I don't know if they've spoken out about it or not (I don't follow the L Party in the least). Have also let my subscription lapse to Reason, so I haven't heard squat from there either.
Just because someone's viewpoint hasn't made the mainstream media doesn't mean they must hold the opposite... (unless, of course, you have an axe to grind)
I disagree. Republicans tend to not like business that deal in porn, etc, things they find morally offensive (however you feel like defining that).
And they certainly like the gov't when its enforcing the things they like.
Not that no unions, business is good, goverment bad is a good overview of libertarian policy either. Gov't isn't bad. Big, over intrusive gov't is bad (if you're a libertarian).
Maybe NANs could put the telephone company out of business.
Doubtful it will put the telco's out of business, but I've always thought that cheap (over public spectrum) wireless is eventually going to be very, very big, and I think 802.XXX is where its going to start.
Like the beginning of ISPs, radio, TV and cable I bet that small, regional Wireless ISPs are going to spring up all over the place (because it doesn't cost all that much money to set up). Some will be non-profit, some will be small for-profit. I think we've just started entering that phase. Eventually the market will mature and there's going to be consolidation as companies start buying each other out, including the big telcos.
This is still good though, because as the tech becomes more refined its going to give traditional telcos, Cell phone companies (who are trying to push G3) a run for their money, and keep them on thier toes.
I'd wager this is the first volley in another push by MS to cover thier asses by legal means. I see another push to make the release of any information that shows weaknesses a criminal activity. Expect lots of flag waving, anti-terrorism rhetoric to be sprinkled throughout, and some suspect demands that seem to be more motivated at gaining market share than protecting machines.
God damn... when did I get so cynical? Oh yeah, after reboot #3 of NT 4.0 today. {grumble grumble grumble}
IMHO, if he was really interested in furthering space exploration, he would have sought to keep the budget as is, or get it increased, and used the cost savings from productivity for more research and exploration.
The reason that he didn't keep the funding at the old level was probably because he couldn't. Remember, congress wasn't exactly NASA's friend for quite a while. They thought of NASA as big, bloated, and a waste of money. Its nice to think he could have just said "hey congress, let us keep our current funding, we'll get better," but that's a wishful thinking. Between the choice of "get less money, show me you aren't a waste of taxpayer money" and "last one turn out the lights" he probably did the best he could.
Open Source software was no guarantee that your software was not written by a professional.
Not only that, but paying for a program doesn't guarantee that it's quality code either. Hell, during the last few years when the market was tight people were hiring friggin anyone to program. I've seen some really shitty, shitty software that people paid a LOT of money for (and I mean software that makes MS's worst look like it was gold plated and bullet proof).
According to the article the reason that the RIAA was pushing this POS was because the new Anti-Terrorism bill (you know, the one that states that hacking=terrorism) would put the Kybosh on the RIAA trying to block people who trade MP3s and such.
I still think the hacking provisions of the anti-terrorist bill stink (and I hope they're sunsetted eventually) but it gives me a nice warm glow to know that they're also causing the RIAA lots of grief.
I can't wait for the first person to sue the RIAA for "terrorism" when they try to port-block someone. I'd even donate some $$$ for the cause.
Didn't Mossad kill someone using a cell phone a few years ago? If I remember correctly they rigged a cellphone with a small explosive device and somehow smuggled it into some organization. When the head honcho made a call from it (and they could confirm it was the guy they wanted)... Boom!
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition...
on
Torvalds Tells All
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Wasn't it actually Jack Trammel who coined the phrase "Business is War?" (I know he took credit for it). Look what he did. Almost killed Commodore and destroyed Atari (snif snif).
Re:Aim Gun, Miss Foot, Collect Check, Reload...
on
EU May Fine Microsoft
·
· Score: 2
In a lot of ways you're right. In fact, I think you hit the nail on the head with the Aim Gun, Miss Foot, Reload bit. And that's the point I guess I was trying to get at.
Yes, Microsoft has dodged some bullets, but I wonder if it was out of brilliance or just dumb luck (I would less of the first and more of the second). The fact that they *keep* reloading and aiming for thier foot -- to me -- says that one of these days they're going to hit the target, which in this case may be the EU fine (should it ever come to be. They may dodge that one too).
