This survey is biased -- it assume defacto that there there is no "line in the sand" about whether code is proprietary or not when it is repurposed, or copied for use from another client or employer, or any other purpose.
It also makes no distinction between coding to sell software to a client, or being paid as a consultant to develop an application for a client, which are very different things. The later assume the codebase is written for developing a software product -- the product itself will be sold, not the cost of creating the product for a specific purpose. Think Microsoft Office - a develper writes code for Microsoft to include in a project which will be sold. The developer is paid to write code for the product, which is proprietary to Microsoft. A Developer re-using any or all of this proprietary code is harmfully wrong, in my opinion.
However, In my trade, we are often paid to fuse original code and free code libraries with custom development for a client, for a specific application. The client is paying us for the service of assembling and customizing an application for their specific needs, not to resell to someone else (ala Microsoft Office). In this case, the client does own the code we wrote in the sense that it is theirs to use, but if open source libraries were used or other generic/free code snippets and routines were deployed, it is understood that they do not own this code, but they can use and modify it (And pay for us to modify it more!) at will.
In this latter case, copying code is a non-issue. The code is not what is being bought, the labor and expertise of the consultantancy in assembling an application is.
If they can't find academic, gov't, or corporate sponsorship.. put up a donation box a la Paypal.
Forget not, SETI@Home is as much a search for extraterrestrial life as it is a dorky eyecandy screensaver. I'd definitely shell out a few bucks to pay for it just *as a screensaver*, and I'm sure many, many others would do the same. Certainly beats "Starfield Simulation" or whatever.
if you are looking specifically for multiplayer games, so the kiddies can interact, there are a few games out there that are both fun and intellectually stimulating, while not being all about 'killkilkill!', and are not quite "Oregon Trail".
Someone suggested CIV III, which is a great choice. Some others:
Black & White (community building, resource management, influence)
Northern Light does a great deal of enterprise work (from my understanding...) that predates the CIA work for a long time. I think it is totally coincidental.
I mean, it's the beginning of the new year, they probably made the decision sometime last year to close the public site as it just wasn't brining in any cash - who makes money from web advertising? nobody. you can't sustain an army of engineers on a free public search site. at least you can't when the competition is tight, and though the Northern Light search engine is very powerful, more precise and relevant than Google, it's just not as popular. Less eyeballs = less $$$ per click from advertisers. And Northernlight kept their integrity and never sold out like AltaVista (The advertisement search engine), and kept it "all about search", and relevancy, for so long.
You can't give away something for free if it is costing you alot of money to do it forever.
On the other side, enterprise search, classification and what they call "content integration" services (see their press releases on northernlight.com) probably make a lot more money, and since their site has shown how GOOD they are at search and classification, and selling premium documents, probably puts them in a really good position in this market.
I think it is a wise move for them as a business, though I will miss the search engine.;(
well, i'm about to graduate from college, and have already signed a NDA/Non Competitive/Development Agreement with my first employer. I've lent a hand to a few open source projects, and have a couple other things of my own going on. I wish i had language like that before to ammend the document i signed to protect my interest in developing for "not the corporation".
OSDA is something i support, and hope others endorse it as well. Hopefully I'm the last crop the has to put up with these sort of IP enslavements, and maybe in the first batch able to have our IP rights recaptured.
"...It is, therefore, an object of the present invention to provide a host processor with apparatus for enhancing the operation of a microprocessor which is less expensive than conventional state of the art microprocessors yet is compatible with and capable of running application programs and operating systems designed for other microprocessors at a faster rate than those other microprocessors..."
think of it like this: the cpu is capable of reading the instruction set for another architecture, figuring out what that architecture needs from the cpu, determining all possibile instructions of that architecture, and "emulating" that architecture by a technique that allows the "emulation" to be as fast or faster than the original architeture (by taking advantage of the invented cpu's "extra" free stuff).
so, what that means is that the cpu would theoretically be able to run any OS designed for any instruction set (ie x86, alpha, mac, etc.)
Slashdot Mirror
This survey is biased -- it assume defacto that there there is no "line in the sand" about whether code is proprietary or not when it is repurposed, or copied for use from another client or employer, or any other purpose.
