The entire trick to surviving these waves seems to be not catch them from the side. If this warning comes in enough time to turn the ship to face the wave at the safest angle then the ship stands a better chance.
Even if the ship is destined to sink, this might give the crew more time to get to the liveboats, some modern ones are almost like subs so that no matter the wave, they can survive because they always right themselves and are closed so they can't fill with water and are to small to be broken up.
I have no idea exactly how much warning a ship can get with this, but as you can see from the pictures supplied and the stories in the article these waves can be survived. Perhaps a person with some experience can tell if the sudden sinkings could be down to the ship catching the wave at the wrong angle.
The claim that the innocent have nothing to hide may be up for debate, but "non-speeders don't need to fear the radar gun" is not.
If this thing is ONLY to be used for traffic control then that is a good thing. I doubt it, I think it is going to be used to detect for isntance weed plantations (you can detect them through the heat signatures that the lighting gives off) and surveillance. But as someone who has had two attempts at break in, I am not all that worried about the police getting some new tools. The privacy nutters never seem to come up with better arguments then "this won't allow us to break the law anymore". Fine with me, don't like the law, change it, don't break it. If you really want to speed that badly, get the speed limit lifted, it worked for the germans.
Why is there so little reporting on what this Kasparov actually stands for? Check wikipedia, about the only thing I can find is that he is far-left (communist?) and that the Other Russia party is a coalition of parties including communists and nationalists. Well, that is a load of my mind. That is Stalin and Hitler in one party, why choose when you can have two!
It is kinda like the US people who keep saying vote Ron Paul, then you read up on the guy and learn that, yes there people who would make even worse presidents then Bush.
Just what does Kasparov stand for, just because he is against Putin who clearly ain't all that nice does NOT make kasparov himself any better. The problem with the media is that they like the idea of heroes, Putin clearly no longer is one so they need someone else. The world doesn't work like that.
No comments so far seem to explain anything about Kasparov except one commenter who points out that his dad was jewish. Oh well that eases my mind. I think another person rallying against a troubled goverment promising better things had a jewish father (step-father).
Godwin or not, just what does the Unitied Civil Front (his real party, Other Russia is a coalition of multiple parties) stand for? I do not know and don't speak russian and the western media seems almost reluctant (or kasparov just ain't as intresting as britney spears) to report on it.
He first began the serious study of chess after he came across a chess problem set up by his parents and proposed a solution... His father died when he was seven years old.
I suppose that is one way to stop the old man from testing you.
He talks about Improvised Explosive Devices and that they account for half the US casualties. Right, eh so? These things are new? Pretty sure my field manual mentioned them, not just how to spot them and deal with them but including suggestions on how to make your own should the need arise. That was over 2 decades ago.
The vietnamese used a lot of IED's and even non-explosive traps. So did the Israeli's in their war against Britian (well would be Israeli's) the various occupied nations during WW2 became experts in it.
In the days of Sword and Bow&Arrow a flail was a dangerous weapon found on any farm. You would need to be very good with your sword to go up against a farmer with a scythe and ask yourselve, who has had the most training with their weapon.
The LIE is that somehow modern tech has changed this. It hasn't. So they use mobile phones now as remote detonators, is that really that different then a radio or IR detonator, how about a simple wire? A fuse? They all been used and plenty of others.
He then goes on to claim that you could use a PS3 as a missle guidance system. You probably could. Except missle guidance systems existed long before you had the PS3, so why do you need anything that powerfull?
It also doesn't explain where you get the rest of the tech, you know like the missle or the detection system. No, the IR sensor is NOT good enough to track a plane. Not by a long shot. What about the software?
It becomes even more silly when you then ask where these PS3 guided missles ARE? All the incidents involving missles involve regular missles bought on the blackmarket. I seen no story claiming that these SAM's were handmade.
If this stuff was so advanced you would think that by now Hezbollah could hit a target with it rather then having to fire at civilian centers because they are the only target big enough to have a change of causing damage.
If you want to see real modern tech you got to look at the propaganda war, every incident, there is a camera right there, recording it and its data gets out to the rest of the world with amazing speed. But the tech used is all of the shelf stuff. Nothing home grown or opensource.
No, this guy is just trying to use a buzzword to scaremonger. Iraq is nothing new, what is frightening is that the US was incapable avoiding it. That we still don't have any better way to deal with this. No I don't have the answer, except that perhaps they should have done another Gulf War 1, bomb the place back to the stoneage every couple of years but stay the fuck out of it. Really, hasn't history shown us that modern occupations rarely work well?
We recently had the Lord of the Rings movies. Handsup who fast forwards past the hobbit bits to the good stuff. The action rather then the endless whining.
Read the book, it is worse. Edit out the bits where Frodo is whining about his fate and you got the shortest book in history. The Star Wars formula is an intresting new and original take on the classic fairy tale. Evil king, entrapped princess, destined hero.
It is nothing unusual except George Lucas added a brilliant new twist. The hero doesn't whine. Compare Luke Skywalker (and for that matter Han Solo and Leia Organa and Obi-wan Kenobi, even the baddies (please do not force me to name them as well, I would like to pretend I have at least once touched a girl) with ALL the other destined heroes from entertainment. Luke doesn't whine. He WANTS to join the rebellion as a fight pilot and when opportunity knocks he turns from a teen boy into a responsible adult in a flash. He acts! He is there for his friends and fights for the cause ALL WITHOUT ONCE WHINING ABOUT IT. Nobody in the entire movie WHINES.
You especially have to take note of this as the movies launched in the late 70's when EVERY bloody movie had tons of whining in it. Endless soul searching and meaningless drivel was what made movies. The audience was desperately inneed of some mindless entertainment with simple heroes who did the right thing and George Lucas gave it to them.
It is this element that is most often forgotten about why Star Wars was so amazingly succesfull. People who were kids then forgot that the movie had just as much of an impact among the ADULTS of that day. Star Wars was NOT a 'for kids' movie. ALL ages loved it.
Then come the prequels and we don't get Lukes dad, we get Frodo, a teen Frodo. An angsty teen frodo. And no Han Solo or for that matter a Leia. Were are the heroes in the pre-quels? Where are the people who do the right thing? It gets killed of right at the start "we are not here to free the slaves". These are NOT the Jedi we are looking for.
George Lucas once gave us a simple story of heroes and we loved it. Then he gave us an angsty teen story and we didn't give a shit.
Another thing to consider, there are more Han Solo prequel books then Luke Skywalker or Leia Organa prequel books. Even Lando has more then the two skywalkers combines (The twins only have a Splinter of the minds eye and both Han and Lando each got a trilogy back in the 80's or so and Han Solo got another trilogy in the Expanded Universe.) Lots of people thought Han was the hero. Where is the smuggler in the prequels?
