He didn't get a nobel prize for researching software patents. He got a prize for research into a new Economic theory, it just happens he's applying that theory to his research of software patents.
I wonder if Apple are going to keep playing "cat and mouse", and try to bring legal action to bear against these "vile hackers",
On what grounds? People are hacking their own phones, which is explicitly permitted under the DMCA. Link (pdf warning). Apple is under no obligation to support it or make it easy, but they can't sue people for unlocking iPhones.
Not only that, we've been transfusing blood for decades. If guidelines allow for storing blood up to 42 days, and people survive after being given 41 day old blood, I fail to see why the requirements should be changed.
That was the point entirely. All of the things he pointed out were (good?) unintended consequences of the tool.
Personally, I do backups of all of my important data, but use my RAID to store hundreds of gigabytes of stuff (recorded TV shows mainly) that I couldn't afford to backup otherwise. It gives me a great deal of comfort to know that my data is safe from a drive failure, and I keep close tabs to make sure my RAID isn't degraded.
A raid may not be intended to replace backup, but it does keep your data safer than something that just stripes your data together for speed or LVM for combining volumes.
I agree that we'd be in a better position if Microsoft had refused to incorporate DRM into their operating system.
However, the content is the source of the DRM. If Vista enables users to access content they can't access under XP, that adds to Vista's value, rather than subtracting from it. To say "I'm not going to use Vista because Vista uses too much DRM" is like saying "I'm going to use Windows XP so that I can't access the content that requires Vista's DRM."
Don't take me the wrong way. I avoid DRM as a general rule. I don't know what changes (new OS, new music player, etc.) I may want to make a few years down the road that would leave me unable to access my DRM'd content, but I don't think the ability to play DRM'd content detracts from the value of a product.
While you're probably correct, isn't it still nice that companies are starting to develop those "user friendly" tools for Linux ? Not to mention the existence of such a tool / application is "support" for the platform, and the more companies that "support" Linux the more attention it will get from the mainstream.
I agree that it's nice that they're creating a Linux tool and that it helps to legitimize our OS of choice, but it would be nice if in the mean time they'd offer zip files or something so we wouldn't be left waiting.
I'm excited by the idea of a Linux friendly music store with a decent selection, but I'd much rather buy by the album than individual tracks. But then, that's what I keep a VM around for.
BSD may get some contributions back, but I can't believe they get nearly as much back as the GPL. You state that there are examples, but you don't answer my question, which is "Why? What compels them to contribute back?"
If I were developing a product (with the intent of profit), I would certainly jump at the chance to have pre-developed software I could incorporate into my product. Now, presumably I would need to make some changes and improvements to make this software fit my needs. Under BSD style licenses, if I release my code back to the community, a competitor could scoop it up, spend a little bit more money improving from my code base, and never contribute anything back - leaving me at a competitive disadvantage.
Under the GPL, when I release my code back to the community, a competitor could still scoop it up, spend some money improving my code base, but any changes they made would also have to come back to me (among others), so they're not at any significant advantage.
I chose my words poorly. Using GPL software internally is not covered by the GPL, so is in my mind "compliant" with the GPL. Using GPL software in a way that is non-compliant with the GPL implies distribution (at least in my mind).
Re:Is this really different from the RIAA or MPAA?
on
GPL Lawsuit May Not Settle
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
This really makes using GPL'ed software a liability for any business. It just becomes too risky.
Using GPL software without complying with the GPL is a liability for any business. As is using any proprietary software without complying with the license that comes with the software.
Now, maybe this isn't a bad thing. If GPL'ed softwrae becomes to dangerous to use, there's always an ample supply of BSD- and MIT-licensed software. FreeBSD, for instance, might start getting more of the commercial backing that Linux has gotten.
But what would compel a company to support FreeBSD when they could just take the code, use it for their own needs, and never make upstream contributions?
Sorry, I don't see why this story is even here. Microsoft has been telling bald-faced lies about their security for at least a decade. What's different this time?
This time they started out by admitting that their security used to be lacking. Clearly they started out being honest, they're going to be honest throughout the entire statement.
It's great that there are head units that support AAC and OGG, but mine doesn't. I'm not interested in upgrading my portable music player and my head unit when I could upgrade just one.
