"Gee, Yer Honor, we *really* need to see the code that IBM has before we can determine what they put into Linux... What's that? Oh, why yes, I *am* a fisherman!"
C'mon, who the hell are they trying to kid? The judge will take one look at this, have a hearty laugh, and say, "Not on my watch, asshole!" This is a fishing expedition to rival that of Moby Dick.
SCO hasn't any evidence. However, they're going to mewl and cry that they were wronged. Unless and until they can show proof, they're fucked.
Darl says, 'If vendors feel so confident with the intellectual property foundation under their massive contributions into Linux, then they should put their money where their mouth is and protect end users with true vendor-based indemnification.'
I say if SCO feels so confident with their intellectual property claims re: their massive contributions into Linux, then they should put their money where their mouth is and SHOW US THE BLEEDING CODE ALREADY! Their case will be thrown out of court. Without showing what the code is to the people who authored it in order to substantiate their claims and give the defendant a chance to rectify the problem before going to court, they haven't a legal leg to stand on, and the judge will simply toss it aside like the piece of scribbled, stained toilet paper it truly is.
I thought once you had earned that higher education, you were supposed to be worth more in the job market. Now, these clowns think that "highly educated workers" should be working for minimum wage or lower??? How the hell is a highly educated person supposed to pay off their school loans? Never mind the fact that minimum wage won't support a single person let alone a family.
The proxypot operators who are also capturing spam that would have been deliverable to AOL addresses but didn't. I ran a proxypot for a couple of months, back about July-August 2003. I trapped *gigabytes* of spam that would have gotten to AOl users, almost exclusively in some instances, most of it from Internet Video Networks hosted on C&W's sewer network. I took it down after posting too many messages to nanae and had it identified by spammers and no longer used. It's comin' nigh up on getting it back up and on the network. I'm gonna *cash in*, PRAISE "BOB"!
But a Live CD is just awesome, think of all the new users who can try Linux for the first time, not as Knoppix, which is translated from German, but Mandrake! What a great way to learn about and be introduced to Linux!
Yeah, but Mandrake beat them to the punch with MandrakeMove. I find it very much similar in function and feel to a Knoppix/Drake bastard child, although it lacked a bit of the applications that I'm used to with Mandrake. It was much like Mandrake Light.
'The movie industry, he said, has to ask itself what the music industry should have asked years ago: 'Why do they want to steal from us?' The answer, he said, is simple: 'Because you won't sell them what they want.'
Gee, who'd'a' thunkit?? We're looking for music we can play on our pc's, our stereos, in our cars, on our little mp3 players. We're looking for movies that will play in similar devices, some more portable than others. Limiting access to a shitty little scratched up disc that only cost the companies $0.05 to make for $17 a pop is rape, plain and simple, especially when you consider there's one good song on an album and 12 other terrible songs. Sell me a song I like for $0.50 and I'm a happy camper! Let me use that song in any way I see fit (as long as I'm not trading it around like a joint at a frat party) and I'm certain the RIAA/MPAA can make a buck and keep their customers from thieving their works.
Who's afraid of the big bad SCO Big bad SCO, big bad SCO? Who's afraid of the big bad SCO? Mother F-ing Darl
Who's afraid of the big bad SCO Big bad SCO, big bad SCO? Who's afraid of the big bad SCO? Mother F-ing Darl
Darl is the windy wolf, the three little pigs are IBM, Redhat and Novell. Unfortunately, there were no straw or twigs used in this story, and the three little piggies are all laughing their asses off as Darl stands outside the door of the brick house, huffing and puffing about the validity of the GPL, the mysterious stolen code and Darl's hurt feelings because he tried a working relationship with IBM and it went sour.
C'mon, Darl, let's see you huff and puff and blow the door down. I don't think you can do it!
Before the DMCA, technically they were right, these boxes _are_ legal to own. Now, its very illegal to _USE_ them... But to just own one, that was not.
