Having something to hide isn't the only reason why IBM might say they can't find the source.
Uh, like, maybe they can't find the source code? The only thing IBM is trying to hide is that they're a huge corporation without total control over every little thing their people do, and that their people sometimes lose things. Valueable things. I'll bet the person who knows/knew where the source is quit or transferred long ago. It's probably on a backup tape in a warehouse somewhere, like what happend to the Arc at the end of that Indiana Jones movie.
Unfortunately you can't sue, because nothing's happened yet. Well, you can sue, but you won't win as they've done nothing wrong. Once their system is hacked and your data is buying boob implants in Paris, then you'll have a case.
You're right. By my reading, if you want to distribute a work that doesn't pass the test, you can. You just have to include the test it doesn't pass. If it now suits your purposes despite failing the test, so what?
Screw Sun, my "Java" now runs Fortran!
I don't think that's what Sun intends, so I don't think this wording is anything close to the final license.
No one saying that if this is open sourced someone can't take it and do a clone under a different license (which would be more compatible than say GIJ).
Fine, just don't call your "clone" Java if it doesn't pass the Java test suite. What's needed here isn't a new open source license but rather a license on the trademark 'Java.' Why would Sun care if you (defectively) "clone" Java, as long as you don't try to pass it off as Java?
As for bugs in the test suite, I can think of two ways to handle this. First, use versioning so if Java X.Y has bugs you can switch to Java X.Z. Second, craft the test suite such that the tests are the defining authority for what constitutes "Java".
For historical reference, this would be much like the IBM EGA video "standard". The original IBM EGA card didn't meet the EGA spec, and hardware makers soon found that cards meeting the EGA spec wouldn't work because all the software was written to run on the (out-of-spec) IBM hardware. So all EGA clones soon conformed to the REAL "standard" by duplicating the flaws in IBM's original EGA card. I'm sure if there were a significant bug like this in Java, the bug would become part of the "standard" -- which would all be a non-issue if indeed the tests ARE the "standard."
Form a company to own the domain, and register it in the name of that company. That way if someone really needs to find you they can, but it will take some work (they'll have to find where you incorporated and then find your name in that paperwork). That should keep the spammers away -- they hate real work.
OK, this is posting so late that I doubt anyone will read it, but...
Thin clients are nice, and I was a proponent back in 1990 or so, but my thinking has evolved: My vision now is a distributed file system based on freenet. Your data wouldn't necessisarily reside on your computer (although it could be cached locally, so you could work off-line, as with a laptop). Rather, your data would be broken up and the parts redundantly stored out on the network... somewhere. To your PC this network data store looks like one huge disk. Redundancy is key, as it allows any one machine to crash without losing anyone's data, essentially eliminating the need for backups. The security Freenet provides is also key, as it prevents one from examining other's files on one's PC. There's no longer a need for file servers. If you need more disk space, upgrade the PCs with the smallest drives. The data on those old drives is backed up elsewhere, so all you need do is swap out the drive and re-image the new one with your baseline install. With this scheme your IT costs will go down, guaranteed.
To the subject at hand: Take this a step further and have your PC boot off this network data store, as if it were an NFS server. You can now crash your PC and not lose a damn thing, right down to the volume setting, if you choose.
The general/. consensus seems to be that blacklisting entire ISPs to block one spammer is OK, so why would it not be just as OK to block entire ISPs to stop one troll?
Why is this modded "funny"? If I ran an internet forum, the first thing I'd do is block AOL access. If you're feeling especially nice you could divert them to a special "AOL only" page that tells them how to find a real ISP. Friends don't let friends use AOL
Sounds like what's needed is a moderation system that flags the trolls (X troll moderations in Y days == Troll, no matter how many insiteful mods they get). Trolls are then banned, but in a sneeky way: The trolls can still post, and when they check the forum they see their posts, but when anyone else logs on the trolls are hidden. That way the trolls think they're posting and wonder why nobody replies; then they go away because your forum is no fun anymore.
