It's most likely *NOT* samba that they're using. HP has(had) a product called CIFS/9000 that provides smb services for HP-UX systems. Most likely they have ported this code and added the code from their JetDirect stuff and possibly their SNMP utilities. This would give them a solution that they are in control of, on an open source platform.
This is only my speculation, as HP did not follow the route that sgi went, when it hired on the main developer of samba (who has since left). Also, unlike sgi, HP did not make public statements about its support of samba, as it already had an SMB/CIFS suite.
Time will tell though, I can't afford, nor do I need one of these.
Do you honestly believe this? I can't understand why being a conservative would preclude any Supreme Court Justice from weighing the merits of the case presented, and rendering a fair decission. I might add that in some of the more recent "litmus" test cases, the conservatives voicing minority opinions (yes, they loose sometimes, even with the perceived majority) have had much more objective views.
Before anyone accuses me as being either partisan or myoptic, I must confess that I am a former liberal, a former Democrat yellow dog. Somewhere along the way, I woke up and truely found myself somewhere between a libertarian and a conservative. Did my core values change? Absolutely not! The only thing that changed was my perspective of the world around me.
I moved beyond the silly labels and stereotypes that people attach to people that they don't know (or don't want to find out about). I suggest that you and all others reading this do the same.
I wouldn't be surprised if the SC does overturn this, for conflict of interest or whatever else people have already suggested here. As lame and unfitting as the "Freedom to Innovate" argument is for M$, it actually meshes well with the DeCSS defense. Reverse engineering is a protected act. I am not aware of the MPAA having a patent on the particular algorithm that is used on DVD's, this being the only way to actually keep the encryption method secret. If DeCSS has cracked it on their own, as a clean room effort (I believe that they have), then the conservative members of the court would probably recognize this and lead the charge.
If not, then I would just look like an ass for presuming their actions would follow their recent objective history.
The absolute best thing about this movie has got to be the absence of high profile fast food tie-ins. To the best of my knowledge, neither McDonald's nor Pepsi have touched this movie with a ten foot pole.
What this means is no little kids choking on their Travolta-in-dreads wind-up happy meal toys. No choking means no pesky frivolous law-suits (free publicity for the movie). The absence of such a controversy would definately mean that the movie would disappear from sight faster than Michael Jackson at a youth rally.
Seriously though, I am a little pissed that I couldn't get that Yoda magic 8-ball at any Pizza Hut near my house because they sold out too fast. What really irritated me though was seing Jar Jar crap at every Taco Bell, KFC, and Pizza Hut for four months straight!
Excuse the reply to myself, but I need to thank Masem for the info and clarify my position.
First, I figured that the Methane -> Methanol trick would be quite difficult without something like a bacterial or enzyme helper in an aqueous solution of some sort. But like I said before, I'm not a chemist so I'm just guessing.
For clarification though, I've lived with and been around enough pot legalization (make clothes out of hemp) people, and pot smokers to know that there is nearly a 100% cross-over between the two groups. I think that their "lucidations" are amusing from my standpoint of a casual observer, but I can't help to think how much code is un-intentionally obfuscated by over-nestings of conditionals and loops by stoned programmers.
I think that pot does have a definite future in pharmacology in treatments for glaucoma, cancer, and other horrific debilitating diseases. I just think that it would be a waste to use it for non-medical purposes, especially celulose production. There are much faster growing "weeds" like bamboo that contain much more celulose than marijuana.
I'm not to up on using pot for methanol production, but I know from living around too many dairy farms to know that the cheapest place to find methane is in manure. Because I'm not a chemist, I dont know how hard it is to knock off one of those pesky Hydrogen atoms and replace it with an O-H. But it can't be that hard, right?
More seriously, I think that the pulp and paper industry could supply more cellulose for "wood alcohol" production than most pot farmers would be willing to waste, er, give up.
ACAD 2k is rumored to be coming back to the Mac with MacOS X. ACAD used to be on Unix up to R13, when Autodesk started to use way to many M$ "technologies" to keep up maintenance on non-windoze ports.
Having been forced to use R13 on win and Unix (Solaris and HP-UX) I can tell you without qualification that ACAD on unix absolutely sucks! There was little feature parity between the Unix and windows versions, and many many bugs prevented the Unix version from being usefull. To be fair, the windows version had so many unacceptable inconsistencies within itself, I forced myself to lear how to use Pro/Engineer, so that I could produce accurate data for downstream NC operations. Autodesk is as much of a proprietary monopolist as Microsoft, changing their portable format(.dxf) on a whim to break any and all competitors applications from reading a "standard" format. We don't need crappy AutoCAD on Linux, we need something much better!
