We can have a lot of use for all these 200-man people (1e6/5000=200) attending that party, like sending 200 letters to congressmen, or posting 200 troll messages on/. Oh, wait, nevermind.
Actually, drugs are illegal in Amsterdam. It's just not enforced there.
However, export of drugs from the Netherlands is strictly controlled and with heavy penalties.
Also, as it is a controlled substance in the US it's illegal to posses or use it there.
besides matters of national security like nuclear technology, or products of criminal acts like child porn
Nuclear technology is well-known all over the world, and doesn't affect national security at all. Either you have the right to see it (and then the enemy can find it out too), or nobody can see it (then you don't need legal protection as it's a secret).
Regarding child porn, I see no problem with "products of criminal acts". Do we prohibit snuff films or survailence photos of thefts. No! These films/photos are used as evidence against the felons. There is nothing inherently wrong with any kind of information. If distribution of such "products of criminal acts" were allowed the original felons could be more easily traced. Censoring this kind of information will only serve to protect the felons.
I wonder if they have been taking McOwen to court if has run something that could actually save lives on the department's spare time.
I think they just decided to use public opinion against "cracking" and made McOwen a criminal ("Look, he's trying to break codes on company time. He must be a criminal"). Sorry, not criminal, what's the buzzword again? Ah, terrorist...
I can run those on my 486 with windows! And you can run a Linux workstation on a 386. I wrote "Windows XP" (aka Windows DRM), with the slogan "What does M$ want to do with your cycles today?"
You don't need to. I think this comment suffices to show "prior art" if anyone would now want to patent this EVIL, although it would not prevent them from using it...
My filesystem actually removes the file entry from the directory, and clears the relevant inodes. Also, even FAT-based filesystems clear the FAT cluster chain, which can complicate recovery if the file was fragmented.
If I ever send in my PC for repair, I always take the HDs out. I keep way too much private info on my PC (passwords, keys, personal data, etc.) that I would never just grant a stranger (no matter how trustworthy) any access to my data.
Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we were unable to defrag its ext2 file system Actually, Linux supports Token Ring (you need to recompile the kernel for that) and there is no need to defrag the ext2fs due to it's superior design.
So you can imagine our suprise when we were informed by a lawyer that we would be required to publish our source code for others to use. It was brought to our attention that Linux is copyrighted under something called the GPL, or the Gnu Protective License. Part of this license states that any changes to the kernel are to be made freely available. Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would now be available at no cost to our competitors. The GNU General Public License does not limit your rights granted by copyright law in any way (as it plainly states). You do not have to realease any source code, UNLESS you plan to release work based on the code. With M$ code you cannot even see the kernel code, let alone modify it.
Furthermore, after reviewing this GPL our lawyers advised us that any products compiled with GPL'ed tools - such as gcc - would also have to its source code released. This was simply unacceptable. You are right. This is unaccepable. This also incorrect. You should fire your lawyers and hire ones that know how to read. The GPL allows any USE of the code, including compiling commercial code with the gcc compiler.
Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with another solution. Although it was tought to do, there really was no option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 2000. If you don't want anyone outside the company to see your source code or products, then simple DON'T RELEASE them. You are required to release the source only if you redistribute work based on GPL'd code, such as kernel patches.
I think the biggest thing keeping Linux from being truly competitive with Microsoft is this GPL. Its draconian requirements virtually guarentee that no business will ever be able to use it. After my experience with Linux, I won't be recommending it to any of my associates. I may reconsider if Linux switches its license to something a little more fair, such as Microsoft's "Shared Source". Until then its attempts to socialize the software market will insure it remains only a bit player. Micro$oft's "Shared Source" allows only specific buisness partners to see (but not modify in any way) limited parts of Micro$oft source code. Micro$oft uses it's clients for peer review of their code without giving anything in return.
In the "Shared Source" license you are not even allowed to create a work based on the source, let alone distribute it.
There is no black and white, there's only only black and that's Micro$oft and there are a lot of grey, that's BSD, Linux, etc.
