I'm not sure if you've already thought of this, but would it be possible to remove any redundant data, then compress what is left, or would the data need to be left intact and as-is, so that it can be accessed without any fuss should the need arise?
Simple. Run a virus scan, which will tell you what virus it is. Do some research on the reported virus(es). The writeup on that particular virus will help you determine how it propagates.
...So the system can be up-to-date with all known patches, and still be attacked. Fining people for things that flat-out aren't their fault is likely to be, at best, contrary to the ISPs customers idea about what makes a good ISP...
I work at an ISP where we do virus removals on customers computers. If someone comes in with a virus, we determine whether it slipped through the email virus scanning. If so, we don't charge them. Otherwise it's usually about half an hour labour to clean the system up. Sooo...basically, if it isn't their fault, there's no charge. Mind you, that's if our system doesn't keep the customer's email clean. Whether their Norton or AVG is up to date or not, and the virus didn't come through email, or they're not on email virus scanning, then we charge them for labour regardless where the virus came from.
...Anyone care to open a hotmail account and then forge an email to appear to come from that account....just to see what happens..,.
Along a similar train of thought, how about creating a new Hotmail account, then from this new account, file a complaint against it regarding spam abuse. Should be interesting to see if they'd shut it down right away, or just what they'd do...
...I, and I'm sure many others, would agree that flourescent lighting (the standard stuff anyway) can be a pain in the ass. The artificialness and 60 Hz buzz in poorly wired rooms can lead to all sorts of strain...
Back when I was working as a developer in Winnipeg, we never had a problem with flourescent lighting buzzing...mainly because we'd never have the lights turned on. Why? Because they'd...buzz...hmmmm. We actually would work without the lights, and liked it. Personally, I find I work better in the dark, with as few distractions, including light, as possible. Mind you, I'm also the kind of guy who actually enjoyed getting 10-15 minutes of sunlight per day as I walked to and from Subway to get lunch.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Apple have a GUI before Microsoft, and if so, wouldn't one be able to open an application merely by doubleclicking on it? Next thing you know, Microsoft's going to try patenting the Start menu as 'a menu allowing a user to quickly find and launch applications.' or something like that...
IBM slams 'grandiose' SCO, asks for whole farce to be called off
Latest court filings may be make or break for controversial Linux copyright case.
By Robert McMillan, IDG News Service
IBM has filed new documents in its legal dispute with the SCO Group, accusing SCO of having no evidence to back up its copyright infringement claims and asking the judge to throw a major component of the case out of court.
"For more than a year, SCO has made far-reaching claims about its right to preclude IBM's (and everyone else's) Linux activities," wrote IBM in documents filed with the District Court for Utah. "Despite SCO's grandiose descriptions of its alleged evidence of IBM's infringement, SCO now effectively concedes that it has none."
SCO has been unable to provide any evidence of copyright infringement during the discovery phase of the trial and the court should therefore render a summary judgement against SCO, IBM's filings say.
In March 2003, SCO filed a multibillion dollar lawsuit against IBM, accusing it of violating SCO's Unix intellectual property. SCO accused IBM of unfair competition, breach of contract, and of violating SCO's trade secrets. In late February this year, it dropped the trade secret allegations in the case, but added a claim that IBM had violated SCO's Unix copyright.
A few weeks after the trade secret claims were dropped, IBM sought a declaratory judgement in the case, a move that opened the possibility of a quick ruling against SCO. Lawyers following the dispute saw this as a sign of growing confidence on IBM's part.
By seeking a declaratory judgement, IBM was showing that it had not found any evidence to back up SCO's claims, said Jeff Norman, an intellectual property partner with the Chicago law firm Kirkland Ellis. Because the copyright claims form the crux of SCO's case, this week's filing for a summary judgement creates the possibility that the dispute could essentially be over in a matter of months, he said.
"IBM is saying to SCO: 'As a matter of law you're playing this so weak that no reasonable jury could find in your favor'," Norman said. "They must think that they have a pretty good chance of winning the motion, or you wouldn't bring it."
This week's filings could also force SCO to provide more compelling evidence of copyright violations, said David Byer, a partner with the patent and intellectual property group at Boston's Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault. "It is another way to try to focus the court on the evidentiary questions that have been battled about since day one, meaning who is going to produce what when," he said. "SCO needs to respond to this. If they don't respond appropriately, the case can get thrown out."
SCO is likely to produce more evidence to support its claims, said Blake Stowell, an SCO spokesman. On 19 April, IBM turned over 232 versions of its AIX and Dynix Unix source code as well as internal documents and memos from executives, he said. "Our lawyers are still going through much of the evidence IBM turned over as part of the discovery process. I'm confident that there is still other evidence that will come forward in order for us to be able to prove those claims," Stowell said.
Complicating matters for SCO is the fact that Linux vendor Novell also claims to own copyright to the Unix source code. SCO has sued Novell for slander in connection with this claim.
