Are you suffering from a lack of google?
The page also has a link to an RMS essay about how free software developers should prevent proprietary developers from using their software in order for the GPL software developers to get a collective advantage for themselves. (BTW, it sounds to me like RMS doesn't intend for proprietary developers to wrap the GSL in IPC.)
Are you suffering from a lack of google?
To wrap GPL code in its own process and use it via IPC is one of the most bizarre pro-GPL arguments I have ever heard. 'You are not being creative [subversive] enough!' What??? Why not simply license the code as LGPL in the first place and let the other developers avoid this arbitrary hassle that forces a most likely inelegant design? (Really. If you don't answer that question I can't take you seriously. As it is my faith in humanity went down a notch.) In addition, people may very rightly think it is circumvention of the GPL, including the authors of the GPL code and the end-users, breeding ill-will. Hypothetical GPL authors who promote IPC wrapping of their libraries seems obnoxious to me: you can use and redistribute my code in your proprietary app but only if you jump through hoops and waste your life to the benefit of nobody. Lose-lose.
(Of course, there could be a difference of perspective here: if you live in the world of the unix command line where so many things can be done with simple command line tools, and your role in life is shell script developer, doing simple command line things, then yeah the GPL is more a common part of life. If you are an application developer, using 10+ libraries, you do not want to have to create 10 auxiliary processes to run in the background and create 10 IPC server codebases. That is totally insane. And as an application developer, when I see someone license their middleware library as GPL (out of ignorance and not a cunning strategy for a future commercial dual license), I very quickly come to the conclusion that they are either ignorant newbies, or hippie idiots who don't understand how the world works and will end up with a userbase close to zero until someone slaps some sense into them. (And I have done that successfully.))
I have a open source project that I licensed as CC0 / public domain (it is small and obscure, otherwise I may have selected BSD/MIT), and in the same breath said I welcome contributions. I also am saying "We'll appreciate what you chose to contribute and
I find that contributing back to BSD licensed open source projects is often in the end-developer's best interest anyway, as it can mean they don't have to maintain a private fork, and their changes will be regression tested and supported by the official team. (I won't even get into the nightmare of GPL and LGPL linking requirements on mobile devices and app stores. And in case you haven't noticed, the world is going mobile.)
There is sensationalistic journalism, and then there is blatantly misleading journalism. This is the latter.
I have been a
Sure there has been a cultural shift that maybe was in more of a full swing from 2006-2010 that has seen open source as less suspicious and fringe and more useful, but my reaction is: 2009 called and they want their story back.
There is still a lot of irrational fear about
I cut the haters some slack though, as I used to hate Microsoft in 2000, and it took me a few years of full time work with
No! People are upset about Facebook's privacy! And how they sell out as much as possible and have no qualms about ending privacy -- "privacy is dead" - didn't Zuck say that? Just recently they added wall postings, and people thought they were private messages. Even though this was a bogus problem, it gets people upset.
Maybe if we all shared this with our non-techie friends it would help it gain traction.
1) you can crosspost to facebook and twitter (and tumblr)
2) you can use hashtags. Score! People on FB get flamed for being idiots who don't know how to use twitter. This way they can win.
I've been a user for about 14 minutes now.
The fishies will be swimming stupidly faster with more energy!
I've been using a VPS for $3/month from 123systems.net. I haven't done much with it yet, and I don't know how consistent it is, but so far I have no complaints. buyvm.net was another I was looking at that I believe has an even cheaper option ($15/yr!). Like someone else said, check out http://www.lowendbox.com/ to become informed about the options. Of course, you get only a pittance of ram/cpu for these bargain basement prices (and often limited availability -- buyvm sounds like a bit of a lottery), but it is still nice to have full control over a linux system that I can pack it up and deploy it to another linux server with more resources/consistency if/when I need to, while playing around with it for cheap now. It's also nice to have a far away offsite backup in case my city gets EMP'ed / destroyed by aliens / etc.
