"And it is important to note that these are not pissant fines - they can be up to 10% of revenue made during the period over which they are held to be infining (also defined by the Commisioner)."
Not to be argumentative but 10% seems to just be a "cost of doing business."
Maybe you can explain why the BSD license is better that the GPL? Is it because it allows companies like Microsoft to take the code, modify it in a way that makes it incompatible then release it again as closed source?
This is what they did with Kerboros. By using their Monopoly power they basically stole the technology by introducing incompatibilities by design.
Projects that are truly great that are under the BSD are great because the authors choose to keep their source open. It is the openness of the source that is the root of the success and is what makes the projects most valuable to other developers. If these BSD projects had been closed source from the beginning they would not be great.
GPL forces the source to be open and that is why it is superior to BSD for the open source community. That being said, I do believe that the GPL should allow closed source code to link to it. This would facilitate hardware drivers, etc.
This is how it would seem to me also. Everything that I know about abstraction layers tell me that they link to other code. But I haven't taken the time to review the code.
Never under estimate the ability of a lawer to make something cut and dried into something subjective.
Come on, let it out... How do you really feel about GPL'd code?
Do you work for Microsoft or something?? "I shudder to think of the wasted hours of development because someone decided to push a political agenda by writing this stupid license (the GPL) and brainwashing-- err, convincing everyone they had to GPL their code, because otherwise, The Big Bad Monster Under The Bed was going to steal it!"
What a bunch of crap. The GPL is a stupid license?? As opposed to Microsoft's? Convince people the put their code under the GPL to prevent people from stealing it?? Your lips are moving buy you're not saying anything!
"The company has invested a lot into their software and should not have to give all that work away for nothing."
If a company chooses to base a work on GPL'd code that is their choice and they must follow the agreement. If they don't want to give the code to the community that's okay but they'll need to start from scratch and not base thier work on the hard work of other's.
This may not be a breach of the GPL. What Castle has said is that the hardware abstraction layer was based on the Linux kernel sources. They have made that code available.
What will determine if the remaining code is also under the GPL is how closely it integrates with the abstraction layer. Castle maintains that this abstraction layer is "roughly" analogous to a PC's BIOS.
For those of you who don't know what the BIOS is, it is the initial code which resides on a microchip that runs when you first boot your computer. It has, among other things, the very low level I/O routines that allow your computer to read enough of your hard drive to allow your operating system to boot.
It would be possible to write a BIOS and then put the code under the GPL. Would that mean that any OS that gets booted by these BIOS would suddenly be in violation of GPL? I don't think so.
The two questions that need to be answered are:
1. How analogous to a PC's BIOS is this abstraction layer? (This may be a subjective assessment and therefore open to litigation.) 2. Is there any more GPL'd code contained in the Castle product?
The GPL license needs a good test in a court of law to see if it will stand. I plan on thanking these people for offering to spend the many thousands of dollars that it will take to conduct this test.
Just by challenging their authority to do the background check you have probably eliminated any possibility that they will hire you. It is probably a privacy issue that could be litigated but your attorney will be the only real winner.
"JV: You have to have copy prevention mandated by the government sooner or later because otherwise everybody's not playing by the same ground rules. For example, the standards of my cell phone have to be mandated by the FCC because everybody has to operate off the same standards. Also, all railroad tracks in this country are the same standardized width.
If you don't have tightly focused, narrowly drawn mandates, either regulatory or congressional, then, if I'm a maverick computer maker in Taiwan, I can say, "Hell, I'm not going to play by the rules. I'm going to do it so everybody can copy." Then Toshiba and Sony and IBM can say, "Well if he does that, then I want to do it." We always operate on the fact that everybody needs to know that there's a 55 mph speed limit. That's called a standard"
No Jack, it's called a stupid greedy old man trying to abuse the legal system by dictating to millions of people what the "ground rules" are. We, collectively, set the ground rules not you, unilaterally.
