while i get the "it's not a bug, it's a feature" relevance, I don't get the "one question geek test" part, since you didn't ask a question. So what, you explain that there's a VW Beetle (Bug) with a somewhat witty license plate. What's the question?
mind you, I completely don't understand the red and green card joke of the previous post.
When are juries used? Sometimes it seems judges make decisions without a jury, and sometimes a jury is used. Are juries only for criminal cases, and not civil cases? This is a civil case, right? It seems it would be easier to explain to a single educated judge than a group of random citizens (seriously, what's the literacy rate these days? probably not even 50% among people over 18)
We either need IBM to use its huge patent portfolio to protect OSS...
BZZZZZZZZZZTTT! Wrong answer!
Depend on yet another corporation to have integrity? I don't quite see that happening. Let Big Blue "manage" what technologies we can and cannot use? Um, no thanks. Swap Microsoft in for IBM in your statement and see how silly it sounds. Why should IBM be any different? They are simpley defending their coporporate interest, which happens to coincide with OSS interest at this point in time. Their interest won't always be the same as our interest, at which point they pull the proverbial rug out from beneath our feet.
The trade secrets thing is just an excuse to make it seem like they still have a reason to be in court.
I agree. As far as I understand, trade secrets are protected so carefully because once they are no longer secrets there is no law protecting them. So if such a "trade secret" became public knowledge, then it no long would be considered a "trade secret". it isn't protected by something like a patent which gives the owner of the patent explicit rights for a set amount of time. it's either a secret or it's not. if it's not, too bad for you, you should have protected it better.
If I might explain in Simpsons terms... Consider the Flaming Homer episode where Homer makes a flamable beverage. Moe gets the recipe and makes a Flaming Moe. Secret ingredient is cough syrup. Just before Moe sells the recipe to someone, planning on splitting the revenue with Homer, Homer declares in public that the secret ingredient is cough syrup. The trade secret is no longer secret, so the guy who was going to buy the recipe doesn't need to anymore and is free to use it himself however he pleases.
Over simplification, I'm sure, but SCO is flailing blindly, just trying to keep stock prices up a while longer. This is what we need the judge to find, that this lawsuit is part of a larger scheme for the management to fraudulently make a buck.
SCO is basically asking the court to tell IBM to hand over every file in their possession relating to Unix, Linux, AIX or any other operating system that ends in "X" so they can plow though them to see what they can accuse IBM of doing wrong.
Are you kidding me? If I were a judge, I would laugh SCO out of court, then have some law grad student beat them over and over again with a Law For Dummies book until they bled out their... um, ears. Yes, ears, thats it.
So you're saying that SCO wants to be given the right to look through all IBM's crap and then say what they want to take IBM to court for?
It's illegal for them to charge a restocking fee on defective equipment. Contact the state AG, the Attorney General. (not to be confused with the state AC)
Similarly, SBC Ameritech once sent me 6 phones and equipment I never ordered. It was a hassle trying to get them to pay for shipping. I never got an explanation from any level as to why i was sent the equipment. No record of order anywhere. It took 6 months before I finally got the $200+ amount completely off my bill, all along they were charging me late fees (which i had to pay) for payment on that equipment even though I had returned it before the 2 weeks (or 1 month, i forget the "allowed" time period for returns).
Now Time Warner cable has a $10 instalation fee for their Roadrunner cable modem service. Wtf for? Flip a switch, drop of the cable modem at my apartment and give me 10 dollars for saving 30 minutes of your technicians time. Take your "no running servers" policy out of the Terms Of Use, and you might get a customer. Until then i'll get my Internet fix at work.
