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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Legal Advice (Score 1) 179

The article by Bruce Perens, like all pro-GPL writing, is nothing but Orwellian double-speak, constantly talking about freedom but at the same time insisting that freedom means "you must do exactly as I say".

This keeps coming up, and I've never received a proper reply, but maybe this potty mouth anonymous coward will surprise me.

Licensing code under a non-copyleft free license means you are fine with someone taking your code and building a commercial product with it, and never giving it back in any way or form. If you're okay with that, how come you're not okay with someone who does give it back, except in a way you can't use?

Intuitively, GPL ought to be more free than completely closed off no matter where you stand, and yet you're okay with the later but not with the former. Please explain.


Comment Re:I'm not suprised... (Score 2, Insightful) 1109

you have to admit that he generally tries to do what he promises...

Not ... particularly. I voted for neither Trump nor Clinton. But I would hardly call Trump one who "does what he promises." Or even "tries."

How many times did he say he was going to drain the swamp, again?

Then again, he promises so much that I suppose almost anything he does is "trying" to fulfill a promise. :)

Comment Re:My tractors! (Score 1) 235

I'm not sure if I have a "latest fancy model," but I have a mid-2000s Kubota L48. Seems to be running fine, it's been well serviced, etc.

Looking craigslist, there just aren't that many tractors for sale in general, but it's certainly not uncommon to find 90s and 2000s. And also, of course, really old ones, too.

And that's mostly just looking for Kubotas.

One thing I have noticed, though, is that there seems to be a larger interest in some ... Japanese? I think? And Korean? ... tractors. Branson and Mahindra, for example, seems to be gaining popularity, but there aren't that many used ones, so those are mostly new-ish.

Comment Re:Typos and whatnot (Score 1) 80

To anybody with a little bit of knowledge, it is clear that there is no advantage to the consumer in buying a TV with a built-in computer

Of course there are advantages.

I have a TV with a built-in Roku. If it was available at the time we updated my parents TV setup, I would have gotten them one. Why? Because there's a single remote where you can change inputs on the TV, or fiddle with the Roku, or change the volume. There's no cables going here and there such that they have no idea what is what. It's easy. Easier than a Roku + Dumb TV in that you don't have a separate TV remote.

That may not sound like a big deal to someone who is totally cool with having 4 remotes and switching between them. And I actually have a little Android box plugged in, too, with a separate remote, for Skype and stuff. But to people who just want to have one remote, and be able to watch youtube, amazon video, and DVDs, it's great.

Comment Re:Well, sadly, probably.... (Score 1) 405

Yeah, so I was looking at this and apparently, my thoughts/experiences (likely because I've had jobs on the west coast my whole life) apparently are not accurate across the nation.

Which I think is entirely crazy. I cannot imagine anyone in their sane mind siding with the company in a lawsuit like that, but... :P

Comment Re:Well, sadly, probably.... (Score 1) 405

Most employment agreements are such that the company owns it even if it is outside of normal hours. So inventions you come up with on your own time are not yours.

Ummm, [citation needed] here, I think.

I can't imagine how this is possibly legal, even if it was in there. Yeah, if you use *company provided assets* to develop your invention, sure. You're using their stuff to do it, so they could reasonably argue they should own it (or at least part of it). But if I use my own time, my own assets, my own learning, and it's not even related to my work (e.g., they can't claim that I'm using knowledge learned on the job or something, I could see them trying to argue that), how could they possibly claim it is theirs?

It'd be interested in seeing examples of this, as well as any related court cases where it was upheld. I seriously cannot see how it's possible. I don't know anyone in that boat, nor have I heard of anyone in that boat, nor have I ever seen a contract that tried to say that. And I've seen legal stuff that prevented some related issues, but where the company had a bit more of an argument (non-compete sort of stuff). Not saying I agree with the non-compete stuff, just that it seems like a slightly more rational argument than "anything you invent, regardless of how, where, or when, is ours")

Comment Re:They are not government employees (Score 1) 470

Maybe it's because I'm not an American, but I don't get what the fuss is about.

If you're having a conversation with me, and I record (video or otherwise) the conversation, how is that invading your privacy? You were already conversing with me?

How is me recording the conversation different than me testifying about its content?


Slashdot Top Deals

Suggest you just sit there and wait till life gets easier.