You're right, but there is confusion between "Hong Kong" and "Hong Kong the Island" and that's where you're getting stuck. "Hong Kong the Island" was permantly given to the British and the origional treaty never had any stipulations about return to China. But what you don't mention and is the important thing is "Kwoloon". Kwoloon is a penisula (sp?) which is part of China given to the British after the Boxer Rebellion in 1898 for 99 years.
When people refer to "Hong Kong" now they refer to "Hong Kong Island", "Kwoloon", and a bunch of much smaller island. The vast majority of the population live in "Hong Kong Island" and "Kwoloon", with less then 5% living in the smaller island.
By treaty stipulations, again which China still claims were forced upon them, Kwoloon was to be returned to China in 1997. If the British just return "Kwoloon" as by treaty and kept "Hong Kong Island", it would be totaly redilicious. It would be like diving London into two pieces and saying this half now belong to France and you need a visa to cross between them.
Slashdot is becoming another Miss-Information type of deal. The editor basically ignored what was written in the article and pushed his existing anti-MS slant.
RTFA before you post..., at the rate this is going I might as well be reading the National Enquierer to get my news.
as I quote someone I read on Fark, as it applies to slashdot as well:
Members of Fark are a fairly intellectual minority (for the most part). Before you begin going off on your "this is what's best for a free market" spiel, check out the likely results. People here seem to think that the stations they want would be around in a year, because they picked them. Most of them won't. Stations like MTV, VH1, ESPN, SpikeTV, and other mainstream channels have by far the highest viewing (other then the local monsters of CBS, NBC, ect.)
The channels I hear people on Fark want: Discovery, some of the News channels, History channel, are channels that, due to their viewership, will not get many subscribers under a "a la carte" system. They die. Pop culture and sports will survive. I'm a sports fan, but I'd like more to TV then sports and sitcoms.
I'd rather pop culture not own the airwaves at all times, forcing more useful channels out in a shark tank frenzy of a ratings war, which is exactly what would happen.
Okay... lets compare a computer virus and the smallpox biological agent...
if a computer virus gets somewhere critical.. like ATC, 911, Nuclear Reactors, etc systems... it will cause deaths....
if an biological agent spreads, people die.
and to your argument: Of course, I'm sure someone is going to provide a link to an iron lung that failed due to a virus now -- but I think, again, people draw the other line at the point where the people operating and creating such equipment should have known better.
by that logic.. if a critical comptuer gets infected, then the computer should've been operated and protected and build better..
by the same logic... if we immunize everyone against smallpox (which we have an vaccine for). then it is the same thing right? why don't we do it?
All programs are a form of discrete mathematics, and mathematics is in my books an artform. The freedom and creativity involved in writing a program is infinite and the people who right viruses can be very crafty.
I will say:
All biological agents are a form of DNA/RNA sequences, and all the possible DNA/RNA sequences is in my books an artform. The freedom and creativity involved in manipulating a DNA sequence is infiniute and the people who create biological agents can be creafy.
are the editors on/. particularily lazy today or just want headlines? Read the fucking article:
The move follows a decision last week by Dell Computer, the number two PC maker, to replace Microsoft software. Both companies said they would offer WordPerfect productivity software from Corel of Canada instead of Microsoft's Works, a scaled-down version of its top-selling Office software.
They dropping Microsoft Works in favor of WordPerfect. Not Microsoft Word.
I used the world solicited instead of unsolicited. Its suppose to say that the ban on unsolicited faxes has been ruled a violation of the 1st amendment.
will this lead to code bloat? I mean think about this...
most software use a lot of libraries... you get into a lot of problems if the libraries are slighty different...
Lets say that my products works with a shared library version 2.4.292. Lets say that the implementors of the shared library makes a slight change in version 2.4.293. Lets say someone who uses it with version 2.4.293 crashes...
am I responsible? If I am... I am sure hell going to compile my executable statically linking every single shared library... (eek. on the code size)
I am having too many thoughts tonight (time to meet some beer). this would also be fairly bad for code resuse.
Lets say I own WangCorp and market a commerical linux application which say uses zlib. Now lets say that a bug in zlib causes my application to crash. One of the clients, SingerCorp lost some data cause of this.
1) does SingerCorp sue WangCorp or the writers of zlib? does it matter if zlib is GPL code?
