First the Red Hat zealots came for me, and I said nothing because I didn't want to run a commercialized distro Then the Gentoo zealots came for me, and I said nothing because I didn't want to compile everything Then the OS X zealots came for me, and I said nothing because I won't pay for overpriced hardware Finally the Ubuntu zealots came for me, and everyone was so sick of offtopic zealotry that no one spoke up at all.
That's an enforcement nightmare. How will you police if people are doing anything with the patent or not?
There's a lot of loopholes in it too. You want patent examiners that are too stupid to refuse patents on completely obvious things to judge whether the company has brought the completely obvious thing to market or not?
A network application (especially web based ones) copies parts of itself verbatim out over the network.
Unless you are asserting that the HTML and CSS files are not copyrighted and owned by the author of the application. Look at the Bison problem, it's similar. These applications copy large chunks of their source to the output. This is distribution under copyright law.
Version 2 leaves significant ambiguity with regard to applications used over a network. If I install fooForums that is GPL, and I modify it then put it on my website, am I distributing a modified GPL work? I'm sure distributing parts of it (the HTML etc). Right now it's not clear if the person modifying the app has any obligation to distribute source.
One of the possibilities for GPLv3 is a clause that would allow authors of network based server side applications to include links in the app to download source, that could not be removed legally under the GPL.
Two parties garnering 97% of the vote doesn't exactly point to healthy democracy either. Are we to believe that 97% of people agree with one party or the other?
Corrupt politicians goal is to look like a normal guy. You can't be running rabid like Jack Thompson and expect people to trust you and vote for you.
As Pink Floyd put it: "You have to be trusted by the people that you lie to, so when they turn their back on you, you get a chance to put the knife in."
Would this nutrient be present in high concentrations in vegemite? I know vegemite is mostly brewery yeast scum, but isn't it filtered out of the beer after the hops are in?
So it's a case of the boy who cried wolf. Really I think companies should tell their lawyers to fuck off more often. A little FUD from their legal department and they cover their products in stickers about non-issues.
Heh, well if you are planning on doing something I'd at least talk with a lawyer first, the NEC might try to sue even though their case would have little merit in light of the precedents.
I don't think it matters. As long as it is law somewhere, it's public domain. Like it wouldn't be illegal for me to post a copy of the laws of georgia, even though I don't live there.
It uses this big still to distill the water and make it fresh and clean again. It's called the atmosphere. You might have seen it through a window or on google images.
No, not really. I'd say RHEL is in the definitely in the running for my favorite distro. Like I said, possibly in another thread, we still have lots of CentOS servers.
I even own Red Hat stock. Given it's like $1500 of it, but still.
It looks like they have changed their EULAs to be less obnoxious, which helps. It's still a lot of money for not much other than the brand name, especially at the lower tiers.
You don't think that a race that's figured out faster than light travel hasn't also figured out simple fission/fusion weapons that we figured out 70 years ago?
Here's some more text from it regarding running unsupported RHEL installations:
The amount of the payment deficiency will be determined by multiplying the number of underreported Installed Systems or Services by the annual fee for such item. If Customer is found to have underreported the number of Installed Systems or amount of Services by more than five percent (5%),
So you can't have "underreported installed systems" by running them without services, under this old EULA.
They've silently changed the EULA it seems. My information is old. The new one is much better. There was much controversy over the old EULA.
There used to be one big EULA for RHEL, and it did state that you must not have any RHEL servers installed without RHN. It didn't give you the option to run unsupported copies, period. If you bought one copy, you were bound by the EULA automatically since it came with services. If you wanted to install RHEL on another computer, the only way you could do it without violating the EULA was to buy another seat from them.
Here's some text from the old EULA:
"If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed Servers, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed Server."
"During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement"
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh.
First the Red Hat zealots came for me, and I said nothing because I didn't want to run a commercialized distro
Then the Gentoo zealots came for me, and I said nothing because I didn't want to compile everything
Then the OS X zealots came for me, and I said nothing because I won't pay for overpriced hardware
Finally the Ubuntu zealots came for me, and everyone was so sick of offtopic zealotry that no one spoke up at all.
That's an enforcement nightmare. How will you police if people are doing anything with the patent or not?
There's a lot of loopholes in it too. You want patent examiners that are too stupid to refuse patents on completely obvious things to judge whether the company has brought the completely obvious thing to market or not?
A network application (especially web based ones) copies parts of itself verbatim out over the network.
Unless you are asserting that the HTML and CSS files are not copyrighted and owned by the author of the application. Look at the Bison problem, it's similar. These applications copy large chunks of their source to the output. This is distribution under copyright law.
Version 2 leaves significant ambiguity with regard to applications used over a network. If I install fooForums that is GPL, and I modify it then put it on my website, am I distributing a modified GPL work? I'm sure distributing parts of it (the HTML etc). Right now it's not clear if the person modifying the app has any obligation to distribute source.
