Uh, recording what DID happened is NOT the same as controlling what WILL happen... The systems you mentioned are controlled by live readings as to what IS happening...
Police in this state (Missouri) apparently ARE above the law. They do not give each other speeding tickets, period. We actually had a reporter riding with a Highway Patrolman on the interstate last year doing a story. They stopped a car, gave a ticket, stopped another, gave a ticket. Then, stopped a car that was going WAY faster (87 if I recall correctly) than either of the first two. No ticket. Turns out he was an off duty patrolman just on his way somewhere for personal reasons. They have a 'policy' that they don't have to give each other tickets. And this was all caught on tape that they showed on TV. (Springfield, MO)
People don't speed, or are usually very selective/careful about speeding for 1 or more of 3 main reasons, in my view. 1. It is against the law. 2. They don't want to have to pay the fine. 3. The biggie: they don't want to have much higher insurance rates for a LONG time after getting a ticket.
I don't care if they or anyone else speeds a bit, it's a fact of life people do. I also don't think the state will go broke because an officer gets out of a $50 ticket cost now and then. But what I *DO* find unacceptable is that these people who are supposed to set the example don't have to pay, or even have to worry about paying, the much higher insurance premiums like the rest of us do simply because they scratch each others backs.
Yes, people sue all the time without any basis. In civil litigation cases, the plaintiff (person who filed the case) controls the execution of the case to a large extent. The defendant, unlike in a criminal case, does not have the same right to a speedy trial. The plaintiff can also choose to accept a settlement, or have the case dismissed at any time without showing one iota of evidence (kinda like poker, you can keep betting until you decide it is too high, then fold, and no one can look at your cards) The judge may be able to refuse the dismissal but they rarely, if ever, do.
That makes no sense. If that were true then I (or anyone else) can force you to pay me for any ol' code you use, claiming it is a trade secret, but not reveal to you what code it is that you are using.
I know it is an extreme longshot, but maybe the wacky FCC decision has finally woken at least some of them up. I was watching the Senate hearing yesterday and almost every Senator on the panel was completely against their decision and made it plainly known, although naturally the Democrats were somewhat harder on them.
But what it you threw a few seeds of your own in the ground in an otherwise unused corner of the field and tilled it during your breaks or when your required work was done? Who's corn is it then?
The way I read the parent I wasn't taking it that he was wanting to give out the same code he was hired to write for sale, but rather 'other' OSS he had maybe downloaded and improved, or his own creations that may have been unrelated. Still, company written policy, or existing law in the absence of policy will prevail, but the poster was simply asking for suggestions...
You can actually watch the video of the test from multiple camera angles here:
http://caib.us/news/press_briefings/rt030604_pre se nt.html
It doesn't look good, especially considering the wing being tested is the fiberglass wing from the Enterprise, and not a carbon-fiber composite from a real shuttle, which is much less flexible.
It would be nice to have something akin to the way the zmodem transfer protocol worked that we used back in the BBS days. If I recall correctly it would basically dump the data in large chunks (8k?) and not wait for a success response. Only if it got an error response along with the position indicator, it would then stop, and start resending from the error position. It was much faster than xmodem, ymodem, kermit, or punter protocols. Plus, resume worked great, too!
Thinking of it like stolen property.... The Courts usually don't agree with you when you claim that you didn't know the TV you sold was stolen property...Following this, once you take posession of it you need to make sure it isn't stolen before you start selling it as 'your' distro under the GPL.
I think if something covered by an NDA is already disclosed by someone else to everyone then there is no longer a purpose for the NDA and it is relatively meaningless.
Re:OSI Papers notwithstanding...
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
"...non litigated..."?
You are referring to a not only litigated, but convicted, monopolist....
Maybe SCO code actually contains GPL code and they are trying to twist it around the other way before someone notices it and forces the entire SCO system to be GPL'd!:)
That is exactly what happens quite often. Once the plaintiff sees a lawyer, the defendant magically changes from 'careless' to 'negligent' and gets sued.
The fact of the matter is that accidents DO happen. People are NOT perfect. Everyone has moments of being 'careless' many, many, times in their lives. All of these things are normal things that happen in the lives of humans...until you talk to a lawyer.
I believe the presupposition that "...Enterprises use Microsoft for a simple reason, the alternatives suck...." is completely incorrect. Rather, they use it because the enterprises up the street and down the street use it. They use it because all their employees and prospective employees (who aren't computer illiterate) can use it.
