Unless the Supreme Court rejects the appeal out of hand in the next 2 months and attempted injunctions against releasing Windows XP fail, Microsoft wins, at least in the short term. IANAL, but if I understand legal proceedings correctly, the entire remedy phase is on hold until the Supreme Court rejects the appeal, vacates the ruling out of hand or hears the case. Typically, the Supreme Court takes several months to reach a decision on whether to put a given case on the docket. Microsoft's short-term goal is to extend the case into November, clearing the way for the release of Windows XP. It's a lot harder to put the genie back in the bottle, and both sides know this.
Regardless how you feel about Microsoft, though, this isn't good for consumers. The October release date has become much more than an arbitrary deadline, and XP will be released in whatever condition it's in. (I know, the same can be said about their previous versions of Windows, but this time there's a lot more than PR on the line!)
Personally, I don't think the Supreme Court will even hear the case. There doesn't seem to be any legal ambigity or any untested or controversial legal rulings at stake. A conservative, MS-friendly court ruled unanimously against Microsoft on all counts. As big and powerful as Microsoft is, I think the Supreme Court will simply reject the appeal without comment, leaving it to the lower courts. The Supreme Court doesn't like to get involved unless there are constitutional issues at stake, and there aren't any here.
Actually, I don't think they can, at least not with bound materials. The law is clear on this. And while the government has been "pro-business" lately, especially with the DMCA, they're beginning to realize it may have been a mistake and are starting to soften their stance. The laws regarding printed matter are very clear, and there is no compelling reason to change the basics of the law (except possibly the duration of the copyright.) The question that needs to be answered is whether books in electronic format constitute software or printed matter in another medium. Don't forget, as popular as big business is, libraries do have a reputation as wholesome, family-friendly places, and in spite of PAC donations etc, I think most congressmen would be reluctant to limit libraries in that fashion, especially ones who campaign on "family values." This is different from CIPA and COPA because it's about the libraries' core business. Libraries have existing law and tradition on their side. Regardless what happens in Congress, it will end up in the courts, and I don't see the publishers winning there. There's simply too much legal precedent.
Under Title 17 of the U.S. Code, libraries are permitted to lend materials - books, magazines, videotapes, DVDs, CDs, cassettes, CD-ROMs, etc, with certain restrictions. IANAL, but from everything I've seen and everything my local public library's lawyer has said (I'm an employee), the publishers don't really have much of a leg to stand on shy of changing U.S. Copyright law outright.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you ever could patent a standard. Either you patent it and collect royalties, or you try to make it a standard and simply become one of the top developers for it. IIRC, Sun tried to do the same thing with Java and had it thrown out. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I don't know if he will read this, but I, for one, am pleased that he took the time out of his busy schedule to address a few of the concerns of the Slashdot community. Come what may, it's nice to see American-style representative democracy at work.
Bess comes equipped with an override capability which requires a username and password. Your bio teacher friend should, in theory, have access to that password. There is one other way to circumvent Bess, but I'm not at liberty to divulge it since I have to work with it on a regular basis (as an admin) and I really don't want to undermine my job security.
that Paramount was keen on doing a "Starfleet Academy"-based series. I also have it on fairly good authority that the Excelsior proposal has been rejected outright. Once again, Paramount is ignoring their core fan base... not that I support the Excelsior campaign, but I have heard zero support for the Academy.
It looks to me like Allchin is using the Napster fallout to try to put OSS and Napster in the same boat: both are free, both are a threat (allegedly) to intellectual property and legitimate business. In other words, their argument is that OSS and Napster are two peas in a pod.
The truth is much different, as we all know: OSS is copyrighted and legally licensed, and the authors are legally exercising their intellectual property rights: there is no law precluding the author from giving his work away for free, especially if there are strings attached (such as the GPL's stipulation that it cannot be sold for profit and that the source must always be made available, etc etc.) I'm no legal expert, but it looks like this is a weak attempt to link OSS to Napster while Napster is reeling. In the long run, I think the facts will outweigh the hype.
First, I take exception to being called an idiot. The first rule of effective arguing is to stay on topic. That being said, the DeCSS case is a slightly different story. In my job capacity I've had to deal with different forms of ebooks, including books involving proprietary hardware as well as web-based books. What I'm saying is that the technology is there, but the means of implementingthat technology have not been thoroughly examined. But the technology to implement a reasonable means of authentication and adherence to loanrules is certainly not outside our grasp.
