... if you write a piece of code for a project with a specific functionality that is requested and you finish it and the requested functionality for your piece of code has changed, then you have still written the code that was "asked" for.
If it is a problem with the fact that time changes, code changes, goals changes then fork the project, otherwise keep up the spirit and evolve with the project.
I don't think I've ever worked on a project where the end goal has been the same for anybody, small differences here and there and then the never ending "if we have this feataure, then we can do..." and so on and then the projects evolve beyond the initial project goal... aka. "evolution".
I can't see what the problem is, yes the DBI's life in wine is a rather difficult thing, but the changes of the overall project be it open source or in the future a more commercially oriented organizational structure and environment, then it is still a piece of code in the project that is needed, from what I can understand. Commercial or not, then wine is a good thing and if the chief maintainer goes commercial, then a lot of developers would most likely abandon the project and move on to other tings or as you say fork the project.
Either way, I don't see the problem as being the maintainer, but rather an piece of evolutionary jump for the project. Wine has been very slow to gain momentum and for me the only program I use it for (or rather will) is VMWare Infrastructure Client, but not being a great hacker with the knowledge to hack wine, I'm waiting, more or less patiently:-) I'll gladly pay for wine (or the the possible fork) when it is supported to get rid of a virtual machine just to run that program.
As it is now, I think it is way out in the future, open source or commercial, so either way the problem for me seems more like an evlutionary bump in the road than a time for a fork.
Is it early monday morning and I've missed the point or is it a minor problem?
Somebody might be able to ensure some sort or of public/private keypair cryptology between the SMTP servers to encrypt the message-id or what other information is used to say "this is the message you can fetch for user X". Possibly a publicly signed key, somewhat like the current SSL-certificate signing.
That way the only "change" to the SMTP protocol would be
- fetching the message from the receiving SMTP server that would normally just receive everything
- some encryption based on the MX record validity/certificicate signing to ensure the correct receiver fetches the mail
I don't think that it would be a big issue or problem to implement.
Well either sign/encrypt the message with the receivers key or just make the SMTP protocol fetch the mail from the MX server that is says it comes from, this will make sure that approx. 90% of all spam will never reach you inbox since they need to have a valid MX record for the mail to orriginate from.
To day the SMTP protocol goes like this:
userA@sub1.example.com sends a mail from a spoofing SMTP server at some arbitrary IP address to someuser@sub2.example.com, the sub2 SMTP server receives everything from SMTP server from the IP address, "thinking" it is from SMTP at sub1 and puts it in the inbox of someuser@sub2.example.com.
If it was "reverse"-SMTP then it would be like this:
The spoofing SMTP sever at some IP sends a mail for userA@sub1.example.com to someuser@sub2.example.com. The SMTP server at sub2 gets the inital handshake from the spoofing SMPT IP server and then, according to the senders email address eg. the "From:" tag, contacts the MX SMTP server for that email address to fetch the actual mail. Since the SMTP server for sub1 does not have the mail that is being sent by the spoofing SMTP server, the SMTP transaction is dropped and the mail never reaches the inbox of someuser@sub2.example.com.
Simple solution to a major problem. No valid MX record for the spoofed email disables the spammer from sending a spoofed email.
It will make it easier to track down spammers since they need an actual domain with an MX record, but it does not, however, solve the problem with fake domain registrations for MX records or hacked DNS records (I'm thinking demographic information (name, address, contact information etc.) But as I understand then work is in progress to make this better... or perhaps not, might just be a dream I had:-)
I never got that ZZ or:wq thing that I see a lot of coworkes use? I always use:w when I've made or finished a sentence and:x to quit and save. Rarely the:q! option. I think it comes from the old unstable network days at the dorm in the late '90... I must be getting old or something like that:x
Don't take this the wrong way, but I laughed out loud when I read you comment, I feel the same way about the MC editor (and any other for that matter:w appears often when I'm in a GUI program). CLI + VI(M) and you have all you need. Gnome/KDE is only for having mulitple terminals open on one screen - great for log-watching when developing.
