A Steam Account has so far been the easiest and best ways to share a game that I've ever seen. Tell your friend what your SteamID and password is, and as long as you aren't on at the same time, they have full access to all your games. Installing multiple games is a breeze, the only limiting factor is the long download times.
You don't need to submerge the craft, which would require too much water, and a place to put it in. (The ocean won't work.) All you gotta do is put the water IN the spacecraft and watch for the water to spray OUT! The ship contains the water, and you only need enough to fill up the ship.
You can even use dowsing rods to find where it's coming out.
Liberty City baseball bats, Liberty City golf clubs, Liberty City brass knuckles, Liberty City pistols, Liberty City cars (with convenient hot-wire accesibility panel!) and my personal fav, Liberty City branded hookers! (right on the small of their back!)
Wonder how much longer until people start selling their Slashdot accounts on eBay... and does selling your mySpace profile mean that all your mySpace friends have to be their friend now, instead?
If it was his site, and therefore he was the one who holds ownership of the IP, just because he allows others to use it under said CC license doeesn't mean he can't himself use it for his own, for-profit ends. His ownership = his choice of use. There are certainly arguments about someone else creating the content for his wiki. But if we assume that he made a clause in the terms of use, then he can use the content others posted to his own site to his own ends.
Is not a man entitled to the sweat of his brow? No, says the man on Slashdot.
I don't read the license because IANAL... and because they don't have alternative licenses.
I suspect the add hardware clause is in the OEM licenses. I worked at a small computer shop and spent 2-3 hours on the phone trying to convince M$ to validate the license on a machine which only took me 1 hour to change the motherboard on. Once I literally got passed back and forth between M$ and the OEM. (eMachines, I think) Each claimed the other was responsible for the licensing. M$ saying that eMachines needed to give me a new one, and eMachines saying that M$ should be vaidating the license.
The issue was never resolved, and we had to give the customer their computer back in perfectly working order - without an operating system. Needless to say, they were upset.
FTA, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini:
"Frankly speaking, instructing people to make a bomb has nothing to do with the freedom of expression, or the freedom of informing people.
"The right balance, in my view, is to give priority to the protection of absolute rights and, first of all, right to life."
A more important question in my mind is, who DOES get to see the information on making bombs? There are many, many industrial applications for explosive devices. In fact, I can buy explosive devices online!
Hostage situations can drag on for a long, long time. News sites release breaking news within minutes. Search sites poll popular news sites more frequently. There are certainly cases where the example would be valid, albeit it is dramatic.
Every so often there's a question to Slashdot from a system administrator who's trying to figure out how to explain to their bosses what they do all day to get paid. Nailing down that quantity is harder than hammering in a rubber nail... with the proper hammer design, board media and time, it can be done, but it ain't always very feasible. (Hammering it into Jello always worked pretty well for me though...)
Again, it can usually be done, but it's usually a whole lot easier to just pay someone hourly or salary and be done with it. It's a lot easier to make sure people aren't slacking than to define when they aren't. Because like pornography, we know slacking when we see it... which is usually when someone is checking out pornography.
Lots of people are mentioning how to make money with these GPL violations, and it all boils down to what has become a classic American war cry: SUUUUUEEEE SUUUEEE. Not usually a good idea.
So he that goes to law, as the proverb is, holds a wolf by
the ears, or, as sheep in a storm runs for shelter to a briar.
(Robert Burton (1577-1640) Anatomy of Melancholy, 1621,
Democritus to the Reader)
The key to making money is working with people and not against them. So, as the owner of the code, you have every right to relicense it. Call the company violating your license. Mention their non-compliance with your current license. Say that, should they not wish to comply with the current licensing, you would be willing to license it to them under a license they were more comfortable with, for say, a small sum. No, it's not like winning the legal lottery, the key is to rinse and repeat. But don't expect much in the way of repeats if you use GPL. The real key with making money is to provide support for it. When you make that license, be sure and mention that you are available to add custom code or assist with integrating with their product. Charge $1000 an hour as a consultant or specialist, whichever term you feel is more appropriate. Sleep on a bed stuffed with money and build more GPL code that attracts the attention of others.
GPL is NOT FREE. I think it's a mistake to keep on calling it such. The license outlines very specific requirements. You are NOT free to do whatever you want with it. Even BSD requires a few small things.
