Even if you put the subject of KDE code theft and GPL violations aside, that horrid licensing and pricing scheme of QT sucks, and that vacuum drags KDE down to the suck level.
I'm amazed at how KDE people bitch and moan about anyone who refuses to use KDE because of the Trolltech license, but they happily use and distribute completely free software from the rest of Linux.
What a double standard. Keep your desktop free, refuse KDE and QT until the TROLLS fix that disgusting license. Check out helixcode.com or something, anything but Trollware.
It would also be nice if some KDE people would recognize that QT has screwed them far more than any other group.
I'd use VC++ and Win2K first, for less than half the price of QT!
List of Musicians (over 1M records sold) under contract:
Aqua 98 Degress ABBA Andrea Bocelli The Cranberries Sheryl Crow Bee Gees Boyzone The Brian Setzer Orchestra The Cardigans Vince Gill Dru Hill Enrique Iglesias Elton John É o Tchan ERA (Eric Levi) Florent Pagny Jay-Z Kirk Franklin George Strait André Rieu Shania Twain U2 Caetano Veloso Rob Zombie
List of Record Company Subsidiaries:
A&M Records Blue Thumb Records Decca Record Company Def Jam Recordings Deutsche Grammophon Geffen Records GRP Records Impulse! Records Interscope Records Island Records MCA Records MCA Nashville Mercury Records Mercury Nashville Motown Record Company Philips Polydor Universal Records Verve Records
Common products:
Universal Studios Universal Music Chivas Regal Captain Morgan Rum Absolut Vodka Steinlager Beer Grolsch Beer Mumm wines Tessera Wines Sterling Vinyards Perrier-Jouet Champagne
I estimate that since the 'tallica and RIAA lawsuits, my personal boycott of CD purchases amounts to 30 sales.
Mostly, I just listen to my older CDs, borrow from the library, borrow from friends/relatives, or listen to the radio.
When I see a way to pipe cash back to my favorite musicians, without supporting the RIAA, NetPD, 'tallica and others (who I beleive made illegal intrusions into millions of people's privacy) then I'll start spending on my favorite bands.
The RIAA and music companies are screwing the public and the musicians -- stop buying CDs til they stop the theft of our privacy.
I submitted this story to slashdot, but they rejected it. Not all musicians are against napster; take a look at the following and the links at the end.
Courtney Love, of the band "Hole", railed against the RIAA and record industry at a New York conference on Digital Music Tuesday.
And I quote:
"It's become quite fashionable lately for artists to express outrage at music piracy, and I'm a fashionable gal. Stealing artists' music without paying for it is absolutely piracy -- and I'm talking about major labels, not Napster," she remarked, citing major record labels as the single greatest threat to artist subsistence.
She is desperately trying to break off from Geffen to go "DIY".
1) Call friend on phone. 2) Play 'tallica music into phone.
Now, suppose a company listens in and compiles evidence, then sells it to 'tallica. 'tallica, in turn, sues the phone manufacturer, who then takes away your phone.
This can't happen, for a few reasons. AFAIK/IANAL, there are only three ways for any entity to compile evidence regarding your phone usage and use it in court:
a) The FBI, I beleive, can monitor your phone line without a court order or your consent in some cases of national security;
b) Any authority, with a judge-issued search warrant;
c) Anyone, with your permission.
Therefore, the first defense a lawyer would use is : "How did you aquire your evidence?", and then have the case thrown out on the grounds that the evidence was illegally obtained.
Then, I as an individual, could countersue 'tallica and "PhonePD" for unlawful invasion of privacy. I would settle for a resonable amount of their worth, of course:-)
This is a much, much bigger issue than most people, including the Holy Linux Trio (Torvalds, Perens, Wall) think.
> NetPD didn't do anything wrong by browsing > this.
No other companies can enter a person's home or listen to their communications, let alone compile a usage digest and sell it. Whether or not it's currently legal to do is not the point; the point is that it should not be legal.
> Again, it's not snooping when you are online, > sharing files. You don't have to put those MP3's > on Napster and you can even remove them from > your shared library without deleting them. > > It's not snooping when you voluntarily and > willingly share files online and someone looks > at them for a reason other than downloading > them.
