Fortunately it's not a real spoiler, and even if it were, it's such an obvious thing to suggest that it's easily dismissed as a moron pretending to be a spoiler troll.
their aim... to rid the world of non-free software.
And THAT right there is why it's not completely crazy to suggest that the (intention behind the) GPL is anti-capitalist. It's not crazy to suggest that if Stallman could, he would prohibit all licenses but the GPL. (There are quotes from the FSF website and from FSF people earlier in the topic that explicitly say as much.)
Yes, plenty of companies save/make tons of money via Free software. Stallman does not care. Stallman has shown in many ways that he cares not about people, and especially not about companies, but about only his own ideas. One of his ideas is "All software everywhere has to be Free." There is no room in his worldview for "Free software over here, proprietary software over there." Not even as a temporary situation until the Free products are better than the proprietary products. He has to live with it for now, but if he had the power he wouldn't. He would make it GPL or nothing; and that's what makes Stallman's ultimate idea of Free software communistic: its lack of voluntariness.
I'm not saying, however, that he's completely anti-capitalist. As I said above, he could not care less how money is made or saved with Free software; he does, however, see it as an evil that companies can make selling proprietary software a primary source of income, because he is not just for Free software, but vehemently AGAINST proprietary software.
So far as I can see, the OSI is an attempt to keep all/most of the benefits of the FSF's position while moderating their worldview and not coming across as wacko as Stallman does. I think this is fine, and I think most "open-source"y people are fine living alongside Stallman AND alongside proprietary software. They just want to make the best software they can and help the most people they can. Free software just happens to be their best way of doing that. They DO care about people, not just their own ideas.
You can't pick and choose which parts of science you like, and which parts of science you don't like.
I dunno. I don't think you're too crazy if you like the "guessing at the causes of testable, observable stuff that happens today" part of science more than the "guessing at the causes of untestable, unobservable stuff that happened way back in the past" part.
To be fair to GM, you really should have been negatively reinforced every time you took your keys out (keys out == no more bing), and then noticed the time taking your keys out didn't make the sound stop. There's gotta be at least like two or three seconds between the time you pull the keys out and the time you shut the door.
I suppose I should have been more clear: I should have said you didn't know the difference between a semantic markup language and a document format. HTML in its current kosher form does not specify presentation, but leaves it up to another language. A full-fledged document format almost by definition DOES have to include presentation information. If it didn't, it would cease to be a full document format and become a semantic markup language.
In any case, your original statement,
Document formats do not specify how the data should be displayed in most cases.
, is obviously untrue in this context. We're talking about full document formats like.doc and ODF and OOXML etc, the purpose of all of which INCLUDES reliably formatting all the stuff within them.
Sigh... back in high school I would've understood every bit of that little expression. Then I pursued a music degree instead of a CS degree. Now I can only dimly see how logarithms even enter into it.
The odds of those bits coming together by chance in a movie file, in that exact order, are the same as your odds of guessing another of the MPAA's hex keys completely by chance, out of thin air.
Not correct. Let's think this through.
The infamous hex key you refer to is a collection of sixteen hex bytes. That's 128 bits, for a grand total of 2^128 = ~3.4 x 10^38 possible values. Your odds of guessing one of their keys is one out of 3.4 x10^38.
Now let's look at what GP said:
they were found in the decimal representation of some movies?
The decimal representation of those movies consists, by definition, solely of digits 0 through 9. ICQ numbers consist (last I checked) of integers between 1 and 999,999,999. So to be conservative, let's call an ICQ number any string of nine decimal digits.
If we converted a whole movie's worth of bytes into decimal digits, how many thousand ICQ numbers do you think we'd come up with? Especially if you start with any arbitrary digit and don't divide it into nine-digit chunks? I had typed out the math, but the point is already well enough made, I think.
Okay, I stand corrected on the specifics of what a PSone is, but I never said that PSone wasn't Sony's name for a PSone. I said that what GGP was referring to was not PSone, but all forms of the original PlayStation, the abbreviation for which is PS1, not PSone.
PSone was a handheld version of the PlayStation with a small LCD screen. It did very well, but it was not the runaway smash you were referring to.
PS/2 is a type of connector for computer peripherals. It perhaps was a runaway smash, but it was not by Sony, and was also not what you were referring to.
And how many lawsuits have you been hit with from parents of kids injured while using the contraptions pictured there? I mean, they look like lots of fun, but I wouldn't want to be in charge of a company that made those middle two gadgets, not with all the wacky freeze-tag-banning parents and school districts out there these days.
This parable illustrates how personal defects get in the way of quality.
Dude, did you even read the comment you were responding to?! It said that Gates ALLOWED THE FIX!! I mean, I don't think Bill Gates is some kind of role model or anything, but having someone come into your office to unwittingly call your own code "crap" to your face, and then going along with what that person says, is NOT a "personal defect" of any kind.
You can't easily switch between the columns, since half the options expand into submenu's instead.
Ehh, I call BS. Everything in the left column is an application shortcut. These do not expand. Stuff in the right column does expand, but it expands to the right, meaning there's no ambiguity when you push a horizontal arrow key from that column, unless you're somehow fixated on hitting -> in the right column to go around-the-world to the left column.
Slashdot Mirror
Fortunately it's not a real spoiler, and even if it were, it's such an obvious thing to suggest that it's easily dismissed as a moron pretending to be a spoiler troll.
And THAT right there is why it's not completely crazy to suggest that the (intention behind the) GPL is anti-capitalist. It's not crazy to suggest that if Stallman could, he would prohibit all licenses but the GPL. (There are quotes from the FSF website and from FSF people earlier in the topic that explicitly say as much.)
