Actually, I worked on the Helldesk at the largest IP in Houston, Texas up until November of last year, and they were 100% a MSoft shop (except for routers and switches) until they were acquired by Internet America who proceeded to impose a certain degree of sanity (and also laid me off).
Well... not knowing the reasoning behind the blanket statements, I'll skip over your 1) and 2).... 3) it's been said that a Bachelor's degree is merely a license to learn accompanied by most (not all) the tools needed to use the license productively. I've found this to be true...4) I didn't attack anyone's intelligence... 5) I don't think anyone with a doctorate (NOT in CS) doubts, or lacks knowledge of, the value of an education, and 6) I got the job I have now because I had the technical qualifications for the job and I was lucky enough to skim past the HR drones. However, at the time I was fortunate enough to do so, I knew no one employed by my current employer.
"... competent HR person" is a contradiction in terms when you are dealing with IT positions. The ONLY reason I even got an interview for the position I currently hold was because the technical managers personally attended a job fair I went to and liked what they saw enough to red-flag the resume I gave them.
Hint #1 to IT people who are job-hunting... Hit the Tech job fairs, you might get lucky like I did. Hint #2, leave the fancy MCSE and MCP graphics off your resume... if you DO happen to hit a geek instead of an HR drone and you have the right stuff, you don't NEED the graphics, if you don't have it, they'll see through you after about 3 minutes of conversation. I got a job, the guy ahead of me, who had all those Msoft certs hasn't yet, to the best of my knowledge.
The Computer Science Dept. at the University of Utah is WAY out on the cutting edge, having taken the lead on (among other things) the Mach kernel, the GLUT library and GLX extensions used by BOTH OpenGL and Mesa, and the Flask OS which has served as a base for the NSA's SELinux kernel security extension research.
Calling that program sub-par to cover the fact that you 1) don't want to work hard enough to get a four-year degree, or 2) can't get in, or 3) can't cut it, boggles the mind and borders on disingenuousness.
I apologize if you find my remarks hurtful or insulting, but I've just about had my fill of the "common sense and tech training is better than book-learning" argument.
What the AC says is true. and I don't think a 2 hour renewal period for dynamic IPs is unreasonably short, especially since a renewal only requires the exchange of 4 or 5 packets. The truth of the matter is that administering any kind of firewall competently requires more understanding and effort than MOST ISPs lusers want to invest.
When I was on the Helldesk, I got a call from a user who wanted to know why her e-mail didn't work. She had installed Norton's PF and her neighbor, "who's a computer pro at ***** Co." had configured it for her. Of course, he blocked OUTgoing traffic on ports 110 and 25, so she couldn't connect to our POP3 and SMTP servers... (SOME pro this is... ). She refused to believe the firewall was the problem until I had her disable it and check her mail. Surprise... it worked.
Because of company policy, I was prohibited from walking her thru the fix, so I told her what needed to be done and told her to have her neighbor fix it.
Frankly, I think anyone who panics over this type of log entry doesn't need the TCP/IP Illustrated Guide, the need "TCP/IP Networking for Dummies... REAL Dummies".
Well, I can't speak for the newly-minted MCSE part of the question, because I only admin n*x boxen, but yes, ignorance is a large factor here... a failure to understand the nature of the internet is the other big part.
Personally, I don't consider a connection "hostile" unless there's an actual connection made (thank You Wietse, TCPWrappers is a Godsend) from an unauthorized host, or... until I receive an inquiry from another admin whom I have reason to believe is competent about a port-scan or other probe from one of the hosts I admin. Of course, at the University where I do my magic, postscanning from the Computer Lab is PROHIBITED.
As for the "healthy dose of paranoia," I've been informed that this is a professional requirement for a Unix admin... but then, so is an in-depth understanding of how TCP/IP works... after all, "the network IS the computer"...
I came home once to find that my sister had plugged her surge protector into yet another surge protector...
In truth, this is my normal practice... because of the "A.C. adapters" supplied with things like my speakers, printers, etc., I need more outlet space (physically, not electrically) than one 6-outlet strip provides. So I plug one into the other, and connect the system unit into the second...
Having once lost a mobo to a surge, it helps my peace of mind.
You just might be surprised to see just how snappy an X-terminal really can be with minimal processor power, given an appropriate networking environment.
