HN user
Me too, this was my favourite of the countless Gauntlet clones, given that it added some cool ideas: element magic which affected enemies differently, a sidekick you could conjure, and probably more cool things I can't recall at the moment.
Let's not forget that Microsoft is backing Oracle in making API's copyrightable.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/microsoft-foresee...
I find your reasoning very strange, if anything, GPL ensures that the 'ideas' are instead made available for anyone to use, provided that they in turn do the same.
If anything would be a 'tumor' by your reasoning around ideas, it would be proprietary software, which is what GPL prevents.
They've developed it and it was adopted by everyone and their mother for being good and cheap FS.
No, it was adopted in order to have Windows compability, which you need given the Windows desktop monopoly and since Windows refuses to support any filesystem it won't get royalties on.
I've seen projects use LGPL with a added static linking exception (as in allowing it).
Cisco is also a h264 patent holder, which may have given them a better licensing deal.
Beyond this, Cisco is part of the 'Alliance for Open Media', consisting of Google, Cisco, Intel, Netflix, Amazon, Microsoft, Mozilla (the latter funding Daala) who are building a new royalty free codec for their needs based upon vp10, but which will make use of any useful technology their members have access to.
Early days yet:
https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/#/q/project:webm/ao...
Why do you suppose that is? It's infuriating to see someone else make a lot of money with something you developed for free?
The argument as I recall it from back then was that they did not want to hurt the arcade business, the manufacturers of arcade games would suffer if instead of purchasing their arcade machines, their potential customers would load up a PC with MAME and rig it to a coin-slot/cabinet.
Also the MAME (and MESS which is the same for computers and consoles/handheld) has a policy of not emulating arcades/etc until they are no longer supported/out of circulation.
True, an increase in optimizations will likely mean longer compile times, on the other hand, with better optimized code, the compiler itself (as it's written in Go) will also perform better, which may negate some of the increase in compile time.
Improved optimizations which will also be easier to implement, with the result being faster and also typically smaller code.
And then he went and released Java under the GPL.
I'm going to go with the actual author of the licence (Danese), and not just because she authored it but because the idea that Sun management, seeing themselves struggle against Linux, would allow Linux to use their prized ZFS and DTrace, and thus offer even less reason to choose Solaris over Linux is simply insane from any kind of business point.
And not even now do we have anyone arguing here that CDDL is not GPL-incompatible, people accept that and Linus refuses to merge any CDDL code in to mainline, what is being discussed here is if ZFS counts as a derivative (and thus has to be GPL compatible) when it runs as a kernel module in Linux kernel space.
The other reply [1] nails the real point: No one at Oracle is complaining.
Canonical hasn't shipped their distro with the ZFS kernel module yet. My impression of Oracle is that they let their lawsuits do the talking.
You also ignore the binary kernel object point: Nvidia's drivers are completely proprietary and closed source. How is that in any way less of a violation?
AFAIK NVidia's drivers are not a default part of any distribution (including Ubuntu from Canonical) and has to be enabled/installed explicitly by the end user, meanwhile Canonical said they were going to make the ZFS kernel module part of their default distribution.
Oh please, even the author of the CDDL license states that this is so (Danese Cooper).
And it's not as if that admission was ever needed, were you even around back then ?
Solaris was being killed in the market by Linux, Sun decided to go open source in an effort to better compete with Linux, but there was NO way that they would give away their prized technology (ZFS, DTrace) under a license which would allow their main competitor to whom they were losing, to integrate said technology.
Hence CDDL, GPLv2 incompatible.
Of course this game did not lead to the 'videogame crash' of 83, other videogame areas like the arcades was doing just fine, and home computers as well.
The problem was that the console games of the time were incredibly poor in graphics/sound, and typically also in game play.
Consumers wanted better games than what the console hardware at the time could produce, once something came along which was a technical leap compared to the Atari, Coleco etc, it did fantastically well, this was the NES.
It is probably more accurate to claim the GPL was designed to be incompatible with an entire class of licenses that includes the CDDL,
It was designed to give and preserve rights for end users, it's not really a big mystery, and the actual rights which are given and preserved perfectly mirror that.
I don't see anything that would substantiate your claim of them being 'deliberately' incompatible with any other licenses (anything you can point to ?), in fact they've fixed incompability problems in GPLv3 with other licenses.