2) assume that WangCorp does not link to zlib but instead another similar library but commerical. does that change the issue?
3) will the writers of a library be liable for damanges that the library causes if it used in another application?
4) for example: VMWare includes a copy of Samba for file sharing. lets say that Samba get rooted. do you sue VMWare Incorperated or the Samba people?
The website will sensibly say "This software is provided as is, with no guarantees" or something similar (i.e., disclaiming liability for problems, which is fair as you agreed to those terms when you started downloading the software).
mmm... isn't that what exact a EULA does? and aren't we against EULAs?... and what prevents MSFT from saying the same thing?
Of course, the company would have to prove that they updated X with the relevant security fixes over time (e.g., with BIND, updating to 9.2.1 which is a 5 minute job from source) and that it was that code that caused the failure.
Great now lets start the lawyers arguing over the meaning of 'over time'... when is appropiate? within a week of the patch coming out?
1) RedHat/Mandrake/Suse/Caledra has been the big push of open source for the business world... without them Linux would be dead in the business world...
2) companies in (1) released products for sale (you buy them) and they sometimes have security bugs (a lot of them has a recent exploit in SSH recently)..
3) companies who uses products by companies in (1) who get 'rooted will sue the companies in (1)
4) companies in (1) will die (they have lot less $$$ then MSFT)..
I think this would be an administrative nightmere for open source... Don't give me some B.S. about open source getting some kind of exemption cause its not gonna happen... also don't give me B.S. about open source not having security bugs... they DO!
Lets say this becomes true and Microsoft gets sued cause HyperTerminal (part of Windows) has an root exploit. Microsoft pays damanges and then will probably sue HillGrave Software (or whatever company they sub-contracted to write it). (or they have insurance). This will drive up the cost of software for sure..
Lets take a look at the open source way. Lets say some company using package X get rooted cause of an bug in package X. It sues the maintainer of package X. The maintainer then pays out. What does the maintainer do? sue the developer who wrote the chunks of code?
This will particularily bad for open source software for the following reason: large companies can afford insurance against this.. open source cannot... once open source gets one or two lawsuits cause of this... I expect more and more open source projects/developer to give up cause they can't afford to pay out..
Slashdot Mirror
that's divding London int two pieces...
You're right, but there is confusion between "Hong Kong" and "Hong Kong the Island" and that's where you're getting stuck. "Hong Kong the Island" was permantly given to the British and the origional treaty never had any stipulations about return to China. But what you don't mention and is the important thing is "Kwoloon". Kwoloon is a penisula (sp?) which is part of China given to the British after the Boxer Rebellion in 1898 for 99 years.
When people refer to "Hong Kong" now they refer to "Hong Kong Island", "Kwoloon", and a bunch of much smaller island. The vast majority of the population live in "Hong Kong Island" and "Kwoloon", with less then 5% living in the smaller island.
By treaty stipulations, again which China still claims were forced upon them, Kwoloon was to be returned to China in 1997. If the British just return "Kwoloon" as by treaty and kept "Hong Kong Island", it would be totaly redilicious. It would be like diving London into two pieces and saying this half now belong to France and you need a visa to cross between them.
Slashdot is becoming another Miss-Information type of deal. The editor basically ignored what was written in the article and pushed his existing anti-MS slant.
RTFA before you post..., at the rate this is going I might as well be reading the National Enquierer to get my news.
Yeah! I have one right here I got for Christmas a while ago.. Its laying there useless
The Clik! Drive is 40MB, not 40GB as the article states!
Picture of Number 6 from New Show and I beg the question, why is there a light coming out of her ass?
Weekley World News is a tabloid.. like those who say Elvis is alive and working at Microsoft!
great! by the same token a company can steal GPL software.. by having a minor click on AGREE!
Okay... lets compare a computer virus and the smallpox biological agent...
if a computer virus gets somewhere critical.. like ATC, 911, Nuclear Reactors, etc systems... it will cause deaths....
if an biological agent spreads, people die.
and to your argument: Of course, I'm sure someone is going to provide a link to an iron lung that failed due to a virus now -- but I think, again, people draw the other line at the point where the people operating and creating such equipment should have known better.
by that logic.. if a critical comptuer gets infected, then the computer should've been operated and protected and build better..
by the same logic... if we immunize everyone against smallpox (which we have an vaccine for). then it is the same thing right? why don't we do it?
thanks for taking it to the next step :) I didn't think even of murder as an example :) thanks man!