There are several benefits of controlling my iPod through the head unit. First, my iPod stays locked away in my glovebox. I never touch it, and I don't worry that it's lying out in plain sight to tempt a thief. I agree that the iPod itself has an interface that is easier to use than a head unit, but my eyes stray from the road less to glance down and see a big, lit up display as opposed to small description on a screen with lots of other data. I also like having to just look down to see what song is playing, rather than having to find my iPod, get it at the right angle, and find the data I'm looking for on the screen. Before I bought an aftermarket stereo, I had a setup that involved controlling the music with the iPod, and I'm much more comfortable using the head unit.
As far as audio quality, I know my car stereo won't show much improvement above 128 kbps, but I have other sound systems that will, and I'd rather not have two copies of all of my music so I can play it through different sound systems. I'm not one to complain about lossy codecs (encoded at reasonable bit rates), but if you re-encode from one lossy codec to another the artifacts become more noticeable.
I know what the iPod is and isn't capable of. If anything, I have misconceptions about the capabilities of the other players on the market. The original topic was what draws people to iPods in the first place, and I find that they have a very good line of third party accessories. I'm not going to say it's unmatched, and I'm not going to say there aren't things about the iPod that couldn't be improved upon, but I find that the iPod fits my needs better than any other product I'm aware of, so when it comes time to replace my iPod, I'll probably buy another iPod. Also note that I've had my iPod for 3 years and don't foresee replacing it any time soon. That kind of lifespan reflects well when I'm considering my next music player.
There is no control panel for adjusting the way the touch pad works, and I found it so sensitive that I was constantly launching programs and opening windows accidentally by touching the thing.
System > Preferences > Touchpad?
Maybe it should be easier to find, but it's there.
#2. Volume control crashes on "wake from sleep". Probably legit - definitely minor.
Strikes me as an error on dells end. I've never had that happen, much less consistently.
#3. Playing mp3's - learn the legal issues, we've been harping on that for YEARS.
In my experience, Ubuntu only slightly delays the use of these codecs to warn you of the legal issues, then makes it very easy to install them. They may come standard with other systems, but if you're getting your entire operating system for free, having to wait an extra 30 seconds and read a pop up to play an mp3 seems silly. I do agree with his criticism that calling the codecs "bad" and "ugly" is a tad harsh.
#4. Hooking up camera & iPod. Probably legit.
Again, this must be a problem with his/Dell's setup. I've used a variety of cameras and SD cards with Ubuntu and all worked out of the box. As far as iPods, I've not used the iPod management software with Rythmbox (or whatever comes with Gnome) but Amarok works wonderfully.
#5. Playing videos - see #3.
For downloadable videos, I think this is a non-issue because the codecs are generally very easy to install. For things requiring w32codecs it can be a pain, but those codecs can be purchased legally through Fluendo for much less than the cost of Windows. It would be nice if they were included by default, but I think you have to expect that when your operating system is free, you'll have to pay to get some proprietary features.
The most legitimate complaint I see is that there is no DVD playing software in Ubuntu. I'm not aware of any software you can buy to legally watch DVD's on Ubuntu. I see that as a pretty significant roadblock, and hope it gets remedied in the near future.
You can get that stuff easily for any player. Chargers, cases, FM transmitters are not special to ipod. It's just that IPOD ones only work with IPOD (proprietary connection) whereas a non-Ipod transmitted (which is usually less expensive) will work with anything including the Ipod. That's called lock-in, ala microsoft.
You're missing the point. We're not talking about car chargers and FM transmitters, we're talking about plugging your iPod directly into your car stereo and controlling it the same way you control your radio. When I bought my stereo, I also bought an adapter for my iPod. It plugs into the iPod dock, lets me browse artists, albums, playlists, and individual songs. Then I can play them, and it will display the Album, Artist, Title, Track Number, and distance into the song.
Now, my car stereo also supports USB mass storage devices and data CDs, but if it uses those, it can only play mp3, wma, and wav files. Since much of my music is AAC (I used to be an iTunes user), and I'd rather not reencode and lose quality, my next music player will probably also be an iPod. I would only be compelled to get a different player if it would let me start encoding any new music as OGG vorbis while continuing to let me play all of my music through my stereo. Since such a device does not exist, I'm sticking with the iPod.