Your arrogance and dim witted opinions offend me on so many levels that it is hard to coalesce my thoughts into a few concise well though out sentences. I must therefore yield to my more base side by pointing out that you are an old man. You haven't many years left and before I die, I intend to find your grave so that I can piss on it!
One of the arguments people give me as to why they don't want to switch their shop over to Linux is because 'The learning curve is just too great.' They feel that they have too much time and money invested in learning Windows.
Making Linux training available cheaply gives Linux more credibility and at the same time removes one of the main reasons I've heard for not adopting it.
My wife and I went to see LOTR but that theater was full so we took in STAR TREK NEMESIS. I wouldn't say that it sucked but I did find myself wishing that there were two open seats in the other theater.
I think that it probably did more poorly than it would have because of the timing of its release. That's what really sucked.
Yeah, I all of the messages could intimidate the non-geek. Mandrake version 8.2 and 9.0, I think, hides the messages so even that concern is being addressed.
I don't totally disagree with the original poster, just most of what he says. Linux has come a LONG way and now appears to be unstoppable. No amount of FUD is going to hide the truth. Linux is hot!
Mandrake has a 'Command Center' That's one place and it's graphical. You can't get fewer or easier than that.
'Convenient, standardised help system with excellent searching and troubleshooting options'
One of the places where I agree that Linux can improve and they are improving. Each new version of Mandrake get's better in this area.
'In built support, from time of consumer device launch, for peripherals and card types (PCMCIA, USB etc. - Linux got late to market here).'
I don't know how 'late' Linux got to the market but the point is they have this support so this concern is FUD.
'Advanced tools are hidden from basic users.'
I assume you mean for basic users. Again, Mandrake has many wizards that make setting up and configuring a no brainer.
'System files are protected from inadvertent change.'
As they are in Linux. Unless the user runs as the root user he can't change/delete important files. The same is true of someone running NT as the administrator.
'System rescue tools provided on disk (while Linux may die less frequently, when it does there's NO WAY for Joe User to recover).'
Most distributions ask if you want to make a set of boot CDs. So your statement is false.
'No confusing messages on startup.'
This isn't a big deal. Windows hides the messages and Linux users ignore them unless the need them. A real non-issue.
This can only be a good thing for both desktops. It will also make life easier for programmers who wish to support both desktops.
It shows that KDE and Gnome can have healthy competition while at the same time, work for a common goal, unlike unhealthy competition where one tries to be incompatible in the hopes of gaining an advantage. It is too bad that some proprietary companies don't understand the long-term benefits of healthy competition verses unhealthy competition.
I like the idea of a "wheel" group. However, if a worm exploits a process that is running as root we're still screwed.
I'm sure there are quite a few processes that must run as root. The important thing is that we don't allow anything to run as root unnecessarily and all processes that must run as root should be highly scrutinized for possible exploits.
While it is true that Linux users shouldn't be running applications as root it does not remove the danger. Users of Windows NT and 2000 rarly run programs as the administrator of the PC but malicious VBA code can still infect and hurt them.
Let's say that Microsoft introduces Outlook.NET. Suddenly emails may have Word.NET attachments. These attachments may spread through the mail system just like they do on the current Windows platform. They may also contain worms that look for vulnerabilities on Linux boxes. It does not matter if you are running as root or not if some part of your system that is running as root is vulnerable to a buffer overflow.
No, not running as root is not going to save use if we get sloppy.
Okay, anyone who has read my posts knows that I'm not a Microsoft supporter. I find it hard not to see the humor in Microsoft's own servers getting hit when the vulnerability was not new and patchable especially after they proclaimed that they were now striving to be secure.
However, after laughing myself sick, the seriousness of the situation darkened my mood. Although I believe that Linux is currently a more secure platform, it is not a platform without flaws. Linux could be the next security nightmare if we don't occasionally do a reality check.
