If it's a piece of software that was never finished, and he made the copy while he worked there, wouldn't it be considered in the grey area of the law? Provided he didn't distribute it, then arguably he could claim that working at that company gave him the right to a copy of the code, though not any rights to do anything with it?
It just seems like one of those loopholes they'd install to protect over-zealous employees from over-zealous employers...
Any thoughts from someone who has studied cases in this realm? If not in computer code, perhaps music, or writing, or electronics?
A smart guy wouldn't have lied to the world. A smart guy wouldn't have placed tarriffs on their largest trading partner whose biggest exports are already controlled by american companies. A smart guy wouldn't have lowered taxes while a huge 300 billion dollar deficit looms over this years budget. A smart guy wouldn't have broken international and US law to go to war with an already crippled dictator.
A smart guy MIGHT EVEN have noticed all the talk in the intelligence community about a plan to fly planes into the WTC and the pentagon and put some saveguards in place to ensure nothing would happen.
Re-read what I wrote. He's using hiter-like TACTICS. I never said he wanted to slaugheter anyone(erm...except middle-easterners, but I guess tens of thousands of them are ok since it's "liberation"), but the way he's going "if you don't agree with me, you're a bad American, because you're either with us or against us" is very much like the atmosphere of patriotism that permeated Germany before WWII that allowed Hitlers rise to power and the subsequent slaughter.
I think that points more to the stupidity of the people doing the voting. The guy uses the same techniques as hitler to keep the populace in line (see:Patriotism as a tool), while trying to pretend that he's one of the good guys.
Personally, I think the whole system is broken, starting from the schools that forgot to teach anyone about the world around them. Tell me, if you're in south dakota, which state is directly north of you? Yeah. Some Americans answer this wrong.
Amen. I think there are too many people in this discussion who have run a 5 or 10 computer network and think it makes them an authority on effective policies for actual enterprise networks. Frightening, isn't it? That's one good reason I'm so jaded with the entire IT industry -- everybody thinks knowing how to set an IP address in windows 98 makes them an expert. That's the reason why so many techs consider users the enemy -- they think they know better than the techs themselves because they can surf the web or install an OS.
1)there is a HUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEE difference between a secured corporate installation and the OS some guy put on his machine on the weekend.
2)That's doubtful. If some know it all user is putting the entire organizations security at risk because he doesn't want to use windows, the person who did the unauthorized OS installation (and the one who didn't follow the policy of working off the networked drive, as most places I've worked do) will be out on his ass faster than the IT guy cracking down on said unauthorized OS installations. What makes you think that he wouldn't? It's like saying the VP would be angry that you didn't get to a conference because you stole a car and got pulled over by the police.
All the other stuff you've responded to seems to be a pretty good description of a worst-case scenario breakin, which could happen a lot more easily with an unsecured, unauthorized installation of an OS than with an IT department crafted OS installation designed to be secure.
Personally, I've worked for an IT department that serviced thousands of users over hundreds of miles. After working there, you begin to understand just how crucial a secure, consistent platform created by the IT dept is, especially when it's a machine in some remote community that will take a days drive to get to. On the other hand, since the users have been under our care for over ten years, most of them realize the (very good!) reasons why we are so strict about security -- because to them, security and reliability are inseperable.
Hey, not just any windows, OUR copy of windows, which we will ghost onto your drive, which has been prepared to be secure and reliable. Personally, as a tech, I'd rather people not be allowed to install anything on their machines that doesn't pertain to work. A new OS falls under this classification.
Even beyond that, if some joker decides to keep sendmail on his machine, your network can be blacklisted. Earlier versions of Red Hat kept relays open. I saw it happen at the last place I worked. The guy needed the machine though, so we sent someone down to secure it and ensure there were no mail services installed.
OK, that was spooky. I'm heading to college in a week, so it won't be accurate anymore then, but the fact that I am, in fact, staying in my parents basement while I save for college, is accurate.
