Re:Nice reading there, CowboyNeal
on
Is IRC All Bad?
·
· Score: -1
Yes, Not all of the IRC protocol is used for illegal activity. Take for example, honest conversations between young friends.
Let's face it, the article doesn't emphasize the verry legitimate use of IRC as a tunnel for communication, and that is justified. But, lets not let a bad article biases against IRC to be thought of any less a bad joke of an activity not all of us find entertaining or social. I swear, in another forum this article would be deemed the curse of the Sith from the Department of Homeland Security.
Because it's an other fucking rock. There are many fucking rocks, but not an other like this one. And this one has bunny ears! Larry Flint's dead president just turned in its crotch-grave.
If you want to help Linux' adoption, STOP posting information on the exploits! Learn from Microsoft: hide your rotten eggs on Christmas, to be found on Easter.
Michael, get a clue and stop posting this stuff. Some people have pleasure on wreaking havoc on vulnerable computers, and you are no different than a terrorist if you say otherwise.
Why bother with that hassle when the numbers of people donwloading and actually USING the linux version are so small compared with that of windows?
(*pulls pants out and looks*)
I'll have you know that We, the Linux users are by no means dismissisable as being "small." In fact, one among us is "the giver" and that trumps the flock of powdery-white-collared John Holmes wanna-bees in Redmond photoshopping pictures of theirselves. Redmond is the reason Hello.jpg exists.
So does the beowulf cluster of water striders have NUMA extensibility?
It would freak alot of geeks to see a #1 wate strider copulating with a #2 and then a #3 copulating with #2 and a #4 copulating with #3... et al continuing upto #100.
It pains my head to think of such mind-boggling computing. I feel cluster-fucked, preferably all by gorgeous non-dyke women. I hope there is enough patience that enough of me will get around before they all turn dyke. But at least they are nothing like CowboyNeal-like women; they levy.
And this post is on-topic informative; all my quotes are H20 compliant: dykes, levies, water striders, and Jesus loves you! So there!;-)
By my observation, the professor is wrong.
on
Robot Walks on Water
·
· Score: -1
For this Carnegie Mellon professor, at MIT, to proclaim that this Nano-robot has any design similarities with the Water Strider is a lie.
As I shall name it, On the surfacetension water-robot's page, it has no correlation to the design of a living Water Strider because all of this robot's "legs" are coated by a water-repelling plasting and is necessary to repel water with thousands of times more surface area of water-surface tension applied to its legs. In short terms, a living Water Strider has small follicles on its legs with an oil that simply makes the insect water-proof and it can in no way easily peirce the surface tension on the water's surface perhaps because it weighs so little. Comparing this "nano robot" to a Water Strider is like comparing a cannon ball on a tripod with the tripod legs all horizontal pointing opposite directions.
This nano robot's weight is excessive and the fact that it is not duplicating that a Water Strider floats on the tips of its tarcel folli is no comparison. The nano robot requires all surface area of its "legs" to be in contact with the water surface. Maybe they can ask IBM to refab it down to 0.13nm?
(Slashdot, please *try* to mirror the articles on other websites; SCO especially due to all the traffic they cause. You are at liberty to customize (http://www.gnu.org/software/wget/wget.html) to ignore Robots.txt if you like; please try to help another's bandwith bill! Thanks; part 3 of 4;)
In addition to Rule 37(b)(2), therefore, the Gupta Declaration should also be excluded from consideration on IBM's motion for summary judgment under Rule 37(c)(1). See Orjias v. Stevenson, 31 F.3d 995, 1005 (10th Cir. 1994) (affirming exclusion of testimony at trial because defendant failed adequately to respond to interrogatories); Stevens v. Deluxe Fin. Servs., Inc., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1128, 1144 n.44 (D. Kan. 2002) (excluding document from consideration on summary judgment motion because it was not provided in response to discovery requests); Go Med. Indus. Pty, Ltd. v. Inmed Corp., 300 F. Supp. 2d 1297, 1308-10 (N.D. Ga. 2003) (excluding documents and testimony from consideration on summary judgment motion because they were not disclosed in response to discovery requests).
2. In any event, SCO's purported evidence is inadmissible because it is not based on personal knowledge and is improper opinion testimony.
As is described in more detail in IBM's accompanying motion to strike, Mr. Gupta's testimony should further be stricken from the record because it is not based on personal knowledge and SCO has made no attempt to qualify Mr. Gupta as an expert witness. Accordingly, the testimony is not competent evidence and cannot be relied upon to create a genuine issue of material fact.17
3. Even if his testimony were admissible, the allegedly infringing code identified by Mr. Gupta is insufficient to establish copyright infringement.
Even if the Gupta Declaration was timely disclosed (which it was not) and even if it was competent evidence (which it is not), it remains insufficient as a matter of law to show that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to IBM's copying of protectable elements of SCO's allegedly copyrighted materials. See Mitel, 124 F.3d at 1370 ("In order to establish copyright infringement, plaintiff must prove... that the defendant copied protectable elements of the copyrighted work.") (emphasis added).
The Tenth Circuit has adopted the abstraction-comparison-filtration test, to determine whether a computer program, such as the Linux kernel, is substantially similar to (and therefore may infringe the copyright in) another computer program, such as SCO's allegedly copyrighted UNIX software. See Gates Rubber Co. v. Bando Chem. Indus. Ltd., 9 F.3d 823, 834 (10th Cir. 1993). As set forth in Gates Rubber, the test requires that a court (1) "dissect the program according to its varying levels of generality", (2) "filter out those elements of the program which are unprotectable" at each level of abstraction; and (3) then "compare the remaining protectable elements with the allegedly infringing program". Id. According to the Tenth Circuit, "[f]iltration should eliminate from the comparison the unprotectable elements of ideas, processes, facts, public domain information, merger material, scenes a faire material, and other unprotectable elements suggested by the particular facts of the program under examination." Id. at 834.
As discussed in IBM's accompanying motion to strike, Mr. Gupta's analysis wholly disregards the abstraction-filtration-comparison test and is therefore fatally flawed.18 Specifically, Mr. Gupta failed to filter the unprotectable elements of the allegedly copyrighted work and to apply the appropriate standard for determining, at the comparison stage, whether one body of code is substantially similar to another body of code.
