CVS is empty and the source on the download page is for the 2.6 version. The version of the executable is 3.53
If it's original work, can't the copyright holder decide to close the source? If it doesn't contain anyone else's work that happens to be GPLd, I don't see a problem here.
've paid for lots of software with my PayPal account, but without a credit card I can't purchase the other programs I'd like to.
So, I get a pirated serial and use that.
Honestly, that's a pretty lame excuse for pirating software. You can afford to pay but don't like the fact they they require a credit card and you refuse to get one? That sounds like your problem, not theirs.
Yet another IDG (ComputerWorld) story from and IDG shill in how many days? How many TODAY?
Looks like IDG (ComputerWorld, ITWorld, NetworkWorld...) is really hitting Slashdot HARD, either that or they have a deal with Slashdot. Here's a partial list of the shills that regularly show up and have almost 100% article acceptance rates:
Ian Lamont Lucas123 coondoggie inkslinger77 narramissic jcatcw
Looks like they spread out the work over a few shill user accounts, which is to be expected. If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
If the ISO is perfectly at home with political pressure, why did it take the outrage of the entire community to make them relent after they succumbed to political pressure?
Because they are in Microsoft's pocket, and thought they could railroad one of their corporate buddies through? Maybe that's a paranoid view, maybe it's a realistic view. What do you think?
Alright, I guess we should sit back and wait until Microsoft decides to clean up the ISO. Brilliant, sir. You are very, very well informed and surely not just some nay saying Slashdot cynic.
Man, that went right over your head. The parent isn't saying we should sit around, and isn't even criticizing Freecode's "CEO". It's saying that ISO is perfectly at home with political pressure, not exactly a virgin in the field, and Freecode's "CEO" doesn't carry a lot of weight anyway, not exactly being a "heavy hitter".
Nothing in the parent's post even suggest that he/she feels we should leave ISO and Microsoft to a closed source orgy. But suggesting that ISO is having the wool pulled over it's eyes is ignorant. ISO knows exactly what's going on.
Yet another IDG (ComputerWorld) story from and IDG shill in how many days? These arn't stories, they're ADVERTISING INSERTS.
Looks like IDG (ComputerWorld, ITWorld, NetworkWorld...) is really hitting Slashdot HARD, either that or they have a deal with Slashdot. Here's a partial list of the shills that regularly show up and have almost 100% article acceptance rates:
Lucas123 coondoggie inkslinger77 narramissic jcatcw
Looks like they spread out the work over a few shill user accounts, which is to be expected. If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
It really is quite simple, what parts of the open source SUN, BSD or userland Linux versions of ZFS are covered by NetApps patents. Give line numbers! Otherwise NetApp is just another SCO wanabe.
This might be so, but don't jump on Sun's bandwagon just because their PR wonks know how to play the Open Source Community with all the right buzz words, Sun is not historically a friend of Open Source. Look at the facts: it was Sun that originally brought the specter of patents to the table on this, and when the smaller patent troll balked at Sun's heavy-handedness, they pull out the "support meeeee! I'm open source!" card. Sun is full of shit on this.
By the way when was Java fully Open Sourced? Solaris is only headed that way because Sun sees the end of their proprietary money model, not because of some great love for Open Source.
Looks like IDG (ComputerWorld, ITWorld, NetworkWorld...) is really hitting Slashdot HARD, either that or they have a deal with Slashdot. Here's a partial list of the shills that regularly show up and have almost 100% article acceptance rates:
Looks like they spread out the work over a few shill user accounts, which is to be expected. If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
Looks like IDG (ComputerWorld) is really hitting Slashdot HARD, either that or they have a deal with Slashdot. Here's a partial list of the shills that regularly show up and have almost 100% article acceptance rates:
inkslinger77
narramissic
jcatcw
Looks like they spread out the work over a few shill user accounts, which is to be expected. If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
Looks like IDG (ComputerWorld) is really hitting Slashdot HARD, either that or they have a deal with Slashdot. Here's a partial list of the shills that regularly show up and have almost 100% article acceptance rates:
inkslinger77
narramissic
jcatcw
If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
The airmen who load the planes don't make the decisions.
