Electric cars that require an outside power source just don't have the range to satisfy people. The auto industry now thinks that fuel cell powered cars are much closer to achieving the 300 mile range that people expect. So fuel cell technology is where it is going.
Incidentally there is a good articles in a recent Time magazine and Wired.
I like Mandrake but your comments regarding them not caring about the license is just plain wrong. 8.2 no longer includes Netscape. The next version will not include pine because of license issues. Mandrake has made a large attempt to remove all software that isn't free software from the GPL CDs. The only way to get anything else is to belong to the MandrakeClub or buy the PowerPack.
Well of course my statement assumes that the given invention is patentable at all. If it is just having done something before someone else doesn't automatically mean the existence of prior art. Besides Europe doesn't have software patents, Yet.
The question is not if you did it. But did you publish how to do the work to the public? Prior art requires public disclosure. Keeping things to yourself allows someone to come along after you and patent something you discovered first.
Not really. The DMCA applies to copyright. This license is not covering reverse engineering or protecting their copyright on their binary code. But is licensing the use of patents and documentation of the protocol.
The DMCA does not give you the legal right to violate a patent for interoperability. Finally documentation does not constitute a computer program.
So basically this license is setting out very specific terms as to how they license their patents and some documentation. It does nothing to prevent someone with a copy of windows from reverse engineer it to write another implementation of CIFS. That's an issue for the windows EULA. Which if I'm not mistaken probably already stipulates you may not reverse engineer it anyway.
The DMCA grant you mention only exists to circumvent digital rights management for the purpose of interoperability. And even then it's pretty narrowly construed.
Last but not least. Just because you have a right does not mean you can not give it up contracturaly. For example, generally one has the right to free speach. However, if I sign a NDA and start saying things I agreed I would not I could be sued. The judge wouldn't be very interested in my Free Speech rights.
From: Ben Reser
To: editors@eff.org
Subject: Re: EFF on Spam
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 09:01:35 -0700
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 09:20:30PM -0700, Stanton McCandlish wrote:
> Public Interest Postion on Junk Email: Protect Innocent Users
>
> EFF Statement Regarding Anti-Spam Measures
>
> Executive Summary: Any measure for stopping spam must ensure that all
> non-spam messages reach their intended recipients.
>
>...
I disagree greatly with your statement about Anti-Spam. It is clearly
poorly researched. You may a number of statements that I find really
odd. It is unfortunate that because of your inaccurate stance I may
have to reconsider my continuing membership in EFF when my membership
comes up for renewell.
* System adminstrators are forced to adopt anti-spam policies. The only
policy MAPS or ORBS seeks to have other admins adopt on their systems is
to close their open relays and other ways for non-customers to inject
email into their mail servers. While this may be inconvient to some end
users it is not difficult to be sure and select the correct mailserver
to send your email. However, you make it sound like admins are forced
into filtering with MAPS or ORBS. This is absolutely untrue. The use
of any blocking system is entirely voluntary.
* 50% of ISPs use blocking systems like MAPS or ORBS. This may have
been the case in the past but most certainly is no longer the case.
ORBS has changed hands recently and has a very uncertain future. Mainly
because ORBS is controversial among administrators who feel that it's
proactive scanning is a violation of the internet norms of stayiing out
of other peoples systems. In the case of MAPS it has gone from a free
service to a pay service. I know that they lost me as a site that was
using them when they did this and I'm sure the vast majority of their
users also haven't subscribed.
* users are not being informed their email is not being delivered. This
is cleary false. Users receive an bounce message explaining why the
email was bounced and giving the URL of the blocking list organization.
* Email is protected speech. It's a Fundamental free speech right to be
able to send and receive messages. Yes but it's also a fundamental
right that I be allowed to reject messages. With telephones you can use
a number of blocking technologies to attempt to keep out telemarketers.
Many of these technologies will ultimately block people who are not
telemarketers. You can choose not to answer your door when someone
knocks. Free speech is not a guarantee that any one has to listen to
you. Only that you may speak. Block email is the same situation. I as
a system admin have a right to block any traffic coming into my private
owned system.
