You are of course, quite correct. As I mentioned later one could easily provide printed manuals, supports, etc. to create a commercial product from a GPL'd one. The same of course applies to datafiles and such. Which, as I said in the original post, only adds to Bill Gates hypocrisy, making him not equal to what he is complaining about, but worse.
You're missing the point. No, I cannot expand on a GPL'd product and make money off of it. That is why Bill Gates is saying he dislikes the GPL. But if I cannot make money by expanding a product under MS's license then Bill Gates is guilty of the same thing he is complaining about, which, by definition, is hypocrisy.
And just as a side note, if I wanted to Shrink-wrap a GPL'd office suite with a printed manual and tech support, I could charge money for it, whereas I most certainly could not do the same thing with MS Office. So, actually Billy-Boy's argument as even less credibility.
While that may be true the MFC isn't an APPLICATION, the FSF equivalent to such a thing would be released under the LGPL and could be used in a commercial product with no problems at all other than the requirement of dynamic linking. GPL is used primarily for applications, such as MS Office. So until I can take MS Office and expand on it however I want, and charge money for it without paying Bill Gates one red dime of royalties or licensing, then I remain unconvinced that this isn't one of the most hypocritical statements I've ever heard.
Copyright is copyright, anyone telling you what you can and can't do is not "freedom". Anyone violating a copyright is breaking the law, regardless of their motives. For example, if someone keys my car and I shoot him, it's still murder, and I still go to jail, regardless of whether or not I think he deserved to die.
This is going to be marked as flamebait, but what is the difference between a company violating the GPL's copyright and Napster users violatin an artist's copyright. Both are digitally reproducable works, yet you defend one and condemn the other. It seems to me the average Slashdot reader wants to have his cake and eat it too.
They already have a patch to wine that I tried quite some time ago. The American McGee Alice demo works just as well under Linux as Windows. (Unfortunately on both systems it crashes.)
I haven't tried any other games, but they already have a bit of work done, so I wouldn't call it vaporware.
Well, If I had more choice I would prefer loadable kernel modules over anti-aliased fonts anyday. It takes a primitive OS to still require one to reboot everytime a new driver is installed.
And oh yes, Win95 was quite impressive, many "new" features, long file names (oops, UNIX already had that), true multi-tasking, (oops, no a first either!).
Sigh, Oh well, I am done responding to the troll now.
Yes!
I thought of the same thing when I saw that message. It was quite a fun game to play actually (assuming you had two people of course). We got it at a yardsale a long time ago. It's in a rather bad shape now though.
Hmm, it seems they are saying that they have a complaint against being able to use other people work for profit, right?
I'm glad that gave this little clarification. I can only assume then, that they would have no problem with me writing shell to replace explorer.exe and copying a WinME CD with the replacement, and selling for my own $80 correct?
Feel free to point me to any false logic with that, until then I will be working on it, any feature requests?:)
Theres one site floating around out there that won't let me view it from my Linux box, it says I need Win32. It doesn't say anything about plugins, so I'm not quite sure why they think I need Win32 over UNIX or Mac, but needless to say I've never been interested enough to reboot into Windows as find out, despite the fact that I ran across that site alot when I was researching whatever it was I was researching at the time.
So I tend to agree with you, it would have taken less time to reboot my computer than to download a 12 meg program on my 56k modem, but I still didn't do it.
Besides, alot of people in non-US countries still pay for access by the minute. Maybe if the website designers want to start re-imbursing these people for the lost money, I'll give them more credibility. Then again, maybe not.
This really doens't make much since to me, as a web designer. My page works fine in Lynx, Netscape, and IE. (A little less so in IE than Netscape because IE wouldn't let me have transparent table backgrounds) I haven't checked it in Mozilla yet (Or NS6 for that matter) yet but it works fine in Konquerer. The thing is, with IE and Netscape it has the fancy animated DHTML and such. There is absolutely no need for a good designer to REQUIRE those things though.
One of the things I've always prided my work on is trying to make it work with ALL browsers. Not just new browsers, or graphical browsers. Technologies such as CSS are great for browsers that support it, but it's still a relatively simple task to write additional code for browsers that don't. Conditional SSI makes this job very easy, as well as updating of the page. SSI of course, being server side is completely browser independant as well.
I just see no need to do this. My site needs a redesign because the menus have grown to large and Netscape for Win is kinda slow with the transparency, but the new design will most definetely still take full use of new browsers, without locking the old browsers out. There is not now, nor will there EVER be an excuse to do that. Not as far as I am concerned.
