I dunno, to me this post seemed perfectly appropriate. It is after all related, KDE (a desktop environment) released a beta of their next version. GNOME (another desktop environment) also released a beta of their next version. I personally did not know about the GNOME beta before this post, I'm sure there are others who would also be interested. Just because GNOME is mentioned under a KDE thread doesn't mean it's an attempt to flame. The sad part is that you need to include disclaimers to let people know).
Your arguement doesn't hold water, however. Read any EULA. Every single one of them (even the GPL) has a clause about the software coming without waranty. So if Win NT decides to eat your database and you lose millions of dollars you can sue MS all you want, but you will lose. For proof of this read the article linked on slashdot about the Washington state supremem court upholding a EULA in exactly this type of situation. And since MS is located in Washington I'm assuming this does a lot to cover their asses with a nice precident.
Atleast the open source community doesn't pretend to give any gaurantees of stability, they just fix the bugs as they come up and say "oops!" Try getting Microsoft to admit that they made a huge mistake in some app.
Read the article about the Washington Supreme Court upholding shrink wrap licenses. Even with commercial software no one is responsible. Read the EULA on any peice of software (commercial or otherwise) and i assure you it will have a clause in there about no waranty being provided with said software.
Here is one way to install say, RedHat 6.2 on an UDMA 66 controller. Just one note before I start, from what I understand the drivers are hardly Abit's I think they just patched the RedHat 6.1 kernel with the patch you mentioned and called it their own.
First, unhook hdd from the UDMA controller and plug it into the corrisponding IDE controller (ie, if it's the primary master on the UDMA controller it should be the same on the IDE controller).
Second, install whatever distro you chose.
Third, get a clean kernel source (since the ones distributed with most distros never patch cleanly) and grab the patch you mentioned. Build and install this kernel. You should probably put it on a floppy as lilo might not entirely like this procedure.
Now you put your hdd back on the UDMA controller and reboot. The UDMA controller now becomes/dev/hd[a-d] so to linux nothing should have changed.
If you have any problems my email is spam@drexel.edu.
Unfortunately, my understanding of the DMCA is that making a mp3 of a CD you own is still illegal. Now I think the law is plain stupid and wrong, but until we fix it, it's still the law. I won't be deleting my mp3s anytime soon though.
DOS 6.2->6.21 $10 (for an upgrade that removed disk compression) (or was it 6.2->6.22?) (I think this update might have been made freely available at one point)
OS/2 2.1 Service Pack $20 (granted very few people actually needed it). I think with this one you could download it (even though at the time you would probably pay more for the time online downloading it)
Win98 -> Win98SE $80 IIRC (and it seemed to cause more bugs than it fixed).
Nope, IIRC the GPL states that the source must be made available on a comonly used medium. I strongly doubt that a supermodel is a comonly used medium for transmitting code. Then again, I'd probably pay for the supermodel.
Not true. AC3 (the sound format most DVDs use) is 384Kbps (IIRC). Now some dvds do contain uncompressed audio but they are rather rare. IMHO, it is a real shame that MP3 wasn't part of the standard, I'd love to write an xmms plugin to decode mp3s through my dxr2 dvd card.
I think everyone complaining about the license is missing the point. Maybe watch manufacturers don't WANT to give out the source code period. And before you open source nazis start jumping down my throat complaining that not distributing the source is imoral or whatever else, when is the last time you got the source code to a watch, or a PDA, or just about any embeded device.
With the (new) BSD license there is nothing at all preventing a company from distributing the source, there is just nothing requiring it. And someone could take minix and make a GPL'd fork, now that the advertising clause is out BSDL and GPL are perfectly compatible.
Just remember, the GPL isn't the end all and be all of free licenses, it's just one of many. Or have you all forgotten that Linux, etc, are about choice.
go to ebay, people sell them all the time. but you must get a dxr2 OVERLAY card. There are plans to possibly support the inlay version of the dxr2, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Man when did you go to drexel? Tutution is something like 26K now for the 5 year program (30 something for 4) and i think they are looking to pull in 1500 freshmen alone next year.
That's right kids, ALL mp3s, regardless of the legallity, because all mp3s are illegal, didn't you know that? This one kid here was forced to delete all of the mp3s from his box and write an 8 page letter of appology for his evil actions. The university of course ignored the fact that many of these mp3s were completely legal, infact I think he composed some of them. And why is Drexel pulling this crap? You guessed it, because the RIAA sent them a scarey letter threatening to sue them for up to $150,000 for each mp3 found on Drexel's network.
