If I remember correctly, I think Slashdot left those posts up and basically told Microsoft legal to 'bring it on'.
That's correct, that's exactly what they did. They did not respect Microsoft's IP. Those documents are in fact copyrighted by Microsoft. Slashdot violated Microsoft's IP rights, because when it's someone else's IP, they seem to think the whole idea of IP is wrong. But when it's IP that has something to do with Linux, people on here(cmdrtaco and the slashdot crew included) don't stick to their ideals.
This guy seriously has a point, more than I can say for the rest of the hypocrits on here today.
Fuck, I can't believe all the bullshit comments on here today, how fucking hypocritical. Who the hell hasn't ripped of an image or two, or three? This isn't hurting anyone, he even gives credit to linux.com, which is more than most people do. Where's the spirit of open source? Where's all the idealists who talk about how evil IP is? Did they all change their minds now because it's VA IP being used? WTF?
Remember the whole thing about the M$ documents that were posted here on Slashdot? M$ sent letters demanding they remove them, Slashdot refused. What Slashdot refused to remove were documents that are copyrighted by M$.
Slashdot was right to do that, IP is bullshit.
And now they shouldn't act like hypocrits now that someone is using VA IP.
"You can't compare software to devices, or aparatus."
Yes, in many cases that is correct.
"Most certainly the design of the razor is patented, and through that patent, only one sort of blade, with the proper attachment mechanism can be attached to the razor."
Who said anything about patents? In his example, he didn't say the device was patented, where is this patent talk coming from. Obviously, in his example, you are supposed to assume the device in question isn't patented.
"Also, the statement "Hardware is often ignored by other operating systems. On the other hand, Linux takes advantage of all the hardware it can." is ridiculous."
Your using that statement out of context. He was referring to faulty hardware that can cause Linux to crash, where in other OSes it won't cause a crash because that particular OS doesn't pay attention to that particular piece of hardware.
So, in other words, what you are saying is that it's a good thing that school's aren't turning people into scientists anymore but turning them into corporate slaves?
What about pure research? Why does everything have to be for the benefit of corporations?
Sorry, but that's just the way I see it, I could just be paranoid though or something...
It's probably the video cards you've seen on the PC side that was the problem. Many 3dfx cards I've seen deliver a very washed out appearance, while many Nvidia cards deliver very vibrant colors, and I hear the picture quality of the Matrox G400 is excellent.
Don't forget, if it's a trade secret it still doesn't matter. A trade secret doesn't mean a thing without an NDA, or if the secret was discovered through illegal means. Once it's out... it's not a secret anymore!
IANALBMUAIBHDPTB (i am not a lawyer but my uncle almost is but he didn't pass the bar =)
First off, that title is purely flaimbait, surely not something a writer of your skill level would sink to.
Second, you have no clue what you're talking about, Linux didn't do too bad on bugtraq, much better than windows. You must have been referring to the aggregate results, which obviously consisted of a total of bugs from several distributions, as Redhat's, and Suse's numbers were much lower. Obviously, the aggregate results don't mean much, as you won't be running every distribution on the same machine at the same time. Surely someone as smart as you would realize this.
Third, someone who writes about technical issues would surely understand what these numbers mean. If not, let me tell you. Virtually NOTHING! Yes, that's correct, they mean next to nothing. These are reported bugs, so they are most likely fixed almost right away. They may also be insignificant bugs that don't really matter in most situations, as they don't distinguish between the severity of bugs. Also, since they are only reported bugs, there's probably plenty that are not known. For example, MacOS X has 1 reported bug! Surely MacOS X has WAY more than that, as it's still in development, and everyone who has a clue knows that it's just not possible for there to be ONLY 1 BUG in an OS in development!
So I think I understand. There are only three possibilities.
1. This article is pure flaimbait meant to create traffic, hence, more banner revenue! This is the most likely scenario. Job well done, you made an ass of yourself and it paid off.
2. This is a joke! Haha, pretty funny, I'm dyin! But seriously, that's really not a very good joke, I don't think many people will get it.