Jabba the Hut ALWAYS met up with Han Solo BEFORE he fled Tatooine, it is part of the books and was shot at the same time of the original. In fact the bit where Han steps on his tail is because originally Jabba was a fat human with no tail so Han could just walk around him.
This scene (apart from the 'comedy') actually is a good thing, it helps deepen the characters bit. I just wish they had added the scenes where Luke talks to Biggs about joining the rebbelion, it would help explain why Luke chokes up when Biggs buys it over the death star.
But I guess George Lucas can only have so much depth in his movies. Really, examine the original Biggs scene, realise that it removes an essential human element from the movie, a real bit of drama and you will learn why the prequels were so bad. George Lucas can't do drama. That wasn't a problem in A New Hope, it in many ways succeeded because it was a non-stop thrill ride, but the prequels demanded more and GL just could not deliver. If he could, ANH would have had the biggs intro.
Star Wars spaceships use repulsors NOT wings. The use repulsors to hover and land and provide the lift that wings or rotors do in our craft. The engines in the back are just there for forward propulsion. The repulsors would be at the bottom of the craft, and so half a star ship would still have them, just as the front half of an aircraft would still have a landing gear.
If you want to complain, how about the foam from the firecraft not instantly scattering in the onrushing air?
In a Punch and Judy show you got the hero who is a clueless brainless idiot, and a baddy. The baddy will helpfully explain his entire scheme to the audience. Then when it comes time to execute his plan, the audience will try to warn the hero of the baddy creeping up behind him. The hero, being an idiot, will offcourse look the wrong way and never see the baddy no matter how hard to audience shouts. But no worry, the author knows his stuff and through sheer luck, the hero will nonetheless triomph.
Now take Episode 1. We know who the baddy is, Palpatine. We KNOW him to be the future emperor, no suprise there. We also KNOW him to be evil. The prequels don't even pretend he is perhaps someone who is trying to create a better future but gets corrupted along the way. Palpatine is evil, end of story.
We know what his plan is. Nobody in the movie seems to have a clue. Powerfull Jedi, experienced leaders. Somehow this dude manages to pull the wool over an entire galaxies eyes. Only near the end does one Jedi finally get a clue. It is pathetic. In episode 4-6 the whole galaxy KNOWS the empire is bad, there is not even the smallest pretense that the empire might be good for some people, it is an evil goverment, end of story. Did something happen between 3 and 4, did every living creature get hit by a massive cluestick?
Were episode 1 is bad enough (what with the KID, and shiny spaceships) 2 and 3 has us watching in disbelief, wanting to shout "BEHIND YOU" but being too old for that.
Steven Spielberg has directed a Columbo show, that is a series that proved a "WE KNOW YOU DID IT" can work, if you are really really good and have a fantastic hero and amazing actors. Spielberg MIGHT have been able to turn the prequels basic story into a story that worked. Possibly if we had witnessed Palpatines own fall as well. So that he starts out with the best intentions but becomes seduced by the dark side and takes Anakin with him in his fall. ANYTHING but this "BEHIND YOU" and Punch not even bothering to look behind him.
People love to rant about the Ewoks and JarJar but that is just cattle following the herd. The real problem is simple, the story just does not work. If you want to create a story about the tragic fall of a hero, you must first create a likeable person. Anakin ain't likable. He never does anything that endears us to him. We don't see him as anything but a brat who can't see how he is being manipulated.
If you make a Punch and Judy show, the hero has got to win. Yes he will get the audiences warning WRONG but in the end HE will WIN because right when all seems lost, he listens, spots the baddy and triumphs.
And that is the ultimate failing of the pre-quels, we don't get a happy ending. 3 movies and it is all just doom and gloom. The death of a princess, the slaughter of the jedi and the collapse of a galaxy wide civilization, all because everyone in it is to dumb to see Palpatines rather obvious moves.
Columbo would NOT have worked if the baddies got away with it.
George Lucas just ain't a good enough writer, I am not talking about dialoge here, that is just details, the synopsis of the pre-quels doesn't even work. Why doesn't Anakin see the manipulations? The entire fall just doesn't come across. If anything it reminded me of some of the more angsty animes where the hero is a kid who won't talk no matter what because that wouldn't be cool and shouts at the world for not being able to read his mind. Angsty teen movies are NOT what Star Wars is about.
Because we also got to ask ourselves what was so great about Episode 4? The hero did what he was supposed to do without whining about it. Luke Skywalker NOT ONCE bemoans his fate. He WANTS to join the rebellion, very briefly he protests because he has responisbilties but when the empire destroys that by killing his family he fights for the cause and never looks back. A HERO and rather unlike most other movies off that type where the weenie spents at least half the movie whining about how he doesn't want to be the
In a story with a princess and a destined one? The original three movies just didn't lay it on as thick as the pre-quels but they are BOTH the same story. Luke Skywalker is DESTINED to be a jedi, because his father is one. Han Solo could NEVER become one. This whole upper-cast system has ALWAYS been there, both in the form of born-to-be jedi's and royalty.
Lets be honest here, it is a fairy tale, and in fairy tales the world revolves around nobility because telling a story of how a real peasant becoming a great leader might just be a little upsetting to the people in whose kingdom these fairy tales began.
You wonder why no large media companies (fixed it for you) have a report devoted to this, or even report on it much or do anything but rehash the RIAA/MPAA press statements and never ever examine it.
Follow the money. You might as well ask, why do popular entertainment shows like Futurama show a dislike for things like napster and filesharing in general? Because they are the ones whose files are being shared!
Geez, name a news company that isn't part of some huge media giant. You might start to realize that those who should report on the RIAA/MPAA are in fact its members. Geez, you might as well expect Dell to launch a survey, computers, do we really need them.
What next, do you expect the tabaco industry to report on the dangers of smoking?
Follow the money, who is the person you expect to report on something paid for. There was an issue a few years ago around Oprah when she said something bad about meat. That was just the advertisers complaining. Reporting on the RIAA/MPAA tactics, that will get you a letter direct from the head office "STOP IT".
What next, Ruport Murdoch writing a story "Why it is a bad idea for one guy to own a lot of media"?
We infringe on our citizens rights, introduce draconian measures that will make us a laughing stock of the world and you, you release DVD's a month and half earlier (that is AFTER the EU movie release has already been delayed for half a year).
Wow, so frenchies, all of sudden those Bush voters look pretty shrewd eh?
Wasn't france the place were DVD's copy protection was ruled illegal? How has this been handled? Has the movie industry actuallty been made to do anything about it?