MC does not take up the 1.4 Mb + shared libs + Gnome or N Mb + shared libs + KDE , which by the way only works if you have X also.
The 100% customizable build-in menu at the touch of a finger (F2) and of course file-extension feature works great - better than KDE or Gnomes version of the file-extension association lists... that don't work in all programs anyway.7
And it is almost as fast and versatile as the CLI. "Pure" CLI is still faster if you know the way around you keyboard...
And most of all no stupid mouse you have to reach out for when you want to view(F2)/edit(F3), copy(F5) or move(F6) a file (+ many more), the only thing you have to do is to reach an inch or a bit more depending on your keyboard and you got your action. When you do "system administration" work at the terminal then the mouse is not really an option. If you don't believe me then give it a few weeks of testing. All there is to it, that goes for any and all GUI applications, is _not_ to use the mouse if there is a keyboard shortcut, including getting to menu items etc. It won't take you long to figure out that you loose time with the mouse, in just about any thing that is not drawing or moving windows around your desktop. GUI = pretty pictures and tennis elbow, CLI = the fastest (also the choice that you need the most knowledge about GNU utilities to use), MC = CLI made easy and you get "free" visualisation of the filesystem.
If you aren't used to the CLI or the approx. 1000 "default" GNU utilities that comes with a default GNU/*nix installation that enables you to do just about anything you can thing of, excluding what your girlfriend can do, if you have one, then MC is the best way to get things done, fast and easy.
And of course, nostalgia from the "good" old DOS days where Norton Commander and DOS Navigator (some old MIT/russian NC clone that is much better than both NC and any NC clone I've run across, including MC).
I've got a Dell X1 weighing in on 1140 grams according to the specs... battery time is not something that is recommended but then I don't use it much outdoors anyways.
60 gig of (normal) hdd and 1280megs of ram for the small fee of about $3k almost 2 years ago... and it runs Gentoo and hasn't failed once... yet that is
If you are referring to the code you write, then the same applies. If it didn't, then vast swathes of MS source code would be open now, as any employee who left the company would be able to release anything they wrote into the PD.
This is only true if it's stated in your contract !
If you contract does not specificaly mention that you are hired to make/create program/programs for the company then you own the code that you write, but if the contract specifies otherwise then the company owns the code you have written.
On the other hand, if you are hired by a company to create a specific program or work on a specific program then only the code that is related to that program is the company's property all other code is yours.
I worked (still do) for a company where my initial job and contract was as a student misc-helper and not a programmer, but ended up programming full time. The company now claims that they own the code, but they don't because it's not in any contract.
Hence, if not specificaly specified by a contract then you own what ever code you write, at work or not. This is also why large corporations have so much "small print" in your contract and, aparent, harsh security policies when it comes to system access as mentioned in the article.
Point well taken but still not "accepted", since it's a very, very american way of thinking, the DMCA, DRM et.al., do not have any faith in the consumer. I mentioned it with the buy/rent example. Neigther does politicians who actually "creates" the laws... wonder what all those expense accounts at the big coorporations are for !
Trust is no longer something that comes naturally to people anymore. In the old days - my old days and I'm only 29 years old - trust was assumed to exist between people. The fall of the Wall in '89 has effectivly put a slow stop to that with the international political and military bullying the US has put into the world (another storie for some other time). Most western countries have adopted a lot of "the american way" including the law-passing spirit. The patent laws are almost just as stupid and non friendly for the consomer as DRM et.al.
It used to be implied what was and what was not illegal in some ares that were gowernd by some very large, broad and non specific law and rules, but now everything has been put into law, and enforced by EOLA's and licenses when a product is bought by a consumer.
It is no longer the consumer that controls the market, it's the big coorporations that are able to push for the most non-liberal and conservative laws that will only help them on the "free market" that they create and control through the money flow to the politicians.
