First of all, I am one of those people who believe industrial pursuits should have a reward and a carrot approach for those who can start up a company and come up with a product. Protections of some sort should be in place to protect small companies entering markets. Using a different patent system than what we have now, which puts large limits on the time you can lock up a copyright or patent. 2 years max for high tech for example, and 5 years for literary works, print, film etc.
However, in the two sections of the document as posted the authors give no supporting examples for thier arguments.
I for one, would have liked to see them address the issue or counter the GPL v3 documents on Submarine Patents as well as the growing problem of Intellectual Property/Copyright/Patent forever and ever direction the US is taking.
Furthermore, the patent system as setup in the USA is specifically designed around who has the most cash to give to lawyers.
The Blackberry dabacle was just an example.
Second, I would like to have seen the authors address the growing lets patent everything, and not make anything, and prevent others from making anything companies.
This is EVIL because it is sheer GREED and is a complete slap in the face of what the Patent system was originally intended to do: Provide a means to protect REAL inventions and spur investment so that the inventor can get his carrot for being so inventive/innovative.
In short, I would make it illegal to collect patents. If you can't build a protoype, you don't get a patent period.
The authors seem to be more concerned about the issue of patents and protecting a huge amount of patent IP property. Yet turn around and totally ignore the fact that the GPLv2 technically can't work in a patent system as defined now, critique the v3 of the license which attempts to weed out any participation from said companies to protect open source ideas and the people who participate in open source projects.
Finally, lets not forget the entire Open Source movement as defined by the GPL doesn't have a use for patents, has no use for DRM or "trusted" computing and continues to innovate and march forward leaving most US companies in the dust where they belong selling crappy windows products which are "patent pending".
You mean ripping people off that are not even born yet by extending patents and copyrights out to 100 years for example?
As far as I am concerned, the entire patent/copyright process as defined by the USA is nothing but a big boys club specifically designed to seal markets and prevent "disruptive" technologies.
As long as the guy has good references and a nice portfolio of projects he can let me look at in the area of expertise I am looking for, I usually stop looking at other candidates.
Mmmmm....10 years, I think it is a great idea, but let me make a few adjustments to what most drugs will be like in 10 years of this variety. But I do agree treatment will get better.
A patent has to be developed from it first, so that it can be restricted to only those that can pay.
We wouldn't want EVERYONE surviving cancer, that wouldn't be profitable and would destroy the market demand.
Even if the protocols used are perfected on a per cancer basis, we certainly wouldn't want to CURE a person.
What we would like to do is give them a pill they are required to take to keep the cancer in remission only. (However, if you are the Elite, and you know who you are, we could probably reach a deal for a cure. But it must be kept quiet so that the general population thinks you just had a "cold" and are better now. We wouldn't want to anger the masses.)
That way they would need to subscribe to our drug for life. Excellent profit potential for this sort of treatment.
Then of course, any scientist who gets ANY ideas they are going to get access to this research outside commercial interests we will politely ask them to stop thier research, or throw them in jail or perhaps maybe the good doctor might have an "accident" on the way to his lab one day.
Yes, the future is bright for "treatments" but don't think for a second a cure is going to be dished out to anyone if these protocols are finally perfected.
It isn't in the best interests of the corporate empires that are working on these protocols.
The real reason binaries in Linux are shunned is because of the administrative community maintaining Linux machines in critical operations.
Secondly, where does it stop?
If we allow closed source proprietary binary anything into Linuxland kernel apis, then what will we be forced to compromise on next? If that is the case, I would just run Windows server software.
I mean really, the benefits of Open Source is because the OS is much more robust, and much more proactive in security planning and bug corrections in software.
I find Mr. Raymonds arguements about closing one of the most serious aspects of kernel level software, dubious at best economically, and worse totally defeats the reason to running a Linux kernel over Windows for security, reliability, especially in 24x7x365 operations.
The whole idea in my opinion from working with source code for users and manufacturers is that it keeps costs low through shared development, and maintains better quality.
You also have to understand the media companies are still in old school mode with regards to making profits out of media in general.
This whole DRM craze is because Media can't keep up with the business models required to generate revenue, not because we have a "compromise" on our hands.
Whats next?
Changing the kernel so that we charge the user 2 cents per click on a web page?
In case you haven't been following Xen, the reason why you cannot run Windows is because we are waiting for intel's VM processor instructions to be implemented in the next VT release of thier processors.
Well, that appearently is no longer a problem and you should be able to use a standard Linux Fedora Core, or whatever installation to load windows on by next year.
VMware knows this, and is trying to prevent existing customers from leaving or looking elsewhere by giving away its products.
Interesting thoughts I have was:
1) I can install Windows workstations and servers remotely. 2) How long will it take for Microsoft to add a Service Pack update that detects windows running on a Linux box and have it start not working properly so that people use thier VM product instead, or don't have a choice. 3) Whats the performance going to be like.
VMWare is a nice product but A it is too expensive, and be it is too expensive because it turns any VM machine into a basket case performance wise.
So XeN's approach hopefully won't be any worse, maybe better since they are not trying to emulate an entire machine.:-)
Your quite right Stallman knew this was going to fail. But the real issue is something you neglected to point out is, that DRM is not about copying songs and video.
This is a much bigger issue than that.
It has to do with education, who gets knowledge, who can pay for knowledge and those that can't are screwed.
This goes for anything science or technology related.
Throughout history corrupt regimes and governments have known all too well that citizens that can read or write, or are empowered to discover or reorganize information without dogma are "disruptive" to the state as a whole.
Whether you like it or not, Universities, school systems etc are not setup by what one accomplishes or contributes. They are setup for those who want to play "the game" so to speak. Don't play the "game" and your out. This is painfully obvious if you are in a computer science department and are doing research. If someone doesn't like your ideas, your out.
See it happen to my prof personally and the process is disgusting because it ties everything to money and corporate contributors and very little of it has to do with any real science.
What Stallman is really advocating is that information and technology should be available for all, free for all and there should be no barriers constructed artifically or legislated by governments.
Since most of his arguments revolve around software this makes sense because software is what directs computers to share or not share information. As the world becomes fully networked, obviously there is going to be a huge divide if something isn't done about it soon.
The little guy here as you should point out is every Slashdot reader.
I also believe you made a interesting point about governments listening. If it hasn't hit everyone in the head by now, governments ARE listening quite well to thier citizens. But these citizens are not individuals, they are corporations.
I do not even believe governments such as those in the US for example even listen to citizens as defined as "voter" anymore.