3. You are a complete moron and should be fired from your job immediately!
If 1 or 2 is correct, then I hope you are happy being a completely worthless human being! That must bring you great joy!
I am an extremely fast twitch quake/unreal player. The M$ Optical mice cannot handle fast twitches well at all. If you twitch really fast, the mouse will go off in all different directions.
I've done this with several of these mice/surfaces, so it's not that I had a bad mouse. Needless to say, that just won't cut it for a lot of gamers like myself.
Actually, just using the mouse for normal applications I sometimes move it faster than it can handle. I find this very annoying.
Does anyone know if the newer mice still have these problems?
He was talking about circumventing access control devices, and now you're saying "this isn't about locks, it's about copyright, a different arena". That's not correct, this IS about locks, and has NOTHING to do with copyright.
He was saying that breaking/picking your own lock should be legal, whether it be a digital device, or a physical lock. Technically, this whole thing doesn't even come CLOSE to being about copyright, it is entirely about breaking a ditital lock on your own property.
This whole thing has been twisted around so much it is absolutely ridiculous! CSS is a lock. Its purpose is to protect the data on a DVD, whether for access control or marketing control shouldn't matter. (It IS for marketing control however, which IMHO is disgusting) Breaking/picking a lock is not illegal, unless you are damaging someone else's property. Whether it's digital or not shouldn't matter.
The DMCA is grossly unconstitutional, and needs to die as soon as possible.
Don't believe me, then how come the tobacco companies got busted for $150billion?! They are the one group that has unlimited money and they lost their case.
That is not a good example to use to support your argument! Go rent The Insider. Yes it's a dramatization, but the events in the film really happened, it really was tramatic enough for his wife to leave him, he really did get smeared on TV, and he really did get shafted by CBS because they were affraid of the tobacco industry... See just how much money can buy you in the courtroom. The only reason the tobacco industry lost was because some people were willing to throw their lives into the trash to take them down. And it took a long time for them to lose a case. Think about it, millions of people die every year because of cigarettes, and up until just a few years ago they had NEVER lost a case.
The tobacco industry (actually, a certain tobacco company, don't remember which) was able to influence the court in the state of Kentucky, the FBI, make death threats with impunity, etc. etc..
You couldn't be more wrong, morally or historically. To follow an unjust law is to commit a moral crime, and the most effective form of protest has throughout history been civil disobedience. Throughout history this has been proven time and time again. The civil rights movement is one of the best examples of this.
They didn't win their rights by taking their seat on the back of the bus!
It would be like Slashdot posting a story about Kuro5hin, and then pulling it because they didn't want to promote a competitor. Is/Should that be legally wrong, I don't think so. Morally wrong? Maybe, I don't know... Does that demonstrate much journalistic integrity? Hell no.
Some CPU's are much more tolerant to overclocking than others. You didn't get lucky, I know how that is. Fortuneately for me, I got lucky when I bought my Celery 400. I spent $0 on stuff to use to overclock it. I have it overclocked to 500mhz. It's runs just as stable at 500 as it does at 400. I have no extra fans or anything, and it runs fine sitting in a hot room.
Anyway, my point being, buy the CPU at the speed you want, and maybe you'll get lucky and be able to run it faster without spending extra money.
I really wish I had a porsche that I could sell! But why sell such a fine automobile when you could drive it yourself? Forget paying the mortgage, I'll sleep in the car...
Yes, but in this case no one owns the porsche. It's not actually comparable to a porsche since a porsche is physical property.
In any case, I think what they're doing is wrong, and unfair to other registrars. It's certainly not the end of the world, and I doubt it will actually make much difference.
If you don't pay for a domain name it should go back into the pool for other people to register(like it has always been). NSI is trying to prevent their current batch of domain names registered through them from being registered via other registrars. Complete and utter bullshit if you ask me.
This is very very wrong for them to do because once someone registers a name with NSI, it can NEVER be registered with another registrar. It seems they're trying to reclaim their monopoly hold in a small way.
Of course if someone registers the name they can always switch it over to another registrar, but they're still stuck with having to pay money to NSI.
