Five years is quite a bit to soon. Sentient suggests higher brain function. Sentient automation would do tech support and other fuctions needing to make on the fly judgmens.
First we need a theroy of how to make a sentient computer then someone builds the first sentient super computer.. Probably a large tech company or a high tech university. Then hobbyests will play with scaled down versions untill it works reasonably well on the desk top then down to lap top then over priced consummer gadget and eventually the avrage CEO will want one and then in a few years it's part of everyones work life. Estemated time 20 years. (In my arrogent estimation) We don't have sentient super computers yet so the sentient office is a very long way off. Five years from now someone will draft a theroetical technology that may one day make thinking machines a reality. But first someone will need to fund the effort to build the first sentient mainframe computer.
It's quite possable that the code in question was never SCOs property. Early on I was thinking what happend (based on the early complaint) was that IBM gave SCO code needed to support IBMs hardware proterly and IBM gave Linux the same code for pritty much the same reason. It is a vital function of IBMs business that IBM dose not transfer IP rights to that code to SCO.
However SCO has desided any code that makes it into SCOs hands is SCOs property. Starting from the clame of ownership of Unix. An idea not supported by contract or law.
SCO clames the Linux code in question basicly dose the same thing in a diffrent order. The same basic commands producing an identical result. Just from complaints by Linux users I'm pritty sure the code in question dose not produce an identical result and the diffrences between SCOs code and the "stiolen" Linux code amount to a TOTAL REWRITE.
It is a reasonable assumption to think this is the case. Off the shelf systems are with Windows and office preinstalled and then the united states military needs a fresh military previewed version so they do pay twice. If this is the case.
But they may be buying them for non-critical functions or buying blank consumer hardware.
Or buying systems with GASP SCO Unixware preinstalled.... (Said for ironys sake) or HPUX or Solarus or what ever operating system they feel they need to get the job done.
Enterprise operating systems? Maybe in a star trek way.
United Linux NCC 1701 (B): Originally designed to have transwarp but that was scrapped. Whats left is a federation joke. A five year cruse who's most notable event was getting Kirk killed in it's maden voyage so it's not all bad.
United Linux was that effort to make a standard platform for other Linux distros. Binarrys.. yeah.
RedHat NCC 1701: Transporter malfuctions pleage this ship. Redhat has taken some questionable design choices that are like the transporter accadents. Only just enough to get your notice. Avoidable. Don't use X.0 releases and use the shuttle.
Windows NCC 1701d: A marvle of high tech. At first no problems at all. Over time however the holodecks wig out. Great so rip it out only some wiz felt put the dignostics in the holodecks. And a kid can take over the ship.
Right now 2003 is going good but we know the history. It works, an auxillery feature wigs and importent features were put into it. Can't remove.
I don't know why those patents took so long but that is not normal. If patents took that long the inventers would be long dead before the patents were issued.
After apple won it's look and feel patent lawsute many companys sought to cash in on software patents.
Early in the 1990s it was believed that internet patents were the next gold rush. Take any old thing and apply it to the internet it becomes brand new and patentable. So a flood of obveous and frivilous patents came it.
At this point the USPO was flooded with patent applications. Then comes the Y2K crissis and a flood of Y2K bug fix solutions. (Why patent Y2K bug fixes?)
The USPO has more trash today than ever before. If we get rid of Internet and software patents the patent office won't have as much trash and can go back to properly reviewing patents. Dumping business methoud patents would help a lot as well.
The only way to make a bully look bad is to punch him good and hard back
I find the harder a person pushes his "truth" the less true it is. In this case I'm dealing with someone who is defending his own philosophy of life. Very hard to debate or argue with someone when I have to destory his basis of reality to make my point.
However there are two obveous problems with his clame. 1. Bullys pick on people who can't fight back. It's a game and they want the victiom to try and fight back so they can justify doing them sereous harm. The first attack has to look to anyone else to be just kidding around so the victom can look bad if he complains.
2. My own experences disprove this. I didn't make this up I actually did beat the school yard bully at his own game simply by laughing at him or ignoring him depending on how I felt. He got angry and couldn't pretend he was just joking around anymore becouse of it.
