So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language still
considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent book to pick up,
something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
May 09 2008
↑ ↓←→ Neal Alexander <WQEQWEUQY HOTMAIL.COM> writes:
soup2nuts wrote:
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language still
considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent book to pick up,
something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
↑ ↓ ← → Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> writes:
Neal Alexander wrote:
soup2nuts wrote:
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language still
considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent book to
pick up, something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
↑↓←→ John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
On Fri, 09 May 2008 21:57:22 -0400, bob wrote:
soup2nuts Wrote:
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language still
considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent book to
pick up, something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
Except that the tango book is not free; and thus, it seems quite baffling
that you would post this torrent.
It's a shame that people do this without permission. I'm especially
surprised people do this in the very forum in which the authors
participate. Kind of a slap in their face, really.
-JJR
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language still
considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent book to
pick up, something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
Except that the tango book is not free; and thus, it seems quite baffling
that you would post this torrent.
It's a shame that people do this without permission. I'm especially
surprised people do this in the very forum in which the authors
participate. Kind of a slap in their face, really.
-JJR
You take free code and advice but when it does not suit then you say ""it
should not be free""?
Point is ,it is available free and it would be LYING to say it isn't ,or, to
avoid saying it is. Either is a lie
I'm especially surprised people do this in the very forum in which
the authors participate. Kind of a slap in their face, really.
Some years ago my statement of intent to bind executables to specific
hardware was arraigned here.
I wonder how you would call that arraigning, when considering your
statement above. For this please observe, that printing a book is also
binding some intellectual property to some specific hardware.
Please observe further, that the owners of the website holding the
torrent promise to remove torrents for copyrighted files from their
website on request of the copyright holder. I believe that no one is
allowed to criticize a decision of copyright holders to take no action
on beeing informed of a possible copyright breach. Especially is an
information on a possible copyright breach no slap in the face of
holder of the copyright.
-manfred
May 09 2008
↑ ↓←→ Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
Manfred Nowak wrote:
John Reimer wrote:
I'm especially surprised people do this in the very forum in which
the authors participate. Kind of a slap in their face, really.
Some years ago my statement of intent to bind executables to specific
hardware was arraigned here.
I wonder how you would call that arraigning, when considering your
statement above. For this please observe, that printing a book is also
binding some intellectual property to some specific hardware.
Please observe further, that the owners of the website holding the
torrent promise to remove torrents for copyrighted files from their
website on request of the copyright holder. I believe that no one is
allowed to criticize a decision of copyright holders to take no action
on beeing informed of a possible copyright breach. Especially is an
information on a possible copyright breach no slap in the face of
holder of the copyright.
If someone provided us with such information in private communication (which
is easy to accomplish), then this would be true. Bob did however provide
the information in a public forum, and did in a followup show that he
thinks such breaches of copyright are ok.
--
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango
None here seem to see the real issue, IMO.
The torrent by itself should not be illegal. The true issue is the
copyright of the authors (please DON'T use the term intellectual
property since it's a term invited by the RIAA to spread FUD and has NO
real legal meaning).
What I want to ask is: Had I downloaded the book via the above torrent
and than sent a paycheck to the authors, would I still be violating the
copyright?
The issue is not people using torrents to download ebooks (which they
could do simply because they prefer this method of downloading). The
issue is people that do not respect the authors' copyright and violate
the law.
In the same way you can go to a library and use a copy-machine, thus
violating the copy-right of authors, that doesn't mean we should
disallow libraries.
I do see the problem in the above idealized argument, but the problem is
that the current situation was created by the very organizations who
represent content creators like the RIAA and MPAA. They have cultivated
this culture of disrespect towards the content creators via their
disrespect towards the users of the content and via their DRM schemes.
trust and respect goes both ways. This is why in free-software
communities copy-rights are always respected (via mutual respect and
trust instead of fear and DRM).
--Yigal
I disagree.
A torrent is a machine made and machine readable citation of _some_
source. Without the content of the _original_ source a torrent would be
meaningless. Therefore a torrent is purely mechanical "derived work"
and _should_ require the same treatment as the original source.
Had I downloaded the book via the above torrent and than sent a
paycheck to the authors, would I still be violating the copyright?
You _should_ be violating the copyright, because the content of the
book is not licensed on a "try before you buy" basis "without the prior
written permission".
(which they could do simply because they prefer this method of
downloading).
In some countries this might be called "gross negligence".
-manfred
I disagree.
A torrent is a machine made and machine readable citation of _some_
source. Without the content of the _original_ source a torrent would be
meaningless. Therefore a torrent is purely mechanical "derived work"
and _should_ require the same treatment as the original source.
Had I downloaded the book via the above torrent and than sent a
paycheck to the authors, would I still be violating the copyright?
You _should_ be violating the copyright, because the content of the
book is not licensed on a "try before you buy" basis "without the prior
written permission".
(which they could do simply because they prefer this method of
downloading).
In some countries this might be called "gross negligence".
-manfred
Do all the books in the library have a copyright that specifically
allows a "try before you buy" basis "without the prior written
permission", as you say? of course not.