In his declaration, Mr. Gupta opines that six "routines" or "groupings of code" in Linux are substantially similar to the allegedly copyrighted works: (1) "the Read-Copy-Update [(RCU)] routine"; (2) "the user level synchronizations (ULS) routines"; (3) "IPC code"; (4) certain "header and interfaces"; (5) "System V init code"; and (6) "Executable and Link
(my sincere apologies on the last post, due its form error. heil to slashdot's "code" form post)
(Slashdot, please *try* to mirror the articles on other websites; SCO especially due to all the traffic they cause. You are at liberty to customize (http://www.gnu.org/software/wget/wget.html) to ignore Robots.txt if you like; please try to help another's bandwith bill! Thanks; part 2 of 4;)
Civil No. 2:03CV0294 DAK
Honorable Dale A. Kimball
Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Preliminary Statement 1 Statement of Undisputed Facts 5 Argument 6 I. SCO BEARS THE BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING THAT THERE ARE GENUINE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT THAT WOULD PRECLUDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON IBM'S TENTH COUNTERCLAIM 6 II. SCO HAS NOT ADDUCED, AND CANNOT ADDUCE, EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO CREATE A GENUINE ISSUE OF MATERIAL FACT 10 A. SCO Fails Properly To Challenge IBM's Statement Of Undisputed Facts 11 B. SCO Fails To Adduce Any Competent Evidence That IBM Has Infringed SCO's Alleged UNIX Copyrights 12 1. SCO's purported evidence should be stricken from the record because it was not disclosed in response to IBM's discovery requests or in response to Judge Wells's discovery orders 12 2. In any event, SCO's purported evidence is inadmissible because it is not based on personal knowledge and is improper opinion testimony 17 3. Even if his testimony were admissible, the allegedly infringing code identified by Mr. Gupta is insufficient to establish copyright infringement 18 C. SCO Fails To Adduce Any Competent Evidence That SCO Is The Rightful Owner Of Valid Copyrights In The UNIX Software 23 III. NEITHER SCO'S RULE 56(f) APPLICATION NOR THE PROCEDURAL POSTURE OF THE CASE PRECLUDES A GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT 25 A. The Fact That Discovery Is Not Complete Is Alone No Reason To Grant SCO's Rule 56(f) Application 26 B. SCO Has (And Has Had) All Of The Materials It Needs To Show "Substantial Similarity" And Claims Already To Have Analyzed The Materials 27 C. None Of The Additional And Extensive Discovery SCO Seeks Is Necessary Or Even Relevant To IBM's Motion 32 IV. SCO'S OPPOSITION SEEKS MERELY TO CREATE A SMOKESCREEN TO COVER THE INADEQUACIES OF ITS CLAIMS AND FURTHER TO DELAY THE RESOLUTION OF THIS LITIGATION 38 Conclusion 45 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Adams v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 184 F.R.D. 369 (D. Kan. 1998) 30 Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores. Inc., 144 F.3d 664 (10th Cir. 1998) 7, 31 American Eagle Ins. Co. v. Thompson, 85 F.3d 327 (8th Cir. 1996) 8 Ashley Creek Phosphate Co. v. Chevron, 129 F. Supp. 2d 1299 (D. Utah 2000) 11 Autoskill Inc. v. Nat'l Educ. Support Sys., Inc., 994 F. 2d 1476 (10th Cir. 1993) 22, 24, 28 Baker v. IBP, Inc., No. 02-4067, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23869 (D. Kan. Dec. 5, 2002) 14 Ben Ezra, Weinstein, & Co., Inc. v. America Online Inc., 206 F.3d 980 (10th Cir. 2000) 27 Biocore Med. Techs., Inc. v. Khosrowshahi, No. 98-2031, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20512 (D. Kan. Nov. 6, 1998) 14 Bobian v. Csa Czech Airlines, 232 F. Supp. 2d 319 (D.N.J. 2002) 31 Bridge Publ'ns. Inc. v. F.A.C.T. Net. Inc., 183 F.R.D. 254 (D. Colo. 1998) 24 Brightway Adolescent Hosp. v. Health Plan of Nevada, Inc., No. Civ. 2:98CV0729, 2000 WL 33710845 (D. Utah Sept. 20, 2000) 32 Bucklew v. Hawkins, Ash. Baptie & Co., LLP, 329 F.3d 923 (7th Cir. 2003) 22, 34 Calvary Holdings, Inc. v. Chandler, 948 F.2d 59 (1st Cir. 1991) 37 Castle Rock Entm't, Inc. v. Carol Publ'g Group, Inc., 150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 1998) 34 Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) 7 Committee For The First Amendment v. Campbell, 962 F.2d 1517 (10th Cir. 1992) 26, 27 Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730 (1989) 24 Computer Assoc. Int'l, Inc. v. Altai, Inc., 982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992) 21 Country Kids N City S
(Slashdot, please *try* to mirror the articles on other websites; SCO especially due to all the traffic they cause. You are at liberty to customize (http://www.gnu.org/software/wget/wget.html) to ignore Robots.txt if you like; please try to help another's bandwith bill! Thanks; part 2 of 4;)
Civil No. 2:03CV0294 DAK
Honorable Dale A. Kimball
Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Preliminary Statement 1
Statement of Undisputed Facts 5
Argument 6
I. SCO BEARS THE BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING THAT THERE ARE GENUINE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT THAT WOULD PRECLUDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON IBM'S TENTH COUNTERCLAIM 6
II. SCO HAS NOT ADDUCED, AND CANNOT ADDUCE, EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO CREATE A GENUINE ISSUE OF MATERIAL FACT 10
A. SCO Fails Properly To Challenge IBM's Statement Of Undisputed Facts 11
B. SCO Fails To Adduce Any Competent Evidence That IBM Has Infringed SCO's Alleged UNIX Copyrights 12
1. SCO's purported evidence should be stricken from the record because it was not disclosed in response to IBM's discovery requests or in response to Judge Wells's discovery orders 12
2. In any event, SCO's purported evidence is inadmissible because it is not based on personal knowledge and is improper opinion testimony 17
3. Even if his testimony were admissible, the allegedly infringing code identified by Mr. Gupta is insufficient to establish copyright infringement 18
C. SCO Fails To Adduce Any Competent Evidence That SCO Is The Rightful Owner Of Valid Copyrights In The UNIX Software 23
III. NEITHER SCO'S RULE 56(f) APPLICATION NOR THE PROCEDURAL POSTURE OF THE CASE PRECLUDES A GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT 25
A. The Fact That Discovery Is Not Complete Is Alone No Reason To Grant SCO's Rule 56(f) Application 26
B. SCO Has (And Has Had) All Of The Materials It Needs To Show "Substantial Similarity" And Claims Already To Have Analyzed The Materials 27
