Hi Everyone,
I agree with Alia, can't we all just get along ?
If this is to be a competition about rich internet applications, then
the competition could be open to AIR and alternatives, such as Google
Gears etc. That is likely to appeal to our various sub-communities
better. Also,
David saw this story on the BBC News website and thought you
should see it.
** Message **
Not seen this pop up on the list...
** It's not the Gates, it's the bars **
Richard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation, on the departure of
Bill Gates.
Not seen this pop up on the list:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7487060.stm
Not so much the message which not everyone agrees with - but I am impressed to
see the point-of-view coming from a mainstream source :)
David
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To
David Greaves wrote:
Not seen this pop up on the list:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7487060.stm
Not so much the message which not everyone agrees with - but I am impressed to
see the point-of-view coming from a mainstream source :)
Richard Stallman is a mainstream source now? Damn
On Fri Jul 4 08:39:26 2008, David wrote:
** It's not the Gates, it's the bars **
Richard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation, on the departure
of Bill Gates.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/technology/7487060.stm
Meh, doesn’t really say anything new. It’s good that
Peter Bowyer wrote:
You pretty much talked yourself out of that one, then :-)
Peter
2008/7/4 Matt Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi, just browsing the news and I wanted to send a link to a friend, and was
wondering if it would be good to have a switch we could append to the URL,
to make the video
Dan Brickley wrote:
David Greaves wrote:
Not seen this pop up on the list:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7487060.stm
Not so much the message which not everyone agrees with - but I am
impressed to
see the point-of-view coming from a mainstream source :)
Richard Stallman is a
Peter Bowyer wrote:
You pretty much talked yourself out of that one, then :-)
Haha indeed...
And don't forget browser restarts. Here's the sound of my Firefox 3
re-opening 50 tabs... http://danbri.org/words/2008/05/02/311
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHsI0UBwh5E
Could bring a
On Thu Jul 3 21:46:16 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/7/3 Matt Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If we ran a competition which required the final
Have you ever considered your freedom, or do you thrive off being
facetious?
Yes. I regular consider my freedom. My freedom to consider, carefully
think about and, where appropriate amend my views. My rights to not be
hectored, badgered and lectured at, at every possible opportunity,
Fred Phillips wrote:
On Fri Jul 4 08:39:26 2008, David wrote:
** It's not the Gates, it's the bars **
Richard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation, on the departure
of Bill Gates.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/technology/7487060.stm
Meh, doesn’t really say anything
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Lockwood
Sent: 04 July 2008 10:24
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:40:58 +0100
Have you ever
Ben's suggestion to allow the people to choose their RIA flavour whether it
be AIR, gears or whatever is very sensible.
Surely the main thing is that a good idea gets built.
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Richard Lockwood
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you ever considered your
2008/7/4 simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ben's suggestion to allow the people to choose their RIA flavour whether it
be AIR, gears or whatever is very sensible.
Surely the main thing is that a good idea gets built.
Surely the main thing is that we preserve our freedom to understand
and share the
Oops, posted that without a subject and on a new thread... here you are:
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/7/4 simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ben's suggestion to allow the people to choose their RIA flavour whether
it
be AIR, gears or whatever is very
bit of a rant
This software by Adobe that makes it easier to deploy cross-platform,
desktop apps, and to use AJAX, HTML, Flash, and have it running
offline/online - and these skills would be useful in other situations too -
seems cool.
In regard to the.. discussion that this competition thread has
2008/7/4 Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/7/4 simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ben's suggestion to allow the people to choose their RIA flavour whether it
be AIR, gears or whatever is very sensible.
Surely the main thing is that a good idea gets built.
Surely the main thing is that we
No Dave.
The main thing *for you* is that you preserve *your* perceived freedom. For
a lot of us, that isn't the main thing at all. Please stop making sweeping
statements as though your world view is the only one. If you don't want to
use non-free software, then don't. Don't go trying to
Anyone else find it strange that Richard Stallman feels it is apparently
unjust for Microsoft and others to publish software that users are not
free to share and modify, but it is ok to publish an article which
readers are not free to share and modify?