Of course there is.... "He will be victorious who knows when to fight and when not to fight"
Pick your fights... don't let your fights pick you.
Before we start this up again look elsewhere in the comments and you'll see a chat on 7 fingsrs, funny and realistic reasons for using 7 bit for binary incoding of text.
Still it has me going hmmm. ASCII standard text uses 7 bit they use 7 bit... ASCII. Now to see if the had rope sites. Ohhh then we discover Slashdot means "News for anti-socal wizards. Knowladge of global importance" Look for the rope from annonomous coward saying "First rope". Jeff bates was the co mod and his name in that life was Hemos. Then the preveous incarnation of Bill Gates (Columbus) came in and thats the end. Of course crypto exporting wasn't an issue.
You can republish letters sent to you as well as repeate anything told to you in private. Or at least nobody has ever been sued for repeating stuff. E mail is presumed to be personal coraspondence. I know people do tend to throw in that "no disclosure" thing but if memory serves this went to cort ages ago and the judge said the recepiant of the email can do as he likes. The obveous exceptions being prior contract and pre-exsisting intelectual property.
As a kid I didn't let the bullys bother me. It really pissed them off and ultimately made them look bad. It was better than trying to defend myself at the time simply becouse I was to small to do anything. (7 year old vs 14 year old bully) The teachers would see it and the bully would be in deep trubble.
SCO people run out being childish saying "Just kidding" we can laugh and let it go making them look bad or we can whine and look bad ourselfs.
After all we should laugh at outselfs once in a while.
The rest of the story gose that when I did fight back the poor kid went to the hospital. When they think you'll fight back they are ready. when they don't they are easy targets. Pick your battles:)
I suspect Linus already checked
on
My Visit to SCO
·
· Score: 1
Second try. I goofed and posted off topic first time:( I've long suspected Linus has already checked the Linux source to see how much code of the features SCO clames Linux got from SCO was actually contributed by IBM and of what nature was that code. I long suspected Linus found IBM had little or no hand in that code or what code did cime from IBM was targeted to IBMs hardware and useless to platforms SCO supports. It also may be the code is so much built around the Linux kernel that it could not come from SCOs kernel. Or the features are so diffrent between the two platforms that it could not be the same code.
I also suspect SCO just assumes nither IBM nore the avrage hobby coder could come up with the same features with out stealing code.
I don't know this for a fact but I long suspected that Linus jumpped up and did some checking for himself. SCO clames XXX features in Linux came from SCO via IBM all Linus need do is check his records and see how much code in features XXX actually came from IBM. Early on in IBMs contrabutions resulted in much whining and bitching. IBMs people can't get anything accepted into Linux or IBM isn't being sereous depending on who your taking sereously and for this bitchfest I suggest ignoring everyone. What it dose at least suggest to me is IBM while contributing what they can isn't really making the impact on Linux anyone expected.
So Linus looks on those features and finds minimal or no contrabutions from IBM.
I know if I were Linus I'd have have pulled are replaced ALL IBM contributed code to the features SCO clames Linux took from them. But if I found IBM did not play a major part in those features I wouldn't bother.
But I don't know this for fact just what I suspect.
A few days ago I was explaining to my mother how 'eyeballing' was perficly legal. Eyeballing is the process of copying a program by rewriting it. Now you do have to be conserned about patents preticularly 'look and feel' patents buy ouside that and with out stealing copywriten elements (code, art, music) you can clone the functionility of a web browser, email client, word processer or even a game. Or can you.... The *Craft complant is really pushing it. To be a complete game you need to buy the game CD for the art and maps or your stuck with the download sized free game. It means Linux users can buy the product too and Bungee need not pay a dime to support Linux in any way. Unless a 'look and feel' patent was slipped in it should be perficly legal to eyeball it. Should Bungee care? Dosen't hurt them helps Linux a tad only Microsoft would care. Didn't Bungee say they can do as they wish? Looks like Microsoft has quite a bit of say in what Bungee dose. "We ownz you" litterally.
