It is a _very_ bad idea to ship a product with certain features and then afterwards attempt through subterfuge to take it away.
Even if your lawyers find a way to make it 'legal' the bad press it generates ALWAYS really hurts a product. Not to mention that the product Tivo is trying to push is something very new in concept. You're going to have a real hard time getting new customers after pissing off all your existing ones.
Or in caveman talk: If give.. cannot take back.. ugh... if pay for, mine! not yours! You want change? ask Ug first! No smack him on head while he sleep and do anyways!
.... and reinstall Windows 2000... I'm not sure I'd trust them to be able to implement anything at this point in time, much less some complicated copy-protection scheme.
Roxio has been working hard to prove to everyone they really suck. This probably is the coup-de-grace. Congrats to them for succeeding so aptly at it.
If I was a designer there, I'd be sending my resume around.
Whilst I thought I understood how the GPL works, judging from many of the threads here, apparently I don't.
Some possible cases:
Software loads a KDE lib to do something. Can this software ever be proprietary since KDE is GPLed?
Software links against glibc. Must it then only be GPL?
I was under the impression that a piece of software could use GPL libraries as long as said libraries were not shipped with the product itself: any enhancements made must have the code published under the GPL BUT any GUI or unrelated (to the GPLed code linked to in the library) component of the system can be proprietary. If this is correct, then this presents a special issue for proprietary products since they often link against other 3rd party libraries over which they have little control. Is it possible then for somebody who has accidentally linked against a GPL library to now be liable for making all their code public? I admit this is perhaps more of an issue for Windows programs as they can load libraries at anytime either directly or through COM.
If I wrapped a GPL component with a wrapping layer, publishing that wrapping layer under a "GPL compatible license" would this then satisfy the requirements? Or, as I understand from what this person is claiming, is there no way to publish software that uses GPL code (library format or not/ directly or indirectly) and make it proprietary.
I think it would help A LOT, for people wanting to develop proprietary software for Linux, if there was an authoritative faq somewhere on the does and don'ts, what is expected by the community, and how to publish. I'm interested in writing software for Linux even though all my experience is in Windows. I dont' really expect to ever publish anything that would be worthy enough to sell for money and don't mind sharing my code. But if I ever did come up with a realy nifty idea and wanted to cross platform it, such a faq would help me a lot.
I'm getting previous Windows only people to try out Linux because of Mandrake. The enhancements Mandrake has made that put their distribution well ahead of the others in terms of usability.
The control panel, for example, is a godsend to users who have no clue about where to begin to look. Mandrake shows that Linux can be an OS for the masses.
*grumbles about the stock market in general... then stops because its pointless*
Hold on Mandrake, you've got the right idea... stick it out and you'll do splendidly.
Infineon RAM has proved nicely robust for my AMD system and I'm quite pleased with it. I'd recommend their RAM to anyone right now.
512Megs of 133Mhz Infineon RAM.. at today's prices, you can get that for about 140$ in some places. Locally (here in Canada), this Infineon RAM is selling for 105$Cnd for a 256Meg stick.. so about 75$ US.. such a sweeeeeet deal..
malloc 30 bytes?... ah what the hell... gimme 4k, RAM is cheap and all my SUV(RAM guzzling) software is quite happy... I think I need to start a few more services.. I'm still not using enough RAM...
Here is my take on this. Fundamentally, you can prove this idea using a few examples:
Code expresses an idea in terms of machine understandable instructions. Many ideas today cannot be expressed accurately in ordinary language with the technical accuracy computer code provides. A good example would be simulations. How does one use the English language to describe a dynamic system whose components are continually changing? You might try to say, A changes to B, then B changes to A, then to C... and do so for infinity.. this would be an impossible task since you would need to stick around for the rest of time describing the system as it changes. Computer code on the other hand, can be written that not only describes the system, but also predicts how it will change.
The computer program effectively and accurately describes the system.
