Re: Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra)
On 7 apr, 09:39, Steven D'Aprano steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: It's astonishing how anti-Mono FUD just won't die. (Something can be true, and still FUD. Oh no, people might *choke* on a peanut, or have an allergic reaction, we must label every piece of food May Contain Nuts just in case, because you never know!!!) Look, patent threats are real, but we don't gain anything by exaggerating the threat, and we *especially* don't gain anything by treating one patent holder as the Devil Incarnate while ignoring threats from others. Regardless of source, the obvious conclusion from the patent FUD is this: - Python might infinge on a patent, never use Python. - Mono might infinge on a patent, never use Mono. - Java might infinge on a patent, never use Java. - .NET might infinge on a patent, never use .NET. - The C compiler might infinge on a patent, never use C. - Your code might infinge on a patent, never program anything. - Software on your computer might infinge on a patent, never dear to use it. - Hardware on your computer might infinge on a patent, turn it off. - Risk of litigation is a greater concern than anything a computer can do for you. - Get rid of your computer before you get sued. - A slide ruler is a hell of an invention. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 00:25:46 -0500, harrismh777 wrote: The gnu suite of tools and the linux kernel were the keys to unlocking Microsoft lock-in... brilliant technologies for innovation and freedom. I used to believe this too, but then I found I was relying on Linux and GNU software so much that I couldn't afford to move away from Linux and GNU. Damn lock-in. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra)
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 07:50:56 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info writes: Mono is free, open source software that is compatible with .NET […] It's difficult to take a claim of “free” seriously for a technology (Mono) that knowingly implements techniques (the “C#” language, the “.NET” platform, etc.) covered by specific idea patents held by an entity that demonstrates every intention of wielding them to restrict the freedom of software recipients. It's astonishing how anti-Mono FUD just won't die. (Something can be true, and still FUD. Oh no, people might *choke* on a peanut, or have an allergic reaction, we must label every piece of food May Contain Nuts just in case, because you never know!!!) Let's reword your concern slightly: It's difficult to take a claim of “free” seriously for technologies (including, but not limited to, HTML, CSS, C++, XML, Public Key Cryptography, packet-based multimedia, IPv6) that knowingly or unknowingly [the later not being a defence against infringement] implement techniques covered by specific idea patents held by an entity that allegedly demonstrates every intention, or at least some intention, of wielding them to restrict the freedom of software recipients. Perhaps every piece of software should be labeled May Infringe Patents. I've seen a lot of FUD about Mono, but nothing to suggest that it is at more risk than any other piece of non-trivial software. As far as I know, there is only one major piece of FOSS that *has* actually been sued for patent infringement, and it's not Mono. Software idea patents are incompatible with free software. Every non-trivial program likely violates countless such patents, but most of those patents are not yet enforced even in the unlucky jurisdictions where they are recognised by law. Right. So why single out Mono? Python likely violates countless such patents, so obviously we can't take the idea of Python being free seriously either. Same with Perl, and the Linux kernel, and the entire Gnu tool set. As you say, quite probably every piece of non-trivial software you have used, or ever will use, or write, infringes. By this logic, we can't take the idea of FOSS software seriously at all, since no software can be expected to be free from infringing some patent somewhere. But of course, the conclusion does not follow from the premise. Yes, Mono is at risk from patents, *possibly even from Microsoft*. So is everything else. So why single out Mono as non-serious? (Although it is in Microsoft's best interest to tolerate Mono. It's in their best interests to tolerate FOSS. And as their recent actions show: http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft-cozies-up-to-open-source-donates-10-to-Apache/1217018107 http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/07/24/linus-torvalds-speaks-out-on-the-microsoft-gpl-code-contribution/ at least parts of Microsoft have finally come to recognise this.) More here: http://www.jprl.com/Blog/archive/development/mono/2009/Jan-19.html Microsoft, though, is clearly a vigorous enforcer of software idea patents they hold. They have been very cagey about stating what they will and won't enforce about patents they hold on .NET – and none of those statements are binding. This is complete FUD. I suggest you start with this: http://www.microsoft.com/interop/cp/default.mspx Perhaps what you mean is, none of the licences granted are *irrevocable*. But the same applies to the GPL -- break the GPL's (generous) terms, and you too could find that your licence is revoked. Is it possible that there could be portions of .NET or Mono which are unclear patent-wise? Of course it is possible, it's even likely. Software patents are truly a mess. But there is zero evidence I have seen that Mono is more of a mess patent-wise, or more of a risk, than any other non-trivial piece of software. With large portions of Mono protected by the Microsoft Community Promise licence, it may even be that Mono is *safer* than most FOSS software. Microsoft is far less vigorous at enforcing patents than many other companies. (This is possibly a bad thing, when they darkly drop hints that there are secret patent infringements in Linux and some day there will be a reckoning...) Given the tens, or is it hundreds, of thousands of patents they hold, they've barely used them. Do you want to know who scares me? Google and Apple. Google, because they're turning software from something you run on your own computer to something you use on a distant server you have no control over. And Apple, because they're turning the computer from a general purpose computing device you control, to a locked-down, restricted, controlled specialist machine that only runs what they permit you to run. But I digress. The freedom of a software work isn't a matter of the copyright license alone; it's a matter of the freedoms each recipient has in