Part of Microsoft's strength and ironically part of the reason that Microsoft products tend to be vulnerable to attack is the fact that Microsoft strives to give the customer everything including the kitchen sink.
To do this, products are made with far too much power. VBA is an example of this. Combining data with code is not a good idea. It makes it very convenient for the customer and unfortunately the black hats as well.
Right now Microsoft is pushing their.NET platform. They are hopeful that this will become the development platform of choice across multiple OSes. Parts of the Linux community are scrabbling to enable Linux to benefit from this emerging technology thought the Mono project.
If successful it may become possible to run many applications that will be developed on the Windows OS that are targeted for the.NET platform. If Microsoft introduces a.NET version of their flagship Office package it is likely to incorporate some form of VBA. Running a VBA enable application on Linux will not help the security of the Linux platform.
Re:Make software, not war!
on
Corporate KDE
·
· Score: 1
I understand your point of view. These are perilous times and I'm sure that our government officials are in a quandary as to what to do.
However, if anything in our way of life is sacred it is our rights as laid out in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. A right cannot be taken away without due process. No one is suppose to be able to come into your home and take you away, lock you up and deny you access to an attorney and contact with the world.
You say that you have seen no abuse. I am telling you that these things cannot be done without an abuse because they are an abuse of power themselves. How do you KNOW that the people who have been detained in this way have committed any crime? Because your government tells you that they are enemy combatants and that's good enough?? They ACCUSE someone of being a combatant and we shouldn't allow this person to say 'Hey, I'm not!' Instead we just shuffle them off. They just quietly disappear never to be seen again! This is okay with you??
I don't know if these guys are a danger to our society or not because the place that we determine guilt is in a court of law but Ashcroft has decided that these guys will not go through our justice system. Ashcroft feels that he can alienate these people from there rights without due process just because HE HAS ACCUSED them.
Make no mistake. If these guys can be made to disappear at the will of this asshole then anyone can be. Maybe these guys deserve to be placed behind bars but if so then they should be put on trial for their crimes.
By God we need to protest this abuse of power while we still can! Today they make citizens ACCUSED of being enemy combatants disappear tomorrow will they have a new buzz phrase? Maybe 'enemy of the state' that sounds like a good one.
When someone steals away our rights, no matter if they do so with the best of intentions, we must fight back. Ashcroft and Bush need to be held accountable for their actions.
Re:Make software, not war!
on
Corporate KDE
·
· Score: 1
"Please be responsible when you rant. Not everything the government does is a personal, egregious attack directly on you."
I am being very responsible. Just what part of my post was not the truth??
When our leaders step over the line they need to be held accountable. And holding American citizens in this manner is stepping way the F**K over the line!
You should think before accusing someone of being irresponsible. It is you and all other Americans who are NOT outraged by this flagrant disregard for our civil rights that are being irresponsible. My forefathers shed their blood for these rights and some political asshole with visions of Godhood thinks that he can just take them away?! I think NOT! What is the penalty for attempting to subvert the constitution of the United States?
Distributed backup... That's an interesting idea... I know some guys in Singapore who would be willing to backup your credit card information.
Re:Make software, not war!
on
Corporate KDE
·
· Score: 1
"Some people would rather have governments protect them than fund useless software."
Oh yes, Ashcroft is really protecting us. By taking away our freedoms!
If he want's to take you out for ANY reason all he has to do is ACCUSE you of being an enemy combatant. You don't get to argue about it. He can put you away without allowing you to exercise your RIGHT to council, a trial by your peers, the right to face your accuser, etc, etc.
We no longer have rights thanks to Bush and Ashcroft. Yeah, these guys are really protecting us!
Slashdot Mirror
"And it is important to note that these are not pissant fines - they can be up to 10% of revenue made during the period over which they are held to be infining (also defined by the Commisioner)."
Not to be argumentative but 10% seems to just be a "cost of doing business."
Maybe you can explain why the BSD license is better that the GPL? Is it because it allows companies like Microsoft to take the code, modify it in a way that makes it incompatible then release it again as closed source?
