But people do pay for free software. Lets take an example, like Redhat.
They take Linux, make a distribution. Sell it, people buy it. They realize it needs some improvement to sell more. They hire some experts on thie software, not surprisingly some of the people who wrote it. Now they have a better version, that they can keep improving. They keep selling it, people keep buying it. The programmers get paid. You could get it for free, but it is worth the money to some to pay for an expert to make sure things work smoothly.
Redhat makes money by adding value to the free software. The software is still free, you don't have to pay, but they are able to offer something worth paying for.
Now it is more directly support contracts, the software has still remained free, people still pay, the programmer still has a job, and the corporation still makes a profit.
I don't see the problem, and Redhat isn't fooling anyone, Fedora (aka Redhat) is still available for free.
Proprietary software is antisocial, so developing it is wrong or The free software movement is based on an ethical stance: that users are morally entitled to the freedom to share and change software, that non-free software is unethical and wrong.
I think you meant one of those lines. He says not having the freedom to share is wrong. Selling software is perfectly acceptable, the FSF sells software itself.
The logic is simple, if I have something, and I can share it, I should be able to share it if I want to. Also I should be allowed to change or alter things that I have.
The GPL is just a tool to encourage others to share by making it a competative disadvantage ot opt out of the sharing pool.
They don't mean the same thing. For many practical purposes they are similar, and provide many of the same benefits.
What many people like you don't realize is that the distinction _IS_ important. It is mostly an ideological issue IMO.
When you have a founding idea that you follow or pursue it can help guide your efforts in a unified and more productive way.
RMS is pursuing a moral/ethical goal, by keeping that in mind has been able to retain this focus and become quite successful in his pursuit. The Open source is pursuing slightly different goals. If you lump them together you might assume that something that is good enough for the Open source movement is good enough for the free software movement too, and this might not be the case, due to the difference in their respective goals.
This is precisely the point of free software. Surprisingly the foundation of copyright and patent law.
To benefit society, ideas must be shared. Copyright tries to force an idea to artificial scarceness to encourage sharing. This has worked very well, think of the amount of additional creative production that has been generated. Books, movies and music come to my mind.
Patent law attacks this directly. You still get a limited monopoly, but the terms require complete disclosure of how your idea works and can be implemented. Again the idea is to disseminate this information to the world at large, not imprison the idea to a select few.
Yes losing nmap is small, but illegally distributing it is big. Assuming SCO does not want to risk a copyright violation suit, they will have to immediately stop distributing this entire CD. If they continue to distribute it the fines could be substantial
With 2.4 it was stable, but now under 2.6 some days it stays the same, other days it might move by 15+ minutes in a 24 hour period (I ntp it back of course)
Yes we have beer. Some American breweries, and the big Canadian Mass market guys too.
But what I really like is the selection in Ontario. The beer store and the LCBO have quite a nice selection of beer from around the world, quite a bit of variety if you want it.
That being said, I drink a lot of the mass market stuff myself.
I don't see a privacy problem. They are tracking product that they or their dealer distributes. Car companies do the exact same thing.
I think it would be very beneficial to both the producer, retailer, and consumer. They might find that it is worthwhile to cool the product and command a higher price at certain stores, and sell it warmer yet cheaper at others. There is likely seasonal and locational variation. And if different brands sell in different ways it may allow them to better predict consumer demand.
Getting the product I want, in the condition I want now is a valuable service, and I'm glad that they're working on providing this to me. Again car companies do this to try and have the cars people want on the lot today.
The GPL is a copyright licence, not a patent licence. You can't licence a patent under the GPL, it just doesn't make sense. A patent license needs permission to use, not distribute, and there is no source code to distribute.
Sorry money never gets "tied up". The only place close would be in government bonds, which are now basically tools to control the money supply.
If you have a lot of money, you own companies (outright or in stock), or you loan it out (bonds, money market investments, or a bank account).
The money is still there, being invested and growing both the investment and the economy at large.
FWIW I'd hope that Bill G pays little in taxes compared to his wealth. You should pay taxes on income, not only on assets. I'd be really pissed if the gov started taxing my emergency fund, or the money I was saving to [buy a house, go to school, retire on].
