Although, at least between KDE and GNOME, I can just say "clipboard clipboard clipboard" as enough of a reason. Granted, it's gotten better, but not that much better (and why, exactly, do I have an X clipboard as well as the WM clipboard...?).
You're being an idiot and hair-splitting in order to dodge the fact that the majority of software's "use" (by the creator) is at least in some form predicated on distribution. I can't distribute something that links to the GPL (which is a "use" as far as I am concerned, because I am using my code--specifically, my use is distribution).
It's their right to license under the GPL, of course, just as it's my right to refuse to license anything under the GPL (I license under BSD or CDDL), due to the cretinousness of the GPL. So I don't use GPL libraries and I encourage others to avoid them as well because of the inherent immorality of GNU's stance on software "freedom" (which is not freedom at all), as is also my right.
Please don't conflate "conservative" with "neoconservative". I am the former; "conservatives = Republicans" is the latter.
I wrote in "None of the Above" on my Presidential ballot because I couldn't in good conscience vote for either Presidential candidate, voted Republican for my senator (because her Democrat challenger proved very incompetent in the House), and voted for a Democrat for the House of Representatives because her Republican challenger is a moron.
I dislike Gore for his hypocrisy, not because of his party affiliation.
This kind of hair-splitting is painful to look at. Surely you're smarter than that. Distribution of code is "doing something with" that code. And while they're within their legal rights to make the demand that they do (licensing linked work under the GPL as well), that doesn't make it any less immoral or unethical.
Not being "ready" for Linux is like not being "ready" to take a driving test in a car where the brake lines are frayed and the steering wheel jams when you try to make a left turn.
The terms are immoral; the person writing GPL code (and in some cases, keep in mind that this code can sometimes be the only way of interfacing with something, such as the KDE environment) is essentially blocking off not only proprietary development, but the development of open source that doesn't live and breathe according to Stallman's principles.
It attempts to force ideological conformity. It is immoral.
OK, so it's comparable--to other 10,000-square-foot houses. Even with office space, why do two people need a house that big? Gore's huge on telling everybody else to downsize, to conserve--while it's great that he's buying some electricity from "green" sources, wouldn't having a smaller house be setting a better example?
It's the whole "hypocrisy" argument that annoys me, nothing more. He tells others to conserve, but while some of his properties use "green", his grid usage is still an order of magnitude more than, say, mine.
The user interface makes me cringe, and the disconnects are considerably more than annoying because I set alerts on certain users and, the last time I used Kopete, it treated all logins by me as logins by those users and fired those alerts--to be fair, Pidgin does this as well, but Pidgin doesn't randomly drop out on me.
Re:How would *you* know?
on
Qt Becomes LGPL
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
How is it trolling to say I don't use a Linux desktop? I've tried it. It's not good. I wish it were; I don't like Windows any better (Windows currently wins based on applications more than anything) and the OS X user interface makes me cringe. But it's bad. It's not usable.
"Troll" is not a synonym for "disagrees with me and therefore is bad".
I didn't say that they don't have the right to license their code under it. I said that they're wrong to do so, but I would not presume to take that right away from them.
Had he the authority, Stallman would take away my right to write code that was not under his perverted idea of "freedom".
MIT/X11/BSD, MPL/CDDL, Artistic. Even the LGPL (though the problems with static linking make it kind of suck for some applications, it's still head and shoulders above the GPL). Those (and some others, of course) are ethical licenses, because they don't presume to tell you what you can do with your code.
Of course they can license their code under it. I didn't say they couldn't. That said, it's an immoral license. I do not use GPL-based code for my own work if I ever have any intent on distributing it. I license my own code under BSD and MPL/CDDL, which are both ethical licenses. The former because there are no meaningful restrictions to use of the code; the latter because it is a true quid pro quo, as opposed to the false one of the GPL (the GPL isn't "give back your changes to my code", which would be fine, but rather "give me your code") and the problematic one of the LGPL (no static linking reduces where code under the LGPL can be practically used).