C. None Of The Additional And Extensive Discovery SCO Seeks Is Necessary Or Even Relevant To IBM's Motion 32
IV. SCO'S OPPOSITION SEEKS MERELY TO CREATE A SMOKESCREEN TO COVER THE INADEQUACIES OF ITS CLAIMS AND FURTHER TO DELAY THE RESOLUTION OF THIS LITIGATION 38
Conclusion 45
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
CASES
Adams v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.,
184 F.R.D. 369 (D. Kan. 1998) 30
Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores. Inc.,
144 F.3d 664 (10th Cir. 1998) 7, 31
American Eagle Ins. Co. v. Thompson,
85 F.3d 327 (8th Cir. 1996) 8
Ashley Creek Phosphate Co. v. Chevron,
129 F. Supp. 2d 1299 (D. Utah 2000) 11
Autoskill Inc. v. Nat'l Educ. Support Sys., Inc.,
994 F. 2d 1476 (10th Cir. 1993) 22, 24, 28
Baker v. IBP, Inc.,
No. 02-4067, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23869 (D. Kan. Dec. 5, 2002) 14
Ben Ezra, Weinstein, & Co., Inc. v. America Online Inc.,
206 F.3d 980 (10th Cir. 2000) 27
Biocore Med. Techs., Inc. v. Khosrowshahi,
No. 98-2031, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20512 (D. Kan. Nov. 6, 1998) 14
Bobian v. Csa Czech Airlines,
232 F. Supp. 2d 319 (D.N.J. 2002) 31
Bridge Publ'ns. Inc. v. F.A.C.T. Net. Inc.,
183 F.R.D. 254 (D. Colo. 1998) 24
Brightway Adolescent Hosp. v. Health Plan of Nevada, Inc.,
No. Civ. 2:98CV0729, 2000 WL 33710845 (D. Utah Sept. 20, 2000) 32
Bucklew v. Hawkins, Ash. Baptie & Co., LLP,
329 F.3d 923 (7th Cir. 2003) 22, 34
Calvary Holdings, Inc. v. Chandler,
948 F.2d 59 (1st Cir. 1991) 37
Castle Rock Entm't, Inc. v. Carol Publ'g Group, Inc.,
150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 1998) 34
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,
477 U.S. 317 (1986) 7
Committee For The First Amendment v. Campbell,
962 F.2d 1517 (10th Cir. 1992) 26, 27
Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid,
490 U.S. 730 (1989) 24
Computer Assoc. Int'l, Inc. v. Altai, Inc.,
982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992) 21
Country Kids N City Slicks, Inc. v. Sheen,
77 F.3d 1280 (10th Cir. 1996) 10, 28
Cudjoe v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 12,
297 F.3d 1058 (10th Cir. 2002) 7
Cuenca v. Univ. of Kan.,
No. 98-4180, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9942 (D. Kan. May 14,
(First of all, proper to my observation; the verry instant SCO hinted even a shadow of lowering stock dividends is bad news. The stock will now tank, and whomever wants to buy SCO will do it quickly or if it was a facade by the SCO employees to buy back all their stock then there so.)
(Also, Slashdot needs to mirror these articles. Groklaw can barely even respond on my traceroute. The text for IBM's memorandum follows; part 1 of 4;)
IBM here explains all the reasons why its motion should succeed and why SCO should be sanctioned for failing to disclose information in discovery. "SCO has not only wasted IBM's time and resources over the past year of discovery, by requiring IBM to seek to compel SCO to provide necessary information that SCO apparently was only willing to come forward with in the face of a summary judgment motion, but SCO has also perpetuated fear, uncertainty and doubt about the lawfulness of IBM's activities."
IBM mocks SCO's "surprise" that copyright infringement should be an issue, now claiming, for purposes of this motion anyway, it hasn't raised that issue and is relying instead on contract claims.
IBM then lists numerous times SCO has mentioned copyright infringement. If I might add to their list the following additional instances:
* "'What we found was that the infringements went way beyond just IBM's involvement and that other parties had contributed things improperly... in going through the process, we counted over a million lines of code that we allege are infringed in the Linux kernel today out of a total code base of five million,' added McBride.
"Nevertheless, IBM was the source of most of that allegedly tainted code, said McBride: 'The vast majority of that did, in fact, come from IBM and when we say IBM, the majority of that actually came from IBM's acquisition of Sequent.'"-- Darl McBride, Infoconomy, 2003-09-11
* "We are staring down the barrel of hundreds of thousands of lines of code that enabled Linux to go from a mom-and-pop operating system to a big-time, enterprise-class OS at Fortune 100 companies. It's really interesting to see what happens when people see the code, when they see how blatant the copying is."-- Darl McBride, Wired, 2003-09-11
* "78. However, as is widely reported and as IBM executives knew, or should have known, a significant flaw of Linux is the inability and/or unwillingness of the Linux process manager, Linus Torvalds, to identify the intellectual property origins of contributed source code that comes in from those many different software developers. If source code is code copied from protected UNIX code, there is no way for Linus Torvalds to identify that fact.
"79. As a result, a very significant amount of UNIX protected code and materials are currently found in Linux 2.4.x, Linux 2.5.x and Linux 2.6.x releases in violation of SCO’s contractual rights and copyrights." -- SCO's Second Amended Complaint
* "But the unlicensed use of its Unix shared libraries was just the 'tip of the iceberg as there are so much IP we're dealing with here, ranging from copyright, trade secrets, patents, source code and licensing issues. Because this range of IP-related issues is so broad-based and there is such a wide-range of players involved, we're just making sure we move forward very sure-footedly. We don't want to start running before we can walk. We're trying to take things in the right order,' McBride said."-- Darl McBride, eWeek, 2003-02-26
* "'Today is really the formalization of our going down the path of broadening our case to go beyond just contracts to include copyrights," McBride said. He added, 'Today's announcement really is a new front that we're opening up.'"-- Darl McBride, InternetNews, 2003-07-21
* "'Today's announcement is really a new front that we're opening up' with existing enterprise Linux customers, McBride said. 'It gets you clean, it gets you square with Linux without having to go into the courtroom.'"-- Darl Mc
quoth {
"Unless I'm doing assembly, could you explain why these books would be good for me, a programmer?"
} quoth
Application and System layer programming was once united under one title "Programmer", but it is now separated.
