Well, my argument is, that if this gets through, then you might as well kill off the lameness filter altogether. More people are annoyed by it than it's able to protect the illuminati against the great unwashed masses.
Anyway, thanks for the enlightening me on the interpunction work-around. Not that I'll be needing it, but it's nice to know that the filter is as faulty as I always thought.
You, Sir, may not be an idiot, but you are short-sighted. We (as in the Open Source crowd) may not need the SEC to win IBM's case, absolutely true. The thing is that 'we' don't want this to happen over and over again untill anyone ever hearing about Linux will go "That's about those lawsuits, isn't it?"
The only way that isn't going to happen is if the sorry sods that cause this (Daryl & co) get personally prosecuted for their misdeeds and preferably thrown in jail, even if it is only minimal security. If the only thing that happens is that SCO goes bankrupt, while the managers can get away with this money-making scheme, I think we are in for a world of pain. It would encourage every greedy bastard out there with even the slightest leverage to go to 'donors' (you fill in the blanks) and ask to fund their little pocket filling thingy while damaging OSS for the 'donors'.
I hope that at least the SEC knows that if it lets people get away with this in such a high publicity case they will have a flood on their hands. That may entice them to do something about it even if it is only small fries to them.
Besides, from the moral high ground, if this case is thrown out with prejudice, what have we won with SCO's demise when IBM's counter suit finally cut's off it's air supply? If there are any competent, product involved employees left in that company, they will be the ones taking the hit. That is, unless the SEC steps in and makes management feel the pain... (a man can dream, can't he?;-)
ROFLMAO. Point taken. Fortunatly for me, he's not yet so far that he'll sneak out on his own. What I meant to say is: I will tell my kid I trust him, and I do, but up to the point that I think he can handle at (almost) three years old and that's not very far.
The parent-post and replies to it completely miss the irony of putting copy right protection on a disc and then claiming to be 'trusting the consumer'.
This is the kind of 'trust' I give to my three year old kid!
Unfortunatly, to 'the bottle-is-half-empty' me, the sadness of the statement overshadows the funny aspect. Others may well perceive the text to be hilarious though...
And to one-up you, here in the Netherlands this is standard practice. There are loops in front of all traffic lights. Multiple loops even, a small one right in front of the stop line and a long one before that.
The logic is set so that the light goes green, then stays green as long as the long loop is still covered by cars. Quite clever actually: if you stay close to each other the light will stay green untill the timer maximum expires. However, when the speed picks up, people cars will start to move further apart so usually its a dingus that doesn't pull up fast enought that leaves a gap. Eh presto, red light.
Other systems are also employed, including measuring speed, using these loops. For instance, you can watch traffic flow on most of our national roads on a website. This for instance, is the biggest and bussiest part. Click on the rectangle boxes on the sides of the picture to see other regions.
I would really like for them to alter it a bit to show traffic density as well, but alas.
By the way, over here the loops have to be sensitive enough to even detect motor-bikes. Most European (and Asian) cars are 'light' in metal content. You will therefore always be able to see the loops: they aren't sealed into the pavement, they are put in afterwards by cutting a slit into the surface, putting the wiring in and then sealing it again. A black rectangle remains.
Nah. It shouldn't bother anyone, as long as the US electorate keeps dumb, megalomanic, power-abusing, non-accountable people from getting into the oval office...
*oops*, too late.
And here I was, thinking that "Outbreak" was way ridiculous.
Thanks for the tip. You are right, it comes close. Since I probably won't be able to hold out much longer (my current phone's battery is almost dead) I may even go for it. Pitty about the camera and associated ilk, it's pure waste. (For my rant on that topic, please see my reply to another poster's comment on my 'wish-list', if it interests you at all.)
Obviously I need to clarify since you are quite right on being unreasonable given the current language.
A good screen needen't be heavy. A high amp battery is heavy. Solution: consume less power during normal (eg: phone) use. A decent keyboard doesn't have to be big, as long as the keys aren't too slick, tiny (don't try to squeeze more into it than nescesary) or dome-shaped (see SL55 for example of bad design on slick/domed).
Durable, btw, to me isn't the same as rugged. Durable means that quality components are used and the thing doesn't go to shreads from normal usage. Too many phones do that nowadays because manufacturers seem to believe you must buy a new phone in a year or so anyway. Good bussiness for them, not such good bussiness for the customer.
