We didn't get where we are today by making money off OSS. OSS exists because of what it is.. not because someone can make money off it.
OSS sets a nice baseline, and those who want to sell software on the open market generally have to do better than OSS. That's MY ideal scenario. There will always be room for someone to do it better, faster.. but a good OSS baseline will 1) force informal standards 2) set a standard for performance/reliability.
The point, I think, is that, regardless of the method used, a DDOS is a deliberate action taken by an individual/group to disrupt a service. This is just plain wrong. If it's not intentional.. it's not as wrong.
example: You are unloading your moving van, and don't notice that you ahve blocked my driveway. Are you guilty of blocking my free movement? Not exactly.. it's an accident.
But.. if you park a big truck in front of my driveway with the express purpose of keeping my car in the driveway.. you are directly violating my rights.
Perhaps my years of reading Adbusters (check it out sometime) has taught me a few things.. and I *try* to practice what I preach.. things like:
- Don't respond to spammers. Ever. Period. - Don't buy things from companies who's advertising insults your intelligence. - Don't buy things from companies who's advertising practices annoy you. - DO NOT LET ADVERTISING INVADE YOUR LIFE. IT doesn't HAVE TO BE THIS WAY.
Cancel your cable TV. Go DO something. Even if you don't cancel it, stop watching it! Sure.. watch the news... but cut it down!
The movies? Wait for DVD. Seriously. Nothing pisses me off more than going to the movies, paying my $10, and exorbitant price for popcorn/soda, and then waiting for 15 goddamn minutes while they put on ADVERTISING! I just don't go anymore. I refuse to pay my own money to see advertising.
Web banners? Sure! No problem!
You know what's good for your community? Watch TV one night, and write down everyone who advertises. Then, go look for alternative products that don't advertise. If you have to advertise it, it must not be that good...
Due diligence refers to the company's responsibility to it's shareholders. By law, the company MUST PROTECT the interests of it's shareholders, and letting others do for free what the company has a right to collect money for is NOT taking care of your shareholders. The officers in a company have a legal responsibility to protect the shareholder's interests.
Wouldn't the patent cover the software that MAKES The gifs, and DISPLAYS the gifs? Why on earth would it cover something that simply moves data around? The data itself is not an implementation of the patented method... the codec itself is.
As long as the tools that made the gifs were legit, and the tools that display them are too.. it's just data.
and it seems different. Yes.. I personally think they are being silly.. BUT...
EVERYONE KNOWS that unisys has a patent on.gif, and that, BY LAW, they HAVE THE RIGHT to profit from that patent. THIS IS WELL PUBLICISED, AND HAS BEEN FOR MANY MANY YEARS.
People use it ANYWAY, defiantly, saying 'they won't come after me'. Well.. YOU KNEW! So if it seems like 'aww.. that's not fair, for them to ask for payment now..' well.. go ASK YOUR LAWYER! It *IS* totally fair. That's how it works.
I'm fairly sure that a number of laws have been passed that make telemarketing over cellular completely illegal. It is direct theft of service, as the vast majority of cellular calls cost the phone owner by the minute, or the second...... and this used to cost a LOT.
This is an excellent idea, and really the kind of service I would like to see from my own telco. A service that caters to the end-user.. not to the telespammers.
Seems to me they posted sources for all the GNU components of libroot.so, but not for their own proprietary components. The problem is, this brings them into violation of the GPL. Though the spirit of the GPL is alive and well here, and they are using a single library instead of dozens of separate libraries.. it's really just packaging....
but.. the GPL states that a work based on a GPL'd work must be GPL. This means libroot.so, in it's entirety must be GPL, or not be distributed, or use no GPL code. Period.
Yes. It covers distribution. You are free, I believe, to release a non-working version of a product that requires the user to go get a library themselves in order to make it work.
So do I read this right? The crypt() used in some libraries provided by QNX (which is analogous to unix crypt()?) is not a one-way hash?
