Except the "similar Linux issues" aren't similar. This is a bug in a piece of USERLAND software, which Microsoft routinely claims is 100% secure for use by uninformed computer users. This bug allows arbitrary code to be run on a Windows system without the user knowing they are running code. In fact, the code advertises itself as being something else.
Now, if you've found a "similar Linux issue", report it to the Konqueror, Mozilla, Lynx, W3C, Galleon, and Netscape teams, because they'll sure as hell want to know about a kernel hole (because that's what Linux is) that causes their browsers to behave similarly to this. Except for the fact that we weren't dumb enough to integrate our browsers with our operating system kernel.
Oh, wait. I forgot. The above recieved +2 - irrational ranting about how Slashdot sucks and +2 - Pro-Microsoft.
Michael's writeup was actually good this time, accurately summarizing the article content.
You seem to forget something. This is America. No voter will vote for anyone who isn't a Republican or a Democrat, because that's throwing away your vote. And both the Republicans and the Democrats are so far in the pockets of the "entertainment" industry that the chances of their repealing any of these laws are about nil.
Ok, let me clarify my position. No-one with their head screwed on straight, and who is capable of detaching themselves even slightly from their prior assumptions about the way the world works and actually examining the data, is doubting that the planet is, as a whole, getting hotter. There will, of course, always be extremist groups on both sides of the issue, but they can safely be ignored. As usual.
The question is both the magnitude, cause, and ultimate effect of said climatic change. To me, it looks reasonable that its just a natural cycle, but that is, of course, a guess. I doubt more than a hundred people on the entire planet have access to enough data and enough skill to even give an informed guess.
Rather than force Microsoft to develop bloated software for linux, which will probably only work with a single distribution anyway,
You're being overly optimistic if you think it'd work for even one distribution. I can see Microsoft putting 'effort' into development for a year or so, then giving up and saying something like:
"Well, we tried to satisfy these inane and unreasonable requirements pushed on us by the courts. But we have been unable to build an office suite for the Linux platform that meets our high standards of quality and ease of use. It is our opinion that the Linux platform is completely unsuitable as a platform for quality software, due to the numerous competing factions, standards, and systems and the inherent unreliability of such a system of development."
Or, even worse, they release a broken, semi-ported product that crashes continuously and reads even fewer Office files than current Free Software office suites, and then say exactly the same thing.
No, enforced openness of file formats and network protocols is the way to go. Does anyone else remember the Halloween documents? Microsoft said that the only way for them to crush the Free Software movement was through propritization of communication. File formats, network protocols, and the like. And they're currently working their best at doing just that. To be effective, the settlement not only has to prevent this tactic, but also prevent them from encrypting everything and using the DMCA as a shield.
What it does not, cannot, tell us is wether this is a cyclical or progressive change. Thats the same as here on earth. The earth is warmer now than it was 100 years ago.
I don't think anyone's debating that fact. It would do well to remember that we are coming out of a mini-ice-age, and that there are warmer temperatures in recorded history. Remember that the Vikings did mange to settle both Iceland and Greenland (over 500 years ago, IIRC), and things were warm enough there for them to actually live off what they could grow there.
That the effect is increasing, or could be, doesn't mean that humans are responsible. We have no proof either way, though you're unlikely to see any meaningful discussion in the mainstream media. They've pretty much decided that its a convenient "fact" to be trotted out whenever they want to beat down industrial concerns, and something they can ignore the rest of the time.
Oh, and saying that the earth is warmer now than a century ago means nothing when one considers the scale of the processes involved. As many scientists have been trying in vain to point out, we don't have nearly enough valid data.
Yeah, but they're also probably paying for all that bandwidth. And once the Slashdot effect gets up to full power, I think we can assume that they're going to have a very nasty bill indeed.
So threatening physical harm is illegal, but threatening legal harm (in an apparently baseless and frivolous fashion, as they later retracted the threat, obviously feeling they could not effectively follow through on it) is perfectly ok? Interesting logic you've got there, especially since a legal attack will do much more damage that a physical one. (Finances drained, locked in prison and probably abused there)
Legally, you're still wrong. See other posts about the kind of case Felten brought.