Just a thought.
-Original Message-
On 4 Jul 2008, at 12:24, Gareth Davis wrote:
Anyone else find it strange that Richard Stallman feels it is
apparently
unjust for Microsoft and others to publish software that users are not
free to share and modify, but it is ok to publish an article which
readers are not free to share and
I thought the CC licence at the bottom allowed this.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fearghas McKay
Sent: 04 July 2008 12:49
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC E-mail: It's not the Gates, it's the bars
On 4 Jul
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anyone else find it strange that Richard Stallman feels it is apparently
unjust for Microsoft and others to publish software that users are not
free to share and modify, but it is ok to publish an article which
readers are
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 04:41:00PM +0100, Ian Forrester wrote:
If we ran a competition which required the final prototype to be in Adobe
Air, how would people feel about that?
There's a run time and SDK for Win, OSx and now gnu/Linux.
32-bit only on Linux unfortunately, so not
On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 12:24:24PM +0100, Gareth Davis wrote:
Anyone else find it strange that Richard Stallman feels it is apparently
unjust for Microsoft and others to publish software that users are not
free to share and modify, but it is ok to publish an article which
readers are not free
It uses CC-ND which only allows sharing with attribution, it does not
allow commercial reuse or you to 'alter, transform or build upon this
work'
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
On Fri Jul 4 11:59:45 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
If you don't want to use non-free software, then don't. Don't go
trying to impose your restrictions on the rest of us. You don't
want to code with AIR, then don't. Simple solution.
But it is suggested that this competition be _only_
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It uses CC-ND which only allows sharing with attribution, it does not
allow commercial reuse or you to 'alter, transform or build upon this
work'
ND does allow commercial use. NC-ND would prevent commercial use.
He
I've left this list once before, because whilst it's full of interesting
people, I've absolutely no interest in watching them bang their heads
against each other in the same way over and over again. I still have no
interest in that. Whilst it is your right to speak it is also everyone
elses
On Fri Jul 4 10:24:29 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
Have you ever considered your freedom, or do you thrive off being
facetious?
Yes. I regular consider my freedom. My freedom to consider, carefully
think about and, where appropriate amend my views. My rights to not be
hectored,
Rob Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stallman believes that works of opinion are different from pieces of
software. He is concerned that arbitrary modifications of a work of
opinion could lead to misrepresentation, and he's not alone in that.
Software doesn't really have that problem, so he's right
On 04 July 2008 at 13:32 , Rob Mayers wrote:
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Gareth Davis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It uses CC-ND which only allows sharing with
attribution, it does not
The ND licence is restrictive compared to copyleft but it is less
restrictive than normal copyright, because it allows commercial copying of
the work.
That said I do see where you're coming from, and I personally would much
rather Stallman just copylefted his writings. BY-SA and moral rights
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was just following the CC link posted in the news article, it states no
commercial use. Has the wrong version been linked?
Yes, it looks like it. Is that an error from the author or the publisher?
Just so I know who to
I'm not sure I understand why one should have more freedom to twist
Mr. Stallman's words than the protection under copyright to reuse and
change traditional BBC articles.
Mr. Stallman can be demanding (I have interviewed him twice, a
daunting experience) but I think his message is very important.
On 4 jul 2008, at 15.32, Rob Myers wrote:
Just an observation but why do all these damn CC licence variants need
to be so complex. No wonder people can make mistakes with them..
Darren
¦ D P Ingram ¦ Ab Ingram Oy ¦
¦ darren at ingram.fi ¦ www.ingram.fi ¦
¦
¦ +358 6 781 0275 (FIN) ¦ +46 8
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Fred Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri Jul 4 11:59:45 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
If you don't want to use non-free software, then don't. Don't go
trying to impose your restrictions on the rest of us. You don't
want to code with AIR, then don't.