Had Microsoft (Gates in particular) not shot his mouth off on national TV the day that Microsoft signed the concent agreement with the Gov't in the early 90s one wonders whether the Gov't would have gone after MS a second time (or at least as hard as they did) (I remember reading somewhere that the DOJ were livid after seeing Gates say "This will not effect MS business practices in the least" right after the agreement).
Remember, the first anti-trust investigation hardly played at all in the mainstream press. Gates and MS were still considered to be the good guys (well, to everyone except maybe IBM and some other software developers). It didn't tarnish MS reputation at all and they continued to do "business as usual". After the second investigation and trial there was considerable image damage to MS. Not to mention that even though it looks like they'll get a slap on the wrist at worst, they have been found guilty of abusing a monopoly position and will forever have to worry about having the Feds (and state gov't) focusing on their behavior.
Microsoft continuing to do thing such as obstruting investigation, lying, mis-representing things, etc do *way* more harm than good. If you get caught it just sours you in the view of those who are judging you. It happend in the DOJ case, and they were fortunatle enough to have a judge who talked too much followed by a favorable change in the executive branch to help bail them out. In Europe, though, they may not be so lucky.
Yum! I love my old HP. Once you go RPN you never go back:)
I'd argue that if you're going to use the calculator a lot it might be worth getting a seperate machine (although a pain in the ass to carry around two things) simply because of ware and tear. The HPs are TANKS. I've given mine a crap load of abuse over the last ten years, and it keeps on ticking.
Microsoft yet again (apparently) makes life more difficult for themselves. I'm no huge fan of the company, but even I think that they would have had a *much* better time in both the US trial and EU investigation if they didn't play so dirty (the whole video debacle at the US trial, the apparent obstruction of justice with the EU trial)
Monopoly cases are HARD to prove (and should be, as bad as a true monopoly can be I think the bar should be set very high when determining if a company is an abusive monopoly). While under investigation Intel played ball, didn't get into a "winning at all cost" mentality, consented to a few behavioral changes, and came out of it intact.
I wonder if the threat of a big $$$ (er.. $EU) settlement will finally piss a few of the large MS stockholders into applying a little pressure on MS management to change tactics.
Please learn something about how the market works. When MS's stock first fell after they were threatened with a possible breakup, the market began to fall. Each blow against MS was a blow against the tech market as a whole. When people lost faith in MS stock they lost faith in the tech stocks. As the tech stocks fell so did the rest of the market as people begin to panic.
Was the orig post. The insinuation was that "each blow" to MS caused more damage to the tech stocks than the general state of the industry, which is complete bullshit. As I said before, a small company with good fundamentals may have their stock price influenced by a bellweather in the industry, but if its a sound company it will NOT go under. Regardless of what was done to MS (and I'm not arguing that what was done was good or bad) the tech market would still be in the crapper today. The action against MS did not have that much effect on the tech market as a whole (remember, just 3 years ago we were reading a lot of articles by analysts saying MS were dinosaurs...)
But to sit here and deny that this case has had a horrible effect on the economy of this country is short-sighted and ludicrous
isn't true either. One company does not have that much sway on an entire industry. Had no action been leveled at Microsoft we'd still be looking at the same market conditions now.
Again, how did this action against Microsoft case the Telecom industry to go into the toilet? How would have NOT doing anything to MS keep all of those unprofitable dot-coms afloat?
[BZZZZZZZ] Wrong... tell 'em what they're going home with Don Pardo.
So you're telling me that the tech market in the last 5 years has been technically sound and the ONLY thing that made them collapse was Microsoft? I think you may need to brush up on how the market works. Sure, bellweather stocks influence smaller stocks, but if a smaller stock is FUNDAMENTALLY SOUND it will survive.
So it wasn't the irrational exuberance of the telecom industry that fucked up Cisco, Lucent, et al, it was the gov't action against Microsoft? So it wasn't the fact that many pure dot.com companies were generating NO revenue that wasn't their downfall, it was the gov't action against Microsoft?
Nice troll. No clue.
As far as I can tell (and I ran to OpenOffice.org) Open Office 6.0 *HAS NOT* been released. I think someone is mixing up the Star Office 6.0 BETA with Open Office (the SO Beta is based on the last OO build)
Not according to IDC they're not. (Of course, how much weight you give the likes of IDC, Gartner, et al will temper this report).
