I'm in California right now, near San Francisco. All power is on across Silicon Valley. Traffic lights are functioning normally, and the BART can't hold "hundreds of thousands" of people like the NYC subway system apparently can. I'm connected through an ethernet cable to the wall on a laptop, with the power adapter plugged in.
My tropical fish also live on electricity, but they are thankfully in no danger. Regardless, I'm going to freak out like everyone else.
Your timeline is fine up until the point where Microsoft buys SCO. Are you implying that SCO's lawsuit would be dropped at this point? But what about Red Hat's suit? What about IBM's countersuit? I'm not sure those would go away.
Regardless, I don't know how there would be any chance of features being removed from Linux, or IBM changing a major business strategy. The merits of SCO's case, or rather the lack thereof, don't change no matter who buys up the company. Microsoft has more money, and more lawyers, but still no case.
The terms and conditions of the service define a "Locatable User" as "the owner or keeper of a Locatable Mobile Phone who has consented to being Located."
In a confusing definition, a Locatable Mobile Phone is defined as "a mobile telephone registered with the Service by a Locating User." Do they mean Locatable User? If not, this seems to indicate that I add someone else's phone to the registry, then they are notified and have to give consent, and then I can locate them. This seems like an odd mechanism as opposed to a purely opt-in method. Their further description indicates that this might be the case, but it's still unclear:
"MI International shall contact all Locatable Users directly by SMS to obtain their Consent to be Located."
Slashdot Mirror
For interested history buffs, the Duplo drive bay can be seen in a display case in the basement of Stanford's CS building.
I'm in California right now, near San Francisco. All power is on across Silicon Valley. Traffic lights are functioning normally, and the BART can't hold "hundreds of thousands" of people like the NYC subway system apparently can. I'm connected through an ethernet cable to the wall on a laptop, with the power adapter plugged in.
My tropical fish also live on electricity, but they are thankfully in no danger. Regardless, I'm going to freak out like everyone else.
Your timeline is fine up until the point where Microsoft buys SCO. Are you implying that SCO's lawsuit would be dropped at this point? But what about Red Hat's suit? What about IBM's countersuit? I'm not sure those would go away.
Regardless, I don't know how there would be any chance of features being removed from Linux, or IBM changing a major business strategy. The merits of SCO's case, or rather the lack thereof, don't change no matter who buys up the company. Microsoft has more money, and more lawyers, but still no case.
The terms and conditions of the service define a "Locatable User" as "the owner or keeper of a Locatable Mobile Phone who has consented to being Located."
In a confusing definition, a Locatable Mobile Phone is defined as "a mobile telephone registered with the Service by a Locating User."
Do they mean Locatable User? If not, this seems to indicate that I add someone else's phone to the registry, then they are notified and have to give consent, and then I can locate them. This seems like an odd mechanism as opposed to a purely opt-in method. Their further description indicates that this might be the case, but it's still unclear:
"MI International shall contact all Locatable Users directly by SMS to obtain their Consent to be Located."