In the article, focus on the description of the "Information Rights Management" tools. They constitute "just another application", don't they? By cloning the operability of those tools, and adding them to competing Office packages, you allow restricted files to be open-able in accordance with Microsoft's rules, based on permissions. I do think that the original notions of specific methods being copyrightable while ideas are not, remains true, even with respect to the DCMA.
If SCO really has that quantity of evidence against Linux, they should be able to let the community know about just one truly illegally incorporated item, while saving the rest for the courtroom. Since they refuse to reveal just one, we might as well assume they actually have none, and will consequently deserve much worse than dinky fines.
If I recall right, in that movie a con artist explained what he did as "selling dreams". In the software industry, such dreams are vaporware, and trying to collect money for something that doesn't match the hype is perilously close to con-artisianship. What law covers such things, that we can use to prosecute those developers who claim their software will let you do thus-and-so, but the EULA says they are not liable when it fails to deliver?
"It may be a case of 'do as we say, not as we do' over at the Santa Cruz Operation. The Netcraft statistics meter says that for the last year, SCO's web site has been served by Apache on Linux."
Has anyone noticed that if you check NetCraft for microsoft.com, it says that they are running IIS on Linux? I realize that a previous article here indicated that Windows Update was running on Linux for a time, but I'm talking about the main Microsoft site here!
I also have sent off a message or two to various people, trying to ensure that all the various data items that come up, each of which refutes SCO claims in some manner, get brought together when the court case starts.
For example, in response to a prior claim that the copyright law prevents the GPL from allowing users to make multiple copies, I wrote:
There is an obvious flaw in that reasoning. It focusses on the the public, and not on the copyright holder. A copyright holder decides how a work is to be released, after all, and it is perfectly legal for a copyright holder to release something to the Public Domain, in which case everyone can make unlimited copies. So, the actual relevant fact is the copyright holder has the right to decide on any degree of release between public domain and not-at-all. Therefore, when the copyright holder releases something under the GPL, the copyright holder has decided to accept the GPL's details for a release. In such case the copyright holder is giving the public the right to make unlimited copies, which fact does NOT violate the copyright law.
"The GPL allows unlimited copies, the copyright law allows one. Therefore, the GPL is invalid. The copyright law, in giving consumers the right to make one backup of their software without any permission from the copyright holder, outlaws any contractual agreement that allows users to make more than one copy."
There is an obvious flaw in the above reasoning. It focusses on the the public, and not on the copyright holder. A copyright holder decides how a work is to be released, after all, and it is perfectly legal for a copyright holder to release something to the Public Domain. In actual fact the copyright holder has the right to decide on any degree of release between public domain and not-at-all. So, when the copyright holder releases something under the GPL, the copyright holder has decided to accept the GPL's details for a release. In such case the copyright holder is giving the public the right to make unlimited copies, which fact does NOT violate the copyright law.
It seems to me that if they can find out how those two sets of genes get along with each other in a chimera, then that knowledge might lead to better immune-response-suppression techniques, during organ transplants!
No not the article, THIS: If protons can sometimes seem invisible to electrons and neutrons, then what about also sometimes invisible to other protons? If yes, then can that "sometimes" finally explain both the positive and the negative Cold Fusion experiments?
This problem can be fixed by exporting the Labor Unions, so that they encourage everyone everywhere to demand the same high pay. Even without unions, this will happen, only more slowly. Remember when Japanese cars were lots cheaper than American? The obvious reason was the lower cost of labor in Japan. Well, these days Japanese auto workers make about the same or even more than American auto workers. Any difference in cost of autos these days can be traced to greater usage of robotics in Japan. So, I'm convinced that globalization will eventually even out the cost of labor. But it sure is going to hurt until it happens!
If the only way to get data in or out of the system is via connection to outside servers, then I wouldn't want to own one. I want joysticks and a keyboard, at least, to input my data!
