When you release a piece of code under the BSD license, if I adopt it, build a business around its use, and then you get a patent on the technology in the code, I'm screwed.
So, I have two choices. I can use GPLv3 software and know I can't be screwed, or I can develop my own solution.
In this situation, as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter if you wrote the code or not, because it's not safe for me to rely on it.
You say you do not believe in telling others to share. That's not what this is about. The GPL does not give you that power in the first place, in any of its iterations.
This is about offering to share, collaborating with others who also wish to share, and everyone assuring each other that no one will attempt to impose a cost later that isn't transparent at the time of adoptation.
Right. What is the cost of the Niagara Falls dam? It was built before I was born, it still stands, and it supplies power for vast numbers of people. The effort to maintain that project is negligible next to the effort that was required to create it, and day after day millions of people find all their electrical needs are met by that project.
So, explain to me why it is that this power is considered private property, and why we pay so much for it. Explain to me why it is necessary for millions of us to supply executives with million dollar homes and yachts in order to meet my energy needs, when the people who actually did the work are long dead?
Explain to me how that doesn't count as free energy, once the artifact is created.
I could sit down with you and in the span of a few hours, I could make it apparent to you that there are practical projects we as a race could co-operate to create which would alleviate the power needs of the whole earth for generations to come, that would not run out. I could do the same with manufacturing.
Once my manifesto is complete, you can read it for yourself, and be convinced. Once I've got another 15 years experience under my belt and I've reached the phase of my life where my personal and political power is at its peak, I will be ready for this task, and I intend to lead the way forward. Nations are created around such projects and leaders who can make the path to their realization visible to everyone. My own nation was founded by a drunken brawler who had a vision of a continent of people tied together by a railroad that would make the impossible task of traveling across it into a triviality. The one-world-one-nation will be created in the same way, not by Imperial Dominion as the USA would like to believe is possible, but with a realizable vision that transforms the human experience.
1) If you receive software and hardware together from a vendor, and the software is released under the GPLv3 license, you have legal assurance that they will not attempt through hardware to prevent you exercising your right to change the code and deploy your changes. If you receive software released under the GPLv2 license, you do not have these assurances. You can reasonably expect that the pressure on the vendor to increase revenue will lead to them attempting to rent out the control they have over you to third parties.
2) If you use or redistribute software, and the software is released under the GPLv3 license, you have legal assurances that you will not wake up one morning and find that the software you have come to rely on is now subject to patents that the vendor received. If you receive software released under the GPLv2 license, you could suddenly be forced to pay large sums of money or stop using the technology. This is a large risk that can tank a business model that relied on having liberty to grow without increased intellectual property costs and suddenly does not have that liberty.
I'm afraid that this hardly will hurt ISO too much. They have some of the most important and widely used certification standards like ISO1400 (environmental management ) and ISO900 (quality management systems). Sorry, but they will be up and running for a long time.
Yeah, I know a lot of people would like to receive credibility because they met the ISO certifications. But I'm afraid that the ISO certifications doesn't really give you credibility like it used to.
A lot of people like the prestige that a university degree brings, but when people find out that all you had to do was pay a bunch of money and you got your certification in the mail, they're not going to give you the job. This isn't any different.
Welcome to the modern age, where the dollar value of a good name is in how long you can deliver substandard overpriced service before people stop coming back.
You ever think that if you were to actually pay your taxes in labour rather than money, that you might find it's a lot harder to misappropriate your contribution, waste it, then demand more?
Ever think that you might be able to be more free, if you were more involved?
So, do you want to be free of control over your own food, or do you want to be free to be involved despite the desire of others to control your food?
No, you're American... you want to be free to keep a whole pile of people desperate and controllable, and make them grow your food.
Am I getting close?
This freedom stuff that Americans always talk about... I really don't get it. You came from an economic system with an agenda to make every single thing or concept on earth into private property so its use can be restricted. How can you possibly feel free?
ISO... ISO... aren't they that defunct organization in Switzerland, the one that used to represent standards before they got into the advertising business and disappeared?
Maybe you should move to another country... one with less propaganda.
Let me guess, you live in that country where just going to Cuba, coming back and saying "I went to Cuba and it was very nice, and look, I brought you back some cigars." is a criminal offense. Am I right?
He appealed to the public for donations, and made statements to the effect that he would have new, uncrippled drivers available faster if there were more donations.
