I really dont know why a printer manufacturer should have exclusive rights on producing ink
They shouldn't, but printer manufacturers want to "give us the razor and sell us the blades". You can buy a cheap ink-jet printer and spend MORE on the first set of replacement inks then the original printer. It makes the printer a throw away printer if you don't want to spend the money on the ink. The only problem is that most new ink-jets come with a "preview" cartridge that has a very small amount of ink. The printer manufacturers want you to go out in a month tops and pay more for the ink then for the printer.
I am actually very shocked by this ruling. It looks like we Americans still have at least ONE branch of governemt that is working "For The People". The rest have all sold out to big business.
A farmer gets to leave a legacy for his children. You don't.
Dude, you are WAY off. Copyright was supposed to be for a LIMITED time and to create a LIMITED monopoly for the ORIGINAL copyright holder. Not to leave a "legacy" to your children's, children's, children. There is no WAY that the ORIGINAL copyright holder is going to benefit from a copyright 70 years after they are DEAD. How can a person benefit from something after they are dead? That is insane and against the original purposes of copyright.
A copyright owner can still leave a legacy for their children. Then can take the money they make from that copyright and do something good with it so that it is there for their children. Copyright was NEVER about passing it along to your kids. Your kids are not the ORIGINAL copyright holder or author and should have NO right to it. It should be in the public domain. The WHOLE point of copyright is to move works in to the public domain. Not to make sure that some copyright holders kids get a bunch of money.
The problem with copyright is because of people like you who think that the purpose of copyright is to give you an UNLIMITED stream of revenue. The purpose of copyright is to influence the creative arts by giving a LIMITED monopoly to a work. After that LIMITED (IMO 15 - 20 years) time, that work becomes the public domain, thus creating an incentive to CREATE AGIAIN.
This is how all political people or people influenced by money are. She acts one way while she is getting "paid", and changes her tune once she is no longer a part of that organization. It is really sad. She says this now, however, if she were to get her old position back, I would bet any sum of cash that she would not be singing the same tune. The RIAA would never go for a license like this, it doesn't give them enough "control".
Yes, so G + B = giga + byte. So 4 GB/s = 4 gigaBytes/s not 4 Gigabits/s (there are 8 bits per byte). As I said, there is a HUGE difference. I would love to transfer data at 4 GB/s over a network!
During the 3 big debates how many people were allowed to debate? Just two so I have not been able to hear Nader's stance on many issues. I did watch a Badnarik/Cobb debate over the web (I would actaully vote Badnarik if I could). It is really sad how the presidential debate is controled by two corrupt parties.
One issue I have about voting for a "thrid party" candidate is that I feel that make help skew the election in the favor of Bush. If we had a REAL voting method like the Condorcet method I would then be able to indicate my TRUE voting preferences as such:
Badnarik
Peroutka
Cobb
Kerry
Bush
As you can see I REALLY don't want to give Bush another four years and the Condorcet method would allow me to express that.
If, however, you review his history and find that he has instead done nothing or voted against issues important to you -
vote for someone else.
You say that as if there is a choice in the someone else. Here in the USA, the Republicans and Democrats keep a monopoly over the Presidential election and keep out other parties. A real democracy would give us far more candidates to pick from. As it is now, if you don't like Bush, you have no choice but to vote for Kerry; if you don't like Kerry you vote Bush. However, if you are like me and don't want either of them to be president, then you are pretty much screwed.
Why don't we look instead at security vulnerabilities in a Server OS that are relative to functions a server should be performing. How many vulnerabilities has IIS 6.0 had versus Apache in the year and a half Server 2003 has been out?
Hmmm one of those has had zero, and it sure the hell ain't Apache.
Huh? You didn't hear of the latest.Net vulnerability? IIS 6.0 has.Net installed. Oh, and why in the world would you be comaparing a Server OS against an APPLICATION? If you want to look at the server OS Win2k3, then you would have to count ALL security issues, not just IIS. That means the.Net issues, IE, OE, Media Player, VM, MDAC, etc are all part of Win2k3. Here is MS's blurb on the.Net issue.
Anyone who needs treatment gets it in the USA. No one gets turned away
Your statement is not correct. It should read:
Anyone who needs
emergency treatment gets it in the USA. No one gets turned away
Did you even _read_ the article? This guy would have had to come up with up to $200,000 USD to get the surgery. They wouldn't even touch him unless he put $50,000 USD down. That kind of throws a wrench in your statement doesn't it?
