...because the news media has already announced that the entire election will be decided in Ohio and Florida, so the rest of us might as well stay home.
Yet Another/. Troll (for posts) on a otherwise slow day.
Problems with that article:
1) it's written by Maureen (Clueless) O'Gara
2) it's premised on the idea that SCO has some contractural control over IBM's System 3-based AIX -- another thing (besides infringing code in Linux, of which there is none) that SCO has not proven
Oh well, 0-for-2 is about on par for O'Gara *and* SCO...
...to realize they're not trying this in any court of public opinion.
They're going down in flames in every court they're fighting a legal battle, and they somehow think public opinion is either:
going to change in their favor
going to matter at all after Lindon Utah is reduced to a smoking crater, salted, and plowed under
just because people get to read some emails from IBM that (in SCO's opinion) kinda look bad.
Actually, the way SCO's research has been going, they've totally misunderstood the meaning of the emails and as soon as they're made public SCO will have made complete and utter fools of themselves, once again...
The point is not the distribution, but the fact that while SCO was *still* distributing Linux, they had already sued IBM for distributing it also -- Linux that allegedly contained wrongfully contributed IP
>>> 6) the act by SCO to actually engage in the business of distributing itself the very property it claims was wrongly contributed (to SCO as well as all other recipients of the Linux code) <<<
...Pamela is really just getting closer to her own inner troll?
She starts off with this self-referential, circular narative about "blows != violence", but then brings up "sending Enderle over the top" and then she mentions guns and how she really wants to keep Enderle calm, and then she comes full circle and no that's not what she means and suddenly she's *really* talking about "blowhards" and "step-by-step".
Why bother with the entire prologue, except that it makes good "press" when written by someone who's now a "journalist".
And she ends up with a long monologue about how poor Groklaw (center of the known universe) is about to be astroturfed (the latest "attack!" "attack!") by that dreadful SCO.
All this angst really comes from the ongoing facts that:
Pamela remains *very* uncomfortable with her awkward relationship to OSRM, but doesn't want to talk about it (shall we deflect discussion *away* from OSRM and Pamela? There's an idea).
Pamela absolutely will not compromise on "it's my damn blog and I'll censor^W delete posts^W^W run it like I want" despite how it plays to any larger audience outside of Groklaw itself
there are still a whole bunch of people who are still worked up about these issues; see the Yahoo! Finance SCOX board, where the discussion about all of this continues unabated after a full week since the OSRM study popped up
fewer and fewer people are even bothering to try to discuss *any* of this at Groklaw itself, so Pamela's "Groklaw's being attacked" "Groklaw's being attacked" meme is succeeding
So, Pamela's got issues, and a lot of people have issues with Pamela, but to hear her tell it it's all Enderle's and McBride's and SCO's fault.
Pamela's backed herself into a corner. Period.
As for SCO itself, fuck 'em.
SCO clearly isn't going to get anything past anyone here, and anyone (Pamela included..) who thinks that/. is going to be fooled by any such BS from SCO is smoking something I don't want any part of...
His take on SCO's increasing their SCOSource license fees:
"...I guess SCO lawyers do not to see this motion [Novell's motion to dismiss] coming their way because someone suggested to SCO management that they should increase the price of those SCO licenses
to help scare at least one more linux customer into paying license money while the SCO legal scheme goes down in flames. Or maybe I should say gets hosed with cold water."
the Judge has looked at the Asset Purchase Agreement, and Amendment No. 2, and has said that those documents do *not* add up to a clear transfer of *any* copyrights (whatever those copyrights were being a separate issue)
because the Judge himself has raised the doubtfulness of a transfer of copyrights, Novell (in this Judge's opinion) cannot *knowingly* be making a false statement when Novells says "Wait just a minute, you (the New SCO) don't have any copyrights, we have 'em".
ignore the "motion to remand" bit because it's just when the Judge's opinion was stated
"...why can't they join a coordinated search for patterns in financial markets?"
There's going to be a lack of enthusiasm for such reseach in a whole lot of boardrooms across corporate America (and elsewhere..) because one of the most common patterns will be stock price manipulation that (for some bizarre reason) regulatory agencies like the SEC just can't seem to notice.
Witness the completely bizarre sh*t that goes on almost daily with SCOX (the SCO Group -- heard of them?)
My objection to the deletion and editing of posts [at Groklaw] is that it's really founded in the cult of personality that's grown up around Pamela Jones, a cult of personality that she herself has not repudiated and therefore (presumably) enjoys and encourages.
That cult of personality is manifested in the attitude that Groklaw is somehow a private, personal sanctum, and that any criticism of Pamela is both a personal attack on her, and utterly unreasonable.
That attitude is utter nonsense, as I've said before.
A publicly-accessible web page is just that: public.
Any illusions of privacy or personal space are just that: illusions.
