TITLE:Worlds Largest (38TB) Copyright bust in Germany
BODY : The German Copyright Cops GVU "Die Gesellschaft zur Verfolgung von Urheberrechtsverletzungen e.V." aka "The society for the pursuit of copyright infringements e.V." has busted the worlds largest ring of copyright violators in history.
This "Release Group" was highly organised and was releasing movies and games before they were available online anywhere else.
The GUV with the law enforcement agencies confiscated a total of 38 Terabytes of data, and 19 internet servers. A total of 800 Offices and Appartments were searched.
But AOL has been deeply involved in Worldcom, as well as Microsoft with both of them.
Worldcom was also hugly overvalued, and way buying up company left and right, until the bubble burst when the MCI merger blew up.
The real question at hand is, when will the AOL bubble burst?
Or is there more to the Microsoft Worldcom AOL Triangle that will we find out when more people lose thier pension funds?
It is also a question, what is the real value of Microsoft? How much of it is hyperinflated, and what if it turns into another worldcom with cooked books full of accounting tricks. If it is anything like its partners, I would not be suprised if they were involved in such practices with them.
>>Suse should never have made it closed in the first >>place. I will NEVER use ANYTHING made by such >>a shady company.
I have to agree with you. The fact that they are only doing this after the merger does not make them more believable. It is one of the reasons that I dont use Suse. But when it is released, surly Debian will gain something from Yast.
One the other hand, It did make the company SuSe more valuable and prevented others from just taking the installer.
BTW, I think it is very ontopic to point out the bug fixing policies of pnet/c. I am one of the *few* people who even uses pnetc and one of the *fewer* people who reports bugs on it. It would suprise me if anyone has reported more.
Dear Anonymous Coward, If you had the *guts* to post with your *real name*, I would give it more credibility.
** COWARD ***
"Actually it sounds from your own description that you got banned from the project for being an asshole." Yes, I was being unpleasant. But, you can see that it is not the point. I have learned my lessons from dotgnu, and surly wont be making the same mistakes again.
"The fact that you have an axe to grind doesn't lend you much credibility to indict the whole project" I am not "indicting" the whole project, I am pointing out that Rhys is being unfair to other developers by hiding bugs and pretending that they dont exist.
It is a disservice to other developers close bugs without reason. The backpedling makes his arguments weaker.
That is the the real sign of the lack of integrity, the fact that my bug reports were being all fixed. That was also because *noone* was really reporting bugs pnet/c for anything complex at the time. So my bug reports were welcome, becuase no one else was bothering.
One good thing I have to say about Rhsy is that he fixes bugs quickly!
My sometimes harsh and questioning nature that brought me to free software is sometimes too much for people to take.
I bitched and moaned alot about dotgnu implementing patent-endanged code instead of following thier original plan.
My complaining got me banned from the project.
Now instead of accepting reports about this buggy software that would warn people that it is not usable on really challenging code (like libx11 or the gcc) that I was compiling with it.
In the end, he of course appreciated my valid bug report and fixed them like all the other ones.
The arguments that my bugs are not valid really dont hold water if all of them are fixed. The reality is that the software was lacking major testing, and that my reporting of all these bugs reflected that unstable state.
The funny thing it the backpedling you can find in the history here, the bug is turned from invalid to fixed! "Mon 02/16/04 at 23:41 rweather resolution_id Invalid Fixed"
So, I would really think twice before spending your time working on pnet/c, because the developers are trying to hide bugs from you! (the ones that I reported (Real bugs))
Is it possible to change strings values and integer variables to contain cryptographic values?
Is it possible to add bytes or set bits in the code that can be scanned for? what about all the wasted bits in enums?
What about slight changes to all the enum values, all the contant values that are not really important. insertion of md5 checksums into the unused data of the program?
That could be done to the source code at a given time. You could setup rules that would use parts of the codes values in the compiler to produce the checksum. The gcc could be extended to allow for a crytpgraphic digest function. That would allow for the code to be signed. Basically the checksum would be stored in the wasted space. When you have the checksum of the entire program (after scanning all the executabl code), you also know where are the free space is. Then you pass through that and insert the checksum into the free space. That is then a fingerprint of the program. Then you can check yourself if the code has been copied.
Now to apply that to only parts of the code, given only the binaries? Well you could make it very hard to guess at all the changes made to the code. I think there is a big chance in watermarking code that could be recogised in the binaries.
mike
. What about hidden values in variable? Hidden constants? What about using cryptographic enums? If the enum values were generated by a cryptographic function, then you could look for them. The enum is generally 16-32 bit
I have written to Janke about allowing me to use the database schema under a GPL Dual Licensed Product with MPL. I dont know what to make of his answer, do you think he understood the question?
