The idea is, they can't possibly win, but they can attract lots and lots of attention to themselves because they can drag out the trial ad infinitum. By suing someone really big who people expect would have a strong case instead of someone small, people will apply the false analogy that SCO has a strong case and can win lots of cash.
I've heard many older folks repeatedly say that "trading music is okay now", because they've conflated the idea that Kazaa sued the RIAA with the idea that there happen to be legal places to buy music online. SCO is hoping that they can scum up the same type of conflation: "SCO is suing IBM for using that bad, bad linux thing (the one we saw on those IBM commercials), and Microsoft says Linux is bad..., and we use Windows at home... and..."
Fyodor says that they will license their software for distribution under the GPL (and only the GPL). SCO continues to do this after saying the GPL is bunk. If SCO isn't following the GPL (because they don't believe in it), then they have no license to distribute this software.
That's all.
If one legally declares a contract to *not* be valid, one cannot follow it's terms [logical contradition].
I tend to hold my fingers just a hair off the keys to begin with, and I've typed this entire message with my eyes closed.
People need little tactile feedback while writing via pen, I'd be willing to guess that you could type nearly letter perfect if given a desk and an infrared keyboard.
Which brings me to my next point, I think it'd be phenomenal if someone would invent gloves that would record my hand movements and keylog, and after a very long time of collecting data, let me type on the surface of anything and judge the letters by the twitches in my hands.
I played dragonrealms for a long time. You might recognize the name.
It was a lot of fun while it lasted, and had some great systems that no other game has come close to mimicking. Their combat / magic systems were very impressive. But leveling was a chore.
No, really. Once you've reached a certain level, it became no more fun to level. Everything was just X creature with new name, in Y area. Roleplaying is much more fun in small groups with a DM: There's no need to keep up the insanely serious air without some breathing room to just have fun, and often, major events happened without you.
I contributed a lot to the game in terms of player content (I hear many of the G'nar Peth stuff which a few of us started is still going on), and lets face it, I had a lot of fun doing it. But overall, the game is a whole lot less rewarding than something which lets you be a character in a social situation: real life.
I mean, if the point of the game you're playing really is social interaction, why don't you just go interact socially?
I posted this earlier in another SCO thread, but I think it would be really spiffy to start a small "business" and buy up a few licenses. Just to see if would actually *get* one.
Once we did, we could put scans of the documents on the web for others to see and read and discuss.
But, lets be honest, we're probably not going to get one.
We'd need like 500 people willing to donate a dollar or two, right?
Suppose we got a group of people together and bought a SCO Linux License. I mean, would we ever get anything for the 700 bucks we give them? It's illegal if we *don't*, I just wonder what exactly they'd give us if we asked for one of these things [as I can't imagine many people in their right minds have ever bought them].
I think it'd be interesting to put all the material one gets for buying a license online. Not pirated stuff, I just mean photocopies of the documents, etc. It would bring new light to how ridiculous this situation really is.
I doubt I'm going to get a reply, but I'll reply anyway.
Some people sometimes find jobs via Monster, et al. But the only credible studies that have been done suggest that the boards are a lousy way to find or fill a job.
This is the kind of logic that works in any industry. No one reads statistics, everyone reads expert ratings and listens to the commentary of friends. The availability heuristic is much more important to consumers than are actual statistics - something you seem to be intimately familiar with.
Being as this is the case: People listen to their friends about jobs, the boards operate by filling some of their customers with jobs and having those people tell friends about it. Just as you've pointed out that managers hire people with personal credibility and expert advice [30k to fill 100k job] first, people choose services based on personal credibility and expert advice first. Here's my question: What makes you think you can change that?
I mean, lets face it. Your post doesn't really make me want to go read your website [and, to be fair, I haven't]. It's intelligent, but it's the same kind of thing: ''I'm an expert, and being an expert, I shall loosely cite a few other "expert" sources which convince you I'm right, and then I shall give you expert advice: Don't trust big websites, trust me.''
My point is this: What advice can you offer than transcends that other other "experts" in the field? Why are you more qualified to offer advice? 9 years of personal testimonials are still personal testimonials, go read alexchiu.com for a brief survey of testimonial science.
