Why on earth would you need 100 addresses per human being? I can for see needing two at most, one for your home and one for your "mobile communication device". Your home would have a router and use private addresses for all your home devices. Your "mobile communication device" would have a router and use private address for all your other devices via bluetooth or whatever comes next. Does this not make sense, or I am being short sighted?
The evidence that SCO has released shows that code IBM developed is both in AIX and Linux. The "evidence" is know, now it's simply a battle over contracts. If SCO wins, we remove the code and go on our merry way. They can not inforce any type of licensing on a Linux kernel without that code, end of story. SCO will find this out soon enough, and their new money making scheme will go up in flames.
It all depends on which side of the coin you're looking at. Commercial software venders see the GPL'ed code as a risk to their IP. Alas, viral is a bad word to describe this any ways. Recursive licensing sounds better:)
In another example of the fair United States justice system, it is yet again proven that whoever pays more for their lawyer wins. Even when a crime has not been committed. The U.S. may be the land of the free, but it sure does chafe a lot.
Because these exploits will be fixed in the revision of the XBox. With an official release of the linux the anonymous group would for updates I presume. But I do agree with you, there is no way Microsoft is going to do it. In fact the only thing the probably will do is call there blood-sucking lawyers with there big DMCA stamp of approval.
True, Windows NT does meet some POSIX compliancy, but not many. And Windows NT also does not provide a UNIX like system. I guess my point is that when GNU was started UNIX was a proprietary term, now it is an open term. Shouldn't we try to embrace it, rather than claim to be different. Also, if GNU really wanted to preverse the aspect of UNIX userland they would aim for compliancy. Thats just my 2 cents tho.
I know GNU's Not UNIX, and RMS makes sure we know it. But GNU is a UNIX clone. No matter what RMS says, the GNU system is very similar to UNIX and I imagine that a GNU/Linux system is about 80% compliant with The Open Groups Single UNIX Specification. In addition RMS said, Unix is and always was non-free software, meaning that it denies its users the freedom to cooperate and to control their computers. What is this 1984? UNIX is an open standard now, UNIX is no longer this mass of proprietary code. GNU may not be UNIX, but it sure as heck wants to be... nuff said.
First off I'd like to make a point to say that I support DRM. I support it if it keeps people from doing something illegal, ie. downloading movies, music and software for that matter that is copyrighted without paying for it. There is nothing wrong with that. The only problem I do have with DRM is if it prevents me from using the media that I have acquired legally, that pisses me off.
Next, we do need a standard so that mulitple devices can talk to one another over a wired or wireless network to share media files. You call e-mail a way to do this. Sure it works, but it's cumbersome and barbaric. What I want is the abillity to turn on my set top box connect to my pc, and stream some music to the whole house. Anyways, the point is that we do need proper protocols for this kind of thing, sometimes I think people scream wolf way to much.
I like the idea of mandatory standards throught large orginziations, and thats all the government really is. There will be exceptions to the rules of course, but most of what comercial software provides is found in open source except in smaller specialty areas. Thats just my 2 cents tho.
This is a big win for Linux, but is making it mandatory going too far? It would seem wiser to support a solution that favors the best tool for the job, which may not always be an open source product.
I think that is why it is mandatory for 80% of the computers and not 100%.
Speaking of the TV being on, would you see your reflection during a dark scene in a movie? How would ambient room light affect this?
I imagine the trick to the mirror involves polarization of some type and the screen is still outputting photons durring a dark scene so there trick will probably still work.
The point is that the tv/mirror is a much more attractive combination than having a clunky tv set, or even a flat panel on the wall. Plus you got the point of all new gadgets, the novelty feature.
One thing that seems a little odd here is that yes SCO did show that there is code in unixware that is also in linux. But they have not proven where the code originated from, and who put it in there.... And on top of that SCO picked Friday the 13th as the ultimatum date!
There is plenty of free software out there for a young programmer to learn with. I learned C with DJGPP and a 21 days book in the mid 90's. The resources are there and todays tech minded youth know how to look for them. Besides, the poster talks of improving the situation, but in reality the situation has never been better for youth to learn the ins and outs of computers. Thats just my 2 cents tho
"Principia" is generally considered the most important scientific works in history.
While I will agree that Newton's "Principia" is an extremely important work and can be held responsible for one of the biggest changes in the ways human look at reality. However I feel that by saying any single work is the most important is absurd. Einsteins General Theory of Relativity is at least as important if not more. Yet it would not have been made possible without Newton's previous theory. So saying one peice of science is the most important simply does not have any sense in the statement due to the fact that all scientific works build upon another.
I dont think that was the point of this question. Everyone knows that United States legal system is not perfect, and the people with the most money typically win. The question here is more whether the actual production of these chips is legal or not. Not if he can be sued for producing these.
Slashdot Mirror
Why on earth would you need 100 addresses per human being? I can for see needing two at most, one for your home and one for your "mobile communication device". Your home would have a router and use private addresses for all your home devices. Your "mobile communication device" would have a router and use private address for all your other devices via bluetooth or whatever comes next. Does this not make sense, or I am being short sighted?
