Oh the philanthropy! But seriously, is it even legal for a corporation to do something purely for the philanthropic sake of it. Doesn't it have to be for the purposes of generating revenue. They want to ensure programmers stay with their platform. If they do, then they will continue to thrive because Windows is only used because it has a lot of crap written for it (and it's familiar). I believe Microsoft is legally obliged to be incapable of a truly philanthropic act, like every big corporation.
You should always read between the lines with these guys. They know how to write in very small type.
I read an article somewhere (probably linked from slashdot) about how there was a vast carbon dioxide lake underneath a lake in the top of a volcano. One day the carbon dioxide pool erupted, and suffocated the surrounding village. So you have a very good (I think show stopping even) point indeed.
Uhh, Sony is just improving the VFAT driver for linux because it has problems. Every USB Mass Storage device uses FAT, thats why this is an issue. I understand FAT sucks monkey balls, but that doesn't stop it being a popular partition in the Windows world, and hence the rest of us have to put up with it.
Here is a ext2fs driver for windows. Not currently the most top of the line file system for Linux, but still a pretty nice addition (you know if you like dual boot and don't want your partition to have any security respected on it:-P).
Yeah, what I like are games (like Zelda) where you have an ultimate goal, but there are lots and lots of points in the game play where you are rewarded, and not just frustrated over and over again by having to protect some chick for 10 years who continuously gets in trouble or falls in traps and what not (Resident Evil 4).
When I analyzed his writing all I saw is a coninuous barrage of subtle comments which would only do Microsoft good. I'm pretty sure he's getting paid by Microsoft for this. Here's why:
Microsoft with all of its resources, seems powerless against the massive engine represented by Linux, and its supporters often appear as an endangered species during a government-approved hunting season.
Does this not seem like an obvious attempt to make Microsoft seem like its not in a monopoly position.
In addition, companies using Linux technology and not complying with the GPL generally face a combination of legal and public relations exposures more similar to what would happen if they faced a union than if they faced a company. Linux has showcased over and over again that, when threatened, it can move as a group to eliminate that threat.
This seems like a two pronged attack on Linux, specifically discouraging businesses to adopt it. He drops the word union, which any business owner will tell you is a word that is dodged like the plague. He talks about Linux as if it is a conscious entity unto itself (which it is nothing like), and further he talks about GPL violations like they are something that happen mistakenly to innocent companies. He doesn't mention the fact that you are free to use any GPLd program within a company for any reason whatsoever. As long as you aren't distributing any code with it in it, you don't even have to care whether its GPLd, you can do whatever the hell you want with it.
Let's take the most powerful software company in the world, Microsoft, and imagine a scenario where they had a problem with a negative article. Generally they could call and complain, they could (as Oracle has often done) pull all advertising from the site, and they could also make threatening comments (that they probably couldn't enforce).
Or they could just buy up another writer/thinktank, with a rebuttal which exonerates them and villifies their enemies, like they've always done in the past.
...Linux effectively made good on a threat that is beyond even Microsoft's reach, and often beyond the U.S. government's reach. That threat is putting your company out of business if the desired result is not achieved.
Firstly, the readers did the damage. They expected a certain quality from the works provided by the company. The company did not provide it. Their dumbass fault. Secondly, I completely agree with him here, neither the US government or Microsoft have ever put a business out of business (rolls eyes).
The power to control the press and the skills contained in this organization are likely capable of disrupting travel, power grids and other broad national infrastructure systems if their demands are not met. No union has this kind of power today. However, power without leadership is just dangerous and often more dangerous to the very organization which has the power.
Blind statements asserting Linux is a terrorist entity. Yeah, Linux as a base of software is as big a terrorist entity as the Red Cross or Salvation Army. Because giving software away is really going to destroy the power grids and such. I would say rampant Windows viruses and trojans are a much larger national security threat and business threat. And again he drops the word union.
Without strong leadership any organization with this much power can easily find itself with an image more similar to that of organized crime than one of organized labor (and, recall, the two have, historically, often appeared as interchangeable). It shouldn't take long for someone to emerge as the leader of what is likely becoming a world power that could stand up to most governments.
Oh this is my favorite one, where he directly equates Linux as a potential terrorist threat.
This is power that Microsoft, Oracle, IBM and many governments could only dream of having. The power to control the press and the skills contained in this organization are likely capable of disrupting travel, power grids and other broad national infrastructure systems if their demands are not met.
He is trying to scare people away from Linux, by saying that the developers are all powerfull. Like as if they could just uninstall the software and source from your systems all of a sudden. What a stupid article, and what bad summary here on slashdot.