Oh.. btw.... it would do really well for a lot of people to remember that just because people are using QNX as a kernel does not at all mean they are using these functions for anything. The embedded OS merely servers as a base for development. It's like they took the linux kernel ONLY and started development (okay.. maybe with libc too)
1) The reason redhat, va, and others lost so much value is because, according to the way stocks are traditionally valued, they were absolutely NOT worth the incredible amounts of money people were paying for them.
2) Also realize that, just because va goes from 300 to 30, this does not mean that VA is going 'broke' or is somehow 'losing money'. It simply means that the world sees it as not as valuable.
3) JDS Uniphase (everyone's heard of it, right?) at it's peak, had a market cap that was worth more than the market caps of Ford & GM combined. Does this seem realistic? Ford & GM employ many many thousands of people, and compbined, turn over a BILLION DOLLARS A MONTH in sales. JDS, though they have profits, good technology, and are certainly a good company, are nowhere near this size, so why were they worth more? Ford & GM going broke would change the entire economy of the country. So many people would be out of work. JDS going out of business would be a small, localized burp.
3) As for people losing money.. well.. I lost some money too... but one must realize, you don't put all your eggs in one basket. Many have said for quite a while that lots of tech stocks were severely overvalued.. everyone had fair warning.
4) People who invested in strong companies will find that their companies will continue to grow, and continue to grow.. (JDS will grow. Cisco will grow. IBM will grow. Hell..even MSFT will grow, even with the trial and all).
5) Many of the worthless b2b and.com companeis will DIE, as they will be unable to properly raise capital due to extrememly low stock valuations. This is GOOD. People must start viewing companies in a proper light, valuating them properly.... yes, a good idea for a.com startup is worth something, but how much? Why is an 'e-mall' that some guy created suddenly worth 50 million dollars? Where are the profits?
6) Invest long, invest smart, don't daytrade. Actually read all about the companies you are investing in. Find out how much stock is out there, who holds it, who's running the company, what experience they have doing so.
It's about time that the consumer started questioning the 'no servers' rules that @home puts in it's contract.
Saying 'stay within bandwidth constraints' is fine, it's impartial, but saying 'no servers' means that, technically, everyone running mirc + identd is breaking the rules. Inf act, anyone running windows 2000 with telnet server on is breaking the rules. Anyone running a quake or tribes or UT server is breaking the rules. Foo.
Whether or not it's a crime really depends on how they are describing their computers. If they claim it's got an intel Pentium II processor, and that it runs at 500Mhz... then they aren't ripping you off if it happens to be a 333 overclocked to 500Mhz. You bought a working computer that runs as specified.
If they claim it uses a Pentium II 500 as a processor, but really it's a 333 overclocked, then they are ripping you off.
Good points. As for your first point, them not liking it when poeple return melted chips, that all makes sense, but have they ever actually stated this, or are you just assuming? I would guess the number of 'melted' chips they receive, compared to the number sold is miniscule, so small a number that they don't even care. What they DO care about is having their market hurt.
As for small PC makers selling computers.. I am divided.
As a PC maker, if I build a 'PC'with a celeron 300A and overclock it to 450, and sell you a '450 Mhz intel based system', what have you to complain about? Nothing. You got what you thought you were getting, an intel based system running at 450Mhz. Now, if you asked me if it included a 450Mhz Celeron, I might be lying if I told you it did, as the common assumption is that I mean a process that is *rated* at 450Mhz, not simply running at 450 Mhz.
The point is, if you are joe average, and want a '450 Mhz Celeron' computer, then who cares if it's overclocked? You *DID* get what you paid for. On the other hand, if you are a geek, and want a computer that uses intel's 450Mhz rated Celerons, then you got ripped off. It's all in the details.
The real issue is that the game does not work by itself. It's not elegant. They must enforce real-world 'rules' that are human-policed in order to make the game function. The design is flawed, and they are trying to make up for it.
Why on earth SHOULDN'T people be able to trade items, under whatever terms they want? What's the big deal? WHO CARES!
Okay. Look at it this way. 1) I buy a celeron 2) I overclock 3) It gets coked 4) I go back to the store and say 'this chip worked for an hour and now it's dead' 5) The store takes it back, and sends it back to their supplier as DOA.
