If only I had mod points, I'd mod you +8 Insightful! Why? Because of your last paragraph. I for one can only warn the potential users of ZFS. There are chances of you losing all your data. Don't believe me? Search all threads of the almost-defunct forums there, and you'll hit a double-digit number of users who did lose their data. Most important: the developers were and are aware of that fact, and have 'officially' (as officially as open-source-guys can be official) confirmed and conceded this fact, and likewise 'officially' discouraged the use of ZFS without RAID/backup.
I lost one volume, documented there. A Masters student of mine lost 2 volumes; at an exhibition where we wanted to use ZFS for something else. No question, ZFS has some features that are unique and useful. Though not necessarily on a small machine, with a single drive. Hands off in such cases!
Yep. You have your five mod points, so I save mine. I didn't know Texas A&M was just a crap low-level place. Is 'publish or perish' so relevant these days, that you 1. have to invent new maths; in order to 2. get such nonsense published?
Really, I'm p***ed. I could even argue, that roughly 70% of middle grades students in the US are better in maths than math professors in Texas A&M. Parentheses are used in maths to override precedence(s); not as variable name. Shame on you, Texas A&M!
Joker. You're below 1.000.000, but at a close shave. I guess 'PDP' is a word that you heard from your dad? Well-oh-well, I also have 6 digits, but I don't claim to have touched tapes on a PDP. You get of our lawn!
No, I wasn't confused. Maybe you were, because I wrote my lines in the context of 'apology'; not in the context of 'US American consumer rights'. As someone not living in the States, that makes a huge difference. Plus the psychological effect on the consumer, when you say 'irrespective of legal issues, we will refund at any moment what turned out to be an engineering error'.
Isn't. I mean, difference; whatever this cybertrooper (OP) tries to tell us.
I used to adore Jobs for a number of things, from his aesthetics to him turning Apple around totally. But now he has lost the plot. The sacrificial lamb has been slaughtered. The actual mistake was made by Jobs; trying to play down if not ridicule the customers' concerns. Instead of apologising, offer refunds, respectively recalls for everyone who wasn't happy. IMHO, not 10% would have wanted their phones to be sent for a recall action.
So one Steve has joined the other Steve, the one who - and that makes a difference - never shone with competence.
Actually, that's quite unfair. Papermaster was Vice-President for... blabla. Definitively he didn't design the antenna. That is, above everything else, outside of his own field. Papermaster was a chip freak; antenna design is the task of an RF freak.
No, there is no visible difference. It were, if either of the Steves would have taken the consequence of a management blunder.
Now that interests me. Seriously. I'd even fork out some sen to actually see all this misery, but I'm close to the equator, UTC+8, and chances are that your shop is just too far away. Because I believe you, though I don't believe that I'd encounter the same problems. I'm really curious. You see, I've been doing such things (installes) rather regular, and I actually did hear about what you described, a number of times. Though, when I was just sitting next to those having all the problems, it turned out, that the larger part (surely not all, beware), disappeared into vapor. A good number thereof simply induced by trying to imitate the windows install process just too closely. If I ask you to sponsor my trip - possibly half around the globe - you'd call me crazy, deservedly. If I invite you with all your stuff here, likewise. Though I am convinced, you could offer some extra value to your customers, plus enter a niche market, by offering Linux (Ubuntu) to your customers, as choice of OS. There must be someone closer to you, to look at your predicaments for a day or two, until the installs run as smoothly on your hardware as they are supposed to.
Let us compare to my last Linux installation, shall we? First a bunch of questions about partitions that an average user would have fucked up royally, finally get to the desktop and...WTF!!! NO Sound, my Wireless don't even exist according to it, and my screeen resolution is fucked and the GUI for some reason won't stick.
Since you didn't post as AC - I would have known you're a troll - 1. Which year was that? 2. Which Linux distribution? 3. Which hardware?
Yep. I'd mod you funny if I could, for your 'decimal places'. For the rest, yep, I do have some 10**5 mails in my personal archive(s), and those not transparently showing in Wave rendered Wave into a 'I-do-not-need'-piece of software.
I really tried it out, followed the development, and found it absolutely phantastic! - Except of for me. Serious. I hope and wish it will come back; but not as an 'outside' thingy like Wave was; yet-another-comm-application. When I saw the movies on Youtube, I was sure, that the death knell of email was close. When I started using it, everything had to be set up from scratch. I couldn't just drag and drop all my mails, any mail, around the globe to any of my contacts. I am running a number of mail servers, and this thing, Wave, wouldn't work with them. In a nutshell, I guess Wave was just premature, like many inventions. Leonardo and the helicopter spring into mind. Though I have my contacts, my archives of close to 100.00 mails, my servers; and hell freezes over before I start another system, empty, from scratch.