I guess I just don't quite understand something. The article *seems* to state that this event hasn't happened in 100 years. That doesn't make sense to me. As Mercury revolves around the sun in I believe 88 days, this should happen 4.x times during the Earths 365 day orbit. Maybe they were implying it just hadn't happened during the daytime in Bangkok in 100 years?
Surely you jest. The 'other party' in any decent lawsuit is always 'negligent'. Since it is so common to be negligent that thousands of suits claiming it are filed every day, it can hardly be classified as 'extreme'.
I work in a courthouse. Been working there for close to 15 years. I can tell you with certainty, that most lawyers, in fact, are scum. Not the regular kind of scum either. The bubbly, green, stagnant pond scum.
Consider this: Lawyers spend years getting paid to "virtually" lie, cheat, and steal on behalf of them selves, oops, I mean their "clients". Then we elect them as judges, representatives, and senators????
..."It appears that Microsoft is tying the tie its applications (developer tools) to their operating system," Hentzen told us...
Duh! What rock have these guys been hiding under for the last several years? Care to take a bet that there were some of the people who were against the DOJ and for MS, and basing it on not knowing the facts to boot? Apparently some of them at least have now had their eyes pried open, and this is a good thing. Ignorance sure is bliss isn't it?
As a person who works for a state Court here in the good ol' US of A I can tell you that if you are using the terms -
"..."a strong case in court...", "...convince the judge/jury...", "...likely be acquitted."
in real life a couple of other things are going on:
1. You are paying a (mostly worthless) lawyer large sums of YOUR money already.
2. There is *NO* guarantee of the outcome in court, even if you really are innocent.
3. Juries as a whole are often morons. They way it works in a lot of jurusdictions the only people you get on a jury are the ones too stupid to send in a decent excuse to get out of it.
With things like this already working against you, I sure wouldn't want to base my $ and possible freedom on some email or a verbal "don't worry about it" from a sales goober.
Speaking of those thousands/millions of people who are still spending millions/billions for support for this OS that has *not* reached the published EOL as of yet, is there any wiggle room for a successful class action lawsuit over this? Successful in this case means either they get a ruling in their favor and MS pays out, or MS decides it is cheaper to fix the bug...
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, recording what DID happened is NOT the same as controlling what WILL happen... The systems you mentioned are controlled by live readings as to what IS happening...
Police in this state (Missouri) apparently ARE above the law. They do not give each other speeding tickets, period. We actually had a reporter riding with a Highway Patrolman on the interstate last year doing a story. They stopped a car, gave a ticket, stopped another, gave a ticket. Then, stopped a car that was going WAY faster (87 if I recall correctly) than either of the first two. No ticket. Turns out he was an off duty patrolman just on his way somewhere for personal reasons. They have a 'policy' that they don't have to give each other tickets. And this was all caught on tape that they showed on TV. (Springfield, MO)
People don't speed, or are usually very selective/careful about speeding for 1 or more of 3 main reasons, in my view. 1. It is against the law. 2. They don't want to have to pay the fine. 3. The biggie: they don't want to have much higher insurance rates for a LONG time after getting a ticket.
I don't care if they or anyone else speeds a bit, it's a fact of life people do. I also don't think the state will go broke because an officer gets out of a $50 ticket cost now and then. But what I *DO* find unacceptable is that these people who are supposed to set the example don't have to pay, or even have to worry about paying, the much higher insurance premiums like the rest of us do simply because they scratch each others backs.
Since you are 'forced' to pay in via mandatory insurance, they should likewise be 'forced' to pay out.
The Open Group owns the name "Unix", as well as the right to certify that operating system X is or is not 'a' Unix, from my understanding...
Yes, people sue all the time without any basis. In civil litigation cases, the plaintiff (person who filed the case) controls the execution of the case to a large extent. The defendant, unlike in a criminal case, does not have the same right to a speedy trial. The plaintiff can also choose to accept a settlement, or have the case dismissed at any time without showing one iota of evidence (kinda like poker, you can keep betting until you decide it is too high, then fold, and no one can look at your cards) The judge may be able to refuse the dismissal but they rarely, if ever, do.
That makes no sense. If that were true then I (or anyone else) can force you to pay me for any ol' code you use, claiming it is a trade secret, but not reveal to you what code it is that you are using.
I know it is an extreme longshot, but maybe the wacky FCC decision has finally woken at least some of them up. I was watching the Senate hearing yesterday and almost every Senator on the panel was completely against their decision and made it plainly known, although naturally the Democrats were somewhat harder on them.
But what it you threw a few seeds of your own in the ground in an otherwise unused corner of the field and tilled it during your breaks or when your required work was done? Who's corn is it then?
