Yes. Problem is, the club is expensive to join, and requires tests and classes and so forth. Also, M$ decides who can be a member, and can change the rules at their whim.
Luckily, the tests are not difficult. Shame about the money thing, though.
Oh, in case you hadn't figured it out, they are known as the "Clan of the MCSE". I think there is another group the "Clan of the MCSE w/IIS" which is kinda like a Taco Bell burrito with extra beans, but the former causes more intestinal upset.
Seriously though, check any Linux newsgroup (or M$ one for that matter) www.ntfaq.com (good info, but they tend to goosestep to the M$ drumbeat a bit much) or the talk-back section of any ZD-Net article that mentions M$ and Linux. Plenty of zealots on their side of the camp.
The more beautiful women, the better. Not sure when you went to high school, but when I did, they sure as hell weren't sending the hot chicks to slobber over the geeks. Anyway, seeing them for free at trade shows is better than spending $10 a month to "look at pictures of me and all my sorority sisters".
Perhaps they haven't caught on to one small fact though: having been turned down (or 'friended') by more physically attractive women than I can shake a stick at, I'm largely immune. Any geek with any sense (and any experience) will figure out that these women are similar to those in HS/College who were nice until right after you helped them with their homework. So what it boils down to is I get a peek; the company doesn't get a sale unless they have a good product; and Barbie gets a job that suits her intelligence.
As Judge Judy is so fond of saying: "Beauty fades, Dumb is Forever"
("OW! Yes, honey, of course you are beautiful. I only meant I got dumped on and/or used by every beautiful woman I met EXCEPT you.")
Don't take it all so seriously! Why doesn't all people have a sense of humor?
Because my wife has RP? Because every time I ask her what she wants the answer is always "to see like I used to"?
This isn't bullshit like the latest M$ conspiracy to control the world. This isn't pie-in-the-sky genetic research. This isn't try to land on a planet 100 million miles away. This is real-life. This is something that effects millions of people.
Geez, it's a 30 year old OS, there are tons of newer ones available that handle everything almost as well as *nix platforms do. It's time we got rid of this albatross and moved on.
Were I a shareholder, I'd have to move that Mr. Gates be fired for incompetance. Same if I was the president of a member of the MPAA. These men are either lying through their teeth (most likely) or complete rubes. If the latter, it's obvious why they should be fired. If the former, it's just a good thing to can (or is that cane?) liars of this sort. Totally offensive to my dignity as a human being.
And what the fuck is with Valenti's attorney? Read the end of the deposition where he states that Valenti should not have been deposed. He's the president of the damned organization that brought the suit! He has the duty to know what his underlings are up to (same as in any company/organization. 'The buck stops here' thing.)
On another front, it appears that 2600's attorney is asking very intelligent to the point questions that show: MPAA has no clue. None whatsoever. Unfortunately, the MPAA's attorney is sticking very much to the legal nitpicking that is part and parcel of a modern court case in America. And THAT is what wins the case. Not facts. Not intelligence. But who is a better nitpicker.
Hopefully this will be different, but let's face it: most judges are much closer to collecting Social Security than I am (and the Supremes have largely been eligible for several years). Not to disparage the elderly, but by and large, those who fought Germans, Japanese, and Italians in the 40's do not grasp computers, DVD's, encryption (barring the occasional Waterhouse;) and basically anything more advanced that a Selectric Typewriter.
I'll point to what my father says about malpractice and 'a jury of his peers': he doesn't mind being tried by a jury of his peers. Unfortunately, his peers are quite capable of getting out of jury duty, leaving the Jerry Springer/Rosie Odonnell fans to decide his fate.
Much the same case as the DeCSS cases. While the judges (are there any jury trials yet?) may not be watching Rosie Odonnell, they sure ain't submitting any kernel patches.
Fuck it. The code is out. It's not going away. This seems more a free speech issue than DMCA anyway. But I guess DMCA is yet another chink in the armor of the first amendment.
What is interesting is the idea that they may want soverign control of their domains. While it does allow a country to do what it wishs with said domain, all it would take is one small whacko nation going for it to screw it up..
>Well, I realize that laws can make people feel more comfortable, but there comes a point where penalizing somebody doesn't make anymore sense. For example, if they guy who wrote melissa had to pay restitution or pay a $17,000 fine for every copy of the virus he spread, he'd probably own millions upon millions of dollars which he'd never be able to repay, no matter how long he lived.
