Can we not figure out for ourselves what wine we like with salmon?
Actually I think that would be a great use for this technology - I often shop at a somewhat upscale grocery store that has 'experts' that recommend which wine to drink with what, or suggest a suitable side dish to have with a main...as long as the carts are 'programmed' with recommendations from people who know what they are talking about (instead of 'oh Suzy on aisle two drinks wine once in a while, let's use her choices') then I think that would be a great addition to my shopping experience.
And yes, I know what wine I like to have with most dishes (but not all), but trying different things (sometimes things I really wouldn't think would be good) is fun, and often illuminating.
not that I necessarily agree with the who needs radio (cuz I like it once in a while), but it'd be nice if Pete Tong (or whomever) could post a blog of his latest tunes 'picks' so I wouldn't have to traverse endless lists of downloadable music or listen to the radio for hours, hoping they say the song name after they play it before I can buy/download the latest 'new stuff'.
I have a 4.0 MP camera (and that is more than enough - I was very happy with my 3.2 MP for photographs. However there were many times when I wish I had it for some goofy situation that I'd love to take a quick snap of to laugh at later (or to see how to put something back together again).
640x480 is fine for some of those purposes so I bought a LG 6000.
You are right, 1.1 is useless for real photography (but then 2 years ago, real photographers were saying, and some still do, that digital cameras as a whole are useless for real photography), but "real photography" isn't the only use for camera, and the convenience of having a lower quality device available when you need is a bonus.
I love the way that people can interpret things that others say.
What s typical letter may read: Dear Microsoft,
Your product is full of security holes. If it was coded properly from the get go, would have have fewer critical holes and you wouldn't have to release patches EVERY week. This patch process is a pain for administrators and users alike.
Regards,
Babyrat
What Microsoft interprets it as:
You release too many patches too quickly. We'd rather have the security holes rather than have to patch our systems every week.
I wouldn't necessarily blame Joe Admin or Fred End-user for that comment from Microsoft.
Without seeing the actual survey questions I think that jumping to the conclusion that 16% of CIOs think that SCO's claims hold water.
The article merely said that the case caused them to re-evaluate.
Maybe those 16% re-evaluated and came to the conclusion they'd better implement NOW instead of waiting in case there is some sort of grandfather clause in the settlement stating that anyone who was using Linux before Oct. 31, 2003 wouldn't owe SCO anything.
OK this situation is unlikely but if the question was simply: "Has the SCO lawsuit caused you to re-evaluate your linux position" and some the PHCEO said to the CIO - "Hey - I've heard about a lawsuit, we OK?" and then the CIO digs around the internet, maybe calls a lawyer and decides that Linux it is OK to go ahead and implement Linux, he has technically re-evaluated and would probably answer that way on the survey, yet it hasn't stopped him from implementing Linux.
Did you read the article? It is almost exact parallel. No one is disputing that Edison did a bunch of good for society, and was an intelligent man, and a grea inventor, but the parallels between what he (his company) was doing with the movie industry and what the RIAA is doing with the music industry is pretty good.
for his accomplishments this "ordinary Joe" should be wealthier than oprah, but he ain't.
What's wealth got to do with winning? It sounds to me like Linus would be happier hanging out with his family in a cramped apartment coding on a 386 than most people are in mansions with dozens of toys to play with.
If you are happy doing what you are doing, then you've won. That he's happy doing what he's doing and has enough cash to afford a few toys is even better.
but without a system in place for fact-checking and followup
Maybe it's just me, but if you don't even want to take the time to look at the site in question, then you shouldn't be posting about it. Ooops forgot the Slashdot motto...
For instance, say a scandal breaks, but the politician in question is later exonerated because of a specific fact. Users can poll the system to see if that fact was logged, and find out who contributed that fact, and when they did, without knowing their real name. They can then rank the credibility of that contributor, and ask the system to notify them if he or she makes further contributions in the future. Thus, they can learn whether they trust or mistrust a contributor, while the contributor still retains anonymity.
A further feature of the site is that any subject of a submission -- whether individual, agency, or organization -- is notified of the submission, and asked to respond. They can confirm or deny the submission. It's important to note that, like an FBI file, submissions are not purged when denied -- the stakes are simply too high to do so. As with such files, subjects of spurious submissions who are nonetheless innocent have nothing to fear from GIA.
