The text of the press release was interesting, but certainly could've used some editing before distribution:
The GPL licenses software free of cost, but requires any redistributor to provide the full source code.
If you're a reporter interested in the story, but you don't work for a tech rag, then would that mean anything to you?
injunctive relieve... preliminnary...
Not everyone speaks English as a native tongue. However, if you're going to issue a press release in English, then have a native speaker proofread it for you.
The netfilter/iptables project provides state-of-the-art network
security software for Linux firewalling, packet filter and network
address translation (NAT), distributed as Free Software under the terms
of the GNU General Public License. Being part of the linux operating
system kernel, the software is running on virtually every Linux installation.
Umm, what?
~% lsmod | grep ipt ~%
It most certainly is not running on virtually every Linux installation. Is it even available for the machines still running 2.x kernels?
I'm very happy for the netfilter/iptables team, and glad that they've established a precedent in their country. However, bad grammar and exaggeration are not becoming to anyone.
Before I get flamed for the inevitable typo or grammar mistake in this post, remember that I'm not issuing a formal press release. If I were, I probably would've hit "preview" before I posted this.
If by "we", you mean "Linux users and developers", then you are certainly correct. Do you think that IBM contributes heavily to Linux because they get warm fuzzies from it, or because they're acting in their best interest to build a solid infrastructure that they can package for their clients?
Much Linux development has been driven by individuals "scratching an itch". Another huge portion has been driven by for-profit entities who want to use it to make more money. In that sense, you're right. Capitalism has definitely helped Linux to rise to its current position.
OS X's LDAP support in the address book application is just as bad as in KDE's address book. You can do searches of a directory, but that's it - no editing or entry creation is supported (at least as of Jaguar).
In the context of iSync, which works with a Palm (or phone or whatever) against a user's address book, this means that it doesn't offer a way to sync LDAP entries to those in the other device.
I'd love to be able to set up a single, centralized address database for my household, so that my wife and I don't have to maintain our own separate lists of friends and acquaintances ("Hey, is Heidi's number 123-3456?" "No, that's her old number. Now it's 123-4543."). Apple seems to be uninterested in making this happen natively.
First, you are a consumer, you don't have a "business relationship" with any "entity".
I agree with you. I have not entered into any agreement stipulation what actions I may or may not take with the product I bought. Copyright law still applies, certainly, but that's about it.
Second, as with the ticket, if you buy a DVD you recieve a license to view the DVD privately in your home. It is clearly stated in the beginning of most DVDs. If you don't agree to it return the DVD and don't watch it.
There is a fair amount of legal opinion that unless you have access to the terms beforehand, then you're not expected to comply with them. I may legally make a backup of my DVD, regardless of what the warning on the DVD itself may happen to say.
That would be fine, if they provided an enumerated list of the rights granted to you by the purchase of your ticket before you bought it. Do you have the right to talk in the theater before the movie starts if they haven't granted you that privilege? How do you know? Have you ever seen the terms that you're agreeing to?
Understand that I believe that the person in the article did something wrong, was fairly caught, and deserves punishment. However, if they said that he was arrested under order of the British Royal Family, I'd argue until I turned blue that this was an invalid reason. The poster was using terms like "rights" and "license" in the context of an agreement with the theater, and I don't think that has any merit at all.
Put another way: he broke the law - fine. That has nothing to do with the restrictions on the "license" he supposedly bought from the theater.
I was replying to someone who implied that the license you get when you purchase a movie ticket doesn't include certain rights, and I was arguing that no such license exists at all.
People seem to think that companies have some mysterious ability to refer to a purchase as a license and then unilaterally dictate the terms of that license. See also the RIAA, who assert that you don't have the right to make a copy of a CD that they sold to you. Some people actually believe that BS, and I'm tired of it.
I know that much progress has been made toward getting workable machine vision for blind people. So, would a blind person be allowed to view a movie through a camera that converts the image into something they can interpret as sight?
If so, then I see a perfect alibi for movie-grabbers: "I'm blind, you insensitive clod! These are my eyes!"
If not, then: "Hang on - could you speak up so that I can get this on tape to play for my lawyer?"
This isn't an issue now, that I'm aware of, but what about 5 or 10 years from now?
Your ticket gives your the right to watch the movie once in that theater at that time, and that is all.