In summary, I think that these patented interfaces are not only bad, but they are corrupting and dividing the open source and free software implementations of the software.
I find it amazing that dotgnu has a contest to implement patented interfaces. They say, that this stuff is #ifdef'd out, but it still throws a bad light onto the whole competition.
Why should they pay people to implement code that will need to be thrown away?
Slashdot Mirror
The plugin architecture is based on an "gcc exception" that
in my humble opinion, and I am not a lawyer, is very shaky.
See my article on this :
http://rdfintrospector2.blogspot.com/2009/01/gnu-gcc-compiler-introspector-reloaded.html
mike
"Intel is in the business of selling hardware, not software, and so will support/recommend whatever they think is most advantagrous to them."
Intel is moving into the biz of selling software big time
Microsoft has a rational for buying a telecoms company, considering the weak telecoms market at this moment.
People have to really consider that AOL is also a competitor that Microsoft wants to take out
But I cannot seem to find any history of restaments of earnings about this topic with microsoft.
but here you can read about the restatments from AOL to "reduce revenue by $190 million and would erase $97 million in qualified earnings from its books over a 21-month period"
It is very funny that Microsoft DID recently post a restatement of 2billion based on stock options, but I wonder if there was something else pidgonholed away in there.,
But veritas restated its earnings because of its dealings with AOL!
TITLE :Worlds Largest (38TB) Copyright bust in Germany
BODY : The German Copyright Cops GVU "Die Gesellschaft zur Verfolgung von Urheberrechtsverletzungen e.V." aka "The society for the pursuit of copyright infringements e.V." has busted the worlds largest ring of copyright violators in history.
This "Release Group" was highly organised and was releasing movies and games before they were available online anywhere else.
The GUV with the law enforcement agencies confiscated a total of 38 Terabytes of data, and 19 internet servers. A total of 800 Offices and Appartments were searched.
Here is the Original German Press Release
and for you non Deutsch speaking people
BabelFisched .
After worldcom imploded, everyone looked to put the blame on them, but forget to ask about the partners in crime.
Simlar to the illegal practice of swapping bandwidth at the end of the quarter to inflate the value of the company that worldcom, quest and colt were involved in was also practiced by AOL.
But AOL has been deeply involved in Worldcom, as well as Microsoft with both of them.
Worldcom was also hugly overvalued, and way buying up company left and right, until the bubble burst when the MCI merger blew up.
The real question at hand is, when will the AOL bubble burst?
Or is there more to the Microsoft Worldcom AOL Triangle that will we find out when more people lose thier pension funds?
It is also a question, what is the real value of Microsoft? How much of it is hyperinflated, and what if it turns into another worldcom with cooked books full of accounting tricks. If it is anything like its partners, I would not be suprised if they were involved in such practices with them.
Also, Why is it that microsoft was interested in buying corrupt companies like Worldcom?
>>Suse should never have made it closed in the first >>place. I will NEVER use ANYTHING made by such >>a shady company.
I have to agree with you. The fact that they are only doing this after the merger does not make them more believable. It is one of the reasons that I dont use Suse. But when it is released, surly Debian will gain something from Yast.
One the other hand, It did make the company SuSe more valuable and prevented others from just taking the installer.
BTW,
I think it is very ontopic to point out the bug fixing policies of pnet/c. I am one of the *few* people who even uses pnetc and one of the *fewer* people who reports bugs on it. It would suprise me if anyone has reported more.
So, My complaint is ontopic, IMHO.
You *** COWARD ***,Please come out an show your face. I would be suprised if you were not someone that I know. What a baby.
It is not about me being banned from the list,
it is about the hiding of bug reports.
It is a disservice to other developers when bug reports are hidden from them.
Think abuot
mike
Dear Anonymous Coward,
If you had the *guts* to post with your *real name*, I would give it more credibility.
** COWARD ***
"Actually it sounds from your own description that you got banned from the project for being an asshole."
Yes, I was being unpleasant. But, you can see that it is not the point. I have learned my lessons from dotgnu, and surly wont be making the same mistakes again.
"The fact that you have an axe to grind doesn't lend you much credibility to indict the whole project"
I am not "indicting" the whole project, I am pointing out that Rhys is being unfair to other developers by hiding bugs and pretending that they dont exist.
It is a disservice to other developers close bugs without reason. The backpedling makes his arguments weaker.
That is the the real sign of the lack of integrity, the fact that my bug reports were being all fixed. That was also because *noone* was really reporting bugs pnet/c for anything complex at the time. So my bug reports were welcome, becuase no one else was bothering.
Just wanted to point out that I have produced the most bug reports for pnet at the time (currently 54 bug reports in the system).
