On 29/02/2008, Nick Reynolds-FMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
people don't have a moral obligation to share with other if they don't want
to
Sure, but thats different to agreeing not to share with anyone at all,
indiscriminately, because what happens after making that agreement
when you do want
On 29/02/2008, Matt Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course the BBC has a duty to educate. The use of proprietary
protocols/formats is a direct contradiction to this duty. How can we
educate people when we can not even tell them how things work.
I can see where your coming from in
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 04:30:35PM +, Dave Crossland wrote:
On 29/02/2008, Matt Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course the BBC has a duty to educate. The use of proprietary
protocols/formats is a direct contradiction to this duty. How can we
educate people when we can not even
people don't have a moral obligation to share with other if they don't
want to
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Barber
Sent: 28 February 2008 18:12
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Adobe fuses
Quoting Nick Reynolds-FMT [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
people don't have a moral obligation to share with other if they don't
want to
Nobody is saying that they do.
But people should not generally be prevented from helping others, for
example by sharing with them, should they wish to do so.
- Rob.
practicality with morality i.e. open systems work
with this means that everything must be shared.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 29 February 2008 10:49
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Adobe
On 26/02/2008, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's never bothered Dave before.
Actually of all the free software advocates, Dave is certainly the
least confrontational, and most friendly.
*You* may disagree with his views, however your actions demonstrate
your readiness to listen
the
vilification of him rather feeble and self-defeating.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tim Dobson
Sent: 29 February 2008 12:24
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Adobe fuses on and offline worlds
On 26/02/2008, Richard Lockwood
Quoting Nick Reynolds-FMT [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It's not wrong to refuse to share with someone. As was implied
earlier.
It depends on the circumstances.
But what is wrong is to forbid people from being to help people
regardless of the circumstances, for example by sharing with them,
even if
On 29/02/2008, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course the BBC has a duty to educate. The use of proprietary
protocols/formats is a direct contradiction to this duty. How can we
educate people when we can not even tell them how things work. It is
really damaging the future of education and the
On 29/02/2008, Peter Bowyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't that akin to criticising the BBC for not making sure everyone
knows about how its (former) transmitters work?
You are entirely misinterpreting what I am saying.
I didn't say the BBC should make sure everyone knows how their
protocols
Of course the BBC has a duty to educate. The use of proprietary
protocols/formats is a direct contradiction to this duty. How can we
educate people when we can not even tell them how things work.
I can see where your coming from in regard to the software that runs the
platforms to deliver
On 28/02/2008, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the BBC publishes information in open formats/protocols that have
only proprietary software implementations, it ought to be criticized
and pressured to start or contribute to the development of free
software implementations.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But what is wrong is to forbid people from being to help people
regardless of the circumstances, for example by sharing with them, even
if they want to. This is what proprietary software does.
It's also what happens when railways require photocards for season
On 27/02/2008, ST [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Crossland wrote:
For a certain value judgement of 'good' that is?
It tramples users' freedom and their friendships since we can't know
how it works or redistribute it. That's not good.
Conversely, it allows SMEs to enter market
On 27/02/2008, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 27 February 2008 14:00:18 Richard Lockwood wrote:
It's a mature way of dealing with trolls on mailing lists, yes.
I tend to try ask people to accept that other people have differing views and
to ask them politely not to impose
On 27/02/2008, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 27 February 2008 17:13:41 Dave Crossland wrote:
Software freedom is very tightly defined -
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Actually that is just one definition of software freedom.
URLs of others? :-)
On Thursday 28 February 2008 15:58:08 Dave Crossland wrote:
Even if I choose to use a proprietary program on a open source operating
system. Sorry, I'm not wrong,
Sorry, you agree not to share with me, which is wrong.
*plonk*
Michael.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion
So to put this thread back on track, does anyone have any experience with
Air? Developing or using?
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 28 February 2008 15:58:08 Dave Crossland wrote:
Even if I choose to use a proprietary program on a open source
On Thursday 28 February 2008 18:11:35 Matt Barber wrote:
So to put this thread back on track, does anyone have any experience with
Air? Developing or using?
I've applied to the closed pre-beta for Linux. No idea if I'll be accepted
onto it or not. Personally I think its an interesting
Dave Crossland wrote:
For a certain value judgement of 'good' that is?
It tramples users' freedom and their friendships since we can't know
how it works or redistribute it. That's not good.
Conversely, it allows SMEs to enter market places with the knowledge
that their intellectual
Hi Rupert,
I appear to have duplicated your comment on Prism. Didn't mean to
ignore your message, it just got a bit lost in the noise. Have you used
it at all? Or anyone else on this list for that matter. I'd be
interested in an opinion.
Alia
Rupert Watson wrote:
Ian
I think it is
Quoting ST [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
When was the last
time you had the feeler guage out to re-tappet your car?
I personally wouldn't know how. But if I fill up at a petrol station
and they tell me that as a result I am forbidden from hiring a
mechanic to fix my car, I know that is an
I find filtering his mail directly into trash helps.
That is a mature approach to dealing with mailing lists; thanks :-)
It's a mature way of dealing with trolls on mailing lists, yes.
R.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
On 26/02/2008, Alia Sheikh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since Air is proprietary, that it runs on GNU+Linux is not good.
For a certain value judgement of 'good' that is?
