Nothing Linus did in v1.0 was innovative enough for a patent. Linus was a college student who couldn't afford the fees to apply for a patent let alone the attorney fees to push it through. Software patents aren't like submitting a patent for a cat exercise tool you're going to require an attorney so that the patent is properly worded if/when it comes to a lawsuit. When Linus tries to force a company to not use his invention in a closed source product he has just entered into a $2 million lawsuit over a technology he makes no money from.
Copyright is free and the GPL is a license worked on and fine tuned by one of the best Constitutional law scholars out there. All Linus has to do is write code and add the license to it and viola his code can't be subsumed by any closed source product unless they get him to relicense the code.
So yes, rward there it does make sense that F/OSS proponents can be so for copyright and so against software patents.
Even if it cost you a $130. You've said it yourself. You know nothing about linux but you essentially want to tackle turning your laptop into an embedded device. You're also trying to poll/. to find/create a solution for you. If you screw up the patitioning on your cf card do we get a new Ask Slashdot article?
Buy the drive, learn a thing or two about linux and then research this down the road. Honestly, this is the best advice I can give you.
Well seeing that people have confirmed that the fix you link to is implemented by the current patch I went to the Internet Storm Center and read the handler diary. Some site has exploit code which will work even after the patch is applied. Now just have to figure out what's being exploited now. And once again, I must break out into song...
"There's a hole in the browser. Dear Liza, dear Liza. There's a hole in the browser. Dear Liza, a hole!"
Oh come on. A little aerobic exercise break during the day is good for you. Get the blood going as you sprint to the PC, stretch those fingers out with some manual dexterity exercises... Oh and don't forget the primal scream therapy those IT guys are providing you for free.
Admit it. Those updates just let you know IT is looking out for you!
Don't get me started on Windows Update. My PC at home just got a trojan and after cleaning it up I found the following. Windows Update said I was up-to-date on all patches. I wasn't. MBSA said I was up-to-date and I wasn't. Trying to get the patch I was bounced between the advisory and the page saying I should use Windows Update to download the patch. What a farce.
This is the first time I've ever been tempted to buy a Mac. I'd go straight to Linux if I could but my wife's working on her Master's and the programs she requires are only available on Windows or MacOS.
I did. And I shouldn't have to be a patent lawyer to determine if a patent is valid or not! I just need to be sufficiently skilled in the art and capable of recreating the invention by *gasp* RTFP! And even if I can't that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion or have experience with another product that makes me believe the patent is bogus.
And what does Apple having patents have anything to do with anything? Like I'm going to enjoy another frivolous software patent just because it was probably typed on translucent lime colored paper.
Why isn't it obvious? One of the flaws with a taskbar is that if you have too many applications running your taskbar becomes nothing more than a non-descript button bar. There's only so many ways you can resolve this problem. Tooltips, autosizing the taskbar so the buttons are descriptive again and *gasp* grouping the buttons to free up real estate.
I haven't seen a grouping yet that was particuliarly innovative. How about grouping by interrealtion? I group an Excel spreasheet together a Word document because they are sharing data and are obviously one task. I'm copying and pasting between IE and PowerPoint for a presentation. Shouldn't they be grouped together instead of all my IE session including the unrelated/. and Groklaw windows?
So no, I don't this stuff as non-obvious or innovative. Nor am I saying "I hate MS" for doing this. I'm saying it's a dumb patent.
The guy in the article was discussing both Linux and Windows kernels and how one difference is that Windows handles windowing in the kernel. Go back and ReRTFA.
As my HellRaiser joke falls totally flat.... I even had an ephiphany of Daddy Daycare meets HellRaiser and PinHead saying "Kristie. Use the box. Use the box!"
Bull. More like he doesn't have time to waste and was counting on the recruiter to seperate the wheat from the chaff for him. There's also the issue that the canidate would obviously be in over his head. Depending on the vibe I got from the canidate I personally may be more civil and take the time to explain he needs more experience and be a little more realistic on his resume but often people trying to excessively puff themselves up on a resume are being dishonest and I don't think that is a quality that you want in a security engineer.
