It's $299 for enterprise development, and the agreement is pretty highly walled. Look at Oracle, Microsoft, etc., and then those within the FOSS community. Much different, aren't they? I'm not a much of a fan of either Oracle or Microsoft, and use them emblematically here.
Darwin-the-kernel itself isn't controlled by its community any longer. The kernel used by Apple is now pretty closed up. Seen source recently? Yes, X and SAMBA 4 were used when the GPLv2 were allowed. Lots of FOSS apps ran on MacOS X and still does. Except GPLv3 eventually can't run there.
Calling them "control freak assholes" is disingenuous. They decided on their values, formed the GPLv3, and stuck to those values. They believe their values have merit, and have requisite need to prevent what they feel is non-free use cases from slipping in.
It took some courage, but I understand with their principles. I don't necessarily agree for all use cases, but I agree for many use cases. For that, I'll respect them. IMHO, Apple becomes less and less free than the ideals expressed when MacOSX arrived, and becomes more and more like Microsoft all the time, in terms of proprietary infrastructure with high walls and draconian developer requirements.
Threat: it's been seen in the wild, hammering something.
Vulnerability: a conceivable possibility exists if someone is dogged enough to do the wild coding needed, and some happless situation is setup, to cause a problem which may or may not result in something to worry about.
Threats are alive and transitive, vulnerabilities are conceptual and passive.
I realize that the chances of a civilian being sued directly are small, and for the reasons you stated stated. But we need some consequential/correlative injury or no one will give a crap. I'm fairly sure that simple coverage on Groklaw isn't going to incense Joe and Jane SixPack et al sufficiently to make them be unhappy at Microsoft. And they should be.
For many reasons, there will be no out-of-court settlement. If Google doesn't take it to the wall, then they expose the rest of the FOSS community to litigation. Death by a thousand cuts/litigations.
I want Microsoft to sue civilians. Users. Then the excrement will hit the airconditioning.
Have you looked at Clearwire's finances or their 8Ks/10K's? Not so good. Sprint's reputation among their clientele? Not so good. Marketshare when looking in any measure of this, pre-/post merger? Not so good.
I hope you're a satisfied customer of VirginM and Clearwire. Not too many of those, according to various surveys.
Clearwire isn't really comparable to Comcast save that they're both ostensible broadband providers; AT&T's DSL "broadband" isn't very good for the majority of its clientele either. Disclaimer: I hate them all and have had business relationships with all but Clearwire.
We can hope, altho it's damning Verizon with faint praise. It becomes a GSM monopoly, further pushing Verizon out on an EDGE (pun intended) with LTE.
The duopoly that results (sorry, Sprint and Clearwire are dying) means that we'll have the fun of the Canadians, who deal with the Rogers- Bell Canada Conundrum. Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum.
What we really need is a technology to become the successor to GSM, CDMA, and LTE. Call it, 5G. We could bribe the ITU to lower the speed floor, and use visible light modulation for phone-- with mirrors.
Facebook has full https control (they had partial, but some APIs didn't work, they do now) and Twitter works with https as well.
Using https seems to be becoming default, rather than an option, and yes, it does requires more muscular hardware and yes, it uses up session sockets. Ultimately, it's what we'll use until it too, gets cracked.
In the sense that someone was attacked unjustly, defended themselves based on the law, and won, yes-- the good guys (e.g. defendants that weren't guilty) prevailed.
The law was what the law was; no new groundbreaking precedent-setting decision. Just a look at the litigation, and the law, with a judgment that followed the law and didn't invent anything new.
And people wonder why I don't 'out' the paid shills. There are several here. Watch the names and attitudes when an anti-FOSS, Apple, Google or pro-Microsoft post comes out.
They line up, either side of the fence, draw an arrow from the quivver, then take bead on the perceived threat..... and often miss.
I wish I had the time to do a spider on slashdot, sort the topics, rate them, then sort users vs bias, speed of reply, and thread extension. Might make for some interesting results.
