Even if MIT is right, these are problems the RIAA can easily remedy. If the RIAA has to file the actions locally, instead of filing them all in Washington, D.C., it will. If the RIAA has to provide more time for notice, it will. Neither of these issues will halt the onslaught for long.
Many here are downplaying this as some kind of "technicality" or frumpy MIT only rules kind of thing. I'm not sure why. The whole thing is a "technicality" if you want to look at complience with fedearal law as some kind of technicality.
If MIT is right, they are right everywhere. Privacy issues for students are a federal issue, the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act specifically. All the schools that agreed to comply had better think twice before they violate federal laws. Juristiction issues are not just a Boston thing either. Sure, the RIAA can do it all again and obey the law this time, but that will cost them. Imagine them sending teams to every real jusristiction for every screen-name with 5 songs downloaded. Pththth-fit! MIT's stand should be embarasing to the RIAA in any case, but my money is on MIT being right.
The only thing the RIAA should be dissapointed in is the way their lawyers have cocked this up. Had they done just a little more homework, they could have saved themselves considerable expense. I hope this costs them a fortune and that they decide they might be better off promoting music instead of screwing their fans.
The kind of people who worry about "getting laid" are stupid fucks who view the opposite sex as a masturbation tool. They stand out like sore thumbs and rarely get used by those who decide they need a little cheap gratification at their expense. They never put anything like effort or understanding into anything and are perfect Windows users - always looking to screw others over and therfore are always in that position themsleves. This is the message implied in Bill Gate's talk about "commodity software" and market forces, yet Microsoft has the most expeensive and least versitile software there is. Con artists take advantage of their victim's greed and desire to get something for nothing. He who wants is always helpless.
People who write device drivers for themselves have device drivers and the knowledge of how to do it. They don't have to ask for them again and can contemplate their own devices to do things for them. This puts them in a much better position than the average windoze scmuck who has to buy nev devices that don't always do what they should every two years or so. That advantage translates into money and other things. Even when it does not, the silly Windoze user does not know what to do with himself.
I just hate it when people are scared to do ANYTHING that might be useful because of the DMCA.
Useful, like refilling your printer cartridge? Oh yeah, Lexmark does not think the DMCA is a big blanket law they can use against their competitors and anyone who would do anything useful, do they?
No, people should not be scared, but we should realize that big dumb companies do this kind of thing and we should avoid equipment from them. Think I'm going to buy Lexmark garbage? Not for a long long time. I bought a DLink PCI wireless card and I would not recomend anyone do the same thing. I got encouraged by a pcimcia card working, and figured I should just keep looking. My mistake, I should have taken the piece of shit back right away.
$60 is overpriced for an Access Point/Cable Router/Switch?
Sure it is, when you consider the fact that you already have the equipment. Who does not have a PC mothballed? Also, that PC can give you much better control and flexibility. With a little effort you can have something like kerebos authentication and ssh only connectivity. Can you do that with some dinky little access point?
Seeing as SCO does not actually offer the Linux kernel in any form, their sale of licenses for UnixWare to cover Linux is a gross dilution of the term. If you don't have Linux, you can't call it Linux, that's what trademard is all about. SCO is going to have to come up with a name like SNL, SCO's Not Linux.
Won't it just be easier (if there's any grounds for their action) to zap the offending code from the kernel or are they going to prevent this by not actually telling anyone where it is?
Ding, ding, that's true, and so long as SCO keeps it's mouth shut about what's actually infringing, I'll just abide by the kernel license, the GPL. I don't have much to say to SCO people except that they can come and get free software if they are in Baton Rouge today. This offer, of course, extends to anyone who happens to be in Baton Rouge today.
Hey now, don't knock Bourbon Street's professionalism. I was very expertly pick-pocketed there.
Bah! If you notice and don't thank them, it's not good. Bill Gates gets you once a year or so with the same old software, sometimes updated with a new look or with the control center changed around. Restaurants, bars and whores all go through more effort for what they offer and sometimes have something you can't find anywehre else.
This WinInfo clown would not know the difference between Antoine's and McDonalds and does a poor job of hyping Microsoft's few virtues. Grief, the "another security flaw, so what?" is way over the top. It's like saying, "Ah, another customer get's the shits from a flaw tha affects 100% of our greasy burgers, so what?" Is there anyone out there who does not know someone who's windoze box has When you have to lie and when the lie is obvious, you suck.
