Do you remember that the (GPL'd) libreadline library was released (I think under BSD) by Tom Cr. a few years ago and also mentioned on slashdot. And of course, all the BSD idiots of slashdot applauded the act that a piece of code was converted to BSD despite the wishes of the libreadline authors.
(The name of Tom Cr. is intentionaly left uncompleted. Very many of you already know his name.)
Your problem is that you believe that stock prices follow the fundamentals. No, those investors are not ignorant since they made money and are the winners.
I am afraid, only those who lose money might be mistaken.
SCO did not just violate the GPL, they have done so many things during the last 6 months that almost anyone can sue them for fraud, extortion, defamation, infrigment, interference, or slader. This is not an exhaustive list of charges. There are probably at least 100 more (valid) reasons to sue SCO.
SCO did not register their code with the Copyright office on time, so they could not have sued for copyright infrigment. They registered some code in June 2003; therefore, they can now alledge copyright violations that they could not do last June (when their lawsuit was ammended).
SCO was financed by Microsoft and Sun to embark on an anti-GPL, andit-Linux fud campaing. You can already see the extend of the fud. As Linux and the GPL become more popular, Microsoft and Sun will have more reasons to fight more.
I am afraid, the upcoming demise of SCO has little affect on the future.
It will only be over when Linux and the GPL become illegal through legislation. I don't wish that it be over.
How did you conclude that Red Hat was not damaged by SCO? Red Hat might have been damaged and its revenue could have been much higher, but because of the Microsoft/Sun funded anti-Linux campaing it did not show.
Just because revenues are not lower, we can not conclude from this alone that they have not been damaged.
Why make simple things complecated? Sure, a faster bootup might be a benefit for a few people, but how about the rest of us? Can you imagine having to troubleshoot this thing when each time it boot in (mostly) unpredictable ways. And how can you provide support to the users when they cannot repeat the sequence that gave them trouble?
I think the benefits of speedup will not appear as benefits when users are forced into such unecessary, complecated, and unpredictable madness.
A more intresting point is that SCO choose to invoke complicate legal theories against Red Hat. Why? Because SCO preferes not to show even 1 line (out of the 1.2 million lines of code) to the judge and tell Red Hat is wrong since they have proof of copyright violations in Linux.
When SCO is given an opportunity to show proof, they always seem to have arrive empty handed in court, even when showing (some) proof is in SCO's benefit.
Show some proof SCO, we are not amused with elaborate legal arguments.
And Microsoft is not to blame? What is the role of Microsoft who are financing this anti-linux and anti-GPL campaingn?
The reason SCO seems to behaving with such stupidity is no a stupidity at all. They act this way because they are (essentially) in a martydom mission for the benefit of Microsoft. SCO no longes has a reason to behave for its own best interests.
What good are our laws if they are not not enforeced? Yes, for GPS speeding devices. Yes, for enforcing current laws.
The main issue is having just laws, not whether they should be enforced. I could understand why a nation might now want new laws, or why a nation decides to do way with old laws, but I cannot understand why laws once created that are constitutional should not be enforced. If that is the case, why bother making them?
Hmm, Microsoft can instantly gain the advantages of peer review by using BSD licensed software.
As for peer review security, what Miscrosoft says is funny. since they themselves are using Free Software security products like kerberos, and most of BSD's networking stack.
Don't listen to others on Slashdot might say, but Free-of-Charge is indeed a big part of freedom. But choosing a product just because it is free-of-charge might not be as desirable as the one at is free-as-freedom, it (usually) depends whether you are an individual user or a business user.
As an aside, would you use GNU/Linux if you got a free cd from SCO? No, I will wiser to *purchace* Free Software for other vendors.
Why should Microsoft "get it"? They are doing fine as it is. Granted, eventually Free Software will win, but Microsoft can still continue to rape everyone until some time in the future when the crime will no longer be viable. Until then, the rape must go on.
We have been through this before. "The best tool for the job" is usually not what is desirable. Do you always buy the Ferari when you need a car, do you buy what makes sense? Free Software can make lots of sense if you don't want to become a bitch to your suplier, and Free Software can make sense if it means spending less money. The "best tool for the job" is usually never makes sense.
It means nothing when you say that *some* propriatory software are superior. Of course, and *some* Free Software are also superior.
The real question is how many, and by how much.
I can also claim that some Chinese are taller than Americans, but again, this means nothing. The real question is how many, or what is the distribution graph.
Assuming, of course, you can define "superior". That is another subject.
