My take on the article is that there are several journalling file systems available, and one of them MIGHT be in 2.4 at some point in time. Further, the author believes that IBM may have a go at it for pretty lame reasons (mostly having to do with physical location of the IBM JFS).
Another non-news article brought to you by Slashdot.
Moss-Magnuson act allows aftermarket companies to make parts. Actually, what it does is say that your warranty on your GM/Ford/et al. is not void by using aftermarket parts.
Now if only I could get an aftermarket (read: CHEAP) oil filter for an '81 Honda Gold Wing...
Not to toot my own horn, but I just started a project at furng.sourceforge.net and sourceforge.net/projects/furng to do precisely that. Still in the navel picking stage (ie, planning) but I hope it will be more general than options listed so far.
To answer the question from Cliff, yes, it would be very useful. Lots of folks still pay by the minute for internet/phone access (mostly non-US) and it's much easier to use a screenreader on a terminal based client. Lynx and friends? I've heard that while they work better than Netscape and IE for the last purpose, they aren't the best.
When/if the Katzians decide to rant about this turn of events, it will be simply another sign that they want things their way, and their way only. They want the freedom to look after their own lives and their own societies. They want it free from government control. But as soon as a company takes action, that's bad. They totally ignore the facts:
a) the company is owned by stockholders who are free to determine how the company operates. Don't like it? Buy a share and go the annual meeting.
b) they are free to buy from stores that don't card. We did the same thing for rated R movies. Switch theatres. No problem.
c) if all of the above is impossible, then open a store and sell them yourself. In this case, there are a few possibilities:
1) the idea is a good one, people flock to the store, and it becomes successful (ironically, you then become part of the corporatocracy:)
2) the store is unpopular amongst parents, who prevent their children from going there. Now, Katz is frequently a kook, but I don't think he would say that this is bad. This is what it is supposed to be. Parents raise their kids. What's the problem?
3) the 'society', whether or not the individuals have children boycott the store or picket in front of it. Again, how can this possibly be different in spirit than the protests in Seattle and Wash. DC? So long as they don't bring the long arm of the law into it, so what?
But no, it's much easier to call for an anarchist society where we let anyone do whatever they want.
(Lest anyone think I'm totally against the plight of 'disturbed youth', I submitted a story today about the asinine report the FBI is sending to schools. But remember folks: if you don't watch yourself, which is what Wal-Mart and the BigK are doing, Big Brother and his sister Janet will be happy to provide that service.)
To continue your (very bad) metaphor, the people ripped open the microwave because it would only cook certain brands of popcorn. They have now fiddled with it, and it can cook any brand of popcorn.
Nobody was complaining about anything other than the fact that they weren't allowed to cook their popcorn. They were only allowed to cook popcorn deemed acceptable by the seller of the microwave.
Further, someone got something and wanted to play with it. What's so wrong with that?
FWIW, there isn't a law (not even DMCA) that prevents the reverse engineering of a physical product. Patent protection prevents one from making a copy or using unique aspects of the product, but this has nothing to do with IP.
Done and done. FWIW, my company (at my behest) tried very hard to prevent the UCITA from being passed in Maryland.
Guess what? Didn't work. Spineless idiots.
OTOH, remember that this is in response not to written laws but rather to poor interpretations of existing laws by judges. It might have been 'Database Nation', but there was a book I read this summer that talked of the absurdity of the sexual harassment laws/interpretations in particular.
This is probably what we will do in conjunction with some other ideas. The problem is that the company is right around 50 employees. At that point, with the facilities available to us, things start to get difficult to handle. As a matter of fact, most of the problems are due to the fact that we are large enough to need more formal management, but not large enough to afford it:)
Nowhere did I imply that gaining millions in a civil suit is either easy or necessarily possible. But in a legal climate where nearly every claim, regardless of its absurdity, is given time in a court, it is impossible to predict what a court will force me to pay to defend. And this is not simply monetary costs. The costs due to a loss of reputation, and the time involved could possibly be devastating.
As far as having intelligent employees, yes, that is the bulk of our staff. However, when unemployment rates are as low as they are, finding new staff that is competent (and by this, I mean that they can alphabetize) becomes increasingly difficult.
We have phone policies. We have fax policies. But if you reread the original question, you'll see that the purpose was to garner what seemed to be a reasonable policy regarding the internet and email (not yet implemented in our office for a variety of reasons).
