Worse yet, they still have to deal with Redhat's suit. Dropping the suit against IBM will worsen their situation when dealing with the suit from Redhat.
Let's see if IBM wins instead of SCO then they'll want damages and SCO won't be worth spit. All they'll have is the copyright for Unix Sys V. So IBM ends up with Unix as part of the settlement. Does anyone really think that IBM, who uses its IP like a precision weapon would release Unix into the public domain?
This goes hand in hand with that SCO buy recommend the other day from DuestchBank, the premise of which is that if SCO wins their lawsuit against IBM and is awarded $3B its worth $185/share. Of course if SCO loses, its stock isn't worth using as toilet paper. The buy recommendation came as a high risk, all or nothing investment play. But its predicated on several bad assumptions, first that SCO has a 50/50 or better chance of winning, and second that if they win they will be awarded the full $3B. This is the sort of logic that lead to the dot.com bubble. You might as well take $50M to Las Vegas and put it on number 16 on the roulette wheel.
I wonder how many of the people signed up for the class action suit have 2.4GHz cordless phones in their houses or wireless mice. I had a a devil of a time sorting out all the different channels in my house when I installed a 2.4GHz cordless phone, wireless keyboard and mouse, and a WiFi Cable/DSL router. Oh my! I must be doomed!
If SCO includes open source software such OpenSSH, Apache, Gimp-print, and bash in their Unixware distribution, does this make it Unix derivative code and they now own it? It did for JFS, XFS, NUMA, etc.
But the parents don't have the deep pockets a multi-national corporation do. If you sue the parents you get what? Maybe a few thousand, assuming the parents don't file for bankruptcy. But you can sue Sony for millions. And a jury will make a monster award against Sony in the lawsuit lottery. They wouldn't even consider it against a private citizen unless they were fabulously wealthy.
Then it isn't really his operating system at all, its Novell's. SCO is just an agent for Novell. Does that mean he's acting on behalf of Novell when he sues people?
Given their methodology, the answer is really 39% with a plus/minus 30% margin for error. Which pretty much means the results are meaningless. Did anybody else notice that they didn't "study" consumer software just high priced packages like MS Office (at least $300 OEM) and AutoCad (greater than $1,000 depending on configuration). Is it any wonder that economically impoverished countries seem to have the hightest piracy rates?
Just think about this the next time you do a 5MB driver download. How much of that code is specifically for detecting and defeating benchmarks? How much of the cheats are part of the instability problems in your system?
Having had to take time from my normal duties to address the declassification of old documents when I was in the military, I can tell you that it shouldn't be automatic and it can take a lot of time. The issues around 25 year old documents are nowhere near as straightforward as they appear. First of all you have to look at the originial classification guidance to determine what in the document is classified then you have to look at the current classification guidance to see if there are any relevant changes in 25 years. Some things are still sensitive after 25 years. Their are still weapons systems and intelligence gathering systems in operation that are well over 25 years old (the B-52, F-15, F-14, F-16, USS Nimitz, etc...). Much of what was originally available for classification is now certainly declassifiable. Much of it isn't. Plus many documents concerning these systems get updated, but still have the original publication dates on them. Sometimes the reason a document is classified hasn't changed and still can't be released because it reveals some form of capability or asset that is still important. The original security guidance prior to the Clinton Administration was that documents were to be REVIEWED after 25 years for declassification, not be automatically declassified. There's good reason for this, we really don't want to be telling the whole world how to build a Mark XXX nuclear weapon or how to defeat a certain weapon system. The volumes of material that the government has produced over the last century are huge. When I got a request under the Freedom of Information Act to release previously classified documents it would take up to a week of my time away from my normal duties to review the appropriate security guidances sift through the document for classified information, sanitize it, then coordinate the result through the public affairs and security offices. The worst part is that when you got requests for these things, you didn't get a request for one document, you got a request for every document you had on XYZ topic! With the current manpower being tied up in ongoing conflicts and restructuring of the government for Homeland Defense, I can understand instituting a 3 year delay. The manpower just isn't there to review the documents and declassification shouldn't be automatic.
