Slashdot Mirror

• Call this OS anything you want, but please include the name "linux" in whatever you call it.
• Please claim to your free subdomain (reputation) in our community-owned, mother-of-all-intranets at http://our.linux.org/dns (eg: va.linux.org = valinux.com etc)
• Let's chaorganize ourselves to free our idea exchange, while forging a commercial agreement to immunize ourselves from free-riders like Dr. Chiou.. This process might take us a year..

• Call this OS anything you want, but please include the name "linux" in whatever you call it.
• Please claim to your free subdomain (reputation) in our community-owned, mother-of-all-intranets at http://our.linux.org/dns (eg: va.linux.org = valinux.com etc)
• Let's chaorganize ourselves to free our idea exchange, while forging a commercial agreement to immunize ourselves from free-riders like Dr. Chiou.. This process might take us a year..

• Call this OS anything you want, but please include the name "linux" in whatever you call it.
• Please claim to your free subdomain (reputation) in our community-owned, mother-of-all-intranets at http://our.linux.org/dns (eg: va.linux.org = valinux.com etc)
• Let's chaorganize ourselves to free our idea exchange, while forging a commercial agreement to immunize ourselves from free-riders like Dr. Chiou.. This process might take us a year..

In announcing the new suite Wednesday, Jobs said the company had looked at the fact that it owned proprietary software on both ends of a Web visit to the site. "We realized we could take unfair advantage of the fact," Jobs said.
The panel generally said the approach just made it more compelling to buy a Mac for consumers seeking Internet access, and that Apple was smart to leverage it.

I would have liked to have asked Woz what his take on this would be. We all know how much we love pages that need AOL or internet explorer or some other non-universal technology.

With Microsoft slowly going the route of open source (also this) (it's only disclosed source but it's a start), I wonder if this is a wise move or a fatal mistake. I only wish I had known about this in time.

I've been waiting for weeks now for a critical article on the LinuxOne IPO from a mainstream non-Linux friendly source and this is it.
After reading articles like this one which actually may convince some silly investors that LinuxOne is a Linux underdog that may take off. Or even worse articles from other mainstream press that merely state that Open Source "enthusiasts" dislike LinuxOne for not being true to Open Source (they usually link to this), it is good to see a reputable mainstream site do a quality job of describing LinuxOne to the average clueless investor (when I say clueless i mean with regards to Linux).
In a climate where Salon's stock rises 90% simply because they are going to provide content on RedHat's website, LinuxOne has potential to rise above and beyond their IPO price , fleecing unknowledgeable investors along the way. What's extremely interesting is that the CEO of LinuxOne hold shares of LinuxOne through a charity and thus may be able to cash out if given prior written consent by their underwriter(From ZDNet).
All in all kudos to Motley Fool for showing the average investor exactly what kind of company LinuxOne is. I especially like the blurb at the end...
I can't repeat this enough: DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK. It's a vicious market out there, buyer beware. Don't blindly trust a company's press releases, they're advertising. Don't trust what analysts say about it. Even the Fool has been small-f fooled before, right here in this portfolio. Our original paper money "Simpleton" portfolio included Oxford Health Plans (Nasdaq: OXHP), which one day lost 75% of its value due to "accounting irregularities." I know the stock market's booming like mad but DON'T go on margin, DON'T gamble away money you can't afford to lose, and DON'T put all your eggs in one basket. We don't always repeat that often enough here, so you'd better get in the habit of repeating it to yourself.

If only all individual investors followed this advice maybe the stock market wouldn't be the crazy place it is today. :)

I had some trouble getting the document so I've put a copy here.

I remember reading about this back around 1994, 5, or 6. I thought the bill had been killed in Congress, but clearly I was wrong. From what I recall it is a very bad bill, but I haven't read it in over a year. If I can I will submit a review or an annotated version to TECHNOCRAT.NET or SlashDot. Of course, I have no idea if it will go through on either site.

