but still put on a suit and tie for presentation day. Really gave me a warm feeling, knowing they got the same credit those of us who worked on it got.
You mean they made the effort to put a suit on, must have been a high quality outfit:-), and by the way you ungrateful miscreants, it's called "support"
An interesting example is the construction of "ingres" that started as a "large project development" course...
I agree that feedback and small steps are necessary, but it can be done within the scope of a large project..
If you start by "everyone, build a CMS" you will also want to decide if you run it as "n projects" or a project in n parts" and you'll have to make sure tat somewhere basic project management methods have been or are being teached...
And what is happening now in most of the case it that students get regular feedback on not very relevant evaluation of "testing events"
I have 25 years of experience teaching computer science to students at all level of academia. And most students who came to my courses came either because they found it interesting or because I had the reputation of being "difficult" but with the "midas touch" (basically if you had enough credit with me you where pretty sure to get an interesting job).
And I totally agree with Steve Wozniak.
First only long term projects can really check if the subject you are studying has any interest for you, too many people are looking for a "diploma" to get a job, not for an education.
BTW I got my "job positive results" by completelly ignoring "the industry wisdom" (or I would have teached GCOS MOD400 and/or PL1 and/or RPG and other "magic recepies to get some work", and gradually moved to.net & java)..
Second only long term project enables you to understand the difference between "half cooked solutions" and something you can actually inflige to somebody ele.
Third it shows the relevance of what you learn
Of course it has the unfortunate effect that you might find out that your teacher is fading into obsolescence, and too busy with external money making schemes to follow what you are doing, and I believe that is the main reason institutions prefers "tests"...
And I would have more trust on Woz about what makes a good "maker of things" than a "learning expert" who might or might not have made a serious study of "teaching and grading methods impact on long term creativity". not because of some bias against "humanities studies" but because it is almost impossible to organize large scale provable experiments in such a situation, most students request "fairness", so if you would organize to groups one being tested on long term projects and the other on "conventional grading" the result would be that in the first group you would get all the "geeks" and a good part of the would drop out running with their pet projects, and the other would get all the "mundane", and unless you force some to "switch" you would not be able to have a statistically relevant sample. And if you ask them to swich all so the "mundane" would protest, and you would not be able to see if they would actually be able to morph in something useful...
Thank you for this detailled and very interesting answer that gives a good idea of the challenges that face a "long term software développement". It also brillantly illustrate that real life does not need any conspiracy to have unplanified effects.
Analysing and putting it all into an historical context would probably yield a pretty good book.
But in conclusion, two personal thanks, first of all for writing, maintaining and making avaiable Kermit over all these years, it did help me, and for taking the time to write an interesting answer to my question/remark.
Well that cannot be the real reason since as show on the C-Kermit site: Due to relaxations in USA export law, secure versions of C-Kermit are available in source-code form, supporting Kerberos IV, Kerberos V, SSL/TLS, and SRP. and from the C-Kermit man page it can also make SSH connections through your external SSH client application.
So conceivably an open source Kermit-95 with just the SSH ripped out (if really necessary) could be made avaiable, if that would be all...
Alternativelly a legitimate message could be: C-Kermit is better and allready BSD so it's better in the long run even if Kermit-95 has some adventage in dying old machines... so we do not bother.. Or out contracts with Amazon, E-Academy, etc... prohibits us...
But "we can't", well why ? of course they have no obligation even no "moral" obligation after all they paid for the developpment and it helped lots of people...
But on an other hand it is unlickely that they made any real revenue out of it even over 30 years, so as an historical and econonical case study it would be interesting to see what the motivations for the old licences where, and what the motivations for keeping K95 close are...
I miss Kermit like I miss my old Kreidler motobike, found memories but I'd probable wouldn't really like it if I would need it again...
