"There is always enthusiasm in our business for new concepts. So-called free software is the latest new thing. We will rise to this challenge, and we will compete in a fair and responsible manner that puts our customers first."
Wow Ballmer... Microsoft is looking at new concepts!
"You are right. But should it be wrong for someone who has brought a copy of the book but wants to read it in their native language to have access to that? Note that the book isn't coming out in other languages for months yet. I am sure the hardcore fans that download the translated version will also buy it once it is released."
I don't believe that they are being sued because they translated the book. They are being sued for posting it on the internet for all to download free of charge.
"They make you fill out a form that asks for your email and then do an opt out checkbox at the bottom of the form (you have to check it to NOT get spam from them)."
Nah... Just put in your boss' email address and tell them to bring it on...
""Our government has a checks and balances system," Pieruccini said. "While sometimes it moves slowly, these cases . . . are going to find their way up to the Supreme Court."
So this means that as long as the Bush Administration can pass civil liberty eroding laws faster than the Supreme Court can hear them our society will move towards being a suppressive, totalitarian type of government.
The Bush administration has done more to destroy our way of life than any group of terrorists ever could. And the funny think is, is that the Republican party put Mr. Bush in power, not through the election process alone but in large part through litigation.
It seems to me that our laws are more and more being held hostage as tools for special interest groups.
If we want to reverse this trend we have to ensure that in next few elections we place people of integrity and intelligence into office. Something that this Administration is apparently lacking.
Four of their top people are moving out because they found greater opportunities... What a coincidence! Me thinks that it is more likely that not all is well in Blizzardland.
Oh well, I really don't care after they went after the bnetd project using a bogus DMCA suit. I have never bought another of their games since. Screw 'em.
"...EFF will also place advertisements about the Right to Share campaign in magazines such as Spin, Blender, Computer Gaming World, and PC Gamer. .."
First of all, the EFF is not going to convince anyone by placing ads in those magazines. It's like preaching to the choir.
Second, we have no "right to share" if sharing infringes on someone's copyright.
I say if the RIIA wants to sue people who are breaking the law by infringing on their copyrights then let them. These people knew, or should have known, that it was illegal.
If you don't like the law then work to change it. If you choose to ignore it be prepared to pay the price.
I don't want to rain on the parade and I'm defiantly not in SCO's corner but let's not be over confident here. There are some real questions that are going to be asked in court like:
Is SCO correct that some of its code was copied into GNU/Linux? If not then they immediately loose their case. End of story, turn off the lights when you leave.
Is it reasonable that SCO should check every line of code in a distribution prior to releasing it's contribution, to ensure that none of the code for which it has copyright rights over is included by other parties? If it is reasonable then again SCO looses because they did release GNU/Linux themselves and thus implied that the approved of GNU/Linux as a whole. If this turns out to be the case then SCO had better put some of the Microsoft money into a defense fund 'cause the counter suits are going to fly. However, I'm not at all confident that a Judge is going to say that it is reasonable. We'll just have to wait and see.
If a Judge deems that it is not reasonable that SCO should examine every single line of code then the next question will be: When did SCO become aware of the code's existence? I.E. Did they release a version of GNU/Linux after becoming aware. If so then again this implies approval.
I don't believe that SCO has a very good chance of proving anything and their actions appearing to be less than forthcoming raises even more doubt. But never be too confident when going before a Judge.
Retirement in the USA...
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Employee: Boss, I've been working here for thirty years. When can I retire?
The problem with the US government is that it has forgotten its place. It is suppose to be for the people by the people. If we draw a triangle the people should be on top and the government beneath them but the government places itself on top.
Rather than being a tool for the people to use the government thinks that it should be the master over the people. This was not what was intended.
A problem arises when you have a government that needs to collect money to function but doesn't have power to do so. So, the people give the government the authority to forcibly collect taxes and everything goes down hill from there.
We all know that we should be more involved in our government but who has the time or the energy? So we are paying the price for our inattention. It is human nature to try to control. The lack of constant scrutiny by all of us has allowed the people in our government to grab more and more control. This equates to less and less freedom for us all.
"Some people don't like to admit it, but there is no such thing as moral relativism. You are trying to say that there is no difference between Saddam possessing a nuke, and the US possessing a nuke. Yes, the United States is the only country to use a nuclear weapon, but we used it responsibly and continue to use our power responsibly. Saddam would try and drop it on DC."
I don't understand that reasoning. By your example there is such a thing as moral relativism. You appear to be saying that both countries have WMD but is okay for the US but not for Iraq.
The truth is that right and wrong are irrelevant in the face of overwhelming power.
For the most part, the government should stay out of things. However, the true function of government, if you think about it, is to do for the people what the people cannot do for themselves alone.
Free market is a great idea and works until you have a monopoly or near monopoly. At that point the system breaks down due to the overwhelming force of that monopoly. That's where government must intervene in order to maintain a healthy balance.
Of course the assumption being that government is working for the good of the people. Lobbying, however, causes a corrupt government to turn a deaf ear to the voice of its people.
