I know this is a dumb question. I remember hearing the answer back in high school but I have since forgotten it. I want to know the total energy in sunlight. I know it varies widely depending on location and weather but an average or a range per square foot, square yard, acre or whatever would be interesting. I ask because I think some people overestimate the value. If you can produce a 1 inch square solar cell that's 100% effecient but it costs $1000, then it's never going to pay for itself except in space applications. The big payoff for solar cells will come when you can produce them for almost nothing and plaster them over everything. When that cool, one way billboard plastic wrap stuff that covers busses also acts as an 80% effecient solar cell, then we'll see more of this stuff.
I think the point that you are missing is that Zope is a development environment, not an out of the box BBS or portal.
Granted Zope isn't directly comparable to something like PostNuke but they both are development environments that support modules (products). The bulk of what I use in the PostNuke environment are add on modules. I guess that I'm just surprised that given the object oriented nature of Zope and Python that there aren't more great products available for Zope that solve most of the more common needs in the web world. I'm not saying that I don't want to dig into the guts of the system to get what I want. I'm just saying that I'm surprised that I have to start from such a base level.
Maybe if I get some time one of these days I'll create a site devoted to showing off the capabilities of Zope and the available products. I think this might be exactly what's missing (for me anyway). I just don't see all that many Zope based sites that really impress.
As far as all the Zope sites being hard to navigate, I'm sure that is because a programmer created the site and not a web designer. (I don't want the frills, just the info)
It's not just the lack of frills. I guess that frills would be nice but basic function is lacking. Finding things on Zope.org for example can be very frustrating. It's hard to navigate. It's hard to tell what type of page I have accessed. It's hard to distinguish old information from new. It's hard to tell what products go with what Zope versions, etc. It makes me wonder if core Zope development far outpaces documentation, product support, etc. It sounds like Zope 3 is supposed to address some usability issues. I hope it does and I hope some really cool products and sites emerge.
This is a stupid question - I hope. I have used Zope before and I understand pretty much how things work. I'm also big Python fan so that's not a problem. However, I still find Zope ugly, inflexible and tedious. Maybe it's because I don't think in Zope but I find, for example, the PostNuke world to be more useful, robust extensible, etc. I think the best example of this is the Zope websites. Why are they so hard to navigate? Why do they look so plain? Why does everyone have a useless calendar stuffed to one side? Don't get me wrong. I _really_ want to like Zope. The concept is exactly what I want - an object oriented web framework built on Python. I just can't seem to get all that excited about it without facing the prospect of writing an entire system from scratch. Am I missing something or is it really that hard to create a highly functional, good looking portal site from Zope? I currently run a couple sites on PostNuke and I incorporate news, a photo system, a BBS style forum and a group calendar. I know Plone looks pretty cool but it still seems cumbersome and difficult to taylor to specific needs. What am I missing?
Don't miss Kennekott. It's the largest open pit copper mine in North America. You get to see where all those nasty heavy metals in your PC come from plus some HUGE trucks and explosions and smelters, etc.
I've had success with RPMs, DEBs, EBuilds, etc. What really makes the biggest difference is the packager. Most major distros have pretty good package maintainers now. This wasn't always the case.
Now for me it's all about convenience. If I can use Debian, Gentoo or Mandrake+Ximian Red Carpet and keep my system up to date on a daily basis then I'm happy. This requires good packages and good mirrors. I throw Ximian in there becuase I've had a terrible time with Mandrake mirrors. Also if I can upgrade without running an install from CD then I'm happy. Debian and Gentoo seem to do this quite well. If I can avoid conflicts and install a couple versions of the same thing and keep it all straight, then I'm really happy. Gentoo seems to be making strides towards the last one but compiling everything isn't always an option.
I just thought I would mention that this book will likely be on Oreilly Safari since the Rev. 1 is already there. I'm a big fan of Safari since I: rarely read a tech book cover to cover, I have a shelf of outdated tech books and I like their search features. [disclaimer] I have no affiliation with Oreilly Safari other than I subscribe to the service [/disclaimer]
First, it's not that these populations "bounced back". These populations are, as far as anyone can tell, at an all time high. It's more like an infestation in some locations. Second, your argument is dangerous in that it invites only inaction. "Let's just sit around and study something and see if we really understand it." I see the need for study but a more balanced approach might be more effective.