Morse code is fun and people won't stop using it. But to have a test on copying Morse code by ear required to get any ham license that allows operation below 30 MHz in this day and age is rediculous. The average ham is older than 60, but ham radio should be a resource for young people to learn analog electronics, RF, wide-area networking, etc. I'm hoping that this change will start to address the age gap in ham radio, and I'll be working on a campaign to get young people into the hobby and on to our HF bands.

One of the best things about this decision is that it ends a very ugly acrimonious situation in ham radio that has persisted since 1990, when the no-code VHF license was introduced as the first foot in the door for modernization of ham radio. A lot of the older hams alienated the younger ones because they felt that no-coders weren't real hams. Now, those younger hams will have the same licenses as the older ones, and will be in their faces on the HF bands.

You can read more about this in my editorial The World's Most Silly Technology Law.

Bruce Perens K6BP

I am sure Bruce Perens will have more to say but in the meantime go to http://www.nocode.org/ (this is an organization reponisble for lobbying of the FTC regarding this issue.

Also, make sure you chek out The World's Most Silly Technology Law , an editorial by Bruce Perens over at technocrat.net

Cheers.

Nick

I am sure Bruce Perens will have more to say but in the meantime go to http://www.nocode.org/ (this is an organization reponisble for lobbying of the FTC regarding this issue.

Also, make sure you chek out The World's Most Silly Technology Law , an editorial by Bruce Perens over at technocrat.net

Cheers.

Nick

• LinuxOne's GPL violation status:
• • They acknowledge the requirement to provide a written offer in the README on the CDROM
  • They acknowledge the problem when contacted by phone
  • They have failed to follow through on providing the source code on their FTP site
• Caldera has distributed OpenLinux Demo CDs without source code or a written offer of source code.
• • The CDROM README file does no discuss the availablity of the source code at all
  • Caldera refuses to respond to email on the subject
  • Caldera refuses to address the problem when contacted by phone stating a policy of requiring software authors to contact the Caldera contact assigned to them at the time Caldera choose to redistribute their software (however, Caldera has not assigned contacts to GPL authors, only to companies authoring commerical licensed software). They have refused to acknowledge that there is any problem.
• Linux Systems Labs in their product titles implies that entire CDs are covered by the GPL when in actuality the CD conatins several packages that are not covered by the GPL (this act is described as a GPL violation by the Free Software Foundation)
• Linux Central when a binary only CD is ordered does not supply any written offer of source code availablity
• Cheap Bytes when a binary only CD is ordered does not supply any written offer of source code availablity
• IBM has been in violation of the LGPL for over 400 days since the time they have distributed unsupported ADSM for Linux. To date, they still have not made the object files for ADSM available for accomplishing relinking against modified versions of the LGPL material. There is every reason to believe that IBM will remain in violation of the LGPL throughout the entire 1999 year.

I'm sure Sentator Schumer could care less about your petrified Natalie Portmans.

I'm sure Sentator Schumer could care less about your petrified Natalie Portmans.

I'm sure Sentator Schumer could care less about your petrified Natalie Portmans.

So there 8-P

I'm sure Sentator Schumer could care less about your petrified Natalie Portmans.

So there 8-P

I had a great time speaking in Iceland and would love to go to Norway. If there's a conference there, tell me about the call for papers.

Thanks

Bruce

Our web content manager
software is Zope. Zope is written in Python. The
weblog software that displays our articles is a Zope
component called Squishdot. It looks a lot like the
Slashdot software, but the software is entirely
different from Slashdot and it's expected to evolve
its own unique look and feel over time.

...and throw away machine cycles, maybe PHP _is_ cool. But if you rather have an organized, object oriented web development interface, with multithreaded persistent database connections, a standalone web server, plugable modules and no overhead per call, try Zope. All the great new sites use it, like AppWatch, Technocrat and iMacLinux. Why? How about going from drawing board to full featured site in 2 weeks? And please don't mention the PHP + MySQL combo, the MySQL license sucks. OpenSource rules, I don't care about the rest.

Enjoy.

Enjoy.

http://technocrat.net/ArticleImages/L iVid.tgz

I think there's a copy on Bruce Peren's Technocrat. I'm too lazy to find the exact URL, but it should be somewhere on this URL.

