They could port that IDE to Linux, but unless they also want to rewrite the entire framework, you are only going to be able to run the code on windows.
For vb.net, it is fully featured, and just as powerfull as c#
I personally prefer c# syntax, because it is more terse, and more strict. Its also closer to Java and C (obviously) so I dont have to do as much mind shifting about case sensitivity, semicolons, etc.
Uh, its not like the hash is in the file. Its computed from the file. You could write something in winamp that randomly changed bits in your music, and that would change the hash, but it would also slowly corrupt your music until you had static.
If the hash is using ID3 tags, you could change some unused field in there, but there would be a much smaller number of permutations available (although probelby still enough to be useful)
Actually, Westworld had the first CGI ever. The targeteing system that Yule Brenner had overlayed over what he saw was computer generated. It took a rediculous amount of time to render each frame.
No confusion. Just as doing a search and replace on a novel would still be illegal, ifyou go through and rearrange someone elses code, that is infringing too.
And if you start over from scratch, just trying to rephrase each loop and structure, thats infringing, just like if I copied an encyclopedia entry, but rewrote each line
No, but if someone goes through war of the worlds, and c=just renames all the characters, and some place names, maybe rearranges a few chapters, that IS infringement.
Someone would have to start from scratch, and replicate functionality in the current code. How would they get that knowledge without just copuying the logic in the current code. That is the issue.
For some pieces of code like "Find the largest contiguous block of memory" that isnt an issue, the problem is clearly defined, and easy to write an alternate algorythm.
but for something more proprietary, its going to be very difficult.
You start out with plain linux code, without any SCO code in it.
They say, here are some snippets, you can include at line 440, and replace line 20 with this new one. You may use these snippets if you pay us $. However, you cannot redistribute your changes (due to GPL issues)
That is the senario they are trying to create. They are saying since the SCO code is in the distribution, without their permission, they will let you integrate their code for a cost, because extracting all their code out of linux is going to be very difficult.
You wont really be able to replace their code, because if you rewrite it, that would still be plagarism. You would have to use a blackbox technique. However, almost everyone qualified to write that code would have been exposed to the SCO code, and therefore cannot be considered to be a blackbox author.
The funcitonality will need to be removed, licenced from SCO, given away by SCO, or found to be not owned by SCO. Replacing it with non SCO code is not really an option IMO
Another thing that you would have some issues with for what you are looking for, is that the CLR is essentially one process spawning threads to handle each request. If you set the CLR to have affinity, all web requests would be running on the same cpu.
There might be a way (theoretically, not that it is implemented) to have threads for a certain app go to a certain CPU, but what if that CPU is already loaded up etc. Also, handling multiple requests could be a bitch if that CPU is tied up by a bad thread.
Actually, in this case, the buisniess owner has the capitol, just like the record studio. (Which is why they take all the profit. They also take all the risk)
Not that I thikn this is fair, but is certainly the truth.
It is not up to the recording studios to change. It is up to the musicians to either a) be their own stuido, or b) find some other buisiness model that satisfies them.
As long as the recording studio is involved, they will continue to act in the way that generates themselves the most profit. (Just like the musician, and just like the listener)
Times have changed, the studio isnt needed as much as they were in the past, but you are a fool if you expect them to go quietly into the night.
Why should music be different than book publishing, magazine publishing, computer programming, or any of the thousands of other occupations that involve authoring works for hire?
If you buy that phone with a new 2 year contract, the $500 price will drop down to 200 or so.
A phone that is $100-200 will be free with the contract.
Go by any one of those verizon or Mlife kiosks at the mall, and compare the retail price to with contract.
For example, if you get new phone service, and end up losing that phone, if you paid $100 to begin with with the contract, the replacement phone could be around $400 (
This is why it actually makes sense to buy the $4/mo replacement insurance.
They make phones plugs different for every phone (even for the same carrier and mfgr) because they give the phones away (or sell at a deep discount for high end phones) and need to break even on the accessories.
First of all, I would say that even your website being pulled by the ISP is not censorship, as once again, you are free to be your own ISP if you want. However, since the ISP is presenting itself as an open forum for anyone to use (within the limits of their TOS) you do have a point.
However, friendster is NOT presenting itself as an open forum. It is presenting itself as an forum for real human beings to map out their social relationships. Anything outside that scope is not being censored, it is being filtered as noise. Rightly so.
Just as if I started posting my blog on ebay as item updates, they would remove the item. That wouldn't be censorship.
No no no no. Censorship is only censorship if someone stops you from publishing something. Choosing to not help you publish something is not censorship. Go make your own website, if someone stops you - THAT is censorship.
A newspaper certainly has the right to choose which letters to the editor it publishes, which ads it accepts, which editorials and stories it publishes, and what it lets you say in the classifieds. This is not censorship.
If the govt makes those decisions for the newspaper (and presumably all newspapers) that IS censorship.
But if its the newspaper itself that is stopping the article from being published, tough shit. Go start your own newspaper.