In my arrogent opinion the 'news' artical was writen as a dump on all gammers. The target has a bad rep amoung some so the reporter must have figured he's be scum of the earth in real life. But supprise. Just like any troll or such online in real life it's just a normal person with a hell of a lot to blow off and the internet is just the place to blow it off. Trying to paint this guy as a loser has hurt him in some sereous ways. In as much that he's already having problems making a living now he is losing clients becouse the artical paints him as disfunctional and untrust worthy. This reminds me of an "inteeview" with a hacker that consisted mostly of the reporters opinions. The few quotes didn't appear to support those comments eather. It's just reporting the populare stereotype as fact. The same is happening here. Just a convenent fiction reported as fact. "All you gammers are moral rejects" By publishing this the reporter is saying "This is your typical gammer".
This is a GREAT example of broken IP laws. Before patenting the compression technology they placed it into the public domain. After that IBM patented it AND THEN Unisys filed a patent. Unisys got to keep it's patent becouse they can prove they had it first. But that proof comes in the form of publishing it. In other words anything you place into the public domain you or anyone else can clame later. If there was no GPL the first jerk who came along would sue Linus and RMS for IP theft and win. The reason Compuserve used this compression technology was simply it was placed into the public domain. But today there is no public domain just IP waiting for someone to scoop up. You should not be able to file for and receave patent protection for anything that has already been published.
Microsoft is the 800 ton gorilla that's been trying to crush Linux for so long. The spam community is just as resolved at surviving any attacks as the Linux community.
I'm against all forms of commertal e-mail myself not becouse it's all evil but becouse spammers are so evil in the way they twist everything.
The opt out system was part of e-mail lists everywhere. Someone somehow accadentally opts you in or worse dose so as a prank so you opt out again. Spammers then include the opt out system and ignore it or worse use it to scoop up e-mail addresses.
Every time lagit commertal e-mail finds some way to make it obveous they are lagit the spammer community copys them and suddenly the spam looks lagit too.
I've nothing against opt in spam. I've opt in to some spam myself BUT what I've welcomed into my system is flooeded over with junk I've never agreed to.
Every now and then I get this "Thank you for joining !!!!!" if you don't opt out you get spam from them if you do they sell your e-mail address.
And there are thousands of other tricks. They just keep comming up with new ways to thwart filters bypass spam blockers and be generally annoying.
So now Microsoft is taking on spam..... Well... ummmmm Go Microsoft.. we hope you'll be successful in a way we know can't happen. But hay you'll give spam a big black eye put it in the hospital for a while and drain your FUD department of all resorces.
Now how can the Linux community help Microsoft on this. I think with a little more effort Spam won't be going to the hospital but the morge...
With the way organisations abuse IP rights laying clame to things the don't have any rights to and worse catagoricly classifying whole groups if users as theafs you can see the abuse potental. Check out SCO claming they own everything ever done in computer technology. IBMs old antics of the past and Microsofts antics of current. Music industry clamming to own speahes and artist who can't publish music on Napster becouse of some random idiot who clames it's his music. And other games.
What's to keep me from claming ownership of ALL standard political arguments and then blowing up computers of politicians I disagree with. I open liccensed my arguments under the 'agree with me' liccens after all and he violated the liccens.
First thing to know is this is a real disorder but chances are if your dignosed with it you don't have it.
This is a disorder with an insain misdignosis rate that could be improved on by using dice to consult. Most ADA aren't dignosed most who are dignosed aren't ADA.
They look at disruptive, boared and the like. Such is more likely caused by increased intelegence (already knows the matereal) or personal problems. They ignore the kids who just zone out or do boring repeditive motions for no apparent reason.
What to do: Watch your reaction to the medication. If it works then great but if the problems continue or get worse pull the kid off the meds pronto.
DO NOT what ever you do don't ever stick your kid on herbal cures. They only work if the kid never had ADA.
Seek expert advice on dealing with the disorder.
I am not an expert just friends with a few misdignosed people (In both directions) But take it sereous it's a real disorder even if there are a lot of misdignosis.
