I really think that us that identify with the libertarian philosophy are going to have a REALLY hard time getting a candidate we like (and this year's lib candidate just doesn't have what it takes.
Last year Harvard Business Review, generally acknowledged to be run by some fairly bright folks, had a special edition on motivation. While they had some fairly recent work, they also cited Fred Herzeberg (Two factor theory--dissatisfiers and motivators) and Abraham Maslow (hierarchy of needs), reprinting some of their original needs.
While both of these men had what would be considered classic work on motivation, by modern standards, their work is severely lacking, and most (if not all), theorists agree that their is no support for their work (although there is some truth to both).
The sad truth is this: the general public is about 50 - 75 years behind when it comes to understanding psychology. Simple stuff makes it fairly quickly, but motivation theories, and theories of human development take much longer.
I choose motivation because I am currently doing research in the area (not directly, but certainly crucial to motivation). I doubt that the general public knows anything about my area (I base this on people's reactions when I mention it), which is hedonic prediction.
So, yes, you will occasionally find some nut who loves Freud--ignore them, and they'll go away eventually.
Okay, so you got one flame for this already, so I will try a more informed approach.
Freud was not correct on most of his major theories, that is a fact that most research oriented psychologists will agree on. By most, I should say, somewhere in the neighborhood of 90%. Many therapists will agree that Freud's methods of psychotherapy were not useful in facilitating a lasting recovery.
That said, he was a very intelligent man. He was a brilliant physiologist, and had a lot of very insightful things to say regarding the human condition. I cannot emphasize enough that he was very competent and intelligent.
Now, what is the real problem with Freud? The fact that so many people mistook him for a psychologist. He was, as I said, trained as physiologist, primarily studying brain disease. His pre-therapy work was wonderful. He was not a psychologist, and his later delvings into human behavior should have been treated as philosophy, not psychology.
Unfortunately, this was at a time when psychology was in its infancy, and still had a long ways to go. Today Freud would be considered a philosopher, but certainly not a research psychologist.
As for Jung, he was a student of Freud, and although he agreed on many points, he did not on others. Still, the same applies to him (in general), and his philosophy has not stood up to scrutiny.
I'll bite-- I think divorce, broken families, and the like are a huge problem, and kids are best of with two parents, one male, one female.
That said, there are always LEGITIMATE reasons for divorce. In my mind, they include, but are not limited to: adultery sexual abuse physical abuse any other kind of abuse and probably a lot of other reasons that I can't think of right now.
You don't know why the op was divorced, or had a split family. Neither do I. To resort to such flamage before knowing that, or to even bring it up is a serious case of being a jerk.
That aside, one can have all kinds of social problems, and still be very intelligent regarding software. The two just aren't related.
Now, I hope everyone else can keep this place nicer than you have.
That may be true, but I remember not too long ago having trouble getting T-bird to open links in firefox if I clicked on them, and firefox wouldn't open mailto links.
That said, there is also a calendar plugin for both of these programs that can be made to use the sunbird calendar (all use the same file format, and you simply point them to the same file). A bit more work, yes, but ultimately useful.
I suspect that now is the time to speak up, and they will be able to fix the problems before a 1.0 release occurs.
I know that there have been issues with the 2.6 kernel, but I do have them working, AND quite well. I am also using a rather dated GPU (Geforce 2 MX 400 32MB card), but that's another issue. Personally, if open source is important to you and you don't NEED the highest powered cards (like some people seem to, even if it is just for the latest FPS), then that's great.
For some people though, the latest is important. Your priorities may vary, but that's what this world is all about--making decisions. Sometimes we make a decision about what is important and we are correct (we enjoy the outcome), and sometimes we aren't (we don't enjoy the outcome), but we still have to make the decision.
For you, it would seem that having the latest graphics card is less of a priority than having open source drivers that work on EVERY kernel version. That's cool, but remember, some people don't have that priority.
Interesting commentary, but it MAY need to go to the next step--FORCING communal use of the infrastructure. That is, allowing 3rd party cable companies to use line laid by their competitors. It sounds bizarre, but might be a way of accomplishing this whole business.
