If your working on a 3000+ page manuscript and getting paid for it, wouldn't have been smart to find out what version of Word they were using before starting the project? I mean bitch, whine, and moan at Microsoft all you want, but it's like taking a Photoshop file to my printer instead of a TIF or EPS. While there all graphics files, they don't produce the same results and my printer can't use the Photoshop file to print with anyway. So when you say, I'm mad an MS because they changed the format; I say, don't bitch because you didn't do your job. You didn't ask enough questions as a consultant because if you had, you would have found out what version they were running. BTW, Word does suck for the most part when laying out text and graphics that's why I use Pagemaker to do it!
When someone asks me what sort of computer they should buy, the first question I ask is "What sort of purposes will you use your computer." So my first question is "How are the schools going to use the laptops."
Laptops are incredibly powerful tools. The keyword here is "tool." Unless curriculum involves, promotes, and enriches the educational experience laptops are worthless. However, if learning and education are being enriched through a dynamic curriculum that involves and uses laptops to their fullest extent then we have a truly useful tool.
So the question becomes "How do these schools plan on using laptops." Is it just for homework, is it for student-initiated learning, or for something else.
My personal belief is that this is a wonderful opportunity to introduce the digital age to many who have not experienced it. But, these are the trailblazers and they must do a good job for the rest of the US. This means integrating and maximizing teaching effectiveness with curriculum in place when the laptops come to promote and create value. This cannot be an instance when "Hey we have these tools, now what do we do with them." This scenario will fuel the fire of anti-technologists in education and keep digital technology from the one group that is the most capable of understanding it quickly.
Hangtime If you continue to think the way you have always thought, you will continue to get what you have always got. - Anonymous
In many of the comments Im reading here make me think of the almighty hill much of the Slashdot communitity sits on.
Here is a company TRYING to do a good thing and help people out making driver writing easier within the space. No nobody ever claimed that this method of doing things was faster then regular code. One word: DUH! Its running outside the native OS OF COURSE its not going to run as fast. This from the same people that carry on about Transmeta chips and how fast their going to run and blow up Intel.
Listen, everybody step down from their high and mighty and come down to the normal user for the moment.
1. Joe Blow user wants simple running, if you want to keep Linux within the confines of the computer elite then keep this attitude about anything easier coming along. Someone how Grandma likes running Windows 95 because its easy and she doesnt want to recompile a kernel.
2. Keep putting anything down that might actually help the OS that wasn't suggested by Linux or Bruce Perens. There are a lot of smart people out there and if you continually dog good ideas instead of trying to nurture them and WOW maybe improve on them then Linux will become pardon for lack of a better term "an imbred communitity."
3. Not accepting the fact that some stuff will be closed source. Not all companies can make money from support. Reverse engineering of chipsets becomes significantly easier with all the specs laid out in front of you. Think about the company's interest for a moment:
a. Release closed source drivers for Windows and Mac and not worry about competition. Put up with Linux user requests.
b. Release specs to the Communitity and have competitor figure out what I'm doing and move before I can. Whether this is a logical or reasonable arguement doesn't matter.
Personally, I like the UDI idea and think its about time. Whether it works as quickly or not as native code really doesnt matter to me if I can run Solaris, Win2000, RedHat, and Windows 95 on the same system without having to download different sets of drivers for each OS. You can't tell me that this problem cannot be beaten with a little humility, ingenuity and hardwork within the community instead of a "It CANT BE DONE, ITS HARDWARE and NATIVE argument." Hell if Linus can program a processor to emulate x86 code and nice people can get Windows to play in Linux sandbox and vice versa then this can be done. Dance with the same girl you brought and live by the motto "It just works." Worry about upgrading performance later and free your mind. Live by the motto below:
Hangtime If you continue to think the way you always thought, you will continue to get what you have always got. - Anonymous Hangtime's collary If the Linux communitity adopts the same attitude it has had, it will never grow beyond the elitiest of computer users and never pass Apple in marketshare.
Re:Everybody take a breather
on
Microsoft Loses
·
· Score: 1
Thats the point mwa, Microsoft doesn't do things for the public good if it doesnt benefit the bottom line in some direct or indirect way. That's the point of business. I'm not out for the common good, I'm out to serve customers which in turn gets me money.
Server software: IIS, because you buy NT and you got the HTTP server for free, it was tightly integrated with the rest of the Microsoft products.
Internet Technologies: SQL server and ASP. One of the easiest combinations to use. Use Apache and PHP, its a free market.
Application Development: Name me one IDE that beats Visual Studio across the breath of programs and the depth at which you can go. Yes you can use gmacs or Codewarrior for Linux but it still doesnt have as much functionality.
Re:I wish they *would* innovate for a change
on
Microsoft Loses
·
· Score: 1
ch-chuck: John Chambers recently told a crowd that he might just buy up every pre-IPO company in the San Jose area. When did Cisco make an innovation. Intel took the same idea of 3dnow and made its own modifications and bundled it as SSE.
Imitation happens all over the marketplace, not just here.
Re:Everybody take a breather
on
Microsoft Loses
·
· Score: 1
So there is a different set of rules then buying X company for $500 million dollars rather then take the same concept develop it for $4 million and put the other company out of business right.
You can still get IE on Apple for free.
So you hold up Netscape as the standards bearer? Thats a laugh outside of maybe Opera thats about as close as you will get to true HTML. And guaranteed in your little world with shopping bots they will all be pointed to AOL "partners". Oh you will be able to get to other sites but what you see in front on the tool bar will be AOL preferred.
Re:Everybody take a breather
on
Microsoft Loses
·
· Score: 1
Replies, replies everywhere
WillAfleck: Perhaps you didn't see the NASDAQ close today, it dropped 7% and with Microsoft dragging it down most of the way. Also the Dow 30 does include Microsoft so considering if Bill did decide to close the doors, I would say a depression (a drop of 30% in more less then 6 months) would be very likely. Second your argument that economies are independent of one another. We are in an interdependent marketplace. If something in Asia happens we feel it here. If something in Washington state happens its felt here. Events do not happen in isolation they happen in the total marketplace.
Black Parrot: Sorry bud, Netscape bombed I went to the processes and killed it.
Mr. Anonymous Coward who called me morally bankrupt: First off I take great offense to your post and find that it was moderated up a point even more offensive. At what point did I say the law shouldn't take its course. I am in fact VERY MUCH FOR RULE OF LAW! The fact is the market is correcting itself, I never said that Microsoft didn't engage in objectionable practices. The fact the entire case was based on Microsoft operating as an monopoly is patently false. See my previous post.
TicTacTux: See Tennessee Valley Authority, it already happens. See above paragraph.
SteveM: There was an economy before 1995 and the Internet. Let's say that the Internet would not have as many connected users today if Microsoft wasn't around. Take it or leave it Microsoft brought a good deal of legitimaticy to the Internet.
nhurm: Then go begin a Linux day like the LUG did at Michigan. Offer your own support if you feel so strongly. Wow, its amazing you have to actually get someone to talk about a product before they will buy it. Microsoft promotes its products, I don't see Redhat promoting its OS. Microsoft does promotion and marketing extremely well. They may not always have the best product but they do get people to buy there product.
The market is doing its job of finding alternatives. I'm sure when Linux becomes just as easy as Windows to use, i.e. my Grandmother doesn't have to hack linuxconf to run, it will become widespread. Until then, people are free to choose their own OS. Microsoft doesn't twist Dell, Compaq, HP's arm (LET ME FINISH) to install Windows, consumers do.
Re:Everybody take a breather
on
Microsoft Loses
·
· Score: 2
So you believe that because the company is so large it should be outlawed? So any company lets say that reaches a 300 billion dollars in market captialization should be outlawed correct?
I would submit for your approval that Intel and Cisco have FAR more influence on their industries respectively then Microsoft. Of course they have business competing directly against them. Unlike like Microsoft who has MILLIONS of people giving up their free time coding for their platform (Linux), along with a market that is changing so fast as to make its platform near obsolete (PalmOS), as well as traditional competitors who are innovating just as or quicker then they are and can support themselves through hardware sales (Sun and Apple). Let's get right down to it. This is an EXTREMELY competitive market, in fact, I would applaud Microsoft for hanging on this long.
Is the hostility towards Microsoft or is it directed at an envious population of Bill Gates. Love him or hate him, he has made Microsoft into a money generating business. Keyword: Business - A entity that generates value for its stockholders. You could not be a great business if you are not a servant. I would submit that Microsoft has been the ultimate servant.
Think about it, whats the chance that Internet would be what it is today if Microsoft had not made the browser free? Would the Internet be as large a communitity?
Re:Everybody take a breather
on
Microsoft Loses
·
· Score: 1
Oh how I do attact the anonymous don't want to login show my real self and lose karma cowards. Rather then stoop so low I will rather answer in fact-based commentary.
When I transitioned to the use of Windows NT two years ago, I was still using Netscape. This funny thing started happening, everytime I would pull up a Java based page it would screw my whole system. Not being one who works on things that bomb all the time I began using IE and never went back.