I happen to live where there are plenty of bow hunters (SLC Utah - very urban surrounded by very rural/mountainous). During the bow hunt I have no worries about biking, hiking, etc in the surrounding mountains. During the rifle hunt I stay home.
I also know that some towns in CT (1 hour from NYC) have hired bow hunters to thin herds. In the town that my parents live in _the garden club_ supported this policy. Keep in mind that this town is primarily made up of homes on 1-3 acre wooded lots. You could _not_ safely fire a rifle but the bow hunters have operated without incident.
Bow hunters, in Utah anyway, have to go through some training to get a hunting permit. They also have to spend a lot of time stalking and waiting since they don't have the luxury of shooting some buck on a ridge 1/2 mile away. Bow hunters will rarely take a shot unless it's virtually guaranteed to be a kill. Does this rule out yahoos and morons? No but it should put it into perspective.
I'm also becoming a BIG Gentoo fan. Not so much for the speed, although that's nice, but rather for the education. The problem I have with the other distros is that lots of stuff gets tweaked (good) but it's all hidden from the user (good and bad). It's nice in that someone has already turned on the really useful stuff and turned off the really buggy stuff (hopefully) but it's a real pain when you try to figure out what's been done. I know it's all in the SRPM but it's not obvious if you don't already understand this stuff. What I really like about Gentoo is the very clear documentation that allows you to install a complete system from source. You also get some nice update tools and good documentation on that too. It seems like their philosophy isn't to make the system automatic or "for dummies" but to make things effecient and as simple as is practical. The Gentoo team hasn't added a whole lot of extra complexity to make an install brainless and the result is a refreshingly simple and functional distro.
The FSF has a vested interest in this not just because the "field of use" clause violates the GPL but because it could really be restrictive. Here's the example given by the FSF (which I found confusing):
"W3 members may contribute patent claims to a standard describing the behavior of web servers providing particular functionality. A Free Software program implementing that standard would be available for others to copy from, in order to add functionality to browsers, or non-interactive web clients. But if, as the present proposed policy permits, the patent-holder has licensed the practicing of its patent claims "royalty-free" only "in order to implement the standard", reuse of the relevant code in these latter environments would still raise possible patent infringement problems."
I read this as the current proposed policy contains a gaping loophole. If I understand this correctly then a patent can be included, royalty free, in a W3C standard but the royalty free part is only for a very limited scope. I fear that it's like those bills in Congres that have these nice sounding names but have wording so contrary that you have to question the basic integrity of the authors. On one hand I would like to trust that the W3C is working towards standards that benefit the common good but I still worry that they will bend to the will of companies who simply want their patents to also be standards.
"Unless someone actually quantifies this information, it's pointless."
I see what you're saying but every benchmark that I have ever read has some sort of flaw or bias or hint of irrelevence. Does this mean that they are all worthless too? Sure anecdotal evidence is at best 1 data point but it's still better than nothing and usually it's all you have. So let's see these stories for what they are but not throw them out completely. That would also be irresponsible.
I use Devil Linux on one network that I administer. The docs are a bit scant and mostly point you to the docs for each service you install but overall I think the firewall is excellent. It's built from Linux From Scratch. All but the config files are on the CD. The config files are on a write protected floppy. There is support for most common services for those shops that can't afford a firewall and mail server for example. I know this isn't the best idea but it is a practical reality for many. At least Devil Linux offers chroot jails and since a reboot sets the server back to the original install state (except for any mail spool that is saved on a disk) the exposure is fairly low. There is also support for FirewallBuilder scipts and most common services . I think Devil Linux is at least worth consideration. It's actively developed and GPL'ed.
Plants do take in oxygen and release carbon dioxide. It's called cell respiration. They also happen to perform photosynthesis which binds carbon dioxide and releases oxygen.
