SCO's obligation to obtain the consent of the investors will terminate automatically if and when the aggregate number of shares of SCO's common stock issuable upon conversion of all outstanding shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock held by the Investors fails to equal or exceed five percent of SCO's outstanding shares of common stock as of December 8, 2003.
So did SCO just announce that intend to issue more stock? I'm confused by what they intend to gain from this statement.
SCO's agreement...provides that the law firms will receive...20 percent of the proceeds from specified events related to the protection of SCO's intellectual property rights. These events include settlements, judgments, licensing fees, subject to certain exceptions, or a sale of our company during the pendancy of litigation or through settlement...
And now, did then just announce their intent to sell the company?
Like I say, I'm not a lawyer, and this might be typical legalese, but if not, is this significant?
IANAVulcanologist, but how would one handle a "molten sphere" under terrestrial conditions such as gravity? Perhaps a molten amorphous entity sitting in a container, like a hollowed out sphere, but then the container would act like an insulating buffer, which might skew the results.
Also, how would Lord Kelvin have accounted for the temperature differential of a "molten sphere" in a laboratory vs. a molten earth in the vacuum and extreme coldness of space? What about the effect of gravity to pull heavier elements towards the core of a planetary entity vs. the negligible effects on a lab-sized specimen?
I dunno...lots of questions here. The kinds of things that gave my physics teachers in high school fits (but for which I learned not to ask of my physics professors in college, lest I become a physics major...;)
Some of you moderators are stupid. Check the time and ID# of my post vs. the ones that said the same thing -- I am not the redundant post.
Just because you didn't see my article first doesn't mean I'm redundant -- it means you are negligent in doling out negative moderation by not checking to see who submitted first.
To meta-moderators -- check any post labelled redundant against posts in that thread to verify who actually posted the idea first -- then meta-moderate accordingly.
Simple fact -- you can't be redundant if you said it first.
Now to be ontopic -- the most incorrect assumption in computing is that anyone is capable of being a Slashdot moderator.
Worse yet for them, it associates spammers and virus writers with child pornography, which is considered among the lowest of the low for crimes. If this doesn't get those in a position of power to realize the depths of depravity that these people are willing to go to, I wonder if anything will.
Why only create two different versions? Why not make every screener unique? If there's up to 15,000 screeners going out, a simple 2-byte tag within the file should be sufficient to tag every single non-retail copy of the movie, both screeners and the actual disc sent to theaters, with minimal technological requirements to accomplish this.
Hmmmm.....this is just a theory, but perhaps this is the MPAA punishing certain production houses for leaking their copies to the black market? Total speculation, but it seems plausible....
Ah....I see. It's a terminology issue. The author used the "software based partitions" phrase to describe zones/containers, but the original poster confused it with soft partitioning, which is a SVM/ODS term. Better to have called it logical partitioning, like the rest of the UNIX world calls them.
You're referring to Solaris 10's "Zone" concept, which is new. The original poster was referring to soft partitioning as a function of SVM/Disksuite (see man page for "metainit softpart -p") and has been around since the middle of Solaris 8.
You're confusing Solaris Resource Manager (what you're talking about) with Solaris Volume Manager (what the grandparent poster is referring to). Both are nice, but neither is new to Sol10.
Yes, good point. The Internet is much more akin to CB radio since it is uncontrolled, unverified, entirely volunteer-based, entirely virtual, and highly volatile. By contrast, books, TV, and other media are highly controlled, subject to external verification, have a high cost of entry, are either themselves physical media, or require a physical presense in order to communicate, and are largely static in content.
The problem with the Washington Post's article is that their premise is flawed. They assume that the Internet is a mostly static source of information, when it is definitely a mostly dynamic information source. Webpages are meant to be updated, and with updates come change. It's inevitable. To assume that we keep every update to the webpages in separate locations is a false assumption. It's cool to see sites like the Wayback machine do this, but it's not required.
We need to get this and the folks at the Diebold and Sequoia to combine their e-voting machines with this technology...