Let me ask you my question again (slightly differently):
Had I sent a paycheck to the authors and then downloaded the book via
the above torrent, would I still be violating the copyright?
I prefer JJR's notion of common courtesy. I only disagree that being
respectful means avoid mentioning this torrent [that was the first
result in google it seems]. I agree with JJR that we should respect the
creators, only my view point is that as long as I've paid the authors it
shouldn't matter that much if I used the torrent link or downloaded via
the official site.
--Yigal
Your respect has to go to the publisher as well.
-manfred
in what way did I disrespect the publisher? the copyrights belong to the
authors, not the publisher. either I can use the services of the
publisher and buy a paper book and thus will pay the publisher and the
author, or I can download an ebook and pay the author (I also can buy an
ebook through the publisher, and get an ebook plus the benefit of it
being under some unnecessary protection scheme like DRM or password
protection). Where does it say that that specific publisher has a legal
right to be the sole publisher of the work?
what if I asked Lars directly for a copy of the book? what if Lars is my
neighbor and I prefer to pay him directly than drive to the mall to buy
his book in the book store?
The whole point of the internet as a medium of distribution is that I
don't have to go through a middle-man anymore. Book publishers will not
go away, since there will always be need for real paper books. it's just
that they are no longer the only medium to distribute one's creation.
My point was that the torrent link by itself is not illegal. there are
both legal and illegal uses for that same torrent link.
--Yigal
May 11 2008
↑ ↓ ←→ Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
Yigal Chripun wrote:
Manfred Nowak wrote:
<snip>
Your respect has to go to the publisher as well.
-manfred
in what way did I disrespect the publisher? the copyrights belong to the
authors, not the publisher. either I can use the services of the
publisher and buy a paper book and thus will pay the publisher and the
author, or I can download an ebook and pay the author (I also can buy an
ebook through the publisher, and get an ebook plus the benefit of it
being under some unnecessary protection scheme like DRM or password
protection). Where does it say that that specific publisher has a legal
right to be the sole publisher of the work?
what if I asked Lars directly for a copy of the book? what if Lars is my
neighbor and I prefer to pay him directly than drive to the mall to buy
his book in the book store?
When it comes to the publisher, it has a much bigger role than just printing
it - indeed at least 4 persons at Apress (among them 2 types of editors) +
one external technical editor has been involved in creating the product
that has resulted in both the printed version and the ebook, and so the
publisher has an obvious financial stake in both versions. Thus I am not
legally entitled to sell copies of the book and take the money myself,
something I couldn't do in any case as I have 3 co-authors. Then there is
the last aspect of this particular book, and that is that all money that
otherwise would have gone to us authors (not the publisher's share, are
donated back to the D community (DSource and Tango sofar).
So in effect, this particular book wouldn't have happened at all without a
publisher.
The whole point of the internet as a medium of distribution is that I
don't have to go through a middle-man anymore. Book publishers will not
go away, since there will always be need for real paper books. it's just
that they are no longer the only medium to distribute one's creation.
The medium is not at all the point of the publisher, indeed most publishers
don't print anything at all, that is the job of a printing shop. The
publisher is there to make sure the contents of the book are presented
properly, and can mean a fairly large amount of work on their part.
--
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango
o>therwise would have gone to us authors (not the publisher's share, are
donated back to the D community (DSource and Tango sofar).
what you do with your money is your business.
If it is so donated back to the D community then nothing is lost by a torrent
download as it will only be downloaded by existing or future members of the D
Community
When it comes to the publisher, it has a much bigger role than just printing
it - indeed at least 4 persons at Apress (among them 2 types of editors) +
one external technical editor has been involved in creating the product
that has resulted in both the printed version and the ebook, and so the
publisher has an obvious financial stake in both versions. Thus I am not
legally entitled to sell copies of the book and take the money myself,
something I couldn't do in any case as I have 3 co-authors. Then there is
the last aspect of this particular book, and that is that all money that
otherwise would have gone to us authors (not the publisher's share, are
donated back to the D community (DSource and Tango sofar).
So in effect, this particular book wouldn't have happened at all without a
publisher.
of the book of course, not just you :) i was just lazy typing all the
names so i chose you since you were the one who initially replied.
my question is this: if you (all the authors) are not entitled to sell
the book yourselves, does it mean than that your publisher has some part
of the copy-rights in the book?
if the answer is yes than the situation is completely different from
what i thought, since the point was not violating anyones copy-rights.
May 11 2008
↑ ↓ ←→ Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Yigal Chripun wrote:
I do see the problem in the above idealized argument, but the problem is
that the current situation was created by the very organizations who
represent content creators like the RIAA and MPAA. They have cultivated
this culture of disrespect towards the content creators via their
disrespect towards the users of the content and via their DRM schemes.
trust and respect goes both ways. This is why in free-software
communities copy-rights are always respected (via mutual respect and
trust instead of fear and DRM).
I'm rather proud that my compilers are not, have never, and never will
be copy protected, DRM'd, require activation, phone home, nag for
registration, etc.
I've been amply rewarded by discovering that my customers are nearly
without exception decent, honorable, and nice people. I don't know if
that is cause or effect, but it's fine with me either way.