--
Reject

I think there's a copy on Bruce Peren's Technocrat. I'm too lazy to find the exact URL, but it should be somewhere on this URL.

--
Reject

• Year: an integer indicating the year A.D. However, if this integer is between 0 and 99, the ``obvious'' year is used; more precisely, that year is assumed that is equal to the integer modulo 100 and within fifty years of the current year (inclusive backwards and exclusive forwards). Thus, in the year 1978, year 28 is 1928 but year 27 is 2027. (Functions that return time in this format always return a full year number.)

Compatibility note: This is incompatible with the Lisp Machine Lisp definition in two ways. First, in Lisp Machine Lisp a year between 0 and 99 always has 1900 added to it. Second, in Lisp Machine Lisp time functions return the abbreviated year number between 0 and 99 rather than the full year number. The incompatibility is prompted by the imminent arrival of the twenty-first century. Note that (mod year 100) always reliably converts a year number to the abbreviated form, while the inverse conversion can be very difficult.

Aside, Bruce Perens has an interesting proposal over at Technocrat.Net.

(Meta: Any good reason to not allowing attrs (esp. cite) with

tags?)

/Anonym Fegis

• Year: an integer indicating the year A.D. However, if this integer is between 0 and 99, the ``obvious'' year is used; more precisely, that year is assumed that is equal to the integer modulo 100 and within fifty years of the current year (inclusive backwards and exclusive forwards). Thus, in the year 1978, year 28 is 1928 but year 27 is 2027. (Functions that return time in this format always return a full year number.)

Compatibility note: This is incompatible with the Lisp Machine Lisp definition in two ways. First, in Lisp Machine Lisp a year between 0 and 99 always has 1900 added to it. Second, in Lisp Machine Lisp time functions return the abbreviated year number between 0 and 99 rather than the full year number. The incompatibility is prompted by the imminent arrival of the twenty-first century. Note that (mod year 100) always reliably converts a year number to the abbreviated form, while the inverse conversion can be very difficult.

Aside, Bruce Perens has an interesting proposal over at Technocrat.Net.

(Meta: Any good reason to not allowing attrs (esp. cite) with

tags?)

/Anonym Fegis

In reality, ER's opinion is the only one that counts since he will be showing up at the meeting strapped with an AK-47 and a small arms cache. He has already displayed that he is one pickle short of a barrel by his many antics, including his appearance on the MS campus as Obi Wan Kenobi (or however the hell you spell it).

Bruce Perens will be too busy trying to promote his new website.

Salus will probably be too busy working on the free buffet.

Stallman, of course will be too busy doing hits of LSD.

Larry Wall will be boring everyone out of their mind with his drug-induced ramblings about onions and whatnot.

Hmm, interesting point of view. I must say, I don't visit /. so often nowadays, nor post so much, simply because I feel that an on-line forum that can accomodate the likes of Katz isn't for me. But, where else does one go? Technocrat has much better editorial control, and more intelligent posts, but doesn't have the "critical mass" in user numbers to generate real discussion -- 2 to 9 comments seems to be the usual range. I don't see people leaving slashdot; most are morely likely simply to ignore Katz. But there's the rub -- can Katz be ignored? I think not. He is symptomatic of a deeper problem at slashdot: the lack of proper editing. Stuff posted as news sometimes contains hearsay, rumour, and plain misinformation (not deliberate, I'm sure). Katz is not the only offender, merely far and away the worst.

MySQL sucks. Have you ever read the LICENSE it comes under?? Try Zope. And take a look at some Open Source sites that use it daily, like AppWatch and Technocrat.

The main article on that site contains a link to a mailing list populated by several experimenters who are looking at using this type of link to deliver bandwidth to underserved areas in the US and various foreign countries.

Although apparently not 'nerdly' enough for a Slashdot quickie topic, the microwave link was the subject of a thread at Technocrat.net, which can be found here. I'll be glad to answer any questions anyone has about this project, either here, on the mailing list, or at the email address below.

