Uh, because there are more costs involved in software development than buying an OS? You're thinking about this like it's you needing an operating system to run a web browser and read email -- where Linux is free and your time is valued at nothing.
Uh no I'm not thinking it's just browsing. FYI when you install programs and develop software do YOU realise that MS has to go through the same procedure as any other OS. Compiling, etc., do you also know from experience that MS generally takes longer to perform certain tasks, not to mention the god awful that when something goes wrong you normally have to reboot. Can you say Bluescreens they still occur in XP too. Nix based... kill the job and restart it through the shell. That simple.
Microsoft's "Windows Embedded" operating system platforms (specifically, Windows CE.NET and Windows XP Embedded) are completed 43% faster and at 68% lower cost, on average, compared with similar projects using Embedded Linux.
Windows XP = money
Linux = free to download
I don't see where the money argument comes into play here? Before someone says something about TCO let me point out a humorous but true text on how Microsoft actually kills (link is a google cache).
The report includes data from a survey of 100 manufacturers using 32-bit processors in a range of embedded projects and applications -- 50 using various implementations of embedded Linux, and 50 using Microsoft's Windows Embedded platforms(Windows CE.NET and Windows XP Embedded).
Rubbish rubbish and more rubbish. They shouldn't have been so biased with the study. Which manufacturers were used? Give it a rest now MS. It's obvious for one if MS funded the study, it's bound to be swayed, however if they didn't fund the study, depending on the vendors, it's still bound to be swayed. Remember MS violated antitrust forcing companies to go MS or go to bankruptcy court. How is one supposed to believe any studies they'd do?
I'm sure someone else is going to post a very good thorough post but we all know this is nothing more than utter bs.
when business interests and advertising dollars trump the rights of readers to obtain honest, hard-hitting advice that would send a media bean-counter into a stroke.
One of the problems with independent journalists is cognitive dissonance:
Festinger claimed that people avoid information that is likely to increase dissonance. Not only do we tend to select reading material and television programs that are consistent with our existing beliefs, we usually choose to be with people who are like us. By taking care to ''stick with our own kind," we can maintain the relative comfort of the status quo. Like-minded people buffer us from ideas that could cause discomfort. In that sense, the process of making friends is an example of selecting our own propaganda.
We as people tend to stick with familiarity, and with the news agencies, just because it isn't an independent person but rather a slew of ideals thrown together, no matter what you think things will always be slanted one way or the other.
As most newspaper and broadcast journalists can attest, there are some news subjects that are considered generally off-limits to the news side
Everything must be taken with a grain of salt. My pet peeve about news agencies, is they seemed to be reserved in what they will say, and I think too many people are left blind to major issues in life. It's sad to admit it, but there are many people worldwide who don't have the mental capability of understanding what is in front of them. Instead they turn away to fantasy, Jennifer Lopez, Ben Affleck, Oprah, whatever can be used as an escape.
Being that i run a pseudo news site with information that I think is interesting, I too know how to slant things for my own enjoyment or gain. I also know the dangers that most don't when it comes to posting certain information. Sure I've been threatened with suits, been visited by feds, and I'm still debating whether or not I should take down MI6's headquarter pix from my FOIA directory. I think participation is great because it gives another perspective to an issue, yet at the same time I think it is dangerous because common sense would dictate, somewhere along the line information will be misconstrued which could lead to grave danger.
This could actually come in handy for the military industrial complex who will build it for pennies and sell it for millions... Actually think about it, the military could use it for real time war scenarios. tracking their own and the enemies soldiers, aircraft etc., as opposed to purchasing a tracking device for all soldiers, they could have one all inclusive roving machine which if shot at wouldn't have a widow or saddened family members.
Look at what the mil has done with the unmanned Predator drones, it could be used more or less under the same situations, to limit casualties and get into places where it would be too dangerous for soldiers. Or it could be a combo biometric machine for companies (say financial co.'s) to use. Perhaps it could be used for a nightly or daily audit to see which hosts on their machines are using insecure protocols
With all these insecurities over protocols not using any form of SSL you would think companies after so much time would have made it a default issue to run these protocols securely. How hard would it be for the developers of BSD/Linux/*Nix to change the settings on this. Well actually someone should create a sort of "Trust" repository for sites that don't know how to set up SSL and the likes. (e.g. the millions of mom and pop shops on the net) and perhaps charge them for securing their data.
