Re:Why up in December of 2001?
on
SCO SCO SCO!
·
· Score: 1
The stock value on those charts corrects for stock-splits. E.g. if the value beforehand was $1 and afterward was $4, then the whole graph would shift making it look like the value per share beforehand was $4. The only way you can tell is the split marker or the historical data.
The effect however is clear in the chart... if you had $4 in stock beforehand, you have $4 in stock after.
If you check out IBM's stock, it would show $13 in 1993 when it was actually around $50.
...when the instructor makes their notes available.
I spent two terms with the same particular professor for a history course. For both terms, she made the course notes available in the library.
I found the course very interesting, and I took notes in class. The first term, I ignored the course notes... I didn't see the point. I just took notes the way I did in other humanities courses: I wrote down what the professor was trying to convey, and some of the interesting points which came out in class. I didn't take down every little thing the professor was putting on the board.
Before the midterm exam of the second term, I grabbed the course notes. They were great. I began taking notes on top of the copies of the instructor's notes.... it was far more useful. I could also 'preview' the material much in the same way one can do in the sciences, so that I don't have to waste all my time taking notes about things which really didn't matter.
I know what you mean about writing things down to remember them, but I didn't have any problem. Whenever it mattered, I just elaborated on the existing notes.
My first term notes were almost useless to me. They were just chicken scratchings taken down while I was busy paying attention to the professor. My second term notes were invaluable... they were chicken-scratchings taken down alongside the clearly written course notes which the instructor provided.
Everyone has their own system, but IMHO, if a student is spending all their time taking a detailed transcript of what the professor is saying, they shouldn't bother showing up.
As an aside... I hate keyboards in lectures. Anything you can do to get rid of them, including just giving the students notes and letting them not show up, is better. I'd rather they not showed up than show up with a laptop and frantically type every word the professor is saying. Ugh. It's horrible.
They seem to be doing a good job mapping, indexing and cataloguing the radio-map of the sky. I bet there are people on SETI who don't think there's a chance of finding an ET, they just want to check out and catalogue cool unexplained signals.
SETI has also done a good job with distributed computing.
They've also captured the interest of millions of people around the world.
Fully.... there isn't a compiler which implements the language fully. Plenty of compilers do what they do correctly and clearly document their limitations and extensions.
The market has little to do with the perception of performance of the company, it has to do with the perception of the perception of the performance of a company.
I.e. The stock is up because people are betting that their neighbour will think the stock will go up thinking that they think that there's merit to the claim.
The real trick is to anticipate when everyone will think that everyone is thinking that the stock is going to drop.
The market is really just a big horse-race with people buying and selling their bets and no finish line.
I guess my wording does sound odd... and my spelling is off.... but I stand by the statement. After all, it it wouldn't have been a very effective deterrent if you actually had to use it.
Hmm... interesting theory. So you're saying that the moon is a means for a Chineese attack on the U.S.?
You do realize that the Pacific ocean is easier to traverse than the distance between the earth and the moon?
You do also realize that the U.S. has demonstrated the effectiveness of nuclear submarines as a "last strike" deterrant?
Do you think it is possible that rather than nuking the U.S., the Chineese goverment wants to use this for genuine research, some nationalist bragging rights and as an asset to build or develop international relations?
I wonder if IBM, Linus Torvalds, or any kernel contributor could launch a copyright violation suit against SCO and sue them out of existance before they could argue their IP suit?
By their own admission, they've clearly violated the GPL and they're continuing to do it.
Hmm.... after the first one goes, then subsequent copyright holders could go after them... maybe as a class-action.
Is the patent on what the device does, or what the device is?
If it is on what the device is, then every general-purpose computer can decode or encode MP3's, run the SCO's patented code etc. It's just a matter of how hard it is for you to actually put the algorithms into the machine.
Does viewing the reference implementation violate the patent? It can be copied, pasted, compiled and run... so why not?
Do routers violate patents by forwarding packets containing patented code?