That reason better be casual interest. They better not be storing it for resale without my permission. See the laws regarding party lines. The use of of phone lines has many restrictions on who can listen in and why. I don't think NetPD has the right to compile information about my servers for any reason, let alone for the purpose of resale. I'm well within my rights to claim that any information about my computer is for private, non-commercial use. I can't currently enforce it, but I do claim the right.
> > 3) The legality of 'tallica to coerce a > > software company to deny me access to their > > product based on the data aquired in 1) and > > 2);
> That isn't Metallica's doing. That's Napster's > own policy. Didn't you read the agreement > when you signed up?
Haven't you read the news lately? Napster banned thousands of innocent users because of the lawsuit brought my 'tallica. If you still don't understand, that means "The results of the action by 'tallica deprived thousands of innocent users the benefit of a product".
> Well, here's my broken record. You invited them > there by putting your files up for display using > Napster.
More like your broken brain. I have never used napster, idiot. Once invited into my house, guests cannot do "anything they want". For example, they can't take pictures of me or make recordings of my voice without my permission.
> You ask a lot of stupid legal questions but > there aren't any legal arguments behind them.
Actually, I think you're pretty stupid. Why? Because I don't use napster, never have used napster, have never pirated anything, and you blindly assumed I do. That make you pretty stupid, doesn't it? An ass, more or less.
When I invite a police officer into my house for a cup of coffee, or as a friend/neighbor, that's completely different from that officer entering my house on offical business. The courts have already decided that.
The phone company can monitor my line -- only for the purpose of "quality testing" -- and for no other reason. The courts have decided that as well.
NetPD, 'tallica and the RIAA have done far more damage to the public's right to communicate that the public has done to their revenue stream. It has to stop.
Your accusion of my criminal behavior, without any facts, proof, or evidence, when I have violated no law, is exactly the point I am trying to make. Thank you for making it for me.
People are innocent until proven guilty, and that proof must be obtained legally, or at least that was the case until morons like 'tallica, the RIAA, and you spewed their dollars and/or idiocy on an ignorant legislature and judicial system.
I'm still not sure that the following issues are being put into their proper perspective:
1) The legality of companies like NetPD to snoop a computer in my house without my permission or a judge-issued warrant;
2) The legality of 'tallica to hire a third party such as netPD to compile information about me and my computer uses without my permission or a judge-issued warrant;
3) The legality of 'tallica to coerce a software company to deny me access to their product based on the data aquired in 1) and 2);
4) The legality of the RIAA's treatment of the internet community as a class; specificially with regard to interpersonal peer-to-peer communication .
Traditionally, legal action involving theft or copyright infringement in directed toward an individual or corporation dealing in "piracy" : the unauthorized *sale* of material, not individuals simpay sharing samples of a material.
The idea of corporations or extremely rich individuals manipulating the law against a large number of not-for-profit individuals communicating for any reason, and treating them as a class, is quite alarming to me.
I understand that 'tallica and the RIAA are concerned about the impact of emerging technologies on their revenue stream. They have a point. But they are stomping around in people's living rooms, and decisions made now could have a chilling effect on the future of our privacy on the net.
If a sacrifice must be made, let it be on the against the rich and powerful, and for the freedom of the masses.
Perhaps it is time to consider alternatives, such as overseas connections, certified anonymous servers, port hopping, tunnelling, encrypted streams and the like. If that's what it takes in "The Land of the Free" to get the government, corporations and the rich musicians out of my living room, so be it.
As a citizen of the United States of America, I am concerned at the short notice given to the internet community of the "Internet Music" hearing to be held this Wednesday, May 24th. I only heard about the hearing today, via the following website (http://www.slashdot.org)
I am also concerned at the small number of participants invited to speak at this hearing, especially as the topic and proposals are in no way restricted to small business or the music industry.
I am requesting that before any hearing be held on this matter, the following two organizations be contacted and allowed time to present their points of view on freedom and the internet : The Electronic Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org) and the Free Software Foundation (www.fsf.org).
