PG does release some books in HTML format. I know, because I have created several of them. When you supply a HTML version, they also want to have a text version. Some books, however, don't make much sense as text only (an Illustrated Childrens Alphabet, for example)
If the person uploading the files to PG include a HTML version, it will be made available. However, not many of the providers take the time, or have the knowledge, to create one.
Buying a SCO license as an investment is a really dumb idea. After the lawsuits are over, the lawyers on both sides will strip out any remaining cash value for their fees.
However, if you hang onto it for 20 years, maybe you could sell it on e-bay as a historical document (listed with the description "remember when SCO imploded, taking MicroSoft down with it?"). Someone might be dumb enough to bid it up to the original price, because it will probably be an extremely rare document ("only 13 were ever sold").
If you looked for knocking after a service is connected instead, and drop the connection if the followup knocks don't occur within a short time, it could really frustrate the script kiddies.
They get a connection, then immediately lose it. They then need to decide if it a network problem, a problem in their script, or something else? Might keep them busy trying to 'debug' their code for a while.
Although we met several technical challenges along the way (specifically, Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we were unable to defrag its ext2 file system),
This is probably just another drooling idiot trolling, but...
Why were you trying to defrag the file system? This isn't windows! It is rare that defragging will produce any noticable result (unlike windows, where it is almost a necessity). The reason that you can't find defraggers for ext2 (they actually do exist), is that nobody ever uses them.
MicroSofts "shared source" is considered a joke around here. It lets you LOOK at SOME the code, but you must be a very large "MicroSoft" shop, and you CANNOT make any changes (like fixing bugs), or compile it, or use any of it in your own projects, or do anything useful with it, or tell anyone else about it (NDA). It's absolutely useless.
Remember when MicroSoft was saying they couldn't show the source to anyone, because it would threaten national security. Nothing has changed in the source, but now China gets to look at it. And virus attacks have jumped again.
Your main problem seems to be of the form "it isn't windows so I don't like it". Even your bogus licensing rant is wrong. You really need to talk to someone other than MicroSoft unless you want to keep looking as stupid as this post makes you look.
Wow! Nicely slanted story!! Full of exciting words like rushed, shambles, and worst nightmares! Too bad many of the details are wrong!
Maybe you can add some lines to your next version, like: the entire West Coast should have been evacuated! Kazillions might have been killed! Giant Mutant Man Eating Spiders could have been created by the explosion, requiring us to bring Godzilla over from Japan to kill them! You need to improve your use of your weasel words!
Don't forget to use plenty of exclamation points!!! That shows you are really really an expert!!! who has actually researched!!! the facts!!!! and doesn't normally wear his tin foil hat!!!
You forgot to add in the rumors about the guy who manually pulled the rods may have been trying to commit suicide!!!! And all the Secret Government Coverups that everyone knows about!!!!
Try to find sources who actually know what they are talking about, and not depend only on zealot anti-nuclear propoganda spin-doctors. Otherwise, you might as well quote "Weekly World News" as a reliable source of information.
Needing to use the ancient SL-1 as an example, shows just how poor your proof is. A very early experimental research reactor proves all nuclear is bad? Do you also prove that SUV's are bad because Ugg the Caveman was killed by his stone wheel?
Whatever happened to MicroSoft shutting down all new development, and focusing entirely on security for a month? Didn't they get all the problems fixed them?
Is this just MicroSoft part II: security refocused? Will the sequel be as good as the original?
Create a new company with one employee, its sole business is to provide your company with internet access. All his expenses are charged to the larger company. He buys his license ($100.00), saving your 10,001 employee company ((10,001 - 1) * 100) = $1,000,000 per year.
The only additional fees would be for handling the accounting work for the tiny company, which should be extremely simple, and easily covered by your savings.
Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab.
Is SCO going to charge Lawrence Livermore their licence scam fee? Could this have been planned from the start? Have one group you own sell a system, which you can then have another group charge for a scam licence fee for.
1. Sell a big multiprocessor system using one company. 1a. Profit! 2. Charge a licensing fee from another unrelated company. 2b. Profit! 3. ???? What other companies do they have ???? 3a. Profit! 4. ???? 5. Profit!
