I can't even make it through the first two questions. He doesn't write clear, concise answers. It's very tough to read a well thought out question, and then read a response that is extremely long and says nothing at all. Damnit. I guess it just goes to show that having multi-millions of dollars doesn't do a damn thing about a lack of education. I hate speaking to people who can't speak Enlish well.
Dude, you've basically chased your own tail. How can you say "support an artist by buying the cd" when the damn labels don't support them, by "allowing" them to make 3 cents per song per CD. The frickin labels do nothing but line their _own_ coffers with the rest of the money. They couldn't buy stamps unless they had artists contracts and they _STILL_ screw them. I don't agree with you in the "buy the CD" sense, but you have a great idea on the other side. Let's all send $2 - $5 bucks (or whatever) for songs you _do_ like DIRECTLY to the artists. They's love that if people honestly did that.
Now your statement about the RIAA is a little bit incorrect. The RIAA, contrary to their title, are not looking out for the best interest of music "artists." They get paid by the record labels, thussly they look out for the interests of said labels. Now of course the Labels supposedly look out for their artists, but normally that is not the case. Big-name artists (Like Metallica or Madonna) get preferential treatment from their labels, unless they own them;-) in which case, duh! But for most artists they have only to look forward to touring. Just wanted to make a clarification.
Bob
Re:More OSes = More standards = Good
on
AtheOS
·
· Score: 1
Damn you man;-) Think of the whole business of software/file format translators. There are/have been millions made. You want a whole (sub)industry to die?
Apparently you didn't understand the point of my posting. What I was hinting at was that it would be stupid for (insert fortune500 name here) to rewrite the millions of lines of code to a new OS that they would have to run on the same underlying OS. I'm _not_familiar_ with the particulars, but at a very high level, the cobol programs are running on MVS. If one decided to run numerous LinuxVM's, they would have to port the Cobol apps to Linux, No? If they ported them, they would lose all the reliabilty inherent in the fact that some of these programs are 30 years old. If they didn't port them (ie, a cobol translator/emulator on the LinuxVM, if such a thing exists) it would be redundant in the fact that the LinuxVM itself is running the same way as one of those cobol apps.
IMHO, it is silly to work on a Linux port to the mainframe hardware outside of the opinion it is neat (with which I agree). There could be some business need to have _some_ LinuxVM's on a mainframe, but it certainly isn't what the Iron should be used primarily for. If you can make a profit using your 390 as a LinuxVM-hosting ONLY box/wing (sic), great; congratulations. I just wouldn't think that was possible.
ps. that statement about maturity is a little flawed. Maturity is about knowing which things to implement. OS/390+Big Blue/Big Iron are mature because they have weathered constant and oftentimes drastic changes in the computer field. They have outstanding products that do not buckle under the high stress these changes have placed on computing, where PC based systems WOULD HAVE. It is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT market and it should STAY that way. I don't screw around with the mainframes, the mainframers don't screw around with the PC systems. We have a mutual respect for each other. When issues arrise, they're usually PC related;-) go figure, we just haven't been around that long.
Wow, kudos to Bob Metcalfe
on
Boo No More
·
· Score: 1
And you can be sure he'll rub in our proverbial faces. Make sure to keep your eye on the ether. Thanks Bob for being such a closed-minded **** Oh wait, thanks for ethernet. And for all you Micro$erfs living in a Linux world, check out Nicholas Petreley's current article on Infoworld. He suggests things that you should have learned the first time around, gasp!! when Novell was everyone's baby.
and it is kiddo. the point is, is that it should be available in the case that one _needs_ it, as my friend does. BTW, I never said "mission critical." You implied.
Not only that, but consider the investment. They would have to rewrite MILLIONS of lines of code from cobol to whatever. They didn't rewrite for Y2K, what make (that guy) think they'd rewrite for a system downgrade (yes, i realize I said downgrade). I agree that VMS is the most mature OS around, what do you expect for 30+ years in the making. Bank's wouldn't move from the reliability associated with mainframes to that of questionable integrity associated with a PC (based, developed) OS, even if it _WAS_ on the same old hardware. The fact is you _cannot_ beat a mainframe for reliabilty, stability at HIGH loads, and total cost per transaction, and THAT is what banks look at.
