Whois Server Version 1.3
Domain names in the.com,.net, and.org domains can now be registeredwith many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net for detailed information.
MICROSOFT.COM.WILL.LIVE.FOREVER.BUT.LUNIX.SUCKS- BY BIRTH.ARTISTICCHEESE.COM
Total bullshit. This was either humour, or clueless crap.;)
There is no highway (or motorway, or autobahn, whatever) between England and France. Just railroad and an escape tunnel.
Also, Cold Air and Snow aren't traded, so they're not exports.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/pressroom/default.a sp
Check out how much Bill gives away this year.
I remembers hearing that on his death, all of his money is going to the trust, aside from under a 100 million going to his family - No idea if this is true, can't find confirmation on the web.
Pizza maybe, I've never seen beer associated with geekdom. Bunch of namby-pambies with their Jolt Cola usually, I prefer to code with a nice thick guiness in hand (tho not with beer, i like fat tire with my pizza)
Gah. Unless you have a tap in your gaff.
Guinness is piss out of a can.
I have often heard bands being paid in clubs do covers of songs they did not write. Happens pretty often, as far as I can tell.
Good. In my country, Ireland, a copyright organisation collects the money from venues and distributes accordingly to artists. Artists playing gigs for money earning over a certain amount of money a year (around £300, I think), are obliged to provide setlists, so that the right people end up with money from IMRO. IMRO pay the various copyright organisations, and pay aritsts for use of their work by themselves or others. It all works out in the end. kids playing Nirvana covers in a corner of a pub don't get charged, the venue does. Career musicians playing weddings etc. must give some money for use of other people's work, and IMRO are a one-stop-shop for payments. People who write music get money.
Whether or not your country has a similar setup, or even if you've seen bands play and don't think they incurred charges, it doesn't change that others shouldn't be able to rip-off and benefit from other people's work without their permission.
Then ask the same artist if they had ever sung or played a "cover version" and if they had got explicit permission from the original artist...
Utterly irrelevant. Can't you distinguish from "personal use" and "making money from"? Should copyright law forbid me to learning a song by The Smashing Pumpkins at home by playing along with the album? No. That'd be stupid. Should it forbid me earning money from use of this song without permission? Yes, it should, and does.
Old old news.
It's been in since kernel 2.3.14 KHTTPD web page.
It's not enabled by default (Duh). Redhat have a similar product, as used in some SPECweb ratings to beat NT. KHTTPD and the Redhat product offload non-static requests to Apache/AOLserver/whatever.
Ask a music artist this - Would you be happy with
__anybody__ using your work for their benefit without your permission? I would gag if any bozo could use, say, The Smashing Pumpkins music in a Levi's ad. Without copyright law, they'd have no recourse. Is this right or wrong?
Copyright law is needed. I don't buy the "information wants to be free" argument. Information should not be free for me to do with what I want. Just because I've got a copy of The Smashing Pumpkins' Gish album does not mean I have the right to distribute it and make money out of it without The Smashing Pumpkins' permission. I believe in this vehemently.
With sensible copyright laws, the only people losing out are the actual pirates and people just intrested in making money out of other people's work. I'm not arguing for the current USA copyright laws. I'm arguing for the artists right to choose. And the companys right to choose. Just because the way that IP is going is bad, in a bad, evil way, does not mean that the concept of owning information is bad. The backlash against copyright is nothing more than USA college kids being miffed at not being able to use Napster. There's little substance in the argument, imho.
> When I call (yes, I would self-declare as a
> knowledgable user, not the telecom expert), I
> want the tech guy to assume that I've already
> checked the phone line, that I know what an IP
> address is, and that I've tried stuff like
> pinging common servers and looking at their web
> page for reported outages. In other words, that
> the problem is probably on their side, and they
> should make a few phone calls to eliminate that
> first.
I don't agree with your "I'm above their problem solving methodology" attitude. I worked in Unix
tech support for over a year, no matter if it was the customer who was ringing up who had written an embedded OS and adminning Unix since before I was into puberty, when his printing sub-system wasn't working right, I'd have to rule things out and ask pretty much identical questions as if I was talking to Mr.I-know-a-bit-of-Unix-but-I'm-more-of-a-Windows- man. I'm sure it might have pissed him off, but I learned the hard way - Sometimes very clueful people make mistakes.
Of course, @HOME's service does sound very poor from the other postings - I'm not defending the company in any way, but when you hit tech. support, it's a bad thing for tech. support to make any assumptions about what you think you've checked - It can be embarrasing for the tech support person and the customer for it to have been a cable plugged out, or a netmask, or whatever.
I reckon the "tiered" tech support would be a service you've to pay extra for.