[RIAA researcher]: Hey boss, you gotta see this. Our drone stations in LA and Miami are reporting the usual mix we've given them of Britney, Kelly, and 50 cent, but all of a sudden, there's like 17 billion requests for Lawrence Welk and Pat Boone. Whaddya make of this?
[RIAA boss]: Hey, that must be our trend analyzer picking up on a new trend! It's the beginning of the way-retro movement! Wait till I tell Valenti about this! We'll be rich!!!
OK, sure, I don't know of a virus that "drains bank accounts", but I sure as heck know of virii like Bugbear-B that contains a keystroke logger, which could be abused to track bank account information. So while the coincidence of the virus and the life-threatening surgery is extreme, the existence of the virus definitely is not, and in fact, is severe.
What if a virus infects my PC whose goal is to drain the bank accounts of random people, and what if one of those random people dies because they no longer had the ability to pay for a life-saving operation? Sure, it's an extreme case, but there are such virii out there. Not so far fetched to me.
If I leave my car unlocked with the keys in the ignition, and someone steals my car, packs it fulls of C4, and blows up a building with it, hopefully, my alibi is good enough to show that I wasn't the one that perpetrated such a heinous act.
The problem with computer crime is that the alibi part of the equation is harder for the computer owner to prove. He may very well have been actively using the computer in question that hacked the Bank of North Elbonia at the time of the crime, but that doesn't mean he did it. In spite of that, proving that he wasn't the perp is difficult. Most other alibis work because of physical bias placing the individual in some other place than the crime in question. This is harder to prove in a virtual setting.
Because the owners of Slashdot have a vested interest in the well-being of Linux. So if Linux tends to get a little more press here than seems normal, the reason ought to be obvious to all.
So let's ignore the selective policing of the leaks, and assume that **AA cares about making sure that the screeners don't get out. How to accomplish that? Simple, do what the feds have done for decades in their official documentation and insert a poison pill into the screener. With the feds, the wording or typeset of certain documents vary from copy to copy to that if someone leaks, whether to the press or to foreign governments, the source can be tracked quickly and quietly.
With the **IA, should the pre-release make it into the wild, the poison pill will be able to track the copy down to the actual person they gave it to, and they could deal with it on a case by case basis at that point.
But of course, this is overly idealistic and we all know that the leaks, whether intentional or not, will never result in the person who originally had the screener being prosecuted -- you don't eat your own.
For example why exactly does anyone need to send a stream of several thousand SYN packets per second from a home computer to the same IP address for several hours at a time? There is simply no reason why a home machine should need to do that, nor should a home machine be sending millions of DNS requests per second to any machine.
Question: Are you advocating that we create devices that disallow this or create policies that disallow this? The difference is not so subtle -- on one hand, we require an inherent limitation of technology, which runs counter to most ideals of progress.
The alternative, which I believe is desirable, is to allow such events, but police based on acceptable use and other such legalities. It builds a community that is intolerant of abuse, rather than sheltered from it.
Its not illegal to have music files on your computer! Did they delete "legal" and "illegal" ones alike? If so that means the RIAA has scared people into believing they aren't allowed to have music on their computer.
It really wouldn't surprise me if this was the RIAA's ulterior motive all along. I mean, think about it -- they're an organization that represents the interests of companies that make, sell, and distribute recordings of songs, and we the general public have developed a way to make their virtual monopoly on this business model obsolete.
So given the possibility of embracing a new, yet much less profitable, technology, or scaring the bejeezus out of people to the point that they associate MP3 with bad, which do you think they'll do?
That blast on the last few frames of the CME mpg file is the CME that occured earlier today. The end of the movie looks like someone polka-dotted the screen, but from the NOAA's website, that's actually the high-charged protons from the CME hitting the camera's lens. This is one whopper of a storm.
So then what you're saying is that Red Hat has become a marketing organization rather than an OS distribution company? I mean, really, what did we really get since RH7.x that is truly significant? A few kernel patches? I've got up2date or yum to deal with that. An updated GUI? Bah.
