What about those potential vulnerabilities discovered by Michael Zalewski ? Are they fixed ? Thats something very important IMHO. Each one of them is one potential exploit waiting some malicious hacker. I believe all of them should be fixed before the 1.0 release, which should be considered stable, and doesnt have the benefit of the "pre-1.0" excuse.
"Except as provided below, Microsoft hereby grants you a royalty-free license under Microsoft's Necessary Claims to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import, and otherwise distribute Licensed Implementations solely for the purpose of reading and writing files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas." ... "You are not licensed to distribute a Licensed Implementation under license terms and conditions that prohibit the terms and conditions of this license." ...
No, its not like that. Those "Telecentros" are entirelly free, like in beer. You dont have to pay to use the computers with highspeed Internet. You may also get free computer classes (Linux, OpenOffice, etc). We (Im brazilian) also have those comercial Internet centers, called "Internet Cafe", where usually you pay by the hour to use highspeed Internet conections. Unfortunately, unlike "Telecentros", they still use Windows.
Telecomutting is different from taking jobs outside USA. Do you really believe workers in, for example, India, are telecomutters ? No, problably the majority of them go to work everyday, and problably in a worse schedule than yours...
Please donÂt mess the concepts here... It IS possible to distribute a software under two(or more) differents licenses. Each license is just a group of rights that you give to your licensee. If you give him a GPL license, he is obligged to redistribute the software under GPL. If you give him a commercial license, and it allows redistribution, he can redistribute it under commercial licenses... see the difference ? If you want to look an example, see the QT library. The Unix version is distributed under GPL and under a commercial license.
"The Common Criteria,..., grades products based not only on their security and reliability, but also on the development and support processes that ensure quick responses to problems." Does that mean that the US Gov. will be officially saying that the Kernel development model is OK ?
Who said that they didnt contribute to the kernel ? Just look at the NUMA post... You can say they didnt create the kernel, or that they dont lead the kernel development, but they do contribute to the kernel.
"More recently, the NUMA scheduler patch has been reworked (by Martin Bligh, Erich Focht, Michael Hohnbaum, and others) around a simple observation: most of the NUMA problems can be solved by simply restricting the current scheduler's balancing code to processors within a single node. If the rebalancer - which moves processes across CPUs in order to keep them all busy - only balances inside a node, the worst processor imbalances will be addressed without moving processes into a foreign-node slow zone.
A simple (three-line) patch which did nothing but add the within-node restriction yielded most of the benefits of the full NUMA scheduler; indeed, it performed better on some benchmarks. Real-world loads, however, will require a scheduler which can distribute processes evenly across nodes. Occasionally it is necessary, even, to move processes to a slower node; a lot of CPU time on a lightly-loaded node will give better performance than waiting in the run queue on a heavily-loaded node. So a bit of complexity had to be added back into the new scheduler to complete the job."
But if your software is GPL, your user must be able to freely redistribute it. "Freely" here means that neither you neither Microsoft can charge him for redistributing your software. Now you see how it is incompatible with per seat licenses ?
Millions of people believe Santos Dumont is the father of aviation because he was the first to fly a self-propeling heavier than air machine. The Wrights machine wasnt much more than a catapult. Only Americans really believe that could be called an airplane...
I saw a reference to a Lotus Notes Client written in sashXB in the previous post, but now I cant find anything about it in the sashXB homepage. Is there such a thing ? It would be extremely helpfull in convincing my company into changing from Windows to Linux.
This company is restricted from selling their software (Hmm, I wonder if they could give an NDA to their customers prohibiting the re-release of their source code?) by the GPL. Their "rights" are not being protected here. "their" software ? Did you forget that their code is based on someone elses code ? They have no exclusive "rights" here... Besides, when they started modifying the code, they were supposed to know it was GPLed and the restrictions that comes with GPL. If their intent was to sell software, they should code from scratch or use some non-GPLed software... GPL is protecting the right of the original coder to keep HIS original code free... and if you dont want to respect his will, then dont use his code... I mean, noone will force you to use GPL code on your projects...
Slashdot Mirror
What about those potential vulnerabilities discovered by Michael Zalewski ? Are they fixed ?
Thats something very important IMHO.
Each one of them is one potential exploit waiting some malicious hacker.
I believe all of them should be fixed before the 1.0 release, which should be considered stable, and doesnt have the benefit of the "pre-1.0" excuse.
Brains coworker :-)
:-)
Watch cartoons all day and see your mind melt down
Office 2003 XML Reference Schema Patent License:
...
...
"Except as provided below, Microsoft hereby grants you a royalty-free license under Microsoft's Necessary Claims to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import, and otherwise distribute Licensed Implementations solely for the purpose of reading and writing files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas."