I am not of the opinion that restrictions on the internet affect only the music industry. To me, such a view is dangerously shortsighted.
I'll be honest here. I don't know what proposals are up for privacy on the net. Later to night I'm going to take a look at Electronic Frontier Foundation and see what they have on the topic.
In the near future, I'm going to become more active in this area. Why? Mostly, the ease at which 'tallica and NetPD invaded my privacy -- not only my privacy, but millions of people -- an entire segment of society was poked, prodded and examined without their approval or a court order.
Traditionally, the authorities cannot enter my home without my permission or a judge-issued search warrant. Private citizens? They either have to get permission, or contact the authorities if they think I've committed a crime.
But suppose I have a computer with a soundcard, mic and camera installed. It's technically feasible for people to enter my home -- not just the autorities, which is bad enough -- but regular people can enter without my permission. Several years ago there were issues with some Unix workstations having funky permissions on such devices and varisou forms of monitoring going on.
Finally, at some point, I think the peer-to-peer connection between two personal computers needs to become a protected channel. No examination or monitoring without 1) My explicit permission; or 2) a warrant issued by a judge.
I understand why 'tallica did what they did. They want the traditional revenue stream to stay intact as technology transitions away from CDs. The problem is the unforeseen negative consequences of such an action -- if 'tallica and netPD can examine what we do at will in the year 2000, who knows what the courts will say is legal 20 years from now!
If anyone has links to sites working on these types of issues, I'd like to see them.
This is just more non-information, the same as the non-information that is continuously posted about HP OpenMail.
The client and the server REQUIRE that LDAP and or POP3 be open! This requires the Admins to be willing to support Linux and other open systems.
The exchange protocol is illegal to write against. Any company that tries to make a linux client that works with the exchange protocol will get sued into the ground.
Exchange itself. It does not work with open email standards.
Where I work, the system admins on the M$HAFT side of things run the email. They absolutely refuse to open up pop3 or LDAP.
Thus we can only use Outlook to read our mail; the exchange protocol is proprietary.
People say that HP OpenMail has a client that will access Exchange from Linux, but I have never seen it on the HP website.
As an aside, our company recently hired some M$HAFT types to write a "web based info system". They wrote it such that it only works with IE -- Netscape can't access it.
One is on the release of Solaris 8, which is about $20 for the unwarranted version, and NDS directory services.
This is kinda odd, tho -- although eDirectory will run on Solaris, W2K and Linux, check this:
> Novell is pursuing aggressive sales for > eDirectory. It will give a 100-user licence free > to customers buying Windows 2000 Server within > 90 days of its release. Sun Solaris 7 buyers > will be offered the same deal until 31 January.
What, no Linux? People actually buy Linux, ya know.
Historically, no entity could enter your home without one of two things: One, your permission; or Two, a warrant from a judge.
Obviously, the citizen is in control of issue #1. If you don't want someone on your property, they're gone.
Item 2, a warrant, means the citizen must submit to a search for the items clearly delimited on the warrant. To obtain a warrant, the investigators must show they have reasonable suspicion that a crime has, or is about to be, committed on the property to be searched.
Contrast this with "personal" computers. NetPD was able to scan thousands of computers, obtain information about the users, compile and distribute the information without a warrant or your permission to access your machine.
The situation is grim. In my opinion, all communication between two computers must become legally protected. That is, no sifting or compilation of data about me, without my consent or a warrant from a judge; no monitoring of my communication with other PC users without a warrant or my consent.
Obviously, an employer has a right to know what their machines are being used for. I admit employers and company PCs do not fall under this umbrella.
One reason the presumption of innocence exists is to allow people to communicate freely. When I have a guest over to my house, I know we can speak and act freely -- any monitoring, without my permission or a warrant, is illegal.
My computer has microphones and video equipment attached. All transmissions between my computer and the outside world need to become protected. No monitoring without a warrant, or my express permission.
Don't get me wrong. I really enjoyed watching Maddog introduce Linus at Comdex last November.
It was my first Comdex, and very exciting all around; mostly cuz of the huge Linux presence.