Red Hat needs to get back to the open source basics of realizing that there's little to be gained from releasing early, and much to be gained by releasing when there's significant updates. They could easily have waited following the initial RH8 release until now to release RH8-Final, and then give kernel geeks the chance to pore through the 2.6 kernel before releasing RH-Fedora1 with 2.6 support, not without. Any other reason smacks of the Microsoft/Sun type of release strategy to gain market share, not to release because there's something worth releasing. And with the majority of installations probably occuring from copied/downloaded media rather than purchased media, what's their economic reason? Save the cost of packaging and support and release when it's ready and relevant, not before.
Slashdot Mirror
So did SCO just announce that intend to issue more stock? I'm confused by what they intend to gain from this statement.
And now, did then just announce their intent to sell the company?
Like I say, I'm not a lawyer, and this might be typical legalese, but if not, is this significant?
IANAVulcanologist, but how would one handle a "molten sphere" under terrestrial conditions such as gravity? Perhaps a molten amorphous entity sitting in a container, like a hollowed out sphere, but then the container would act like an insulating buffer, which might skew the results.
;)
Also, how would Lord Kelvin have accounted for the temperature differential of a "molten sphere" in a laboratory vs. a molten earth in the vacuum and extreme coldness of space? What about the effect of gravity to pull heavier elements towards the core of a planetary entity vs. the negligible effects on a lab-sized specimen?
I dunno...lots of questions here. The kinds of things that gave my physics teachers in high school fits (but for which I learned not to ask of my physics professors in college, lest I become a physics major...
Some of you moderators are stupid. Check the time and ID# of my post vs. the ones that said the same thing -- I am not the redundant post.
Just because you didn't see my article first doesn't mean I'm redundant -- it means you are negligent in doling out negative moderation by not checking to see who submitted first.
To meta-moderators -- check any post labelled redundant against posts in that thread to verify who actually posted the idea first -- then meta-moderate accordingly.
Simple fact -- you can't be redundant if you said it first.
Now to be ontopic -- the most incorrect assumption in computing is that anyone is capable of being a Slashdot moderator.
"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home." -- Kenneth Olson, 1977, founder of Digital
Worse yet for them, it associates spammers and virus writers with child pornography, which is considered among the lowest of the low for crimes. If this doesn't get those in a position of power to realize the depths of depravity that these people are willing to go to, I wonder if anything will.
Why only create two different versions? Why not make every screener unique? If there's up to 15,000 screeners going out, a simple 2-byte tag within the file should be sufficient to tag every single non-retail copy of the movie, both screeners and the actual disc sent to theaters, with minimal technological requirements to accomplish this.
Hmmmm.....this is just a theory, but perhaps this is the MPAA punishing certain production houses for leaking their copies to the black market? Total speculation, but it seems plausible....
Ah....I see. It's a terminology issue. The author used the "software based partitions" phrase to describe zones/containers, but the original poster confused it with soft partitioning, which is a SVM/ODS term. Better to have called it logical partitioning, like the rest of the UNIX world calls them.
We're on the same page...if not everyone else.
You're referring to Solaris 10's "Zone" concept, which is new. The original poster was referring to soft partitioning as a function of SVM/Disksuite (see man page for "metainit softpart -p") and has been around since the middle of Solaris 8.
You're confusing Solaris Resource Manager (what you're talking about) with Solaris Volume Manager (what the grandparent poster is referring to). Both are nice, but neither is new to Sol10.
Yes, good point. The Internet is much more akin to CB radio since it is uncontrolled, unverified, entirely volunteer-based, entirely virtual, and highly volatile. By contrast, books, TV, and other media are highly controlled, subject to external verification, have a high cost of entry, are either themselves physical media, or require a physical presense in order to communicate, and are largely static in content.
The problem with the Washington Post's article is that their premise is flawed. They assume that the Internet is a mostly static source of information, when it is definitely a mostly dynamic information source. Webpages are meant to be updated, and with updates come change. It's inevitable. To assume that we keep every update to the webpages in separate locations is a false assumption. It's cool to see sites like the Wayback machine do this, but it's not required.
the ultimate irony would be if the Los Alamos council used the Sequoia voting system to take the vote....
