On the one hand, the developed West becomes completely beholden to the Corporations: Microsoft, RIAA, MPAA, with Windows used in schools, universities, hospitals, governments... with innovation stiffled by patents and the DMCA, with lobbyists creating laws for purposes of business and not the civil state.
On the other hand, the rest of the world with an eye on the budget, choosing for free software and eventually developing their own. India, Brazil, China, and eventually Africa too. Countries where innovation continues because it's a matter of survival, and where the corporations can't impose their US laws because governments are incapable and unwilling to enforce them.
Why does the US still suffer from a fragmented and pathetically old-fashioned telephone system while even the most war-striken, bankrupt nations on earth already have one or two national GSM networks? Because where there is nothing, people can create.
Similarly, the IT industry in the West has moved to a phase of terminal stagnation, and will eventually be reduced to a simple service industry, with the innovation being done in those places that today choose open source.
No coincidence that another article today mentioned Microsoft's gradual takeover of the US's CompSci departments. Innovation through Windows? Now that's funny!
SCO-formerly-Caldera is run by a group of predatory, scumbag lawyers who think they can fool enough people with their arrogant bullshit to carry out their mission of sabotage on the GPL and the OSS community in general.
Three cheers for Eric S. Raymond for saying publicly and from an official perspective what we all think when we read SCO-f-C's latest approximation of the "truth".
If ever there was a group of men that deserved to go to jail and be repeatedly abused by large men with indelicate tastes, it's the SCO boys.
Personally I'm going to buy a small amount of overpriced SCO stock now so that I can take part in the class-action lawsuit that will send these bums to prison where they belong.
Tomorrow, 12 noon at the Place de Luxembourg, in front of the EU building.
An ironic construction, this building, raised on the ruins of what used to be a lovely city square. Brussels demolished itself to make way for the EU and big business, doing with bulldozers and the 'open window policy' what the bombs of WWII did not manage to do.
The EU does not really care about its citizens any more than the White House does. Self-interest makes the world go around. But, in any case, I will be there, so that at least I can tell my children that when the time came to raise my voice in anger - or at least, modest disapproval - I did not shirk my duty.
But, somehow, I don't think even a large crowd will impress the MPs. Brussels has more than one demonstration per day, on average.
It's not about open source, although there is a similarity in the principle of open and free exchange of ideas.
Patents are government grants to build a business around a specific invention. There is a general issue here, namely that all invention comes from a communual process, exchange and refinement of ideas over time, and the granting of "exclusive" rights is by its very nature an act that ignores the reality of the process in order to create a new reality that favours certain groups over others.
However, we tend to accept that patents are one way of rewarding intellectual endeavour. Why then, are they bad?
There are many technical issues that make patents complex to grant: knowledge of the area in question, searching prior art, preparing lengthy documentation. This means that patents are expensive - in the EU, for instance, 10,000 Euro is the starting price, before you start looking at defending a patent.
The huge price tag puts patents firmly out of the reach of smaller groups and individuals who are not already wealthly. It is ironic, perhaps that these are also the groups and individuals who work the hardest to create new products and ideas, since they have the most to gain.
It is larger groups that are able to assemble large patent portfolios, therefore. Presumably these are then used to protect and reward innovation? No, most patents go unused in the direct sense, and become instead instruments for patent negotiations.
What is this? It is when a small company with a patent discovers that a larger company is infringing. It raises the question, and the large company discovers a handful of its own patents - previously ignored - that the smaller company is also infringing. The innovater finds that the precious patent is not only worthless, but has landed them in a situation where they may go bankrupt or have to sell their products to survive.
Large companies seek patents principally for this reason: to protect their existing markets and businesses against innovators.
The role of legislators is clear: their mandate, sponsored by big business, is to make this process as easy as possible.
Software patents take this to a new dimension. Software development is - unlike most prodyct creation - a process of almost pure invention. It is almost impossible to develop a complex software product without finding and solving many problems that others have also solved.
Patents are already biased against innovation, but software patents can create insurmountable obstacles. A business with the cash and the lawyers can find hundreds, perhaps thousands of "new" inventions in any complex software product. Needless to say, most or all of these are multiple re-inventions, but have not been previously patented, so are legally open to patent.
Software development, like all creative processes, relies on a pure and unbroken exchange of ideas and techniques across space and time. Software patents pretend that this exchange does not happen, and worse, they make the exchange impossible, and sometimes illegal.