Finally, you state that any citizen can get a card at any library, but that a local card is usually required first. That statement implies that you have to be able to prove that you're eligible for a card, meaning you pay taxes to support a local library. Most states have something similar at no or low cost. But the bottom line is that you have to reside in an area which supports a public library through tax revenue.
The idea that libraries are "free" is a popular misconception. The public library I work at is supported by township property taxes, and to be eligible to borrow from the library, you need to be able to prove you are a resident of an eligible township OR purchase a card (which costs about as much as the library would have received from your taxes.) Not too long ago we had a case in which a local township opted against library service because they didn't want higher taxes. Even today, after a highly publicized battle, residents don't understand that libraries are not a free god-given right. Residents pay for libraries, just not overtly.
I'm still not entirely sure what all the uproar is about, though. The technology is very much in place to enable e-books to be loaned for a specific period of time. It's a simple matter of patron authentication and timed decryption or access, not altogether unlike the much reviled Divx format. Really, I think it's much ado about nothing.
Actually, it's *not* unconstitutional. The library or school itself has the right to decide what can and cannot be allowed on its computers, based on "community standards" and local ordinances. The Federal government cannot legally outlaw adult-oriented websites, but localities certainly do not have to permit obscene material in public places.
Read the First Amendment. Congress is not prohibiting the freedom of expression here. They're simply regulating the forum. A recent Supreme Court decision upheld a local ordinance requiring exotic dancers to wear pasties and g-strings. I don't see too much difference here.
I'm running 6 on my older 8600/300 with 9.0.4. It did take a little tweaking to get it to my liking and I still have a few plugin issues to take care of, but overall it's been fast and stable. I will definitely need more time before I can render final judgement, however. One final note: upon initial installation, java didn't work for me. When I downloaded and installed the latest MRJ, it ran beautifully and tackled java apps that 4.7 couldn't.
Normally I would keep my mouth shut... or maybe not... but anyway, for once I'm going to come out and say how I'm going to vote to the whole public.
1) I _AM_ going to vote.
2) For president, I am voting for...
No one. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for any of the presidential candidates. If the best our country has to offer are a stiff twit from Tennessee whose political views are dictated by the polls, a spoiled rich brat from Texas who can act all "aw-shucks" folksey on camera but has something of a temper, an isolationist who is about as warm and cuddly as a porcupine and Ralph Nader, I truly pity us. I've seen all the pro-Nader stuff here, but I honestly believe we can do much better, and I'm not talking about Larry Ellison (who I hear has secret political aspirations.)
In short, I'm voting for candidates I support. I don't support any presidential candidates, so I'm not voting for the electoral college.
In spite of the flame I know I'm going to get, here are a few things to ponder...
First, suppose John Doe enters public library and uses public library's computer to access illicit material (such as child porn, etc.). Now suppose 5-year-old kid sees John Doe John Doe's screen with said illicit images and asks his mom what that is. Mother is outraged. What is the library's legal liability?
Second, there's a position at the library called "acquisitions head." This person is responsible for making decisions about what and what not to purchase on a daily basis. It's called "selection." It's one major reason many libraries do not carry "Hustler." Censorship? Maybe. Illegal? Absolutely not. Libraries are also constrained by budget. How does this apply to the internet? That's a fuzzy area, but many libraries view the internet as part of their "content," and libraries do review content based on a mix of popularity, quality and community standards.
Finally, I am personally aware of one library's filtering standards and protocols. This library has the capacity to override blocks and will review blocked sites at patron requests. The system has worked, and is configurable and customizable, and has generally been viewed as a positive thing. It's not about censorship so much as it is about making sure inappropriate material is not made readily available to minors. Is it a perfect system? No. But it has been almost universally well received in the community and has the flexibility to allow humans and human decisions to have the final say.
This topic has been raging for several years now, and it is not likely to go away. And remember: for every person who claims it is a violation of their First Amendment rights, there is a parent who has the constitutional right to expect that their child won't be exposed to "inappropriate material" at school or at the library. There is no easy answer, but simply viewing filters as "censorware" is far too simplistic.
After all, this was a proposal laid out by a committee encouraging formation of other committees to look deeper into OSS. What this means concretely is that this report will ultimately end up on the desk of some low-level government beaurucrat where it will age until being uncovered sometime around 2039. The only actual "action" I see anyone taking on this in the forseeable future is that there might be (gasp!) a meeting!
