I always think it's great when another hardware manufacturer sees the light of open source software. But when it's coming to sun the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is saying.
Here we have Scott McNealy telling people ""Don't touch open-source software unless you have a team of intellectual-property lawyers prepared to scour every single piece" of open-source code. " yet they're also releasing an open sourced distribution of Linux.
What's the deal with Sun? One minute their CEO is in a penguin suit extolling the world starts with open source, then it's Solaris will save the world, then it's Linux is doomed because of the SCO thing, etc.
But the remaining 95% of the computing world that had their desktops connected to the internet proceeded to geenrate millions of messages sent to their friends & family who were dumb enough to continue to read things sent to them even when they've been warned hundreds if not thousands of times....
Boy, nothing like proving his point in not time flat by showing the ignorance that can be the linux community sometimes.
His point was, if a user ran out and bought a copy of Linux there are many scripting exploits out there that would tank a machine before it could patch itself. I don't think there is one for current distributions - but that doesn't mean one can't be found in the future.
Behind a firewall? I thought linux WAS a firewall. At least with Redhat it ASKS you to install the firewall - and even if it did and you selected 'medium' security the wu-ftpd exploit would have hacked it because port 21 is open under 'medium' as I recall.
I had the same thing happen with RH 6.2 when RH 7.0 first came out. I was downloading patches via my cable modem and a buffer overrun occured within 1 hr of me isnstalling. I dont' remember for sure but I think it was the atd process.
At the time, I had no idea how to run linux and didn't think that people would script hacks of linux because it's the *real* os and no one would want to hack it like they do MS.
Proves that there are assholes that just do this for fun IMHO.
Peachy keen jolly green. But in 1995 when this happeend Windows 2000 wasn't an option, Windows 95 and 3.1 were the only options. They weren't rock solid, and everyone who worked on computers in that era would know that too.
Used to work as a contractor for a major pizza company that used to be in Kansas. They were an entire Macintosh place, had systems for about 700 - 1000 users I think it was.
Then a large soda company bought them and felt that 'they all needed to be the same' even though the Microsoft Offices the platforms ran worked together.
So, we went from the two of us supporting 700 - 1000 users to 18 people.
And the user populace was not happy. The standard rebuild time of a machine went from 'when they got new ones' to once a week. We had device driver issues, and SLAs of getting machines back up and running in two hours so we ended up just ghosting machines over and over to clear up whatever went wrong.
I certainly know that every time I upgrade my video card all my previous games fail to work on my computer.
Last time I checked, the xBox was a fancy name for 'cheap computer hacked so it can only run our games' and would think that MS makes all their developers write to the standard they dictate (directX for xbox or whatever)
So Xbox2 would have DirectX for Xbox 10.0 vs. 7.3 or whatever was on the original Xbox and then everything works.
I don't think MS could take over the world as they plan without giving someone an upgrade path. I mean just look how long it took them to quit booting some type of DOS (Windows 3.x, 95, 98, ME)
Excuse me if I don't take a single thing FSF says to heart.
These guys can find fault with anything but the 'blessed GPL'. They're the ones that give free software the 'commie' name because of their inflexibility.
I should think that any company that releases the core of their operating system as a open source of *any* kind with no monetary cost associated with it is impressive.
Why are Dell and HP so silent on this? HP 'fully supports' Linux according to recent articles yet they're keeping their lips tighter than any of them. Not even a peep.
Last time I looked at a changelog there were several @hp.com addresses that were adding stuff to the kernal.
DR-DOS 0wn3d all other DOSes! That's a desktop operating system isn't it? That's what DOS stood for right? (for the humor imparied, I know what it stood for)
...teach some form of 'Math 002' or Science 101 of some kind. Find your local university and see if they have a weekend/evening program (if you're working) and then go to it, work hard. reading books for betterment is a good thing too, but sometimes it helps to have someone to talk to about it.
Legitimate question, except not everyone has hardware that they can use with Apple's service.
Ok, but there's Buymusic.com or whatever that car wreck is. That's got 95% of the market or whatever can use. Bad example with iTMS but I'm a recent convert to the mac platform and wonder why the hell I didn't do that a long time ago.