Frankly, I would LOVE to open up an ISP that provided fiber to the home, and there are several that do, but I simply haven't got the time, money or connections.
try nvidia--they have 64 bit drivers both for windows and linux.
Seriously, many people here rag on nvidia for their binary-only stuff, but they DO provide drivers for a VERY broad range of OS's, unlike many other companies. They may not support open source, but the DO support their customers in a greater degree than many companies, even when those customers want to do some fairly weird stuff!
Actually, she just now got that option for the first time. i know of a few places that are more rural, but not many.
As far as satellite goes, here's the shakedown: if you do ANY online gaming, avoid it. Dial-up is just as good due to the 800ms+ ping times that you end up with. Sorry, its just not worth the cash.
Additionally, direcway (directv's internet offering) is horribly overpriced, and they lock you into a 2-3 year agreement, and charge you 700 bucks for the modem if you cancel early.
As far as I'm concerned, wait for something faster.
First, there are a LOT of reasons the US is behind, and the baby bells (bellsouth in my area) are largely to blame, because of FCC regs. But then again, so is localized monopoly of cable service (again, blame the FCC).
The first step to cheaper broadband? FCC demonopolization of areas currently controlled by a single company (phone/cable). As it stands, I live in an area where I can only get Northland Cable. It sucks beyond beleif. They offer very slow connections at an outrageous price.
Two months ago I had DSL, but when I moved, it was outside the range. So I switched (I also went with vonage, but hey). I am now paying MORE for LESS (which in this case sucks).
Compare this to my mother. She lives 10 miles from the closest post office (give or take 2) in Boonesboro KY. It small enough that it doesn't even have its own zip code or fire dept. Bellsouth called her and offered DSL, starting this month. Go figure--she lives in the most rural area I can think of, and is getting DSL!!
Let me reiterate--if we want faster cheaper internet, gov't subsidy is one way to go. The better way is to open up the competition. This will also decrease the price of cable TV (note that satellite has already helped with this, but more competition is always good).
but that still leaves some cash, ANd the fact that I quote retail prices for that stuff. anyone who thinks apple pays that is out of their head. I would guess they pay closer to 50% of that, then they have to pay labor. All said, they probably aren't making as big a profit as some folks think, but I still feel that there is a premium for the mac name.
One way to look at this is fairly simple: they must have fairly high profit margins to stay alive with the low number of sales they push (as compared to ms). Otherwise they would have died a while ago. (by profit margin, I am referring to hardware costs only. by the time you factor in the humans in the company, their profit margins are probably not all that high.)
So yes, you're right, but I still think they make some cash on the hardware.
Actually, since ram is so cheap, the only thing that I question is the price of the proc and the mobo. I really think that everything else (RAM, vid, cd) can be had really cheap (figure ~$50 for vid (yes that's about right for a 5200, less at the price apple surely pays), ~$75 for RAM (expensive at that price too), and ~$75 for the cd/dvd (since burners are easily available for less to the consumer)).
I am guessing $200 for all parts save the mobo and cpu is actually quite a bit more than apple really pays (since I can get all the aforementioned parts at that price). $400 for the mobo and cpu is quite a bit, and I seriously doubt that it costs apple anywhere near that amount (probably closer to half that). Factor into that the fact that aplle very likely makes a sizeable profit on the cinema display, and yes, you are paying a premium for the machine.
Would I pay it? Absolutely. I don't have the cash, but if I did, I wouldn't hesitate a bit. Even knowing that there is a markup for the machine. And no, I don't have a mac right now. I have a home-brew AMD 3200+ (XP) machine that dual boots winxp pro and gentoo linux. I am happy with this machine, but I can understand why macs are appealing, and I would like to have one. What I don't like is the way that pc freaks so often bash the mac, and the macoids bash the pc. Both have merits unique to them.
I am willing to pay taxes to support legitimate (sp?) government. What differs is the degree to which you and I feel that any particular government program should be considered legitimate.
