1) It may be as long as the other licenses, but it's certainly more complicated. None of the other licenses threated to terminate your right to use the code, while the APSL does.
2) Most of us already understand the other licenses. Understanding the GPL will enable you to work on literally thousands of projects without learning another license. Same with BSD. Having to learn a license for every project will get quite tedious after a while.
3) Being "able to contribute with all the blessings of Apple" is not my goal, unless I know what type of project I'm contributing to, and what type of license the code is put under (i.e. How Free is it?).
Innovation by commercial, proprietary software? I can list quite a few examples: Civilization Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) All the various CAD programs Wolfenstein 3D & co. (doom, quake, unreal, etc.) Tetris Just about any other graphical game Java BeOS
There's tons more, but that's a good start.
Incorrect usage of "hacker" and "cracker"
on
"Hackers" are Dumb
·
· Score: 1
It seems that nobody - the media, slashdot, or anybody else - can get the usage of the words right (or even agree on what "right" is). The media seems to take "hackers" as a synonym for "those who circumvent security" whether those people really are hackers (yes, a few of them actually are) or are merely script kiddies (the vast majority). Many slashdot readers, on the other hand, seem to say that nobody who circumvents security can be called a "hacker," which is also obviously incorrect, as some of those who break security are indeed skilled hackers in the 1970s sense of the word.
...not to mention the problem that "cracker" in reference to computers already applies to the skilled assembly coders who remove copy protection schemes from software.
First of all, there have been optical mice around, but this is one that you can get for $50 (or $75 for the version with scroll wheels and extra buttons) and you'll be able to find at most major computer stores. At the moment, it's nearly impossible to find optical mice anywhere. I'll probably get one, since I'm sick of all the dirt getting in my wheeled mouse and making it hard to move the pointer precisely, and I don't see anybody else selling optical mice at my local Best Buy.
Anyway, Microsoft hardware in general is pretty nice. I've had no problems with the Sidewinder gamepad, and the joystick is nice as well.
That's exactly the problem. With a license that length, I'd have to hire a lawyer to figure out what exactly it says. The chances of me contributing code to a project that requires me to pay a lawyer in order to know what I'm contributing to are not very good.
I don't think many developers want to have to figure out a new license for *every* project they want to contribute to, so as more and more new licenses proliferate, the projects with established licenses that are already well-understood (GPL, BSD, Artistic License, etc.) will probably have an advantage.
Problems with your analysis: 1) the original UNIX operating system was not Open Source. That's why the free UNIX clones don't use any code from the original AT&T UNIX. It was innovative software, but innovative proprietary software.
2) X would qualify, but that's hardly a project of the free software community. It's a collaboration of the major players in the proprietary UNIX software market. It probably was made free because each was scared of the others controlling it. Now XFree86 is a true Free Software project, but it's not really innovative, since it's just based on the X Consortium's specs.
There are several innovative Free Software projects, but the majority are, unfortunately, clones of proprietary software. Linux, FreeCiv, GNUStep, and GPG, just to name a few of the more high-profile clones.
From reading the article, it would appear that the law was only partially upheld. Originally, it would have banned any indecent, threatening, or obscene material with the intent to harrass or annoy. The judges merely upheld the portion banning material legally defined as obscene. The portion banning indecent material or material with the intent to annoy was struck down.
the User Friendly parody is humorous. I love how they keep throwing in "Linux" and "FreeBSD" everywhere on unrelated issues...it reminds me of certain people here =)
Why are they charging $10 for digital music? I buy my CDs for $10-$12 (mail-order from record labels such as Nitro Records and Epitaph) and that includes the cost of pressing and mailing the CDs (there are no shipping/handling charges). Since selling digital music doesn't have those overhead costs, it should be cheaper, not the same price.
Hmm, the.us domain seems to be administered by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). Hopefully they will continue to keep things sane even without Postel around to check up on them...
Winamp v2.11, due to be released in a few days (some people already have it since it was accidentally placed on the FTP server prematurely three days ago), has support for MSAudio 4.0 files, so people with winamp can play them.
Well, either you only listen to what MTV tells you to listen to, or you haven't listened to any of the artists at mp3.com. I don't know what type of music you like, but if you're into industrial, there are several industrial artists there that are at least as good as the radio stuff. Sure, there is *lots* of bad stuff out there, but also some very good unsigned bands. Listen to Painted Blue, The Chain Reactive, Revelation 9, or Burn, they're all quite good (IMHO).
That's a synonym, and a more accurate one, missing from Katz's list.
When a product such as NetNanny or CyberPatrol that purports to block "offensive" content goes around blocking sites that criticize it, that's censorship, not filtering. How is a site that criticizes CyberPatrol deemed "inappropriate"? It has nothing anybody could reasonably consider offensive, it just criticizes a company that happens to be in a position to do something about the criticism. In addition, why is alt.atheism blocked, while alt.judaism and alt.christianity are not?
This is basically why I consider the use of censorware in libraries and schools to be unconstitutional - the government does not have the right to empower a company or companies to decide what speech is and is not accepted according to that company's personal opinions and business strategy. Why should CyberPatrol be given the right to say "nobody shall criticize CyberPatrol from a library or school"?
