Unfortunately their statement is very misleading considering how VP8 and H.264 and other MPEG codecs use basically the same transform so their statements of bias against VP8 ring untrue. One of the professors who was part of doing this test even confirmed that the VP8 developers statement was untrue and misleading.
That will effectively force people to upgrade to Comcast TV or Comcast Internet" in order to get decent television.
It can't force anyone to do anything. Watching TV is not a necessity of life and thus there is nothing forcing you to continue buying it other than one's own choice to do so.
Because making something illegal means that no one ever does that act, right? Secondly, making fraud illegal is just something to prevent people from trying to commit these con jobs. It has absolutely no bearing on the fact that people will still fall for them.
It follows that more savvy and knowledgable users are less likely to fall for social engineering attempts. Ignorance is the social engineers' very best friend.
So then where was that savvy and knowledge when people were installing malware ridden screensavers on their Ubuntu boxes? Or where were all those eyes on the source when UnrealIRCD had a trojan put into the Linux version without anyone knowing for a year? You can crow all you want about only Windows users falling for this and all about how open source leads to this not happening but there are counterexamples to show this just isn't true.
I believe what they meant by that comment is that there is nothing regulators can do to stop people for falling for social engineering scams. In what way do you presume them to be able to do so?
Pay no heed to the AC. Apparently Tom Cruise's handlers were away for a few minutes so he decided to post his ramblings on Slashdot. If only you too paid thousands of dollars to the Church of Scientology you would know the truth as well.
Renowned internet troll and FOSS FUDster Roy Schestowitz. His blog used be called BoycottNovell but he renamed it in a lame attempt to get people to forget that.
Why is this only now unacceptable? IEEE has never been against software patents. In fact they brag about the fact that "IEEE leads the pack as the top scientific-technical source of patents – 32% of all patent citations, versus just 10% for the number-two organization, ACM."
somehow i cant imagine donald, with all the work hes put into latex and the public opinions hes made related to open source and copyright law, will take this laying down.
1) Donald Knuth doesn't work on LaTeX. He works on TeX. 2) The IEEE has never been against software patents. So why do you suddenly think this statement is going to be some sort of tipping point?
Your canceling your membership based on a FUD story by Roy Schestowitz? You do realize that IEEE hasn't had a problem with software patents for pretty much forever, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately their statement is very misleading considering how VP8 and H.264 and other MPEG codecs use basically the same transform so their statements of bias against VP8 ring untrue. One of the professors who was part of doing this test even confirmed that the VP8 developers statement was untrue and misleading.
That will effectively force people to upgrade to Comcast TV or Comcast Internet" in order to get decent television.
It can't force anyone to do anything. Watching TV is not a necessity of life and thus there is nothing forcing you to continue buying it other than one's own choice to do so.
Because making something illegal means that no one ever does that act, right? Secondly, making fraud illegal is just something to prevent people from trying to commit these con jobs. It has absolutely no bearing on the fact that people will still fall for them.
It follows that more savvy and knowledgable users are less likely to fall for social engineering attempts. Ignorance is the social engineers' very best friend.
So then where was that savvy and knowledge when people were installing malware ridden screensavers on their Ubuntu boxes? Or where were all those eyes on the source when UnrealIRCD had a trojan put into the Linux version without anyone knowing for a year? You can crow all you want about only Windows users falling for this and all about how open source leads to this not happening but there are counterexamples to show this just isn't true.
That has nothing to do with Linux being open source or not. Linux could be closed source and a windows virus or malware won't run on it.
I believe what they meant by that comment is that there is nothing regulators can do to stop people for falling for social engineering scams. In what way do you presume them to be able to do so?
How exactly does open source prevent social engineering scams?
Why do you need something like that when you can just buy some plastic compartments?
Pay no heed to the AC. Apparently Tom Cruise's handlers were away for a few minutes so he decided to post his ramblings on Slashdot. If only you too paid thousands of dollars to the Church of Scientology you would know the truth as well.
Basically your point is that nobody can have an opinion on this if they didn't have one a year ago, and my contention is that you can cram it.
No, that's not my point at all. Lovely strawman though.
Who writes that crap blog?
Renowned internet troll and FOSS FUDster Roy Schestowitz. His blog used be called BoycottNovell but he renamed it in a lame attempt to get people to forget that.
I haven't seen one fact from you, although maybe I missed it.
Yeah, cause posting things from IEEE themselves on their stance to software patents clearly aren't facts.
What I have seen is you replying to three or four posts, exclaiming that the news isn't news, and that the poster should just not have bothered.
It isn't news. IEEE's stance on software patents is pretty well-known by anyone who has had any significant experience with them.
You even copied and pasted the same thing you wrote earlier into a new comment at least once.
No, I haven't. I posted the same link to IEEE twice, but that's not the same thing.
Please quit spamming this forum about this not being news.
So pointing out facts to counter Roy's FUD is now spamming? Really?
and to elaborate, not being against software patents and being for software patents are two very different things.
Since when has IEEE not been for software patents? They even brag about how they get cited in more patents than ACM.
but the press release cited is real and states IEEE-USA is pleased that software patents have been upheld.
And that's news, how? IEEE has never been against software patents.
Why is this only now unacceptable? IEEE has never been against software patents. In fact they brag about the fact that "IEEE leads the pack as the top scientific-technical source of patents – 32% of all patent citations, versus just 10% for the number-two organization, ACM."
somehow i cant imagine donald, with all the work hes put into latex and the public opinions hes made related to open source and copyright law, will take this laying down.
1) Donald Knuth doesn't work on LaTeX. He works on TeX.
2) The IEEE has never been against software patents. So why do you suddenly think this statement is going to be some sort of tipping point?
Your canceling your membership based on a FUD story by Roy Schestowitz? You do realize that IEEE hasn't had a problem with software patents for pretty much forever, right?
Do people still take Roy seriously? Have people really fallen for his lame rebranding of his site?
As an aside this was amusing quote:
The disparity between these views of Knuth (creator of LaTeX, which is Free software)
Sorry, buddy, but Knuth created TeX. LaTeX was created by Leslie Lamport.
Because Packt Publishing has some long and storied history on Slashdot?
This is Slashdot. We don't read anything.
No, the point is that no where in the review does it even have one sentence telling anyone what Plone is.
Okay, but what the fuck is Plone?
Cisco doesn't have a history of making consumer grade products.
Linksys.
Yes, I wish I could have a 3 inch cock and a junker car. Where do I sign up?!?!?!