This is a form of espionage which is illegal without a court order.
If you read the article, you would know that the email were part of the discovery they had gained legally.
IBM bought a the rights long before SCOX even created.
For a different version of Unix, SVR3 not SVR4. Their rights to use 4 was based on several conditions that they no longer meet. They have made about 180 million on AIX software since then. (not counting hardware). I hate SCO as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean that this is not valid, none of us know yet.
I am not saying SCO has anything, but they might, again, if you bother to actually read the article. It would not be the end of the world for IBM either way, as they are pushing toward Linux on all hardware. We need more info before jumping to conclusions or karma whoring.
It's not the damn money. I'm sick of this argument getting trotted out every fucking time this issue comes up. I for one, am tired of remembering 894752097835984375 different logins for every site I visit through the day, and I sure as hell am not going to bother with a site I'll visit maybe once to read an interesting tidbit.
No one said anything about money, we said that reg'ing is the price you pay for access. That means no money. Tired of all the logins and passwords? I use the same name, throwaway email and password on every bullshit registration site. Not sites like slashdot, but sites where I only read, like NYT, etc. If I go to a site and the login doesn't work, then I register with that login/email/pass. Only one to remember for every site in the world. Oh, and my password for all those sites: password. So all i remember is the same bogus login name I have used since 1995.
I mean, am I supposed to worry someone is going to hack my account on a news site? Damn, you guys *REALLY* should be smart enough to figure that out. Its not like they ask for a fucking credit card.
The problem is that it is not a fair trade. Their one article, locked behind a registration barrier and available elsewhere most likely, becomes outdated 24 hours later. My personal information does not and is much more valuable than that soon-to-be-outdated article.
Then don't go to registration sites. They do not have a monopoly on news, you know. That is the whole point. You have a right to choose. You DON'T have a right to tell others how to do business.
Is a very small price to pay for free content. Besides, with portals like Google news, if there is a story you are interested in, there is a good chance that several other media outlets have written a similar article.
I agree, and would add that it would increase diversity, not decrease it. Everyone has a throwaway email account they can use for free regs, or can get one in 30 seconds. Its is *free* regs we are talking about, after all.
Yes, information wants to be free, but someone has to pay for it and if targeting ads is the price, so be it. I can always not visit the site. It's amazing how people will raise so much hell over registering to get free content, and then bitch about the ads. Holy Christ, its free, but its not "free enough"? I guess they would like to get unemployment benefits even tho they have never had and will not seek a job, too.
Huh? The solution the previous poster is describing is _inherently_ wireless.
The styluses at my bank are not wireless. They use an old fashioned steel cord that is always just a hair too short to be useful, forcing you to put the viewing surface in an uncomfortable position to input data. Also, they use a "write once, read many times" core in the stylus, and its seems that over half the time, the stylus is defective and incapable of input anyway.
These hot spot do provide lots of specific input surfaces, but they are proprietary and only allow limited data input related to their own business. Oh, and they don't even offer coffee or bagels.
And a marketing push for SCO Openserver/Unixware will?
<form action="smoke" value="crack">
Sure. Now that they are not the litigious bastards they once were, wouldn't you want to do business with them? I am sure they will start contributing code to GPL projects, maybe even the same code in questions, to prevent any further problems in the future. I would not be shocked if they released a new version of SCO Linux with the 2.6 kernel in a few weeks, and refunded what few license fees they received. When all is said and done, most people will just let it pass and understand that they were just mistaken in their belief that they owned Linux IP. I mean, its not like anyone was actually hurt, right?
Amen, this is more Michael Moore flavoured BS that says that if anything bad has happened in the last 4 years, it must be Bush's fault, regardless of the lack of evidence. It just "must be". Bush is a big boy and can take the heat for his shortcomings, but I get sick of blanket attacks on ANY person where the author simply says "Everyone knows this, you must be dumb for not knowing it". Thats not an arguement, thats flamebait.
The reason (it seems) that patent registrations are increasing is easy: They are working (ie: profitable). They will increase as long as they are working, until they stop working. Once (or if) the courts start blowing all these patents out of the water, and not allowing enforcement of overly broad patents, then you will see the number of patents applied for decrease.
