Can anyone think of an imaginative way to break this part of the program license?
* This software is not designed or intended for use in on-line control of
* aircraft, air traffic, aircraft navigation or aircraft communications; or in
* the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear
* facility. Licensee represents and warrants that it will not use or
* redistribute the Software for such purposes.
Their not worried about the aircraft shooting each other, but shooting friednly forces on the ground. I doubt a remote controll plane would be any good at air-to-air combat anyway, for one thing it couldnt be that hard to fool their sensors.
Thats why this crack was different, they were there for months and had use of normal accounts, they could have made any source changes that the victim users could have.
OK, so whats wrong with the statement that a virus or bug could have been included in versions of Windows shipping now? And why the [sic], have I been spelling bug wrong all these years?
It is quite possible they planted a bug, virus, or more likely a backdoor in some Microsoft software, though since the scare Microsoft say they've ruled this out. Myself... I dont think they could know enough yet to rule anything out.
Nothings as simple as just find the changes. Whoever broke in had access to valid, active accounts, they would have no problems making changes to source code through the normal methods. Some poor sods are going to have to look through every source change for the last three months to find something 'suspicious'.
I'm planning to upgrade soon. I was going to go AMD. I thought they would be hoping to catch the techy market => overclocking, and upgrades on the same motherboard, maybe other stuf I hadn't thought of. Obviously they decided theres more money to be made without this, so I dont see much of an advantage over Intel. When I have such a bad choice of motherboards to go with a new AMD my choice is pretty much made. Anyway I was feeling a bit guilty not buying Intel, they're one of the big local employers about here.
How can you try to measure key-press responses exact to milli-seconds when it taks a lot longer than that to press a key? Sure you could wire up some sort of flat, fast button, but then why run it through the keyboard port?
Another issue is that all tty/user input tasks seem to be under the control of the windowing system. I kind of like booting in textmode.. Plus, if all that stuff is handled by the windowing system, is the OS even capable of handling, say, a telnet daemon? Hate to sound stupid, but ya gotta wonder..
I guess it works like the Amiga used to (that names getting a few too many mentions lately). As far as I now its only i386 type computers that boot into textmode, so that might be something to get away from. As for telnet daemons I guess it would use an invisible window, maybe even all the daemons share one window. On second thoughts they wouldnt, that would defeat the point of seperate namespaces.
While your talking about browsers on FreeBSD, can anyone else get Netscape4.72 with FreeBSD3.4 working on Slashdot.. it consistently crashes with me, works fine on linux though.
I think its most likely that anyone who applies will get a cheque returned fro Amiga Inc in a couple of weeks. I mean who wants their bank manager to know they're an Amiga developer when they're not paying loans.
Seems to be quite a cheek actually, I dont know what they take Amiga fans for but I think many of them moved towards open source, they definitely dont want to pay $90 for the privilege of writing for a platform that they supposedly already worked on ten years ago (supposedly cos the only thing connecting this with my Amiga600 is the trademark). What is the new Amiga supposed to be anyway.. an OS for Java? Competiton for Java.
What I took from it is "The main part of the pulse exits the far side of the chamber even before the main part of the pulse enters the near side.." however, the leading edge of the pulse has reached the near side.
Send the wave through the device which triggers a wave to come back from the other side. The outgoing wave appears to reach the other side before it reaches this side, so the incoming wave should return even earlier again.
Im sure there is some theoretical readon why this is impossible, or doesnt matter. Im not interested in how its impossible in practice.
This sort of article (the NYTimes one, not the slashdot one) drives me mad. I have questions about copyright in many cases (software, music) but at least here some sort of protection of the creators rights is needed. Im not too happy about genetic engineering, but I dont think trying to stop it because it can be used for bad as well as good makes sense. But here we have the worst possible use of genetic engineering not being controlled, but in fact being protected by law.
Read the article, it is totally inconsistant. It starts off saying that new resistant food crops will allow everyone in the third world to have food. The main problem in the third world is not droughts and famine, these are just the worst case disasters. The problem is food is farmers are forced to mainly grow food for export (cash crops) as opposed to local varieties. Availability of new varieties of food wont change this. OK this paragraphs a bit muddled, but look it up if you want a more thorough explanation.
