it's quite obvious, even to the law clerks in my firm
Please don't dis your clerks. Lawyers may may manipulative, jurors may be duped, judges may be prejudiced, and clerks may be wanabe thickos, but none of these are axiomotic. Lawyers might also be principled, jurors shrewd, judges wise, and clerks knowledgable. I bet you would kill for a clerk like PJ at Groklaw, that is if you don't already have one of that quality.
I agree that this case looks straight forward, but if it goes wrong I bet it ain't the clerk's fault.
No Linux install will be as easy as a an OS X install, because PC's have such a range of hardware compared to Mac's. That said SUSE is quick and easy, if you get it wrong first time just try again, after all it's a learning experience. Make sure you set the BIOS to allow writing to the boot sector, that gotcha has been the my single biggest source of free beer from clueful Windows users making the switch to Linux.
Precident forms law in England and Wales, but not Scotland (Scots Law is akin to most European systems in that regard), I'm not sure how the system works in Northern Ireland.
Likewise, the dutch interpretation has decided that ftp site indexing or whatever the site does is currently on the "ok" side of the tipping point. however, contentholders may come back after some period of time and try to make a case that "you know, things have really changed--this has led to significant erosion of our copyrights and we ask the court again to consider this as de facto infringement because we have x, y, and z evidence collected in the interim now" and the court may re-examine it.
No the judge ruled that such acts are not covered by copyright laws because they do not involve copying. It's got nothing to do with fair use.
OK, but how would you fix this? OK, some dipshit is a troll... I don't think it's fair to expect mods to examine his history and make a judgement call on every poster they look at.
Why not, moderators only get five mod points at a time. They're not asked to make a judgement on every post, just five. Of course the fact that regular viewers of slashdot are penalised and don't get mod points means that points go to those that neither have the time do so, nor the experience to recognise the trolls.
The mods messed up, other mods caught it... check and balances and all that shit.
It's not a case of mods messing up, such posts are regularly made from that account and always modded up before being modded down to -1. A clear indication that some people get a lot of mod points which they use to abuse the system, and that such abuse can continue over a period. If that's not a sign that the system is broken I don't know what is.
Now, there is something to be said for checking a poster's history before responding (to avoid said trolls), but even that it tough to trust, given that any number of valid opinions (against the quasi-groupthink around here) can get you moderated troll...Sorry I don't buy that one, it's a regular claim by trolls, but if you bother to check posts that go against the supposed group think are modded up more than those that go against. Though the modding in Mac stories is clearly coordinated.
You would have a point if there had not been three +1 insightful mods before it got modded down, and that such mods were not a regular feature for such posts from that account.
How the fuck does this get modded insightful, a lame troll comment with a link to the "hey everybody I'm looking at gay porn" site. Come on Taco fix the moderation system, because at the moment slashdot is fucked, and yes I fully expect to get bitch slapped for daring to point out the obvious.
Did you read the list of some of the artists they lost contact details for, they included long forgotten one hit wonders like "David Bowie, Dolly Parton, Harry Belafonte, Liza Minnelli, Dave Matthews, Sean Combs and Gloria Estefan". Now if you believe they couldn't contact these people then you'll believe anything. It's just a typical out of court where the guilty party pays up and in return get to deny all blame i.e. the RIAA are good guys stuff in document is only for the consumption of the legal system and fools.
I don't think Microsoft has ever released a patch to the Windows kernel via Windows Update. Can anyone confirm this?
No, but I can disconfirm it. All kernels will have exploits due to their complexity, that's forgivable even when it's Microsoft. What annoys is their willful bad practise in ignoring known dangers such as program and data separation.
Window Management in OS X is arguably far superior to X, currently though the gap is narrowing.
That makes no sense to me. If your talking about about the desktop environments then I agree; if your talking about the services made available for a window manager to use then I'm not qualified to comment, but if your talking about the ability to organise windows to maximise productivity offered by the respective window managers then it's my turn to call bullshit. Multiple desktops offer an elegant and effective solution to grouping windows round a task. They allow you to switch between such groups quickly and to switch within these groups without concern to what else may be happening on the machine at the time. They are a great way to organise your work, I'm mystified as to why both Apple and Microsoft have not seen fit to put such capabilities into their window managers, and no expose doesn't come close to providing an adequate solution.
