Re:show us the CODE!
on
Today's SCO News
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Are those statements true? I kind of hope so. Linux is just the kernel (name flames aside, technically it's true). So it's not possible that anyone can add a whole program to a monolithic kernel. That would indicate that they are actually talking about something included as a program/utility/whatever in the OS by the distributor (I'm assuming this is IBM). If it's even true that a whole progrm was released under GPL when it wasn't supposed to be, it's easy to excise it from any distributions that are including it. It's certainly not a core piece of the OS, GNU and Linux are enough to create a useable OS/Linux distribution.
I think you're missing the point. These employees are getting paid by the company to write code. If they screw it up, it's the company's responsibilty to make sure products they are releasing aren't going to cause problems. The engineers did not release the code. The company did.
See there's the rub. It doesn't matter if the engineers weren't supposed to release it, or if it didn't go through legal. No one outside of Caldera is subject to their internal procedures. They fucked up, they face the consequences. I've said it before. If those engineers did something to cost the company money fine punish/fire them. But those engineers are acting on behalf of the company, it's not our job to police what they do.
That definition of devolve is not an antonym for evolve. Which I think was the original point. He didn't say there is no such word as devolve.
Evolution is not a path that gets walked, there is no progress made towards some universal goal. Evolution merely helps a species adapt to it's current environment. Should our environment change so that, over time, humans needed less intellectual capacity than they now have it would still be evolution, not de-evolution.
That's not what the anthropomorphic principle is. It's the tendency for humns to attribute human qualities to things that aren't human. It has nothing ot do with genus egotism.
Re:ESR just couldn't resist...
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
If it didn't bother you then you wouldn't have complained about it.
Re:ESR just couldn't resist...
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
'Hacker' is a word that's been around long before law enforcement abused it, by people who don't care about law enforcements agenda.
Their called hackers because it's a term of respect and has been before ESR, before the media perverted it, and likely before you came on the scene. Else you would know the history of the word.
Re:a good explanation from....
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
MOD PARENT UP! A well written and insightful reply.
Kids aren't taught functional languages in college much anymore. You can go through all four years, get a degree and know very little about even imperative programming. Object Orienting caught on at schools when it was at the height of it's buzzword curve and hasn't let go yet.
I'm sure I'm not the only one working in the industry that's had to deal with poorly educated fresh out of college employees. Kids that only know one langauge, and one way of doing things. OTOH I don't believe I learned much from college, it was the reading and coding I did on the side.
I wish when kids chose CompSci as a major, the first thing they got was a copy of Knuth, Godel Escher and Bach, the Planiverse, and the Turing Omnibus. (There are obviously others I'm leaving out for instance Programming Pearls, Hackers, ext.) I think it would go a long way towards a better Comp Sci education.
I believe this is statndard practice for companies offering rebates. Fully half of the rebates I send in come back with this notification. I believe they figure that only a certain percentage of people will call them on it, so they save money. It got to the point where I won't buy things based on an advertisied "mail in rebate" corporations are untrustworthy, give me the discount at the register or forget it.
A judge could, in theory, assign ownership of the entire Linux kernel to SCO if he finds that the copyright violation is particularly blatant and pervasive. But that's unrealistic, which is why I called it an "unrealistic worst case".
Not true. Someone owns the bits that aren't SCO property, no judge can transfer that ownership. Regarless of how blatant or pervasive. SCO only has a claim to their copyrighted material (which may or not exist in the kernel).
Unless Caldera/SCO were the ones that inserted the code in the distribution tr
There is no such person as Caldera/SCO. The person working for Caldera/SCO is part of the company and their actions are the same as the company's. Assuming there are bits of SCO code (for the sake of argument) in Linux, the employee who did it should be liable (assuming you believe in software patents and copyrights in the first place), and they should be able to stop it from being continually distributed (maybe) but they shouldn't be able to sue those that weren't responsible.
Which is nonsense, since in order for the situation to be corrected they need to show what bits are theirs to everybody. If it's copyrighted they have nothing to fear. It's like me telling you that the book you wrote stole a paragraph from mine, I won't tell you which one so you have to abandon your whole book. Kinda highlights the bullshit that is copyrighted, and patented code.
Linux (meaning, some key portion of the Linux kernel
Luckily, it can only BE the kernel, since that's what Linux technically is. All the rest that's needed to make it an OS (discounting for simplicity) is GNU (which as we know is Not Unix;). I'd imagine if someone did copy SCO code and used it in the kernel, it would be relatively easy to replace, I can't imagine that there is THAT much copied code. It's also unlikely that the alleged code in question is something that's poorly understood that only SCO knows how to do.
Regardless of whether or not SCO does prove there are copied portions of their code (unauthorized I mean) that wouldn't give them ownership of the kernel as a whole.
Yes because girlfriends across america were thrilled with their boyfriend's salivating during the Dunst in a wet dress scene. I hear the director told her to bounce up and down like that... for the chick demographic.
Happened actually, not to Kasparov of course, nor was it intentional. Dig through the Risks Forum, you'll find lots of anthropomorphized cases of computer failures. Some of them sound funny, then you get an explanation of why it happened and it makes sense.
Probably not coherent to you, but that certainly doesn't mean it's less intelligent. For all you know it may be more so, and that it why it's incoherent.
Or any other device. Artificial Intelligence is not about making computers think. That's just as far as the kiddies understand it. Good answer though, saved me the trouble.;)
Re:Will we ever have *real* AI?
on
AI Going Nowhere?
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Wow, please mod down for gross misuse of the Uncertainty principle.
of how god works, and I just can't see how one would understand something that is bigger than all of us.
Easy, there is no god, religion works telling the weak how to live their lives.
I've always said "make a differential equation that models my soul, then tell me what my favourite colour is".
