The copyright clause. Which is really possibly the most tangible thing the BSD license insists on (so I get that they would be unhappy) aside from open. As for the hypocrisy claim vaulted at the GPL community I am of two minds 1) sure, I personally wouldn't mind giving back 2) wtf?
The BSD is a permissive license and getting bent out of shape over the "Linux" community adhering to it but relicensing their own work under a more restrictive license makes it clear that there is just as much misunderstanding in the BSD community as this made clear existed in the GPL community: BSD is permissive, GPL is restrictive (in a very forcefully open way). Claiming that it's hypocritical to benefit from permissively open software, altering it and redistributing it with a more aggressively open license really shows some people are missing the boat. GPL !=BSD. Different motives, different politics, etc. Just like BSD != [insert company] proprietary license. The only difference is that sometimes GPL developers, out of the kindness of their collective hearts, will BSD or dual-license their work. Which is probably a little confusing, particularly when they don't (but that is kind of the point of the GPL, protectivism) and the GPL developers do have a right to license their own modifications as they like (just like the BSD developers, it just happens the GPL restricts some of what can be done).
That said I'm glad this came up because I do have a more rounded appreciation of the expectations of someone releasing code under the BSD and some of the misunderstanding on both sides (and a much more RMS-like view of Theo, which is kind of amusing after thinking we were the crazy ones for all these years). Ciao!
I never played the original, but I became very interested after I started working on a Source mod of my own. I've been a big fan of class-based FPS team play since Tribes and an even bigger fan of fun/silliness since discovering (the tasteless) Postal 2 (not that it need be tasteless, but humor is good...especially with FPS where you can get WAY too serious). The thing I like about class play is if it's done right you actually end up in a situation where team members depend on other team member filling various roles. Most FPS really feel mostly like endless variations on standard DM. With good class-based play you have to opportunity to learn to excel at a variety of roles so that truly skilled players know the game and the teams responsibilities and make decisions based on more then simple kill-rates or individual point. Some of the most fun I've had was playing support competitively.
For the love of god. When we recommend off-site backups we mean off-site. Thieves are just one issue. Then there are fires, tornadoes, earthquakes and the whole gambit of other natural and man-made disasters. Unfortunately you don't get to choose which one.
If enough people will pay for it to create a sustainable market, it's needed (period). Not to mention I hear what sounds like and assumption that this is going to be targeted at the enthusiast market, side-stepping the high-end (and high-cost) graphics shops and their associated market. Unless we assumed Pixar ran all their workstations on...pixie dust?
Anyway, if it finds a markets more power. Engineers do their jobs, people get paid. Welcome the open market. (:
I've wondered about this myself, but ages ago. Since then I've found that in my particular situation it's not needed (VPN/SSH/WEBDAV). But a quick check on Freshmeat shows at least 2 possibilities: scponly, rssh.
I get that using a wrapper program like either of these is kind of cockeyed, but SFTP *is* the most commonly supported secure transfer protocol (webdav/ssh, but not nearly as drop-in for Dreamweaver users, etc).
Anyway, I think it's safe to say the *nix community is now big enough that most itches have at least been attempted to scratch. And FTR, there are assholes in every community, sounds like you just had a spot of bad luck.
I think that is really the heart of the issue. Vista was supposed to be their latest, greatest offering. We are all accustomed to major products from major vendors being upgraded with point releases and then eventually a full release. These upgrades can be expensive, but generally the full updates offer a better feature-set, better performance or more up-to-date tool-set. That's the trade-off. No-one likes to part with their hard earn money unless there's some kind of net gain.
That's the problem with Vista. So far it's effectively proved at best a lateral upgrade. Considering performance, it can be considered a downgrade.
People might be a lot of things that make more technical people feel smug, but they aren't stupid.
Take a familiar product from a consumer and replace it with a newer, less efficient product and what should you expect? Microsoft made some really bad assumptions:
They assumed by increasing the acceptable requirements consumers wouldn't notice the decrease in performance (it evens out with better hardware, right?).
They relied on their old monopoly tactics that have served then so well. The motive for the upgrade hasn't been "gee-wiz, I've got to have it!" features. It's been things like lock-in (Direct X10), (in)availability and support. That's going to be rather insulting to your average user, especially when you take the first point into account that they've effectively lost performance.