Which brings me to a rather not so nice future painting. The entire globe is one huge computer network. If you don't work for a corporation, you can't learn. Can't learn, can't get a job. Can't get a job, your even lower than the guy working for the corporation so you get substandard or next to no healthcare, your kids can't go to college because it is too expensive. (i.e. every public university will be corporate owned in about 20-30 years anyway at the rate its going. Form a buget perspective anyway.) Furthermore, if you are caught making copies of information say about "Calculas" or "American History" DRM books you can instantly be imprisoned for hard labor with no trial.
Sounds absolutely rediculous if it wasn't for the fact that it has already happened.
1) Back in my day I wrote my own cf files from scratch. Sendmail complexity didn't scare me, but neither does Geometrodynamics. Like most things in life, complex problems in the real world rarely have simple solutions.
My observation: People pick the wrong tools to solve problems with. There are plenty of alternatives to Sendmail. Throwing a temper tantrum and removing it from a distro doesn't make the problems it was designed to handle go away.
Problems, that many alternatives still can't handle or scale well. Postfix is simple to set up because I don't use postfix with several different directory service systems, and have to format email addresses into non standard formats over a variety of transport mechanisms.
If and when Postfix or others can do these things, people will throw them aside as well and say they are too complex to setup.
2) Personally, I think this is a growing up issue. We are now seeing BSD, Linux leaving the engineering/science sectors and entering peoples homes and small businesses. You do not need sendmail on a desktop for example.
Althought, for myself who designs very complex mail systems, I run it on my personal laptop where it then forwards my mail when it senses I have a net connection.
3) Sendmail is one of the oldest pieces of software on the net. Often duplicated, but never dominated it will be here to stay to solve really complex mail problems.
People who say sendmail is complex and we shouldn't use it probably think the same thing about calculas. Calculas took about 3500 years to rediscover. You can figure out sendmail in about 30 days if you put some study and thought into it. But to say it is too hard like calculas, so we should not go to the moon, build better drugs through protein folding and what not is not a very good reason.
4) Personally I think distros are getting out of hand and are including a lot of stuff people do not need besides sendmail. I think package systems suck right now, but are improving. My favorite is yum right now. Whats yours? Do you think your grandma can operator your packaging system and pick what she needs to view that abc news clip on the web?
Better packaging systems are one of the frontiers of end user security that I think will help us go a long way to fixing security problems by keeping user machines free of cruft.
Sendmail and Postfix etc are cruft if the user doesn't need them.
Actually, if everyone had free access or a terminal of some sort to information, they could probably fix most of thier problems themselves.
Problem is, Intellectual Property was created to insure the havs get information and the hav nots cannot use information.
Allowing people to tap into the global internet and get access to other view points, how things are and asking others for help or consultation is one way to destroy totalitarianism, corrupt governments and greedy corrupt corporations.
The countries that have large muslim populations do not like the west.
Sugar coating news articles and censoring stories on news sites is not going to make the fact go away.
I think part of the issue with these countries is that they are poor, and poverty ridden.
This generates a sort of hopelessness and despair and this soon turns to anger and irrational decisions.
If the West and Far East doesn't do something about correcting this soon, we are going to suffer some serious consequences including waking up one morning and finding Bejing, Los Angelos or Chicago/New York gone in a flash of light.
Some of the things I would suggest would be education. However, some of the countries in question, could chop your head off if you actually became educated. However, I guess getting on the tube and telling your people we need to annihilate a race of people is an exception.
Especially if you are a women living in Iran.
The cultural divide is huge here, and I think if we get rid of the poverty things would fix themselves over time.
Problem is, Iran, Saudi Arabi for example are corrupt, and are not interested in democracy, empowering people in general because the chaos in those countries allows them to make tons of cash.
Welcome to the Empire of the United States of America.
While you serve the sufferance of the 5% of the families in this empire that own 95% of everything here, please be advised that you do not and cannot own:
Any sort of source code, any sort of music, any sort of transportation, any energy source.
You can however, license it from said 5% of the population here that own 95% of everything else.
You may buy a "rights" upgrade to your license to do as you please here, if you get caught violating the law. But bear in mind, sometimes we have to not accept your cash so we can calm the masses and throw them a "justice bone". In that instance should it happen, your "rights" license is null and void.
Above all else, while you are here please be advised that any government official can be purchased for a limited time depending on how much cash you have, and how much influence you want.
Just do not make it obvious and please use foreign banks to make sure transactions are not traceable.
Java is code, XSLT is the Layout and XML is the content.
Furthermore, when you combine relationally, XML and XSLT code embedded into SQL databases, you have the ability to add security to your servers, that is not attainable otherwise.
The reason, is that nothing is ever stored as a HTML file, or a file on the web server.
Everything is a URL that translates into a SQL table to get XML or XSLT code to layout content.
Thats right, to update your website you just talk to a bunch of SQL tables and that is all. You do not give a login to your web server, or your app server to people. Just the SQL server.
I am working with my current employer to see if he would let me release the framework as an open source project, because it is MUCH better than the LAMP model or PHP crapola that requires you to put HTML all over the place in files that clutter and make securing 3 or 4 different servers from users who want to update content, to programmers and what not.
"Ok, this is where I stopped reading, because you are either in the stone age, or just don't know any better..
A GUI on a server is a bad thing? Lets see the GUI portion of a Windows 2003 server consumes about 2-8mb of RAM and virtually NO CPU time whatsoever. This was also true of NT4 when Novell was trying to tell people NT would be slower because it had a GUI."
Well, there is a lot more too this problem with Windows than just a memory foot print. Yes, tis true the gui probably doesn't take up much to display the screen.
But the Entire Windows event and call back interface the GUI is attached to, AT THE KERNEL LEVEL, makes the entire Windows OS far less viable to use in a 24/7 context.
"The only way a GUI would slow down a server is if someone was logged into the GUI and running GUI based interfaces like the Explorer Desktop."
I never talked about the GUI slowing things down. I consistently said that the GUI is not required and adds more issues and reliability problems to a server that more often than not doesn't need it.
"Secondly, you do realize this is the year 2006, and servers are used for more than just file and printer sharing, this not 1990 where servers have 2-3 basic functions."
Quite true, and my biggest problem with Windows is you can't make those decisions yourself. If I want to run a VoIP server, like Asterisk, yeah sure we have a webserver running a GUI for it.
Even THEN THOUGH, we do not have X windows running on the box, there is no need for it, and the interface is a user level process and can't touch the kernel.
"Servers today provide video/audio encoding, are Media Servers... Oh and wait for it. They also provide GUI Multi-User interfaces for terminals. You know something like XWindows was doing in the FREAKING 1980s."