They're still copyrighted, though <g>.
I've been amply rewarded by discovering that my customers are nearly
without exception decent, honorable, and nice people. I don't know if
that is cause or effect, but it's fine with me either way.
Hmm, having troubles catching this. Shoot, where's the glossary. Ah there it
is, and here are the relevant sections:
'my customers' = Those that have paid me.
'decent, honorable, and nice people' = Paid me.
So what you're saying is, 'Those that have paid me, have paid me'? Sure, makes
logical sense I guess, but isn't really much of a statement.
What would really be more interesting, at least as far as I see it, is some
mention of how you would know if you had been stolen from. Otherwise, saying
anything like that is as hollow as saying, oh, 'Each copy that was purchased
was not stolen'. Well, duh. But without something like that, all you are really
saying here is, is that you have no idea how much of your stuff is stolen from
you. Fair enough if that works for you, but I wouldn't try to claim that every
user of your stuff is honest, just based on the fact that all of your paying
users paid you. :P
They're still copyrighted, though <g>.
May 10 2008
↑ ↓ ←→ Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
darrylb wrote:
What would really be more interesting, at least as far as I see it,
is some mention of how you would know if you had been stolen from.
Otherwise, saying anything like that is as hollow as saying, oh,
'Each copy that was purchased was not stolen'. Well, duh. But without
something like that, all you are really saying here is, is that you
have no idea how much of your stuff is stolen from you. Fair enough
if that works for you, but I wouldn't try to claim that every user of
your stuff is honest, just based on the fact that all of your paying
users paid you. :P
I've never encountered indications of widespread illegal copying of it.
They're still copyrighted, though <g>.
but you are on another? :)
If you treat people with respect and honor, they'll respond in kind.
I've bought products where the maker treats me like a criminal. It
always leaves me with a sour taste and a poor impression of that
company. I don't believe that bodes well for the long term success of it.
On 2008-05-10 23:14:03 +0200, Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> said:
darrylb wrote:
What would really be more interesting, at least as far as I see it,
is some mention of how you would know if you had been stolen from.
Otherwise, saying anything like that is as hollow as saying, oh,
'Each copy that was purchased was not stolen'. Well, duh. But without
something like that, all you are really saying here is, is that you
have no idea how much of your stuff is stolen from you. Fair enough
if that works for you, but I wouldn't try to claim that every user of
your stuff is honest, just based on the fact that all of your paying
users paid you. :P
I've never encountered indications of widespread illegal copying of it.
They're still copyrighted, though <g>.
but you are on another? :)
If you treat people with respect and honor, they'll respond in kind.
I've bought products where the maker treats me like a criminal. It
always leaves me with a sour taste and a poor impression of that
company. I don't believe that bodes well for the long term success of
it.
I completely agree with your approach, the thing is that the best way
to fight against piracy is to compete with it, and offer a compelling
alternative.
Most people understand and agree with the idea of paying for the work
of others, draconian security make the life of those that pay (and that
you want to keep) worse, without (normally) really making the life of
pirates much more difficult, in the worst case they could make the
pirated content even more attractive that your own.
Still I think that some measure, so that the step to pirated content
must be made fully consciously, can be very effective.
The thing is that psychologically if it is too easy to get the pirated
version people have the tendency of doing it saying to themselves that
the author does not care about it.
So I find some measure to make it clear that you care about it (even
indirectly like the "this book was prepared for xxxx) ok.
Fawzi
Most people understand and agree with the idea of paying for the work
of others, draconian security make the life of those that pay (and
that you want to keep) worse, without (normally) really making the
life of pirates much more difficult, in the worst case they could make
the pirated content even more attractive that your own.
I have thought it would be interesting to try a business model that is
something
like "the product is free, support is not". The authors would publish the
material for free and then make it clear that they accept donations and that
they will put more priority on development activities that help those who
are supporting them financially. They would of course still exercise there
own judgment in what gets done but the timing... Also a million from Microsoft
need not count as much as 50 from some broke collage student.
Anyway it would be an interesting experiment.
May 11 2008
↑ ↓←→ Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
BCS wrote:
Reply to Fawzi,
Most people understand and agree with the idea of paying for the work
of others, draconian security make the life of those that pay (and
that you want to keep) worse, without (normally) really making the
life of pirates much more difficult, in the worst case they could make
the pirated content even more attractive that your own.
I have thought it would be interesting to try a business model that is
something like "the product is free, support is not". The authors would
publish the material for free and then make it clear that they accept
donations and that they will put more priority on development activities
that help those who are supporting them financially. They would of course
still exercise there own judgment in what gets done but the timing... Also
a million from Microsoft need not count as much as 50 from some broke
collage student.
Anyway it would be an interesting experiment.
Well, there are quite a few successful companies which has such a business
model in the software business, so hardly what could be called an
experiment.
All Linux distributing companies (RedHat, Suse/Novell, Canonical), TrollTech
with Qt, mySQL (you know the thing ;), eZ (ez.no), and many many more.