Munich has some 127 custom applications that work under windoze. I assume they have licensing that's better than M$ for those. I also asume that this is why they need VMware and what not. Here's what the silly Gatner report said about it:
The business case assumes that many applications will not migrate to Linux; instead, the bulk of applications requiring Windows will probably be Web-enabled and accessed through a browser. Munich will accommodate any remaining applications using virtual machine software, such as VMware.
How Paul Thrrott of WinInfo jumps to the conclusion that the "Desktop" won't be GNU/Linux and that they are really running Windoze is beyond me. I imagine the browser will be from KDE or Mozilla and the desktop will be KDE and that all normal applications, email, word processing, simple spreadsheets will be free and open software. That Munich can also run crappy old windoze stuff is a benifit that's not reciprocated on Microsoft's limited little GUI. Yet Paul would imply that this ablity indicates some kind of short comming in free software, hmph.
WinInfo looks like it was written by a crack smoking Microsoft Public Relations firm. Other nonsense on the same page include dreams of a surge of interest in Windoze as a web serving platform prompted by Bill Gates changing servers for his personal site, a rosy assesment of the M$ empire after failing to meet market expectations, and a piece playing down yet another major security flaw in windoze. There's neither logic nor dignity on that page. I've seen circus posters that made more sense and promoted more reputable things. Hell, I've seen more profesional things on Burbon Street. What does our Anonymous Reader do all day that he might stumble across drivel like that?
I dont understand why they have to fake the AD's. Just give me something I'd click.
And murder is a poor method of conflict resolution, and Bill Gates could have made a respectable amount of money honestly, and lots of people who do crappy things have the talent and drive to do things better. When they do crappy things, punishment is what they deserve. Double click made money lying to people about their computers, they deserve to lose that money and then some.
Not too shabby.
The more compiler hackers that use PPC, the better gcc will become, no? Maybe this new machine will add some motivation.
Yeah, maybe "Duncan3" can get his company to help if indeed "Duncan3" reall is Adam L Beberg that spends, "Most of my waking hours are spent working on Cosm, one of the projects of my company Mithral Communications & Design, Inc. Cosm is a set of protocols for doing cross platform development and large scale distributed computing." That would be a lot better than bitching about how sucky a free thing is.
that and partimage are very nice. Part image does not promise NTFS stuff will work, however. The general problems of M$ making things difficult are not ever going to go away and those who make tools to interact with NTFS risk bad things from bad laws.
Of course, this means that if your windows partition goes south you have to backup your linux partition and start from scratch, but that's the risk you take.
There's not much "risk" of that. The probability of Windoze failure is 1:1. Microsoft is the source of pain. The less you have to do with them, the less pain you suffer.
Microsoft has at least three versions of NTFS all under the same name, all secret propriatory junk. Patents prevent software from reading and writing to it, but there are experimental writes available.
If you are going to make your own image, check out partimage, a projcet for doing just that.
The only thing you have to wonder is if you can boot off that DVD at all. Hmmmm, Windows Pain, why bother with it?
modern linux distros are quite capable of resizing preset partitions, much like Partition Magic can, which is already mentioned.
Really? I thought Microsoft had patents that kept free software from writing to NTFS. Well, certian version of NTFS at least. here is a cluefull letter about NTFS and installs. I imagine that parted is state of the free art, and that M$ can make their crap a pain in the ass at any time.
If YOU fuck up Windows (Blaming Microsoft is easier, but fact is, Windows is most often mangled by incompetent users doing stuff they shouldn't be doing.) then it is YOUR responsibility to have made proper backups of the full HD with Linux already installed. Same thing applies when it is NOT your fault, your data is still your responsibility
The only fault a user has when dealing with Microsoft software is the fact that they decided to use Microsoft. It is impossible for a Microsoft user to take proper precations and make up for the ill will and malice Microsoft has for them. Data loss is NEVER the user's fault. Where do you get off telling us that we should not be putting an alternate OS onto our computers? What other "stuff" shouldn't we be doing? Fold up your "blame the user" FUD till it's all sharp corners and stick it up your ass.
