06.14.11
Posted in GNU/Linux at 2:09 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Personal opinion on what needs to be done in order to make GNU/Linux ever more ubiquitous
Long before writing in this Web site I was a GNU/Linux user and also an advocate whose approach was to make people familiar with practical benefits of the platform. People tend to stick with what they know, so unless there is an idealogical or emotional reason for a change, people tend to repel and reject even friendly advice. Resistance to change is somewhat of a defence mechanism and some companies learned how to exploit this. Let us identify ways in which a massive move to GNU/Linux (especially on the desktop) will become possible.
Put an end to software patents. On at least one occasion in recent years Red Hat planned a move into the desktop market, but multimedia codecs with patents on them stood in Red Hat’s way, according to reports. Apple and Microsoft have been using MPEG-LA as a barrier to entry — a menacing barrier facing low-cost competition. Without software patents, this barrier will be gone. Right now, especially with Android, we see a lot more of these familiar strategies. Software patents are inherently conflicting with GNU/Linux as a free platform one can distribute.
“Software patents are inherently conflicting with GNU/Linux as a free platform one can distribute.”Highlight ethical factors. Telling people only about pragmatic benefits of GNU/Linux — while they do truly exist — may fall on deaf ears. it would take a leap in terms of benefits and marketing for a lot of people to appreciate and embark on a long migration path. To a large degree and to grossly generalise, Apple tries to sell people a dream (status, quality, etc.), Microsoft advocates being uniform and docile by just accepting what OEMs preinstall (Microsoft spins lack of choice as a case of customers choosing Windows), whereas GNU/Linux and BSD are all about control (versatility, access to code, many choices, and so on). Those last bits concentrate mostly on technical benefits and unless one views it as the “GNU system”, freedom is rarely mentioned; in fact, cost is more likely to come up as a selling point. Fortunately in a way, now that kill switches, DRM and other limitations become commonplace, it becomes easier to take a complaint and then explain computer freedom to people, using real-world examples that affect everyone. To tell people that they would be in control of their data, devices, and computer can persuade some people to at least give GNU/Linux a chance.
Security. GNU/Linux is inherently more secure because it uses the well-researched and mature UNIX model and it typically embraces repositories to limit access to untrusted software. While security is probably not the main factor when choosing an operating system, the trick seems to come most handy when someone’s Windows computer gets walware and does something really nasty like data loss, considerable slowdown, and/or bank account breach. There is a window of opportunity opening when one suffers the consequences of these ordeals and promises himself or herself that a move away from the failed software is now justified.
“GNU/Linux is inherently more secure because it uses the well-researched and mature UNIX model and it typically embraces repositories to limit access to untrusted software.”Uniqueness.. To be unique is sometimes to be silly, but often it is to overcome marketing and delusion. People wish to be unique for all sorts of reasons, including specialties that help employment, merits of individuality that increase self esteem, and generally a sense of identity. As GNU/Linux has so much preinstalled software that varies across desktop environments and distributions, almost every user of GNU/Linux finds some way to customise things on a platform of choice to the point where the desktop can almost uniquely identity the person (or group of persons). This is a good thing. Taking this perspective further, GNU/Linux treats people like people, whereas Mac OS X and Windows treat people like Soviet Russia did. Being treated like a mere number discourages and demoralises. Finding one’s community and identity in a group of GNU/Linux users (there are many such groups with overlap and also distinctive features) can open a whole new door to a social world. A lot of people are in it for the sense of belonging, and there is nothing wrong with that. At the lower level there is a good deal of POSIX, so operation of key components across platforms is not a real peril. GNU/Linux is very standards-adherent because it had to be so. Lock-in is rarely a commercial consideration.
Growth. People like to be early adopters of what they know is going to become the “next best thing”. By joining early they can improve their relevance in what would become a dominant hub (e.g. social networks, political party), so to point out to people that GNU/Linux is already conquering nearly 100% of the world’s top computers and has grown to the point of dominance in phones can help persuade them that “Linux” is indeed the future, i.e. learning how to cope with it is inevitable. A lot of companies these days also recruit based on UNIX/Linux skills; that too can show people that by being early adopters they improve their prospects of wealth.
“GNU/Linux is very standards-adherent because it had to be so. Lock-in is rarely a commercial consideration.”Pace of expansion. As Linux does not really have much/any marketing, few people can appreciate the amount of innovation coming from “Linux” (and GNU). Moreover, unlike Microsoft and Apple which merely copied the work of others, the Free software movement was typically a trailblazer because technical excellence and leadership — not number of sales based on superficial jingles/jargon — were typically a priority. In less than 20 years Linux turned from a dormitory project into the best kernel out there, bar none (it is arguably, but with heaps of drivers and excellent filesystem features, counter arguments would be uncompelling and weak). In less than 10 years a crude desktop environments turned into what we now know as KDE4, which by my own judgment is the best environment one can get on any platform (not just GNU/Linux and BSD). You can usually spot a winner when you see who is growing the fastest and enjoys steady expansion/inertia. Linux is the very fast stallion in a race of old horses and little by little it overtakes the older generation (going back to the 1970s). The Linux Foundation has so many corporate backers now. People wish to embrace something which keeps being developed and actively maintained. By showing people that Linux is growing faster than its competition (compare KDE2 to Windows XP or Linux 1.x to Windows 95/98) people will accept the fact that GNU/Linux not only caught up with the competition a while ago but is also increasing the gap over it. This fact would be reassuring to many, including of course businesses (volatility matters to them).
“The Linux Foundation has so many corporate backers now.”Support. When something goes wrong in proprietary operating systems people often resort to asking a friend, a member of the family or a neighbour for help. By contrast, for many years GNU/Linux thrived in LUGs and in online communities which are eager to help other users of the same operating system. Since many of them did not have to pay for it and are not merely volunteers helping some billionaire/s, they feel almost obliged to give something back. Increasing userbase like theirs is not just a way of making one’s own choice safer and more resistant to collapse; it is also a way of justifying one’s own preference. This is generally fine because we speak about technology and not ancient scripture. This dedication to GNU/Linux worldwide helps ensure support will be there for a long, long time to come.