In the newer releases of AOL (starting with 4, I think) there's a folder they don't document or tell you about called "net" which contains basic ftp, telnet and ping applications with absolutely no bells or whistles. In fact, to ftp I have to open a DOS box, cd to progra~1/americ~1/net/osr2/ and then ftp from there. But they did include it. Go figure.
IIRC, several years ago an American who had set up a white supremicist neo-nazi website went on vacation to Norway (I believe) where he was immediately arrested and deported to Germany, where any nazi or neo-nazi propaganda is illegal. The American was tried and convicted and had to do jail time. The U.S. government did not intervene.
What does this mean for Yahoo? The French government has no legal authority to require Yahoo to remove any material from any US-based servers. However, the French authorities have every right to arrest, try and convict the Yahoos responsible, should they set foot in France. Due to European extridition agreements, Yahoo execs (Jerry Yang comes to mind) would be well advised to avoid that European vacation.
A very close personal acquaintance of mine (we'll call him "Dad") works as an administrator for an orchestra. I asked him about the copyright, and he told me that for old dead composers like Beethoven and Mozart, music is in the public domain, i.e. the score can be freely traded and performed by anyone who so desires. Recordings, on the other hand, are the property of the performer. Therefore, it's utterly legal for you and your friends to get together and perform Beethoven's 9th in public and charge admission. It is not legal to trade an MP3 of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra performing Beethoven's 9th. Make sense?
From what I understand, Metallica's position is somewhat unique in the music industry. They pay for their own studio time and recording costs, and therefore have a great deal of leverage when dealing with a distributor. Most newer acts who haven't been around long enough to build up that kind of cash rely heavily on the record company to pay for recording and studio costs, and are therefore at a disadvantage when it comes time to negotiate a distribution deal. These bands only receive a small percentage of revenues from the record companies, and have to rely on tours to make money.
It's somewhat parallel to the movie industry, in which studios absorb the majority of production costs and therefore receive most of the revenues. George Lucas was able to dictate his own terms to Fox regarding Star Wars, because he assumed the entire financial risk. The studio simply served as an advertising and distribution vehicle.
In short, Metallica is the exception rather than the rule. Most bands are at the mercy of the RIAA companies and don't have as much legal clout. By allowing the RIAA companies to take the financial risk, artists risk sacrificing intellectual ownership.
I have a Visor Deluxe (8MB) in blue. I love the thing, to be honest. Here's a breakdown of the good and bad about it:
Good:
Inexpensive
USB-native hotsynch utilizing the entire throughput for very fast synch operations
Datebook+ is superior to Datebook
Springboard expansion slot already has modules for modems, barcode scanners, books, games, remote controls, digital cameras and (I think) ethernet, with others on the way.
Macintosh ready out-of-the-box
Bad:
No flash ROM (but the OS can be upgraded under certain circumstances)
Runs on AAA batteries rather than rechargeable ones
Certain units have a memory problem. Handspring has released a patch.
Is it the handheld for everyone? Probably not. However, based on the number and types of springboard modules on the market already, it's only a matter of time before the Visor will have all the capabilities of a Palm VII.
IMHO, the fairest solution to all these domain name disputes is to eliminate domain names altogether and stick with IP numbers. (Imagine that wavy fade to daydream here...) "... or check out our website at 206.144.183.14" "Which search engine did you use? 102.64.119.4, 218.95.166.19 or other?" -----------
In latest developments, security experts are urging colleges and universities not to send *ANY* information over computer networks at all! Studies have shown that 96% of colleges, universities and ISPs do not have adequate protection, and are urged to cease use of the following protocols: ftp, tftp, http, telnet, gopher, talk, sendmail, smtp and C3PO. Files are not to be stored in digital, analog or any other elegtronic, electric or magnetic format. The use of digital or analog data or telephone lines is strongly discouraged. If you have windows, remove them. If you have doors, remove them too. And for Pete's sake, DO NOT talk to anyone! This is the only way to ensure your data is protected.
...but IIRC Intel and AMD's 64-bit strategies are remarkably divergent. From what I've read, Intel's chips will not be compatible with existing 32-bit apps and OSes (with the exception of Linux.) It's my understanding, then, that the Itanium will be Intel's foray into the non-M$ world. AMD, on the other hand, seems to be inviting the Evil Empire to put out Windows 64, in effect becoming the standard-bearer for Intel's x86 platform. If history bears itself out, Intel will probably come out with an x86-compatible 64-bit processor around the same time AMD introduces theirs. If not, AMD will be well-poised to take over the desktop market. -------
Slashdot Mirror
Unless the Supreme Court rejects the appeal out of hand in the next 2 months and attempted injunctions against releasing Windows XP fail, Microsoft wins, at least in the short term. IANAL, but if I understand legal proceedings correctly, the entire remedy phase is on hold until the Supreme Court rejects the appeal, vacates the ruling out of hand or hears the case. Typically, the Supreme Court takes several months to reach a decision on whether to put a given case on the docket. Microsoft's short-term goal is to extend the case into November, clearing the way for the release of Windows XP. It's a lot harder to put the genie back in the bottle, and both sides know this.
