IBM's finally opened the patent portfolio. Boies must have known this was coming; he worked on the IBM anti-trust case for years. I wonder if he already has plans for dealing with this.
Part of the claim demands that SCO stop shipping all of the software infringing on IBM's patents, which is essentially all of SCO's software. I think SCO may have decided that they are not really in the software business anymore but intends to just pursue licensing, contract, and IP infringement claims for years.
If that's the case, then they won't be upset even if they lose the right to distribute their software due to the patent claims.
OTOH, SCO is screwed. I'm waiting for a pacer account to show up in the mail so I can read the counter-claim online. If anyone already has a pacer account, can they download the file and post it someplace where we can all see it?
This is their reasoning: They are offereing an end user license agreement for the use of their IP. In other words, it is a usage license. The GPL is a distribution license. Therefore, in SCO's warped logic, there is no conflict.
"SCO did not respond to Red Hat's letter {requesting that SCO explain the bases for its allegations regarding Linux}, except to make a telephone call seeking to have Red Hat pay for an unneeded UNIX license."
Darl: Hi, is Matt around?
Operator: Matt who?
Darl: Umm, I'm not real sure how to pronounce it... Matt, uh, SSS-Zulick?
Operator: Hold on...
(telephone ringing)
Darl: Chris, can you believe these fuckers are suing us?
Chris Sontag: Well, you know, once we get into court and show them what we showed the analysts under DNA-
Darl: Chris, you're an idiot. Shut up.
Female Voice: Hello, you've reached the office of Matthew Szulick. How can I help you?
Darl: Uh, yeah, is Matt in?
Matt's Admin. Asst.: I'm not sure. I can check for you. May I ask who's calling?
Darl: Yeah, this is, uh, Darl McBride. From SCO?
Admin: Please hold.
(Muzak)
Darl: Chris, I'm gonna put this on speaker for a moment.
(pause)
Isn't that the IBM corporate song?
Chris: No... I don't think so. It's "Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head", isn't it?
Male Voice: Matt here.
Darl: (fumbles with speakerphone switch) Hey, Matt, how are you? It's Darl McBride here, from SCO.
Matt: Yeah, Darl, what do you want?
Darl: Look we got your letter here...
Matt: Uh huh
Darl:... and, uh, I was wondering if we could settle this between us.
Matt: What did you have in mind?
Darl: Well, I've got this Unix license I could sell you real cheap, just between friends, I mean, hey, we're both CEO's here...
This is a valid complaint. I know a number of people who switched from Red Hat to Debian over this. Of course, they're all computer literate and use standard equipment (no wireless keyboards and mice, for instance).
The Debian install is confusing for Joe Average. Han Knopper prefers to keep the Knoppix installer a "secret" feature, because it's not well-tested yet and it's a feature he is not overly concerned with.
Joe Average just wants to install it quickly. He probably doesn't even know about Debian or Knoppix, but maybe he's heard of Red Hat or Mandrake. So he installs one of them, and, later, when he wants to upgrade a piece of software or install something new off the web, ends up in dependency hell.
Sure, he could get Lindows, which *is* Debian based, and use either apt-get or Click & Run, but the cost of Lindows and Click & Run is much higher than Red hat or Mandrake.
So, basically, a lot of people who *try* GNU/Linux are going to get fed up with it until: A) RPM dies its quick and deserved death, and B) a graphical package management tool that *works* (maybe Synaptic?) becomes standard on all of the *major* Joe Average distributions.
I'm not saying that Portage, Tar-gaz, or Pac-Man should go away. I prefer these types of tools in a lot of ways. But Joe and Jane Average want their software installed as easily as they install screen-savers and Bonzai Buddy on Windows.
