I hope you are ashamed about yourself after rereading this thread.....
You may not agree with their business plan...
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 1
.... but is one that is working. And very much in the lines that many/.ers support: offer extra features (remastering, new covers, new formats) of recordings.
Lack of innovation is not a crime and not even immoral.
... as you are currently graded (hopefully for short time).
Apple computer signed a contract that bared them from the music business as part of a previous settlement with the recording company. That is what this is all about and your ignorance should not be encouraged by positive mod points.
We are talking about the freedom of people to write software and share it among themselves.
That is one of the most fundamental stands that any person related to the IT industry can take.
Given the fact that everything in a way or another relies on computers, it is clear that this issue is not a small matter that will affect a few derided technophiles. How the SCO fiasco pans out could affect the whole society in its use of one of the most important technologies available today.
You having principles was completely unacceptable.
You should have accepted your paycheck and a lifetime of servitude and humilliation. In the economic situation in which you lived of unemployment and no working rights, you should had been grateful of having achieved an education as a lawyer, obviously your dubious moral agenda damaged gravely the people that most needed you your wife and children, which due to your stuborness suffered a life of depravation.
Mr Mandela, sir, you should be thorhougly ashamed of yourself.
Only because this man clearly stated he did not care about the moral consequences of his endaevours, was willing to sacrifice anything (like Alaskan wilderness or poor Pacific islanders homes) in the pursuit of his deadly devices or because for 50 years humanity was held hostage of these paranoids (and their soviet counterparts)?
Why should anybody disagree with your praise, specially you being a military man (which clearly in your mind makes you something different or even better than the rest of poor uncamouflaged us).
me@machine which vi/usr/bin/vi me@machine ls -la/usr/bin/vi -r-xr-xr-x 5 bin bin 227868 Feb 4 1998/usr/bin/vi
But wait a minute:
ldd/usr/bin/vi | awk '{print $NF}' | xargs ls -la -rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 1015768 May 22 2001/usr/lib/libc.so.1 -rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 4304 May 22 2001/usr/lib/libdl.so.1 -rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 10168 Jul 16 1997/usr/lib/libmapmalloc.so.1 -rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 16936 May 22 2001/usr/platform/SUNW,Ultra-2/lib/libc_psr.so.1
Even then we barely reach 2MB (half of it is libc, which is shared anyway).
There you have it.
Burro.
vi != vim
And then they ask why Solaris is more efficient than Linux (another time we can talk about bash vs ksh).
So what you are saying is that the wrong people is been prosecuted when they catch copyright infringers. They should go after the people that manufacture and sell duplication equipment (which can be used by as many legit purposes as illegal ones).
P2P is a double edged sword, it can be used legally or illegally. The responsibility to know how to use technology is on the user, of course that if technology companies do not make clear how to use a new tool and legislators don't allow for basic freedoms that are alligned with common sense, then people will find more difficult to make informed decisions about how to legally use technology.
I do not know what the situation is in the good ole US of A (where privacy is treated as the private feudal property of a certain Mr Ashcroft) but in other countries you have not got any right to collect private information without the affected person's consent. No matter what the excuse.
A company using hidden spyware and then pursuing reparations due to copyright infringement, detected by above mentioned device, may find itself in hot legal water for collecting private information without consent.
The solutions are obvious and as usual, to be open about what you do is the best way to proceed. Why companies don't grasp this basic concept is completely and absolutely beyond my intellectual capacity to understand corporations.
Such software would be breaking the law in many countries (specially in Europe) since nobody can gather data about you without your consent.
Both the copyright infringer and the company gathering information without a persons consent could land themselves in legal trouble.
The company producing the software can get themselves of the hook clearly stating that they are collecting information, which information and where it is kept.
