Slashdot Mirror
SCO Roundup
Time to clear out the bin of the taint of SCO, hopefully we haven't posted these already... The Economist has a piece titled Face Value -- Of Monkeys and Penguins. The EFF is pushing an email campaign about SCO. An anonymous reader submits this completely unverified claim that SCO needs to change the password on their mail server: sco.txt. And another reader presents a theory about SCO's stock performance.
...should be McBride's mantra.
Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
and it was rejected.
I'm not grousing.
The Economist has captured the issue very well, and in a way that any businessman (your boss, your clients, for instance) will understand.
It has also defined the core of this issue, namely the realignment of the IT industry from old to new, with SCO/MS on the old side, and IBM/OSS/Linux on the new.
I never thought I would see IBM on the right side of IT, but there we have it.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
If you feel like lowering yourself to their level, keep that sco.txt link there.
I thought the whole point was to take the high road?
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
...when the EFF is coming after you. The EFF is not light-handed on the legal representation side, and if they're coming down on the side of Linux against SCO, then SCO has problems.
What I want to see happen, however, is an injunction that holds all funds paid for "Linux licenses" in an escrow account until this matter is settled permanently.
-- We live in a world where lemonade is artificial and soap has real lemon.
"SCO Stock Goes Up After SCOForum Code Revealed as Baloney... Does This Make Sense?"
No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense.
If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
I imagine he is using 'we' in the royal sense meaning 'he.' It's a little shocking to me that so many people are devoting so much time to this. Wouldn't we be better off to just ignore him and let IBM squash him and his claim unnoticed as a something as unsubstantiated as his is should be.
Instead we spend an awful lot of time and energy talking and reading...and making SCO a household word. And worse, making people nervous about linux and open source software in general for (so far) no reason at all. This seems to be a guy who likes to make his money suing people and is getting some free publicity at everyone's expense. Until they are willing to pony up with some real evidence let them slither back to the obscurity more fitting companies that have nothing good to offer.
The fact that SCO stock increased while there case was shown to suck, really shows we are not kicking SCO in the right place. We need to hit them where it hurts.
We finally got to see what was presumably their best evidence, and it was a steaming turd of donkeyshit. They were either lying or were unbelievably negligent. While this was all over geek websites, it didn't make much of a ripple in the business press, and as the last article points out, SCO stock actually got pumped in the business press after the bogus code was released. And the business press is the place to hit SCO -- all they care about is their stock price, and the corporate hacks who determine stock prices don't read Slashdot.
Playing on the defensive as the EFF is doing is good, but we also need to go on the offense more.
People and organizations should contact biz journalists, or write letters to the editors. Send out press releases. Post the information at stock sites -- wherever. If stock traders know how bogus SCO's claims are, it will hurt the fuckwads at SCO. While the SCO story may not be of interest to the general public, it is of interest to the business community. I am sick of seeing unbalanced articles in businessweek or whatever, which contain no viewpoint from the free software software community.
And hackers can go on the offensive by filing lawsuits or threatening such. Send out cease and desist letters and make it public with a press release. Specific people and development teams have been libeled. They have accused the kernel team of theft. Now that code snippets have been made public, further lies by SCO can even be considered as slander against the specific people who contributed that code. And those who are the public face of the kernel team can claim damages as well. While the damages one could claim would not be enough to retire on, it can damage SCO's stock price with the publicity. SCum needs to be told to put up or shut the fuck up.
Stick it to the bastards!
Deconstruct the State
Yeah, I'll believe that "sco.txt" link when SCO releases every last one of those allegedly misappropriated snippets of code to the LKML.
Well, I take that back. I wouldn't be surprised if SCO released that themselves in the hopes that they could catch a OpenSource supporter breaking into their server...
You know you have to watch out for them sneaky commie bastards!
I've created a random comment generator for stories about SCO, with Slashdot in mind. All you geeks with no ability to write +5 Funny articles, here's your savior. Have fun!
StickMan
www.rageagainst.net
Damn it, I swear I read this as:
All as it takes is one sanguine penguin to turn the tide...
And this bizarre mental image of a sanguine penguin explaining to Mr Gerstner what the future looked like and why it involved lots of ice and fish.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
The precedent set in the Berkeley v AT&T decision counters much of SCO's mindless spew. I got the idea that by the time Rob and Eric got to that point in the rebuttal that they got sick of repeating the same point over and over again, resulting in comments becoming sparser.
Can somebody just hand Halloween IX to the appropriate judges so they can dismiss this thing already and focus on IBM's counterclaims? hehe Stupid SCO.
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
Seriously, when I saw the title, SCO Roundup, my first thought was that somebody rounded up all the SCO executives and were now patiently waiting for someone else to come up with a suitable way of disposing of them.
/. poll in there somewhere.