A more apt comparison might be a mafia hitman threatening to break someone's limbs with a baseball bat he's carrying with him. (Thug = RIAA, baseball bat = lawyers, for the imagination-impaired) When brought before a judge, said hitman proceeds to say "But your honor, I was only joking!" and then walks.
Not that this situation hasn't happened before. (I have no doubt it was rather common in Chicago during Al Capone's time in power) But that doesn't make it right.
Is it me, or were Californian courts (both federal and state, IIRC) showing an unusual amount of sanity today? First the EULA ruling mentioned below, then this... Someone's been falling behind on their bribes... Err... Donations, it seems.
The DMCA actually doesn't do anything to enforce EULAs, IIRC. Yes, they were tangled up in the DeCSS case, but the MPAA quickly forgot about them, as Johnson was too young to have been bound by the supposed contract anyway. The UCITA was supposed to do this, but I believe it got defeated or quietly dropped everywhere but Maryland and Virginia. (I think Maryland adopted a heavily modified version, while Virginia used pretty much the written bill, after some "encouragement" from AOL)
The SCAAA, which is the only one I know of currently in the pipeline, doesn't have any effect on EULAs. It does effectively make it illegal to create or program any "digital devices" that don't implement a copy control system in hardware.
I'm guessing the moderator thought it was spelled satyr, which is a mythological beast sufficiently similar to a Troll for the moderation rating to apply.;)
In case you haven't noticed, proprietary software advocates always forget that clause. How many times have Linux developers been told that someone's not going to use Linux because "there's no-one we can sue if something goes wrong!"? Proprietary software isn't any better. In fact, given the wording of some EULAs I've seen, your attempted lawsuit might give the company grounds for legal action against you, especially if you publicize said lawsuit.
This is, of course, assuming that EULAs have any legal weight at all. That is, unfortunately, still an uncertain issue, and seems to depend entirely on what judge you get and how informed he is about precedent and contract law. And how much he's been paid off, in America.
Ah, yes. That is kind of important. And quite stupid on their part. I guess its the R2-in-the-docking-bay phenomona mentioned elsewheres in this discussion.;)
Though, as usual, the solution's not more laws. Rather, the solution to what is fundamentally a technical problem is technical. Namely, if you've got something vital to someone's health or life hooked up to a network, make DAMN sure its secure.
Yeah, but in case you haven't noticed, that would mean a settlement harmful to Microsoft. And that's one thing neither Microsoft nor its supporters want. Of course, a settlement like this would do that - as you said, it might encourage companies to start making software for Linux. It'd create some competition. And why isn't there any of that competition right now, despite all the advantages of Linux or Mac OS X? Because Microsoft has a monopoly.
If its just a monitor, and doesn't have to do any reporting, then the data line should be one-way. If it does do reporting, then whatever's on the other end should discard anything that isn't a valid data signal.
If we still had to use machine language and punch cards, there wouldn't be open source.
If you seriously think that, I suggest reading Steven Levy's Hackers. The community he describes in the first few chapters sounds a whole lot like a community similar to the modern open-source one, using... Guess what? Machine language, punch cards, paper tape, and assembly language.
They did acknowledge that they'd screwed up, and apologize. But it just goes to show the clout that large business organizations can have when it comes to dealing with government.
Having read the Kafka works in question, I must say that he was spot-on in his evaluation of their quality. Step back from established literary tradition and actually read the things. They're horrible.
I'd suggest doing some research on the early days of the DeCSS persecution. A Norwegian national, younger than the age required to agree to a legally binding contract (and thus, not covered by EULAs, especially not ones he'd never read) who had written a program that was perfectly legal in Norway, was arrested. IIRC, he was held for several days and all computer equipment he or his family owned, including cel phones, was confiscated.
Why? The MPAA told Norwegian law enforcement that he'd done something illegal.
Now, while he got out of jail quite quickly and had a full apology made to him, what do you think would happen if Microsoft decided to go after an adult working on this kind of project? They can be at least as nasty as the MPAA, if not nastier - how many governments still run almost entirely on Microsoft software?