It's my understanding that Corel Linux was based on Debian. Rumor has it that Microsoft was so afraid that they bought up a bunch of Corel shares and made the company cease and desist. More recent rumor has it that Microsoft has now dumped Corel, not unlike rats leaving a sinking ship. BUT-- Corel still has Name Recognition. Without Microsoft to say them nay, why shouldn't Corel distribute Debian Linux once again?
I think that most of those idle moble units will be switched off, or be resting in a receive-only mode, to save battery power. That means the linkages you envision aren't likely to be as available as you want.
Personally, I've been using QWERTY keyboards since manual-typewriter days of about 1970. I don't claim to be a super-fast typist (maybe 40wpm), but I do think that one's ATTITUDE toward key-pounding is more important than the actual key-pounding. For example, Isaac Asimov claimed to type 90wpm, and in order to churn out 300+ books across maybe 50 years, you can bet he spent most of it typing -- and he claimed to actually enjoy all that key-pounding. As for myself, for 30-odd years I've generally typed up stuff I wanted to type (mostly computer programs since 1980). I suspect that most people with carpal tunnel have spent years doing work they'd rather not be doing. Their subconscious systems are causing their hands to fail, to give them an excuse to do some other work. But since it's subconscious, they don't realize it -- and the one-track subconscious mind certainly doesn't think about how they'll probably need their hands for that other work....
No, the whole development process involves lots of randomly-generated code being run, after which the best-performing chunks are gathered together, randomly modified umpteen different ways, ALL of which are re-run. After some number of iterations, the result is distributed as the latest driver. It is already known that genetic algorithm development can lead to things that work great, but nobody can understand how (especially with respect to hardware device development). Here is a link to a whole bunch of papers on the topic.
Some time ago I had read something to the effect that Nvidia was using "genetic algorithm generation" procedures, to improve its drivers. If so, then it may be possible that the driver cheats just happened as a result of that process, and not as a result of deliberation.
Am I mistaken?
Hasn't.NET stuff been advertised/promoted by Microsoft for more than a year prior to its submission of its patent application? If so, the patent cannot be granted! The rules clearly state that an inventor only has a year, after disclosing an idea to the public, to apply for a patent on it. It seems to me that I've been hearing about.NET stuff for three years or so....
Missing Correlation
on
Due Diligence?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
How sure are you the the administrators of the servers you sampled are also Slashdot readers? While certainly some laziness could explain your statistics, what of good old-fashioned lack of communcations? Just because a message warning about a security hole was sent out, doesn't mean it got received, or even read in a timely manner. Besides, maybe most of those administrators were taking three-week vacations just then!
Having experienced the early personal computer era, in which hard disks were ten or twenty times less reliable than they are today, I formed a major dislike of the things, and retain most of that today. So here is a bit of boring history: Back when I built myself a '486 computer, I rigged it up as a SCSI system that had NO hard disk. Instead it has a 640MB magneto-optical removable-cartridge drive. Data retention is guaranteed for a long long time, and you don't lose it if the drive dies. Don't laugh at the puniness of only 640MB; this machine is only used for DOS and Windows 3.1 stuff, and that amount of capacity is plenty. Also, this machine can be booted either directly to the MO disk (the SCSI controller unfortunately limits me to using 540MB disks if I do that), or it can be booted via floppy disk, to load the special drivers that allows the controller to work with 640MB disks. So, one of my 540MB MO disks contains copies of all my boot-floppy data. As long as they make ordinary 3.5" floppies (and as long as I keep a bunch of new floppies in cold storage), I will have access to all the data that that machine ever processed.
More recently, a Windows 98 machine I built has both an ordinary hard disk and a magneto-optical drive. I install operating-system stuff and applications from CD-ROM to the hard disk, but I arrange for all the data-saves to go to a tree of directories located on the MO disk. If the hard drive dies -- which it did a couple months ago! -- I just get a new one and reinstall everything, but my data still exists. Also more modern MO drives can put a few gigabytes on a disk these days, which is fine for almost everything except extreme graphics work. I don't happen to do that kind of work, so it all works fine for me.
