Common sense GUI. See article above. Users like KDE almost as much as Windows and these users had most likely previously used Windows and not KDE (although they hadn't used Win XP before)
Universal Hardware Support. This is done by the people that make hardware. They always start by supporting Windows since most people have that so it makes the most sense.
Quick and glitch free hardware and software installation. Mostly works in Windows. Mostly works in Linux. In my experience Windows machines are easier to get going the first time but are more apt to have a problem appear down the road. I found Linux hardware and software more difficult to get running the first time but once configured they stay working consistently.
DirectX. I'm not a gamer so I can't compare LibSDL (or any similar project) to DirectX.
I think the killer product wouldn't be MS-Linux but rather Windows for Linux. Implement a Windows GUI that runs on top of Linux. But who needs that with KDE being as good as it is?
I just called my local theater and told them that I will not be attending this weekend because I object to being preached to about digital piracy in a movie that I obviously paid to see.
I won't be watching TV tomorrow either. (I'm on a break from TV. I accomplish the same amount staring into space that I do while watching television.)
Let's start pushing reading. At least there are a few good books that are not under copyright protection any more. I doubt there will ever be any movies that escape copyright except for the few that already available.
It is a protection racket and is prohibited by federal law. Simple reading of the GPL reveals that what SCO proposes is not possible. SCO cannot license the Linux kernel since even if all of SCO's claims were totally true, they do not own the rest of the kernel and have no rights to it.
Since it is abundantly clear that they don't own the kernel they are in no position to claim any legal right to accept protection money for a service they cannot provide. If they were to somehow win, the kernel would be invalidated and unusable until their "IP" was removed from it.
Yes it does. I just downloaded the src rpm from their web site and extracted the kernel source from it using the instructions posted here.
SCO is trying to sell a product they do not own. They continue to distribute the product on their ftp site with GPL notices intact. They used to be a major Linux distributor. Must we sue them for fraud and harassment before we get some peace and quiet?
I am not a pirate. I am using legally licensed software that they don't have any claim to. You can't release it under the GPL and then say "wait, no, we want money". I don't need this BS right now.
You like to label people. Let me guess, you're a labeler.
Goodness knows we need more of them. The work of placing everyone into their categories is far too daunting. Why can't we just issue people signs with their labels? "I'm a libertarian euro-hispanic polygamist video gamer with pesticidal tendencies". Oh, and I like jazz.
Yea. Heaven forbid they ever develop a cheap solution using naturally available products.
It would be a silly waste of money to research whether you can prevent or cure cancer or diabetes with proper diet or some silly easily available herb. Much smarter to look for a patentable cure you can get rich off of.
(I'm not saying that there is a cheap cure. Just that I am not aware of any researchers looking for it.)
On Sat Apr 17 23:01:04 1999, I said in chat "anyone think an autotranslating chat site would be cool?"
Using modern patent rules where you don't have to actually invent anything, you only need a bright idea, I am as deserving of a patent for this as anybody.
America is a government by the people, for the people, and of the people. Or so they say. So if the people don't have a problem with file-sharing, yet there is some legal problem with it, then that shows a flaw in the system.
My solution to the whole mess is to avoid purchasing music CDs or having music in my house. This way they cannot sue me because I don't have or distribute any of their stuff. I am worried that if I play a CD too loud and the neighbor records it (due to the analog hole) that I may be liable for sharing music.
I also do not play movies with the windows open for fear that there may be an unlicensed viewer watching through the window. Let us all do our part to protect "intellectual property" and screw free expression.
OK. So the local convenience store is robbed. Is the logical solution to shut down the sidewalks? (Wouldn't that make it an inconvience store?)
File swapping is legal. File swapping copyrighted files that you do not own or have permission to swap is not. So running a file swapping service cannot be illegal because there is a legitimate legal purpose for it.
Side Point. The recording industry has had way too much handed to them with the copyrights that last multiple lifetimes and mandated Macrovision in VCRs and DVD players. They get this stuff because they have been the safe group for congressmen to accept money from. You're off looking for family values or gay rights or gun control or gun safety while they're safely buying your congressman's vote on their issues.