The list could go further, but to name some strategies that prove to be less effective at evangelising, telling people about the criminal nature of companies like Microsoft is not always productive; the education system teaches people to shy away from talking about crime as though it is somewhat of a taboo and even poor ethics are seen as commendable sometimes (some PR techniques for example); talking about Apple over-hyping its products is fine, but saying that Apple products hurt the user is sometimes an insult to their users (who paid for these products), so in both cases the communication suffers and the two sides drift apart.Techrights does cover those issues for reasons other than advocacy. The target audience is different, too. On the whole, telling people they can choose one of 10 browsers would not work because other platforms have that too and they also boast many more games (including free ones). Telling people about filesystem snapshots functionality would work only with a tech-savvy audience. Something different is needed. It is generally good to show people 3-D effects because this can be done quickly and it is memorable; it is also somewhat of a vanity/rave feature. It does, however, entice people to at least explore what’s underneath the skin. When demonstrating a desktop, provided someone is willing to give it a glance, it is good to show virtual workspaces along with some powerful applications and nice themes. To many people, a powerful package which is not neatly packaged will be seen as inherently inferior, especially if it is free of charge.
“Android has great brand recognition — probably better than Red Hat’s and Ubuntu’s by now.”Lastly, in some cases it may help to demonstrate the promise of GNU/Linux merely by association or comparison. For instance, saying that the Web mostly runs Free software like Apache and that Google is predominantly based on GNU/Linux (even is the crown jewels are Google’s proprietary software) lends enormous credibility to the platform. It goes without saying that reminding people that Android is Linux at the core can work magic. Android has great brand recognition — probably better than Red Hat’s and Ubuntu’s by now. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in GNU/Linux, Novell, OpenSUSE, Red Hat, Ubuntu at 12:50 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Volunteer Gardener
Summary: How communities of large GNU/Linux distributions are often perceived by their patrons, even if this is not explicitly stated
ONE taboo subject in the GNU/Linux community was brought up last night in IRC. People get insulted or fearful (depending on their role) if someone points out the value of communities to the company with trademarks and control over these communities. If an unpaid volunteer perceives peers as people more worthy and better rewarded, there is backlash (see what selective monetary invectives did to Debian about 4 years ago). There are certain things that just cannot be said and certain illusions that are necessary for the status quo.
Here is an example scenario. If it is said that some volunteers help with the expectation of receiving a job that way (like placements and internships), they deny this aggressively. If a volunteer is called an employee of the company which pays a wage to run its community, then too opposition comes from many directions. It’s not that the claim is untrue, it’s just not a convent one to grasp.
“It’s not that the claim is untrue, it’s just not a convent one to grasp.”But let’s face it and be true to ourselves. Companies like Novell, Red Hat and even tiny Canonical have obligations to themselves and often to shareholders. The development communities are convenient to them because they reduce the cost of doing business (key products which are carriers to the rest of the portfolio), where the toll is the time and effort of people. As long as a company maintains full control of a community and has a clear priority when it comes to strategic direction (e.g. through paid community members) it remains an integral part of this community and also its proprietor. To merely say this is not heresy; it’s common sense. Perhaps it’s just the way one says which really counts at the end.
To be critical of the above is not the same as highlighting it and to self-censor based on what is ‘safe’ to argue is to no longer care about what’s true.
Speaking of which, “NOVELL” news is very scarce now because the company no longer exists as an independent entity, a lot of the staff was laid off, and managers mostly moved on and joined other companies. With the exception of few people like one who still organises Weekly News, we hardly see OpenSUSE activities from unpaid members. Communities collapse when the volunteers base gets to grips with the reality of exploitative companies like Novell. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google at 12:25 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Android has a patent fee. You do have to license patents.” ~Steve Ballmer
“…Microsoft wished to promote SCO and its pending lawsuit against IBM and the Linux operating system. But Microsoft did not want to be seen as attacking IBM or Linux.”
–Larry Goldfarb, BayStar, key investor in SCO approached by Microsoft
Summary: Microsoft makes good use of its mole inside Nokia to tax competitors (elevating their prices) while it is also trying to block Android’s owner, Google, from getting patents
THE EXTORTION RACKET of Microsoft is not news. This site has covered it since 2006. This site foresaw the problem’s different aspects and explained quite accurately what would happen.
As we explained yesterday, Microsoft is taxing Android while the corporate media mostly plays a along rather than actually speak out against the practice of penalising one’s competition without even a trial. It’s blackmail and we have already explained why, even 4 years ago [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7].
” Microsoft wants Google to stay defenseless while Microsoft’s legal department shoots Google’s distributors one by one, even taking some of them to court (e.g. B&N, Motorola)…”Rather than attack Google directly using patents, Microsoft goes to distributors (less incentive to fight back), which is the equivalent of doing a mafia-style racket by going after shop customers with a gun, intimidating them one by one until the shop no longer gets customers. To make matters worse, when Google (the shopkeeper in this analogy) wants to get a gun for protection, Microsoft (the mafioso) steps in and plays the role of “police” again. Yes, the crook pretends to be the policeman again. Microsoft is trying prevent Google from having patents even though Google does not use any patents offensively and Reuters wrote about it first on the face of things. Microsoft wants Google to stay defenseless while Microsoft’s legal department shoots Google’s distributors one by one, even taking some of them to court (e.g. B&N, Motorola):
Google should not be allowed to buy thousands of patents belonging to bankrupt Nortel Networks under current sale terms, Microsoft said on Monday, the deadline for bids in an closely watched auction.
Microsoft, which claims a “worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free license to all of Nortel’s patents” following a 2006 deal, said in a filing with a Delaware bankruptcy court that existing agreements should be transferred to any new owner of the intellectual property, which spans many fields.
Look who’s talking…
This is absolutely disgraceful behaviour from Microsoft, which not so long ago pocketed Novell’s patents using the CPTN proxy. Microsoft the hypocrite is once again pretending to be a law enforcer while in reality it is Microsoft that law enforcers should put on trial. Here are more articles on the subject [1, 2].
“Microsoft is using Nokia for its patents and it’s likely that the next objective for this Microsoft mole (Elop is still the 8th biggest MSFT shareholder) is to tax all devices running Linux, elevating their prices just like SCO wanted to elevate the price of every Linux instance.”But wait, it gets worse. Having essentially taken over Nokia, guess what its mole, Elop, is doing next. He ‘licenses’ patents to Apple, which gives room for imagination. Well, we said it all along because Nokia itself had dropped hints about it. Microsoft is using Nokia for its patents and it’s likely that the next objective for this Microsoft mole (Elop is still the 8th biggest MSFT shareholder) is to tax all devices running Linux, elevating their prices just like SCO wanted to elevate the price of every Linux instance. It’s all that Microsoft has left as a strategy because it has lost on the technical side in phones (like it did in servers back in SCO days). So, it now resorts to patent collection and shakedown, sometimes by proxy (e.g. Nathan Myhrvold and Paul Allen). We warned about this repeatedly in 2007. “Looks bad,” said to us a reader from Finland by E-mail, pointing to this article:
Apple has agreed to license wireless phone patents owned by Nokia that sparked a long-running legal dispute between the two companies.
