So I am going to cut off my nose to spite my face!
Seriously, how does that do anything but hurt Linux or do anything effective to stop the war in Iraq? That's about as intelligent as banning Islam becuase some murderous extremeists happen to be Islamic.
Downtown Jackson Hole, WY (yes the tourist trap part near yellowstone) has an all-walk cycle. And it's across a US Highway. And this also happens to be a place where you have to make a left to follow the highway as well.
As for the red light left, such turns are only legal where both streets (the one you are on and the one you are going to) are one-way. the premis of the permitted left is that you dont' have to cross a through lane of traffic either way. It's actally in most trafic law books in the sections on permitted rights. Denver just puts a sign up to tell you, to ease traffic congestion.
We are expecting a child in october and I am trying to convince my wife to name it "Princess 247" if it's a girl and "Hot_Wheels 180" if it's a boy.
Her most convincing arguments have to do with the standardized testing that is going on in the schools now. Unless I can show her a bubble sheet with numbers for the middle initial or an underscore for the first name they are out of consideration. (I releneted on the colouring of the names as well, since I was going to make the "Hot" red and the "Wheels" a dark rubber grey but there's a chance the boy may be colour blind).
Dose anyone work for the ITBS tests or the CAT tests and can upgrade the bubble sheets for this? It doesn't have to be immediate, Since it is at least 5-7 years away until they will test I think that if I can show they will be there by then I can make her budge. That will show her to make comprimizes that aren't!
From my experience the DRM is still present to a degree. Rather than tieing a single install to a single machine via some sort of server registration they have gone to some sort of on disk DRM. The criteria for triggering it has also gone up, but eh conseqence has changed. Instead of hosing your license they make you re-install from the disk. It happened to me. Start tax regurn, realize you are missing some forms, save, close, install free* norton anti virus, start up turbo tax, get message about configuration chagneing and needing a re-install.
This does solve part of the principal problem of installing and handing of the disk never to be seen again, the source of most turbo tax piracy. (you just need to make sure you are done before passing it around), but I dont' know if there is some unique ID on the disk that prevents e-file or the print process checks against a central service before printing.
Now combine this with intuits nasty habit of sending you an unactivated copy in the mail of turbotax in late november it can get nasty. Word of advide: Either throw the disk out before you get in the house or make sure it's the demo disk you are thowing out and not the retail version. And have your wife call and act confused if you do, social engineering is much easier from a female who can play the "oops.. i don't know what I am doing" game well (even if they know exactly what they are doing).
I have to disagree on the fact the schools are the one strongly discouraging the little girls. My wife, who is a civil engineer, is of the opinion that because of the nature of most women there will never be absolute parity of interest in technical areas like engineering and computers. There is typically some level of bias against such technical fields that is just intrinsic in the way womans minds are wired. The fact that there are some differences between the way male and female brains are wired has been scientificlly proven for things like the ability to mentally visualize 3D objects. Some transgender studies (female to male in this case) have shown increases in such abilities as testoterone levels rise and estrogen levels fall. (This is admittedly a male biased example, but that was the first one that comes to mind because occasionally my wife complains about how much she hated her drafting classes and why).
Given that bias there is a feedback loop that you may be observing, in that it's the other little girls influinceing said little girls. It's not usally until high school that peoples personalities/abilities and the adolecent's understanding of such personalities that people are less concerned with being like the rest of their friends, the only real distinctions in elementary/secondary school are between extremes of intelligence and social class. Having more people in high school may help too.
I would have to echo the sentiment that this isn't as dire as it seems. I was in CS from 92-93, 95-96, and 98-00 (I have an alergic reaction to large amounts of unsecured debt) I noticed in the 98-00 timeframe that there were a lot of students in CS that plain old dind't belong there, and quite frankly would have (and for one I saw was) happier elsewhere.
Seeing the dot com bubble and microsofts valuation many incoming studens thought that it was spelled $oftware and Computer $cience, when they are really interested in Bu$ine$$. I mean if you want money go to business school, you don't have to graduate. Then there is the "plug and chug" crowd can now see there is more stability in the Engineering disciplines. There is no drop from the hard sciences because "anything that needs to put the word science in it's name isn't a science". As for the others... well it's only a 19% drop.