I never said the world would come to an end if Microsoft was spanked, I referred to the end if Microsoft decided to close up shop. Big difference.
Lastly, I see you didn't dispute my assertion that much of the economic growth we have enjoyed can be attributed to Microsoft. Just in case you do decide to come back and dispute that claim. Examine the economic impact that Microsoft has on each phase of our economy before you answer including but not restricted to games, server software, internet related technologies, and application development.
People just want to be able to run games, use their office apps, and browse the Internet. If reliability was a big factor in the buying decision of consumers (it is in departmental and enterprise server sales hence Linux's fast growth in that segment) Microsoft would have been sorely beat by Linux long ago. If ease of use were a factor in sales Apple and MacOS would have trounced Microsoft in the ground and danced on its grave.
Sometimes the factors you cite as the overriding factors in consumer buying criteria are in fact not the real factors.
Hangtime If you continue to think the way you have always thought, you will continue to get what you have always got. - Anonymous
Alright everyone take a deep breath......that's good. Now lets all think about this rationally for a moment.
1. Microsoft will appeal the decision to the D.C. Court of Appeals, aCourt that has already overturned a Jackson decision (see the 1997 anti-trust suit by the DOJ). Chances are this will happen again and even if the DOJ decides to appeal directly to the Supreme Court, the Court has the right to put it back into the lower courts.
2. MANY people lost money, a lot MORE people will lose money VERY soon. When people start receiving their first and second quarter mutual fund reports, fund managers are going to have to say due to a sell off in technology i.e. Microsoft and every other tech company, we lost 10% of your money this quarter. This translates to anger against the government. Why is the DOJ ripping Microsoft and my stock. Call representatives in Congress and ask what the hell they are doing about this situation. Not a pretty picture.
3. Bad stock markets days like this make things VERY rough for Mr. Gore. Bush will be putting this on Gore for the rest of the campaign. You want an out of control DOJ that sues EVERY company (Smith & Wesson, the Tobacco industry, Microsoft, Glock) and puts your stocks in the toilet: Vote Al Gore. Not a very pleasant thought considering the majority of those who buy stock also vote.
Now, that we have thought about this rationally. Think about what would happen if Bill Gates said "Fine, if you don't want us to innovate then were going to shutdown Microsoft and return all value to the shareholders." Think about how many industries, businesses, individuals are affected by Microsoft financially both directly and indirectly. I would venture a guess that you would see a depression unlike any other since the 1930's. Believe it or not, a great deal of the expansion of the U.S. economy over the past 15 years can be attributed to Microsoft. Whether they did something bad or not doesn't change the fact that you, me, the businesses we work for, the schools we go to, and just about everything around us is effected by Microsoft. You want to run Linux, that's fine. I like running Windows 2000. You wanna use Netscape fine. I like running IE 5 - it has a tendency not to crash my system like Netscape. We both have a choice.
Let the market slug it out, its already making Windows obsolete anyway (anybody heard of Palm and little OSs running on cell phones).
Perhaps you would like to logon and discuss this further, but rather then stoop to name calling I will rather answer your retort. Unfortunately, I did not see that article in the WSJ last week but I definitely will go back and read it since I do have an online account with WSJ.
Actually, I pull most of my information from various readings I do. Internet World, the aforementioned Network World, PC Week, VARBusiness, Reseller News, Interactive Week, Internet Week all of which I look through.
Both of these details have been WIDELY reported within networking trade publications before the WSJ got around to commenting on them. These two facts are very easily verifiable and I would never portray them as my own research. Besides isn't the point to contribute all information so people can make informed decisions. Even taking your comments, how many people actually subscribe to the WSJ on Slashdot. Maybe instead of your witty retort you could have enriched us all with a copy of some of the articles main points instead of snapping back at me. Perhaps I could start sourcing all my comments in MLA format with a Works Cited page for your benefit. Ahhh, but you decided to logon as an Anonymous Coward and not show your true self even though your comments do.
Hangtime
If you continue to think the way you always thought, you will continue to get what you always got. - Anonymous
Actually Cisco makes good products their not great products. Ask anyone in the networking field and more then likely you will find that their are SUPERIOR products to that of Cisco.
Begs the question: Why is Cisco so valuable?
Number one: Cisco does put out a quality product, its just not spectacular so no points lost here like MS.
Number two: "No one lost their job buying Cisco product" mentality pervading the networking arena. Goto www.nwfusion.com or pick up a copy of Network World, an unbiased and very well done trade magazine, their was an article about these thoughts around two months ago. Very well done and will give some insight about this ideas.
Number three: Cisco has gobbled up every company in an area of weakness and made M&A work. Credit CEO John Chambers and his staff on this one. Cisco has got "the buyout" down to an artform, in fact, executives from other companies come and study it. This ability to quickly integrate companies into Cisco has lead to the EXTREMELY low turnover within companies Cisco has bought out. This number hovers around 2% vs a standard in the industry 30%. Leading to number four.
Number four: Great people make Cisco work. Cisco has been able to recruit, hire, buy, and keep its people allowing it to move quickly. With the use of a good corporate culture and outrageous stock options, Cisco can get the people it needs to keep moving.
Words of caution: Cisco makes good gear, they dont make great gear. Refer back to Number two about this idea. Also sticker prices for Cisco gear are generally higher then the industry but many net managers can weasal price breaks out of them. Cisco also has a serious lacking of product towards the network core (ie fiber optics). Of course, Cisco has been on a terror buying up companies to fill this void. Actually Cisco's competitor Lucent has many more products and expertise related to the area thanks to its roots at AT&T.
Food for thought: Cisco 12 billion in revenue last year, Lucent 34 billion Cisco's market cap almost 540+ Billion Lucent's 208+ Billion
While I dont believe Cisco will be headed down anytime soon, I do believe there growth will slow, ie dont see 700 Billion next year. However, as a value play Lucent does figure well. Lucent does compete with Cisco in some areas but Lucent has more expertise at the network core then Cisco. With the increasing use of fiber-optics towards the network edge, ie in hubs, routers, into your home maybe =), then Lucent becomes much more valuable.
Last comment: Cisco has become a giant within the networking arena, a benevolent giant. Cisco's reach is extending to nearly every aspect of the networking world, but we here nothing about them as a force. If people were TRULY interested in anti-trust lawsuits Cisco would be sitting in the crosshairs. Why? Because it could be argued that Cisco has more pull in the networking arena then Microsoft has in the software and OS arena. Also, if Microsoft were buying up companies at the rate of Cisco rather then tied down by prosecution, Microsoft would have already passed one trillion by now.
These people went into a networking closet, jacked a connection, and routed into their rooms. Think about that one for a second. EVERY university in the U.S. has a policy towards unauthorized use of the network. This one falls into that place. This not a Napster, GNUtella, whatever, this is just plain theft that people got caught trying. For goodness sake's its a 300 FT PIECE OF CABLE!
I agree with the post about bad publicity, and having gone on a tour of OSU, I ended up here at Baylor =) (Fast Ethernet every dorm), OSU dorms are gettoland (except maybe for the Honors dorm).
Thepost talking about per semester fees. Its either $40 or $60 here at Baylor per semester. That ain't bad for Ethernet access. Also having been part of a bid out process for networking its about $300 a port to cover costs. Two ports per room roughly $600 per room (includes man power, cabling, testing, building updating and work, etc.) You can do the math from there but the charges per semester are essentially to take care of support.
Thats a good question. What value does a lawyer bring to the world. Do they somehow make the pie larger for us all or are they a nuissance. When has a lawyer enriched the lives of others with his work without having a reciprocating loss in another party. THERE'S a question for you! Hangtime
Up until about 3 months ago, I did not listen to Trance genre music. I didn't even know what Trance was! However, after downloading an extended set of Paul Oakenfold, I got hooked. Now, I have bought at least $300 worth of CDs containing Oakenfold, Sasha, Nick Warren, Paul van Dyk, as well as many others. Digital downloads like VHS cassesettes before them, EXPAND the pie for companies and industries, it doesnt shrink it. The problem is new business models have to be adopted and used to receive gain from these new opportunities. Scary for record executives approaching 50 and the head of MPAA, a WWII vetetran, Jack Valenti.
The orignial songs didn't curb itself to the censors and neither did the movie. That is what made the movie so good. Dont go rewriting the song now because you dont have to cowtow to the Man!
Where we may see the correlations between 1984 and the coming and present society, I see more corelation between Farenheit 451. Knowledge and books are dangerous things that can't be controled so they are outlawed. A dumb society is a subserviant society. Many of the points brought out by Katz are not new but its good to bring them to a collective summarization. We live in a dangerous time. Our rights are cowtowed more often now then they have been in previous decades.
The reason: People have not come to understand the rights they enjoy on the Internet. What a boom to man-kind the Internet and the open ideas it was formed around. Now people that twiddle around AOL are the ones making decisions. Indeed as in real life, an uninformed, ignorant and generally apathetic citizenery leads to encroached upon rights. Finally, live by the words of Ben Franklin
"Those who would give up an Essential Liberty, to purchase Temporary Security, deserve Liberty nor Security."
