Hold on there, chief. Don't you mean copyright infringement?
While I loath the language used by the copyright mafiaa and its lawyers, using "theft" for "copyright infringement" is on par with the canonical terms.
"Free" software would be free for anyone to use however they wanted to, including creating a closed-source derivative. GPL is "free" for certain, limited values of 'free'.
Free as in freedom, not as in beer. The GPL creates a line of freedom from developer to end user. No one in between has the right to alter the contract or limit the freedoms.
The "freedom" you speak of is a "freedom" to limit other's freedom, which isn't really a freedom, its oppression.
This is obviously written from the perspective of "anti-free software."
"The new lesson is that the freedom belongs to the software, not to users." This is SO bogus and mis characterizes the whole point of the new GPL. The "freedom" is absolutely for the users, especially the end users. The restrictions quoted in the article have nothing to do with users, but everything to do with ISVs taking GPL software and screwing the users.
"Changes in the GPL impose other limits on the ability to leverage a proprietary position when open source is involved."
This is true, so, write it for yourselves then. Don't think you can capitalize on someone else's work and deny then the ability to capitalize on your modifications to their software, that isn't very fair.
I don't get what the issue is. If you want to develop closed source software, then so be it, however, don't take other's GPL code and try to close that off, that's theft. How hard is it for the reptilian lawyer brain to understand this very simple concept.
We even say what is needed to comply. But NOOO, they have to keep up with the FUD.
Last little bit:
"Edmund J. Walsh is a shareholder and a member of the electrical and computer technologies and the IP transactions groups at Wolf Greenfield."
I worked at Denning Mobile Robotics, and we had a bunch of them. They had a printer port, modem, and RS232.
We used them as portable RS232 terminals!! They were cheaper than Wyse terminals and far more portable. They were awesome devices. I often wonder why simple devices can't be created to do a job efficiently and reliably. I guess, with no stable computing standards, they would become obsolete too quickly.
The EeePC was close, but now that it has gone Windows, that device is on the upgrade treadmill as well.
Well, any show that can make funny jokes based on "The dopler effect, SchrÃdinger's cat, the original time machine, social ineptness of geeks, and so on is not so bad.
I laugh at a lot of the jokes, while my wife just looks and asks "what????"
Sci-Fi channel has really been inventive with programming. It takes balls to re-do Battlestar Galactica. Bring back "Dr. Who" to the U.S. audience. Eureka is kind of cool too.
With "Big Bang Theory" on NBC, can anyone doubt its the year of the geek?
Without more details, it is difficult to say exactly, but this may be the Blue-Ray killer.
*if* a DVD disk can play at a lower resolution on an old dvd player, but play at Blue-ray resolution with a new player. Then blue ray may die.
There are a LOT of old-style DVD players out there and regular DVDs still outsell, by far, blue ray. Now, if one product satisfies both the technology luddite and the early adopter, blue ray has some serious competition. People with old DVD players can buy new high res disks but not be left out in the media cold with their computers, laptops, or bedroom TVs.
It makes a lot of sense, and really, it is probably the only way to defeat blue ray.
The problem with Google's posting of an opinion, that many probably agree with, is that the use of ad-hominem is so prevalent and accepted that, these days, it is impossible to state something factual and verifiable, or reasonable and well thought out, without it being automatically colored by what people's perceptions of your motives might be.
People have just given up even attempting to think. They judge quickly based on sound bites and prejudices, they no longer contemplate the validity of an argument before forming an opinion.
I take exception to the notion that no one uses gcj, but I'll leave that for now.
You may leave it for now, but it simply is not used in production environments. It is an interesting idea, bit not prime time.
With regard to a Windows DLL or Linux shared library, the answer is that it depends.
Of course it does.
My biggest problem with Java are the over zealous supporters. Yes, java has some very nice qualities, but it is not for every job. Pointers have a real place in a lot of development. Pure native code as well.
so, because C/C++ can do things that java can't, that makes them automatically better?
I never once used the term better.
there is no need for other languages as anything can be done in C?
I never said that either.
Java is not "a language", it's a "platform", a "framework", or whatever you want to call it. Java includes a lot of things that C doesn't include in its standard libraries, and adding another library to a java app is as simple as dropping the jar in the classpath. No need to worry about library version incompatibilities. That is at best an oversimplification. Yes, java has neat features, but it is not perfect either.