Verizon ultimately pisses me off with fees. my $39 a month service costs $50 each month. Thats a significant amount of money, and no where on the bill does it explain exactly what the extra fees are for. It has some "see here for information" but that just give the fee a longer name, doesn't explain what it is for.
right, but if they set aside a block of 100,000 combinations of numbers that will never be generated by the machines instead of having a fair, random distribution across the entire set of numbers, then it would appear to me to put the odds more in their favor. in essence, you would be fighting against the probablity that the machine will generate a certain number, then again the probablity that that number is picked in the lottery drawing, no?
wondering about probability and not having any reference with me, a quick google resulted in http://www.lottogenie.com/html/odds.html which presents odds of 1 in 13983816.00 for picking 6 numbers out of 49, which is the lotto scheme FL had at the time. picking 5 out of 49, as you said Georgia is, resulted in significantly reduced figures, much less than the 13.9M
So if this odds calculator is correct, spending 13.9 million on tickets to ensure a win isn't all that far fetched (although it is a bit silly)
its probably a result of childhood memory glorification on the guy buying all possible numbers. someone did something crazy like spending way too much money on the lottery and won it.
I always questioned the legitimacy of state lotteries. How can it be that jackpots rollover to such huge amounts with the amount of people playing? In Florida, when i was young, i remember atleast one "rich" person who bought a ticket for every possible combination, just so he could say he won. Nowadays it seems most people have the machines automatically pick numbers. How do we know that these machines have equal odds at selecting every sequence? I doubt they do, which leads to these balloned jackpots of 60-100 million and more, which in turn brings more people out of the woodworks hoping to strike it rich, and then the state just again reaps the rewards. Until someone wins, and they end up receiving only a fraction of the "jackpot" for various reasons.
State lottery is such a scam. I'm glad to say I've never bought a single ticket. The state pocketing the rest.
well it's also not money that brings a person to work for a non-profit in the first place (usually). It's some agreement with the goals of the organization. How cool would it be if Debian could say, "yeah, we got hacked, but we caught the bastard ourselves and prosecuted."
Let me remind you, this is the kind of B.S. that can happen when you rely on proprietary software (I'm guessing that FreeDOS and friends do rely on MS standards in order to maintain compatibility with MS-DOS programs). Someone can pull the rug right out from under you whenever they want to.
So MS is going to nickle and dime people to death. Who would have guessed...
Leads? I'll just check with the boys back at the crime lab. They got 3 more detectives working on the case. They got us working in shifts! -The Big Lebowski
Seriously though, I would hope that organizations like Debian or Gentoo would have the brain power and tech resources to find a few leads that results in arrests. But why do I doubt that anyone will ever be arrested for any of these types of attacks?
Oh and finally spam makes money. TONS AND TONS of money. hundreds of thousands of dollars profit a month usually run by 3-4 guys
From who, seriously? Is the money comming from sale of illegal goods? Or is legal goods? I still don't see how spammers make money. Is it from people hiring their services? If so, do those people hiring spammers make money?
Don't start batting the "racist" word about like it's a ping pong ball. "Regionalist" would be more appropriate, but of course you wanted mod points, and what better way than by calling the slashdot editors racist.
Rich Taylor, an MPAA spokesman, said the lawsuit is misguided because the reason for the ban was "to reduce piracy and to preserve the motion picture industry for filmmakers, both large and small."
What a numbscull. He never stopped to think that the ban was misguided. We can only expect such responses I guess.
and my point is that they are not two separate things because those pushing you to DRM platforms are the same people pushing the legislation.
so the theoretical stance that the technology is fine is a thin thread to walk upon, and should be discarded as a real argument since DRM technology exists as a means to pass legislation which would legalize abuses by the corporations developing DRM in the first place.
but saying "DRM is fine", doesn't address the coupling that has been made between DRM and legislation. In popular media, they are all but one in the same. Companies pushing DRM products are pushing legislation that legalizes their intrusion into something you own. Legalizing that intrusion locks the manufacturer into your system as a neccesary componant.
So don't play the "technically, DRM is fine" card. While it very well may be fine, the statement is misrepresentative of the real problem and abstracts away too much information.