It also makes no distinction between coding to sell software to a client, or being paid as a consultant to develop an application for a client, which are very different things. The later assume the codebase is written for developing a software product -- the product itself will be sold, not the cost of creating the product for a specific purpose. Think Microsoft Office - a develper writes code for Microsoft to include in a project which will be sold. The developer is paid to write code for the product, which is proprietary to Microsoft. A Developer re-using any or all of this proprietary code is harmfully wrong, in my opinion.
However, In my trade, we are often paid to fuse original code and free code libraries with custom development for a client, for a specific application. The client is paying us for the service of assembling and customizing an application for their specific needs, not to resell to someone else (ala Microsoft Office). In this case, the client does own the code we wrote in the sense that it is theirs to use, but if open source libraries were used or other generic/free code snippets and routines were deployed, it is understood that they do not own this code, but they can use and modify it (And pay for us to modify it more!) at will.
In this latter case, copying code is a non-issue. The code is not what is being bought, the labor and expertise of the consultantancy in assembling an application is.
i just want to help keep the economy afloat, and microsoft employees out of the unemployment line.
If they can't find academic, gov't, or corporate sponsorship.. put up a donation box a la Paypal.
Forget not, SETI@Home is as much a search for extraterrestrial life as it is a dorky eyecandy screensaver. I'd definitely shell out a few bucks to pay for it just *as a screensaver*, and I'm sure many, many others would do the same. Certainly beats "Starfield Simulation" or whatever.
if you are looking specifically for multiplayer games, so the kiddies can interact, there are a few games out there that are both fun and intellectually stimulating, while not being all about 'killkilkill!', and are not quite "Oregon Trail".
Someone suggested CIV III, which is a great choice. Some others:
Black & White (community building, resource management, influence)
Empire Earth (diplomacy, resource management)
Tropico (civil planning/management, resource management)[single player]
GTA#....oh, nm.
I don't think the two are related in any way...
;(
Northern Light does a great deal of enterprise work (from my understanding...) that predates the CIA work for a long time. I think it is totally coincidental.
I mean, it's the beginning of the new year, they probably made the decision sometime last year to close the public site as it just wasn't brining in any cash - who makes money from web advertising? nobody. you can't sustain an army of engineers on a free public search site. at least you can't when the competition is tight, and though the Northern Light search engine is very powerful, more precise and relevant than Google, it's just not as popular. Less eyeballs = less $$$ per click from advertisers. And Northernlight kept their integrity and never sold out like AltaVista (The advertisement search engine), and kept it "all about search", and relevancy, for so long.
You can't give away something for free if it is costing you alot of money to do it forever.
On the other side, enterprise search, classification and what they call "content integration" services (see their press releases on northernlight.com) probably make a lot more money, and since their site has shown how GOOD they are at search and classification, and selling premium documents, probably puts them in a really good position in this market.
I think it is a wise move for them as a business, though I will miss the search engine.
well, i'm about to graduate from college, and have already signed a NDA/Non Competitive/Development Agreement with my first employer. I've lent a hand to a few open source projects, and have a couple other things of my own going on. I wish i had language like that before to ammend the document i signed to protect my interest in developing for "not the corporation". OSDA is something i support, and hope others endorse it as well. Hopefully I'm the last crop the has to put up with these sort of IP enslavements, and maybe in the first batch able to have our IP rights recaptured.
"...It is, therefore, an object of the present invention to provide a host processor with apparatus for enhancing the operation of a microprocessor which is less expensive than conventional state of the art microprocessors
yet is compatible with and capable of running application programs and operating systems designed for other microprocessors at a faster rate than those other microprocessors..."
think of it like this: the cpu is capable of reading the instruction set for another architecture, figuring out what that architecture needs from the cpu, determining all possibile instructions of that architecture, and "emulating" that architecture by a technique that allows the "emulation" to be as fast or faster than the original architeture (by taking advantage of the invented cpu's "extra" free stuff).
so, what that means is that the cpu would theoretically be able to run any OS designed for any instruction set (ie x86, alpha, mac, etc.)
or at least that's how i read it, but whoami