Now, one can control content of a publicly-accessible web page, as I do for example at my web site, but in the context of what Groklaw is alleged to be (an "advocacy" site), as soon as content beyond obvious spam and/or obscenity is edited or deleted, it should raise the obvious question of censorship, and it should pose the obvious question as to whether the issue being "advocated" can stand on its own merits, or whether it needs to be protected and can only survive within a limited context where not all questions will be allowed, let alone answered.
But I find this unrepenatant true-beliver mentality very off-putting (particularly when it's advanced by individuals who are to some extent on a payroll around here, and when they do it not only at Groklaw but on other message boards) and I would state that such a true-beleiver mentality is little different than that of SCO's, at it's core.
Once you buy into the idea that your cause is pure, and you can say and do anything to support it, and you *do* do anything to support it, you've lost me.
My objection (and having heard no denial or explanation from Pamela, I can only assume that I'm correct) to the apparent fact that the research being done by unknowing volunteers here is being assimilated into the product that OSRM is selling, comes from the fact that nowhere do I see that usage acknowleged in any way.
Other posters have made reference to the research here being used by IBM; a completely different issue.
IBM is a clear and visible party to the battle being fought here [at Groklaw], a battle that is the foundation of why and how Groklaw came into existence, and I would be proud to think that I had personally contributed to the sucess of that battle.
But OSRM is a later-day contrivance, an entity created to fill a perceived need (no matter how "worthy" - that's open to question) as a business concept created by Daniel Egger and its only association with Groklaw is that they hired Pamela to work for them.
And after that hiring I saw no notice that our work here was going to be appropriated by OSRM.
OSRM's patent study is, then, tantamount to an insurance company seeding clouds with silver nitrate, and then saying "Oh! By the way! We have rain insurance to sell you!"
Is the issue of potential patent infrigement in the Linux kernel one that needs to be studied and discussed?
Absolutely.
But is no one but me troubled by the fact that the study is issued by the very company that will issue insurance^W - sorry - "indemnification" for such infrigement?
Apparently not.
The true believer mentality and group-think comes forth, and anyone who has a problem with it can go back to slashdot or alt.flame.
Then, again, the timing of this announcement was horrible, given that SCO Forun 2004 is taking place, and given that the city of Munich, Germany is suddenly having major problems adopting Linux because of patent issues being raised by a local politician there.
And yet, again, I've heard no acknowledgement or discussion of that issue: in fact, the entire OSRM issue is being studiously ignored by Pamela, accept as it might appear anecdotally in isolated posts.
And finally, (and here you can sneer at my whining) I will say that I'm not a little hurt by the complete lack of reponse by
Slashdot Mirror
uh..
Maybe you're looking at a hacked version of the hacked jpeg.
The *real* one says "hacked by realloc( " where the woman in the background is just about to write the final " )"
t_t_b == i_s_g != "Horse Lover"
...because the news media has already announced that the entire election will be decided in Ohio and Florida, so the rest of us might as well stay home.
t_t_b
...it's Window$ only.
End of story.
t_t_b
Yet Another /. Troll (for posts) on a otherwise slow day.
Problems with that article:
1) it's written by Maureen (Clueless) O'Gara
2) it's premised on the idea that SCO has some contractural control over IBM's System 3-based AIX -- another thing (besides infringing code in Linux, of which there is none) that SCO has not proven
Oh well, 0-for-2 is about on par for O'Gara *and* SCO...
t_t_b
>>> Why the hell has there been 3 Amendments..sounds like SCO attacks, finds something and then chages their case.
No.
SCO finds *nothing* and then changes its case.
Haven't been paying any attention, have you?
t_t_b
They're going down in flames in every court they're fighting a legal battle, and they somehow think public opinion is either:
- going to change in their favor
- going to matter at all after Lindon Utah is reduced to a smoking crater, salted, and plowed under
just because people get to read some emails from IBM that (in SCO's opinion) kinda look bad.Actually, the way SCO's research has been going, they've totally misunderstood the meaning of the emails and as soon as they're made public SCO will have made complete and utter fools of themselves, once again...
t_t_b
From wired:
>>> a member of the so-called Black Hat Hackers Bloc <<<
And the URL at that quote?
http://phil.ist-backup.de/rncelectronic/
Gee... last time I heard, *.de was Germany.
Maybe these are "Democrats" in the armed forces, stationed in Germany, who are going to perpetrate this dastardly deed.
t_t_b
What makes you think these people are Democrats?
Not taking the opportunity to push your own agenda, are you?
Are you a "Republican"?
feh...
t_t_b
One of the points at http://www.lamlaw.com/
>>> 6) the act by SCO to actually engage in the business of distributing itself the very property it claims was wrongly contributed (to SCO as well as all other recipients of the Linux code) <<<
t_t_b
t_t_b
Three digits!