I'm curious about this situation where I might be able to see where there *is* a legal, non-infringing use. Suppose I already am a subscriber, but I purchase my own equipment, ie, one of these black boxes, to use instead of my cable provider's in order to save the extra charges they tack on to the bill for each box? Fair use? Or illegal?
That way, the outcome is *sure* to be in Microsoft's favor once again.
We've seen them sued for antitrust before. DOJ jumped all over them, proved their case and what did Microsoft get? Any meaningful punishment? Any breakup of their software/hardware/services hydra? Nope.
It's still the same big blue monster in the same zippered plastic suit, trying to take over the world as we know it. Unfortunately, we've not found any kind of monster to throw at it to get the bugger to march off back into the murky depths from which it arose.
"OptInBig: Possesses over 45 million online consumers in its database; Has lists available with a reach from 500,000 to up to 16 million online consumers; Produces over 20 million page views per month on our clients' websites; and, Delivers an average of 350,000 individual website orders per month."
Heh... all this says is that Snotty Scotty is willing to burn someone a copy of his "45 Million FRESH ADDRESSES CD!!" for the right fee.
If I had my way, the bugger would have "spam" tattooed on that baldy-bald head of his.
I'm in the middle of a community college library, trying hard not to laugh out loud at the news that Snotty Richter is going to get a taste of the legal hammers of NY State and MSFT combined. Remember, the current AG in NY, Eliot Spitzer, is the same fellow who sued spam factory Monsterhut in 2002. Monsterhut had sued PaeTec, their ISP, after service was withdrawn for AUP violations for their mass emailing. Monsterhut prevailed in front of the first judge in that case, however an appeals court ruling overturned that verdict. The whole legal mess pretty much left the principles behind Monsterhut, Todd Pelow and Gary Hartl, financially ruined (yay!) so that they easily closed their doors and ran. I've not heard an update on the story but if you can ping me on NANAE (Rev Egg Plant), I'd love to hear.
Re:Related to Earning Reports?
on
SCOrched Earth
·
· Score: 1
Could someone with financial background tell us if this is related to SCOX waiting to report their earnings for another two weeks? Any correlation? How would these moves affect their reports?
"The SCO Group, Inc. (SCOX, Trade), a leading provider of Unix based solutions, announced today that its earnings release and investor conference call previously scheduled for December 8, 2003 at 9:00 am Mountain Standard Time, will be moved to December 22, 2003 at 9:00 am Mountain Standard Time in order for the Company to finalize the accounting treatment for its recent $50 million Series A Convertible Preferred Stock transaction. The Company is in the process of performing a valuation of the conversion feature associated with the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock. The Company will utilize the services of an outside advisor to assist the Company in its valuation of the conversion feature.
"The accounting for the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock will not impact the Company's revenue or cash balance. The Company also reiterates that its revenue for the fourth quarter ended October 31, 2003 will be consistent with the Company's prior guidance of $22 million to $25 million."
IOW, since they made the $50M deal with DeutscheBank, they need time to reconcile their books to reflect the earnings properly.
Re:Darl gets his ass kicked.
on
SCOrched Earth
·
· Score: 1
Darl McBride: The Most Dangerous Man in the Technology Industry(1). There was an article in the Nov. 24, 2003 issue of InformationWeek.
Sure, a lot of people don't like Microsoft, but that's no reason to make it worse for the millions of people who are forced to use Microsoft products, especially for security holes which have yet to be exploited.
This reminds me of the old National Lampoon spoof advertisement:
Photo of a dog, eyes looking sideways, with a human arm holding a gun to its head. Captioned below it: Use Microsoft Software or the dog gets it!
Right, we're all being held at gunpoint to use Microsoft's inferior software. Pull the other one, it's got bells on.
The only reason that the majority of computer users use Microsoft software is because of the illegal monopoly tactics used to stifle their competition. Sure, there could have been choices but MS was given full reign by the government, by its lack of conviction to press the antitrust lawsuit against them, to horn the competition right out of the market. There's no force about which software you decide to use.
