This isn't sensationalist, it's the truth
on
Leaving the GPL Behind
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
There is a small but vocal group of Free Software zealots who make life miserable for anyone who thinks that the GPL isn't the end-all and be-all of Open Source licenses. They frequently point out problems they perceive with other licenses like BSD without conceding that their perspective may not be applicable/correct/logical/reasonable. These are what I call the Free Software Fascists. They claim to work for the greater good of the OSS movement, but their actions are only self-serving.
This is not to say that everyone who chooses the GPL is one of these. There are many reasons to use the GPL, the greatest among them is how the GPL guarantees software freedom for all users, not just the developers. This is a respectable choice, though it does tend towards indian-giving.
It's difficult to say that the GPL fails to be useful to business because 1) there are businesses which quite efficiently use GPL software and tools and 2) it was not written with commercialization in mind (in fact, commercialization of GPL software is completely tangential to the GPL). But in its own way, the GPL makes itself hostile to developers basing their products on the base GPL libraries/software. In a very real sense, by demanding software freedom, the GPL makes any software it covers poison to a software product company.
So the article is right. There are many software/hardware product companies who are shunning Linux and the GPL. The lack of IP protection (nee, the deliberate elimination of IP protection) is not something companies who innovate are likely to embrace. On the other hand, the article is wrong in that GPL software usage has never been higher. The existence of GPL software helps many companies be able to compete due to lower implementation and licensing costs.
Which side you believe is the side you already believe.
When I voted for Obama, I voted for change. Not the kind that jingles in the purse pocket of the 90 year old lady standing in front of me at the Piggly Wiggly searching for her checkbook in her handbag. I understand that we probably can't leave these grannies without their paper checks, but at some point, probably during the Obama administration, a bunch of them will die off. We should use that as an opportunity to do away with checks completely.
Electronic bank transfer is where it's at. Paperless society. Swipe and go at the grocery store.
Please Mr. Obama, implement real change. Get rid of checks.
If you take the act of posting on a message board, especially one as hostile to religion as Slashdot, and consider it less an act of trolling but one of encouraging discussion, then encouraging thoughtful posts creates an opportunity for the student to have his beliefs challenged and subsequently shaped. Only through adversity do people really learn who they are.
Besides, we're talking about Science here, not "Biblical Creationism" as such. The idea that the Earth was created in 6 literal days replete with "faith-challenging" dino fossils and other fairy tales is the story that Evolutionists spread as Intelligent Design dogma. It shows a very big gap in their knowledge of the ID field which is quite a bit less dogmatic about the 6 day theory and much more in tune with mainstream scientific method.
What ID brings to the table is a new reexamination of facts. Why are clam fossils at the top of very young mountains? What is the evolutionary progression of DNA? Why are there still discrepancies in the geologic and biologic record where we would expect certain types of data but find none? ID brushes away the dogma of science and brings the scientific method back to it.
But that's not to say that it isn't also flawed. Many of the scientists involved with ID hold very religious views which may cause them to insert God into areas they do not yet understand. The "God in the Gaps" folks. Luckily, most ID scientists are able to put their personal biases away for the sake of good science.
The other problem with ID is also prevalent in fields such as homeopathy and supernatural research. The attempt to address the issues at hand with a completely open mind leads to bad conclusions. Sometimes the established scientific theory is just fine and doesn't need reevaluation. So when ID scientists start questioning things that don't need questioning, they come off looking like crackpots. However, their search for science is no less deeply held and their methods are no less scientific than mainstream scientists.
Though it hasn't been so directly argued for a while, there is still the belief that OSS is somehow unique and better than closed source software because it engages the lone hacker sitting in his basement writing code in his spare time. What I found interesting was Charlie Miller's take on unpaid effort.
This SMS stuff is a good example. Between us, Collin and I found one bug in iPhone, Android, and Windows Mobile. Then we stopped testing. We had enough for our talk, what motivation did we have to keep looking? This is really an unpaid hobby for us, so we do the minimum level of work possible to get results good enough for conference presentations.
