There is a reason this guy (Milunovich) has earned a nickname at the Register, putting him in the same pantheon as Chipzilla, Chimpzilla, Captain Cyborg, and the World's Greatest Luddite. He's the Loon.
That said, a lawsuit of this magnitudeis for sure something to bank on. If it pans out, SCO is almost guaranteed to throw good dividends. A few hundred bucks could be worth thousands if the GPL, which has no real legal ground yet, fails to impress the courts. I'd say the odds are about even on that one.
And you'd be a fool. The last suit of this magnitude that SCO/Caldera played they settled for a tenth of their demand. And only after MS decided to get out before their last AT trial. That was the Dr. DOS settlement, hmmm?
Blue has no reason to back down or settle up. When this thing pans out sometime in 2008, SCO, if not bankrupted already, will be by the judgement.
That guy got consideration for that article. He is mouthing the company line word for word with a one-line sop to objectivity sunk in the middle of the puff.
Ink is flying over the lawsuit, countering claims that Canopy Group is a front for a barratry racket. This is how much McBride has to say about SCO's actual business:
We're building out business for solution providers and will be pushing them to sell SCO solutions in hosted mode.
Mmmmm. I am Jack's SCO reseller brimful of confidence.
We have come to expect lies. It is considered part of the cost of doing business. Marketing; legal; political; the little niceties of socializing. Ours is a culture of lies.
Aren't the jails already full of college-boy, pot-pushers? Now you want to make stupidity a criminal offense. Who is going to pay for the bottom half of the bell-curve watching TV all day?
. . . violence against the authorities you are subject to . ..
Kinda gets right to the heart of the matter, don't it? Violent revolution is always a crime and sometimes necessary. Read any American history, you Tory bitch?
Norm's take on the party switch is that he had a *Road to Damascus* type moment regarding abortion. He came to the conclusion that he was not pro-choice and the Democratic establishment in MSP was unable to countenance this conviction. He basically claims to have been offended by the demands of political correctness on the left.
I think it smells to high heaven. The timing of his change coincided quite closely to the arrival of the Gingrich/Contract with America class of Reps in the House. Norm strikes me as particularly astute about which way the wind is blowing.
I think he's taking his freshman lumps and doing some bag-carrying for the establishment. The RIAA can look forward to referring to the passing grade they get from Normie's review when the heat starts to rise:
The license didn't specify that you got a refund if you installed Linux, smarty. It offered a refund if the license terms were unacceptable.
It doesn't matter what Linux is, though most Merkins what read a newspaper do know, I reckon. The judge was making a quick, subjective read on plaintiff's truthfulness. The quick and clean answer is what got him his judgement. That and the no-show. Small claims is a gimme when the other party doesn't honor their summons.
No. Because there are clear problems with the structure of language. Because, in fact, we do not act as though language has structure, we act as though we impose structure on language as an ordering act, an imposition which is highly contingent. All this method does is minimize the impact of that contingency upon the success of machine translation. My point is that it raises some interesting questions about a problem that contemporary linguistics would like to have put away.
There is always a linguistic problem. That academic linguistics is at such pains to make itself a science, either empirical or statistical, does not make the problem of language go away. This is why philosophy has had to take up the slack.
Language is both structured and uncentered. The communicative act partakes of a formal stucture and a generic function. Not Either/Or, Both/And. The problem with UG is not its biological determinism, but its reductio.
I agree. In fact, I began to wonder about the basis for Chomsky's universal grammar as I read this. I always have had a problem with a biologically encoded grammar. It seems to me that any UG could only really be constituted by a handful of conceptual rubrics like object, action, etc. Really a matter of epistemology rather than linguistics. This research would seem to point to a way out of the UG box. There is other research about the neurological basis for language that lends itself to this conclusion. The leap to language would seem to be constituted not by the adoption of a formalism, however biologically determined, but by an advance in pattern recognition, at which big, parallel systems like the brain excel.
Far from a hack, a system like this accommodates the dynamism of language: idiomatics and tropes far more gracefully than grammar chopping code.
Some joker expects this to blow over with a cease and desist order. They're just trying to scare people.
I think he's in for a big surprise. This is the law and the law wins. Please disabuse yourselves of the notion that the great Amerikan Sheople are going to rise up and do dick about this. They will quietly and fearfully conclude this free music business was just a big fad, like free love in the sixties.
Which leaves the rest of us in the underground, where we belong.
