Ok, I took a good look over the patent. It appears that the patent is for a software package management system that operates over the internet specifically. Well, there's a good chance that was never patented. There's also a good chance that someone else patented this same feature over a network in general. If that is the case, the patent office has just granted a duplicate patent with more specific terms.
If there never was a patent even like this before, I'm fairly certain AIX had a NIM-like service before this patent was submitted that would work over the internet... if you would want to do that.
This is nice as long as your employer only sees things your way. Go get a job at IBM and you'll quickly learn that it doesn't matter what you think. It only matters WHAT THEY THINK.
So until you get that into your scrawny little ass mind, I suggest you remain a pizza delivery boy.
Until you get fired for missing work because you were in jail. Or maybe because your name is associated with the company and they want to keep their image somewhat clean.
Will this internet that we know exist forever? As the net slowly changes, I see a tug of war occuring in everything online. It appears that the "share" way of thinking is in constant struggle with the "control" way of thinking. Each little upgrade to an internet application seems to show a tug to one side or the other.
So what am I getting at? Well, every person who connects helps to contribute to either way things will eventually work. And lately, I think the number of people who don't realize this are outnumbering those who do realize this. The balance of power is shifting to a more controlled environment where a minority may rule.
As the CoS doesn't seem to be growing (if it is, it isn't very fast, or the CoS would be a major religion by now)...
Gee, with the tons of stupid people out there, you'de think CoS would be overtaking Christianity soon. Well, I guess you can't fool all the people all the time.
...there's really not going to be much motivation from their standpoint to continue supporting a standalone OS, especially when it's now being given away for free...
The version that's being `given' away for free is not the Pro version and isn't what I would call the FULL version of BeOS.
I am not a Be person, so my information may be flawed or even *GASP* wrong.
1) Be does not have a large amount of manpower. They had barely enough to keep BeOS going and slowly keep up with driver support and software support all at the same time.
2) BeIA is more important to Be as a company and therefore more of it's resources will be working on BeIA (and not BeOS).
With those two issues stated, I submit that BeOS is turning into a bastard stepchild. Be will give it enough resources to appear alive, but in the end, it will never receive the attention it needs to really make a difference to anyone. I am NOT happy with this situation. If Be won't take care of BeOS, then let someone else. Why not Open Source the thing and spend a little effort to help nurture it out into the Open Source world? I think that everyone could benefit from a very workstation oriented, open OS. Even Be.
As someone else pointed out on/. a while back, you can be governed by elected officials, by corporations, or by roving street gangs (Chaos Overlords anyone?), but you're still gonna be governed.
Unless, of course, you do the governing of all others. It's good to be grand high ruler of the entire universe.;)
This statement has never ceased to provide humor for me. Anyone who thinks that a video game (console, PC, or arcade) is a training simulator has either never played one, or never been on an actual killing spree.
Perhaps the government should look into purchasing Iridium and using it to both transfer military use transmissions and earn some money back by selling services to phone companies around the world. For once the military might could pay for its own satellites.
Wouldn't you STILL be using a program? Everyone HAS to use a tool to get MP3's (legally or not). Sure, your news program might have other uses than getting MP3's, but once the MPAA and RIAA find out how you can get terrorist propoganda, bomb making instructions and porn from it, they'll want to shut them down and corner the market.
Then I hope you aren't using a search engine, FTP, web browser, or other program. I guess you suit up with safari equipment and go outside and hunt them the old fasioned way?
plus I wouldn't want people accessing my files on my computer.
Both Napster and Gnutella allow you to prevent anyone from seeing or DLing your files. Maybe you should TRY these apps before you start comenting on wether they are worthwhile or not.
"Freenet could be used by pedophiles and terrorists." Okay, this is kind of ridiculous. In a way, saying this makes it seem as though there are is a large army of child pornographers just waiting for an anonymous network.
Just like they were waiting for pencils, paper, cars, etc. Freenet is a tool and if people always focused on the horrible things a tool could be used for, we'de have a lot less tools, no?