Also, if they start insisting that you can't use a dual-boot machine or Unix machine with their service, demand it in writing, and ask where you signed up to that. Procede to lawyer if neccessary.
> Perhaps they don't want to be perceived as an
> "evil corporation"...
Yes, this is totally true. The big people in Sun really really really care if they're known as an "evil corporation" by/.ers.
Or, it might just make good business sense, and fit into Sun's vision of Open Computing, Dot in Dot com blah blah.
Wooooo. That page has been there for months on
openoffice. I presume there'll be extra content
to go with the source code being open as soon
as the webserver repairs itself.
And the fact that he was perfectly content to repeat the poorly researched Computerworld article makes him look as dumb as Computerworld to Sun and Sun folk.
Not many people figure happyness as one of the things that they think about when figuring which job to go for. Personally, I'm extremely picky about jobs - I don't even see why I should leave my suburb to work - I'm happier with my friends around me. Yet, in Ireland only 15-20 years ago, people of my age were fleeing the country to find work, because good jobs were so scarce at the time.
Yeh, sure, I'm sure I'll do some travelling at some stage, but I'd rather live my life with my friends at the moment.:)
Big suprise. Why face the threat of legal action when you can just kick off the user. I promise you, whatever makes people's jobs easier, they'll do. Nobody wants to be a martyr and get the sack.
Store the stuff on a server you run if you actually believe in the spread of DeCSS.
There are good reasons for not forcing GPL on everybody who develops for StarOffice - Some people and companies don't like publishing under the GPL. Sun don't want to force the GPL on them. Makes sense to me. The SISSL will probably have the differences that the BSD and X11 licenses have compared to the GPL (i.e. no forcing disclosure of code)
Sun aren't shipping OpenWindows *shudder* with it. Bets they ship the helixcode desktop environment with it, to go with their GTK enabled Staroffice 6.:)
> They already ARE open. You can download them > from various places on the net. There are > various Open Source fileconverters based on > them. You can get them > on the Jan 1999 edition of the MSDN library. > How much more open do they have to be?
Well, no. I'm not an authority on the subject, but this chap is.
Re:Q: is this a good solution?
on
Linux Failover?
·
· Score: 1
>Yes Solarus can do a lot of great things Linux > can not. In the end Linux has one > great advantage and thats price. > Source code and quick security patch relases is > a bonus.
Solaris is free, for any system smaller than 8 CPU's, aside from shipping. And get a clue, Sun are damn quick about getting security patches out.
> I have downloaded several MP3s that I did not > own the rights to. I have > also listened to songs on the radio that I did > not own the rights to.
How dim are you?
THE RADIO STATION YOU WERE LISTENING HAD THE EXPRESSED CONSENT TO DISTRIBUTE THE ARTISTS MUSIC FROM THE ARTIST THEMSELVES. THE COLLEGE KID WHO RIPPED THE MP3 DID NOT HAVE ANY PERMISSION, NOR DOES HE CARE ABOUT AN ARTISTS RIGHT TO CHOOSE HOW THEIR WORK IS DISTRIBUTED.
Chances of this being moderated up is very very slim. I'm sick of making this point everytime Slashdot posts a boring "Let us pirate music" story. Yesterday a story was run about Nvidia violating the GPL and how bad they are, yet you're here advocating breaching artists publishing licenses.
>I suppose if M$ was to actually provide a near > full implementation of a unix shell, > filesystem, and command line utilities, it > could be argued that NT would be, indeed, a >UNIX.
Yes, by people who don't understand the difference between UNIX(tm) and Unix-like, along with the fundamentals of what a Unix like OS does.
Here's a flame. Would the slashdot kids jump up and down and flame and babble about somebody not conforming with the GPL? (say, using code published under GPL in a closed source app.). Of course you would.
But you don't respect artists right to release their music under a license of their choice? What a joke. I detest MP3z, Napster etc. as much as I detest violations of GPL,BSD license etc. They're all about infringing other people's right to publish ideas how they want to.
>It was developed on Solaris. Then I had to port >it to HP. Which required some changed. (I >remember that grep under Solaris had options not >supported by HP's grep; but they both claimed to >be POSIX compliant).
POSIX compliancy has nothing to do with all utilities being the same. They are compliant about a sub-set of options. They share their own features. What's your point?
Stability has nothing to do with UNIX(tm). It's very clear what UNIX(tm) is. It's very clear what Unix-like is. I refer you to the preaching of the Rev. Don Kool on computing.unix.admin:)
Slashdot Mirror
whois -h whois.internic.net. microsoft.com
Whois Server Version 1.3 Domain names in the .com, .net, and .org domains can now be registeredwith many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net for detailed information.