The deal will settle all patent litigation between Nokia and Apple, and the two will withdraw their respective complaints with the U.S. International Trade Commission. In addition, Apple will pay Nokia an undisclosed one-time fee and on-going royalties, Nokia said today.
Those “on-going royalties” are not specified and a huge disclaimer has been sent out by Microsoft’s mole in Nokia. The at-times Microsoft-friendly Register quotes Microsoft Florian, who has been working hard to make Linux fail and be taxed. Yes, Florian Müller, the lobbyist who is leaning on journalists, keeps changing masks, this time to “patent analyst”. To quote The Register: “In his blog patent analyst Florian Mueller suggests that this will open the way for Nokia to start extracting cash from the manufacturers of Android handsets, pointing out that they are almost certainly in breach of the Nokia patents for which Apple now holds a licence.” On this point he is actually correct for a change. Just days ago Elop the mole insinuated that Android was merely derived or based on the iPhone’s success.
“Just days ago Elop the mole insinuated that Android was merely derived or based on the iPhone’s success.”We found it amusing that someone in IRC thought that Müller being quoted is a sign of his credibility. As we explained before, Müller works hard mass-mailing journalists, urging them to squeeze his quotes into articles so that later he can brag about these. He makes false claims about his credentials and he also spreads disinformation (to his credit, his English is excellent). This is how lobbyists typically work. This one in particular is spending his time in Twitter speaking to patent lawyers (pro-software patents) and pro-Microsoft bloggers such as Bott, Enderle, and others. One can only guess who is funding his current lobbying endeavours. In any event, today in the news we found another reminder of how cold and apathetic patent lawyers are when it comes to the damage caused by software patents:
In the second part of Computerworld’s Q and A interview with intellectual property laywer …
What are your clients telling you about the change in the law, excluding software patents?
I have clients that have software patents and others that are relaxed about it and wouldn’t bother to get a patent if they could. It is a question of horses for courses. I think what really needs changing is the ability to get patents on “innovations” that are not really new.
Listen to what Linus Torvalds has just said about “innovations” (video below). It’s about 20 minutes from the start. One has to wonder how Torvalds feels about the technology giant of his home country (he has dual nationality now) becoming a patents-wielding slave of Microsoft. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Patents at 11:33 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: How patents on software algorithms smash progress in the field
SOFTWARE PATENTS are nothing but trouble to everyone but patent lawyers/trolls and monopolists. What is it that such patents actually bring to an industry? What about the fabric of society? Let’s look at a preliminary list:
- Patent trolls abundance
- Incentive to non-practising entities including patent hoarders
- Researchers being fenced out or faced with barriers of appropriation
- EU patent (unitary patent), which increases damages and scale of the patent menace
- Distrust among public figures (e.g. due to software patents in the USPTO)
- Patent deals with Android/Linux royalties
- Removal of features from Linux-based devices, using patents
- Suppression of inclusion or development of features, e.g. ZFS
- Reducing the speed of software development (patent reviews, surveys, licensing, etc.)
- Increasing uncertainty and doubt among software developers, discouraging the occupation
- FUD campaigns based on software patents (claiming Linux to be disrespectful or prone to litigation)
- Suppression of GPLv3 adoption (which impedes TiVoisation)
- Reduced trust in politics and politicians, who are subjected to heavy lobbying and disinformation
- Increased cost of products that the public buys
- Excessive preoccupation/overburdening of public courts, which deal with petty patent feuds rather than real offences
- Encouragement of software cartels that pool patents to make up a thicket
- Discouragement of standards that have patents applying to them (including submarine patents)
- Derivative works de-emphasised
- Misuse of taxpayers’ money (e.g. NASA auctioning of patents)
- Distraction from technical skills due to bureaucracy and unavoidable complexity associated with otherwise-unnecessary skills
- Wasted effort due to reimplementation and patent workarounds
- Reduced staffing of developers and increased staffing of lawyers (and patent applications-geared professionals), thus less market for programmers
- Decrease in the number of programming languages and frameworks (duplicity and inspiration as a violation)
- Syntax plurality, which puts more learning burden on developers
- Increased tension and distrust between companies and respective developers
- Degraded access to multimedia (codec patents for the most part), impeding information access especially in developing nations
- Reduced interoperability and resultant inefficiency
- Code and pseudo-code turned to legalese/text, harming the teaching of technical skills
Any more? Any biases noted? How can it be objectivity improved to overcome bias? █
Disclosure: from a professional point of view, I have no vested interests in patents except that they impede my work. I work in algorithms research, software development, Web development, systems administration/monitoring, and also media and fitness on the side.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in News Roundup at 4:19 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Contents
-
Ultimately the best solution for getting Linux into the hands of someone new and having it provide a positive experience is the proper setup and configuration of the operating system by someone that knows what they are doing. Ninety percent of Linux distributions that exist can be easily used by just about anyone when properly configured and presented with a couple minutes of explanation to the new user. Just like Windows or OSX anyone can use Linux in 2011, but not everyone can install Linux.
-
No. This FUD doesn’t wash. GNU/Linux is quite a reasonable OS for ordinary users. I have introduced thousands of all ages to GNU/Linux and few of them had any such problems with GNU/Linux. They use PCs. They don’t try to destructively test an OS. Even grandmothers and little kids can use GNU/Linux.
see Linux Desktop Experience Killing Linux on the Desktop if you want to see a logical train-wreck of an essay.
-
What’s in a name? Acronyms, in-jokes and lots of capital letters, if free software is anything to go by.
We look at some unfortunate choices that have been made at this critical stage of development.
-
What about silly names? Ubuntu nicknames come to mind.
While I’m not a big fan of Ubuntu’s release nicknames, I don’t see any problem with them, either. Developers name or nickname their releases at their will. Don’t like it? Then help develop and earn your right to change those names! 
But what about Kaffeine, K3B, GNOME, and so on? Some people will tell me “C’mon! They are indeed SILLY!”
Sillier than Windows Vista and Vista/7 mega-killer “new” feature, the one that goes by the name of “POWERSHELL”?
What’s that? What does that tell you? Power Rangers meet Ninja Turtles?? See? Subjectivity is not a problem of the name, but of the audience.
-
-
Linux-based plug computers such as the Sheevaplug have been drawing fresh attention for some time already, but on Monday MimoMonitors launched the new MimoPlug, a tiny, cube-shaped contender that’s designed as a desktop PC alternative for cloud computing applications.