But what I would really appreciate from columbia would be a clear and detailled explanation of what parts or "kind of parts" of kermit-95 and why ? cannot be open sourced ? Are there pieces of code written by Open Source adverse copyright holders ? Or "lost coypright holders" that have rights but cannot be located Or legally "challenged" copyright holders (childs who are too young to "agree" to anything but are the sole heir of some copyrights ? for example ?) Backdoors mandated by some three letters authority that cannot be released under an open source licences:-) code that implement something patented and the patent holders do not authorise the inclusion in open source code.. Or contracts with former clients prohibiting "unfair compétition"... or, or,....
I know that the value of an Open Source Kermit-95 would be very law, it might be better on Windows than C-Kermit for some values of "better"... but it's unlikelly that any futur use would be better served with an update of K95 rather than a modificiation of CK.
But the lesson on "freeing" code would be very interesting, and after all Columbia as a quite proheminent law school... so it would be interesting...
Of course you have to climb trees to compute, but you can use b-trees, straight binary trees or even oriented graph trees or best of all fractal trees..
So the US lobbies successfully imposed to EU the same stupidity that they got at home...
Basically copyrights and patents are the "semi religious framework" that justifies sending money from all over the world, and preferably reasonably rich countries to the US without stating the obvious, we should anyway because the US got the biggest army and secret services...
You point out exactly what is wrong with current views of what a company should be...
You say that companies who pay dividends are "not good", and that the growth of the share price is the only thing that shareholders are/should be concerned with.
But the law of diminishing returns make it that at some point the growth will hit a limit, so basically any "pure share" play is a ponzi scheme, at some point the people who should pay your "margin" on the share you own stop being interested.. not because the company is not good anymore but because it does not get "better" fast enough.
Seen from another point of view, if you buy something "good" you should want to keep it, so why are you buying shares with the intent to sell them... Do you plan to buy other shares ? or need to eat ?...
So we all live in a global "con game" that only works because in the past 50 years global growth has outpaced the "potlash" effect... As we fill up the earth, and as we try to stop innovation growth will stall, and then suddently the system will implode, and people who have invested in companies doing something usefull and stable and paying divident will be very happy they didn't try to put their eggs in "growth values"...
Perfect security is imposible, but if you reinstall everything with "local" code you can lean on "local" companies.
And you are right malicious HW is a problem, but at least having an "in house installation" gives you some level of protection and accountability. It also gives you the opportunity not to detect malicious HW but some of the effects of malicious HW.
Although things like encoding messages in tiny time discrepencies in response times from some public server would be difficult to detect..
My point was that basically there is no difference between an HP or Dell computer and a Lenovo or Haier in terms of "security" They all are variations of the same core "producer" China Inc.
Worse, forgot to install the english spellchecker on my new machine, but you are right I miss spell in each of the five languages I'm fluent in.... "Qui trop embrasse mal étreints" Or a bout of dislexia...
There was a title for this in germany before WW1 it was called the - Sitz DIrector (or Redactor for a news paper) Sitting Director They has also the "früshtuck director" Breakfast Director
THe first one is the one supposed to go to jail in case of problems, and the second one is usually an aristocrat with a nice title he takes the VIP to breakfast and other "meetings", so the real directors do not need to loose time...
But somehow the IRS equivalent tends to think that whoum ever is making the most money in the company is the one that should go to jail.... (not that it happens very often unfortunatelly)...
So basically you should investigate the money trail and this gives you the "effective CEO" and that person should be the one sued...
About the security of foreing built computers this is b**t ALL computers a build by an handfull of ODM in china, if the US government is not basically trashing the preinstalled software of any sensitive machine to install their own their clueless...
And since they know how easy it was for them to stop various categories of foreing computers they cannot really ignore this...
So buying US computer is purelly lobbying and nationalism...
You are almost right, these people are actually choosing gedit or notepad although vim and emacs are avaiable....
Basically in many countries studying computer science is avoiding one "small" issue, code is supposed to really work... So many developpers know how to shovel out some more or less complex code, and it works just long enough to get the credit... But then they completelly forget about it, so they like an IDE that "remembers" so they do not have too. But they lack the practice, and the curiosity to learn what it can really do... (they do not know about debugger either...)
No but revealing for example the add targeting process might be an issue, for competitive, regulatory and marketing reasons.