I actually delete the music that I don't like. If I were to do that with Apple's service, then I'd still be out the money for music I don't like. This, I believe, is where the grey area lies.
does the 30 sec preview not enough? I used to use CDNOW pretty heavily prior to the amazon buyout. I could figure out if I liked it enough to buy it blind by listening to a few of the 30 sec tracks. Barnes and Nobel and Borders in my area (Raleigh) lets me pick up a CD, wave it under a bar code reader and hear the whole thing if I want.
You are probably in the minority, and you use p2p to pick what you own. I've seen kids (12 - 17) and adults (21+) that get every p2p file they can find and use it to populate their CD players, their MP3 players.
You raise some valid points, but I think you are unfairly dismissive of what you call the "fighting the man" defense. The fact is that a new technology has arisen that makes large portions of an existing industry irrelevant. It's a powerful, entrenched industry, and consequently it has legal protections for itself. You may consider the following just an elaborate justification for self-serving behavior, but I feel that by going to shows, supporting smaller acts with CD purchases, and, yes, stealing major label music off of P2P networks I am doing nothing more than my small part to hasten the fall of a fundamentally doomed industry of middlemen.
So what's next, car dealerships? they're all corrupt and screw everyone right? See that's the part I don't understand. If you don't like the way someone does business, don't do business with them. Copyright infringing/stealing/denying them the right to make money off their product, however you want to call it doesn't justify your position, it makes you a violator of the law in this country and makes you punishable by civil and possibly criminal penalties (I hope the congress is just not THAT stupid, we'll see)
Artists don't make very much money on CD sales -- only the largest acts cover the spread on their advances and start to collect royalties based on sales. Filesharing takes money out of these folks' pockets, it's true. Most acts, though, don't achieve that level of sales. An advance generally pays for recording an album, but most of their real revenue comes from touring. I think it's reasonable to say that P2P is likely to increase live show attendance, if anything, by fueling interest in bands through easy access to their music.
I agree on this point. The artists do not make money from CD sales. They make money from the acts they perform that are created by the demand of CD Distribution. p2p could get money to the artist, but the current method of p2p does not get money to them, or to the current distribution method and they will hunt people down. Right now it may be for the more 'name brand' acts but if this continues they will do it for anyone they support. But again, the current p2p method is still outside the bounds of the contracts in place, and methods of distribution. They are flat out copyright infringment which is punishable by civil and possible criminal penalties.
So who loses out? Not the artists particularly; mostly it's the industry middlemen
But does this make it right? No.
Marketing: nobody likes marketing
So? It's a necessary evil. You have to engage in marketing every time you went out on a date, looked for a job, made a friend. Some folks just have made it an entire packaging thing, it still doesn't justify breaking the letter of the law
But the digital revolution behind P2P is also making recording an album a lot easier and cheaper. The average band already owns the instruments they need, and probably a PA. Throw a $300 sound card in a PC -- and maybe an open-source ProTools equivalent (admittedly a stumbling block -- does anything even approaching this exist?) -- and you can make something that sounds pretty damn good. Professional quality audio will soon be within everybody's reach.
this point is a good one. To address your technology point, I've been picking up CDs for $5 - $10 after local music groups for years as I attended small bar with local talent for years. Some of my favorites included 'Split Lip Rayfield' which started out in Mid Wichita, KS and had a bass player who made his bass out of a 5 gallon gas can & a weed wacker string. (He was the brother of a girl I hung out with). They burnt their music to a CD using a Soundblaster & some burning software back in '96 or so. It can be done easily with a $500 - $700 computer today, Mac or PC
But search down your KaZaa list, or show me a few new artists
2. Artist should get compensated for their efforts.
how is this a conflict of moral interests? To me they are one and the same. We should be able to enjoy the arts, and the artist should get compensated for the work. These can't be seperated.
Since the record companies swindle the artists, the second one takes a back seat to the first. And hence we have the p2p networks.
This goes to my 'fighting the man' statement. This is BS. If the poor starving artists were swindled than why do I see shows like 'MTV Cribs' that has the latest artist du jour showing off their palatial mansion? Are they that swindled? I'd like to be swindled like that. Maybe the niche artist with a small network doesn't need the big distrubtors and p2p is more for that person, but the big, name brand acts like Metallica, Madonna, etc can do just fine off of their 'swindling' they get.