The books I suggested only contribute to the over-all understanding to establish pre-ponderance in your source-code that it may be of good portage and maintenance should another be granted its access. Today, Application Programmers are separated unto further hostile classification based upon hardware architecture and software platforms. If you want your application to behave nearly identical on vague hardware as a Agenda VR3 PDA, Ipaq, Win32 X86, and Linux/Sparc, then the more you know to develop your own syntax within your C is the better; to build your own Abstraction Layer. Can't you imagine that Hardware and Software were once one and the same, but now that are splintered off. Dennis Ritchie was quoted as saying somthing similar at the last convention he attended; OSCON, Iirc. Verry intelligent man, but even he admitted that Plan9 is re-inventing what other *NIX inventors already solved and lost; port Unix to other platforms and thus losing compatibility. Many people believed Dennis Ritchie to suggest that Unix was not supposted to be an Operating System but an actual behavioral API for how code may interact with foreign code upon differing architectures. Sun datalinks and LUMP nodes don't actualy have hardware with the same signal specification even though they both follow the same RFC.
Just my point of view.
First, I apologise for the completly negatory subject and I will follow shortly with a proved rebuttal.
The article text says,
quoth { "Further advancements in Bluetooth technology will be made by the Special Interest Group, which consists of a number of companies with ties to the technology. Ericsson will remain a part of that group." } quoth
Ericson isn't leaving the market per se; perhaps they see profit in regulating the market and licensing technology that interoperates with Ericson. Yes, my anticipation is unfounded as of yet, but they have never ceased to amaze us all with their products. Consider software and intelectual property; ideas on paper cost less to market and more profit margin than to risk implementing a large volume of possibly quirky products that is demanded by users to improve stability et al. Ericson is to phones as SCO is to software; they just want to sell a license, and no crime in that with exception to the current monopolies.
I found that Donald Knuth's "Art of Computer Programming" was the most visionary book in applying code to real-world situations. Although this slashdot story is a status of the first anouncment on the Pragmatic Programmer being composed a while ago, I'm thankful its status is made known. I bought it from Amazon.com and am only 33% into the book. It is verry enlightening, equaly so to "Art of Computer Programming." I think it doesn't bring enough introductory information to warrant purchase by a Novice. To prepare for this book, I found the best recommendation from my shelf to be "Computer Hardware Theory" (1972 University of Illinois) and "Fundamentals of Signal Theory" (1960).
Being a programmer isn't supposed to be all-software; you need to know the basics of the hardware so you can prepare your code to be cross-platform.
KDE is not a library limited by X11 and is slowly revealing that it can be a Desktop replacement for X11 because it can be used with X11.
KDE does not efficiently use X11. X11's transport protocol through X11 is only providing the primitives abstracted by KDE's widgets. The only popular credential to KDE is that it can provide a low-bandwidth complete remote desktop with KDE Drag'N'Drop through a low-bandwith duplex network session while having X11-aware syntax.
I've been a Xlib programmer for the passed 4.5 years and protocol-efficiency of X11 is only exhibited by Motif. KDE has all the purpose in a Desktop, yet there are many users that find using proprietary widgets is difficult to switch between context with Xlib. Load the X packet session effeciently is more efficiently accomplished when using strait Xlib. I hope KDE, and not either GNOME, ever try to legislate core changes to X protocol and they should stay as X module extensions.
This is using KDE's widgets; the article does not conclude with any reasonable technical confrontation of the X11 protocol. The feature is KDE can be used to minimize the Xlib transport layer by using only widgets. It is a verry impressive feat, the general purpose of X11, but this is using KDE libraries which are slowly demanding more system resource overhead just to run.
The largest gripe I have with KDE is it is more difficult to jump between KDE widget context and Xlib context.
I've been able to program using Xlib and Xtk for the past 4.5 years and all the bloat in KDE is justified, but I fear X protocol will slowly be over-ruled to accept legislated features previously extensions. X is meant to be a verry quick drawing canvas for low-bandwidth connections. Next thing you and I will know is they will be calling it XKDE or XGNOME.
I said "Fry Cook", not the Crockery that Fry's Electronics employs.
There's much more honest work, usually around the perimeter of Fry's Electronics; like the Fry's Electronics product return Service Center.
I was forced to move out of my apartment and into a condominium.
In a condominium, you can't just call the manager down the hall and tell her to pull up her skirt and get on her hands and knees to fix the Garbage Disposal Unit.
I'm the one bending over (missionary style) to fix that noisy thing.
Working as an Engineer as I, before my Technical Support specialist job, was a verry full-filling and difficult job. Engineers are the persons innovating new technology, while the pseudo-Engineers with MCSE certification are the persons implementing or slandering the fruits of your labors by holding false-authority.
Can you imagine how much techology some corporations run through and have utterly destroyed because they didn't comprehend the profit increase (that means saving money too). It makes many people wonder how Microsoft profits with having the highest specialized Technical Support inter-company employment per capita for its Operating System and Application software against other companies whos products don'tneedmanytechnicalsupport agents because their product serves its purpose as stated on their retail box.
You wanna switch ? I work at dennys' as a cook, I'd rather be tech support.
Are you some sort of Massochist? Do you enjoy sweating over a keyboard for 10 hours in front of unnatural light bombardments from a encapsulated and pressurized scanning electron gun?
It's too late for me! Stay safe over the sensual scolding safety of your fry pan! Don't let computers cut down the prime of your life! Remember me brother!
I've always thought of how many mis-placed people there have been and learned from their experience as though an Elementary School. When they feel abused and diminished because the Superior Official employs them for tasks menial in contrast to their previous accomplishments, the stain of their employment history settles in hard to depression. I know this one guy who was a Programmer and couldn't secure a Technical Support job as I did; being layed-off as I, he fell flat on his face in the various construction businesses and having not much physical strength yet above-average Building Code knowledge he nearly rotted away his career for almost 8 years. He didn't know the right people to get re-hired, in addition to this wicked California job resession, I'm happy he got a job back in Engineering and is only 2/3 the job he once held.
When you laugh at me, you laugh at CowboyNeal; because he's my prime client. Jared at Subway nearly starved to death until the Masonic Alliance of Food Preparers suggested baking lard into the subway bread given to Jared at Subway so his poor sould wouldn't waste away.
It's Fry Cooks like us that keep America well-fed. Jared at Subway nearly starved because you College-educated ignoramouses pushed the hard-working people out of our industry.
When my current Technical Support boss beggs me to not leave, I'm going to exclaim; I was attracted to you first, but after that it's been cold fries since you firewalled the ports in the 6000 block.
"I'm going back to the green pastures of employment where I can have my fun and eat it too!"
Slashdot Mirror
I for one welcome our tenctacle monstered overlords!
