FTFA: For some reason, as soon as a budget and a deadline are involved, all of the lessons we've learned over the years and applied successfully to open source projects seem to fly out the window. Discussions of what features are in and out of scope never seem to take place.
That's it right there. Everything revolves around staying within budget, and sometimes, the budget (and usually the deadline) is dependent upon the ROI that the project has to make. F/OSS doesn't have to worry about that.
...be warned that if you're developing software, you might want to actually read the license of anything else you or your contractors plan to use rather than just ignoring it like you usually do".
Here's parts of Section (bold mine):5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.
However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library". The executable is therefore covered by this License. Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables.
When a "work that uses the Library" uses material from a header file that is part of the Library, the object code for the work may be a derivative work of the Library even though the source code is not. Whether this is true is especially significant if the work can be linked without the Library, or if the work is itself a library. The threshold for this to be true is not precisely defined by law.
It looks to me that if I link to any library, my code is now a derivative. I'm sorry but the Q&A up on GNU is not a license so it doesn't matter what is said. The license will be what a judge will rule on.
My point is I will need a lawyer to understand this stuff and make sure I don't violate it. I'm not knocking it or anything, I'm just saying that a PRUDENT organization will understand the license completely - including getting legal advice.
I'm trying to find the article about Stallman's suit against NeXT regarding the Objective-C compiler. That is an example of what happens when you think you understand the GNU licenses.
the F/OSS movement has a dual personality. One wants their stuff to be widely used, especially by the corps. The other personality is flipping those same people off.
If you know something bad is happening and you're in a position to do something about it, shouldn't you?
I am sooo cynical, I would have to say, "No." Whistle blowers destroy any prospect of getting a job ever again, and wrongful termination lawsuits are a waste of time. The Economist did an article about this a few years ago. (I can't find it on their website.)Whistle-blowers get fucked in the end. The odds are in favor of business; not the little guy.
Anyway, the best thing to do is quit, find a new job, and if subpoenaed, then tell all - like that ex-Enron accountant - can't remember her name. Other than that, keep your mouth shut. How does it go again: never have a whistle-blower or a criminal background on your resume (CV).
at the shareholder's expense. When this is over, and if/when SCO loses, there's going to be a shareholder lawsuit. I guaaraannnteee it! Which will mean the death of SCO as we know it. Sure, it'll come back somehow, restructured and all, but it'll be a eunuch.
I've been shopping for machines, and the only time I've seen machines w/o Windows were the ones w/o any OS - in the server section for Small Business. I just figured I'd get one with a DVD and install Linux.
FTFA:... lawyer Jim Charne commented on the danger of this exceptionally wide-ranging patent,...
Here's the patent. Go down to the middle of the document and you'll see some specific mathematical algorithms. What I'm getting at is that it doesn't seem so broad. Then again, I'm not a Patent Lawyer or one of the defendents.
This individual was afraid of violence if a Harvard published those cartoons. Guess what, the Muslims got all bent out of shape because she suggested that there may be violence. WTF?!? Cartoons are shown and there's violence. Unbelievable. I'm sure there's going to be some eloquent excuse posted here about how it's not right to make the connection betwen Muslims and violence.
There can be excuses (offensive material, insensitive, or something else that implies that those people have are entitled to riot) till the end of time for their acts, but, unfortunately, their actions are not condemned. Funny isn't it? There's always an excuse for the Muslim riots, but never any condemnation from them.
Then, after you don't win, you get to put up for the rest of your time at that residence with crap junk mail. May the lord have mercy on your soul if you give those people your e-mail address.
That's the reason there are these "free" prizes. Anyone who collects personal information is doing it for some sort of marketing purposes. They may not sell it, or even use it for junk mail or junk calls, but it is being used for some sort of marketing purpose. Even then, if there's some sort of "transaction", as it is called many times in the "terms of service" statements, the new owners of the organization (or th same owners who reorganzied)can do anything that they want, such as sell all of that customer data. Even then, the "terms of service" isn't contract, so you couldn't hold them to it - even if you could, there's always the statment, "We reserve the right to change this agreement at anytime." So, WTF even have a terms of service if they may not even abide by them.
I'm ranting now. Bye.
Re:IPods are the only reason why Apple still exist
on
Woz On Apple's Success
·
· Score: 1
Actually, they were loooking at those same ratios that I posted back then and they were showing Apple to be less profitable than Dell and everyone else. IIRC, Apple's return on equity was in the low single digits back then.
