I don't know why the parent was modded as "funny" because it is a good point. That was part of their whole legal defense at one point. However, I think their entire argument was that it could not be pulled out of the current incarnation of Windows. It is entirely possible that they are creating a specific version of Windows for this particular use, and that may include some kernel modifications which do not require IE, IIS, etc. If so, then removing the items would improve security immensely.
Doesn't Bill Gates have enough money that he now has to go into everyone else's?
Now that that's off my chest... We should not be so quick to criticize Microsoft about this endeavor so quickly. Yes, they said a VERSION of Windows will be on there. But, due to a specialized niche industry here, odds are this will be a specialized version of Windows. There will be communication issues at stake here, the usual wariness of a MS operating system, but with the money probably being put in place to fund this project, and their recent egg on the face with the security holes, I think they will at least try with this special version of Windows to make it secure.
Yes, I like the open source movement as well and free software and would prefer to use it, but without an opensource alternative available to the companies that use the machines, they have to use what is offered to them.
I don't think that the mentality is "take what you can get for free" from everyone. However, to take your analogy between software and music a step further...
With Linux, an individual can download it, install it, and see if he or she likes it. The same goes with Shareware programs that are widely available on the Web. With P2P, an individual can download music from an artist and see if he or she likes it before purchasing it.
It's more of a "try before you buy" mentality, and many individuals hold to that fact. Like you said, the artists went to a lot of trouble to record their music and distribute it. But, were the artists hearts really into that music or did they have to do it because of a contractual obligation? Usually you can tell which of the two it is by listening to the music. Most times, a contractual obligation album (no reference to the Monty Python album of that name intended) is full of smaller songs or songs the band does not like as much, and it is these albums that the industry promotes... to death. They know it is not as good as the stuff the artists wanted to write, but it will sell because of: 1) the name of the artist, and 2) their mass marketing campaign of it being "hot" or "great" will always sucker some people in.
As I have said on/. before, I have purchased only two CDs in the past few years, and that was because the artist in question is consistently turning out good music that I enjoy listening to. He releases his music when he wants, not when a recording industry president says he has to. I do not download much from P2P either, as I already have much of the music I like (I am a big retro fan). I mostly use P2P to download those television shows which are not yet available on DVD. If it is available on DVD in a higher quality medium, I get it there; and many people do the same with music.
By the time the G5 Powerbooks come out, I think I might be able to actually afford a Macintosh laptop system. Here in Canada, the Powerbooks are at least $2300, and the iBooks are at least $1400. Right now, this is not feasible. But, by the time the cooling system works properly, I might be able to scrape up the thousands of dollars required.
I do applaud Apple for not releasing information on products that it is unsure about, including these G5 laptops. They have strongly hinted in the article that they are looking at it, but they did not make any promises as to when it will be released. This way, they are not forced to rush production which would result in an inferior product. They are going to make sure they have quality over timeframe, which is something some other software companies should learn. Before you set a release date, get a demo/prototype done, and do at least a minimal level of testing!
But doesn't the intent of the incitement hold bearing? If the game was not intended to influence people to go out, shoot people, run over people, pick up hookers, etc. then I do not think that there was any intentional incitement and as such the liability for the organization that 'incited' the act would be minimal, if held liable at all. If video games truly incited people to do various things, I think I would have taken on my fair share of gorillas with barrels by now and ghosts who can be eaten once I digest a nice, flashy, glowing Power Pellet.
If the kids were truly imitating the game, they would have picked up hookers, made the car rock, and THEN ran the hookers over to get their cash. They then would have totaled the car, stolen an ambulance, and drive that around town. Perhaps followed by beating up a cop, shooting some random civilians, and finally getting gunned down in a parade of gunfire from the cops.
Did that happen? No? Then I guess the kids were not imitating the video game.
This issue continues to come back up, time and time again. Whenever there is a killing or attack by someone under the age of 18, ANYWHERE, games, television, and other items which identify the current culture are being put to blame.
If it were necessarily true that kids follow games, then why aren't MORE kids out there killing and maiming? The mentality is set to a small group. If there was a mass hysteria, sure, maybe then there would be something. But for God's sake, people, it's a video game! I played them on the Commodore 64, Apple 2, Atari 2600, Intellivision, and the original Nintendo when I was a kid!
