A democracy is the opposite of an authoritarian state, whereas a monarchy is the opposite of a republic. These are orthogonal concepts. A monarchy is characterized by the fact that the supreme position of power is hereditary. In a republic, the prime minister or president or whatever is elected in some way, but not necessarily by the people.
Examples: the UK is a monarchy and a democracy. The US is a republic and a democracy. China is an authoritarian republic, and... um, I can't think of a well-known authoritarian monarchy right now. But you get my drift.
I suppose you Europeans can't hassle us Yanks as much for having draconian patent laws.
Fair enough. But can we please hassle you for letting yourself be totally misled by the US media (read: Slashdot) when it gets the news utterly and completelywrong?;-)
They can "protect" their individual expression of those ideas by copyright, as is the case with every other written work. Ideas as such cannot be "protected" (i.e. monopolized) under either copyright or patent law, fortunately. (And you're supposed to be an aspiring patent lawyer, huh.)
And all of you out there protesting against software patents should be very happy that software protection is not included in copyright protection, because that would make protection probably five time longer (at least).
Huh??? What are you saying here, that software isn't copyrightable? What are you smoking?
arr[smp_processor_id()] = i; /* Chris, I'm gonna insert this bit from SVR4 here
so we can sue these commie pinkos later, hehe */ j = arr[smp_processor_id()] /* Darl, you're a freaking genius! ROFL Chris */
A computer-implemented invention shall not be regarded as making a technical contribution merely because it involves the use of a computer, network or other programmable apparatus. Accordingly, inventions involving computer programs which implement business, mathematical or other methods and do not produce any technical effects beyond the normal physical interactions between a program and the computer, network or other programmable apparatus in which it is run shall not be patentable.
This seems to exclude software patents, as far as I can tell. However, the language throughout the whole directive is still extremely weaselly.
My father works for the US Dept of Commerce in the Eastern Bloc.
Pardon me? This is 2003. There hasn't been an "Eastern Bloc" for well over a decade. That's like saying your father works in the USSR, or in Yugoslavia.
[This is an update of my earlier post on this subject, which I won't link to because this is much better. Mod me up if you want to protest against the gnaming kraziness; don't mod me down if you're humor-challenged.]
KDE Developers Anonymous
Hello group, my name is Klark and I'm addikted to the letter K... As is the kase with many of you, I've always been krazy about komputers and like many of my fellow komp sci students, I was looking forward to a suksessful kareer in the field of information and kommunikation teknology... but my troubles started when I diskovered open source software and the wonderful kommunity around it and got kwite seriously into KDE development... At first I didn't komprehend the effekt this would kome to have on my life as a koder - it wasn't really konspikuous initially when I started to spell more and more kommon words with a k, sometimes even with a kapital K... But then my kolleagues began to wonder why I kouldn't spell korrektly. They asked me, "Are you on krack? Kut the krap!"... some even went as far as kalling me kompletely krazy! What kould I do? I must admit, I'm a kolerik person, even kwick-tempered you might say... okkasionally I would get inkredibly angry and kuss and kurse at my ko-workers... People should judge me by the kontent of my karakter instead of just kriticizing what they konsider kurious spelling! Other times, I would just retreat into a korner and kry kwietly by myself... However, it wasn't until they kicked me out of my kalligraphy kourse at kommunity kollege and I lost my job on akkount of my unkooperative konduct that I finally realized I had to kome to terms with my problem... so here I am, this is my koming-out... I know my kase is a komplex one, but I do hope it is kurable...
Re:Just to point it out....
on
Back To SCO
·
· Score: 1
That crazy gun-nut has done more for the OSS movement than you ever have or ever will, Mr. dhowells.
Not to butt in on your eloquent debate, but here's an interesting link concerning the above observation.
My jaw has permanently cemented itself to the floor...another fucking browser????