Just use rockbox and treat your iPod like what it is, a mass storage device.
There are a number of reasons not to use Rockbox. First, it's not yet supported on the new line of iPods, so it's not even an option. Next, rockbox has horrible battery life relative to the iPod firmware. Then there's the interface to consider: I never really could figure out how to find songs or playlists in the rockbox interface. Lastly, the main reason I see to use an iPod is the vast array of addons that are available for the iPod. I have an adapter in my car radio that lets me plug in my iPod and control it with the head unit - don't think you can use that with Rockbox.
That said, I'm still completely content with my old grayscale iPod, which works quite well with Amarok. I've no intentions of "upgrading" until it has completely died. Once that happens, I'll consider another iPod if they're working with Linux again, otherwise Apple has lost a semi-content customer.
I agree. Open source and Free Software won't get far without corporate backing, and that requires that it be profitable.
Linus' stance seems to be largely economical: You can use my code for whatever you like, so long as you contribute changes back to the community. Some corporations may find this daunting, but when they look at the quality and quantity of pre-made code they can get for free, some of them sign on for the open source software. OSS benefits from this because they get contributions back from those companies. Linus has even made a few concessions to allow proprietary drivers, and while that's not an optimal solution, it expands the functionality of the kernel for those who want to use it.
Stallman's stance seems to be strictly principled: You can use this code for anything so long as it stays free. Disallowing TiVoisation isn't going to convince TiVo to unencumber their systems, should they be required to do so, it's going to convince them to switch to another kernel - which likely means nobody will be getting contributions from them. Even if you can't use TiVo's code on a TiVo, you can still learn from it and changes can even be merged into the kernel - improving the quality of the software. Prohibiting proprietary drivers on the Linux kernel isn't going to convince the hardware manufacturers to produce high quality, open source drivers - it will either result in no driver, or severely crippled open source drivers.
In short I'd much rather have open source be economical and give up a few ideals than have something completely unusable to stick to the principles of Free software.
I think that's a slight misquote. My father taught me
Always assume everyone is stupid.
You won't be disappointed.
There are plenty of people who won't screw up, but if you deal with the idiots before they have a chance to screw up, it will be easier than dealing with it later.
If you've got money to burn, buy MS Office. If you are a tightwad, download Open Office.
I think, at least here on slashdot, money doesn't have a whole lot to do with choosing open source alternatives.
When I got my last laptop, I installed an old copy of Office XP I'd had lying around. I found it horribly unstable, so when I found out about OpenOffice, I tried it and I've never looked back. I also find a great deal of comfort knowing that I'm not dependent on one company for my documents. The open format provides a great deal of comfort to me.
That said, I agree with the rest of your statement. Downloading OpenOffice is a good place to start. If it's not satisfactory for whatever reason, no big loss, try MS Office.
I keep a portable version of firefox on my flash drive. In fact, I think I keep equivalents of all of the apps offered by AjaxWindows on my flash drive. I'll pass.
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
Part of the purpose of the GTK libraries is to be able to write cross platform software without having to spend a great deal of time porting the software for each platform. If a developer were trying to write software for several different platforms without a common library, they'd have to rewrite large portions of the code for each platform for each release. It would be a nightmare. I've got a pretty good feeling the Windows version of Gaim wouldn't exist if the developers had to port without cross platform libraries.
How about rethinking what's patentable instead? The number of patent infringement cases would plummet if the junk patents were thrown out - and no new junk patents were granted.
The summary doesn't mention this, and I honestly haven't read the linked article, but they did introduce a process to help reduce junk patents. Starting immediately after a patent is granted, there is a one year period in which companies, organizations, or individuals who have reason to oppose a patent can submit petitions and evidence to why the patent should not have been granted. It's intended to drastically reduce the costs of invalidating a patent.
It also introduces a plan to restrict submarine patents, requiring all patents be published within 18 months of first finding.
If you can publish your "invention" publically then it becomes prior art and you don't have to worry about first to file right ?
