I'm looking at the text of the bill right now - and I think some of the ranting has to do with the section on First Inventor Defense.
Looks like the gist of it is to establish that if *you*, the little guy, invented and actually built it one year before the patent filing, or sold it ("used it commercially") anytime before the patent filing - then you can use that as your defense in a patent suit. It looks like it excludes companies - it's just for the garage tinkerer it seems - but the nastiest part is paragraph numbered (9) [page 23 of my copy].
That paragraph says that even successfully using this defense only acquits the one using it - it doesn't invalidate the patent. This looks real bad - a big monkey-wrench to invalidating bad patents.
I can just bet that was put in there so big companies can lean on little guys, let them off the hook by not challenging the First Inventor Defense, and still hold onto an invalid patent and use it to extort licensing fees from any company using that patented technology. Oh, yeah, and prevent the little guy who actually invented the thing first from selling it to any company (or any customers?).
I sure hope I'm wrong - is there a lawyer in the house who can make better sense of this &%#$%@! ?
While a very nice step, this only has implications for shops using NT or W95/98 right now for desktops, that are thinking about moving to Linux. I would like to see this personally, since I have to reboot my machine once a week to use a Windows accounting package (this would save me that, but then again WINE or VMWare would do as well).
Other than that - allowing application locked shops to move to a heterogeneous network - this announcement is no big deal (but I still like to see them 8-)
The company could be in real trouble - section 2512 is kindof vague. It uses the term 'surrepitious' apparently to mean 'disguised'. So on the face of things Ramsey should be OK. They make electronics kits, not hidden microphones.
But, the text of 2512 also makes use of the term "primary use or function", which I think gives the Feds a real lever to use against Ramsey - they don't have to find devices hidden in clocks and picture frames (which is what they apparently were looking for). All they have to do is be able to argue in court that the "primary use" for the kits would be for people to build their own hidden monitoring devices. That it is not the kit's stated or advertised use may not be defense enough.
IANAL of course, but I can see where Ramsey's lawyers might advise them to "settle" (ie. plead guilty to a lesser charge rather than challenge them in court), just like the "other cases" mentioned by Violanti in the follow up to the article.
The employers in the high-tech arena are really going to be in a bind about this. They really don't have any choice - there is a lot of competition for good software people out there today, and telecommuting is just one of the expected 'benefits' (IME), as expected as 401K or stock options.
I work from home occasionally, and it's just as important to me to have a good environment for doing it as it would be for my employer - I treat telecommuting as a privalege, not a right, and so I need to be not as productive as at work, but more productive than at work.
I even have one of those big metal desks (used - weighs a ton), ergonomic keyboard, 17" monitor(used), and a nice computer(built by me from components). And I didn't pay a lot for any of them - you just have to hunt around a bit.
I can see the compromise being photos of the "workplace" to prove the employer does 'know' you have a good setup, and maybe a signed statement that you've read the rules on ergonomics and will abide by them. Other than that, it really does not make much difference - my medical covers me at home just as well as at the office.
I can also see this as a good excuse for insurance companies to raise rates if any employee telecommutes.
It is not overkill. I know the systems they are referring to. I would reccomend even more video RAM. These things do full terrain modeling and flight planning, you'd be surprised the amount of information they process.
Unless they are doing full-blown OpenGL modelling and perspective views (i.e. using the video card as a geometry and rendering engine), extra video RAM is wasted. 2-D is just 2-D - it doesn't matter what is being shown.
Sometimes this kind of stuff just irks me - how clueless are people anyway??
This is a DATA PROCESSING machine. You do NOT need a 128bit sound card plus massive speakers. If any kind of sound is going to come out of this thing, an average SB16 or AWE32 is more than adequate.
You also do NOT need a Viper 770 video card. What the heck are you going to display on your screen that you would need 32 Mb of video RAM for?? Just an ordinary video will do - 8Mb at the most. This is X-Windows, not Quake.
No need to specify UltraDMA66 controllers if the only thing you're going to hang off it is a DVD drive.
The Athalons will still give you a few percent higher performance on math than the PIIIs, you may want to go with that instead - though you may not have much pick of motherboards.
Other than that, looks like a darn nice set of specs.
Sorry guys, but this should be strange to no one - despite their investment in Linux, BSD has the widely acknowleged claim as the most secure OS out of the box. Jeez, if I were building server boxes you aren't intended to have to bring down for years, BSD is *the* obvious choice.
I think the author of the PCWorld article has Windoze on the brain. When the Merced chips hit the streets you can BET that there will be a Redhat distro for it the same month (if not the same day).
It may be true that you won't be able to get Win200X (Specially built for Pentium IV! Upgrade today!) for quite some time, but the folks that just need to recompile like Linux, or BSD, will be there instantly. Slashdot itself has run the articles on Linux booting off a Merced simulator, and GCC being ported to run as well.
