skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There simply can't be a perfect licence, since the licence reflects the conditions the author/owner value, and well, people value different things, something licence profileration is a good indication of.

Beyond that, I think we can (imo) see that different types of licences are more popular in certain types of open source projects. GPL is very popular for 'full application'-style projects, more permissive licences like BSD/LGPL etc are in my experience more likely to be used in libraries, frameworks, component code in general.

Antirez wants to promote his personal choice, the BSD-licence, and that's perfectly fine, other programmers are vocal in their support for other licences aswell.

One thing struck me though (apart from the complaints concerning 'another' available licence which felt unecessary), which is that after his words of how he 'just wants to better the world with his code' his concern of 'what open source does not recieve enough of' boils down to money, not code contributions. And as such he suggests that companies should send part of their earnings the programmer's way, not an unreasonable request by any measure (although sadly perhaps unrealistic).

It's no surprise then however, that he does not favour GPL, in which the source code is paramount.

There's no right or wrong here of course, just different preferences, Antirez has little interest in source code contributions but feels that monetary contributions are lacking, the GPL on the other hand is all about 'the source code' and that it (and enhancements made to it) remains open.

Choice is good!
As someone that has spent the better part of the last 18 months getting animations as smooth as possible in Javascript, I will happily buy a beer for anyone trying to execute a time-based side-channel attack against Javascript. You'll need the beer to cry into when the garbage collector craps all over your assumptions of constant durations for code path execution...
Sure, lets kick things off! Can I have your email ID?
No, I don't speak spanish :-D
I'm fine with this of course, that's why Redis is BSD licensed. I don't expect users to just use a subset of the rights they have with this license. However as I said the real value is in the evolution of software. If a company can evolve a Redis fork very well, they are able to provide new releases that are stable with well designed features, they are probably also able to rewrite it from scratch (with bigger efforts), so I just provided a tool to enter into business ASAP.
I love the books but I have to say that Fry and Laurie's adaptation is a perfect retelling. They were born for those roles.
Thats the point! There is no limitations on what the target audience could be.

While, yes, social media can be an indicative of ones personality, I think a more concise landing page would be far more effective in all cases.
I think this is unrealistic considering technical debt involved in any codebase. There is an example of what you described, specifically a company that rebranded Blender, renamed it to 3DMagix. I guess the companies you're describing are mostly out to make a quick buck and they'll do it regardless of licensing.
If you send people just the files, without hosting, you are limiting your target group to pretty technical people who know how to maintain their web space.
LGPL lets you do as you please with the code. If you need to modify the code, which in my experience isn't all that often, you simply provide the patch back to the committers. They're not required to take it, but that doesn't affect you. You simply had to provide it.

And since you took from the community, doesn't it make sense to contribute back when you have something to contribute?
The iPad Is Three Today
What issues did you have with the LGPL that made it necessary to expunge all LGPL code?
For all the benefits of being mobile, I suppose.

I've found it cumbersome to edit this spreadsheet on my iPad using the Google Drive app. My real spreadsheets are much larger, of course. A dedicated app could also have pre-fab templates for common decision cases. This is just what I can think off the top of my head.
A raw bootstrap site doesn't look sketchy, just a little undesigned. Depending on your audience, this may be perfectly fine.
Interesting that you called it "Laurie and Fry's TV series". They will always be "Fry and Laurie" to me.
so clearly what you said and what OP said are different, OP claims ipod success is due to cd-players failures (batteries etc).

"Wanting" is valid for some portion of consumer products and Need or some others are valid for others. I never wanted an ipod, and it died. I never wanted an iphone, and it is already dying too (check AAPL analysis). So watch out, for "want" products, they die quicker. Ericcson, Nokia and RIMM have experienced this and its Apple's turn.
the point is, it's outrageous MySQL even does GROUP BY this way and that doing it the "correct" way is not even the default.
Yup. I loved to hate The Browser That Shall Not Be Named. Now I just hate it. (What do you mean, we still need to support IE8? What do you mean, IE10 has no Flash if you look at it from the Metro side?) Get our new crap, same as the old crap, but Now In New And Improved Packaging!
> In the places I have seen it used, the 'arbitrary' column typically has the same value for the entire group, e.g. for efficiently selecting distinct texts based on their hash values.

