You might want to be careful with that line of thinking. One of the few things the US really exports is intellectual property. That's why the US government is so obsessed with bullying the rest of the world into enacting repressive copyright and patent laws. If the US makes a habit of stealing information there's no reason the rest of the world should respect their IP.
A language is a system consisting of a grammar and syntax used to encode information. A programming language is also a grammar and syntax system, a very strict one. Written mathematics as well.
It's not "something smart." Mathematics, programming languages, assembly code, Swahili, these are all languages in a very real sense. Reading and writing music, combined with music composition (equivalent to composing your own sentences) could also be considered a language, but just playing an instrument, not really.
You can always complain that a test is too hard or too easy. I think it's pretty ridiculous that a government employee in Whitehorse has to be able to speak French while the ones in Montreal often sigh as if speaking to you in English is a major ordeal, but that's irrelevant to the discussion. The point is that the second language requirement for government service and the one for getting into university have different intentions and the OPs conflation of the two is misleading.
The Clang and LLVM developers reach different conclusions from ours because they do not share our values and goals. They object to the measures we have taken to defend freedom because they see the inconvenience of them and do not recognize (or don't care about) the need for them. I would guess they describe their work as "open source" and do not talk about freedom. They have been supported by Apple, the company which hates our freedom so much that its app store for the ithings _requires_ all apps to be nonfree.
The existence of LLVM is a terrible setback for our community precisely because it is not copylefted and can be used as the basis for nonfree compilers -- so that all contribution to LLVM directly helps proprietary software as much as it helps us.
I retract my verb. Stallman isn't complaining. He's preaching. And it ain't cooperation and understanding he's preaching.
I have no problem with Stallman pushing his viewpoint. I hope you don't have a problem with someone else calling him out as a zealot.
Stallman's general message is an important one. Proprietary software, particularly software that locks data into non-interchangeable formats, certainly has some drawbacks that are important to consider when you're choosing what to use. It is important to make an informed decision. The problem is, Stallman acts like a raving zealot, building up all kinds of crazy around that reasonable insight. Personally, after his initial contribution, I think Stallman has done much more harm to open source than good. The only reason it has any credibility at all is due to the masses of contributors who take a more reasonable approach, quietly putting their code where their mouths are.
I don't think there's anything wrong with someone writing a program and then deciding to keep it proprietary. I might choose not to use it because of that decision, but it's not a moral failing of the author. Likewise, there's nothing wrong with a bunch of people deciding to write a compiler and let others use or modify it, whether they choose a BSD license or the GPL. He who wrote it gets to decide what rights he'd like to give away. As a user, I have, and always have had, complete freedom: to take it or leave it.
In Canada most universities will accept math to fulfill a grade 12-level second language requirement, and have for decades. The point is not that you can order a beer in some other country while on vacation, it's that your brain has been stretched in the right direction. It makes sense.
Federal government jobs require that you actually speak French (and English) well enough to serve someone in that language, because there the point is that you actually speak the second language. That's well beyond what a grade 12 level French class would teach you, by the way.
They may not have to, but most proprietary vendors see that there's benefit to contributing their changes rather than forking. Incorporating new changes from the community into your fork is a huge pain in the ass. If you're actually selling the fork as an end product, maybe it's worth it. For Apple with a compiler? Not a chance.
Have you been to an airport in the last, oh, few decades? The rich people go through special priority lanes to get to their special seats-that-fold-down-into-beds. Whenever I see it I smile, because that rich guy who just paid $5,000 for his seat means I got mine for $200. Enjoy your priority lane and comfy seat, sucker.
You guys are really going to have to fix that lawsuit thing. Every time someone proposes to do anything new the first objection is "you're going to get sued."
In civilized places you buy insurance. The insurance company is really good at figuring out how risky you are and charges you appropriate premiums. Figuring out how risky robotic cars are is a lot easier.
Actually, tipping taxi drivers is one of the situations I find tipping to make a lot of sense. Taxi drivers vary immensely from great guys who give great service, to complete assholes. Making part of their fee contingent on customer satisfaction seems like a great idea.
We did, until recently. They were called "neighbourhoods."
Now parents are so paranoid that leaving little Johnny with the neighbour is out of the question, along with letting him play at the park with the other kids.
If you let ${means of production} = "capital" and ${taxes} = "collecting part of what you think you own but are really just managing for the people" my practical definition of how socialism is practiced today is a subset of the formal definition.
In reality it's very rare that anyone practices "socialism" or "capitalism". Virtually all economies (including the USA) are actually mixed, which is what I assume you're getting at with your "social-democrats". Since "Slashdot is an American site" and most Americans seem to think, for example, France is socialist, using simplified practical definitions that don't challenge their assumptions unnecessarily helps the discussion along.
"Socialism" really is a synonym for "badness" in the US, isn't it?
Socialism is an economic system where the state collects taxes to fund things like social programs, that allow people to do things like not work when they're sick without fear of, for example, starving to death. Socialism is also usually associated with regulation, such as laws that say you need to give your employees ample sick days.
Capitalism is an economic system where the market (which is generally controlled by those who have capital) makes the decisions. Although it's possible in a labor-shortage situation that employers would insist on sick employees staying home to avoid a productivity hit, in current corporate capitalistic practice this doesn't seem to happen. Employees are generally granted the minimum sick time required by law.
For examples, see Europe (lots of sick and vacation days, more socialist) versus the USA (few sick and vacation days, more capitalist).
Slashdot Mirror
You might want to be careful with that line of thinking. One of the few things the US really exports is intellectual property. That's why the US government is so obsessed with bullying the rest of the world into enacting repressive copyright and patent laws. If the US makes a habit of stealing information there's no reason the rest of the world should respect their IP.
