well, this is gender dependent. I would advise to hire women to work in the office and men to work from home.
I am so good at multitasking that I can cook, do my hair, read/., K5, rootprompt, wideopen and three mailing lists at once, but never managed to code, because some clueless programmers told me I should RTFM online and the relevant mailing lists.
Big mistake. Never tell that a woman. We art just too good at reading all that's irrelevant simultaneously with that what isn't and then seem always let the wrong processes run in the background.
I am all for it, send the men home and let them do the three CCC, coding, cooking and chatting. Send me in the office an let me do the three SSSs, smiling, screaming and surfing. Meanwhile we think about the three PPPs, planning, purchasing and procrastinating and end up with three BBBs, burned out, bored and bancrupt.
If it were for me, I would vote for a silent man. Because I read somewhere that men believe women think silent men are the better listeners. So, I let you geeks believe that...as long as your chosen leader keeps silent most of the time, it's fine by me.
If the RedHats and the Mandrakes and the VALinux-ers etc wouldn't support the original programmers, who developed the code, I would say your arguement would be right. But I think they try to do what they can to support developers. So
"the RedHats" or "the Mandrakes", who do you think they are ? Some strange evil species or what ?
What's wrong with having any company, Dell, HP, Compaq or what have you sell ONE model of their laptops or PCs with Linux preconfigured and sell it at CompUSA, Best Buy or whatever ?
Sometimes I have the feeling the geeks couldn't just stand that their favourite toy goes mainstream. No more fun out of getting the "I am just smarter than you" bashing attitude. Mami can get her Linux box without you. Not to imagine, she could even get her server box set up without you. My, oh my, that would be the end of the world, right ?
My retarded half brain bought the boxed distros in the beginning, because I was too retarded to download all the stuff over a stupid modem.
Later my retarded brain became so sophisticated that I bought the boxed distros for the accompanying documentation to see which distro cares more about their customer's fullblown retarded brains.
Who would try to use the opportunity to write good handbooks for their distros so that potential clients would finally get cured from their retardism and be ever so grateful to become loyal supporters of open/free software ? That was THE
question which my heart desired to get an answer to.
Now I am cured and have a big, mellow heart. That's why I am still buying every disto I want to try out in a boxed version from my neighborhood computer store. I just fell in love with the idea that people work to keep the source code open and I think they deserve my support.
Actually I am proud to be a retarded supporters of companies, who support free/open source software and am quite willing to invest my couple of pennies in them.
If just the geeks would be as retarded as I am, the world of/. would be a much nicer place to live in.
Sorry, my bad. I mixed up and misspelled the Progress 9.1 RDMB offered by the Progress Corp and wanted to refer to the GPL PostgreSQL, which I thought might have been the basis for the Progress Corporation's Progress 9.1 RDBM.
Oh, well, just another coincidence of choosing names too closely related to GPL software. Why, oh why, one wonders.
The parent corporation of Nusphere, the Progress Corporation, offers an RDBMS called Progress 9.1.
Is that a database based on the GPL ProgreSQL code ? Is that an attempt to manage both GPL databases, MySQL and ProgreSQL, commercially ? Or has Progress Corporation nothing to do with ProgreSQL ?
Cop-out answer. Obviously the question was meant to be based on a situation, where you have a male and a female candidate, who both look for their first employment as a system admin with both having the same qualifications to offer.
That is a realistic, real life situation. Make it even more realistic. Think of people who have worked in other fields before and change careers. Their previous work experiences have very little to do with their newly chosen field. What's wrong with that question ?
I see hundreds of people from all walks of life attempting it. If there wouldn't be a problem with it, why is the first thing any female student on an American college campus runs in is a "Woman's Association for XYZ" ? IT and Computing Sciences are no exemptions.
I haven't seen the same need or trend in Europe. Why ? Strangely enough the U.S. has many more, and more explicit laws to protect against discrimination because of age, gender or race. If there were no issue, there wouldn't be a need for
so many women to organize themselves in their own "gender based" associations. I am not used to it and it upsets me pretty much that actually there are separate professional association for women in almost any professional field. I am a woman and I think it's strange. So, my question as someone, who wasn't raised in the U.S., is to tell me why.
