Another company looking at the interface and saying "Gee, that's good idea. Can we come up with something like that, or even better?" is quite all right. that's the way things get better.
If, however, they take it apart and copy it right down to the included errors, that's theft, and not all right.
I have to assume that the evidence given proved the theft, and that's why it went through at least three judicial levels and came out the same each time.
I have an Early Warning System for detecting those, also.
It's when my 2.6Mb/S cable broadband connection starts to take 20 - 30 seconds (or more!) to download a page of text from Google or any other reasonably quick set of servers.
The past 24 hours was a total miserable crawl at times.
As soon as my existing battery powered portable TV can be plugged into a cable outlet anywhere at the beach or in the mountains, I'll consider broadcast TV outmoded.
As soon as I can replace that portable TV with a similar-size, weight, and battery use satellite set at the same cost, I'll consider my old one obsolete.
As soon as Cable and Satellite cost the same to view as broadcast TV (Think FREE), I'll consider moving exclusively to them...
Well, I suppose I should have mentioned that I did not in any way have legitimate access to the/src files - I was not in an area that was associated with computers other than as end-users.
The files were just open to read - to anyone who happened to log on to the system, be they computer guru, engineer, marketeer or clerk - or even the temp employees we hired for fill-in.
Even though UNIX was originally from Bell Labs, and the other Bell System companies had also been subsidiaries of AT&T, this was well after divestiture (JAN84), and the code that was accessible was Amdahl's version of System V, not BTL's. When I was actually at BTL, I did NOT have access to source...
My confidentiality agreements dealt with customer and telco plant information.
As to whether this applies only to the Intel stuff by Novell or not won't really be known until SCO releases what "stuff" they are talking about.
Back in the mid '80's, when I was working for U S WEST, the Amdahl machine I and a bunch of other engineers had logins on had the/src files all open (read only).
I used my access to the source of that version of UNIX (UTS) source a lot to help me with the Xenix system I was running at home.
Thing is, my racall of this is flakey enough that I cannot provide actual dates that the source on the "PN1" machine was open (about a one year window, after we moved from an IBM to an Amdahl mainframe, probably around 1985-86).
I don't think that's good enough, though, to have any effect on the SCO v IBM case.
(I wonder if the fact that U S WEST used to be a part of the Bell System - I went to U S WEST from Bell Labs, Holmdel - possibly made us feel a "part of the UNIX family" so we didn't seem to be as strict about holding the source inviolate. I dunno.)
Hmmmmm... Who's to say AT&T really WANTS to fix this problem.
Every time someone pulls this scam (not Phreak) AT&T makes money. In the two cases cited each one is worth about $8000 to AT&T.
Yes, some will fight the bill, and even win out against AT&T and SBC, but for every one who fights the charge hard enough to win, I'll bet that ten more just swallow and pay.
Uh, who knows, maybe SBS and AT&T are even making the calls, eh?;o)
Sadly I do believe the 3GHz PC is faster than a twin 1.25GHz Mac RUNNING OS X, however, I believe I can match or surpass the equivalent PC with my Mac by simply switching back to OS 9.
On my particular Mac, Photoshop runs probably 1.5 to 2 times faster on OS 9 as it does on OS X.
My question is: Does this reflect poorly on Adobe's port to OS X or does it reflect poorly on OS X?
I just gave the "form" link a try and got the complaint from the server, BUT when I backed up a level at the server and linked to it from one of THEIR (Washington state's) pages it worked fine...
Having changed over (finally) from Mac OS 9.2.2. to OS X 10.2.3 on January 1, 2003, my memory of how Photoshop worked on MacOS 9 is fresh, and it is slower on OS X.
With OS X I'm often, very often, waiting for the machine on Photoshop operations that I never have in the past.
OS X is in it's infancy, still in some ways a beta test product.
A fast PC will beat current Macs in many things, at least until the PC gets its knickers in a knot and needs to be rebooted.
Apple does indeed need faster processors, and a lot of the kinks still need to be worked out of OS X and applications that work with it.
Does the fact a PC can do some things faster than my Macs bother me? Yup! Does that mean I'll be changing to a PC anytime soon? Nope!
I'm comfortable with my Macs and with my *nix server.
My first thought was "Heinlein of course!" then I said to myself "But wait, what about John Varley?" then "No! Arthur Clarke!" "Asimov!" "Spider Robinson!" "Gibson!" "Brin!" "Greg Bear!" "F.M. Busby!" "Fred Pohl!" "Simak!" "Phil Dick!" until finally I just ended up gasping and going back and forth amongst my 3600+ Science Fiction books, touching one after the other.
