Oh, I don't know - at time time of writing, the original comment is at +5, while his "don't bother" comment is at +2. That's not a lot of karma perhaps, but it doesn't seem to have hurt...
Exlax is probably ok - if someone complained, you could argue that you needed it (for the obvious reason) and that that was the way you prefered to take it.
Its sad I have to add that but it seems the kind of world we are in where all the know it alls have to bark up and say something they fell makes them look like they know something
Actually, what I find sad is that we live in the kind of world where a lunch thief who was poisoned by what he ate probably could sue the rightful owner. He might not win, but that's not the point; you shouldn't have to defend yourself at all. Mind you, you shouldn't have to defend your lunch, either...
Completely offtopic, but it reminds me of an old joke - a guy goes to a pub on his own and has a couple of drinks. Part way through a pint, he really needs to go to the toilet, but is afraid that if he leaves his pint undefended, someone will drink it. Thinking quickly, he writes "I've spat in this pint" on a piece of paper and leaves it next to the glass, and goes off to the toilet. When he gets back, sure enough, his drink is still there - but someone has written "So have I" on the paper.
Regardless of what the word "torture" means, it is an emotionally loaded term, and was doubtless chosen because of its more common definition, that which the GP used.
Emotionally-loaded terms should be avoided in reasoned debate, unless you really want it to just turn into a shouting match.
And yet, in many important areas on the desktop, Linux is still playing catch up with Windows and OS X. Don't get me wrong, it is indeed coming on leaps and bounds, but it's far too early to write off the competition.
I'd also quite like to see some hard figures to back up your assertion, if you have any.
Tell me - while all that is doubtless true, what part of it means that the user experience on a Mac is in anyway worse than the OP claimed? The person sat at the keyboard doesn't care why it all works, so long as it does...
Oh right, you have to know two things about computers. Shit sorry. I forgot it's hip to be a techno-ignorant-opiniated bastard.
Well, he claims to have been using Linux for 10 years, so I guess he knows a thing or two about computers. I gave up on Linux after about 6 years, and like to think I know a thing or two about computers too. I've upgraded my kernel, gcc, I manually upgraded from libc5 to glibc2, I've hand-hacked modeline entries in XF86Config when an installer didn't recognise my monitor, etc - and I simply can't be bothered with it any more.
No, it's not that bad any more, of course it isn't. But I came to realise that Linux gave me nothing that I needed/wanted that Windows didn't give me. Maybe that'll change, but right now, Linux isn't for me. I realise that it's for a lot of people, and that's fine, I'm not trying to convert anyone.
Mind you, nor am I "a techno-ignorant-opiniated bastard" - well, I'm not techno-ignorant, at least...
Strictly speaking, he didn't misunderstand it - that's exactly what "how are you doing for $foo" means, "do you have enough $foo?". Whoever wrote the title got it wrong.
At the very least, she's guilty of destruction of evidence. I don't know what the penalties are for that (IANAL, etc) but I wouldn't be surprised if they're rather more serious than those for copyright infringement.
Not that I am advocating such a course of action, but if someone were to do that, they'd have to be careful to maintain a believable usage pattern. If no file has been accessed or modified in months, that's going to immediately ring alarm bells (especially if they have logs from the ISP showing dates and times when the user was online).
Remember that obstruction, pervertinghte course of justice, etc are generally taken *very* seriously.
But only if you live close enough to the exchange, and the wires between your modem and the equipment in the exchange are good enough.
I have an 8Mbps/512Kbps service, and currently actually achieve about 3Mbps/440Kbps according to my router. Actual download speeds depend on the method and server (of course), but rarely get that high.
If you actually want as fast as you can get, you have to choose where to live very carefully. (Not that it matters that much to me - I get 100Mbps at work)
For example, every time I play a media file in Windows Media Player, it tries to connect to the Internet not once but twice - once when Media Player fires up and once again after it's fnished! Excuse me? Exactly what is Media Player trying to figure out?
Depending on your settings, it's probably opening a connection to the server to retrieve media info from (on startup) and reporting anonymous* usage data (on shut down). Both of these things can be switched off in the options settings. I don't guarantee that this will stop it phoning home completely, however, as I long since did as you did and blocked it.
The *most* effective would be to simply not use Windows, but the driveling masses accept happily whatever crap the consumer OEM's spoonfeed them
The funny thing is that just this last weekend, a friend of mine discovered that his home Linux server had been hacked. Someone managed to break in remotely and get root.
So while using something other than Windows makes you safer, it most definitely does not make you invulnerable.