They don't say 'prove you didn't break it yourself'. If they did, the answer would be 'prove I DID break it'. You can't, they can't, so you get a new chip. Granted this is dishonest, and I have never done this.. however.. it's true.
Also.. as for 'voiding' the warranty.. I don't believe that my celeron process had any 'warranty' terms that described exactly in what manner it was to be used...
But you are using as intended. The 600Mhz rating is a rating that says 'With X cooling and Y voltage, this chip will function within normal parameters at 600Mhz'. If you go and change the environment the chip is used in, they simply can't guarantee anything.
I find it strange, the way people look at overclockers, and the way the media treats them.
It's not that they are 'ripping off' Intel, or AMD. it's not doing something 'wrong', and it's not doing something 'illegal'.
Let's look at something like a resistor. A plain, old resistor. You can pay one price for a pack of resistors with a specified tolerance of 15%, a slightly higher price for 5%, an even higher price for 1%. Now, it is not uncommon for a hobbyist to simply take some cheap 15% bags, find ones that are over tolerance, and file them down to increase ristance, providing a very accurate match to whatever they are building. In short, they 'hacked' the resistor. Nobody would accuse them of 'ripping off' the company that made the resistor. What you are paying for, when you buy that expensive bag of 1% devices, is the fact that they are guaranteed to work to within 1% of the specified speed.
This is very similar to what happens when Intel sells a chip. When they sell a chip rated 500Mhz, they are in no way saying you are not allowed to run it faster, they are saying that they guarantee it will work at 500Mhz. So, if you are a manufacturer, and you want a 500Mhz chip for your computer, you buy a chip that's guaranteed to work at 500Mhz, right?
To put it a different way, a 500Mhz Pentium-III is guaranteed to run at 500Mhz under specified conditions: A certain voltage, a certain shape of clock signal, a certain amount of heat dissipation (cooling), etc. It shoudl be obvious then, that this rating of 500Mhz only applies as long as the other conditions are met. IF you change those conditions, the rating is meaningless.
So if you cool your chip with some extra fans, effectively doubling the cooling, it can probably run faster.
This is the fallacy of your thinking: People should *NOT* believe everything they read, should not take it at face value. If you publish something libelous, claiming it to be truth, and you are lying, then it is up to others to prove that you are wrong. Should you be punished? Your only punishment should be one of respect. If you lie enough, nobody will believe you.
I have enough integrity in society that if a faceless, nameless person is going to slander me, what do I care?
1) Freenet adjusts availability of data based on use. If the vast majority of people using it want kiddie porn, then the kiddy porn will persist. If they don't, it will vanish.
Is the world crying out for a way to anonymously share information via the internet? YES! Many just don't know it. Far too many people won't feel their rights have been violated until it's far too late. Copyright violations? Breaking copyright is still illegal. If your business is using illicit software, it's STILL illegal. If you are in posession of banned material, it's STILL illegal. Leave that up to the community. FreeNET is simply a medium that is free of censorship as of NOW.
#1. Freenet is not cool, because you don't understand the language. Got it. They should have consulted you first.
#2. Java isn't as cross platform as perl? Hmm. Could have fooled me. My java apps run on my Windoze boxes (all of them), my linux box, my sparc, my mac, and the list goes on.... And with Perl, it's NOT fully cross platform. There are exceptions for every platform.
#4. How do you figure that a java runtime takes up so much space? It doesn't.
#5. We are developing something completely new, so why should we use a 'standard' protocol? There ISN'T a standard protocol that even comes close to matching what we want to do. By your logic, HTTP should not have been developed, and they should have just used a 'standard' protocol. Same for MySQL. They should use a 'standard' protocol too.
#6. Evil powers might just try. Yeah. They might try at that. Good luck...
Slashdot Mirror
We didn't get where we are today by making money off OSS. OSS exists because of what it is.. not because someone can make money off it.
OSS sets a nice baseline, and those who want to sell software on the open market generally have to do better than OSS. That's MY ideal scenario. There will always be room for someone to do it better, faster.. but a good OSS baseline will
1) force informal standards
2) set a standard for performance/reliability.
