Nothing is wrong with giving credit. The problem (philosophically for GNU advocates) is that _requiring_ that credit is given can be an impediment to reuse of software.
If someone wants to give credit to a GNU project he's welcome to. However the license doesn't require it, and appears to be incompatable with other licenses that would require it.
Which is more mulish, requiring that certain text be copied exactly, or allowing it but not requiring it? (Note that the GFDL (Gnu Free Documentation License has a similar problem reqiring some sections of a document not be modified. This is restrictive enough that the Debian guys won't accept it.)
Strange logic you have... To pharaphrase "license A is incompatable with license B therefore there must be something wrong with license B".
IMHO it's the BSDish license that will eventually lead to such a bizzare tangle of required credits, attributions, acknowledgements, etc that it'll be very hard to keep track of them all.
I'm glad I use the *GPL's. Pretty much avoid mess's like this altogether too.
"If each 1Mb/s/month of bandwidth costs $500 and one hundred people want to download CDs...on a constant basis, how much bandwidth would be required and what would it cost?"
If 1Mb/s/month costs $500, it is completely false to assume that $100Mb/s/month costs $50000. Pricing does not scale linearly like that at all.
If you start quoting bandwidth in the 50Mb/s and 100Mb/s you'll see that these rates are in the $80/Mbps and $50/Mbps ranges -- so 100Mbps should go for about $5000/month, or about 10X less than what you implied.
It can't be that fun to work on -- Did you guys know that Microsoft has to _pay_ people to work on this codebase! If there was really anything interesting in it, people would be working there for fun on their own time.
[ I unintentionally posted as an AC first - hopefully it's interesting enough that I get more interesting mods than redundant.]
Are you suggesting people block all those ports because there are known windows trojans that use them?!?
Sure if you block ports 21, 25, 53, etc you might be safer, but far less functional a system as well. If you go that far, I think you'd be better firewalling off all ports and just opening the ones for the services you _want_ to have exposed.
Contrary to what the parent poster suggested, the efficiency of high-tech _is_ bringing jobs back -- it costs just as little to run a robot clothing manufacturer here as it does in other parts of the world. Note that China is losing more manufacturing jobs than the US
"China lost 16 million manufacturing jobs, a decline of 15 percent, between 1995 and 2002, according to a recent study of manufacturing jobs in the 20 largest economies by Joe Carson, director of economic research at Alliance Capital Management. In that same time, U.S. factory employment shrank by 2 million, or 11 percent"
And yes, some industries (software, in particular) are maturing and are no longer high-tech. However as these jobs become commodities, other high-skilled and high-paying jobs in what I like to think of as the newhightech are quickly replacing them. If you don't believe there are good paying jobs around here, explain the still expensive housing prices.
The disassembly law reminds me of an interesting technothriller book called Acts of the Apostles in which a major character is begged to build such a weakness in his nano-machine for fear it may be used as a weapon.
It was quite the fun book for those paranoid about technology, especially nano/bio stuff.
" ANY smart cafe operator would lock down rebooting, not install a cd drive, or not allow access to the system case at all. So your knoppix idea holds no water."
Why? If it were me, I'd do the opposite.
Remove the hard disk, install a CD drive, and only allow booting from the CD - and forcing a reboot between users.
Interetingly, I disagree with _each_ of your suggetions (no reboot vs. force re boot; no CD drive vs. only CD drive).
Why would you want re-writable media enabled on a shared system?!?
"
How true. In my mind the Wikipedia is a collection of generally accepted truths. Much of it is researched, true, but you still are at the whim of majority rule when editting. They could use a mod system like/. "
Wow, I can't tell if you were being serious, or a troll, or funny. The more I stared at this the more I started laughing. I still can't tell, though.
(FWIW,/. has lots of spammers and trolls trying to screw with it. Wikipedia doesn't, exactly because it doesn't make this some sort of perverse game. Try spamming Wikipedia, and you'll quickly see that it is not fun and there's no point to it.)
Parent post wrote: "You can't expect to use a "public" computer AND have complete privacy."
You can get close, if they let you boot your own OS from CD. Reboot to Knoppix, and use a VPN or tunnel to connect to whatever you're doing.
I know people can still look over shoulders or hack your hardware (keyboard cable, etc), but you'd be safe from most software viruses, etc. However of course people could do that to non-public computers too.
"However, in a terrible privacy decision, the court said video monitoring of the computers and patrons was a-ok."
