In fact, I fail to see why people are ready to pay ridiculos amounts of money for a combination of letters. So VA Linux would have domain valinux.com istead of linux.com, what's bad? If companies wouldn't create such a fuss over this, they won't have to pay so many money, and the money could possibly go to something that is really important.
Another thing I fail to see is why someone is allowed to sell "linux" domain names while TM on "Linux" belongs to Linus? Why his lawyers won't do the same thing that etoys lawers did? Why someone should make big bucks on Linux, giving absolutely nothing to Linux and just getting in the way of people who really do something?
I personally won't like my personality to be used as a brainpower and then shutdown out of existence. If I'd find myself trapped in some computer, I'd possibly to the maximum to trick that guy which has occupied my body and claims to be me out of the body and insert myself instead, or at least to make my existance longer. For example, if I'd know I'll be alive until I solved some problem, I'd postpone this indefinitely. The only problem is that me being outside of the computer will see all the tricks, because they made by the identical brain... But 50 brains could possibly organize and make that silly one who created them very-very sorry...
There also was an interesting thought by Stanislav Lem (if I remember right) about teleporation method, as described by some sci-fi writers, by recording molecular structure, passing it over the wire and then assemblying it on the remote end as an exact copy. The question is what is done with original? If it's dissolved, it's basically murder, and creating a copy on the other end doesn't make it less so. If it's not dissolved, then the user didn't move anywhere at all, it just was copied.
And now I have yet another thought - what about illegal brain records copying industry, Brainwave copyright act and some norway hacker that would write an open-source brainwave decoder & recorder? Uff, I'm afraid even to think about it.
Maybe that's why they are getting cracked? They read PC Magazine, buy NT, hire some freshly-out-of-colledge MCSE wannabe-admin, that knows exactly one this - to click "OK" buttons, and then they wonder why their systems are wide open and bent... The only cause we haven't 10 times more such cracks is because 99% of crackers are plain stupid - even too stupid to correctly run ready-made exploit, not to say make one by oneself.
I remeber that Israel (my country) refused to extradict some guy that commited murder in the US and then fled to Israel. Funny thing that he even wasn't Israeli citizen - his parents were, so he had *right* for a citizenship, but never applied for it. But still they refused to extraditct him. I'm not sure if this is good or bad in this particular case, and I know other cases when Israel didn't behave so protectively. But still a real-life primer.
Well, "arrested" and "questioned and then let go" is totally different thing, as I understand. Police may question anybody on anything, from President to sewage cleaner, but to arrest person you need some hard cause (at least in normal states), and you need to bring him before the judge in N hours and then judge will see the case and prolong arrest or lift it. If he was questioned and released, than he wasn't really arrested.
GPL doesn't prevent you from having same code under another license. Contact the author, get a permission on usage of this code without GPL restrictions, and go ahead. I don't see why the author won't give you a non-GPL license.
Great! Just wanted to ask why aren't people coming on the streets for it. I don't really understand how Norvegian police arrests a man because somebody filed a suit in States that maybe, if *American* court ever decides so, mean that Norvegian citizen violated US law. Do I misunderstand something or Norway isn't a US state yet?
Why not? Can you hear your music on your CD? Can you do it with a friend sitting near you? Can your friend still hear it when you leave the room? Can he take mini-radio and put it alongside the tape so you could still hear the music with the second mini-radio set when you go, say, to the bathroom? Now how this is much different from what MP3 does?
You know, that's something strange here. Did Newton, Leibnitz, Koshi, Weierstrass, Fourier et. al. (sorry for spelling of the names - have no book around to see the right one) - all who made current differential/ingegral mathematics - did they all apply for patents on any single fact they found? What would we have instead of current science if every single theorem that was invented for last 2000 years would be patented and everyone who wanted to use any practical result of it would be demanded money?
I don't say that said matematician shouldn't have something for his work - I just call you to see and think, would this promote common good (I mean not welfare of one scientists' family, but the level of all science) if one should pay for every scientific result? Wasn't science based on free ideas exchange once? Or am I missing something vital here?