About a year and a half ago, M$ made a major investment in PTC to make Pro/Engineer run BEST on NT. The same was done with other MCAD companies, to persuade them to only develop for M$. As has been noted earlier, there is a lot of money in licensing this type of software, and M$ wants a cut through development fees.
I lamented the loss of AutoCAD from the Mac world, when it was on R12. The architectural CAD world revolved around the Mac platform. Microsoft persuaded AutoDesk to pull the Mac version (and later the poorly outfited Unix version) and only develop for Windoze. After using Autocad R13 & 14, I no longer feel the pain of this loss! It sucks!
Pro/Engineer on the other hand, was designed, and still works best on Unix. When Microsoft dumped a lot of money on PTC, Pro/E on NT was an abomination, a mere charicture of Pro/E on a real platform like HP-UX, Solaris, or Irix.
Many other CAD companies had started to move to solid rendering kernels that were designed to only run on Windows NT or 9x. This reduced their development cost, as they didn't have to develop the solid modeling code themselves, and could concentrate on user interface and other value added features. With the reduced cost of development, license costs dropped and a full scale CAD on NT pricewar erupted.
Many PHB's bought into this new commodity market for MCAD, and decided not to re-up on expensive seats like Pro/E. My former employer decided to not eschew Pro/E, as we had accumulated several years of modeled parts (legacy data), and instead force Pro/E on NT as the standard. The plain truth is that Pro/E *STILL* sucks on NT! But marketing hype makes it sell easily as a more inexpensive equivalent to Pro/E on Unix.
Now, I'm holding on to my outdated SGI box until they pry it from my cold dead fingers, at least until I can make a case for running Pro/E and *nix on a cheap comodity PC.
If you're speaking of Dylan, that wasn't enough. According to the Washington times (I don't have the link right now), he was in counseling for attempted auto theft! The kid drove a BMW every day!
The problem that he had is the same one that I see with my younger sisters; their parents give them everything. Unconditionally. I see it as a defense mechanism found in poor parenting, it starts when the children are very young, and most often occurs in the relationships between parents and younger siblings (note that both Dylan and Eric were the youngest in their families).
As anyone with young kids around knows from experience, children fight about posession of everything. Quite often, the older child will win the phisical fight, but the completion of this contest just spawns another of temper tantrums. When the younger siblings throw the tantrum, many parents will do ANYTHING to make it stop. Usually the fought after object is given outright to the tantrum thrower, just to end the crying. This is the dangerous part, as it sets a pattern of the parent always apeasing the youngest child, a behavior that doesn't stop with childhood. The older child, many times, learns to deal with the challenge of having what was "theirs" being taken away, thus making the older child more apt to overcoming adversity to gain the parents' attention. The younger child only gains quick appeasement in place of genuine parental attention.
Moving forward to the hormonally driven teenage years, the younger sibling may attempt to do many things to shock or disturb their parents by doing anything that may bring forth a negative response (remember the parents in this situation are used to giving the child what they want, not what they need). In many cases, it is too late, as the parent misinterprets what they think the child wants from them, making the parents try hard to please the child by "being cool." This of course doesn't work, as it would only drive the child to more outrageous things. Neither the parents, nor the mal-adjusted youth realize that what they need is a real channel of communication, not a stimulus-reaction type of relationship.
I've aluded to my own sisters above, as I know them best to demonstrate this pattern. To be truthfull, the older one is actually my twin, but the eleven minutes separating us at birth have grown into almost ten years at our current age of 25 (I'm the older one). As we grew up though, I was always the oldest one, and my youngest sister (now 23) even today is referred to by my mother as the "baby of the family."
Today, I am married. My wife and I own a house, and two new cars (although we paid for them through the American way of debt). My sisters, in contrast, live together in a house that my parents own. They each drive S-Class Mercedes that my father originally bought for himself (he walks 5 miles to and from work everyday as he doesn't have a car now). Even though both of my sisters have jobs (and college degrees), they pay no rent or utilities, and my father is the one who pays for all of the feul that both of their cars use.
I won't even go into the things that they have done in trying to shock my parents, suffice it to say that I would have been appauled if they were my kids.
I write of this pattern as I have seen it many times in my experience in counseling youth in the Boy Scouts. Also, I have seen it many times in my roomates, friends and other acquaintances that I have made both at college and elsewhere. I mean no offence if anyone reading this feels singled out, or unfairly characterized. I certainly hold no ill will towards my parents, although I think that my sisters are taking too much advantage of them.
I wrote this because I just feel that I have to get it off of my chest, hoping that someone may recognize themselves as the parent or youngest/only child, and make a concerted effort to change the situation.