With the huge number of people I see doing business at cybercafes, I fear the monitoring may make running hotbeds of industrial spying too. I guess this is one more reason to have a good VPN / tunnel when working in those places.
It's really KPCB vs Microsoft.
on
Google v. Microsoft
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I think the author is close, but doesn't have the big picture.
It's never been _just_ Netscape vs Microsoft, or Google vs Microsoft, or Macromedia vs. Microsoft or Sun vs Microsoft, or AOL vs Microsoft.
A bigger picture you can have is when you look at the investors behind each of Google, AOL, Sun, Netscape, Macromedia, and many more. Kliener Perkins Caufield & Byers is one of the leading Venture Capital firms out here, and they're behind
every one of those companies! And they're not shy about talking about the "collective strength and experience" that they encourage among their portfolio.
I think it's really the cultural difference that makes Silicon Valley strong. Companies like Microsoft grow by becoming having zillions of divisions that do some of everything. In the bay area, perhaps no single piece can compete with microsoft as a hole, but the combined plays of all these slighlty related companies really becomes significant. In Microsoft, each of those functions is a division that is shelterd by the parent organization. In Silicon Valley, each is a separate company that has to survive on its own merits. If one fails, and the market segment it focused on is still important, another may be funded to take its place.
Ah, then it'd be interesting to know how much the write was delayed. If the write finished 40 seconds later then it's easy to understand what happened.
The
[Real] Coke --> New Coke --> Coke classic
changes allowed them to change the sweetener (sugar -> sugar and/or corn stuff) without people noticing as much.
Parent wrote: "appearently the Vulture Capitalists in Silly Valley won't even look at your business plan if it involves using US engineering talent for the bulk of the development. They want offshoring in the plan to begin with before they dish out any money.
That's false. Some top tier VC firms want tech that is not easily commoditized, and even tell the press that those jobs will stay here.
For example, a couple days ago's San Jose Mercury News quotes VCs saying the opposite:
"[Kevin] Fong [of the Mayfield Fund], too, expressed optimism about jobs. His firm has doubled its pace of investment into new companies, he said, and they're hiring. ``These are the kinds of jobs that won't be leaving the country,'' he said. ``They require very deep domain experience, the ones you find in the valley.''"
Sounds to me like you're source was trying to make excuses for not having his biz-plan read -- or perhaps he was talking to a VC firm targeting markets inappropriate for his product.
And the grandparent post is assuming someone's working alone. Do you know other unemployed people? If not, perhaps unemployment's not all it's cracked up together, or perhaps go to a Linux users group and see if they all have jobs. Why not work together on something. It's amazing how impressively a few highly motivated people can turn out a good prototype (perhaps especially if their seed money is running out).
Yesterday's SJ Mercury news
article
has stats that VC funding is way up (22% over last quarter), and that software is the big winner
with $415 million in the bay area this quarter.
Sure one bubble may have burst, but looking at the glass as a whole, the champagne is still sparkling.
Slashdot Mirror
If someone wants to give credit to a GNU project he's welcome to. However the license doesn't require it, and appears to be incompatable with other licenses that would require it.
Which is more mulish, requiring that certain text be copied exactly, or allowing it but not requiring it? (Note that the GFDL (Gnu Free Documentation License has a similar problem reqiring some sections of a document not be modified. This is restrictive enough that the Debian guys won't accept it.)
IMHO it's the BSDish license that will eventually lead to such a bizzare tangle of required credits, attributions, acknowledgements, etc that it'll be very hard to keep track of them all.
I'm glad I use the *GPL's. Pretty much avoid mess's like this altogether too.
"Find one who'se license is compatible with your own" is far more efficient.
If you have a BSD-licensed product, you shouldn't feel a need to build your own if you find appropriate BSD-licensed components.
If you have a GPL-licensed product, you shouldn't feel a need to build your own if you find appropriate GPL-licensed components.
If you're making something proprietary, well, I guess yeah, build your own.
If 1Mb/s/month costs $500, it is completely false to assume that $100Mb/s/month costs $50000. Pricing does not scale linearly like that at all.
If you start quoting bandwidth in the 50Mb/s and 100Mb/s you'll see that these rates are in the $80/Mbps and $50/Mbps ranges -- so 100Mbps should go for about $5000/month, or about 10X less than what you implied.
(the coolest VW pictures I've seen)
One advantage of VWs is that they're very customizable.