Also, like someone else mentioned, I have run ssh/www for about 15 years on my home ISP since whenever I got broadband with no complaints from my ISP.
I am pretty ticked off about it. My 7 year old 17" Dell laptop that still works (used for 5 years) but I no longer use daily has 1920x1200. For now when mobile I make do with 1366x768 with 7pt Verdana font and fullscreen mode and low expectations in Visual Studio and a nice and tiny 11" Macbook Air and 13" Acer.
My primary desktop is 2 1920x1200 monitors in portrait mode and I love being able to see a lot of code at once. The vertical (horizontal in portrait) viewing angle on Samsung 2443BW is atrocious but I get them just right and make do and they were dirt cheap at the time I bought them so I can't complain too much.
I'm hoping this iPad 3 thing and Apple's 27" monitor indulgences will spark a new resolution war. As in: a ~2000x1500 11" laptop please, and ~2400x1700 17-19" desktop monitors so I can put several of them together and take over the world.
I blame blu-ray and HD TVs for contributing to the marketing hype over 'short-screen' monitors.
Somehow I never knew that. A design infringement makes a lot more sense. (Unless of course, Samsung now has to release a triangular tablet with sharp corners.) I'm pulling for Samsung here.
In their greed for controlling of the entire PC ecosystem, Apple and MS will eventually end up pissing off most computer users... at least most power-users..
We need someone to sneak into Ballmer's room while he's sleeping and play a recording with subliminal message: "USERS USERS USERS. USERS USERS USERS! YES!"
(Or maybe some would argue he already got this message and that's why they're doing this. Maybe replace it that with power users, or else they may jump to Linux like the parent says. (Might Google take Android to the desktop and open it up for power users? Or are they too engrossed in the web to believe in the future of the desktop?))
As a reasonably happy (cross platform and OSS)
Or to sum up, Metro is "boxy but good"
Wait and see what Microsoft's lawyers do to you if you try to use it for commercial product development.
Do you know what you're talking about? A quick google makes it looks like their lawyers should be fine with it:
The nature of copyright has to evolve with current times and technologies, allowing P2P downloads for personal use while putting a fee on MP3 players and blank media is a compromise that I see as fair.
I think it might be nice for us Canadians since the levies are not too high, but still a horrible compromise.
Conceding that everyone who buys MP3 player or blank media is a sort of criminal by putting a levy on the player is a horrible idea to me. It gives everyone in the country a license to be a legitimate pirate, because they're paying the penalty whether they like it or not. What kind of logic is "don't do this, it's bad, but even if you don't, we're taking your money anyway"? I've heard Indy producers get hurt by the blank media tax (not sure how much that is true). And where does the money go? In communistic fashion it gets redistributed in some horribly inefficient and inaccurate way to people who some government agency thinks deserves it, and it is a breakdown of the free market.
As for music (and movies), I think part of the answer is to make stores more convenient. The first music store I bought a lot from was allofmp3, but I don't think it was legit. It was awesome, had a very large library, letting me download previews and buy in any format I wanted. I wouldn't have minded paying more to a legit store. I currently subscribe to emusic and they give super short music samples, which is idiotic and I plan to unsubscribe when I finish getting what I want from there. (I can't speak for iPod/iTunes because I hate all the Apple DRM and proprietary lock-in.) A lot of people care about convenience more than freeness, and a lot of people also want to contribute back to the artists they love who they think does deserve something. Perhaps a radical idea is that it would be great to have more of a culture of honour and tipping. Magnatune.com lets the customer decide how much to tip, and most of their customers do, knowing 50% goes directly to artists. I also think Beatport.com has a great interface overall.
I think our government should take an anti-draconian stand in the world and against the US lobbies, and committing (in legislation) to never sell the souls of consumers to content companies. This legal and technical arms race in **AA is a cancer in the world and needs to be stopped. The forced obsolecence of the HD analog mentioned recently on