If the implementations of DRM can be cracked then they will and people will do just that, just like everybody runing a pirate version of M$ Windows... which M$ is very aware of, since that particular pirazy, for them, is not hurting them, just the opposite. Perhaps there is one good thing with DRM... it will prevent pirazy of windows and allow non M$ OS'es to be more dominant on the market... perhaps my favorite:-)
When it comes to stupid laws, the US rules. When it comes to what consumers want we will have to wait until consumers get so tired of big coorporatios that civilization will revert to the 1900's and start using the head instead of a keyboard. IMHO that will happen of we will get a world like Brazil, Blade Runner or The Fifth Element... large cooprorations that control the world.
IMHO DRM is evil, just like stupidity, taxes, and religion (in what ever order).
And just FYI, there is a very good and versatile media player (DVD, vmw, mpegN etc.) for non M$ OS'es - it's called mplayer... there is even a DVD-player with mplayer inside - even though they don't comply with mplayer's license, but that is another story, IIRC it's called KISS or something like that.
Because of the quotes you needed to put around "fair use".
I did not know that Fair Use was the actual term (I'm not from the US) - so it was more to make sure that "fair use" was understood the right way, which you did:-)
Intel is NOT supporting fair use. Intel is supporting DRM that PROHIBITS Fair Use, Intel is supporting a position and expectation that people engaging in Fair Use be IMPRISONED.
Well, DRM is not Fair Use in anybodys oppinion, only the politicians, but what do they know? Not much from what I see and hear when they talk about IT. But Intel is actually trying to bend what DRM actually does, allow for more than one install of a piece of software, office and home.
What I want is for INNOCENT people not to FACE PRISON for staying within the bounds of what is noninfringing under copyright law.
Or do you think a 12 year old girl should go to prison for including a small clip from something in some class project? Intel's position certainly doesn't allow her to do that. Intel's position is that she is expected to go to prison for up to five years if she does that. Oh, and just in case it wasn't obvious already, a student including a small clip of something in a class project *is* *not* *copyright infringment*. It is Fair Use.
You don't get to make up what is and is not included in Fair Use. The courts decide what is Fair use, and Intel wants to prohibit Fair Use.
No, I don't want "young 12 year old girls" to go to prisson, but they wont because theire parents and perhaps the school will be responsible for "her" actions. And with DRM you won't be able to copy/past content from DRM protected content... that's the whole point of DRM - keep the content where the vendor wants it to be - only on the computer that has been allowed to (dis)play the content. Your point, though well understood, is implausible by the very nature of DRM.
And yes, it is really comming to the point in commerce where you don't buy but rent what you pay for - for which I'm very sad since I want to own my computer and be able to do with it as I please. Also one of the reasons I'm in for the F/OSS trying to make the big coorporations open up theire designs and software for the chips they make so improvements can be made by everyone and not just them.
If ever a F/OSS hardware computer get to market (all open and free design) under the GPL, you'll see me at the doors to be the first buyer of that computer - regardless of the performance, it can only improve... especially without DRM !
How can a major player on the international market who oppenly wants "fair use" support in the "new" DVD-hardware be a bad thing? I mean, if you don't like Intel pushing for at least "fair use" support in the hardware then what do you want? Do you want to be able to make further installs beyond what you are allowed to by DRM (that's only one install) or don't you like that a huge firm actually tries to do some good instead of what M$ wants (total DRM control of every machine)?
If it ends up with Intel, AMD, IBM, ARM, et.al. only producing DRM hardware then I'll stay with my current hardware (I'm not a gamer). I'd rather wait an extra second/minute/hour for some piece of software to do it's processing than being robbed of my rights given to me by eons of trade traditions and by law when I buy hardware or software - If I don't own what I buy then why am I paying for it as if I an buying it and not renting it under some strange company's oppinion of what I can and cannot do with it???
I am a huge fan of F/OSS, but never ever will I buy hardware that only works with DRM or software for that matter. Might I add that I havn't bought a piece of software since '97 when I made a total switch to GNU/Linux!