I honestly think the increased support for USB 2.0 in kernel 2.6.x, when it goes to stable, is going to help relieve a lot of install issues for users and that we'll see desktop Linux adoption increase dramatically. But until the dependency hells (and driver issues, as well) are resolved, a large number of users interested in GNU/Linux, or Open Source in general, will get frustrated and blow it off before they even give it a fair try. In their minds, and rightfully so, if they can't easily install the tools, games, and doodads, they want to use, they've already given it a fair try and it didn't measure up.
You pocket the *entire* difference as profit? Look, if I were customer, I wouldn't mind that you made some profit from reducing my costs, but I'd expect you to split the difference or at least give me some discount. If and when they find out that they overpaid for the software, they'll look for another vendor or consultant.
I'm sorry, but you seem to be arguing a point here and - while I understand the point - I'm not sure how it orginated to anything in my previous post (i.e. the parent post).
In any case, to answer your questions:
A) Yes, I was aware that von Neumann was suportive of preemptive war.
B) No I did not know about the Churchill quote.
C) I have read Poundstone's "Prisoner's Dillema" and found it to be quite an interesting read, as well as a nice overview of some of the ideas in game theory.
If what you are taking exception to is the phrase "Atrocious new age speculation", I assure you that game theory and social sciences were not what I meant by that phrase. It was a criticism of Capra's amd Zukav's attempts to imbue physics with a layer of spiritualism that cannot be accommodated within the scientific method. Zukav, in particular, seems to have done way too much acid.
In other words, please don't take the statement as a criticism of the so-called "soft sciences" for which I have a healthy respect. The statement was a criticism of non-science and it's popularization through books claiming to be about science.
I like the Feynman books as well, but I'd start with "Surely, You're Joking Mr. Feyman" first. The reason I say that, especially if you want to share them with your kids - I'm assuming they're about adolescent in age - is that I find it's easier to develop an understanding in these subjects by hearing stories in them first, then moving on to more theory-oriented works.
For math, I'd recommend:
G. H. Hardy - A Mathemetician's Apology E. T. Bell - Men of Mathematics (some people have problems with this book in terms of historical accuracy, but I'v always found it a lot of fun) Courant & Robbins - What is Mathematics? (nice grounding in general theory) Nagel & Newman - Godel's Proof Georg Cantor - Transfinite Numbers Alan Turing - On the Computable Numbers (fantastic essay, don't know where you can find it though) J. E. Thompson - Algebra / Calculus for the Practical Man Silvanus Thompson & Martin Gardner - Calculus Made Easy
For physics:
Feynman - QED (Quantum Electrodynamics)/ The Character of Physical Law Galileo - Two New Sciences (Much more readable than you'd think) Fermi - Thermodynamics / Elementary Particles (these might be a little too technical) Brian Greene - The Elegant Universe Einstein - Relativity / The Principle of Relativity / The Meaning of Relativity / The Theory Of Brownian Movemnent
Highly Unrecommended:
The Tao of Physics - Fritjof Capra The Dancing Wu-Li Masters - Gary Zukav
I cannot emphasize enough how lousy these last two books are. I can't understand why they are still in print. Atrocious new age speculation.
Thanks for the link. That's actually a pretty interesting article and I wasn't aware of the French Secret Services responsibility for that particular act.
To say that the French are terrorists because of some random French idiots is kind of like saying Americans are terrorists because of Timothy McVeigh and the Unabomber.
Word on various boards seems to be that the 2.6 kernel is much faster than 2.4.x. People are claiming improvements of up to 50% in some operations.
Of course, these are early adopters, most of them with single cpu machines. I haven't heard of anyone testing it for robustness or stability in a high-end environment yet.
Interestingly, this "cake" metaphor was used in an article on USAToday's website just a couple of days ago: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technolog y/maney/2003-07-30-maney_x.htm
"SCO claims it rummaged around in its closet and found that since the mid-1990s it has owned the rights to certain core source code for the waning Unix operating system. SCO says it then realized that the Unix code somehow got copied into the core of Linux, an increasingly popular "open-source" operating system developed and modified by thousands of independent programmers and owned by no one.