I know Verisign and others offer services like this often at a high rate but perhaps the initiative can be funded by governments participating in some W3 standard to secure transactions.
Re:They need to be more outspoken
on
NASA's Sensor Web
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Maybe these bombshells could be to sway the attention away from the past failures they've had, or perhaps to divert attention from some bombshell about to be dropped with that last shuttle crash. It could be NASA is just trying to maintain a favorable disposition with the general public since congress has drastically slashed their budget for the past decade+
Of the estimated 8 million computer users who seek technical support from software manufacturers every year, about a third never get the help they need,
I sympathize with both the tech support personnel and the end user of the product. But some things about this article catch my eye and either bug me or amuse me.
The March survey of 10,000 computer users found widespread dissatisfaction with the level of service offered by U.S. software manufacturers.
I wonder if those who gave the survey had a skill level assessment for some of the people they question. For instance asking farmer Bill in West Bubblefsck Nebraska what he thinks about Mathematica is a pretty lame excuse for a survey.
Quality has been the victim as companies cut corners to cut costs. As a result, the magazine put software tech support among the lower-ranked services that it's rated in the last 10 years -- slightly worse than the customer support offered by cell phone carriers and just a little better than that provided by cable TV companies.
This is amusing... Those years of ripping into tech support calling me while I'm playing Quake to ask me some damn question about some product we made... Why I outta!$*
More and more, people are turning to tech-savvy friends, online message boards and paying independent computer service firms to get results.
"People are already so frustrated with tech support, they're not even calling," Jeff Blyskal, senior editor for Consumer Reports.
One problem I've seen with non techie users of machines, is they (the newbies) tend to think that first is better, and they often rush out and get something that is being pimped out on the shelfs of CompUSA or something with some groovy color and packaging scheme. They never read reviews on the products, probably never even used it, or heard about it on Oprah or something extremely dumb. So who is really to blame if farmer Bill goes out and buys an AutoCAD program and is clueless?
Don't get me wrong I know tech support isn't the greatest but sheesh to have the comp industry so close to the cable industry in ratings, and the cell... oh my I'm fainting.
The first chapter has sections on different relationship pairings (introvert male with extrovert female, introvert female with extrovert male, introvert with introvert).
I'd revert before I convert to extro from introvert. Or is it revert to the original excerpt about the introvert formally known as extrovert? Hmmm... confused I am I am I am... well does being a simple pervert count anywhere in this?
Let's stop all this confusion with some factual information, you know reading between the lines of he said she said corp. style.
According to SCO spokesperson Blake Stowell in an article on Infoworld (src):
Stowell admitted that his company was still providing Linux source code and security patches on its Web site in order to fulfill support contracts with customers, but he disputed Kuhn's claim. "If our IP [intellectual property] is being found in Linux and that's being done without our say, then I don't think that the GPL can force us not to collect license fees from someone who may be using our intellectual property," he said.
IBM's complaint echoes Kuhn's criticism. SCO has included GPL code in its Linux products
This is the key to the confusion from my perspective: SCO has included GPL code in its Linux products. SCO is not seeking any injuctions for anything Linux but the core UNIX codes. Sounds very confusing, but according to what I'm reading, like it or not SCO has the right to charge. Now back to the rest of what was said: and "by so doing, SCO accepted the terms of the GPL," the complaint says. By seeking licensing fees, SCO is in breach of the license, it says.
Now if SCO is selling 2 which contains elements of 1, SCO has the right to do so since it's their intellectual property. Now SCO is claiming item2 contains portions of item1 and is redistributing item2 without permissions for the portions taken from item1 (which is their Intellectual Property). They don't seem to be complaining about whether item2 is sold or wanting credit for item2, they want compensation for the portions being used it's that simple. There is so much distortion in this matter, and all these so called "Open Source Movements" are going to end up backfiring on everyone.