By the way, DRM stands for Dumb, Ridiculous Monopoly.
Does anyone in the US have, what we in Europe call, Common Sence???
I think that all the legislative work in the US is becoming too much. Why does anyone want to make legislation on what's on a CD/DVD?
In worst case the US will be a place where you talk to a lawyer about how you can create a CD/DVD without breaking any laws...
If the US makes one law about sex or rather sex related to public material eg. books, posters, movies (et. al.) and games and what have you, that you can buy in a store that states that you have to be over 15 (don't recall the minimum age for entering into "adulthood" in the US).
It't would be a lot easier for us in the "east" to figure out why a movie that shows a naked leg is PG-13 rated (or what the censorship is for nudity).... most non US movies don't get clasified as p0rn if there are a nude person or people in it.
My main reason for "complaining" is that what happens in the US is being copied here in our country,Denmark, where people used to be able to talk to each other without caling the police to settle a dispute... we don't even have the "self defence" thing where you have the "right" to shoot an uninvited "guest" in you home.
And our, danish, politicians invited the freaking terrorist Bush the other day and shut down the roads so I had to drive 45km (apx. 30mp) extra to get to the other side of the highway (I live between to off/on ramps 1km apart) and the danish police put in 10k (tenthousand) man-hours to "protect" that stupid imbecil of a president who don't even know that imports comes from outside the country... hence the word import.
ahhhhh.... common sence, especially when there are kids around will make the world a better place to live in instead of a place where you can't look to your left because some people made a law agains leftwing politically engaged people... er.. that was a few years back, but anyhows.. I hope that some day common sence will prevail over single minded people that can't see beyond the tip of their noses.
I grew up with MS DOS 3.3 and progressed until Widoze 98 and then switched to GNU/Linux. I had a period whith 98 where I wanted to test power saving, but it always made the programs and network unstable or useless. So I don't use it... besides the few seconds that it takes a computer to "come back to life" and then to be rebooted is not worth my time when I need my computer... and with encrypted wireless pcmcia it is utterly useless.
But there are some good in the screen controll, but I need the screen to be on all the time else I can't see what happens or who writes on ICQ/MSN... just hearing a sound is annoying, if you know what I mean... need to know what is going on "out there":-)
Well, to get the facts straight you need to know what you are talking about. Mobile phones are prohibited because the GSM network can handle a mobile that connects to 1 or 5 GSM accesspoints (antennas) - they can figure out which one is the master recieve and the others will "ignore" the signal.
When you are in an areoplane the signal from your mobile will travel up towards 50 miles (+/- depending on altitude) and you will connect with hundreds of GSM accesspoints. This is where the problems come in. The GSM backbone cannot, since the signal is traveling so fast, figure out which accesspoint is to be the master, and you will in a sence overload the system.
The bluetooth signal is not powerfull enough to create disturbances in electronics that are more than about 1 foot away from the broadcast antenna, even though it sends at 2.41 ghz... think about your laptop - if bluetooth could interrupt signals don't you think that your laptop would stop working as soon as you turn on bluetooth !!!
I thought that everybody knew the facts about why mobiles etc. are prohibited on areoplanes... Laptops, and other electronics of that kind, are not allowed to be on/used during takeoff and landing, because of your safety, not the plane.
I heard that it was 63% ! But then, if we don't know the real made up number I'll go with Churchill's statictics "I never trust a statistics that I havn't made my self" (or something like that):-)
I'll move to the moon if they pattent then number "42". That would effectively make them own the universe and everything... well, you know, they'll be able to collect royalties from everything.
A *nix box does not require as much tender care as a MS box, which is why I don't consider it a daily chore like the MS box and did not put it in my comment !!!
But if I must then yes, you are 100% correct about keeping the *nix box up to date as well, since no software is flawless...
I'll be more specific next time, even though it was my first time/. post and all:-)
When working with *nix you usualy only have to do an initial setup of the server to get it working in a production enviroment, while you have to spend daily time with an MS server to keep it up to date and keep it from crashing.