Background: Eight months ago I was supposed to be working in the Air Force Information Warfare Center at Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio. I don't how many of you know the defense chain as it applies to cyberspace but the AFIWC runs point on all cyberwarfare operations for the United States.
Patriotism? I have had five uncles and my grandfather all serve their country in varying wartime capacities. I do have a sense of patriotism and what my country has given me if was using some of the skills that I have learned well I was going to my darnest to help. BTW, getting a Top Secret security clearance and play with things nobody had ever seen was another perk of the job. I wasn't alone though in feeling that way. The others selected for the internships inside the AFIWC and who I talked to were some of the best and brightest America had to offer including a guy who was weened on Unix and had been working with Linux since 94 with a speciality in penetration, a genetics student, a student at Stanford who could blow the doors off coding as well as others. I'll be the first to admit setting up hardware and networks was why I was there and while not glamourous, I do my job very well.
Unfortunantly, if you are in the military you would know this but most do not the agency in charge of background checks the DSS or Defense Security Service has been so backlogged and mismanaged over the past few years none of us who were told we were interning actually did. That's a bitter spot for me and the others but hopefully it will hold out soon. It does make me angry but given the chance I would still like to go back and have that summer at the AFIWC. I think it would have been a very unique learning experience.
One other thing, those that have feeling hacking for the man is wrong. The world is a very ugly and dangerous place. The Chinese have been developing cyberwarfare and we still dont know the extent of their knowledge. Many small 3rd world countries are throwing a bone to cyberwarfare because its the cheapest way of bringing down the U.S.. You don't need guns or missiles you just need a direct modem link into the U.S. power grid. Their are alot of countries that hate the U.S. and would love to do damage to it especially with the anonimity afforded by electronic warfare so dont bash anyone that wants to protect your family whether it be your family dying in a car accident because the power was turned off as they were going through a light, some maniac who thinks it would be fun to grab credit card numbers from an ecommerce site and use them to finance weapons purchases or any other thing your mind can think of or might not think of will happen eventually. Winn Schwauta one of the foremost experts in the security realm has been predicting an electronic Pearl Harbor for a long time. The only questions remain are will the gun implacements on our side be ready and how much damage will someone do when there not isolated to just Hawaii.
If you would like to read about the trials and tribulations of the DSS, you can read the following article in the archives of USA Today
Goto the archives and use the keyword search security clearance and military and backlog Goto the 13K document on 06-03-1999 Sorry it only keeps the last search you did in memory
Trade Group Files Suit Against All Identifiable Posters of or Linkers to Linux DVD Hack
EFF Assembling Legal Team to Defend Targets
The movie industry, through its recently activiated Digital Video Disc Content Control Association (DVD CCA), a trade organization controlling DVD patents, has filed a lawsuit in California against dozens of people around the world. who have published information, or links to information, about the DVD Content Scrambling System (CSS), on the Internet. As many as 500 defendants could eventually be named. The DVD CCA claims that the defendants are violating the association's trade secrets and other intellectual property rights by posting the source code of (or simply having links to other sites with the source code of) a legally reverse-engineered means of decoding DVD discs. An important hearing in the case has been scheduled for tomorrow, Wed., Dec. 29, 1999.
Tomorrow's hearing is on whether the judge should issue a temporary restraining order against the defendants, who have been publishing information about the DVD content scrambling system in various locations in the US and worldwide. Any such order, if issued, would only apply for a few weeks, while the parties argued in court about whether a permanent injunction should restrict these defendants from publishing this information for the duration of the court case.
It is EFF's opinion that this lawsuit is an attempt to architect law to favor a particular business model at the expense of free expression. It is an affront to the First Amendment (and UN human rights accords) because the information the programmers posted is legal. EFF also objects to the DVD CCA's attempt to blur the distinction between posting material on one's own Web site and merely linking to it (i.e., providing directions to it) elsewhere.
These defendant individuals have been publishing legitimate, protected speech, including software, textual descriptions, and discussions of the DVD CSS. This speech is in no way copied or acquired from the DVD CCA's trade-secret documents. Copyrights do not give anyone any rights in "ideas", only in the exact form in which they are expressed. Trade-secret law only controls people who agreed to keep it secret and have been told the secret; other people remain free to independently discover the secret. The ideas being discussed and implemented were apparently extracted by having an engineer study a DVD product ("reverse engineering it"), which is a legal activity that is not restricted by any laws in most jurisdictions.
The DVD CCA is trying to shut these speakers down by starting with the false assumption that reverse engineering is illegal. It is not. If, for example, the DVD reverse engineering had been done in Santa Clara, it would be legal under the 9th Circuit Court case Sega v. Accolade. See also the 1998 US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which provides specifically in section 1201(f) that reverse engineering of an copy-protection encryption system is legal for "interoperability", which is why it was done in this case.
The case itself is organized as a "theft of trade secrets" case; it doesn't use the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and doesn't appear to rely otherwise on copyright law. The root of the case is their allegation that the original reverse-engineering of the DVD CSS system was "improper" (paragraph 18), "unauthorized" (para. 20), "wrongfully appropriating proprietary trade secrets" (para. 21), "unauthorized use of proprietary CSS information, which was illegally "hacked" (para. 22). However, they provide no proof of these allegations, and they are unlikely to be true. If the original reverse-engineering was legal, which we believe is true, then the subsequent republication of the information is also legal, and the case is merely a tool to harass people exercising their legal rights.
EFF's interest in the case is to protect reverse engineering as part of First Amendment protected speech. EFF legal counsel Robin Gross, and pro-bono counsel Allonn Levy of Huber, Samuelson will be at Santa Clara Superior Court tomorrow morning to represent at least two defendants, Chris DiBona and Andrew Bunner. EFF co-founder John Gilmore will also attend at the hearing tomorrow. EFF will at minimum provide "stop-gap" defense to avoid a temporary restraining order against the defendants. Following the hearing, EFF will assess the situation and the level of our involvement.
EFF is committed to ensuring that individuals rights are protected, and free speech is a fundamental right. It would be a poor public policy to allow intellectual property owners to expand their property at the expense of free speech -- particularly when the speech in question elucidates how companies constrain the distribution of other free expression.
The technology at issue here is the DVD Content Scrambling System (CSS), a technical effort to prevent people who have legally purchased a DVD from making completely legal copies of it for their own use. It is legal ("fair use") for people to make personal copies of copyrighted material available to them. (See, e.g., the Supreme Court's 1984 decision in the "Betamax" case, Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios. In that case a movie studio was trying to have all VCR's banned from the United States because of the potential to "pirate" valuable movies -- just as in the current case they are attempting to have all reverse-engineered decoders of DVDs banned. The Supreme Court ruled that if VCR's have even a single non-infringing use, they cannot be banned. It is clear that the reverse-engineered DVD CSS has a non-infringing use, the viewing of DVDs on the Linux operating system.) The underlying technology is for censorship, for control over who can communicate what to whom. The DVD CSS prevents people from making illegal copies -- and also prevents them from making LEGAL copies, by preventing them from making ALL copies. The publishers are trying to take away, by technical means, the rights guaranteed to citizens under the copyright laws of many jurisdictions, including the US.
The decoder source code at the center of the case, called "DeCSS", was created (by third parties, not the defendants) to enable Linux computers to utilize DVD drives and content, since the industry itself failed to produce the necessary drivers for this operating system. DVD CCA alleges rather unbelievably that the source code's real purpose is to enable illegal duplication of DVD discs. The industry association also misleadingly suggests that the DVD medium is simply a vehicle for commercial content delivery, when in fact it is a read-write medium intended to be used as computer storage by computer-using consumers, just like hard drives or writable CDs.
We believe that the industry is mounting this legal attack merely as a charade to discourage the widespread adoption of the legally reverse-engineered information into popular open source software programs. They knew that their "encryption system" was weak and that it would not withstand scrutiny, so they kept it secret as long as possible. Now that it's out in the open, they are wielding legal clubs against anyone who attempts to write about it or use it, to delay the inevitable. If they wanted to keep their information secret, they shouldn't have made millions of copies of it and sold them all over the world. Instead their tactics have been to follow the inevitable disclosure by swift oppression, using large bankrolls to send lawyers against little people. But the little people are part of the Linux community and the Internet community, which have made billions of dollars recently, and are not kindly disposed toward oppression.
More information, including case documents, is available at Chris DiBona's site: http://www.dibona.com/social/dvd/index.shtml
WHAT YOU CAN DO: Show up!
If you're in the SF Bay Area and can make it to the hearing, consider it "Netizen's Dress-Up Day" on Wed., Dec. 29. Meet at the front of the Santa Clara County Superior Court, 191 N. 1st St., San Jose, CA, at 8am PST, dressed sharp, to personally attend the DVD case hearing. It is important that the judge see an unexpectedly large and intent attendance. The hearing will begin at 8:30 in one of Departments 2, 9 or 12 (uncertain at this time).
We will follow the hearing with a press conference outside the courthouse, and many attendees will do a group lunch at nearby Havana Cuba Restaurant.
