I'm surprised at this news, as in every IT shop I've worked in that had foreign workers I found their programming skills to be excellent but their written English skills to be lacking. Oh, they learned English very well, don't get me wrong. But there is a world of difference between being able to speak English fluently and being able to write it correctly. Even the very best of them would have comma issues or something that was a result of their native language rules imposing on their brain. That's perfectly natural. If I learned German, for instance, for a move to Germany, I'll bet I could learn to speak it long before I could write it fluently and correctly enough to pass an editor's check.
Now I know that Indians get an excellent education, and that includes English. But do they know the language well enough to be efficient writers? I truly don't know, so I'm asking if anyone has had experience in this area. My first reaction to this story is to think that editor is going to have a LOT more red lining to do.
I wouldn't classify myself as such a geek, but I sure hung around with those types in school and know the mindset very well. I was always the type who thought somewhat like a geek, but not all the way. I was fascinated by tech stuff, but it was not all-consuming for me. I enjoyed writing as much as I did programming, for example. So I served as a kind of bridge for my more geeky friends to the "normal" kids. I could get along in both crowds, and made friends easily among all types. (In fact, I usually would try to befriend the tough kids so as to have protection ).
What I saw missing from my geeky friend's social skill set was empathy. They knew they were different and smarter than the rest, and they liked being smarter. Made them cocky, and they looked down upon the rest. The more they were teased, the more they withdrew, and the more they looked down on their tormentors. So how does empathy help? Look, these are smart kids and they can be reasoned with that they are going to have to spend a lifetime among people not as smart as they are. There is no getting around that unless you become a near hermit. So wouldn't it be smart to try to see themselves as others see them?
Yeah, who cares if you comb your hair anyway? Aren't there more important things in life, and besides people shouldn't judge me by my outer appearance! True, all true. But you know what? They do and they will. So does it make a difference whether or not your hair is combed? If no one cares, no. If people do care, yeah, it causes hassles for you that can so easily be avoided by a 30-second brush with a comb. Not hard, appeases the ignorant. Comes in handy if you ever have a job interview (and you will want one someday, won't you?).
Empathy allows you to think through the other person's eyes. Yeah, they aren't as smart as you, but they can't fully help that (biology and all that) and yet they are still humans with as much right toward dignity and respect as you would want for yourself. Apperances and actions shouldn't matter in a perfect world where intellect was all that counted, but we don't live in that world. We do have to interact with people who judge us for all the wrong reasons. Isn't it smart to spend just a minimal amount of effort to smooth our way in life? If you are perceived as a jerk by others, no matter how invalid the reason may be, it will cause friction in your life.
The smart person sees that friction coming and heads it off with a few simple social tricks that fool the ignorant. It's great as a party trick too!
WM and Real - Just Say No
on
Real's Reality
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Ah, Real and Windows Media, the two formats I avoid on principle just because I find the practices of their parent companies to be ugly. It's a shame, really, and sometimes I go to a site where those are the only two choices I have to view video. So what do I do to get around that? Simple: I move on to the next site.
Get that, Real? Some of us avoid your products because of your policies and would rather not see the cute little movie rather than give in. Enjoy your bottom line.
Ahhh...what to do, what to do?....This is good, for software patents are bad. But this is bad, for it is good for Microsoft. But it is good, for it saves the rest of us from this patent. But this is bad-- (HEAD EXPLODES)
Actually, I'd pay good money to see an example of that. Let's see, if something is constant, it is firmly steadfast, and so something that is inconstant that must be free and easy and ever-changing. Would be quite a sentence...
Remember the first MyDoom variant had programmer comments in them and people were speculating that it was an attack on SCO because of the DDoS that was set in motion. Later we found out more details and it seemed that the DDoS was just the misdirect designed to fool the media. It worked, and all the media stories faithfully reported the SCO angle. But the real purpose of MyDoom is to create zombie machines for spamming. That angle was mostly overlooked, but is the most important part of the story. Investigation seemed to point to Russia as an origin point, and possibly organized crime behind it all.
With that in mind, those programmer comments being reported now, although they do seem to show a gang war, may just be more misdirection and once again the media fell for it. If it really is the spammers behind it all, and criminal elements doing it (yeah, I know, "spammers" and "criminal elements" are redundant), this gang war idea may just be more cover.