At the extreme, software patents spell the end of not just open source, but the freedom of individuals to create new software. When every software invention has been patented, writing unauthorized code will become a criminal offense.
Large business loves this scenario. They pretend that software patents are essential to protect their "innovation" and "research". But this is a lie, as any honest observer can see.
The EU is, like all governments, manipulated by lobbyists, and the person who pays for the music will choose the dance. Software patents will come into law in the EU, there is no doubt about this.
The realisation that software patents (and all patents, indeed) are tools for monopolists will only come when the West has lost most of its competitive edge. I only hope that India and China realise - from self-interest - that they are being given a silver plate with a blank cheque, marked "please profit, we are in the process of strangling our nascent software businesses".
It would be nice to believe that one NZ spammer was responsible for 95% of all spam, but somehow... I don't think so.
Vigilantism, legislation, and spam filters are simply selection agents that will help to breed a tougher new spammer.
The drop in spam comes because spammers are trying something else and I reckon the writers of SoBig were paid by spammers, looking for a new way to send emails. If you thought the last week was relaxed, just wait. You ain't seen nothing yet.
The ugly truth (and I have this on good authority from a spaceship that lands in my backyard everynight), is that Darly McBride has already had his picture from ten years hence widely distributed. Apparently he got on very well with his big friends in the slammer.
I apologise deeply for linking (deep linking?) to this offensive image but it's the one and true Darly McBride staring back at you. I figured the world had to know.
Now, if some kind hacker would please deface www.sco.com appropriately, the world can also learn.
I know I'm going to get modded down but...
on
The Ultimate Game Room
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
It's been like 2 days, and three articles on games nothing about SCO!
I'm getting withdrawal symptoms. Please, the next installment in the "Daryl Goes To Hell" soap opera...?
Uhm, also (karmawhorekarmawhore) I think the ultimate game collection really rocks, it's totally cool, really wonderful.
How about "playing with yourself because you're too antisocial / introverted / goddamn lazy" to go out and play with other people? Yes, I think the word "masturbation" is pretty much what I meant, and not even particularly pejoratively.
But, I see you are from that website "insertcredit", the same one mentioned in the article, so I am guessing this is where you demonstrate that independence of thought that journalists are so famous for.
ROTFL. Kids like you make it fun to hang out here. Flame me, my Karma comes easy.
And you call my post "condescending?" Bejesus. You should write reviews for gaming magazines, your attitude is just right.
Back to my post: games too hard or too easy is missing the entire point. Games should be fun and while learning can be fun, more basic things can be much more fun. Four neurons are all it should take to enjoy oneself.
But I'm sure writing stuff like "perceived intellectual superiority" makes you feel much better than actually thinking.
After years of learning to use only four neurons, today's game players can't even pickup the basics of the current crop of games.
There should be special remedial classes for game players, so that they can find their basic game-playing skills again. Perhaps we can get Federal funding for this programme, after all it is of vital national intere...
Oh no, this article did more damage to my brain than goatsex on a monday morning before coffee.
Please, all the gods, spare us from this kind of thing in the future. I promise I will make regular sacrifices, only the best chickens, and the expensive vodka.
Truly, that was a pretentious and stomach-churning piece of self-pretentious drivel written by someone who sounds like he has just figured out why the wax crayons break when you lean on them too hard.
Oh... my.... god.... I can't believe just reading words could be so painful. Anyhow, I've had a stiff drink, and I'll now be heading down to the PTS unit for some counselling, and possibly a nice masssage by that new girl. Lucy, her name, apparently, is.
Sweet Jesus. I pray for the future of our godawful-but-better-than-rocks-and-sticks civilisation that the writer of that crap-junket gets hit by a flying garbage disposal unit and is permanently buried under ten tons of rotting herring fillets. Nothing less would cure the pain I'm currently suffering.
It's almost as funny as journalism about sports, or journalism about porn, or journalism about journalism.
Journalism means analysing things that are interesting and important. Games - sorry - are mental masturbation, neither interesting nor important.
Now, journalism about the games industry, that is possible. Journalism about developing games, or about how the freakish death of twelve games writers in similar toaster-joystick-bathroom accidents. OK.
But journalism about games? Gimme a break, it's almost as irrelevant as journalism about Slashdot.
Freedom is not freedom at all, in fact, but slavery.