Interesting. Mandrake's default GUI is KDE and it automatically installs KOffice for you in default installations. But the BSA algorithm didn't find the KOffice rpm. Could it be they really are targeting OpenOffice? Trying to get whatever gullible system administrators they can find to remove it from their sites?
The format that wouldn't die. Lets see we now have a DRM that phones home and tells how many times you used the media. I guess now each DVD/CD will carry the disclaimer, "This disk comes with XX authorized uses, additional uses cost $XX per use." I guess the RIAA/MPAA have come up with a new business model, the gift that keeps on costing.
Great, my desk is already cluttered with all my computer stuff, scanners, printers, hubs, etc. Where am I going to find space for a scanning tunneling electron microscope?
I think the real issue with the recording and music industry isn't technology, they want a revenue stream like Micro$oft. They would really like you to pay every time you listen/view their product, instead of the one-time sale. By killing off the existing download sites and standards, they are free to establish an online business model based on music/videos that expire.
The scale of "millions" is an issue of course. But I doubt that you would find very many blind or otherwise handicapped individuals who would agree with the concept of being better off dead. Especially, when you see how productive handicapped individuals can be with the proper opportunities and training.
So lets get this straight, under the Geneva convention its against the rules to build a weapon that can only maim or mutilate somebody, but its all right to build a weapon if it has a reasonable chance of killing a combatant?
If Gateway were to distribute music online the question is whose? The major labels aren't going to license their hoard to Gateway. The artists might, but most of the major names are tied by exclusive contract to their label. So Gateway is going to release music by unknowns? Without some major artists providing music the idea would be doomed.
I typically find it unscientific to attack anyone's work because they have "an agenda". Everyone who publishes these things has "an agenda". Its best to assault them on scientific grounds rather than philosophical. A theory is only as good as the supporting data. Since until recently we didn't even have positive proof other stars had planets, we seem to have a lack of any usable data, save from our own solar system. The planets we have seen around other stars appear to be gas giants (primarily due to physical limitations of our instruments, ain't optical diffraction and photon counting a bitch!). Neither side has room to be taking pot shots, since there assumptions are basically articles of faith (do I discern signs of a new religion here?). I see no reason why life can't be based on silicon or some other materials when a planet orbits a sun with too much UV. It seems to me that critical to the development of life is a photon source with sufficient energy to make chemical reactions occur dependant on the materials available. This reminds me of Sagan's nuclear winter theory, too many unprovable assumptions. It doesn't mean its a bad theory, just unprovable with current knowledge.
Remember, this is the same industry in which no film ever makes a profit, thus negating the need to pay royalties, yet somehow nobody ever goes bankrupt.
On the other hand jet fuel is pretty much kerosene and has an energy density of about 43 megajoules per kilogram, has a density of 783 kg/cu. meter, and the 767 holds 91 cu. meters of fuel. This translates to a fuel energy of 3 trillion joules or about 600 times the KE of the airplane. Imagine that going off all at once instead of burning over an hour.
Actually the volume is more like 70%, but thats consistent with the lower density and the fact that it takes twice as much hydrogen as oxygen by volume to make the engine run (H2O being the final product). Mass wise its a different story. There is eight times more oxygen than hydrogen by mass, which is why hybrid air breathing rocket engines such as scramjets are interesting for space launch. Also the energy density of a hydrogen tank depends on how much structure (and mass) your willing to commit to in order to increase the tank pressure.
While the fire was the key to weakening the central core of the towers and hence the collapse, I'm not sure hydrogen would make it safer. The energy required from a hydrogen fueled aircraft for transcontinental flight would be the same as standard jet fuel. On impact the entire hydrogen fuel supply would detonate as opposed to only a fraction as in jet fuel. While there would not be a long sustained fire to weaken the structure, the initial energy release might be strong enough to cause immediate collapse versus what actually happened. In which case, over 30,000 people could have died instead of 5,200.
Slashdot Mirror
Worse yet, they still have to deal with Redhat's suit. Dropping the suit against IBM will worsen their situation when dealing with the suit from Redhat.