With Transmeta, 1.2 GHz Athalons, and Merceds coming out, next year should be very interesting.
Wow, Katz certainly tugs the chains of FUD like the best of them - quoting Shelly like a madman.
I, however, see wonderful applications of this knowlege - first create the simplest organism that can live. Then start adding to it - add the genes for producing Insulin. Grow the microbes in huge vats - poof! Insulin by the gallon, for pennies per gallon.
How about figuring out a carbon sequencing gene set? The "programming" of it would be maybe the greatest intellectual challenge we've had recently, but in the end - poof! microbes that can produce petroleum products. Where we need them. No more supertankers, no more oil wells, no more pipelines. Make it where it's used. (Of course that will cripple the economies of dozens of countries around the world... side effects are unavoidable. On the good side, it will probably take years, so there will be plenty of warning for those smart enough to take the hint)
Or how about a microbe that binds carbon out of the atmosphere? Convert CO2 to O2 with super efficient microbes - poof! space travel just got a whole lot easier. The greenhouse effect could be reversed. No wait - better than reversed - regulatable. No more Ice Ages while we're around.
And the downside? People will try to kill off diseases, resist pests, etc. The problems we have now with breeding resistant bugs and germs will only accelerate. It's been a brush war so far - soon we'll be bringing in the heavy artillery. We're pretty tough - I think we'll win in the end. But there will be quite a bit of "colateral damage" to the environment.
How about AIDS? Maybe the solution isn't killing the disease, maybe the best solution is to alter our genes - raise a new generation that AIDS can't affect at all.
In all this though we'll do it because we can - there will always be a soft spot to open the door to this research ("But we can use it to cure Muscular Distrophy! Surely you can't be against THAT?"). And it will happen - moral discussions are irrelevant. Whatever is "decided" the research will go on. Pandoras box cannot be closed again.
New company, same claim - they all seem to work "in the laboratory", but get out in the muck of the real world...
Anyhow, it could be neat - if everyone connected like that we'd have a pretty extensive topology for the web from day 1. All we'd need then is a S**tload of intelligent routers (that can stand 50KV) on the electrical poles.
If this turns out to be substratable we may end up with only one wire going into the home - carying power, phone, cable, internet, etc. Heh, it's nice to dream isn't it?
I've had the problem myself, and yes you can work on it yourself. IANAD, and your milage may vary, but...
Thing one. Act early. I started to get tingly feelings in my fingers, they started to twitch a bit on their own, and it was a little painful to stretch them out fully. Does that sound familiar? If so - STOP. Right now.
Thing two. Get a wrist pad - it's the cheapest addition that might help you. DO NOT get a foam one - these are junk IMO. Get a GEL wristpad (about $15 at a computer store).
Thing three. READ THE FAQ. Understand it. Work on ergonimics. Rearrange your work area. Use bricks and boards if you have to - it doesn't have to look pretty.
Thing four. Take breaks. Do the stretches. Work on (gasp!) paper to figure out new things. Go for variety.
Thing five. Baby yourself. It sounds silly, but act like a baby - if you feel anything at all, stop. Do other stuff until it feels better. Work slower. Use the mouse. Get creative with your bash history - anything to avoid more keystrokes.
Thing six. If it doesn't get better, or already hurts a lot, go to a doctor - go to your councillors - go to your dean - go to your attached medical school. You're in school dammit - get creative! Get help!
That's my $.02. Don't spend it all in one place. Good luck.
Well, certainly an interesting idea. However, Microsoft would have about as easy a time porting IE or Office to Linux as I would have trying to document Windows from the machine language.
There is just no way that Microsoft engineers (albeit they have some very smart people) can adjust to living outside the box of their Windows environment - or make the move from inside the box to outside. There is just too much cruft built up - even Microsoft can't dig down to the bottom of it anymore.
Microsoft has chained themselves to a big rock with a Windows view. Where I can learn to work in the Windows world they are in too deep to learn how to move their code to the Unix world. It just won't happen.
Thinking about that some more - maybe that's part of the reason why the Office port to the Mac was dropped. In addition to the political reasons, maybe they just got too tied to Windows to be able to port to the Mac anymore?
I can't help but sigh at Katz going off the deep end again. I do like his stuff, but he has that modern Journalist's disease - that whatever he is writing about is OH MY GOD the most vital, important, incredibly inciteful idea since the invention of fire. Jon, just calm down a little - this is nothing new, nothing glorious, nothing earth-shattering. Haven't you noticed by now that NOTHING turns out to be?
Anyway, the survey that prompted this sounds like more random crap - totally meaningless.