Keep trying Google, it's the right thing. Now it only needs to fully integrate, work, migrate.
If only I had mod points... ! Now I even endanger my karma; but I can take a hit. This is just too beautifully written. Have heard this really, really stupid argument just too often over the years. What the hell are your competitors to do with your code on their hardware? Except your name is Steve The Maniac of Cupertino. Of course.
France Musique. They have exactly what I'm looking for, with lots of not-necessarily-on-the-shelf, mostly classical music http://mp3.live.tv-radio.com/francemusique/all/francemusique-32k.mp3 There is also a high-quality stream; but my place of work has a lousy connection, and so has my ISP.
Yep. Interesting article, very interesting. Unfortunately, as I can see, by making it the all-encompassing round-up, the author also somewhat disqualified. Which is very sad, since what was brought up about publication, sponsoring, fairness, are all topics that need urgent attention. The tertiary education system is broken. But in the end, I lost the earlier interest to buy, or even read, the book. As someone who is in a similar position (teaching in a university), I can only laugh about sentences like "I say, 'I make them good.' Every student is capable of college." Just think of the implied logic: A person who has been failed by parents, or society or school, whatever, in his/her first 20 years, and joins university at the age of around 20, barely able to do basic arithmetics, no chance to express herself in a consistent stream of thoughts, or subsequent sentences in writing. And then someone comes waltzing along, reversing all damage done in a course at a tertiary institution. Maybe in a single course, in a single semester. My only reaction could be, to doubt the second coming.
I don't see how anyone can think that this patent is as broad as the/. blurb, the TechDirt article, or the lawsuit PR make it out to be
You're simply too technical-minded. The legal standing is, that the CLAIMS are what counts; not the description. Though the rule is, that 'the claims need to be seen in the light of the description'; it is not the other way round: It is not that the description is read in the light of the claims. Though that's what you do in your post. I suggest you go back to the document and read (independent) claim no.1. That is what the patent owner refers to when they sue for litigation. The only way around it, is to find a document of prior art that exactly describes the content of the claim(s), published before the priority/filing date.
True. Alas, this decision is still considered as one of the turning points - if not the turning point - in the handling of software patents. If you read the decision (I did several years ago) it turns out to be wrongly worded, and those who did word it, later on regretted it partially. Curing rubber using a specific algorithm was known, and the application implemented the same in a computer. Since it was a Supreme Court decision, it was taken (maybe overly) as gauge to measure future cases, and the ambiguity in the wording was taken as precursor to slip in software patents. Since then, thousands of software patents have been granted. And if you happen to be a lay person in the field, you need to be aware of the fact, that the Supreme Court has no more say about future cases and future interpretation of their own reasoning. And since the big guns of the world were happy - if not keen - about the state of affairs, nobody had any interest, or funds, to bring it up to that level of jurisdiction again. Once the case law was established - possibly on a misinterpretation of that decision - subsequent decisions had to be based on the case law as established.
While we might differ on opinion on laches, and not all too much, could we agree that future royalties are still in the offing, once procedures are commencing? I would not know why, as a proprietor of a legal right, my decision to pursue this right would be adversely affected by earlier lenience.
If this was the case, Microsoft had no issue in claiming infringement on the famous 235 (or so) intellectual property issues in the Linux kernel alone. I for one take it, that - despite of limited damages - they could still (try to) ascertain their rights by a mere cease and desist. Or asking for royalties, eventually effectively closing down some kernel features.
So, if you grant someone access to your encrypted wireless network, the person you granted access to can access data on that network? Who would have thunk it?
Is that 'data' in your sentence or 'encrypted data'? Is that 'data' in your sentence or 'keys'?
Is there not some rule that says you cant just sit there for all that time until making an infringement claim?
While this is true; by the way with most legal proceedings; it is in practice a no-go. Who is to prove that you were aware of the implied infringement years ago? You could have been travelling, sick, bringing up the kids, and whatnot. Being late will severely restrict the damages; but severely restricting actual damages of tens or hundreds of millions will still result at your point 4/.
Forfeiting all your rights would probably require that the defendants can prove malicious intent.
Everyone knows this; and one way or another in these sicko days of ours, one simply has to make the headlines to grab attention; followed by get-rich-quick. Fine. Let them try. I wished, though, some clever chap in Slashdot would have vetted the whole lot sufficiently, to dump it where it belongs: into the trash-bin.
