Re: [backstage] Lol
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 12:02:43AM +, Iain Wallace wrote: That's great! Needs translating to LOLcats speak though :P I wonder if some amount of keyword filtering could be done on the photos... not sure if that would still be funny though. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] RTMP stream URL resolving script
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 12:41:42PM +, vijay chopra wrote: FWIW I personally prefer BSD\MIT style licenses as I consider them to be more free than the GPL in that they allow anyone to play with your code in any way they like without forcing your own choice of license on them. Of course what you really mean is that you want to give people the freedom to restrict other peoples freedom, which seems a little contradictory. But yes, we've argued this before vijay. ;) -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] RTMP stream URL resolving script
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 01:34:14PM +, Fearghas McKay wrote: [0] #insert smiley.h You mean #include, surely? Jeez, such a n00b. ;) -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] RTMP stream URL resolving script
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 06:23:31PM +, Dave Crossland wrote: How would you feel if some developer who receive your program can improve it and then tell people, even you as the original author, that you can't share that version with your friends, or see how their improvement works, or build upon their work as they built upon yours? I am a CouchDB developer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CouchDB We recently switched from GPL to the Apache licence. Now, I would like to get it out of the way that I am unhappy with the switch, but as I am not the primary developer, I decided to go along with the move. The reason I am not happy is because Amazon could come along one day and take all the code I had slaved over for so many hours, put a team of 10 developers on improving it full time, and then release as a competing product, be that closed source or via a web service. Suddenly, all that time I had put into the project is being used against me to compete. Not only that, but the competing product is completely non-free, so it's not like /anyone/ benifits. Sean mentions GPLv3 may be criticised for being too complicated but that seems like a sham to me; the GPL isn't longer than an average sunday newspaper article and is written for a software developer audience in mind. Lets remember that we are talking about legal documents here, not poems. That the GPL is so long is a testiment to how complicated copyright law is any how many precautions need to be taken to prevent things like I just described from happening. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Facebook, Google And Plaxo Join The DataPortability Workgroup
On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 07:36:31PM -, Christopher Woods wrote: Maybe Scoble was, in reality, calling their bluff... Or maybe it was just another attempt to stay relevant. /me goes back to lurking... -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [backstage] New BBC customisable homepage
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 08:40:18PM +, Jeremy James wrote: I'm a bit disappointed by the clock I'm sorry if I missed the answer to the following question previously in the thread, but what is the justification for the clock? It could hardly be argued for utility purpose as most people, I assume, already have plenty of time-pieces available. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] New BBC customisable homepage
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 09:16:30PM +, Stephen Miller wrote: The character set on the page appears not to support £ signs, this story http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/7149616.stm appears with the ? black diamond replacement character in firefox. It works for me, though your email doesn't. From Firefox, View, Character Encoding, what does it say? Latin-1 here... -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Noah, you're taking my use of the word speech to literally; replace all instances of the word speech with expression Expression is fine, people should have freedom of expression. I apply the same principles to my code. Take an example other that TIVO, say $Company uses my code to do something I don't like perhaps they sell something I find morally objectionable (from arms dealers to rap music; choose your bogeyman) and my code is used within their product, should I be able to stop them? Yes, because this is action not expression. If TIVO started using the software to smuggle arms or deal drugs then you are guaranteed that the government will stop them. To be blunt, I disagree that what TIVO did took any freedom away from anyone, they just did something I didn't like, no one is free to to not be offended. Well, to be blunt, you are wrong. All of the customers who bought a TIVO did not have the same amount of freedom as people who would have installed the software on a normal PC. Your whole argument is based around conflating the freedom to express one's self and the freedom to take action - which are fundamentally different to one another. I may call you an idiot repeatedly and no law will stop me. I can start to punch you in the face repeatedly and I'll get locked up. BTW, I don't think you're an idiot, by any measure - just a colourful example. ;) -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh my word this is all so tiresome - rehashed, insoluble debate points surrounded in prose which is itself quite retentively picked apart to needlessly point score - in a discussion I'm sure 90% of the list would prefer not to be cluttering their inboxes. I can visit Slashdot for this no ? I actually think this thread has been highly relivent. You don't agree and that's fine, you couldn't hope for anything more. My mail client has a mute button, how about yours? Please... please more signal; less noise. On this list, the noise /is/ the signal. You are invited to filter. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes they do, users have the choice to take the original source, compile it and then run it if they want. In my world, developers and users have identical freedoms. Yes they do, but what if a vendor takes the source, adds loads of improvements, and then removes the freedoms explicitly given in the original licence? The users are free to go upstream for the original source but it will be missing the key features the vendor added. This happens, all the time. Take Apple and WebKit for example. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: benefit people who won't share than prevent your code from being used by Why would you want to benefit selfish people? However, this is your choice, and I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong - just that I don't understand why. I do think your arguments about freedom of expression are highly confused and potentially misleading to people who might not otherwise know very much about the issues involved and as such could be considered a sort of FUD. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, Peter Bowyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He was attempting to apply an ingress filter. Which is significanly more effective than n x egress filters. Asking the whole list to filter it's self to one's own preferences seems a little selfish, don't ya think? ;) -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just because you don't like or because it challenges your beliefs it doesn't make it FUD, it's a legitimate argument about the nature of freedom and how it relates to software freedom. I say it's misleading because your argument seems to boil down to I am free to say what I want therefor I should be free to do what I want. which is clearly absurd. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And you are free to carry on misrepresenting my argument. That is actually the first time you've disagreed with my point. How am I misrepresenting your argument? I'm genuinely open to correction. From how I parse your arguments you are saying just like free speech, people should be able to take software and redistribute it with whatever licencing they choose which is the same as saying just like free speech, people should be able to take software and take any action they like with it. This simply doesn't make any sense to me. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, Thomas Leitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You know if Godwin's first law was that as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. Then his second law must state that for any Backstage discussion that grows longer, the probability that the topics of freedom and/or DRM crop-up also approach one. Well, technically you should call it Leitch's Law. :) -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or by closing the list if it was deemed to be an unhelpful echo chamber that wasn't beneficial to the BBC for the amount of money spent on the backstage.bbc.co.uk project Isn't the definition of an echo chamber one where the same opinion is magnified between a group of like-minded individuals to the point of loosing context? If anything this list is a melting pot of people with vastly different opinions. The people complaining that this thread, or any thread about freedom, is boring/noise are indirectly trying to promote a heterogeneous environment which would lead directly to the echo chamber you speak about. So things get quite heated around here? It's healthy. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 06/12/2007, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In fact isn't the bulk of this thread concerned with the way in which Perl On Rails will be non proprietary. Not really, proprietry is the wrong word to use here. The word free is much more descriptive. It is perfectly possible to have free proprietary software. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 05/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My usual response to this argument is that essentially you are asking for the freedom to restrict the freedom. This is patently absurd. Actually I'd compare free speech; it's not free speech unless it difficult to hear what I'm saying. Similarly it's not software freedom unless it's hard to bear what I'm doing to your code. I have no idea what your argument is, sorry. Could you rephrase? -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Code is just expression, thus it's like any other form of communication; a way of expressing something, unless you believe in the fallacy of intellectual property. See my above argument, you are confusing things terribly. If you really want to talk about this in terms of free speech you are arguing that as a member of society you should be able to take a sentence such as I love apples and forbid anyone else from ever saying it again. How does Godwin's law apply here? Because you mentioned the Haulocaust. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, if code is speech, then free code should have the same properties as free speech - that is someone must be able to take what I write and use it in a way I find difficult. if code is speech - it would probably have been called speech and not code I totally reject this premise and hence the whole argument falls apart for me. Software is an act of creativity (like art or poetry) and is different from the act of expression. Vijay's arguments are based upon conflating the freedom to express one's self with the freedom to create/modify/distribute a creative work. There is nothing you could say that would ever restrict someone's ability say something. The analogy is completely flawed. If we really run with Vijay's argument (which is totally absurd and hence this is going to get a bit abstract) then I could say I love apples and his argument would dictate that you could come along and take my words and say them again but forbid ANYONE ELSE from saying them. Is that really freedom? -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It makes about as much sense as you saying that I should have the freedom to say something which would remove YOUR freedom to say something else. Would you argue that we don't live in a free society because I am not allowed to gag you when you're saying something I don't like? By your arguments I should have this freedom. Some freedoms need to be protected by PREVENTING people from doing certain things. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, but I don't see what TIVO did as oppression, I don't particularly like what they did, but as I said before, software freedom should be the same as free speech. I don't like what racists like Nick Griffin or Holocaust deniers like David Irving say, but I would defend their right to say it; similarly I will defend TIVOs rights to run free software in any way. Free expression is totally different from free action. While I think you should be allowed to state a racist opionion I do not thinkk you should be able to take action on it. Anyway, I'm calling Godwin's Law on this. End of discussion. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And that agrees with the premise of an /analogy/ of speech - you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer.(paragraph 2) But the analogy is flawed because the freedoms are different. The freedom of speech is the freedom to express one's self without restriction. The four freedoms of the GPL are to do with modification/distribution/usage/opacity and are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT both practically and metaphorically. The GPL v3 does not restrict your freedom to speak the source code it restricts your freedom to remove the freedom to modify/distribute/use/study. Software is an act of creativity (like art or poetry) Poetry is speech. Yes, it's also a creative act. So say I write a poem called Noah is awsum and I licenced it under the GPL v3 all I would be doing is stopping you from removing the freedom to modify/distribute/use/study. I would not be restricting your freedom to recite the poem and hence the whole analogy to free speech is wrong. Vijay's argument is conflating the freedom to perform/speak/run with the freedom to alter further modification/distribution/usage/opacity. These two things are not the same, they're not even related. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll leave it there, since we're actually agreeing on the fact they're different, but you're shouting at me. That's the third time you mentioned this. Sorry you think I was shouting, I only capitalised two words and it was meant to add tonal emphasis. Really, I didn't think you were talking it the wrong way but you were, so for that sorry. :) -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are many people all over the world who **SAY** things I don't like racists, bigots and extremists of all flavours. Similarly it's only truly free software when companies like TIVO have the ability to **DO** with free software anything that they wish See above for my emphasis. There is such a huge difference between the freedom to say something and the freedom to do something. I would defend your right to be racist and oppose your right to discriminate, for example. I am happy for TIVO to **SAY** anything they want about my software, free software or anything else for that matter. But when TIVO want to take freedom's away from me I will opose it. Talking about the freedom to take away freedoms is absurd. It makes about as much sense as you saying that I should have the freedom to say something which would remove YOUR freedom to say something else. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, I'm arguing that anyone has the right to stop saying I love apples if they so wish. No, you're not. I'm not even sure /what/ you're arguing. When I write some software and license it under the GPL I am giving you some freedoms you didn't have before. I specifically waiver freedoms given to me by copyright law so that YOU may do more things with my creative work. You are free not to use my software or print the source code as many times as you want or any of the other muddy analogies you have drawn between software and freedom of speech What I DO object to however is if you take my software and rip out the freedoms I sacrificed in the first place. If you take my software, remove the freedoms, and then give to someone else. Why on earth would I want to give you the freedom to do this? Who are YOU to take MY creative work and shackle it with more restrictions? This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, the two concepts are totally unrelated and you are confusing matters greatly by trying to find a link where there is non. Actually I mentioned a holocaust denier as an example of someone an holding an extreme point of view. Godwin does not apply. I don't care how you mentioned it, when a discussion about the GPL starts to involve /anything/ related to the Holocaust it's a good indicator that things have started to get a bit silly. -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 05/12/2007, James Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Still, better that than nothing. Which reminds me - have we finished adding that DRM to our podcasts?