In my experience prouctivity is 5-10% *nix time and 90-95% MS time - that is not a good thing when you have to talk about TCO.
Only reason for using MS is ignorant marketing people that don't dare take a chance with FOSS because "MS products work out of the box"....
IMHO and experience, that is, a *nix server is cheaper in the long run vs. a MS server. Sorry that I don't have any factual budget to back my experience up, besides my own time spent on *nix vs. MS machines, which many of my friends and coleagues also share.
Slashdot Mirror
There is teamviewer which is a similar option as well, and free for non commercial use.
... if you write a piece of code for a project with a specific functionality that is requested and you finish it and the requested functionality for your piece of code has changed, then you have still written the code that was "asked" for.
..." and so on and then the projects evolve beyond the initial project goal... aka. "evolution".
:-) I'll gladly pay for wine (or the the possible fork) when it is supported to get rid of a virtual machine just to run that program.
If it is a problem with the fact that time changes, code changes, goals changes then fork the project, otherwise keep up the spirit and evolve with the project.
I don't think I've ever worked on a project where the end goal has been the same for anybody, small differences here and there and then the never ending "if we have this feataure, then we can do
I can't see what the problem is, yes the DBI's life in wine is a rather difficult thing, but the changes of the overall project be it open source or in the future a more commercially oriented organizational structure and environment, then it is still a piece of code in the project that is needed, from what I can understand. Commercial or not, then wine is a good thing and if the chief maintainer goes commercial, then a lot of developers would most likely abandon the project and move on to other tings or as you say fork the project.
Either way, I don't see the problem as being the maintainer, but rather an piece of evolutionary jump for the project. Wine has been very slow to gain momentum and for me the only program I use it for (or rather will) is VMWare Infrastructure Client, but not being a great hacker with the knowledge to hack wine, I'm waiting, more or less patiently
As it is now, I think it is way out in the future, open source or commercial, so either way the problem for me seems more like an evlutionary bump in the road than a time for a fork.
Is it early monday morning and I've missed the point or is it a minor problem?
Somebody might be able to ensure some sort or of public/private keypair cryptology between the SMTP servers to encrypt the message-id or what other information is used to say "this is the message you can fetch for user X". Possibly a publicly signed key, somewhat like the current SSL-certificate signing.
That way the only "change" to the SMTP protocol would be
- fetching the message from the receiving SMTP server that would normally just receive everything
- some encryption based on the MX record validity/certificicate signing to ensure the correct receiver fetches the mail
I don't think that it would be a big issue or problem to implement.
Well either sign/encrypt the message with the receivers key or just make the SMTP protocol fetch the mail from the MX server that is says it comes from, this will make sure that approx. 90% of all spam will never reach you inbox since they need to have a valid MX record for the mail to orriginate from.
To day the SMTP protocol goes like this:
userA@sub1.example.com sends a mail from a spoofing SMTP server at some arbitrary IP address to someuser@sub2.example.com, the sub2 SMTP server receives everything from SMTP server from the IP address, "thinking" it is from SMTP at sub1 and puts it in the inbox of someuser@sub2.example.com.
If it was "reverse"-SMTP then it would be like this:
The spoofing SMTP sever at some IP sends a mail for userA@sub1.example.com to someuser@sub2.example.com.
The SMTP server at sub2 gets the inital handshake from the spoofing SMPT IP server and then, according to the senders email address eg. the "From:" tag, contacts the MX SMTP server for that email address to fetch the actual mail.
Since the SMTP server for sub1 does not have the mail that is being sent by the spoofing SMTP server, the SMTP transaction is dropped and the mail never reaches the inbox of someuser@sub2.example.com.
Simple solution to a major problem. No valid MX record for the spoofed email disables the spammer from sending a spoofed email.