It is quite apparent that you are chosing to just dismiss me as wrong.
Power=Torque X Revolutions/Time Assuming that your peak power is still at the same rpm (which is likely) Torqe = Force X distance, I'm assuming you didn't change any component geometry.
For the power to increase, obviously the related forces increase, the bearings, gears, shafts are all experiencing higher loads. This WILL happen.
I wasn't saying your car, just a general statement using reasonable assumptions. Assuming the TT rated engine has the same weakest link components, sure it is possible that it will have a lower expected life, but lower isn't necessarily insufficient, and I would guess Audi has taken this into account.
This may or may not be an issue, if the automaker built your car to have 5% failure after 200k miles, even halving that means you only have a 5% failure at 100k, to reach a 50% failure rate you might have to join the million mile club. Fatigue failure tends to happen on a distribution resembling a log normal distribution.
Yes it is possible to hide stuff in open source code. Few people actually review it, mostly because it is rare in the mainstream trusted stuff.
Closed source has lots of hidden things, and again few people review it, so it is rarely found.
Both cases we generally trust the source, but in open source at least we have the option NOT to trust them and check for ourselves. Closed source, we are at their mercy
Lets see what 'security systems' are open source. Locks, keyed and combination, they still work well. DES, AES, Blowfish, all these algorithms are available, but the security isn't weaker because of it. Electronic tags that beep at the exit to a store, they still work.
As long as it isn't a broken algorithm, or a password that is being shown, it shouldn't be a problem.
Yes, and every windows user who spends enough time clicking on icons can be a Network Admin.
You can fool around and probaly fake it pretty good, but there is a wee bit more to making a car go then fiddling around with bits of steel.
Re:Magnusson Moss Warranty Act
on
Hack Your Car
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Aftermarket is not OEM. OEM Service parts are made to origional manufacturing specs. Aftermarket parts can be made by Joe in his garage.
The warranty acts basically say that if you use components of the proper class, it won't void your warranty. This means you don't need to use GM motor oil in your car, but you DO have to use the proper SAE grade motor oil. You don't have to use the same brand of shocks, tires, spark plugs etc, but they have to be of the same type.
Think of it like memory modules, you can put any DDR module in a DDR motherboard, and not void your warranty, but if you were force a 30pin sim in there and fry it, the manufacturer could void the warranty because you used it in an improper manner.
A 57 hp gain (at the wheels) from a chip upgrade. Depending what engine this is quite huge, I think you're likely putting quite a bit of stress on it, and you will have the reduced reliability because of this.
Lets say it was a 200hp car, now it is 250, that's 25% more power, but also 25% more force acting on EVERY component in the engine and powertrain, you likely just halved the life of many components.
(Assume a life exponent of 3, (1/1.25)^3=1/1.95, about 50%) btw 3 is a typical life exponent for certain cyclic fatigue failure modes, yes this is a simplified example. and yes I'm assuming peak power is at the same engine RPM. Also for many 'infinite life' components when you increase forces 25% you are likely back into the limited life zone.
If you never signed up for cable, you likely aren't liable. If/when it goes to collections they have to prove you owe the money. You should check your credit report, and make sure there aren't any claims from them. (equifax.ca, and it's FREE!!!)
Slashdot Mirror
But people do pay for free software.
Lets take an example, like Redhat.
They take Linux, make a distribution. Sell it, people buy it. They realize it needs some improvement to sell more. They hire some experts on thie software, not surprisingly some of the people who wrote it.
Now they have a better version, that they can keep improving. They keep selling it, people keep buying it. The programmers get paid.
You could get it for free, but it is worth the money to some to pay for an expert to make sure things work smoothly.
Redhat makes money by adding value to the free software. The software is still free, you don't have to pay, but they are able to offer something worth paying for.
Now it is more directly support contracts, the software has still remained free, people still pay, the programmer still has a job, and the corporation still makes a profit.
I don't see the problem, and Redhat isn't fooling anyone, Fedora (aka Redhat) is still available for free.