Simple economics, if you something is profitable, do more of it. If it is not, do less. It has no bearing on who is President. It *may* be affected by Congress, if they pass laws that change the status of patents, making them more or less inforceable, but that takes getting hundreds of old men to agree on something. As of late, this hasn't been an issue.
I had to google for it, dropping the.exe part, but found that littel jewel here. In spite of what you said, it seems to work. I installed it on my P4 2.4ghz laptop, ran it, and now my laptop runs as fast as a 486dx/66, just as advertised.
Actually, a "Slashdotting" or "The Slashdot Effect" does not have to originate from Slashdot anymore. According to the definition by Wikipedia it originated from Slashdot, but is now considered a generic term. Quoting Wiki:
It can be generalized to refer to any time a popular website links to another one. Typically, less robust sites are unable to cope with the huge increase in traffic and become unavailable -- either their bandwidth is consumed or their servers are unable to cope with the high strain.
While Slashdot may be the source of more than 70% of the slashdotting, it is not the source of 100% anymore. I am not sure if other dictionaries recognize or accept this definition, however.
According to Apple, it is based on FreeBSD. I assume that NeXT borrowed code from the various BSD projects as well. NeXT was proof you could do a consumer OS from BSD, but not the original source of the kernel. The GUI, perhaps.
Go do a google for "freebsd site:apple.com" and you will see 2690 hits. OS/X kernel is absolutely derived from FreeBSD, and benefits from improvements to FreeBSD. I think this is one reason the kernel (Darwin) is open source.
I guess as soon as the HURD is production ready, we can just call it GNUNIX. Then again, considering the pace of the HURD project, I don't think we will need to worry about this for a few decades.
In Unix you *can't* remove a program. They are all mixed in together and it is hopeless to determine what files belong to what package unless you keep a database of this.
rpm -e packagename
Yea, thats real tough. Or if it was compliled from source either:
cd/pathtosrc make uninstall
or if all else fails, delete the executable and blow off the libs if any:
cd/pathtogame rm -f filename
Me thinks you are either very confused about deleting files in Unix or full of FUD. We are not talking about removing one specific element of Open Office or Mozilla, we are talking about a GAME being removed.
As someone who uses Windows and Linux equally, I can promise you that it is easier to remove a program in Linux than Windows much of the time. Windows can give you "Can't uninstall, can't find setup file" errors, which I have NEVER gotten with Linux. I had this EXACT problem with Windows last night, on a box I am prepping as a media center. Its making me consider using Linux for the media center now.
How about if it recognized that you were running say, SETI@Home, and it optimized itself to execute that algorithm faster?
It would seem to me that this is exactly what the article seems to indicate. If what you are doing is not i/o, disk or memory intensive, but instead 98% cpu cycles (like seti@home or other distributed computing) then it would adjust. If you are rendering frames in a SGI fashion, it would change. If you are using it for streaming media box, adjust. The big questions are: How long does it take to adjust and what is the criteria to change? What is the reference time? Can it be tweaked through software? (force 'setiathome' mode, for instance).
Another thing to keep in mind: This technology can apply to any chip, and it will be implemented in 970/Power4/Power5 grade chips, which are already kickass SMP chips from the ground up. With an 8 or 16 way box, using dual core Power5 chips, holy crap on a stick, this IS is beowolf in a box, and one that adjust or repairs itself.
How applicable. Nothing beats a technology that brings up images of either "2001" or "The Matrix". (insert eFuse Overlord joke here)
But on a more serious note, while this sounds pretty cool, it still breaks down to this: If a portion of the chip is screwed up, eFuse will bypass it. If you bypass part of the chip, you will have lower performance. I can see where this would be good in enterprise computing *IF* the chip also *TELLS* you that it is messed up, so if a portion of the chip becomes defective, it will still operate until it can be replaced. This would be great for uptimes and in mission critical systems, but for overclocking desktop system, this seems pretty useless, here is why:
Take a 2ghz chip. Overclock to 2.5ghz. Blow two eFuses (oops). Now chip at 2.5ghz functions as fast as a 2ghz chip. Clock back down, and it performs as fast as a 1.5ghz chip. Sell chip or system on eBay to someone without telling them eFuses are blown, screwing them over.
