The monopoly in this case was not found to have been illegally acquired, but only to have been illegally maintained. Therefore, rather than termination of the monopoly, the proper objective of the remedy in this case is termination of the exclusionary acts and practices related thereto which served to illegally maintain the monopoly.
"Yes, you are dead" was the quote from 1984 where I bookmarked, before hopping over here to slashdot. Oh my.
I don't think the parent poster understood your substitution syntax. Hopefully, he'll request an English translation if s/a/b/ is still ambiguous.
P.S. Your mention of corporate entities divulging pertinent personal information really cannot be emphasized enough. In recent memeory, Lindows.com gave Microsoft it's mailing list and subscriber list *immediately* with no hesitation, before anyone had any idea they might be so violently inconsiderate. I was left with the impression that they had the list ready to go, and were waiting for the Microsoft lawyers to request the mailing list. They had turned the list over days before the event was publicized.
P.S.S. No one has cut off my thumb (yet) to gain access to the NOC that my employer uses.
I partially agree with you, but for nearly opposite reasons.
You say that unions "theoretically exist for the benefir of all members" but that is not true: they theoretically exist to combat abusive management.
What *really* scares me about unionizing the IT sector is that we would suddenly have more concrete/inflexible/mandated diploma and certificate requirements. Rarely does a BS in CS indicate that someone can program well. Experience is a much clearer indicator. If all IT were unionized, my job would require someone with a BS or MA (as it currently does) but the rules would not be able to bend to allow me to work!
The word free in FOSS refers not to fiscal cost, but to the autonomy rights that FOSS grants its users. (A better word for zero-cost software, which lacks such rights, is "freeware.") The phrase open source emphasizes the right of users to study, change, and improve the source code--that is, the detailed design--of FOSS applications. Software that qualifies as free almost always also qualifies as open source, and vice versa, since both phrases derive from the same set of software user rights formulated in the late 1980s by Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation.
That reference to the FSF is precisely what is in question here, and therefore qmail does not deserve to be mentioned.
Time Warner/Road Runner (here) does not support Linux. I usually have to borrow someone's Win98 laptop if I feel like harrasing their tech support when their DNS is down. (Hasn't happened recently.)
- Gain some badly needed weight, pal. Cold doesn't bother heavier people as badly. Score some Carl's Jr. coupons and get to work.
If it were only weight you might have a valid point. I have gained 35-40 lbs in the last 5 years to no avail. I am perhaps more suceptible to cold server rooms now than I was 5 years ago. It's a metabolism thing, not (as much) a blubber thing.
Yes, I see your point. I suggest you wear a hat.
Advising anyone to gain weight is misguided. At best.
P.S. Carl's jr. is evil. Ever notice their advertising? They ALWAYS depict an animal eating with it's mouth open, for the sake of saying their customers/potential customers are all animals, therefore should be addressed on an anamalistic level, i.e. visible noisy mastication.
The noise in the datacenter is WORLDS better than listening to analysts describing their latest HIPAA probelm! It has a double benefit that if they {somehow} follow you in, you can't hear their mindless blather.
I guess you and I use/have used very different versions of Outlook. Last time I used it, it obeyed the Windows default setting of "hide extentions for known filetypes" which hideously is on by default.
I did not save any copies of the virus that I was sent, but the co-worker that clicked on the icon thought he was opening a picture of Anna Cornakova(sp?), because the icon looked like a JPG icon. (That's what he said, anyhow.)
Regarding your third point, I simply disagree. The text content of an e-mail message is the only part that should be rendered (by design) and anything/everything else should be an attachment. That makes the e-mail completely safe, making the rest irrelevant.
As for your first item:
"reading e-mail should be safe"
I can not agree with you more on that one! That is another reason why I recommend *not* using outlook!
Note that users can follow these simple rules without disrupting their usual email habits. On the other hand, if you tell people to "Stop using Outlook, "Never open attachments (even jpegs?)," or "Don't read email from anyone you don't know," they will probably just ignore you, and they'll be just as vulnerable as before.