And you need to make sure the comment and code elements are not offensive, make sure there is nothing like
if (luser.category() >= cluless) luser.serve(advertisement[lies].bulshit());
switch (luser.machine() ){ case Windows: luser.category(iq_eval.reduce()): break: case MAC : luser.category(toy_addiction.increase()); break; case Linux : luser.category(cussness.increase(tothemax)); break; case BSE : luser.category(cussness.increade(overthemax)); break; default : luser.call_police(weirdo); break; }
tsss no eclipse is an anti emacs, I see everyday java jockey typing away with eclipse and so happy of all the "help" but unable to remember where their code is, and taking hours to go from one file to an other.... And I would like to hit them on the head with their screen and yell "can't you esc-X shell and grep *.[ch] for XYZ's sake ??? please.... I'm loosing my patience...
(nb: concidering the MB's used by eclipse and it's modular nature I would suspect that something like this is possible, but why can't the users figure it out...)
No Emacs "rules":-) (of course vim is acceptable too because now we do not need to fight amongs ourselves we can sneer at eclipse users:-))
I stopped using Yahoo when it stopped being a service directory to morph into a mix of portal/search engine...
I do not see Portal as a replacement of CNN/others... And google provides a more streamlined user experience (although I'm started to be irritated by the ammount of "help" it provides me, particularly because for some reason it does not believe that I'm interested in relevant content not in "tailored for french no latin america nor whatever other tailoring it does..."
And I see very personally how it now has the power to do "friendly censorship"... of course if you "know it exists" you can still with some effort see it, but "accessible reality" is shaped by google,and that is scary (well bing would be even scarier...)
I would guess the real reason is to track the cars...
a) Do a new tax to avoid raising the old ne b) make sure that the people who would opose on what you really want to do are seen as oposing your new tax for selfish reasons. --- Commentator: You say that this tracking is bad because of civil liberties, but aren't you driving an hybrid ? --- Oponent:: ahem yes but that is not the point --- Commentator: Oups we do not have any more time: so I'll quicky resume: Selfish Earth Warming Zealot opose the new law wich would increase the taxes on their high priced hybrid cars...
c) Show that the mile counting device would be much easier to read if we put a cheap mobile phone in it. d) use the phone and mile tracking device to track all the cars and detect automatically suspicious change of habits... e) Control (and profit is you have invested in a diversified portfolio of security oriented high tech companies)
Wonder when the will think of a tax that linked to something that implies metering warm bodies...
(the basic technology is already applied to track four legged cattle)..
Nothing prohibits them, but they would have to give the sources to their client, and any client could post it and then everybody could have it for free.
They could obviously "give it" and sell support They could create a nice proprietary "click tool" who would be using open api's and actually sell this.
What they cannot do is modify the code, add modules into the code, and then only distribute the "free part" in source code, and not the "proprietary parts" and then sell this.
They cannot patent stuff that are inside the software they distribute, so if they want to get a patent to "" and then sue redhat users...
So the reasons to remove SAMBA and the Article are the same "FUD"
Apple and Microsoft (and many others) want to make sure you are only a "consumer" of their services, they would probably prohibit the distribution of typewriters and adding machines, as it does infringe on some of their patents, and anyway you are not supposed to write text, just buy some on itune, and calculating, what for, the price you have to pay is the one on the bill, and it will be applied on your bank account, you are not supposed to double check...
Linux/Free Software people let you do what ever you want with their code, the only thing you are not allowed is REMOVING SOMEBODY ELSES RIGHTS... and whine about this just shows lack of caracter...
This comment is only insighful as it documents the frustration of people who would like to have something for nothing.
The GPL including the v3 allows people to use code "as they want", what it does prohibit is letting them enforce restrictions of their liking to others. They are perfectly free to have any value they care, they are not allowed to force their values with my code on others.
The hypocisy is not the GPL is people who say: Oh we loooove free software, but we just need to get sommme money out of you to be really happy.
The GPL has not created a problem, the companies who would like to release products without incuring the cost of developping or licencing a solution, and without passing the economy to the user are the problems.
