The GPL3 is causing the same sort of "all or none" lock-in via legal instead of technical means. It is becoming very difficult to mix GPL3 software with commercial software.
Not really, it isn't: I've got Unreal Tournament 2004 installed on the very same PC I use to develop software with GCC, no problems installing either whatsoever.
The problems as usual only begin when greedy corporations want to get free code without contributing back, but that's a situation 99.99% of end-users will never find themselves in because most people can't code, most people that can code aren't interested in mixing up their code with pre-existing software, and most people that are interested have no problem contributing back to the project they benefitted from.
Really, as far as ordinary people are concerned, the only difference between the GPLv3 and the BSD license is which set of funny letters they need to type them.
SAMBA is going to be replaced with something that works that has fewer restrictions on it. Unless they revert back to GPL(2).
Or Apple can't find any replacement that works, and they realize spending thousands of dollars developing a replacement in-house just to continue fighting their own petty war against Openness is idiotic.
No, both of those deal exclusively with propietary programs, doesn't say anything about commercial or non-commercial distribution. Perhaps English isn't your first language and got those terms mixed up? you may want to try the FSF Europe website instead, as it's available on languages other than English.
Unfortunately, Apple is not alone here. Nearly all big companies are in the same position and they will follow suit. While I understand RMS aims and ideas here, that is really not the way. GPL should not be a replacement for court, legislation and enforcement.
True, but people have been trying to repel software patents in the US for well over a decade, without a single measure of success.
The GPLv3 solution isn't ideal, but it's still better than just gritting your teeth and taking it from the patent holders.
So is society's restrictions against murder then, according to your definition.
Thing is, we have deemed legalized murder to result in less actual freedoms for people than they'd have with it illegal, so we've declared that a society can promote freedom and liberty while keeping murder illegal without it being a contradiction.
Same goes for allowing redistributors to put their own restrictions in place.
This is why I support true open source licenses that allow both free and proprietary use. They are the real free licenses, not GPL, and unless we deal with that hypocricy Microsoft will always win.
So which licenses are those? even the 3-clause BSD prevents me from claiming ownership of the code and suing other users for copyright infringement, so it's not really free either.
Just replace the word "information" with "porn" in all arguments and you get rid of the false moral calls that "free information serves a higher purpose" which is just an excuse for not paying for the benefit you get from the information.
Yeah. And if we replace the word "Liberty" with "Porn" in the US declaration of independance, you'd see that in reality that Thomas Jefferson et al were just a bunch of dirty old men looking to see some titties.
There's a reason why in Logic before you replace one term with another you must first prove that both terms are equivalent to one another.
Nice rationalization there, but no. Your argument against pedophilia is pretty much the same I'd make, but the "problem" being that it only works for actions that are directly harmful to children: jacking off to a drawing of Lisa Simpson is not, yet that's still considered "degenerate" by society and illegal in many places.
And then there's your argument against incest which fails on two levels: first, as many otherwise "normal" couples show, just because you're together and having sex doesn't mean you'll be having children, and second, the argument of society having to provide medical care can be used just as well for every possible genetic anomaly, and I'm quite sure you know what kind of associations that ideology would have.
there are no two sides. unless by that you mean supporting someone's identity and denying them their identity
You mean, like our society does to pedophiles and incestuous couples?
Ohh, that's right, *those* are an abomination against nature. Fuck as many guys as you'd ever want, but if you dare fall in love with your sister (even if you didn't know she *was* your sister) you deserve to rot in jail for the rest of your life you sick, degenerate bastard.
Face it, you can replace "homosexuality" for "pedophilia" in the GP's post and you'd get the exact same argument society uses to persecute pedophiles, to unanimous applause from the 'liberal' crowd.
I fully support Apple's right to ban the app. Since I don't approve of their ban (both now and in the past), I don't buy Apple products.
See how that works????
No, I don't. People that have bought Apple products before are still getting screwed, and me covering my ears and singing doesn't stop that from happening.
Your selfish desire for more freedom is at the cost of taking it away from someone else.
As a developer I'm sure you enjoy it, everyone has some obscure niches, but what about the users? Why do WE have to suffer? To the users, flash is dead.