This insightful comment by a former paralegal is a good example of the sort of malinformed speculation that passes for insight in this debate. That SCO had freely released the code ostensibly infringed by GNU/Linux and had done so under the GPL and had done so until quite recently is an historical fact which is not amenable to a juridical determination. Period. Oh, and WTF is a quire?
And it is widely held that Leibnitz read and was influenced by an early German translation of the work. In fact, one of the organizations of hexagrams, the *Sequence of Later Heaven*, corresponds directly to the binary sequence representing decimal 1-64, top-endian. Using that fact, one can build a simple program to calculate the oracle using binary math instead of a matrix.
Here you are leaving LaTeX behind, but any commercial PS engine manages separations. My point (the expression of my wish, rather) was that the WYSIWYG DTP paradigm is dying at the hands of structured and semi-stuctured XML data. The old is new again.
You're in the industry, you gotta recognize that print production workflows are hopeless at this point in time. Things are treated together that belong apart. The most elemental requirements for archiving or repurposing data are hostage to the friggin' page-preview tool.
I'm a little concerned at the way the question conflates open-source with J2EE. Java can be used in an open-handed fashion but it is not inherently open. Certainly J2EE is not though JBoss gets props for trying.
Anyway, why take the pill? If you don't like the infrastructure, build and borrow the tools you need. It's not rocket science, as much as MS wants you to fear its complexity. A decent controller and a quality markup regime and you can do *web services* as you see fit on top of Tomcat.
In point of fact, there is relatively little that Quark does that LaTeX and comparable, proprietary pagination engines cannot. Those few features that aren't supported are typically used to facilitate contorted, anxious and befuddled layout and the routine abuse of typeforms. Indeed, we are not far from XML/SVG layout systems which will finally eliminate the middling DTP market (Quark, InDesign), unless our tastes have been so abused that we no longer recognize quality in page composition.
If you give it a moment's thought, I think you can recognize that using Quark is rather a lot like editing 400 pages individually in vi, only with lots of little buttons. Quark's claim to greatness is its WYSIWYG system, but it was implementated in such a slipshod manner (best example, the complete divergence between picture and text boxes) that it seriously hinders the software growing with its primary markets. There is the catalog of Xtensions which reads like a testament to Quark's failures: H&J, flow constraints, templating limitations, data import and export. Finally, last I looked, XML support was profoundly limited by some childish assumptions about the technology. That alone should (I pray God) ensure that this rev of Quark is the last.
You missing a few book-business idiocyncracies that complicate your analysis. Firstly, costs of print publication are not dropping dramatically. Process improvements have helped hold the line on costs, but up to 85% of print costs is the paper itself and paper as a commodity is highly volatile. 1995 saw a fourfold increase in paper costs for all printers and contributed mightily to the consolidation in the newspaper industry, for example. This necessitates maintaining high inventories relative to other manufacturing processes in order to hedge raw materials price swings.
Another aspect of the publishing market you may not be aware of is an anacronistic feature of book distribution contracts termed a buy-back clause. What this means is that publishers commit to repurchasing unsold inventory from distributors. This habit has some quirky historical background and is very uncommon in other industries. It lingers both because distributors are loath to give up this safety net and because of the high cost of inventory maintenance for print publications. The upshot of this is that the line between production and marketing costs is very fluid for most publishers. High print runs signal a publishers commitment to a book and can be considered an important aspect of marketing, but it also builds in a cost overhang. Among other things this inefficiency contributes to the durability of book genres and big names in print. New authors and untried formulas are highly risky. This also contributes to some eggregious contractual terms for authors. Did you know that the vast majority of publication advances to authors are refundable? That is, if the book fails to sell sufficiently for the author's royalties to cover the advance, the difference is the author's liability. In fact, most new works of fiction fail this test and most fiction authors' first books are consequently their last.
As to the cost basis for libraries I refer you this article
I regret to say that the absurdities/. finds in the infrastructure of industrial music production and distribution were invented and refined by the book business for two centuries before the advent of vinyl. The book industry taught the music and film studios how to do the business of mass meme distribution and how to control their creative talent.
Slashdot Mirror
One man's terrorist is another man's Women's Rights advocate. . . . Er.
There is a reason this guy (Milunovich) has earned a nickname at the Register, putting him in the same pantheon as Chipzilla, Chimpzilla, Captain Cyborg, and the World's Greatest Luddite. He's the Loon.