And mixing the GPL issues with the CODECS issues (MPEG-LA, H264, etc...) is an error, and has nothing to do with GPLV2 or V3 or BSD, but everything to do with the restrictive and unfair licencing models that most codec owner impose, and these issue hurts just as bad a "closed source" company as an "open source"..
Finally the SAMBA team has all right to licence as they want, and there is nothing that stops anybody from making any kind of package "around" samba, only modifications to samba are really impacted. It stops people like APPLE to make modification in the code, not release it and then say "you can have the sources but all the hooks into our operating system are proprietary, so for example using samba to unify authentication between the MAC and the fileserver could depend on non free software". And introduce vulnerabilities which could only be corrected by Apple.
Finally I suspect the real reason is linked to some of the patent cross licencing between microsoft and apple and they are afraid the this could give "bad ideas" to others.
And yes a free licence can prohibit you from taking a free sotfware deciding that some feature would be central to it's use and is not patented, benefits from microsoft's sponsored "first to fill" reform, and patent it, and then remove all the rights of everybody else...
"The Freedom to bear arms is severly restricted by the interdiction to shoot anybody you do not like,.. how unfair........"
GPL is good, GPL V3 is better (although I do understand why Linus Torvald has reservation and prefers "good enough" to "better")
A) Facebook is only starting to seriously ban people, B) A large part of the "Banned" kids do not wait till they are 13 to recreate an Account... C) The quantity of under 13 users is probably growing... So they claim to ban around 7 million kids a year, and are probably increasing the rate, and it's probably not enough.. (for some values of enough)
As for bots and farmers they are probably in the millions a day...
Slashdot Mirror
but still put on a suit and tie for presentation day. Really gave me a warm feeling, knowing they got the same credit those of us who worked on it got.
You mean they made the effort to put a suit on, must have been a high quality outfit :-), and by the way you ungrateful miscreants, it's called "support"
An interesting example is the construction of "ingres" that started as a "large project development" course...
I agree that feedback and small steps are necessary, but it can be done within the scope of a large project..
If you start by "everyone, build a CMS" you will also want to decide if you run it as "n projects" or a project in n parts" and you'll have to make sure tat somewhere basic project management methods have been or are being teached...
And what is happening now in most of the case it that students get regular feedback on not very relevant evaluation of "testing events"
I have 25 years of experience teaching computer science to students at all level of academia.
And most students who came to my courses came either because they found it interesting or because I had the reputation of being "difficult" but with the "midas touch" (basically if you had enough credit with me you where pretty sure to get an interesting job).
And I totally agree with Steve Wozniak.
First only long term projects can really check if the subject you are studying has any interest for you, too many people are looking for a "diploma" to get a job, not for an education.
BTW I got my "job positive results" by completelly ignoring "the industry wisdom" (or I would have teached GCOS MOD400 and/or PL1 and/or RPG and other "magic recepies to get some work", and gradually moved to .net & java)..
Second only long term project enables you to understand the difference between "half cooked solutions" and something you can actually inflige to somebody ele.
Third it shows the relevance of what you learn
Of course it has the unfortunate effect that you might find out that your teacher is fading into obsolescence, and too busy with external money making schemes to follow what you are doing, and I believe that is the main reason institutions prefers "tests"...
And I would have more trust on Woz about what makes a good "maker of things" than a "learning expert" who might or might not have made a serious study of "teaching and grading methods impact on long term creativity". not because of some bias against "humanities studies" but because it is almost impossible to organize large scale provable experiments in such a situation, most students request "fairness", so if you would organize to groups one being tested on long term projects and the other on "conventional grading" the result would be that in the first group you would get all the "geeks" and a good part of the would drop out running with their pet projects, and the other would get all the "mundane", and unless you force some to "switch" you would not be able to have a statistically relevant sample.
And if you ask them to swich all so the "mundane" would protest, and you would not be able to see if they would actually be able to morph in something useful...
Dear Frank and Jeff,
Thank you for this detailled and very interesting answer that gives a good idea of the challenges that face a "long term software développement".