The evidence that SCO has released shows that code IBM developed is both in AIX and Linux. The "evidence" is know, now it's simply a battle over contracts. If SCO wins, we remove the code and go on our merry way. They can not inforce any type of licensing on a Linux kernel without that code, end of story. SCO will find this out soon enough, and their new money making scheme will go up in flames.
It all depends on which side of the coin you're looking at. Commercial software venders see the GPL'ed code as a risk to their IP. Alas, viral is a bad word to describe this any ways. Recursive licensing sounds better :)
There's already a D, learn about it at http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
In another example of the fair United States justice system, it is yet again proven that whoever pays more for their lawyer wins. Even when a crime has not been committed. The U.S. may be the land of the free, but it sure does chafe a lot.
Because these exploits will be fixed in the revision of the XBox. With an official release of the linux the anonymous group would for updates I presume. But I do agree with you, there is no way Microsoft is going to do it. In fact the only thing the probably will do is call there blood-sucking lawyers with there big DMCA stamp of approval.
hehe, but then the Open Group would counter sue, so we'd be safe. Alas, I doubt anyone can change RMS's opinion on this anyways.
True, Windows NT does meet some POSIX compliancy, but not many. And Windows NT also does not provide a UNIX like system. I guess my point is that when GNU was started UNIX was a proprietary term, now it is an open term. Shouldn't we try to embrace it, rather than claim to be different. Also, if GNU really wanted to preverse the aspect of UNIX userland they would aim for compliancy. Thats just my 2 cents tho.
I know GNU's Not UNIX, and RMS makes sure we know it. But GNU is a UNIX clone. No matter what RMS says, the GNU system is very similar to UNIX and I imagine that a GNU/Linux system is about 80% compliant with The Open Groups Single UNIX Specification. In addition RMS said, Unix is and always was non-free software, meaning that it denies its users the freedom to cooperate and to control their computers. What is this 1984? UNIX is an open standard now, UNIX is no longer this mass of proprietary code. GNU may not be UNIX, but it sure as heck wants to be... nuff said.
It was my understanding that U.S. patents were only applicable within the U.S. Can someone please clarify?
umm, yeah just as much as any BSD doesn't need manual.
First off I'd like to make a point to say that I support DRM. I support it if it keeps people from doing something illegal, ie. downloading movies, music and software for that matter that is copyrighted without paying for it. There is nothing wrong with that. The only problem I do have with DRM is if it prevents me from using the media that I have acquired legally, that pisses me off.
Next, we do need a standard so that mulitple devices can talk to one another over a wired or wireless network to share media files. You call e-mail a way to do this. Sure it works, but it's cumbersome and barbaric. What I want is the abillity to turn on my set top box connect to my pc, and stream some music to the whole house. Anyways, the point is that we do need proper protocols for this kind of thing, sometimes I think people scream wolf way to much.
I like the idea of mandatory standards throught large orginziations, and thats all the government really is. There will be exceptions to the rules of course, but most of what comercial software provides is found in open source except in smaller specialty areas. Thats just my 2 cents tho.
I think that is why it is mandatory for 80% of the computers and not 100%.
look at the picture, the screen is only taking up approx. 1/3 of the mirror while on. So you can still shave and read slashdot.
Speaking of the TV being on, would you see your reflection during a dark scene in a movie? How would ambient room light affect this?
I imagine the trick to the mirror involves polarization of some type and the screen is still outputting photons durring a dark scene so there trick will probably still work.
The point is that the tv/mirror is a much more attractive combination than having a clunky tv set, or even a flat panel on the wall. Plus you got the point of all new gadgets, the novelty feature.
One thing that seems a little odd here is that yes SCO did show that there is code in unixware that is also in linux. But they have not proven where the code originated from, and who put it in there.... And on top of that SCO picked Friday the 13th as the ultimatum date!
There is plenty of free software out there for a young programmer to learn with. I learned C with DJGPP and a 21 days book in the mid 90's. The resources are there and todays tech minded youth know how to look for them. Besides, the poster talks of improving the situation, but in reality the situation has never been better for youth to learn the ins and outs of computers. Thats just my 2 cents tho
Let's just create a P2P network with sure purpose of providing VOD. They'll never stop us with there evil patent!
Well they do still have some control on what IBM can do with AIX because it contains SysV code but only if they win.
This has been a part of the Microsoft Select program for a long while, i'm not sure if you was a standard part of the program or an option.
While I will agree that Newton's "Principia" is an extremely important work and can be held responsible for one of the biggest changes in the ways human look at reality. However I feel that by saying any single work is the most important is absurd. Einsteins General Theory of Relativity is at least as important if not more. Yet it would not have been made possible without Newton's previous theory. So saying one peice of science is the most important simply does not have any sense in the statement due to the fact that all scientific works build upon another.
I dont think that was the point of this question. Everyone knows that United States legal system is not perfect, and the people with the most money typically win. The question here is more whether the actual production of these chips is legal or not. Not if he can be sued for producing these.
Buy a used diamond get a new ring for it and voila, you're the hero.