The people buying these products are not your typical "M$ sucks"/.er. They are people trying to secure corporate networks. If they want to use a Unix-like box to run the scanner and Microsoft has the best product, they are going to pay for it rather than pay for something from Symantex or McAffee.
I used to use an MV8000 in college (early 90s and it was old then). It's entertaining to see the specs on this machine. Runs at up to 19 MIPS and takes up to 256 MB of RAM.
That will tell you who is cheap, not who is good. I really like Newegg too, and I think they charge me tax, but I order from them. I also like mwave.com, but I think they are based in CA, which may not help the OP.
He does on my DVD too. It's called a torrent of the original Laserdisc. Doesn't look as good as the recent DVDs, but it looks a lot better than a tape.
A Palm and a little (free/libre) application called "Top Secret." I rememember one password and all the other ones are encrypted as are CC numbers, etc.
That's exactly how it's useful. Widespread smallpox vaccination was stop *before* smallpox was eliminated. In the interim, any reported case of small pox resulted in vacinating people in the area and those who could have come into contact with the infected in a containment policy.
Sure, people will still die in outbreaks, but they can be contained with many fewer people. No matter what the financial cost, *I* don't want a vaccination against Ebola unless I'm going somewhere where there is an outbreak. There are risks with vaccines too. (About 1 in a million died from the smallpox vaccine, I think).
Not true. Unless they assign their copyright to the author. Linux, for instance, has thousands of "owners."
Also witness the recent problems with mozilla re-licensing. Every contributor had to agree to the relicensing or the code they contributed had to be rewritten when they couldn't be found (and there were a few).
That's why, in the FA, the organizer of GPL-Violations is able to enforce the GPL on the kernel. He is one of the thousands of contributors.
Well, at least it's running Linux. Because on dialup, it'd probably take at least 12 months to download the patches to secure XP.
Umm, I hate to break it to you, but every month I have to download about 200MB of updated RPMs for the various Mandrake and Redhat distros I run/admin. It's fine on broadband, but it is in no way a lower volume of updates than XP.
Maybe, maybe not. As a distributor of software, under the GPL, if you provide binaries, *you* have to provide the source, even if it is identical to the source from Apache or some other source. If you are Whitebox linux you *cannot*, according to the GPL (this is explicitly in the FAQ, not the license itself), just point at Red Hat's sources, you have to host your own.
Now, if a new version of the GPL equates distributing binaries with running apps, the grandparents suggestion may come true. It certainly would if you changed one line of the source or a compile option or....
I use NIMH for most everything (and don't they last longer in digital cameras than alkalines?) but they are no good for flashlights, where you need long storage life and a lot of power. Long life is good too. So, I'll get a few of these oxy-whatever when they come out.
I was curious what Linux had to say about this, so from the LKML:
Date Wed, 6 Apr 2005 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) From Linus Torvalds Subject Kernel SCM saga..
Ok,
as a number of people are already aware (and in some cases have been aware over the last several weeks), we've been trying to work out a conflict over BK usage over the last month or two (and it feels like longer;). That hasn't been working out, and as a result, the kernel team is looking at alternatives.
[ And apparently this just hit slashdot too, so by now _everybody_ knows ]
It's not like my choice of BK has been entirely conflict-free ("No, really? Do tell! Oh, you mean the gigabytes upon gigabytes of flames we had?"), so in some sense this was inevitable, but I sure had hoped that it would have happened only once there was a reasonable open-source alternative. As it is, we'll have to scramble for a while.
Btw, don't blame BitMover, even if that's probably going to be a very common reaction. Larry in particular really did try to make things work out, but it got to the point where I decided that I don't want to be in the position of trying to hold two pieces together that would need as much glue as it seemed to require.
We've been using BK for three years, and in fact, the biggest problem right now is that a number of people have gotten very very picky about their tools after having used the best. Me included, but in fact the people that got helped most by BitKeeper usage were often the people _around_ me who had a much easier time merging with my tree and sending their trees to me.
Of course, there's also probably a ton of people who just used BK as a nicer (and much faster) "anonymous CVS" client. We'll get that sorted out, but the immediate problem is that I'm spending most my time trying to see what the best way to co-operate is.
NOTE! BitKeeper isn't going away per se. Right now, the only real thing that has happened is that I've decided to not use BK mainly because I need to figure out the alternatives, and rather than continuing "things as normal", I decided to bite the bullet and just see what life without BK looks like. So far it's a gray and bleak world;)
So don't take this to mean anything more than it is. I'm going to be effectively off-line for a week (think of it as a normal "Linus went on a vacation" event) and I'm just asking that people who continue to maintain BK trees at least try to also make sure that they can send me the result as (individual) patches, since I'll eventually have to merge some other way.
That "individual patches" is one of the keywords, btw. One thing that BK has been extremely good at, and that a lot of people have come to like even when they didn't use BK, is how we've been maintaining a much finer- granularity view of changes. That isn't going to go away.