With few exceptions, I have gotten few, if any, reasonable responses to my question. It is very easy for slashdot to bemoan the practices of companies. Yet when I asked for a policy that takes into account both their needs and those of the employer, the responses seem to be:
Screw 'em. You gotta cover your own ass.
-or-
It's your job, not mine.
As long as that is the mentality that exists when one tries to get the opinions of/., I'm afraid that it will always be viewed as a fringe group with fringe opinions.
I must also state that I'm quite dismayed that Mr. Katz has not chimed in. (or at least he hasn't yet been modded up. Perhaps a recheck is in order). Despite his constant protests of the hegemony of the American Corporate Culture, when given a chance to voice constructive criticism, he is nowhere to be seen. Perhaps those who denigrate him are correct. He is a reactionary with little to offer to the conversation.
But on slashdot, it seems he is not alone.
(btw, for those who must flame, the mail server is at olg.com)
They might be a smartass, but they would be a bright smartass. Someone cognizant enough of their situation to try to change it. That person should quite probably deserve more responsibilities.
I'm not saying they aren't a malcontent. But how many smart people on/. would do something similar just out of boredom?
Not sure why I hadn't considered this before, as it has helped with some other policies we've been forced to introduce. This will receive some consideration.
>You need to consult an attorney. You may also
>want to investigate some kind of business insurance to
>cover litigation and damages that may result.
Done and done. That wasn't the point of my question. The point is: what is too much to an employee?
Why not ask my own employees? Not technically savvy enough to give an educated response.
BTW, part of the problem with the US is that we too often feel that the legal response is the correct one. Sometimes, one has to do what is right, which is what I am attempting to do in this case. As mentioned in an earlier post, blocking all email except for a few is the safest policy from a legal perspective. However, it's also the least kind to employees who have not done anything wrong. I have no desire to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
As far as being compliant: welcome to the United States. I manage a business with > 50 employees. Therefore, I have to be as compliant with every bit of personnel law as General Motors and Microsoft. Whether or not we claim compliance has nothing to do with it.
The point of this is not to go after the employee, as you seem to imply. It's to cover my own butt, while not pissing them off.
>On August 17, 2000, a federal district court in
>the Southern District of New York confirmed that
>offering, providing, or trafficking in DeCSS, or
>any other device designed to circumvent CSS,
>violates the DMCA.
Unless, until, there is a supreme court decision saying essentially the same thing, isn't this decision and the precedent set confined to the jurisdiction of this court? Therefore, shouldn't anyone with an ounce of sense tell the lawyers to go (insert verb of choice here) themselves?
BTW, do any of those MPAA members offer free web pages? Sounds like the right place for new mirrors.
Good point(s). However, perhaps at 27, I'm an old fogie, but I was always under the impression that universities were institutions of higher thought and learning. It seems that the original poster actually went beyond the requirements and had a novel, if only partial, solution to the problem.
Unfortunately, thought is no more required in school, and it seems that most schools are no more than a Lincoln Tech (tech school for cars, AC, etc.) for computers.
I was wondering about a similar issue a few weeks back (even submitted an AskSlashdot). Why go through that much effort? Why not just release a C program with 'main()' commented out? Then heavily comment it. Then release it as a white paper under the Open Content License. As delivered, it cannot successfully be compiled, so it's not source code. Given that your comments will say "here is how we would do this. For a code example read the next 50 lines".
The real moral of the story is that your prof was a jackass. You took some code, and made it to compile in another environment? Sounds like a non-trivial task to me, and certainly demonstrated knowledge of the material. Combine this with previous grades, and you certainly should have gotten an A in the class.
It would be even more appropos if AOL et al. sued the RIAA members (including themselves) for making music. After all, if they didn't make music, who would pirate it?? Makes as much sense as the mp3board suit.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, it's one way to make Voyager interesting...
My take on the article is that there are several journalling file systems available, and one of them MIGHT be in 2.4 at some point in time. Further, the author believes that IBM may have a go at it for pretty lame reasons (mostly having to do with physical location of the IBM JFS).
Another non-news article brought to you by Slashdot.
Moss-Magnuson act allows aftermarket companies to make parts. Actually, what it does is say that your warranty on your GM/Ford/et al. is not void by using aftermarket parts.
Now if only I could get an aftermarket (read: CHEAP) oil filter for an '81 Honda Gold Wing...
was not a virus.
