But at the same time it's not so easy to pass a serialized type from one system to another without rolling your own solution. Int and String will have no problem but what happens when you try to pass a custom collection type that derives from a hashtable in.net to a j2ee system.
I agree with what he said about it not being spec'd out but I also agree with you in saying it should be left out of the SOAP specs. I think that 3rd party software similiar to Borland's Janeva will come into play when interoperating between two different systems. But a few more complex types in SOAP would be nice.
Wouldn't this mean that other's distributing Linux are also in violation?
Snip from the GPL (emphasis added): 7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
The wording is typical legalese, vague and foreign to my human mind. But since there is a dispute over the ownership on the source and potential "trade secrets" would linux distributors be in violation ONLY if they have conditions imposed on them or would the mere allegation of such conditions warrant the ending of distributing Linux under the GPL?
All I know is this is a serious issue for Linux and just the accusations of source theft will cause havoc. IMO that is why SCO is remaining so vague about the accusations and not quick to point out the lines of supposed theft. They really have no reason not to release the specific code to the public because it supposedly already has been released in Linux. So what's the problem? If the suspected lines of code are available to the public then why must the recipients of the evidence sign NDAs?
But they keyword is fraudulent. I wouldn't go trying to make a US penny into a US dime or a Euro 20 into a Euro 100.
If you want to destroy your money I will do it for you! I will destroy it using my patented buy shiny-things technique. I have single handidly managed to destroy all of my money without any problems and even went so far as to destroy other's money. My parent's, my spouse, my kid's future...
You call me a kid based on the fact that I pay tuition and rent, and play video games.
No I called you a kid because you said you are 22. I think that qualifies as as still a kid. I was still a kid at 22. Not generalizing, just going on your statement. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way, sorry about that.
I happen to think that believing you're being monitored every second of your life, when it's not actually happening, is flat out idiotic
I don't believe that. In fact I never said that at all. Although I know the government has the power I doubt I warrant close survellience;-)
I'm not sure what the point is in sitting around and gnashing your teeth about it all, let me know if you find out, though
I agree. But you can say something to your local and state representatives. Make your voice heard on the matter if you care enough about it. My point was though that I think there is a change of the type of economy and society we have now compared to 15-20 years ago. We seem to be more consumer based and the idea of ownership has been replaced with services and rentals. Fortunately it's not the end of the world and one can still own land, homes, vehicles, etc.. But the economy seems to be shifting to a service economy where we don't actually produce or own anything, just consume. And It disturbs me so I said something.
Re:There are no words speakable
on
The Searchable Life
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
It's kind of funny because his talk of paying rent, gas, food, and tuition really just affirms your assertion that one no longer owns anything. I have long had a beef with the progession from a ownership based society (the American dream of owning a house and a chicken in every pot) to a disposable service based society. Even though ownership of land and property can be usurped by the government (hence there really is no ownership beyond what they allow) the idea of the traditional American dream has been replaced with that of a consumer driven economy and a dumbed down society where your life is rented from blockbuster and true American grit has taken a back seat to couch-ass complacency.
I'd like to contradict what the kid said as for America not needing you. We do need you. We need people just like you in America to continue to think freely and express their opinions, however radical. That is what being American is all about. So I say stay and fight in your own way, only run when your actual _life_ is on the line. That's what I intend to do.
So when they fuck up and mis-identify me as a terrorist and declare me an enemy combatant because I used to post to UseNet about drug use, never mind that I haven't touched the stuff in years, and take away my rights to challenge them in court, how exactly am I going to get any kind of "check" or "balance"?
This will never happen. The government doesn't make mistakes.
The Pentagon is not free from oversight by Congress. That is exactly why they are having to explain to Congress about why they need the TIA. Hopefully they will see the room for abuse and put very strict checks on who can do what and where. Unfortunately they have us all running from real life boogey men and Jane and Joe American are willing to sacrifice their personal privacy and freedom if it means they might get to live just one more second longer and buy one more shiny bubble.
Not much one can do except sit back and watch. I'd do something about it but I'm fat and lazy. Besides I gotta go buy the latest SUV. Don't worry though I'll post a bitch about it to my blog using my latest $500 cell-phone while slurping on a frosted Quadaccino.
