Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Who cares if they are wrong? (Score 1) 90

What they may believe about Open Source, after all, does not change what it actually is.

Ah! But here's the problem; what they claim to believe about Open Source does indeed change what most common people think Open Source is really about. When they mischaracterize the OSI, it strategically weakens the movement as a whole, and it makes Free/Libre Software advocates seem unethical to the vast majority of people who don't really know any better and will just think the richest guy they meet must be the one always right about everything.

Comment Not an accident. (Score 2) 90

These guys didn't get rich by not knowing their ass from a hole in the ground. They got rich by using knowledge to strategically build on investment. I don't believe for a second that the misinformation spread around about Apache, RedHat, and OSI policy in general represents naivety; it represents protectionism. As long as people like for example, my non-tech-savvy relatives think that these assholes know more about the Open Source Initiative than I do, than my ethics and expertise, along with that of thousands of other Free/Libre Software advocates like me, will consistently be devalued by business. Saying these VCs are just unaware of the damage this misinformation does is like suggesting Apple and other Silicon Valley companies like them enter into no-poaching agreements on accident.

Comment Re:VCs who miss the point of open source... (Score 2) 90

These VCs in question are actually spreading harmful misinformation about the state of OSI approved licenses. Read the article and you'll see the problem is deeper than just that they're funding it. The real problems are to do with what they're saying and doing *while* funding it, and who is believing their flat-out lies.

Comment Re:Consumerist stories about Comcast (Score 3, Informative) 176

The BBB has no authority whatsoever. They are not a branch of the government. They're a non-profit organization.

You want the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) or the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) - why neither of THEM have even barely lifted a finger about this crap so far though is completely beyond me.

Comment Re:What could go wrong (Score 3, Insightful) 407

No, more likely they're doing this because nobody wanted to give up any of their private land on the sides of the roads, so using the road itself for solar paneling is an infinitely more efficient use of space, because the roads themselves are public land by definition, and paving them with solar panels takes up exactly 0 extra real estate.

Comment Re:Not that crap again (Score 3, Informative) 256

Except that the "open" PDF standard you're talking about is only a small subset of the oldest, most primitive image/text drawing features of said file format, and the aforementioned government website is not only requiring use of a PDF document that used some of the newer (massively insecure) JavaScript-enabled interactive form input/validation features not included in said "open" PDF standard or implemented outside of Acrobat, but apparently they even then used said features to code the document such that it blocks you from even trying to read the document without Acrobat.

Go ahead. Go download it and try to open it with Xpdf, let us know how that works out.

Slashdot Top Deals

"For the man who has everything... Penicillin." -- F. Borquin