It also brillantly illustrate that real life does not need any conspiracy to have unplanified effects.
Analysing and putting it all into an historical context would probably yield a pretty good book.
But in conclusion, two personal thanks, first of all for writing, maintaining and making avaiable Kermit over all these years, it did help me, and for taking the time to write an interesting answer to my question/remark.
Sincerely Yours
Patrick
hum that must be the reason somebody wrote the Emacs Doctor, I wonder what is the option to automatically speak to your emacs kermit mode buffer....
Well that cannot be the real reason since as show on the C-Kermit site:
Due to relaxations in USA export law, secure versions of C-Kermit are available in source-code form, supporting Kerberos IV, Kerberos V, SSL/TLS, and SRP. and from the C-Kermit man page it can also make SSH connections through your external SSH client application.
So conceivably an open source Kermit-95 with just the SSH ripped out (if really necessary) could be made avaiable, if that would be all...
Alternativelly a legitimate message could be: C-Kermit is better and allready BSD so it's better in the long run even if Kermit-95 has some adventage in dying old machines ... so we do not bother .. ... prohibits us...
Or out contracts with Amazon, E-Academy, etc
But "we can't", well why ? of course they have no obligation even no "moral" obligation after all they paid for the developpment and it helped lots of people...
But on an other hand it is unlickely that they made any real revenue out of it even over 30 years, so as an historical and econonical case study it would be interesting to see what the motivations for the old licences where, and what the motivations for keeping K95 close are ...
I miss Kermit like I miss my old Kreidler motobike, found memories but I'd probable wouldn't really like it if I would need it again...
But what I would really appreciate from columbia would be a clear and detailled explanation of what parts or "kind of parts" of kermit-95 and why ? cannot be open sourced ? :-) .. ....
Are there pieces of code written by Open Source adverse copyright holders ?
Or "lost coypright holders" that have rights but cannot be located
Or legally "challenged" copyright holders (childs who are too young to "agree" to anything but are the sole heir of some copyrights ? for example ?)
Backdoors mandated by some three letters authority that cannot be released under an open source licences
code that implement something patented and the patent holders do not authorise the inclusion in open source code
Or contracts with former clients prohibiting "unfair compétition"...
or, or,
I know that the value of an Open Source Kermit-95 would be very law, it might be better on Windows than C-Kermit for some values of "better"...
but it's unlikelly that any futur use would be better served with an update of K95 rather than a modificiation of CK.
But the lesson on "freeing" code would be very interesting, and after all Columbia as a quite proheminent law school... so it would be interesting...
Of course you have to climb trees to compute, but you can use b-trees, straight binary trees or even oriented graph trees or best of all fractal trees..
So the US lobbies successfully imposed to EU the same stupidity that they got at home...
Basically copyrights and patents are the "semi religious framework" that justifies sending money from all over the world, and preferably reasonably rich countries to the US without stating the obvious, we should anyway because the US got the biggest army and secret services...
this sucks
You point out exactly what is wrong with current views of what a company should be...
You say that companies who pay dividends are "not good", and that the growth of the share price is the only thing that shareholders are/should be concerned with.
But the law of diminishing returns make it that at some point the growth will hit a limit, so basically any "pure share" play is a ponzi scheme, at some point the people who should pay your "margin" on the share you own stop being interested.. not because the company is not good anymore but because it does not get "better" fast enough.
Seen from another point of view, if you buy something "good" you should want to keep it, so why are you buying shares with the intent to sell them...
Do you plan to buy other shares ? or need to eat ?...
So we all live in a global "con game" that only works because in the past 50 years global growth has outpaced the "potlash" effect...
As we fill up the earth, and as we try to stop innovation growth will stall, and then suddently the system will implode, and people who have invested in companies doing something usefull and stable and paying divident will be very happy they didn't try to put their eggs in "growth values"...
Is that you again ? congratulation you win the "GN" prize of the day.
What has this to do with the conversation again ?
Perfect security is imposible, but if you reinstall everything with "local" code you can lean on "local" companies.