People who are truly passionate about computers programming, algorithms, languages, etc. will still do Computer Science, and in my last school stint it was a minority (as far as being passionate) in the overloaded senior level classes. The down side is there seems to be a strong gender correlation to being passionate about CS. For of the femenine persuasion when they are passionate about something it tends to be in the liberal arts/musical/medical side of things. (and when I say medical it's more the RN/NP side than the MD side: passionate != stupid WRT insurance liability).
When the job market improves back to where it was durring the dot com era? Improves? Do you seriously call that a good situation? Sure it was great to extort large sums of money for essentially transient skills for a time. But what was we had in '98 and '99 was a very sick economy indeed. The wise ones stashed money away but unless you won the IPO lottory at the right time you've got to be counting your blessings to have a stable job and a paycheck.
Seriously, I feel this jobless recovery is a reaction to the extreme sellers market and financial excesses of the gilded ages of the internet boom.
Instead of 0:58 solve problem with minutes to spare it was 0:57 solve problem with minutes to spare,:58 make veiled social commentary,:59 roll credits to an eerie silence.
as Paradise Pete said, do you understand the meaning of the word AND? Windows AND english only? You've got serious myopia if you think you can force english on all windows users.
But as for the languages. What is the layout difference between Norwegian and Traditional Chineese? About 20 to 30 characters for some standard GUI labels. With absolute positioning you will have GOBS of white space in traditional chineese and your labels will overlap into the controls with Norwegian (or any northern european language for what it's worth). With absolute positioning you have to position for each and every language, a waste of efficiency.
If you are writing windows applications to an english-only audience you are right, C# and absolute positioning is a very fine solution. But once you do I18N into a language line norwegian or traditional chinese (or both at the same time) then you will get the point of layout managers.
And clearly this means you haven't used Eclipse on a Linux box, try playing with the tree in a real production project with 1000+ source files (not just java code) and you will see it crawl like an injured turtle.
But in an english-only and windows-only world, you're right: C# rules and absolute positioning is all you need. The other 80% of the world (and I do mean world) will use other solutions.
First off, SWT only performes well on windows, and stack on top of that that the principal native abstractions are taylored to a win32 environment. Based off of that it is easy to see how SWT performes quite nicely on Windows.
Elsewhere it sucks. MacOS, GTK, photon, Motif. Even porrly writeen swing programs outperform on those platforms.
But back to your FUD. Yes, bad programmers make ugly and poor performing GUI code. Swing is no different in that regard. But have you looked at recent swing programs in the 1.4.2 version of the JDK? Tried stuff like CleverCactus (a mail client)? Synced your MP3s on a new RIO? Used Yahoo's Site Builder to make a web site? There are excelent swing progams out there. Many you probobly don't realize are java swing apps!
But since SWT is only in early adopter land we haven't seen the real dogs of GUIs it can make yet, especially since you have to do such arcane and ancient tasks in SWT as managing your own event queue!:( Give the same bad programmer SWT and you won't get a bad GUI instead you will get a non-fucntioning GUI.
And thus by releasing my code under a BSD/Apache style license I grant the reciever the liberty of creating a derivitive work under the GPL or a BSD/Apache as they choose. By releaseing my code under a GPL licence I grant less liberty by requireing that derivitive derivitives must also be GPL code.
In my opinion the work itself is not a person, or even autonomous. It is an expression of my intellectual work, which when I place it under an OSS license is a gift to others. No matter what anoyone else does my gift can never be amended by others recieving it.
But by placing it under a GPL license I restrict the manner in which people who make derivitive works of my gift can use it, and I even restrict the types of gifts they can make from it. It's like a divorced parent that only has visitation rights buying their son a PS2/XBox/GameCube, but requiring that it stay at their house. It's a gift with ulterior motives.
