Shenanigans came into popular culture from, as does almost everything that didn't come from the Simpsons, including a now-classic Simpsons metajoke, from South Park,
UnixWare is neither a person nor a group, it is a platform. Nothing obliges the nmap maintainers to support any particular platform or obliges them to continue such support once it has been offered.
If they'd just quietly dropped it without comment, would there be an issue ?
Actually, what the HUs technically mean, is someone who has registered their copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office. It costs $30 (literary works) and takes effect when they receive their copies for deposit, the (paper) form and US$30.
But yes, the cynical parent is right in practical terms - entities that have purchased legislation.
To be ulitmately cynical you write something, make a funny picture or Flash animation that gets passed around the Internet. Keep an eye out for a copy leaving your target's organization. File notice that you intend to penetrate their security to search for copies of your (registered) copyrighted works [1]. Hack their systems. Destroy anything with a copy of your creation on it with complete impunity. Do not neglect mail servers and the backup servers (a copy is a copy).
For bonus points go through the outbound logs, Sent Items folders and address books to identify additional targets. [2]
Disclaimer: Some steps expressed as trivialities may, in fact, be epic undertakings in their own right [3].
[1] This bill didn't actually pass, but I reserve the right in all circumstances to be more hypothetical than strictly necessary.
[2] This last is nothing a virus with access to Windows Scripting Host couldn't do to an Outlook user. If DRM software to do this already exists (in, say, Windows 2005) then you have a legitimate reason to use it - or to reverse engineer it for "interoperability".
I'd really like to know why we should belive anything the Architect said. We assume that he's manipulating Neo, but then we analyze his words.
Guys, he's BS'ing Neo bigtime. Don't take the architect seriously. There may be a few nuggets of truth in there, perhaps even the whole fabric. But at least some of the details simply must be wrong.
Like I said, narrow it down some, then throw some big iron at it. Like a Beowulf clustor of something. Preferrably something identical to the hardware originally used for the compilation youre' trying to recreate.
There's a billion dollar lawsuit on the table. If SCO manages to kill every developer involved and destroy all backups of the build system, IBM can still recreate the compilation for less than what SCO sued them for. And probably less than what they'd settle for.
The compiler settings can be recovered by brute force, but you can probably find at least some clues and shortcuts.
You can always compare the newly compiled binaries to what went out on CD. It would be possible to write a program to repeatedly compile the code in question with different options and flags until it hits on the exact binary that was shipped. Then try it on the whole thing. By process of elimination, you can eventually derive the exact sequence of the compilation.
Assuming of course that you can't find so much as an email discussion about the process. Ask the person who did it. Dust off old tapes of the build system. For that matter some combinations of settings can be ruled out by expert analysis. There are many ways to reduce the size of the problem domain.
We had a couple of guys from Adobe in the office recently. They both showed up lugging 12" PowerBooks.
Not a statistcal sample,just a real-life example.
Also note that the "100 second minutes" thing is due to a poorly designed graph (Adobe makes graphics software, they don't DO graphics:-). Really poorly designed, the x-axis is in decimal minutes - which I've never seen before.
Another possibility, which is somewhere out past left field, is that some nitwit at SCO saw a date in comments using European format (day first) and thought that the Linux code dates from after the SCO code when it's really the other way round. The CVS logs would verify this.
That would be more embarassing than, oh, Microsoft faking evidence in Federal court.
Ubi has one bright spot. Their support for IL-2 Sturmovik has been aoutstanding. A lot of that is due to the developer, but Ubi producers have been very active on their flight sim boards.
The consensus from the review sites is: if you're interested in combat flight sims, buy this game.
One of the Creative Directors at work does that. He loves it. There are several LaCie PocketDrives in the office. We love 'em, 40GB goes in the boss' pocket and he's off to a presentation in Europe. The only thing wrong is that they aren't bootable, but they will do USB in partial recompense.
Slashdot Mirror
I second that.
GifConverter has ruled for years.
Well, there aren't any trade scerets in this stuff (anymore).