When was the last time you paid the sun for all that electricity?
That's where it comes from, and yes, it's free.
The mass of humanity is a teeny spec compared to the vast amount of matter that makes up the earth, and we get to share it.
When was the last time you paid God for that chunk of rock and the cables that were made out of it?
There does not have to be a cost involved in ongoing energy needs, or ongoing material needs. Clever infrastructure that is based around destroying scarcity is what is needed. All the infrastructure we have now is intentionally engineered to not achieve such things. Planned obsolescence, anyone?
You have a very narrow view of what is possible. Try to grow a little bit.
The socialist societies you're referring to do not have properly working democracies. If those socialist societies had a proper direct democracy in the Roman style, or something like the modified democratic process that I have conceived, they would not be so vulnerable to the unilateral action that you describe.
Dictators are dictators. It doesn't matter if they are dictators because they are rich capitalists, or because they have the backing of a political system without proper mechanisms to remove malignant leadership, they still fuck everything up.
The difference is, in a capitalist society, they don't even have to play lip service to the idea that their power was given to them by the population to serve its larger goals. They can just set fire to infrastructure and watch it burn, and we consider that "their right".
As for Brazil, Brazil is poor because when foreigners are stripping your nation of all its wealth, it really doesn't fucking matter what political-economic system you use. You want to straighten your country out, start by shooting all the foreign capitalists in the head at the border, and you'll see things turn around quite quickly.
Worked for Cuba. No one has any money, because no one needs any money, because everything is available without it, and everyone is happy, except the capitalists who can't get in there with their clever contracts and turn the nation into a dairy cow.
It contains passages like "Treat the binary contents of this section the way that Word 97 would have treated them" without specifying with any precision how Word 97 would have treated them.
These passages make the spec impossible to implement as it is written. Not hard, flat out impossible.
You're an ignorant lout. Shut the fuck up already.
I personally think internet services are too important to be left to the market, and should be provided by government free of restriction to all people, just like other essential services.
Pay per use just disinclines people to expose themselves to culture and knowledge that they might have investigated out of curiosity but will not pay for sight unseen. This hurts society in profound ways.
The entire "pay per use" mechanism needs to go away forever. We're never going to move from a rationed society to a society of plenty while this meme holds.
will force us into a proper re-evaluation of self-appointed standards bodies and the standards they whore around.
In the real world this translates to nothing more than the acceptance of the de facto standards of the marketplace. The entrepreneur will always move faster than the committee - he'll be at light speed before the committee is out of first gear.
Right. Because entrepreneurs are always finishing their deliverable before they're invited to review the spec and tender a bid. Entrepreneurs move at light speed, and can do anything. If standards bodies get in the way, they destroy them with fireballs from their eyes and lightning bolts from their arse.
You wish. For now this 'extremely high profile black eye' consist of Norwegian protest (which will be ignored or answered with 'no law was broken so stop whining') and bunch of nerds raging on Slashdot. Which they do all the time anyway. Until it hits mainstream media no one that actually matters is going to care.
You think the opinions of mainstream people matter where ISO is concerned? It's the opinion of the propellerheads that work with the technology that matters. If it's not the propellerheads opinion that rules the day, people have been known to call what eventuates a "boondoggle".
So, ISO got an extremely high profile black eye in the credibility department from which it may never recover. Developers and purchasers who are not able to make their high-level decision makers realize that they shouldn't early-adopt OOXML despite this certification are going to end up being held responsible for the massive clusterfuck that eventuates. Information will become a lot harder to keep organized and accessible in countries that adopt this messy non-spec as a standard, and global productivity will shrink due to the ensuing chaos.
Spoken like a true delusional. Look, this is the NSA. They're pretty smart folks
Smart, and RAND Corporation kind of evil. You can't use evil people, keep an eye on them and end up getting good returns. It's a delusion. If you let evil people be involved in your enterprises, they will fuck them up, and you as well. Most people need to learn this the hard way.
People have learned from experience that the professional news isn't trustworthy. They co-operate to do the best they can in the absence of reputable news sources. How obvious and inevitable. How incredibly insulated from reality do you have to be to not see this?
People born before us were not nearly as stupid and primitive as we are led to believe they were, and we are not as brilliant and sophisticated as we think we are.