Even if our Bayesian filters win the arms race against the spammers, in terms of quantity as well as quality of communications, email has been a disaster.
Using this same logic you could conclude that snail mail (normal postal mail) is a failure. But yet it continues to thrive in various forms. Just because it doesn't meet utopian standards doesn't mean it's a failure.
Re:I hate math...
on
Making Change
·
· Score: 4, Funny
The only problem with our current monetary system is that inflation has made pennies freakin worthless.
We have evidence that portions of UNIX System V software code have been copied into Linux and that additional other portions of UNIX System V software code have been modified and copied into Linux, seemingly for the purposes of obfuscating their original source.
I have released Open Source software into the wild and suspected that some companies where using my code but I came upon one stumbling block in my argument - it had been modified. Unless you can prove within a reasonable doubt (you see your sig in the header, etc) that the work was stolen then how do you go about this? How do you prove it was your code that has been modified? Sounds like bullshit to me. The other argument may be valid but this is a stretch IMO.
The eaxmple you cite would be an obvious flaw in the system. There are only so many possible bass lines that can be produced and eventually in the current sytem this is possible. But that example is not the same situation as Dr. Dre encountered. He knew the bass line was from a certain song and actually sought a "musicologist" to determine whether he could use it or not. He knew he was walking a thin line and simply should have contacted the copyright owner.
But yes, the example you give would spotlight an obvious flaw in the system if it occured.
I agree, this is an obvious derivative work. When you create a derivative work the very least you should do is contact the copyright holder and ask their permission or optionally you should give them credit for the work and display their copyright. If not then people will asume that you created the work and the originator of the material gets nothing.
Let me give you two instances of my run in with derivative works:
1. I added a regex to my open source email library that would check the validity of an email address. I found one written by Jeffrey E. F. Friedl (Mastering Regular Expressions; O'reilly) and wanted to port this to the language I used. Even though the differences where drastic because of the programming language semantics it was still a derivative works in the eyes of the law (the regex itself was the derivative, not the code to implement it). So I sent Mr. Friedl and email and he granted me permission. Problem avoided.
2. A company that shall remain nameless takes the same LGPL email library I wrote mentioned above and released it as a commercial component without distributing the source in it's "demo version" and never once showing it's customers my copyright to that library. I would have had no problem if the company simply obeyed the GPL license and properly displayed my copyright and included the source. There were other violations but these where the main ones. This is a case of a derivative work and the company violated my copyright. Taking someone elses work and putting your name on it is stealing, plain and simple.
Now I'm gonna step down off the soap box but my point is this - if you create a derivative work make sure you are very careful to follow the rules or you'll end up with your ass in a sling like Dr. Dre and those mentioned above.
If it's not hard then why do so many fail? I'm sure you'll chalk it up to idiocy but many intelligent business owners have screwed the pooch and been cast aside. How would you prove that it is easy? I can easily provide evidence to the contrary, can you also do the same for your argument?
My point was TCO is a valid formula for calculating total cost but apparently this fell on deaf ears. When I say the term TCO others in busines know what I am refering to. It's merely a way to communicate an idea to others, similiar to the way us techies communicate using acronyms. I'm sorry you feel so strongly about that particular acronym and other business acronyms but they do serve a purpose. Just because you worked at a large company that made wrong decisions does not mean an acronym loses meaning or value in it's communication of an IDEA. I am not saying the same idea can't be communicated differently but TCO has been around for quite a while and still serves a purpose.
But if you don't want to I'm not gonna put a gun to your head. Don't like it? Don't use it. But judging someone because they used a term and labeling them a "bitch" is a bit childish. Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder. I could be wrong but that's just what I infer from your writing.
Labor costs are not the only cost covered in the TLA you so quickly dismiss. Time spent rebooting the server? That time while the server is down instead of making money for the company costs money. Who rebooted the server? You did, you are payed. That costs money. Did this server hardware cost money? Add that to your TCO. Does the electricity it uses everyday have a cost? Add that to the TCO. TCO must include ALL identifiable costs - one-time fixed costs, capital expenses, and recurring costs need to be factored in. Nothing is free.
My point - there are many more factors regarding Total Cost of Ownership and young support jockeys need to get with the program. This isn't some geekfest where we all trade D&D stories while chewing on the latest OSS install. It's called business and time costs money. You don't like that? Find another way to pay the rent.
