For as long as nobody else is allowed to support it for them.
With current copyright law and the DMCA that means 95 years, so MicroSoft can stop supporting Windows 95 in 2090 (unless the Mouse gets another extension in the meantime).
And secondly, stating that anybody is "wrong" is closed-minded thinking. By definition, no good scientist will ever close their mind to an alternate point of view.
Wrong.
No good scientist will close their mind to an alternate point of view that fits the available facts. I can come up with wonderful hypotheses that have no bearing on reality, and when I do, I am wrong too.
Ah,that makes sense.
I expect the XFree86 license to revert shortly in that case, since if it doesn't the new license forces a fork with the included GPL code.
is the advertising clause incompatible with the GPL?
Yes, I know the FSF say it is, but it is a simple assertion that I have been unable to find explicit justification for. The only justification given in their statement is that it is awkward and impractical when in common use, this does not make it incompatible, it just means they don't like it. Not the same thing.
I can see their point about not liking it, and not wanting to use it, I just don't see an explicit incompatibility.
10 years is too long, but a punitive period of
banning MicroSoft OS preinstalls would be "punishment fitting the crime" since one of the monopoly abuses they stand convicted of in the US is preventing OS preinstalls of their competitors software.
And Econ 101 told me that.
Trade is a Win-Win scenario for those involved in the trade. The problem is that fewer people in the U.S. are involved in the trade, and the ones that are have improved their skills at protecting the profits. The real problem if the concentration of wealth, which takes money out of the trade cycle, which is a loss for everyone but those accumulating the wealth.
"american wages will stagnate while corporate profits will go up. this means the social division of the GDP will become more unequal."
This has been the case over the past few years, probably for other factors. But protectionists have been making these arguments for decades, all while real wages made meteoric rises in all income quintiles.
Sorry, the facts just don't support your hypothesis.
Lets see, according to the inflation calculator
a nickel in 1965 would be about a quarter now.
In the meantime, the minimum wage has gone from
$3.00/hr (roughly) to $5.50/hr, for a significant net drop.
The median family income has been sitting in the
low $30k's for at least 5-10 years, with significant inflation in the meantime.
I call bullshit.
Unless you are a salesman, executive, or "Knowledge Worker" your real income has held steady or dropped in the past decade or three,
and with outsourcing only the first two groups
are still growing.
Pretty soon, the only people with significant money will be the salesmen selling to executives and salesmen, because in India you can have a
US middle class standard of living for 1/10th the price.
Given the timeline, I'd say that they would
have found such code in action, and couldn't
keep their mouths shut long enough for due diligence.
Note that it could be bi-directional or BSD source. Hence the new wally-waving at BSD and talk about invalidating the USL settlement.
Of course BSD-source would be better for SCOG than
having Linux-sourced code in SysV, but still leaves their business plan and legal case somewhat short.
"SCO" code is found in the kernel and is found
to have originated in Linux and been moved to SysV by SCO.
Now, everyone who has purchased the offending
product is entitled to a copy of the source under the GPL, and their "Trade Secret" protection
goes POOF!
I will hardly ever believe anything coming from a national paper or magazine. All this bigotry and hatred for anything Clinton is totally ruining this country. You want change? Fine, then vote them out of office. But to constantly blast anybody in the media who doesn't think like you do, or believe in what you believe is like a child throwing a tantrum.
Of course, Clinton didn't involve us in wars of aggression for the OBVIOUS benefit of his cronies.
He also had a vague concept of this thing called "diplomacy" that keeps us from being at war with everybody. But of course talking is for wimps when you have the biggest military in the world...
There exist carbon fiber flywheels that disintegrate to easily blocked fibers for safety. I don't know
if they use them in regenerative braking systems, but they do exist.
Other methods used are: storing the energy in batteries (Prius), and storing the energy as compressed air (some busses, I think semi's have
something like this too).
I'm not saying that I would necessarily want it, but people who have the money can be seen buying Humvees, jet fighters, and all sorts of other military type equipment. Just "de-militarised".
As a historical example I would point to the town square cannons you see in a lot of small towns.
These were often purchased and owned by private citizens, and were major military hardware in their day. Kinda like having a tank now. Perfectly legal.
So, when it comes to 9/11, we should all be packing...the govt should ENCOURAGE it!!!! The only terrorist attack to be unsecessful was the one resisted by the PEOPLE. On top of that, with "disallowed" cellphones and in violation of most of the sissy "anti-terrorist" policies.
Exactly. It is plain that our government and many
lobbying groups do not expect adults to be able to behave as adults, or perhaps do not want adults defending themselves?
I would dispute the "laziness" of Democratic voters.
Try to get by on $5-$8 an hour and see how much time you have for little niceties like making sure you have registered to vote. Especially if you are trying to support a family on that kind of non-income.
Federal minimum wage is $5.15/hr. This comes to under $10,000/year after payroll tax is taken out.
Yes, the "Lucky Duckies" get to pay over 7% of their already meager incomes in TAX, this is without counting sales tax, not that they can afford to actually buy anything.
"Free" as in liberty. I am at liberty to sell
copies of the code that I have made, but if I am selling binary (compiled) copies I _must_ make the source code available to everyone I sell the binary to. I can even charge what it costs me to give them this access.