They're just telling you what risks are involved with using GPL'd software.
No they are not telling you the risks of using GPL'd software - they are telling you the risks of breaking license agreements and then portraying GPL license violations as different than any other license violations, which they are not. The ONLY thing they indicated are different is that sometimes the violations of the GPL can not be rectified by throwing money at them, as is generally the case with violations of commercial software ("oops we stole your code, here is the money that we would have had to pay you had we done things legally, and a bit extra for your trouble", versus "hey - we stomped all over your ideals with our unethical and illegal behaviour and money won't fix that, so we will stop redistribution or release our changes as dictated by the license")
Just out of curiosity, why don't more people release their code under the BSD license?
Because they believe in the terms of the GPL and that those are the terms that they choose? Personally I feel that if I create a program and release the source to the public (under some sort of license rather than the public domain) then I'd prefer the GPL - I like the idea that if someone improves the program and wants to distribute the improvements then they also have to distribute the source to those improvements. That really makes sense to me (epsecially if that someone is a commercial entity who is using my code as a base to make $$$).
Not sure why you are modd'ed funny, I don't think you were intending to be. Yes the whole thing is a little socialist - a little socialist isn't such a bad thing (ask any country who has government sponsored healthcare - OK ask anyone who isn't filthy rich in a country that has gov't sponsored healthcare). In this case it is better than a socialist gov't because there is no individual (or relatively small group of indiviudals) in a position to be 'corrupted' by the power, which is generally the weak point socialism.
The enforcement actions aren't draconion at all - the companies were pointed to their infraction and quitely given a chance (multiple chances) to comply. If they don't then it will go to a court of law. Absolutely no different than what would happen with software under any proprietary software license.
Furthermore before using the code, they could have decided to contact the original authors and negotiate a different license. If the copyright holder can be convinced, then the company could have the code released to them under a different set of licensing restrictions, just like normal commercial software.
what I want is an easy to use tool that will allow me to download the music that I want in a format that I can use (in my CD player, laptop, MP3 player, PVR, DVD player, cell phone, digital camera and whatever the next new fangled machine they come out with).
Kazaa is that tool - except I don't use it because the music that I want is copyrighted, thus illegal to download and use. If all of the sudden I could use that tool (even if it involves paying a fee) legally, I would.
4. Why should kazaa get money? They arent really providing the networking power or files, the people are. Real p2p networks like gnutella just cut out the middle man and will always be free.
And they will always be illegal, if you are downloading copyrighted music files.
What Kazaa is envisioning is that you use the tool you are currently using, pay a fee per download and have LEGAL distribution system, as opposed to an ILLEGAL one. I'd pay (a certain amount) for that. Kazaa would get a portion of the fee, and the rest would be divvied up like the blank CD and cassette royalties in Canada. Sounds like a great system to me...
Your points regarding the organization of the ISPs to get them to chrage the users on that level is probably correct - but there are certainly ways around the payment system.
The biggest problem would be getting the record companies to agree.
I'm all for innovation, but seriously, who needs a 300GB hard disks except for pr0n c0lLeCt0R5, warez d00ds and RAID junkies?
Please tell me you are kidding????
Having a 300 GB drive in my PVR machine would be great - and I wouldn't really worry about backing it up as if I lost the recorded show, it really wouldn't matter that much to me (some I'd want to save, but for most it really wouldn't matter at all).
I'd even like it for editing my miniDV tapes - wouldn't have to worry about doing (finishing) one project at a time because I need to clear out HD space to transfer the next tape. And if it failed, everything is still back on the miniDVs (the source and the finished edit) so I'd only lose the work in progress (not ideal, but not a catastrophe either)
I'm sure there are many other personal reasons that others would like to use a large disk for...I can think of about a dozen uses I could find for this in our office (ghost backups anyone???)
I wouldn't expect them to shoot themselves in the foot with changing somehting liek this in a service pack - if you broke something on Samba, you'd also be breaking it on every other client that wasn't upgraded to said Service Pack. if they did it on the client side, then no client could upgrade unless all the file servers were also upgraded.
Backwards compatibility issues work for the Samba team in this case.
I wouldn't expect them to be walled out for very long in any event.
