Slashdot Mirror

Well, given the site's relation to SourceForge, both in concept and in codebase, I'd assume that's where the name is derived from. But, hey, what do I know? It's just as possible that they took the name from a now-defunct script kiddie site that some random Slashdot user visited in his younger days.

YES!
Old McBride he had some IP
IBIBM
And that IP it was not free
IBIBM

With some SCO code here; Some SCO code there
Here a SCO, there a SCO; Everywhere a SCO SCO

The linux kernel had SMP
IBIBM
And that code was from Project Monterey
IBIBM

The linux kernel had NUMA
IBIBM
Then someone spread rumours
IBIBM

The linux kernel had JFS
IBIBM
And Christoph Hellwig did his best
IBIBM

Old McBride owns none of that
IBIBM
How we'd love to see THAT contract
IBIBM

With a lawsuit here; A counter-suit there
Sue a SCO, sue a SCO; Everybody sue a SCO SCO

Surely they would never do a thing like that!

I am surprised this Ask Slashdot question hasn't (really) been answered after this many hours. Well here is the answer.

Go to this link:

http://www.archive.org/web/researcher/proposal.php

Create an account, log in, write a proposal, submit it, then wait.

Yes they have Usenet data, not just web data.

After I submitted a proposal this way, I had to bug them by email and eventually phone even to get the account set up. It's not that they aren't helpful, they are just busy with lots of projects.

But don't expect hand holding. You need to be comfortable operating in a Unix environment. And I don't know if the data can leave their servers; you might need to do all your processing using their machines.

1st, this letter has inconsistancies in it. It 1st says that the songs disappeared, but later said that they could not be played.

When reading the "Terms of Service", it says that purchases are not available outside of the US and the "service" is not used outside of the US. I'm guessing that iTunes must phone home or something to do with its DRM. If he were to move back to the US, I would guess that he could play his songs again, provided that they were not deleted.

As his letter ends with, maybe we should buy CDs, they are not that expensive when bought used, or download free music, or "share" mp3s off of someone you don't know.

To the tune of 'Old McDonald', if you don't know that then any latvian folk dance tune should suffice!

Phish sells FLAC downloads on LivePhish.com. Hundreds of artists have free music available at The Live Music Archive or Furthurnet. If you want reasonable access to music, patronize artists who haven't sold their soul. Besides, mp3 is old technology. Ogg does it better and is free.

I would really hate any company to read this, and think that SCO has any legal ground vs. the linux community whatsoever, so I will repost my message, from yesterday, here to clarify SCO's idiocy:
Here, is where I think SCOs major flaw in their argument is, the GPL circa Jan 28, 1999 explicitly states in its preamble:
To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.

For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.
Refer to way back machine: http://web.archive.org/web/19990128195748/www.gnu. org/copyleft/gpl.html

And seeing as how SCO has been distributing Linux which had their code in the kernel. They have thusly, knowingly or not, distributed their rights, to the GPLd code in question, to the public. Because, of the statement above. Or if you want to hear it straight from GNU's statement:
...
Moreover, there are straightforward legal reasons why SCO's assertions concerning claims against the kernel or other free software are likely to fail. As to its trade secret claims, which are the only claims actually made in the lawsuit against IBM, there remains the simple fact that SCO has for years distributed copies of the kernel, Linux, as part of GNU/Linux free software systems. Those systems were distributed by SCO in full compliance with GPL, and therefore included complete source code. So SCO itself has continuously published, as part of its regular business, the material which it claims includes its trade secrets. There is simply no legal basis on which SCO can claim trade secret liability in others for material it widely and commercially published itself under a license that specifically permitted unrestricted copying and distribution.
...

I haven't darkened cnets doorstep since they killed winfiles.com, probably the greatest site ever created for win compatible shareware and drivers.

Not only could you find anything on the site, but it actually had a decent automatic payment system for shareware registration.

Tucows is probably the closest thing these days.

Here, is where I think SCOs major flaw in their argument is, the GPL circa Jan 28, 1999 explicitly states in its preamble:
To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.