Here is why: Because it actually is an attack. An attack that works for dumbos only. For people, who ought not legally be allowed to buy an access point or whatnot.
Here is the attack: assume router XYZ by default comes with username 'root' and password '12345'. The same router, as default or after reset, offers dhcp in 192.168.1.0/24, with 192.168.1.1 as gateway address. Then, following the trick, some 192.168.1.0/24-address becomes available on the outside (WAN). So when you blindly send 'root' and '12345' to 192.168.1.1 (to the box), from the outside, you're in. As I said, yes, it is an attack. But for any sane setup it will fail miserably, because you have changed the internal network; and most of all, you changed at least the password. I dunno, and haven't tried - because I have better things to do with my time - if any of those spoofing-filters that simply drop RFC1918-compliant addresses on the WAN-side would also fail the proposed attack, despite of default network, username and default password.
Shakespeare would probably have called this 'much ado about peanuts'. And as far as I am concerned, anyone who actually is vulnerable, should be slapped with a court order restricting him or her from touching, buying, setting up or administrating any network equipment until further notice, including home networks.
Spot on, absolutely. If I had, I gave you 6 out of 5 mod points. People might be offended, but this is the precise description of what is going on; and where the trouble (or chances?) brew.
Oh, by the way, I'd reduce your 6 mod points to 4; for the 'dictator' as a need. We have one, and as far as I can make out,there is no such thing on OpenBSD as what OP asks for.
Since you post AC, I can't give you mod points. But your observation is fine, and important. This is a serious bug: One must not be able to install a distro into what cannot boot up. File this bug for all of us, please!
... a tad late. While I was fiddling with some Windows applications over the last 10 years, to make them work in wine (not too high a success rate,:( ); these days thanks to SUN Microsystems (anyone remembers??) I fire up my Virtualbox, and chances are, the application works.
Has one made some comparison of speed, resource usage, of major applications between running in wine and running in Virtualbox? Google has a few hits, though of old age.
Slashdot Mirror
If only I had mod points, I'd mod you +8 Insightful!
Why? Because of your last paragraph. I for one can only warn the potential users of ZFS. There are chances of you losing all your data. Don't believe me? Search all threads of the almost-defunct forums there, and you'll hit a double-digit number of users who did lose their data. Most important: the developers were and are aware of that fact, and have 'officially' (as officially as open-source-guys can be official) confirmed and conceded this fact, and likewise 'officially' discouraged the use of ZFS without RAID/backup.
I lost one volume, documented there. A Masters student of mine lost 2 volumes; at an exhibition where we wanted to use ZFS for something else.
No question, ZFS has some features that are unique and useful. Though not necessarily on a small machine, with a single drive. Hands off in such cases!
You have been warned!
Yep. You have your five mod points, so I save mine.
I didn't know Texas A&M was just a crap low-level place. Is 'publish or perish' so relevant these days, that you
1. have to invent new maths; in order to
2. get such nonsense published?
Really, I'm p***ed. I could even argue, that roughly 70% of middle grades students in the US are better in maths than math professors in Texas A&M. Parentheses are used in maths to override precedence(s); not as variable name.
Shame on you, Texas A&M!
Joker. You're below 1.000.000, but at a close shave. I guess 'PDP' is a word that you heard from your dad?
Well-oh-well, I also have 6 digits, but I don't claim to have touched tapes on a PDP.
You get of our lawn!
No, I wasn't confused.
Maybe you were, because I wrote my lines in the context of 'apology'; not in the context of 'US American consumer rights'. As someone not living in the States, that makes a huge difference. Plus the psychological effect on the consumer, when you say 'irrespective of legal issues, we will refund at any moment what turned out to be an engineering error'.
Yep. But look at the subject. Wozniak was a genius.
Look at the subject. Mine is the other Steve.
Isn't. I mean, difference; whatever this cybertrooper (OP) tries to tell us.
I used to adore Jobs for a number of things, from his aesthetics to him turning Apple around totally. But now he has lost the plot. The sacrificial lamb has been slaughtered. The actual mistake was made by Jobs; trying to play down if not ridicule the customers' concerns. Instead of apologising, offer refunds, respectively recalls for everyone who wasn't happy. IMHO, not 10% would have wanted their phones to be sent for a recall action.
So one Steve has joined the other Steve, the one who - and that makes a difference - never shone with competence.
Actually, that's quite unfair. Papermaster was Vice-President for ... blabla. Definitively he didn't design the antenna. That is, above everything else, outside of his own field. Papermaster was a chip freak; antenna design is the task of an RF freak.