Another example would be expressing a scientific opinion on some matter. For example, if a scientist wishes to express why a particular outcome in some massive experiment is bad, that scientist must also prove why this is so. Often in modern society, the technical whys are glossed over by the media as they are too complicated, but the why of something is definately part of what the scientist wishes to expose-- wishes to say. So that scientist creates computer code to prove his point, to articulate to a machine the mechanism of his proof so that he can produce and reproduce the necessary results his argument needs-- should some government agency be allowed to cut short his research, his proof, on the grounds that his computer code is not speech?
Computer code is inherently part of the makeup of the new digital age-- it is both its fabric and its means of communication. The framers of the constitution could never have predicted the advent of the internet. I postulate however, that had they been here, they would have immeadiately recognized the importance of a medium that gives a voice to everyone in an age of billion dollar media companies controlling most of what is heard or seen on television. If I stand on a street corner with a large sign on which I have written large bold and colorful words describing my opinion on some matter-- nobody will argue that I am engaging in my right to freedom of expression and speech. If a policeman rips away my sign on the grounds that I can still yell what I have to say because the sign is merely a device that disseminates my idea-- nobody will argue that he is not infringing against my right to free speech.
In the digital age, computer code is also my sign. In chat programs I insert special codes to highlight important things to me. On the web, I use codes to add emphasis and expression to my speech. Underlying all of this though are fundamental computer codes that act as my mouth as I attempt to voice what I wish to say over electronic mediums. If a policeman puts a gag over your mouth on the grounds it is only a device and that your brain is what contains your speech surely nobody will argue he is not limiting my freedom of speech. Electronic communication is speech. And that speech, gentlemen, once it is electronic, is in computer code.
We are in the midst of a complicated revolution in communication. Surely everyone has seen the countless publicity from all manner of companies actively engaged in trying to secure a presence in the new markets this revolution has offered. This digital realm, where information is traded and communication is shared, is made up of computer code. My mouth is my biological device for communication and computer code is my electronic one. In eras of fundamental change it is normal for confusion to surround that change. But make no mistake, the intent of the framers of the constitution is clear: freedom of speech is paramount. The judiciary and our legislators need to tread very carefully as they rule-upon/create laws to govern this new digital realm-- one day it may be the way all humans speak. I pray that my freedom to speak to today is preserved for tomorrow.
Devices
One may not, on the grounds that current opinion holds that a device is not speech, hold that all devices are not speech. Neither can they maintain that in such a case as a device now is not speech, that it never will be.
While many devices rarely change their form or working (unlike speech).. computer code does. This is especially true in GNU/Linux where freedom is paramount. Computer code in Linux can be seen, reviewed/changed, and used by anyone with a computer. This is much the same as text in a book, except that the book is stored on paper in a library and is only accessible to those in the city it is in with a library card. In this case the Linux computer code is a community's collective expression of an opinion that computer programs are best when they are free. The act of making the computer code and giving it away itself is speech: we are expressing our opinion on how the new digital age should be.
Just some thoughts, I have many others.
until you have the check and its cleared in your account, you don't have an investor. Its a tough market out there and not everything is going to fly, as much as they might deserve to.
I would rather have only a few good ones than lots of trash. The themes.org site desperately needs to review the mishmash of incompatible KDE themes sitting there and delete all the old crap.
When one side has the power to control your behavior under the threat of corporeal punishment, you may find having that camera in your hand a moot point after they take your film away. T
here is no equality when the other side has a gun and the law on its side to use it. Privacy is your only protection against those who would seek to control everything you do.
Your boss can control what you do at work, but has no business meddling in the affairs of your home. Why? Because it's you're privacy.
Why people so complacently give up their rights because "there's nothing that can be done" totally escapes me.
