2007-12-30 Swhack IRC Log

00:00:41 <pierpa`> .weather helsinki
00:00:46 <phenny> Cloudy, 5℃, 1000mb, Fresh breeze 16kt (↑) - EFHF 2:50, 0050Z
00:00:55 <pierpa`> .weather lirf
00:00:58 <phenny> Clear ☼, 2℃, 1023mb, Mist, Light breeze 5kt (↑) - LIRF, 1:50, 0050Z
00:03:55 <pierpa`> .weather palermo
00:03:58 <phenny> Cloudy, 12℃, 1021mb, Light breeze 6kt (↑) - LICP 18:55, 1755Z
00:05:45 <pierpa`> .weather pisa
00:05:47 <phenny> PISA: no such ICAO code, or no NOAA data
00:05:58 <pierpa`> .g pisa icao
00:06:01 <phenny> pierpa`: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flughafen_Pisa
00:06:46 <pierpa`> .weather lirp
00:06:49 <phenny> Clear ☼, -1℃, 1024mb, Mist, Light air 2kt (↑) - LIRP, 1:45, 0045Z
00:07:06 <pierpa`> .weather peretola
00:07:10 <phenny> Clear ☼, -1℃, 1024mb, Light air 1kt (↑) - LIRQ 1:50, 0050Z
00:07:29 <pierpa`> .weather toronto
00:07:31 <phenny> CYZD: no such ICAO code, or no NOAA data
00:07:39 <pierpa`> .g toronto icao
00:07:41 <phenny> pierpa`: http://www.icao.on.ca/Forms/1008page2558.pdf
00:12:04 * therethinker takes the chance to introduce pierpa` to his discovery
00:16:24 *** cr`x (n=zax@user-12lcqh4.cable.mindspring.com) has joined #swhack
00:16:32 <therethinker> http://consumerist.com/assets/resources/2007/12/applepullsawalmart.jpg -- spot the typo!
00:17:57 <perigrin> I'm not shure I know which one is the typo?
00:19:02 <therethinker> Look harder, I'm shure you'll find it eventually
00:25:15 <perigrin> Are you shure?
00:31:50 <therethinker> I shure hope you can, that'd be very sad.
00:32:56 <therethinker> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Regex,_Schmegex.aspx I shure hope that wasn't any of you
00:35:42 <perigrin> nice ...
00:49:03 <therethinker> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/ITAPPMONROBOT.aspx -- that's even better
00:49:58 <perigrin> that one is cool
00:50:27 <therethinker> Its like that cup-holder website
00:50:38 <therethinker> .g Cat food CD-ROM drive
00:50:40 <phenny> therethinker: http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/28/diy-cat-feeder-powered-by-ubuntu-linux-cd-rom-tray
00:50:55 <therethinker> That's another fun CD drive toy
01:06:43 *** cr`x has quit ("אַכטונג! קאָמפיוטער שלאָפֿט.")
01:08:45 *** MorbusIff has quit ("http://www.disobey.com/")
01:34:18 *** JibberJim has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
01:36:49 <Mike_L> it's the weekend
01:40:10 <therethinker> Horrayy! Now join the obvious circle: O get in there, don't worry, it's a circle!
01:40:15 <therethinker> Sorry
01:40:21 <therethinker> I'm tired
01:44:09 <Mike_L> it's ok to be tired
01:44:15 <Mike_L> I'm tired, too
01:45:01 <therethinker> Hence, Horray weekend!@
01:46:30 <_bjoern> .compare "you can drink your misery away" "you can't drink your misery away"
01:46:33 <phenny> "you can drink your misery away" (590), "you can't drink your misery away" (0)
01:47:15 <therethinker> .rate the weekend
01:47:22 <phenny> "the weekend": 62.37% (3,700 rocks; 502 rules; 2,150 sucks; 385 blows)
01:47:31 <therethinker> .rate my life
01:47:38 <phenny> "my life": 17.25% (26,900 rocks; 14,800 rules; 193,000 sucks; 7,060 blows)
01:49:02 *** BigJibby has quit ("Konversation terminated!")
01:50:27 <therethinker> That's sad
01:54:56 <Mike_L> .rate her body
01:55:03 <phenny> "her body": 44.94% (5,530 rocks; 485 rules; 5,120 sucks; 2,250 blows)
01:55:50 <Mike_L> .rate her mind
01:55:57 <phenny> "her mind": 99.13% (8 rocks; 565 rules; 4 sucks; 1 blows)
01:56:02 <Mike_L> WIN!
02:00:16 <therethinker> Haha
02:00:20 <therethinker> .gs I love her *
02:00:22 <phenny> (9), yaaaaaaaaaar (4), lyric (4), style (3), dreadlock (3), dicitencello vuie (3), misbah (2), ladyship sincerely (2), in (2), colorway (2), carlinamerica (2), yep yep yep, yeah yeah, yana, wikipedia, whoa whoa dum, weeping weeping, voise, voicee, valleri, umbrella, trumpet, too, tenderly, tab, sis
02:00:37 <therethinker> I love her wikipedia?!
02:02:18 <therethinker> Aha! That's the culpret!
02:02:26 <Mike_L> culprit
02:02:57 <therethinker> phenny: tell sbp: if it ends with an o, then it will result in a "f]" : therethinker: [off] .g testo /[off] f] .g testo: http://w...
02:02:59 <phenny> therethinker: I'll pass that on when sbp is around.
02:03:06 <therethinker> Yeah... spel good I do
02:09:59 *** est (n=est@64.74.213.174) has joined #swhack
02:12:51 *** est has quit (Client Quit)
02:18:17 *** cr`x (n=zax@user-12lcqh4.cable.mindspring.com) has joined #swhack
02:19:04 *** cr`x has quit (Client Quit)
02:42:04 <Mike_L> Monty: help me think of a new name for my virtual server
02:42:52 <Mike_L> zomg... Monty isn't here
02:42:59 <therethinker> Monty isn't here! D:
02:43:29 * therethinker runs and screams and panikz... startz spelin wierd....
02:43:30 <Mike_L> help me think of a new name for my virtual server
02:44:34 <therethinker> UBERServerZ
02:45:32 <therethinker> Ultimate-Boswell-Erotic-Really-Serving-Easter-Really-Very-Erratic-Really-Zish
02:46:17 <therethinker> You like?
02:53:43 <Mike_L> it's a little long
02:54:19 <Mike_L> I wonder if anyone has written an algorithm to create names that are easy to type on qwerty
02:54:30 *** est (n=est@64.74.213.174) has joined #swhack
02:54:54 <xover> Call it qwerty?
02:55:39 <therethinker> I don't even know what's easy to type on QWERTY
02:55:40 <Mike_L> asdf!
02:55:44 <therethinker> asdfjkl; is pretty hard
02:55:49 <therethinker> asdf is hard too >_>
02:55:53 <therethinker> jio is easy for me...
02:56:02 <therethinker> "lol" is really easy
02:56:33 <Mike_L> 'lol' requires me to move my right-ring finger up and then back... quite slow
02:57:16 <Arnia> .g ergonomic metrics
02:57:19 <phenny> Arnia: http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?IA=WO2005%2F120346&WO=2005%2F120346&DISPLAY=DESC
02:57:33 <therethinker> Really? I type that really fast
02:57:41 <therethinker> "really" is pretty easy...
02:57:47 <therethinker> rea is easy too
02:58:56 <Mike_L> I could call it 'hot'
02:59:01 <Mike_L> then it would be hot.tamale.net ;)
02:59:12 <therethinker> Is it really for tamale.net?
02:59:20 <Arnia> Could model it as a markov process where the transition probability from one letter to the next is inverse proportional to the distance between the letters on querty
02:59:28 <Mike_L> therethinker: yeah, tamale.net is my domain name.
02:59:36 <Arnia> Although, you'd have to account for the way people's hands seize up
03:00:05 <therethinker> Arnia: not quite, jkl; is harder than jiji
03:00:33 <Arnia> therethinker: that's what I just said
03:00:43 <Arnia> therethinker: that causes muscles to move against each other
03:00:59 <Arnia> Against as in physical, not force
03:01:08 <therethinker> Yeah... sorry
03:01:38 <Arnia> Be interesting actually
03:01:46 <Arnia> Mike_L: go implement :)
03:01:53 <therethinker> Hehe
03:01:56 <Mike_L> Arnia: implement?
03:01:59 <therethinker> I'm busy, or I would
03:02:06 <therethinker> Could model it as a markov process where the transition probability from one letter to the next is inverse proportional to the distance between the letters on querty -- do it mike!
03:02:30 <Mike_L> hmm
03:02:49 <Mike_L> that would be a lot of work just to choose a host name
03:03:08 <Arnia> Mike_L: But you could write it up and get respect for it
03:03:43 * Arnia should just pay people to write his code
03:03:49 <Arnia> A lot easier than cajoling them :p
03:04:01 <Arnia> Oh, but I forgot... I'm poor :p
03:04:19 <Mike_L> it's interesting to figure out how to write a program. Then you need to get someone to actually write it.
03:04:31 <therethinker> Haha, I KNEW IT! You're using us!
03:04:48 <therethinker> You're probably writing papers on my brillaint Neural network!
03:04:57 <therethinker> ...with a capital N!
03:05:03 <Mike_L> I could put a job into topcoders.com for that program
03:05:23 <Mike_L> do you think I'd get any decent submissions?
03:06:14 * Arnia turns back to CSS
03:06:31 <therethinker> How much do you think it'll cost?
03:06:33 <tonybaloney> Arnia: You'd probably know this. Haskell + CGI. Possible? Or is there a sort of mod_haskell for Apache or lighttpd?