(austin powers)
yeah baby, yeah!
(/austin powers)
Yes, Not all of the IRC protocol is used for illegal activity. Take for example, honest conversations between young friends.
Let's face it, the article doesn't emphasize the verry legitimate use of IRC as a tunnel for communication, and that is justified. But, lets not let a bad article biases against IRC to be thought of any less a bad joke of an activity not all of us find entertaining or social. I swear, in another forum this article would be deemed the curse of the Sith from the Department of Homeland Security.
Mermaidmad: must...answer...the...Clarion Call!
more on-topic and not misleading as any of CmdrTaco's Teen GatesBeat yesterday.
How do I know it's a sex stone, you ask?
Because it's an other fucking rock. There are many fucking rocks, but not an other like this one. And this one has bunny ears! Larry Flint's dead president just turned in its crotch-grave.
It's a holographically projected camoflauge of two homeless men fighting over Moon-cheese.
If you want to help Linux' adoption, STOP posting information on the exploits! Learn from Microsoft: hide your rotten eggs on Christmas, to be found on Easter.
Michael, get a clue and stop posting this stuff. Some people have pleasure on wreaking havoc on vulnerable computers, and you are no different than a terrorist if you say otherwise.
Why bother with that hassle when the numbers of people donwloading and actually USING the linux version are so small compared with that of windows?
(*pulls pants out and looks*)
I'll have you know that We, the Linux users are by no means dismissisable as being "small." In fact, one among us is "the giver" and that trumps the flock of powdery-white-collared John Holmes wanna-bees in Redmond photoshopping pictures of theirselves. Redmond is the reason Hello.jpg exists.
So does the beowulf cluster of water striders have NUMA extensibility?
... et al continuing upto #100.
;-)
It would freak alot of geeks to see a #1 wate strider copulating with a #2 and then a #3 copulating with #2 and a #4 copulating with #3
It pains my head to think of such mind-boggling computing. I feel cluster-fucked, preferably all by gorgeous non-dyke women. I hope there is enough patience that enough of me will get around before they all turn dyke. But at least they are nothing like CowboyNeal-like women; they levy.
And this post is on-topic informative; all my quotes are H20 compliant: dykes, levies, water striders, and Jesus loves you! So there!
For this Carnegie Mellon professor, at MIT, to proclaim that this Nano-robot has any design similarities with the Water Strider is a lie.
As I shall name it, On the surfacetension water-robot's page, it has no correlation to the design of a living Water Strider because all of this robot's "legs" are coated by a water-repelling plasting and is necessary to repel water with thousands of times more surface area of water-surface tension applied to its legs. In short terms, a living Water Strider has small follicles on its legs with an oil that simply makes the insect water-proof and it can in no way easily peirce the surface tension on the water's surface perhaps because it weighs so little. Comparing this "nano robot" to a Water Strider is like comparing a cannon ball on a tripod with the tripod legs all horizontal pointing opposite directions.
This nano robot's weight is excessive and the fact that it is not duplicating that a Water Strider floats on the tips of its tarcel folli is no comparison. The nano robot requires all surface area of its "legs" to be in contact with the water surface. Maybe they can ask IBM to refab it down to 0.13nm?
Jesus jokes aside...
(Slashdot, please *try* to mirror the articles on other websites; SCO especially due to all the traffic they cause. You are at liberty to customize (http://www.gnu.org/software/wget/wget.html) to ignore Robots.txt if you like; please try to help another's bandwith bill! Thanks; part 3 of 4;) In addition to Rule 37(b)(2), therefore, the Gupta Declaration should also be excluded from consideration on IBM's motion for summary judgment under Rule 37(c)(1). See Orjias v. Stevenson, 31 F.3d 995, 1005 (10th Cir. 1994) (affirming exclusion of testimony at trial because defendant failed adequately to respond to interrogatories); Stevens v. Deluxe Fin. Servs., Inc., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1128, 1144 n.44 (D. Kan. 2002) (excluding document from consideration on summary judgment motion because it was not provided in response to discovery requests); Go Med. Indus. Pty, Ltd. v. Inmed Corp., 300 F. Supp. 2d 1297, 1308-10 (N.D. Ga. 2003) (excluding documents and testimony from consideration on summary judgment motion because they were not disclosed in response to discovery requests). 2. In any event, SCO's purported evidence is inadmissible because it is not based on personal knowledge and is improper opinion testimony. As is described in more detail in IBM's accompanying motion to strike, Mr. Gupta's testimony should further be stricken from the record because it is not based on personal knowledge and SCO has made no attempt to qualify Mr. Gupta as an expert witness. Accordingly, the testimony is not competent evidence and cannot be relied upon to create a genuine issue of material fact.17 3. Even if his testimony were admissible, the allegedly infringing code identified by Mr. Gupta is insufficient to establish copyright infringement. Even if the Gupta Declaration was timely disclosed (which it was not) and even if it was competent evidence (which it is not), it remains insufficient as a matter of law to show that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to IBM's copying of protectable elements of SCO's allegedly copyrighted materials. See Mitel, 124 F.3d at 1370 ("In order to establish copyright infringement, plaintiff must prove ... that the defendant copied protectable elements of the copyrighted work.") (emphasis added).
The Tenth Circuit has adopted the abstraction-comparison-filtration test, to determine whether a computer program, such as the Linux kernel, is substantially similar to (and therefore may infringe the copyright in) another computer program, such as SCO's allegedly copyrighted UNIX software. See Gates Rubber Co. v. Bando Chem. Indus. Ltd., 9 F.3d 823, 834 (10th Cir. 1993). As set forth in Gates Rubber, the test requires that a court (1) "dissect the program according to its varying levels of generality", (2) "filter out those elements of the program which are unprotectable" at each level of abstraction; and (3) then "compare the remaining protectable elements with the allegedly infringing program". Id. According to the Tenth Circuit, "[f]iltration should eliminate from the comparison the unprotectable elements of ideas, processes, facts, public domain information, merger material, scenes a faire material, and other unprotectable elements suggested by the particular facts of the program under examination." Id. at 834.
As discussed in IBM's accompanying motion to strike, Mr. Gupta's analysis wholly disregards the abstraction-filtration-comparison test and is therefore fatally flawed.18 Specifically, Mr. Gupta failed to filter the unprotectable elements of the allegedly copyrighted work and to apply the appropriate standard for determining, at the comparison stage, whether one body of code is substantially similar to another body of code.