People expect a big earthquake in CA? DUH!
A big terrorist incident in the US sometime in the next ** 50 years **? DUH (Though, in 50 years we could have two more world wars, another regional one or two, and change every friggin' political boundary on the planet. Geez, C'mon - 50 years? Isn't that a little much? Terrorism itself could go the way of the Dodo in 50 years.)
People are hopeful in the US for 2000? DUH! We have single digit unemployment, the economy is going strong, a world economic meltdown was avoided, crime is down, drug use is down, violence is down. Gee, NO, I guess I'm depressed.
Katz, you should know better than to listen to the mindless prattle of surveys that ask things so moronic that a four-year old could predict the results.
Nope - I think it is entirely correct to say that anyone can appeal to the Supreme Court. However, like a prayer, your appeal can go unanswered. There is no right to have your case heard by the SC, but you have every right to *ask* them to hear it.
By the way, I think this is a really interesting development - and quite in line with what the Anti-Trust Act is supposed to do. Rather than have a decision dragged from court to court endlessly - and the public bearing the brunt of the delay (they ARE being harmed, by the nature of an Anti-Trust violation) - the delay is bypassed by going directly to the Supreme Court, if warranted.
Judging by the 'new hires' by the DOJ, I'd say MicroSoft is in deep, deep trouble.
Without delving back into the GPL's language I'm not entirely clear what the problem is - the Corel tool itself (GPL? The article didn't seem to state that explicitly, but that is what I expect it was) is linking to two shared libraries - one under the QPL and the other under GPL (NOT LGPL, but GPL).
This makes no sense - WHERE is the problem? Does the GPL license explicitly force any libraries it uses to be GPL? I don't think that's so. If it were I imagine a lot of software out there would be invalidated.
Perhaps the REAL problem here is the GPL'd library. RMS pushes libraries to be placed under GPL instead of LGPL explicitly to force the applications that use them to be GPL. I think Corel's app is GPL, so that's OK.
It seems the real solution is for the GPL library's author to place the library under LGPL, so this kind of thing doesn't happen again. RMS advocates GPL libraries so that ONLY GPL applications can use them, which does help to give free software an advantage if the library does really good things. But it does play havoc with anything not exclusively GPL.
There's an added irony that this story hasn't pointed out - the disparity in import and export laws on cryptography.
In the US there are restrictions on EXPORTing cryptography, but no restrictions on IMPORTing cryptography. Getting good quality cryptography here isn't easy, but for some things it's mandatory.
Right now I'm designing and coding an e-commerce solution. The target customers are mostly here in the US, but one is in Canada, and who knows when someone will come on board to make it international?
So the solution to where to get cryptography packages? Off-shore! Obtain it outside the US, import it into the US, and that's it. No applying for export licenses, no restrictions or background checks on customers, no having them fill out nasty looking legal disclaimers. The worst we'd have to do is make each on-US customer "import" the package on his/her own to make it legal (So we wouldn't be 'exporting' anything - even something we imported already. I'm not sure on that point - anyone?)
There are Open Source cryptography packages available for Import. The only problem with them: I can't help! (being in the US, this might 'taint' their legal stance)
Want strong encryption not hampered by our silly laws? Go get some! (Yes, Virginia, there really are mathemeticians outside the US.)
There was a flap some time ago when it was learned that most of our elected officials admitted that they wouldn't vote in favor of the first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) if it were placed in front of them as new legislation.
How would you vote in that situation? Are there any you would NOT vote for? If so, which ones -or what specific provisions would you strike (if given the chance)?
I personally think every candidate for office should be handed this question - the answers are usually most enlightening.
Near the bottom of the article is a mention of cultivating the talent in Universities. This has always been ignored.
How about this for a "foundation" venture - Get the Universities involved. Create a list of "good things to do" for the Open Source community. These could be anything - a new utility, a new feature on an existing application, documentation (for English majors), a web based resource on a topic (for Journalism majors perhaps?), example programming, anything.
Take this list and give it to all the Universities as suggested Senior Projects - for credit. Shucks, while in school I had to complete 2 of these. Larger and more complex ideas could be candidate Masters Theses/Projects.
Multiple takers on one idea would be OK - add a task to the list for the next semester to take and evaluate the solutions - and blend them into a better one.
We keep talking about ways to pay OSS people for the work they do. How about rewarding students in their own coin - credit. Something interesting to put on that first resume. And the incredible reward of seeing something they worked on being used... everywhere. As a side note - what a benefit for the Universities as well - "Look at the cool stuff students here contributed to the WORLD. Come join our CS 'team'!"
This is the idea Red Hat (or anyone else with the inkling) should be considering.