The manufacturers would want to participate in this program because the content can only be uploaded to and played by devices that conform to this spec. Also, to stop the rich kids the device needs to self destruct the keys if it is tampered with at all, and obviously shut down. No other ICs need to be anything particularly special. Mainly what they are trying to prevent is the spread of perfect digital replicas. If the keys destroy themselves and also the unit shuts down when the case is opened in any way, then you can't get that digital stream from any internal bus. And since its all stored encrypted there is little hope getting it that way either. Granted you can always, plug the headphone jack into something to record it, but then you don't get the full quality as you'd have to reencode. And even if some rich guy did manage to set up a rig to extract it, it would narrow down who to go after, and it would create a bottleneck. I think it would work quite nicely.
If Sony is really this worried about this stuff why don't they add an RSA key pair and certificate to every device they distribute signed by the RIAA. And then have all communications take place encrypted between RIAA approved servers and the device itself (using the computer as a router of sorts [of course using an open source well defined protocol]). Have the chips that stores the keys be inaccesable (over external interfaces) after the initial setting at the factory. Keep a revoke list on the server side, make sure the hard drive is encrypted by another key stored in the device itself, and have the chips that hold the keys self destruct if the case is opened? Not really that hard to figure out. And as a bonus, if they use these signed certificates then you could hook multiple devices together, they could check if they are signed by an RIAA trusted vendor and you could make your legally allowed 1 backup or transfer ownership. Or you could do this with any RIAA approved vendor who provides backup services in case you are selling your player, or if the service buys used music licenses. This would be so simple, I really don't understand why its not like this already.
I think its more along the lines of:
1) Try to make software patents valid everywhere
2) File some patents
3) Allow only a particular version of linux to use a subset of patents under certain terms (contrary to the terms of the GPL, and infringing on the copyrights of the 1000s of contributors to the linux kernel)
4) Develop a wireless linux based hand held web browser and get goodwill with those ignorant of the situation
5) Get Bought by Microsoft
6) Claim patent infringements
7) Errr... PROFIT??
Sorry, to ride off your post, but I just have a couple questions. Is it legal to distribute a paraphrase of a patent freely? If so then how is open source software even applicable to patent litigation as long as they acknowledge the patent they come from? Programs are just a conglomeration of paraphrases and translations into other languages (albeit not so easily human readable languages, unless debugging information is compiled in).
My point is dispatch-conf is an interactive configuration file update program where you manually diff in changes to the config files. Not very practical.
So the difference between OpenBSD and FreeBSD (besides the maintainers of course) is more along the lines of politics (OpenBSD only allowing software in which meets their definition of free). Do these two share between each other? Is there a common BSD kernel or anything like that?
The impact of change hurts young people just as much as old people. Except young people don't have any money/houses (but by the time they are out of college they usually have a small family). And I'm sure they love how they are fresh out of college, but still can't get a job because the industry is unionized. My point there is young people need jobs too. Young people are struggling to get on their feet. But conversely your point about the older generation is true. But I don't think the real problem here is unionization.
The real problem here is the fact that we can trade between societies that have different costs for labor without any kind of taxes by our government to offset these cost differences. If our government is to tax anything it should be a labor cost difference tax. Make it something like e^(supply of foreign workers in field)/e^(supply of local workers in field)-1. Or something like that.
Slashdot Mirror
And ignore me, because I have had way to little sleep today.
Yes, your nick. Everybody HIS NICK. Look at the end of the line people. Good lord.
Oh the philanthropy! But seriously, is it even legal for a corporation to do something purely for the philanthropic sake of it. Doesn't it have to be for the purposes of generating revenue. They want to ensure programmers stay with their platform. If they do, then they will continue to thrive because Windows is only used because it has a lot of crap written for it (and it's familiar). I believe Microsoft is legally obliged to be incapable of a truly philanthropic act, like every big corporation.
You should always read between the lines with these guys. They know how to write in very small type.
I'm not from, but with it for a long, long time.
Um, this now-casting he speaks of has existed for many many years here in Oklahoma.
It took a couple of months for mine to get here, but they did come eventually. I ordered about 30.
I read an article somewhere (probably linked from slashdot) about how there was a vast carbon dioxide lake underneath a lake in the top of a volcano. One day the carbon dioxide pool erupted, and suffocated the surrounding village. So you have a very good (I think show stopping even) point indeed.
Uhh, Sony is just improving the VFAT driver for linux because it has problems. Every USB Mass Storage device uses FAT, thats why this is an issue. I understand FAT sucks monkey balls, but that doesn't stop it being a popular partition in the Windows world, and hence the rest of us have to put up with it.
Here is a ext2fs driver for windows. Not currently the most top of the line file system for Linux, but still a pretty nice addition (you know if you like dual boot and don't want your partition to have any security respected on it :-P).
Go to google and type in darwine
Yeah, what I like are games (like Zelda) where you have an ultimate goal, but there are lots and lots of points in the game play where you are rewarded, and not just frustrated over and over again by having to protect some chick for 10 years who continuously gets in trouble or falls in traps and what not (Resident Evil 4).
Oh yeah. Thanks.
Wow, a Simpsons quote I don't know. What episode?
Man those are absolutely hilarious.
Does this not seem like an obvious attempt to make Microsoft seem like its not in a monopoly position.