03:06:42 * therethinker reminds Arnia that it isn't code, but might be Turing-complete
03:08:29 <tonybaloney> nevermind, I got an answer (I think)
03:08:42 <Mike_L> I would divide the keyboard in two... left and right
03:08:56 <Mike_L> then each side would be divided into sets of keys for each finger of the hand
03:09:58 <Mike_L> *then* the markov process would have transition probabilities for keys of the other hand
03:10:20 <therethinker> Sounds good
03:10:39 <therethinker> Although, wouldn't work great for me, since I type funny
03:10:48 <Mike_L> and keys on the home row would have higher probabilities than those that require finger extension or curling
03:10:57 * therethinker hits T occasionally with right-hand
03:11:07 <therethinker> And index finger easier than pinky
03:11:32 <therethinker> And right easier than left, although that's not true for me, even though I'm r-handed
03:11:45 <Mike_L> then the best thing would be to write a keyboard logger that analyzes the timings of your keystrokes and builds the probabilities based on the time between various strokes
03:12:29 <therethinker> Yes, work on that
03:12:33 <Mike_L> hah!
03:12:55 <Mike_L> I could dig up the Win32 keylogger that I wrote when I was 16 :P
03:12:58 <therethinker> I can provide sample data, if you write an app for linux
03:13:17 <therethinker> Fedora Core 8, if it matters ;-)
03:13:27 * therethinker hopes no OS wars break out right now
03:13:33 <Mike_L> but this would be a lot of work just to generate good hostnames
03:13:36 <therethinker> I'm gonna hit the hay, work on that, Mike ;-)
03:13:41 <therethinker> So? it has other uses
03:13:45 <Mike_L> like what?
03:13:57 <Mike_L> ok, generating easily typeable passwords
03:14:22 <therethinker> Yep
03:14:27 <Mike_L> hmm
03:14:41 <therethinker> That are still near-random
03:14:46 <Mike_L> not really
03:15:01 <Mike_L> I expect that they would be very much like the text that you type every day
03:15:08 <Mike_L> so 's' would be the most common letter
03:15:20 <therethinker> Hmm... I wonder if my typing habits are a result of my old password, I used to have the same password for everything back 5 years ago...
03:15:30 <therethinker> maybe it was 6...
03:15:34 <Mike_L> and the resulting passwords would probably have about as much entropy as English text... which isn't much
03:15:44 <therethinker> Good point
03:15:49 <therethinker> they wouldn't be in the dictionary, though
03:16:26 <qopi> what is "harsh, hard, dry and astringent"?
03:16:41 <qopi> any guesses?
03:17:15 <therethinker> Your joke?
03:17:24 <therethinker> Vodka?
03:17:41 <qopi> hehe
03:17:43 <Mike_L> I've already made a pronounceable password generator that I think is pretty good: http://tamale.net/pub/2007/pwdgen/pronounce3.1.py
03:17:43 <qopi> not a joke
03:17:55 <therethinker> Am I right, though? Vodka?
03:18:07 <therethinker> Mike_L: Dun work
03:18:15 <qopi> A: the fruit of the osage orange tree http://permaculturetokyo.blogspot.com/2006/05/top-10-fuel-trees-for-zone-5-and-above.html
03:19:22 <Mike_L> therethinker: it doesn't work?
03:19:55 <therethinker> Mike_L: Might be my browser, the link isn't working, the page is blank
03:20:15 <Mike_L> http://tamale.net/pub/2007/pwdgen/pronounce3.1.py
03:20:20 <Mike_L> hmm that's the same URL
03:20:39 <Mike_L> therethinker: go here and then right-click the link and choose Save As: http://tamale.net/pub/2007/pwdgen/
03:20:46 <therethinker> thanks, doy'
03:22:07 *** cre8radix has quit ()
03:25:26 *** BigJibby (n=matt@ip1-79.eyrkonaeac08.dialup.ca.telus.com) has joined #swhack
03:31:09 *** Jibbler|gone (n=Jibbler@jibble.plus.com) has joined #swhack
03:32:17 <Mike_L> I've chosen a name for my linode
03:33:09 <Arnia> tonybaloney: HAppS
03:33:24 * Arnia wants something alcoholic to drink
03:33:36 <Arnia> But does this count as morning or evening?
03:35:41 <therethinker> Its 12 somewhere
03:35:55 * tonybaloney investigates HAppS
03:38:20 <therethinker> http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/ee476/FinalProjects/ -- wow, I'm not really impressed by most of these...
03:39:07 *** Jibbler has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
03:45:23 <therethinker> night
03:46:53 <glen_quagmire> therethinker: is that undergrad class?
03:47:24 <glen_quagmire> it looks difficult and a lot of homework
03:47:45 <glen_quagmire> i'd have to come here everyday if i were to take the class
03:48:20 <glen_quagmire> yay midnight
03:48:26 *** glen_quagmire has quit ("banana")
03:48:54 <Mike_L> 'wearable air guitar' <-- cool
03:58:06 <realist> They seem more like 'home brew' hacks, than something you'd expect from a final year project... then again, they only had 4 weeks to do them.
03:58:52 <Mike_L> do you expect any class project to be well-engineered?
04:00:51 <realist> Is that a rhetorical question?
04:07:27 *** therethinker has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
04:11:10 *** pierpa` is now known as pierpa
04:12:40 *** cre8radix (n=cre8radi@p54BE7019.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #swhack
04:31:03 *** cre8radix has quit ()
04:57:55 *** est has quit ("leaving")
04:57:59 *** est (n=est@64.74.213.174) has joined #swhack
05:00:11 *** BigJibby has quit ("Konversation terminated!")
05:05:11 *** jasonw22 (n=jasonw22@64.74.213.174) has joined #swhack
05:05:46 *** cr`x (n=zax@user-12lcqh4.cable.mindspring.com) has joined #swhack
05:26:31 <Arnia> Oh what a beautiful morning
05:30:11 <perigrin> says you ...
05:30:13 * perigrin heads to bed
05:42:49 *** bpt (n=bpt@adsl-227-106-84.rmo.bellsouth.net) has joined #swhack
06:03:30 *** xover has quit (Remote closed the connection)
06:25:40 <sbp> chuckle, license-review reached an awesome climax overnight
06:25:43 <phenny> sbp: 03:18Z <therethinker> tell sbp if it ends with an o, then it will result in a "f]" : therethinker: [off] .g testo /[off] f] .g testo: http://w...
06:26:06 *** cr`x has quit ("אַכטונג! קאָמפיוטער שלאָפֿט.")
06:29:56 <sbp> I specifically refer to:
06:29:57 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:19
06:29:58 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:msn:19
06:29:58 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:21
06:29:58 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:msn:21
06:30:00 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:23
06:30:02 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:msn:23
06:30:05 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:25
06:30:06 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:msn:25
06:30:08 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:27
06:30:10 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:msn:27
06:30:12 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mmn:29
06:33:39 <Arnia> "John often teases us with such ancient runes from the days when the web was slow and warriors fought."
06:34:15 <sbp> on which, see my reply
06:34:31 <sbp> (it was me who teased 'em with that. Larry didn't read my submission, it seems)
06:35:52 <sbp> I'm not going to bother that the AFL 3.0 is proliferation findingsed out for the APL...
06:36:45 <sbp> even though the Apache License (hmm, doesn't seem it has APL as an abbreviation) doesn't have the same ability to have the protected two-line reference
06:37:06 <sbp> I also never did get a reply about the consistency of the Fair License...
06:39:51 <sbp> what I wrote about the AFL was of the "ask a question, get no answers; declare a statement, get many refutations" variety incidentally--I couldn't find a Debian position on it so I looked at Wikipedia which literally has a "?" in the DFSG compatibility field for AFL 3.0
06:40:24 <sbp> obviously I'll ask debian-legal as is directed, but I also got the handy info from Rick
06:41:48 * sbp -> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/threads.html#00230
06:42:50 <sbp> [[[
06:42:50 <sbp> Figures. Another in Rosen's long line of appallingly written, non-free
06:42:50 <sbp> licenses. Why do people even consider using these things?
06:43:02 <sbp> ]]] - Andrew Suffield, http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00237.html
06:43:48 *** cre8radix (n=cre8radi@p54BE7019.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #swhack
06:44:11 <sbp> seems to have been a fairly controversial license
06:44:18 <sbp> of course, this is v2.1
06:45:21 <Arnia> Why would anyone consider using a 'Free' licence? :p
06:45:35 <sbp> [[[
06:45:35 <sbp> As I understand it (from Rosen's book) the point of the AFL was to
06:45:35 <sbp> be the non-copyleft version of the OSL. Essentially, they're the
06:45:36 <sbp> BSD and GPL licenses written in conservative legalese. And Rosen
06:45:36 <sbp> designed them to be contracts rather than unilateral grants of
06:45:36 <sbp> permission.
06:45:53 <sbp> ]]] - "Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch patent attorney - Speaking only for myself"
06:45:58 <sbp> in http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00265.html
06:49:55 <Arnia> oh this is all so fun
06:50:05 * Arnia kicks the copy-lefters in the head
06:50:17 * Arnia kicks the contract lawyers in the head
06:50:25 * Arnia kicks common law in the proverbial head
06:51:04 <sbp> thanks. I feel a bit better now, heh
06:52:43 <Arnia> I'm annoyed
06:53:07 <Arnia> Only two rendering engines support the content property with image URLs
06:53:44 * Arnia stabs Gecko
06:53:52 <Arnia> Hopefully the IE8 engine will
06:55:41 <sbp> [[[
06:55:42 <sbp> It seems that a rather clear consensus about the AFL is being formed
06:55:42 <sbp> here at debian-legal: it doesn't comply with DFSG and it's
06:55:42 <sbp> GPL-incompatible.