Here is a quote from the article
suffered from a life-threatening heart condition and would have to undergo surgery at a cost of up to $200,000
You see, here in the USA, you are only guaranteed health care if your life is in immediate danger. That means like you may DIE RIGHT NOW WITHOUT TREATMENT.
The USA population represents only 5% of the world-wide population, yet we have 50% or so of the worlds wealth. I think it is VERY sad that 50% of the worlds wealth cannot provide good health care for 5% of the worlds population. Why is that? Because the top 1% of the USA control the majority of that wealth. The top 1% has a combined income/worth of the lower 95% of the USA population. It is really sad when you think about it, though that requires getting through all the Republican FUD (and no I am not a democrat).
1960's? You old fart. My SS card is from 1972 and I do not have the text you mentioned. The SS Administration must have had some "reason" to remove that text between the 1960's and 1972.
The back of my SS card says:
This card is the property of the Social Security Administration and must be returned upon request.
I didn't know that I don't own this worn piece of paper I have carried around all these years.
I agree with you about the cable companies. They all try to hold on to a monopoly. However, I disagree with this statement:
so I can say from my experience that Microsoft is actually trying to introduce innovation and competion into a market
If you really think that, then IMO, you need a CAT scan : )
MS is not trying to "introduce innovation and competion into a market", they are only trying to replace one monopoly with another monopoly. MS is trying to replace the cable company monopoly with the MS monopoly. Do you really think MS will introduce open protocols and specs to the cable industry? Certainly not! They will just try to replace the closed/proprietary stuff of the cable companies with the closed/proprietary stuff of MS. Personally I would rather have the closed/proprietary stuff of the cable company that _I_ pay for service then the closed/proprietary stuff of MS.
You forgot to add the price of content that Media Center will not record.
I had a "Media" center PC and it sucked. I tried to record some shows on HBO that I PAY FOR to watch at a time when I was home. However, "Media" center would not record it because of a "no-copy-bit".
There are far better options out there then "Media" center to allow you to use your Fair-Use rights to record and watch a show at a later time. I am not talking about recording a show and blasting it all over the net. I am just talking about recording a fricken show for personal use to watch at a later time. For those situations, "Media" Center sucks.
I can list a ton of codecs that doesn't have a stable port in Linux. None the other way. And that's only one problem
So why didn't you list them? What mainstream codecs do not work in Linux? I can play MPEG 1/2/4, MP3, OGG, MS Audio/Video, MKV, etc. Give me these "tons" of codecs that don't work in Linux. MPlayer is an excellent media player and has played _everything_ I have tried to play. IMO, MPlayer is much more efficient then MS Windows Media Player and every other media player I have tried under MS Windows. Windows Media Player, PowerDVD and Media Player Classic suck up over 20% CPU to just play a DVD, while using MPlayer under Linux on the SAME HARDWARE only uses maybe 7% CPU.
As for the "tried to lock EVERYTHING", either you don't know how to setup a shared drive with Windows, you are using a funky software (in which case, your bad), or you are just plain lying.
Huh? The locking has NOTHING to do with a shared drive bone head. The MS Media PC uses DRM on everything. It has nothing to do with a "shared" drive or NTFS permissions. It also prevents you from making copies of many shows. For example, HBO sends down a "no-copy-flag" and MS Media PC will not let you record it. Not very useful if you ask me. It is pretty sad that MS prevents Fair Use to make a back up copy of a show to view at a later time. If you record a show with MS Media PC (MS Video format only), burn it to CD/DVD and want to watch it at a friends house, you are out of luck. The DRM in MS Media PC will prevent that.
It looks like your the only one spreading FUD champ.
Everything you just explained is NO HARDER IN LINUX. There are a bunch of Linux streaming servers. In fact, my Linux based Media server if far better then the orginal MS Media center PC I origianlly tried to setup. The MS Media PC tried to lock EVERYTHING to the MS PC. Any audio or video I recorded was LOCKED to the MS ONLY MEDIA CENTER. Not very useful in a home environment. I setup a MythTV PC in no time and it blows away an MS Media PC. MythTV doesn't try to lock EVERY PIECE OF MEDIA to only one computer while MS's media offering does.
If you look at the "instructions" you gave for you setup, it is not any more involved then a typical Linux media setup, save for the extra $100 or so for WinXP home.