Of course, to make this work you have to ban anonymous posting...
I didn't vote to illegally invade a nation that posed no immediate threat to us, while claiming they did. Bush did that, so yes, I do blame him. He turned USA policy on it's ear and now we're (or rather, he's) international criminals.
And I did not vote for Bush in the last election, and I'm not on the Supreme Court, so don't blame me for that, either.
OK, I admit you're right: my house is big enough. But I don't want my electronics scattered through all the rooms. Our familyroom has a typical TV armoire, with the TV above shelves for the other components, CDs, DVDs, and tapes. Currently it holds a reciever, VCR, and Xbox. There's maybe room for one more component, but I'd have to add a shelf and then there may be cooling issues. If I do add one more thing, it would be a PVR (TiVo), and I'd need a new reciever as well, as its inputs are all taken. Add a second game console? Forget it!
Well, it makes a heck of a difference to me whether I need to have "1 or 2 additional consoles." My house isn't big enough for a console collection.
If the XB2 won't play my XB1 games, forcing me to have two consoles, then the second one might as well be a PS3 (or even PS2!). If the XB2 won't play my XB1 games then it has to be far and away better than the PS3 or I won't have one (fool me once...). If the XB2 plays XB1 games then I'm almost certain to buy one, regardless of how it stacks up against the PS3, because I really don't want two consoles. I don't know how many others are like me, but it's a large enough market that Sony made the PS2 play PS1 games. I hope Microsoft is smart enough to figure this out.
How about putting a trickle charger on the "auxilary" car battery? You can get one at any auto parts store, or maybe even Target. Then the UPS isn't charging the battery, just discharging it through its inverter. If this is indeed for a temporary fix through hurricane season, you could use auto jumper cables to connect the UPS's battery to the car battery. You'd have to take the UPS out of its case to expose the battery terminals, so you'd expose all the circuits. Keep the cat away, but it should work.
Then what's the problem with the GPL? If elm and pine and all the rest will work with senderID as-is -- if it's purely a mail server thing -- then what's the problem? I have zero control over what software Comcast uses to provide me my email, and frankly I don't care if they use something from Microsoft or something open, as long as it works. If you're an ISP and you want to use non-Microsoft software, then you should be on the front lines fighting this patent nonsense, but if it doesn't affect the rest of us, so what?
But now I'm troubled by the notion that Comcast will (or will not) assign me a senderID whether (or not) I want them to.
Unfortunately, Microsoft Outlook and Outlook Express have a huge market share. My brother, for example, uses it/them. So what am I supposed to do when my brother's email program refuses to accept my emails because I don't use the same mailer that he uses? How can I even email him to explain myself? For all I know, he won't even see that my email came in marked as "spam", he'll just wonder why I never send emails anymore.
That's my fundimental objection to all these anti-spam kludges (and that's what they are, kludges): they only work if everyone adopts the same kludge.
It may be poor form to reply to your own post, but I feel I must clarify this business of "non-transferable." OK, so IANAL, but as I read it, Microsoft is saying that if you create product X then you cannot transfer your license to Microsoft's patents to the author of product Y. It does say you can transfer the patent license to users of your code. Specifically [section 2.5]:
By way of clarification, in order for a third party to distribute a Licensed Implementation as part of its third party branded products, such party must be authorized to do so by You and must also execute this license and comply with its terms.
As I read that, if someone takes your product X and makes their product Y, they must have your permission (the GPL gives them this permission), and they must follow the terms of Microsoft's patent license (and I see nothing in the GPL that prevents this).
I'm sorry, I don't follow. How does MS asking you to mention their patent in your source cause any problem for the GPL? The GPL is quite clear that individual users must not need to apply for a patent license; that license must be royalty-free and transferable to anyone who uses the GPL'd code. Period. Microsoft's patent license appears to be royalty-free and transferable. They want their patent license in close proximity to your software license -- that's OK by the GPL, just bundle the two text files with your source, as you today bundle the GPL text file with your source.