Seems the Court of Appeals has more common sense that the Supreme Court:
"The Court of Appeals also held that use of the GPS devices was merely sense augmenting,
Of course. When the subject is under surveillance, the GPS tags might not enhance your vision, they might not enhance hearing, but they do enhance your ability to perceive the world. Common sense? No, not for the Supreme Court which is not willing to share such simple reasoning. The Supreme claim that it is ok to use binoculars, flashlight, and hearing aids to enhance senses you already have (into a new super-natural state), but it it not ok to add new senses via GPS, infrared detectors, etc,. WFF, if binoculars are permitted so should GPS detectors. At least that is what even children will tell us.
revealing information that Jackson exposed to public view./
Jackson took great pains to preserve his privacy: he kept his movements secret, he borrowed a different truck, he was cautious nobody is following, he ensured that nobody is looking. He wanted to stay private. He wanted privacy. So what if he "exposed himself to public view"? He did exposed himself to public view, but he wanted privacy. And he was able to get it!
Note: I am not taking a position for or agaist privacy. It is just that I read things that seem silly, which as adults we have heard for so often that they no longer seem silly.
Oh, no! You don't know how much damage you can do with a phone; either to yourself, or against other people.
Is a computer different than a phone? Yes, idiot, it is differnt than a phone, as it is differnt to everything else. But you can still damage other people, or you can be damaged by others.
Same thing for using a bicycle. I can think of lots of reasons why you might need a license for a bycicle, or for just walking down the street.
That will then the benefit to the advertizers if you can remove the add?
I it a pity that modern man has been introctrinated to tolerate ads that bombard his life all day, and then show on slashdot to tell us proudly how easy it is to tolerate. Cows!
Nothing is wrong, it just gives me the perfect reason not to ever try Mandrake. Why bother? And besides, it is commercial distro which implies that they will find a way to screw you sooner or later. I feel safer with Debian.
Nothing is wrong, I am just guessing that one of these days Mandrake will vanish in the wind, like so many distros before it.
It is not a benefit to gain a competitor in return for his money to stay in this country. It is a benefit only if he is not a competitor. I don't mind allowing everyone on earth to relocate here, as long as they don't work in IT.
In short, competitors should be shot and rot on hell. Non-competitors (who might need my IT services) are welcomed with open arms.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you remember that the (GPL'd) libreadline
library was released (I think under BSD) by
Tom Cr. a few years ago and also mentioned on
slashdot. And of course, all the BSD idiots
of slashdot applauded the act that a piece of
code was converted to BSD despite the wishes
of the libreadline authors.
(The name of Tom Cr. is intentionaly left
uncompleted. Very many of you already know
his name.)
usefull to collect subscription fees, from the clueless.
stock prices follow the fundamentals. No,
those investors are not ignorant since they
made money and are the winners.
I am afraid, only those who lose money might
be mistaken.
SCO did not just violate the GPL, they have
done so many things during the last 6 months
that almost anyone can sue them for fraud, extortion,
defamation, infrigment, interference, or slader.
This is not an exhaustive list of charges. There
are probably at least 100 more (valid) reasons
to sue SCO.
SCO did not register their code with the
Copyright office on time, so they could
not have sued for copyright infrigment. They
registered some code in June 2003; therefore,
they can now alledge copyright violations that
they could not do last June (when their
lawsuit was ammended).
embark on an anti-GPL, andit-Linux fud campaing.
You can already see the extend of the fud. As
Linux and the GPL become more popular, Microsoft
and Sun will have more reasons to fight more.
I am afraid, the upcoming demise of SCO has
little affect on the future.
It will only be over when Linux and the GPL become
illegal through legislation. I don't wish that it be over.
damaged by SCO? Red Hat might have been damaged
and its revenue could have been much higher,
but because of the Microsoft/Sun funded anti-Linux
campaing it did not show.
Just because revenues are not lower, we
can not conclude from this alone that they
have not been damaged.
a faster bootup might be a benefit for a few
people, but how about the rest of us? Can you
imagine having to troubleshoot this thing
when each time it boot in (mostly) unpredictable
ways. And how can you provide support to
the users when they cannot repeat the
sequence that gave them trouble?
I think the benefits of speedup will not
appear as benefits when users are forced into
such unecessary, complecated, and unpredictable
madness.
The just should render a just decision, why
should his decision be based only on the law?
Furthermore, what if a judge is faced an unjust?
I think the judge has a duty to his concept of justice, not
to the law.
to invoke complicate legal theories against
Red Hat. Why? Because SCO preferes not to
show even 1 line (out of the 1.2 million lines of code)
to the judge and tell Red Hat is wrong since
they have proof of copyright violations in Linux.