Weel, if they settled, it did not get to court and Motevista did not 'win' it's case in court, just like the RIAA hasn't 'won' any of it's court cases against filesharers.
Without seeing the settlement agreement, we can 't tell whehter the GPL was invovled at all in the settlement. Settlement agreements can indicate no admission of wrongdoing - they merely state that the issue will be dropped by one party for the following concessions of the other party (generally $$$$)
You are absolutely correct, but on the other side of the coin, I refuse to buy from a company whose website does not function correctly when accessed with Mozilla, and I usually fire off feedback to the site indicating that.
Now if I could only get our 'intranet' people to listen...
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
It's my favourite movie...technically they didn't innovate or invent as to innovate is "To begin or introduce (something new) for or as if for the first time." Dictionary.com
They didn't do it for the first time, others have done it before (the museum domain. for instance)
Perhaps they are innovating new ways of breaking the internet?
Errmmm...maybe I'm using some other Windows, but here I have to press Ctrl-Alt-Del to login to my W2K and XP boxes too. Did I miss something? You say they removed it? Err?
Nope you are using the same windows. You can turn off the CTL-ALT-DEL requirement in XP (and 2000) a couple of different ways (as usual).
Security Policy: control panel > administrative tools > then either domain or local security policy. Go into Security Setting > Local Policies > Security Options and find the Disable CTRL + ALT + DEL requirement for logon and set it to disabled.
OR
under control panel > user accounts > advanced tab > secure logon section > require users to press ctrl+alt+delete checkkbox
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft, and Sun are doing as merely "freely speaking".
What exactly are Microsoft and Sun doing?
Can we not figure out for ourselves what wine we like with salmon?
Actually I think that would be a great use for this technology - I often shop at a somewhat upscale grocery store that has 'experts' that recommend which wine to drink with what, or suggest a suitable side dish to have with a main...as long as the carts are 'programmed' with recommendations from people who know what they are talking about (instead of 'oh Suzy on aisle two drinks wine once in a while, let's use her choices') then I think that would be a great addition to my shopping experience.
And yes, I know what wine I like to have with most dishes (but not all), but trying different things (sometimes things I really wouldn't think would be good) is fun, and often illuminating.
But if it wasn't powered by the sun, it wouldn't be solar energy now would it?
Holy Crap - look at the Solar Flare coming out of that Volcano!
kind of like RAID on files, call it RARF (Redundant Array of Remote Files).
:)
Hmmm... I think I'd call it 'Back-up Array of Remote Files' (BARF)
not that I necessarily agree with the who needs radio (cuz I like it once in a while), but it'd be nice if Pete Tong (or whomever) could post a blog of his latest tunes 'picks' so I wouldn't have to traverse endless lists of downloadable music or listen to the radio for hours, hoping they say the song name after they play it before I can buy/download the latest 'new stuff'.
Meaning that the kids who won the 4 million dollar lawsuit should still be getting their 4 million dollars.
This brings to mind something about getting blood from a stone...how exactly would they pay the $4M if they didn't have it?
They absolutely can. (Well, they could if they actually had any claim to the software to which they are claiming they have a claim).
If I write a piece of software, I can choose to give it to someone, and I can choose to sell it to someone else.
I have a 4.0 MP camera (and that is more than enough - I was very happy with my 3.2 MP for photographs. However there were many times when I wish I had it for some goofy situation that I'd love to take a quick snap of to laugh at later (or to see how to put something back together again).
640x480 is fine for some of those purposes so I bought a LG 6000.
You are right, 1.1 is useless for real photography (but then 2 years ago, real photographers were saying, and some still do, that digital cameras as a whole are useless for real photography), but "real photography" isn't the only use for camera, and the convenience of having a lower quality device available when you need is a bonus.
How long do you think it will take SCO to make back $50 million in profits, assuming they succeed in their suit?
If they succeed in their suit, it will take them about 10 minutes to get to the bank to cash a 3 Billion dollar cheque from IBM.
Maybe less as they'll be able to afford a speeding ticket or two.
I love the way that people can interpret things that others say.
What s typical letter may read:
Dear Microsoft,
Your product is full of security holes. If it was coded properly from the get go, would have have fewer critical holes and you wouldn't have to release patches EVERY week. This patch process is a pain for administrators and users alike.