Did they have an effect on me? Well, as a kid, I never knocked over a turtle and kicked it away a la Mario Brothers! I never stole a car and took it for a spin around the city like many racing games! Hell, I never went out and had sex at age 12 because of all those crappy sex games the C-64 had available for it, either.
So the question remains: why are kids being blamed, and in this case saying, that they learned the behavior from TV and video games? Simple answer: their parents and the media. Parents today are worried about their kids, and they have every right to be. But what do they do? (And I have noticed this with friends and family who have children of various ages.) When their kid is in trouble, they ask them where they learned it. "Was it on TV? Was it in those video games they play?" The parents are giving the kids the scapegoat the kids want and need, and the companies that make the games are the ones getting in crap. The media blows all of this out of proportion, with CNN reporting hours-upon-hours of how the games are corrupting the youth.
Grow up, people! Yes, some people may be influenced by games, but those people need some form of attention and intervention; it will not go away by removing one video game. Take some responsibility for your own actions, and that includes random blaming of games and television for acts which are probably rooted deeper into the kid's psyche (although I am not a psychologist).
By filing a lawsuit as well, would they not have to pay an initial filing fee with an appropriate judge/jurisdiction? If so, this could end up being costly for the industry should they lose a majority of the cases. Then who knows what kind of monetary settlement they would want to demand from the sued individuals.
The Mars base is much LESS useful. Look at the relative orbits of the planet. How far away is Mars going to be from Earth in 20 years as opposed to now? Not a lot scientifically perhaps, but enough that the extra fuel expenditure will make a financial and time difference. However, the moon will ALWAYS be there. Mankind has not been back there in a long time. Before arguing against one possibility, let's go back to our "roots" as it were and establish that we can:
1. Create a proper base on another celestial body (in this case, the moon)
2. Work out any bugs in the system before going to Mars
If there are any problems, it will be a lot easier for rescue vehicles, with this current plan, to assist those on the moon as opposed to those stranded on Mars. Yes, changes will be made for a Mars base, but let's get some of the ideas worked out and proven first, with relative safety for the astronauts involved.
(And I was almost tempted to use "3. Profit!" earlier, but I thought that might get me shot...)
So, if beer can create a "new sound" as it were, and it has successfully assisted in the creation of a "biocomputer", then what can the world look forward to? Paul Hogan promoting Foster's 2.5MHz "Head"less PC? I hope that's not what this world is coming to... And dear God, please PLEASE do not let any company use the Crocodile Hunter in any more promotions...
In the style of IBM->HAL and VMS->WNT we get CFR->BGS
Shouldn't this, following this logic, be different?
I -> H
B -> A
M -> L
(All letters go back one step...)
V -> W
M -> N
S -> T
(All letter go forward one step...)
C -> B
F -> G
R -> S
So take one step back and then two steps forward? Wait a second.. on second thought, that does sound like MS after all. Now if only they could remove that pesky step back, as it keeps reocurring..
Remarkably, this is the same urban legend story that happened in various hospitals worldwide where several patients mysteriously died nightly in the same wing of the hospital... until it was found that a janitor was coming around and unplugging the life support systems to plug in the floor buffer...
Wouldn't a mainframe require a different power socket for a vaccuum cleaner? Or is this one UBER-vaccuum?
Really? Although the company doesn't have an S, its main product of revenue does... macintoSh. Although it is not the third letter from the right, it still has an S. So does that make it not AS evil? But only quasi-evil?
"...perhaps science fiction is suffering from too much science!"
This is a very good possibility, but it is not always the case. A point disproving this: "The Neanderthal Parallax" trilogy written by Robert J. Sawyer. The whole point is that science works everywhere,not just in our world.
The main plotline is in two very different worlds, with different scientific technologies and begs the question: would our science be science fiction to these people?
First, we have "our" reality, which takes place in "our" present, more or less, not the distant future. It takes place in a University-run science lab. The other reality is in a parallel Earth, where neanderthals remained dominant and did not evolve into homo sapiens, but managed to gain the ability to reason and grow scientifically. A gateway opens between the worlds, and a neanderthal is thrust into our world.
