Note that it was the executive and legislative branches that cooperated to pass the USA PATRIOT Act, while the quote is a statement of the judicial branch.
Except Python isn't a business and so they don't care that they don't have control over it, on the other hand Sun is, and they want control, but don't want to alienate a whole community of talented developers who place more in the license of a product over its use as a simple tool.
Just how much money does Sun make from selling JVMs and JREs? Yep, that's right, zero.
On further reflection, though, may be right re: trademark dilution (see the end of my post). You're also right that Sun wants to prevent the kind of stunts MS pulled by marketing something as Java that doesn't fit their standard.
However, I don't think Sun really gives a shit about "the more zealous of the OSS developer". I don't think OSS zealots who won't go near any development tool that isn't OSS are necessarily any more talented than than people who are willing to use Java even though it is not open source.
Now, IANAL, but I think you may be right about trademark dilution. If anybody is stupid enough to call their project Java without Sun's blessing, then, as long as Sun sends out a C&D letter and follows through with litigation, if necessary, their trademark should be safe. After all, Linux is trademarked.
Still, there's nothing wrong with my suggestion other than GPL incompatibility; everyone gets exactly what they want. (Or, is this the real problem in your eyes? C'mon, the GPL wasn't handed down by God on a stone tablet, after all.) Sun gets to revoke the licence of anyone wrongly using the Java name, the community gets its OSS Java.
Not quite. You could add additional features to the language that are not tested by the test suite. The fun comes when future versions of the test suite/standard break your code.
Sun should just take a lesson from the Python Software Foundation. Although I don't like how Python's current implementation basically acts as a de facto standard (there should be a real standard rather than just a reference implentation that doesn't really reference anything), Python's implementation and "standard" are both open. Anyone can take Python and fork it in incompatible directions. Just take a look at all the posts in comp.lang.python regarding Python-derived languages.
How has this affected Python? Not a bit. If anything, it's encouraged innovation through the Stackless and IronPython projects.
I think what Sun is really worried about is trademark dilution. If that is the case, why not just specifiy that any derivative works must be named something other than Java? The only practical effect this would have is to make the licence GPL incompatible, since most people will rename a fork anyway. However, it does preserve Sun's trademark.
Sun could still certify implementations as Java compatible, giving them the right to use the phrase, too. If there were a reasonable fee involved for certification, then Sun wins another revenue stream. It's a win-win.
Why use Jython when you could use regular Python? The only advantage Jython has (and I'll admit, this might be a big advantage depending on the size of the codebase) is that it compiles to Java bytecodes and allows you to access Java classes from Python.
Other than that, I can't think of any reason why I'd use it, especially for numeric computation. Why be 2 versions behind in the language when you can have some very useful and elegant features like generator expressions now?
You obviously haven't spent any time in the QA department of a medium/large company, have you? (I have, btw.)
WORKSFORME is a pretty common method that developers use, in my experience, to reject bug reports that come in from QA. Truly, that's a failure of QA, because the test case should be independent of, or at least take into account, the environment it's executing in, but you can't claim it doesn't happen.
Let's not even talk about vague specs and other issues the QA professional has to deal with... trust me, there are plenty. Sometimes I'd rather be debugging than testing, believe you me.:-)
Also, these companies, even though they may be CMM level 3 and 4, tend to treat the QA guys as second-class citizens. They're the first ones to get shit on when deadlines start slipping, even though sometimes they don't even *see* the code until the deadline is in danger already.
P.S. This is not intended as a flame, just food for thought.
I don't see how you can characterize a distro that has KDE, etc as "server oriented" vs "desktop oriented," as some of the other posts imply. The key distinction a lot of people seem to be missing, though, is "How friendly is the install procedure?"
In terms of usability, for someone coming from a Windows background, I think KDE is alright. Maybe not perfect, but definitely not terrible.
Take a look at the other distros that seem to be mentioned as "desktop oriented" or "user friendly": Mandrake, SuSe, RedHat. What do they all have in common? A nice, pretty installer.
Now, look at the so-called "server-oriented" distros: Debian, Slack, hmm, I can't really think of any others. I am not 100% certain about Slack these days, but back when I used it aeons ago, the install wasn't very user-friendly to the average computer user. I was comfortable with it as a hobbyist, but the average Joe probably would not be. (It's too bad TFA is slashdotted, otherwise I might be able to check my facts on slack 10.:( )
Gentoo, OTOH, is in a class by itself. I run it, I love it, but my mom would not touch it. Installing and setting up a decent environment is a serious commitment. I suppose as a server, it could work, as long as the PHBs are kept away from it, but one would need linux sysadmins that actually know what they're doing, rather than clicking through a pretty install program on Redhat Enterprise Edition.