I don't think the GPL licensing would have much impact in this case. IF the military were to "adopt" Linux I can see it being done in a very specific manner:
1) Pick a distro and version number. That's it . Period. No other versions allowed. (i.e. must be consistant)
2) Look over the source code for the sections/tools the military wants. Thow out everything else. (i.e. make sure there are no back doors / trojan horses / whatever)
3) Make a new "distro" that is military only - with the unwanted stuff removed. Now they own this distro and don't change it except under extreme scrutiny - see 2) above. (i.e. Make sure no one can sneak in a back door / Trojan horse)
4) Fix bugs on a case by case basis, as needed.
5) Publish this as the official USA Linux.
No GPL conflicts there. When they add features or applications there is no preasure to openly publish or sell them. The GPL makes allowances for "in house only" modifications. They do not have to be made available in source code.
Reading the article carefully, we see that the aim of this tax is to build up a trust fund for education - paying teachers salaries out of the fund.
"WARNING WARNING WARNING!!!"
Isn't this the same kind of #$#@! they pulled with Federal Highway Funds - a big pool that can be selectively doled out where the Feds see fit?
I can see this as a new method concocted to control local school boards. Once the local school districts are dependent on Fed funds to operate, the Feds can finally have control over local school boards. "Oh, don't like the new Federal Education guidelines? Well, we'll just have to withhold the Federal Education Funding...".
We can't let the esteemed Senator get away with this.
If the Red Sox site is a good example of minivend I can't say I'm impressed.
To try and find a game that has good seats available is a real chore - you have to give all of your vital information, including CC#, before you get to see what seats there are.
And if you don't like them you get to start all over since "using the back button on your browser will cause errors".
I'm afraid you've missed the point I was trying to make with my LFTM comments. The Open Source community, and all it has done is absolutely irrelevant in the mainstream arena. I made the point of stating Linux binary compatability for a reason - the average person wouldn't know a compiler from a cobra. They don't WANT to compile code. The average Linux person doesn't even compile code - "Hey, here's a great new app that will run on every machine on the planet! Download it and compile away!" "Uh, are there any RPM there? No? Oh, oh well."
I'm not trying to start a flame war (Really! I'm not!), but the idea of the Amiga being LFTM does not include source code. Period.
For any machine to reach the mainstream public it has to be able to run apps. All apps, any app you go down to CompUSA and buy off the shelf. Right now that is Win9x. We are starting to see a few Linux titles on the shelves. Games, distributions. That is what I think Amiga Inc is capitolizing on - and needs to.
This may be slightly off-topic, but I think I can see all the company's logic. This makes my head hurt too - I was a staunch and loyal member of the Amiga community for a very long time. Most would be simply overjoyed to have a new Amiga come out - any Amiga. Now there will be TWO?
Anyway, Phase 5 has been cut out of the loop for a very long time. They are still trying to work with the old Amiga architecture and update it (even with the A/box and pre/Box projects that fizzled). To their credit they have been very good and very didicated.
Amiga Inc has decided to start over (and as we read in CatB, you have to be prepared to "start over, at least once"). I sincerely hope that Amiga Inc's "magical mystery chip" is Transmeta's and that it turns out to be worth the secrecy and hype.
FWIW, I think Amiga Inc. is right and Phase 5 is wrong. Embracing the Linux kernel is the only chance Amiga really has of creating a place for itself. I've been thinking about this a lot since the Linux for Amiga announcement. This might be the perfect opportunity for LFTM. Phase 5 and QNX will be just another bit player, and will end up like the old Amiga - lost in the shuffle, with little hope of getting into the mainstream. [I know, I know - it saddens me too, but there comes a point you have to cut the cord and move on.]
Think about Amiga Inc's vision. A new Amiga - which has some (very specialized) name recognition, "running Linux" (you know that's how the press will talk about it), using the newest, greatest powerhouse CPU from the mysterious Transmeta. This will have Linux binary compatability (read: large application base), ONE desktop, ONE look and feel (with the option to add more later, but having ONE at first is a key point for LFTM), plug and play hardware (if they are lucky), ONE video system (already configured for X-windows and 3D), ONE sound system (really key, and still painful for Linux in general). This could be THE saving grace for Linux For The Masses - somewhere everyone can start. For 75%, that will be it. The rest will add and play a little at a time (read: progressive disclosure - another user interface point for LFTM). No sysadmin duties, no configuration worries, plug it in and run. Period. It could be "the Linux box any grandmother can use".
clear assumption here that a company applied for a patent in 1995 - four years ago - and hasn't been either laughed out of the office or had their patent granted yet?
Aren't serial killers appeals, all the way up to the Supreme Court, handled faster than this? How can this continue? Can businesses really function like this?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm looking at the text of the bill right now - and I think some of the ranting has to do with the section on First Inventor Defense.