Watch the wheels of justice grind! Shake hands with the intrepid lawyers who are working hard to protect our rights! Meet interesting defendants risking a lot to excercise their rights!
Please make a positive impression on the judge. Don those expensive, semi-formal duds. Show the court -- by showing up -- that this case matters to more people than just the plaintiff and defendants. Demonstrate that this decision will make a difference to society. That the public and the press are watching, and really do care that the issue is handled well.
We'll have to be quiet and orderly while we're in the courthouse. There will be no questions from the audience (that's us), and no photography there, but the session will be tape-recorded and transcribed, and you can take notes if you like. Remember that courts have strict security these days, so don't bring cameras, or even small pocket knives unless you want them held by entrance guards while you're in the courthouse.
We realize this is very short notice, and that only locals are likely to be able to attend, but this case is moving rapidly toward filing and there is nothing we can do to delay it.
For more information on this gathering, see: http://www.dibona.com/social/dvd/plan/
The real crown will be who busts 1GHZ. It will be interesting because both Intel and AMD are looking at making some serious headway in the design process and 1GHZ will be a landmark for years to come. Look for 1GHZ by early 2nd quarter if we keep up the pace we have been on. Alright show of hands, who 3 years ago with the release of the K6 actually thought AMD would be around this long and this competitive. You in the back with your hand up. Put it down, your lying! Just that much better for the consumer, btw P2 266 gonna upgrade to the Athlon once they release the new motherboards with 133MHZ bus and 4X AGP. =)
All these lawsuits filed by RIAA against say Diamond Multimedia, Napster, Lycos, couldn't these frivilous lawsuits be construed as an organized intimidation effort under the law and thereby be prosecutable under RICO? Just a thought. Having Big 5 record label and RIAA employees get hauled in on federal charges. HA. That would be hilarious Hangtime
I will state that I support Microsoft's appeal to the WTO for withdrawal of tariffs on software products. I will give a quick affirmative stance then I'm going to address the truthfulness or fallacy of the comments here on the board.
First, I believe any form of tariff on a good is in essence a crutch for that country, an isolationist's view of the world and a subscriber to the Archimedes idea of wealth. When tariffs are imposed it means that the consumers within that country are hurt because they are "persuaded" to buy products from that country even if those products have poor performance characteristics and/or quality associated with them. I believe that consumers should be the final judge on the merit of product in the marketplace not government. Anything else is a limit of free will. The only time tariffs should be instituted are when another government has subsidized a company to produce product below costs and dump it on another. At that point, I believe it is the government's job to step in. I say this because there is a restraint on free trade when a government props up an industry by subsidies.
Isolationists such as Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot in my country (USA) like to whine and point fingers at trade agreements such as NAFTA and how they are sucking the jobs out of the United States. You can take these same arguments and find them anywhere else in the world including China. The restriction of trade in essence kills any sort of competitive advantage a country has of getting ahead because they must create all the products that are needed to sustain said country. For instance the United States has the internal resources to make any product in the world including plastic toys. However, it has been found by American business that it is not a fruitful endeavor to produce them in the U.S. because of high overhead costs associated with labor prices. Therefore most all plastic toy making and assembly happen in China instead. Well what does that do for the U.S.? Now more internal resources can be spent on things that are fruitful to make in the U.S. including computers, software, equipment, etc. By recognizing something that you cannot do as well as someone else both countries benefited. For a further example I give you the Research Triangle 25 years ago, a haven of the slogging textile industry, and the border towns along the Mexican side of the line. When NAFTA allowed free trade between the U.S. and Mexico many of these textile mills that used to inhabit the southern U.S. moved to the Mexican border. Why, because it was cheaper and economically more efficient. True, many U.S. cities were stung and never recovered from factory closings, however, RTP noticing the winds of change began to invest more heavily in science and technology industries there making it what it is today one of the foremost regions in the U.S. today. So as an end result we have two regions that in Mexico has become one of the best standard of living in the whole country in a matter or 10 years and RTP which has become a center of technology and industry.
This all ties into the failed Archimedes Idea of Wealth meaning that to become richer, someone must become poorer. What do you think is the best predictor of a nations wealth? Is it how many goods were bought by someone else or is the amount and how many times money-changed hands? If you said the first your wrong. Its not the Balance of Trade that makes a country strong, it's the Balance of Payments i.e. how many times you use money to buy things. Remember money itself was meant to change hands and has no intrinsic value but when capital is used to build things, make things, do things then that is true wealth.
Selected answers for rebuttal
To the Canadian pollution response on the board.
First all, I don't know how that one got moderated up so high but here is the fallacy in the argument. Personally, I could care less as a consumer what happened environmentally in another country. You were right at the end of the article being for free will but went south by saying "But when there is a good reason, then somebody should make it clear that I am doing the world a disservice by purchasing that product." Let the market decide not some bureaucrat. If there a television special comes on and people don't like what they see, let them choose not to buy the product, don't force them not to buy it.
To the response on trying to police transactions
Kudos! What makes anybody here think that many of these small African republics can police their own transactions? Better yet, who here thinks that someone wouldn't come up with a way to sidestep transactions by going through one of these countries? Corruption is a bad thing and while I do believe in helping others I do not believe giving someone a way to harbor crime is an answer.
To the response MS is leading you into a trap
Hey when did we give up our right to regulate countries which are incorporated within our own borders? WE DIDN'T! The WTO can't do one thing to stop the court process of Microsoft. The WTO by its nature is set up to deal with international trade conflicts not internal politics of its member nations so quit acting like a chicken with its head cut-off and read some international policy books.
To the response Re: Evil capitalists and the South American / Cuba connection
The reason capitalism in South American has faltered in those countries revolves around one word, corruption. You have seen it in Brazil, Columbia, Venezuela, Chile, Argentina, Ecuador, etc. Capitalism must have strong court system and mentality that there is fairness in order to thrive. When no fair government regulations exist, self-interest takes over on politicians part and capitalism is hampered. BTW, instead of in South America where there trying to create a middle class and there are poor everywhere, you can goto Cuba where everyone is poor and their no hope for prosperity, least till Castro dies.
To the response of No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no (ok I got the idea)
Go line up with Patrick Buchanan and Ross Perot. Don't you think the reason we had a debate for a few months in Congress both sides of the chamber was to make sure we didn't give up what you speak so passionately about. BTW, no rights were taken away as American citizens. There is not even a guarantee a. the WTO will last that long and b. anyone will follow the rules. The WTO's power is with the fortitude of the nations within it to carryout policy. No one is going to try to screw their biggest trading partner, the United States of America, even China won't. We do 3% of our GDP with China they do 50% with us.
To the response of Thoughts (the one with the polysci class discussion)
What you and your class fail to comprehend two things. One what you talk about is colonialism with manufactured goods. Actually the case is quite reverse from your own discussion. Most corporations moving into other countries i.e. GE, Coca-Cola, Maytag, use companies in other countries already established so that don't have to deal with local customs and regulations. This is the same way when either opening up a manufacturing plant or distributing a product in another country. The VAST majority of companies will not go into another country alone for one very good reason, ITS RISKY! If your interested, I can point in the direction of some articles on this subject. Two, your arguments about software do not take into account the benefit of using more polished software on existing industry. Say the Ivory Coast imposed a 500% tariff on Microsoft Office. Of course, this might spur some local people to get together and try to produce an alternative but wouldn't the better solution be to keep importing Microsoft Office but to also encourage through investment someone to come up with better or add-on software? It's the difference between competing and combining forces.
Well I'm tired and that's enough for the day. Later.
The reason to subscribe to Gartner, IDG or any other profile is to gain insight where it my dangerous and expensive to tread. Unlikely will you see someone be able to implement 4 different SAN solutions and hope for the best one or undertake the building of enterprise server farm to determine if Novell, NT, Solaris or Linux fit their organzation best. As long as people use it much like a book, "Glean information and synthesize", which most people will do. We will not worry.
Why does everyone assume that if in a breakup the said brokenup Microsoft companies won't use the others products? Why mess with a good thing. You make a very good argument that prior code is good and the Microsoft (consumer) benefits from a strategic alliance with Microsoft (Internet technologies). Gonna have the Justice department jump up again and argue that case. Why dont you go back and kill any sort of strategic alliance that has brought value to the world. BTW, current alliances such as Sun and AOL, FedEx and Cisco, Wal-Mart and Proctor and Gamble on and on can be subject to that as well. One area in which consumers have truly benefited from the integration of Microsoft products has been SQL Server and Windows NT. If SQL Server had not risen to promience I guarantee you we would be having this same discussion about Larry Ellison and Oracle and how their scum of the Earth. The low-cost and bang for your buck entrance of MS SQL Server has pushed Oracle, Sybase and every other database vendor. What would we be using now if it werent for them and how much would we be paying? If Netscape had had its way in the beginning we would all be using the Netscape Internet Server that was not any better the NCSA based server and we would pay for it unlike Apache and IIS which are free. Think about it. Later, Hangtime
Slashdot Mirror
/me gets up on the soapbox
If your working on a 3000+ page manuscript and getting paid for it, wouldn't have been smart to find out what version of Word they were using before starting the project? I mean bitch, whine, and moan at Microsoft all you want, but it's like taking a Photoshop file to my printer instead of a TIF or EPS. While there all graphics files, they don't produce the same results and my printer can't use the Photoshop file to print with anyway. So when you say, I'm mad an MS because they changed the format; I say, don't bitch because you didn't do your job. You didn't ask enough questions as a consultant because if you had, you would have found out what version they were running. BTW, Word does suck for the most part when laying out text and graphics that's why I use Pagemaker to do it!