The DMCA does not require a hosting provider to do anything.
The DMCA just says that IF they take it down right away, they wont be held liable because they had it up in the first place.
Its a "hey, take this down right now, and we wont sue you because you had it up for the last 6 months"
If they choose not to take it down, they dont get punished, except via the normal copyright infringment stuff, the DCMA is not involved at all at that point.
They could get damages retroactive from when they notified people, and if they could prove that the insertion was willful (whoever did it knew it was SCOs) they could get them directly for damages as well.
I may be wrong here, but my understanding was that no individual entity owned the linux kernel anymore. Each section is owned by whoever contributed it. Therefore there is no single proper agent to address grievances to.
That does sound silly in that case, however Open Sources advocates are always praising the biggest strench of OSS : the users are the providers. There is no single point to go to remove the software, there is no single entity to sue to get restitution.
Further, each user has the ability to manipulate the porduct for themselves, so (if SCO would tell people what is infringing, which they should) each person can remove it individually. If people choose not to remove it, well then, they should buy the license (yes yes, I know they dont tell you which part, I understand that, and I agree they should have to)
In that case he is going back to the users (the providers) for resolution
They are saying go get linux somewhere, they are giving the code away. Then, buy this license so you can use our proprietary code in your copy of linux.
They are not trying to license all of linux.
A simmilar situation would be, if Linux has no infringing code, but SCO does offer something you want to use, you can go get linux for free, license some stuff from SCO, and integrate it into your copy of linux. You are not allowed to redistribute this tho, because you do not have ownership of the SCO code.
This is in fact what SCO alleges happened. Excepted someone started to distribute, and it got integrated into the main kernel.
Only if the information is financial in nature, or false (without regard to comparison).
If they said "we do feature X" and they dont, they can get spanked (but not by the SEC). If they say "we do feature X better than Linux" and linux is really better, that is off the hook (unless it was a numbers fudge or something, and even that is shakey).
Slashdot Mirror
The unaltered part would be pretty easy to handle with a public/private hash of the message.
PGP and other tools have had that feature for years.
Uh. Thats just an IDE.
They could port that IDE to Linux, but unless they also want to rewrite the entire framework, you are only going to be able to run the code on windows.
Mono etc. is what will get c# to linux
for VB = 6 I agree 100%
For vb.net, it is fully featured, and just as powerfull as c#
I personally prefer c# syntax, because it is more terse, and more strict. Its also closer to Java and C (obviously) so I dont have to do as much mind shifting about case sensitivity, semicolons, etc.
Uh, its not like the hash is in the file. Its computed from the file. You could write something in winamp that randomly changed bits in your music, and that would change the hash, but it would also slowly corrupt your music until you had static.
If the hash is using ID3 tags, you could change some unused field in there, but there would be a much smaller number of permutations available (although probelby still enough to be useful)
Actually, Westworld had the first CGI ever. The targeteing system that Yule Brenner had overlayed over what he saw was computer generated. It took a rediculous amount of time to render each frame.
a) you dont know that she reached terminal velocity. She only fell for a few seconds, so at 9.8m/s/s she could be going only 20m/s or so.
b) you dont know how fast he flew
c) regardless of how fast he flew, he could have stopped and even started falling when he got even with her, to give her a gradual reduction in speed.
No confusion. Just as doing a search and replace on a novel would still be illegal, ifyou go through and rearrange someone elses code, that is infringing too.
And if you start over from scratch, just trying to rephrase each loop and structure, thats infringing, just like if I copied an encyclopedia entry, but rewrote each line
No, but if someone goes through war of the worlds, and c=just renames all the characters, and some place names, maybe rearranges a few chapters, that IS infringement.
Someone would have to start from scratch, and replicate functionality in the current code. How would they get that knowledge without just copuying the logic in the current code. That is the issue.
For some pieces of code like "Find the largest contiguous block of memory" that isnt an issue, the problem is clearly defined, and easy to write an alternate algorythm.
but for something more proprietary, its going to be very difficult.
Think of it like this :
You start out with plain linux code, without any SCO code in it.
They say, here are some snippets, you can include at line 440, and replace line 20 with this new one. You may use these snippets if you pay us $. However, you cannot redistribute your changes (due to GPL issues)
That is the senario they are trying to create. They are saying since the SCO code is in the distribution, without their permission, they will let you integrate their code for a cost, because extracting all their code out of linux is going to be very difficult.
You wont really be able to replace their code, because if you rewrite it, that would still be plagarism. You would have to use a blackbox technique. However, almost everyone qualified to write that code would have been exposed to the SCO code, and therefore cannot be considered to be a blackbox author.
The funcitonality will need to be removed, licenced from SCO, given away by SCO, or found to be not owned by SCO. Replacing it with non SCO code is not really an option IMO
I am not agreeing or disagreeing with their position, just clarifying what their position is.
They say : the GPL is valid. However, our code was put into a GPL product without our permission.