I think the downturn doesn't bode well for PocketPC (nor Palm, frankly). PocketPCs seem to be geared towards business users (WAY too expensive for the average folk) and I wonder how willing business are going to be to plunk down a lot of money to take full advantage of what the PocketPC PDAs can do.
Palm are getting it in the shorts due to economy and saturation, MS will get it in the shorts due to the economy and the dubious usefulness of PocketPC devices beyond niche applications.
Actually, if MS could gain full control over Java they wouldn't kill it. They'd just make some subtle changes to tie it directly to Windows and go to town.
But what are the chances of Scott McN. selling to Bill B? About as good as me shitting a gold brick (even though I posted the rumor I still think the chances of Scott McN. selling to Lou G. are about as good as me shitting a bronze brick).
I know the new IBM kit is supposed to go head to head against the new Sun kit, but if The Inquirer is correct this may be the last salvo in the Sun vs. IBM unix war. Of course, I take this with a HUGE grain of salt, but stranger things have happened (*cough* *cough* HP/Compaq).
Look, NSync is about a million times more popular than that first case that got posted here a couple of weeks back. (See? I can't even remember the name of that artist.)
Actually, I believe it *was* NSync from the first article. The band was actually unnamed at the time (the article just said that over 100K albums had been shipped) and a lot of/.ers (including myself... self congratulatory pat on the back) guessed NSync since their album had been released a few weeks before hand.
So, since the album has been on the shelves for a while has anyone fired up Gnutella and checked for MP3s to see if how successful they were?
But how big of an advantage would that be? Is it worth paying the $$$ premium for? (I'm not sure, but I can't think of any mass market situation where I that type of access warrents the extra $$$, and I don't think the G3 service is going to be cheap, at least not in the beginning). Maybe in a niche market, but not in a broad market.
The problem I see is that only a handful of providers have the deep pockets to do G3, and so far its turned out to be a lot harder (and a lot more expensive) than anyone thought. A 801.xx type network, though, has a lower barrier of entry. I see a lot of smaller, regional companies doing pretty creative stuff with the technology, and then consolidation of the the industry over time (think the ISP market from 1995-2000). Sure, the technology isn't as good as what's proposed with G3, but the pricing will more than make up for it.
Here's my prediction ("All the authority and accuracy of Gartner (i.e. None) without the cost" (TM)):
3G is going to be dead in the water, at least for the next few years (5-10) here in the states. Why?
Because what it delivers can be done for MUCH less money. High speed wireless *is* a very cool thing, and very desirable. The problem is the cellular phone isn't the application for it. In reality, who wants to watch a movie on a small screen if you have to pay for it? Who wants to pipe music down the phone if you have to pay for it? These services are not going to be cheap (someone's got to pay for all of those licenses). What reason does a cellular *need* 300+kbps?
The only reason you would want that speed to your phone is if you have it hooked up to a PDA or a laptop. That's the only "killer app" I see for high speed internet. And if that's the case, there are better and cheaper ways of doing it. Think the "Freenets" that have been talked about on/. as of late. The infrastructure cost for some 801.xx network is *much* less than 3G service. Its a fairly open protocol, so you won't get locked into Sprint / AT&T / WorldCom / et al's service.
I see cellular service sticking with 2.5 G here in the states. That allows you to do all the things that are a cellphone actually does well (voice, some limited data: e-mail, texting, *simple* WAP). For high speed data that you'd need for your laptop/PDA, look for the commercialization of 801.xx (or something similar).
Linux will be BANNED from OEMs or face lawsuits for circumventing copyright.
Here's an interesting question for those better versed in the law (in general) and this proposed law. Assuming it gets passed as is, and we assume the worst in interpreting the language of the law (because it seems pretty vague) how would linux fare?
Could the appropriate code be included in the Kernal (in order to make it legal) but made an option like everything else in the kernal, so I can compile a new one sans all the copy control nonesense?
Also, is it just the kernal we have to worry about? More to the point, would we even have to worry about the kernal at all? Wouldn't this effect applications more than the kernal (I'm thinking XMMS, WinAmp, Real, etc.)?
Would filesystems have to be changed? How deep would all of this have to go to make a "compliant" system?
Enquiring mind (not to mention slightly ignorant) wants to know.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if they've spoken out about it or not (I don't follow the L Party in the least). Have also let my subscription lapse to Reason, so I haven't heard squat from there either.