It should be noted that the greatest liberty is to place it in the Public Domain, hence there are no restrictions ant a total grant of liberty. Apache/BSD licenses only ultimately require attribution, credit where credit is due. What the GPL does is it "guarantees" wider reach of liberties by prohibiting liberties, and leaves you with two choices: adopt the GPL or completely remove it. This choice is a very bad one for corperations (you know, the people who make stuff lice computers and food economically feasable) and people wanting to make a living off of software development. When given the choice between a GPL based option and an Apache/BSD option businesses tend to choose the Apache/BSD option more often than not.
but in long term reality GPL is freer? I disagree. For the rest of eternity the code you use under a GPL license you do not have title to will forever contain the restriction that it must be available under the terms of the GPL (actually it's not eternity, but it is until the respective Copyright Acts declares that the copyrighted work is now in the public domain. And with all the Mickey Mouseing going on with Copyright Law it basically is eternity, but I digress). When you use BSD code you can choose to licence the derivitive work under the GPL, which is to choose to continue the chain of life with fewer licensing rights than were previously had from where you got the software. It is a hastey generalization to say that the only thing you can do with BSD software is to make it proprietary. A presumption that is entirely wrong.
However, real questions of liberty are asked about the rights on has in the immediate time frame, not the possible freedom in the future that people may or may not have. You may dismiss it as "short term thinking" but the only real and substantial rights are the ones that can be exercised in the present. Ask a prisioner who will be released in 100 years, 100 days, or even an hour. They do not have the same liberty as a free citizen. What rights they may have in the future are irrelevant because at any moment they could be shanked and bleed to death.
But what you dismiss is the right of someone who is using BSD licences code to re-relase a derivitive work under the GPL just as freely as they can place it under a lock and key, so the BSD code in reality has the same potential "freedom" in the future as GPL code because the user can choose to place it under such a license, they merely are under no requirement too. But the option, nonetheless, exists. The user of the GPL, however, cannot place GPL code (or LGPL code) udner a BSD style license. Their liberty is restricted at the present time while the user of the BSD code can do everything that the user of the GPL can do *and*then*some*. So the rights of liberty that a user of BSD code are truly a super set of the rights the user of GPL code has, includeing the possibility to restrict future uses to share alike copyrights of the GPL code.
In guaranteeing the liberties of subsquent generations of recipt the GPL actually prohibits liberties to the most immediate recipient of the GPLed work. It is a liberty that when prphibited in the manner that the GNU licenses do that will never be grantable.
Without the license you have no right whatsover to use or distribute the code that would be covered by the GPL (assuming no other license has been applied). The GPL grants you the right to re-use in a limited fashion, but without the GPL you would have no right, so it is truely additive and a grant, just not the grant you want. If a piece of code wasn't licensed in any way you wouldn't be able to use it unless you wrote it.
However, I agree on the philosophical subtext. The BSD license does grant the developer more liberty to use the code in any fashion they choose, including later restricting rights if they so choose. The GPL does not grant as much liberty, so BSD is more free (as in speech) than the GPL, since you can modify the free (as in beer) status of the code with BSD, whereas you cannot with the GPL.
It is ironic that the GPL, which really rattels the libery saber, is out libertied by the BSD licences, which generally do no such saber ratteling.
well, now it stands for "General Public Licnece." But that was after the FSF did their FUD renaming the LGPL from "Library GNU Public License" to "Lesser General Public License" and adding the Linux slander (my opinion at least) to the preamble.
GPL more accurately referres to "GNU General Public License" and LGPL to "GNU Lesser General Public License"
Plapatine IS NOT Darth Sideous. Palpatine is a CLONE of Darth Sideous (but doesn't know it yet). The Sith Lords arent stupid enough to believe they can hide underneath the nose of the greatst Jedi Masters of the day, they aren't that powerful. But with a bit of cleverness they can over come the Jedi.
Ahh, the good old ==.
We are talking about Java, and instance of something, and an SUV, a tpye label assigned to various other isntances. The headling won't compile, you need to say Java == SUV.class but that's not quite right either. So what the headline should say is...