06:55:47 <sbp> ]]] - http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00263.html
06:57:36 <sbp> Arnia: the content property?
06:58:26 <Arnia> sbp: #logo { content: url(images/my-logo.png); }
06:58:55 <sbp> ah!
06:58:59 <Arnia> How image replacement should be done
06:59:17 <sbp> I was thinking some DOM thing
06:59:20 <Arnia> WebKit supports it... Opera has supported it for yonks... Gecko and IE don't
07:00:50 <sbp> alright, I'm going to write to debian-legal
07:01:03 <sbp> more for fun than anything, since my beliefs about licenses are just being massively reinforced
07:01:23 <sbp> some much factionalism, inconsistency, and bad design...
07:01:27 <sbp> s/some/so/
07:02:08 <sbp> also because debian-legal seem fairly helpful
07:02:20 <sbp> so a good place to learn teh learnings
07:06:50 <Arnia> There are some things I can fix... for example, altering the font settings. But it won't look half as good :/
07:08:26 *** bpt has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
07:24:56 <sbp> can't you just do it another way?
07:25:52 <Arnia> I can... but I'd actually prefer to have it usable and not too ugly but still sticking to CSS 3 where possible and avoiding the hacks
07:26:15 <Arnia> The reason is, I want to show Gecko up
07:26:54 <Arnia> They apparently have no major plans for the CSS renderer for the next few cycles... they think their CSS support is good enough
07:26:57 <Arnia> I disagree
07:27:27 <Arnia> Although I hope IE8 knocks some sense into them...
07:31:09 <Arnia> Firefox 2 has some strange bugs though
07:31:39 <Arnia> (this was a firefox 3 render, which is a bit better than FF2 but has a whole new slew of rendering glitches to iron out)
07:31:59 <Arnia> The 'semantic web' category tag is faded using an opacity property
07:32:26 <Arnia> In FF2, the use of the opacity property causes random DOM nodes to go translucent
07:32:46 <Arnia> I need to figure out why it is leaking a property like that...
07:41:06 <lisppaste2> sbp pasted "Choosing a License: GNU APL? AFL 3.0?" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/53274
07:43:12 <sbp> there, quite pleased with that
07:43:19 <sbp> .t
07:43:22 <phenny> Sun Dec 30 08:58:44 GMT 2007
07:43:33 <sbp> hmm, probably not a great idea to have sent it on a Sunday
07:43:54 <sbp> but just for fun anyway
07:46:27 <sbp> it would be nice though if debian-legal could work something out: having my package in debian would be good for me to make phenny more readily available, and good for debian as a small enrichment of their package library
07:47:05 <sbp> but if there's a prevention of that from licenses being shite, when whatever
07:47:09 <sbp> s/when/then/
07:48:14 <Arnia> sbp: bastards :)
07:48:44 <sbp> if I thought about it too much, I'd probably turn to djb's point of view
07:48:45 * Arnia wonders how much more gratuitous CSS he can get into his site design without it looking cack
07:49:15 <Arnia> I'm really tempted to stress-test the renderers now you see
07:49:23 <sbp> hehe
07:49:42 <sbp> The Acid Pi Test
07:50:04 <Arnia> I wonder what a rendering engine built to be entirely modular would look like
07:50:12 <Arnia> Probably a lot like XSmiles actually...
07:50:18 <Arnia> But it would be a nice thing to have
07:50:52 <sbp> heh: http://www.xsmiles.org/images/poro.jpg
07:51:50 <Mike_L> sbp: it would be great if you would write a short how-to for writing phenny modules
07:52:36 * Arnia thinks about what a plug-and-play CSS renderer would look like
07:53:14 <sbp> ah: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/12/msg00102.html
07:53:19 <sbp> Mike_L: yeah, definitely on the todo list
07:53:24 <tonybaloney> Arnia: In terms of how it would be organized or how well it would perform and do its job?
07:53:55 <Arnia> Well... each CSS property group (I don't think it is possible to separate down to individual properties) would have to handle cascading (downwards), computed styles (upwards), and rendering to some context.
07:55:33 <Arnia> Hm... not sure it is possible to abstract contexts above the level of medium
07:56:02 * Arnia can see how this would work in Haskell
07:56:27 <Arnia> Not necessarily in an OO setting though...
07:59:15 <Tene> .seen Monty
07:59:17 <phenny> Sorry, I haven't seen monty around.
07:59:50 *** Monty (n=monty@myrtle.ukc.ac.uk) has joined #swhack
07:59:58 <tonybaloney> I wonder where Monty could be
08:00:00 <Monty> I reckon toast-rack + helipad = scraps.
08:00:09 <tonybaloney> Ahhh, there's my answer
08:00:13 <tonybaloney> Hello Monty
08:00:19 <Monty> Its boundaries will try to be in highschool who guys was talking about. Some people reporting bugs with people would
08:04:17 <sbp> anyway, I gotta run
08:04:20 <sbp> c'ya!
08:04:23 <tonybaloney> night :)
08:46:05 <Arnia> Still ugly in Firefox 2, but ok in 3
08:49:25 *** pierpa has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
09:01:19 *** jetscreamer (n=jetscrea@unaffiliated/jetscreamer) has joined #swhack
09:31:44 *** jetscreamer has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
10:10:52 *** JibberJim (n=none@81-86-174-182.dsl.pipex.com) has joined #swhack
10:34:25 *** est has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
10:53:02 *** xover (n=xover@pounder.neutri.no) has joined #swhack
11:05:52 <sbp> tonybaloney: not night :-)
11:06:38 <sbp> "Disclaimers: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP."
11:06:44 <sbp> - Francesco Poli, debian-legal
11:06:50 <sbp> chuckle
11:11:31 <sbp> so, IANAL and TINLA are obvious, TINASOTODP is This Is Not A Statement Of The Official Debian Position...
11:11:35 <sbp> DD... hmm...
11:11:40 <sbp> Debian Developer, perhaps?
11:12:03 <sbp> ah yes
11:39:11 *** chris2 (n=chris@p5B16B472.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) has joined #swhack
12:08:05 * sbp sends two more emails to debian-legal
12:10:36 <sbp> Francesco's comment on Moen was fun
12:12:17 <realist> I suddenly remember why I never became a debian developer... politics.
12:14:23 <sbp> ahahaha:
12:14:24 <sbp> [[[
12:14:25 <sbp> On the subject of Digital Rights Management, Moglen once said, "We also live in a world in which the right to tinker is under some very substantial threat. This is said to be because movie and record companies must eat. I will concede that they must eat. Though, like me, they should eat less."
12:14:30 <sbp> ]]] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eben_Moglen
12:14:32 <sbp> Moglen++
12:14:56 <sbp> realist: well, I'm enjoying debian-legal more than license-review so far
12:15:19 <sbp> the tone is much more polite and helpful (but I'm also not using a strawman)
12:16:55 <sbp> it also didn't really matter what the OSI say
12:17:05 <sbp> whereas it does matter what Debian say if I want to submit a package to them :-)
12:19:48 <realist> What package?
12:19:52 <sbp> phenny
12:20:18 <xover> Nooo!
12:20:26 <sbp> nooo?
12:20:27 <xover> Don't prostitute the poor girl!
12:20:28 <sbp> [[[
12:20:29 <sbp> Noah Slater has offered to make a debian package from some of my
12:20:29 <sbp> software, but I'm having trouble choosing a DFSG compatible license. I
12:20:29 <sbp> was wondering if debian-legal could help.
12:20:34 <sbp> ]]] - http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/12/msg00102.html
12:20:38 <sbp> it won't be me doing it, it'll be Noah
12:21:05 <xover> And particularly not to those hard-nosed pervert degenerates in the Debian Club!
12:21:10 <sbp> hehe
12:21:51 <realist> sbp: what license are you considering?
12:22:18 <sbp> realist: there aren't any that meet my requirements
12:22:34 <realist> which are?
12:22:37 <sbp> though the AFL 3.0 and the GNU APL are kinda close
12:23:07 <sbp> realist: I outlined them in http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/12/msg00102.html if you'd like to read it (it's hard to summarise any more concisely than I did in there, and even that required further explanation)
12:23:09 <realist> any consideration for a BSD license?
12:23:16 <sbp> which is available in http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/12/msg00110.html
12:23:43 <sbp> the BSD license does not meet my requirements, as I demonstrate specifically in those two messages; especially the latter. I use the Modified BSD *specifically* as an example
12:24:23 <realist> debian-legal is one of the very few debian lists that I'm specifically not subscribed to
12:24:28 <sbp> heh
12:24:32 * realist reads your posts
12:28:18 <xover> You're too conservative about whitespace and comment blocks in your code.
12:28:34 <sbp> hmm?
12:28:50 <xover> Someone has had a very very bad influence on your coding style, probably at a very formative point in your development.
12:28:57 <sbp> what do you mean?
12:29:56 <xover> The only reason exceeding two lines of license boilerplate is jarring to you is that you're to stingy with whitespace and comments blocks in your code, so the license sticks out like a sore thumb.
12:30:11 <sbp> or perhaps I hate licenses?
12:30:22 <xover> Everybody hates licenses. :-)
12:30:27 <sbp> there you go then
12:30:53 <xover> I've been considering writing up a Non-Lawyer License.
12:30:59 <sbp> I'm going to make a distro and then mandate all code submissions to have a huge ascii-goatse at the top
12:31:14 <xover> Write it in more or less plain english, stating my intent so people can understand it.