Because Kopete is an ugly Mac-ish mess? I've seriously never seen anybody use it. Among the folks I know, grabbing Pidgin from APT or YUM seems to be one of the first steps on a new box.
Webcam support might make me change my mind on that, when I actually need a webcam (though if Kopete has it, it's rather stupid that Pidgin doesn't). Or I can go back to my normal Windows desktop.:P
No, the GPL just presumes to attempt to restrict what I do with my code that has no GPL code in it. Which is within their rights, but thoroughly corrupt and domineering of them.
Which makes sense, as Stallman is the ugliest type of human being--the zealot.
Bzzt, wrong. I don't want to be using different apps when "integration is important". I want it to work. That's one of (many) reasons I don't use a Linux desktop.
Nokia doesn't give a shit about the Free Software bullshit (and neither does anyone else of relevance). Nokia is LGPLing the libraries to encourage development on their platforms.
They have more important things to do than suck up to Stallman.
Right, one desktop's programs for everybody! Because people really want to use Kopete under KDE instead of Pidgin (bahahahaha) or any of the GNOME text editors under GNOME instead of something like Kate (baaaaaaaaahahahahaha).
Users are more or less forced to mix them up, and I still have clipboard issues with crossing between applications to this day.
The biggest ads I have are 50Kb, and the same ones are displayed on all sites (so the banner doesn't have to be re-downloaded; my HTTP headers are configured to expire the cache only once per day). They don't even attempt to download on mobile browsers to avoid hitting those users with bandwidth charges.
I've experimented with text ads, but they simply don't pay as well (they're CPM ads--while I mentioned CPM above, I should have pointed out that my ads through Project Wonderful are cost-per-day ads; the only problem is that my CPM rates are much lower because of adblock).
I hate ads as much as the next guy, I really do. But I go the extra mile to make my ads not suck.
The site should be fully functional with AdBlock and NoScript.
Yes on the latter, a resounding "no" on the first.
Why? Because they're making their money off the advertisements. I know you want everything for free RIGHT GOD DAMN NOW, but people still have to make money. And the way most companies on the web make money (if they do at all) is via those advertisements. I host and operate a web-based browser game, and I have exactly three advertisements (a skyscraper ad on the right side of the login page, a banner ad at the bottom of every page, out of the way of all relevant game information, and a 300x250 rectangle ad on the logout page. All are screened for obnoxiousness and I don't allow Flash or Java advertisements; JPG/PNG/GIF (no animation) only. 70% of my players block them. That's 70% less CPM and turns something that could be profitable into something that doesn't quite pay for the hosting cost of the game. I've been thinking about closing it down because of it.
(Now, if you'd like to subscribe to a website, of course there should be no advertisements and AdBlock should be unnecessary. If I offered a subscription service for the game, it's a no-brainer that I'd strip out all advertisements as well as kick in whatever goodies I could think of. But very few people actually do that sort of subscription in the browser game world.)
Slashdot Mirror
At least somebody gets it.
Although, at least between KDE and GNOME, I can just say "clipboard clipboard clipboard" as enough of a reason. Granted, it's gotten better, but not that much better (and why, exactly, do I have an X clipboard as well as the WM clipboard...?).
You're being an idiot and hair-splitting in order to dodge the fact that the majority of software's "use" (by the creator) is at least in some form predicated on distribution. I can't distribute something that links to the GPL (which is a "use" as far as I am concerned, because I am using my code--specifically, my use is distribution).
It's their right to license under the GPL, of course, just as it's my right to refuse to license anything under the GPL (I license under BSD or CDDL), due to the cretinousness of the GPL. So I don't use GPL libraries and I encourage others to avoid them as well because of the inherent immorality of GNU's stance on software "freedom" (which is not freedom at all), as is also my right.
Not a hard concept.
Please don't conflate "conservative" with "neoconservative". I am the former; "conservatives = Republicans" is the latter.
I wrote in "None of the Above" on my Presidential ballot because I couldn't in good conscience vote for either Presidential candidate, voted Republican for my senator (because her Democrat challenger proved very incompetent in the House), and voted for a Democrat for the House of Representatives because her Republican challenger is a moron.