This is what they did with Kerboros. By using their Monopoly power they basically stole the technology by introducing incompatibilities by design.
Projects that are truly great that are under the BSD are great because the authors choose to keep their source open. It is the openness of the source that is the root of the success and is what makes the projects most valuable to other developers. If these BSD projects had been closed source from the beginning they would not be great.
GPL forces the source to be open and that is why it is superior to BSD for the open source community. That being said, I do believe that the GPL should allow closed source code to link to it. This would facilitate hardware drivers, etc.
The GPL license made Linux, possibly the greatest open source project ever, possible. You marron.
Billions of years ago life crawled out of the primordial sludge.
.
Slowly over many millions of years it evolved, learned to walk upright and became intelligent enough to know that it was fucked . .
This is how it would seem to me also. Everything that I know about abstraction layers tell me that they link to other code. But I haven't taken the time to review the code.
Never under estimate the ability of a lawer to make something cut and dried into something subjective.
Come on, let it out... How do you really feel about GPL'd code?
Do you work for Microsoft or something??
"I shudder to think of the wasted hours of development because someone decided to push a political agenda by writing this stupid license (the GPL) and brainwashing-- err, convincing everyone they had to GPL their code, because otherwise, The Big Bad Monster Under The Bed was going to steal it!"
What a bunch of crap. The GPL is a stupid license?? As opposed to Microsoft's? Convince people the put their code under the GPL to prevent people from stealing it?? Your lips are moving buy you're not saying anything!
"The company has invested a lot into their software and should not have to give all that work away for nothing."
If a company chooses to base a work on GPL'd code that is their choice and they must follow the agreement. If they don't want to give the code to the community that's okay but they'll need to start from scratch and not base thier work on the hard work of other's.
This may not be a breach of the GPL. What Castle has said is that the hardware abstraction layer was based on the Linux kernel sources. They have made that code available.
What will determine if the remaining code is also under the GPL is how closely it integrates with the abstraction layer. Castle maintains that this abstraction layer is "roughly" analogous to a PC's BIOS.
For those of you who don't know what the BIOS is, it is the initial code which resides on a microchip that runs when you first boot your computer. It has, among other things, the very low level I/O routines that allow your computer to read enough of your hard drive to allow your operating system to boot.
It would be possible to write a BIOS and then put the code under the GPL. Would that mean that any OS that gets booted by these BIOS would suddenly be in violation of GPL? I don't think so.
The two questions that need to be answered are:
1. How analogous to a PC's BIOS is this abstraction layer? (This may be a subjective assessment and therefore open to litigation.)
2. Is there any more GPL'd code contained in the Castle product?
The GPL license needs a good test in a court of law to see if it will stand. I plan on thanking these people for offering to spend the many thousands of dollars that it will take to conduct this test.
Just by challenging their authority to do the background check you have probably eliminated any possibility that they will hire you. It is probably a privacy issue that could be litigated but your attorney will be the only real winner.
"Your friendly DSL or cable broadband provider could implement this technique to enforce their single-machine license clause."
Why would a provider prefer to lease me an additional IP for five bucks when they can lease it to a new customer for over forty bucks?
This assumes that IPs are scarce.
"JV: You have to have copy prevention mandated by the government sooner or later because otherwise everybody's not playing by the same ground rules. For example, the standards of my cell phone have to be mandated by the FCC because everybody has to operate off the same standards. Also, all railroad tracks in this country are the same standardized width.
If you don't have tightly focused, narrowly drawn mandates, either regulatory or congressional, then, if I'm a maverick computer maker in Taiwan, I can say, "Hell, I'm not going to play by the rules. I'm going to do it so everybody can copy." Then Toshiba and Sony and IBM can say, "Well if he does that, then I want to do it." We always operate on the fact that everybody needs to know that there's a 55 mph speed limit. That's called a standard"
No Jack, it's called a stupid greedy old man trying to abuse the legal system by dictating to millions of people what the "ground rules" are. We, collectively, set the ground rules not you, unilaterally.