Imagine you go to the dealer with your reasonably new car for trade in, they offer you a new car that goes slower, has worse gas mileage and seemingly fewer features. With no real reason to upgrade you might be better off sticking with the car you already own, or even a new version of the same model.
But in the end Microsoft is doing to consumers what they do to businesses. Forcing adoption. Not on features or buzz but relying on strong-arm tactics and lock-in. And your average user doesn't like to be bullied.
While I agree (mostly), those lines of thinking side-step things like convenience (I download it when I like, from the comfort of my home, probably while doing other things) and format (I use mp3's exclusively, so buying 'hard' media simply adds an additional step between me and the music).
So while I agree that you end up paying more for less (no album cover, no liner notes, no physical media) it comes close to being a wash (not quite) with the immediacy and the convenience.
Recovering the cost of attorneys fees alone would be no small thing. And technically damages can be considered any revenue made, had the copyright holder(s) chose to, say, dual license the product and legally bring it to market. Should people be allowed to keep profits made by stealing your intellectual property?
They do a subscription service, which I can understand how that might bug you. But for DRM-free music, since they carry a lot of music I like, the price-point and service style are fine. If I want to pick and chose only a couple of tracks I use services like Bleep, Fintunes, Inertia or even iTunes.
But their model is a subscription service. Which for people like me works (with a booster pack here and there).
The site looks awful. Maybe the selection used to be better, but what I see there now certainly doesn't warrant excitement or press coverage. I generally find the work that Michael Robertson does interesting but this isn't a project I'd have taken much notice to on it's own merits. At least not as it currently stands.
Ya, it can be a little difficult to navigate before you sign up. I'm assuming they figure most people who are interested would go for the free downloads right away. But you can still check it out, you just have to dig around. Here's a link that will get you there.
I mean we need lingo for these slash-memes. The antithetical ones are always the best (cutting!) but there's a whole chain of mantras we proudly trot out (only the older and the wiser of us of course) as if they haven't be said line for line 123902184^23948 times.
This is the newest one I've seen bandied about lately. Kind of a post-slashdotism really. Quite clever to mock the very community you're MUCH to good to be a part of...or maybe it's just meant to be ironic. I mean, it is...but it would be enheartening if these posters see that it is (then I guess the jokes on me!).
Effectively you offer nothing (+5 Interesting!) but a rehash of another person's rehash of a set of observations about...observations condemning other posts for having...opinions, that might relay (God forbid it)...facts and stir conversion. Which I totally get. It's trite (??). All that talking and stuff can really bring a brother down. Sometimes I just hold my breath (*unless I read something somewhere really witty I can reiterate*).
eMusic no traction? They are the second largest digital music retailer. The #1 largest DRM-free retailer and probably the only major digital retailer with (recently updated) Linux support. It's a great resource for slightly older music or anything even remotely off the beaten path (my main interest).
and I agree the drugs thing *is* very unnatural allowing you're brain chemistry to achieve states that are terribly disconnected from anything you'd be able to actually achieve by any natural means. But before getting too high (no pun) on our horses I think it's important to remember that while this is a pretty incredibly young science and the chances are there will be a lot of missteps as we explore it the lives that it improves really are important. Even if it's done a bit imperfectly.
I do it anyway but it anyways, but it used to annoy me when people would tell me how much better it would make me feel. If anything the exercise/drug comparison is really only an example of how ineffective our current batch of antidepressant really are and with the high level of hit-and-miss and the 'poop-out's' I'd imagine you could study doing just about anything consistently and find it was as effective or nearly as effective as antidepressants.
Not that I don't believe exercise make some people happier, but I don't get a joggers high. I get tired and sore. I'll probably live longer and my heart probably gets more oxygen.
Did you read the two links? I keep seeing the words replica and 'hoax bomb' around here like people know what their talking about. But I've seen the hoodie. The "electronics" consist what looks a solderless circuit board with some LEDs and a battery to power them. A hoax is supposed to be intended to deceive someone.
If wearing a hoodie with lights merits arrest at (automatic weapons) gun-point then I guess you're right. Mission accomplished. As for the not responding, we'll have to let her speak up (or not). But at 8AM if some clerk got weird with me when I asked a simple question because I had blinky LED's I might not provide the response they wanted either. My first reaction might not be: oh. I totally look like a terrorist! But more: what a moron. Where's my coffee.
