However, Webbink believes a compromise can be crafted, with proprietary vendors on board, that allows a person purchasing a software license to reverse-engineer the software to write interfaces for the software. His example: A Linux programmer purchasing a popular word-processing program and using its source code to port it to Linux. With Red Hat's proposal, UCITA would allow such reverse engineering and override any prohibitions in the word-processor's license agreement.
I'm assuming that what's meant is that you can use the program's output to reverse engineer another program that will interface with it. This is damned important stuff -- things like WORD compatibility and samba, and a whole ton of other applications would not be able to exist without this technique of reverse engineering the output of a program in order to create an interface to it.
The work ethic you'll find in the Japanese culture is very strong and historically been one that had it's white collar workers on duty every day of the week. Then there was the move to having one day off to spend with the family, and the amazing realization that this actually boosted productivity, to the point where corporations on mass are encouraging workers to take that second day off from the office.
I'm skeptical of the figures about the Americans because of the many variables, including the need to rely on self-assessment for salaried workers. What the American figures do indicate is that they just might be reaching the point of work saturation, where no matter how much you increase your efforts and time spent at work, you're only going to be counterproductive.
The worst may lie ahead. Gartner Inc. predicted in August that as many as 60 percent of the then 480 ASPs operating could fail by the end of this year. By 2004, the number of viable ASPs will shrink further, with about 20 focusing on enterprise-class applications such as ERP and 100 more offering single-function applications, according to Gartner, in Stamford, Conn.
I can see that the predictions for this year are fairly straight forward, and in line with other "dot-com" businesses due to the general volatility in the tech market and what-not. However, the figure for 2004 is confusing, not to mention --- how does a company predict what's going to happen in 2004? In computer years that's like a decade! Now, are they saying that by 2004 there are only going to be 120 ASP's left, or does it mean that they're going to lose yet another 120 ASP's in 2004?
Still, I don't think that people should vilify a company nor cut it any slack just because they "seem cool".
What I see here, is another example of how a company actually took the time to read the software license and did what it legally was able to do. You can't expect ethics from a software license, just as you can't expect ethics from a business. They might be the product of a particular vision which may have some motivation in ethics, but not much more.
Expecting a company to adhere to it's moral obligation to give back to the community even though it purposely entered into an agreement with the community requiring no such thing... is back-asswards.
We should all have a good look at what a BSD license looks like, and what a GPL license looks like, and any other license we're going to get involved in. Then we should question whether that license actually serves what we believe or if it just served the interests of it's creators--if perhaps it's time to look at things a new way.
Anyone who gets off the net for long enough to read the book likely doesn't have the problems the book seeks to address. Make it an online book, on the other hand, and you'd be doing the world some real good!
So how does this show that bagging the rights to the game, preventing any other company from developing a game like it, somehow has the potential to be a good thing? A good thing (tm), perhaps only for the company that bags the rights, and even then, only in their eyes.
Pretend to merge with them and then bail out at the eleventh hour.
The two may not look as if they're competing right now, but with Turbolinux setting it's sights in new directions (unbeknownst to Linuxcare) you just gotta wonder.
....attached to my computer, that transmits signals over the internet to a community in Zaire where there is a computer with a string similarly attached to another Tin can, where a child speaks into the can in a language that we cannot understand, marking the first trans-atlantic tin can transmission!
To supplement caller-id, cell customers can now have unique ringtones for each caller that calls them, or, better yet, each person can determine what the ring will sound like on the recieving end.
This creates two intriguing but very different applications. First, there's the fun you can have with calling people when you know they're at certain places (eg: at a funeral) and playing a particularly unsuitable tune (eg: for he's a jolly good fellow) on their phone. Second, this would change who is responsible for the ring tone to the caller rather than the owner of the phone.
Because the internet (and any other digital media) doesn't operate on the same rules as the physical hardcover/paperback world, people need to just move on and realize that the copying of data, once it's been published to a community of millions of users, is going to be very hard to prevent. However, online value can be retained if the service model (commonly implemented in businesses that use open source software) of doing business makes it so that although the product itself is free, the service for the latest and most personalized stuff is subscription based or otherwise fee based.
As much as I would want to hope that we will be able to convince our legislators and big businesses of such things, I believe that it is a lost cause. The digital copyright revolution won't happen until the "net" generation siezes power.
It's come to my attention that people with a photographic memory may not create a copy of any copyrighted work in their head without proper permission.
Quick -- must forget-- the cops are coming.. aughh...
... is yet another "Zero knowledge system". We've got enough already -- let's stick with what's out there. Otherwise we'll end up with these new entities coming into that field with commercial interests of their own, not necessarily in tune with the original intent/philosophy.