Absolutely true, something went wrong a lot deeper than the crew that loaded the missiles. But they should have picked up on something being wrong. Their Commander was rightfully relieved of his command.
On close examination IDG, which owns a number of domains and "magazines" gets quite a bit of exposure this way at Slashdot. I don't think Slashdot "supports" this, I don't think its "editors" are smart enough to pick up on it. But Slashdot is clearly being "played" for financial gain by IDG and its stable of "bloggers" and other content authors.
Take this guy for example: narramissic. He shills for "itworld.com", another IDG property (besides ComputerWorld)
The truth is that ITWorld and ComputerWorld rarely have the best or even complete articles on whatever the subject is, they are simply vehicles to sell advertising.
Yes, she doesn't like lowly Slashdot users sticking their noses into the Story Acceptance process:
Firehose: misplaced democracy or no democracy at all?
By Joyce Carpenter
Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff that matters. Or so it says. Recently Slashdot implemented a system that apparently allows users to vote on which news and stuff they'd like to see on the homepage. The feature is called Firehose.
It's a bad metaphor and a bad idea.
When I (Slashdot nickname: jcatcw) first discovered/., it was a site for science & technology stories submitted by the community and selected by the editors. Early on, when I got a story accepted, the response from the dotters was so great that it crashed our site. That might sound bad, but we can buy more servers (in fact, we have).
Well. I guess you're right on that one. But it's a heck of a lot of stories, and actually there are more than just a few ComputerWorld shills tending gardens at Slashdot...
Have a look at jcatcw's 100% accepted articles: Yet another ComputerWorld Whore shilling ComputerWorld trip on Slashdot. Does ComputerWorld have some sort of arrangement?
Look at which "editor" posted the "story": KDawson. Mr. Dawson has become the Poster Child for misleading Slashdot headlines and summaries. I'm as anti-Microsoft as the next reasonably sane guy, but Dawson's editing generally has little relationship to the actual story.
By the way, you might want to look up what the word "shill" means; if you were correct, which you aren't, he would be selling computerworld subscriptions. Driving news traffic to a news site isn't shilling, as nobody but advertisers are handing over money. Don't use words you don't understand.
Websters: "to act as a spokesperson or promoter"
Wikipedia: "A shill is an associate of a person selling a good or service, who pretends no association and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer."
There are many more definitions that don't involve selling subscriptions.
I'm not sure why you got modded down. You're pretty obviously correct.
Actually, this very activity - shilling stories to blogs as a part of a calculated advertising / PR campaign - would make an excellent Slashdot story itself!
It needs to be delivered in a format that is playable in a FOSS player that does not require ant 'illegal' codecs. Also the encoder software needs to be FOSS. Also the browser plugin.
It needs to be free of any DRM of any sort. I should be able to save it for my viewing when I want. I should be able to recode it into any other format I want so I can play it on my homemade portable player. Also in my car. Or save it to a DVD to give to a friend. I should be able to share it on the internet via p2p services with no consequences.
That's noce, but it's not essential content, it's entertainment tv. And the copyright holder has ther rights (as they should) to distribute it how they want. If you don't like how the distribute it, that's your right not to watch it. But you don't have a right to pirate it. And please, get a grip, it's a fucking TV show. Stop making excuses for piracy.
Slashdot Mirror
Is VNC GPL? I don't know. But I think OpenSSH is BSD, so source isn't an issue there.
Perhaps that's why the current version isn't on Sourceforge?
If it's original work, can't the copyright holder decide to close the source? If it doesn't contain anyone else's work that happens to be GPLd, I don't see a problem here.
Need more info...
Honestly, that's a pretty lame excuse for pirating software. You can afford to pay but don't like the fact they they require a credit card and you refuse to get one? That sounds like your problem, not theirs.