I've paid $20 for a CD that I like 1 song from for the last time, than *THAT* is what the RIAA is worried about
If they were worried about that why is the iTMS from Apple in business?
Not trying to troll here, I'm just trying to understand where the 'reasoning' comes from. And its not like I've not been burned by this. I have quite a few 'one hit wonders' CDs in my collection. But with the advent of iTMS I have a bunch of singles now that I didn't have before/didn't trust buying the CD without hearing it type thing.
This is still something that has not been explained to me without it coming down to 'i like to steal music because it's easy and free' not 'i like to preview my music before I run out and buy the CD'
p2p in itself is an awesome technology. BitTorrent is one of my favorites, it solves that problem of things like Fileplanet that make yous sit through 70 ads for 30 min while you wait to download the latest 50MB patch to fix a game you like that wasn't released finished, but half finished because the hype machine kept it going for 2 years before it was ready (1.5 before it was released)
but Kazaa, Napster, Grokster, and any other method of distributing music that was taken from a CD that was distributed as a copyrighted material is just as bad as the guys that scan in the playboy centerfolds and post them to usenet. It's theft of property/right to make money.
Just because we think RIAA is screwing the artists, and RIAA is keeping CD prices artifically high, or whatever justification of the week is tossed out, you're still stealing the music.
It's not like Napster/Kazaa negotiated contracts with the artists that allowed you the user to download music seperate and outside the distribution structure. Its not like the artists are fighting RIAA by not signing contracts for music, heck they're jumping at the chance for a record deal with 'the industry' and are happy they get the $0.08 per CD or whatever measly amount it is.
When you download a song off of kazaa or whatever the p2p du jour is, you're stealing. There isn't a justification for this other than some made up BS. You aren't 'fighting the man' because 'the man' is someone that is out to make a buck. they're not 'trampling your rights' in an attempt to enforce their valid and legal copyrights.
If half the energy was put into going after our lawmakers to get things like Copyright lenghts, patents, and all the things that have been legally approved by our legally elected representatives and making them change this, we'd get something done.
Instead we're going to make a bunch of lawyers rich, a bunch of parents whos 12 year old kids are downloading and hosting millions of songs turn off the internet because it corrupted poor johnn and jane, and we're going to get it so that anything outside of port 80 requests to certified websites will be reported as piracy activity and they'll use the PATRIOT act to hunt us down.
73 iTunes Music Store songs purchased and counting.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean someone has got to mow that lawn.
I always think it's great when another hardware manufacturer sees the light of open source software. But when it's coming to sun the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is saying.
Here we have Scott McNealy telling people ""Don't touch open-source software unless you have a team of intellectual-property lawyers prepared to scour every single piece" of open-source code. " yet they're also releasing an open sourced distribution of Linux.
What's the deal with Sun? One minute their CEO is in a penguin suit extolling the world starts with open source, then it's Solaris will save the world, then it's Linux is doomed because of the SCO thing, etc.
I wouldn't want to support someone so wishy washy
But the remaining 95% of the computing world that had their desktops connected to the internet proceeded to geenrate millions of messages sent to their friends & family who were dumb enough to continue to read things sent to them even when they've been warned hundreds if not thousands of times....
...not everyone would sit down, register and post. What if the readership of slashdot is only represented by 20 - 30% of the registered?
Boy, nothing like proving his point in not time flat by showing the ignorance that can be the linux community sometimes.
His point was, if a user ran out and bought a copy of Linux there are many scripting exploits out there that would tank a machine before it could patch itself. I don't think there is one for current distributions - but that doesn't mean one can't be found in the future.
Behind a firewall? I thought linux WAS a firewall. At least with Redhat it ASKS you to install the firewall - and even if it did and you selected 'medium' security the wu-ftpd exploit would have hacked it because port 21 is open under 'medium' as I recall.
I had the same thing happen with RH 6.2 when RH 7.0 first came out. I was downloading patches via my cable modem and a buffer overrun occured within 1 hr of me isnstalling. I dont' remember for sure but I think it was the atd process.
At the time, I had no idea how to run linux and didn't think that people would script hacks of linux because it's the *real* os and no one would want to hack it like they do MS.
Proves that there are assholes that just do this for fun IMHO.