One of the tenets in GPL is you have to return what you have added on. It does hurt you if someone else extends your program and doesn't return the favor you gave them in creating the program. A better description of the reasons behind Stallman's thinking comes from Free as in Freedom by Sam Williams, quoted below. The book is CC, and you can read the rest at O'reilly's open book.
The project's new name, Emacs, came courtesy of Stallman. Short for "editing macros," it signified the evolutionary transcendence that had taken place during the macros explosion two years before. It also took advantage of a gap in the software programming lexicon. Noting a lack of programs on ITS starting with the letter "E," Stallman chose Emacs, making it possible to reference the program with a single letter. Once again, the hacker lust for efficiency had left its mark.6
In the course of developing a standard system of macro commands, Stallman and Steele had to traverse a political tightrope. In creating a standard program, Stallman was in clear violation of the fundamental hacker tenet-"promote decentralization." He was also threatening to hobble the very flexibility that had fueled TECO's explosive innovation in the first place.
"On the one hand, we were trying to make a uniform command set again; on the other hand, we wanted to keep it open ended, because the programmability was important," recalls Steele.
To solve the problem, Stallman, Steele, and fellow hackers David Moon and Dan Weinreib limited their standardization effort to the WYSIWYG commands that controlled how text appeared on-screen. The rest of the Emacs effort would be devoted to retaining the program's Tinker Toy-style extensibility.
Stallman now faced another conundrum: if users made changes but didn't communicate those changes back to the rest of the community, the Tower of Babel effect would simply emerge in other places. Falling back on the hacker doctrine of sharing innovation, Stallman embedded a statement within the source code that set the terms of use. Users were free to modify and redistribute the code on the condition that they gave back all the extensions they made. Stallman dubbed it the " Emacs Commune." Just as TECO had become more than a simple editor, Emacs had become more than a simple software program. To Stallman, it was a social contract. In an early memo documenting the project, Stallman spelled out the contract terms. "EMACS," he wrote, "was distributed on a basis of communal sharing, which means that all improvements must be given back to me to be incorporated and distributed."
Not everybody accepted the contract. The explosive innovation continued throughout the decade, resulting in a host of Emacs-like programs with varying degrees of cross-compatibility. A few cited their relation to Stallman's original Emacs with humorously recursive names: Sine (Sine is not Emacs), Eine (Eine is not Emacs), and Zwei (Zwei was Eine initially). As a devoted exponent of the hacker ethic, Stallman saw no reason to halt this innovation through legal harassment. Still, the fact that some people would so eagerly take software from the community chest, alter it, and slap a new name on the resulting software displayed a stunning lack of courtesy.
Such rude behavior was reflected against other, unsettling developments in the hacker community. Brian Reid's 1979 decision to embed "time bombs" in Scribe, making it possible for Unilogic to limit unpaid user access to the software, was a dark omen to Stallman. "He considered it the most Nazi thing he ever saw in his life," recalls Reid. Despite going on to later Internet fame as the cocreator of the Usenet alt heirarchy, Reid says he still has yet to live down that 1979 decision, at least in Stallman's eyes. "He said that all software should be free and the prospect of charging money for software was a crime against humanity."
Slashdot Mirror
Not to be a troll but.... I vote for all the black people.
Put him in the fire mines... to mine fire.
I think the point is the cool map of the internet, not the really awesome comic.
A Steam Account has so far been the easiest and best ways to share a game that I've ever seen. Tell your friend what your SteamID and password is, and as long as you aren't on at the same time, they have full access to all your games. Installing multiple games is a breeze, the only limiting factor is the long download times.
Try sending those science journals an automatically generated paper.
That's just crazy.
You don't need to submerge the craft, which would require too much water, and a place to put it in. (The ocean won't work.) All you gotta do is put the water IN the spacecraft and watch for the water to spray OUT! The ship contains the water, and you only need enough to fill up the ship.
You can even use dowsing rods to find where it's coming out.
Hmmmm, he seems to have moved from a small to a commanding lead... I wonder why?
..but I can't hum it for you, since it's a copyrighted work.
Where are YOU wearing the bracelet?