When things change without companies getting a 'vote', it's because the masses want change.
OSS only survives when it's worth using. If something better comes along, we move to it.
The point, I think, is that, regardless of the method used, a DDOS is a deliberate action taken by an individual/group to disrupt a service. This is just plain wrong. If it's not intentional.. it's not as wrong.
example: You are unloading your moving van, and don't notice that you ahve blocked my driveway.
Are you guilty of blocking my free movement? Not exactly.. it's an accident.
But.. if you park a big truck in front of my driveway with the express purpose of keeping my car in the driveway.. you are directly violating my rights.
(and I might blow up your truck)
Perhaps my years of reading Adbusters (check it out sometime) has taught me a few things.. and I *try* to practice what I preach.. things like:
- Don't respond to spammers. Ever. Period.
- Don't buy things from companies who's advertising insults your intelligence.
- Don't buy things from companies who's advertising practices annoy you.
- DO NOT LET ADVERTISING INVADE YOUR LIFE. IT doesn't HAVE TO BE THIS WAY.
Cancel your cable TV. Go DO something. Even if you don't cancel it, stop watching it! Sure.. watch the news... but cut it down!
The movies? Wait for DVD. Seriously.
Nothing pisses me off more than going to the movies, paying my $10, and exorbitant price for popcorn/soda, and then waiting for 15 goddamn minutes while they put on ADVERTISING! I just don't go anymore. I refuse to pay my own money to see advertising.
Web banners? Sure! No problem!
You know what's good for your community? Watch TV one night, and write down everyone who advertises. Then, go look for alternative products that don't advertise. If you have to advertise it, it must not be that good...
Due diligence refers to the company's responsibility to it's shareholders. By law, the company MUST PROTECT the interests of it's shareholders, and letting others do for free what the company has a right to collect money for is NOT taking care of your shareholders. The officers in a company have a legal responsibility to protect the shareholder's interests.
Wouldn't the patent cover the software that MAKES The gifs, and DISPLAYS the gifs? Why on earth would it cover something that simply moves data around? The data itself is not an implementation of the patented method... the codec itself is.
As long as the tools that made the gifs were legit, and the tools that display them are too.. it's just data.
and it seems different.
.gif, and that, BY LAW, they HAVE THE RIGHT to profit from that patent. THIS IS WELL PUBLICISED, AND HAS BEEN FOR MANY MANY YEARS.
Yes.. I personally think they are being silly.. BUT...
EVERYONE KNOWS that unisys has a patent on
People use it ANYWAY, defiantly, saying 'they won't come after me'. Well.. YOU KNEW! So if it seems like 'aww.. that's not fair, for them to ask for payment now..' well.. go ASK YOUR LAWYER! It *IS* totally fair. That's how it works.
I'm fairly sure that a number of laws have been passed that make telemarketing over cellular completely illegal. It is direct theft of service, as the vast majority of cellular calls cost the phone owner by the minute, or the second...... and this used to cost a LOT.
Moderators, moderate this up.
This is an excellent idea, and really the kind of service I would like to see from my own telco. A service that caters to the end-user.. not to the telespammers.
Seems to me they posted sources for all the GNU components of libroot.so, but not for their own proprietary components. The problem is, this brings them into violation of the GPL.
Though the spirit of the GPL is alive and well here, and they are using a single library instead of dozens of separate libraries.. it's really just packaging....
but..
the GPL states that a work based on a GPL'd work must be GPL. This means libroot.so, in it's entirety must be GPL, or not be distributed, or use no GPL code. Period.
Yes. It covers distribution. You are free, I believe, to release a non-working version of a product that requires the user to go get a library themselves in order to make it work.
So do I read this right? The crypt() used in some libraries provided by QNX (which is analogous to unix crypt()?) is not a one-way hash?
Oh.. btw....
it would do really well for a lot of people to remember that just because people are using QNX as a kernel does not at all mean they are using these functions for anything. The embedded OS merely servers as a base for development. It's like they took the linux kernel ONLY and started development (okay.. maybe with libc too)
Here are a few thigns it's good to remember.