Oh, and less of the "drivelling masses", thanks - some of us choose to use Windows for entirely practical reasons, and yet somehow manage to remain virus and rootkit free.
Personal firewalls do not block outbound connection because it is a pain in the ass to decide what can pass or not. I mean, did you ever try some windows firewall that allows that?
Yes, and I took the time to train/configure the firewall. Now it will warn me about a new app trying to make connections for the first time, but that's a rare enough occurence that it's no problem at all (and is of course entirely expected).
Users are clueless about it
Yes, most users are - but they generally don't care about outbound traffic. Protecting them from inbound traffic is far, far more important, and in that respect, software firewalls do a fine job.
1) You aren't copying, the installer is, which isn't your code
Oh come now, that's no argument at all. You can equally well say that when I copy anything, unless I do it by hand, I'm not doing it, the equipment I use is.
2) If you need to copy to use, the Berne Convention says this is not copying controlled by copyright
I'm not familiar enough with the Berne Convention to comment on this. If it is the case, however, and if it trumps local law (which are two big ifs), then you're free to simply ignore the EULA and use hte software as you like, so what does it matter what they say? If not, or if local law wins out, then you're stuffed.
The chances of actually being prosecuted for a violation are vanishingly small, of course, as there's generally nothing in an EULA that you can violate without definitely infringing copyright. (At least in my experience, but then IANAL and I've not studied very many EULAs)
The EULA is a contract, no matter what the L means.
If your assertion that use of software does not require a licence due to the Berne Convention is true, then the EULA is irrelevant, contract or not, as there is nothing compelling you to agree to it. That's perfectly fine by me; let the fools make their empty demands.
He didn't say he couldn't use it, but he did say that he needed it at work. Where I work, that would have required a copy of hte software to be bought; hence I would search a little longer to see if there was a free version. I strongly suspect that he did the same for the same reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I don't know - at time time of writing, the original comment is at +5, while his "don't bother" comment is at +2. That's not a lot of karma perhaps, but it doesn't seem to have hurt...
I'd rather fire the offender for character issues
Character issues? You mean like commiting a criminal offence (albeit a minor one) on company time and company property?
Exlax is probably ok - if someone complained, you could argue that you needed it (for the obvious reason) and that that was the way you prefered to take it.
Its sad I have to add that but it seems the kind of world we are in where all the know it alls have to bark up and say something they fell makes them look like they know something
Actually, what I find sad is that we live in the kind of world where a lunch thief who was poisoned by what he ate probably could sue the rightful owner. He might not win, but that's not the point; you shouldn't have to defend yourself at all. Mind you, you shouldn't have to defend your lunch, either...
Completely offtopic, but it reminds me of an old joke - a guy goes to a pub on his own and has a couple of drinks. Part way through a pint, he really needs to go to the toilet, but is afraid that if he leaves his pint undefended, someone will drink it. Thinking quickly, he writes "I've spat in this pint" on a piece of paper and leaves it next to the glass, and goes off to the toilet. When he gets back, sure enough, his drink is still there - but someone has written "So have I" on the paper.
While he definitely did do that for a while, he appears to have stopped.
Almost as though he were listening to us - or perhpaps, he really was being paid or otherwise favoured by the editors...
Regardless of what the word "torture" means, it is an emotionally loaded term, and was doubtless chosen because of its more common definition, that which the GP used.
Emotionally-loaded terms should be avoided in reasoned debate, unless you really want it to just turn into a shouting match.
I think you'll find that they can "manufacture terrorists" faster than you can find them to shoot them.
And yet, in many important areas on the desktop, Linux is still playing catch up with Windows and OS X. Don't get me wrong, it is indeed coming on leaps and bounds, but it's far too early to write off the competition.
I'd also quite like to see some hard figures to back up your assertion, if you have any.
Tell me - while all that is doubtless true, what part of it means that the user experience on a Mac is in anyway worse than the OP claimed? The person sat at the keyboard doesn't care why it all works, so long as it does...
Oh right, you have to know two things about computers. Shit sorry. I forgot it's hip to be a techno-ignorant-opiniated bastard.
Well, he claims to have been using Linux for 10 years, so I guess he knows a thing or two about computers. I gave up on Linux after about 6 years, and like to think I know a thing or two about computers too. I've upgraded my kernel, gcc, I manually upgraded from libc5 to glibc2, I've hand-hacked modeline entries in XF86Config when an installer didn't recognise my monitor, etc - and I simply can't be bothered with it any more.