Personally, I'd rather have a Sharp Zaurus SL 5600 with an added GPS unit. Different use cases, true, but I'm certain I'd get more use out of the Zaurus.
Not really. If you look at the specs, it measures 12" by 6" by 0.8" and weighs 2.8 pounds. You're better off using a portable media player such as an iPod as a portable media player.
Abiword is great, I use it myself. But it's not a full office suite, and by itself is not a replacement for OO.o. Now, if you had said Gnome office, then I'd buy it.
Say wing-ding looping and sorting method 'B' is patented and, not knowing anything about it, I create it myself. Should I check my code and all code I write to ensure that it is not already patented?
Yes, that's exactly what you should do if you intend to release publically. To not do so opens you up to attacks from dingbats like SCO.
Actually, no, that is the exact opposite of what you should do. If you conduct a patent search, then you open yourself up to triple damages if anyone can show you violated their patent, because it is then willfull infringement.
Much of the original Mac operating system was implemented in ROM, as hardware.
I wonder if the author is aware of how directly the PC BIOS maps to MS DOS system calls? That isn't to say that the Mac's ROMs weren't much more sophisticated, however.
Some systems do not allow any more tries at logging in after a few unsuccessful attempts. After an hour or so, the systems resets and gives the user another chance to try to get in. If that also fails, the user must call the system admin. This process goes a long way toward thwarting multiple access atempts.
I wish I had mod points. Someone please mod parent up as "Insightful".
No password cracking scheme based on brute force can work under these conditions. Say it allows 5 attempts before locking you out for an hour and 5 more the second time. You get a total of 10 attempts. Someone with no knowledge of the user (so social engineering can't be used to get info which might lead to the password) or the password itself via a keylogger (which, as the parent wrote, is still a security issue), cannot hope to guess the password with any practical degree of probability. This essentially eliminates the technical security problem, leaving only the human element, which is susceptible to social engineering attacks.
Sounds like an excellent market for a mod that feeds the box a hard (or slightly varying) upper speed limit, to be faithfully recorded for posterity.
Keep in mind, this may very well be illegal under the DMCA in the United States. I suppose I need not remind you of the recent Slashdot post regarding Australia and the WIPO?
You also have to keep in mind that IronPython is not yet a complete implementation. I love python as a language, and if IronPython turns out to be faster than CPython in a way that matters to me, then I'll switch. I'm not tied to a particular implementation at all.
OTOH, I do think it's going to be pretty hard to beat the combination of CPython and psyco. I've achieved speedups on code I've written of up to 24x, and it's claimed one can get up to a 100x speedup on certain limited types of code.
OTOOH, the types of code that psyco tends to speed up that dramatically tends to be rather non-pythonic in my experience. My best experience was with number crunching code using regular ints -- that's clearly a job for a C extension and I fail to see how any VM can beat raw C consistently for that type of code, unless it has one hell of a JIT compiler. But then, that's exactly what psyco is...
Heh. I'm a software tester, and my boss, who actually is a Native American, put it to us this way: You guys are the cavalry at Little Bighorn, and the whole rest of IT is the Indians.
Basically, what he was trying to get across to us was that as long as we can keep the BS somewhat at bay, we can do our jobs, but the second it gets out of hand, 2000 Indians are gonna be on your ass.
To be fair, not all the development guys are like that, but some of them are.
At the risk of being moderated redundant, I have to basically say "me too" to both the post by AC that says to try a different language, and the one by the other AC that says to consider a different computing related career.
I, for one, am a testing specialist. In that role, I get to play with cool toys and break every application in the company; it's great. I also code in python as a hobby, and even manage to merge the two occasionally. One of the projects I'm working on is teaching me TDD, and it also happens to be a testing tool.;)
Well, I never worked in a soap factory, but I read the labels at Wal Mart. This has been obvious to me for quite some time.
What kills me though is when they take and make the "economy"/larger size more expensive than the smaller size container. Check it out some time, take a calculator the next time you go shopping (oh wait, this is/., some of us probably take our calculators everywhere... I forgot;)
...all software will be free in the future, simply because it will be dominated by Open Source and free software. But who is going to pay for it all? You can't develop in a vacuum, *somebody* has to pay the developers. It seems to me that the only way to do it is for all the Open Source developers to be working at large companies, with the large companies paying a salary for the developer to work on the Open Source project for some portion of their time.