Another thing I observed is that in the field of system admin, the women you see, who learned their skills on the job, are women, who work for the military. That was actually the last place I would have guessed to find the least discrimination in giving women the same kind of work exposure as men. But again, I am not from the U.S. I may misunderstand the situation. That's why I posted my question here.
1. How do you choose among candidates, who apply for their first system admin job ?
2. How do you evaluate their "experience" or "education" ? What would you want to see them to bring to the table ?
3. If training on the job is non existent, how do you come to believe that a candidate has what it takes ?
4. Which educational path do you trust most ? C.S. college graduates, or adult education with certification good enough ?
5. If you had female and male candidates, what would be the reason to choose or not to choose a woman ?
Sure, but when I have finished studying a book I bought, and ready to give it away (which is extremely hard for me to do anyway), then the book is already outdated and the newer edition out. Do you want me to donate old computer books ?
Saying that you want the right to VOTE to what happens in a private organization/corporation is just never going to happen, hence the term "private".
Well then, if they are private, they are private and they should be allowed to do on their *private network* whatever they want with content provided by its users. But they should not be allowed to do whatever they want with the user provided content on the complete network of the internet, which they only own partly.
Instead of demanding from me to use a private network, if I don't like their way of providing too little control over the content I provide to them, they should be asked to use their private network, where they then can have rightfully complete control user provided content.
What do you deduct from the fact that they are private entities, but use the worldwide network publicly, as if the complete internet were owned by them in its entirety ? Neither VALinux, AOL/Amazon or the government own the internet alone, therefore neither should be allowed to decide about the distribution of content on the internet in a manner, as if the complete network were owned by just one of them.
Let's say if the total of all existing servers on the internet were x million and the total of all available bandwidth were y million and VALinux would own 1/100 000 of the total number of servers and 2/100 000 of the total existing bandwidth, why should they have total units of control over the content distribution and not just 1/100 000 units of control, which would be their weighted shares of ownership on the total network ?
Why is public usage and public ownership of the internet understood as if it actually would exist?
I don't see any public ownership and almost no laws, which would govern that public property's usage by the people. I see only public usage without public control. Even if they own the content, they don't own the complete network on which they are distributing and allow uncontrolled third party usage of that content to happen.
This is BTW not at all VALinux or Amazon bashing. It's just one example to make a point.
So, what is the logic in supporting on the one hand the transparency and openess of the source code for the public, but at the same token accepting that publicly provided content is not free and not under public control ?
Blech. It's the lame excuse of people, who can't find a better argument as to assume that all motivation for my point of view is rooted in some feeling of personal embarrassment, because one might have said something one regrets later, or in a some paranoia about Amazon or AOL logging my last purchase of a CD among zillions of other data.
If the issue were that lame, I and, I assume, also you, would not fight over it.
The meaning of PUBLIC forum goes much deeper than that.
The whole idea that, what used to be defined loosely as PUBLIC forum in the pre-internet days, when most of our privacy laws were created, can be nilly-willy extended over to a world-wide accessible, indexable, searchable and storable medium of the internet, is just short-sighted.
In pre-internet age content, generated for public usage on a publicly accessible medium, like a published book, a newspaper, a radio broadcast, in a wire transcript of a town meeting etc, was limited to your town, your newspaper-, film-, or library archives and bookstores. The distribution of archived material was limited to certain physical locations and their storage limited timewise. Before something was decided to be kept in public libraries (paid for by your government and my tax dollars) for good, librarians filtered it and made decisions about its relevance. Books have natural lifetime and go through an editorial process, as well as newspaper articles.
There was not ONE medium in the pre-internet time, where material stored was not limited, compressed, managed, edited and filtered by some human brain. And if it was not done by a human brain, it was done by time. Sources fade away. Grass grows over things. The world goes on, repeating itself. People could count on that.
All those pre-internet time archives had a clearly defined ownership. Either it was the government or a private entity or a corporation. For each of those entities, there was a legal framework of what they were allowed to collect and archive AGAINST the will of the people, who provide the things or content they collected. There was also a legal framework to regulate distribution, access and broadcasting of that content. In addition there were clear regulations about who was allowed to access this information and that people, who had the right to access the information, had to identify themselves.