A language is a system consisting of a grammar and syntax used to encode information. A programming language is also a grammar and syntax system, a very strict one. Written mathematics as well.
It's not "something smart." Mathematics, programming languages, assembly code, Swahili, these are all languages in a very real sense. Reading and writing music, combined with music composition (equivalent to composing your own sentences) could also be considered a language, but just playing an instrument, not really.
Yeah, he forgot HP. I constantly forget HP. Most people I know who remember them would like to forget.
You can always complain that a test is too hard or too easy. I think it's pretty ridiculous that a government employee in Whitehorse has to be able to speak French while the ones in Montreal often sigh as if speaking to you in English is a major ordeal, but that's irrelevant to the discussion. The point is that the second language requirement for government service and the one for getting into university have different intentions and the OPs conflation of the two is misleading.
I retract my verb. Stallman isn't complaining. He's preaching. And it ain't cooperation and understanding he's preaching.
I have no problem with Stallman pushing his viewpoint. I hope you don't have a problem with someone else calling him out as a zealot.
Stallman's general message is an important one. Proprietary software, particularly software that locks data into non-interchangeable formats, certainly has some drawbacks that are important to consider when you're choosing what to use. It is important to make an informed decision. The problem is, Stallman acts like a raving zealot, building up all kinds of crazy around that reasonable insight. Personally, after his initial contribution, I think Stallman has done much more harm to open source than good. The only reason it has any credibility at all is due to the masses of contributors who take a more reasonable approach, quietly putting their code where their mouths are.
I don't think there's anything wrong with someone writing a program and then deciding to keep it proprietary. I might choose not to use it because of that decision, but it's not a moral failing of the author. Likewise, there's nothing wrong with a bunch of people deciding to write a compiler and let others use or modify it, whether they choose a BSD license or the GPL. He who wrote it gets to decide what rights he'd like to give away. As a user, I have, and always have had, complete freedom: to take it or leave it.
PS - hello zombie Stallman minion moderators!
In Canada most universities will accept math to fulfill a grade 12-level second language requirement, and have for decades. The point is not that you can order a beer in some other country while on vacation, it's that your brain has been stretched in the right direction. It makes sense.
Federal government jobs require that you actually speak French (and English) well enough to serve someone in that language, because there the point is that you actually speak the second language. That's well beyond what a grade 12 level French class would teach you, by the way.
They may not have to, but most proprietary vendors see that there's benefit to contributing their changes rather than forking. Incorporating new changes from the community into your fork is a huge pain in the ass. If you're actually selling the fork as an end product, maybe it's worth it. For Apple with a compiler? Not a chance.
Then use only GPLed software on your computer.
This story is about Stallman complaining because other people don't agree with his vision. Too bad.
Have you been to an airport in the last, oh, few decades? The rich people go through special priority lanes to get to their special seats-that-fold-down-into-beds. Whenever I see it I smile, because that rich guy who just paid $5,000 for his seat means I got mine for $200. Enjoy your priority lane and comfy seat, sucker.
You guys are really going to have to fix that lawsuit thing. Every time someone proposes to do anything new the first objection is "you're going to get sued."
In civilized places you buy insurance. The insurance company is really good at figuring out how risky you are and charges you appropriate premiums. Figuring out how risky robotic cars are is a lot easier.
Actually, tipping taxi drivers is one of the situations I find tipping to make a lot of sense. Taxi drivers vary immensely from great guys who give great service, to complete assholes. Making part of their fee contingent on customer satisfaction seems like a great idea.
It's rare that a ban on discrimination is more than half a ban on discrimination.
We did, until recently. They were called "neighbourhoods."
Now parents are so paranoid that leaving little Johnny with the neighbour is out of the question, along with letting him play at the park with the other kids.
Do you have numbers to back that up? With a divorce rate of 50% I wouldn't be so sure.
Except that the majority of the developed world practices mixed economics, with both socialist and capitalist elements. Even the US.
If you let ${means of production} = "capital" and ${taxes} = "collecting part of what you think you own but are really just managing for the people" my practical definition of how socialism is practiced today is a subset of the formal definition.
In reality it's very rare that anyone practices "socialism" or "capitalism". Virtually all economies (including the USA) are actually mixed, which is what I assume you're getting at with your "social-democrats". Since "Slashdot is an American site" and most Americans seem to think, for example, France is socialist, using simplified practical definitions that don't challenge their assumptions unnecessarily helps the discussion along.
I was unaware of that verse. Thank you. Should make an interesting discussion point next time some poor Jehovah's Witness wanders across my doorstep.
"Socialism" really is a synonym for "badness" in the US, isn't it?
Socialism is an economic system where the state collects taxes to fund things like social programs, that allow people to do things like not work when they're sick without fear of, for example, starving to death. Socialism is also usually associated with regulation, such as laws that say you need to give your employees ample sick days.
Capitalism is an economic system where the market (which is generally controlled by those who have capital) makes the decisions. Although it's possible in a labor-shortage situation that employers would insist on sick employees staying home to avoid a productivity hit, in current corporate capitalistic practice this doesn't seem to happen. Employees are generally granted the minimum sick time required by law.
For examples, see Europe (lots of sick and vacation days, more socialist) versus the USA (few sick and vacation days, more capitalist).
That's many times the annual US death rate due to terrorism, isn't it?
Headline: "Aspirin: Terrorist Sleeper Attack?"
Slave to the prisoner's dilemma are you?
If they figured out how to make a car entirely dependent on a single solder joint nobody would buy that car because it would be constantly dying.
Somebody has a weird idea of what the human digestive system looks like.
Wait, you're saying that because it has an entropy similar to a book of the bible it's not gibberish?
First hack - remove the cellular radio.