I would agree with you, but throwing rocks reduces yourself to their level. There's merit to living a life in dignity where others around you are incapable or unwilling to do so.
It's along the same lines as: living well is the best revenge. Suppressing the urge to throttle the living shit out of the ignorant may be the most courageous thing you ever do. There is honor in that courage. To do less, is to aid in their entropy.
I accuse no one of shilling, but it's here. I recognize the fierce handles. I've little doubt of who's writing the check.
I believe the criteria judged for the article doesn't take into account historical merit, for it did, then it would be mistaken, and not so sadly but with a blind eye. I wish them no evil because I wish no one evil. Yet I've seen them do some really nasty things-- some of which have been the crux of litigation and regulatory action-- and others that have been just boorish. No one's perfect, but there are those with honest intent. Using Sun Tzu's book as your corporate mantra will always produce evil effects because some idiots believe that corporations are the modern warriors and must act in brutish ways with some sort of shareholder mantra instead of humanity as their guiding force.
Ballmer is a numbers man. Quantification is one way of looking at humanity, but in the end, quality counts, and ultimately rewards more honorably.
Unethical==Evil under most of the circumstances that we're describing here, and downthread. It's not just marketing, it's business transactions, truth about product deficiencies, astroturfing (and some right here, right now in this thread), and so much more.
If you think they got to their current position through altruism, you're sadly mistaken and should consider another line of business. You're about to get hurt.
There's no revenue there. That's why they didn't run expensive stuff. The last mile, when it's rural, is the most expensive. That's why, in the US, there was a tax to subsidize rural phone after it worked for rural electric. Coops are a great idea when the fat cats are distracted by low-hanging fruit.
Mod parent up. You can say anything you want if it's true, but there might be consequences, and this is what the litigation is about. It's likely to be overturned on appeal, as cited.
The plaintiff ought to be countersued for attorney's fees for bringing the litigation to court. On the surface, it looks like there was injury. But the jury should have scratched the surface-- and the defendent's counsel ought to have been able to convince the jury that there should be no consequences. He/She did a bad job, unless it really was a dozen dullards.
The bandwidth paid is the bandwidth paid. Yeah, there are heavy users. Uploaders, downloaders, isochronous, asych, bisynch, uploaders/downloaders, it's all good and it's been that way since the beginning of the commercial use of the Internet. Many people are spoon-fed a mix of 90%down 10%up. That's the biggest part of the problem. Unless you get a symmetrical connection, they're robbing you, in my opinion.
No sir, it categorically is not. It's responsibility. History, the dictionary, political sentiment, all say that you are wrong. You're entitled to your opinions. You're not entitled to your facts.
The facts are that socialism has roots going back to 1200 BCE. The modern term is one that has roots in India, but is more commonly known by Marx and Engels.
May I quote a reasonable definition I found on Wikipedia:
Socialism is an economic and political theory advocating public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.[1][2][3] A socialist society is organized on the basis of relatively equal power-relations, self-management, dispersed decision-making (adhocracy) and a reduction or elimination of hierarchical and bureaucratic forms of administration and governance; the extent of which varies in different types of socialism.[4][5] This ranges from the establishment of cooperative management structures to the abolition of all hierarchical structures in favor of free association.
Taxing and giving to the poor doesn't meet that definition at all. Instead, it's acting responsibly through collective (governmental) aid to a segment of the population that needs it. You can argue the segment, you can argue the collection. None of your arguments will make it socialism.
It's voluntary, too. You needn't expose anything you don't (insert your ad here! contact Virgin today!) tell anyone that you're putting your (Read The Times! google ads) stanching anything.
Slashdot Mirror
It's $299 for enterprise development, and the agreement is pretty highly walled. Look at Oracle, Microsoft, etc., and then those within the FOSS community. Much different, aren't they? I'm not a much of a fan of either Oracle or Microsoft, and use them emblematically here.