There is no one SF universe ("What about Niven?!?") that is "better" than all the others. Some are so complete and self supporting, even when they make no overall sense ("Frank Herbert!"), that they leave one breathless. Others don't seem to be a coherent whole ("LeGuin!"), but each part of them is surperb.
How can one possibly choose?
As "literature" most SF does not measure up. But some of it I would put up against most any sort of fiction, if it were to be judged honestly and fairly. ("Vonnegut!")
As others have said, the quality of a novel/story depends a lot on "real" characters and reasonable situations, but SF gives a bit more latittude because both characters and situations can be expected to have changed enough to be VERY different but still "real."
Bottom line, is "Does this book/author/series bring you pleasure and expand your mind and feelings in some way?" If the answer is "Yes" then it is good.
I'm amazed that we're 85 comments into this discussion about paying attention and no one has noticed the incorrect wording in the lead item . ..
"More importantly, the findings show how the amount of eye contact one receives in a group will effect the number of turns one can take in a discussion. What is interesting about the study his how it will effect the design of the future communication devices . . . "
Both times it should be "affect" rather than "effect."
I'm also an ex-Bell Labber, one who left at divestiture in '84 because I could clearly see the place going from what it was to a bottom-line oriented product development "lab."
Still, though, I'm very glad to see that they maintained the intelligence, backbone, and ethics to bounce Schon's sorry ass.
Slashdot Mirror
Another company looking at the interface and saying "Gee, that's good idea. Can we come up with something like that, or even better?" is quite all right. that's the way things get better.
If, however, they take it apart and copy it right down to the included errors, that's theft, and not all right.
I have to assume that the evidence given proved the theft, and that's why it went through at least three judicial levels and came out the same each time.
Congratulations are due the winner.
--
Tomas
Yup!
I have an Early Warning System for detecting those, also.
It's when my 2.6Mb/S cable broadband connection starts to take 20 - 30 seconds (or more!) to download a page of text from Google or any other reasonably quick set of servers.
The past 24 hours was a total miserable crawl at times.
--
Tomas
Certainly not!
Bill already IS a toad!
--
Tomas
As soon as my existing battery powered portable TV can be plugged into a cable outlet anywhere at the beach or in the mountains, I'll consider broadcast TV outmoded.
...
As soon as I can replace that portable TV with a similar-size, weight, and battery use satellite set at the same cost, I'll consider my old one obsolete.
As soon as Cable and Satellite cost the same to view as broadcast TV (Think FREE), I'll consider moving exclusively to them
--
Tomas
Seriously, though, this sounds very much like the comm units described by Robert Anson Heinlein in Starship Troopers (the BOOK not the movie!).
...
Properly designed and used this sort of communication capability can greatly expand effectiveness and survivability.
Just don't let Microsoft do the software
--
Tomas
Until we have enough solid data to say positively "Yes, there is a form of life on Mars, and here it is," *points* we won't really know.
As it stands right now, both sides can use the very same data and say either "There is!" or "There isn't!"
That's how firm and solid the information is so far.
I'll wait until we have something reliable and reproducible to go on, OK?
(Personally I think there IS and hope there is.)
--
Tomas
Well, I suppose I should have mentioned that I did not in any way have legitimate access to the /src files - I was not in an area that was associated with computers other than as end-users.
...
The files were just open to read - to anyone who happened to log on to the system, be they computer guru, engineer, marketeer or clerk - or even the temp employees we hired for fill-in.
Even though UNIX was originally from Bell Labs, and the other Bell System companies had also been subsidiaries of AT&T, this was well after divestiture (JAN84), and the code that was accessible was Amdahl's version of System V, not BTL's. When I was actually at BTL, I did NOT have access to source
My confidentiality agreements dealt with customer and telco plant information.
As to whether this applies only to the Intel stuff by Novell or not won't really be known until SCO releases what "stuff" they are talking about.
--
Tomas
Back in the mid '80's, when I was working for U S WEST, the Amdahl machine I and a bunch of other engineers had logins on had the /src files all open (read only).
I used my access to the source of that version of UNIX (UTS) source a lot to help me with the Xenix system I was running at home.
Thing is, my racall of this is flakey enough that I cannot provide actual dates that the source on the "PN1" machine was open (about a one year window, after we moved from an IBM to an Amdahl mainframe, probably around 1985-86).
I don't think that's good enough, though, to have any effect on the SCO v IBM case.