And of course both MPL and CDDL came along much later than GPLv2, with which they were incompatible (MPL 2.0 in turn rectified this).
can be simplified to one guy thinking GPL incompatibility is a good feature.
No, I don't think for a second that it was 'one guy', again Sun management had absolutely zero reason to allow Linux to incorporate ZFS and DTrace and every business reason not to, in fact from a business standpoint it would have been crazy to hand over ZFS and DTrace to their main competitor.
but that does not stop people from distributing it as a kernel module and that is how filesystem code is loaded these days, so it is a non-issue.
I'm not at all sure it's a non-issue, this is a Linux kernel module running in Linux kernel space, I'm pretty sure there is a strong case for this being considered a derivative, that said I hope it won't be an issue since having ZFS in a native capacity with minimal effort is a boon for Linux.
It's a Linux kernel module running in Linux kernel address space, I'd say there is reason to assume it can be considered a derivative work, and thus a license incompability.
The CDDL was crafted with GPL existing and was according to the person responsible for creating it, deliberately made incompatible with GPLv2. Of course not hard to understand given that Sun had no reason whatsoever to hand over their prized technology (ZFS, DTrace) to the competitor which was killing them in the market.
On the other hand, I suspect RMS isn't too happy with this turn of events.
Why not ?
The sfconservancy may be the more likely party to bring a lawsuit.
That would require that a Linux copyright holder would want to sue, why would they ? OpenZFS is open source, and previous suits has been about source code compliance.
Thanks for the correction, I'm not really well-versed in that area (should have asked the missus!)
Tack!
Here is the actual complaint, translated from swedish to english:
Sexual Assault
They were sitting in bed talking and he took off her clothes. They had sex again and she realised that he had only put the condom over the tip of his penis, but she let it pass.
They went to sleep and she awoke with the sensation of him entering her. She immediately asked 'Are you wearing anything?' and he replied 'You'.
She told him 'You better not have HIV' and he replied 'Of course not'. She felt it was too late, he was already in her so she let him continue, she was too tired to tell him once more, she had been nagging him about using a condom all night.
She never had unprotected sex before. He said he wanted to come inside her, he did not say when he would but he did. A lot leaked out of her afterwards.
She told him 'What if I get pregnant?'. He answered that Sweden is a good place to have kids. She jokingly told him that if she became pregnant he would have to pay her student loans.
On the train to Enköping he had told her that he had slept in Anna Ardins bed after a party. She asked if he had sex with Anna but he said Anna liked girls, that she was a lesbian.
Now she knows that he did the same thing with Anna. She asked him about how many he has had sex with, he responded that he didn't keep count. He said that he had HIV tested himself 3 months earlier and that he had sex with a woman after that and that she was tested and not positive.
She said sarcastic things to him in a joking tone, she believes that she was trying to de-dramatize what had happened, he in turn did not seem to care. When he was told the size of her student loans he said that if he was to pay her loans then she would have to give birth to a baby.
They joked that the child would be named Afghanistan. He also said that he ought to keep abortion-pills with him that would in reality be sugar-pills.
His phone rang and he had a meeting with Aftonbladet (swedish newspaper) on tuesday at 12. She explained that he would not make it to that meeting, so he pushed his whole schedule ahead by one hour.
After that he rode a bicycle with her on the back down to the train station. She paid his ticket to Stockholm. Before they separated he told her to keep her phone on. She asked if he was going to call and he said he would.
She took the bike home, showered and changed sheets. Since she didn't make it in time for work she called in sick and stayed home. She wanted to clean up and wash everything. There was semen on the sheets and she thought it was disgusting. She also went by the drugstore and bought 'dagenefterpiller' (abortion pills).
After she had discussed with her friends she realized that she had been the victim of a crime. She went to Danderyd hospital and from there to Södersjukhuset (another hospital). There she was examined and also tested using a so called 'rape-kit'.
edit: pdf of the original complaint (in swedish): http://www.nnn.se/nordic/assange/docs/memoria.pdf
I made a swedish to english translation of the actual allegation (as in the actual case file), the original can be found here, naturally it's in swedish: http://www.magasinetparagraf.se/bilden/forundersokningen-avs....
Here's my translation of the accusation (to the best of my ability):
Sexual Assault
They were sitting in bed talking and he took off her clothes. They had sex again and she realised that he had only put the condom over the tip of his penis, but she let it pass.
They went to sleep and she awoke with the sensation of him entering her. She immediately asked 'Are you wearing anything?' and he replied 'You'.
