Not only that, but the other studies were most definately paid for by the RIAA, so do you really think that they are going to show what the funders don't want to admit?
It's like all those MS funded studies and reports that say that Microsoft is better. Take with large grain of salt, a lime, and some tequilla.
I work for the government these days, and our policy is no personal electronic devices in secure Secret or TS areas, and no camera phones.
I don't know what they do if they catch you with an electronic device in a secure area, but if they catch you with a camera phone, they take the phone, grind it into small pieces, and then fire you and/or bring you up on charges.
Part of me is wondering who they are going to buy the stock back from.
Boise is due 400,000 shares.
If Baystar/RBC provide some or all of it, it's a sweetheart deal where SCO redeams Baystar's investment, costing them nothing (they are just making shares up), and then buys them back, writing off the same expense twice.
Baystar/RBC get their money, and SCO gets yet another chance to cook the books.
Pretty simple, but if I mess something up too badly, someone who is a lawyer can correct me.
1) None of what they (SCO) said we (IBM) did is against the law.
2) No really, none of it was against the law, and here are the contracts we had that prove we didn't do anything wrong.
3) Piss off, you don't have any real reason to file this suit. (No, really, that's what a lack of standing defense means.)
4) Even if we (IBM) did do something wrong (which we didn't), then SCO didn't file in time to actually do anything about it.
5) Even if we (IBM) did do something wrong (which we didn't), then SCO didn't lose any money from it (mostly because their business sucked before any of this started).
6) When they 'found' what they say we (IBM) did (and, no we _really_ didn't do it) they waited too long after they found out about it to tell us there was an issue. [Not the same as #4.]
7) We (IBM) bought the stuff from the Original SCO (now Tarrentula), and the new SCO (dirtbags) can't sue us for stuff we legally liscenced from them.
8) Talk to the Feds. We (IBM) still didn't do anything wrong, and even if we did, Federal law says it wasn't wrong, it was legit.
9) They (SCO) are playing the ball in the wrong court. Come play in our backyard, and this arguement goes away.
10) Even when they (SCO) found what they say we (IBM) did wrong, they didn't try to stop it first, they just went straight to the lawyers.
The 'truth' will come out if more companies start paying.
Please note, I'm not saying that SCO didn't get somebody to pay, but we only have 500 Fortune 500 companies.
How hard would to ask each of them if they have paid? Any that say "no" we can cross off, any that say "no comment" we leave on the list.
If SCO's next announcement (my guess, late Wednesday or early Thursday) is that more Fortune 500 companies have paid, it will be even easier to find out who is 'paying'.
Slashdot Mirror
Not only that, but the other studies were most definately paid for by the RIAA, so do you really think that they are going to show what the funders don't want to admit?
It's like all those MS funded studies and reports that say that Microsoft is better. Take with large grain of salt, a lime, and some tequilla.
Where did you get your $75 price from?
:)
Canada.
All I wanted was sharks with freaking lasers on their heads?
How freaking hard is that?
I work for the government these days, and our policy is no personal electronic devices in secure Secret or TS areas, and no camera phones.
I don't know what they do if they catch you with an electronic device in a secure area, but if they catch you with a camera phone, they take the phone, grind it into small pieces, and then fire you and/or bring you up on charges.
Retry, Reboot, Reapply, and Reinstall...
Part of me is wondering who they are going to buy the stock back from.
Boise is due 400,000 shares.
If Baystar/RBC provide some or all of it, it's a sweetheart deal where SCO redeams Baystar's investment, costing them nothing (they are just making shares up), and then buys them back, writing off the same expense twice.
Baystar/RBC get their money, and SCO gets yet another chance to cook the books.
Sure he did.
:)
What do you think happened to "cold fusion"?
Actually, he did ask first.
Mathers gave permission for the song, but then wouldn't allow it to be released as either a single, or for a video for it to be produced.
Al mocked this decision during the Poodle Hat tour with one of his 'interviews', by turning it around on Mathers as a free speach issue.
It was extremely funny.