Java instanceof SUV
We'll ignore the bad naming conventions, specifically it should be a lowercase J. Dont forget also that Java instanceof 3GL and Java instanceof OO.
My favorit happens to be Java instanceof ToyLanguage. The difference between men and boys? The size of their toys!
If it was an advert for PalmOS 5 one would think they would mention both the Tungsten T and Toungsten C.
They woudl probobly point out that the Tungsten T has built in bluetooth, PalmOS 5.0, 16MB of memory, and a slick compact size that expands to full size when you need to use the graffiti area.
If it was the Tungsten C they were advertising they would mention the thumboard, 64MB of RAM(!) and built in 802.11b(!) which would be perfect for use from a SSH client. The Sony NX series only gets Wi-Fi from a thick compact flash card while the C has it built in.
Since this is a geek site, they would probobly not mention the new Zire 71 with a built in 300 kilapixel camera. Only 16MB and no wireless, but like the C it has a nice 320x320 transflective display. Buy that one for your non-technical spouse.
If it was an advert, I am sure they woud have mentioned these.
Comparing JavaScript and Java is like comparing a Shark to a Dolphin, quite different actually even though both animals live in the sea, and both languages use the letters J A and V. Both have cariovascular systems and both use variables and control structures. But that is basically where the similarities end.
JavaScript actually started life inside of Netscape as LiveScript, and durring the Netscape 2.0 time frame was re-named to JavaScript to ride the Java bandwagon, but thre is no realtionship at all beyond that. Compile-time type saftey? Java yes JavaScript no. Prototypes? JavaScript yes Java no. eval() of new programming code? One but not the other. Interface inheritance? Again. First Class Methods? yep, not both. Bones? Sharks no Dolphins yes (teeth don't count).
Now C# and Java, they are at best siblings but java did not beget C#. The namespace structure is straight from Ansi C++, and the primative types include Cisims like signed and unsigned varieties. You don't shed a tail and then grow it back further down the trail. The comparison here is alligators and crocidiles. Very similar but one did not beget the other, it was a closer common parent than the sharks and dolphins.
An Enigneer, Physicist, and a Mathamathition were all up late studying one nigh in identical dorm rooms. As they go to sleep a fire breaks out in their trask can full of paper.
The Engineer sees a pitcher of water on the desk and pours the entire contents into the trash can, observes that the fire is out, and rolls over and goes back to sleep.
The Physicist does some quick mental calulations, and determines that pouring one quarter of the pitcher in the can would be sufficient to keep the fire confined to the trash can. He then pours precicely one quarter of the pitcher in the trash can and the rolls over and goes back to sleep.
The Mathamaticition wakes up and notices the fire and the pitcher of water. Satisfied that a solution exits he rolls over and goes back to sleep.
It's not that they work too cheaply, it's that they are, for all intents and purposes, indentured servents sold on the idea that they have to pay back the company they are working for sponsering them. It's the green card process that feeds into this as well, which H1-Bs feed.
Too many H1-Bs (including the whole shop of consultants that basically staffed a company I worked for) are either forced to sign a (unually non-enforcable) contract limiting mobility, are mis-informed of their rights of mobility, are coerced into not moving on, or are cheated out of their salary by bad/absent bennies or by bogus (and sometimes illegal) fees. All of these prevent the free market from working it's natural way on their salary.
What is causing all of the low pay/cost for H1-B workers is all of these rediculous restrictions for them, and the companies are exploiting. Why do immagrants with green cards see their salaries jump within a year of the green card? They are playing on the same field as citizens, unlike before. Rather than imposing all of these effort to try and make the restriction on guest workers behave more like a free market I feel the real solution is to get rid of the concept of a guest worker, and relax general immigration os that these immigrant workers work on the same field with the same reatrictions and protections as native workers, only then will true pay equality occur, until then they will always be notably cheaper or economically unfeasable.
Slashdot Mirror
So I am going to cut off my nose to spite my face!
Seriously, how does that do anything but hurt Linux or do anything effective to stop the war in Iraq? That's about as intelligent as banning Islam becuase some murderous extremeists happen to be Islamic.
