I was as pissed as you were when goatse.cx was taken down. Especially since it was a fellow australian who complained. God some of my countrymen/women are such absolute assholes.
1. He posted no proof. 2. He got modded up for making assertions which might be true, but as there is no proof, how do we know? 3. Via anecdotal evidence of my Hotmail account, n0dez's fact number 2 is wrong.
This is a legitimate problem. The thing is, lots of labels are independant, but rely on the RIAA and its ilk for distibution purposes. So while most of the money is going back to the band and the independant label, some is still going back to the RIAA. The best way to encourage not using the RIAA is ordering directly from the label itself, either via Mail Order or over the Internet.
Sorry Overly Critical Guy, oops, I mean Bonch, but in your quickfire trolling to get anyone who bashes MS, you missed the sarcasm and came out looking more idiotic than you already do. Pretty impressive.
There are lots of independant bands out there, making good music, without comprimising their integrity. There are labels, for example Peaceville, which have a rather wide distribution these days and are completely independant.
I know voting with your dollars is also is a quaint notion, but the cop-out of being made to do it by the record company is ridiculous. If they don't like it, find a record company that will not put copy-protection out there.
With honesty, you let the possibility for the exploit to be used, but you also make people aware of the fact so they can take steps to stop it from ever happening.
Sweeping it under the carpet until you have a patch ready is ridiculous reasoning. What if the exploit details get leaked, but not published?
What happens if a black hat comes across it anyway? Then you have an exploit being used that no-one knows about yet.
Full Disclosure has risks, but it allows for more corrective steps to be taken then waiting for a patch or something similar.
I used to be amused and chuckle at the posts made by you and other trolls (before the -1 comment cap hit).
Now, if you've guys have gone to regurgitating old posts and show a rather sad lack of creativity, its time you guys either tried something new, or went somewhere else. The GNAA stuff and anti-slash stuff just doesn't cut it compared to the old material.
Not quite, but this topic does bring up a interesting point.
Compression Labs were not pursuing patent royalties on this until after they were acquired by Forgent.
This has interesting implications for ownership details.
Maybe there should be some sort of restriction, or legal wall to stop this sort of behaviour is a company becomes a subsidiary of another company, or only when absorbed by a larger company that royalties become an issue.
Im not a lawyer, so I'm unaware of the in-depth specifics of the laws, but it seems to be against the original reasoning for patent laws for these sorts of things to happen.
Those restrictions are only in place due to the allowance of other rights in other parts of the GPL.
Its isn't restricive compared to copyright law, but it is restrictive compared to completely free public domain stuff. What are you comparing it against?
Actually, when I first read it, I thought you were accepting something without proof. After reading your replies, I then realized you meant it as raising the question.
You might understand it, but not everyone does. There was no need to go off at that other guy like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Your babelfish-translated german has a few spelling mistakes and lots and lots of typos. Plz fix k thx bye!
I was as pissed as you were when goatse.cx was taken down. Especially since it was a fellow australian who complained. God some of my countrymen/women are such absolute assholes.
Didn't you get the memo? Iraq is sovereign. Nothing of theirs is under American control.
Pish Posh. Must of been a typo.
You sure of that? This exploit is affecting IIS, and Bank of America runs Solaris
Take a ENGLISH COMPREHENSION LEARNING COURSE.
Repeat it a hundred times until it sinks it.
Facts about n0dez's post
1. He posted no proof.
2. He got modded up for making assertions which might be true, but as there is no proof, how do we know?
3. Via anecdotal evidence of my Hotmail account, n0dez's fact number 2 is wrong.
This is a legitimate problem. The thing is, lots of labels are independant, but rely on the RIAA and its ilk for distibution purposes. So while most of the money is going back to the band and the independant label, some is still going back to the RIAA. The best way to encourage not using the RIAA is ordering directly from the label itself, either via Mail Order or over the Internet.
Yay. Prison rape is funny, its completely justifiable!!!
You Sir, are a Moron.
Sorry Overly Critical Guy, oops, I mean Bonch, but in your quickfire trolling to get anyone who bashes MS, you missed the sarcasm and came out looking more idiotic than you already do. Pretty impressive.
But your fighting the good fight, right?
There are lots of independant bands out there, making good music, without comprimising their integrity. There are labels, for example Peaceville, which have a rather wide distribution these days and are completely independant.
I know voting with your dollars is also is a quaint notion, but the cop-out of being made to do it by the record company is ridiculous. If they don't like it, find a record company that will not put copy-protection out there.
And a extremely shitty joke, at that. Offtopic is synonymous with "-1 not funny"
Does someone have to point out everytime this guy posts that he's a troll?
He spouts inane platitudes to get Karma, than trolls with it. Move along, nothing to see.
Use your eyes and realize that he doesn't care about any source-based distro.
One's made of fire and likes eating bunny rabbits. The other is very loud and normally hunts fish.
Where the hell is 56ker fucker when we need him?
You need to take 1st year maths again, I think.
After 3 comes 4, not 1.
Are you retarded? Being Anon has nothing to do with ethical problems, fucktard.
With honesty, you let the possibility for the exploit to be used, but you also make people aware of the fact so they can take steps to stop it from ever happening.
Sweeping it under the carpet until you have a patch ready is ridiculous reasoning. What if the exploit details get leaked, but not published?
What happens if a black hat comes across it anyway? Then you have an exploit being used that no-one knows about yet.
Full Disclosure has risks, but it allows for more corrective steps to be taken then waiting for a patch or something similar.
I find it very funny that your sig is trying to correct their and there, yet you use make believe words like virii in your post.
You are such a fucking retard.
Thanks for giving me a true laugh. Its a pity no-one else noticed your sarcasm.
I used to be amused and chuckle at the posts made by you and other trolls (before the -1 comment cap hit).
Now, if you've guys have gone to regurgitating old posts and show a rather sad lack of creativity, its time you guys either tried something new, or went somewhere else. The GNAA stuff and anti-slash stuff just doesn't cut it compared to the old material.
I'm not afraid to burn some karma.
Not quite, but this topic does bring up a interesting point.
Compression Labs were not pursuing patent royalties on this until after they were acquired by Forgent.
This has interesting implications for ownership details.
Maybe there should be some sort of restriction, or legal wall to stop this sort of behaviour is a company becomes a subsidiary of another company, or only when absorbed by a larger company that royalties become an issue.
Im not a lawyer, so I'm unaware of the in-depth specifics of the laws, but it seems to be against the original reasoning for patent laws for these sorts of things to happen.
And an equal amount go to astalavista and get a crack for free. Your point?
Those restrictions are only in place due to the allowance of other rights in other parts of the GPL.
Its isn't restricive compared to copyright law, but it is restrictive compared to completely free public domain stuff. What are you comparing it against?
Actually, when I first read it, I thought you were accepting something without proof. After reading your replies, I then realized you meant it as raising the question.
You might understand it, but not everyone does. There was no need to go off at that other guy like that.