Java is an environment, not really a platform. There are many environments in which to develop applications. It should be noted, however, C/C++ are more than mere platforms, and that Java is written in C/C++.
Why the heck do people think this? You certainly can write an OS in other languages and people have.
Why the heck do people conflate a specific argument with a general case? The statement was: "You can't, in any practical sense, write an OS in java." Which is true. Then I said: "C and C++ are *the* standard for writing system level software." Which is true for general system design, but I'll admit it may not be true for small embedded systems.
their functionality? what functionality is it, that you can't duplicate elsewhere?
The direct and predictable translation from source code to object code is a big one. There are others, like creating directly callable entrypoints and even interrupt handlers.
The point isn't that it isn't "doable" elsewhere, it is just that it is not being done in other popular languages.
You are confusing an "observation" of "what isn't" for a statement of "what isn't possible." *Anything* is probably possible, but whether or not it is practical, efficient, or something that people are going to use is a different story.
malloc()s make memory management so easy and cross-platform. and clustering is for wussies, if you need more than a core2duo on Linux, is because you're unl33t or because you need to do some routines
C/C++ and Java have different application types. Sure, there is cross over, but generally speaking there are things you can do in C/C++ that you can't do in Java, but the converse is not also true.
now when you program in Java you forget all that crap, you just code. need a bigger app? J2EE it and run it on a cluster. add nodes a needed to keep performance. node dies? no problem, J2EE takes care of it.
Umm, excuse me? You are talking about a load balanced scaling, not classic "cluster" as in beowulf. J2EE does take care of a lot of the issues, sure, but it's all nodes have all data session sharing or being reliant on a session sensitive load balancer are, IMHO, sub optimal.
migrated from mysql to Oracle or DB2? no problem, just let Hibernate know about it.
Hibernate, lets see some hands... Who has found hibernate to be problem free?
tired of Windows Server and want to run opensolaris, linux or OS X Server? no problem, just drop your EAR/WAR on the new server and relax. it's working.
It is not hard to make server code, in almost any language, that is cross platform. It is the GUI part that's the hard part.
wanna add more coders to your project? point 'em to the javadoc and let they read through the verbose (and thus self-explaining) code.
This is blatantly oversimplified and you know it.
strong typing is there to keep you from doing stupid things. you can always tell what the program IS going to do in all situations, because you HAVE to specify all situations.
Yup, we NEVER see java exceptions do we?
but you're too cool for java. lemme know when banks switch their systems to LAMP and we'll talk. Yup, banks! Those bastions of technical visionaries. What decade did they finally update from COBOL? How many COBOL systems are still running!!???
Another set of reasons why some languages survive and some don't may be the types of applications they can be used for.
The C and C++ tool set is *never* going away. You can't, in any practical sense, write an OS in java. C and C++ are *the* standard for writing system level software. Most all system software is written in one of them and they are tightly coupled. There is no other language currently or on the realistic horizon that can replace their functionality.
Java, on the other hand, is popular, but has plenty of practical competition, from C#, to perl, to even PHP. Hell, even visual basic has a VM environment.
As a system level guy, I have little use for Java, C#, perl, or the others except as needed for glue between system level code.
The most important aspect of any language is how open it is to incorporating external technologies.
PHP is, by all accounts, a horrible language, but because it can wrap just about anything easily, it ends up being used a lot.
I think what makes a language successful has more to do with how it works outside itself. Ironically, that's why I dislike Java, its focus is java java java. Other languages seem to better facilitate interfacing. (Yes I know about and have used JNI, but other languages are typically better, IMHO.)
I know it is not obvious, but sites that are sensitive to bandwidth issues may find this a cost saving measure. Google, of course, gets even more information about everyone.
win win, except for us privacy people. I guess we have to true "do no evil," huh?
The more and more I see these things, the more I think that sinister forces are at work to maneuver governments and industry to keep a strong lock down on the flow of information.
Democracies with hundreds of years of history of free speech and dissemination of information are under tremendous pressure to curb citizens right to share and transfer information. It is a totalitarian movement not stemming from Orwell's 1984 government, but the fascist working of corporation and government. The ironic twist is that the government is not leading the way, global corporations have found governments easy to bribe and control. Its those pesky consumers who shouldn't be sticking their noses into their business that they want to control.
They are starting with the premise: copyrighted works need to be controlled. What most people don't understand is that EVERY WRITTEN WORD is copyrighted. If you create a regime where copyright trumps rights and public will, you obliterate democracy and freedom which rely on a free flow of information.