For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.
Refer to way back machine: http://web.archive.org/web/19990128195748/www.gnu. org/copyleft/gpl.html

And seeing as how SCO has been distributing Linux which had their code in the kernel. They have thusly, knowingly or not, distributed their rights, to the GPLd code in question, to the public. Because, of the statement above. Or if you want to hear it straight from GNU's statement:
...
Moreover, there are straightforward legal reasons why SCO's assertions concerning claims against the kernel or other free software are likely to fail. As to its trade secret claims, which are the only claims actually made in the lawsuit against IBM, there remains the simple fact that SCO has for years distributed copies of the kernel, Linux, as part of GNU/Linux free software systems. Those systems were distributed by SCO in full compliance with GPL, and therefore included complete source code. So SCO itself has continuously published, as part of its regular business, the material which it claims includes its trade secrets. There is simply no legal basis on which SCO can claim trade secret liability in others for material it widely and commercially published itself under a license that specifically permitted unrestricted copying and distribution.
...

United Nuclear: where you can purchase all the parts and plans that will have you well on your way to becoming an embarrassing headline in your local paper.

I have to wonder if George Gobel is a regular customer.

But doesn't everyone get a copy of Windows when they buy their computer? After all, only evil vendors catering to software pirates would sell computers without Windows.

Or at least that's what I learned from Microsoft's OEM section a couple of years ago when they talked about the evils of "Naked PCs".

(For those who don't remember the "Naked PC" campaign, you'll have to go to the Wayback Machine to find a copy of Microsoft's page -- Microsoft removed it from their OEM area after this PR campaign failed.)

Apologies for the less-than-perfect technical nature of the new website - it was done in a bit of a hurry. Still, looks better than the old one, huh? :-)

invalid HTML.

Hopefully fixed in CVS; waiting for the site to sync.

Gerv
(gerv@mozilla.org)

Oh, wait, sorry. I'm wrong. You can exclude sites from the Wayback Machine the same way you woult for Google's cache.

Try the Wayback Machine. It caches EVERYTHING - NO EXCEPTIONS.

see the web as it was, Nov 11, 1998

The Internet Archive, which I just used minutes ago to find a handy page removed years ago, is an interesting corollary to the Google cache. I often wonder how it has survived thus long without a major lawsuit. It also reminds how crappy the web looked 5 years ago.

At any rate, cache-ing is an important force on the internet, and isn't one that should be limited in any legal way, including litigation.

Technically your asshole is smaller than the XBox. But, your entire ass (including sphincter, anal region, ass hair, encrusted faggot semen, shit nuggets, and butt cheeks) is indeed bigger.

Decrem later issued a rather funny retraction which can still be found on archive.org. I wish the images that went along with the retraction were archived too, but it's still pretty funny.

I found on this site a mention of 1650 C for reentry temperatures, which seems low enough to make the material feasable.

I did my own google search on ward and starlite, and found this:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010407012348/www.char m.net/~dmg/mysteries/mystery1.html

The article mentions that NASA was investigating it, but the inventor wouldn't allow them to pursue it when they refused to sign an NDA.

I'm guessing the actual temperature on the material would differ slightly based on friction (or its coefficient of friction? I'm not a physicist), so its possible that the plastic still wasn't feasable for some reason. Then again, I'm told most of the heat is from ram pressure, so friction may not make a lot of difference.

Another explanation could be that the starlite plastic doesn't handle the extreme cold of space.

Or, NASA refused to sign the NDA because they thought he was a crackpot. Their view is somewhat supported by the site's claim that Maurcie Ward is no longer interested in his revoluntionary material, having given it up for harness horse-racing.

-Zipwow

Lots of plans for the future:

• Post-#10000 formatting changes. We'll be rearranging our directories to make it easier to find things. Likely we'll go with something OAI (OpenArchives.org) compliant
  
• Conversion on the fly to many formats. We'll putting eBooks into XML format (mostly using teixlite.dtd, we think) for conversion on the fly to many other formats.
  