Re:IPods are the only reason why Apple still exist
on
Woz On Apple's Success
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I mention this because a couple of years ago I was once with a bunch of mgt types and they were saying that Apple should get out of the PC business because they were an industry laggard. It looks like things have changed.
an someone explain to me why people care about windows media player being bundled with windows?
Microsoft Windows Media Player (TM) is an essential piece of the Microsoft Winddows operating system (TM). Without it, the operating system could not function. It was not placed to put any competition out of business or to get a "monopoly". All of those accusations are undeniably false.
the only "deadlocks" that occur are when you open the box and look at the cat...
Debuggers! You're right! If you try examining your variables, it would change their state. Hmmmm, it sounds like the debugger writers have the real challenge ahead of them! They could call it a "Cat scanner".
FTFA: "It is very bizarre that you know your computer has not run but you also know what the answer is," says team member Onur Hosten.
I wonder if it will give answers to questions not yet asked? [just joking]
Also, it sounds like these computers are still in the stage of "plug and play". Like the early electronic computers, you had to plug in patchcords to program it. This thing needs photons injected into it.
I wonder if there's any CompSci people thinking of the possible compilers that can be written for this thing? I'm thinking that a quantum computer will have the CompScientists throwing out a lot of the current Computer Science theory and developing new ones that fit into the computational capabilities of a quantum computer. I don't know, would deadlocks and such exist with a quantum computer? With all those funky quantum effects, like entanglement, you wouldn't have to worry about deadlocks - or whatever. I think you get me.
So, the phone company will by default always be cheaper.
Not necessarily. AOL may come in and negotiate a "bulk" deal, so to say, and as a result, end up with a cheaper "per unit" price than your typical retail or even business customer. And by business customer, I mean your local firm who needs a DSL, T1, or whatever. So AOL comes in and says, "Hey local monopoly telco who's sitting on billions of invested infrastructure and trying to figure out how to get the best ROI, we'll lease [insert amount of badwidth], but we want to only pay [insert steaply discounted rate]. Now if the local telco says "go fuck yourself AOL!", I don't know. Maybe AOL, will just stiff their dial-ups in that area until they switch to someone else.
World peace and mutual understanding! (And, um, some profit for the execs).
You've made an interesting point. Why not name the foundation the: "Larry Page and Sergey Brin Foundation"? Why does "Google" have to be in it? Or just name it the "Global Poverty Foundation" or whatever?
Slashdot Mirror
That's it right there. Everything revolves around staying within budget, and sometimes, the budget (and usually the deadline) is dependent upon the ROI that the project has to make. F/OSS doesn't have to worry about that.
I've been trying to see if there was a website for the language, you know like Perl, PHP, etc.... This is what I found: A political site?
The lumber industry, paper mills, and O'Reilly publishing are all it together! Create a new programming language and Presto! More revenue for all!
I agree with you. Lesser GPL
Here's parts of Section (bold mine):5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.
However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library". The executable is therefore covered by this License. Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables. When a "work that uses the Library" uses material from a header file that is part of the Library, the object code for the work may be a derivative work of the Library even though the source code is not. Whether this is true is especially significant if the work can be linked without the Library, or if the work is itself a library. The threshold for this to be true is not precisely defined by law.
It looks to me that if I link to any library, my code is now a derivative. I'm sorry but the Q&A up on GNU is not a license so it doesn't matter what is said. The license will be what a judge will rule on.
My point is I will need a lawyer to understand this stuff and make sure I don't violate it. I'm not knocking it or anything, I'm just saying that a PRUDENT organization will understand the license completely - including getting legal advice.
I'm trying to find the article about Stallman's suit against NeXT regarding the Objective-C compiler. That is an example of what happens when you think you understand the GNU licenses.
the F/OSS movement has a dual personality. One wants their stuff to be widely used, especially by the corps. The other personality is flipping those same people off.
This is what happens to whistleblowers
I am sooo cynical, I would have to say, "No." Whistle blowers destroy any prospect of getting a job ever again, and wrongful termination lawsuits are a waste of time. The Economist did an article about this a few years ago. (I can't find it on their website.)Whistle-blowers get fucked in the end. The odds are in favor of business; not the little guy.