It will make it easier to track down spammers since they need an actual domain with an MX record, but it does not, however, solve the problem with fake domain registrations for MX records or hacked DNS records (I'm thinking demographic information (name, address, contact information etc.) But as I understand then work is in progress to make this better... or perhaps not, might just be a dream I had :-)
I never got that ZZ or :wq thing that I see a lot of coworkes use? I always use :w when I've made or finished a sentence and :x to quit and save. Rarely the :q! option. I think it comes from the old unstable network days at the dorm in the late '90... I must be getting old or something like that:x
Don't take this the wrong way, but I laughed out loud when I read you comment, I feel the same way about the MC editor (and any other for that matter :w appears often when I'm in a GUI program). CLI + VI(M) and you have all you need. Gnome/KDE is only for having mulitple terminals open on one screen - great for log-watching when developing.
You don't need X, all you need is a terminal.
MC does not take up the 1.4 Mb + shared libs + Gnome or N Mb + shared libs + KDE , which by the way only works if you have X also.
The 100% customizable build-in menu at the touch of a finger (F2) and of course file-extension feature works great - better than KDE or Gnomes version of the file-extension association lists... that don't work in all programs anyway.7
And it is almost as fast and versatile as the CLI. "Pure" CLI is still faster if you know the way around you keyboard...
And most of all no stupid mouse you have to reach out for when you want to view(F2)/edit(F3), copy(F5) or move(F6) a file (+ many more), the only thing you have to do is to reach an inch or a bit more depending on your keyboard and you got your action. When you do "system administration" work at the terminal then the mouse is not really an option.
If you don't believe me then give it a few weeks of testing. All there is to it, that goes for any and all GUI applications, is _not_ to use the mouse if there is a keyboard shortcut, including getting to menu items etc. It won't take you long to figure out that you loose time with the mouse, in just about any thing that is not drawing or moving windows around your desktop.
GUI = pretty pictures and tennis elbow, CLI = the fastest (also the choice that you need the most knowledge about GNU utilities to use), MC = CLI made easy and you get "free" visualisation of the filesystem.
If you aren't used to the CLI or the approx. 1000 "default" GNU utilities that comes with a default GNU/*nix installation that enables you to do just about anything you can thing of, excluding what your girlfriend can do, if you have one, then MC is the best way to get things done, fast and easy.
And of course, nostalgia from the "good" old DOS days where Norton Commander and DOS Navigator (some old MIT/russian NC clone that is much better than both NC and any NC clone I've run across, including MC).
I've got a Dell X1 weighing in on 1140 grams according to the specs... battery time is not something that is recommended but then I don't use it much outdoors anyways.
60 gig of (normal) hdd and 1280megs of ram for the small fee of about $3k almost 2 years ago... and it runs Gentoo and hasn't failed once... yet that is
Keep it, I have lots of them
I, for one, use GNU/Linux and only F/OSS
This is only true if it's stated in your contract !
If you contract does not specificaly mention that you are hired to make/create program/programs for the company then you own the code that you write, but if the contract specifies otherwise then the company owns the code you have written.
On the other hand, if you are hired by a company to create a specific program or work on a specific program then only the code that is related to that program is the company's property all other code is yours.
I worked (still do) for a company where my initial job and contract was as a student misc-helper and not a programmer, but ended up programming full time. The company now claims that they own the code, but they don't because it's not in any contract.
Hence, if not specificaly specified by a contract then you own what ever code you write, at work or not. This is also why large corporations have so much "small print" in your contract and, aparent, harsh security policies when it comes to system access as mentioned in the article.
Trust is no longer something that comes naturally to people anymore. In the old days - my old days and I'm only 29 years old - trust was assumed to exist between people. The fall of the Wall in '89 has effectivly put a slow stop to that with the international political and military bullying the US has put into the world (another storie for some other time). Most western countries have adopted a lot of "the american way" including the law-passing spirit. The patent laws are almost just as stupid and non friendly for the consomer as DRM et.al.