I wonder about that. If you boot to Linux and mess with the MBR to show the entire disk occupying just the cylinders of the NTFS partition, and go into the BIOS to show that same number of cylinders, it might just leave the rest alone.
No, it will fail. You don't think their little utility will be bright enough to resize the image, do you? Of course not! It's designed in part to insure nothing but that obsolete OS gets used on the PC. In time, when the upgrade train rolls on, the user will be left without new Windoze drivers for the new Windoze O$ and unable to "upgrade" and will be forced to buy, ta-da, another laptop! That's why they do this.
In any case, few people will have the savy to even attempt your scheme. Those that do will simply use partimage to back up their current installation for reimplemntation, work and all NTFS may give them a headache.
Another thing you might not have considered is that the BIOS may refuse to boot off anything but a signed DVD. Oh dear, it's a paperweight.
One would use the verb 'envoyer', so no 'courriel' in that sentence. It's a very specific feature of English that almost any noun can be verbed, as you did.
For the same reason you don't just tell someone to "mail" you something in English, that won't work. Unless you have the context established, you need a specific word. Even then you need a specific word or your likely to make a second, anoying call to someone who just snail mailed you. I imagine they have a way of doing this which might just be "email le moi" to indicate pushing a button on a US made PC interpreted by M$ software, all very forgein and barbaric but usefull.
The Microsoft plauge is everywhere. It fouls up Internet Cafes in Paris, government desktops in Quebec, and all maner of private and public computing.
This would just give all the schools Microsoft windows to run on all its desktops, with a copy of office and maybe even.net developers tools. Wheres linux or bsd in the mix?
The school gets an overpriced Dell junker.
Cluefull andministrator plugs it into the local Debian mirror. Dell Software sent back to M$.
Just do what everyone else does, make it abroad import it sending all the money back out of the US and fold if anyone sues you.
Look, I used my dividend to buy three or four nice boxed coppies of XP and put them on Ebay. They came from abroad, cost me nothing, yet still I do not prosper! Everyone just laughed at me and now I'm stuck with this sucky software. What't to do?
most geeks (like me, and perhaps you) that don't want to buy Windows know enough about computers to put one together from parts. Or at least know a fellow geek who will do so for free or cheap.
Microsoft made it so expensive to buy comodity hardware that was preconfigured that they have trained up their doom. How many enemies have they made? Too many and all knowledgable. They have trained me and many other to know just how shitty their stuff is and how not to need it. I will gladly help others to avoid them at no cost. If you are in Baton Rouge, come join me and my friends Monday.
The first thing I thought of, is "Why doesn't Microsoft distribute electronically?"
And why can't you find them at places like Cheapbytes or any other CD vendor? Oh yeah, I forgot, they are a bunch of control freaks marketing closed source software. They don't get it and will never be as easy to get, deploy or use. My bad, what was I thinking?
Despite what many people here have said, I think that there are a lot of people who don't have broadband at home (or CD burners at work) and (believe it or not) there are companies that have only dialup net access. These people (e.g. me) will apparently no longer be Redhat customers.
How do these people get Debian, I wonder. No, I know that you can get cheap CDs much easier than you can get a silly box at the store. It's a much better means to distribute than boxed sets. Oh yeah, it also supports the local installers better because you don't fool Joe Sixpacks into thinking that he can walk out of a store with a box and get it onto his computer at home without much trouble. Well, it may be less trouble than a Windoze install, but poor Joe Sixpacks will have a lot more reading to do than what's contained in that little Red Box before he gets it. I've bought one little red box once and I was not near as happy with that arangement as I was with the CheapHytes solution. Now that I've discovered apt-get, Red Hat has a long way to go. This is a change in the right direction. Killing end of life nonsense is the next change they need to make, then Viola! their superior hardware compatibility and Solaris work alikeness and other strengths will be worth the effort of learning the Red Hat way.
Currently, packages are "handed over" to Red Hat developers, who then tune them for inclusion in a particular version. Under the new system, developers will maintain control of the packages.