There's a
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Do you know what "6X7liA1zmJhyA" means? I have a Czech dictionary, but I douldn't find that word in there.
At a more general level (and surprisingly for a Linux distributor), he (McBride) found the entire free-software trend "communistic", he says: "We don't get the whole free-lunch thing."
,a notch on their CV for them to earn bread with and the support of users who pay their way by submitting feedback, bug reports etc.
I still don't get the constant references from Gates, McBride et al about Linux being communist.
In Soviet Russia which was communist in name if not nature, the provision of all goods an services was centralised in the hands of a few, huge agencies. These agencies excercised a vast amount of power over those it "served" and generally with property being theft and all that no-one could truly be said to own their their property, e.g. house, car etc. This basically constitutes the large organisations licencing the use of "their" property to the members of the society and as many dissedents found, these licences could be revoked along with the issue of a new one way licence to Siberia.
The free enterprise west on the other hand, benefitted from competition between many decentralised comapanies, organisations and individuals that in some cases formed alliances and co-operated when it would benefit.
If anything, the behaviour of the vast corporations bears more resemblance to the overpowering Soviet interpretation of communism than Open Source. On the other hand, open source follows the free market evolutionary pattern with projects popping into existence all the time with the weaker pointless ones falling by the wayside and the stronger useful ones maturing.
The open source system negates the need for money as developers receive the kudos of a job well done
In the meantime, please stop giving us this shit about open source and communism. The one thing it offers is freedom of choice and action. I don't remember the Russian people having much of that before the wall came down and I don't see that in any EULA from Microsoft, SCO or any other proprietry software company for that matter.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
Following is an opinion - all Speculation & conjecture - could SCOX = BRE-X?
BRE-X was a struggling small town Canadian mining company.
SCOX is a struggling small town Utah software company.
Midland Walsh, one of the principals of BRE-X was famous for suing a former employer and getting a settlement for an undisclosed sum.
Darl McBride, one of the principals of SCOX is famous for suing a former employer and getting a settlement for an undisclosed sum.
BRE-X suddenly said they found these incredibly huge gold deposits in a mine in Indonesia. This despite considerable prior evidence that this mine never contained gold before.
SCOX suddenly says they found these incredibly huge illegal UNIX code deposits in Linux. This despite considerable prior evidence that Linux never contained illegal UNIX before.
BRE-X brought in well-known outside experts (Kavanagh and Francisco) which made their claims of gold found, look more credible. Investors didn't know if these outside experts were directly involved in the search for gold - it later turned out that they weren't.
SCOX brought in well-known outside experts (Boies and Heise) which made their claims of gold found, look more credible. Investors don't know if these outside experts were directly involved in the search for UNIX code - how will it later turn out?
BRE-X said they had their own secret teams of experts, whose identities they couldn't reveal, supporting their claims (assaying of core samples for gold).
SCOX says they have their own secret teams of experts,whose identities they couldn't reveal, supporting their claims (finding illegal UNIX code in Linux).
Industry experts criticized the BRE-X techniques for assaying which were unorthodox, which they say didn't follow industry standard practises, and lacked concrete details.
Industry experts criticized the SCOX techniques for code search which were unorthodox, which they say don't follow industry standard practises, and lack concrete details.
BRE-X's reports (with incredible claims) were criticized by industry experts for the same reasons. The industry experts were ignored.
SCOX reports (with incredible claims) are criticized by industry experts for the same reasons. The industry experts are ignored.
BRE-X kept issuing new reports, with no verifiable concrete details, upping and upping their claims of gold found.
SCOX keep issuing new reports, with no verifiable concrete details, upping and upping their claims of UNIX code found.
Despite the obvious reasons to doubt, media and stock analysts preferred the BRE-X version of events to that of the industry experts. Some stock analysts (Bianchini of Nesbitt Burns) really pushed the stock hard.
Despite the obvious reasons to doubt, media and stock analysts preferred the SCOX version of events to that of the industry experts. Some stock analysts (Cohen of JHC Capital Management) really pushed the stock hard.
As more and more discrepencies in the BRE-X story came to light, the company produced a series of increasingly unsatisfactory explanations, and more outrageous claims, which were disputed by industry experts too.
As more and more discrepencies in the SCOX story come to light, the company produced a series of increasingly unsatisfactory explanations, and more outrageous claims, which were disputed by industry experts too.
The BRE-X stock prise rose and rose on the Toronto Stock Exchange, driven by massive relatively uncritical media coverage.
The SCOX stock prise rose and rose on the NASDAQ, driven by massive relatively uncritical media coverage.
BRE-X insiders cashed out millions of stock. It was a tiny fraction of the total company stock, but still a lot of money to them, especially considering their prior investment in the company was worth a relative pittance.
SCOX insiders cash out millions of stock. It was a tiny fraction