Well intentioned, this is the sort of reason why lawmakers need an education in how improvements are made in software and hardware. You can't stanch curiousity by outlawing it. The German software industry gave us improvements to Linux from SuSE, Project LiMux, and a raft of excellent tools for debugging, general hacking, and just plain good creative code.
Now a Damocles sword hangs over the head of the genuinely interested German hacker. And hacks will continue across the rest of the planet, because improvements are iterative lessons learned from mistakes.
Why not instead develop infrastructure that allows ISPs to eliminate machines controlled by bots? Or find a way to make a better international citizen out of PTT-behaving Deutche Telekom/T-Mobile? Or perhaps learn the lessons from the fear-engendering legislation that's now law.....
No, ownership is very clear, but
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
SCO is still a going concern, and if Novell releases the code, SCO could sue (and as an injured party) might win.
The timing will be critical, but what's likely to happen is that SCO's assets will go to Novell. Then Novell can decide what to do.
However, Novell's in bed with the very devil himself, Microsoft, who might just have a trick or two up their sleeves. After all, after Noorda's death, Novell's changed their tune mightily. Microsoft could buy Novell, and the keys to Unix, for chump change-- and Microsoft has it IN CASH. No one else is in a cash position to do so.
Microsoft has not, cannot, and hasn't the political will to take on the Linux community directly.
Many people have told them directly, and in no uncertain terms, so sue me. The principal of estoppel says that Microsoft will get into hot water unlike any it has ever known should it open the pandora's box of patent litigation against the F/OSS community.
Shuttleworth dances with the devil. No wonder he's hot under the collar.
Linux isn't fractured. Linux isn't hurt. Linux development and FOSS will naturally evolve. It grows stronger. It is principled, where Microsoft certainly is specifically interested solely in shareholder return. Let's see, Linux has been successfully sued how many times? How many countries has busted Linux for restraint of trade and so on? How many attorney generals have sued Linux? Now show me the assets Microsoft gets by suing Linux. There is no Linux; there are multiple OS kernels, and a freighter full of GNU and GPL's apps. There are no assets. There ARE NO VIOLATORS. The lineage of what Linux has become has been more than adequately outlined in multiple different litigations by multiple reference-able authors.
That's why the SCO-IBM litigation farce was underwritten by Microsoft (and others) and why it's so flimsy. Shuttleworth needs to re-examine his motives. Certainly a corp as large as Micorosft can make anyone quake. So can several quarters of very negative revenues make Microsoft change its tune.
There's little putting lipstick on the pig of humanity. God would seem to have a sense of responsibility. Aliens have no such responsibility.
The irony of putting a ship on the course to Mars at many millions of dollars while 19 million people have been displaced by the flooding in SE Asia is impossible to escape. These and many other ironies are very difficult to rectify if brotherhood is an ideal of humanity. Instead, we kill, maim, rape, bludgeon, etc. There are powerful and influential individuals that have influenced humanity towards a less violent and less planet-murdering course. Paul Elrich; McLuhan, Gandhi, MLK, Mother Theresa, Mandella, Bolivar (ok, he was violent but protective of indigenous peoples-- although they became modern serfs), and others have had profound recent influence on raising the collective consciousness of the large portions of the earth towards peacefulness and wisdom. So did Jesus, the Buddha, and so forth.
And that's my point: were I an alien, I'd bypass the place. Nothing to see here. Come back in few thousand years to see if there's anything left. Current indications are that there might be. Others say naught. Space travel isn't so much a folly as it's misplaced priority: the Mars mission burns some $5million in fuel while dozens/day die in Darfur. Egads.
So self important, so smart, and witty, these humans. They'll be just adorable as friends!
Why, they shoot, rob, kill, maim, pollute, blow up infidels, abuse each other incessantly, lie, cheat, steal, and so on.
Delightful little interplanetary friends, these people on the third rock from the sun.
Hey: any evolved civilzation with the brains to travel at C will take one look at us, and fly on by. And I wouldn't blame them a bit. We're barely out of the stone ages. Evolving, yes, but see the above for great reasons to make the Fermi Paradox both laughable and embarrrassing.
Your incapacity for guilt is of no interest to me. That's not what I responded to.
