A coworker (ok... technically my boss) asked me yesterday when I expected the lawsuit to be resolved. I immediately replied 5-10 years.
Not a chance.
The reason is that SCO can't afford the burn rate. They have to go for a quick win: they're burning through more than $10 million a year in legal expenses on top of several a million a year in operating losses. Their latest round of financing included clauses that make further equity financing nearly impossible, and they have less than $40 million in the bank.
Bottom line: this sucker is going to be over, one way or another, in less than three years because SCO can't afford to keep it going any longer.
SCO have been ordered to produce their evidence against IBM by midnight on January 11th, 2004.
Actually, they've been ordered to state their complaints against IBM; evidence comes later.
Also, their deadline isn't midnight the 11th: as with all such legal matters, it's COB (17:00 local) on the deadline or the first Court day (the 12th) following it. The Clerk of the Court's receipt of the response is the magic timestamp, and the Clerk isn't going to wait up to midnight on a Sunday in the hopes that soon Darl will be there.
Sontag says SCO has provided 1 million pages of documents to IBM and that IBM in return has provided only 100,000 pages to SCO. "The foot-dragging is on the part of IBM," he says.
Where was the freaking C&C warning?
Look, Chris baby, let's put this kindly: it was SCO who replied to a request for source code (requested for code comparison purposes) who printed it out, then scanned it, then PDFed the scanned image, then shipped the PDF. I'm sure that trick was the basis for endless merriment in Lindon, with backslapping and congratulations all around.
You'll allow me, I hope, to quietly contemplate the prospect of the Court ordering SCO to pay for manual transcription and proofreading of all 150,000 pages?
GrokLaw's posting of IBM's "Handy Guide to SCOX Legal Obfuscation," also known as "IBM Addendum to Memorandum in Support of IBM's 2nd Motion to Compel Discovery."
Warning: put drinks and domestic animals safely out of danger first.
Different subject. Up in the metal interconnect layers, you want low-K to reduce capacitance between unrelated signals. Down at the gate level, you want high-K dielectrics to make it possible to induce a reasonable channel charge at low voltages and practical gate thicknesses.
Nickel is the metal on top of the gate dielectric. Most of these processes actually have layers of material in each structure, though. For instance, the dielectric may have a layer of something compatible with silicon at the "bottom" and then something with high K above it, then something on top of that which gets along with the metal of the gate itself. Nickel is good because it's fairly nonreactive with the other materials in use.
That process was later abandoned in favor of polysilicon because poly was much easier to work with at smaller feature sizes (I'm a bit foggy on this one).
Silicon gates can be self-aligning. Once you've got gate oxide, deposit a layer of polysilicon and pattern it, then use the remaining poly as a mask for the gates while the rest of the oxide is removed.
I do know I'm forgetting another difficulty in working with GaAs, anyone care to remind me why GaAs is not as common as silicon today?
There are several. The defect densities in compound semiconductors are much higher than silicon, limiting size. The materials aren't as mechanically stable as silicon, which also limits size due to misalignment. Also, complementary FET structures are hard to get right (which is why most compound semiconductor circuits today are basically bipolar.)
I suspect that I'm also forgetting a few. It's been a while for me, too.
No. The bonds between silicon atoms are covalent. A metal (e.g. copper) has a "cloud" of electrons free to move around in the lattice. Silicon is a semiconductor, with the charges bound to the atoms except when there's enough energy (typically thermal) to kick them loose.
To clarify: the idea is to use a gate dielectric which has a higher dielectric constant than silicon dioxide. Most of the candidates are metallic oxides, nitrides, etc. That allows the transistors to have thicker gates for the same gate capacitance (which is how MOS transistors work).
The chemistry of the non-silica gate dielectric requires that the gate itself be non-silicon, and metals are better conductors anyway. (For larger transistors, we're already running into trouble from the distributed resistance of the gates.)
Novell apparently is more interested in the Connector than the Ximian desktop, and more interested in SuSE's servers than its desktop offerings. However, SuSE has been a huge backer of the KDE project and Ximian is the home of Gnome. It'll certainly be interesting to see how the Novell management allocates their resources going forward, won't it?
A Cease & Desist is a good first start, but along with it you should send a DMCA takedown notice to their ISP. Yes, that ISP is another Canopy company, but when (not if) they refuse to pull the plug you have another target for statutory damages on contributory infringement. One that won't be a glowing crater following IBM's TOKARI [1]
There was much rejoicing in civil liberties circles.
Here is something that a judge will actually understand: a graduate student publishing a plain-English report of research into DRM being sued (and bankrupted) under the DMCA for pointing out a shift key.