Looks like the gist of it is to establish that if *you*, the little guy, invented and actually built it one year before the patent filing, or sold it ("used it commercially") anytime before the patent filing - then you can use that as your defense in a patent suit. It looks like it excludes companies - it's just for the garage tinkerer it seems - but the nastiest part is paragraph numbered (9) [page 23 of my copy].
That paragraph says that even successfully using this defense only acquits the one using it - it doesn't invalidate the patent. This looks real bad - a big monkey-wrench to invalidating bad patents.
I can just bet that was put in there so big companies can lean on little guys, let them off the hook by not challenging the First Inventor Defense, and still hold onto an invalid patent and use it to extort licensing fees from any company using that patented technology. Oh, yeah, and prevent the little guy who actually invented the thing first from selling it to any company (or any customers?).
I sure hope I'm wrong - is there a lawyer in the house who can make better sense of this &%#$%@! ?
While a very nice step, this only has implications for shops using NT or W95/98 right now for desktops, that are thinking about moving to Linux. I would like to see this personally, since I have to reboot my machine once a week to use a Windows accounting package (this would save me that, but then again WINE or VMWare would do as well).
Other than that - allowing application locked shops to move to a heterogeneous network - this announcement is no big deal (but I still like to see them 8-)
The company could be in real trouble - section 2512 is kindof vague. It uses the term 'surrepitious' apparently to mean 'disguised'. So on the face of things Ramsey should be OK. They make electronics kits, not hidden microphones.
But, the text of 2512 also makes use of the term "primary use or function", which I think gives the Feds a real lever to use against Ramsey - they don't have to find devices hidden in clocks and picture frames (which is what they apparently were looking for). All they have to do is be able to argue in court that the "primary use" for the kits would be for people to build their own hidden monitoring devices. That it is not the kit's stated or advertised use may not be defense enough.
IANAL of course, but I can see where Ramsey's lawyers might advise them to "settle" (ie. plead guilty to a lesser charge rather than challenge them in court), just like the "other cases" mentioned by Violanti in the follow up to the article.
The employers in the high-tech arena are really going to be in a bind about this. They really don't have any choice - there is a lot of competition for good software people out there today, and telecommuting is just one of the expected 'benefits' (IME), as expected as 401K or stock options.
I work from home occasionally, and it's just as important to me to have a good environment for doing it as it would be for my employer - I treat telecommuting as a privalege, not a right, and so I need to be not as productive as at work, but more productive than at work.
I even have one of those big metal desks (used - weighs a ton), ergonomic keyboard, 17" monitor(used), and a nice computer(built by me from components). And I didn't pay a lot for any of them - you just have to hunt around a bit.
I can see the compromise being photos of the "workplace" to prove the employer does 'know' you have a good setup, and maybe a signed statement that you've read the rules on ergonomics and will abide by them. Other than that, it really does not make much difference - my medical covers me at home just as well as at the office.
I can also see this as a good excuse for insurance companies to raise rates if any employee telecommutes.
It is not overkill. I know the systems they are referring to. I would reccomend even more video RAM. These things do full terrain modeling and flight planning, you'd be surprised the amount of information they process.
Unless they are doing full-blown OpenGL modelling and perspective views (i.e. using the video card as a geometry and rendering engine), extra video RAM is wasted. 2-D is just 2-D - it doesn't matter what is being shown.
Sometimes this kind of stuff just irks me - how clueless are people anyway??
This is a DATA PROCESSING machine. You do NOT need a 128bit sound card plus massive speakers. If any kind of sound is going to come out of this thing, an average SB16 or AWE32 is more than adequate.
You also do NOT need a Viper 770 video card. What the heck are you going to display on your screen that you would need 32 Mb of video RAM for?? Just an ordinary video will do - 8Mb at the most. This is X-Windows, not Quake.
No need to specify UltraDMA66 controllers if the only thing you're going to hang off it is a DVD drive.
The Athalons will still give you a few percent higher performance on math than the PIIIs, you may want to go with that instead - though you may not have much pick of motherboards.
Other than that, looks like a darn nice set of specs.
Sorry guys, but this should be strange to no one - despite their investment in Linux, BSD has the widely acknowleged claim as the most secure OS out of the box. Jeez, if I were building server boxes you aren't intended to have to bring down for years, BSD is *the* obvious choice.
I think the author of the PCWorld article has Windoze on the brain. When the Merced chips hit the streets you can BET that there will be a Redhat distro for it the same month (if not the same day).
It may be true that you won't be able to get Win200X (Specially built for Pentium IV! Upgrade today!) for quite some time, but the folks that just need to recompile like Linux, or BSD, will be there instantly. Slashdot itself has run the articles on Linux booting off a Merced simulator, and GCC being ported to run as well.