Maddog is a *big guy* -- I wish someone would put his height into the interviews.
Drinking can be fun, but I bet a lot of people out there know someone who has burn hurt or killed because things got out of control.
When your application dumps core, big deal. But if your brain skews while trying to navigate some tricky curve with friends in the car, well, it's a pretty sad thing.
There are many tragedies in life, be careful with booze. Too many students get in too much trouble with liquor. Don't let people drive when they've had too much, and don't be "ashamed" to take care of your friends. You might be saving a life...
Guns can and do shoot projectiles that can kill a person, but by and large they are not used for that purpose. Here's an example to help you understand. Picture a playground full of schoolchildren. A guy with a big ass four wheel drive plows through the fence and kills several children. People like you demand that all four wheel drives be outlawed. Now do you understand? Or do I have to use more capital letters?
By the way, the incident occurred in California, in the late nineteen eighties, and yes, for a short while, the politicians and brilliant people like you proposed outlawing four wheel drive vehicles similar to the model the wacko drove.
in the proper hands, they do good -- what they are designed to do -- coerce a person to your point of view ("No, I won't let you kill my family. In fact, I kill you before I let that happen.")
in the wrong hands, they are trouble. "I said, "Give me yo wallet, Muthuh Fuckuh". Or, as can be seen in Los Angeles, they make great evidence when the police plant them in and around a parollee's home.
Guns sometimes kill people. Sometimes in a good way, sometimes in a bad way. The question is not whether or not they should be legal -- only a person with a very poor understanding of the world around us would advocate outlawing handguns -- the real question is : "What steps can be taken to increase the percentage of "Good" outcomes vs. "Bad" outcomes?
Because when you start thinking in absolutes, you are using simple solutions to solve a complex problem. And we know where that path leads. Utter failure and grotesque unanticipated consequences.
Unfortunately, the only solution I can see is stiff sentences and long probation periods for handgun offenders. That's all the technology we have right now.
Maybe in the future we can make smart weapons. For example, everyone could have a subcutaneous chip in their neck that could be queried by the weapon. "Does this person have a propensity to crime? A history of violence? Is the target armed? Do they have a propensity to violence? What is the probability that I am being used to commit a crime? What is the probability that I am protecting a good person?" If the proper equations are triggered, the weapon fires.
But human rights and the global situation, not to mention the technology, would have to progress significantly before I'd let anyone put a chip in my neck.
I have never hated Microsoft more than I do today.
Why? Exchange. That horrid piece of monolistic crap, Exchange.
The MSCE nazis who run our exchange server refuse to open LDAP or POP3. So, No access from my Unix machine, no access from my Linux boot -- instead, I have to reboot into WinDOS just to read my fscking mail.
People yap about HP having a Linux client that speaks exchange, but I don't think they do. At least, it's not obvious on the OpenMail webpage. What do I have to do? Get the entire OpenMail package and yank the client out? If there is a Linux client that speaks exchange, it should be much easier to get ahold of.
Now, to pour salt in the would, the IT morons where I work have created a new payroll system. Guess what? It only works with IE5. Oh boy. Another great reason to reboot into WinDOS.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if you put the subject of KDE code theft and GPL violations aside, that horrid licensing and pricing scheme of QT sucks, and that vacuum drags KDE down to the suck level.
I'm amazed at how KDE people bitch and moan about anyone who refuses to use KDE because of the Trolltech license, but they happily use and distribute completely free software from the rest of Linux.
What a double standard. Keep your desktop free, refuse KDE and QT until the TROLLS fix that disgusting license. Check out helixcode.com or something, anything but Trollware.
It would also be nice if some KDE people would recognize that QT has screwed them far more than any other group.
I'd use VC++ and Win2K first, for less than half the price of QT!
might be fun and easy to kill buffalo with a gun, but i'd love to see you try to take one down without your pussboy weapons helping you.
http://www.seagram.com/financials/annual_reports/s eagram99-AR68.html
This corporation is MASSIVE!