This is complete bullshit, NSI should not be able to do this.
What you are saying makes absolutely no sense. They could simply say that the film has to have a theatrical release in order to qualify, which would still "ensure that the Academy Awards for film continue to be awards for film." Why on earth would it matter where it's shown first?
I agree with the poster you responded to, the Academy is simply looking out for their own.
But to hell with the Academy, they're so biased anyway who gives a shit.
My brother is really into film, and he's got plenty to say about how much he dislikes the Academy.
Traditionally, when an actor wins a golden globe, they are at least nominated for an Oscar. You'll find that almost everyone who wins a golden globe is nominated. Jim Carrey has won 2 golden globes, but has never been nominated for an Oscar. The Academy simply does not like Jim Carrey, despite the fact that he's an excellent actor. You can't deny that his performance in The Truman Show, or Man on the Moon, was outstanding. Not enough? Maybe the Academy simply didn't like these films? Ed Harris was nominated for an Oscar for his performance in The Truman Show.
Why give the Academy the benefit of the doubt when they clearly don't deserve it.
Turning IE into the windows file manager was not a technological innovation, it was a marketing innovation. This is so obvious I'm surprised someone else hasn't said this already.
While using a web browser as a file manager could be very useful, Microsoft didn't do anything useful with it. All they did was add file managing capabilities to IE, so when your browsing through files it works just like the old file manager, with prettier icons and image/html thumbnails on the left.
It would have been easier and wouldn't suck down so much resources to add those capabilities to the file manager, but that wouldn't have allowed them to integrate the browser with the OS.
Slashdot Mirror
A wife is not intellectual property.
Fucking is not intellectual property.
If your friend fucks your wife he hasn't stolen anything, your wife is just a whore, and your friend is an asshole.
If I remember correctly, I think Slashdot left those posts up and basically told Microsoft legal to 'bring it on'.
That's correct, that's exactly what they did. They did not respect Microsoft's IP. Those documents are in fact copyrighted by Microsoft. Slashdot violated Microsoft's IP rights, because when it's someone else's IP, they seem to think the whole idea of IP is wrong. But when it's IP that has something to do with Linux, people on here(cmdrtaco and the slashdot crew included) don't stick to their ideals.
You can't have it both ways.
This guy seriously has a point, more than I can say for the rest of the hypocrits on here today.
Fuck, I can't believe all the bullshit comments on here today, how fucking hypocritical. Who the hell hasn't ripped of an image or two, or three? This isn't hurting anyone, he even gives credit to linux.com, which is more than most people do. Where's the spirit of open source? Where's all the idealists who talk about how evil IP is? Did they all change their minds now because it's VA IP being used? WTF?
Leave the guy alone.
Remember the whole thing about the M$ documents that were posted here on Slashdot? M$ sent letters demanding they remove them, Slashdot refused. What Slashdot refused to remove were documents that are copyrighted by M$.
Slashdot was right to do that, IP is bullshit.
And now they shouldn't act like hypocrits now that someone is using VA IP.
JMHFO just my honest fucking opinion
What on earth are you talking about?
"You can't compare software to devices, or aparatus."
Yes, in many cases that is correct.
"Most certainly the design of the razor is patented, and through that patent, only one sort of blade, with the proper attachment mechanism can be attached to the razor."
Who said anything about patents? In his example, he didn't say the device was patented, where is this patent talk coming from. Obviously, in his example, you are supposed to assume the device in question isn't patented.
You are making no sense.
I don't know. The whole thing was not written very well. It could easily be interpreted in different ways.
"Also, the statement "Hardware is often ignored by other operating systems. On the other hand, Linux takes advantage of all the hardware it can." is ridiculous."
Your using that statement out of context. He was referring to faulty hardware that can cause Linux to crash, where in other OSes it won't cause a crash because that particular OS doesn't pay attention to that particular piece of hardware.
So, in other words, what you are saying is that it's a good thing that school's aren't turning people into scientists anymore but turning them into corporate slaves?
What about pure research? Why does everything have to be for the benefit of corporations?
