Basically in the same boat. Guess I should have seen it coming. I had service from Northpoint and PhoenixDSL for 10.5 months before they billed me at all. Then only after the Telocity sale did I start getting a bill. Wonder why they went bankrupt?:-)
A DeCSS Virus. How many charges would that be?
on
The DeCSS Haiku
·
· Score: 2
How many lawsuits would you attract and how
many charges would you get nailed with if
you wrote a Outlook virus that dropped a copy
of the DeCSS source on every machine it touched?
You got it. People I work with have built several DII COE certified and compliant software product for the government. They always deliver the DII COE version as the contract requires, then they snicker and say, "Do you also want the one that works?".
DII COE certification for Linux would exactly as you describe. The DII COE version would exist, which would allow government folks to choose Linux. The government users that really need a functioning system, would put the DII COE version in the round file and just install Debian or RedHat or similar.
DII/COE is the ultimate in US government waste and
bureaucracy. An entire fiefdom had grown up around DII COE's goals of standardization and interoperabilty. Trouble is the people setting the rules for DII COE certification (or compliance) have little real software experience. This leads to ridiculuos rules and recommendations . On the military side (where I work), this leads to many poor decisions just to be "DII COE Compliant" (most even on the inside have given up being certified its too much paper work and too much wasted money). Being a US government project, lots of contractors were hired, lots of people were put in charge of things, so this bad idea has a life and cannot be killed.
It started as standardization of things on Unix systems. When much of the military started shifting to Windows NT, DII COE followed suit, but keep their Unix rules in place. For instance, you have to install things in on the "/h" partition of your NT box, just like Unix. Of course, NT does not have partitions like Unix, so you create a "/h" directory on your NT disk drive and install stuff there. Another for instance, up until very recently, you could only add things to the NT registry in the DII COE spot, nowhere else! Try installing an OCX on NT and obeying that rule. Who cares about NT? Well I mention this to serve as an example why the Linux community should not waste any time on DII COE.
It boils down to the US government trying to set software standards, usually in conflict with accepted commercial standards. Remember Ada? If the US government wants to use Linux, they should. Just install it and go. They do not need DII COE to be successful with Linux.
I have worked with DII COE compliance for several years. I do not know a single developer who does not snicker everytime DII COE is mentioned. Just kill DII COE and give the $$millions$$ to support development of open source software. In the end what benefit would DII COE certification bring to the Linux operating system?
How is censorware not a violation free speech? Besides, government operated censorware may start innocently (banning kiddie porn, etc.), but which Americans out there really think the government would not slowly find a way to abuse such power? The first amendment of the Consitution should be enough to prohibit censorware. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." For Americans, read about your Constitutional rights here: Bill of Rights
Athlon Soaks Unfilled Pee 3 Demand
on
Athlons Sold Out
·
· Score: 1
Athlons are sold out because they are arguably better that Pee 3s and always cheaper. Throw in the fact that Intel has been sacrifising yields grasping at higher MHz chips, and you can see why they can sell everything they make.
Intel cannot afford to announce only the processors they can do volume on. If they did AMD would have a small lead in MHz number. Then manufacturers like Gateway and Dell would think about rolling out AMD based machines. By announcing fast chips, whether there is volume or not, Intel strings these guys along just enough (OK, co-marketing money helps too) to keep them from making any significant investment in Athlon machines. We have already seen Compaq and others introduce Athlon machines, if Intel cannot keep the MHz crown, AMD might get a foot hold with all the big US manufacturers. Intel would not want that.
The flip side is that AMD has probably been holding back a little bit to maximize revenue from each step up in MHz.
This points to one of the reasons they DoD has trouble securing there sites. They obviously do not understand the technology. FUD rules. Security threat! Security threat! shut down all the servers.
How will banning the use of Javascript and ActiveX from DoD sites prevent people from hacking DoD servers? Also, how does this help client machines, do they not trust their own servers? The problem with Javascript and ActiveX, is when DoD people use DoD computers (PCs) to surf untrusted sites on the Web. Then Javascript and ActiveX, especially ActiveX, become a security risk. Mobile code is a problem when users go get it from an untrusted site, DoD users should not be doing that.
Finally, computer software starts to catch up ridiculous Hollywood portrayals of computer software. Now if I could just run a program to let me break the world's toughest encryption in 30 key strokes or less.
It is interesting that after the Athlon comes out with some success, Intel is able to rapidly accelerate their release schedule for newer, faster chips. Either Intel has a stunning ability to improve its engineering process and timelines or they were withholding better chips until we had all purchase their current chip du jour.
Hope AMD can stay a float, because competion will be good for us all.
The point is that Intel does not want the Celeron to further cannabilize its PII (dead anyway) or PIII sales. Most persons who do a price performance comparison would obviously buy an SMP Celeron system over the much more expensive PIII systems. Intel is still trying to limit the damaged they caused themselves on PII and PIII sales when they rushed out cheap powerful Celeron to stem the tide of K6's from AMD. Its all ecomonic, Intel needs a very low priced processor to keep AMD on the edge of bankrupcy, but its a two edged sword because its so close to the power of a PII/III it cuts into their high margin sales (or rip-offs).
Jim Pick has done a nice job for two years building a solid reputation for a useful Linux community site, LinuxHQ. My guess is that Mark Evans will be attempting to cash in on the LinuxHQ name as either an ad banner site or auctioning the domain name.
It would be nice if my/. link were to kernelnotes.org
Slashdot Mirror
Basically in the same boat. Guess I should have seen it coming. I had service from Northpoint and PhoenixDSL for 10.5 months before they billed me at all. Then only after the Telocity sale did I start getting a bill. Wonder why they went bankrupt? :-)
How many lawsuits would you attract and how
many charges would you get nailed with if
you wrote a Outlook virus that dropped a copy
of the DeCSS source on every machine it touched?