In closing I might mention that that computer was dual-boot with BeOS, and BeOS had no problem using the MO drive/disks. Linux is another story, however. I won't be happy with Linux until it has full driver support for all MO drives.
It seems to me that this is a situation just begging for the Govt. to mandate that all the auto manufacturers should get together to create a standardized list of error codes, that they all use, and everyone who wants to know can find out the codes and their meanings. Note that the Govt. should NOT specify the codes; the Govt. is usually too stupid/ignorant to do something like that right. The industry, however, knows what kinds of codes are needed, and their relative importance, and so it is the industry that should create the list (preferably open-ended, for future expansion).
OK, so we start off with a nice open standard, that everybody embraces. How long after that will Microsoft introduce some proprietary enhancements that only work with Windows, and announces various copyrights, patents and EULAs that forbid cloning those enhancements for any other OS?
When I put together a new computer for myself, I have a tendency to replace the 12-volt case fan(s) with 120-volt fans. Such are widely available, and are the same size (except thicker), so they fit the mounting holes. The perceived advantage is the reduced load on the 12V regulator in the power supply, so that maybe it will run a bit cooler and last a bit longer.
The mod has to be done carefully, of course. I might recommend Radio Shack Cat. No. 274-222 (2-conductor male/female Molded Nylon Connector Pair) as a means of bringing 120V from inside the PSU to inside the main computer case, so that the power is available for the 120V fan(s). Yes, this means the fans will run all the time, unless you have either provided an additional switch to the PSU, or tapped the switched 120V line inside the PSU.
Slashdot Mirror
In the article, focus on the description of the "Information Rights Management" tools. They constitute "just another application", don't they? By cloning the operability of those tools, and adding them to competing Office packages, you allow restricted files to be open-able in accordance with Microsoft's rules, based on permissions. I do think that the original notions of specific methods being copyrightable while ideas are not, remains true, even with respect to the DCMA.
If SCO really has that quantity of evidence against Linux, they should be able to let the community know about just one truly illegally incorporated item, while saving the rest for the courtroom. Since they refuse to reveal just one, we might as well assume they actually have none, and will consequently deserve much worse than dinky fines.
If I recall right, in that movie a con artist explained what he did as "selling dreams". In the software industry, such dreams are vaporware, and trying to collect money for something that doesn't match the hype is perilously close to con-artisianship. What law covers such things, that we can use to prosecute those developers who claim their software will let you do thus-and-so, but the EULA says they are not liable when it fails to deliver?
"It may be a case of 'do as we say, not as we do' over at the Santa Cruz Operation. The Netcraft statistics meter says that for the last year, SCO's web site has been served by Apache on Linux."
Has anyone noticed that if you check NetCraft for microsoft.com, it says that they are running IIS on Linux? I realize that a previous article here indicated that Windows Update was running on Linux for a time, but I'm talking about the main Microsoft site here!
I also have sent off a message or two to various people, trying to ensure that all the various data items that come up, each of which refutes SCO claims in some manner, get brought together when the court case starts.
For example, in response to a prior claim that the copyright law prevents the GPL from allowing users to make multiple copies, I wrote:
There is an obvious flaw in that reasoning. It focusses on the the public, and not on the copyright holder. A copyright holder decides how a work is to be released, after all, and it is perfectly legal for a copyright holder to release something to the Public Domain, in which case everyone can make unlimited copies. So, the actual relevant fact is the copyright holder has the right to decide on any degree of release between public domain and not-at-all. Therefore, when the copyright holder releases something under the GPL, the copyright holder has decided to accept the GPL's details for a release. In such case the copyright holder is giving the public the right to make unlimited copies, which fact does NOT violate the copyright law.
