Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Are Altcoins Undermining Bitcoin's Credibility?

WorBlux Re:Self Serving Story? (267 comments)

The value is not in the number, but in the integrity of the chain of numbers. The integrity of specific chains is preserved by the limitation upon raw number. The numbers are not provided in the market without differentiation between units. That is block-chains of any *Coin is provided to the market with differentiation between them. An alt coin that doesn't have a specific technical advantage over bitcoin is going to fail unless it can jump ahead of bitcoin in terms of adoption. Those with technical improvements have the potential to offer a chain of greater integrity. Being first and having the head start is a pretty good indicator of greater integrity as well.

3 days ago
top

Are Altcoins Undermining Bitcoin's Credibility?

WorBlux Re:Self Serving Story? (267 comments)

The reason to reject governmental fiat currencies to date has been no substantial guarantee that banks and governments will not rig the game in their favor. The reason to reject non-governmental fiat currencies to date their vulnerability to interference or catastrophe. xCoins offer strong rules that are transparent and driven by consensus, as well as offering a robust infrastructure.

3 days ago
top

Hemp Fibers Make Better Supercapacitors Than Graphene

WorBlux Re:Oh, come now (178 comments)

They are the same species, the main difference with where the plant invests carbon, and what chemical compounds are more highly expressed.

about a week ago
top

Larry Rosen: A Case Study In Understanding (and Enforcing) the GPL

WorBlux Re:A reply to the enumerated points (191 comments)

I'm not 100% sure Ameriprise was distributing the work withing the legal meaning. Form my quick research, especially with reference to the blizzard case and copying to RAM. IF you purchased a copy of the software (physical medium) then that includes the right to copy for installation and execution. If your essentially buying the license then you can only copy to RAM for execution in accordance with that license. Re Section 7/ Exactly, it's not meant to allow patent control by the copyright holder. A GPL licensee should be able to assume the licensor isn't going to turn around and sue them for using the software within the copyright licence. That would be a restriction on use of the software, which the GPL asserts is not restricted to use.

Section 8 might be relevant if Ximpleware insists the GPL'd distribution of thier XML-thingymajig does not include a patent licence withing it. They had the option and opportunity of openly assert this. However such assertion it ommited, and the doctrine of estoppel can also arise due to omissions in a representation.

Of course a breach of the GPL terminated any of the rights held by the offending party. (explicit or otherwise), but a full finding of fact is going to have to raise the question were copyrights actually violated (was the program copied, modified, or distributed in breach of the GPL). And if you already have to adjudicate those facts, I find it odd as to why Ximpleware would not additionally pursue copyright claims --- Some weird legal thing?

about a week ago
top

Larry Rosen: A Case Study In Understanding (and Enforcing) the GPL

WorBlux Re:Compelled to freely license? (191 comments)

When you copy, modify to distribute the program, it creates the presumption of acceptance, because to do otherwise would presume a party carried out an illegal act. Additionally because verseta stripped out the original notices and marketed to work commercially so it's potentially criminal infringement as well. The the origninal topic we can still be assured an accidental GPL inclusion won't force a work open as the GPL specifically states "Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or collective works based on the Program."

about a week ago
top

Larry Rosen: A Case Study In Understanding (and Enforcing) the GPL

WorBlux A reply to the enumerated points (191 comments)

1. Implied - Not directly expressed.
Patent - A patent is an exclusive right to a particular invention.
License - permission to do what what otherwise be illegal.


IF a company gives you permission to do something that would otherwise violate patent law, you have a patent license for that task even if not patent was specifically mentioned. If Microsoft entered into a contract with me to manufacture android devices for their employees, that can't turn around a sue me for patent infringement of those specific enumerated devices on the purchase order. In the purchase contract it is implied Microsoft gives me permission to do those things reasonably required to fulfill the contract.

The is precedent I assume of using the principle of estoppel as a defense against patent claims. And estoppel may be implied. Ergo implications of representations made by a person may estopped patent claims against other persons.

2. The contract must be judged by it's actual language rather than ex-post-facto assertions of it's authors. It is the interpretation they would like to see in the courts, though not indicative of current law.

It may be true the FSF believes running a program is not a copyright issue, however there are precedents that claim loading a program into RAM constitutes a copying under the meaning or 106, especially if done by a licensee of a copy rather than an owner. A licensee being differentiated by having significant restrictions places on their ability to redistribute to transfer the copy of the work. The GPL does put significant limitations on this act, Section 4 specifically forbids you to "copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License"

But this point is irrelevant. The GPL is not a copyright grant it is a license contract giving permission under certain conditions to do certain things that would otherwise be illegal. The GPL could have said that use of the program is not restricted by this license, but is simply says not restricted.

3. Section 8. allows the Original Copyright holder to expressly exclude distribution on such jurisdictional basis, why was this not done?

Anyways that's not quite what I think section 7 implies. If you agree not to distribute or use the program outside a license agreement, you may not longer distribute under the GPL unless royalty-free licenses are granted downstream. If there is a judicial ruling that the software infringes then you may not distribute it (under this license at least).

So with section 8 available (but not taken), then it must be presumed Ximpleware's distribution really did give a full GPL license to those receivers in the U.S., without additional restrictions. Now if the programs was distributed in violation of the GPL then it could be considered and inducement to infringe.

Having transmitted the program under a license in which no restrictions are placed on use of the program, Ximpleware is estopped from asking for judicial relief that would be a restriction on the use of the program.

Even in the case of the accusation patent infringement the GPL the GPL makes no termination of right.. The GPL just clarifies that distribution under the GPL may only only happen when in full compliance with the GPL; if for some reason you are legally unable to fully comply then you must forgo distribution.