True, but the server portion ran on the client, not on the server running the app.
Now that was Freaky.:-)
"There are many companies that have centeralized applications running XWindows off a Server, as well as Windows 2003 servers with people running RDP/Terminal Services.
Why do we always have people jump into a topic, go off topic, then say things like 'Servers shouldn't have GUIs'. I sometimes think I slipped back to the 70s."
Because your missing the point entirely. Its a reliability issue like I said, and its a choice issue as I have pointed out with Microsoft Windows.
I never said we should all go back to running text terminals for our applications. I am talking about running server apps and whether the kernel that is doing the server part should even have a gui on it.
"If you cannot envision a reason to have a GUI on a server, then you need to be more creative, and explore other ways your servers can be used.
And even if you can't do that, do the math on the GUI memory footprint, and the CPU utilization on a system like Windows 2003 server, where the VGA card booted to a login screen is consuming VIRTUALLY nothing."
I have BIG problems on how windows SELECTIVE measures CPU utilization, and what it calls IDLE time.
But I won't get into that here.
As far as being creative how about notloading a GUI and just running a web server process for the vast majority of your GUI needs in userland, and how about this for creativty: !Let the admin choose if he wants a GUI to run in the first place!!
Windows already runs WAY too much crap that screws itself every 7 days on my Windows 2000 servers which I have to reboot on a weekly basis or they tank running terminal services
I find this so hard to believe, unless you are running some really crappy internal software eating resources or having a major memory leak.
We run Win2k and Windows 2003 servers that are rebooted once a month for updates when needed. And we are handling some of the largest volume websites in the world. In addition to office environments with 1000s of users to a server.
If we have a server (Windows/Linux/Solaris) that has to be re
"You sir are on crack, do you seriously believe what you're saying? Are possibly comparing the ease of Active Directory with OpenLdap? Sorry but you're attacking Windows at almost all the wrong angles."
No I am not on crack and yes I believe what I am saying.:-)
"Naturally Windows is far more complex and yes, that means bugs, but its all for ease of use. I'm sorry but you cannot create a directory service enabled network with anything even close to the ease of Windows with Active Directory. Now add in SMS and MOM for management and monitoring and you've got yourself an environment capable of servicing hundreds or more workstations. It's too easy for your arguments to work. Now that that horse plop is out of the way let's address your thinking that Vista is for servers or will be anything like the server product. The server product is still called Longhorn and does not contain any of the "pretty" effects of which you complain. You're right, servers don't need that stuff and guess what? Microsoft agrees. You seem to just want to spread fud all over the place. Despite what you seem to think Microsoft does listen to its business customers and add features accordingly which is why you see 2200 registry entries now built into the group policy and a management snapin that is much more capable of organizing said rediculous amount of remote customization. Yes all these features exist for linux environments but I'm sorry, they are not easier to deploy, at least not for larger organizations. Smaller shops can probably get away with it better. In a world where I'm buying quad processor dual core servers using virtual machines to run additional operating systems with 64gigs of ram I can afford the 512megs of overhead which may or may not be required. I'll add that AD on Win2k3 requires 168megs of ram and longhorn won't be all that different especially considering management and monitoring services can be control via domain policy."
Ease of use time is traded for all the lost time when the server stops working because of all the bugs.
Do you know how much time is spent on correcting Windows issues and developing and maintaining the enourmous amounts of software and hardware security infrastructure to get that ease of use?
I am saying it isn't worth it pal, and that is not from thoery, its from practice.
Yes the interface on a command line can be a bear sometimes, but I would rewrite and entire Sendmail.cf file by hand than have the pain and suffering of operating a server system and network that only works part of the time in a 24/7 operation like we have.
In my experience therefore, the so called ease of use doesn't save time because it is lost on the end of poorly engineered operating system software which causes massive scalability and staffing problems for anything except operating a small office of about 25 people.
As for Active Directory, I use a PostGRES database to generate LDIFF files in perfect syntax to add user accounts for example. Takes more to setup, but once completed, I can add a person much quicker than you can click on all those buttons.
Besides there are LDAP GUI tools for OpenLDAP, if you must use them.
"I'll also add that Microsoft has not delayed Vista, Gartner doesn't think they can do it. Considering the latest build I work with I'm inclined to agree with Microsoft. I don't understand the animosity. My linux boxes are right along side my Windows boxes and I reboot every few months as part of regular system maintenance, thats why I cluster so I can take nodes down. It's smart for both linux and windows. Last I checked there were kernel updates for SUSE Enterprise linux about once a week just like Windows so regular maintenance is just good practice."
Your missing the point, again. I have a CHOICE with my Linux boxes to do maintenance. With Windows I DO NOT have a choice to do maintance because a much great selection of problems with Windows REQUIRES I do more maintenance.
There is a architectural problem here with Windows software in that Redmond keeps making versions of the software to sell more software to lock everyone stupid enough to buy it, in.
It is insane to use 512MB on a server that doesn't need it just to run the OS on it.
Let alone a stupid GUI, which doesn't belong on servers anyway.
More and more software piled ontop of machines to do simple functions make machines easier to break into, not harder to break into. So what do we do? We add more software ontop of that to fix it, which of course doesn't fix it. (i.e. Virus scanners, spam blockers...etc)
My Mantra: Increasing the process working set size of a server makes it less secure, not more secure.
Windows already runs WAY too much crap that screws itself every 7 days on my Windows 2000 servers which I have to reboot on a weekly basis or they tank running terminal services. We must have paid Microsoft, I don't know, maybe 3GRAND last year to try and fix the problem and they can't.
They told us to buy Win2003 to fix the problem. After spending about 3 Grand.
Up YOURS Balmer, my solution to this problem was to convert everything to Linux. Problem solved.
Meanwhile, NONE of my UNIX boxes (Linux, BSD) have these issues and run far more complex programs on them like PostGRES FreeNX and OpenOffice and have uptimes on them well over 200 days.
I do Kernel updates once a year if I must.
You just don't get it. It is not OLD it is a well know software engineering problem: More instructions to execute means MORE BUGS and there is a direct correlation between the two with tons of research from the military on the topic when ADA was developed.
Repeat after me:
Desktops and Servers with smaller working executable code sets run better than Desktops and Servers with bigger working executable code sets. By better I mean, they crash less, run faster and are CHEAPER to run. Yes, thats right, CHEAPER. You can ACTUALLY affect your electricity bill if you have that XEO doing more idle time than work time. If your a guy like me with 20 or so big honkin X64 systems, you can cut your electric bill by 8% by running LINUX instead of windows. This is due to the simple fact that UNIX or Linux does exactly what I want to it too and if it doesn't I can make it because I can tell it what processes to run and even have the source code should I want to get all Richard Stallman on my servers behind.
