Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SCO Asks IBM To Make SCO's Case For It

Posted by timothy on from the it's-just-simpler-that-way dept.

acousticiris writes "According to an analysis of Friday's memorandum from SCO on Groklaw: 'If I had to characterize it in a brief sentence or two, the sentence would be that SCO tells the court, "How are we supposed to know what code IBM misappropriated? It's up to them to prove our case for us."...' It's also interesting to note that in Friday's memorandum, footnote 4, SCO uses Eric Raymond's Jargon File entry for FUD to take pot shots at IBM (footnote 4). Evidently, Eric was not pleased, according to the updated entry."

4 of 459 comments (clear)

  1. Come On You guys by ratfynk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    all your bandwith belong to .........I am not alowed to post mirrors so somebody do it please..

    --
    OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
  2. Re:Don't forget... by super_ogg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    That's when a guy pulls down his pants, and spreads apart his legs and takes his balls and hits them against someone's head. So if I teabagged you, I would be over top of you and hit you in the head with my nuts!

    hahahah, glad to help. You won't find that in the dictionary.
    ogg

    --
    Black cat, searing pain, flames...? I must be in Heaven! - Homer Simpson
  3. Re:Don't forget... by super_ogg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Different definitions I guess, I saw the movie Pecker and that's what they were doing in the show. Both terms are rather vulgar. Just don't get teabagged if your a man, and see if you can do it to your girlfriend. :-)
    ogg

    --
    Black cat, searing pain, flames...? I must be in Heaven! - Homer Simpson
  4. Prime numbers provably infinite by Doug+Merritt · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    There are real world examples of this - the idea that prime numbers are an infinite series, for example. Since nobody has ever been able to find an end to the series, it still stands, but you can't *prove* it.

    You're getting completely confused here. There are an infinite number of prime numbers, this was proven thousands (yes, thousands) of years ago, and there is absolutely no controversy about the fact. It isn't even one of the subjects where the nature of "proof" gets argued philosophical...to the extent that anything at all can be proven mathematically, primes have been proven to be infinite.

    The oldest and easiest proof is simple. If primes are finite, then there must be some prime N that is the biggest. Multiply together all primes and add one: x=1 + 2*3*5*7*...*N. This resulting x is not divisible by any prime...it has remainder 1 when divided by 2 or by 3 or by 7...up to N. But that means that x is prime, yet it is obviously bigger than the biggest prime N. Contradiction, therefore our premise, that there is a largest prime N, is false, therefore there are infinite primes.

    Maybe you're thinking of the strangeness exhibited by "grue"?

    The "grue" property is defined as:

    x is grue if and only if x is green and is observed before the year 2000, or x is blue and is not observed before the year 2000. This is a "weird" property but there is no obvious reason why we couldn't make up such a property. Now, let us pretend that the x referred to above are actually emeralds. Further, pretend that we have observed many emeralds and they have all been green and thus have had the property "grue". Then, intuitively, this should increase our belief that the next emerald we observe will be green and that it will be grue. This intuition is fine until New Years Eve in 1999. Now our pretend emeralds observed in 2000 should be grue and therefore blue and not green. (quotation source )

    Web search on Nelson Goodman for more on that.

    --
    Professional Wild-Eyed Visionary