Slashdot Mirror
It's most likely *NOT* samba that they're using. HP has(had) a product called CIFS/9000 that provides smb services for HP-UX systems. Most likely they have ported this code and added the code from their JetDirect stuff and possibly their SNMP utilities. This would give them a solution that they are in control of, on an open source platform.
This is only my speculation, as HP did not follow the route that sgi went, when it hired on the main developer of samba (who has since left). Also, unlike sgi, HP did not make public statements about its support of samba, as it already had an SMB/CIFS suite.
Time will tell though, I can't afford, nor do I need one of these.
-- Len
Do you honestly believe this? I can't understand why being a conservative would preclude any Supreme Court Justice from weighing the merits of the case presented, and rendering a fair decission. I might add that in some of the more recent "litmus" test cases, the conservatives voicing minority opinions (yes, they loose sometimes, even with the perceived majority) have had much more objective views.
Before anyone accuses me as being either partisan or myoptic, I must confess that I am a former liberal, a former Democrat yellow dog. Somewhere along the way, I woke up and truely found myself somewhere between a libertarian and a conservative. Did my core values change? Absolutely not! The only thing that changed was my perspective of the world around me.
I moved beyond the silly labels and stereotypes that people attach to people that they don't know (or don't want to find out about). I suggest that you and all others reading this do the same.
I wouldn't be surprised if the SC does overturn this, for conflict of interest or whatever else people have already suggested here. As lame and unfitting as the "Freedom to Innovate" argument is for M$, it actually meshes well with the DeCSS defense. Reverse engineering is a protected act. I am not aware of the MPAA having a patent on the particular algorithm that is used on DVD's, this being the only way to actually keep the encryption method secret. If DeCSS has cracked it on their own, as a clean room effort (I believe that they have), then the conservative members of the court would probably recognize this and lead the charge.
If not, then I would just look like an ass for presuming their actions would follow their recent objective history.
The absolute best thing about this movie has got to be the absence of high profile fast food tie-ins. To the best of my knowledge, neither McDonald's nor Pepsi have touched this movie with a ten foot pole.
What this means is no little kids choking on their Travolta-in-dreads wind-up happy meal toys. No choking means no pesky frivolous law-suits (free publicity for the movie). The absence of such a controversy would definately mean that the movie would disappear from sight faster than Michael Jackson at a youth rally.
Seriously though, I am a little pissed that I couldn't get that Yoda magic 8-ball at any Pizza Hut near my house because they sold out too fast. What really irritated me though was seing Jar Jar crap at every Taco Bell, KFC, and Pizza Hut for four months straight!
Excuse the reply to myself, but I need to thank Masem for the info and clarify my position.
First, I figured that the Methane -> Methanol trick would be quite difficult without something like a bacterial or enzyme helper in an aqueous solution of some sort. But like I said before, I'm not a chemist so I'm just guessing.
For clarification though, I've lived with and been around enough pot legalization (make clothes out of hemp) people, and pot smokers to know that there is nearly a 100% cross-over between the two groups. I think that their "lucidations" are amusing from my standpoint of a casual observer, but I can't help to think how much code is un-intentionally obfuscated by over-nestings of conditionals and loops by stoned programmers.
I think that pot does have a definite future in pharmacology in treatments for glaucoma, cancer, and other horrific debilitating diseases. I just think that it would be a waste to use it for non-medical purposes, especially celulose production. There are much faster growing "weeds" like bamboo that contain much more celulose than marijuana.
I'm not to up on using pot for methanol production, but I know from living around too many dairy farms to know that the cheapest place to find methane is in manure. Because I'm not a chemist, I dont know how hard it is to knock off one of those pesky Hydrogen atoms and replace it with an O-H. But it can't be that hard, right?
More seriously, I think that the pulp and paper industry could supply more cellulose for "wood alcohol" production than most pot farmers would be willing to waste, er, give up.
ACAD 2k is rumored to be coming back to the Mac with MacOS X. ACAD used to be on Unix up to R13, when Autodesk started to use way to many M$ "technologies" to keep up maintenance on non-windoze ports.
Having been forced to use R13 on win and Unix (Solaris and HP-UX) I can tell you without qualification that ACAD on unix absolutely sucks! There was little feature parity between the Unix and windows versions, and many many bugs prevented the Unix version from being usefull. To be fair, the windows version had so many unacceptable inconsistencies within itself, I forced myself to lear how to use Pro/Engineer, so that I could produce accurate data for downstream NC operations. Autodesk is as much of a proprietary monopolist as Microsoft, changing their portable format(.dxf) on a whim to break any and all competitors applications from reading a "standard" format. We don't need crappy AutoCAD on Linux, we need something much better!
Just my 2 cents.
-- Len
He is (Bill G. that is).
