I know you know this, but Gmail has POP3 access. Not as cool as IMAP, but it's Good Enough for me (keep all my mail online when I'm travelling, then download it onto my home computer when I'm at home).
I think you've got to backwards - which isn't to say you aren't making a very good point; you are, it's just not the point you think it is.
Remember Stallman's vision is a world where everything-- libraries, the OS, programs-- every strip of code is GPL. If you try to introduce a new, non-GPL strip of code, it needs to be a license which is "GPL Compatible" so that as soon as it links to any library it becomes GPL (rather, anything that links to it implicitly links to GPL code by proxy, and thus is forced to be GPL or "GPL compatible").
Right, exactly. As near as I can tell, that is Stallman's vision in a paragraph.
To escape this visionary world, you have to write your own OS, own tools, own compiler, own C library, everything; he's backed down on the C library and compiler (LGPL and GPL with an exception clause) because he knows nobody will use it, but by the same turn if the world was in his vision then nobody would use your new OS stack either. You would have to write a completely new application base; it'd be just like the uptake of Linux, except all your own stuff, i.e. imagine having something like Ubuntu but 100% BSD/MIT licensed and you'll understand how hard this would be to accomplish.
First off, a slight caveat: he's not backed down on the compiler - the compiler's output wouldn't be a "derived" part of the software anyway. He has backed down on the library, exactly as you say.
The rest of your paragraph is (again, IMHO) exactly what the FSF has been trying to achieve for the last twenty years! Way Back When, most of the compilers/operating systems/system utilities/Unix toolkits were all proprietary. The FSF has been recreating all these tools "100% GPL licensed" so that when you buy a new computer, you don't have to rely on XYZ Corp's C compiler, or ZMachine's operating system; you have the option of taking the GNU system and porting it to your new computer, giving you (a) exactly the same experience you'd have on any other GNU system, and (b) the ability to tinker around with the system as much as you like, with (c) a known set of restrictions (the GPL rules). As compared to the proprietary systems, which could have arbitrary restrictions ("you cannot release software written in this program without paying extra for 'distribution'") or - heck - sensible restrictions, too (per seat pricing, vendor lock-in, incompatible formats, etc.)
My point is that while you seem to think that this "visionary world" is a conspiracy of some sort, it is actually exactly the world the FSF has been trying to bring into existence since 1985, and they're pretty open about it. If you disagree, there are always alternatives. The nicest thing about GPL software is that it's so hard to lock you in anywhere.
Stallman's vision is effectively that, in the software world, everyone contributes "for the common good." You write code, you release it, you open the source code to everyone and leave it free for use to everyone. Everyone contributes, everyone benefits. This is the core of Marxism; the only thing missing is that the copyrights aren't all turned over to the FSF (if we claim that everything "should" be turned over to the FSF or some central copyright holder to "ensure that it stays open," then this does become Marxism).
Yes, yes, he does. And as an aside, the FSF does claim that all GNU software copyrights should be turned over to the project. Not all GPL software, just anything with the "GNU" name on it, really.
Personally, I like having an extremist organisation in my corner. I don't think anybody should be forced into this Brave GNU World, but I like the trend that's going on of people working together to improve common pieces of software, while still making money for their effort and knowledge in doing so. Like any large inhabitant in the ecosystem, the FSF makes a lot of noise
Opera 9.10 on MacOS X beach-balled for a while, and the interface went slow for a while too (opening another window took ages, etc.). The image did eventually load up, after about 30 secs to a minute. It's still "open" in a tab as I write this =).
As an aside, this comic is probably really appropriate, considering the number of people who tried clicking that link, just to see what happened.
Wow, is there a long line of people trying to tell you what the "motivation" behind the GPL is, or what?
Okay, here's my take on it (none of my immediate sibling posts have taken up this viewpoint, so I might as well): the GPL is there to protect the rights of the users, not the developers. BSD code is designed to be "free", like free code: you can take it, break it, do what you want with it, put it together in strange new ways, or just throw it away. It's best for things like the network stack, or the FTP program, so instead of rewritting your own (potentially buggy) implementation every time you need one, you just take the official BSD copy. You (the developer) are happy, everybody else (including the BSD developers) is happy because their FTP program/network stack "just works". The BSD developers also don't have to spend time working around broken FTP programs, so they're happy too.