IBM and SCO should know better than getting into this whole mess, and IBM is equally guilty. For starters it just shows an extreme amount of corporate immaturity, it shows that the Open Source community cannot get their act right. So why would a company want to choose a product which has an uncertain future? Sure MS may suck at times, but at least you don't hear this juvenile crap from their camp.
Linux is keeping these old hat computer businesses relevant.
This would be an Open Source-o-files dream come true if it were true, but IBM probably makes more money off of legacy applications and there hardware products than they would by anything Linux could offer them.
I think its a mistake for Novell to keep Netware around, they should just focus on developing for the linux kernel.
There are plenty of corporations around the world which would still support purchasing and using Netware, so I wouldn't see why they would just flat out trash it. Maybe make some significant modifications, but it wouldn't make sense for any company to throw away something still generating revunue. Novell has been around for sometime which means they're doing something right.
If they continue developing for both platforms the quality of each will suffer.
Disagree. By developing with both, they might just be able to tweak their own product to a dominant force which may not be a good thing should they do so. That would obviously mean after a while they would not need Linux anymore now would they.
======== Article
Despite Novell's firm and frequent statements concerning continued development and support for NetWare, discussion of Novell's Linux strategy invariably leads to concern over Novell's NetWare commitment. Let us put those concerns to rest.
Personally I feel Netware is likely to make some major modifications over the next few months in order to tweak Netware into something that may catch the eyes of many businesses. Netware isn't something that we use at home, so I notice that a majority of posters here are a bit blind to Netware, and are rather making odd comments on it. For those who have used it at work, or at school somewhere, you would know it has its pros and cons. With Linux in the mix now, hopefully Novell can make some form of comeback from its mid 90's WOW! phase.
Ok so maybe I erred a bit, now do you have information to support this 99%. Not saying I don't believe you, but I would like to read some more on it. As far as I know (or at least thought) most animals in existance adapted and moved on along.
a growing body of research suggests that excessive exposure to artificial night light can alter basic biological rhythms in animals, change predator-prey relationships, and even trigger deadly hormonal imbalances in humans.
Sadly no proof of deadly hormonal imbalances is included to support this article.. Makes me wonder...
"The farther from lights and altered habitats you get, the more moths you find," he says.
Animals have always for millions of years adapted to factors beyond their control. Climate, seasons, etc., they've all managed to evolve just fine.
Sure the article is informative but the studies should have included any relevant information (and I'm sure there is some) on adaptations by animals who are affected by this. As stated before though, animals have managed to adapt just fine for millions of years, and I'm sure similar arguments have come about for other technologies and when time has gone on, studies were proven wrong.
Example... Windmills used for energy were supposedly the devil's spawn way back when because it was viewed as a bird killer. Yet there is little mention of this anymore. Either the birds that were being killed are all dead and an entire species became extinct or... DUH... They adapated
Now to scroll down and see some trolls mention that Nelly Furtado "Turn off the lights" song
I respect your point of view, but fact remains, whether or not they both had the same idea, one beat the other to the punch. Common sense dictates the early bird gets the worm, which is all that matters here.
Either way you argue this, eBay was wrong, whether the ex-spook is ethically wrong is not to be judged in a court of law only the action. And the action remains as: eBay infringed. There's no buts, there's no grey area here.
As long as In Q Tel doesn't buy them out one shouldn't pay much thought to this considering the following:
1) You have the right to question the vendor of a product your buying and determine whether or not you want this. 2) No one is making this a standard it is a company doing what they want, so I don't see the big hoorah around this 3) It might actually come in handy considering if someone were kidnapped, this could be a possible method of determining their whereabouts.
Sure there are pros and cons behind this, but it isn't anything new. Now if this were any longer I would rant on about Applied Digital Solutions' Digital Angel product, and how the DOJ is looking into using them in the future.