Let's kill the non-competative bastard and then find a happy medium and mix all open-source OSs ad nauseum.
What you don't realize is that if everybody will have a Linux PC at home and will become experienced Linux users, buisnesses won't be dumb to buy M$ software that nobody (in Belguim) uses at home, but will also move to Linux.
The OS has nothing to do with user interface. Many people are using Linux everyday in embedded systems or servers without even knowing about it.
My father (who is by all means not a techie) uses Linux daily to play LOKI games. I did the installation, but usage is as simple as can be.
By many aspects, Linux is easier than Windows. It's easier for the experts, and it's just the same on the basic level.
Strange, I've recently setup a Linux (MDK8.1) server and XP workstation, and as it turned out the server was much easier to setup. I spent days till I managed to setup file sharing network printing (on the client side) with the HP drivers, and the scanner didn't work at all (It has only Linux and Win95/98/me/2k drivers).
Setting up the server was a piece of cake (reading HOWTOs and acting accordingly). Setting up an XP workstation was real tough.
Actually, that is illegal. According to Israeli law, a merchant may not refuse to accept valid currency. He must have complied, even if you had payed with a 200 NIS bill (which are quite rare). I had no problem purchasing goods worth less than 5NIS with a 200NIS bill. The merchant didn't like it very much, but complied with the law.
Here in Israel, we have 10NIS ~ $2.70 coins, that were introduced several years ago. There is no problem using these larger denomination coins. You don't keep your change in your pocket, you keep it in your wallet because it's real money. Then, you can always pay with a coin.
Or, you can make it a PNG image, so only Mozilla shows the icon and the IE users won't see it.
Also, you won't have to create your icon in a M$ format.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe they set their watches wrong, and are now set to Apr 1st?
Could it be true?
We can have a lot of use for all these 200-man people (1e6/5000=200) attending that party, like sending 200 letters to congressmen, or posting 200 troll messages on /. Oh, wait, nevermind.
Actually, drugs are illegal in Amsterdam. It's just not enforced there.
However, export of drugs from the Netherlands is strictly controlled and with heavy penalties.
Also, as it is a controlled substance in the US it's illegal to posses or use it there.
besides matters of national security like nuclear technology, or products of criminal acts like child porn
Nuclear technology is well-known all over the world, and doesn't affect national security at all. Either you have the right to see it (and then the enemy can find it out too), or nobody can see it (then you don't need legal protection as it's a secret).
Regarding child porn, I see no problem with "products of criminal acts". Do we prohibit snuff films or survailence photos of thefts. No! These films/photos are used as evidence against the felons. There is nothing inherently wrong with any kind of information. If distribution of such "products of criminal acts" were allowed the original felons could be more easily traced. Censoring this kind of information will only serve to protect the felons.
I wonder if they have been taking McOwen to court if has run something that could actually save lives on the department's spare time.
I think they just decided to use public opinion against "cracking" and made McOwen a criminal ("Look, he's trying to break codes on company time. He must be a criminal"). Sorry, not criminal, what's the buzzword again? Ah, terrorist...
I can run those on my 486 with windows!
And you can run a Linux workstation on a 386. I wrote "Windows XP" (aka Windows DRM), with the slogan "What does M$ want to do with your cycles today?"
They'll sue you for installing WindowsXP on company hardware. It wastes far more "unused" cycles than a mere distributed.net challange...
You don't need to. I think this comment suffices to show "prior art" if anyone would now want to patent this EVIL, although it would not prevent them from using it...
My filesystem actually removes the file entry from the directory, and clears the relevant inodes. Also, even FAT-based filesystems clear the FAT cluster chain, which can complicate recovery if the file was fragmented.
If I ever send in my PC for repair, I always take the HDs out. I keep way too much private info on my PC (passwords, keys, personal data, etc.) that I would never just grant a stranger (no matter how trustworthy) any access to my data.
Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we were unable to defrag its ext2 file system
Actually, Linux supports Token Ring (you need to recompile the kernel for that) and there is no need to defrag the ext2fs due to it's superior design.