Meanwhile there are millions of zombie Windows boxes around the world with clueless owners not realizing they are 0wn3d. That's the real story the media should be following up on.
"In terms of usage, Apple got it intuitively right."
Whether it's intuition or hard research, more often than not Apple gets it right. The other computer companies usually go for "good enough" and as cheap as they can make it, and that got them market share but not that much loyalty. Now that the computer companies are being forced by reduced margins into the consumer electronic space, they are going to be faced with a different mindset. People who buy electronic widgets do not say, "Hey, who cares if it's a beige box, I don't care what it looks like, I just want cheap!" Instead people want stereos and televisions and DVD players that have quality features and look good with the rest of their stuff. Low price works to some degree here, but high-end does quite well too.
Apple has been there all along. There's a reason Apple users tend to be loyal despite the occasional hiccups from Apple and historically higher margins: They get it right. And boy does that matter in the consumer electronic marketplace. For proof of that, just walk around any large city and count the iPods. They got it right.
"Open source is a philosophy for software licensing designed to encourage the improvement and use of software by anyone who wants to join in. It ensures that the source code, the underlying instructions of the software, can be examined and modified freely.
The open source movement eschews proprietary controls and its software is usually produced not by firms, but by networks of volunteers who look after different pieces of an application."
Groklaw is an example of this exact method, even though it is not involved in software development. It is a legal site that encourages anyone to join in, the results are not produced by law firms, but by networks of volunteers who look after different pieces of the legal brief. It started as one woman's personal blog and then took off when the FOSS community saw the usefulness of having a subject matter expert in law commenting on cases that mattered to the community. So the community joined in and now it's a distributed project on the exact model of an Open Source programming project.
So these principles work for more than just programming. It's a useful model for any community project. The power of the community made manifest. We're stronger when we work together.
Whoever did it, they were probably influenced by the publicity about the case and calls for prior art. Haven't we seen a number of patent cases discussed on/. where someone asks for prior art examples and people respond with examples? All it took was for the issue to be exposed. If you know about prior art, but you don't hear about a patent violating it, you can't speak up. It's the publicity that helps.
We all know how poorly the U.S. Patent Office has handled tech patent requests. What can you or I do to help the bad situation? Spread the word. In the Net universe, even the most famous tech god is only an email away.
" If 99% of the world uses "hacker" in a negative context, I think the real hackers had better find a new term, because language is driven by those that use it."
You know, you are correct about that. I make my living from words and I have quoted that rule to many people. And yet...and yet...this one just sticks in my craw. 99% of the world uses "hacker" in a negative context because they are ignorant of how it should be, and that just seems so unnecessary. Those of us (well, not me, I was never good enough to be a true hacker) who used the word in the right way saw all these ignorant media stories pushing the wrong definition and we tried to fight it. By educating others. That means speaking up in public forums. Telling friends and neighbors when the subject comes up.
I've been doing this ever since "War Games" came out. I still do it because the hacker tradition continues, is a noble and proud one, and its members use the word the way it is meant to be used. It's not as if the rest of the world decided to use it differently, they just don't know any better.
So for that reason I have not given up the fight yet. Might doesn't make right, even if it sometimes gets the dictionary writers to go along. As long as there are true hackers among us, I will call them by their true and preferred name.
" I can tell right away that you are type of person who defines "FUD" as anything he/she disagrees with."
Completely wrong. I define FUD as anything that is designed to steer somebody away from or toward something the FUDster wants, all without resorting to facts. When you use verifiable facts, it's not FUD. When you use unverifiable innuendo, it's FUD.
"Fairly common attitude among operating system advocates."
I don't run Linux. Totally wrong there too.
"What you are unable to 'grok' is that the whole point of Groklaw is to provide "Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt" that SCO has solid legal case. It's not "anti-FUD" at all -- it's "Fight FUD with FUD".
Completely wrong. Groklaw provides facts and the links to back them up. Let's see Darl try that for a change. If you think Groklaw is just FUDding, go on the site and provide your own facts. But since you are hiding your identity here, perhaps you have no facts.
"And they are very successful at it, and there's some very solid information there. However, they have zero interest in being objective (as they say, lawyers are "fierce advocates"), and their over-willingness to counter every statement Darl farts out with a 2000 word essay just underscores that point."