Software Libre isn't sold, it's published. The authors of KDE are liable in the same way that the authors of a book are: you might find it useful, you might find it worthless, or you might just find it interesting. All up to you.
This is fundamentally different from something sold for its utility but with no attendant literary or educational value.
Maybe prior art searches will improve once the USPTO moves into the new two million square foot USPTO campus, which includes five interconnected buildings, a twelve-story atrium, a landscaped two-acre park, and a museum."
Don't be silly -- once they have the new digs, they'll have even less reason than now to look outside of their own records.
The government does listen to IBM, however. My question is, what are they waiting for?
The last thing IBM wants is to have SCO suffer a "fatal accident" before they are bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated in court. In fact, it looks as though IBM wants to make sure that not only is SCO left with no stock certificate standing on another but the Canopy Group is sown with salt as well.
The reason for this is that SCO accused IBM of violating confidentiality agreements. Sort of like commenting on the local Don's wife's amorous inclinations: he just can't afford to be seen tolerating that kind of talk. IBM gets half its revenues from managing others' computer systems, and they can not afford to have their trustworthiness in doubt.
IBM isn't going to be satisfied until they are not only off the hook but absolutely vindicated, with Darl begging for a cardboard box to sleep in. Then they have the SEC add insult to injury with criminal charges.
Someone needs to give these idiots a clue or two. With only a trivial effort in steganography they could "watermark" each copy uniquely. That way if if some reviewer leaked his copy they'd have evidence to nail him to the wall.
With both of these lists, sure denial of service sucks. Given. When you rovide a service for free you expect acolades, guys buying you beers and women offering you their virginity. Best case, sure. But sometimes things aren't going to go your way and it seems so easy to close up shop, which can really screw people there were relying on you.
Maybe it's not about the lack of women begging to bear your children.
For instance, Joe Jared's case. Osirusoft was purely a volunteer effort on Joe's part, and it took time and money away from his family. Which they accepted.
The lawsuit and DDOS, on the other hand, not only sucked money to fight them but denied him the use of his systems and connection for his main business (orthotic shoe inserts).
Joe didn't give up because we weren't worshipping him, he gave up because he had to in order to feed his family. Whether you approve or not really doesn't matter.
The report really doesn't add anything new. Everyone and his cousin's dog have already commented on how "monoculture" is a Bad Thing and Mircrosoft's (in)security is legendary.
Prediction: most of the counters to this will come from the observation that it was sponsored by the CCIA, which contains many of Microsoft's would-be competition. Of course, the CCIA contains just about everyone -- but then I repeat myself.
Suppose that the DDoS zombies used use a internet name instead of IP addresses.. Why not change the DNS for monkeys.com & compunet to a nice NSA or FBI address range
NSA? FBI? Why go for the small fry?
Resolve them to either a.mil or to the House and Senate sites for 12 hours. After that, apologize and point out that they, with Gov-spec servers, were only hit for twelve hours while Joe Jared, Ron Guiliamette, etc. have been trying to deal with it for that many weeks -- but for some reason "law enforcement" didn't see it as a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft will sue them for trademark violation -- after all, it's "Windows" in the context of a computer display.
Not a chance.
The reason is that SCO can't afford the burn rate. They have to go for a quick win: they're burning through more than $10 million a year in legal expenses on top of several a million a year in operating losses. Their latest round of financing included clauses that make further equity financing nearly impossible, and they have less than $40 million in the bank.
Bottom line: this sucker is going to be over, one way or another, in less than three years because SCO can't afford to keep it going any longer.
Actually, they've been ordered to state their complaints against IBM; evidence comes later.
Also, their deadline isn't midnight the 11th: as with all such legal matters, it's COB (17:00 local) on the deadline or the first Court day (the 12th) following it. The Clerk of the Court's receipt of the response is the magic timestamp, and the Clerk isn't going to wait up to midnight on a Sunday in the hopes that soon Darl will be there.
egrep -ril 'smp|jfs|rcu' *
Where was the freaking C&C warning?
Look, Chris baby, let's put this kindly: it was SCO who replied to a request for source code (requested for code comparison purposes) who printed it out, then scanned it, then PDFed the scanned image, then shipped the PDF. I'm sure that trick was the basis for endless merriment in Lindon, with backslapping and congratulations all around.
You'll allow me, I hope, to quietly contemplate the prospect of the Court ordering SCO to pay for manual transcription and proofreading of all 150,000 pages?
Warning: put drinks and domestic animals safely out of danger first.