Personally when I got into this industry I also swiped aside everything management spouted as just "BS". Then I grew up and realized that a lot is riding on things we take for granted. You might think it's easy to run a business but it's not. _Everything_ affects the bottom line and has associated risks and there is no way around that. Identifying and quantifying that risk is part of the process of making an informed decision. Would you rather they just shot from the hip and hope to hit the target?
You better learn these acronyms and use them to your advantage if you ever want to play with the big boys. OSS solutions CAN compete with proprietary solutions in the TCO arena. But who is going to get them into the arena? Learn the lingo and play hard ball, or go whine in the corner about how everyone else is a bitch like you do now.
And to add: If one uses Interop within.Net you expose yourself to the same problems inherit in COM, with buffer overflows being the most dangerous. Interop code is run as "unsafe", meaning memory allocation and deallocation is up to the developer. So while you can write DirectX applications in.Net, the memory handling/garbage collection features of the CLR are not available when Interoping with COM code. You must clean up after yourself. Nothing new for game developers but it must be considered.
But I suspect.Net interop with DirectX will allows those of us that aren't C++ gurus to use a 3D interface. I think those coming from a Java background will be pleased at how quickly they can get up to speed with C#/.Net and DirectX9.
They have an automatic algorithm to determine whether you are cheating. Although it is very complex let me explain - if you are winning you must be cheating.
Given the probability of winning (0) one can then plug this number into our algorithm where W = you:
P(A|B) = [P(B|A) x P(A)] / P(B) W = Negative Ghostrider Loser = You
Slashdot Mirror
You laugh but I saw Star Wars: Episode II at an IMAX theatre. I got three words for you - twenty foot nipples.
I knew that but I couldn't help it. I can't stop trolling for karma!
Only if conditions are imposed that would break the license would you be in violation.
But at the same time it's not so easy to pass a serialized type from one system to another without rolling your own solution. Int and String will have no problem but what happens when you try to pass a custom collection type that derives from a hashtable in .net to a j2ee system.
I agree with what he said about it not being spec'd out but I also agree with you in saying it should be left out of the SOAP specs. I think that 3rd party software similiar to Borland's Janeva will come into play when interoperating between two different systems. But a few more complex types in SOAP would be nice.
Wouldn't this mean that other's distributing Linux are also in violation?
Snip from the GPL (emphasis added):
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
The wording is typical legalese, vague and foreign to my human mind. But since there is a dispute over the ownership on the source and potential "trade secrets" would linux distributors be in violation ONLY if they have conditions imposed on them or would the mere allegation of such conditions warrant the ending of distributing Linux under the GPL?
All I know is this is a serious issue for Linux and just the accusations of source theft will cause havoc. IMO that is why SCO is remaining so vague about the accusations and not quick to point out the lines of supposed theft. They really have no reason not to release the specific code to the public because it supposedly already has been released in Linux. So what's the problem? If the suspected lines of code are available to the public then why must the recipients of the evidence sign NDAs?
Bullshit and lawyers, the American way.
Informative yes. But also incorrect.
But they keyword is fraudulent. I wouldn't go trying to make a US penny into a US dime or a Euro 20 into a Euro 100.
If you want to destroy your money I will do it for you! I will destroy it using my patented buy shiny-things technique. I have single handidly managed to destroy all of my money without any problems and even went so far as to destroy other's money. My parent's, my spouse, my kid's future...
You call me a kid based on the fact that I pay tuition and rent, and play video games.
;-)
No I called you a kid because you said you are 22. I think that qualifies as as still a kid. I was still a kid at 22. Not generalizing, just going on your statement. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way, sorry about that.
I happen to think that believing you're being monitored every second of your life, when it's not actually happening, is flat out idiotic
I don't believe that. In fact I never said that at all. Although I know the government has the power I doubt I warrant close survellience
I'm not sure what the point is in sitting around and gnashing your teeth about it all, let me know if you find out, though
I agree. But you can say something to your local and state representatives. Make your voice heard on the matter if you care enough about it. My point was though that I think there is a change of the type of economy and society we have now compared to 15-20 years ago. We seem to be more consumer based and the idea of ownership has been replaced with services and rentals. Fortunately it's not the end of the world and one can still own land, homes, vehicles, etc.. But the economy seems to be shifting to a service economy where we don't actually produce or own anything, just consume. And It disturbs me so I said something.
