I just don't get how intercepting a signal that is located in my own yard, using equiptment that I own, that would just go into the dirt anyway, could be considered theft. Cable theft I can understand.
That's sort of my position on this too... if they don't want me intercepting it, then don't BEAM it at me. However, I must say, if you want to put your attitude into action, at least don't a) put up a web site bragging about it and b) don't use the word "pirate" in your domain name.
It is ridiculous to think that you can steal someone's code, copy it into a GPLed product, and the owner of the stolen code auto-magically loses all right to that code.
Nobody has suggested that. What SCO's *apparent* faux pas here is that they (possibly)own the code AND they distributed that code under a license which explicitly requires the licensee to give up certain rights to that code. If I copy something you wrote (and do not wish to see distributed) into Taco's product, and he distributes it, you would indeed have the right to object and/or seek redress. However, if I copy your code from one of your products INTO ANOTHER ONE OF YOUR PRODUCTS, and then YOU distribute it under that same restrictive license, well, it's just too bad for you. (Companies which are large enough to have attorneys on staff live and die by the concept of "due dilligence", and this is exactly the sort of situation that due dilligence is supposed to prevent.)
Sys V is a huge code base. It is very _unlikely_ that a coder would notice stolen code unless they were specifically looking for it and wrote automated tools to do it!
And how difficult would this have been for them to do??? I think five minutes worth of perl coding would be sufficient to scour the linux code for examples of plagiarism, ESPECIALLY if it's as blatant and pervasive as SCO claims.
From what I understand, Apple already has a license (someone please correct me if I'm wrong...) Also, SCO claims that IBM took SCO code and put it in the Linux kernel, which would not affect BSD at all. Of course, there is nothing stoping SCO from claiming that (for example) Apple did the same thing - releasing SCO IP back into the BSD tree.
SCO's predecessors already tried this same thing with BSD a long time ago, and got smacked down HARD (although the details are sealed by court order for some reason.) BSD is totally immune in this action, no license (from SCO) required.
My brother used to work for a company that made "intelligent" EKG's. I'm not sure if they augered in because it was a baaaadd idea or because he's a jinx. He learned quite a bit about interpreting them in the process, although I'm not sure I'd trust his opinion (as much as I love and respect him.)
Or maybe it was because the lead programmer (some PhD for whom english was a second language) was famous for his commenting style
mov ax, dx ; move contents of dx into ax
cmp ax, 02Eh ; see if ax is equal to 2E
etc etc. Maybe it was his style of job security, who knows???
Sorry, but what exactly is the difference between "what the viewer wants" and "what brings the most eyeballs to the advertisers" ???
HUGE difference, my friend. The simple one-word explanation is demographics
Advertisers don't want the MOST viewers possible, they want the MOST VIEWERS IN THE DESIRED DEMOGRAPHIC. IANAAE, but I believe the hot demo right now is young women. (That's why you and I think Jerry Springer sucks, but it remains popular with advertisers anyway.) If there were a "viewing tax", equally distributed among all age, sex, and income brackets, then demographics would become meaningless, and television producers would cater to viewers, rather than advertisers (when then in turn care about viewers, but only certain ones.) I am getting crotchety and unreasonable in my old age, and I have gotten to the point that I would rather watch a show about starfish reproductive habits on PBS than something with 2 minutes of ads for ever 3 minutes of content. (e.g. anything on TBS in the evening. Watching the last 30 minutes of any movie on TBS is an exercise in madness because the ration worsens to 4 minutes of ads for every 1 minutes of content.)
Add me to the list of people who wouldn't mind paying a TV tax if it would get rid of the goddam tampon ads.
I know quite a few people using encryption, but that doesn't mean any more than the factoid that you DON'T know anyone using it.
Maybe it's my definition of encryption, because I would certainly include things like SSL, SSH, etc, which are used so commonly as to not even register on the average user's consciousness. (i.e. possibly you don't pay attention to the little lock icon in the corner of your browser, but it's there and if you browse much at all, it flops back and forth between locked and unlocked fairly regularly.)
I can see a great business model now. We could create a law enforcement company and then we can do all kinds of things that regular cops couldn't do. We could be the Corporate IP Police. It would be a bunch of black suit lawyers and money. Thats all it takes. We can also then create a database of these "known felons" and then sell it creating more revenue.