Looks like IDG (ComputerWorld, ITWorld, NetworkWorld...) is really hitting Slashdot HARD, either that or they have a deal with Slashdot. Here's a partial list of the shills that regularly show up and have almost 100% article acceptance rates: Ian Lamont
Lucas123
coondoggie
inkslinger77
narramissic
jcatcw
Looks like they spread out the work over a few shill user accounts, which is to be expected. If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
Because they are in Microsoft's pocket, and thought they could railroad one of their corporate buddies through? Maybe that's a paranoid view, maybe it's a realistic view. What do you think?
Man, that went right over your head. The parent isn't saying we should sit around, and isn't even criticizing Freecode's "CEO". It's saying that ISO is perfectly at home with political pressure, not exactly a virgin in the field, and Freecode's "CEO" doesn't carry a lot of weight anyway, not exactly being a "heavy hitter".
Nothing in the parent's post even suggest that he/she feels we should leave ISO and Microsoft to a closed source orgy. But suggesting that ISO is having the wool pulled over it's eyes is ignorant. ISO knows exactly what's going on.
Looks like IDG (ComputerWorld, ITWorld, NetworkWorld...) is really hitting Slashdot HARD, either that or they have a deal with Slashdot. Here's a partial list of the shills that regularly show up and have almost 100% article acceptance rates: Lucas123
coondoggie
inkslinger77
narramissic
jcatcw
Looks like they spread out the work over a few shill user accounts, which is to be expected. If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
By the way when was Java fully Open Sourced? Solaris is only headed that way because Sun sees the end of their proprietary money model, not because of some great love for Open Source.
coondoggie
inkslinger77
narramissic
jcatcw
jpkunst
Looks like they spread out the work over a few shill user accounts, which is to be expected. If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
Looks like IDG (ComputerWorld) is really hitting Slashdot HARD, either that or they have a deal with Slashdot. Here's a partial list of the shills that regularly show up and have almost 100% article acceptance rates: inkslinger77 narramissic jcatcw Looks like they spread out the work over a few shill user accounts, which is to be expected. If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
inkslinger77
narramissic
jcatcw
If it's all OK and everything with the corporate ownership of Slashdot to be played by IDG, I suppose that's their business, but one would hope that they are actually getting PAID for being part of IDG's advertising program. And of course there should be disclosure so that visitors to Slashdot realize they are reading advertisements and not an article submitted by a "real" user...
Absolutely true, something went wrong a lot deeper than the crew that loaded the missiles. But they should have picked up on something being wrong. Their Commander was rightfully relieved of his command.
Take this guy for example: narramissic. He shills for "itworld.com", another IDG property (besides ComputerWorld)
The truth is that ITWorld and ComputerWorld rarely have the best or even complete articles on whatever the subject is, they are simply vehicles to sell advertising.
Well. I guess you're right on that one. But it's a heck of a lot of stories, and actually there are more than just a few ComputerWorld shills tending gardens at Slashdot...
Have a look at jcatcw's 100% accepted articles: Yet another ComputerWorld Whore shilling ComputerWorld trip on Slashdot. Does ComputerWorld have some sort of arrangement?
So, it's really not Eudora, it's Thunderbird with some Eudora-like widgets thrown in. It's "Eudora" in name only, than?
Look at which "editor" posted the "story": KDawson. Mr. Dawson has become the Poster Child for misleading Slashdot headlines and summaries. I'm as anti-Microsoft as the next reasonably sane guy, but Dawson's editing generally has little relationship to the actual story.
Websters: "to act as a spokesperson or promoter"
Wikipedia: "A shill is an associate of a person selling a good or service, who pretends no association and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer." There are many more definitions that don't involve selling subscriptions.
Actually, this very activity - shilling stories to blogs as a part of a calculated advertising / PR campaign - would make an excellent Slashdot story itself!
And, of course, a steady supply of advertising and "product placement".
That's quite the story write-up, almost as if done by a PR writer...
True, but according to the story, the "theft prevention" guy declined to accuse this guy of shoplifting:
And even if it's not strictly "illegal", it's not appropriate or ethical.