Peachy keen jolly green. But in 1995 when this happeend Windows 2000 wasn't an option, Windows 95 and 3.1 were the only options. They weren't rock solid, and everyone who worked on computers in that era would know that too.
Used to work as a contractor for a major pizza company that used to be in Kansas. They were an entire Macintosh place, had systems for about 700 - 1000 users I think it was.
Then a large soda company bought them and felt that 'they all needed to be the same' even though the Microsoft Offices the platforms ran worked together.
So, we went from the two of us supporting 700 - 1000 users to 18 people.
And the user populace was not happy. The standard rebuild time of a machine went from 'when they got new ones' to once a week. We had device driver issues, and SLAs of getting machines back up and running in two hours so we ended up just ghosting machines over and over to clear up whatever went wrong.
Weird.
I certainly know that every time I upgrade my video card all my previous games fail to work on my computer.
Last time I checked, the xBox was a fancy name for 'cheap computer hacked so it can only run our games' and would think that MS makes all their developers write to the standard they dictate (directX for xbox or whatever)
So Xbox2 would have DirectX for Xbox 10.0 vs. 7.3 or whatever was on the original Xbox and then everything works.
I don't think MS could take over the world as they plan without giving someone an upgrade path. I mean just look how long it took them to quit booting some type of DOS (Windows 3.x, 95, 98, ME)
You're right, he helped make computers a household item, and flooded the market with jobs. what a commie bastard.
Maybe I was spelling it the english way eh? Don't know what got over me.
Excuse me if I don't take a single thing FSF says to heart.
These guys can find fault with anything but the 'blessed GPL'. They're the ones that give free software the 'commie' name because of their inflexibility.
I should think that any company that releases the core of their operating system as a open source of *any* kind with no monetary cost associated with it is impressive.
James would knot have this.
:)
1) It's not in an Aston Martin
2) It's a fricken breifcase. he'd just put it in his watch
3) it requires more than a twist & push of a button.
So no, this is a geek case, not a james bond one.
Why are Dell and HP so silent on this? HP 'fully supports' Linux according to recent articles yet they're keeping their lips tighter than any of them. Not even a peep.
Last time I looked at a changelog there were several @hp.com addresses that were adding stuff to the kernal.
What's up with that?
DR-DOS 0wn3d all other DOSes! That's a desktop operating system isn't it? That's what DOS stood for right?
(for the humor imparied, I know what it stood for)
...teach some form of 'Math 002' or Science 101 of some kind. Find your local university and see if they have a weekend/evening program (if you're working) and then go to it, work hard. reading books for betterment is a good thing too, but sometimes it helps to have someone to talk to about it.
Maybe because it's kernal 2.6 usage instead of YAPR (yet another point release)
Maybe that's why redhat just went from 8 to 9 , they want to be on the front page of Slashdot!
Ok, but there's Buymusic.com or whatever that car wreck is. That's got 95% of the market or whatever can use. Bad example with iTMS but I'm a recent convert to the mac platform and wonder why the hell I didn't do that a long time ago. does the 30 sec preview not enough? I used to use CDNOW pretty heavily prior to the amazon buyout. I could figure out if I liked it enough to buy it blind by listening to a few of the 30 sec tracks. Barnes and Nobel and Borders in my area (Raleigh) lets me pick up a CD, wave it under a bar code reader and hear the whole thing if I want.
You are probably in the minority, and you use p2p to pick what you own. I've seen kids (12 - 17) and adults (21+) that get every p2p file they can find and use it to populate their CD players, their MP3 players.
So what's next, car dealerships? they're all corrupt and screw everyone right? See that's the part I don't understand. If you don't like the way someone does business, don't do business with them. Copyright infringing/stealing/denying them the right to make money off their product, however you want to call it doesn't justify your position, it makes you a violator of the law in this country and makes you punishable by civil and possibly criminal penalties (I hope the congress is just not THAT stupid, we'll see)
I agree on this point. The artists do not make money from CD sales. They make money from the acts they perform that are created by the demand of CD Distribution. p2p could get money to the artist, but the current method of p2p does not get money to them, or to the current distribution method and they will hunt people down. Right now it may be for the more 'name brand' acts but if this continues they will do it for anyone they support. But again, the current p2p method is still outside the bounds of the contracts in place, and methods of distribution. They are flat out copyright infringment which is punishable by civil and possible criminal penalties.