* Blacklisting isn't a magic bullet. Nobody ever said it was. It takes
lots of different efforts to stop spam. No one effort will ever truely
be 100% effective.
* Filtering is good. Yes but you make it out to be a magic bullet.
It's not anymore than blacklisting. To be precise you're talking about
content filtering. Blacklisting is actually a filter. I use content
filtering myself. However, it misses many many many pieces of spam and
blocks some legitimate mail. It's no better than blacklisting in that
respect. Further quite a few content filtering systems are not setup to
notify the sender that they were filtered.
I believe that given further research into this issue and discussion
with many system admins will paint you an entirely different picture. I
strongly urge that you undertake said research.
You are correct that it will still be in 8.1 of the x86 version. However, netscape's support of PPC is fine. Linux/PPC had to ask them for source and work with them to get it compiled. Since Mandrake knew they were going to be removing Netscape further down the line they just didn't bother.
That's the developers decision. The vast majority of people who use Mandrake aren't developers. They have no intention of making any code modifications. Probably never will look at source.
Freedom is about letting developers decide how they want to license their works in a way in which everyone can use them. And if developers don't care if someone like Microsoft uses their work without compensation, then let them.
Keeping their work from the world is merely because you as a developer wouldn't want to give up that right is silly. I can understand you not wanting to work on that code. But nobody is forcing you to make any changes.
So frankly this whole BSD license is bad has nothing to do with freedom but everything with RMS not liking anything he didn't invent.
Re:Yeah, when will the networks notice?
on
Calling Out TiVo
·
· Score: 2
Actually when you consider that ABC is owned by Disney that is the big three networks.
Furthermore, Dvorak writes a lot of stuff for ZD and here on ZD is an article going on about how both ReplyTV and Tivo have received large investments from the various media.
Microsoft rants about how free (as in beer not speech) isn't a good business model. If that's so much the case why aren't their shareholders having a cow about Internet Explorer? It worked for them against Netscape. So it would only be logical for them to be damn scared of a similar tactic.
I went down there and measured tonight as well. It was nearly 1.0ft x 4.00ft but on the height I came up with 106 inches or 8.83 ft. I'd guess between the ground and the part that's buried it's still darn close to the proportions.
On the other sides though it was slightly over by like a 16th of an inch.
I said if you don't WANT KDE. In order to use Konquerer you have to have the KDE libraries installed. Some people still are so religious about KDE that they don't even want the libraries installed.
Netscape is included as the one exception because Mandrake doesn't feel there is a sutable replacement at this time. Yes Konquerer is out there but if you don't want KDE you're kinda screwed.
Before you moderators moderate this down read the whole post.
There has recently been some discussion on the Mandrake cooker mailing list (I'd link to it but apparently the mail archive doesn't have it up yet), about the fact that Wal*Mart is selling a version of 7.2 that is labeled as 7.2 but is actually a prerelease version with many bugs. I strongly recommend that everyone hold off buying boxed copies until Mandrake has let us know that this issue has been resolved. At this time no one from Mandrake has actually responded to this issue!
The reason they weren't installed was because both of these items are not Open Source software and as such can not be included on the Mandrake GPL CDs. The only ISOs that are ever available for download are the GPL CD ISOs. Since the box set isn't available yet you couldn't have used it.
So to me it makes perfect sense that you didn't get RealPlayer or Adobe Acrobat. Ohh and BTW as far as I know the only Netscape Plugin for PDF is the actual Adobe program.
Not true. There is a flat fee + a percentage. The bank gets the percentage. The aquiring processer (e.g. EDS, PaymentTech, FirstData etc) gets the flat fee.
More than likely Amazon is eating part of this because it makes for good advertising for them and frankly they would love to get rid of the publishers.
Let's just say for a moment that this was true: $0.20 + 3% to process the charge, Amazon keeps say $0.25. This gives King $0.52 cents. So King is getting 52% of the transaction and Amazon is operating on a 48% gross margin. Now I'm willing to bet that their gross margin on the books after paying the Cost of Goods Sold is less than 5%. So of course they'd love this. Plus they don't have to ship anything. Which also lowers their costs and means they don't have to have as many employees. Plus they don't have to keep any stock which means they don't need as much warehouse space, etc etc etc etc...