About a year and a half ago, M$ made a major investment in PTC to make Pro/Engineer run BEST on NT. The same was done with other MCAD companies, to persuade them to only develop for M$. As has been noted earlier, there is a lot of money in licensing this type of software, and M$ wants a cut through development fees.
I lamented the loss of AutoCAD from the Mac world, when it was on R12. The architectural CAD world revolved around the Mac platform. Microsoft persuaded AutoDesk to pull the Mac version (and later the poorly outfited Unix version) and only develop for Windoze. After using Autocad R13 & 14, I no longer feel the pain of this loss! It sucks!
Pro/Engineer on the other hand, was designed, and still works best on Unix. When Microsoft dumped a lot of money on PTC, Pro/E on NT was an abomination, a mere charicture of Pro/E on a real platform like HP-UX, Solaris, or Irix.
Many other CAD companies had started to move to solid rendering kernels that were designed to only run on Windows NT or 9x. This reduced their development cost, as they didn't have to develop the solid modeling code themselves, and could concentrate on user interface and other value added features. With the reduced cost of development, license costs dropped and a full scale CAD on NT pricewar erupted.
Many PHB's bought into this new commodity market for MCAD, and decided not to re-up on expensive seats like Pro/E. My former employer decided to not eschew Pro/E, as we had accumulated several years of modeled parts (legacy data), and instead force Pro/E on NT as the standard. The plain truth is that Pro/E *STILL* sucks on NT! But marketing hype makes it sell easily as a more inexpensive equivalent to Pro/E on Unix.
Now, I'm holding on to my outdated SGI box until they pry it from my cold dead fingers, at least until I can make a case for running Pro/E and *nix on a cheap comodity PC.
-- Len
If you're speaking of Dylan, that wasn't enough. According to the Washington times (I don't have the link right now), he was in counseling for attempted auto theft! The kid drove a BMW every day!
The problem that he had is the same one that I see with my younger sisters; their parents give them everything. Unconditionally. I see it as a defense mechanism found in poor parenting, it starts when the children are very young, and most often occurs in the relationships between parents and younger siblings (note that both Dylan and Eric were the youngest in their families).
As anyone with young kids around knows from experience, children fight about posession of everything. Quite often, the older child will win the phisical fight, but the completion of this contest just spawns another of temper tantrums. When the younger siblings throw the tantrum, many parents will do ANYTHING to make it stop. Usually the fought after object is given outright to the tantrum thrower, just to end the crying. This is the dangerous part, as it sets a pattern of the parent always apeasing the youngest child, a behavior that doesn't stop with childhood. The older child, many times, learns to deal with the challenge of having what was "theirs" being taken away, thus making the older child more apt to overcoming adversity to gain the parents' attention. The younger child only gains quick appeasement in place of genuine parental attention.
Moving forward to the hormonally driven teenage years, the younger sibling may attempt to do many things to shock or disturb their parents by doing anything that may bring forth a negative response (remember the parents in this situation are used to giving the child what they want, not what they need). In many cases, it is too late, as the parent misinterprets what they think the child wants from them, making the parents try hard to please the child by "being cool." This of course doesn't work, as it would only drive the child to more outrageous things. Neither the parents, nor the mal-adjusted youth realize that what they need is a real channel of communication, not a stimulus-reaction type of relationship.
I've aluded to my own sisters above, as I know them best to demonstrate this pattern. To be truthfull, the older one is actually my twin, but the eleven minutes separating us at birth have grown into almost ten years at our current age of 25 (I'm the older one). As we grew up though, I was always the oldest one, and my youngest sister (now 23) even today is referred to by my mother as the "baby of the family."
Today, I am married. My wife and I own a house, and two new cars (although we paid for them through the American way of debt). My sisters, in contrast, live together in a house that my parents own. They each drive S-Class Mercedes that my father originally bought for himself (he walks 5 miles to and from work everyday as he doesn't have a car now). Even though both of my sisters have jobs (and college degrees), they pay no rent or utilities, and my father is the one who pays for all of the feul that both of their cars use.
I won't even go into the things that they have done in trying to shock my parents, suffice it to say that I would have been appauled if they were my kids.
I write of this pattern as I have seen it many times in my experience in counseling youth in the Boy Scouts. Also, I have seen it many times in my roomates, friends and other acquaintances that I have made both at college and elsewhere. I mean no offence if anyone reading this feels singled out, or unfairly characterized. I certainly hold no ill will towards my parents, although I think that my sisters are taking too much advantage of them.
I wrote this because I just feel that I have to get it off of my chest, hoping that someone may recognize themselves as the parent or youngest/only child, and make a concerted effort to change the situation.
-- Len