Yea, the wording was incorrect (create arsenic) but there is a lot of work being done using plants to bind elements in ways that were impossible with non GM plants. Did you see the Slashdot article about plants that extract gold from the soil? Now you might extract arsenic as a side effect.
Actually I don't think that this type of poisoning is all that likely although it is possible. I think that the wide array of organic combinations that result are much scarrier. I'm sure that these GM plants don't get it exactly right 100% of the time. I'm sure there are many other secondary chemical interactions, solar interactions and even gene mutations. So what other odd chemicals are being synthesized?
I don't know how to get what you're after and a number of people have already addressed this with either warnings about this (flawed) method or solutions that are currently being developed but aren't quite ready for "The Desktop". Anyway, I think that you could accomplish enough of this with iptables and some scripts. You could lock down the system except when you need a particular service. Make a few icons on your desktop that open ports when you want to browse or send mail and icons that shut down the system when you're done. (You'll have to weigh the convenience of this against the suid exposure.) You could also have a script that scans the logs for outbound requests and flashes Zone Alarm style warnings at you. There is a nice article
by Daniel Robbins of Gentto fame over at Developerworks that discusses scripts for dynamic firewalls. The focus is on inbound blocks but it should be easy enough to block outbound as well. You could also use Win4Lin or VMWare for your windows stuff and then you would get another network device which would allow you to at least see what from what OS the request came from.
Actually what I like best about Zone Alarm is the ability to lock down a system and then peal back the port restrictions as requests are made. It's a great way to make a firewall for those who don't want to deal with iptables (Yea, I'm sure it's flawed from an absolute security perspective but it's better that no firewall). I seem to remember a project similar to this for Linux from a few years ago but I can't remember what it was called...
"but also bestowed on those who survived much more immunity to disease"
I think you mean that those who survived were the ones with much more immunity to disease. I know that there is evidence showing what you are stating - exposure to pathogens build immunity to other unrelated pathogens - but I think the bigger effect here is that those who are gentically predisposed to having a strong immune system are the ones that survive such things as polio and smallpox.
By the way, there also happens to be evidence that exposure to such nasty bugs reduces alergies as well. Today, we are exposed to fewer nasty bugs and thus experience more allergies. Although, I can't remember where I just read that.
Yes, but we were talking about software patents weren't we? I do get your point. Business practices patents, although quite broken, won't be fixed in any way by this approach. The same goes for patents on physical inventions, etc that are just plain stupid or obvious.
OK I was afraid this might turn into a debate about the ethics of Free Software. Please don't get me wrong. I'm actually a big RMS _fan_. Hippie? Hairy? I don't really care. Like you said, the guy is often very correct and often vindicated. He's also considered by many to be a bit extreme and over zealous. Just the same. I like the guy and I like what he stands for. He keeps us honest anyway.
Now back to the issue at hand. I still don't think you have convinced me that this is a bad idea. In fact you may have done the opposite. Consider this:
I and many others would consider the legal system in the US to be mostly broken. Yet RMS and the FSF have created a tool (GPL) which makes works more free. The GPL allows someone who creates something the ability to release it to the world knowing that this creation can be freely replicated, expanded and redistributed in the same spirit that it was originally released. Some criticize the GPL for being too restrictive. Unlike a BSD style license the GPL prevents a corporation from taking code and re-releasing it in binary only form. Without getting too deep into this debate let's just leave it as the GPL does place some restrictions on the use of a copyrighted work. With that said, let's look at patents. As copyright protects written works, patents protect ideas. Can we apply the same GPL concept to ideas? I think so but I had it wrong in the last post. You don't do it by charging for a license to use the patent. You do it by placing restrictions on the license. You make the licensees agree to release their source code. If you thought the GPL was viral before, wait until you get some key ideas patented and licensed GPL style.
Obviously this concept has issues but I don't think it's as far off the mark as you say it is. I originally suggested this concept as a way to force patent reform but after thinking in terms of freedom things changed a bit. I think that manipulating (abusing?) our broken patent system for the sake of patent reform or for the sake of promoting Free Software is worthy.
