I thought planets were Roman gods. It's not even like we've run out of them. We can still find Vulcan (Mulciber if you want to avoid rabit Trekkies), Juno, Minerva, Apollo (You can call this one Phoebus if you want to avoid confusing it with space probes), Diana, Vesta.
I'm not sure about those ones, but I believe that "Caligula" is still available.
Who modded this insightful? It's stupid. It doesn't matter where the victim lives, it matters where the crime was committed. If I rob a Swiss tourist in Sydney, do I get extradited to Switzerland to stand trial for robbery? Think, people, think!
What would Cthulhu do?
Hmmmm... so the real issue at stake here is whether this man should be devoured alive or driven insane and then devoured alive. It's a tough one.
By the look of the slashdot crowd's groupthink responses so far, applying the same formula to your above sample they should all want the victim to go to Nigeria to have the case heard.
Whereas if a Nigerian accuses an American of carrying out such a scam then you think that he should be extradited to Nigeria I guess?
If I'm accused of having committed an act that IS illegal in my own country but another givernment claims also amounted to a crime in their country then should I face trial in my own country, in accordance with the legal system that I've been nrought up in and giving evidence in front of people with similar cultural references and expectations to my own facing the range of penalities and legal safe guards of my own country, or should my government send me to face the penalties of a foreign state within their legal system instead?
I think it's a damn easy question to answer as long as you retain presumption of innocence and the intention of giving a fair hearing.
"If you commit a criminal act in a foreign country which is legal in your home country, you probably shouldn't be extradited."
There is no "probably" about it. If you do something that isn't a crime where you are, the government there shouldn't send you to another place where it is a crime.
You need to re-read what he said. His example considers someone who DID commit a crime where they were, that place being a foreign country.
The article says "Griffiths Australian lawyers are fighting the move, stating that he has never set foot in the United States and has committed no crime under Australian law" but to me thats lawyer defense standard sputtering as it IS illegal in australia.
I'm not fanmiliar with Australian copyright laws but him saying that it is not a crime is not incompatible with you saying that it is illegal. A great many things that are illegal are not crimes. And yes, the distinction can matter a lot.
If you are saying that the actions he is alleged to have performed would amount to a crime in Australia then please confirm that your familiarity with Australian law is sufficient to enable you to support that.
You're right, on reflection I think the real point to focus on here is that this Anderer admits that anything that's wrong in the world is the fault of him and Microsoft and that SCO and Canopy are innocent victims of their evil schemes. He couldn't have said it any clearer if I'd paid him as much as we promised.
He doesn't say "that Microsoft has many more disruptive lawsuits planned up their sleeves", he says that Microsoft have a great many lawsuits queued up AGAINST them. His perspective is evidently that you can only survive in the operating systems market if you can stand up against the sort of litigation that Microsoft has to. I don't think his point is a very good one but let's not pretend that it was something else entirely.
well with apache and the new xfree86 4.4 license, it seems things are starting to 'decentralize' from GPL,
Is that supposed to be a joke? One of the reasons for the changes to the Apache license was specifically to make it compatible with the GPL, which it hadn't previously been (though in the opinion of the FSF the changes didn't accomplish that intended goal).
BTW, does anyone else think the SCO logo there looks like a big red beachball with Mickey Mouse's head on the side???
It's the world being eclipsed by, as you correctly recognised, a gigantic mickey mouse logo. It represents the ultimate triumph of intellectual property over sanity. I chose it myself.
It seems they were looking for something less ambigious and more business-friendly than "free software".
Possibly they were looking for something more business friendly but they definitely weren't looking for something less ambiguous and if they had been then they wouldn't have settled on "open source".
"Open source" just sounds like the source code is available. It does not sound as though you get the freedoms promoted by the Free Software Foundation and, apparently, by the Open Source Initiative at all.
If anything it is more ambiguous. At least 'free as in freedom' or 'free as in speech' rolls off the rongue a little more easily than 'open source as in free (as in speech) software'.
I've noticed recently that the SCO lawsuit has made some waves in UK papers, where previously you'd be hard pushed to find a mention of Linux whenever a computer-related article is published (Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft!).