Financial incentive is, despite the feeble arguments to the contrary, still the thing that gets code written (and bugs found). Without paying the developers, Linux never would have gotten to the stage it is now. Yes, the source code is open, but it is primarily because there is a team of developers getting paid to write the OS source code that we have such a great system today.
The hobbyist is still just a user. The real developers do it as their job.
Africans and African American individuals have made great strides in science in technology. It's well known that botanist George Washington Carver invented over 200 things out of peanuts. It's less known that African Americans are also behind such technologies as pace makers and traffic signals.
However, that there are outstanding individuals of any race is not surprising. What is surprising, as you have pointed out, is the dearth of African Americans winning these competitions. However, if you look at the problem statistically, you'll find that they are winning in proportion to their representation as participants. Which is to say not at all.
But why is that? The simple answer is to ascribe lower intelligence to Africans, but that is a cop-out. The real answer is multifaceted and has roots both in external discrimination as well as negative factors in the African American community which hold back achievement. White racism is also at fault for creating mass media caricatures like Steve Urkel and Carlton Banks as black kids succeeding in society due to their overwhelming non-blackness.
The problem you describe is insidious and sad. But it isn't because Africans and African Americans are less intelligent than you or me. It's due to much more complex socio-cultural reasons that have their roots in racism.
This hotel, is very nice. You stay at most expensive room, daily maid service, free. Also female goat for morning milk and evening enjoyment. Chicken cage available, extra cost, but eggs free.
I remember when my team won the Math Olympiad back in high school. The light hearted competition was what really stands out as the prime motivator for me. Without this kind of competition, we geeks would have just been white wedgied wallflowers with wack Hypercolor t-shirts.
The kids taking part in this IOI are going to take home something memorable. And hopefully the American teams can learn a little more about the rest of the world.
Jupiter also looks better in the sense that it is a human ovum-shaped object which is encountering a sperm-shaped space craft. The symbolism of new life, new evolution is much clearer with Jupiter than Saturn.
There are only two occasions when asking about average employee working hours is appropriate:
1) When you will be contracting with the company and will be charging them an hourly rate with the possibility of overtime 2) You don't really care about getting the job
If you ask in the first situation, you are simply being professional. You want to be able to accurately estimate the amount you will be charging them. It just makes sense, especially since it will end up costing them more to keep you later.
If you ask in the second situation, you are simply lazy and unwilling to be a "team player".
If you want to know how much overtime you're going to work, and how family-friendly a workplace is, find out what the demographics of the company are. If you are single, you may find that an overly family-oriented workplace is going to put extra pressure on you to stay late due to parents needing to take time off to be with their family (doctor visits, holidays, etc). On the other hand, if you have a family, a family-friendly workplace may afford you more time to spend with your family.
Another good question is to ask your interviewer how many times a week he talks to customers. It will give you a good idea of how insulated you will be from customers, and that can give you an idea of whether you want the job or not. A non-customer centric position will probably be slower in promotion, but much lower pressure. A customer centric position will be higher pressure, but the opportunity for professional growth (even if all you want to be is a developer) is enormous.
If you are going to say that Africans are somehow less intelligent than other races, and then claim that is the reason there has been very little scientific progress made by Africans, you would also have to show how this holds true in non-African countries where Africans have moved and actually made significant scientific achievements.
In the United States alone, botanist George Washington Carver is well known for his work with the peanut, Lewis Latimer developed the carbon filament used in light bulbs, Garrett Morgan invented both the gas mask and the traffic signal, and Otis Boykin developed the pacemaker and the electronic control system for ICBMs. As you can see, this is scientific progress in both pure and applied science.
Perhaps you'd like to rescind your racist remarks.
The biggest problem with aging materials is their propensity to leak. Take your mother, for example. When I first met her, she was in her 60's and had an ass like a drum. But after a decade of giving her the old backdoor to and fro, she now leaks like a sieve. I'd recommend taking her to get fitted for a colostomy bag, but that's your family's business, not mine.
So too with batteries. As they age and rust, the internal chemicals are liable to leak and cause serious harm to the environment. There really isn't any good way to dispose of these batteries that doesn't come at great cost or cause chemical contamination.
