Login with username and password (forgot your password?)

We have had some interesting discussions about other licenses (in particular the GPL) in the past, so I figured I would try and see if you have any opinions about the Apache License (2.0).

First a little background:

I have used the zlib license in the past for a couple of smaller source code releases, but I was trying to see if one of the more commonly used licenses would work for me. This led to a couple of hours of hit-and-google browsing, trying to figure out the exact differences between MIT, BSD, Apache, and GPL.

I am not planning to use the GPL -- I want people to be able to use my work in commercial software without risking suddenly being forced into an open source license. I like the MIT and BSD licenses because they are so short and (relatively) easy to understand, but I feel perhaps they lack somewhat in precision and their age is showing. This lead me to the Apache license, which to a large extent appears to be similar to the BSD license, but more descriptive.

For instance, I like how it says directly that if you contribute something it will by default be covered by the license, and that you are allowed to link to something covered by the license without risking that affecting your software.

Two things worry me a bit though; the fact that it is longer and harder to read, which makes it less obvious what your obligations are, and that the FSF says it is incompatible with GPLv2.

So, this brings me to my questions:

What are your feelings on using the Apache license compared to the MIT/BSD licenses?

Do you think the incompatibility with GPLv2 is a problem? (or perhaps rather a feature?)

A couple of links for reference:

http://oreilly.com/openbo...sfreesoft/book/index.html
http://www.tldrlegal.com/...e-license-2.0-(apache-2.0)

I guess people are still having too much fun checking out how Nokia apparently is faking both the video and still images used to advertise how good the camera in those phones is:

http://www.theverge.com/2...review-ads-are-fraudulent

http://sefsar.com/nokia-faked-the-still-photos-too

http://www.forbes.com/sit...iews-amazons-rotten-core/

Leather admitted to creating accounts on Amazon under assumed names in order to leave positive reviews of his own work.  ...  Leather is not the only one engaging in such practices. On 25 August, the New York Times revealed that the use of fake reviews is widespread. In exploring the case of reviewer-for-hire Todd Jason Rutherford, the NY Times exposed self-publishing poster boy John Locke who bought 300 reviews from Rutherford’s business, GettingBookReviews, spending about $6,000 to do so

Stuff like this makes it really hard to trust public user reviews .

Roughly the same here .. at first I thought "winzip for free, maybe a slightly simplified version or something, worth a click", but the slight enthusiasm quickly cooled when I saw it was (even an older version of) some addon to zip files for e-mail.

Anyway, this vm-infecting thing is hardly a big deal. It's not a break-out of the vm. I find it kinda silly that this feature is included in a generic piece of malware, given that the gains for zombie-gathering purposes is pretty small.

Actually my initial thought was that it was kind of clever. I agree that the target audience is rather small, but I would guess the code required to write something into a VM disk image in a file is not terribly complicated, and an action that is likely to not trigger too many alerts. And I don't know how many people use anti-virus and anti-malware inside their virtual machines, but if not, this could perhaps circumvent some of the security measures on your actual machine?

I mean of course it wouldn't have access to the outside machine, but it could communicate with the outside and possibly spread from the VM.

Too late. I just patented the point.
Please contact me to arrange licensing before creating any geometric constructs.
 

Since geometry is pointless, that will never hold up in court .

Probably made up, but still an interesting angle I agree

Meanwhile, at Starbucks:

https://plus.google.com/u...2708332/posts/246srfbqg6G

I'm writing this post after the FOURTH group of Starbucks patrons have made the connection that Samsung is now the same as Apple. They don't know the details, they don't really care, what they know is Apple is saying that Samsung is the same as Apple ... and with one simple Google Search, you get prices that are basically half for what seems to be the same products -- for nearly everything.

Two of these groups (including the husband/wife) asked me about my Samsung laptop, the second group noticed my Galaxy phone (also by Samsung)... Best billion dollar ad-campaign Samsung ever had.

Interesting .. my only immediate reservation is where do they make their money if the software is free?

There are sites like alternativeto which sometimes can help:

http://alternativeto.net/software/recentx/

Not sure if any of the ones listed do what you need of course.

I was actually just looking at that, it seems like it would be awesome and cheap for storing data in the size range of normal consumer backups.

But it is almost impossible to work out how much it would cost to retrieve all your data at once in case of emergency -- some of the comments on HN suggest it could be very expensive.

I guess we can hope it will bring down the prices of other online services.

You are charged a retrieval fee when your retrievals exceed your daily allowance. If, during a given month, you do exceed your daily allowance, we calculate your fee based upon the peak hourly usage from the days in which you exceeded your allowance. As we saw above, if you store 12 terabytes of data in Amazon Glacier, you can retrieve up to 20.5 gigabytes for free each day. If you exceed 20.5 gigabytes during a given day (or days) over the course of the month, we determine the hour during those days in which you retrieved the most amount of data for the month. In this example, let’s say your peak hourly retrieval rate is 1 gigabyte per hour, and the amount you retrieved that day is 24 gigabytes.