Nothing of that is regulated on the internet medium. Nowhere has it been decided upon BY THE PEOPLE, which represents the PUBLIC, who owns the archives generated on the "Public" forum of the web. I am member of the public. I don't own the archives, I even don't own my own comments. Right now, someone (VALinux) owns this comment. What is public about it ? It's private property of the VALinux corporation. The only thing public about it, is the fact that VALinux has decided to leave access to this comment on their servers open for world wide reading and searching for a yet undetermined length of time. It's their decicison, which they could make, because they own the archives, and NOT the PUBLIC. The fact that, as soon as VALinux to provide a world-wide readable web forum, it can't control the content anymore from being archived, logged, mirrored once it is out by someone else, does not mean by default that WE, the people, agree to give up that control of the content as well.
It's not the government, who decides, which rights the government has to archive information they gather. It's the people who make the laws, which govern the government. The people decide that WE, the people, have the right to access all information, WE allowed the government to gather about US.
If corporations (or the government) are gathering information about us, they find on the internet, and archive them, WE, the people, have NOT decided, that THEY are allowed to do that, nor have WE (yet) decided, that WE have a right to access all information, which was generated on the internet by US.
Amazon owns Alexa, Alexa owns the complete usenet and web archives of the first couple of years.
Early dejanews.com at least offered nuke options for users to delete the traces they have innocently left in the early years on public forums without thinking much about the consequences. Since it was bought by Google, a same option has not been implemented. Just wait til Google sells its stuff to AOL. How much more blinded do you want to get ?
The info lands in the hand of corporations. That is what is wrong with it.
Strangely enough, if someone suggest that the people in the U.S. should register their place of residence (as it is done in other European countries), you hear an outcry of Americans protesting that their privacy and freedom would be restricted.
But when corporation thrive on any information they can get about you, then it's ok.
What kind of hypocritical thinking is that ?
Quite frankly, corporations which don't delete the accounts of their customers, because they are just too plain lazy to do it, can go to hell. It should be mandatory.
That's American business tactics. You are always served with a surprise stab in the back in the last minute. It's just something European companies have to know, expect and learn.
It's shitty to have to be so suspicious, and probably, being always suspicious, one ends up misjudging the wrong people. But it is not your side who caused the necessity to be overly untrusting. Seems to me you were, as a small European company, just naive about the nature and goals of the NuSphere corporation.
Re:MySQL AB is Absolutely Right!
on
MySQL & Nusphere
·
· Score: 1
MySQL AB claims that the agreement is no longer in effect.
Seems to me that's for a reason. The interim agreement was not replaced, as agreed upon when signing the interim agreement, that this agreement would only be valid for three month and then replaced by a final agreement. A replacement didn't occur, so the the interim agreement ended.
Why didn't NuSphere pay what was agreed upon in the beginning ?
quote from the FAQ:
Did NuSphere pay MySQL AB $2.5 million?
NuSphere (or Progress) have not paid MySQL AB $2.5 million. Under the interim agreement, they have paid a total of $312,501 and the last check was cut in September 2000.
For those unaware of the history, Progress in June 2000 agreed in an interim agreement to pay MySQL AB up to $2.5 million and this information was presented in press releases around that time.
Can those press releases be found somewhere ?
Has NuSphere sued you?
Yes. On 15 June 2001, while meeting with NuSphere and Progress in Boston for the purpose of resolving our differences, NuSphere and Progress sued David Axmark personally, Michael "Monty" Widenius personally, MySQL AB, TcX DataKonsult AB, and something they call John Doe Corporation for "breach of contract, tortious interference with third party contracts and relationships and unfair competition".
Any more sources about the claims ?
I am just wondering why all this is done that sloppy. Why did MySQL AB waited til June 2001 to state in writing that the interim agreement is not any longer valid ? As for the.org site, it's a shame, but legally I think MySQL has just been sloppy not to register it. Now it's too late to and the.org name is (a)used against them. Seems to me those are just the U.S. hardball business practices the Europeans don't expect to happen. Clearly, it's NuSphere who started the mess, they sued first. Just forget it and let the courts decide. What a shame.
I just wonder what kind of contract this "John Doe Corporation" has breached and where they exercised *tortious* interference with third party contracts.
