Microsoft Research operates fairly independently and it's focus is in research, not product development. They publish papers and their projects are reasonably open but that openness has mostly not carried over to Microsoft itself.
Sigh... how hard would it be to get a license and distribute it as a binary-only module to people like me who'd be willing to pay for it?
Microsoft has their own virtual server product. They propably do not want competition, especially something that allows one to run Windows XP and Linux on the same machine at the same time.
I would personally love to have access to a Windows system without having to dedicate entire machine for it. But Microsoft has not, is not, and propably will not show any signs of willingness to cooperate with non-Microsoft systems.
in the real world, people need money. Not to flame you, but until someone cracks the problem of making actual cash money, you know, the stuff that buys groceries and houses and cars - - then there will be no open source industry.
In the real world there are lots of businesses that need customized software. They have money to buy it and I have the skills to do it. Usually they do not care if the software is open or not, but they would very much like the possibility that someone else could add some features when I am not available for the job.
Now that said, the reason many Americans don't like diesel cars is that diesel is thicker and less volatile, and thus diesel engines don't start as easily, particularly in cold climates.
That is an interesting view since here in Finland diesel is fairly popular and the temperature tends to drop below minus 30 degrees Celsius at some point every winter.
Although the popularity has much to do with regular gasoline costing a little bit over one dollar per liter and diesel only nearly half of it. The regular gas had 75% tax in it not so long ago.
A version control system would not be any help if someone tried to commit 300K patches. Linus already accepts good patches from people with good track record for presenting good patches.
And another way of saying this is "By taking some people's earned money, we are able to provide things for people who may not have earned money to pay for these same things". It sounds admirable, but there is another philosophy which says, "Let me keep as much of the fruits of my own labor to determine my own educational and financial future".
I can understand your point of view but for example I have been quite a costly student for the state and I have only recently started paying income tax. I come from a relatively poor family and without social security I wouldn't had any chance of coming study to University of Helsinki which I consider myself entitled to.
The money tends to come after high education, not the other way around.
Your country comes from the background of looking for freedom from taxes and government and mine has a lutheran history or working and funding the church. The difference is understandable. Many Finns do seem to think we can afford to share our wealth.
Like your statements about the US demonstrate, I am not familiar with the Finnish electoral process, however, I will research it in order to have a better grasp of it. Based solely upon what your have written, it doesn't sound very good to have my vote for candidate X go to candidate Y because X lost. Perhaps I missed something in the translation.
The idea is basically that a list contains people who have similar ideas. The green party has one list, perhaps the christian party and the centre party have a common one and several other parties have their lists. So for example when I vote for a student who's on center party's list and he doesn't get elected, my vote is counted in favor of someone who has basically the same ideas as the one i vote for. So I'm voting both for a person and ideas.
Actually the counting methods aren't that simple but the idea is this. I can't seem to find an URL that would explain this in more details.
And since USA is much more heterogenous than Europe, shouldn't your minorities be better represented?
My NYT Almanac notes that in 1998, unemployment in Finland reached 12%. GDP, $20,100 per capita, estimate for the same year. For the US, figures for the same year were 4.9% and $31,500, respectively.
According to Finnish Statistics Center the situation in 1999 was this: unemploment 10.2%, GDP I don't now (It's difficult to analyze anyway because Euro hasn't exactly been steady (IMHO Euro is a stupid idea)).
In 1990 the unemploment was 3.2% and the huge increase came with the recession. Propably the biggest reason for it was that a huge Russian market disappeared when Soviet Union was dissolved. That had nothing to do with our social security. It would be similar, if suddenly Michigan couldn't sell anything to other US states.
Your social safety net is HURTING the masses. It's not a coincidence that unemployment in Europe tends to be higher, and per capita productivity lower.
Social security propably affects unemployment slightly, but I think it's just humane to not force people to work for example two jobs just to survive or raise children. I think the reasons for unemployment here are mostly economical because there were too few workers just 10 years ago and there will propably be another worker shortage in 10 years in the future.