That said, a lawsuit of this magnitudeis for sure something to bank on. If it pans out, SCO is almost guaranteed to throw good dividends. A few hundred bucks could be worth thousands if the GPL, which has no real legal ground yet, fails to impress the courts. I'd say the odds are about even on that one.
And you'd be a fool. The last suit of this magnitude that SCO/Caldera played they settled for a tenth of their demand. And only after MS decided to get out before their last AT trial. That was the Dr. DOS settlement, hmmm?
Blue has no reason to back down or settle up. When this thing pans out sometime in 2008, SCO, if not bankrupted already, will be by the judgement.
SCO is swimming in their own piss.
That guy got consideration for that article. He is mouthing the company line word for word with a one-line sop to objectivity sunk in the middle of the puff.
emacs rulz.
Yah. Quite so. And begs the question how you can have so many different, copyrighted versions of the same two or three plots.
Ink is flying over the lawsuit, countering claims that Canopy Group is a front for a barratry racket. This is how much McBride has to say about SCO's actual business:
We're building out business for solution providers and will be pushing them to sell SCO solutions in hosted mode.
Mmmmm. I am Jack's SCO reseller brimful of confidence.
I hit this article to make just those points. You and parent are dead on.
We have come to expect lies. It is considered part of the cost of doing business. Marketing; legal; political; the little niceties of socializing. Ours is a culture of lies.
Oi.
.
Aren't the jails already full of college-boy, pot-pushers? Now you want to make stupidity a criminal offense. Who is going to pay for the bottom half of the bell-curve watching TV all day?
. . . violence against the authorities you are subject to . .
Kinda gets right to the heart of the matter, don't it? Violent revolution is always a crime and sometimes necessary. Read any American history, you Tory bitch?
It means they have their heads so far up their asses they have to loosen their ties to see daylight.
Norm's take on the party switch is that he had a *Road to Damascus* type moment regarding abortion. He came to the conclusion that he was not pro-choice and the Democratic establishment in MSP was unable to countenance this conviction. He basically claims to have been offended by the demands of political correctness on the left.
I think it smells to high heaven. The timing of his change coincided quite closely to the arrival of the Gingrich/Contract with America class of Reps in the House. Norm strikes me as particularly astute about which way the wind is blowing.
I think he's taking his freshman lumps and doing some bag-carrying for the establishment. The RIAA can look forward to referring to the passing grade they get from Normie's review when the heat starts to rise:
Our tactics have passed muster in the Senate!
The license didn't specify that you got a refund if you installed Linux, smarty. It offered a refund if the license terms were unacceptable.
It doesn't matter what Linux is, though most Merkins what read a newspaper do know, I reckon. The judge was making a quick, subjective read on plaintiff's truthfulness. The quick and clean answer is what got him his judgement. That and the no-show. Small claims is a gimme when the other party doesn't honor their summons.
No. Because there are clear problems with the structure of language. Because, in fact, we do not act as though language has structure, we act as though we impose structure on language as an ordering act, an imposition which is highly contingent. All this method does is minimize the impact of that contingency upon the success of machine translation. My point is that it raises some interesting questions about a problem that contemporary linguistics would like to have put away.
There is always a linguistic problem. That academic linguistics is at such pains to make itself a science, either empirical or statistical, does not make the problem of language go away. This is why philosophy has had to take up the slack.
Language is both structured and uncentered. The communicative act partakes of a formal stucture and a generic function. Not Either/Or, Both/And. The problem with UG is not its biological determinism, but its reductio.
I agree. In fact, I began to wonder about the basis for Chomsky's universal grammar as I read this. I always have had a problem with a biologically encoded grammar. It seems to me that any UG could only really be constituted by a handful of conceptual rubrics like object, action, etc. Really a matter of epistemology rather than linguistics. This research would seem to point to a way out of the UG box. There is other research about the neurological basis for language that lends itself to this conclusion. The leap to language would seem to be constituted not by the adoption of a formalism, however biologically determined, but by an advance in pattern recognition, at which big, parallel systems like the brain excel.
Far from a hack, a system like this accommodates the dynamism of language: idiomatics and tropes far more gracefully than grammar chopping code.
Some joker expects this to blow over with a cease and desist order. They're just trying to scare people.
I think he's in for a big surprise. This is the law and the law wins. Please disabuse yourselves of the notion that the great Amerikan Sheople are going to rise up and do dick about this. They will quietly and fearfully conclude this free music business was just a big fad, like free love in the sixties.
