Obviously my friend, you can't comprehend the weight of this decision and how the outcome can have implications to almost every part of your life.
Hopfully, this is just someone trying to set a legal precedent simply because it's not been set before. With the way things are going, it seems that unless a decision has been made in the courts sometime before preventing an action, anything can be done.
If you're imagination isn't creative enough to work out where this could end up, read 1984, written by a guy with a name exactly like that of a river running through Ipswich, England (I don't dare say his name, incase his publisher owns it...)
We are missing the point a bit here. Of course, you are all totally correct, this isnt anywhere near a new thing, but we are missing the whole patent issue. I know you all understand this as well as cookies, but ill say it anyway. Patents protect an IDEA. They dont protect the end result. Hell, imagine if Hoover could patent clean carpets, no one else is allowed to invent a sucky upy thing, since it's patented!
This is exactly the problem with a load of software patents. They dont patent HOW something is done, that patent WHAT is done. It's like trying to patent staying dry and warm, and therefore preventing anyone else building houses! I do believe there are some valid software patents, but that should NOT stop someone else getting to the same result by doing it differently. Just because some guy invented RSA security, does not stop some other guy inventing a totally differnt way to use the same algorithm.
Microsoft can patent the source they used to time this button, if it uses some cool new timing algorithm that works without needing the internal clock, but no way should they be allowed to patent the actual result, a timed button.
And honestly, i dont blame microsoft, i blame the fucking stupid patent clerks and judges who let things like this through. Microsoft are just using the system, we all would given half a chance. You patent people should wake the fuck up and engage brain!
However, you will owe me money, since i own Thought(TM). oh, and i also own "Correct Answer(TM)" and "Common Sense(TM)", all registered trademarks and patents, thank you...
Software makers are always going on about how when you buy software, you dont actually own it, you own a licence to use it. Therefore, if the software allows a virus to spread, surely its the software makers role to bare the responsibility, as they are the only ones who own the software?
If they argue that the user owns the software, then we are allowed to reverse engineer it etc...
your all probably not interested, but i went to the University of Nottingham, and looking at the pictures, you can see the area where I 'christened' the IESSG building, which is just 100m from my old hall;-)
then some 7337 ha>"nuke the bug, destroy it!! invade the bugs home terroritory!!!"
Meanwhile, in ha>or land: "those American infedels dont stand a chance now, they will be trampled down like the useless flies that they are...."
oooo, tenticle rape, loverly. Id imagine you would be joining me, cos since you've posted on/. , you are now one of us....
hope you like them there tenticles....
btw - what the fuck is tenticle rape? octopuss rape?
hmmm, you miss understand what i wrote. I didnt say that the posters come up with the stories, (i admit, my writing is a bit shite at the mo:-) ). What i mean was that this story wasnt posted by Mr. Joe Public and then/. decide to publish it. It looks like some1 at/. saw this and posted it theselves... if you get me.
There is no, xxx writes b4 the actual article.
it just surprised me when it all came up, tis all;-)
Ive just had a thought. Can you licence a licence from someone?
Im asking this, cos microsoft have licences Unix from SCO. But if SCO only had a licence themeselves, can they licence that licence off?
If they can, surely they cant retain a licence themeselves, cos they paid for one, they cant then sell one to whoever, and still retain a licence. Thats like buy one, get one free! Does this mean that if MS buy or have bought (even better!) the licence, SCO no longer own ANY unix licence? This could really open a can of worms!!!
this is interesting, have you noticed that/. put this up themeselves, rather than it being a story posted by someone else. First time ive seen something like this happen...
heh, i was just gonna write the same comment. I posted b4 on/. saying something along the lines "I dunno how this is gonna end up, but you can bet your willy its gonna get interesting"
but wow, this was totally unexpected...
WOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
who would have thought open source could be so exciting!!!!
heh, im not as excited as the text akes it look;-)
I wonder whether this will make getting software patents easier or harder, and whether people who failed to get a royalty patent go for one of these instead?
aye, on further consultation, I remember spending a lot of time massaging every byte of base memory out of my 386 back in '95. Although, I was doing it for a purpose, i needed to be able to use win3.11 to edit doom levels, then go into doom without reseting the machine to get a different memory profile. This is so i didnt get the bios BEEP and wake my mum up at 3am:-) Yeah, i know, i didnt think of simply unplugging the speaker.
I did however, learn a load of stuff, which is still very useful today, specially in gettin those old games that require over 590k base to work on todays machines! Who would have thought that would be difficult?
yeah, fair doos to this guy, I was just in a mood in work trying to get things done realising there isnt enought time in the universe to do it.....ho hum
Yup, i hear you all. Fair comments, if the guy wants to do it, its not a problem with me. Heck, i do a load of stuff that most people will think a)boring, b) stupid (jumping out of planes:-) ) c) pointless. Its all about freedom to do it. In fact, ill expect to see a legal notice from Crucials suppliers sueing him for 'messing where he isnt welcome' microsoft-xbox style.
has was too much time on his hands. WAY too much time.
Speaking as an engineer, I do hate buying new stuff because its cheaper to do so rather than spending time tweaking the old stuff, but 100's of combinations, for a few % increase? Even I would be perfectly happy in paying the money rather than loosing 0.05% of my life!
seen this before
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Yeah, i saw this ages ago (well, a few days anyhoo). I found it fairly interesting, until i looked outside and was mesmorised by the grass growing!
Honest, I do think this is an interesting case, purely from one view point. The claims SCO have raised are valid, but since the legal submission they gave to the court is 'open source', ie everyone can read it, the amount of evidence piling up against SCO is astonishing. The interesting point is how on earth SCO feel their gonna get out of this. I can't wait for it to hit the courts....
Im kinda intrigued with the last paragraph. The fact that SCO is in itself a Linux distributer, and therefore has already released the unix source code within its own linux distro, under the GPL.
Surely this is in fact the case, unless SCO went through the code and striped out the supposidly unix code. But if they did that, this law suit would have surfaced years ago, when they found the code.
is this server using bit-torrent to serve html cos id have thought this site would be/.'ed by now, but it still loads up super quick.
Could you serve web content using bittorrent?
sooo, not only do microsoft talk shit, they talk shit about making things that deal with shit, which end up being as useful as shit, because, in the end, its all shit...:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously my friend, you can't comprehend the weight of this decision and how the outcome can have implications to almost every part of your life. Hopfully, this is just someone trying to set a legal precedent simply because it's not been set before. With the way things are going, it seems that unless a decision has been made in the courts sometime before preventing an action, anything can be done. If you're imagination isn't creative enough to work out where this could end up, read 1984, written by a guy with a name exactly like that of a river running through Ipswich, England (I don't dare say his name, incase his publisher owns it...)
What a wonderful twist of fate: kids asking for something easy to teach their parents....
We are missing the point a bit here. Of course, you are all totally correct, this isnt anywhere near a new thing, but we are missing the whole patent issue. I know you all understand this as well as cookies, but ill say it anyway. Patents protect an IDEA. They dont protect the end result. Hell, imagine if Hoover could patent clean carpets, no one else is allowed to invent a sucky upy thing, since it's patented!
This is exactly the problem with a load of software patents. They dont patent HOW something is done, that patent WHAT is done. It's like trying to patent staying dry and warm, and therefore preventing anyone else building houses! I do believe there are some valid software patents, but that should NOT stop someone else getting to the same result by doing it differently. Just because some guy invented RSA security, does not stop some other guy inventing a totally differnt way to use the same algorithm.
Microsoft can patent the source they used to time this button, if it uses some cool new timing algorithm that works without needing the internal clock, but no way should they be allowed to patent the actual result, a timed button.
And honestly, i dont blame microsoft, i blame the fucking stupid patent clerks and judges who let things like this through. Microsoft are just using the system, we all would given half a chance. You patent people should wake the fuck up and engage brain!