And Alienware is just ONE builder out there and a more pricey one. There are tons of others that can build faster systems for less. Or, you can do like I usually do an build your own. You cannot do that with Apple.
I just built the following system for about $700:
An AMD AthlonXP 2800+, 512MB DDR, 120 GB 7,200 ATA 133, 4x DVD+-/RW, USB 2.0, SATA raid, case, etc.
What NEW system does Apple have for under $800 that is not a crappy G4? I used G4's for sometime and they blow. Apple's bottom of the line is a $1,000 slow 1.25GHz G4 eMac that you cannot expand.
The $1,500 iMac comes with a very high-quality 17" LCD monitor
Have you seen the monitors? They are nice, but not "very high-quality". I looked on the Apple site for the monitor specs for the 17" iMac, but could not find them. Why doesn't Apple post those?
You can get good 17" monitors starting at $250. For $300, you can get a very nice 17" LCD monitor.
Huh? I guess only Apple makes great hardware? I have not had problems with my x86 hardware for years. I guess the HUGE majority of data centers across the USA are filled with dummies who know nothing about hardware? I guess all those data centers are using x86 hardware because they are dumb and "haven't seen the light" to the "great" Apple hardware?
I hope you're happy with your overpriced Windows computer
Who said I have a "Windows" computer?
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040913 Firefox/0.10
I just built the following system for about $700:
An AMD AthlonXP 2800+, 512MB DDR, 120 GB 7,200 ATA 133, 4x DVD+-/RW, USB 2.0, SATA raid, case, etc.
What NEW system does Apple have for under $800 that is not a crappy G4? I used G4's for sometime and they blow. Apple's bottom of the line is a $1,000 slow 1.25GHz G4 eMac that you cannot expand.
Did you a purchase a 17 inch flat screen monitor to go with that? Oh no you didn't... Ahh I see you forgot to add that
A 17" LCD does not add that much money. You can get a good one starting at around $250 now
Alienware has a 2.8GHz P4 starting at $874.00. What 2+ Ghz system can you get from Apple in that price range? What 1.5GHz system can you get from Apple for under $1,000?
I just built my own home system for about $700. An AMD AthlonXP 2800+, 512MB DDR, 120 GB 7,200 ATA 133, 4x DVD+-/RW, case, etc. What NEW system does Apple have for under $800 that is not a crappy G4? I used G4's for sometime and they blow. Apple's bottom of the line is a $1,000 slow 1.25GHz G4 eMac that you cannot expand.
Alienware is one of the more expensive PC makers out there because of nice quality. There are tons of others where you can get fast P4 and AMD systems for under $1,000. Apple cannot touch that price range. You can also do like I did an BUILD YOUR OWN. Apple doesn't allow that.
But lets not forgot to look at the cinema displays as well.
Why would I pay Apple $1,300 for a 20" LCD when you can get a 27" LCD TV for less?
I agree. I have an AlienWare box and it cost less then a Mac and kicks the crap out of a Mac speed-wise. There is just no comparision for price/speed of an AlienWare box vs. a Mac.
Mac fans try to talk about the "great" hardware you get with a Mac, however if you compare a $1,500 iMac G5 vs a $1,500 AlienWare box, there is no contest. The AlienWare box gives you far better hardware that out performs a Mac hands down. Note: I an not talking about the OS, just what you get hardware-wise for your money. Apple, just cannot compete with the x86 market on hardware because of the massive x86 volume.
You didn't RTFA, you spew bunk and get modded "Insightful". You gotta love/.
The DRM is not the compression part. The files are encrypted. If you DID RTFA, you would have read:
First among these is that Microsoft, asked to open up and document the interfaces to its communication protocols for licensees, has chosen to issue the documentation in a rights-protected file format called MHT, readable only with its own Web browser, Internet Explorer. This means licensees can neither annotate nor effectively search the information, according to the plaintiffs.
And that MS is offering a
free software development toolkit for the digital rights management system
The problem with this dev toolkit is that it is MS only, so that means no Linux, Mac, *BSD or Solaris for the DRM of these MHT files. These documents are for developers who may want to interact with MS's proprietary communications protocols, and some of them may be working on different OSes to make those other OSes use MS's proprietary communications protocols. Now they will be forced to use MS windows to get to the documentation.
Bias article?
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I use both Java and C# professionally and this post smells of bias.
in my NSHO, the Java API has become bloated...