She told him 'You better not have HIV' and he replied 'Of course not'. She felt it was too late, he was already in her so she let him continue, she was too tired to tell him once more, she had been nagging him about using a condom all night.
She never had unprotected sex before. He said he wanted to come inside her, he did not say when he would but he did. A lot leaked out of her afterwards.
She told him 'What if I get pregnant?'. He answered that Sweden is a good place to have kids. She jokingly told him that if she became pregnant he would have to pay her student loans.
On the train to Enköping he had told her that he had slept in Anna Ardins bed after a party. She asked if he had sex with Anna but he said Anna liked girls, that she was a lesbian.
Now she knows that he did the same thing with Anna. She asked him about how many he has had sex with, he responded that he didn't keep count. He said that he had HIV tested himself 3 months earlier and that he had sex with a woman after that and that she was tested and not positive.
She said sarcastic things to him in a joking tone, she believes that she was trying to de-dramatize what had happened, he in turn did not seem to care. When he was told the size of her student loans he said that if he was to pay her loans then she would have to give birth to a baby.
They joked that the child would be named Afghanistan. He also said that he ought to keep abortion-pills with him that would in reality be sugar-pills.
His phone rang and he had a meeting with Aftonbladet (swedish newspaper) on tuesday at 12. She explained that he would not make it to that meeting, so he pushed his whole schedule ahead by one hour.
After that he rode a bicycle with her on the back down to the train station. She paid his ticket to Stockholm. Before they separated he told her to keep her phone on. She asked if he was going to call and he said he would.
She took the bike home, showered and changed sheets. Since she didn't make it in time for work she called in sick and stayed home. She wanted to clean up and wash everything. There was semen on the sheets and she thought it was disgusting. She also went by the drugstore and bought 'dagenefterpiller' (abortion pills).
After she had discussed with her friends she realized that she had been the victim of a crime. She went to Danderyd hospital and from there to Södersjukhuset (another hospital). There she was examined and also tested using a so called 'rape-kit'.
edit: the old link s no longer working, here is a working one (again it's in swedish):
It's about the consolidation of tools into a few monolithic binaries.
Could you go in to some detail here, what are the tools that have been turned in to monolithic binaries ?
The systemd project consists of some 70 different binaries, the vast majority of them being optional, and each of them handling specific tasks very much in the UNIX tradition.
They are being developed in the same tree, exactly like the BSD's, and just like the BSD equivalents they want to make use of features the kernel can provide even if that makes it less portable.
Most opponents of systemd are not against consolidation and standardization of linux system administration.
That's not my experience, in the discussions I've seen and taken part in, most (as in vast majority) of the detractors are opposed to systemd as a consolidation of a large array of core tools and services all under the same 'umbrella', which is exactly what the BSD's do at an even higher level as they are developed as full operating systems.
I'm not sure what 'happiness to introduce bugs and unbootable systems' refer to, I've been using systemd ever since Arch made the switch (~4 years ago). I've yet to have stability issues and I haven't read of any widespread problems in the Arch forums either.
There are (and likely always will be) distros which default to and promote alternatives (Gentoo comes directly to mind), but in the grand scope we're seeing a huge convergence around systemd across distros, which tells me this type of standardisation is something the Linux ecosystem really pined for overall.
Interesting, I haven't heard of those.
Basically they improve blood circulation and prevent varicose vein problems.
My old coach was convinced it improved recovery time for lower-leg muscles after hard training and more or less made us swear to use them as much as possible :)
It's funny, after you do it long enough your body craves it.
I'm doing daily (well at least 5-6 days a week) walks myself as well, I do between 50-70 minutes depending on how I feel, and yes it does become something of a craving, I typically feel uneasy if I don't get out and walk.
The reason I started was as part of rehabilitation after a knee injury I sustained during sports, and it became a great habit (something good came out of that injury).
This might also play in to avoiding vein issues when standing since you get the leg circulation up and running during high pace walks.
Interest in FreeBSD seems to be on the rise, with the advent of systemd.
I don't buy this, why would someone who complains about the consolidation and standardisation of core tools/services in Linux want to move to FreeBSD which does exactly the same as it is a full operating system and only supports what they ship, anything else you are on your own, just like what we get with standardising around systemd across distros.