It has long been known that if you control the flow of information you can control the people. That's what is happening, only this time it isn't soldiers in the streets, its $100 million law suits and lawyers. Its funny, threaten a man's life, and he'll fight. Threaten his future and he'll capitulate.
Yes, many times over. I haven't seen Crystal Skull yet, but can name "Quatermass and the Pit aka 2million years to earth," "Sphere" with Dustin Hoffman, lets not forget "The Abyss" to name a few.
However, it could make for a topical SciFi with some current events.
This is a prime example of why we need to watch, not just congress, the courts, and the president, but the trade officials that put to gether trade treaties.
In U.S. law, treaties become the law of the land as if passed by congress and signed by the president. Breaking treaties is harder that repealing bad law.
How this affects the U.S. depends on what treaties are in place with Singapore, maybe even WIPO.
Offtopic because the topic was about the hardware, not the mission - (there are a lot of us disappointed by recent events).
I'm not sure I agree, obviously, because I think, and wouldn't you agree, that the mission of the OLPC is inseparable from how we evaluate its success, failure, or functionality?
Also, before you say calling Negroponte an ass was name calling, I would submit that it would be hard to find people who would disagree with it as a general purpose title.
So even if the OLPC project hasn't (yet) succeeded in helping poor kids to connect to the rest of the world, and improve their education, it has done 2 things: a) realize part of that dream, and b) bring that goal closer.
A dream can be a dangerous thing. The dream of nuclear energy can all too easily be perverted to the quest for nuclear weapons.
The dream of the OLPC was powerful, but it has been perverted into a Microsoft market development system.
Slashdot Mirror
Hold on there, chief. Don't you mean copyright infringement?
While I loath the language used by the copyright mafiaa and its lawyers, using "theft" for "copyright infringement" is on par with the canonical terms.
the fact that it's not theft, it's stealing
From the dictionary:
Theft: the act of stealing.
"Free" software would be free for anyone to use however they wanted to, including creating a closed-source derivative. GPL is "free" for certain, limited values of 'free'.
Free as in freedom, not as in beer. The GPL creates a line of freedom from developer to end user. No one in between has the right to alter the contract or limit the freedoms.
The "freedom" you speak of is a "freedom" to limit other's freedom, which isn't really a freedom, its oppression.
This is obviously written from the perspective of "anti-free software."
"The new lesson is that the freedom belongs to the software, not to users." This is SO bogus and mis characterizes the whole point of the new GPL. The "freedom" is absolutely for the users, especially the end users. The restrictions quoted in the article have nothing to do with users, but everything to do with ISVs taking GPL software and screwing the users.
"Changes in the GPL impose other limits on the ability to leverage a proprietary position when open source is involved."
This is true, so, write it for yourselves then. Don't think you can capitalize on someone else's work and deny then the ability to capitalize on your modifications to their software, that isn't very fair.
I don't get what the issue is. If you want to develop closed source software, then so be it, however, don't take other's GPL code and try to close that off, that's theft. How hard is it for the reptilian lawyer brain to understand this very simple concept.
We even say what is needed to comply. But NOOO, they have to keep up with the FUD.
Last little bit:
"Edmund J. Walsh is a shareholder and a member of the electrical and computer technologies and the IP transactions groups at Wolf Greenfield."
Ahh, now I understand!
I worked at Denning Mobile Robotics, and we had a bunch of them. They had a printer port, modem, and RS232.
We used them as portable RS232 terminals!! They were cheaper than Wyse terminals and far more portable. They were awesome devices. I often wonder why simple devices can't be created to do a job efficiently and reliably. I guess, with no stable computing standards, they would become obsolete too quickly.
The EeePC was close, but now that it has gone Windows, that device is on the upgrade treadmill as well.
"Big bang theory is awful. "
Well, any show that can make funny jokes based on "The dopler effect, SchrÃdinger's cat, the original time machine, social ineptness of geeks, and so on is not so bad.
I laugh at a lot of the jokes, while my wife just looks and asks "what????"
Sci-Fi channel has really been inventive with programming. It takes balls to re-do Battlestar Galactica. Bring back "Dr. Who" to the U.S. audience. Eureka is kind of cool too.
With "Big Bang Theory" on NBC, can anyone doubt its the year of the geek?