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra)
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: Do you want to know who scares me? Google and Apple. Google, because they're turning software from something you run on your own computer to something you use on a distant server you have no control over. And Apple, because they're turning the computer from a general purpose computing device you control, to a locked-down, restricted, controlled specialist machine that only runs what they permit you to run. But I digress. I agree about Apple, but Google are not turning software... into; they are providing an option that involves such things. They are not stopping you from running software on your own computer, and they never can. One of my hobbies is running (and, let's face it, playing) online games. The MUD system is similar to what Google does, only more so; the server has *everything* and the client is just basic TELNET. Yes, some clients have some nice features, but they don't need to, and some of my players use extremely basic terminals. But nobody complains that they're playing a game they have no control over (and the only complaints about a distant server relate to ping times). Having the option to cloud things is a Good Thing. Yes, you lose control if you put your data on someone else's cloud, but if you want the functionality, you pay the price. If you don't like that price, you stick with your desktop software. Chris Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra)
On Apr 7, 7:17 pm, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: Do you want to know who scares me? Google and Apple. Google, because they're turning software from something you run on your own computer to something you use on a distant server you have no control over. And Apple, because they're turning the computer from a general purpose computing device you control, to a locked-down, restricted, controlled specialist machine that only runs what they permit you to run. But I digress. I agree about Apple, but Google are not turning software... into; they are providing an option that involves such things. They are not stopping you from running software on your own computer, and they never can. One of my hobbies is running (and, let's face it, playing) online games. The MUD system is similar to what Google does, only more so; the server has *everything* and the client is just basic TELNET. Yes, some clients have some nice features, but they don't need to, and some of my players use extremely basic terminals. But nobody complains that they're playing a game they have no control over (and the only complaints about a distant server relate to ping times). Having the option to cloud things is a Good Thing. Yes, you lose control if you put your data on someone else's cloud, but if you want the functionality, you pay the price. If you don't like that price, you stick with your desktop software. Chris Angelico Currently Oracle's actions seem far more concerning than anything microsoft could cook up. Look at the Openjdk http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/04/openjdk_rules/ now thats a joke... As I see it, C# has never had more than an 8% market share. But perhaps you have some better data. Jobs posted in Sydeny in the last 3 days on our major search seek.com.au; Jobs% of total Jobs c# 134 17.1% java422 53.9% python 29 3.7% c++ 79 10.1% Ruby16 2.0% asp.net 103 13.2% scala 0 0.0% Total 783 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
On Thursday, April 7, 2011 2:43:09 AM UTC-4, Steven D#39;Aprano wrote: On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 00:25:46 -0500, harrismh777 wrote: The gnu suite of tools and the linux kernel were the keys to unlocking Microsoft lock-in... brilliant technologies for innovation and freedom. I used to believe this too, but then I found I was relying on Linux and GNU software so much that I couldn't afford to move away from Linux and GNU. Damn lock-in. Once you commit yourself to a free and open community, there's nothing locking you in other than your personal level of commitment and loyalty, and how much you stand to lose by simply walking away. Free software doesn't eliminate the real constraints of the real world. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra)
Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: Perhaps what you mean is, none of the licences granted are *irrevocable*. But the same applies to the GPL -- break the GPL's (generous) terms, and you too could find that your licence is revoked. Actually, you could argue since the GPL doesn't meet the legal definition of a contract, it can be revoked unilateraly (but not retroactively) by the copyright holder at any time for any reason. Ross Ridge -- l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU [oo][oo] rri...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca -()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rridge/ db // -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