In his declaration, Mr. Gupta opines that six "routines" or "groupings of code" in Linux are substantially similar to the allegedly copyrighted works: (1) "the Read-Copy-Update [(RCU)] routine"; (2) "the user level synchronizations (ULS) routines"; (3) "IPC code"; (4) certain "header and interfaces"; (5) "System V init code"; and (6) "Executable and Link
(my sincere apologies on the last post, due its form error. heil to slashdot's "code" form post)
(Slashdot, please *try* to mirror the articles on other websites; SCO especially due to all the traffic they cause. You are at liberty to customize (http://www.gnu.org/software/wget/wget.html) to ignore Robots.txt if you like; please try to help another's bandwith bill! Thanks; part 2 of 4;)
Civil No. 2:03CV0294 DAK
Honorable Dale A. Kimball
Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Preliminary Statement 1
Statement of Undisputed Facts 5
Argument 6
I. SCO BEARS THE BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING THAT THERE ARE GENUINE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT THAT WOULD PRECLUDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON IBM'S TENTH COUNTERCLAIM 6
II. SCO HAS NOT ADDUCED, AND CANNOT ADDUCE, EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO CREATE A GENUINE ISSUE OF MATERIAL FACT 10
A. SCO Fails Properly To Challenge IBM's Statement Of Undisputed Facts 11
B. SCO Fails To Adduce Any Competent Evidence That IBM Has Infringed SCO's Alleged UNIX Copyrights 12
1. SCO's purported evidence should be stricken from the record because it was not disclosed in response to IBM's discovery requests or in response to Judge Wells's discovery orders 12
2. In any event, SCO's purported evidence is inadmissible because it is not based on personal knowledge and is improper opinion testimony 17
3. Even if his testimony were admissible, the allegedly infringing code identified by Mr. Gupta is insufficient to establish copyright infringement 18
C. SCO Fails To Adduce Any Competent Evidence That SCO Is The Rightful Owner Of Valid Copyrights In The UNIX Software 23
III. NEITHER SCO'S RULE 56(f) APPLICATION NOR THE PROCEDURAL POSTURE OF THE CASE PRECLUDES A GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT 25
A. The Fact That Discovery Is Not Complete Is Alone No Reason To Grant SCO's Rule 56(f) Application 26
B. SCO Has (And Has Had) All Of The Materials It Needs To Show "Substantial Similarity" And Claims Already To Have Analyzed The Materials 27
C. None Of The Additional And Extensive Discovery SCO Seeks Is Necessary Or Even Relevant To IBM's Motion 32
IV. SCO'S OPPOSITION SEEKS MERELY TO CREATE A SMOKESCREEN TO COVER THE INADEQUACIES OF ITS CLAIMS AND FURTHER TO DELAY THE RESOLUTION OF THIS LITIGATION 38
Conclusion 45
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
CASES
Adams v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.,
184 F.R.D. 369 (D. Kan. 1998) 30
Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores. Inc.,
144 F.3d 664 (10th Cir. 1998) 7, 31
American Eagle Ins. Co. v. Thompson,
85 F.3d 327 (8th Cir. 1996) 8
Ashley Creek Phosphate Co. v. Chevron,
129 F. Supp. 2d 1299 (D. Utah 2000) 11
Autoskill Inc. v. Nat'l Educ. Support Sys., Inc.,
994 F. 2d 1476 (10th Cir. 1993) 22, 24, 28
Baker v. IBP, Inc.,
No. 02-4067, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23869 (D. Kan. Dec. 5, 2002) 14
Ben Ezra, Weinstein, & Co., Inc. v. America Online Inc.,
206 F.3d 980 (10th Cir. 2000) 27
Biocore Med. Techs., Inc. v. Khosrowshahi,
No. 98-2031, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20512 (D. Kan. Nov. 6, 1998) 14
Bobian v. Csa Czech Airlines,
232 F. Supp. 2d 319 (D.N.J. 2002) 31
Bridge Publ'ns. Inc. v. F.A.C.T. Net. Inc.,
183 F.R.D. 254 (D. Colo. 1998) 24
Brightway Adolescent Hosp. v. Health Plan of Nevada, Inc.,
No. Civ. 2:98CV0729, 2000 WL 33710845 (D. Utah Sept. 20, 2000) 32
Bucklew v. Hawkins, Ash. Baptie & Co., LLP,
329 F.3d 923 (7th Cir. 2003) 22, 34
Calvary Holdings, Inc. v. Chandler,
948 F.2d 59 (1st Cir. 1991) 37
Castle Rock Entm't, Inc. v. Carol Publ'g Group, Inc.,
150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 1998) 34
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,
477 U.S. 317 (1986) 7
Committee For The First Amendment v. Campbell,
962 F.2d 1517 (10th Cir. 1992) 26, 27
Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid,
490 U.S. 730 (1989) 24
Computer Assoc. Int'l, Inc. v. Altai, Inc.,
982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992) 21
Country Kids N City S
(Slashdot, please *try* to mirror the articles on other websites; SCO especially due to all the traffic they cause. You are at liberty to customize (http://www.gnu.org/software/wget/wget.html) to ignore Robots.txt if you like; please try to help another's bandwith bill! Thanks; part 2 of 4;) Civil No. 2:03CV0294 DAK Honorable Dale A. Kimball Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Preliminary Statement 1 Statement of Undisputed Facts 5 Argument 6 I. SCO BEARS THE BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING THAT THERE ARE GENUINE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT THAT WOULD PRECLUDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON IBM'S TENTH COUNTERCLAIM 6 II. SCO HAS NOT ADDUCED, AND CANNOT ADDUCE, EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO CREATE A GENUINE ISSUE OF MATERIAL FACT 10 A. SCO Fails Properly To Challenge IBM's Statement Of Undisputed Facts 11 B. SCO Fails To Adduce Any Competent Evidence That IBM Has Infringed SCO's Alleged UNIX Copyrights 12 1. SCO's purported evidence should be stricken from the record because it was not disclosed in response to IBM's discovery requests or in response to Judge Wells's discovery orders 12 2. In any event, SCO's purported evidence is inadmissible because it is not based on personal knowledge and is improper opinion testimony 17 3. Even if his testimony were admissible, the allegedly infringing code identified by Mr. Gupta is insufficient to establish copyright infringement 18 C. SCO Fails To Adduce Any Competent Evidence That SCO Is The Rightful Owner Of Valid Copyrights In The UNIX Software 23 III. NEITHER SCO'S RULE 56(f) APPLICATION NOR THE PROCEDURAL POSTURE OF THE CASE PRECLUDES A GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT 25 A. The Fact That Discovery Is Not Complete Is Alone No Reason To Grant SCO's Rule 56(f) Application 26 B. SCO Has (And Has Had) All Of The Materials It Needs To Show "Substantial Similarity" And Claims Already To Have Analyzed The Materials 27 C. None Of The Additional And Extensive Discovery SCO Seeks Is Necessary Or Even Relevant To IBM's Motion 32 IV. SCO'S OPPOSITION SEEKS MERELY TO CREATE A SMOKESCREEN TO COVER THE INADEQUACIES OF ITS CLAIMS AND FURTHER TO DELAY THE RESOLUTION OF THIS LITIGATION 38 Conclusion 45 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Adams v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 184 F.R.D. 369 (D. Kan. 1998) 30 Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores. Inc., 144 F.3d 664 (10th Cir. 1998) 7, 31 American Eagle Ins. Co. v. Thompson, 85 F.3d 327 (8th Cir. 1996) 8 Ashley Creek Phosphate