Instead, you purport that that 95% of (let's call them elected officials and other government types) have innate "naivete which indirectly supports the position of those who do abuse their priveleges(sic)."
In fact, you're presumptuous and have come to an incorrect conclusion from that presumption. I've been on the Hill, and started with a very sanguine view of the net results of elected official's output. I found many of my sample of appointed and elected officials to be genuinely aghast at what goes on in the hands of a very powerful few. The money in Washington is both stupefying and unbelievable, and it comes both from domestic and international sources.
Your dismissive attitude betrays your own naivete. You can toss you hands in the air, and watch the train wreck, or you can try to throw the switch. The choice is yours. Give up easily and we can know the score without watching what happens. Become a part of a process that changes it and you can have a real effect on the outcome. But I doubt you believe this. Armchair criticism, methinks.... cheap thrill.
Yeah, from 1600 Pennsylvania to the Library of Congress (go look at a map), there's a lot of corrruption, but the figure of 95% does those that have tried and failed to remove corruption a bad disservice.
I find it odd to be defending some of these people, but indeed there are a strong number/percentage that don't take bribes, don't push their own projects in legislation, aren't on the take, have asked for campaign funding reform, and actually have a real heart-- and even a few that didn't vote for the war (for reasons good and bad).
Might Senator Stevens be guilty? Maybe. We let a trial by a judge (if selected by the defense) or a jury decide this, unless there's an admission of guilt or direct evidence to the contrary.
It's called due process, and everyone from scum to saints gets and deserves it. Even those that damn everyone with one brush.
Seattle DOS was only one.... the source code to MP/M and CP/M floated around freely. CP/M itself is a re-do of RT-11, a horrible DEC OS.
After the success of MS/IBM DOS, he started selling his own version again. It was less weird (compatibility wise) than versions of MS-DOS, but never really took off. DRDOS survives to this day in one form and another.
Then Microsoft tried to make DOS realistic with subdirectories, and other 'inventions' borrowed from other places. The whole operating system industry was/is highly incestuous.
No, virtualization allows application instanciation, and therefore 'containerizes' the application instance as an atomic/discrete entity for manipulation.
It also abstracts the instance from a physical hardware location, provided uniform hardware resource needs. It also permits throttling application resources, or conversely, changing application resource capacities nearly in an ad hoc way.
If you accept this premise, contains are an effect of virtualization and a mathematical relationship shows containers as a subset and a by-product of virtualizing-- a subset of functionality.
Since I have to take care of a lot of machines of people that get these things, my otherwise non-violent nature would like to find the authors, well, in a Turkish prison. Yes these things have been sold on the net for a long damn time, but I've also had to scrape, reformat, debug, and otherwise keep hapless unwitting people from the damage these things do. They're often chained to using Windows whether they want to or not.
I've seen them spend hundreds of dollars on both prevention and cure, only to get owned again. This isn't about Microsoft, this is about guys that are the seeming equivalent to those that might cut brake lines in a car. The outcome isn't injurious physically, just emotionally/mentally and financially.
My hacker instinct says always continue to hack and explore and try and break things, but selling trojans seems way over the top. No fucking 'let them download Ubuntu or get a second mortgage for a Mac' shit. This is real, this is vulgur, and this is a business plan for bright guys gone bad.... and I don't get paid for scraping this crap.
The i-squared-r law at 60ghz means that even if the spectra was available (it's not) then you'll need both line of site (reflections won't help and will slow the data rate considerably) and you'll need the will to gulp content that fast. Of course, a shared fixture like an access point in WiFi suffers from duty-cycle problems and raw bandwidth will help. But we could also use spread-spectrum and/or advanced coding techniques like n-Pole modulation to accomplish the same thing.
Therefore, with all due respect to the geeks in Georgia, this is like saying: Hey-- wireless is going to be way faster!!!!! in some breathless sort of way.
No duh. Now jump over the obstacles. There are huge numbers of them, and only the surface ones are seemingly scratched here.
Linus could dictate a PL of his own liking. The hardware strictures are dubious in GPLv3 in a number of ways, but let's nod our heads and run along those lines for a moment. Imagine that projects fork, based on GPL version. There are herds like that.