Huh? The Java 5 JRE download is 14 MB, while the.Net 1.1 runtime is 24MB. The Java 5 SDK download is 44MB while the.Net 1.1 SDK download is a whopping 109MB! Which one has bloat again? Java by far beats out C#/.Net as far as 3rd party modules goes. Anything you can think of programming, there is something available in Java. I cannot say the same yet about C#/.Net.
At this point (even before Whidbey) the deciding factor (as always) for Enterprise work, when choosing a language platform, should be the support it has behind it, in terms of IDE, tools, api, and longevity of the vendor pushing it (forget the OpenSource crap argument, those guys are too in love with Perl, Python, and Ruby - Java could become the child nobody wants to talk about if Sun dies) - right now that's C# and the.NET Framework
Does this guy know _anything_ about the Java community? The fortune 500 where I work had a few meetings trying to figure out which vendor we would use for our JAVA IDE. There was no choice with our C# IDE, it was just MS. For Java, we looked at IBM, Sun, BEA, JCreator, Eclipse, IntelliJ and Borland. If SUN died, we would still have _PLENTY_ of choice.
I like both Java and C# from a language perspective, however, working for a large company, I would recommend Java over MS's.Net. Java has been _very_ stable and _SECURE_ while the.Net security holes have already started at only version 1.1. We also appreciated the fact that we were able to switch our Java server apps to Linux over Solaris, we could even use MS Windows if we wanted to for our Java app servers; we don't have that same choice or luxury with MS.Net.
OS X, runs smoothly on a G3 700MHz, it runs smoothly on a G4 400MHz, a G4 1GHz won't leave you waiting in any application including Alias' Maya. Hence you don't need a dual 2.5GHz G5 to 'test' OS X, a second hand mac is usually just fine to try it out.
That has not be my experience. Even a dual G5 feels sluggish coming from a _single_ P4. Did you miss the MacDate review yesterday? Here is a quote:
Although the performance of OS X on the dual 2GHz G5 system that I'd been running was definitely acceptable, there is definitely room for improvement. The overall responsiveness of the system was decent, but go back to using a top-of-the-line PC in Windows for a few minutes, and you definitely feel a bit sluggish on the G5.
The reviewer paid $3,000 for the dual G5! A nice top of the line x86 is around $1,200. I built my own x86 for about $700 (not including monitor) and it just feels so much faster then a single G5. Also, to get better performance out of a dual G5 with the latest Mac OS, you need a bunch of memory that further drives up the cost. The reviewer put 4GB, the wimpy 512MB that comes with a $3,000 system is not acceptable.
I would purchase Mac OS for x86 and give it a try. I would not dump Linux for it, buy I would certainly dump MS Windows. Maybe Apple should rethink their business and make software their "cash cow" like MS did (it has made MS billions). I bet Apple would make tons more cash with the x86 market then they could ever dream of. It could also be a selling point for their proprietary hardware. I am sure that if people used Mac OS x86 and really liked it that some of them would make the switch from x86 to Apple.
Losing one job does not generally damage your _future_ jobs. People make mistakes. This was a tiny, tiny, mistake. No harm was done. The guy paid for this mistake by losing his current job. There is NO reason why this guy should have the rest of his career affeted. It is not like he commited a felony or something. He ran a stupid program that he should not have run. That is it, no harm done, no financial loss.
It is not Apple's DRM or open format. Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) is a standard, though it is not free. It requires a license to implement legally. "Fair" play was also not Apple's and still is not unless they purchased it, though I think they just have an exclusive license for it.
Why are "they" picking on Apple? Because Apple does not want to play fair (pun intended). They will not allow "Fair" play to be used by anyone else. They want to own the online music market to drive iPod sales. I am not a fan of MS, but at least with MS "if you pay you can play". MS _wants_ to license their DRM, they want the whole world to license it. Silly Apple is making another huge mistake that will eventually make iTunes a niche market like their other products. If they just allowed anyone to license "Fair" play, then they could not only make money from the sale of iPods, but also license fees for _every_ competing portable player out there.
The sad thing is that because of this dumb move by Apple, I bet MS's DRM will win out. That means MS DRM for MS OS'es only. MS will always lag with a Mac OS version and you can bet there will never be a Linux version. So all portable players out there suddenly become "MS only".