The GPL, on the other hand, protects the rights of the users. I give you my brilliant FTP clone (with the BSD code inside), and it works fine for you - it serves your needs, copies files at unimaginable speeds, and has a cute iguana icon which nods during downloads. The GPL doesn't care about all that. What it cares about is: does this software belong to you, the user? Can you do what you like with it? Can you modify it for any specific needs you have? Can you make, say, a mobile phone version of it so you can use it from your phone? Can you change it to use your own language? These are all things guaranteed to you by the GPL. This creates incentive for users to use GPL software (since they are guaranteed to be able to do whatever they want with it), as well as to contribute back (since they know that whatever modifications are made to the "official" distribution, they will always be free to put their changes back in).
So, the "free" in BSD's license refers to the freedom of the code, while the "free" in GPL refers to the freedoms guaranteed to the user: specifically, the four freedoms the FSF considers essential (when it comes to software, atleast). The GPL is the way it is not because it's trying to establish a "hang-together-or-we'll-all-hang-separately" rule, or because it's trying to establish a free software utopia, but to guarantee the rights of the users of GPL'd software to the freedoms the FSF considers essential.
Sorry if you've heard all this before; it's been a long week, and writing all that was sort of relaxing. =)
I think there was a saved game included with SimCity 2K (possibly only with the SimCity 2000 Special Edition) which had the right number of Arcos; once you loaded it up, all the buildings would start taking off in a minute or two.
The Dilbert comic refered to by the sister post is available online, too. "Condescending Unix computer user" has to be one of the coolest characters in Dilbert ever!
Arthur Yoria's amazing debut album is downloading even as I speak, and downloaded Lisa DeBenedictis' Tigers last week. For me, the biggest selling point - apart from the feel-good feeling you get by supporting somebody trying to make money honestly, and being able to listen to the music I bought within thirty minutes of putting money down on the virtual table - is being able to download high-quality MP3s to listen to at work, and high-quality OGGs to play on my home computer, direct from the publisher.
Thanks to some site updates over the last few months, it's now much easier to find the kind of music you like (by being able to preview darn near everything on the website). You should definitely check it out.
Like the sister posts, I'm just a satisfied customer, and I hope they do well so they can get more indie artists interested, and more good albums released.
Err, sorry to nitpick, but you mean Greek phalanxes. Although the Romans used phalanx formations occasionally, it was a Greek invention, and its use was perfected by the Macedonians and Thebans. Which perfectly supports your point: the Romans invented the Legion, which was more than a match for the Greek phalanx.
Sorry, I've been playing way too much Rome:Total War recently:).
The feeds, I think, are working fine: they just spit out the DOCTYPE line normally. The problem occurs when feed readers, which use the DOCTYPE line to get the DTD to make sure the document is formatted just like the DTD says it is, try to download the DTD from Netscape's website. Since they get a 404, they assume something is wrong with the feed, and tell you as much.
According to the article, Google and Firefox's feed readers don't mind that the DTD's gone missing, but Microsoft Live's RSS Feed Gadget does.
Right now, any text in the form 'ISBN {ISBN-number}' are turned into links to a special Book sources page, where you can find the book in local libraries, online databases, and online bookstores. It doesn't look like those links make Wikipedia any money, though. I wonder how many people will click through two pages to find the book they want to buy? And how much money Wikipedia can make off that?
Workstations with RedHat pre-installed have been available in Singapore for ages. This seems to only be for small business-targetting workstations, though: I haven't seen any in the home/home office range yet (although atleast one of the OptiPlexs come with 'DOS not factory installed').
... initial excitement died down after a major publishing house announced the release of a competing device. With a cheaper price, and the words "Don't Panic" written in large, friendly letters on the cover, the new version, tentatively called "The Guide Mk 1", is expected to dramatically outsell Wikipedia's own offering.