[... snip para....]
This whole thing is not unlike finding your grandmother's recipe for Bundt cake, realizing it's similar to the recipe in a number of cookbooks, suing the biggest cookbook publisher, then sending letters to everyone who makes a Bundt cake saying they should send you some money or risk legal action. Not a good way to make friends."
What's really nice about this is that it means some of the mainstram press (do you really get any more mainstream than USAToday?) is finally starting to criticize the SCO FUD.
That's for the magazine. The guy who writes for PBS is actually the first, or maybe the second Cringely, I can't remember which, but somehow he got rights to the name for his own writing and still uses it.
Well, actually, I did read it, and that offer didn't come until after he had filed in small claims court. My point was that he *might* have been able to avoid court if he had asked to speak to someone in compliance in the first place. And that the compliance department *might* not have asked for a gag order, since there was no court claim yet and thus very little to gag.
Most large companies have compliance departments to handle legal issues with customers before it gets to the legal department.
He might have been able to get the refund before going to small claims court by asking to speak to someone in compliance. Especially, if he had told them small claims court would be his next step if they couldn't resolve the issue. They would have preferred to refund just the software w/o the court costs and would have realized he wasn't joking.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, SCO stock dropping like a stone.
Here's the link: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOX&d=c&k=c1&a=v&p=
IBM's finally opened the patent portfolio. Boies must have known this was coming; he worked on the IBM anti-trust case for years. I wonder if he already has plans for dealing with this.
Part of the claim demands that SCO stop shipping all of the software infringing on IBM's patents, which is essentially all of SCO's software. I think SCO may have decided that they are not really in the software business anymore but intends to just pursue licensing, contract, and IP infringement claims for years.
If that's the case, then they won't be upset even if they lose the right to distribute their software due to the patent claims.
OTOH, SCO is screwed. I'm waiting for a pacer account to show up in the mail so I can read the counter-claim online. If anyone already has a pacer account, can they download the file and post it someplace where we can all see it?
This is their reasoning: They are offereing an end user license agreement for the use of their IP. In other words, it is a usage license. The GPL is a distribution license. Therefore, in SCO's warped logic, there is no conflict.
This is, without a doubt, the geekiest item I have ever seen on
"SCO did not respond to Red Hat's letter {requesting that SCO explain the bases for its allegations regarding Linux}, except to make a telephone call seeking to have Red Hat pay for an unneeded UNIX license."
Darl: Hi, is Matt around?
Operator: Matt who?
Darl: Umm, I'm not real sure how to pronounce it... Matt, uh, SSS-Zulick?
Operator: Hold on...
(telephone ringing)
Darl: Chris, can you believe these fuckers are suing us?
Chris Sontag: Well, you know, once we get into court and show them what we showed the analysts under DNA-
Darl: Chris, you're an idiot. Shut up.
Female Voice: Hello, you've reached the office of Matthew Szulick. How can I help you?
Darl: Uh, yeah, is Matt in?
Matt's Admin. Asst.: I'm not sure. I can check for you. May I ask who's calling?
Darl: Yeah, this is, uh, Darl McBride. From SCO?
Admin: Please hold.
(Muzak)
Darl: Chris, I'm gonna put this on speaker for a moment.
(pause)
Isn't that the IBM corporate song?
Chris: No... I don't think so. It's "Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head", isn't it?
Male Voice: Matt here.
Darl: (fumbles with speakerphone switch) Hey, Matt, how are you? It's Darl McBride here, from SCO.
Matt: Yeah, Darl, what do you want?
Darl: Look we got your letter here...
Matt: Uh huh
Darl:
Matt: What did you have in mind?
Darl: Well, I've got this Unix license I could sell you real cheap, just between friends, I mean, hey, we're both CEO's here...
(click)
Darl: Matt? Matt, are you still there?
Whoops, typo's galore. That'll teach me to use preview.