Some people, for instance, support a mandated social security tax. I do not. I feel that there are a lot of people who are harmed by this. If I make 100,000/year (in my current area of residence), I could easily put away enough to retire comfortably and take care of myself. Having the social security tax removed from my check, however, would inhibit my ability to do so (it's a fairly hefty chunk), limits my ability to invest that money as I see fit.
The concepts of social security and welfare are useful to a degree, but I do believe that they are not the only solution. I support the concept of a national sales tax--and the elimination of the vast majority of the IRS. I do feel bad for those people who work for them that will be out of a job, but I suspect that they will have plenty of opportunity to make money elsewhere.
The national sales tax could take in enough money to support the current welfare system until we can make a transition to a more useful version.
(A possible, not foolproof, solution to welfare is this: match income for those who make less than X/year--but cap it at a reasonable level. If you make $0/year, then the government would match that at $0/yr. If you make $5000/year, then the gov't would match that at $5000/year. Since the gov't would not be issuing tax refund checks any longer (national sales tax, remember), then this would take its place for lower income folks.
There would have to be a certain set of qualifying events in this system--if you smoke, or drink, then you get that much less from the gov't. Why? Because these are luxury items. No one can honestly claim that a 40 of Magnum every week is a necessity. Therefore if you expect the gov't to help you out, you shouldn't be spending money on that type of thing. On the other hand, going to school would increase the multiplier (say to 1.25 instead of 1 for the percentage of personal income matched).
The goal here would be to increase the incentive of persons on welfare to go to school, save money and avoid costly personal addictions (yes, alcohol and tobacco are addictions for the vast majority). The gov't shouldn't sponsor such things.
On the other hand, I am not opposed to helping out those who truly cannot work--certain mental illnesses, truly disabled, etc. What I do find, however, is that commonly those who claim they cannot work are only lazy. I have worked with some folks who were mentally ill, and many of them held a job. I have seen folks with severe physical disabilities find a means of supporting themselves. It is possible. Because of this, I have little sympathy for those who claim they cannot work. Despite this, I recognize that I don't know the depth of anyone's pain or the true severity of their mental illness, so I can't, in good consience, eliminate all help for them.
Enough said.)
In relation to the topic at hand, though, I will say that a license change for linux doesn't really make sense. The current set has worked for a while now, and no one can reasonably make the claim that BSD licensed products are free from litigation issues such as those currently faced by linux. That's just a pipe dream, and Business Week should KNOW THAT! I lost a lot of respect for them on this. They just don't make good decisions sometimes.
As a behavioral scientist (read: psychology), I have to absolutely disagree that "it's all pretty much been wanking". What a sorry attitude.
I do agree that many lay persons are capable of contributing meaningful insight to some of these problems, but in my own area of specialty, I encounter a lot of situations where people really have no clue what I am talking about, but think that they do. (FWIW, I am a grad student doing my thesis on Hedonic Prediction (in particular), and Motivation/Judgment-Decision Making in particular: I find that it takes at least 15 minutes to explain what these are really about to most people, and why they are related to industrial psychology).
As far as linguistics are concerned, having lived in a foreign country and REALLY learned the language, I know that language is a very deep area of research.
This is an interesting example, but not quite valid--many landlords will put things that they KNOW are unenforceable in a lease agreement. That is, the state you are in specifically prohibits certain contractual obligations, and EVEN IF you sign a lease containing those obligations, you cannot be held to them. Landlords who have more than a few properties (apartment developers and other demons) are likely to know this, but they have it there anyway, so that the uninformed will comply.
A peice of advice: before you sign, know your local laws regarding rental agreements. You may be surprised.
In this case, there is something different--the judge could quite easily rule that if you make the code available under any conditions that it is then public domain. Neither IBM nor SCO wants to see that judgement. In fact, no one who is sane wants to see that judgement.
The next worse thing is for the judge to agree with SCO, that the GPL is essentially a public domain release, and therefore everything licensed under it is public domain. SCO, despite what they think, does NOT want to see this. This would mean that they had released some of their own stuff to the public domain. IBM wants this even less.
The logical (as many have pointed out) conclusion is that if the GPL is invalid, then all works licensed under are really under normal copyright law, and therefore no one has any right to them at all.