Slashdot Mirror
while i get the "it's not a bug, it's a feature" relevance, I don't get the "one question geek test" part, since you didn't ask a question. So what, you explain that there's a VW Beetle (Bug) with a somewhat witty license plate. What's the question?
mind you, I completely don't understand the red and green card joke of the previous post.
thats actually funny :)
When are juries used? Sometimes it seems judges make decisions without a jury, and sometimes a jury is used. Are juries only for criminal cases, and not civil cases? This is a civil case, right? It seems it would be easier to explain to a single educated judge than a group of random citizens (seriously, what's the literacy rate these days? probably not even 50% among people over 18)
SHIALIH (someone here is a lawyer i hope?)
We either need IBM to use its huge patent portfolio to protect OSS...
BZZZZZZZZZZTTT! Wrong answer!
Depend on yet another corporation to have integrity? I don't quite see that happening. Let Big Blue "manage" what technologies we can and cannot use? Um, no thanks. Swap Microsoft in for IBM in your statement and see how silly it sounds. Why should IBM be any different? They are simpley defending their coporporate interest, which happens to coincide with OSS interest at this point in time. Their interest won't always be the same as our interest, at which point they pull the proverbial rug out from beneath our feet.
The trade secrets thing is just an excuse to make it seem like they still have a reason to be in court.
I agree. As far as I understand, trade secrets are protected so carefully because once they are no longer secrets there is no law protecting them. So if such a "trade secret" became public knowledge, then it no long would be considered a "trade secret". it isn't protected by something like a patent which gives the owner of the patent explicit rights for a set amount of time. it's either a secret or it's not. if it's not, too bad for you, you should have protected it better.
If I might explain in Simpsons terms... Consider the Flaming Homer episode where Homer makes a flamable beverage. Moe gets the recipe and makes a Flaming Moe. Secret ingredient is cough syrup. Just before Moe sells the recipe to someone, planning on splitting the revenue with Homer, Homer declares in public that the secret ingredient is cough syrup. The trade secret is no longer secret, so the guy who was going to buy the recipe doesn't need to anymore and is free to use it himself however he pleases.
Over simplification, I'm sure, but SCO is flailing blindly, just trying to keep stock prices up a while longer. This is what we need the judge to find, that this lawsuit is part of a larger scheme for the management to fraudulently make a buck.
SCO is basically asking the court to tell IBM to hand over every file in their possession relating to Unix, Linux, AIX or any other operating system that ends in "X" so they can plow though them to see what they can accuse IBM of doing wrong.
Are you kidding me? If I were a judge, I would laugh SCO out of court, then have some law grad student beat them over and over again with a Law For Dummies book until they bled out their... um, ears. Yes, ears, thats it.
So you're saying that SCO wants to be given the right to look through all IBM's crap and then say what they want to take IBM to court for?
Ein State. Ein Hummer. Ein Arnold.
;)
i'm pretty sure he received more than one "hummer" in his life... "ein" does mean "one", right? and hummer does mean b.j., right?
OOP will lead to more robust, easier to maintain and higher quality software
;)
It did.
You're right, it did.
It's illegal for them to charge a restocking fee on defective equipment. Contact the state AG, the Attorney General. (not to be confused with the state AC)
Similarly, SBC Ameritech once sent me 6 phones and equipment I never ordered. It was a hassle trying to get them to pay for shipping. I never got an explanation from any level as to why i was sent the equipment. No record of order anywhere. It took 6 months before I finally got the $200+ amount completely off my bill, all along they were charging me late fees (which i had to pay) for payment on that equipment even though I had returned it before the 2 weeks (or 1 month, i forget the "allowed" time period for returns).
Now Time Warner cable has a $10 instalation fee for their Roadrunner cable modem service. Wtf for? Flip a switch, drop of the cable modem at my apartment and give me 10 dollars for saving 30 minutes of your technicians time. Take your "no running servers" policy out of the Terms Of Use, and you might get a customer. Until then i'll get my Internet fix at work.
Verizon ultimately pisses me off with fees. my $39 a month service costs $50 each month. Thats a significant amount of money, and no where on the bill does it explain exactly what the extra fees are for. It has some "see here for information" but that just give the fee a longer name, doesn't explain what it is for.
nickled and dimed to death.
on both sides of the coin.
right, but if they set aside a block of 100,000 combinations of numbers that will never be generated by the machines instead of having a fair, random distribution across the entire set of numbers, then it would appear to me to put the odds more in their favor. in essence, you would be fighting against the probablity that the machine will generate a certain number, then again the probablity that that number is picked in the lottery drawing, no?