At any time, you could elect to download and install a copy of Linux or run Knoppix from CD or download BSD even, or try Lindows or something, *ANYTHING* but Gates's bloated virus propagation technology! Just because you're too lazy to learn anything *new*, don't blame it on some imaginary force holding you hostage to a certain OS.
This is the worst thing to hit in the spam wars yet. Mainsleazers are given free reign to "prospect via email" and this law will be like all the rest: Window dressing that won't be enforced. Without private right of action, this bill is toothless--the victims of the crime are at the mercy of the enforcement authorities. Seeing how well the enforcement authorities have done so far -- remember how Monkeys.com and Osirusoft.com both got Denial of Serviced off the net by virus-wielding spammers and the Feds paid *no* attention to the complaints by both operators? -- this law will be enforced no differently: NOT AT ALL.
Feel free to call your senators and house members up and *thank them* for the spectacular way they bowed to the forces of $$BIG MONEY$$ yet again. And ask them kindly if they can spare a bottle of Astroglide(tm) to ease the situation.
as a native english speaker, of the american "dialect", i would have considered any of the "odd" uses of english in the http://www.rajiv.com/india/humor/langusa.asp article as absolutely normal and understandable. I would have understood everything the Indians had said without hesitation.
I can't imagine any town or city in the U.S. were they wouldn't know what a "bill" is in the context of a meal at a resturaunt or a "ring" in the context of a getting in contact with someone. it was rediculous.
I'm not legally married to a wonderful woman who looks at me funny when I speak perfectly acceptable geekish colloquialisms, say something spiced up with a bit of Douglas Addam sharp wit or Pythonesque influences or anything else to help, in my own mind, convey how silly or stupid or serious I really am about something. She'll sometimes sit and stare, as if she's trying to puzzle it out, then says, "Speak English."
I don't get it, I get seriously pissed when she does this. Like, did she grow up on a different planet than I did? She claims to have gone to college during the late 70's-early 80's so she's hip to some of the stuff that I might stick into a conversation. She remembers most Saturday Night Live material (I quote them often). But I always get "The Look".
I wish I could figure out why. But then again, this is another fine example of how each one of us is different in a zillion different ways. Some people parse language differences well, others don't.
Another excellent summary of the problems with SCO's arguments. So what on earth are they trying to do? Everything they say is spin, and everything the Open Source and Free Software community says is well-organized, annotated fact. How can they possibly think this will go as they hope? Even more to the point, what is David Boies trying to accomplish? He either: Thinks they can win on their existing evidence and arguments, in which case he is as crazy as SCO's executives, or Wisely realizes they're likely to lose, or at least not get everything they're bargaining for, but is sticking around for the downfall anyway.
So what's his plan? Personally I think (2) is the answer, and he's sticking around for the money. He must be hoping there will be a buyout, perhaps by Microsoft or someone else of worth, which would raise the value of the stock he's been given.
Ahh, you've not considered option 3:
3. Fool the folks at SCO to think you were really serious about pursuing their claims, after all, they're just foolish CEO types who have no clue about how this software stuff really works. Get them to sign over a bunch of stock to us, get the lawsuit to fail, then take the company management over. Laugh all the way to the bank.
Even that Forbes reporter could (kind of) tell the difference between GNU/Linux the OS and Linux the kernel... how come Caldera, a former distributor, can't?
Because the entity that was Caldera spun off and became Tarantella, then Canopy stepped in and bought out the rest of the business, the Linux distribution, the Unix software, and all the successive rights. The clowns at Canopy probably looked at the failing bottom line of what was left of the business, said to themselves, "We gotta stop this hemorrhaging.. *FAST*!!"
"But how we donna do dat, boss?" I can hear in reply in my mind.
"We'll call ourselves SCO again, so that people will associate us with all that was good in the Unix world -- BIG BUSINESS!! Then they hired Darl and his pals Sonntag, et alia, and put them to work to come up with a bright idea to salvage some stockholder value outta the whole mess.
The most creative thing they could think of was a stock pump-and-dump deal and an attempt to rape the world for the software that they created.