It used to be implied what was and what was not illegal in some ares that were gowernd by some very large, broad and non specific law and rules, but now everything has been put into law, and enforced by EOLA's and licenses when a product is bought by a consumer.
It is no longer the consumer that controls the market, it's the big coorporations that are able to push for the most non-liberal and conservative laws that will only help them on the "free market" that they create and control through the money flow to the politicians.
If the implementations of DRM can be cracked then they will and people will do just that, just like everybody runing a pirate version of M$ Windows... which M$ is very aware of, since that particular pirazy, for them, is not hurting them, just the opposite. Perhaps there is one good thing with DRM... it will prevent pirazy of windows and allow non M$ OS'es to be more dominant on the market... perhaps my favorite :-)
When it comes to stupid laws, the US rules. When it comes to what consumers want we will have to wait until consumers get so tired of big coorporatios that civilization will revert to the 1900's and start using the head instead of a keyboard. IMHO that will happen of we will get a world like Brazil, Blade Runner or The Fifth Element... large cooprorations that control the world.
IMHO DRM is evil, just like stupidity, taxes, and religion (in what ever order).
And just FYI, there is a very good and versatile media player (DVD, vmw, mpegN etc.) for non M$ OS'es - it's called mplayer... there is even a DVD-player with mplayer inside - even though they don't comply with mplayer's license, but that is another story, IIRC it's called KISS or something like that.
I did not know that Fair Use was the actual term (I'm not from the US) - so it was more to make sure that "fair use" was understood the right way, which you did :-)
Intel is NOT supporting fair use. Intel is supporting DRM that PROHIBITS Fair Use, Intel is supporting a position and expectation that people engaging in Fair Use be IMPRISONED.
Well, DRM is not Fair Use in anybodys oppinion, only the politicians, but what do they know? Not much from what I see and hear when they talk about IT. But Intel is actually trying to bend what DRM actually does, allow for more than one install of a piece of software, office and home.
What I want is for INNOCENT people not to FACE PRISON for staying within the bounds of what is noninfringing under copyright law. Or do you think a 12 year old girl should go to prison for including a small clip from something in some class project? Intel's position certainly doesn't allow her to do that. Intel's position is that she is expected to go to prison for up to five years if she does that. Oh, and just in case it wasn't obvious already, a student including a small clip of something in a class project *is* *not* *copyright infringment*. It is Fair Use. You don't get to make up what is and is not included in Fair Use. The courts decide what is Fair use, and Intel wants to prohibit Fair Use.
No, I don't want "young 12 year old girls" to go to prisson, but they wont because theire parents and perhaps the school will be responsible for "her" actions. And with DRM you won't be able to copy/past content from DRM protected content... that's the whole point of DRM - keep the content where the vendor wants it to be - only on the computer that has been allowed to (dis)play the content. Your point, though well understood, is implausible by the very nature of DRM.
And yes, it is really comming to the point in commerce where you don't buy but rent what you pay for - for which I'm very sad since I want to own my computer and be able to do with it as I please. Also one of the reasons I'm in for the F/OSS trying to make the big coorporations open up theire designs and software for the chips they make so improvements can be made by everyone and not just them. ... especially without DRM !
If ever a F/OSS hardware computer get to market (all open and free design) under the GPL, you'll see me at the doors to be the first buyer of that computer - regardless of the performance, it can only improve
If it ends up with Intel, AMD, IBM, ARM, et.al. only producing DRM hardware then I'll stay with my current hardware (I'm not a gamer). I'd rather wait an extra second/minute/hour for some piece of software to do it's processing than being robbed of my rights given to me by eons of trade traditions and by law when I buy hardware or software - If I don't own what I buy then why am I paying for it as if I an buying it and not renting it under some strange company's oppinion of what I can and cannot do with it???
I am a huge fan of F/OSS, but never ever will I buy hardware that only works with DRM or software for that matter. Might I add that I havn't bought a piece of software since '97 when I made a total switch to GNU/Linux!
