Correct me if I am wrong.. but doesn't bitkeeper also involve use of bitkeepers servers to store your repository? Isn't this about more than a software license? It's about a service being provided.. a service that costs money to run.
Stating who can use their service for free within limited terms.. what's so bad about that? You are free to use something else.
So if an American drives to mexico for the weekend, breaks into a dozen computers in the US, steals tons of cool data, spreads lots of copyrighted software around, etcetera... then returns to the US...
The company who's computers he broke into cannot have him charged with a crime, because he was not on US soil when he did it? They have to take it up with the Mexican authorities, who would have to extradite, etc....?
Obviously, the majority of their users don't have problems, or else they would not be so popular. Butg consider this:
To err on the side of caution is one thing... but to hold up funds for months on end for any reason they want, something even a bank could not do without a court order, is another.
Not only will they freeze an account so you can't withdraw your funds, but they will still permit that account to *accept* new payments... so you can have customers paying you for things and you can't refund their money or otherwise touch it.
One thing that I always thought was smart was how Ebay stayed out of the financial end of things. They were providing a listing service; actual payment and whatnot, unlike with a real life auction house, were up to the buyer and seller.
now ebay is involving themselves in the financial end as well... this will make things more complicated.
Look at something like the need for search warrants.
If the cops are chasing you, and you run into your house, they can chase you into the house. They can also use what they find IN That house, in plain sight anyway, as evidence against you (maybe you were boosting car stereos). You cannot say "beat it cop, go get a warrant" because they know that catching you NOW is imperative.
The intent of a warrant is to ensure that the police do not just randomly search people to see what crimes they may have committed.
"If you're not an American citizen and you are arrested in the United States, you aren't guaranteed a jury of your peers, etc."
Pardon? The right to due process applies to all people in the US, regardless of their nationality or even whether they are in the country legally or not.
How you describe things is how things work now. You obey the laws of the country you are in. US law does not follow you wherever you go.
But if you fly to China, copy 30000 Britney Spears CDs, and then ship them to the US, you can bet the US courts will charge you with copyright violation, and arrest your ass if it ends up back on US soil. Why? Because your actions partly took place in the US.
If oyu are in the US, and you break into computers in, say, the UK.. and then you decide to vacation in the UK, are you saying the Brits shouldn't be able to charge you?
When they broke into American computers and stole American data form them, they were committing illegal acts IN THE UNITED STATES. The fact that they were physically in Russia is moot. Let's pretend they were in a country where this activity was legal. Their home country would never extradite.. but the US could STILL charge them under it's own legal system, and deal with them should they set foot on US soil. This is not simply a case of someone doing something in a foreign land that would have been illegal if it was happening in the US, it WAS happening in the US.
You are responsible for your actions. If I go to one country, do something illegal, and leave, and this is not a crime in my own country, my own country should not extradite me. However, should I ever end up in that foreign country again, why should I deserve protection?
Who is comparing them to windows? I'm comparing them to every other linux distribution out there. Most of them have other ways to install, via ftp, nfs, http, afs, etcetera.. with versatile boot disks.
As for windows, Microsoft has plenty of documents for how to install over a network.
So in other words.. The fact that it may be breaking a law in Russia is moot, the case is in the United States, and they were not breaking any US law in acquiring the evidence? something like that?
Realize that having your credit card number stolen is the issuing banks problems, and not really yours.
If you read your cardholder agreement, you will most likely find that you are not responsible for fraudulent use of the card UNLESS the *card* is stolen, and then only before you report it, and even then, damages are limited.
The onus is on the merchant to prove that the charges are authorized. Always.
I'm not saying credit card theft is no big deal.. but you have to remember where the responsibility lies. It's not like having your savings account drained. It's just a nuisance.
Slashdot Mirror
"If the GNU people suddenly decided that their software was no longer open source and changed their licensing"
That's fine. It would have no effect on the current GPL'd toolsets we are using now. They can't revoke the license.
Correct me if I am wrong.. but doesn't bitkeeper also involve use of bitkeepers servers to store your repository? Isn't this about more than a software license? It's about a service being provided.. a service that costs money to run.
Stating who can use their service for free within limited terms.. what's so bad about that? You are free to use something else.
between a "competing product" and "competing softwre?"
It would seem one is the same as the other.
So if an American drives to mexico for the weekend, breaks into a dozen computers in the US, steals tons of cool data, spreads lots of copyrighted software around, etcetera...
then returns to the US...
The company who's computers he broke into cannot have him charged with a crime, because he was not on US soil when he did it? They have to take it up with the Mexican authorities, who would have to extradite, etc....?
Obviously, the majority of their users don't have problems, or else they would not be so popular. Butg consider this:
... but to hold up funds for months on end for any reason they want, something even a bank could not do without a court order, is another.