It isn't the first time the french have shown to be thouroughly corrupt. The EU level laws in this area also are often french backed.
You would think with race riots and national strikes the goverment has better things to do.
Over here in holland (the country with the tulips, windmills and woodenshoes... Rembrandt? van Gogh? sigh... Free pot AH I see that rang a bell) the gift giving day is the 5th of december, Sinterklaas. (Belgians are a bit slow, and do it on the 6th in the early morning)
Also, not all cultures have Christmas, and even among christians the date varies.
I suppose it explains a lot about the americans waistline that they got the longest "holiday season". Starting with thanksgiving and ending with new year.
So, just like the US citizen was wrong in thinking the rest of the world starts the holiday season with thanksgiving, you are wrong in thinking that everyone else starts it with Christmas.
On a side note, Christmas is a more religious holiday in holland without the exchange of presents. This is however changing slightly. Still the major gift giving day is the 20 days earlier then yours.
Sub site note, the americans got halloween, we got Sint Maarten, where kids dress up and go begging for candy
It is however perfectly easy for a company to launch with a limited number of items received from the factory. This is a basic sales trick. Amazon ordered the production of the kindle, but that doesn't mean all the units arrive in one go, that itself would be extremely foolish, it would delay the launch and cost a lot of money to stock everything.
Say that a factory can produce 100 devices per day just as an example. You want to launch as soon as possible so you tell them, when you got 500 send them over, so I can launch. Then at launch those 500 are "sold out". Sure they are, but the factory has been busily producing so they in fact now got 700 more, but because sending small orders is uneconomical you told them to NOT send the daily production over, you told them to wait till they got a 1000.
Bam, you get a head line of being sold out while the factory has plenty.
The kindle ain't sold out because it is still in production. It is trivial to set this scenario up and Amazon should fire its marketting department if they hadn't set this up. It is a basic move. Make the item seem hot, so that people get the idea that they MUST buy it now or they may not have another chance.
Have you EVER sold anything? It doesn't matter what house you are looking at buying, they ALWAYS got an intrested party about to make a good offer, so if you are quick you might just beat them. Decide NOW!
I am saying, don't expect me to give a damn. I am a baker by training. A good one, but YOU buying YOUR bread in the supermarket and insisting on zoning laws that don't allow me to have the bakery attached to the shop have put me out of business.
Times change, I had to give up my dream, why should you be any different?
Society does NOT own you the right to make a living in your chosen career. Only a lucky few manage that.
Unless you support goverment action to protect all kinds of other jobs that are dying out, I don't see my musicians should be given any more special threatment then they already get. Check how much money already goes to the arts. You need my taxes AND my spending money? Greedy much?
I wish you luck, if you make it, congrats. BUT do NOT expect me to subsidize a dying industry unless you are willing to do the same for mine. Show me the receipts from your local butcher, baker and grocer for the last decade and I will buy your album, but if you shopped at a supermarket just once, the deal is off. You don't care about my career, I don't care about yours.
Well it feels like it anyway, I am pretty sure I saw this list before. Oh yeah, every damn year. It is just a blessing the flying car ain't on it anymore, have you got yours yet? Mine must be stuck in the mail. I knew there would be problems going all email.
But hey, I got time, so lets go through the whole list shall we.
Personalized medicineWith the initial mapping of the human genome, scientists are moving rapidly toward the following likely breakthroughs for gene-based products and services:
creation of an individuals genome map for a retail price of less than $1,000 Good one, with the dollar going DOWN, that means you can get your genome mapped for the price of a coffee.
correlation of specific genes and proteins with specific conditions, such as cancers, Alzheimers, heart disease, and diabetes, which will allow both physicians and patients to anticipate, plan for, and mitigate, if not cure, DNA-based health challenges Well, duh, and can I predict that women will get tested for breast cancer so it can be detected earlier? Oh wait, this is already happening. It ain't much of a predition if it is already happening. That is pretty much the problem with this entire list
development of pharmaceuticals that treat gene-based diseases, replacing surgeries and chemotherapy Same as above, no not just my comment, this one is part of the previous point.
Distributed energyThe evolution of distributed energy will reflect that of computing: just as computing has migrated from the 20th centurys centralized model (powerful mainframes delivering applications to remote workstations) to todays decentralized model (PCs and networks), so energy generation and delivery will move from central to distributed sources, increasingly featuring local generators that can be linked when needed for greater output. Specific innovations will include:
advanced electric storage devices and batteries at all scales WoW, batteries will be better then they were before. Gosh. This includes small batteries and big batteries. Who would have thought. The future is bright indeed.
new power systems with source-switching flexibilityNot even sure what the hell this means. Is this like my laptop that can switch over from battery to net power without a hitch?
new energy management systemsWhat kind of energy management systems, are we talking new CPU throttling here OR management of nation wide energy? But hey, whatever. I am pretty sure new systems will be introduced. Sale people got to make a living you know.
Pervasive computingAlmost every device or object in consumers lives will be both smart and networked, giving rise to an Internet of things. Pervasive computing will drive the convergence of computing, the Internet, voice communications, and televisionultimately blurring categories of infotech products and services. Specific breakthroughs will include:
very simple and inexpensive computing devices with integrated wireless telephone and Internet capabilities (the $100 computer) Ah, that is cheap, now I can get a computer for less then a visit to the toilet. Damn inflation is a bitch eh. Bit lazy to predict the $100 dollar computer after it launched (at 200 dollars but lets not be picky). Also kinda ignores that the really hot item is the overpriced iPhone. We may GET simple and inexpensive but do we WANT it? Anyway, computers will be cheaper. WoW. I wish I had known that before I robbed a bank to pay for my PC
the semantic Web, enabled by Web data that automatically self-organizes based on its content, allowing search tools or software agents to better identify relevant Web pagesnot just find keywords on them The semantic web cannot exist until you somehow manage to stop people from spamming pages with all kinds of drivel just to get them listed. Google some obscure game and IGN will come up as the ultimate source of info for it, despite the fact that they have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ON I
Why can't the AllofMP3 model you metion work? Why is it not a valid business model?
99 cents a song is insanely high, a few megabyte of data at 99 cents? Just where is all the money going? Someone, somewhere is making a hell of a profit out of those iTunes sales. (Most likely the credit card companies)
AllOfMP3 had a simple business plan, use a balance, so that you limit the transaction costs, and sell the music with a minimum profit.
This last bit is very hard to get into the music industry's collective brains and apparently yours. JUST BECAUSE A CD COSTS X, DOES NOT MEAN THAT DIGITAL ALBUM HAS TO COST X.
What happened to passing savings on to the customer?