But in anycase, You heard it hear first folks: Run Linux save electricity.
I use to have to get up at 2AM or some other freakin hour 3 times a week at least to kick a Windows machine's arse because it would simply get "tired" and stop working.
Guess what? I moved 90% of my network and application services to Linux and since then haven't got a page yet from NAGIOS at 2AM in the morning. (Still get some though as the Thunderstorms tend to knock out my network in the summer, which sucks but I can't do anything about it.)
So this isn't old, or an idle complaint. Microsoft is doing this not to solve your business problem, because the software industry already knows how to make reliable software systems than Microsoft puts out. Microsoft is doing this too sell you more software and to HELL with your business requirements! (i.e. Mine where still are a business computing system that operates 24x7, nonstop and MUST be available at all times.)
Screw Microsoft, and if you buy servers with Vista loaded on them with half a gig of memory to run a NTP server you GET what you DESERVE.
We started a program that offered pptp access for users.
With one caveat: People had to have permision to obtain a company laptop for travel or remote use.
No WAY are we touching home machines.
A few busers were really easy to identify and deal with because they don't work here anymore.
But for the most part, no problems with the machines after people found out what happens when they load porn and software on the machine by breaking the rules.
We are up to about 20 people now with these laptops, and I hardly here a peep out of them, except for the occasional phone call of "How do I connect to the internet at this Hotel?"
As it is, DRM is nothing more than insuring only those who can pay, get information they need.
If DRM continues, it will be illegal to learn just about anything, unless you have a license to read about it.
As is some idiots already think the patent system can be used to patent mathematical constructs "i.e. programs which are fundamentally part of the research Alan Turing did long ago.".
You can be bet if the methods of the limit and the derivative were invented today, you would have to pay a license for just determining what your speed was into work 30 minutes into the trip!
That is the "ideal world" of those in favor of DRM.
Screw DRM. I will learn whatever I want, will apply it to whatever human condition I feel helps people or improves out lives.
Screw U if you think you need to make a profit off of other peoples suffering.
Its the same thing over again through out history.
100 Revolution 200 Citizens get peacetime 300 Citizens get stupid and complacent 400 Givernment Goons get the upper hand 500 People die, people get upset 600 Government gets out of control 700 goto 100
Intel has a lot to gain by a particular file format.
Any company with plans to enforce "trusted computing" hardware has a great deal of interest in file formats, and how to keep them as closed as possible.
XML documents can be parsed using a so called "open" (i.e. Open to Trusted Computing Members if you pay a HUGE fee.) so that documents can become encrypted XML objects that can only run on a particular machine.
If a file format is known, a BIOS modification can be made to intercept calls that the OS on the machine will not know about.
That way, you can't get around the hardware, its burned into silicone.
What is better, if you attempt to break the keys, ala HDCP and they find out, the next time you attempt to update your BIOS they can black list your motherboard. Just like they plan on doing to consumers if they find out a product (TV, DVD player, PVR etc) can be cracked for the encryption keys.
That way, your new 5K server or 5K TV won't boot anymore.
I have a network of just 30 Windows boxes (Out of 380 nodes of Linux desktops) and they keep ONE PERSON fully employed with all the ludicrous stuff that happens with those machines from login profiles getting screwed, the Exchange server that needed to be migrated to a bigger machine because the virus and spam situation was overwhleming the Exchange mail server.
You can't even friggin upgrade the damn thing without going through a complete reinstall!!
Try transferring an exchange server to new hardware. Welcome to your worst nightmare.
I just updated my existing sendmail hubs.
Know how I did it?
dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/sdb, and 45 minutes later I had a NEW FRIGGIN MAIL HUB on ET64 hardware!!!
I am sorry, but I have locked down KDE network desktops in my organization and they do not need half the baby sitting Microsoft does.
We have plenty of Oil. Its actually all over the place underground.
Why we do not have enough, is because like diamonds, which too there is a huge glut off.
It is artificially being limited.
Why?
Well, because why would you build refineries to drive down the cost of your product when you can keep it high?
It is really simple: It is not good business.
What is happening is not that we are running out of oil, what is happening is oil is in control of a very few ineterest groups in its refining, and this cartel will not be satisfied with any price of oil, at $65, $100, $200 or even a $1000 dollars a barrel.
Alternative energy sources will also not be created.
If someone is foolish enough to create such a alternative energy source and it really does have any kind of impact on Oil use and price, they will be ELIMINATED.
The price of Oil is all about Power and Control.
Armies will rise, Nations will fall and Oil shall remain in control of a very few.
Perhaps the terrorists will make Oil too dangerous to use.
"If you really disagree with this shit, and you're not just bitching for the sake of bitching, then do something about it. Write a letter to your congressman voicing your concerns. Talk about human rights violations, Tianemen Square, their aggressive stance on Tiawan, the virtual genocide in Tibet, pegging the yuan to the dollar, the lack of freedom of religion, their support of a nuclear Iran and nuclear North Korea, their poor environmental standards, rampant espionage, pick anything."
You can be certain that I am doing something about it.
Starting this year, I dumped every single piece of Cisco routing gear in my organization and replaced it with Linux boxen. I started dumping all my access points, and started using Linksys firmwares on the net for my Warehouse operations/Network Services. (A little more problematic now that Cisco bought Linksys.)
But as the Network manager, covering 16 different locations in a Fox Valley Network here in Wisconsin, I have removed about 50-80K in sales from Cisco from not buying or upgrading my routing gear from them.
I specifically told the Cisco sales person exactly why I was doing it too.
Next is the switching topology on my local LANS. I am converting to a fiber backbone and I will gutting all of my Cisco gear in 2006.
That will be a MUCH higher figure Cisco will lose.
Slashdot Mirror
You silly person.
Why would you want to investigate Congress?
Corporate America IS Congres, and have the real power.
Duh!
-Hack
First of all, I am one of those people who believe industrial pursuits should have a reward and a carrot approach for those who can start up a company and come up with a product. Protections of some sort should be in place to protect small companies entering markets. Using a different patent system than what we have now, which puts large limits on the time you can lock up a copyright or patent. 2 years max for high tech for example, and 5 years for literary works, print, film etc.
However, in the two sections of the document as posted the authors give no supporting examples for thier arguments.
I for one, would have liked to see them address the issue or counter the GPL v3 documents on Submarine Patents as well as the growing problem of Intellectual Property/Copyright/Patent forever and ever direction the US is taking.
