By the way, Trusted Computing defeats the GPL and other OSS. The source code is useless. I see this differently: the source code for a compliant and open source Trusted platform can also have, hard-wired into it, some codes for unlocking the system and running the trusted software in an untrusted environment.
Surely, this use of OSS material complies and defeats the Trusted platform?
If the sky really is falling, and tin foil ain't gonna protect me, then I want to find other ways round this.
Things like reversing the trust chip to privatise my hard-disk against anyone else reading it (and perhaps even wiping it if the correct login sequence isn't followed), or maybe developing a bittorrented equivalent of the William Gibson "Killfile" concept (such as amending torrents so that they are dynamically generated and interactive, so as to carrier and encrypt http-gets, among other TCP traffic).
However, being denied access to the internet is a ludicrous proposition: the internet works on free principles like mutually sharing messages (the peering agreement), and there will always be people willing to take the risk that freedom brings. I really hope that the people in the "land of the free" don't end up kidding themselves that they're free in the same way that 'freedoms' under communism were free.
Equally, tinfoil-hat talk of MS denying Windows Firefox access to run on its Trusted Platform will just result in another Anti-Trust suit. The OSS will PayPal (etc.) the cash for the lawyers, and the process becomes unfeasible.
Why isn't this modded as a troll? While there is truth in the statement that theocratic methods of governance oppose democracy, such an outburst doesn't make sense.
How are you not the fascist for wanting to marginalise a group you (I assume) don't agree with?;-)
Although in fairness this link says that the ISS has been orbiting around 250 miles up. I think I heard it called Low Earth Orbit, but the graph on the page indicates it's falling. Bil Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything comments that the edge of the atmosphere isn't that well defined, illustrating it that the ISS is falling a few thousand yards per week because of something up there equivalent to air resistance.
The magazine is not free-as-in-beer. They sell paper copies of their journalistic work and the only way you can get a copy of the magazine article is to invest in this proprietry news-format.
I know, it's upsetting. My penguin's crying too, mate.
(and dear, moderators, please don't miss the sarcasm in this post.)
From umusic.com's "about the company" page: Press Contacts United States: Peter LoFrumento (mailto:Communications@Umusic.com) United Kingdom: Adam White (mailto:Communications2@Umusic.com)
I think that I will write FAO their boss and state that extending copyrights will stifle innovation. The real talents of the music industry are playing, unknown, in local pubs, and the model that his business has been using is out of date for the technology it is sitting on -- the extension of UK copyright laws to 95 years from creation is only a money-making scam -- and so they will have to find another way to do business.
Lawyers and politicians aren't musicians, don't contribute more than protecting the innocent and chooing how large their slice of the pie is.
Ben Folds got Shatner into the studio to record a version of Pulp's Common People, which I've heard twice on BBC radio. [ontopic]I must see about filesharing it, haven't thought about using either emule or kazaa networks, 'cause of spyware.[/ontopic]
And Bill discusses this in his The Road Ahead book. I think that makes the idea already 'in the wild' so it's not patentable.
In the words of someone I met whose father is a UK patent approver: you don't progress as a patent technicain by turning down patents. Particularly those of big, rich corporations (which suggests why and how the patent system and its economy need changing).
I think that this memo's content is actually an indication of how MS are bullying their partners into not supporting the Open-Source movement. The section on Industry Reaction reads "Dell backed out of a lot of Linux activity and laid off their Linux marketing group, and Intel went radio silent on Linux publicity in March" and may just be hot air to scare HP away from adding their support to any open source project.
The paragraph titled 'Microsoft's Intentions' talks about suing companies whose use of Samba isn't covered by a patent-sharing cross-licence. And those that don't will have their Microsoft licence forcibly changed to exclude their use of F/OSS products.
Either I'm misreading this phrase "OEMs like HP that they force a change in their cross license to exclude open source software" or it's clear what's going on here: HP are forced to exclude the combined use of OSS projects when Microsoft products are also installed and delivered sold by HP as the OEM.
I'm really glad I got rid of WinXP this weekend (moved to FC2 -- thanks to the community sites that helped me!). I'm shocked by the behaviour of Microsoft and surprised HP didn't have more balls.
I think that the approach may be similar to the MPL (as I understood the 1.0 edition, the 1.1 Mozilla Public License is different) requiring people to submit to the Mozilla foundation the alterations that they had made to the code-base.
This allowed the foundation to maintain centralised control of the project without forked copies damaging it. I think that will allow Sun to nicely control Solaris.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you suggesting that the kernel is line noise, too? ;)
K3n.
I believe this device can connect to cameras and the like as a host to transfer files. Job done.
Signing up to iTunes affiliate program doesn't cost much... and they get a free pod of every five phones. ;)
So point cameras at them...
Well, a mile will certainly help you go toothing. ;)
I, for one, welcome our new...
(you get the picture)
Thank God someone's going to stop using irony ni the wrong places. It's so nineties. ;)
take care.
ken.
Thanks for caching the article against a slashdotting.
Take care.
love Ken.
By the way, Trusted Computing defeats the GPL and other OSS. The source code is useless.
I see this differently: the source code for a compliant and open source Trusted platform can also have, hard-wired into it, some codes for unlocking the system and running the trusted software in an untrusted environment.
Surely, this use of OSS material complies and defeats the Trusted platform?
Take care.
Ken.
If the sky really is falling, and tin foil ain't gonna protect me, then I want to find other ways round this.
