Great - let's go and invade China then. They've been imprisoning, torturing, killing and generally oppressing their population for decades. Do you remember the troops turning on protestors in Tiananmen Square?
Or is it that Iraq is strategically useful and that even pressing China about human rights seems to cause problems with selling them goods and services?
Oh of course. Microsoft are funding all this in a clandestine fashion in a bid to undermine Linux. And your evidence for this is? Oh hang on you haven't got any evidence, you just dreamed this up because it seemed cool.
The only people SCO care about are those they are asking to pay up for using Linux software they claim IP rights over. These are company CEOs who have already made the business decision to use Linux. They're not about to be influnced by stories of DDoS attacks, especially not if they're already committed to using Linux in the corporate environment.
Growing up doesn't mean using MS software - it means stopping being a zealot. I am an MS basher, but simply because I can do more with Free Software. I wouldn't use Mac OS X either.
Right. So you think it is likely that SCO have mounted a DDoS attack on themselves, or otherwise somehow faked it to look like one, instead of there actually being a real DDoS attack? Fair enough. I think that's a joke.
Please point out to me where SCO have accused "open source people" of this latest attack and please explain why anyone whose opinion matters to SCO is going to care. The peopel SCO want to chase are commercial Linux users. They know already what the "open source people" are like - they're using their software and paying money for it to be supported.
Do you know how hard to might be for SCO to actually fake a DDoS attack on themselves?
The Slashdot headline was "Security Experts Doubt SCO's Claims of DoS"...well there are lots of "experts" around here it seems, and they all thought it was a PR stunt.
How anyone could see PR value in this is beyond me. The opinions that matter to SCO are those of the people who control the purse strings at companies who use Linux heavily. They are not about to jack in Linux/pay up because some script kiddies were playing games. It just doesn't make sense that a company would fake a DDoS attack.
I think the hilarious and totally outlandish accusations of them lying about a DoS attack meant Slashdot had to publish this or look like real idiots. Why they published the "SCO might be lying" story in the first place is a mystery.
Given it was derived from known experimental data that is indeed the case. Revolutionary, and hard to swallow for some I bet, but it took just 11 years for a more complete follow-up and a further 3 years for experimental data to prove that ideas espoused follow-up had great credibility. Funnily he received the Nobel Prize for Physics for his work on the photoelectric effect, not relativity.
The US could shoot the entire system out of the skies if it wanted. That doesn't make it responsible, amenable to good relations or the best policy. You'd hope that democratic nations would behave in a sensible way towards each other.
That is not what they meant at all. If they had wanted to claim world-beating productivity with Mac OS X then they would have used the word 'productivity'. As it was they made a big fuss about the G5 processor and said it was the most powerful PC in the world. That is obviously about the silicon, and not about the software. This is why the ITC banned the advert.
BMW's claim is not something you can objectively prove. So it's a subjective statement that passes fine. And so it goes for most of the ad lines you've given. Guiness's claim is ancient and the ITC would give them a kicking for that these days.
Apple actually claimed to have the fastest personal computer in the world. That's not the "best" or the "world's favourite" or even "the king of PCs" - it's an objective claim. And so they got judged objectively. And were found wanting. Tough cheese.
Dr. Criswell predicts that with this project, "the average American income could increase from today's ~$35,000/y-person to more than $150,000/y-person."
So it'll spark off massive inflation?
This seems about right. Apache 2.0 is still not as complete as Apache 1.3.x when it comes to support from surrounding software. I'm waiting for Apache::Request to be ported properly.
What else were we expecting from Charles Murray? Lots of clever-sounding numbers and an inherent bias towards male white westerners. Because of the clear subjectivity in deciding what makes something an achievement he is free to exercise his partiality. It may be asking too much to ask for a book that contains no stupid figures but then didn't we all cotton on to his agenda back in 1994?
Slashdot Mirror
Great - let's go and invade China then. They've been imprisoning, torturing, killing and generally oppressing their population for decades.
Do you remember the troops turning on protestors in Tiananmen Square?
Or is it that Iraq is strategically useful and that even pressing China about human rights seems to cause problems with selling them goods and services?
Oh of course. Microsoft are funding all this in a clandestine fashion in a bid to undermine Linux.