There is a legal case going on here, and legal cases take time to explain so that you or I can understand what is happening. I'm grateful that a site like Groklaw came along to show that what Darl says is wrong and why it is wrong legally.
" (For example, what's the point of today's story? That SCO used to sell Linux? Everyone knows that.)"
ROFL! I think you should re-read the story if that is what you think the point is.
When the facts are on one side, the other side can't do much except resort to innuendo and FUD. Thus the rise in 'Groklaw is biased' whispers I've seen over the past few months. Well, against SCO, who could NOT be biased at this point unless you are ignorant of the facts of the case? The more you learn about SCO's claims, the more you realize they have nothing. That is why the mainstream press has been slowly but steadily turning against SCO too. They have realized what Groklaw saw early on.
If a guy wants to mug you, guess what? You are biased against his claims against your money.
"Plus, it's blatantly obvious that PJ's whole rationale for spending dozens of hours a week doing Groklaw is to defeat SCO in the public relations war. Chip on her shoulder?"
Not at all. Groklaw is stated to be an anti-FUD site. That is what PJ does, she fights FUD. Guess where most of the FUD has been coming from in this case? So what else would you WANT her to do? Just ignore it?
'Not that there's anything wrong with all that, but you aren't going to convince any outsiders of Groklaw's 'level headed objectivity'. Looks like any bunch of Linux kooks from here."
No it doesn't. Groklaw has been cited in many news articles, is read by CEOs and lawyers and reporters, and has been included in the court case by being cited by IBM. You don't get that level of respect by authorities if you are viewed as "a bunch of Linux kooks." Sorry, go spread your FUD elsewhere, it doesn't apply to Groklaw.
What? A Star Trek series that might not live beyond its third season? Because of viewer apathy and low ratings? Because the plot lines are getting silly?
What is this, the late 60s? Oh yeah, we have seen this exact same scenario before -- with the original series. Yes, all those now beloved Kirk and Spock episodes were being ignored even as all the posters in this thread have been bragging about doing to Enterprise. So no, this is not the end of Star Trek even as Star Trek didn't come to an end in the late 60s. It's all cyclical.
Thank you Emma, that was a very well done review. You answered the usual question ("should I buy this book?") clearly, and the mini-interview with Pogue showed some extra initiative.
For what it's worth, I also like Pogue's writing style. He's very clear, readable, and funny. I also own the OS X Unleashed book, which I recommend too, but it's hard to go wrong with a Mac book by David Pogue.
I realize some people prefer Windows, or accepts Windows as being the most convenient option, but if it were my relative there is no way I would give them a new PC with Windows on it. With the upcoming Digital Restrictions Management and lock-in that Microsoft has planned for Longhorn and beyond, you're setting your relative up for trouble down the road. Let alone the worms issue.
I would never do this for a relative or friend. If they are new to computers, now is not the time to introduce them to Windows. Set 'em up on a Linux distro, or even a Mac.
Yeah, yeah, I know, this sounds like a troll and all, but I am quite serious. Unless you are locked in to Windows for some reason, and given what the Windows world has endured in 2003 and what Microsoft itself says it is going to do to users in the future, please don't inflict this on yet another computer newbie. They won't thank you down the road.
Poor SCO, no one takes them seriously any more. "We own Linux-- er, UNIX, um I mean, some of it, or do we Novell? And we're going to sue everybody in existence for theft-- uh, copyright violations of this code-- oops, not that code, don't look at the man behind the curtain, we mean this code over here -- what? not that code either? OK, I mean these header files -- um, you can't copyright ideas, you have to patent them, and we have plenty of patents -- we don't? Well, we'll be threaten-- um, sending letters to our partners (aren't you happy to be doing business with SCO?) telling to to keep their noses clean and line up for a nose inspection -- what, Novell just copyrighted the same stuff we claim to have copyrighted? Don't tell the judge that! Yikes! What's our stock doing now?! Quick read this press release about, um, yeah, that's it: we just got DDoSed, um, Again! Yeah, that'll work....what's that you say? How much are we paying our lawyers for this nonsense? It's contingency, people, don't worry. Contingency all the way...except for the huge fees we pay along the way...and 20% of the company...but otherwise not much -- and yes, that just wiped out any chance of profits in this quarter, but don't worry, next quarter the legal fees go up and we still don't have any licensees yet. But step right up with $699 and you can be the first on the block to say you got rooked--, uh squared yourself with the law-- um, not really the law, with our lawyers, yeah, that's it."