Based on your arguments:
All programs are a form of discrete mathematics, and mathematics is in my books an artform. The freedom and creativity involved in writing a program is infinite and the people who right viruses can be very crafty.
I will say:
All biological agents are a form of DNA/RNA sequences, and all the possible DNA/RNA sequences is in my books an artform. The freedom and creativity involved in manipulating a DNA sequence is infiniute and the people who create biological agents can be creafy.
are the editors on /. particularily lazy today or just want headlines? Read the fucking article:
They dropping Microsoft Works in favor of WordPerfect. Not Microsoft Word.
you're wrong.. it was Cyris that started the PR Rating but AMD joined
Their PR Rating (back in the Pentium Days) is the biggest piece of BullShit there ever was..
I used the world solicited instead of unsolicited. Its suppose to say that the ban on unsolicited faxes has been ruled a violation of the 1st amendment.
The full text of the ruling is here.
The ruling is currently being appealed of couse, but as it stands right now what the spammers have done is prefectly legal. The FCC fine is a joke.
You can also read the relevant K5 story.
How could you editors? I am so disappointed now!
Seriously what's the problem? its not like Gator is installed automatically... the user has to install it themselves....
(yes I know its included in some softwar) but the user installs that software out of free will... so wtf is the problem?
will this lead to code bloat? I mean think about this...
most software use a lot of libraries... you get into a lot of problems if the libraries are slighty different...
Lets say that my products works with a shared library version 2.4.292. Lets say that the implementors of the shared library makes a slight change in version 2.4.293. Lets say someone who uses it with version 2.4.293 crashes...
am I responsible? If I am... I am sure hell going to compile my executable statically linking every single shared library... (eek. on the code size)
I am having too many thoughts tonight (time to meet some beer). this would also be fairly bad for code resuse.
Lets say I own WangCorp and market a commerical linux application which say uses zlib. Now lets say that a bug in zlib causes my application to crash. One of the clients, SingerCorp lost some data cause of this.
1) does SingerCorp sue WangCorp or the writers of zlib? does it matter if zlib is GPL code?
2) assume that WangCorp does not link to zlib but instead another similar library but commerical. does that change the issue?
3) will the writers of a library be liable for damanges that the library causes if it used in another application?
4) for example: VMWare includes a copy of Samba for file sharing. lets say that Samba get rooted. do you sue VMWare Incorperated or the Samba people?
mmm... isn't that what exact a EULA does? and aren't we against EULAs?... and what prevents MSFT from saying the same thing?
Great now lets start the lawyers arguing over the meaning of 'over time'... when is appropiate? within a week of the patch coming out?
lets consider two facts..
1) RedHat/Mandrake/Suse/Caledra has been the big push of open source for the business world... without them Linux would be dead in the business world...
2) companies in (1) released products for sale (you buy them) and they sometimes have security bugs (a lot of them has a recent exploit in SSH recently)..
3) companies who uses products by companies in (1) who get 'rooted will sue the companies in (1)
4) companies in (1) will die (they have lot less $$$ then MSFT)..
5) bad for Linux...
disclaimers? prehaps for those "book" they have disclaimers and stuff ......
just like those "Psyhic (sp?) Friend Network" ads they have subtitles "for entertainment purposes only"
and labels on peanut choclate bars that says "this may contain nuts" (I know peanuts is not a nut but geeze).
people are STUPID enough to belive these things...
I think this would be an administrative nightmere for open source... Don't give me some B.S. about open source getting some kind of exemption cause its not gonna happen... also don't give me B.S. about open source not having security bugs... they DO!
Lets say this becomes true and Microsoft gets sued cause HyperTerminal (part of Windows) has an root exploit. Microsoft pays damanges and then will probably sue HillGrave Software (or whatever company they sub-contracted to write it). (or they have insurance). This will drive up the cost of software for sure..
Lets take a look at the open source way. Lets say some company using package X get rooted cause of an bug in package X. It sues the maintainer of package X. The maintainer then pays out. What does the maintainer do? sue the developer who wrote the chunks of code?
This will particularily bad for open source software for the following reason: large companies can afford insurance against this.. open source cannot... once open source gets one or two lawsuits cause of this... I expect more and more open source projects/developer to give up cause they can't afford to pay out..