Downtown Jackson Hole, WY (yes the tourist trap part near yellowstone) has an all-walk cycle. And it's across a US Highway. And this also happens to be a place where you have to make a left to follow the highway as well.
As for the red light left, such turns are only legal where both streets (the one you are on and the one you are going to) are one-way. the premis of the permitted left is that you dont' have to cross a through lane of traffic either way. It's actally in most trafic law books in the sections on permitted rights. Denver just puts a sign up to tell you, to ease traffic congestion.
We are expecting a child in october and I am trying to convince my wife to name it "Princess 247" if it's a girl and "Hot_Wheels 180" if it's a boy.
Her most convincing arguments have to do with the standardized testing that is going on in the schools now. Unless I can show her a bubble sheet with numbers for the middle initial or an underscore for the first name they are out of consideration. (I releneted on the colouring of the names as well, since I was going to make the "Hot" red and the "Wheels" a dark rubber grey but there's a chance the boy may be colour blind).
Dose anyone work for the ITBS tests or the CAT tests and can upgrade the bubble sheets for this? It doesn't have to be immediate, Since it is at least 5-7 years away until they will test I think that if I can show they will be there by then I can make her budge. That will show her to make comprimizes that aren't!
From my experience the DRM is still present to a degree. Rather than tieing a single install to a single machine via some sort of server registration they have gone to some sort of on disk DRM. The criteria for triggering it has also gone up, but eh conseqence has changed. Instead of hosing your license they make you re-install from the disk. It happened to me. Start tax regurn, realize you are missing some forms, save, close, install free* norton anti virus, start up turbo tax, get message about configuration chagneing and needing a re-install.
This does solve part of the principal problem of installing and handing of the disk never to be seen again, the source of most turbo tax piracy. (you just need to make sure you are done before passing it around), but I dont' know if there is some unique ID on the disk that prevents e-file or the print process checks against a central service before printing.
Now combine this with intuits nasty habit of sending you an unactivated copy in the mail of turbotax in late november it can get nasty. Word of advide: Either throw the disk out before you get in the house or make sure it's the demo disk you are thowing out and not the retail version. And have your wife call and act confused if you do, social engineering is much easier from a female who can play the "oops.. i don't know what I am doing" game well (even if they know exactly what they are doing).
I have to disagree on the fact the schools are the one strongly discouraging the little girls. My wife, who is a civil engineer, is of the opinion that because of the nature of most women there will never be absolute parity of interest in technical areas like engineering and computers. There is typically some level of bias against such technical fields that is just intrinsic in the way womans minds are wired. The fact that there are some differences between the way male and female brains are wired has been scientificlly proven for things like the ability to mentally visualize 3D objects. Some transgender studies (female to male in this case) have shown increases in such abilities as testoterone levels rise and estrogen levels fall. (This is admittedly a male biased example, but that was the first one that comes to mind because occasionally my wife complains about how much she hated her drafting classes and why).
Given that bias there is a feedback loop that you may be observing, in that it's the other little girls influinceing said little girls. It's not usally until high school that peoples personalities/abilities and the adolecent's understanding of such personalities that people are less concerned with being like the rest of their friends, the only real distinctions in elementary/secondary school are between extremes of intelligence and social class. Having more people in high school may help too.
I would have to echo the sentiment that this isn't as dire as it seems. I was in CS from 92-93, 95-96, and 98-00 (I have an alergic reaction to large amounts of unsecured debt) I noticed in the 98-00 timeframe that there were a lot of students in CS that plain old dind't belong there, and quite frankly would have (and for one I saw was) happier elsewhere.
Seeing the dot com bubble and microsofts valuation many incoming studens thought that it was spelled $oftware and Computer $cience, when they are really interested in Bu$ine$$. I mean if you want money go to business school, you don't have to graduate. Then there is the "plug and chug" crowd can now see there is more stability in the Engineering disciplines. There is no drop from the hard sciences because "anything that needs to put the word science in it's name isn't a science". As for the others... well it's only a 19% drop.