We think these clever people are scarce rarities because we have been brainwashed to think they are. In reality, the accumulated knowledge we think is so precious is actually rather obvious, and has been lost and re-discovered again and again and again.
Perhaps it says that you know your way around a DB enough to know not to use database abstraction layers, but rather to marry your application to a proper database.
A good web application stores all its data logic in stored procedures, denies the middle tier user access to anything except those stored procedures, and builds the application to use the procedures.
A bad web application sticks to the minimal SQL featureset, has embedded SQL commands that are dynamically generated in code and moves a lot of unnecessary data forth from the database to the middle tier.
I would go so far as to say that if your application is capable of working with MySQL5, it was poorly designed.
That may well be true now, because the last time I tried using PostgreSQL was nearly two years ago and it was a configuration nightmare that was poorly documented for windows. But if PostgreSQL is so much easier to use now than MySQL, why is MySQL still that default database for hosted websites, and why do most open source web applications that I've looked at recommend a LAMP/WAMP stack?
You get MySQL instead of PostgreSQL by default on hosted websites for the same reason you get a WYSIWYG config panel instead of root access. Power comes with responsibility. The person selling you those services wants you crippled to the point that you can't screw things up on their server because they don't trust you. Therefore, they give you a toy database that you can't hose their server with. By extension, the reason most of those cutesy little web apps recommend MySQL is because they were written to go on cheap hosting, and hit critical mass because there are a lot of cheap people looking for cutesy web apps.
You do know that Slashdot data has less requirements for atomic operation than your average mom-and-pop e-commerce site, right? It's easy to set up fast multi-master replication across a cluster if you decide to relieve the system of the requirement to honor data integrity constraints, but it's not much use if your problem can't be solved with a "close enough" database.
Slashdot Mirror
When you release a piece of code under the BSD license, if I adopt it, build a business around its use, and then you get a patent on the technology in the code, I'm screwed.
So, I have two choices. I can use GPLv3 software and know I can't be screwed, or I can develop my own solution.
In this situation, as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter if you wrote the code or not, because it's not safe for me to rely on it.
You say you do not believe in telling others to share. That's not what this is about. The GPL does not give you that power in the first place, in any of its iterations.
This is about offering to share, collaborating with others who also wish to share, and everyone assuring each other that no one will attempt to impose a cost later that isn't transparent at the time of adoptation.
Right. What is the cost of the Niagara Falls dam? It was built before I was born, it still stands, and it supplies power for vast numbers of people. The effort to maintain that project is negligible next to the effort that was required to create it, and day after day millions of people find all their electrical needs are met by that project.
So, explain to me why it is that this power is considered private property, and why we pay so much for it. Explain to me why it is necessary for millions of us to supply executives with million dollar homes and yachts in order to meet my energy needs, when the people who actually did the work are long dead?
Explain to me how that doesn't count as free energy, once the artifact is created.
I could sit down with you and in the span of a few hours, I could make it apparent to you that there are practical projects we as a race could co-operate to create which would alleviate the power needs of the whole earth for generations to come, that would not run out. I could do the same with manufacturing.
Once my manifesto is complete, you can read it for yourself, and be convinced. Once I've got another 15 years experience under my belt and I've reached the phase of my life where my personal and political power is at its peak, I will be ready for this task, and I intend to lead the way forward. Nations are created around such projects and leaders who can make the path to their realization visible to everyone. My own nation was founded by a drunken brawler who had a vision of a continent of people tied together by a railroad that would make the impossible task of traveling across it into a triviality. The one-world-one-nation will be created in the same way, not by Imperial Dominion as the USA would like to believe is possible, but with a realizable vision that transforms the human experience.
Watch and see.
The GPLv3 is important for reasons that include:
1) If you receive software and hardware together from a vendor, and the software is released under the GPLv3 license, you have legal assurance that they will not attempt through hardware to prevent you exercising your right to change the code and deploy your changes. If you receive software released under the GPLv2 license, you do not have these assurances. You can reasonably expect that the pressure on the vendor to increase revenue will lead to them attempting to rent out the control they have over you to third parties.
2) If you use or redistribute software, and the software is released under the GPLv3 license, you have legal assurances that you will not wake up one morning and find that the software you have come to rely on is now subject to patents that the vendor received. If you receive software released under the GPLv2 license, you could suddenly be forced to pay large sums of money or stop using the technology. This is a large risk that can tank a business model that relied on having liberty to grow without increased intellectual property costs and suddenly does not have that liberty.