This development using organic compounds and no harmful lead or mercury is a godsend for those of us in the environmental movement. It has been a source of great consternation that greeting cards and other miniature throw-away gadgets have contained batteries with harmful chemicals, and now that seems to be a thing of the past.
It also has the side effect of making the card itself less bulky, so not only are you saving the environment by not polluting the groundwater, you're saving precious resources by buying products made of lighter materials.
Their channel of trade is clearly the game industry, as that is what Edge Games ostensibly is targeting with its past and current game development. Whether they have actually released a game in the past 3 years (what seems to be the legally defined period) doesn't seem to be relevant because 1) they have continuously existed with the mark in the channel of trade they exist within, 2) they have vigorously defended against mark violators within that channel of trade, and 3) they do seem to have the intention of releasing products within that channel of trade. Their use of the trademark is continuous, and their trademark is used as the company name and is attached to future projects.
Anyone claiming that Edge Games has abandoned the mark would have to show abandonment. I think (IANAL, clearly) that the above arguments would need to be overcome to show such. However, I also think that there is a strong argument in Edge Games' favor that many here at Slashdot are unwilling to consider because of the natural bias against IP bullies.
Again we come to the definition of "use" as the critical point.
A trademark is abandoned when its use is discontinued with an intent not to resume its use. Such intent can be inferred from the circumstances. Moreover, non-use for three consecutive years is prima facie evidence of abandonment.
1. It's use is discontinued with an intent not to resume its use 1a. Intent is inferred from circumstances
2. 3 consecutive years of non-use is evidence of abandonment
Edge Games clearly has point 1 covered. They at least give the impression of intending to continue using the trademark.
Point 2 is much murkier, as you suggest. Is the intent to resume using the trademark with all the clear advertisement (websites) and infringement protection actions that Langdell has undertaken sufficient to claim "use"? Also, the mark is the name of the company, and isn't the existence of the company prima facie evidence that the mark is in continual use?
I don't know. But if someone is just going to claim that the trademark is up for grabs because it hasn't been "used" for a long time, it is really up to them to define what they expect the requirement for "use" are.
No one is doing anything ethically challenged here except maybe the government trying to change the deal to generate a new revenue stream.
This is a common meme, but it disregards the fact that the government exists to implement the will of the citizens. Many of those Microsofties who voted in the last election voted for the winners, and those winners are now making the laws. Call it the tyranny of the majority, but it is the will of the majority.
Many Christians believe that those who will enter the Kingdom of Heaven are already named in the Book of Life. God is omniscient, therefore he already knows who will spend eternity in Glory and who will burn forever in the Lake of Fire. Calvinists hold this concept of preordination.
However such a concept flies in the face of a loving Creator for many Christians. So these subscribe to the concept of Free Will. The choices you make in life actually affect how you will be judged in the afterlife.
What it boils down to, though, is whether God is omnipotent and omniscient. If he is, then he knows that a vast number of people will die and enter the flames of Hades, and his refusal to do anything about it is far from the loving God caricature He is portrayed as. On the other hand, if he isn't those things, then how shall we live such that we can pass lightly through the Gates of St. Peter? Isn't the fallibility and lack of knowledge a sign of weakness in our God?
What this brings me to is your comment.
Fine. But the terms of the contract were changed. Unilaterally. The state offerd tax incentives to attract business and then withdrew them once the business is up and running. Why not just charge the going tax rates from the outset?
From the outset of what? Are laws never to be changed? No one can know the perfect formulation of taxes and services from the outset of incorporation. Laws should be allowed to change as no politician is infallible, and thus those subject to those laws should also have the ability to adapt (even to the point of leaving the neighborhood/city/state/country) if those laws become too heavy a burden.
It is a mistake to think that laws are perfect from Day 1.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a small but vocal group of Free Software zealots who make life miserable for anyone who thinks that the GPL isn't the end-all and be-all of Open Source licenses. They frequently point out problems they perceive with other licenses like BSD without conceding that their perspective may not be applicable/correct/logical/reasonable. These are what I call the Free Software Fascists. They claim to work for the greater good of the OSS movement, but their actions are only self-serving.