There's the LGPL. CC. Various odd Sun licenses. Three versions of the GPL.
All that versus: some god-forsaken EULA of a closed-source project..... with the law firm of Dewey Cheatem and Howe standing behind them.
This new superfluity of licensing is freedom of expression and intent. Yet Torvalds could come to bear strongly.... except that Stallman and Co have gone down a righteous path. There is religion there. Will Torvalds become the Martin Luther of free licenses? Stay tuned. Has he the power? I think so-- he's a practical guy in the face of the FSF who has idealism, a dogma, and a zealot (RMS, one of the premier programmers of the 1990's).
How does it play out??? As I'm a betting man, I'm betting on Linus. He won't want this role, but he'll take it anyway because soon it will get in his way. He's much better at overcoming obstacles pragmatically and with creativity than RMS. Just my 2c worth.
Let's take Linus Torvald's opinions for one. He, with Stallman, are the two principal (and principle) authors of software covered by the GPL. They could have chosen BSD licensing, and so on if they'd wanted to. The GPL made sense for both. Stallman's leadership and a sense of danger on his part helped evolve the very strict (yet very free) GPLv3 to where it is today. Linus doesn't believe it's necessary at all, and is more purist hubris than actual protection.
I can see both views, and both views make sense given the freedom of the author's to do whatever they please with their code. The GPLv3 makes more sense for me personally, yet others I know think it's potentially highly confining, if 'purist'.
That tech writers think it'll slow down adoption is more of a Microsoft fantasy than reality. That the GPLv3 closes odd loopholes is all the better. I hope that Linus figures out that he actually needs to consider that a GPLv4 needs his input might get him the goals he's seeking. He's going to have to lift his head out of the sand one of these days and help form what he's inadvertenly made (along with Stallman and thousands of others), the most highly viable OS. What was once a ego fantasy is now a reality far beyond anyone's wildest imaginations. There's a maturation point where you're a leader, or a follower of what you've inspired. I hope he picks "leader" and gets off the kernel kick long enough to make corrections suggestions that he can 'lead' with. Simply bashing something (pardon the pun) isn't constructive. It might work in coding, but not when you have to gain consensus.
New projects open all the time. As the FOSS code base increases, it's easier to move code around. Once one takes on responsibility for a project, the new code vs maintenance code is always going to change. And there are thousands of projects where someone gets bored, moves on, or whatever, where the project then becomes stuck in the mud. SourceForge is full of them. It doesn't mean there's anything wrong, it's the fits-and-spurts of how coding works.
If all black holes were present at or nearly at the big bang, then the universe is pocked with bunches of black holes, which by their proposed definitions, are time-less. When one considers the simplicity of time warps around these uber masses, then time is non-linear, universally, subject to the proximity to a black hole. The fabric of space is therefore more like the surface of a mattress with a buttoner who's gone mad, randomly creating divots.
This also means that the Schwarzchild radius is probably not uniform, and also non-linear. In fact, therein might lay the proof. Watch the light shift around a radius, and you can probably see how time/mass is or is not linear.... thus proving/disproving/causing madness/ for this hypthesis.
So of course he might have a few of his own prejudices.....
One more browser on Windows doesn't hurt anything. Because Safari is based on K, it's tougher to smack down with silly code crunches, although they shouldn't have released it until they tested it JUST A BIT MORE. How embarrassing to release a browser that has to have six patches on its first freaking release day.
But Elgan is wrong about Apple. His background at Windows Magazine and HP's in-house organ haven't given him much insight into the seige mentality at Apple. It's plainly been a survivor mentality with a few stellar successes and a few big craters. I wouldn't leave it to Elgan, however, to comment on Apple's mentality when he's clearly been a bit of a stooge of the Windows mindset.
Look at iTunes, QuickTime, and other cross-platform Apple successes, just like Microsoft has theirs (Office and Entourage for the Mac). More competition is good.
It was a failure for this individual to not protect himself. Let's count the ways: 1) should have retained counsel 2) should have counterclaimed immediately 3) could have chosen a different venue 4) could have chosen a different court , 5) might have been more clear about the content of the blog, so as to remove any possible doubt of malice of forethought, which is required in most libel and slander litigation 6) might have considered other remedies, including bankruptcy variants, or bar review.