And from this they learned that immediately after RIAA started some highly publicised lawsuits, people who were aware that their activities were being actively (voluntarily) monitored cut down on their use of P2P software, and perhaps even more stunningly, people asked in paper surveys whether or not they were doing anything they could be sued for were less likely to say "yes".
I guess the fact that the numbers are going up again is mildly interesting, but I don't see that you can draw many conclusions the earllier drop in recorded p2p use. "Not telling" is at least as likely as "not doing". Promises of anonymity or not, it's human nature.
But, can someone with a little more market savvy explain what is in Novell's best interest in the long run?
In the long run they should use [favored desktop] and ONLY [favored desktop]. The [other dekstop] is light years behind technologically and is only supported by trolls and zealots. [Favored dekstop] is so fast now it's amazing, I installed the latest beta the other day and I was amazed how fast it ran. It's also so stable now. And the default theme is just beautiful. Not like [other desktop] which is just eye candy. Yes, [favored desktop] has had its problems but it's way past them now. EVERYONE I know or have ever heard of uses [favored desktop] anyway, there's no point in supporting anything else.
The work means they can use KDE for most things and cherry pick any apps they want from Ximian and they will integrate nicely into the desktop
Or they can focus on developing for Gnome with the knowledge that their work will integrate relatively well into KDE for those users that want it anyway.
Seriously, you can take the integration as a pro either way so why strain to make it a win for 'your team'?
Slashdot Mirror
I thought planets were Roman gods. It's not even like we've run out of them. We can still find Vulcan (Mulciber if you want to avoid rabit Trekkies), Juno, Minerva, Apollo (You can call this one Phoebus if you want to avoid confusing it with space probes), Diana, Vesta.
I'm not sure about those ones, but I believe that "Caligula" is still available.
I'm a strong proponent of the idea that only the faithful should be devoured alive while still sane.
Faithful and still sane? What sort of cult is that???
Who modded this insightful? It's stupid. It doesn't matter where the victim lives, it matters where the crime was committed. If I rob a Swiss tourist in Sydney, do I get extradited to Switzerland to stand trial for robbery? Think, people, think!
What would Cthulhu do?
Hmmmm... so the real issue at stake here is whether this man should be devoured alive or driven insane and then devoured alive. It's a tough one.
By the look of the slashdot crowd's groupthink responses so far, applying the same formula to your above sample they should all want the victim to go to Nigeria to have the case heard.
Whereas if a Nigerian accuses an American of carrying out such a scam then you think that he should be extradited to Nigeria I guess?
The question is:
If I'm accused of having committed an act that IS illegal in my own country but another givernment claims also amounted to a crime in their country then should I face trial in my own country, in accordance with the legal system that I've been nrought up in and giving evidence in front of people with similar cultural references and expectations to my own facing the range of penalities and legal safe guards of my own country, or should my government send me to face the penalties of a foreign state within their legal system instead?
I think it's a damn easy question to answer as long as you retain presumption of innocence and the intention of giving a fair hearing.
What is the argument in favor of extradition?
"If you commit a criminal act in a foreign country which is legal in your home country, you probably shouldn't be extradited."
There is no "probably" about it. If you do something that isn't a crime where you are, the government there shouldn't send you to another place where it is a crime.
You need to re-read what he said. His example considers someone who DID commit a crime where they were, that place being a foreign country.
The article says "Griffiths Australian lawyers are fighting the move, stating that he has never set foot in the United States and has committed no crime under Australian law" but to me thats lawyer defense standard sputtering as it IS illegal in australia.
I'm not fanmiliar with Australian copyright laws but him saying that it is not a crime is not incompatible with you saying that it is illegal. A great many things that are illegal are not crimes. And yes, the distinction can matter a lot.
If you are saying that the actions he is alleged to have performed would amount to a crime in Australia then please confirm that your familiarity with Australian law is sufficient to enable you to support that.
I can't really say I care for the precedent being set here.
Wouldn't you like to find out what precedent is in fact set before deciding whether you like it? The decision hasn't been made yet.
You're right, on reflection I think the real point to focus on here is that this Anderer admits that anything that's wrong in the world is the fault of him and Microsoft and that SCO and Canopy are innocent victims of their evil schemes. He couldn't have said it any clearer if I'd paid him as much as we promised.
You actually think thats the real Darl McBride of SCO?