Stop bending over for the RIAA and they lackey's. 99 cents for a few megabytes of data that you can reproduce for a trivial ammount is far too high. Insane profit margins are NOT a natural right.
Filesharing took a blow from the closing of napster? Can I have some, the stuff you are smoking? You know that you can't smoke enough of it to stop breast cancer don't you? But I see that ain't stopping you from trying.
Ahh, good stuff.
When napster hit the headlines in its protracted legal battle all that happened was that LOTS of people found out about napster and filesharing. Every single time such an article comes in the headlines I hear people asking, so how does this work anyway, can I do it?
Once there was usenet, and it was good but few used it. Then there was napster, and it was better, but its usage was limited. Then came the kazaa's and god knows what more, and it started to explode and now there is bittorrent and the majority of network traffic is that protocol, and no I don't think a lot of its linux torrents.
Saying the filesharing took a blow is like saying that... well the war on drugs has dealt a blow to the drugs trade. Except less so.
You are aware that bittorrent traffic is now the majority of network traffic?
If napster HADN'T closed down, if it had simply been left to be, then it might have turned out like usenet, used by a small group but ultimately not spreading because most never hear about it.
All these stories do is free publicity. Napster died, but filesharing flourished. As for what Metallica won, they didn't gain anything from the legal victory but lost an awfull lot of reputation. If you look at their sales results, they are now in a steady decline. That might be age, or it might be the backlash of a horrific PR blunder. If you were paying attention back then, they were heavily critized.
And for what? They didn't get anything, except that people made a point out of putting their music on file share networks.
Maybe not quite a pyrrhic victory, but close.
Prince is doing the same thing, these megarich popstars just don't seem to realize that they just ain't that popular as people. We, the public, do NOT shed a tear when someone making millions cries about lost income. I remember a joke by Jim Carry where he lamented on this: "I feel troubled, ever since I became famous people just don't seem to genuinly care anymore" "Oh boohoo, stop crying and GET OUT OF MY CHURCH". I horribly mangled the joke, but the point is true, rich people don't get a lot of symphaty. We may idolize them, buy all their crap, but only on the clear understanding they don't moan about how we are stealing from them.
Metallica did it, and became a joke. Prince is doing it and, well continues to be a joke.
Will the piratebay survive? Unsure, demonoid is still down and lots of other torrent sites are in legal trouble BUT for everyone that goes down another springs up and someone somewhere is coming up with an even better program/protocol that will be even harder to defeat and more people will be using it thanks to the free publicity.
When napster was around, I was one of the few in my circle to use it. Nowadays I don't know anyone with a computer who doesn't fileshare. Oh yeah, Metallica won alright. I wonder how you would define a loss.
There are countless musicians who got a day time job to support their hobby, at best they recoup a bit of their costs at times but mainly it is a hobby AKA a moneysink.
When I was young a neighbour of mine operated a pirate radio station. He bought all the gear, bought records, payed for the power and for what? A few small ads? Did he become rich of it or even break even? Hell no, but it was his dream, his hobby.
If all musicians are out of a job tomorrow, the music will go on. And personally, I think the music will be a lot better or at least more varied, because people will play what they want to play, not what sells best.
This is EXACTLY what happened with all those chinese product safety scandals. A safe 'certified' product gets produced in China, someone there decides to change something, and BAM the product turns out to be unsafe.
Certification is meant to be "I seen this product, I tested it, it is safe". If you then CHANGE that product, that means the test is no longer valid.
And yes, that is down to the size of the screws. In this case that would matter a great deal, voting machines are supposed to be tamper proof. Change the screws and it might be a lot easier to open all of a sudden.
If you work with products that are certified, then you must keep the product the same. Those are the rules, it is in the contract.
Really, with the recent stories from China I would think nobody would be stupid enough to think it a good idea when products are changed on the production line.
It don't matter that the changes may not have an impact, HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO KNOW.
The deal with this kind of situations is, you produce a product in X form. That is form is tested and gets certified. If you then change it, it has to be retested and recertified because without it that product has suddenly become untested and your word isn't good enough or we would have gone through the first testing and certfication in the first place.
Do you trust voting machine companies? You must be a diebold stockholder.
Lets see you claim 50 years of listening to aliens with just one BLEEP. Okay. Now for the other side. A minimum of 5000/6000 years with NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING.
That is not even comparing the size of the searches. So explain to me, if you believe god exists, where is the evidence. If you are willing to forgo evidence in the case of god, why do you demand evidence in the case of aliens?
Offcourse neither proves a single thing. Just because we don't see a god, doesn't mean there isn't one. And just because we don't see any aliens doesn't mean there aren't any.
But if you believe in science, then the thought that life might exist elsewhere ain't so hard. If you believe in science and think there is a beard in the sky... Aliens can be explained, god can't.
That is really the question isn't it. IS it what you claim, OR is it closer to what I think namely.
You can use my code but if you change it, I would like you to share those changes.
The BSD license is (in my opinion): Here is my code, I think you would be better off if you used it instead of writing your own, so please use it without any obligations other then that you cannot claim it as being your own.
The GPL spirit has always been against that and is more I share so you share.
That you didn't have to share your modifications under the GPLv2 if you didn't distribute it was more of a side effect. Another guy who responded to me earlier pointed out that for his website code he used BSD, because the GPL had no meaning for that kind of code, but now he is condering going to AGPL instead.
If you write server programs like all those PHP packages then the GPL is useless to enforce sharing because those who modify the code do not redistribute it.
Surely part of the idea of GPL is that software is better if lots of people work on it? It worked for client programs, who should server programs be different?
Because in away the REAL end user, the person actually USING the program (in my example the slashdot based website reader) still is the same end-user as before, and if I modify the slashdot code send to me, I don't have to share it.
I think of this as the closing of a loophole for a specific class of code/programs. But yes, I guess it all depends on what you consider the GPL to be about. Is it about allowing users to modify their code OR is it to enforce sharing of modifications.
You see, my personal problemwith your view is, why are you so against sharing code back? What is so damned objectionable against sharing those modifications you made back? It is not like I am asking you to donate blood or something. I am highly suspicious of people who want to use free software but don't want to share their own code.
I think your reading of the AGPL is perfectly accurate, and I like it. You want my code, fine, but I expect you to share it back. Perhaps that makes me an asshole, perhaps that makes you not want to use my code, but I have real trouble why I should give you my code, but you get to keep yours. Come on, I show you mine, you show me yours, it is a fun game, trust me ^_^
We don't give gifts in holland, just seats on the board of directors. Check out what all the politicians are doing after they retire and then look back at some of the decisions they made just before retiring.
Ever wondered why that building corruption scandal was so poorly dealt with? Just wait for the people involved to reach retirement age. You will get your answer.