Yeah man. I love slack. You can't guess how many times a buddy of mine has asked for some help, or asked me to point him in the direction of a good (put app name here). I usually say "It's in the XYZ directory." "No it's not," he'll reply. I'll then say "Get a real dist." It's amazing that so many "big name" Linux distros (like Caldera, nudge, nudge) don't install by default critical services like tftpd. Duh!! I take so many things for granted that I assume other (li/*NUX) admins now where to find things. Duh me.
dude, did you read that article from linuxplanet awhile back? Twas awesome! If you thought that article was awesome, check out this sweet piece of hardware.
My point being that Microsoft knowingly unleashed their "intellectual property," their "trade secret" with the intention of using our community to make a point in the online world. No doubt there are Micro$erfs who read slashdot to see what we're up to. They know of our extreme dislike of them. They _MUST_ have known that someone _WOULD_ post the frickin source on our forum. They knew this would happen and that would then give them the leverage they need to make it more apparent for the US' "need" of the DMCA. I personally think it was stupid and irresposible of the poster to actaully post the damn thing, but even I knew it would happen. I feel that M$, not Andover.net should feel the consequences for this stupid act.
I like your idea here and I agree with you 100%. However I suggest taking it one step further. Perhaps all parties currently in litigation (your above-mentioned 2600, Napster, mp3.com, et al) and Andover.net should instead challenge the legality of the DMCA _DIRECTLY_ in regards to freedom of speech and such. Is it possible to go directly to the top (Supreme court), you know "Andover.net et al, VS United States?"
Obviously M$ has a case if their "Specification" was truely a trade secret. My question of course is how can one post a "Trade Secret" on the internet? Part of that phrase is "secret." You can't post a "secret" on the internet and expect it to stay that way. I assume M$ _KNEW_ someone would illegally post their "secret" and prolly knew it would get posted here (/.). It sounds to me as some sort of scare tactic and a feeble attempt at quieting the geekish masses who are about to overthrow their market domination. If M$ follows through with legal action against Andover.net, you can be ASSURED everyone will watch, those with alot to lose with the overturn of the DMCA like MPAA, RIAA, Metallica (:p), M$.
I like your idea here and I agree with you 100%. However I suggest taking it one step further. Perhaps all parties currently in litigation (your above-mentioned 2600, Napster, mp3.com, et al) and Andover.net should instead challenge the legality of the DMCA _DIRECTLY_ in regards to freedom of speech and such. Is it possible to go directly to the top (Supreme court), you know "Andover.net et al, VS United States?"
Obviously M$ has a case if their "Specification" was truely a trade secret. My question of course is how can one post a "Trade Secret" on the internet? Part of that phrase is "secret." You can't post a "secret" on the internet and expect it to stay that way. I assume M$ _KNEW_ someone would illegally post their "secret" and prolly knew it would get posted here (/.). It sounds to me as some sort of scare tactic and a feeble attempt at quieting the geekish masses who are about to overthrow their market domination. If M$ follows through with legal action against Andover.net, you can be ASSURED everyone will watch, those with alot to lose with the overturn of the DMCA like MPAA, RIAA, Metallica (:p), M$.
Dude dude dude. I have been waiting to hear this. Finally someone who has been defamed. I feel sorry for your buddy who is trying to get some play out of his cover of "Enter Sandman." That is the whold idea behind Napster/mp3.com/MP3z in general. For smalltime bands/artists to get play who wouldn't otherwise. Is there anything illegal about playing covers? Is there anything illegal about distributing a friend's cover band music? If there isn't I think you have ONE HELL OF A CASE. Of course, I'm not a lawyer but I wanted to show my support. Good Luck!!!
I tell you, every one of those 300,000 users should consent to be sued. Like Metallica is really gonna sue ALL 300,000 people. Not that they can't afford it, but thats like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Why would you sue 300,000 (loyal) fans?!?!?!?!?
Well dude, consider that its much easier to wipe down a (flat) keyboard than to hose out a standard keyboard. That's the idea with this industrial keyboards, they can take alot AND they can be cleaned off easily too.
Just do what Compaq did years ago to bust into the clone line. Get someone to download the spec, get a moron to click through, then get an intelligent programmer to read the PDF. That way, the programmer never agreed to anything; he's just reading a PDF.