Well, in order to get enough money to pay the fines, all he has to do is buy a marginal OS, have his mother sleep with an IBM exec, get IBM to sign a silly deal using his bought OS. 20 years later, join another crappy product to the eleventy-seventh version of that OS, and...
You work on the Death Star. I'll help fund some X-Wings, a womp rat hunter, and some ancient mystics. (BTW, if the force was so strong, how come Yoda or Ben didn't just flatten the Death Star like a pancake without having to kill Biggs, Porkins, etc?)
Seriously, do they actually have to move the entire HQ, or do they just have to set up a satellite office, call it "M$ HQ" and be done with it?
Second question: if they still sell products in the US, does this get them out of the settlement?
Third, does the US gov't still buy from them since they are in a foreign country? I believe there are still laws that for military purposes at least, preference is given to US suppliers. Could be good for Apple, RedHat, etc?
I don't have a coffee table, but I do have a Space Invaders cocktail table in my living room. Does that count? BTW, shouldn't 'we' be boycotting UF because it uses gif's?
Normally, I'd agree, but the 'general population' isn't ordering a machine without OS in the first place. It's either a corporate type, who (hopefully) should know what they are doing, a hobbyist (who should have to agree that Dell is making no claims that this hardware will work with his/her software, and will accept no returns based on that) or a l33+ haxor who is going to install a stolen copy of M$ whatever. So who gives a rat's ass about the copy of your license.
Personally, I think the original poster should have sent that one Apple 'open source' license. Or perhaps gotten the license from a copy of QNX:)
Next time, give us a factual article and post any personal opinions about the matter to the comments section like the rest of us; we'll decide if they're worth reading.
Ah, yes, if it is on the screen, I must read it. Whatever happened to skimming, scanning, and thinking for yourself?
Yeah, we heard you the first three times you posted this nearly identical comment. Why don't you post it another time, this time in ALL CAPS for those who haven't read it yet?
And no, if/. were a bunch of spineless shits, they would yank the story. IF they agree with what you have said, and IF they think something should be done, they would modify the original, erase the comments you don't seem to care for, and post a link to the original.
Assuming you got to the story from the front page, you already got the news portion. When you clicked to open the article, you got the beginning of commentary.
Slashdot refers you to news. Readers post commentary. IF anything has changed in the past year or so, it's that there is a little more commentary in the news reference.
Saying that/. is biased or has changed: the new way to get modded as 'Insightful'.
Insightful: You use that word a lot, but I don't think you know what it means.
We can discuss who has proof about who molests baby kittens while clubbing seals, but it doesn't matter: yes, technically, a person in the US is innocent until proven guilty. But if you really wish to protect your privacy, the only rational response is that all are guilty until proven innocent.
Why shouldn't we expect these privacy advocates, or whatever the hell DC is calling them, to prove themselves? We ask people from nearly every walk of life to prove themselves capable of the task they have been handed.
DC's goal is to have the board members' capability 'proven' by the groups with whom they associate. The comments that were part of the original article were to show how disingenious this was. I hate to sound like a two year old, but 'DC started it!'
It is DC's imperative to dig up the facts, post the facts, and give us a good reason to trust them. Slashdot is not a reporting service per se. It is a news referral service with liberal amounts of commentary thrown in. I'm not sure when they've claimed to be otherwise (except in a few FEATUREs)
Okay, my karma on/. sucks. Why? Because I read articles and links BEFORE moderating/meta-moderating. So this likely leads to some unpopular moderation. But clearly, if anyone had read the link, they would have seen that what the university did was BULLSHIT!! The page had a link to a program called DeCSS.
Now, for the unwashed morons who didn't read the page, guess what THIS DeCSS does? It's a perl script that strips Cascading Style Sheets from html! How is that illegal? Clearly, any moron (even one from the MPAA) could see this.
And now to the fucking lamer(s) who upmarked this post: get a clue. I used to be quite in favor of the moderation system on/. Clearly, it doesn't work. If you aren't interested enough in the story to read the links, don't moderate the discussion.
Hmmm. I'll assume you are a US citizen. Which would explain your grossly inadequate understanding of our Constitution. See, there's an addendum (you might even call it an amendment) to the constitution. It's actually the first of several such 'amendments'. It declares that all US citizens have the right to say pretty much whatever the hell they want.
Now, I know what you are going to say: "in case such and such, judge so and so said" and "this law says that" and so on. But guess what? It's crap. As a nation, we've let ourselves get pushed around by attorneys (in the forms of legislators, litigators, and judges) till we have essentially lost most of what is guaranteed in not only that amendment, but most of the rest (OK, I guess DC residents can vote for President still. But why the fuck are they being taxed without representation in Congress????)