I don't know if you meant that to be humorous, but I'd be VERY surprised if there weren't companies out there scrambling to do this exact thing right now. They will begin by targeting certain industries (like music) but eventually expanding into more generalized services.
there were actually more than three questions... they started out with stuff that only a baby boomer would know (like "what was richard nixon's dog's name?") and got progressively more current until your age range could be estimated.
I don't know how many Mac people this will upset, but given the large hold Apple has on design pros and film, this seems like a bad move on Adobe's part.
It doesn't really matter whether the Mac people are all upset or not... until somebody comes along with a viable alternative to their products, Adobe can say pretty much anything they want.
Are there devices that can get the ANI data, outside of being a 911 operator? Or does the phone company only allow certain circuits access to ANI?
It's been five years since I was in the telecom industry, so things have probably changed. But at the time, the only way to get ANI was to have a leased line directly into the switch of a carrier who was willing to provide it. (Not all were... some would only provide it to other tarriffed carriers. I don't know if this was a legal thing or just their way of not having to deal with riff-raff like me.) However, in any given area (basically all over the US) I never had any problem finding a provider, although since it involved a leased line (be it POTS, ISDN, whatever) it was very expensive, and as someone else mentioned, it's only available with a toll-free number, so in addition to leased-line costs you get to pay for all the phone calls too.
But what about 911? They use something other than Caller ID, don't they? Something that can't be spoofed by the end user? If they don't, or it can in fact be spoofed as well, I can see quite a bit of abuse once this practice becomes mainstream.
What is their "special" Caller ID called? How is it transmitted to them? Can regular people receive it?
What you're talking about is ANI, which IIRC is "automated number information". It's out-of-band information (unlike caller ID) which is primarily used for billing purposes by whatever carriers lie between the caller and callee. It cannot be blocked (unless you're one of the rated carriers in the middle, then you're regulated out the ass anyway.)
I used to write automated call software (incoming and outgoing) and I worked with this all the time. It used to REALLY piss off people who have their caller ID blocked (or have used *67) yet have their number recognized anyway. Hehehe.
All the telezapper does it emit the first of the three tones in a standard SIT signal... you know, the little "doo dee dweep the number you have dialed is no longer in service" thing you get from time to time. This tone is handled in the automated dialing software the same way that any other tones (1,2,3,#,etc) are... i.e. however the programmer wants to handle it, depending on the application. There's no magic involved in "getting around" a telezapper, it would involve one line of programming code to simply ignore it.
by the way, you don't NEED a telezapper... if you use an answering machine, just record the SIT tone (or even the first 1/3rd of it) at the beginning of your outgoing message. Human callers expect weird noises from answering machines, they just ignore it. But automated dialers which are programmed to look for it assume the number is disconnected.
To get the SIT tones, just google up sit.wav, you can find it all over the place.
Does the reach of the Pennsylvania attorney general extends beyond the border of Pennsylvania
Most assuredly.
A friend of mine spent two years in an Alabama jail for running a "porn" BBS from his home in Florida. There was nothing on his site that was any more explicit than what you would see in Playboy (some fur but no pink.) It didn't stop a grandstanding bible-thumping asshole from sticking him in jail.
You would at least expect some witty rejoinder to the first questioner's detailed mention of how he met Dave.
The first questioner's detailed mention of how he met dave wasn't really funny.
It's sad that most of the questions that people asked him were attempts at "I set 'em up, you knock 'em down". If you want humor, read his column. If you want to know what he thinks, ask serious questions; if you want lame answers, ask lame questions. I thought most of the questions were lame.
What is it about him I don't like? He's like the Robin Williams of print. All he does is talk and talk and talk, but if you actually listen to what he's saying, he's not saying anything funny.
DB's humor is "wry" rather than "cynical". I bet you think Jay Leno's (cruel/hateful/cynical)humor is funny.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh please. That tired argument is so dead
That argument got 8 hours of sleep last night and woke up this morning fresh as a daisy. And if you wanna intercept my phone calls, go right ahead.
I just don't get how intercepting a signal that is located in my own yard, using equiptment that I own, that would just go into the dirt anyway, could be considered theft. Cable theft I can understand.
That's sort of my position on this too... if they don't want me intercepting it, then don't BEAM it at me. However, I must say, if you want to put your attitude into action, at least don't a) put up a web site bragging about it and b) don't use the word "pirate" in your domain name.