On the camera issue: before you had a phone with a camera, did you always lug a camera with you wherever you went? Did you miss it much? If you did carry a camera everywhere, you would probably want a real one to take real pictures anyway so the point is moot. A camera means more things to damage, more components to go bust, more space/weight taken. Kill the bleeding camera's already! For that space/weight/powerconsumption give me bluetooth or batterylife.
The point that both of you seem to miss, imho, is that if voice is the method of input, you want to adapt your interface to cater for it. Or, to put it differently, the current interfaces are all geared toward mouse/keyboard input.
A new method of input requires a new method of desiging the interface. It is that simple. Unfortunatly, we'll be going through some of the outer rings of hell before they will get this right. (Think about how long it took to get the current interfaces only half-usable and they're still not there yet if you compare to pen and paper for some uses).
Yes it is. Unfortunatly, it has a camera. I'm wondering when that hype will go out again because I'm unable to find a decent phone to my specs:
Good colorscreen (65k colors) with good resolution
Simple, clean and clear customizable interface (forget siemens, unfortunatly) with good performance (read: fast reacting)
Long battery life
Decent keyboard (no odd, flashy layouts, easy to touch type)
Light (less than 100g)
Bluetooth and IR
Good phonebook (with fully customizable groups, lots of info fields per entry, group grouping: don't want to react to groups 1-4, silent for 5,6, full ring for 8)
Good alarm/reminder (no need for a full calendar, as long as it syncs with the major apps)
GPRS
Triple band
last but not least: durable.
Nice to have, willing to pay extra:
Ssh client... (not kidding either)
Browser
Mail-app
Good calculator
Notes/mini-text-editor
Nice to have if free:
IRC client
Fax capability (send mostly)
Timezone/extended clock
Absolutely not on/in there:
Camera
Radio / Mp3 player
Other strange bolt-ons that suck power and give little if anything in return in the way of usability
Such a phone would fullfill my day to day needs as a telephone and organizer quite well.
If it helps any, I think it is an enlightening post that goes to show how little one knows. Oh well. I'm just happy people outside of the Netherlands / Belgium make the effort to learn Dutch. Not one of the easiest languages out there.
What I find most interesting is that it then must be that english migrated to the courteous form, whereas Dutch seems to be converging on the informal form.
Language can be a lot of fun, whichever language it is.
In Dutch, as in most other European languages, there is a formal form ('u') and an informal form ('je'/'jullie') of addressing people. In english, the same was true in the past with 'thee' and 'thou' as the formal variant.
As you say, if in doubt, use 'u'. However, here in the Netherlands, young people are often amazed if one uses 'u' instead of 'je' to address them. Most people feel, that if addressed with u, they're suddenly old...;-). If you want to be polite, use 'u', but don't when the person you address is young (apparantly younger than 25) and it doestn't concern a formal contact or situation.
[dutch mode]Ik vind het knap dat je de moeite neemt om Nederlands te leren en ik hoop dat je het niet al te moeilijk vindt.[/dutch mode]
I am not a lawyer, (obviously...) and you are probably right about the absence of a precedent. I should have been clearer on what I meant with 'strengthening'. I meant that, given this settlement, other entities are less likely to infringe on the GPL on the basis that 'this GPL has no teeth'. Too many examples already of companies that have folded under the mere threat of a lawsuit based on the GPL.
I'm no big fan of the cold war, but if nothing else, it has shown that a threat alone can prevent attacks under most circumstances.
I think it is sad though, that an idealistic organisation like the YMCA would rather avoid going to court (on those occaisions that they were not to blame) than setting a precedent for a settlement figure.
Anyway, thank you for your insight. I'd rather not learn about legalese but unfortunatly it seems a necessity nowadays.
According to the article, Montavista found GPL-ed code in Lineo's product.
Possible implications: - the issue who copied from whom has become a lot more important to the SCO court-case - Lineo broke the GPL and decided to settle. Why? Did Lineo think that the GPL does hold water? Any way you turn this, it looks no good for SCO and their bickering over the GPL being 'invalid'. - The GPL was the basis for law-suit. Just because it was settled out of court doesn't take anything away from that fact. Another strengthening. - How is SCO going to deal with IBM's and RedHats quid pro quo: innocent infringement? Innocent infringement means that, although an infringement is aknowlegded by the accused party, the infringement was done unknowingly. In the SCO case it would then become very hard to get any compensation because: a) damage will be hard to show anyway (it is probably easily provable that SCO lost more customers because of the lawsuit than because of infringment of any kind). b) if any damage is shown, compensation will be low if at all applicable because it was due to 'innocent infringement'. c) !!! d) Loss for SCO/MS because the victory for IBM, SGI and RedHat will be complete.