This is not to say that everyone who chooses the GPL is one of these. There are many reasons to use the GPL, the greatest among them is how the GPL guarantees software freedom for all users, not just the developers. This is a respectable choice, though it does tend towards indian-giving.
It's difficult to say that the GPL fails to be useful to business because 1) there are businesses which quite efficiently use GPL software and tools and 2) it was not written with commercialization in mind (in fact, commercialization of GPL software is completely tangential to the GPL). But in its own way, the GPL makes itself hostile to developers basing their products on the base GPL libraries/software. In a very real sense, by demanding software freedom, the GPL makes any software it covers poison to a software product company.
So the article is right. There are many software/hardware product companies who are shunning Linux and the GPL. The lack of IP protection (nee, the deliberate elimination of IP protection) is not something companies who innovate are likely to embrace. On the other hand, the article is wrong in that GPL software usage has never been higher. The existence of GPL software helps many companies be able to compete due to lower implementation and licensing costs.
Which side you believe is the side you already believe.
You shouldn't let your cat surf the web unattended. Without proper supervision, they will start downloading kitty porn to your hard drive.
*This* is why you voted for Obama?
This and the unicorns.
When I voted for Obama, I voted for change. Not the kind that jingles in the purse pocket of the 90 year old lady standing in front of me at the Piggly Wiggly searching for her checkbook in her handbag. I understand that we probably can't leave these grannies without their paper checks, but at some point, probably during the Obama administration, a bunch of them will die off. We should use that as an opportunity to do away with checks completely.
Electronic bank transfer is where it's at. Paperless society. Swipe and go at the grocery store.
Please Mr. Obama, implement real change. Get rid of checks.
If a D&D college existed, I'd be amongst the first to sign up.
NOOOOO
No, andrewd18! You didn't have to do that!
If you take the act of posting on a message board, especially one as hostile to religion as Slashdot, and consider it less an act of trolling but one of encouraging discussion, then encouraging thoughtful posts creates an opportunity for the student to have his beliefs challenged and subsequently shaped. Only through adversity do people really learn who they are.
Besides, we're talking about Science here, not "Biblical Creationism" as such. The idea that the Earth was created in 6 literal days replete with "faith-challenging" dino fossils and other fairy tales is the story that Evolutionists spread as Intelligent Design dogma. It shows a very big gap in their knowledge of the ID field which is quite a bit less dogmatic about the 6 day theory and much more in tune with mainstream scientific method.
What ID brings to the table is a new reexamination of facts. Why are clam fossils at the top of very young mountains? What is the evolutionary progression of DNA? Why are there still discrepancies in the geologic and biologic record where we would expect certain types of data but find none? ID brushes away the dogma of science and brings the scientific method back to it.
But that's not to say that it isn't also flawed. Many of the scientists involved with ID hold very religious views which may cause them to insert God into areas they do not yet understand. The "God in the Gaps" folks. Luckily, most ID scientists are able to put their personal biases away for the sake of good science.
The other problem with ID is also prevalent in fields such as homeopathy and supernatural research. The attempt to address the issues at hand with a completely open mind leads to bad conclusions. Sometimes the established scientific theory is just fine and doesn't need reevaluation. So when ID scientists start questioning things that don't need questioning, they come off looking like crackpots. However, their search for science is no less deeply held and their methods are no less scientific than mainstream scientists.
Though it hasn't been so directly argued for a while, there is still the belief that OSS is somehow unique and better than closed source software because it engages the lone hacker sitting in his basement writing code in his spare time. What I found interesting was Charlie Miller's take on unpaid effort.
Financial incentive is, despite the feeble arguments to the contrary, still the thing that gets code written (and bugs found). Without paying the developers, Linux never would have gotten to the stage it is now. Yes, the source code is open, but it is primarily because there is a team of developers getting paid to write the OS source code that we have such a great system today.