Brendan Simon wrote: Any other arguments where Python has benefits over Cobra ?? Python is built from C, Cobra is built from Cobra... Python does not require Microsoft .NET, nor MONO framework, Python has better community support, has a larger install base and developer community, and Python is sponsored by more commercial shops. (Which isn't always a fair statement...) The greatest strength of Python is its community. Cobra is pretty much a one-man operation with limited appeal at this time. Supposedly Cobra sports better performance due to static binding and machine code compilation; also Cobra sports better error checking, depending on your opinion (compile time versus run time). And of course, Cobra tries to enforce OOP (the only thing about it I like) / However, these are at the same time Cobra's weaknesses. Dynamic binding and interactive consistent interface is Python's strength. Python is flexible and easier to learn IMHO. Python is not the fastest horse in town... but has the ability for performance enhancement at any time due to good interoperability with C C++ addins. And frankly, by far and away, Python is fast enough. If I want strict OOP and speed I'm gonna compile from C++ from the get go. But that's me. Having said all of that, I must admit my bias against Microsoft .NET and the Mono frameworks. I personally cannot support a language that requires either one. Microsoft has made such a mess out of almost everything it has touched... including language design (er, lockin). Cobra patronizes this scheme and is therefore also evil. This is of course just an opinion (and a proud one I must admit). kind regards, m harris -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 6:03 PM, harrismh777 harrismh...@charter.net wrote: Having said all of that, I must admit my bias against Microsoft .NET and the Mono frameworks. I personally cannot support a language that requires either one. Microsoft has made such a mess out of almost everything it has touched... including language design (er, lockin). Cobra patronizes this scheme and is therefore also evil. This is of course just an opinion (and a proud one I must admit). In other words, you have a bias against non-portability. Right now, I have around me two laptops running Windows XP, two running Ubuntu 10.10 64-bit, and two running Ubuntu 32-bit. (Surprisingly balanced.) With a very few exceptions, code that I write in IDLE on one box will run perfectly on any of the others. That won't happen in a language that requires a Microsoft framework, because it's simply not in their interests to ship for Linux (let alone OS/2, which I have at home). I do like me some true portability. Even if you don't intend to move off Windows, though, there's a lot of risk in tying yourself to a non-free framework, especially such a heavy one as .NET. You're completely at the mercy of the provider, in this case Microsoft, and if they make an incompatible change in the framework, you're forever stuck. At least with open source systems, you have the option of forking Python version whatever and compiling it for your new hardware (is there a Python 1.0 for amd64? heh). Hypothetical situation yes, but it's a question of trust. Do you trust Microsoft to never have any bugs in the .NET framework? (To be honest, I don't actually trust the Python devs *that* much. But if Python version 3.Foo has a bug that breaks my code, I do at least have the ability to fix it myself, if I care. Which I probably don't with Python, but I have done with other OSS.) Chris Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 18:26:25 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: Right now, I have around me two laptops running Windows XP, two running Ubuntu 10.10 64-bit, and two running Ubuntu 32-bit. (Surprisingly balanced.) With a very few exceptions, code that I write in IDLE on one box will run perfectly on any of the others. That won't happen in a language that requires a Microsoft framework, because it's simply not in their interests to ship for Linux (let alone OS/2, which I have at home). I do like me some true portability. Mono is free, open source software that is compatible with .NET and is available on Linux, Mac OS, Solaris, Unix and even that little-known operating system Windows. *wink* http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page And some FUD-busting: http://ubuntu-tutorials.com/2007/03/13/squashing-a-few-myths-about-mono-development/ -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: Mono is free, open source software that is compatible with .NET and is available on Linux, Mac OS, Solaris, Unix and even that little-known operating system Windows. *wink* Ah! My apologies, I stand corrected. Not being familiar with it (and not really being able to google it - there's no guarantee it's the first hit), I assumed that the dependency was .NET *and* Mono, meaning that the program needs .NET regardless. That reduces the risks considerably, although I'd still rather stick with Python itself. Chris Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
[OT] Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra)
Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info writes: Mono is free, open source software that is compatible with .NET […] It's difficult to take a claim of “free” seriously for a technology (Mono) that knowingly implements techniques (the “C#” language, the “.NET” platform, etc.) covered by specific idea patents held by an entity that demonstrates every intention of wielding them to restrict the freedom of software recipients. Software idea patents are incompatible with free software. Every non-trivial program likely violates countless such patents, but most of those patents are not yet enforced even in the unlucky jurisdictions where they are recognised by law. Microsoft, though, is clearly a vigorous enforcer of software idea patents they hold. They have been very cagey about stating what they will and won't enforce about patents they hold on .NET – and none of those statements are binding. The freedom of a software work isn't a matter of the copyright license alone; it's a matter of the freedoms each recipient has in the work. What the copyright license grants, the applicable patents held by demonstrably litigious parties can take away. http://ubuntu-tutorials.com/2007/03/13/squashing-a-few-myths-about-mono-development/ It squashes some myths, but does not address the restrictions imposed by the .NET software idea patents at all AFAICT. Here are some links that do address this: URL:http://nocturn.vsbnet.be/content/get-facts-mono URL:http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono -- \ “Our products just aren't engineered for security.” —Brian | `\ Valentine, senior vice-president of Microsoft Windows | _o__) development | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