(I wonder if the fact that U S WEST used to be a part of the Bell System - I went to U S WEST from Bell Labs, Holmdel - possibly made us feel a "part of the UNIX family" so we didn't seem to be as strict about holding the source inviolate. I dunno.)
Hmmmmm ... Who's to say AT&T really WANTS to fix this problem.
;o)
Every time someone pulls this scam (not Phreak) AT&T makes money. In the two cases cited each one is worth about $8000 to AT&T.
Yes, some will fight the bill, and even win out against AT&T and SBC, but for every one who fights the charge hard enough to win, I'll bet that ten more just swallow and pay.
Uh, who knows, maybe SBS and AT&T are even making the calls, eh?
A few years ago, when Yahoo! took over Geocities, they tried the same sort of thing with their TOS/AUP.
There was a brief general revolt by a number of customers, and they fairly quickly changed their policy to something more reaswonable.
Here's my old Geocities page discussing the problem, which hasn't really been used since, other than putting up a newer pic of me:
http://www.geocities.com/eunuchone/
"Very funny, Scotty, now beam down my clothes."
Sadly I do believe the 3GHz PC is faster than a twin 1.25GHz Mac RUNNING OS X, however, I believe I can match or surpass the equivalent PC with my Mac by simply switching back to OS 9.
On my particular Mac, Photoshop runs probably 1.5 to 2 times faster on OS 9 as it does on OS X.
My question is: Does this reflect poorly on Adobe's port to OS X or does it reflect poorly on OS X?
I dunno.
Hi, Pink.
I liked "Chimera" even though I couldn't remember it, and Camino isn't all that bad, really, but how 'bout a bit more humor in the name, Pink?
Name it "Floyd."
What?
Oh, OK.
I'll go away.
Bye!
Tomas
Hmmmm ... My first name shows up about 16 in a million, my last name shows up about 7 in a million, I'd guess my name is fairly rare.
(Throw in my middle name, which is not even on the top 1000 list, and the numbers become infinitesimal.)
Tomas (really, Tomás)
I just gave the "form" link a try and got the complaint from the server, BUT when I backed up a level at the server and linked to it from one of THEIR (Washington state's) pages it worked fine ...
/. ?
Looks like the server has been told to block
Tom
Having changed over (finally) from Mac OS 9.2.2. to OS X 10.2.3 on January 1, 2003, my memory of how Photoshop worked on MacOS 9 is fresh, and it is slower on OS X.
With OS X I'm often, very often, waiting for the machine on Photoshop operations that I never have in the past.
OS X is in it's infancy, still in some ways a beta test product.
A fast PC will beat current Macs in many things, at least until the PC gets its knickers in a knot and needs to be rebooted.
Apple does indeed need faster processors, and a lot of the kinks still need to be worked out of OS X and applications that work with it.
Does the fact a PC can do some things faster than my Macs bother me? Yup! Does that mean I'll be changing to a PC anytime soon? Nope!
I'm comfortable with my Macs and with my *nix server.
Tomas
My first thought was "Heinlein of course!" then I said to myself "But wait, what about John Varley?" then "No! Arthur Clarke!" "Asimov!" "Spider Robinson!" "Gibson!" "Brin!" "Greg Bear!" "F.M. Busby!" "Fred Pohl!" "Simak!" "Phil Dick!" until finally I just ended up gasping and going back and forth amongst my 3600+ Science Fiction books, touching one after the other.
There is no one SF universe ("What about Niven?!?") that is "better" than all the others. Some are so complete and self supporting, even when they make no overall sense ("Frank Herbert!"), that they leave one breathless. Others don't seem to be a coherent whole ("LeGuin!"), but each part of them is surperb.
How can one possibly choose?
As "literature" most SF does not measure up. But some of it I would put up against most any sort of fiction, if it were to be judged honestly and fairly. ("Vonnegut!")
As others have said, the quality of a novel/story depends a lot on "real" characters and reasonable situations, but SF gives a bit more latittude because both characters and situations can be expected to have changed enough to be VERY different but still "real."
Bottom line, is "Does this book/author/series bring you pleasure and expand your mind and feelings in some way?" If the answer is "Yes" then it is good.
Excuse me, I need to go read a bok . . .
. . . And they would build the car in your driveway from parts they scavenged from other projects or got by mailorder.
Both times it should be "affect" rather than "effect."
I'm also an ex-Bell Labber, one who left at divestiture in '84 because I could clearly see the place going from what it was to a bottom-line oriented product development "lab."
Still, though, I'm very glad to see that they maintained the intelligence, backbone, and ethics to bounce Schon's sorry ass.
Tomas
"Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes!"