People who are truly passionate about computers programming, algorithms, languages, etc. will still do Computer Science, and in my last school stint it was a minority (as far as being passionate) in the overloaded senior level classes. The down side is there seems to be a strong gender correlation to being passionate about CS. For of the femenine persuasion when they are passionate about something it tends to be in the liberal arts/musical/medical side of things. (and when I say medical it's more the RN/NP side than the MD side: passionate != stupid WRT insurance liability).
When the job market improves back to where it was durring the dot com era? Improves? Do you seriously call that a good situation? Sure it was great to extort large sums of money for essentially transient skills for a time. But what was we had in '98 and '99 was a very sick economy indeed. The wise ones stashed money away but unless you won the IPO lottory at the right time you've got to be counting your blessings to have a stable job and a paycheck.
Seriously, I feel this jobless recovery is a reaction to the extreme sellers market and financial excesses of the gilded ages of the internet boom.
Some things are best left in our history.
Umm... they did tweak the formula last week...
:58 make veiled social commentary, :59 roll credits to an eerie silence.
Instead of 0:58 solve problem with minutes to spare it was 0:57 solve problem with minutes to spare,
See, thet are innovating!
as Paradise Pete said, do you understand the meaning of the word AND? Windows AND english only? You've got serious myopia if you think you can force english on all windows users.
But as for the languages. What is the layout difference between Norwegian and Traditional Chineese? About 20 to 30 characters for some standard GUI labels. With absolute positioning you will have GOBS of white space in traditional chineese and your labels will overlap into the controls with Norwegian (or any northern european language for what it's worth). With absolute positioning you have to position for each and every language, a waste of efficiency.
If you are writing windows applications to an english-only audience you are right, C# and absolute positioning is a very fine solution. But once you do I18N into a language line norwegian or traditional chinese (or both at the same time) then you will get the point of layout managers.
And clearly this means you haven't used Eclipse on a Linux box, try playing with the tree in a real production project with 1000+ source files (not just java code) and you will see it crawl like an injured turtle.
But in an english-only and windows-only world, you're right: C# rules and absolute positioning is all you need. The other 80% of the world (and I do mean world) will use other solutions.
First off, SWT only performes well on windows, and stack on top of that that the principal native abstractions are taylored to a win32 environment. Based off of that it is easy to see how SWT performes quite nicely on Windows.
:( Give the same bad programmer SWT and you won't get a bad GUI instead you will get a non-fucntioning GUI.
Elsewhere it sucks. MacOS, GTK, photon, Motif. Even porrly writeen swing programs outperform on those platforms.
But back to your FUD. Yes, bad programmers make ugly and poor performing GUI code. Swing is no different in that regard. But have you looked at recent swing programs in the 1.4.2 version of the JDK? Tried stuff like CleverCactus (a mail client)? Synced your MP3s on a new RIO? Used Yahoo's Site Builder to make a web site? There are excelent swing progams out there. Many you probobly don't realize are java swing apps!
But since SWT is only in early adopter land we haven't seen the real dogs of GUIs it can make yet, especially since you have to do such arcane and ancient tasks in SWT as managing your own event queue!
And thus by releasing my code under a BSD/Apache style license I grant the reciever the liberty of creating a derivitive work under the GPL or a BSD/Apache as they choose. By releaseing my code under a GPL licence I grant less liberty by requireing that derivitive derivitives must also be GPL code.
In my opinion the work itself is not a person, or even autonomous. It is an expression of my intellectual work, which when I place it under an OSS license is a gift to others. No matter what anoyone else does my gift can never be amended by others recieving it.
But by placing it under a GPL license I restrict the manner in which people who make derivitive works of my gift can use it, and I even restrict the types of gifts they can make from it. It's like a divorced parent that only has visitation rights buying their son a PS2/XBox/GameCube, but requiring that it stay at their house. It's a gift with ulterior motives.