The system isn't fair, and it tipped in the favor of better counsel, or whomever can overwhelm the judge with 'evidence'. The preponderance of evidence is what sways the case, should the unlikely event that the case is somehow brought up for review. Evidence by the truckload usually does it. To counter the evidence, lots of discovery should ensue, making it all that tougher. This is small claims, not a circuit or higher court using almost anything but magistrates.... who are essentially out of work lawyers.
1) all the vendors that I've seen have WPA turned on by default. They didn't use to, but then cars didn't have seat belts years ago, either.
2) you can find lots of information about bandwidth. The same site as the article cited has product reviews on ftp throughput; it's about a max of 3/5ths stated bandwidth or less.
3) this already happens. Use 802.11a instead. There are tons of non-interfering channels and you can get double-data-rate schemes with them.
4) someone using your wifi might be legal, but it depends strictly on where you live and what laws apply there. Generally, it's not legal in the US, but there have been few prosecutions. 'Hotspots' are generally thought to be legal to use if they self-identify as 'free wifi' or 'hotspot' etc.
5) use free WiFi sources where you find them. Go to muniwireless.com to understand how muni-wifi projects are tougher than they seem. Nice idea. Expensive and tough to do, and to manage (low) expectations.
Slashdot Mirror
and look what happened....
I'll reply with a useless aphorism that says that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Obviously, this one was both ill-conceived and ill-executed.
It stops nothing but improvement.
Perhaps we can hire some ex-pat German coders! H1Bs ought to be easy now, right??
Well intentioned, this is the sort of reason why lawmakers need an education in how improvements are made in software and hardware. You can't stanch curiousity by outlawing it. The German software industry gave us improvements to Linux from SuSE, Project LiMux, and a raft of excellent tools for debugging, general hacking, and just plain good creative code.
Now a Damocles sword hangs over the head of the genuinely interested German hacker. And hacks will continue across the rest of the planet, because improvements are iterative lessons learned from mistakes.
Why not instead develop infrastructure that allows ISPs to eliminate machines controlled by bots? Or find a way to make a better international citizen out of PTT-behaving Deutche Telekom/T-Mobile? Or perhaps learn the lessons from the fear-engendering legislation that's now law.....
SCO is still a going concern, and if Novell releases the code, SCO could sue (and as an injured party) might win.
The timing will be critical, but what's likely to happen is that SCO's assets will go to Novell. Then Novell can decide what to do.
However, Novell's in bed with the very devil himself, Microsoft, who might just have a trick or two up their sleeves. After all, after Noorda's death, Novell's changed their tune mightily. Microsoft could buy Novell, and the keys to Unix, for chump change-- and Microsoft has it IN CASH. No one else is in a cash position to do so.
So maybe you sue Novell. Oops, can't do that.
Or maybe you sue Red Hat. Hmmmmm. That'll be the day.
Maybe you sue Linus. Right. Make him a martyr. Seal your own fate.
Or maybe you sue users. That'll make 'em love you.
Or maybe you sue IBM. Fat chance on that one.
Or maybe you sue me. Go ahead. Sue me. Lot of assets there, buddy.
Or maybe you sue some poor orphanage. That's satisfying. Look at what happened when SCO sued AutoZone, Chrysler, etc. That stuck. Not.
Microsoft has not, cannot, and hasn't the political will to take on the Linux community directly.
Many people have told them directly, and in no uncertain terms, so sue me. The principal of estoppel says that Microsoft will get into hot water unlike any it has ever known should it open the pandora's box of patent litigation against the F/OSS community.
Shuttleworth dances with the devil. No wonder he's hot under the collar.
Linux isn't fractured. Linux isn't hurt. Linux development and FOSS will naturally evolve. It grows stronger. It is principled, where Microsoft certainly is specifically interested solely in shareholder return. Let's see, Linux has been successfully sued how many times? How many countries has busted Linux for restraint of trade and so on? How many attorney generals have sued Linux? Now show me the assets Microsoft gets by suing Linux. There is no Linux; there are multiple OS kernels, and a freighter full of GNU and GPL's apps. There are no assets. There ARE NO VIOLATORS. The lineage of what Linux has become has been more than adequately outlined in multiple different litigations by multiple reference-able authors.