Well, maybe that attitude by the record companies isn't right, but the artists did sign a contract, whether you like it or not that makes the record companies owners of the IP. I couldn't for example sell my application to MS for distribution, and then release the source code for free.
Also there are other artists (like Metallica) that don't want to give their stuff for free. But people don't repsect that, they just say screw Metallica's rights I'm going to download it anyhow.
Linux or Open Source on a whole isn't doing that. There is DVD and that's just about it. On a whole Open Source is about me giving you my code and you taking it. Napster is the equivalent of WareZ, whereby I would be giving you someone else's code, whether they wanted you to have it or not.
Those are two totally different things, napster is used primarily to share copyrighted material without the author's permission. Linux is the exact opposite, it's sharing copyrighted material WITH the authors permission.
I would be happier if they would just stop the deeption in ads (that very few people fall for anyhow) such as given a subject like "Re:How do I make money" to make you think they are responding to you, or "FWD:Check this out" to make it look like a friend sent it, or the latest "Delivery Failure", to make it look like an email you sent didn't get through! That is intentional deception and should at least be outlawed.
Oh yeah, and anyone who gets a fill-in-the-blanks spam letter to send out and gives their name as "fsdfk" should be shot in the head just on principle.
Slashdot makes you wait 1 minute before sending a second post. I wasn't sure a post got through because my ISP went flaky for a second and quit loading so I hit the back button (no the page hadn't loaded, but you always have to hit the back button on Netscape 6 if you click on a link, then hit the stop button) and clicked send again, and it told me that it had been less than a minute and to wait.) Of course I knew then that the post made it and didn't have to wait and retry.
True Edison did slander Tesla, but Tesla's college Electrical Engineering professor told him that an AC motor was an impossiblity.
Secondly there were scientists who didn't think the world was round, quite alot of them the fact that there were those you believed otherwise serves to prove my point, not yours.
Thirdly the same applies. You've named three scientists who would have believed in flight, contrast that to the number who didn't.
Fourthly, is that supposed to be sarcasm? I certainly hope not, Einstein theory of relativity flew in the face of not only then then accepted theory of aether, but indeed in the face of newtonian physics themsevles. Einstein hardly thought "in the box".
The skeptical inquirer and it's followers always amuse me. You can always catch "skeptics" floating around paranormal newsgroups yabbering about psuedoscience and whatnot. Most of them are just as biased toward established science as any loon is toward his or her chosen belief system. Of course some of Tesla's ideas were bad, that could be said of any given scientist. But the problem with "Skeptics" is that they cling to hard to established scientific dogma. Tesla was laughed at for thinking AC motors were possible. The scientists of back in the day would practically kill you for merely suggesting that the world might be round. Go back 200 years and tell them man will fly and clone animals and they will laugh at you. I'm certainly not a member of any Tesla "cult", but being biased on any given side is useless, and Tesla in his life proved the skeptics wrong on a number of occasions, in fact all the great advancements have come from men who go against the grain, not those who blindly cling to it.
There have been people that have done so on a smaller level using two tesla coils. I think the farthest one I read about reached about 100 feet or so, of course those were relatively small coils, no where near the monster that Tesla was building at wardenclyffe. The problem that occured is that Marconi came in and stole the idea as the radio (violated 14 Tesla patents and even had his patent revoked by the courts, but alas the history books still list Marconi as the inventor of the radio [and Edison as the man who brought power to the world even though he said AC would never work!]) Nowadays it wouldn't work becuase there is already to much competing airways as many others have said, not to mention Tesla coils make electrical appliances near them go batty, back before electricity was mainstream there could have been ways around it, such as putting faraday cages around electrical appliances to protect them, but now that is near impossible and another reason why the idea is lost.
We might as well just accept the lame patent office, I was looking at some of the various implementations of tilting trikes at delphion a few days ago and was intriqued by the gallery of obscure patents. One of them... here is particularly bad. It appears someone has a patent on pointing a laser pointer at the floor and making a cat chase it!
I'm all for protecting intellectual property (no flames please) but geez! how do you sell that! It's isn't intellectual property anymore than using a spatula to flip pancakes is!
