How about someone write a few paragraphs listing the provisions of the GPL. People could read it, and then they would know what they are permitted to do with software received under such a license, and what responsibilities they have if they choose to redistribute such software.
Then we could create some kind of online community where people discuss these types of things every time someone does something questionable.
Yeah. Seems to me the Game Boy Color was a stopgap to prevent anyone else from taking too much of the market while development on the Game Boy Advance was ongoing. It did just fine, since its only competitor was the N-Gage and the Sega Nomad.
If you think there's the kind of slack in the system that 50% of students in some inner city schools would have some place to go, or that voucher money would allow all kinds of new for-profit schools to be founded, you are deluded.
Tivo does distribute the software. The issue is that they include in their device some chip that checks if the Tivo software has been modified; if it has been modified, the device won't work. This prevents the user from using and modifying the software, rights that he/she should have under the GPL. Version 3 of the GPL prevents this.
In OS X, an administrator is prompted for a password when a program requests escalation of privileges. A normal user is prompted for an administrator username and password.
It doesn't sound like a content-related issue to me, although I won't deny that that likely figured in.
It's a service issue for the other 98% of customers that see degraded service when 2% are constantly exchanging packets. I definitely disagree with the method, but it's obviously a problem. In the UK at least providers are honest about what they're doing, and they only do it during peak (evening) hours.
ATI and nVidia are in the software business because software is required to make their hardware work: the hardware only does what the software allows. Since they don't charge money for their Windows drivers, I find it hard to believe that money is any obstacle to making their video drivers free software.
Also, for many applications (3D desktop effects, most games) IBM's shitty display adapters work pretty well, and I'm perfectly happy to use them because they are fully supported on Linux and some other free platforms.
The LGPL allows some measure of dynamic linking. In the case of a new technology implemented in a LGPL-licensed library, anyone could use it, and any improvements to the library code itself would be copylefted, so that if someone tried to distribute an improved version of the library, they would have to release the code. If it's implemented in a BSD-licensed library, anybody can take your work and run with it, and their improvements to the technology itself could be hidden.
Also, eMusic uses its own download manager program. There are some free clients available for different platforms, and apparently some people get it to work via a shell script. But you don't get a page full of links to mp3 files.
2. Officially released software has bugs in it, unless you just run the base NetBSD system with only port 22 open, which is reasonably useless.
3. What is the difference between publicizing a bug and telling the developers what it is, and publicizing a bug and not telling the developers anything? There's a higher likelihood of the bug getting fixed if the devs are notified, and you still get traffic to your stupid blog. If you give a shit about software security and not just ad revenue, maybe you ought to report the bug.
Slashdot Mirror
How about someone write a few paragraphs listing the provisions of the GPL. People could read it, and then they would know what they are permitted to do with software received under such a license, and what responsibilities they have if they choose to redistribute such software.
Then we could create some kind of online community where people discuss these types of things every time someone does something questionable.
I doubt his NAS runs Vista.
Yeah. Seems to me the Game Boy Color was a stopgap to prevent anyone else from taking too much of the market while development on the Game Boy Advance was ongoing. It did just fine, since its only competitor was the N-Gage and the Sega Nomad.
But if a RHEL subscriber acquires the configuration information, there's no way to stop him or her from giving that information to CentOS.
If you think there's the kind of slack in the system that 50% of students in some inner city schools would have some place to go, or that voucher money would allow all kinds of new for-profit schools to be founded, you are deluded.
Uh, I don't think the prefix M means 1 e6.
I can't convert from 1Gb to a kilometre Yeah, and I can't convert from a hogshead to a fathom. Shut the fuck up.
Tivo does distribute the software. The issue is that they include in their device some chip that checks if the Tivo software has been modified; if it has been modified, the device won't work. This prevents the user from using and modifying the software, rights that he/she should have under the GPL. Version 3 of the GPL prevents this.
In OS X, an administrator is prompted for a password when a program requests escalation of privileges. A normal user is prompted for an administrator username and password.
It doesn't sound like a content-related issue to me, although I won't deny that that likely figured in.
It's a service issue for the other 98% of customers that see degraded service when 2% are constantly exchanging packets. I definitely disagree with the method, but it's obviously a problem. In the UK at least providers are honest about what they're doing, and they only do it during peak (evening) hours.
What the fuck are you talking about? Identity theft?
Maybe they'll move toward an ad-supported revenue model. Did you know Harry Potter wears Reeboks?
ATI and nVidia are in the software business because software is required to make their hardware work: the hardware only does what the software allows. Since they don't charge money for their Windows drivers, I find it hard to believe that money is any obstacle to making their video drivers free software.
Also, for many applications (3D desktop effects, most games) IBM's shitty display adapters work pretty well, and I'm perfectly happy to use them because they are fully supported on Linux and some other free platforms.
AC non sequitur of the day!
The LGPL allows some measure of dynamic linking. In the case of a new technology implemented in a LGPL-licensed library, anyone could use it, and any improvements to the library code itself would be copylefted, so that if someone tried to distribute an improved version of the library, they would have to release the code. If it's implemented in a BSD-licensed library, anybody can take your work and run with it, and their improvements to the technology itself could be hidden.
u cant spel
If she's using songs you bought, you're a music pirate. Listen up for the RIAA sirens..
Also, eMusic uses its own download manager program. There are some free clients available for different platforms, and apparently some people get it to work via a shell script. But you don't get a page full of links to mp3 files.
How many non-techies run an OS which has no version of iTunes?
I guess this guy missed every single news article and blog post about the iPod batteries.
I don't recall seeing that license when I ripped my CD.
My department's secretary uses one on XP, I think. It's some kind of joystick thing.
You kick with your right hand? That's fucked.
1. This is beta software. It has bugs in it.
2. Officially released software has bugs in it, unless you just run the base NetBSD system with only port 22 open, which is reasonably useless.
3. What is the difference between publicizing a bug and telling the developers what it is, and publicizing a bug and not telling the developers anything? There's a higher likelihood of the bug getting fixed if the devs are notified, and you still get traffic to your stupid blog. If you give a shit about software security and not just ad revenue, maybe you ought to report the bug.
4. THIS IS A BETA TEST VERSION OF A WEB BROWSER.
Windows Services for Unix makes NT POSIX-compliant.
r vices_for_UNIX
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows_Se