What in the almighty heavens are you smoking? Flash has a higher penetration rate than freaking Windows, and outside of a few geeks here at Slashdot and the odd Apple cultist or two, people are pretty damn happy with it.
Now, being one of the aforementioned geeks I don't hold much love for Flash myself, but I also don't pretend my opinion is anywhere near universal. Flash is very much alive, and we won't be getting rid of it any time soon regardless of what Your Holiness Stevie may say about it.
But, for getting into a more comfortable chair, or sitting in the back-yard or the hammock at my parents place, or at the hotel bar or in the airport... I actually find the form factor to be usable in a lot of circumstances where I wouldn't want a laptop. For me a laptop is mostly something I put on a desk and use it like a desktop.
I can sit in a comfortable chair in the hotel lobby, cross my legs or slouch in my chair and still check my email in several different accounts, check the news, and maybe play sudoku or Pocket Frogs or something. It's used more for consuming content than doing anything like my professional work. But it's become something I get quite a lot of use out of, and on business trips I use it far more often than my laptop (which I still drag around with me).
All of which I can do perfectly well on my old Palm PDA and now my smartphone, both of which are far smaller and lighter than any tablet I've ever seen. Hence the GP's point about them being oversized PDAs which, even though you quoted it directly, you never really addressed in your reply.
Then Amazon can't be infringing as their App Store clearly sells applications rather than.app files, and no customer would confuse the two of them. Right?
Call me a fanboi if you'd like, but I don't think it's unreasonable to have a powerful Unix machine that most of my favorite Linux software runs without modification on - and then not have to fuck with it to keep it working.
Really? the whole "not [having] to fuck with it to keep it working" thing doesn't seem to have worked so well for the submitter.
Because the Brits are still pissed that they had to rely on luck, the English Channel and the combined armies of four empires to stop Napoleon from conquering the entirety of Europe, and the US is still very much shaped by its motherland whether they like it or not.
And of course, there's also an element of "America Saves The Day!" WW2-related thoughts since making France look weaker makes the US' subsequent "coming to the rescue" look more heroic by comparison.
Just because one option results in war and meaningless bloodshed doesn't mean the other won't; not all situations have an alternative that'd result in peace, just look at the rest of the Middle East for examples.
Like it or not they're not the world police, the UN is, and when the US acts on its own thinking it's their responsability to make the world a friendlier place to their interests the world reacts much as they would with a rogue cop killing alleged criminals on his spare time.
Somalia was a mistake but Iraq is an attrocity, the US' current reputation is well deserved.
Not really. The metric isn't "were they right or not?" but rather "is there a strong possibility of leaving the country a better place if we intervene or not?". In China, it's just that any intervention would've likely resulted in a much worse enviroment for all involved, but here the revolution actually has a chance of succeeding if provided with proper support.
What's the name of the guy getting bashed here? oh, that's right, it's a "group". Much like the group of people that believe in the existence of said imaginary being, right? right.
Yes, both situations are exactly alike, stop looking for excuses to bash one and protect the other just because you have an axe to grind.
As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks. Atleast I know I can somehow just suddenly decide and stop being interested in other girls, no matter how hard I'd try. It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change.
True, but given the right treatment you could always be convinced that it's wrong to act on those impulses, and while you may continue being attracted towards females, you'll cease to *act* like an heterosexual and as such look like a proper member of our society.
It's what we do with pedophilia, necrophilia and all the other "evil" paraphilias in fact.
They don't blame Apple for optimizing its standalone browser, they blame Apple for NOT optimizing their embedded one, as well as not saying anything about it until now.
So the conclusion from the test is different, but still damning: if you're writing mobile apps designed around an embedded browser, your users will have a much smoother experience on an Android device over an iPhone.
Slashdot Mirror
The GPL3 is causing the same sort of "all or none" lock-in via legal instead of technical means. It is becoming very difficult to mix GPL3 software with commercial software.
Not really, it isn't: I've got Unreal Tournament 2004 installed on the very same PC I use to develop software with GCC, no problems installing either whatsoever.