It should be noted that the greatest liberty is to place it in the Public Domain, hence there are no restrictions ant a total grant of liberty. Apache/BSD licenses only ultimately require attribution, credit where credit is due. What the GPL does is it "guarantees" wider reach of liberties by prohibiting liberties, and leaves you with two choices: adopt the GPL or completely remove it. This choice is a very bad one for corperations (you know, the people who make stuff lice computers and food economically feasable) and people wanting to make a living off of software development. When given the choice between a GPL based option and an Apache/BSD option businesses tend to choose the Apache/BSD option more often than not.
Real liberty involves taking risks.
but in long term reality GPL is freer? I disagree. For the rest of eternity the code you use under a GPL license you do not have title to will forever contain the restriction that it must be available under the terms of the GPL (actually it's not eternity, but it is until the respective Copyright Acts declares that the copyrighted work is now in the public domain. And with all the Mickey Mouseing going on with Copyright Law it basically is eternity, but I digress). When you use BSD code you can choose to licence the derivitive work under the GPL, which is to choose to continue the chain of life with fewer licensing rights than were previously had from where you got the software. It is a hastey generalization to say that the only thing you can do with BSD software is to make it proprietary. A presumption that is entirely wrong.
However, real questions of liberty are asked about the rights on has in the immediate time frame, not the possible freedom in the future that people may or may not have. You may dismiss it as "short term thinking" but the only real and substantial rights are the ones that can be exercised in the present. Ask a prisioner who will be released in 100 years, 100 days, or even an hour. They do not have the same liberty as a free citizen. What rights they may have in the future are irrelevant because at any moment they could be shanked and bleed to death.
But what you dismiss is the right of someone who is using BSD licences code to re-relase a derivitive work under the GPL just as freely as they can place it under a lock and key, so the BSD code in reality has the same potential "freedom" in the future as GPL code because the user can choose to place it under such a license, they merely are under no requirement too. But the option, nonetheless, exists. The user of the GPL, however, cannot place GPL code (or LGPL code) udner a BSD style license. Their liberty is restricted at the present time while the user of the BSD code can do everything that the user of the GPL can do *and*then*some*. So the rights of liberty that a user of BSD code are truly a super set of the rights the user of GPL code has, includeing the possibility to restrict future uses to share alike copyrights of the GPL code.
In guaranteeing the liberties of subsquent generations of recipt the GPL actually prohibits liberties to the most immediate recipient of the GPLed work. It is a liberty that when prphibited in the manner that the GNU licenses do that will never be grantable.
Well, yes.
Without the license you have no right whatsover to use or distribute the code that would be covered by the GPL (assuming no other license has been applied). The GPL grants you the right to re-use in a limited fashion, but without the GPL you would have no right, so it is truely additive and a grant, just not the grant you want. If a piece of code wasn't licensed in any way you wouldn't be able to use it unless you wrote it.
However, I agree on the philosophical subtext. The BSD license does grant the developer more liberty to use the code in any fashion they choose, including later restricting rights if they so choose. The GPL does not grant as much liberty, so BSD is more free (as in speech) than the GPL, since you can modify the free (as in beer) status of the code with BSD, whereas you cannot with the GPL.
It is ironic that the GPL, which really rattels the libery saber, is out libertied by the BSD licences, which generally do no such saber ratteling.
well, now it stands for "General Public Licnece." But that was after the FSF did their FUD renaming the LGPL from "Library GNU Public License" to "Lesser General Public License" and adding the Linux slander (my opinion at least) to the preamble.
GPL more accurately referres to "GNU General Public License" and LGPL to "GNU Lesser General Public License"
Plapatine IS NOT Darth Sideous. Palpatine is a CLONE of Darth Sideous (but doesn't know it yet). The Sith Lords arent stupid enough to believe they can hide underneath the nose of the greatst Jedi Masters of the day, they aren't that powerful. But with a bit of cleverness they can over come the Jedi.
Ahh, the good old ==. We are talking about Java, and instance of something, and an SUV, a tpye label assigned to various other isntances. The headling won't compile, you need to say Java == SUV.class but that's not quite right either. So what the headline should say is...
Java instanceof SUV
We'll ignore the bad naming conventions, specifically it should be a lowercase J. Dont forget also that Java instanceof 3GL and Java instanceof OO.