As I understand it, the US government can under anti-trust law declare a service to be "essential" and thus regulate its pricing and implementation. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure exactly how this would work, but if that's the case, they should be able to specify that all APIs must be open and documented.
I think what it means is that any freely distributable program is ok, regardless of its copyright restrictions. For example, Microsoft Internet Explorer is freely distributable (though not Free Software or Open Source), so it would (I assume) be ok under the treaty (though not under US export law).
BSD is not centralized. You have a choice of BSDi (commercial), or FreeBSD, NetBSD, or OpenBSD, all of which are Free Software. The advantage here is that you not only have a choice of distributions (as you do with Linux) but of tweaked kernels, since they all use slightly modified kernels (something you can't do with Linux's centralized kernel development).
So it would appear that Linux is actually more centralized than BSD is.
Well, if you want a Linux box with a GUI running, it's still not that great. XF86Setup has improved, but it still auto-detects very little. You have to give it very specific information about your video card and monitor and what video modes it supports. Most users don't know that information, and win95/98 auto-detect it for you.
That, and USB support, are probably the two biggest problems.
I've heard that repeated over and over again here, and that's part of the problem, but it's not the whole problem. Windows 95/98 installation is still much easier than Linux installation (even of RedHat). When I installed Windows 95 on this computer, it auto-detected my video card, network card, serial mouse, IDE Zip drive, monitor, and just about everything else. When I installed Linux, the basic OS installation wasn't too bad (though definitely a bit kludgy since it was Slackware 3.0), but in order to get the GUI running, I had to muck around in XF86Setup for quite a while. Whereas Windows auto-detected both the video card and monitor and told me what video settings were supported, in XF86Setup I pretty much had to guess until I got something that didn't mess up my monitor. Ironically, I rebooted windows once or twice during the installation, but I rebooted Linux at least five times before everything including X was running (several times due to messed up consoles after i tried to cat a binary file, and several times due to my monitor getting set into a video mode it didn't support, and me having no idea how to get out of it).
Speaking of radio, you mentioned a while back that you were using a radio modem to connect (albeit quite slowly) while your ADSL line was down. I don't think I've ever seen a radio modem. Any links to sites I could get info on them?
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed the truth that is.
1) It may be as long as the other licenses, but it's certainly more complicated. None of the other licenses threated to terminate your right to use the code, while the APSL does.
2) Most of us already understand the other licenses. Understanding the GPL will enable you to work on literally thousands of projects without learning another license. Same with BSD. Having to learn a license for every project will get quite tedious after a while.
3) Being "able to contribute with all the blessings of Apple" is not my goal, unless I know what type of project I'm contributing to, and what type of license the code is put under (i.e. How Free is it?).
Innovation by commercial, proprietary software? I can list quite a few examples:
Civilization
Pretty Good Privacy (PGP)
All the various CAD programs
Wolfenstein 3D & co. (doom, quake, unreal, etc.)
Tetris
Just about any other graphical game
Java
BeOS
There's tons more, but that's a good start.
It seems that nobody - the media, slashdot, or anybody else - can get the usage of the words right (or even agree on what "right" is). The media seems to take "hackers" as a synonym for "those who circumvent security" whether those people really are hackers (yes, a few of them actually are) or are merely script kiddies (the vast majority). Many slashdot readers, on the other hand, seem to say that nobody who circumvents security can be called a "hacker," which is also obviously incorrect, as some of those who break security are indeed skilled hackers in the 1970s sense of the word.
...not to mention the problem that "cracker" in reference to computers already applies to the skilled assembly coders who remove copy protection schemes from software.
First of all, there have been optical mice around, but this is one that you can get for $50 (or $75 for the version with scroll wheels and extra buttons) and you'll be able to find at most major computer stores. At the moment, it's nearly impossible to find optical mice anywhere. I'll probably get one, since I'm sick of all the dirt getting in my wheeled mouse and making it hard to move the pointer precisely, and I don't see anybody else selling optical mice at my local Best Buy.
Anyway, Microsoft hardware in general is pretty nice. I've had no problems with the Sidewinder gamepad, and the joystick is nice as well.
That's exactly the problem. With a license that length, I'd have to hire a lawyer to figure out what exactly it says. The chances of me contributing code to a project that requires me to pay a lawyer in order to know what I'm contributing to are not very good.
I don't think many developers want to have to figure out a new license for *every* project they want to contribute to, so as more and more new licenses proliferate, the projects with established licenses that are already well-understood (GPL, BSD, Artistic License, etc.) will probably have an advantage.
Problems with your analysis:
1) the original UNIX operating system was not Open Source. That's why the free UNIX clones don't use any code from the original AT&T UNIX. It was innovative software, but innovative proprietary software.
2) X would qualify, but that's hardly a project of the free software community. It's a collaboration of the major players in the proprietary UNIX software market. It probably was made free because each was scared of the others controlling it. Now XFree86 is a true Free Software project, but it's not really innovative, since it's just based on the X Consortium's specs.