I have to say that this is a good point. I am using M14 on Win32 platform mostly and there are good and bad things to see. M14 is fairly stable, it formats HTML flawlessly, but... There are still tons of bugs and problems. I hear that the Linux version is better. I've also run Netscape 6 preview (and it sucked so bad, must have been based on M10 or something). Mozilla shows serious promise, but it's not done yet, so don't go sticking forks in it.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel Netscape would NEVER drift from Mozilla. Netscape's new browser is a value added product built on Mozilla. If Netscape forks and runs amok with Mozilla's code, they will be right back where they started before Mozilla was opensourced. In essence, they will be the only people working on their code, supporting it, and trying to sell it. At least with Mozilla, they will have a serious product to resell.
Imagine if Mandrake suddenly decided to stop using RedHat. Suddenly they would need to do all the work RedHat had been doing for them. Why duplicate effort?
"No but if someone is able to use a firearm to express their anger then the firearm was way too accessible."
Even MORE people do the SAME thing with their automobiles in the US. They get enraged and out of control and cause wrecks, a lot of them fatal. Do you think cars are too accessible as well? Or are you willing to admit that you think the benefit of driving yourself to work each day is more important than the benefit of being able to defend yourself and your country?
"That's why most gun deaths are `crimes of passion.'"
Statistics beg to differ when it comes to handgun deaths. Show me some proof from recent years that show that a majority of handgun deaths were crimes of passion by law abiding citizens.
I enjoyed this quote from the first link you provided...
"UNIX design flaws: There are number of inherent flaws in the UNIX operating system that frequently lead to intrusions. The chief problem is the access control system, where only 'root' is granted administrative rights. As a result,"
That's it. Seriously, the page had no more to say and seemed to end mid-sentance. Hrm. Very intereting, some l33t h4x0r must have deleted the text to cover his tracks while compromising the server.
"In 10 years you would see a difference. In 30 they'd be practically non-existant."
And in 40 years the US people would be ripe for a military coup or unable to defend itself from any kind of tyranical(sp) government. Sure, I admit that we are unlikely to have a serious revolution soon, but maybe 40 years from now, once we're helpless (and unable to reverse such a decision) I don't want to take that chance.
"The guy who shoots his neighbor in a fit of rage was not the criminal(s) you were talking about."
With freedom comes responsability. As a gun owner, I am held to a level of control that prevents me from using my handgun outside the law. If someone is out of control, and they use a firearm to express that anger, why is the gun to blame? Did the gun create the anger or loss of control? No. Did the gun leap into an enraged killers hands? No.
Many US citizens may want to give up certain rights to FEEL safer, but I am not one of them. I would rather live with a risk of being shot than KNOW for a FACT that I have no way to even defend myself from an aggresor who DOES have a gun or knife. I am willing to risk my life in order to maintain the well being of this country as a free nation.
Not having guns will mean that only those who OBEY the law will be without them. You can't give a gun to kids now, so they are allready violating a law. Do you think violating another gun law will really stop someone who is going to break a law to begin with?
If a law is passed to ban guns or severly restrict them, it will not impede criminals at all. Unless you are under some delusion that a gun ban will actually keep criminals from getting guns.
And once you've gotten used to how UNREALISTIC and horribly coded it is, you'll get frustrated and decide to kill yourself in real life. Oh yeah, sign me UP!
For many people, a boycott is a good way to show you are not supporting a particular company or product. But for a few, that is not enough. For that few, the boycott++ is required. A boycott++ is when a person does not only not purchase an item, but goes out of their way to STEAL it. Thereby using a product and denying it's manufacturer of profit. And for those few SUPER hard core protestors, there is VisualBoycott++. VB++ is when you ruin a product for everyone, sell it to other people for cash for yourelf and basically take any measure you can to further your own monetary gain while causing a companies products to fail.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, I took a good look over the patent. It appears that the patent is for a software package management system that operates over the internet specifically. Well, there's a good chance that was never patented. There's also a good chance that someone else patented this same feature over a network in general. If that is the case, the patent office has just granted a duplicate patent with more specific terms.
... if you would want to do that.
If there never was a patent even like this before, I'm fairly certain AIX had a NIM-like service before this patent was submitted that would work over the internet
Bad Mojo
This is nice as long as your employer only sees things your way. Go get a job at IBM and you'll quickly learn that it doesn't matter what you think. It only matters WHAT THEY THINK.