If I can't rip it I can't play it. If I can't play it I can't view it.
If I need a new DVD player.....
I have a screw driver, a sodering iron, and etchant. What I don't have is unlimited supplys of cash to buy a new player every time some jerk get's a fuzzy up his butt.
In my youth I would eyeball programs. Meaning I'd copy the functions and features but not the code. It's the anolog of patenting the way a person walks or talks. Should someone copy that (eyeball) they would break the patent. Picture how many parents could be sued by "Dancing cartoon fluffy" when child fans copy his unique dance.
In other words/. has this unreasonable tendency to slam monopolys. Strange I thought/. was anti-capitalim. Capitalism: On a level playing field companys compete. Any new company can enter the market and do a better job. In a monoploy a company can screw the costummer all they like and there isn't any chance of annother company entering the market to do things better.
Seams like SCO would rather force IBM to admit guilt than risk being disproven in cort. Sence SCO plans to cancle IBMs liccens couldn't IBM get a new liccens from Novel? And hay while we are at it Novel can cancle SCOs liccens to Unix. Now wouldn't that just suck for SCO?
Yes they could modify every major GPLed application to fuction correctly under SCO Unix and mirror those changes on SCOs website. This means SCO users won't have access to the latest changes untell SCO fixes it. SCO users will have to go to SCO for all future support of the software and not the free software community. SCO will have to spend money recoding free software to work for them. Lastly SCO users can't use anything SCO hasn't fixed. The vast majority of free software. Unless they fix it themselfs. Added work JUST to continue using SCO.
Also instead of waiting for the NEXT SCO release DO IT NOW. Just add the needed lines to prevent compiling under SCO with autoconfig AND make. Make offical releases saying "Patched to disfuction on SCO Unixware". Don't I mean malfunction? No the term suggests it works and crashes. Disfuction suggests never fuctioning at all. Not even WANTING to function.
Slashdot Mirror
Five years is quite a bit to soon. Sentient suggests higher brain function. Sentient automation would do tech support and other fuctions needing to make on the fly judgmens.
First we need a theroy of how to make a sentient computer then someone builds the first sentient super computer.. Probably a large tech company or a high tech university. Then hobbyests will play with scaled down versions untill it works reasonably well on the desk top then down to lap top then over priced consummer gadget and eventually the avrage CEO will want one and then in a few years it's part of everyones work life.
Estemated time 20 years. (In my arrogent estimation)
We don't have sentient super computers yet so the sentient office is a very long way off.
Five years from now someone will draft a theroetical technology that may one day make thinking machines a reality. But first someone will need to fund the effort to build the first sentient mainframe computer.
It's quite possable that the code in question was never SCOs property.
Early on I was thinking what happend (based on the early complaint) was that IBM gave SCO code needed to support IBMs hardware proterly and IBM gave Linux the same code for pritty much the same reason. It is a vital function of IBMs business that IBM dose not transfer IP rights to that code to SCO.
However SCO has desided any code that makes it into SCOs hands is SCOs property. Starting from the clame of ownership of Unix. An idea not supported by contract or law.
SCO clames the Linux code in question basicly dose the same thing in a diffrent order. The same basic commands producing an identical result.
Just from complaints by Linux users I'm pritty sure the code in question dose not produce an identical result and the diffrences between SCOs code and the "stiolen" Linux code amount to a TOTAL REWRITE.
It is a reasonable assumption to think this is the case. Off the shelf systems are with Windows and office preinstalled and then the united states military needs a fresh military previewed version so they do pay twice. If this is the case.
But they may be buying them for non-critical functions or buying blank consumer hardware.
Or buying systems with GASP SCO Unixware preinstalled.... (Said for ironys sake) or HPUX or Solarus or what ever operating system they feel they need to get the job done.
Enterprise operating systems? Maybe in a star trek way.
United Linux NCC 1701 (B): Originally designed to have transwarp but that was scrapped. Whats left is a federation joke.
A five year cruse who's most notable event was getting Kirk killed in it's maden voyage so it's not all bad.
United Linux was that effort to make a standard platform for other Linux distros. Binarrys.. yeah.