I'm not saying we shouldn't do it if we can't avoid killing innocents. I'm saying we should try to avoid killing innocents, to make the distinction between US (we're taking out those who hurt us and are trying to destroy us, and trying as hard as we can not to hurt anyone else) and THEM (blow them all up! The more the better! As long as infidels die, who cares what else happens?)
Unfortunately, killing's a bit different from throwing someone in jail. The later is reversable, the former is (regretably) permanent.
Thanks for the reasoned and measured reply. Judging from most of what I've seen here and on Kuro5hin, the anti-US zealots are out in full force, for no apparent reason than the fact that America has deployed military forces in someone else's country.
What benefit does Adobe get for having Skylarov thrown in jail for several years?
The answer is, as usual, it depends. If some of the information was, say, credit card numbers, they've got a convenient way to say "it wasn't our fault!" Or maybe they aren't acting rationally at all. (and we all know that corporations, big and small, never do that! </sarcasm>) Or maybe they were just lashing out and trying to deflect blame.
No. A better analogy is: "if someone car-jacks your sister and drives off a cliff, should you shoot his mom?"
Depends. Did my sister die? Did his mom, out of a hatred for my family, encourage him to kill himself in an attack on us, taking as many of us with him as possible? Would she encourage his siblings to do the same?
The situation's very complicated. IMHO, we need to wipe out the organization responsible for the Sept. 11th attacks, without damaging any innocents around them. Then we need to re-examine our foreign policy, and adjust it so we don't create any more Bin Ladens or Afghanistans, and maybe actually take actions in line with our stated principles of democracy and freedom this time!
I believe the suggested exchange would go something like this:
L33T H4X0R H finds Linux vulnerability mentioned in kernel changelog.
Knowing that many sites do not keep their kernels up-to-date for a variety of reasons, H creates an exploit for said vulnerability.
Big Company R has their servers broken into by H, and valuable "intellectual property" is stolen, including copyrighted materials and trade secrets.
Big Company R consults with its Lawyers.
Big Company R concludes that H is going to be too expensive to track down. The Lawyers, however, have a different target. The Linux changelog was a crucial component in a circumvention device intended to breach protections on R's valuable "intellectual property"!
Kernel Hacker A, who happens to be responsible for writing changelogs, visits America on a routine business trip.
Federal forces waiting for A grab him, throw him in jail, and leave him there for several months before trying him, convicting him under the DMCA, and leaving him there for several years.
Now, while you may be eager to spend several years in Jail, Mr. Cox is not.
Slashdot Mirror
Except the "similar Linux issues" aren't similar. This is a bug in a piece of USERLAND software, which Microsoft routinely claims is 100% secure for use by uninformed computer users. This bug allows arbitrary code to be run on a Windows system without the user knowing they are running code. In fact, the code advertises itself as being something else.
Now, if you've found a "similar Linux issue", report it to the Konqueror, Mozilla, Lynx, W3C, Galleon, and Netscape teams, because they'll sure as hell want to know about a kernel hole (because that's what Linux is) that causes their browsers to behave similarly to this. Except for the fact that we weren't dumb enough to integrate our browsers with our operating system kernel.
Oh, wait. I forgot. The above recieved +2 - irrational ranting about how Slashdot sucks and +2 - Pro-Microsoft.
Michael's writeup was actually good this time, accurately summarizing the article content.
You seem to forget something. This is America. No voter will vote for anyone who isn't a Republican or a Democrat, because that's throwing away your vote. And both the Republicans and the Democrats are so far in the pockets of the "entertainment" industry that the chances of their repealing any of these laws are about nil.
Ok, let me clarify my position. No-one with their head screwed on straight, and who is capable of detaching themselves even slightly from their prior assumptions about the way the world works and actually examining the data, is doubting that the planet is, as a whole, getting hotter. There will, of course, always be extremist groups on both sides of the issue, but they can safely be ignored. As usual.
The question is both the magnitude, cause, and ultimate effect of said climatic change. To me, it looks reasonable that its just a natural cycle, but that is, of course, a guess. I doubt more than a hundred people on the entire planet have access to enough data and enough skill to even give an informed guess.