Furthermore, the patent system as setup in the USA is specifically designed around who has the most cash to give to lawyers.
The Blackberry dabacle was just an example.
Second, I would like to have seen the authors address the growing lets patent everything, and not make anything, and prevent others from making anything companies.
This is EVIL because it is sheer GREED and is a complete slap in the face of what the Patent system was originally intended to do: Provide a means to protect REAL inventions and spur investment so that the inventor can get his carrot for being so inventive/innovative.
In short, I would make it illegal to collect patents. If you can't build a protoype, you don't get a patent period.
The authors seem to be more concerned about the issue of patents and protecting a huge amount of patent IP property. Yet turn around and totally ignore the fact that the GPLv2 technically can't work in a patent system as defined now, critique the v3 of the license which attempts to weed out any participation from said companies to protect open source ideas and the people who participate in open source projects.
Finally, lets not forget the entire Open Source movement as defined by the GPL doesn't have a use for patents, has no use for DRM or "trusted" computing and continues to innovate and march forward leaving most US companies in the dust where they belong selling crappy windows products which are "patent pending".
-Hack
Ripping people off?
You mean ripping people off that are not even born yet by extending patents and copyrights out to 100 years for example?
As far as I am concerned, the entire patent/copyright process as defined by the USA is nothing but a big boys club specifically designed to seal markets and prevent "disruptive" technologies.
I wish the Chinese all the best.
-Hackus
As long as the guy has good references and a nice portfolio of projects he can let me look at in the area of expertise I am looking for, I usually stop looking at other candidates.
-Hackus
Mmmmm....10 years, I think it is a great idea, but let me make a few adjustments to what most drugs will be like in 10 years of this variety. But I do agree treatment will get better.
A patent has to be developed from it first, so that it can be restricted to only those that can pay.
We wouldn't want EVERYONE surviving cancer, that wouldn't be profitable and would destroy the market demand.
Even if the protocols used are perfected on a per cancer basis, we certainly wouldn't want to CURE a person.
What we would like to do is give them a pill they are required to take to keep the cancer in remission only.
(However, if you are the Elite, and you know who you are, we could probably reach a deal for a cure. But it must be kept quiet so that the general population thinks you just had a "cold" and are better now. We wouldn't want to anger the masses.)
That way they would need to subscribe to our drug for life. Excellent profit potential for this sort of treatment.
Then of course, any scientist who gets ANY ideas they are going to get access to this research outside commercial interests we will politely ask them to stop thier research, or throw them in jail or perhaps maybe the good doctor might have an "accident" on the way to his lab one day.
Yes, the future is bright for "treatments" but don't think for a second a cure is going to be dished out to anyone if these protocols are finally perfected.
It isn't in the best interests of the corporate empires that are working on these protocols.
-Hack
The real reason binaries in Linux are shunned is because of the administrative community maintaining Linux machines in critical operations.
Secondly, where does it stop?
If we allow closed source proprietary binary anything into Linuxland kernel apis, then what will we be forced to compromise on next? If that is the case, I would just run Windows server software.
I mean really, the benefits of Open Source is because the OS is much more robust, and much more proactive in security planning and bug corrections in software.
I find Mr. Raymonds arguements about closing one of the most serious aspects of kernel level software, dubious at best economically, and worse totally defeats the reason to running a Linux kernel over Windows for security, reliability, especially in 24x7x365 operations.
The whole idea in my opinion from working with source code for users and manufacturers is that it keeps costs low through shared development, and maintains better quality.
You also have to understand the media companies are still in old school mode with regards to making profits out of media in general.
This whole DRM craze is because Media can't keep up with the business models required to generate revenue, not because we have a "compromise" on our hands.
Whats next?
Changing the kernel so that we charge the user 2 cents per click on a web page?
Thats comming next.
-Hackus
Good Points, and as people have pointed out you can get VT enabled processors and chipsets right now.
However, XeN has about a years worth of cooking I feel before I would want to use it for running anything other than another bunch of Linux servers.
No doubt, admin tools will be created to deal with the VT issues of running different OS's and tuning issues will be much understood, or fixed.
Right now, XeN is definately not ready for prime time to run a Windows OS in production.
Or at least, I wouldn't just yet.
-Hack
In case you haven't been following Xen, the reason why you cannot run Windows is because we are waiting for intel's VM processor instructions to be implemented in the next VT release of thier processors.
:-)
Well, that appearently is no longer a problem and you should be able to use a standard Linux Fedora Core, or whatever installation to load windows on by next year.
VMware knows this, and is trying to prevent existing customers from leaving or looking elsewhere by giving away its products.
Interesting thoughts I have was:
1) I can install Windows workstations and servers remotely.
2) How long will it take for Microsoft to add a Service Pack update that detects windows running on a Linux box and have it start not working properly so that people use thier VM product instead, or don't have a choice.
3) Whats the performance going to be like.
VMWare is a nice product but A it is too expensive, and be it is too expensive because it turns any VM machine into a basket case performance wise.
So XeN's approach hopefully won't be any worse, maybe better since they are not trying to emulate an entire machine.
-Hack
A couple of Points:
Your quite right Stallman knew this was going to fail. But the real issue is something you neglected to point out is, that DRM is not about copying songs and video.
This is a much bigger issue than that.
It has to do with education, who gets knowledge, who can pay for knowledge and those that can't are screwed.
This goes for anything science or technology related.
Throughout history corrupt regimes and governments have known all too well that citizens that can read or write, or are empowered to discover or reorganize information without dogma are "disruptive" to the state as a whole.
Whether you like it or not, Universities, school systems etc are not setup by what one accomplishes or contributes. They are setup for those who want to play "the game" so to speak. Don't play the "game" and your out. This is painfully obvious if you are in a computer science department and are doing research. If someone doesn't like your ideas, your out.
See it happen to my prof personally and the process is disgusting because it ties everything to money and corporate contributors and very little of it has to do with any real science.
What Stallman is really advocating is that information and technology should be available for all, free for all and there should be no barriers constructed artifically or legislated by governments.
Since most of his arguments revolve around software this makes sense because software is what directs computers to share or not share information. As the world becomes fully networked, obviously there is going to be a huge divide if something isn't done about it soon.
The little guy here as you should point out is every Slashdot reader.
I also believe you made a interesting point about governments listening. If it hasn't hit everyone in the head by now, governments ARE listening quite well to thier citizens. But these citizens are not individuals, they are corporations.
I do not even believe governments such as those in the US for example even listen to citizens as defined as "voter" anymore.
