This is largely true in the U.S. as well, but tell me, what do you expect deal makers to do once they retire from public life?
I imagine that making horrible decisions and managing not to get tarred and feathered is, in fact, a great line item for the ole C.V. come 'retirement' time.
I don't have an opinion on this subject, but there is a problem with your points.
When you are talking about a 100% proprietary stack you are talking about a massive development cost burden. While MS could attempt to target other platforms for their programs their costs will not scale favorably.
At first blush the author is simply making the mistake of going one step too far with the analysis (that MS must choose Open Source). The underlying economic reality of maintaining a 100% proprietary stack tied to a proprietary foundation seems to dictate that MS will need to do something, but not necessarily this.
My point is not to bash the organization, but I stand by my point.
NCAR could be a fantastic organization, and I has already seen the info that members of NCAR had participated in IPCC stuff, published public deicing info for aviators etc..
If anything, my point seems more valid in light of those things. However the organization has chosen to position itself, and however beneficial to the public, use of the word National implies a different level of accountability.
Again, thanks for the good work, but I feel there should be a clear distinction between organizations like this and those that answer directly to the GAO or equivalent at the end of the day.
This debate is so old and contentious that it feels trollish just to participate...
But anyhow, is it still ok to copy software for which an OSS equivalent exists?
Granted there remain legitimate reasons to use MS Office, but if these guys are just using pirated ware for mundane office tasks then fix the issue at the root.
Being good includes the ability to handle office politics successfully. Jobs that don't require office politics are incredibly rare.
+5... And being able to shield your teams from politics in highly politicized environments will make you indispensable... You will be the one who gets the transfer when the rest of the division is laid off.
If the American in question had directly targeted Bahrainian(?) citizens for the distribution of restricted content then yes, I would expect them to get arrested.
If the American in question did not target Bahrain for distribution, then there is no infraction.
I should add that as a result of the Elcomsoft case the government hinged its case against Carruthers on the use of telephones.
For a conviction of this sort the infringement must be proven 'willful.' Apparently dialing a country code is sufficient evidence whereas sending an email is not.
The case you are referencing is entirely different. Carruthers and Kaplan attempted to open and advertise direct routes for Americans to circumvent U.S. law. Further more, both made statements publicly that they were aware of the illegality of their actions.
Carruthers was hung out to dry by his own cronies and Kaplan muscled by his own as well because his past criminal activities were drawing heat to a fast growing online company.
Neither the Elcomsoft or the Google case share anything in common with the case you referenced.
Who knows what your prospective employer etc would see in your file?
Who knows if it would be true?
Oh wait.. there could be some sort of efficient appeals process to get improper notations removed from your file just as easy as fixing your credit history after getting ID jacked...
Boy, my grade school teachers didn't know how right they were when they threatened me with screwing up my 'permanent record.'
No, not every EULA is a wrap license. Perhaps you are thinking of software solely as something distributed by large corporations.
You do have me on one point, though. It had not even occurred to me that people still buy software off a shelf.
Don't you lurk through the support forums before buying a package? I research the licensing, relicensing, and EULA situations before considering products for purchase. And then I usually either download or order online - basically, if you are getting caught off guard by wrapped EULAs then something is wrong;)
On another note, the click wrapping i referred to above is apparently not the practice I wanted to reference. I cannot find the right term right now, but it is used with bundled software - the installation of one package is considered consent to install additional unspecified packages at the discretion of the distributor...
I thought EULAs were by and large found to be toothless since the customer must open the package to agree to it. By which point the transaction is complete sans EULA.
You are referring to 'shrink wrap licenses.' There is an online equivalent known as 'click wrap licenses.'
I haven't seen a recent example of either of these rather egregious license delivery mechanisms in quite a while.
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting.. So if the staff had been provided a reader they would have trusted any halfway legit looking card provided it read properly?
Sounds like it.
This is largely true in the U.S. as well, but tell me, what do you expect deal makers to do once they retire from public life?
I imagine that making horrible decisions and managing not to get tarred and feathered is, in fact, a great line item for the ole C.V. come 'retirement' time.
Wires aren't needed for power right now.
If you want any sort of acceptable bleed rate, though, I recommend sticking with the ole copper roots.
I don't have an opinion on this subject, but there is a problem with your points.
When you are talking about a 100% proprietary stack you are talking about a massive development cost burden. While MS could attempt to target other platforms for their programs their costs will not scale favorably.
At first blush the author is simply making the mistake of going one step too far with the analysis (that MS must choose Open Source). The underlying economic reality of maintaining a 100% proprietary stack tied to a proprietary foundation seems to dictate that MS will need to do something, but not necessarily this.