DDR has a pretty unique situation, because they changed the hole system little more then ten years ago. The same thing is with Russia.
Note: I'm not trying to flame anyone, just stating my view of the American Way as a Finnish citizen. (Note2: I have never even set a foot on American ground so all this is hearsay.)
So, you wan't a tax cut even though you pay only minimal taxes already. I think there would be great many ways to spend that money even that many to make the lives of the poorer Americans a little bit better. I'm comparing to the Scandinavian and Finnish system where we often pay approximately 50% taxes from salaries and 22% from most stuff and services (I as a poor student pay up to 17% income tax). But with that money we have full social security, almost free healthcare and fully free schools.
I would certainly not wan't to be in America and lose a job.
Another thing I'm amazed by is the electoral system where only the local majority has anything to say. And THAT is called democracy. Compare this to the Finnish way, where everyone votes both a list and a person on it. When a person doesn't get elected, the votes he got go in favor of someone else on the list who got more votes. Each party has generally a list of it's own. In this system a vote almost always has an effect.
Bush:In the international community, the challenge is even tougher since we must both help establish a legal framework for intellectual property protection and ensure it is enforced.
Let's say I had made a closed source -program that needed some library placed under GPL. What if I wrote a wrapper that called both the library and the program. Therefore it would naturally fall under GPL, but what about the program itself? So the wrapper would be a derivative of the program, but would the program still be a derivative of the library?
Another interesting note is that under Finnish law small pieces of code don't have copyright protection, only larger collections. I wonder how it is elsewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on the NCO's the staff had to sign-- if the NCO allows it, then yes, the opportunity is indeed perfect.
IANADL (I am not a danish lawyer).
Typical limiting agreements that I have seen only apply when the employee leaves, not when he is fired.
Some jurisdictions even force the issue to protect the employees (at least Finland that I know of).
Microsoft Research operates fairly independently and it's focus is in research, not product development. They publish papers and their projects are reasonably open but that openness has mostly not carried over to Microsoft itself.
Sigh... how hard would it be to get a license and distribute it as a binary-only module to people like me who'd be willing to pay for it?
Microsoft has their own virtual server product. They propably do not want competition, especially something that allows one to run Windows XP and Linux on the same machine at the same time.
I would personally love to have access to a Windows system without having to dedicate entire machine for it. But Microsoft has not, is not, and propably will not show any signs of willingness to cooperate with non-Microsoft systems.
> You wacky Euros. Here in the US, the TRACKS tell
:)
> our trains where they can and can't go.
So you mean you poor things only have one-dimensional railways. I suppose we Europeans could sell you some more advanced train technology
in the real world, people need money. Not to flame you, but until someone cracks the problem of making actual cash money, you know, the stuff that buys groceries and houses and cars - - then there will be no open source industry.
In the real world there are lots of businesses that need customized software. They have money to buy it and I have the skills to do it. Usually they do not care if the software is open or not, but they would very much like the possibility that someone else could add some features when I am not available for the job.
Now that said, the reason many Americans don't like diesel cars is that diesel is thicker and less volatile, and thus diesel engines don't start as easily, particularly in cold climates.
That is an interesting view since here in Finland diesel is fairly popular and the temperature tends to drop below minus 30 degrees Celsius at some point every winter.
Although the popularity has much to do with regular gasoline costing a little bit over one dollar per liter and diesel only nearly half of it. The regular gas had 75% tax in it not so long ago.
Why risk removing this extra peer review?
And another way of saying this is "By taking some people's earned money, we are able to provide things for people who may not have earned money to pay for these same things". It sounds admirable, but there is another philosophy which says, "Let me keep as much of the fruits of my own labor to determine my own educational and financial future".
I can understand your point of view but for example I have been quite a costly student for the state and I have only recently started paying income tax. I come from a relatively poor family and without social security I wouldn't had any chance of coming study to University of Helsinki which I consider myself entitled to.