Just a thought.
Clever trick to hide it in a jungle of
other model and product numbers.
AYE
You got it. People I work with have built several DII COE certified and compliant software product for the government. They always deliver the DII COE version as the contract requires, then they snicker and say, "Do you also want the one that works?".
DII COE certification for Linux would exactly as you describe. The DII COE version would exist, which would allow government folks to choose Linux. The government users that really need a functioning system, would put the DII COE version in the round file and just install Debian or RedHat or similar.
This describes DII COE accurately.
DII/COE is the ultimate in US government waste and
bureaucracy. An entire fiefdom had grown up around DII COE's goals of standardization and interoperabilty. Trouble is the people setting the rules for DII COE certification (or compliance) have little real software experience. This leads to ridiculuos rules and recommendations . On the military side (where I work), this leads to many poor decisions just to be "DII COE Compliant" (most even on the inside have given up being certified its too much paper work and too much wasted money). Being a US government project, lots of contractors were hired, lots of people were put in charge of things, so this bad idea has a life and cannot be killed.
It started as standardization of things on Unix systems. When much of the military started shifting to Windows NT, DII COE followed suit, but keep their Unix rules in place. For instance, you have to install things in on the "/h" partition of your NT box, just like Unix. Of course, NT does not have partitions like Unix, so you create a "/h" directory on your NT disk drive and install stuff there. Another for instance, up until very recently, you could only add things to the NT registry in the DII COE spot, nowhere else! Try installing an OCX on NT and obeying that rule. Who cares about NT? Well I mention this to serve as an example why the Linux community should not waste any time on DII COE.
It boils down to the US government trying to set software standards, usually in conflict with accepted commercial standards. Remember Ada? If the US government wants to use Linux, they should. Just install it and go. They do not need DII COE to be successful with Linux.
I have worked with DII COE compliance for several years. I do not know a single developer who does not snicker everytime DII COE is mentioned. Just kill DII COE and give the $$millions$$ to support development of open source software. In the end what benefit would DII COE certification bring to the Linux operating system?
2 more tidbits.
Thunderbird will be manufactured with copper
interconnects at the new Dresden Fab.
Duron (Spitfire) will be manufactured with
aluminum interconnects at the Austin Fab.
How is censorware not a violation free speech? Besides, government operated censorware may start innocently (banning kiddie porn, etc.), but which Americans out there really think the government would not slowly find a way to abuse such power? The first amendment of the Consitution should be enough to prohibit censorware. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." For Americans, read about your Constitutional rights here: Bill of Rights
Athlons are sold out because they are arguably
better that Pee 3s and always cheaper. Throw
in the fact that Intel has been sacrifising
yields grasping at higher MHz chips, and you
can see why they can sell everything they make.
Intel cannot afford to announce only the processors they can do volume on. If they did AMD would have a small lead in MHz number. Then manufacturers like Gateway and Dell would think about rolling out AMD based machines. By announcing fast chips, whether there is volume or not, Intel strings these guys along just enough (OK, co-marketing money helps too) to keep them from making any significant investment in Athlon machines. We have already seen Compaq and others introduce Athlon machines, if Intel cannot keep the MHz crown, AMD might get a foot hold with all the big US manufacturers. Intel would not want that.
The flip side is that AMD has probably been holding back a little bit to maximize revenue from each step up in MHz.
This points to one of the reasons they DoD has trouble securing there sites. They obviously do not understand the technology. FUD rules. Security threat! Security threat! shut down all the servers.
How will banning the use of Javascript and ActiveX from DoD sites prevent people from hacking DoD servers? Also, how does this help client machines, do they not trust their own servers? The problem with Javascript and ActiveX, is when DoD people use DoD computers (PCs) to surf untrusted sites on the Web. Then Javascript and ActiveX, especially ActiveX, become a security risk. Mobile code is a problem when users go get it from an untrusted site, DoD users should not be doing that.
Finally, computer software starts to catch
up ridiculous Hollywood portrayals of computer
software. Now if I could just run a program
to let me break the world's toughest encryption
in 30 key strokes or less.
It is interesting that after the Athlon comes
out with some success, Intel is able to rapidly
accelerate their release schedule for newer,
faster chips. Either Intel has a stunning ability
to improve its engineering process and timelines
or they were withholding better chips until we
had all purchase their current chip du jour.
Hope AMD can stay a float, because competion will
be good for us all.
Free is not the same as Open Source. Open
Source has made Linux and GNU great, in
addition to the fact they are free.
Would Sun support Solaris on Alpha, PPC,
ARM, etc. or just Sparcs and x86? Since
Sun sells Sparcs, I think you can guess the
answer.
The point is that Intel does not want the
Celeron to further cannabilize its PII (dead
anyway) or PIII sales. Most persons who do a price performance comparison would obviously buy an SMP Celeron system over the much more expensive
PIII systems. Intel is still trying to limit
the damaged they caused themselves on PII and
PIII sales when they rushed out cheap powerful
Celeron to stem the tide of K6's from AMD. Its
all ecomonic, Intel needs a very low priced
processor to keep AMD on the edge of bankrupcy,
but its a two edged sword because its so close
to the power of a PII/III it cuts into their high
margin sales (or rip-offs).
Jim Pick has done a nice job for two years
/. link were to kernelnotes.org
building a solid reputation for a useful
Linux community site, LinuxHQ. My guess is that
Mark Evans will be attempting to cash in on
the LinuxHQ name as either an ad banner site
or auctioning the domain name.
It would be nice if my
tim
Is MS legally negligent for is callous disregard
for computer security? Can companies recover
civil damages from MS related to Melissa?
Negligence Defined