The Gimp isn't the best of candidates for porting to OS X anyway, the interface is built round the assumption that you have a three button mouse. Yes I know that you can have such mice on a Mac, but it's not the standard and any cludges to fit the Gimp to one button operation are going to be extremely panful.
or worse arrogantly denouncing the OS Window Management and not the application design.
The Gimp is fine in the environment it was designed for. It's a poor marriage for a Mac wich in the relevant aspects is less feature rich than that available in X. Since OS X is supposed to be able to run X applications but in this case fails to provide the services needed to use a well designed application I'd say the fault lies with Apple.
I like your attitude, if I were a hardcore graphics man that's the kind of setup I would go for. I'm not and the Gimp is sufficient for 90% of what graphics work I do need to do, if it wasn't I'd add a Mac to my setup in an instant. Zealotry and cost be damned, if you need a tool to do a job then get the tool you need.
*cough* no I haven't. I've used both under Windows and the Gimp is a royal pain there, though I find the interface rocks in X. From what I've used of OS X I can't imagine the Gimp interface would work well with it. How does Photoshop solve the problem of multiple windows when there is a clutter of other applications running?
Ok troll I'll bight, the reason that using the Gimp in OS X or in Windows is a bad idea is that in both cases the window management sucks. The Gimp is designed to take advantage of the capabilities of the typical window manager under X. The idea is that you open a fresh desktop for the gimp and any other programs that you are using to work on the image/files with, and use the window manager to switch between windows. When you switch to another task you switch desktops. Yes I know that there is a powertoy for virtual desktops in Windows, but it is a poor implementation of the idea.
This way of working allows for a much more flexible way of placing windows than the monolithic interface of Photoshop and your typical IDE. So the Gimp interface is great for Unix users but sucks for Windows and Mac users. Similarly the Photoshop interface is great for Windows and Mac users, but gets in the would get in the way for Unix users.
Sorry I didn't explain myself very clearly. If you take your hand and wrest the heel at the edge of a desk and allow your elbow to drop then you'll notice that your arm is in a comfortable position. Your elbow is at your side and there is no strain on your shoulder, also your wrist is bent slightly forward like the way we're supposed to type. With a very small mouse you can put your hand in the correct this position and control it with only your fingers. With larger mice I find either my wrist is bent back (very bad), or my elbow is raised very high and there is strain on my shoulder. Of course stopping using a mouse might be preferable, but the poster I was responding to prefers a mouse.
Also I wasn't to specialist ergonomic mice but just the more expensive ones that are usually one handed and frequently claimed to be ergonomic as part of the sales spiel. I suspect they're about as ergonomic as the so called achilles heel protectors on training shoes which are there because they look good, but actually do a lot of damage.
You can also try a very small mouse, the type you get for use with laptops. They allow to rest the heel of your hand on the desk and move them between pinkie and thumb so that you don't need to move your wrist or shoulder. Personally I find the huge things shaped to fit your hand and advertised as ergonomic to be anything but.
If you've got nothing to hide, then why worry about it, and if you've got something to hide, then it's something you're just gonna have to deal with.
Who says I've got nothing to hide, and who says it's the police I wish to hide from. I could be a battered wife who wants to adopt a new identity, or I could be a witness to a crime that criminals wish to intimidate. Organised criminals are going to love these things because it will make tracking their victims so much easier. I bet loan sharks will now remove them from people, as collateral. Stand back and watch identity theft soar.
You can't stick a EULA on a GPL'd piece of software, at least not one that adds to or subtracts from the GPL. All the author is saying in the case you describe is you are welcome to use this at your own risk, that's just a notice not a contract.
Let's face it EULA's are a crock of shit quasi legalese masquerading as contracts hiding the description of what the software does in such a document hardly qualifies as disclosure. I don't read EULA's because I don't agree to them, and no having to click a button to continue the installation of software I've bought and paid for doesn't signify acceptance.