Also, somewhat amusingly, there was an article in the school newspaper about some kids who got busted for running a "fake id ring" out of their dorm. In addition to selling fake ids, the school busted them for drug dealing, and....owning mp3s. The kiddies' boxes were stolen^H^H^H^H^H^H confiscated and they have lost their network privlages. So remember kids, dealing drugs is bad, but if you own mp3s, we're gonna steal your computer.
P.S. I'm not usually this sarcastic, but I'm about to go to Humanities 102, my least favorite of all classes. Have fun y'all.
Ignoring the fact that I like to think Corel is a company that does have good intentions, it simply wouldn't make sense for them to make it Corel Linux only. Sure it would boost the Corel Linux market share some, but I imagine they'd take a much larger hit in loss of sales from people who a) refuse to buy from a company that looks like it's trying to become the microsoft of the linux world and b) refuse to give up their current distro just so they can use some app that isn't really needed. I honeslty doubt they'd try to pull something like this. Also, I imagine if the ports do lean to one desktop/toolkit it will be kde/qt as they are used heavily in Corel Linux. Just a guess.
I think they're motives are pretty straight forward, they want to port their software to linux with the least ammount of effort (read: money). This way is by taking wine and enhancing it to the point where their apps will compile for linux. Just be glad they are publishing their changes, wine IIRC is under the BSD license which allows for people to make closed source forks. I really can't see of any underhanded movites they might have.
Juries can in a way say that the law is unjust or whatever. It's called nullification, I think the way it works is that the jury just returns a verdict of "not guilty" even though they know he's guilty. Since in the US once you are found not guilty you cannot be tried again, you are free even though you did break said law.
I think the hardest part is that there is no way for a virus writer to know exactly what the kernel installed on a computer is going to look like. There are countless different variations of the linux kernel out there, due to different versions, config options, compilers, etc. I would think that if anything tried this the result would be the system locking during the kernel boot process. Which would be a pain in the arse, but not really harmful.
Yes and no. A key grabber as they exist in the dos world would not work because no user program can get physical access to the keyboard. What would work however, would be for a program to open the terminal you are logged into and start recording what you type. I just verified that this can indeed work.
Could you please explain how exactly a mechanism designed to export files could lead to you getting a mean old virus on your computer? khttpd can do nothing more than serve static files, could pose a greater problem, but it's no more dangerous than nfsd. Just because something is in the kernel doesn't make it automatically insecure. Think about it, all of the security mechanisms on your linux system eventually trace back to the kernel.
Please, before you post comments like this think about them first. There's nothing wrong with being cautious, but there is no need for paranoia.
Just an FYI, all IP stacks MUST support ICMP. IIRC TCP requires ICMP for initiating connections, and it is used to signal a broken connection and all sorts of things. Also, ICMP = Internet Controll Message Protocol, and IGMP = Internet Group Message Protocol. And one final thing, windows supports UDP just fine.
From what I've heard it's pretty much a way for people who don't believe in christianity to express time with out paying hommage to the christian god. Ie, jews do not believe that jesus was the son of god, there for refering to the current year as the 1999th "year of our lord" (translation of A.D.) doesn't really make a lot of sense. Also refering to time as being "Before Christ" also makes very little sense. Also, IMHO it makes sense even if you are a christian because I think this is technically the year 2004 A.D. and there was a screw up during the middle ages that made us all think it is currently 1999.
P.S. I learned about C.E. from a high school religion teacher, so take what I said with a shaker of salt.
Here's the funny thing about encryption. People use encryption because they want to put the security of their data in their own hands without having to get uncle scam involved, right? Now if the DVD forum had done their job and had a decent encryption algorithm created for DVDs they wouldn't be in this mess right now. But they used an incredibly poor algorithm, and they got bit. Deal with it. If someone breaks into my house with a lock pick, I'm not going to go after the company that made the lock pick, I'm going to go after the guy who used the lock pick to commit a crime. Also, if my version of a lock is a dead bolt that goes into a weak wooden door frame, it's pretty much my fault when someone kicks my door in.
I really don't see how publishing information on how to bypass any security protection is any different than publishing information in say, a lock smith magazine (I'm sure they must exist somewhere) explaining how to open the latest and greatest lock. Sure the information can be used for criminal purposes, but it can also be used for perfectly legal purposes, such as when you lose the key to your house and you want to get in without having to break a window.
Slashdot Mirror
I dunno, to me this post seemed perfectly appropriate. It is after all related, KDE (a desktop environment) released a beta of their next version. GNOME (another desktop environment) also released a beta of their next version. I personally did not know about the GNOME beta before this post, I'm sure there are others who would also be interested. Just because GNOME is mentioned under a KDE thread doesn't mean it's an attempt to flame. The sad part is that you need to include disclaimers to let people know).