C'mon: the first paragraph was not supposed to be sensible, it was a feeble attempt to mock the linguistic legalisms. Free, free, free... the meaning of the word is irrelevant, and the GPL's value is not in its spirit, only its letter.
And the GPL is just a license. It does not bring down copyright law, indeed it relies on it fully. GPL'd software is fully copyrighted, and the GPL defines terms under which the right to copy is extended. "COPYLEFT" is not, despite the preamble, exclusive with copyright, it is a way of using it to ensure that one person's works, distributed as source code, do not become (mis)appropriated by another person.
Q: Why are SCO suing everyone? A: SCO is run by a bunch of vicious, lying, cowardly, greedy, sociopathic lawyers.
Q: Why is IBM being so slow to respond? A: IBM is still coming to terms with the fact that a company such as SCO would be so entirely suicidal and stupid. They are not used to dealing with complete and utter morons.
Q: Do SCO's actions present a danger to the Linux and OSS community? A: Yes, a sociopathic killer who hates you can present a danger. He might just get lucky with that ax he is waving.
Q: Are SCO doing this for the money, for the shares? A: SCO's executives will end up in prison getting midnight visits from large violent criminals. But that kind of logic never stopped a sociopath before.
Q: How can I defend myself from SCO? A: This would be a good time to move to Texas and get a larger gun.
Q: Does SCO have any valid arguments at all? A: Strictly speaking, all arguments have equal merit when digested by stupid and possibly corrupt members of the press, as government ministries of disinformation have shown over the centuries. SCO remain, however, a stinkin' bunch of evil mutant fiends, and everthing they say should be taken to be concentrated pranoid drivel.
Q: Who stands to gain from this circus? A: Entertainment is good for everyone, and it has been a slow summer, so SCO is actually contributing to the mental well-being of many people with their daily antics. For this we should be grateful. If you mean financial gain, the only party who stands to gain is Microsoft, who enjoy watching people attack the GPL and Free Software, because these represent a way of life that is entirely incompatible with its own.
Q: Could Microsoft actually be behind SCO? A: Is George Bush the President of the US? OK, poor comparison. Yes, of course they are. Even evil, corrupt, whore-mongering, cocaine-sniffing running dogs like SCO's executives have a sense of self-interest and only leap into dark holes when they know they will be paid well for it.
Q: How is Microsoft paying SCO, then? A: It only has to pay the executives. SCO is a publicly traded company. I presume MS is offering the SCO legal eagles direct and indirect financial support, promises of future comfort, what have you. There are so many ways...
Q: Should I be buying SCO shares? A: YES, and if you do, I also have some very nice shares in a brand-new satellite network called Iridium that might interest you. They are sure to do amazing things!!
Yes, people make many incorrect assumptions. Such as "free means free as in something". No, "free" means "free" as in "free", which should be obvious to any student of the tautological school of metaphilosophics. Claiming that "free" is in any way related to speech, beer, or freedom fries, is just sowing the seeds of confusion. Freedom is not freedom at all, in fact, but slavery. Except that it is a slavery we freely choose. Which is of course an abuse of our freedom of choice. But overall I have to confirm that the parent post is principally free of what we laymen call "common sense".
Holy crap.
The GPL is a license. This means a set of terms and conditions defined by the creator of a work as regards the use of the work. The GPL specifically seeks to define a model in which source code can be both distributed and protected from abusive reuse.
Using terms like "slave traders" is an incredibly silly attempt to polarise the discussion. My company has made free software since 1995, which we package under the GPL. But we provide the same software under a commercial license. Does that make us heroes or slave traders?
The author of a work has the right to distribute it under any license he likes. What part of this "freedom of choice" do you not understand? I completely support, for instance, Microsoft's right to distribute their software under their EULAs, which is why I don't buy their software.
The GPL is no "better" than any other license except in the view point of its users.
Too many people think they have a "right" to get software for free. This is not true: software is incredibly expensive to make, painful even, and the best products out there have been produced at incredibly cost to the teams and individuals involved. A programmer, like any author, chooses how he distributes and/or sells his work. Period.
I'm as annoyed with fools who believe the GPL is a bill of rights or a holy document, as with the fools who believe it's "evil" in some way. It's a licence, a damn good one, but still a license godamnit, and as such intended to protect and reward the creative process.
It is up to the author, and (on this I will agree with the parent poster) up to the user.