Unless there is a way to test if the eFuses are blown, I can see some real problems on the used market for this kind of chip. This would also apply to "why is this server performing like crap?" situations. Of course, as long as the eFuses are not blown, but are instead just reordering its own logic for specific uses (web server only, database server, etc), this would be majorly kick ass offering a quazi-specific purpose system on the fly. Especially once you have a kernel module that can talk to it and tell it what kinds of changes in routing would be best for a given platform, telling it "this computer is used for $x only, route logic accordingly".
technically, IE didn't permit execution of code, since Mozilla would do the same thing. Both simply handed the URL over to the OS (shell:// I believe) so the problem was actually OS related, NOT browser related. Both browsers were doing what they were supposted to do. The fix was to disable the shell:// URL type in both Mozilla and IE.
But anything that allows you to produce a certificate for SSL that looks real, as well as create a false window that appears to be from a place it is not originating from, IS a bug, since the original intention was not to facilitate fraud.
This is why I use Windows, which is more secure because hackers can't search the code for vulnerabilities to exploit. </stupidity>
But it does make me glad I have both installed on all computers. It is ironic tho, with all the MS bashing, and this is actually a more serious exploit the last few IE exploits. Firefox doesn't have the quantity of bugs that IE has, but it makes up for it with the quality I guess.
As for me, I'm gonna start surfing in a shell with Lynx.
Do you notice a speed up in web surfing when blocking those ads?
On my laptop (2.4ghz), which is wireless to cable modem but far away and a weak link (1mb avg) I can tell a difference because I am not downloading the ads. Some ads are big, some use flash, some use jave, all use some bandwidth. But yea, I notice a moderate difference. Your mileage may vary, but I would image that the slower the connection you have (or if you are p2p or bittorent'ing), the bigger the difference it would make.
I have it installed on this box, along with IE. I still use IE half the time. I use mozilla on my linux boxes, but (i hate to say it) there are are certain aspects of IE that are more comfortable, or at least more familiar. Keep in mind, im an old geek, not a hobbiest. Been using Linux and GNU software for years and it is catching up very fast, but I still use the tools that make me more productive, and IE fits that bill at least half the time. The pops ups don't annoy me as bad as they used to, now that they are all blank pages.
Oh, i found that hosts file address here. I chang a few lines for my uses (travelocity.com and osdn.com for instance) because it may break a few things, like Pogo, but its a great template for a hosts file if you customize it a bit for yourself.
except I DO allow ads.osdn.net because im a nice guy and dont mind looking at the purdy pictures from them (and they are not usually popups). I found the hosts file here on/., with about 100 lines of entries.
Re:It was submitted minutes after Groklaw put it u
on
SCO Playing Name Games
·
· Score: 1
Jeez, lighten up "Ghost in the Shell Game", the person who really should have put in the correction was Taco, since he put it up on the site. We all understand that articles arent' posted instantly. My "the author" was actually meant for TACO, not you as the submitter. Technically, the author was the gal at Grok, as what we do here at/. is hardly authoring.
It wasn't a personal attack on you. A "I submitted before the correction, but Taco didn't notice the correction" would have been fine. Posted in your real name, perhaps.
No, I read the article update last night, which is how I knew the article posting was incorrect. I went back and double checked. The author just got in a hurry and didn't finish, or forgot that part or something. Nice try tho;)
Like many slashdotters, I like to come here and discuss articles I have already seen on Groklaw and The Register a few days before...
Slashdot Mirror
This is a form of espionage which is illegal without a court order.
If you read the article, you would know that the email were part of the discovery they had gained legally.
IBM bought a the rights long before SCOX even created.
For a different version of Unix, SVR3 not SVR4. Their rights to use 4 was based on several conditions that they no longer meet. They have made about 180 million on AIX software since then. (not counting hardware). I hate SCO as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean that this is not valid, none of us know yet.