If not, when do you actually posess the code which violates the patent? When it is in an executable form?
Is posessing the i386 binary on a PowerPC violating the patent?
Could you just send the code out as source? what if it needed to be fixed before it would work?
All these problems go away when you say that it is the action which is patented. When using the machine violates the patent. That encoding an MP3 is violating a patent, that creating a GIF is violating a patent, that running the kernel is violating the patent.
The reason I bring it up is because I don't know. I'm not a lawyer of course...
SCO distributed Linux under the GPL. If Linus is guilty of patent violation, SCO is guilty of copyright violation.
Section 7:
If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
Strange thought, don't you have to actually do something to violate a patent? The code in and of itself does not violate the patent. And if SCO violated Linus' copyright by distributing their patented code under GPL... then they're suing because Linus doesn't have a license... ugh.
You can't filter based on the MAC since the MAC doesn't ever go out anyways.
If they wanted to be twerps about implementing their protocol, it could go something like this:
Assign the machine a UUID. When the machine enters protected mode and the ethernet card isn't transmitting, blast a frame out on the network.
Always listen for a set of specially crafted frames.
It's easiest to send a packet to a static IP address, it doesn't require finding and speaking with a DNS server. The BIOS doesn't need to know TCP/IP... it just needs a frame to send. The hard part would be getting the BIOS to learn its own IP... so you have to do an ARP or sniff outbound traffic. The BIOS also doesn't need to care about the OS, it has to hijack the/all network card(s) (Aren't all the cards compatible with that universal Novell spec these days?). So you send out a pre-crafted frame with the UUID obfuscated (just to make firewall blocking trickier). Include and obfuscate the real IP address in the payload.
The reply-to address should probably be left intact only because most firewalls don't like sending out traffic which shouldn't be originating from their network. But to be a real jerk, you could increment, decrement or semi-randomize the reply-to address so that if you did block based on source IP, you'd be defeated.
As for the reply packet... again the BIOS doesn't need to speak IP. It just needs to listen for a magic number.
HDD passwords are probably more effective anyways.
"Stretching" or "compressing" light is what the doppler shift is doing. As I interpreted the article, the motion of the crystal from the shockwave is causing the light to shift. The properties of the medium are reflecting undesired wavelengths back into the crystal, while allowing desirable ones though.
The percieved effect wouldn't be pulsing. But a pulsing laser going in might be smeared across time as some photons are emitted before others.
I don't know squish about photonics, but I would think that merely blasting a shockwave through a prism reflector would result in your "alternating bluer and redder" light. I would think that putting the output of that through a prism or spectrometer should show a spectral blur centered on the original frequency.
What I don't get is that if light intensity is the volume of photons, and this converts photon for photon, where's the energy coming from to convert (for example) IR to UV? And where does the energy go, converting UV to IR? Is it pulling it out/putting it in to the shockwave?
The GPL places no restrictions on the use or distribution of a product. Copyright law places restrictions on the redistribution. Nothing restricts your use of the code.
If you were standing on the sidewalk and two boxes flew out of a car and hit you, one Windows, the other Linux, copyright law would let you do anything with those packages short of redistributing copies of the software.
That is... you can open the boxes, use the software, erase the software, and sell the boxes with the software in them. You can create backup copies, install it on all of your machines, reverse engineer the code, de-compile, disassemble or whatever you want. You can even write critical articles about the software you found.
Except.....
Microsoft wants you to believe that you're legally bound to not do most of that stuff because you opened the box... and that through some miracle of law, disregarding, disagreeing or otherwise ignoring the licence takes away all your rights to use the software. Infact, they want you to belive that agreeing with the license also takes away most of those rights.
Microsoft also believes that it is the duty of the legal system to enforce a business model based on these strange notions.
The GPL says it can't stop you from doing any of that... but it can allow you to redistribute the code (modified or otherwise) under a set of conditions. If you redistribute GPL'd software and you disagree with, disregard or ignore the GPL, you're simply in violation of copyright law.
