I'm not a lawyer but I think there's a distinction between making money from your fame alone and making money from your profession. One is profiting from your crime. In any case, I don't believe he would have done any such thing. I'm merely pointing out that he might not have been able to even if he had he wanted to.

I thought he'd only recently been allowed to profit from his "crimes" which is why he's now allowed to publish this book.

I don't it's the end of the world either way but only the individuals that made the contribution should be the judge of how bad it is.

I also agree with most others here that this is way too complicated. Developers have already been caught in schemes like this. The company wants to have a low quality version that is GPL'd and hopefully get some software contributions back and they want to have a nicely packaged application with proprietary features. Since anybody else that wants to fork the software would need to do so under the AGPL L-N would get these contributions through the AGPL but they wouldn't need to share their proprietary additions. It's not what the GPL was intended for.

It's complicated and I think people are wise to this SugarCRM way of doing business.

Honestly, if they are looking for bug fixes, they can just open source their software - no redistribution rights required. People who use the software will gladly contribute bug fixes. For new features development, just continue paying for them.

Or better yet, go GPL all the way. Competition might actually be a good thing and when you start with most of the domain knowledge and brains that created it, I like the odds.

The scheme you propose makes these guys look like another SugarCRM. In a few years people will be complaining about L-N and L-N will be wondering why after open sourcing their code, nobody likes them.

If humans existed outside of Eden then what was the purpose of Eden? Was it only for a select few?
Also, which part of the Bible are literal and which are not?

I'm sure there's a dongle for that.

Agreed.

Also, isn't the \0 terminated string a library implementation more than a language implementation. The char* points to a string of chars. The effective size of the string is library dependent. If you don't like that strlen() looks for a terminating \0, just use a different library.

The fact that the std library still uses \0 terminated strings seems to indicate that it wasn't such a bad decision.

Now that I've commented, I'll go read the article and maybe change my mind.

http://www.dilbert.com/strips/comic/2011-05-18/

Oops. Never mind.

> Do you want to give a justification

Maybe it's because Apple doesn't sign their paycheck.

Maybe it's because they like the protection of the GPLv3 more than they would like their hugely popular software to run on the Apple platform as well.

One thing is certain though. They don't need to justify their choice. If you don't like GPLv3, don't use their software or fork from the GPLv2.

So how does that work if I buy a book? If I rip a few pages and let everyone know that by ripping pages 12 and 15 the book is much more entertaining have I done anything wrong? If I start describing the plot of a movie and give an opinion as to how that plot could have been better, have I done anything wrong?

I understand that if I start bypassing online security then I am trying to bypass something that doesn't belong to me. That, in my opinion, is wrong.

On the other hand, there are books and magazines that explain how to open locks and safe. These are perfectly legal, educational and sometimes useful. If I am not attempting to open your lock then I don't understand what I'm doing wrong.

Laws like the DMCA are simply wrong.

So you have a problem with the atheists that try to educate people because you feel they are on a mission. I myself only have a problem with people that are on a mission to convince atheists that they should just stfu. Not because you are expressing your opinion; That would be perfectly fine. I have a problem with people like you because you are the exact thing you complain about.

Is this a reference to Gamow's One, Two, Three... infinity? In that case, Gamow showed ways for the 2D character to imagine 3D. There might be some hope for him yet.

That's an interesting trivia. Is this for special cases only - for example several multiplication requests and not enough resources - or is it generally true?

In any case, it doesn't make the lack of a multiplication a non-problem; It just makes this an additional problem.

That's like saying that ADD wasn't necessary because you could use AND and NOT and some some conditional loops. Yes it works but it's still a problem. It requires more instructions, it's is slower and it's harder to test for overflow conditions.

Yes.