I dislike Gore for his hypocrisy, not because of his party affiliation.
This kind of hair-splitting is painful to look at. Surely you're smarter than that. Distribution of code is "doing something with" that code. And while they're within their legal rights to make the demand that they do (licensing linked work under the GPL as well), that doesn't make it any less immoral or unethical.
Not being "ready" for Linux is like not being "ready" to take a driving test in a car where the brake lines are frayed and the steering wheel jams when you try to make a left turn.
The terms are immoral; the person writing GPL code (and in some cases, keep in mind that this code can sometimes be the only way of interfacing with something, such as the KDE environment) is essentially blocking off not only proprietary development, but the development of open source that doesn't live and breathe according to Stallman's principles.
It attempts to force ideological conformity. It is immoral.
But the GPL doesn't make it similarly attractive. It makes it much less attractive.
OK, so it's comparable--to other 10,000-square-foot houses. Even with office space, why do two people need a house that big? Gore's huge on telling everybody else to downsize, to conserve--while it's great that he's buying some electricity from "green" sources, wouldn't having a smaller house be setting a better example?
Or are tiny houses just for us peasants?
It's the whole "hypocrisy" argument that annoys me, nothing more. He tells others to conserve, but while some of his properties use "green", his grid usage is still an order of magnitude more than, say, mine.
The user interface makes me cringe, and the disconnects are considerably more than annoying because I set alerts on certain users and, the last time I used Kopete, it treated all logins by me as logins by those users and fired those alerts--to be fair, Pidgin does this as well, but Pidgin doesn't randomly drop out on me.
How is it trolling to say I don't use a Linux desktop? I've tried it. It's not good. I wish it were; I don't like Windows any better (Windows currently wins based on applications more than anything) and the OS X user interface makes me cringe. But it's bad. It's not usable.
"Troll" is not a synonym for "disagrees with me and therefore is bad".
I agree. Hence why it is my primary desktop, even though I really would like a Linux desktop that didn't suck.
(I'm amused that the post you replied to was modded troll. Do people really think that Linux integration doesn't suck?)
I didn't say that they don't have the right to license their code under it. I said that they're wrong to do so, but I would not presume to take that right away from them.
Had he the authority, Stallman would take away my right to write code that was not under his perverted idea of "freedom".
MIT/X11/BSD, MPL/CDDL, Artistic. Even the LGPL (though the problems with static linking make it kind of suck for some applications, it's still head and shoulders above the GPL). Those (and some others, of course) are ethical licenses, because they don't presume to tell you what you can do with your code.
Of course they can license their code under it. I didn't say they couldn't. That said, it's an immoral license. I do not use GPL-based code for my own work if I ever have any intent on distributing it. I license my own code under BSD and MPL/CDDL, which are both ethical licenses. The former because there are no meaningful restrictions to use of the code; the latter because it is a true quid pro quo, as opposed to the false one of the GPL (the GPL isn't "give back your changes to my code", which would be fine, but rather "give me your code") and the problematic one of the LGPL (no static linking reduces where code under the LGPL can be practically used).
Because Kopete is an ugly Mac-ish mess? I've seriously never seen anybody use it. Among the folks I know, grabbing Pidgin from APT or YUM seems to be one of the first steps on a new box.
Webcam support might make me change my mind on that, when I actually need a webcam (though if Kopete has it, it's rather stupid that Pidgin doesn't). Or I can go back to my normal Windows desktop. :P
No, the GPL just presumes to attempt to restrict what I do with my code that has no GPL code in it. Which is within their rights, but thoroughly corrupt and domineering of them.
Which makes sense, as Stallman is the ugliest type of human being--the zealot.
Bzzt, wrong. I don't want to be using different apps when "integration is important". I want it to work. That's one of (many) reasons I don't use a Linux desktop.
You'd be the first I've seen. Kopete is terrible.
The Mono crew will be able to release their stuff under LGPL too. which is great, because Winforms->QT# is a really easy port.