That said, I have been in the opposite position of applying for a security engineering position and it wasn't what the company really wanted. I had done my research on the company, did some more research on the skill set a security engineer needed and tailored my resume for the job. I passed it by some consulting associates of mine and they gave me a few suggestions some I took and others I just felt I couldn't do. A lot of my experience was indirectly related to security. Setting up an MRTG box to troubleshoot WAN links, postmaster duties and resolving open relay issues, work on VPNs and a CheckPoint firewall, obligatory use of a sniffer and my recent duty of setting up policy and procedure for patching servers. Nothing outstanding imho but pertinent and more importantly honest. I didn't want to get grilled and looked like a haughty ass.
So I get to the interview and five minutes into the discussion it's obvious they want someone who can be a Security Officer. The skillset they wanted was managerial and required a great deal more business and legal acumen than I possessed. No hands-on, lots of selling the company's security initiative to middle management, etc.. I stuck through the entire interview for the experience and in another life the job would have been rewarding but it wasn't for me.
I really wished they had been more honest about the job description though. In any event, Kope's way of handling that situation is severe but in a round-about way I can understand where it comes from.
Yeah I have to agree with pretty much everything. But I think the biggest problem is the CV's lack of focus and formatting. Honestly it was too hard to get to the stuff I needed to know. Rip out the languages/platforms/misc. skills from the experience section and keep them in the skills section where they belong. They're redundant and waste space. Use that freed space to get a quip in on how his work benefitted his place of employment. If he saved or made the company money it goes there! It's also too informal.
Nix other interests and move the language skills up. Also, the formatting is "stringy" especially the education section which goes on and on and on. With the pictures gone he can make better utilization of the space.
Disclaimer: This is from my perspective living in the US. I don't know how job hunting works in other countries. Maybe I'm totally off on the informal style.
There has been more than one intern at my company who has been able to come out of the deal with practical experience they can put on a resume. I worked on Project X which saved company Y $Z. They also came away with a few references. And all of them were paid - more than minimum wage. Some do get hired full-time though I admit not many. Employment here is stable and we're not expanding the department.
And quite a few here just get paid, do their stint and are gone. That's life. They had the opprotunity and what they make of it is their business. So you go roll on the floor. Your future boss is stepping over you to work at her internship.
Yeah, I have to agree. The 7920s work great. Heck, even the SpectraLink phones do a good job though I prefer the 7920s because they display more information as they boot up. Having a SpectraLink show 'No Net Found' when the solution is restarting a tftp service on the Call Manager is kind of obtuse. With the 7920 you can at least see it is authenticating to the AP instead of having to use a tool like AirMagnet.
But in the article it appears this guy is trying to do VoIP on a laptop or PC and the first question that popped into my mind was did the device have a DSP card in place or was it doing everything in software. From the admittedily little I've seen it makes a huge difference in performance. Of course the other obvious issue is QoS but that is already getting a lot of discussion here and I don't have anything more to add.
According to various example implementations of the invention, a task list facilitates code development by assisting developers in keeping track of and managing a variety of tasks, such as errors to be corrected, opportunities for optimization, and other user-defined tasks. As the developer edits source code, warnings and coding errors are detected and inserted as tasks in a task list. The developer can also embed keywords known as comment tokens in the code. These comment tokens are detected and used to define tasks.
I've read through the patent and noticed that it covered real-time updates to the list. Now when I first read the article I was moritified because it seemed obvious you could code this in a shell script. Then I read the patent and found the real time issue. As IANAP I want to ask those who are just how difficult is adding the real-time component?
The difference is borrowing ideas and utilizing standards is not the same as misappropriating code. Lots of copying goes on between closed source software just look at the various GUIs out there.
The problem is Mr Brown (anybody else envision an evil twin to Paddington Bear when they hear that?) doesn't accept the axiom that software development leverages other works to build better software. Ugh. That wasn't well articulated and I can't figure out a how to phrase it better atm.