John Miles (ke5fx@qsl.net; tried to register but the /. password-mailer seems to be on strike tonight)

The main article on that site contains a link to a mailing list populated by several experimenters who are looking at using this type of link to deliver bandwidth to underserved areas in the US and various foreign countries.

Although apparently not 'nerdly' enough for a Slashdot quickie topic, the microwave link was the subject of a thread at Technocrat.net, which can be found here. I'll be glad to answer any questions anyone has about this project, either here, on the mailing list, or at the email address below.

John Miles (ke5fx@qsl.net; tried to register but the /. password-mailer seems to be on strike tonight)

There's some interesting discussion over on Technocrat on this story.

There's some interesting discussion over on Technocrat on this story.

From the translated message from the Senator, it's not at all clear as to what the Articles actually state.

I'd be very much in favor of a law that required all software used by the Government to be provided as Open Source, wherever possible (whatever that means).

This is not really that different from the current law in the US, if I understand it correctly, that any software written for the US Government (as a deliverable) has no copyright and is thus in the public domain. It would simply be moving from public domain to an Open Source license requirement. The two are very close, but an Open Source requirement would imply that the original source code must be supplied. A deliverable to the US Government could be executables that are in the public domain (could legally be reverse engineered).

There was a discussion of these issues over on Technocrat awhile back, with Bruce Perens making the interesting suggestion that someone should look into getting software created by/for the US Government released with Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests. While it appears the software created by/for the US Government has no copyright (Public Domain), the US Government is not under any obligation to make releases, except possibly under FOIA requests, which is what Bruce suggested someone should look into.

It appears that some people here seem to think that the French law will require that all Software be Open Source. I'd probably be opposed to such a mandate. This would unnecessarily displace workers suddenly who develop and release non-Open Source software. If Open Source is to succeed, I feel that it's better that it wins in the marketplace, not by mandate.

The Government is a customer in the marketplace, and if it's determined that the Government (and thus the people) benefit from the advantages of Open Source, well, that's just a customer making a minimum requirement for purchased goods. Nothing wrong with that.

From the translated message from the Senator, it's not at all clear as to what the Articles actually state.

I'd be very much in favor of a law that required all software used by the Government to be provided as Open Source, wherever possible (whatever that means).

This is not really that different from the current law in the US, if I understand it correctly, that any software written for the US Government (as a deliverable) has no copyright and is thus in the public domain. It would simply be moving from public domain to an Open Source license requirement. The two are very close, but an Open Source requirement would imply that the original source code must be supplied. A deliverable to the US Government could be executables that are in the public domain (could legally be reverse engineered).

There was a discussion of these issues over on Technocrat awhile back, with Bruce Perens making the interesting suggestion that someone should look into getting software created by/for the US Government released with Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests. While it appears the software created by/for the US Government has no copyright (Public Domain), the US Government is not under any obligation to make releases, except possibly under FOIA requests, which is what Bruce suggested someone should look into.

It appears that some people here seem to think that the French law will require that all Software be Open Source. I'd probably be opposed to such a mandate. This would unnecessarily displace workers suddenly who develop and release non-Open Source software. If Open Source is to succeed, I feel that it's better that it wins in the marketplace, not by mandate.

The Government is a customer in the marketplace, and if it's determined that the Government (and thus the people) benefit from the advantages of Open Source, well, that's just a customer making a minimum requirement for purchased goods. Nothing wrong with that.

Tired of Katz? Then run, do not walk, away from slashdot. We, the posters, are what's keeping this leech alive. It is quite obvious that Rob and co. don't give two fucks if he pisses people off. Why? slashdot is owned by a corporation now: hits and click-throughs are what matter. Use technocrat instead: it's quiet over there, but only because everyone is here.

Who's paying for it it not important, the important thing is to do it right. That is why all the media hype and the bogus companies that pretend to support Open Source get in the way instead of helping out the movement. Just ignore them, and go for trully OS sources of information and software, like GNU, Technocrat and AppWatch.

If I were you, I'd get ahold of Bruce Perens, either here, or post something to Technocrat.net. Doesn't look like he's gotten wind of this yet.


Note: I would do it myself, but I am way too busy to provide the proper follow-up...