If a third party had written the parser, then Ximpleware could claim any distribution in the U.S was illegal. However Ximpleware as the patent holder needs no patent license to distribute it's parser and may give licence to whomever it wishes. And section 6 of the GPL makes it clear upon distribution the person receiving the program also receives the license under the GPL from the original licencor. Upon the third party receiving the license from Ximpleware, they to have the implied patent license from the no restrictions on use clause. To distribute under the the GPL is to represent that you are imposing no restrictions on the use of the program.

about a week ago
top

Larry Rosen: A Case Study In Understanding (and Enforcing) the GPL

WorBlux Re:Compelled to freely license? (191 comments)

Where did Vyatta get the source if not from a GPL version?

about a week ago
top

Larry Rosen: A Case Study In Understanding (and Enforcing) the GPL

WorBlux Re:What if it were Microsoft code (191 comments)

Sections 4+6. Shows the license is granted from the original licencor each time the work is distributed.

about a week ago
top

Some Windows XP users just can't afford to upgrade

WorBlux React OS` (2 comments)

About time to dump some money into it,

about a year ago
top

Linux Fatware: Distros That Need To Slim Down

WorBlux Re:"Tuned"? (299 comments)

And does everyone start with Ubuntu-minimal? In that you can get rid of the wireless-tools, wpa-supplicant, and pcmia-utils. Other distros may just want to offer a more vm-friendly version of their standard base. (You can do everything you can with the original, except those things that wouldn't make sense to do in a VM anyways.

about a year ago
top

Linux Fatware: Distros That Need To Slim Down

WorBlux Re:"Tuned"? (299 comments)

You should be able to perform some shortucuts in the init process. You can also get rid of anything related to being a host to a virtual machine (who is insane enough to run a VM inside a VM?) You can rip out a lot of hardware support, and some of the really advance network stuff. Who needs lm-sensors on a virtual machine? hdpram? smartctl?

about a year ago
top

Build a Secret Compartment, Go To Jail

WorBlux Re:Jury, not DEA. (1111 comments)

Voir Dire is french for jury-rigging.

about a year ago
top

Seagate To Stop Making 7200rpm Laptop HDDs

WorBlux Re:SSDs are a fad (261 comments)

I'd bet their using it as Cache, as it's still much cheaper than RAM (1-2 dollars vs 10-20 dollars per GB) and is much better at random access than spinning disks.

about a year and a half ago
top

Can Valve's 'Bossless' Company Model Work Elsewhere?

WorBlux Yes (522 comments)

I mean it works for a tomato company in Florida (Morning Star), it can work for just about anything, but it takes a lot of time to cultivate the culture, and you've got to have the right people initially for it to work.

about a year and a half ago
top

Supreme Court Disallows FISA Challenges

WorBlux Re:The case was badly constructed (306 comments)

Scalia in Busch v. Gore "One of the principal issues in the appeal we have accepted is precisely whether the votes that have been ordered to be counted are, under a reasonable interpretation of Florida law, "legally cast vote[s]." The counting of votes that are of questionable legality does in my view threaten irreparable harm to petitioner Bush, and to the country, by casting a cloud upon what he claims to be the legitimacy of his election."

With Roe V Wade if you ever read the decision it admits there is none, but proceeds because the issue is widespread but unlikely to be addressed in any other way, though really a poor decisio, increasing it's controversy and setting it up as a decision likely to be overturned.

about a year and a half ago
top

Supreme Court Disallows FISA Challenges

WorBlux Re:The case was badly constructed (306 comments)

Dude, the case or controversy clause is black letter law, there is really nothing more fundamental to the legal process. It's not a matter of semantics, it's not a matter a failing to bring up an argument. It's a matter of failing to present sufficient factual basis to establish some loss, harm, or injury suffered by the plantiff. And keep in mind that a judge is required to accept all pleaded facts as true when considering a motion to dismiss for lack of standing. (The standard or proof here is beyond all doubt) And if you don't have standing no amount of assuaging the details and theory of the complaint will do you any good if it's found you don't have standing.

about a year and a half ago
top

Supreme Court Disallows FISA Challenges

WorBlux Re:The case was badly constructed (306 comments)

Standing is based on a specific and concrete harm alleged by the plaintiff. Read the actual ruling.

about a year and a half ago
top

The U.S. minimum wage should be

WorBlux Re:Fixed (1106 comments)

Actually it's pretty easy to legally work for free. (volunteer positions and internships) . It's the in between that is harder to do. Either you need to be in you first 90 days on the job, or in a special federal program, or be self-employed.

about a year and a half ago
top

Tesla Motors Battles the New York Times

WorBlux Re:Fault Irrelevant: Shows Flaw (700 comments)

Fuel cell + CNG, with regenerative braking into a ultracapicitor is going to be cleaner and more efficient that just about any engine. This alone will be pretty sustainable and improve air quality. It will also have all the conveniences of the current fueling infrastructure, plus home or work refueling is possible (albiet at a fairly high cost).

Using a battery won't help unless you generate the electricity from solar, wind, hyrdro, geo-thermal, or nuclear sources. In fact it makes the situation worse as you need to use resources to manufacturer the battery.

For renewable mandates, biogas is a lot easier to do than cellulostic ethanal, though is can use the exact same feedstock.

The only then you give up is the ability to refuel when you run out of gas away from a station. This might be solved with a 5-10 lbs reserve propane tank.

about a year and a half ago

Submissions

WorBlux hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

WorBlux has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>