Just because someone's viewpoint hasn't made the mainstream media doesn't mean they must hold the opposite... (unless, of course, you have an axe to grind)
... does IPv6 have built in encryption? (or at least the ability to do encryption at the IP level?)
That could really put a dent in the ability to snoop (they still may crack it, but its going to cost a hell of a lot more processor cycles to do so).
Sounds Republican to me.
I disagree. Republicans tend to not like business that deal in porn, etc, things they find morally offensive (however you feel like defining that).
And they certainly like the gov't when its enforcing the things they like.
Not that no unions, business is good, goverment bad is a good overview of libertarian policy either. Gov't isn't bad. Big, over intrusive gov't is bad (if you're a libertarian).
Maybe NANs could put the telephone company out of business.
Doubtful it will put the telco's out of business, but I've always thought that cheap (over public spectrum) wireless is eventually going to be very, very big, and I think 802.XXX is where its going to start.
Like the beginning of ISPs, radio, TV and cable I bet that small, regional Wireless ISPs are going to spring up all over the place (because it doesn't cost all that much money to set up). Some will be non-profit, some will be small for-profit. I think we've just started entering that phase. Eventually the market will mature and there's going to be consolidation as companies start buying each other out, including the big telcos.
This is still good though, because as the tech becomes more refined its going to give traditional telcos, Cell phone companies (who are trying to push G3) a run for their money, and keep them on thier toes.
I'd wager this is the first volley in another push by MS to cover thier asses by legal means. I see another push to make the release of any information that shows weaknesses a criminal activity. Expect lots of flag waving, anti-terrorism rhetoric to be sprinkled throughout, and some suspect demands that seem to be more motivated at gaining market share than protecting machines.
God damn... when did I get so cynical? Oh yeah, after reboot #3 of NT 4.0 today. {grumble grumble grumble}
IMHO, if he was really interested in furthering space exploration, he would have sought to keep the budget as is, or get it increased, and used the cost savings from productivity for more research and exploration.
The reason that he didn't keep the funding at the old level was probably because he couldn't. Remember, congress wasn't exactly NASA's friend for quite a while. They thought of NASA as big, bloated, and a waste of money. Its nice to think he could have just said "hey congress, let us keep our current funding, we'll get better," but that's a wishful thinking. Between the choice of "get less money, show me you aren't a waste of taxpayer money" and "last one turn out the lights" he probably did the best he could.
Open Source software was no guarantee that your software was not written by a professional.
Not only that, but paying for a program doesn't guarantee that it's quality code either. Hell, during the last few years when the market was tight people were hiring friggin anyone to program. I've seen some really shitty, shitty software that people paid a LOT of money for (and I mean software that makes MS's worst look like it was gold plated and bullet proof).
According to the article the reason that the RIAA was pushing this POS was because the new Anti-Terrorism bill (you know, the one that states that hacking=terrorism) would put the Kybosh on the RIAA trying to block people who trade MP3s and such.
I still think the hacking provisions of the anti-terrorist bill stink (and I hope they're sunsetted eventually) but it gives me a nice warm glow to know that they're also causing the RIAA lots of grief.
I can't wait for the first person to sue the RIAA for "terrorism" when they try to port-block someone. I'd even donate some $$$ for the cause.
Didn't Mossad kill someone using a cell phone a few years ago? If I remember correctly they rigged a cellphone with a small explosive device and somehow smuggled it into some organization. When the head honcho made a call from it (and they could confirm it was the guy they wanted)... Boom!
Wasn't it actually Jack Trammel who coined the phrase "Business is War?" (I know he took credit for it). Look what he did. Almost killed Commodore and destroyed Atari (snif snif).
In a lot of ways you're right. In fact, I think you hit the nail on the head with the Aim Gun, Miss Foot, Reload bit. And that's the point I guess I was trying to get at.
Yes, Microsoft has dodged some bullets, but I wonder if it was out of brilliance or just dumb luck (I would less of the first and more of the second). The fact that they *keep* reloading and aiming for thier foot -- to me -- says that one of these days they're going to hit the target, which in this case may be the EU fine (should it ever come to be. They may dodge that one too).
Had Microsoft (Gates in particular) not shot his mouth off on national TV the day that Microsoft signed the concent agreement with the Gov't in the early 90s one wonders whether the Gov't would have gone after MS a second time (or at least as hard as they did) (I remember reading somewhere that the DOJ were livid after seeing Gates say "This will not effect MS business practices in the least" right after the agreement).