Of course, I'm only 20, so it's not like it's scary "45 year old guy living in his basement" scary, but still...
It is your duty, as a citizen of a democratic nation, to vote. It's the only thing that seperates you from people in despotic and communist nations(though to be fair, communism isn't a form of government, it's a system of commerce, which tends to have fascist governments in charge due to the very nature of communism). If you decide that you'd rather someone else makes the decisions for you, don't be suprised when some fascist decides to take your free little land and turn it into Soviet USistan.
You mistake the journey for the destination. To make it to Europe, I have to cross an ocean. The ocean isn't important. In order to sip a glass of wine, I must first lift the glass to my lips. That motion isn't important. To use my computer, I must first press the power button to turn it on. The button isn't important. The whole idea that money is important is ludicrous. To put it in business terms, money doesn't plow fields. Money doesn't move packages. Money doesn't talk. Money doesn't help customers or write programs or smelt iron or roll paper or compose music or art or writing. Money is a means to an end. A mere bargining chip. Anyone who treats it like more than that is a fool of unparalelled proportions.
I would rather live with a great family with no money than live all alone in the nicest house in the country.
I would rather have the greatest freinds and no money to party with than be a billionaire who has to hire whores to keep him company.
I would rather have a great love than have all the money in the world and never have known the feeling.
Health I don't really have to worry about. I'm Canadian.
Hobbies don't need constant money infusions to keep moving, and money isn't the only means to getting what you need. Trust me. I've been there. FOR A LONG, LONG TIME.
You don't need money to travel. A good walking stick(free) and a bit of knowlege(free) will let you go wherever you'd like to go on the continent with all the food you desire.
As for Entertainment, since when do you need to have money to enjoy a tune, or a work of art? I assure you that not all expression has a price tag.
Education? Education is an interesting thing. To many, it isn't really that useful. It's certainly not important as anything more than a means to an end...but it's not something that you MUST buy. As it has often been said -- Information wants to be free. There are plenty of free sources of information for the resourceful.
On the other hand, I didn't say that money wasn't the slightest bit useful. I just said it wasn't the most useful thing out there. And you managed to ignore the subtext of the parent post. Let me spell it out for you. Of course there's no business sense in programming after hours for free, it's for those things that are more important than money, varied and plenty, that one programs for free. You can't talk about business and volunteer work in the same way. Saying "why volunteer your time and work? You're not getting paid for it!" isn't a business case, it's missing the point of doing it in the first place. It's saying that money is the most important thing in life, and anything that doesn't involve getting paid is just a waste, because you could be making money instead.
Personally, I'd love to rid myself of this addiction to money. I'd love to get a farm someday, install some solar panels and windmills, and live out my life without ever seeing another looney, quarter, or dime again. Will it require money? Sure, that's how the world works. But it's just a means to an end. It's not that important.
Regarding winmodem support, it's far better than you'd expect. While some brands don't have drivers, it's not a mistake of the OS developers, it's a choice of stupid modem manufacturers. Connexant and Rockwell, among others, have drivers available for their winmodem chips.
Regarding GNU HURD, That would be a mistake of GNU, not of linux developers.
Regarding Gimp, just because it doesn't have one or two features you want doesn't make that a mistake, it's a matter of patents and taste, if I understand correctly.
Regarding Mozilla, it works quite well, and it's not going to be replaced by firebird any time soon. Even if it is, it's still mozilla underneath a rewritten UI. I don't see any mistakes here.
Regarding Tuxkart, I fail to see how the fact that you don't like the game is a mistake of the OS developers.
Regarding Gnome and Abiword, I fail to see how the former is a mistake simply because you don't like it, nor how the latter, a hugely multiplaform word processor which happened to be runnable under linux, is a mistake of Linux specifically. MS word can work on linux through WINE.