So until you get that into your scrawny little ass mind, I suggest you remain a pizza delivery boy.
Bad Mojo
Until you get fired for missing work because you were in jail. Or maybe because your name is associated with the company and they want to keep their image somewhat clean.
It's all private till it's public.
Bad Mojo
Will this internet that we know exist forever? As the net slowly changes, I see a tug of war occuring in everything online. It appears that the "share" way of thinking is in constant struggle with the "control" way of thinking. Each little upgrade to an internet application seems to show a tug to one side or the other.
So what am I getting at? Well, every person who connects helps to contribute to either way things will eventually work. And lately, I think the number of people who don't realize this are outnumbering those who do realize this. The balance of power is shifting to a more controlled environment where a minority may rule.
It sucks.
Bad Mojo
I'll swear, under penality of perjury, that I claim to be an owner of IP. I won't swear that I *AM* the owner of said, IP.
Bad Mojo
*WARNING* Random pot shot against CoS!
As the CoS doesn't seem to be growing (if it is, it isn't very fast, or the CoS would be a major religion by now)...
Gee, with the tons of stupid people out there, you'de think CoS would be overtaking Christianity soon. Well, I guess you can't fool all the people all the time.
Bad Mojo
Sure, it's impossible for us to visualise it...
Some of us with 6th dimensional sensory organs have no problem `seeing' this.
Hehehe. Puny humans.
Bad Mojo
...there's really not going to be much motivation from their standpoint to continue supporting a standalone OS, especially when it's now being given away for free...
The version that's being `given' away for free is not the Pro version and isn't what I would call the FULL version of BeOS.
Bad Mojo
I am not a Be person, so my information may be flawed or even *GASP* wrong.
1) Be does not have a large amount of manpower. They had barely enough to keep BeOS going and slowly keep up with driver support and software support all at the same time.
2) BeIA is more important to Be as a company and therefore more of it's resources will be working on BeIA (and not BeOS).
With those two issues stated, I submit that BeOS is turning into a bastard stepchild. Be will give it enough resources to appear alive, but in the end, it will never receive the attention it needs to really make a difference to anyone. I am NOT happy with this situation. If Be won't take care of BeOS, then let someone else. Why not Open Source the thing and spend a little effort to help nurture it out into the Open Source world? I think that everyone could benefit from a very workstation oriented, open OS. Even Be.
Bad Mojo
As someone else pointed out on /. a while back, you can be governed by elected officials, by corporations, or by roving street gangs (Chaos Overlords anyone?), but you're still gonna be governed.
;)
Unless, of course, you do the governing of all others. It's good to be grand high ruler of the entire universe.
Bad Mojo
This statement has never ceased to provide humor for me. Anyone who thinks that a video game (console, PC, or arcade) is a training simulator has either never played one, or never been on an actual killing spree.
Bad Mojo
Perhaps the government should look into purchasing Iridium and using it to both transfer military use transmissions and earn some money back by selling services to phone companies around the world. For once the military might could pay for its own satellites.
Bad Mojo
Wouldn't you STILL be using a program? Everyone HAS to use a tool to get MP3's (legally or not). Sure, your news program might have other uses than getting MP3's, but once the MPAA and RIAA find out how you can get terrorist propoganda, bomb making instructions and porn from it, they'll want to shut them down and corner the market.
Bad Mojo
I don't need a program searching for mp3's
Then I hope you aren't using a search engine, FTP, web browser, or other program. I guess you suit up with safari equipment and go outside and hunt them the old fasioned way?
plus I wouldn't want people accessing my files on my computer.
Both Napster and Gnutella allow you to prevent anyone from seeing or DLing your files. Maybe you should TRY these apps before you start comenting on wether they are worthwhile or not.
Bad Mojo
"Freenet could be used by pedophiles and terrorists." Okay, this is kind of ridiculous. In a way, saying this makes it seem as though there are is a large army of child pornographers just waiting for an anonymous network.
Just like they were waiting for pencils, paper, cars, etc. Freenet is a tool and if people always focused on the horrible things a tool could be used for, we'de have a lot less tools, no?
Bad Mojo
"No, you have a democracy in the sense that it's commonly understood."
No, it's a floor wax AND a desert topping!