There are several innovative Free Software projects, but the majority are, unfortunately, clones of proprietary software. Linux, FreeCiv, GNUStep, and GPG, just to name a few of the more high-profile clones.
sure, it smells bad, but tobacco smoke smells much worse.
From reading the article, it would appear that the law was only partially upheld. Originally, it would have banned any indecent, threatening, or obscene material with the intent to harrass or annoy. The judges merely upheld the portion banning material legally defined as obscene. The portion banning indecent material or material with the intent to annoy was struck down.
the User Friendly parody is humorous. I love how they keep throwing in "Linux" and "FreeBSD" everywhere on unrelated issues...it reminds me of certain people here =)
Why are they charging $10 for digital music? I buy my CDs for $10-$12 (mail-order from record labels such as Nitro Records and Epitaph) and that includes the cost of pressing and mailing the CDs (there are no shipping/handling charges). Since selling digital music doesn't have those overhead costs, it should be cheaper, not the same price.
Hmm, the .us domain seems to be administered by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). Hopefully they will continue to keep things sane even without Postel around to check up on them...
most people still have winamp or x11amp.
Winamp v2.11, due to be released in a few days (some people already have it since it was accidentally placed on the FTP server prematurely three days ago), has support for MSAudio 4.0 files, so people with winamp can play them.
Well, either you only listen to what MTV tells you to listen to, or you haven't listened to any of the artists at mp3.com. I don't know what type of music you like, but if you're into industrial, there are several industrial artists there that are at least as good as the radio stuff. Sure, there is *lots* of bad stuff out there, but also some very good unsigned bands. Listen to Painted Blue, The Chain Reactive, Revelation 9, or Burn, they're all quite good (IMHO).
That's a synonym, and a more accurate one, missing from Katz's list.
When a product such as NetNanny or CyberPatrol that purports to block "offensive" content goes around blocking sites that criticize it, that's censorship, not filtering. How is a site that criticizes CyberPatrol deemed "inappropriate"? It has nothing anybody could reasonably consider offensive, it just criticizes a company that happens to be in a position to do something about the criticism. In addition, why is alt.atheism blocked, while alt.judaism and alt.christianity are not?
This is basically why I consider the use of censorware in libraries and schools to be unconstitutional - the government does not have the right to empower a company or companies to decide what speech is and is not accepted according to that company's personal opinions and business strategy. Why should CyberPatrol be given the right to say "nobody shall criticize CyberPatrol from a library or school"?
In response to point 1:
As I understand it, the US government can under anti-trust law declare a service to be "essential" and thus regulate its pricing and implementation. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure exactly how this would work, but if that's the case, they should be able to specify that all APIs must be open and documented.
I think what it means is that any freely distributable program is ok, regardless of its copyright restrictions. For example, Microsoft Internet Explorer is freely distributable (though not Free Software or Open Source), so it would (I assume) be ok under the treaty (though not under US export law).
Opera fits all those requirements. Well, except for the Linux one.
BSD is not centralized. You have a choice of BSDi (commercial), or FreeBSD, NetBSD, or OpenBSD, all of which are Free Software. The advantage here is that you not only have a choice of distributions (as you do with Linux) but of tweaked kernels, since they all use slightly modified kernels (something you can't do with Linux's centralized kernel development).
So it would appear that Linux is actually more centralized than BSD is.
FreeBSD's superior stability and speed probably made up for the slowdown due to Linux emulation.
After all, Windows apps run faster in win95/98, but that doesn't stop people from running them in WINE.
Well, if you want a Linux box with a GUI running, it's still not that great. XF86Setup has improved, but it still auto-detects very little. You have to give it very specific information about your video card and monitor and what video modes it supports. Most users don't know that information, and win95/98 auto-detect it for you.
That, and USB support, are probably the two biggest problems.
Well, 2.2.2 *was* listed as a stable kernel after all, so why would they have any reason to expect otherwise?
I've heard that repeated over and over again here, and that's part of the problem, but it's not the whole problem. Windows 95/98 installation is still much easier than Linux installation (even of RedHat). When I installed Windows 95 on this computer, it auto-detected my video card, network card, serial mouse, IDE Zip drive, monitor, and just about everything else. When I installed Linux, the basic OS installation wasn't too bad (though definitely a bit kludgy since it was Slackware 3.0), but in order to get the GUI running, I had to muck around in XF86Setup for quite a while. Whereas Windows auto-detected both the video card and monitor and told me what video settings were supported, in XF86Setup I pretty much had to guess until I got something that didn't mess up my monitor. Ironically, I rebooted windows once or twice during the installation, but I rebooted Linux at least five times before everything including X was running (several times due to messed up consoles after i tried to cat a binary file, and several times due to my monitor getting set into a video mode it didn't support, and me having no idea how to get out of it).
Speaking of radio, you mentioned a while back that you were using a radio modem to connect (albeit quite slowly) while your ADSL line was down. I don't think I've ever seen a radio modem. Any links to sites I could get info on them?
I saw it four times, but you probably already know that by now =)