Actually those crooks at Medellin stole our trademarked name, "El Mellin" and made some subtle changes just to confuse the public and make it possible for them to sell an inferior product on the back of our hard-earned reputation. They even changed the name of the city just to make it look good! Incredible.
The chainsaw and bath idea, however, is entirely theirs, and truly it is a barbaric one. We are civilised people and never use a chainsaw inside the house. This is what the back court yard is for.
1. Wonderful press release, kick the MPAA/RIAA where it hurts.
2. Web site not slashdotted.
3. 40kb/sec download of the software. Exactly what kind of net pipes do they have running into Jenin? Maybe download.es5.com is located somewhere else...
4. None of this "we're just technology providers" bullshit. No, this is theftware at its best. Hey, the US has paid billions to help the Israeli state bomb the Palestinians into the stone age, it's not surprising there is not huge local support for US "intellectual property".
The software was apparently developed in Russia, financed by Arab and Israeli businessmen. It appears to use UDP rather than TCP/IP, which is a neat idea when you are sending redundant chunks of information around, and SSL for security, which may or may not be really secure.
The whole thing may be a hoax, I am downloading it to a test machine to try right now.
At last, someone with the guts to sock it to those bums at the MPAA and RIAA. Yeah!!
A VT220 terminal sitting here in a box, too precious to throw away, too useless to do anything with except perhaps hook up to a Linux box as a useless console.
And now I can hook it to the Internet! This is seriously useful stuff. Maybe I can make it beep as the text appears, in double size, so that people can see I have a REAL computer!
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, this is actually the way it was.
Still, it's the only toilet in the world I always came out of with a big smile on my face. And I know that sounds even worse. Tant pis.
On the one hand, the developed West becomes completely beholden to the Corporations: Microsoft, RIAA, MPAA, with Windows used in schools, universities, hospitals, governments... with innovation stiffled by patents and the DMCA, with lobbyists creating laws for purposes of business and not the civil state.
On the other hand, the rest of the world with an eye on the budget, choosing for free software and eventually developing their own. India, Brazil, China, and eventually Africa too. Countries where innovation continues because it's a matter of survival, and where the corporations can't impose their US laws because governments are incapable and unwilling to enforce them.
Why does the US still suffer from a fragmented and pathetically old-fashioned telephone system while even the most war-striken, bankrupt nations on earth already have one or two national GSM networks? Because where there is nothing, people can create.
Similarly, the IT industry in the West has moved to a phase of terminal stagnation, and will eventually be reduced to a simple service industry, with the innovation being done in those places that today choose open source.
No coincidence that another article today mentioned Microsoft's gradual takeover of the US's CompSci departments. Innovation through Windows? Now that's funny!
Anyone who laughs at "insert trousers" needs to readjust their sense of humour.
Now, in a club in Lagos Nigeria (the bar is called Towers, a nice place on Victoria Island), there is a sign above the urinals, which says:
"Employees must wash genitals before returning to work"
I just wish I'd had my camera with me, but you will have to take my word for it.
Spam merchants and virus/worm writers are collaborating and will collaborate, and build networks that make spam filters entirely useless.
Of course Sobig is about spam. Why else does some mysterious but well-financed entity want to control half the desktops of the world?
How about this spam technique, which I predict will occur in 6-9 months' time:
Tampering with real emails, inserting the spam message mixed with the real email.
Does that scare anyone? It makes a mockery of current technology for fighting spam.
SCO-formerly-Caldera is run by a group of predatory, scumbag lawyers who think they can fool enough people with their arrogant bullshit to carry out their mission of sabotage on the GPL and the OSS community in general.
Three cheers for Eric S. Raymond for saying publicly and from an official perspective what we all think when we read SCO-f-C's latest approximation of the "truth".
If ever there was a group of men that deserved to go to jail and be repeatedly abused by large men with indelicate tastes, it's the SCO boys.
Personally I'm going to buy a small amount of overpriced SCO stock now so that I can take part in the class-action lawsuit that will send these bums to prison where they belong.
Tomorrow, 12 noon at the Place de Luxembourg, in front of the EU building.
An ironic construction, this building, raised on the ruins of what used to be a lovely city square. Brussels demolished itself to make way for the EU and big business, doing with bulldozers and the 'open window policy' what the bombs of WWII did not manage to do.
The EU does not really care about its citizens any more than the White House does. Self-interest makes the world go around. But, in any case, I will be there, so that at least I can tell my children that when the time came to raise my voice in anger - or at least, modest disapproval - I did not shirk my duty.