Nonsense. Prove you have a soul. Then one day maybe we will. Favorite color may be nothing more than a chemical reaction induced by physicial stimuli that makes you feel "good". It doesn't exist "somewhere else" as you imply.
Slashdot Mirror
Are those statements true? I kind of hope so. Linux is just the kernel (name flames aside, technically it's true). So it's not possible that anyone can add a whole program to a monolithic kernel. That would indicate that they are actually talking about something included as a program/utility/whatever in the OS by the distributor (I'm assuming this is IBM). If it's even true that a whole progrm was released under GPL when it wasn't supposed to be, it's easy to excise it from any distributions that are including it. It's certainly not a core piece of the OS, GNU and Linux are enough to create a useable OS/Linux distribution.
We call that the monetary unit soon to be known as the Euro.
I think you're missing the point. These employees are getting paid by the company to write code. If they screw it up, it's the company's responsibilty to make sure products they are releasing aren't going to cause problems. The engineers did not release the code. The company did.
See there's the rub. It doesn't matter if the engineers weren't supposed to release it, or if it didn't go through legal. No one outside of Caldera is subject to their internal procedures. They fucked up, they face the consequences. I've said it before. If those engineers did something to cost the company money fine punish/fire them. But those engineers are acting on behalf of the company, it's not our job to police what they do.
That's the point though. Due to the definition of the word evolution, there is no such thing as a detrimental evolutionary change.
Aha, figured there had to be a correct name for it, just didn't know what it was ;)
Evolution is not a path that gets walked, there is no progress made towards some universal goal. Evolution merely helps a species adapt to it's current environment. Should our environment change so that, over time, humans needed less intellectual capacity than they now have it would still be evolution, not de-evolution.
That's not what the anthropomorphic principle is. It's the tendency for humns to attribute human qualities to things that aren't human. It has nothing ot do with genus egotism.
If it didn't bother you then you wouldn't have complained about it.
Their called hackers because it's a term of respect and has been before ESR, before the media perverted it, and likely before you came on the scene. Else you would know the history of the word.
MOD PARENT UP! A well written and insightful reply.
change halfway through the task
Wow you're being generous. My favorite is when it changes hourly.
I'm sure I'm not the only one working in the industry that's had to deal with poorly educated fresh out of college employees. Kids that only know one langauge, and one way of doing things.
OTOH I don't believe I learned much from college, it was the reading and coding I did on the side.
I wish when kids chose CompSci as a major, the first thing they got was a copy of Knuth, Godel Escher and Bach, the Planiverse, and the Turing Omnibus. (There are obviously others I'm leaving out for instance Programming Pearls, Hackers, ext.) I think it would go a long way towards a better Comp Sci education.
.. I believe I shall patent "a method of looking up information". Sound fair?
I believe this is statndard practice for companies offering rebates. Fully half of the rebates I send in come back with this notification. I believe they figure that only a certain percentage of people will call them on it, so they save money. It got to the point where I won't buy things based on an advertisied "mail in rebate" corporations are untrustworthy, give me the discount at the register or forget it.
A judge could, in theory, assign ownership of the entire Linux kernel to SCO if he finds that the copyright violation is particularly blatant and pervasive. But that's unrealistic, which is why I called it an "unrealistic worst case".
Not true. Someone owns the bits that aren't SCO property, no judge can transfer that ownership. Regarless of how blatant or pervasive. SCO only has a claim to their copyrighted material (which may or not exist in the kernel).
I'm no fan of Windows, though I doubt the breaks more than it fixes theory.
Unless Caldera/SCO were the ones that inserted the code in the distribution tr
There is no such person as Caldera/SCO. The person working for Caldera/SCO is part of the company and their actions are the same as the company's. Assuming there are bits of SCO code (for the sake of argument) in Linux, the employee who did it should be liable (assuming you believe in software patents and copyrights in the first place), and they should be able to stop it from being continually distributed (maybe) but they shouldn't be able to sue those that weren't responsible.
Which is nonsense, since in order for the situation to be corrected they need to show what bits are theirs to everybody. If it's copyrighted they have nothing to fear. It's like me telling you that the book you wrote stole a paragraph from mine, I won't tell you which one so you have to abandon your whole book. Kinda highlights the bullshit that is copyrighted, and patented code.
Linux (meaning, some key portion of the Linux kernel
Luckily, it can only BE the kernel, since that's what Linux technically is. All the rest that's needed to make it an OS (discounting for simplicity) is GNU (which as we know is Not Unix
Regardless of whether or not SCO does prove there are copied portions of their code (unauthorized I mean) that wouldn't give them ownership of the kernel as a whole.
Yes because girlfriends across america were thrilled with their boyfriend's salivating during the Dunst in a wet dress scene. I hear the director told her to bounce up and down like that... for the chick demographic.
Happened actually, not to Kasparov of course, nor was it intentional. Dig through the Risks Forum, you'll find lots of anthropomorphized cases of computer failures. Some of them sound funny, then you get an explanation of why it happened and it makes sense.
Probably nothing very coherent
Probably not coherent to you, but that certainly doesn't mean it's less intelligent. For all you know it may be more so, and that it why it's incoherent.
an analog computer rather than a digital one.
Or any other device. Artificial Intelligence is not about making computers think. That's just as far as the kiddies understand it. Good answer though, saved me the trouble.
of how god works, and I just can't see how one would understand something that is bigger than all of us.
Easy, there is no god, religion works telling the weak how to live their lives.
I've always said "make a differential equation that models my soul, then tell me what my favourite colour is".
Nonsense. Prove you have a soul. Then one day maybe we will. Favorite color may be nothing more than a chemical reaction induced by physicial stimuli that makes you feel "good". It doesn't exist "somewhere else" as you imply.