This is a very good thing. Red Hat had been getting entirely too "tuned" for my tastes. This can only help them be more flexible and they will put their resources to work fixing things that need help, not messing with other people's code. Their hardware compatibility is awsome but for it to come at the expense of basic stuff like "adduser"? They can take advice like that now. They also had good Solaris match up. Quicker, cheaper releases will help them compete for share against the ultimate in free, Debian. Red Hat has to maintian both code quality and ease of implemntation to maintain that share. A boxed set provided neither of those things. Oh yeah, they might also put those resources on making migration packages for their up2date users instead of End of Lifing them. Who better for that than package maintainers? Their cheap CD's that migrated from one version to another were a way better distribution method than boxed sets ever were. They are getting back to the things that set them appart and that they do well. I'm encouraged by this change in direction and expect them to grow.
"Judge, I want to violate this license on this product that I got for free because it's not free enough".
Who wants to do that? Copying Bitkeeper's feature set is all that's required. No one's dumb enough to say that can't be done are they?
If they want to make it hard to get current work out, it's all the more reason not to put work in. The Bitkeeper people should be happy that people admire the feature set and work to make it better than free versions or simply charge for the hosting they provide. Surely, the things they provide of value will continue to have value and they can continue to do what they want with the revenue stream and other resources. A free version won't make any of that go away anymore than free mail transport agents killed email. It's incredible that anyone might waste time with protocal changes and then brag about it. There is NO context that's good in.
It's hard to fathom anyone being so stupid as to make a threat like that, "the protocol every 6 months", to maintian incompatibility with a free version. With an "owner" like that, Bit Keeper needs replacement.
Slashdot Mirror
Many here are downplaying this as some kind of "technicality" or frumpy MIT only rules kind of thing. I'm not sure why. The whole thing is a "technicality" if you want to look at complience with fedearal law as some kind of technicality.
If MIT is right, they are right everywhere. Privacy issues for students are a federal issue, the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act specifically. All the schools that agreed to comply had better think twice before they violate federal laws. Juristiction issues are not just a Boston thing either. Sure, the RIAA can do it all again and obey the law this time, but that will cost them. Imagine them sending teams to every real jusristiction for every screen-name with 5 songs downloaded. Pththth-fit! MIT's stand should be embarasing to the RIAA in any case, but my money is on MIT being right.
The only thing the RIAA should be dissapointed in is the way their lawyers have cocked this up. Had they done just a little more homework, they could have saved themselves considerable expense. I hope this costs them a fortune and that they decide they might be better off promoting music instead of screwing their fans.
People who write device drivers for themselves have device drivers and the knowledge of how to do it. They don't have to ask for them again and can contemplate their own devices to do things for them. This puts them in a much better position than the average windoze scmuck who has to buy nev devices that don't always do what they should every two years or so. That advantage translates into money and other things. Even when it does not, the silly Windoze user does not know what to do with himself.
Useful, like refilling your printer cartridge? Oh yeah, Lexmark does not think the DMCA is a big blanket law they can use against their competitors and anyone who would do anything useful, do they?
No, people should not be scared, but we should realize that big dumb companies do this kind of thing and we should avoid equipment from them. Think I'm going to buy Lexmark garbage? Not for a long long time. I bought a DLink PCI wireless card and I would not recomend anyone do the same thing. I got encouraged by a pcimcia card working, and figured I should just keep looking. My mistake, I should have taken the piece of shit back right away.
Sure it is, when you consider the fact that you already have the equipment. Who does not have a PC mothballed? Also, that PC can give you much better control and flexibility. With a little effort you can have something like kerebos authentication and ssh only connectivity. Can you do that with some dinky little access point?
I'll sell McBitch a shell account anytime he feels the need for a real OS. Just reply in this thread and I'll tell you where to send the money.
Seeing as SCO does not actually offer the Linux kernel in any form, their sale of licenses for UnixWare to cover Linux is a gross dilution of the term. If you don't have Linux, you can't call it Linux, that's what trademard is all about. SCO is going to have to come up with a name like SNL, SCO's Not Linux.
Ding, ding, that's true, and so long as SCO keeps it's mouth shut about what's actually infringing, I'll just abide by the kernel license, the GPL. I don't have much to say to SCO people except that they can come and get free software if they are in Baton Rouge today. This offer, of course, extends to anyone who happens to be in Baton Rouge today.
Bah! If you notice and don't thank them, it's not good. Bill Gates gets you once a year or so with the same old software, sometimes updated with a new look or with the control center changed around. Restaurants, bars and whores all go through more effort for what they offer and sometimes have something you can't find anywehre else.
This WinInfo clown would not know the difference between Antoine's and McDonalds and does a poor job of hyping Microsoft's few virtues. Grief, the "another security flaw, so what?" is way over the top. It's like saying, "Ah, another customer get's the shits from a flaw tha affects 100% of our greasy burgers, so what?" Is there anyone out there who does not know someone who's windoze box has When you have to lie and when the lie is obvious, you suck.
The business case assumes that many applications will not migrate to Linux; instead, the bulk of applications requiring Windows will probably be Web-enabled and accessed through a browser. Munich will accommodate any remaining applications using virtual machine software, such as VMware.
How Paul Thrrott of WinInfo jumps to the conclusion that the "Desktop" won't be GNU/Linux and that they are really running Windoze is beyond me. I imagine the browser will be from KDE or Mozilla and the desktop will be KDE and that all normal applications, email, word processing, simple spreadsheets will be free and open software. That Munich can also run crappy old windoze stuff is a benifit that's not reciprocated on Microsoft's limited little GUI. Yet Paul would imply that this ablity indicates some kind of short comming in free software, hmph.
WinInfo looks like it was written by a crack smoking Microsoft Public Relations firm. Other nonsense on the same page include dreams of a surge of interest in Windoze as a web serving platform prompted by Bill Gates changing servers for his personal site, a rosy assesment of the M$ empire after failing to meet market expectations, and a piece playing down yet another major security flaw in windoze. There's neither logic nor dignity on that page. I've seen circus posters that made more sense and promoted more reputable things. Hell, I've seen more profesional things on Burbon Street. What does our Anonymous Reader do all day that he might stumble across drivel like that?
And murder is a poor method of conflict resolution, and Bill Gates could have made a respectable amount of money honestly, and lots of people who do crappy things have the talent and drive to do things better. When they do crappy things, punishment is what they deserve. Double click made money lying to people about their computers, they deserve to lose that money and then some.
Not too shabby. The more compiler hackers that use PPC, the better gcc will become, no? Maybe this new machine will add some motivation.
Yeah, maybe "Duncan3" can get his company to help if indeed "Duncan3" reall is Adam L Beberg that spends, "Most of my waking hours are spent working on Cosm, one of the projects of my company Mithral Communications & Design, Inc. Cosm is a set of protocols for doing cross platform development and large scale distributed computing." That would be a lot better than bitching about how sucky a free thing is.
that and partimage are very nice. Part image does not promise NTFS stuff will work, however. The general problems of M$ making things difficult are not ever going to go away and those who make tools to interact with NTFS risk bad things from bad laws.
There's not much "risk" of that. The probability of Windoze failure is 1:1. Microsoft is the source of pain. The less you have to do with them, the less pain you suffer.
If you are going to make your own image, check out partimage, a projcet for doing just that.
The only thing you have to wonder is if you can boot off that DVD at all. Hmmmm, Windows Pain, why bother with it?
Really? I thought Microsoft had patents that kept free software from writing to NTFS. Well, certian version of NTFS at least. here is a cluefull letter about NTFS and installs. I imagine that parted is state of the free art, and that M$ can make their crap a pain in the ass at any time.
If YOU fuck up Windows (Blaming Microsoft is easier, but fact is, Windows is most often mangled by incompetent users doing stuff they shouldn't be doing.) then it is YOUR responsibility to have made proper backups of the full HD with Linux already installed. Same thing applies when it is NOT your fault, your data is still your responsibility
The only fault a user has when dealing with Microsoft software is the fact that they decided to use Microsoft. It is impossible for a Microsoft user to take proper precations and make up for the ill will and malice Microsoft has for them. Data loss is NEVER the user's fault. Where do you get off telling us that we should not be putting an alternate OS onto our computers? What other "stuff" shouldn't we be doing? Fold up your "blame the user" FUD till it's all sharp corners and stick it up your ass.