They're both licenses, but nobody's really sure why or how MS's are binding.
See, there you go spouting your suburban venom when all I did was rattle off an obviously over-the-top generalization about suburban life.:-)
I'm going to head off on my bicycle now. I've carefully planned my route to avoid the suburban commuting routes. They're too dangerous, if I'm not outright flattened, some slob might come after me with a tire-iron.
If people want to live in less densly populated areas, have a nice home and a yard, let the kids play, a seperate bedroom for every kid, a workshop for every parent, a media room, etc. somehow that is some kind of threat to you? How about being able to open a window below the 20th floor without choking on the smell of fermented human urine, who are you to tell them no?
I have a theory that people who live in the suburbs hate everyone. They do their best to avoid all human contact.
These people by SUV's as third-homes in which they spend a few hours each day driving on 16-lane highways to get to-and-from their suburban homes with neighbours who love eachother so much that they don't want to get out of their cars to open their doors, they separate their yards with arsenic-treated fences and close all the windows to block the sound of central airconditioners in the summer.
I knew one fellow who would never actually step outside or speak to anyone except his family or coworkers except for the weekends. His skin was desparately pale. He would get up, have breakfast, enter his attached garage, hit the garage door opener button on the right side of the visor, back out, drive along the highway, coffee in hand, radio going. About an hour later, he would arrive at his workplace downtown, hit the button on the left of his visor, drive into his office tower, park in his allotted spot, work, then do the reverse to go home.
Your assumption that living downtown means smelling your neighbour's urine, to me says that you're among these mizerable people who simply doesn't want to deal with anyone outside your family or workplace.
... granted... people generally are just as much assholes downtown as they are in the suburbs... and as such there is a greater density of assholes per square metre downtown as in the suburbs... meaning that their urine, blasting stereos, hyped-up cars, late drunken screaming etc is more prevalent... but buying a fully-detached air conditioned home in the suburbs along with a matching SUV and "media room!", doesn't make you part of any solution... the money we pour into 16-lane highways would be better spent on trains, and your houses would be better as parks and farmland.
IMHO, the real problem is the way people treat one another... and I don't know how to fix that.
P.s. what do your kids do when they are too old to 'play?'
The analogy doesn't quite hold, you can close the door all you want... that is, you can scrub the code of all contributions for which you don't hold the copyright and then stop distributing it under the GPL... but...
...that won't stop your obligations when somebody comes back to you with an old GPL'd copy of your program and demands the source code of that version.
Wasn't Sourceforge GPL? (They may have been BSD'd I could be mistaken.)
The similarities in plot devices between Attack of the Clones and the two towers are a little strange though. Magneto doesn't raise an army of clones/orcs for the Empire/Sauron.
The X-men don't have a showdown at Helm's Deep/that stupid desert arena. Yeah, they do have a sort-of showdown, but there's no "army" involved (military henchmen excepted).
They even have a good-guy trapped and tortured in Orthanc/Ducu's stronghold slowly revealing bad-guy plot thing happening. Xavier was captured and controled, it is similar on the surface, but it is used differently as a plot device.
Although IMHO the most disappointing part of Attack of the Clones was that big battle at the end. Lucas sets up this huge and impossible battle... sort of like Helm's Deep. The Jedi/men are outnumbered and don't stand a chance. Tolkien sent in reenforcements... Lucas pulled a G.I. Joe and had the Jedi win by brute force... staggeringly dumb.
Yeah they're all written for kids, but I'm sure any kid over 8 would look on Lucas' work skeptically.
Slashdot Mirror
The stock value on those charts corrects for stock-splits. E.g. if the value beforehand was $1 and afterward was $4, then the whole graph would shift making it look like the value per share beforehand was $4. The only way you can tell is the split marker or the historical data.
The effect however is clear in the chart... if you had $4 in stock beforehand, you have $4 in stock after.
If you check out IBM's stock, it would show $13 in 1993 when it was actually around $50.