So all in all it's a great deal for Amazon.
Assuming the above is correct in one day Amazon made $15360 in gross off The Plant, and their profit was $8000. Not bad for doing nothign.
King on the other hand made $16640.00 again I'm willing to bet that's not bad compared to what he would normally get for a book that sold 32,000 copies.
Should the publishers fear getting kicked off the gravey train of someone like King? Damn Straight, King et al know damn well you have to really promote a book to get it to sell. But I'm also sure he wasn't willing to spend his hard earned cash on an expiriment. If this expiriment is sucessful I'm sure he'll go and promote the hell out of it the next time he does it.
Shareware isn't immune to the constraints of the market. Mr Katz failed to continue to have a successful and profitable company because he failed to publish a Windows version until it was way too late. At that point in time everyone was using WinZip.
Basically what happened to PKWare is very similar to what happened to a certain other company that we all know. WordPerfect.
Keeping with the shareware analogy. What's happening in publishing is that authors of books are getting the Internet distribution that killed disk vendors in the shareware area. And people ran around saying that nobody would ever just be content to just download a product and not get disks. Now it's rather common. Go figure.
No you're totally interpretating what he meant wrong and taking it very much so out of context.
The agreement they made was to treat the entire thing as confidential until they received the deposition (i.e. the paper copy) and then they would ammend what was and was not confidential.
So he meant tomorrow literally. It's not unusual for paper copies of depositions to not be available to even the lawyers for up to a week. In fact if they want it quickly (like say the next day) they usually have to pay the court reporter extra.
You'll note that this deposition was taken almost a month ago. So I'm sure all issues with what was and was not confidential have been adequately been hashed over by the parties.
Hopefully they included the numerous updates for security that they've been doing as of late. And also fixed the slightly broken install of PostFix. There was something else that was broken but I can't remember what else I had to fix.
Re:weirdest install concept i've ever heard of
on
Mandrake 7.1 Released
·
· Score: 2
If you choose the expert install option then it allows you to choose exactly the packages you want to install. The Customized option allows you a little less flexibility in what you want install, but insulates the inexperienced user from what might be a very confusing experience. The Recommended option is even more limited.
Slashdot Mirror
Incidentally there is a good articles in a recent Time magazine and Wired.
Are we sure they weren't just hacked again and the hackers put up a Linux story this time?
I like Mandrake but your comments regarding them not caring about the license is just plain wrong. 8.2 no longer includes Netscape. The next version will not include pine because of license issues. Mandrake has made a large attempt to remove all software that isn't free software from the GPL CDs. The only way to get anything else is to belong to the MandrakeClub or buy the PowerPack.
Well of course my statement assumes that the given invention is patentable at all. If it is just having done something before someone else doesn't automatically mean the existence of prior art. Besides Europe doesn't have software patents, Yet.
The question is not if you did it. But did you publish how to do the work to the public? Prior art requires public disclosure. Keeping things to yourself allows someone to come along after you and patent something you discovered first.
Not really. The DMCA applies to copyright. This license is not covering reverse engineering or protecting their copyright on their binary code. But is licensing the use of patents and documentation of the protocol.
The DMCA does not give you the legal right to violate a patent for interoperability. Finally documentation does not constitute a computer program.
So basically this license is setting out very specific terms as to how they license their patents and some documentation. It does nothing to prevent someone with a copy of windows from reverse engineer it to write another implementation of CIFS. That's an issue for the windows EULA. Which if I'm not mistaken probably already stipulates you may not reverse engineer it anyway.
The DMCA grant you mention only exists to circumvent digital rights management for the purpose of interoperability. And even then it's pretty narrowly construed.
Last but not least. Just because you have a right does not mean you can not give it up contracturaly. For example, generally one has the right to free speach. However, if I sign a NDA and start saying things I agreed I would not I could be sued. The judge wouldn't be very interested in my Free Speech rights.
Here's the email I sent to EFF yesterday:
...