It is ridiculous to think that you can steal someone's code, copy it into a GPLed product, and the owner of the stolen code auto-magically loses all right to that code.
Nobody has suggested that. What SCO's *apparent* faux pas here is that they (possibly)own the code AND they distributed that code under a license which explicitly requires the licensee to give up certain rights to that code. If I copy something you wrote (and do not wish to see distributed) into Taco's product, and he distributes it, you would indeed have the right to object and/or seek redress. However, if I copy your code from one of your products INTO ANOTHER ONE OF YOUR PRODUCTS, and then YOU distribute it under that same restrictive license, well, it's just too bad for you. (Companies which are large enough to have attorneys on staff live and die by the concept of "due dilligence", and this is exactly the sort of situation that due dilligence is supposed to prevent.)
Sys V is a huge code base. It is very _unlikely_ that a coder would notice stolen code unless they were specifically looking for it and wrote automated tools to do it!
And how difficult would this have been for them to do??? I think five minutes worth of perl coding would be sufficient to scour the linux code for examples of plagiarism, ESPECIALLY if it's as blatant and pervasive as SCO claims.
From what I understand, Apple already has a license (someone please correct me if I'm wrong...) Also, SCO claims that IBM took SCO code and put it in the Linux kernel, which would not affect BSD at all. Of course, there is nothing stoping SCO from claiming that (for example) Apple did the same thing - releasing SCO IP back into the BSD tree.
SCO's predecessors already tried this same thing with BSD a long time ago, and got smacked down HARD (although the details are sealed by court order for some reason.) BSD is totally immune in this action, no license (from SCO) required.
Or maybe it was because the lead programmer (some PhD for whom english was a second language) was famous for his commenting style
etc etc. Maybe it was his style of job security, who knows???
Sorry, but what exactly is the difference between "what the viewer wants" and "what brings the most eyeballs to the advertisers" ???
HUGE difference, my friend. The simple one-word explanation is demographics
Advertisers don't want the MOST viewers possible, they want the MOST VIEWERS IN THE DESIRED DEMOGRAPHIC. IANAAE, but I believe the hot demo right now is young women. (That's why you and I think Jerry Springer sucks, but it remains popular with advertisers anyway.) If there were a "viewing tax", equally distributed among all age, sex, and income brackets, then demographics would become meaningless, and television producers would cater to viewers, rather than advertisers (when then in turn care about viewers, but only certain ones.)
I am getting crotchety and unreasonable in my old age, and I have gotten to the point that I would rather watch a show about starfish reproductive habits on PBS than something with 2 minutes of ads for ever 3 minutes of content. (e.g. anything on TBS in the evening. Watching the last 30 minutes of any movie on TBS is an exercise in madness because the ration worsens to 4 minutes of ads for every 1 minutes of content.)
Add me to the list of people who wouldn't mind paying a TV tax if it would get rid of the goddam tampon ads.
I know quite a few people using encryption, but that doesn't mean any more than the factoid that you DON'T know anyone using it.
Maybe it's my definition of encryption, because I would certainly include things like SSL, SSH, etc, which are used so commonly as to not even register on the average user's consciousness. (i.e. possibly you don't pay attention to the little lock icon in the corner of your browser, but it's there and if you browse much at all, it flops back and forth between locked and unlocked fairly regularly.)
The RESULT of the paranoia about the clipper chip is that NO ONE is now using encryption.
Huh?
You mean it doesn't count as encryption if there's no backdoor for the FBI to use?
collect and analize
You have unintentionally hit the nail on the head.
I couldn't think of a more perfect term to describe this abomination that "analizing".
Ari Fleisher? Is that you?
I can see a great business model now. We could create a law enforcement company and then we can do all kinds of things that regular cops couldn't do. We could be the Corporate IP Police. It would be a bunch of black suit lawyers and money. Thats all it takes. We can also then create a database of these "known felons" and then sell it creating more revenue.
I don't know if you meant that to be humorous, but I'd be VERY surprised if there weren't companies out there scrambling to do this exact thing right now. They will begin by targeting certain industries (like music) but eventually expanding into more generalized services.