They are not charging for GPL code, they are saying you can use our non GPL code in your GPL product, if you pay our license fee.
people say AWP, because the GAME said AWP, until 1.4 IIRC. They had a typo in the description text.
By the time they fixed the text to AWM, it was engraved in the hard-core gamers as AWP
Another thing that you would have some issues with for what you are looking for, is that the CLR is essentially one process spawning threads to handle each request. If you set the CLR to have affinity, all web requests would be running on the same cpu.
There might be a way (theoretically, not that it is implemented) to have threads for a certain app go to a certain CPU, but what if that CPU is already loaded up etc. Also, handling multiple requests could be a bitch if that CPU is tied up by a bad thread.
hrm, not absolutely sure, but look at cpu gardening in asp.net (as opposed to cpu farming). That may have some features that do what you want.
Actually, in this case, the buisniess owner has the capitol, just like the record studio. (Which is why they take all the profit. They also take all the risk)
Not that I thikn this is fair, but is certainly the truth.
It is not up to the recording studios to change. It is up to the musicians to either a) be their own stuido, or b) find some other buisiness model that satisfies them.
As long as the recording studio is involved, they will continue to act in the way that generates themselves the most profit.
(Just like the musician, and just like the listener)
Times have changed, the studio isnt needed as much as they were in the past, but you are a fool if you expect them to go quietly into the night.
Why should music be different than book publishing, magazine publishing, computer programming, or any of the thousands of other occupations that involve authoring works for hire?
If you buy that phone with a new 2 year contract, the $500 price will drop down to 200 or so.
A phone that is $100-200 will be free with the contract.
Go by any one of those verizon or Mlife kiosks at the mall, and compare the retail price to with contract.
For example, if you get new phone service, and end up losing that phone, if you paid $100 to begin with with the contract, the replacement phone could be around $400 (
This is why it actually makes sense to buy the $4/mo replacement insurance.
They make phones plugs different for every phone (even for the same carrier and mfgr) because they give the phones away (or sell at a deep discount for high end phones) and need to break even on the accessories.
First of all, I would say that even your website being pulled by the ISP is not censorship, as once again, you are free to be your own ISP if you want. However, since the ISP is presenting itself as an open forum for anyone to use (within the limits of their TOS) you do have a point.
However, friendster is NOT presenting itself as an open forum. It is presenting itself as an forum for real human beings to map out their social relationships. Anything outside that scope is not being censored, it is being filtered as noise. Rightly so.
Just as if I started posting my blog on ebay as item updates, they would remove the item. That wouldn't be censorship.
No no no no. Censorship is only censorship if someone stops you from publishing something. Choosing to not help you publish something is not censorship. Go make your own website, if someone stops you - THAT is censorship.
It is very different here.
A newspaper certainly has the right to choose which letters to the editor it publishes, which ads it accepts, which editorials and stories it publishes, and what it lets you say in the classifieds. This is not censorship.
If the govt makes those decisions for the newspaper (and presumably all newspapers) that IS censorship.
But if its the newspaper itself that is stopping the article from being published, tough shit. Go start your own newspaper.
The DMCA does not require a hosting provider to do anything.
The DMCA just says that IF they take it down right away, they wont be held liable because they had it up in the first place.
Its a "hey, take this down right now, and we wont sue you because you had it up for the last 6 months"
If they choose not to take it down, they dont get punished, except via the normal copyright infringment stuff, the DCMA is not involved at all at that point.
They could get damages retroactive from when they notified people, and if they could prove that the insertion was willful (whoever did it knew it was SCOs) they could get them directly for damages as well.
I may be wrong here, but my understanding was that no individual entity owned the linux kernel anymore. Each section is owned by whoever contributed it. Therefore there is no single proper agent to address grievances to.
That does sound silly in that case, however Open Sources advocates are always praising the biggest strench of OSS : the users are the providers. There is no single point to go to remove the software, there is no single entity to sue to get restitution.
Further, each user has the ability to manipulate the porduct for themselves, so (if SCO would tell people what is infringing, which they should) each person can remove it individually. If people choose not to remove it, well then, they should buy the license (yes yes, I know they dont tell you which part, I understand that, and I agree they should have to)
In that case he is going back to the users (the providers) for resolution
Thats the point. They arent licensing Linux.
They are saying go get linux somewhere, they are giving the code away. Then, buy this license so you can use our proprietary code in your copy of linux.
They are not trying to license all of linux.
A simmilar situation would be, if Linux has no infringing code, but SCO does offer something you want to use, you can go get linux for free, license some stuff from SCO, and integrate it into your copy of linux. You are not allowed to redistribute this tho, because you do not have ownership of the SCO code.
This is in fact what SCO alleges happened. Excepted someone started to distribute, and it got integrated into the main kernel.
Only if the information is financial in nature, or false (without regard to comparison).
If they said "we do feature X" and they dont, they can get spanked (but not by the SEC). If they say "we do feature X better than Linux" and linux is really better, that is off the hook (unless it was a numbers fudge or something, and even that is shakey).