it depends. It would be nice if we could say they always belong to the prof or the student - but things are never so simple. It really depends on the content and how the notes were taken. If the prof is just teaching lower division material then she/he is not presenting any new information and is probably in fact teaching out of several books. How then can the prof claim IP? The only case I can see for this is if the student copyied what was said word for word - and even then this is iffy. On the other hand, if the prof is sharing new ideas (ie results of years of research, etc) then I would say there is a much better case for IP.
So what you're saying is that it's wrong to come up with ideas if you don't know they are right before-hand? He's not saying these ideas are facts, just ideas - and these ideas have led to break-throughs in the past. He us not saying we don't have to worry about lack of fossil fuels - rather, we *might* not have to. To say otherwise is dogmatic.
BTW - the sum of the brain power of an infinite number of monkeys is infinite. So then, it is possible to have an infinite number of monkeys filtering noise and an infinite number generating content so that all that is produced is signal (infinity + infinity = infinity). Just an idea
The $51,000 to Slade Gorton does look very bad and he may regret this during election time. However, I'll bet this has more to do with the fact that Sen. Gorton is from Wash (same as MS) and if MS were to get broken up it would probably cause a bit of an economic problem in his state. So I don't think it's as corrupt as it looks (BTW - it was 51,000 to his campain fund - not personal account, which would be illegal). In any case, it still looks bad - I just don't think its really as bad as it looks.
Take some political science classes people! America is not a democracy - its a republic. I don't mean to nit-pick, but this is much the same as the crackers/hackers thing.
Non profit orgs are technically "corporations" so under such a law there would be no way to organize lobbies by "the people" and I can't see individuals flying out to DC to lobby their rep. One could argue that a valid work-around would be to only allow non-profit orgs to lobby. Then all you would get is a bunch of non-profits spawned off and supported mainly by corporations to do their lobbing. There is always a loop hole - the current system has flaws, but lets not throw it all away because it doesn't always work for you - this is like making up the rules to a game as you go. What's better is to know what reps are recieving funds/gifts from what entities - in a way this is a blessing because you can cut through all the crap and see where she/he really stands on issues (money speaks louder than words). Although, I don't know of any sites out there that will give you this info - anyone know?
I suppose the percentages change depending on the process of verification. The fact that we have about 36,000 documents means that a lot can be done with textual critisism - this disipline is much like working with diff files or parity error correction - overlapping documents are compared for variances and errors corrected. The percent of error I cited (1.7%) was caculated after textual critism - my guess is that the ~15% that you present accounts for all found variances before obvious coping errors, translation issues, mispellings, etc are removed. BTW - this technique is quite common and acepted, even outside biblical research.
"The very possibility the bible might be false (or even only false in parts, or essentially correct but corrupted)"
While possible, the Bible is still one of the most accurate literary texts we have from the old world. For example, there are about 36,000 manuscripts from the dates 50-200AD that textual critics have used to determine that the New Testiment is about 98.3% accurate to what the original authors wrote. On the Old Testement side there are the Dead Sea Scrolls that show that the Old Testiment has remained about 95% accurate over a period of ~900 years. Compare this to the works of Plato of which we have about 7 documents that date back to about 1200 years after his death. Also, I don't know of any historical recordings in the Bible that have been contradicted by science - in fact the more cities and palaces that get uncovered the more accurate we find the Bible to be.
This doesn't nessasarily mean it is God's Word (kinda up to the individual to decide), but regardless, the 40some authors provide a great insite to how the world was ~600BC. If nothing else its a collection of proverbs and experiances covering a span of ~1500 yrs.
If you sell something online you still have to pay sales tax - that is if your state has sales tax. In fact, the federal government doesn't do sales tax for the most part. Almost all sales tax go to local governments - Big Brother makes most of its revenue on the 30-40% income tax (yes, all of you that are in college, this is what you have to look forward to when you finally get out and start making money - the government takes it all). What this bill would do is prevent the government from slapping on additional taxes based on the means in which the product(s) were sold (internet). We get taxed enough!