Things like reversing the trust chip to privatise my hard-disk against anyone else reading it (and perhaps even wiping it if the correct login sequence isn't followed), or maybe developing a bittorrented equivalent of the William Gibson "Killfile" concept (such as amending torrents so that they are dynamically generated and interactive, so as to carrier and encrypt http-gets, among other TCP traffic).
However, being denied access to the internet is a ludicrous proposition: the internet works on free principles like mutually sharing messages (the peering agreement), and there will always be people willing to take the risk that freedom brings. I really hope that the people in the "land of the free" don't end up kidding themselves that they're free in the same way that 'freedoms' under communism were free.
Equally, tinfoil-hat talk of MS denying Windows Firefox access to run on its Trusted Platform will just result in another Anti-Trust suit. The OSS will PayPal (etc.) the cash for the lawyers, and the process becomes unfeasible.
Take care.
Ken.
church censors speach while claiming to provide freedom...
church exiles people 'different from them'...
take care.
love ken.
Why isn't this modded as a troll? While there is truth in the statement that theocratic methods of governance oppose democracy, such an outburst doesn't make sense.
;-)
How are you not the fascist for wanting to marginalise a group you (I assume) don't agree with?
Take care.
Ken.
I had thought I'd need to apologise for being rude about someone's creative works (or for voicing my opinion).
Take care.
ken.
Er. You taking credit for this?
;-)
Um. Thank you for it. Sorry* we melted your webserver. I enjoyed it, but wouldn't read it twice. A clever idea, pulled off okay. Mostly harmless.
*: in a kind-and-polite way. Not in a accepts-liability kinda way.
take care.
love ken.
Although in fairness this link says that the ISS has been orbiting around 250 miles up. I think I heard it called Low Earth Orbit, but the graph on the page indicates it's falling. Bil Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything comments that the edge of the atmosphere isn't that well defined, illustrating it that the ISS is falling a few thousand yards per week because of something up there equivalent to air resistance.
Take care.
love Ken.
The magazine is not free-as-in-beer. They sell paper copies of their journalistic work and the only way you can get a copy of the magazine article is to invest in this proprietry news-format.
I know, it's upsetting. My penguin's crying too, mate.
(and dear, moderators, please don't miss the sarcasm in this post.)
Take care.
Ken.
oh, er, have you not seen the christian holy book at http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible
(in no way am i advocating or detracting from the use of this resource: just pointing out its there.)
take care.
ken.
From umusic.com's "about the company" page:
Press Contacts
United States: Peter LoFrumento (mailto:Communications@Umusic.com)
United Kingdom: Adam White (mailto:Communications2@Umusic.com)
I think that I will write FAO their boss and state that extending copyrights will stifle innovation. The real talents of the music industry are playing, unknown, in local pubs, and the model that his business has been using is out of date for the technology it is sitting on -- the extension of UK copyright laws to 95 years from creation is only a money-making scam -- and so they will have to find another way to do business.
Lawyers and politicians aren't musicians, don't contribute more than protecting the innocent and chooing how large their slice of the pie is.
A boycott will be offered.
Take care.
Ken.
Ben Folds got Shatner into the studio to record a version of Pulp's Common People, which I've heard twice on BBC radio. [ontopic]I must see about filesharing it, haven't thought about using either emule or kazaa networks, 'cause of spyware.[/ontopic]
Take care.
Ken.
I've had difficulty with my Palm reader since moving from kernel 2.4.23 to 2.6.8.
(I said yesterday that punning is a serious crime. I accept low karma for that attempt at humour.)
take care.
love ken.
And Bill discusses this in his The Road Ahead book. I think that makes the idea already 'in the wild' so it's not patentable.
In the words of someone I met whose father is a UK patent approver: you don't progress as a patent technicain by turning down patents. Particularly those of big, rich corporations (which suggests why and how the patent system and its economy need changing).
Take care.
love K3n.
I think that this memo's content is actually an indication of how MS are bullying their partners into not supporting the Open-Source movement. The section on Industry Reaction reads "Dell backed out of a lot of Linux activity and laid off their Linux marketing group, and Intel went radio silent on Linux publicity in March" and may just be hot air to scare HP away from adding their support to any open source project.
The paragraph titled 'Microsoft's Intentions' talks about suing companies whose use of Samba isn't covered by a patent-sharing cross-licence. And those that don't will have their Microsoft licence forcibly changed to exclude their use of F/OSS products.
Either I'm misreading this phrase "OEMs like HP that they force a change in their cross license to exclude open source software" or it's clear what's going on here: HP are forced to exclude the combined use of OSS projects when Microsoft products are also installed and delivered sold by HP as the OEM.
I'm really glad I got rid of WinXP this weekend (moved to FC2 -- thanks to the community sites that helped me!). I'm shocked by the behaviour of Microsoft and surprised HP didn't have more balls.
Take care.
love K3n.
Cue cheap joke about the collection of 17 small-adult* entertainment companies standing up to this.
(*: erroneous punctuation.)
I think that'd be a human slashdotting.
I think that the approach may be similar to the MPL (as I understood the 1.0 edition, the 1.1 Mozilla Public License is different) requiring people to submit to the Mozilla foundation the alterations that they had made to the code-base.
This allowed the foundation to maintain centralised control of the project without forked copies damaging it. I think that will allow Sun to nicely control Solaris.
Take care.
K3n.