-
MimoMonitors.com announced a Debian Linux-based, Marvell SheevaPlug mini-PC bundled with its USB touchscreen displays for desktop-PC use. The compact, 1.2GHz MimoPlug features SD storage, gigabit Ethernet, USB 2.0, and optional eSATA ports, and is available with 7-10-inch touchscreens in bundling deals ranging from $380 to $500.
-
I believe that the human mind is capable of learning when the subject is willing to participate in the process of knowledge acquisition. That being said, let me review some of the arguments that I have encountered against Linux, which, in my humble opinion, manifest some subjective reasoning that is used as an over-generalization.
-
It has taken Australian open-source conference linux.conf.au several years, quite a lot of negotiation and the use of alternatives to finally secure the rights to its own domain name.
-
Desktop
-
Rather than just reading the ad, I went to the site and did a search for “linux”. An ASUS eeeBox for $229 was second on the list! A bit further down the list was a USB GNU/Linux installer… followed by an over-priced HP thin client running GNU/Linux on board, and a mess of Linux-compatible devices and NAS devices. I went to the site’s search box again and entered “android”. 10 products came up from five different OEMs.
-
“Bachelors are not the only ones who can use GNU/Linux desktops,” blogger Robert Pogson pointed out. “I have had students from grade 1 to 12 use it just fine. None of them needed to configure the clock…” Trenholme’s article, in fact, “is an example of the trolls who visit my blog with some obscure problem never seen by other humans.”
-
Server
-
Sitting at the core of the NX-10K is a Linux operating system on the appliance.
-
Audiocasts/Shows
-
Kernel Space
-
The Linux kernel power regressions in the Linux 2.6.38 where I was the first to largely document and prove would cause major power problems in Ubuntu 11.04 and other Linux distributions, continues to bite plenty of mobile users.
-
PathScale is announcing that they are open-sourcing their EKOPath 4 Compiler Suite. For those not familiar, EKOPath is a high-performance Intel 64 / AMD64 compiler for C99, C++ 2003, and partial support for Fortran 2003. Up to this point in development, PathScale’s compiler has been proprietary and has carried a rather high price-tag with the licensing starting out at $1795 USD and going up from there. Of course, that’s a small price to a large organization seeking to build their software for maximum performance, but is out of the price range for nearly any independent enthusiast or non-commercially-backed free software project. This code compiler is especially popular in super-computing environments. The open-source EKOPath 4 will be available to Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris users free of charge. PathScale will also continue to offer commercial support for this compiler suite.
-
Increasing disquiet in the kernel community as ARM tree grows out of control. Linux User’s Rory MacDonald investigates…
Linux kernel contributor and LWN editor Jonathan Corbet has spoken out about the current state of the codebase supporting the ARM architecture within Linux. “In short, it’s a bit of a mess,” said Corbet on his Linux Foundation Blog.
-
Applications
-
Gnac is a graphical audio converter for GNOME with support for encoding/decoding to and from various formats, including the free formats FLAC and Ogg, WAV, MP3, M4A or SPX.
-
It’s easy to get angry at software and hardware companies that don’t provide support for Linux, but have you ever taken time to thank those that do?
-
Proprietary
-
Yet despite all this success, it seems like adoption of proprietary software on the desktop Linux platform remains spotty at best.
-
Instructionals/Technical
-
Desktop Environments
-
Climate change should not be included in the national curriculum, the government adviser in charge of overhauling the school syllabus in England has said.
Tim Oates, whose wide-ranging review of the curriculum for five- to 16-year-olds will be published later this year, said it should be up to schools to decide whether – and how – to teach climate change, and other topics about the effect scientific processes have on our lives.
-
K Desktop Environment/KDE SC)
-
LightDM is a cross-desktop display manager (think KDM). It’s designed to be fast and lightweight, it is written to replace GDM Gnome’s display manager.
What makes LightDM interesting for KDE is it is designed to to have multiple ‘greeters’. This is the front end that sits on top of the daemon and does the displaying to the user asking them for login details. This means we can have our own KDE interfaces, whilst the Gnome people do their different UIs all whilst sharing the same daemon that handles all the hard parts.
-
It’s not easy to put up a list of “best” applications which do something, however there are some highlights in each category which really deserve to be mentioned. In this article I will overview 20 KDE applications which I believe are best in their niche, one application from each important category, in no particular order.
-
GNOME Desktop
-
Yesterday we shared a new Gnome Shell theme Adwaita-White that matches perfectly with default GTK3 theme in Gnome 3. Black Glass theme is another cool Gnome Shell theme made by deviantARTist shule1987 .
-
Although normally I am a fan of xfce or {open,flux}box, curiosity got the best of me and I decided to take gnome 3 for a spin.
One annoyance was the need to click a window to change the focus. I prefer to have the focus of my windows to follow the mouse and find it bothersome to have to click a window to get it’s attention.
-
Recently Phoronix did an article about performance under different compositing and non-compositing window managers. GNOME Shell didn’t do that well, so lots of people pointed it out to me. Clearly there was a lot of work put into making measurements for the article, but what is measured is a wide range of 3D fullscreen games across different graphics drivers, graphics hardware, and environments.
-
-
Gentoo Family
-
This will probably be my last summer in Gentoo. I have to be around to make sure my packages work until I migrate my systems to Arch Linux and Debian ( highly unlikely since most of them are managed by ssh. No physical access 
). Even before I join Gentoo, I knew that policies were the reason that so many developers decided to leave Gentoo. And yet, nobody learned anything from past experiences. You already know that Gentoo is short on manpower. Yet, leaders feel comfortable to remove cvs access and demotivate people without carrying about the project progress at all.
-
Red Hat Family
-
Debian Family
-
Derivatives
-
Canonical/Ubuntu
-
What do you do when it’s time to port the most popular Linux distribution to a completely different architecture? Canonical employee [David Mandalla] works on their ARM development team and recently shared the answer to that question with his fellow Dallas Makerspace members.
Canonical needed a way to compile about 20,000+ packages for the ARM platform, however they did not want to cross-compile, which is quite time consuming. Instead, they opted to build a native solution that could handle the load while ensuring that all packages were compiled securely. To tackle this immense task, [David] and his team constructed a 4U server that runs 20 fully-independent ARM development platforms simultaneously.
-
-
With the purchase of Ubuntu Earrings, $6 per pair will go directly to Partimus’ operating costs, helping them to expand into more schools.
-
Canonical has pushed Ubuntu along, and teased us with potential tablet offerings. In the server space, where things are more serious, Ubuntu now deploys more quickly and sensibly into a variety of virtualized instances and joins one of two prominent cloud organizational camps. Ubuntu wants to be taken seriously for cloud use, but also for desktop use.