Then you must be really unfamiliar with Gnome and the direction it's been taking since 2.0, and I'm afraid your ignorance shows. Epiphany has been around for many months now, it has different goals than Galeon, and most importantly, all this has been discussed to death already. If you don't know Epiphany and why it was created, why don't you just read up on the reasons instead of bitching and swearing that someone more informed than you has made a decision you don't like?
don't you think there are other places to spend your time
Where do you get off telling other people what to do with their time? This is Free Software. If you're not happy with it, why don't you just make a contribution yourself? I haven't seen you around on the mailing lists where the reasons for replacing Galeon with Epiphany were discussed extensively, and where the right decision was taken by general consensus...
Assuming that Canopy produces all the alleged evidence for SCO's claims and IBM gets it hands on it tomorrow, can IBM publish the material? Or could they at least disclose its contents?
Thank you for that. Sometimes it is really difficult to stem the tide of misinformation that is Slashdot.
The court agreed that linking and publishing copyrighted works was illegal and providers should give out names and addresses of violators.
Let me run that by you once more, crack-smoking submitter, crack-smoking editor, and crack-smoking moderators: The court agreed that linking and publishing copyrighted works was illegal, contrary to the sensationalist write-up with its sensationalist title! Spaink was acquitted because the material that she links to is in fact legal.
Whaley, how long until your posts and mine get modded up to where people actually read them? And how many Slashbots are going to walk away thinking "Yay! I can link to any illegal thing I want."?
Or was the submitter smoking crack, as so often happens? As I said in my other post, there is absolutely nothing in the ruling that says linking to illegal material is legal. Go read it again. That was a sentence thrown in by scientologywatch, with no explanation or corroboration whatsoever. Then the Slashdot submitter included it in the sensationalist title, and now we have a myriad Slashdotters cheering how great this is. Could we please have some confirmation of this important point first before cheering our asses off?
Am I missing something? All I can see in the ruling is that ISPs cannot be held responsible for what their users publish (yay!) and that a putative copyright holder has to substantiate their infringement claims before the allegedly infringing material has to be taken down (yay!). However, this whole "linking is legal" thing that the title of the Slashdot story refers to and that everyone here seems to be focusing on doesn't appear in the ruling at all. It is only mentioned briefly on the scientologywatch page, and without any explanation on how this ruling is supposed to apply. Does anyone have any more info on that?
(1) Great powers have existed in most of civilized history, and examples of one-country hegemonies are not unusual. (2) All countries try to further their own aims. (3) Power projected in this way is usually preferable to military power. Thus, the situation Wade discribes is neither unusual, nor necessarily bad or immoral.
Discrimination against people on the basis of their race, sex etc. has existed in most of civilized history, and examples of it are not unusual. All societies have at some point, or even over an extended period in their history, discriminated against some groups on the basis of their race, sex etc. Such discrimination is usually preferable to hauling said people off to concentration camps.
Thus, this situation is neither unusual, nor necessarily bad or immoral.
Sound like a logical argument? What is unusual and what is bad or immoral are two entirely different questions; "it's always been like this" and "everyone does it" are no moral arguments at all; and your number (3) is a textbook example of a strawman.
Our word for today is intertextuality. For someone with a userid almost 600.000 below mine, you seem strangely unfamiliar with the expression "Coincidence? I think not." and what it implies about the intended meaning of an article on Slashdot.
Or, to put it another way:
Me: Horse walks into a bar, barman says: "Why the long face?" You: Your story is crap! Horses don't usually just run around in urban areas and walk into bars as they please! And any reasonably educated barman wouldn't assume that they can just initiate a normal conversation with a herbivorous quadruped!
Or, to put it another way: Consider your parent a Turing test. You just failed.
Bear in mind though that SCO's irresponsible behaviour is entirely the fault of the new management over in the US. The German SCO employees might even be totally disgusted with what's going on. What would you do if you were in their place? How would you feel if you were a Free Software enthousiast and you had joined Caldera years ago, happy to have a job at a Linux company (not a very successful one, but still), and all of a sudden your new US bosses started pulling all these ridiculous and libellous claims about Linux out of their arses? Would you ditch your job or get yourself fired by speaking your mind, considering current unemployment levels in Germany?
Our enemies are McBride and his gang, not necessarily every SCO employee on this planet.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux desperately NEEDS more people looking at it from a marketing perspective
Have you heard of IBM, HP, RedHat, SuSE, Sun, Novell...?