No. No. No. No. I'm sick of these "implied contracts" that we've all supposedly agreed to without having seen. While I understand and agree with the idea that you shouldn't be recording the move, I didn't agree to a license of any type when I bought my ticket. I paid for the privilege of being allowed to occupy a given room at a given time. I may bring a book, stare at cute girls, or take a nap. If the theater is otherwise empty, I can even play "MST3K" with my friends and yell at the screen.
I'm tired of this "but your license says..." crap. I have yet to sign a contract regarding my rights to use a ticket, or DVD, or piece of software that I've purchased. Give me a piece of paper with clear terms and a signature line, and I'll be willing to admit that I have a business relationship with the entity I'm buying a product from. Until then, forget it.
I half wonder if they're trying to get payback on PVR users who timeshift the shows. I almost never watch TV during the "real" timeslot - I always catch it later when it's more convenient.
However, I have a Dish Network "DVR", and it lacks TiVo's intelligence in that although it does remember the name of the program that you set a timer for, it is completely inable to cope with changes to a network's schedule. In other words, if I set it to record "Malcolm In The Middle" at 8:00PM on Sunday, I actually get whatever Fox happens to decide to air in that timeslot (although the timer screen will cheerfully tell me that it's set to record "Malcolm", even though a trip to the schedule will show otherwise).
My wife and I loved to watch Boston Public, but we only managed to see about half of the episodes. I'd come home to find "Survivor 23: Queens" or "The Neophyte" or some other junk.
Either Fox is deliberately screwing with PVR users ("You will pay attention, or we'll move your show without telling you.") or completely ignorant of the fact that people get used to seeing a given show at a given time. The other networks periodically shift programming around special events, but Fox seems to delight in swapping shows around at random.
For some reason, though, "Arrested Development" has been on at the same time every week since the first episode. Ron Howard must have more pull than Matt Groening.
I saw the same demonstration on "Late Night with Johnny Carson" a long time ago with my dad. A scientist dropped a rat into a covered tank and the audience oohed and aahed as the critter swam around for several minutes before the next guest came out.
I didn't catch where the article said that this was the first test flight ever.
No matter how many thousands of times you take it for a "dry run", eventually you have to test it in a real situation. For all we know, this might have been the culmination of an exhaustive series of difficult tests.
No backup master worth his salt is ever going to reuse a single tape more than 5-10 times.
Ouch. I've been cycling 12 DDS3 tapes through a daily rotation for about 4 years and have only had one tape die - the drive reports that the rest are in reasonable condition.
8 cycles? Wow. Got some used tape you'd be willing to sell cheap?:)
My wife and I have large student loans, to the point that neither of us could pay them by ourselves. However, if we both work, then we can pay our loans and have enough left over for some nice stuff. Some people might look at us and think that we're both greedy materialists who work to support our lifestyle, but that's simply not true in our case.
Put mathematically, suppose that our minimum required monthly income is x. My wife and I each make.8x. If one of us doesn't work, then we go bankrupt. If we both work, we have.6x left over to invest as we see fit.
No, he meant Click Of Death. However, you're half correct in that it is the sound of another failed Iomega product (as in, "dang it, there goes another one!").
An Iomega disk is an alternative to a tape drive for data backup in much the same way that carbon dioxide is an alternative to oxygen for mammalian respiration.
I just wonder if these things will be as shoddy as Jaz drives were?
A friend (hi Jayson!) used to have a Jaz drive and he loved it, until it started reliably devouring data without warning. We named it the "WORN drive" (write once, read never).
I personally lost two drives and about 10 disks to the Click Of Death before the phenomenon was documented.
I will never under any circumstances trust data to an Iomega product until they can go at least 5 years without selling inherently suicidal equipment.
Your transport almost sounds like you implemented a lightweight imitation of Subversion but without the versioning capabilities.
Also, what am I missing that makes it significantly better than a triggered rsync session, i.e. one that runs either periodically or whenever a threshold of changes is exceeded?
Really, what's the point of that unless you have multiple geographically diverse webservers as well?
As mentioned, Internet != web. Even there, though, it's the difference between "this server seems to be down" and "there is no evidence that this server exists". If I'm having a problem with my server, then at least would-be visitors have an indication that a website should be at its address and will hopefully try again later.
Does anyone really think that this will make it impossible for police to record chats? They can tap a phone line without the consent of either party, so why wouldn't they be able to do the same here?
Did your parent poster testify before congress that he's trying to make a living by selling his credit card and social security numbers at a reasonable price, but that those meddling kids are denying his livelihood? If he did, then you have a point.