2048x1152 DLP (front projection)
1280x720 DLP (rear projection)
Flat CRT (still under development)
Inorganic Electroluminescent (still under development)
Electrostatics & Suspension (ambient light, still working on color)
Electrostatics & Revolution (ambient light, still working on color)
Electrostatics & Interference (ambient light, no plans for larger modules!?!?)
"The GPL allows unlimited copies, the copyright law allows one. Therefore, the GPL is invalid. The copyright law, in giving consumers the right to make one backup of their software without any permission from the copyright holder, outlaws any contractual agreement that allows users to make more than one copy."
There is an obvious flaw in the above reasoning. It focusses on the the public, and not on the copyright holder. A copyright holder decides how a work is to be released, after all, and it is perfectly legal for a copyright holder to release something to the Public Domain. In actual fact the copyright holder has the right to decide on any degree of release between public domain and not-at-all. So, when the copyright holder releases something under the GPL, the copyright holder has decided to accept the GPL's details for a release. In such case the copyright holder is giving the public the right to make unlimited copies, which fact does NOT violate the copyright law.
Actually, while I'm not so sure about its security, the stability of QNX appears to be unquestioned. See earlier Slashdot story
It seems to me that if they can find out how those two sets of genes get along with each other in a chimera, then that knowledge might lead to better immune-response-suppression techniques, during organ transplants!
No not the article, THIS: If protons can sometimes seem invisible to electrons and neutrons, then what about also sometimes invisible to other protons? If yes, then can that "sometimes" finally explain both the positive and the negative Cold Fusion experiments?
This problem can be fixed by exporting the Labor Unions, so that they encourage everyone everywhere to demand the same high pay. Even without unions, this will happen, only more slowly. Remember when Japanese cars were lots cheaper than American? The obvious reason was the lower cost of labor in Japan. Well, these days Japanese auto workers make about the same or even more than American auto workers. Any difference in cost of autos these days can be traced to greater usage of robotics in Japan. So, I'm convinced that globalization will eventually even out the cost of labor. But it sure is going to hurt until it happens!
If the only way to get data in or out of the system is via connection to outside servers, then I wouldn't want to own one. I want joysticks and a keyboard, at least, to input my data!
Microsoft wants patent on .Net
but can't have it
It's my understanding that Corel Linux was based on Debian. Rumor has it that Microsoft was so afraid that they bought up a bunch of Corel shares and made the company cease and desist. More recent rumor has it that Microsoft has now dumped Corel, not unlike rats leaving a sinking ship. BUT-- Corel still has Name Recognition. Without Microsoft to say them nay, why shouldn't Corel distribute Debian Linux once again?
I think that most of those idle moble units will be switched off, or be resting in a receive-only mode, to save battery power. That means the linkages you envision aren't likely to be as available as you want.
Personally, I've been using QWERTY keyboards since manual-typewriter days of about 1970. I don't claim to be a super-fast typist (maybe 40wpm), but I do think that one's ATTITUDE toward key-pounding is more important than the actual key-pounding. For example, Isaac Asimov claimed to type 90wpm, and in order to churn out 300+ books across maybe 50 years, you can bet he spent most of it typing -- and he claimed to actually enjoy all that key-pounding. As for myself, for 30-odd years I've generally typed up stuff I wanted to type (mostly computer programs since 1980). I suspect that most people with carpal tunnel have spent years doing work they'd rather not be doing. Their subconscious systems are causing their hands to fail, to give them an excuse to do some other work. But since it's subconscious, they don't realize it -- and the one-track subconscious mind certainly doesn't think about how they'll probably need their hands for that other work....
No, the whole development process involves lots of randomly-generated code being run, after which the best-performing chunks are gathered together, randomly modified umpteen different ways, ALL of which are re-run. After some number of iterations, the result is distributed as the latest driver. It is already known that genetic algorithm development can lead to things that work great, but nobody can understand how (especially with respect to hardware device development). Here is a link to a whole bunch of papers on the topic.