McBride: The Canopy Group [of Utah] is an investment company. Those are just ignorant statements about SCO's business. Hundreds of customers like and use SCO's Unix products.
then
CRN: CRN noticed that SCO recently changed its number of resellers from 16,000 to 11,000. Can you explain?
So, thay have hundreds of customers, using 11,000 resellers. Dong some simple math (100/11000) it shows that they need around 100 resellers per sale.
Since they want about $1300 for their Linux license, which I assume is about the price of their SCO Unix, we get ($1300/100) $13 profit on average per reseller.
Boy! Can I get on this gravy train and start selling this fantastically profitable product! Look out AmWay, you've got competition!
According to the article, it is illegal for SCO to extort money from both IBM and from the individual users.
If even one individual user has bought the SCO license, wouldn't that force SCO to have to sue individual users and drop the IBM suit, or fall into trouble with these double dipping laws?
I gave up on trying to use GnuCash long ago due to the impossibility of compiling it, and getting it to run.
They used large numbers of libraries, which you had to locate yourself. No links to the proper versions either. You needed specific versions of those libraries, some no longer available from that libraries web site, and some pulled from CVS at some unspecified time (and no other time would work).
The database it used was their own creation (why should we use an existing library for the database? That would only add another dependency, but here's another error logging library that we can't live without). It was unaccessable to mere humans, and messed up the database all too frequently.
After they added yet another round of libraries (several of them not yet available on the web), I finally gave up. It was simply unbuildable and unusable, and I could not forsee it as ever becoming usable, let alone ever be able to compile it.
In this test, we are running the latest WindowsXP on this 3Ghz Intel processor with 2GB memory and 200GB disk, and running Linux on a compariable 30Mhz 386SX with 2MB memory and a 200MB disk, and our tests conclusively prove that WindowsXP is almost twice as fast as Linux running equivelent programs!
Now that someone is taking them to court (where I believe SCO will lose hugely), how long will it be before the SCO officers start to sell their stock short, in order to cash again after their "sell ourselves many thousands of stock at $0.66 each, then immediately sell it for $12.00" money making game?
I don't think it will help anything if section six of the GPL can overrule section one. If the copyright holder did not Know they had code in Linux, they should not be obligated to have that code be considered GPLed because they distribute it.
IANAL: Didn't they just admit that they do not hold the copyright to the code they have been complaining about (NUMA, JFS, RCU, etc). If there is any other code in the complaint, they have been very quiet about it.
I don't see how they can claim copyright violations, and try to extort payment from Linux users for that, when they don't own any of the copyrights.
But they sure seem to be making money on their pump-and-dump stock scheme. Isn't insider trading like this illegal?
SCO claims that IBM borrowed their car years ago, and IBM took part of the car (perhaps near the bumper) and donated it to you, who assumed that it was a genuine gift from IBM.
From what I've heard, it's more like IBM took the hula-dancing-girl out from their own car, and put it in the borrowed SCO car, thus now SCO owns all hula-dancing-girls in the universe.
I think that IBM (or RedHat, or whoever) should set up a competing license for SCO's software, since it's just as likely that SCO is the one who did the copying. From their example, no actual proof of copyright ownership is necessary!
Maybe I ought to set up my own MicroSoft license program. Pay me, or I'll sue you for using Windows!
If SCO's extortion scheme works, I should be able to make millions! Millions, do you hear me, millions! (pinky finger to mouth)
Re:I assume it touches on copying
on
Altered Carbon
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
PG does release some books in HTML format. I know, because I have created several of them. When you supply a HTML version, they also want to have a text version. Some books, however, don't make much sense as text only (an Illustrated Childrens Alphabet, for example)
If the person uploading the files to PG include a HTML version, it will be made available. However, not many of the providers take the time, or have the knowledge, to create one.
PG has several cookbooks available.
http://www.gutenberg.net
Thogh finding ingredients for some of them may be a bit hard. Stores just don't seem to want to stock pigs heads any more...
So, that's how much a penis enlarger costs.
Buying a SCO license as an investment is a really dumb idea. After the lawsuits are over, the lawyers on both sides will strip out any remaining cash value for their fees.
