Yeah, the national institues of health also have stated to confrences of developmental scientest that any reseach showing that, single parent families of families with working mothers, are just as stable as the "normal" 2 parent 1 income house holds, will not be funded. This happened at a confrence on child development. My mother an her collegues were shocked at this announcement. I, of course, didnt care, I am only an astrophysics student, then Bush announces his Mars push and Hubble is gone and all the astronomy probes that were planed for the next ten years are in jepordy. So yes this adiministration has a very poor record of distrorting facts and ignoring scientific goals.
PS All that NSF funding has been going to projects that benefit DARPA and Homeland Security not fundamental science.
All of the Files are from AIX and Dynx! The only way these conrtibutions are improper is if IBM cannot contribute ANY of its home grown code into linux. There was a bit of a row about this on the LKML before JFS was accepted.
I also find this paragraph odd (113 under First Cause of Action)
IBM has violated 2.01 of the Software Agreement by, inter alia, using and assisting others to use the Software Products (including System V source code, derivative works, documentation rrelated thereto and methods based thereon) for external purposes that are different from, and broader than, IBM's own internal business purposes. By actively supporting, assisting and promoting the transfer of UNIX technology to Linux, and using its access to UNIX technology to accomplish this objective, IBM is (a) using the Software Product for external business purposes, which include use for the benefit of Linus Torvalds, the general Linux community and IBM's Linux distribution partners, Red Hat, Inc., Novell, Inc., SuSE Linux AG and their respective subsidiaries; and is (b) directly and indirectly preparing unauthorized derivative works based on the Software Products and unauthorized modifications thereto in violation of 2.01 of the Software Agreement.
Notice that SysV code is not listed amongst the files in the complaint. The above claim is only true in the case that SCO's Idea of a derivative work is valid.
IMHO, this is actually a reasonable leagal document, where there may be an actual dispute over the idea of a derivative work. However, SCO should not be allowed to change its tack in the middle of discovery, until now this case has been about a claim of copying of sysV code and breach of contract, but now they are claiming here that there was no copying and IBM breached its contract by contributing code that IBM owns into Linux. SCO no longer claims, as they did in there initial filing, that IBM improperly contributed sysV code into Linux. This should not be allowed on the grounds that until now, SCO has been using improper contributions of sysV code attempt to persuade people to pay license fees. This also means that SCO has once again lied publicly about the ammount severity of the copying. In fact the Linux community would not be a party to the dispute if JFS, RCU, and NUMA were removed from the kernel. (These documents do not explain how SMP is affected accept by NUMA.) In that case the court cannot ignore what SCO has stated in public, while allowing them to state something substantivly different in court, its one or the other SCO, not both.
In any case Linux is indemnified by the fact that they asked IBM if all of there technologies were contributed in good faith, IBM said yes, and the Kernel development community had no reason not to belive them.
I still think that SCO has a lot of explaining to do when this is all said and done.
And I resent the hell out of the fact that interplay is selling me back my favorate game, while refusing to make the follow up, Freespace 3. Oh, sure there is a petition but this is interplay were talking about here, they canceled fallout 3 and disbanded Black Isle which was still producing incredible games. Volition wants to make FS3 but Interplay holds the copyright. So yeah, I purchaced this, but I gave them a one out of ten on there feedback from, because Interplay has done some absolutly stupid, dumbass stuff over the past 5 years.
Ummm.....
Have you looked at the 2.4+ Linux Kernels. Or for that matter the BSDs or OSX, the fact is that UNIX and its workalikes are perfectly capeable of handling large disk I/O tasks. Especially with Journaling file systems like JFS or XFS, hell even ext3 does a decent job. This is annother example of Microsoft "innovating" in an attempt to beat a proven solution (EX. putting IIS into the Win2003 kernel) The fact remains that a good journaling filesystem, with a swap partition, more than likely is a much safer solution to the problem you describe than turning every thing on the disk into an XML taged.NET object.
Here here, the only problem is that most users are willing to cooperate.
I point out that ILove U thing from awhile ago and the latest Minmail variant. Lets not forget any virus that poses as porn is almost bound to propigate.
Why are copyrights inherently wrong? As a programer I would like to at least be given credit for my work . Indeed in the BSD licence this is one of the few requisites for compliance. Copyright is a fair comprimise between the user of a pice of software and the entity that wrote it.
I think what has gotten out of hand is granting patents for software as, PJ said in her interview on Linux Universe, "Software is math. There are only so many ways to write 1 + 1 = 2. If you let math be patented, you are bound to choke off the ability to write new software eventually, because programmers can't write without eventually needing to write 1 + 1 = 2, and if they can only write it by paying a toll to the big guys who can afford to patent 1 + 1 = 2, you've limited who can write software and/or what they can write. Meanwhile, other countries that don't do patents the way the US currently does will be innovating like crazy and leaving the US and Europe, if it follows their lead, in a walled-in software prison controlled by the Microsofts of the world."
Just because some chose to ask for money for ther work dosent make it wrong, since if its only copyrighted someone can go out and reimplement it for free, in that way Copyright promotes competiton.
in sumary:
patents->bad;
copyright->fair (as in fair use);
Marcelo is the 2.4 tree maintainer like AC was (or still is?) the 2.2 tree maintainer. Linus turns the trees over to there maintainers once they reach a point of stability.
From the website
Dr. Douglas Ikeler
~ Highly Successful Business Entrepreneur - Multiple Veterinary Medical Practices, Substantial Real Estate Portfolio and International Training and Consulting
~ Student of Astrophysics, Human Factors Engineering, Systems Thinking and Business Innovation
~ Private Pilot
~ Doctor of Veterinary Medicine - Completing Additional Requirements for MD Degree
I think this is a BS product since the best testimonial they could come up with was a Veternarian
And of course, you all convieniently ignore IBM's counter suit which includes patent violations for stuff the slashdot crowd would ordinarily claim were "obvious".
I'll bite
You are forgetting the fact that these patents were not enforced until SCO picked the fight. Also SCO never asked for clarification, they just filed suit. IBM probly has some hideous patents hidden in its massive fortress of leagal solitude. I feel no remose for the kid punces the 800lb gorilla in the face, and then claims to be the victm when he gets his ass kicked.
As for Communisim, since when is doing your own thing communism, I like, enjoy and profit from open source software. In a way it is the Nash Equilibrium, in which we do not only what is best for us, but also what is best for the group. Now this is decidedly not communistic, its enlightened self intrest. After all its free as in freedom, do you horde your speech?
I am done, so why don't you take your troll energy and post some goatse links.
4+Gb of opensource/free software on a single disc... why don't do a Linux DVD Live distro?..just wondering. Knoppix has already done it.
As for live CD's, I think that they are a tribute to the flexibility of opensource software in that they show how OSS can do someting that proproietary software vendors would not dare do, given there hightly restrictive licences.
if you look at there stock performance over the past 5 years (here) you will see that over the past month that SCO stock has been loosing its value, and even after the SCO FUD machine kicked into high gear this week and brought on some lawyers the stock is still on a downward slope. So maybe now its time for people to start shorting that stock, at least do it before Dec 8, when the judge may rule on IBMs motion to compel. IANAL but there might even be a declatory judgement at that time due to the poor response from SCO and the fact that there public statements are contradictory to many aspects of their case.
The architecture is 10 years old. Why would I want to develop on an old technology when I can get it done 10x as fast on the latest technology
Karma to burn so, PUT DOWN SCO's CRACK PIPE
Ok, Steve, Linux has some of the most advanced features in the world like Kernel level exectuion checking, and True 100% fully functional streemlined , low latency memory management. Linux, and for that matter GNU, have grown at least ten times more than windows has over the same period of time. Microsoft has been using the win32 api for almost 7 years and the individual systems are so similar that a security hole in WinNT 4.0 will allow a virus to be created that destroys windows server 2003, while the kernel (22 stable kernels in 2 years) GNOME and GTK+ and Qt/KDE have not gone a year without major improvement, and is there anything in windows that can compete with the speed of GLADE's GUI development?
Linux is constantly being improved upon and features added, like a Kernel Level cypto API and the futex system, which makes 2.6 incredibly fast, and they took out khttpd because apache was fast enough on a Linux system to kick IIS ass. Microsoft cannot win the argument on technical superiority, because Linux is constantly scrutinized and improved, 2.4.0 was released in Jan of 2001 while 2.6.0 is going to be relaced almost two years later, when is the next major installment of windows comming? How long between XP and Longhorn again?
Dont forget major Kernel improvements in Windows only happen with the upgrade cycle.
Tie for 7 the CEBAF upgrade. Hopefully we will be able to get higher resolution and decern the nature of the Nucleon, w00t
Sorry, every one here at UVa is pretty excited since CEBAF, or JLab, is one of our primary projects, along with conributions to the D0 experiment at Fermi Lab, and the PI-Beta experiment at SLACK.
Sorry hit submit instead of preview, I got flustered and the buttons are so close together.
Some of thoes files don't contain any UNIX System V source code, only "UNIX methods" which is a vague way of saying that it may have appeared in a textbook. That is why IBM feels that simply giving filenames is insuffecent since even if there is not one pice of SysV code in thoes files SCO can still claim that some of the algorithims are similar to thoes in SysV and thus there is still a copyright violation, even though these alogrithims are taught to students in classes and SCO dosent have a patent on them.
The last point is the major weakness in SCO's case and why Novell can now just flick them away like the tiny fly that they are.
Yes but some of thoes files dont contain any UNIX System V source code, only "UNIX methods" which is a vague way of saying that it may have appeared in a textbook. That is why IBM feels that giving simply giving filenames is insuffecent since even if there is one pice of SysV code in thoes files SCO can still claim that some of the algorithims are similar to thoes in SysV and thus there is still a copyright violation.
Yeah, most holes I have seen could be fixed by running up2date or 'apt-get update;apt-get upgrade' 24 hours or less after the vulnerabiltiy is discovered not after the exploit is in the wild.
thats at most 30 minutes of work, most of it just watching stuff download.
Please respond to this post Microsoft
on
Security FUD On Linux
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
They may pull out all the stops, but they still have to explain why there is no memory protection built into the Windows Kernel, why the default user has install privleges, why they are now relasing patches on a monthly basis and not when the vulnerability is discovered.
My first point is the one I want answered, why can't Microsoft build a kernel that polices the processes that it runs?
I wish KDE and GNOME could have some sort of truce and just make the a collabritive effort to help the Desktop. None of the projects work together even though they all depend on each other.
Odd, they have had a truce, and Blucurve is part of Fedora Core 1.
I thnk that most of the "fanboys", or people who acutaly took the time to learn and use Linux would agree with me that in the past year alone there has been exponential progres with KDE and GNOME to the point that they really are ready for the desktop, if not very very close. A year ago the parent(s) might have been accurate a year ago but not they are just troll.
The fact that this was possible once, should really make people think about the possibility of it happened ALREADY, and determine if it is necessary to hunt through the code for a systematic review.
I don't know if your trying to spread FUD but I'll bite. Each of the patch on the kernel that goes into the main trunk is inspected by the maintainers, and Linus gets the last word. Even the other maintainers go over the code so No it hasn't happened already and this person was an idiot for thinking it would get anywhere near the main tree.
Slashdot Mirror
yeah, I get that felling too.
Yeah, the national institues of health also have stated to confrences of developmental scientest that any reseach showing that, single parent families of families with working mothers, are just as stable as the "normal" 2 parent 1 income house holds, will not be funded. This happened at a confrence on child development. My mother an her collegues were shocked at this announcement. I, of course, didnt care, I am only an astrophysics student, then Bush announces his Mars push and Hubble is gone and all the astronomy probes that were planed for the next ten years are in jepordy. So yes this adiministration has a very poor record of distrorting facts and ignoring scientific goals.
PS All that NSF funding has been going to projects that benefit DARPA and Homeland Security not fundamental science.
IBM has violated 2.01 of the Software Agreement by, inter alia, using and assisting others to use the Software Products (including System V source code, derivative works, documentation rrelated thereto and methods based thereon) for external purposes that are different from, and broader than, IBM's own internal business purposes. By actively supporting, assisting and promoting the transfer of UNIX technology to Linux, and using its access to UNIX technology to accomplish this objective, IBM is (a) using the Software Product for external business purposes, which include use for the benefit of Linus Torvalds, the general Linux community and IBM's Linux distribution partners, Red Hat, Inc., Novell, Inc., SuSE Linux AG and their respective subsidiaries; and is (b) directly and indirectly preparing unauthorized derivative works based on the Software Products and unauthorized modifications thereto in violation of 2.01 of the Software Agreement.
Notice that SysV code is not listed amongst the files in the complaint. The above claim is only true in the case that SCO's Idea of a derivative work is valid.
IMHO, this is actually a reasonable leagal document, where there may be an actual dispute over the idea of a derivative work. However, SCO should not be allowed to change its tack in the middle of discovery, until now this case has been about a claim of copying of sysV code and breach of contract, but now they are claiming here that there was no copying and IBM breached its contract by contributing code that IBM owns into Linux. SCO no longer claims, as they did in there initial filing, that IBM improperly contributed sysV code into Linux. This should not be allowed on the grounds that until now, SCO has been using improper contributions of sysV code attempt to persuade people to pay license fees. This also means that SCO has once again lied publicly about the ammount severity of the copying. In fact the Linux community would not be a party to the dispute if JFS, RCU, and NUMA were removed from the kernel. (These documents do not explain how SMP is affected accept by NUMA.) In that case the court cannot ignore what SCO has stated in public, while allowing them to state something substantivly different in court, its one or the other SCO, not both.
In any case Linux is indemnified by the fact that they asked IBM if all of there technologies were contributed in good faith, IBM said yes, and the Kernel development community had no reason not to belive them.
I still think that SCO has a lot of explaining to do when this is all said and done.
And I resent the hell out of the fact that interplay is selling me back my favorate game, while refusing to make the follow up, Freespace 3. Oh, sure there is a petition but this is interplay were talking about here, they canceled fallout 3 and disbanded Black Isle which was still producing incredible games. Volition wants to make FS3 but Interplay holds the copyright. So yeah, I purchaced this, but I gave them a one out of ten on there feedback from, because Interplay has done some absolutly stupid, dumbass stuff over the past 5 years.
Ummm..... .NET object.
Have you looked at the 2.4+ Linux Kernels. Or for that matter the BSDs or OSX, the fact is that UNIX and its workalikes are perfectly capeable of handling large disk I/O tasks. Especially with Journaling file systems like JFS or XFS, hell even ext3 does a decent job. This is annother example of Microsoft "innovating" in an attempt to beat a proven solution (EX. putting IIS into the Win2003 kernel) The fact remains that a good journaling filesystem, with a swap partition, more than likely is a much safer solution to the problem you describe than turning every thing on the disk into an XML taged
I point out that ILove U thing from awhile ago and the latest Minmail variant. Lets not forget any virus that poses as porn is almost bound to propigate.
I think what has gotten out of hand is granting patents for software as, PJ said in her interview on Linux Universe, "Software is math. There are only so many ways to write 1 + 1 = 2. If you let math be patented, you are bound to choke off the ability to write new software eventually, because programmers can't write without eventually needing to write 1 + 1 = 2, and if they can only write it by paying a toll to the big guys who can afford to patent 1 + 1 = 2, you've limited who can write software and/or what they can write. Meanwhile, other countries that don't do patents the way the US currently does will be innovating like crazy and leaving the US and Europe, if it follows their lead, in a walled-in software prison controlled by the Microsofts of the world."
Just because some chose to ask for money for ther work dosent make it wrong, since if its only copyrighted someone can go out and reimplement it for free, in that way Copyright promotes competiton.
in sumary:
patents->bad;
copyright->fair (as in fair use);
Marcelo is the 2.4 tree maintainer like AC was (or still is?) the 2.2 tree maintainer. Linus turns the trees over to there maintainers once they reach a point of stability.
From the website
Dr. Douglas Ikeler
~ Highly Successful Business Entrepreneur - Multiple Veterinary Medical Practices, Substantial Real Estate Portfolio and International Training and Consulting
~ Student of Astrophysics, Human Factors Engineering, Systems Thinking and Business Innovation
~ Private Pilot
~ Doctor of Veterinary Medicine - Completing Additional Requirements for MD Degree
I think this is a BS product since the best testimonial they could come up with was a Veternarian
And of course, you all convieniently ignore IBM's counter suit which includes patent violations for stuff the slashdot crowd would ordinarily claim were "obvious".
I'll bite
You are forgetting the fact that these patents were not enforced until SCO picked the fight. Also SCO never asked for clarification, they just filed suit. IBM probly has some hideous patents hidden in its massive fortress of leagal solitude. I feel no remose for the kid punces the 800lb gorilla in the face, and then claims to be the victm when he gets his ass kicked.
As for Communisim, since when is doing your own thing communism, I like, enjoy and profit from open source software. In a way it is the Nash Equilibrium, in which we do not only what is best for us, but also what is best for the group. Now this is decidedly not communistic, its enlightened self intrest. After all its free as in freedom, do you horde your speech?
I am done, so why don't you take your troll energy and post some goatse links.
4+Gb of opensource/free software on a single disc... why don't do a Linux DVD Live distro? ..just wondering.
Knoppix has already done it.
As for live CD's, I think that they are a tribute to the flexibility of opensource software in that they show how OSS can do someting that proproietary software vendors would not dare do, given there hightly restrictive licences.
Apple are using a bsd core for OS X, not linux. Thus they are safe.
Check netcraft before you post. They run Linux.
Yeah SCO is getting 699 used pices of that paper if they ever ask me to pay for a licence.
if you look at there stock performance over the past 5 years (here) you will see that over the past month that SCO stock has been loosing its value, and even after the SCO FUD machine kicked into high gear this week and brought on some lawyers the stock is still on a downward slope. So maybe now its time for people to start shorting that stock, at least do it before Dec 8, when the judge may rule on IBMs motion to compel. IANAL but there might even be a declatory judgement at that time due to the poor response from SCO and the fact that there public statements are contradictory to many aspects of their case.
Anyone else read that as THC??
oh shit, I think someone already posted that.
The architecture is 10 years old. Why would I want to develop on an old technology when I can get it done 10x as fast on the latest technology
Karma to burn so,
PUT DOWN SCO's CRACK PIPE
Ok, Steve, Linux has some of the most advanced features in the world like Kernel level exectuion checking, and True 100% fully functional streemlined , low latency memory management. Linux, and for that matter GNU, have grown at least ten times more than windows has over the same period of time. Microsoft has been using the win32 api for almost 7 years and the individual systems are so similar that a security hole in WinNT 4.0 will allow a virus to be created that destroys windows server 2003, while the kernel (22 stable kernels in 2 years) GNOME and GTK+ and Qt/KDE have not gone a year without major improvement, and is there anything in windows that can compete with the speed of GLADE's GUI development?
Linux is constantly being improved upon and features added, like a Kernel Level cypto API and the futex system, which makes 2.6 incredibly fast, and they took out khttpd because apache was fast enough on a Linux system to kick IIS ass. Microsoft cannot win the argument on technical superiority, because Linux is constantly scrutinized and improved, 2.4.0 was released in Jan of 2001 while 2.6.0 is going to be relaced almost two years later, when is the next major installment of windows comming? How long between XP and Longhorn again?
Dont forget major Kernel improvements in Windows only happen with the upgrade cycle.
Tie for 7 the CEBAF upgrade. Hopefully we will be able to get higher resolution and decern the nature of the Nucleon, w00t
Sorry, every one here at UVa is pretty excited since CEBAF, or JLab, is one of our primary projects, along with conributions to the D0 experiment at Fermi Lab, and the PI-Beta experiment at SLACK.
Sorry hit submit instead of preview, I got flustered and the buttons are so close together.
Some of thoes files don't contain any UNIX System V source code, only "UNIX methods" which is a vague way of saying that it may have appeared in a textbook. That is why IBM feels that simply giving filenames is insuffecent since even if there is not one pice of SysV code in thoes files SCO can still claim that some of the algorithims are similar to thoes in SysV and thus there is still a copyright violation, even though these alogrithims are taught to students in classes and SCO dosent have a patent on them.
The last point is the major weakness in SCO's case and why Novell can now just flick them away like the tiny fly that they are.
Yes but some of thoes files dont contain any UNIX System V source code, only "UNIX methods" which is a vague way of saying that it may have appeared in a textbook. That is why IBM feels that giving simply giving filenames is insuffecent since even if there is one pice of SysV code in thoes files SCO can still claim that some of the algorithims are similar to thoes in SysV and thus there is still a copyright violation.
Yeah, most holes I have seen could be fixed by running up2date or 'apt-get update;apt-get upgrade' 24 hours or less after the vulnerabiltiy is discovered not after the exploit is in the wild.
thats at most 30 minutes of work, most of it just watching stuff download.
They may pull out all the stops, but they still have to explain why there is no memory protection built into the Windows Kernel, why the default user has install privleges, why they are now relasing patches on a monthly basis and not when the vulnerability is discovered.
My first point is the one I want answered, why can't Microsoft build a kernel that polices the processes that it runs?
I wish KDE and GNOME could have some sort of truce and just make the a collabritive effort to help the Desktop. None of the projects work together even though they all depend on each other.
Odd, they have had a truce, and Blucurve is part of Fedora Core 1.
Tryknoppix for KDE 3.1 and Debian Unstable and Slackware and Mandrake for both Gnome 2.4, and KDE 3.1. (they now share a desktop now mind you)
I thnk that most of the "fanboys", or people who acutaly took the time to learn and use Linux would agree with me that in the past year alone there has been exponential progres with KDE and GNOME to the point that they really are ready for the desktop, if not very very close.
A year ago the parent(s) might have been accurate a year ago but not they are just troll.
Is /. now a field?
(every expletive you can imagine inserted here)
Asshats
The fact that this was possible once, should really make people think about the possibility of it happened ALREADY, and determine if it is necessary to hunt through the code for a systematic review.
I don't know if your trying to spread FUD but I'll bite. Each of the patch on the kernel that goes into the main trunk is inspected by the maintainers, and Linus gets the last word. Even the other maintainers go over the code so No it hasn't happened already and this person was an idiot for thinking it would get anywhere near the main tree.