So, is this a half baked idea? Sure it is. Has someone else been through this before and determined it ill advised? Most likely. Have I given up on the concept? Not yet. Have you given me an argument worth even considering? Not yet...;-)
First, these aren't just Mocrosoft's rules. It's not just Microsoft that holds stupid patents. In fact MS usually wins by means other than sueing over patents. Secondly, I wasn't really referring to this particular case (other than I said it made me smile). I was suggesting that supporters of open source might find it useful to abuse the current system in an effort to create pain and generate support for changing the current situation. Thirdy, there are organizations like the FSF that are fairly well funded and already have access to IP lawyers. Once a number of obvious but highly essential concepts have been patented then whole thing is self funding. Is this obnoxious? Yes. Is this counter to what the open source movement stands for? Not really. I think it would be highly productive in terms of creating pain for those corporations that push for the status quo. Plus it would provide incentive to make code open source. There are a lot of great and patentable ideas that arise from open source. Those ideas are often not patented and thus are available to closed source projects. There are a lot of great ideas that arise from closed source commercial projects. Those ideas are usually locked up and made unavailable to those unwilling to pay for them. I just think we need something similar (more sinister?;-) to the GPL and FSF only for patents.
I understand your point but this still makes me smile. Here's why. The rules of the game are what they are. They suck but that's the state of it right now. So it's time to play by those rules until the rules can be changed. That's it. In fact I think that the true mental giants of the open source movement should patent everything they can. At the same time they should make those patents available for free software and continuously request that the patent rules be changed. If enough technology gets tied up in open source then maybe the powers that be might have an interest in changing the rules. Right now patents only help proprietary software and hurt free software. Guess which side has the money to lobby congress?
Did you read anything from the site? It does a little more than add mouse gestures. It puts a black and white web browser window on top of any application (framed in current application) without any borders, buttons, etc. It's certainly not invisible but someone could easily walk by your desk and think you're not browsing the web. All the mouse gesture does is eliminate the browser portion of the screen allowing the original app to shine through. Since human vision is so tuned toward movement this method of hiding draws far less attention than your plain old mouse gesture.
Slashdot Mirror
I know this is a dumb question. I remember hearing the answer back in high school but I have since forgotten it. I want to know the total energy in sunlight. I know it varies widely depending on location and weather but an average or a range per square foot, square yard, acre or whatever would be interesting. I ask because I think some people overestimate the value. If you can produce a 1 inch square solar cell that's 100% effecient but it costs $1000, then it's never going to pay for itself except in space applications. The big payoff for solar cells will come when you can produce them for almost nothing and plaster them over everything. When that cool, one way billboard plastic wrap stuff that covers busses also acts as an 80% effecient solar cell, then we'll see more of this stuff.
I think the point that you are missing is that Zope is a development environment, not an out of the box BBS or portal.
Granted Zope isn't directly comparable to something like PostNuke but they both are development environments that support modules (products). The bulk of what I use in the PostNuke environment are add on modules. I guess that I'm just surprised that given the object oriented nature of Zope and Python that there aren't more great products available for Zope that solve most of the more common needs in the web world. I'm not saying that I don't want to dig into the guts of the system to get what I want. I'm just saying that I'm surprised that I have to start from such a base level.
Maybe if I get some time one of these days I'll create a site devoted to showing off the capabilities of Zope and the available products. I think this might be exactly what's missing (for me anyway). I just don't see all that many Zope based sites that really impress.
As far as all the Zope sites being hard to navigate, I'm sure that is because a programmer created the site and not a web designer. (I don't want the frills, just the info)
It's not just the lack of frills. I guess that frills would be nice but basic function is lacking. Finding things on Zope.org for example can be very frustrating. It's hard to navigate. It's hard to tell what type of page I have accessed. It's hard to distinguish old information from new. It's hard to tell what products go with what Zope versions, etc. It makes me wonder if core Zope development far outpaces documentation, product support, etc. It sounds like Zope 3 is supposed to address some usability issues. I hope it does and I hope some really cool products and sites emerge.
