On the other hand... if I were to take chepter 5 from the LOTR and change it a little bit, include it in my story and then publish it then it would be a derived work. Just like a company taking net/socket.c, modifying it, then including it in their own module and not distributing the source.
Maybe I'm wrong here but perhaps this is a way to look at it. If I wrote a story that was derived from the LOTR then it would not be a derived work in the legal sense it would be copyright by me. Although I'd have to get permission to use the trademarked names etc. Isn't this a bit like the linux kernel issue? The module is not directly derived from the kernel it is an extension that uses the hooks that were created in the previous "story". Maybe I'm on crack here....
The fundamental value produced by workers is thought, not manual labor. When they can produce computers that can think better than humans - that's when we have to start worrying.
Most people are not paid for factory labor. They're paid to solve complex (as far as a computer is concerned) problems. Like how to make a hamburger.. or how to make a SQL server engine.
Also, if they actually do automate everything then I'm gonna be the guy writing the software for a competing robot that costs 20% less than theirs. And I assume there'll be a lot of other/.'ers out there doing the same (probably selling robots that cost less than mine.)
I.e. SOHO companies will have these things in no time (presuming the bastards don't include any nasty patents.)
Which translates into lower cost for the consumers all around. Which makes the cost of living go down.Oh... and due to the lost jobs... it also makes a lot of underachievers go to college instead of working at a charcoal plant.
hmmm, what kind of Amiga achurch and more importantly was it booting off floppy? I seem to remember my A2000(Workbench 1.3) booting in what had to be less than 10 seconds off scsi....
I KNOW that my A1000 I had before that took at least a minute though. Always booted off floppy.
Maybe the drugs affected my perception back then... who knows.
--:wq
Back when I was into UO I wrote a set of tools (in Perl) to track Ultima Online Gold to US dollar exchange rates. It'll graph them and track the on an hourly basis. When I saw this story I immediately tarred it up and placed it live for general slashdot interest. It's just a shame that an accidental 'rm -rf *.htm' deleted my MySQL database that had about 2 years of UO data.
God you QT zealots are annoying. First of all GTK is LGPL not GPL. Secondly you can't develop a commercial application for Windows and sell it using QT without paying $1500. That is, I believe the authors primary point here. If you can choose between 5 different toolkits to write a program and you think you might want to sell it on win32 then you would be a moron to use QT (or maybe you like giving away profit?)
I use QT all the time. It's great. The structure is particularly nice. But it's not that much better than GTK+ and definately not better than wxWindows. That's why my company went with wxWindows to develop our proprietary GIS software. Maybe we'll make it GPL some time down the line (I'd like to see that happen.) But not before we make $$$ off it.
Absolutely. Why do we need 15+ different toolkits (I'm not exagerating, count them sometime.) My theory goes like this.
Toolkit programmers like all us geeks are antisocial and tend to think that others around them are dolts. So they naturally choose to write Their Better Toolkit (tm). Because they Can Do It Better.
Then these Better toolkits get a small following of cowed developers that all think that their particular toolkit is the best (mostly because it's the first one they learned.)
The success or failure of a given toolkit will depend on how much indirect marketing the Cowed developers do for the given toolkit.
Thus... we get this
list of toolkits available for linux.
There is a disturbing trend of recent articles that engage in Qt/KDE bashing.
If you were a developer and there were three different options two were free and one had the potential of costing your company $1,500 which would you choose? He makes the argument that wxWindows/GTK+ have everything that QT has but have truly free licenses. This isn't bashing... this is common sense.
There will be an almost constant time in developing the GUI for an application with these three toolkits. Why not choose one that you know you won't have to pay $1,500 to compile a Windows version for?
A free version of QT for Windows is available but it is expressly for non-commercial use. To quote the Trolltech sight: "Private users may use the Qt non-commercial edition in a non-commercial setting to produce non-commercial applications. More details can be found in the Qt Non Commercial license."
http://www.trolltech.com/download/qt/noncomm.html
This means you must pay to sell a Windows version. So not using QT just makes sense.