Regardless how you feel about Microsoft, though, this isn't good for consumers. The October release date has become much more than an arbitrary deadline, and XP will be released in whatever condition it's in. (I know, the same can be said about their previous versions of Windows, but this time there's a lot more than PR on the line!)
Personally, I don't think the Supreme Court will even hear the case. There doesn't seem to be any legal ambigity or any untested or controversial legal rulings at stake. A conservative, MS-friendly court ruled unanimously against Microsoft on all counts. As big and powerful as Microsoft is, I think the Supreme Court will simply reject the appeal without comment, leaving it to the lower courts. The Supreme Court doesn't like to get involved unless there are constitutional issues at stake, and there aren't any here.
Actually, I don't think they can, at least not with bound materials. The law is clear on this. And while the government has been "pro-business" lately, especially with the DMCA, they're beginning to realize it may have been a mistake and are starting to soften their stance. The laws regarding printed matter are very clear, and there is no compelling reason to change the basics of the law (except possibly the duration of the copyright.) The question that needs to be answered is whether books in electronic format constitute software or printed matter in another medium. Don't forget, as popular as big business is, libraries do have a reputation as wholesome, family-friendly places, and in spite of PAC donations etc, I think most congressmen would be reluctant to limit libraries in that fashion, especially ones who campaign on "family values." This is different from CIPA and COPA because it's about the libraries' core business. Libraries have existing law and tradition on their side. Regardless what happens in Congress, it will end up in the courts, and I don't see the publishers winning there. There's simply too much legal precedent.
Under Title 17 of the U.S. Code, libraries are permitted to lend materials - books, magazines, videotapes, DVDs, CDs, cassettes, CD-ROMs, etc, with certain restrictions. IANAL, but from everything I've seen and everything my local public library's lawyer has said (I'm an employee), the publishers don't really have much of a leg to stand on shy of changing U.S. Copyright law outright.
I know this is offtopic but...
...that won't work in German. ALL German nouns are capitalized.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you ever could patent a standard. Either you patent it and collect royalties, or you try to make it a standard and simply become one of the top developers for it. IIRC, Sun tried to do the same thing with Java and had it thrown out. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I don't know if he will read this, but I, for one, am pleased that he took the time out of his busy schedule to address a few of the concerns of the Slashdot community. Come what may, it's nice to see American-style representative democracy at work.
Bess comes equipped with an override capability which requires a username and password. Your bio teacher friend should, in theory, have access to that password. There is one other way to circumvent Bess, but I'm not at liberty to divulge it since I have to work with it on a regular basis (as an admin) and I really don't want to undermine my job security.
that Paramount was keen on doing a "Starfleet Academy"-based series. I also have it on fairly good authority that the Excelsior proposal has been rejected outright. Once again, Paramount is ignoring their core fan base... not that I support the Excelsior campaign, but I have heard zero support for the Academy.
It looks to me like Allchin is using the Napster fallout to try to put OSS and Napster in the same boat: both are free, both are a threat (allegedly) to intellectual property and legitimate business. In other words, their argument is that OSS and Napster are two peas in a pod.
The truth is much different, as we all know: OSS is copyrighted and legally licensed, and the authors are legally exercising their intellectual property rights: there is no law precluding the author from giving his work away for free, especially if there are strings attached (such as the GPL's stipulation that it cannot be sold for profit and that the source must always be made available, etc etc.) I'm no legal expert, but it looks like this is a weak attempt to link OSS to Napster while Napster is reeling. In the long run, I think the facts will outweigh the hype.
First, I take exception to being called an idiot. The first rule of effective arguing is to stay on topic. That being said, the DeCSS case is a slightly different story. In my job capacity I've had to deal with different forms of ebooks, including books involving proprietary hardware as well as web-based books. What I'm saying is that the technology is there, but the means of implementingthat technology have not been thoroughly examined. But the technology to implement a reasonable means of authentication and adherence to loanrules is certainly not outside our grasp.