"Han Knopper" should, of course, be "Klaus Knopper". And "Tar-gaz" should be "Tar-gz".
This is a valid complaint. I know a number of people who switched from Red Hat to Debian over this. Of course, they're all computer literate and use standard equipment (no wireless keyboards and mice, for instance).
The Debian install is confusing for Joe Average. Han Knopper prefers to keep the Knoppix installer a "secret" feature, because it's not well-tested yet and it's a feature he is not overly concerned with.
Joe Average just wants to install it quickly. He probably doesn't even know about Debian or Knoppix, but maybe he's heard of Red Hat or Mandrake. So he installs one of them, and, later, when he wants to upgrade a piece of software or install something new off the web, ends up in dependency hell.
Sure, he could get Lindows, which *is* Debian based, and use either apt-get or Click & Run, but the cost of Lindows and Click & Run is much higher than Red hat or Mandrake.
So, basically, a lot of people who *try* GNU/Linux are going to get fed up with it until: A) RPM dies its quick and deserved death, and B) a graphical package management tool that *works* (maybe Synaptic?) becomes standard on all of the *major* Joe Average distributions.
I'm not saying that Portage, Tar-gaz, or Pac-Man should go away. I prefer these types of tools in a lot of ways. But Joe and Jane Average want their software installed as easily as they install screen-savers and Bonzai Buddy on Windows.
I honestly think the increased support for USB 2.0 in kernel 2.6.x, when it goes to stable, is going to help relieve a lot of install issues for users and that we'll see desktop Linux adoption increase dramatically. But until the dependency hells (and driver issues, as well) are resolved, a large number of users interested in GNU/Linux, or Open Source in general, will get frustrated and blow it off before they even give it a fair try. In their minds, and rightfully so, if they can't easily install the tools, games, and doodads, they want to use, they've already given it a fair try and it didn't measure up.
You pocket the *entire* difference as profit? Look, if I were customer, I wouldn't mind that you made some profit from reducing my costs, but I'd expect you to split the difference or at least give me some discount. If and when they find out that they overpaid for the software, they'll look for another vendor or consultant.
Why not burn a few ISO's and either offer to install it for them for an install fee of 1/2 an hour's labor or sell them the CD for $10-30?
Is it because it doesn't fit into the Circuit City business procedures? Because they would have to support it if they offered it?
And it doesn't do two-way paging. I'll never be able to sell this to management unless they know they can get e-mail on it.
I'm sorry, but you seem to be arguing a point here and - while I understand the point - I'm not sure how it orginated to anything in my previous post (i.e. the parent post).
In any case, to answer your questions:
A) Yes, I was aware that von Neumann was suportive of preemptive war.
B) No I did not know about the Churchill quote.
C) I have read Poundstone's "Prisoner's Dillema" and found it to be quite an interesting read, as well as a nice overview of some of the ideas in game theory.
If what you are taking exception to is the phrase "Atrocious new age speculation", I assure you that game theory and social sciences were not what I meant by that phrase. It was a criticism of Capra's amd Zukav's attempts to imbue physics with a layer of spiritualism that cannot be accommodated within the scientific method. Zukav, in particular, seems to have done way too much acid.
In other words, please don't take the statement as a criticism of the so-called "soft sciences" for which I have a healthy respect. The statement was a criticism of non-science and it's popularization through books claiming to be about science.
I like the Feynman books as well, but I'd start with "Surely, You're Joking Mr. Feyman" first. The reason I say that, especially if you want to share them with your kids - I'm assuming they're about adolescent in age - is that I find it's easier to develop an understanding in these subjects by hearing stories in them first, then moving on to more theory-oriented works.
