IMHO the DaVinci Code was good, but not great. For a much, much better book (also by Dan Brown) try Angels and Demons. I don't know if it was published this year (& therefore 'eligible'), but I found it better in every way than the DaVinci Code -- more (and better) science, more (and just as interesting) symbology, and just as much historical basis with tons of little tidbits that make you go 'hmm.'
"Flavour." That's so genteel and British-sounding . . . but it doesn't answer the only important question, dammit! (Which is, naturally, does it have -- and if so how much -- caffeine?)
combine your morning coffee with breakfast
Doesn't everyone eat their Cheerios in out of their coffee cup anyway? Surely I'm not the only one . ..
True, but until it is proved that their code has already been placed in the public domain, SCO has the same rights as any business that has a legitimate trade secret to protect -- which is to seek this sort of protective order to prevent that secret becoming a part of the public record.
I don't doubt that this is all just more SCO manuevering/FUD, but if they do get a protective order it only hurts the OSS community, not IBM and its lawyers.
Amen to that. And it's not just Rich White Man A vs. B -- it's Rich White Man that went to stuffy New England prep school 1 and then Yale/Harvard vs. RWM that went to stuffy New England prep school 2 and then Yale/Harvard.
"Both Howard Brush Dean III and George Walker Bush hail from the same White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (Wasp) establishment: a world of blue blood and old money, of private schools and deb balls, of family connections and inherited first names. Their fathers and grandfathers were educated at the same Ivy League university, Yale. One of Mr Bush's grandmothers was a bridesmaid for one of Dr Dean's (they had been at finishing school together). Dr Dean's father worked as a stockbroker at Dean Witter Reynolds, and the young Howard grew up on Hook Pond in East Hampton and on Park Avenue. He was educated at St George's in Newport, a posh boarding school, and then at Yale, where he overlapped for a year with Mr Bush, who had been to Andover."
from the Economist, 11/27/03 print edition, online here, but subscription required.
I don't buy it. As far as being able to organize a campaign based on emotionally-charged issues, and thus being able to recruit volunteers with little or not effort, the internet will and has had a dramatic impact on politics (i.e., Howard Dean). But just because it allowed Dean to expand his base of support much more rapidly and widely than was ever possible before, that does not automatically mean the death of organized politics and our two-party system. How will it help moderate, hum-drum politics and politicians (probably > 90%), or even interesting politicians without a drum to beat? It won't. It'll help the radical and/or disaffected fringes to have more of a voice (which is usually a good thing), but most Americans are firmly in the middle of the road. The group that appeals most to the middle is going to be the one that wins. I'm not saying our current system will be the way it is forever (god help us if so), but I don't see any radical change anytime soon.
That's the way trademark law works -- it doesn't just prohibit exact copies, but also any mark that's close enough to cause "confusion." And with a famous mark like Windows, there's a dilution argument which basically prevents anything that makes the famous mark look bad or cause negative connotations in people's minds.
Either way, though, I think Windows' case is pretty shaky. The underlying basis for trademark law is to prevent a company from confusing consumers and taking advantage of a competitor's goodwill. Unfortunately, the courts keep expanding it to ridiculous levels so that now a trademark is protected as intellectual property, instead of just to prevent unfair competition.
Here's another article at the Reg about this, and one at Newsforge about Lindows new website, ChoicePC for taking donations to help Lindows European resellers fight this.
Microsoft has plans to deliver a 64-bit version of its Windows XP operating system for Athlon 64 desktops. Once that software is available, consumers will be able to make the step up to 64 bits.
But not until then, apparently. Aw, shucks. Too bad there aren't any 64 bit operating systems out there now . ..
Anyone know of anything comparable for old Macs? My father-in-law gave me an old PowerPC that I hate to throw away, but don't have any real use for. Thanks.
I'm all for IBM pursuing this to the bloody end, but to play the devil's advocate here the downside to the "Linux lottery" is the millions that SCO has paid its attorneys in cash and stock options, with no return on its investment other than the loss of its legitimacy and good will as a software provider.
As for IBM's lawyers, I don't know the details of IBM's internal structure, but generally speaking in-house counsel handle thinks like transactions and reviewing licensing agreements. Big-time litigation is contracted out to firms that specialize in litigation. You may be thinking that IBM is probably involved in enough litigation to justify hiring its own trial lawyers, but think about how many jurisdictions they would have to be licensed in to be worthwhile (it's very unusual for lawyers to be licensed in more than a couple states -- bar exams just aren't that fun, not to mention the yearly continuing education requirements for each state). I do know some details about another behemoth business entity, Wal-Mart, and its legal department handles contracts and real estate, and that's pretty much it.
SCO can't dismiss the counterclaims, but IBM would probably settle very quickly for an agreement by SCO not to challenge its rights to UNIX/LINUX in the future. IBM is still a business, after all, and -- as emotionally satisfying as it may be to stomp SCO into a greasy film -- litigation is expensive. Without the threat to its business, IBM loses its incentive to pursure this matter.
