If you're looking for a totally open-minded discussion about polygraphs from people who haven't thought about it, you should hardly be paying attention to what the NSA says. They are obviously pro-polygraph as much as antipolygraph.org is against it.
Look. Polygraphs either work or they don't. It's not a matter of opinion. They could test it scientifically but they won't. Scientists won't for the same reason they don't spend a lot of time trying to prove that perpetual motion machines are impossible. The Polygraph industry won't because they know any proper study will fail.
Then go ahead and interrogate all of them and drop the "dog and pony" show. It's scary to think that our security is in the hands of people who can't think.
The fact that the "stakes are high" doesn't justify a technique that doesn't work. There are much less expensive techniques that also don't work (e.g. a coin toss) if the government feels it must do something.
Remember McBride wasn't around when the agreement was created, so his motivations have nothing to do with how the agreement was viewed by the parties signing it.
The asset section starts with "All rights and ownership of UNIX and UnixWare, including but not limited to...". How can "all rights" exclude copyright?
Furthermore, if you look at the exclusions section, it's clear that it's primary purpose was to insure that rights to Novell's money-making properties (e.g. Netware) were not transferred.
It's quite possible that the word "copyright" was accidentally left out of the phrase. With the word included, the document would be self-consistent which it is not in it's current form.
I thank you for the references. I can see why SCO could have thought they bought all the rights. The full quote is "All copyrights and trademarks, except for the trademarks UNIX and UnixWare." So a casual reading of this quote might give the impression that the UNIX copyrights were part of the except clause. Note that it would have been clearer to say "All copyrights and all trademarks except UNIX and UnixWare" if that was the actual intent.
Your anti-MS post has been duly noted and your AMS points now stand at 1500. 100 more points and you're eligible for the full-size Bill Gates as Borg poster.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're confusing BSD sockets with TCP/IP. You can have sockets without TCP/IP and you can have TCP/IP without sockets.
"He's one of the top three UNIX gurus in the entire world. In fact, the Internet today is what it is thanks to his hard work and dedication."
I wasn't aware that UNIX guruism played such a key role in the Internet. I always thought it was stuff like Ethernet and TCP/IP.
Well, if the criteria for debating a subject is not having an opinion, there aren't going to be many debates.
Beyond that, we are allowed to use what we know about science and the scientific method and apply it to the debate.
What theory does polygraph supporters espouse that connects thought with the body's autonomic system? What is its mechanism?
Have they performed blind tests to insure that the polygraph data alone determines the true or false conclusion?
"Ah but here's the rub... regardless of what you read there is no evidence to the fact that it doesn't work."
No such evidence is required. The burden of proof lies with the person who develops the theory.
If you're looking for a totally open-minded discussion about polygraphs from people who haven't thought about it, you should hardly be paying attention to what the NSA says. They are obviously pro-polygraph as much as antipolygraph.org is against it.
Look. Polygraphs either work or they don't. It's not a matter of opinion. They could test it scientifically but they won't. Scientists won't for the same reason they don't spend a lot of time trying to prove that perpetual motion machines are impossible. The Polygraph industry won't because they know any proper study will fail.
Then go ahead and interrogate all of them and drop the "dog and pony" show. It's scary to think that our security is in the hands of people who can't think.
The fact that the "stakes are high" doesn't justify a technique that doesn't work. There are much less expensive techniques that also don't work (e.g. a coin toss) if the government feels it must do something.
"The polygraph can at best detect the physiological changes that happen when a person is fabricating a response."
No. At best it can detect physiological parameters that aren't correlated in any known way to a subject's response.
I've heard that story too, but the fact is that the photocopier lie detector has as much scientific evidence to support it as a Polygraph does.
Or it might just be more "noise" that researchers have to sift through to find useful information.
Sure. The early adopters are still laughing about how long it took other people to adopt PointCast.
No significant competitor is allowed. From an anti-trust perspective Apple's change is a NOP.
"What anti-MS post?
Successfully not using Windows makes you a troll and/or Microsoft hater?"
No, but bringing it up out of the blue does. If the topic under discussion was "how long have you been MS free?" it would make sense.
for school district officials this year.
the laptop plays Apple's 1984 big brother commercial.
Or perhaps I can't spell "word".
"No, but killing it off completely would help admins and end-users."
Perhaps you don't understand what the world "help" means.
Remember McBride wasn't around when the agreement was created, so his motivations have nothing to do with how the agreement was viewed by the parties signing it.
The asset section starts with "All rights and ownership of UNIX and UnixWare, including but not limited to ...". How can "all rights" exclude copyright?
Furthermore, if you look at the exclusions section, it's clear that it's primary purpose was to insure that rights to Novell's money-making properties (e.g. Netware) were not transferred.
It's quite possible that the word "copyright" was accidentally left out of the phrase. With the word included, the document would be self-consistent which it is not in it's current form.
I thank you for the references. I can see why SCO could have thought they bought all the rights. The full quote is "All copyrights and trademarks, except for the trademarks UNIX and UnixWare." So a casual reading of this quote might give the impression that the UNIX copyrights were part of the except clause. Note that it would have been clearer to say "All copyrights and all trademarks except UNIX and UnixWare" if that was the actual intent.
What's next? INTERPOL?
Your anti-MS post has been duly noted and your AMS points now stand at 1500. 100 more points and you're eligible for the full-size Bill Gates as Borg poster.
Believe it or not hurting MS isn't a long term benefit for end users and admins.
"Whatever it takes to damage Microsoft is okay with me."
Perhaps you should apply to Google. Apparently they've been hiring guys like you.
A vulnerability that existed before the universe existed.