Where this seems to bite people is the lack of understanding that if you distribute binaries, the source code available to those receiving the binaries has to be the code they were compiled from. No "secret sauce".
OTOH, you _can_ distribute closed source binaries in conjunction with GPL binaries and there is no "cross infection" as long as the closed source binaries only interact with GPL'd binaries through
public interfaces and are not linked together.
The linking problem is why a lot of libraries are distributed under the LGPL which allows linking as long as there is no modification of the library.
But the public interface interaction is why the Linux kernel does not infect user-space programs.
Try again.
What they are trying to protect is their Common Carrier status. If they take any responsibility for third party content passing over their circuits they are royally screwed.
Slashdot Mirror
With current copyright law and the DMCA that means 95 years, so MicroSoft can stop supporting Windows 95 in 2090 (unless the Mouse gets another extension in the meantime).
Sounds reasonable to me...
Even at that, they only have 62 years to beat a truly millennial losing streak.
1. French Revolution : Tie, French won and lost.
2. Norman Conquest : France wasn't France yet.
Wrong. No good scientist will close their mind to an alternate point of view that fits the available facts. I can come up with wonderful hypotheses that have no bearing on reality, and when I do, I am wrong too.
Ah,that makes sense.
I expect the XFree86 license to revert shortly in that case, since if it doesn't the new license forces a fork with the included GPL code.
Yes, I know the FSF say it is, but it is a simple assertion that I have been unable to find explicit justification for. The only justification given in their statement is that it is awkward and impractical when in common use, this does not make it incompatible, it just means they don't like it.
Not the same thing.
I can see their point about not liking it, and not wanting to use it, I just don't see an explicit incompatibility.
This could bear some serious thought.
Kids these days, spoiled rotten I tell ya.
And Econ 101 told me that.
Trade is a Win-Win scenario for those involved in the trade. The problem is that fewer people in the U.S. are involved in the trade, and the ones that are have improved their skills at protecting the profits. The real problem if the concentration of wealth, which takes money out of the trade cycle, which is a loss for everyone but those accumulating the wealth.
In the meantime, the minimum wage has gone from $3.00/hr (roughly) to $5.50/hr, for a significant net drop.
The median family income has been sitting in the low $30k's for at least 5-10 years, with significant inflation in the meantime.
I call bullshit.
Unless you are a salesman, executive, or "Knowledge Worker" your real income has held steady or dropped in the past decade or three, and with outsourcing only the first two groups are still growing.
Pretty soon, the only people with significant money will be the salesmen selling to executives and salesmen, because in India you can have a US middle class standard of living for 1/10th the price.
Note that it could be bi-directional or BSD source. Hence the new wally-waving at BSD and talk about invalidating the USL settlement.
Of course BSD-source would be better for SCOG than having Linux-sourced code in SysV, but still leaves their business plan and legal case somewhat short.
Now, everyone who has purchased the offending product is entitled to a copy of the source under the GPL, and their "Trade Secret" protection goes POOF!
Unless they invalidate the GPL first.
There is no upstream obligation, despite popular opinion on the topic.
Of course, Clinton didn't involve us in wars of aggression for the OBVIOUS benefit of his cronies. He also had a vague concept of this thing called "diplomacy" that keeps us from being at war with everybody. But of course talking is for wimps when you have the biggest military in the world...
There exist carbon fiber flywheels that disintegrate to easily blocked fibers for safety. I don't know if they use them in regenerative braking systems, but they do exist.
Other methods used are: storing the energy in batteries (Prius), and storing the energy as compressed air (some busses, I think semi's have something like this too).
You misspelled "not born with a silver spoon up their nose".
As a historical example I would point to the town square cannons you see in a lot of small towns. These were often purchased and owned by private citizens, and were major military hardware in their day. Kinda like having a tank now. Perfectly legal.
If you can afford it the 2nd amendment _does_ give you the right to parity with the government.
Nukes are restricted by international treaty. Personally I don't think that governments are responsible enough to be trusted with them.
Exactly. It is plain that our government and many lobbying groups do not expect adults to be able to behave as adults, or perhaps do not want adults defending themselves?
Federal minimum wage is $5.15/hr. This comes to under $10,000/year after payroll tax is taken out.
Yes, the "Lucky Duckies" get to pay over 7% of their already meager incomes in TAX, this is without counting sales tax, not that they can afford to actually buy anything.
Short form: 2 CPU's in one package. In this case on one chip.
Yeah, it's a nit, but I just had to picket.
Odd, if you want to interoperate with me using MSOffice would be a definite detriment.
Of course, I'm not most people, I'm only me.
Where this seems to bite people is the lack of understanding that if you distribute binaries, the source code available to those receiving the binaries has to be the code they were compiled from. No "secret sauce".
OTOH, you _can_ distribute closed source binaries in conjunction with GPL binaries and there is no "cross infection" as long as the closed source binaries only interact with GPL'd binaries through public interfaces and are not linked together. The linking problem is why a lot of libraries are distributed under the LGPL which allows linking as long as there is no modification of the library. But the public interface interaction is why the Linux kernel does not infect user-space programs.
Try again.
What they are trying to protect is their Common Carrier status. If they take any responsibility for third party content passing over their circuits they are royally screwed.