But, somehow, I don't think even a large crowd will impress the MPs. Brussels has more than one demonstration per day, on average.
It's not about open source, although there is a similarity in the principle of open and free exchange of ideas.
Patents are government grants to build a business around a specific invention. There is a general issue here, namely that all invention comes from a communual process, exchange and refinement of ideas over time, and the granting of "exclusive" rights is by its very nature an act that ignores the reality of the process in order to create a new reality that favours certain groups over others.
However, we tend to accept that patents are one way of rewarding intellectual endeavour. Why then, are they bad?
There are many technical issues that make patents complex to grant: knowledge of the area in question, searching prior art, preparing lengthy documentation. This means that patents are expensive - in the EU, for instance, 10,000 Euro is the starting price, before you start looking at defending a patent.
The huge price tag puts patents firmly out of the reach of smaller groups and individuals who are not already wealthly. It is ironic, perhaps that these are also the groups and individuals who work the hardest to create new products and ideas, since they have the most to gain.
It is larger groups that are able to assemble large patent portfolios, therefore. Presumably these are then used to protect and reward innovation? No, most patents go unused in the direct sense, and become instead instruments for patent negotiations.
What is this? It is when a small company with a patent discovers that a larger company is infringing. It raises the question, and the large company discovers a handful of its own patents - previously ignored - that the smaller company is also infringing. The innovater finds that the precious patent is not only worthless, but has landed them in a situation where they may go bankrupt or have to sell their products to survive.
Large companies seek patents principally for this reason: to protect their existing markets and businesses against innovators.
The role of legislators is clear: their mandate, sponsored by big business, is to make this process as easy as possible.
Software patents take this to a new dimension. Software development is - unlike most prodyct creation - a process of almost pure invention. It is almost impossible to develop a complex software product without finding and solving many problems that others have also solved.
Patents are already biased against innovation, but software patents can create insurmountable obstacles. A business with the cash and the lawyers can find hundreds, perhaps thousands of "new" inventions in any complex software product. Needless to say, most or all of these are multiple re-inventions, but have not been previously patented, so are legally open to patent.
Software development, like all creative processes, relies on a pure and unbroken exchange of ideas and techniques across space and time. Software patents pretend that this exchange does not happen, and worse, they make the exchange impossible, and sometimes illegal.
At the extreme, software patents spell the end of not just open source, but the freedom of individuals to create new software. When every software invention has been patented, writing unauthorized code will become a criminal offense.
Large business loves this scenario. They pretend that software patents are essential to protect their "innovation" and "research". But this is a lie, as any honest observer can see.
The EU is, like all governments, manipulated by lobbyists, and the person who pays for the music will choose the dance. Software patents will come into law in the EU, there is no doubt about this.
The realisation that software patents (and all patents, indeed) are tools for monopolists will only come when the West has lost most of its competitive edge. I only hope that India and China realise - from self-interest - that they are being given a silver plate with a blank cheque, marked "please profit, we are in the process of strangling our nascent software businesses".
I'm expecting certain people to make much of this news, citing the "insecurity that comes with open source".
All it demonstrates is that large complex pieces of software are inherently more difficult to secure than smaller simpler ones.
Sendmail is great but we switched to another MTA about four years ago, also because Sendmail had exploits.
It would be nice to believe that one NZ spammer was responsible for 95% of all spam, but somehow... I don't think so.
Vigilantism, legislation, and spam filters are simply selection agents that will help to breed a tougher new spammer.
The drop in spam comes because spammers are trying something else and I reckon the writers of SoBig were paid by spammers, looking for a new way to send emails. If you thought the last week was relaxed, just wait. You ain't seen nothing yet.
The ugly truth (and I have this on good authority from a spaceship that lands in my backyard everynight), is that Darly McBride has already had his picture from ten years hence widely distributed. Apparently he got on very well with his big friends in the slammer.
I apologise deeply for linking (deep linking?) to this offensive image but it's the one and true Darly McBride staring back at you. I figured the world had to know.
Now, if some kind hacker would please deface www.sco.com appropriately, the world can also learn.
It's been like 2 days, and three articles on games nothing about SCO!
I'm getting withdrawal symptoms. Please, the next installment in the "Daryl Goes To Hell" soap opera...?