...when the instructor makes their notes available.
I spent two terms with the same particular professor for a history course. For both terms, she made the course notes available in the library.
I found the course very interesting, and I took notes in class. The first term, I ignored the course notes... I didn't see the point. I just took notes the way I did in other humanities courses: I wrote down what the professor was trying to convey, and some of the interesting points which came out in class. I didn't take down every little thing the professor was putting on the board.
Before the midterm exam of the second term, I grabbed the course notes. They were great. I began taking notes on top of the copies of the instructor's notes.... it was far more useful. I could also 'preview' the material much in the same way one can do in the sciences, so that I don't have to waste all my time taking notes about things which really didn't matter.
I know what you mean about writing things down to remember them, but I didn't have any problem. Whenever it mattered, I just elaborated on the existing notes.
My first term notes were almost useless to me. They were just chicken scratchings taken down while I was busy paying attention to the professor. My second term notes were invaluable... they were chicken-scratchings taken down alongside the clearly written course notes which the instructor provided.
Everyone has their own system, but IMHO, if a student is spending all their time taking a detailed transcript of what the professor is saying, they shouldn't bother showing up.
As an aside... I hate keyboards in lectures. Anything you can do to get rid of them, including just giving the students notes and letting them not show up, is better. I'd rather they not showed up than show up with a laptop and frantically type every word the professor is saying. Ugh. It's horrible.
They seem to be doing a good job mapping, indexing and cataloguing the radio-map of the sky. I bet there are people on SETI who don't think there's a chance of finding an ET, they just want to check out and catalogue cool unexplained signals.
SETI has also done a good job with distributed computing.
They've also captured the interest of millions of people around the world.
None of them make that claim. They state their limitations clearly.
Databases claim to use SQL when they don't implement the whole language. Ditto for web browsers and HTML/CSS.
Fully.... there isn't a compiler which implements the language fully. Plenty of compilers do what they do correctly and clearly document their limitations and extensions.
The market has little to do with the perception of performance of the company, it has to do with the perception of the perception of the performance of a company.
I.e. The stock is up because people are betting that their neighbour will think the stock will go up thinking that they think that there's merit to the claim.
The real trick is to anticipate when everyone will think that everyone is thinking that the stock is going to drop.
The market is really just a big horse-race with people buying and selling their bets and no finish line.
I guess my wording does sound odd... and my spelling is off.... but I stand by the statement. After all, it it wouldn't have been a very effective deterrent if you actually had to use it.
Hmm... interesting theory. So you're saying that the moon is a means for a Chineese attack on the U.S.?
You do realize that the Pacific ocean is easier to traverse than the distance between the earth and the moon?
You do also realize that the U.S. has demonstrated the effectiveness of nuclear submarines as a "last strike" deterrant?
Do you think it is possible that rather than nuking the U.S., the Chineese goverment wants to use this for genuine research, some nationalist bragging rights and as an asset to build or develop international relations?
I wonder if IBM, Linus Torvalds, or any kernel contributor could launch a copyright violation suit against SCO and sue them out of existance before they could argue their IP suit?
By their own admission, they've clearly violated the GPL and they're continuing to do it.
Hmm.... after the first one goes, then subsequent copyright holders could go after them... maybe as a class-action.
That's not the hair I'm trying to split.
Is the patent on what the device does, or what the device is?
If it is on what the device is, then every general-purpose computer can decode or encode MP3's, run the SCO's patented code etc. It's just a matter of how hard it is for you to actually put the algorithms into the machine.
Does viewing the reference implementation violate the patent? It can be copied, pasted, compiled and run... so why not?
Do routers violate patents by forwarding packets containing patented code?
If not, when do you actually posess the code which violates the patent? When it is in an executable form?
Is posessing the i386 binary on a PowerPC violating the patent?
Could you just send the code out as source? what if it needed to be fixed before it would work?
All these problems go away when you say that it is the action which is patented. When using the machine violates the patent. That encoding an MP3 is violating a patent, that creating a GIF is violating a patent, that running the kernel is violating the patent.