My point is not to bash the organization, but I stand by my point.
NCAR could be a fantastic organization, and I has already seen the info that members of NCAR had participated in IPCC stuff, published public deicing info for aviators etc..
If anything, my point seems more valid in light of those things. However the organization has chosen to position itself, and however beneficial to the public, use of the word National implies a different level of accountability.
Again, thanks for the good work, but I feel there should be a clear distinction between organizations like this and those that answer directly to the GAO or equivalent at the end of the day.
Plug the vents and they overheat?
I am always a little peeved when a private organization calls themselves the 'National' this or that.
They are free to do it, sure, it just seems like someone is angling for a little unwarranted validity when they choose names like that.
This debate is so old and contentious that it feels trollish just to participate...
But anyhow, is it still ok to copy software for which an OSS equivalent exists?
Granted there remain legitimate reasons to use MS Office, but if these guys are just using pirated ware for mundane office tasks then fix the issue at the root.
Companies that use lay-offs instead of firing usually have employee incentive issues to begin with, and definitely have issues afterwards.
From an employee point of view a firing is something that can be prevented, a lay-off is more like an act of god.
There are few things worse than a department full of fatalistic pessimists who are just biding the time until their turn to get laid-off comes around.
Being good includes the ability to handle office politics successfully. Jobs that don't require office politics are incredibly rare.
+5... And being able to shield your teams from politics in highly politicized environments will make you indispensable... You will be the one who gets the transfer when the rest of the division is laid off.
Well, we can just build a society where only 10% or so have any real hope of success or stability, what could possibly go wrong?
Terrorists would fly planes into our buildings?
C'mon, Taco, leave him alone.
That is interesting, but I was more referring to the fact that MS will be distributing this product.
Most users will never know that Hotmail and Apache are running on Linux.
Thanks for the info, though ;)
Just asking.
Huh, Well ... Uhm... there's something you should know about santa claus. You may want to sit down for this one.
Yeah, yeah... My parents tried this one on me. Don't fall for it user 1410247, there is a hole in the crotch of Santa's suit.
If the American in question had directly targeted Bahrainian(?) citizens for the distribution of restricted content then yes, I would expect them to get arrested.
If the American in question did not target Bahrain for distribution, then there is no infraction.
That is the difference between these cases.
I should add that as a result of the Elcomsoft case the government hinged its case against Carruthers on the use of telephones.
For a conviction of this sort the infringement must be proven 'willful.' Apparently dialing a country code is sufficient evidence whereas sending an email is not.
The case you are referencing is entirely different. Carruthers and Kaplan attempted to open and advertise direct routes for Americans to circumvent U.S. law. Further more, both made statements publicly that they were aware of the illegality of their actions.
Carruthers was hung out to dry by his own cronies and Kaplan muscled by his own as well because his past criminal activities were drawing heat to a fast growing online company.
Neither the Elcomsoft or the Google case share anything in common with the case you referenced.
I wouldn't call it stupidity. Google has a martyr now.
That case set a positive precedent. Dmitri and Elcomsoft were exonerated.
If anything it will be more difficult for this type of thing to be tried in the U.S. because of that case.
If obscurity is not a chief objective you could latinize the server's functions. Mailicus, Proxius, Validicus etc..
Add in some major/minor modifiers and you are in business.
Who knows what your prospective employer etc would see in your file?
Who knows if it would be true?
Oh wait.. there could be some sort of efficient appeals process to get improper notations removed from your file just as easy as fixing your credit history after getting ID jacked...
Boy, my grade school teachers didn't know how right they were when they threatened me with screwing up my 'permanent record.'
No, not every EULA is a wrap license. Perhaps you are thinking of software solely as something distributed by large corporations.
You do have me on one point, though. It had not even occurred to me that people still buy software off a shelf.
Don't you lurk through the support forums before buying a package? I research the licensing, relicensing, and EULA situations before considering products for purchase. And then I usually either download or order online - basically, if you are getting caught off guard by wrapped EULAs then something is wrong ;)
On another note, the click wrapping i referred to above is apparently not the practice I wanted to reference. I cannot find the right term right now, but it is used with bundled software - the installation of one package is considered consent to install additional unspecified packages at the discretion of the distributor...
I thought EULAs were by and large found to be toothless since the customer must open the package to agree to it. By which point the transaction is complete sans EULA.
You are referring to 'shrink wrap licenses.' There is an online equivalent known as 'click wrap licenses.'
I haven't seen a recent example of either of these rather egregious license delivery mechanisms in quite a while.
Whatever happened to the 'desktop replacement' designation for mobile but not lightweight platforms?
This reminds me of the first laptop I ever owned:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_SX-64.