I am not saying SCO has anything, but they might, again, if you bother to actually read the article. It would not be the end of the world for IBM either way, as they are pushing toward Linux on all hardware. We need more info before jumping to conclusions or karma whoring.
Its very easy, and I have said it before:
Women want ONE man to fulfill her EVERY need.
Men want EVERY woman to fulfill his ONE need.
That is pretty much all there is to it.
It's not the damn money. I'm sick of this argument getting trotted out every fucking time this issue comes up. I for one, am tired of remembering 894752097835984375 different logins for every site I visit through the day, and I sure as hell am not going to bother with a site I'll visit maybe once to read an interesting tidbit.
No one said anything about money, we said that reg'ing is the price you pay for access. That means no money. Tired of all the logins and passwords? I use the same name, throwaway email and password on every bullshit registration site. Not sites like slashdot, but sites where I only read, like NYT, etc. If I go to a site and the login doesn't work, then I register with that login/email/pass. Only one to remember for every site in the world. Oh, and my password for all those sites: password. So all i remember is the same bogus login name I have used since 1995.
I mean, am I supposed to worry someone is going to hack my account on a news site? Damn, you guys *REALLY* should be smart enough to figure that out. Its not like they ask for a fucking credit card.
The problem is that it is not a fair trade. Their one article, locked behind a registration barrier and available elsewhere most likely, becomes outdated 24 hours later. My personal information does not and is much more valuable than that soon-to-be-outdated article.
Then don't go to registration sites. They do not have a monopoly on news, you know. That is the whole point. You have a right to choose. You DON'T have a right to tell others how to do business.
Is a very small price to pay for free content. Besides, with portals like Google news, if there is a story you are interested in, there is a good chance that several other media outlets have written a similar article.
I agree, and would add that it would increase diversity, not decrease it. Everyone has a throwaway email account they can use for free regs, or can get one in 30 seconds. Its is *free* regs we are talking about, after all.
Yes, information wants to be free, but someone has to pay for it and if targeting ads is the price, so be it. I can always not visit the site. It's amazing how people will raise so much hell over registering to get free content, and then bitch about the ads. Holy Christ, its free, but its not "free enough"? I guess they would like to get unemployment benefits even tho they have never had and will not seek a job, too.
Huh? The solution the previous poster is describing is _inherently_ wireless.
The styluses at my bank are not wireless. They use an old fashioned steel cord that is always just a hair too short to be useful, forcing you to put the viewing surface in an uncomfortable position to input data. Also, they use a "write once, read many times" core in the stylus, and its seems that over half the time, the stylus is defective and incapable of input anyway.
These hot spot do provide lots of specific input surfaces, but they are proprietary and only allow limited data input related to their own business. Oh, and they don't even offer coffee or bagels.
And a marketing push for SCO Openserver/Unixware will?
<form action="smoke" value="crack">
Sure. Now that they are not the litigious bastards they once were, wouldn't you want to do business with them? I am sure they will start contributing code to GPL projects, maybe even the same code in questions, to prevent any further problems in the future. I would not be shocked if they released a new version of SCO Linux with the 2.6 kernel in a few weeks, and refunded what few license fees they received. When all is said and done, most people will just let it pass and understand that they were just mistaken in their belief that they owned Linux IP. I mean, its not like anyone was actually hurt, right?
</form>
Oh wait, wtf was I thinking?!?
Amen, this is more Michael Moore flavoured BS that says that if anything bad has happened in the last 4 years, it must be Bush's fault, regardless of the lack of evidence. It just "must be". Bush is a big boy and can take the heat for his shortcomings, but I get sick of blanket attacks on ANY person where the author simply says "Everyone knows this, you must be dumb for not knowing it". Thats not an arguement, thats flamebait.
The reason (it seems) that patent registrations are increasing is easy: They are working (ie: profitable). They will increase as long as they are working, until they stop working. Once (or if) the courts start blowing all these patents out of the water, and not allowing enforcement of overly broad patents, then you will see the number of patents applied for decrease.