Why is it that things are not still evolving? Why don't we see new and strage species cropping up all the time?
We do! How do you think diseases become drug resistant?
Is everything perfect now?
Yes. But everything's changing, too. That's why I consider it perfect -- it adapts (via evolution) to the changes. The change is what drives the system and gives it its perfection. Just because the change happens too slowly for you to notice doesn't mean it's not there.
Why don't people have 4 arms? I know that this would be a great feature that would make dificult work much easier.
Evolution doesn't happen the way you seem to think it happens.
There are insects with six legs why don't they evolve from an exoskeleton to in internal skeleton so they can grow bigger?
Because they don't need to. Again, evolution doesn't work the way you seem to think it works. Or wish it worked, so you could debunk it. But you're right, if evolution worked the way you think it works, it wouldn't work.
I realize that everything has its place and there are cycles, but what I am getting at is why has another animal not evolved with inteligence?
They have, and homo sapiens killed them off.
Why do dogs that have lived with humans for thousands of years not evolved into a more inteligent being to be able to communicate with us better.
They have! They can communicate with us just fine -- much better than wolves, for example.
Evolution is a great theory an it explains some environmental factors but it farfrom explains everything.
"Creationists" are the only people I know who insist that evolution must explain everything or it fails; are you a member of that group? Gravity doesn't explain quantum physics, yet nobody says that because of this "failure" gravity must not exist. Well, maybe nobody says that, I dunno -- do you say that, too?
No, we don't have to bitch about dupes, but it's fun! And while the Slashdot "editors" have made it clear they favour dupes, we readers are making it equally clear that we don't.
I'm sure the "editors" prefer us bitching about the dupes to us bitching about the crappy job they do as "editors". Oh, wait...
Do all copy-protected games have a warning on the box so you can easily avoid them? No? Then how can I "simply [not] buy their product"?I'll gladly not buy their product, if I can avoid it.
I just checked. The parent is the only post that complains about the vCard. Other mention it, but this is the first to complain about it. How is that "redundant"?
1) A "mere millionaire" is not someone making a million a year, it's someone who has a million. They could be unemployed and starving yet living in a house that's worth a million.
2) A 747 costs well over a hundred million, yet I can afford to fly on one. The airlines don't make you buy the airplane before they'll give you a ticket, and I see no reason why space travel will be any different.
Slashdot Mirror
The link works, but Slashcode added an extra space in the text. That's supposed to read "goodtobeindc" not "goodto beindc."
That's just how our system works, sorry.
Depends on what you mean by "reasonable care or diligence." I'll bet the Powers That Be believe that the RIAA is reasonable.
Screw Sun, my "Java" now runs Fortran!
I don't think that's what Sun intends, so I don't think this wording is anything close to the final license.
As for bugs in the test suite, I can think of two ways to handle this. First, use versioning so if Java X.Y has bugs you can switch to Java X.Z. Second, craft the test suite such that the tests are the defining authority for what constitutes "Java".
For historical reference, this would be much like the IBM EGA video "standard". The original IBM EGA card didn't meet the EGA spec, and hardware makers soon found that cards meeting the EGA spec wouldn't work because all the software was written to run on the (out-of-spec) IBM hardware. So all EGA clones soon conformed to the REAL "standard" by duplicating the flaws in IBM's original EGA card. I'm sure if there were a significant bug like this in Java, the bug would become part of the "standard" -- which would all be a non-issue if indeed the tests ARE the "standard."
Form a company to own the domain, and register it in the name of that company. That way if someone really needs to find you they can, but it will take some work (they'll have to find where you incorporated and then find your name in that paperwork). That should keep the spammers away -- they hate real work.