I found during my time watching CNN that they have a very nasty tendancy to try to editorialize something to skew opinion. For instance, they were "covering" the anti-war protests, and decided to stay on the footage of one guy pulling someone out of their car and attacking him. Then the reporter(who was, Ironically enough, pro-war) goes on this rant about how it's wrong to attack people.
Personally, this whole episode with the war has made me realize that America is just a fascist dictatorship in disguise who has mastered several orwellian tactics quite well.
To be brief, Microsoft is in their position specifically BECAUSE they act this way, and the others aren't because they don't. If Sun or Oracle decided the law didn't apply to them, I bet they could claw their way to the top as well. Many companies have put out better software over the years, but they've all been crushed, and mostly illegally at that. That's what you MS apologists always like to forget. Those companies that testified at MS's trial? They weren't there because they were trying to stifle innovation, or because they were envious of Microsofts position, it's because MS acted in ways that were entirely antiethical, and in some cases, blatantly illegal. Their entire history is a case study in how to be criminally antiethical, From illegal OEM agreements to trying to pay back fines in court using SOFTWARE LICENSES.
And did you ever stop to think that Gates might haave set up the fund specifically so gullable saps like yourself would go "oh sure, he's responsible for one of the most unethical and criminally inclined software companies in the world, but he donates money!"? He's systematically made the biggest of his donations during times of bad PR, such as during the antitrust trial, and ensured they were widely publicized.
...because there were NEVER any OSes, OS Shells, or productivity software before Microsoft came on the scene! I mean, they cane, and they said "let there be software", and there was software, and it was good. Right?
Slashdot Mirror
If it's a piece of software that was never finished, and he made the copy while he worked there, wouldn't it be considered in the grey area of the law? Provided he didn't distribute it, then arguably he could claim that working at that company gave him the right to a copy of the code, though not any rights to do anything with it?
It just seems like one of those loopholes they'd install to protect over-zealous employees from over-zealous employers...
Any thoughts from someone who has studied cases in this realm? If not in computer code, perhaps music, or writing, or electronics?
A smart guy wouldn't have lied to the world. A smart guy wouldn't have placed tarriffs on their largest trading partner whose biggest exports are already controlled by american companies. A smart guy wouldn't have lowered taxes while a huge 300 billion dollar deficit looms over this years budget. A smart guy wouldn't have broken international and US law to go to war with an already crippled dictator.
A smart guy MIGHT EVEN have noticed all the talk in the intelligence community about a plan to fly planes into the WTC and the pentagon and put some saveguards in place to ensure nothing would happen.
A smart guy might -- just MIGHT -- have
Re-read what I wrote. He's using hiter-like TACTICS. I never said he wanted to slaugheter anyone(erm...except middle-easterners, but I guess tens of thousands of them are ok since it's "liberation"), but the way he's going "if you don't agree with me, you're a bad American, because you're either with us or against us" is very much like the atmosphere of patriotism that permeated Germany before WWII that allowed Hitlers rise to power and the subsequent slaughter.
I think that points more to the stupidity of the people doing the voting. The guy uses the same techniques as hitler to keep the populace in line (see:Patriotism as a tool), while trying to pretend that he's one of the good guys.
Personally, I think the whole system is broken, starting from the schools that forgot to teach anyone about the world around them. Tell me, if you're in south dakota, which state is directly north of you? Yeah. Some Americans answer this wrong.
Morality has no place in the music industry. Never has. Never will.
What?! I doubt it. Bush is too stupid to take the honorable way out.
show me a country anywhere in the world where a democracy has -ever- been practiced
Switzerland.
Amen. I think there are too many people in this discussion who have run a 5 or 10 computer network and think it makes them an authority on effective policies for actual enterprise networks. Frightening, isn't it? That's one good reason I'm so jaded with the entire IT industry -- everybody thinks knowing how to set an IP address in windows 98 makes them an expert. That's the reason why so many techs consider users the enemy -- they think they know better than the techs themselves because they can surf the web or install an OS.
1)there is a HUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEE difference between a secured corporate installation and the OS some guy put on his machine on the weekend.