Really, I'm genuinely curious. "Expert" referent power has always interested me. Please don't take this as angry sarcasm.
The reason why the government should do it for you is because you're not the one who's going to be drunk driving.
We get it. You're responsible. Congradulations. But there's nothing that makes Joe responsible, and Joe is driving on the same road as your wife/daughter/son.
If I were you, I'd *want* legislation in place that made sure Joe was responsible, because if you're already responsible, it doesn't change the way *you* act. It's hardly infringing on *your* rights to make sure Joe isn't an idiot on the road and doesn't put the lives of your children at risk.
Windows gets accused of bugs it's often not responsible for. Because some shoddy developer never realized that people might be running on system configuration X instead of system configuration A, when his application crashes, people often blame Windows hardware support.
I'm not advocating for Windows, I'm just saying it's got decent hardware support and that when writing an application for one specific set of hardware it's made to appear infinately better because the consumer can't screw with the default application environment.
Most of the problems aren't with unstable *hardware*, it's unstable and ugly Windows Malware.
I think so, because the act could be termed illegal by the individual or group doing the racketeering.
I mean, if you have such control over a market or a court that you can deem things illegal and virtually set penalties, when you then accuse people of doing those arbitrary things, you're racketeering, right?
I mean, it's a stretch, but it's not hard to say that the RIAA has sufficient monopoly power to dictate legislation in the area of music distribution in the US.
It's also a particularly difficult one to get through.
--> Further, the Criminal Division will not approve "imaginative" prosecutions under RICO which are far afield from the congressional purpose of the RICO statute. A RICO count which merely duplicates the elements of proof of traditional Hobbs Act, Travel Act, mail fraud, wire fraud, gambling or controlled substances cases, will not be approved unless it serves some special RICO purpose. Only in exceptional circumstances will approval be granted when RICO is sought merely to serve some evidentiary purpose.
However, it seems as though this is basically the purpose of RICO, if worded carefully enough: "The decision to institute a federal criminal prosecution involves balancing society's interest in effective law enforcement against the consequences for the accused." In other words, the implication seems to be that RICO serves to protect citizens from litigation which they cannot pursue due to legal fees and great personal damages (i.e., grossly misproportioned punishments) by groups or individuals who can offer "settlements" which deprive the courts of their function.
In other OTHER words, the point seems to be: if something is truly illegal, a full case in the courts should be seen as a neccessary requirement by BOTH parties in order to gain proper compensation for the illegal act. OTHERWISE, individuals who have power over the state or a market can abuse the system by creating lawsuits that others can't win but offer bribes out of them for personal gain.
But of course, IANAL. I just read some random legislation and made an interpretation out of it.
Besides, every new piece of hardware that comes out is practically designed for Windows, and we all know that this is not the operating system that will drive consumer appliances, right?
Well, that's a good question. Windows is sorta big and bulky, but it runs on an awful lot of things. I mean, think about how versatile the code really is, even if it does crash. Take that requirement out of the picture - that the OS has to run on Nteen thousand different hardware configurations, just one, your superblender - and it might not be the worst choice one could make.
But then, I might be completely uninformed. It's just conjecture.
Slashdot Mirror
SCO Reponse: Damn... now they're using free speech against us! What shall we do?
That, or they could be trying the Kazaa trick.
The idea is, they can't possibly win, but they can attract lots and lots of attention to themselves because they can drag out the trial ad infinitum. By suing someone really big who people expect would have a strong case instead of someone small, people will apply the false analogy that SCO has a strong case and can win lots of cash.
I've heard many older folks repeatedly say that "trading music is okay now", because they've conflated the idea that Kazaa sued the RIAA with the idea that there happen to be legal places to buy music online. SCO is hoping that they can scum up the same type of conflation: "SCO is suing IBM for using that bad, bad linux thing (the one we saw on those IBM commercials), and Microsoft says Linux is bad..., and we use Windows at home... and..."
Visual effects is the category you're looking for, and LOTR won that.