Sorry, but that's just the way I see it, I could just be paranoid though or something...
What about Slackware?
I've seen quite a few IAAL posts. The thing is, even they usually share very different opinions on subjects...
It's probably the video cards you've seen on the PC side that was the problem. Many 3dfx cards I've seen deliver a very washed out appearance, while many Nvidia cards deliver very vibrant colors, and I hear the picture quality of the Matrox G400 is excellent.
I have a 3dfx V3, which isn't too bad.
Don't forget, if it's a trade secret it still doesn't matter. A trade secret doesn't mean a thing without an NDA, or if the secret was discovered through illegal means. Once it's out... it's not a secret anymore!
IANALBMUAIBHDPTB (i am not a lawyer but my uncle almost is but he didn't pass the bar =)
A few thoughts about a recent article of yours.
"Linux Sux Redux"
First off, that title is purely flaimbait, surely not something a writer of your skill level would sink to.
Second, you have no clue what you're talking about, Linux didn't do too bad on bugtraq, much better than windows. You must have been referring to the aggregate results, which obviously consisted of a total of bugs from several distributions, as Redhat's, and Suse's numbers were much lower. Obviously, the aggregate results don't mean much, as you won't be running every distribution on the same machine at the same time. Surely someone as smart as you would realize this.
Third, someone who writes about technical issues would surely understand what these numbers mean. If not, let me tell you. Virtually NOTHING! Yes, that's correct, they mean next to nothing. These are reported bugs, so they are most likely fixed almost right away. They may also be insignificant bugs that don't really matter in most situations, as they don't distinguish between the severity of bugs. Also, since they are only reported bugs, there's probably plenty that are not known. For example, MacOS X has 1 reported bug! Surely MacOS X has WAY more than that, as it's still in development, and everyone who has a clue knows that it's just not possible for there to be ONLY 1 BUG in an OS in development!
So I think I understand. There are only three possibilities.
1. This article is pure flaimbait meant to create traffic, hence, more banner revenue! This is the most likely scenario. Job well done, you made an ass of yourself and it paid off.
2. This is a joke! Haha, pretty funny, I'm dyin! But seriously, that's really not a very good joke, I don't think many people will get it.
3. You are a complete moron and should be fired from your job immediately!
If 1 or 2 is correct, then I hope you are happy being a completely worthless human being! That must bring you great joy!
If 2 is correct... oh wait, same thing.
Thanks for you time,
Ryan
I am an extremely fast twitch quake/unreal player. The M$ Optical mice cannot handle fast twitches well at all. If you twitch really fast, the mouse will go off in all different directions.
I've done this with several of these mice/surfaces, so it's not that I had a bad mouse. Needless to say, that just won't cut it for a lot of gamers like myself.
Actually, just using the mouse for normal applications I sometimes move it faster than it can handle. I find this very annoying.
Does anyone know if the newer mice still have these problems?
uhhh... what?
He was talking about circumventing access control devices, and now you're saying "this isn't about locks, it's about copyright, a different arena". That's not correct, this IS about locks, and has NOTHING to do with copyright.
He was saying that breaking/picking your own lock should be legal, whether it be a digital device, or a physical lock. Technically, this whole thing doesn't even come CLOSE to being about copyright, it is entirely about breaking a ditital lock on your own property.
This whole thing has been twisted around so much it is absolutely ridiculous! CSS is a lock. Its purpose is to protect the data on a DVD, whether for access control or marketing control shouldn't matter. (It IS for marketing control however, which IMHO is disgusting) Breaking/picking a lock is not illegal, unless you are damaging someone else's property. Whether it's digital or not shouldn't matter.
The DMCA is grossly unconstitutional, and needs to die as soon as possible.
Don't believe me, then how come the tobacco companies got busted for $150billion?! They are the one group that has unlimited money and they lost their case.