/me comes down from the soap box
Hangtime
When someone asks me what sort of computer they should buy, the first question I ask is "What sort of purposes will you use your computer." So my first question is "How are the schools going to use the laptops."
Laptops are incredibly powerful tools. The keyword here is "tool." Unless curriculum involves, promotes, and enriches the educational experience laptops are worthless. However, if learning and education are being enriched through a dynamic curriculum that involves and uses laptops to their fullest extent then we have a truly useful tool.
So the question becomes "How do these schools plan on using laptops." Is it just for homework, is it for student-initiated learning, or for something else.
My personal belief is that this is a wonderful opportunity to introduce the digital age to many who have not experienced it. But, these are the trailblazers and they must do a good job for the rest of the US. This means integrating and maximizing teaching effectiveness with curriculum in place when the laptops come to promote and create value. This cannot be an instance when "Hey we have these tools, now what do we do with them." This scenario will fuel the fire of anti-technologists in education and keep digital technology from the one group that is the most capable of understanding it quickly.
Hangtime
If you continue to think the way you have always thought, you will continue to get what you have always got. - Anonymous
In many of the comments Im reading here make me think of the almighty hill much of the Slashdot communitity sits on.
Here is a company TRYING to do a good thing and help people out making driver writing easier within the space. No nobody ever claimed that this method of doing things was faster then regular code. One word: DUH! Its running outside the native OS OF COURSE its not going to run as fast. This from the same people that carry on about Transmeta chips and how fast their going to run and blow up Intel.
Listen, everybody step down from their high and mighty and come down to the normal user for the moment.
1. Joe Blow user wants simple running, if you want to keep Linux within the confines of the computer elite then keep this attitude about anything easier coming along. Someone how Grandma likes running Windows 95 because its easy and she doesnt want to recompile a kernel.
2. Keep putting anything down that might actually help the OS that wasn't suggested by Linux or Bruce Perens. There are a lot of smart people out there and if you continually dog good ideas instead of trying to nurture them and WOW maybe improve on them then Linux will become pardon for lack of a better term "an imbred communitity."
3. Not accepting the fact that some stuff will be closed source. Not all companies can make money from support. Reverse engineering of chipsets becomes significantly easier with all the specs laid out in front of you. Think about the company's interest for a moment:
a. Release closed source drivers for Windows and Mac and not worry about competition. Put up with Linux user requests.
b. Release specs to the Communitity and have competitor figure out what I'm doing and move before I can. Whether this is a logical or reasonable arguement doesn't matter.
Personally, I like the UDI idea and think its about time. Whether it works as quickly or not as native code really doesnt matter to me if I can run Solaris, Win2000, RedHat, and Windows 95 on the same system without having to download different sets of drivers for each OS. You can't tell me that this problem cannot be beaten with a little humility, ingenuity and hardwork within the community instead of a "It CANT BE DONE, ITS HARDWARE and NATIVE argument." Hell if Linus can program a processor to emulate x86 code and nice people can get Windows to play in Linux sandbox and vice versa then this can be done. Dance with the same girl you brought and live by the motto "It just works." Worry about upgrading performance later and free your mind. Live by the motto below:
Hangtime
If you continue to think the way you always thought, you will continue to get what you have always got. - Anonymous
Hangtime's collary
If the Linux communitity adopts the same attitude it has had, it will never grow beyond the elitiest of computer users and never pass Apple in marketshare.
Thats the point mwa, Microsoft doesn't do things for the public good if it doesnt benefit the bottom line in some direct or indirect way. That's the point of business. I'm not out for the common good, I'm out to serve customers which in turn gets me money.
Server software: IIS, because you buy NT and you got the HTTP server for free, it was tightly integrated with the rest of the Microsoft products.
Internet Technologies: SQL server and ASP. One of the easiest combinations to use. Use Apache and PHP, its a free market.
Application Development: Name me one IDE that beats Visual Studio across the breath of programs and the depth at which you can go. Yes you can use gmacs or Codewarrior for Linux but it still doesnt have as much functionality.
ch-chuck: John Chambers recently told a crowd that he might just buy up every pre-IPO company in the San Jose area. When did Cisco make an innovation. Intel took the same idea of 3dnow and made its own modifications and bundled it as SSE.
Imitation happens all over the marketplace, not just here.
So there is a different set of rules then buying X company for $500 million dollars rather then take the same concept develop it for $4 million and put the other company out of business right.
You can still get IE on Apple for free.
So you hold up Netscape as the standards bearer? Thats a laugh outside of maybe Opera thats about as close as you will get to true HTML. And guaranteed in your little world with shopping bots they will all be pointed to AOL "partners". Oh you will be able to get to other sites but what you see in front on the tool bar will be AOL preferred.
Replies, replies everywhere
WillAfleck: Perhaps you didn't see the NASDAQ close today, it dropped 7% and with Microsoft dragging it down most of the way. Also the Dow 30 does include Microsoft so considering if Bill did decide to close the doors, I would say a depression (a drop of 30% in more less then 6 months) would be very likely. Second your argument that economies are independent of one another. We are in an interdependent marketplace. If something in Asia happens we feel it here. If something in Washington state happens its felt here. Events do not happen in isolation they happen in the total marketplace.
Black Parrot: Sorry bud, Netscape bombed I went to the processes and killed it.
Mr. Anonymous Coward who called me morally bankrupt: First off I take great offense to your post and find that it was moderated up a point even more offensive. At what point did I say the law shouldn't take its course. I am in fact VERY MUCH FOR RULE OF LAW! The fact is the market is correcting itself, I never said that Microsoft didn't engage in objectionable practices. The fact the entire case was based on Microsoft operating as an monopoly is patently false. See my previous post.
TicTacTux: See Tennessee Valley Authority, it already happens. See above paragraph.
SteveM: There was an economy before 1995 and the Internet. Let's say that the Internet would not have as many connected users today if Microsoft wasn't around. Take it or leave it Microsoft brought a good deal of legitimaticy to the Internet.
nhurm: Then go begin a Linux day like the LUG did at Michigan. Offer your own support if you feel so strongly. Wow, its amazing you have to actually get someone to talk about a product before they will buy it. Microsoft promotes its products, I don't see Redhat promoting its OS. Microsoft does promotion and marketing extremely well. They may not always have the best product but they do get people to buy there product.
The market is doing its job of finding alternatives. I'm sure when Linux becomes just as easy as Windows to use, i.e. my Grandmother doesn't have to hack linuxconf to run, it will become widespread. Until then, people are free to choose their own OS. Microsoft doesn't twist Dell, Compaq, HP's arm (LET ME FINISH) to install Windows, consumers do.
So you believe that because the company is so large it should be outlawed? So any company lets say that reaches a 300 billion dollars in market captialization should be outlawed correct?
I would submit for your approval that Intel and Cisco have FAR more influence on their industries respectively then Microsoft. Of course they have business competing directly against them. Unlike like Microsoft who has MILLIONS of people giving up their free time coding for their platform (Linux), along with a market that is changing so fast as to make its platform near obsolete (PalmOS), as well as traditional competitors who are innovating just as or quicker then they are and can support themselves through hardware sales (Sun and Apple). Let's get right down to it. This is an EXTREMELY competitive market, in fact, I would applaud Microsoft for hanging on this long.
Is the hostility towards Microsoft or is it directed at an envious population of Bill Gates. Love him or hate him, he has made Microsoft into a money generating business. Keyword: Business - A entity that generates value for its stockholders. You could not be a great business if you are not a servant. I would submit that Microsoft has been the ultimate servant.
Think about it, whats the chance that Internet would be what it is today if Microsoft had not made the browser free? Would the Internet be as large a communitity?
Oh how I do attact the anonymous don't want to login show my real self and lose karma cowards. Rather then stoop so low I will rather answer in fact-based commentary.
When I transitioned to the use of Windows NT two years ago, I was still using Netscape. This funny thing started happening, everytime I would pull up a Java based page it would screw my whole system. Not being one who works on things that bomb all the time I began using IE and never went back.
I never said the world would come to an end if Microsoft was spanked, I referred to the end if Microsoft decided to close up shop. Big difference.
Lastly, I see you didn't dispute my assertion that much of the economic growth we have enjoyed can be attributed to Microsoft. Just in case you do decide to come back and dispute that claim. Examine the economic impact that Microsoft has on each phase of our economy before you answer including but not restricted to games, server software, internet related technologies, and application development.