I agree that case is convenient. But I've seen it being used to actually pick a random row, where a different row would have a different result (such that the output of the program would definitely be different), and it's clear the developers who wrote it didn't fully understand this was going on. I wrote it up in a report for this particular client but they didn't seem to want to touch this particular very old and venerable code.
LGPL requires us to ship the libraries in particular ways. Our product runs on mac, windows, android, pad and phone. It was impossible to conform.

An now, we don't take from the community, so no we don't feel the need to give back in that way.

And in my experience, much of open source does have to be modified. Usually to extract the IP needed without the cruft sticking to it - all the assumptions made by the authors about how it was going to be used.
> You make it sound like FreeBSD's code got all closed off and hidden away when it got wrapped into OS X. FreeBSD's stuff is still available openly and can be studied.

I think I was pretty precise in this criticism. Yes, FreeBSD's code is still there, but it hasn't been contributed back to by Apple, and (partly) as a result of that it's been growing less relevant over time; to the point where I would no longer describe FreeBSD as having a healthy community. In contrast, Linux is flourishing.
The IE "child" grew into a very sick and kind of an asshole person in the 2000's. I guess they left that part of the ad out.
My email is nodemaker@gmail.com.
This article reminded me of something I've always wondered about software licenses:

Suppose I write a book of "software licenses" with a short introduction, copyright page, etc. The rest of the book's content are the actual software licenses (GPL, BSD, MIT, Apache, the CC variants, etc.), one license per chapter.

At the end of the book, I include a final chapter with the source code for a small software program, without any license or copyright declaration. I then distribute the book on the Internet, for free.

What license is the source code at the end of the book under, if any, for the people the book is distributed to?

In particular, would any of the GPL licenses necessarily apply, due to their "virality"? And if not, why not?

Would all licenses apply equally?
Spending engineer hours (money) on packaging the libraries in the proscribed ways. As posted elsewhere in this thread, shipping separate libraries isn't always possible.

The effort was triggered by an investor requirement - that we not endanger our commercial viability with LGPL code of any kind. I.E. The lawyers told us to.
That ought to be a pretty easy fix, no?
Sure, I like AGPL. I tend to use BSD with languages/libraries where everyone else is using BSD, but would prefer to use AGPL.
LGPL is fine for 'commercial folks' aswell, as long as they are willing to make changes they've made to the 'LGPL licenced code' available in source form.

If you are not willing to do this then no, LGPL is not right for you.

As an example, Apple uses the LGPL licenced Webkit in their proprietary Safari browser.
Maroc vs sud afrique live en direct
I live in China and I am being treated very well. Obviously I am not Chinese, so people are just curious about who I am and where I come from. The staring is still what annoys me most, but getting used to it - I love when people come up and try to talk to me in broken English and I will answer them in broken Mandarin..

Did have the photo experience two times - oddly enough it was in Hong Kong. I think they must have been Chinese mainlanders on a tourist trip.
مشاهدة مباراة الاهلى والفتح بث مباشر
>>It's good enough. No it ain't. There are plenty of other equally-capable data storage systems that don't come with MySQL's huge raft of edge cases and quirks.

Actually, it is good enough. Good enough to powere billions of websites. Good enough not to pay for Oracle, DB2, or trying to cram some half-finished nosql mess in where a relational database works better.

MySQL isn't an end all, but please, don't pretend that NoSQL holds all the answers.
Exactly - interpreted code is harder to do timing attacks against because interpreters add a lot of timing "noise", while native code is much more consistent re: time taken to execute a specific routine.
Looks very cool. I really like the way it looks and the idea of having a text-based dashboard.