This ruling doesn't fit, however. This would be essentially the same as saying that ALL license agreements are invalid, because they do the exact same thing that the GPL does--they extend the permissions normally granted under copyright law so that you and I can use software. Ruling that the GPL is invalid is essentially stating that extensions to copyright law through contractual agreements are not legal. You can expect IBM to fight that one all the way to the Supreme Court.
Folks, the truth is, and we all know it, is that SCO is screwed! Live with it.
I know that there is a way to do this properly, but I know that there is a way to do this. Perhaps a better solution would be to use a median score or a weighted average (hey folks, we have a serious outlier in these twelve months, maybe we should eliminate the outlier and start over?)
Re-reading my post, here is something I meant to say, but didn't, is that the average should be calculated _without_ including the final month. That way it would be a person spending $1k a month, not $2k. That would eliminate the bubble as I intended.
The only trouble is that sometimes you have this feeling that you might need it next year.
Logically, it is plausible that you would need more next year than you did the previous year.
A fairly simple workaround would be to cut the next year's budget to the actual spending, plus a percentage equal to estimated inflation for the next year.
To avoid end-year spending bubbles, base this on the average amount spent each month times 12 (this doesn't completely eliminate the spending bubble, but would depress it somewhat). This would make sure that people's bad habits were accounted for, and that they didn't have as much reason to rush-spend.
At the same time, it might a good idea for people to have a place where they can list special spending needs that don't normally come up, and have those accounted for in their budget.
Slashdot Mirror
good for you.
I really think that us that identify with the libertarian philosophy are going to have a REALLY hard time getting a candidate we like (and this year's lib candidate just doesn't have what it takes.
Last year Harvard Business Review, generally acknowledged to be run by some fairly bright folks, had a special edition on motivation. While they had some fairly recent work, they also cited Fred Herzeberg (Two factor theory--dissatisfiers and motivators) and Abraham Maslow (hierarchy of needs), reprinting some of their original needs.
While both of these men had what would be considered classic work on motivation, by modern standards, their work is severely lacking, and most (if not all), theorists agree that their is no support for their work (although there is some truth to both).
The sad truth is this: the general public is about 50 - 75 years behind when it comes to understanding psychology. Simple stuff makes it fairly quickly, but motivation theories, and theories of human development take much longer.
I choose motivation because I am currently doing research in the area (not directly, but certainly crucial to motivation). I doubt that the general public knows anything about my area (I base this on people's reactions when I mention it), which is hedonic prediction.
So, yes, you will occasionally find some nut who loves Freud--ignore them, and they'll go away eventually.
Okay, so you got one flame for this already, so I will try a more informed approach.
Freud was not correct on most of his major theories, that is a fact that most research oriented psychologists will agree on. By most, I should say, somewhere in the neighborhood of 90%. Many therapists will agree that Freud's methods of psychotherapy were not useful in facilitating a lasting recovery.
That said, he was a very intelligent man. He was a brilliant physiologist, and had a lot of very insightful things to say regarding the human condition. I cannot emphasize enough that he was very competent and intelligent.
Now, what is the real problem with Freud? The fact that so many people mistook him for a psychologist. He was, as I said, trained as physiologist, primarily studying brain disease. His pre-therapy work was wonderful. He was not a psychologist, and his later delvings into human behavior should have been treated as philosophy, not psychology.
Unfortunately, this was at a time when psychology was in its infancy, and still had a long ways to go. Today Freud would be considered a philosopher, but certainly not a research psychologist.
As for Jung, he was a student of Freud, and although he agreed on many points, he did not on others. Still, the same applies to him (in general), and his philosophy has not stood up to scrutiny.
I'll bite--
I think divorce, broken families, and the like are a huge problem, and kids are best of with two parents, one male, one female.
That said, there are always LEGITIMATE reasons for divorce. In my mind, they include, but are not limited to:
adultery
sexual abuse
physical abuse
any other kind of abuse
and probably a lot of other reasons that I can't think of right now.