12:31:24 <sbp> (the abbreviated form, /-{ }-\, would not be allowed)
12:31:42 <xover> Because the “people” will include any judge in any legal case; they actually tend to be smart and pragmatic people.
12:32:00 <xover> Unlike the IPR lawyers, who've earned the appelation “Landshark” many times over.
12:32:23 <sbp> the best license ever, of course, is the Woody Guthrie license
12:32:25 <sbp> "This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright #154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin' it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do."
12:32:32 <sbp> - quoted on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woody_Guthrie
12:32:49 <xover> heh heh
12:34:57 <realist> What's the problem with a LICENSE.txt file anyway?
12:35:44 <sbp> second email
12:35:59 <realist> I think Ben Finney also has a good point in his post, that a copyright notice becomes redundant with a permissive license
12:36:10 <sbp> redundant how?
12:36:21 <realist> Especially if you're using a 'copyleft' style license
12:36:33 <sbp> I've demonstrated that there is a permissive license, the AFL 3.0, which preserves notices
12:36:42 <sbp> and that the Modified BSD does not
12:36:53 <realist> Well, are derived works required to use the same copyright notice?
12:36:57 <sbp> yes
12:37:09 <realist> Interesting.
12:38:04 <realist> Only a modified BSD license is DFSG compatible?
12:38:12 <sbp> and the AFL 3.0 isn't, right
12:38:24 <sbp> or probably isn't
12:39:31 <sbp> what I'd like is for someone to take the bit from the top of the AFL 3.0 license and add it to the Expat/MIT license
12:39:42 <sbp> in a legally consistent manner
12:39:55 <sbp> oh, Bo Diddley is 81 today by the way
12:40:04 <realist> Perhaps it's just too late in the evening for me to be thinking about software licensing.
12:40:05 <sbp> a pub had it advertised on their blackboard
12:40:17 <realist> It's already NYE here ;-)
12:40:42 <sbp> heh, ô
12:41:00 <realist> On that note, I must get some shut eye
12:41:06 <sbp> wait, there's an ANTIpode now?
12:41:10 <sbp> 'night!
12:41:16 <realist> Let me know what license you chose :-)
12:41:22 <sbp> if I do...
12:41:28 <sbp> :-)
12:41:37 <realist> True, if/when.
12:49:56 <sbp> beep beep
12:50:45 <xover> .wik TransGaming Technologies
12:50:48 <phenny> "TransGaming Inc. is a company specialized in video game portability technology." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransGaming_Technologies
12:52:31 <xover> Combine the general rotted poor quality of RPGs, the general shittyness of code shipping from UbiSoft, and the proprietary-fork-of-WINE called Cedega^W Cider…
12:52:54 <xover> …and you get «Heroes of Might and Magic V» for Mac.
12:53:45 <xover> The thing is so buggy I don't think anyone has been able to complete the campaign mode yet, and it's been out for yonks.
12:54:24 <xover> So whenever you see this logo: http://www.freeverse.com/assets/games/6002/overview46/ciderLogo.png
12:54:38 <xover> I strongly suggest you consider it a warning label, and stay the hell away.
12:55:13 <xover> I think it's would actually be preferable for all parties concerned if you bought the original Windows title and played it using Boot Camp.
12:55:37 <xover> (Since Cider-based emulations/“ports” are Intel-only in any case)
12:55:40 <sbp> [[[
12:55:41 <sbp> Quakerism in 1652 is a tremendous flame, burning across the countryside. 1659 is probably the peak of political radicalism for Quakerism as a movement. By 1690, those flames are cooling to embers, embers which have sustained Quakerism to the present, through a long list of additional shifts.
12:55:47 <sbp> ]]] - http://lightandsilence.org/2006/07/quakers_ranters_and_the_presen.html
12:56:15 <sbp> ...posted by Simon St.Laurent! can't be *the* Simon St.Laurent, surely?
12:58:18 <xover> Why wouldn't it be?
12:58:49 <crschmidt> sbp: any response from Larry Rosen yet?
13:02:05 <sbp> crschmidt: plenty. see http://swhack.com/logs/2007-12-30#T06-29-57
13:02:19 <sbp> but the conversation has moved to debian-legal now
13:02:27 <sbp> xover: because there's no mention of XML on the site... :-)
13:03:12 <sbp> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/12/threads.html#00102
13:03:17 <sbp> that's the debian-legal thread
13:04:11 *** kpreid has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
13:06:29 <sbp> cool: http://www.strecorsoc.org/maps/map1654.html
13:11:04 <crschmidt> hm
13:11:05 <crschmidt> TINASOTODP
13:11:13 <crschmidt> This is not a statement of the debian project?
13:11:23 <crschmidt> no
13:11:25 *** _bjoern has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
13:11:35 <crschmidt> Yeah, I can't work it out
13:12:31 *** cre8radix is now known as cre8radix|off
13:19:40 <sbp> yeah, I already looked it up. hang on...
13:19:49 <sbp> 12:27 <sbp> so, IANAL and TINLA are obvious, TINASOTODP is This Is Not A Statement Of The Official Debian Position...
13:19:49 <sbp> 12:27 <sbp> DD... hmm...
13:19:49 <sbp> 12:27 <sbp> Debian Developer, perhaps?
13:19:49 <sbp> 12:27 <sbp> ah yes
13:24:10 <crschmidt> ah, yeah
13:24:14 <crschmidt> I got the debian developer one
13:26:33 * crschmidt wonders what makes the AFL non-Debian Friendly
13:26:40 <sbp> [[[
13:26:42 <sbp> ome of these threatening ideas and practices included:
13:26:43 <sbp> ...
13:26:52 <sbp> * Allowing women to preach in public (and even, as Fox mentions in his journal, recognizing that women have souls).
13:26:57 <sbp> ]]] - http://www.homewoodfriends.org/earlyfriends.html
13:27:10 <sbp> crschmidt: Google about for the huge original thread
13:27:24 <sbp> I didn't look at the exact issues, but several people said "ugh"
13:33:49 <crschmidt> sbp: it seems that Rosen himself wrote the AFL -- I hadn't realized that
13:35:42 <sbp> yup
13:36:08 <sbp> debian-legal knew it
13:36:47 <sbp> Andrew Suffield denounced it, and Rosen's licenses in general, strongly in http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00237.html
13:37:09 <sbp> (is he the same asuffield, Freenode developer, I wonder?)
13:39:12 <crschmidt> Interestingly, it seems to me that at least some of the complaints in that email -- the second, at the very least -- is almost exactly the same as the Apache License, Version 2.0
13:39:27 <crschmidt> (Which, I'll add, is a PITA that I only realized yesterday OpenLayers isn't complying with)
13:42:10 <crschmidt> er, weird. The review on debian-legal was of the AFL 2.1 -- the one on opensource.org is 3.0. Now I have to go figure out if there are any differences between them
13:42:48 <crschmidt> and of course, the 2.1 version isn't hosted on opensource.org anymore
13:44:54 <sbp> the proliferation report says that the Apache License should be used in place of the AFL, note
13:45:07 <sbp> which is fun, because I was told to use the AFL specifically; the Apache License doesn't meet my needs
13:45:16 <sbp> so that makes you wonder about the proliferation report
13:45:17 <crschmidt> Yeah, except for the fact that you have to distribute the Apache License with the software
13:45:27 <crschmidt> Well.
13:45:27 <sbp> but anyway, yeah. I'm not sure what the 2.1 -> 3.0 differences are
13:45:37 <crschmidt> The proliferation report is not designed to say 'these are exactly the same'
13:45:39 <sbp> which is why I asked on debian-legal about 3.0 specifically, because only 2.1 was rejected
13:45:44 * crschmidt nods
13:45:53 <crschmidt> The questionable claims on't seem to have changed
13:45:54 <sbp> aye, I suppose it depends how big you see this difference
13:46:00 <sbp> it's big for me, probably not for others
13:46:06 <sbp> yeah
13:46:18 <crschmidt> To almost anyone on debian-legal, your requirements are likely clumsily trivial
13:46:20 <sbp> the FSF still say that the AFL 3.0 is incompatible with the GPL for example
13:46:23 <crschmidt> the same is presumably true of license-discuss
13:46:30 <crschmidt> Hm
13:46:30 <sbp> which jcowan disputes, and says that Rosen disputes
13:46:34 <crschmidt> Yeah
13:46:41 <crschmidt> i wonder why specifically.
13:46:45 <crschmidt> Possibly clause 10
13:46:50 <sbp> he says somewhere. hang on
13:47:20 <sbp> [[[
13:47:21 <sbp> Both the Open Source Initiative and the Free Software Foundation have
13:47:21 <sbp> analyzed the AFL and declared it conformant to their definitions of "open
13:47:21 <sbp> source" and "free". The FSF also claims that the AFL is incompatible
13:47:21 <sbp> with the GNU GPL, but I (and the author of the AFL) believe this to be
13:47:21 <sbp> incorrect, and a failure to reflect on the sublicenseability (that is,
13:47:23 <sbp> the right of a distributor of original or modified works to replace the
13:47:25 <sbp> AFL with his own license, proprietary or open) of the AFL. I have asked
13:47:27 <sbp> the AFL's author to make this point clearer in AFL 2.2.
13:47:29 <sbp> ]]] - http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00232.html
13:47:41 <sbp> but presumably 2.2 failed to do so, since the FSF reject all versions through to 3.0
13:47:51 <sbp> (failed to convince, that is)
13:47:56 <crschmidt> Oh!