--
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango
Well, there are quite a few successful companies which has such a
business model in the software business, so hardly what could be
called an experiment.
All Linux distributing companies (RedHat, Suse/Novell, Canonical),
TrollTech with Qt, mySQL (you know the thing ;), eZ (ez.no), and many
many more.
Most of those, IIRC, have a free version and a for sale version and they
provide tech support only on the for sale one. That not quite what I was
thinking. I'm thinking, no for sale version at all. The company would just
have a donations page, and an explicit statement that donations can effect
the priority of fixing particular bugs and whatnot.
May 11 2008
↑ ↓←→ Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
BCS wrote:
Reply to Lars,
Well, there are quite a few successful companies which has such a
business model in the software business, so hardly what could be
called an experiment.
All Linux distributing companies (RedHat, Suse/Novell, Canonical),
TrollTech with Qt, mySQL (you know the thing ;), eZ (ez.no), and many
many more.
Most of those, IIRC, have a free version and a for sale version and they
provide tech support only on the for sale one. That not quite what I was
thinking. I'm thinking, no for sale version at all. The company would just
have a donations page, and an explicit statement that donations can effect
the priority of fixing particular bugs and whatnot.
I don't see the difference? The software is the same - either you download
it, or you pay, then download it. Or you can download, then pay later if
you decide to use it.
--
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango
Well, there are quite a few successful companies which has such a
business model in the software business, so hardly what could be
called an experiment.
All Linux distributing companies (RedHat, Suse/Novell, Canonical),
TrollTech with Qt, mySQL (you know the thing ;), eZ (ez.no), and
many many more.
they provide tech support only on the for sale one. That not quite
what I was thinking. I'm thinking, no for sale version at all. The
company would just have a donations page, and an explicit statement
that donations can effect the priority of fixing particular bugs and
whatnot.
download it, or you pay, then download it. Or you can download, then
pay later if you decide to use it.
The difference is you never pay for the software, end of story. The cost,
no matter what, is Zero. Possibly even the tech support would be free. It
would be like if Walter started putting price tags on bugs "pay me $50 and
I'll fix bug X sooner ($250 and I'll do it now) or don't and I'll get around
to it sooner or later" (Not that I think he would do that, or that he should
or should not) I would a a sort of vote with cash for what you think is
important.
Not a good way to run a country, but it might work for a company.
Well, there are quite a few successful companies which has such a
business model in the software business, so hardly what could be
called an experiment.
All Linux distributing companies (RedHat, Suse/Novell, Canonical),
TrollTech with Qt, mySQL (you know the thing ;), eZ (ez.no), and
many many more.
they provide tech support only on the for sale one. That not quite
what I was thinking. I'm thinking, no for sale version at all. The
company would just have a donations page, and an explicit statement
that donations can effect the priority of fixing particular bugs and
whatnot.
download it, or you pay, then download it. Or you can download, then
pay later if you decide to use it.
The difference is you never pay for the software, end of story. The
cost, no matter what, is Zero. Possibly even the tech support would be
free. It would be like if Walter started putting price tags on bugs "pay
me $50 and I'll fix bug X sooner ($250 and I'll do it now) or don't and
I'll get around to it sooner or later" (Not that I think he would do
that, or that he should or should not) I would a a sort of vote with
cash for what you think is important. Not a good way to run a country,
but it might work for a company.
also i forgot to mention, natural-docs operate in that matter. you can
pay to make your preferred language higher on the todo list.
Well, there are quite a few successful companies which has such a
business model in the software business, so hardly what could be
called an experiment.
All Linux distributing companies (RedHat, Suse/Novell, Canonical),
TrollTech with Qt, mySQL (you know the thing ;), eZ (ez.no), and many
many more.
Most of those, IIRC, have a free version and a for sale version and they
provide tech support only on the for sale one. That not quite what I was
thinking. I'm thinking, no for sale version at all. The company would
just have a donations page, and an explicit statement that donations can
effect the priority of fixing particular bugs and whatnot.
website the amount o money needed to record their next album (renting a
studio, and stuff like that) which surprisingly is in the range of
20K-30K$ (not millions as the record companies makes us think).
anyway, the idea is that the real fans, those that are willing to donate
money to the band have influence of the content of the album. so if all
the fans who paid want love songs, than the band will produce an album
of love songs. of course, the band reserves some creative judgment for
themselves.
Personally i'm not into that music so i don't know what happened to
them, but last time i looked at their site, probably a year ago, they
already had one album and half the money to produce the next one, or
something like that.
I knew of a band that has exactly this model.
the idea is that the real fans, those that are willing to
donate
money to the band have influence of the content of the album.
cool!
May 11 2008
↑ ↓ ←→ Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
BCS wrote:
The authors would
publish the material for free and then make it clear that they accept
donations and that they will put more priority on development activities
that help those who are supporting them financially.
That's Oracle's model - "we'll fix bugs the bugs you want us to if you
pay us to". That is, for an exorbitant fee, you can have the bugs that
affect your system prioritized. (That's after charging $50k a seat for
the software and asking companies to pay a full-time Oracle consultant
to fix the numerous problems that add in their software to keep any
other DBA from touching it.)