What more do you want?
u fired! kekekekekekekeke!!11111
Well, if you can't find a more specific service, you can do everything at Zombo.com. Anything. Welcome. Anything. You can do anything at Zombo.com.
This isn't really that complicated.
Fyodor says that they will license their software for distribution under the GPL (and only the GPL). SCO continues to do this after saying the GPL is bunk. If SCO isn't following the GPL (because they don't believe in it), then they have no license to distribute this software.
That's all.
If one legally declares a contract to *not* be valid, one cannot follow it's terms [logical contradition].
On the bright side, it does mean you only get served one subpoena.
I worked in an Arcade, those things really do throw you back 5 feet if you're stupid.
A boss tried to pry off the monitor-connector without a ground on his screwdriver. BAM. Hit the wall *really hard* .
Live in or near Boston? Come to Tufts or Harvard, the libraries are completely open and free for anyone who wants to browse and photocopy material.
You need no account to search or request help. Much of the material is online, and they'll already scan and send you articles.
See Iliad at http://www.library.tufts.edu
I tend to hold my fingers just a hair off the keys to begin with, and I've typed this entire message with my eyes closed.
People need little tactile feedback while writing via pen, I'd be willing to guess that you could type nearly letter perfect if given a desk and an infrared keyboard.
Which brings me to my next point, I think it'd be phenomenal if someone would invent gloves that would record my hand movements and keylog, and after a very long time of collecting data, let me type on the surface of anything and judge the letters by the twitches in my hands.
I played dragonrealms for a long time. You might recognize the name.
It was a lot of fun while it lasted, and had some great systems that no other game has come close to mimicking. Their combat / magic systems were very impressive. But leveling was a chore.
No, really. Once you've reached a certain level, it became no more fun to level. Everything was just X creature with new name, in Y area. Roleplaying is much more fun in small groups with a DM: There's no need to keep up the insanely serious air without some breathing room to just have fun, and often, major events happened without you.
I contributed a lot to the game in terms of player content (I hear many of the G'nar Peth stuff which a few of us started is still going on), and lets face it, I had a lot of fun doing it. But overall, the game is a whole lot less rewarding than something which lets you be a character in a social situation: real life.
I mean, if the point of the game you're playing really is social interaction, why don't you just go interact socially?
It is only rated as being able to lift 16 ounces. Not nearly enough for a bomb.
Or plenty to drop a pound of pick your poison, with no danger of personal injury.
I posted this earlier in another SCO thread, but I think it would be really spiffy to start a small "business" and buy up a few licenses. Just to see if would actually *get* one.
Once we did, we could put scans of the documents on the web for others to see and read and discuss.
But, lets be honest, we're probably not going to get one.
We'd need like 500 people willing to donate a dollar or two, right?
I think this might be a really interesting idea.
Suppose we got a group of people together and bought a SCO Linux License. I mean, would we ever get anything for the 700 bucks we give them? It's illegal if we *don't*, I just wonder what exactly they'd give us if we asked for one of these things [as I can't imagine many people in their right minds have ever bought them].
I think it'd be interesting to put all the material one gets for buying a license online. Not pirated stuff, I just mean photocopies of the documents, etc. It would bring new light to how ridiculous this situation really is.
Common sense says that distance makes the heart grow fonder.
It also says that distance makes the heart grow weak.
It's mainly just ambiguous data that we use to confirm a pre-existing notion. Having common sense on a website doesn't help.
Mr. Corcodilos:
I doubt I'm going to get a reply, but I'll reply anyway.
Some people sometimes find jobs via Monster, et al. But the only credible studies that have been done suggest that the boards are a lousy way to find or fill a job.
This is the kind of logic that works in any industry. No one reads statistics, everyone reads expert ratings and listens to the commentary of friends. The availability heuristic is much more important to consumers than are actual statistics - something you seem to be intimately familiar with.
Being as this is the case: People listen to their friends about jobs, the boards operate by filling some of their customers with jobs and having those people tell friends about it. Just as you've pointed out that managers hire people with personal credibility and expert advice [30k to fill 100k job] first, people choose services based on personal credibility and expert advice first. Here's my question: What makes you think you can change that?