What about ICP? They claim KISS stole the Psycho Circus from thier Dark Carnival, but a look at "KISS and Sell" will reveal that Gene wanted a carnival or circus based on the bands personas to travel around with them on the 1978 tour, when ICP were still fetuses. However, wasn't there some obscure man in the seventies who had black on white face paint (colors NO clown wears), an "evil" persona, a nice little nickname for his fraternity-like fans, and who together with his band mates starred in thier own action adventure comic series? Hmmmm. I think his last name was...Simmons, or something...;-)
I was just about to post a similar post. Open Source has a definite definition. That is to say that if they had even pretended to do their homework then the DVD guys would never have made such a slanderous statement.
I wanted to take it one step further though. I have open source software on my site. (Heck, on of them is even an educational kids game, how evil of me, eh?) And I honestly take this personally offensive. I'm not one of the people that frequent here that think anything that can be copied should be given away free, heck, I'm not even an "Open Source" zealot, much less a Piracy-Zealot. But the fact of the matter is I support open source software, I write open source code, this was obviously an attack that effects me. If I were to tell someone now that I am a big supporter of Open Source, thanks to the DVD guys that is going to have negative connotation. Remember "Open Source" isn't a term that has made it into the mainstream yet, and this DVD Slander isn't they way we want it to get there.
My point is that anyone who has ever written a piece of Open Source code (and maybe even those who have downloaded it) should be able to file a gigantic class action suit against the DVD people. With big companies like Red Hat and Corel that could very will be a very large lawsuit. One that would get alot of publicity for Open Source, setting the record straight, and maybe even putting the DVD guys in their place once and for all.
Using multiple computers to perform multiple tasks, I guess that'd be distributed distributed computing, eh? Distributed Squared, if you will.
Shouldn't be all that hard really should it? just write some little script or daemon or something that starts and stops the appropriate programs at set times.
This is great, I didn't even know that computers could simulate a viruses reaction to drugs. How accurate is it?
Distributed computing is really catching on I suppose, but I have heard alot of people say that they use the seti screensaver because it looks cool, maybe the choice of which project to help, at least for the masses, isn't which is most moral or beneficial to mankind, but which has the prettiest screensaver!;-)
Alot of people complain when they see the government doing something like this. They say that the government is sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong and such. I think that you have to step back and look at the whole picture. I for one am comforted by the fact that I live in a country/state whose government looks out for the rights of the people. Sometimes they might do something "for us" that we don't agree with, but it's better than them doing nothing for us at all.
As far as this case goes I am glad to see it happen. I think that the whole Napster ordeal should have been a clue to the RIAA that they need to lower their prices but it wasn't. Though the record companies might not see it this way, this case is going to help them. If the prices are lower people might not feel the need to pirate. And if you sell more product, even at a lower cost, you can still make more money.
Besides this issue has been huge, Napster versus RIAA is huge. The government has already been made involved by the RIAA and thier actions against Napster, if they don't do something that could stop the madness, then they will have to put up with Napster cases until the end of time. Just be thankful that they are doing something that helps us instead of something that hurts us... like shutting down anything with the name MP3 in it.
I would agree that paying alot for a CD isn't the end of the world, but prices that are being forced to unneccesarily high levels hurt the economy. If price fixing weren't legislated in some way then all products could be very expensive. This would raise the cost of living and have a negative affect on the economy.
Slashdot Mirror
You are of course, quite correct. As I mentioned later one could easily provide printed manuals, supports, etc. to create a commercial product from a GPL'd one. The same of course applies to datafiles and such. Which, as I said in the original post, only adds to Bill Gates hypocrisy, making him not equal to what he is complaining about, but worse.
And just as a side note, if I wanted to Shrink-wrap a GPL'd office suite with a printed manual and tech support, I could charge money for it, whereas I most certainly could not do the same thing with MS Office. So, actually Billy-Boy's argument as even less credibility.
They already have a patch to wine that I tried quite some time ago. The American McGee Alice demo works just as well under Linux as Windows. (Unfortunately on both systems it crashes.) I haven't tried any other games, but they already have a bit of work done, so I wouldn't call it vaporware.
Well, If I had more choice I would prefer loadable kernel modules over anti-aliased fonts anyday. It takes a primitive OS to still require one to reboot everytime a new driver is installed.
And oh yes, Win95 was quite impressive, many "new" features, long file names (oops, UNIX already had that), true multi-tasking, (oops, no a first either!).
Sigh, Oh well, I am done responding to the troll now.
I thought of the same thing when I saw that message. It was quite a fun game to play actually (assuming you had two people of course). We got it at a yardsale a long time ago. It's in a rather bad shape now though.