-matt
source: ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/unstable/distribution/
p m/
rpms: ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/unstable/distribution/r
Better?
Your arguement doesn't hold water, however. Read any EULA. Every single one of them (even the GPL) has a clause about the software coming without waranty. So if Win NT decides to eat your database and you lose millions of dollars you can sue MS all you want, but you will lose. For proof of this read the article linked on slashdot about the Washington state supremem court upholding a EULA in exactly this type of situation. And since MS is located in Washington I'm assuming this does a lot to cover their asses with a nice precident.
Atleast the open source community doesn't pretend to give any gaurantees of stability, they just fix the bugs as they come up and say "oops!" Try getting Microsoft to admit that they made a huge mistake in some app.
Read the article about the Washington Supreme Court upholding shrink wrap licenses. Even with commercial software no one is responsible. Read the EULA on any peice of software (commercial or otherwise) and i assure you it will have a clause in there about no waranty being provided with said software.
Here is one way to install say, RedHat 6.2 on an UDMA 66 controller. Just one note before I start, from what I understand the drivers are hardly Abit's I think they just patched the RedHat 6.1 kernel with the patch you mentioned and called it their own.
/dev/hd[a-d] so to linux nothing should have changed.
First, unhook hdd from the UDMA controller and plug it into the corrisponding IDE controller (ie, if it's the primary master on the UDMA controller it should be the same on the IDE controller).
Second, install whatever distro you chose.
Third, get a clean kernel source (since the ones distributed with most distros never patch cleanly) and grab the patch you mentioned. Build and install this kernel. You should probably put it on a floppy as lilo might not entirely like this procedure.
Now you put your hdd back on the UDMA controller and reboot. The UDMA controller now becomes
If you have any problems my email is spam@drexel.edu.
Unfortunately, my understanding of the DMCA is that making a mp3 of a CD you own is still illegal. Now I think the law is plain stupid and wrong, but until we fix it, it's still the law. I won't be deleting my mp3s anytime soon though.
Companies do charge for bug fixes on occasion.
DOS 6.2->6.21 $10 (for an upgrade that removed disk compression) (or was it 6.2->6.22?) (I think this update might have been made freely available at one point)
OS/2 2.1 Service Pack $20 (granted very few people actually needed it). I think with this one you could download it (even though at the time you would probably pay more for the time online downloading it)
Win98 -> Win98SE $80 IIRC (and it seemed to cause more bugs than it fixed).
Nope, IIRC the GPL states that the source must be made available on a comonly used medium. I strongly doubt that a supermodel is a comonly used medium for transmitting code. Then again, I'd probably pay for the supermodel.
Not true. AC3 (the sound format most DVDs use) is 384Kbps (IIRC). Now some dvds do contain uncompressed audio but they are rather rare. IMHO, it is a real shame that MP3 wasn't part of the standard, I'd love to write an xmms plugin to decode mp3s through my dxr2 dvd card.
I think everyone complaining about the license is missing the point. Maybe watch manufacturers don't WANT to give out the source code period. And before you open source nazis start jumping down my throat complaining that not distributing the source is imoral or whatever else, when is the last time you got the source code to a watch, or a PDA, or just about any embeded device.
With the (new) BSD license there is nothing at all preventing a company from distributing the source, there is just nothing requiring it. And someone could take minix and make a GPL'd fork, now that the advertising clause is out BSDL and GPL are perfectly compatible.
Just remember, the GPL isn't the end all and be all of free licenses, it's just one of many. Or have you all forgotten that Linux, etc, are about choice.
go to ebay, people sell them all the time. but you must get a dxr2 OVERLAY card. There are plans to possibly support the inlay version of the dxr2, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
IANAL, but I'm fairly certain that playback and backup copies are covered under "fair use".
Man when did you go to drexel? Tutution is something like 26K now for the 5 year program (30 something for 4) and i think they are looking to pull in 1500 freshmen alone next year.
That's right kids, ALL mp3s, regardless of the legallity, because all mp3s are illegal, didn't you know that? This one kid here was forced to delete all of the mp3s from his box and write an 8 page letter of appology for his evil actions. The university of course ignored the fact that many of these mp3s were completely legal, infact I think he composed some of them. And why is Drexel pulling this crap? You guessed it, because the RIAA sent them a scarey letter threatening to sue them for up to $150,000 for each mp3 found on Drexel's network.