True, it's going to cost the library/non-profit/what-have-you a few hundred bucks to use switched fast ethernet, but with an appropriately customized kernel and a reasonable display (don't forget that there are a LOT of old 486's out there with a PCI buss instead of ISA-only) I think this is a very viable topic.
Actually, the situation is quite reversed from the big-iron days. With AS/400s and S/390s pretty much relegated to their appropriate tasks (i.s being file/spplication/database servers to PCs) the cumulative processing power of the workstations attached to a mainframe far exceeds the processing power of the mainframe itself in a large company.
That being said, let's concede that the average slashdotter is going to have sufficient use for all the processor power and bandwidth he/she can get. On the other hand, this article brings togather all the information necessary for a savvy "system/network consultant" to open the final door to Linux's achieving "world domination."
You can build a world-crushing server-class box for (I'm guessing) under $2000. You can add 4 X-terminals to it (using single-board computers) for about another $1500. Preconfigure the server for your client, using Star Office, or your productivity suite of choice, make sure the whole thing works reliably, and sell the new homebuyer a "Smart Home" package for less than the cost of 5 retail market packaged PCs (plus MS Office on each) plus the router they'll need to share their DSL/cablemodem connection.
True we don't have the depth of entertainment software the Windows world has, but Loki's working hard to set that situation to right.
Actually, with an X-terminal, all you're running on the 486 is X itself. The apps run on the server and the X-terminal only manages/provides the display.
When you say "only releases the code through valid contracts (licenses) which include limitation of liability and disclaimer of warranty terms" (under the "public domain" question), you seem to be implying that licenses similar to the GPL are a contract between the copyright holder and the end user.
This is contrary to everything I've ever read about the GPL.
If this statement is, in fact, true, I would submit that everything you've ever read about the GPL is incorrect. By it's own terms, the GPL controls the totality of a licensee's rights with regard to the object (program/document, what-have-you) to which it applies, just as Microsoft's "shrink-wrap" license does. The difference is that the GPL makes a very broad and sweeping grant of rights as opposed to the highly restrictive grant by Microsoft and other closed-source/unfree software developers.
The GPL isn't a contract between the copyright holder and an end-user, it's a contract between the copyright holder and a (prospective) author of derivative works, or anyone who wants to make copies of the software.
The GPL even says: You are not required to accept this License.
This is true, however, failure or refusal to accept the license requires that one either negotiate a one-off personal license or infringe the original developer's copyright. The essence of the GPL is "take this program for free and do what you will with it, however, if you choose to modify it or improve on it, the cost of me giving it to you free is that you have to share your modifications and improvements just as I did."
You seem to be under the impression that the GPL applies to anyone who uses free software. It doesn't, and that's intentional.
The GPL does, in fact, apply to everyone who does anything with free software because the license governs the terms under which you have permission to use it. The license is a document that grants anyone other than the original developer the right even to possess the software. The fact that the few restrictions imposed by the licensee only impact those who develop derivative works is irrelevant.
Hewlett-Packard: responsible for confusing generations of calculator users.
Well, if you say so... I remember using an HP-27 back in '74 that was like giving water to a duck. (Hint: I was a freshman engineering major then). As a result of that experience, I shortly thereafter, spent the then princely sum of $450.00 for an HP-45. When the -45 died, I spent another $450.00 for the mighty HP-67 (magnetic cards, Oh JOY!).
Whatever. As anyone here with an IQ > 40 will tell you, RPN if far superior to infix notation. Besides, it's pretty rude to make snide comments like that when linking to an obituary.
Well, on that point, my mama always told me not to argue religious issues in public.
It is kind of sad though. I have tremendous respect for anybody who can build the kind of
company HP has become.
I'm not all that sure about the company... they've made some pretty serious faux pax over the past few years, but, that's the nature of the technology business. You pays your money and you takes your risks.
All that aside, Bill Hewlett is one of those who took the techno-bull by the horns and made the world what it is today. Today we lost something that will be hard to replace. We lost a contributor.
Hey, is your.sig supposed to be some kinda haiku? If so it's a syllable short and the meter's all wrong. Sorta like your comments.
Geeks flame away because they have the intelligence it takes to do so. What was it Truman said? "If you can't stand the heat... "
I dislike *senseless* flame wars immensely... too much like a gunfight with an unarmed man. But, up against a WORTHY opponent, nothing is more enjoyable.