"So, this apologist for the FSF is apparently attempting to sweep its true intentions under the rug."
First off, Groklaw is not an apologist for anyone. It is an anti-FUD site, and this article was to fight FUD about the GPL. You then contributed to the FUD by your incorrect comments about the GPL. The example Stallman gives is of an employer who sees an opportunity to steal GPL code. Stallman is trying to prevent that from happening.
If you incorporate GPL code into propietary code, you do NOT have to release the resulting code. You are welcome to do so in-house forever. But if you want to take someone else's GPL code and, against the wishes of that copyright owner, put it into your proprietary code and sell it for a profit, that original copyright owner can say no, you may not use my code in that way. Nothing wrong with that, that's what a license is for. That is what copyright law is for.
The true intentions of the GPL are right out there in the open: Don't steal our code! Use it internally all you want. Release it if you want, but release our code only the way the copyright holder of the code wants it to be released. Only if you try to steal code does the GPL bite. But then you should write your own code if that is your intention.
"The second, following We, the Living. It will be followed by Stephen King's We, the Dead. Then the series continues with Jerry Garcia's unpublished autobiography, For Us, the Dead. Finally it will be concluded with a Michael Crichton book, We, the terminally ill, but feeling better today. Perhaps there's still hope for a transplant."
You forgot to conclude it with the Monty Python book, We, the Not Quite Dead Yet.
And in related news, all news reports about the call for paper receipts vanished from news servers today. Spokespersons for all major news services refused comment on the alleged disappearance. A spokesperson for Diebold said, "What reports? Paper receipts? Nobody has asked for that. Can you point to any news stories that allege this? Thought you couldn't."
It is reported that the American people are very happy to have receiptless electronic voting machines. No dissenting reports can be found...
That's right, while the rest of the mainstream media happily reported whatever SCO told them to say, despite the evidence not appearing to support the DDoS story, Groklaw posted a detailed analysis of the situation. Now was it so hard for/. admins to take a quick glance over there, the source for accurate SCO news, before just posting Yet Another SCO Spin version of the story?
Folks, if it's a SCO story, check with Groklaw before passing judgment. For every bit of FUD coming out of Linden, a blast of anti-FUD is lobbied back.
Slashdot Mirror
Now I know that Indians get an excellent education, and that includes English. But do they know the language well enough to be efficient writers? I truly don't know, so I'm asking if anyone has had experience in this area. My first reaction to this story is to think that editor is going to have a LOT more red lining to do.
What I saw missing from my geeky friend's social skill set was empathy. They knew they were different and smarter than the rest, and they liked being smarter. Made them cocky, and they looked down upon the rest. The more they were teased, the more they withdrew, and the more they looked down on their tormentors. So how does empathy help? Look, these are smart kids and they can be reasoned with that they are going to have to spend a lifetime among people not as smart as they are. There is no getting around that unless you become a near hermit. So wouldn't it be smart to try to see themselves as others see them?
Yeah, who cares if you comb your hair anyway? Aren't there more important things in life, and besides people shouldn't judge me by my outer appearance! True, all true. But you know what? They do and they will. So does it make a difference whether or not your hair is combed? If no one cares, no. If people do care, yeah, it causes hassles for you that can so easily be avoided by a 30-second brush with a comb. Not hard, appeases the ignorant. Comes in handy if you ever have a job interview (and you will want one someday, won't you?).
Empathy allows you to think through the other person's eyes. Yeah, they aren't as smart as you, but they can't fully help that (biology and all that) and yet they are still humans with as much right toward dignity and respect as you would want for yourself. Apperances and actions shouldn't matter in a perfect world where intellect was all that counted, but we don't live in that world. We do have to interact with people who judge us for all the wrong reasons. Isn't it smart to spend just a minimal amount of effort to smooth our way in life? If you are perceived as a jerk by others, no matter how invalid the reason may be, it will cause friction in your life.
The smart person sees that friction coming and heads it off with a few simple social tricks that fool the ignorant. It's great as a party trick too!
Get that, Real? Some of us avoid your products because of your policies and would rather not see the cute little movie rather than give in. Enjoy your bottom line.