Oh yea. I also make use of a PHP based Wiki clone. This is one thing that Zope does seem to do well.
This is a stupid question - I hope. I have used Zope before and I understand pretty much how things work. I'm also big Python fan so that's not a problem. However, I still find Zope ugly, inflexible and tedious. Maybe it's because I don't think in Zope but I find, for example, the PostNuke world to be more useful, robust extensible, etc. I think the best example of this is the Zope websites. Why are they so hard to navigate? Why do they look so plain? Why does everyone have a useless calendar stuffed to one side? Don't get me wrong. I _really_ want to like Zope. The concept is exactly what I want - an object oriented web framework built on Python. I just can't seem to get all that excited about it without facing the prospect of writing an entire system from scratch. Am I missing something or is it really that hard to create a highly functional, good looking portal site from Zope? I currently run a couple sites on PostNuke and I incorporate news, a photo system, a BBS style forum and a group calendar. I know Plone looks pretty cool but it still seems cumbersome and difficult to taylor to specific needs. What am I missing?
Don't miss Kennekott. It's the largest open pit copper mine in North America. You get to see where all those nasty heavy metals in your PC come from plus some HUGE trucks and explosions and smelters, etc.
I've had success with RPMs, DEBs, EBuilds, etc. What really makes the biggest difference is the packager. Most major distros have pretty good package maintainers now. This wasn't always the case.
Now for me it's all about convenience. If I can use Debian, Gentoo or Mandrake+Ximian Red Carpet and keep my system up to date on a daily basis then I'm happy. This requires good packages and good mirrors. I throw Ximian in there becuase I've had a terrible time with Mandrake mirrors. Also if I can upgrade without running an install from CD then I'm happy. Debian and Gentoo seem to do this quite well. If I can avoid conflicts and install a couple versions of the same thing and keep it all straight, then I'm really happy. Gentoo seems to be making strides towards the last one but compiling everything isn't always an option.
I just thought I would mention that this book will likely be on Oreilly Safari since the Rev. 1 is already there. I'm a big fan of Safari since I: rarely read a tech book cover to cover, I have a shelf of outdated tech books and I like their search features. [disclaimer] I have no affiliation with Oreilly Safari other than I subscribe to the service [/disclaimer]
Sure, but will it play on your Trusty Palladium PC?
First, it's not that these populations "bounced back". These populations are, as far as anyone can tell, at an all time high. It's more like an infestation in some locations. Second, your argument is dangerous in that it invites only inaction. "Let's just sit around and study something and see if we really understand it." I see the need for study but a more balanced approach might be more effective.
I happen to live where there are plenty of bow hunters (SLC Utah - very urban surrounded by very rural/mountainous). During the bow hunt I have no worries about biking, hiking, etc in the surrounding mountains. During the rifle hunt I stay home.
I also know that some towns in CT (1 hour from NYC) have hired bow hunters to thin herds. In the town that my parents live in _the garden club_ supported this policy. Keep in mind that this town is primarily made up of homes on 1-3 acre wooded lots. You could _not_ safely fire a rifle but the bow hunters have operated without incident.
Bow hunters, in Utah anyway, have to go through some training to get a hunting permit. They also have to spend a lot of time stalking and waiting since they don't have the luxury of shooting some buck on a ridge 1/2 mile away. Bow hunters will rarely take a shot unless it's virtually guaranteed to be a kill. Does this rule out yahoos and morons? No but it should put it into perspective.
I'm also becoming a BIG Gentoo fan. Not so much for the speed, although that's nice, but rather for the education. The problem I have with the other distros is that lots of stuff gets tweaked (good) but it's all hidden from the user (good and bad). It's nice in that someone has already turned on the really useful stuff and turned off the really buggy stuff (hopefully) but it's a real pain when you try to figure out what's been done. I know it's all in the SRPM but it's not obvious if you don't already understand this stuff. What I really like about Gentoo is the very clear documentation that allows you to install a complete system from source. You also get some nice update tools and good documentation on that too. It seems like their philosophy isn't to make the system automatic or "for dummies" but to make things effecient and as simple as is practical. The Gentoo team hasn't added a whole lot of extra complexity to make an install brainless and the result is a refreshingly simple and functional distro.