"[Java apps] will all perform the same functionality."
Not to burst your bubble or anything but, I have not found this to be the case. Fist let me say, I like Java - the language is great and its a great concept. However, I have worked with a number of large enterprise customers that have had lots of trouble with Java. Every VM that runs on different machines can be thought of as processors released by different vendors (ie Intel vs AMD vs Motorola). And, every version of a VM is much the same as different chip releases from the same company (ie P-Pro, PII, etc). So the problem that always occurs is, Java applications must be written and QA'd for a _very_ specific VM on a specific platform. So instead of having to just maintain different hardware achitectures, a lot of folks are having to also manage many different virtual machines (usually one for each product installed). This becomes very messy when you start installing 3rd party Java products. Once you have 3-4 VMs installed, keeping classpaths and environments proper is hell. And to say the least, its anything but platform independent (no more so than C. Perl is the most portable I've seen). Add on top of this that Sun still *owns* Java and is not willing to hand it over to a standards group and I see little reason to use Java for anything serious.
Stock prices have no direct relationship with how much revenue a company is currently taking in. In reality, a stock price represents the average value of the company (in profits/assets/etc) the stock holders expect the company to achieve over an average period of time. For example, if I owned NDOG stock at $92 and I thought the company was going nowhere and would eventually go under, I would short (sell). However, if I feel that NDOG was going to dominate the market in 5 years and become 5x more profitable I would probably invest more, even if the company was currently lossing money. The fact that RHAT's stock is worth so much while it is lossing money just means that people see RedHat as on of the major contenders in a rapidly growing Linux market in the future. Because RedHat is so widly used and because of the partnerships RedHat has made, I don't expect RHAT to drop much as other Linux companies IPO.
1) Many seem to think that this is ok because the beta testers can be thought of as internal (hence Ok w/ GPL). However, beta testers do not qualify as employees of Corel (otherwise Corel would be required to offer health care, 401K, stock options, etc). Notice that no one had to sign an NDA. Therefore, beta testers should not qualify as internal to Corel.
2) According to the GPL no one may restrict your rights in distributing GPL software (section 6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.)
3) Corel can restrict the distribution of its own software (even if it is running on Linux), but it cannot restrict GPL code in anyway once it is released to non-Corel persons (beta release or otherwise)
4) If Corel has made any modifications to GPL'd software, it is required to make these modifications avaliable to those that recieve the modified GPL software (sections 2.a and 2.b). This means that even if, by some strange techicality, beta testers did qualify as internal, Corel is still obligated to publish any changes to GPL code.
Hmm...seems that Corel should have first defined a point of separation between the GPL'd stuff and their own proprietary Products (why did they use an uppercase P?). In other words, they should have worded it something like "This distro contains both GPL and Corel owned product. All GPL'd product can be distributed freely under the terms of the GPL and any changes Corel has made to GPL products is also freely avaliable. However, all Corel owned products are copyrighted by Corel and my not be copied or redistributed."
Also, I really liked "Linux Application Development" - this is an excelent book that is very broad yet short and to the point (no stupid story lines about aliens or banks to fill pages). It talks about most of the development tools for Linux (compilers, debugers, libraries, etc) and it covers a lot of the system API. Good book.
I always thought RedHat was the name of the distro and "The Official RedHat" was the name of the boxed set (at least that's what's on all of my RH boxes).
This just leaves me with a bad feeling - it kinda reminds me of the way Unisys let everyone use the GIF format for free until it became very popular and then they come in and collect fees from everyone.
I love the GPL - if RedHat gets too pushy about things like this I'm moving to Mandrake Linux (http://www.linux-mandrake.com). Hopefully I won't have to do this.
emacs is the best IDE for C/C++ development. Emacs gives me syntax highlighting, auto-formats code, can do recursive file searches for #define's, variables, and function definitions (etags are the best), it can jump blocks of code, match parins, match #define's and #end's, etc. I used to use VC++ and Borland C++ editors - I just have no need to any more. I can do everything in emacs (including compile, and debug using gdb) just as well and I don't have to deal with awfull project files and auto-generated 10K makefiles that are anything but usable.