Which leaves the rest of us in the underground, where we belong.
here.
God love the stinkin' gub'mint.
I'd like to use it at video rental places and CD stores to get product reviews.
You mean to say yer buying movies and music these days, Taco? Shame on you!
This insightful comment by a former paralegal is a good example of the sort of malinformed speculation that passes for insight in this debate. That SCO had freely released the code ostensibly infringed by GNU/Linux and had done so under the GPL and had done so until quite recently is an historical fact which is not amenable to a juridical determination. Period. Oh, and WTF is a quire?
And it is widely held that Leibnitz read and was influenced by an early German translation of the work. In fact, one of the organizations of hexagrams, the *Sequence of Later Heaven*, corresponds directly to the binary sequence representing decimal 1-64, top-endian. Using that fact, one can build a simple program to calculate the oracle using binary math instead of a matrix.
Here you are leaving LaTeX behind, but any commercial PS engine manages separations. My point (the expression of my wish, rather) was that the WYSIWYG DTP paradigm is dying at the hands of structured and semi-stuctured XML data. The old is new again.
You're in the industry, you gotta recognize that print production workflows are hopeless at this point in time. Things are treated together that belong apart. The most elemental requirements for archiving or repurposing data are hostage to the friggin' page-preview tool.
I'm a little concerned at the way the question conflates open-source with J2EE. Java can be used in an open-handed fashion but it is not inherently open. Certainly J2EE is not though JBoss gets props for trying.
Anyway, why take the pill? If you don't like the infrastructure, build and borrow the tools you need. It's not rocket science, as much as MS wants you to fear its complexity. A decent controller and a quality markup regime and you can do *web services* as you see fit on top of Tomcat.
We are already those things and the streets are full.
In point of fact, there is relatively little that Quark does that LaTeX and comparable, proprietary pagination engines cannot. Those few features that aren't supported are typically used to facilitate contorted, anxious and befuddled layout and the routine abuse of typeforms. Indeed, we are not far from XML/SVG layout systems which will finally eliminate the middling DTP market (Quark, InDesign), unless our tastes have been so abused that we no longer recognize quality in page composition.
If you give it a moment's thought, I think you can recognize that using Quark is rather a lot like editing 400 pages individually in vi, only with lots of little buttons. Quark's claim to greatness is its WYSIWYG system, but it was implementated in such a slipshod manner (best example, the complete divergence between picture and text boxes) that it seriously hinders the software growing with its primary markets. There is the catalog of Xtensions which reads like a testament to Quark's failures: H&J, flow constraints, templating limitations, data import and export. Finally, last I looked, XML support was profoundly limited by some childish assumptions about the technology. That alone should (I pray God) ensure that this rev of Quark is the last.
Power to the people and PDF to the presses!
Dear Robot,
/. finds in the infrastructure of industrial music production and distribution were invented and refined by the book business for two centuries before the advent of vinyl. The book industry taught the music and film studios how to do the business of mass meme distribution and how to control their creative talent.
You missing a few book-business idiocyncracies that complicate your analysis. Firstly, costs of print publication are not dropping dramatically. Process improvements have helped hold the line on costs, but up to 85% of print costs is the paper itself and paper as a commodity is highly volatile. 1995 saw a fourfold increase in paper costs for all printers and contributed mightily to the consolidation in the newspaper industry, for example. This necessitates maintaining high inventories relative to other manufacturing processes in order to hedge raw materials price swings.
Another aspect of the publishing market you may not be aware of is an anacronistic feature of book distribution contracts termed a buy-back clause. What this means is that publishers commit to repurchasing unsold inventory from distributors. This habit has some quirky historical background and is very uncommon in other industries. It lingers both because distributors are loath to give up this safety net and because of the high cost of inventory maintenance for print publications. The upshot of this is that the line between production and marketing costs is very fluid for most publishers. High print runs signal a publishers commitment to a book and can be considered an important aspect of marketing, but it also builds in a cost overhang. Among other things this inefficiency contributes to the durability of book genres and big names in print. New authors and untried formulas are highly risky. This also contributes to some eggregious contractual terms for authors. Did you know that the vast majority of publication advances to authors are refundable? That is, if the book fails to sell sufficiently for the author's royalties to cover the advance, the difference is the author's liability. In fact, most new works of fiction fail this test and most fiction authors' first books are consequently their last.
As to the cost basis for libraries I refer you this article
I regret to say that the absurdities