Which brings me to a rather not so nice future painting. The entire globe is one huge computer network. If you don't work for a corporation, you can't learn. Can't learn, can't get a job. Can't get a job, your even lower than the guy working for the corporation so you get substandard or next to no healthcare, your kids can't go to college because it is too expensive. (i.e. every public university will be corporate owned in about 20-30 years anyway at the rate its going. Form a buget perspective anyway.) Furthermore, if you are caught making copies of information say about "Calculas" or "American History" DRM books you can instantly be imprisoned for hard labor with no trial.
Sounds absolutely rediculous if it wasn't for the fact that it has already happened.
-Hack
My comments:
1) Back in my day I wrote my own cf files from scratch. Sendmail complexity didn't scare me, but neither does Geometrodynamics. Like most things in life, complex problems in the real world rarely have simple solutions.
My observation: People pick the wrong tools to solve problems with. There are plenty of alternatives to Sendmail. Throwing a temper tantrum and removing it from a distro doesn't make the problems it was designed to handle go away.
Problems, that many alternatives still can't handle or scale well. Postfix is simple to set up because I don't use postfix with several different directory service systems, and have to format email addresses into non standard formats over a variety of transport mechanisms.
If and when Postfix or others can do these things, people will throw them aside as well and say they are too complex to setup.
2) Personally, I think this is a growing up issue. We are now seeing BSD, Linux leaving the engineering/science sectors and entering peoples homes and small businesses. You do not need sendmail on a desktop for example.
Althought, for myself who designs very complex mail systems, I run it on my personal laptop where it then forwards my mail when it senses I have a net connection.
3) Sendmail is one of the oldest pieces of software on the net. Often duplicated, but never dominated it will be here to stay to solve really complex mail problems.
People who say sendmail is complex and we shouldn't use it probably think the same thing about calculas. Calculas took about 3500 years to rediscover. You can figure out sendmail in about 30 days if you put some study and thought into it. But to say it is too hard like calculas, so we should not go to the moon, build better drugs through protein folding and what not is not a very good reason.
4) Personally I think distros are getting out of hand and are including a lot of stuff people do not need besides sendmail. I think package systems suck right now, but are improving. My favorite is yum right now. Whats yours? Do you think your grandma can operator your packaging system and pick what she needs to view that abc news clip on the web?
Better packaging systems are one of the frontiers of end user security that I think will help us go a long way to fixing security problems by keeping user machines free of cruft.
Sendmail and Postfix etc are cruft if the user doesn't need them.
Just my thoughts....
-Hack
Actually, if everyone had free access or a terminal of some sort to information, they could probably fix most of thier problems themselves.
Problem is, Intellectual Property was created to insure the havs get information and the hav nots cannot use information.
Allowing people to tap into the global internet and get access to other view points, how things are and asking others for help or consultation is one way to destroy totalitarianism, corrupt governments and greedy corrupt corporations.
-Hack
The countries that have large muslim populations do not like the west.
Sugar coating news articles and censoring stories on news sites is not going to make the fact go away.
I think part of the issue with these countries is that they are poor, and poverty ridden.
This generates a sort of hopelessness and despair and this soon turns to anger and irrational decisions.
If the West and Far East doesn't do something about correcting this soon, we are going to suffer some serious consequences including waking up one morning and finding Bejing, Los Angelos or Chicago/New York gone in a flash of light.
Some of the things I would suggest would be education. However, some of the countries in question, could chop your head off if you actually became educated. However, I guess getting on the tube and telling your people we need to annihilate a race of people is an exception.
Especially if you are a women living in Iran.
The cultural divide is huge here, and I think if we get rid of the poverty things would fix themselves over time.
Problem is, Iran, Saudi Arabi for example are corrupt, and are not interested in democracy, empowering people in general because the chaos in those countries allows them to make tons of cash.
-Hack
Welcome to the Empire of the United States of America.
While you serve the sufferance of the 5% of the families in this empire that own 95% of everything here, please be advised that you do not and cannot own:
Any sort of source code, any sort of music, any sort of transportation, any energy source.
You can however, license it from said 5% of the population here that own 95% of everything else.
You may buy a "rights" upgrade to your license to do as you please here, if you get caught violating the law. But bear in mind, sometimes we have to not accept your cash so we can calm the masses and throw them a "justice bone". In that instance should it happen, your "rights" license is null and void.
Above all else, while you are here please be advised that any government official can be purchased for a limited time depending on how much cash you have, and how much influence you want.
Just do not make it obvious and please use foreign banks to make sure transactions are not traceable.
Thank You and enjoy your stay!
-The Empire USA
Easy.
For me, it is clear anyway.
Java is code, XSLT is the Layout and XML is the content.
Furthermore, when you combine relationally, XML and XSLT code embedded into SQL databases, you have the ability to add security to your servers, that is not attainable otherwise.
The reason, is that nothing is ever stored as a HTML file, or a file on the web server.
Everything is a URL that translates into a SQL table to get XML or XSLT code to layout content.
Thats right, to update your website you just talk to a bunch of SQL tables and that is all. You do not give a login to your web server, or your app server to people. Just the SQL server.
I am working with my current employer to see if he would let me release the framework as an open source project, because it is MUCH better than the LAMP model or PHP crapola that requires you to put HTML all over the place in files that clutter and make securing 3 or 4 different servers from users who want to update content, to programmers and what not.
-Hack
"Ok, this is where I stopped reading, because you are either in the stone age, or just don't know any better..
:-)
A GUI on a server is a bad thing? Lets see the GUI portion of a Windows 2003 server consumes about 2-8mb of RAM and virtually NO CPU time whatsoever. This was also true of NT4 when Novell was trying to tell people NT would be slower because it had a GUI."
Well, there is a lot more too this problem with Windows than just a memory foot print. Yes, tis true the gui probably doesn't take up much to display the screen.
But the Entire Windows event and call back interface the GUI is attached to, AT THE KERNEL LEVEL, makes the entire Windows OS far less viable to use in a 24/7 context.
"The only way a GUI would slow down a server is if someone was logged into the GUI and running GUI based interfaces like the Explorer Desktop."
I never talked about the GUI slowing things down. I consistently said that the GUI is not required and adds more issues and reliability problems to a server that more often than not doesn't need it.
"Secondly, you do realize this is the year 2006, and servers are used for more than just file and printer sharing, this not 1990 where servers have 2-3 basic functions."
Quite true, and my biggest problem with Windows is you can't make those decisions yourself. If I want to run a VoIP server, like Asterisk, yeah sure we have a webserver running a GUI for it.
Even THEN THOUGH, we do not have X windows running on the box, there is no need for it, and the interface is a user level process and can't touch the kernel.