I don't agree. If a company had the right to offer a commercial license than it is the company who has written the code, i.e. MySQL AB and not another one who was not involved writing the code.
If I had to choose between any third party company to pay for services or MySQL AB I would choose MySQL AB to honor the developer's work. Period. They deserve it first. Simple as that.
That doesn't mean that I think MySQL couldn't partner up with other companies to offer a combined product of technical support services, like for example RH.
Oooh, not at all, did you ever go to a hairdresser in Northwest Washington D.C. ? French as French can be. Not only do they (American ladies) pronounce them (the French words) "perfectly", they also pay "perfectly" for the little "aventure" to do it "a la francaise" and that is "magnifique" and much "au gout" of "le hairdressers francophone" in the Metropolitan Area.
"Mon dieu, ce n'est pas la fault de la pauvre Madame Bush, que le mari 'always wears boots'." --
a french hairdresser in Washington D.C, explaining why the new First Lady hasn't the "flair" of the current "Zeitgeist" in the city, where "Mensch" is an endangered species.
What a "Schmarren".
Ich nix sprechen French. Me love Uncle Tom and Uncle Sam. But essen always French cheese.
I once ordered online all available TPJs from its beginnings, never got an answer to my order, never got the older journals.
Hopefully you find a way to make up for that. Looking forward to subscribe to the paper version, but want a complete set of ALL older journals too, in whatever format you can make them availalbe as long as they are readable "off-line".
Here a $ 140 000 000.00 worth of advice. As you said: "Of course, you don't want any children in your nasty porn site", I have a hint for you. The cheapest way really is to just check on your daughters and sons a little bit more often. They deliver everything for you for free and in real time.
The posters on Slashdot are aware of the subsequent archival and searchability. They (1) posted content with the expectation of immediate publishing in this venue, so (2) they have granted web-publishing rights for the works.
I doubt that by granting web-publishing rights of your own comment, you would also grant time unlimited archival rights. Neither do I believe that by posting to slashdot, I would by default agree to give up my rights to delete or edit my own comment. I may accept the status quo, because of technical limitations of slashdot's site to offer such features, but I can't believe that one could conclude that slashdot has a right to deny such features, if they were requested in court.
I also doubt that a poster agrees by default that the archived comments could be sold.
Or is there fine print somewhere proving me wrong ?
I wished a lawyer could comment on that.
Slashdot Mirror
I am so good at multitasking that I can cook, do my hair, read /., K5, rootprompt, wideopen and three mailing lists at once, but never managed to code, because some clueless programmers told me I should RTFM online and the relevant mailing lists.
Big mistake. Never tell that a woman. We art just too good at reading all that's irrelevant simultaneously with that what isn't and then seem always let the wrong processes run in the background.
I am all for it, send the men home and let them do the three CCC, coding, cooking and chatting. Send me in the office an let me do the three SSSs, smiling, screaming and surfing. Meanwhile we think about the three PPPs, planning, purchasing and procrastinating and end up with three BBBs, burned out, bored and bancrupt.
Good job.
I see said the blind man to his deaf wife.
That's the question...
If it were for me, I would vote for a silent man. Because I read somewhere that men believe women think silent men are the better listeners. So, I let you geeks believe that...as long as your chosen leader keeps silent most of the time, it's fine by me.
If the RedHats and the Mandrakes and the VALinux-ers etc wouldn't support the original programmers, who developed the code, I would say your arguement would be right. But I think they try to do what they can to support developers. So
"the RedHats" or "the Mandrakes", who do you think they are ? Some strange evil species or what ?
What's wrong with having any company, Dell, HP, Compaq or what have you sell ONE model of their laptops or PCs with Linux preconfigured and sell it at CompUSA, Best Buy or whatever ?
Sometimes I have the feeling the geeks couldn't just stand that their favourite toy goes mainstream. No more fun out of getting the "I am just smarter than you" bashing attitude. Mami can get her Linux box without you. Not to imagine, she could even get her server box set up without you. My, oh my, that would be the end of the world, right ?
My retarded half brain bought the boxed distros in the beginning, because I was too retarded to download all the stuff over a stupid modem.
/. would be a much nicer place to live in.