However, if you hang onto it for 20 years, maybe you could sell it on e-bay as a historical document (listed with the description "remember when SCO imploded, taking MicroSoft down with it?"). Someone might be dumb enough to bid it up to the original price, because it will probably be an extremely rare document ("only 13 were ever sold").
Snippet from the top of the file in question // Copyright (c) SCO group, Inc.
Now, where's thet $699 they owe?
If you looked for knocking after a service is connected instead, and drop the connection if the followup knocks don't occur within a short time, it could really frustrate the script kiddies.
They get a connection, then immediately lose it. They then need to decide if it a network problem, a problem in their script, or something else? Might keep them busy trying to 'debug' their code for a while.
What's this I hear from you about no patches in December from MicroSoft?
They has been e-mailing me new patches all this month. In fact, they usually send me several to install every day.
You should really double check your sources before posting misleading articles like this.
SCO Lawyer: When you said "Darryl is blowing smoke out of his ass", you meant the donkey/horse crossbread, not the other kind, right?
Although we met several technical challenges along the way
(specifically, Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we
were unable to defrag its ext2 file system),
This is probably just another drooling idiot trolling, but...
Why were you trying to defrag the file system? This isn't windows! It is rare that defragging will produce any noticable result (unlike windows, where it is almost a necessity). The reason that you can't find defraggers for ext2 (they actually do exist), is that nobody ever uses them.
MicroSofts "shared source" is considered a joke around here. It lets you LOOK at SOME the code, but you must be a very large "MicroSoft" shop, and you CANNOT make any changes (like fixing bugs), or compile it, or use any of it in your own projects, or do anything useful with it, or tell anyone else about it (NDA). It's absolutely useless.
Remember when MicroSoft was saying they couldn't show the source to anyone, because it would threaten national security. Nothing has changed in the source, but now China gets to look at it. And virus attacks have jumped again.
Your main problem seems to be of the form "it isn't windows so I don't like it". Even your bogus licensing rant is wrong. You really need to talk to someone other than MicroSoft unless you want to keep looking as stupid as this post makes you look.
Wow! Nicely slanted story!! Full of exciting words like rushed, shambles, and worst nightmares! Too bad many of the details are wrong!
Maybe you can add some lines to your next version, like: the entire West Coast should have been evacuated! Kazillions might have been killed! Giant Mutant Man Eating Spiders could have been created by the explosion, requiring us to bring Godzilla over from Japan to kill them! You need to improve your use of your weasel words!
Don't forget to use plenty of exclamation points!!! That shows you are really really an expert!!! who has actually researched!!! the facts!!!! and doesn't normally wear his tin foil hat!!!
You forgot to add in the rumors about the guy who manually pulled the rods may have been trying to commit suicide!!!! And all the Secret Government Coverups that everyone knows about!!!!
Try to find sources who actually know what they are talking about, and not depend only on zealot anti-nuclear propoganda spin-doctors. Otherwise, you might as well quote "Weekly World News" as a reliable source of information.
Needing to use the ancient SL-1 as an example, shows just how poor your proof is. A very early experimental research reactor proves all nuclear is bad? Do you also prove that SUV's are bad because Ugg the Caveman was killed by his stone wheel?
What makes you think it is english only?
They'll just jump into the foreign books.
Also, there are a lot of post 1922 books that were not copyright renewed, but they are a bit harder to clear.
Did anyone else note that this started about the same time as the DO-NOT-CALL list took effect in the USA?
Maybe they just getting the overflow from the telemarketers.
[beat others to silly joke]
1. Do not call takes effect in USA.
2. Spam Australia.
3. ???
4. Profit!
[/beat others to silly joke]
Whatever happened to MicroSoft shutting down all new development, and focusing entirely on security for a month? Didn't they get all the problems fixed them?
Is this just MicroSoft part II: security refocused? Will the sequel be as good as the original?
Say you have a company with 10,001 employees.
Create a new company with one employee, its sole business is to provide your company with internet access. All his expenses are charged to the larger company. He buys his license ($100.00), saving your 10,001 employee company ((10,001 - 1) * 100) = $1,000,000 per year.