List of Musicians (over 1M records sold) under contract:
Aqua
98 Degress
ABBA
Andrea Bocelli
The Cranberries
Sheryl Crow
Bee Gees
Boyzone
The Brian Setzer Orchestra
The Cardigans
Vince Gill
Dru Hill
Enrique Iglesias
Elton John
É o Tchan
ERA (Eric Levi)
Florent Pagny
Jay-Z
Kirk Franklin
George Strait
André Rieu
Shania Twain
U2
Caetano Veloso
Rob Zombie
List of Record Company Subsidiaries:
A&M Records
Blue Thumb Records
Decca Record Company
Def Jam Recordings
Deutsche Grammophon
Geffen Records
GRP Records
Impulse! Records
Interscope Records
Island Records
MCA Records
MCA Nashville
Mercury Records
Mercury Nashville
Motown Record Company
Philips
Polydor
Universal Records
Verve Records
Common products:
Universal Studios
Universal Music
Chivas Regal
Captain Morgan Rum
Absolut Vodka
Steinlager Beer
Grolsch Beer
Mumm wines
Tessera Wines
Sterling Vinyards
Perrier-Jouet Champagne
as i recall from my history classes, wasn't seagrams the greatest bootlegger ever?
deep connections throughout organized crime?
gave rise to joe kennedy and the kennedy political dynasty?
who the hell is this to talk about crime and criminality? a huge portion of seagram's early fortunes were built on it.
when did i elect this ahole? who is he to say what me and my friends can do over our ip connections? why should he know what i do online?
why is this moron allowed to stand between the musicians, many of whom want me to have mp3s of their music, and end users?
truly, the record industry is panicing, losing control over the musicians they have raped for so long.
f*ck seagrams. hypocritcal losers.
We could really get back at this judge by writing a bot that searches /. for intelligent posts.
Sample Ouput:
Elapsed time : 4.4321 years
Intelligent Posts Found : 0
> Courtney Love doesn't support Napster, she's
> just grinding her own axe in an entirely
> separate argument.
Wrong. If you had bothered going to the 'stone link, you quite possible would have read:
"... It's not piracy when kids swap music over the Internet using Napster..."
...which is definitely a statement supportive of the Napster concept.
I estimate that since the 'tallica and RIAA lawsuits, my personal boycott of CD purchases amounts to 30 sales.
Mostly, I just listen to my older CDs, borrow from the library, borrow from friends/relatives, or listen to the radio.
When I see a way to pipe cash back to my favorite musicians, without supporting the RIAA, NetPD, 'tallica and others (who I beleive made illegal intrusions into millions of people's privacy) then I'll start spending on my favorite bands.
The RIAA and music companies are screwing the public and the musicians -- stop buying CDs til they stop the theft of our privacy.
Courtney Love, of the band "Hole", railed against the RIAA and record industry at a New York conference on Digital Music Tuesday.
And I quote:
"It's become quite fashionable lately for artists to express outrage at music piracy, and I'm a fashionable gal. Stealing artists' music without paying for it is absolutely piracy -- and I'm talking about major labels, not Napster," she remarked, citing major record labels as the single greatest threat to artist subsistence.
She is desperately trying to break off from Geffen to go "DIY".
Here are the links:
news page on the hole site
and the rolling stone article
2 letters : vi.
1) Call friend on phone.
:-)
2) Play 'tallica music into phone.
Now, suppose a company listens in and compiles evidence, then sells it to 'tallica. 'tallica, in turn, sues the phone manufacturer, who then takes away your phone.
This can't happen, for a few reasons. AFAIK/IANAL, there are only three ways for any entity to compile evidence regarding your phone usage and use it in court:
a) The FBI, I beleive, can monitor your phone line without a court order or your consent in some cases of national security;
b) Any authority, with a judge-issued search warrant;
c) Anyone, with your permission.
Therefore, the first defense a lawyer would use is : "How did you aquire your evidence?", and then have the case thrown out on the grounds that the evidence was illegally obtained.
Then, I as an individual, could countersue 'tallica and "PhonePD" for unlawful invasion of privacy. I would settle for a resonable amount of their worth, of course
This is a much, much bigger issue than most people, including the Holy Linux Trio (Torvalds, Perens, Wall) think.