Remember, the first anti-trust investigation hardly played at all in the mainstream press. Gates and MS were still considered to be the good guys (well, to everyone except maybe IBM and some other software developers). It didn't tarnish MS reputation at all and they continued to do "business as usual". After the second investigation and trial there was considerable image damage to MS. Not to mention that even though it looks like they'll get a slap on the wrist at worst, they have been found guilty of abusing a monopoly position and will forever have to worry about having the Feds (and state gov't) focusing on their behavior.
Microsoft continuing to do thing such as obstruting investigation, lying, mis-representing things, etc do *way* more harm than good. If you get caught it just sours you in the view of those who are judging you. It happend in the DOJ case, and they were fortunatle enough to have a judge who talked too much followed by a favorable change in the executive branch to help bail them out. In Europe, though, they may not be so lucky.
Emu48CE, an HP48 emulator.
:)
Yum! I love my old HP. Once you go RPN you never go back
I'd argue that if you're going to use the calculator a lot it might be worth getting a seperate machine (although a pain in the ass to carry around two things) simply because of ware and tear. The HPs are TANKS. I've given mine a crap load of abuse over the last ten years, and it keeps on ticking.
Microsoft yet again (apparently) makes life more difficult for themselves. I'm no huge fan of the company, but even I think that they would have had a *much* better time in both the US trial and EU investigation if they didn't play so dirty (the whole video debacle at the US trial, the apparent obstruction of justice with the EU trial)
Monopoly cases are HARD to prove (and should be, as bad as a true monopoly can be I think the bar should be set very high when determining if a company is an abusive monopoly). While under investigation Intel played ball, didn't get into a "winning at all cost" mentality, consented to a few behavioral changes, and came out of it intact.
I wonder if the threat of a big $$$ (er.. $EU) settlement will finally piss a few of the large MS stockholders into applying a little pressure on MS management to change tactics.
Please learn something about how the market works. When MS's stock first fell after they were threatened with a possible breakup, the market began to fall. Each blow against MS was a blow against the tech market as a whole. When people lost faith in MS stock they lost faith in the tech stocks. As the tech stocks fell so did the rest of the market as people begin to panic.
Was the orig post. The insinuation was that "each blow" to MS caused more damage to the tech stocks than the general state of the industry, which is complete bullshit. As I said before, a small company with good fundamentals may have their stock price influenced by a bellweather in the industry, but if its a sound company it will NOT go under. Regardless of what was done to MS (and I'm not arguing that what was done was good or bad) the tech market would still be in the crapper today. The action against MS did not have that much effect on the tech market as a whole (remember, just 3 years ago we were reading a lot of articles by analysts saying MS were dinosaurs...)
Oh that's right. I didn't.
Neither did I but...
But to sit here and deny that this case has had a horrible effect on the economy of this country is short-sighted and ludicrous
isn't true either. One company does not have that much sway on an entire industry. Had no action been leveled at Microsoft we'd still be looking at the same market conditions now.
Again, how did this action against Microsoft case the Telecom industry to go into the toilet? How would have NOT doing anything to MS keep all of those unprofitable dot-coms afloat?
[BZZZZZZZ] Wrong... tell 'em what they're going home with Don Pardo.
So you're telling me that the tech market in the last 5 years has been technically sound and the ONLY thing that made them collapse was Microsoft? I think you may need to brush up on how the market works. Sure, bellweather stocks influence smaller stocks, but if a smaller stock is FUNDAMENTALLY SOUND it will survive.
So it wasn't the irrational exuberance of the telecom industry that fucked up Cisco, Lucent, et al, it was the gov't action against Microsoft? So it wasn't the fact that many pure dot.com companies were generating NO revenue that wasn't their downfall, it was the gov't action against Microsoft?
Nice troll. No clue.
As far as I can tell (and I ran to OpenOffice.org) Open Office 6.0 *HAS NOT* been released. I think someone is mixing up the Star Office 6.0 BETA with Open Office (the SO Beta is based on the last OO build)
So, is this the mighty Palm-killer?
Not according to IDC they're not. (Of course, how much weight you give the likes of IDC, Gartner, et al will temper this report).