Without more details, it is difficult to say exactly, but this may be the Blue-Ray killer.
*if* a DVD disk can play at a lower resolution on an old dvd player, but play at Blue-ray resolution with a new player. Then blue ray may die.
There are a LOT of old-style DVD players out there and regular DVDs still outsell, by far, blue ray. Now, if one product satisfies both the technology luddite and the early adopter, blue ray has some serious competition. People with old DVD players can buy new high res disks but not be left out in the media cold with their computers, laptops, or bedroom TVs.
It makes a lot of sense, and really, it is probably the only way to defeat blue ray.
The problem with Google's posting of an opinion, that many probably agree with, is that the use of ad-hominem is so prevalent and accepted that, these days, it is impossible to state something factual and verifiable, or reasonable and well thought out, without it being automatically colored by what people's perceptions of your motives might be.
People have just given up even attempting to think. They judge quickly based on sound bites and prejudices, they no longer contemplate the validity of an argument before forming an opinion.
I take exception to the notion that no one uses gcj, but I'll leave that for now.
You may leave it for now, but it simply is not used in production environments. It is an interesting idea, bit not prime time.
With regard to a Windows DLL or Linux shared library, the answer is that it depends.
Of course it does.
My biggest problem with Java are the over zealous supporters. Yes, java has some very nice qualities, but it is not for every job. Pointers have a real place in a lot of development. Pure native code as well.
so, because C/C++ can do things that java can't, that makes them automatically better?
I never once used the term better.
there is no need for other languages as anything can be done in C?
I never said that either.
Java is not "a language", it's a "platform", a "framework", or whatever you want to call it. Java includes a lot of things that C doesn't include in its standard libraries, and adding another library to a java app is as simple as dropping the jar in the classpath. No need to worry about library version incompatibilities.
That is at best an oversimplification. Yes, java has neat features, but it is not perfect either.
Java is an environment, not really a platform. There are many environments in which to develop applications. It should be noted, however, C/C++ are more than mere platforms, and that Java is written in C/C++.
Why the heck do people think this? You certainly can write an OS in other languages and people have.
Why the heck do people conflate a specific argument with a general case? The statement was: "You can't, in any practical sense, write an OS in java." Which is true. Then I said: "C and C++ are *the* standard for writing system level software." Which is true for general system design, but I'll admit it may not be true for small embedded systems.
their functionality? what functionality is it, that you can't duplicate elsewhere?
The direct and predictable translation from source code to object code is a big one. There are others, like creating directly callable entrypoints and even interrupt handlers.
The point isn't that it isn't "doable" elsewhere, it is just that it is not being done in other popular languages.
You are confusing an "observation" of "what isn't" for a statement of "what isn't possible." *Anything* is probably possible, but whether or not it is practical, efficient, or something that people are going to use is a different story.
It seems to me that you can compile Java to native code with gcj and integrate other languages like C++ easily with CNI.
Oh please, spare us. That's not how people use the java environment in production environments.
Exactly how does it fail to successfully interact with other languages again?
I have a Windows DLL or Linux shared library that has a standard C interface. How do you call it?
while (x-->0) { blah; }
Perfectly obvious.
malloc()s make memory management so easy and cross-platform. and clustering is for wussies, if you need more than a core2duo on Linux, is because you're unl33t or because you need to do some routines
C/C++ and Java have different application types. Sure, there is cross over, but generally speaking there are things you can do in C/C++ that you can't do in Java, but the converse is not also true.
now when you program in Java you forget all that crap, you just code. need a bigger app? J2EE it and run it on a cluster. add nodes a needed to keep performance. node dies? no problem, J2EE takes care of it.
Umm, excuse me? You are talking about a load balanced scaling, not classic "cluster" as in beowulf. J2EE does take care of a lot of the issues, sure, but it's all nodes have all data session sharing or being reliant on a session sensitive load balancer are, IMHO, sub optimal.
migrated from mysql to Oracle or DB2? no problem, just let Hibernate know about it.
Hibernate, lets see some hands... Who has found hibernate to be problem free?
tired of Windows Server and want to run opensolaris, linux or OS X Server? no problem, just drop your EAR/WAR on the new server and relax. it's working.
It is not hard to make server code, in almost any language, that is cross platform. It is the GUI part that's the hard part.
wanna add more coders to your project? point 'em to the javadoc and let they read through the verbose (and thus self-explaining) code.
