Actually, most subpoenaes are fishing expeditions. If that doesn't work, then a character assasination takes place.
From someone who's gone through this, it is an ugly process, something you rarely ever want to go through.
And, unlike criciminal cases, there often isn't a judge there to decide what questions can be asked. You still have to answer a question, even if your lawyer objects. The judge subsequently decides whether the objection is merited.
But even if a question isn't admitted in the official transcript, the fact that it can be asked can make your life miserable. You are also more likely to lose your cool if you keep being pounded without having a judge there to stop frivolous questions.
Bullshit. You are not going to be treated like a terrorist for failing to respond to a subpoena in a civil matter.
You may be jailed or be made pay a fine.
This is a trojan horse that will have two immediate consequences:
1) Manufacturers will just tell users and Linux kernel driver developers that they do not need drivers or specs. Just use the wrapper.
2) A new host of difficult to debug problems will creep in putting a blemish on the wonderful stability provided by Linux.
Say no to this nonsense and demand native drivers.
It's the most mature content management system that I have ever come across, built on top of the mature zope application server. I am dismayed at how few people actually know of this project or have used it.
I am in the plone mailing list and I am reading about 50,000 user installations and larger. I have been using it to create a cognitive map of everything I read and it's an incredible tool. In the context of a knowlege base or knowledge sharing in academia or in a company, it makes it easy to decide who is a contributitor, who is a reviewr, who is an editor.
Anyway, enough, just check it out.
Zoe is also very, very cool.
And both applications have tremendous enterprise and home user appeal.
And why would that be?
Oh, yes, who would want mainstream hardware support or mainstream application support?
Who would want Linux to be recognized as a viable OS in educational setttings?
I have a pro-star 8593 and it works flawlessly in Linux. Everything but the winmodem just works and there are binary drivers for that, but I haven't needed it.
I met a guy who had a computer that was identical to mine, but his turned out to be a Dell. It seems like there is a great deal of rebranding in the laptop world with only a few real manufacturers.
Only trouble I have had with the laptop is the battery. It doesn't hold a charge anymore and pro-star refuses to replace it, even though I bought an extended warranty from them and they claim the battery was covered at the time of purchase.
Good laptop, overall. I have had it for close to three years and I haven't had any major problems with it.
I wanted to quote the following part of the interview because it seems to point to an important shift in how society values software. To the point that society begins to understand the social value of free software beyond its market valuation, FLOSS can only become accepted and supported. Here's the relevant quote:
"The more fundamental question that firms and policy makers need to be thinking about is just what type of good is software? The answer to this question may be shifting just as economic and social life becomes dependent upon a common computing infrastructure. When a successful entrepreneur with every possible advantage chooses to found a nonprofit instead of a firm, because this is more likely to lead to success, what can be inferred about the state of the software market?
Organizational theorists argue that nonprofit foundations are created to protect goods too valuable and socially desired to be left to the market, goods like education. If we are granting special tax privileges to organizations to produce software, we as a society are saying something about the nature of that good and the nature of the markets that create it."
Nowhere does the Spanish article or its English translation state that the government of Brazil has made open source mandatory. It states that the government of Brazil chose free software because they believe it to be more trustworthy and reliable.
It also says that they are conducting a pilot project within one ministry and that the project will be completed over a period of three years.
When I did the quick translation and sent it to PCLinuxonline, I did so because the cited Spanish news source appeared to be the first organization reporting on it widely and because I thought it deserved further analysis and scrutiny.
I believe Mr. Stanco created a strawman, maybe unintentionally, and that both Linux Today and now Slashdot fell for that strawman by restating that Brazil is indeed mandating open source. By arguing against something that the article never claimed, Mr. Stanco only leaves to wonder whether he actually even read the short summary or the other articles available in the Brazilian media.
Making a choice about what software makes it easier for Brazil's government to respect the constitutional rights of its citizens to privacy and transparency of data seems like a perfectly legitimate choice to me. The fact that they will realize significant savings as a result also seems sensible for a nation facing severe economic problems.
Ps: One note to all the Brazilians noting that the word in Portuguese is livre and used "software libre". This is not a mistake in my part. The words software libre are widely used and well known in English. I know many English speakers who prefer the terms software libre to the English "free software" because the former make it patently clear that we are talking about freedom not cost.
It is in light of this usage that I felt and feel that the terms "software libre" are appropriate. People immediately understand the "libre" as in "liberty" where as the free as in speech not beer often gets you puzzled looks.
