There's a big difference between LGPL and BSD/MIT. But if you are arguing to release code under BSD/MIT in order to attract the interest of companies developing proprietary software "products", then your code is actually going to evolve into something much less free.
Licensing software under GPL does not restrict the ability of companies to develop products. But the GPL does restrict the ability of companies to prevent other competing companies from developing products.
Did you enable frequency scaling? Under KDE3.5 I use kpowersave. There's a frequency scaling applet under GNOME as well. I just can't remember the name at the moment.
You are free to speak about whatever you want but Obama's face is copyright protected. Otherwise anybody could run for president without licensing his face.
Python and Ruby are the tools of choice when working on a strict deadline while getting a blowjob and having a gun pointed at my head. And yes, this kind of thing predominantly happens on weekends.
That's interesting. I know many people who would purchase dual-boot if it where available. For cross-platform developers it is a must and for experienced Windows users it makes the switch less painful. And I would be really interested in a pre-installed tripple-boot providing XP/Linux/MacOS;)
Open source effectively prevents businesses from making money by giving away the code for free, says Fun Underberg, a lawyer specializing in law. We believe in a mixed-source environment and in a healthy coopetition. There is a healthy discussion to be had about software patents and intellectual property. With GPL software you can't keep selling copies and reaping the benefits of our programmers' creations. We tried to interview Richard Stallman and sell his article (not even his source code) but he refused flat-out and wanted to take control of his work. Does GPL still matter? Well, not to us! With the Apache license it is much easier to understand how you can make money without working.
In Germany this is called "Salamitaktik" (salami attack). Use terrorism (or now child porn) as a litmus test to scare of any opposition. Undo some civil rights. Once the public indignation has dissipated the next hardliner comes forward to implement the next step.
Google is in the advertisment-business. Search engine development does not generate revenue on its own. And there is a conflict of interest: There is a strong incentive for Google to make AdblockPlus less visible.
With "fetching the stapler" you probably mean the STAIR-robot? I don't know how that particular robot was programmed. I did have a look at some of the papers from DARPA participants though. The winning robot basically uses a laser scanner and a camera. It then segments the image into drivable/planar terrain and other terrain not fitting that assumption. This system would be completely unfit to perform a different task such as recognising objects (other cars, houses, pedestrians). There are various projects in map building (SLAM), 3D object recognition (various methods), object classification (various methods), task planning, motion planning,... However all this approaches only work in a limited domain and they are not well integrated with each other. I would be content with having a robot which is "smart" enough to do part of my household work by the time I retire.
If you look at what *active* scientists in that field are saying, you will see that the actual concern is, that we may never be able to build autonomous robots and factories in our lifetime. Worrying about machines outsmarting man is a waste of research funding at best and it may cause overregulation at an early stage at worst. Just think about what happened to stem cell research or nuclear science. I have yet to see a machine which can outperform a honey bee (search food items, avoid collisions, take-off and landing at any angle, navigation,...). Or is outsmarting a man a more doable venture?
A human brain only is capable of 65 processes? As far as I know, brains consist of neurons which are sometimes arranged in series of layers and sometimes in parrallel depending on the task at hand. E.g. the visual cortex is extremely parallelised while motor neurons are arranged in series to generate a sequence of accurately timed signals.
Kevin Spacey: "I hate that virus!" Dustin Hoffman: "Come on! You have to admire its simplicity. It's one-billionth of our size and its beating us!" Kevin S.: "What do you want to do? Take it out for lunch?" Dustin H.: "No, I'm gonna kill it."
Somebody who only wants to learn one language will most likely not become a great programmer. The problem is that the reason to understand a particular language is only visible to you after you have understood it * C/C++: understand pointer-arithmetic and the datatypes of the underlying machine * Java: enjoy the garbage collector while exploring the limits of strict and static typing * Maxima: feel the power of functional programming and symbolic evaluation * Lisp: transform code using meta-programming * Ruby: see how a trade-off between Lisp and Java could look like * Forth: see how different programming languages can be * Io: realize that there always will be new languages until we figure out what makes reading and writing programs easy
Slashdot Mirror
I don't need this to encourage myself to write software. But apparently Microsoft does.
There's a big difference between LGPL and BSD/MIT. But if you are arguing to release code under BSD/MIT in order to attract the interest of companies developing proprietary software "products", then your code is actually going to evolve into something much less free.
Licensing software under GPL does not restrict the ability of companies to develop products. But the GPL does restrict the ability of companies to prevent other competing companies from developing products.
Shouldn't be a problem as long as the bank has enough imaginary reserve funds to back it up.