From: Ben Reser
To: editors@eff.org
Subject: Re: EFF on Spam
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 09:01:35 -0700
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 09:20:30PM -0700, Stanton McCandlish wrote:
> Public Interest Postion on Junk Email: Protect Innocent Users
>
> EFF Statement Regarding Anti-Spam Measures
>
> Executive Summary: Any measure for stopping spam must ensure that all
> non-spam messages reach their intended recipients.
>
>
I disagree greatly with your statement about Anti-Spam. It is clearly
poorly researched. You may a number of statements that I find really
odd. It is unfortunate that because of your inaccurate stance I may
have to reconsider my continuing membership in EFF when my membership
comes up for renewell.
* System adminstrators are forced to adopt anti-spam policies. The only
policy MAPS or ORBS seeks to have other admins adopt on their systems is
to close their open relays and other ways for non-customers to inject
email into their mail servers. While this may be inconvient to some end
users it is not difficult to be sure and select the correct mailserver
to send your email. However, you make it sound like admins are forced
into filtering with MAPS or ORBS. This is absolutely untrue. The use
of any blocking system is entirely voluntary.
* 50% of ISPs use blocking systems like MAPS or ORBS. This may have
been the case in the past but most certainly is no longer the case.
ORBS has changed hands recently and has a very uncertain future. Mainly
because ORBS is controversial among administrators who feel that it's
proactive scanning is a violation of the internet norms of stayiing out
of other peoples systems. In the case of MAPS it has gone from a free
service to a pay service. I know that they lost me as a site that was
using them when they did this and I'm sure the vast majority of their
users also haven't subscribed.
* users are not being informed their email is not being delivered. This
is cleary false. Users receive an bounce message explaining why the
email was bounced and giving the URL of the blocking list organization.
* Email is protected speech. It's a Fundamental free speech right to be
able to send and receive messages. Yes but it's also a fundamental
right that I be allowed to reject messages. With telephones you can use
a number of blocking technologies to attempt to keep out telemarketers.
Many of these technologies will ultimately block people who are not
telemarketers. You can choose not to answer your door when someone
knocks. Free speech is not a guarantee that any one has to listen to
you. Only that you may speak. Block email is the same situation. I as
a system admin have a right to block any traffic coming into my private
owned system.
* Blacklisting isn't a magic bullet. Nobody ever said it was. It takes
lots of different efforts to stop spam. No one effort will ever truely
be 100% effective.
* Filtering is good. Yes but you make it out to be a magic bullet.
It's not anymore than blacklisting. To be precise you're talking about
content filtering. Blacklisting is actually a filter. I use content
filtering myself. However, it misses many many many pieces of spam and
blocks some legitimate mail. It's no better than blacklisting in that
respect. Further quite a few content filtering systems are not setup to
notify the sender that they were filtered.
I believe that given further research into this issue and discussion
with many system admins will paint you an entirely different picture. I
strongly urge that you undertake said research.
You are correct that it will still be in 8.1 of the x86 version. However, netscape's support of PPC is fine. Linux/PPC had to ask them for source and work with them to get it compiled. Since Mandrake knew they were going to be removing Netscape further down the line they just didn't bother.
Umm this is a odd comment to make about a generally KDE distribution (the reason for it's existance is because RedHat didn't use to ship KDE).
The Drake tools work just fine under KDE. Never had a problem with them. So I don't see what you're complaigning about.
Netscape is in the process of being removed from Mandrake. For example Mandrake PPC no longer has Netscape. Besides rpm -e if you don't like it.
That's the developers decision. The vast majority of people who use Mandrake aren't developers. They have no intention of making any code modifications. Probably never will look at source.
Freedom is about letting developers decide how they want to license their works in a way in which everyone can use them. And if developers don't care if someone like Microsoft uses their work without compensation, then let them.
Keeping their work from the world is merely because you as a developer wouldn't want to give up that right is silly. I can understand you not wanting to work on that code. But nobody is forcing you to make any changes.
So frankly this whole BSD license is bad has nothing to do with freedom but everything with RMS not liking anything he didn't invent.
Furthermore, Dvorak writes a lot of stuff for ZD and here on ZD is an article going on about how both ReplyTV and Tivo have received large investments from the various media.
