To put that in perspective, a good katana will run at about 2-3 pounds, and a claymore, which is nearly as tall as I am, will weight in at 6-10, tops. You would need arms like Herculese to use this thing properly.
Apple tried this with their computer architecture, and they began hemoraging business. The licensed cloners undercut Apple's hardware prices, and Apple itself couldn't compete.
HP will, in all likelyhood, make a "cheaper iPod," and cut into one of Apple's darling moneymakers. Remember, Apple makes no money off of iTunes MS, but uses it as a way of promoting the iPod.
I mind the electronic spam -- my Yahoo! Mail account keeps getting clogged. Don't mind the paper, though, because they're paying the bulk of the cost anyway and I have recycling at home.
I'm the exact opposite. I can filter my spam, and click "delete" if that doesn't work. Bulk mail sits around until I take out the grabage, and irks me a bit more.
RULE 1: If there's a flag, do what it says.
RULE 2: If there's no flag, play the damn thing.
Exactly, and so intuitivley obvious that I can't imagine it being done any other way. Anything else would be a broken implementation.
That makes everyone happy. The FCC and MPAA can mandate their stupid flags as much as they want to and it will do what it's supposed to, but I can still play my home videos and all the pirated videos I'll be able to get once someone cracks the flag (and you know it's inevitable).
I don't even know if this qualifies as a crack. The specification will be open, and the driver will only need to be changed from
No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property."
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to deprive people of their rights.
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to hide the fact that your product is shoddy, and very likely will not work as advertised.
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to exagerate the dammage caused by saying 'hold the shift key.'
The term "intellectual property" is actually quite misleading (and this is no doubt a deliberate choice by many of the people using the term) because those rights work very differently from other property rights. For example, they expire. You should think of them more as a temporary contract between you and the government, a kind of non-renewable "lease".
Given the state of the internet, and the trends we can see concerning innovation in that area, I think the search of the future is more likely to sound like "Computer, today I feel like read heads..."
Whether that's good or bad, I suppose, depends on you...
Assume for a second that I was completely clueless as to the verbage and the scope of the GPL. Also assume for a second that I am a sysadmin of Linux servers (I know, I know, this is a hypothetical) and I am served with notice from SCO. I pay the US$699 x however many servers I have.
Now, when this case finally gets to trial, and SCO loses (God willing), could the company turn around and sue for extortion/other illegality, since it has been proven in court that SCO has no legal basis to enforce/collect licensing fees?
Definatly a possibility, but also unlikely to ammount to anything; I do not expect SCO to have any assets left after the IBM and Red Hat trials, and if that is the case, you would be unable to recoup your costs. Better to simply not pay.
What boggles my mind is why telemarketers think their job is going to be harder with a list of people who don't want to receive calls from them. That's the most absurd logic ever.
The FTC basically wants to give telemarketers a list of people who, 99% of the time, will just hang up on them anyway.
What they are worried about are the people that, 99% of the time, are too polite to say "ring off," and end up buying whatever pap the telemarketer is selling. If they are unable to reach these people, profits will plumet, and I imagine that a large percent of the DNC list is made up of these people.
One of the very few instances of a beuracracy not getting in its own way. I suppose, if you get enough people angry, the government can still be on the people's side. Happy dance!
Now if we can hurry up and get that 1st ammendment case overruled...
Seriously, though, high marks for pretty much everyone involved in this one.
they're repressing me by releasing movies and music that i am in no way forced to buy and to which there are many alternatives
I am not "forced to buy" anything from hollywood or mowtown. That is not the problem. The problem is that the music and movie industries are attempting to buy legislation curtailing both my fair use rights with regard to what I do purchase, as well as computer applications with substantial non-infringing uses.
As bad as a Chineese dictator? No. But bad, just the same.
There are some very real, very good uses for ananymous P2P; for instance, it would allow the people of China to see and share information deemed 'subversive' by their government. I expect this to be the 'killer app' of P2P in the fairly near future.
It just so happens, though, that the features that would make P2P useful for fighting represive regimes are also useful for fighting the major media companies.
Which, when I think about it, is a redundant statement.
What the author means is that, if communication in one direction is possible, communication in the other direction is also possible. These are closed systems; if it is network aware enough to send a file, it may also be aware enough to recieve a file, thus altering the voting record, and there is no way we can know about it. I believe his point is that the machines themselves should not be connected while voting is taking place.