I know it wasn't exactly _planned_ as such, but it is kinda funny. You've got a company that thinks it's got 5 million in the bank and based solely on that (and a couple hundred thousand of investments) quadruples in size, and is now expecting a revenue stream of $10 million. There's the boom and bust of the tech industry.
This shit should NOT BE HAPPENDING! And I think that the reporting on stories like this is like reporting on the moron who went out and kept buying lottery tickets because the tarot card reader told him he'd win the big one, selling his house, car, and cashing in savings bonds to finance the effort that fortunately was successful. It's like a fable with a lesson you don't want your kids to learn.
1) Door Stop
2) Weapon
3) Paperweight
4) Door knocker
5) Coaster
6) Build Franken-Machine with it
7) Mail it to your favorite congressman (C.O.D)
8) Melt it down to make the next leet case
9) Put it on railroad tracks
10)Use it as ballast when trolling for newbies.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm skeptical of the figures about the Americans because of the many variables, including the need to rely on self-assessment for salaried workers. What the American figures do indicate is that they just might be reaching the point of work saturation, where no matter how much you increase your efforts and time spent at work, you're only going to be counterproductive.
What I see here, is another example of how a company actually took the time to read the software license and did what it legally was able to do. You can't expect ethics from a software license, just as you can't expect ethics from a business. They might be the product of a particular vision which may have some motivation in ethics, but not much more.
Expecting a company to adhere to it's moral obligation to give back to the community even though it purposely entered into an agreement with the community requiring no such thing... is back-asswards.
We should all have a good look at what a BSD license looks like, and what a GPL license looks like, and any other license we're going to get involved in. Then we should question whether that license actually serves what we believe or if it just served the interests of it's creators--if perhaps it's time to look at things a new way.
Anyone who gets off the net for long enough to read the book likely doesn't have the problems the book seeks to address. Make it an online book, on the other hand, and you'd be doing the world some real good!
So how does this show that bagging the rights to the game, preventing any other company from developing a game like it, somehow has the potential to be a good thing? A good thing (tm), perhaps only for the company that bags the rights, and even then, only in their eyes.
The two may not look as if they're competing right now, but with Turbolinux setting it's sights in new directions (unbeknownst to Linuxcare) you just gotta wonder.
....attached to my computer, that transmits signals over the internet to a community in Zaire where there is a computer with a string similarly attached to another Tin can, where a child speaks into the can in a language that we cannot understand, marking the first trans-atlantic tin can transmission!
This creates two intriguing but very different applications. First, there's the fun you can have with calling people when you know they're at certain places (eg: at a funeral) and playing a particularly unsuitable tune (eg: for he's a jolly good fellow) on their phone. Second, this would change who is responsible for the ring tone to the caller rather than the owner of the phone.
You babble on about loser posts and loser mags, and then say that cheap pr0n has more staying power? baah!
dejavu
As much as I would want to hope that we will be able to convince our legislators and big businesses of such things, I believe that it is a lost cause. The digital copyright revolution won't happen until the "net" generation siezes power.
I suppose it's kinda like trying to sue someone for copyright infringement when all they did was use your RSS file to make a "slashbox".
No more new web pages; Just read what's already out there, and you can shut down your damned browser for good.
Quick -- must forget-- the cops are coming.. aughh...
... is yet another "Zero knowledge system". We've got enough already -- let's stick with what's out there. Otherwise we'll end up with these new entities coming into that field with commercial interests of their own, not necessarily in tune with the original intent/philosophy.
Does anyone else feel kinda woozy about this? Or is my gotch in a knot for not reason?
You know, the usual health monitors .... Fan 1 and two RPM indicators, CPU and case temperature, plus voltage indicators.
Now don't go sending any LADA's into space ya hear?
Enough already with the AYB
Apprach management/HR Demand all of the above Get fired
Damn... AI network intrusion detection/response systems, now Self-healing servers, Tommorow self coding programs!
Hey, you know, that insane type of business plan has worked for _some_ companies.
This shit should NOT BE HAPPENDING! And I think that the reporting on stories like this is like reporting on the moron who went out and kept buying lottery tickets because the tarot card reader told him he'd win the big one, selling his house, car, and cashing in savings bonds to finance the effort that fortunately was successful. It's like a fable with a lesson you don't want your kids to learn.
1) Door Stop 2) Weapon 3) Paperweight 4) Door knocker 5) Coaster 6) Build Franken-Machine with it 7) Mail it to your favorite congressman (C.O.D) 8) Melt it down to make the next leet case 9) Put it on railroad tracks 10)Use it as ballast when trolling for newbies.