RedHat NCC 1701:
Transporter malfuctions pleage this ship.
Redhat has taken some questionable design choices that are like the transporter accadents. Only just enough to get your notice. Avoidable. Don't use X.0 releases and use the shuttle.
Windows NCC 1701d: A marvle of high tech. At first no problems at all.
Over time however the holodecks wig out.
Great so rip it out only some wiz felt put the dignostics in the holodecks.
And a kid can take over the ship.
Right now 2003 is going good but we know the history. It works, an auxillery feature wigs and importent features were put into it. Can't remove.
I don't know why those patents took so long but that is not normal.
If patents took that long the inventers would be long dead before the patents were issued.
After apple won it's look and feel patent lawsute many companys sought to cash in on software patents.
Early in the 1990s it was believed that internet patents were the next gold rush. Take any old thing and apply it to the internet it becomes brand new and patentable. So a flood of obveous and frivilous patents came it.
At this point the USPO was flooded with patent applications.
Then comes the Y2K crissis and a flood of Y2K bug fix solutions. (Why patent Y2K bug fixes?)
The USPO has more trash today than ever before.
If we get rid of Internet and software patents the patent office won't have as much trash and can go back to properly reviewing patents. Dumping business methoud patents would help a lot as well.
The only way to make a bully look bad is to punch him good and hard back
I find the harder a person pushes his "truth" the less true it is. In this case I'm dealing with someone who is defending his own philosophy of life. Very hard to debate or argue with someone when I have to destory his basis of reality to make my point.
However there are two obveous problems with his clame.
1. Bullys pick on people who can't fight back. It's a game and they want the victiom to try and fight back so they can justify doing them sereous harm. The first attack has to look to anyone else to be just kidding around so the victom can look bad if he complains.
2. My own experences disprove this. I didn't make this up I actually did beat the school yard bully at his own game simply by laughing at him or ignoring him depending on how I felt.
He got angry and couldn't pretend he was just joking around anymore becouse of it.
Of course there is....
"He will be victorious who knows when to fight and when not to fight"
Pick your fights... don't let your fights pick you.
Before we start this up again look elsewhere in the comments and you'll see a chat on 7 fingsrs, funny and realistic reasons for using 7 bit for binary incoding of text.
Still it has me going hmmm. ASCII standard text uses 7 bit they use 7 bit... ASCII.
Now to see if the had rope sites. Ohhh then we discover Slashdot means "News for anti-socal wizards. Knowladge of global importance"
Look for the rope from annonomous coward saying "First rope".
Jeff bates was the co mod and his name in that life was Hemos.
Then the preveous incarnation of Bill Gates (Columbus) came in and thats the end.
Of course crypto exporting wasn't an issue.
You can republish letters sent to you as well as repeate anything told to you in private.
Or at least nobody has ever been sued for repeating stuff.
E mail is presumed to be personal coraspondence. I know people do tend to throw in that "no disclosure" thing but if memory serves this went to cort ages ago and the judge said the recepiant of the email can do as he likes. The obveous exceptions being prior contract and pre-exsisting intelectual property.
As a kid I didn't let the bullys bother me. It really pissed them off and ultimately made them look bad.
:)
It was better than trying to defend myself at the time simply becouse I was to small to do anything.
(7 year old vs 14 year old bully)
The teachers would see it and the bully would be in deep trubble.
SCO people run out being childish saying "Just kidding" we can laugh and let it go making them look bad or we can whine and look bad ourselfs.
After all we should laugh at outselfs once in a while.
The rest of the story gose that when I did fight back the poor kid went to the hospital.
When they think you'll fight back they are ready. when they don't they are easy targets.
Pick your battles
Second try. I goofed and posted off topic first time :(
I've long suspected Linus has already checked the Linux source to see how much code of the features SCO clames Linux got from SCO was actually contributed by IBM and of what nature was that code.
I long suspected Linus found IBM had little or no hand in that code or what code did cime from IBM was targeted to IBMs hardware and useless to platforms SCO supports.