And my usual question goes here - who funded the research? Obviously, if someone did and this gets patented, patent revenues should go to funder, not?
The point here is that you can ease even sendmail config - see various m4's for it, for example. Or even write soem GUI that would mirror 1-1 all sendmail.cf capabilities but won't force me to remember what exactly:$( $) means, but replace every sendmailoglif with nice helpful button. That won't harm any on the configurability but would largely enhance usability for occasional user.
XML is not so bad, used properly, and can enchance structure of data. It's still text, so you can edit it by hand. It has structure, so program and human can understand easier what is where. And it has tools for parsing it, so one needs not to reinvent config parser every time he wants to write something configurable.
Another question rises - there are mentioned governmental agenices. Those are usually funded with state's (i.e., people's) money, not? And then they go and patent the thing which was the product of their research, and take all the money to itselves? Am I misunderstanding something or this is somehow strange?
So, *that's* and answer about if we'd have human cloning, etc. - just patent it and nobody will come close to it for 20 years. Ancient ethics' problems solved with ancient legal system - isn't it ironic?
This only shows that current patent system is very far from helping innovation. How happened that they invented some cool technology and holded it for 5 years until *other* inmplemented it and started to revenue from it - without any help from the parent holders, notice it - and then they jump out and cry "Gimme all your money!". How exactly this is going to help innovation? All innovative startups just close and/or go wait until the patent expires, or just leave it alone, and only corporations with deep pockets can continue now.
And imagine this technology won't interesting enough? Then all the manufacturers would hold it back for some 15-20 years to get rid of the patents, and then start working on it - pretty innovation-advancing scenario, right?
Not on batteries, on those power cells you read about five articles below. Then you need no computer at all, except for data storage:) Add BlueTooth radio-link technology, and you have a real full-strength computer in your pocket.
In fact, I'd have no problem with Linus approving use of word "Linux" within a trademar/company name/title. AFAIK, you can't call a product "Unix" without whoever-holds-the-TM approval, why Linux is worse? And if your distribution is good, you'd probably get the permission. And if it's bad, you won't.
Or if you are too proud, you can just call it FooBar (without "Linux"), and write "we are distribution of Linux(TM)" in a small letters below. That'd be worse, but still OK - Debian/Caldera/Mandrake are all known now by the first name, and are seldom referred to as "Debian Linux" or "Mandrake Linux" - because they have their own name, and everybody knows what they are.
Very simple. They are another products, called IE for marketing purposes. I can write three products, and call them FooBar for Windows, FooBar for Solaris and FooBar for MacOS, that alone won't make it same product. I'm pretty sure you can't just take IE code and compile it on SOlaris and get MSIE for Solaris - too much COM/OLE/whatever-they-call-it-now for this. You would end up porting half of windows that way - much simpler to make something quick-and-dirty that has the same GUI and works in a similiar way. And judging from reports on the quality of IE for Solaris, that's what they deed in fact.
That's true indeed. MSIE is now no more than a GUI wrapper to a set of objects for talking HTTP, displaying HTML, etc., etc. That was a clever move, and a silly move was to include this thing in a monopoly lawsuit.
2. The Alleged Tie Does Not Foreclose a Substantial Amount of Sales of the Tied Product
And here we all can cry "lie!". I'm sure most of users won't bother to d/l netscape if they have a working IE (there were times when IE was hardly working, but it did improve - it is now working in about 90% of cases and in 99.9% of cases that Netscape is working). And the fact is that IE is better than Netscape, at least for now. I'm really dissatisfied with my Netscape on Unix, and would change it to a better product, if such one was available. Maybe Opera? Mozilla, which is in permanent pre-alpha? What? In fact, would MS care to make MSIE cross-platform, it could be a web-browser monopoly indeed. But they left the niche to competitors - which failed miserably. Too bad for us.