Yes, it is based on scientific theory and principles, but the idea is interesting. I think this series proves that science fiction does not always have to suffer from too much science. I think that many sci-fi authors just need to not use all the techno-gadgetry a la Star Trek as the main basis of their stories, and instead deal with the human/alien aspect of the characters in telling a story. (Oh, in case anyone was wondering, the 3 books are Hominids and Humans, both out in paperback, and Hybrids, which is now out in hardcover.)
This, in my opinion, is one responsible parent. Watching what your child does is always important, so one can make an educated and informed decision on the life of that child.
One thing to note, though: violence is not always the responsibility of the games, as the people who sue the game makers are saying. Let's say I am out playing Halo, with lots of different guns. Who is more likely to go out and practice using weapons (and this is going to get somewhat country-biased here): an American or a Canadian? The answer is the American, because of the legality of weapons in the US.
Yes, I am Canadian, and yes, I am against the use of weapons to the general population. However, many people in the US (and I have lived there for many years, so this is personal observation), but not all, but many have quite a few weapons stored in their homes. Even those I know who have children. Using weapons has become somewhat of a sport and hobby with many, and the easy access some children have to weapons is astounding. Some parents may say that "well we keep the guns here and the ammunition here".. so what? If the child knows where both are, what does it matter that they are not in the same place? Many parents will watch what their child does on the computer or gaming stations, but when it comes to real guns, common sense at times is thrown out the window because it is a right. I am not begrudging those who do it safely and responsibly, but in all honesty.. those who are suing the company for the use of weapons on their property.. how many of them actually own weapons themselves that are given easy access to younsters?
For many, it is the high prices. It appears that Universal Music got the hint, and are dropping all prices in Canada and the US. Their top selling CDs will sell for a max of $14.99 (Canadian), and new artists for a max of $9.99 (Canadian). (Information taken from a CBC news story.)
These days, music just keeps getting crappier and crappier. I am not a fan of rap at all, and that is all that seems to be thrown at me on certain days no matter where I am (the radio in the car, heading out to the bar with friends, etc.). Other days it is hip-hop, again which I am not a fan of. But, this seems to be the current bandwagon. Gone are the bars here in my town with different themes - we used to have a retro 70s/80s bar, which was great! A nice change from the normal bar scene, but that has now been replaced with a bar that plays exclusively hip-hop and rap, not even rock or dance music. Have all of these genres just been tossed out the window?
Oh, and I have only purchased one new CD in the past 4 years - the recent Weird Al Yankovic CD, "Poodle Hat". My last purchase before that was Weird Al Yankovic, "Running With Scissors". There is something to be said for continuing to support an artist that continually creates things you enjoy, not just one good song and 11 crappy ones. As others have said, concerts and in-person promotions are great, as are small venues with local and independent artists who make most of their money off of these sales and genuinely continue to love making music, unlike many "large" artists who it seems have the creative ability to turn out one or two good songs for the love of the music, and the rest for the love of the dollar.
I think the key phrase here is as follows, and I quote: They believe they own the rights to said product. (Emphasis mine.)
The ability to charge for something one does not own is illegal. Until the charge has been proven in a court of law, which is pending, SCO charging for something they do not own is quite illegal. There is no proof of ownership.
This begs another question I have been thinking about... Exactly how will SCO know who has Linux and who does not? Most individuals and companies do not register Linux at all, except for service support. How can they attempt to find out? Perhaps by searching online to see who appears to be running Linux, and querying their box. Honestly, I would be tempted to put a lone machine online, running Windows that is set up to appear as Linux in the HTTP headers, and see what SCO does. For them to go onto that box in the first place, if I secure it, is illegal and I would LOVE to see themselves talk their way out of that one.
Hey, I had a dual boot machine so that was all right for me to do that.:-) Also, if I was having problems, I am sure I know SOMEONE who has online access so that I could get the files I need. Or, just install Mandrake 9.1 like I said and you have the files already there.