Also, somewhat amusingly, there was an article in the school newspaper about some kids who got busted for running a "fake id ring" out of their dorm. In addition to selling fake ids, the school busted them for drug dealing, and....owning mp3s. The kiddies' boxes were stolen^H^H^H^H^H^H confiscated and they have lost their network privlages. So remember kids, dealing drugs is bad, but if you own mp3s, we're gonna steal your computer.
P.S. I'm not usually this sarcastic, but I'm about to go to Humanities 102, my least favorite of all classes. Have fun y'all.
IIRC LinuxOne originally tried this and it failed miserably.
Ignoring the fact that I like to think Corel is a company that does have good intentions, it simply wouldn't make sense for them to make it Corel Linux only. Sure it would boost the Corel Linux market share some, but I imagine they'd take a much larger hit in loss of sales from people who a) refuse to buy from a company that looks like it's trying to become the microsoft of the linux world and b) refuse to give up their current distro just so they can use some app that isn't really needed. I honeslty doubt they'd try to pull something like this. Also, I imagine if the ports do lean to one desktop/toolkit it will be kde/qt as they are used heavily in Corel Linux. Just a guess.
I think they're motives are pretty straight forward, they want to port their software to linux with the least ammount of effort (read: money). This way is by taking wine and enhancing it to the point where their apps will compile for linux. Just be glad they are publishing their changes, wine IIRC is under the BSD license which allows for people to make closed source forks. I really can't see of any underhanded movites they might have.
Juries can in a way say that the law is unjust or whatever. It's called nullification, I think the way it works is that the jury just returns a verdict of "not guilty" even though they know he's guilty. Since in the US once you are found not guilty you cannot be tried again, you are free even though you did break said law.
Yes there is, and has been for a long time:
cypherpunks/cypherpunks. Which does work on this site as it's how I got in.
I think the hardest part is that there is no way for a virus writer to know exactly what the kernel installed on a computer is going to look like. There are countless different variations of the linux kernel out there, due to different versions, config options, compilers, etc. I would think that if anything tried this the result would be the system locking during the kernel boot process. Which would be a pain in the arse, but not really harmful.
Yes and no. A key grabber as they exist in the dos world would not work because no user program can get physical access to the keyboard. What would work however, would be for a program to open the terminal you are logged into and start recording what you type. I just verified that this can indeed work.
Could you please explain how exactly a mechanism designed to export files could lead to you getting a mean old virus on your computer? khttpd can do nothing more than serve static files, could pose a greater problem, but it's no more dangerous than nfsd. Just because something is in the kernel doesn't make it automatically insecure. Think about it, all of the security mechanisms on your linux system eventually trace back to the kernel.
Please, before you post comments like this think about them first. There's nothing wrong with being cautious, but there is no need for paranoia.
Just an FYI, all IP stacks MUST support ICMP. IIRC TCP requires ICMP for initiating connections, and it is used to signal a broken connection and all sorts of things. Also, ICMP = Internet Controll Message Protocol, and IGMP = Internet Group Message Protocol. And one final thing, windows supports UDP just fine.
From what I've heard it's pretty much a way for people who don't believe in christianity to express time with out paying hommage to the christian god. Ie, jews do not believe that jesus was the son of god, there for refering to the current year as the 1999th "year of our lord" (translation of A.D.) doesn't really make a lot of sense. Also refering to time as being "Before Christ" also makes very little sense. Also, IMHO it makes sense even if you are a christian because I think this is technically the year 2004 A.D. and there was a screw up during the middle ages that made us all think it is currently 1999.
P.S. I learned about C.E. from a high school religion teacher, so take what I said with a shaker of salt.
Here's the funny thing about encryption. People use encryption because they want to put the security of their data in their own hands without having to get uncle scam involved, right? Now if the DVD forum had done their job and had a decent encryption algorithm created for DVDs they wouldn't be in this mess right now. But they used an incredibly poor algorithm, and they got bit. Deal with it. If someone breaks into my house with a lock pick, I'm not going to go after the company that made the lock pick, I'm going to go after the guy who used the lock pick to commit a crime. Also, if my version of a lock is a dead bolt that goes into a weak wooden door frame, it's pretty much my fault when someone kicks my door in.
I really don't see how publishing information on how to bypass any security protection is any different than publishing information in say, a lock smith magazine (I'm sure they must exist somewhere) explaining how to open the latest and greatest lock. Sure the information can be used for criminal purposes, but it can also be used for perfectly legal purposes, such as when you lose the key to your house and you want to get in without having to break a window.