And you are right malicious HW is a problem, but at least having an "in house installation" gives you some level of protection and accountability.
It also gives you the opportunity not to detect malicious HW but some of the effects of malicious HW.
Although things like encoding messages in tiny time discrepencies in response times from some public server would be difficult to detect..
My point was that basically there is no difference between an HP or Dell computer and a Lenovo or Haier in terms of "security"
They all are variations of the same core "producer" China Inc.
Worse, forgot to install the english spellchecker on my new machine, but you are right I miss spell in each of the five languages I'm fluent in.... ...
"Qui trop embrasse mal étreints"
Or a bout of dislexia
There was a title for this in germany before WW1 it was called the
- Sitz DIrector (or Redactor for a news paper) Sitting Director
They has also the "früshtuck director" Breakfast Director
THe first one is the one supposed to go to jail in case of problems, and the second one is usually an aristocrat with a nice title he takes the VIP to breakfast and other "meetings", so the real directors do not need to loose time...
But somehow the IRS equivalent tends to think that whoum ever is making the most money in the company is the one that should go to jail....
(not that it happens very often unfortunatelly)...
So basically you should investigate the money trail and this gives you the "effective CEO" and that person should be the one sued...
About the security of foreing built computers this is b**t ALL computers a build by an handfull of ODM in china, if the US government is not basically trashing the preinstalled software of any sensitive machine to install their own their clueless...
And since they know how easy it was for them to stop various categories of foreing computers they cannot really ignore this...
So buying US computer is purelly lobbying and nationalism...
You are almost right, these people are actually choosing gedit or notepad although vim and emacs are avaiable ....
Basically in many countries studying computer science is avoiding one "small" issue, code is supposed to really work... ...)
So many developpers know how to shovel out some more or less complex code, and it works just long enough to get the credit...
But then they completelly forget about it, so they like an IDE that "remembers" so they do not have too.
But they lack the practice, and the curiosity to learn what it can really do...
(they do not know about debugger either
No but revealing for example the add targeting process might be an issue, for competitive, regulatory and marketing reasons.
And you need to make sure the comment and code elements are not offensive, make sure there is nothing like
if (luser.category() >= cluless) luser.serve(advertisement[lies].bulshit());
switch (luser.machine() ){
case Windows: luser.category(iq_eval.reduce()): break:
case MAC : luser.category(toy_addiction.increase()); break;
case Linux : luser.category(cussness.increase(tothemax)); break;
case BSE : luser.category(cussness.increade(overthemax)); break;
default : luser.call_police(weirdo); break;
}
tsss no eclipse is an anti emacs, I see everyday java jockey typing away with eclipse and so happy of all the "help" but unable to remember where their code is, and taking hours to go from one file to an other.... And I would like to hit them on the head with their screen and yell "can't you esc-X shell and grep *.[ch] for XYZ's sake ??? please .... I'm loosing my patience ...
(nb: concidering the MB's used by eclipse and it's modular nature I would suspect that something like this is possible, but why can't the users figure it out ...)
No Emacs "rules" :-) (of course vim is acceptable too because now we do not need to fight amongs ourselves we can sneer at eclipse users :-))
I guess he will write an emacs clone in GoLang :-)
(ok it's a joke, and linked to the fact that although I'm regular emacs user planning to grow a sixt finger "RSN"... I'm not super fan of Java...
I stopped using Yahoo when it stopped being a service directory to morph into a mix of portal/search engine...
I do not see Portal as a replacement of CNN/others...
And google provides a more streamlined user experience (although I'm started to be irritated by the ammount of "help" it provides me, particularly because for some reason it does not believe that I'm interested in relevant content not in "tailored for french no latin america nor whatever other tailoring it does..."
And I see very personally how it now has the power to do "friendly censorship"... of course if you "know it exists" you can still with some effort see it, but "accessible reality" is shaped by google,and that is scary (well bing would be even scarier ...)
I would guess the real reason is to track the cars...
a) Do a new tax to avoid raising the old ne
b) make sure that the people who would opose on what you really want to do are seen as oposing your new tax for selfish reasons.