"Though Microsoft may soon be blocking Office suite compatability with open source productivity tools"
Microsoft is not only doing this with office. I use Gaim to access MSN Messenger on my Linux box, and they are now going to be blocking access for this as well, unless the third party companies purchase a license to connect. They are taking everything in-house, so you can ONLY use a Microsoft of MS-Licensed product to use a service. Way to go MS! Let's push away those people who use your service for other reasons! Next thing you know, you won't be able to use Hotmail unless you are running the newest version of Windows with all the service packs...
Word 2004 can't be many lines of code from self-awareness
Great. So what you are saying is that Clippy, my bestest-ever pal, will soon be able to write my papers for me, without me coming near a computer?
*Picks up a mouse a la Scotty in Star Trek IV* Hello, computer. Can you write me a paper on the effects of putting WD-40 on my computer fan while the machine is operating?
*Voice from the speaker* I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave... (And yes, when something goes wrong on my computer that IS my warning sound in Windows...)
I remember ClarisWorks! It ran wonderfully in 1993/94 on my Mac Quadra 604 with 4 MB RAM! Ah, the ability to remember a computer I used to have.. it's like a long lost friend...
Why wait? But my question is easy: wasn't HP the company that was rumored to have paid the license to SCO for use of Linux? If so, would this not indicate some kind of collaboration between the two? The question then follows: if successful, is it possible the other big computer manufacturers will follow suit and "register" with SCO so they can release Linux machines as well?
The modem issue is not a big one, I don't think. Many people today are using broadband, so as long as there is a network card in the box it should be all right. Also, in case they do want a modem, at least they are providing Mandrake. After installing Mandrake 9.0 and 9.1 on my box at home, I was amazed that 9.0 told me I had a Winmodem and gave me a URL to find out how to make it work, and 9.1 even installed the Winmodem drivers! (If only Dell had not given me a Winmodem in the first place...)
Having the capability for non-Earth-based scientific research and living is something that is sorely needed these days. Humans are taking over more and more of the non-ocean surface of our planet, reducing the botanic resources available. What could this potentially mean? That we could ultimately require so much space that we can no longer grow those items that are required for our species to live on: plants that generate oxygen for us to breathe, as well as the sustenance our bodies need to survive.
Granted, this worse-case scenario would be a long time off, but should we achieve the ability for orbital/sub-orbital vehicles, we will also have the potential for non-Earth-based research laboratories and research centers. There are many scientific endeavors which cannot properly be studies in a gravity-based environment, and by having research stations in orbit, we can test new botanic possibilities as well as other scientific experiments in orbit, while we humans live on below.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know why the parent was modded as "funny" because it is a good point. That was part of their whole legal defense at one point. However, I think their entire argument was that it could not be pulled out of the current incarnation of Windows. It is entirely possible that they are creating a specific version of Windows for this particular use, and that may include some kernel modifications which do not require IE, IIS, etc. If so, then removing the items would improve security immensely.
Doesn't Bill Gates have enough money that he now has to go into everyone else's?
Now that that's off my chest... We should not be so quick to criticize Microsoft about this endeavor so quickly. Yes, they said a VERSION of Windows will be on there. But, due to a specialized niche industry here, odds are this will be a specialized version of Windows. There will be communication issues at stake here, the usual wariness of a MS operating system, but with the money probably being put in place to fund this project, and their recent egg on the face with the security holes, I think they will at least try with this special version of Windows to make it secure.
Yes, I like the open source movement as well and free software and would prefer to use it, but without an opensource alternative available to the companies that use the machines, they have to use what is offered to them.
I don't think that the mentality is "take what you can get for free" from everyone. However, to take your analogy between software and music a step further...
/. before, I have purchased only two CDs in the past few years, and that was because the artist in question is consistently turning out good music that I enjoy listening to. He releases his music when he wants, not when a recording industry president says he has to. I do not download much from P2P either, as I already have much of the music I like (I am a big retro fan). I mostly use P2P to download those television shows which are not yet available on DVD. If it is available on DVD in a higher quality medium, I get it there; and many people do the same with music.
With Linux, an individual can download it, install it, and see if he or she likes it. The same goes with Shareware programs that are widely available on the Web. With P2P, an individual can download music from an artist and see if he or she likes it before purchasing it.