Simple economics, if you something is profitable, do more of it. If it is not, do less. It has no bearing on who is President. It *may* be affected by Congress, if they pass laws that change the status of patents, making them more or less inforceable, but that takes getting hundreds of old men to agree on something. As of late, this hasn't been an issue.
So do the guys in my sig.
Don't forget 386to486.exe while you're at it.
.exe part, but found that littel jewel here. In spite of what you said, it seems to work. I installed it on my P4 2.4ghz laptop, ran it, and now my laptop runs as fast as a 486dx/66, just as advertised.
I had to google for it, dropping the
And, the author's apparent success story notwithstanding, downloading random Russian utilities usually isn't the best way to go about that.
This was *exactly* my first thought. Glad to know I am not alone.
Actually, a "Slashdotting" or "The Slashdot Effect" does not have to originate from Slashdot anymore. According to the definition by Wikipedia it originated from Slashdot, but is now considered a generic term. Quoting Wiki:
It can be generalized to refer to any time a popular website links to another one. Typically, less robust sites are unable to cope with the huge increase in traffic and become unavailable -- either their bandwidth is consumed or their servers are unable to cope with the high strain.
While Slashdot may be the source of more than 70% of the slashdotting, it is not the source of 100% anymore. I am not sure if other dictionaries recognize or accept this definition, however.
According to Apple, it is based on FreeBSD. I assume that NeXT borrowed code from the various BSD projects as well. NeXT was proof you could do a consumer OS from BSD, but not the original source of the kernel. The GUI, perhaps.
Go do a google for "freebsd site:apple.com" and you will see 2690 hits. OS/X kernel is absolutely derived from FreeBSD, and benefits from improvements to FreeBSD. I think this is one reason the kernel (Darwin) is open source.
I guess as soon as the HURD is production ready, we can just call it GNUNIX. Then again, considering the pace of the HURD project, I don't think we will need to worry about this for a few decades.
In Unix you *can't* remove a program. They are all mixed in together and it is hopeless to determine what files belong to what package unless you keep a database of this.
/pathtosrc
/pathtogame
rpm -e packagename
Yea, thats real tough. Or if it was compliled from source either:
cd
make uninstall
or if all else fails, delete the executable and blow off the libs if any:
cd
rm -f filename
Me thinks you are either very confused about deleting files in Unix or full of FUD. We are not talking about removing one specific element of Open Office or Mozilla, we are talking about a GAME being removed.
As someone who uses Windows and Linux equally, I can promise you that it is easier to remove a program in Linux than Windows much of the time. Windows can give you "Can't uninstall, can't find setup file" errors, which I have NEVER gotten with Linux. I had this EXACT problem with Windows last night, on a box I am prepping as a media center. Its making me consider using Linux for the media center now.
How about if it recognized that you were running say, SETI@Home, and it optimized itself to execute that algorithm faster?
It would seem to me that this is exactly what the article seems to indicate. If what you are doing is not i/o, disk or memory intensive, but instead 98% cpu cycles (like seti@home or other distributed computing) then it would adjust. If you are rendering frames in a SGI fashion, it would change. If you are using it for streaming media box, adjust. The big questions are: How long does it take to adjust and what is the criteria to change? What is the reference time? Can it be tweaked through software? (force 'setiathome' mode, for instance).
Another thing to keep in mind: This technology can apply to any chip, and it will be implemented in 970/Power4/Power5 grade chips, which are already kickass SMP chips from the ground up. With an 8 or 16 way box, using dual core Power5 chips, holy crap on a stick, this IS is beowolf in a box, and one that adjust or repairs itself.
How applicable. Nothing beats a technology that brings up images of either "2001" or "The Matrix". (insert eFuse Overlord joke here)
But on a more serious note, while this sounds pretty cool, it still breaks down to this: If a portion of the chip is screwed up, eFuse will bypass it. If you bypass part of the chip, you will have lower performance. I can see where this would be good in enterprise computing *IF* the chip also *TELLS* you that it is messed up, so if a portion of the chip becomes defective, it will still operate until it can be replaced. This would be great for uptimes and in mission critical systems, but for overclocking desktop system, this seems pretty useless, here is why:
Take a 2ghz chip. Overclock to 2.5ghz. Blow two eFuses (oops). Now chip at 2.5ghz functions as fast as a 2ghz chip. Clock back down, and it performs as fast as a 1.5ghz chip. Sell chip or system on eBay to someone without telling them eFuses are blown, screwing them over.