--- Commentator: You say that this tracking is bad because of civil liberties, but aren't you driving an hybrid ?
--- Oponent:: ahem yes but that is not the point
--- Commentator: Oups we do not have any more time: so I'll quicky resume: Selfish Earth Warming Zealot opose the new law wich would increase the taxes on their high priced hybrid cars...
c) Show that the mile counting device would be much easier to read if we put a cheap mobile phone in it.
d) use the phone and mile tracking device to track all the cars and detect automatically suspicious change of habits...
e) Control (and profit is you have invested in a diversified portfolio of security oriented high tech companies)
Wonder when the will think of a tax that linked to something that implies metering warm bodies...
(the basic technology is already applied to track four legged cattle)..
Nothing prohibits them, but they would have to give the sources to their client, and any client could post it and then everybody could have it for free.
They could obviously "give it" and sell support
They could create a nice proprietary "click tool" who would be using open api's and actually sell this.
What they cannot do is modify the code, add modules into the code, and then only distribute the "free part" in source code, and not the "proprietary parts" and then sell this.
They cannot patent stuff that are inside the software they distribute, so if they want to get a patent to "" and then sue redhat users...
So the reasons to remove SAMBA and the Article are the same "FUD"
Apple and Microsoft (and many others) want to make sure you are only a "consumer" of their services, they would probably prohibit the distribution of typewriters and adding machines, as it does infringe on some of their patents, and anyway you are not supposed to write text, just buy some on itune, and calculating, what for, the price you have to pay is the one on the bill, and it will be applied on your bank account, you are not supposed to double check...
Linux/Free Software people let you do what ever you want with their code, the only thing you are not allowed is REMOVING SOMEBODY ELSES RIGHTS...
and whine about this just shows lack of caracter...
This comment is only insighful as it documents the frustration of people who would like to have something for nothing.
The GPL including the v3 allows people to use code "as they want", what it does prohibit is letting them enforce restrictions of their liking to others.
They are perfectly free to have any value they care, they are not allowed to force their values with my code on others.
The hypocisy is not the GPL is people who say: Oh we loooove free software, but we just need to get sommme money out of you to be really happy.
The GPL has not created a problem, the companies who would like to release products without incuring the cost of developping or licencing a solution, and without passing the economy to the user are the problems.
And mixing the GPL issues with the CODECS issues (MPEG-LA, H264, etc...) is an error, and has nothing to do with GPLV2 or V3 or BSD, but everything to do with the restrictive and unfair licencing models that most codec owner impose, and these issue hurts just as bad a "closed source" company as an "open source"..
Finally the SAMBA team has all right to licence as they want, and there is nothing that stops anybody from making any kind of package "around" samba, only modifications to samba are really impacted.
It stops people like APPLE to make modification in the code, not release it and then say "you can have the sources but all the hooks into our operating system are proprietary, so for example using samba to unify authentication between the MAC and the fileserver could depend on non free software".
And introduce vulnerabilities which could only be corrected by Apple.
Finally I suspect the real reason is linked to some of the patent cross licencing between microsoft and apple and they are afraid the this could give "bad ideas" to others.
And yes a free licence can prohibit you from taking a free sotfware deciding that some feature would be central to it's use and is not patented, benefits from microsoft's sponsored "first to fill" reform, and patent it, and then remove all the rights of everybody else...
"The Freedom to bear arms is severly restricted by the interdiction to shoot anybody you do not like, .. how unfair........"
GPL is good, GPL V3 is better (although I do understand why Linus Torvald has reservation and prefers "good enough" to "better")
I'm so disapointed I though it would be something that a dude maned peter has built :-),
A) Facebook is only starting to seriously ban people,
B) A large part of the "Banned" kids do not wait till they are 13 to recreate an Account...
C) The quantity of under 13 users is probably growing...
So they claim to ban around 7 million kids a year, and are probably increasing the rate, and it's probably not enough.. (for some values of enough)
As for bots and farmers they are probably in the millions a day...