• New ways to donate. "Sponsor a book"
  
• More contemporary content. We receive donations nearly every week from currently published authors who want to make their stuff available to a wider audience (i.e., our Doctorow's Down and Out)
  
• Your ideas! Visit gutenberg.net to sign up for newsletters, find out how to get started producing an eBook, and find eBooks
  

Thanks especially to our main and backup distribution sites, iBiblio and The Internet Archive. And thanks to the THOUSANDS of volunteers who have brought us nearly to our 10,000th eBook.

Dr. Gregory B. Newby

Chief Executive and Director

Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
http://gutenberg.net

A 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization with EIN 64-6221541

gbnewby@pglaf.org

Now all we need is more people promoting this in schools and printing the books. Much like the IA Bookmobile. It seems like the people who could use this the most, don't even know it exists.

Reminds me of this one.

My bad:

Here's a Web Archive link with the official /. merchandise (feels like it's slashdotted): http://web.archive.org/web/20020206014203/www.thin kgeek.com/slashdot/

if your site isn't to depemded on database integation and other dynamic stuff TheWayBackMachine can be a life saver; it'll miss some of the graphics sometimes.

It looks like HP has already been selling PCs with free OS's for quite a while now.

You scared my seeing eye dog!!!!

You do it WRONG!!!!

Sure, later he denied ever saying it, but after a bit of digging I found an interview that basically proves that he assumed it was enough: It was ten times what we had before. But to my surprise, we ran out of that address base for applications within -- oh five or six years people were complaining.

That's because the average slashdotter is a sci-fi fan who hasn't the faintest clue how incredibly expensive it is to explore space, and how little potential for profit there is. (the only money in space flight is in launching commercial satellites, and that is best (cheapest) handled with big dumb rockets, not with new unproven technology that is years from getting an inch off the earth.)

Yeah, yeah... mine the moon/asteroids ... blah blah blah ... I've read the fiction too and it was way cool, but does not constitute a legitimate business plan.

If private funding is such a panacea, why haven't the privately funded efforts gotten past slick graphics of cool spacecraft and "flight tests" of scaled down vehicles cruising well beneath the commercial aircraft?

If you want to see what happens to privately funded space fantasies, go here and then look here. [hint: It isn't there any more]

If you listen to a lot of live music, you need high quality compression. Live music sources often have a lot of crowd noise. Compressing the crowd noise means you can't compress the music as well. Lossy stereo coupling can add artifacts when there's a lot of noise. Also, the acoustics in a concert setting are different from a studio. From my experience q6 ogg is the minimum necessary for good sound. That's roughly 192kbps. But really, until somebody tweaks a codec for the peculiarities of live audio, lossless is the way to go.

P.S. See furthurnet, etree and The Live Music Archive. For tons of high quality live audio from many of todays best bands. (Phish, Medeski, Martin, and Wood, Particle, Yonder Mountain String Band, and lots lots more.

Actually, the Internet Archive's main Wayback Machine servers are located in a co-location center in San Francisco, so it's not correct to say they're located outside the US. There is a mirror of the Archive's web content at the Library of Alexandria in Egypt, however - maybe that's what you're thinking of?

In any case, the Archive's work with the Library Of Congress and, increasingly, national libraries who want to archive the Web content of their countries, proves that the establishment also thinks Web archiving is a vital thing to do for posterity. But the rights issues are definitely tricky.

Or if you wanted the pictures too, you could use the archive.org cache.

Archive .org FAQ

How can I remove my site's pages from the Wayback Machine?
The Internet Archive is not interested in preserving or offering access to Web sites or other Internet documents of persons who do not want their materials in the collection. By placing a simple robots.txt file on your Web server, you can exclude your site from being crawled as well as exclude any historical pages from the Wayback Machine.
See our exclusion policy.
You can find exclusion directions at exclude.php. If you cannot place the robots.txt file, opt not to, or have further questions, email wayback2@archive.org.