Your arrogance and dim witted opinions offend me on so many levels that it is hard to coalesce my thoughts into a few concise well though out sentences. I must therefore yield to my more base side by pointing out that you are an old man. You haven't many years left and before I die, I intend to find your grave so that I can piss on it!
One of the arguments people give me as to why they don't want to switch their shop over to Linux is because 'The learning curve is just too great.' They feel that they have too much time and money invested in learning Windows.
Making Linux training available cheaply gives Linux more credibility and at the same time removes one of the main reasons I've heard for not adopting it.
Well done Red Hat!
My wife and I went to see LOTR but that theater was full so we took in STAR TREK NEMESIS. I wouldn't say that it sucked but I did find myself wishing that there were two open seats in the other theater.
I think that it probably did more poorly than it would have because of the timing of its release. That's what really sucked.
Yeah, I all of the messages could intimidate the non-geek. Mandrake version 8.2 and 9.0, I think, hides the messages so even that concern is being addressed.
I don't totally disagree with the original poster, just most of what he says. Linux has come a LONG way and now appears to be unstoppable. No amount of FUD is going to hide the truth. Linux is hot!
I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with most of your post:
'Simpler setup with very few questions.'
Both Mandrake and Redhat are striving to make it country simple. I installed Mandrake by just accepting the defaults. It was a no brainer.
'Smaller more focused set of default applications'
I don't consider less choice of applications an advantage.
'Simpler, centralised, graphical configuration tools'
Mandrake has a 'Command Center' That's one place and it's graphical. You can't get fewer or easier than that.
'Convenient, standardised help system with excellent searching and troubleshooting options'
One of the places where I agree that Linux can improve and they are improving. Each new version of Mandrake get's better in this area.
'In built support, from time of consumer device launch, for peripherals and card types (PCMCIA, USB etc. - Linux got late to market here).'
I don't know how 'late' Linux got to the market but the point is they have this support so this concern is FUD.
'Advanced tools are hidden from basic users.'
I assume you mean for basic users. Again, Mandrake has many wizards that make setting up and configuring a no brainer.
'System files are protected from inadvertent change.'
As they are in Linux. Unless the user runs as the root user he can't change/delete important files. The same is true of someone running NT as the administrator.
'System rescue tools provided on disk (while Linux may die less frequently, when it does there's NO WAY for Joe User to recover).'
Most distributions ask if you want to make a set of boot CDs. So your statement is false.
'No confusing messages on startup.'
This isn't a big deal. Windows hides the messages and Linux users ignore them unless the need them. A real non-issue.
This can only be a good thing for both desktops. It will also make life easier for programmers who wish to support both desktops.
It shows that KDE and Gnome can have healthy competition while at the same time, work for a common goal, unlike unhealthy competition where one tries to be incompatible in the hopes of gaining an advantage. It is too bad that some proprietary companies don't understand the long-term benefits of healthy competition verses unhealthy competition.
Boss: "What is that horrible stench!"
Employee: "My laptop battery developed a leak."
I like the idea of a "wheel" group. However, if a worm exploits a process that is running as root we're still screwed.
I'm sure there are quite a few processes that must run as root. The important thing is that we don't allow anything to run as root unnecessarily and all processes that must run as root should be highly scrutinized for possible exploits.
While it is true that Linux users shouldn't be running applications as root it does not remove the danger. Users of Windows NT and 2000 rarly run programs as the administrator of the PC but malicious VBA code can still infect and hurt them.
Let's say that Microsoft introduces Outlook.NET. Suddenly emails may have Word.NET attachments. These attachments may spread through the mail system just like they do on the current Windows platform. They may also contain worms that look for vulnerabilities on Linux boxes. It does not matter if you are running as root or not if some part of your system that is running as root is vulnerable to a buffer overflow.