Some time ago I had read something to the effect that Nvidia was using "genetic algorithm generation" procedures, to improve its drivers. If so, then it may be possible that the driver cheats just happened as a result of that process, and not as a result of deliberation.
Am I mistaken? Hasn't .NET stuff been advertised/promoted by Microsoft for more than a year prior to its submission of its patent application? If so, the patent cannot be granted! The rules clearly state that an inventor only has a year, after disclosing an idea to the public, to apply for a patent on it. It seems to me that I've been hearing about .NET stuff for three years or so....
How sure are you the the administrators of the servers you sampled are also Slashdot readers? While certainly some laziness could explain your statistics, what of good old-fashioned lack of communcations? Just because a message warning about a security hole was sent out, doesn't mean it got received, or even read in a timely manner. Besides, maybe most of those administrators were taking three-week vacations just then!
Having experienced the early personal computer era, in which hard disks were ten or twenty times less reliable than they are today, I formed a major dislike of the things, and retain most of that today. So here is a bit of boring history: Back when I built myself a '486 computer, I rigged it up as a SCSI system that had NO hard disk. Instead it has a 640MB magneto-optical removable-cartridge drive. Data retention is guaranteed for a long long time, and you don't lose it if the drive dies. Don't laugh at the puniness of only 640MB; this machine is only used for DOS and Windows 3.1 stuff, and that amount of capacity is plenty. Also, this machine can be booted either directly to the MO disk (the SCSI controller unfortunately limits me to using 540MB disks if I do that), or it can be booted via floppy disk, to load the special drivers that allows the controller to work with 640MB disks. So, one of my 540MB MO disks contains copies of all my boot-floppy data. As long as they make ordinary 3.5" floppies (and as long as I keep a bunch of new floppies in cold storage), I will have access to all the data that that machine ever processed. More recently, a Windows 98 machine I built has both an ordinary hard disk and a magneto-optical drive. I install operating-system stuff and applications from CD-ROM to the hard disk, but I arrange for all the data-saves to go to a tree of directories located on the MO disk. If the hard drive dies -- which it did a couple months ago! -- I just get a new one and reinstall everything, but my data still exists. Also more modern MO drives can put a few gigabytes on a disk these days, which is fine for almost everything except extreme graphics work. I don't happen to do that kind of work, so it all works fine for me. In closing I might mention that that computer was dual-boot with BeOS, and BeOS had no problem using the MO drive/disks. Linux is another story, however. I won't be happy with Linux until it has full driver support for all MO drives.
It seems to me that this is a situation just begging for the Govt. to mandate that all the auto manufacturers should get together to create a standardized list of error codes, that they all use, and everyone who wants to know can find out the codes and their meanings. Note that the Govt. should NOT specify the codes; the Govt. is usually too stupid/ignorant to do something like that right. The industry, however, knows what kinds of codes are needed, and their relative importance, and so it is the industry that should create the list (preferably open-ended, for future expansion).
OK, so we start off with a nice open standard, that everybody embraces. How long after that will Microsoft introduce some proprietary enhancements that only work with Windows, and announces various copyrights, patents and EULAs that forbid cloning those enhancements for any other OS?
When I put together a new computer for myself, I have a tendency to replace the 12-volt case fan(s) with 120-volt fans. Such are widely available, and are the same size (except thicker), so they fit the mounting holes. The perceived advantage is the reduced load on the 12V regulator in the power supply, so that maybe it will run a bit cooler and last a bit longer. The mod has to be done carefully, of course. I might recommend Radio Shack Cat. No. 274-222 (2-conductor male/female Molded Nylon Connector Pair) as a means of bringing 120V from inside the PSU to inside the main computer case, so that the power is available for the 120V fan(s). Yes, this means the fans will run all the time, unless you have either provided an additional switch to the PSU, or tapped the switched 120V line inside the PSU.