What strikes me is that the paper is trying to sell genetic engineering by big multinationals as a good thing, and give the example of these people working with patents and with these companies as an example. Later in the article it says how these organisations can give the reproducing organisms for use in the third world, and the multinationals can sell crops that wont reproduce in the developed world. First off why should I believe that will happen?
Lowest powered embedded chips I could find on Intels site used.112 watts, or 34mA at 3.3v, (eg SB80L186EA-13) so unless someone can convince me that potatoes are more powerful than they seem... I guess its a hoax.
Lots in it I disagree with (e.g implicit Commy bashing), lots in it I agree with (gun control), but these are just side issues. His conclusions seem sensible but his arguments dont. He seems to have missed the point of free software, and gets all of his information on it from the community's two most notorious figures. Stallmans habit of turning on anyone who does not support his world view is almost as embarrasing as Raymond's insistence on bringing guns into every discussion no matter how unrelated (not literally of course).
First off he doesnt seem to get that not everyone here agrees that selling software is wrong. He claims Eric Raymond contradicts himself when he says he wants to get rich, no, he just contradicts Stallman.
The GNU and FSF view is that it is OK to sell anything except software. Well Im not sure what the party line is, but like some others on slashdot I think it is OK to sell anything, but not in a situation of total control, where you can charge an arbitrarily high cost with a legally guaranteed monopoly. This applies equally to music, books and cars. It isnt an issue with cars since they do cost a significant amount to make, it is still a big issue with music, books as well as software.
The gradual imposition of a copyright.. was a major moral correction, re-establishing the rights of the creators. The new idea was that the "software".. had a value, not just the "hardware"
If this is what copyright is for, it no longer works. It is no longer the software writer that holds the copyright, but their employer. Many companies make all employers sign over ownership of all the ideas they have while under employment, even if not related to their own job.
The major point the writer makes (that some free-software people are nuts, and need to live in the real world) is fine. One of the tings that most annoyed me about the article is that it seems to treat people as part of the property of their employers. They need to improve their marketability, and worst of all, they should say how they were paid while working on any open source project as he seems to ask in this paragraph. Demand (in the spirit of faithful advertising) that the economic origin of "free" software be clearly stated, and that the products be classified as one of "donated", "taxpayer-funded" and the other categories described in this article.
Have the attacks stopped, or is the setup just better able to cope now? It sounds like there is always a background level of ddos going on, it just affected you because of the change in system?
Id just like to point out that this perfectly follows the formula for a slashdot rebuttal. First an almost completely irrelevant but eyecatching paragraph (note use of the word nuke). Then a fairly sensible and coherent response to the post being replied to. Finally a personal attack on the original writer, occasionally related to the points under discussion. Is there another post-comment form somewhere that I havent been told about?
I wasnt saying workers at Microsoft are not individuals. In fact this was one of the things I was replying about, that to expect the employees to work against their employers you must look at them as individuals. As individuals most Microsoft employees have nothing to do with Microsofts bullying tactics, and the only power they have over company policy is to leave and find another company, which Im sure some people will do.
The other thing was that I dont see Microsoft as "evil", I just see them as "the enemy". You seem to be comparing Microsoft executives to murderers, or have I taken that paragraph wrongly? Companies like Microsoft do whatever they can get away with to make money because that is their only measure of success. Its not that their brainwashed into acting that way, thats how they choose to act. Thats how the corporate environment works, its my hope that we can replace it with a more open and flexible environment... (To read more from this paragraph pleas look up Utopia somewhere)
Oh and Im not a sheep dog, (at first I thought you said sheep which I found much more offensive) cos Im not an executive, and so dont make these sort of decisions. I dont even work yet, but I plan to work somewhere I can comfortably take ethical decisions.
Ok, so your not saying MS is the nazi party, but you still imply it is an evil organization. Its not, its just a commercial one. By being the company with the most power in its market, it has no choice but to exercise that power, its up to others (government and competitors commercial or not) to control how they use it. As far as I remember the big company has always been the evil one, and the underdog has always been the saviour. For a current example look at AMD and Intel. Now that AMD has the upper hand in the market they have no problem changing around specs so Intel chips wont work with their motherboards. It remains to be seen if the same happens when Linux overtakes Windows. I think it might, and because there are so many distributions it might turn out to be much more painful.
Second, by saying everyone in Microsoft has responsibility for you are treating Microsoft as an organisation of individuals, rather than one evil whole.
And if anyone from Microsoft is reading Im sure you can work this much out yourself, I wouldnt start trying to support Slashdot from inside unless you have a good idea where your next job could come from. Betraying your own company could make it difficult to get a job anywhere in the industry, even if it is Microsoft you're betraying.
Slashdot Mirror
Except of course that random access isnt supported - DVD being a linear device type thing with seek times like any other. Read/write is another thing.
Can anyone think of an imaginative way to break this part of the program license?
* This software is not designed or intended for use in on-line control of* aircraft, air traffic, aircraft navigation or aircraft communications; or in
* the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear
* facility. Licensee represents and warrants that it will not use or
* redistribute the Software for such purposes.
Still, it could have been worse, they might have said vi is un-american.
So few characters where? Do you mean the size of the program?!?
Their not worried about the aircraft shooting each other, but shooting friednly forces on the ground. I doubt a remote controll plane would be any good at air-to-air combat anyway, for one thing it couldnt be that hard to fool their sensors.
Havok have lots of physic simulation demos - including one of cloth. The dancers are pre-programmed but the cloths movement happens in real time.
Thats why this crack was different, they were there for months and had use of normal accounts, they could have made any source changes that the victim users could have.
OK, so whats wrong with the statement that a virus or bug could have been included in versions of Windows shipping now? And why the [sic], have I been spelling bug wrong all these years? It is quite possible they planted a bug, virus, or more likely a backdoor in some Microsoft software, though since the scare Microsoft say they've ruled this out. Myself... I dont think they could know enough yet to rule anything out.
Nothings as simple as just find the changes. Whoever broke in had access to valid, active accounts, they would have no problems making changes to source code through the normal methods. Some poor sods are going to have to look through every source change for the last three months to find something 'suspicious'.
I'm planning to upgrade soon. I was going to go AMD. I thought they would be hoping to catch the techy market => overclocking, and upgrades on the same motherboard, maybe other stuf I hadn't thought of. Obviously they decided theres more money to be made without this, so I dont see much of an advantage over Intel. When I have such a bad choice of motherboards to go with a new AMD my choice is pretty much made. Anyway I was feeling a bit guilty not buying Intel, they're one of the big local employers about here.
How can you try to measure key-press responses exact to milli-seconds when it taks a lot longer than that to press a key? Sure you could wire up some sort of flat, fast button, but then why run it through the keyboard port?
I thought the blocks had to be checked more than once anyway, to avoid tampering and errors.
I guess it works like the Amiga used to (that names getting a few too many mentions lately). As far as I now its only i386 type computers that boot into textmode, so that might be something to get away from. As for telnet daemons I guess it would use an invisible window, maybe even all the daemons share one window. On second thoughts they wouldnt, that would defeat the point of seperate namespaces.
While your talking about browsers on FreeBSD, can anyone else get Netscape4.72 with FreeBSD3.4 working on Slashdot.. it consistently crashes with me, works fine on linux though.
Seems to be quite a cheek actually, I dont know what they take Amiga fans for but I think many of them moved towards open source, they definitely dont want to pay $90 for the privilege of writing for a platform that they supposedly already worked on ten years ago (supposedly cos the only thing connecting this with my Amiga600 is the trademark). What is the new Amiga supposed to be anyway.. an OS for Java? Competiton for Java.
Whats that on the banner page of the WIPO website? It looks like arms in handcuffs or something... thats hardly the signal they want to give out.
"The main part of the pulse exits the far side of the chamber even before the main part of the pulse enters the near side.." however, the leading edge of the pulse has reached the near side.
Im sure there is some theoretical readon why this is impossible, or doesnt matter. Im not interested in how its impossible in practice.