A democracy is the opposite of an authoritarian state, whereas a monarchy is the opposite of a republic. These are orthogonal concepts. A monarchy is characterized by the fact that the supreme position of power is hereditary. In a republic, the prime minister or president or whatever is elected in some way, but not necessarily by the people.
Examples: the UK is a monarchy and a democracy. The US is a republic and a democracy. China is an authoritarian republic, and... um, I can't think of a well-known authoritarian monarchy right now. But you get my drift.
Share or get booted!
That's OK, because you'll have to install Wine anyway for lots of other things to not work. ;-)
I suppose you Europeans can't hassle us Yanks as much for having draconian patent laws.
;-)
Fair enough. But can we please hassle you for letting yourself be totally misled by the US media (read: Slashdot) when it gets the news utterly and completely wrong?
Ummm, maybe give us the first letter?
And how to protect those ideas?
They can "protect" their individual expression of those ideas by copyright, as is the case with every other written work. Ideas as such cannot be "protected" (i.e. monopolized) under either copyright or patent law, fortunately. (And you're supposed to be an aspiring patent lawyer, huh.)
And all of you out there protesting against software patents should be very happy that software protection is not included in copyright protection, because that would make protection probably five time longer (at least).
Huh??? What are you saying here, that software isn't copyrightable? What are you smoking?
Nice troll.
If you'll be in Los Angeles and would like to attend, buy your tickets early.
Nah, I'll just download one from KaZaA.
Hmmm, I'm not so sure. Article 4a says:
This seems to exclude software patents, as far as I can tell. However, the language throughout the whole directive is still extremely weaselly.
My father works for the US Dept of Commerce in the Eastern Bloc.
Pardon me? This is 2003. There hasn't been an "Eastern Bloc" for well over a decade. That's like saying your father works in the USSR, or in Yugoslavia.
Now if OSS only paid their developers
Um, could you name five Linux kernel hackers who don't get paid for what they do? This is 2003, not 1993...
Um, what's in it for Darl?
[This is an update of my earlier post on this subject, which I won't link to because this is much better. Mod me up if you want to protest against the gnaming kraziness; don't mod me down if you're humor-challenged.]
KDE Developers Anonymous
Hello group, my name is Klark and I'm addikted to the letter K... As is the kase with many of you, I've always been krazy about komputers and like many of my fellow komp sci students, I was looking forward to a suksessful kareer in the field of information and kommunikation teknology... but my troubles started when I diskovered open source software and the wonderful kommunity around it and got kwite seriously into KDE development... At first I didn't komprehend the effekt this would kome to have on my life as a koder - it wasn't really konspikuous initially when I started to spell more and more kommon words with a k, sometimes even with a kapital K... But then my kolleagues began to wonder why I kouldn't spell korrektly. They asked me, "Are you on krack? Kut the krap!"... some even went as far as kalling me kompletely krazy! What kould I do? I must admit, I'm a kolerik person, even kwick-tempered you might say... okkasionally I would get inkredibly angry and kuss and kurse at my ko-workers... People should judge me by the kontent of my karakter instead of just kriticizing what they konsider kurious spelling! Other times, I would just retreat into a korner and kry kwietly by myself... However, it wasn't until they kicked me out of my kalligraphy kourse at kommunity kollege and I lost my job on akkount of my unkooperative konduct that I finally realized I had to kome to terms with my problem... so here I am, this is my koming-out... I know my kase is a komplex one, but I do hope it is kurable...
That crazy gun-nut has done more for the OSS movement than you ever have or ever will, Mr. dhowells.
Not to butt in on your eloquent debate, but here's an interesting link concerning the above observation.
My jaw has permanently cemented itself to the floor...another fucking browser????
Then you must be really unfamiliar with Gnome and the direction it's been taking since 2.0, and I'm afraid your ignorance shows. Epiphany has been around for many months now, it has different goals than Galeon, and most importantly, all this has been discussed to death already. If you don't know Epiphany and why it was created, why don't you just read up on the reasons instead of bitching and swearing that someone more informed than you has made a decision you don't like?
don't you think there are other places to spend your time
Where do you get off telling other people what to do with their time? This is Free Software. If you're not happy with it, why don't you just make a contribution yourself? I haven't seen you around on the mailing lists where the reasons for replacing Galeon with Epiphany were discussed extensively, and where the right decision was taken by general consensus...