No, it will fail. You don't think their little utility will be bright enough to resize the image, do you? Of course not! It's designed in part to insure nothing but that obsolete OS gets used on the PC. In time, when the upgrade train rolls on, the user will be left without new Windoze drivers for the new Windoze O$ and unable to "upgrade" and will be forced to buy, ta-da, another laptop! That's why they do this.
In any case, few people will have the savy to even attempt your scheme. Those that do will simply use partimage to back up their current installation for reimplemntation, work and all NTFS may give them a headache.
Another thing you might not have considered is that the BIOS may refuse to boot off anything but a signed DVD. Oh dear, it's a paperweight.
For the same reason you don't just tell someone to "mail" you something in English, that won't work. Unless you have the context established, you need a specific word. Even then you need a specific word or your likely to make a second, anoying call to someone who just snail mailed you. I imagine they have a way of doing this which might just be "email le moi" to indicate pushing a button on a US made PC interpreted by M$ software, all very forgein and barbaric but usefull.
The Microsoft plauge is everywhere. It fouls up Internet Cafes in Paris, government desktops in Quebec, and all maner of private and public computing.
Look, I used my dividend to buy three or four nice boxed coppies of XP and put them on Ebay. They came from abroad, cost me nothing, yet still I do not prosper! Everyone just laughed at me and now I'm stuck with this sucky software. What't to do?
Microsoft made it so expensive to buy comodity hardware that was preconfigured that they have trained up their doom. How many enemies have they made? Too many and all knowledgable. They have trained me and many other to know just how shitty their stuff is and how not to need it. I will gladly help others to avoid them at no cost. If you are in Baton Rouge, come join me and my friends Monday.
The revolution was not televised.
And why can't you find them at places like Cheapbytes or any other CD vendor? Oh yeah, I forgot, they are a bunch of control freaks marketing closed source software. They don't get it and will never be as easy to get, deploy or use. My bad, what was I thinking?
How do these people get Debian, I wonder. No, I know that you can get cheap CDs much easier than you can get a silly box at the store. It's a much better means to distribute than boxed sets. Oh yeah, it also supports the local installers better because you don't fool Joe Sixpacks into thinking that he can walk out of a store with a box and get it onto his computer at home without much trouble. Well, it may be less trouble than a Windoze install, but poor Joe Sixpacks will have a lot more reading to do than what's contained in that little Red Box before he gets it. I've bought one little red box once and I was not near as happy with that arangement as I was with the CheapHytes solution. Now that I've discovered apt-get, Red Hat has a long way to go. This is a change in the right direction. Killing end of life nonsense is the next change they need to make, then Viola! their superior hardware compatibility and Solaris work alikeness and other strengths will be worth the effort of learning the Red Hat way.
This is a very good thing. Red Hat had been getting entirely too "tuned" for my tastes. This can only help them be more flexible and they will put their resources to work fixing things that need help, not messing with other people's code. Their hardware compatibility is awsome but for it to come at the expense of basic stuff like "adduser"? They can take advice like that now. They also had good Solaris match up. Quicker, cheaper releases will help them compete for share against the ultimate in free, Debian. Red Hat has to maintian both code quality and ease of implemntation to maintain that share. A boxed set provided neither of those things. Oh yeah, they might also put those resources on making migration packages for their up2date users instead of End of Lifing them. Who better for that than package maintainers? Their cheap CD's that migrated from one version to another were a way better distribution method than boxed sets ever were. They are getting back to the things that set them appart and that they do well. I'm encouraged by this change in direction and expect them to grow.
Who wants to do that? Copying Bitkeeper's feature set is all that's required. No one's dumb enough to say that can't be done are they?
If they want to make it hard to get current work out, it's all the more reason not to put work in. The Bitkeeper people should be happy that people admire the feature set and work to make it better than free versions or simply charge for the hosting they provide. Surely, the things they provide of value will continue to have value and they can continue to do what they want with the revenue stream and other resources. A free version won't make any of that go away anymore than free mail transport agents killed email. It's incredible that anyone might waste time with protocal changes and then brag about it. There is NO context that's good in.
It's hard to fathom anyone being so stupid as to make a threat like that, "the protocol every 6 months", to maintian incompatibility with a free version. With an "owner" like that, Bit Keeper needs replacement.