Here's a hint: a for-profit corporation only has one motivation, and that is to make money. If IBM, RedHat, et al. did not think that supporting OSS was a money-making endeavor, they wouldn't be doing it.
Funny, I was able to cut and paste between Firefox and Xterm and vice versa today. Try selecting text to copy and middle click (or single clicking both buttons simultaneously if you emulate three buttons) to paste.
That said, support for copying other types of data, such as graphics, between apps that don't speak a common desktop language is pretty limited.
In this subsection, the term `intentionally induces' means
intentionally aids, abets, induces, or procures, and intent may be
shown by acts from which a reasonable person would find intent to
induce infringement based upon all relevant information about such
acts then reasonably available to the actor, including whether the
activity relies on infringement for its commercial viability.
(Italics mine)
The problem here is that "reasonable people" are rarely reasonable.
Slashdot Mirror
Followup to this: If Linux is not Unix, in what ways is it better or worse than Unix?
Note that it was the executive and legislative branches that cooperated to pass the USA PATRIOT Act, while the quote is a statement of the judicial branch.
Just how much money does Sun make from selling JVMs and JREs? Yep, that's right, zero.
On further reflection, though, may be right re: trademark dilution (see the end of my post). You're also right that Sun wants to prevent the kind of stunts MS pulled by marketing something as Java that doesn't fit their standard.
However, I don't think Sun really gives a shit about "the more zealous of the OSS developer". I don't think OSS zealots who won't go near any development tool that isn't OSS are necessarily any more talented than than people who are willing to use Java even though it is not open source.
Now, IANAL, but I think you may be right about trademark dilution. If anybody is stupid enough to call their project Java without Sun's blessing, then, as long as Sun sends out a C&D letter and follows through with litigation, if necessary, their trademark should be safe. After all, Linux is trademarked.
Still, there's nothing wrong with my suggestion other than GPL incompatibility; everyone gets exactly what they want. (Or, is this the real problem in your eyes? C'mon, the GPL wasn't handed down by God on a stone tablet, after all.) Sun gets to revoke the licence of anyone wrongly using the Java name, the community gets its OSS Java.
Sun should just take a lesson from the Python Software Foundation. Although I don't like how Python's current implementation basically acts as a de facto standard (there should be a real standard rather than just a reference implentation that doesn't really reference anything), Python's implementation and "standard" are both open. Anyone can take Python and fork it in incompatible directions. Just take a look at all the posts in comp.lang.python regarding Python-derived languages.
How has this affected Python? Not a bit. If anything, it's encouraged innovation through the Stackless and IronPython projects.
I think what Sun is really worried about is trademark dilution. If that is the case, why not just specifiy that any derivative works must be named something other than Java? The only practical effect this would have is to make the licence GPL incompatible, since most people will rename a fork anyway. However, it does preserve Sun's trademark.
Sun could still certify implementations as Java compatible, giving them the right to use the phrase, too. If there were a reasonable fee involved for certification, then Sun wins another revenue stream. It's a win-win.
Why is this so difficult for Sun to see?
Other than that, I can't think of any reason why I'd use it, especially for numeric computation. Why be 2 versions behind in the language when you can have some very useful and elegant features like generator expressions now?
WORKSFORME is a pretty common method that developers use, in my experience, to reject bug reports that come in from QA. Truly, that's a failure of QA, because the test case should be independent of, or at least take into account, the environment it's executing in, but you can't claim it doesn't happen.
Let's not even talk about vague specs and other issues the QA professional has to deal with... trust me, there are plenty. Sometimes I'd rather be debugging than testing, believe you me. :-)
Also, these companies, even though they may be CMM level 3 and 4, tend to treat the QA guys as second-class citizens. They're the first ones to get shit on when deadlines start slipping, even though sometimes they don't even *see* the code until the deadline is in danger already.
P.S. This is not intended as a flame, just food for thought.
In terms of usability, for someone coming from a Windows background, I think KDE is alright. Maybe not perfect, but definitely not terrible.
Take a look at the other distros that seem to be mentioned as "desktop oriented" or "user friendly": Mandrake, SuSe, RedHat. What do they all have in common? A nice, pretty installer.