People just want to be able to run games, use their office apps, and browse the Internet. If reliability was a big factor in the buying decision of consumers (it is in departmental and enterprise server sales hence Linux's fast growth in that segment) Microsoft would have been sorely beat by Linux long ago. If ease of use were a factor in sales Apple and MacOS would have trounced Microsoft in the ground and danced on its grave.
Sometimes the factors you cite as the overriding factors in consumer buying criteria are in fact not the real factors.
Hangtime
If you continue to think the way you have always thought, you will continue to get what you have always got. - Anonymous
Alright everyone take a deep breath......that's good. Now lets all think about this rationally for a moment.
1. Microsoft will appeal the decision to the D.C. Court of Appeals, aCourt that has already overturned a Jackson decision (see the 1997 anti-trust suit by the DOJ). Chances are this will happen again and even if the DOJ decides to appeal directly to the Supreme Court, the Court has the right to put it back into the lower courts.
2. MANY people lost money, a lot MORE people will lose money VERY soon. When people start receiving their first and second quarter mutual fund reports, fund managers are going to have to say due to a sell off in technology i.e. Microsoft and every other tech company, we lost 10% of your money this quarter. This translates to anger against the government. Why is the DOJ ripping Microsoft and my stock. Call representatives in Congress and ask what the hell they are doing about this situation. Not a pretty picture.
3. Bad stock markets days like this make things VERY rough for Mr. Gore. Bush will be putting this on Gore for the rest of the campaign. You want an out of control DOJ that sues EVERY company (Smith & Wesson, the Tobacco industry, Microsoft, Glock) and puts your stocks in the toilet: Vote Al Gore. Not a very pleasant thought considering the majority of those who buy stock also vote.
Now, that we have thought about this rationally. Think about what would happen if Bill Gates said "Fine, if you don't want us to innovate then were going to shutdown Microsoft and return all value to the shareholders." Think about how many industries, businesses, individuals are affected by Microsoft financially both directly and indirectly. I would venture a guess that you would see a depression unlike any other since the 1930's. Believe it or not, a great deal of the expansion of the U.S. economy over the past 15 years can be attributed to Microsoft. Whether they did something bad or not doesn't change the fact that you, me, the businesses we work for, the schools we go to, and just about everything around us is effected by Microsoft. You want to run Linux, that's fine. I like running Windows 2000. You wanna use Netscape fine. I like running IE 5 - it has a tendency not to crash my system like Netscape. We both have a choice.
Let the market slug it out, its already making Windows obsolete anyway (anybody heard of Palm and little OSs running on cell phones).
Perhaps you would like to logon and discuss this further, but rather then stoop to name calling I will rather answer your retort. Unfortunately, I did not see that article in the WSJ last week but I definitely will go back and read it since I do have an online account with WSJ.
Actually, I pull most of my information from various readings I do. Internet World, the aforementioned Network World, PC Week, VARBusiness, Reseller News, Interactive Week, Internet Week all of which I look through.
Both of these details have been WIDELY reported within networking trade publications before the WSJ got around to commenting on them. These two facts are very easily verifiable and I would never portray them as my own research. Besides isn't the point to contribute all information so people can make informed decisions. Even taking your comments, how many people actually subscribe to the WSJ on Slashdot. Maybe instead of your witty retort you could have enriched us all with a copy of some of the articles main points instead of snapping back at me. Perhaps I could start sourcing all my comments in MLA format with a Works Cited page for your benefit. Ahhh, but you decided to logon as an Anonymous Coward and not show your true self even though your comments do.
Hangtime
If you continue to think the way you always thought, you will continue to get what you always got. - Anonymous
Actually Cisco makes good products their not great products. Ask anyone in the networking field and more then likely you will find that their are SUPERIOR products to that of Cisco.
Begs the question: Why is Cisco so valuable?
Number one: Cisco does put out a quality product, its just not spectacular so no points lost here like MS.
Number two: "No one lost their job buying Cisco product" mentality pervading the networking arena. Goto www.nwfusion.com or pick up a copy of Network World, an unbiased and very well done trade magazine, their was an article about these thoughts around two months ago. Very well done and will give some insight about this ideas.
Number three: Cisco has gobbled up every company in an area of weakness and made M&A work. Credit CEO John Chambers and his staff on this one. Cisco has got "the buyout" down to an artform, in fact, executives from other companies come and study it. This ability to quickly integrate companies into Cisco has lead to the EXTREMELY low turnover within companies Cisco has bought out. This number hovers around 2% vs a standard in the industry 30%. Leading to number four.
Number four: Great people make Cisco work. Cisco has been able to recruit, hire, buy, and keep its people allowing it to move quickly. With the use of a good corporate culture and outrageous stock options, Cisco can get the people it needs to keep moving.
Words of caution: Cisco makes good gear, they dont make great gear. Refer back to Number two about this idea. Also sticker prices for Cisco gear are generally higher then the industry but many net managers can weasal price breaks out of them. Cisco also has a serious lacking of product towards the network core (ie fiber optics). Of course, Cisco has been on a terror buying up companies to fill this void. Actually Cisco's competitor Lucent has many more products and expertise related to the area thanks to its roots at AT&T.
Food for thought: Cisco 12 billion in revenue last year, Lucent 34 billion
Cisco's market cap almost 540+ Billion
Lucent's 208+ Billion
While I dont believe Cisco will be headed down anytime soon, I do believe there growth will slow, ie dont see 700 Billion next year. However, as a value play Lucent does figure well. Lucent does compete with Cisco in some areas but Lucent has more expertise at the network core then Cisco. With the increasing use of fiber-optics towards the network edge, ie in hubs, routers, into your home maybe =), then Lucent becomes much more valuable.
Last comment: Cisco has become a giant within the networking arena, a benevolent giant. Cisco's reach is extending to nearly every aspect of the networking world, but we here nothing about them as a force. If people were TRULY interested in anti-trust lawsuits Cisco would be sitting in the crosshairs. Why? Because it could be argued that Cisco has more pull in the networking arena then Microsoft has in the software and OS arena. Also, if Microsoft were buying up companies at the rate of Cisco rather then tied down by prosecution, Microsoft would have already passed one trillion by now.
All random thoughts, pick and choose.
These people went into a networking closet, jacked a connection, and routed into their rooms. Think about that one for a second. EVERY university in the U.S. has a policy towards unauthorized use of the network. This one falls into that place. This not a Napster, GNUtella, whatever, this is just plain theft that people got caught trying. For goodness sake's its a 300 FT PIECE OF CABLE!
I agree with the post about bad publicity, and having gone on a tour of OSU, I ended up here at Baylor =) (Fast Ethernet every dorm), OSU dorms are gettoland (except maybe for the Honors dorm).
Thepost talking about per semester fees. Its either $40 or $60 here at Baylor per semester. That ain't bad for Ethernet access. Also having been part of a bid out process for networking its about $300 a port to cover costs. Two ports per room roughly $600 per room (includes man power, cabling, testing, building updating and work, etc.) You can do the math from there but the charges per semester are essentially to take care of support.
Thats a good question. What value does a lawyer bring to the world. Do they somehow make the pie larger for us all or are they a nuissance. When has a lawyer enriched the lives of others with his work without having a reciprocating loss in another party. THERE'S a question for you! Hangtime
Up until about 3 months ago, I did not listen to Trance genre music. I didn't even know what Trance was! However, after downloading an extended set of Paul Oakenfold, I got hooked. Now, I have bought at least $300 worth of CDs containing Oakenfold, Sasha, Nick Warren, Paul van Dyk, as well as many others. Digital downloads like VHS cassesettes before them, EXPAND the pie for companies and industries, it doesnt shrink it. The problem is new business models have to be adopted and used to receive gain from these new opportunities. Scary for record executives approaching 50 and the head of MPAA, a WWII vetetran, Jack Valenti.
Hangtime
The orignial songs didn't curb itself to the censors and neither did the movie. That is what made the movie so good. Dont go rewriting the song now because you dont have to cowtow to the Man!
Where we may see the correlations between 1984 and the coming and present society, I see more corelation between Farenheit 451. Knowledge and books are dangerous things that can't be controled so they are outlawed. A dumb society is a subserviant society. Many of the points brought out by Katz are not new but its good to bring them to a collective summarization. We live in a dangerous time. Our rights are cowtowed more often now then they have been in previous decades.
The reason: People have not come to understand the rights they enjoy on the Internet. What a boom to man-kind the Internet and the open ideas it was formed around. Now people that twiddle around AOL are the ones making decisions. Indeed as in real life, an uninformed, ignorant and generally apathetic citizenery leads to encroached upon rights. Finally, live by the words of Ben Franklin
"Those who would give up an Essential Liberty, to purchase Temporary Security, deserve Liberty nor Security."
Hangtime
Dressed in sheets and tie string with his best John Belushi impression.
"Tunnel, Tunnel, Tunnel, Tunnel, Tunnel"
It was too easy
=)
Hangtime
Background: Eight months ago I was supposed to be working in the Air Force Information Warfare Center at Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio. I don't how many of you know the defense chain as it applies to cyberspace but the AFIWC runs point on all cyberwarfare operations for the United States.