Actually, I'd pay good money to see an example of that. Let's see, if something is constant, it is firmly steadfast, and so something that is inconstant that must be free and easy and ever-changing. Would be quite a sentence...
With that in mind, those programmer comments being reported now, although they do seem to show a gang war, may just be more misdirection and once again the media fell for it. If it really is the spammers behind it all, and criminal elements doing it (yeah, I know, "spammers" and "criminal elements" are redundant), this gang war idea may just be more cover.
Meanwhile there are millions of zombie Windows boxes around the world with clueless owners not realizing they are 0wn3d. That's the real story the media should be following up on.
Whether it's intuition or hard research, more often than not Apple gets it right. The other computer companies usually go for "good enough" and as cheap as they can make it, and that got them market share but not that much loyalty. Now that the computer companies are being forced by reduced margins into the consumer electronic space, they are going to be faced with a different mindset. People who buy electronic widgets do not say, "Hey, who cares if it's a beige box, I don't care what it looks like, I just want cheap!" Instead people want stereos and televisions and DVD players that have quality features and look good with the rest of their stuff. Low price works to some degree here, but high-end does quite well too.
Apple has been there all along. There's a reason Apple users tend to be loyal despite the occasional hiccups from Apple and historically higher margins: They get it right. And boy does that matter in the consumer electronic marketplace. For proof of that, just walk around any large city and count the iPods. They got it right.
The open source movement eschews proprietary controls and its software is usually produced not by firms, but by networks of volunteers who look after different pieces of an application."
Groklaw is an example of this exact method, even though it is not involved in software development. It is a legal site that encourages anyone to join in, the results are not produced by law firms, but by networks of volunteers who look after different pieces of the legal brief. It started as one woman's personal blog and then took off when the FOSS community saw the usefulness of having a subject matter expert in law commenting on cases that mattered to the community. So the community joined in and now it's a distributed project on the exact model of an Open Source programming project.
So these principles work for more than just programming. It's a useful model for any community project. The power of the community made manifest. We're stronger when we work together.
We all know how poorly the U.S. Patent Office has handled tech patent requests. What can you or I do to help the bad situation? Spread the word. In the Net universe, even the most famous tech god is only an email away.
You know, you are correct about that. I make my living from words and I have quoted that rule to many people. And yet...and yet...this one just sticks in my craw. 99% of the world uses "hacker" in a negative context because they are ignorant of how it should be, and that just seems so unnecessary. Those of us (well, not me, I was never good enough to be a true hacker) who used the word in the right way saw all these ignorant media stories pushing the wrong definition and we tried to fight it. By educating others. That means speaking up in public forums. Telling friends and neighbors when the subject comes up.
I've been doing this ever since "War Games" came out. I still do it because the hacker tradition continues, is a noble and proud one, and its members use the word the way it is meant to be used. It's not as if the rest of the world decided to use it differently, they just don't know any better.
So for that reason I have not given up the fight yet. Might doesn't make right, even if it sometimes gets the dictionary writers to go along. As long as there are true hackers among us, I will call them by their true and preferred name.
Completely wrong. I define FUD as anything that is designed to steer somebody away from or toward something the FUDster wants, all without resorting to facts. When you use verifiable facts, it's not FUD. When you use unverifiable innuendo, it's FUD.
"Fairly common attitude among operating system advocates."
I don't run Linux. Totally wrong there too.
"What you are unable to 'grok' is that the whole point of Groklaw is to provide "Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt" that SCO has solid legal case. It's not "anti-FUD" at all -- it's "Fight FUD with FUD".
Completely wrong. Groklaw provides facts and the links to back them up. Let's see Darl try that for a change. If you think Groklaw is just FUDding, go on the site and provide your own facts. But since you are hiding your identity here, perhaps you have no facts.
"And they are very successful at it, and there's some very solid information there. However, they have zero interest in being objective (as they say, lawyers are "fierce advocates"), and their over-willingness to counter every statement Darl farts out with a 2000 word essay just underscores that point."
There is a legal case going on here, and legal cases take time to explain so that you or I can understand what is happening. I'm grateful that a site like Groklaw came along to show that what Darl says is wrong and why it is wrong legally.
" (For example, what's the point of today's story? That SCO used to sell Linux? Everyone knows that.)"
ROFL! I think you should re-read the story if that is what you think the point is.
Absolutely not true. You do not have to register to read articles. If you had problems earlier, it was probably due to the temporary /.ing.
