A line of code can look much the same from onbe program to the next without being a duplicate. Suppose I copy a 5 line routine from a GPLd source, but change a loop variable from "i" to "loopvar" -- does that count? What if the variable only appears on 4 of the 5 lines? What if I only change the indentation, or collaps a couple of lines together?
Many concepts are independently invented. I imagine the odds are quite high that I have 5 lines of code somewhere that are very close to some GPLd code that I have never seen. How do you prove I have seen the GPLd code? How do I prove I haven't seen it? And again, if I change variable names, does that matter?
Not only am I not a lawyer, I don't even play one on TV. Imagine what fun a real lawyer could have with such arguments.
I recently gave a series of three talks to over fifteen hundred developers in Canada. In each talk I asked how many were programming in Visual Basic, C++, and Java. The ratios were about 3/6, 2/6, and less than 1/12, respectively.
He specializes in M$ development. He gives talk on M$ development.
Now if he'd talked to pure Unix audiences, the VB component would have been ZERO. And that's probably closer to reality for server development than M$ audiences.
It was sort of nice that they gave you an old obsolete binary module, in a short term here's a crumb sort of way. But that's it. Binary modules are short term fixes while you go about getting a real network device. Wha is this gadget, who makes it, why is it so important? It sounds like it is old obsolete hardware, single sourced, or you wouldn't be stuck with it and its obsolete module.
If you have to have this device to interface to some equipment or a network, why not scrounge an old 486/Pentium, install a 2.0 kernel, and make the best of a bad situation?
Several compilers exist for Java, so I suspect there is no speed advantage to either. Java has two advantages: it works on non-M$ platforms, and it isn't a hodge-podge of programming mis-paradigms. I see no advantages for VB.
Teh company, that is. My new box came with Red Hat 5.1 pre installed, and I don't like where various dirs and files ended up. But then, my old computer was a 4 year old Slackware, manually upgraded to 2.0, glibc, ELF. I will install Slackware on the new box when the glibc version comes out, because I don't want to have to go thru that upgrade again.
But Red Hat as a company is doing fine. They can't steal Linux any more than Borgus of Bill could. And people who say they have too many partnerships with companies whose proprietary closed source applications only run on Red Hat -- fools! Non of the Linux distros are anywhere near far enough apart for that to be the case. That's just FUD from within, silly, ignorant, pointless FUD.
Sorry to hear you got paper cuts while licking the envelopes. Did you clean off the bllod or will they show up that way?:-)
--
Dishonesty like Mindcraft / Thurrott causes flames
on
Linux Advocacy Hurts
·
· Score: 1
He lists two points about the benchmark and says they were no cause for flames. He's right so far, but he left out the third and most important point which *WAS* cause for flameage: the benchmark was blatantly dishonest.
His editorial itself is dishonest for leaving out point 3, he will get flames for it, and he deserves it. If the Mindcraft survey had been honest, and if his editorial had been honest, there would be fewer flames, and those would be undeserved.
--
What about victims rights and M$ responsibilities?
on
RMS on Dealing with MS
·
· Score: 1
I find it amazing the extent to which people are willing to ignore Microsoft's rights simply because they write bad software.
No, that's not why. This is a trial. M$ is on trial for breaking the law, the anti-trust, anti-monopoly law. Court cases have penalties for losing defendants.
It's convenient for your argument to forget this. If M$ loses, the court can impose penalties. In general, judges have wide latitude. Have you never heard of criminal cases where the judge imposes novel punishments, such as the drunk driver who had to write a letter every day while in prison to the mother of the kid he killed?
So if the judge decides that proper punishment is releasing the source, or APIs, or splitting up the company, or anything else, he has a pretty wide latitude.
their punishment should be restricted to that provided by law
Yes indeedy, and that's exactly what all the discussion is about. All the proposed remedies *are* legal if the judge imposes them and they make it thru appeal.
I see no reason why anyone has a right to know anything about Microsoft's products.
Because the remedies in anti trust cases are designed to prevent further abuses, just like a 20 year prison sentence is designed to prevent further criminal activity. In this case, the remedy is to prevent them holding a monopoly.
I see no reason for the courts to make a special exception to Microsoft's lawful property rights.
If you commit a crime, and the court confiscates your property as part of the restitution, is that not legal? Again, you are forgetting that M$ is on trial here.
The idea that corporations do not have rights is baloney.
The idea that corporations can not be held accountable for breaking laws is baloney.