Slashdot Mirror
Bravo! Bravo! Bravissimo!
That's beautiful! Do you mind if I post a link to Newsvine?
I think the same thing too, but remember what the opinion on the iPod was when it was released: "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
I suppose we'll have to see what Apple's famous marketing dept will do with this.
I know you know this, but Gmail has POP3 access. Not as cool as IMAP, but it's Good Enough for me (keep all my mail online when I'm travelling, then download it onto my home computer when I'm at home).
Right, exactly. As near as I can tell, that is Stallman's vision in a paragraph.
First off, a slight caveat: he's not backed down on the compiler - the compiler's output wouldn't be a "derived" part of the software anyway. He has backed down on the library, exactly as you say.
The rest of your paragraph is (again, IMHO) exactly what the FSF has been trying to achieve for the last twenty years! Way Back When, most of the compilers/operating systems/system utilities/Unix toolkits were all proprietary. The FSF has been recreating all these tools "100% GPL licensed" so that when you buy a new computer, you don't have to rely on XYZ Corp's C compiler, or ZMachine's operating system; you have the option of taking the GNU system and porting it to your new computer, giving you (a) exactly the same experience you'd have on any other GNU system, and (b) the ability to tinker around with the system as much as you like, with (c) a known set of restrictions (the GPL rules). As compared to the proprietary systems, which could have arbitrary restrictions ("you cannot release software written in this program without paying extra for 'distribution'") or - heck - sensible restrictions, too (per seat pricing, vendor lock-in, incompatible formats, etc.)
My point is that while you seem to think that this "visionary world" is a conspiracy of some sort, it is actually exactly the world the FSF has been trying to bring into existence since 1985, and they're pretty open about it. If you disagree, there are always alternatives. The nicest thing about GPL software is that it's so hard to lock you in anywhere.
Yes, yes, he does. And as an aside, the FSF does claim that all GNU software copyrights should be turned over to the project. Not all GPL software, just anything with the "GNU" name on it, really.
Personally, I like having an extremist organisation in my corner. I don't think anybody should be forced into this Brave GNU World, but I like the trend that's going on of people working together to improve common pieces of software, while still making money for their effort and knowledge in doing so. Like any large inhabitant in the ecosystem, the FSF makes a lot of noise
I think we're all just a little surprised that it didn't get classified into "Your Rights Online".
Opera 9.10 on MacOS X beach-balled for a while, and the interface went slow for a while too (opening another window took ages, etc.). The image did eventually load up, after about 30 secs to a minute. It's still "open" in a tab as I write this =).
As an aside, this comic is probably really appropriate, considering the number of people who tried clicking that link, just to see what happened.
Wow, is there a long line of people trying to tell you what the "motivation" behind the GPL is, or what?
Okay, here's my take on it (none of my immediate sibling posts have taken up this viewpoint, so I might as well): the GPL is there to protect the rights of the users, not the developers. BSD code is designed to be "free", like free code: you can take it, break it, do what you want with it, put it together in strange new ways, or just throw it away. It's best for things like the network stack, or the FTP program, so instead of rewritting your own (potentially buggy) implementation every time you need one, you just take the official BSD copy. You (the developer) are happy, everybody else (including the BSD developers) is happy because their FTP program/network stack "just works". The BSD developers also don't have to spend time working around broken FTP programs, so they're happy too.
The GPL, on the other hand, protects the rights of the users. I give you my brilliant FTP clone (with the BSD code inside), and it works fine for you - it serves your needs, copies files at unimaginable speeds, and has a cute iguana icon which nods during downloads. The GPL doesn't care about all that. What it cares about is: does this software belong to you, the user? Can you do what you like with it? Can you modify it for any specific needs you have? Can you make, say, a mobile phone version of it so you can use it from your phone? Can you change it to use your own language? These are all things guaranteed to you by the GPL. This creates incentive for users to use GPL software (since they are guaranteed to be able to do whatever they want with it), as well as to contribute back (since they know that whatever modifications are made to the "official" distribution, they will always be free to put their changes back in).