What this does, is makes the company put out a buggy, hard-to-use piece
of software (since they'll make more money if they fix fewer bugs). This
means product advertising becomes much more financially viable than QA,
and they stick in a bunch of untested features hoping someone bites and
then pays to get the issues sorted out.
The authors would
publish the material for free and then make it clear that they accept
donations and that they will put more priority on development
activities
that help those who are supporting them financially.
That's Oracle's model -
<G> I've heard of people's dealings with them. (They at one point tried to
sell the state of Oregon one seat for every person in the state)
However...
"we'll fix bugs the bugs you want us to if you
pay us to". That is, for an exorbitant fee, you can have the bugs that
affect your system prioritized.
nix the exorbitant fee and replace it with a reasonable one ...
(That's after charging $50k a seat for
the software
charge nothing for the program to began with...
and asking companies to pay a full-time Oracle consultant
to fix the numerous problems that add in their software to keep any
other DBA from touching it.)
give a "nice user experience"...
What this does, is makes the company put out a buggy, hard-to-use
piece of software (since they'll make more money if they fix fewer
bugs).
and somehow avoid human nature regarding that and you might actually be able
to make it work.
As I said, it would be an experiment.
May 11 2008
↑ ↓ ←→ Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
BCS wrote:
Reply to Robert,
BCS wrote:
The authors would
publish the material for free and then make it clear that they accept
donations and that they will put more priority on development
activities
that help those who are supporting them financially.
That's Oracle's model -
<G> I've heard of people's dealings with them. (They at one point tried
to sell the state of Oregon one seat for every person in the state)
However...
"we'll fix bugs the bugs you want us to if you
pay us to". That is, for an exorbitant fee, you can have the bugs that
affect your system prioritized.
nix the exorbitant fee and replace it with a reasonable one ...
(That's after charging $50k a seat for
the software
charge nothing for the program to began with...
and asking companies to pay a full-time Oracle consultant
to fix the numerous problems that add in their software to keep any
other DBA from touching it.)
give a "nice user experience"...
What this does, is makes the company put out a buggy, hard-to-use
piece of software (since they'll make more money if they fix fewer
bugs).
and somehow avoid human nature regarding that and you might actually be
able to make it work.
Aye, there's the rub.
As I said, it would be an experiment.
I'll give you that it would be an interesting experiment, but in my
software, I'd rather prioritize the bugs that affect the largest group
of users or are more important to the system in general than the ones
that affect the highest-paying users. New features, though, I'd be more
willing to see an auction system for.
The authors would
publish the material for free and then make it clear that they accept
donations and that they will put more priority on development
activities
that help those who are supporting them financially.
That's Oracle's model -
<G> I've heard of people's dealings with them. (They at one point
tried to sell the state of Oregon one seat for every person in the state)
However...
"we'll fix bugs the bugs you want us to if you
pay us to". That is, for an exorbitant fee, you can have the bugs that
affect your system prioritized.
nix the exorbitant fee and replace it with a reasonable one ...
(That's after charging $50k a seat for
the software
charge nothing for the program to began with...
and asking companies to pay a full-time Oracle consultant
to fix the numerous problems that add in their software to keep any
other DBA from touching it.)
give a "nice user experience"...
What this does, is makes the company put out a buggy, hard-to-use
piece of software (since they'll make more money if they fix fewer
bugs).
and somehow avoid human nature regarding that and you might actually
be able to make it work.
Aye, there's the rub.
As I said, it would be an experiment.
I'll give you that it would be an interesting experiment, but in my
software, I'd rather prioritize the bugs that affect the largest group
of users or are more important to the system in general than the ones
that affect the highest-paying users. New features, though, I'd be more
willing to see an auction system for.
I think Walter should instrument a policy where people can pay for
certain bugs to be moved up in the prioritization queue. It may even
make companies feel safer using DMD if they can pay for particular bugs
to be fixed. However you'd have to be careful with a system like that,
that high priority bugs are not just left there because they generate a
lot of cash. Maybe the money could go slowly down overtime, or people
could withdraw their money if the bug was not fixed within there time
frame.
Then I guess it could work like this. Someone would post if you get bug
X finished by Data Y then I'll pay you $G.
-Joel
The world is a changing and changed place
When I wanted to know something I went to a library and looked it up and / or
borrowed the book. I was not supposed to copy what I needed but I did , that
was why I went to get it.
Everybody did .
When I could afford to buy my own reference books I only bought what I had to
and still used the Library where I could.
This saved the trees.
Now the library is linked to my home and there are many more Libraries and
paper copies are less needed and will become cherished antiques . This will
save more trees and thats good because they really are what keeps us alive by
making oxygen and consuming carbon dioxide.
The typed word on the Internet is public as soon as its typed. Trying to hang
on to a conceived right to own those words or that knowledge is flawed by this
new fact above.
Layers will try to maintain it but it will not be enforceable until all
countries in the world agree to accept that copyright should exist.
This world wide agreement will never happen.
Because one race will never trust another race nor respect its views it cant
happen . Like religious fervour every religion believes it is irrefutably right
. Every race believes this and every country will want something different .