But does this make it right? No.
So? It's a necessary evil. You have to engage in marketing every time you went out on a date, looked for a job, made a friend. Some folks just have made it an entire packaging thing, it still doesn't justify breaking the letter of the law
this point is a good one. To address your technology point, I've been picking up CDs for $5 - $10 after local music groups for years as I attended small bar with local talent for years. Some of my favorites included 'Split Lip Rayfield' which started out in Mid Wichita, KS and had a bass player who made his bass out of a 5 gallon gas can & a weed wacker string. (He was the brother of a girl I hung out with). They burnt their music to a CD using a Soundblaster & some burning software back in '96 or so. It can be done easily with a $500 - $700 computer today, Mac or PC
But search down your KaZaa list, or show me a few new artists
how is this a conflict of moral interests? To me they are one and the same. We should be able to enjoy the arts, and the artist should get compensated for the work. These can't be seperated.
This goes to my 'fighting the man' statement. This is BS. If the poor starving artists were swindled than why do I see shows like 'MTV Cribs' that has the latest artist du jour showing off their palatial mansion? Are they that swindled? I'd like to be swindled like that. Maybe the niche artist with a small network doesn't need the big distrubtors and p2p is more for that person, but the big, name brand acts like Metallica, Madonna, etc can do just fine off of their 'swindling' they get.
Point taken. That is a better way of saying it than I was.
If they were worried about that why is the iTMS from Apple in business?
Not trying to troll here, I'm just trying to understand where the 'reasoning' comes from. And its not like I've not been burned by this. I have quite a few 'one hit wonders' CDs in my collection. But with the advent of iTMS I have a bunch of singles now that I didn't have before/didn't trust buying the CD without hearing it type thing.
Actually we used it as a 'see if they read or just check every box to say that they know something they don't.'
It was never officially called NT 5.0, it wasn't released as 5.0. Geek pickyness I guess.
This is still something that has not been explained to me without it coming down to 'i like to steal music because it's easy and free' not 'i like to preview my music before I run out and buy the CD'
p2p in itself is an awesome technology. BitTorrent is one of my favorites, it solves that problem of things like Fileplanet that make yous sit through 70 ads for 30 min while you wait to download the latest 50MB patch to fix a game you like that wasn't released finished, but half finished because the hype machine kept it going for 2 years before it was ready (1.5 before it was released)
but Kazaa, Napster, Grokster, and any other method of distributing music that was taken from a CD that was distributed as a copyrighted material is just as bad as the guys that scan in the playboy centerfolds and post them to usenet. It's theft of property/right to make money.
Just because we think RIAA is screwing the artists, and RIAA is keeping CD prices artifically high, or whatever justification of the week is tossed out, you're still stealing the music.
It's not like Napster/Kazaa negotiated contracts with the artists that allowed you the user to download music seperate and outside the distribution structure. Its not like the artists are fighting RIAA by not signing contracts for music, heck they're jumping at the chance for a record deal with 'the industry' and are happy they get the $0.08 per CD or whatever measly amount it is.
When you download a song off of kazaa or whatever the p2p du jour is, you're stealing. There isn't a justification for this other than some made up BS. You aren't 'fighting the man' because 'the man' is someone that is out to make a buck. they're not 'trampling your rights' in an attempt to enforce their valid and legal copyrights.
If half the energy was put into going after our lawmakers to get things like Copyright lenghts, patents, and all the things that have been legally approved by our legally elected representatives and making them change this, we'd get something done.
Instead we're going to make a bunch of lawyers rich, a bunch of parents whos 12 year old kids are downloading and hosting millions of songs turn off the internet because it corrupted poor johnn and jane, and we're going to get it so that anything outside of port 80 requests to certified websites will be reported as piracy activity and they'll use the PATRIOT act to hunt us down.
73 iTunes Music Store songs purchased and counting.
But I remember the reason I got broadband was for the free pr0n, not the free music.
But then that was ISDN in 1996.
...that some companies still have 'Windows 5.0' on their sheets as lists of systems with operating experience, I don't see how this is relavent.
Right now 'Java' is the en vogue thing to ask for on a resume. C# hasn't reached that level yet. It's still a buzzword to the HR types.