Rather than force Microsoft to develop bloated software for linux, which will probably only work with a single distribution anyway,
You're being overly optimistic if you think it'd work for even one distribution. I can see Microsoft putting 'effort' into development for a year or so, then giving up and saying something like:
"Well, we tried to satisfy these inane and unreasonable requirements pushed on us by the courts. But we have been unable to build an office suite for the Linux platform that meets our high standards of quality and ease of use. It is our opinion that the Linux platform is completely unsuitable as a platform for quality software, due to the numerous competing factions, standards, and systems and the inherent unreliability of such a system of development."
Or, even worse, they release a broken, semi-ported product that crashes continuously and reads even fewer Office files than current Free Software office suites, and then say exactly the same thing.
No, enforced openness of file formats and network protocols is the way to go. Does anyone else remember the Halloween documents? Microsoft said that the only way for them to crush the Free Software movement was through propritization of communication. File formats, network protocols, and the like. And they're currently working their best at doing just that. To be effective, the settlement not only has to prevent this tactic, but also prevent them from encrypting everything and using the DMCA as a shield.
What it does not, cannot, tell us is wether this is a cyclical or progressive change. Thats the same as here on earth. The earth is warmer now than it was 100 years ago.
I don't think anyone's debating that fact. It would do well to remember that we are coming out of a mini-ice-age, and that there are warmer temperatures in recorded history. Remember that the Vikings did mange to settle both Iceland and Greenland (over 500 years ago, IIRC), and things were warm enough there for them to actually live off what they could grow there.
That the effect is increasing, or could be, doesn't mean that humans are responsible. We have no proof either way, though you're unlikely to see any meaningful discussion in the mainstream media. They've pretty much decided that its a convenient "fact" to be trotted out whenever they want to beat down industrial concerns, and something they can ignore the rest of the time.
Oh, and saying that the earth is warmer now than a century ago means nothing when one considers the scale of the processes involved. As many scientists have been trying in vain to point out, we don't have nearly enough valid data.
Yeah, but they're also probably paying for all that bandwidth. And once the Slashdot effect gets up to full power, I think we can assume that they're going to have a very nasty bill indeed.
You're on air? Man, that's baaadddd stuff. Trying to stop using it can kill you! ;)
So threatening physical harm is illegal, but threatening legal harm (in an apparently baseless and frivolous fashion, as they later retracted the threat, obviously feeling they could not effectively follow through on it) is perfectly ok? Interesting logic you've got there, especially since a legal attack will do much more damage that a physical one. (Finances drained, locked in prison and probably abused there)
Legally, you're still wrong. See other posts about the kind of case Felten brought.
A more apt comparison might be a mafia hitman threatening to break someone's limbs with a baseball bat he's carrying with him. (Thug = RIAA, baseball bat = lawyers, for the imagination-impaired) When brought before a judge, said hitman proceeds to say "But your honor, I was only joking!" and then walks.
Not that this situation hasn't happened before. (I have no doubt it was rather common in Chicago during Al Capone's time in power) But that doesn't make it right.
Is it me, or were Californian courts (both federal and state, IIRC) showing an unusual amount of sanity today? First the EULA ruling mentioned below, then this... Someone's been falling behind on their bribes... Err... Donations, it seems.
Kinda worrying, isn't it? Makes you wonder exactly whats up with it...
The DMCA actually doesn't do anything to enforce EULAs, IIRC. Yes, they were tangled up in the DeCSS case, but the MPAA quickly forgot about them, as Johnson was too young to have been bound by the supposed contract anyway. The UCITA was supposed to do this, but I believe it got defeated or quietly dropped everywhere but Maryland and Virginia. (I think Maryland adopted a heavily modified version, while Virginia used pretty much the written bill, after some "encouragement" from AOL)
The SCAAA, which is the only one I know of currently in the pipeline, doesn't have any effect on EULAs. It does effectively make it illegal to create or program any "digital devices" that don't implement a copy control system in hardware.
I'm guessing the moderator thought it was spelled satyr, which is a mythological beast sufficiently similar to a Troll for the moderation rating to apply. ;)
In case you haven't noticed, proprietary software advocates always forget that clause. How many times have Linux developers been told that someone's not going to use Linux because "there's no-one we can sue if something goes wrong!"? Proprietary software isn't any better. In fact, given the wording of some EULAs I've seen, your attempted lawsuit might give the company grounds for legal action against you, especially if you publicize said lawsuit.