Later my retarded brain became so sophisticated that I bought the boxed distros for the accompanying documentation to see which distro cares more about their customer's fullblown retarded brains.
Who would try to use the opportunity to write good handbooks for their distros so that potential clients would finally get cured from their retardism and be ever so grateful to become loyal supporters of open/free software ? That was THE
question which my heart desired to get an answer to.
Now I am cured and have a big, mellow heart. That's why I am still buying every disto I want to try out in a boxed version from my neighborhood computer store. I just fell in love with the idea that people work to keep the source code open and I think they deserve my support.
Actually I am proud to be a retarded supporters of companies, who support free/open source software and am quite willing to invest my couple of pennies in them.
If just the geeks would be as retarded as I am, the world of
Another good poll would be: How much did you spend on Linux/Unix books in comparison to Windows books?
Oh, well, just another coincidence of choosing names too closely related to GPL software. Why, oh why, one wonders.
The parent corporation of Nusphere, the Progress Corporation, offers an RDBMS called Progress 9.1.
Is that a database based on the GPL ProgreSQL code ? Is that an attempt to manage both GPL databases, MySQL and ProgreSQL, commercially ? Or has Progress Corporation nothing to do with ProgreSQL ?
Cop-out answer. Obviously the question was meant to be based on a situation, where you have a male and a female candidate, who both look for their first employment as a system admin with both having the same qualifications to offer.
That is a realistic, real life situation. Make it even more realistic. Think of people who have worked in other fields before and change careers. Their previous work experiences have very little to do with their newly chosen field. What's wrong with that question ?
I see hundreds of people from all walks of life attempting it. If there wouldn't be a problem with it, why is the first thing any female student on an American college campus runs in is a "Woman's Association for XYZ" ? IT and Computing Sciences are no exemptions.
I haven't seen the same need or trend in Europe. Why ? Strangely enough the U.S. has many more, and more explicit laws to protect against discrimination because of age, gender or race. If there were no issue, there wouldn't be a need for
so many women to organize themselves in their own "gender based" associations. I am not used to it and it upsets me pretty much that actually there are separate professional association for women in almost any professional field. I am a woman and I think it's strange. So, my question as someone, who wasn't raised in the U.S., is to tell me why.
Another thing I observed is that in the field of system admin, the women you see, who learned their skills on the job, are women, who work for the military. That was actually the last place I would have guessed to find the least discrimination in giving women the same kind of work exposure as men. But again, I am not from the U.S. I may misunderstand the situation. That's why I posted my question here.
1. How do you choose among candidates, who apply for their first system admin job ?
2. How do you evaluate their "experience" or "education" ? What would you want to see them to bring to the table ?
3. If training on the job is non existent, how do you come to believe that a candidate has what it takes ?
4. Which educational path do you trust most ? C.S. college graduates, or adult education with certification good enough ?
5. If you had female and male candidates, what would be the reason to choose or not to choose a woman ?
Sure, but when I have finished studying a book I bought, and ready to give it away (which is extremely hard for me to do anyway), then the book is already outdated and the newer edition out. Do you want me to donate old computer books ?
Well then, if they are private, they are private and they should be allowed to do on their *private network* whatever they want with content provided by its users. But they should not be allowed to do whatever they want with the user provided content on the complete network of the internet, which they only own partly.
Instead of demanding from me to use a private network, if I don't like their way of providing too little control over the content I provide to them, they should be asked to use their private network, where they then can have rightfully complete control user provided content.
What do you deduct from the fact that they are private entities, but use the worldwide network publicly, as if the complete internet were owned by them in its entirety ? Neither VALinux, AOL/Amazon or the government own the internet alone, therefore neither should be allowed to decide about the distribution of content on the internet in a manner, as if the complete network were owned by just one of them.
Let's say if the total of all existing servers on the internet were x million and the total of all available bandwidth were y million and VALinux would own 1/100 000 of the total number of servers and 2/100 000 of the total existing bandwidth, why should they have total units of control over the content distribution and not just 1/100 000 units of control, which would be their weighted shares of ownership on the total network ?
Why is public usage and public ownership of the internet understood as if it actually would exist?