2)That's doubtful. If some know it all user is putting the entire organizations security at risk because he doesn't want to use windows, the person who did the unauthorized OS installation (and the one who didn't follow the policy of working off the networked drive, as most places I've worked do) will be out on his ass faster than the IT guy cracking down on said unauthorized OS installations. What makes you think that he wouldn't? It's like saying the VP would be angry that you didn't get to a conference because you stole a car and got pulled over by the police.
All the other stuff you've responded to seems to be a pretty good description of a worst-case scenario breakin, which could happen a lot more easily with an unsecured, unauthorized installation of an OS than with an IT department crafted OS installation designed to be secure.
Personally, I've worked for an IT department that serviced thousands of users over hundreds of miles. After working there, you begin to understand just how crucial a secure, consistent platform created by the IT dept is, especially when it's a machine in some remote community that will take a days drive to get to. On the other hand, since the users have been under our care for over ten years, most of them realize the (very good!) reasons why we are so strict about security -- because to them, security and reliability are inseperable.
Hey, not just any windows, OUR copy of windows, which we will ghost onto your drive, which has been prepared to be secure and reliable. Personally, as a tech, I'd rather people not be allowed to install anything on their machines that doesn't pertain to work. A new OS falls under this classification.
Even beyond that, if some joker decides to keep sendmail on his machine, your network can be blacklisted. Earlier versions of Red Hat kept relays open. I saw it happen at the last place I worked. The guy needed the machine though, so we sent someone down to secure it and ensure there were no mail services installed.
OK, that was spooky. I'm heading to college in a week, so it won't be accurate anymore then, but the fact that I am, in fact, staying in my parents basement while I save for college, is accurate.
Of course, I'm only 20, so it's not like it's scary "45 year old guy living in his basement" scary, but still...
It is your duty, as a citizen of a democratic nation, to vote. It's the only thing that seperates you from people in despotic and communist nations(though to be fair, communism isn't a form of government, it's a system of commerce, which tends to have fascist governments in charge due to the very nature of communism). If you decide that you'd rather someone else makes the decisions for you, don't be suprised when some fascist decides to take your free little land and turn it into Soviet USistan.
Because both the big parties are so corrupt they make those dictators we like to hate so much seem alright in comparison?
You mistake the journey for the destination. To make it to Europe, I have to cross an ocean. The ocean isn't important. In order to sip a glass of wine, I must first lift the glass to my lips. That motion isn't important. To use my computer, I must first press the power button to turn it on. The button isn't important. The whole idea that money is important is ludicrous. To put it in business terms, money doesn't plow fields. Money doesn't move packages. Money doesn't talk. Money doesn't help customers or write programs or smelt iron or roll paper or compose music or art or writing. Money is a means to an end. A mere bargining chip. Anyone who treats it like more than that is a fool of unparalelled proportions.
I would rather live with a great family with no money than live all alone in the nicest house in the country.
I would rather have the greatest freinds and no money to party with than be a billionaire who has to hire whores to keep him company.
I would rather have a great love than have all the money in the world and never have known the feeling.
Health I don't really have to worry about. I'm Canadian.
Hobbies don't need constant money infusions to keep moving, and money isn't the only means to getting what you need. Trust me. I've been there. FOR A LONG, LONG TIME.
You don't need money to travel. A good walking stick(free) and a bit of knowlege(free) will let you go wherever you'd like to go on the continent with all the food you desire.
As for Entertainment, since when do you need to have money to enjoy a tune, or a work of art? I assure you that not all expression has a price tag.
Education? Education is an interesting thing. To many, it isn't really that useful. It's certainly not important as anything more than a means to an end...but it's not something that you MUST buy. As it has often been said -- Information wants to be free. There are plenty of free sources of information for the resourceful.