With Transmeta, 1.2 GHz Athalons, and Merceds coming out, next year should be very interesting.
Wow, Katz certainly tugs the chains of FUD like the best of them - quoting Shelly like a madman.
I, however, see wonderful applications of this knowlege - first create the simplest organism that can live. Then start adding to it - add the genes for producing Insulin. Grow the microbes in huge vats - poof! Insulin by the gallon, for pennies per gallon.
How about figuring out a carbon sequencing gene set? The "programming" of it would be maybe the greatest intellectual challenge we've had recently, but in the end - poof! microbes that can produce petroleum products. Where we need them. No more supertankers, no more oil wells, no more pipelines. Make it where it's used. (Of course that will cripple the economies of dozens of countries around the world... side effects are unavoidable. On the good side, it will probably take years, so there will be plenty of warning for those smart enough to take the hint)
Or how about a microbe that binds carbon out of the atmosphere? Convert CO2 to O2 with super efficient microbes - poof! space travel just got a whole lot easier. The greenhouse effect could be reversed. No wait - better than reversed - regulatable. No more Ice Ages while we're around.
And the downside? People will try to kill off diseases, resist pests, etc. The problems we have now with breeding resistant bugs and germs will only accelerate. It's been a brush war so far - soon we'll be bringing in the heavy artillery. We're pretty tough - I think we'll win in the end. But there will be quite a bit of "colateral damage" to the environment.
How about AIDS? Maybe the solution isn't killing the disease, maybe the best solution is to alter our genes - raise a new generation that AIDS can't affect at all.
In all this though we'll do it because we can - there will always be a soft spot to open the door to this research ("But we can use it to cure Muscular Distrophy! Surely you can't be against THAT?"). And it will happen - moral discussions are irrelevant. Whatever is "decided" the research will go on. Pandoras box cannot be closed again.
We just have to make the best of it.
New company, same claim - they all seem to work "in the laboratory", but get out in the muck of the real world...
Anyhow, it could be neat - if everyone connected like that we'd have a pretty extensive topology for the web from day 1. All we'd need then is a S**tload of intelligent routers (that can stand 50KV) on the electrical poles.
If this turns out to be substratable we may end up with only one wire going into the home - carying power, phone, cable, internet, etc. Heh, it's nice to dream isn't it?
I've had the problem myself, and yes you can work on it yourself. IANAD, and your milage may vary, but...
Thing one. Act early. I started to get tingly feelings in my fingers, they started to twitch a bit on their own, and it was a little painful to stretch them out fully. Does that sound familiar? If so - STOP. Right now.
Thing two. Get a wrist pad - it's the cheapest addition that might help you. DO NOT get a foam one - these are junk IMO. Get a GEL wristpad (about $15 at a computer store).
Thing three. READ THE FAQ. Understand it. Work on ergonimics. Rearrange your work area. Use bricks and boards if you have to - it doesn't have to look pretty.
Thing four. Take breaks. Do the stretches. Work on (gasp!) paper to figure out new things. Go for variety.
Thing five. Baby yourself. It sounds silly, but act like a baby - if you feel anything at all, stop. Do other stuff until it feels better. Work slower. Use the mouse. Get creative with your bash history - anything to avoid more keystrokes.
Thing six. If it doesn't get better, or already hurts a lot, go to a doctor - go to your councillors - go to your dean - go to your attached medical school. You're in school dammit - get creative! Get help!
That's my $.02. Don't spend it all in one place.
Good luck.
Well, certainly an interesting idea. However, Microsoft would have about as easy a time porting IE or Office to Linux as I would have trying to document Windows from the machine language.
There is just no way that Microsoft engineers (albeit they have some very smart people) can adjust to living outside the box of their Windows environment - or make the move from inside the box to outside. There is just too much cruft built up - even Microsoft can't dig down to the bottom of it anymore.
Microsoft has chained themselves to a big rock with a Windows view. Where I can learn to work in the Windows world they are in too deep to learn how to move their code to the Unix world. It just won't happen.
Thinking about that some more - maybe that's part of the reason why the Office port to the Mac was dropped. In addition to the political reasons, maybe they just got too tied to Windows to be able to port to the Mac anymore?
Hmmmm.....
I can't help but sigh at Katz going off the deep end again. I do like his stuff, but he has that modern Journalist's disease - that whatever he is writing about is OH MY GOD the most vital, important, incredibly inciteful idea since the invention of fire. Jon, just calm down a little - this is nothing new, nothing glorious, nothing earth-shattering. Haven't you noticed by now that NOTHING turns out to be?
Anyway, the survey that prompted this sounds like more random crap - totally meaningless.