The reasons I tell people not to use Outlook are:
1) The preview window opens e-mail FOR you 2) It executes programs/activex objects embedded in HTML 3) It renders e-mail in HTML format instead of text only 4) It hides file extentions and mime types 5) It allows attachments to display their own icons so as to impersonate a different file type
No other mail client I've used is nearly that silly, easpecially not by default. Once they are not using Outlook, they are not as susceptible to most of the popular viruses.
My point is that Red Hat *is* making bad changes. The parent-parent-parent post that you were pooh-poohing was saying something similar. The important fact here is that Red Hat *is* changing their very-popular-market-leader-many-people-think-this- is-linux distribution to emulate what I think is the WORST of the computing industry: Microsoft Windows.
What they do affects all of the linux community, whether they like it or not. What they are doing now affects me and my computer directly and I do not like it!
Switching what OS I use was a non-trivial task. Switching to a new distro is also non-trivial. I do think I've had enough of Red Hat now. But rebuilding my main computer with Debian is not something that can be accomplished overnight!
RedHat can change the UI as much as they want to make it easier, but experienced users don't have to be crippled by it.
Experienced users *are* crippled by RedHat changing their UI willy-nilly. Well, maybe just intollerably inconvenienced. But is certainly is not getting "easier!" Pontificating that just anyone can install any flavor of Linux on any box is silly. The time involved (and in my case, the expense of buying another hard drive) is also a larger factor than you are implying.
It's really too bad. RH was a nice distro to "mess around with linux" for a couple years. And it still is a great starter/newbie distribution.
Red Hat 6.x did not break the Caps Lock/Shift key functionality to emulate Windows, but later versions did. There is no way to undo their insiduous change. I tried to not upgrade to avoid their horrid change, but their 'up2date' destroyed my system anyway.
I use CTRL-ALT-F1/F6 most of the time. Ever try to use xmodmap on an stty? Doesn't work. xmodmap only affects the Xwindows session(s).
So now, as I try to maintain 30 year old MUMPS code for work, I no longer have a working system. When I try to type "D ^%SS" it comes out as "d ^%ss" which does not work in any version of ANSI standard MUMPS.
What is wrong? The industry standard for ever has been that EITHER caps lock OR Shift will guarante an alphabetic character comes out in upper case. The windows experience paradigm is to use the shift key instead as a toggle so that Caps Lock+Shift+A = "a" <--This is the wrong behavior!
Now I have no way to fix the change that Red Hat foisted on me. So yeah, now I have a reason to bo build my own slackware, but I have to destroy my current system (and it's data) to do so. That should only take me, what 50-70 hours or so right?
It is specious of Red Hat so think that they are perhaps "helping" people with changes that make systems less usable.
>>If the politician wins, then this will open the door for every 'non-profit' group to spam, and all it will take, is to set up a dummy non-profit company and spam for donations.
Don't look now, but they are getting away with that now on the unsolicited telephone call/telemarketing side already.
I only gave CUPS a couple chances (and not recently). I guess I will again later today, after work. (Hi ho, Hi ho, it's off to work I go...)
--
But to get back to my orignal post, the on again, off again nature of HP is disconcerting. If they had supported the FSF from the start, there would not have been IP issues with print drivers to begin with.
No print server. Parallel cable. Yes, it does still print test pages. It could be a bad cable, but I doubt it, since it works when I hook my scanner up to it.
I would think this is off topic. But anyhow, I have an HP 672C Deskjet that worked fine with RedHat 5.2 back in 1999. But after I upgraded to 6.x, then 7.x, I have never been able to get this printer to work. I have not yet downgraded back to see if there was something peculiar in the 5.2 install that allowed it, but even installing drivers from HP has not helped. I am currently using Red Hat 7.2, and have an lpd queue that has test jobs that are months old pending. It has been a while since I've bothered with it. Mandrake did not recognise it either.
How did your [incorrect] post get modded up to +5?
SGML is a standard. XML is not - it has been raped to the point of being non-sensical.
XSLT is for MS only, no? DOM did not originate from XML.
HTML4 is ignored by 99%+ of the web pages out there. Only a few hundred "large" sites actually can get their HTML to fit that nasty spec.
CSS - lots of sites use this is MANY DIFFERENT WAYS. How is that standard?
SOAP - isn't that what those evolution guys are messing with? Can't guess how much MS is paying them under the sheets...
--
If the W3C wants to be a 'standards' organization, they should be adopting things that are in common practice. Their recommendations should be for things that make sense. I will personally NEVER forgive them for their <DOCTYPE> blasphemy. MIME types were (and still are) much more appropriate. But that is a tiny example.
--
The W3C knows that if they accept royalties, they would automatically be ignored. It's too bad they were not dumb enough to sign their own death-warrant.
Bullshit. This is Michael Robertson saying "FUCK YOU" to the FSF. He and his company are in direct violation of the letter AND intent of the GPL.
Your generic "Free software doesn't work" argument is wrong. The economy of the country is collapsing, yet companies like Red Hat and IBM are still around and solvent! Lindows should last, well, has already lasted too long (due to 100 million dollars from Vivendi universal.)
You seem to be saying that any method that results in the "content producers" getting fewer sales has shifted the "replacement burden" from the consumer back to the "content producers."
You seem to be using circular logic. Are you suggesting that all crime victims are to blame for providing an opportunity for a crime to be committed? One reason that presumption is absurd is that criminals are the ones *by definition* who are performing a crime. Whether it is easy or very difficult for them is irrelevant - a theif is a theif.
But in your example, both parties could be found guilty, since the one party was advertising (and therefore conspiring) with the person doing the physical stealing.
To extend your logic further, it would be theft to restore from backup, a CD that was melted accidentally by sunlight!
Slashdot Mirror
The monopoly in this case was not found to have been illegally acquired, but only
to have been illegally maintained. Therefore, rather than termination of the
monopoly, the proper objective of the remedy in this case is termination of the
exclusionary acts and practices related thereto which served to illegally maintain
the monopoly.
How on earth did she come to that conclusion?!
"Yes, you are dead"
was the quote from 1984 where I bookmarked, before hopping over here to slashdot. Oh my.
I don't think the parent poster understood your substitution syntax. Hopefully, he'll request an English translation if s/a/b/ is still ambiguous.
P.S.
Your mention of corporate entities divulging pertinent personal information really cannot be emphasized enough. In recent memeory, Lindows.com gave Microsoft it's mailing list and subscriber list *immediately* with no hesitation, before anyone had any idea they might be so violently inconsiderate. I was left with the impression that they had the list ready to go, and were waiting for the Microsoft lawyers to request the mailing list. They had turned the list over days before the event was publicized.
P.S.S.
No one has cut off my thumb (yet) to gain access to the NOC that my employer uses.
I partially agree with you, but for nearly opposite reasons.
You say that unions "theoretically exist for the benefir of all members" but that is not true: they theoretically exist to combat abusive management.
What *really* scares me about unionizing the IT sector is that we would suddenly have more concrete/inflexible/mandated diploma and certificate requirements. Rarely does a BS in CS indicate that someone can program well. Experience is a much clearer indicator. If all IT were unionized, my job would require someone with a BS or MA (as it currently does) but the rules would not be able to bend to allow me to work!
What exactly were you reading?
From page one:
The word free in FOSS refers not to fiscal cost, but to the autonomy rights that FOSS grants its
users. (A better word for zero-cost software, which lacks such rights, is "freeware.") The phrase
open source emphasizes the right of users to study, change, and improve the source code--that
is, the detailed design--of FOSS applications. Software that qualifies as free almost always also
qualifies as open source, and vice versa, since both phrases derive from the same set of software
user rights formulated in the late 1980s by Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation.
That reference to the FSF is precisely what is in question here, and therefore qmail does not deserve to be mentioned.
No, they should ALL be public seats. Corporate affilliations should diqualify someone from sitting on the ICANN board.
Time Warner/Road Runner (here) does not support Linux. I usually have to borrow someone's Win98 laptop if I feel like harrasing their tech support when their DNS is down. (Hasn't happened recently.)
- Gain some badly needed weight, pal. Cold doesn't bother heavier people as badly. Score some Carl's Jr. coupons and get to work.