It's kind of funny because his talk of paying rent, gas, food, and tuition really just affirms your assertion that one no longer owns anything. I have long had a beef with the progession from a ownership based society (the American dream of owning a house and a chicken in every pot) to a disposable service based society. Even though ownership of land and property can be usurped by the government (hence there really is no ownership beyond what they allow) the idea of the traditional American dream has been replaced with that of a consumer driven economy and a dumbed down society where your life is rented from blockbuster and true American grit has taken a back seat to couch-ass complacency.
I'd like to contradict what the kid said as for America not needing you. We do need you. We need people just like you in America to continue to think freely and express their opinions, however radical. That is what being American is all about. So I say stay and fight in your own way, only run when your actual _life_ is on the line. That's what I intend to do.
So when they fuck up and mis-identify me as a terrorist and declare me an enemy combatant because I used to post to UseNet about drug use, never mind that I haven't touched the stuff in years, and take away my rights to challenge them in court, how exactly am I going to get any kind of "check" or "balance"?
This will never happen. The government doesn't make mistakes.
The Pentagon is not free from oversight by Congress. That is exactly why they are having to explain to Congress about why they need the TIA. Hopefully they will see the room for abuse and put very strict checks on who can do what and where. Unfortunately they have us all running from real life boogey men and Jane and Joe American are willing to sacrifice their personal privacy and freedom if it means they might get to live just one more second longer and buy one more shiny bubble.
Not much one can do except sit back and watch. I'd do something about it but I'm fat and lazy. Besides I gotta go buy the latest SUV. Don't worry though I'll post a bitch about it to my blog using my latest $500 cell-phone while slurping on a frosted Quadaccino.
Even if our Bayesian filters win the arms race against the spammers, in terms of quantity as well as quality of communications, email has been a disaster.
Using this same logic you could conclude that snail mail (normal postal mail) is a failure. But yet it continues to thrive in various forms. Just because it doesn't meet utopian standards doesn't mean it's a failure.
The only problem with our current monetary system is that inflation has made pennies freakin worthless.
Except for this penny
Besides a good roll of pennies and a sock are good for those times you have to dish out some street therapy.
We have evidence that portions of UNIX System V software code have been copied into Linux and that additional other portions of UNIX System V software code have been modified and copied into Linux, seemingly for the purposes of obfuscating their original source.
I have released Open Source software into the wild and suspected that some companies where using my code but I came upon one stumbling block in my argument - it had been modified. Unless you can prove within a reasonable doubt (you see your sig in the header, etc) that the work was stolen then how do you go about this? How do you prove it was your code that has been modified? Sounds like bullshit to me. The other argument may be valid but this is a stretch IMO.
You are right. It was just my knee-jerk reaction to a battle over a stupid domain name. Cohen should be legally castrated.
I wish there was a way both of these schmucks could lose. Fighting over sex.com bah
I say no gnews is good gnews from gary gnu
The eaxmple you cite would be an obvious flaw in the system. There are only so many possible bass lines that can be produced and eventually in the current sytem this is possible. But that example is not the same situation as Dr. Dre encountered. He knew the bass line was from a certain song and actually sought a "musicologist" to determine whether he could use it or not. He knew he was walking a thin line and simply should have contacted the copyright owner.
But yes, the example you give would spotlight an obvious flaw in the system if it occured.
I agree, this is an obvious derivative work. When you create a derivative work the very least you should do is contact the copyright holder and ask their permission or optionally you should give them credit for the work and display their copyright. If not then people will asume that you created the work and the originator of the material gets nothing.
Let me give you two instances of my run in with derivative works:
1. I added a regex to my open source email library that would check the validity of an email address. I found one written by Jeffrey E. F. Friedl (Mastering Regular Expressions; O'reilly) and wanted to port this to the language I used. Even though the differences where drastic because of the programming language semantics it was still a derivative works in the eyes of the law (the regex itself was the derivative, not the code to implement it). So I sent Mr. Friedl and email and he granted me permission. Problem avoided.