M$hit owns ZDNet anyway, so why are you all surprised.
Bob
remember the cryptographic export restriction?
on
Thus Spake Stallman
·
· Score: 1
It just hit me as I was reading RMS' replies, that this whole DMCA/UCITA thing will die in a few years. The Supreme Court will have to settle a landmark case for the illegality of the (DMCA/UCITA) to be completely apparent, to all. (just because we understand it, doesn't mean the senators/representatives did; they just passed a bill they were lobbied to push.) Consider, the Supreme Court just recently over-ruled the long-standing ban on exporting encryption because a professors free-speech was impaired. The Judges who sit on the Supreme Court are _well_versed_ on Constitutional freedoms. The congress is not. Remember of course the Supreme Court does _NOT_ get to create new laws. They can only _overturn_ them. I hate to think we'll have to live with the UCITA/DMCA for awhile, but give it some time. If someone decides to break the law claiming the illegality of DMCA/UCITA, it's gonna have to be well thought out, or just very simply point out the fundamental flaws of those laws.
Now that has got to be the most sane advice I have ever seen on/. I think I'll join you. I suggest that the rest of us who'd be just as content to sit on the fence (read/.) jump the hell off and get into the mud. We can complain all we want in an online forum like this, granted there is some notariety with the Slashdot name, but no one *Important* cares. I doubt that my Senators, Bill Roth and Joe Biden, have/. accounts or even know we exist. The point is if we want to make an impression on our *ELECTED representatives*, we must bring it to them. They got a lot of people to look after and can't monitor everything. If there is an issue the house or senate can work, you need to get in touch. Hit up the Congressional website to find your rep's and senators. And if they don't consider your issues as a problem, find a possible replacement for them next election year. Otherwise, run yourself and put it to them. They gotta come back home to campaign sometime!
If I recall, part of the spec for High-class containing/carrying (notebooks) and computers in general is that if they are tampered with, the drives erase. If orange book doesn't already cover this, then someone needs to be shot.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't even make it through the first two questions. He doesn't write clear, concise answers. It's very tough to read a well thought out question, and then read a response that is extremely long and says nothing at all. Damnit. I guess it just goes to show that having multi-millions of dollars doesn't do a damn thing about a lack of education. I hate speaking to people who can't speak Enlish well.
/dev/null
flames can go to
Bob
Dude, you've basically chased your own tail. How can you say "support an artist by buying the cd" when the damn labels don't support them, by "allowing" them to make 3 cents per song per CD. The frickin labels do nothing but line their _own_ coffers with the rest of the money. They couldn't buy stamps unless they had artists contracts and they _STILL_ screw them. I don't agree with you in the "buy the CD" sense, but you have a great idea on the other side. Let's all send $2 - $5 bucks (or whatever) for songs you _do_ like DIRECTLY to the artists. They's love that if people honestly did that.
;-) in which case, duh! But for most artists they have only to look forward to touring. Just wanted to make a clarification.
Now your statement about the RIAA is a little bit incorrect. The RIAA, contrary to their title, are not looking out for the best interest of music "artists." They get paid by the record labels, thussly they look out for the interests of said labels. Now of course the Labels supposedly look out for their artists, but normally that is not the case. Big-name artists (Like Metallica or Madonna) get preferential treatment from their labels, unless they own them
Bob
Damn you man ;-) Think of the whole business of software/file format translators. There are/have been millions made. You want a whole (sub)industry to die?
bob
Apparently you didn't understand the point of my posting. What I was hinting at was that it would be stupid for (insert fortune500 name here) to rewrite the millions of lines of code to a new OS that they would have to run on the same underlying OS. I'm _not_familiar_ with the particulars, but at a very high level, the cobol programs are running on MVS. If one decided to run numerous LinuxVM's, they would have to port the Cobol apps to Linux, No? If they ported them, they would lose all the reliabilty inherent in the fact that some of these programs are 30 years old. If they didn't port them (ie, a cobol translator/emulator on the LinuxVM, if such a thing exists) it would be redundant in the fact that the LinuxVM itself is running the same way as one of those cobol apps.
;-) go figure, we just haven't been around that long.