However, you will owe me money, since i own Thought(TM). oh, and i also own "Correct Answer(TM)" and "Common Sense(TM)", all registered trademarks and patents, thank you...
Software makers are always going on about how when you buy software, you dont actually own it, you own a licence to use it. Therefore, if the software allows a virus to spread, surely its the software makers role to bare the responsibility, as they are the only ones who own the software?
If they argue that the user owns the software, then we are allowed to reverse engineer it etc...
tee hee
then some 7337 ha>"nuke the bug, destroy it!! invade the bugs home terroritory!!!" Meanwhile, in ha>or land: "those American infedels dont stand a chance now, they will be trampled down like the useless flies that they are...."
oooo, tenticle rape, loverly. Id imagine you would be joining me, cos since you've posted on /. , you are now one of us....
hope you like them there tenticles....
btw - what the fuck is tenticle rape? octopuss rape?
There is no, xxx writes b4 the actual article.
it just surprised me when it all came up, tis all ;-)
Im asking this, cos microsoft have licences Unix from SCO. But if SCO only had a licence themeselves, can they licence that licence off?
If they can, surely they cant retain a licence themeselves, cos they paid for one, they cant then sell one to whoever, and still retain a licence. Thats like buy one, get one free! Does this mean that if MS buy or have bought (even better!) the licence, SCO no longer own ANY unix licence? This could really open a can of worms!!!
SERVE EM RIGHT!
tee hee
heh, i was just gonna write the same comment. I posted b4 on /. saying something along the lines "I dunno how this is gonna end up, but you can bet your willy its gonna get interesting"
but wow, this was totally unexpected...
WOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
who would have thought open source could be so exciting!!!!
heh, im not as excited as the text akes it look ;-)
I wonder whether this will make getting software patents easier or harder, and whether people who failed to get a royalty patent go for one of these instead?
aye, on further consultation, I remember spending a lot of time massaging every byte of base memory out of my 386 back in '95. Although, I was doing it for a purpose, i needed to be able to use win3.11 to edit doom levels, then go into doom without reseting the machine to get a different memory profile. This is so i didnt get the bios BEEP and wake my mum up at 3am :-) Yeah, i know, i didnt think of simply unplugging the speaker.
I did however, learn a load of stuff, which is still very useful today, specially in gettin those old games that require over 590k base to work on todays machines! Who would have thought that would be difficult?
yeah, fair doos to this guy, I was just in a mood in work trying to get things done realising there isnt enought time in the universe to do it.....ho hum
Speaking as an engineer, I do hate buying new stuff because its cheaper to do so rather than spending time tweaking the old stuff, but 100's of combinations, for a few % increase? Even I would be perfectly happy in paying the money rather than loosing 0.05% of my life!
3. ???
4. Profit
Yeah, i saw this ages ago (well, a few days anyhoo). I found it fairly interesting, until i looked outside and was mesmorised by the grass growing!
Honest, I do think this is an interesting case, purely from one view point. The claims SCO have raised are valid, but since the legal submission they gave to the court is 'open source', ie everyone can read it, the amount of evidence piling up against SCO is astonishing. The interesting point is how on earth SCO feel their gonna get out of this. I can't wait for it to hit the courts....
Surely this is in fact the case, unless SCO went through the code and striped out the supposidly unix code. But if they did that, this law suit would have surfaced years ago, when they found the code.
is this server using bit-torrent to serve html cos id have thought this site would be /.'ed by now, but it still loads up super quick.
Could you serve web content using bittorrent?
GEEEEENIOOOOUS!!!! well done!! hehe, i lurve Uranus jokes :-)
can it wipe yer bum? me no think so, the iLoo can :-)
sooo, not only do microsoft talk shit, they talk shit about making things that deal with shit, which end up being as useful as shit, because, in the end, its all shit... :-)
no, its Allcock as in "Allcock no brains" :-)
w00t!