Here, lemme set you straight, young'n. Follows from the FSF's front page:
'The GNU Project was launched in 1984 to develop a complete Unix-like operating system which is free software: the GNU system. (GNU is a recursive acronym for "GNU's Not Unix"; it is pronounced "guh-NEW".) Variants of the GNU operating system, which use the kernel Linux, are now widely used; though these systems are often referred to as "Linux", they are more accurately called GNU/Linux systems.'
Now, do you truly understand? Hie theeself off to that webpage and absorb some knowledge, before crowing on about exactly that which you do not possess.
Excellent - it seems I'm reading more and more critical-of-SCO stuff these days. Just desserts, and all that:-)
Heh. The world is waking up and seeing this thing for what it is: A blatant attempt by some big money corporate thugs to take over the finest collaborative work this world has ever seen.
Compare this to the recent Spamhaus case, where depsite winning the case Steve Linford & Co can't afford the legal bill.
Yeah, I know, it's off-topic, mod me down...
Winning isn't what I'd call the finish to the Spamhaus/Spews/7 other unassociated individuals case. Remember, Linford, et al, hired one of the best antispam lawyers to take the case. He did a fantastic job addressing the complaint and all the filings related to it. The attorney for the spammers, one Mark E Felstein (Felchstain to you) took a good look at the opposition's filings, quietly shit his pants, and filed a motion to drop the case *with prejudice*.
Win? No, all that asshole Felchstain managed to do is run up the legal bills for the SPEWS/Spamhaus seven. He should have been disbarred but I'm certain that the judge at the court where this was filed is an ol' drinkin' bud with Felchstain, so all he might have gotten was a dirty look from the judge for the waste of time and taxpayer money for the court.
We have to be careful that we only filter out the unwanted and nothing else. There should have been at a bare minimum, 1. A check to guarantee that the site was not spamvertising 2. Emailed the site to notify them of the blacklisting. This would give them a chance to verify the information and not fall victom to someone spoofing the FROM: field and domain. This would also stop spammers from using the blacklist against people by getting them blacklisted after the person reported the spamming.
Nice ideas. First one, I would hope, would be SOP for anyone running a blocklist. However, mailing the domain that's subject to the blocklisting often falls on deaf ears. Here's why:
Postmaster@somedomain.com isn't aliased to a working email account monitored by a human. Same for abuse@somedomain.com. The site contacts in the whois registry either are stale and no longer work or are no longer monitored by a human. It's another scenario of whack-a-mole, trying to identify the proper contact to reach to inform them of the blocklisting, time better spent simply doing the Ronco thing: Set your blocklist entry and FORGET IT!
You want the job of attempting to notify a responsible party of every blocklist entry on SPEWS? Go ahead! Have fun trying! You'll be there for a month of Sundays, making a significant dent in the job.
[SPEWS] operate[s] on the "nuclear bomb" method: list spammers, plus anyone using a "spam-friendly" mailserver (a definition that can be stretched to cover almost anyone) or anyone who is simply suspicious." Oh, and you might also be listed if your new IP block was once used by a spammer. Don't worry, though. You can just wait a few weeks and lose massive amounts of buisiness because many customers can't recieve email from you and have no idea why - they just think you aren't responding. Or you can go onto NANAE and post a delist request, which will get you nothing but "Whiner! Eat your SPEWS, it's good for you!"
Incorrect characterization of SPEWS methods. From my own personal observations, a SPEWS listing starts out with the spammer's IP addresses based on spam received at multiple spamtrap accounts. Complaints are filed by the people who run the SPEWS list and, of course, they do not identify themselves as SPEWS operators in those complaints. Some time elapses (I'm not SPEWS, how should I know how much time exactly?). Either the spammer is removed (Yay! The listing drops off the list) or the complaints go ignored and more spam is received at the spamtrap accounts. The listing gets widened to the/24 in which the spammer space is included (this may happen immediately in the case of a spammer identified by Steve Linford's ROKSO (Registry of Known Spam Organizations) at spamhaus.org (may be difficult to reach due to the Slashdot effect or DDoS by virus)).