That's why the SCO-IBM litigation farce was underwritten by Microsoft (and others) and why it's so flimsy. Shuttleworth needs to re-examine his motives. Certainly a corp as large as Micorosft can make anyone quake. So can several quarters of very negative revenues make Microsoft change its tune.
There's little putting lipstick on the pig of humanity. God would seem to have a sense of responsibility. Aliens have no such responsibility.
The irony of putting a ship on the course to Mars at many millions of dollars while 19 million people have been displaced by the flooding in SE Asia is impossible to escape. These and many other ironies are very difficult to rectify if brotherhood is an ideal of humanity. Instead, we kill, maim, rape, bludgeon, etc. There are powerful and influential individuals that have influenced humanity towards a less violent and less planet-murdering course. Paul Elrich; McLuhan, Gandhi, MLK, Mother Theresa, Mandella, Bolivar (ok, he was violent but protective of indigenous peoples-- although they became modern serfs), and others have had profound recent influence on raising the collective consciousness of the large portions of the earth towards peacefulness and wisdom. So did Jesus, the Buddha, and so forth.
And that's my point: were I an alien, I'd bypass the place. Nothing to see here. Come back in few thousand years to see if there's anything left. Current indications are that there might be. Others say naught. Space travel isn't so much a folly as it's misplaced priority: the Mars mission burns some $5million in fuel while dozens/day die in Darfur. Egads.
So self important, so smart, and witty, these humans. They'll be just adorable as friends!
Why, they shoot, rob, kill, maim, pollute, blow up infidels, abuse each other incessantly, lie, cheat, steal, and so on.
Delightful little interplanetary friends, these people on the third rock from the sun.
Hey: any evolved civilzation with the brains to travel at C will take one look at us, and fly on by. And I wouldn't blame them a bit. We're barely out of the stone ages. Evolving, yes, but see the above for great reasons to make the Fermi Paradox both laughable and embarrrassing.
Your incapacity for guilt is of no interest to me. That's not what I responded to.
Instead, you purport that that 95% of (let's call them elected officials and other government types) have innate "naivete which indirectly supports the position of those who do abuse their priveleges(sic)."
In fact, you're presumptuous and have come to an incorrect conclusion from that presumption. I've been on the Hill, and started with a very sanguine view of the net results of elected official's output. I found many of my sample of appointed and elected officials to be genuinely aghast at what goes on in the hands of a very powerful few. The money in Washington is both stupefying and unbelievable, and it comes both from domestic and international sources.
Your dismissive attitude betrays your own naivete. You can toss you hands in the air, and watch the train wreck, or you can try to throw the switch. The choice is yours. Give up easily and we can know the score without watching what happens. Become a part of a process that changes it and you can have a real effect on the outcome. But I doubt you believe this. Armchair criticism, methinks.... cheap thrill.
Yeah, from 1600 Pennsylvania to the Library of Congress (go look at a map), there's a lot of corrruption, but the figure of 95% does those that have tried and failed to remove corruption a bad disservice.
I find it odd to be defending some of these people, but indeed there are a strong number/percentage that don't take bribes, don't push their own projects in legislation, aren't on the take, have asked for campaign funding reform, and actually have a real heart-- and even a few that didn't vote for the war (for reasons good and bad).
Might Senator Stevens be guilty? Maybe. We let a trial by a judge (if selected by the defense) or a jury decide this, unless there's an admission of guilt or direct evidence to the contrary.
It's called due process, and everyone from scum to saints gets and deserves it. Even those that damn everyone with one brush.
Seattle DOS was only one.... the source code to MP/M and CP/M floated around freely. CP/M itself is a re-do of RT-11, a horrible DEC OS.
After the success of MS/IBM DOS, he started selling his own version again. It was less weird (compatibility wise) than versions of MS-DOS, but never really took off. DRDOS survives to this day in one form and another.
Then Microsoft tried to make DOS realistic with subdirectories, and other 'inventions' borrowed from other places. The whole operating system industry was/is highly incestuous.
or some notebook makers will find their brand equity digested by their purchasers (say hello to the *New* HP and *New* Dell branding).