-Keep an accurate list of the electorate. -Voter identifies itself, gets a paper ballot with all candidates. These are clearly identified by equally sized photogrpahs and their respective party symbols, if any and their name. -Voter crosses with pen one candidate only, this is done in the privacy of a voting booth. -Vote is put in a trasnparent box. -Voting station closes. -Officials of an independent, citizen led, election comission count the votes, supervised by representatives of the different parties and candidates taking part on the election. -They count the votes again to verify. -They officials call a concentrating office announcing the results for that voting station, 3 of the representatives of the candidates have to confirm these results verbally. This forms the preliminary result. -Officials and representatives sign an official document whith the results which is dispatched to the concentrating office. Ballot box is sealed with all the votes inside. -Officials and representatives go our for a beer. -Results are concentrated by locality, state, or region and finally by national level.
I would like to add that all this is mostly arithmetic and bureaucracy.
I don't know about MS but Sun is introducing Linux machines and GPLed software (Mozilla, Gonme) in Solaris.
I don;t see how they could benefit in view of those efforts and repeated commitments to Linux.
They back stabbed IBM with the AIX issue, for which I hope they live to regret it. Honestly, you don't want a company like Sun that has made a name out of technical quality to use such despicable tactics, but so far they have not shown any animosity towards Linux or towards the GPL.
There is only one entity that can force people to do something in a cumpolsory manner, yes ladies and gentlemen, your often depised goverment.
If a given goverment mandates software upgrades in the benefit of the common good then I will gladly agree. Of course this invasion of privacy to prop-up a private service means that the service provider becomes heavily regulated.
If mandatory pacthes woud mean that MS would be forced to produce quality software or it would be fined for endagering the public, I am all for it.
If mandatory patches means a company I don't trust will put whatever they see fit in the computers of my friends and relatives (not mine mind you, I don't have to worry about MS ever touching my hard disk) I will be a vocal opossition to such stupid, ludicrous idea.
Since when did MS became tha arbiter and regulator of how people use computers? That some people seem to believe they have that "right" shows in how horrible bad shape the IT industry is.
Because to do the right thing conflicts with their interests, their way to work and their perceived bottom line.
-They should respect the privacy of their users. -They should not force feed EULAs with patches. -They should take enough time to test patches, ensuring they don't brake things.
MS has willingly ignored the first two issues above, there are many examples of that.
As for the last one, they are completely lost: they are trying to integrate so many things in the OS (in their anticompetitive zeal to try to push out of the market every single company that produces any useful piece of software) that they are creating an unmaintainable pile of software kludge.
With the pressures to cut costs and to put patches out in service quickly there is a fundamental contradiction between effective software testing and complexity of a software kludge that includes everything and the kitchen sink.
They are becoming a victim of developping according to marketing strategy and not to sound software engineering principles. If they are in a catch 22 it is one of their own making.
Every single computer that is on unnecessarily causes environmental damage, most goverments, individuals and organizations in general agree that such damage should be restricted in as much as possible without interfering with productive activities.
A computer doing nothing in a household for 22 hours wasting power is not only foolish (no matter how much you pay for your electricity) but wasteful.
A computer used in a lab for the best part of 12 or 14 hours is a completely different beast since society is getting a direct benefit and thus the environmental damage at least have a direct justification.
And in spite of all that, your friends are weirdos and in a minority. Most people have the common sense to turn off their computers when they stop using them.
I have provided some PC support professionally and as a "hobby" (friends, colleagues) in, let me count, 15 countries in four continents (perhaps even your corner of the US) and I can confidently say that only weirdos (like/.ers ) have their computer on at all times.
Most people realize the critter is using that thing some parts of the US lacked sorely this last weekend, electricity, and most people are sure as hell that that is not free since they are reminded of the fact periodically by the electricity bill.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope you are ashamed about yourself after rereading this thread.....
.... but is one that is working. And very much in the lines that many /.ers support: offer extra features (remastering, new covers, new formats) of recordings.
Lack of innovation is not a crime and not even immoral.
So what you are saying is that if it suits somebody it is OK to break a legaly binding contract if that benefits the bottom line.
Who are you? SCO's CEO?
... as you are currently graded (hopefully for short time).
Apple computer signed a contract that bared them from the music business as part of a previous settlement with the recording company. That is what this is all about and your ignorance should not be encouraged by positive mod points.
Apple Computer agreed not to get into the music business as part of a previous agreements between both companies.