Patriotism? I have had five uncles and my grandfather all serve their country in varying wartime capacities. I do have a sense of patriotism and what my country has given me if was using some of the skills that I have learned well I was going to my darnest to help. BTW, getting a Top Secret security clearance and play with things nobody had ever seen was another perk of the job. I wasn't alone though in feeling that way. The others selected for the internships inside the AFIWC and who I talked to were some of the best and brightest America had to offer including a guy who was weened on Unix and had been working with Linux since 94 with a speciality in penetration, a genetics student, a student at Stanford who could blow the doors off coding as well as others. I'll be the first to admit setting up hardware and networks was why I was there and while not glamourous, I do my job very well.
Unfortunantly, if you are in the military you would know this but most do not the agency in charge of background checks the DSS or Defense Security Service has been so backlogged and mismanaged over the past few years none of us who were told we were interning actually did. That's a bitter spot for me and the others but hopefully it will hold out soon. It does make me angry but given the chance I would still like to go back and have that summer at the AFIWC. I think it would have been a very unique learning experience.
One other thing, those that have feeling hacking for the man is wrong. The world is a very ugly and dangerous place. The Chinese have been developing cyberwarfare and we still dont know the extent of their knowledge. Many small 3rd world countries are throwing a bone to cyberwarfare because its the cheapest way of bringing down the U.S.. You don't need guns or missiles you just need a direct modem link into the U.S. power grid. Their are alot of countries that hate the U.S. and would love to do damage to it especially with the anonimity afforded by electronic warfare so dont bash anyone that wants to protect your family whether it be your family dying in a car accident because the power was turned off as they were going through a light, some maniac who thinks it would be fun to grab credit card numbers from an ecommerce site and use them to finance weapons purchases or any other thing your mind can think of or might not think of will happen eventually. Winn Schwauta one of the foremost experts in the security realm has been predicting an electronic Pearl Harbor for a long time. The only questions remain are will the gun implacements on our side be ready and how much damage will someone do when there not isolated to just Hawaii.
If you would like to read about the trials and tribulations of the DSS, you can read the following article in the archives of USA Today
Goto the archives and use the keyword search
security clearance and military and backlog
Goto the 13K document on 06-03-1999 Sorry it only keeps the last search you did in memory
Trade Group Files Suit Against All Identifiable Posters of or Linkers to
Linux DVD Hack
EFF Assembling Legal Team to Defend Targets
The movie industry, through its recently activiated Digital Video Disc
Content Control Association (DVD CCA), a trade organization
controlling DVD patents, has filed a lawsuit in California against
dozens of people around the world. who have published information, or
links to information, about the DVD Content Scrambling System (CSS),
on the Internet. As many as 500 defendants could eventually be named.
The DVD CCA claims that the defendants are violating the association's
trade secrets and other intellectual property rights by posting the
source code of (or simply having links to other sites with the source
code of) a legally reverse-engineered means of decoding DVD discs. An
important hearing in the case has been scheduled for tomorrow, Wed.,
Dec. 29, 1999.
Tomorrow's hearing is on whether the judge should issue a temporary
restraining order against the defendants, who have been publishing
information about the DVD content scrambling system in various
locations in the US and worldwide. Any such order, if issued, would
only apply for a few weeks, while the parties argued in court about
whether a permanent injunction should restrict these defendants from
publishing this information for the duration of the court case.
It is EFF's opinion that this lawsuit is an attempt to architect law
to favor a particular business model at the expense of free
expression. It is an affront to the First Amendment (and UN human
rights accords) because the information the programmers posted is
legal. EFF also objects to the DVD CCA's attempt to blur the
distinction between posting material on one's own Web site and merely
linking to it (i.e., providing directions to it) elsewhere.
These defendant individuals have been publishing legitimate, protected
speech, including software, textual descriptions, and discussions of
the DVD CSS. This speech is in no way copied or acquired from the DVD
CCA's trade-secret documents. Copyrights do not give anyone any rights
in "ideas", only in the exact form in which they are expressed.
Trade-secret law only controls people who agreed to keep it secret and
have been told the secret; other people remain free to independently
discover the secret. The ideas being discussed and implemented were
apparently extracted by having an engineer study a DVD product
("reverse engineering it"), which is a legal activity that is not
restricted by any laws in most jurisdictions.
The DVD CCA is trying to shut these speakers down by starting with the
false assumption that reverse engineering is illegal. It is not. If,
for example, the DVD reverse engineering had been done in Santa Clara,
it would be legal under the 9th Circuit Court case Sega v. Accolade.
See also the 1998 US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which provides
specifically in section 1201(f) that reverse engineering of an
copy-protection encryption system is legal for "interoperability",
which is why it was done in this case.
The case itself is organized as a "theft of trade secrets" case; it
doesn't use the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and doesn't appear to
rely otherwise on copyright law. The root of the case is their
allegation that the original reverse-engineering of the DVD CSS system
was "improper" (paragraph 18), "unauthorized" (para. 20), "wrongfully
appropriating proprietary trade secrets" (para. 21), "unauthorized use
of proprietary CSS information, which was illegally "hacked" (para.
22). However, they provide no proof of these allegations, and they are
unlikely to be true. If the original reverse-engineering was legal,
which we believe is true, then the subsequent republication of the
information is also legal, and the case is merely a tool to harass
people exercising their legal rights.
EFF's interest in the case is to protect reverse engineering as part
of First Amendment protected speech. EFF legal counsel Robin Gross,
and pro-bono counsel Allonn Levy of Huber, Samuelson will be at Santa
Clara Superior Court tomorrow morning to represent at least two
defendants, Chris DiBona and Andrew Bunner. EFF co-founder John
Gilmore will also attend at the hearing tomorrow. EFF will at minimum
provide "stop-gap" defense to avoid a temporary restraining order
against the defendants. Following the hearing, EFF will assess the
situation and the level of our involvement.
EFF is committed to ensuring that individuals rights are protected,
and free speech is a fundamental right. It would be a poor public
policy to allow intellectual property owners to expand their property
at the expense of free speech -- particularly when the speech in
question elucidates how companies constrain the distribution of other
free expression.
The technology at issue here is the DVD Content Scrambling System
(CSS), a technical effort to prevent people who have legally purchased
a DVD from making completely legal copies of it for their own use. It
is legal ("fair use") for people to make personal copies of
copyrighted material available to them. (See, e.g., the Supreme
Court's 1984 decision in the "Betamax" case, Sony Corp. v. Universal
City Studios. In that case a movie studio was trying to have all VCR's
banned from the United States because of the potential to "pirate"
valuable movies -- just as in the current case they are attempting to
have all reverse-engineered decoders of DVDs banned. The Supreme Court
ruled that if VCR's have even a single non-infringing use, they cannot
be banned. It is clear that the reverse-engineered DVD CSS has a
non-infringing use, the viewing of DVDs on the Linux operating
system.) The underlying technology is for censorship, for control over
who can communicate what to whom. The DVD CSS prevents people from
making illegal copies -- and also prevents them from making LEGAL
copies, by preventing them from making ALL copies. The publishers are
trying to take away, by technical means, the rights guaranteed to
citizens under the copyright laws of many jurisdictions, including the
US.
The decoder source code at the center of the case, called "DeCSS", was
created (by third parties, not the defendants) to enable Linux
computers to utilize DVD drives and content, since the industry itself
failed to produce the necessary drivers for this operating system. DVD
CCA alleges rather unbelievably that the source code's real purpose is
to enable illegal duplication of DVD discs. The industry association
also misleadingly suggests that the DVD medium is simply a vehicle for
commercial content delivery, when in fact it is a read-write medium
intended to be used as computer storage by computer-using consumers,
just like hard drives or writable CDs.
We believe that the industry is mounting this legal attack merely as a
charade to discourage the widespread adoption of the legally
reverse-engineered information into popular open source software
programs. They knew that their "encryption system" was weak and that
it would not withstand scrutiny, so they kept it secret as long as
possible. Now that it's out in the open, they are wielding legal clubs
against anyone who attempts to write about it or use it, to delay the
inevitable. If they wanted to keep their information secret, they
shouldn't have made millions of copies of it and sold them all over
the world. Instead their tactics have been to follow the inevitable
disclosure by swift oppression, using large bankrolls to send lawyers
against little people. But the little people are part of the Linux
community and the Internet community, which have made billions of
dollars recently, and are not kindly disposed toward oppression.
More information, including case documents, is available at Chris
DiBona's site: http://www.dibona.com/social/dvd/index.shtml
WHAT YOU CAN DO: Show up!
If you're in the SF Bay Area and can make it to the hearing, consider
it "Netizen's Dress-Up Day" on Wed., Dec. 29. Meet at the front of the
Santa Clara County Superior Court, 191 N. 1st St., San Jose, CA, at
8am PST, dressed sharp, to personally attend the DVD case hearing. It
is important that the judge see an unexpectedly large and intent
attendance. The hearing will begin at 8:30 in one of Departments 2, 9
or 12 (uncertain at this time).
We will follow the hearing with a press conference outside the
courthouse, and many attendees will do a group lunch at nearby Havana
Cuba Restaurant.