(4th row, opening concert, Poodle Hat tour; aka, the sound check.)
Oh good. Someone got it.
They didn't lose his aerial photos...
It also doesn't explain why the NetCraft stats show their connection going dead like a switch was flipped.
Even with a SYN flood, there should have been a ramp up period of increasing latency, not an "on/off" situation.
Help me out here...
Why would the arcing missiles be impossible?
Missile (forgive the lousy ASCII art)
===== -Thrust that way.
Applying thrust from the side of the missile, akin to the maneuvering jets, would get you an arc, wouldn't it?
Taking inertia into account, etc.
Or am I missing something obvious here?
First, bandwidth is an issue. Determined hackers can bring GIGABITS of syn requests in...
True. However, the Netcraft stats do not support a massive amount of data flooding their bandwidth.
Rather, they go from a reasonable response time to completely off, with no ramp up.
On, then off, as if someone, say, turned off the box.
But that's just my guess.
Perhaps they will start again if/when a significant portion of the population only has cell phones.
Shocked, I say, to discover that there are violations of the agreement here!
"Your bribe money, sir."
"Thank you."
"Shocked I say!"
Nothing elitist about it.
I moved across country, got a cell phone for the trip, and kept it.
The land line is in the roommate's name, I don't use it, I don't even know the number.
Internet is cable modem.
And the voice mail came free with the cell phone. At any rate, I've only used it about 5 times.
All I've got left is a cell phone. No land line.
And the cost difference is $5... Less!
Or flesh eating shrews.
We are proud of that, and the future going forward is bright.
Shhh! I think we are getting a way with this, the SEC hasn't noticed yet...
That light? It's at the end of the tunnel. From an oncoming train. Named IBM.
Try here
Actually, if you read all the articles, you'll notice that the Bond clips were provided by MGM (who owns the hotel SCO is at) for SCO's use.
Thus, no piracy.
I dislike SCO's tactics as much as the next guy (unless the next guy is Gates or Ballmer), but a touch of fairness isn't going to hurt our cause.
Pretty simple, but if I mess something up too badly, someone who is a lawyer can correct me.
1) None of what they (SCO) said we (IBM) did is against the law.
2) No really, none of it was against the law, and here are the contracts we had that prove we didn't do anything wrong.
3) Piss off, you don't have any real reason to file this suit. (No, really, that's what a lack of standing defense means.)
4) Even if we (IBM) did do something wrong (which we didn't), then SCO didn't file in time to actually do anything about it.
5) Even if we (IBM) did do something wrong (which we didn't), then SCO didn't lose any money from it (mostly because their business sucked before any of this started).
6) When they 'found' what they say we (IBM) did (and, no we _really_ didn't do it) they waited too long after they found out about it to tell us there was an issue. [Not the same as #4.]
7) We (IBM) bought the stuff from the Original SCO (now Tarrentula), and the new SCO (dirtbags) can't sue us for stuff we legally liscenced from them.
8) Talk to the Feds. We (IBM) still didn't do anything wrong, and even if we did, Federal law says it wasn't wrong, it was legit.
9) They (SCO) are playing the ball in the wrong court. Come play in our backyard, and this arguement goes away.
10) Even when they (SCO) found what they say we (IBM) did wrong, they didn't try to stop it first, they just went straight to the lawyers.
The 'truth' will come out if more companies start paying.
Please note, I'm not saying that SCO didn't get somebody to pay, but we only have 500 Fortune 500 companies.
How hard would to ask each of them if they have paid? Any that say "no" we can cross off, any that say "no comment" we leave on the list.
If SCO's next announcement (my guess, late Wednesday or early Thursday) is that more Fortune 500 companies have paid, it will be even easier to find out who is 'paying'.
No, no...
.
Pot makes you sit around and eat chips all day.
SCO is on crack
*******
This is your brain. [Insert picture of a computer running Linux.]
This is your brain on crack. [Insert picture of computer running SCO Unixware.]
Any questions?
South Carolina.
I wish I was back there to help un-elect him.