That is truly newsworthy. Besides one could set up their own triangulator to do the same thing if they really wanted to track you. Expensive yea, but it's doable without going through some company
Why is it stupid that this guy went out patented something, and is now seeking compensation for what is his work? I fail to see the logic of any argument anyone can make about this here. Personally I support a lot of things, but it is downright dumb to go against the grain when you subliminaly suggest that it is ok to steal someone else's idea, no matter how dumb one may think that idea is. A patent is a patent is a guess what... A patent and it is protection of your work from being used without permission. Legal 101 there's no in betweens in the law or else it wouldn't be fair. People shouldn't rant on about something which is not trivial, eBay infringed on this guy's work. Case closed. Now some of you may not agree, but to follow the law to the letter eBay was wrong.
Regardless of what he said freedom of speech is freedom of speech, and if I wanted to say something extremely stupid like humans are ignorant pieces of shit who lick cow dung, I should have the right to say it. You can't have it one way or the other under any circumstance or else it would be a biased law.
Whether or not he acted on anything he posted is a different matter, however no matter what kind of moronic statements he made, under the constitution he has a right to make them.
It's obvious that they can't take every case in front of them, and I know of people whom had strong cases, whose civil liberties were trampled on by corporations and governments. I also know firsthand from dealing with them and speaking with people in the ACLU, that their attitude is geared towards media. It's how they make their revenue.
So while you can ramble on let me remind you that somewhere down the line someone has to receive a paycheck which comes via way of donations and such, which is why the ACLU doesn't take lesser known cases. Fact is fact whether you choose to see through what you may think is ethical.
I also know of people who were being assisted only to have their cases dropped simply because it wasn't attention getting enough for the ACLU so please spare me of the but the ACLU and it's 80 year history...
Starving to death? Where did you get these stats from. If this were the case it would be an epidemic talked about on the news 24/7. Don't fall for some propaganda being thrown out there by certain groups. See one thing I've noticed is, if you look for certain things you will find them. I'm sure if you took some time to look for how well India's economy is doing, and how their people are not starving, I'm sure you will find this.
Now to answer your question about bringing those people down here, do you know how much redtape is involved in bringing someone over here? Do you have any idea about the costs of this, let alone the mention of doing so only to have that person leave for another co. the minute they get here?
Remembering the dot com boom, people in Santa Clara were working for 10 different companies in one year, and the attitude of those hiring them, was "Well if he worked for some many companies, he must be that good." bullshit. Why bring someone down into a revolving door of employment when most would rather remain where they are.
Going to jail is an article about someone going to jail for linking to bomb making plans, yet I see no mention of the EFF or ACLU. One thing I know personally about the ACLU is, they will not take a case unless it generates huge amounts of publicity for them which is sad, because there are cases which need an overseer, that will never get any attention because of the media whores such as ACLU.
Now don't get me wrong, I know they assist with many cases, but they're in it more or less for the publicity. As for EFF, slowly they are becoming the same way.
There is likely a bit more to the case than it seems so keep this in mind, and I doubt any smart prosecutor would lay his cards right out since it could alter his offense.
Firstly I want to say that SCO succeeded in rebranding themselves by becoming a distasteful name in open source. As for the IBM suit, no one should have been surprised at this move however thinking about it gets sickening.
What claims to patents or infringements can IBM claim over IF SCO owns the rights. Seems to be from reading what I have it's a corporate he said she said.
"We have asked the courts to declare that no violation of intellectual property and trade secrets have occurred," Szulik said.
But if bits and pieces of SCO's license material was used, then a violation has occurred, whether one likes to admit it or not.
"We've been patient, we've listened. But when our customers and the whole open-source community are threatened with innuendo and rumor, it's time to act."
Don't want to play the devil's advocate here, but Redhat seems to have just jumped on the bandwagon. Something similar to the MS case from yonder when the competition all got together against the evil empire. Now the tables have changed. 's/MS/SCO/g'
The action is the most serious attempt so far to seize some of the initiative from SCO, owner of key Unix copyrights, in its legal actions against Linux.