IANAC either but there are acids that eat glass. Hydroflouric being one, I believe.
there were actually more than three questions... they started out with stuff that only a baby boomer would know (like "what was richard nixon's dog's name?") and got progressively more current until your age range could be estimated.
You can ask three questions (that adults can answer), just like at the beginning of Leisure Suite Larry :-)
I was gonna mention that... it was a very cool feature fairly well implemented. (Probably tongue-in-cheek, but still effective.)
Would that be the B&N in Cupertino? I've sure never seen one that had more than 2% as many mac books as win books.
Joe Vs. The Volcano, hands down.
"Wherever we go, whatever we do, we're going to take this lkuggage with us."
I'll second and third that. It's probably my favorite movie of all time.
I don't know how many Mac people this will upset, but given the large hold Apple has on design pros and film, this seems like a bad move on Adobe's part.
It doesn't really matter whether the Mac people are all upset or not... until somebody comes along with a viable alternative to their products, Adobe can say pretty much anything they want.
How is is this offtopic but the parent funny?
98% of all mods who EVER use the "offtopic" rating are fucking morons.
Are there devices that can get the ANI data, outside of being a 911 operator? Or does the phone company only allow certain circuits access to ANI?
It's been five years since I was in the telecom industry, so things have probably changed. But at the time, the only way to get ANI was to have a leased line directly into the switch of a carrier who was willing to provide it. (Not all were... some would only provide it to other tarriffed carriers. I don't know if this was a legal thing or just their way of not having to deal with riff-raff like me.) However, in any given area (basically all over the US) I never had any problem finding a provider, although since it involved a leased line (be it POTS, ISDN, whatever) it was very expensive, and as someone else mentioned, it's only available with a toll-free number, so in addition to leased-line costs you get to pay for all the phone calls too.
But what about 911? They use something other than Caller ID, don't they? Something that can't be spoofed by the end user? If they don't, or it can in fact be spoofed as well, I can see quite a bit of abuse once this practice becomes mainstream. What is their "special" Caller ID called? How is it transmitted to them? Can regular people receive it?
What you're talking about is ANI, which IIRC is "automated number information". It's out-of-band information (unlike caller ID) which is primarily used for billing purposes by whatever carriers lie between the caller and callee. It cannot be blocked (unless you're one of the rated carriers in the middle, then you're regulated out the ass anyway.)
I used to write automated call software (incoming and outgoing) and I worked with this all the time. It used to REALLY piss off people who have their caller ID blocked (or have used *67) yet have their number recognized anyway. Hehehe.
All the telezapper does it emit the first of the three tones in a standard SIT signal... you know, the little "doo dee dweep the number you have dialed is no longer in service" thing you get from time to time. This tone is handled in the automated dialing software the same way that any other tones (1,2,3,#,etc) are... i.e. however the programmer wants to handle it, depending on the application. There's no magic involved in "getting around" a telezapper, it would involve one line of programming code to simply ignore it.
by the way, you don't NEED a telezapper... if you use an answering machine, just record the SIT tone (or even the first 1/3rd of it) at the beginning of your outgoing message. Human callers expect weird noises from answering machines, they just ignore it. But automated dialers which are programmed to look for it assume the number is disconnected.
To get the SIT tones, just google up sit.wav, you can find it all over the place.
Are you saying Radar Detectors are legal now?
They've always been legal and continue to be legal in most states in the US.
Does the reach of the Pennsylvania attorney general extends beyond the border of Pennsylvania
Most assuredly.
A friend of mine spent two years in an Alabama jail for running a "porn" BBS from his home in Florida. There was nothing on his site that was any more explicit than what you would see in Playboy (some fur but no pink.) It didn't stop a grandstanding bible-thumping asshole from sticking him in jail.
You would at least expect some witty rejoinder to the first questioner's detailed mention of how he met Dave.
The first questioner's detailed mention of how he met dave wasn't really funny.
It's sad that most of the questions that people asked him were attempts at "I set 'em up, you knock 'em down". If you want humor, read his column. If you want to know what he thinks, ask serious questions; if you want lame answers, ask lame questions. I thought most of the questions were lame.
What is it about him I don't like? He's like the Robin Williams of print. All he does is talk and talk and talk, but if you actually listen to what he's saying, he's not saying anything funny.
DB's humor is "wry" rather than "cynical". I bet you think Jay Leno's (cruel/hateful/cynical)humor is funny.