Microsoft being a monopoly and having shown that it is willing to abuse its monopoly position to both maintain that position and to extend its influence into other non-related areas of business, clearly demonstrates that the government needs to take corrective action. I personally don't think that forcing Microsoft to include a non-broken version of JAVA as a corrective action is in error.
Okay, assuming that the code that IBM contributed came from a code base that SCO controls then the real question is: When did SCO become aware of the infringement?
If they were aware of the code and didn't raise an objection it would be implying that they approved and therefore would give away their rights to the code.
It will be up to a Judge to determine when they became aware and if they acted in a timely manner.
Again, this is only if the code belonged to SCO to begin with and I have my doubts to that.
"I asked whether SCO has any plans to license the Unix code to Linux users, to remove the liability. SCO said it has no current program. It hopes to come up with something in which noncommercial use and educational use would be free, but for commercial use it wants some remuneration. SCO said it hadn't come up with a plan because it still is trying to figure out the scale of the problem. SCO hopes to have some sort of solution by as early as July. "
Oh, I get it now. SCO can't make it buy just selling it's own pathetic OS so it is trying to steal Linux.
I really can't comment further without the use of profanity.
"Love 'em or hate 'em, Microsoft produces quality products. What can we hope to see from an MS-created search engine?
Good internationalization support. Contrast this with the Linux-run Google. High speed returns. Contrast to the slow, BSD-run Yahoo. Seamless OS integration. Contrast to almost any search engine, none of which tie directly to the browser, let alone let you search from inside a Word document or email message. Standarization. Contrast this to the situation now, where almost everyone uses a different search engine, requiring website designers to submit their pages to hundreds of different databases. "
Oh, you mean vaporware... Yeah, Microsoft is pretty good at that...
that SCO, out of desparation, decided to try to bully IBM into buying them out. Now they have their pee-pee caught in a wringer and either their egos or maybe plain stupidity won't let them stop turning the handle.
Slashdot Mirror
"There is always enthusiasm in our business for new concepts. So-called free software is the latest new thing. We will rise to this challenge, and we will compete in a fair and responsible manner that puts our customers first."
Wow Ballmer... Microsoft is looking at new concepts!
"You are right. But should it be wrong for someone who has brought a copy of the book but wants to read it in their native language to have access to that? Note that the book isn't coming out in other languages for months yet. I am sure the hardcore fans that download the translated version will also buy it once it is released."
I don't believe that they are being sued because they translated the book. They are being sued for posting it on the internet for all to download free of charge.
"They make you fill out a form that asks for your email and then do an opt out checkbox at the bottom of the form (you have to check it to NOT get spam from them)."
Nah... Just put in your boss' email address and tell them to bring it on...
Well slavery obviously was a major issue as indicated by the fact that the entire quote was full of slavery referances.
If this was a Lincoln quote then why is it shown to be from T.T. Halls?
""Our government has a checks and balances system," Pieruccini said. "While sometimes it moves slowly, these cases . . . are going to find their way up to the Supreme Court."
So this means that as long as the Bush Administration can pass civil liberty eroding laws faster than the Supreme Court can hear them our society will move towards being a suppressive, totalitarian type of government.
The Bush administration has done more to destroy our way of life than any group of terrorists ever could. And the funny think is, is that the Republican party put Mr. Bush in power, not through the election process alone but in large part through litigation.
It seems to me that our laws are more and more being held hostage as tools for special interest groups.
If we want to reverse this trend we have to ensure that in next few elections we place people of integrity and intelligence into office. Something that this Administration is apparently lacking.
who supported Mandrake hats off to you. It is truly a great distro.
For all of you who made posts to the effect of "I'll use it 'till they die but I won't ever pay for it. Let them die."
Four of their top people are moving out because they found greater opportunities... What a coincidence! Me thinks that it is more likely that not all is well in Blizzardland.
Oh well, I really don't care after they went after the bnetd project using a bogus DMCA suit. I have never bought another of their games since. Screw 'em.
in slashdot a few months back. It talked about a government (Germany I think) that was going to develop an open source Exchange-like server?
"...EFF will also place advertisements about the Right to Share campaign in magazines such as Spin, Blender, Computer Gaming World, and PC Gamer. . ."
First of all, the EFF is not going to convince anyone by placing ads in those magazines. It's like preaching to the choir.
Second, we have no "right to share" if sharing infringes on someone's copyright.
I say if the RIIA wants to sue people who are breaking the law by infringing on their copyrights then let them. These people knew, or should have known, that it was illegal.
If you don't like the law then work to change it. If you choose to ignore it be prepared to pay the price.
"Primarily targeted towards Japanese families living in France..."
Secondarily targeted towards slashdot readers with WAY too much time on their hands...
Corporations: All of your dollars are belong to us...
I don't want to rain on the parade and I'm defiantly not in SCO's corner but let's not be over confident here. There are some real questions that are going to be asked in court like:
Is SCO correct that some of its code was copied into GNU/Linux? If not then they immediately loose their case. End of story, turn off the lights when you leave.