Basically you are saying, don't use software if you are not willing to follow the license.
If you can't live with the AGPL, don't use software licensed under it. The spirit of the GPL was that if you modify code, you share it. This has now just been updated to reflect web apps that previously were immune to it.
Don't like it, don't use it. Same as with GPL software.
If you want to dictate license terms, write your own software. You can then set any license you want on it. So what if some people don't want to play by the license I choose, let them go somewhere else. Let them negioate with closed source companies about the license. Let them pay me. My code, my license. Your project, your choice as to wether to use my software, but on my terms, not yours, else I will see you in court.
What you claim is 100% correct, the scenario is EXACTLY what must happen if you use AGPL code on your site. Why should it not? Why should you be free to modify MY code, profit from that for free and not have to share it back? If I wanted that I would have chosen a different license. Who are you to tell me how to license my code?
I can't make you pick my code, but you can't make me pick your preffered license.
Slashdot Mirror
The entire trick to surviving these waves seems to be not catch them from the side. If this warning comes in enough time to turn the ship to face the wave at the safest angle then the ship stands a better chance.
Even if the ship is destined to sink, this might give the crew more time to get to the liveboats, some modern ones are almost like subs so that no matter the wave, they can survive because they always right themselves and are closed so they can't fill with water and are to small to be broken up.
I have no idea exactly how much warning a ship can get with this, but as you can see from the pictures supplied and the stories in the article these waves can be survived. Perhaps a person with some experience can tell if the sudden sinkings could be down to the ship catching the wave at the wrong angle.
don't commit traffic violations. Brilliant no?
The claim that the innocent have nothing to hide may be up for debate, but "non-speeders don't need to fear the radar gun" is not.
If this thing is ONLY to be used for traffic control then that is a good thing. I doubt it, I think it is going to be used to detect for isntance weed plantations (you can detect them through the heat signatures that the lighting gives off) and surveillance. But as someone who has had two attempts at break in, I am not all that worried about the police getting some new tools. The privacy nutters never seem to come up with better arguments then "this won't allow us to break the law anymore". Fine with me, don't like the law, change it, don't break it. If you really want to speed that badly, get the speed limit lifted, it worked for the germans.
Why is there so little reporting on what this Kasparov actually stands for? Check wikipedia, about the only thing I can find is that he is far-left (communist?) and that the Other Russia party is a coalition of parties including communists and nationalists. Well, that is a load of my mind. That is Stalin and Hitler in one party, why choose when you can have two!
It is kinda like the US people who keep saying vote Ron Paul, then you read up on the guy and learn that, yes there people who would make even worse presidents then Bush.
Just what does Kasparov stand for, just because he is against Putin who clearly ain't all that nice does NOT make kasparov himself any better. The problem with the media is that they like the idea of heroes, Putin clearly no longer is one so they need someone else. The world doesn't work like that.
No comments so far seem to explain anything about Kasparov except one commenter who points out that his dad was jewish. Oh well that eases my mind. I think another person rallying against a troubled goverment promising better things had a jewish father (step-father).
Godwin or not, just what does the Unitied Civil Front (his real party, Other Russia is a coalition of multiple parties) stand for? I do not know and don't speak russian and the western media seems almost reluctant (or kasparov just ain't as intresting as britney spears) to report on it.
He first began the serious study of chess after he came across a chess problem set up by his parents and proposed a solution... His father died when he was seven years old.
I suppose that is one way to stop the old man from testing you.
He talks about Improvised Explosive Devices and that they account for half the US casualties. Right, eh so? These things are new? Pretty sure my field manual mentioned them, not just how to spot them and deal with them but including suggestions on how to make your own should the need arise. That was over 2 decades ago.
The vietnamese used a lot of IED's and even non-explosive traps. So did the Israeli's in their war against Britian (well would be Israeli's) the various occupied nations during WW2 became experts in it.
In the days of Sword and Bow&Arrow a flail was a dangerous weapon found on any farm. You would need to be very good with your sword to go up against a farmer with a scythe and ask yourselve, who has had the most training with their weapon.
The LIE is that somehow modern tech has changed this. It hasn't. So they use mobile phones now as remote detonators, is that really that different then a radio or IR detonator, how about a simple wire? A fuse? They all been used and plenty of others.
He then goes on to claim that you could use a PS3 as a missle guidance system. You probably could. Except missle guidance systems existed long before you had the PS3, so why do you need anything that powerfull?
It also doesn't explain where you get the rest of the tech, you know like the missle or the detection system. No, the IR sensor is NOT good enough to track a plane. Not by a long shot. What about the software?
It becomes even more silly when you then ask where these PS3 guided missles ARE? All the incidents involving missles involve regular missles bought on the blackmarket. I seen no story claiming that these SAM's were handmade.
If this stuff was so advanced you would think that by now Hezbollah could hit a target with it rather then having to fire at civilian centers because they are the only target big enough to have a change of causing damage.
If you want to see real modern tech you got to look at the propaganda war, every incident, there is a camera right there, recording it and its data gets out to the rest of the world with amazing speed. But the tech used is all of the shelf stuff. Nothing home grown or opensource.
No, this guy is just trying to use a buzzword to scaremonger. Iraq is nothing new, what is frightening is that the US was incapable avoiding it. That we still don't have any better way to deal with this. No I don't have the answer, except that perhaps they should have done another Gulf War 1, bomb the place back to the stoneage every couple of years but stay the fuck out of it. Really, hasn't history shown us that modern occupations rarely work well?
We recently had the Lord of the Rings movies. Handsup who fast forwards past the hobbit bits to the good stuff. The action rather then the endless whining.
Read the book, it is worse. Edit out the bits where Frodo is whining about his fate and you got the shortest book in history. The Star Wars formula is an intresting new and original take on the classic fairy tale. Evil king, entrapped princess, destined hero.
It is nothing unusual except George Lucas added a brilliant new twist. The hero doesn't whine. Compare Luke Skywalker (and for that matter Han Solo and Leia Organa and Obi-wan Kenobi, even the baddies (please do not force me to name them as well, I would like to pretend I have at least once touched a girl) with ALL the other destined heroes from entertainment. Luke doesn't whine. He WANTS to join the rebellion as a fight pilot and when opportunity knocks he turns from a teen boy into a responsible adult in a flash. He acts! He is there for his friends and fights for the cause ALL WITHOUT ONCE WHINING ABOUT IT. Nobody in the entire movie WHINES.
You especially have to take note of this as the movies launched in the late 70's when EVERY bloody movie had tons of whining in it. Endless soul searching and meaningless drivel was what made movies. The audience was desperately inneed of some mindless entertainment with simple heroes who did the right thing and George Lucas gave it to them.