13:48:08 <crschmidt> I just remembered where I'd heard smack about figlet / dfsg before
13:48:13 <crschmidt> And it was (naturally) from jcowan
13:48:14 <sbp> (and reject as being compatible with the GPL)
13:48:17 <sbp> heh
13:48:46 <crschmidt> hm
13:49:10 <crschmidt> which I'm having problems finding reference to.
13:49:13 <crschmidt> Ah well.
13:55:15 <remote> hey crschmidt maybe you could give me a valuable opinion on this question that's been with me for a few...
13:55:52 <crschmidt> Probably not. My opinions are cheap (like my booze)
13:56:13 <sbp> 2c is the traditional value
13:56:57 <remote> wait, can I ask you in private?
13:57:06 <sbp> spoilsport
13:57:20 <remote> i'm not even sure what this channel is about
13:57:20 *** Xanthor (n=Xanthor@90.9.249.122) has joined #swhack
13:57:36 <crschmidt> Did you read the swhack faq?
13:58:00 <crschmidt> sbp: I find it interesting that you don't find a problem with the fact that the AFL essentially allows for relicensing under essentially any other license, which would then mean the derivative authors could change the license to MIT, and pull your name off all the files.
13:58:29 <remote> now that you mention it, it rings a bell but topic's empty about that
13:58:44 <sbp> nope, the AFL only allows you to relicense under a license with the same conditions
13:58:54 <sbp> which presumably would include keeping the statement
13:58:56 <crschmidt> .g swhack faq
13:58:58 <phenny> crschmidt: http://swhack.com/faq/
13:59:03 <sbp> if not, then indeed it's not suitable
13:59:09 <crschmidt> sbp: "So works under the AFL
13:59:11 <crschmidt> can be treated much like those under the BSD or MIT licenses." -- jcowan
13:59:22 <sbp> "much like" doesn't mean exactly the same as
13:59:24 <remote> yes, actually firefox did the lucky google search for me from `swhack' :)
13:59:31 <crschmidt> -- http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00681.html
13:59:31 <sbp> he just means it's in the same class of licenses, I think
13:59:35 <sbp> the permissive licenses
13:59:55 <crschmidt> Hm. I'm not convinced of that, but okay.
14:00:07 <sbp> well, if it were exactly the same then there'd be no need for it
14:00:30 <sbp> and there'd be no question as to it being DFSG compatible, since BSD/MIT are
14:00:54 <sbp> but yeah, I'm not entirely sure
14:02:08 <sbp> at least the general approach is nifty. if only someone would tack it on to the Expat/MIT license...
14:02:56 <crschmidt> Well, my reading of that email seems to indicate that 1. You can relicense it essentially any way you want, *but*, 2. The AFL itself is not considered, by debian-legal, to be dfsg friendly. Which means that *you* could release under AFL, nchanter could take the code, relicense it as MIT, and then give the code to debian under that license
14:03:11 <sbp> perhaps I should ask AaronSw what he thinks. he might be able to suggest things, or someone to talk to
14:03:40 <crschmidt> But I agree that it seems very strange that that is the case.
14:03:43 <sbp> which email, 2004/10/msg00681.html?
14:03:52 <crschmidt> yeah.
14:03:59 <crschmidt> So I'm probably just misunderstanding something.
14:04:40 <sbp> hmm, actually it does sound like that to me too
14:04:53 <sbp> gonna take another look at the license itself...
14:05:14 <crschmidt> The text changed in AFL3.0
14:05:20 <crschmidt> Specifically this was added: "under any license of your choice that does not contradict the terms and conditions, including Licensor’s reserved rights and remedies, in this Academic Free License;"
14:05:27 <sbp> hmm
14:05:35 <crschmidt> rather than jcowan's suggested "under any license whatsoever"
14:05:54 <sbp> does not contradict...
14:06:34 <sbp> I don't know, quite frankly. it does seem that jcowan believes you can relicense under BSD and MIT
14:06:51 <sbp> I suppose I'd have to ask Rosen. I'm not doing that :-)
14:08:36 * sbp looks at Andrew Suffield's quote again
14:12:56 <crschmidt> It seems that there is a general agreement that section 9 is one of the things that makes it non-dfsg free
14:13:31 <sbp> yeah
14:14:35 <crschmidt> That section changed between 2.1 and 3.0
14:14:46 <crschmidt> But not in a way that seems very likely to have affected the dfsg freeness
14:14:53 <crschmidt> lisppaste2: url?
14:14:54 <lisppaste2> To use the lisppaste bot, visit http://paste.lisp.org/new/swhack and enter your paste.
14:15:50 <lisppaste2> crschmidt pasted "academic free license section 9" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/53284
14:18:06 <sbp> someone needs to invent a semantic diff
14:18:12 <sbp> that would be unbelievably cool
14:18:55 *** therethinker (n=zach@c-76-118-203-70.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) has joined #swhack
14:19:22 <therethinker> G'morning!
14:20:04 <crschmidt> Hm, Tagsoup is dual licensed under GPL/AFL
14:20:16 <sbp> ôrly? I thought it was only AFL
14:20:37 <sbp> ha!
14:20:37 <sbp> "It's also licensed under the GNU GPL version 2.0, since unfortunately the GPL and the AFL are incompatible."
14:20:47 <sbp> contradicting what he said on debian-license
14:20:58 <crschmidt> Well, perhaps just going with the FSF view.
14:21:00 <sbp> or perhaps there's an implied "popularly perceived as being"
14:21:02 <sbp> yeah
14:21:09 <crschmidt> .gc inurl:copyright inurl:debian site:packages.debian.org Academic free license
14:21:12 <phenny> inurl:copyright inurl:debian site:packages.debian.org Academic free license: 23
14:21:36 *** Xanthor is now known as Xanthor[aw]
14:21:49 <crschmidt> not the most reassuring copyright statemenet: http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/d/dbconfig-common/dbconfig-common_1.8.36/dbconfig-common.copyright
14:22:03 <sbp> .gc inurl:copyright inurl:debian site:packages.debian.org "Academic free license 3"
14:22:05 <phenny> inurl:copyright inurl:debian site:packages.debian.org "Academic free license 3": 0
14:22:27 <sbp> "downloaded from somewhere" - chuckle
14:23:55 <crschmidt> Seems like most people who license under AFL dual-license under GPL
14:24:15 <crschmidt> However, there are a number of packages in debian with some portion of the code being licensed under AFL
14:24:26 <crschmidt> So I think it seems unlikely that the ftp-masters would reject the package on that basis alone.
14:24:29 <sbp> why do people use the AFL rather than BSD/MIT, I wonder?
14:24:51 <crschmidt> Not clear.
14:25:01 <crschmidt> In at least one case (python-dbus) etch is GPL/AFL
14:25:04 <crschmidt> and sid is MIT-only
14:25:17 <sbp> hmm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_Free_License has a list of goals
14:26:26 *** cre8radix|off is now known as cre8radix
14:31:17 *** _bjoern (n=bjoern@dslb-084-057-224-027.pools.arcor-ip.net) has joined #swhack
14:33:32 <crschmidt> Anyway I highly doubt that your package would be rejected if it was entered under AFL3.0
14:36:27 <sbp> ooh: http://www.openldap.org/software/release/license.html
14:36:39 <sbp> yeah, but as you point out, the sublicensing thing in AFL 3.0 isn't clear
14:37:03 <crschmidt> "3. Redistributions must contain a verbatim copy of this document."
14:37:28 <sbp> rats
14:37:30 <sbp> and also:
14:37:31 <sbp> [[[
14:37:31 <sbp> The OpenLDAP Foundation may revise this license from time to time.
14:37:31 <sbp> Each revision is distinguished by a version number. You may use
14:37:31 <sbp> this Software under terms of this license revision or under the
14:37:32 <sbp> terms of any subsequent revision of the license.
14:37:34 <sbp> ]]]
14:37:46 <sbp> strike, yer out
14:39:09 <sbp> oh, hmm. see Section 6 of the AFL
14:40:42 <crschmidt> Yes
14:40:49 <crschmidt> I figured that was the one that mattered most to you?
14:41:44 <sbp> Section 6, you mean?
14:41:51 <crschmidt> Yeah
14:42:03 <sbp> well yeah, but I forgot about it through all the sublicensing questions
14:42:11 <sbp> and now I'm not sure how it can sit with the sublicensing
14:42:29 <sbp> it seems entirely clear that you can't sublicense under BSD/MIT given Section 6
14:42:44 <sbp> then again, that seemed clear to me anyway. probably I don't understand what it means to sublicense
14:46:51 <sbp> hmm, http://opensource.org/licenses/cddl1.php is similar to the OpenLDAP License
14:47:04 <sbp> it protects the notices, but you also have to contain a verbatim copy
14:47:25 <sbp> on the versioning, it at least lets you opt-out of "any later version"
14:48:23 <sbp> ooh, http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ecl1.php is closer
14:48:56 <sbp> it lets you merely give "The full text of the Educational Community License in a location viewable to users of the redistributed or derivative work." - I should think that a URI would work
14:49:03 <sbp> e.g.
14:49:09 <sbp> Copyright 2007, Sean B. Palmer, inamidst.com
14:49:17 <sbp> Released to the public under the Educational Community License.
14:49:25 <sbp> License URI: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ecl1.php
14:50:07 <sbp> "Educational Community License (special purpose: only suitable for educational establishments)"
14:50:13 <sbp> - http://opensource.org/proliferation-report
14:50:14 <sbp> oh well
14:51:12 <tonybaloney> Place your bets, gentlemen and pick a software license. Any software license.
14:51:25 * tonybaloney sounds like a Las Vegas casino owner
14:51:29 <sbp> ew...