Here's the Groklaw post, since it'll never survive/. today:
First Report from Grokker Inside Hearing: IBM Wins Both Motions to Compel
Friday, December 05 2003 @ 02:30 PM EST
Our first report from a Groklaw volunteer, sam, who attended the court hearing is that IBM won both of its motions to compel and SCO's motion was set for a later date. Here is what sam is telling us, and it's subject to further information and confirmation as more news arrives. We have several attending and I'll do a followup, but this is the first word. Here is what sam is telling us:
"Just returned from the hearing.
"Needless to say there was blood all over the floor on the SCO side of the aisle none on the 'left' side.
"Judge granted both IBM motions to compel, gave SCO thirty days to comply 'with specificity' and suspended further discovery. Did not rule on the SCO motion until next hearing scheduled for Friday, Jan 23 and 10:00 am.
"SCO did say that they will be filing a complaint within days on copyright violations.
"More to come"
So it looks like they have 30 days to finally tell us what code they are talking about "with specificity". Finally.
The judge could, indeed, dismiss the case if SCO refuses to comply, but that is an extreme remedy that is seldom used. I think SCO will either give the information (although probably not with "specificity") or else dismiss the suit on its own. As Michael's pithy tag-line says, this is a classic case of put-up-or-shut-up, and I (like most/.ers) doubt there is much of anything to "put-up."
He provides an interesting framework for analyzing the issue, but I don't know that I agree with his conclusions that nanotech will increase the demand for highly-educated labor, thereby increasing income inequality. I think any shifts in income equality will come from a straight loss of manufacturing jobs rather than an increase in the need for educated workers. If nanotechnology is to be economically feasible, it will have to rely on automation to the same or a higher degree than current manufacturing techniques. Other than R&D, there won't be any need for more education, because extra schooling is probably more of a liability than an asset when it comes to running a machine on an assembly line.
This is also analogous to the technological revolution, because a much higher number of workers were left unemployed by the increase in productivity than moved to the cities and became factory workers -- witness the enormous social turmoil at the turn of the century. The relatively higher American education levels probably had a much greater impact in the service sector than manufacturing 50-100 years ago. Although level of education has picked up somewhat in the last decade or so (concurrent with America's resurgent dominance in non-military technology), compared to other industrialized countries American education below the college level simply sucks.
This goes back to the recent law passed by congress (discussed here ) that failed to define spam as all unsolicited mass emails. Until we can get politicians to pass a law defining spam to be what we all know it to be, there isn't anything we can do about obvious conflicts of interest like this except gripe.
the biggest problem that the Open Source community faces in taking Open Source to the next level is . . . the immaturity and insecurity of some of the members of the community.
I obviously cannot vouch for the maturity and security level of everyone in the Open Source community, but I disagree with this conclusion. The partisanship and the sometimes irrational emotional responses are a problem (maybe the problem) with Open Source, but are not the result of "immaturity" or "insecurity." They are a natural human reaction to perceived attacks on X, where X is something into which a great deal of time/work/hope has been invested.
I agree that the community could advance more rapidly without all of the competing distributions, standards, etc., but that very same diversity is what gives Open Source its strength. The redundancy may slow things in some ways, but it helps guarantee that -- when the standards are winnowed down -- the strongest and best survive. Calling the members of the community "immature" and "insecure" is mere name-calling that is more likely to induce the exact emotional responses the author laments rather than the needed calm, rational debate on this important issue.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess that means this new album will fit nicely into your collection then?
Dammit Jim! I'm a doctor, not a lounge singer!
I've done it, lots of times. I make them out of tinfoil. It's stops the cosmic rays, you know.
IMHO the DaVinci Code was good, but not great. For a much, much better book (also by Dan Brown) try Angels and Demons. I don't know if it was published this year (& therefore 'eligible'), but I found it better in every way than the DaVinci Code -- more (and better) science, more (and just as interesting) symbology, and just as much historical basis with tons of little tidbits that make you go 'hmm.'
Answer: The Slashdot-effect!
Only if you promise to stop calling me Leslie Nielson......Shirley.
"Flavour." That's so genteel and British-sounding . . . but it doesn't answer the only important question, dammit!
combine your morning coffee with breakfast(Which is, naturally, does it have -- and if so how much -- caffeine?)
Doesn't everyone eat their Cheerios in out of their coffee cup anyway? Surely I'm not the only one . . .
I don't doubt that this is all just more SCO manuevering/FUD, but if they do get a protective order it only hurts the OSS community, not IBM and its lawyers.
"Both Howard Brush Dean III and George Walker Bush hail from the same White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (Wasp) establishment: a world of blue blood and old money, of private schools and deb balls, of family connections and inherited first names. Their fathers and grandfathers were educated at the same Ivy League university, Yale. One of Mr Bush's grandmothers was a bridesmaid for one of Dr Dean's (they had been at finishing school together). Dr Dean's father worked as a stockbroker at Dean Witter Reynolds, and the young Howard grew up on Hook Pond in East Hampton and on Park Avenue. He was educated at St George's in Newport, a posh boarding school, and then at Yale, where he overlapped for a year with Mr Bush, who had been to Andover."
from the Economist, 11/27/03 print edition, online here, but subscription required.I don't buy it. As far as being able to organize a campaign based on emotionally-charged issues, and thus being able to recruit volunteers with little or not effort, the internet will and has had a dramatic impact on politics (i.e., Howard Dean). But just because it allowed Dean to expand his base of support much more rapidly and widely than was ever possible before, that does not automatically mean the death of organized politics and our two-party system. How will it help moderate, hum-drum politics and politicians (probably > 90%), or even interesting politicians without a drum to beat? It won't. It'll help the radical and/or disaffected fringes to have more of a voice (which is usually a good thing), but most Americans are firmly in the middle of the road. The group that appeals most to the middle is going to be the one that wins. I'm not saying our current system will be the way it is forever (god help us if so), but I don't see any radical change anytime soon.