So, the "free" in BSD's license refers to the freedom of the code, while the "free" in GPL refers to the freedoms guaranteed to the user: specifically, the four freedoms the FSF considers essential (when it comes to software, atleast). The GPL is the way it is not because it's trying to establish a "hang-together-or-we'll-all-hang-separately" rule, or because it's trying to establish a free software utopia, but to guarantee the rights of the users of GPL'd software to the freedoms the FSF considers essential.
Sorry if you've heard all this before; it's been a long week, and writing all that was sort of relaxing. =)
I think there was a saved game included with SimCity 2K (possibly only with the SimCity 2000 Special Edition) which had the right number of Arcos; once you loaded it up, all the buildings would start taking off in a minute or two.
The Dilbert comic refered to by the sister post is available online, too. "Condescending Unix computer user" has to be one of the coolest characters in Dilbert ever!
*chimes in*
Arthur Yoria's amazing debut album is downloading even as I speak, and downloaded Lisa DeBenedictis' Tigers last week. For me, the biggest selling point - apart from the feel-good feeling you get by supporting somebody trying to make money honestly, and being able to listen to the music I bought within thirty minutes of putting money down on the virtual table - is being able to download high-quality MP3s to listen to at work, and high-quality OGGs to play on my home computer, direct from the publisher.
Thanks to some site updates over the last few months, it's now much easier to find the kind of music you like (by being able to preview darn near everything on the website). You should definitely check it out.
Like the sister posts, I'm just a satisfied customer, and I hope they do well so they can get more indie artists interested, and more good albums released.
Err, sorry to nitpick, but you mean Greek phalanxes. Although the Romans used phalanx formations occasionally, it was a Greek invention, and its use was perfected by the Macedonians and Thebans. Which perfectly supports your point: the Romans invented the Legion, which was more than a match for the Greek phalanx.
:).
Sorry, I've been playing way too much Rome:Total War recently
A Slashdot user named Billly Gates wants CPM?
*head explodes*
The feeds, I think, are working fine: they just spit out the DOCTYPE line normally. The problem occurs when feed readers, which use the DOCTYPE line to get the DTD to make sure the document is formatted just like the DTD says it is, try to download the DTD from Netscape's website. Since they get a 404, they assume something is wrong with the feed, and tell you as much.
According to the article, Google and Firefox's feed readers don't mind that the DTD's gone missing, but Microsoft Live's RSS Feed Gadget does.
Hope that helps.
Right now, any text in the form 'ISBN {ISBN-number}' are turned into links to a special Book sources page, where you can find the book in local libraries, online databases, and online bookstores. It doesn't look like those links make Wikipedia any money, though. I wonder how many people will click through two pages to find the book they want to buy? And how much money Wikipedia can make off that?
Workstations with RedHat pre-installed have been available in Singapore for ages. This seems to only be for small business-targetting workstations, though: I haven't seen any in the home/home office range yet (although atleast one of the OptiPlexs come with 'DOS not factory installed').
Beautiful. Thanks for posting that.
Right? RIGHT?
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
Rofl! It's been a while since I saw something which made me laugh out that loud. Thanks!
I vote for The Scream. "Terror! Terror! Oh, snake, it's a ssnnnake, sssnake ..."
Or it could just represent the rest of us screaming at the sheer inanity of some of the new laws coming out. Whichever.
You could try using Sloppy. I've only ever heard about it because its programmer has a very nice page on getting a free Thwarte FreeMail certificate to work with Java WebStart, so this isn't a recommendation or anything. Looks pretty decent, though.
Wonder how mad they'd get if it turns out they're *not* the "high-ranking executives" being targetted =).
Do not be born in a country ruled by a paranoid dictator.
Best of luck.
... initial excitement died down after a major publishing house announced the release of a competing device. With a cheaper price, and the words "Don't Panic" written in large, friendly letters on the cover, the new version, tentatively called "The Guide Mk 1", is expected to dramatically outsell Wikipedia's own offering.
Hehe - nice! I'll have to remember that one ...
Recursive domino setups would also be crazy cool!