Anyway, the point is that we have no hope until someone offs a few Supreme Court judges. May as well take out some senators and congressmen as well (does it really take 535 of them to cornhole the country? I think a committee of ten could rape our rights much faster. Oh, wait. There's already a committee of nine who does that.)
Seriously though (in case anyone missed it, the call to arms is a joke) the only reason copyright trumps speech is because the American electorate has allowed it to happen.
(I'm a little grumpy tonight. Even though I live 2000 miles away, I'm pissed off that it turns out that NM residents might not be able to sue the government for setting fires that destroyed their homes.)
Thanks for the input. Upon reading the licenses, I'm leaning more towards GPL. But, perhaps a little explanation:
I actually am a PHB in a small company. We've tried (and spent money) on some products. They suck. There's no standards. Etc. We want a product that will work for us. I've started talking with sourcexchange. We need to pick a license. We have no desire to sell software. What would work better for us (and society) would be to have this be the dominant app in that particular niche. I've met the assholes who run the companies that make the closed source crap. I don't want my money funding their company or their product. The little bit of limelight from a BSD product doesn't help. I don't want to bring the product back in house (and likely can't, as it seems that my company would hold joint rights with the programmer(s)) so why bother with the Mozilla, Novell, etc. licenses?
Unfortunately, even the PHB has his own PHB's to answer to, as well as lawyers. But again, thanks for the comments.
(Yup, -1 offtopic, but I needed to say thank you. BTW, the thank you extends to everyone in the thread. This just looked like the best place in the thread to say thanks. Oh, and if you want any more details about the particular project: ghowell@@NOSPAMolg.com)
Is there a good, non-flame/troll ridden site to explain the differences in the various open source licenses from a practical perspective?
I'm looking at doing something with sourcexchange, and need to have a bit more info on the licenses first. (Yes, I could read the licenses, but given the nature of them, someone must have a reasonable analysis of them somewhere already.)
Slashdot Mirror
>Is there such a culture surrounding windows?
Yes. Problem is, the club is expensive to join, and requires tests and classes and so forth. Also, M$ decides who can be a member, and can change the rules at their whim.
Luckily, the tests are not difficult. Shame about the money thing, though.
Oh, in case you hadn't figured it out, they are known as the "Clan of the MCSE". I think there is another group the "Clan of the MCSE w/IIS" which is kinda like a Taco Bell burrito with extra beans, but the former causes more intestinal upset.
Seriously though, check any Linux newsgroup (or M$ one for that matter) www.ntfaq.com (good info, but they tend to goosestep to the M$ drumbeat a bit much) or the talk-back section of any ZD-Net article that mentions M$ and Linux. Plenty of zealots on their side of the camp.
The more beautiful women, the better. Not sure when you went to high school, but when I did, they sure as hell weren't sending the hot chicks to slobber over the geeks. Anyway, seeing them for free at trade shows is better than spending $10 a month to "look at pictures of me and all my sorority sisters".
Perhaps they haven't caught on to one small fact though: having been turned down (or 'friended') by more physically attractive women than I can shake a stick at, I'm largely immune. Any geek with any sense (and any experience) will figure out that these women are similar to those in HS/College who were nice until right after you helped them with their homework. So what it boils down to is I get a peek; the company doesn't get a sale unless they have a good product; and Barbie gets a job that suits her intelligence.
As Judge Judy is so fond of saying: "Beauty fades, Dumb is Forever"
("OW! Yes, honey, of course you are beautiful. I only meant I got dumped on and/or used by every beautiful woman I met EXCEPT you.")
Don't take it all so seriously! Why doesn't all people have a sense of humor?
Because my wife has RP? Because every time I ask her what she wants the answer is always "to see like I used to"?
This isn't bullshit like the latest M$ conspiracy to control the world. This isn't pie-in-the-sky genetic research. This isn't try to land on a planet 100 million miles away. This is real-life. This is something that effects millions of people.
I got modded as interesting, and you as insightful? I was thinking it should be the other way around. Anyway, glad at least someone got the point;)
Geez, it's a 30 year old OS, there are tons of newer ones available that handle everything almost as well as *nix platforms do. It's time we got rid of this albatross and moved on.
Were I a shareholder, I'd have to move that Mr. Gates be fired for incompetance. Same if I was the president of a member of the MPAA. These men are either lying through their teeth (most likely) or complete rubes. If the latter, it's obvious why they should be fired. If the former, it's just a good thing to can (or is that cane?) liars of this sort. Totally offensive to my dignity as a human being.