Liberty City baseball bats, Liberty City golf clubs, Liberty City brass knuckles, Liberty City pistols, Liberty City cars (with convenient hot-wire accesibility panel!) and my personal fav, Liberty City branded hookers! (right on the small of their back!)
Wonder how much longer until people start selling their Slashdot accounts on eBay... and does selling your mySpace profile mean that all your mySpace friends have to be their friend now, instead?
If it was his site, and therefore he was the one who holds ownership of the IP, just because he allows others to use it under said CC license doeesn't mean he can't himself use it for his own, for-profit ends. His ownership = his choice of use. There are certainly arguments about someone else creating the content for his wiki. But if we assume that he made a clause in the terms of use, then he can use the content others posted to his own site to his own ends.
Is not a man entitled to the sweat of his brow? No, says the man on Slashdot.
With the new EFF victory, you are in a good position.
I don't read the license because IANAL... and because they don't have alternative licenses.
I suspect the add hardware clause is in the OEM licenses. I worked at a small computer shop and spent 2-3 hours on the phone trying to convince M$ to validate the license on a machine which only took me 1 hour to change the motherboard on. Once I literally got passed back and forth between M$ and the OEM. (eMachines, I think) Each claimed the other was responsible for the licensing. M$ saying that eMachines needed to give me a new one, and eMachines saying that M$ should be vaidating the license.
The issue was never resolved, and we had to give the customer their computer back in perfectly working order - without an operating system. Needless to say, they were upset.
Putting a joke on ./ is all well and good, but one on CollegeHumor.com is certainly a low point...
FTA, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini:
"Frankly speaking, instructing people to make a bomb has nothing to do with the freedom of expression, or the freedom of informing people.
"The right balance, in my view, is to give priority to the protection of absolute rights and, first of all, right to life."
A more important question in my mind is, who DOES get to see the information on making bombs? There are many, many industrial applications for explosive devices. In fact, I can buy explosive devices online!
Hostage situations can drag on for a long, long time. News sites release breaking news within minutes. Search sites poll popular news sites more frequently. There are certainly cases where the example would be valid, albeit it is dramatic.
The other two mentioned are also open source and run on linux. It actually begs the question: Are commercial programs such as these even available?
I'd also like to know if any professionals use these (Celestia, Kstars and Stellarium) or if they have their own fancy-pants versions.
Not jumping on Daed here, because he values skill and ability.
The problem comes when all the people you 'want to hire' are white men. Convenient for me, not so convenient for some other people.
Every so often there's a question to Slashdot from a system administrator who's trying to figure out how to explain to their bosses what they do all day to get paid. Nailing down that quantity is harder than hammering in a rubber nail... with the proper hammer design, board media and time, it can be done, but it ain't always very feasible. (Hammering it into Jello always worked pretty well for me though...)
Again, it can usually be done, but it's usually a whole lot easier to just pay someone hourly or salary and be done with it. It's a lot easier to make sure people aren't slacking than to define when they aren't. Because like pornography, we know slacking when we see it... which is usually when someone is checking out pornography.
Better be careful, it probably violates the EULA if you attempt to load it on a different platform... you know, like trying to rip your DVD to AVI?
Ahem... Administrative Assistant - there's nothing personal about it.
And here I was just worried about what happens to your hard drive when you walk through the metal detectors...
The key to making money is working with people and not against them. So, as the owner of the code, you have every right to relicense it. Call the company violating your license. Mention their non-compliance with your current license. Say that, should they not wish to comply with the current licensing, you would be willing to license it to them under a license they were more comfortable with, for say, a small sum. No, it's not like winning the legal lottery, the key is to rinse and repeat. But don't expect much in the way of repeats if you use GPL. The real key with making money is to provide support for it. When you make that license, be sure and mention that you are available to add custom code or assist with integrating with their product. Charge $1000 an hour as a consultant or specialist, whichever term you feel is more appropriate. Sleep on a bed stuffed with money and build more GPL code that attracts the attention of others.
Found the author of the quote used from http://members.ozemail.com.au/~danok/LegalQuotes.
One of the tenets in GPL is you have to return what you have added on. It does hurt you if someone else extends your program and doesn't return the favor you gave them in creating the program. A better description of the reasons behind Stallman's thinking comes from Free as in Freedom by Sam Williams, quoted below. The book is CC, and you can read the rest at O'reilly's open book.