I'm happy alright. You've managed to completely discredit yourself. A feat I would have needed to work long and hard for.
For your information: the fact that one gives up on making an argument to someone who can most obviously not be pursuaded to see things in any other way than his own is not hypocrisy btw. It is common sense.
nice troll indeed. You have just proven that there is only one person here calling names, going for the ad hominem attacks and outright muddying the waters of discussion and it is you. Just put me on your foe list and be done with it will you?
I've wondered if I should even react to such a hilarious and sad discounting of arguments. This seems more of a troll than anything else. I will answer nonetheless, because some people may not be able to see through your smoke screen.
First of all, I never said that patrons should not be allowed to ask for ID. I do oppose a system where that ID, including photograph is kept on record and shared with other establishments. Once that happens, yes it will already be too late. Laugh all you want, this has been proven adequatly by history. (And don't start about learning from mistakes, it's bullshit. Politicians have the memory of a amoebe).
Secondly, you start to make no sense at all. What are you saying here?
Thirdly, your guess is wrong.
Fourthly(sp?) As the article says (read the fine article), this isn't about individual bars or the freedom of their owners to do as they like, this is about a system among all bars. And that is when it goes bad. So you're way of base here, chap. Please stay on the subject.
Lastly, for you to claim that a) I should have bigger fish to fry b) protection of rights is something for an elite educated minority only shows how little you understand about the issues of liberty and safety and how they relate.
I hope the people around you are photogenic, they'll be wanting to look their best if they want to keep coming in your neighbourhood.
Disclaimer: I live in the Netherlands and we've had our fair share of senseless violence, but nobody here is contemplating these kinds of ludicrous schemes and we have arguably less freedom than people in Canada or the US.
Slashdot Mirror
10 minutes at 10 bits/s, I wonder what was important enough to spent those bytes on...
;-)
If Nasa-geeks are anything like other geeks, it must've been either martian porn or nethack I guess. The former being more likely.
Well, my argument is, that if this gets through, then you might as well kill off the lameness filter altogether. More people are annoyed by it than it's able to protect the illuminati against the great unwashed masses.
Anyway, thanks for the enlightening me on the interpunction work-around. Not that I'll be needing it, but it's nice to know that the filter is as faulty as I always thought.
(Yes it's off topic. Deal with it.)
You heard the 'Division Bell' ring, I'm sure... (It wants its 1994 back.)
;-)
Besides, your relationship suffered the 'Final Cut' years ago after you both had a 'Momentary lapse of reason'.
Enough already!
You, Sir, may not be an idiot, but you are short-sighted. We (as in the Open Source crowd) may not need the SEC to win IBM's case, absolutely true. The thing is that 'we' don't want this to happen over and over again untill anyone ever hearing about Linux will go "That's about those lawsuits, isn't it?"
;-)
The only way that isn't going to happen is if the sorry sods that cause this (Daryl & co) get personally prosecuted for their misdeeds and preferably thrown in jail, even if it is only minimal security. If the only thing that happens is that SCO goes bankrupt, while the managers can get away with this money-making scheme, I think we are in for a world of pain. It would encourage every greedy bastard out there with even the slightest leverage to go to 'donors' (you fill in the blanks) and ask to fund their little pocket filling thingy while damaging OSS for the 'donors'.
I hope that at least the SEC knows that if it lets people get away with this in such a high publicity case they will have a flood on their hands. That may entice them to do something about it even if it is only small fries to them.
Besides, from the moral high ground, if this case is thrown out with prejudice, what have we won with SCO's demise when IBM's counter suit finally cut's off it's air supply? If there are any competent, product involved employees left in that company, they will be the ones taking the hit. That is, unless the SEC steps in and makes management feel the pain... (a man can dream, can't he?
ROFLMAO. Point taken. Fortunatly for me, he's not yet so far that he'll sneak out on his own. What I meant to say is: I will tell my kid I trust him, and I do, but up to the point that I think he can handle at (almost) three years old and that's not very far.
I consider anything that makes an audio-cd not conform Redbook standard, solely for the reason of making it 'less copyable', copyright protection.
The extras are only there to cover this fact up, I'm sure (or it wouldn't be Sony Music.)
Who modded parent up insightfull?!
The parent-post and replies to it completely miss the irony of putting copy right protection on a disc and then claiming to be 'trusting the consumer'.
This is the kind of 'trust' I give to my three year old kid!
Unfortunatly, to 'the bottle-is-half-empty' me, the sadness of the statement overshadows the funny aspect. Others may well perceive the text to be hilarious though...