The only additional fees would be for handling the accounting work for the tiny company, which should be extremely simple, and easily covered by your savings.
Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab.
Is SCO going to charge Lawrence Livermore their licence scam fee? Could this have been planned from the start? Have one group you own sell a system, which you can then have another group charge for a scam licence fee for.
1. Sell a big multiprocessor system using one company.
1a. Profit!
2. Charge a licensing fee from another unrelated company.
2b. Profit!
3. ???? What other companies do they have ????
3a. Profit!
4. ????
5. Profit!
Two intresting quotes:
McBride: The Canopy Group [of Utah] is an investment company. Those are just ignorant statements about SCO's business. Hundreds of customers like and use SCO's Unix products.
then
CRN: CRN noticed that SCO recently changed its number of resellers from 16,000 to 11,000. Can you explain?
So, thay have hundreds of customers, using 11,000 resellers. Dong some simple math (100/11000) it shows that they need around 100 resellers per sale.
Since they want about $1300 for their Linux license, which I assume is about the price of their SCO Unix, we get ($1300/100) $13 profit on average per reseller.
Boy! Can I get on this gravy train and start selling this fantastically profitable product! Look out AmWay, you've got competition!
But wait! You also get...
According to the article, it is illegal for SCO to extort money from both IBM and from the individual users.
If even one individual user has bought the SCO license, wouldn't that force SCO to have to sue individual users and drop the IBM suit, or fall into trouble with these double dipping laws?
I gave up on trying to use GnuCash long ago due to the impossibility of compiling it, and getting it to run.
They used large numbers of libraries, which you had to locate yourself. No links to the proper versions either. You needed specific versions of those libraries, some no longer available from that libraries web site, and some pulled from CVS at some unspecified time (and no other time would work).
The database it used was their own creation (why should we use an existing library for the database? That would only add another dependency, but here's another error logging library that we can't live without). It was unaccessable to mere humans, and messed up the database all too frequently.
After they added yet another round of libraries (several of them not yet available on the web), I finally gave up. It was simply unbuildable and unusable, and I could not forsee it as ever becoming usable, let alone ever be able to compile it.
MicroSoft test results:
In this test, we are running the latest WindowsXP on this 3Ghz Intel processor with 2GB memory and 200GB disk, and running Linux on a compariable 30Mhz 386SX with 2MB memory and a 200MB disk, and our tests conclusively prove that WindowsXP is almost twice as fast as Linux running equivelent programs!
Now that someone is taking them to court (where I believe SCO will lose hugely), how long will it be before the SCO officers start to sell their stock short, in order to cash again after their "sell ourselves many thousands of stock at $0.66 each, then immediately sell it for $12.00" money making game?
I don't think it will help anything if section six of the GPL can overrule section one. If the copyright holder did not Know they had code in Linux, they should not be obligated to have that code be considered GPLed because they distribute it.
IANAL: Didn't they just admit that they do not hold the copyright to the code they have been complaining about (NUMA, JFS, RCU, etc). If there is any other code in the complaint, they have been very quiet about it.
I don't see how they can claim copyright violations, and try to extort payment from Linux users for that, when they don't own any of the copyrights.
But they sure seem to be making money on their pump-and-dump stock scheme. Isn't insider trading like this illegal?
SCO claims that IBM borrowed their car years ago, and IBM took part of the car (perhaps near the bumper) and donated it to you, who assumed that it was a genuine gift from IBM.
From what I've heard, it's more like IBM took the hula-dancing-girl out from their own car, and put it in the borrowed SCO car, thus now SCO owns all hula-dancing-girls in the universe.
I think that IBM (or RedHat, or whoever) should set up a competing license for SCO's software, since it's just as likely that SCO is the one who did the copying. From their example, no actual proof of copyright ownership is necessary!
Maybe I ought to set up my own MicroSoft license program. Pay me, or I'll sue you for using Windows!
If SCO's extortion scheme works, I should be able to make millions! Millions, do you hear me, millions! (pinky finger to mouth)
The RIAA does not allow copying.
I think you would have better luck if you looked for words that weren't mispelled. You would end up with a much shorter list of words.