Proprietary software is antisocial, so developing it is wrong
or
The free software movement is based on an ethical stance: that users are morally entitled to the freedom to share and change software, that non-free software is unethical and wrong.
I think you meant one of those lines. He says not having the freedom to share is wrong. Selling software is perfectly acceptable, the FSF sells software itself.
The logic is simple, if I have something, and I can share it, I should be able to share it if I want to. Also I should be allowed to change or alter things that I have.
The GPL is just a tool to encourage others to share by making it a competative disadvantage ot opt out of the sharing pool.
They don't mean the same thing.
For many practical purposes they are similar, and provide many of the same benefits.
What many people like you don't realize is that the distinction _IS_ important.
It is mostly an ideological issue IMO.
When you have a founding idea that you follow or pursue it can help guide your efforts in a unified and more productive way.
RMS is pursuing a moral/ethical goal, by keeping that in mind has been able to retain this focus and become quite successful in his pursuit.
The Open source is pursuing slightly different goals. If you lump them together you might assume that something that is good enough for the Open source movement is good enough for the free software movement too, and this might not be the case, due to the difference in their respective goals.
This is precisely the point of free software.
Surprisingly the foundation of copyright and patent law.
To benefit society, ideas must be shared.
Copyright tries to force an idea to artificial scarceness to encourage sharing.
This has worked very well, think of the amount of additional creative production that has been generated. Books, movies and music come to my mind.
Patent law attacks this directly. You still get a limited monopoly, but the terms require complete disclosure of how your idea works and can be implemented.
Again the idea is to disseminate this information to the world at large, not imprison the idea to a select few.
If they agree to the terms of the GPL, no you can't revoke their rights to use it.
If they do not agree to the terms of the GPL, they are committing copyright violation and hence have no rights of distribution.
I do not see how anyone can argue that they agreed to a licence they claim is unconstitutional.
Yes losing nmap is small, but illegally distributing it is big.
Assuming SCO does not want to risk a copyright violation suit, they will have to immediately stop distributing this entire CD.
If they continue to distribute it the fines could be substantial
This has already been done.
Without permission to distribute, they are committing a copyright violation. This is the default state under copyright law.
As long as SCO does not use the GPL as their permission to distribute, they are in violation of copyright law.
My only problem was that my clock has gone nuts.
With 2.4 it was stable, but now under 2.6 some days it stays the same, other days it might move by 15+ minutes in a 24 hour period (I ntp it back of course)
And sound support for the nforce2 mobo is better.
Yes we have beer.
Some American breweries, and the big Canadian Mass market guys too.
But what I really like is the selection in Ontario.
The beer store and the LCBO have quite a nice selection of beer from around the world, quite a bit of variety if you want it.
That being said, I drink a lot of the mass market stuff myself.
I don't see a privacy problem.
They are tracking product that they or their dealer distributes. Car companies do the exact same thing.
I think it would be very beneficial to both the producer, retailer, and consumer.
They might find that it is worthwhile to cool the product and command a higher price at certain stores, and sell it warmer yet cheaper at others.
There is likely seasonal and locational variation.
And if different brands sell in different ways it may allow them to better predict consumer demand.
Getting the product I want, in the condition I want now is a valuable service, and I'm glad that they're working on providing this to me. Again car companies do this to try and have the cars people want on the lot today.
The GPL is a copyright licence, not a patent licence.
You can't licence a patent under the GPL, it just doesn't make sense.
A patent license needs permission to use, not distribute, and there is no source code to distribute.
Looks like point 2 is repeated with two different phrasings.
Perhaps the following summary is more clear.
2- Rather then listen to opinions, see for yourself. If you look at the two licenses they really are compatible.
I use my normal 2MPixel digital camera to take photos of articles all the time.
Works well, and it is cheaper then photocopies.
I think it would be cool to be able to combine images like this.
But I'm not an imaging expert.
I would also like to build 3d models from several photos, not that anyone cares, but I think it would be neat.
You can hardly afford to fly to India on what they'd pay you.