It is this element that is most often forgotten about why Star Wars was so amazingly succesfull. People who were kids then forgot that the movie had just as much of an impact among the ADULTS of that day. Star Wars was NOT a 'for kids' movie. ALL ages loved it.
Then come the prequels and we don't get Lukes dad, we get Frodo, a teen Frodo. An angsty teen frodo. And no Han Solo or for that matter a Leia. Were are the heroes in the pre-quels? Where are the people who do the right thing? It gets killed of right at the start "we are not here to free the slaves". These are NOT the Jedi we are looking for.
George Lucas once gave us a simple story of heroes and we loved it. Then he gave us an angsty teen story and we didn't give a shit.
Another thing to consider, there are more Han Solo prequel books then Luke Skywalker or Leia Organa prequel books. Even Lando has more then the two skywalkers combines (The twins only have a Splinter of the minds eye and both Han and Lando each got a trilogy back in the 80's or so and Han Solo got another trilogy in the Expanded Universe.) Lots of people thought Han was the hero. Where is the smuggler in the prequels?
Jabba the Hut ALWAYS met up with Han Solo BEFORE he fled Tatooine, it is part of the books and was shot at the same time of the original. In fact the bit where Han steps on his tail is because originally Jabba was a fat human with no tail so Han could just walk around him.
This scene (apart from the 'comedy') actually is a good thing, it helps deepen the characters bit. I just wish they had added the scenes where Luke talks to Biggs about joining the rebbelion, it would help explain why Luke chokes up when Biggs buys it over the death star.
But I guess George Lucas can only have so much depth in his movies. Really, examine the original Biggs scene, realise that it removes an essential human element from the movie, a real bit of drama and you will learn why the prequels were so bad. George Lucas can't do drama. That wasn't a problem in A New Hope, it in many ways succeeded because it was a non-stop thrill ride, but the prequels demanded more and GL just could not deliver. If he could, ANH would have had the biggs intro.
Star Wars spaceships use repulsors NOT wings. The use repulsors to hover and land and provide the lift that wings or rotors do in our craft. The engines in the back are just there for forward propulsion. The repulsors would be at the bottom of the craft, and so half a star ship would still have them, just as the front half of an aircraft would still have a landing gear.
If you want to complain, how about the foam from the firecraft not instantly scattering in the onrushing air?
In a Punch and Judy show you got the hero who is a clueless brainless idiot, and a baddy. The baddy will helpfully explain his entire scheme to the audience. Then when it comes time to execute his plan, the audience will try to warn the hero of the baddy creeping up behind him. The hero, being an idiot, will offcourse look the wrong way and never see the baddy no matter how hard to audience shouts. But no worry, the author knows his stuff and through sheer luck, the hero will nonetheless triomph.
Now take Episode 1. We know who the baddy is, Palpatine. We KNOW him to be the future emperor, no suprise there. We also KNOW him to be evil. The prequels don't even pretend he is perhaps someone who is trying to create a better future but gets corrupted along the way. Palpatine is evil, end of story.
We know what his plan is. Nobody in the movie seems to have a clue. Powerfull Jedi, experienced leaders. Somehow this dude manages to pull the wool over an entire galaxies eyes. Only near the end does one Jedi finally get a clue. It is pathetic. In episode 4-6 the whole galaxy KNOWS the empire is bad, there is not even the smallest pretense that the empire might be good for some people, it is an evil goverment, end of story. Did something happen between 3 and 4, did every living creature get hit by a massive cluestick?
Were episode 1 is bad enough (what with the KID, and shiny spaceships) 2 and 3 has us watching in disbelief, wanting to shout "BEHIND YOU" but being too old for that.
Steven Spielberg has directed a Columbo show, that is a series that proved a "WE KNOW YOU DID IT" can work, if you are really really good and have a fantastic hero and amazing actors. Spielberg MIGHT have been able to turn the prequels basic story into a story that worked. Possibly if we had witnessed Palpatines own fall as well. So that he starts out with the best intentions but becomes seduced by the dark side and takes Anakin with him in his fall. ANYTHING but this "BEHIND YOU" and Punch not even bothering to look behind him.
People love to rant about the Ewoks and JarJar but that is just cattle following the herd. The real problem is simple, the story just does not work. If you want to create a story about the tragic fall of a hero, you must first create a likeable person. Anakin ain't likable. He never does anything that endears us to him. We don't see him as anything but a brat who can't see how he is being manipulated.
If you make a Punch and Judy show, the hero has got to win. Yes he will get the audiences warning WRONG but in the end HE will WIN because right when all seems lost, he listens, spots the baddy and triumphs.
And that is the ultimate failing of the pre-quels, we don't get a happy ending. 3 movies and it is all just doom and gloom. The death of a princess, the slaughter of the jedi and the collapse of a galaxy wide civilization, all because everyone in it is to dumb to see Palpatines rather obvious moves.
Columbo would NOT have worked if the baddies got away with it.
George Lucas just ain't a good enough writer, I am not talking about dialoge here, that is just details, the synopsis of the pre-quels doesn't even work. Why doesn't Anakin see the manipulations? The entire fall just doesn't come across. If anything it reminded me of some of the more angsty animes where the hero is a kid who won't talk no matter what because that wouldn't be cool and shouts at the world for not being able to read his mind. Angsty teen movies are NOT what Star Wars is about.
Because we also got to ask ourselves what was so great about Episode 4? The hero did what he was supposed to do without whining about it. Luke Skywalker NOT ONCE bemoans his fate. He WANTS to join the rebellion, very briefly he protests because he has responisbilties but when the empire destroys that by killing his family he fights for the cause and never looks back. A HERO and rather unlike most other movies off that type where the weenie spents at least half the movie whining about how he doesn't want to be the
In a story with a princess and a destined one? The original three movies just didn't lay it on as thick as the pre-quels but they are BOTH the same story. Luke Skywalker is DESTINED to be a jedi, because his father is one. Han Solo could NEVER become one. This whole upper-cast system has ALWAYS been there, both in the form of born-to-be jedi's and royalty.
Lets be honest here, it is a fairy tale, and in fairy tales the world revolves around nobility because telling a story of how a real peasant becoming a great leader might just be a little upsetting to the people in whose kingdom these fairy tales began.
always felt that reading slashdot was taking years of my life.
You wonder why no large media companies (fixed it for you) have a report devoted to this, or even report on it much or do anything but rehash the RIAA/MPAA press statements and never ever examine it.
Follow the money. You might as well ask, why do popular entertainment shows like Futurama show a dislike for things like napster and filesharing in general? Because they are the ones whose files are being shared!
