> So in conclusion, are we ever going to see PNG as a widespread use format...no. The only problem it solved was one of not using GIF and come 11 days from now, its primary reason for existence will be gone.
Interesting claim. My tools will create either PNG or GIF, and I've standardized on GIF for all my Web pages anyway.
Oh, and I use them in my LaTeX documents too. Exact same image on Web, slide, paper, or poster.
For some of us they aren't going away anytime soon.
> but that seems to have been forgotten, along with [...] and "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Every law restricting non-criminals from owning certain types of weapons.
Where did you get the restriction to non-criminals from the Constitution? Are you saying that the Bill of Rights is open to interpretation based on common sense and the needs of society?
> We have emarked full tilt into the arena of socialism. Its been slow in coming, but since 9/11 we have raced towards it as fast as we can, with the publics support. There is still a ways to go, but the momentum is there.. its a matter of ( short ) time.
I'm curious what your definition of 'socialism' is. According to ordinary definitions we've had some (limited) socialist institutions at least since the Great Depression. If anything our present Administration and Congress are trying to roll them back rather than increase them.
What has greatly accelerated since 9/11 is the steady increase in police powers (but that going back at least to the beginning on the War on Drugs) and tendancy toward non-representative government (old as time, but very popular with our current regime even before 9/11).
> The question I have is whether this is 80 lines of contiguous code, or if it's a line here and there. If it's just here and there, then it's quite easy for them to find matches, heck I bet it'd be pretty easy to find some comments that match too.
> Has anybody ever heard about anyone who actually fall for this scam?
Yes, a year or so ago a US law firm took one of their employees to court for embezzeling millions of dollars in a futile attempt to play it out to the pay-off.
I have read that lots of other people have been bitten by it too, though perhaps not quite so hard.
> SCO seems to think they'll either be able to make Linux go away or force everyone using Linux to buy an SCO license.
Or the third option - the most probable one IMO - they think they can arrange a buyout or make their stock bolt, providing the funds for a nice set of golden parachutes.
There is absolutely no way they can take IBM to court without revealing the relevant lines of code to IBM's lawyers, and at that point all the secrecy will become moot. Ergo, they are up to something that they expect to pay off before the case gets to court. Ergo, it's a golden parachute acquisition plan.
I suspect the SEC will need to look into this before its over with.
> Seriously, if Microsoft doesn't have the power/ability to make a secure/robust OS, what makes you think they have the ability to pull of this complex Machiavellian stunt? =)
Because history shows that they're crappy at producting software and superb at pulling off Machiavellian stunts.
> Mensa member, beware of the large swollen head and general "I am better than you" attitude.
Mensa membership apparently doesn't require you to be smart enough to know that you shouldn't brag about your IQ in a forum with ~ half a million readers.
> Ok, for the sake of discussion, let's assume that the 80 lines were lifted and it is deemed improper. I think we have a long way to go before that is established as fact, but if it is.....
...how many hours will it take the kernel hackers to replace 80 lines of code?
> the way that SCO has acted at every stage simply doesn't add up to a company that's playing this thing straight.
If they were in fact trying to protect their IP then the first thing that would have happened is that kernel.org would have been hit with a cease-n-desist.
Bank on it: once they've established the 'standard' they'll start lobbying to have it made law. Disclosing a vulnerability that has been around for a couple of years will get you labeled as a terrorist.
> It might piss off these companies, but anyone who really cares about security would realize that giving the vendors the exclusive right to disclose flaws (regardless how much time has passed or how many systems have been compromised) prevents people from making an informed decision to yank these programs until a solution is identified.
These people aren't interested in your informed decisions; they're interested in suppressing bad PR so they can keep selling crappy software.
Slashdot Mirror
> For a second there, I thought it said "Mobile Phones Disrupt Ashcroft." And I was ALL SET take my cell phone down to the White House!
Send him a pic of Lady Of Justice With The Exposed Tit and he'll be disrupted for days.
> Everyone should expect to see small things like this begin to trickle out of Microsoft over the coming few years
In addition to the big things that have already been happening?
> Since MS is declared a Destructive Monopoly in the courts all Lindows has to do is the following.
> 1) Gather Information on what MS is doing to Stifle Competition.
> 2) Sue.
> 3) Win.
> It's That Simple.
You left out -
0) Get a different party elected to the White House.
Maybe we should pool our resources so we can offer a cheap version of Linux to people who buy systems with Windows XP!
> Until IE fully supports the format, it might as well be dead.
Why let one vendor's crappy software hold us back?
> So in conclusion, are we ever going to see PNG as a widespread use format...no. The only problem it solved was one of not using GIF and come 11 days from now, its primary reason for existence will be gone.
