That simply isn't true. MS could accept the license and relicense it as GPLv4. Of course so could everyone else but if GPLv4 says 'you be the bitch of MS' then there really is little that could be done. MS will have closed that fork of the code.
It isn't about what the user can choose but about what abusers can choose. It removes the protection from the code. We'll still have the code but wouldn't have improvements made by MS. That drastically changes the mechanism of the license, suddenly one company will be able to do whatever they want with 50% of Free software. Totally changes what the point is.
Hasn't this been tested in the past and it's been shown that vouchers do count as distribution. The reason it doesn't work out this way with MS software is their license asserts that they are the distributor and everyone else is a licensee. The GPL explicitly enables redistribution, it doesn't say 'GNU are the distributors and the rest of you are licensees', it lays out what counts as distribution.
In essence the situation you describe is an artifact of standard copyright licenses rather than of the copyright system in itself. The reason it is common is generally most copyright licenses do the same thing and try and screw people over.
So basically, when you use GPLed code, you have to agree to anything that gets put in there or risk losing the right to use that code? No MS can use the code internally to burn bunnies with proprietary software driven lasers if they wish. The GPL refers solely to distribution. I can use GPL software for anything I like, the license allows for this. I only have to worry if I distribute.
The way I always understood it, using the "any later version" language is akin to saying "I beleive in free software, the FSF and I'm in it for the long haul". No it's just stupid. Lets assume for now that the FSF aren't going to make fundamental changes to the way the GPL works. Tomorrow they could go bankrupt and the arbitrator would sell their IP rights to the highest bidder, potentially MS. At that point MS can make GPLv4 and allow themselves to use all the GPLv2 or later code without respecting freedom.
Theo doesn't actually make any concrete claims. He bets that out of 60 bugs 2/3 will be exploitable. He doesn't produce a PoC or even a theory he just takes a number and a percentage then combines them. Essentially he is guessing.
Not knocking him in general but here he hasn't produced anything we didn't know already.
Oh, we here in the US can visit Cuba as well, we just have to fly to Mexico first.
The US embargo of Cuba is not something people in the US take seriously. One of the "perks" of going to Mexico is bringing back a bottle of Cuban rum or a box of cigars. Most of us are mystified why the embargo wasn't lifed in 1991; engagement works better against communism than isolation (see: China.) You talk as if you want the terrists to win.
For one there are twice as many general purpose registers for x86_64 than there are for x86 so that alone will provide a huge benefit. Really it's better than that since half the x86 'general purpose' registers have specific purposes so you actually are getting 3 times the number of general purpose registers.
Any scientist will also tell you that, if your hypothesis or calculations leave an "x" for "the work of God", they are incomplete. Yet universities around the world still teach CS students the optimal page replacement algorithm which basically states that 'something' tells you which loaded page is needed last then you replace it. They never make any effort to describe that something.
Even these sorts of belief are flawed. How do they know that what they experience is god. Assuming for a moment that all the 'miracles' performed by Jesus actually happened. How do you know that such acts are supernatural. They could easily be part of the natural world but are simply beyond our current level of understanding. The biggest fallacy is that because it cannot be explained now that it can never be explained.
If some big guy with a beard came and hit me with a lightening bolt my first thought (assuming I survive) would be that there is some scientific way for a person to generate lightening bolts that is beyond my comprehension (actually this is a bad example because such is already scientifically possible to some extent) rather than falling to my knees and praising Zeus.
It's actually not; beliefs that can't be proven are only mocked and considered fanciful if very few people believe them. The majority of people in the US and around the world have some faith in a religion, whereas very few people around the world believe in invisible unicorns. Because argumentum ad populum is so not a logical fallacy.
At some point the majority of Americans believed Bush was the best candidate to lead their nation.
He's a conservative that distrusts the free market, what's the point. He is a traditional conservative (pre-classic liberal) with all that protectionist and big state claptrap. Unfortunate really, I thought the French were finally waking up to the insanity of a big state.
The benefit of Java is that it is built around a large and consistent API. The actual language is irrelevant, it's what API's are available that count. If Perl, PHP, Python or any of the other languages had a solid and consistent cross platform API around them then the argument is valid. You can't have WORA otherwise.
All this fiddling about with GPLv3 and other nonsense when the real battle has been ignored. I put it to you fellow OSS advocates that we need the secret of immortality so that Linus may rule supreme for all time.
Because any old random person can make commits to repositories. Why have they bothered competing? All they had to do was use the admin privileges in subversion that are open to all and wipe the code off the face of the Earth.
That was the original announcement but who knows if they stick to that given the mess with the 2 month delay for Dapper and the subsequent lack of development time for Edgy. Personally I'd consider a delay but they can probably pull it off if they put the big bucks in.
A crisis point is coming over the EU soon anyway. It's traditional supporters have turned against further integration recently and while most in Britain still have token support for the EU there is more and more annoyance with the level of infringement things like Maastricht allow.
Fact is most of the British population still think we signed up to a free trade zone rather than what the EU now is.