14:51:30 <sbp> [[[
14:51:31 <sbp> a. Document any Modifications You make to the Licensed Software
14:51:31 <sbp> including the nature of the change, the authors of the change, and
14:51:31 <sbp> the date of the change. This documentation must appear both in the
14:51:31 <sbp> Source Code and in a text file titled "CHANGES" distributed with the
14:51:32 <sbp> Licensed Software and Your Extensions.
14:51:36 <sbp> ]]] - http://opensource.org/licenses/rpl.php
14:53:16 <tonybaloney> I seriously think that it would be an excellent idea to have a webpage with a thorough (but not necessarily all-inclusive) and you would select your requirements in a series of menus and you would be presented with a license that matches :)
14:53:47 <sbp> aw. "a. You must include this license document in the distribution."
14:53:49 <sbp> - http://opensource.org/licenses/qtpl.php
14:54:01 <sbp> shame you can't symlink to a URI. heh
14:54:58 <crschmidt> It really is annoying that there is not a single dfsg, fsf, gpl friendly license that you can refer to solely by URL in each file and expect your statement in the source code to be maintained
14:55:36 <sbp> "Open Group Test Suite (special purpose: only suitable for tests or test suites)"
14:55:48 <sbp> that would also have worked, I think, had it not been special use
14:55:58 <sbp> so that's two special use licenses that might have been suitable... sheesh!
14:56:09 <sbp> crschmidt: yup, it's maddening
14:56:17 <sbp> seems like an obvious, obvious design to me
14:56:22 * crschmidt would agree
14:56:27 <crschmidt> But I also understand why it's not common
14:57:07 *** cr`x (n=zax@user-12lcqh4.cable.mindspring.com) has joined #swhack
14:57:40 <therethinker> oh, sbp, did you get the bug?
14:57:51 <zooko> tonybaloney: https://zooko.com/licence_quick_ref.html
14:57:58 <zooko> then http://pgl.yoyo.org/lqr/
15:01:44 * sbp will continue to study licenses after doing two things:
15:01:54 <sbp> 1) welcoming zooko, whom I didn't notice was on the channel
15:02:05 <sbp> 2) playing COMPUTER BOWLING WHOO
15:02:08 <sbp> hi zooko!
15:02:17 <sbp> COMPUTER BOWLING WHOO, biab
15:08:20 <zooko> Howdy sdp! Thanks for the warm welcome.\
15:12:09 *** cr`x has quit ("אַכטונג! קאָמפיוטער שלאָפֿט.")
15:18:08 <sbp> you're... welcome!
15:18:14 <sbp> alrighty, back to licenses
15:23:07 <Arnia> oh, good grief: http://ajaxian.com/archives/erjs-erlang-in-javascript
15:24:54 * crschmidt wonders why that's a problem
15:25:39 <sbp> hmm, the Nethack General Public License...
15:25:41 <sbp> it appears to be a match
15:25:46 <sbp> http://opensource.org/licenses/nethack.php
15:25:51 <sbp> except that it's "non-reusable"
15:26:03 <sbp> but I wonder about these non-reusable licenses. can't you just change the names?
15:26:42 <sbp> it's a bit obscure though
15:27:16 <sbp> aw man, http://opensource.org/licenses/eiffel.html
15:27:27 <sbp> it requires distribution of the license as a file
15:27:30 <sbp> so close, so close
15:28:53 <_bjoern> .calc 512 kbps in KB/s
15:28:55 <phenny> 512 kbps = 64 kilobytes / second
15:29:26 <sbp> heh, the Microsoft Public License requires a copy of the license too
15:30:23 * _bjoern tends to use the 2 paragraph gpl banner
15:30:28 <sbp> ew
15:30:33 <sbp> bloat causer
15:30:34 <_bjoern> no license pointer, no license copy.
15:30:43 <_bjoern> well it's smaller than the minimally correct version!
15:31:11 <sbp> "Licensed to the public under the GPLv3." is the smallest correct version
15:31:28 <crschmidt> sbp: there is a solid reason to require inclusion of the license -- specifically, that referring to a URL means that when the content at the URL changes, it could change in a way to screw you over, no?
15:31:33 <crschmidt> Certainly that
15:31:40 <sbp> but you're still causing bloat since the GPL requires itself to be distributed along with all copies(?) and derivative works
15:31:41 <crschmidt> s why we include full text of licenses in the stuff we build at MC
15:32:02 <sbp> crschmidt: yeah, though some licenses don't say to use a URL
15:32:08 <sbp> the AFL for example, just says to call it by name
15:32:10 <_bjoern> I don't do that of course!
15:32:14 <sbp> and that's what Rosen said in the recent thread
15:32:38 * sbp tries to find the specific message
15:32:57 <sbp> here: http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mmp:19
15:33:08 * crschmidt nods
15:33:14 <sbp> [[[
15:33:14 <sbp> Copyright (C) <year> <author or owner>
15:33:14 <sbp> Licensed to the public under the XXXX license.
15:33:15 <sbp> ...where XXXX is the name of an OSI-approved or CC-approved license
15:33:15 <sbp> published on OSI's or CC's website.
15:33:17 <sbp> ]]]
15:33:32 <sbp> for ye record
15:33:45 <sbp> since www-archive was mysteriously elided from the CC list by that point
15:33:58 <sbp> by Russ, I believe
15:34:04 <_bjoern> it was? I thought I read that...
15:34:10 <crschmidt> I read through the license discuss thread (using the crap interface that it provides)
15:34:19 <crschmidt> I'll never understand why more people can't just use a stock mailman.
15:34:20 <_bjoern> cf http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Dec/0110.html
15:34:43 <sbp> oh you're right, sorry
15:34:46 <_bjoern> nice i18n b0rkage there
15:34:47 <sbp> it was just after that
15:34:50 <sbp> yeah
15:35:01 <sbp> I think both jcowan and Larry's clients couldn't handle the Æ
15:35:34 <sbp> I was going to say something, but I thought I'd better not
15:35:35 <_bjoern> I meant this [[[
15:35:38 <_bjoern> Previous message: John Cowan: "⡷牯湧⁳瑲楮朩⃃㽳瑨整楣⁐敲浩獳楶攠䱩捥湳攠ⴠ䙯爠"
15:35:38 <_bjoern> In reply to: John Cowan: "⡷牯湧⁳瑲楮朩⃃㽳瑨整楣⁐敲浩獳楶攠䱩捥湳攠ⴠ䙯爠"
15:35:39 <_bjoern> ]]]
15:35:44 <sbp> oh. chuckle
15:36:08 <sbp> "(unknown charset) (unknown charset) Re: �??sth (unknown "
15:36:09 <sbp> - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Dec/
15:36:16 <sbp> good stuff
15:36:31 <_bjoern> list software b0rken as ever
15:36:40 <sbp> I should try to slip a ㋡ into a lists.w3.org subject somewhere
15:36:57 <sbp> .email www-archive@w3.org ㋡ // This is an i18n test.
15:37:00 <phenny> sbp: Sent (214 bytes).
15:37:07 <sbp> well that was easy
15:37:19 <sbp> bwahaha. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Dec/
15:37:21 <_bjoern> didn't work well http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Dec/0112.html
15:37:29 <sbp> nope
15:37:32 <sbp> works on the index page though!
15:37:35 <sbp> and looks awesome
15:37:39 <_bjoern> I suspect your client's borken
15:37:54 <_bjoern> for the charset=US-ASCII should be inherited from the mail message
15:38:30 <sbp> ah yes
15:38:52 <sbp> well I just used fairly low level python stuff
15:39:32 <sbp> hehe, I still like the archive index at any rate
15:40:11 <_bjoern> You could add a .email www-archive@w3.org 咒 // This is an i18n test.
15:40:29 <_bjoern> < 冗 > YES HE COULD
15:41:02 <sbp> fine
15:41:31 <sbp> .email www-archive@w3.org 咒 // This is a second i18n test. Please continue about your regular routines as though you had not been affected by this test.
15:41:34 <phenny> sbp: Sent (314 bytes).
15:41:54 <sbp> woah, that broke the second subject
15:41:56 <sbp> bizarre
15:42:22 <sbp> well that sucks
15:42:34 <therethinker> Sbp, any idea what's causing this:
15:43:17 <sbp> [[[
15:43:18 <sbp> HTMLWG co-chair: Chris Wilson (Microsoft) (Nice guy, but he did put his
15:43:18 <sbp> name on the first XHTML spec 8 years ago, then prevented over 6 Billion
15:43:18 <sbp> people from being able to use it.)
15:43:25 <sbp> ]]] - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Dec/0097
15:43:32 <sbp> therethinker: nope, checking
15:43:52 <therethinker> Also, I made a thing to exclude modules
15:44:23 <sbp> there are already two existing tools that exclude modules
15:44:30 <therethinker> Oh, good then
15:44:32 <sbp> one is called mv, and the other is called rm
15:44:51 <therethinker> Haha
15:44:55 <crschmidt> But that doens't allow you to maintain all your modules for all your bots in a single place
15:44:59 <therethinker> Exactly
15:45:04 <sbp> good point
15:45:05 <therethinker> (what he said)
15:45:24 <sbp> incidentally, I've been discussing making things easier for people who run multiple bots with nslater
15:45:33 <crschmidt> There's even a comment in the source code about that soewhere, I think
15:45:35 <therethinker> hmm
15:45:36 <sbp> yeah
15:45:44 <therethinker> Yeah, that was inspiration
15:45:52 <crschmidt> Led by me :)
15:45:55 <sbp> I'm going to make it so that you can have multiple config files easily
15:45:59 <crschmidt> since i now run 8 of them
15:46:22 <sbp> awesome
15:46:37 <crschmidt> Hickson works for Google now?