Anyway, when I read his words I almost envision that what Ken wants out of linux is a bibliography noting that Unix and Minix was an inspiration and because there was obvious influence by the ideas behind the implementation of these OSes that Linus somehow should never have been allowed to use them without properly compensating AT&T or Prentice Hall (note that atm I don't see anything out of Ken's mouth about compensating Prof. Tanenbaum.)
Personally I don't find Mr. Brown's line of reasoning very compelling.
Like a GPL project can't be developed with tracked source contributions or that a BSD project could not misappropriate commercial code. Hybrid Source is such a misnomer that it isn't even funny. If you have misappropriated proprietary code into a GPL'd product it is no longer GPL'd.
It just goes on and on. I could write a frickin' paper on this if only I had the time.
It's the principle of the matter. Providing a forum for MS to present it's PR on a site devoted to promoting Linux is kinda self-defeating imho. As is patronage of that site since it helps up their impression count which dictates their ad rates and ability to draw in advertisers. By visiting the site a person reinforces MS' desire to place those ads and the current owners of Linux Today to take their money.
You either buy into it or you don't for whatever reason. fwiw, personally I don't think Linux Today provides such an indispensable service that I can overlook it's owners providing MS' "FUD" prime ad space for a quick buck so I'll boycott.
fwiw, I always thought that The Clueless Newbie's Guide would be a funny series but I think it's already been done. And quite honestly I never considered such a title insulting since everybody starts off as a clueless newbie at some time or another.
In any event, there is another way to view the For Dummies series - as reader friendly. If it can explain a topic like linux even to a dummy it can obviously explain it to an average Joe interested in the subject. Gotta make for a better read than a man page.
Well I guess someone here has obviously read "The Pontificating Windbag's Guide for Composing Laments on Niggling Contentions"
Sorry, don't get the rant. Always saw the series' titles as being tounge-in-cheek instead of some condemnation of the target audience. Maybe that's because 99% of the time I don't have a bug up my butt over the issue. In any event, picking up a book to learn something new isn't an indication someone is a dummy but someone turning a condenscending eye towards them is a sure sign that a person is an ass.
Slashdot Mirror
Copyright is free and the GPL is a license worked on and fine tuned by one of the best Constitutional law scholars out there. All Linus has to do is write code and add the license to it and viola his code can't be subsumed by any closed source product unless they get him to relicense the code.
So yes, rward there it does make sense that F/OSS proponents can be so for copyright and so against software patents.
Buy the drive, learn a thing or two about linux and then research this down the road. Honestly, this is the best advice I can give you.
"There's a hole in the browser. Dear Liza, dear Liza. There's a hole in the browser. Dear Liza, a hole!"
Admit it. Those updates just let you know IT is looking out for you!
This is the first time I've ever been tempted to buy a Mac. I'd go straight to Linux if I could but my wife's working on her Master's and the programs she requires are only available on Windows or MacOS.
And what does Apple having patents have anything to do with anything? Like I'm going to enjoy another frivolous software patent just because it was probably typed on translucent lime colored paper.
I haven't seen a grouping yet that was particuliarly innovative. How about grouping by interrealtion? I group an Excel spreasheet together a Word document because they are sharing data and are obviously one task. I'm copying and pasting between IE and PowerPoint for a presentation. Shouldn't they be grouped together instead of all my IE session including the unrelated /. and Groklaw windows?
So no, I don't this stuff as non-obvious or innovative. Nor am I saying "I hate MS" for doing this. I'm saying it's a dumb patent.
The guy in the article was discussing both Linux and Windows kernels and how one difference is that Windows handles windowing in the kernel. Go back and ReRTFA.
I really must stop watching Comedy Central.
As my HellRaiser joke falls totally flat.... I even had an ephiphany of Daddy Daycare meets HellRaiser and PinHead saying "Kristie. Use the box. Use the box!"