Similar to the other comments, would be nice to be able to add some `fetcher` plugins, that know how to pull data from external resources (Graphite, Google Analytics etc), preprocess it, and then push it to the dashboard. If you go down that route however, then the question is why run a server in the first place?

It kinda goes against the essence of a command-line tool, which should be lightweight, quick and can run (almost) anywhere. I'm not trying to discourage you, but am thinking whether instead of server-based architecture, this might be better off as a client with different 'plugins' for different types of data (e.g. a sysinfo plugin that gets memory and cpu, a graphite plugin to fetch data from your graphite server, an SQL plugin etc)

(disclaimer: I wrote Giraffe, a graphite dashboard, so perhaps I'm suffering from tunnel-vision based on the graphite architecture).
For commercial use you want to use components that have been LGPL'd. Using LGPL'd components to build your application does not require your application to be either GPL'd or LGPL'd. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_Licen... for information on LGPL.
But couldn't this magical meta node as easily be created by malicious code running on the client page?
Yes this is called "we're stuck with it syndrome"
My question is why do you want to host your SVG images elsewhere?

If you just want to shop them you could convert them to bitmap or host them on GitHub

If you want to include them on your website, they're small and compress well with gzip so why have the complexity of relying on a third party services

It you have too much traffic to be able to host them yourself then you should look at something like a CDN e.g. Cloudfront, infront of S3
You can do up to 6 in Canada. Nobody ever told me, but when I was signing up at RBC I accidentally typed 5 and it worked. Now I know why they don't deterministically say 'OK, he's done' after you hit four digits.
It looks like there are three problems at work here:

1. A framing effect: the narrative of "poor, starving Africans" makes you sympathize with them, and thus consider them the "in-group" of the narrative.

2. A fairness/democratic bias: people think that the best way for a group to decide on something, is for everyone to have an equal vote. Even if half the people making up the group are experts and the other half have no idea what they're talking about; even if what they're "voting" on is a fact like "the distance between [two cities none of them have ever heard of]."

(Or, at least, on the face of it. People actually like being ruled by a high-status dictator as long as they have a way to pretend they're not being ruled--and thus aren't losing status from submission. This is why you'll get more enthusiasm for electing a leader than most forms of direct democracy--even when things like holding referendums are pretty easy to implement today.)

3. People believe that only their in-group holds the information necessary to make decisions about what their in-group should do. This one is actually not that far off; central allocation, as tried in Communism et al., failed due to many instances of the Principal-Agent problem: "orders from on high" to do things with neither clarity as to how accomplishing those things will benefit anyone, or an accompanying incentive structure to make those actually the things that will get done.

But this only holds for in-groups that are about the size of "tribe" in hunter-gatherer terms: 20-150 people--where the group can come to a single decided set of social mores pretty much by osmosis. When you get entire societies thinking this way, countries composed of millions of people where there's no single thing everyone can agree on, only laws that are barely tolerated--you begin to find that decisions derived from sociological statistics achieve better results than just asking the population what they want.

---

Combining these effects, we see a poor, sympathetic in-group being dominated by the will of a dictator, who must not know what the heck he's talking about, not being part of their group and all. It smells vaguely of colonialism [something most Americans are familiar with]: of being ruled over from the seat of power of a distant empire who has no "real" idea of what's important to your own people or what your own desires would be. And so, we don't like it.

Even though, in consequentialist terms, it's the best possible thing.
Lol fuck the science
Some diagrams here
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/everyday-tech/lithium-i...
Read "willing to .. .make available" as "spend engineer hours/money".
I read it in 12th :p
Doesn't this apply to all of science?

I mean we don't actually know why anything really works, but we have some models which fit the observations at the moment. This is just a very shallow model i.e. "we poked it and it worked".
Its not about contributing back, but the way the dependencies have to be deployed. For example, static linking is a violation.
I agree 100% with you, but one reason why lately I look at GPL with suspicious is that it's long and complex enough that I'm not sure every contributor to GPL fully realizes the implications. It's not just "if you modify you need to release the modified version" as I believed. The SDR Touch affair clearly shows it. Also the problem when linking to closed source code.