Finally I don't expect libre software to be exempt from having to behave as described, a trojan is a trojan end of story. GPL'd spyware should be illegal too, do you think a virus writer would get off in court because the virus was FOSS. There is a world of difference between buggy code and malicous code. Incompetence is forgivable but capriciousness is not. All that FOSS contibutors ask is that they not be held liable for being less than perfect, Gator try and indemnify themselves from attacking peoples' machines. Big difference, and not a subtle one at that.
If the EULA on a GPL application absolves the author of being held responsible for any damages that his program causes, how is that any different from a Microsoft or Gator EULA that says the same thing? You are going to find that opening this can of worms releases a sword that cuts both ways.
The GPL is not a EULA it is a license to distribute the software and places no restrictions on the end user. Secondly there is a world of difference between saying feel free to use this if you want but I am not responsible for any unintended consequences and saying thankyou for your purchase but I absolve myself of any legal responsibility regarding fitness for purpose that the law imposes upon me as a vendor. In the case of spyware there problems are not of unintended consequences but of deliberate deception and malicious intent. I see no similarity between the situations you describe.
I was just responding to seeing a mix of technical(but non-Linux experienced) & non-technical people in the organization doing Bad Things(TM). When said things were pointed out to them, they requested a do's&don't document, which I was elated to see them ask for.
I think I now understand why your users have root, at least for their own machines. It's still a mistake, at least for the non technical users. One of the great things about Linux is that a machine with a broadband connection can be administered and updated remotely via a ssh pipe. If broadband isn't available to all users, burn the updates to a cd and post them out. All the user has to do is put the disc in the tray and close it, the remote admin can then update the machine and even reboot it if necessary.
Slashdot Mirror
to some one skilled in the art.
Yes but in practice the art is that of being a patent lawyer, and the skill is that of being deliberately obtuse.
it's quite obvious, even to the law clerks in my firm
Please don't dis your clerks. Lawyers may may manipulative, jurors may be duped, judges may be prejudiced, and clerks may be wanabe thickos, but none of these are axiomotic. Lawyers might also be principled, jurors shrewd, judges wise, and clerks knowledgable. I bet you would kill for a clerk like PJ at Groklaw, that is if you don't already have one of that quality.
I agree that this case looks straight forward, but if it goes wrong I bet it ain't the clerk's fault.
No Linux install will be as easy as a an OS X install, because PC's have such a range of hardware compared to Mac's. That said SUSE is quick and easy, if you get it wrong first time just try again, after all it's a learning experience. Make sure you set the BIOS to allow writing to the boot sector, that gotcha has been the my single biggest source of free beer from clueful Windows users making the switch to Linux.
(except GB?)
Precident forms law in England and Wales, but not Scotland (Scots Law is akin to most European systems in that regard), I'm not sure how the system works in Northern Ireland.
Likewise, the dutch interpretation has decided that ftp site indexing or whatever the site does is currently on the "ok" side of the tipping point. however, contentholders may come back after some period of time and try to make a case that "you know, things have really changed--this has led to significant erosion of our copyrights and we ask the court again to consider this as de facto infringement because we have x, y, and z evidence collected in the interim now" and the court may re-examine it.
No the judge ruled that such acts are not covered by copyright laws because they do not involve copying. It's got nothing to do with fair use.
It's 'tis 'tisn't it, but its his or was.
OK, but how would you fix this? OK, some dipshit is a troll... I don't think it's fair to expect mods to examine his history and make a judgement call on every poster they look at.
Why not, moderators only get five mod points at a time. They're not asked to make a judgement on every post, just five. Of course the fact that regular viewers of slashdot are penalised and don't get mod points means that points go to those that neither have the time do so, nor the experience to recognise the trolls.
The mods messed up, other mods caught it... check and balances and all that shit.
It's not a case of mods messing up, such posts are regularly made from that account and always modded up before being modded down to -1. A clear indication that some people get a lot of mod points which they use to abuse the system, and that such abuse can continue over a period. If that's not a sign that the system is broken I don't know what is.