Anyway, the best thing to do is quit, find a new job, and if subpoenaed, then tell all - like that ex-Enron accountant - can't remember her name. Other than that, keep your mouth shut. How does it go again: never have a whistle-blower or a criminal background on your resume (CV).
at the shareholder's expense. When this is over, and if/when SCO loses, there's going to be a shareholder lawsuit. I guaaraannnteee it! Which will mean the death of SCO as we know it. Sure, it'll come back somehow, restructured and all, but it'll be a eunuch.
The more slack; the more rope to hang themselves.
Anyway, how do you find those burried ones?
Here's the patent. Go down to the middle of the document and you'll see some specific mathematical algorithms. What I'm getting at is that it doesn't seem so broad. Then again, I'm not a Patent Lawyer or one of the defendents.
This individual was afraid of violence if a Harvard published those cartoons. Guess what, the Muslims got all bent out of shape because she suggested that there may be violence. WTF?!? Cartoons are shown and there's violence. Unbelievable. I'm sure there's going to be some eloquent excuse posted here about how it's not right to make the connection betwen Muslims and violence.
There can be excuses (offensive material, insensitive, or something else that implies that those people have are entitled to riot) till the end of time for their acts, but, unfortunately, their actions are not condemned. Funny isn't it? There's always an excuse for the Muslim riots, but never any condemnation from them.
That's the reason there are these "free" prizes. Anyone who collects personal information is doing it for some sort of marketing purposes. They may not sell it, or even use it for junk mail or junk calls, but it is being used for some sort of marketing purpose. Even then, if there's some sort of "transaction", as it is called many times in the "terms of service" statements, the new owners of the organization (or th same owners who reorganzied)can do anything that they want, such as sell all of that customer data. Even then, the "terms of service" isn't contract, so you couldn't hold them to it - even if you could, there's always the statment, "We reserve the right to change this agreement at anytime." So, WTF even have a terms of service if they may not even abide by them.
I'm ranting now. Bye.
Actually, they were loooking at those same ratios that I posted back then and they were showing Apple to be less profitable than Dell and everyone else. IIRC, Apple's return on equity was in the low single digits back then.
Industry Comparison: Apple doing better than Dell in terms of operating margin. MS still better 40+%
ROE very nice!
I mention this because a couple of years ago I was once with a bunch of mgt types and they were saying that Apple should get out of the PC business because they were an industry laggard. It looks like things have changed.
Microsoft Windows Media Player (TM) is an essential piece of the Microsoft Winddows operating system (TM). Without it, the operating system could not function. It was not placed to put any competition out of business or to get a "monopoly". All of those accusations are undeniably false.
Sincerely,
Steve Ballmer.
Debuggers! You're right! If you try examining your variables, it would change their state. Hmmmm, it sounds like the debugger writers have the real challenge ahead of them! They could call it a "Cat scanner".
I wonder if it will give answers to questions not yet asked? [just joking]
Also, it sounds like these computers are still in the stage of "plug and play". Like the early electronic computers, you had to plug in patchcords to program it. This thing needs photons injected into it.
I wonder if there's any CompSci people thinking of the possible compilers that can be written for this thing? I'm thinking that a quantum computer will have the CompScientists throwing out a lot of the current Computer Science theory and developing new ones that fit into the computational capabilities of a quantum computer. I don't know, would deadlocks and such exist with a quantum computer? With all those funky quantum effects, like entanglement, you wouldn't have to worry about deadlocks - or whatever. I think you get me.
Not necessarily. AOL may come in and negotiate a "bulk" deal, so to say, and as a result, end up with a cheaper "per unit" price than your typical retail or even business customer. And by business customer, I mean your local firm who needs a DSL, T1, or whatever. So AOL comes in and says, "Hey local monopoly telco who's sitting on billions of invested infrastructure and trying to figure out how to get the best ROI, we'll lease [insert amount of badwidth], but we want to only pay [insert steaply discounted rate]. Now if the local telco says "go fuck yourself AOL!", I don't know. Maybe AOL, will just stiff their dial-ups in that area until they switch to someone else.
AOL is probably leasing bandwidth from your local telco. As far as I know, AOL doesn't have their own infrastructure.
You've made an interesting point. Why not name the foundation the: "Larry Page and Sergey Brin Foundation"? Why does "Google" have to be in it? Or just name it the "Global Poverty Foundation" or whatever?