I have absolutely no intention of switching to XP anytime soon at all. Not to mention this new "os enabling/disabling copy protection feature" now forced unto everyone who wants to use the os and yet another version of NTFS that breaks Partition Magic again... Man I can hardly wait for the next version of Redhat.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/17438.htm l
I'm happy with win2000-- why don't you fix the bugs in that first (aka sp2)... I don't want a new dumbed down (or what I fondly term: shoot yourself in the foot technology) version of Windows I want fixes for what I've already fucking paid for.
my hotmail account receives every few days and you try to not accidentally delete an important email strewn amongst the junk... thank God they don't have my regular email..
It's total bullshit when people say "all you have to do is delete".
Last I checked the enterprise Redhat distributions came with a nice price tag. Redhat doesn't expect to make money from you. They'll make it from the corporations out there with the $$$ to pay for real support.
The fact Microsoft is porting.NET to Linux is a clear signal to all out there that even Microsoft now admits the market share Linux has... and that is worth dollars to anyone in a position to sell services to it.
want you to have something:
"It's too expensive"... "It's too hard to do"... "oh, and by the way, not doing that conveniently saves my ass on a few issues"
Unfortunately, this time, these corporations should have no choice-- regardless of how much it fucking costs. Privacy is at the very center of everything that allows us to be individuals. If intellectual property is sacred then my most cherished intellectual property, which is my identity and privacy, better fucking be sacrosanct.
Maybe Scott has a vision of everyone running around like Borg drones with no rights to personal thoughts or privacy but I certainly don't.
Solution. If what you're doing is anything that requires transations, MySQL won't do the job.
Ultimately, I think you'll find that Oracle has pretty robust ODBC drivers and its a nice namebrand that your boss will recognize....
MSSQL Server does the job, but you'll be forever tied down to MS the second you start down that path.
You might point out to your boss that Microsoft is moving away from ODBC in favor of a new technology called OLE DB. What implications this may or may not have for your design I leave to you.... all the new Microsoft paradigms are based on OLE DB data sources (basically a COM based interface to data) you only have to see the big ADO push in VB land to see this is true....
did when they were your age. It sucks being on the bottom of the pile.. but, by the same token you're young-- and you get all the benefits of that... time will fly fast enough and soon you'll debate the wisdom of wanting all that responsability.
anyways.... what I wouldn't give to be able to recover from all nighters like I used to.
It is commong practice for businesses to rationalize their departments and "cut the fat" so to speak.
In my last job I was "re-orged" about 5 times...
Big companies do this all the time..
The only reason Apple chose it over Linux was that they wanted a closed source OS. Which is fine-- Apple stuff has and will always be more expensive than PCs.
*bites*
Give me AMD and Suse/Mandrake/Redhat/Debian anyday.
So spare me the BSD vs Linux crap.. I'm sick of it.
Apparently somebody needs to explain to that German court that people also use CD writers to perform backups and store software they've bought electronically over the net.
I don't own a single (CDR or CDRW) cd with songs on it.. all my cds are store bought and used to backup the imaging I do and store critical data.
I don't know who the recording industry bribbed/stupified in order to get that ruling.
For the record: I'm not intrested in your crappy albums anymore... I listen to mp3 streams or the radio these days. Or case in point: I have easily about 100 CDR cds lying around my home office and NOT one of them has a single F@$@$#@ music tract on it.
Pesticides, fertilizers .. oh my..
on
Golden Rice
·
· Score: 1
They don't seem to have a very good idea on how such a beast might survive in the rice patties of the third world.
A superior rice is fine.. so long as it doesn't require more pesticides or fertilizers that are expensive and potentially dangerous for 3rd world farmers to use.
I would be concerned that these rice plants would naturally attract the attention of all kinds of pests equally interested in their nutritional value.
Anyways... I get worried when I hear the words "rush" and "hurry" in the same sentence with "genetically modified".
Slashdot Mirror
*grumbles* I need a big dialog to pop up after 0200 and warn me there is a 50% chance I'm going to forget something and look silly if I post now.
/.
Trouble is, usually I just want to say something and if I wait, the moderation police marks me down as redundant....
aaah... the trials and tribulations of posting on
take them (the features that is) away.
There should be a way after 02:21 to do a grammar/spell check in the preview before submitting...