Now, look at the so-called "server-oriented" distros: Debian, Slack, hmm, I can't really think of any others. I am not 100% certain about Slack these days, but back when I used it aeons ago, the install wasn't very user-friendly to the average computer user. I was comfortable with it as a hobbyist, but the average Joe probably would not be. (It's too bad TFA is slashdotted, otherwise I might be able to check my facts on slack 10. :( )
Gentoo, OTOH, is in a class by itself. I run it, I love it, but my mom would not touch it. Installing and setting up a decent environment is a serious commitment. I suppose as a server, it could work, as long as the PHBs are kept away from it, but one would need linux sysadmins that actually know what they're doing, rather than clicking through a pretty install program on Redhat Enterprise Edition.
Personally, I'd rather have a Sharp Zaurus SL 5600 with an added GPS unit. Different use cases, true, but I'm certain I'd get more use out of the Zaurus.
1. Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these running Doom 3 in Soviet Russia... 2. ??? 3. Profit!
Not really. If you look at the specs, it measures 12" by 6" by 0.8" and weighs 2.8 pounds. You're better off using a portable media player such as an iPod as a portable media player.
What about my wi-fi access point with a built-in hotplate? :)
Abiword is great, I use it myself. But it's not a full office suite, and by itself is not a replacement for OO.o. Now, if you had said Gnome office, then I'd buy it.
Actually, no, that is the exact opposite of what you should do. If you conduct a patent search, then you open yourself up to triple damages if anyone can show you violated their patent, because it is then willfull infringement.
I wonder if the author is aware of how directly the PC BIOS maps to MS DOS system calls? That isn't to say that the Mac's ROMs weren't much more sophisticated, however.
No password cracking scheme based on brute force can work under these conditions. Say it allows 5 attempts before locking you out for an hour and 5 more the second time. You get a total of 10 attempts. Someone with no knowledge of the user (so social engineering can't be used to get info which might lead to the password) or the password itself via a keylogger (which, as the parent wrote, is still a security issue), cannot hope to guess the password with any practical degree of probability. This essentially eliminates the technical security problem, leaving only the human element, which is susceptible to social engineering attacks.
And this makes him different from the average ./er how?
Keep in mind, this may very well be illegal under the DMCA in the United States. I suppose I need not remind you of the recent Slashdot post regarding Australia and the WIPO?
OTOH, I do think it's going to be pretty hard to beat the combination of CPython and psyco. I've achieved speedups on code I've written of up to 24x, and it's claimed one can get up to a 100x speedup on certain limited types of code.
OTOOH, the types of code that psyco tends to speed up that dramatically tends to be rather non-pythonic in my experience. My best experience was with number crunching code using regular ints -- that's clearly a job for a C extension and I fail to see how any VM can beat raw C consistently for that type of code, unless it has one hell of a JIT compiler. But then, that's exactly what psyco is...
Basically, what he was trying to get across to us was that as long as we can keep the BS somewhat at bay, we can do our jobs, but the second it gets out of hand, 2000 Indians are gonna be on your ass.
To be fair, not all the development guys are like that, but some of them are.
I wonder if they'd accept using Jython as a "library". ;)
I, for one, am a testing specialist. In that role, I get to play with cool toys and break every application in the company; it's great. I also code in python as a hobby, and even manage to merge the two occasionally. One of the projects I'm working on is teaching me TDD, and it also happens to be a testing tool. ;)
Well, I never worked in a soap factory, but I read the labels at Wal Mart. This has been obvious to me for quite some time. What kills me though is when they take and make the "economy"/larger size more expensive than the smaller size container. Check it out some time, take a calculator the next time you go shopping (oh wait, this is /., some of us probably take our calculators everywhere... I forgot ;)
Here's a hint: a for-profit corporation only has one motivation, and that is to make money. If IBM, RedHat, et al. did not think that supporting OSS was a money-making endeavor, they wouldn't be doing it.
That said, support for copying other types of data, such as graphics, between apps that don't speak a common desktop language is pretty limited.
In this subsection, the term `intentionally induces' means intentionally aids, abets, induces, or procures, and intent may be shown by acts from which a reasonable person would find intent to induce infringement based upon all relevant information about such acts then reasonably available to the actor, including whether the activity relies on infringement for its commercial viability.
(Italics mine)
The problem here is that "reasonable people" are rarely reasonable.
Doh, didn't mean to post this as AC.