15:47:09 <sbp> yup
15:47:15 <sbp> has done for a few years I think
15:47:23 <crschmidt> hm
15:47:27 <crschmidt> must be thinking of someone else then
15:47:39 <crschmidt> Also, I don't understand the Chris Wilson comment
15:47:46 <sbp> me neither
15:48:00 <sbp> perhaps _bjoern can explain
15:50:34 <Arnia> Hm... http://timepedia.org/chronoscope
15:52:27 <sbp> therethinker: there you go, fixed
15:52:52 <sbp> Arnia: nice style
15:53:03 <sbp> well, needs more leading, etc.
15:53:41 *** BigJibby (n=matt@ip1-159.eyrkonaeac03.dialup.ca.telus.com) has joined #swhack
15:54:45 *** cr`x (n=zax@user-12lcqh4.cable.mindspring.com) has joined #swhack
15:54:53 <Arnia> Oh dear... a new semantic use of fragment identifiers: http://timepedia.org/chronoscope/docs/microformats/intro/
15:56:44 *** dumnut_ has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
15:59:15 *** MattRead (n=matt@ip1-171.eyrkonaeac03.dialup.ca.telus.com) has joined #swhack
16:03:58 <sbp> making a license table
16:05:47 <sbp> wow, LGPL fares worse than GPL
16:05:56 <sbp> because there's no "or later version" opt-out
16:10:52 *** BigJibby has quit (Nick collision from services.)
16:10:56 *** MattRead is now known as BigJibby
16:15:54 <lisppaste2> sbp pasted "License Table" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/53289
16:16:08 <sbp> crschmidt, zooko: check that out
16:16:55 <sbp> a surprisingly large amount of licenses allow B
16:16:59 <sbp> none allow C
16:17:29 <sbp> so, the CDDL fares best...
16:17:39 <sbp> but actually Y | Y | N | Y could've been a Y | Y | N | ? really
16:17:47 <sbp> because it doesn't make it clear how to opt out
16:19:16 <sbp> here's exactly what it says about that:
16:19:16 <sbp> [[[
16:19:17 <sbp> If the Initial Developer includes a
16:19:17 <sbp> notice in the Original Software prohibiting it from being
16:19:17 <sbp> distributed or otherwise made available under any
16:19:17 <sbp> subsequent version of the License, You must distribute and
16:19:19 <sbp> make the Covered Software available under the terms of the
16:19:21 <sbp> version of the License under which You originally received
16:19:23 <sbp> the Covered Software.
16:19:25 <sbp> ]]] - http://opensource.org/licenses/cddl1.php
16:19:36 <sbp> so something like this?
16:19:47 <sbp> Copyright 2007, Sean B. Palmer, inamidst.com
16:20:05 <sbp> Released to the public under the Common Development and Distribution License, Version 1.0 only.
16:20:21 <sbp> .eval len('Released to the public under the Common Development and Distribution License, Version 1.0 only.')
16:20:23 <phenny> 95
16:20:29 <sbp> sigh
16:20:46 <sbp> .eval len('Released to the public under the CDDL, v1.0 only.')
16:20:48 <phenny> 49
16:21:41 <sbp> "You may additionally distribute without a copy of the CDDL license!"
16:21:47 <therethinker> phenny: help eval
16:21:50 <phenny> Sorry, no documentation for eval.
16:21:57 <therethinker> Is it python?
16:22:01 <therethinker> .eval 1+1
16:22:02 <sbp> it is an admins only command
16:22:04 <sbp> but yes
16:22:05 <therethinker> Ah
16:22:33 <therethinker> Ah
16:22:45 <sbp> "You must include a copy of this License with every copy of the Source Code form of the Covered Software You distribute or otherwise make available." is the offending sentence
16:22:52 <sbp> shame it's not in a section of its own
16:22:58 <sbp> then I could simply waive that section
16:27:03 <therethinker> That's annoying, what licence? CDDL
16:28:47 <sbp> yeah
16:31:42 <crschmidt> wait, you can distribute without it, but you must include it?
16:32:18 <crschmidt> sorry, on my phone at the moment, so i can't follow links
16:36:38 <therethinker> Wait, what does that have to do with anything?
16:36:50 <therethinker> Ooh, you're ICRing on your phone...
16:37:00 <therethinker> s/CR/RC
16:37:27 <crschmidt> right
16:37:27 *** BigJibby has quit ("Konversation terminated!")
16:37:41 <sbp> I sent off the table in a reply to debian-legal
16:37:57 <sbp> crschmidt: the initial author can distribute without it
16:38:08 <crschmidt> ah
16:38:10 <sbp> all subsequent copies and redistributions must include it, though
16:38:20 <therethinker> Does that mean if you got a distribution without it, you have to go hunt down the licence and include it?
16:40:11 <sbp> yes
16:41:28 <therethinker> That sucks
16:41:52 <sbp> aye
16:41:58 <sbp> I think I'll expand The Table to "Other/Miscellaneous licenses"
16:43:44 *** cr`x has quit ("אַכטונג! קאָמפיוטער שלאָפֿט.")
16:49:10 *** remote has parted #swhack ()
16:50:54 <sbp> ha, I just found a Y | Y | Y | Y
16:51:04 <sbp> but sadly it's The Artistic License
16:51:20 <sbp> the original, much-maligned for its sloppiness, version
16:51:23 <sbp> 2.0 is Y | N | Y | ?
16:54:20 <sbp> the OSL 3.0 is probably Y | Y | Y | Y
16:54:50 <sbp> but it's strong copyleft, I think, and probably not DSFG compatible
16:55:02 <sbp> (it's AFL 3.0's copyleft sister)
16:57:04 <sbp> the Q Public License is Y | Y | N | Y
16:57:10 <sbp> much more clearly Y | Y | N | Y than the CDDL
16:59:16 <lisppaste2> sbp annotated #53289 with "License Table Augmented" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/53289#1
17:00:06 <sbp> my use of the original table on debian-legal:
17:00:06 <sbp> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/12/msg00115.html
17:07:28 * sbp sends the augmented table to debian-legal
17:11:04 <sbp> .title http://www.statistica.unimib.it/utenti/dellavedova/software/artistic2.html
17:11:07 <phenny> sbp: The Clarified Artistic License
17:11:18 <sbp> that might get a Y | Y | Y | Y and have integrity as a license
17:11:47 <sbp> it's not OSI approved
17:12:05 <cre8radix> where's the copycan license?
17:12:10 <sbp> it is FSF approved
17:12:13 <sbp> the copycan license?
17:12:36 <crschmidt> for the record, "You may otherwise modify your copy of this Package in any way, provided that you insert a prominent notice in each changed file stating how and when you changed that file" <- I dislike that type of restriction.
17:13:13 <cre8radix> http://cre8radix.net/cc_license
17:13:22 <sbp> crschmidt: yeah, me too
17:13:51 <cre8radix> sbp: ^^
17:14:19 <crschmidt> (I primarily dislike it since I'm in violation of it, and am feeling somewhat lazy as to how to fix it.)
17:14:27 <sbp> cre8radix: seems like a Y | N | Y | Y
17:14:40 <sbp> oh wait, I didn't read the dislike. I like it actually
17:14:45 <sbp> though... I know what you mean
17:14:53 <sbp> I'd treat it as a really, really strong SHOULD
17:15:07 <sbp> but I guess no license has a really, really strong SHOULD
17:15:12 <sbp> it's all MUST and SHALL
17:15:24 <sbp> cre8radix: it also seems like it wasn't written by a legal expert
17:15:58 <Arnia> .cp QED
17:16:02 <phenny> Sorry, no results found for 'QED'.
17:16:09 <Arnia> .cp open square
17:16:11 <phenny> Sorry, no results found for 'open square'.
17:16:13 <sbp> the craziest thing about the Clarified Artistic License is this:
17:16:14 <sbp> [[[
17:16:14 <sbp> place your modifications in the Public Domain or otherwise make them Freely Available, such as by posting said modifications to Usenet or an equivalent medium, or placing the modifications on a major network archive site allowing unrestricted access to them, or by allowing the Copyright Holder to include your modifications in the Standard Version of the Package.
17:16:15 <sbp> ]]]
17:16:21 <sbp> that's a requirement
17:16:40 <crschmidt> that's one option
17:16:41 <zooko> Heh heh.
17:16:42 <sbp> you've got to raise an eyebrow at any license that mentions Usenet
17:16:45 *** BigJibby (n=matt@ip3-45.eyrkonaeac03.dialup.ca.telus.com) has joined #swhack
17:16:47 <crschmidt> another option is "permit and encourge anyone who receives a copy of the modified Package permission to make your modifications Freely Available in some specific way."
17:16:48 <Arnia> .cp square
17:16:50 <phenny> 005B: LEFT SQUARE BRACKET ([)
17:16:53 <sbp> ah, indeed
17:16:53 <phenny> 005D: RIGHT SQUARE BRACKET (])
17:16:54 <zooko> I love the diversity of software licensing.
17:16:56 <phenny> 033B: COMBINING SQUARE BELOW (◌̻) [...]
17:17:09 <Arnia> .cp proof
17:17:11 <phenny> 220E: END OF PROOF (∎)
17:17:15 <sbp> zooko: I'd love it even more if it were diverse enough to support my needs... :-)
17:17:39 * sbp is so glad zooko is back on Swhack again... yay!
17:17:49 <zooko> How goes the project of getting your own licence OSI and DFSG approved?
17:17:58 <zooko> Your minimal permissive licence looks good to me.
17:18:10 <zooko> I might switch to using that one instead of mine if you get some official stamps of approval on it.