One of the possibilities for GPLv3 is a clause that would allow authors of network based server side applications to include links in the app to download source, that could not be removed legally under the GPL.
I once read that 10% of all trade worldwide is underground, dollar for dollar (or peso for peso or whatever). That's trillions of dollars.
I wonder if aggregate underground economy percentages have increased, or if more traditional underground trade has just moved online.
Total misapplication of the parable and his questionable links regarding MS charity.. Have the mods been trolled? I'll have a nice day just in case.
Two parties garnering 97% of the vote doesn't exactly point to healthy democracy either. Are we to believe that 97% of people agree with one party or the other?
Just playing devils advocate here.
Corrupt politicians goal is to look like a normal guy. You can't be running rabid like Jack Thompson and expect people to trust you and vote for you.
As Pink Floyd put it: "You have to be trusted by the people that you lie to, so when they turn their back on you, you get a chance to put the knife in."
That sounds like a cop-out to me. Two wrongs don't make a right.
It would be very practical to bomb MS headquarters, making sure to take out Gates and Ballmer, but I doubt you advocate that.
Would this nutrient be present in high concentrations in vegemite? I know vegemite is mostly brewery yeast scum, but isn't it filtered out of the beer after the hops are in?
So it's a case of the boy who cried wolf. Really I think companies should tell their lawyers to fuck off more often. A little FUD from their legal department and they cover their products in stickers about non-issues.
Heh, well if you are planning on doing something I'd at least talk with a lawyer first, the NEC might try to sue even though their case would have little merit in light of the precedents.
Look, I just went on the first thing I saw on crucial. I didn't notice it was very high end at the time.
I don't think it matters. As long as it is law somewhere, it's public domain. Like it wouldn't be illegal for me to post a copy of the laws of georgia, even though I don't live there.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned that RAID5 is no replacement for backups.
I guess if it's just porn you got for free or whatever it doesn't matter, but if the data is important you still need some sort of backups.
RAID protects against:
Disk Failure
Backups protect against:
Disk Failure
Accidental Deletion
Malicious users
Malicious programs
Filesystem corruption
Errant program causing file corruption
RAID won't protect you from any of those other things one bit.
There's this thing called the water cycle.
It uses this big still to distill the water and make it fresh and clean again. It's called the atmosphere. You might have seen it through a window or on google images.
And until a recent supreme court ruling, you had to pay to even know what the law was!
I'm surprised no enterprising person has put the NEC up for download yet, in a public manner. It's legal now since that court ruling.
It's not uncommon to have a wastewater treatment plant a mile upstream from a drinking water treatement plant. Happens all the time.
No, not really. I'd say RHEL is in the definitely in the running for my favorite distro. Like I said, possibly in another thread, we still have lots of CentOS servers.
I even own Red Hat stock. Given it's like $1500 of it, but still.
It looks like they have changed their EULAs to be less obnoxious, which helps. It's still a lot of money for not much other than the brand name, especially at the lower tiers.
Get the developers toolbar extension.
You don't think that a race that's figured out faster than light travel hasn't also figured out simple fission/fusion weapons that we figured out 70 years ago?
That's probably important to talk about too.
Like "How not to get exterminated by a vastly superior race should they vist us".
Us waving our collective penises^Wweapons at a visitor could get us in some real shit.
Hey I found a copy of the old EULA, it's still up, just buried:
Old EULA
Here's some more text from it regarding running unsupported RHEL installations:
The amount of the payment deficiency will be determined by multiplying the number of underreported Installed Systems or Services by the annual fee for such item. If Customer is found to have underreported the number of Installed Systems or amount of Services by more than five percent (5%),
So you can't have "underreported installed systems" by running them without services, under this old EULA.
They've silently changed the EULA it seems. My information is old. The new one is much better. There was much controversy over the old EULA.
There used to be one big EULA for RHEL, and it did state that you must not have any RHEL servers installed without RHN. It didn't give you the option to run unsupported copies, period. If you bought one copy, you were bound by the EULA automatically since it came with services. If you wanted to install RHEL on another computer, the only way you could do it without violating the EULA was to buy another seat from them.
Here's some text from the old EULA:
"If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed Servers, then
Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each
additional Installed Server."
"During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter,
Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer's
facilities and records from time to time in order to verify
Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement"
Link
Another Link
Yet another
You can see there was plenty of talk about this questionable EULA, I'm not making it up.
I'm glad to see they have a much better set of EULAs in place now. They are still pretty pricey for what you get.
For $349 you get 1 month of installation support, and 1 year of web installation support.
Once you are up and running, you are on your own.
And you have to pay $349 again in 1 year, or you have violated the EULA and must remove all copies of RHEL from your server.