corps will be unhappy of that, but they will survive. But we will se several times more start-up companies and new investments to R&D.
- make the update protocol encrypted and secured;
- make virus pattern update sucription for money;
- release the client software itself for free;
- ???
- Profit!
Why? I hate product activation - it never works and users are always frustrated.Besides, the scanning and curing are not complicated operations per se. Virus patterns are the content that I am ready to pay money. Therefore the the other business model: charging for content rather than for software.
Download a new version of a web browser, break all your old plugins because of a compiler incompatibility.
This is a classic example of why EVERYTHING on Linux must be installed ONLY from the source code.
Compile a new version of a web browser, recompile your old plugins both using the same compiler to guarantee compatibility.