You don't know why the op was divorced, or had a split family. Neither do I. To resort to such flamage before knowing that, or to even bring it up is a serious case of being a jerk.
That aside, one can have all kinds of social problems, and still be very intelligent regarding software. The two just aren't related.
Now, I hope everyone else can keep this place nicer than you have.
Sure, if you use gnome. I tend to use XFCE, for a number of reasons (though I plan to give gnome another shot here soon).
That may be true, but I remember not too long ago having trouble getting T-bird to open links in firefox if I clicked on them, and firefox wouldn't open mailto links.
That said, there is also a calendar plugin for both of these programs that can be made to use the sunbird calendar (all use the same file format, and you simply point them to the same file). A bit more work, yes, but ultimately useful.
I suspect that now is the time to speak up, and they will be able to fix the problems before a 1.0 release occurs.
I know that there have been issues with the 2.6 kernel, but I do have them working, AND quite well. I am also using a rather dated GPU (Geforce 2 MX 400 32MB card), but that's another issue. Personally, if open source is important to you and you don't NEED the highest powered cards (like some people seem to, even if it is just for the latest FPS), then that's great.
For some people though, the latest is important. Your priorities may vary, but that's what this world is all about--making decisions. Sometimes we make a decision about what is important and we are correct (we enjoy the outcome), and sometimes we aren't (we don't enjoy the outcome), but we still have to make the decision.
For you, it would seem that having the latest graphics card is less of a priority than having open source drivers that work on EVERY kernel version. That's cool, but remember, some people don't have that priority.
Thanks, and have a great day!
Interesting commentary, but it MAY need to go to the next step--FORCING communal use of the infrastructure. That is, allowing 3rd party cable companies to use line laid by their competitors. It sounds bizarre, but might be a way of accomplishing this whole business.
Frankly, I would LOVE to open up an ISP that provided fiber to the home, and there are several that do, but I simply haven't got the time, money or connections.
try nvidia--they have 64 bit drivers both for windows and linux.
Seriously, many people here rag on nvidia for their binary-only stuff, but they DO provide drivers for a VERY broad range of OS's, unlike many other companies. They may not support open source, but the DO support their customers in a greater degree than many companies, even when those customers want to do some fairly weird stuff!
Actually, she just now got that option for the first time. i know of a few places that are more rural, but not many.
As far as satellite goes, here's the shakedown: if you do ANY online gaming, avoid it. Dial-up is just as good due to the 800ms+ ping times that you end up with. Sorry, its just not worth the cash.
Additionally, direcway (directv's internet offering) is horribly overpriced, and they lock you into a 2-3 year agreement, and charge you 700 bucks for the modem if you cancel early.
As far as I'm concerned, wait for something faster.
First, there are a LOT of reasons the US is behind, and the baby bells (bellsouth in my area) are largely to blame, because of FCC regs. But then again, so is localized monopoly of cable service (again, blame the FCC).
The first step to cheaper broadband? FCC demonopolization of areas currently controlled by a single company (phone/cable). As it stands, I live in an area where I can only get Northland Cable. It sucks beyond beleif. They offer very slow connections at an outrageous price.
Two months ago I had DSL, but when I moved, it was outside the range. So I switched (I also went with vonage, but hey). I am now paying MORE for LESS (which in this case sucks).
Compare this to my mother. She lives 10 miles from the closest post office (give or take 2) in Boonesboro KY. It small enough that it doesn't even have its own zip code or fire dept. Bellsouth called her and offered DSL, starting this month. Go figure--she lives in the most rural area I can think of, and is getting DSL!!
Let me reiterate--if we want faster cheaper internet, gov't subsidy is one way to go. The better way is to open up the competition. This will also decrease the price of cable TV (note that satellite has already helped with this, but more competition is always good).
Nuff said.
yeah i remembered the hdd after posting...oops.
but that still leaves some cash, ANd the fact that I quote retail prices for that stuff. anyone who thinks apple pays that is out of their head. I would guess they pay closer to 50% of that, then they have to pay labor. All said, they probably aren't making as big a profit as some folks think, but I still feel that there is a premium for the mac name.