If it were only weight you might have a valid point. I have gained 35-40 lbs in the last 5 years to no avail. I am perhaps more suceptible to cold server rooms now than I was 5 years ago. It's a metabolism thing, not (as much) a blubber thing.
Yes, I see your point. I suggest you wear a hat.
Advising anyone to gain weight is misguided. At best.
P.S. Carl's jr. is evil. Ever notice their advertising? They ALWAYS depict an animal eating with it's mouth open, for the sake of saying their customers/potential customers are all animals, therefore should be addressed on an anamalistic level, i.e. visible noisy mastication.
Not even McD's/BK sink that low!
The noise in the datacenter is WORLDS better than listening to analysts describing their latest HIPAA probelm! It has a double benefit that if they {somehow} follow you in, you can't hear their mindless blather.
Next you'll be saying that Microsoft helps "fix" elections.
I guess you and I use/have used very different versions of Outlook. Last time I used it, it obeyed the Windows default setting of "hide extentions for known filetypes" which hideously is on by default.
I did not save any copies of the virus that I was sent, but the co-worker that clicked on the icon thought he was opening a picture of Anna Cornakova(sp?), because the icon looked like a JPG icon. (That's what he said, anyhow.)
Regarding your third point, I simply disagree. The text content of an e-mail message is the only part that should be rendered (by design) and anything/everything else should be an attachment. That makes the e-mail completely safe, making the rest irrelevant.
As for your first item:
"reading e-mail should be safe"
I can not agree with you more on that one! That is another reason why I recommend *not* using outlook!
... and vietname.com [vietname.com] is already taken. Just shows you there are no good domains left anymore...
Someone please mod the parent up.
Oh, and fix the title's typo already.
Note that users can follow these simple rules without disrupting their usual email habits. On the other hand, if you tell people to "Stop using Outlook, "Never open attachments (even jpegs?)," or "Don't read email from anyone you don't know," they will probably just ignore you, and they'll be just as vulnerable as before.
The reasons I tell people not to use Outlook are:
1) The preview window opens e-mail FOR you
2) It executes programs/activex objects embedded in HTML
3) It renders e-mail in HTML format instead of text only
4) It hides file extentions and mime types
5) It allows attachments to display their own icons so as to impersonate a different file type
No other mail client I've used is nearly that silly, easpecially not by default. Once they are not using Outlook, they are not as susceptible to most of the popular viruses.
My point is that Red Hat *is* making bad changes. The parent-parent-parent post that you were pooh-poohing was saying something similar. The important fact here is that Red Hat *is* changing their very-popular-market-leader-many-people-think-this- is-linux distribution to emulate what I think is the WORST of the computing industry: Microsoft Windows.
What they do affects all of the linux community, whether they like it or not. What they are doing now affects me and my computer directly and I do not like it!
Switching what OS I use was a non-trivial task. Switching to a new distro is also non-trivial. I do think I've had enough of Red Hat now. But rebuilding my main computer with Debian is not something that can be accomplished overnight!
RedHat can change the UI as much as they want to make it easier, but experienced users don't have to be crippled by it.
Experienced users *are* crippled by RedHat changing their UI willy-nilly. Well, maybe just intollerably inconvenienced. But is certainly is not getting "easier!" Pontificating that just anyone can install any flavor of Linux on any box is silly. The time involved (and in my case, the expense of buying another hard drive) is also a larger factor than you are implying.
It's really too bad. RH was a nice distro to "mess around with linux" for a couple years. And it still is a great starter/newbie distribution.
You are wrong.
Red Hat 6.x did not break the Caps Lock/Shift key functionality to emulate Windows, but later versions did. There is no way to undo their insiduous change. I tried to not upgrade to avoid their horrid change, but their 'up2date' destroyed my system anyway.
I use CTRL-ALT-F1/F6 most of the time. Ever try to use xmodmap on an stty? Doesn't work. xmodmap only affects the Xwindows session(s).
So now, as I try to maintain 30 year old MUMPS code for work, I no longer have a working system. When I try to type "D ^%SS" it comes out as "d ^%ss" which does not work in any version of ANSI standard MUMPS.