When I was starting college, we had a one-day orientation to let us get to know the campus, and the professors who would be teaching us. During a question-and-answer period, one of the kids asked the Comp Sci head what kind of computer he should bring with him. The professor spoke for a few minutes about the college's development labs (mostly MS), then about the DogNet lab (BSD), and finally settled on saying that a dual-boot, MS/Linux pc would be the best bet.
Then he looked at the kid and asked, completely straight, if he was "thinking about doing anything silly, like bringing a Mac."
Of course, this was far before OSX, so his critisism was justified.
For those of you who could care less about the article and want your daily SCO bashing, here's the thing: It was a pretty good angle that the lawyer was making, and the interviewer was asking tough questions, the same ones we all have. The main thrust is that he's betting on the fact that Copyright law trumps whatever provisions are in the GPL, so IBM's GPL defense doesn't hold water; and also that just because Caldera released kernel source under that license does not mean that the whole codebase (not just what was republished) should also be GPL'd.
Not really. What I got out of the article was the same old story that they've been telling more or less from the beginning; our copyrighted code was released under the GPL without our knwledge or permission, and therefor the GPL does not apply. This claim has yet to be substantiated, and there one attempt to do so has been thoroughly rebutted by the Open Source community.
Slashdot Mirror
He says it weighs 18 pounds, and swings great.
To put that in perspective, a good katana will run at about 2-3 pounds, and a claymore, which is nearly as tall as I am, will weight in at 6-10, tops. You would need arms like Herculese to use this thing properly.
Apple tried this with their computer architecture, and they began hemoraging business. The licensed cloners undercut Apple's hardware prices, and Apple itself couldn't compete.
HP will, in all likelyhood, make a "cheaper iPod," and cut into one of Apple's darling moneymakers. Remember, Apple makes no money off of iTunes MS, but uses it as a way of promoting the iPod.
I give this one year, max.
Strangly enough, the Congress seemed unwilling to vote themselves out of a job.
I mind the electronic spam -- my Yahoo! Mail account keeps getting clogged. Don't mind the paper, though, because they're paying the bulk of the cost anyway and I have recycling at home.
I'm the exact opposite. I can filter my spam, and click "delete" if that doesn't work. Bulk mail sits around until I take out the grabage, and irks me a bit more.
I don't know, I just can't see McBride as the angel of death.
SCO's investors won't have that trouble in about six months or so...
Never, in my wildest dreams, did I think 17 inches would leave me feeling inadequate. Curse you, Apple!
Exactly, and so intuitivley obvious that I can't imagine it being done any other way. Anything else would be a broken implementation.
I don't even know if this qualifies as a crack. The specification will be open, and the driver will only need to be changed fromto
alwayson-network.com is a wonderfully ironic name for a webserver that just got slashdotted...
I don't know when the next war will be, but it will be fought against corporations.
Actually, the next war will probably be fought against Syria. The corporations are a bit farther down the list.
No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property."
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to deprive people of their rights.
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to hide the fact that your product is shoddy, and very likely will not work as advertised.
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to exagerate the dammage caused by saying 'hold the shift key.'
But who's counting?
The term "intellectual property" is actually quite misleading (and this is no doubt a deliberate choice by many of the people using the term) because those rights work very differently from other property rights. For example, they expire. You should think of them more as a temporary contract between you and the government, a kind of non-renewable "lease".
Non-renewable? You're new here, aren't you?
Given the state of the internet, and the trends we can see concerning innovation in that area, I think the search of the future is more likely to sound like "Computer, today I feel like read heads..."
Whether that's good or bad, I suppose, depends on you...
Assume for a second that I was completely clueless as to the verbage and the scope of the GPL. Also assume for a second that I am a sysadmin of Linux servers (I know, I know, this is a hypothetical) and I am served with notice from SCO. I pay the US$699 x however many servers I have.
Now, when this case finally gets to trial, and SCO loses (God willing), could the company turn around and sue for extortion/other illegality, since it has been proven in court that SCO has no legal basis to enforce/collect licensing fees?
Definatly a possibility, but also unlikely to ammount to anything; I do not expect SCO to have any assets left after the IBM and Red Hat trials, and if that is the case, you would be unable to recoup your costs. Better to simply not pay.