It's very simple. The purpose of trademark law is to allow a way for a company, such as AOL, Red Hat, SuSE, IBM or whatever, to protect their name by preventing the name from being used in a way that would cause 'confusion' (that's a term of art in TM law) in the minds of consumers.
Where a spammer runs afoul of trademark law in forging an e-mail header is this: by making it appear that an e-mail originated from an AOL server, the message allegedly meets the requirements of AOL's AUP and ToS, and is therefore, "approved" by AOL. (I know, I know... , but that's the legal reasoning, and in a lawsuit, that's ALL that counts).
As in ANY IP lawsuit, the infringer is liable for treble damages PLUS attorney's fees. I saw, in another thread, that AOL's spam volume could be as high as 30% of total mail handled. Given the cost of handling that mail, the damages for handling 550'd mail from people who have the capability to bounce mail coupled with the cost of handling the complaints to abuse@aol.com and postmaster@aol.com add up to a substantial amount of money.
I hope AOL succeeds in this lawsuit and that they continue in this vein. The trademark infringement issue is a lay-down winner. I'd like to see hotmail (another prime victim of header forgery) adopt this tactic also.
Spammers have been using "throw-down" ISP accounts for access and header spoofing for years. They don't care if they lose their account because they can always open another. Making it cost them money to forge headers and pass off the cost of 550's to someone else just might bring the practice to an end.
Spamming exists because it allows the advertiser to transfer the cost of his advertising to the recipient. This is an evil practice. Battling spammers is something that is not for the faint of heart. One spam-fighter of whom I am aware has received death threats because of his activities. For all it's faults, AOL should be supported for it's apparently novel tactic.
This is actually a pretty close approximation of how damages would be calculated because a normal remedy granted under IP law is "disgorgement" of the amount by which the infringer wrongfully benefitted.
"Considering the exclusive right to invention as given not of natural right, but for the benefit of society, I know well the difficulty of drawing a line between the things which are worth to the public the embarrassment of an exclusive patent, and those which are not."
Unfortunately, Jefferson misunderstood, or mis-stated, the concept of property that flows from the Anglo-American common law, which is that property is NOT a natural right. All property rights, including real property rights (land) flow directly from the sovereign.
I support the GPL and, in this case, oppose DSFNet, but the property right protected by copyright and patent law IS property in its purest sense. Violation of a software license like the GPL is not necessarily theft but it is, at minimum, the tort of conversion.
An inventor has a right to be compensated for his work in advancing the state of the art. An author has a right to be compensated for his effort in creating his 'reduction of an idea to tangible form.' Those who release software under the GPL have chosen a different form of compensation from the form chosen by the Microsofts (Symantecs, etc.) of the world. The open source movement is no more Communist or Socialist than any other business. People and companies get compensated in the form they chose, that is all.
Actually, I believe one of the things that led to the end of the road for Steve Jobs and the NeXT cube was a lawsuit by the FSF for basing the Objective C compiler on gcc and then withholding the source for it.
If I recall correctly, the lawsuit alleged BOTH violation of the GPL and copyright infringement.
I cannot agree with this post wholeheartedly enough. I do not believe that computer literacy NEEDS to be emphasized with elementary school children any more than any other subject is. Expose the kids to it and they will absorb it. More important than teaching computer literacy is teaching things like analytical thinking, the scientific method and a proper understanding of cause and effect. Once children learn these things, computer literacy, mathematical fluency and all the other important mental skills come naturally.