"Servers today provide video/audio encoding, are Media Servers... Oh and wait for it. They also provide GUI Multi-User interfaces for terminals. You know something like XWindows was doing in the FREAKING 1980s."
True, but the server portion ran on the client, not on the server running the app.
Now that was Freaky.
"There are many companies that have centeralized applications running XWindows off a Server, as well as Windows 2003 servers with people running RDP/Terminal Services.
Why do we always have people jump into a topic, go off topic, then say things like 'Servers shouldn't have GUIs'. I sometimes think I slipped back to the 70s."
Because your missing the point entirely. Its a reliability issue like I said, and its a choice issue as I have pointed out with Microsoft Windows.
I never said we should all go back to running text terminals for our applications. I am talking about running server apps and whether the kernel that is doing the server part should even have a gui on it.
"If you cannot envision a reason to have a GUI on a server, then you need to be more creative, and explore other ways your servers can be used.
And even if you can't do that, do the math on the GUI memory footprint, and the CPU utilization on a system like Windows 2003 server, where the VGA card booted to a login screen is consuming VIRTUALLY nothing."
I have BIG problems on how windows SELECTIVE measures CPU utilization, and what it calls IDLE time.
But I won't get into that here.
As far as being creative how about notloading a GUI and just running a web server process for the vast majority of your GUI needs in userland, and how about this for creativty: !Let the admin choose if he wants a GUI to run in the first place!!
Windows already runs WAY too much crap that screws itself every 7 days on my Windows 2000 servers which I have to reboot on a weekly basis or they tank running terminal services
I find this so hard to believe, unless you are running some really crappy internal software eating resources or having a major memory leak.
We run Win2k and Windows 2003 servers that are rebooted once a month for updates when needed. And we are handling some of the largest volume websites in the world. In addition to office environments with 1000s of users to a server.
If we have a server (Windows/Linux/Solaris) that has to be re
"You sir are on crack, do you seriously believe what you're saying? Are possibly comparing the ease of Active Directory with OpenLdap? Sorry but you're attacking Windows at almost all the wrong angles."
:-)
No I am not on crack and yes I believe what I am saying.
"Naturally Windows is far more complex and yes, that means bugs, but its all for ease of use. I'm sorry but you cannot create a directory service enabled network with anything even close to the ease of Windows with Active Directory. Now add in SMS and MOM for management and monitoring and you've got yourself an environment capable of servicing hundreds or more workstations. It's too easy for your arguments to work.
Now that that horse plop is out of the way let's address your thinking that Vista is for servers or will be anything like the server product. The server product is still called Longhorn and does not contain any of the "pretty" effects of which you complain. You're right, servers don't need that stuff and guess what? Microsoft agrees. You seem to just want to spread fud all over the place. Despite what you seem to think Microsoft does listen to its business customers and add features accordingly which is why you see 2200 registry entries now built into the group policy and a management snapin that is much more capable of organizing said rediculous amount of remote customization. Yes all these features exist for linux environments but I'm sorry, they are not easier to deploy, at least not for larger organizations. Smaller shops can probably get away with it better. In a world where I'm buying quad processor dual core servers using virtual machines to run additional operating systems with 64gigs of ram I can afford the 512megs of overhead which may or may not be required. I'll add that AD on Win2k3 requires 168megs of ram and longhorn won't be all that different especially considering management and monitoring services can be control via domain policy."
Ease of use time is traded for all the lost time when the server stops working because of all the bugs.
Do you know how much time is spent on correcting Windows issues and developing and maintaining the enourmous amounts of software and hardware security infrastructure to get that ease of use?
I am saying it isn't worth it pal, and that is not from thoery, its from practice.
Yes the interface on a command line can be a bear sometimes, but I would rewrite and entire Sendmail.cf file by hand than have the pain and suffering of operating a server system and network that only works part of the time in a 24/7 operation like we have.
In my experience therefore, the so called ease of use doesn't save time because it is lost on the end of poorly engineered operating system software which causes massive scalability and staffing problems for anything except operating a small office of about 25 people.
As for Active Directory, I use a PostGRES database to generate LDIFF files in perfect syntax to add user accounts for example. Takes more to setup, but once completed, I can add a person much quicker than you can click on all those buttons.
Besides there are LDAP GUI tools for OpenLDAP, if you must use them.
"I'll also add that Microsoft has not delayed Vista, Gartner doesn't think they can do it. Considering the latest build I work with I'm inclined to agree with Microsoft. I don't understand the animosity. My linux boxes are right along side my Windows boxes and I reboot every few months as part of regular system maintenance, thats why I cluster so I can take nodes down. It's smart for both linux and windows.
Last I checked there were kernel updates for SUSE Enterprise linux about once a week just like Windows so regular maintenance is just good practice."
Your missing the point, again. I have a CHOICE with my Linux boxes to do maintenance. With Windows I DO NOT have a choice to do maintance because a much great selection of problems with Windows REQUIRES I do more maintenance.
Some industries you cannot d
No it is not getting old.
There is a architectural problem here with Windows software in that Redmond keeps making versions of the software to sell more software to lock everyone stupid enough to buy it, in.
It is insane to use 512MB on a server that doesn't need it just to run the OS on it.
Let alone a stupid GUI, which doesn't belong on servers anyway.
More and more software piled ontop of machines to do simple functions make machines easier to break into, not harder to break into. So what do we do? We add more software ontop of that to fix it, which of course doesn't fix it. (i.e. Virus scanners, spam blockers...etc)
My Mantra: Increasing the process working set size of a server makes it less secure, not more secure.
Windows already runs WAY too much crap that screws itself every 7 days on my Windows 2000 servers which I have to reboot on a weekly basis or they tank running terminal services. We must have paid Microsoft, I don't know, maybe 3GRAND last year to try and fix the problem and they can't.
They told us to buy Win2003 to fix the problem. After spending about 3 Grand.
Up YOURS Balmer, my solution to this problem was to convert everything to Linux. Problem solved.
Meanwhile, NONE of my UNIX boxes (Linux, BSD) have these issues and run far more complex programs on them like PostGRES FreeNX and OpenOffice and have uptimes on them well over 200 days.
I do Kernel updates once a year if I must.
You just don't get it. It is not OLD it is a well know software engineering problem: More instructions to execute means MORE BUGS and there is a direct correlation between the two with tons of research from the military on the topic when ADA was developed.