-
I have been a Compiz fan ever since I started using Linux. Compiz is also a very integral part of Ubuntu, more so with the introduction of new Unity desktop for Ubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal. There are many Compiz effects that are not enabled by default and some of them are really good IMO. Useful Compiz tweaks for Ubuntu 11.04. Note: Post not meant for advanced users.
-
-
-
At $5000 a pop Nagy’s mechanistic marvels are not going to become an overnight impulse buy, but they will catch the eye – whether it it bionic, glass or another Victorian material – of Steampunk fans the world over.
-
Unix was ostensibly forged on the philosophy that every entity be designed to do only one thing, and do it well. Has Canonical, which develops one of the most popular Unix-like OS’s around today, thrown this philosophy out the window when it comes to business strategy? Former Canonical COO Matt Asay thinks so. Here’s why he may be wrong about Canonical and Ubuntu Linux.
-
I still, however, do not like Ubuntu Unity. That’s okay because, at the moment, you can still enjoy Classic GNOME on Ubuntu 11.04. Or you can opt to install KDE (by installing Kubuntu Desktop). Right now I’m enjoying a close a representation of the desktop I had before the upgrade occurred (sadly, minus Compiz).
After this upgrade experience, I started thinking, “It’s time I look for a new desktop distribution.” Although I do enjoy Ubuntu, there are aspects about my GNOME/Compiz desktop I don’t like working without. I could, of course, wait until 11.10 which will include GNOME 3 (instead of Classic GNOME), which is a pretty good desktop. But what about openSUSE (with either GNOME 3 or KDE — no Classic GNOME). Or, I could migrate to Fedora 15, which already uses GNOME 3 and does a bang-up job with it. Or, there are a couple of projects attempting to bring GNOME 3 to Ubuntu…but the current state of the GNOME libraries on Ubuntu makes this a huge challenge. Or…what about Bodhi Linux (which I’ve covered here and really like); it’s Ubuntu combined with E17 and Ecomorph…
-
Flavours and Variants
-
In my opinion Mint has been consistent in putting out solid, polished releases and version 11 continues that trend. There’s nothing really ground-shaking in this version and I believe that was a good way for the developers to go. There have been some minor tweaks to Software Manager, a swap out of OpenOffice.org for LibreOffice and the thin scrollbars for GNOME applications were introduced, but this is a tame release. And I think that’s a good thing given the status of some of the other big-name desktop distributions right now. With Ubuntu and Fedora adopting new desktop environments, Mageia/Mandriva having forked and the openSUSE project changing hands I think Mint is gaining users for its apparent stability as a project as much as for its ease of use.
There were a few minor things I would have liked to have seen done differently in Mint 11. The blank start-up screen, while done for efficiency, might put off inexperienced users who will wonder why their screen doesn’t appear to be working. Though Software Manager and Package Manager do similar things, I think these could stand to be renamed along the lines of “Software Manager (basic)” and “Software Manager (advanced)” to make the distinction more apparent. And, while I’m wishing, I’d like to see a screen added to the installer dedicated to GRUB settings, similar to the way the Fedora and Mageia installers let users configure their bootloader.
All-in-all Mint 11 was a very good experience for me and I think it’s one of the better desktop distributions available at the moment. There’s a good selection of pre-installed software, all of my hardware was supported properly, performance was good and everything ran smoothly for me. Mint is well worth looking into whether you’re a newcomer to Linux or an experienced user looking for a distro you can install quickly and use without configuring.
-
Although Ubuntu 11.04 comes with tons of new features, it simply fails to impress as much as Linux Mint 11 does. Mint is fast, easy to use and just fresh. Ubuntu Natty though, has a lot to work upon. Earlier, Mint was always a step behind Ubuntu, but by sticking with GNOME classic, it has proven itself as a superior distribution. Only time will tell whether it can retain the top spot as Ubuntu is readying itself for bigger challenges.
-
In the end we were somewhat underwhelmed by the end user though. Bodhi can be very pretty to look at, and you can make it even prettier if you take the time, but these days I find myself longing for super-minimalist desktops with a focus on staying out of the way (of course, Bodhi can be made to be this as well, if you are interested in learning the ins and outs of Enlightenment). The simplicity of the default installation is great — I don’t like being overloaded with apps. But there was just not enough there to hold my interest — I’d rather install CrunchBang and customise Openbox.
On the flipside: If you want to play with Enlightenment (and who doesn’t like playing with new desktop environments) then by all means check it out. The Bodhi team has done a great job of creating a relatively friendly vehicle for playing with Enlightenment — it’s just not for me.
-
-
Phones
-
Sub-notebooks/Tablets
-
Dell will launch its highly anticipated 10-inch tablet in the Chinese market first, based on a emerging belief that the U.S. market isn’t mature enough for a successful Android launch, Dell executives told CNET today.
Dell’s Streak 10 Pro (see specifications below) will launch in China this summer and in the U.S. market probably sometime next year, John Thode, a Dell vice president and manager of Dell’s mobility business, told CNET. The U.S. market simply doesn’t offer a viable 10-inch tablet strategy for Dell, he said.
-
A couple of years ago I wrote about the IT culture of Europe and the market opportunity it presents for vendors of open source software. If you’re ready to take advantage of that information, here are some points American open source software vendors should consider when developing a plan to open new markets in Europe.
Before you make the decision to expand into a major new market, you need to do some serious prep work. Research regulations at the local, regional, national, and EU levels; a discussion with a local lawyer in every country you plan to enter can save hundreds of hours of time you might have to spend if you run afoul of the authorities.
[...]
All of these tactics increase the chance that your efforts to conquer Europe will succeed. Open source software is uniquely suited to the challenge of expanding to new and different markets. Proprietary software companies have to pay a large up-front cost to get involved in a new market. Open source software companies have an advantage due to the cost-effectiveness of community-building and viral marketing. This allows open source companies to feel out new markets and invest significant resources only if demand is confirmed by innovators and early adopters.
-
Web Browsers
-
Mozilla
-
Mozilla is changing the interface of Firefox and is discussing its ideas with its users. Here is another round of mockups how Firefox X could look like.
-
Browser makers appear to paying special attention to the improved use of open connection to speed up your browser. Following Google’s SPDY, Mozilla has a fresh idea: Sort available connections.
-
-
As I write this, I have no fewer than 11 tabs open on my browser linked to reference information I might need to consult if an editor has a question on a story, data for the story I’m currently working on, and ancillary sites that remind me of things I need to do before the end of my shift.
One feature I like about my browser, Mozilla Firefox, is that when I’m done for the day and I’m ready to close down the browser, it asks if I want to reopen those tabs the next time Firefox starts.