Watch the wheels of justice grind! Shake hands with the intrepid
lawyers who are working hard to protect our rights! Meet interesting
defendants risking a lot to excercise their rights!
Please make a positive impression on the judge. Don those expensive,
semi-formal duds. Show the court -- by showing up -- that this case
matters to more people than just the plaintiff and defendants.
Demonstrate that this decision will make a difference to society. That
the public and the press are watching, and really do care that the
issue is handled well.
We'll have to be quiet and orderly while we're in the courthouse.
There will be no questions from the audience (that's us), and no
photography there, but the session will be tape-recorded and
transcribed, and you can take notes if you like. Remember that courts
have strict security these days, so don't bring cameras, or even small
pocket knives unless you want them held by entrance guards while
you're in the courthouse.
We realize this is very short notice, and that only locals are likely
to be able to attend, but this case is moving rapidly toward filing
and there is nothing we can do to delay it.
For more information on this gathering, see:
http://www.dibona.com/social/dvd/plan/
The real crown will be who busts 1GHZ. It will be interesting because both Intel and AMD are looking at making some serious headway in the design process and 1GHZ will be a landmark for years to come. Look for 1GHZ by early 2nd quarter if we keep up the pace we have been on. Alright show of hands, who 3 years ago with the release of the K6 actually thought AMD would be around this long and this competitive. You in the back with your hand up. Put it down, your lying! Just that much better for the consumer, btw P2 266 gonna upgrade to the Athlon once they release the new motherboards with 133MHZ bus and 4X AGP. =)
Hangtime
All these lawsuits filed by RIAA against say Diamond Multimedia, Napster, Lycos, couldn't these frivilous lawsuits be construed as an organized intimidation effort under the law and thereby be prosecutable under RICO? Just a thought. Having Big 5 record label and RIAA employees get hauled in on federal charges. HA. That would be hilarious Hangtime
A synopsis
I will state that I support Microsoft's appeal to the WTO for withdrawal of tariffs on software products. I will give a quick affirmative stance then I'm going to address the truthfulness or fallacy of the comments here on the board.
First, I believe any form of tariff on a good is in essence a crutch for that country, an isolationist's view of the world and a subscriber to the Archimedes idea of wealth. When tariffs are imposed it means that the consumers within that country are hurt because they are "persuaded" to buy products from that country even if those products have poor performance characteristics and/or quality associated with them. I believe that consumers should be the final judge on the merit of product in the marketplace not government. Anything else is a limit of free will. The only time tariffs should be instituted are when another government has subsidized a company to produce product below costs and dump it on another. At that point, I believe it is the government's job to step in. I say this because there is a restraint on free trade when a government props up an industry by subsidies.
Isolationists such as Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot in my country (USA) like to whine and point fingers at trade agreements such as NAFTA and how they are sucking the jobs out of the United States. You can take these same arguments and find them anywhere else in the world including China. The restriction of trade in essence kills any sort of competitive advantage a country has of getting ahead because they must create all the products that are needed to sustain said country. For instance the United States has the internal resources to make any product in the world including plastic toys. However, it has been found by American business that it is not a fruitful endeavor to produce them in the U.S. because of high overhead costs associated with labor prices. Therefore most all plastic toy making and assembly happen in China instead. Well what does that do for the U.S.? Now more internal resources can be spent on things that are fruitful to make in the U.S. including computers, software, equipment, etc. By recognizing something that you cannot do as well as someone else both countries benefited. For a further example I give you the Research Triangle 25 years ago, a haven of the slogging textile industry, and the border towns along the Mexican side of the line. When NAFTA allowed free trade between the U.S. and Mexico many of these textile mills that used to inhabit the southern U.S. moved to the Mexican border. Why, because it was cheaper and economically more efficient. True, many U.S. cities were stung and never recovered from factory closings, however, RTP noticing the winds of change began to invest more heavily in science and technology industries there making it what it is today one of the foremost regions in the U.S. today. So as an end result we have two regions that in Mexico has become one of the best standard of living in the whole country in a matter or 10 years and RTP which has become a center of technology and industry.
This all ties into the failed Archimedes Idea of Wealth meaning that to become richer, someone must become poorer. What do you think is the best predictor of a nations wealth? Is it how many goods were bought by someone else or is the amount and how many times money-changed hands? If you said the first your wrong. Its not the Balance of Trade that makes a country strong, it's the Balance of Payments i.e. how many times you use money to buy things. Remember money itself was meant to change hands and has no intrinsic value but when capital is used to build things, make things, do things then that is true wealth.
Selected answers for rebuttal
To the Canadian pollution response on the board.
First all, I don't know how that one got moderated up so high but here is the fallacy in the argument. Personally, I could care less as a consumer what happened environmentally in another country. You were right at the end of the article being for free will but went south by saying "But when there is a good reason, then somebody should make it clear that I am doing the world a disservice by purchasing that product." Let the market decide not some bureaucrat. If there a television special comes on and people don't like what they see, let them choose not to buy the product, don't force them not to buy it.
To the response on trying to police transactions
Kudos! What makes anybody here think that many of these small African republics can police their own transactions? Better yet, who here thinks that someone wouldn't come up with a way to sidestep transactions by going through one of these countries? Corruption is a bad thing and while I do believe in helping others I do not believe giving someone a way to harbor crime is an answer.
To the response MS is leading you into a trap
Hey when did we give up our right to regulate countries which are incorporated within our own borders? WE DIDN'T! The WTO can't do one thing to stop the court process of Microsoft. The WTO by its nature is set up to deal with international trade conflicts not internal politics of its member nations so quit acting like a chicken with its head cut-off and read some international policy books.
To the response Re: Evil capitalists and the South American / Cuba connection
The reason capitalism in South American has faltered in those countries revolves around one word, corruption. You have seen it in Brazil, Columbia, Venezuela, Chile, Argentina, Ecuador, etc. Capitalism must have strong court system and mentality that there is fairness in order to thrive. When no fair government regulations exist, self-interest takes over on politicians part and capitalism is hampered. BTW, instead of in South America where there trying to create a middle class and there are poor everywhere, you can goto Cuba where everyone is poor and their no hope for prosperity, least till Castro dies.
To the response of No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no (ok I got the idea)
Go line up with Patrick Buchanan and Ross Perot. Don't you think the reason we had a debate for a few months in Congress both sides of the chamber was to make sure we didn't give up what you speak so passionately about. BTW, no rights were taken away as American citizens. There is not even a guarantee a. the WTO will last that long and b. anyone will follow the rules. The WTO's power is with the fortitude of the nations within it to carryout policy. No one is going to try to screw their biggest trading partner, the United States of America, even China won't. We do 3% of our GDP with China they do 50% with us.
To the response of Thoughts (the one with the polysci class discussion)
What you and your class fail to comprehend two things. One what you talk about is colonialism with manufactured goods. Actually the case is quite reverse from your own discussion. Most corporations moving into other countries i.e. GE, Coca-Cola, Maytag, use companies in other countries already established so that don't have to deal with local customs and regulations. This is the same way when either opening up a manufacturing plant or distributing a product in another country. The VAST majority of companies will not go into another country alone for one very good reason, ITS RISKY! If your interested, I can point in the direction of some articles on this subject. Two, your arguments about software do not take into account the benefit of using more polished software on existing industry. Say the Ivory Coast imposed a 500% tariff on Microsoft Office. Of course, this might spur some local people to get together and try to produce an alternative but wouldn't the better solution be to keep importing Microsoft Office but to also encourage through investment someone to come up with better or add-on software? It's the difference between competing and combining forces.
Well I'm tired and that's enough for the day.
Later.
The reason to subscribe to Gartner, IDG or any other profile is to gain insight where it my dangerous and expensive to tread. Unlikely will you see someone be able to implement 4 different SAN solutions and hope for the best one or undertake the building of enterprise server farm to determine if Novell, NT, Solaris or Linux fit their organzation best. As long as people use it much like a book, "Glean information and synthesize", which most people will do. We will not worry.
Hangtime
Why does everyone assume that if in a breakup the said brokenup Microsoft companies won't use the others products? Why mess with a good thing. You make a very good argument that prior code is good and the Microsoft (consumer) benefits from a strategic alliance with Microsoft (Internet technologies). Gonna have the Justice department jump up again and argue that case. Why dont you go back and kill any sort of strategic alliance that has brought value to the world. BTW, current alliances such as Sun and AOL, FedEx and Cisco, Wal-Mart and Proctor and Gamble on and on can be subject to that as well. One area in which consumers have truly benefited from the integration of Microsoft products has been SQL Server and Windows NT. If SQL Server had not risen to promience I guarantee you we would be having this same discussion about Larry Ellison and Oracle and how their scum of the Earth. The low-cost and bang for your buck entrance of MS SQL Server has pushed Oracle, Sybase and every other database vendor. What would we be using now if it werent for them and how much would we be paying? If Netscape had had its way in the beginning we would all be using the Netscape Internet Server that was not any better the NCSA based server and we would pay for it unlike Apache and IIS which are free. Think about it. Later, Hangtime