Repeat after me:
Desktops and Servers with smaller working executable code sets run better than Desktops and Servers with bigger working executable code sets. By better I mean, they crash less, run faster and are CHEAPER to run. Yes, thats right, CHEAPER. You can ACTUALLY affect your electricity bill if you have that XEO doing more idle time than work time. If your a guy like me with 20 or so big honkin X64 systems, you can cut your electric bill by 8% by running LINUX instead of windows. This is due to the simple fact that UNIX or Linux does exactly what I want to it too and if it doesn't I can make it because I can tell it what processes to run and even have the source code should I want to get all Richard Stallman on my servers behind.
But in anycase, You heard it hear first folks: Run Linux save electricity.
I use to have to get up at 2AM or some other freakin hour 3 times a week at least to kick a Windows machine's arse because it would simply get "tired" and stop working.
Guess what? I moved 90% of my network and application services to Linux and since then haven't got a page yet from NAGIOS at 2AM in the morning. (Still get some though as the Thunderstorms tend to knock out my network in the summer, which sucks but I can't do anything about it.)
So this isn't old, or an idle complaint. Microsoft is doing this not to solve your business problem, because the software industry already knows how to make reliable software systems than Microsoft puts out. Microsoft is doing this too sell you more software and to HELL with your business requirements! (i.e. Mine where still are a business computing system that operates 24x7, nonstop and MUST be available at all times.)
Screw Microsoft, and if you buy servers with Vista loaded on them with half a gig of memory to run a NTP server you GET what you DESERVE.
CRAP!
-Hack
The high price of gas brought this on last year.
We started a program that offered pptp access for users.
With one caveat: People had to have permision to obtain a company laptop for travel or remote use.
No WAY are we touching home machines.
A few busers were really easy to identify and deal with because they don't work here anymore.
But for the most part, no problems with the machines after people found out what happens when they load porn and software on the machine by breaking the rules.
We are up to about 20 people now with these laptops, and I hardly here a peep out of them, except for the occasional phone call of "How do I connect to the internet at this Hotel?"
-Hackus
It better be free.
As it is, DRM is nothing more than insuring only those who can pay, get information they need.
If DRM continues, it will be illegal to learn just about anything, unless you have a license to read about it.
As is some idiots already think the patent system can be used to patent mathematical constructs "i.e. programs which are fundamentally part of the research Alan Turing did long ago.".
You can be bet if the methods of the limit and the derivative were invented today, you would have to pay a license for just determining what your speed was into work 30 minutes into the trip!
That is the "ideal world" of those in favor of DRM.
Screw DRM. I will learn whatever I want, will apply it to whatever human condition I feel helps people or improves out lives.
Screw U if you think you need to make a profit off of other peoples suffering.
-Hackus
I place the increase of rootkits in numbers in a spectacular way to Sony and the DRM folks.
They mass produce rootkits by the MILLIONS.
Idiots.
-Hackus
Its the same thing over again through out history.
100 Revolution
200 Citizens get peacetime
300 Citizens get stupid and complacent
400 Givernment Goons get the upper hand
500 People die, people get upset
600 Government gets out of control
700 goto 100
-Hackus
Err, No.
Intel has a lot to gain by a particular file format.
Any company with plans to enforce "trusted computing" hardware has a great deal of interest in file formats, and how to keep them as closed as possible.
XML documents can be parsed using a so called "open" (i.e. Open to Trusted Computing Members if you pay a HUGE fee.) so that documents can become encrypted XML objects that can only run on a particular machine.
If a file format is known, a BIOS modification can be made to intercept calls that the OS on the machine will not know about.
That way, you can't get around the hardware, its burned into silicone.
What is better, if you attempt to break the keys, ala HDCP and they find out, the next time you attempt to update your BIOS they can black list your motherboard. Just like they plan on doing to consumers if they find out a product (TV, DVD player, PVR etc) can be cracked for the encryption keys.
That way, your new 5K server or 5K TV won't boot anymore.
How nice.
-gc
Are you outta your mind?
And Windows isn't a support nightmare already?
That is a bunch of horse manure.
I have a network of just 30 Windows boxes (Out of 380 nodes of Linux desktops) and they keep ONE PERSON fully employed with all the ludicrous stuff that happens with those machines from login profiles getting screwed, the Exchange server that needed to be migrated to a bigger machine because the virus and spam situation was overwhleming the Exchange mail server.
You can't even friggin upgrade the damn thing without going through a complete reinstall!!
Try transferring an exchange server to new hardware. Welcome to your worst nightmare.
I just updated my existing sendmail hubs.
Know how I did it?
dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/sdb, and 45 minutes later I had a NEW FRIGGIN MAIL HUB on ET64 hardware!!!
I am sorry, but I have locked down KDE network desktops in my organization and they do not need half the baby sitting Microsoft does.
Pure crap and you know it.
-Hackus
We have plenty of Oil. Its actually all over the place underground.
Why we do not have enough, is because like diamonds, which too there is a huge glut off.
It is artificially being limited.
Why?
Well, because why would you build refineries to drive down the cost of your product when you can keep it high?
It is really simple: It is not good business.
What is happening is not that we are running out of oil, what is happening is oil is in control of a very few ineterest groups in its refining, and this cartel will not be satisfied with any price of oil, at $65, $100, $200 or even a $1000 dollars a barrel.
Alternative energy sources will also not be created.
If someone is foolish enough to create such a alternative energy source and it really does have any kind of impact on Oil use and price, they will be ELIMINATED.
The price of Oil is all about Power and Control.
Armies will rise, Nations will fall and Oil shall remain in control of a very few.
Perhaps the terrorists will make Oil too dangerous to use.
Then perhaps things will change.
-Hack
"If you really disagree with this shit, and you're not just bitching for the sake of bitching, then do something about it. Write a letter to your congressman voicing your concerns. Talk about human rights violations, Tianemen Square, their aggressive stance on Tiawan, the virtual genocide in Tibet, pegging the yuan to the dollar, the lack of freedom of religion, their support of a nuclear Iran and nuclear North Korea, their poor environmental standards, rampant espionage, pick anything."
You can be certain that I am doing something about it.
Starting this year, I dumped every single piece of Cisco routing gear in my organization and replaced it with Linux boxen. I started dumping all my access points, and started using Linksys firmwares on the net for my Warehouse operations/Network Services.
(A little more problematic now that Cisco bought Linksys.)
But as the Network manager, covering 16 different locations in a Fox Valley Network here in Wisconsin, I have removed about 50-80K in sales from Cisco from not buying or upgrading my routing gear from them.
I specifically told the Cisco sales person exactly why I was doing it too.
Next is the switching topology on my local LANS. I am converting to a fiber backbone and I will gutting all of my Cisco gear in 2006.
That will be a MUCH higher figure Cisco will lose.
-gc