Both H (Bill Hewlett) and P (Dave Packard) were at Stanford prior to WW2. And Silicon Valley pre-dates the Internet era. See Fairchild Semiconductor, The Treacherous Eight, etc.
I think it is because we (as a community) should be past the piling-on stage and on to the constructive discussion stage. Snark doesn't add to the discussion.
Even if Cisco was running open source code they could still put ALL of this language into this agreement. The difference would be you could see the actual mechanism in work if they had open source code. The egregious part is the language, not the implementation.
If I have 1000Mbits to send then gigE is 10 times faster. But in the article we are transferring only 2k across the network. Mixing latency and bandwidth here. The latency to send 2k across an empty network isn't 10 times greater on a fastE versus gigE network, right?
This may be ignorant and please correct if I am off base but given the same physical medium isn't sending 2k across the network the same cost whether you are at fastE or gigE? Given the network is not saturated?
Woah, in one sentence you claim about PHP devs feeling the need to go OO and then the next sentence you extol the virtues of ZF? ZF is all OO, all the time.
I know the Internet has seriously damaged the music label's revenue stream but why hasn't it done even more damage? It is 2011,the labels should not still have this much power, should they?
I have used FreeBSD since 2.2. I used to laugh at the slashdot trolls saying BSD is dying but I really think it is dying. The commercial support is just not there.
This doesn't seem so shady when you realize that there are also these things called "liabilities" that you need to account for. It should be fine to count the whole cost as revenue as long as you are also accounting for the expense on the other side.
To your second point - it is entirely possible that people are traveling abroad to get medical care that was developed here but not yet approved for the general public. That doesn't contradict their original point. I think they more than just hint that the problem is regulatory. The fact that investing in medtech has a late exit time period speaks to the regulatory hurdles and they point that out in the article.