17:18:56 <cre8radix> hrhr
17:19:06 <cre8radix> it was written by us
17:19:09 <cre8radix> :D
17:20:36 <sbp> zooko: it's collapsed pretty badly
17:20:38 <zooko> Well, thanks for doing it.
17:20:54 <sbp> I've been told that it was badly written
17:21:07 <sbp> hence all this surveying of existing licenses, just in case I missed one which might actually work...
17:21:12 <sbp> sigh
17:21:24 <zooko> It isn't clear to me if the OSI's job is to stamp any submitted licence which is open source, or only submitted licences which are open source and non-duplicative, or only submitted licences which are open source, non-duplicative, and well-written, or ...
17:23:07 <sbp> me neither. I mean logically they should just check to see if they pass the OSD
17:23:26 <sbp> but they tend to reject licenses on proliferation grounds too
17:23:41 <sbp> though with your submission, I see that they said if you insisted they'd think about it some more...
17:23:54 <sbp> the process does not seem as formal as it should be
17:25:12 <sbp> .title http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Dec/0075
17:25:12 <phenny> sbp: OSI Issues Tracker - Problem Opening a Ticket from Sean B. Palmer on 2007-12-19 (www-archive@w3.org from December 2007)
17:25:25 *** cr`x (n=zax@user-12lcqh4.cable.mindspring.com) has joined #swhack
17:25:25 <sbp> see that email for some specific problems encountered, too...
17:25:25 <Monty> Thank goodness, cr`x is back!
17:25:27 <phenny> Be quiet, Monty.
17:25:30 <Monty> UID Boris Yeltsin scratches marooned nose!!!
17:25:31 <sbp> (I didn't get a reply to it yet, either)
17:29:19 <crschmidt> sbp: based on a relatively thorough review in preperation for the Clear BSD thing -- rejection based on prolifieration has aonly been used when there is *no* legal difference between the offered license and an existing license.
17:29:45 <zooko> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility
17:29:47 <zooko> cool table
17:30:48 <crschmidt> There is often negative feedback on a license as a result of proliferation, but i haven't found a case where it has resulted in the license not being approved solely on that account.
17:31:06 <sbp> crschmidt: hmm. what about zooko's case?
17:31:25 <sbp> at any rate, in this case perhaps I should submit a ticket again when the thirty days are up!
17:31:31 <zooko> Apparently that fell under the "discouragement" goal of the OSI, as per:
17:31:52 <zooko> http://opensource.org/approval
17:32:07 <crschmidt> hm, I may have missed zooko's case
17:32:11 <sbp> though it's not the method I'd use now, of course
17:32:16 <zooko> They successfully discouraged me, and now they seem to be successfully discouraging sbp.
17:32:23 <sbp> indeed
17:32:32 * crschmidt nods.
17:33:11 <crschmidt> Was there discussion here about zooko's case?
17:33:14 <zooko> I'm subscribing to issues@opensource.org to ask for some clarification/transparency about this.
17:33:20 <crschmidt> /last zooko isn't showing it to me
17:33:25 <zooko> http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:30:200712:okhcnihjmlcnhanfdanf
17:33:30 <crschmidt> thx
17:33:33 <zooko> discussion links therein.\
17:33:43 <zooko> No discussion in #swhack that I know of.
17:35:15 <sbp> what annoys me is that the paragraphs of derision that I got about the AEPL could easily have been substituted with paragraphs of explanation that would've come to half the length and satisfied me immediately
17:35:29 <zooko> Perhaps we should propose that there be a licence proliferation category (https://osi.osuosl.org/wiki/help/proliferation )
17:35:48 <zooko> for licences that aren't completely redundant nor completely vain but which ought to be Discouraged anyway.
17:35:49 <sbp> valid questions that I had, such as why the terms that I used from the Fair License were the ones regarded as being too fuzzy to use, went unanswered
17:35:53 <crschmidt> I would say that in zooko's case, the resulting license is legally the same as the MIT license.
17:36:11 <sbp> crschmidt: they said BSD, I think
17:36:11 <crschmidt> In fact, that seems to be the point?
17:36:29 <zooko> The Simple Permissive Licence omits warranty disclaimer.
17:36:30 <sbp> which is odd since he modified it from the MIT. perhaps I misremember
17:36:43 <sbp> hmm. the BSD has a warranty disclaimer...
17:36:50 <sbp> so it can't be legally the same as either
17:37:18 <crschmidt> zooko: It does? It looks like it omits most of the warranty disclaimer, but leaves the "THIS OSFTWARE IS PROVIDED ... WITHOUT WARRANTY ..."
17:37:32 <crschmidt> Hm
17:37:37 <crschmidt> https://zooko.com/simple_permissive_license.html is different than
17:37:44 <crschmidt> http://www.mail-archive.com/license-discuss@opensource.org/msg07044.html
17:37:47 <zooko> Oh, my mistake.
17:37:50 <crschmidt> I must be confused.
17:37:52 <zooko> Sorry about that.
17:38:37 <crschmidt> Well, I'm still trying to understand :) is https://zooko.com/simple_permissive_license.html the license which we're talking about?
17:39:03 <zooko> No. There is a new, shorter licence under the same name at that URL now than there was dsuring the OISI submission.
17:39:10 <crschmidt> Gotcha.
17:41:21 <crschmidt> I do think that you weren't forceful enough -- and I do think that the OSI process does give the grease to the squeaky wheel.
17:42:53 <sbp> I doubt that would work for the AEPL on the other hand
17:43:07 <sbp> they could claim it's too fuzzy to be able to check for OSD compliance
17:43:10 <crschmidt> sbp: I agree.
17:43:50 <sbp> I could submit a version of the CDDL without the offending sentence, if Sun would let me. I wonder what the terms are on the license itself...
17:44:33 <sbp> ah! yes, I may do that
17:44:39 <sbp> if I rename it and blah blah
17:44:46 <sbp> well that's definitely a possibility!
17:45:25 <sbp> of course I haven't looked at the rest of the CDDL yet
17:45:30 <sbp> it might suck for other reasons
17:45:37 <crschmidt> sbp: heh
17:54:12 * sbp sees zooko's new mail in the thread... cool
17:55:17 <crschmidt> license-discuss?
17:55:56 <Tene> .wik compersion
17:55:58 <phenny> "Compersion is a term used by practitioners of polyamory or swingers to describe the experience of taking pleasure when one's partner is with another person." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compersion
17:56:48 <therethinker> O_O
17:57:20 <sbp> crschmidt: yeah
17:57:54 * crschmidt gives up on trying to follow along with that discussion on license discuss.
17:58:09 <sbp> http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mmn:29
17:58:10 <sbp> argh, the fuck
17:58:17 <sbp> the links that I pasted earlier aren't permalinks!
17:58:21 <sbp> they're relative to the end of the thread
17:58:32 <sbp> 06:30:12 <sbp> * http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mmn:29
17:58:39 <sbp> same link as the current link for zooko's email
17:58:54 <crschmidt> Ah, I saw this, yes, he linked to it above
17:59:14 <sbp> I suppose http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:30:okhcnihjmlcnhanfdanf is the permalink? not sure
17:59:17 * crschmidt gives up and subscribes to license-discuss
17:59:22 <sbp> hehe
18:00:17 <crschmidt> I've been avoiding it for a year at this piont
18:01:35 <sbp> muahahaha
18:07:43 <thelsdj> .w The Jazz (book)
18:07:45 <phenny> thelsdj: Words must match the regexp ^[A-Za-z0-9\' -]+$
18:07:54 <thelsdj> .wik The Jazz (book)
18:07:57 <phenny> "The Jazz Piano Book is a tutorial by Mark Levine that aims to summarise the musical theory required by an aspiring jazz pianist." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jazz_Piano_Book
18:11:25 <sbp> bwahaha:
18:11:28 <sbp> "I'm not 100% sure (been on the mulled wine again)"
18:11:34 <sbp> - M.J. Ray, debian-legal
18:12:25 <thelsdj> Misinformation, PR, disinformation, rumors, spinning, lies--in the near future, the art of untruth has evolved into the jazz: virtual-reality Internet theatre, an entertainment for the cognoscenti and a source of pain and scandal for those who believe what they see, read, or experience. Tin Lizzy has escaped her troubled criminal adolescence to become one of the premiere design programmers of the jazz. But when she agrees to ...
18:12:31 <thelsdj> ... design the back-tech for a teenage boy's brilliant jazz scenario, she discovers too late that Keyz created his jazz with a sophisticated program stolen from a Hollywood studio. Now Lizzy is a criminal again, a desperate fugitive on the run with Keyz through the dangerous underground of the 21st century, fleeing cops, bounty hunters, studio detectives, and a powerful, ruthless CEO who has a secret to preserve, and boundless ...
18:12:37 <thelsdj> ... resources and vindictiveness.
18:12:56 <sbp> ...Tin Lizzy?
18:13:02 *** chris2 has quit ("Leaving")
18:14:00 <thelsdj> thats the characters name, or more accurately, her most well known virtual persona
18:14:32 <sbp> ah, so not meant to be her birth name
18:14:39 <thelsdj> yea
18:14:40 <sbp> wouldn't surprise me if someone did have that birth name though
18:14:50 * thelsdj <3 Melissa Scott
18:15:12 <thelsdj> though she doesn't seem to be writing much recently
18:15:25 <sbp> send her a pogbomb
18:15:41 <sbp> it's like a regular bomb but instead of dispensing pain and horror, it dispenses pogs
18:15:51 <thelsdj> this is her most recent standalone novel from 2000, she did one in 2001 with her partner, but now her parner is dead, hopefully she's not retired
18:16:51