*sigh*
It is a _very_ bad idea to ship a product with certain features and then afterwards attempt through subterfuge to take it away.
Even if your lawyers find a way to make it 'legal' the bad press it generates ALWAYS really hurts a product. Not to mention that the product Tivo is trying to push is something very new in concept. You're going to have a real hard time getting new customers after pissing off all your existing ones.
Or in caveman talk: If give.. cannot take back.. ugh... if pay for, mine! not yours! You want change? ask Ug first! No smack him on head while he sleep and do anyways!
.... and reinstall Windows 2000... I'm not sure I'd trust them to be able to implement anything at this point in time, much less some complicated copy-protection scheme.
Roxio has been working hard to prove to everyone they really suck. This probably is the coup-de-grace. Congrats to them for succeeding so aptly at it.
If I was a designer there, I'd be sending my resume around.
Whilst I thought I understood how the GPL works, judging from many of the threads here, apparently I don't.
Some possible cases:
Software loads a KDE lib to do something. Can this software ever be proprietary since KDE is GPLed?
Software links against glibc. Must it then only be GPL?
I was under the impression that a piece of software could use GPL libraries as long as said libraries were not shipped with the product itself: any enhancements made must have the code published under the GPL BUT any GUI or unrelated (to the GPLed code linked to in the library) component of the system can be proprietary. If this is correct, then this presents a special issue for proprietary products since they often link against other 3rd party libraries over which they have little control. Is it possible then for somebody who has accidentally linked against a GPL library to now be liable for making all their code public? I admit this is perhaps more of an issue for Windows programs as they can load libraries at anytime either directly or through COM.
If I wrapped a GPL component with a wrapping layer, publishing that wrapping layer under a "GPL compatible license" would this then satisfy the requirements? Or, as I understand from what this person is claiming, is there no way to publish software that uses GPL code (library format or not/ directly or indirectly) and make it proprietary.
I think it would help A LOT, for people wanting to develop proprietary software for Linux, if there was an authoritative faq somewhere on the does and don'ts, what is expected by the community, and how to publish. I'm interested in writing software for Linux even though all my experience is in Windows. I dont' really expect to ever publish anything that would be worthy enough to sell for money and don't mind sharing my code. But if I ever did come up with a realy nifty idea and wanted to cross platform it, such a faq would help me a lot.
I'm getting previous Windows only people to try out Linux because of Mandrake. The enhancements Mandrake has made that put their distribution well ahead of the others in terms of usability.
... then stops because its pointless*
The control panel, for example, is a godsend to users who have no clue about where to begin to look. Mandrake shows that Linux can be an OS for the masses.
*grumbles about the stock market in general
Hold on Mandrake, you've got the right idea... stick it out and you'll do splendidly.
You forget that the price of extortion is not constant.. it increases.
Had a nice little code chunk.. but the lameness filter wouln't let me post it.. oh well..
All the companies who wimped out to Rambus must just be seething right now...
*can just see their law offices right now*
"what do you mean we couldn't win???!!!"
Infineon RAM has proved nicely robust for my AMD system and I'm quite pleased with it. I'd recommend their RAM to anyone right now.
512Megs of 133Mhz Infineon RAM.. at today's prices, you can get that for about 140$ in some places. Locally (here in Canada), this Infineon RAM is selling for 105$Cnd for a 256Meg stick.. so about 75$ US.. such a sweeeeeet deal..
malloc 30 bytes?... ah what the hell... gimme 4k, RAM is cheap and all my SUV(RAM guzzling) software is quite happy... I think I need to start a few more services.. I'm still not using enough RAM...
Here is my take on this. Fundamentally, you can prove this idea using a few examples:
Code expresses an idea in terms of machine understandable instructions.
Many ideas today cannot be expressed accurately in ordinary language with the technical accuracy computer code provides. A good example would be simulations. How does one use the English language to describe a dynamic system whose components are continually changing? You might try to say, A changes to B, then B changes to A, then to C... and do so for infinity.. this would be an impossible task since you would need to stick around for the rest of time describing the system as it changes. Computer code on the other hand, can be written that not only describes the system, but also predicts how it will change.