When I first knew about iTunes I thought: "Apple's lawyers suck..."
When someone mentions Stallman I think EMACS and then coherent and measured arguments regarding the freedom to write, dhare, and modify software.
Ideas and solidarity improve full societies and civilizations.
Noooo Mr Mandela, please don't fight apartheid! You have got to feed your children!
We are talking about the freedom of people to write software and share it among themselves.
That is one of the most fundamental stands that any person related to the IT industry can take.
Given the fact that everything in a way or another relies on computers, it is clear that this issue is not a small matter that will affect a few derided technophiles. How the SCO fiasco pans out could affect the whole society in its use of one of the most important technologies available today.
Sir:
You having principles was completely unacceptable.
You should have accepted your paycheck and a lifetime of servitude and humilliation. In the economic situation in which you lived of unemployment and no working rights, you should had been grateful of having achieved an education as a lawyer, obviously your dubious moral agenda damaged gravely the people that most needed you your wife and children, which due to your stuborness suffered a life of depravation.
Mr Mandela, sir, you should be thorhougly ashamed of yourself.
Only because this man clearly stated he did not care about the moral consequences of his endaevours, was willing to sacrifice anything (like Alaskan wilderness or poor Pacific islanders homes) in the pursuit of his deadly devices or because for 50 years humanity was held hostage of these paranoids (and their soviet counterparts)?
Why should anybody disagree with your praise, specially you being a military man (which clearly in your mind makes you something different or even better than the rest of poor uncamouflaged us).
me@machine /usr/bin/vi /usr/bin/vi /usr/bin/vi
/usr/bin/vi | awk '{print $NF}' | xargs ls -la /usr/lib/libc.so.1 /usr/lib/libdl.so.1 /usr/lib/libmapmalloc.so.1 /usr/platform/SUNW,Ultra-2/lib/libc_psr.so.1
which vi
me@machine
ls -la
-r-xr-xr-x 5 bin bin 227868 Feb 4 1998
But wait a minute:
ldd
-rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 1015768 May 22 2001
-rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 4304 May 22 2001
-rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 10168 Jul 16 1997
-rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 16936 May 22 2001
Even then we barely reach 2MB (half of it is libc, which is shared anyway).
There you have it.
Burro.
vi != vim
And then they ask why Solaris is more efficient than Linux (another time we can talk about bash vs ksh).
So what you are saying is that the wrong people is been prosecuted when they catch copyright infringers. They should go after the people that manufacture and sell duplication equipment (which can be used by as many legit purposes as illegal ones).
P2P is a double edged sword, it can be used legally or illegally. The responsibility to know how to use technology is on the user, of course that if technology companies do not make clear how to use a new tool and legislators don't allow for basic freedoms that are alligned with common sense, then people will find more difficult to make informed decisions about how to legally use technology.
Stop that meme right here.
Share what you are entitled to share and nobody can touch you.
Why are you not more explicit so we can join the fun?
Share music you are entitled to share. Don't share music for which you don't have a copy-right.
Judge: you were distributing music for which you have no copyright.
"Freedom" fighter: yup.
Judge: you owe the RIAA 1500000000. Next.
If you are guilty, you would be stupid to fight.
If you are not (i.e. you were sharing stuff which you are actually entitled to share) you should fight with all your might.
I do not know what the situation is in the good ole US of A (where privacy is treated as the private feudal property of a certain Mr Ashcroft) but in other countries you have not got any right to collect private information without the affected person's consent. No matter what the excuse.
A company using hidden spyware and then pursuing reparations due to copyright infringement, detected by above mentioned device, may find itself in hot legal water for collecting private information without consent.
The solutions are obvious and as usual, to be open about what you do is the best way to proceed. Why companies don't grasp this basic concept is completely and absolutely beyond my intellectual capacity to understand corporations.
Or something like that.
Such software would be breaking the law in many countries (specially in Europe) since nobody can gather data about you without your consent.
Both the copyright infringer and the company gathering information without a persons consent could land themselves in legal trouble.