What boggles my mind is why telemarketers think their job is going to be harder with a list of people who don't want to receive calls from them. That's the most absurd logic ever.
The FTC basically wants to give telemarketers a list of people who, 99% of the time, will just hang up on them anyway.
What they are worried about are the people that, 99% of the time, are too polite to say "ring off," and end up buying whatever pap the telemarketer is selling. If they are unable to reach these people, profits will plumet, and I imagine that a large percent of the DNC list is made up of these people.
One of the very few instances of a beuracracy not getting in its own way. I suppose, if you get enough people angry, the government can still be on the people's side. Happy dance!
Now if we can hurry up and get that 1st ammendment case overruled...
Seriously, though, high marks for pretty much everyone involved in this one.
I still have no idea how a trac can be compatible with regular CD players, but somehow invisible to a computer.
Ah well, looks like it's time to shut off Autoplay. Well, if I was planning on buying this disk, anyway. And I was running Windows.
"If there were no problem sin the Linux kernel, you'd indemnify your customers!"
"Ha! You had to indemnify your customers! There must be a problem in the Linux kernel!"
"See! You're running the Linux kernel on hardware! There must be a problem inthe Linux Kernel!"
they're repressing me by releasing movies and music that i am in no way forced to buy and to which there are many alternatives
I am not "forced to buy" anything from hollywood or mowtown. That is not the problem. The problem is that the music and movie industries are attempting to buy legislation curtailing both my fair use rights with regard to what I do purchase, as well as computer applications with substantial non-infringing uses.
As bad as a Chineese dictator? No. But bad, just the same.
There are some very real, very good uses for ananymous P2P; for instance, it would allow the people of China to see and share information deemed 'subversive' by their government. I expect this to be the 'killer app' of P2P in the fairly near future.
It just so happens, though, that the features that would make P2P useful for fighting represive regimes are also useful for fighting the major media companies.
Which, when I think about it, is a redundant statement.
"Don't depend on flash," I said.
"Nonsense," from the web-site head.
"Don't tie the site to flash," I chimed.
"Hush, silly boy," they replied.
"We tied our site to flash," I mope.
"Go rewrite the site," they cry, crushing all my hope.
So, who else sees an all-nighter coming up real quick-like?
What the author means is that, if communication in one direction is possible, communication in the other direction is also possible. These are closed systems; if it is network aware enough to send a file, it may also be aware enough to recieve a file, thus altering the voting record, and there is no way we can know about it. I believe his point is that the machines themselves should not be connected while voting is taking place.
When I was starting college, we had a one-day orientation to let us get to know the campus, and the professors who would be teaching us. During a question-and-answer period, one of the kids asked the Comp Sci head what kind of computer he should bring with him. The professor spoke for a few minutes about the college's development labs (mostly MS), then about the DogNet lab (BSD), and finally settled on saying that a dual-boot, MS/Linux pc would be the best bet.
Then he looked at the kid and asked, completely straight, if he was "thinking about doing anything silly, like bringing a Mac."
Of course, this was far before OSX, so his critisism was justified.
For those of you who could care less about the article and want your daily SCO bashing, here's the thing:
It was a pretty good angle that the lawyer was making, and the interviewer was asking tough questions, the same ones
we all have. The main thrust is that he's betting on the fact that Copyright law trumps whatever provisions are in the
GPL, so IBM's GPL defense doesn't hold water; and also that just because Caldera released kernel source under that license does
not mean that the whole codebase (not just what was republished) should also be GPL'd.
Not really. What I got out of the article was the same old story that they've been telling more or less from the beginning; our copyrighted code was released under the GPL without our knwledge or permission, and therefor the GPL does not apply. This claim has yet to be substantiated, and there one attempt to do so has been thoroughly rebutted by the Open Source community.
What is the sound of one hand slapping?
More precisely, what is the sound of an 800 lb. gorilla's one hand slapping?
Or, to be even more exact, what is the sound of an 800 lb. gorilla's one hand slapping an annoying monkey silly?
My friends, it is the sound of delicious justice.
And that other noise? That's the sound of a house of cards beginning to collapse.
It's a game. You have a thwump stick. Draw your own conclusions.