I had an idea for a web site I like to call my technology wish list. Basically everyone can enter their ideas for products they would like to see, like "a wi-fi access point in a cell phone that my pda, laptop, and my car's on-board computer can use to connect to the internet" and then cross our fingers and hope someone decides to make it. Others could comment on and improve the ideas or tell the person that it already exists and where to find it.
If there is a patent case comes up involving one of the wishes then the postings might serve as prior art.
(If this web site already exists somewhere please post a link to it.)
"Legislation from the bench" is not considered legal or ethical in the United States.
In theory all laws come from the Constitution and the legislative branch and the courts can only interpret them.
In practice it is a little more complex than that. The judge may rule/interpret that a law passed conflicts with the Constitution or another law and that the law is illegal. In no case can the courts bring into being any law. They may emphasize or de-emphasize a law by their actions but they cannot create them.
Slashdot Mirror
Common sense GUI. See article above. Users like KDE almost as much as Windows and these users had most likely previously used Windows and not KDE (although they hadn't used Win XP before)
Universal Hardware Support. This is done by the people that make hardware. They always start by supporting Windows since most people have that so it makes the most sense.
Quick and glitch free hardware and software installation. Mostly works in Windows. Mostly works in Linux. In my experience Windows machines are easier to get going the first time but are more apt to have a problem appear down the road. I found Linux hardware and software more difficult to get running the first time but once configured they stay working consistently.
DirectX. I'm not a gamer so I can't compare LibSDL (or any similar project) to DirectX.
I think the killer product wouldn't be MS-Linux but rather Windows for Linux. Implement a Windows GUI that runs on top of Linux. But who needs that with KDE being as good as it is?
It has a "K" button.
Probably because everything in KDE "starts" with "K". KWord, KMail, KPorn. er. sorry. That's Konqueror.
I like KDE and have it on all my machines except the servers.
I just called my local theater and told them that I will not be attending this weekend because I object to being preached to about digital piracy in a movie that I obviously paid to see.
I won't be watching TV tomorrow either. (I'm on a break from TV. I accomplish the same amount staring into space that I do while watching television.)
Let's start pushing reading. At least there are a few good books that are not under copyright protection any more. I doubt there will ever be any movies that escape copyright except for the few that already available.
It is a protection racket and is prohibited by federal law. Simple reading of the GPL reveals that what SCO proposes is not possible. SCO cannot license the Linux kernel since even if all of SCO's claims were totally true, they do not own the rest of the kernel and have no rights to it.
Since it is abundantly clear that they don't own the kernel they are in no position to claim any legal right to accept protection money for a service they cannot provide. If they were to somehow win, the kernel would be invalidated and unusable until their "IP" was removed from it.
Yes it does. I just downloaded the src rpm from their web site and extracted the kernel source from it using the instructions posted here.
SCO is trying to sell a product they do not own. They continue to distribute the product on their ftp site with GPL notices intact. They used to be a major Linux distributor. Must we sue them for fraud and harassment before we get some peace and quiet?
I am not a pirate. I am using legally licensed software that they don't have any claim to. You can't release it under the GPL and then say "wait, no, we want money". I don't need this BS right now.
Amiga booted a 32 bit multitasking operating system from a floppy back in 1985. So I would have to agree with you.
You like to label people. Let me guess, you're a labeler.
Goodness knows we need more of them. The work of placing everyone into their categories is far too daunting. Why can't we just issue people signs with their labels? "I'm a libertarian euro-hispanic polygamist video gamer with pesticidal tendencies". Oh, and I like jazz.
The rpm kernel source here contains the exact same tar.bz2 file that you can download from kernel.org.
The Linux distro is not the issue here. The Linux kernel is the issue. SCO continues to distribute the Linux kernel source to this day.
Here are the instruction for downloading the kernel source from SCO directly.