No, not running as root is not going to save use if we get sloppy.
Okay, anyone who has read my posts knows that I'm not a Microsoft supporter. I find it hard not to see the humor in Microsoft's own servers getting hit when the vulnerability was not new and patchable especially after they proclaimed that they were now striving to be secure.
.NET platform. They are hopeful that this will become the development platform of choice across multiple OSes. Parts of the Linux community are scrabbling to enable Linux to benefit from this emerging technology thought the Mono project.
.NET platform. If Microsoft introduces a .NET version of their flagship Office package it is likely to incorporate some form of VBA. Running a VBA enable application on Linux will not help the security of the Linux platform.
However, after laughing myself sick, the seriousness of the situation darkened my mood. Although I believe that Linux is currently a more secure platform, it is not a platform without flaws. Linux could be the next security nightmare if we don't occasionally do a reality check.
Part of Microsoft's strength and ironically part of the reason that Microsoft products tend to be vulnerable to attack is the fact that Microsoft strives to give the customer everything including the kitchen sink.
To do this, products are made with far too much power. VBA is an example of this. Combining data with code is not a good idea. It makes it very convenient for the customer and unfortunately the black hats as well.
Right now Microsoft is pushing their
If successful it may become possible to run many applications that will be developed on the Windows OS that are targeted for the
I understand your point of view. These are perilous times and I'm sure that our government officials are in a quandary as to what to do.
However, if anything in our way of life is sacred it is our rights as laid out in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. A right cannot be taken away without due process. No one is suppose to be able to come into your home and take you away, lock you up and deny you access to an attorney and contact with the world.
You say that you have seen no abuse. I am telling you that these things cannot be done without an abuse because they are an abuse of power themselves. How do you KNOW that the people who have been detained in this way have committed any crime? Because your government tells you that they are enemy combatants and that's good enough?? They ACCUSE someone of being a combatant and we shouldn't allow this person to say 'Hey, I'm not!' Instead we just shuffle them off. They just quietly disappear never to be seen again! This is okay with you??
I don't know if these guys are a danger to our society or not because the place that we determine guilt is in a court of law but Ashcroft has decided that these guys will not go through our justice system. Ashcroft feels that he can alienate these people from there rights without due process just because HE HAS ACCUSED them.
Make no mistake. If these guys can be made to disappear at the will of this asshole then anyone can be. Maybe these guys deserve to be placed behind bars but if so then they should be put on trial for their crimes.
By God we need to protest this abuse of power while we still can! Today they make citizens ACCUSED of being enemy combatants disappear tomorrow will they have a new buzz phrase? Maybe 'enemy of the state' that sounds like a good one.
When someone steals away our rights, no matter if they do so with the best of intentions, we must fight back. Ashcroft and Bush need to be held accountable for their actions.
"Please be responsible when you rant. Not everything the government does is a personal, egregious attack directly on you."
I am being very responsible. Just what part of my post was not the truth??
When our leaders step over the line they need to be held accountable. And holding American citizens in this manner is stepping way the F**K over the line!
You should think before accusing someone of being irresponsible. It is you and all other Americans who are NOT outraged by this flagrant disregard for our civil rights that are being irresponsible. My forefathers shed their blood for these rights and some political asshole with visions of Godhood thinks that he can just take them away?! I think NOT! What is the penalty for attempting to subvert the constitution of the United States?
Distributed backup... That's an interesting idea... I know some guys in Singapore who would be willing to backup your credit card information.
"Some people would rather have governments protect them than fund useless software."
Oh yes, Ashcroft is really protecting us. By taking away our freedoms!
If he want's to take you out for ANY reason all he has to do is ACCUSE you of being an enemy combatant. You don't get to argue about it. He can put you away without allowing you to exercise your RIGHT to council, a trial by your peers, the right to face your accuser, etc, etc.
We no longer have rights thanks to Bush and Ashcroft. Yeah, these guys are really protecting us!