Let's see if IBM wins instead of SCO then they'll want damages and SCO won't be worth spit. All they'll have is the copyright for Unix Sys V. So IBM ends up with Unix as part of the settlement. Does anyone really think that IBM, who uses its IP like a precision weapon would release Unix into the public domain?
This goes hand in hand with that SCO buy recommend the other day from DuestchBank, the premise of which is that if SCO wins their lawsuit against IBM and is awarded $3B its worth $185/share. Of course if SCO loses, its stock isn't worth using as toilet paper. The buy recommendation came as a high risk, all or nothing investment play. But its predicated on several bad assumptions, first that SCO has a 50/50 or better chance of winning, and second that if they win they will be awarded the full $3B. This is the sort of logic that lead to the dot.com bubble. You might as well take $50M to Las Vegas and put it on number 16 on the roulette wheel.
I wonder how many of the people signed up for the class action suit have 2.4GHz cordless phones in their houses or wireless mice. I had a a devil of a time sorting out all the different channels in my house when I installed a 2.4GHz cordless phone, wireless keyboard and mouse, and a WiFi Cable/DSL router. Oh my! I must be doomed!
If SCO includes open source software such OpenSSH, Apache, Gimp-print, and bash in their Unixware distribution, does this make it Unix derivative code and they now own it? It did for JFS, XFS, NUMA, etc.
But the parents don't have the deep pockets a multi-national corporation do. If you sue the parents you get what? Maybe a few thousand, assuming the parents don't file for bankruptcy. But you can sue Sony for millions. And a jury will make a monster award against Sony in the lawsuit lottery. They wouldn't even consider it against a private citizen unless they were fabulously wealthy.
Then it isn't really his operating system at all, its Novell's. SCO is just an agent for Novell. Does that mean he's acting on behalf of Novell when he sues people?
Gartner doesn't do any of these papers without somebody footing the bill. So the big question is who paid for this one? Microsoft? Sun? SCO?
Given their methodology, the answer is really 39% with a plus/minus 30% margin for error. Which pretty much means the results are meaningless. Did anybody else notice that they didn't "study" consumer software just high priced packages like MS Office (at least $300 OEM) and AutoCad (greater than $1,000 depending on configuration). Is it any wonder that economically impoverished countries seem to have the hightest piracy rates?
Just think about this the next time you do a 5MB driver download. How much of that code is specifically for detecting and defeating benchmarks? How much of the cheats are part of the instability problems in your system?
Having had to take time from my normal duties to address the declassification of old documents when I was in the military, I can tell you that it shouldn't be automatic and it can take a lot of time. The issues around 25 year old documents are nowhere near as straightforward as they appear. First of all you have to look at the originial classification guidance to determine what in the document is classified then you have to look at the current classification guidance to see if there are any relevant changes in 25 years. Some things are still sensitive after 25 years. Their are still weapons systems and intelligence gathering systems in operation that are well over 25 years old (the B-52, F-15, F-14, F-16, USS Nimitz, etc...). Much of what was originally available for classification is now certainly declassifiable. Much of it isn't. Plus many documents concerning these systems get updated, but still have the original publication dates on them. Sometimes the reason a document is classified hasn't changed and still can't be released because it reveals some form of capability or asset that is still important. The original security guidance prior to the Clinton Administration was that documents were to be REVIEWED after 25 years for declassification, not be automatically declassified. There's good reason for this, we really don't want to be telling the whole world how to build a Mark XXX nuclear weapon or how to defeat a certain weapon system. The volumes of material that the government has produced over the last century are huge. When I got a request under the Freedom of Information Act to release previously classified documents it would take up to a week of my time away from my normal duties to review the appropriate security guidances sift through the document for classified information, sanitize it, then coordinate the result through the public affairs and security offices. The worst part is that when you got requests for these things, you didn't get a request for one document, you got a request for every document you had on XYZ topic! With the current manpower being tied up in ongoing conflicts and restructuring of the government for Homeland Defense, I can understand instituting a 3 year delay. The manpower just isn't there to review the documents and declassification shouldn't be automatic.
