Who is this "they" you are talking about? To be a proper conspiracist you need to be able to attach names to the "they". You need to assert that anti-linux FUD is a plot by the Bilderbergers, or the Illuminati, or the Joos, or Bush/Cheney and their Hallibuddies, or Hillary. It also helps if you wear a black teeshirt with a stupid phrase like "Vista was an inside job!" You have the anti-social behavior down pat, so you're almost there.
I do crossplatform development with Qt/C++, and it most certainly is not lowest common denominator. While I know some frameworks are crippled by the LCD philosophy, Qt is not. It's not perfect (nothing in life is), but it's complete enough that I know of many companies using it for single-platform development on all available platforms.
You whiny iPhone owners are starting to get on my nerves. If you had two brain cells to put together, you would have known that a company that sells a $699 cellphone is in it for the money.
I agree as well. I think the TSA are a bunch of goons, and our current paranoia about terrorism ridiculously overblown. But if this student didn't think she was going to create an incident with this device, she's an idiot. And those of you sticking up for her are idiots as well. Look at that device. Really look at it. In addition, she was holding a lump of playdoh in her hands. Do you really expect TSA agents to be determine the purpose of that circuitry? To know that she was holding plasticine instead of plastique?
The Mooninites "scare" was overblown, but this incident was not. She's lucky her clever MIT hack didn't get her killed.
Get a bunch of old railroad flares, tape them to an alarm clock, and mail them to various white house staffers. Should be a laugh.
If someone does this, and gets shot, there will be the obligatory Slashdorks whining that the TSA should have been able to tell the difference between railroad flares an dynamite.
Which conspiracy are you accusing me of participating in? That 9/11 was an inside job? That the military is covering up a spaceship that crashed at Roswell? That Kennedy was assassinated by the Federal Reserve? That Bush is really a reptilian space alien? That the rich and powerful sacrifice babies at Bohemian Grove during satanic rituals? That so-called chemtrails are a government plot to poison us? That Microsoft bought off everyone who every wrote a bad review of Linux?
Please tell me. Which paranoid delusion of yours am I a part of?
Courts where the GPL has been tested (e.g. in Germany) have upheld this.
But this isn't Germany. Every nation has slightly different legal systems. I tried looking up your term "conditional license", and the only thing showing up is stuff about drivers licenses. I very strongly suspect you made up this term, and that it doesn't exist in US law.
Nope! I have no idea what all the hullaballoo is, because I'm not able to use that site. But apparently it's so cool that many Linux users would willingly abandon the precepts of Free Software so they can use a closed proprietary plugin to watch some ghey whinger scream his throat raw about Britney for five whole minutes.:-)
You have distributed to your friend. If you asks for sources, you MUST give it to him. If you accidently threw away the CD that it was on, you'll be in deep legal doodoo. It won't be your friend suing it, it will be the original developer. Hopefully your friend won't rat you out...
The problem goes much deeper. The GPL claims that it is based only on copyright law, yet parts of it demand that the license be agreed to. Yet contracts are a completely different body of law than copyrights. If the GPL is indeed a EULA, then the conditions hold. But if I do not assent to the GPL contract, do the conditions still apply? If the GPL is not a contract, do I get the permissions without the conditions?
Yes, I know how the average Slashdot poster will answer. But the average Slashdot poster is NOT a lawyer. I would love to hear an answer from a bona fide contract attorney.
The truth, as is often the case, is far less exciting than the conspiracy theorists would like to believe.
The truth always is. There is one common trait to conspiracists, and it doesn't matter if they are 9/11 Truthers, Roswellians, Tax Deniers, Lunar Landing Hoaxers, or the everpresent Everyone-is-a-Shill-For-Microsoft loons. That common trait is a dissociation from reality.
"No rational person could ever deny the awesome truths presented in Groklaw," the conspiracists say, "And since Daniel Lyons appears to be rational, he must have been paid off by Microsoft or SCO."
If this issue was important to the Democrats, they could have filibustered it and forced the bill out onto the floor and a full debate. Instead they contented themselves on having a mere token support for it. Now they can go back to their constituents and say "but I tried!" without having tried at all.
p.s. That certain East Coast senator does not agree wiht Bush's policies "in general", only in one specific area, the so called "War on Terror". Beyond that, he is a solidly liberal progressive.