The hobbyist is still just a user. The real developers do it as their job.
Africans and African American individuals have made great strides in science in technology. It's well known that botanist George Washington Carver invented over 200 things out of peanuts. It's less known that African Americans are also behind such technologies as pace makers and traffic signals.
However, that there are outstanding individuals of any race is not surprising. What is surprising, as you have pointed out, is the dearth of African Americans winning these competitions. However, if you look at the problem statistically, you'll find that they are winning in proportion to their representation as participants. Which is to say not at all.
But why is that? The simple answer is to ascribe lower intelligence to Africans, but that is a cop-out. The real answer is multifaceted and has roots both in external discrimination as well as negative factors in the African American community which hold back achievement. White racism is also at fault for creating mass media caricatures like Steve Urkel and Carlton Banks as black kids succeeding in society due to their overwhelming non-blackness.
The problem you describe is insidious and sad. But it isn't because Africans and African Americans are less intelligent than you or me. It's due to much more complex socio-cultural reasons that have their roots in racism.
Don't hate the playa. Hate the game.
I always wanted to know where my mandibula was.
Look that up in your Funk & Wagnalls.
This hotel, is very nice. You stay at most expensive room, daily maid service, free. Also female goat for morning milk and evening enjoyment. Chicken cage available, extra cost, but eggs free.
And what's a "wack hypercolor t-shirt" anyway?
Was yours rad?
I remember when my team won the Math Olympiad back in high school. The light hearted competition was what really stands out as the prime motivator for me. Without this kind of competition, we geeks would have just been white wedgied wallflowers with wack Hypercolor t-shirts.
The kids taking part in this IOI are going to take home something memorable. And hopefully the American teams can learn a little more about the rest of the world.
Jupiter also looks better in the sense that it is a human ovum-shaped object which is encountering a sperm-shaped space craft. The symbolism of new life, new evolution is much clearer with Jupiter than Saturn.
Why do TLD's remind me of real estate sales in Second Life?.
In the .eco case, I'd say it's because you're going to get fucked by someone who loves animals a lot.
There are lots of TLDs that no one ever thinks about and hardly ever use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_domains
When was the last time you visited a .biz site? Have you ever found a position using the .jobs TLD?
How cool is it that the TLD for mobile devices is longer than the usual 3 letter TLD?
Found a lawyer or doctor using the .pro TLD lately? Could you point someone to a good travel agent on the .travel TLD?
Face it, there are only 5 real, non-national TLDs: .com, .org, .edu, .Net, and .gov. All the others are just a waste of time.
There are only two occasions when asking about average employee working hours is appropriate:
1) When you will be contracting with the company and will be charging them an hourly rate with the possibility of overtime
2) You don't really care about getting the job
If you ask in the first situation, you are simply being professional. You want to be able to accurately estimate the amount you will be charging them. It just makes sense, especially since it will end up costing them more to keep you later.
If you ask in the second situation, you are simply lazy and unwilling to be a "team player".
If you want to know how much overtime you're going to work, and how family-friendly a workplace is, find out what the demographics of the company are. If you are single, you may find that an overly family-oriented workplace is going to put extra pressure on you to stay late due to parents needing to take time off to be with their family (doctor visits, holidays, etc). On the other hand, if you have a family, a family-friendly workplace may afford you more time to spend with your family.
Another good question is to ask your interviewer how many times a week he talks to customers. It will give you a good idea of how insulated you will be from customers, and that can give you an idea of whether you want the job or not. A non-customer centric position will probably be slower in promotion, but much lower pressure. A customer centric position will be higher pressure, but the opportunity for professional growth (even if all you want to be is a developer) is enormous.
If you are going to say that Africans are somehow less intelligent than other races, and then claim that is the reason there has been very little scientific progress made by Africans, you would also have to show how this holds true in non-African countries where Africans have moved and actually made significant scientific achievements.
In the United States alone, botanist George Washington Carver is well known for his work with the peanut, Lewis Latimer developed the carbon filament used in light bulbs, Garrett Morgan invented both the gas mask and the traffic signal, and Otis Boykin developed the pacemaker and the electronic control system for ICBMs. As you can see, this is scientific progress in both pure and applied science.