That is not a good example to use to support your argument! Go rent The Insider. Yes it's a dramatization, but the events in the film really happened, it really was tramatic enough for his wife to leave him, he really did get smeared on TV, and he really did get shafted by CBS because they were affraid of the tobacco industry... See just how much money can buy you in the courtroom. The only reason the tobacco industry lost was because some people were willing to throw their lives into the trash to take them down. And it took a long time for them to lose a case. Think about it, millions of people die every year because of cigarettes, and up until just a few years ago they had NEVER lost a case.
The tobacco industry (actually, a certain tobacco company, don't remember which) was able to influence the court in the state of Kentucky, the FBI, make death threats with impunity, etc. etc..
You are wrong, money buys a lot.
You couldn't be more wrong, morally or historically. To follow an unjust law is to commit a moral crime, and the most effective form of protest has throughout history been civil disobedience. Throughout history this has been proven time and time again. The civil rights movement is one of the best examples of this.
They didn't win their rights by taking their seat on the back of the bus!
Your analogy is more correct, but still not..
It would be like Slashdot posting a story about Kuro5hin, and then pulling it because they didn't want to promote a competitor. Is/Should that be legally wrong, I don't think so. Morally wrong? Maybe, I don't know... Does that demonstrate much journalistic integrity? Hell no.
Some CPU's are much more tolerant to overclocking than others. You didn't get lucky, I know how that is. Fortuneately for me, I got lucky when I bought my Celery 400. I spent $0 on stuff to use to overclock it. I have it overclocked to 500mhz. It's runs just as stable at 500 as it does at 400. I have no extra fans or anything, and it runs fine sitting in a hot room.
Anyway, my point being, buy the CPU at the speed you want, and maybe you'll get lucky and be able to run it faster without spending extra money.
Overclocking sure is fun though...
I really wish I had a porsche that I could sell! But why sell such a fine automobile when you could drive it yourself? Forget paying the mortgage, I'll sleep in the car...
Yes, but in this case no one owns the porsche. It's not actually comparable to a porsche since a porsche is physical property.
In any case, I think what they're doing is wrong, and unfair to other registrars. It's certainly not the end of the world, and I doubt it will actually make much difference.
If you don't pay for a domain name it should go back into the pool for other people to register(like it has always been). NSI is trying to prevent their current batch of domain names registered through them from being registered via other registrars. Complete and utter bullshit if you ask me.
This is very very wrong for them to do because once someone registers a name with NSI, it can NEVER be registered with another registrar. It seems they're trying to reclaim their monopoly hold in a small way.
Of course if someone registers the name they can always switch it over to another registrar, but they're still stuck with having to pay money to NSI.
This is complete bullshit, NSI should not be able to do this.
What you are saying makes absolutely no sense. They could simply say that the film has to have a theatrical release in order to qualify, which would still "ensure that the Academy Awards for film continue to be awards for film." Why on earth would it matter where it's shown first?
I agree with the poster you responded to, the Academy is simply looking out for their own.
But to hell with the Academy, they're so biased anyway who gives a shit.
My brother is really into film, and he's got plenty to say about how much he dislikes the Academy.
Traditionally, when an actor wins a golden globe, they are at least nominated for an Oscar. You'll find that almost everyone who wins a golden globe is nominated. Jim Carrey has won 2 golden globes, but has never been nominated for an Oscar. The Academy simply does not like Jim Carrey, despite the fact that he's an excellent actor. You can't deny that his performance in The Truman Show, or Man on the Moon, was outstanding. Not enough? Maybe the Academy simply didn't like these films? Ed Harris was nominated for an Oscar for his performance in The Truman Show.
Why give the Academy the benefit of the doubt when they clearly don't deserve it.
I could be entirely wrong though.
Turning IE into the windows file manager was not a technological innovation, it was a marketing innovation. This is so obvious I'm surprised someone else hasn't said this already.
While using a web browser as a file manager could be very useful, Microsoft didn't do anything useful with it. All they did was add file managing capabilities to IE, so when your browsing through files it works just like the old file manager, with prettier icons and image/html thumbnails on the left.
It would have been easier and wouldn't suck down so much resources to add those capabilities to the file manager, but that wouldn't have allowed them to integrate the browser with the OS.
I'd say it's more like a freight train hitting a bicycle.