This article was written by some knuckle-head journalist, not an IT guy. What exactly was this "server"? My home Linux box is a server with Apache, MySQL, Samba, etc. My work WinXP box is a server with Apache, Tomcat, etc. Where I work, we programmers have a bunch of Linux and Win2k test "servers" that we get to control. We can put what we want on them to test different things out. However, our production servers we do not have access to install things. We go through the admins for that. The article says this guy was a programmer, I'd like to know what type of box he installed SETI on. Was it his workstation, a dev server or a production server. If it was a production server, then there are more problems where he works then just running SETI. He should not have had access to a production server as a programmer, that is what an admin is for.
I don't agree with you here. I have worked at three fortune 500 companies. Whenever they were called by a new employer on my behalf, they would _only_ verify the dates of employment and my title. They seem to not want to take any chance of being sued.
I would think this guy has to be entitiled to some type of compensation. The comments by his boss will have a _very_ real affect on his ability to find a job. That negative affect will cause him to lose money, money he should be entitled to be compensated for. If I made PUBLIC comments about you and it caused you to lose money, would you not feel you are entitled to retribution?
Slashdot Mirror
I am actually very shocked by this ruling. It looks like we Americans still have at least ONE branch of governemt that is working "For The People". The rest have all sold out to big business.
A copyright owner can still leave a legacy for their children. Then can take the money they make from that copyright and do something good with it so that it is there for their children. Copyright was NEVER about passing it along to your kids. Your kids are not the ORIGINAL copyright holder or author and should have NO right to it. It should be in the public domain. The WHOLE point of copyright is to move works in to the public domain. Not to make sure that some copyright holders kids get a bunch of money.
The problem with copyright is because of people like you who think that the purpose of copyright is to give you an UNLIMITED stream of revenue. The purpose of copyright is to influence the creative arts by giving a LIMITED monopoly to a work. After that LIMITED (IMO 15 - 20 years) time, that work becomes the public domain, thus creating an incentive to CREATE AGIAIN.
This is how all political people or people influenced by money are. She acts one way while she is getting "paid", and changes her tune once she is no longer a part of that organization. It is really sad. She says this now, however, if she were to get her old position back, I would bet any sum of cash that she would not be singing the same tune. The RIAA would never go for a license like this, it doesn't give them enough "control".
Yes, so G + B = giga + byte. So 4 GB/s = 4 gigaBytes/s not 4 Gigabits/s (there are 8 bits per byte). As I said, there is a HUGE difference. I would love to transfer data at 4 GB/s over a network!
I think you mean 4Gbit/s not 4 GB/s. There is a HUGE difference : )
One issue I have about voting for a "thrid party" candidate is that I feel that make help skew the election in the favor of Bush. If we had a REAL voting method like the Condorcet method I would then be able to indicate my TRUE voting preferences as such:
Badnarik
Peroutka
Cobb
Kerry
Bush
As you can see I REALLY don't want to give Bush another four years and the Condorcet method would allow me to express that.
Here is an interesting write up
And it sure as hell wasn't IIS 6.0, a simple Google search show that.The USA population represents only 5% of the world-wide population, yet we have 50% or so of the worlds wealth. I think it is VERY sad that 50% of the worlds wealth cannot provide good health care for 5% of the worlds population. Why is that? Because the top 1% of the USA control the majority of that wealth. The top 1% has a combined income/worth of the lower 95% of the USA population. It is really sad when you think about it, though that requires getting through all the Republican FUD (and no I am not a democrat).
The back of my SS card says:
I didn't know that I don't own this worn piece of paper I have carried around all these years.MS is not trying to "introduce innovation and competion into a market", they are only trying to replace one monopoly with another monopoly. MS is trying to replace the cable company monopoly with the MS monopoly. Do you really think MS will introduce open protocols and specs to the cable industry? Certainly not! They will just try to replace the closed/proprietary stuff of the cable companies with the closed/proprietary stuff of MS. Personally I would rather have the closed/proprietary stuff of the cable company that _I_ pay for service then the closed/proprietary stuff of MS.
I had a "Media" center PC and it sucked. I tried to record some shows on HBO that I PAY FOR to watch at a time when I was home. However, "Media" center would not record it because of a "no-copy-bit".
There are far better options out there then "Media" center to allow you to use your Fair-Use rights to record and watch a show at a later time. I am not talking about recording a show and blasting it all over the net. I am just talking about recording a fricken show for personal use to watch at a later time. For those situations, "Media" Center sucks.
It looks like your the only one spreading FUD champ.