Finally, you state that any citizen can get a card at any library, but that a local card is usually required first. That statement implies that you have to be able to prove that you're eligible for a card, meaning you pay taxes to support a local library. Most states have something similar at no or low cost. But the bottom line is that you have to reside in an area which supports a public library through tax revenue.
The idea that libraries are "free" is a popular misconception. The public library I work at is supported by township property taxes, and to be eligible to borrow from the library, you need to be able to prove you are a resident of an eligible township OR purchase a card (which costs about as much as the library would have received from your taxes.) Not too long ago we had a case in which a local township opted against library service because they didn't want higher taxes. Even today, after a highly publicized battle, residents don't understand that libraries are not a free god-given right. Residents pay for libraries, just not overtly.
I'm still not entirely sure what all the uproar is about, though. The technology is very much in place to enable e-books to be loaned for a specific period of time. It's a simple matter of patron authentication and timed decryption or access, not altogether unlike the much reviled Divx format. Really, I think it's much ado about nothing.
Actually, it's *not* unconstitutional. The library or school itself has the right to decide what can and cannot be allowed on its computers, based on "community standards" and local ordinances. The Federal government cannot legally outlaw adult-oriented websites, but localities certainly do not have to permit obscene material in public places. Read the First Amendment. Congress is not prohibiting the freedom of expression here. They're simply regulating the forum. A recent Supreme Court decision upheld a local ordinance requiring exotic dancers to wear pasties and g-strings. I don't see too much difference here.
I'm running 6 on my older 8600/300 with 9.0.4. It did take a little tweaking to get it to my liking and I still have a few plugin issues to take care of, but overall it's been fast and stable. I will definitely need more time before I can render final judgement, however. One final note: upon initial installation, java didn't work for me. When I downloaded and installed the latest MRJ, it ran beautifully and tackled java apps that 4.7 couldn't.
Normally I would keep my mouth shut... or maybe not... but anyway, for once I'm going to come out and say how I'm going to vote to the whole public.
1) I _AM_ going to vote.
2) For president, I am voting for...
No one. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for any of the presidential candidates. If the best our country has to offer are a stiff twit from Tennessee whose political views are dictated by the polls, a spoiled rich brat from Texas who can act all "aw-shucks" folksey on camera but has something of a temper, an isolationist who is about as warm and cuddly as a porcupine and Ralph Nader, I truly pity us. I've seen all the pro-Nader stuff here, but I honestly believe we can do much better, and I'm not talking about Larry Ellison (who I hear has secret political aspirations.)
In short, I'm voting for candidates I support. I don't support any presidential candidates, so I'm not voting for the electoral college.
that|smoke
First, suppose John Doe enters public library and uses public library's computer to access illicit material (such as child porn, etc.). Now suppose 5-year-old kid sees John Doe John Doe's screen with said illicit images and asks his mom what that is. Mother is outraged. What is the library's legal liability?
Second, there's a position at the library called "acquisitions head." This person is responsible for making decisions about what and what not to purchase on a daily basis. It's called "selection." It's one major reason many libraries do not carry "Hustler." Censorship? Maybe. Illegal? Absolutely not. Libraries are also constrained by budget. How does this apply to the internet? That's a fuzzy area, but many libraries view the internet as part of their "content," and libraries do review content based on a mix of popularity, quality and community standards.
Finally, I am personally aware of one library's filtering standards and protocols. This library has the capacity to override blocks and will review blocked sites at patron requests. The system has worked, and is configurable and customizable, and has generally been viewed as a positive thing. It's not about censorship so much as it is about making sure inappropriate material is not made readily available to minors. Is it a perfect system? No. But it has been almost universally well received in the community and has the flexibility to allow humans and human decisions to have the final say.
This topic has been raging for several years now, and it is not likely to go away. And remember: for every person who claims it is a violation of their First Amendment rights, there is a parent who has the constitutional right to expect that their child won't be exposed to "inappropriate material" at school or at the library. There is no easy answer, but simply viewing filters as "censorware" is far too simplistic.
CmdrTaco. Seriously, how can you overlook the brains behind /. ?
After all, this was a proposal laid out by a committee encouraging formation of other committees to look deeper into OSS. What this means concretely is that this report will ultimately end up on the desk of some low-level government beaurucrat where it will age until being uncovered sometime around 2039. The only actual "action" I see anyone taking on this in the forseeable future is that there might be (gasp!) a meeting!