My taste in sci-fi runs more to the military genre, but these come to mind quickly as the cream of the crop of what I've read: Greg Bear - "Hammer of God", "Anvil of Stars"... "Foundation and Chaos", Greg's contribution to the estate-commissioned extension of Asimov's Foundation trilogy is a pretty good read too. Heinlein - Starship Troopers (ignore the film, read the book), Stranger in a Strange Land. Frank Herbert - the entire "Dune" series, although the ones after "God Emperor of Dune" get kinda strange Clark - the "Rama" trilogy Asimov - anything and everything, but especially the "Robots" series (especially, "Caves of Steel" and "I, Robot") and the "Foundation" trilogy-plus Orson Scott Card - the "Ender" trilogy (read them in order, please... ) Gordon Dickson - the "Childe Cycle" (all of them, if you can find them) David Weber - all the Honor Harrington books... especially since you're reading them with a young girl... good role model... start with "On Basilisk Station" and follow her career through in sequence Jerry Pournelle - the "Falkenberg's Legion" books... "Falkenberg's Legion," "Prince of Sparta," and "Go Tell the Spartans" in that order Spider Robinson - all the "Callahan's" books (funny, although they might be a little risque for the young lady) Spider and Jean Robinson - the "Stardancer" trilogy Vernor Vinge - A Fire on the Deep William Gibson - "Neuromancer", "Burning Chrome", "Johnny Mnemonic" (ignore the movie), "The Difference Engine", "Virtual Light" Movies? Try "Forbidden Planet", "Plan 9 from Outer Space" (with tongue in cheek), "Dune" (AFTER you read the book, NOT before), "Blade Runner", "The Abyss", "Terminal Man", "Firestarter" and "The Matrix"
Right on all five... as far as it goes. However, I believe that items 1, 2 and 5 are the REAL reason why minors are excluded. Comdex is primarily a place where business is transacted. People who are seeking to do business do not want to be swarmed by children "playing" with the computers. Minors (persons under 18 years of age) cannot make a binding contract. There are a VERY few exceptions to this rule, but they RARELY arise. Although the risk exposure for personal injury liability is a very real consideration in planning any type of large public event, I seriously doubt that it is the motivation behind the rule excluding minors from COMDEX. Exhibitors are there to sell products and make money. This fact is reflected in the cost of exhibit space, which borders on exorbitant for a big-name trade show like COMDEX. In exchange for the price they pay for exhibit space, the exhibitors expect that space not to be packed with non-customers (which children under 18 are). I can sympathize with the young man who is the subject of the article, and I applaud his accomplishments and agressiveness in starting up a company at the age of 14. I applaud his apparent business accumen which is exhibited by the fact that the compnay has become profitable in only three years. However, I would suggest that he knew, or should have known of the age-based restriction on attendees at COMDEX. After all, Matrixcubed DID have the option of purchasing exhibit space and issuing him one of their Exhibitor's passes.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I worked on the Helldesk at the largest IP in Houston, Texas up until November of last year, and they were 100% a MSoft shop (except for routers and switches) until they were acquired by Internet America who proceeded to impose a certain degree of sanity (and also laid me off).
Sooner or later, all of them ...
Well ... not knowing the reasoning behind the blanket statements, I'll skip over your 1) and 2) .... 3) it's been said that a Bachelor's degree is merely a license to learn accompanied by most (not all) the tools needed to use the license productively. I've found this to be true ...4) I didn't attack anyone's intelligence ... 5) I don't think anyone with a doctorate (NOT in CS) doubts, or lacks knowledge of, the value of an education, and 6) I got the job I have now because I had the technical qualifications for the job and I was lucky enough to skim past the HR drones. However, at the time I was fortunate enough to do so, I knew no one employed by my current employer.
Regards,
ninewands
" ... competent HR person" is a contradiction in terms when you are dealing with IT positions. The ONLY reason I even got an interview for the position I currently hold was because the technical managers personally attended a job fair I went to and liked what they saw enough to red-flag the resume I gave them.
... Hit the Tech job fairs, you might get lucky like I did. Hint #2, leave the fancy MCSE and MCP graphics off your resume ... if you DO happen to hit a geek instead of an HR drone and you have the right stuff, you don't NEED the graphics, if you don't have it, they'll see through you after about 3 minutes of conversation. I got a job, the guy ahead of me, who had all those Msoft certs hasn't yet, to the best of my knowledge.
Hint #1 to IT people who are job-hunting
Excuse me???
The Computer Science Dept. at the University of Utah is WAY out on the cutting edge, having taken the lead on (among other things) the Mach kernel, the GLUT library and GLX extensions used by BOTH OpenGL and Mesa, and the Flask OS which has served as a base for the NSA's SELinux kernel security extension research.
Calling that program sub-par to cover the fact that you 1) don't want to work hard enough to get a four-year degree, or 2) can't get in, or 3) can't cut it, boggles the mind and borders on disingenuousness.
I apologize if you find my remarks hurtful or insulting, but I've just about had my fill of the "common sense and tech training is better than book-learning" argument.
Regards,
ninewands
What the AC says is true. and I don't think a 2 hour renewal period for dynamic IPs is unreasonably short, especially since a renewal only requires the exchange of 4 or 5 packets. The truth of the matter is that administering any kind of firewall competently requires more understanding and effort than MOST ISPs lusers want to invest.
... (SOME pro this is ... ). She refused to believe the firewall was the problem until I had her disable it and check her mail. Surprise ... it worked.