I'm afraid that this hardly will hurt ISO too much. They have some of the most important and widely used certification standards like ISO1400 (environmental management ) and ISO900 (quality management systems). Sorry, but they will be up and running for a long time.
Yeah, I know a lot of people would like to receive credibility because they met the ISO certifications. But I'm afraid that the ISO certifications doesn't really give you credibility like it used to.
A lot of people like the prestige that a university degree brings, but when people find out that all you had to do was pay a bunch of money and you got your certification in the mail, they're not going to give you the job. This isn't any different.
Welcome to the modern age, where the dollar value of a good name is in how long you can deliver substandard overpriced service before people stop coming back.
So, I guess you don't pay any taxes then...
You ever think that if you were to actually pay your taxes in labour rather than money, that you might find it's a lot harder to misappropriate your contribution, waste it, then demand more?
Ever think that you might be able to be more free, if you were more involved?
So, do you want to be free of control over your own food, or do you want to be free to be involved despite the desire of others to control your food?
No, you're American... you want to be free to keep a whole pile of people desperate and controllable, and make them grow your food.
Am I getting close?
This freedom stuff that Americans always talk about... I really don't get it. You came from an economic system with an agenda to make every single thing or concept on earth into private property so its use can be restricted. How can you possibly feel free?
ISO... ISO... aren't they that defunct organization in Switzerland, the one that used to represent standards before they got into the advertising business and disappeared?
Freedom from what?
Maybe you should move to another country... one with less propaganda.
Let me guess, you live in that country where just going to Cuba, coming back and saying "I went to Cuba and it was very nice, and look, I brought you back some cigars." is a criminal offense. Am I right?
He appealed to the public for donations, and made statements to the effect that he would have new, uncrippled drivers available faster if there were more donations.
He shot himself in the foot when he did that.
When was the last time you paid the sun for all that electricity?
That's where it comes from, and yes, it's free.
The mass of humanity is a teeny spec compared to the vast amount of matter that makes up the earth, and we get to share it.
When was the last time you paid God for that chunk of rock and the cables that were made out of it?
There does not have to be a cost involved in ongoing energy needs, or ongoing material needs. Clever infrastructure that is based around destroying scarcity is what is needed. All the infrastructure we have now is intentionally engineered to not achieve such things. Planned obsolescence, anyone?
You have a very narrow view of what is possible. Try to grow a little bit.
The socialist societies you're referring to do not have properly working democracies. If those socialist societies had a proper direct democracy in the Roman style, or something like the modified democratic process that I have conceived, they would not be so vulnerable to the unilateral action that you describe.
Dictators are dictators. It doesn't matter if they are dictators because they are rich capitalists, or because they have the backing of a political system without proper mechanisms to remove malignant leadership, they still fuck everything up.
The difference is, in a capitalist society, they don't even have to play lip service to the idea that their power was given to them by the population to serve its larger goals. They can just set fire to infrastructure and watch it burn, and we consider that "their right".
As for Brazil, Brazil is poor because when foreigners are stripping your nation of all its wealth, it really doesn't fucking matter what political-economic system you use. You want to straighten your country out, start by shooting all the foreign capitalists in the head at the border, and you'll see things turn around quite quickly.
Worked for Cuba. No one has any money, because no one needs any money, because everything is available without it, and everyone is happy, except the capitalists who can't get in there with their clever contracts and turn the nation into a dairy cow.
He's clearly saying that no one can implement it.
It contains passages like "Treat the binary contents of this section the way that Word 97 would have treated them" without specifying with any precision how Word 97 would have treated them.
These passages make the spec impossible to implement as it is written. Not hard, flat out impossible.
You're an ignorant lout. Shut the fuck up already.
I personally think internet services are too important to be left to the market, and should be provided by government free of restriction to all people, just like other essential services.
Pay per use just disinclines people to expose themselves to culture and knowledge that they might have investigated out of curiosity but will not pay for sight unseen. This hurts society in profound ways.
The entire "pay per use" mechanism needs to go away forever. We're never going to move from a rationed society to a society of plenty while this meme holds.
will force us into a proper re-evaluation of self-appointed standards bodies and the standards they whore around.