3. Plaintiffs Failed To Prove That There Is a Dangerous Probability That Microsoft Will Achieve Monopoly Power in the Alleged Market for Web Browsing Software. and Microsoft Does Not Have the Power To Control Prices or Exclude Competition in the Relevant Market.
Huh, this is plain silly. They not "will achieve", they "had achieved", if we talk about Windows market. And other markets would be the same if they'd care to do them. And if they, having 90% of desktop OS market, still have no power to control the market, then who has, indeed? But they aruments of why they aren't monopoly are really amazing. Not only they refer to grocery stores analogy, they say they can't raise price on Windows because they can't restrict total output of the market of OSes... As if it is possible at all to restrict number of copies of Windows, given that lovely CD-Rs:) Application of middle-age law to a current technical level could be really funny, if they'd not take it so seriously.
Recently installed my first BSD. Almost exactly the same as an average Linux install. The ports part is really nice, but the extra is not so different that I'd abandon my Linux habits fo it. Not used it yet seriously, though. But looks nice, as it should:)
Daily CVS update for the *OS*? And what if someone would make really stupid thing on CVS that will cut off your CVS ability after make world?
And believe me, it's a real PITA to work on a system that more-or-less work, especially if you accidentally hit the "less" part and all your other work stops until that part is corrected.
You CANNOT install RedHat without installing X-windows
So I'm a freaking mage. I've installed a lot of RH's without even launching X once. What the heck do you need X on server, is it an NT or what?
Jou just get and RTFM a bit, and then RTFM a bit more, and the know that rpm works without X and vi works without X too.
And you *can* upgrade from 5.2 to 6.x. I did it. Not that you really need it if you have working server. Not that you need sendmail either - name me one security hole in qmail? qmail is 1.03 and working and sendmail is 8.9.x and still broken. See it?
Slashdot Mirror
In fact, I fail to see why people are ready to pay ridiculos amounts of money for a combination of letters. So VA Linux would have domain valinux.com istead of linux.com, what's bad? If companies wouldn't create such a fuss over this, they won't have to pay so many money, and the money could possibly go to something that is really important.
Another thing I fail to see is why someone is allowed to sell "linux" domain names while TM on "Linux" belongs to Linus? Why his lawyers won't do the same thing that etoys lawers did? Why someone should make big bucks on Linux, giving absolutely nothing to Linux and just getting in the way of people who really do something?
I personally won't like my personality to be used as a brainpower and then shutdown out of existence. If I'd find myself trapped in some computer, I'd possibly to the maximum to trick that guy which has occupied my body and claims to be me out of the body and insert myself instead, or at least to make my existance longer. For example, if I'd know I'll be alive until I solved some problem, I'd postpone this indefinitely. The only problem is that me being outside of the computer will see all the tricks, because they made by the identical brain... But 50 brains could possibly organize and make that silly one who created them very-very sorry...
There also was an interesting thought by Stanislav Lem (if I remember right) about teleporation method, as described by some sci-fi writers, by recording molecular structure, passing it over the wire and then assemblying it on the remote end as an exact copy. The question is what is done with original? If it's dissolved, it's basically murder, and creating a copy on the other end doesn't make it less so. If it's not dissolved, then the user didn't move anywhere at all, it just was copied.
And now I have yet another thought - what about illegal brain records copying industry, Brainwave copyright act and some norway hacker that would write an open-source brainwave decoder & recorder? Uff, I'm afraid even to think about it.
Maybe that's why they are getting cracked? They read PC Magazine, buy NT, hire some freshly-out-of-colledge MCSE wannabe-admin, that knows exactly one this - to click "OK" buttons, and then they wonder why their systems are wide open and bent... The only cause we haven't 10 times more such cracks is because 99% of crackers are plain stupid - even too stupid to correctly run ready-made exploit, not to say make one by oneself.