That said, I have been in the opposite position of applying for a security engineering position and it wasn't what the company really wanted. I had done my research on the company, did some more research on the skill set a security engineer needed and tailored my resume for the job. I passed it by some consulting associates of mine and they gave me a few suggestions some I took and others I just felt I couldn't do. A lot of my experience was indirectly related to security. Setting up an MRTG box to troubleshoot WAN links, postmaster duties and resolving open relay issues, work on VPNs and a CheckPoint firewall, obligatory use of a sniffer and my recent duty of setting up policy and procedure for patching servers. Nothing outstanding imho but pertinent and more importantly honest. I didn't want to get grilled and looked like a haughty ass.
So I get to the interview and five minutes into the discussion it's obvious they want someone who can be a Security Officer. The skillset they wanted was managerial and required a great deal more business and legal acumen than I possessed. No hands-on, lots of selling the company's security initiative to middle management, etc.. I stuck through the entire interview for the experience and in another life the job would have been rewarding but it wasn't for me.
I really wished they had been more honest about the job description though. In any event, Kope's way of handling that situation is severe but in a round-about way I can understand where it comes from.
Tell you what. You explain that to my 3 year old. His crying will bring you suffering that will be legendary. Even in Hell!
Nix other interests and move the language skills up. Also, the formatting is "stringy" especially the education section which goes on and on and on. With the pictures gone he can make better utilization of the space.
Disclaimer: This is from my perspective living in the US. I don't know how job hunting works in other countries. Maybe I'm totally off on the informal style.
And quite a few here just get paid, do their stint and are gone. That's life. They had the opprotunity and what they make of it is their business. So you go roll on the floor. Your future boss is stepping over you to work at her internship.
You mean like this?
But in the article it appears this guy is trying to do VoIP on a laptop or PC and the first question that popped into my mind was did the device have a DSP card in place or was it doing everything in software. From the admittedily little I've seen it makes a huge difference in performance. Of course the other obvious issue is QoS but that is already getting a lot of discussion here and I don't have anything more to add.
Sorry, those are actually all frownies and have been trademarked. Microsoft would be sued for diluting the brand.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
According to various example implementations of the invention, a task list facilitates code development by assisting developers in keeping track of and managing a variety of tasks, such as errors to be corrected, opportunities for optimization, and other user-defined tasks. As the developer edits source code, warnings and coding errors are detected and inserted as tasks in a task list. The developer can also embed keywords known as comment tokens in the code. These comment tokens are detected and used to define tasks.
TIA
The problem is Mr Brown (anybody else envision an evil twin to Paddington Bear when they hear that?) doesn't accept the axiom that software development leverages other works to build better software. Ugh. That wasn't well articulated and I can't figure out a how to phrase it better atm.
Anyway, when I read his words I almost envision that what Ken wants out of linux is a bibliography noting that Unix and Minix was an inspiration and because there was obvious influence by the ideas behind the implementation of these OSes that Linus somehow should never have been allowed to use them without properly compensating AT&T or Prentice Hall (note that atm I don't see anything out of Ken's mouth about compensating Prof. Tanenbaum.)
Personally I don't find Mr. Brown's line of reasoning very compelling.
My question is what do you do to naughty network traffic? Do you scold it, give it a time out or do you tie it up and make it your slave?
It just goes on and on. I could write a frickin' paper on this if only I had the time.
You either buy into it or you don't for whatever reason. fwiw, personally I don't think Linux Today provides such an indispensable service that I can overlook it's owners providing MS' "FUD" prime ad space for a quick buck so I'll boycott.
In any event, there is another way to view the For Dummies series - as reader friendly. If it can explain a topic like linux even to a dummy it can obviously explain it to an average Joe interested in the subject. Gotta make for a better read than a man page.
Sorry, don't get the rant. Always saw the series' titles as being tounge-in-cheek instead of some condemnation of the target audience. Maybe that's because 99% of the time I don't have a bug up my butt over the issue. In any event, picking up a book to learn something new isn't an indication someone is a dummy but someone turning a condenscending eye towards them is a sure sign that a person is an ass.