-
Mozilla will try to plug more memory leaks in Firefox with a new, aggressive approach that relies on weekly bug triage meetings, the company said last week.
“It’s become increasingly clear over the last several months that we have a pretty pressing need to deal with increases in memory usage in Firefox,” said Johnny Stenback, a Finnish developer who works for Mozilla, in a message on a company mailing list last Thursday. “Since we released [Firefox] 4 (and before, too), we’ve seen lots of reports about Firefox memory usage being higher than in older versions, and that Firefox memory usage is growing over time.”
-
Oracle/Java/LibreOffice
-
-
The best thing end-users can do is ignore OpenOffice.org at Apache until the dust settles, and switch to LibreOffice instead.
As expected, the Apache Software Foundation took the first steps to admitting the OpenOffice.org project to the Apache community, following Oracle’s IBM-designed proposal. It now faces a time of maturing and proving in Apache’s Incubator, a period when most likely user-facing development will grind to a halt.
-
Education
-
Business
-
Nuxeo, the Open Source Enterprise Content Management (ECM) platform company, now offers a Digital Signature add-on for its flagship Open Source Document Management software, Nuxeo DM. Based on the X.509 standard, the new component provides a secure electronic method for signing PDF files in Nuxeo DM and verifying the signatures with a digital certificate in a PDF reader.
-
I have a question for you. To what extent does the “commercial release” of a piece of open source software represent its “success”..?
-
FSF/FSFE/GNU/SFLC
-
-
As with the FSF and GNU, the GPL stands as a bulwark against this kind of encroachment. It is not a matter of percentages, but of absolutes. And that’s why I believe the FSF, GNU and GPL will always be necessary – whatever their residual ‘market shares’ – because they will offer fixed points by which actions and options can be judged without losing sight of the core values of freedom and sharing.
-
While we have no specific reason to doubt Black Duck’s figures, Bradley M Kuhn, in particular, suggested that Black Duck’s data should be “ignored by serious researchers” since the company doesn’t disclose enough detail about its data collection methods.
-
Public Services/Government
-
Then there are the glimmers of what appears to be a darker truth about how open source is really handled in the UK. Glimmers like Minister of Parliament (MP) John Pugh’s 2007 statement at the launch of the National Open Centre (NOC): “Open source has enemies, and its enemies are very, very close to government.” (The story of NOC and its ultimately fizzled launch was detailed last summer.)
More recently, the CEO of an open source vendor out and out accused one of the systems integrators tasked with implementing the Bristol City Council’s latest open source project of deliberately fumbling the project in order to keep the integrators’ connections with Microsoft secure and their own wallets fat.
“‘My opinion is that the large systems integrators would not survive a transition to open source in the public sector, for the simple reason that the savings would be enormous,’ Mark Taylor [CEO of Sirius] told Computer Weekly. ‘The loss to their revenue would be massive. Their survival depends on there being no successful open source trials.’”
Taylor’s statements, if true, would seem to explain an old gaping wound in the history of open source. In 2004, it was the Bristol City Council that announced an initial push to deploy open source software on up to 5,500 desktops. That initial plan was greeted with much enthusiasm, and one year after the project was launched in 2005, Bristol seemed well on its way, touting a potential savings of £1 million in 2006.
-
Licensing
-
Recently Oracle has decided to give OpenOffice.org code to the Apache Foundation. That’s going to mean a huge license change for OpenOffice.org that I don’t really appreciate. Because of that, I will no longer be supporting OpenOffice.org. I can’t support something that in my opinion causes a regression in freedoms, which in this case the Apache License would be.
Does that mean I’ll start using LibreOffice? No. I am perfectly happy using lighter, individual alternatives such as AbiWord and Gnumeric.
-
Openness/Sharing
-
What can we learn from them? How can lessons from the Spanish Revolution contribute to the transition to a post capitalist , commons-based society?
“The Commons is the social and political space where things get done and where people have a sense of belonging and have an element of control over their lives, providing sustenance, security and independence. Commons are organised around resources that are collectively owned or shared between or among populations. It gives voice to civil society and helps us to learn new social practices, imagine a political, economic and social system beyond capitalism or communism. It is beyond party politics or other sectarian beliefs and practices.” (Wikipedia)
-
Standards/Consortia
-
Open Document Format (ODF) advances in Russia, approved as national standard, migration plans starting. http://bit.ly/l0lfue
-
IBM reaffirmed its dedication to open source development by recommitting support to the development of OpenOffice.org, the alternative productivity suite to Microsoft’s Office and Google Apps. What IBM is really looking to cultivate is the further development of the Open Document Format, which it sees as a potential standard for collaboration across multiple platforms.
“Open source and standards are key to making our planet smarter and improving the way we live and work,” said Kevin Cavanaugh, vice president, IBM Collaboration Solutions. “As IBM celebrates its centennial, we’re actively investing in projects that will help our clients to collaborate in an open manner over the next 100 years.”
-
Cablegate
-
It may be a first in the annals of government secrecy: Declassifying documents to mark the anniversary of their leak to the press. But that is what will happen Monday, when the federal government plans to finally release the secret government study of the Vietnam War known as the Pentagon Papers 40 years after it was first published by The New York Times.
-
He is the subject of a documentary about his life, “The Most Dangerous Man in America,” nominated for a 2010 Academy Award, which took its title from the words former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger used to describe Ellsberg in 1971.
-
-
Internet/Net Neutrality
-
Austria, Bosnia, Botswana, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Lithuania, fmr Yugoslav Rep of Macedonia, Maldives, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palestine, Peru, Poland, Senegal, South Africa, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, the United States, Uruguay
-
Intellectual Monopolies
-
Trademarks
-
iCloud Communications, a Phoenix-based voice over IP provider, alleges that the name of Apple’s recently announced online storage service copies its name and causes confusion over competing products:
-
Copyrights
-
Access Copyright has issued a response to the AUCC complaint over its decision to stop issuing pay-per-use or transactional licences. The complaint arises from requests from universities to license individual works so that they can be used with payment and without risk of copyright infringement. Access Copyright is refusing to issue such licences, offering only a more expensive blanket licence that requires universities to license use of the entire repertoire. The Access Copyright response bizarrely claims that pay-per-use licences actually create incentives to infringe and that blanket licences are more appropriate in the digital economy. Never mind that Access Copyright offers transactional licences to corporate customers. Never mind that millions of cultural products are licensed individually and that the Internet and new technologies make it easier to do so.