MICROSOFT.COM.WILL.LIVE.FOREVER.BUT.LUNIX.SUCKS- BY BIRTH.ARTISTICCHEESE.COM
Total bullshit. This was either humour, or clueless crap. ;)
There is no highway (or motorway, or autobahn, whatever) between England and France. Just railroad and an escape tunnel. Also, Cold Air and Snow aren't traded, so they're not exports.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/pressroom/default.a sp
Check out how much Bill gives away this year.
I remembers hearing that on his death, all of his money is going to the trust, aside from under a 100 million going to his family - No idea if this is true, can't find confirmation on the web.
Pizza maybe, I've never seen beer associated with geekdom. Bunch of namby-pambies with their Jolt Cola usually, I prefer to code with a nice thick guiness in hand (tho not with beer, i like fat tire with my pizza) Gah. Unless you have a tap in your gaff. Guinness is piss out of a can.
Good. In my country, Ireland, a copyright organisation collects the money from venues and distributes accordingly to artists. Artists playing gigs for money earning over a certain amount of money a year (around £300, I think), are obliged to provide setlists, so that the right people end up with money from IMRO. IMRO pay the various copyright organisations, and pay aritsts for use of their work by themselves or others. It all works out in the end. kids playing Nirvana covers in a corner of a pub don't get charged, the venue does. Career musicians playing weddings etc. must give some money for use of other people's work, and IMRO are a one-stop-shop for payments. People who write music get money.
Whether or not your country has a similar setup, or even if you've seen bands play and don't think they incurred charges, it doesn't change that others shouldn't be able to rip-off and benefit from other people's work without their permission.
Then ask the same artist if they had ever sung or played a "cover version" and if they had got explicit permission from the original artist...
Utterly irrelevant. Can't you distinguish from "personal use" and "making money from"? Should copyright law forbid me to learning a song by The Smashing Pumpkins at home by playing along with the album? No. That'd be stupid. Should it forbid me earning money from use of this song without permission? Yes, it should, and does.
Old old news. It's been in since kernel 2.3.14
KHTTPD web page.
It's not enabled by default (Duh). Redhat have a similar product, as used in some SPECweb ratings to beat NT. KHTTPD and the Redhat product offload non-static requests to Apache/AOLserver/whatever.
Ask a music artist this - Would you be happy with
__anybody__ using your work for their benefit without your permission? I would gag if any bozo could use, say, The Smashing Pumpkins music in a Levi's ad. Without copyright law, they'd have no recourse. Is this right or wrong?
Copyright law is needed. I don't buy the "information wants to be free" argument. Information should not be free for me to do with what I want. Just because I've got a copy of The Smashing Pumpkins' Gish album does not mean I have the right to distribute it and make money out of it without The Smashing Pumpkins' permission. I believe in this vehemently.
With sensible copyright laws, the only people losing out are the actual pirates and people just intrested in making money out of other people's work. I'm not arguing for the current USA copyright laws. I'm arguing for the artists right to choose. And the companys right to choose. Just because the way that IP is going is bad, in a bad, evil way, does not mean that the concept of owning information is bad. The backlash against copyright is nothing more than USA college kids being miffed at not being able to use Napster. There's little substance in the argument, imho.
> When I call (yes, I would self-declare as a
- man. I'm sure it might have pissed him off, but I learned the hard way - Sometimes very clueful people make mistakes.
> knowledgable user, not the telecom expert), I
> want the tech guy to assume that I've already
> checked the phone line, that I know what an IP
> address is, and that I've tried stuff like
> pinging common servers and looking at their web
> page for reported outages. In other words, that
> the problem is probably on their side, and they
> should make a few phone calls to eliminate that
> first.
I don't agree with your "I'm above their problem solving methodology" attitude. I worked in Unix
tech support for over a year, no matter if it was the customer who was ringing up who had written an embedded OS and adminning Unix since before I was into puberty, when his printing sub-system wasn't working right, I'd have to rule things out and ask pretty much identical questions as if I was talking to Mr.I-know-a-bit-of-Unix-but-I'm-more-of-a-Windows
Of course, @HOME's service does sound very poor from the other postings - I'm not defending the company in any way, but when you hit tech. support, it's a bad thing for tech. support to make any assumptions about what you think you've checked - It can be embarrasing for the tech support person and the customer for it to have been a cable plugged out, or a netmask, or whatever.
I reckon the "tiered" tech support would be a service you've to pay extra for.
Also, if they start insisting that you can't use a dual-boot machine or Unix machine with their service, demand it in writing, and ask where you signed up to that. Procede to lawyer if neccessary.
> Perhaps they don't want to be perceived as an > "evil corporation"... Yes, this is totally true. The big people in Sun really really really care if they're known as an "evil corporation" by /.ers.