My favorit happens to be Java instanceof ToyLanguage. The difference between men and boys? The size of their toys!
Apparently they already have the cluster up and running and it has since started to host their web site since the story was first posted.
If it was an advert for PalmOS 5 one would think they would mention both the Tungsten T and Toungsten C.
They woudl probobly point out that the Tungsten T has built in bluetooth, PalmOS 5.0, 16MB of memory, and a slick compact size that expands to full size when you need to use the graffiti area.
If it was the Tungsten C they were advertising they would mention the thumboard, 64MB of RAM(!) and built in 802.11b(!) which would be perfect for use from a SSH client. The Sony NX series only gets Wi-Fi from a thick compact flash card while the C has it built in.
Since this is a geek site, they would probobly not mention the new Zire 71 with a built in 300 kilapixel camera. Only 16MB and no wireless, but like the C it has a nice 320x320 transflective display. Buy that one for your non-technical spouse.
If it was an advert, I am sure they woud have mentioned these.
Sorry, Wrong and Wrong.
Comparing JavaScript and Java is like comparing a Shark to a Dolphin, quite different actually even though both animals live in the sea, and both languages use the letters J A and V. Both have cariovascular systems and both use variables and control structures. But that is basically where the similarities end.
JavaScript actually started life inside of Netscape as LiveScript, and durring the Netscape 2.0 time frame was re-named to JavaScript to ride the Java bandwagon, but thre is no realtionship at all beyond that. Compile-time type saftey? Java yes JavaScript no. Prototypes? JavaScript yes Java no. eval() of new programming code? One but not the other. Interface inheritance? Again. First Class Methods? yep, not both. Bones? Sharks no Dolphins yes (teeth don't count).
Now C# and Java, they are at best siblings but java did not beget C#. The namespace structure is straight from Ansi C++, and the primative types include Cisims like signed and unsigned varieties. You don't shed a tail and then grow it back further down the trail. The comparison here is alligators and crocidiles. Very similar but one did not beget the other, it was a closer common parent than the sharks and dolphins.
An Enigneer, Physicist, and a Mathamathition were all up late studying one nigh in identical dorm rooms. As they go to sleep a fire breaks out in their trask can full of paper.
The Engineer sees a pitcher of water on the desk and pours the entire contents into the trash can, observes that the fire is out, and rolls over and goes back to sleep.
The Physicist does some quick mental calulations, and determines that pouring one quarter of the pitcher in the can would be sufficient to keep the fire confined to the trash can. He then pours precicely one quarter of the pitcher in the trash can and the rolls over and goes back to sleep.
The Mathamaticition wakes up and notices the fire and the pitcher of water. Satisfied that a solution exits he rolls over and goes back to sleep.
'Just ask yourself the question..... "Is This Good For The Company"?' [Points to teal and pink banner....]
Good luck with the layoffs Bob!
> For some, it was a dark divergence from the free software movement;
+1
206kg of lead was found where the plutonioum was last believed to have been.
It's not that they work too cheaply, it's that they are, for all intents and purposes, indentured servents sold on the idea that they have to pay back the company they are working for sponsering them. It's the green card process that feeds into this as well, which H1-Bs feed.
Too many H1-Bs (including the whole shop of consultants that basically staffed a company I worked for) are either forced to sign a (unually non-enforcable) contract limiting mobility, are mis-informed of their rights of mobility, are coerced into not moving on, or are cheated out of their salary by bad/absent bennies or by bogus (and sometimes illegal) fees. All of these prevent the free market from working it's natural way on their salary.
What is causing all of the low pay/cost for H1-B workers is all of these rediculous restrictions for them, and the companies are exploiting. Why do immagrants with green cards see their salaries jump within a year of the green card? They are playing on the same field as citizens, unlike before. Rather than imposing all of these effort to try and make the restriction on guest workers behave more like a free market I feel the real solution is to get rid of the concept of a guest worker, and relax general immigration os that these immigrant workers work on the same field with the same reatrictions and protections as native workers, only then will true pay equality occur, until then they will always be notably cheaper or economically unfeasable.