-
Earlier this week, I posted on how the Canadian IP Council, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce’s IP lobby arm, floated false claims about the scope of counterfeiting in Canada in an attempt to bolster claims for increased border measures. That was followed by a post yesterday on Professor Edward Iacobucci’s debunking of the Chamber’s report on Canadian patent law, which he found to be deeply flawed. In response to my first post, the IP Council’s Chris Gray tweeted responses that the Chamber does not want individual travellers searched and that its claim of $30 billion in losses from counterfeiting in Canada comes from a recent International Chamber of Commerce report.
Interview with Linus Torvalds at LinuxCon Japan
Credit: TinyOgg
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Patents at 3:55 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: ¿Cómo las patentes de software sobre los algoritmos impide progresos en el campo?
Las Patentes de Software son más que problemas a todo el mundo, excepto para los abogados, los trolls de patentes, y los monopolistas. ¿Qué es lo que estas patentes en realidad hacen a la industria? ¿Qué pasa con el tejido de la sociedad? Echemos un vistazo a una lista preliminar:
* Abundancia de los Trolls de Patentes.
* Incentivos a las entidades no practicantes como acaparadores de patentes.
* Los investigadores están cercados o se enfrentan a obstáculos de apropiación.
* Unión Europea de Patentes (patente unitaria), lo que aumenta sus daños y la magnitud de la amenaza de las patentes.
* La desconfianza entre los personajes públicos (por ejemplo, debido a las patentes de software en la USPTO).
* Ofertas de patentes con Android/Linux regalías.
* Extracción de características de dispositivos basados en Linux, utilizando las patentes.
* Supresión de la inclusión o desarrollo de funciones, por ejemplo, ZFS.
* La reducción de la velocidad de desarrollo de software (revisión de patentes, encuestas, licencias, etc).
* El aumento de la incertidumbre y la duda entre los desarrolladores de software, desalentando la ocupación.
* Campañas de FUD sobre la base de las patentes de software (alegando que Linux sea una falta de respeto o con tendencia al litigio).
* Supresión de la adopción de la GPLv3 (que impide la tivoización).
* Reducción de la confianza en la política y los políticos, que están sometidos a fuertes presiones y la desinformación.
* Aumento del costo de los productos que el público compra.
* Preocupación excesiva / sobrecarga de los tribunales públicos, que se ocupan de las disputas de patentes menores en lugar de ofensas reales.
* Fomento de los carteles de software que acaparan patentes de software para crear barreras.
* El desaliento de las normas que tienen las patentes que se les aplica (incluyendo patentes submarinas).
* Los trabajos derivados de-enfatizados.
* El mal uso de dinero de los contribuyentes (por ejemplo, la NASA subasta de patentes).
* La distracción de los conocimientos técnicos debido a la burocracia y la complejidad inevitable, asociado a otro tipo-innecesaria habilidades.
* Un esfuerzo inútil debido a la reimplementación soluciones y patentes.
* Reducción de la dotación de personal de los promotores y aumento de la plantilla de los abogados (y solicitudes de patente-orientados profesionales), el mercado por lo tanto menos para los programadores.
* Disminución del número de lenguajes de programación y los marcos (duplicidad y la inspiración como una violación).
* Sintaxis de la pluralidad, lo que pone más carga de aprendizaje de los desarrolladores.
* Incremento de la tensión y la desconfianza entre las empresas y los desarrolladores respectivos.
* Acceso a los degradados multimedia (patentes codec en su mayor parte), que impide acceder a la información, especialmente en países en desarrollo.
* Reducción de la interoperabilidad y la consiguiente ineficacia.
* El código y pseudo-código se dirigió a la jerga legal/texto, perjudicando la enseñanza de las habilidades técnicas.
¿Algo más? Cualquier sesgo observado? ¿Cómo se puede mejorar la objetividad de superar los prejuicios?
Divulgación: desde un punto de vista profesional, no tengo intereses creados en las patentes, salvo que impiden mi trabajo. Yo trabajo en la investigación de algoritmos, desarrollo de software, desarrollo Web, administración de sistemas / supervisión, así como los medios de comunicación y de la aptitud en el lateral.
Comentario de Mr. Slave5tom:
Excelente artículo para añadir un poco de perspectiva sobre las patentes de software. Los MONOPOLISTAS tratan de utilizar las patentes para crear una escasez donde no existe. La mejor explicación que he leído sobre este tema es de un libro llamado “Contra El Monopolio Intelectual” por Michele Boldrin y David K. Levine. http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm. Los autores describen los articuladamente las barreras a la innovación que las patentes de muchos motivos-en detrimento de la sociedad. Ellos van a desacreditar todos los argumentos del monopolista (sin derecho de incentivos o exclusivos, la innovación no se produce – incorrecta, porque la innovación tiende a ocurrir más rápidamente en los sectores no regulados, donde el conocimiento se comparte y mejoras rápidas puede ocurrir – como con el código abierto software). Básicamente, las patentes recompensan a unos pocos afortunados, que tienen los medios y la influencia de adquirir más patentes y promulgar una legislación favorable en detrimento de los demás, que deben pagar las rentas de monopolio (precios inflados) para productos o servicios de calidad inferior. Muchos modelos alternativos para generar ideas innovadoras son posibles una vez que podamos ver más allá de la retórica y la propaganda de los argumentos huecos monopolista. Consideremos, por ejemplo, el X-Prize para estimular la carrera espacial y el desarrollo del sistema Linux, creado en un entorno libre y compartido, donde las ideas se basan en otras ideas en un proceso de mejora continua.
Comentario de edik
Las patentes de software en general no solo impiden el accesso a la información en los países en desarrollo, sino que tambien destruye toda posibilidad de un futuro mejor para su juventud y sus generaciones venideras al encadenarlos al colonialismo digital. La luchan contra las patentes de software es en primer lugar una labor humanitaria para el beneficio común de toda la humanidad. En segundo lugar es el deber de todos aquellos que aspiramos a un mundo mejor.