Darwin-the-kernel itself isn't controlled by its community any longer. The kernel used by Apple is now pretty closed up. Seen source recently? Yes, X and SAMBA 4 were used when the GPLv2 were allowed. Lots of FOSS apps ran on MacOS X and still does. Except GPLv3 eventually can't run there.
So go FANBOI someplace else, will ya?
On a good day, Microsoft is perhaps the most closed of them all. On a bad day, they are, IMHO.
Indeed we agree; my mistake.
Calling them "control freak assholes" is disingenuous. They decided on their values, formed the GPLv3, and stuck to those values. They believe their values have merit, and have requisite need to prevent what they feel is non-free use cases from slipping in.
It took some courage, but I understand with their principles. I don't necessarily agree for all use cases, but I agree for many use cases. For that, I'll respect them. IMHO, Apple becomes less and less free than the ideals expressed when MacOSX arrived, and becomes more and more like Microsoft all the time, in terms of proprietary infrastructure with high walls and draconian developer requirements.
It's more like:
Threat: it's been seen in the wild, hammering something.
Vulnerability: a conceivable possibility exists if someone is dogged enough to do the wild coding needed, and some happless situation is setup, to cause a problem which may or may not result in something to worry about.
Threats are alive and transitive, vulnerabilities are conceptual and passive.
I realize that the chances of a civilian being sued directly are small, and for the reasons you stated stated. But we need some consequential/correlative injury or no one will give a crap. I'm fairly sure that simple coverage on Groklaw isn't going to incense Joe and Jane SixPack et al sufficiently to make them be unhappy at Microsoft. And they should be.
Mmmmm. Then we're down to one GSM, and one CDMA. Insane.
For many reasons, there will be no out-of-court settlement. If Google doesn't take it to the wall, then they expose the rest of the FOSS community to litigation. Death by a thousand cuts/litigations.
I want Microsoft to sue civilians. Users. Then the excrement will hit the airconditioning.
Have you looked at Clearwire's finances or their 8Ks/10K's? Not so good. Sprint's reputation among their clientele? Not so good. Marketshare when looking in any measure of this, pre-/post merger? Not so good.
I hope you're a satisfied customer of VirginM and Clearwire. Not too many of those, according to various surveys.
Clearwire isn't really comparable to Comcast save that they're both ostensible broadband providers; AT&T's DSL "broadband" isn't very good for the majority of its clientele either. Disclaimer: I hate them all and have had business relationships with all but Clearwire.
We can hope, altho it's damning Verizon with faint praise. It becomes a GSM monopoly, further pushing Verizon out on an EDGE (pun intended) with LTE.
The duopoly that results (sorry, Sprint and Clearwire are dying) means that we'll have the fun of the Canadians, who deal with the Rogers- Bell Canada Conundrum. Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum.
What we really need is a technology to become the successor to GSM, CDMA, and LTE. Call it, 5G. We could bribe the ITU to lower the speed floor, and use visible light modulation for phone-- with mirrors.
Facebook has full https control (they had partial, but some APIs didn't work, they do now) and Twitter works with https as well.
Using https seems to be becoming default, rather than an option, and yes, it does requires more muscular hardware and yes, it uses up session sockets. Ultimately, it's what we'll use until it too, gets cracked.
In the sense that someone was attacked unjustly, defended themselves based on the law, and won, yes-- the good guys (e.g. defendants that weren't guilty) prevailed.
The law was what the law was; no new groundbreaking precedent-setting decision. Just a look at the litigation, and the law, with a judgment that followed the law and didn't invent anything new.
And people wonder why I don't 'out' the paid shills. There are several here. Watch the names and attitudes when an anti-FOSS, Apple, Google or pro-Microsoft post comes out.
They line up, either side of the fence, draw an arrow from the quivver, then take bead on the perceived threat..... and often miss.
I wish I had the time to do a spider on slashdot, sort the topics, rate them, then sort users vs bias, speed of reply, and thread extension. Might make for some interesting results.
