Most of their problems have been in old code they're undoubtedly afraid to change until it's proven there's actually a vulnerability there. I haven't hard anything to indicate their fresh code produced since adopting their current security process is any more insecure than the stuff produced by the open source world.
Java is a compiled into an intermediate form just like any other compiled language. The key difference is the JIT transforms it into native code at runtime rather than an additional compilation stage translating the intermediate form produced by a C or C++ compiler into native code.
What does Paul Allen himself make? I think he just bankrolls research and has the resulting patents assigned to him. I'm not sure who you could countersue there. If the patents are valid, he's probably got them all by the balls.
That's already been done. The thing people bitch about is they didn't get a direct license but an irrevocable promise not to sue. Now the claim is they'll sell their patents on their own technology so some other company can sue. It's not like that would send EVERYONE running away from not only Mono but Microsoft's.NET as well...
I'm pretty sure both companies have quite a heavy corporate presence in the US. If they don't want to deal with our courts, they should get out perhaps?
Microsoft actually has two of them (the M and Windows logo) and both are pretty big. Between them there's 33 websites so I'd actually assume a lot of other sites are ripping off their favicons (the M and the Windows logo).
The US trying to hold him accountable for breaking our laws, when he didnt commit the crimes here, or break into any computers here is akin to a Muslim country holding your mother responsible for not wearing a burqa.
I'm not sure outing hundreds of Afghans as "the enemy" for cooperating with NATO forces and putting their lives, the lives of their families, the lives of anyone with a similar name and the lives of the families of anyone with a similar name is comparible to someone's mother not wearing a burqa.
Mr Assange and his organization has essentially handed the names of people aiding international forces over to the Taliban since they were apparently too lazy to comb through them and remove the names of Afghanis. There's probably people combing through the documents even now compiling the list so they can be found and murdered as an example to those who would cooperate with their enemy. Wikileaks through pure laziness has put bullseyes on the heads of hundreds of Afghanis and their families.
Re:I think Google should solve this the easy way
on
The Case For Oracle
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I don't know why anyone ever suggests this. It would be suicide for Google. The moment they revealed they would even consider blocking search terms in retaliation for anything they're no longer trustworthy as a search engine.
A 1982 model could move itself with just 70 hp and many could get 50 mpg on the highway compared to the Camry's 29. Sounds like we're advancing in the wrong direction to me.
That would be incorrect. That's also only the preamble.
If a patent would prevent you from distributing a work without additional limitations incompatible with the GPL, you may not distribute the work under the GPL. Sun had to license their patents to anyone using the original work or derivatives of the work or they simply couldn't use the GPL. What they meant in the preamble is that there will be no selling licenses to individual distributors. Anyone who distributes the GPLed work is licensed or nobody is.
They do NOT have to license their patents to everyone for works that do not derive from sources they've released, however.
We recommend that customers follow the guidance provided in the Security Advisory, making note of mitigations and tested workarounds. We will continue to investigate the vulnerability and, upon completion of that investigation, we will take appropriate action to protect our customers.
So they'll fix or it not fix it once they've complete their investigation of the problem.... sounds about right.
The Kin was not a smartphone. I'd suggest Verizon probably did most of the killing by requiring a full smartphone data plan for a phone that was more of a beefed up feature phone.
x86-64 can only address 48-bits and Windows only addresses 44-bits (16 TB). The Windows limitation is interesting because no windows release to date can even touch that address limitation.
My best guess would be that OS releases are artificially limited to the amount of memory they actually test internally against. Home Premium probably doesn't get serious testing beyond 16GB while Ultimate might get tested against 192GB workstation hardware. High end server releases probably get tested with up to 2TB (probably the maximum amount of hardware available at time of testing). 32-bit desktops probably don't even get tested with PAE enabled at all since chances are desktop hardware drivers will crash and burn so they get a 4GB limit.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 was not and was never intended to be amended by the First Amendment so yeah it probably trumps the First Amendment. It's why Fair Use was codified into law in order to make a compromise between the two rights.
The idea is for IE9 you'll be running the same code as for Firefox, Chrome and Safari... then you only have to worry about the other IEs until they die off.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of their problems have been in old code they're undoubtedly afraid to change until it's proven there's actually a vulnerability there. I haven't hard anything to indicate their fresh code produced since adopting their current security process is any more insecure than the stuff produced by the open source world.
Java is a compiled into an intermediate form just like any other compiled language. The key difference is the JIT transforms it into native code at runtime rather than an additional compilation stage translating the intermediate form produced by a C or C++ compiler into native code.