Geez, name a news company that isn't part of some huge media giant. You might start to realize that those who should report on the RIAA/MPAA are in fact its members. Geez, you might as well expect Dell to launch a survey, computers, do we really need them.
What next, do you expect the tabaco industry to report on the dangers of smoking?
Follow the money, who is the person you expect to report on something paid for. There was an issue a few years ago around Oprah when she said something bad about meat. That was just the advertisers complaining. Reporting on the RIAA/MPAA tactics, that will get you a letter direct from the head office "STOP IT".
What next, Ruport Murdoch writing a story "Why it is a bad idea for one guy to own a lot of media"?
We infringe on our citizens rights, introduce draconian measures that will make us a laughing stock of the world and you, you release DVD's a month and half earlier (that is AFTER the EU movie release has already been delayed for half a year).
Wow, so frenchies, all of sudden those Bush voters look pretty shrewd eh?
Wasn't france the place were DVD's copy protection was ruled illegal? How has this been handled? Has the movie industry actuallty been made to do anything about it?
It isn't the first time the french have shown to be thouroughly corrupt. The EU level laws in this area also are often french backed.
You would think with race riots and national strikes the goverment has better things to do.
Over here in holland (the country with the tulips, windmills and woodenshoes... Rembrandt? van Gogh? sigh... Free pot AH I see that rang a bell) the gift giving day is the 5th of december, Sinterklaas. (Belgians are a bit slow, and do it on the 6th in the early morning)
Also, not all cultures have Christmas, and even among christians the date varies.
I suppose it explains a lot about the americans waistline that they got the longest "holiday season". Starting with thanksgiving and ending with new year.
So, just like the US citizen was wrong in thinking the rest of the world starts the holiday season with thanksgiving, you are wrong in thinking that everyone else starts it with Christmas.
On a side note, Christmas is a more religious holiday in holland without the exchange of presents. This is however changing slightly. Still the major gift giving day is the 20 days earlier then yours.
Sub site note, the americans got halloween, we got Sint Maarten, where kids dress up and go begging for candy
It is however perfectly easy for a company to launch with a limited number of items received from the factory. This is a basic sales trick. Amazon ordered the production of the kindle, but that doesn't mean all the units arrive in one go, that itself would be extremely foolish, it would delay the launch and cost a lot of money to stock everything.
Say that a factory can produce 100 devices per day just as an example. You want to launch as soon as possible so you tell them, when you got 500 send them over, so I can launch. Then at launch those 500 are "sold out". Sure they are, but the factory has been busily producing so they in fact now got 700 more, but because sending small orders is uneconomical you told them to NOT send the daily production over, you told them to wait till they got a 1000.
Bam, you get a head line of being sold out while the factory has plenty.
The kindle ain't sold out because it is still in production. It is trivial to set this scenario up and Amazon should fire its marketting department if they hadn't set this up. It is a basic move. Make the item seem hot, so that people get the idea that they MUST buy it now or they may not have another chance.
Have you EVER sold anything? It doesn't matter what house you are looking at buying, they ALWAYS got an intrested party about to make a good offer, so if you are quick you might just beat them. Decide NOW!
I am saying, don't expect me to give a damn. I am a baker by training. A good one, but YOU buying YOUR bread in the supermarket and insisting on zoning laws that don't allow me to have the bakery attached to the shop have put me out of business.
Times change, I had to give up my dream, why should you be any different?
Society does NOT own you the right to make a living in your chosen career. Only a lucky few manage that.
Unless you support goverment action to protect all kinds of other jobs that are dying out, I don't see my musicians should be given any more special threatment then they already get. Check how much money already goes to the arts. You need my taxes AND my spending money? Greedy much?
I wish you luck, if you make it, congrats. BUT do NOT expect me to subsidize a dying industry unless you are willing to do the same for mine. Show me the receipts from your local butcher, baker and grocer for the last decade and I will buy your album, but if you shopped at a supermarket just once, the deal is off. You don't care about my career, I don't care about yours.
Well it feels like it anyway, I am pretty sure I saw this list before. Oh yeah, every damn year. It is just a blessing the flying car ain't on it anymore, have you got yours yet? Mine must be stuck in the mail. I knew there would be problems going all email.
But hey, I got time, so lets go through the whole list shall we.
Personalized medicineWith the initial mapping of the human genome, scientists are moving rapidly toward the following likely breakthroughs for gene-based products and services:
Distributed energyThe evolution of distributed energy will reflect that of computing: just as computing has migrated from the 20th centurys centralized model (powerful mainframes delivering applications to remote workstations) to todays decentralized model (PCs and networks), so energy generation and delivery will move from central to distributed sources, increasingly featuring local generators that can be linked when needed for greater output. Specific innovations will include:
Pervasive computingAlmost every device or object in consumers lives will be both smart and networked, giving rise to an Internet of things. Pervasive computing will drive the convergence of computing, the Internet, voice communications, and televisionultimately blurring categories of infotech products and services. Specific breakthroughs will include:
Why can't the AllofMP3 model you metion work? Why is it not a valid business model?
99 cents a song is insanely high, a few megabyte of data at 99 cents? Just where is all the money going? Someone, somewhere is making a hell of a profit out of those iTunes sales. (Most likely the credit card companies)
AllOfMP3 had a simple business plan, use a balance, so that you limit the transaction costs, and sell the music with a minimum profit.
This last bit is very hard to get into the music industry's collective brains and apparently yours. JUST BECAUSE A CD COSTS X, DOES NOT MEAN THAT DIGITAL ALBUM HAS TO COST X.
What happened to passing savings on to the customer?
Stop bending over for the RIAA and they lackey's. 99 cents for a few megabytes of data that you can reproduce for a trivial ammount is far too high. Insane profit margins are NOT a natural right.
Filesharing took a blow from the closing of napster? Can I have some, the stuff you are smoking? You know that you can't smoke enough of it to stop breast cancer don't you? But I see that ain't stopping you from trying.
Ahh, good stuff.
When napster hit the headlines in its protracted legal battle all that happened was that LOTS of people found out about napster and filesharing. Every single time such an article comes in the headlines I hear people asking, so how does this work anyway, can I do it?
Once there was usenet, and it was good but few used it. Then there was napster, and it was better, but its usage was limited. Then came the kazaa's and god knows what more, and it started to explode and now there is bittorrent and the majority of network traffic is that protocol, and no I don't think a lot of its linux torrents.
Saying the filesharing took a blow is like saying that... well the war on drugs has dealt a blow to the drugs trade. Except less so.
You are aware that bittorrent traffic is now the majority of network traffic?
If napster HADN'T closed down, if it had simply been left to be, then it might have turned out like usenet, used by a small group but ultimately not spreading because most never hear about it.