SCO, owner of key Unix copyrights Role reversal... If it would have been Redhat who made claims against SCO with Redhat owning the patents, then everyone would have stood behind SCO. What many will overlook is what is already LAW, which is SCO, owner of key Unix copyrights
Personally I think this was done by SCO solely to make money off of licensing, and the bottom line is, if they own the copyrights to some of the core material, then maybe it's time for someone to spin off a new OS chuck SCO's stuff, and let them self-destruct on their own.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh no I'm not thinking it's just browsing. FYI when you install programs and develop software do YOU realise that MS has to go through the same procedure as any other OS. Compiling, etc., do you also know from experience that MS generally takes longer to perform certain tasks, not to mention the god awful that when something goes wrong you normally have to reboot. Can you say Bluescreens they still occur in XP too. Nix based... kill the job and restart it through the shell. That simple.
I would hope so I wrote it years ago... Uh geniusthat's a Bushonian minute I thought you knew
Windows XP = money Linux = free to download
I don't see where the money argument comes into play here? Before someone says something about TCO let me point out a humorous but true text on how Microsoft actually kills (link is a google cache).
The report includes data from a survey of 100 manufacturers using 32-bit processors in a range of embedded projects and applications -- 50 using various implementations of embedded Linux, and 50 using Microsoft's Windows Embedded platforms(Windows CE .NET and Windows XP Embedded).
Rubbish rubbish and more rubbish. They shouldn't have been so biased with the study. Which manufacturers were used? Give it a rest now MS. It's obvious for one if MS funded the study, it's bound to be swayed, however if they didn't fund the study, depending on the vendors, it's still bound to be swayed. Remember MS violated antitrust forcing companies to go MS or go to bankruptcy court. How is one supposed to believe any studies they'd do?
I'm sure someone else is going to post a very good thorough post but we all know this is nothing more than utter bs.
One of the problems with independent journalists is cognitive dissonance:
We as people tend to stick with familiarity, and with the news agencies, just because it isn't an independent person but rather a slew of ideals thrown together, no matter what you think things will always be slanted one way or the other.
As most newspaper and broadcast journalists can attest, there are some news subjects that are considered generally off-limits to the news side
Everything must be taken with a grain of salt. My pet peeve about news agencies, is they seemed to be reserved in what they will say, and I think too many people are left blind to major issues in life. It's sad to admit it, but there are many people worldwide who don't have the mental capability of understanding what is in front of them. Instead they turn away to fantasy, Jennifer Lopez, Ben Affleck, Oprah, whatever can be used as an escape.
Being that i run a pseudo news site with information that I think is interesting, I too know how to slant things for my own enjoyment or gain. I also know the dangers that most don't when it comes to posting certain information. Sure I've been threatened with suits, been visited by feds, and I'm still debating whether or not I should take down MI6's headquarter pix from my FOIA directory. I think participation is great because it gives another perspective to an issue, yet at the same time I think it is dangerous because common sense would dictate, somewhere along the line information will be misconstrued which could lead to grave danger.
EOF
It should be a good thing for SoIP, and for pissing off the RIAA
Dubya: "Those techies aren't lonely, they just have no one to talk to, and speak with."
Look at what the mil has done with the unmanned Predator drones, it could be used more or less under the same situations, to limit casualties and get into places where it would be too dangerous for soldiers. Or it could be a combo biometric machine for companies (say financial co.'s) to use. Perhaps it could be used for a nightly or daily audit to see which hosts on their machines are using insecure protocols
I know Verisign and others offer services like this often at a high rate but perhaps the initiative can be funded by governments participating in some W3 standard to secure transactions.
I sympathize with both the tech support personnel and the end user of the product. But some things about this article catch my eye and either bug me or amuse me.
The March survey of 10,000 computer users found widespread dissatisfaction with the level of service offered by U.S. software manufacturers.
I wonder if those who gave the survey had a skill level assessment for some of the people they question. For instance asking farmer Bill in West Bubblefsck Nebraska what he thinks about Mathematica is a pretty lame excuse for a survey.
Quality has been the victim as companies cut corners to cut costs. As a result, the magazine put software tech support among the lower-ranked services that it's rated in the last 10 years -- slightly worse than the customer support offered by cell phone carriers and just a little better than that provided by cable TV companies.