Sheesh people, wake up...
And to one-up you, here in the Netherlands this is standard practice. There are loops in front of all traffic lights. Multiple loops even, a small one right in front of the stop line and a long one before that.
The logic is set so that the light goes green, then stays green as long as the long loop is still covered by cars. Quite clever actually: if you stay close to each other the light will stay green untill the timer maximum expires. However, when the speed picks up, people cars will start to move further apart so usually its a dingus that doesn't pull up fast enought that leaves a gap. Eh presto, red light.
Other systems are also employed, including measuring speed, using these loops. For instance, you can watch traffic flow on most of our national roads on a website. This for instance, is the biggest and bussiest part. Click on the rectangle boxes on the sides of the picture to see other regions.
I would really like for them to alter it a bit to show traffic density as well, but alas.
By the way, over here the loops have to be sensitive enough to even detect motor-bikes. Most European (and Asian) cars are 'light' in metal content. You will therefore always be able to see the loops: they aren't sealed into the pavement, they are put in afterwards by cutting a slit into the surface, putting the wiring in and then sealing it again. A black rectangle remains.
Nah. It shouldn't bother anyone, as long as the US electorate keeps dumb, megalomanic, power-abusing, non-accountable people from getting into the oval office...
*oops*, too late.
And here I was, thinking that "Outbreak" was way ridiculous.
According to Userfriendly there is... ;-)
Thanks for the tip. You are right, it comes close. Since I probably won't be able to hold out much longer (my current phone's battery is almost dead) I may even go for it. Pitty about the camera and associated ilk, it's pure waste. (For my rant on that topic, please see my reply to another poster's comment on my 'wish-list', if it interests you at all.)
Obviously I need to clarify since you are quite right on being unreasonable given the current language.
A good screen needen't be heavy. A high amp battery is heavy. Solution: consume less power during normal (eg: phone) use. A decent keyboard doesn't have to be big, as long as the keys aren't too slick, tiny (don't try to squeeze more into it than nescesary) or dome-shaped (see SL55 for example of bad design on slick/domed).
Durable, btw, to me isn't the same as rugged. Durable means that quality components are used and the thing doesn't go to shreads from normal usage. Too many phones do that nowadays because manufacturers seem to believe you must buy a new phone in a year or so anyway. Good bussiness for them, not such good bussiness for the customer.
On the camera issue: before you had a phone with a camera, did you always lug a camera with you wherever you went? Did you miss it much? If you did carry a camera everywhere, you would probably want a real one to take real pictures anyway so the point is moot. A camera means more things to damage, more components to go bust, more space/weight taken. Kill the bleeding camera's already! For that space/weight/powerconsumption give me bluetooth or batterylife.
The point that both of you seem to miss, imho, is that if voice is the method of input, you want to adapt your interface to cater for it. Or, to put it differently, the current interfaces are all geared toward mouse/keyboard input.
A new method of input requires a new method of desiging the interface. It is that simple. Unfortunatly, we'll be going through some of the outer rings of hell before they will get this right. (Think about how long it took to get the current interfaces only half-usable and they're still not there yet if you compare to pen and paper for some uses).
Yes it is. Unfortunatly, it has a camera. I'm wondering when that hype will go out again because I'm unable to find a decent phone to my specs:
Good colorscreen (65k colors) with good resolution
Simple, clean and clear customizable interface (forget siemens, unfortunatly) with good performance (read: fast reacting)
Long battery life
Decent keyboard (no odd, flashy layouts, easy to touch type)
Light (less than 100g)
Bluetooth and IR
Good phonebook (with fully customizable groups, lots of info fields per entry, group grouping: don't want to react to groups 1-4, silent for 5,6, full ring for 8)
Good alarm/reminder (no need for a full calendar, as long as it syncs with the major apps)
GPRS
Triple band
last but not least: durable.
Nice to have, willing to pay extra:
Ssh client... (not kidding either)
Browser
Mail-app
Good calculator
Notes/mini-text-editor
Nice to have if free:
IRC client
Fax capability (send mostly)
Timezone /extended clock
Absolutely not on/in there:
Camera
Radio / Mp3 player
Other strange bolt-ons that suck power and give little if anything in return in the way of usability
Such a phone would fullfill my day to day needs as a telephone and organizer quite well.
If it helps any, I think it is an enlightening post that goes to show how little one knows. Oh well. I'm just happy people outside of the Netherlands / Belgium make the effort to learn Dutch. Not one of the easiest languages out there.