Either way, though, I think Windows' case is pretty shaky. The underlying basis for trademark law is to prevent a company from confusing consumers and taking advantage of a competitor's goodwill. Unfortunately, the courts keep expanding it to ridiculous levels so that now a trademark is protected as intellectual property, instead of just to prevent unfair competition.
Here's another article at the Reg about this, and one at Newsforge about Lindows new website, ChoicePC for taking donations to help Lindows European resellers fight this.
Like, say, from /. for example?
But not until then, apparently. Aw, shucks. Too bad there aren't any 64 bit operating systems out there now . . .
They tried marijuana first, but the mice just got paranoid and started eating everything in sight.
Anyone know of anything comparable for old Macs? My father-in-law gave me an old PowerPC that I hate to throw away, but don't have any real use for.
Thanks.
. . . but the more that people get used to seeing non-MS operating systems (even Java and Lindows), the better.
As for IBM's lawyers, I don't know the details of IBM's internal structure, but generally speaking in-house counsel handle thinks like transactions and reviewing licensing agreements. Big-time litigation is contracted out to firms that specialize in litigation. You may be thinking that IBM is probably involved in enough litigation to justify hiring its own trial lawyers, but think about how many jurisdictions they would have to be licensed in to be worthwhile (it's very unusual for lawyers to be licensed in more than a couple states -- bar exams just aren't that fun, not to mention the yearly continuing education requirements for each state). I do know some details about another behemoth business entity, Wal-Mart, and its legal department handles contracts and real estate, and that's pretty much it.
SCO can't dismiss the counterclaims, but IBM would probably settle very quickly for an agreement by SCO not to challenge its rights to UNIX/LINUX in the future. IBM is still a business, after all, and -- as emotionally satisfying as it may be to stomp SCO into a greasy film -- litigation is expensive. Without the threat to its business, IBM loses its incentive to pursure this matter.
Here's the Groklaw post, since it'll never survive /. today:
First Report from Grokker Inside Hearing: IBM Wins Both Motions to Compel
Friday, December 05 2003 @ 02:30 PM EST
Our first report from a Groklaw volunteer, sam, who attended the court hearing is that IBM won both of its motions to compel and SCO's motion was set for a later date. Here is what sam is telling us, and it's subject to further information and confirmation as more news arrives. We have several attending and I'll do a followup, but this is the first word. Here is what sam is telling us:
"Just returned from the hearing."Needless to say there was blood all over the floor on the SCO side of the aisle none on the 'left' side.
"Judge granted both IBM motions to compel, gave SCO thirty days to comply 'with specificity' and suspended further discovery. Did not rule on the SCO motion until next hearing scheduled for Friday, Jan 23 and 10:00 am.
"SCO did say that they will be filing a complaint within days on copyright violations.
"More to come"
So it looks like they have 30 days to finally tell us what code they are talking about "with specificity". Finally.
The judge could, indeed, dismiss the case if SCO refuses to comply, but that is an extreme remedy that is seldom used. I think SCO will either give the information (although probably not with "specificity") or else dismiss the suit on its own. As Michael's pithy tag-line says, this is a classic case of put-up-or-shut-up, and I (like most /.ers) doubt there is much of anything to "put-up."
Thanks Santa!
This is also analogous to the technological revolution, because a much higher number of workers were left unemployed by the increase in productivity than moved to the cities and became factory workers -- witness the enormous social turmoil at the turn of the century. The relatively higher American education levels probably had a much greater impact in the service sector than manufacturing 50-100 years ago. Although level of education has picked up somewhat in the last decade or so (concurrent with America's resurgent dominance in non-military technology), compared to other industrialized countries American education below the college level simply sucks.
But if that happened, what would happen to /.?
I obviously cannot vouch for the maturity and security level of everyone in the Open Source community, but I disagree with this conclusion. The partisanship and the sometimes irrational emotional responses are a problem (maybe the problem) with Open Source, but are not the result of "immaturity" or "insecurity." They are a natural human reaction to perceived attacks on X, where X is something into which a great deal of time/work/hope has been invested.
I agree that the community could advance more rapidly without all of the competing distributions, standards, etc., but that very same diversity is what gives Open Source its strength. The redundancy may slow things in some ways, but it helps guarantee that -- when the standards are winnowed down -- the strongest and best survive. Calling the members of the community "immature" and "insecure" is mere name-calling that is more likely to induce the exact emotional responses the author laments rather than the needed calm, rational debate on this important issue.