Right. Epithets are the first drop of grease on the slippery slope to disrespect.
I would agree with you, but throwing rocks reduces yourself to their level. There's merit to living a life in dignity where others around you are incapable or unwilling to do so.
It's along the same lines as: living well is the best revenge. Suppressing the urge to throttle the living shit out of the ignorant may be the most courageous thing you ever do. There is honor in that courage. To do less, is to aid in their entropy.
I accuse no one of shilling, but it's here. I recognize the fierce handles. I've little doubt of who's writing the check.
I believe the criteria judged for the article doesn't take into account historical merit, for it did, then it would be mistaken, and not so sadly but with a blind eye. I wish them no evil because I wish no one evil. Yet I've seen them do some really nasty things-- some of which have been the crux of litigation and regulatory action-- and others that have been just boorish. No one's perfect, but there are those with honest intent. Using Sun Tzu's book as your corporate mantra will always produce evil effects because some idiots believe that corporations are the modern warriors and must act in brutish ways with some sort of shareholder mantra instead of humanity as their guiding force.
Ballmer is a numbers man. Quantification is one way of looking at humanity, but in the end, quality counts, and ultimately rewards more honorably.
Looks like a duck. Quacks like a duck. Has feathers like a duck. Shits like a duck.
It's a duck. No names, just quacks.
No.
Unethical==Evil under most of the circumstances that we're describing here, and downthread. It's not just marketing, it's business transactions, truth about product deficiencies, astroturfing (and some right here, right now in this thread), and so much more.
If you think they got to their current position through altruism, you're sadly mistaken and should consider another line of business. You're about to get hurt.
There's no revenue there. That's why they didn't run expensive stuff. The last mile, when it's rural, is the most expensive. That's why, in the US, there was a tax to subsidize rural phone after it worked for rural electric. Coops are a great idea when the fat cats are distracted by low-hanging fruit.
Mod parent up. You can say anything you want if it's true, but there might be consequences, and this is what the litigation is about. It's likely to be overturned on appeal, as cited.
The plaintiff ought to be countersued for attorney's fees for bringing the litigation to court. On the surface, it looks like there was injury. But the jury should have scratched the surface-- and the defendent's counsel ought to have been able to convince the jury that there should be no consequences. He/She did a bad job, unless it really was a dozen dullards.
I think that life is prior art.
No.
The bandwidth paid is the bandwidth paid. Yeah, there are heavy users. Uploaders, downloaders, isochronous, asych, bisynch, uploaders/downloaders, it's all good and it's been that way since the beginning of the commercial use of the Internet. Many people are spoon-fed a mix of 90%down 10%up. That's the biggest part of the problem. Unless you get a symmetrical connection, they're robbing you, in my opinion.
No sir, it categorically is not. It's responsibility. History, the dictionary, political sentiment, all say that you are wrong. You're entitled to your opinions. You're not entitled to your facts.
The facts are that socialism has roots going back to 1200 BCE. The modern term is one that has roots in India, but is more commonly known by Marx and Engels.
May I quote a reasonable definition I found on Wikipedia:
Socialism is an economic and political theory advocating public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.[1][2][3] A socialist society is organized on the basis of relatively equal power-relations, self-management, dispersed decision-making (adhocracy) and a reduction or elimination of hierarchical and bureaucratic forms of administration and governance; the extent of which varies in different types of socialism.[4][5] This ranges from the establishment of cooperative management structures to the abolition of all hierarchical structures in favor of free association.
Taxing and giving to the poor doesn't meet that definition at all. Instead, it's acting responsibly through collective (governmental) aid to a segment of the population that needs it. You can argue the segment, you can argue the collection. None of your arguments will make it socialism.
I know. I was a member. Then I had children and couldn't afford neat little Yaesu VHF-FM radios with phone patches, etc.
It's voluntary, too. You needn't expose anything you don't (insert your ad here! contact Virgin today!) tell anyone that you're putting your (Read The Times! google ads) stanching anything.