What I find most interesting is that it then must be that english migrated to the courteous form, whereas Dutch seems to be converging on the informal form.
Language can be a lot of fun, whichever language it is.
In Dutch, as in most other European languages, there is a formal form ('u') and an informal form ('je'/'jullie') of addressing people. In english, the same was true in the past with 'thee' and 'thou' as the formal variant.
;-). If you want to be polite, use 'u', but don't when the person you address is young (apparantly younger than 25) and it doestn't concern a formal contact or situation.
As you say, if in doubt, use 'u'. However, here in the Netherlands, young people are often amazed if one uses 'u' instead of 'je' to address them. Most people feel, that if addressed with u, they're suddenly old...
[dutch mode]Ik vind het knap dat je de moeite neemt om Nederlands te leren en ik hoop dat je het niet al te moeilijk vindt.[/dutch mode]
A hype?
/.?!
Here? On
Never!
(Insert overly-obvious "You must be new here" comment.)
I am not a lawyer, (obviously...) and you are probably right about the absence of a precedent. I should have been clearer on what I meant with 'strengthening'. I meant that, given this settlement, other entities are less likely to infringe on the GPL on the basis that 'this GPL has no teeth'. Too many examples already of companies that have folded under the mere threat of a lawsuit based on the GPL.
I'm no big fan of the cold war, but if nothing else, it has shown that a threat alone can prevent attacks under most circumstances.
I think it is sad though, that an idealistic organisation like the YMCA would rather avoid going to court (on those occaisions that they were not to blame) than setting a precedent for a settlement figure.
Anyway, thank you for your insight. I'd rather not learn about legalese but unfortunatly it seems a necessity nowadays.
Can be a "friend", a "foe" or a "freak", on the basis of logic, with only this premise we will never know... :D
According to the article, Montavista found GPL-ed code in Lineo's product.
Possible implications:
- the issue who copied from whom has become a lot more important to the SCO court-case
- Lineo broke the GPL and decided to settle. Why? Did Lineo think that the GPL does hold water? Any way you turn this, it looks no good for SCO and their bickering over the GPL being 'invalid'.
- The GPL was the basis for law-suit. Just because it was settled out of court doesn't take anything away from that fact. Another strengthening.
- How is SCO going to deal with IBM's and RedHats quid pro quo: innocent infringement? Innocent infringement means that, although an infringement is aknowlegded by the accused party, the infringement was done unknowingly. In the SCO case it would then become very hard to get any compensation because:
a) damage will be hard to show anyway (it is probably easily provable that SCO lost more customers because of the lawsuit than because of infringment of any kind).
b) if any damage is shown, compensation will be low if at all applicable because it was due to 'innocent infringement'.
c) !!!
d) Loss for SCO/MS because the victory for IBM, SGI and RedHat will be complete.
I'm happy alright. You've managed to completely discredit yourself. A feat I would have needed to work long and hard for.
For your information: the fact that one gives up on making an argument to someone who can most obviously not be pursuaded to see things in any other way than his own is not hypocrisy btw. It is common sense.
Good day, Sir.
nice troll indeed. You have just proven that there is only one person here calling names, going for the ad hominem attacks and outright muddying the waters of discussion and it is you. Just put me on your foe list and be done with it will you?
(btw, I'm glad you at least had fun).
I've wondered if I should even react to such a hilarious and sad discounting of arguments. This seems more of a troll than anything else. I will answer nonetheless, because some people may not be able to see through your smoke screen.
First of all, I never said that patrons should not be allowed to ask for ID. I do oppose a system where that ID, including photograph is kept on record and shared with other establishments. Once that happens, yes it will already be too late. Laugh all you want, this has been proven adequatly by history. (And don't start about learning from mistakes, it's bullshit. Politicians have the memory of a amoebe).
Secondly, you start to make no sense at all. What are you saying here?
Thirdly, your guess is wrong.
Fourthly(sp?) As the article says (read the fine article), this isn't about individual bars or the freedom of their owners to do as they like, this is about a system among all bars. And that is when it goes bad. So you're way of base here, chap. Please stay on the subject.
Lastly, for you to claim that a) I should have bigger fish to fry b) protection of rights is something for an elite educated minority only shows how little you understand about the issues of liberty and safety and how they relate.
I hope the people around you are photogenic, they'll be wanting to look their best if they want to keep coming in your neighbourhood.
Disclaimer: I live in the Netherlands and we've had our fair share of senseless violence, but nobody here is contemplating these kinds of ludicrous schemes and we have arguably less freedom than people in Canada or the US.