So you can imagine our suprise when we were informed by a lawyer that we would be required to publish our source code for others to use. It was brought to our attention that Linux is copyrighted under something called the GPL, or the Gnu Protective License. Part of this license states that any changes to the kernel are to be made freely available. Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would now be available at no cost to our competitors.
The GNU General Public License does not limit your rights granted by copyright law in any way (as it plainly states). You do not have to realease any source code, UNLESS you plan to release work based on the code. With M$ code you cannot even see the kernel code, let alone modify it.
Furthermore, after reviewing this GPL our lawyers advised us that any products compiled with GPL'ed tools - such as gcc - would also have to its source code released. This was simply unacceptable.
You are right. This is unaccepable. This also incorrect. You should fire your lawyers and hire ones that know how to read. The GPL allows any USE of the code, including compiling commercial code with the gcc compiler.
Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with another solution. Although it was tought to do, there really was no option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 2000.
If you don't want anyone outside the company to see your source code or products, then simple DON'T RELEASE them. You are required to release the source only if you redistribute work based on GPL'd code, such as kernel patches.
I think the biggest thing keeping Linux from being truly competitive with Microsoft is this GPL. Its draconian requirements virtually guarentee that no business will ever be able to use it. After my experience with Linux, I won't be recommending it to any of my associates. I may reconsider if Linux switches its license to something a little more fair, such as Microsoft's "Shared Source". Until then its attempts to socialize the software market will insure it remains only a bit player.
Micro$oft's "Shared Source" allows only specific buisness partners to see (but not modify in any way) limited parts of Micro$oft source code. Micro$oft uses it's clients for peer review of their code without giving anything in return.
In the "Shared Source" license you are not even allowed to create a work based on the source, let alone distribute it.
There is no black and white, there's only only black and that's Micro$oft and there are a lot of grey, that's BSD, Linux, etc.
Let's kill the non-competative bastard and then find a happy medium and mix all open-source OSs ad nauseum.
If government gave everybody a Linux machine, what do you think will the software stores sell? Linux Software!
What you don't realize is that if everybody will have a Linux PC at home and will become experienced Linux users, buisnesses won't be dumb to buy M$ software that nobody (in Belguim) uses at home, but will also move to Linux.
The OS has nothing to do with user interface. Many people are using Linux everyday in embedded systems or servers without even knowing about it.
My father (who is by all means not a techie) uses Linux daily to play LOKI games. I did the installation, but usage is as simple as can be.
By many aspects, Linux is easier than Windows. It's easier for the experts, and it's just the same on the basic level.
Strange, I've recently setup a Linux (MDK8.1) server and XP workstation, and as it turned out the server was much easier to setup. I spent days till I managed to setup file sharing network printing (on the client side) with the HP drivers, and the scanner didn't work at all (It has only Linux and Win95/98/me/2k drivers).
Setting up the server was a piece of cake (reading HOWTOs and acting accordingly). Setting up an XP workstation was real tough.
Yes you are a terrrorist! Don't you know that only terrorists use steganography, and whoever uses steganography must be a terrorist?
Actually, that is illegal. According to Israeli law, a merchant may not refuse to accept valid currency. He must have complied, even if you had payed with a 200 NIS bill (which are quite rare). I had no problem purchasing goods worth less than 5NIS with a 200NIS bill. The merchant didn't like it very much, but complied with the law.
Here in Israel, we have 10NIS ~ $2.70 coins, that were introduced several years ago. There is no problem using these larger denomination coins. You don't keep your change in your pocket, you keep it in your wallet because it's real money. Then, you can always pay with a coin.
No no, Lame ain't an MP3 encoder!
Consider using a # sign before the colors in the BODY tag of your page, if you care about standards, or people using Mozilla.
Don't forget RFC 2325 ofcourse for network managment of coffee pots.
In favicon? Are you sure?
Or, you can make it a PNG image, so only Mozilla shows the icon and the IE users won't see it.
Also, you won't have to create your icon in a M$ format.
But quantum crypto is proven to be uncrackable. Just like one-time-pad.