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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:I think that's all college students (Score 1) 823

You know, I heard that excuse a lot twenty years ago.

That's what they said twenty years after Gutenberg invented the movable type. Of course the printing press was perfect by then, there wasn't any possibility for improvement, technology hasn't advanced at all since, and books were as easy to handle then as they're now. So there's no excuse for anybody that didn't know how to read, and they should be blamed for not taking advantage of that brand new technology.

Or maybe computing technology is primitive and hard to use, and it requires years of professional training to understand?

(...I wonder where the impression that nerds are arrogant comes from?)

Comment Re:but they will waste no time (Score 1) 284

GPL or CC-BY-SA content is not safe from DMCA takedown notices either. I don't see how that's relevant.

The license still.grants pretty much absolute control to the rights holder

How come? The rights holder can't control non-commercial use after he has released it. So it's "open for non-commercial use".

There is not *one* definition of open and free, the BSD-GPL license wars prove it. Sure -NC is less open than those, but it isn't necessarily closed either.

Comment Re:It's been a cyclic fad. (Score 1) 211

The fact remains that you will never be able to match the typing speed achieved on a keyboard, even with limited travel, when typing on a tablet's screen.

Most users I know use the "hunt and peck" technique and are unable to touch-type, so they will never be able to match the typing speed achieved on a keyboard, even with a physical keyboard. A tablet virtual keyboard thus proves no disadvantage to them.

Comment Re:but they will waste no time (Score 1) 284

Yes, it's legally equivalent to shareware and freeware; it's unclear whether it can be used for self-promotion where the content is not distributed for money, only for publicity; and it doesn't allow for building a corpus of open content like a fully open license would do.

However, CC-*-NC licenses allow for unlimited amateur work and redistribution, which is a step above what standard copyright allows even under free use terms. Given the "web 2.0" model of distributed content generation, that end-users can reuse the content without legal worries is a win toward freedom even if it doesn't go the extra mile and only some users can benefit from it.

Comment Re:but they will waste no time (Score 0) 284

Because freedom and openness are both incompatible with NC.

No, they aren't.

Seriously, I thought you should be able to defend the free/open principles with a less shallow argument than that. See my post below. Defending open content is not a binary proposition but more like a continuum; and CC-NC-SA falls inside that continuum nearer to "open" than "close".

Comment Re:but they will waste no time (Score 1) 284

It really depends on how you define freedom and openness. I'd say the CC-NC-SA is quite apt for the goals it promotes - that small content creators release their work to be shared and reused throughout the Internet "informal" channels.

That it doesn't offer full doesn't make it opposing open principles, it just offers a less permissive version of them; that's still promoting openness in my book. As you say, the GPL itself includes some restrictions, and even then it's held as the definition of "free and open" for many of us.

Heck, even the MIT license places restrictions on what you an do (you cannot use the names of the copyright holders, you have to copy the license notice in all versions, etc), and therefore is not "free as in freedom"; there are still things you aren't allowed to do with MIT-licensed content. So by your definition it would be "opposing free and/or open principles" too, because the content under it is not in the public domain.

Comment Re:Inflation LOL (Score 1) 133

Point releases in Firefox did definitely include new functions on par or bigger than current "major" versions do. Firefox 3.5 included multimedia tags, private browsing, several new web technologies (workers, JSON)... Firefox 3.6 included the Personas interface and checking old plugins.

Firefox 16 is not 'mayor' in the same way that 3.0 or 4.0 were. The new numbering schema means that the version number does no longer provide significant information about the project evolution.

Google

Google Gets Into Politics With Civic Info API 58

mikejuk writes "The new Google Civic Information API can be used to look up comprehensive voting information for particular addresses in the U.S. such as the polling place, early vote sites, contests, and local election official contact information. At the moment the API is limited to voting information for elections in the U.S., but Google plans to expand the support to cover other countries and include other types of civic information. Google plans to use the API to power their own election tools, including an embeddable app anyone can use on their site."

Slashdot Top Deals

All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.

Working...