There's often good ham news at Bruce Perens' Technocrat.Net. Bruce has been an avid ham for a while, so he makes sure to post the important stuff there. Not much on there today, but a couple of weeks ago there were several ham articles.

----

Well, then, I must complain about your complaining. True Technocrat.Net looks a lot like /. It may even be based on the slash code (I'm not absolutely positive on this thought). But guess what, there are a a number of sites based on Slash and I expect that number to grow. Heck I'd make one of my own if I had the time and I was better at perl.

Personally, I find that Technocrat, while more limited in scope than slashdot, to be alot like slashdot was in the old days. //end old man mode

Finally, let me say that what you put in your .sig is your own business. If you don't like seeing sigs, disable them. It's not all that hard.

• It's an arbitrary value. You may use your MAC address or you may use something else.
• Your MAC address isn't any more sensitive than your IP.
• One of the main points of ipv6 is to give IPs for everyone, so why not? We will already have to rethink a lot of our "privacy" systems. We do a lot of what Perens calls "security trough obscurity"; relying on dynamic IP for "privacy" is in effect treating a bug as a feature.

Bruce Perens seems to enjoy that sort of thing. He was the primary author of the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Perhaps you should check out his website - http://www.technocrat.net/

It is more than likely that ZD is trying to jump on the publicity bandwagon discovered by Slashdot readers, and is merely pouring gasoline on the fire.

It would be useful for developers to complain about abuses of their code; for advokiddies too gripe about this is a waste of bits...

Don't expect the media to raise any issues at all with this law. Media companies will benefit BIG time from such a law. They'll be able to compile all of those polls they're always running into databases and then copyright them. They'll be the first one's to commercialize the use of copyrighted on-line databases.

Copyrights are there not to ensure 'fairness'. They are there to encourage creation of intellectual property. Check the Constititution, not that Media considers THAT relevant anymore.

I haven't seen a lack of data collection/database creation under the present system. This is legislation that probably protects only campaign contributors.

Speaking of campaign contributors, if someone puts together campaign contribution databases will I be allowed to point out that Senators X, Y and Z and Congressmen A, B, C, D, (not E or F) and G got fat contributions and then supported some legislation? A case could certainly be made that I used their database and violated their copyright here.

I also believe the example of someone's book that was photocopied and placed on the Web to be bogus. It doesn't raise to the level of specious because nobody who knows ANYTHING about copyrights would believe that this is a problem. Of course the original author of a book is protected against it being published on the Web without permission. That's exactly what copyright protects.

They are attempting to extend copyright to every fact in a collection of facts. Very scary.

Yes, Bruce's Technocrat.net site is a wonderful thing. For those who missed the earlier story, Technocrat.net is devoted to "technology policy" -- laws which affect technology. It may take a while for the site to become popular, and may go through some growing pains, but if it can actually serve to bridge the gap between computer techies and non-computer techies, it may help educate everyone. (I've learned quite a bit from it already -- I'm quite familiar with the computer-related stories, but I haven't followed the space exploration stories as much, and I didn't know anything about amateur radio.)

I've already submitted a UCITA story to that site. I imagine a lot of other people have, too. I haven't seen one posted yet, but I can't possibly imagine this story not showing up there.

There is a Zope component that connects to an IMAP server to provide a web oriented front end that can be accessed via HTTP, XML-RPC, and even FTP. The most common configuration is HTTP (via a fairly functional but very minimal web forms based interface).

I jokingly call it NotMail. Since being hired by the authors of Zope, I have not be able to pursue it to hard core, but Python, is as most of you know, is vey easy. Most of the core is done, there would just have to be some improvements made to get it to work with the new Zope version, 2.0b1, some threadsafing issues (2.0 is fully threaded) and of course, some cosmetic changes to the HTTP interface.

For an example of a Zope powered site, check out Technocrat.net.

Are you sure? It's not slash, it's Squishdot (built on Zope, which is built on Python).

Admittedly, the look-and-feel is "borrowed" from Slashdot, but the underlying technology is completely different. Check The Technology behind TECHNOCRAT.NET for more info.