This is, of course, assuming that EULAs have any legal weight at all. That is, unfortunately, still an uncertain issue, and seems to depend entirely on what judge you get and how informed he is about precedent and contract law. And how much he's been paid off, in America.
Ah, yes. That is kind of important. And quite stupid on their part. I guess its the R2-in-the-docking-bay phenomona mentioned elsewheres in this discussion. ;)
Though, as usual, the solution's not more laws. Rather, the solution to what is fundamentally a technical problem is technical. Namely, if you've got something vital to someone's health or life hooked up to a network, make DAMN sure its secure.
Yeah, but in case you haven't noticed, that would mean a settlement harmful to Microsoft. And that's one thing neither Microsoft nor its supporters want. Of course, a settlement like this would do that - as you said, it might encourage companies to start making software for Linux. It'd create some competition. And why isn't there any of that competition right now, despite all the advantages of Linux or Mac OS X? Because Microsoft has a monopoly.
If its just a monitor, and doesn't have to do any reporting, then the data line should be one-way. If it does do reporting, then whatever's on the other end should discard anything that isn't a valid data signal.
If we still had to use machine language and punch cards, there wouldn't be open source.
If you seriously think that, I suggest reading Steven Levy's Hackers. The community he describes in the first few chapters sounds a whole lot like a community similar to the modern open-source one, using... Guess what? Machine language, punch cards, paper tape, and assembly language.
They did acknowledge that they'd screwed up, and apologize. But it just goes to show the clout that large business organizations can have when it comes to dealing with government.
Having read the Kafka works in question, I must say that he was spot-on in his evaluation of their quality. Step back from established literary tradition and actually read the things. They're horrible.
I'd suggest doing some research on the early days of the DeCSS persecution. A Norwegian national, younger than the age required to agree to a legally binding contract (and thus, not covered by EULAs, especially not ones he'd never read) who had written a program that was perfectly legal in Norway, was arrested. IIRC, he was held for several days and all computer equipment he or his family owned, including cel phones, was confiscated.
Why? The MPAA told Norwegian law enforcement that he'd done something illegal.
Now, while he got out of jail quite quickly and had a full apology made to him, what do you think would happen if Microsoft decided to go after an adult working on this kind of project? They can be at least as nasty as the MPAA, if not nastier - how many governments still run almost entirely on Microsoft software?
I'm not saying we shouldn't do it if we can't avoid killing innocents. I'm saying we should try to avoid killing innocents, to make the distinction between US (we're taking out those who hurt us and are trying to destroy us, and trying as hard as we can not to hurt anyone else) and THEM (blow them all up! The more the better! As long as infidels die, who cares what else happens?)
Unfortunately, killing's a bit different from throwing someone in jail. The later is reversable, the former is (regretably) permanent.
Thanks for the reasoned and measured reply. Judging from most of what I've seen here and on Kuro5hin, the anti-US zealots are out in full force, for no apparent reason than the fact that America has deployed military forces in someone else's country.
What benefit does Adobe get for having Skylarov thrown in jail for several years?
The answer is, as usual, it depends. If some of the information was, say, credit card numbers, they've got a convenient way to say "it wasn't our fault!" Or maybe they aren't acting rationally at all. (and we all know that corporations, big and small, never do that! </sarcasm>) Or maybe they were just lashing out and trying to deflect blame.
No. A better analogy is: "if someone car-jacks your sister and drives off a cliff, should you shoot his mom?"
Depends. Did my sister die? Did his mom, out of a hatred for my family, encourage him to kill himself in an attack on us, taking as many of us with him as possible? Would she encourage his siblings to do the same?
The situation's very complicated. IMHO, we need to wipe out the organization responsible for the Sept. 11th attacks, without damaging any innocents around them. Then we need to re-examine our foreign policy, and adjust it so we don't create any more Bin Ladens or Afghanistans, and maybe actually take actions in line with our stated principles of democracy and freedom this time!
I believe the suggested exchange would go something like this:
Now, while you may be eager to spend several years in Jail, Mr. Cox is not.