* ZOMG! THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS!11 May I suggest you licence your podcasts using... -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 04/12/2007, James Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Delighted to let you know that after discussion with my team, we *will* be making Perl on Rails (we'll call it something different) open-source. It'll be licenced as openly as possible. You asked for it, so we'll give you it. Wow. Thread delivers. Thanks beeb! Can I suggest that you licence the code under the GNU Affero GPL v3 please. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 04/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I expect the BBC will use an in house licence to fit it's needs as set out in the charter. This makes sense, though is a little disapointing if true. As an aside I still don't understand the need for GPLv3, as far as I can it just adds confusion and is actually LESS free than GPLv2 (this isn't meant to be trolling or flamebait, just a personal opinion). IANAL and I haven't properly read the GPLv3 (so I may be talking bollocks) but I am under the impression that things have been changed ensure greater protection for the users freedoms. That the licence is more complex is a testament to the legal system, not the licence's freeness so to speak. Likewise w/r trolling/flamebait. :) -- Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
Hello, This email is directed at the BBC staffers on the list. I was excited to read about the Perl on Rails framework you have developed internally: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2007/11/perl_on_rails.shtml Unfortunately, the post doesn't make any reference to the possibility of the BBC releasing the source back into the community as Free Software. Does anyone know more about this or the BBC's intentions? Thanks, -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 03/12/2007, Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You don't need the BBC to release it. Yeah, a lot of the comments on that blog post said similar things - that notwithstanding it would be very helpful for the community if the BBC shared the source. I should imagine that running a site the size of the BBC could influence the engineering somewhat in way which would be useful/interesting to study. We'll never know unless they free up the code. :) -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 03/12/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: open sourcing code will only take you so far: I never mentioned Open Source. I ask for them to make it Free Software. :) Whilst I applaud the technical achievement of the individual developers, I deplore the situation that has forced them to do this. Well yes, quite, but it would still be a contribution to society. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
On 03/12/2007, Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well this only runs the tiniest part of the BBC site. Like most of the myriad clever pieces of code at the BBC :-) Agreed, but it would still be a contribution to the community. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Please release Perl on Rails as Free Software
Michael, Thank you for your reply, all very useful info. On 03/12/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Demanding people use the phrase free software rather than open source, however, actually makes life harder for release in my experience, not easier (not everyone agrees on the definitions of freedom and rights used afterall). I wasn't aware that I had demanded anything from anyone. That you would lambaste me for simply choosing one phrase over another shows more about your own bias than anything else. I might understand your comment better if I had mindlessly jumped in on someone else's discussion demanding proper use of the term Free Software. You comment carries the implicit reasoning that Open Source is the correct term and I was incorrect to use it and incorrect to address another poster when they incorrectly mis-attributed my suggestion. I used the phrase Free Software very purposefully in this situation as I believe it is more appropriate. Open Source is a development model that focuses on making the software better, Free Software is a political model that focuses on making society better. With my suggestion that the BBC share the source code I was not making a pragmatic suggestion, a suggestion about how the BBC should alter it's development model - I really don't think this would ever happen. I was making a suggestion that the BBC make society a little bit better by contributing back to the community. Clearly, the Open Source movement and the doctrines it enshrines do not have much to do with this. Now, I don't want this to turn into a Free Software vs. Open Source debate. I think one thing, other people may disagree. That's fine, there's enough room on this list to co-exist. Also, Michael, you reply was very useful, and I thank you for it. However, I feel your comment unfairly painted a picture of me as being in the wrong for explicitly making a socio-political suggestion and then correcting someone when they misattributed my intentions. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] How long should copyright last?
On 29/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/29/comment.intellectualproperty Brian, I agree with your later points - I would just like to mention that Intellectual Property is a misleading phrase. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] How long should copyright last?
On 29/11/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digital Rights Management includes rights expression as well as restrictions enforcement. That's the first I've heard. So either I am wrong or it's not common usage. Either way I am guessing that the term should be avoided because it carries such strong connotations with restrictions management. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] How long should copyright last?