The problems as usual only begin when greedy corporations want to get free code without contributing back, but that's a situation 99.99% of end-users will never find themselves in because most people can't code, most people that can code aren't interested in mixing up their code with pre-existing software, and most people that are interested have no problem contributing back to the project they benefitted from.
Really, as far as ordinary people are concerned, the only difference between the GPLv3 and the BSD license is which set of funny letters they need to type them.
SAMBA is going to be replaced with something that works that has fewer restrictions on it. Unless they revert back to GPL(2).
Or Apple can't find any replacement that works, and they realize spending thousands of dollars developing a replacement in-house just to continue fighting their own petty war against Openness is idiotic.
No, both of those deal exclusively with propietary programs, doesn't say anything about commercial or non-commercial distribution. Perhaps English isn't your first language and got those terms mixed up? you may want to try the FSF Europe website instead, as it's available on languages other than English.
Unfortunately, Apple is not alone here. Nearly all big companies are in the same position and they will follow suit. While I understand RMS aims and ideas here, that is really not the way. GPL should not be a replacement for court, legislation and enforcement.
True, but people have been trying to repel software patents in the US for well over a decade, without a single measure of success.
The GPLv3 solution isn't ideal, but it's still better than just gritting your teeth and taking it from the patent holders.
So is society's restrictions against murder then, according to your definition.
Thing is, we have deemed legalized murder to result in less actual freedoms for people than they'd have with it illegal, so we've declared that a society can promote freedom and liberty while keeping murder illegal without it being a contradiction.
Same goes for allowing redistributors to put their own restrictions in place.
This is why I support true open source licenses that allow both free and proprietary use. They are the real free licenses, not GPL, and unless we deal with that hypocricy Microsoft will always win.
So which licenses are those? even the 3-clause BSD prevents me from claiming ownership of the code and suing other users for copyright infringement, so it's not really free either.
Just replace the word "information" with "porn" in all arguments and you get rid of the false moral calls that "free information serves a higher purpose" which is just an excuse for not paying for the benefit you get from the information.
Yeah. And if we replace the word "Liberty" with "Porn" in the US declaration of independance, you'd see that in reality that Thomas Jefferson et al were just a bunch of dirty old men looking to see some titties.
There's a reason why in Logic before you replace one term with another you must first prove that both terms are equivalent to one another.
Nice rationalization there, but no. Your argument against pedophilia is pretty much the same I'd make, but the "problem" being that it only works for actions that are directly harmful to children: jacking off to a drawing of Lisa Simpson is not, yet that's still considered "degenerate" by society and illegal in many places.
And then there's your argument against incest which fails on two levels: first, as many otherwise "normal" couples show, just because you're together and having sex doesn't mean you'll be having children, and second, the argument of society having to provide medical care can be used just as well for every possible genetic anomaly, and I'm quite sure you know what kind of associations that ideology would have.
there are no two sides. unless by that you mean supporting someone's identity and denying them their identity
You mean, like our society does to pedophiles and incestuous couples?
Ohh, that's right, *those* are an abomination against nature. Fuck as many guys as you'd ever want, but if you dare fall in love with your sister (even if you didn't know she *was* your sister) you deserve to rot in jail for the rest of your life you sick, degenerate bastard.
Face it, you can replace "homosexuality" for "pedophilia" in the GP's post and you'd get the exact same argument society uses to persecute pedophiles, to unanimous applause from the 'liberal' crowd.
I fully support Apple's right to ban the app. Since I don't approve of their ban (both now and in the past), I don't buy Apple products.
See how that works????
No, I don't. People that have bought Apple products before are still getting screwed, and me covering my ears and singing doesn't stop that from happening.
Your selfish desire for more freedom is at the cost of taking it away from someone else.
And that's exactly how things work in society.
As a developer I'm sure you enjoy it, everyone has some obscure niches, but what about the users? Why do WE have to suffer? To the users, flash is dead.
What in the almighty heavens are you smoking? Flash has a higher penetration rate than freaking Windows, and outside of a few geeks here at Slashdot and the odd Apple cultist or two, people are pretty damn happy with it.