Read the article, it is totally inconsistant. It starts off saying that new resistant food crops will allow everyone in the third world to have food. The main problem in the third world is not droughts and famine, these are just the worst case disasters. The problem is food is farmers are forced to mainly grow food for export (cash crops) as opposed to local varieties. Availability of new varieties of food wont change this. OK this paragraphs a bit muddled, but look it up if you want a more thorough explanation.
What strikes me is that the paper is trying to sell genetic engineering by big multinationals as a good thing, and give the example of these people working with patents and with these companies as an example. Later in the article it says how these organisations can give the reproducing organisms for use in the third world, and the multinationals can sell crops that wont reproduce in the developed world. First off why should I believe that will happen?
Lowest powered embedded chips I could find on Intels site used .112 watts, or 34mA at 3.3v, (eg SB80L186EA-13) so unless someone can convince me that potatoes are more powerful than they seem... I guess its a hoax.
Lots in it I disagree with (e.g implicit Commy bashing), lots in it I agree with (gun control), but these are just side issues. His conclusions seem sensible but his arguments dont. He seems to have missed the point of free software, and gets all of his information on it from the community's two most notorious figures. Stallmans habit of turning on anyone who does not support his world view is almost as embarrasing as Raymond's insistence on bringing guns into every discussion no matter how unrelated (not literally of course).
First off he doesnt seem to get that not everyone here agrees that selling software is wrong. He claims Eric Raymond contradicts himself when he says he wants to get rich, no, he just contradicts Stallman.
The GNU and FSF view is that it is OK to sell anything except software.
Well Im not sure what the party line is, but like some others on slashdot I think it is OK to sell anything, but not in a situation of total control, where you can charge an arbitrarily high cost with a legally guaranteed monopoly. This applies equally to music, books and cars. It isnt an issue with cars since they do cost a significant amount to make, it is still a big issue with music, books as well as software.
The gradual imposition of a copyright .. was a major moral correction, re-establishing the rights of the creators. The new idea was that the "software" .. had a value, not just the "hardware"
If this is what copyright is for, it no longer works. It is no longer the software writer that holds the copyright, but their employer. Many companies make all employers sign over ownership of all the ideas they have while under employment, even if not related to their own job.
The major point the writer makes (that some free-software people are nuts, and need to live in the real world) is fine. One of the tings that most annoyed me about the article is that it seems to treat people as part of the property of their employers. They need to improve their marketability, and worst of all, they should say how they were paid while working on any open source project as he seems to ask in this paragraph.
Demand (in the spirit of faithful advertising) that the economic origin of "free" software be clearly stated, and that the products be classified as one of "donated", "taxpayer-funded" and the other categories described in this article.
---
Have the attacks stopped, or is the setup just better able to cope now? It sounds like there is always a background level of ddos going on, it just affected you because of the change in system?
I wasnt saying workers at Microsoft are not individuals. In fact this was one of the things I was replying about, that to expect the employees to work against their employers you must look at them as individuals. As individuals most Microsoft employees have nothing to do with Microsofts bullying tactics, and the only power they have over company policy is to leave and find another company, which Im sure some people will do.
The other thing was that I dont see Microsoft as "evil", I just see them as "the enemy". You seem to be comparing Microsoft executives to murderers, or have I taken that paragraph wrongly? Companies like Microsoft do whatever they can get away with to make money because that is their only measure of success. Its not that their brainwashed into acting that way, thats how they choose to act. Thats how the corporate environment works, its my hope that we can replace it with a more open and flexible environment... (To read more from this paragraph pleas look up Utopia somewhere)
Oh and Im not a sheep dog, (at first I thought you said sheep which I found much more offensive) cos Im not an executive, and so dont make these sort of decisions. I dont even work yet, but I plan to work somewhere I can comfortably take ethical decisions.
Second, by saying everyone in Microsoft has responsibility for you are treating Microsoft as an organisation of individuals, rather than one evil whole.
And if anyone from Microsoft is reading Im sure you can work this much out yourself, I wouldnt start trying to support Slashdot from inside unless you have a good idea where your next job could come from. Betraying your own company could make it difficult to get a job anywhere in the industry, even if it is Microsoft you're betraying.