It's more of a "try before you buy" mentality, and many individuals hold to that fact. Like you said, the artists went to a lot of trouble to record their music and distribute it. But, were the artists hearts really into that music or did they have to do it because of a contractual obligation? Usually you can tell which of the two it is by listening to the music. Most times, a contractual obligation album (no reference to the Monty Python album of that name intended) is full of smaller songs or songs the band does not like as much, and it is these albums that the industry promotes... to death. They know it is not as good as the stuff the artists wanted to write, but it will sell because of: 1) the name of the artist, and 2) their mass marketing campaign of it being "hot" or "great" will always sucker some people in.
As I have said on
I got the prices from the Apple Canada stored. Specifically, here for the iBook and here for the PowerBook.
By the time the G5 Powerbooks come out, I think I might be able to actually afford a Macintosh laptop system. Here in Canada, the Powerbooks are at least $2300, and the iBooks are at least $1400. Right now, this is not feasible. But, by the time the cooling system works properly, I might be able to scrape up the thousands of dollars required.
I do applaud Apple for not releasing information on products that it is unsure about, including these G5 laptops. They have strongly hinted in the article that they are looking at it, but they did not make any promises as to when it will be released. This way, they are not forced to rush production which would result in an inferior product. They are going to make sure they have quality over timeframe, which is something some other software companies should learn. Before you set a release date, get a demo/prototype done, and do at least a minimal level of testing!
But doesn't the intent of the incitement hold bearing? If the game was not intended to influence people to go out, shoot people, run over people, pick up hookers, etc. then I do not think that there was any intentional incitement and as such the liability for the organization that 'incited' the act would be minimal, if held liable at all. If video games truly incited people to do various things, I think I would have taken on my fair share of gorillas with barrels by now and ghosts who can be eaten once I digest a nice, flashy, glowing Power Pellet.
If the kids were truly imitating the game, they would have picked up hookers, made the car rock, and THEN ran the hookers over to get their cash. They then would have totaled the car, stolen an ambulance, and drive that around town. Perhaps followed by beating up a cop, shooting some random civilians, and finally getting gunned down in a parade of gunfire from the cops.
Did that happen? No? Then I guess the kids were not imitating the video game.
This issue continues to come back up, time and time again. Whenever there is a killing or attack by someone under the age of 18, ANYWHERE, games, television, and other items which identify the current culture are being put to blame.
If it were necessarily true that kids follow games, then why aren't MORE kids out there killing and maiming? The mentality is set to a small group. If there was a mass hysteria, sure, maybe then there would be something. But for God's sake, people, it's a video game! I played them on the Commodore 64, Apple 2, Atari 2600, Intellivision, and the original Nintendo when I was a kid!
Did they have an effect on me? Well, as a kid, I never knocked over a turtle and kicked it away a la Mario Brothers! I never stole a car and took it for a spin around the city like many racing games! Hell, I never went out and had sex at age 12 because of all those crappy sex games the C-64 had available for it, either.
So the question remains: why are kids being blamed, and in this case saying, that they learned the behavior from TV and video games? Simple answer: their parents and the media. Parents today are worried about their kids, and they have every right to be. But what do they do? (And I have noticed this with friends and family who have children of various ages.) When their kid is in trouble, they ask them where they learned it. "Was it on TV? Was it in those video games they play?" The parents are giving the kids the scapegoat the kids want and need, and the companies that make the games are the ones getting in crap. The media blows all of this out of proportion, with CNN reporting hours-upon-hours of how the games are corrupting the youth.
Grow up, people! Yes, some people may be influenced by games, but those people need some form of attention and intervention; it will not go away by removing one video game. Take some responsibility for your own actions, and that includes random blaming of games and television for acts which are probably rooted deeper into the kid's psyche (although I am not a psychologist).
By filing a lawsuit as well, would they not have to pay an initial filing fee with an appropriate judge/jurisdiction? If so, this could end up being costly for the industry should they lose a majority of the cases. Then who knows what kind of monetary settlement they would want to demand from the sued individuals.