This is amusing... Those years of ripping into tech support calling me while I'm playing Quake to ask me some damn question about some product we made... Why I outta!$*
More and more, people are turning to tech-savvy friends, online message boards and paying independent computer service firms to get results.
"People are already so frustrated with tech support, they're not even calling," Jeff Blyskal, senior editor for Consumer Reports.
One problem I've seen with non techie users of machines, is they (the newbies) tend to think that first is better, and they often rush out and get something that is being pimped out on the shelfs of CompUSA or something with some groovy color and packaging scheme. They never read reviews on the products, probably never even used it, or heard about it on Oprah or something extremely dumb. So who is really to blame if farmer Bill goes out and buys an AutoCAD program and is clueless?
Don't get me wrong I know tech support isn't the greatest but sheesh to have the comp industry so close to the cable industry in ratings, and the cell... oh my I'm fainting.
The first chapter has sections on different relationship pairings (introvert male with extrovert female, introvert female with extrovert male, introvert with introvert).
I'd revert before I convert to extro from introvert. Or is it revert to the original excerpt about the introvert formally known as extrovert? Hmmm... confused I am I am I am ... well does being a simple pervert count anywhere in this?
This is the key to the confusion from my perspective: SCO has included GPL code in its Linux products. SCO is not seeking any injuctions for anything Linux but the core UNIX codes. Sounds very confusing, but according to what I'm reading, like it or not SCO has the right to charge. Now back to the rest of what was said: and "by so doing, SCO accepted the terms of the GPL," the complaint says. By seeking licensing fees, SCO is in breach of the license, it says.
Let's look at makeshift diagram:
[ ORIG.UNIX.CODE ] = item1 (SCO's Intellectual property)
[ LINUX.CODE ] = item2
Now if SCO is selling 2 which contains elements of 1, SCO has the right to do so since it's their intellectual property. Now SCO is claiming item2 contains portions of item1 and is redistributing item2 without permissions for the portions taken from item1 (which is their Intellectual Property). They don't seem to be complaining about whether item2 is sold or wanting credit for item2, they want compensation for the portions being used it's that simple. There is so much distortion in this matter, and all these so called "Open Source Movements" are going to end up backfiring on everyone.
IBM and SCO should know better than getting into this whole mess, and IBM is equally guilty. For starters it just shows an extreme amount of corporate immaturity, it shows that the Open Source community cannot get their act right. So why would a company want to choose a product which has an uncertain future? Sure MS may suck at times, but at least you don't hear this juvenile crap from their camp.
This would be an Open Source-o-files dream come true if it were true, but IBM probably makes more money off of legacy applications and there hardware products than they would by anything Linux could offer them.
I think its a mistake for Novell to keep Netware around, they should just focus on developing for the linux kernel.
There are plenty of corporations around the world which would still support purchasing and using Netware, so I wouldn't see why they would just flat out trash it. Maybe make some significant modifications, but it wouldn't make sense for any company to throw away something still generating revunue. Novell has been around for sometime which means they're doing something right.
If they continue developing for both platforms the quality of each will suffer.
Disagree. By developing with both, they might just be able to tweak their own product to a dominant force which may not be a good thing should they do so. That would obviously mean after a while they would not need Linux anymore now would they.
======== Article Despite Novell's firm and frequent statements concerning continued development and support for NetWare, discussion of Novell's Linux strategy invariably leads to concern over Novell's NetWare commitment. Let us put those concerns to rest.
Personally I feel Netware is likely to make some major modifications over the next few months in order to tweak Netware into something that may catch the eyes of many businesses. Netware isn't something that we use at home, so I notice that a majority of posters here are a bit blind to Netware, and are rather making odd comments on it. For those who have used it at work, or at school somewhere, you would know it has its pros and cons. With Linux in the mix now, hopefully Novell can make some form of comeback from its mid 90's WOW! phase.
Ok so maybe I erred a bit, now do you have information to support this 99%. Not saying I don't believe you, but I would like to read some more on it. As far as I know (or at least thought) most animals in existance adapted and moved on along.
Sadly no proof of deadly hormonal imbalances is included to support this article.. Makes me wonder...