When SCO is given an opportunity to show proof,
they always seem to have arrive empty handed
in court, even when showing (some) proof is
in SCO's benefit.
Show some proof SCO, we are not amused with
elaborate legal arguments.
the role of Microsoft who are financing this
anti-linux and anti-GPL campaingn?
The reason SCO seems to behaving with such
stupidity is no a stupidity at all. They act
this way because they are (essentially) in
a martydom mission for the benefit of Microsoft.
SCO no longes has a reason to behave for its
own best interests.
not enforeced? Yes, for GPS speeding devices.
Yes, for enforcing current laws.
The main issue is having just laws, not
whether they should be enforced. I could
understand why a nation might now want new
laws, or why a nation decides to do way with
old laws, but I cannot understand why
laws once created that are constitutional
should not be enforced. If that is the case,
why bother making them?
of peer review by using BSD licensed software.
As for peer review security, what Miscrosoft
says is funny. since they themselves are using
Free Software security products like kerberos,
and most of BSD's networking stack.
but Free-of-Charge is indeed a big part of
freedom. But choosing a product just because
it is free-of-charge might not be as desirable
as the one at is free-as-freedom, it (usually) depends
whether you are an individual user or
a business user.
As an aside, would you use GNU/Linux if
you got a free cd from SCO? No, I will
wiser to *purchace* Free Software
for other vendors.
Why should Microsoft "get it"? They are doing
fine as it is. Granted, eventually Free Software
will win, but Microsoft can still continue to
rape everyone until some time in the future
when the crime will no longer be viable. Until
then, the rape must go on.
to promote Microsoft than Free Software has
users willing to promote Free Software.
We have been through this before. "The best
tool for the job" is usually not what is desirable.
Do you always buy the Ferari when you need a
car, do you buy what makes sense? Free Software
can make lots of sense if you don't want to
become a bitch to your suplier, and Free Software
can make sense if it means spending less money.
The "best tool for the job" is usually never
makes sense.
propriatory software are superior. Of course,
and *some* Free Software are also superior.
The real question is how many, and by how much.
I can also claim that some Chinese are taller
than Americans, but again, this means nothing.
The real question is how many, or what is the
distribution graph.
Assuming, of course, you can define "superior".
That is another subject.
"The Court of Appeals also held that use of the
GPS devices was merely sense augmenting,
Of course. When the subject is under surveillance, the GPS tags might not
enhance your vision, they might not enhance hearing, but they do
enhance your ability to perceive the world. Common sense? No, not for
the Supreme Court which is not willing to share such simple reasoning. The
Supreme claim that it is ok to use binoculars, flashlight, and hearing aids
to enhance senses you already have (into a new super-natural state),
but it it not ok to add new senses via GPS, infrared detectors, etc,.
WFF, if binoculars are permitted so should GPS detectors. At least that
is what even children will tell us.
revealing information that Jackson exposed to public view. /
Jackson took great pains to preserve his privacy: he kept his movements secret,
he borrowed a different truck, he was cautious nobody is following, he
ensured that nobody is looking. He wanted to
stay private. He wanted privacy. So what if he "exposed himself to public view"?
He did exposed himself to public view, but he wanted privacy. And he was able
to get it!
Note: I am not taking a position for or agaist privacy. It is just that I
read things that seem silly, which as adults
we have heard for so often that they no longer seem silly.
can do with a phone; either to yourself, or
against other people.
Is a computer different than a phone? Yes, idiot,
it is differnt than a phone, as it is differnt
to everything else. But you can still damage
other people, or you can be damaged by others.
Same thing for using a bicycle. I can think
of lots of reasons why you might need a license
for a bycicle, or for just walking down the street.
And I don't know anyone who does not
desire that their competitors be shot
on sight and rot in hell.
Perhaps, you have
different desires towards your competitors, I don't.
you can remove the add?
I it a pity that modern man has been introctrinated
to tolerate ads that bombard his life all day,
and then show on slashdot to tell us proudly
how easy it is to tolerate. Cows!
Ad revenue will not be spotty if Microsoft
decides to advertize in as many Linux distros
as they can.
the perfect reason not to ever try Mandrake.
Why bother? And besides, it is commercial
distro which implies that they will find
a way to screw you sooner or later.
I feel safer with Debian.
Nothing is wrong, I am just guessing that
one of these days Mandrake will vanish
in the wind, like so many distros before it.
return for his money to stay in this country.
It is a benefit only if he is not
a competitor. I don't mind
allowing everyone on earth to relocate here,
as long as they don't work in IT.
In short, competitors should be shot and
rot on hell. Non-competitors (who might
need my IT services) are welcomed with open
arms.