The computer program effectively and accurately describes the system. Another example would be expressing a scientific opinion on some matter. For example, if a scientist wishes to express why a particular outcome in some massive experiment is bad, that scientist must also prove why this is so. Often in modern society, the technical whys are glossed over by the media as they are too complicated, but the why of something is definately part of what the scientist wishes to expose-- wishes to say. So that scientist creates computer code to prove his point, to articulate to a machine the mechanism of his proof so that he can produce and reproduce the necessary results his argument needs-- should some government agency be allowed to cut short his research, his proof, on the grounds that his computer code is not speech?
Computer code is inherently part of the makeup of the new digital age-- it is both its fabric and its means of communication. The framers of the constitution could never have predicted the advent of the internet. I postulate however, that had they been here, they would have immeadiately recognized the importance of a medium that gives a voice to everyone in an age of billion dollar media companies controlling most of what is heard or seen on television. If I stand on a street corner with a large sign on which I have written large bold and colorful words describing my opinion on some matter-- nobody will argue that I am engaging in my right to freedom of expression and speech. If a policeman rips away my sign on the grounds that I can still yell what I have to say because the sign is merely a device that disseminates my idea-- nobody will argue that he is not infringing against my right to free speech. In the digital age, computer code is also my sign. In chat programs I insert special codes to highlight important things to me. On the web, I use codes to add emphasis and expression to my speech. Underlying all of this though are fundamental computer codes that act as my mouth as I attempt to voice what I wish to say over electronic mediums. If a policeman puts a gag over your mouth on the grounds it is only a device and that your brain is what contains your speech surely nobody will argue he is not limiting my freedom of speech. Electronic communication is speech. And that speech, gentlemen, once it is electronic, is in computer code.
We are in the midst of a complicated revolution in communication.
Surely everyone has seen the countless publicity from all manner of companies actively engaged in trying to secure a presence in the new markets this revolution has offered. This digital realm, where information is traded and communication is shared, is made up of computer code. My mouth is my biological device for communication and computer code is my electronic one. In eras of fundamental change it is normal for confusion to surround that change. But make no mistake, the intent of the framers of the constitution is clear: freedom of speech is paramount. The judiciary and our legislators need to tread very carefully as they rule-upon/create laws to govern this new digital realm-- one day it may be the way all humans speak. I pray that my freedom to speak to today is preserved for tomorrow.
Devices
One may not, on the grounds that current opinion holds that a device is not speech, hold that all devices are not speech. Neither can they maintain that in such a case as a device now is not speech, that it never will be.
While many devices rarely change their form or working (unlike speech).. computer code does. This is especially true in GNU/Linux where freedom is paramount. Computer code in Linux can be seen, reviewed/changed, and used by anyone with a computer. This is much the same as text in a book, except that the book is stored on paper in a library and is only accessible to those in the city it is in with a library card. In this case the Linux computer code is a community's collective expression of an opinion that computer programs are best when they are free. The act of making the computer code and giving it away itself is speech: we are expressing our opinion on how the new digital age should be.
Just some thoughts, I have many others.
until you have the check and its cleared in your account, you don't have an investor. Its a tough market out there and not everything is going to fly, as much as they might deserve to.
I would rather have only a few good ones than lots of trash. The themes.org site desperately needs to review the mishmash of incompatible KDE themes sitting there and delete all the old crap.
When one side has the power to control your behavior under the threat of corporeal punishment, you may find having that camera in your hand a moot point after they take your film away. T
here is no equality when the other side has a gun and the law on its side to use it. Privacy is your only protection against those who would seek to control everything you do.
Your boss can control what you do at work, but has no business meddling in the affairs of your home. Why? Because it's you're privacy.
Why people so complacently give up their rights because "there's nothing that can be done" totally escapes me.