This idea that it's ok to make money using the GPL in one way (just using the software as it is, as a service, like when you run a copy of MySQL) and not into another way (by using a GPL library in your closed source app, just releasing back what you changed in the GPL code) is very odd IMHO, probably not in the spirit of code sharing.
ابراج يوم الاثنين 2013/1/28 - حظك ليوم الاثنين 2013/1/28 abraj
what's wrong with this picture?

Oracle/DB2/SQL Server/$$$ <------------ (?) ------------- MySQL --------> NoSQL

someone's missing the elephant in the room.
But as open source wins is that not happening? I see that as the reason for the shift to BSD licenses as time goes on.
I think Red Hat is a prime example of a successful opensource company and if every company would operate like that we wouldn't need GPL. Clearly, that's a bad example. Red Hat does contribute to BSD licensed software as well, it's not at all what i described..
God it's hard to read something 5 words at a time.
I have seen bugs caused by this and I have only worked a little with MySQL. I agree though that the behaviour is very convenient, but the PostgreSQL way of implementing it is superior since it is more explicit about what it does and it also can be combined with ORDER BY so it does not just give you a random row.
" I could give a rat's ass about performance. I'm trying to find the answer to a question, and if I can get that answer in a reasonable amount of time, then the code is good enough"

This is the only bad point that a lot of people are aligned with.

The more time a program needs to finish, the more time you will need to run it again with some other dataset, and in turn - more time to find the right answer.

I really feel that people with scientific and mathematics background should learn proper programming (not take a course in some language - but have actual experience). Design patterns, data structures, best practices, memory consumption, are all things that should be known before a person starts submitting code for this kind of projects.
The US companies are disgusting, but it's a far cry from the wretchedness of the legislators that are proposing the laws whispered in their ears.
The fast development Linux enjoys is the result of lots of 'capitalist' companies cooperating under the GPL so it's certainly not a case of one or the other.

Certain types of business, like that of using open source but not wanting to contribute 'the secret sauce' back is obviously not compatible with the GPL. But for that there are other licences.
Just sent you one!
Cool concept, I like how easily accessible the content is. You should try displaying more images for the articles. Also sometimes the image lags when loading.
I think the BSD license can result in "tragedy of the commons" scenarios where maximizing individual freedom has worse total consequences than would have resulted by applying regulation to maximize societal freedom instead.

There is no tragedy of the commons in software b/c there is no scarcity. Why shouldn't everyone get as much as they can?

re: "FreeBSD is dwindling" and "Linux is growing hugely", it's an improper comparison. There are many distributions of Linux and only one FreeBSD. And regardless, FreeBSD exceeded their fundraising goal for this year:

http://freebsdfoundation.blogspot.ca/2013/01/thank-you-for-h...
Something makes me suspect this article is missing part of the truth, similar to sites that claim we don't know how bees can fly (we do).
Ask HN: Would you be interested in a wiki for cheat sheets?
I often find very clever or interesting 'cheat sheets' around the web, such as the HN post this morning on Max Burstein's "Python Shortcuts for the Python Beginner". And there are always helpful cheat sheets on programming languages and server config files and text editor/IDE keyboard shortcuts that I have found quite helpful when learning a new platform or technology. However, I always have to spend time looking for them around the web.

So I thought, perhaps a community wiki would be a good place to get all of these together in one place (with the authors' permission on a case-by-case basis, of course). Then, if I decided to pick up Scala one of these days (been meaning to), I could hop over to wiki.cheatsheets.com or whatever and search for Scala and see what has been posted.

So my question is, would this be something worth pursuing? Do you folks think it would be useful? Would you use it and add content when you came up with something? It wouldn't even have to be software dev specific topics. A cheat sheet on rules of thumb for baking would fit the guidelines, I would think.