Regards,
Babyrat
What Microsoft interprets it as:
You release too many patches too quickly. We'd rather have the security holes rather than have to patch our systems every week.
I wouldn't necessarily blame Joe Admin or Fred End-user for that comment from Microsoft.
Statistics, surveys and lies...
Without seeing the actual survey questions I think that jumping to the conclusion that 16% of CIOs think that SCO's claims hold water.
The article merely said that the case caused them to re-evaluate.
Maybe those 16% re-evaluated and came to the conclusion they'd better implement NOW instead of waiting in case there is some sort of grandfather clause in the settlement stating that anyone who was using Linux before Oct. 31, 2003 wouldn't owe SCO anything.
OK this situation is unlikely but if the question was simply:
"Has the SCO lawsuit caused you to re-evaluate your linux position"
and some the PHCEO said to the CIO - "Hey - I've heard about a lawsuit, we OK?" and then the CIO digs around the internet, maybe calls a lawyer and decides that Linux it is OK to go ahead and implement Linux, he has technically re-evaluated and would probably answer that way on the survey, yet it hasn't stopped him from implementing Linux.
Did you read the article? It is almost exact parallel. No one is disputing that Edison did a bunch of good for society, and was an intelligent man, and a grea inventor, but the parallels between what he (his company) was doing with the movie industry and what the RIAA is doing with the music industry is pretty good.
win? according to what rules?
for his accomplishments this "ordinary Joe" should be wealthier than oprah, but he ain't.
What's wealth got to do with winning? It sounds to me like Linus would be happier hanging out with his family in a cramped apartment coding on a 386 than most people are in mansions with dozens of toys to play with.
If you are happy doing what you are doing, then you've won. That he's happy doing what he's doing and has enough cash to afford a few toys is even better.
but without a system in place for fact-checking and followup
:
Maybe it's just me, but if you don't even want to take the time to look at the site in question, then you shouldn't be posting about it. Ooops forgot the Slashdot motto...
From the site's FAQ
For instance, say a scandal breaks, but the politician in question is later exonerated because of a specific fact. Users can poll the system to see if that fact was logged, and find out who contributed that fact, and when they did, without knowing their real name. They can then rank the credibility of that contributor, and ask the system to notify them if he or she makes further contributions in the future. Thus, they can learn whether they trust or mistrust a contributor, while the contributor still retains anonymity.
A further feature of the site is that any subject of a submission -- whether individual, agency, or organization -- is notified of the submission, and asked to respond. They can confirm or deny the submission. It's important to note that, like an FBI file, submissions are not purged when denied -- the stakes are simply too high to do so. As with such files, subjects of spurious submissions who are nonetheless innocent have nothing to fear from GIA.
They're just telling you what risks are involved with using GPL'd software.
No they are not telling you the risks of using GPL'd software - they are telling you the risks of breaking license agreements and then portraying GPL license violations as different than any other license violations, which they are not. The ONLY thing they indicated are different is that sometimes the violations of the GPL can not be rectified by throwing money at them, as is generally the case with violations of commercial software ("oops we stole your code, here is the money that we would have had to pay you had we done things legally, and a bit extra for your trouble", versus "hey - we stomped all over your ideals with our unethical and illegal behaviour and money won't fix that, so we will stop redistribution or release our changes as dictated by the license")
Just out of curiosity, why don't more people release their code under the BSD license?
Because they believe in the terms of the GPL and that those are the terms that they choose? Personally I feel that if I create a program and release the source to the public (under some sort of license rather than the public domain) then I'd prefer the GPL - I like the idea that if someone improves the program and wants to distribute the improvements then they also have to distribute the source to those improvements. That really makes sense to me (epsecially if that someone is a commercial entity who is using my code as a base to make $$$).
Not sure why you are modd'ed funny, I don't think you were intending to be. Yes the whole thing is a little socialist - a little socialist isn't such a bad thing (ask any country who has government sponsored healthcare - OK ask anyone who isn't filthy rich in a country that has gov't sponsored healthcare). In this case it is better than a socialist gov't because there is no individual (or relatively small group of indiviudals) in a position to be 'corrupted' by the power, which is generally the weak point socialism.
The enforcement actions aren't draconion at all - the companies were pointed to their infraction and quitely given a chance (multiple chances) to comply. If they don't then it will go to a court of law. Absolutely no different than what would happen with software under any proprietary software license.