It was a public beta.
I get one every time I see an article on Slashdot.
Guess it means off to Radio Shack tonight:)
Anybody tried using Wine to use the DVD software that came with their drive?
Not to toot my own horn, but I just started a project at furng.sourceforge.net and sourceforge.net/projects/furng to do precisely that. Still in the navel picking stage (ie, planning) but I hope it will be more general than options listed so far.
To answer the question from Cliff, yes, it would be very useful. Lots of folks still pay by the minute for internet/phone access (mostly non-US) and it's much easier to use a screenreader on a terminal based client. Lynx and friends? I've heard that while they work better than Netscape and IE for the last purpose, they aren't the best.
When/if the Katzians decide to rant about this turn of events, it will be simply another sign that they want things their way, and their way only. They want the freedom to look after their own lives and their own societies. They want it free from government control. But as soon as a company takes action, that's bad. They totally ignore the facts:
a) the company is owned by stockholders who are free to determine how the company operates. Don't like it? Buy a share and go the annual meeting.
b) they are free to buy from stores that don't card. We did the same thing for rated R movies. Switch theatres. No problem.
c) if all of the above is impossible, then open a store and sell them yourself. In this case, there are a few possibilities:
1) the idea is a good one, people flock to the store, and it becomes successful (ironically, you then become part of the corporatocracy:)
2) the store is unpopular amongst parents, who prevent their children from going there. Now, Katz is frequently a kook, but I don't think he would say that this is bad. This is what it is supposed to be. Parents raise their kids. What's the problem?
3) the 'society', whether or not the individuals have children boycott the store or picket in front of it. Again, how can this possibly be different in spirit than the protests in Seattle and Wash. DC? So long as they don't bring the long arm of the law into it, so what?
But no, it's much easier to call for an anarchist society where we let anyone do whatever they want.
(Lest anyone think I'm totally against the plight of 'disturbed youth', I submitted a story today about the asinine report the FBI is sending to schools. But remember folks: if you don't watch yourself, which is what Wal-Mart and the BigK are doing, Big Brother and his sister Janet will be happy to provide that service.)
I believe only the minor or his parents can end a contract signed in this way. IANAL, but I watch a lot of Judge Judy.
It should be different because it is different.
To continue your (very bad) metaphor, the people ripped open the microwave because it would only cook certain brands of popcorn. They have now fiddled with it, and it can cook any brand of popcorn.
Nobody was complaining about anything other than the fact that they weren't allowed to cook their popcorn. They were only allowed to cook popcorn deemed acceptable by the seller of the microwave.
Further, someone got something and wanted to play with it. What's so wrong with that?
FWIW, there isn't a law (not even DMCA) that prevents the reverse engineering of a physical product. Patent protection prevents one from making a copy or using unique aspects of the product, but this has nothing to do with IP.
surprise.
Not.
Just think how happy millions will be to have that asinine paper-clip tell them "just leave your x-box turned off overnight to reset the clock".
Sorry. My vcr works fine. No reason to BSOD the thing.
(Yes, as a matter of fact, I AM reinstalling Win 98 this weekend. Why? Because Loki isn't making Roller Coaster Tycoon.)
Done and done. FWIW, my company (at my behest) tried very hard to prevent the UCITA from being passed in Maryland.
Guess what? Didn't work. Spineless idiots.
OTOH, remember that this is in response not to written laws but rather to poor interpretations of existing laws by judges. It might have been 'Database Nation', but there was a book I read this summer that talked of the absurdity of the sexual harassment laws/interpretations in particular.
This is probably what we will do in conjunction with some other ideas. The problem is that the company is right around 50 employees. At that point, with the facilities available to us, things start to get difficult to handle. As a matter of fact, most of the problems are due to the fact that we are large enough to need more formal management, but not large enough to afford it:)
Nowhere did I imply that gaining millions in a civil suit is either easy or necessarily possible. But in a legal climate where nearly every claim, regardless of its absurdity, is given time in a court, it is impossible to predict what a court will force me to pay to defend. And this is not simply monetary costs. The costs due to a loss of reputation, and the time involved could possibly be devastating.
/., I'm afraid that it will always be viewed as a fringe group with fringe opinions.
As far as having intelligent employees, yes, that is the bulk of our staff. However, when unemployment rates are as low as they are, finding new staff that is competent (and by this, I mean that they can alphabetize) becomes increasingly difficult.