On the other hand, I didn't say that money wasn't the slightest bit useful. I just said it wasn't the most useful thing out there. And you managed to ignore the subtext of the parent post. Let me spell it out for you. Of course there's no business sense in programming after hours for free, it's for those things that are more important than money, varied and plenty, that one programs for free. You can't talk about business and volunteer work in the same way. Saying "why volunteer your time and work? You're not getting paid for it!" isn't a business case, it's missing the point of doing it in the first place. It's saying that money is the most important thing in life, and anything that doesn't involve getting paid is just a waste, because you could be making money instead.
Personally, I'd love to rid myself of this addiction to money. I'd love to get a farm someday, install some solar panels and windmills, and live out my life without ever seeing another looney, quarter, or dime again. Will it require money? Sure, that's how the world works. But it's just a means to an end. It's not that important.
If you think money is all there is to life, you are infinitely dumber than anyone you may ever try to make fun of.
Regarding winmodem support, it's far better than you'd expect. While some brands don't have drivers, it's not a mistake of the OS developers, it's a choice of stupid modem manufacturers. Connexant and Rockwell, among others, have drivers available for their winmodem chips.
Regarding GNU HURD, That would be a mistake of GNU, not of linux developers.
Regarding Gimp, just because it doesn't have one or two features you want doesn't make that a mistake, it's a matter of patents and taste, if I understand correctly.
Regarding Mozilla, it works quite well, and it's not going to be replaced by firebird any time soon. Even if it is, it's still mozilla underneath a rewritten UI. I don't see any mistakes here.
Regarding Tuxkart, I fail to see how the fact that you don't like the game is a mistake of the OS developers.
Regarding Gnome and Abiword, I fail to see how the former is a mistake simply because you don't like it, nor how the latter, a hugely multiplaform word processor which happened to be runnable under linux, is a mistake of Linux specifically. MS word can work on linux through WINE.
You'd be suprised.
Personally, I don't like either of them, but MS has been quite thorough in destroying the competiton.
I found during my time watching CNN that they have a very nasty tendancy to try to editorialize something to skew opinion. For instance, they were "covering" the anti-war protests, and decided to stay on the footage of one guy pulling someone out of their car and attacking him. Then the reporter(who was, Ironically enough, pro-war) goes on this rant about how it's wrong to attack people.
Personally, this whole episode with the war has made me realize that America is just a fascist dictatorship in disguise who has mastered several orwellian tactics quite well.
You're living in the dark. Read up on Microsofts history, and you'll see that it's not customer appreciation that keeps people running MS software!
To be brief, Microsoft is in their position specifically BECAUSE they act this way, and the others aren't because they don't. If Sun or Oracle decided the law didn't apply to them, I bet they could claw their way to the top as well. Many companies have put out better software over the years, but they've all been crushed, and mostly illegally at that. That's what you MS apologists always like to forget. Those companies that testified at MS's trial? They weren't there because they were trying to stifle innovation, or because they were envious of Microsofts position, it's because MS acted in ways that were entirely antiethical, and in some cases, blatantly illegal. Their entire history is a case study in how to be criminally antiethical, From illegal OEM agreements to trying to pay back fines in court using SOFTWARE LICENSES.
And did you ever stop to think that Gates might haave set up the fund specifically so gullable saps like yourself would go "oh sure, he's responsible for one of the most unethical and criminally inclined software companies in the world, but he donates money!"? He's systematically made the biggest of his donations during times of bad PR, such as during the antitrust trial, and ensured they were widely publicized.
The only reason it seems that way is that 99.9% of OSS software projects that make it huge do so because they have a pre-established demand.
That's OK though, it's not like MS hasn't done it's fair share of copying from OSS. Share and share alike.
Might I remind you that Sega has now given up after the dreamcast bombed...
On the other hand, that upgrade is free. Who cares if OO.o 1.1 doesn't read it in that case?
...because there were NEVER any OSes, OS Shells, or productivity software before Microsoft came on the scene! I mean, they cane, and they said "let there be software", and there was software, and it was good. Right?
Oh wait...