It'd better be. He's been charging overtime for making some of these posts.
Yup, PJ over at Groklaw seems to have made the same mistake.
There's always some risk when someone copies the girl next to them instead of doing their own homework.
Did anyone else read this interview and get the feeling that Anderer spoke a lot but didn't really say anything specific or all that relevant?
Yes. My favorite is:
"I helped build the channels for most of the products that corporate America is currently using and some they will be using soon."
So he builds "channels". To quote Benjy mouse "Sounds very significant without actually tying you down to meaning anything."
He doesn't say "that Microsoft has many more disruptive lawsuits planned up their sleeves", he says that Microsoft have a great many lawsuits queued up AGAINST them. His perspective is evidently that you can only survive in the operating systems market if you can stand up against the sort of litigation that Microsoft has to. I don't think his point is a very good one but let's not pretend that it was something else entirely.
That is exactly the point: no matter how desperate you are, there's always going to be someone out there who's just a little bit more desperate.
Yeah, if we carry this to its logical extreme then it'll be the people who need the jobs most who get them! A fine mess that'd be.
well with apache and the new xfree86 4.4 license, it seems things are starting to 'decentralize' from GPL,
Is that supposed to be a joke? One of the reasons for the changes to the Apache license was specifically to make it compatible with the GPL, which it hadn't previously been (though in the opinion of the FSF the changes didn't accomplish that intended goal).
BTW, does anyone else think the SCO logo there looks like a big red beachball with Mickey Mouse's head on the side???
It's the world being eclipsed by, as you correctly recognised, a gigantic mickey mouse logo. It represents the ultimate triumph of intellectual property over sanity. I chose it myself.
$699. Buy now while stocks last.
DMCA outlaws circumvention, not decryption.
Circumvention of what? And if you get the answer to that right then you should understand why decryption is an issue.
It seems they were looking for something less ambigious and more business-friendly than "free software".
Possibly they were looking for something more business friendly but they definitely weren't looking for something less ambiguous and if they had been then they wouldn't have settled on "open source".
"Open source" just sounds like the source code is available. It does not sound as though you get the freedoms promoted by the Free Software Foundation and, apparently, by the Open Source Initiative at all.
If anything it is more ambiguous. At least 'free as in freedom' or 'free as in speech' rolls off the rongue a little more easily than 'open source as in free (as in speech) software'.
I would have waited to see what the Judge has to say tomorrow before responding.
The judge won't have anything to say tomorrow, at least not about SCO v IBM. It's been postponed until 6 February.
They just can't sue you if you do
Wrong! People can always sue you. Fair use just affexcts your chance of winning the case.
Well you started it.
I've noticed recently that the SCO lawsuit has made some waves in UK papers, where previously you'd be hard pushed to find a mention of Linux whenever a computer-related article is published (Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft!).
The BBC have picked up on the story now.
And from this they learned that immediately after RIAA started some highly publicised lawsuits, people who were aware that their activities were being actively (voluntarily) monitored cut down on their use of P2P software, and perhaps even more stunningly, people asked in paper surveys whether or not they were doing anything they could be sued for were less likely to say "yes".
I guess the fact that the numbers are going up again is mildly interesting, but I don't see that you can draw many conclusions the earllier drop in recorded p2p use. "Not telling" is at least as likely as "not doing". Promises of anonymity or not, it's human nature.
But, can someone with a little more market savvy explain what is in Novell's best interest in the long run?
In the long run they should use [favored desktop] and ONLY [favored desktop]. The [other dekstop] is light years behind technologically and is only supported by trolls and zealots. [Favored dekstop] is so fast now it's amazing, I installed the latest beta the other day and I was amazed how fast it ran. It's also so stable now. And the default theme is just beautiful. Not like [other desktop] which is just eye candy. Yes, [favored desktop] has had its problems but it's way past them now. EVERYONE I know or have ever heard of uses [favored desktop] anyway, there's no point in supporting anything else.
The work means they can use KDE for most things and cherry pick any apps they want from Ximian and they will integrate nicely into the desktop
Or they can focus on developing for Gnome with the knowledge that their work will integrate relatively well into KDE for those users that want it anyway.
Seriously, you can take the integration as a pro either way so why strain to make it a win for 'your team'?