This seems like a two pronged attack on Linux, specifically discouraging businesses to adopt it. He drops the word union, which any business owner will tell you is a word that is dodged like the plague. He talks about Linux as if it is a conscious entity unto itself (which it is nothing like), and further he talks about GPL violations like they are something that happen mistakenly to innocent companies. He doesn't mention the fact that you are free to use any GPLd program within a company for any reason whatsoever. As long as you aren't distributing any code with it in it, you don't even have to care whether its GPLd, you can do whatever the hell you want with it.
Or they could just buy up another writer/thinktank, with a rebuttal which exonerates them and villifies their enemies, like they've always done in the past.
Firstly, the readers did the damage. They expected a certain quality from the works provided by the company. The company did not provide it. Their dumbass fault. Secondly, I completely agree with him here, neither the US government or Microsoft have ever put a business out of business (rolls eyes).
Blind statements asserting Linux is a terrorist entity. Yeah, Linux as a base of software is as big a terrorist entity as the Red Cross or Salvation Army. Because giving software away is really going to destroy the power grids and such. I would say rampant Windows viruses and trojans are a much larger national security threat and business threat. And again he drops the word union.
Oh this is my favorite one, where he directly equates Linux as a potential terrorist threat.
He is trying to scare people away from Linux, by saying that the developers are all powerfull. Like as if they could just uninstall the software and source from your systems all of a sudden. What a stupid article, and what bad summary here on slashdot.
The manufacturers would want to participate in this program because the content can only be uploaded to and played by devices that conform to this spec. Also, to stop the rich kids the device needs to self destruct the keys if it is tampered with at all, and obviously shut down. No other ICs need to be anything particularly special. Mainly what they are trying to prevent is the spread of perfect digital replicas. If the keys destroy themselves and also the unit shuts down when the case is opened in any way, then you can't get that digital stream from any internal bus. And since its all stored encrypted there is little hope getting it that way either. Granted you can always, plug the headphone jack into something to record it, but then you don't get the full quality as you'd have to reencode. And even if some rich guy did manage to set up a rig to extract it, it would narrow down who to go after, and it would create a bottleneck. I think it would work quite nicely.
If Sony is really this worried about this stuff why don't they add an RSA key pair and certificate to every device they distribute signed by the RIAA. And then have all communications take place encrypted between RIAA approved servers and the device itself (using the computer as a router of sorts [of course using an open source well defined protocol]). Have the chips that stores the keys be inaccesable (over external interfaces) after the initial setting at the factory. Keep a revoke list on the server side, make sure the hard drive is encrypted by another key stored in the device itself, and have the chips that hold the keys self destruct if the case is opened? Not really that hard to figure out. And as a bonus, if they use these signed certificates then you could hook multiple devices together, they could check if they are signed by an RIAA trusted vendor and you could make your legally allowed 1 backup or transfer ownership. Or you could do this with any RIAA approved vendor who provides backup services in case you are selling your player, or if the service buys used music licenses. This would be so simple, I really don't understand why its not like this already.
I think its more along the lines of: 1) Try to make software patents valid everywhere 2) File some patents 3) Allow only a particular version of linux to use a subset of patents under certain terms (contrary to the terms of the GPL, and infringing on the copyrights of the 1000s of contributors to the linux kernel) 4) Develop a wireless linux based hand held web browser and get goodwill with those ignorant of the situation 5) Get Bought by Microsoft 6) Claim patent infringements 7) Errr... PROFIT??
Sorry, to ride off your post, but I just have a couple questions. Is it legal to distribute a paraphrase of a patent freely? If so then how is open source software even applicable to patent litigation as long as they acknowledge the patent they come from? Programs are just a conglomeration of paraphrases and translations into other languages (albeit not so easily human readable languages, unless debugging information is compiled in).
My point is dispatch-conf is an interactive configuration file update program where you manually diff in changes to the config files. Not very practical.
So the difference between OpenBSD and FreeBSD (besides the maintainers of course) is more along the lines of politics (OpenBSD only allowing software in which meets their definition of free). Do these two share between each other? Is there a common BSD kernel or anything like that?
Just out of curiosity do you like FreeBSD or OpenBSD better. And why?
Also, if that equation was inforced it would force countries to not overproduce workers as that would decrease their foreign viability.
The impact of change hurts young people just as much as old people. Except young people don't have any money/houses (but by the time they are out of college they usually have a small family). And I'm sure they love how they are fresh out of college, but still can't get a job because the industry is unionized. My point there is young people need jobs too. Young people are struggling to get on their feet. But conversely your point about the older generation is true. But I don't think the real problem here is unionization.
The real problem here is the fact that we can trade between societies that have different costs for labor without any kind of taxes by our government to offset these cost differences. If our government is to tax anything it should be a labor cost difference tax. Make it something like e^(supply of foreign workers in field)/e^(supply of local workers in field)-1. Or something like that.