If you look at the "instructions" you gave for you setup, it is not any more involved then a typical Linux media setup, save for the extra $100 or so for WinXP home.
I just built my own home system for about $700. An AMD AthlonXP 2800+, 512MB DDR, 120 GB 7,200 ATA 133, 4x DVD+-/RW, case, etc. What NEW system does Apple have for under $800 that is not a crappy G4? I used G4's for sometime and they blow. Apple's bottom of the line is a $1,000 slow 1.25GHz G4 eMac that you cannot expand.
Alienware is one of the more expensive PC makers out there because of nice quality. There are tons of others where you can get fast P4 and AMD systems for under $1,000. Apple cannot touch that price range. You can also do like I did an BUILD YOUR OWN. Apple doesn't allow that.
Why would I pay Apple $1,300 for a 20" LCD when you can get a 27" LCD TV for less?Mac fans try to talk about the "great" hardware you get with a Mac, however if you compare a $1,500 iMac G5 vs a $1,500 AlienWare box, there is no contest. The AlienWare box gives you far better hardware that out performs a Mac hands down. Note: I an not talking about the OS, just what you get hardware-wise for your money. Apple, just cannot compete with the x86 market on hardware because of the massive x86 volume.
The DRM is not the compression part. The files are encrypted. If you DID RTFA, you would have read:
And that MS is offering aThe problem with this dev toolkit is that it is MS only, so that means no Linux, Mac, *BSD or Solaris for the DRM of these MHT files. These documents are for developers who may want to interact with MS's proprietary communications protocols, and some of them may be working on different OSes to make those other OSes use MS's proprietary communications protocols. Now they will be forced to use MS windows to get to the documentation.I like both Java and C# from a language perspective, however, working for a large company, I would recommend Java over MS's .Net. Java has been _very_ stable and _SECURE_ while the .Net security holes have already started at only version 1.1. We also appreciated the fact that we were able to switch our Java server apps to Linux over Solaris, we could even use MS Windows if we wanted to for our Java app servers; we don't have that same choice or luxury with MS .Net.
I would purchase Mac OS for x86 and give it a try. I would not dump Linux for it, buy I would certainly dump MS Windows. Maybe Apple should rethink their business and make software their "cash cow" like MS did (it has made MS billions). I bet Apple would make tons more cash with the x86 market then they could ever dream of. It could also be a selling point for their proprietary hardware. I am sure that if people used Mac OS x86 and really liked it that some of them would make the switch from x86 to Apple.
Losing one job does not generally damage your _future_ jobs. People make mistakes. This was a tiny, tiny, mistake. No harm was done. The guy paid for this mistake by losing his current job. There is NO reason why this guy should have the rest of his career affeted. It is not like he commited a felony or something. He ran a stupid program that he should not have run. That is it, no harm done, no financial loss.
Why are "they" picking on Apple? Because Apple does not want to play fair (pun intended). They will not allow "Fair" play to be used by anyone else. They want to own the online music market to drive iPod sales. I am not a fan of MS, but at least with MS "if you pay you can play". MS _wants_ to license their DRM, they want the whole world to license it. Silly Apple is making another huge mistake that will eventually make iTunes a niche market like their other products. If they just allowed anyone to license "Fair" play, then they could not only make money from the sale of iPods, but also license fees for _every_ competing portable player out there.
The sad thing is that because of this dumb move by Apple, I bet MS's DRM will win out. That means MS DRM for MS OS'es only. MS will always lag with a Mac OS version and you can bet there will never be a Linux version. So all portable players out there suddenly become "MS only".
This article was written by some knuckle-head journalist, not an IT guy. What exactly was this "server"? My home Linux box is a server with Apache, MySQL, Samba, etc. My work WinXP box is a server with Apache, Tomcat, etc. Where I work, we programmers have a bunch of Linux and Win2k test "servers" that we get to control. We can put what we want on them to test different things out. However, our production servers we do not have access to install things. We go through the admins for that. The article says this guy was a programmer, I'd like to know what type of box he installed SETI on. Was it his workstation, a dev server or a production server. If it was a production server, then there are more problems where he works then just running SETI. He should not have had access to a production server as a programmer, that is what an admin is for.
I would think this guy has to be entitiled to some type of compensation. The comments by his boss will have a _very_ real affect on his ability to find a job. That negative affect will cause him to lose money, money he should be entitled to be compensated for. If I made PUBLIC comments about you and it caused you to lose money, would you not feel you are entitled to retribution?