Kernel Source provided by SCO
Make sure you are in the directory you want to extract the kernel source to
rpm2cpio linux-2.4.13-21S.src.rpm | cpio -i
tar -xvjf linux-2.4.13.tar.bz2
You now have a perfect copy of the kernel source in the linux directory, just as if you had downloaded from kernel.org and extracted it yourself.
Yea. Heaven forbid they ever develop a cheap solution using naturally available products.
It would be a silly waste of money to research whether you can prevent or cure cancer or diabetes with proper diet or some silly easily available herb. Much smarter to look for a patentable cure you can get rich off of.
(I'm not saying that there is a cheap cure. Just that I am not aware of any researchers looking for it.)
OK. Replying to myself. How silly.
On Sat Apr 17 23:01:04 1999, I said in chat "anyone think an autotranslating chat site would be cool?"
Using modern patent rules where you don't have to actually invent anything, you only need a bright idea, I am as deserving of a patent for this as anybody.
Actually this is totally obvious and was featured in hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy and star trek for many years.
I can probably dig up a chat log where I describe wanting to do this myself.
http://www.dotregistrar.com/ works for me. They are pretty easy to use, inexpensive, and they have a reseller API (I have not tried it.)
Moonshining doesn't have the profit margins it used to. And the revenooers have much better tools to catch you with.
If you microwave your money and blow out the rfid tags will it still be legal tender?
The message said "This little pill will make your penis 3 inches longer". So I ordered 4 pills.
America is a government by the people, for the people, and of the people. Or so they say. So if the people don't have a problem with file-sharing, yet there is some legal problem with it, then that shows a flaw in the system.
My solution to the whole mess is to avoid purchasing music CDs or having music in my house. This way they cannot sue me because I don't have or distribute any of their stuff. I am worried that if I play a CD too loud and the neighbor records it (due to the analog hole) that I may be liable for sharing music.
I also do not play movies with the windows open for fear that there may be an unlicensed viewer watching through the window. Let us all do our part to protect "intellectual property" and screw free expression.
OK. So the local convenience store is robbed. Is the logical solution to shut down the sidewalks? (Wouldn't that make it an inconvience store?)
File swapping is legal. File swapping copyrighted files that you do not own or have permission to swap is not. So running a file swapping service cannot be illegal because there is a legitimate legal purpose for it.
Side Point. The recording industry has had way too much handed to them with the copyrights that last multiple lifetimes and mandated Macrovision in VCRs and DVD players. They get this stuff because they have been the safe group for congressmen to accept money from. You're off looking for family values or gay rights or gun control or gun safety while they're safely buying your congressman's vote on their issues.
Don't be a prick. I know the story.
SCO claims to own all operating systems and wants to be paid lots and lots of money by everyone out there.
Free ride? SCO wants to get paid for a product Linus and a bunch of internet buddies wrote and we're the ones after a free ride?
I don't think so.
and, if you were an englander using the tv/mirror to get out of paying your tv tax a broken mirror could get you caught. More bad luck.
OK. I visited the link now. Close enough to what I want.
I had an idea for a web site I like to call my technology wish list. Basically everyone can enter their ideas for products they would like to see, like "a wi-fi access point in a cell phone that my pda, laptop, and my car's on-board computer can use to connect to the internet" and then cross our fingers and hope someone decides to make it. Others could comment on and improve the ideas or tell the person that it already exists and where to find it.
If there is a patent case comes up involving one of the wishes then the postings might serve as prior art.
(If this web site already exists somewhere please post a link to it.)
(IANAL. I just read a lot. I could be wrong)
"Legislation from the bench" is not considered legal or ethical in the United States.
In theory all laws come from the Constitution and the legislative branch and the courts can only interpret them.
In practice it is a little more complex than that. The judge may rule/interpret that a law passed conflicts with the Constitution or another law and that the law is illegal. In no case can the courts bring into being any law. They may emphasize or de-emphasize a law by their actions but they cannot create them.
Any decent developer maybe. The great ones take the same amount of time to write 3 lines of code that does the same thing.