Microsoft rants about how free (as in beer not speech) isn't a good business model. If that's so much the case why aren't their shareholders having a cow about Internet Explorer? It worked for them against Netscape. So it would only be logical for them to be damn scared of a similar tactic.
On the other sides though it was slightly over by like a 16th of an inch.
I said if you don't WANT KDE. In order to use Konquerer you have to have the KDE libraries installed. Some people still are so religious about KDE that they don't even want the libraries installed.
Here is the original posting from the Mandrake cooker mailing list regarding this issue.
Netscape is included as the one exception because Mandrake doesn't feel there is a sutable replacement at this time. Yes Konquerer is out there but if you don't want KDE you're kinda screwed.
Yes but xswallow is more of a hack than what he was looking for. I'm sure he was expecting to get the Acrobat Reader.
There has recently been some discussion on the Mandrake cooker mailing list (I'd link to it but apparently the mail archive doesn't have it up yet), about the fact that Wal*Mart is selling a version of 7.2 that is labeled as 7.2 but is actually a prerelease version with many bugs. I strongly recommend that everyone hold off buying boxed copies until Mandrake has let us know that this issue has been resolved. At this time no one from Mandrake has actually responded to this issue!
So to me it makes perfect sense that you didn't get RealPlayer or Adobe Acrobat. Ohh and BTW as far as I know the only Netscape Plugin for PDF is the actual Adobe program.
Not true. There is a flat fee + a percentage. The bank gets the percentage. The aquiring processer (e.g. EDS, PaymentTech, FirstData etc) gets the flat fee.
More than likely Amazon is eating part of this because it makes for good advertising for them and frankly they would love to get rid of the publishers.
Let's just say for a moment that this was true:
$0.20 + 3% to process the charge, Amazon keeps say $0.25. This gives King $0.52 cents. So King is getting 52% of the transaction and Amazon is operating on a 48% gross margin. Now I'm willing to bet that their gross margin on the books after paying the Cost of Goods Sold is less than 5%. So of course they'd love this. Plus they don't have to ship anything. Which also lowers their costs and means they don't have to have as many employees. Plus they don't have to keep any stock which means they don't need as much warehouse space, etc etc etc etc...
So all in all it's a great deal for Amazon.
Assuming the above is correct in one day Amazon made $15360 in gross off The Plant, and their profit was $8000. Not bad for doing nothign.
King on the other hand made $16640.00 again I'm willing to bet that's not bad compared to what he would normally get for a book that sold 32,000 copies.
Should the publishers fear getting kicked off the gravey train of someone like King? Damn Straight, King et al know damn well you have to really promote a book to get it to sell. But I'm also sure he wasn't willing to spend his hard earned cash on an expiriment. If this expiriment is sucessful I'm sure he'll go and promote the hell out of it the next time he does it.
Shareware isn't immune to the constraints of the market. Mr Katz failed to continue to have a successful and profitable company because he failed to publish a Windows version until it was way too late. At that point in time everyone was using WinZip.
Basically what happened to PKWare is very similar to what happened to a certain other company that we all know. WordPerfect.
Keeping with the shareware analogy. What's happening in publishing is that authors of books are getting the Internet distribution that killed disk vendors in the shareware area. And people ran around saying that nobody would ever just be content to just download a product and not get disks. Now it's rather common. Go figure.
No you're totally interpretating what he meant wrong and taking it very much so out of context.
The agreement they made was to treat the entire thing as confidential until they received the deposition (i.e. the paper copy) and then they would ammend what was and was not confidential.
So he meant tomorrow literally. It's not unusual for paper copies of depositions to not be available to even the lawyers for up to a week. In fact if they want it quickly (like say the next day) they usually have to pay the court reporter extra.
You'll note that this deposition was taken almost a month ago. So I'm sure all issues with what was and was not confidential have been adequately been hashed over by the parties.
Hopefully they included the numerous updates for security that they've been doing as of late. And also fixed the slightly broken install of PostFix. There was something else that was broken but I can't remember what else I had to fix.
If you choose the expert install option then it allows you to choose exactly the packages you want to install. The Customized option allows you a little less flexibility in what you want install, but insulates the inexperienced user from what might be a very confusing experience. The Recommended option is even more limited.