If you can get root to run this then the you need to find another SA. Once *NIX is installed very little needs to be done as root. If you need to install a program as root you better know where it came from and if it can be trusted. I doubt you could even find a case were someone has broken into a system by getting the SA to overwrite/etc/passwd. Most other programs can be installed by the user into that users home directory so no real security issues can arise. On NT, I just gave up and gave myself admin (and so does everyone I know) because I was logging in as administrator and switching back to my user account so offten. The MS "security" model just plain sucks. I would like to see someone set up NT with read only file access to the entire system except for the users home directory - I just ain't going to happen.
I can't see the USPS going away until we have widly used, strong, legaly binding digital sigs. The only reason I ever send snail mail is because something requires a signiture or it needs to be send via certified mail. By the time congress gets around to overhauling the crypto laws most people will have internet access. Sure, a few will still use snail mail, but most will find the speed and ease of email much to convenient. Yeah, the model T was a quality car with lots of character (and its still around), but it just isn't practical any more - the same will be said about hand written letters in the future.
There is no evidence to support the claim that Linux's TCO is higher than NT - this idea comes from an interview with Ed Muth (a MS Exec) - no supprise.
Linux doesn't require a re-install every 6 months to 1 year as my experiance has been. Linux won't start BSODing, and acting strange just because you install a new product. You install it, config it once, and the it just works all the time - what a concept! Further - if a user needs something changed/installed an admin can do a remote login, make the changes, and then log out without even going to the machine. I'd be more willing to say that a properly administered Linux/UNIX network will have a lower TCO in the longrun.
Point 1: If your a home user Win00 is not going to add any *real* value as a desktop. In fact, it is only going to run slower. So I don't expect many people running Win95/98 to upgrade to Win2K.
Point 2: You offer not stats. The netcraft studies - although only web servers - is a very large sample and should be a pretty fair reflection of server activity. If NT server numbers where once growning and they are now declining that is a pretty good indication of market momentum
Point 3: Linux has been around since '91. Kernels 1.x, 2.0.x, 2.2.x have gone though major changes. Meanwhile, the applications have needed very little change. Further, because most of it is OSS, minor changes to source are no big deal.
Point 4: I have used Win00 beta 3 - I was unimpressed. Win00 is bloatware - it will take about a year after its release until it is close to enterprise ready.
Point 5: Despite what MS would have you to believe - people can't affort to just wait around for vaporware. While some people will wait for Win00 and all the MS promises it will be - most people need an email/web/ftp/smb/etc server _NOW_ and many will use Linux instead of waiting.
"Frankly given the lack of testing regarding Year 2000 issues which has been performed with Linux and other Open Source software I wouldn't be surprised that there won't be a huge Linux failure on 1/1/2000."
Your FUD skills are quite good - MS employee? As I said, pure FUD. The Linux source has been looked over by more eyes than even MS can afford to pay. I doubt anyone will have Linux problems on 1/1/2000
Who cares if NT (errr...Win00) steals the media's attention in 2008 or whenever MS gets around to releasing their next version of boat. I will always have my Linux - MS will never be able to kill it. Linux will continue to improve and it will continue to outpace NT regardless of how many adds MS buys. So I don't really care - I'm plain sick of the media and 100% buzzword compliant companies. Linux works, it works well, I have complete control over my Linux boxen - I don't care what MS does.
- sure if the process if blocking waiting for a resource then the kernel doesn't need to give any attention. However, if a timer expires or if some other event occures (this happens often) the the process will need to be swapped back into memory any CPU time will be needed.
Slashdot Mirror
it depends. It would be nice if we could say they always belong to the prof or the student - but things are never so simple. It really depends on the content and how the notes were taken. If the prof is just teaching lower division material then she/he is not presenting any new information and is probably in fact teaching out of several books. How then can the prof claim IP? The only case I can see for this is if the student copyied what was said word for word - and even then this is iffy. On the other hand, if the prof is sharing new ideas (ie results of years of research, etc) then I would say there is a much better case for IP.
