Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Need for change... (Score 1) 1040

I think tablets ARE the way of the future - they do everything that about 90% of people use their home PCs for. I'd love to have one so I don't have to traipse off to the PC every time I want to use the web but while my PC works it's just a waste of money to fork out £££s to replace something that works perfectly well. But in the current climate, I'm not spending money on things I don't need. I'm sure I'm not the only one and I think this is the reason they aren't selling like they should.

Comment I'm going to make my own (Score 1) 192

None of the thermostats I've seen (not that I've looked that hard) have the one feature I want: a button that raises the set temperature by 2 degrees C for 30 minutes and then lowers is back to normal over the next hour. It would please the ladies who want an instant blast of heat while not annoying the chaps who don't want the house heated to tropical levels all day when it doesn't get turned back to normal.

Comment Re:Only games tho. (Score 1) 343

I know you are trying to be funny, but it's worth pointing out a couple of things. None of those other things are as immersive as video games. These are kids, remember? They really do learn from experience. The effect will be far greater coming from an activity that totally absorbs your attention by allowing you to take part in it. Actual violence is provably more effective - kids that grow up in violent households usually become violent themselves. Lastly, I don't recall the last time someone said that actual violence was OK while video games are not. Humour works best when it keeps some sort of tie with reality.

Comment Eh? (Score 1) 161

What a strange article. Lots of words, but no clear meaning comes through to me. He seems to be taking one sentence from a Canonical license and saying that it proves there's lots of problems for open source because copyrights fwibble a gwabbit. Well, if he's making up stuff I might as well start making up stuff too. Copyrights are what keep open source open - i.e. you can't ignore the license and stop other people using the open source code you distribute without breaking copyright law yourself.

I really don't see the problem. Contributed code where copyright is assigned to the company can be distributed under a license specified by the company it was contributed to. How is this different from any other company that takes in code? Code that is already under the GPL stays under the GPL - you can't hijack it for your own license, thanks to the copyright laws. If Canonical start being bastards and distributing copyright-assigned contributed code under a non-free license then people will stop contributing. The stuff they have already distributed under a free license remains free forever and they can't revoke it.

Open Source

The Biggest Legal Danger For Open Source? 161

itwbennett writes "Brian Proffitt is blogging about the undercurrent of legal issues troubling the open source world these days and offers up this question: Are patents or copyright a bigger threat to the open source community? Patents are the obvious choice, with inflicting fear being the 'obvious intention of those who have instigated the various legal troubles on open source practitioners.' But the issue of copyright and copyright assignments is no less troublesome, argues Proffitt. And copyright assignment can be confusingly Machievllian, even in open source land."

Slashdot Top Deals

Where there's a will, there's a relative.

Working...