The reason I bring it up is because I don't know. I'm not a lawyer of course...
SCO distributed Linux under the GPL. If Linus is guilty of patent violation, SCO is guilty of copyright violation.
Section 7:
If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
Strange thought, don't you have to actually do something to violate a patent? The code in and of itself does not violate the patent. And if SCO violated Linus' copyright by distributing their patented code under GPL... then they're suing because Linus doesn't have a license... ugh.
Ugh!
I hereby declare myself "the owner of the UNIX(tm) theme park"
(Unix(tm) is(tm) a trademark of the Open Group.)
(is(tm) is(tm) a trademark of William Clinton.)
You can't filter based on the MAC since the MAC doesn't ever go out anyways.
If they wanted to be twerps about implementing their protocol, it could go something like this:
It's easiest to send a packet to a static IP address, it doesn't require finding and speaking with a DNS server. The BIOS doesn't need to know TCP/IP... it just needs a frame to send. The hard part would be getting the BIOS to learn its own IP... so you have to do an ARP or sniff outbound traffic. The BIOS also doesn't need to care about the OS, it has to hijack the/all network card(s) (Aren't all the cards compatible with that universal Novell spec these days?). So you send out a pre-crafted frame with the UUID obfuscated (just to make firewall blocking trickier). Include and obfuscate the real IP address in the payload.
The reply-to address should probably be left intact only because most firewalls don't like sending out traffic which shouldn't be originating from their network. But to be a real jerk, you could increment, decrement or semi-randomize the reply-to address so that if you did block based on source IP, you'd be defeated.
As for the reply packet... again the BIOS doesn't need to speak IP. It just needs to listen for a magic number.
HDD passwords are probably more effective anyways.
Plenty of musicians have dayjobs and love playing music.
"Stretching" or "compressing" light is what the doppler shift is doing. As I interpreted the article, the motion of the crystal from the shockwave is causing the light to shift. The properties of the medium are reflecting undesired wavelengths back into the crystal, while allowing desirable ones though.
The percieved effect wouldn't be pulsing. But a pulsing laser going in might be smeared across time as some photons are emitted before others.
I don't know squish about photonics, but I would think that merely blasting a shockwave through a prism reflector would result in your "alternating bluer and redder" light. I would think that putting the output of that through a prism or spectrometer should show a spectral blur centered on the original frequency.
What I don't get is that if light intensity is the volume of photons, and this converts photon for photon, where's the energy coming from to convert (for example) IR to UV? And where does the energy go, converting UV to IR? Is it pulling it out/putting it in to the shockwave?
The GPL places no restrictions on the use or distribution of a product. Copyright law places restrictions on the redistribution. Nothing restricts your use of the code.
If you were standing on the sidewalk and two boxes flew out of a car and hit you, one Windows, the other Linux, copyright law would let you do anything with those packages short of redistributing copies of the software.
That is... you can open the boxes, use the software, erase the software, and sell the boxes with the software in them. You can create backup copies, install it on all of your machines, reverse engineer the code, de-compile, disassemble or whatever you want. You can even write critical articles about the software you found.
Except.....
Microsoft wants you to believe that you're legally bound to not do most of that stuff because you opened the box... and that through some miracle of law, disregarding, disagreeing or otherwise ignoring the licence takes away all your rights to use the software. Infact, they want you to belive that agreeing with the license also takes away most of those rights.
Microsoft also believes that it is the duty of the legal system to enforce a business model based on these strange notions.
The GPL says it can't stop you from doing any of that... but it can allow you to redistribute the code (modified or otherwise) under a set of conditions. If you redistribute GPL'd software and you disagree with, disregard or ignore the GPL, you're simply in violation of copyright law.
They're both licenses, but nobody's really sure why or how MS's are binding.
Time for a change in terminology.
...the sum of humanity is just a support system for housecats.