--
The Java goal does not allow pollution
on
Java for EGCS
·
· Score: 1
Nice idea, competition, but Sun's goal is write once, run anywhere. How well it works is open to dispute, but you can't have WORA if their are different versions. Why not let's have different versions of C, tcl/tk, perl, etc?
One bloated super do-it-all appliance is just what M$ is trying to push down the world's throat with W98, W2K, and Office. Notice how well Unix works in comparison.
Now add the Unix pipe and you've got something interesting. Tell the breadmaker it's got X ingredients and it should make bread for 6pm; tell the coffeemaker to have coffee ready at the same time; tell the oven ditto, and ditto for the microwave. Well, not quite a pipeline, but you couldn't do that with one jumbo appliance.
You probably have at least a monitor and printer, possibly an external modem.
Would you buy one unit that had cpu, monitor, and printer all in one box? Even Apple's iMac doesn't go that far. Now add copy machine, scanner, phone answering machine...
Wouldn't it be nice to have all those appliances connected by a Jini network?
Think of it. The increasing number of missing children, the increasing rise in share price of Microsoft, the increasing desparation of Bill Gates as Microsoft works itself into the W2K corner....
I think you're on to something (or *on* comething:-)
One of the points in the article is that tarining is worthwhile, whether continued ttraining in QWERTY, or retraining in Dvorak. The very fact that you spent time training is responsible for speed increase, regardless of which keyboard.
And let us not forget that you are a sample of one.
And as for doctors, have they actually done studies on the RSI effects?
Interesting to see someone other than an American think the world revolves around their nationalistic ways. The significance of the date is that it is the first day of the financial new year -- in Britain, that is.
In the US at least, it won't cost your employer a dime usually. Most jobs have a certain number of sick days allowed per year. Take one, so what? Employer had to allow for it anyway.
ZDUK says here that it's not so straightforward. Apparently the GUID is only inserted when a document is first created -- after that, copies and extreme mods leave the original GUID intact. And since most of us copy some other document and modify rather than create from scratch, the GUID is not particularly useful.
If you're going to have to defray the cost of building the fiber optic cable, you have to also defray the cost of building the road. Yeh, roads have other purposes, but so do fiber optic cables. And yeh, roads have more capacity than one truck, but then let's flood the road to its maximum carrying capacity.
Make the assumptions equal unless you want to compare apples and oranges.
What does "old" have to do with obsolete? Any OS out of Redmond is more obsolete than Unix, as long as billborg sets its major design goal to be different from everything else so he can daydream about staying in control.
Seems pretty straightforward to me. If you lose any court case, the winner can try to auction off your property. I think you are overreacting. For instance,
his decision gives lawyers a way to go after my other domain assets, whether or not the alleged infringement was intentional
Let's rephrase that:
his decision gives lawyers a way to go after my other property, whether or not the alleged infringement was intentional
Beowulf is about compute power. Even if the crunched numbers display as a rendered pic, what diff does the GUI make? Like rejecting a honking powerful engine for your car because you think the radiator hose is the wrong color.
9.1 Infringement. If any of the Original Code becomes the subject of a claim of infringement ("Affected Original Code"), Apple may, at its sole discretion and option: (a) attempt to procure the rights necessary for You to continue using the Affected Original Code; (b) modify the Affected Original Code so that it is no longer infringing; or (c) terminate Your rights to use the Affected Original Code, effective immediately upon Apple's posting of a notice to such effect on the Apple web site that is used for implementation of this License.
The Apple ][ was such a great success because anybody could be an Apple ][ hacker; adding hardware and software was ridiculously easy. IBM copied the basic idea for their PC, and that's why it took off. It would have been much less successfull if they had locked up the architecture and software as they later tried to do with the Micro Channel Architecture PS/2. That's when they lost big time in the market.
Apple did not remember the lesson. They locked the Mac up so tight and lost developers.
Now it's too late for partial measures. If they would release hardware specs, that would be a start, probaly help Linux ports.
Steve Jobs is their downfall and their saving grace. Without him they have no imagination. He fires them up, but only because he keeps such a lock on the machine and its software that they can perceive themselves as special and get worked up over it. They are doomed to be a niche player with Jobs in control. Someone less talented would doom them to disappearing. It will take someone with more self confidence to make Apple a real player again.
English as she is spoke. Grammar which is considered perfect today was radical in years past; English which was proper then is not today.
AFAIK, only the French think a language can be controlled top down. They are wrong. Languages are what people speak and write daily. Languages change. If you understood what "soucish" meant, then you understand English. If not, then you have rigidified between the ears and should go join that French language committee.