In fact, one impact BK ha shad is to very fundamentally make us (and me in particular) change how we do things. That ranges from the fine-grained changeset tracking to just how I ended up trusting submaintainers with much bigger things, and not having to work on a patch-by-patch basis any more. So the three years with BK are definitely not wasted: I'm convinced it caused us to do things in better ways, and one of the things I'm looking at is to make sure that those things continue to work.
So I just wanted to say that I'm personally very happy with BK, and with Larry. It didn't work out, but it sure as hell made a big difference to kernel development. And we'll work out the temporary problem of having to figure out a set of tools to allow us to continue to do the things that BK allowed us to do.
We want to have a manned mission to Mars, but we don't want any exploration of what else is out there in our solar system...
Actaully, I don't think they want either. Read the highest ranked response to this and then think about if the promise of a Mars program is "starve-the-beast" (an established and open fiscal "conservative" policy) for NASA. Bush proposes a hugely expensive program for NASA. The R&D for that program demands that most of the other science (Hubble, etc.) is cut back to fund the R&D (NASA's not getting any new money.) Then Bush, or more likely the next president will say "Hey, we can't afford a trillion dollars to go to Mars" and will cancel the whole thing. The net result is that NASA does less and has less money to do it with. The money they cut to do the Mars R&D won't come back.
Sorry, but no. This is not a secret plan. Those who advise the Bush adminstration (like Grover Norquist, who is a frequent guest) have been very upfront that this is exactly what they want. Just do a search for Grover Norquist and "starve the beast." That's their name for what they want to do.
I want the data to last for ever. The media? Meh. 10-20 years is probably enough. I'm guessing before long everything I have will be on a backed up harddrive and transferred from one to the next every five years.
If you read the comments to the linked article, you will see several other suggestions. But if I was the developer, there is no way I'd give away control over what I wrote just to try to wrest control from a third party. Frankly, given the options of giving the code to the FSF or letting CherryOS do whatever it wants, I'd pick the latter. Fortunately he has other options.
This comes up everytime and you are painting with a very broad brush, but:
Suing a company who has infringed your copyright and is using your work to make money: Good
Suing your fans and potential customers, people who may be checking out which music to buy, and in any case are not making money off it: Within your legal rights but very stupid and shortsighted.
Why should he give his code to another company, even if it is one you trust, to get fair representation?
FSF may not deal with this, but another organization interested in preserving the "sanctity" of the GPL might without any demand for the copyright of the code.
I think I've e-mailed the editor about a "future" story three times. Twice were about corrections to the story. Those were accepted. Once was about a duplicate. I assume many people must e-mail about duplicates. I can only assume they post duplicates on purpose or really, really don't care.
Slashdot Mirror
It's "nucular" and therefore evil. There is nothing else you need to know.
The people buying these products are not your typical "M$ sucks" /.er. They are people trying to secure corporate networks. If they want to use a Unix-like box to run the scanner and Microsoft has the best product, they are going to pay for it rather than pay for something from Symantex or McAffee.
I used to use an MV8000 in college (early 90s and it was old then). It's entertaining to see the specs on this machine. Runs at up to 19 MIPS and takes up to 256 MB of RAM.
That will tell you who is cheap, not who is good. I really like Newegg too, and I think they charge me tax, but I order from them. I also like mwave.com, but I think they are based in CA, which may not help the OP.
Do a google for magnoliafan and torrent. There is also "TR47," but the former are anamorphic transfers.
He does on my DVD too. It's called a torrent of the original Laserdisc. Doesn't look as good as the recent DVDs, but it looks a lot better than a tape.
A Palm and a little (free/libre) application called "Top Secret." I rememember one password and all the other ones are encrypted as are CC numbers, etc.
Sure, people will still die in outbreaks, but they can be contained with many fewer people. No matter what the financial cost, *I* don't want a vaccination against Ebola unless I'm going somewhere where there is an outbreak. There are risks with vaccines too. (About 1 in a million died from the smallpox vaccine, I think).
IANAP (pathologist)
Yeah, google is a publicly owned company. Where are my shares, dammit?
Also witness the recent problems with mozilla re-licensing. Every contributor had to agree to the relicensing or the code they contributed had to be rewritten when they couldn't be found (and there were a few).
That's why, in the FA, the organizer of GPL-Violations is able to enforce the GPL on the kernel. He is one of the thousands of contributors.
Yeah, until we start patching the just file(s) that changed (and updating our RPM/DEB db's) Windows will require less bandwidth, I think.
Umm, I hate to break it to you, but every month I have to download about 200MB of updated RPMs for the various Mandrake and Redhat distros I run/admin. It's fine on broadband, but it is in no way a lower volume of updates than XP.
Now, if a new version of the GPL equates distributing binaries with running apps, the grandparents suggestion may come true. It certainly would if you changed one line of the source or a compile option or ....
I use NIMH for most everything (and don't they last longer in digital cameras than alkalines?) but they are no good for flashlights, where you need long storage life and a lot of power. Long life is good too. So, I'll get a few of these oxy-whatever when they come out.
I was curious what Linux had to say about this, so from the LKML:
;). That hasn't been working out, and as a result, the kernel team
;)
Date Wed, 6 Apr 2005 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT)
From Linus Torvalds
Subject Kernel SCM saga..