SPARC is an open specification. Nothing's stopping them from doing it now, except perhaps ROI.
OK, sure, I don't know of a virus that "drains bank accounts", but I sure as heck know of virii like Bugbear-B that contains a keystroke logger, which could be abused to track bank account information. So while the coincidence of the virus and the life-threatening surgery is extreme, the existence of the virus definitely is not, and in fact, is severe.
What if a virus infects my PC whose goal is to drain the bank accounts of random people, and what if one of those random people dies because they no longer had the ability to pay for a life-saving operation? Sure, it's an extreme case, but there are such virii out there. Not so far fetched to me.
If I leave my car unlocked with the keys in the ignition, and someone steals my car, packs it fulls of C4, and blows up a building with it, hopefully, my alibi is good enough to show that I wasn't the one that perpetrated such a heinous act.
The problem with computer crime is that the alibi part of the equation is harder for the computer owner to prove. He may very well have been actively using the computer in question that hacked the Bank of North Elbonia at the time of the crime, but that doesn't mean he did it. In spite of that, proving that he wasn't the perp is difficult. Most other alibis work because of physical bias placing the individual in some other place than the crime in question. This is harder to prove in a virtual setting.
Because the owners of Slashdot have a vested interest in the well-being of Linux. So if Linux tends to get a little more press here than seems normal, the reason ought to be obvious to all.
So let's ignore the selective policing of the leaks, and assume that **AA cares about making sure that the screeners don't get out. How to accomplish that? Simple, do what the feds have done for decades in their official documentation and insert a poison pill into the screener. With the feds, the wording or typeset of certain documents vary from copy to copy to that if someone leaks, whether to the press or to foreign governments, the source can be tracked quickly and quietly.
With the **IA, should the pre-release make it into the wild, the poison pill will be able to track the copy down to the actual person they gave it to, and they could deal with it on a case by case basis at that point.
But of course, this is overly idealistic and we all know that the leaks, whether intentional or not, will never result in the person who originally had the screener being prosecuted -- you don't eat your own.
Question: Are you advocating that we create devices that disallow this or create policies that disallow this? The difference is not so subtle -- on one hand, we require an inherent limitation of technology, which runs counter to most ideals of progress.
The alternative, which I believe is desirable, is to allow such events, but police based on acceptable use and other such legalities. It builds a community that is intolerant of abuse, rather than sheltered from it.
It really wouldn't surprise me if this was the RIAA's ulterior motive all along. I mean, think about it -- they're an organization that represents the interests of companies that make, sell, and distribute recordings of songs, and we the general public have developed a way to make their virtual monopoly on this business model obsolete.
So given the possibility of embracing a new, yet much less profitable, technology, or scaring the bejeezus out of people to the point that they associate MP3 with bad, which do you think they'll do?
That blast on the last few frames of the CME mpg file is the CME that occured earlier today. The end of the movie looks like someone polka-dotted the screen, but from the NOAA's website, that's actually the high-charged protons from the CME hitting the camera's lens. This is one whopper of a storm.
So then what you're saying is that Red Hat has become a marketing organization rather than an OS distribution company? I mean, really, what did we really get since RH7.x that is truly significant? A few kernel patches? I've got up2date or yum to deal with that. An updated GUI? Bah.
Red Hat needs to get back to the open source basics of realizing that there's little to be gained from releasing early, and much to be gained by releasing when there's significant updates. They could easily have waited following the initial RH8 release until now to release RH8-Final, and then give kernel geeks the chance to pore through the 2.6 kernel before releasing RH-Fedora1 with 2.6 support, not without. Any other reason smacks of the Microsoft/Sun type of release strategy to gain market share, not to release because there's something worth releasing. And with the majority of installations probably occuring from copied/downloaded media rather than purchased media, what's their economic reason? Save the cost of packaging and support and release when it's ready and relevant, not before.
weellcome our (hic) neww bio (hic) bio (hic) bioethanol supplying overlawrds... (burp)...