Slashdot Mirror
A line of code can look much the same from onbe program to the next without being a duplicate. Suppose I copy a 5 line routine from a GPLd source, but change a loop variable from "i" to "loopvar" -- does that count? What if the variable only appears on 4 of the 5 lines? What if I only change the indentation, or collaps a couple of lines together?
Many concepts are independently invented. I imagine the odds are quite high that I have 5 lines of code somewhere that are very close to some GPLd code that I have never seen. How do you prove I have seen the GPLd code? How do I prove I haven't seen it? And again, if I change variable names, does that matter?
Not only am I not a lawyer, I don't even play one on TV. Imagine what fun a real lawyer could have with such arguments.
--
I recently gave a series of three talks to over fifteen hundred developers in Canada. In each talk I asked how many were programming in Visual Basic, C++, and Java. The ratios were about 3/6, 2/6, and less than 1/12, respectively.
He specializes in M$ development. He gives talk on M$ development.
Now if he'd talked to pure Unix audiences, the VB component would have been ZERO. And that's probably closer to reality for server development than M$ audiences.
--
No wonder he says half his audiences use VB, and only 1/12 use java. He's talking to M$ audiences.
--
It was sort of nice that they gave you an old obsolete binary module, in a short term here's a crumb sort of way. But that's it. Binary modules are short term fixes while you go about getting a real network device. Wha is this gadget, who makes it, why is it so important? It sounds like it is old obsolete hardware, single sourced, or you wouldn't be stuck with it and its obsolete module.
If you have to have this device to interface to some equipment or a network, why not scrounge an old 486/Pentium, install a 2.0 kernel, and make the best of a bad situation?
--
Several compilers exist for Java, so I suspect there is no speed advantage to either. Java has two advantages: it works on non-M$ platforms, and it isn't a hodge-podge of programming mis-paradigms. I see no advantages for VB.
--
Teh company, that is. My new box came with Red Hat 5.1 pre installed, and I don't like where various dirs and files ended up. But then, my old computer was a 4 year old Slackware, manually upgraded to 2.0, glibc, ELF. I will install Slackware on the new box when the glibc version comes out, because I don't want to have to go thru that upgrade again.
But Red Hat as a company is doing fine. They can't steal Linux any more than Borgus of Bill could. And people who say they have too many partnerships with companies whose proprietary closed source applications only run on Red Hat -- fools! Non of the Linux distros are anywhere near far enough apart for that to be the case. That's just FUD from within, silly, ignorant, pointless FUD.
--
Sorry to hear you got paper cuts while licking the envelopes. Did you clean off the bllod or will they show up that way? :-)
--
He lists two points about the benchmark and says they were no cause for flames. He's right so far, but he left out the third and most important point which *WAS* cause for flameage: the benchmark was blatantly dishonest.
His editorial itself is dishonest for leaving out point 3, he will get flames for it, and he deserves it. If the Mindcraft survey had been honest, and if his editorial had been honest, there would be fewer flames, and those would be undeserved.
--
I find it amazing the extent to which people are willing to ignore Microsoft's rights simply because they write bad software.
No, that's not why. This is a trial. M$ is on trial for breaking the law, the anti-trust, anti-monopoly law. Court cases have penalties for losing defendants.
It's convenient for your argument to forget this. If M$ loses, the court can impose penalties. In general, judges have wide latitude. Have you never heard of criminal cases where the judge imposes novel punishments, such as the drunk driver who had to write a letter every day while in prison to the mother of the kid he killed?
So if the judge decides that proper punishment is releasing the source, or APIs, or splitting up the company, or anything else, he has a pretty wide latitude.
their punishment should be restricted to that provided by law
Yes indeedy, and that's exactly what all the discussion is about. All the proposed remedies *are* legal if the judge imposes them and they make it thru appeal.
I see no reason why anyone has a right to know anything about Microsoft's products.
Because the remedies in anti trust cases are designed to prevent further abuses, just like a 20 year prison sentence is designed to prevent further criminal activity. In this case, the remedy is to prevent them holding a monopoly.
I see no reason for the courts to make a special exception to Microsoft's lawful property rights.
If you commit a crime, and the court confiscates your property as part of the restitution, is that not legal? Again, you are forgetting that M$ is on trial here.
The idea that corporations do not have rights is baloney.
The idea that corporations can not be held accountable for breaking laws is baloney.
--
Nice idea, competition, but Sun's goal is write once, run anywhere. How well it works is open to dispute, but you can't have WORA if their are different versions. Why not let's have different versions of C, tcl/tk, perl, etc?
--
One bloated super do-it-all appliance is just what M$ is trying to push down the world's throat with W98, W2K, and Office. Notice how well Unix works in comparison.
