Re: Please recommend a web host in Israel
Thanks for the info! From the original el recomendator as well! :) So what vpslink-like provider do you recommend that have a good response time from Israel? On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Ori Bergerlinux...@orib.net wrote: Itay Donenhirsch wrote: hi folks, has anyone used vpslink.com? i got a recommendation for them but i was wondering about response times from israel. thanks Itay Up until this week their response time from Israel was atrocious, because they only had a farm in Seattle. As of this week, they offer virtual hosting in New York as well, so it's probably just going to be horrible, rather than atrocious. But their service works very well, and they are very well connected within the US. Disclosure: a satisfied user of vpslink in Seattle (They deliver bandwidth, which I care about; latency, I care less about; I'll probably switch to New York soon). prgmr.com is a little cheaper than vpslink - you can get a 128MB xen VM with reasonable CPU and great bandwidth for $6/month on a monthly basis ($4.5/month or so on a yearly basis), but they are even farther away from Israel in San Jose. I like their slogan: We don't assume you're stupid. Haven't had a chance to use them so far, but heard good things about them. (Oh, and hi!) ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Essay - FOSS Licences Wars
On 09/01/2009 11:21 PM, geoffrey mendelson wrote: snipped/ Apple is actually a pretty decent supporter of FOSS, they just chose not to use the GPL, which lead them to BSD instead of Linux, and they kept parts of their operating system and technology proprietary. They have an obligation to their stockholders to maintain the value of their investment. They also pay their employees fairly and have good benefits, something that some people on this list feel is their right as consultants marketing FOSS, but not the right of the developers of it. Geoff. A company which shuts down websites (to let their PR keep rolling on launch), forces other to remove videos (wired), uses the DMCA to hold down a wiki site (just to keep a format hidden) and much more are no supporters of FOSS. The obligation to stockholders is a lame excuse (just like, it's a company, they need to make money) for keeping a fake FOSS/Cool mask. -- Meir ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Essay - FOSS Licences Wars
On Sep 2, 2009, at 12:30 PM, Meir Kriheli wrote: A company which shuts down websites (to let their PR keep rolling on launch), How about a citation? This is to vague to be anything but FUD without one. forces other to remove videos (wired), That's simply wrong. Apple never forced Wired, they asked. They asked them to remove the video because it was a step by step tutorial on how to violate the Apple EULA. It was not a tutorial on how to install Darwin, a FOSS operating system on your PC, but a full out install the parts that are proprietary too video. What that has to do with FOSS, I have no idea. uses the DMCA to hold down a wiki site (just to keep a format hidden) and much more are no supporters of FOSS. I looked that up. The website in question had pages which suggested that a user circumvent a DRM method. Telling people how to circumvent DRM is a DMCA viloation, telling them should do it, but not how, may have been. The law was unclear. Instead of embroiling the EFF and Apple in a long and lengthy lawsuit, Apple decided to fold on the side of public freedom. It could have gone the other way, and due to the cost may have bankrupted the EFF. IMHO Apple did the right thing in both cases, they moved to protect their intelectual property as was permitted by law (and may be required by securities law, being a publicy traded company) and when it came down to fighting the EFF in court, they left the EFF standing. It is important to note that there was no legal precident set by dropping the cases, it still is a gray area in the law, and someone else could (and possibly may have to) do it all over again. The only victory for FOSS, if there was one at all, is Apple let the EFF live. The obligation to stockholders is a lame excuse (just like, it's a company, they need to make money) for keeping a fake FOSS/Cool mask. Why? They really do have both an ethical and a legal obligation to shareholders. It's the US, Meir, laws and ethics are different there than Israel. BTW, don't you do exactly that? Push FOSS/Cool and then charge customers for your services? Oh I forgot, you need to make money. Geoff. -- geoffrey mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM Jerusalem Israel geoffreymendel...@gmail.com ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Please recommend a web host in Israel
Thanks Eli, what other plans do you have? who is maintaining those servers? I'm actually looking for a host of my current site ( http://itay.bazoo.org ), which doesn't need many resources, plus a place i can experiment on with various ideas and projects. Maybe even put asterisk on it. Something comparable to Link3 or Link4 on vpslink: http://vpslink.com/compare/vpslink-hosting-plans/ Itay On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Eli Elizureeli...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I can provide you a virtual machine located in Bazeq Ben Leumi The minimum configuration is 1 CPU (minimum 200mhz), 256Mb Mem, IP, 5Gb HD For 50 Shekel per month Regards, Eli Elizur. -Original Message- From: linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il [mailto:linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il] On Behalf Of Itay Donenhirsch Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 12:06 PM To: Ori Berger Cc: linux-il Subject: Re: Please recommend a web host in Israel Thanks for the info! From the original el recomendator as well! :) So what vpslink-like provider do you recommend that have a good response time from Israel? On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Ori Bergerlinux...@orib.net wrote: Itay Donenhirsch wrote: hi folks, has anyone used vpslink.com? i got a recommendation for them but i was wondering about response times from israel. thanks Itay Up until this week their response time from Israel was atrocious, because they only had a farm in Seattle. As of this week, they offer virtual hosting in New York as well, so it's probably just going to be horrible, rather than atrocious. But their service works very well, and they are very well connected within the US. Disclosure: a satisfied user of vpslink in Seattle (They deliver bandwidth, which I care about; latency, I care less about; I'll probably switch to New York soon). prgmr.com is a little cheaper than vpslink - you can get a 128MB xen VM with reasonable CPU and great bandwidth for $6/month on a monthly basis ($4.5/month or so on a yearly basis), but they are even farther away from Israel in San Jose. I like their slogan: We don't assume you're stupid. Haven't had a chance to use them so far, but heard good things about them. (Oh, and hi!) ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Please recommend a web host in Israel
2009/9/1 Itay Donenhirsch i...@bazoo.org: hi folks, has anyone used vpslink.com? i got a recommendation for them but i was wondering about response times from israel. I use vpslink both for a private xen host ($8/month) and one of my workplace's external servers and their service is reliable, I access them from Australia, thought. How about European providers? Is Israel still connected to Europe through the US or has this changed? There was a thread here a while back about European hosts. Cheers, --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: an open phone from nokia ?