Any thoughts or suggestions?
This is how I think about BSD vs. GPL issue (of course, it's a contrived example and numbers are not accurate):

You have created X (say, redis). 5000 individuals and companies need it right away and want to use it momentarily.

If it's in public domain, all of them will use it, then make separate forks, and maintain them (individually, or in groups).

If it's a commercial product (say, $20.000), you might get 10-20 customers. They won't contribute back code, but will give you loads of money so you can hire more people. It's great business, but a couple of teenagers can't hack away with it because it's just too expensive.

If it's GPL, 500 companies (10%) will use it. Because if they use it, they have to re-licence their code as GPL also, which is unacceptable in many cases. They all contribute back their modifications though, which is great.

If it's BSD, everybody (5000 people) can and will use it (as it doesn't require you to contribute back your modifications, and you can have a private fork). So, we have 5000 companies using X. How many of them are contributing back? If it's more than 10%, then it's a win. If it's less, it's a loss (compared to GPL).

In other words, if you GPL you code, your pool of potential contributes has shrunken substantially.

---

So, the question is this: which is bigger? the percentage of companies that can use a GPL-licenced software, or the percentage of companies that are using BSD-licenced software and are contributing back their changes. I think in a lot of cases, the second one is bigger.
Well, yes, but in the midwest State U. could be Purdue, UIUC, Wisconsin, etc.
I'm finding it extremely buggy. For example - pressing F8 when no code has been entered yet causes a TypeError. I will post this on the mailing list but considering it's an old (~4yrs?) project I'm surprised such issues haven't been fixed.
Cost of 4-Kilowatt Solar System: United States & Germany
Or you can roll like a haxor and use http://fbcmd.dtompkins.com/ to download other peoples photos of you. That's what I did.
Buying colocation space with a negotiated SLA that provides for reimbursement in the case of outage. And building enough redundancy into your setup that even if a location goes completely offline you're still OK. It's REALLY hard to do that when you know nothing of the hardware and infrastructure that your app sits on. It's still difficult to do when you know all the details, but it's easier to control for risks that you are aware of.
I see. I think i'm just not as good a person as you, i would not like that. From my point of view the company could as well operate open-source and make money through additional services (e.g. Redhat) and that would bother me very much.

So kudos to you for thinking that way.
I believe this is an example of the sort of thing that the essay author complained about.

Bit-packing is simple. You spent a lot of time working around problems that shouldn't have existed in the first place. Even when using the approach you described, here is Python code which does what you described:

>>> byte_to_bits = dict((chr(i), bin(i)[2:].zfill(8)) for i in range(256))
>>> byte_to_bits["A"]
'01000001'
>>> as_bits = "".join(byte_to_bits[c] for c in open("benzotriazole.sdf").read())
>>> as_bits[:16]
'0000110100001010'
>>> chr(int(as_bits[:8], 2))
'\r'
>>> chr(int(as_bits[8:16], 2))
'\n'
>>> open("benzotriazole.sdf").read(2)
'\r\n'

This keeps everything in memory, since 300MB is not a lot of memory. If it was in the GB range then I would have written to a file instead of building an in-memory string.

The run-time was small enough that I didn't notice it.

The thing is, you succeeded in solving the problem, and are justly proud of your success. This is how a lot of scientists feel. But a lot of CS people look at the wasted work when there are simpler, better, more maintainable ways.
> It's not, actually. http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/xnu/

Thanks for the correction, I thought it'd been closed. (I suppose I could modify my argument to start talking about iOS, which is based on FreeBSD but closed, in comparison to Android.)

> Does society ultimately benefit more from an open license than one with legal burdens attached, as noble as they are?

Yeah, it's a purely practical question -- and is why I brought up contributions back to FreeBSD vs. Linux, since I think that's one example where the GPL comes out on top regarding participation to the codebase.