Perhaps you'd like to rescind your racist remarks.
The biggest problem with aging materials is their propensity to leak. Take your mother, for example. When I first met her, she was in her 60's and had an ass like a drum. But after a decade of giving her the old backdoor to and fro, she now leaks like a sieve. I'd recommend taking her to get fitted for a colostomy bag, but that's your family's business, not mine.
So too with batteries. As they age and rust, the internal chemicals are liable to leak and cause serious harm to the environment. There really isn't any good way to dispose of these batteries that doesn't come at great cost or cause chemical contamination.
This development using organic compounds and no harmful lead or mercury is a godsend for those of us in the environmental movement. It has been a source of great consternation that greeting cards and other miniature throw-away gadgets have contained batteries with harmful chemicals, and now that seems to be a thing of the past.
It also has the side effect of making the card itself less bulky, so not only are you saving the environment by not polluting the groundwater, you're saving precious resources by buying products made of lighter materials.
Their channel of trade is clearly the game industry, as that is what Edge Games ostensibly is targeting with its past and current game development. Whether they have actually released a game in the past 3 years (what seems to be the legally defined period) doesn't seem to be relevant because 1) they have continuously existed with the mark in the channel of trade they exist within, 2) they have vigorously defended against mark violators within that channel of trade, and 3) they do seem to have the intention of releasing products within that channel of trade. Their use of the trademark is continuous, and their trademark is used as the company name and is attached to future projects.
Anyone claiming that Edge Games has abandoned the mark would have to show abandonment. I think (IANAL, clearly) that the above arguments would need to be overcome to show such. However, I also think that there is a strong argument in Edge Games' favor that many here at Slashdot are unwilling to consider because of the natural bias against IP bullies.
Again we come to the definition of "use" as the critical point.
1. It's use is discontinued with an intent not to resume its use
1a. Intent is inferred from circumstances
2. 3 consecutive years of non-use is evidence of abandonment
Edge Games clearly has point 1 covered. They at least give the impression of intending to continue using the trademark.
Point 2 is much murkier, as you suggest. Is the intent to resume using the trademark with all the clear advertisement (websites) and infringement protection actions that Langdell has undertaken sufficient to claim "use"? Also, the mark is the name of the company, and isn't the existence of the company prima facie evidence that the mark is in continual use?
I don't know. But if someone is just going to claim that the trademark is up for grabs because it hasn't been "used" for a long time, it is really up to them to define what they expect the requirement for "use" are.
No one is doing anything ethically challenged here except maybe the government trying to change the deal to generate a new revenue stream.
This is a common meme, but it disregards the fact that the government exists to implement the will of the citizens. Many of those Microsofties who voted in the last election voted for the winners, and those winners are now making the laws. Call it the tyranny of the majority, but it is the will of the majority.
Many Christians believe that those who will enter the Kingdom of Heaven are already named in the Book of Life. God is omniscient, therefore he already knows who will spend eternity in Glory and who will burn forever in the Lake of Fire. Calvinists hold this concept of preordination.
However such a concept flies in the face of a loving Creator for many Christians. So these subscribe to the concept of Free Will. The choices you make in life actually affect how you will be judged in the afterlife.
What it boils down to, though, is whether God is omnipotent and omniscient. If he is, then he knows that a vast number of people will die and enter the flames of Hades, and his refusal to do anything about it is far from the loving God caricature He is portrayed as. On the other hand, if he isn't those things, then how shall we live such that we can pass lightly through the Gates of St. Peter? Isn't the fallibility and lack of knowledge a sign of weakness in our God?
What this brings me to is your comment.
From the outset of what? Are laws never to be changed? No one can know the perfect formulation of taxes and services from the outset of incorporation. Laws should be allowed to change as no politician is infallible, and thus those subject to those laws should also have the ability to adapt (even to the point of leaving the neighborhood/city/state/country) if those laws become too heavy a burden.
It is a mistake to think that laws are perfect from Day 1.