Uhm, also (karmawhorekarmawhore) I think the ultimate game collection really rocks, it's totally cool, really wonderful.
Now what's up with SCO!?
Masturbation
How about "playing with yourself because you're too antisocial / introverted / goddamn lazy" to go out and play with other people? Yes, I think the word "masturbation" is pretty much what I meant, and not even particularly pejoratively.
But, I see you are from that website "insertcredit", the same one mentioned in the article, so I am guessing this is where you demonstrate that independence of thought that journalists are so famous for.
ROTFL. Kids like you make it fun to hang out here. Flame me, my Karma comes easy.
Dumb-bastard?
Not-even?
Going-to?
Bother?
Lazy-too.
And you call my post "condescending?" Bejesus. You should write reviews for gaming magazines, your attitude is just right.
Back to my post: games too hard or too easy is missing the entire point. Games should be fun and while learning can be fun, more basic things can be much more fun. Four neurons are all it should take to enjoy oneself.
But I'm sure writing stuff like "perceived intellectual superiority" makes you feel much better than actually thinking.
It has to be said.
After years of learning to use only four neurons, today's game players can't even pickup the basics of the current crop of games.
There should be special remedial classes for game players, so that they can find their basic game-playing skills again. Perhaps we can get Federal funding for this programme, after all it is of vital national intere...
Oh, games. Right.
Next article, please.
Oh no, this article did more damage to my brain than goatsex on a monday morning before coffee.
Please, all the gods, spare us from this kind of thing in the future. I promise I will make regular sacrifices, only the best chickens, and the expensive vodka.
Truly, that was a pretentious and stomach-churning piece of self-pretentious drivel written by someone who sounds like he has just figured out why the wax crayons break when you lean on them too hard.
Oh... my.... god.... I can't believe just reading words could be so painful. Anyhow, I've had a stiff drink, and I'll now be heading down to the PTS unit for some counselling, and possibly a nice masssage by that new girl. Lucy, her name, apparently, is.
Sweet Jesus. I pray for the future of our godawful-but-better-than-rocks-and-sticks civilisation that the writer of that crap-junket gets hit by a flying garbage disposal unit and is permanently buried under ten tons of rotting herring fillets. Nothing less would cure the pain I'm currently suffering.
It's almost as funny as journalism about sports, or journalism about porn, or journalism about journalism.
Journalism means analysing things that are interesting and important. Games - sorry - are mental masturbation, neither interesting nor important.
Now, journalism about the games industry, that is possible. Journalism about developing games, or about how the freakish death of twelve games writers in similar toaster-joystick-bathroom accidents. OK.
But journalism about games? Gimme a break, it's almost as irrelevant as journalism about Slashdot.
Freedom is not freedom at all, in fact, but slavery.
C'mon: the first paragraph was not supposed to be sensible, it was a feeble attempt to mock the linguistic legalisms. Free, free, free... the meaning of the word is irrelevant, and the GPL's value is not in its spirit, only its letter.
And the GPL is just a license. It does not bring down copyright law, indeed it relies on it fully. GPL'd software is fully copyrighted, and the GPL defines terms under which the right to copy is extended. "COPYLEFT" is not, despite the preamble, exclusive with copyright, it is a way of using it to ensure that one person's works, distributed as source code, do not become (mis)appropriated by another person.
Q: Why are SCO suing everyone?
A: SCO is run by a bunch of vicious, lying, cowardly, greedy, sociopathic lawyers.
Q: Why is IBM being so slow to respond?
A: IBM is still coming to terms with the fact that a company such as SCO would be so entirely suicidal and stupid. They are not used to dealing with complete and utter morons.
Q: Do SCO's actions present a danger to the Linux and OSS community?
A: Yes, a sociopathic killer who hates you can present a danger. He might just get lucky with that ax he is waving.
Q: Are SCO doing this for the money, for the shares?
A: SCO's executives will end up in prison getting midnight visits from large violent criminals. But that kind of logic never stopped a sociopath before.
Q: How can I defend myself from SCO?
A: This would be a good time to move to Texas and get a larger gun.
Q: Does SCO have any valid arguments at all?
A: Strictly speaking, all arguments have equal merit when digested by stupid and possibly corrupt members of the press, as government ministries of disinformation have shown over the centuries. SCO remain, however, a stinkin' bunch of evil mutant fiends, and everthing they say should be taken to be concentrated pranoid drivel.
Q: Who stands to gain from this circus?