No, it's not that bad any more, of course it isn't. But I came to realise that Linux gave me nothing that I needed/wanted that Windows didn't give me. Maybe that'll change, but right now, Linux isn't for me. I realise that it's for a lot of people, and that's fine, I'm not trying to convert anyone.
Mind you, nor am I "a techno-ignorant-opiniated bastard" - well, I'm not techno-ignorant, at least...
I don't know about US English, but in UK English, that's the correct spelling of axe, and the Financial Times is an English newspaper.
He broke the law, he got caught, het got convicted, and now he's getting punished. He was a big-time guy, not one of the small fry.
What does this have to do with my rights?
Strictly speaking, he didn't misunderstand it - that's exactly what "how are you doing for $foo" means, "do you have enough $foo?". Whoever wrote the title got it wrong.
Actually, the title means "Do you have enough open source adoption left?", but you were on the right tracks.
At the very least, she's guilty of destruction of evidence. I don't know what the penalties are for that (IANAL, etc) but I wouldn't be surprised if they're rather more serious than those for copyright infringement.
Not that I am advocating such a course of action, but if someone were to do that, they'd have to be careful to maintain a believable usage pattern. If no file has been accessed or modified in months, that's going to immediately ring alarm bells (especially if they have logs from the ISP showing dates and times when the user was online).
Remember that obstruction, pervertinghte course of justice, etc are generally taken *very* seriously.
But only if you live close enough to the exchange, and the wires between your modem and the equipment in the exchange are good enough.
I have an 8Mbps/512Kbps service, and currently actually achieve about 3Mbps/440Kbps according to my router. Actual download speeds depend on the method and server (of course), but rarely get that high.
If you actually want as fast as you can get, you have to choose where to live very carefully. (Not that it matters that much to me - I get 100Mbps at work)
For example, every time I play a media file in Windows Media Player, it tries to connect to the Internet not once but twice - once when Media Player fires up and once again after it's fnished! Excuse me? Exactly what is Media Player trying to figure out?
Depending on your settings, it's probably opening a connection to the server to retrieve media info from (on startup) and reporting anonymous* usage data (on shut down). Both of these things can be switched off in the options settings. I don't guarantee that this will stop it phoning home completely, however, as I long since did as you did and blocked it.
The *most* effective would be to simply not use Windows, but the driveling masses accept happily whatever crap the consumer OEM's spoonfeed them
The funny thing is that just this last weekend, a friend of mine discovered that his home Linux server had been hacked. Someone managed to break in remotely and get root.
So while using something other than Windows makes you safer, it most definitely does not make you invulnerable.
Oh, and less of the "drivelling masses", thanks - some of us choose to use Windows for entirely practical reasons, and yet somehow manage to remain virus and rootkit free.
Personal firewalls do not block outbound connection because it is a pain in the ass to decide what can pass or not. I mean, did you ever try some windows firewall that allows that?
Yes, and I took the time to train/configure the firewall. Now it will warn me about a new app trying to make connections for the first time, but that's a rare enough occurence that it's no problem at all (and is of course entirely expected).
Users are clueless about it
Yes, most users are - but they generally don't care about outbound traffic. Protecting them from inbound traffic is far, far more important, and in that respect, software firewalls do a fine job.
1) You aren't copying, the installer is, which isn't your code
Oh come now, that's no argument at all. You can equally well say that when I copy anything, unless I do it by hand, I'm not doing it, the equipment I use is.
2) If you need to copy to use, the Berne Convention says this is not copying controlled by copyright
I'm not familiar enough with the Berne Convention to comment on this. If it is the case, however, and if it trumps local law (which are two big ifs), then you're free to simply ignore the EULA and use hte software as you like, so what does it matter what they say? If not, or if local law wins out, then you're stuffed.
The chances of actually being prosecuted for a violation are vanishingly small, of course, as there's generally nothing in an EULA that you can violate without definitely infringing copyright. (At least in my experience, but then IANAL and I've not studied very many EULAs)
The EULA is a contract, no matter what the L means.
If your assertion that use of software does not require a licence due to the Berne Convention is true, then the EULA is irrelevant, contract or not, as there is nothing compelling you to agree to it. That's perfectly fine by me; let the fools make their empty demands.
t's an EULA, not a license.
I know what you mean, but you do realise what that L stands for, right?
Do you mean something like this?
Kind of ironic, linking to a PowerPoint presentation, given your sig...
He didn't say he couldn't use it, but he did say that he needed it at work. Where I work, that would have required a copy of hte software to be bought; hence I would search a little longer to see if there was a free version. I strongly suspect that he did the same for the same reason.