All these stories do is free publicity. Napster died, but filesharing flourished. As for what Metallica won, they didn't gain anything from the legal victory but lost an awfull lot of reputation. If you look at their sales results, they are now in a steady decline. That might be age, or it might be the backlash of a horrific PR blunder. If you were paying attention back then, they were heavily critized.
And for what? They didn't get anything, except that people made a point out of putting their music on file share networks.
Maybe not quite a pyrrhic victory, but close.
Prince is doing the same thing, these megarich popstars just don't seem to realize that they just ain't that popular as people. We, the public, do NOT shed a tear when someone making millions cries about lost income. I remember a joke by Jim Carry where he lamented on this: "I feel troubled, ever since I became famous people just don't seem to genuinly care anymore" "Oh boohoo, stop crying and GET OUT OF MY CHURCH". I horribly mangled the joke, but the point is true, rich people don't get a lot of symphaty. We may idolize them, buy all their crap, but only on the clear understanding they don't moan about how we are stealing from them.
Metallica did it, and became a joke. Prince is doing it and, well continues to be a joke.
Will the piratebay survive? Unsure, demonoid is still down and lots of other torrent sites are in legal trouble BUT for everyone that goes down another springs up and someone somewhere is coming up with an even better program/protocol that will be even harder to defeat and more people will be using it thanks to the free publicity.
When napster was around, I was one of the few in my circle to use it. Nowadays I don't know anyone with a computer who doesn't fileshare. Oh yeah, Metallica won alright. I wonder how you would define a loss.
If musicians can't make money, they won't record.
Dire straits, Sultans of swing.
Listen to the song and hear what it is about.
There are countless musicians who got a day time job to support their hobby, at best they recoup a bit of their costs at times but mainly it is a hobby AKA a moneysink.
When I was young a neighbour of mine operated a pirate radio station. He bought all the gear, bought records, payed for the power and for what? A few small ads? Did he become rich of it or even break even? Hell no, but it was his dream, his hobby.
If all musicians are out of a job tomorrow, the music will go on. And personally, I think the music will be a lot better or at least more varied, because people will play what they want to play, not what sells best.
This is EXACTLY what happened with all those chinese product safety scandals. A safe 'certified' product gets produced in China, someone there decides to change something, and BAM the product turns out to be unsafe.
Certification is meant to be "I seen this product, I tested it, it is safe". If you then CHANGE that product, that means the test is no longer valid.
And yes, that is down to the size of the screws. In this case that would matter a great deal, voting machines are supposed to be tamper proof. Change the screws and it might be a lot easier to open all of a sudden.
If you work with products that are certified, then you must keep the product the same. Those are the rules, it is in the contract.
Really, with the recent stories from China I would think nobody would be stupid enough to think it a good idea when products are changed on the production line.
It don't matter that the changes may not have an impact, HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO KNOW.
The deal with this kind of situations is, you produce a product in X form. That is form is tested and gets certified. If you then change it, it has to be retested and recertified because without it that product has suddenly become untested and your word isn't good enough or we would have gone through the first testing and certfication in the first place.
Do you trust voting machine companies? You must be a diebold stockholder.
Lets see you claim 50 years of listening to aliens with just one BLEEP. Okay. Now for the other side. A minimum of 5000/6000 years with NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING.
That is not even comparing the size of the searches. So explain to me, if you believe god exists, where is the evidence. If you are willing to forgo evidence in the case of god, why do you demand evidence in the case of aliens?
Offcourse neither proves a single thing. Just because we don't see a god, doesn't mean there isn't one. And just because we don't see any aliens doesn't mean there aren't any.
But if you believe in science, then the thought that life might exist elsewhere ain't so hard. If you believe in science and think there is a beard in the sky... Aliens can be explained, god can't.
That is really the question isn't it. IS it what you claim, OR is it closer to what I think namely.
You can use my code but if you change it, I would like you to share those changes.
The BSD license is (in my opinion): Here is my code, I think you would be better off if you used it instead of writing your own, so please use it without any obligations other then that you cannot claim it as being your own.
The GPL spirit has always been against that and is more I share so you share.
That you didn't have to share your modifications under the GPLv2 if you didn't distribute it was more of a side effect. Another guy who responded to me earlier pointed out that for his website code he used BSD, because the GPL had no meaning for that kind of code, but now he is condering going to AGPL instead.
If you write server programs like all those PHP packages then the GPL is useless to enforce sharing because those who modify the code do not redistribute it.
Surely part of the idea of GPL is that software is better if lots of people work on it? It worked for client programs, who should server programs be different?
Because in away the REAL end user, the person actually USING the program (in my example the slashdot based website reader) still is the same end-user as before, and if I modify the slashdot code send to me, I don't have to share it.
I think of this as the closing of a loophole for a specific class of code/programs. But yes, I guess it all depends on what you consider the GPL to be about. Is it about allowing users to modify their code OR is it to enforce sharing of modifications.
You see, my personal problemwith your view is, why are you so against sharing code back? What is so damned objectionable against sharing those modifications you made back? It is not like I am asking you to donate blood or something. I am highly suspicious of people who want to use free software but don't want to share their own code.
I think your reading of the AGPL is perfectly accurate, and I like it. You want my code, fine, but I expect you to share it back. Perhaps that makes me an asshole, perhaps that makes you not want to use my code, but I have real trouble why I should give you my code, but you get to keep yours. Come on, I show you mine, you show me yours, it is a fun game, trust me ^_^
We don't give gifts in holland, just seats on the board of directors. Check out what all the politicians are doing after they retire and then look back at some of the decisions they made just before retiring.
Ever wondered why that building corruption scandal was so poorly dealt with? Just wait for the people involved to reach retirement age. You will get your answer.
Basically you are saying, don't use software if you are not willing to follow the license.
If you can't live with the AGPL, don't use software licensed under it. The spirit of the GPL was that if you modify code, you share it. This has now just been updated to reflect web apps that previously were immune to it.
Don't like it, don't use it. Same as with GPL software.
If you want to dictate license terms, write your own software. You can then set any license you want on it. So what if some people don't want to play by the license I choose, let them go somewhere else. Let them negioate with closed source companies about the license. Let them pay me. My code, my license. Your project, your choice as to wether to use my software, but on my terms, not yours, else I will see you in court.
What you claim is 100% correct, the scenario is EXACTLY what must happen if you use AGPL code on your site. Why should it not? Why should you be free to modify MY code, profit from that for free and not have to share it back? If I wanted that I would have chosen a different license. Who are you to tell me how to license my code?
I can't make you pick my code, but you can't make me pick your preffered license.