Let's see.... YouTube goes to GooTube which devolves back to Google.
Branding has become a useless exercise..... brand assets are as good as the purchasing company's mindset.
So, listen up there all you 3rd-Mortgaged Startups: Make That Brand Count. But don't fall in love with it.
I'll bet DLink is laughing their butts off. Now they compete with Cisco instead of measily old Linksys. Whoohooo!
No, virtualization allows application instanciation, and therefore 'containerizes' the application instance as an atomic/discrete entity for manipulation.
It also abstracts the instance from a physical hardware location, provided uniform hardware resource needs. It also permits throttling application resources, or conversely, changing application resource capacities nearly in an ad hoc way.
If you accept this premise, contains are an effect of virtualization and a mathematical relationship shows containers as a subset and a by-product of virtualizing-- a subset of functionality.
Since I have to take care of a lot of machines of people that get these things, my otherwise non-violent nature would like to find the authors, well, in a Turkish prison. Yes these things have been sold on the net for a long damn time, but I've also had to scrape, reformat, debug, and otherwise keep hapless unwitting people from the damage these things do. They're often chained to using Windows whether they want to or not.
I've seen them spend hundreds of dollars on both prevention and cure, only to get owned again. This isn't about Microsoft, this is about guys that are the seeming equivalent to those that might cut brake lines in a car. The outcome isn't injurious physically, just emotionally/mentally and financially.
My hacker instinct says always continue to hack and explore and try and break things, but selling trojans seems way over the top. No fucking 'let them download Ubuntu or get a second mortgage for a Mac' shit. This is real, this is vulgur, and this is a business plan for bright guys gone bad.... and I don't get paid for scraping this crap.
The i-squared-r law at 60ghz means that even if the spectra was available (it's not) then you'll need both line of site (reflections won't help and will slow the data rate considerably) and you'll need the will to gulp content that fast. Of course, a shared fixture like an access point in WiFi suffers from duty-cycle problems and raw bandwidth will help. But we could also use spread-spectrum and/or advanced coding techniques like n-Pole modulation to accomplish the same thing.
Therefore, with all due respect to the geeks in Georgia, this is like saying: Hey-- wireless is going to be way faster!!!!! in some breathless sort of way.
No duh. Now jump over the obstacles. There are huge numbers of them, and only the surface ones are seemingly scratched here.
Linus could dictate a PL of his own liking. The hardware strictures are dubious in GPLv3 in a number of ways, but let's nod our heads and run along those lines for a moment. Imagine that projects fork, based on GPL version. There are herds like that.
There's the LGPL. CC. Various odd Sun licenses. Three versions of the GPL.
All that versus: some god-forsaken EULA of a closed-source project..... with the law firm of Dewey Cheatem and Howe standing behind them.
This new superfluity of licensing is freedom of expression and intent. Yet Torvalds could come to bear strongly.... except that Stallman and Co have gone down a righteous path. There is religion there. Will Torvalds become the Martin Luther of free licenses? Stay tuned. Has he the power? I think so-- he's a practical guy in the face of the FSF who has idealism, a dogma, and a zealot (RMS, one of the premier programmers of the 1990's).
How does it play out??? As I'm a betting man, I'm betting on Linus. He won't want this role, but he'll take it anyway because soon it will get in his way. He's much better at overcoming obstacles pragmatically and with creativity than RMS. Just my 2c worth.
Let's take Linus Torvald's opinions for one. He, with Stallman, are the two principal (and principle) authors of software covered by the GPL. They could have chosen BSD licensing, and so on if they'd wanted to. The GPL made sense for both. Stallman's leadership and a sense of danger on his part helped evolve the very strict (yet very free) GPLv3 to where it is today. Linus doesn't believe it's necessary at all, and is more purist hubris than actual protection.
I can see both views, and both views make sense given the freedom of the author's to do whatever they please with their code. The GPLv3 makes more sense for me personally, yet others I know think it's potentially highly confining, if 'purist'.
