Funny thing is... only americans have ever targeted american schools...
Well its not "Funny", its interesting how "attacks on schools" are such a cliche against foreign terrorism, when its just never ever happened that way, maps or no maps.
In this respect, google earth like services would play a better role in confusing terrorists if the US can figure out from time to time from where does a cell connect.
In that knowledge, a MITM attack on their google earth could send them to attack an ambushed site.
Now THATS THINKING.
Banning maps is NOT THINKING. Thats just being an idiot.
And the CIA world factbook, and the US constitution while we are at it.
Also, the bible seems to stir up the terrorists pretty much, lets forbid it too!
Hey, also, the TV series "24" should be marked as munnition with export controls so that the terrorists cannot prepare themselves to what a CIA operative does!
ORM was there WAY, WAY, WAY before that. This is just plain stupid and a microsoft proxy war that will brew GREAT PR for Red Hat and probably put one more nail in the coffin of sw patents.
Its the fault of the government asshole making some dough on the side by choosing a provider without making sure that they comply with what should be minimal government procurement practice for public facing electronic trading.
Okay, the guy deserves respect, so here it is: R E S P E C T for Scott, a true father of the net, a civil libertarian.
THere, now onto the matter at hand: why the fuck would McNeally get Obama's ear on open source if he isnt really a guy behind the community or that wants ANYTHING ELSE than a better-doing Sun Microsystems?
My point is that I would be happyest if some LINUX company would lead that kind of lobby effort and not some guy that only wants his company to come back from the dead.
Id claim that YOU didnt understand it. The fact that its not what Orwell thought does not mean the basic waivering and/or takeaway of rights is different.
You claim that "our cammeras point both ways" and that government does not have control... I dont mean just the government (who can or not be a control freak), I mean the corporations AND the government.
"We" have a conscience. I mean you and I do. But WE, the average consumer, do not. We couldnt care less if facebook can tag your ass and be used as a very nice way to do face recongnition elsewhere (and theyll be selling that data in a second), we dont give a fuck if ourd ata is searched and COPIED by customs officials into some hardrive deep inside the airport.
First of all: Schneier is not "like" chuck norris. He IS chuck norris.
Having said that, I think that someone "up there" needs to start listening to this guy: we are on the verge of big brother and we happily go online and pay for some old gizmo on ebay.
Tomorrow, ebay will give us automatic sign-on with our webcam. We will tout it as "great" and think nothing of them having our pic along all the data of what we buy or not, our credit record will go to banks, which will then be able to cross-refference it all and then serve it to the government because "we are in danger" (we are always in enough danger to be fucked in our rights for some reason or another).
Senseless: it doesnt work this way because america COULD if she WANTED be the biggest FOSS engine in the world and still kick into the european market.
You confuse microsoft with your country: What a shame.
I think that if you want to protect your software implementation, then you can use copyright (which protects the stuff YOU WROTE).
Software patents try to protect a USE-CASE of a given software (which is only a set of instructions), instead of the work and creativity of writing said software. Im completely against this kind of protection to software because, as ive said, there is ALWAYS more than one way to "DO" something that some software does.
The WAY to do it, can be protected by simply using copyright law (since that is "encoded" in a computational language and its WRITTEN), the PURPOSE of a particular piece of code SHOULD NOT BE PROTECTABLE, and that what software patents attempt to do.
Sure, id have no problem with you patenting a given set of bits youve discovered does something. But only that very particular set of bits and nothing else.
What you see MS tries to do is patenting a USE-CASE of a particular set of bits. Id have no problem of them patenting their IMPLEMENTATION (but then, thats why we have copyright law), not THE USES of the result of their implementation.
Its like if we let Ford patent the way someone should push the accelerator in a car and let them sue say, John Dear for using the same "method".
Slashdot Mirror
Funny thing is... only americans have ever targeted american schools...
Well its not "Funny", its interesting how "attacks on schools" are such a cliche against foreign terrorism, when its just never ever happened that way, maps or no maps.
See now, this is an idea. Seriously.
In this respect, google earth like services would play a better role in confusing terrorists if the US can figure out from time to time from where does a cell connect.
In that knowledge, a MITM attack on their google earth could send them to attack an ambushed site.
Now THATS THINKING.
Banning maps is NOT THINKING. Thats just being an idiot.
I was in very very very "high" school and got to SURFem!
And the CIA world factbook, and the US constitution while we are at it.
Also, the bible seems to stir up the terrorists pretty much, lets forbid it too!
Hey, also, the TV series "24" should be marked as munnition with export controls so that the terrorists cannot prepare themselves to what a CIA operative does!
