The fact you don't understand the difference says even more about you than calling someone 'douchey'.

You sound like a teenager.

And it's spelled 'kindergarten', idiot.

See what I did there?

Actually most copyright legislation includes the moral right to be identified as the author of your work (and to not be identified as the author of something you didn't produce).

This applies to books, but software is explicitly excluded- so your book analogy is invalid.

Yeah the problem is that the moral right, under various copyright laws, to be identified as the author of your work specifically does not apply to software.

I used to contribute to JBoss until I had this happen to me.

I wrote the very first JAAS tutorial and example code for JBoss. It was promptly stolen, the other guy's name added, mine removed and then published to the JBoss community.

I called the plagiarist, Scott Stark, out, he denied it.

I pointed out all "his" code was identical to mine including variable names, he denied it, claiming the variable names were "obvious".

I pointed out this "his" examples contained exactly the same errors as mine did, finally he admitted he'd stolen my work and added my name as a contributor.

That plus Mark Fleury's attitude drove me away and I decided never to contribute to JBoss again.

Err. Maybe I am missing something but don't you WANT the light to pass through the LCD? In other words the 1% that you claim 'gets through' is actually the wasted light and it's the other "99%" that actually provides any value?

So you're saying the Norse myths of about a thousand years ago are also Lord of the Rings knockoffs?

That word doesn't mean what you think it does:

That word doesn't mean what you think it does.

"Sensibility refers to an acute perception of or responsiveness toward something, such as the emotions of another. This concept emerged in eighteenth-century Britain, and was closely associated with studies of sense perception as the means through which knowledge is gathered. It also became associated with sentimental moral philosophy." - Wikipedia.

If that were true then outsourcing to India would have done that a long time ago.

The only losers to mass immigration and outsourcing are the citizens (obviously) and the government (less taxes).

The SOLE reason arseholes like Zuckerberk want to relax immigration controls is to keep wages low.

• Destroyed much of Britain's industry, just to remove her opponents' power base.
• Politicised the police and used them to enforce her party politics: so much so that even today the Conservatives are so politically indebted to the police that they won't reform them.
• She took Britain into a war over some meaningless rocks in the South Atlantic in order to divert attention from her unpopularity and an imminent kicking in the polls.
• She destroyed our national rail network- selling it in parts to foreign companies that take truly enormous subsidies (far bigger than the old British Rail ever received) and ship their dubiously earned profits overseas (and certainly never actually invest it back!)- solely because she personally disliked travelling by rail.
• She sold off national assets and used North Sea oil revenues to fund tax cuts for the rich.
• She set the stage for that even bigger scum bag and her acolyte, Tony Blair: possibly the most personally corrupt prime minister this country has ever had.

Care to provide evidence for your claim? I've bought many books from Amazon, not one of them contains an advert.

I think you need to check the sewers under your house, I expect you'll find grammar nazis, the syntax police and the spelling fairy down there arguing over who gets to tear you a new one first ;)

But at least he didn't start any of his sentences with a conjunction. :)

What's dotslash?