That tech writers think it'll slow down adoption is more of a Microsoft fantasy than reality. That the GPLv3 closes odd loopholes is all the better. I hope that Linus figures out that he actually needs to consider that a GPLv4 needs his input might get him the goals he's seeking. He's going to have to lift his head out of the sand one of these days and help form what he's inadvertenly made (along with Stallman and thousands of others), the most highly viable OS. What was once a ego fantasy is now a reality far beyond anyone's wildest imaginations. There's a maturation point where you're a leader, or a follower of what you've inspired. I hope he picks "leader" and gets off the kernel kick long enough to make corrections suggestions that he can 'lead' with. Simply bashing something (pardon the pun) isn't constructive. It might work in coding, but not when you have to gain consensus.
New projects open all the time. As the FOSS code base increases, it's easier to move code around. Once one takes on responsibility for a project, the new code vs maintenance code is always going to change. And there are thousands of projects where someone gets bored, moves on, or whatever, where the project then becomes stuck in the mud. SourceForge is full of them. It doesn't mean there's anything wrong, it's the fits-and-spurts of how coding works.
Nothing to worry about. It's natural.
Wouldn't it be nice if you could get a Xen rootkit for Windows XP and/or Vista?
;)>
Perhaps it's a silly concept, but it could make work easier.
But then there's the graphics difficulties.... the need for a hyperthreading CPU....and there's no support of course, for a rootkit
The cow might be in the barn, but it might not.
If all black holes were present at or nearly at the big bang, then the universe is pocked with bunches of black holes, which by their proposed definitions, are time-less. When one considers the simplicity of time warps around these uber masses, then time is non-linear, universally, subject to the proximity to a black hole. The fabric of space is therefore more like the surface of a mattress with a buttoner who's gone mad, randomly creating divots.
This also means that the Schwarzchild radius is probably not uniform, and also non-linear. In fact, therein might lay the proof. Watch the light shift around a radius, and you can probably see how time/mass is or is not linear.... thus proving/disproving/causing madness/ for this hypthesis.
So of course he might have a few of his own prejudices.....
One more browser on Windows doesn't hurt anything. Because Safari is based on K, it's tougher to smack down with silly code crunches, although they shouldn't have released it until they tested it JUST A BIT MORE. How embarrassing to release a browser that has to have six patches on its first freaking release day.
But Elgan is wrong about Apple. His background at Windows Magazine and HP's in-house organ haven't given him much insight into the seige mentality at Apple. It's plainly been a survivor mentality with a few stellar successes and a few big craters. I wouldn't leave it to Elgan, however, to comment on Apple's mentality when he's clearly been a bit of a stooge of the Windows mindset.
Look at iTunes, QuickTime, and other cross-platform Apple successes, just like Microsoft has theirs (Office and Entourage for the Mac). More competition is good.
It was a failure for this individual to not protect himself. Let's count the ways: 1) should have retained counsel 2) should have counterclaimed immediately 3) could have chosen a different venue 4) could have chosen a different court , 5) might have been more clear about the content of the blog, so as to remove any possible doubt of malice of forethought, which is required in most libel and slander litigation 6) might have considered other remedies, including bankruptcy variants, or bar review.
The system isn't fair, and it tipped in the favor of better counsel, or whomever can overwhelm the judge with 'evidence'. The preponderance of evidence is what sways the case, should the unlikely event that the case is somehow brought up for review. Evidence by the truckload usually does it. To counter the evidence, lots of discovery should ensue, making it all that tougher. This is small claims, not a circuit or higher court using almost anything but magistrates.... who are essentially out of work lawyers.
How awful. I stand corrected.
1) all the vendors that I've seen have WPA turned on by default. They didn't use to, but then cars didn't have seat belts years ago, either.
2) you can find lots of information about bandwidth. The same site as the article cited has product reviews on ftp throughput; it's about a max of 3/5ths stated bandwidth or less.
3) this already happens. Use 802.11a instead. There are tons of non-interfering channels and you can get double-data-rate schemes with them.
4) someone using your wifi might be legal, but it depends strictly on where you live and what laws apply there. Generally, it's not legal in the US, but there have been few prosecutions. 'Hotspots' are generally thought to be legal to use if they self-identify as 'free wifi' or 'hotspot' etc.
5) use free WiFi sources where you find them. Go to muniwireless.com to understand how muni-wifi projects are tougher than they seem. Nice idea. Expensive and tough to do, and to manage (low) expectations.
That's a very good idea.