Shall we go on?
Yes, you are right!
Who can even think that Microsoft would EVER do this!
Its not like they ever tried this befo....
Really? Is that your argument?
Well... apparently you havent seen the way microsoft conducts "bussiness". This is the second attack on FOSS this year by Microsoft.
They got awarded this patent 8 years ago!
ORM was there WAY, WAY, WAY before that. This is just plain stupid and a microsoft proxy war that will brew GREAT PR for Red Hat and probably put one more nail in the coffin of sw patents.
Hey hey, this is no troll.
Its the fault of the government asshole making some dough on the side by choosing a provider without making sure that they comply with what should be minimal government procurement practice for public facing electronic trading.
Same in portugal as anywhere i guess.
It fucking sucks, its encumbered, no standard at all and you need to give your ass to MS to develop a port for it.
You know it since you work for microsoft.
...an army of assholes pretending to deffend america through the assertion of unreasonable "property" rights.
In 3, 2, 1.... contact.
Okay, the guy deserves respect, so here it is: R E S P E C T for Scott, a true father of the net, a civil libertarian.
THere, now onto the matter at hand: why the fuck would McNeally get Obama's ear on open source if he isnt really a guy behind the community or that wants ANYTHING ELSE than a better-doing Sun Microsystems?
My point is that I would be happyest if some LINUX company would lead that kind of lobby effort and not some guy that only wants his company to come back from the dead.
I smell treachery.
Id claim that YOU didnt understand it. The fact that its not what Orwell thought does not mean the basic waivering and/or takeaway of rights is different.
You claim that "our cammeras point both ways" and that government does not have control... I dont mean just the government (who can or not be a control freak), I mean the corporations AND the government.
"We" have a conscience. I mean you and I do. But WE, the average consumer, do not. We couldnt care less if facebook can tag your ass and be used as a very nice way to do face recongnition elsewhere (and theyll be selling that data in a second), we dont give a fuck if ourd ata is searched and COPIED by customs officials into some hardrive deep inside the airport.
We have a conscience... right!
First of all: Schneier is not "like" chuck norris. He IS chuck norris.
Having said that, I think that someone "up there" needs to start listening to this guy: we are on the verge of big brother and we happily go online and pay for some old gizmo on ebay.
Tomorrow, ebay will give us automatic sign-on with our webcam. We will tout it as "great" and think nothing of them having our pic along all the data of what we buy or not, our credit record will go to banks, which will then be able to cross-refference it all and then serve it to the government because "we are in danger" (we are always in enough danger to be fucked in our rights for some reason or another).
We deserve what we get.
We need concience.
Senseless: it doesnt work this way because america COULD if she WANTED be the biggest FOSS engine in the world and still kick into the european market.
You confuse microsoft with your country: What a shame.
It supports ITIL processing well. Thats all I meant.
BTW, this is as a (free) add-on, its not on the base install.
Yadda yadda: it support itil clearly.
Happy?
otrs is ITIL compliant, has a webservice interface and generally rocks.
We use them and so should many others.
Another great one, but really complicated to deploy, is RT.... but its pretty cool, its what CERT uses AFAIK.
Well, no.
I think that if you want to protect your software implementation, then you can use copyright (which protects the stuff YOU WROTE).
Software patents try to protect a USE-CASE of a given software (which is only a set of instructions), instead of the work and creativity of writing said software. Im completely against this kind of protection to software because, as ive said, there is ALWAYS more than one way to "DO" something that some software does.
The WAY to do it, can be protected by simply using copyright law (since that is "encoded" in a computational language and its WRITTEN), the PURPOSE of a particular piece of code SHOULD NOT BE PROTECTABLE, and that what software patents attempt to do.
Care to post that in spanish?
Well it works fine, my friend. If it didnt, Microsoft wouldnt be sueing.... yes?
Sure, id have no problem with you patenting a given set of bits youve discovered does something. But only that very particular set of bits and nothing else.
What you see MS tries to do is patenting a USE-CASE of a particular set of bits. Id have no problem of them patenting their IMPLEMENTATION (but then, thats why we have copyright law), not THE USES of the result of their implementation.
Its like if we let Ford patent the way someone should push the accelerator in a car and let them sue say, John Dear for using the same "method".
Ayanami is not a lesbian, you insensitive clod.
On the other hand, Shinji clearly was...
Lets see... the ability to run two operating systems on a thing thats good for email, webbrowsing and phone calls (sometimes, other handheld apps).
Nope, cant think of anything usefull for this.
Cant read a thing of that.