"You are not licensed to distribute a Licensed Implementation under license terms and conditions that prohibit the terms and conditions of this license."
No GPL ?
No, its not like that. Those "Telecentros" are entirelly free, like in beer. You dont have to pay to use the computers with highspeed Internet. You may also get free computer classes (Linux, OpenOffice, etc).
We (Im brazilian) also have those comercial Internet centers, called "Internet Cafe", where usually you pay by the hour to use highspeed Internet conections. Unfortunately, unlike "Telecentros", they still use Windows.
Telecomutting is different from taking jobs outside USA. Do you really believe workers in, for example, India, are telecomutters ? No, problably the majority of them go to work everyday, and problably in a worse schedule than yours...
Why ? Ill tell you why... ...
Its expensive !!!
Then you would be discriminating against poor blind people !!!
Oh, those poor blinds
Please donÂt mess the concepts here ...
It IS possible to distribute a software under two(or more) differents licenses. Each license is just a group of rights that you give to your licensee. If you give him a GPL license, he is obligged to redistribute the software under GPL. If you give him a commercial license, and it allows redistribution, he can redistribute it under commercial licenses... see the difference ?
If you want to look an example, see the QT library. The Unix version is distributed under GPL and under a commercial license.
SSL is supposed to be imune against "man in the middle" attacks, so if its vulnerable, its a SSLs failure.
What ??? Impopular, me ???? No way.... thats totally impossible cause I Use Linux (TM) and Linux rocks !!!!
"... because they are much lighter than conventional panels they don't need specially reinforced structures to support them."
...
I believe this has a greater appeal to an architect than the blue denim lookalike
"The Common Criteria, ..., grades products based not only on their security and reliability, but also on the development and support processes that ensure quick responses to problems."
Does that mean that the US Gov. will be officially saying that the Kernel development model is OK ?
Who said that they didnt contribute to the kernel ? Just look at the NUMA post ...
You can say they didnt create the kernel, or that they dont lead the kernel development, but they do contribute to the kernel.
"More recently, the NUMA scheduler patch has been reworked (by Martin Bligh, Erich Focht, Michael Hohnbaum, and others) around a simple observation: most of the NUMA problems can be solved by simply restricting the current scheduler's balancing code to processors within a single node. If the rebalancer - which moves processes across CPUs in order to keep them all busy - only balances inside a node, the worst processor imbalances will be addressed without moving processes into a foreign-node slow zone. A simple (three-line) patch which did nothing but add the within-node restriction yielded most of the benefits of the full NUMA scheduler; indeed, it performed better on some benchmarks. Real-world loads, however, will require a scheduler which can distribute processes evenly across nodes. Occasionally it is necessary, even, to move processes to a slower node; a lot of CPU time on a lightly-loaded node will give better performance than waiting in the run queue on a heavily-loaded node. So a bit of complexity had to be added back into the new scheduler to complete the job."
Extracted from:
http://lwn.net/Articles/20741/
- Ally X Enemy : How to distinguish in 10 easy steps ...
... now you try ... :-)
- The Lawyers Interests X The Clients Interests : Which is more important ?
Too tired to think of new ones
He didnt say "this card works in PCI bus systems", he had a "product" (website) named "PCI Vendor ...", i.e., using the trademark.
...
He could claim that he didnt make profit from the "product"
Am I wrong or he just wants an dictation software (versus Speech Recognition) ???
But if your software is GPL, your user must be able to freely redistribute it. "Freely" here means that neither you neither Microsoft can charge him for redistributing your software.
Now you see how it is incompatible with per seat licenses ?
Millions of people believe Santos Dumont is the father of aviation because he was the first to fly a self-propeling heavier than air machine. The Wrights machine wasnt much more than a catapult. ...
Only Americans really believe that could be called an airplane
Hmmm...tamper-proof, huh ? Yeah...
... --
Crackers, anyone ?
-- The world was built in six days. The seventh wa spent looking for the undo button
I saw a reference to a Lotus Notes Client written in sashXB in the previous post, but now I cant find anything about it in the sashXB homepage. Is there such a thing ? It would be extremely helpfull in convincing my company into changing from Windows to Linux.
This company is restricted from selling their software (Hmm, I wonder if they could give an NDA to their customers prohibiting the re-release of their source code?) by the GPL. Their "rights" are not being protected here. ... Besides, when they started modifying the code, they were supposed to know it was GPLed and the restrictions that comes with GPL. If their intent was to sell software, they should code from scratch or use some non-GPLed software ... ... and if you dont want to respect his will, then dont use his code ... I mean, noone will force you to use GPL code on your projects ...
"their" software ? Did you forget that their code is based on someone elses code ? They have no exclusive "rights" here
GPL is protecting the right of the original coder to keep HIS original code free