If it's good, maybe it'll take some market share from BSD.
I, for one, would pay a premium for a diamond's profits went to high-tech inventors instead of to slave owners.
[ I unintentionally posted as an AC first - hopefully it's interesting enough that I get more interesting mods than redundant.]
Sure if you block ports 21, 25, 53, etc you might be safer, but far less functional a system as well. If you go that far, I think you'd be better firewalling off all ports and just opening the ones for the services you _want_ to have exposed.
Sounds difficult, because AutoDesk (owners of 3DS) is worth more than a third as much as apple, and I don't they want to let it go.
Or even set up your own TLD
Because people let them. If more people pointed to alternative root servers, they wouldn't have as much power.
"China lost 16 million manufacturing jobs, a decline of 15 percent, between 1995 and 2002, according to a recent study of manufacturing jobs in the 20 largest economies by Joe Carson, director of economic research at Alliance Capital Management. In that same time, U.S. factory employment shrank by 2 million, or 11 percent"
And yes, some industries (software, in particular) are maturing and are no longer high-tech. However as these jobs become commodities, other high-skilled and high-paying jobs in what I like to think of as the new high tech are quickly replacing them. If you don't believe there are good paying jobs around here, explain the still expensive housing prices.
If he's a perl hacker, how 'bout wear a pearl g-string, but in the card misspell Pearl as Perl to cover the geek part.
It was quite the fun book for those paranoid about technology, especially nano/bio stuff.
Why? If it were me, I'd do the opposite.
Remove the hard disk, install a CD drive, and only allow booting from the CD - and forcing a reboot between users.
Interetingly, I disagree with _each_ of your suggetions (no reboot vs. force re boot; no CD drive vs. only CD drive).
Why would you want re-writable media enabled on a shared system?!?
Wow, I can't tell if you were being serious, or a troll, or funny. The more I stared at this the more I started laughing. I still can't tell, though.
(FWIW, /. has lots of spammers and trolls trying to screw with it. Wikipedia doesn't, exactly because it doesn't make this some sort of perverse game. Try spamming Wikipedia, and you'll quickly see that it is not fun and there's no point to it.)
You can get close, if they let you boot your own OS from CD. Reboot to Knoppix, and use a VPN or tunnel to connect to whatever you're doing.
I know people can still look over shoulders or hack your hardware (keyboard cable, etc), but you'd be safe from most software viruses, etc. However of course people could do that to non-public computers too.
With the huge number of people I see doing business at cybercafes, I fear the monitoring may make running hotbeds of industrial spying too. I guess this is one more reason to have a good VPN / tunnel when working in those places.
A bigger picture you can have is when you look at the investors behind each of Google, AOL, Sun, Netscape, Macromedia, and many more. Kliener Perkins Caufield & Byers is one of the leading Venture Capital firms out here, and they're behind every one of those companies! And they're not shy about talking about the "collective strength and experience" that they encourage among their portfolio.
I think it's really the cultural difference that makes Silicon Valley strong. Companies like Microsoft grow by becoming having zillions of divisions that do some of everything. In the bay area, perhaps no single piece can compete with microsoft as a hole, but the combined plays of all these slighlty related companies really becomes significant. In Microsoft, each of those functions is a division that is shelterd by the parent organization. In Silicon Valley, each is a separate company that has to survive on its own merits. If one fails, and the market segment it focused on is still important, another may be funded to take its place.
Ah, then it'd be interesting to know how much the write was delayed. If the write finished 40 seconds later then it's easy to understand what happened.
The
[Real] Coke --> New Coke --> Coke classic
changes allowed them to change the sweetener (sugar -> sugar and/or corn stuff) without people noticing as much.
That's false. Some top tier VC firms want tech that is not easily commoditized, and even tell the press that those jobs will stay here.
For example, a couple days ago's San Jose Mercury News quotes VCs saying the opposite:
"[Kevin] Fong [of the Mayfield Fund], too, expressed optimism about jobs. His firm has doubled its pace of investment into new companies, he said, and they're hiring. ``These are the kinds of jobs that won't be leaving the country,'' he said. ``They require very deep domain experience, the ones you find in the valley.''"
Sounds to me like you're source was trying to make excuses for not having his biz-plan read -- or perhaps he was talking to a VC firm targeting markets inappropriate for his product.
Sure one bubble may have burst, but looking at the glass as a whole, the champagne is still sparkling.
(or the beer's still got a nice head of foam)