The Mars base is much LESS useful. Look at the relative orbits of the planet. How far away is Mars going to be from Earth in 20 years as opposed to now? Not a lot scientifically perhaps, but enough that the extra fuel expenditure will make a financial and time difference. However, the moon will ALWAYS be there. Mankind has not been back there in a long time. Before arguing against one possibility, let's go back to our "roots" as it were and establish that we can:
1. Create a proper base on another celestial body (in this case, the moon)
2. Work out any bugs in the system before going to Mars
If there are any problems, it will be a lot easier for rescue vehicles, with this current plan, to assist those on the moon as opposed to those stranded on Mars. Yes, changes will be made for a Mars base, but let's get some of the ideas worked out and proven first, with relative safety for the astronauts involved.
(And I was almost tempted to use "3. Profit!" earlier, but I thought that might get me shot...)
So, if beer can create a "new sound" as it were, and it has successfully assisted in the creation of a "biocomputer", then what can the world look forward to? Paul Hogan promoting Foster's 2.5MHz "Head"less PC? I hope that's not what this world is coming to... And dear God, please PLEASE do not let any company use the Crocodile Hunter in any more promotions...
I -> H
B -> A
M -> L
(All letters go back one step...)
V -> W
M -> N
S -> T
(All letter go forward one step...)
C -> B
F -> G
R -> S
So take one step back and then two steps forward? Wait a second.. on second thought, that does sound like MS after all. Now if only they could remove that pesky step back, as it keeps reocurring..
Remarkably, this is the same urban legend story that happened in various hospitals worldwide where several patients mysteriously died nightly in the same wing of the hospital... until it was found that a janitor was coming around and unplugging the life support systems to plug in the floor buffer...
Wouldn't a mainframe require a different power socket for a vaccuum cleaner? Or is this one UBER-vaccuum?
Really? Although the company doesn't have an S, its main product of revenue does... macintoSh. Although it is not the third letter from the right, it still has an S. So does that make it not AS evil? But only quasi-evil?
The main plotline is in two very different worlds, with different scientific technologies and begs the question: would our science be science fiction to these people?
First, we have "our" reality, which takes place in "our" present, more or less, not the distant future. It takes place in a University-run science lab. The other reality is in a parallel Earth, where neanderthals remained dominant and did not evolve into homo sapiens, but managed to gain the ability to reason and grow scientifically. A gateway opens between the worlds, and a neanderthal is thrust into our world.
Yes, it is based on scientific theory and principles, but the idea is interesting. I think this series proves that science fiction does not always have to suffer from too much science. I think that many sci-fi authors just need to not use all the techno-gadgetry a la Star Trek as the main basis of their stories, and instead deal with the human/alien aspect of the characters in telling a story. (Oh, in case anyone was wondering, the 3 books are Hominids and Humans, both out in paperback, and Hybrids, which is now out in hardcover.)
This, in my opinion, is one responsible parent. Watching what your child does is always important, so one can make an educated and informed decision on the life of that child.
One thing to note, though: violence is not always the responsibility of the games, as the people who sue the game makers are saying. Let's say I am out playing Halo, with lots of different guns. Who is more likely to go out and practice using weapons (and this is going to get somewhat country-biased here): an American or a Canadian? The answer is the American, because of the legality of weapons in the US.
Yes, I am Canadian, and yes, I am against the use of weapons to the general population. However, many people in the US (and I have lived there for many years, so this is personal observation), but not all, but many have quite a few weapons stored in their homes. Even those I know who have children. Using weapons has become somewhat of a sport and hobby with many, and the easy access some children have to weapons is astounding. Some parents may say that "well we keep the guns here and the ammunition here".. so what? If the child knows where both are, what does it matter that they are not in the same place? Many parents will watch what their child does on the computer or gaming stations, but when it comes to real guns, common sense at times is thrown out the window because it is a right. I am not begrudging those who do it safely and responsibly, but in all honesty.. those who are suing the company for the use of weapons on their property.. how many of them actually own weapons themselves that are given easy access to younsters?