People expect a big earthquake in CA? DUH!
A big terrorist incident in the US sometime in the next ** 50 years **? DUH (Though, in 50 years we could have two more world wars, another regional one or two, and change every friggin' political boundary on the planet. Geez, C'mon - 50 years? Isn't that a little much? Terrorism itself could go the way of the Dodo in 50 years.)
People are hopeful in the US for 2000? DUH! We have single digit unemployment, the economy is going strong, a world economic meltdown was avoided, crime is down, drug use is down, violence is down. Gee, NO, I guess I'm depressed.
Katz, you should know better than to listen to the mindless prattle of surveys that ask things so moronic that a four-year old could predict the results.
Nope - I think it is entirely correct to say that anyone can appeal to the Supreme Court. However, like a prayer, your appeal can go unanswered. There is no right to have your case heard by the SC, but you have every right to *ask* them to hear it.
By the way, I think this is a really interesting development - and quite in line with what the Anti-Trust Act is supposed to do. Rather than have a decision dragged from court to court endlessly - and the public bearing the brunt of the delay (they ARE being harmed, by the nature of an Anti-Trust violation) - the delay is bypassed by going directly to the Supreme Court, if warranted.
Judging by the 'new hires' by the DOJ, I'd say MicroSoft is in deep, deep trouble.
Without delving back into the GPL's language I'm not entirely clear what the problem is - the Corel tool itself (GPL? The article didn't seem to state that explicitly, but that is what I expect it was) is linking to two shared libraries - one under the QPL and the other under GPL (NOT LGPL, but GPL).
This makes no sense - WHERE is the problem? Does the GPL license explicitly force any libraries it uses to be GPL? I don't think that's so. If it were I imagine a lot of software out there would be invalidated.
Perhaps the REAL problem here is the GPL'd library. RMS pushes libraries to be placed under GPL instead of LGPL explicitly to force the applications that use them to be GPL. I think Corel's app is GPL, so that's OK.
It seems the real solution is for the GPL library's author to place the library under LGPL, so this kind of thing doesn't happen again. RMS advocates GPL libraries so that ONLY GPL applications can use them, which does help to give free software an advantage if the library does really good things. But it does play havoc with anything not exclusively GPL.
There's an added irony that this story hasn't pointed out - the disparity in import and export laws on cryptography.
In the US there are restrictions on EXPORTing cryptography, but no restrictions on IMPORTing cryptography. Getting good quality cryptography here isn't easy, but for some things it's mandatory.
Right now I'm designing and coding an e-commerce solution. The target customers are mostly here in the US, but one is in Canada, and who knows when someone will come on board to make it international?
So the solution to where to get cryptography packages? Off-shore! Obtain it outside the US, import it into the US, and that's it. No applying for export licenses, no restrictions or background checks on customers, no having them fill out nasty looking legal disclaimers. The worst we'd have to do is make each on-US customer "import" the package on his/her own to make it legal (So we wouldn't be 'exporting' anything - even something we imported already. I'm not sure on that point - anyone?)
There are Open Source cryptography packages available for Import. The only problem with them: I can't help! (being in the US, this might 'taint' their legal stance)
Want strong encryption not hampered by our silly laws? Go get some! (Yes, Virginia, there really are mathemeticians outside the US.)
There was a flap some time ago when it was learned that most of our elected officials admitted that they wouldn't vote in favor of the first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) if it were placed in front of them as new legislation.
How would you vote in that situation? Are there any you would NOT vote for? If so, which ones -or what specific provisions would you strike (if given the chance)?
I personally think every candidate for office should be handed this question - the answers are usually most enlightening.
"Darned clever these Earthlings..."
Near the bottom of the article is a mention of cultivating the talent in Universities. This has always been ignored.
How about this for a "foundation" venture - Get the Universities involved. Create a list of "good things to do" for the Open Source community. These could be anything - a new utility, a new feature on an existing application, documentation (for English majors), a web based resource on a topic (for Journalism majors perhaps?), example programming, anything.
Take this list and give it to all the Universities as suggested Senior Projects - for credit. Shucks, while in school I had to complete 2 of these. Larger and more complex ideas could be candidate Masters Theses/Projects.
Multiple takers on one idea would be OK - add a task to the list for the next semester to take and evaluate the solutions - and blend them into a better one.
We keep talking about ways to pay OSS people for the work they do. How about rewarding students in their own coin - credit. Something interesting to put on that first resume. And the incredible reward of seeing something they worked on being used... everywhere. As a side note - what a benefit for the Universities as well - "Look at the cool stuff students here contributed to the WORLD. Come join our CS 'team'!"
This is the idea Red Hat (or anyone else with the inkling) should be considering.