In the real world this translates to nothing more than the acceptance of the de facto standards of the marketplace. The entrepreneur will always move faster than the committee - he'll be at light speed before the committee is out of first gear.
Right. Because entrepreneurs are always finishing their deliverable before they're invited to review the spec and tender a bid. Entrepreneurs move at light speed, and can do anything. If standards bodies get in the way, they destroy them with fireballs from their eyes and lightning bolts from their arse.
You wish. For now this 'extremely high profile black eye' consist of Norwegian protest (which will be ignored or answered with 'no law was broken so stop whining') and bunch of nerds raging on Slashdot. Which they do all the time anyway. Until it hits mainstream media no one that actually matters is going to care.
You think the opinions of mainstream people matter where ISO is concerned? It's the opinion of the propellerheads that work with the technology that matters. If it's not the propellerheads opinion that rules the day, people have been known to call what eventuates a "boondoggle".
Lets all vote that it's not fair to need to eat, then we can stop dealing with those messy farms.
Oh, wait... democracy doesn't override cold hard reality, does it. My bad.
So, ISO got an extremely high profile black eye in the credibility department from which it may never recover. Developers and purchasers who are not able to make their high-level decision makers realize that they shouldn't early-adopt OOXML despite this certification are going to end up being held responsible for the massive clusterfuck that eventuates. Information will become a lot harder to keep organized and accessible in countries that adopt this messy non-spec as a standard, and global productivity will shrink due to the ensuing chaos.
Thanks MS.
Spoken like a true delusional. Look, this is the NSA. They're pretty smart folks
Smart, and RAND Corporation kind of evil. You can't use evil people, keep an eye on them and end up getting good returns. It's a delusion. If you let evil people be involved in your enterprises, they will fuck them up, and you as well. Most people need to learn this the hard way.
People have learned from experience that the professional news isn't trustworthy. They co-operate to do the best they can in the absence of reputable news sources. How obvious and inevitable. How incredibly insulated from reality do you have to be to not see this?
The reason they're doing the experiment is because they don't know what will happen.
Any scientists who say that they know one way or another what will happen are not scientists at all.
Scientific experiments that aren't surrounded by uncertainty and doubt are not much use in removing uncertainty, are they?
People born before us were not nearly as stupid and primitive as we are led to believe they were, and we are not as brilliant and sophisticated as we think we are.
We think these clever people are scarce rarities because we have been brainwashed to think they are. In reality, the accumulated knowledge we think is so precious is actually rather obvious, and has been lost and re-discovered again and again and again.
Doesn't look very interesting to me. Nothing novel, just Amazon "Now with hosting"
Why would anyone choose to leave their data on someone elses server when the price of owning your own hardware has become so low?
Pretty boring Me Too kind of stuff.
Perhaps it says that you know your way around a DB enough to know not to use database abstraction layers, but rather to marry your application to a proper database.
A good web application stores all its data logic in stored procedures, denies the middle tier user access to anything except those stored procedures, and builds the application to use the procedures.
A bad web application sticks to the minimal SQL featureset, has embedded SQL commands that are dynamically generated in code and moves a lot of unnecessary data forth from the database to the middle tier.
I would go so far as to say that if your application is capable of working with MySQL5, it was poorly designed.
That may well be true now, because the last time I tried using PostgreSQL was nearly two years ago and it was a configuration nightmare that was poorly documented for windows. But if PostgreSQL is so much easier to use now than MySQL, why is MySQL still that default database for hosted websites, and why do most open source web applications that I've looked at recommend a LAMP/WAMP stack?
You get MySQL instead of PostgreSQL by default on hosted websites for the same reason you get a WYSIWYG config panel instead of root access. Power comes with responsibility. The person selling you those services wants you crippled to the point that you can't screw things up on their server because they don't trust you. Therefore, they give you a toy database that you can't hose their server with. By extension, the reason most of those cutesy little web apps recommend MySQL is because they were written to go on cheap hosting, and hit critical mass because there are a lot of cheap people looking for cutesy web apps.
You do know that Slashdot data has less requirements for atomic operation than your average mom-and-pop e-commerce site, right? It's easy to set up fast multi-master replication across a cluster if you decide to relieve the system of the requirement to honor data integrity constraints, but it's not much use if your problem can't be solved with a "close enough" database.
Close enough.
Dum dum dum dum dumb.