And what the fuck is with Valenti's attorney? Read the end of the deposition where he states that Valenti should not have been deposed. He's the president of the damned organization that brought the suit! He has the duty to know what his underlings are up to (same as in any company/organization. 'The buck stops here' thing.)
On another front, it appears that 2600's attorney is asking very intelligent to the point questions that show: MPAA has no clue. None whatsoever. Unfortunately, the MPAA's attorney is sticking very much to the legal nitpicking that is part and parcel of a modern court case in America. And THAT is what wins the case. Not facts. Not intelligence. But who is a better nitpicker.
Hopefully this will be different, but let's face it: most judges are much closer to collecting Social Security than I am (and the Supremes have largely been eligible for several years). Not to disparage the elderly, but by and large, those who fought Germans, Japanese, and Italians in the 40's do not grasp computers, DVD's, encryption (barring the occasional Waterhouse;) and basically anything more advanced that a Selectric Typewriter.
I'll point to what my father says about malpractice and 'a jury of his peers': he doesn't mind being tried by a jury of his peers. Unfortunately, his peers are quite capable of getting out of jury duty, leaving the Jerry Springer/Rosie Odonnell fans to decide his fate.
Much the same case as the DeCSS cases. While the judges (are there any jury trials yet?) may not be watching Rosie Odonnell, they sure ain't submitting any kernel patches.
Fuck it. The code is out. It's not going away. This seems more a free speech issue than DMCA anyway. But I guess DMCA is yet another chink in the armor of the first amendment.
Can be found here.
(Probably redundant at this point, given the speed of posting. Oh well:)
What is interesting is the idea that they may want soverign control of their domains. While it does allow a country to do what it wishs with said domain, all it would take is one small whacko nation going for it to screw it up..
'Nuff Said
The .pn TLD is being taken back. In the future, use username and password: cypherpunks
How is this going to work with X10 modules? How will X10 modules work with this?
>Well, I realize that laws can make people feel more comfortable, but there comes a point where penalizing
somebody doesn't make anymore sense. For example, if they guy who wrote melissa had to pay restitution
or pay a $17,000 fine for every copy of the virus he spread, he'd probably own millions upon millions of
dollars which he'd never be able to repay, no matter how long he lived.
Well, in order to get enough money to pay the fines, all he has to do is buy a marginal OS, have his mother sleep with an IBM exec, get IBM to sign a silly deal using his bought OS. 20 years later, join another crappy product to the eleventy-seventh version of that OS, and...
Oops. Too late.
You work on the Death Star. I'll help fund some X-Wings, a womp rat hunter, and some ancient mystics. (BTW, if the force was so strong, how come Yoda or Ben didn't just flatten the Death Star like a pancake without having to kill Biggs, Porkins, etc?)
As if there was ever an excuse to attack Canada!
Seriously, do they actually have to move the entire HQ, or do they just have to set up a satellite office, call it "M$ HQ" and be done with it?
Second question: if they still sell products in the US, does this get them out of the settlement?
Third, does the US gov't still buy from them since they are in a foreign country? I believe there are still laws that for military purposes at least, preference is given to US suppliers. Could be good for Apple, RedHat, etc?
But what about /bin/bash?
I don't have a coffee table, but I do have a Space Invaders cocktail table in my living room. Does that count? BTW, shouldn't 'we' be boycotting UF because it uses gif's?
Normally, I'd agree, but the 'general population' isn't ordering a machine without OS in the first place. It's either a corporate type, who (hopefully) should know what they are doing, a hobbyist (who should have to agree that Dell is making no claims that this hardware will work with his/her software, and will accept no returns based on that) or a l33+ haxor who is going to install a stolen copy of M$ whatever. So who gives a rat's ass about the copy of your license.
Personally, I think the original poster should have sent that one Apple 'open source' license. Or perhaps gotten the license from a copy of QNX:)
Ah, yes, if it is on the screen, I must read it. Whatever happened to skimming, scanning, and thinking for yourself?
Yeah, we heard you the first three times you posted this nearly identical comment. Why don't you post it another time, this time in ALL CAPS for those who haven't read it yet?
/. were a bunch of spineless shits, they would yank the story. IF they agree with what you have said, and IF they think something should be done, they would modify the original, erase the comments you don't seem to care for, and post a link to the original.
And no, if
Assuming you got to the story from the front page, you already got the news portion. When you clicked to open the article, you got the beginning of commentary.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again:
/. is biased or has changed: the new way to get modded as 'Insightful'.