Now add the Unix pipe and you've got something interesting. Tell the breadmaker it's got X ingredients and it should make bread for 6pm; tell the coffeemaker to have coffee ready at the same time; tell the oven ditto, and ditto for the microwave. Well, not quite a pipeline, but you couldn't do that with one jumbo appliance.
--
You probably have at least a monitor and printer, possibly an external modem.
Would you buy one unit that had cpu, monitor, and printer all in one box? Even Apple's iMac doesn't go that far. Now add copy machine, scanner, phone answering machine...
Wouldn't it be nice to have all those appliances connected by a Jini network?
--
Think of it. The increasing number of missing children, the increasing rise in share price of Microsoft, the increasing desparation of Bill Gates as Microsoft works itself into the W2K corner....
:-)
I think you're on to something (or *on* comething
--
One of the points in the article is that tarining is worthwhile, whether continued ttraining in QWERTY, or retraining in Dvorak. The very fact that you spent time training is responsible for speed increase, regardless of which keyboard.
And let us not forget that you are a sample of one.
And as for doctors, have they actually done studies on the RSI effects?
--
Interesting to see someone other than an American think the world revolves around their nationalistic ways. The significance of the date is that it is the first day of the financial new year -- in Britain, that is.
In the US at least, it won't cost your employer a dime usually. Most jobs have a certain number of sick days allowed per year. Take one, so what? Employer had to allow for it anyway.
--
Weird Al === Larry Wall
All part of the coinky dink I suppose.
--
ZDUK says here that it's not so straightforward. Apparently the GUID is only inserted when a document is first created -- after that, copies and extreme mods leave the original GUID intact. And since most of us copy some other document and modify rather than create from scratch, the GUID is not particularly useful.
--
If you're going to have to defray the cost of building the fiber optic cable, you have to also defray the cost of building the road. Yeh, roads have other purposes, but so do fiber optic cables. And yeh, roads have more capacity than one truck, but then let's flood the road to its maximum carrying capacity.
Make the assumptions equal unless you want to compare apples and oranges.
--
What does "old" have to do with obsolete? Any OS out of Redmond is more obsolete than Unix, as long as billborg sets its major design goal to be different from everything else so he can daydream about staying in control.
Technology doesn't become obsolete just by aging.
--
Seems pretty straightforward to me. If you lose any court case, the winner can try to auction off your property. I think you are overreacting. For instance,
his decision gives lawyers a way to go after my other domain assets, whether or not the alleged infringement was intentional
Let's rephrase that:
his decision gives lawyers a way to go after my other property, whether or not the alleged infringement was intentional
So where's the beef? Looks pretty ordinary to me.
--
At least as I follow your logic.
I think you would find general consensus being open source is more reliable because the holes are in the open for anyone to fix.
--
Beowulf is about compute power. Even if the crunched numbers display as a rendered pic, what diff does the GUI make? Like rejecting a honking powerful engine for your car because you think the radiator hose is the wrong color.
--
9.1 Infringement. If any of the Original Code becomes the subject of a claim of infringement ("Affected Original Code"), Apple may, at its sole discretion and option: (a) attempt to procure the rights necessary for You to continue using the Affected Original Code; (b) modify the Affected Original Code so that it is no longer infringing;
or (c) terminate Your rights to use the Affected Original Code, effective immediately
upon Apple's posting of a notice to such effect on the Apple web site that is used for
implementation of this License.
--
The Apple ][ was such a great success because anybody could be an Apple ][ hacker; adding hardware and software was ridiculously easy. IBM copied the basic idea for their PC, and that's why it took off. It would have been much less successfull if they had locked up the architecture and software as they later tried to do with the Micro Channel Architecture PS/2. That's when they lost big time in the market.
Apple did not remember the lesson. They locked the Mac up so tight and lost developers.
Now it's too late for partial measures. If they would release hardware specs, that would be a start, probaly help Linux ports.
Steve Jobs is their downfall and their saving grace. Without him they have no imagination. He fires them up, but only because he keeps such a lock on the machine and its software that they can perceive themselves as special and get worked up over it. They are doomed to be a niche player with Jobs in control. Someone less talented would doom them to disappearing. It will take someone with more self confidence to make Apple a real player again.
--
English as she is spoke. Grammar which is considered perfect today was radical in years past; English which was proper then is not today.
AFAIK, only the French think a language can be controlled top down. They are wrong. Languages are what people speak and write daily. Languages change. If you understood what "soucish" meant, then you understand English. If not, then you have rigidified between the ears and should go join that French language committee.
--