Article about the phone (in hebrew): http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3770875,00.html -- Arie ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Essay - FOSS Licences Wars
On Tuesday 01 September 2009 22:43:12 Steve Litt wrote: On Tuesday 01 September 2009 14:09:24 Shlomi Fish wrote: So why am I still sticking with the MIT/X11? The main reason I think is that as an open-source programmer, I'm not interested in worrying about how people abuse my code. I don't like Apple, and am not fond of many Microsoft products. But I'm not interested to prevent Apple or Microsoft or any other developer of commercial and/or proprietary software for Windows or Mac OS X or the iPhone or whatever from using my code in their projects. Even if they do monopolistic things with your code? See this: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137291/Mac_clone_maker_sues_Apple_o ver_Snow_Leopard Sorry for breaking the URLs. It's a KMail boo-boo. I've thought about it and I'd like to say what I feel about it. The first part of the answer is that I'm don't want my software to police Ethics. If I make my licence GPL or similar, then no one will be able to use it in proprietary contexts, including many small software developers, or many big and small benevolent organisations (both software and non-software related) that are too scared of complex copyleft licences, for many reasons. So I don't only discriminate against abusive companies such as Apple, but I also discriminate against many other perfectly innocent corpora - some of which won't ask me for permission before moving elsewhere or writing something themselves. The second reason is that in accordance with: http://www.shlomifish.org/philosophy/philosophy/guide-to-neo-tech/ I think that while monopolies are often inevitable, then given good market conditions, they cannot remain abusive for long, or else they won't be able to sustain their market-share. And the current economical situation in many countries encourages many monopolies or oligopolies by giving huge contracts (of the military, the education system etc.) to only one very large contractor. (We may be getting off-topic). Therefore, I think that we should let the market should speak for itself, and we should not worry too much about monopolies. The third reason is that I think even the worst monopolies in history that I can think of were not as abusive as many governments: http://vip.latnet.lv/LPRA/100MilVictims.htm Corporations, while possibly being immoral and destructive are unlikely going to do something that stands against absolute ethics such as killing, stealing/theft or fraud, which governments have been routinely doing, even against their own citizens. Finally, let's say I'm writing a text editor called My Enhanced Text Editor or METE for short, and release it under a BSD-style licence. Someone (perhaps a single developer, perhaps a multi-million-dollar-corporation), takes it, enhances it and creates METE-Enterprise Edition, which becomes insanely popular and gains a near monopoly on the text editors' market. As the developer of METE, I can now work on integrating the good features of METE-EE into METE, so we will eventually regain some of the market share. And maybe some features are only of interest to METE-EE-Corp.'s customers and are of no interest to the open-source version, which can regain a substantial share of the market while still allowing METE-EE-Corp. to make nice sales. And naturally, as METE developers we're not standing still. As the developer of Freecell Solver, I got some very good ideas from my competitors. For example, I implemented a randomised scan with a user- configurable seed after seeing Freecell Tool, and I worked on a meta-scan for minimising the average solution length after some input from the creator of http://www.numin8r.us/programs/ ). Neither of them are free. Naturally, all of this is assuming there are legal problems such as software patents, but these may affect the original METE too, and are an even greater danger to commercial software than to gratis one. (Even Microsoft has been bitten by software patent litigations several times.) I should note that also there's a place in the market for both FOSS and non- FOSS alternatives. For example, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Bug_and_issue_tracking_software There are several high-quality FOSS alternatives, but many commercial and/or non-free offerings are also doing fine. And there isn't a clear winner. And in the software world there have been several historical transitions from one dominant alternative to a different one or to several alternatives. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Best Introductory Programming Language - http://shlom.in/intro-lang God gave us two eyes and ten fingers so we will type five times as much as we read. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
info.org.il in open source
The Israeli equivalent of snopes.com offers to make his information available to any open source project: http://info.org.il/irrelevant/item.php/9103191236949576673 --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Essay - FOSS Licences Wars