In the newer releases of AOL (starting with 4, I think) there's a folder they don't document or tell you about called "net" which contains basic ftp, telnet and ping applications with absolutely no bells or whistles. In fact, to ftp I have to open a DOS box, cd to progra~1/americ~1/net/osr2/ and then ftp from there. But they did include it. Go figure.
IIRC, several years ago an American who had set up a white supremicist neo-nazi website went on vacation to Norway (I believe) where he was immediately arrested and deported to Germany, where any nazi or neo-nazi propaganda is illegal. The American was tried and convicted and had to do jail time. The U.S. government did not intervene.
What does this mean for Yahoo? The French government has no legal authority to require Yahoo to remove any material from any US-based servers. However, the French authorities have every right to arrest, try and convict the Yahoos responsible, should they set foot in France. Due to European extridition agreements, Yahoo execs (Jerry Yang comes to mind) would be well advised to avoid that European vacation.
A very close personal acquaintance of mine (we'll call him "Dad") works as an administrator for an orchestra. I asked him about the copyright, and he told me that for old dead composers like Beethoven and Mozart, music is in the public domain, i.e. the score can be freely traded and performed by anyone who so desires. Recordings, on the other hand, are the property of the performer. Therefore, it's utterly legal for you and your friends to get together and perform Beethoven's 9th in public and charge admission. It is not legal to trade an MP3 of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra performing Beethoven's 9th. Make sense?
From what I understand, Metallica's position is somewhat unique in the music industry. They pay for their own studio time and recording costs, and therefore have a great deal of leverage when dealing with a distributor. Most newer acts who haven't been around long enough to build up that kind of cash rely heavily on the record company to pay for recording and studio costs, and are therefore at a disadvantage when it comes time to negotiate a distribution deal. These bands only receive a small percentage of revenues from the record companies, and have to rely on tours to make money.
It's somewhat parallel to the movie industry, in which studios absorb the majority of production costs and therefore receive most of the revenues. George Lucas was able to dictate his own terms to Fox regarding Star Wars, because he assumed the entire financial risk. The studio simply served as an advertising and distribution vehicle.
In short, Metallica is the exception rather than the rule. Most bands are at the mercy of the RIAA companies and don't have as much legal clout. By allowing the RIAA companies to take the financial risk, artists risk sacrificing intellectual ownership.
I have a Visor Deluxe (8MB) in blue. I love the thing, to be honest. Here's a breakdown of the good and bad about it:
Good:
Inexpensive
USB-native hotsynch utilizing the entire throughput for very fast synch operations
Datebook+ is superior to Datebook
Springboard expansion slot already has modules for modems, barcode scanners, books, games, remote controls, digital cameras and (I think) ethernet, with others on the way.
Macintosh ready out-of-the-box
Bad:
No flash ROM (but the OS can be upgraded under certain circumstances)
Runs on AAA batteries rather than rechargeable ones
Certain units have a memory problem. Handspring has released a patch.
Is it the handheld for everyone? Probably not. However, based on the number and types of springboard modules on the market already, it's only a matter of time before the Visor will have all the capabilities of a Palm VII.
IMHO, the fairest solution to all these domain name disputes is to eliminate domain names altogether and stick with IP numbers.
(Imagine that wavy fade to daydream here...)
"... or check out our website at 206.144.183.14"
"Which search engine did you use? 102.64.119.4, 218.95.166.19 or other?"
-----------
In latest developments, security experts are urging colleges and universities not to send *ANY* information over computer networks at all! Studies have shown that 96% of colleges, universities and ISPs do not have adequate protection, and are urged to cease use of the following protocols: ftp, tftp, http, telnet, gopher, talk, sendmail, smtp and C3PO. Files are not to be stored in digital, analog or any other elegtronic, electric or magnetic format. The use of digital or analog data or telephone lines is strongly discouraged. If you have windows, remove them. If you have doors, remove them too. And for Pete's sake, DO NOT talk to anyone! This is the only way to ensure your data is protected.
...but IIRC Intel and AMD's 64-bit strategies are remarkably divergent. From what I've read, Intel's chips will not be compatible with existing 32-bit apps and OSes (with the exception of Linux.) It's my understanding, then, that the Itanium will be Intel's foray into the non-M$ world. AMD, on the other hand, seems to be inviting the Evil Empire to put out Windows 64, in effect becoming the standard-bearer for Intel's x86 platform. If history bears itself out, Intel will probably come out with an x86-compatible 64-bit processor around the same time AMD introduces theirs. If not, AMD will be well-poised to take over the desktop market. -------