Great! Another reason not to install Gnash! I've been Flash free for a long time, because Adobe/Macromedia will not support FreeBSD (and at one time even had a license forbidding the use of Flash on FreeBSD). I end up with a lot of sparse and blank webpages, but that just saves me on bandwidth.
More Flash ads means less ads I have to see!
p.s. It used to be that the Linux community derided Flash and sites that used Flash for navigation or content. Then they got their very own proprietary Flash plugin, and most opposition vanished. The Linux community embraced the closed proprietary standard enthusiastically. Shameful.
A pox on both their houses. The Democrats got handed a majority by the voters because they promised to change things. But they've done nothing. They continue to call for an end to the war, but their words have not translated into deeds. Same thing with this cloture vote. The Democrats are nothing but the Republican's enablers.
Cato is a libertarian think tank. But even if you classify libertarianism as belonging to the conservative sphere, you're still attempting to equate them with Republicans. Conservative != Republican.
It's not about ex-soldiers in general, it's about ex-soldiers with lots of experience in violence against civilians. We haven't had much of that until the Iraq occupation. And I didn't mean to imply occupation soldiers were the cause of increasing police violence. Only that they contribute some to the current increase in it.
Objective proof is something that is rather elusive in economics- since economics is usually based on some implicit axioms that may or may not be true, it's hard to be objective about such things.
That's not the reason. The axioms in economics are few, and widely agreed to. The reason that objective proof is elusive is that human beings are not at all objective. Trying to predict the exact number of jobs created/lost due to a specific tax change is as futile as trying to predict the exact population of caribou in the arctic due a specific wolf protection policy. But the impossibility of such predictions does not invalidate population biology!
There is a major school of economic thought (Austrians) that rejects rigid empirical methodology for precisely this reason. This drives the empirical Chicagoists nuts, of course.
The first is the supply/demand theory of wages...
Sorry, I am not aware of that theory. But wages are like any other price. Valid theories of prices will of course apply to wages. I myself am partial to the marginal utility theory of prices, because it explains prices better than anything else out there. But to be fair to you, the supply/demand curves we all know from Econ 101 actually arise from marginal utility....in which whenever you raise the supply of something the price MUST go down
If everything else in the economy were equal, then that would be true. But everything else is NEVER equal. You will never find static supply/demand curves outside of college textbooks. Dozens of variables are continuously changing over time. On average, an increase in programmers will tend to lower the wages of programmers. But what if that increase were due to a greater demand for programmers?
...but in fact GNOME has become a standard desktop for many Unix vendors.
Sun. That's one. I'm unable to think of others to fill out the "many Unix vendors" you are referring to. Apple doesn't. The BSDs don't. SGI doesn't (didn't). I don't recall that HP does. Who am I missing?
Part of the reason my be that Ron Paul has not made any bold dramatic "plans" for the intertubes. He's not going to regulate them, not going to subsidize them, doesn't promise a taxpayer funded last mile, isn't going to pave a superhighway into every living room, isn't going to excoriate Bill gates, etc.
His philosophy is too simple for the modern media: leave the internet alone.
Part of this recent spate of tasering (and lethal raids on wrong addresses) can be attributed to the Iraq war. Iraq soldiers are trained to behave this way to Iraqi civilians, and they carry their training with them when they muster out and join a police force.
Besides, on embedded devices like phones, you're likely to run across the occasional patent. There is a lot of industry confusion about the GPLv3 and a lot of companies are deliberately avoiding it.
It was also a semi-private auditorium. Owners get to make the rules in private places. If you make speech I disagree with (or yell and flail your arms about like this jerk), then I have the right to eject you from my property. Unfortunately, university campuses are in a very gray area. But surely the microphone hogging antics of this nut can be restricted by the university.
Of course, there was no need to tazer him. Hauling his ass out of the auditorium was sufficient.
You're missing the point. The various BSDs want a small base OS to be completely unrestricted in licensing. This allows a third party to embed the complete OS in a device without having to worry about getting in legal trouble for not distributing the source or modifications. There has been sufficient shitting on embedded Linux manufacturers, that this is indeed a valid concern.
Slashdot Mirror
Who is this "they" you are talking about? To be a proper conspiracist you need to be able to attach names to the "they". You need to assert that anti-linux FUD is a plot by the Bilderbergers, or the Illuminati, or the Joos, or Bush/Cheney and their Hallibuddies, or Hillary. It also helps if you wear a black teeshirt with a stupid phrase like "Vista was an inside job!" You have the anti-social behavior down pat, so you're almost there.