Lather, rinse, repeat the above until someone at the responsible ISP who received the original complaints wakes the fuck up and notices the situation, usually after their own customers are screaming at them, asking them to fix the problem that got them blocklisted. Then again, this is all laid out in the SPEWS faq in fairly clear, easy to understand language.
If ISP's are dropping mail from both level1 and level2 listings, they've made their own bed and are now laying in it. Only an idiot would block on level2 listings as they are meant as an historical indicator of problems with an ISP and do age off after an indeterminate period of time, again outside my control or knowledge.
SPEWS is the only thing thus far in the war against spam that actually has an effect at the ISP level to get some of these outfits to wake the fuck up and see what's happening in their own abuse@ mail accounts. ISP's think they can continue to shine on the spam problem, thinking they have no responsibility for their customers' actions. We, the users of SPEWS blocklist, say otherwise.
If I decide I don't want mail from a corner of the Internet that has sent me nothing but spam, that's my right. If I decide to rely upon the opinion of another Internet service who tracks this kind of information for themselves and elects to share it with the public, that's my right also. SPEWS works for me and mine.
What's with the current boo-hoo over blacklists? Do we have some kind of spammer astroturf going here?
Not certain but this sounds like someone somewhere is completely off the mark. Why would Verio block all traffic, including http, from Noos? Which set of IP's was blocklisted? I thought most anti-spam blocklists only affected receipt of smtp packets? I look up IP's for noos.com's mail exchangers and nothing listed. It'd take too long to go searching for all of noos.com's cablemodem IP space and see if it's been blocklisted, and if it has, the most likely reason is the typical listing of DHCP-delegated address space that's happening to cablemodem pools all over the world.
I don't get it, this is so unlike the typical case of innocent trapped in an anti-spam blocklist that I can't sort out what exactly happened here. If Verio decides they don't want traffic from a French ISP, it's their right. As usual, thank the spammers.
Slashdot Mirror
"Gee, Yer Honor, we *really* need to see the code that IBM has before we can determine what they put into Linux... What's that? Oh, why yes, I *am* a fisherman!"
C'mon, who the hell are they trying to kid? The judge will take one look at this, have a hearty laugh, and say, "Not on my watch, asshole!" This is a fishing expedition to rival that of Moby Dick.
SCO hasn't any evidence. However, they're going to mewl and cry that they were wronged. Unless and until they can show proof, they're fucked.
I say if SCO feels so confident with their intellectual property claims re: their massive contributions into Linux, then they should put their money where their mouth is and SHOW US THE BLEEDING CODE ALREADY! Their case will be thrown out of court. Without showing what the code is to the people who authored it in order to substantiate their claims and give the defendant a chance to rectify the problem before going to court, they haven't a legal leg to stand on, and the judge will simply toss it aside like the piece of scribbled, stained toilet paper it truly is.
I thought once you had earned that higher education, you were supposed to be worth more in the job market. Now, these clowns think that "highly educated workers" should be working for minimum wage or lower??? How the hell is a highly educated person supposed to pay off their school loans? Never mind the fact that minimum wage won't support a single person let alone a family.
Who are they trying to kid???
The proxypot operators who are also capturing spam that would have been deliverable to AOL addresses but didn't. I ran a proxypot for a couple of months, back about July-August 2003. I trapped *gigabytes* of spam that would have gotten to AOl users, almost exclusively in some instances, most of it from Internet Video Networks hosted on C&W's sewer network. I took it down after posting too many messages to nanae and had it identified by spammers and no longer used. It's comin' nigh up on getting it back up and on the network. I'm gonna *cash in*, PRAISE "BOB"!
Yeah, but Mandrake beat them to the punch with MandrakeMove. I find it very much similar in function and feel to a Knoppix/Drake bastard child, although it lacked a bit of the applications that I'm used to with Mandrake. It was much like Mandrake Light.