No, there is no visible difference. It were, if either of the Steves would have taken the consequence of a management blunder.
Now that interests me. Seriously. I'd even fork out some sen to actually see all this misery, but I'm close to the equator, UTC+8, and chances are that your shop is just too far away. Because I believe you, though I don't believe that I'd encounter the same problems. I'm really curious.
You see, I've been doing such things (installes) rather regular, and I actually did hear about what you described, a number of times. Though, when I was just sitting next to those having all the problems, it turned out, that the larger part (surely not all, beware), disappeared into vapor. A good number thereof simply induced by trying to imitate the windows install process just too closely.
If I ask you to sponsor my trip - possibly half around the globe - you'd call me crazy, deservedly. If I invite you with all your stuff here, likewise. Though I am convinced, you could offer some extra value to your customers, plus enter a niche market, by offering Linux (Ubuntu) to your customers, as choice of OS.
There must be someone closer to you, to look at your predicaments for a day or two, until the installs run as smoothly on your hardware as they are supposed to.
Let us compare to my last Linux installation, shall we? First a bunch of questions about partitions that an average user would have fucked up royally, finally get to the desktop and...WTF!!! NO Sound, my Wireless don't even exist according to it, and my screeen resolution is fucked and the GUI for some reason won't stick.
Since you didn't post as AC - I would have known you're a troll -
1. Which year was that?
2. Which Linux distribution?
3. Which hardware?
Come on, you can't possibly dodge this question.
Yep. I'd mod you funny if I could, for your 'decimal places'. For the rest, yep, I do have some 10**5 mails in my personal archive(s), and those not transparently showing in Wave rendered Wave into a 'I-do-not-need'-piece of software.
I really tried it out, followed the development, and found it absolutely phantastic! - Except of for me. Serious. I hope and wish it will come back; but not as an 'outside' thingy like Wave was; yet-another-comm-application. When I saw the movies on Youtube, I was sure, that the death knell of email was close. When I started using it, everything had to be set up from scratch. I couldn't just drag and drop all my mails, any mail, around the globe to any of my contacts. I am running a number of mail servers, and this thing, Wave, wouldn't work with them.
In a nutshell, I guess Wave was just premature, like many inventions. Leonardo and the helicopter spring into mind. Though I have my contacts, my archives of close to 100.00 mails, my servers; and hell freezes over before I start another system, empty, from scratch.
Keep trying Google, it's the right thing. Now it only needs to fully integrate, work, migrate.
If only I had mod points ... !
Now I even endanger my karma; but I can take a hit.
This is just too beautifully written. Have heard this really, really stupid argument just too often over the years. What the hell are your competitors to do with your code on their hardware? Except your name is Steve The Maniac of Cupertino. Of course.
France Musique.
They have exactly what I'm looking for, with lots of not-necessarily-on-the-shelf, mostly classical music
http://mp3.live.tv-radio.com/francemusique/all/francemusique-32k.mp3
There is also a high-quality stream; but my place of work has a lousy connection, and so has my ISP.
YMMV
Yep. Interesting article, very interesting. Unfortunately, as I can see, by making it the all-encompassing round-up, the author also somewhat disqualified. Which is very sad, since what was brought up about publication, sponsoring, fairness, are all topics that need urgent attention. The tertiary education system is broken.
But in the end, I lost the earlier interest to buy, or even read, the book. As someone who is in a similar position (teaching in a university), I can only laugh about sentences like "I say, 'I make them good.' Every student is capable of college."
Just think of the implied logic: A person who has been failed by parents, or society or school, whatever, in his/her first 20 years, and joins university at the age of around 20, barely able to do basic arithmetics, no chance to express herself in a consistent stream of thoughts, or subsequent sentences in writing. And then someone comes waltzing along, reversing all damage done in a course at a tertiary institution. Maybe in a single course, in a single semester. My only reaction could be, to doubt the second coming.
I don't see how anyone can think that this patent is as broad as the /. blurb, the TechDirt article, or the lawsuit PR make it out to be
You're simply too technical-minded. The legal standing is, that the CLAIMS are what counts; not the description. Though the rule is, that 'the claims need to be seen in the light of the description'; it is not the other way round: It is not that the description is read in the light of the claims. Though that's what you do in your post.
I suggest you go back to the document and read (independent) claim no.1. That is what the patent owner refers to when they sue for litigation. The only way around it, is to find a document of prior art that exactly describes the content of the claim(s), published before the priority/filing date.
True. Alas, this decision is still considered as one of the turning points - if not the turning point - in the handling of software patents. If you read the decision (I did several years ago) it turns out to be wrongly worded, and those who did word it, later on regretted it partially.