I don't think the GPL licensing would have much impact in this case. IF the military were to "adopt" Linux I can see it being done in a very specific manner:
1) Pick a distro and version number. That's it . Period. No other versions allowed. (i.e. must be consistant)
2) Look over the source code for the sections/tools the military wants. Thow out everything else. (i.e. make sure there are no back doors / trojan horses / whatever)
3) Make a new "distro" that is military only - with the unwanted stuff removed. Now they own this distro and don't change it except under extreme scrutiny - see 2) above. (i.e. Make sure no one can sneak in a back door / Trojan horse)
4) Fix bugs on a case by case basis, as needed.
5) Publish this as the official USA Linux.
No GPL conflicts there. When they add features or applications there is no preasure to openly publish or sell them. The GPL makes allowances for "in house only" modifications. They do not have to be made available in source code.
Reading the article carefully, we see that the aim of this tax is to build up a trust fund for education - paying teachers salaries out of the fund.
"WARNING WARNING WARNING!!!"
Isn't this the same kind of #$#@! they pulled with Federal Highway Funds - a big pool that can be selectively doled out where the Feds see fit?
I can see this as a new method concocted to control local school boards. Once the local school districts are dependent on Fed funds to operate, the Feds can finally have control over local school boards. "Oh, don't like the new Federal Education guidelines? Well, we'll just have to withhold the Federal Education Funding...".
We can't let the esteemed Senator get away with this.
If the Red Sox site is a good example of minivend I can't say I'm impressed.
To try and find a game that has good seats available is a real chore - you have to give all of your vital information, including CC#, before you get to see what seats there are.
And if you don't like them you get to start all over since "using the back button on your browser will cause errors".
As I said, I'm not impressed.
I'm afraid you've missed the point I was trying to make with my LFTM comments. The Open Source community, and all it has done is absolutely irrelevant in the mainstream arena. I made the point of stating Linux binary compatability for a reason - the average person wouldn't know a compiler from a cobra. They don't WANT to compile code. The average Linux person doesn't even compile code - "Hey, here's a great new app that will run on every machine on the planet! Download it and compile away!" "Uh, are there any RPM there? No? Oh, oh well."
I'm not trying to start a flame war (Really! I'm not!), but the idea of the Amiga being LFTM does not include source code. Period.
For any machine to reach the mainstream public it has to be able to run apps. All apps, any app you go down to CompUSA and buy off the shelf. Right now that is Win9x. We are starting to see a few Linux titles on the shelves. Games, distributions. That is what I think Amiga Inc is capitolizing on - and needs to.
Time will tell.
This may be slightly off-topic, but I think I can see all the company's logic. This makes my head hurt too - I was a staunch and loyal member of the Amiga community for a very long time. Most would be simply overjoyed to have a new Amiga come out - any Amiga. Now there will be TWO?
.]
Anyway, Phase 5 has been cut out of the loop for a very long time. They are still trying to work with the old Amiga architecture and update it (even with the A/box and pre/Box projects that fizzled). To their credit they have been very good and very didicated.
Amiga Inc has decided to start over (and as we read in CatB, you have to be prepared to "start over, at least once"). I sincerely hope that Amiga Inc's "magical mystery chip" is Transmeta's and that it turns out to be worth the secrecy and hype.
FWIW, I think Amiga Inc. is right and Phase 5 is wrong. Embracing the Linux kernel is the only chance Amiga really has of creating a place for itself. I've been thinking about this a lot since the Linux for Amiga announcement. This might be the perfect opportunity for LFTM. Phase 5 and QNX will be just another bit player, and will end up like the old Amiga - lost in the shuffle, with little hope of getting into the mainstream. [I know, I know - it saddens me too, but there comes a point you have to cut the cord and move on
Think about Amiga Inc's vision. A new Amiga - which has some (very specialized) name recognition, "running Linux" (you know that's how the press will talk about it), using the newest, greatest powerhouse CPU from the mysterious Transmeta. This will have Linux binary compatability (read: large application base), ONE desktop, ONE look and feel (with the option to add more later, but having ONE at first is a key point for LFTM), plug and play hardware (if they are lucky), ONE video system (already configured for X-windows and 3D), ONE sound system (really key, and still painful for Linux in general). This could be THE saving grace for Linux For The Masses - somewhere everyone can start. For 75%, that will be it. The rest will add and play a little at a time (read: progressive disclosure - another user interface point for LFTM). No sysadmin duties, no configuration worries, plug it in and run. Period. It could be "the Linux box any grandmother can use".
clear assumption here that a company applied for a patent in 1995 - four years ago - and hasn't been either laughed out of the office or had their patent granted yet?
Aren't serial killers appeals, all the way up to the Supreme Court, handled faster than this? How can this continue? Can businesses really function like this?