I was always awful at probablity. I give up.
wondering about probability and not having any reference with me, a quick google resulted in http://www.lottogenie.com/html/odds.html which presents odds of 1 in 13983816.00 for picking 6 numbers out of 49, which is the lotto scheme FL had at the time. picking 5 out of 49, as you said Georgia is, resulted in significantly reduced figures, much less than the 13.9M
So if this odds calculator is correct, spending 13.9 million on tickets to ensure a win isn't all that far fetched (although it is a bit silly)
its probably a result of childhood memory glorification on the guy buying all possible numbers. someone did something crazy like spending way too much money on the lottery and won it.
I always questioned the legitimacy of state lotteries. How can it be that jackpots rollover to such huge amounts with the amount of people playing? In Florida, when i was young, i remember atleast one "rich" person who bought a ticket for every possible combination, just so he could say he won. Nowadays it seems most people have the machines automatically pick numbers. How do we know that these machines have equal odds at selecting every sequence? I doubt they do, which leads to these balloned jackpots of 60-100 million and more, which in turn brings more people out of the woodworks hoping to strike it rich, and then the state just again reaps the rewards. Until someone wins, and they end up receiving only a fraction of the "jackpot" for various reasons.
State lottery is such a scam. I'm glad to say I've never bought a single ticket. The state pocketing the rest.
well it's also not money that brings a person to work for a non-profit in the first place (usually). It's some agreement with the goals of the organization. How cool would it be if Debian could say, "yeah, we got hacked, but we caught the bastard ourselves and prosecuted."
Let me remind you, this is the kind of B.S. that can happen when you rely on proprietary software (I'm guessing that FreeDOS and friends do rely on MS standards in order to maintain compatibility with MS-DOS programs). Someone can pull the rug right out from under you whenever they want to.
So MS is going to nickle and dime people to death. Who would have guessed...
Leads? I'll just check with the boys back at the crime lab. They got 3 more detectives working on the case. They got us working in shifts!
-The Big Lebowski
Seriously though, I would hope that organizations like Debian or Gentoo would have the brain power and tech resources to find a few leads that results in arrests. But why do I doubt that anyone will ever be arrested for any of these types of attacks?
Oh and finally spam makes money. TONS AND TONS of money. hundreds of thousands of dollars profit a month usually run by 3-4 guys
From who, seriously? Is the money comming from sale of illegal goods? Or is legal goods? I still don't see how spammers make money. Is it from people hiring their services? If so, do those people hiring spammers make money?
Don't start batting the "racist" word about like it's a ping pong ball. "Regionalist" would be more appropriate, but of course you wanted mod points, and what better way than by calling the slashdot editors racist.
Rich Taylor, an MPAA spokesman, said the lawsuit is misguided because the reason for the ban was "to reduce piracy and to preserve the motion picture industry for filmmakers, both large and small."
What a numbscull. He never stopped to think that the ban was misguided. We can only expect such responses I guess.
and my point is that they are not two separate things because those pushing you to DRM platforms are the same people pushing the legislation.
so the theoretical stance that the technology is fine is a thin thread to walk upon, and should be discarded as a real argument since DRM technology exists as a means to pass legislation which would legalize abuses by the corporations developing DRM in the first place.
!thhp ...tnemnrevog gib
but saying "DRM is fine", doesn't address the coupling that has been made between DRM and legislation. In popular media, they are all but one in the same. Companies pushing DRM products are pushing legislation that legalizes their intrusion into something you own. Legalizing that intrusion locks the manufacturer into your system as a neccesary componant.
So don't play the "technically, DRM is fine" card. While it very well may be fine, the statement is misrepresentative of the real problem and abstracts away too much information.
same reason people will pay for redhat enterprise solutions, i imagine. support if the sh*t hits the fan.