One way to look at this is fairly simple: they must have fairly high profit margins to stay alive with the low number of sales they push (as compared to ms). Otherwise they would have died a while ago. (by profit margin, I am referring to hardware costs only. by the time you factor in the humans in the company, their profit margins are probably not all that high.)
So yes, you're right, but I still think they make some cash on the hardware.
Actually, since ram is so cheap, the only thing that I question is the price of the proc and the mobo. I really think that everything else (RAM, vid, cd) can be had really cheap (figure ~$50 for vid (yes that's about right for a 5200, less at the price apple surely pays), ~$75 for RAM (expensive at that price too), and ~$75 for the cd/dvd (since burners are easily available for less to the consumer)).
I am guessing $200 for all parts save the mobo and cpu is actually quite a bit more than apple really pays (since I can get all the aforementioned parts at that price). $400 for the mobo and cpu is quite a bit, and I seriously doubt that it costs apple anywhere near that amount (probably closer to half that). Factor into that the fact that aplle very likely makes a sizeable profit on the cinema display, and yes, you are paying a premium for the machine.
Would I pay it? Absolutely. I don't have the cash, but if I did, I wouldn't hesitate a bit. Even knowing that there is a markup for the machine. And no, I don't have a mac right now. I have a home-brew AMD 3200+ (XP) machine that dual boots winxp pro and gentoo linux. I am happy with this machine, but I can understand why macs are appealing, and I would like to have one. What I don't like is the way that pc freaks so often bash the mac, and the macoids bash the pc. Both have merits unique to them.
I have to disagree with your .sig--I personally would love to collect servers of all types. Unfortunately, I am in grad school and can't afford too.
frood was wrong.
smart guy, but wrong. on almost every point.
Now that even aluminum has better transparency support than IE.
Doh!
I am willing to pay taxes to support legitimate (sp?) government. What differs is the degree to which you and I feel that any particular government program should be considered legitimate.
Some people, for instance, support a mandated social security tax. I do not. I feel that there are a lot of people who are harmed by this. If I make 100,000/year (in my current area of residence), I could easily put away enough to retire comfortably and take care of myself. Having the social security tax removed from my check, however, would inhibit my ability to do so (it's a fairly hefty chunk), limits my ability to invest that money as I see fit.
The concepts of social security and welfare are useful to a degree, but I do believe that they are not the only solution. I support the concept of a national sales tax--and the elimination of the vast majority of the IRS. I do feel bad for those people who work for them that will be out of a job, but I suspect that they will have plenty of opportunity to make money elsewhere.
The national sales tax could take in enough money to support the current welfare system until we can make a transition to a more useful version.
(A possible, not foolproof, solution to welfare is this: match income for those who make less than X/year--but cap it at a reasonable level. If you make $0/year, then the government would match that at $0/yr. If you make $5000/year, then the gov't would match that at $5000/year. Since the gov't would not be issuing tax refund checks any longer (national sales tax, remember), then this would take its place for lower income folks.
There would have to be a certain set of qualifying events in this system--if you smoke, or drink, then you get that much less from the gov't. Why? Because these are luxury items. No one can honestly claim that a 40 of Magnum every week is a necessity. Therefore if you expect the gov't to help you out, you shouldn't be spending money on that type of thing. On the other hand, going to school would increase the multiplier (say to 1.25 instead of 1 for the percentage of personal income matched).
The goal here would be to increase the incentive of persons on welfare to go to school, save money and avoid costly personal addictions (yes, alcohol and tobacco are addictions for the vast majority). The gov't shouldn't sponsor such things.
On the other hand, I am not opposed to helping out those who truly cannot work--certain mental illnesses, truly disabled, etc. What I do find, however, is that commonly those who claim they cannot work are only lazy. I have worked with some folks who were mentally ill, and many of them held a job. I have seen folks with severe physical disabilities find a means of supporting themselves. It is possible. Because of this, I have little sympathy for those who claim they cannot work. Despite this, I recognize that I don't know the depth of anyone's pain or the true severity of their mental illness, so I can't, in good consience, eliminate all help for them.