Thin clients are nice, and I was a proponent back in 1990 or so, but my thinking has evolved: My vision now is a distributed file system based on freenet. Your data wouldn't necessisarily reside on your computer (although it could be cached locally, so you could work off-line, as with a laptop). Rather, your data would be broken up and the parts redundantly stored out on the network... somewhere. To your PC this network data store looks like one huge disk. Redundancy is key, as it allows any one machine to crash without losing anyone's data, essentially eliminating the need for backups. The security Freenet provides is also key, as it prevents one from examining other's files on one's PC. There's no longer a need for file servers. If you need more disk space, upgrade the PCs with the smallest drives. The data on those old drives is backed up elsewhere, so all you need do is swap out the drive and re-image the new one with your baseline install. With this scheme your IT costs will go down, guaranteed.
To the subject at hand: Take this a step further and have your PC boot off this network data store, as if it were an NFS server. You can now crash your PC and not lose a damn thing, right down to the volume setting, if you choose.
Try that with Windows!
Gee, it says here that your name is "Anonymous Coward". Or is this you?
The general /. consensus seems to be that blacklisting entire ISPs to block one spammer is OK, so why would it not be just as OK to block entire ISPs to stop one troll?
Why is this modded "funny"? If I ran an internet forum, the first thing I'd do is block AOL access. If you're feeling especially nice you could divert them to a special "AOL only" page that tells them how to find a real ISP. Friends don't let friends use AOL
Of course, to make this work you have to ban anonymous posting...
I didn't vote to illegally invade a nation that posed no immediate threat to us, while claiming they did. Bush did that, so yes, I do blame him. He turned USA policy on it's ear and now we're (or rather, he's) international criminals.
And I did not vote for Bush in the last election, and I'm not on the Supreme Court, so don't blame me for that, either.
OK, I admit you're right: my house is big enough. But I don't want my electronics scattered through all the rooms. Our familyroom has a typical TV armoire, with the TV above shelves for the other components, CDs, DVDs, and tapes. Currently it holds a reciever, VCR, and Xbox. There's maybe room for one more component, but I'd have to add a shelf and then there may be cooling issues. If I do add one more thing, it would be a PVR (TiVo), and I'd need a new reciever as well, as its inputs are all taken. Add a second game console? Forget it!
If the XB2 won't play my XB1 games, forcing me to have two consoles, then the second one might as well be a PS3 (or even PS2!). If the XB2 won't play my XB1 games then it has to be far and away better than the PS3 or I won't have one (fool me once...). If the XB2 plays XB1 games then I'm almost certain to buy one, regardless of how it stacks up against the PS3, because I really don't want two consoles. I don't know how many others are like me, but it's a large enough market that Sony made the PS2 play PS1 games. I hope Microsoft is smart enough to figure this out.
How about putting a trickle charger on the "auxilary" car battery? You can get one at any auto parts store, or maybe even Target. Then the UPS isn't charging the battery, just discharging it through its inverter. If this is indeed for a temporary fix through hurricane season, you could use auto jumper cables to connect the UPS's battery to the car battery. You'd have to take the UPS out of its case to expose the battery terminals, so you'd expose all the circuits. Keep the cat away, but it should work.
But now I'm troubled by the notion that Comcast will (or will not) assign me a senderID whether (or not) I want them to.
That's my fundimental objection to all these anti-spam kludges (and that's what they are, kludges): they only work if everyone adopts the same kludge.
Seriously, what's the problem?
I'm sure the "editors" prefer us bitching about the dupes to us bitching about the crappy job they do as "editors". Oh, wait...
Do all copy-protected games have a warning on the box so you can easily avoid them? No? Then how can I "simply [not] buy their product"?I'll gladly not buy their product, if I can avoid it.
I just checked. The parent is the only post that complains about the vCard. Other mention it, but this is the first to complain about it. How is that "redundant"?
2) A 747 costs well over a hundred million, yet I can afford to fly on one. The airlines don't make you buy the airplane before they'll give you a ticket, and I see no reason why space travel will be any different.