I remeber that Israel (my country) refused to extradict some guy that commited murder in the US and then fled to Israel. Funny thing that he even wasn't Israeli citizen - his parents were, so he had *right* for a citizenship, but never applied for it. But still they refused to extraditct him. I'm not sure if this is good or bad in this particular case, and I know other cases when Israel didn't behave so protectively. But still a real-life primer.
Well, "arrested" and "questioned and then let go" is totally different thing, as I understand. Police may question anybody on anything, from President to sewage cleaner, but to arrest person you need some hard cause (at least in normal states), and you need to bring him before the judge in N hours and then judge will see the case and prolong arrest or lift it. If he was questioned and released, than he wasn't really arrested.
GPL doesn't prevent you from having same code under another license. Contact the author, get a permission on usage of this code without GPL restrictions, and go ahead. I don't see why the author won't give you a non-GPL license.
Great! Just wanted to ask why aren't people coming on the streets for it. I don't really understand how Norvegian police arrests a man because somebody filed a suit in States that maybe, if *American* court ever decides so, mean that Norvegian citizen violated US law. Do I misunderstand something or Norway isn't a US state yet?
Why not? Can you hear your music on your CD? Can you do it with a friend sitting near you? Can your friend still hear it when you leave the room? Can he take mini-radio and put it alongside the tape so you could still hear the music with the second mini-radio set when you go, say, to the bathroom? Now how this is much different from what MP3 does?
You know, that's something strange here. Did Newton, Leibnitz, Koshi, Weierstrass, Fourier et. al. (sorry for spelling of the names - have no book around to see the right one) - all who made current differential/ingegral mathematics - did they all apply for patents on any single fact they found? What would we have instead of current science if every single theorem that was invented for last 2000 years would be patented and everyone who wanted to use any practical result of it would be demanded money?
I don't say that said matematician shouldn't have something for his work - I just call you to see and think, would this promote common good (I mean not welfare of one scientists' family, but the level of all science) if one should pay for every scientific result? Wasn't science based on free ideas exchange once? Or am I missing something vital here?
And my usual question goes here - who funded the research? Obviously, if someone did and this gets patented, patent revenues should go to funder, not?
The point here is that you can ease even sendmail config - see various m4's for it, for example. Or even write soem GUI that would mirror 1-1 all sendmail.cf capabilities but won't force me to remember what exactly :$( $) means, but replace every sendmailoglif with nice helpful button. That won't harm any on the configurability but would largely enhance usability for occasional user.
XML is not so bad, used properly, and can enchance structure of data. It's still text, so you can edit it by hand. It has structure, so program and human can understand easier what is where. And it has tools for parsing it, so one needs not to reinvent config parser every time he wants to write something configurable.
But for what I see they are *not* broadcasting it. They are unicating it to those who owns it.
Domain Name: MYLINUX.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: No nameserver
Updated Date: 11-may-1999
Can I cry "squatters! squatters!" already? Especially seeing "No nameserver" part?
Another question rises - there are mentioned governmental agenices. Those are usually funded with state's (i.e., people's) money, not? And then they go and patent the thing which was the product of their research, and take all the money to itselves? Am I misunderstanding something or this is somehow strange?
So, *that's* and answer about if we'd have human cloning, etc. - just patent it and nobody will come close to it for 20 years. Ancient ethics' problems solved with ancient legal system - isn't it ironic?
Which one, a red one or a blue one? :)
This only shows that current patent system is very far from helping innovation. How happened that they invented some cool technology and holded it for 5 years until *other* inmplemented it and started to revenue from it - without any help from the parent holders, notice it - and then they jump out and cry "Gimme all your money!". How exactly this is going to help innovation? All innovative startups just close and/or go wait until the patent expires, or just leave it alone, and only corporations with deep pockets can continue now.
And imagine this technology won't interesting enough? Then all the manufacturers would hold it back for some 15-20 years to get rid of the patents, and then start working on it - pretty innovation-advancing scenario, right?
Not on batteries, on those power cells you read about five articles below. Then you need no computer at all, except for data storage :) Add BlueTooth radio-link technology, and you have a real full-strength computer in your pocket.
