Re:Restricting Free (as in speech) Software
on
P2P vs. The Clones
·
· Score: 1
The ecnomic argument to this is that since anyone can compile the sources and redistribute it, it does not make sense to sell it. Yes, you can sell GPL code, even if your not the author, but it's doubtful you'll have success.
This is NOT so. There are plenty of high-profile GPLd apps being sold by companies / indeviduals making money.
..."jumped the shark"? I think so. Sure, geeks will never use Microsoft's new search engine, but others will. Most will say that Microsoft's search will be biased and full of adds. But there are some that say Google is already there. Sure, for geeks, we may not see it as much because when we search for deep technical subjects, there just are not going to be that many spammers who have focused on being top Google in that subject. But to the average Googler, it's not that useful anymore because of all the spam. It will take spammers awhile to figure out Microsoft's ranking algorithm, and in the mean time, Goggle will lose market.
From what I understand, you can't actually go and buy Google shares. They're slowly giving them out to prominent bloggers. Though they'll probably end up for sale on eBay soon enough.
I wonder how many people here got this joke?
Re:Restricting Free (as in speech) Software
on
P2P vs. The Clones
·
· Score: 1
Er, not quite. The additional cost can only be "no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution", and you're certainly not required to charge anything for distribution.
SPAMMER: "My time is very valuble. This is going to cost you big..."
Re:Restricting Free (as in speech) Software
on
P2P vs. The Clones
·
· Score: 3, Informative
i couldnt find the part where you arent allowed to sell gnu software. you just have to supply the source
You're quite correct. Many people do not understand the GPL. There is no problem at all selling GPLd software for whatever price you like, and you don't even have to be the author. This is a fact.
By rereleasing the software with spyware included, they have modified the software.
No. They have released an installer which installs spyware, and coincidentally also installs UNMODIFIED p2p software. GPL does not address this issue. And really, does it make a difference? Realisticly, no one is going to sue tham.
Yes, actuall, I understand what you are saying. We bought Symantec Anti-Virus Corp Version for all our people to take home (as well as several other apps).
The book is for the "home user". Most help desk / IT shop guys get asked a lot of questions by fellow employees that are not work related, and in those cases, no prob. not his job. On the other hand, is the boss going to want to pay for these books?
In fairness to accuracy, it mentions Groklaw Spies exactly twice. But it's interesting when people start frothing and spitting and blathering about the "spies" in our midst. We see it from the paranoids at SCO and in our own US government all the time; we even see it from the Linux "hardcore" here at Slashdot. What it indicates is the desperation of someone who has run out of remotely reasonable arguments for whatever case they are trying to make. In SCOs case, it shows that these people have been scraping the bottom of the barrel for some time, and are now resorting to the only thing they have left, irrational paranoia. How does showing up at a conference make you a spy? Speaking of "spies" didn't I here that Darl himself (not one of his clones?) showed up in the back row of a presentation at some Linux get-together down Australia way not too long ago?
We can assume exactly that. And, we can also assume that they have no interest in upgrading the quality and functionality of their offerings, because they are not in the business of selling software.
First you would have to have the source code. I suppose it could be de-compiled? I don't know how that works. Are there laws against that? We are talking about Windows, here, right?
Reminds me of the FedEx commercial: Office Wench showing a PHB-In-Training how FedEx is sent. The PHBIT say something like "But I don't do FedEx. I have an MBA. To which the Office Wench responds: "Oh. OK, have a seat. This may take some time..."
Once again, the Slashdot writ-up and the actual story do not quite jive together. The story itself is NOT about the fact that the music industry is foisting off crappy CDs that they need to get rid of, as a part of the settlement. What the story ***IS*** about is rap music. The Kansas AG does not like the politics of the music, saying (rightly so) that it is overly sexual and violent. We ***ARE NOT*** talking about the music industry sending 2500 Engleburt Humperdink CDs to the schools and libraries. RTFA!!! And Slashdot editors: Do you even RTFA???? Clearly not.
Semantics of the word indoctrination [reference.com] aside, the reason this is so objectionable is that the kids aren't being taught the law as it is written, but the law the record companies use it.No, it is still the law as it is written, it is just that the record companies have written it. It is still the law.
How is it "indoctrination" to educate people of any age as to the law of the land? You may not agree with many laws, I know I don't. But learning about the law is not the same as "indoctrination". On the other hand, Socialists (as well as Communists) are very well known through out history to believe in "indoctrination". The interesting thing is that Socialists rarely recognize pushing of their beliefs as "indoctrination". I object to the whole wording of this story, it is so biased , it is not worth reading
So, because you don't like the position, and can't argue intellegently, you mod me "troll"? How about saying something intellegent about it?
How is it "indoctrination" to educate people of any age as to the law of the land? You may not agree with many laws, I know I don't. But learning about the law is not the same as "indoctrination". On the other hand, Socialists (as well as Communists) are very well known through out history to believe in "indoctrination". The interesting thing is that Socialists rarely recognize pushing of their beliefs as "indoctrination". I object to the whole wording of this story, it is so biased , it is not worth reading.
My initial assessment is that you are a fool, but none the less, I will tell you that I have detailed information about the situation which completely proves that what this woman alleges are illusions, do not in fact repeat their lies. You are a lucky but ignorant man that you believe that you believe in the one Hell,/dev/null, for in reality, infidels such as you will roast in the lowest level of contempt,/var/www/html.