See, there you go spouting your suburban venom when all I did was rattle off an obviously over-the-top generalization about suburban life. :-)
I'm going to head off on my bicycle now. I've carefully planned my route to avoid the suburban commuting routes. They're too dangerous, if I'm not outright flattened, some slob might come after me with a tire-iron.
(o.b. on-topic comment: Segways are pointless.)
If people want to live in less densly populated areas, have a nice home and a yard, let the kids play, a seperate bedroom for every kid, a workshop for every parent, a media room, etc. somehow that is some kind of threat to you? How about being able to open a window below the 20th floor without choking on the smell of fermented human urine, who are you to tell them no?
I have a theory that people who live in the suburbs hate everyone. They do their best to avoid all human contact.
These people by SUV's as third-homes in which they spend a few hours each day driving on 16-lane highways to get to-and-from their suburban homes with neighbours who love eachother so much that they don't want to get out of their cars to open their doors, they separate their yards with arsenic-treated fences and close all the windows to block the sound of central airconditioners in the summer.
I knew one fellow who would never actually step outside or speak to anyone except his family or coworkers except for the weekends. His skin was desparately pale. He would get up, have breakfast, enter his attached garage, hit the garage door opener button on the right side of the visor, back out, drive along the highway, coffee in hand, radio going. About an hour later, he would arrive at his workplace downtown, hit the button on the left of his visor, drive into his office tower, park in his allotted spot, work, then do the reverse to go home.
Your assumption that living downtown means smelling your neighbour's urine, to me says that you're among these mizerable people who simply doesn't want to deal with anyone outside your family or workplace.
... granted... people generally are just as much assholes downtown as they are in the suburbs... and as such there is a greater density of assholes per square metre downtown as in the suburbs... meaning that their urine, blasting stereos, hyped-up cars, late drunken screaming etc is more prevalent... but buying a fully-detached air conditioned home in the suburbs along with a matching SUV and "media room!", doesn't make you part of any solution... the money we pour into 16-lane highways would be better spent on trains, and your houses would be better as parks and farmland.
IMHO, the real problem is the way people treat one another... and I don't know how to fix that.
P.s. what do your kids do when they are too old to 'play?'
You cannot, however, close the original GPL door.
The analogy doesn't quite hold, you can close the door all you want... that is, you can scrub the code of all contributions for which you don't hold the copyright and then stop distributing it under the GPL... but...
...that won't stop your obligations when somebody comes back to you with an old GPL'd copy of your program and demands the source code of that version.
Wasn't Sourceforge GPL? (They may have been BSD'd I could be mistaken.)
It's very frustrating to see obvious solutions for common problems getting patented.
A conversation which no doubt took place thousands of times by now:
I'm sure any kid over 8 would look on Lucas' work skeptically.
Not to say they wouldn't like it, they would just have playground arguments about how it was "unrealistic".
Excellent point :-)
The similarities in plot devices between Attack of the Clones and the two towers are a little strange though. Magneto doesn't raise an army of clones/orcs for the Empire/Sauron.
The X-men don't have a showdown at Helm's Deep/that stupid desert arena. Yeah, they do have a sort-of showdown, but there's no "army" involved (military henchmen excepted).
They even have a good-guy trapped and tortured in Orthanc/Ducu's stronghold slowly revealing bad-guy plot thing happening. Xavier was captured and controled, it is similar on the surface, but it is used differently as a plot device.
Although IMHO the most disappointing part of Attack of the Clones was that big battle at the end. Lucas sets up this huge and impossible battle... sort of like Helm's Deep. The Jedi/men are outnumbered and don't stand a chance. Tolkien sent in reenforcements... Lucas pulled a G.I. Joe and had the Jedi win by brute force... staggeringly dumb.
Yeah they're all written for kids, but I'm sure any kid over 8 would look on Lucas' work skeptically.
"The hour is later than you think young jedi -- the army of the dark side is massing and Sauron will control the senate!"
Count Duku and Saruman are the same character. It is distractingly painful.