Slashdot Mirror
The copyright clause. Which is really possibly the most tangible thing the BSD license insists on (so I get that they would be unhappy) aside from open. As for the hypocrisy claim vaulted at the GPL community I am of two minds 1) sure, I personally wouldn't mind giving back 2) wtf?
The BSD is a permissive license and getting bent out of shape over the "Linux" community adhering to it but relicensing their own work under a more restrictive license makes it clear that there is just as much misunderstanding in the BSD community as this made clear existed in the GPL community: BSD is permissive, GPL is restrictive (in a very forcefully open way). Claiming that it's hypocritical to benefit from permissively open software, altering it and redistributing it with a more aggressively open license really shows some people are missing the boat. GPL !=BSD. Different motives, different politics, etc. Just like BSD != [insert company] proprietary license. The only difference is that sometimes GPL developers, out of the kindness of their collective hearts, will BSD or dual-license their work. Which is probably a little confusing, particularly when they don't (but that is kind of the point of the GPL, protectivism) and the GPL developers do have a right to license their own modifications as they like (just like the BSD developers, it just happens the GPL restricts some of what can be done).
That said I'm glad this came up because I do have a more rounded appreciation of the expectations of someone releasing code under the BSD and some of the misunderstanding on both sides (and a much more RMS-like view of Theo, which is kind of amusing after thinking we were the crazy ones for all these years). Ciao!
I never played the original, but I became very interested after I started working on a Source mod of my own. I've been a big fan of class-based FPS team play since Tribes and an even bigger fan of fun/silliness since discovering (the tasteless) Postal 2 (not that it need be tasteless, but humor is good...especially with FPS where you can get WAY too serious). The thing I like about class play is if it's done right you actually end up in a situation where team members depend on other team member filling various roles. Most FPS really feel mostly like endless variations on standard DM. With good class-based play you have to opportunity to learn to excel at a variety of roles so that truly skilled players know the game and the teams responsibilities and make decisions based on more then simple kill-rates or individual point. Some of the most fun I've had was playing support competitively.
And of course right after paying out on the high profile class action law suite for price fixing related to that bait-and-switch.
For the love of god. When we recommend off-site backups we mean off-site. Thieves are just one issue. Then there are fires, tornadoes, earthquakes and the whole gambit of other natural and man-made disasters. Unfortunately you don't get to choose which one.
And there's always room for improvement. (:|>
If enough people will pay for it to create a sustainable market, it's needed (period). Not to mention I hear what sounds like and assumption that this is going to be targeted at the enthusiast market, side-stepping the high-end (and high-cost) graphics shops and their associated market. Unless we assumed Pixar ran all their workstations on...pixie dust?
Anyway, if it finds a markets more power. Engineers do their jobs, people get paid. Welcome the open market. (:
Of course now that I'd done the simple search I find it coincidentally, everywhere.
I've wondered about this myself, but ages ago. Since then I've found that in my particular situation it's not needed (VPN/SSH/WEBDAV). But a quick check on Freshmeat shows at least 2 possibilities: scponly, rssh.
I get that using a wrapper program like either of these is kind of cockeyed, but SFTP *is* the most commonly supported secure transfer protocol (webdav/ssh, but not nearly as drop-in for Dreamweaver users, etc).
Anyway, I think it's safe to say the *nix community is now big enough that most itches have at least been attempted to scratch. And FTR, there are assholes in every community, sounds like you just had a spot of bad luck.
That's the problem with Vista. So far it's effectively proved at best a lateral upgrade. Considering performance, it can be considered a downgrade.
People might be a lot of things that make more technical people feel smug, but they aren't stupid.
Take a familiar product from a consumer and replace it with a newer, less efficient product and what should you expect? Microsoft made some really bad assumptions:
- They assumed by increasing the acceptable requirements consumers wouldn't notice the decrease in performance (it evens out with better hardware, right?).
- They relied on their old monopoly tactics that have served then so well. The motive for the upgrade hasn't been "gee-wiz, I've got to have it!" features. It's been things like lock-in (Direct X10), (in)availability and support. That's going to be rather insulting to your average user, especially when you take the first point into account that they've effectively lost performance.
Imagine you go to the dealer with your reasonably new car for trade in, they offer you a new car that goes slower, has worse gas mileage and seemingly fewer features. With no real reason to upgrade you might be better off sticking with the car you already own, or even a new version of the same model.But in the end Microsoft is doing to consumers what they do to businesses. Forcing adoption. Not on features or buzz but relying on strong-arm tactics and lock-in. And your average user doesn't like to be bullied.
no matter how confident it is you are that they do.