Of course for the few that work at OSDN or whatever they are calling themselves these days (how about 503.com?), these things have never been an issue... It's clear from the server preformence, free beer has never been an issue.
I agree. I really don't understand the brew-ha-ha. The Olympics have been a strictly commercial enterprise for years, plastered with brand names and used mostly as a jumping off point for athletes to go pro with big endorsements contracts. I mean, even the US basketball team is mostly pro players already. It's all just another big corporate money making show. So, really, who cares?
Slashdot Mirror
This is NOT so. There are plenty of high-profile GPLd apps being sold by companies / indeviduals making money.
Still running Windows ME, I take it... For as much as a bloated whale Win2k and XP are, BSOD is history.
..."jumped the shark"? I think so. Sure, geeks will never use Microsoft's new search engine, but others will. Most will say that Microsoft's search will be biased and full of adds. But there are some that say Google is already there. Sure, for geeks, we may not see it as much because when we search for deep technical subjects, there just are not going to be that many spammers who have focused on being top Google in that subject. But to the average Googler, it's not that useful anymore because of all the spam. It will take spammers awhile to figure out Microsoft's ranking algorithm, and in the mean time, Goggle will lose market.
I wonder how many people here got this joke?
SPAMMER: "My time is very valuble. This is going to cost you big..."
You're quite correct. Many people do not understand the GPL. There is no problem at all selling GPLd software for whatever price you like, and you don't even have to be the author. This is a fact.
No. They have released an installer which installs spyware, and coincidentally also installs UNMODIFIED p2p software. GPL does not address this issue. And really, does it make a difference? Realisticly, no one is going to sue tham.
Yes, actuall, I understand what you are saying. We bought Symantec Anti-Virus Corp Version for all our people to take home (as well as several other apps).
The book is for the "home user". Most help desk / IT shop guys get asked a lot of questions by fellow employees that are not work related, and in those cases, no prob. not his job. On the other hand, is the boss going to want to pay for these books?
"irrational paranoia", is there anyother kind? Yes.
"Speaking of "spies" didn't I here...", of course I meant "hear".
In fairness to accuracy, it mentions Groklaw Spies exactly twice. But it's interesting when people start frothing and spitting and blathering about the "spies" in our midst. We see it from the paranoids at SCO and in our own US government all the time; we even see it from the Linux "hardcore" here at Slashdot. What it indicates is the desperation of someone who has run out of remotely reasonable arguments for whatever case they are trying to make. In SCOs case, it shows that these people have been scraping the bottom of the barrel for some time, and are now resorting to the only thing they have left, irrational paranoia. How does showing up at a conference make you a spy? Speaking of "spies" didn't I here that Darl himself (not one of his clones?) showed up in the back row of a presentation at some Linux get-together down Australia way not too long ago?
We can assume exactly that. And, we can also assume that they have no interest in upgrading the quality and functionality of their offerings, because they are not in the business of selling software.
This may have been true in the past, but I think it's moving rapidly away from this.
First you would have to have the source code. I suppose it could be de-compiled? I don't know how that works. Are there laws against that? We are talking about Windows, here, right?
Reminds me of the FedEx commercial: Office Wench showing a PHB-In-Training how FedEx is sent. The PHBIT say something like "But I don't do FedEx. I have an MBA . To which the Office Wench responds: "Oh. OK, have a seat. This may take some time..."
Once again, the Slashdot writ-up and the actual story do not quite jive together. The story itself is NOT about the fact that the music industry is foisting off crappy CDs that they need to get rid of, as a part of the settlement. What the story ***IS*** about is rap music. The Kansas AG does not like the politics of the music, saying (rightly so) that it is overly sexual and violent. We ***ARE NOT*** talking about the music industry sending 2500 Engleburt Humperdink CDs to the schools and libraries. RTFA!!! And Slashdot editors: Do you even RTFA???? Clearly not.
Does it make coffee?
Yap yap yap-yap, yap yapity-yap yap yap, yap yap yap ypa ypa ypa ypa ypa. Yap yap yap yap. Yap yap yap yap! Exactly.
Semantics of the word indoctrination [reference.com] aside, the reason this is so objectionable is that the kids aren't being taught the law as it is written, but the law the record companies use it.No, it is still the law as it is written, it is just that the record companies have written it. It is still the law.
So, because you don't like the position, and can't argue intellegently, you mod me "troll"? How about saying something intellegent about it?
How is it "indoctrination" to educate people of any age as to the law of the land? You may not agree with many laws, I know I don't. But learning about the law is not the same as "indoctrination". On the other hand, Socialists (as well as Communists) are very well known through out history to believe in "indoctrination". The interesting thing is that Socialists rarely recognize pushing of their beliefs as "indoctrination". I object to the whole wording of this story, it is so biased , it is not worth reading.
My initial assessment is that you are a fool, but none the less, I will tell you that I have detailed information about the situation which completely proves that what this woman alleges are illusions, do not in fact repeat their lies. You are a lucky but ignorant man that you believe that you believe in the one Hell, /dev/null, for in reality, infidels such as you will roast in the lowest level of contempt, /var/www/html.
Come on, it's a joke.
So, is this just a re-branding for the American market? We have seen this before...
I agree. I really don't understand the brew-ha-ha. The Olympics have been a strictly commercial enterprise for years, plastered with brand names and used mostly as a jumping off point for athletes to go pro with big endorsements contracts. I mean, even the US basketball team is mostly pro players already. It's all just another big corporate money making show. So, really, who cares?