Sorry money never gets "tied up".
The only place close would be in government bonds, which are now basically tools to control the money supply.
If you have a lot of money, you own companies (outright or in stock), or you loan it out (bonds, money market investments, or a bank account).
The money is still there, being invested and growing both the investment and the economy at large.
FWIW I'd hope that Bill G pays little in taxes compared to his wealth. You should pay taxes on income, not only on assets. I'd be really pissed if the gov started taxing my emergency fund, or the money I was saving to [buy a house, go to school, retire on].
It is quite apparent that you are chosing to just dismiss me as wrong.
Power=Torque X Revolutions/Time
Assuming that your peak power is still at the same rpm (which is likely)
Torqe = Force X distance, I'm assuming you didn't change any component geometry.
For the power to increase, obviously the related forces increase, the bearings, gears, shafts are all experiencing higher loads. This WILL happen.
I wasn't saying your car, just a general statement using reasonable assumptions.
Assuming the TT rated engine has the same weakest link components, sure it is possible that it will have a lower expected life, but lower isn't necessarily insufficient, and I would guess Audi has taken this into account.
This may or may not be an issue, if the automaker built your car to have 5% failure after 200k miles, even halving that means you only have a 5% failure at 100k, to reach a 50% failure rate you might have to join the million mile club.
Fatigue failure tends to happen on a distribution resembling a log normal distribution.
Yes it is possible to hide stuff in open source code.
Few people actually review it, mostly because it is rare in the mainstream trusted stuff.
Closed source has lots of hidden things, and again few people review it, so it is rarely found.
Both cases we generally trust the source, but in open source at least we have the option NOT to trust them and check for ourselves. Closed source, we are at their mercy
Lets see what 'security systems' are open source.
Locks, keyed and combination, they still work well.
DES, AES, Blowfish, all these algorithms are available, but the security isn't weaker because of it.
Electronic tags that beep at the exit to a store, they still work.
As long as it isn't a broken algorithm, or a password that is being shown, it shouldn't be a problem.
Yes, and every windows user who spends enough time clicking on icons can be a Network Admin.
You can fool around and probaly fake it pretty good, but there is a wee bit more to making a car go then fiddling around with bits of steel.
Aftermarket is not OEM.
OEM Service parts are made to origional manufacturing specs.
Aftermarket parts can be made by Joe in his garage.
The warranty acts basically say that if you use components of the proper class, it won't void your warranty.
This means you don't need to use GM motor oil in your car, but you DO have to use the proper SAE grade motor oil.
You don't have to use the same brand of shocks, tires, spark plugs etc, but they have to be of the same type.
Think of it like memory modules, you can put any DDR module in a DDR motherboard, and not void your warranty, but if you were force a 30pin sim in there and fry it, the manufacturer could void the warranty because you used it in an improper manner.
A 57 hp gain (at the wheels) from a chip upgrade.
Depending what engine this is quite huge, I think you're likely putting quite a bit of stress on it, and you will have the reduced reliability because of this.
Lets say it was a 200hp car, now it is 250, that's 25% more power, but also 25% more force acting on EVERY component in the engine and powertrain, you likely just halved the life of many components.
(Assume a life exponent of 3, (1/1.25)^3=1/1.95, about 50%)
btw 3 is a typical life exponent for certain cyclic fatigue failure modes, yes this is a simplified example. and yes I'm assuming peak power is at the same engine RPM.
Also for many 'infinite life' components when you increase forces 25% you are likely back into the limited life zone.
And how does taping prevent this?
Steal the card, call from any phone, activate it.
They don't authenticate in ANY way that I'm aware of.
If you never signed up for cable, you likely aren't liable.
If/when it goes to collections they have to prove you owe the money.
You should check your credit report, and make sure there aren't any claims from them. (equifax.ca, and it's FREE!!!)
Punish me now.
This is old news BTW, years old
Yes, but then the question of "what is tampering".
There are actually cases of people photoshopping fingerprints to "bring them out".
Is that evidence tampering?
What if they just use a large burn/dodge tool? what if they just use a small one?
Where is the line?