Gee, who'd'a' thunkit?? We're looking for music we can play on our pc's, our stereos, in our cars, on our little mp3 players. We're looking for movies that will play in similar devices, some more portable than others. Limiting access to a shitty little scratched up disc that only cost the companies $0.05 to make for $17 a pop is rape, plain and simple, especially when you consider there's one good song on an album and 12 other terrible songs. Sell me a song I like for $0.50 and I'm a happy camper! Let me use that song in any way I see fit (as long as I'm not trading it around like a joint at a frat party) and I'm certain the RIAA/MPAA can make a buck and keep their customers from thieving their works.
Who's afraid of the big bad SCO
Big bad SCO, big bad SCO?
Who's afraid of the big bad SCO?
Mother F-ing Darl
Who's afraid of the big bad SCO
Big bad SCO, big bad SCO?
Who's afraid of the big bad SCO?
Mother F-ing Darl
Darl is the windy wolf, the three little pigs are IBM, Redhat and Novell. Unfortunately, there were no straw or twigs used in this story, and the three little piggies are all laughing their asses off as Darl stands outside the door of the brick house, huffing and puffing about the validity of the GPL, the mysterious stolen code and Darl's hurt feelings because he tried a working relationship with IBM and it went sour.
C'mon, Darl, let's see you huff and puff and blow the door down. I don't think you can do it!
I'm curious about this situation where I might be able to see where there *is* a legal, non-infringing use. Suppose I already am a subscriber, but I purchase my own equipment, ie, one of these black boxes, to use instead of my cable provider's in order to save the extra charges they tack on to the bill for each box? Fair use? Or illegal?
That way, the outcome is *sure* to be in Microsoft's favor once again.
We've seen them sued for antitrust before. DOJ jumped all over them, proved their case and what did Microsoft get? Any meaningful punishment? Any breakup of their software/hardware/services hydra? Nope.
It's still the same big blue monster in the same zippered plastic suit, trying to take over the world as we know it. Unfortunately, we've not found any kind of monster to throw at it to get the bugger to march off back into the murky depths from which it arose.
Heh... all this says is that Snotty Scotty is willing to burn someone a copy of his "45 Million FRESH ADDRESSES CD!!" for the right fee.
If I had my way, the bugger would have "spam" tattooed on that baldy-bald head of his.
I'm in the middle of a community college library, trying hard not to laugh out loud at the news that Snotty Richter is going to get a taste of the legal hammers of NY State and MSFT combined. Remember, the current AG in NY, Eliot Spitzer, is the same fellow who sued spam factory Monsterhut in 2002. Monsterhut had sued PaeTec, their ISP, after service was withdrawn for AUP violations for their mass emailing. Monsterhut prevailed in front of the first judge in that case, however an appeals court ruling overturned that verdict. The whole legal mess pretty much left the principles behind Monsterhut, Todd Pelow and Gary Hartl, financially ruined (yay!) so that they easily closed their doors and ran. I've not heard an update on the story but if you can ping me on NANAE (Rev Egg Plant), I'd love to hear.
This article from PR Newswire covers it in good fashion.
"The SCO Group, Inc. (SCOX, Trade), a leading provider of Unix based solutions, announced today that its earnings release and investor conference call previously scheduled for December 8, 2003 at 9:00 am Mountain Standard Time, will be moved to December 22, 2003 at 9:00 am Mountain Standard Time in order for the Company to finalize the accounting treatment for its recent $50 million Series A Convertible Preferred Stock transaction. The Company is in the process of performing a valuation of the conversion feature associated with the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock. The Company will utilize the services of an outside advisor to assist the Company in its valuation of the conversion feature.
"The accounting for the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock will not impact the Company's revenue or cash balance. The Company also reiterates that its revenue for the fourth quarter ended October 31, 2003 will be consistent with the Company's prior guidance of $22 million to $25 million."
IOW, since they made the $50M deal with DeutscheBank, they need time to reconcile their books to reflect the earnings properly.