A note to the music industry: my discretionary spending potential is at least 100 times what it was when I was in high school. I send money to CD Baby on a regular basis because they sell music that I enjoy.
You can market to my kids all they want, and I might buy the occasional CD for them. Alternatively, you can spend some of that money on real musicians, and I'll buy what you're offering.
Hint: unless my kids are named Mary Kate and Ashley, and they're not, their spending money is a subset of mine. You might want to consider that.
It's that this country is turning into a country full of fat, pasty, apartment-dwelling, lazy mouse-clickers who don't really care about where they live and the stores around them.
I used to shop at a local computer store with an owner that had an attitude to match yours. I now buy my stuff online, because I can't stand being around the jerk who's always bitching about how noone supports their local stores anymore.
On the Internet, I don't have to deal with pain-in-the-neck salespeople. If you want to run a successful brick-and-mortar, then don't be one of those people. If you are, then blame yourself when your doors close.
Slashdot Mirror
Argh. That should've been "2.2.x". I knew I'd make a mistake, hence the disclaimer. :)
If you're a reporter interested in the story, but you don't work for a tech rag, then would that mean anything to you?
Not everyone speaks English as a native tongue. However, if you're going to issue a press release in English, then have a native speaker proofread it for you.
Umm, what?It most certainly is not running on virtually every Linux installation. Is it even available for the machines still running 2.x kernels?I'm very happy for the netfilter/iptables team, and glad that they've established a precedent in their country. However, bad grammar and exaggeration are not becoming to anyone.
Before I get flamed for the inevitable typo or grammar mistake in this post, remember that I'm not issuing a formal press release. If I were, I probably would've hit "preview" before I posted this.
If by "we", you mean "Linux users and developers", then you are certainly correct. Do you think that IBM contributes heavily to Linux because they get warm fuzzies from it, or because they're acting in their best interest to build a solid infrastructure that they can package for their clients?
Much Linux development has been driven by individuals "scratching an itch". Another huge portion has been driven by for-profit entities who want to use it to make more money. In that sense, you're right. Capitalism has definitely helped Linux to rise to its current position.
In the context of iSync, which works with a Palm (or phone or whatever) against a user's address book, this means that it doesn't offer a way to sync LDAP entries to those in the other device.
I'd love to be able to set up a single, centralized address database for my household, so that my wife and I don't have to maintain our own separate lists of friends and acquaintances ("Hey, is Heidi's number 123-3456?" "No, that's her old number. Now it's 123-4543."). Apple seems to be uninterested in making this happen natively.
I agree with you. I have not entered into any agreement stipulation what actions I may or may not take with the product I bought. Copyright law still applies, certainly, but that's about it.
Second, as with the ticket, if you buy a DVD you recieve a license to view the DVD privately in your home. It is clearly stated in the beginning of most DVDs. If you don't agree to it return the DVD and don't watch it.
There is a fair amount of legal opinion that unless you have access to the terms beforehand, then you're not expected to comply with them. I may legally make a backup of my DVD, regardless of what the warning on the DVD itself may happen to say.
Understand that I believe that the person in the article did something wrong, was fairly caught, and deserves punishment. However, if they said that he was arrested under order of the British Royal Family, I'd argue until I turned blue that this was an invalid reason. The poster was using terms like "rights" and "license" in the context of an agreement with the theater, and I don't think that has any merit at all.
Put another way: he broke the law - fine. That has nothing to do with the restrictions on the "license" he supposedly bought from the theater.
People seem to think that companies have some mysterious ability to refer to a purchase as a license and then unilaterally dictate the terms of that license. See also the RIAA, who assert that you don't have the right to make a copy of a CD that they sold to you. Some people actually believe that BS, and I'm tired of it.
If so, then I see a perfect alibi for movie-grabbers: "I'm blind, you insensitive clod! These are my eyes!"
If not, then: "Hang on - could you speak up so that I can get this on tape to play for my lawyer?"
This isn't an issue now, that I'm aware of, but what about 5 or 10 years from now?
No. No. No. No. I'm sick of these "implied contracts" that we've all supposedly agreed to without having seen. While I understand and agree with the idea that you shouldn't be recording the move, I didn't agree to a license of any type when I bought my ticket. I paid for the privilege of being allowed to occupy a given room at a given time. I may bring a book, stare at cute girls, or take a nap. If the theater is otherwise empty, I can even play "MST3K" with my friends and yell at the screen.