2. A company that shall remain nameless takes the same LGPL email library I wrote mentioned above and released it as a commercial component without distributing the source in it's "demo version" and never once showing it's customers my copyright to that library. I would have had no problem if the company simply obeyed the GPL license and properly displayed my copyright and included the source. There were other violations but these where the main ones. This is a case of a derivative work and the company violated my copyright. Taking someone elses work and putting your name on it is stealing, plain and simple.
Now I'm gonna step down off the soap box but my point is this - if you create a derivative work make sure you are very careful to follow the rules or you'll end up with your ass in a sling like Dr. Dre and those mentioned above.
Business is cut-throat, but its not hard.
If it's not hard then why do so many fail? I'm sure you'll chalk it up to idiocy but many intelligent business owners have screwed the pooch and been cast aside. How would you prove that it is easy? I can easily provide evidence to the contrary, can you also do the same for your argument?
My point was TCO is a valid formula for calculating total cost but apparently this fell on deaf ears. When I say the term TCO others in busines know what I am refering to. It's merely a way to communicate an idea to others, similiar to the way us techies communicate using acronyms. I'm sorry you feel so strongly about that particular acronym and other business acronyms but they do serve a purpose. Just because you worked at a large company that made wrong decisions does not mean an acronym loses meaning or value in it's communication of an IDEA. I am not saying the same idea can't be communicated differently but TCO has been around for quite a while and still serves a purpose.
But if you don't want to I'm not gonna put a gun to your head. Don't like it? Don't use it. But judging someone because they used a term and labeling them a "bitch" is a bit childish. Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder. I could be wrong but that's just what I infer from your writing.
Labor costs are not the only cost covered in the TLA you so quickly dismiss. Time spent rebooting the server? That time while the server is down instead of making money for the company costs money. Who rebooted the server? You did, you are payed. That costs money. Did this server hardware cost money? Add that to your TCO. Does the electricity it uses everyday have a cost? Add that to the TCO. TCO must include ALL identifiable costs - one-time fixed costs, capital expenses, and recurring costs need to be factored in. Nothing is free.
My point - there are many more factors regarding Total Cost of Ownership and young support jockeys need to get with the program. This isn't some geekfest where we all trade D&D stories while chewing on the latest OSS install. It's called business and time costs money. You don't like that? Find another way to pay the rent.
Personally when I got into this industry I also swiped aside everything management spouted as just "BS". Then I grew up and realized that a lot is riding on things we take for granted. You might think it's easy to run a business but it's not. _Everything_ affects the bottom line and has associated risks and there is no way around that. Identifying and quantifying that risk is part of the process of making an informed decision. Would you rather they just shot from the hip and hope to hit the target?
You better learn these acronyms and use them to your advantage if you ever want to play with the big boys. OSS solutions CAN compete with proprietary solutions in the TCO arena. But who is going to get them into the arena? Learn the lingo and play hard ball, or go whine in the corner about how everyone else is a bitch like you do now.
Hold up, wait... this might just be a blessing is disguise. No more frames.. w00t! And such a good reason.
And to add: If one uses Interop within .Net you expose yourself to the same problems inherit in COM, with buffer overflows being the most dangerous. Interop code is run as "unsafe", meaning memory allocation and deallocation is up to the developer. So while you can write DirectX applications in .Net, the memory handling/garbage collection features of the CLR are not available when Interoping with COM code. You must clean up after yourself. Nothing new for game developers but it must be considered.
.Net interop with DirectX will allows those of us that aren't C++ gurus to use a 3D interface. I think those coming from a Java background will be pleased at how quickly they can get up to speed with C#/.Net and DirectX9.
But I suspect
They have an automatic algorithm to determine whether you are cheating. Although it is very complex let me explain - if you are winning you must be cheating.
:
Given the probability of winning (0) one can then plug this number into our algorithm where W = you
P(A|B) = [P(B|A) x P(A)] / P(B)
W = Negative Ghostrider
Loser = You
No it's LICENSE. Reboot is automatic.
I doubt anyone in prison really cares about spamming. They'd probably be like, "You got sent to prison for throwing meat at people? wtf".
I think it would be more like this: "I don't give a flying fuck what you're in here for.. give me your Cocktail FRUIT!
Nope
Yes but you must use one of the controller ports for the infared receiver. This one apparently will be built in.