Slashdot refers you to news. Readers post commentary. IF anything has changed in the past year or so, it's that there is a little more commentary in the news reference.
Saying that
Insightful: You use that word a lot, but I don't think you know what it means.
We can discuss who has proof about who molests baby kittens while clubbing seals, but it doesn't matter: yes, technically, a person in the US is innocent until proven guilty. But if you really wish to protect your privacy, the only rational response is that all are guilty until proven innocent.
Why shouldn't we expect these privacy advocates, or whatever the hell DC is calling them, to prove themselves? We ask people from nearly every walk of life to prove themselves capable of the task they have been handed.
DC's goal is to have the board members' capability 'proven' by the groups with whom they associate. The comments that were part of the original article were to show how disingenious this was. I hate to sound like a two year old, but 'DC started it!'
It is DC's imperative to dig up the facts, post the facts, and give us a good reason to trust them. Slashdot is not a reporting service per se. It is a news referral service with liberal amounts of commentary thrown in. I'm not sure when they've claimed to be otherwise (except in a few FEATUREs)
Okay, my karma on /. sucks. Why? Because I read articles and links BEFORE moderating/meta-moderating. So this likely leads to some unpopular moderation. But clearly, if anyone had read the link, they would have seen that what the university did was BULLSHIT!! The page had a link to a program called DeCSS.
/. Clearly, it doesn't work. If you aren't interested enough in the story to read the links, don't moderate the discussion.
Now, for the unwashed morons who didn't read the page, guess what THIS DeCSS does? It's a perl script that strips Cascading Style Sheets from html! How is that illegal? Clearly, any moron (even one from the MPAA) could see this.
And now to the fucking lamer(s) who upmarked this post: get a clue. I used to be quite in favor of the moderation system on
>Copyright *DOES*, in fact, trump free speech.
Hmmm. I'll assume you are a US citizen. Which would explain your grossly inadequate understanding of our Constitution. See, there's an addendum (you might even call it an amendment) to the constitution. It's actually the first of several such 'amendments'. It declares that all US citizens have the right to say pretty much whatever the hell they want.
Now, I know what you are going to say: "in case such and such, judge so and so said" and "this law says that" and so on. But guess what? It's crap. As a nation, we've let ourselves get pushed around by attorneys (in the forms of legislators, litigators, and judges) till we have essentially lost most of what is guaranteed in not only that amendment, but most of the rest (OK, I guess DC residents can vote for President still. But why the fuck are they being taxed without representation in Congress????)
Anyway, the point is that we have no hope until someone offs a few Supreme Court judges. May as well take out some senators and congressmen as well (does it really take 535 of them to cornhole the country? I think a committee of ten could rape our rights much faster. Oh, wait. There's already a committee of nine who does that.)
Seriously though (in case anyone missed it, the call to arms is a joke) the only reason copyright trumps speech is because the American electorate has allowed it to happen.
(I'm a little grumpy tonight. Even though I live 2000 miles away, I'm pissed off that it turns out that NM residents might not be able to sue the government for setting fires that destroyed their homes.)
Shouldn't that have been released under the FPL?
Thanks for the input. Upon reading the licenses, I'm leaning more towards GPL. But, perhaps a little explanation:
I actually am a PHB in a small company. We've tried (and spent money) on some products. They suck. There's no standards. Etc. We want a product that will work for us. I've started talking with sourcexchange. We need to pick a license. We have no desire to sell software. What would work better for us (and society) would be to have this be the dominant app in that particular niche. I've met the assholes who run the companies that make the closed source crap. I don't want my money funding their company or their product. The little bit of limelight from a BSD product doesn't help. I don't want to bring the product back in house (and likely can't, as it seems that my company would hold joint rights with the programmer(s)) so why bother with the Mozilla, Novell, etc. licenses?
Unfortunately, even the PHB has his own PHB's to answer to, as well as lawyers. But again, thanks for the comments.
(Yup, -1 offtopic, but I needed to say thank you. BTW, the thank you extends to everyone in the thread. This just looked like the best place in the thread to say thanks. Oh, and if you want any more details about the particular project: ghowell@@NOSPAMolg.com)
Is there a good, non-flame/troll ridden site to explain the differences in the various open source licenses from a practical perspective?
I'm looking at doing something with sourcexchange, and need to have a bit more info on the licenses first. (Yes, I could read the licenses, but given the nature of them, someone must have a reasonable analysis of them somewhere already.)