Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:An epic case of MISSING THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT (Score 1) 476

by Elendil (#42379901) Attached to: GNU Grep and Sed Maintainer Quits: RMS and FSF Harming GNU Project

> Billions have been wasted rewriting the same code (at times in roundabout ways) just to avoid copyLEFT restrictions!

Billions have been wasted rewriting the same code (at times in roundabout ways) just to avoid proprietary restrictions, too. People who want to use copyleft code only have to release their changes, it's not such a big deal...
From the point of view of the software ecosystem, I'd say that the GNU toolchain has given birth to what I consider the most successful open-source project ever, namely Linux (probably a billion-dollar success overall), mostly under the GPL. From an industrial point of view, copyleft hasn't harmed Google too much, and Apple is definitely not a model for free software.

Comment: Re:Google Scholar (Score 1) 164

by Elendil (#40158221) Attached to: All Researchers To Be Allocated Unique IDs

> I think that free and transparent will prevail, that is Google Scholar.

I agree about the free part, but "transparent"? Not really. How do you know what's in GS or not? How do you correct inaccurate data when you notice it? There are so many questions about the under-the-hood working of GS that I'd like to ask...

Comment: Re:Every time a bell rings (Score 1) 309

by Elendil (#39149675) Attached to: Should There Be a Sci-Fi Category At the Oscars?

> Tolkien actually enjoyed hard sf, especially Asimov

Huh? Could you please tell us your evidence for this? I was under the impression (based on JRRT's letters and novels) that he wasn't too keen on technology and the so-called modern world. So I have some difficulty imagining him interested in a distant future filled with spaceships and robots.

Comment: Re:Impact Factor is the point, not publishing. (Score 2) 206

by Elendil (#38839157) Attached to: Scientists Organize Elsevier Boycott

> Publishing articles nowadays is terribly easy and does not cost a thing (arxiv)

Note that this is no longer accurate: Arxiv is now asking universities worldwide for donations. It isn't a mandatory license fee and it only amounts to a handful of commercial journal subscriptions, but it is no longer "not a thing".

Comment: Re:UN = dictators anonymous (Score 1) 735

by Elendil (#37916346) Attached to: US Defunds UNESCO After Palestine Vote

> Some UN fixes I can think of are 1) t 1) the invasion of Normandy in 1942 and the subsequent war in Europe against Germany

Sorry, but huh?
- the invasion of Normandy took place in 1944. There was a raid on the city of Dieppe in 1942, performed by Canadian forces under British command, but it was a complete failure.
- the United Nations didn't really exist until 1945, at which time they mostly meant "the WW2 winners"

What does it have to do with the UN?

Comment: Re:Google Scholar (Score 4, Informative) 161

by Elendil (#31290382) Attached to: Losing Google Would Hit Chinese Science Hard

> Google Scholar is the most comprehensive index of scholarly articles in the world, period.

You can't possibly know that, as Google doesn't tell us exactly what's covered by GS.

> Not only are there no free alternatives, there are no alternatives at all.

Wrong. The Web of Knowledge and Scopus (commercial) and Scirus (free) are perfectly valid alternatives. Furthermore, a number of studies in various fields have shown that all of these tools, as well as GS, usually return a number of hits that were not found by the others (again, including GS). Therefore, they can always be seen as complementing each other.

What you cound argue, on another hand, is that GS offers the best quality/price ratio. I for one would accept that.

Recent investments will yield a slight profit.

Working...