Assuming that Canopy produces all the alleged evidence for SCO's claims and IBM gets it hands on it tomorrow, can IBM publish the material? Or could they at least disclose its contents?
Thank you for that. Sometimes it is really difficult to stem the tide of misinformation that is Slashdot.
The court agreed that linking and publishing copyrighted works was illegal and providers should give out names and addresses of violators.
Let me run that by you once more, crack-smoking submitter, crack-smoking editor, and crack-smoking moderators: The court agreed that linking and publishing copyrighted works was illegal, contrary to the sensationalist write-up with its sensationalist title! Spaink was acquitted because the material that she links to is in fact legal.
Whaley, how long until your posts and mine get modded up to where people actually read them? And how many Slashbots are going to walk away thinking "Yay! I can link to any illegal thing I want."?
Or was the submitter smoking crack, as so often happens? As I said in my other post, there is absolutely nothing in the ruling that says linking to illegal material is legal. Go read it again. That was a sentence thrown in by scientologywatch, with no explanation or corroboration whatsoever. Then the Slashdot submitter included it in the sensationalist title, and now we have a myriad Slashdotters cheering how great this is. Could we please have some confirmation of this important point first before cheering our asses off?
Am I missing something? All I can see in the ruling is that ISPs cannot be held responsible for what their users publish (yay!) and that a putative copyright holder has to substantiate their infringement claims before the allegedly infringing material has to be taken down (yay!). However, this whole "linking is legal" thing that the title of the Slashdot story refers to and that everyone here seems to be focusing on doesn't appear in the ruling at all. It is only mentioned briefly on the scientologywatch page, and without any explanation on how this ruling is supposed to apply. Does anyone have any more info on that?
I guarantee that neither Moses, Matthew, Mark, Luke, nor John will sue your ass...
And even if they did, you could always turn the... um, other cheek.
(1) Great powers have existed in most of civilized history, and examples of one-country hegemonies are not unusual. (2) All countries try to further their own aims. (3) Power projected in this way is usually preferable to military power. Thus, the situation Wade discribes is neither unusual, nor necessarily bad or immoral.
Discrimination against people on the basis of their race, sex etc. has existed in most of civilized history, and examples of it are not unusual. All societies have at some point, or even over an extended period in their history, discriminated against some groups on the basis of their race, sex etc. Such discrimination is usually preferable to hauling said people off to concentration camps.
Thus, this situation is neither unusual, nor necessarily bad or immoral.
Sound like a logical argument? What is unusual and what is bad or immoral are two entirely different questions; "it's always been like this" and "everyone does it" are no moral arguments at all; and your number (3) is a textbook example of a strawman.
Our word for today is intertextuality. For someone with a userid almost 600.000 below mine, you seem strangely unfamiliar with the expression "Coincidence? I think not." and what it implies about the intended meaning of an article on Slashdot.
Or, to put it another way:
Me: Horse walks into a bar, barman says: "Why the long face?"
You: Your story is crap! Horses don't usually just run around in urban areas and walk into bars as they please! And any reasonably educated barman wouldn't assume that they can just initiate a normal conversation with a herbivorous quadruped!
Or, to put it another way: Consider your parent a Turing test. You just failed.
...Coincidence? I think not.
Bear in mind though that SCO's irresponsible behaviour is entirely the fault of the new management over in the US. The German SCO employees might even be totally disgusted with what's going on. What would you do if you were in their place? How would you feel if you were a Free Software enthousiast and you had joined Caldera years ago, happy to have a job at a Linux company (not a very successful one, but still), and all of a sudden your new US bosses started pulling all these ridiculous and libellous claims about Linux out of their arses? Would you ditch your job or get yourself fired by speaking your mind, considering current unemployment levels in Germany?
Our enemies are McBride and his gang, not necessarily every SCO employee on this planet.