Or, it might just make good business sense, and fit into Sun's vision of Open Computing, Dot in Dot com blah blah.
Wooooo. That page has been there for months on openoffice. I presume there'll be extra content to go with the source code being open as soon as the webserver repairs itself.
And the fact that he was perfectly content to repeat the poorly researched Computerworld article makes him look as dumb as Computerworld to Sun and Sun folk.
Not many people figure happyness as one of the things that they think about when figuring which job to go for. Personally, I'm extremely picky about jobs - I don't even see why I should leave my suburb to work - I'm happier with my friends around me. Yet, in Ireland only 15-20 years ago, people of my age were fleeing the country to find work, because good jobs were so scarce at the time. Yeh, sure, I'm sure I'll do some travelling at some stage, but I'd rather live my life with my friends at the moment. :)
Big suprise. Why face the threat of legal action when you can just kick off the user. I promise you, whatever makes people's jobs easier, they'll do. Nobody wants to be a martyr and get the sack.
Store the stuff on a server you run if you actually believe in the spread of DeCSS.
There are good reasons for not forcing GPL on everybody who develops for StarOffice - Some people and companies don't like publishing under the GPL. Sun don't want to force the GPL on them.
Makes sense to me. The SISSL will probably have the differences that the BSD and X11 licenses have compared to the GPL (i.e. no forcing disclosure of code)
Sun aren't shipping OpenWindows *shudder* with it. :)
Bets they ship the helixcode desktop environment with it, to go with their GTK enabled Staroffice 6.
> They already ARE open. You can download them
> from various places on the net. There are
> various Open Source fileconverters based on
> them. You can get them
> on the Jan 1999 edition of the MSDN library.
> How much more open do they have to be?
Well, no. I'm not an authority on the subject, but this chap is.
Interview with Caolan.
WV info.
Incomplete documentation, it seems.
>Yes Solarus can do a lot of great things Linux
> can not. In the end Linux has one
> great advantage and thats price.
> Source code and quick security patch relases is
> a bonus.
Solaris is free, for any system smaller than 8 CPU's, aside from shipping. And get a clue, Sun are damn quick about getting security patches out.
> I have downloaded several MP3s that I did not
> own the rights to. I have
> also listened to songs on the radio that I did
> not own the rights to.
How dim are you?
THE RADIO STATION YOU WERE LISTENING HAD THE EXPRESSED CONSENT TO DISTRIBUTE THE ARTISTS MUSIC FROM THE ARTIST THEMSELVES. THE COLLEGE KID WHO RIPPED THE MP3 DID NOT HAVE ANY PERMISSION, NOR DOES HE CARE ABOUT AN ARTISTS RIGHT TO CHOOSE HOW THEIR WORK IS DISTRIBUTED.
Chances of this being moderated up is very very slim. I'm sick of making this point everytime Slashdot posts a boring "Let us pirate music" story. Yesterday a story was run about Nvidia violating the GPL and how bad they are, yet you're here advocating breaching artists publishing licenses.
>What if NVidia had just used a clever algorithm
>they found in an open source project?
Are you one of these people who think ideas shouldn't be free?
IMHO, algorithms are the same as mathematics. Open source software should be proud of their spreading of good algorithms.
>I suppose if M$ was to actually provide a near
> full implementation of a unix shell,
> filesystem, and command line utilities, it
> could be argued that NT would be, indeed, a >UNIX.
Yes, by people who don't understand the difference between UNIX(tm) and Unix-like, along with the fundamentals of what a Unix like OS does.
Here's a flame. Would the slashdot kids jump up and down and flame and babble about somebody not conforming with the GPL? (say, using code published under GPL in a closed source app.). Of course you would.
But you don't respect artists right to release their music under a license of their choice? What a joke. I detest MP3z, Napster etc. as much as I detest violations of GPL,BSD license etc. They're all about infringing other people's right to publish ideas how they want to.
>It was developed on Solaris. Then I had to port >it to HP. Which required some changed. (I >remember that grep under Solaris had options not >supported by HP's grep; but they both claimed to >be POSIX compliant).
POSIX compliancy has nothing to do with all utilities being the same. They are compliant about a sub-set of options. They share their own features. What's your point?
Stability has nothing to do with UNIX(tm). :)
It's very clear what UNIX(tm) is. It's very clear what Unix-like is. I refer you to the preaching of the Rev. Don Kool on computing.unix.admin
> I would be surprised if they weren't sneaking > > parts of Apache to their other OS's, which have > anemic TCP/IP suites to say the least.
What? They're using Apache's TCP stack in their other OSes? Apache doesn't have a TCP stack...