You may not. A certain Mr Crossland does.
R.
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Fred Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri Jul 4 10:24:29 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
Have you ever considered your freedom, or do you thrive off being
facetious?
Yes. I regular consider my
On Fri Jul 4 15:16:03 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Fred Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri Jul 4 11:59:45 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
If you don't want to use non-free software, then don't. Don't go
trying to impose your restrictions on the
I wish I could be excluded from this banal tit-for-tat kids game!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fred Phillips
Sent: 04 July 2008 15:33
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:40:58 +0100
On Fri
I agree that twisting people's words isn't good but the copyleft licences
such as BY-SA or the FDL do prevent mis-attribution of modified versions to
the original author.
- Rob.
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Sean DALY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure I understand why one should have
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Fred Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri Jul 4 15:16:03 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Fred Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri Jul 4 11:59:45 2008, Richard Lockwood wrote:
If you don't want to use
2008/7/4 Adam Hatia [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I wish I could be excluded from this banal tit-for-tat kids game!
Unfortunately, the modus operandi of this list allows repeated
regurgitation of tired freedom arguments and the religious wars that
ensue. Fortunately, on-topic content crops up often enough
can you please take me off this list please.
thanks
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Lockwood
Sent: 04 July 2008 15:58
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:40:58 +0100
On Fri,
2008/7/4 Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 4 Jul 2008, at 12:24, Gareth Davis wrote:
Anyone else find it strange that Richard Stallman feels it is apparently
unjust for Microsoft and others to publish software that users are not
free to share and modify, but it is ok to publish an article
On Thursday 03 July 2008 21:46:16 Richard Lockwood wrote:
..
But it tramples our freedom and community, which are more important.
No Dave, you're thinking of Godzilla.
+1 QOTW
Michael.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
On Thursday 03 July 2008 16:41:00 Ian Forrester wrote:
..
If we ran a competition which required the final prototype to be in Adobe
Air, how would people feel about that?
Suppose Blue Peter ran a competition for a new toy, but required that children
only use Lego, what that be reasonable?
I
On 4 Jul 2008, at 17:41, Dave Crossland wrote:
I am at the http://2008.rmll.info and sat next to Richard, and he says
that this is not true. (I hope you are just being fooled by a nasty
rumour, rather than making this stuff up.)
He said it to me.
He was sitting next to me.
It was directed
On Friday 04 July 2008 10:05:08 Fred Phillips wrote:
You mean that world where you berate people for their morals? To be
honest, I don’t really want to live there.
That's actually precisely what Dave does as well. My mail client auto-deletes
mails from Dave since I decided I'd had enough when
On Friday 04 July 2008 15:50:29 Adam Hatia wrote:
I wish I could be excluded from this banal tit-for-tat kids game!
There's the backstage-developer mailing list as well, for what it's worth.
Michael.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
Dave Crossland wrote:
2008/7/4 simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Surely the main thing is that we preserve our freedom to understand
and share the software we use to do our computation.
I propose a six-week moratorium on the use of the word 'surely' in this
debate.
Using software running on
On Friday 04 July 2008 20:13:07 Dan Brickley wrote:
I propose a six-week moratorium on the use of the word 'surely' in this
debate.
Surely, the way to surley eliminate the use of the word surely, one and surely
for all is to (surely) overuse it as surely and to the best of our ability,
Surely not?
On 7/4/08, Michael (surely) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 04 July 2008 20:13:07 Dan Brickley wrote:
I propose a six-week moratorium on the use of the word 'surely' in this
debate.
Surely, the way to surley eliminate the use of the word surely, one and
surely
for all is to
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The new iPlayer looks great and seems to work exceptionally well
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayerbeta/
...and it's now at www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer too. With one important addition:
RSS FEEDS. Yes. Mmm. They auto-detect too,
53 matches
Mail list logo