So what you're saying is that it's wrong to come up with ideas if you don't know they are right before-hand? He's not saying these ideas are facts, just ideas - and these ideas have led to break-throughs in the past. He us not saying we don't have to worry about lack of fossil fuels - rather, we *might* not have to. To say otherwise is dogmatic.
BTW - the sum of the brain power of an infinite number of monkeys is infinite. So then, it is possible to have an infinite number of monkeys filtering noise and an infinite number generating content so that all that is produced is signal (infinity + infinity = infinity). Just an idea
"Linux isn't the de-facto host system for all OS apps, whatever you may think."
Ahh, but it will be verrry soon - WHUhahahah...total world domination.
"Perhaps we need an Open Source general encyclopedia to keep the Redmond minions out of this business?"
Something like Project Gutenburg then http://promo.net/pg - not exactly an encyclopedia, but a great resource.
The $51,000 to Slade Gorton does look very bad and he may regret this during election time. However, I'll bet this has more to do with the fact that Sen. Gorton is from Wash (same as MS) and if MS were to get broken up it would probably cause a bit of an economic problem in his state. So I don't think it's as corrupt as it looks (BTW - it was 51,000 to his campain fund - not personal account, which would be illegal). In any case, it still looks bad - I just don't think its really as bad as it looks.
Take some political science classes people! America is not a democracy - its a republic. I don't mean to nit-pick, but this is much the same as the crackers/hackers thing.
Non profit orgs are technically "corporations" so under such a law there would be no way to organize lobbies by "the people" and I can't see individuals flying out to DC to lobby their rep. One could argue that a valid work-around would be to only allow non-profit orgs to lobby. Then all you would get is a bunch of non-profits spawned off and supported mainly by corporations to do their lobbing. There is always a loop hole - the current system has flaws, but lets not throw it all away because it doesn't always work for you - this is like making up the rules to a game as you go. What's better is to know what reps are recieving funds/gifts from what entities - in a way this is a blessing because you can cut through all the crap and see where she/he really stands on issues (money speaks louder than words). Although, I don't know of any sites out there that will give you this info - anyone know?
I suppose the percentages change depending on the process of verification. The fact that we have about 36,000 documents means that a lot can be done with textual critisism - this disipline is much like working with diff files or parity error correction - overlapping documents are compared for variances and errors corrected. The percent of error I cited (1.7%) was caculated after textual critism - my guess is that the ~15% that you present accounts for all found variances before obvious coping errors, translation issues, mispellings, etc are removed. BTW - this technique is quite common and acepted, even outside biblical research.
"The very possibility the bible might be false (or even only false in parts, or essentially correct but corrupted)"
While possible, the Bible is still one of the most accurate literary texts we have from the old world. For example, there are about 36,000 manuscripts from the dates 50-200AD that textual critics have used to determine that the New Testiment is about 98.3% accurate to what the original authors wrote. On the Old Testement side there are the Dead Sea Scrolls that show that the Old Testiment has remained about 95% accurate over a period of ~900 years. Compare this to the works of Plato of which we have about 7 documents that date back to about 1200 years after his death. Also, I don't know of any historical recordings in the Bible that have been contradicted by science - in fact the more cities and palaces that get uncovered the more accurate we find the Bible to be.
This doesn't nessasarily mean it is God's Word (kinda up to the individual to decide), but regardless, the 40some authors provide a great insite to how the world was ~600BC. If nothing else its a collection of proverbs and experiances covering a span of ~1500 yrs.
If you sell something online you still have to pay sales tax - that is if your state has sales tax. In fact, the federal government doesn't do sales tax for the most part. Almost all sales tax go to local governments - Big Brother makes most of its revenue on the 30-40% income tax (yes, all of you that are in college, this is what you have to look forward to when you finally get out and start making money - the government takes it all). What this bill would do is prevent the government from slapping on additional taxes based on the means in which the product(s) were sold (internet). We get taxed enough!