Nokia doesn't give a shit about the Free Software bullshit (and neither does anyone else of relevance). Nokia is LGPLing the libraries to encourage development on their platforms.
They have more important things to do than suck up to Stallman.
Right, one desktop's programs for everybody! Because people really want to use Kopete under KDE instead of Pidgin (bahahahaha) or any of the GNOME text editors under GNOME instead of something like Kate (baaaaaaaaahahahahaha).
Users are more or less forced to mix them up, and I still have clipboard issues with crossing between applications to this day.
The GPL is inherently corrupt and restrictive, so this is a great move.
(The LGPL isn't the best of licenses--the BSD license in a perfect world, or the CDDL/MPL otherwise--but it's a hell of a lot better than the GPL!)
Bravo, Nokia, and thank you.
It is possible, though IIRC it requires JavaScript trickery. My ad provider, Project Wonderful, does it on their home page with the following script:
var isFF = (navigator.userAgent.indexOf("Firefox") > -1) ? true : false;
var hasABP = false;
function detect_abp() {
if(isFF) {
if(Components.interfaces.nsIAdblockPlus != undefined) hasABP = true;
else {
var AbpImage = document.createElement("IMG");
var AbpIframe = document.createElement("IFRAME");
AbpIframe.id = 'abpiframedetector';
AbpIframe.src = '/adimages/';
AbpIframe.style.display = 'block';
AbpImage.id = 'abpimgdetector';
AbpImage.src = '/adimages/textlink-ads.jpg';
AbpImage.style.width = AbpIframe.style.width = '1px';
AbpImage.style.height = AbpIframe.style.height = '1px';
AbpImage.style.border = AbpIframe.style.border = '0px';
AbpImage.style.top = AbpIframe.style.top = '-1000px';
AbpImage.style.left = AbpIframe.style.left = '-1000px';
document.body.appendChild(AbpImage);
document.body.appendChild(AbpIframe);
setTimeout(set_abp_status, 100);
}
}
}
function set_abp_status() {
if(document.getElementById('abpimgdetector').style.display == 'none') hasABP = true;
else if(document.getElementById('abpiframedetector').clientHeight == 0) hasABP = true;
if (hasABP)
{
document.getElementById('adblock_message').innerHTML = "write some stuff here";
}
}
There's an iframe with that ID on the page that gets zapped by ABP. I don't feel right using that script, though.
The biggest ads I have are 50Kb, and the same ones are displayed on all sites (so the banner doesn't have to be re-downloaded; my HTTP headers are configured to expire the cache only once per day). They don't even attempt to download on mobile browsers to avoid hitting those users with bandwidth charges.
I've experimented with text ads, but they simply don't pay as well (they're CPM ads--while I mentioned CPM above, I should have pointed out that my ads through Project Wonderful are cost-per-day ads; the only problem is that my CPM rates are much lower because of adblock).
I hate ads as much as the next guy, I really do. But I go the extra mile to make my ads not suck.
The site should be fully functional with AdBlock and NoScript.
Yes on the latter, a resounding "no" on the first.
Why? Because they're making their money off the advertisements. I know you want everything for free RIGHT GOD DAMN NOW, but people still have to make money. And the way most companies on the web make money (if they do at all) is via those advertisements. I host and operate a web-based browser game, and I have exactly three advertisements (a skyscraper ad on the right side of the login page, a banner ad at the bottom of every page, out of the way of all relevant game information, and a 300x250 rectangle ad on the logout page. All are screened for obnoxiousness and I don't allow Flash or Java advertisements; JPG/PNG/GIF (no animation) only. 70% of my players block them. That's 70% less CPM and turns something that could be profitable into something that doesn't quite pay for the hosting cost of the game. I've been thinking about closing it down because of it.
(Now, if you'd like to subscribe to a website, of course there should be no advertisements and AdBlock should be unnecessary. If I offered a subscription service for the game, it's a no-brainer that I'd strip out all advertisements as well as kick in whatever goodies I could think of. But very few people actually do that sort of subscription in the browser game world.)