It also may be the code is so much built around the Linux kernel that it could not come from SCOs kernel.
Or the features are so diffrent between the two platforms that it could not be the same code.
I also suspect SCO just assumes nither IBM nore the avrage hobby coder could come up with the same features with out stealing code.
How did I get here?
Sorry folks,.. Off topic by a mile...
I don't know this for a fact but I long suspected that Linus jumpped up and did some checking for himself.
SCO clames XXX features in Linux came from SCO via IBM all Linus need do is check his records and see how much code in features XXX actually came from IBM.
Early on in IBMs contrabutions resulted in much whining and bitching. IBMs people can't get anything accepted into Linux or IBM isn't being sereous depending on who your taking sereously and for this bitchfest I suggest ignoring everyone.
What it dose at least suggest to me is IBM while contributing what they can isn't really making the impact on Linux anyone expected.
So Linus looks on those features and finds minimal or no contrabutions from IBM.
I know if I were Linus I'd have have pulled are replaced ALL IBM contributed code to the features SCO clames Linux took from them.
But if I found IBM did not play a major part in those features I wouldn't bother.
But I don't know this for fact just what I suspect.
A few days ago I was explaining to my mother how 'eyeballing' was perficly legal.
Eyeballing is the process of copying a program by rewriting it. Now you do have to be conserned about patents preticularly 'look and feel' patents buy ouside that and with out stealing copywriten elements (code, art, music) you can clone the functionility of a web browser, email client, word processer or even a game.
Or can you....
The *Craft complant is really pushing it. To be a complete game you need to buy the game CD for the art and maps or your stuck with the download sized free game.
It means Linux users can buy the product too and Bungee need not pay a dime to support Linux in any way.
Unless a 'look and feel' patent was slipped in it should be perficly legal to eyeball it.
Should Bungee care? Dosen't hurt them helps Linux a tad only Microsoft would care.
Didn't Bungee say they can do as they wish?
Looks like Microsoft has quite a bit of say in what Bungee dose.
"We ownz you" litterally.
In my arrogent opinion the 'news' artical was writen as a dump on all gammers.
The target has a bad rep amoung some so the reporter must have figured he's be scum of the earth in real life.
But supprise. Just like any troll or such online in real life it's just a normal person with a hell of a lot to blow off and the internet is just the place to blow it off.
Trying to paint this guy as a loser has hurt him in some sereous ways. In as much that he's already having problems making a living now he is losing clients becouse the artical paints him as disfunctional and untrust worthy.
This reminds me of an "inteeview" with a hacker that consisted mostly of the reporters opinions. The few quotes didn't appear to support those comments eather. It's just reporting the populare stereotype as fact.
The same is happening here.
Just a convenent fiction reported as fact.
"All you gammers are moral rejects"
By publishing this the reporter is saying "This is your typical gammer".
This is a GREAT example of broken IP laws.
Before patenting the compression technology they placed it into the public domain.
After that IBM patented it AND THEN Unisys filed a patent.
Unisys got to keep it's patent becouse they can prove they had it first. But that proof comes in the form of publishing it.
In other words anything you place into the public domain you or anyone else can clame later.
If there was no GPL the first jerk who came along would sue Linus and RMS for IP theft and win.
The reason Compuserve used this compression technology was simply it was placed into the public domain.
But today there is no public domain just IP waiting for someone to scoop up.
You should not be able to file for and receave patent protection for anything that has already been published.
Well this nightmare will soon be over.
Microsoft is the 800 ton gorilla that's been trying to crush Linux for so long.
The spam community is just as resolved at surviving any attacks as the Linux community.
I'm against all forms of commertal e-mail myself not becouse it's all evil but becouse spammers are so evil in the way they twist everything.
The opt out system was part of e-mail lists everywhere. Someone somehow accadentally opts you in or worse dose so as a prank so you opt out again. Spammers then include the opt out system and ignore it or worse use it to scoop up e-mail addresses.
Every time lagit commertal e-mail finds some way to make it obveous they are lagit the spammer community copys them and suddenly the spam looks lagit too.