Yeah and I've seen Ubuntu tell me that I no longer need applications as well. The system doesn't work properly yet, at least in Ubuntu it doesn't and they have a much easier job to manage than Debian generally.
No HURD will use 2 mutually recursive package systems. Think of deb and rpm. HURD will store debs inside rpms and rpms inside debs. As a result no software will ever finish installing on the OS that will never finish alpha development.
Slashdot Mirror
That simply isn't true. MS could accept the license and relicense it as GPLv4. Of course so could everyone else but if GPLv4 says 'you be the bitch of MS' then there really is little that could be done. MS will have closed that fork of the code.
It isn't about what the user can choose but about what abusers can choose. It removes the protection from the code. We'll still have the code but wouldn't have improvements made by MS. That drastically changes the mechanism of the license, suddenly one company will be able to do whatever they want with 50% of Free software. Totally changes what the point is.
IBM could have already settled by now. They are cutting them to pieces and making it as painful as possible for the investors.
Hasn't this been tested in the past and it's been shown that vouchers do count as distribution. The reason it doesn't work out this way with MS software is their license asserts that they are the distributor and everyone else is a licensee. The GPL explicitly enables redistribution, it doesn't say 'GNU are the distributors and the rest of you are licensees', it lays out what counts as distribution.
In essence the situation you describe is an artifact of standard copyright licenses rather than of the copyright system in itself. The reason it is common is generally most copyright licenses do the same thing and try and screw people over.
In my tree there is damn it.
Most code is self-documenting. Any sufficiently documented code is impossible to read.
Theo doesn't actually make any concrete claims. He bets that out of 60 bugs 2/3 will be exploitable. He doesn't produce a PoC or even a theory he just takes a number and a percentage then combines them. Essentially he is guessing.
Not knocking him in general but here he hasn't produced anything we didn't know already.
This is why god intelligently designed the French. So we all have someone to hate without needing lasting hatred towards anyone else.
The US embargo of Cuba is not something people in the US take seriously. One of the "perks" of going to Mexico is bringing back a bottle of Cuban rum or a box of cigars. Most of us are mystified why the embargo wasn't lifed in 1991; engagement works better against communism than isolation (see: China.) You talk as if you want the terrists to win.
When Linux distros employ hidden API's.
For one there are twice as many general purpose registers for x86_64 than there are for x86 so that alone will provide a huge benefit. Really it's better than that since half the x86 'general purpose' registers have specific purposes so you actually are getting 3 times the number of general purpose registers.
Google Earth uses QT as most Google apps do. The reason Picasa uses Wine is because they acquired Picasa and it was already Windows based.
Even these sorts of belief are flawed. How do they know that what they experience is god. Assuming for a moment that all the 'miracles' performed by Jesus actually happened. How do you know that such acts are supernatural. They could easily be part of the natural world but are simply beyond our current level of understanding. The biggest fallacy is that because it cannot be explained now that it can never be explained.
If some big guy with a beard came and hit me with a lightening bolt my first thought (assuming I survive) would be that there is some scientific way for a person to generate lightening bolts that is beyond my comprehension (actually this is a bad example because such is already scientifically possible to some extent) rather than falling to my knees and praising Zeus.
At some point the majority of Americans believed Bush was the best candidate to lead their nation.
He could sit on the sidelines shouting 'Developers, Developers, Developers' and throw a few chairs around when they lose.
First they have to purchase the IP for the Ballmer mascot off MS though, apparently the staff are quite attached to him.
He's a conservative that distrusts the free market, what's the point. He is a traditional conservative (pre-classic liberal) with all that protectionist and big state claptrap. Unfortunate really, I thought the French were finally waking up to the insanity of a big state.
The benefit of Java is that it is built around a large and consistent API. The actual language is irrelevant, it's what API's are available that count. If Perl, PHP, Python or any of the other languages had a solid and consistent cross platform API around them then the argument is valid. You can't have WORA otherwise.
All this fiddling about with GPLv3 and other nonsense when the real battle has been ignored. I put it to you fellow OSS advocates that we need the secret of immortality so that Linus may rule supreme for all time.
Because any old random person can make commits to repositories. Why have they bothered competing? All they had to do was use the admin privileges in subversion that are open to all and wipe the code off the face of the Earth.
That was the original announcement but who knows if they stick to that given the mess with the 2 month delay for Dapper and the subsequent lack of development time for Edgy. Personally I'd consider a delay but they can probably pull it off if they put the big bucks in.
A crisis point is coming over the EU soon anyway. It's traditional supporters have turned against further integration recently and while most in Britain still have token support for the EU there is more and more annoyance with the level of infringement things like Maastricht allow.
Fact is most of the British population still think we signed up to a free trade zone rather than what the EU now is.
Yeah and I've seen Ubuntu tell me that I no longer need applications as well. The system doesn't work properly yet, at least in Ubuntu it doesn't and they have a much easier job to manage than Debian generally.
No HURD will use 2 mutually recursive package systems. Think of deb and rpm. HURD will store debs inside rpms and rpms inside debs. As a result no software will ever finish installing on the OS that will never finish alpha development.