I'm glad that gave this little clarification. I can only assume then, that they would have no problem with me writing shell to replace explorer.exe and copying a WinME CD with the replacement, and selling for my own $80 correct?
Feel free to point me to any false logic with that, until then I will be working on it, any feature requests?
So I tend to agree with you, it would have taken less time to reboot my computer than to download a 12 meg program on my 56k modem, but I still didn't do it.
Besides, alot of people in non-US countries still pay for access by the minute. Maybe if the website designers want to start re-imbursing these people for the lost money, I'll give them more credibility. Then again, maybe not.
One of the things I've always prided my work on is trying to make it work with ALL browsers. Not just new browsers, or graphical browsers. Technologies such as CSS are great for browsers that support it, but it's still a relatively simple task to write additional code for browsers that don't. Conditional SSI makes this job very easy, as well as updating of the page. SSI of course, being server side is completely browser independant as well.
I just see no need to do this. My site needs a redesign because the menus have grown to large and Netscape for Win is kinda slow with the transparency, but the new design will most definetely still take full use of new browsers, without locking the old browsers out. There is not now, nor will there EVER be an excuse to do that. Not as far as I am concerned.
Also there are other artists (like Metallica) that don't want to give their stuff for free. But people don't repsect that, they just say screw Metallica's rights I'm going to download it anyhow.
Linux or Open Source on a whole isn't doing that. There is DVD and that's just about it. On a whole Open Source is about me giving you my code and you taking it. Napster is the equivalent of WareZ, whereby I would be giving you someone else's code, whether they wanted you to have it or not.
Those are two totally different things, napster is used primarily to share copyrighted material without the author's permission. Linux is the exact opposite, it's sharing copyrighted material WITH the authors permission.
Oh yeah, and anyone who gets a fill-in-the-blanks spam letter to send out and gives their name as "fsdfk" should be shot in the head just on principle.
Secondly there were scientists who didn't think the world was round, quite alot of them the fact that there were those you believed otherwise serves to prove my point, not yours.
Thirdly the same applies. You've named three scientists who would have believed in flight, contrast that to the number who didn't.
Fourthly, is that supposed to be sarcasm? I certainly hope not, Einstein theory of relativity flew in the face of not only then then accepted theory of aether, but indeed in the face of newtonian physics themsevles. Einstein hardly thought "in the box".
I'm all for protecting intellectual property (no flames please) but geez! how do you sell that! It's isn't intellectual property anymore than using a spatula to flip pancakes is!
I wanted to take it one step further though. I have open source software on my site. (Heck, on of them is even an educational kids game, how evil of me, eh?) And I honestly take this personally offensive. I'm not one of the people that frequent here that think anything that can be copied should be given away free, heck, I'm not even an "Open Source" zealot, much less a Piracy-Zealot. But the fact of the matter is I support open source software, I write open source code, this was obviously an attack that effects me. If I were to tell someone now that I am a big supporter of Open Source, thanks to the DVD guys that is going to have negative connotation. Remember "Open Source" isn't a term that has made it into the mainstream yet, and this DVD Slander isn't they way we want it to get there.
My point is that anyone who has ever written a piece of Open Source code (and maybe even those who have downloaded it) should be able to file a gigantic class action suit against the DVD people. With big companies like Red Hat and Corel that could very will be a very large lawsuit. One that would get alot of publicity for Open Source, setting the record straight, and maybe even putting the DVD guys in their place once and for all.
Shouldn't be all that hard really should it? just write some little script or daemon or something that starts and stops the appropriate programs at set times.
Distributed computing is really catching on I suppose, but I have heard alot of people say that they use the seti screensaver because it looks cool, maybe the choice of which project to help, at least for the masses, isn't which is most moral or beneficial to mankind, but which has the prettiest screensaver!
As far as this case goes I am glad to see it happen. I think that the whole Napster ordeal should have been a clue to the RIAA that they need to lower their prices but it wasn't. Though the record companies might not see it this way, this case is going to help them. If the prices are lower people might not feel the need to pirate. And if you sell more product, even at a lower cost, you can still make more money.
Besides this issue has been huge, Napster versus RIAA is huge. The government has already been made involved by the RIAA and thier actions against Napster, if they don't do something that could stop the madness, then they will have to put up with Napster cases until the end of time. Just be thankful that they are doing something that helps us instead of something that hurts us... like shutting down anything with the name MP3 in it.