Is it reasonable that SCO should check every line of code in a distribution prior to releasing it's contribution, to ensure that none of the code for which it has copyright rights over is included by other parties? If it is reasonable then again SCO looses because they did release GNU/Linux themselves and thus implied that the approved of GNU/Linux as a whole. If this turns out to be the case then SCO had better put some of the Microsoft money into a defense fund 'cause the counter suits are going to fly. However, I'm not at all confident that a Judge is going to say that it is reasonable. We'll just have to wait and see.
If a Judge deems that it is not reasonable that SCO should examine every single line of code then the next question will be: When did SCO become aware of the code's existence? I.E. Did they release a version of GNU/Linux after becoming aware. If so then again this implies approval.
I don't believe that SCO has a very good chance of proving anything and their actions appearing to be less than forthcoming raises even more doubt. But never be too confident when going before a Judge.
Employee: Boss, I've been working here for thirty years. When can I retire?
Boss: That depends. When do you expect to die?
The problem with the US government is that it has forgotten its place. It is suppose to be for the people by the people. If we draw a triangle the people should be on top and the government beneath them but the government places itself on top.
Rather than being a tool for the people to use the government thinks that it should be the master over the people. This was not what was intended.
A problem arises when you have a government that needs to collect money to function but doesn't have power to do so. So, the people give the government the authority to forcibly collect taxes and everything goes down hill from there.
We all know that we should be more involved in our government but who has the time or the energy? So we are paying the price for our inattention. It is human nature to try to control. The lack of constant scrutiny by all of us has allowed the people in our government to grab more and more control. This equates to less and less freedom for us all.
"Some people don't like to admit it, but there is no such thing as moral relativism. You are trying to say that there is no difference between Saddam possessing a nuke, and the US possessing a nuke. Yes, the United States is the only country to use a nuclear weapon, but we used it responsibly and continue to use our power responsibly. Saddam would try and drop it on DC."
I don't understand that reasoning. By your example there is such a thing as moral relativism. You appear to be saying that both countries have WMD but is okay for the US but not for Iraq.
The truth is that right and wrong are irrelevant in the face of overwhelming power.
For the most part, the government should stay out of things. However, the true function of government, if you think about it, is to do for the people what the people cannot do for themselves alone.
Free market is a great idea and works until you have a monopoly or near monopoly. At that point the system breaks down due to the overwhelming force of that monopoly. That's where government must intervene in order to maintain a healthy balance.
Of course the assumption being that government is working for the good of the people. Lobbying, however, causes a corrupt government to turn a deaf ear to the voice of its people.
Microsoft being a monopoly and having shown that it is willing to abuse its monopoly position to both maintain that position and to extend its influence into other non-related areas of business, clearly demonstrates that the government needs to take corrective action. I personally don't think that forcing Microsoft to include a non-broken version of JAVA as a corrective action is in error.
Okay, assuming that the code that IBM contributed came from a code base that SCO controls then the real question is: When did SCO become aware of the infringement?
If they were aware of the code and didn't raise an objection it would be implying that they approved and therefore would give away their rights to the code.
It will be up to a Judge to determine when they became aware and if they acted in a timely manner.
Again, this is only if the code belonged to SCO to begin with and I have my doubts to that.
... in front of that many monitors and you can kiss your future family good-bye!
Oh well, we have an over-population problem anyway...
"I asked whether SCO has any plans to license the Unix code to Linux users, to remove the liability. SCO said it has no current program. It hopes to come up with something in which noncommercial use and educational use would be free, but for commercial use it wants some remuneration. SCO said it hadn't come up with a plan because it still is trying to figure out the scale of the problem. SCO hopes to have some sort of solution by as early as July. "
Oh, I get it now. SCO can't make it buy just selling it's own pathetic OS so it is trying to steal Linux.
I really can't comment further without the use of profanity.
That is possible in any open source project not just GPL.
I don't think that is a rational fear.
"Love 'em or hate 'em, Microsoft produces quality products. What can we hope to see from an MS-created search engine?
Good internationalization support. Contrast this with the Linux-run Google.
High speed returns. Contrast to the slow, BSD-run Yahoo.
Seamless OS integration. Contrast to almost any search engine, none of which tie directly to the browser, let alone let you search from inside a Word document or email message.
Standarization. Contrast this to the situation now, where almost everyone uses a different search engine, requiring website designers to submit their pages to hundreds of different databases. "
Oh, you mean vaporware... Yeah, Microsoft is pretty good at that...
But rather you would avoid open source because some second rate company is making unfounded claims??
IBM belongs to this group. That is not the same as controlling the group. This is a Microsoft FUD campaign. Nothing more.
IBM may have some influence over this group but I doubt that they agree with this recommendation. This is clearly Microsoft FUD.
that SCO, out of desparation, decided to try to bully IBM into buying them out. Now they have their pee-pee caught in a wringer and either their egos or maybe plain stupidity won't let them stop turning the handle.