Furthermore before using the code, they could have decided to contact the original authors and negotiate a different license. If the copyright holder can be convinced, then the company could have the code released to them under a different set of licensing restrictions, just like normal commercial software.
what I want is an easy to use tool that will allow me to download the music that I want in a format that I can use (in my CD player, laptop, MP3 player, PVR, DVD player, cell phone, digital camera and whatever the next new fangled machine they come out with).
Kazaa is that tool - except I don't use it because the music that I want is copyrighted, thus illegal to download and use. If all of the sudden I could use that tool (even if it involves paying a fee) legally, I would.
because they negotiated a deal with the record companies to allow you to share the music file legally, instead of illegally?
4. Why should kazaa get money? They arent really providing the networking power or files, the people are. Real p2p networks like gnutella just cut out the middle man and will always be free.
And they will always be illegal, if you are downloading copyrighted music files.
What Kazaa is envisioning is that you use the tool you are currently using, pay a fee per download and have LEGAL distribution system, as opposed to an ILLEGAL one. I'd pay (a certain amount) for that. Kazaa would get a portion of the fee, and the rest would be divvied up like the blank CD and cassette royalties in Canada. Sounds like a great system to me...
Your points regarding the organization of the ISPs to get them to chrage the users on that level is probably correct - but there are certainly ways around the payment system.
The biggest problem would be getting the record companies to agree.
I'm all for innovation, but seriously, who needs a 300GB hard disks except for pr0n c0lLeCt0R5, warez d00ds and RAID junkies?
Please tell me you are kidding????
Having a 300 GB drive in my PVR machine would be great - and I wouldn't really worry about backing it up as if I lost the recorded show, it really wouldn't matter that much to me (some I'd want to save, but for most it really wouldn't matter at all).
I'd even like it for editing my miniDV tapes - wouldn't have to worry about doing (finishing) one project at a time because I need to clear out HD space to transfer the next tape. And if it failed, everything is still back on the miniDVs (the source and the finished edit) so I'd only lose the work in progress (not ideal, but not a catastrophe either)
I'm sure there are many other personal reasons that others would like to use a large disk for...I can think of about a dozen uses I could find for this in our office (ghost backups anyone???)
I wouldn't expect them to shoot themselves in the foot with changing somehting liek this in a service pack - if you broke something on Samba, you'd also be breaking it on every other client that wasn't upgraded to said Service Pack. if they did it on the client side, then no client could upgrade unless all the file servers were also upgraded.
Backwards compatibility issues work for the Samba team in this case.
I wouldn't expect them to be walled out for very long in any event.
Weel, if they settled, it did not get to court and Motevista did not 'win' it's case in court, just like the RIAA hasn't 'won' any of it's court cases against filesharers.
Without seeing the settlement agreement, we can 't tell whehter the GPL was invovled at all in the settlement. Settlement agreements can indicate no admission of wrongdoing - they merely state that the issue will be dropped by one party for the following concessions of the other party (generally $$$$)
Hmmm...no one actually mentioned if their software protected against a CD-Copy from Roxio or any of the other CD burner software.
Will this protect against that, or just ripping?
You are absolutely correct, but on the other side of the coin, I refuse to buy from a company whose website does not function correctly when accessed with Mozilla, and I usually fire off feedback to the site indicating that.
Now if I could only get our 'intranet' people to listen...
apt but incorrect...
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
It's my favourite movie...technically they didn't innovate or invent as to innovate is "To begin or introduce (something new) for or as if for the first time." Dictionary.com
They didn't do it for the first time, others have done it before (the museum domain. for instance)
Perhaps they are innovating new ways of breaking the internet?
Errmmm...maybe I'm using some other Windows, but here I have to press Ctrl-Alt-Del to login to my W2K and XP boxes too. Did I miss something? You say they removed it? Err?
Nope you are using the same windows. You can turn off the CTL-ALT-DEL requirement in XP (and 2000) a couple of different ways (as usual).
Security Policy: control panel > administrative tools > then either domain or local security policy. Go into Security Setting > Local Policies > Security Options and find the Disable CTRL + ALT + DEL requirement for logon and set it to disabled.
OR
under control panel > user accounts > advanced tab > secure logon section > require users to press ctrl+alt+delete checkkbox