The choice/flexibility which is potentially lost if the entire Linux ecosystem embraces systemd was never available on FreeBSD in the first place, what standardising around systemd is doing is moving Linux distros closer to one of the often touted advantages of choosing one of the BSD distros, which is a standard set of core tools/services which can be targeted (however in Linux's case it is across distros as opposed to the BSD's where it is per-OS).
Nope, but then I've always used compression socks (for long before I started standing due to having it drilled in to my head by a soccer coach I had back in the day) which I think helps prevent such problems, I also have a standing mat.
Anyway, I've been standing for three years now and apart from about a month of adjusting myself to the idea, it's been great, primarily my lower back which used to hurt somewhat and stiffen after a work day, other benefits although not dramatic is some weight loss (atleast initially) and better posture.
In the most recent talk I saw with Tanenbaum regarding Minix and performance, he mentioned a 20% decrease compared to monolithic kernel based systems, which he himself was happy to sacrifice for the greater system stability it offers.
Of course, the big standout for me has always been that if micro-kernel based systems of today are just as, or close enough in terms of performance, why aren't we getting any benchmarks showing this off ?
It would be fantastic promotion to show your system running against Linux or the BSD's and performing as well or near as well in heavy workloads while at the same time offering the great stability of typically being able to restart modules should they crash and thus not take down the whole system.
The micro-kernel vendors should be shouting it from the rooftops, 'here are the benchmarks!', but they don't as far as I can tell.
The last time I saw a modern micro-kernel vs modern monolithic comparison was probably this one way back in 2007, and in this Minix 3 did not do very well against Linux.
Ah, thanks, makes sense.
I'm somewhat confused, is this a different effort than the royalty free codec which is being developed by Google, Amazon, Netflix, Microsoft, Mozilla, Cisco, Intel under the name 'Alliance for Open Media' ?
I don't understand this - every product & service sold in the open market - from baby formula to clothing, from a meal at a restaurant to a flight - relies on competitive advantage that's proprietary to the seller.
I disagree, what products and services typically rely on is price which in turn is typically based on just how well a company can exploit workers and negotiate cheap prices for material, and of course advertising to make people buy their particular version out in a sea of thousands of practically identical products.
A mindset to open this advantage up is somehow being selectively applied to software.
Because the FSF is concerned about software, due to it's founder being a developer. I'm sure there are efforts to have better dislosure of contents, preparation and materials used for the type of physical products you brought up.
In a truly open and free market, malicious elements that include spyware, rootkits .. etc will get rooted out.
I find that incredibly naive, pretty much every company wants to exploit their customers for maximum return, Microsoft recently turned their OS into the equivalent of spyware in order to harvest user data for ad targeting, meanwhile the governments are actively making use of malicious elements to compromise as many end users they can in order to surveil them.
which by the way is how evolution and biology has programmed all of us.
What? Are you saying we are actually programmed to hide our discoveries in order to be able to take advantage of our fellow man rather than share our knowledge in order to advance ourselves as a species ?
BSD/Apache/MIT kind of permissive licenses offer true freedom.
For the developer, Free Software offers 'true freedom' for the end user. Ah, the old 'true freedom' nonsense.
an approach that allows companies to focus on their value-add rather than re-inventing the wheel.
Meanwhile everyone needs to re-invent the value-add functionality, so you are still re-inventing the wheel.
It ends up saving proprietary companies money because they can lower the amount of developers they need, since they don't need to write as much code, only the 'value-add', this leads to less developer employment.
If anything you should be disliking permissive code rather than copyleft, since it is the former which really threathens developer jobs in the proprietary software sector which you seemingly fear for.
Stallman is a vocal detractor [1] of ANY permissive open-source license.
Well obviously since they do not protect any of the end user rights which Free Software was created to protect. Again Free Software is about giving rights to the end user, not the developer.
Quid-pro-quo: the undeniable biological, evolutionary instinct to receive something (money) for a rendered service/product (software) simply cannot be deemed criminal.
FSF/Stallman in way claims that charging for software is criminal or even unethical.
The whole point of Free Software is to give and preserve rights for end users, rights which enable end users to do what they want with the software they recieve, like examining it to make sure it doesn't do anything bad (for the user), modifying it to do what the end user wants, copy it, etc.
Now obviously this makes it incompatible with the traditional way of commercial software, which is proprietary distribution of binaries, which often also comes with DRM schemes further limiting what the end user can do with said software, and worst case, exploiting the end user by enganging in hidden or poorly-disclosed unwanted actions (spyware, rootkits etc).