:
One good thing I have to say about Rhsy is that he fixes bugs quickly!
My sometimes harsh and questioning nature that brought me to free software is sometimes too much for people to take.
I bitched and moaned alot about dotgnu implementing patent-endanged code instead of following thier original plan.
My complaining got me banned from the project.
Now instead of accepting reports about this buggy software that would warn people that it is not usable on really challenging code (like libx11 or the gcc) that I was compiling with it.
The author rhys tried to *gag* me.
I complained to savannah about this here
In the end, he of course appreciated my valid bug report and fixed them like all the other ones.
The arguments that my bugs are not valid really dont hold water if all of them are fixed. The reality is that the software was lacking major testing, and that my reporting of all these bugs reflected that unstable state.
The funny thing it the backpedling you can find in the history here, the bug is turned from invalid to fixed!
"Mon 02/16/04 at 23:41 rweather resolution_id Invalid Fixed"
So, I would really think twice before spending your time working on pnet/c, because the developers are trying to hide bugs from you! (the ones that I reported (Real bugs))
mike
Is it possible to watermark code?
Is it possible to change strings values and integer variables to contain cryptographic values?
Is it possible to add bytes or set bits in the code that can be scanned for? what about all the wasted bits in enums?
What about slight changes to all the enum values, all the contant values that are not really important. insertion of md5 checksums into the unused data of the program?
That could be done to the source code at a given time. You could setup rules that would use parts of the codes values in the compiler to produce the checksum. The gcc could be extended to allow for a crytpgraphic digest function. That would allow for the code to be signed. Basically the checksum would be stored in the wasted space. When you have the checksum of the entire program (after scanning all the executabl code), you also know where are the free space is. Then you pass through that and insert the checksum into the free space. That is then a fingerprint of the program. Then you can check yourself if the code has been copied.
Now to apply that to only parts of the code, given only the binaries? Well you could make it very hard to guess at all the changes made to the code.
I think there is a big chance in watermarking code that could be recogised in the binaries.
mike
. What about hidden values in variable? Hidden constants? What about using cryptographic enums? If the enum values were generated by a cryptographic function, then you could look for them. The enum is generally 16-32 bit
1. Does not IBM have a full copy of the source code they bought from
SCO?
2. Does not IBM have a full copy of the AIX source code?
3. Cannot these source code bodies be compared with linux sources,
without publishing the differences?
Does it really matter what the source code that SCO has is, when IBM
is the one with the copies of the source?
Then IBM can do the comparison themselves....
mike
Dear Anonymous Coward,
Who are you? Come out and Fight.
mike
Dear Anonymous Coward,
Are you Janke himself? How would you know all of this? Please tell me who you are and what you have done so far.
mike
So where are the previous results of the porting? What about a cvs access to what has been done?
Why is it not being published and open to view?
mike
I have worked on enterprise software. I am going to rewrite the backend using gnue
mike
Yes, Well Your right. Give me a year, then I will have something to offer.
mike
Yes the database schema was only an hour or two of work.
Your right, the java files are not ported. Sorry that I did not say that.
Java files? Well that is another story. I am working on the database first, I personally dont think that java code is really that worth it.
My plan is to make a new GNUE app server module that handles the requirements of Compiere and ther other open source ERP systems.
mike
The real problem hindering Compiere developement is the choice of the MPL
:
The Mozilla was relicensed
why-relicensing
I have written to Janke about allowing me to use the database schema under a GPL Dual Licensed Product with MPL. I dont know what to make of his answer, do you think he understood the question?
LICENSE MAIL
That would be the best thing for Compiere'S Future.
mike
I dont know if the GUI works, but the DB builds.
If you want to support my effort, donate $5 to mdupont777@yahoo.com on paypal.
mike
I have already ported this to postgres on the weekend.
Compiere.pgsql
mike
In summary, I think that these patented interfaces are not only bad, but they are corrupting and dividing the open source and free software implementations of the software.
I find it amazing that dotgnu has a contest to implement patented interfaces. They say, that this stuff is #ifdef'd out, but it still throws a bad light onto the whole competition.
Why should they pay people to implement code that will need to be thrown away?
You might want to read
MY MAIL ABOUT THIS SUBJECT HERE.
mike
Flamebait?
I dont think so.
The politics of redhat when it comes to licensing are scary. We need to have more public awareness as to what is really going on.
I think your right.
I posted over 57 bug reports to the project, yet they are discounted. Even if 99% fixed.
Rhys is discriminating against honest help, and I find that he is driving away help. Now they would rather buy help!?
In any case, now they are trying to use Intellectual property law against would be contributors that they have decided to ban.
I think that they have forgotten about the principles of free software.
mike