I do crossplatform development with Qt/C++, and it most certainly is not lowest common denominator. While I know some frameworks are crippled by the LCD philosophy, Qt is not. It's not perfect (nothing in life is), but it's complete enough that I know of many companies using it for single-platform development on all available platforms.
So don't buy Apple!
You whiny iPhone owners are starting to get on my nerves. If you had two brain cells to put together, you would have known that a company that sells a $699 cellphone is in it for the money.
I agree as well. I think the TSA are a bunch of goons, and our current paranoia about terrorism ridiculously overblown. But if this student didn't think she was going to create an incident with this device, she's an idiot. And those of you sticking up for her are idiots as well. Look at that device. Really look at it. In addition, she was holding a lump of playdoh in her hands. Do you really expect TSA agents to be determine the purpose of that circuitry? To know that she was holding plasticine instead of plastique?
The Mooninites "scare" was overblown, but this incident was not. She's lucky her clever MIT hack didn't get her killed.
Get a bunch of old railroad flares, tape them to an alarm clock, and mail them to various white house staffers. Should be a laugh.
If someone does this, and gets shot, there will be the obligatory Slashdorks whining that the TSA should have been able to tell the difference between railroad flares an dynamite.
Which conspiracy are you accusing me of participating in? That 9/11 was an inside job? That the military is covering up a spaceship that crashed at Roswell? That Kennedy was assassinated by the Federal Reserve? That Bush is really a reptilian space alien? That the rich and powerful sacrifice babies at Bohemian Grove during satanic rituals? That so-called chemtrails are a government plot to poison us? That Microsoft bought off everyone who every wrote a bad review of Linux?
Please tell me. Which paranoid delusion of yours am I a part of?
http://www.usermode.org/blog/conspiracism/debunkinglinks.html
Courts where the GPL has been tested (e.g. in Germany) have upheld this.
But this isn't Germany. Every nation has slightly different legal systems. I tried looking up your term "conditional license", and the only thing showing up is stuff about drivers licenses. I very strongly suspect you made up this term, and that it doesn't exist in US law.
Nope! I have no idea what all the hullaballoo is, because I'm not able to use that site. But apparently it's so cool that many Linux users would willingly abandon the precepts of Free Software so they can use a closed proprietary plugin to watch some ghey whinger scream his throat raw about Britney for five whole minutes. :-)
You have distributed to your friend. If you asks for sources, you MUST give it to him. If you accidently threw away the CD that it was on, you'll be in deep legal doodoo. It won't be your friend suing it, it will be the original developer. Hopefully your friend won't rat you out...
The problem goes much deeper. The GPL claims that it is based only on copyright law, yet parts of it demand that the license be agreed to. Yet contracts are a completely different body of law than copyrights. If the GPL is indeed a EULA, then the conditions hold. But if I do not assent to the GPL contract, do the conditions still apply? If the GPL is not a contract, do I get the permissions without the conditions?
Yes, I know how the average Slashdot poster will answer. But the average Slashdot poster is NOT a lawyer. I would love to hear an answer from a bona fide contract attorney.
The truth, as is often the case, is far less exciting than the conspiracy theorists would like to believe.
The truth always is. There is one common trait to conspiracists, and it doesn't matter if they are 9/11 Truthers, Roswellians, Tax Deniers, Lunar Landing Hoaxers, or the everpresent Everyone-is-a-Shill-For-Microsoft loons. That common trait is a dissociation from reality.
"No rational person could ever deny the awesome truths presented in Groklaw," the conspiracists say, "And since Daniel Lyons appears to be rational, he must have been paid off by Microsoft or SCO."
If this issue was important to the Democrats, they could have filibustered it and forced the bill out onto the floor and a full debate. Instead they contented themselves on having a mere token support for it. Now they can go back to their constituents and say "but I tried!" without having tried at all.
p.s. That certain East Coast senator does not agree wiht Bush's policies "in general", only in one specific area, the so called "War on Terror". Beyond that, he is a solidly liberal progressive.
[http://www.freebsdsystems.com/] That's one. It took me all of five seconds to find. You're not putting much effort into this, are you?
But back to your original point, there is no evidence to your assertion that "GNOME has become a standard desktop for many Unix vendors".
Great! Another reason not to install Gnash! I've been Flash free for a long time, because Adobe/Macromedia will not support FreeBSD (and at one time even had a license forbidding the use of Flash on FreeBSD). I end up with a lot of sparse and blank webpages, but that just saves me on bandwidth.