The money tends to come after high education, not the other way around.
Your country comes from the background of looking for freedom from taxes and government and mine has a lutheran history or working and funding the church. The difference is understandable. Many Finns do seem to think we can afford to share our wealth.
Like your statements about the US demonstrate, I am not familiar with the Finnish electoral process, however, I will research it in order to have a better grasp of it. Based solely upon what your have written, it doesn't sound very good to have my vote for candidate X go to candidate Y because X lost. Perhaps I missed something in the translation.
The idea is basically that a list contains people who have similar ideas. The green party has one list, perhaps the christian party and the centre party have a common one and several other parties have their lists. So for example when I vote for a student who's on center party's list and he doesn't get elected, my vote is counted in favor of someone who has basically the same ideas as the one i vote for. So I'm voting both for a person and ideas.
Actually the counting methods aren't that simple but the idea is this. I can't seem to find an URL that would explain this in more details.
And since USA is much more heterogenous than Europe, shouldn't your minorities be better represented?
More statistics on Finland can be found here:
http://www.tilastok esk us.fi/tk/tp/tasku/suomilukuina_en.html
My NYT Almanac notes that in 1998, unemployment in Finland reached 12%. GDP, $20,100 per capita, estimate for the same year. For the US, figures for the same year were 4.9% and $31,500, respectively.
According to Finnish Statistics Center the situation in 1999 was this: unemploment 10.2%, GDP I don't now (It's difficult to analyze anyway because Euro hasn't exactly been steady (IMHO Euro is a stupid idea)).
In 1990 the unemploment was 3.2% and the huge increase came with the recession. Propably the biggest reason for it was that a huge Russian market disappeared when Soviet Union was dissolved. That had nothing to do with our social security. It would be similar, if suddenly Michigan couldn't sell anything to other US states.
Your social safety net is HURTING the masses. It's not a coincidence that unemployment in Europe tends to be higher, and per capita productivity lower.
Social security propably affects unemployment slightly, but I think it's just humane to not force people to work for example two jobs just to survive or raise children. I think the reasons for unemployment here are mostly economical because there were too few workers just 10 years ago and there will propably be another worker shortage in 10 years in the future.
DDR has a pretty unique situation, because they changed the hole system little more then ten years ago. The same thing is with Russia.
Note: I'm not trying to flame anyone, just stating my view of the American Way as a Finnish citizen. (Note2: I have never even set a foot on American ground so all this is hearsay.)
So, you wan't a tax cut even though you pay only minimal taxes already. I think there would be great many ways to spend that money even that many to make the lives of the poorer Americans a little bit better. I'm comparing to the Scandinavian and Finnish system where we often pay approximately 50% taxes from salaries and 22% from most stuff and services (I as a poor student pay up to 17% income tax). But with that money we have full social security, almost free healthcare and fully free schools.
I would certainly not wan't to be in America and lose a job.
Another thing I'm amazed by is the electoral system where only the local majority has anything to say. And THAT is called democracy. Compare this to the Finnish way, where everyone votes both a list and a person on it. When a person doesn't get elected, the votes he got go in favor of someone else on the list who got more votes. Each party has generally a list of it's own. In this system a vote almost always has an effect.
Bush: In the international community, the challenge is even tougher since we must both help establish a legal framework for intellectual property protection and ensure it is enforced.
Oh dear.
Try imagine how silly the US names look to those whose native language isn't related to latin.
:)
Houston, John F. Kennedy Space Center...
Houston actually is almost identical with 'without trousers' in Finnish
Let's say I had made a closed source -program that needed some library placed under GPL. What if I wrote a wrapper that called both the library and the program. Therefore it would naturally fall under GPL, but what about the program itself? So the wrapper would be a derivative of the program, but would the program still be a derivative of the library?
Another interesting note is that under Finnish law small pieces of code don't have copyright protection, only larger collections. I wonder how it is elsewhere.