So in my opinion what has to happen needs to happen at the time the words are
typed , ie lodge your book with a restricted site ,the publisher , who pays you
there and then . A one time fee as agreed . he publisher distributes the book
and takes the risks ,because once another person has purchased the book and
downloaded it , it becomes their property.
You can try to hang onto a right but it will be doomed to fail
The writers must accept now that the days of making big money writing and
living of the royalties died when consumers became international . The Internet
is just one aspect of that. Take China with the CD's right now
The writers must accept now that the days of making big money writing
and living of the royalties died when consumers became international .
The Internet is just one aspect of that. Take China with the CD's
right now
I agree with part of that, that trying to control access to digital media
is pointless. However I think it is right and just for an author to ask for
profit from there work. Otherwise where is the motivation? Material profit
is a much better motivator than altruistic betterment of society. (USSR vs.
US?)
Further more, all that aside I have no issue with people refusing to be a
part in circumventing that motivation nor author bitching about people who do.
May 10 2008
↑ ↓ ←→ John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Hello Walter,
Yigal Chripun wrote:
I do see the problem in the above idealized argument, but the problem
is that the current situation was created by the very organizations
who represent content creators like the RIAA and MPAA. They have
cultivated this culture of disrespect towards the content creators
via their disrespect towards the users of the content and via their
DRM schemes. trust and respect goes both ways. This is why in
free-software communities copy-rights are always respected (via
mutual respect and trust instead of fear and DRM).
be copy protected, DRM'd, require activation, phone home, nag for
registration, etc.
I've been amply rewarded by discovering that my customers are nearly
without exception decent, honorable, and nice people. I don't know if
that is cause or effect, but it's fine with me either way.
They're still copyrighted, though <g>.
Yes, clearly it is unwise to protect a product excessively with the assumption
that all your customers are criminals. Doing so speaks volumes; and in the
end, copy protection schemes probably do little to prevent pirating. If
they actually manage some effectiveness, my guess is that the expense involved
in adopting the anti-pirating scheme might be counteract the profits in the
the long run (combine that with mounting customer frustration, and the strategy
is possibly worse... it could mean loss of customer base). It's the same
with all controls that are unable to be enforced.
BUT, the fact that a company uses or doesn't use a copy protection scheme,
may or may not mean they trust their customers more or less. In actual fact,
it may just be another marketing move to make their customers feel good about
themselves and the company to spin a reason to the Board why it isn't going
to implement any form of anti-piracy protection in it's software (could be
a very good reason). Not to say that's what you do... I'm just saying that
doing so doesn't necessarily make customer or company respectable. Such
respectability could quite easily be destroyed by some other poor
customer/company
relationship. Respectability, I'm guessing, is more related to a consistant
track record of conscientiousness, politeness, responsiveness, and honesty
on the companies part. But doing all that does not guarantee "decent,
honorable,
and nice" customers (or company). That's really just a fantasy.
Now, that's not what we're talking about here. Here we are wondering why
the D newsgroup needs to be used as a medium for spreading and encouraging
illegal copies of material -- that's reflects an aspect of honesty in this
newsgroup. We are not analyzing Google here and why it's so easy to find
illegal content by using that search engine. We are talking about this
newsgroup...
which, I hope, most of us want to keep respectable. If this newsgroup wants
to be respectable, it has to act so. If it doesn't act so, it should be
encouraged to act so. If it can't be encouraged to act so, perhaps it should
be enforced to act so. If no one enforces this, then we invite problems
as people with no respect (yes, they do exist!) push the limits to test how
far they can go.
The fact that this newsgroup seems to allow freedoms that trample out other's
freedoms (in the name of free speech -- see extreme racism in other posts)
shows that there is more than a little contradiction going on here about
what free speech means. The line always has to be drawn somewhere. By now
it should be obvious that people will not always /choose/ to be respectable
and honorable /even/ if you treat them so... assuming that they will does
not make problems go away. So there will always be a time where a person
has to step in and say "no". If we consistantly choose to overlook problems
like this, then we are asking to be plagued by much worse ones down the road.
There is no need for dictatorial intervention if these things are just simply
delt with immediately. This would be seen as simple policy in any other
company that cared about it's image.
-JJR
May 10 2008
↑ ↓ ← → Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
John Reimer wrote:
The fact that this newsgroup seems to allow freedoms that trample out
other's freedoms (in the name of free speech -- see extreme racism in
other posts) shows that there is more than a little contradiction going
on here about what free speech means.
Just an important note: free speech does not imply that someone else
must provide a platform for it. It means that the government cannot
censor it.
For example, a privately published newspaper is not obligated to print
all points of view. But the government is not allowed to order the
newspaper to print or not print a certain opinion.
If someone provided us with such information in private
communication (which is easy to accomplish), then this would be
true.
I disagree.
If someone has the (legal) (co-)ownership of some information, which is
believed to be not in common knowledge, then only in rare circumstances
one has the right to restrict the channel of distributions for that
information.
Without this principle you would not have been able to publish your
book. But the same principle holds for Bob and his information of
existing torrents.
did in a followup show that he thinks such breaches of
copyright are ok.