By the way, DRM stands for Dumb, Ridiculous Monopoly.
I think that all the legislative work in the US is becoming too much. Why does anyone want to make legislation on what's on a CD/DVD?
In worst case the US will be a place where you talk to a lawyer about how you can create a CD/DVD without breaking any laws...
If the US makes one law about sex or rather sex related to public material eg. books, posters, movies (et. al.) and games and what have you, that you can buy in a store that states that you have to be over 15 (don't recall the minimum age for entering into "adulthood" in the US).
It't would be a lot easier for us in the "east" to figure out why a movie that shows a naked leg is PG-13 rated (or what the censorship is for nudity).... most non US movies don't get clasified as p0rn if there are a nude person or people in it.
My main reason for "complaining" is that what happens in the US is being copied here in our country,Denmark, where people used to be able to talk to each other without caling the police to settle a dispute... we don't even have the "self defence" thing where you have the "right" to shoot an uninvited "guest" in you home.
And our, danish, politicians invited the freaking terrorist Bush the other day and shut down the roads so I had to drive 45km (apx. 30mp) extra to get to the other side of the highway (I live between to off/on ramps 1km apart) and the danish police put in 10k (tenthousand) man-hours to "protect" that stupid imbecil of a president who don't even know that imports comes from outside the country... hence the word import.
ahhhhh.... common sence, especially when there are kids around will make the world a better place to live in instead of a place where you can't look to your left because some people made a law agains leftwing politically engaged people... er.. that was a few years back, but anyhows.. I hope that some day common sence will prevail over single minded people that can't see beyond the tip of their noses.
I grew up with MS DOS 3.3 and progressed until Widoze 98 and then switched to GNU/Linux. I had a period whith 98 where I wanted to test power saving, but it always made the programs and network unstable or useless. So I don't use it... besides the few seconds that it takes a computer to "come back to life" and then to be rebooted is not worth my time when I need my computer... and with encrypted wireless pcmcia it is utterly useless.
:-)
But there are some good in the screen controll, but I need the screen to be on all the time else I can't see what happens or who writes on ICQ/MSN... just hearing a sound is annoying, if you know what I mean... need to know what is going on "out there"
When you are in an areoplane the signal from your mobile will travel up towards 50 miles (+/- depending on altitude) and you will connect with hundreds of GSM accesspoints. This is where the problems come in. The GSM backbone cannot, since the signal is traveling so fast, figure out which accesspoint is to be the master, and you will in a sence overload the system.
The bluetooth signal is not powerfull enough to create disturbances in electronics that are more than about 1 foot away from the broadcast antenna, even though it sends at 2.41 ghz... think about your laptop - if bluetooth could interrupt signals don't you think that your laptop would stop working as soon as you turn on bluetooth !!!
I thought that everybody knew the facts about why mobiles etc. are prohibited on areoplanes... Laptops, and other electronics of that kind, are not allowed to be on/used during takeoff and landing, because of your safety, not the plane.
The origianl developer left the company and the code is so obscure that the rest of the developers at M$ can't continue the work on IE.
I heard that it was 63% ! But then, if we don't know the real made up number I'll go with Churchill's statictics "I never trust a statistics that I havn't made my self" (or something like that) :-)
I'll move to the moon if they pattent then number "42". That would effectively make them own the universe and everything... well, you know, they'll be able to collect royalties from everything.
But if I must then yes, you are 100% correct about keeping the *nix box up to date as well, since no software is flawless...
I'll be more specific next time, even though it was my first time /. post and all :-)
In my experience prouctivity is 5-10% *nix time and 90-95% MS time - that is not a good thing when you have to talk about TCO.
Only reason for using MS is ignorant marketing people that don't dare take a chance with FOSS because "MS products work out of the box"....
IMHO and experience, that is, a *nix server is cheaper in the long run vs. a MS server. Sorry that I don't have any factual budget to back my experience up, besides my own time spent on *nix vs. MS machines, which many of my friends and coleagues also share.