Which can be found here:
href=http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArt
This reminds me of the old National Lampoon spoof advertisement:
Photo of a dog, eyes looking sideways, with a human arm holding a gun to its head. Captioned below it: Use Microsoft Software or the dog gets it!
Right, we're all being held at gunpoint to use Microsoft's inferior software. Pull the other one, it's got bells on.
The only reason that the majority of computer users use Microsoft software is because of the illegal monopoly tactics used to stifle their competition. Sure, there could have been choices but MS was given full reign by the government, by its lack of conviction to press the antitrust lawsuit against them, to horn the competition right out of the market. There's no force about which software you decide to use.
At any time, you could elect to download and install a copy of Linux or run Knoppix from CD or download BSD even, or try Lindows or something, *ANYTHING* but Gates's bloated virus propagation technology! Just because you're too lazy to learn anything *new*, don't blame it on some imaginary force holding you hostage to a certain OS.
This is the worst thing to hit in the spam wars yet. Mainsleazers are given free reign to "prospect via email" and this law will be like all the rest: Window dressing that won't be enforced. Without private right of action, this bill is toothless--the victims of the crime are at the mercy of the enforcement authorities. Seeing how well the enforcement authorities have done so far -- remember how Monkeys.com and Osirusoft.com both got Denial of Serviced off the net by virus-wielding spammers and the Feds paid *no* attention to the complaints by both operators? -- this law will be enforced no differently: NOT AT ALL.
Feel free to call your senators and house members up and *thank them* for the spectacular way they bowed to the forces of $$BIG MONEY$$ yet again. And ask them kindly if they can spare a bottle of Astroglide(tm) to ease the situation.
I'm not legally married to a wonderful woman who looks at me funny when I speak perfectly acceptable geekish colloquialisms, say something spiced up with a bit of Douglas Addam sharp wit or Pythonesque influences or anything else to help, in my own mind, convey how silly or stupid or serious I really am about something. She'll sometimes sit and stare, as if she's trying to puzzle it out, then says, "Speak English."
I don't get it, I get seriously pissed when she does this. Like, did she grow up on a different planet than I did? She claims to have gone to college during the late 70's-early 80's so she's hip to some of the stuff that I might stick into a conversation. She remembers most Saturday Night Live material (I quote them often). But I always get "The Look".
I wish I could figure out why. But then again, this is another fine example of how each one of us is different in a zillion different ways. Some people parse language differences well, others don't.
Ahh, you've not considered option 3:
3. Fool the folks at SCO to think you were really serious about pursuing their claims, after all, they're just foolish CEO types who have no clue about how this software stuff really works. Get them to sign over a bunch of stock to us, get the lawsuit to fail, then take the company management over. Laugh all the way to the bank.
Then there's
4. ???
5. Profit!!
It'll still suck like a Hoover...
Because the entity that was Caldera spun off and became Tarantella, then Canopy stepped in and bought out the rest of the business, the Linux distribution, the Unix software, and all the successive rights. The clowns at Canopy probably looked at the failing bottom line of what was left of the business, said to themselves, "We gotta stop this hemorrhaging.. *FAST*!!"
"But how we donna do dat, boss?" I can hear in reply in my mind.
"We'll call ourselves SCO again, so that people will associate us with all that was good in the Unix world -- BIG BUSINESS!! Then they hired Darl and his pals Sonntag, et alia, and put them to work to come up with a bright idea to salvage some stockholder value outta the whole mess.
The most creative thing they could think of was a stock pump-and-dump deal and an attempt to rape the world for the software that they created.
Here, lemme set you straight, young'n. Follows from the FSF's front page:
'The GNU Project was launched in 1984 to develop a complete Unix-like operating system which is free software: the GNU system. (GNU is a recursive acronym for "GNU's Not Unix"; it is pronounced "guh-NEW".) Variants of the GNU operating system, which use the kernel Linux, are now widely used; though these systems are often referred to as "Linux", they are more accurately called GNU/Linux systems.'
Now, do you truly understand? Hie theeself off to that webpage and absorb some knowledge, before crowing on about exactly that which you do not possess.