To err on the side of caution is one thing
Not only will they freeze an account so you can't withdraw your funds, but they will still permit that account to *accept* new payments... so you can have customers paying you for things and you can't refund their money or otherwise touch it.
Not really a case mod, not really warranty voiding.
He just mounted some neon lights inside the case to add some color.
One thing that I always thought was smart was how Ebay stayed out of the financial end of things. They were providing a listing service; actual payment and whatnot, unlike with a real life auction house, were up to the buyer and seller.
now ebay is involving themselves in the financial end as well... this will make things more complicated.
You've never had thousands of dollars held for weeks on end because someone made some silly complaint.
Look at something like the need for search warrants.
If the cops are chasing you, and you run into your house, they can chase you into the house. They can also use what they find IN That house, in plain sight anyway, as evidence against you (maybe you were boosting car stereos). You cannot say "beat it cop, go get a warrant" because they know that catching you NOW is imperative.
The intent of a warrant is to ensure that the police do not just randomly search people to see what crimes they may have committed.
In many ways, this is the digital equivalent.
"If you're not an American citizen and you are arrested in the United States, you aren't guaranteed a jury of your peers, etc."
Pardon? The right to due process applies to all people in the US, regardless of their nationality or even whether they are in the country legally or not.
Does the constitution say "citizens" somewhere?
While that may be true..
Gaining unauthorized access to a computer system without a court order is a crime.
So if I break into computers in russia, the US can't prosecute me? I'm not commiting a crime?
How you describe things is how things work now.
You obey the laws of the country you are in. US law does not follow you wherever you go.
But if you fly to China, copy 30000 Britney Spears CDs, and then ship them to the US, you can bet the US courts will charge you with copyright violation, and arrest your ass if it ends up back on US soil. Why? Because your actions partly took place in the US.
If oyu are in the US, and you break into computers in, say, the UK.. and then you decide to vacation in the UK, are you saying the Brits shouldn't be able to charge you?
But I have to point out.
When they broke into American computers and stole American data form them, they were committing illegal acts IN THE UNITED STATES. The fact that they were physically in Russia is moot. Let's pretend they were in a country where this activity was legal. Their home country would never extradite.. but the US could STILL charge them under it's own legal system, and deal with them should they set foot on US soil.
This is not simply a case of someone doing something in a foreign land that would have been illegal if it was happening in the US, it WAS happening in the US.
You are responsible for your actions. If I go to one country, do something illegal, and leave, and this is not a crime in my own country, my own country should not extradite me. However, should I ever end up in that foreign country again, why should I deserve protection?
They did commit a crime in the US. They broke into US computer systems and stole data from the US.
Who is comparing them to windows? I'm comparing them to every other linux distribution out there.
Most of them have other ways to install, via ftp, nfs, http, afs, etcetera.. with versatile boot disks.
As for windows, Microsoft has plenty of documents for how to install over a network.
Okay.. I stand corrected. I thought I read that they were extradited. Perhaps it was bad reporting.
Not fair? Please.
They lured them to the US for a job interview, so they could get their passwords, then SENT THEM BACK TO RUSSIA.
Then they gathered evidence using the passwords they got.
THEN they had them extradited, officially.
I don't see what's not fair abou that. (and hey, I'm normally the first to criticize the US).
It was just smart.
Did you?
They lured them to the US using a fake job interview, then sent them home.
The interview was to gather information needed to gather evidence.
The gathered more evidence, and then HAD THEM EXTRADITED
So in other words..
The fact that it may be breaking a law in Russia is moot, the case is in the United States, and they were not breaking any US law in acquiring the evidence? something like that?
Realize that having your credit card number stolen is the issuing banks problems, and not really yours.
If you read your cardholder agreement, you will most likely find that you are not responsible for fraudulent use of the card UNLESS the *card* is stolen, and then only before you report it, and even then, damages are limited.
The onus is on the merchant to prove that the charges are authorized. Always.
I'm not saying credit card theft is no big deal.. but you have to remember where the responsibility lies. It's not like having your savings account drained. It's just a nuisance.
See, right away, that's part of the problem.
I have to resort to a forum for something as common and obvious as how to make boot disks for it?
They talk about being a close-to-them-metal distribution.. yet their install procedure is very narrow minded.
What if I don't have a cdrom? How do I install gentoo?
Sony vaio laptop, no cdrom, USB floppy drive.
If it had boot floppies, I could rig something up.. but it seems to assume you have a cdrom that you can boot from.
But there are other search sites out there who do look at meta tags, and having a listing with them improves your google rating.
If your business depends primarily on search engines to draw clients to your site, you still benefit from appropriate keyword meta tags.
Seriously. Well put man.
The point is that emacs is still emacs.
It's version 1.21 now, but we just call it '21'.