Bad Mojo
1) OO is overrated.
2) Perl is powerful.
3) If people who wrote web pages for a living knew perl, there would be better web pages.
4) Items 1-3 are the posters opinions.
Bad Mojo
I have to say that this is a good point. I am using M14 on Win32 platform mostly and there are good and bad things to see. M14 is fairly stable, it formats HTML flawlessly, but... There are still tons of bugs and problems. I hear that the Linux version is better. I've also run Netscape 6 preview (and it sucked so bad, must have been based on M10 or something). Mozilla shows serious promise, but it's not done yet, so don't go sticking forks in it.
Bad Mojo
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel Netscape would NEVER drift from Mozilla. Netscape's new browser is a value added product built on Mozilla. If Netscape forks and runs amok with Mozilla's code, they will be right back where they started before Mozilla was opensourced. In essence, they will be the only people working on their code, supporting it, and trying to sell it. At least with Mozilla, they will have a serious product to resell.
Imagine if Mandrake suddenly decided to stop using RedHat. Suddenly they would need to do all the work RedHat had been doing for them. Why duplicate effort?
Bad Mojo
"No but if someone is able to use a firearm to express their anger then the firearm was way too accessible."
Even MORE people do the SAME thing with their automobiles in the US. They get enraged and out of control and cause wrecks, a lot of them fatal. Do you think cars are too accessible as well? Or are you willing to admit that you think the benefit of driving yourself to work each day is more important than the benefit of being able to defend yourself and your country?
"That's why most gun deaths are `crimes of passion.'"
Statistics beg to differ when it comes to handgun deaths. Show me some proof from recent years that show that a majority of handgun deaths were crimes of passion by law abiding citizens.
Bad Mojo
I enjoyed this quote from the first link you provided...
"UNIX design flaws: There are number of inherent flaws in the UNIX operating system that frequently lead to intrusions. The chief problem is the access control system, where only 'root' is granted administrative rights. As a result,"
That's it. Seriously, the page had no more to say and seemed to end mid-sentance. Hrm. Very intereting, some l33t h4x0r must have deleted the text to cover his tracks while compromising the server.
Bad Mojo
"In 10 years you would see a difference. In 30 they'd be practically non-existant."
And in 40 years the US people would be ripe for a military coup or unable to defend itself from any kind of tyranical(sp) government. Sure, I admit that we are unlikely to have a serious revolution soon, but maybe 40 years from now, once we're helpless (and unable to reverse such a decision) I don't want to take that chance.
"The guy who shoots his neighbor in a fit of rage was not the criminal(s) you were talking about."
With freedom comes responsability. As a gun owner, I am held to a level of control that prevents me from using my handgun outside the law. If someone is out of control, and they use a firearm to express that anger, why is the gun to blame? Did the gun create the anger or loss of control? No. Did the gun leap into an enraged killers hands? No.
Many US citizens may want to give up certain rights to FEEL safer, but I am not one of them. I would rather live with a risk of being shot than KNOW for a FACT that I have no way to even defend myself from an aggresor who DOES have a gun or knife. I am willing to risk my life in order to maintain the well being of this country as a free nation.
Bad Mojo
Not having guns will mean that only those who OBEY the law will be without them. You can't give a gun to kids now, so they are allready violating a law. Do you think violating another gun law will really stop someone who is going to break a law to begin with?
If a law is passed to ban guns or severly restrict them, it will not impede criminals at all. Unless you are under some delusion that a gun ban will actually keep criminals from getting guns.
Bad Mojo
And once you've gotten used to how UNREALISTIC and horribly coded it is, you'll get frustrated and decide to kill yourself in real life. Oh yeah, sign me UP!
Bad Mojo
For many people, a boycott is a good way to show you are not supporting a particular company or product. But for a few, that is not enough. For that few, the boycott++ is required. A boycott++ is when a person does not only not purchase an item, but goes out of their way to STEAL it. Thereby using a product and denying it's manufacturer of profit. And for those few SUPER hard core protestors, there is VisualBoycott++. VB++ is when you ruin a product for everyone, sell it to other people for cash for yourelf and basically take any measure you can to further your own monetary gain while causing a companies products to fail.
It's funny, laugh.
Bad Mojo