"[Java apps] will all perform the same functionality."
Not to burst your bubble or anything but, I have not found this to be the case. Fist let me say, I like Java - the language is great and its a great concept. However, I have worked with a number of large enterprise customers that have had lots of trouble with Java. Every VM that runs on different machines can be thought of as processors released by different vendors (ie Intel vs AMD vs Motorola). And, every version of a VM is much the same as different chip releases from the same company (ie P-Pro, PII, etc). So the problem that always occurs is, Java applications must be written and QA'd for a _very_ specific VM on a specific platform. So instead of having to just maintain different hardware achitectures, a lot of folks are having to also manage many different virtual machines (usually one for each product installed). This becomes very messy when you start installing 3rd party Java products. Once you have 3-4 VMs installed, keeping classpaths and environments proper is hell. And to say the least, its anything but platform independent (no more so than C. Perl is the most portable I've seen). Add on top of this that Sun still *owns* Java and is not willing to hand it over to a standards group and I see little reason to use Java for anything serious.
Stock prices have no direct relationship with how much revenue a company is currently taking in. In reality, a stock price represents the average value of the company (in profits/assets/etc) the stock holders expect the company to achieve over an average period of time. For example, if I owned NDOG stock at $92 and I thought the company was going nowhere and would eventually go under, I would short (sell). However, if I feel that NDOG was going to dominate the market in 5 years and become 5x more profitable I would probably invest more, even if the company was currently lossing money. The fact that RHAT's stock is worth so much while it is lossing money just means that people see RedHat as on of the major contenders in a rapidly growing Linux market in the future. Because RedHat is so widly used and because of the partnerships RedHat has made, I don't expect RHAT to drop much as other Linux companies IPO.
just my $0.02
1) Many seem to think that this is ok because the beta testers can be thought of as internal (hence Ok w/ GPL). However, beta testers do not qualify as employees of Corel (otherwise Corel would be required to offer health care, 401K, stock options, etc). Notice that no one had to sign an NDA. Therefore, beta testers should not qualify as internal to Corel.
2) According to the GPL no one may restrict your rights in distributing GPL software (section 6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to
these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further
restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to
this License.)
3) Corel can restrict the distribution of its own software (even if it is running on Linux), but it cannot restrict GPL code in anyway once it is released to non-Corel persons (beta release or otherwise)
4) If Corel has made any modifications to GPL'd software, it is required to make these modifications avaliable to those that recieve the modified GPL software (sections 2.a and 2.b). This means that even if, by some strange techicality, beta testers did qualify as internal, Corel is still obligated to publish any changes to GPL code.
Hmm...seems that Corel should have first defined a point of separation between the GPL'd stuff and their own proprietary Products (why did they use an uppercase P?). In other words, they should have worded it something like "This distro contains both GPL and Corel owned product. All GPL'd product can be distributed freely under the terms of the GPL and any changes Corel has made to GPL products is also freely avaliable. However, all Corel owned products are copyrighted by Corel and my not be copied or redistributed."
Also, I really liked "Linux Application Development" - this is an excelent book that is very broad yet short and to the point (no stupid story lines about aliens or banks to fill pages). It talks about most of the development tools for Linux (compilers, debugers, libraries, etc) and it covers a lot of the system API. Good book.
I vote for R*dHat (like Un*x)
Or better yet - in the spirit of the Unix wars R*dHat
I always thought RedHat was the name of the distro and "The Official RedHat" was the name of the boxed set (at least that's what's on all of my RH boxes).
This just leaves me with a bad feeling - it kinda reminds me of the way Unisys let everyone use the GIF format for free until it became very popular and then they come in and collect fees from everyone.