What does Paul Allen himself make? I think he just bankrolls research and has the resulting patents assigned to him. I'm not sure who you could countersue there. If the patents are valid, he's probably got them all by the balls.
That's already been done. The thing people bitch about is they didn't get a direct license but an irrevocable promise not to sue. Now the claim is they'll sell their patents on their own technology so some other company can sue. It's not like that would send EVERYONE running away from not only Mono but Microsoft's .NET as well...
I'm pretty sure both companies have quite a heavy corporate presence in the US. If they don't want to deal with our courts, they should get out perhaps?
Microsoft actually has two of them (the M and Windows logo) and both are pretty big. Between them there's 33 websites so I'd actually assume a lot of other sites are ripping off their favicons (the M and the Windows logo).
The US trying to hold him accountable for breaking our laws, when he didnt commit the crimes here, or break into any computers here is akin to a Muslim country holding your mother responsible for not wearing a burqa.
I'm not sure outing hundreds of Afghans as "the enemy" for cooperating with NATO forces and putting their lives, the lives of their families, the lives of anyone with a similar name and the lives of the families of anyone with a similar name is comparible to someone's mother not wearing a burqa.
Mr Assange and his organization has essentially handed the names of people aiding international forces over to the Taliban since they were apparently too lazy to comb through them and remove the names of Afghanis. There's probably people combing through the documents even now compiling the list so they can be found and murdered as an example to those who would cooperate with their enemy. Wikileaks through pure laziness has put bullseyes on the heads of hundreds of Afghanis and their families.
I don't know why anyone ever suggests this. It would be suicide for Google. The moment they revealed they would even consider blocking search terms in retaliation for anything they're no longer trustworthy as a search engine.
They were taking webcam photos of students in their bedrooms via the school provided laptops.
A 1982 model could move itself with just 70 hp and many could get 50 mpg on the highway compared to the Camry's 29. Sounds like we're advancing in the wrong direction to me.
That would be incorrect. That's also only the preamble.
If a patent would prevent you from distributing a work without additional limitations incompatible with the GPL, you may not distribute the work under the GPL. Sun had to license their patents to anyone using the original work or derivatives of the work or they simply couldn't use the GPL. What they meant in the preamble is that there will be no selling licenses to individual distributors. Anyone who distributes the GPLed work is licensed or nobody is.
They do NOT have to license their patents to everyone for works that do not derive from sources they've released, however.
The original allegations were made in 2006. It is now 2010 and the guy that framed him is finally being convicted and sentenced.
Until you sign a contract that says it's not true.
Since they were already ordering replacement hardware, it was probably defective or damaged hardware.
"Thank you very much, fixed in the next release. It's going to be a great upgrade that pumps up our quarterly earnings to new heights. Next! "
We recommend that customers follow the guidance provided in the Security Advisory, making note of mitigations and tested workarounds. We will continue to investigate the vulnerability and, upon completion of that investigation, we will take appropriate action to protect our customers.
So they'll fix or it not fix it once they've complete their investigation of the problem.... sounds about right.
4 hours under non-stop heavy use != battery life for typical usage patterns.
The Kin was not a smartphone. I'd suggest Verizon probably did most of the killing by requiring a full smartphone data plan for a phone that was more of a beefed up feature phone.
x86-64 can only address 48-bits and Windows only addresses 44-bits (16 TB). The Windows limitation is interesting because no windows release to date can even touch that address limitation.
My best guess would be that OS releases are artificially limited to the amount of memory they actually test internally against. Home Premium probably doesn't get serious testing beyond 16GB while Ultimate might get tested against 192GB workstation hardware. High end server releases probably get tested with up to 2TB (probably the maximum amount of hardware available at time of testing). 32-bit desktops probably don't even get tested with PAE enabled at all since chances are desktop hardware drivers will crash and burn so they get a 4GB limit.
I don't recall a complete unmodified duplication ever being found to be fair use.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 was not and was never intended to be amended by the First Amendment so yeah it probably trumps the First Amendment. It's why Fair Use was codified into law in order to make a compromise between the two rights.
It isn't necessary to post the entire site unmodified in order to show what her views were so I doubt it's protected under fair use.
They'll block access to Google via the Great Firewall of China.
No, instead of creating demos to show IE is bad, Google researchers just publish zero-day exploit code for Windows.
The idea is for IE9 you'll be running the same code as for Firefox, Chrome and Safari... then you only have to worry about the other IEs until they die off.