But what they found were Mandrake OpenOffice*.rpm's not zip or exe files. They were specifically named for linux distros supporting rpms
Interesting. Mandrake's default GUI is KDE and it automatically installs KOffice for you in default installations. But the BSA algorithm didn't find the KOffice rpm. Could it be they really are targeting OpenOffice? Trying to get whatever gullible system administrators they can find to remove it from their sites?
The only alternative I know of to a diamond engagement ring is an inflatable love doll. Most women I know are set on that diamond ring.
The format that wouldn't die. Lets see we now have a DRM that phones home and tells how many times you used the media. I guess now each DVD/CD will carry the disclaimer, "This disk comes with XX authorized uses, additional uses cost $XX per use." I guess the RIAA/MPAA have come up with a new business model, the gift that keeps on costing.
Great, my desk is already cluttered with all my computer stuff, scanners, printers, hubs, etc. Where am I going to find space for a scanning tunneling electron microscope?
I think the real issue with the recording and music industry isn't technology, they want a revenue stream like Micro$oft. They would really like you to pay every time you listen/view their product, instead of the one-time sale. By killing off the existing download sites and standards, they are free to establish an online business model based on music/videos that expire.
The scale of "millions" is an issue of course. But I doubt that you would find very many blind or otherwise handicapped individuals who would agree with the concept of being better off dead. Especially, when you see how productive handicapped individuals can be with the proper opportunities and training.
So lets get this straight, under the Geneva convention its against the rules to build a weapon that can only maim or mutilate somebody, but its all right to build a weapon if it has a reasonable chance of killing a combatant?
If Gateway were to distribute music online the question is whose? The major labels aren't going to license their hoard to Gateway. The artists might, but most of the major names are tied by exclusive contract to their label. So Gateway is going to release music by unknowns? Without some major artists providing music the idea would be doomed.
I typically find it unscientific to attack anyone's work because they have "an agenda". Everyone who publishes these things has "an agenda". Its best to assault them on scientific grounds rather than philosophical. A theory is only as good as the supporting data. Since until recently we didn't even have positive proof other stars had planets, we seem to have a lack of any usable data, save from our own solar system. The planets we have seen around other stars appear to be gas giants (primarily due to physical limitations of our instruments, ain't optical diffraction and photon counting a bitch!). Neither side has room to be taking pot shots, since there assumptions are basically articles of faith (do I discern signs of a new religion here?). I see no reason why life can't be based on silicon or some other materials when a planet orbits a sun with too much UV. It seems to me that critical to the development of life is a photon source with sufficient energy to make chemical reactions occur dependant on the materials available. This reminds me of Sagan's nuclear winter theory, too many unprovable assumptions. It doesn't mean its a bad theory, just unprovable with current knowledge.
Remember, this is the same industry in which no film ever makes a profit, thus negating the need to pay royalties, yet somehow nobody ever goes bankrupt.
On the other hand jet fuel is pretty much kerosene and has an energy density of about 43 megajoules per kilogram, has a density of 783 kg/cu. meter, and the 767 holds 91 cu. meters of fuel. This translates to a fuel energy of 3 trillion joules or about 600 times the KE of the airplane. Imagine that going off all at once instead of burning over an hour.
Actually the volume is more like 70%, but thats consistent with the lower density and the fact that it takes twice as much hydrogen as oxygen by volume to make the engine run (H2O being the final product). Mass wise its a different story. There is eight times more oxygen than hydrogen by mass, which is why hybrid air breathing rocket engines such as scramjets are interesting for space launch. Also the energy density of a hydrogen tank depends on how much structure (and mass) your willing to commit to in order to increase the tank pressure.
While the fire was the key to weakening the central core of the towers and hence the collapse, I'm not sure hydrogen would make it safer. The energy required from a hydrogen fueled aircraft for transcontinental flight would be the same as standard jet fuel. On impact the entire hydrogen fuel supply would detonate as opposed to only a fraction as in jet fuel. While there would not be a long sustained fire to weaken the structure, the initial energy release might be strong enough to cause immediate collapse versus what actually happened. In which case, over 30,000 people could have died instead of 5,200.