Interesting claim. My tools will create either PNG or GIF, and I've standardized on GIF for all my Web pages anyway.
Oh, and I use them in my LaTeX documents too. Exact same image on Web, slide, paper, or poster.
For some of us they aren't going away anytime soon.
> but that seems to have been forgotten, along with [...] and "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Every law restricting non-criminals from owning certain types of weapons.
Where did you get the restriction to non-criminals from the Constitution? Are you saying that the Bill of Rights is open to interpretation based on common sense and the needs of society?
> We have emarked full tilt into the arena of socialism. Its been slow in coming, but since 9/11 we have raced towards it as fast as we can, with the publics support. There is still a ways to go, but the momentum is there.. its a matter of ( short ) time.
I'm curious what your definition of 'socialism' is. According to ordinary definitions we've had some (limited) socialist institutions at least since the Great Depression. If anything our present Administration and Congress are trying to roll them back rather than increase them.
What has greatly accelerated since 9/11 is the steady increase in police powers (but that going back at least to the beginning on the War on Drugs) and tendancy toward non-representative government (old as time, but very popular with our current regime even before 9/11).
> And here I thought ESR was a level-headed, objective advocate of OSS.
Eric's going to be the star of the upcoming Hackers Gone Wild! video.
> > Okay, I'll admit I might have let out a slight "heh".
> [...] Plus, I had refreshed and noticed the story just 5 minutes after it came up, so I managed to skate in right ahead of the
Made you let out a "heh" too, eh?
> The question I have is whether this is 80 lines of contiguous code, or if it's a line here and there. If it's just here and there, then it's quite easy for them to find matches, heck I bet it'd be pretty easy to find some comments that match too.
You mean like -
> Has anybody ever heard about anyone who actually fall for this scam?
Yes, a year or so ago a US law firm took one of their employees to court for embezzeling millions of dollars in a futile attempt to play it out to the pay-off.
I have read that lots of other people have been bitten by it too, though perhaps not quite so hard.
> SCO seems to think they'll either be able to make Linux go away or force everyone using Linux to buy an SCO license.
Or the third option - the most probable one IMO - they think they can arrange a buyout or make their stock bolt, providing the funds for a nice set of golden parachutes.
There is absolutely no way they can take IBM to court without revealing the relevant lines of code to IBM's lawyers, and at that point all the secrecy will become moot. Ergo, they are up to something that they expect to pay off before the case gets to court. Ergo, it's a golden parachute acquisition plan.
I suspect the SEC will need to look into this before its over with.
> Seriously, if Microsoft doesn't have the power/ability to make a secure/robust OS, what makes you think they have the ability to pull of this complex Machiavellian stunt? =)
Because history shows that they're crappy at producting software and superb at pulling off Machiavellian stunts.
> > Mensa member, beware of the high IQ
> Mensa member, beware of the large swollen head and general "I am better than you" attitude.
Mensa membership apparently doesn't require you to be smart enough to know that you shouldn't brag about your IQ in a forum with ~ half a million readers.
Maybe someone at SCO ran The Bible Code on the Linux source and found the words "Linux, SCO, rip-off".
> Weve moveed appx 500 seats so fa.
> They prefer to call it an easter egg.
No, they prefer to think of it as a lottery ticket.
> Ok, for the sake of discussion, let's assume that the 80 lines were lifted and it is deemed improper. I think we have a long way to go before that is established as fact, but if it is.....
> the way that SCO has acted at every stage simply doesn't add up to a company that's playing this thing straight.
If they were in fact trying to protect their IP then the first thing that would have happened is that kernel.org would have been hit with a cease-n-desist.
This is another kind of game altogether.
>
It's written in perl.
> The bulk of it is 419 spam, which is reported to be largely done by hand by itinerant Nigerians.
Itinerants? I only get it from ambasadors, generals, and other important public officials.
> Why would anyone follow these guidelines?
Bank on it: once they've established the 'standard' they'll start lobbying to have it made law. Disclosing a vulnerability that has been around for a couple of years will get you labeled as a terrorist.
> It might piss off these companies, but anyone who really cares about security would realize that giving the vendors the exclusive right to disclose flaws (regardless how much time has passed or how many systems have been compromised) prevents people from making an informed decision to yank these programs until a solution is identified.
These people aren't interested in your informed decisions; they're interested in suppressing bad PR so they can keep selling crappy software.
IOW, it's back to the bad old days when Microsoft didn't bother trying to fix exploitable software at all.
> For those about to pun, get on the highway to hell.
I was already there.