If your only reason for worrying about a patent were to block other people from patenting your idea that's fine. If you're trying to reap the other benefits of a patent, that's not going to help.
I agree. As much as I despise everything Jack Thompson stands for, I don't want him to disappear because I'm often amused by the sheer retardedness of his methods. Since I don't think I've ever read about Jack Thompson on anything more credible than slashdot or wikipedia, I occasionally find myself wondering if he could be a work of fiction.
Pidgin also ships with GTK libraries. While the download size is not trivial, it shares libraries with other GTK based software. The Ubuntu deb for pidgin is 1.6 MB.
I'm not trying to knock miranda, I'd likely be using it if I were on Windows, but there is something to be said for shared libraries and cross platform compatibility.
I agree. Of the original poster's list, I use OpenOffice, Firefox, Google Desktop, Picasa, and the Gimp (occasionally). These may not run on a minimal memory footprint, but that's why I've got 1.5 GB memory.
Firefox may not be the lightest web browser or the fastest, but with its plugins it has all the functionality I want from a web browser. Google Desktop isn't exactly light weight software, but I find the time it saves me well worth the extra processes that run (I might also note that I'm a Linux user, and I've found it to be much more efficient and stable than the alternatives). I don't use Picasa much, but it's nice for basic picture management - it provides what I need without getting in the way. OpenOffice isn't great as far as bloat, and I certainly don't use the pre-loader, but it gets the job done whenever I need an office suite.
Of that software list, the Gimp tries the hardest to run on a minimal memory footprint, and as some others have pointed out, that can be a pain in the ass. If I've got 500 MB of memory going unused, there's no reason for the Gimp to take extra time to avoid acquiring more memory.
Slashdot Mirror
He didn't get a nobel prize for researching software patents. He got a prize for research into a new Economic theory, it just happens he's applying that theory to his research of software patents.
But more significantly, Novell accepts Microsoft extortion, yet is in the same boat as Redhat.
On what grounds? People are hacking their own phones, which is explicitly permitted under the DMCA. Link (pdf warning). Apple is under no obligation to support it or make it easy, but they can't sue people for unlocking iPhones.
Not only that, we've been transfusing blood for decades. If guidelines allow for storing blood up to 42 days, and people survive after being given 41 day old blood, I fail to see why the requirements should be changed.
Personally, I do backups of all of my important data, but use my RAID to store hundreds of gigabytes of stuff (recorded TV shows mainly) that I couldn't afford to backup otherwise. It gives me a great deal of comfort to know that my data is safe from a drive failure, and I keep close tabs to make sure my RAID isn't degraded.
A raid may not be intended to replace backup, but it does keep your data safer than something that just stripes your data together for speed or LVM for combining volumes.
However, the content is the source of the DRM. If Vista enables users to access content they can't access under XP, that adds to Vista's value, rather than subtracting from it. To say "I'm not going to use Vista because Vista uses too much DRM" is like saying "I'm going to use Windows XP so that I can't access the content that requires Vista's DRM."
Don't take me the wrong way. I avoid DRM as a general rule. I don't know what changes (new OS, new music player, etc.) I may want to make a few years down the road that would leave me unable to access my DRM'd content, but I don't think the ability to play DRM'd content detracts from the value of a product.
I'm excited by the idea of a Linux friendly music store with a decent selection, but I'd much rather buy by the album than individual tracks. But then, that's what I keep a VM around for.
If I were developing a product (with the intent of profit), I would certainly jump at the chance to have pre-developed software I could incorporate into my product. Now, presumably I would need to make some changes and improvements to make this software fit my needs. Under BSD style licenses, if I release my code back to the community, a competitor could scoop it up, spend a little bit more money improving from my code base, and never contribute anything back - leaving me at a competitive disadvantage.
Under the GPL, when I release my code back to the community, a competitor could still scoop it up, spend some money improving my code base, but any changes they made would also have to come back to me (among others), so they're not at any significant advantage.
I chose my words poorly. Using GPL software internally is not covered by the GPL, so is in my mind "compliant" with the GPL. Using GPL software in a way that is non-compliant with the GPL implies distribution (at least in my mind).
