Microblog
in reply to @ 2016-62 12:13 UTCThe movement is suprisingly organized compared to some other (such as free culture). It has key rally points, goals, projects, news sources.
What you really seem to be asking is "why doesn't this one piece of hardware work". Well, to solve that we would need to make our own hardware. See: ZaReason, Thinkpenguin for the attempts to collab with existing hardware makers: Novena, EOMA for attempts to do it again from (mostly) scratch
in reply to @ 2016-62 12:07 UTCOf course you can sell it, there's no question there.
The question of if the code is derivative of the models is an interesting one. I would expect probably not, but IANAL and you might want to consult with one (or the original creator) if you're worried.
in reply to @ 2016-61 22:25 UTCIt has not come out. Still in alpha and probably will be for years yet
in reply to @ 2016-61 02:22 UTCAnother option similar to the existential hack: Data.Dynamic
in reply to @ 2016-61 02:11 UTCEven when the book came out, remix was pretty common (though not so common as now). The issue was and is that so much of this remix is "illegal art".
We need new life in the movement to promote the commons for our future.
in reply to @ 2016-61 02:09 UTCAt least the software freedom community has a decent understanding of the issues with patents.
in reply to @ 2016-60 22:40 UTCFree Culture mostly fails to even have a rally point these days. It's hard to introduce people because the movement is so fragmented/distributed. Besides this subreddit, where do you go to get news about free culture happenings?
in reply to @ 2016-60 18:14 UTCSo, pubsub nodes cannot be set to persist with prosody yet? Do you know if that's being worked on?
in reply to @ 2016-58 13:19 UTCThe BSDs who hate copyleft still dislike CDDL. Also, could dual-license, don't have to change the license
in reply to @ 2016-58 12:54 UTCAnyone issuing such an explanation would be helping the conversation. Doesn't matter if the person saying the correct thing is "good" or "evil" — if M$ said the same thing, they'd still be right.
In fact, if Oracle starts saying these things, life will get very interesting.
in reply to @ 2016-58 04:28 UTCConservancy enforcement activity almost never ends up as a lawsuit. Lawsuits are expensive and don't serve the goals conservancy has in an enforcement (education and compliance)
in reply to @ 2016-58 04:27 UTCThat's not a claim about what distros are "really" free, but a simple, factual explanation of an infringement case they (and everyone) have been getting a lot of questions about.
in reply to @ 2016-58 03:07 UTCI think you're maybe confusing them with FSF?
in reply to @ 2016-57 21:45 UTCSounds like you would not be allowed to port, post, or otherwise modify or distribute this code. It is not open source
in reply to @ 2016-56 21:18 UTCI have several times run a workshop at my company to run people through some basics: http://www.boltmade.com/presentations/intro-to-functional-programming
I have also (once) at the local hackerspace run an introduction to computer science, which contains quite a bit of functional. Curriculum: https://github.com/singpolyma/cs-top-and-bottom
in reply to @ 2016-56 14:13 UTCZFS is present in the Ubuntu release as a kernel module (zfs.ko) and as explained in the article you link, this is a GPL violation.
in reply to @ 2016-56 13:30 UTCActually, signing over rights would have prevented this case from going forward at all (since presumably Linux Foundation would have them and VMware is a member there)
in reply to @ 2016-56 04:53 UTCYou can change firefox and redistribute the source changes. If you make binaries with your changes, just don't enable the mozilla branding compile options
in reply to @ 2016-56 04:51 UTCI think so. Sounds like permission in writing. #TINLA
in reply to @ 2016-56 04:49 UTCThose two certainly look open source to me. What is the issue exactly?
If you're more used to quickbooks-style, I suggest trying GNU Cash
in reply to @ 2016-56 04:45 UTCJust mentioning a name is very dubious IMHO. #IANAL
in reply to @ 2016-56 04:43 UTCNo, the shim does not make the whole thing derivative of course. But it does make the shim derivative. And they are distributing the shim. That is the infringement
in reply to @ 2016-56 04:41 UTCLinux kernel license contains a specific exception to the GPL for userspace programs making syscalls to avoid this issue
in reply to @ 2016-55 18:55 UTCThey could use it in OEL if the did the relicense. But for some reason they think pushing btrfs to reinvent something they already own is a better way…
in reply to @ 2016-55 18:53 UTCSFC is already funding a module compliance case (the VMWare case). My guess would be they wait on the outcome of that while proceeding with "diplomatic means" here for now
in reply to @ 2016-55 18:50 UTCZFS exists independent of Linux and is not a derivative
But the code that makes it work with the Linux filesystem APIs is not independent
in reply to @ 2016-55 13:07 UTCBesides the wrongness you're driving for, there's also the fact that you never need to use CLI for anything, many of us just prefer to. Members of my family don't CLI their debian or ubuntu installs, they GUI everything
in reply to @ 2016-54 21:48 UTCthey never actually cared about the brand dilution before
Mozilla specifically asked Debian to stop using the Firefox name
in reply to @ 2016-54 21:47 UTCPretty sure it did ages ago…