Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Java > Stupid eclipse/android question

Reply
Thread Tools

Stupid eclipse/android question

 
 
Lew
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-28-2011
On Feb 28, 3:50*pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
> On 28/02/2011 20:42, Stefan Ram wrote:
>
> > Dirk Bruere at NeoPax<(E-Mail Removed)> *writes:
> >> On 28/02/2011 20:29, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
> >>> Please don't tell me you pressed the red button.
> >> The one that said "Do Not Press"?

>
> > * * * * You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed
> > * * * *or intended for use in the design, construction,
> > * * * *operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility.

>
> >http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/j2re-...2-license.html

>
> ****.
> Back to Basic for my home nuke then.
>


Seriously, you're citing the Java 1.4 license? Who uses Java 1.4?

Java 6 has the same restriction if you use Oracle's version.

The question is harder to answer for OpenJDK. The Sun binary license
for OpenJDK has the no-nukes clause but the GPL does not. The binary
license does not mention Oracle.

--
Lew
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2011
On 28/02/2011 21:37, Lew wrote:
> On Feb 28, 3:50 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax<(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>> On 28/02/2011 20:42, Stefan Ram wrote:
>>
>>> Dirk Bruere at NeoPax<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>>> On 28/02/2011 20:29, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
>>>>> Please don't tell me you pressed the red button.
>>>> The one that said "Do Not Press"?

>>
>>> You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed
>>> or intended for use in the design, construction,
>>> operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility.

>>
>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/j2re-...2-license.html

>>
>> ****.
>> Back to Basic for my home nuke then.
>>

>
> Seriously, you're citing the Java 1.4 license? Who uses Java 1.4?
>
> Java 6 has the same restriction if you use Oracle's version.
>
> The question is harder to answer for OpenJDK. The Sun binary license
> for OpenJDK has the no-nukes clause but the GPL does not. The binary
> license does not mention Oracle.
>
> --
> Lew


I once used 1.1.6

--
Dirk

http://www.neopax.com/technomage/ - My new book - Magick and Technology
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Lew
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2011
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>> Seriously, you're citing the Java 1.4 license? Who uses Java 1.4?
>> . . .
>> --
>> Lew


Don't quote sigs.

> I once used 1.1.6
>


I once used FORTRAN IV. So?

--
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2011
On 01/03/2011 10:13, Lew wrote:
> Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>> Lew wrote:
>>> Seriously, you're citing the Java 1.4 license? Who uses Java 1.4?
>>> . . .
>>> --
>>> Lew

>
> Don't quote sigs.


My sig is worth quoting

>> I once used 1.1.6
>>

>
> I once used FORTRAN IV. So?


So, a bit of a step down for you then, after Fortran...

--
Dirk

http://www.neopax.com/technomage/ - My new book - Magick and Technology
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tom Anderson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2011
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011, Lew wrote:

> On Feb 28, 3:50*pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>> On 28/02/2011 20:42, Stefan Ram wrote:
>>
>>> Dirk Bruere at NeoPax<(E-Mail Removed)> *writes:
>>>> On 28/02/2011 20:29, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
>>>>> Please don't tell me you pressed the red button.
>>>>> The one that said "Do Not Press"?

>>
>>> * * * * You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed
>>> * * * *or intended for use in the design, construction,
>>> * * * *operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility.

>>
>> ****. Back to Basic for my home nuke then.

>
> Java 6 has the same restriction if you use Oracle's version.
>
> The question is harder to answer for OpenJDK. The Sun binary license
> for OpenJDK has the no-nukes clause but the GPL does not.


No, but if you do use it to build nukes, you have to give them to
everybody.

tom

--
Sometimes it takes a madman like Iggy Pop before you can SEE the logic
really working.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lew
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2011
On 03/01/2011 05:01 PM, Tom Anderson wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011, Lew wrote:
>
>> On Feb 28, 3:50 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>> On 28/02/2011 20:42, Stefan Ram wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dirk Bruere at NeoPax<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>>>> On 28/02/2011 20:29, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
>>>>>> Please don't tell me you pressed the red button.
>>>>>> The one that said "Do Not Press"?
>>>
>>>> You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed
>>>> or intended for use in the design, construction,
>>>> operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility.
>>>
>>> ****. Back to Basic for my home nuke then.

>>
>> Java 6 has the same restriction if you use Oracle's version.
>>
>> The question is harder to answer for OpenJDK. The Sun binary license for
>> OpenJDK has the no-nukes clause but the GPL does not.

>
> No, but if you do use it to build nukes, you have to give them to everybody.


Not really. You just have to give the source code with them and let them
modify it. There's nothing in the GPL that forces you to give your nukes, and
thus your source code, to anyone, or to do so free of charge.

For those who might wonder, by the casual term "nuke" I mean nuclear power
plant, of course.

Although - the wording is tricky. They say "nuclear facility". That could
include cancer treatment centers, X-ray device factories, particle
accelerators, science laboratories, uranium mines, and Acme Cloud Chamber Co.

But wait - isn't all matter ultimately nuclear - I mean, just because no one
has a good TOE doesn't mean there is no unifying principle. That would mean
absolutely everything is a nuclear facility and Java isn't good for anything.

Certainly the modern computer, using FETs and the like, is itself a nuclear
facility, so it's clear that whatever else you might say, Java is not intended
for use in Java development.

--
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Arne Vajh°j
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2011
On 28-02-2011 16:37, Lew wrote:
> On Feb 28, 3:50 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax<(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>> On 28/02/2011 20:42, Stefan Ram wrote:
>>
>>> Dirk Bruere at NeoPax<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>>> On 28/02/2011 20:29, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
>>>>> Please don't tell me you pressed the red button.
>>>> The one that said "Do Not Press"?

>>
>>> You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed
>>> or intended for use in the design, construction,
>>> operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility.

>>
>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/j2re-...2-license.html

>>
>> ****.
>> Back to Basic for my home nuke then.
>>

>
> Seriously, you're citing the Java 1.4 license? Who uses Java 1.4?
>
> Java 6 has the same restriction if you use Oracle's version.
>
> The question is harder to answer for OpenJDK. The Sun binary license
> for OpenJDK has the no-nukes clause but the GPL does not. The binary
> license does not mention Oracle.


I don't think they can have the clause for OpenJDK.

From the definition of open source:
http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd

"The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in
a specific field of endeavor."

I think that makes an exclude for nuclear-power-plants incompatible.

Arne
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
stupid, STUPID question! rincewind HTML 25 05-08-2009 01:07 PM
stupid question...waiting for a stupid answer Brandon McCombs Java 4 08-28-2006 06:57 PM
Stupid question. Please, only stupid responders. If you're not sureif you're stupid, you probably aren't. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?= Computer Support 6 07-18-2005 05:11 AM
stupid stupid stupid kpg MCSE 17 11-26-2004 02:59 PM
Stupid is as Stupid Does! Michael P Gabriel Digital Photography 3 06-26-2004 12:49 PM



Advertisments