I don't see any public ownership and almost no laws, which would govern that public property's usage by the people. I see only public usage without public control. Even if they own the content, they don't own the complete network on which they are distributing and allow uncontrolled third party usage of that content to happen.
This is BTW not at all VALinux or Amazon bashing. It's just one example to make a point.
So, what is the logic in supporting on the one hand the transparency and openess of the source code for the public, but at the same token accepting that publicly provided content is not free and not under public control ?
Blech. It's the lame excuse of people, who can't find a better argument as to assume that all motivation for my point of view is rooted in some feeling of personal embarrassment, because one might have said something one regrets later, or in a some paranoia about Amazon or AOL logging my last purchase of a CD among zillions of other data.
If the issue were that lame, I and, I assume, also you, would not fight over it.
The meaning of PUBLIC forum goes much deeper than that.
The whole idea that, what used to be defined loosely as PUBLIC forum in the pre-internet days, when most of our privacy laws were created, can be nilly-willy extended over to a world-wide accessible, indexable, searchable and storable medium of the internet, is just short-sighted.
In pre-internet age content, generated for public usage on a publicly accessible medium, like a published book, a newspaper, a radio broadcast, in a wire transcript of a town meeting etc, was limited to your town, your newspaper-, film-, or library archives and bookstores. The distribution of archived material was limited to certain physical locations and their storage limited timewise. Before something was decided to be kept in public libraries (paid for by your government and my tax dollars) for good, librarians filtered it and made decisions about its relevance. Books have natural lifetime and go through an editorial process, as well as newspaper articles.
There was not ONE medium in the pre-internet time, where material stored was not limited, compressed, managed, edited and filtered by some human brain. And if it was not done by a human brain, it was done by time. Sources fade away. Grass grows over things. The world goes on, repeating itself. People could count on that.
All those pre-internet time archives had a clearly defined ownership. Either it was the government or a private entity or a corporation. For each of those entities, there was a legal framework of what they were allowed to collect and archive AGAINST the will of the people, who provide the things or content they collected. There was also a legal framework to regulate distribution, access and broadcasting of that content. In addition there were clear regulations about who was allowed to access this information and that people, who had the right to access the information, had to identify themselves.
Nothing of that is regulated on the internet medium. Nowhere has it been decided upon BY THE PEOPLE, which represents the PUBLIC, who owns the archives generated on the "Public" forum of the web. I am member of the public. I don't own the archives, I even don't own my own comments. Right now, someone (VALinux) owns this comment. What is public about it ? It's private property of the VALinux corporation. The only thing public about it, is the fact that VALinux has decided to leave access to this comment on their servers open for world wide reading and searching for a yet undetermined length of time. It's their decicison, which they could make, because they own the archives, and NOT the PUBLIC. The fact that, as soon as VALinux to provide a world-wide readable web forum, it can't control the content anymore from being archived, logged, mirrored once it is out by someone else, does not mean by default that WE, the people, agree to give up that control of the content as well.
It's not the government, who decides, which rights the government has to archive information they gather. It's the people who make the laws, which govern the government. The people decide that WE, the people, have the right to access all information, WE allowed the government to gather about US.
If corporations (or the government) are gathering information about us, they find on the internet, and archive them, WE, the people, have NOT decided, that THEY are allowed to do that, nor have WE (yet) decided, that WE have a right to access all information, which was generated on the internet by US.
Amazon owns Alexa, Alexa owns the complete usenet and web archives of the first couple of years.
Early dejanews.com at least offered nuke options for users to delete the traces they have innocently left in the early years on public forums without thinking much about the consequences. Since it was bought by Google, a same option has not been implemented. Just wait til Google sells its stuff to AOL. How much more blinded do you want to get ?
The info lands in the hand of corporations. That is what is wrong with it.
Strangely enough, if someone suggest that the people in the U.S. should register their place of residence (as it is done in other European countries), you hear an outcry of Americans protesting that their privacy and freedom would be restricted.
But when corporation thrive on any information they can get about you, then it's ok.
What kind of hypocritical thinking is that ?
Quite frankly, corporations which don't delete the accounts of their customers, because they are just too plain lazy to do it, can go to hell. It should be mandatory.
That's American business tactics. You are always served with a surprise stab in the back in the last minute. It's just something European companies have to know, expect and learn.