> NetPD didn't do anything wrong by browsing
> this.
No other companies can enter a person's home or listen to their communications, let alone compile a usage digest and sell it. Whether or not it's currently legal to do is not the point; the point is that it should not be legal.
> Again, it's not snooping when you are online,
> sharing files. You don't have to put those MP3's
> on Napster and you can even remove them from
> your shared library without deleting them.
>
> It's not snooping when you voluntarily and
> willingly share files online and someone looks
> at them for a reason other than downloading
> them.
That reason better be casual interest. They better not be storing it for resale without my permission. See the laws regarding party lines. The use of of phone lines has many restrictions on who can listen in and why. I don't think NetPD has the right to compile information about my servers for any reason, let alone for the purpose of resale. I'm well within my rights to claim that any information about my computer is for private, non-commercial use. I can't currently enforce it, but I do claim the right.
> > 3) The legality of 'tallica to coerce a
> > software company to deny me access to their
> > product based on the data aquired in 1) and
> > 2);
> That isn't Metallica's doing. That's Napster's
> own policy. Didn't you read the agreement
> when you signed up?
Haven't you read the news lately? Napster banned thousands of innocent users because of the lawsuit brought my 'tallica. If you still don't understand, that means "The results of the action by 'tallica deprived thousands of innocent users the benefit of a product".
> Well, here's my broken record. You invited them
> there by putting your files up for display using
> Napster.
More like your broken brain. I have never used napster, idiot. Once invited into my house, guests cannot do "anything they want". For example, they can't take pictures of me or make recordings of my voice without my permission.
> You ask a lot of stupid legal questions but
> there aren't any legal arguments behind them.
Actually, I think you're pretty stupid. Why? Because I don't use napster, never have used napster, have never pirated anything, and you blindly assumed I do. That make you pretty stupid, doesn't it? An ass, more or less.
When I invite a police officer into my house for a cup of coffee, or as a friend/neighbor, that's completely different from that officer entering my house on offical business. The courts have already decided that.
The phone company can monitor my line -- only for the purpose of "quality testing" -- and for no other reason. The courts have decided that as well.
NetPD, 'tallica and the RIAA have done far more damage to the public's right to communicate that the public has done to their revenue stream. It has to stop.
Your accusion of my criminal behavior, without any facts, proof, or evidence, when I have violated no law, is exactly the point I am trying to make. Thank you for making it for me.
People are innocent until proven guilty, and that proof must be obtained legally, or at least that was the case until morons like 'tallica, the RIAA, and you spewed their dollars and/or idiocy on an ignorant legislature and judicial system.
Fool.
I'm still not sure that the following issues are being put into their proper perspective:
1) The legality of companies like NetPD to snoop a computer in my house without my permission or a judge-issued warrant;
2) The legality of 'tallica to hire a third party such as netPD to compile information about me and my computer uses without my permission or a judge-issued warrant;
3) The legality of 'tallica to coerce a software company to deny me access to their product based on the data aquired in 1) and 2);
4) The legality of the RIAA's treatment of the internet community as a class; specificially with regard to interpersonal peer-to-peer communication .
Traditionally, legal action involving theft or copyright infringement in directed toward an individual or corporation dealing in "piracy" : the unauthorized *sale* of material, not individuals simpay sharing samples of a material.
The idea of corporations or extremely rich individuals manipulating the law against a large number of not-for-profit individuals communicating for any reason, and treating them as a class, is quite alarming to me.
I understand that 'tallica and the RIAA are concerned about the impact of emerging technologies on their revenue stream. They have a point. But they are stomping around in people's living rooms, and decisions made now could have a chilling effect on the future of our privacy on the net.
If a sacrifice must be made, let it be on the against the rich and powerful, and for the freedom of the masses.
Perhaps it is time to consider alternatives, such as overseas connections, certified anonymous servers, port hopping, tunnelling, encrypted streams and the like. If that's what it takes in "The Land of the Free" to get the government, corporations and the rich musicians out of my living room, so be it.
Here is a contact form.
Also, there is an email: smbiz@mail.house.gov.