For many, it is the high prices. It appears that Universal Music got the hint, and are dropping all prices in Canada and the US. Their top selling CDs will sell for a max of $14.99 (Canadian), and new artists for a max of $9.99 (Canadian). (Information taken from a CBC news story.)
These days, music just keeps getting crappier and crappier. I am not a fan of rap at all, and that is all that seems to be thrown at me on certain days no matter where I am (the radio in the car, heading out to the bar with friends, etc.). Other days it is hip-hop, again which I am not a fan of. But, this seems to be the current bandwagon. Gone are the bars here in my town with different themes - we used to have a retro 70s/80s bar, which was great! A nice change from the normal bar scene, but that has now been replaced with a bar that plays exclusively hip-hop and rap, not even rock or dance music. Have all of these genres just been tossed out the window?
Oh, and I have only purchased one new CD in the past 4 years - the recent Weird Al Yankovic CD, "Poodle Hat". My last purchase before that was Weird Al Yankovic, "Running With Scissors". There is something to be said for continuing to support an artist that continually creates things you enjoy, not just one good song and 11 crappy ones. As others have said, concerts and in-person promotions are great, as are small venues with local and independent artists who make most of their money off of these sales and genuinely continue to love making music, unlike many "large" artists who it seems have the creative ability to turn out one or two good songs for the love of the music, and the rest for the love of the dollar.
I think the key phrase here is as follows, and I quote: They believe they own the rights to said product. (Emphasis mine.)
The ability to charge for something one does not own is illegal. Until the charge has been proven in a court of law, which is pending, SCO charging for something they do not own is quite illegal. There is no proof of ownership.
This begs another question I have been thinking about... Exactly how will SCO know who has Linux and who does not? Most individuals and companies do not register Linux at all, except for service support. How can they attempt to find out? Perhaps by searching online to see who appears to be running Linux, and querying their box. Honestly, I would be tempted to put a lone machine online, running Windows that is set up to appear as Linux in the HTTP headers, and see what SCO does. For them to go onto that box in the first place, if I secure it, is illegal and I would LOVE to see themselves talk their way out of that one.
Hey, I had a dual boot machine so that was all right for me to do that. :-) Also, if I was having problems, I am sure I know SOMEONE who has online access so that I could get the files I need. Or, just install Mandrake 9.1 like I said and you have the files already there.
*Picks up a mouse a la Scotty in Star Trek IV* Hello, computer. Can you write me a paper on the effects of putting WD-40 on my computer fan while the machine is operating?
*Voice from the speaker* I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave... (And yes, when something goes wrong on my computer that IS my warning sound in Windows...)
I remember ClarisWorks! It ran wonderfully in 1993/94 on my Mac Quadra 604 with 4 MB RAM! Ah, the ability to remember a computer I used to have .. it's like a long lost friend...
Why wait? But my question is easy: wasn't HP the company that was rumored to have paid the license to SCO for use of Linux? If so, would this not indicate some kind of collaboration between the two? The question then follows: if successful, is it possible the other big computer manufacturers will follow suit and "register" with SCO so they can release Linux machines as well?
The modem issue is not a big one, I don't think. Many people today are using broadband, so as long as there is a network card in the box it should be all right. Also, in case they do want a modem, at least they are providing Mandrake. After installing Mandrake 9.0 and 9.1 on my box at home, I was amazed that 9.0 told me I had a Winmodem and gave me a URL to find out how to make it work, and 9.1 even installed the Winmodem drivers! (If only Dell had not given me a Winmodem in the first place...)
Having the capability for non-Earth-based scientific research and living is something that is sorely needed these days. Humans are taking over more and more of the non-ocean surface of our planet, reducing the botanic resources available. What could this potentially mean? That we could ultimately require so much space that we can no longer grow those items that are required for our species to live on: plants that generate oxygen for us to breathe, as well as the sustenance our bodies need to survive.
Granted, this worse-case scenario would be a long time off, but should we achieve the ability for orbital/sub-orbital vehicles, we will also have the potential for non-Earth-based research laboratories and research centers. There are many scientific endeavors which cannot properly be studies in a gravity-based environment, and by having research stations in orbit, we can test new botanic possibilities as well as other scientific experiments in orbit, while we humans live on below.