What the heck, I can jump in on this too.

If big corporations decide to pay as many taxes as they can, they'll have to get the money somewhere, so they will raise their prices, and it'll be you and me footing the bill.

His code was GPL in name only. Since the body of code contained a part that was not GPL, the decompiled Mojang code, it is at most released under a tainted psuedo-GPL license.

Mojang hired a number of the key Bukkit devs and rights to the Bukkit name. A guy who works for Joe's Plumbing and hacks code on his day off could be decompiling and prepping the Mojang binary.

Succintly, a number of people have been profitting by putting up mulitplayer servers using in part Mojangs code, combined with Buckit and other what-not mod code. They sell Minecraft players access to their servers. This is not allowed by Mojang, who distribute the server binary free for noncommercial use. Mojang takes control of situation by hiring key Buckitt devs and bringing the codebase closer to in-house.

Butthurt dev lashes out in way he considers possible.

What makes it even more intricate is that the GPL project makes use of the decompiled code to hook into the proprietary binary. In other words, the decompiled and deobfuscated 'code' block needs to be re-created sort of from scratch with each new binary release from Mojang. That's why with each new release from Mojang all the mods have to be 'retweaked' to work with the new release, which results in an awkward resynch of everything that is mod based. The 'decompiled and deobfuscated' code has to re redone each time Mojang has a new release.

The Grimm brothers themselves were collectors and aggregators of oral tradition stories. They certainly never pretended that they wrote the stories in their collections. That is part of what makes their story collections so rich.

Since the Minecraft devs have full access to the source code, they are probably uniquely equipped to plug in new code to replace the sections of Bukkit that are GPL'd. Whether they'll need to use a 'cleanroom' approach is interesting to speculate on.

The worst thing I can see coming out of this is the stigma it would attach to companies purchasing companies with GPL'd code. One of the worst, most hyped up fears that anti-GPL forces toss out there is the idea that 'touching' GPL'd code can yank a companies whole codebase under a GPL license. Which is unfounded, but those sorts of people already rely on distorted interpretations to make their case. This whole instance is just a handout to anti-GPL. Sadly.

Keep it up. More and more people will figure out what fever-swamp nuts you are. Keep damaging you brand and maybe we'll be rid of you soon.

Telephone Sanitisers won't suffice. This is too big a job for just them.

You misspelled 'Apple' in above paragraph.

I am hoping, though, based on the rising buzz, that I've mentioned 'Apple' here for the last time they'll be mentioned on Slashdot for a week. There's a whole shitsludge avalanche of Apple hype sliding out this coming week that badly needs to be contained.

No human being is ever completely disarmed. Also, some versions of the story of what happened in Ferguson say the the man killed was vigorously struggling to become the armed man, i.e. trying to wrest the policeman's gun away from him.

The truth is going to be determined eventually. When it is, we'll all need to settle for it and we will ALL need to stfu about our prejudices. Ah, I'm such a dreamer....

The concept of shareware, as originally envisioned by Buttonware back when the term was first coined, is that the software is totally available, and people should donate money in an honor system, if they wanted to support the software. Partially functional software that has to be paid for to get the whole use is called crippleware.

To be more correct, the car's battery probably requires 8000 cells.

But now I'm being all technical and stuff, and slashdot has changed: it's a website for IT types.

So you're saying, to be fair, we need to treat Elon Musk like the operators of Big Oil. Even though most of the American public benefit from the 'subsidies' to traditional energy you cite, whereas Musk's company makes expensive luxury cars for the 1%.

I'm glad we can be clear on that.