Chris Angelico wrote: there's a lot of risk in tying yourself to a non-free framework, especially such a heavy one as .NET. You're completely at the mercy of the provider, in this case Microsoft, and if they make an incompatible change in the framework, you're forever stuck. Yes, lock-in is the name of the game for Microsoft. The only way to win the game is to not play; also, support free software initiatives, use free (as in freedom) software for everything, and help to educate the public. The gnu suite of tools and the linux kernel were the keys to unlocking Microsoft lock-in... brilliant technologies for innovation and freedom. Python adds to this brilliance by providing accessibility together with fun and ease of use for real world problem solving and research in computer science. Computer science (as in all good science) must have as key elements freedom in collaboration, freedom in expanding ideas and abstractions, and freedom in sharing and communication. For computer science to be good science, it must be free. To that end Python deserves kudos and cheers--- brilliant! Hat's off to Guido and the entire team~ ! Don't tread on me! kind regards, m harris -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Python benefits over Cobra
I just came across the Cobra language, which appears to be heavily influenced by Python (and other languages). The pitch sounds great. It's supposed to have: 1. Quick, expressive coding 2. Fast execution 3. Static and dynamic binding 4. Language level support for quality http://cobra-language.com/docs/why/ http://cobra-language.com/docs/python/ I was wondering what advantages Python has over Cobra. I know it's probably a difficult question to answer and depends on specific requirements. All I can think of is: * Maturity of language o Robust and tested. o availability of modules (standard and built-in). o large community support (commercial and non-commercial). * No dependence of .NET/Mono o I don't know if this is an pro or con as I don't know .NET. Presumably the maturity argument would be less significant over time. I'm not sure about the .NET/Mono framework, whether that is good or bad. Sounds good in some situations at least. Any other arguments where Python has benefits over Cobra ?? Cheers, Brendan. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
On 05-Apr-11 06:22 AM, Brendan Simon (eTRIX) wrote: I just came across the Cobra language, which appears to be heavily influenced by Python (and other languages). The pitch sounds great. It's supposed to have: 1. Quick, expressive coding 2. Fast execution 3. Static and dynamic binding 4. Language level support for quality http://cobra-language.com/docs/why/ http://cobra-language.com/docs/python/ I was wondering what advantages Python has over Cobra. I know it's probably a difficult question to answer and depends on specific requirements. All I can think of is: * Maturity of language o Robust and tested. o availability of modules (standard and built-in). o large community support (commercial and non-commercial). * No dependence of .NET/Mono o I don't know if this is an pro or con as I don't know .NET. Presumably the maturity argument would be less significant over time. I'm not sure about the .NET/Mono framework, whether that is good or bad. Sounds good in some situations at least. Any other arguments where Python has benefits over Cobra ?? Cheers, Brendan. Two questions: 1. Is Cobra Open Source? 2. The blog ended on October, did he run out of steam? I liked the '.', in place of '.self', but that's been rejected for Python. Colin W. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
Cobra seems interessant, open-source, but the dependance on Mono and .Net annoy me a bit. Otherwise, cobra have good ideas, a syntax similar to python. One thing i really love is the How-To and the Samples pages on it's website, i think it's a very good thing for beginners. FELD Boris 2011/4/5 Colin J. Williams c...@ncf.ca: On 05-Apr-11 06:22 AM, Brendan Simon (eTRIX) wrote: I just came across the Cobra language, which appears to be heavily influenced by Python (and other languages). The pitch sounds great. It's supposed to have: 1. Quick, expressive coding 2. Fast execution 3. Static and dynamic binding 4. Language level support for quality http://cobra-language.com/docs/why/ http://cobra-language.com/docs/python/ I was wondering what advantages Python has over Cobra. I know it's probably a difficult question to answer and depends on specific requirements. All I can think of is: * Maturity of language o Robust and tested. o availability of modules (standard and built-in). o large community support (commercial and non-commercial). * No dependence of .NET/Mono o I don't know if this is an pro or con as I don't know .NET. Presumably the maturity argument would be less significant over time. I'm not sure about the .NET/Mono framework, whether that is good or bad. Sounds good in some situations at least. Any other arguments where Python has benefits over Cobra ?? Cheers, Brendan. Two questions: 1. Is Cobra Open Source? 2. The blog ended on October, did he run out of steam? I liked the '.', in place of '.self', but that's been rejected for Python. Colin W. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python benefits over Cobra
On 05-Apr-11 06:22 AM, Brendan Simon (eTRIX) wrote: Any other arguments where Python has benefits over Cobra ?? Cheers, Brendan. Two questions: 1. Is Cobra Open Source? 2. The blog ended on October, did he run out of steam? I liked the '.', in place of '.self', but that's been rejected for Python. Cobra is an open source project under the MIT license. according to the web site. It seems that it mostly, if not all, the work of one person. All code commits seem to be from Charles Esterbrook. It seems the latest release is Oct 2010, but I can see posts in the forum for April 2011, March, Feb, . I too like the '.' in place of self :) However, I don't like _ as line continuation :( Life is tough, eh ?? It also looks like there is work to have it run in a JVM. I presume that means that no .NET/Mono framework is required ?? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