In fact, I'd have no problem with Linus approving use of word "Linux" within a trademar/company name/title. AFAIK, you can't call a product "Unix" without whoever-holds-the-TM approval, why Linux is worse? And if your distribution is good, you'd probably get the permission. And if it's bad, you won't.
Or if you are too proud, you can just call it FooBar (without "Linux"), and write "we are distribution of Linux(TM)" in a small letters below. That'd be worse, but still OK - Debian/Caldera/Mandrake are all known now by the first name, and are seldom referred to as "Debian Linux" or "Mandrake Linux" - because they have their own name, and everybody knows what they are.
Very simple. They are another products, called IE for marketing purposes. I can write three products, and call them FooBar for Windows, FooBar for Solaris and FooBar for MacOS, that alone won't make it same product. I'm pretty sure you can't just take IE code and compile it on SOlaris and get MSIE for Solaris - too much COM/OLE/whatever-they-call-it-now for this. You would end up porting half of windows that way - much simpler to make something quick-and-dirty that has the same GUI and works in a similiar way. And judging from reports on the quality of IE for Solaris, that's what they deed in fact.
Interesting things here are that:
:) Application of middle-age law to a current technical level could be really funny, if they'd not take it so seriously.
1. Windows 98 Is a Single, Integrated Product.
That's true indeed. MSIE is now no more than a GUI wrapper to a set of objects for talking HTTP, displaying HTML, etc., etc. That was a clever move, and a silly move was to include this thing in a monopoly lawsuit.
2. The Alleged Tie Does Not Foreclose a Substantial Amount of Sales of the Tied Product
And here we all can cry "lie!". I'm sure most of users won't bother to d/l netscape if they have a working IE (there were times when IE was hardly working, but it did improve - it is now working in about 90% of cases and in 99.9% of cases that Netscape is working). And the fact is that IE is better than Netscape, at least for now. I'm really dissatisfied with my Netscape on Unix, and would change it to a better product, if such one was available. Maybe Opera? Mozilla, which is in permanent pre-alpha? What?
In fact, would MS care to make MSIE cross-platform, it could be a web-browser monopoly indeed. But they left the niche to competitors - which failed miserably. Too bad for us.
3. Plaintiffs Failed To Prove That There Is a Dangerous Probability That Microsoft Will Achieve Monopoly Power in the Alleged Market for Web Browsing Software. and Microsoft Does Not Have the Power To Control Prices or Exclude Competition in the Relevant Market.
Huh, this is plain silly. They not "will achieve", they "had achieved", if we talk about Windows market. And other markets would be the same if they'd care to do them. And if they, having 90% of desktop OS market, still have no power to control the market, then who has, indeed? But they aruments of why they aren't monopoly are really amazing. Not only they refer to grocery stores analogy, they say they can't raise price on Windows because they can't restrict total output of the market of OSes... As if it is possible at all to restrict number of copies of Windows, given that lovely CD-Rs
Recently installed my first BSD. Almost exactly the same as an average Linux install. The ports part is really nice, but the extra is not so different that I'd abandon my Linux habits fo it. Not used it yet seriously, though. But looks nice, as it should :)
Daily CVS update for the *OS*? And what if someone would make really stupid thing on CVS that will cut off your CVS ability after make world?
And believe me, it's a real PITA to work on a system that more-or-less work, especially if you accidentally hit the "less" part and all your other work stops until that part is corrected.
You CANNOT install RedHat without installing X-windows
So I'm a freaking mage. I've installed a lot of RH's without even launching X once. What the heck do you need X on server, is it an NT or what?
Jou just get and RTFM a bit, and then RTFM a bit more, and the know that rpm works without X and vi works without X too.
And you *can* upgrade from 5.2 to 6.x. I did it. Not that you really need it if you have working server. Not that you need sendmail either - name me one security hole in qmail? qmail is 1.03 and working and sendmail is 8.9.x and still broken. See it?