More Flash ads means less ads I have to see!
p.s. It used to be that the Linux community derided Flash and sites that used Flash for navigation or content. Then they got their very own proprietary Flash plugin, and most opposition vanished. The Linux community embraced the closed proprietary standard enthusiastically. Shameful.
A pox on both their houses. The Democrats got handed a majority by the voters because they promised to change things. But they've done nothing. They continue to call for an end to the war, but their words have not translated into deeds. Same thing with this cloture vote. The Democrats are nothing but the Republican's enablers.
Cato is a libertarian think tank. But even if you classify libertarianism as belonging to the conservative sphere, you're still attempting to equate them with Republicans. Conservative != Republican.
here are actually only three major Unix vendors left: Sun, IBM, and HP. All provide GNOME as the default desktop.
Only Sun provides it as the *default*. Both AIX and HP-UX still have CDE as their default, with GNOME as an option.
BSD has no vendors. Just a few enthusiasts.
Wow. Just wow. It's amazing what people can believe if they just put their minds to it.
It's not about ex-soldiers in general, it's about ex-soldiers with lots of experience in violence against civilians. We haven't had much of that until the Iraq occupation. And I didn't mean to imply occupation soldiers were the cause of increasing police violence. Only that they contribute some to the current increase in it.
Objective proof is something that is rather elusive in economics- since economics is usually based on some implicit axioms that may or may not be true, it's hard to be objective about such things.
...in which whenever you raise the supply of something the price MUST go down
That's not the reason. The axioms in economics are few, and widely agreed to. The reason that objective proof is elusive is that human beings are not at all objective. Trying to predict the exact number of jobs created/lost due to a specific tax change is as futile as trying to predict the exact population of caribou in the arctic due a specific wolf protection policy. But the impossibility of such predictions does not invalidate population biology!
There is a major school of economic thought (Austrians) that rejects rigid empirical methodology for precisely this reason. This drives the empirical Chicagoists nuts, of course.
The first is the supply/demand theory of wages...
Sorry, I am not aware of that theory. But wages are like any other price. Valid theories of prices will of course apply to wages. I myself am partial to the marginal utility theory of prices, because it explains prices better than anything else out there. But to be fair to you, the supply/demand curves we all know from Econ 101 actually arise from marginal utility.
If everything else in the economy were equal, then that would be true. But everything else is NEVER equal. You will never find static supply/demand curves outside of college textbooks. Dozens of variables are continuously changing over time. On average, an increase in programmers will tend to lower the wages of programmers. But what if that increase were due to a greater demand for programmers?
...but in fact GNOME has become a standard desktop for many Unix vendors.
Sun. That's one. I'm unable to think of others to fill out the "many Unix vendors" you are referring to. Apple doesn't. The BSDs don't. SGI doesn't (didn't). I don't recall that HP does. Who am I missing?
Part of the reason my be that Ron Paul has not made any bold dramatic "plans" for the intertubes. He's not going to regulate them, not going to subsidize them, doesn't promise a taxpayer funded last mile, isn't going to pave a superhighway into every living room, isn't going to excoriate Bill gates, etc.
His philosophy is too simple for the modern media: leave the internet alone.
Here's his talk at Google. He does talk a bit about some tech issues.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCM_wQy4YVg&mode=related&search=
Part of this recent spate of tasering (and lethal raids on wrong addresses) can be attributed to the Iraq war. Iraq soldiers are trained to behave this way to Iraqi civilians, and they carry their training with them when they muster out and join a police force.
Besides, on embedded devices like phones, you're likely to run across the occasional patent. There is a lot of industry confusion about the GPLv3 and a lot of companies are deliberately avoiding it.
It was also a semi-private auditorium. Owners get to make the rules in private places. If you make speech I disagree with (or yell and flail your arms about like this jerk), then I have the right to eject you from my property. Unfortunately, university campuses are in a very gray area. But surely the microphone hogging antics of this nut can be restricted by the university.
Of course, there was no need to tazer him. Hauling his ass out of the auditorium was sufficient.
If license does not matter, as you seem to be arguing, then why not just stick with proprietary compilers?
You're missing the point. The various BSDs want a small base OS to be completely unrestricted in licensing. This allows a third party to embed the complete OS in a device without having to worry about getting in legal trouble for not distributing the source or modifications. There has been sufficient shitting on embedded Linux manufacturers, that this is indeed a valid concern.