Heh. The world is waking up and seeing this thing for what it is: A blatant attempt by some big money corporate thugs to take over the finest collaborative work this world has ever seen.
Yeah, I know, it's off-topic, mod me down...
Winning isn't what I'd call the finish to the Spamhaus/Spews/7 other unassociated individuals case. Remember, Linford, et al, hired one of the best antispam lawyers to take the case. He did a fantastic job addressing the complaint and all the filings related to it. The attorney for the spammers, one Mark E Felstein (Felchstain to you) took a good look at the opposition's filings, quietly shit his pants, and filed a motion to drop the case *with prejudice*.
Win? No, all that asshole Felchstain managed to do is run up the legal bills for the SPEWS/Spamhaus seven. He should have been disbarred but I'm certain that the judge at the court where this was filed is an ol' drinkin' bud with Felchstain, so all he might have gotten was a dirty look from the judge for the waste of time and taxpayer money for the court.
Nice ideas. First one, I would hope, would be SOP for anyone running a blocklist. However, mailing the domain that's subject to the blocklisting often falls on deaf ears. Here's why:
Postmaster@somedomain.com isn't aliased to a working email account monitored by a human. Same for abuse@somedomain.com. The site contacts in the whois registry either are stale and no longer work or are no longer monitored by a human. It's another scenario of whack-a-mole, trying to identify the proper contact to reach to inform them of the blocklisting, time better spent simply doing the Ronco thing: Set your blocklist entry and FORGET IT!
You want the job of attempting to notify a responsible party of every blocklist entry on SPEWS? Go ahead! Have fun trying! You'll be there for a month of Sundays, making a significant dent in the job.
Incorrect characterization of SPEWS methods. From my own personal observations, a SPEWS listing starts out with the spammer's IP addresses based on spam received at multiple spamtrap accounts. Complaints are filed by the people who run the SPEWS list and, of course, they do not identify themselves as SPEWS operators in those complaints. Some time elapses (I'm not SPEWS, how should I know how much time exactly?). Either the spammer is removed (Yay! The listing drops off the list) or the complaints go ignored and more spam is received at the spamtrap accounts. The listing gets widened to the
Lather, rinse, repeat the above until someone at the responsible ISP who received the original complaints wakes the fuck up and notices the situation, usually after their own customers are screaming at them, asking them to fix the problem that got them blocklisted. Then again, this is all laid out in the SPEWS faq in fairly clear, easy to understand language.
If ISP's are dropping mail from both level1 and level2 listings, they've made their own bed and are now laying in it. Only an idiot would block on level2 listings as they are meant as an historical indicator of problems with an ISP and do age off after an indeterminate period of time, again outside my control or knowledge.
SPEWS is the only thing thus far in the war against spam that actually has an effect at the ISP level to get some of these outfits to wake the fuck up and see what's happening in their own abuse@ mail accounts. ISP's think they can continue to shine on the spam problem, thinking they have no responsibility for their customers' actions. We, the users of SPEWS blocklist, say otherwise.
If I decide I don't want mail from a corner of the Internet that has sent me nothing but spam, that's my right. If I decide to rely upon the opinion of another Internet service who tracks this kind of information for themselves and elects to share it with the public, that's my right also. SPEWS works for me and mine.
Not certain but this sounds like someone somewhere is completely off the mark. Why would Verio block all traffic, including http, from Noos? Which set of IP's was blocklisted? I thought most anti-spam blocklists only affected receipt of smtp packets? I look up IP's for noos.com's mail exchangers and nothing listed. It'd take too long to go searching for all of noos.com's cablemodem IP space and see if it's been blocklisted, and if it has, the most likely reason is the typical listing of DHCP-delegated address space that's happening to cablemodem pools all over the world.
I don't get it, this is so unlike the typical case of innocent trapped in an anti-spam blocklist that I can't sort out what exactly happened here. If Verio decides they don't want traffic from a French ISP, it's their right. As usual, thank the spammers.