While I agree (mostly), those lines of thinking side-step things like convenience (I download it when I like, from the comfort of my home, probably while doing other things) and format (I use mp3's exclusively, so buying 'hard' media simply adds an additional step between me and the music).
So while I agree that you end up paying more for less (no album cover, no liner notes, no physical media) it comes close to being a wash (not quite) with the immediacy and the convenience.
Recovering the cost of attorneys fees alone would be no small thing. And technically damages can be considered any revenue made, had the copyright holder(s) chose to, say, dual license the product and legally bring it to market. Should people be allowed to keep profits made by stealing your intellectual property?
They do a subscription service, which I can understand how that might bug you. But for DRM-free music, since they carry a lot of music I like, the price-point and service style are fine. If I want to pick and chose only a couple of tracks I use services like Bleep, Fintunes, Inertia or even iTunes.
But their model is a subscription service. Which for people like me works (with a booster pack here and there).
The site looks awful. Maybe the selection used to be better, but what I see there now certainly doesn't warrant excitement or press coverage. I generally find the work that Michael Robertson does interesting but this isn't a project I'd have taken much notice to on it's own merits. At least not as it currently stands.
But the variety was never there. I've bought music through them but I rely on sites that can offer more.
Ya, it can be a little difficult to navigate before you sign up. I'm assuming they figure most people who are interested would go for the free downloads right away. But you can still check it out, you just have to dig around. Here's a link that will get you there.
desktop provider. And it pays.
Antithetic. The spelling-bee ones are possibly one of the more primordial. So let me just get that one out of the way for you. My bad.
I mean we need lingo for these slash-memes. The antithetical ones are always the best (cutting!) but there's a whole chain of mantras we proudly trot out (only the older and the wiser of us of course) as if they haven't be said line for line 123902184^23948 times.
This is the newest one I've seen bandied about lately. Kind of a post-slashdotism really. Quite clever to mock the very community you're MUCH to good to be a part of...or maybe it's just meant to be ironic. I mean, it is...but it would be enheartening if these posters see that it is (then I guess the jokes on me!).
Effectively you offer nothing (+5 Interesting!) but a rehash of another person's rehash of a set of observations about...observations condemning other posts for having...opinions, that might relay (God forbid it)...facts and stir conversion. Which I totally get. It's trite (??). All that talking and stuff can really bring a brother down. Sometimes I just hold my breath (*unless I read something somewhere really witty I can reiterate*).
And with other resources (Bleep, Fintunes, Inertia, etc) I find my music selection keeps expanding horizontally (and DRM free).
eMusic no traction? They are the second largest digital music retailer. The #1 largest DRM-free retailer and probably the only major digital retailer with (recently updated) Linux support. It's a great resource for slightly older music or anything even remotely off the beaten path (my main interest).
and I agree the drugs thing *is* very unnatural allowing you're brain chemistry to achieve states that are terribly disconnected from anything you'd be able to actually achieve by any natural means. But before getting too high (no pun) on our horses I think it's important to remember that while this is a pretty incredibly young science and the chances are there will be a lot of missteps as we explore it the lives that it improves really are important. Even if it's done a bit imperfectly.
I do it anyway but it anyways, but it used to annoy me when people would tell me how much better it would make me feel. If anything the exercise/drug comparison is really only an example of how ineffective our current batch of antidepressant really are and with the high level of hit-and-miss and the 'poop-out's' I'd imagine you could study doing just about anything consistently and find it was as effective or nearly as effective as antidepressants.
Not that I don't believe exercise make some people happier, but I don't get a joggers high. I get tired and sore. I'll probably live longer and my heart probably gets more oxygen.
Did you read the two links? I keep seeing the words replica and 'hoax bomb' around here like people know what their talking about. But I've seen the hoodie. The "electronics" consist what looks a solderless circuit board with some LEDs and a battery to power them. A hoax is supposed to be intended to deceive someone.
If wearing a hoodie with lights merits arrest at (automatic weapons) gun-point then I guess you're right. Mission accomplished. As for the not responding, we'll have to let her speak up (or not). But at 8AM if some clerk got weird with me when I asked a simple question because I had blinky LED's I might not provide the response they wanted either. My first reaction might not be: oh. I totally look like a terrorist! But more: what a moron. Where's my coffee.