...and farmers are unable to contain/prevent the spreading of the GM plants, then why the hell does that give Monsanto the right to sue 'infringing' farmers?
It's not much different than a rapist getting a victim pregnant, then sue her for carrying his child/getting an abortion/etc if you think about it
An innocent victim infected by something he/she had no control over, then getting reprimanded for it. Personally, I think Monsanto should be the one getting in trouble over this, as it's their product that is getting out of control.
And just who will be labeled as a 'potential terrorist'? People of a certain ethnic background? People owning a certain amount of firearms? People who dislike the current government in power?
...unless you control the bios and have software control of sound cards, etc. what if you make it playable ONLY in players, or only out of certain soundcards...
Sound is sound. If you can hear and make sense of it, then so will your soundcard, unless of course Microsoft decides that your soundcard will no longer accept input of any kind...
...or you have a slightly different earpiece plugin...
It wouldn't, or at least shouldn't, take much to splice a new end onto any proprietary headphones, allowing you to pipe the music from the player, through the custom jack, into a standard jack, and into your computer/stereo/recording device. Easy, no?
"UNIX-based Code" shall mean any Code or Method that: (i) in its literal or non-literal expression, structure, format, use, functionality or adaptation (ii) is based on, developed in, derived from or is similar to (iii) any Code contained in or Method devised or developed in (iv) UNIX System V or UnixWare(R), or (v) any modification or derivative work based on or licensed under UNIX System V or UnixWare.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this essentially say that if someone were to develop code that performs similar functions to SCO's code, they'd be in violation of SCO's attempt to take over the world? Maybe I'm just misreading it, or looking for something that isn't there...
Slashdot Mirror
In Soviet Russia, mistakes bitch about you.
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
I'm not sure if you've already thought of this, but would it be possible to remove any redundant data, then compress what is left, or would the data need to be left intact and as-is, so that it can be accessed without any fuss should the need arise?
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Simple. Run a virus scan, which will tell you what virus it is. Do some research on the reported virus(es). The writeup on that particular virus will help you determine how it propagates.
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...So the system can be up-to-date with all known patches, and still be attacked. Fining people for things that flat-out aren't their fault is likely to be, at best, contrary to the ISPs customers idea about what makes a good ISP...
I work at an ISP where we do virus removals on customers computers. If someone comes in with a virus, we determine whether it slipped through the email virus scanning. If so, we don't charge them. Otherwise it's usually about half an hour labour to clean the system up. Sooo...basically, if it isn't their fault, there's no charge. Mind you, that's if our system doesn't keep the customer's email clean. Whether their Norton or AVG is up to date or not, and the virus didn't come through email, or they're not on email virus scanning, then we charge them for labour regardless where the virus came from.
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...Anyone care to open a hotmail account and then forge an email to appear to come from that account....just to see what happens..,.
Along a similar train of thought, how about creating a new Hotmail account, then from this new account, file a complaint against it regarding spam abuse. Should be interesting to see if they'd shut it down right away, or just what they'd do...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...I, and I'm sure many others, would agree that flourescent lighting (the standard stuff anyway) can be a pain in the ass. The artificialness and 60 Hz buzz in poorly wired rooms can lead to all sorts of strain...
Back when I was working as a developer in Winnipeg, we never had a problem with flourescent lighting buzzing...mainly because we'd never have the lights turned on. Why? Because they'd...buzz...hmmmm. We actually would work without the lights, and liked it. Personally, I find I work better in the dark, with as few distractions, including light, as possible. Mind you, I'm also the kind of guy who actually enjoyed getting 10-15 minutes of sunlight per day as I walked to and from Subway to get lunch.
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Well, they are selling the general public a load of shite / lies / FUD about Linux.
They don't need to sell me any shit...I make my own...as for lies and FUD against Linux, I get a laugh over the stuff Microsoft's got to offer.
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...I'm tempted to make a Soviet Russia joke about them Slashdotting us...
What, like how in Soviet Russia, Nasa slashdots you?
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Apple have a GUI before Microsoft, and if so, wouldn't one be able to open an application merely by doubleclicking on it? Next thing you know, Microsoft's going to try patenting the Start menu as 'a menu allowing a user to quickly find and launch applications.' or something like that...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Probably the same stuff I was smoking when I posted that. Still trying to figure out just what it was...got it from some Darl guy...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Site's running slow, so here's the article text
----------
IBM slams 'grandiose' SCO, asks for whole farce to be called off
Latest court filings may be make or break for controversial Linux copyright case.
By Robert McMillan, IDG News Service
IBM has filed new documents in its legal dispute with the SCO Group, accusing SCO of having no evidence to back up its copyright infringement claims and asking the judge to throw a major component of the case out of court.