When I was on the Helldesk, I got a call from a user who wanted to know why her e-mail didn't work. She had installed Norton's PF and her neighbor, "who's a computer pro at ***** Co." had configured it for her. Of course, he blocked OUTgoing traffic on ports 110 and 25, so she couldn't connect to our POP3 and SMTP servers
Because of company policy, I was prohibited from walking her thru the fix, so I told her what needed to be done and told her to have her neighbor fix it.
Frankly, I think anyone who panics over this type of log entry doesn't need the TCP/IP Illustrated Guide, the need "TCP/IP Networking for Dummies ... REAL Dummies".
Personally, I NEVER mention the "C-word" unless I'm expressly asked about them.
Well, I can't speak for the newly-minted MCSE part of the question, because I only admin n*x boxen, but yes, ignorance is a large factor here ... a failure to understand the nature of the internet is the other big part.
... until I receive an inquiry from another admin whom I have reason to believe is competent about a port-scan or other probe from one of the hosts I admin. Of course, at the University where I do my magic, postscanning from the Computer Lab is PROHIBITED.
... but then, so is an in-depth understanding of how TCP/IP works ... after all, "the network IS the computer" ...
Personally, I don't consider a connection "hostile" unless there's an actual connection made (thank You Wietse, TCPWrappers is a Godsend) from an unauthorized host, or
As for the "healthy dose of paranoia," I've been informed that this is a professional requirement for a Unix admin
Regards,
ninewands
I came home once to find that my sister had plugged her surge protector into yet another surge protector ...
... because of the "A.C. adapters" supplied with things like my speakers, printers, etc., I need more outlet space (physically, not electrically) than one 6-outlet strip provides. So I plug one into the other, and connect the system unit into the second ...
In truth, this is my normal practice
Having once lost a mobo to a surge, it helps my peace of mind.
Regards,
ninewands
And ... BTW, the average age of THIS slashdot poster is the reverse of what you've read ...
Regards,
ninewands
You just might be surprised to see just how snappy an X-terminal really can be with minimal processor power, given an appropriate networking environment.
True, it's going to cost the library/non-profit/what-have-you a few hundred bucks to use switched fast ethernet, but with an appropriately customized kernel and a reasonable display (don't forget that there are a LOT of old 486's out there with a PCI buss instead of ISA-only) I think this is a very viable topic.
Regards,
ninewands
Actually, the situation is quite reversed from the big-iron days. With AS/400s and S/390s pretty much relegated to their appropriate tasks (i.s being file/spplication/database servers to PCs) the cumulative processing power of the workstations attached to a mainframe far exceeds the processing power of the mainframe itself in a large company.
That being said, let's concede that the average slashdotter is going to have sufficient use for all the processor power and bandwidth he/she can get. On the other hand, this article brings togather all the information necessary for a savvy "system/network consultant" to open the final door to Linux's achieving "world domination."
You can build a world-crushing server-class box for (I'm guessing) under $2000. You can add 4 X-terminals to it (using single-board computers) for about another $1500. Preconfigure the server for your client, using Star Office, or your productivity suite of choice, make sure the whole thing works reliably, and sell the new homebuyer a "Smart Home" package for less than the cost of 5 retail market packaged PCs (plus MS Office on each) plus the router they'll need to share their DSL/cablemodem connection.
True we don't have the depth of entertainment software the Windows world has, but Loki's working hard to set that situation to right.
just My US$0.02.
Regards,
ninewands
Actually, with an X-terminal, all you're running on the 486 is X itself. The apps run on the server and the X-terminal only manages/provides the display.
When you say "only releases the code through valid contracts (licenses) which include limitation of liability and disclaimer of warranty terms" (under the "public domain" question), you seem to be implying that licenses similar to the GPL are a contract between the copyright holder and the end user.
This is contrary to everything I've ever read about the GPL.
If this statement is, in fact, true, I would submit that everything you've ever read about the GPL is incorrect. By it's own terms, the GPL controls the totality of a licensee's rights with regard to the object (program/document, what-have-you) to which it applies, just as Microsoft's "shrink-wrap" license does. The difference is that the GPL makes a very broad and sweeping grant of rights as opposed to the highly restrictive grant by Microsoft and other closed-source/unfree software developers.
The GPL isn't a contract between the copyright holder and an end-user, it's a contract between the copyright holder and a (prospective) author of derivative works, or anyone who wants to make copies of the software.
The GPL even says: You are not required to accept this License.
This is true, however, failure or refusal to accept the license requires that one either negotiate a one-off personal license or infringe the original developer's copyright. The essence of the GPL is "take this program for free and do what you will with it, however, if you choose to modify it or improve on it, the cost of me giving it to you free is that you have to share your modifications and improvements just as I did."
You seem to be under the impression that the GPL applies to anyone who uses free software. It doesn't, and that's intentional.
The GPL does, in fact, apply to everyone who does anything with free software because the license governs the terms under which you have permission to use it. The license is a document that grants anyone other than the original developer the right even to possess the software. The fact that the few restrictions imposed by the licensee only impact those who develop derivative works is irrelevant.
In short, you're wrong.
Regards,
Hewlett-Packard: responsible for confusing generations of calculator users.
... I remember using an HP-27 back in '74 that was like giving water to a duck. (Hint: I was a freshman engineering major then). As a result of that experience, I shortly thereafter, spent the then princely sum of $450.00 for an HP-45. When the -45 died, I spent another $450.00 for the mighty HP-67 (magnetic cards, Oh JOY!).
... they've made some pretty serious faux pax over the past few years, but, that's the nature of the technology business. You pays your money and you takes your risks.
Well, if you say so
Whatever. As anyone here with an IQ > 40 will tell you, RPN if far superior to infix notation. Besides, it's pretty rude to make snide comments like that when linking to an obituary.
Well, on that point, my mama always told me not to argue religious issues in public.
It is kind of sad though. I have tremendous respect for anybody who can build the kind of company HP has become.
I'm not all that sure about the company
All that aside, Bill Hewlett is one of those who took the techno-bull by the horns and made the world what it is today. Today we lost something that will be hard to replace. We lost a contributor.
Regards,
ninewands
Hey, is your .sig supposed to be some kinda haiku? If so it's a syllable short and the meter's all wrong. Sorta like your comments.
... "
... too much like a gunfight with an unarmed man. But, up against a WORTHY opponent, nothing is more enjoyable.
Geeks flame away because they have the intelligence it takes to do so. What was it Truman said? "If you can't stand the heat
I dislike *senseless* flame wars immensely
Regards, ninewands
It's very simple. The purpose of trademark law is to allow a way for a company, such as AOL, Red Hat, SuSE, IBM or whatever, to protect their name by preventing the name from being used in a way that would cause 'confusion' (that's a term of art in TM law) in the minds of consumers.
... , but that's the legal reasoning, and in a lawsuit, that's ALL that counts).
Where a spammer runs afoul of trademark law in forging an e-mail header is this: by making it appear that an e-mail originated from an AOL server, the message allegedly meets the requirements of AOL's AUP and ToS, and is therefore, "approved" by AOL. (I know, I know
As in ANY IP lawsuit, the infringer is liable for treble damages PLUS attorney's fees. I saw, in another thread, that AOL's spam volume could be as high as 30% of total mail handled. Given the cost of handling that mail, the damages for handling 550'd mail from people who have the capability to bounce mail coupled with the cost of handling the complaints to abuse@aol.com and postmaster@aol.com add up to a substantial amount of money.
I hope AOL succeeds in this lawsuit and that they continue in this vein. The trademark infringement issue is a lay-down winner. I'd like to see hotmail (another prime victim of header forgery) adopt this tactic also.
Spammers have been using "throw-down" ISP accounts for access and header spoofing for years. They don't care if they lose their account because they can always open another. Making it cost them money to forge headers and pass off the cost of 550's to someone else just might bring the practice to an end.
Spamming exists because it allows the advertiser to transfer the cost of his advertising to the recipient. This is an evil practice. Battling spammers is something that is not for the faint of heart. One spam-fighter of whom I am aware has received death threats because of his activities. For all it's faults, AOL should be supported for it's apparently novel tactic.
Regards,
ninewands
This is actually a pretty close approximation of how damages would be calculated because a normal remedy granted under IP law is "disgorgement" of the amount by which the infringer wrongfully benefitted.
"Considering the exclusive right to invention as given not of natural right, but for the benefit of society, I know well the difficulty of drawing a line between the things which are worth to the public the embarrassment of an exclusive patent, and those which are not."
Unfortunately, Jefferson misunderstood, or mis-stated, the concept of property that flows from the Anglo-American common law, which is that property is NOT a natural right. All property rights, including real property rights (land) flow directly from the sovereign.
I support the GPL and, in this case, oppose DSFNet, but the property right protected by copyright and patent law IS property in its purest sense. Violation of a software license like the GPL is not necessarily theft but it is, at minimum, the tort of conversion.
An inventor has a right to be compensated for his work in advancing the state of the art. An author has a right to be compensated for his effort in creating his 'reduction of an idea to tangible form.' Those who release software under the GPL have chosen a different form of compensation from the form chosen by the Microsofts (Symantecs, etc.) of the world. The open source movement is no more Communist or Socialist than any other business. People and companies get compensated in the form they chose, that is all.
Actually, I believe one of the things that led to the end of the road for Steve Jobs and the NeXT cube was a lawsuit by the FSF for basing the Objective C compiler on gcc and then withholding the source for it.
If I recall correctly, the lawsuit alleged BOTH violation of the GPL and copyright infringement.
Sort of makes you wonder what kind of drugs "Time Cube" is using ... and in what quantity of truckloads per day.
I cannot agree with this post wholeheartedly enough. I do not believe that computer literacy NEEDS to be emphasized with elementary school children any more than any other subject is. Expose the kids to it and they will absorb it. More important than teaching computer literacy is teaching things like analytical thinking, the scientific method and a proper understanding of cause and effect. Once children learn these things, computer literacy, mathematical fluency and all the other important mental skills come naturally.
My taste in sci-fi runs more to the military genre, but these come to mind quickly as the cream of the crop of what I've read: Greg Bear - "Hammer of God", "Anvil of Stars" ... "Foundation and Chaos", Greg's contribution to the estate-commissioned extension of Asimov's Foundation trilogy is a pretty good read too. Heinlein - Starship Troopers (ignore the film, read the book), Stranger in a Strange Land. Frank Herbert - the entire "Dune" series, although the ones after "God Emperor of Dune" get kinda strange Clark - the "Rama" trilogy Asimov - anything and everything, but especially the "Robots" series (especially, "Caves of Steel" and "I, Robot") and the "Foundation" trilogy-plus Orson Scott Card - the "Ender" trilogy (read them in order, please ... ) Gordon Dickson - the "Childe Cycle" (all of them, if you can find them) David Weber - all the Honor Harrington books ... especially since you're reading them with a young girl ... good role model ... start with "On Basilisk Station" and follow her career through in sequence Jerry Pournelle - the "Falkenberg's Legion" books ... "Falkenberg's Legion," "Prince of Sparta," and "Go Tell the Spartans" in that order Spider Robinson - all the "Callahan's" books (funny, although they might be a little risque for the young lady) Spider and Jean Robinson - the "Stardancer" trilogy Vernor Vinge - A Fire on the Deep William Gibson - "Neuromancer", "Burning Chrome", "Johnny Mnemonic" (ignore the movie), "The Difference Engine", "Virtual Light" Movies? Try "Forbidden Planet", "Plan 9 from Outer Space" (with tongue in cheek), "Dune" (AFTER you read the book, NOT before), "Blade Runner", "The Abyss", "Terminal Man", "Firestarter" and "The Matrix"
Right on all five ... as far as it goes. However, I believe that items 1, 2 and 5 are the REAL reason why minors are excluded. Comdex is primarily a place where business is transacted. People who are seeking to do business do not want to be swarmed by children "playing" with the computers. Minors (persons under 18 years of age) cannot make a binding contract. There are a VERY few exceptions to this rule, but they RARELY arise. Although the risk exposure for personal injury liability is a very real consideration in planning any type of large public event, I seriously doubt that it is the motivation behind the rule excluding minors from COMDEX. Exhibitors are there to sell products and make money. This fact is reflected in the cost of exhibit space, which borders on exorbitant for a big-name trade show like COMDEX. In exchange for the price they pay for exhibit space, the exhibitors expect that space not to be packed with non-customers (which children under 18 are). I can sympathize with the young man who is the subject of the article, and I applaud his accomplishments and agressiveness in starting up a company at the age of 14. I applaud his apparent business accumen which is exhibited by the fact that the compnay has become profitable in only three years. However, I would suggest that he knew, or should have known of the age-based restriction on attendees at COMDEX. After all, Matrixcubed DID have the option of purchasing exhibit space and issuing him one of their Exhibitor's passes.