This is blatantly oversimplified and you know it.
strong typing is there to keep you from doing stupid things. you can always tell what the program IS going to do in all situations, because you HAVE to specify all situations.
Yup, we NEVER see java exceptions do we?
but you're too cool for java. lemme know when banks switch their systems to LAMP and we'll talk.
Yup, banks! Those bastions of technical visionaries. What decade did they finally update from COBOL? How many COBOL systems are still running!!???
Another set of reasons why some languages survive and some don't may be the types of applications they can be used for.
The C and C++ tool set is *never* going away. You can't, in any practical sense, write an OS in java. C and C++ are *the* standard for writing system level software. Most all system software is written in one of them and they are tightly coupled. There is no other language currently or on the realistic horizon that can replace their functionality.
Java, on the other hand, is popular, but has plenty of practical competition, from C#, to perl, to even PHP. Hell, even visual basic has a VM environment.
As a system level guy, I have little use for Java, C#, perl, or the others except as needed for glue between system level code.
The most important aspect of any language is how open it is to incorporating external technologies.
PHP is, by all accounts, a horrible language, but because it can wrap just about anything easily, it ends up being used a lot.
I think what makes a language successful has more to do with how it works outside itself. Ironically, that's why I dislike Java, its focus is java java java. Other languages seem to better facilitate interfacing. (Yes I know about and have used JNI, but other languages are typically better, IMHO.)
But, on balance, I don't want my money funding political blogging and fund raising.
I think that was a fair outcome.
Wow, maybe we have some rational laws after all.
I know it is not obvious, but sites that are sensitive to bandwidth issues may find this a cost saving measure.
Google, of course, gets even more information about everyone.
win win, except for us privacy people. I guess we have to true "do no evil," huh?
tin foil hat
The more and more I see these things, the more I think that sinister forces are at work to maneuver governments and industry to keep a strong lock down on the flow of information.
Democracies with hundreds of years of history of free speech and dissemination of information are under tremendous pressure to curb citizens right to share and transfer information. It is a totalitarian movement not stemming from Orwell's 1984 government, but the fascist working of corporation and government. The ironic twist is that the government is not leading the way, global corporations have found governments easy to bribe and control. Its those pesky consumers who shouldn't be sticking their noses into their business that they want to control.
They are starting with the premise: copyrighted works need to be controlled. What most people don't understand is that EVERY WRITTEN WORD is copyrighted. If you create a regime where copyright trumps rights and public will, you obliterate democracy and freedom which rely on a free flow of information.
It has long been known that if you control the flow of information you can control the people. That's what is happening, only this time it isn't soldiers in the streets, its $100 million law suits and lawyers. Its funny, threaten a man's life, and he'll fight. Threaten his future and he'll capitulate.
Regardless, calling someone an ass is flamebait even when it's true.
:-)
Oh, that's just not fair. Surely "flaimebait" must follow the same legal restrictions for slander or libel, i.e. if its true, it isn't.
Umm,... that's been
Yes, many times over. I haven't seen Crystal Skull yet, but can name "Quatermass and the Pit aka 2million years to earth," "Sphere" with Dustin Hoffman, lets not forget "The Abyss" to name a few.
However, it could make for a topical SciFi with some current events.
The object is a space ship!
This is a prime example of why we need to watch, not just congress, the courts, and the president, but the trade officials that put to gether trade treaties.
In U.S. law, treaties become the law of the land as if passed by congress and signed by the president. Breaking treaties is harder that repealing bad law.
How this affects the U.S. depends on what treaties are in place with Singapore, maybe even WIPO.
Offtopic because the topic was about the hardware, not the mission - (there are a lot of us disappointed by recent events).
I'm not sure I agree, obviously, because I think, and wouldn't you agree, that the mission of the OLPC is inseparable from how we evaluate its success, failure, or functionality?
Also, before you say calling Negroponte an ass was name calling, I would submit that it would be hard to find people who would disagree with it as a general purpose title.
I find it funny that using the very words from the "vision" of the OLPC constitutes a troll.
So even if the OLPC project hasn't (yet) succeeded in helping poor kids to connect to the rest of the world, and improve their education, it has done 2 things: a) realize part of that dream, and b) bring that goal closer.
A dream can be a dangerous thing. The dream of nuclear energy can all too easily be perverted to the quest for nuclear weapons.
The dream of the OLPC was powerful, but it has been perverted into a Microsoft market development system.