Using GPL software without complying with the GPL is a liability for any business. As is using any proprietary software without complying with the license that comes with the software.
But what would compel a company to support FreeBSD when they could just take the code, use it for their own needs, and never make upstream contributions?There are several benefits of controlling my iPod through the head unit. First, my iPod stays locked away in my glovebox. I never touch it, and I don't worry that it's lying out in plain sight to tempt a thief. I agree that the iPod itself has an interface that is easier to use than a head unit, but my eyes stray from the road less to glance down and see a big, lit up display as opposed to small description on a screen with lots of other data. I also like having to just look down to see what song is playing, rather than having to find my iPod, get it at the right angle, and find the data I'm looking for on the screen. Before I bought an aftermarket stereo, I had a setup that involved controlling the music with the iPod, and I'm much more comfortable using the head unit.
As far as audio quality, I know my car stereo won't show much improvement above 128 kbps, but I have other sound systems that will, and I'd rather not have two copies of all of my music so I can play it through different sound systems. I'm not one to complain about lossy codecs (encoded at reasonable bit rates), but if you re-encode from one lossy codec to another the artifacts become more noticeable.
I know what the iPod is and isn't capable of. If anything, I have misconceptions about the capabilities of the other players on the market. The original topic was what draws people to iPods in the first place, and I find that they have a very good line of third party accessories. I'm not going to say it's unmatched, and I'm not going to say there aren't things about the iPod that couldn't be improved upon, but I find that the iPod fits my needs better than any other product I'm aware of, so when it comes time to replace my iPod, I'll probably buy another iPod. Also note that I've had my iPod for 3 years and don't foresee replacing it any time soon. That kind of lifespan reflects well when I'm considering my next music player.
System > Preferences > Touchpad?
Maybe it should be easier to find, but it's there.
Strikes me as an error on dells end. I've never had that happen, much less consistently. In my experience, Ubuntu only slightly delays the use of these codecs to warn you of the legal issues, then makes it very easy to install them. They may come standard with other systems, but if you're getting your entire operating system for free, having to wait an extra 30 seconds and read a pop up to play an mp3 seems silly. I do agree with his criticism that calling the codecs "bad" and "ugly" is a tad harsh. Again, this must be a problem with his/Dell's setup. I've used a variety of cameras and SD cards with Ubuntu and all worked out of the box. As far as iPods, I've not used the iPod management software with Rythmbox (or whatever comes with Gnome) but Amarok works wonderfully. For downloadable videos, I think this is a non-issue because the codecs are generally very easy to install. For things requiring w32codecs it can be a pain, but those codecs can be purchased legally through Fluendo for much less than the cost of Windows. It would be nice if they were included by default, but I think you have to expect that when your operating system is free, you'll have to pay to get some proprietary features.The most legitimate complaint I see is that there is no DVD playing software in Ubuntu. I'm not aware of any software you can buy to legally watch DVD's on Ubuntu. I see that as a pretty significant roadblock, and hope it gets remedied in the near future.
You're missing the point. We're not talking about car chargers and FM transmitters, we're talking about plugging your iPod directly into your car stereo and controlling it the same way you control your radio. When I bought my stereo, I also bought an adapter for my iPod. It plugs into the iPod dock, lets me browse artists, albums, playlists, and individual songs. Then I can play them, and it will display the Album, Artist, Title, Track Number, and distance into the song.
Now, my car stereo also supports USB mass storage devices and data CDs, but if it uses those, it can only play mp3, wma, and wav files. Since much of my music is AAC (I used to be an iTunes user), and I'd rather not reencode and lose quality, my next music player will probably also be an iPod. I would only be compelled to get a different player if it would let me start encoding any new music as OGG vorbis while continuing to let me play all of my music through my stereo. Since such a device does not exist, I'm sticking with the iPod.
There are a number of reasons not to use Rockbox. First, it's not yet supported on the new line of iPods, so it's not even an option. Next, rockbox has horrible battery life relative to the iPod firmware. Then there's the interface to consider: I never really could figure out how to find songs or playlists in the rockbox interface. Lastly, the main reason I see to use an iPod is the vast array of addons that are available for the iPod. I have an adapter in my car radio that lets me plug in my iPod and control it with the head unit - don't think you can use that with Rockbox.
