The ironic thing about this article's stance is that RMS didn't want copyright on software at all: he felt that the code should be free. He created the GPL because he lived in a world with copyright and needed to use its power to protect code from being closed. I'm not trying to start a flame-fest between BSD and GPL over what constitutes "Free" here, so I'll explain. Because of the computing culture RMS grew up in (where code was freely distributed and copied), he felt that he should be able to take anyone else's code and add to it without fear while giving the same rights to others. If he had followed the BSD style license, he wouldn't have had the freedom to take from people who had closed the source, only to give.
The GPL only has teeth because of copyright, but RMS wouldn't have needed to create the GPL if there hadn't been copyright on software in the first place.
I'm sorry? I'm really confused. Two years ago, my editor and I were exchanging MS Wrod documents between her copy of Word and my copy of OO.o Writer, all with comments and edits. Are you talking about something different or do you just not know about this function?
Exactly. I guess I should've added a wink to the end of my original comment to denote my playful tone. There's some element of truth to it somewhere, though, so maybe I was trolling unintentionally....
And if you visit Korean websites, everything is either Flash or...get this... pictures of text. That's right -- most of the "text" I find on Korean websites can't be searched or indexed because they made a graphic out of it! Flash and pictures of text. Wow. I would hate to be a blind Korean trying to use the Internet.
I can't believe you're the only one (at this point) to make this joke. I opened the page specifically to count the number of "Truly andAmerican icon"s. I'm disappointed in the Slashdot community.
Bad form replying to myself, but I realized that the user-level program could just monitor the system and wait for gksudo to be called by the user, then call it again almost immediately to install a rootkit. Much simpler and more foolproof than trying to spoof something.
What's kind of scary on Ubuntu is the sudo and gksudo timeout. If you invoke gksudo to gain administrative privileges one time, then you don't have to type the password in again for a few minutes. What if a piece of malware invokes a program like update-manager which asks for your password, then immediately follows up with "gksudo cp./bash/bin/bash" and gets sudo privileges? Sounds dangerous to me, and not different from the Vista problem highlighted in TFA.
In my opinion, you have just highlighted the strength of the average package system in Linux vs. the binary patch system some people would like to go to. Making a hash comparison is easy in the first case but either more difficult by a magnitude or just impossible, depending on how the patch is done, I guess.
As much as moving to a binary patch system would save bandwidth, I find the.deb,.rpm, and.tgz packages to have significant strengths.
You've been here... what... seven or eight years? How can you still be feeding the trolls? Let him rant his insane, inane, diatribe by himself, and maybe he'll shut up.
The point about security through obscurity is that it shouldn't be used alone as the only source of protection. Many people change their SSH config off the default port to reduce automated attacks, but they don't leave it there in the most open configuration -- they disable root logins and sometimes require key-based logins instead of password-based ones.
Having an element or elements in your security setup which are irregular is a good part of a complete security picture, but don't for a moment assume that these will even slow down someone who knows what to do and is determined to get into your network. Only real security measures will do that. If you leave an unsecured FTP server on port 12056 facing the internet, someone will eventually find it and exploit it. If you leave phpmyadmin with no root password hidden in your website somewhere with no outside links, they still might find it, and then you are toast. Obscurity just stops most script kiddies. That's not bad, though, is it?
This antitrust suit will end in Google being declared a monopoly in the online advertising business. Luckily for Google, they will be allowed to define their own punishment, and offer discount coupons for discounts on B-level keywords only.;) Yes, some of us learn from history.
Theoretically, we could code a GoogleApps API addition to OpenOffice.org which would edit the remote document and save it back to the Google server, is that right? Hmmm.
Exactly my thought. We've been living with Beta software released as final for some time now (and with much pain). Now this guy wants us to deal with Beta level hardware, too? Sound like it's good for management and bad for both customers and engineers.
I appreciate firmware updates that add features or fix non-obvious bugs, but increasing the number of problems we already have with software, firmware, and drivers by adding hardware to the list of incomplete implementations seems like a step in the wrong direction.
I'm not saying anything about what Google did. I think attribution is important, and I don't know that particulars of the extent of what was copied. I just heard so many people talking about "sweat of the brow" as reason for what Google did being wrong, and wanted to present facts like this to let them know that's not the way it is. Databases require trade secrets, apparently.
I'll take a look into it. It's been a few years now. Some popular Thai fonts were being illegally distributed (surprise!) and so the copyright owner went to court over it. In a surprise verdict, the judge ruled that fonts could not be copyrighted. Googling brings up this page, but I couldn't get the page to show up. Maybe it's for members only, or maybe the Bangkok Post (or Thai Internet, in general) is just insanely slow.
Well, Duke's law page makes it clear that copyright is based on originality and not "sweat of the brow."
The relevant portion:
In 1991, the Supreme Court addressed this question in Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Co.10 Feist is a publishing company specializing in area-wide telephone directories, and Rural is a public utility company that provides telephone service to Northwest Kansas. Feist had almost 50,000 white page listings in fifteen counties, while Rural had fewer than 8,000. The white pages listed the names, phone numbers, and towns of residence of all of the residents in a particular area alphabetically by last name. The two companies competed vigorously for yellow page advertisements. Feist copied Rural's collection of white page listings in order to compile its own. The district court granted summary judgment to Rural, relying on the 'sweat of the brow' doctrine, which justified protection because of the labor involved in collecting and arranging the facts.
The Supreme Court rejected this doctrine because, with the Copyright Act of 1976, Congress made it clear that originality was a requirement for copyright protection.