Different subject. Up in the metal interconnect layers, you want low-K to reduce capacitance between unrelated signals. Down at the gate level, you want high-K dielectrics to make it possible to induce a reasonable channel charge at low voltages and practical gate thicknesses.
Nickel is the metal on top of the gate dielectric. Most of these processes actually have layers of material in each structure, though. For instance, the dielectric may have a layer of something compatible with silicon at the "bottom" and then something with high K above it, then something on top of that which gets along with the metal of the gate itself. Nickel is good because it's fairly nonreactive with the other materials in use.
Silicon gates can be self-aligning. Once you've got gate oxide, deposit a layer of polysilicon and pattern it, then use the remaining poly as a mask for the gates while the rest of the oxide is removed.
I do know I'm forgetting another difficulty in working with GaAs, anyone care to remind me why GaAs is not as common as silicon today?
There are several. The defect densities in compound semiconductors are much higher than silicon, limiting size. The materials aren't as mechanically stable as silicon, which also limits size due to misalignment. Also, complementary FET structures are hard to get right (which is why most compound semiconductor circuits today are basically bipolar.)
I suspect that I'm also forgetting a few. It's been a while for me, too.
No. The bonds between silicon atoms are covalent. A metal (e.g. copper) has a "cloud" of electrons free to move around in the lattice. Silicon is a semiconductor, with the charges bound to the atoms except when there's enough energy (typically thermal) to kick them loose.
The chemistry of the non-silica gate dielectric requires that the gate itself be non-silicon, and metals are better conductors anyway. (For larger transistors, we're already running into trouble from the distributed resistance of the gates.)
Hope that helps.
Novell apparently is more interested in the Connector than the Ximian desktop, and more interested in SuSE's servers than its desktop offerings. However, SuSE has been a huge backer of the KDE project and Ximian is the home of Gnome. It'll certainly be interesting to see how the Novell management allocates their resources going forward, won't it?
[1] Trans-Orbital Kinetic Anvil Rectal Insertion
Thanks!
Sun City is 623
Here is something that a judge will actually understand: a graduate student publishing a plain-English report of research into DRM being sued (and bankrupted) under the DMCA for pointing out a shift key.
- No Eeeeeeevil "hackers" at 2600
- No that-can't-be-speech "code"
- No funny Commie (Russian) names
- Nothing for sale, even speculatively
This is the test case we've been waiting for.This is fundamentally different from something sold for its utility but with no attendant literary or educational value.
Don't be silly -- once they have the new digs, they'll have even less reason than now to look outside of their own records.
The last thing IBM wants is to have SCO suffer a "fatal accident" before they are bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated in court. In fact, it looks as though IBM wants to make sure that not only is SCO left with no stock certificate standing on another but the Canopy Group is sown with salt as well.
The reason for this is that SCO accused IBM of violating confidentiality agreements. Sort of like commenting on the local Don's wife's amorous inclinations: he just can't afford to be seen tolerating that kind of talk. IBM gets half its revenues from managing others' computer systems, and they can not afford to have their trustworthiness in doubt.
IBM isn't going to be satisfied until they are not only off the hook but absolutely vindicated, with Darl begging for a cardboard box to sleep in. Then they have the SEC add insult to injury with criminal charges.
Don't forget the t-shirt
Someone needs to give these idiots a clue or two. With only a trivial effort in steganography they could "watermark" each copy uniquely. That way if if some reviewer leaked his copy they'd have evidence to nail him to the wall.
Maybe it's not about the lack of women begging to bear your children.
For instance, Joe Jared's case. Osirusoft was purely a volunteer effort on Joe's part, and it took time and money away from his family. Which they accepted.
The lawsuit and DDOS, on the other hand, not only sucked money to fight them but denied him the use of his systems and connection for his main business (orthotic shoe inserts).
Joe didn't give up because we weren't worshipping him, he gave up because he had to in order to feed his family. Whether you approve or not really doesn't matter.
Prediction: most of the counters to this will come from the observation that it was sponsored by the CCIA, which contains many of Microsoft's would-be competition. Of course, the CCIA contains just about everyone -- but then I repeat myself.
NSA? FBI? Why go for the small fry?
Resolve them to either a .mil or to the House and Senate sites for 12 hours. After that, apologize and point out that they, with Gov-spec servers, were only hit for twelve hours while Joe Jared, Ron Guiliamette, etc. have been trying to deal with it for that many weeks -- but for some reason "law enforcement" didn't see it as a problem.
So if you'll file under Arizona's new anti-spam law, I can get you all the examples and logs you want.
I confess to not being all that optimistic, though.