That said, I'm still completely content with my old grayscale iPod, which works quite well with Amarok. I've no intentions of "upgrading" until it has completely died. Once that happens, I'll consider another iPod if they're working with Linux again, otherwise Apple has lost a semi-content customer.
Linus' stance seems to be largely economical: You can use my code for whatever you like, so long as you contribute changes back to the community. Some corporations may find this daunting, but when they look at the quality and quantity of pre-made code they can get for free, some of them sign on for the open source software. OSS benefits from this because they get contributions back from those companies. Linus has even made a few concessions to allow proprietary drivers, and while that's not an optimal solution, it expands the functionality of the kernel for those who want to use it.
Stallman's stance seems to be strictly principled: You can use this code for anything so long as it stays free. Disallowing TiVoisation isn't going to convince TiVo to unencumber their systems, should they be required to do so, it's going to convince them to switch to another kernel - which likely means nobody will be getting contributions from them. Even if you can't use TiVo's code on a TiVo, you can still learn from it and changes can even be merged into the kernel - improving the quality of the software. Prohibiting proprietary drivers on the Linux kernel isn't going to convince the hardware manufacturers to produce high quality, open source drivers - it will either result in no driver, or severely crippled open source drivers.
In short I'd much rather have open source be economical and give up a few ideals than have something completely unusable to stick to the principles of Free software.
I think, at least here on slashdot, money doesn't have a whole lot to do with choosing open source alternatives.
When I got my last laptop, I installed an old copy of Office XP I'd had lying around. I found it horribly unstable, so when I found out about OpenOffice, I tried it and I've never looked back. I also find a great deal of comfort knowing that I'm not dependent on one company for my documents. The open format provides a great deal of comfort to me.
That said, I agree with the rest of your statement. Downloading OpenOffice is a good place to start. If it's not satisfactory for whatever reason, no big loss, try MS Office.
I keep a portable version of firefox on my flash drive. In fact, I think I keep equivalents of all of the apps offered by AjaxWindows on my flash drive. I'll pass.
Part of the purpose of the GTK libraries is to be able to write cross platform software without having to spend a great deal of time porting the software for each platform. If a developer were trying to write software for several different platforms without a common library, they'd have to rewrite large portions of the code for each platform for each release. It would be a nightmare. I've got a pretty good feeling the Windows version of Gaim wouldn't exist if the developers had to port without cross platform libraries.
The summary doesn't mention this, and I honestly haven't read the linked article, but they did introduce a process to help reduce junk patents. Starting immediately after a patent is granted, there is a one year period in which companies, organizations, or individuals who have reason to oppose a patent can submit petitions and evidence to why the patent should not have been granted. It's intended to drastically reduce the costs of invalidating a patent.
It also introduces a plan to restrict submarine patents, requiring all patents be published within 18 months of first finding.
If your only reason for worrying about a patent were to block other people from patenting your idea that's fine. If you're trying to reap the other benefits of a patent, that's not going to help.
I agree. As much as I despise everything Jack Thompson stands for, I don't want him to disappear because I'm often amused by the sheer retardedness of his methods. Since I don't think I've ever read about Jack Thompson on anything more credible than slashdot or wikipedia, I occasionally find myself wondering if he could be a work of fiction.
I'm not trying to knock miranda, I'd likely be using it if I were on Windows, but there is something to be said for shared libraries and cross platform compatibility.
Firefox may not be the lightest web browser or the fastest, but with its plugins it has all the functionality I want from a web browser. Google Desktop isn't exactly light weight software, but I find the time it saves me well worth the extra processes that run (I might also note that I'm a Linux user, and I've found it to be much more efficient and stable than the alternatives). I don't use Picasa much, but it's nice for basic picture management - it provides what I need without getting in the way. OpenOffice isn't great as far as bloat, and I certainly don't use the pre-loader, but it gets the job done whenever I need an office suite.
Of that software list, the Gimp tries the hardest to run on a minimal memory footprint, and as some others have pointed out, that can be a pain in the ass. If I've got 500 MB of memory going unused, there's no reason for the Gimp to take extra time to avoid acquiring more memory.