Ok,
as a number of people are already aware (and in some cases have been
aware over the last several weeks), we've been trying to work out a
conflict over BK usage over the last month or two (and it feels like
longer
is looking at alternatives.
[ And apparently this just hit slashdot too, so by now _everybody_ knows ]
It's not like my choice of BK has been entirely conflict-free ("No,
really? Do tell! Oh, you mean the gigabytes upon gigabytes of flames we
had?"), so in some sense this was inevitable, but I sure had hoped that it
would have happened only once there was a reasonable open-source
alternative. As it is, we'll have to scramble for a while.
Btw, don't blame BitMover, even if that's probably going to be a very
common reaction. Larry in particular really did try to make things work
out, but it got to the point where I decided that I don't want to be in
the position of trying to hold two pieces together that would need as much
glue as it seemed to require.
We've been using BK for three years, and in fact, the biggest problem
right now is that a number of people have gotten very very picky about
their tools after having used the best. Me included, but in fact the
people that got helped most by BitKeeper usage were often the people
_around_ me who had a much easier time merging with my tree and sending
their trees to me.
Of course, there's also probably a ton of people who just used BK as a
nicer (and much faster) "anonymous CVS" client. We'll get that sorted out,
but the immediate problem is that I'm spending most my time trying to see
what the best way to co-operate is.
NOTE! BitKeeper isn't going away per se. Right now, the only real thing
that has happened is that I've decided to not use BK mainly because I need
to figure out the alternatives, and rather than continuing "things as
normal", I decided to bite the bullet and just see what life without BK
looks like. So far it's a gray and bleak world
So don't take this to mean anything more than it is. I'm going to be
effectively off-line for a week (think of it as a normal "Linus went on a
vacation" event) and I'm just asking that people who continue to maintain
BK trees at least try to also make sure that they can send me the result
as (individual) patches, since I'll eventually have to merge some other
way.
That "individual patches" is one of the keywords, btw. One thing that BK
has been extremely good at, and that a lot of people have come to like
even when they didn't use BK, is how we've been maintaining a much finer-
granularity view of changes. That isn't going to go away.
In fact, one impact BK ha shad is to very fundamentally make us (and me in
particular) change how we do things. That ranges from the fine-grained
changeset tracking to just how I ended up trusting submaintainers with
much bigger things, and not having to work on a patch-by-patch basis any
more. So the three years with BK are definitely not wasted: I'm convinced
it caused us to do things in better ways, and one of the things I'm
looking at is to make sure that those things continue to work.
So I just wanted to say that I'm personally very happy with BK, and with
Larry. It didn't work out, but it sure as hell made a big difference to
kernel development. And we'll work out the temporary problem of having to
figure out a set of tools to allow us to continue to do the things that BK
allowed us to do.
Let the flames begin.
Linus
Actaully, I don't think they want either. Read the highest ranked response to this and then think about if the promise of a Mars program is "starve-the-beast" (an established and open fiscal "conservative" policy) for NASA. Bush proposes a hugely expensive program for NASA. The R&D for that program demands that most of the other science (Hubble, etc.) is cut back to fund the R&D (NASA's not getting any new money.) Then Bush, or more likely the next president will say "Hey, we can't afford a trillion dollars to go to Mars" and will cancel the whole thing. The net result is that NASA does less and has less money to do it with. The money they cut to do the Mars R&D won't come back.
Sorry, but no. This is not a secret plan. Those who advise the Bush adminstration (like Grover Norquist, who is a frequent guest) have been very upfront that this is exactly what they want. Just do a search for Grover Norquist and "starve the beast." That's their name for what they want to do.
Don't forget he's using the Internet, formerly government funded and the product of a DARPA research grant to disseminate his message.
I want the data to last for ever. The media? Meh. 10-20 years is probably enough. I'm guessing before long everything I have will be on a backed up harddrive and transferred from one to the next every five years.
If you read the comments to the linked article, you will see several other suggestions. But if I was the developer, there is no way I'd give away control over what I wrote just to try to wrest control from a third party. Frankly, given the options of giving the code to the FSF or letting CherryOS do whatever it wants, I'd pick the latter. Fortunately he has other options.
This comes up everytime and you are painting with a very broad brush, but: Suing a company who has infringed your copyright and is using your work to make money: Good Suing your fans and potential customers, people who may be checking out which music to buy, and in any case are not making money off it: Within your legal rights but very stupid and shortsighted.
Why should he give his code to another company, even if it is one you trust, to get fair representation? FSF may not deal with this, but another organization interested in preserving the "sanctity" of the GPL might without any demand for the copyright of the code.
But, isn't it kind of like a touch-pad? I find my touchpad gives me a lot more trouble (pain in the hands) than a mouse.
I think I've e-mailed the editor about a "future" story three times. Twice were about corrections to the story. Those were accepted. Once was about a duplicate. I assume many people must e-mail about duplicates. I can only assume they post duplicates on purpose or really, really don't care.
If you do SCOX on the NY Times site, you get Sciax Corp, a penny OTC stock.