Good day.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, most subpoenaes are fishing expeditions. If that doesn't work, then a character assasination takes place. From someone who's gone through this, it is an ugly process, something you rarely ever want to go through. And, unlike criciminal cases, there often isn't a judge there to decide what questions can be asked. You still have to answer a question, even if your lawyer objects. The judge subsequently decides whether the objection is merited. But even if a question isn't admitted in the official transcript, the fact that it can be asked can make your life miserable. You are also more likely to lose your cool if you keep being pounded without having a judge there to stop frivolous questions.
Bullshit. You are not going to be treated like a terrorist for failing to respond to a subpoena in a civil matter. You may be jailed or be made pay a fine.
This is a trojan horse that will have two immediate consequences: 1) Manufacturers will just tell users and Linux kernel driver developers that they do not need drivers or specs. Just use the wrapper. 2) A new host of difficult to debug problems will creep in putting a blemish on the wonderful stability provided by Linux. Say no to this nonsense and demand native drivers.
It's the most mature content management system that I have ever come across, built on top of the mature zope application server. I am dismayed at how few people actually know of this project or have used it.
I am in the plone mailing list and I am reading about 50,000 user installations and larger. I have been using it to create a cognitive map of everything I read and it's an incredible tool. In the context of a knowlege base or knowledge sharing in academia or in a company, it makes it easy to decide who is a contributitor, who is a reviewr, who is an editor.
Anyway, enough, just check it out.
Zoe is also very, very cool.
And both applications have tremendous enterprise and home user appeal.
And why would that be? Oh, yes, who would want mainstream hardware support or mainstream application support? Who would want Linux to be recognized as a viable OS in educational setttings?
I have a pro-star 8593 and it works flawlessly in Linux. Everything but the winmodem just works and there are binary drivers for that, but I haven't needed it.
I met a guy who had a computer that was identical to mine, but his turned out to be a Dell. It seems like there is a great deal of rebranding in the laptop world with only a few real manufacturers.
Only trouble I have had with the laptop is the battery. It doesn't hold a charge anymore and pro-star refuses to replace it, even though I bought an extended warranty from them and they claim the battery was covered at the time of purchase.
Good laptop, overall. I have had it for close to three years and I haven't had any major problems with it.
I wanted to quote the following part of the interview because it seems to point to an important shift in how society values software. To the point that society begins to understand the social value of free software beyond its market valuation, FLOSS can only become accepted and supported. Here's the relevant quote:
"The more fundamental question that firms and policy makers need to be thinking about is just what type of good is software? The answer to this question may be shifting just as economic and social life becomes dependent upon a common computing infrastructure. When a successful entrepreneur with every possible advantage chooses to found a nonprofit instead of a firm, because this is more likely to lead to success, what can be inferred about the state of the software market?
Organizational theorists argue that nonprofit foundations are created to protect goods too valuable and socially desired to be left to the market, goods like education. If we are granting special tax privileges to organizations to produce software, we as a society are saying something about the nature of that good and the nature of the markets that create it."
Nowhere does the Spanish article or its English translation state that the government of Brazil has made open source mandatory. It states that the government of Brazil chose free software because they believe it to be more trustworthy and reliable. It also says that they are conducting a pilot project within one ministry and that the project will be completed over a period of three years. When I did the quick translation and sent it to PCLinuxonline, I did so because the cited Spanish news source appeared to be the first organization reporting on it widely and because I thought it deserved further analysis and scrutiny. I believe Mr. Stanco created a strawman, maybe unintentionally, and that both Linux Today and now Slashdot fell for that strawman by restating that Brazil is indeed mandating open source. By arguing against something that the article never claimed, Mr. Stanco only leaves to wonder whether he actually even read the short summary or the other articles available in the Brazilian media. Making a choice about what software makes it easier for Brazil's government to respect the constitutional rights of its citizens to privacy and transparency of data seems like a perfectly legitimate choice to me. The fact that they will realize significant savings as a result also seems sensible for a nation facing severe economic problems. Ps: One note to all the Brazilians noting that the word in Portuguese is livre and used "software libre". This is not a mistake in my part. The words software libre are widely used and well known in English. I know many English speakers who prefer the terms software libre to the English "free software" because the former make it patently clear that we are talking about freedom not cost. It is in light of this usage that I felt and feel that the terms "software libre" are appropriate. People immediately understand the "libre" as in "liberty" where as the free as in speech not beer often gets you puzzled looks. Good day.