Yes please...
I can see it now:
"Dad, what do you mean that you could only download at 300k/sec... wow, that must have been soooo slow"
Is anyone laughing?
I have absolutely no intention of switching to XP anytime soon at all. Not to mention this new "os enabling/disabling copy protection feature" now forced unto everyone who wants to use the os and yet another version of NTFS that breaks Partition Magic again ... Man I can hardly wait for the next version of Redhat.
m l
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/17438.ht
I'm happy with win2000-- why don't you fix the bugs in that first (aka sp2)... I don't want a new dumbed down (or what I fondly term: shoot yourself in the foot technology) version of Windows I want fixes for what I've already fucking paid for.
my hotmail account receives every few days and you try to not accidentally delete an important email strewn amongst the junk... thank God they don't have my regular email..
It's total bullshit when people say "all you have to do is delete".
Last I checked the enterprise Redhat distributions came with a nice price tag. Redhat doesn't expect to make money from you. They'll make it from the corporations out there with the $$$ to pay for real support.
.NET to Linux is a clear signal to all out there that even Microsoft now admits the market share Linux has... and that is worth dollars to anyone in a position to sell services to it.
The fact Microsoft is porting
want you to have something:
"It's too expensive"... "It's too hard to do"... "oh, and by the way, not doing that conveniently saves my ass on a few issues"
Unfortunately, this time, these corporations should have no choice-- regardless of how much it fucking costs. Privacy is at the very center of everything that allows us to be individuals. If intellectual property is sacred then my most cherished intellectual property, which is my identity and privacy, better fucking be sacrosanct.
Maybe Scott has a vision of everyone running around like Borg drones with no rights to personal thoughts or privacy but I certainly don't.
Solution. If what you're doing is anything that requires transations, MySQL won't do the job.
Ultimately, I think you'll find that Oracle has pretty robust ODBC drivers and its a nice namebrand that your boss will recognize....
MSSQL Server does the job, but you'll be forever tied down to MS the second you start down that path.
You might point out to your boss that Microsoft is moving away from ODBC in favor of a new technology called OLE DB. What implications this may or may not have for your design I leave to you.... all the new Microsoft paradigms are based on OLE DB data sources (basically a COM based interface to data) you only have to see the big ADO push in VB land to see this is true....
did when they were your age. It sucks being on the bottom of the pile.. but, by the same token you're young-- and you get all the benefits of that... time will fly fast enough and soon you'll debate the wisdom of wanting all that responsability.
anyways.... what I wouldn't give to be able to recover from all nighters like I used to.
It is commong practice for businesses to rationalize their departments and "cut the fat" so to speak.
In my last job I was "re-orged" about 5 times...
Big companies do this all the time..
The only reason Apple chose it over Linux was that they wanted a closed source OS. Which is fine-- Apple stuff has and will always be more expensive than PCs.
*bites*
Give me AMD and Suse/Mandrake/Redhat/Debian anyday.
So spare me the BSD vs Linux crap.. I'm sick of it.
Apparently somebody needs to explain to that German court that people also use CD writers to perform backups and store software they've bought electronically over the net.
... I listen to mp3 streams or the radio these days. Or case in point: I have easily about 100 CDR cds lying around my home office and NOT one of them has a single F@$@$#@ music tract on it.
I don't own a single (CDR or CDRW) cd with songs on it.. all my cds are store bought and used to backup the imaging I do and store critical data.
I don't know who the recording industry bribbed/stupified in order to get that ruling.
For the record: I'm not intrested in your crappy albums anymore
They don't seem to have a very good idea on how such a beast might survive in the rice patties of the third world.
A superior rice is fine.. so long as it doesn't require more pesticides or fertilizers that are expensive and potentially dangerous for 3rd world farmers to use.
I would be concerned that these rice plants would naturally attract the attention of all kinds of pests equally interested in their nutritional value.
Anyways... I get worried when I hear the words "rush" and "hurry" in the same sentence with "genetically modified".