If a guy wants to mug you, guess what? You are biased against his claims against your money.
Not at all. Groklaw is stated to be an anti-FUD site. That is what PJ does, she fights FUD. Guess where most of the FUD has been coming from in this case? So what else would you WANT her to do? Just ignore it?
'Not that there's anything wrong with all that, but you aren't going to convince any outsiders of Groklaw's 'level headed objectivity'. Looks like any bunch of Linux kooks from here."
No it doesn't. Groklaw has been cited in many news articles, is read by CEOs and lawyers and reporters, and has been included in the court case by being cited by IBM. You don't get that level of respect by authorities if you are viewed as "a bunch of Linux kooks." Sorry, go spread your FUD elsewhere, it doesn't apply to Groklaw.
What is this, the late 60s? Oh yeah, we have seen this exact same scenario before -- with the original series. Yes, all those now beloved Kirk and Spock episodes were being ignored even as all the posters in this thread have been bragging about doing to Enterprise. So no, this is not the end of Star Trek even as Star Trek didn't come to an end in the late 60s. It's all cyclical.
For what it's worth, I also like Pogue's writing style. He's very clear, readable, and funny. I also own the OS X Unleashed book, which I recommend too, but it's hard to go wrong with a Mac book by David Pogue.
I could have sworn I knew the answer to that question prior to my last job...
I would never do this for a relative or friend. If they are new to computers, now is not the time to introduce them to Windows. Set 'em up on a Linux distro, or even a Mac.
Yeah, yeah, I know, this sounds like a troll and all, but I am quite serious. Unless you are locked in to Windows for some reason, and given what the Windows world has endured in 2003 and what Microsoft itself says it is going to do to users in the future, please don't inflict this on yet another computer newbie. They won't thank you down the road.
Poor SCO, no one takes them seriously any more. "We own Linux-- er, UNIX, um I mean, some of it, or do we Novell? And we're going to sue everybody in existence for theft-- uh, copyright violations of this code-- oops, not that code, don't look at the man behind the curtain, we mean this code over here -- what? not that code either? OK, I mean these header files -- um, you can't copyright ideas, you have to patent them, and we have plenty of patents -- we don't? Well, we'll be threaten-- um, sending letters to our partners (aren't you happy to be doing business with SCO?) telling to to keep their noses clean and line up for a nose inspection -- what, Novell just copyrighted the same stuff we claim to have copyrighted? Don't tell the judge that! Yikes! What's our stock doing now?! Quick read this press release about, um, yeah, that's it: we just got DDoSed, um, Again! Yeah, that'll work....what's that you say? How much are we paying our lawyers for this nonsense? It's contingency, people, don't worry. Contingency all the way...except for the huge fees we pay along the way...and 20% of the company...but otherwise not much -- and yes, that just wiped out any chance of profits in this quarter, but don't worry, next quarter the legal fees go up and we still don't have any licensees yet. But step right up with $699 and you can be the first on the block to say you got rooked--, uh squared yourself with the law-- um, not really the law, with our lawyers, yeah, that's it."
First off, Groklaw is not an apologist for anyone. It is an anti-FUD site, and this article was to fight FUD about the GPL. You then contributed to the FUD by your incorrect comments about the GPL. The example Stallman gives is of an employer who sees an opportunity to steal GPL code. Stallman is trying to prevent that from happening.
If you incorporate GPL code into propietary code, you do NOT have to release the resulting code. You are welcome to do so in-house forever. But if you want to take someone else's GPL code and, against the wishes of that copyright owner, put it into your proprietary code and sell it for a profit, that original copyright owner can say no, you may not use my code in that way. Nothing wrong with that, that's what a license is for. That is what copyright law is for.
The true intentions of the GPL are right out there in the open: Don't steal our code! Use it internally all you want. Release it if you want, but release our code only the way the copyright holder of the code wants it to be released. Only if you try to steal code does the GPL bite. But then you should write your own code if that is your intention.
You forgot to conclude it with the Monty Python book, We, the Not Quite Dead Yet.
It is reported that the American people are very happy to have receiptless electronic voting machines. No dissenting reports can be found...
/nt
Folks, if it's a SCO story, check with Groklaw before passing judgment. For every bit of FUD coming out of Linden, a blast of anti-FUD is lobbied back.