The company producing the software can get themselves of the hook clearly stating that they are collecting information, which information and where it is kept.
Oh yes, IANAL.
-Keep an accurate list of the electorate.
-Voter identifies itself, gets a paper ballot with all candidates. These are clearly identified by equally sized photogrpahs and their respective party symbols, if any and their name.
-Voter crosses with pen one candidate only, this is done in the privacy of a voting booth.
-Vote is put in a trasnparent box.
-Voting station closes.
-Officials of an independent, citizen led, election comission count the votes, supervised by representatives of the different parties and candidates taking part on the election.
-They count the votes again to verify.
-They officials call a concentrating office announcing the results for that voting station, 3 of the representatives of the candidates have to confirm these results verbally. This forms the preliminary result.
-Officials and representatives sign an official document whith the results which is dispatched to the concentrating office. Ballot box is sealed with all the votes inside.
-Officials and representatives go our for a beer.
-Results are concentrated by locality, state, or region and finally by national level.
I would like to add that all this is mostly arithmetic and bureaucracy.
Ah! An that I hate overengineering.
I don't know about MS but Sun is introducing Linux machines and GPLed software (Mozilla, Gonme) in Solaris.
I don;t see how they could benefit in view of those efforts and repeated commitments to Linux.
They back stabbed IBM with the AIX issue, for which I hope they live to regret it. Honestly, you don't want a company like Sun that has made a name out of technical quality to use such despicable tactics, but so far they have not shown any animosity towards Linux or towards the GPL.
There is only one entity that can force people to do something in a cumpolsory manner, yes ladies and gentlemen, your often depised goverment.
If a given goverment mandates software upgrades in the benefit of the common good then I will gladly agree. Of course this invasion of privacy to prop-up a private service means that the service provider becomes heavily regulated.
If mandatory pacthes woud mean that MS would be forced to produce quality software or it would be fined for endagering the public, I am all for it.
If mandatory patches means a company I don't trust will put whatever they see fit in the computers of my friends and relatives (not mine mind you, I don't have to worry about MS ever touching my hard disk) I will be a vocal opossition to such stupid, ludicrous idea.
Since when did MS became tha arbiter and regulator of how people use computers? That some people seem to believe they have that "right" shows in how horrible bad shape the IT industry is.
Because to do the right thing conflicts with their interests, their way to work and their perceived bottom line.
-They should respect the privacy of their users.
-They should not force feed EULAs with patches.
-They should take enough time to test patches, ensuring they don't brake things.
MS has willingly ignored the first two issues above, there are many examples of that.
As for the last one, they are completely lost: they are trying to integrate so many things in the OS (in their anticompetitive zeal to try to push out of the market every single company that produces any useful piece of software) that they are creating an unmaintainable pile of software kludge.
With the pressures to cut costs and to put patches out in service quickly there is a fundamental contradiction between effective software testing and complexity of a software kludge that includes everything and the kitchen sink.
They are becoming a victim of developping according to marketing strategy and not to sound software engineering principles. If they are in a catch 22 it is one of their own making.
Every single computer that is on unnecessarily causes environmental damage, most goverments, individuals and organizations in general agree that such damage should be restricted in as much as possible without interfering with productive activities.
A computer doing nothing in a household for 22 hours wasting power is not only foolish (no matter how much you pay for your electricity) but wasteful.
A computer used in a lab for the best part of 12 or 14 hours is a completely different beast since society is getting a direct benefit and thus the environmental damage at least have a direct justification.
And in spite of all that, your friends are weirdos and in a minority. Most people have the common sense to turn off their computers when they stop using them.
I have provided some PC support professionally and as a "hobby" (friends, colleagues) in, let me count, 15 countries in four continents (perhaps even your corner of the US) and I can confidently say that only weirdos (like /.ers ) have their computer on at all times.
Most people realize the critter is using that thing some parts of the US lacked sorely this last weekend, electricity, and most people are sure as hell that that is not free since they are reminded of the fact periodically by the electricity bill.
I don't deal with convicted monopoly abusers.
I want stability.
I choose carefuly my service providers amongst companies with some integrity.