I love the GPL - if RedHat gets too pushy about things like this I'm moving to Mandrake Linux (http://www.linux-mandrake.com). Hopefully I won't have to do this.
emacs is the best IDE for C/C++ development. Emacs gives me syntax highlighting, auto-formats code, can do recursive file searches for #define's, variables, and function definitions (etags are the best), it can jump blocks of code, match parins, match #define's and #end's, etc. I used to use VC++ and Borland C++ editors - I just have no need to any more. I can do everything in emacs (including compile, and debug using gdb) just as well and I don't have to deal with awfull project files and auto-generated 10K makefiles that are anything but usable.
#!/bin/sh
/etc/passwd
/etc/passwd. Most other programs can be installed by the user into that users home directory so no real security issues can arise. On NT, I just gave up and gave myself admin (and so does everyone I know) because I was logging in as administrator and switching back to my user account so offten. The MS "security" model just plain sucks. I would like to see someone set up NT with read only file access to the entire system except for the users home directory - I just ain't going to happen.
echo foo::0:0::/:/bin/sh >>
If you can get root to run this then the you need to find another SA. Once *NIX is installed very little needs to be done as root. If you need to install a program as root you better know where it came from and if it can be trusted. I doubt you could even find a case were someone has broken into a system by getting the SA to overwrite
I can't see the USPS going away until we have widly used, strong, legaly binding digital sigs. The only reason I ever send snail mail is because something requires a signiture or it needs to be send via certified mail. By the time congress gets around to overhauling the crypto laws most people will have internet access. Sure, a few will still use snail mail, but most will find the speed and ease of email much to convenient. Yeah, the model T was a quality car with lots of character (and its still around), but it just isn't practical any more - the same will be said about hand written letters in the future.
just my $0.02
There is no evidence to support the claim that Linux's TCO is higher than NT - this idea comes from an interview with Ed Muth (a MS Exec) - no supprise.
Linux doesn't require a re-install every 6 months to 1 year as my experiance has been. Linux won't start BSODing, and acting strange just because you install a new product. You install it, config it once, and the it just works all the time - what a concept! Further - if a user needs something changed/installed an admin can do a remote login, make the changes, and then log out without even going to the machine. I'd be more willing to say that a properly administered Linux/UNIX network will have a lower TCO in the longrun.
Point 1: If your a home user Win00 is not going to add any *real* value as a desktop. In fact, it is only going to run slower. So I don't expect many people running Win95/98 to upgrade to Win2K.
Point 2: You offer not stats. The netcraft studies - although only web servers - is a very large sample and should be a pretty fair reflection of server activity. If NT server numbers where once growning and they are now declining that is a pretty good indication of market momentum
Point 3: Linux has been around since '91. Kernels 1.x, 2.0.x, 2.2.x have gone though major changes. Meanwhile, the applications have needed very little change. Further, because most of it is OSS, minor changes to source are no big deal.
Point 4: I have used Win00 beta 3 - I was unimpressed. Win00 is bloatware - it will take about a year after its release until it is close to enterprise ready.
Point 5: Despite what MS would have you to believe - people can't affort to just wait around for vaporware. While some people will wait for Win00 and all the MS promises it will be - most people need an email/web/ftp/smb/etc server _NOW_ and many will use Linux instead of waiting.
"Frankly given the lack of testing regarding Year 2000 issues which has been performed with Linux and other Open Source software I wouldn't be surprised that there won't be a huge Linux failure on 1/1/2000."
Your FUD skills are quite good - MS employee? As I said, pure FUD. The Linux source has been looked over by more eyes than even MS can afford to pay. I doubt anyone will have Linux problems on 1/1/2000
Who cares if NT (errr...Win00) steals the media's attention in 2008 or whenever MS gets around to releasing their next version of boat. I will always have my Linux - MS will never be able to kill it. Linux will continue to improve and it will continue to outpace NT regardless of how many adds MS buys. So I don't really care - I'm plain sick of the media and 100% buzzword compliant companies. Linux works, it works well, I have complete control over my Linux boxen - I don't care what MS does.
- sure if the process if blocking waiting for a resource then the kernel doesn't need to give any attention. However, if a timer expires or if some other event occures (this happens often) the the process will need to be swapped back into memory any CPU time will be needed.