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8 standalone=yes? rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#; xmlns:cc=http://web.resource.org/cc/; xmlns:dc=http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/; rdf:Description rdf:about=this-email dc:abstractI agree completely, semantic rights expression rocks./dc:abstract cc:license rdf:resource=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0// /rdf:Description cc:License rdf:about=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/; cc:requires rdf:resource=http://web.resource.org/cc/Attribution/ cc:requires rdf:resource=http://web.resource.org/cc/Notice/ cc:permits rdf:resource=http://web.resource.org/cc/Reproduction/ cc:permits rdf:resource=http://web.resource.org/cc/Distribution/ cc:requires rdf:resource=http://web.resource.org/cc/Copyleft/ cc:prohibits rdf:resource=http://web.resource.org/cc/CommercialUse/ /cc:License /rdf:RDF - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] How long should copyright last?
On 30/11/2007, Matt Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, BY-SA would be best. It protects the rights, much like the GPL. I stand corrected, again. Thanks Matt. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 28/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would start by constructing Acts of Parliament by Wiki for a start. ROFLCOPTOR!!!1 -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 28/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's just so bloody facetious. Welcome to teh intrawebs: serious business. Whilst were are at it, every room in the Houses of Parliament should be on CCTV, transmitted online 24 hours a day. And Number 10. And all the Ministry's. Even the bogs? ;) -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No. Banging on and on and on and on about the same tired, laboured point is wrong - and simply blindly quoting Richard Stallman doesn't make it any more likely to have people agree with your narrow viewpoint. You are Dave Crossland in a different hat, and I claim my five pounds. This is where our opinions diverge. I, obviously, have some strong view points on freedom and politics. I join /discussion/ groups so that I can /discuss/ the issues that interest me. When a /discussion/ starts that involves freedom or politics I find that I like to join in the /discussion/ by weighing in with my opinion. That, after all, is the point of a /discussion/ list. I only /discuss/ things that interest me when there is direct relevance to the /discussion/ at hand. If a newbie asks how can I get foo driver to work with linux you won't find me correcting his use of the word linux to include gnu but you will find me correcting someone who says tescos should sell and market linux pcs. See the difference? When someone accuses me of banging on about something really they are saying I have heard your opinion before, don't like it and can't be bothered discussing it. To which I have two suggestions: 1) Leave the /discussion/ list you're on. 2) Move to the next message, trash the message and move on. 3) Filter all email with freedom in the body into /dev/null and be done with it. Stop throwing you're weight around because you can't be bothered /discussing/ something on a /discussion/ list. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 27/11/2007, Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My fourth suggestion would be that perhaps the discussion you want to have is not on topic for a list. As such continuing the discussion you want to have may be off topic for most list members. On this list the noise is the signal and you are invited to use filters. On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hope you're not suggesting I have any weight to throw around. I just find bullies, extremists and zealots of any descripton intensely annoying, especially in what's generally a friendly environment. Richard, the world is full of people who are going to disagree with you - calling them bullies, extremists and zealots is only going to get you so far. As you only seem to be throwing around ad hominems the discussion is over. /me bows out -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Broadcasters to launch joint VoD service
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No real technical details, more a re-hashed press release, but an interesting idea nontheless. DRM is bad. Freedom is good. ;) Best, -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Broadcasters to launch joint VoD service
On 27/11/2007, Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For the avoidance of doubt, I'm talking about fivers in general circulation, not in the hands of collectors, drug dealers and suchlike. If you're still up for it, I'm willing to gamble a Mars bar over it, since I have more confidence they'll be around. Sheesh, and I was flamed for being OT. ;) -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Broadcasters to launch joint VoD service
On 27/11/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People tend to appear to prefer variety in their off topic stuff. You're implication is bogus. Like Dave has said before me, I don't consider free culture, ethics or politics to be off-topic for this list - quite the reverse. There is even a list dedicated to people who DO NOT WANT to talk about all of this stuff. But let's not get into this again... -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] tiresias PC fonts released under the GPL
On 27/11/2007, George Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not everyone thinks it's great though - there's a rebuttal/ critique here http://screenfont.ca/fonts/today/Tiresias/ As much as I regard Joe Clark to be an asshole he's usually, and annoyingly so, correct about these things. He's also considered a world expert on Typography for the visually impaired so I would not take his criticisms lightly on the subject. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Broadcasters to launch joint VoD service