"The farther from lights and altered habitats you get, the more moths you find," he says.
Animals have always for millions of years adapted to factors beyond their control. Climate, seasons, etc., they've all managed to evolve just fine.
Sure the article is informative but the studies should have included any relevant information (and I'm sure there is some) on adaptations by animals who are affected by this. As stated before though, animals have managed to adapt just fine for millions of years, and I'm sure similar arguments have come about for other technologies and when time has gone on, studies were proven wrong.
Example... Windmills used for energy were supposedly the devil's spawn way back when because it was viewed as a bird killer. Yet there is little mention of this anymore. Either the birds that were being killed are all dead and an entire species became extinct or... DUH... They adapated
Now to scroll down and see some trolls mention that Nelly Furtado "Turn off the lights" song
I'll trade you my horse and even throw in the magic carpet for $1mill... What? My paypal info... sure
Either way you argue this, eBay was wrong, whether the ex-spook is ethically wrong is not to be judged in a court of law only the action. And the action remains as: eBay infringed. There's no buts, there's no grey area here.
1) You have the right to question the vendor of a product your buying and determine whether or not you want this.
2) No one is making this a standard it is a company doing what they want, so I don't see the big hoorah around this
3) It might actually come in handy considering if someone were kidnapped, this could be a possible method of determining their whereabouts.
Sure there are pros and cons behind this, but it isn't anything new. Now if this were any longer I would rant on about Applied Digital Solutions' Digital Angel product, and how the DOJ is looking into using them in the future.
That is truly newsworthy. Besides one could set up their own triangulator to do the same thing if they really wanted to track you. Expensive yea, but it's doable without going through some company
Whether or not he acted on anything he posted is a different matter, however no matter what kind of moronic statements he made, under the constitution he has a right to make them.
So while you can ramble on let me remind you that somewhere down the line someone has to receive a paycheck which comes via way of donations and such, which is why the ACLU doesn't take lesser known cases. Fact is fact whether you choose to see through what you may think is ethical.
I also know of people who were being assisted only to have their cases dropped simply because it wasn't attention getting enough for the ACLU so please spare me of the but the ACLU and it's 80 year history...
Now to answer your question about bringing those people down here, do you know how much redtape is involved in bringing someone over here? Do you have any idea about the costs of this, let alone the mention of doing so only to have that person leave for another co. the minute they get here?
Remembering the dot com boom, people in Santa Clara were working for 10 different companies in one year, and the attitude of those hiring them, was "Well if he worked for some many companies, he must be that good." bullshit. Why bring someone down into a revolving door of employment when most would rather remain where they are.
Now don't get me wrong, I know they assist with many cases, but they're in it more or less for the publicity. As for EFF, slowly they are becoming the same way.
There is likely a bit more to the case than it seems so keep this in mind, and I doubt any smart prosecutor would lay his cards right out since it could alter his offense.
What claims to patents or infringements can IBM claim over IF SCO owns the rights. Seems to be from reading what I have it's a corporate he said she said.
"We have asked the courts to declare that no violation of intellectual property and trade secrets have occurred," Szulik said.
But if bits and pieces of SCO's license material was used, then a violation has occurred, whether one likes to admit it or not.
"We've been patient, we've listened. But when our customers and the whole open-source community are threatened with innuendo and rumor, it's time to act."
Don't want to play the devil's advocate here, but Redhat seems to have just jumped on the bandwagon. Something similar to the MS case from yonder when the competition all got together against the evil empire. Now the tables have changed. 's/MS/SCO/g'
The action is the most serious attempt so far to seize some of the initiative from SCO, owner of key Unix copyrights, in its legal actions against Linux.
SCO, owner of key Unix copyrights Role reversal... If it would have been Redhat who made claims against SCO with Redhat owning the patents, then everyone would have stood behind SCO. What many will overlook is what is already LAW, which is SCO, owner of key Unix copyrights
Personally I think this was done by SCO solely to make money off of licensing, and the bottom line is, if they own the copyrights to some of the core material, then maybe it's time for someone to spin off a new OS chuck SCO's stuff, and let them self-destruct on their own.