Now, there is something to be said for checking a poster's history before responding (to avoid said trolls), but even that it tough to trust, given that any number of valid opinions (against the quasi-groupthink around here) can get you moderated troll... Sorry I don't buy that one, it's a regular claim by trolls, but if you bother to check posts that go against the supposed group think are modded up more than those that go against. Though the modding in Mac stories is clearly coordinated.
You would have a point if there had not been three +1 insightful mods before it got modded down, and that such mods were not a regular feature for such posts from that account.
How the fuck does this get modded insightful, a lame troll comment with a link to the "hey everybody I'm looking at gay porn" site. Come on Taco fix the moderation system, because at the moment slashdot is fucked, and yes I fully expect to get bitch slapped for daring to point out the obvious.
and there was me thinking Kirkcaldy was in Fife.
Was I the only one who on reading the article title thought - great at last a chance to replace my pox marked old exterior?
Did you read the list of some of the artists they lost contact details for, they included long forgotten one hit wonders like "David Bowie, Dolly Parton, Harry Belafonte, Liza Minnelli, Dave Matthews, Sean Combs and Gloria Estefan". Now if you believe they couldn't contact these people then you'll believe anything. It's just a typical out of court where the guilty party pays up and in return get to deny all blame i.e. the RIAA are good guys stuff in document is only for the consumption of the legal system and fools.
I don't think Microsoft has ever released a patch to the Windows kernel via Windows Update. Can anyone confirm this?
No, but I can disconfirm it. All kernels will have exploits due to their complexity, that's forgivable even when it's Microsoft. What annoys is their willful bad practise in ignoring known dangers such as program and data separation.
Window Management in OS X is arguably far superior to X, currently though the gap is narrowing.
That makes no sense to me. If your talking about about the desktop environments then I agree; if your talking about the services made available for a window manager to use then I'm not qualified to comment, but if your talking about the ability to organise windows to maximise productivity offered by the respective window managers then it's my turn to call bullshit. Multiple desktops offer an elegant and effective solution to grouping windows round a task. They allow you to switch between such groups quickly and to switch within these groups without concern to what else may be happening on the machine at the time. They are a great way to organise your work, I'm mystified as to why both Apple and Microsoft have not seen fit to put such capabilities into their window managers, and no expose doesn't come close to providing an adequate solution.
The Gimp isn't the best of candidates for porting to OS X anyway, the interface is built round the assumption that you have a three button mouse. Yes I know that you can have such mice on a Mac, but it's not the standard and any cludges to fit the Gimp to one button operation are going to be extremely panful.
or worse arrogantly denouncing the OS Window Management and not the application design.
The Gimp is fine in the environment it was designed for. It's a poor marriage for a Mac wich in the relevant aspects is less feature rich than that available in X. Since OS X is supposed to be able to run X applications but in this case fails to provide the services needed to use a well designed application I'd say the fault lies with Apple.
I like your attitude, if I were a hardcore graphics man that's the kind of setup I would go for. I'm not and the Gimp is sufficient for 90% of what graphics work I do need to do, if it wasn't I'd add a Mac to my setup in an instant. Zealotry and cost be damned, if you need a tool to do a job then get the tool you need.
*cough* no I haven't. I've used both under Windows and the Gimp is a royal pain there, though I find the interface rocks in X. From what I've used of OS X I can't imagine the Gimp interface would work well with it. How does Photoshop solve the problem of multiple windows when there is a clutter of other applications running?
Ok troll I'll bight, the reason that using the Gimp in OS X or in Windows is a bad idea is that in both cases the window management sucks. The Gimp is designed to take advantage of the capabilities of the typical window manager under X. The idea is that you open a fresh desktop for the gimp and any other programs that you are using to work on the image/files with, and use the window manager to switch between windows. When you switch to another task you switch desktops. Yes I know that there is a powertoy for virtual desktops in Windows, but it is a poor implementation of the idea.