And your evidence for this is?
Oh hang on you haven't got any evidence, you just dreamed this up because it seemed cool.
The only people SCO care about are those they are asking to pay up for using Linux software they claim IP rights over.
These are company CEOs who have already made the business decision to use Linux. They're not about to be influnced by stories of DDoS attacks, especially not if they're already committed to using Linux in the corporate environment.
Growing up doesn't mean using MS software - it means stopping being a zealot.
I am an MS basher, but simply because I can do more with Free Software.
I wouldn't use Mac OS X either.
But this isn't bad PR for Linux.
So what's the idea about it being faked?
Right. So you think it is likely that SCO have mounted a DDoS attack on themselves, or otherwise somehow faked it to look like one, instead of there actually being a real DDoS attack?
Fair enough.
I think that's a joke.
Please point out to me where SCO have accused "open source people" of this latest attack and please explain why anyone whose opinion matters to SCO is going to care.
The peopel SCO want to chase are commercial Linux users. They know already what the "open source people" are like - they're using their software and paying money for it to be supported.
Do you know how hard to might be for SCO to actually fake a DDoS attack on themselves?
The Slashdot headline was "Security Experts Doubt SCO's Claims of DoS"...well there are lots of "experts" around here it seems, and they all thought it was a PR stunt.
How anyone could see PR value in this is beyond me.
The opinions that matter to SCO are those of the people who control the purse strings at companies who use Linux heavily. They are not about to jack in Linux/pay up because some script kiddies were playing games.
It just doesn't make sense that a company would fake a DDoS attack.
So not 'kiss me Hardy', then?
I think the hilarious and totally outlandish accusations of them lying about a DoS attack meant Slashdot had to publish this or look like real idiots.
Why they published the "SCO might be lying" story in the first place is a mystery.
That was good, but you forgot to do
s/FreeBSD/Windows 98/g; on every line...
It isn't?
Damn and I was looking to living in an Arco...
Given it was derived from known experimental data that is indeed the case. Revolutionary, and hard to swallow for some I bet, but it took just 11 years for a more complete follow-up and a further 3 years for experimental data to prove that ideas espoused follow-up had great credibility.
Funnily he received the Nobel Prize for Physics for his work on the photoelectric effect, not relativity.
It would seem a little odd if the US and its greatest ally went to war with each other yes....
The US could shoot the entire system out of the skies if it wanted. That doesn't make it responsible, amenable to good relations or the best policy.
You'd hope that democratic nations would behave in a sensible way towards each other.
That is not what they meant at all. If they had wanted to claim world-beating productivity with Mac OS X then they would have used the word 'productivity'.
As it was they made a big fuss about the G5 processor and said it was the most powerful PC in the world.
That is obviously about the silicon, and not about the software.
This is why the ITC banned the advert.
BMW's claim is not something you can objectively prove. So it's a subjective statement that passes fine. And so it goes for most of the ad lines you've given.
Guiness's claim is ancient and the ITC would give them a kicking for that these days.
Apple actually claimed to have the fastest personal computer in the world. That's not the "best" or the "world's favourite" or even "the king of PCs" - it's an objective claim.
And so they got judged objectively. And were found wanting. Tough cheese.
Dr. Criswell predicts that with this project, "the average American income could increase from today's ~$35,000/y-person to more than $150,000/y-person." So it'll spark off massive inflation?
Top stuff. Thanks!
This seems about right. Apache 2.0 is still not as complete as Apache 1.3.x when it comes to support from surrounding software.
I'm waiting for Apache::Request to be ported properly.
What do you then incorporate it into?
'Other' perhaps?
Incidentally, it's not 0. Oxford Brookes Univesity in the UK still use it, hilariously.
I attacked the message actually.
Pointed out that it had an unreliable source.
It does.
What else were we expecting from Charles Murray? Lots of clever-sounding numbers and an inherent bias towards male white westerners.
Because of the clear subjectivity in deciding what makes something an achievement he is free to exercise his partiality.
It may be asking too much to ask for a book that contains no stupid figures but then didn't we all cotton on to his agenda back in 1994?
No it's all true. Their plan is currently for a giant flashlight.
That one was found to be a hoax, didn't you know?