IMHO, it is silly to work on a Linux port to the mainframe hardware outside of the opinion it is neat (with which I agree). There could be some business need to have _some_ LinuxVM's on a mainframe, but it certainly isn't what the Iron should be used primarily for. If you can make a profit using your 390 as a LinuxVM-hosting ONLY box/wing (sic), great; congratulations. I just wouldn't think that was possible.
ps. that statement about maturity is a little flawed. Maturity is about knowing which things to implement. OS/390+Big Blue/Big Iron are mature because they have weathered constant and oftentimes drastic changes in the computer field. They have outstanding products that do not buckle under the high stress these changes have placed on computing, where PC based systems WOULD HAVE. It is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT market and it should STAY that way. I don't screw around with the mainframes, the mainframers don't screw around with the PC systems. We have a mutual respect for each other. When issues arrise, they're usually PC related
yeah man sorry 'bout that. so many damn acronyms.
And you can be sure he'll rub in our proverbial faces. Make sure to keep your eye on the ether. Thanks Bob for being such a closed-minded **** Oh wait, thanks for ethernet. And for all you Micro$erfs living in a Linux world, check out Nicholas Petreley's current article on Infoworld. He suggests things that you should have learned the first time around, gasp!! when Novell was everyone's baby.
and it is kiddo. the point is, is that it should be available in the case that one _needs_ it, as my friend does. BTW, I never said "mission critical." You implied.
Not only that, but consider the investment. They would have to rewrite MILLIONS of lines of code from cobol to whatever. They didn't rewrite for Y2K, what make (that guy) think they'd rewrite for a system downgrade (yes, i realize I said downgrade). I agree that VMS is the most mature OS around, what do you expect for 30+ years in the making. Bank's wouldn't move from the reliability associated with mainframes to that of questionable integrity associated with a PC (based, developed) OS, even if it _WAS_ on the same old hardware. The fact is you _cannot_ beat a mainframe for reliabilty, stability at HIGH loads, and total cost per transaction, and THAT is what banks look at.
Bob
Yeah man. I love slack. You can't guess how many times a buddy of mine has asked for some help, or asked me to point him in the direction of a good (put app name here). I usually say "It's in the XYZ directory." "No it's not," he'll reply. I'll then say "Get a real dist." It's amazing that so many "big name" Linux distros (like Caldera, nudge, nudge) don't install by default critical services like tftpd. Duh!! I take so many things for granted that I assume other (li/*NUX) admins now where to find things. Duh me.
Bob
dude, did you read that article from linuxplanet awhile back? Twas awesome! If you thought that article was awesome, check out this sweet piece of hardware.
My point being that Microsoft knowingly unleashed their "intellectual property," their "trade secret" with the intention of using our community to make a point in the online world. No doubt there are Micro$erfs who read slashdot to see what we're up to. They know of our extreme dislike of them. They _MUST_ have known that someone _WOULD_ post the frickin source on our forum. They knew this would happen and that would then give them the leverage they need to make it more apparent for the US' "need" of the DMCA. I personally think it was stupid and irresposible of the poster to actaully post the damn thing, but even I knew it would happen. I feel that M$, not Andover.net should feel the consequences for this stupid act.
Bob
I like your idea here and I agree with you 100%. However I suggest taking it one step further. Perhaps all parties currently in litigation (your above-mentioned 2600, Napster, mp3.com, et al) and Andover.net should instead challenge the legality of the DMCA _DIRECTLY_ in regards to freedom of speech and such. Is it possible to go directly to the top (Supreme court), you know "Andover.net et al, VS United States?"
.02
Obviously M$ has a case if their "Specification" was truely a trade secret. My question of course is how can one post a "Trade Secret" on the internet? Part of that phrase is "secret." You can't post a "secret" on the internet and expect it to stay that way. I assume M$ _KNEW_ someone would illegally post their "secret" and prolly knew it would get posted here (/.). It sounds to me as some sort of scare tactic and a feeble attempt at quieting the geekish masses who are about to overthrow their market domination. If M$ follows through with legal action against Andover.net, you can be ASSURED everyone will watch, those with alot to lose with the overturn of the DMCA like MPAA, RIAA, Metallica (:p), M$.
Just my
Bob
I like your idea here and I agree with you 100%. However I suggest taking it one step further. Perhaps all parties currently in litigation (your above-mentioned 2600, Napster, mp3.com, et al) and Andover.net should instead challenge the legality of the DMCA _DIRECTLY_ in regards to freedom of speech and such. Is it possible to go directly to the top (Supreme court), you know "Andover.net et al, VS United States?"