In other words, by your NOT including a robots.txt file, you are implicitly granting them permission to cache your content. Also, the content is cached as it was published, complete with the appropriate markings, and is only publicly accessible content, so you'd be hard press to argue there is any economic harm from the caching, which means there would be likely be no damages from a successful copyright suit, which means a copyright suit would be pretty damned unlikely.

IANAL.

here.

We've been collecting what freely-redistributable clips we can find at media.xiph.org. There's not much there, but it's still worth a look. Particularly interesting for your case are some public domain HD test clips made available by TU München LDV. Of course, they're quite short given the size of uncompressed HD frames.

Please let us know if you find anything else, that's exactly what the collection is for.

In general, the suggestions of contacting copyright holders for permission is the best one. There are various collections of test clips and movies online, but they're generally either small and without audio, or already compressed. Plus, the more content we get under free licenses, the better the world will be. :-)

The Internet Archive does have a collection of movies with contact information, so that might be an easy place to start.

Good luck!

What about, Archive.org -- they seem to have a large selection of Public domain videos, who knows if they are any recent ones though..

http://www.archive.org/movies/movies.php not that HQ (mpeg2), but still...

...yeah, because otherwise someone might take it seriously.

The press release also mentions patent no.s 5,991,809, 6,370,580 and 6,480,893.

It turns out the last two deal with offloading requests for static content to a separate webserver. Well, isn't that a common use for mod_rewrite? It certainly existed back then, this is the earliest page I can find where it became an 'official' part of apache (I am sure theres more in the cvs logs) - thats from Jan 97, version *3* of mod_rewrite. The patents weren't filed until 5 months later.

Before it was an official apache module, mod_rewrite was released in 1996 and there is evidence of people using it for offloading requests from one server to another that same year.

-Baz

Basically, FLAC has better sampling rates - 24bit, 96khz (a cd is 16bit, 44.1khz) so it is more likely to be a relevant format in the future, is streamable, is compatible with ID3 tags, has an OSI approved license, has integrated checksums, this list goes on... And FLAC does it all in a smaller file size than SHN.

There is a discussion about the practicality of its use as well as a technical comparison for you to glean more information from.

Oh yeah, and FLAC is now a part of Xiph.

There is no way to decode FLAC in OS 9....
See this post from etree.org regarding it.

Artificial scarcity is becoming more and more artificial. Soon all literature, recorded music and video will fit on a cheap disk. If disk space doubles every year for the next 14, today's 120GB drive will become tomorrow's 1PB drive. The Internet Archive, by comparisson, is "only" 300TB.

At that point, the protectionism will become impossibly difficult to defend. When each person could be be given a copy of the Archive of Human Knowledge for the equivalent of 1 week's wage, the issue will resolve. There will be those societies who become enlightened, and those who wither in the greatest of dark ages.

Looking at the Wayback Machine archive for the stormaster.com site, it looks like it included ROM images. That'd probably be why the DMCA was invoked.

I can understand why the game makers would want those ROMs taken down. People are still willing to pay for versions of the classic games -- look at the various "oldies" cartridges for modern game systems. Two of the games on the list I know to be available in stores: Frogger was recently remade as a 3D game, as was Dig Dug. Both include the "classic" game. (I saw Dig Dug at my local job-lot clearance store just the other day.)

It's not a case of the code having no value. Clearly, you can still sell that code. So, having it available for anyone with MAME to use is stealing from the pockets of the current rights-holders.

As much as I think DMCA is bad law and is abused, this is one case where it seems to be used as intended.

There is still an archive from the 4th of July 2002 at the Wayback Machine. Mirror it and make a Freesite on Freenet.

Looky here.
That's the archive.org mirror of that page, circa oct, 2002. Notice that the myutahsearch link is there [though the image link is broken.]

Be kind to it, only fetch if you're going to do something useful with the code. Some of the real mirror sites are still up (wayback is your friend) and may be faster if you're in the USA or Europe. Of course, if you're hitting my ISP from WAIX then ArachNet won't care about bytes, so go for it.

This contains all the items of interest, including the license comments.

Helevius

So no GIF support in the GD library for another year. :-(