We have phone policies. We have fax policies. But if you reread the original question, you'll see that the purpose was to garner what seemed to be a reasonable policy regarding the internet and email (not yet implemented in our office for a variety of reasons).
With few exceptions, I have gotten few, if any, reasonable responses to my question. It is very easy for slashdot to bemoan the practices of companies. Yet when I asked for a policy that takes into account both their needs and those of the employer, the responses seem to be:
Screw 'em. You gotta cover your own ass.
-or-
It's your job, not mine.
As long as that is the mentality that exists when one tries to get the opinions of
I must also state that I'm quite dismayed that Mr. Katz has not chimed in. (or at least he hasn't yet been modded up. Perhaps a recheck is in order). Despite his constant protests of the hegemony of the American Corporate Culture, when given a chance to voice constructive criticism, he is nowhere to be seen. Perhaps those who denigrate him are correct. He is a reactionary with little to offer to the conversation.
But on slashdot, it seems he is not alone.
(btw, for those who must flame, the mail server is at olg.com)
While I haven't double-checked it for use, nmap shows that on our 4050N's by HP, the port for lpr is indeed open.
As for setting up printers, I've never had a problem using anything other than printtool.
They might be a smartass, but they would be a bright smartass. Someone cognizant enough of their situation to try to change it. That person should quite probably deserve more responsibilities.
/. would do something similar just out of boredom?
I'm not saying they aren't a malcontent. But how many smart people on
Not sure why I hadn't considered this before, as it has helped with some other policies we've been forced to introduce. This will receive some consideration.
>Why change things for electronic mail?
You'd have to ask the courts. They are trying (and succeeding) to reinvent the wheel.
If 2600 had 'merely' printed the code in an issue of their magazine, there would be no case.
>You need to consult an attorney. You may also
>want to investigate some kind of business insurance to
>cover litigation and damages that may result.
Done and done. That wasn't the point of my question. The point is: what is too much to an employee?
Why not ask my own employees? Not technically savvy enough to give an educated response.
BTW, part of the problem with the US is that we too often feel that the legal response is the correct one. Sometimes, one has to do what is right, which is what I am attempting to do in this case. As mentioned in an earlier post, blocking all email except for a few is the safest policy from a legal perspective. However, it's also the least kind to employees who have not done anything wrong. I have no desire to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
As far as being compliant: welcome to the United States. I manage a business with > 50 employees. Therefore, I have to be as compliant with every bit of personnel law as General Motors and Microsoft. Whether or not we claim compliance has nothing to do with it.
The point of this is not to go after the employee, as you seem to imply. It's to cover my own butt, while not pissing them off.
>On August 17, 2000, a federal district court in
>the Southern District of New York confirmed that
>offering, providing, or trafficking in DeCSS, or
>any other device designed to circumvent CSS,
>violates the DMCA.
Unless, until, there is a supreme court decision saying essentially the same thing, isn't this decision and the precedent set confined to the jurisdiction of this court? Therefore, shouldn't anyone with an ounce of sense tell the lawyers to go (insert verb of choice here) themselves?
BTW, do any of those MPAA members offer free web pages? Sounds like the right place for new mirrors.
According to this, I think I do:)
Good point(s). However, perhaps at 27, I'm an old fogie, but I was always under the impression that universities were institutions of higher thought and learning. It seems that the original poster actually went beyond the requirements and had a novel, if only partial, solution to the problem.
Unfortunately, thought is no more required in school, and it seems that most schools are no more than a Lincoln Tech (tech school for cars, AC, etc.) for computers.
I was wondering about a similar issue a few weeks back (even submitted an AskSlashdot). Why go through that much effort? Why not just release a C program with 'main()' commented out? Then heavily comment it. Then release it as a white paper under the Open Content License. As delivered, it cannot successfully be compiled, so it's not source code. Given that your comments will say "here is how we would do this. For a code example read the next 50 lines".
The real moral of the story is that your prof was a jackass. You took some code, and made it to compile in another environment? Sounds like a non-trivial task to me, and certainly demonstrated knowledge of the material. Combine this with previous grades, and you certainly should have gotten an A in the class.
It would be even more appropos if AOL et al. sued the RIAA members (including themselves) for making music. After all, if they didn't make music, who would pirate it?? Makes as much sense as the mp3board suit.
Here's hoping for a summary dismissal.