In English: “Software patents in general not only impede the access to the information in developing countries, but also destroys any possibility of a better future for their youth and future generations because they chain them to the digital colonialism. The fight against software patents is primarily a humanitarian work for the common benefit of all mankind. Second is the duty of all those who aspire to a better world.” █
Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the esteemed administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Intellectual Monopoly, Patents at 3:46 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: Las últimas noticias y comentarios sobre los monopolios de patentes (la mayoría de los Estados Unidos)
• Suprema Corte Señala la Reforma de Patentes es Inconstitucional[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-b-ravicher/supreme-court-signals-pen_b_873445.html] (por Dan Ravicher, un abogado pro-software libre, tras la decisión de la Scotus sobre i4i[http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/I4i_vs_Microsoft], cuyas decisiones recientes han sido terribles [1[http://techrights.org/2011/06/02/scotus-vs-freedom-labour/], 2[http://techrights.org/2011/06/10/fine-affecting-ooxml/]])
“El Congreso está, por desgracia, a punto de pasar la llamada “Ley de los Estados Unidos inventa” (S. 23 y HR 1249) que iba a cambiar nuestro sistema de patentes desde el “primero que inventa” del sistema que hemos tenido desde nuestra fundación, al “primer solicitante”. Esto no sólo es perjudicial para los pequeños empresarios, sino que también viola el texto mismo de la Constitución, que obliga a las patentes se concederá a los “inventores”, no a “los que las registren.” Sin duda, la Corte Suprema sólo en esta semana nos recuerda que la Constitución garantiza los derechos de patente se adjudicará a los inventores, no a sus empleadores. En un caso relacionado con la Universidad de Stanford, presidente del Tribunal Supremo John Roberts escribió en la primera frase de su opinión de la Corte, “Desde 1790, la ley de patentes ha operado en la premisa de que los derechos sobre una invención pertenece al inventor.” El Presidente del Tribunal Supremo Continuó escribiendo, “Si bien gran parte de la ley de propiedad intelectual ha cambiado en los 220 años transcurridos desde la primera Ley de Patentes, la idea básica de que los inventores tienen derecho a patentar sus inventos no tiene. … Nuestro precedentes confirman la regla general que los derechos sobre una invención pertenece al inventor. “Por lo tanto, la Corte Suprema, sin duda, cree que el sistema de patentes estadounidense se basa en la concesión de patentes a los inventores. Los estudiosos también coinciden en que el cambio del “primer inventor obtiene la patente” el sistema que tenemos hoy al “primero en presentar una solicitud de patente la obtiene” sistema que está siendo considerado por el Congreso que viola la Constitución.
“Así que uno se queda preguntar, ¿por qué el Congreso a punto de aprobar una ley que beneficiaría a las grandes corporaciones, daño a los pequeños empresarios y violan la Constitución? No sé, pero tal vez si usted llame a su representante (212-224-3121) lo pueden explicar. ”
• Scotus hace a lo titulares de patentes felices, mantiene $ 290 millones veredicto Microsoft[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/06/scotus-makes-patent-holders-happy-upholds-290m-microsoft-verdict.ars] (por Timothy B. Lee, que está en contra de la maquinaria de propaganda de patentes)
El The New York Times editorial de apoyo de Microsoft, UCLA, profesor de derecho Doug Lichtman había argumentado que el cambio de la valoración de la prueba sería “dar alivio a las innumerables empresas que hoy se encuentran vulnerables a las patentes que no deberían haber sido expedido en el primer lugar . “Existe una amplia variedad de empresas y grupos de interés público, como Google, Red Hat, Walmart, la Electronic Frontier Foundation y la Fundación de Software Apache, presentaron escritos haciéndose eco de ese punto. Pero la Corte Suprema decidió que cualquiera que sea el mérito de estos argumentos de política, que no podían hacer caso omiso del texto de la ley de patentes y de la historia de los tribunales largo de emplear el estándar más alto.
• Roche gana en Tribunal Superior Límites de la Universidad de los derechos de patente[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-06/roche-wins-against-stanford-as-high-court-limits-university-patent-rights.html]
La Corte Suprema de los EE.UU., en un fallo que limita los derechos de patentes de las universidades de investigación, rechazó la demanda de la Universidad de Stanford contra Roche Holding AG (ROG) unidad sobre los métodos para probar la eficacia de los tratamientos contra el SIDA.
Con votación 7-2, los jueces confirmó la conclusión de un tribunal inferior de que un científico que trabajaba en Stanford en Palo Alto, California, transfirió sus derechos a los descubrimientos de una empresa cuya línea de negocio de Roche compró más adelante. Bajo este razonamiento del tribunal, la transferencia realizada a la empresa un co-propietario de tres patentes en disputa.
• Los Inversores Se Quejan Que las Patentes Dañan la Innovación[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110607/18502014596/investors-speaking-up-about-patents-harming-innovation.shtml]
Dixon señala una parte clave del problema es que tantas patentes son claramente evidentes para cualquier experto en el arte. Señala que cualquier ingeniero competente puede crear lo que se encuentra en la gran mayoría de las patentes de software, y señala que los examinadores simplemente no son lo suficientemente competentes para reconocer lo obvio. Dixon, quien es un inversionista y un empresario a largo plazo, sin duda sabe estas cosas. Lo que es sorprendente para mí, honestamente, es que muy poca gente en Silicon Valley, en realidad piensan las patentes son una buena idea más. El sistema se ha vuelto tan distorsionada que la mayoría de la gente que se supone que los más beneficiados no los quieren, pero se sienten obligados a hacer que por el sistema. Lo que una gran cantidad de residuos, dando lugar a un desastre que frena la innovación.
Wilson hace una declaración de otro tipo que me pareció interesante. Comparó a las patentes de software a patentar la música, señalando que no tiene sentido.
• Las Patentes de Software Debe Ser Abolidas[http://www.marco.org/2011/06/01/software-patents]
La industria del software funciona así, y el uso de las patentes es muy raro en relación a todo el software que está escrito. El mercado premia la innovación aplicada, pero no tratar de inhibir artificialmente la competencia. Combina las mejores partes del capitalismo, la colaboración y el vasto dominio público.
Nuestra industria está en auge, la innovación es rápido y desenfrenado, y todo el mundo para ganarse la vida. El mundo se podrían beneficiar enormemente si las industrias más podría innovar más rápidamente y de manera significativa como en la industria del software. Estamos muy bien, casi en su totalidad sin necesidad de utilizar las patentes.
• El Equilibrio de Patentes [http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2011/06/the-patent-balance/](Arment Marco está en contra de apuntar alto como la FFII y la FSF)
Mi sensación es que la mayoría de los programadores ahora argumentan en contra de las patentes de software, al igual que Marco. Estamos 30 años en el sistema de patentes de software y vemos sus desventajas: la duración de las patentes es demasiado largo para el software, las patentes de muchos se han emitido, y la extorsión de patentes es recompensada en lugar de castigada. ¿Qué ha pasado?
[...]
Me dijo que en la parte superior que me simpatizan con la idea de que las patentes de software no debería haber permitido. Pero ya sea que se debería haber permitido o no, son un hecho de la vida actual y que no va a cambiar. Si usted piensa que el sistema de patentes está fuera de balance, usted debe trabajar para ponerlo de nuevo en equilibrio, no perseguir una fantasía de volver el tiempo atrás.
Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the esteemed administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Content is available under CC-BY-SA