I submit that there is no originality in the character -- Pinyin pairing, though perhaps there is in the use of the engineers' names.
Slashdot Mirror
The ironic thing about this article's stance is that RMS didn't want copyright on software at all: he felt that the code should be free. He created the GPL because he lived in a world with copyright and needed to use its power to protect code from being closed. I'm not trying to start a flame-fest between BSD and GPL over what constitutes "Free" here, so I'll explain. Because of the computing culture RMS grew up in (where code was freely distributed and copied), he felt that he should be able to take anyone else's code and add to it without fear while giving the same rights to others. If he had followed the BSD style license, he wouldn't have had the freedom to take from people who had closed the source, only to give.
The GPL only has teeth because of copyright, but RMS wouldn't have needed to create the GPL if there hadn't been copyright on software in the first place.
I'm sorry? I'm really confused. Two years ago, my editor and I were exchanging MS Wrod documents between her copy of Word and my copy of OO.o Writer, all with comments and edits. Are you talking about something different or do you just not know about this function?
Exactly. I guess I should've added a wink to the end of my original comment to denote my playful tone. There's some element of truth to it somewhere, though, so maybe I was trolling unintentionally ....
It's called reverse engineering. Think of Samba or bnet ....
Excellent letter. To the point and business-like. No "Install or quit" because it just states the facts. Kudos to you.
And if you visit Korean websites, everything is either Flash or ...get this... pictures of text. That's right -- most of the "text" I find on Korean websites can't be searched or indexed because they made a graphic out of it! Flash and pictures of text. Wow. I would hate to be a blind Korean trying to use the Internet.
I can't believe you're the only one (at this point) to make this joke. I opened the page specifically to count the number of "Truly andAmerican icon"s. I'm disappointed in the Slashdot community.
This is great information and I'll certainly look into it, but I'm concerned that the default behavior is (in my opinion) unsafe.
Shirly, you jest. Why bother?
Don't call me Shirley.
Bad form replying to myself, but I realized that the user-level program could just monitor the system and wait for gksudo to be called by the user, then call it again almost immediately to install a rootkit. Much simpler and more foolproof than trying to spoof something.
What's kind of scary on Ubuntu is the sudo and gksudo timeout. If you invoke gksudo to gain administrative privileges one time, then you don't have to type the password in again for a few minutes. What if a piece of malware invokes a program like update-manager which asks for your password, then immediately follows up with "gksudo cp ./bash /bin/bash" and gets sudo privileges? Sounds dangerous to me, and not different from the Vista problem highlighted in TFA.
In my opinion, you have just highlighted the strength of the average package system in Linux vs. the binary patch system some people would like to go to. Making a hash comparison is easy in the first case but either more difficult by a magnitude or just impossible, depending on how the patch is done, I guess.
.deb, .rpm, and .tgz packages to have significant strengths.
As much as moving to a binary patch system would save bandwidth, I find the
Classic movie quote! Thanks for that one.
Just remove Network Manager. Once you remove it, set up the wireless using System > Administration > Network.
You've been here ... what ... seven or eight years? How can you still be feeding the trolls? Let him rant his insane, inane, diatribe by himself, and maybe he'll shut up.
The submitter apparently feels it should be "None ... has ...."
The point about security through obscurity is that it shouldn't be used alone as the only source of protection. Many people change their SSH config off the default port to reduce automated attacks, but they don't leave it there in the most open configuration -- they disable root logins and sometimes require key-based logins instead of password-based ones.
Having an element or elements in your security setup which are irregular is a good part of a complete security picture, but don't for a moment assume that these will even slow down someone who knows what to do and is determined to get into your network. Only real security measures will do that. If you leave an unsecured FTP server on port 12056 facing the internet, someone will eventually find it and exploit it. If you leave phpmyadmin with no root password hidden in your website somewhere with no outside links, they still might find it, and then you are toast. Obscurity just stops most script kiddies. That's not bad, though, is it?
This antitrust suit will end in Google being declared a monopoly in the online advertising business. Luckily for Google, they will be allowed to define their own punishment, and offer discount coupons for discounts on B-level keywords only. ;) Yes, some of us learn from history.
Let's cut to the chase: both glasses contain the poison.
Theoretically, we could code a GoogleApps API addition to OpenOffice.org which would edit the remote document and save it back to the Google server, is that right? Hmmm.
Exactly my thought. We've been living with Beta software released as final for some time now (and with much pain). Now this guy wants us to deal with Beta level hardware, too? Sound like it's good for management and bad for both customers and engineers.
I appreciate firmware updates that add features or fix non-obvious bugs, but increasing the number of problems we already have with software, firmware, and drivers by adding hardware to the list of incomplete implementations seems like a step in the wrong direction.
I'm not saying anything about what Google did. I think attribution is important, and I don't know that particulars of the extent of what was copied. I just heard so many people talking about "sweat of the brow" as reason for what Google did being wrong, and wanted to present facts like this to let them know that's not the way it is. Databases require trade secrets, apparently.
See here.
I'll take a look into it. It's been a few years now. Some popular Thai fonts were being illegally distributed (surprise!) and so the copyright owner went to court over it. In a surprise verdict, the judge ruled that fonts could not be copyrighted. Googling brings up this page, but I couldn't get the page to show up. Maybe it's for members only, or maybe the Bangkok Post (or Thai Internet, in general) is just insanely slow.
The relevant portion: I submit that there is no originality in the character -- Pinyin pairing, though perhaps there is in the use of the engineers' names.