Peak hourly retrieval for the month = 1 gigabyte per hour

Next we subtract your free allowance from the peak hourly retrieval for the month. To determine the amount of data you get for free, we look at the amount of data retrieved during your peak day and calculate the percentage of data that was retrieved during your peak hour. We then multiply that percentage by your free daily allowance. In this example, you retrieved 24 gigabytes during the day and 1 gigabyte at the peak hour, which is 1/24 or ~4% of your data during your peak hour. We multiply 4% by your daily free allowance, which is 20.5 gigabytes each day. This equals 0.82 gigabytes. We then subtract your free allowance from your peak usage to determine your billable peak.

Billable peak hourly retrieval = Peak hourly retrieval - Free retrieval hourly allowance

Billable peak hourly retrieval = 1 gigabyte - 0.82 gigabytes = 0.18 gigabytes

The amount you pay is your billable peak, multiplied by the number of hours in the month, multiplied by the retrieval fee.

Why stop at 9

Thanks for the comments  .. the lack of snapshot feature would definitely make it less useful for me.

Interesting .. anyone have some insights into how VMware player compares to VirtualBox?

Looks like it still has the 100 MB file size limit of the free 5 GB account. May not be a problem for most people, but worth noting .

It appears I have maneuvered myself into the same corner .

Looks like I managed to change it.

My problem was my primary address was an external one, and I had created an alias with the name I ended up wanting to change to my primary. It turns out, that as long as the alias is on the same account, you can delete the alias and then change your primary address to it, and it will work (with some caveats, like if you already changed it once this year you may not be able to again, and you can only have up to 5 aliases).

I don't think deleting an alias makes it available to other accounts though, at least not for a certain period, so you cannot create a new account using an address you had as an alias.

The 5 alias limit per year (think it said 15 in total somewhere) is worth noting, since you may hold back a couple in case you want a localized outlook address when/if they become available. Also, it means they are not quite as "disposable" as that article suggested.

Btw, the settings pages for managing this stuff are quite horrible.

[once you create an alias, you can't use that email address for a new account even if you delete the alias later.]

Found a couple of things out the hard way. If you sign up for this using a Windows Live account that uses a non-Microsoft email address, you don't get a new Microsoft email address you can send from, you'll have to send from your non-Microsoft email address within outlook.com. (I wouldn't recommend it, when I sent from my gmail address TO my gmail address from outlook.com, it gets flagged as a possibly not from me when I logged into Gmail to check it out.) You can create email aliases which are @outlook.com, but you can't send from them (at least in the above scenario). And the really important part, once you create an alias, you can't use that email address for a new account even if you delete the alias later.

It appears I have maneuvered myself into the same corner .

You can choose to send from an alias by creating an e-mail and pressing the little down arrow next to your name on the left (aliases seem to appear after a while). Still doesn't give an obvious way to change an alias into the main address.

Nice tool, hadn't tried that before .

+1

That is roughly the point I have gotten to as well. In order to survive on one act on inferno, you need the gear from the next one, which means endless grinding or spending real money, neither of which really hits my idea of fun gaming . It's a nice game up to there though, and I had fun playing it.

It has worked quite well so far, but I had one issue with it -- since it does not filter https connections, facebook is now full of adds. Thankfully I don't use facebook much.

I can't see a reason to prefer this to decent Adblock browser extensions.

The two points I could see are that you keep your filter rules in one place for all your browsers (and browser-like applications), and that it appears many people think this is faster than the browser extensions (which many claim slow down some of the browsers considerably).

Thanks for the feedback, I've installed it and disabled my adblock extention, will see how it works out .

I was pleasantly surprised that the lifetime license I bought 7 years ago still appears to be in effect .

I never got around to using it, any experiences with it these days on recent windows version?

That does look pretty cool, nice find .

what a great review.

I've been thinking of switching from flickr to something else, because flickr still is flickr from yeas ago.

Would it be easy to transfer everything on flickr to lets say zenfolio?

I transferred my photos from Flickr last week, and was quite surprised how painless that was. I signed up for a 3 month pro account on Flickr to get access to the original files (I didn't even know they had 3 month subscriptions), and then I used the Upload Junction service.

Basically I just entered what service I was coming from and what service I was going to, logged into both, and the service did all the work, and I got an e-mail a couple of hours later when it was done. It copied all of my Flickr stream into a private gallery and created a collection for each set.

SmugMug has something called SmuggLr, which looks like a Firefox extension to do the transfer.