It tramples users' freedom and their friendships since we can't know
how it works or redistribute it. That's not
Alia
It is on all platforms now I think;
http://wiki.mozilla.org/WebRunner#Latest_version
Rupert Watson
Www.root6.com
+44 7787 554 801
On 26/02/2008 21:43, Alia Sheikh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
windows only for the moment but open
ROOT 6 LIMITED
Registered in the UK at
4 WARDOUR
On Wednesday 27 February 2008 17:13:41 Dave Crossland wrote:
Software freedom is very tightly defined -
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Actually that is just one definition of software freedom. Just because you
don't agree with others doesn't mean there is only one definition. You
On Wednesday 27 February 2008 14:00:18 Richard Lockwood wrote:
It's a mature way of dealing with trolls on mailing lists, yes.
I tend to try ask people to accept that other people have differing views and
to ask them politely not to impose their views on everyone first before
dumping them in the
On 25/02/2008, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A free download will allow users of Macs, PCs and, later this
year, Linux machines to run any Air applications.
Since Air is proprietary, that it runs on GNU+Linux is not good.
The BBC is also building prototype applications with AIR.
I'm so tempted to think that any software that is called Air is probably
vaporware...
On 26/02/2008, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 25/02/2008, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A free download will allow users of Macs, PCs and, later this
year, Linux machines to run any
I'm so tempted to think that any software that is called Air is probably
vaporware...
Duke Nukem ForAirver anyone?
Anyone?
gets coat
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Dave Crossland wrote:
On 25/02/2008, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A free download will allow users of Macs, PCs and, later this
year, Linux machines to run any Air applications.
Since Air is proprietary, that it runs on GNU+Linux is not good.
For a certain value
On 26/02/2008, Alia Sheikh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now this is a bit hairy - would you be happier if the BBC required that
the public could use only non-proprietary software to access any of its
work?
I doubt that it what Dave is saying.
It should make it's content available via a standard
On 26/02/2008, Alia Sheikh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Crossland wrote:
On 25/02/2008, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A free download will allow users of Macs, PCs and, later this
year, Linux machines to run any Air applications.
Since Air is proprietary, that it runs
Hey,
I never said anything about being unhappy with open standards, please do
not implicitly misquote me like that:)
What I said was that as far as possible things should be open but that
that should not be the only value judgement that is made. I also said
positive and fluffy things about
don't know if this has already been discussed here, but:
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/site/Home
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Alia Sheikh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey,
I never said anything about being unhappy with open standards, please do
not implicitly misquote me like
for whatever it's worth:
http://osflash.org/
http://osflash.org/mtasc
are also useful
simon wrote:
don't know if this has already been discussed here, but:
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/site/Home
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Alia Sheikh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL
On 26/02/2008, simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
don't know if this has already been discussed here, but:
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/site/Home
Its amusing that the website is run on Confluence, proprietary wiki software :-)
--
Regards,
Dave
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk
On Tuesday 26 February 2008 15:24:05 Dave Crossland wrote:
It feel uncomfortably like you're avoiding thinking about ethical
aspects of your profession.
I think that's an incredibly unfair thing to say. Just because someone
doesn't share your personal views doesn't mean that they don't think
That's never bothered Dave before. If you don't inhabit the fantasy
world that is Davetopia, you must be related to the anti-Christ.
He'll a one issue troll, who'll quite happily try insult anyone who
disagrees with his zealot tendencies.
I find filtering his mail directly into trash helps.
Dave Crossland wrote:
On 26/02/2008, Alia Sheikh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Crossland wrote:
On 25/02/2008, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A free download will allow users of Macs, PCs and, later this
year, Linux machines to run any Air applications.
Since Air is
On 26 Feb 2008, at 14:11, Andy wrote:
I doubt that it what Dave is saying.
It should make it's content available via a standard way (see:
http://www.ietf.org , http://www.w3c.org , http://www.iso.org ).
That way it can be viewed in both proprietary and Open Source
software. See everyone's
There's also something called Mozilla Prism which seems to have many of
the same goals:
http://labs.mozilla.com/2007/10/prism/
windows only for the moment but open
An article comparing it to air:
http://www.openparenthesis.org/2007/11/10/prism-vs-air
Need to do some more digging to see how if
On 26/02/2008, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's never bothered Dave before. If you don't inhabit the fantasy
world that is Davetopia, you must be related to the anti-Christ.
You are exaggerating my position. When I say that having total power
over other people's computers can
On 26/02/2008, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 26 February 2008 15:24:05 Dave Crossland wrote:
It feel uncomfortably like you're avoiding thinking about ethical
aspects of your profession.
I think that's an incredibly unfair thing to say. Just because someone
doesn't share
Google Gears for Flash? Seemed inevitable to me.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7254436.stm
Adobe Air allows developers to build tools that still have some
functionality even when a computer is no longer
Ian
I think it is funny that it says
The current versions of the programs only work on PCs.
despite the fact that earlier the article quotes your BBC man saying that
the nice thing is that it is cross platform...
I think that the BBC should keep an eye on Mozilla Prism as well.
Rupert Watson
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Ian Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7254436.stm
Adobe Air allows developers to build tools that still have some
functionality even when a computer is no longer connected to the net.
A free download will allow users of
It's been around for quite a while now. It's good in that it's fairly
easy to port existing stuff too, it runs a webkit browser with a few
extensions for access to local files data storage and extra ui control.
You can host a pure js/html app, use frames to load webpages or just
standard ajax.
49 matches
Mail list logo