Slashdot Mirror
They've got about 19 days by my system clock.
jonathan@perl:~/dev/interface/lib$ perl -le 'print time();'
1072051517
jonathan@perl:~/dev/interface/lib$ perl -le 'print 2 ** 30;'
1073741824
jonathan@perl:~/dev/interface/lib$ perl -le 'print 2 ** 30 - time();'
1690288
jonathan@perl:~/dev/interface/lib$ perl -le 'print 1690288 / 60;'
28171.4666666667
jonathan@perl:~/dev/interface/lib$ perl -le 'print 1690288 / 60 / 60;'
469.524444444444
jonathan@perl:~/dev/interface/lib$ perl -le 'print 1690288 / 60 / 60 / 24;'
19.5635185185185
On the other hand... if I were to take chepter 5 from the LOTR and change it a little bit, include it in my story and then publish it then it would be a derived work. Just like a company taking net/socket.c, modifying it, then including it in their own module and not distributing the source.
Maybe I'm wrong here but perhaps this is a way to look at it. If I wrote a story that was derived from the LOTR then it would not be a derived work in the legal sense it would be copyright by me. Although I'd have to get permission to use the trademarked names etc. Isn't this a bit like the linux kernel issue? The module is not directly derived from the kernel it is an extension that uses the hooks that were created in the previous "story". Maybe I'm on crack here....
The fundamental value produced by workers is thought, not manual labor. When they can produce computers that can think better than humans - that's when we have to start worrying.
/.'ers out there doing the same (probably selling robots that cost less than mine.)
Most people are not paid for factory labor. They're paid to solve complex (as far as a computer is concerned) problems. Like how to make a hamburger.. or how to make a SQL server engine.
Also, if they actually do automate everything then I'm gonna be the guy writing the software for a competing robot that costs 20% less than theirs. And I assume there'll be a lot of other
I.e. SOHO companies will have these things in no time (presuming the bastards don't include any nasty patents.)
Which translates into lower cost for the consumers all around. Which makes the cost of living go down.Oh... and due to the lost jobs... it also makes a lot of underachievers go to college instead of working at a charcoal plant.
hmmm, what kind of Amiga achurch and more importantly was it booting off floppy? I seem to remember my A2000(Workbench 1.3) booting in what had to be less than 10 seconds off scsi....
:wq
I KNOW that my A1000 I had before that took at least a minute though. Always booted off floppy. Maybe the drugs affected my perception back then... who knows. --
Back when I was into UO I wrote a set of tools (in Perl) to track Ultima Online Gold to US dollar exchange rates. It'll graph them and track the on an hourly basis. When I saw this story I immediately tarred it up and placed it live for general slashdot interest. It's just a shame that an accidental 'rm -rf * .htm' deleted my MySQL database that had about 2 years of UO data.
The tarball to set it up is at: http://www.visualmanna.com/dev/uowatch.tar.bz2
God you QT zealots are annoying. First of all GTK is LGPL not GPL. Secondly you can't develop a commercial application for Windows and sell it using QT without paying $1500. That is, I believe the authors primary point here. If you can choose between 5 different toolkits to write a program and you think you might want to sell it on win32 then you would be a moron to use QT (or maybe you like giving away profit?)
I use QT all the time. It's great. The structure is particularly nice. But it's not that much better than GTK+ and definately not better than wxWindows. That's why my company went with wxWindows to develop our proprietary GIS software. Maybe we'll make it GPL some time down the line (I'd like to see that happen.) But not before we make $$$ off it.
Absolutely. Why do we need 15+ different toolkits (I'm not exagerating, count them sometime.) My theory goes like this.
Toolkit programmers like all us geeks are antisocial and tend to think that others around them are dolts. So they naturally choose to write Their Better Toolkit (tm). Because they Can Do It Better.
Then these Better toolkits get a small following of cowed developers that all think that their particular toolkit is the best (mostly because it's the first one they learned.)
The success or failure of a given toolkit will depend on how much indirect marketing the Cowed developers do for the given toolkit.
Thus... we get this list of toolkits available for linux.
There is a disturbing trend of recent articles that engage in Qt/KDE bashing. If you were a developer and there were three different options two were free and one had the potential of costing your company $1,500 which would you choose? He makes the argument that wxWindows/GTK+ have everything that QT has but have truly free licenses. This isn't bashing... this is common sense. There will be an almost constant time in developing the GUI for an application with these three toolkits. Why not choose one that you know you won't have to pay $1,500 to compile a Windows version for? A free version of QT for Windows is available but it is expressly for non-commercial use. To quote the Trolltech sight: "Private users may use the Qt non-commercial edition in a non-commercial setting to produce non-commercial applications. More details can be found in the Qt Non Commercial license." http://www.trolltech.com/download/qt/noncomm.html This means you must pay to sell a Windows version. So not using QT just makes sense.