The way I read the parent I wasn't taking it that he was wanting to give out the same code he was hired to write for sale, but rather 'other' OSS he had maybe downloaded and improved, or his own creations that may have been unrelated. Still, company written policy, or existing law in the absence of policy will prevail, but the poster was simply asking for suggestions...
You can actually watch the video of the test from multiple camera angles here:
e se nt.html
http://caib.us/news/press_briefings/rt030604_pr
It doesn't look good, especially considering the wing being tested is the fiberglass wing from the Enterprise, and not a carbon-fiber composite from a real shuttle, which is much less flexible.
It would be nice to have something akin to the way the zmodem transfer protocol worked that we used back in the BBS days. If I recall correctly it would basically dump the data in large chunks (8k?) and not wait for a success response. Only if it got an error response along with the position indicator, it would then stop, and start resending from the error position. It was much faster than xmodem, ymodem, kermit, or punter protocols. Plus, resume worked great, too!
Wow! When I could really use a few mod points I'm fresh out! Somebody mod this as hilarious please!
Thinking of it like stolen property.... The Courts usually don't agree with you when you claim that you didn't know the TV you sold was stolen property...Following this, once you take posession of it you need to make sure it isn't stolen before you start selling it as 'your' distro under the GPL.
I think if something covered by an NDA is already disclosed by someone else to everyone then there is no longer a purpose for the NDA and it is relatively meaningless.
"...non litigated..."?
You are referring to a not only litigated, but convicted, monopolist....
Maybe SCO code actually contains GPL code and they are trying to twist it around the other way before someone notices it and forces the entire SCO system to be GPL'd! :)
That is exactly what happens quite often. Once the plaintiff sees a lawyer, the defendant magically changes from 'careless' to 'negligent' and gets sued.
The fact of the matter is that accidents DO happen. People are NOT perfect. Everyone has moments of being 'careless' many, many, times in their lives. All of these things are normal things that happen in the lives of humans...until you talk to a lawyer.
I believe the presupposition that "...Enterprises use Microsoft for a simple reason, the alternatives suck...." is completely incorrect. Rather, they use it because the enterprises up the street and down the street use it. They use it because all their employees and prospective employees (who aren't computer illiterate) can use it.
I guess I just don't quite understand something. The article *seems* to state that this event hasn't happened in 100 years. That doesn't make sense to me. As Mercury revolves around the sun in I believe 88 days, this should happen 4.x times during the Earths 365 day orbit. Maybe they were implying it just hadn't happened during the daytime in Bangkok in 100 years?
Surely you jest. The 'other party' in any decent lawsuit is always 'negligent'. Since it is so common to be negligent that thousands of suits claiming it are filed every day, it can hardly be classified as 'extreme'.
Now I feel slammed! I certainly did not mean my response to be troll-ly...I was completely serious!
Kill 'em all, they'll have no soul anyway! :) do-wop do-wop
I work in a courthouse. Been working there for close to 15 years. I can tell you with certainty, that most lawyers, in fact, are scum. Not the regular kind of scum either. The bubbly, green, stagnant pond scum.
Consider this: Lawyers spend years getting paid to "virtually" lie, cheat, and steal on behalf of them selves, oops, I mean their "clients". Then we elect them as judges, representatives, and senators????
..."It appears that Microsoft is tying the tie its applications (developer tools) to their operating system," Hentzen told us...
Duh! What rock have these guys been hiding under for the last several years? Care to take a bet that there were some of the people who were against the DOJ and for MS, and basing it on not knowing the facts to boot? Apparently some of them at least have now had their eyes pried open, and this is a good thing. Ignorance sure is bliss isn't it?
As a person who works for a state Court here in the good ol' US of A I can tell you that if you are using the terms -
"..."a strong case in court...",
"...convince the judge/jury...",
"...likely be acquitted."
in real life a couple of other things are going on:
1. You are paying a (mostly worthless) lawyer large sums of YOUR money already.
2. There is *NO* guarantee of the outcome in court, even if you really are innocent.
3. Juries as a whole are often morons. They way it works in a lot of jurusdictions the only people you get on a jury are the ones too stupid to send in a decent excuse to get out of it.
With things like this already working against you, I sure wouldn't want to base my $ and possible freedom on some email or a verbal "don't worry about it" from a sales goober.
Speaking of those thousands/millions of people who are still spending millions/billions for support for this OS that has *not* reached the published EOL as of yet, is there any wiggle room for a successful class action lawsuit over this? Successful in this case means either they get a ruling in their favor and MS pays out, or MS decides it is cheaper to fix the bug...