A: Entertainment is good for everyone, and it has been a slow summer, so SCO is actually contributing to the mental well-being of many people with their daily antics. For this we should be grateful. If you mean financial gain, the only party who stands to gain is Microsoft, who enjoy watching people attack the GPL and Free Software, because these represent a way of life that is entirely incompatible with its own.
Q: Could Microsoft actually be behind SCO?
A: Is George Bush the President of the US? OK, poor comparison. Yes, of course they are. Even evil, corrupt, whore-mongering, cocaine-sniffing running dogs like SCO's executives have a sense of self-interest and only leap into dark holes when they know they will be paid well for it.
Q: How is Microsoft paying SCO, then?
A: It only has to pay the executives. SCO is a publicly traded company. I presume MS is offering the SCO legal eagles direct and indirect financial support, promises of future comfort, what have you. There are so many ways...
Q: Should I be buying SCO shares?
A: YES, and if you do, I also have some very nice shares in a brand-new satellite network called Iridium that might interest you. They are sure to do amazing things!!
Yes, people make many incorrect assumptions. Such as "free means free as in something". No, "free" means "free" as in "free", which should be obvious to any student of the tautological school of metaphilosophics. Claiming that "free" is in any way related to speech, beer, or freedom fries, is just sowing the seeds of confusion. Freedom is not freedom at all, in fact, but slavery. Except that it is a slavery we freely choose. Which is of course an abuse of our freedom of choice. But overall I have to confirm that the parent post is principally free of what we laymen call "common sense".
Holy crap.
The GPL is a license. This means a set of terms and conditions defined by the creator of a work as regards the use of the work. The GPL specifically seeks to define a model in which source code can be both distributed and protected from abusive reuse.
Using terms like "slave traders" is an incredibly silly attempt to polarise the discussion. My company has made free software since 1995, which we package under the GPL. But we provide the same software under a commercial license. Does that make us heroes or slave traders?
The author of a work has the right to distribute it under any license he likes. What part of this "freedom of choice" do you not understand? I completely support, for instance, Microsoft's right to distribute their software under their EULAs, which is why I don't buy their software.
The GPL is no "better" than any other license except in the view point of its users.
Too many people think they have a "right" to get software for free. This is not true: software is incredibly expensive to make, painful even, and the best products out there have been produced at incredibly cost to the teams and individuals involved. A programmer, like any author, chooses how he distributes and/or sells his work. Period.
I'm as annoyed with fools who believe the GPL is a bill of rights or a holy document, as with the fools who believe it's "evil" in some way. It's a licence, a damn good one, but still a license godamnit, and as such intended to protect and reward the creative process.
It is up to the author, and (on this I will agree with the parent poster) up to the user.
And tests proved that anyone wearing 15 million RFID tags could not walk out of the store.
Actually those crooks at Medellin stole our trademarked name, "El Mellin" and made some subtle changes just to confuse the public and make it possible for them to sell an inferior product on the back of our hard-earned reputation. They even changed the name of the city just to make it look good! Incredible.
The chainsaw and bath idea, however, is entirely theirs, and truly it is a barbaric one. We are civilised people and never use a chainsaw inside the house. This is what the back court yard is for.
Sr. Ernesto Sco-Bar
El Mellin Cartel & Co.
1. Wonderful press release, kick the MPAA/RIAA where it hurts.
2. Web site not slashdotted.
3. 40kb/sec download of the software. Exactly what kind of net pipes do they have running into Jenin? Maybe download.es5.com is located somewhere else...
4. None of this "we're just technology providers" bullshit. No, this is theftware at its best. Hey, the US has paid billions to help the Israeli state bomb the Palestinians into the stone age, it's not surprising there is not huge local support for US "intellectual property".
The software was apparently developed in Russia, financed by Arab and Israeli businessmen. It appears to use UDP rather than TCP/IP, which is a neat idea when you are sending redundant chunks of information around, and SSL for security, which may or may not be really secure.
The whole thing may be a hoax, I am downloading it to a test machine to try right now.
At last, someone with the guts to sock it to those bums at the MPAA and RIAA. Yeah!!
A VT220 terminal sitting here in a box, too precious to throw away, too useless to do anything with except perhaps hook up to a Linux box as a useless console.
And now I can hook it to the Internet! This is seriously useful stuff. Maybe I can make it beep as the text appears, in double size, so that people can see I have a REAL computer!