Don't see many of them anymore...
t_t_b
She starts off with this self-referential, circular narative about "blows != violence", but then brings up "sending Enderle over the top" and then she mentions guns and how she really wants to keep Enderle calm, and then she comes full circle and no that's not what she means and suddenly she's *really* talking about "blowhards" and "step-by-step".
Why bother with the entire prologue, except that it makes good "press" when written by someone who's now a "journalist".
And she ends up with a long monologue about how poor Groklaw (center of the known universe) is about to be astroturfed (the latest "attack!" "attack!") by that dreadful SCO.
All this angst really comes from the ongoing facts that:
So, Pamela's got issues, and a lot of people have issues with Pamela, but to hear her tell it it's all Enderle's and McBride's and SCO's fault.
Pamela's backed herself into a corner. Period.
As for SCO itself, fuck 'em.
SCO clearly isn't going to get anything past anyone here, and anyone (Pamela included..) who thinks that /. is going to be fooled by any such BS from SCO is smoking something I don't want any part of...
Finally, no, I'm not an SCO astroturfer:
http://www.finchhaven.com/TSCOG/index.html
I've done my work in the trenches; have you?
t_t_b
And the good news is: this guy *is* a lawyer.
http://www.lamlaw.com/
His take on SCO's increasing their SCOSource license fees:
t_t_b
Better?
t_t_b
I get it!
You forgot the <style content=sarcasm> tags!
hahahahahahahaha!
Silly me...
t_t_b
"The fact"?
"rip off"?
In which alternate universe?
t_t_b
Any thread that references more than two "x ix y's Vietnam" selfdistr
t_t_b
t_t_b
There's going to be a lack of enthusiasm for such reseach in a whole lot of boardrooms across corporate America (and elsewhere..) because one of the most common patterns will be stock price manipulation that (for some bizarre reason) regulatory agencies like the SEC just can't seem to notice.
Witness the completely bizarre sh*t that goes on almost daily with SCOX (the SCO Group -- heard of them?)
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=SCOX&t=1d&l=on&z=m &q=c&p=&a=&c=
Friday's chart was pretty "normal" compared to most days...
t_t_b
Today (08/06/2004) there was a jump from around $4.60 to over $4.80, and then suddenly back down to under $4.60, where it is right now.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=SCOX&t=1d&l=on&z=m &q=c&p=&a=&c=
If you were following along, and timed it *just* right, you could make...pennies!
w00t!
t_t_b
So Forbes pumping didn't really do 'em a lot of good.
'sides, it'll be off again today.
Gravity, and all...
t_t_b
That cult of personality is manifested in the attitude that Groklaw is somehow a private, personal sanctum, and that any criticism of Pamela is both a personal attack on her, and utterly unreasonable.
That attitude is utter nonsense, as I've said before.
A publicly-accessible web page is just that: public.
Any illusions of privacy or personal space are just that: illusions.
Now, one can control content of a publicly-accessible web page, as I do for example at my web site, but in the context of what Groklaw is alleged to be (an "advocacy" site), as soon as content beyond obvious spam and/or obscenity is edited or deleted, it should raise the obvious question of censorship, and it should pose the obvious question as to whether the issue being "advocated" can stand on its own merits, or whether it needs to be protected and can only survive within a limited context where not all questions will be allowed, let alone answered.
But I find this unrepenatant true-beliver mentality very off-putting (particularly when it's advanced by individuals who are to some extent on a payroll around here, and when they do it not only at Groklaw but on other message boards) and I would state that such a true-beleiver mentality is little different than that of SCO's, at it's core.
Once you buy into the idea that your cause is pure, and you can say and do anything to support it, and you *do* do anything to support it, you've lost me.
Other posters have made reference to the research here being used by IBM; a completely different issue.
IBM is a clear and visible party to the battle being fought here [at Groklaw], a battle that is the foundation of why and how Groklaw came into existence, and I would be proud to think that I had personally contributed to the sucess of that battle.
But OSRM is a later-day contrivance, an entity created to fill a perceived need (no matter how "worthy" - that's open to question) as a business concept created by Daniel Egger and its only association with Groklaw is that they hired Pamela to work for them.
And after that hiring I saw no notice that our work here was going to be appropriated by OSRM.
Is the issue of potential patent infrigement in the Linux kernel one that needs to be studied and discussed?
Absolutely.
But is no one but me troubled by the fact that the study is issued by the very company that will issue insurance^W - sorry - "indemnification" for such infrigement?
Apparently not.
The true believer mentality and group-think comes forth, and anyone who has a problem with it can go back to slashdot or alt.flame.
And yet, again, I've heard no acknowledgement or discussion of that issue: in fact, the entire OSRM issue is being studiously ignored by Pamela, accept as it might appear anecdotally in isolated posts.
t_t_b
That's about all there is on cable these days.
What did Bruce say? Something about "..57 channels and nothin's on.."
t_t_b