I disagree. To me his statements do not expose such a thinking.
He only emphasizes the pure fact, that there exists a free _torrent_
for _some_ ebook, which looks like to be the one of you and your
colleagues. Bob did not give any clue, that the "advertized" ebook is
indeed that of you and your colleagues.
Furthermore it seems to be unknown, where Bob resides and therefore it
is pure speculation that he might be bound to some copyright laws.
-manfred
It appears you are defending Bob's "freedom" to post the link and
disregarding the actual /effect/ of his post, which really is what
is important here. Wouldn't it be better to consider the effect
than to baffle ourselves over the legality of the medium?
Please read my postings carefully. You might be able to recognize, that
I state rules but I do not give any clue, that the prerequisites are
fulfilled.
The problem here is, that wheenever Bob does not have the freedom to
post the link, then nobody has the freedom to post the link. But the
link is the first result returned by Google, when Google is feeded with
the canonical search pattern. Now we might have the problem, that
Google aids for breaching copy rights?
Effects are in the eyes of the observers. Lars Ivar required private
posts to the assumed holder of the copy right. But how do one know, who
the actual holder of the copyright is?
It's likely the authors would have to "buy" the book to give it away,
so perhaps the readers should too?
Are you distinguishing between buying the hardware, to which some
content is bound and buying the right to know the content?
-manfred
On 2008-05-10 15:25:52 +0200, John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> said:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 06:21:57 +0000, Manfred Nowak wrote:
John Reimer wrote:
I'm especially surprised people do this in the very forum in which the
authors participate. Kind of a slap in their face, really.
Some years ago my statement of intent to bind executables to specific
hardware was arraigned here.
I wonder how you would call that arraigning, when considering your
statement above. For this please observe, that printing a book is also
binding some intellectual property to some specific hardware.
Please observe further, that the owners of the website holding the
torrent promise to remove torrents for copyrighted files from their
website on request of the copyright holder. I believe that no one is
allowed to criticize a decision of copyright holders to take no action
on beeing informed of a possible copyright breach. Especially is an
information on a possible copyright breach no slap in the face of holder
of the copyright.
-manfred
Manfred,
Once again, my post did not approach the topic of drm or copyright
holding. It referred to common courtesy, respect for investment of work
done under the terms it was completed. Posting such a link is not
helpful, useful or respectful to it's authors, unless the authors have
given express permission to do so. Even opensource operates under
similar principles of courtesy. And indeed, litigation can and may occur
if the opensource licenses aren't followed. It that sense even
opensource "freedom" comes with it's own set of controls.
I see, though, that the demand for a subjective "freedom" that fits each
persons ideals, is becoming more the cultural norm. I sorry to see this
because it lacks consistancy and respect for a persons contributions.
-JJR
The original goal of copyright was to support the development of new work.
I fully support and agree with that goal.
I often don't support how the law implements it, but the goal is worthwhile.
With respect to this I found the way the numpy book was distributed
interesting (see http://www.tramy.us/), limited time and money.
People that do some work should be compensated for it.
In this case I fully agree that posting such a link just shows
disrespect for the work
that the authors have done.
With respect to the way the book is distributed (and it is a good book
and I paid for it, and I think it is worth it), I had some reservation
to the fact that it is encrypted, I find an approach like the one used
by http://www.pragprog.com/ (generate a pdf just for you with written
in in each page <This book was generated for xxxx>) much better and
even more effective.
Anyway (to my surprise) I didn't have any problem with the encryption,
neither on mac not on linux.
I had thought about stripping it immediately, but I still haven't done it.
Fawzi
May 10 2008
↑ ↓ ←→ Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
With respect to the way the book is distributed (and it is a good book
and I paid for it, and I think it is worth it), I had some reservation
to the fact that it is encrypted, I find an approach like the one used
by http://www.pragprog.com/ (generate a pdf just for you with written
in in each page <This book was generated for xxxx>) much better and
even more effective.
Anyway (to my surprise) I didn't have any problem with the encryption,
neither on mac not on linux.
I had thought about stripping it immediately, but I still haven't done it.
I suppose the simple password on the ebook can be considered DRM in some
fashion, but kwallet on KDE/linux remembers it for me, and so I only had to
write it the first time (and I personally think that would be a descent
thinkg of any PDF reader to do).
--
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango
May 10 2008
↑ ↓ ← → Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:
Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
With respect to the way the book is distributed (and it is a good book
and I paid for it, and I think it is worth it), I had some reservation
to the fact that it is encrypted, I find an approach like the one used
by http://www.pragprog.com/ (generate a pdf just for you with written
in in each page <This book was generated for xxxx>) much better and
even more effective.
Anyway (to my surprise) I didn't have any problem with the encryption,
neither on mac not on linux.
I had thought about stripping it immediately, but I still haven't done it.
I suppose the simple password on the ebook can be considered DRM in some
fashion, but kwallet on KDE/linux remembers it for me, and so I only had to
write it the first time (and I personally think that would be a descent
thinkg of any PDF reader to do).