"For more than a year, SCO has made far-reaching claims about its right to preclude IBM's (and everyone else's) Linux activities," wrote IBM in documents filed with the District Court for Utah. "Despite SCO's grandiose descriptions of its alleged evidence of IBM's infringement, SCO now effectively concedes that it has none."
SCO has been unable to provide any evidence of copyright infringement during the discovery phase of the trial and the court should therefore render a summary judgement against SCO, IBM's filings say.
In March 2003, SCO filed a multibillion dollar lawsuit against IBM, accusing it of violating SCO's Unix intellectual property. SCO accused IBM of unfair competition, breach of contract, and of violating SCO's trade secrets. In late February this year, it dropped the trade secret allegations in the case, but added a claim that IBM had violated SCO's Unix copyright.
A few weeks after the trade secret claims were dropped, IBM sought a declaratory judgement in the case, a move that opened the possibility of a quick ruling against SCO. Lawyers following the dispute saw this as a sign of growing confidence on IBM's part.
By seeking a declaratory judgement, IBM was showing that it had not found any evidence to back up SCO's claims, said Jeff Norman, an intellectual property partner with the Chicago law firm Kirkland Ellis. Because the copyright claims form the crux of SCO's case, this week's filing for a summary judgement creates the possibility that the dispute could essentially be over in a matter of months, he said.
"IBM is saying to SCO: 'As a matter of law you're playing this so weak that no reasonable jury could find in your favor'," Norman said. "They must think that they have a pretty good chance of winning the motion, or you wouldn't bring it."
This week's filings could also force SCO to provide more compelling evidence of copyright violations, said David Byer, a partner with the patent and intellectual property group at Boston's Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault. "It is another way to try to focus the court on the evidentiary questions that have been battled about since day one, meaning who is going to produce what when," he said. "SCO needs to respond to this. If they don't respond appropriately, the case can get thrown out."
SCO is likely to produce more evidence to support its claims, said Blake Stowell, an SCO spokesman. On 19 April, IBM turned over 232 versions of its AIX and Dynix Unix source code as well as internal documents and memos from executives, he said. "Our lawyers are still going through much of the evidence IBM turned over as part of the discovery process. I'm confident that there is still other evidence that will come forward in order for us to be able to prove those claims," Stowell said.
Complicating matters for SCO is the fact that Linux vendor Novell also claims to own copyright to the Unix source code. SCO has sued Novell for slander in connection with this claim.
----------
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Does anyone really think SCO (leally) stands a chance?
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...and farmers are unable to contain/prevent the spreading of the GM plants, then why the hell does that give Monsanto the right to sue 'infringing' farmers?
It's not much different than a rapist getting a victim pregnant, then sue her for carrying his child/getting an abortion/etc if you think about it
An innocent victim infected by something he/she had no control over, then getting reprimanded for it. Personally, I think Monsanto should be the one getting in trouble over this, as it's their product that is getting out of control.
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Son, unless you want to pay for a kid, keep it in your pants.
Now why would you want to keep a kid in your pants?
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
And just who will be labeled as a 'potential terrorist'? People of a certain ethnic background? People owning a certain amount of firearms? People who dislike the current government in power?
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Just because you have a buddy or three with you, doesn't mean you're not going to get lost.
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...for the government. How else are they expected to screw with the results so they remain in, or be elected into, power?
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
So, how long is it going to be before Microsoft would go after them for using 'dos' in Lindos?
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...unless you control the bios and have software control of sound cards, etc. what if you make it playable ONLY in players, or only out of certain soundcards...
...or you have a slightly different earpiece plugin...
Sound is sound. If you can hear and make sense of it, then so will your soundcard, unless of course Microsoft decides that your soundcard will no longer accept input of any kind...
It wouldn't, or at least shouldn't, take much to splice a new end onto any proprietary headphones, allowing you to pipe the music from the player, through the custom jack, into a standard jack, and into your computer/stereo/recording device. Easy, no?
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Now, instead of evolving, they'll be mutating. Joy...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...but they aren't evolving under Darwinian survival of then fittest...
Third time's a charm...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Actually, the ski destinations are Whistler and Blackcomb.
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
"UNIX-based Code" shall mean any Code or Method that: (i) in its literal or non-literal expression, structure, format, use, functionality or adaptation (ii) is based on, developed in, derived from or is similar to (iii) any Code contained in or Method devised or developed in (iv) UNIX System V or UnixWare(R), or (v) any modification or derivative work based on or licensed under UNIX System V or UnixWare.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this essentially say that if someone were to develop code that performs similar functions to SCO's code, they'd be in violation of SCO's attempt to take over the world? Maybe I'm just misreading it, or looking for something that isn't there...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
...According to the headlines, only about a million emails will be sent, and only to "close friends."...
Wow...I wish I had that many friends...Wait...No I don't...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
This version of Windows has been around for a long time. It is called NT4.
There's also one called Windows 3.1. Doesn't include much networking stuff, if any at all...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan