Anyone remember a lawsuit about MS trying to fork Java? In my considered opinion, this is the reason
there is a stringent license.
Consider this: MS ships a free, open-source Java
compiler & JVM, which has a built-in preference for
calling.NET shared objects. The compiler is
open, the JVM is open, but unless you own a legal
copy of the.NET libraries, you can only
run on Windows.
Reimplementing.NET is approiximately as hard as finishing WINE, and notably harder than maintaining Samba. So MS gets to lock Java execution to the
Windows platform...
I agree that we want Java on the desktop, but
think a different installer rather than a different
license is the prerequisite.
If RH/SuSE/Debian/whatever can ask the installer
if he or she agrees with the license
terms, then it doesn't need to ask the user again later, and all the packages can install (or not install) automagically.
So: what's the format you'd prefer? I promise
to tell the Sun person (who replied when I
asked for an alternative suitable for my
SPARC at home).
And for their convenience, what's the
appropriate converter? I'm not an A/V
person, you understand!
--dave
mwood asked So how is that better than "just shove it off to one side"?
If you shove it right off the screen,
you can't see it. If you shove part way
so that
the title shows, it occupies too much space.
This is a problem that the various WM folks have
been banging their heads on for more than
a few years (;-))
I want to be able to tell my grandma "if it's
in the way, just turn it sideways and shove it off to one side".
As another commentator said, this is an elegant
way of minimizing a window, closely related to
the normal Linux "roll it up like a blind", but
with the advantage of it being easier to tell what it is, despite
taking minimium screen space.
The paper ballots do handle large numbers
of cantidates, though, they're 8 1/2 x 11,
and can do preferential voting if the ballot
is laid out with first, second and Nth choice columns.
Actually there is a system which will
meet both the proponent's and opponents'
needs: manual marking of electronicaly
tallied ballots.
Toronto used them in the last several
local elections, and I was a scrutineer
(election judge) on the first.
The ballots are a large card,
with a table of jobs and cantidates
printed on them. The voter colors in
the sharft of a broad arrow betwen
cantidate and
the position.
The cards are carrid in a folder to the
recorder, who puts them face-down
in the reader, which reads and totals
them, and feeds them face-down into a box.
The box is kept, for manual and electronic recounts.
At the end of the day, a printout
is made for each scrutineer, another for
the records and then the results are sent
by cell phone to the master polling
station.
By the time I got back to the cantidate's
office, the results were on TV, by
polling station, and they matched my printout.
No, they tried to do that,
to lock Java users in, but were
defeated in court by the contract they
signed to be able to ship Java.
It specifically prohibited that
trick.
To prevent a repetition with
free software, the
GPL would have to prohibit enbrace-and-extend.
--
Remember the lawsuit? MS already added MS-only
features to the Java language, to make sure
that Java programs had to run on
their monopoly platform. And got sued, for
somewhat obvious reasons.
Let's assume Java is open-sourced. MS
will produce a change, available to everyone,
which allows Java to call COM/DCOM/.NET
objects. They they're change their
compiler to use the feature in preference to
any other ones.
Anything compiled with the default compiler
on the monopoly (and very popular) platform will work only on the monopoly platform. The
source code can be recompiled with a GPL'd
compiler, but it still will only work
on the monopoly platform
This is how MS gets around the spirit
of the GPL while honoring the letter.
--
Actually the standards process got
changed, all the names changed and I
find it hard to map the EAL stuff
back into the former categories. I'm
sure the vendors did too (;-))
This means that everyone who used to
have a B-class (manadatory protection)
OS had to rename, realign and retest
for the new "Common Criteria". Net
result? The OSs are out there, but the
accreditations aren't!
TS 7 and 8 are manadatory protection
OSs, and I understand that Trusted Solaris
10 is going to be evaluated under the new
Common Criteria/EAL standards. I'm going to
try and resurrect my test box and get on the
early access programme...
It's also actively misleading to
only look at sucessful attacks and
use that to predict unsucessfull
attacks.
Where are the numbers for the high
security OSs? Event major vendor has a
miliraty-grade ("B2" or Trusted") OS,
and there are both SEL Linux and Trusted BSD
in this high-security group.
I ran Trusted Solaris on my test box at home for a while, until I needed the disk, and
it shrugged off the ordinary attacks...
I'd like to know the sucessful-attack rates
on Trusted BSD and SEL Linux. And they would
be statistically interesting, too.
Also known as taking unfair advantage of
being an officer of the court. From the
Scots term for being a corrupt judge, extended to
include persistantly filing false suits.
I ran into this with Honeywell, a million
years ago. Because they didn't want to
pay a colleague to divest his company, they
agreed to strike the clause. The words
"pay" and "divest" seemed to be significant
considerations.
Interestingly
it was easier to strike it than amend it,
as the meaning of the amendment would have
required a lawyre to approve, but striking
the whole clause just took a signature
by the hiring manager. So you may want
to avoid preparing a rider...
There's a bit of a tradition to Israeli
negotiations that can be startling to
outsiders: when an agreement is reached,
one party or the other tosses in a
deal-breaker (;-))
My old director said
this is like walking right away from
the table if the deal doesn't meet your
expectations. He called this soemthing
lika a "balls test".
Must be stressful for a company expecting
North American styles of negotiation: imagine
a client with that much chutzpa!
I very much disagree: what you've argued is true
only if the original article is true, and it
in fact misses the point of htpewrthreading/CMT.
Jump back to my posting "Memory bottleneck (was: Future prognosis for HT)" for pointers to
the relevant articles.
He should say "no, we're trying to add enough
processors to use up the bus bandwidth we have".
Joking aside, this is best for very
ordinary code which doesn't have special fast
interfaces or run out of the cache. It's fine
for the query optimizer of a DBMS, as that's
something that scales well but could bottleneck
on cache-line fetches.
Code that doesn't scale to multiprocessors, that has "special deals" or is hand-tuned to
run out of cache doesn't benefit as much as
normal code. Samba would be a good thing
to run on one of these chips. It's good, fairly
plain code which scales well.
Slashdot Mirror
It is far less stringent, as it doesn't need to contain all the anti-MS clauses.
--dave
--dave
Consider this: MS ships a free, open-source Java compiler & JVM, which has a built-in preference for calling .NET shared objects. The compiler is
open, the JVM is open, but unless you own a legal
copy of the .NET libraries, you can only
run on Windows.
Reimplementing .NET is approiximately as hard as finishing WINE, and notably harder than maintaining Samba. So MS gets to lock Java execution to the
Windows platform...
Exactly what we don't want.
--dave
It's all to keep MS from forking it and making it Windows-only...
If RH/SuSE/Debian/whatever can ask the installer if he or she agrees with the license terms, then it doesn't need to ask the user again later, and all the packages can install (or not install) automagically.
--dave
--dave
So: what's the format you'd prefer? I promise to tell the Sun person (who replied when I asked for an alternative suitable for my SPARC at home). And for their convenience, what's the appropriate converter? I'm not an A/V person, you understand! --dave
(Actually I was talking about using it, not installing --dave)
If you shove it right off the screen, you can't see it. If you shove part way so that the title shows, it occupies too much space. This is a problem that the various WM folks have been banging their heads on for more than a few years (;-))
--dave
I want to be able to tell my grandma "if it's in the way, just turn it sideways and shove it off to one side".
As another commentator said, this is an elegant way of minimizing a window, closely related to the normal Linux "roll it up like a blind", but with the advantage of it being easier to tell what it is, despite taking minimium screen space.
--dave (biased, you understand) c-b
I therefor recommend Trusted BSD, Trusted Solaris or the New NSA Linux (;-))
--dave
--dave
The paper ballots do handle large numbers of cantidates, though, they're 8 1/2 x 11, and can do preferential voting if the ballot is laid out with first, second and Nth choice columns.
--dave
Toronto used them in the last several local elections, and I was a scrutineer (election judge) on the first.
The ballots are a large card, with a table of jobs and cantidates printed on them. The voter colors in the sharft of a broad arrow betwen cantidate and the position.
The cards are carrid in a folder to the recorder, who puts them face-down in the reader, which reads and totals them, and feeds them face-down into a box. The box is kept, for manual and electronic recounts.
At the end of the day, a printout is made for each scrutineer, another for the records and then the results are sent by cell phone to the master polling station.
By the time I got back to the cantidate's office, the results were on TV, by polling station, and they matched my printout.
--dave
To prevent a repetition with free software, the GPL would have to prohibit enbrace-and-extend.
--
Let's assume Java is open-sourced. MS will produce a change, available to everyone, which allows Java to call COM/DCOM/.NET objects. They they're change their compiler to use the feature in preference to any other ones.
Anything compiled with the default compiler on the monopoly (and very popular) platform will work only on the monopoly platform. The source code can be recompiled with a GPL'd compiler, but it still will only work on the monopoly platform
This is how MS gets around the spirit of the GPL while honoring the letter.
--
This means that everyone who used to have a B-class (manadatory protection) OS had to rename, realign and retest for the new "Common Criteria". Net result? The OSs are out there, but the accreditations aren't!
TS 7 and 8 are manadatory protection OSs, and I understand that Trusted Solaris 10 is going to be evaluated under the new Common Criteria/EAL standards. I'm going to try and resurrect my test box and get on the early access programme...
Where are the numbers for the high security OSs? Event major vendor has a miliraty-grade ("B2" or Trusted") OS, and there are both SEL Linux and Trusted BSD in this high-security group.
I ran Trusted Solaris on my test box at home for a while, until I needed the disk, and it shrugged off the ordinary attacks...
I'd like to know the sucessful-attack rates on Trusted BSD and SEL Linux. And they would be statistically interesting, too.
--dave c-b
Also known as taking unfair advantage of being an officer of the court. From the Scots term for being a corrupt judge, extended to include persistantly filing false suits.
I rather hope not! I'd prefer them to run sandboxed, safey'd-off, strongly-restricted mechanisms that don't attract virus writers.
--dave
Interestingly it was easier to strike it than amend it, as the meaning of the amendment would have required a lawyre to approve, but striking the whole clause just took a signature by the hiring manager. So you may want to avoid preparing a rider...
My old director said this is like walking right away from the table if the deal doesn't meet your expectations. He called this soemthing lika a "balls test".
Must be stressful for a company expecting North American styles of negotiation: imagine a client with that much chutzpa!
--dave
--dave
Joking aside, this is best for very ordinary code which doesn't have special fast interfaces or run out of the cache. It's fine for the query optimizer of a DBMS, as that's something that scales well but could bottleneck on cache-line fetches.
Code that doesn't scale to multiprocessors, that has "special deals" or is hand-tuned to run out of cache doesn't benefit as much as normal code. Samba would be a good thing to run on one of these chips. It's good, fairly plain code which scales well.
--dave (Samba bigot, too (:-)) c-b