Curing rubber using a specific algorithm was known, and the application implemented the same in a computer.
Since it was a Supreme Court decision, it was taken (maybe overly) as gauge to measure future cases, and the ambiguity in the wording was taken as precursor to slip in software patents.
Since then, thousands of software patents have been granted. And if you happen to be a lay person in the field, you need to be aware of the fact, that the Supreme Court has no more say about future cases and future interpretation of their own reasoning. And since the big guns of the world were happy - if not keen - about the state of affairs, nobody had any interest, or funds, to bring it up to that level of jurisdiction again.
Once the case law was established - possibly on a misinterpretation of that decision - subsequent decisions had to be based on the case law as established.
While we might differ on opinion on laches, and not all too much, could we agree that future royalties are still in the offing, once procedures are commencing?
I would not know why, as a proprietor of a legal right, my decision to pursue this right would be adversely affected by earlier lenience.
If this was the case, Microsoft had no issue in claiming infringement on the famous 235 (or so) intellectual property issues in the Linux kernel alone.
I for one take it, that - despite of limited damages - they could still (try to) ascertain their rights by a mere cease and desist. Or asking for royalties, eventually effectively closing down some kernel features.
No?
So, if you grant someone access to your encrypted wireless network, the person you granted access to can access data on that network? Who would have thunk it?
Is that 'data' in your sentence or 'encrypted data'?
Is that 'data' in your sentence or 'keys'?
Is there not some rule that says you cant just sit there for all that time until making an infringement claim?
While this is true; by the way with most legal proceedings; it is in practice a no-go. Who is to prove that you were aware of the implied infringement years ago? You could have been travelling, sick, bringing up the kids, and whatnot. Being late will severely restrict the damages; but severely restricting actual damages of tens or hundreds of millions will still result at your point 4/.
Forfeiting all your rights would probably require that the defendants can prove malicious intent.
Procmail has been filtering email since 1990. Proving prior art on scanning a message for spam filtering should not be difficult.
But that's not what is claimed. Claimed is sender context information from an external reference.
1): no. That's quite enough; not to me, but for 'them'.
2): yes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_v._Diehr was the turning point.
Everyone knows this; and one way or another in these sicko days of ours, one simply has to make the headlines to grab attention; followed by get-rich-quick.
Fine. Let them try. I wished, though, some clever chap in Slashdot would have vetted the whole lot sufficiently, to dump it where it belongs: into the trash-bin.
Here is why: Because it actually is an attack. An attack that works for dumbos only. For people, who ought not legally be allowed to buy an access point or whatnot.
Here is the attack: assume router XYZ by default comes with username 'root' and password '12345'. The same router, as default or after reset, offers dhcp in 192.168.1.0/24, with 192.168.1.1 as gateway address. Then, following the trick, some 192.168.1.0/24-address becomes available on the outside (WAN). So when you blindly send 'root' and '12345' to 192.168.1.1 (to the box), from the outside, you're in.
As I said, yes, it is an attack. But for any sane setup it will fail miserably, because you have changed the internal network; and most of all, you changed at least the password.
I dunno, and haven't tried - because I have better things to do with my time - if any of those spoofing-filters that simply drop RFC1918-compliant addresses on the WAN-side would also fail the proposed attack, despite of default network, username and default password.
Shakespeare would probably have called this 'much ado about peanuts'. And as far as I am concerned, anyone who actually is vulnerable, should be slapped with a court order restricting him or her from touching, buying, setting up or administrating any network equipment until further notice, including home networks.
Spot on, absolutely. If I had, I gave you 6 out of 5 mod points.
People might be offended, but this is the precise description of what is going on; and where the trouble (or chances?) brew.
Oh, by the way, I'd reduce your 6 mod points to 4; for the 'dictator' as a need. We have one, and as far as I can make out,there is no such thing on OpenBSD as what OP asks for.
It is on flash memory, and has USB ports, so I don't see any reason why you simply couldn't put on your ARM distro of choice.
I do. It is MIPS.
Since you post AC, I can't give you mod points.
But your observation is fine, and important. This is a serious bug: One must not be able to install a distro into what cannot boot up.
File this bug for all of us, please!
... a tad late. :( ); these days thanks to SUN Microsystems (anyone remembers??) I fire up my Virtualbox, and chances are, the application works.
While I was fiddling with some Windows applications over the last 10 years, to make them work in wine (not too high a success rate,
Has one made some comparison of speed, resource usage, of major applications between running in wine and running in Virtualbox? Google has a few hits, though of old age.