.com companeis will DIE, as they will be unable to properly raise capital due to extrememly low stock valuations. This is GOOD. People must start viewing companies in a proper light, valuating them properly.... yes, a good idea for a .com startup is worth something, but how much? Why is an 'e-mall' that some guy created suddenly worth 50 million dollars? Where are the profits?
1) The reason redhat, va, and others lost so much value is because, according to the way stocks are traditionally valued, they were absolutely NOT worth the incredible amounts of money people were paying for them.
2) Also realize that, just because va goes from 300 to 30, this does not mean that VA is going 'broke' or is somehow 'losing money'. It simply means that the world sees it as not as valuable.
3) JDS Uniphase (everyone's heard of it, right?) at it's peak, had a market cap that was worth more than the market caps of Ford & GM combined. Does this seem realistic? Ford & GM employ many many thousands of people, and compbined, turn over a BILLION DOLLARS A MONTH in sales. JDS, though they have profits, good technology, and are certainly a good company, are nowhere near this size, so why were they worth more? Ford & GM going broke would change the entire economy of the country. So many people would be out of work. JDS going out of business would be a small, localized burp.
3) As for people losing money.. well.. I lost some money too... but one must realize, you don't put all your eggs in one basket. Many have said for quite a while that lots of tech stocks were severely overvalued.. everyone had fair warning.
4) People who invested in strong companies will find that their companies will continue to grow, and continue to grow.. (JDS will grow. Cisco will grow. IBM will grow. Hell..even MSFT will grow, even with the trial and all).
5) Many of the worthless b2b and
6) Invest long, invest smart, don't daytrade. Actually read all about the companies you are investing in. Find out how much stock is out there, who holds it, who's running the company, what experience they have doing so.
7) Cash is king baby!
They're planning on supporting all platforms.
I thought they should just support tcp/ip over ethernet, and be done with it..
It's about time that the consumer started questioning the 'no servers' rules that @home puts in it's contract.
Saying 'stay within bandwidth constraints' is fine, it's impartial, but saying 'no servers' means that, technically, everyone running mirc + identd is breaking the rules.
Inf act, anyone running windows 2000 with telnet server on is breaking the rules.
Anyone running a quake or tribes or UT server is breaking the rules.
Foo.
Whether or not it's a crime really depends on how they are describing their computers.
If they claim it's got an intel Pentium II processor, and that it runs at 500Mhz... then they aren't ripping you off if it happens to be a 333 overclocked to 500Mhz. You bought a working computer that runs as specified.
If they claim it uses a Pentium II 500 as a processor, but really it's a 333 overclocked, then they are ripping you off.
Good points.
As for your first point, them not liking it when poeple return melted chips, that all makes sense, but have they ever actually stated this, or are you just assuming? I would guess the number of 'melted' chips they receive, compared to the number sold is miniscule, so small a number that they don't even care. What they DO care about is having their market hurt.
As for small PC makers selling computers.. I am divided.
As a PC maker, if I build a 'PC'with a celeron 300A and overclock it to 450, and sell you a '450 Mhz intel based system', what have you to complain about? Nothing. You got what you thought you were getting, an intel based system running at 450Mhz. Now, if you asked me if it included a 450Mhz Celeron, I might be lying if I told you it did, as the common assumption is that I mean a process that is *rated* at 450Mhz, not simply running at 450 Mhz.
The point is, if you are joe average, and want a '450 Mhz Celeron' computer, then who cares if it's overclocked? You *DID* get what you paid for.
On the other hand, if you are a geek, and want a computer that uses intel's 450Mhz rated Celerons, then you got ripped off. It's all in the details.
The real issue is that the game does not work by itself. It's not elegant. They must enforce real-world 'rules' that are human-policed in order to make the game function. The design is flawed, and they are trying to make up for it.
Why on earth SHOULDN'T people be able to trade items, under whatever terms they want? What's the big deal? WHO CARES!
Okay. Look at it this way.