Unless there is a way to test if the eFuses are blown, I can see some real problems on the used market for this kind of chip. This would also apply to "why is this server performing like crap?" situations. Of course, as long as the eFuses are not blown, but are instead just reordering its own logic for specific uses (web server only, database server, etc), this would be majorly kick ass offering a quazi-specific purpose system on the fly. Especially once you have a kernel module that can talk to it and tell it what kinds of changes in routing would be best for a given platform, telling it "this computer is used for $x only, route logic accordingly".
technically, IE didn't permit execution of code, since Mozilla would do the same thing. Both simply handed the URL over to the OS (shell:// I believe) so the problem was actually OS related, NOT browser related. Both browsers were doing what they were supposted to do. The fix was to disable the shell:// URL type in both Mozilla and IE.
But anything that allows you to produce a certificate for SSL that looks real, as well as create a false window that appears to be from a place it is not originating from, IS a bug, since the original intention was not to facilitate fraud.
This is why I use Windows, which is more secure because hackers can't search the code for vulnerabilities to exploit.
</stupidity>
But it does make me glad I have both installed on all computers. It is ironic tho, with all the MS bashing, and this is actually a more serious exploit the last few IE exploits. Firefox doesn't have the quantity of bugs that IE has, but it makes up for it with the quality I guess.
As for me, I'm gonna start surfing in a shell with Lynx.
Depends, did you get a bunch of 500 and 503 errors? Then its the real Slashdot. Oh, and look for dupes on the front page, the spoof's don't do that.
Do you notice a speed up in web surfing when blocking those ads?
On my laptop (2.4ghz), which is wireless to cable modem but far away and a weak link (1mb avg) I can tell a difference because I am not downloading the ads. Some ads are big, some use flash, some use jave, all use some bandwidth. But yea, I notice a moderate difference. Your mileage may vary, but I would image that the slower the connection you have (or if you are p2p or bittorent'ing), the bigger the difference it would make.
Have you tried firefox?
I have it installed on this box, along with IE. I still use IE half the time. I use mozilla on my linux boxes, but (i hate to say it) there are are certain aspects of IE that are more comfortable, or at least more familiar. Keep in mind, im an old geek, not a hobbiest. Been using Linux and GNU software for years and it is catching up very fast, but I still use the tools that make me more productive, and IE fits that bill at least half the time. The pops ups don't annoy me as bad as they used to, now that they are all blank pages.
Oh, i found that hosts file address here. I chang a few lines for my uses (travelocity.com and osdn.com for instance) because it may break a few things, like Pogo, but its a great template for a hosts file if you customize it a bit for yourself.
I use this little thing called a "hosts" file, so my IE popups are all blank ;) stuff like:
/., with about 100 lines of entries.
127.0.0.1 ads.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad2.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad3.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad4.doubleclick.net
except I DO allow ads.osdn.net because im a nice guy and dont mind looking at the purdy pictures from them (and they are not usually popups). I found the hosts file here on
Jeez, lighten up "Ghost in the Shell Game", the person who really should have put in the correction was Taco, since he put it up on the site. We all understand that articles arent' posted instantly. My "the author" was actually meant for TACO, not you as the submitter. Technically, the author was the gal at Grok, as what we do here at /. is hardly authoring.
It wasn't a personal attack on you. A "I submitted before the correction, but Taco didn't notice the correction" would have been fine. Posted in your real name, perhaps.
No, I read the article update last night, which is how I knew the article posting was incorrect. I went back and double checked. The author just got in a hurry and didn't finish, or forgot that part or something. Nice try tho ;)
Like many slashdotters, I like to come here and discuss articles I have already seen on Groklaw and The Register a few days before...