Comment: non-auditable accounting software (Score 1) 1
Kinda ridiculous, I think. Help this project!
My personal blog post on the matter -- http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2013/05/01/npo-accounting-software-audit/
+ - Conservancy running campaign to write better accounting software for nonprofits-> 1
Submitted
by
paroneayea
paroneayea writes "The Software Freedom Conservancy is running a campaign to improve accounting software, especially for nonprofits. To keep their books and produce annual government filings, most NPOs rely on proprietary software, paying exorbitant licensing fees. This is fundamentally at cross purposes with their underlying missions of charity, equality, democracy, and sharing. You can help Conservancy fix this problem by donating now!"
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Comment: any manufacturers named? (Score 1) 441
I have a hard time believing 5% without names. That represents a huge number, at least 20 million units a year, roughly the worldwide market share of a company like Asus.
(If 5% turns out to be true, that's wonderful! Onward to 50%. :-))
Comment: Condifentiality of data not safe ... (Score 1) 376
Is what the story title should've been. Confidentiality, not data, is the subject of "safe".
Much like copyright doesn't "protect" creative works, rather it protects revenue streams and feelings of copyright holders and authors.
+ - Libre Graphics Magazine 1.1 seeking submissions->
Submitted
by
ginger coons
ginger coons writes "Libre Graphics Magazine, spawned from the Libre Graphics Meeting and its surrounding community, is seeking submissions for its inaugural numbered issue. Anyone using or thinking about Libre Graphics applications, standards and workflows is invited to submit already completed works or proposals for work for inclusion in issue 1.1, to be published in print and online November 8."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Comment: one NPO CTO's experience w/RE and CIviCRM... (Score 4, Interesting) 97
+ - Cosmetic Carbon Copy, a new standard in email->
Submitted
by
paulproteus
paulproteus writes "Say you have an email where you want to send an extra copy to someone without telling everyone. There's always been a field for that: BCC, or Blind Carbon Copy. But how often have you wanted to do the opposite: make everyone else think you sent a copy to somebody without actually having done so? Enter the new IETF-NG RFC: Cosmetic Carbon Copy, or CCC. Now you can conveniently email all of your friends (with a convenient exception or two...) with ease!"
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Wikipedia's Assault On Patent-Encumbered Codecs 428
Posted
by
timothy
from the because-they-hate-the-march-of-progress dept.
from the because-they-hate-the-march-of-progress dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Open Video Alliance is launching a campaign today called Let's Get Video on Wikipedia, asking people to create and post videos to Wikipedia articles. (Good, encyclopedia-style videos only!) Because all video must be in patent-free codecs (theora for now), this will make Wikipedia by far the most likely site for an average internet user to have a truly free and open video experience. The campaign seeks to 'strike a blow for freedom' against a wave of h.264 adoption in otherwise open HTML5 video implementations."
What Aspects of Open Source Projects Do You Avoid? 344
Posted
by
timothy
from the don't-you-want-to-cuddle? dept.
from the don't-you-want-to-cuddle? dept.
paulproteus writes "I'm a Debian developer and a part-time contributor to a few smaller projects. I do a lot of free software-y and open source-y things. Sometimes, though, I don't do them. I figure some other Slashdotters might have similar hang-ups — we contribute to a project, but there are parts that we really dread thinking about. So I wrote a post about having these hang-ups, and I made a place on the web to share how others can help your project. What are the parts that, in your projects, you would be relieved if someone else looked at for you?"
+ - What in open source are you avoiding working on?-> 1
Submitted
by
paulproteus
paulproteus writes "I'm a Debian developer and a part-time contributor to a few smaller projects. I do a lot of free software-y and open source-y things. Sometimes, though, I don't do them. I figure some other Slashdotters might have similar hang-ups — we contribute to a project, but there are parts that we really dread thinking about.
So I wrote a post about having these hang-ups, and I made a place on the web to share how others can help your project. What are the parts that, in your projects, you would be relieved if someone else looked at for you?"
Link to Original Source
So I wrote a post about having these hang-ups, and I made a place on the web to share how others can help your project. What are the parts that, in your projects, you would be relieved if someone else looked at for you?"
Link to Original Source
Comment: Re:my experience (Score 1) 8
Great summary. Two tiny things:
Another possibility would be dual-licensing with CC-BY-SA and GFDL, but that's probably not worth the extra work unless you've identified materials you want to use that are under GFDL.
If the things they want to use are GFDL-only and the product is an adaptation of those then they don't have the option of dual licensing. You may have meant "you want your work to be incorporated into that are under GFDL."
Only do CC-BY if you simply want to make a gift to the world, and you don't care if your work is repackaged into something non-free by other people.
CC-BY isn't quite a pure gift -- it could be used by a selfish licensor if that person only cares about maximizing the amount of credit they get -- incorporating CC-BY works into non-free works still requires giving credit.
Comment: Re:understanding the GPL (Score 1) 8
I find the GPL readable. In any case, this post doesn't ask about the GPL. It asks about the GFDL.
Comment: do you want copyleft or not? (Score 2, Interesting) 8
The GFDL and CC-BY are rather different licenses. The first is a copyleft license (requires adaptations to be distributed under the same license), the latter is a permissive license (do anything you want so long as you give credit, roughly).
If you don't want copyleft, CC-BY is your choice.
If you do want copyleft, it would make sense to choose between GFDL and CC-BY-SA, which you can think of as the copyleft version of CC-BY. Wikipedia (and other Wikimedia sites) migrated from the GFDL to CC-BY-SA as their primary content license in June, see http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/15411
Thanks for not considering a more restrictive license.
License For Textbooks — GNU FDL Or CC? 8
Posted
by
timothy
from the compare-and-contrast dept.
from the compare-and-contrast dept.
An anonymous reader writes 'I'm a college professor who is putting together an open-source textbook. I'm trying to decide between using the GNU Free Documentation License or the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. I don't really understand the difference between these, though it seems with the Free Documentation License I need to include a copy of the license in my text. Which do you advise using?'
Comment: Re:Who cares? (Score 1) 82
My business plan is to not think about abicollab again until I hear that the server component is FLOSS. :-)