I think the downturn doesn't bode well for PocketPC (nor Palm, frankly). PocketPCs seem to be geared towards business users (WAY too expensive for the average folk) and I wonder how willing business are going to be to plunk down a lot of money to take full advantage of what the PocketPC PDAs can do.
Palm are getting it in the shorts due to economy and saturation, MS will get it in the shorts due to the economy and the dubious usefulness of PocketPC devices beyond niche applications.
Except for MS and they would just kill it.
Actually, if MS could gain full control over Java they wouldn't kill it. They'd just make some subtle changes to tie it directly to Windows and go to town.
But what are the chances of Scott McN. selling to Bill B? About as good as me shitting a gold brick (even though I posted the rumor I still think the chances of Scott McN. selling to Lou G. are about as good as me shitting a bronze brick).
I know the new IBM kit is supposed to go head to head against the new Sun kit, but if The Inquirer is correct this may be the last salvo in the Sun vs. IBM unix war. Of course, I take this with a HUGE grain of salt, but stranger things have happened (*cough* *cough* HP/Compaq).
Look, NSync is about a million times more popular than that first case that got posted here a couple of weeks back. (See? I can't even remember the name of that artist.)
/.ers (including myself... self congratulatory pat on the back) guessed NSync since their album had been released a few weeks before hand.
Actually, I believe it *was* NSync from the first article. The band was actually unnamed at the time (the article just said that over 100K albums had been shipped) and a lot of
So, since the album has been on the shelves for a while has anyone fired up Gnutella and checked for MP3s to see if how successful they were?
Yeah, but according to the new crypto laws you'll have to cut off your pinkies and give 'em to the FBI to keep in "finger escrow."
But how big of an advantage would that be? Is it worth paying the $$$ premium for? (I'm not sure, but I can't think of any mass market situation where I that type of access warrents the extra $$$, and I don't think the G3 service is going to be cheap, at least not in the beginning). Maybe in a niche market, but not in a broad market.
The problem I see is that only a handful of providers have the deep pockets to do G3, and so far its turned out to be a lot harder (and a lot more expensive) than anyone thought. A 801.xx type network, though, has a lower barrier of entry. I see a lot of smaller, regional companies doing pretty creative stuff with the technology, and then consolidation of the the industry over time (think the ISP market from 1995-2000). Sure, the technology isn't as good as what's proposed with G3, but the pricing will more than make up for it.
Here's my prediction ("All the authority and accuracy of Gartner (i.e. None) without the cost" (TM)):
/. as of late. The infrastructure cost for some 801.xx network is *much* less than 3G service. Its a fairly open protocol, so you won't get locked into Sprint / AT&T / WorldCom / et al's service.
3G is going to be dead in the water, at least for the next few years (5-10) here in the states. Why?
Because what it delivers can be done for MUCH less money. High speed wireless *is* a very cool thing, and very desirable. The problem is the cellular phone isn't the application for it. In reality, who wants to watch a movie on a small screen if you have to pay for it? Who wants to pipe music down the phone if you have to pay for it? These services are not going to be cheap (someone's got to pay for all of those licenses). What reason does a cellular *need* 300+kbps?
The only reason you would want that speed to your phone is if you have it hooked up to a PDA or a laptop. That's the only "killer app" I see for high speed internet. And if that's the case, there are better and cheaper ways of doing it. Think the "Freenets" that have been talked about on
I see cellular service sticking with 2.5 G here in the states. That allows you to do all the things that are a cellphone actually does well (voice, some limited data: e-mail, texting, *simple* WAP). For high speed data that you'd need for your laptop/PDA, look for the commercialization of 801.xx (or something similar).
So says the Bastard
Linux will be BANNED from OEMs or face lawsuits for circumventing copyright.
Here's an interesting question for those better versed in the law (in general) and this proposed law. Assuming it gets passed as is, and we assume the worst in interpreting the language of the law (because it seems pretty vague) how would linux fare?
Could the appropriate code be included in the Kernal (in order to make it legal) but made an option like everything else in the kernal, so I can compile a new one sans all the copy control nonesense?
Also, is it just the kernal we have to worry about? More to the point, would we even have to worry about the kernal at all? Wouldn't this effect applications more than the kernal (I'm thinking XMMS, WinAmp, Real, etc.)?
Would filesystems have to be changed? How deep would all of this have to go to make a "compliant" system?
Enquiring mind (not to mention slightly ignorant) wants to know.
N.