I've nothing against opt in spam. I've opt in to some spam myself BUT what I've welcomed into my system is flooeded over with junk I've never agreed to.
Every now and then I get this "Thank you for joining !!!!!" if you don't opt out you get spam from them if you do they sell your e-mail address.
And there are thousands of other tricks. They just keep comming up with new ways to thwart filters bypass spam blockers and be generally annoying.
So now Microsoft is taking on spam.....
Well... ummmmm Go Microsoft.. we hope you'll be successful in a way we know can't happen.
But hay you'll give spam a big black eye put it in the hospital for a while and drain your FUD department of all resorces.
Now how can the Linux community help Microsoft on this. I think with a little more effort Spam won't be going to the hospital but the morge...
Muahahaha
With the way organisations abuse IP rights laying clame to things the don't have any rights to and worse catagoricly classifying whole groups if users as theafs you can see the abuse potental.
Check out SCO claming they own everything ever done in computer technology.
IBMs old antics of the past and Microsofts antics of current.
Music industry clamming to own speahes and artist who can't publish music on Napster becouse of some random idiot who clames it's his music.
And other games.
What's to keep me from claming ownership of ALL standard political arguments and then blowing up computers of politicians I disagree with. I open liccensed my arguments under the 'agree with me' liccens after all and he violated the liccens.
First thing to know is this is a real disorder but chances are if your dignosed with it you don't have it.
This is a disorder with an insain misdignosis rate that could be improved on by using dice to consult.
Most ADA aren't dignosed most who are dignosed aren't ADA.
They look at disruptive, boared and the like. Such is more likely caused by increased intelegence (already knows the matereal) or personal problems.
They ignore the kids who just zone out or do boring repeditive motions for no apparent reason.
What to do: Watch your reaction to the medication. If it works then great but if the problems continue or get worse pull the kid off the meds pronto.
DO NOT what ever you do don't ever stick your kid on herbal cures. They only work if the kid never had ADA.
Seek expert advice on dealing with the disorder.
I am not an expert just friends with a few misdignosed people (In both directions)
But take it sereous it's a real disorder even if there are a lot of misdignosis.
If I can't rip it I can't play it.
If I can't play it I can't view it.
If I need a new DVD player.....
I have a screw driver, a sodering iron, and etchant. What I don't have is unlimited supplys of cash to buy a new player every time some jerk get's a fuzzy up his butt.
Maybe Novel could yank SCO's liccens to Unix and hand it over to IBM.
In my youth I would eyeball programs. Meaning I'd copy the functions and features but not the code.
It's the anolog of patenting the way a person walks or talks. Should someone copy that (eyeball) they would break the patent. Picture how many parents could be sued by "Dancing cartoon fluffy" when child fans copy his unique dance.
In other words /. has this unreasonable tendency to slam monopolys. /. was anti-capitalim.
Strange I thought
Capitalism: On a level playing field companys compete.
Any new company can enter the market and do a better job.
In a monoploy a company can screw the costummer all they like and there isn't any chance of annother company entering the market to do things better.
Seams like SCO would rather force IBM to admit guilt than risk being disproven in cort.
Sence SCO plans to cancle IBMs liccens couldn't IBM get a new liccens from Novel?
And hay while we are at it Novel can cancle SCOs liccens to Unix. Now wouldn't that just suck for SCO?
Yes they could modify every major GPLed application to fuction correctly under SCO Unix and mirror those changes on SCOs website.
This means SCO users won't have access to the latest changes untell SCO fixes it. SCO users will have to go to SCO for all future support of the software and not the free software community. SCO will have to spend money recoding free software to work for them.
Lastly SCO users can't use anything SCO hasn't fixed. The vast majority of free software. Unless they fix it themselfs. Added work JUST to continue using SCO.
Also instead of waiting for the NEXT SCO release DO IT NOW.
Just add the needed lines to prevent compiling under SCO with autoconfig AND make.
Make offical releases saying "Patched to disfuction on SCO Unixware".
Don't I mean malfunction? No the term suggests it works and crashes. Disfuction suggests never fuctioning at all. Not even WANTING to function.