Acrobat reader does not, so I resorted to removing the password. It
seems a rather silly form of DRM anyway. A pirate only needs distribute
the password with the file to circumvent it.
--bb
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language still
considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent book to pick up,
something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
↑↓← → John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 06:21:57 +0000, Manfred Nowak wrote:
John Reimer wrote:
I'm especially surprised people do this in the very forum in which the
authors participate. Kind of a slap in their face, really.
Some years ago my statement of intent to bind executables to specific
hardware was arraigned here.
I wonder how you would call that arraigning, when considering your
statement above. For this please observe, that printing a book is also
binding some intellectual property to some specific hardware.
Please observe further, that the owners of the website holding the
torrent promise to remove torrents for copyrighted files from their
website on request of the copyright holder. I believe that no one is
allowed to criticize a decision of copyright holders to take no action
on beeing informed of a possible copyright breach. Especially is an
information on a possible copyright breach no slap in the face of holder
of the copyright.
-manfred
Manfred,
Once again, my post did not approach the topic of drm or copyright
holding. It referred to common courtesy, respect for investment of work
done under the terms it was completed. Posting such a link is not
helpful, useful or respectful to it's authors, unless the authors have
given express permission to do so. Even opensource operates under
similar principles of courtesy. And indeed, litigation can and may occur
if the opensource licenses aren't followed. It that sense even
opensource "freedom" comes with it's own set of controls.
I see, though, that the demand for a subjective "freedom" that fits each
persons ideals, is becoming more the cultural norm. I sorry to see this
because it lacks consistancy and respect for a persons contributions.
-JJR
May 10 2008
↑↓← → John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 01:35:02 -0400, bob wrote:
John Reimer Wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2008 21:57:22 -0400, bob wrote:
soup2nuts Wrote:
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language
still considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent
book to pick up, something the covers all the concepts fairly in
depth?
Except that the tango book is not free; and thus, it seems quite
baffling that you would post this torrent.
It's a shame that people do this without permission. I'm especially
surprised people do this in the very forum in which the authors
participate. Kind of a slap in their face, really.
-JJR
free code and advice but when it does not suit then you say ""it
should not be free""?
Point is ,it is available free and it would be LYING to say it isn't
,or, to avoid saying it is. Either is a lie
Have you considered that it might be lying to pretend that avoiding a lie
is your motivation for posting the link? People may find it for
themselves without your help, so you are doing no good service. By NOT
posting this, you neatly avoid the risk of hurting or disrepecting the
authors who invested their personal time and money into this work.
Please leave the choice of being benevolent in the hands of the authors.
It is attitudes like yours that may actually destroy motivation for
contributing to Tango and other works. Or do you not know that the
profits of this book help support the hundreds of hours that go into
Tango developement and maintenance?
-JJR
May 10 2008
↑↓← → John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 10:00:21 +0000, Manfred Nowak wrote:
Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
If someone provided us with such information in private communication
(which is easy to accomplish), then this would be true.
I disagree.
If someone has the (legal) (co-)ownership of some information, which is
believed to be not in common knowledge, then only in rare circumstances
one has the right to restrict the channel of distributions for that
information.
Without this principle you would not have been able to publish your
book. But the same principle holds for Bob and his information of
existing torrents.
did in a followup show that he thinks such breaches of copyright are
ok.
I disagree. To me his statements do not expose such a thinking.
He only emphasizes the pure fact, that there exists a free _torrent_ for
_some_ ebook, which looks like to be the one of you and your colleagues.
Bob did not give any clue, that the "advertized" ebook is indeed that of
you and your colleagues.
Furthermore it seems to be unknown, where Bob resides and therefore it
is pure speculation that he might be bound to some copyright laws.
-manfred
I think this is silly, manfred . You are getting all technical over the
details. It appears you are defending Bob's "freedom" to post the link
and disregarding the actual /effect/ of his post, which really is what is
important here. Wouldn't it be better to consider the effect than to
baffle ourselves over the legality of the medium? DRM, intellectual
property, and copyright will always have muddy waters because of their
very nature... but why don't we just keep it simple and recognize the need
for respect of the author's work. It's likely the authors would have to
"buy" the book to give it away, so perhaps the readers should too?
Honestly, if nobody says something against this habit, this forum will
eventually be overwhelmed by this very mentality: each person decides for
himself what's free. The inconsistancy among the definitions of freedom
will eventually completely cripple the interactions across cultures.
Perhaps that just the way it has to go, but I think it's pretty simple
just to respect the authors work and keep such links out of this public
forum.
-JJR
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language still
considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent book to pick up,
something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
↑ ↓ ←→ Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
bob wrote:
soup2nuts Wrote:
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language still
considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent book to pick up,
something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
[link removed]
Again? I thought we just _did_ this!
May 14 2008
↑ ↓ ← → Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:
Robert Fraser wrote:
bob wrote:
soup2nuts Wrote:
So are there any free ebooks out there for D or is this language
still considered to be too new? And if there aren't what's a decent
book to pick up, something the covers all the concepts fairly in depth?
Home
| Search
| C & C++
| D
| DMDScript
| News Groups
| index
| prev
| next