-1 Flaimbait...
You have it backwards. You're not morally obligated to do anything but document it.
The FSF has a vested interest in this not just because the "field of use" clause violates the GPL but because it could really be restrictive. Here's the example given by the FSF (which I found confusing):
"W3 members may contribute patent claims to a standard describing the behavior of web servers providing particular functionality. A Free Software program implementing that standard would be available for others to copy from, in order to add functionality to browsers, or non-interactive web clients. But if, as the present proposed policy permits, the patent-holder has licensed the practicing of its patent claims "royalty-free" only "in order to implement the standard", reuse of the relevant code in these latter environments would still raise possible patent infringement problems."
I read this as the current proposed policy contains a gaping loophole. If I understand this correctly then a patent can be included, royalty free, in a W3C standard but the royalty free part is only for a very limited scope. I fear that it's like those bills in Congres that have these nice sounding names but have wording so contrary that you have to question the basic integrity of the authors. On one hand I would like to trust that the W3C is working towards standards that benefit the common good but I still worry that they will bend to the will of companies who simply want their patents to also be standards.
Anecdotal Evidence == Oxymoron?
"Unless someone actually quantifies this information, it's pointless."
I see what you're saying but every benchmark that I have ever read has some sort of flaw or bias or hint of irrelevence. Does this mean that they are all worthless too? Sure anecdotal evidence is at best 1 data point but it's still better than nothing and usually it's all you have. So let's see these stories for what they are but not throw them out completely. That would also be irresponsible.
I use Devil Linux on one network that I administer. The docs are a bit scant and mostly point you to the docs for each service you install but overall I think the firewall is excellent. It's built from Linux From Scratch. All but the config files are on the CD. The config files are on a write protected floppy. There is support for most common services for those shops that can't afford a firewall and mail server for example. I know this isn't the best idea but it is a practical reality for many. At least Devil Linux offers chroot jails and since a reboot sets the server back to the original install state (except for any mail spool that is saved on a disk) the exposure is fairly low. There is also support for FirewallBuilder scipts and most common services . I think Devil Linux is at least worth consideration. It's actively developed and GPL'ed.
Plants do take in oxygen and release carbon dioxide. It's called cell respiration. They also happen to perform photosynthesis which binds carbon dioxide and releases oxygen.
Yea, the wording was incorrect (create arsenic) but there is a lot of work being done using plants to bind elements in ways that were impossible with non GM plants. Did you see the Slashdot article about plants that extract gold from the soil? Now you might extract arsenic as a side effect.
Actually I don't think that this type of poisoning is all that likely although it is possible. I think that the wide array of organic combinations that result are much scarrier. I'm sure that these GM plants don't get it exactly right 100% of the time. I'm sure there are many other secondary chemical interactions, solar interactions and even gene mutations. So what other odd chemicals are being synthesized?
by Daniel Robbins of Gentto fame over at Developerworks that discusses scripts for dynamic firewalls. The focus is on inbound blocks but it should be easy enough to block outbound as well. You could also use Win4Lin or VMWare for your windows stuff and then you would get another network device which would allow you to at least see what from what OS the request came from.
Actually what I like best about Zone Alarm is the ability to lock down a system and then peal back the port restrictions as requests are made. It's a great way to make a firewall for those who don't want to deal with iptables (Yea, I'm sure it's flawed from an absolute security perspective but it's better that no firewall). I seem to remember a project similar to this for Linux from a few years ago but I can't remember what it was called...
"but also bestowed on those who survived much more immunity to disease"
I think you mean that those who survived were the ones with much more immunity to disease. I know that there is evidence showing what you are stating - exposure to pathogens build immunity to other unrelated pathogens - but I think the bigger effect here is that those who are gentically predisposed to having a strong immune system are the ones that survive such things as polio and smallpox.
By the way, there also happens to be evidence that exposure to such nasty bugs reduces alergies as well. Today, we are exposed to fewer nasty bugs and thus experience more allergies. Although, I can't remember where I just read that.