Co. v. Chevron, 129 F. Supp. 2d 1299 (D. Utah 2000) 11 Autoskill Inc. v. Nat'l Educ. Support Sys., Inc., 994 F. 2d 1476 (10th Cir. 1993) 22, 24, 28 Baker v. IBP, Inc., No. 02-4067, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23869 (D. Kan. Dec. 5, 2002) 14 Ben Ezra, Weinstein, & Co., Inc. v. America Online Inc., 206 F.3d 980 (10th Cir. 2000) 27 Biocore Med. Techs., Inc. v. Khosrowshahi, No. 98-2031, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20512 (D. Kan. Nov. 6, 1998) 14 Bobian v. Csa Czech Airlines, 232 F. Supp. 2d 319 (D.N.J. 2002) 31 Bridge Publ'ns. Inc. v. F.A.C.T. Net. Inc., 183 F.R.D. 254 (D. Colo. 1998) 24 Brightway Adolescent Hosp. v. Health Plan of Nevada, Inc., No. Civ. 2:98CV0729, 2000 WL 33710845 (D. Utah Sept. 20, 2000) 32 Bucklew v. Hawkins, Ash. Baptie & Co., LLP, 329 F.3d 923 (7th Cir. 2003) 22, 34 Calvary Holdings, Inc. v. Chandler, 948 F.2d 59 (1st Cir. 1991) 37 Castle Rock Entm't, Inc. v. Carol Publ'g Group, Inc., 150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 1998) 34 Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) 7 Committee For The First Amendment v. Campbell, 962 F.2d 1517 (10th Cir. 1992) 26, 27 Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730 (1989) 24 Computer Assoc. Int'l, Inc. v. Altai, Inc., 982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992) 21 Country Kids N City Slicks, Inc. v. Sheen, 77 F.3d 1280 (10th Cir. 1996) 10, 28 Cudjoe v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 12, 297 F.3d 1058 (10th Cir. 2002) 7 Cuenca v. Univ. of Kan., No. 98-4180, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9942 (D. Kan. May 14,
(First of all, proper to my observation; the verry instant SCO hinted even a shadow of lowering stock dividends is bad news. The stock will now tank, and whomever wants to buy SCO will do it quickly or if it was a facade by the SCO employees to buy back all their stock then there so.)
(Also, Slashdot needs to mirror these articles. Groklaw can barely even respond on my traceroute. The text for IBM's memorandum follows; part 1 of 4;)
IBM here explains all the reasons why its motion should succeed and why SCO should be sanctioned for failing to disclose information in discovery. "SCO has not only wasted IBM's time and resources over the past year of discovery, by requiring IBM to seek to compel SCO to provide necessary information that SCO apparently was only willing to come forward with in the face of a summary judgment motion, but SCO has also perpetuated fear, uncertainty and doubt about the lawfulness of IBM's activities."
IBM mocks SCO's "surprise" that copyright infringement should be an issue, now claiming, for purposes of this motion anyway, it hasn't raised that issue and is relying instead on contract claims.
IBM then lists numerous times SCO has mentioned copyright infringement. If I might add to their list the following additional instances:
* "'What we found was that the infringements went way beyond just IBM's involvement and that other parties had contributed things improperly... in going through the process, we counted over a million lines of code that we allege are infringed in the Linux kernel today out of a total code base of five million,' added McBride.
"Nevertheless, IBM was the source of most of that allegedly tainted code, said McBride: 'The vast majority of that did, in fact, come from IBM and when we say IBM, the majority of that actually came from IBM's acquisition of Sequent.'"-- Darl McBride, Infoconomy, 2003-09-11
* "We are staring down the barrel of hundreds of thousands of lines of code that enabled Linux to go from a mom-and-pop operating system to a big-time, enterprise-class OS at Fortune 100 companies. It's really interesting to see what happens when people see the code, when they see how blatant the copying is."-- Darl McBride, Wired, 2003-09-11
* "78. However, as is widely reported and as IBM executives knew, or should have known, a significant flaw of Linux is the inability and/or unwillingness of the Linux process manager, Linus Torvalds, to identify the intellectual property origins of contributed source code that comes in from those many different software developers. If source code is code copied from protected UNIX code, there is no way for Linus Torvalds to identify that fact.
"79. As a result, a very significant amount of UNIX protected code and materials are currently found in Linux 2.4.x, Linux 2.5.x and Linux 2.6.x releases in violation of SCO’s contractual rights and copyrights." -- SCO's Second Amended Complaint
* "But the unlicensed use of its Unix shared libraries was just the 'tip of the iceberg as there are so much IP we're dealing with here, ranging from copyright, trade secrets, patents, source code and licensing issues. Because this range of IP-related issues is so broad-based and there is such a wide-range of players involved, we're just making sure we move forward very sure-footedly. We don't want to start running before we can walk. We're trying to take things in the right order,' McBride said."-- Darl McBride, eWeek, 2003-02-26
* "'Today is really the formalization of our going down the path of broadening our case to go beyond just contracts to include copyrights," McBride said. He added, 'Today's announcement really is a new front that we're opening up.'"-- Darl McBride, InternetNews, 2003-07-21
* "'Today's announcement is really a new front that we're opening up' with existing enterprise Linux customers, McBride said. 'It gets you clean, it gets you square with Linux without having to go into the courtroom.'"-- Darl Mc
quoth { "Unless I'm doing assembly, could you explain why these books would be good for me, a programmer?" } quoth Application and System layer programming was once united under one title "Programmer", but it is now separated. The books I suggested only contribute to the over-all understanding to establish pre-ponderance in your source-code that it may be of good portage and maintenance should another be granted its access. Today, Application Programmers are separated unto further hostile classification based upon hardware architecture and software platforms. If you want your application to behave nearly identical on vague hardware as a Agenda VR3 PDA, Ipaq, Win32 X86, and Linux/Sparc, then the more you know to develop your own syntax within your C is the better; to build your own Abstraction Layer. Can't you imagine that Hardware and Software were once one and the same, but now that are splintered off. Dennis Ritchie was quoted as saying somthing similar at the last convention he attended; OSCON, Iirc. Verry intelligent man, but even he admitted that Plan9 is re-inventing what other *NIX inventors already solved and lost; port Unix to other platforms and thus losing compatibility. Many people believed Dennis Ritchie to suggest that Unix was not supposted to be an Operating System but an actual behavioral API for how code may interact with foreign code upon differing architectures. Sun datalinks and LUMP nodes don't actualy have hardware with the same signal specification even though they both follow the same RFC. Just my point of view.