It's shitty to have to be so suspicious, and probably, being always suspicious, one ends up misjudging the wrong people. But it is not your side who caused the necessity to be overly untrusting. Seems to me you were, as a small European company, just naive about the nature and goals of the NuSphere corporation.
Seems to me that's for a reason. The interim agreement was not replaced, as agreed upon when signing the interim agreement, that this agreement would only be valid for three month and then replaced by a final agreement. A replacement didn't occur, so the the interim agreement ended.
Why didn't NuSphere pay what was agreed upon in the beginning ?
quote from the FAQ:
Did NuSphere pay MySQL AB $2.5 million?
NuSphere (or Progress) have not paid MySQL AB $2.5 million. Under the interim agreement, they have paid a total of $312,501 and the last check was cut in September 2000.
For those unaware of the history, Progress in June 2000 agreed in an interim agreement to pay MySQL AB up to $2.5 million and this information was presented in press releases around that time.
Can those press releases be found somewhere ?
Has NuSphere sued you?
Yes. On 15 June 2001, while meeting with NuSphere and Progress in Boston for the purpose of resolving our differences, NuSphere and Progress sued David Axmark personally, Michael "Monty" Widenius personally, MySQL AB, TcX DataKonsult AB, and something they call John Doe Corporation for "breach of contract, tortious interference with third party contracts and relationships and unfair competition".
Any more sources about the claims ?
I am just wondering why all this is done that sloppy. Why did MySQL AB waited til June 2001 to state in writing that the interim agreement is not any longer valid ? As for the .org site, it's a shame, but legally I think MySQL has just been sloppy not to register it. Now it's too late to and the .org name is (a)used against them. Seems to me those are just the U.S. hardball business practices the Europeans don't expect to happen. Clearly, it's NuSphere who started the mess, they sued first. Just forget it and let the courts decide. What a shame.
I just wonder what kind of contract this "John Doe Corporation" has breached and where they exercised *tortious* interference with third party contracts.
I don't agree. If a company had the right to offer a commercial license than it is the company who has written the code, i.e. MySQL AB and not another one who was not involved writing the code.
If I had to choose between any third party company to pay for services or MySQL AB I would choose MySQL AB to honor the developer's work. Period. They deserve it first. Simple as that.
That doesn't mean that I think MySQL couldn't partner up with other companies to offer a combined product of technical support services, like for example RH.
Oooh, not at all, did you ever go to a hairdresser in Northwest Washington D.C. ? French as French can be. Not only do they (American ladies) pronounce them (the French words) "perfectly", they also pay "perfectly" for the little "aventure" to do it "a la francaise" and that is "magnifique" and much "au gout" of "le hairdressers francophone" in the Metropolitan Area.
"Mon dieu, ce n'est pas la fault de la pauvre Madame Bush, que le mari 'always wears boots'." --
a french hairdresser in Washington D.C, explaining why the new First Lady hasn't the "flair" of the current "Zeitgeist" in the city, where "Mensch" is an endangered species.
What a "Schmarren".
Ich nix sprechen French. Me love Uncle Tom and Uncle Sam. But essen always French cheese.
what's Dr. Merkwuerdigliebe in English ?
Dr. Strangelove ?
I once ordered online all available TPJs from its beginnings, never got an answer to my order, never got the older journals.
Hopefully you find a way to make up for that. Looking forward to subscribe to the paper version, but want a complete set of ALL older journals too, in whatever format you can make them availalbe as long as they are readable "off-line".
Good news.
Stilmittel = stylistic tool
A little bit more balanced and well researched article for you with some quotes:
Yup.
How insightful to have above comment rated as insightful. How high must your IQ be to rate something so outright flat dumb so downright high ?
I doubt that by granting web-publishing rights of your own comment, you would also grant time unlimited archival rights. Neither do I believe that by posting to slashdot, I would by default agree to give up my rights to delete or edit my own comment. I may accept the status quo, because of technical limitations of slashdot's site to offer such features, but I can't believe that one could conclude that slashdot has a right to deny such features, if they were requested in court.
I also doubt that a poster agrees by default that the archived comments could be sold.
Or is there fine print somewhere proving me wrong ? I wished a lawyer could comment on that.