My Quicken data isn't worth that much...
Yes, but we were talking about software patents weren't we? I do get your point. Business practices patents, although quite broken, won't be fixed in any way by this approach. The same goes for patents on physical inventions, etc that are just plain stupid or obvious.
OK I was afraid this might turn into a debate about the ethics of Free Software. Please don't get me wrong. I'm actually a big RMS _fan_. Hippie? Hairy? I don't really care. Like you said, the guy is often very correct and often vindicated. He's also considered by many to be a bit extreme and over zealous. Just the same. I like the guy and I like what he stands for. He keeps us honest anyway.
;-)
Now back to the issue at hand. I still don't think you have convinced me that this is a bad idea. In fact you may have done the opposite. Consider this:
I and many others would consider the legal system in the US to be mostly broken. Yet RMS and the FSF have created a tool (GPL) which makes works more free. The GPL allows someone who creates something the ability to release it to the world knowing that this creation can be freely replicated, expanded and redistributed in the same spirit that it was originally released. Some criticize the GPL for being too restrictive. Unlike a BSD style license the GPL prevents a corporation from taking code and re-releasing it in binary only form. Without getting too deep into this debate let's just leave it as the GPL does place some restrictions on the use of a copyrighted work. With that said, let's look at patents. As copyright protects written works, patents protect ideas. Can we apply the same GPL concept to ideas? I think so but I had it wrong in the last post. You don't do it by charging for a license to use the patent. You do it by placing restrictions on the license. You make the licensees agree to release their source code. If you thought the GPL was viral before, wait until you get some key ideas patented and licensed GPL style.
Obviously this concept has issues but I don't think it's as far off the mark as you say it is. I originally suggested this concept as a way to force patent reform but after thinking in terms of freedom things changed a bit. I think that manipulating (abusing?) our broken patent system for the sake of patent reform or for the sake of promoting Free Software is worthy.
So, is this a half baked idea? Sure it is. Has someone else been through this before and determined it ill advised? Most likely. Have I given up on the concept? Not yet. Have you given me an argument worth even considering? Not yet...
First, these aren't just Mocrosoft's rules. It's not just Microsoft that holds stupid patents. In fact MS usually wins by means other than sueing over patents. Secondly, I wasn't really referring to this particular case (other than I said it made me smile). I was suggesting that supporters of open source might find it useful to abuse the current system in an effort to create pain and generate support for changing the current situation. Thirdy, there are organizations like the FSF that are fairly well funded and already have access to IP lawyers. Once a number of obvious but highly essential concepts have been patented then whole thing is self funding. Is this obnoxious? Yes. Is this counter to what the open source movement stands for? Not really. I think it would be highly productive in terms of creating pain for those corporations that push for the status quo. Plus it would provide incentive to make code open source. There are a lot of great and patentable ideas that arise from open source. Those ideas are often not patented and thus are available to closed source projects. There are a lot of great ideas that arise from closed source commercial projects. Those ideas are usually locked up and made unavailable to those unwilling to pay for them. I just think we need something similar (more sinister? ;-) to the GPL and FSF only for patents.
I understand your point but this still makes me smile. Here's why. The rules of the game are what they are. They suck but that's the state of it right now. So it's time to play by those rules until the rules can be changed. That's it. In fact I think that the true mental giants of the open source movement should patent everything they can. At the same time they should make those patents available for free software and continuously request that the patent rules be changed. If enough technology gets tied up in open source then maybe the powers that be might have an interest in changing the rules. Right now patents only help proprietary software and hurt free software. Guess which side has the money to lobby congress?
Did you read anything from the site? It does a little more than add mouse gestures. It puts a black and white web browser window on top of any application (framed in current application) without any borders, buttons, etc. It's certainly not invisible but someone could easily walk by your desk and think you're not browsing the web. All the mouse gesture does is eliminate the browser portion of the screen allowing the original app to shine through. Since human vision is so tuned toward movement this method of hiding draws far less attention than your plain old mouse gesture.