Enough said.)
In relation to the topic at hand, though, I will say that a license change for linux doesn't really make sense. The current set has worked for a while now, and no one can reasonably make the claim that BSD licensed products are free from litigation issues such as those currently faced by linux. That's just a pipe dream, and Business Week should KNOW THAT! I lost a lot of respect for them on this. They just don't make good decisions sometimes.
Amen.
As a behavioral scientist (read: psychology), I have to absolutely disagree that "it's all pretty much been wanking". What a sorry attitude.
I do agree that many lay persons are capable of contributing meaningful insight to some of these problems, but in my own area of specialty, I encounter a lot of situations where people really have no clue what I am talking about, but think that they do. (FWIW, I am a grad student doing my thesis on Hedonic Prediction (in particular), and Motivation/Judgment-Decision Making in particular: I find that it takes at least 15 minutes to explain what these are really about to most people, and why they are related to industrial psychology).
As far as linguistics are concerned, having lived in a foreign country and REALLY learned the language, I know that language is a very deep area of research.
I agree, which is why I think that a ruling that the GPL is invalid is very unlikely.
This is an interesting example, but not quite valid--many landlords will put things that they KNOW are unenforceable in a lease agreement. That is, the state you are in specifically prohibits certain contractual obligations, and EVEN IF you sign a lease containing those obligations, you cannot be held to them. Landlords who have more than a few properties (apartment developers and other demons) are likely to know this, but they have it there anyway, so that the uninformed will comply.
A peice of advice: before you sign, know your local laws regarding rental agreements. You may be surprised.
In this case, there is something different--the judge could quite easily rule that if you make the code available under any conditions that it is then public domain. Neither IBM nor SCO wants to see that judgement. In fact, no one who is sane wants to see that judgement.
The next worse thing is for the judge to agree with SCO, that the GPL is essentially a public domain release, and therefore everything licensed under it is public domain. SCO, despite what they think, does NOT want to see this. This would mean that they had released some of their own stuff to the public domain. IBM wants this even less.
The logical (as many have pointed out) conclusion is that if the GPL is invalid, then all works licensed under are really under normal copyright law, and therefore no one has any right to them at all.
This ruling doesn't fit, however. This would be essentially the same as saying that ALL license agreements are invalid, because they do the exact same thing that the GPL does--they extend the permissions normally granted under copyright law so that you and I can use software. Ruling that the GPL is invalid is essentially stating that extensions to copyright law through contractual agreements are not legal. You can expect IBM to fight that one all the way to the Supreme Court.
Folks, the truth is, and we all know it, is that SCO is screwed! Live with it.
oops,
wow, i barfed on that one.
I know that there is a way to do this properly, but I know that there is a way to do this. Perhaps a better solution would be to use a median score or a weighted average (hey folks, we have a serious outlier in these twelve months, maybe we should eliminate the outlier and start over?)
Re-reading my post, here is something I meant to say, but didn't, is that the average should be calculated _without_ including the final month. That way it would be a person spending $1k a month, not $2k. That would eliminate the bubble as I intended.
Next time, I'll use preview instead of submit.
The only trouble is that sometimes you have this feeling that you might need it next year.
Logically, it is plausible that you would need more next year than you did the previous year.
A fairly simple workaround would be to cut the next year's budget to the actual spending, plus a percentage equal to estimated inflation for the next year.
To avoid end-year spending bubbles, base this on the average amount spent each month times 12 (this doesn't completely eliminate the spending bubble, but would depress it somewhat). This would make sure that people's bad habits were accounted for, and that they didn't have as much reason to rush-spend.
At the same time, it might a good idea for people to have a place where they can list special spending needs that don't normally come up, and have those accounted for in their budget.
Just some simple ideas.
Yes, because its _obvious_ that you _can't_ make any money at all from supporting software/hardware. Think about it.
Oh come ON! someone needs to mod this up--its frickin' hilarious.
wow, this is like my 2nd troll mod evar...
If you are listening, let me tell you why I disagree:
I was trying to be funny. Obviously, I failed. miserably.