I'm tired of this "but your license says..." crap. I have yet to sign a contract regarding my rights to use a ticket, or DVD, or piece of software that I've purchased. Give me a piece of paper with clear terms and a signature line, and I'll be willing to admit that I have a business relationship with the entity I'm buying a product from. Until then, forget it.
However, I have a Dish Network "DVR", and it lacks TiVo's intelligence in that although it does remember the name of the program that you set a timer for, it is completely inable to cope with changes to a network's schedule. In other words, if I set it to record "Malcolm In The Middle" at 8:00PM on Sunday, I actually get whatever Fox happens to decide to air in that timeslot (although the timer screen will cheerfully tell me that it's set to record "Malcolm", even though a trip to the schedule will show otherwise).
My wife and I loved to watch Boston Public, but we only managed to see about half of the episodes. I'd come home to find "Survivor 23: Queens" or "The Neophyte" or some other junk.
Either Fox is deliberately screwing with PVR users ("You will pay attention, or we'll move your show without telling you.") or completely ignorant of the fact that people get used to seeing a given show at a given time. The other networks periodically shift programming around special events, but Fox seems to delight in swapping shows around at random.
For some reason, though, "Arrested Development" has been on at the same time every week since the first episode. Ron Howard must have more pull than Matt Groening.
This wasn't new tech when "The Abyss" came out.
No matter how many thousands of times you take it for a "dry run", eventually you have to test it in a real situation. For all we know, this might have been the culmination of an exhaustive series of difficult tests.
Ouch. I've been cycling 12 DDS3 tapes through a daily rotation for about 4 years and have only had one tape die - the drive reports that the rest are in reasonable condition.
8 cycles? Wow. Got some used tape you'd be willing to sell cheap? :)
Yeah, but you can open /dev/null without throwing an error. That's more than I can say for the Iomega drives I've been around.
My wife and I have large student loans, to the point that neither of us could pay them by ourselves. However, if we both work, then we can pay our loans and have enough left over for some nice stuff. Some people might look at us and think that we're both greedy materialists who work to support our lifestyle, but that's simply not true in our case.
Put mathematically, suppose that our minimum required monthly income is x. My wife and I each make .8x. If one of us doesn't work, then we go bankrupt. If we both work, we have .6x left over to invest as we see fit.
Just something to think about.
No, he meant Click Of Death. However, you're half correct in that it is the sound of another failed Iomega product (as in, "dang it, there goes another one!").
An Iomega disk is an alternative to a tape drive for data backup in much the same way that carbon dioxide is an alternative to oxygen for mammalian respiration.
A friend (hi Jayson!) used to have a Jaz drive and he loved it, until it started reliably devouring data without warning. We named it the "WORN drive" (write once, read never).
I personally lost two drives and about 10 disks to the Click Of Death before the phenomenon was documented.
I will never under any circumstances trust data to an Iomega product until they can go at least 5 years without selling inherently suicidal equipment.
Also, what am I missing that makes it significantly better than a triggered rsync session, i.e. one that runs either periodically or whenever a threshold of changes is exceeded?
As mentioned, Internet != web. Even there, though, it's the difference between "this server seems to be down" and "there is no evidence that this server exists". If I'm having a problem with my server, then at least would-be visitors have an indication that a website should be at its address and will hopefully try again later.
Does anyone really think that this will make it impossible for police to record chats? They can tap a phone line without the consent of either party, so why wouldn't they be able to do the same here?
Did your parent poster testify before congress that he's trying to make a living by selling his credit card and social security numbers at a reasonable price, but that those meddling kids are denying his livelihood? If he did, then you have a point.
A note to the music industry: my discretionary spending potential is at least 100 times what it was when I was in high school. I send money to CD Baby on a regular basis because they sell music that I enjoy.
You can market to my kids all they want, and I might buy the occasional CD for them. Alternatively, you can spend some of that money on real musicians, and I'll buy what you're offering.
Hint: unless my kids are named Mary Kate and Ashley, and they're not, their spending money is a subset of mine. You might want to consider that.
And do you get an "expulsion rebate" if you get food poisining, and therefore leave part of your purchase in the state of sale?
I used to shop at a local computer store with an owner that had an attitude to match yours. I now buy my stuff online, because I can't stand being around the jerk who's always bitching about how noone supports their local stores anymore.
On the Internet, I don't have to deal with pain-in-the-neck salespeople. If you want to run a successful brick-and-mortar, then don't be one of those people. If you are, then blame yourself when your doors close.