What is wrong? The industry standard for ever has been that EITHER caps lock OR Shift will guarante an alphabetic character comes out in upper case. The windows experience paradigm is to use the shift key instead as a toggle so that Caps Lock+Shift+A = "a" <--This is the wrong behavior!
Now I have no way to fix the change that Red Hat foisted on me. So yeah, now I have a reason to bo build my own slackware, but I have to destroy my current system (and it's data) to do so. That should only take me, what 50-70 hours or so right?
It is specious of Red Hat so think that they are perhaps "helping" people with changes that make systems less usable.
It seems like he was suggesting that password changing be event based, rather than date mandated.
>>If the politician wins, then this will open the door for every 'non-profit' group to spam, and all it will take, is to set up a dummy non-profit company and spam for donations.
Don't look now, but they are getting away with that now on the unsolicited telephone call/telemarketing side already.
I only gave CUPS a couple chances (and not recently). I guess I will again later today, after work. (Hi ho, Hi ho, it's off to work I go...)
--
But to get back to my orignal post, the on again, off again nature of HP is disconcerting. If they had supported the FSF from the start, there would not have been IP issues with print drivers to begin with.
Keep at them Bruce!
We are WAY off topic now.
No print server. Parallel cable. Yes, it does still print test pages. It could be a bad cable, but I doubt it, since it works when I hook my scanner up to it.
I would think this is off topic. But anyhow, I have an HP 672C Deskjet that worked fine with RedHat 5.2 back in 1999. But after I upgraded to 6.x, then 7.x, I have never been able to get this printer to work. I have not yet downgraded back to see if there was something peculiar in the 5.2 install that allowed it, but even installing drivers from HP has not helped. I am currently using Red Hat 7.2, and have an lpd queue that has test jobs that are months old pending. It has been a while since I've bothered with it. Mandrake did not recognise it either.
How did your [incorrect] post get modded up to +5?
SGML is a standard. XML is not - it has been raped to the point of being non-sensical.
XSLT is for MS only, no? DOM did not originate from XML.
HTML4 is ignored by 99%+ of the web pages out there. Only a few hundred "large" sites actually can get their HTML to fit that nasty spec.
CSS - lots of sites use this is MANY DIFFERENT WAYS. How is that standard?
SOAP - isn't that what those evolution guys are messing with? Can't guess how much MS is paying them under the sheets...
--
If the W3C wants to be a 'standards' organization, they should be adopting things that are in common practice. Their recommendations should be for things that make sense. I will personally NEVER forgive them for their <DOCTYPE> blasphemy. MIME types were (and still are) much more appropriate. But that is a tiny example.
--
The W3C knows that if they accept royalties, they would automatically be ignored. It's too bad they were not dumb enough to sign their own death-warrant.
Now if only I could get this ancient HPLJ to work under Red Hat!
Oh wait, HP likes linux.
Oh wait, HP doesn't support their hardware under linux.
Oh wait, HP likes linux.
Oh wait, HP likes Microsoft.
Oh wait, HP lindof likes Linux again (really? Yeah right.)
They wouldn't be diverting your with 'important things that can't cange anyhow' would they? No, not HP.
...but I'll still wear it anyhow.
Bravo! Well said!
Bullshit. This is Michael Robertson saying "FUCK YOU" to the FSF. He and his company are in direct violation of the letter AND intent of the GPL.
Your generic "Free software doesn't work" argument is wrong. The economy of the country is collapsing, yet companies like Red Hat and IBM are still around and solvent! Lindows should last, well, has already lasted too long (due to 100 million dollars from Vivendi universal.)
You seem to be saying that any method that results in the "content producers" getting fewer sales has shifted the "replacement burden" from the consumer back to the "content producers."
You seem to be using circular logic. Are you suggesting that all crime victims are to blame for providing an opportunity for a crime to be committed? One reason that presumption is absurd is that criminals are the ones *by definition* who are performing a crime. Whether it is easy or very difficult for them is irrelevant - a theif is a theif.
But in your example, both parties could be found guilty, since the one party was advertising (and therefore conspiring) with the person doing the physical stealing.
To extend your logic further, it would be theft to restore from backup, a CD that was melted accidentally by sunlight!