Thank you Andy! Fantastic email, much lulz were had. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman look-at-me.dat Description: MPEG movie
Re: [backstage] tiresias PC fonts released under the GPL
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now - who was talking about Ad Hom earlier? Or is this just abuse? Neither, it's called opinion. Now crawl back under your bridge. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Broadcasters to launch joint VoD service
On 27/11/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wasn't implying anything. You implied others view some of your posts as off topic, and I then made what was intended as a lighthearted comment. Yeah, of course, you're totally correct. Apologies. :) -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You have complete freedom - you can go and use someone else's API if their terms or tech are better. Just change the URL and a few XPaths in a config file. To talk of the freedom to stop using a data source is absurd. The Ordanance Survey provide very useful data with horribly onerous licencing conditions, are you arguing that all the campaigning to get that data opened up to the public is moot simple because you can choose not to use it? -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: /me sits down with big tub of pop corn and expectantly googly eyes... /me puts on his flame retardant suit and rubs on the troll repellent -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Given you can't have both (the source code isn't owned by the BBC) I'd be happy with open data. Open data would be fantastic, free software + open data would be better. See my sig. I did. Cathy Come Home would seem to disprove it as a hypothesis. I disagree, it can work on many levels. On one level people were free to take the ideas from Cathy Come Home and discuss/loby them to get social change. On another unrelated level would be how society can re-use and remix the original footage. You are conflating too seperate things. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Matt Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We didn't spend 25 years getting faster computers and larger hard disks so we could run all our applications over a network and have third parties store our data. I think having services in the cloud is an immensely useful thing - only that they should also provide free and legally unencumbered access to the data and software that sits behind them. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People were not free (as in freedom) to choose whether or not they wanted to pay for Cathy Come Home to be made in the first place. It they had been granted the freedom not to pay the licence fee, it would never have been made. This could be said about the decisions of any public body. This renders discussion of use/re-use freedoms somewhat moot. How so? How are the freedoms of use/re-use ever rendered moot? By saying people were not free to do X hence freedom Y is moot is non sequitur. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No... that isn't what I said. You said: You have complete freedom - you can go and use someone else's API if their terms or tech are better. I think any reasonable person would paraphrase this as you have freedom to stop using it. To which I replied: To talk of the freedom to stop using a data source is absurd. Please tell me if I am misunderstanding something. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was referring to Term Extraction APIs. There are plenty, so it doesn't really matter which one you use... you are free to choose. Yes, but if they are all restrictive with the data silos then all you have is the freedom to choose which person restricts your freedom which is patently absurd. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But in this case, API would easily trump source code and dictionary/thesarus with patches IMHO - API could react within minutes to a sudden change in the significance of a term. Who would want to wait 15 days lag for a patch to keep switching McClaren from being primarily about Formula One, Steve or Malcolm Yeah, but what happens when the BBC has technical difficulties, changes it's mind about the licencing terms or is dissolved? Poof! The whole thing disappears! -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They are restrictive data silos for a reason - they contain proprietary data and code. This is a tautology. They contain proprietary data and code for a reason - it was easier and cheaper to build them that way. Do you have the research to show that it is cheaper to build proprietary (which is the incorrect term by the way, closed or licenced would be better) data silos? I am willing to bet that in many cases it would either have no effect on the bottom line (how would the BBC loose money by sharing some data?) or would actually improve customer relations and hence, ultimately, revenue. I am willing to be that you can find no research that suggests a closed data silo such as the one the BBC has and is not sharing would harm revenue if shared with the public. I am also willing to bet that there is direct evidence on the contrary. Google's open source software, the New York Times open source software, LiveJournal's open source software, heck even the beeb contributes IIRC. In all of these cases it fosters a community of developers and good spirit around the organisation - not plummeting revenue figures as you suggest. Given that these systems aren't going to be released in their entirety (at least not in the near future, it would appear), then I think we're in the pretty good situation (given the above constraints) of having a marketplace of different APIs to play with. It's better than nothing, but that's no reason to be complacent and say oh well, it'll do because then nothing will happen. You need to speak out if you want things to change. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This could be said about the decisions of any public body. your point being? (The BBC is not 'any public body' - it is unique in being funded by a hypothecated regressive tax. ) My point being your point is irrelevant. In the case of Cathy Come Home (the test I set for your hypothesis) It's not mine and it's not a hypothesis. you don't get to have the programme at all without societal coercian. Societal coercian? You mean fiscal coercian? In either case, I fail to see how this is related to how much value it presents to the society when they are free to (re)use. Which - in the case of Cathy Come Home - renders talk of 'society being free to use the results of creativity' moot. No, it doesn't. Just because something exists because of X or is only possible because of Y does not mean that society wouldn't benefit through it's availability for (re)use. You're arguments are a total non sequitur. But where creativity still requires capital - or has done in the past - then the freedoms which should be granted on use / re-use are less obvious. After all, it's someone's capital (or licence fee) at stake, I disagree entirely with your hypothetical link between cost of creative production and the freedoms that should be awarded to society. Copyright and trademark law were specifically designed to give away a little bit of societal freedom in exchange for stimulated creativity. At no point is cost of creative production mentioned nor should it enter the discussion. and human nature has been finely tuned to reject freeloaders. This is a broad generalisation that has nothing to do with the discussion. The job of our government is to protect the the public, not the private entities that expend creative effort. It is not the public who are freeloaders when they ask for freedom to use, reuse and modify - it is the creatives who are asking/expecting too much from society. It's my abtuse way of rejecting glib rhetoric. It's not rhetorical and it's not glib, see the full text here: http://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Matt Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [1] other supermarket chains are available Prove it. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's such dogma which gets you described by otherwise pretty measured civil servants and MPs as 'The Copyleft Taliban' This would be highly offensive and on a par with Godwin's Law. I guess I'm just bored of placard waving. I want to see stuff actually change. Funny that, last time I checked it's the people who protest about things that get stuff to changed - not the one's who sit around saying meh, it's good enough for me. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 27/11/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unfortunately, some people have memes that they feel compelled to evangelize at all costs, and they won't stop when they're told to. Memetically, this is the equivalent of rape. Avoid memetic rapists, and respect the boundaries that others have set, if you want them to respect you This is a total crock. Basically the author is saying that anyone who has strong opinions is committing the equivalent of rape. Now, ignoring the highly inappropriate analogy to forced sexual penetration, I think that you could sum this up as having strong opinions and sticking by them is wrong. which is clearly brain-dead. I appreciate that some people prefer not to get into politics or ethics or rights or whatever, in which case ignore the discussion and move on with you life. If you have an opinion, voice it, don't be scared. Anyone who relates intellectual discussion with forced sexual abuse clearly has some serious issues. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC Podcasts Including Music
On 24/11/2007, Stuart Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is this, because it is pretty simple to copy the stream to a file and and save it. I read the terms and conditions and there was nothing to prevent me doing this for my personal use. Of course, there is already a free software tool to do just this. http://streamripper.sourceforge.net/ -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC Podcasts Including Music
On 24/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And why is this different to the broadcast radio where there are plenty of devices that allow the recording of a radio program. Because when it is broadcast it's a single one-to-many pipe, streaming is lots of small pipes.. But that's only an implementation detail - conceptually it's the same thing. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC Podcasts Including Music
On 24/11/2007, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nobody thinks DRM is safe - it just has to be safe enough. I wouldn't say it was safe at all, but I know you weren't talking about our perspective. ;) -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On 09/11/2007, Matthew Cashmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hitler Ahahahah! This is the funniest invokation of Godwin's Law I have ever seen. From a BBC address too - I wonder if you're boss would be happy with this? -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On 09/11/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can't deliberately invoke Godwins law: http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/G/Godwins-Law.html So the silliness is set to continue. Please vijay, RFC 1149 and 2549 clearly state that referenced hyperlinks included within the message body should be indented by no less than two U+0020 (SPACE) characters. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1149.html http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2549.html Please make sure you follow these rudimentary netiquette guidelines in future. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Freesat and backstage?
WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT LOL -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: Etiquette and TCP (was Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manners Argh! So much academic discussion about what is/isnt manners. Let's just consider the facts: * Quoting whole emails is unnecessary for providing context * Quoting whole emails provides a lot of noise when reading the email * This noise can be visually/mentally distracting * This noise might impair usability on small screen devices * This noise might harm accessibility for users with assitive devices. * There are MANY modern email clients that do not support filtering of this noise These are the facts, I assume they are not up for debate. What follows is a judgment call, I guess. I you prepared to continue quoting entire emails given the caveats listed above? Do you consider it bad manners to given all of this points to continue? I cannot tell you what the correct manners are - it's totally subjective - but I can only suggest that I find it rude an inconsiderate. You may disagree - but I think that says a lot, in and of it's self. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again
On 07/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The rules for this discussion forum is deploy filters. If you are offended, please stop reading. There is no need to consider flaming. That's not an excuse for Ad Hominem attacks - which could easily get you kicked if someone complained about your behavior. Also, please don't top-post, it's considered bad form. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again [off topic]
1. Google OS (windows platform) 53.9% What's a windows platform? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again [off topic]
NEVAR JOKE! TEH INTRAWEBS ARE SERIOUS F**KING BUSINESS. On 07/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought I was reponding to do not top post by top posting. It was supposed to be a joke. Sorry, if seemed otherwise. On 07/11/2007, Matthew Cashmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think it would do us any harm to be a little politer on here to each other sometimes But that's just me. In fact I'm also of the opinion we should go back to signing all our letters with... Your obedient servant, m On 7/11/07 10:29, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: LOL On 07/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 07/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The rules for this discussion forum is deploy filters. If you are offended, please stop reading. There is no need to consider flaming. That's not an excuse for Ad Hominem attacks - which could easily get you kicked if someone complained about your behavior. Also, please don't top-post, it's considered bad form. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk http://backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Depending on volumes and volatility of data, it may be 'insane' to have a database connection, query and teardown for every redirect, too. What works on the bench doesn't always work in the field... I would recommend against any method that involved network I/O for Apache. If you have large volumes of redirects that cannot be satisfied with a few simple regular expressions and mod_rewrite the obvious way forward is batch generated (from the DB) apache config files placed in a directory and sourced by the main apache.conf. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Or you can use Gmail and it sorts it all for you. Two points: 1) I may be using a phone, small screen or assistive device on which your emails can take pages and pages of scrolling to get to the real content - even then it could be confusing enough to miss. 2) I DO use Gmail (check the message headers) and it still looks like garbage. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again [off topic]
On 07/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 07/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. Google OS (windows platform) 53.9% What's a windows platform? Last time I checked, it was an OS. My question was really, how do you run an OS on top of another OS. Or rather, why would you want to. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
I thought we were talking about having short codes which could be used by something like go.bbc.co.uk/shortcode where new codes would be added everytime a new news story (or sport or whatever) came up. Yes - you can do this with a single regular expression. Oh, and your quoting of entire emails takes up a LOT of space and make's it harder to read. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] What would you do? (Was: BBC tech chief: You Freetards don't matter)
Anthony Anderson, managing director of Naxos UK, one of the biggest publishers of classical-music CDs, complained: By offering downloads for nothing, the BBC was distorting the marketplace. Is this what a public-sector broadcaster, largely funded by the licence fee, should be doing? Yes. Totally. The BBC is funded by the public sector and should look after the benefits of said public sector, namely us, the public. Anthony Anderson is trying to argue that the BBC as a public sector broadcaster should somehow favour the benefits of the private sector - which is an obvious non sequitur. As the price of music tends to zero, futile attempts by the music distributors to prevent the free dissemination of creative works will only hamper their ability to fully embrace the inevitable marketplace of the future. Look how Apple (iTunes) stepped in and stole the potential market from the existing content distributors because it embraced change instead of resisting it. -- Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