On 09/02/2009 01:16 PM, geoffrey mendelson wrote: On Sep 2, 2009, at 12:30 PM, Meir Kriheli wrote: A company which shuts down websites (to let their PR keep rolling on launch), How about a citation? This is to vague to be anything but FUD without one. ThinkSecret had to shutdown in exchange for keeping their sources hidden. Those sources where under NDA - that's not ThinkSecret's problem but Apple's, yet they were the one paying the price. forces other to remove videos (wired), That's simply wrong. Apple never forced Wired, they asked. They asked them to remove the video because it was a step by step tutorial on how to violate the Apple EULA. It was not a tutorial on how to install Darwin, a FOSS operating system on your PC, but a full out install the parts that are proprietary too video. You sure have nice website here, shame if something bad happened to it. Apple's EULA (or anyone else's for that matter) is not law, but their threat (backed by their very active legal department) sure was enough. We've suffered from the same at whatsup.org.il. An Israeli hardware company threatened us as one of our users wrote against their ethic an behavior. Our options were either revealing his IP or being sued. After consulting a known lawyer he advised us to delete the comment or fight a lengthy battle which we can't afford, and he handled it for us against the company, without his help (no charge) we've been in the mud. Since then it happened again. One can bet same decision was forced on Wired. What that has to do with FOSS, I have no idea. A company which tries to present itself as FOSS friendly has no business of NDAs, DRM, DMCA, legal bullying and lock ins. Sure you can do that (But they need to make money), just don't try to sell you're Cool, Hip and Theo de Raadt soul mate. Someone who pretends to support FOSS can't be against open society. They can't support gag orders just for a refund (looks like a standard corporate procedure), How can a law/state even allow such actions ? http://www.osnews.com/story/21937/ They can't support hiding information from the public to keep their phony image, http://www.osnews.com/story/21878/ : KIRO 7 Consumer Investigator Amy Clancy worked for 7 months to try and get her hands on the 800-page report by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. She used the Freedom Of Information Act, but Apple's lawyers kept on filing exemption after exemption, apparently trying to prevent the report from going public. The report shows in great detail several incident where iPods burst into flames and smoke, at times burning owners uses the DMCA to hold down a wiki site (just to keep a format hidden) and much more are no supporters of FOSS. I looked that up. The website in question had pages which suggested that a user circumvent a DRM method. Telling people how to circumvent DRM is a DMCA viloation, telling them should do it, but not how, may have been. It wasn't about DRMor circumention at all , more about interfacing with iPod and the iTunesDB. And they kept the pressure even when the pages were removed. DMCA had nothing to do with it. The law was unclear. Instead of embroiling the EFF and Apple in a long and lengthy lawsuit, Apple decided to fold on the side of public freedom. It could have gone the other way, and due to the cost may have bankrupted the EFF. Ain't that nice of Apple of letting the EFF linger on ? I must send a Thank you letter to Mr. Jobs. IIRC It's very simple. They've change the format, so the info on the Wiki (which helped other devices/software sync with iTunes/iPod) wasn't relevant anymore. And they still keep using those tactics to lock their users and prevent them from using anything else. Yep, very FOSS friendly: http://www.osnews.com/story/21881 IMHO Apple did the right thing in both cases, they moved to protect their intelectual property as was permitted by law (and may be required by securities law, being a publicy traded company) and when it came down to fighting the EFF in court, they left the EFF standing. It is important to note that there was no legal precident set by dropping the cases, it still is a gray area in the law, and someone else could (and possibly may have to) do it all over again. The only victory for FOSS, if there was one at all, is Apple let the EFF live. The obligation to stockholders is a lame excuse (just like, it's a company, they need to make money) for keeping a fake FOSS/Cool mask. Why? They really do have both an ethical and a legal obligation to shareholders. It's the US, Meir, laws and ethics are different there than Israel. You mean United Corporate of America ? The poster child of laws made for and by the corporations ? looking for their interests instead of the citizens ? Mussolini said: Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power - takes one to know one. BTW, don't you do exactly
Re: New Essay - FOSS Licences Wars
On Wednesday 02 September 2009 12:30:34 Meir Kriheli wrote: On 09/01/2009 11:21 PM, geoffrey mendelson wrote: snipped/ Apple is actually a pretty decent supporter of FOSS, they just chose not to use the GPL, which lead them to BSD instead of Linux, and they kept parts of their operating system and technology proprietary. They have an obligation to their stockholders to maintain the value of their investment. They also pay their employees fairly and have good benefits, something that some people on this list feel is their right as consultants marketing FOSS, but not the right of the developers of it. Geoff. A company which shuts down websites (to let their PR keep rolling on launch), forces other to remove videos (wired), uses the DMCA to hold down a wiki site (just to keep a format hidden) and much more are no supporters of FOSS. The obligation to stockholders is a lame excuse (just like, it's a company, they need to make money) for keeping a fake FOSS/Cool mask. In addition to what Meir said further, I should note that I've been collecting many anti-Apple links here: http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/anti/apple/ Plenty of links and citations there. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Meir ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Stop Using MSIE - http://www.shlomifish.org/no-ie/ God gave us two eyes and ten fingers so we will type five times as much as we read. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