Dear Sir or Madam:
As a citizen of the United States of America, I am concerned at the short notice given to the internet community of the "Internet Music" hearing to be held this Wednesday, May 24th. I only heard about the hearing today, via the following website (http://www.slashdot.org)
I am also concerned at the small number of participants invited to speak at this hearing, especially as the topic and proposals are in no way restricted to small business or the music industry.
I am requesting that before any hearing be held on this matter, the following two organizations be contacted and allowed time to present their points of view on freedom and the internet : The Electronic Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org) and the Free Software Foundation (www.fsf.org).
I am not of the opinion that restrictions on the internet affect only the music industry. To me, such a view is dangerously shortsighted.
Your cooperation is this matter is appreciated.
I'll be honest here. I don't know what proposals are up for privacy on the net. Later to night I'm going to take a look at Electronic Frontier Foundation and see what they have on the topic.
In the near future, I'm going to become more active in this area. Why? Mostly, the ease at which 'tallica and NetPD invaded my privacy -- not only my privacy, but millions of people -- an entire segment of society was poked, prodded and examined without their approval or a court order.
Traditionally, the authorities cannot enter my home without my permission or a judge-issued search warrant. Private citizens? They either have to get permission, or contact the authorities if they think I've committed a crime.
But suppose I have a computer with a soundcard, mic and camera installed. It's technically feasible for people to enter my home -- not just the autorities, which is bad enough -- but regular people can enter without my permission. Several years ago there were issues with some Unix workstations having funky permissions on such devices and varisou forms of monitoring going on.
Finally, at some point, I think the peer-to-peer connection between two personal computers needs to become a protected channel. No examination or monitoring without 1) My explicit permission; or 2) a warrant issued by a judge.
I understand why 'tallica did what they did. They want the traditional revenue stream to stay intact as technology transitions away from CDs. The problem is the unforeseen negative consequences of such an action -- if 'tallica and netPD can examine what we do at will in the year 2000, who knows what the courts will say is legal 20 years from now!
If anyone has links to sites working on these types of issues, I'd like to see them.
This is just more non-information, the same as the non-information that is continuously posted about HP OpenMail.
The client and the server REQUIRE that LDAP and or POP3 be open! This requires the Admins to be willing to support Linux and other open systems.
The exchange protocol is illegal to write against. Any company that tries to make a linux client that works with the exchange protocol will get sued into the ground.
Exchange itself. It does not work with open email standards.
Where I work, the system admins on the M$HAFT side of things run the email. They absolutely refuse to open up pop3 or LDAP.
Thus we can only use Outlook to read our mail; the exchange protocol is proprietary.
People say that HP OpenMail has a client that will access Exchange from Linux, but I have never seen it on the HP website.
As an aside, our company recently hired some M$HAFT types to write a "web based info system". They wrote it such that it only works with IE -- Netscape can't access it.
Same site, other articles.
One is on the release of Solaris 8, which is about $20 for the unwarranted version, and NDS directory services.
This is kinda odd, tho -- although eDirectory will run on Solaris, W2K and Linux, check this:
> Novell is pursuing aggressive sales for
> eDirectory. It will give a 100-user licence free
> to customers buying Windows 2000 Server within
> 90 days of its release. Sun Solaris 7 buyers
> will be offered the same deal until 31 January.
What, no Linux? People actually buy Linux, ya know.
Historically, no entity could enter your home without one of two things: One, your permission; or Two, a warrant from a judge.
Obviously, the citizen is in control of issue #1. If you don't want someone on your property, they're gone.
Item 2, a warrant, means the citizen must submit to a search for the items clearly delimited on the warrant. To obtain a warrant, the investigators must show they have reasonable suspicion that a crime has, or is about to be, committed on the property to be searched.
Contrast this with "personal" computers. NetPD was able to scan thousands of computers, obtain information about the users, compile and distribute the information without a warrant or your permission to access your machine.
The situation is grim. In my opinion, all communication between two computers must become legally protected. That is, no sifting or compilation of data about me, without my consent or a warrant from a judge; no monitoring of my communication with other PC users without a warrant or my consent.