Reminds me of Jan Hendrik Schön.
Did you enable frequency scaling? Under KDE3.5 I use kpowersave. There's a frequency scaling applet under GNOME as well. I just can't remember the name at the moment.
You are free to speak about whatever you want but Obama's face is copyright protected. Otherwise anybody could run for president without licensing his face.
In the USA you need to purchase patent licenses for the permission to run the software!
Python and Ruby are the tools of choice when working on a strict deadline while getting a blowjob and having a gun pointed at my head. And yes, this kind of thing predominantly happens on weekends.
Putin's son won't like this.
That's interesting. I know many people who would purchase dual-boot if it where available. For cross-platform developers it is a must and for experienced Windows users it makes the switch less painful. And I would be really interested in a pre-installed tripple-boot providing XP/Linux/MacOS ;)
Open source effectively prevents businesses from making money by giving away the code for free, says Fun Underberg, a lawyer specializing in law. We believe in a mixed-source environment and in a healthy coopetition. There is a healthy discussion to be had about software patents and intellectual property. With GPL software you can't keep selling copies and reaping the benefits of our programmers' creations. We tried to interview Richard Stallman and sell his article (not even his source code) but he refused flat-out and wanted to take control of his work. Does GPL still matter? Well, not to us! With the Apache license it is much easier to understand how you can make money without working.
I think he just wanted Infoworld to license their article under the Cc-by-nd license. Even the BBC agreed to grant him his wish.
See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7487060.stm
In Germany this is called "Salamitaktik" (salami attack). Use terrorism (or now child porn) as a litmus test to scare of any opposition. Undo some civil rights. Once the public indignation has dissipated the next hardliner comes forward to implement the next step.
What now?
Hi David ;)
Google is in the advertisment-business. Search engine development does not generate revenue on its own. And there is a conflict of interest: There is a strong incentive for Google to make AdblockPlus less visible.
Or as Jörg Tauss said: It's about making the internet a civil-rights free zone.
I can recommend Eben Moglen's keynote and the discussion with Matthew Small (2006 Sakai conference).
http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/CONF06/Keynote+--+Eben+Moglen
http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/CONF06/Lunchtime+Discussion+with+Eben+Moglen+and+Matthew+Small
With "fetching the stapler" you probably mean the STAIR-robot? I don't know how that particular robot was programmed. I did have a look at some of the papers from DARPA participants though. The winning robot basically uses a laser scanner and a camera. It then segments the image into drivable/planar terrain and other terrain not fitting that assumption. This system would be completely unfit to perform a different task such as recognising objects (other cars, houses, pedestrians). There are various projects in map building (SLAM), 3D object recognition (various methods), object classification (various methods), task planning, motion planning, ... However all this approaches only work in a limited domain and they are not well integrated with each other. I would be content with having a robot which is "smart" enough to do part of my household work by the time I retire.
Actually it is not about averaging out. It's about building a better classifier from many good ones. See Adaboost.
If you look at what *active* scientists in that field are saying, you will see that the actual concern is, that we may never be able to build autonomous robots and factories in our lifetime. Worrying about machines outsmarting man is a waste of research funding at best and it may cause overregulation at an early stage at worst. Just think about what happened to stem cell research or nuclear science.
I have yet to see a machine which can outperform a honey bee (search food items, avoid collisions, take-off and landing at any angle, navigation,...). Or is outsmarting a man a more doable venture?
A human brain only is capable of 65 processes? As far as I know, brains consist of neurons which are sometimes arranged in series of layers and sometimes in parrallel depending on the task at hand. E.g. the visual cortex is extremely parallelised while motor neurons are arranged in series to generate a sequence of accurately timed signals.
Pfew. I can use several computers at the same time if I want to.
Kevin Spacey: "I hate that virus!"
Dustin Hoffman: "Come on! You have to admire its simplicity. It's one-billionth of our size and its beating us!"
Kevin S.: "What do you want to do? Take it out for lunch?"
Dustin H.: "No, I'm gonna kill it."
Somebody who only wants to learn one language will most likely not become a great programmer. The problem is that the reason to understand a particular language is only visible to you after you have understood it
* C/C++: understand pointer-arithmetic and the datatypes of the underlying machine
* Java: enjoy the garbage collector while exploring the limits of strict and static typing
* Maxima: feel the power of functional programming and symbolic evaluation
* Lisp: transform code using meta-programming
* Ruby: see how a trade-off between Lisp and Java could look like
* Forth: see how different programming languages can be
* Io: realize that there always will be new languages until we figure out what makes reading and writing programs easy