First, I apologise for the completly negatory subject and I will follow shortly with a proved rebuttal. The article text says, quoth { "Further advancements in Bluetooth technology will be made by the Special Interest Group, which consists of a number of companies with ties to the technology. Ericsson will remain a part of that group." } quoth Ericson isn't leaving the market per se; perhaps they see profit in regulating the market and licensing technology that interoperates with Ericson. Yes, my anticipation is unfounded as of yet, but they have never ceased to amaze us all with their products. Consider software and intelectual property; ideas on paper cost less to market and more profit margin than to risk implementing a large volume of possibly quirky products that is demanded by users to improve stability et al. Ericson is to phones as SCO is to software; they just want to sell a license, and no crime in that with exception to the current monopolies.
I found that Donald Knuth's "Art of Computer Programming" was the most visionary book in applying code to real-world situations. Although this slashdot story is a status of the first anouncment on the Pragmatic Programmer being composed a while ago, I'm thankful its status is made known. I bought it from Amazon.com and am only 33% into the book. It is verry enlightening, equaly so to "Art of Computer Programming." I think it doesn't bring enough introductory information to warrant purchase by a Novice. To prepare for this book, I found the best recommendation from my shelf to be "Computer Hardware Theory" (1972 University of Illinois) and "Fundamentals of Signal Theory" (1960). Being a programmer isn't supposed to be all-software; you need to know the basics of the hardware so you can prepare your code to be cross-platform.
KDE is not a library limited by X11 and is slowly revealing that it can be a Desktop replacement for X11 because it can be used with X11. KDE does not efficiently use X11. X11's transport protocol through X11 is only providing the primitives abstracted by KDE's widgets. The only popular credential to KDE is that it can provide a low-bandwidth complete remote desktop with KDE Drag'N'Drop through a low-bandwith duplex network session while having X11-aware syntax. I've been a Xlib programmer for the passed 4.5 years and protocol-efficiency of X11 is only exhibited by Motif. KDE has all the purpose in a Desktop, yet there are many users that find using proprietary widgets is difficult to switch between context with Xlib. Load the X packet session effeciently is more efficiently accomplished when using strait Xlib. I hope KDE, and not either GNOME, ever try to legislate core changes to X protocol and they should stay as X module extensions.
This is using KDE's widgets; the article does not conclude with any reasonable technical confrontation of the X11 protocol. The feature is KDE can be used to minimize the Xlib transport layer by using only widgets. It is a verry impressive feat, the general purpose of X11, but this is using KDE libraries which are slowly demanding more system resource overhead just to run. The largest gripe I have with KDE is it is more difficult to jump between KDE widget context and Xlib context. I've been able to program using Xlib and Xtk for the past 4.5 years and all the bloat in KDE is justified, but I fear X protocol will slowly be over-ruled to accept legislated features previously extensions. X is meant to be a verry quick drawing canvas for low-bandwidth connections. Next thing you and I will know is they will be calling it XKDE or XGNOME.
I said "Fry Cook", not the Crockery that Fry's Electronics employs. There's much more honest work, usually around the perimeter of Fry's Electronics; like the Fry's Electronics product return Service Center.
I was forced to move out of my apartment and into a condominium. In a condominium, you can't just call the manager down the hall and tell her to pull up her skirt and get on her hands and knees to fix the Garbage Disposal Unit. I'm the one bending over (missionary style) to fix that noisy thing.
Working as an Engineer as I, before my Technical Support specialist job, was a verry full-filling and difficult job. Engineers are the persons innovating new technology, while the pseudo-Engineers with MCSE certification are the persons implementing or slandering the fruits of your labors by holding false-authority. Can you imagine how much techology some corporations run through and have utterly destroyed because they didn't comprehend the profit increase (that means saving money too). It makes many people wonder how Microsoft profits with having the highest specialized Technical Support inter-company employment per capita for its Operating System and Application software against other companies whos products don't need many technical support agents because their product serves its purpose as stated on their retail box.
You wanna switch ? I work at dennys' as a cook, I'd rather be tech support. Are you some sort of Massochist? Do you enjoy sweating over a keyboard for 10 hours in front of unnatural light bombardments from a encapsulated and pressurized scanning electron gun? It's too late for me! Stay safe over the sensual scolding safety of your fry pan! Don't let computers cut down the prime of your life! Remember me brother!
I've always thought of how many mis-placed people there have been and learned from their experience as though an Elementary School. When they feel abused and diminished because the Superior Official employs them for tasks menial in contrast to their previous accomplishments, the stain of their employment history settles in hard to depression. I know this one guy who was a Programmer and couldn't secure a Technical Support job as I did; being layed-off as I, he fell flat on his face in the various construction businesses and having not much physical strength yet above-average Building Code knowledge he nearly rotted away his career for almost 8 years. He didn't know the right people to get re-hired, in addition to this wicked California job resession, I'm happy he got a job back in Engineering and is only 2/3 the job he once held.
When you laugh at me, you laugh at CowboyNeal; because he's my prime client. Jared at Subway nearly starved to death until the Masonic Alliance of Food Preparers suggested baking lard into the subway bread given to Jared at Subway so his poor sould wouldn't waste away. It's Fry Cooks like us that keep America well-fed. Jared at Subway nearly starved because you College-educated ignoramouses pushed the hard-working people out of our industry.
When my current Technical Support boss beggs me to not leave, I'm going to exclaim; I was attracted to you first, but after that it's been cold fries since you firewalled the ports in the 6000 block. "I'm going back to the green pastures of employment where I can have my fun and eat it too!"