Obviously, an employer has a right to know what their machines are being used for. I admit employers and company PCs do not fall under this umbrella.
One reason the presumption of innocence exists is to allow people to communicate freely. When I have a guest over to my house, I know we can speak and act freely -- any monitoring, without my permission or a warrant, is illegal.
My computer has microphones and video equipment attached. All transmissions between my computer and the outside world need to become protected. No monitoring without a warrant, or my express permission.
Don't get me wrong. I really enjoyed watching Maddog introduce Linus at Comdex last November.
It was my first Comdex, and very exciting all around; mostly cuz of the huge Linux presence.
Maddog is a *big guy* -- I wish someone would put his height into the interviews.
Drinking can be fun, but I bet a lot of people out there know someone who has burn hurt or killed because things got out of control.
When your application dumps core, big deal. But if your brain skews while trying to navigate some tricky curve with friends in the car, well, it's a pretty sad thing.
There are many tragedies in life, be careful with booze. Too many students get in too much trouble with liquor. Don't let people drive when they've had too much, and don't be "ashamed" to take care of your friends. You might be saving a life...
Guns can and do shoot projectiles that can kill a person, but by and large they are not used for that purpose. Here's an example to help you understand. Picture a playground full of schoolchildren. A guy with a big ass four wheel drive plows through the fence and kills several children. People like you demand that all four wheel drives be outlawed. Now do you understand? Or do I have to use more capital letters?
By the way, the incident occurred in California, in the late nineteen eighties, and yes, for a short while, the politicians and brilliant people like you proposed outlawing four wheel drive vehicles similar to the model the wacko drove.
guns are simply tools.
in the proper hands, they do good -- what they are designed to do -- coerce a person to your point of view ("No, I won't let you kill my family. In fact, I kill you before I let that happen.")
in the wrong hands, they are trouble. "I said, "Give me yo wallet, Muthuh Fuckuh". Or, as can be seen in Los Angeles, they make great evidence when the police plant them in and around a parollee's home.
Guns sometimes kill people. Sometimes in a good way, sometimes in a bad way. The question is not whether or not they should be legal -- only a person with a very poor understanding of the world around us would advocate outlawing handguns -- the real question is : "What steps can be taken to increase the percentage of "Good" outcomes vs. "Bad" outcomes?
Because when you start thinking in absolutes, you are using simple solutions to solve a complex problem. And we know where that path leads. Utter failure and grotesque unanticipated consequences.
Unfortunately, the only solution I can see is stiff sentences and long probation periods for handgun offenders. That's all the technology we have right now.
Maybe in the future we can make smart weapons. For example, everyone could have a subcutaneous chip in their neck that could be queried by the weapon. "Does this person have a propensity to crime? A history of violence? Is the target armed? Do they have a propensity to violence? What is the probability that I am being used to commit a crime? What is the probability that I am protecting a good person?" If the proper equations are triggered, the weapon fires.
But human rights and the global situation, not to mention the technology, would have to progress significantly before I'd let anyone put a chip in my neck.
If you BUY a FUCKING car, then you at least have to FUCKING admit the possibility that you are going to run someone over.
I have never hated Microsoft more than I do today.
Why? Exchange. That horrid piece of monolistic crap, Exchange.
The MSCE nazis who run our exchange server refuse to open LDAP or POP3. So, No access from my Unix machine, no access from my Linux boot -- instead, I have to reboot into WinDOS just to read my fscking mail.
People yap about HP having a Linux client that speaks exchange, but I don't think they do. At least, it's not obvious on the OpenMail webpage. What do I have to do? Get the entire OpenMail package and yank the client out? If there is a Linux client that speaks exchange, it should be much easier to get ahold of.
Now, to pour salt in the would, the IT morons where I work have created a new payroll system. Guess what? It only works with IE5. Oh boy. Another great reason to reboot into WinDOS.
I hate Microsoft.
as i recall, there was a web-based registrar rating site -- that lists the details of agreements from the various registrars, etc.
when my NSI expires in several months, i should just be able to transfer it over to one of the more forward-thinking registrars, correct?
i think there's one in san diego with a good rep.