Now, being one of the aforementioned geeks I don't hold much love for Flash myself, but I also don't pretend my opinion is anywhere near universal. Flash is very much alive, and we won't be getting rid of it any time soon regardless of what Your Holiness Stevie may say about it.
But, for getting into a more comfortable chair, or sitting in the back-yard or the hammock at my parents place, or at the hotel bar or in the airport ... I actually find the form factor to be usable in a lot of circumstances where I wouldn't want a laptop. For me a laptop is mostly something I put on a desk and use it like a desktop.
I can sit in a comfortable chair in the hotel lobby, cross my legs or slouch in my chair and still check my email in several different accounts, check the news, and maybe play sudoku or Pocket Frogs or something. It's used more for consuming content than doing anything like my professional work. But it's become something I get quite a lot of use out of, and on business trips I use it far more often than my laptop (which I still drag around with me).
All of which I can do perfectly well on my old Palm PDA and now my smartphone, both of which are far smaller and lighter than any tablet I've ever seen. Hence the GP's point about them being oversized PDAs which, even though you quoted it directly, you never really addressed in your reply.
Then Amazon can't be infringing as their App Store clearly sells applications rather than .app files, and no customer would confuse the two of them. Right?
So does the speaker mean to say that the language barely meets some minimum requirement of performance?
Yes, as the GP explained.
And if so where is the standard of that performance documented?
It's not 'documented' anywhere, as it depends on the individual expectations of each user.
It is, incomplete and therefore meaningless.
The eternal bane of informal languages.
So in this case "performant" is pure "word fail" by a want-to-be intellectual.
Not really, at least not moreso than any other word in the English language.
Call me a fanboi if you'd like, but I don't think it's unreasonable to have a powerful Unix machine that most of my favorite Linux software runs without modification on - and then not have to fuck with it to keep it working.
Really? the whole "not [having] to fuck with it to keep it working" thing doesn't seem to have worked so well for the submitter.
Because the Brits are still pissed that they had to rely on luck, the English Channel and the combined armies of four empires to stop Napoleon from conquering the entirety of Europe, and the US is still very much shaped by its motherland whether they like it or not.
And of course, there's also an element of "America Saves The Day!" WW2-related thoughts since making France look weaker makes the US' subsequent "coming to the rescue" look more heroic by comparison.
Just because one option results in war and meaningless bloodshed doesn't mean the other won't; not all situations have an alternative that'd result in peace, just look at the rest of the Middle East for examples.
Like it or not they're not the world police, the UN is, and when the US acts on its own thinking it's their responsability to make the world a friendlier place to their interests the world reacts much as they would with a rogue cop killing alleged criminals on his spare time.
Somalia was a mistake but Iraq is an attrocity, the US' current reputation is well deserved.
Not really. The metric isn't "were they right or not?" but rather "is there a strong possibility of leaving the country a better place if we intervene or not?". In China, it's just that any intervention would've likely resulted in a much worse enviroment for all involved, but here the revolution actually has a chance of succeeding if provided with proper support.
What's the name of the guy getting bashed here? oh, that's right, it's a "group". Much like the group of people that believe in the existence of said imaginary being, right? right.
Yes, both situations are exactly alike, stop looking for excuses to bash one and protect the other just because you have an axe to grind.
True, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't defend them, regardless of where Apple may fall on the issue.
As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks. Atleast I know I can somehow just suddenly decide and stop being interested in other girls, no matter how hard I'd try. It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change.
True, but given the right treatment you could always be convinced that it's wrong to act on those impulses, and while you may continue being attracted towards females, you'll cease to *act* like an heterosexual and as such look like a proper member of our society.
It's what we do with pedophilia, necrophilia and all the other "evil" paraphilias in fact.
I'd say that an iPhone4 user would *still* be waiting for that Flash video to load ;)
They don't blame Apple for optimizing its standalone browser, they blame Apple for NOT optimizing their embedded one, as well as not saying anything about it until now.
So the conclusion from the test is different, but still damning: if you're writing mobile apps designed around an embedded browser, your users will have a much smoother experience on an Android device over an iPhone.
It'd still be bad science, though.
Most likely however is that it was just hyperbole and not an actual experimental result, however flawed it may have been.