For math, I'd recommend:
G. H. Hardy - A Mathemetician's Apology
E. T. Bell - Men of Mathematics (some people have problems with this book in terms of historical accuracy, but I'v always found it a lot of fun)
Courant & Robbins - What is Mathematics? (nice grounding in general theory)
Nagel & Newman - Godel's Proof
Georg Cantor - Transfinite Numbers
Alan Turing - On the Computable Numbers (fantastic essay, don't know where you can find it though)
J. E. Thompson - Algebra / Calculus for the Practical Man
Silvanus Thompson & Martin Gardner - Calculus Made Easy
For physics:
Feynman - QED (Quantum Electrodynamics)/ The Character of Physical Law
Galileo - Two New Sciences (Much more readable than you'd think)
Fermi - Thermodynamics / Elementary Particles (these might be a little too technical)
Brian Greene - The Elegant Universe
Einstein - Relativity / The Principle of Relativity / The Meaning of Relativity / The Theory Of Brownian Movemnent
Highly Unrecommended:
The Tao of Physics - Fritjof Capra
The Dancing Wu-Li Masters - Gary Zukav
I cannot emphasize enough how lousy these last two books are. I can't understand why they are still in print. Atrocious new age speculation.
Offtopic, but...
Thanks for the link. That's actually a pretty interesting article and I wasn't aware of the French Secret Services responsibility for that particular act.
To say that the French are terrorists because of some random French idiots is kind of like saying Americans are terrorists because of Timothy McVeigh and the Unabomber.
God, I must be bored. I'm talking to trolls.
Well, it's offtopic, but here ya' go anyway:
No iso's available. You *can* get the RPM's and SRPM's at:
ftp://ftp.linuxforum.hu/mirror/Mandrake-old/upd
Sorry to post to myself, but I was wrong about Mamdrake being the first major distro to supply the 2.6 kernel. Red Hat has had an RPM for a few weeks.
Please, someone mod this shit down.
I think so.
Word on various boards seems to be that the 2.6 kernel is much faster than 2.4.x. People are claiming improvements of up to 50% in some operations.
Of course, these are early adopters, most of them with single cpu machines. I haven't heard of anyone testing it for robustness or stability in a high-end environment yet.
Anyone else got word on it's performance or bugs?
I hope he has a lot of money on his hands -- for insurance.
"If SCO really does have their way, are we going to run something called SCO-GNU/McLinux?"
No. It will be called: MS SCO Linux GT (Gnu Technology).
Interestingly, this "cake" metaphor was used in an article on USAToday's website just a couple of days ago: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technolog y/maney/2003-07-30-maney_x.htm
...]
"SCO claims it rummaged around in its closet and found that since the mid-1990s it has owned the rights to certain core source code for the waning Unix operating system. SCO says it then realized that the Unix code somehow got copied into the core of Linux, an increasingly popular "open-source" operating system developed and modified by thousands of independent programmers and owned by no one.
[... snip para.
This whole thing is not unlike finding your grandmother's recipe for Bundt cake, realizing it's similar to the recipe in a number of cookbooks, suing the biggest cookbook publisher, then sending letters to everyone who makes a Bundt cake saying they should send you some money or risk legal action. Not a good way to make friends."
What's really nice about this is that it means some of the mainstram press (do you really get any more mainstream than USAToday?) is finally starting to criticize the SCO FUD.
That's for the magazine. The guy who writes for PBS is actually the first, or maybe the second Cringely, I can't remember which, but somehow he got rights to the name for his own writing and still uses it.
Well, no, he didn't forget to mention it.
It's in his second paragraph.
Well, actually, I did read it, and that offer didn't come until after he had filed in small claims court. My point was that he *might* have been able to avoid court if he had asked to speak to someone in compliance in the first place. And that the compliance department *might* not have asked for a gag order, since there was no court claim yet and thus very little to gag.
Most large companies have compliance departments to handle legal issues with customers before it gets to the legal department.
He might have been able to get the refund before going to small claims court by asking to speak to someone in compliance. Especially, if he had told them small claims court would be his next step if they couldn't resolve the issue. They would have preferred to refund just the software w/o the court costs and would have realized he wasn't joking.