I mean, lets face it. Your post doesn't really make me want to go read your website [and, to be fair, I haven't]. It's intelligent, but it's the same kind of thing: ''I'm an expert, and being an expert, I shall loosely cite a few other "expert" sources which convince you I'm right, and then I shall give you expert advice: Don't trust big websites, trust me.''
My point is this: What advice can you offer than transcends that other other "experts" in the field? Why are you more qualified to offer advice? 9 years of personal testimonials are still personal testimonials, go read alexchiu.com for a brief survey of testimonial science.
Really, I'm genuinely curious. "Expert" referent power has always interested me. Please don't take this as angry sarcasm.
God damn! Read my post! You're not the one who's going to be drunk driving! The *OTHER* guy is!
Why are you against legislation that enforces the responsible behavior that *you're* exhibiting?
The reason why the government should do it for you is because you're not the one who's going to be drunk driving.
We get it. You're responsible. Congradulations. But there's nothing that makes Joe responsible, and Joe is driving on the same road as your wife/daughter/son.
If I were you, I'd *want* legislation in place that made sure Joe was responsible, because if you're already responsible, it doesn't change the way *you* act. It's hardly infringing on *your* rights to make sure Joe isn't an idiot on the road and doesn't put the lives of your children at risk.
Of course it's remotely logical.
Windows gets accused of bugs it's often not responsible for. Because some shoddy developer never realized that people might be running on system configuration X instead of system configuration A, when his application crashes, people often blame Windows hardware support.
I'm not advocating for Windows, I'm just saying it's got decent hardware support and that when writing an application for one specific set of hardware it's made to appear infinately better because the consumer can't screw with the default application environment.
Most of the problems aren't with unstable *hardware*, it's unstable and ugly Windows Malware.
I think so, because the act could be termed illegal by the individual or group doing the racketeering.
I mean, if you have such control over a market or a court that you can deem things illegal and virtually set penalties, when you then accuse people of doing those arbitrary things, you're racketeering, right?
I mean, it's a stretch, but it's not hard to say that the RIAA has sufficient monopoly power to dictate legislation in the area of music distribution in the US.
It's also a particularly difficult one to get through.
--> Further, the Criminal Division will not approve "imaginative" prosecutions under RICO which are far afield from the congressional purpose of the RICO statute. A RICO count which merely duplicates the elements of proof of traditional Hobbs Act, Travel Act, mail fraud, wire fraud, gambling or controlled substances cases, will not be approved unless it serves some special RICO purpose. Only in exceptional circumstances will approval be granted when RICO is sought merely to serve some evidentiary purpose.
However, it seems as though this is basically the purpose of RICO, if worded carefully enough: "The decision to institute a federal criminal prosecution involves balancing society's interest in effective law enforcement against the consequences for the accused." In other words, the implication seems to be that RICO serves to protect citizens from litigation which they cannot pursue due to legal fees and great personal damages (i.e., grossly misproportioned punishments) by groups or individuals who can offer "settlements" which deprive the courts of their function.
In other OTHER words, the point seems to be: if something is truly illegal, a full case in the courts should be seen as a neccessary requirement by BOTH parties in order to gain proper compensation for the illegal act. OTHERWISE, individuals who have power over the state or a market can abuse the system by creating lawsuits that others can't win but offer bribes out of them for personal gain.
But of course, IANAL. I just read some random legislation and made an interpretation out of it.
...or if we got some cows, we could put them all in this secret place...
Besides, every new piece of hardware that comes out is practically designed for Windows, and we all know that this is not the operating system that will drive consumer appliances, right?
Well, that's a good question. Windows is sorta big and bulky, but it runs on an awful lot of things. I mean, think about how versatile the code really is, even if it does crash. Take that requirement out of the picture - that the OS has to run on Nteen thousand different hardware configurations, just one, your superblender - and it might not be the worst choice one could make.
But then, I might be completely uninformed. It's just conjecture.
Sorry, Legique =)
Lexique Risi. Latina Mortua Est. :)