Yes, plenty of companies save/make tons of money via Free software. Stallman does not care. Stallman has shown in many ways that he cares not about people, and especially not about companies, but about only his own ideas. One of his ideas is "All software everywhere has to be Free." There is no room in his worldview for "Free software over here, proprietary software over there." Not even as a temporary situation until the Free products are better than the proprietary products. He has to live with it for now, but if he had the power he wouldn't. He would make it GPL or nothing; and that's what makes Stallman's ultimate idea of Free software communistic: its lack of voluntariness.
I'm not saying, however, that he's completely anti-capitalist. As I said above, he could not care less how money is made or saved with Free software; he does, however, see it as an evil that companies can make selling proprietary software a primary source of income, because he is not just for Free software, but vehemently AGAINST proprietary software.
So far as I can see, the OSI is an attempt to keep all/most of the benefits of the FSF's position while moderating their worldview and not coming across as wacko as Stallman does. I think this is fine, and I think most "open-source"y people are fine living alongside Stallman AND alongside proprietary software. They just want to make the best software they can and help the most people they can. Free software just happens to be their best way of doing that. They DO care about people, not just their own ideas.
GUFFAW!
(ahem.) No, no sir, it does not have seven different versions. It has over three hundred.
I'm just sayin' is all.
They don't. They don't think they should. That's their whole point.
disclaimer: I'm a proponent of GPL and BSD licenses.
I dunno. I don't think you're too crazy if you like the "guessing at the causes of testable, observable stuff that happens today" part of science more than the "guessing at the causes of untestable, unobservable stuff that happened way back in the past" part.
It's actually "Paper Cassette".
Because I know you care. <3
To be fair to GM, you really should have been negatively reinforced every time you took your keys out (keys out == no more bing), and then noticed the time taking your keys out didn't make the sound stop. There's gotta be at least like two or three seconds between the time you pull the keys out and the time you shut the door.
I'm just sayin' is all.
You planning on responding to the comment on that entry you keep linking to, or are you hoping people just don't scroll down that far?
They bought blo.gs, my favorite service, and then promptly ran it into the ground. That's dirty enough for me.
So if you're playing Zerg, you can see only like 2% of your units at the same time?
Lame. ;)
I suppose I should have been more clear: I should have said you didn't know the difference between a semantic markup language and a document format. HTML in its current kosher form does not specify presentation, but leaves it up to another language. A full-fledged document format almost by definition DOES have to include presentation information. If it didn't, it would cease to be a full document format and become a semantic markup language.
In any case, your original statement,
, is obviously untrue in this context. We're talking about full document formats like .doc and ODF and OOXML etc, the purpose of all of which INCLUDES reliably formatting all the stuff within them.
You seem to have a gross nonunderstanding of the difference between a markup language and a document format.
This has already been pointed out to him. Either he doesn't check his messages, or he doesn't care. *shrug*
Citation.
(Although to be fair, GP was quoting someone.)
Sigh... back in high school I would've understood every bit of that little expression. Then I pursued a music degree instead of a CS degree. Now I can only dimly see how logarithms even enter into it.
Sigh.
Not correct. Let's think this through.
The infamous hex key you refer to is a collection of sixteen hex bytes. That's 128 bits, for a grand total of 2^128 = ~3.4 x 10^38 possible values. Your odds of guessing one of their keys is one out of 3.4 x10^38.
Now let's look at what GP said:
The decimal representation of those movies consists, by definition, solely of digits 0 through 9. ICQ numbers consist (last I checked) of integers between 1 and 999,999,999. So to be conservative, let's call an ICQ number any string of nine decimal digits.
If we converted a whole movie's worth of bytes into decimal digits, how many thousand ICQ numbers do you think we'd come up with? Especially if you start with any arbitrary digit and don't divide it into nine-digit chunks? I had typed out the math, but the point is already well enough made, I think.
Okay, I stand corrected on the specifics of what a PSone is, but I never said that PSone wasn't Sony's name for a PSone. I said that what GGP was referring to was not PSone, but all forms of the original PlayStation, the abbreviation for which is PS1, not PSone.
PSone was a handheld version of the PlayStation with a small LCD screen. It did very well, but it was not the runaway smash you were referring to.
PS/2 is a type of connector for computer peripherals. It perhaps was a runaway smash, but it was not by Sony, and was also not what you were referring to.
You meant simply "PS1" and "PS2". HTH.
And how many lawsuits have you been hit with from parents of kids injured while using the contraptions pictured there? I mean, they look like lots of fun, but I wouldn't want to be in charge of a company that made those middle two gadgets, not with all the wacky freeze-tag-banning parents and school districts out there these days.
You, sir, are a braver man than I.
Maybe I'm dense, but what the crap does your comment have to do with the comment you quoted? Is this some new kind of troll I'm unaware of?
You need to read this guy's signature.
Dude, did you even read the comment you were responding to?! It said that Gates ALLOWED THE FIX!! I mean, I don't think Bill Gates is some kind of role model or anything, but having someone come into your office to unwittingly call your own code "crap" to your face, and then going along with what that person says, is NOT a "personal defect" of any kind.
Ehh, I call BS. Everything in the left column is an application shortcut. These do not expand. Stuff in the right column does expand, but it expands to the right, meaning there's no ambiguity when you push a horizontal arrow key from that column, unless you're somehow fixated on hitting -> in the right column to go around-the-world to the left column.
You keep using that . I do not think it means what you think it means.
(Try <blockquote>.)
Incorrect. See my reply to the GP.