This way of working allows for a much more flexible way of placing windows than the monolithic interface of Photoshop and your typical IDE. So the Gimp interface is great for Unix users but sucks for Windows and Mac users. Similarly the Photoshop interface is great for Windows and Mac users, but gets in the would get in the way for Unix users.
Aren't you counfounding requirements with specification? You can have a requirements specification and a design specification.
Sorry I didn't explain myself very clearly. If you take your hand and wrest the heel at the edge of a desk and allow your elbow to drop then you'll notice that your arm is in a comfortable position. Your elbow is at your side and there is no strain on your shoulder, also your wrist is bent slightly forward like the way we're supposed to type. With a very small mouse you can put your hand in the correct this position and control it with only your fingers. With larger mice I find either my wrist is bent back (very bad), or my elbow is raised very high and there is strain on my shoulder. Of course stopping using a mouse might be preferable, but the poster I was responding to prefers a mouse.
Also I wasn't to specialist ergonomic mice but just the more expensive ones that are usually one handed and frequently claimed to be ergonomic as part of the sales spiel. I suspect they're about as ergonomic as the so called achilles heel protectors on training shoes which are there because they look good, but actually do a lot of damage.
You can also try a very small mouse, the type you get for use with laptops. They allow to rest the heel of your hand on the desk and move them between pinkie and thumb so that you don't need to move your wrist or shoulder. Personally I find the huge things shaped to fit your hand and advertised as ergonomic to be anything but.
Fingerprint evidence has already been discredited in Scotland.
If you've got nothing to hide, then why worry about it, and if you've got something to hide, then it's something you're just gonna have to deal with.
Who says I've got nothing to hide, and who says it's the police I wish to hide from. I could be a battered wife who wants to adopt a new identity, or I could be a witness to a crime that criminals wish to intimidate. Organised criminals are going to love these things because it will make tracking their victims so much easier. I bet loan sharks will now remove them from people, as collateral. Stand back and watch identity theft soar.
You can't stick a EULA on a GPL'd piece of software, at least not one that adds to or subtracts from the GPL. All the author is saying in the case you describe is you are welcome to use this at your own risk, that's just a notice not a contract. Let's face it EULA's are a crock of shit quasi legalese masquerading as contracts hiding the description of what the software does in such a document hardly qualifies as disclosure. I don't read EULA's because I don't agree to them, and no having to click a button to continue the installation of software I've bought and paid for doesn't signify acceptance. Finally I don't expect libre software to be exempt from having to behave as described, a trojan is a trojan end of story. GPL'd spyware should be illegal too, do you think a virus writer would get off in court because the virus was FOSS. There is a world of difference between buggy code and malicous code. Incompetence is forgivable but capriciousness is not. All that FOSS contibutors ask is that they not be held liable for being less than perfect, Gator try and indemnify themselves from attacking peoples' machines. Big difference, and not a subtle one at that.
If the EULA on a GPL application absolves the author of being held responsible for any damages that his program causes, how is that any different from a Microsoft or Gator EULA that says the same thing? You are going to find that opening this can of worms releases a sword that cuts both ways.
The GPL is not a EULA it is a license to distribute the software and places no restrictions on the end user. Secondly there is a world of difference between saying feel free to use this if you want but I am not responsible for any unintended consequences and saying thankyou for your purchase but I absolve myself of any legal responsibility regarding fitness for purpose that the law imposes upon me as a vendor. In the case of spyware there problems are not of unintended consequences but of deliberate deception and malicious intent. I see no similarity between the situations you describe.
I was just responding to seeing a mix of technical(but non-Linux experienced) & non-technical people in the organization doing Bad Things(TM). When said things were pointed out to them, they requested a do's&don't document, which I was elated to see them ask for.
I think I now understand why your users have root, at least for their own machines. It's still a mistake, at least for the non technical users. One of the great things about Linux is that a machine with a broadband connection can be administered and updated remotely via a ssh pipe. If broadband isn't available to all users, burn the updates to a cd and post them out. All the user has to do is put the disc in the tray and close it, the remote admin can then update the machine and even reboot it if necessary.