1) I buy a celeron
2) I overclock
3) It gets coked
4) I go back to the store and say 'this chip worked for an hour and now it's dead'
5) The store takes it back, and sends it back to their supplier as DOA.
They don't say 'prove you didn't break it yourself'. If they did, the answer would be 'prove I DID break it'. You can't, they can't, so you get a new chip.
Granted this is dishonest, and I have never done this.. however.. it's true.
Also.. as for 'voiding' the warranty.. I don't believe that my celeron process had any 'warranty' terms that described exactly in what manner it was to be used...
But you are using as intended.
The 600Mhz rating is a rating that says 'With X cooling and Y voltage, this chip will function within normal parameters at 600Mhz'. If you go and change the environment the chip is used in, they simply can't guarantee anything.
I find it strange, the way people look at overclockers, and the way the media treats them.
It's not that they are 'ripping off' Intel, or AMD. it's not doing something 'wrong', and it's not doing something 'illegal'.
Let's look at something like a resistor. A plain, old resistor. You can pay one price for a pack of resistors with a specified tolerance of 15%, a slightly higher price for 5%, an even higher price for 1%. Now, it is not uncommon for a hobbyist to simply take some cheap 15% bags, find ones that are over tolerance, and file them down to increase ristance, providing a very accurate match to whatever they are building. In short, they 'hacked' the resistor. Nobody would accuse them of 'ripping off' the company that made the resistor. What you are paying for, when you buy that expensive bag of 1% devices, is the fact that they are guaranteed to work to within 1% of the specified speed.
This is very similar to what happens when Intel sells a chip. When they sell a chip rated 500Mhz, they are in no way saying you are not allowed to run it faster, they are saying that they guarantee it will work at 500Mhz. So, if you are a manufacturer, and you want a 500Mhz chip for your computer, you buy a chip that's guaranteed to work at 500Mhz, right?
To put it a different way, a 500Mhz Pentium-III is guaranteed to run at 500Mhz under specified conditions: A certain voltage, a certain shape of clock signal, a certain amount of heat dissipation (cooling), etc.
It shoudl be obvious then, that this rating of 500Mhz only applies as long as the other conditions are met. IF you change those conditions, the rating is meaningless.
So if you cool your chip with some extra fans, effectively doubling the cooling, it can probably run faster.
This is the fallacy of your thinking:
People should *NOT* believe everything they read, should not take it at face value.
If you publish something libelous, claiming it to be truth, and you are lying, then it is up to others to prove that you are wrong. Should you be punished? Your only punishment should be one of respect. If you lie enough, nobody will believe you.
I have enough integrity in society that if a faceless, nameless person is going to slander me, what do I care?
1) Freenet adjusts availability of data based on use. If the vast majority of people using it want kiddie porn, then the kiddy porn will persist. If they don't, it will vanish.
Is the world crying out for a way to anonymously share information via the internet? YES! Many just don't know it. Far too many people won't feel their rights have been violated until it's far too late.
Copyright violations? Breaking copyright is still illegal. If your business is using illicit software, it's STILL illegal. If you are in posession of banned material, it's STILL illegal. Leave that up to the community. FreeNET is simply a medium that is free of censorship as of NOW.
Try IBM's jdk (looks and feel just like Sun's). The JIT (built into jre/java) is faster than you may believe...
#1. Freenet is not cool, because you don't understand the language. Got it. They should have consulted you first.
#2. Java isn't as cross platform as perl? Hmm. Could have fooled me. My java apps run on my Windoze boxes (all of them), my linux box, my sparc, my mac, and the list goes on.... And with Perl, it's NOT fully cross platform. There are exceptions for every platform.
#4. How do you figure that a java runtime takes up so much space? It doesn't.
#5. We are developing something completely new, so why should we use a 'standard' protocol? There ISN'T a standard protocol that even comes close to matching what we want to do. By your logic, HTTP should not have been developed, and they should have just used a 'standard' protocol. Same for MySQL. They should use a 'standard' protocol too.
#6. Evil powers might just try. Yeah. They might try at that. Good luck...