.02
Obviously M$ has a case if their "Specification" was truely a trade secret. My question of course is how can one post a "Trade Secret" on the internet? Part of that phrase is "secret." You can't post a "secret" on the internet and expect it to stay that way. I assume M$ _KNEW_ someone would illegally post their "secret" and prolly knew it would get posted here (/.). It sounds to me as some sort of scare tactic and a feeble attempt at quieting the geekish masses who are about to overthrow their market domination. If M$ follows through with legal action against Andover.net, you can be ASSURED everyone will watch, those with alot to lose with the overturn of the DMCA like MPAA, RIAA, Metallica (:p), M$.
Just my
Bob
And that is NetPDs lawyers' problem.
bob
Moderate this guy up. He's hit the nail on the head.
Bob
Dude dude dude. I have been waiting to hear this. Finally someone who has been defamed. I feel sorry for your buddy who is trying to get some play out of his cover of "Enter Sandman." That is the whold idea behind Napster/mp3.com/MP3z in general. For smalltime bands/artists to get play who wouldn't otherwise. Is there anything illegal about playing covers? Is there anything illegal about distributing a friend's cover band music? If there isn't I think you have ONE HELL OF A CASE. Of course, I'm not a lawyer but I wanted to show my support. Good Luck!!!
Bob
I tell you, every one of those 300,000 users should consent to be sued. Like Metallica is really gonna sue ALL 300,000 people. Not that they can't afford it, but thats like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Why would you sue 300,000 (loyal) fans?!?!?!?!?
Bob
Well dude, consider that its much easier to wipe down a (flat) keyboard than to hose out a standard keyboard. That's the idea with this industrial keyboards, they can take alot AND they can be cleaned off easily too.
Bob
Moderate this guy up! He's hit the nail on the head. This is basically what I was saying a few days ago on the Maryland UCITA passage.
Bob
Just do what Compaq did years ago to bust into the clone line. Get someone to download the spec, get a moron to click through, then get an intelligent programmer to read the PDF. That way, the programmer never agreed to anything; he's just reading a PDF.
Bob
M$hit owns ZDNet anyway, so why are you all surprised.
Bob
It just hit me as I was reading RMS' replies, that this whole DMCA/UCITA thing will die in a few years. The Supreme Court will have to settle a landmark case for the illegality of the (DMCA/UCITA) to be completely apparent, to all. (just because we understand it, doesn't mean the senators/representatives did; they just passed a bill they were lobbied to push.) Consider, the Supreme Court just recently over-ruled the long-standing ban on exporting encryption because a professors free-speech was impaired. The Judges who sit on the Supreme Court are _well_versed_ on Constitutional freedoms. The congress is not. Remember of course the Supreme Court does _NOT_ get to create new laws. They can only _overturn_ them. I hate to think we'll have to live with the UCITA/DMCA for awhile, but give it some time. If someone decides to break the law claiming the illegality of DMCA/UCITA, it's gonna have to be well thought out, or just very simply point out the fundamental flaws of those laws.
.02
Just my
Bob
man i guess i shouldn't have posted anonymous coward. I could have gotten to points as I made this comment a while ago.
Now that has got to be the most sane advice I have ever seen on /. I think I'll join you. I suggest that the rest of us who'd be just as content to sit on the fence (read /.) jump the hell off and get into the mud. We can complain all we want in an online forum like this, granted there is some notariety with the Slashdot name, but no one *Important* cares. I doubt that my Senators, Bill Roth and Joe Biden, have /. accounts or even know we exist. The point is if we want to make an impression on our *ELECTED representatives*, we must bring it to them. They got a lot of people to look after and can't monitor everything. If there is an issue the house or senate can work, you need to get in touch. Hit up the Congressional website to find your rep's and senators. And if they don't consider your issues as a problem, find a possible replacement for them next election year. Otherwise, run yourself and put it to them. They gotta come back home to campaign sometime!
Bob
If I recall, part of the spec for High-class containing/carrying (notebooks) and computers in general is that if they are tampered with, the drives erase. If orange book doesn't already cover this, then someone needs to be shot.
Bob