I'm saving a copy for posterity.
Well sure, I was really responding farther up the tree I suppose. Mis-clickage.
Shenanigans came into popular culture from, as does almost everything that didn't come from the Simpsons, including a now-classic Simpsons metajoke, from South Park,
UnixWare is neither a person nor a group, it is a platform. Nothing obliges the nmap maintainers to support any particular platform or obliges them to continue such support once it has been offered.
If they'd just quietly dropped it without comment, would there be an issue ?
*BOOM*
Actually, what the HUs technically mean, is someone who has registered their copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office. It costs $30 (literary works) and takes effect when they receive their copies for deposit, the (paper) form and US$30.
But yes, the cynical parent is right in practical terms - entities that have purchased legislation.
To be ulitmately cynical you write something, make a funny picture or Flash animation that gets passed around the Internet. Keep an eye out for a copy leaving your target's organization. File notice that you intend to penetrate their security to search for copies of your (registered) copyrighted works [1]. Hack their systems. Destroy anything with a copy of your creation on it with complete impunity. Do not neglect mail servers and the backup servers (a copy is a copy).
For bonus points go through the outbound logs, Sent Items folders and address books to identify additional targets. [2]
Disclaimer: Some steps expressed as trivialities may, in fact, be epic undertakings in their own right [3].
[1] This bill didn't actually pass, but I reserve the right in all circumstances to be more hypothetical than strictly necessary.
[2] This last is nothing a virus with access to Windows Scripting Host couldn't do to an Outlook user. If DRM software to do this already exists (in, say, Windows 2005) then you have a legitimate reason to use it - or to reverse engineer it for "interoperability".
[3] There's that word again.
"And in tonight's top story, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead."
I'd really like to know why we should belive anything the Architect said. We assume that he's manipulating Neo, but then we analyze his words.
Guys, he's BS'ing Neo bigtime. Don't take the architect seriously. There may be a few nuggets of truth in there, perhaps even the whole fabric. But at least some of the details simply must be wrong.
Bingo. Spotted that a couple of weekends ago.
Where's that Esoteric rip anyway ?
"No smoking or spitting"
THE MGT.
Like I said, narrow it down some, then throw some big iron at it. Like a Beowulf clustor of something. Preferrably something identical to the hardware originally used for the compilation youre' trying to recreate.
There's a billion dollar lawsuit on the table. If SCO manages to kill every developer involved and destroy all backups of the build system, IBM can still recreate the compilation for less than what SCO sued them for. And probably less than what they'd settle for.
The compiler settings can be recovered by brute force, but you can probably find at least some clues and shortcuts.
You can always compare the newly compiled binaries to what went out on CD. It would be possible to write a program to repeatedly compile the code in question with different options and flags until it hits on the exact binary that was shipped. Then try it on the whole thing. By process of elimination, you can eventually derive the exact sequence of the compilation.
Assuming of course that you can't find so much as an email discussion about the process. Ask the person who did it. Dust off old tapes of the build system. For that matter some combinations of settings can be ruled out by expert analysis. There are many ways to reduce the size of the problem domain.
I am so not downloading an .exe from a slashdot posting.
Use the "learning opportunity" as a bullet point for your presentation to the school board. That'll help get the other zillion the Open Source.
Put an Open Source IDE and the Open Office sourcecode on that (those) CD(s) and you have an unparalleled educational opportunity.
We had a couple of guys from Adobe in the office recently. They both showed up lugging 12" PowerBooks.
:-). Really poorly designed, the x-axis is in decimal minutes - which I've never seen before.
Not a statistcal sample,just a real-life example.
Also note that the "100 second minutes" thing is due to a poorly designed graph (Adobe makes graphics software, they don't DO graphics
Well, when Apple adds the indies, they could put in a extra level of detail for browsing:
Home>>Genre>>Label>>Artist>>Albu m
Another possibility, which is somewhere out past left field, is that some nitwit at SCO saw a date in comments using European format (day first) and thought that the Linux code dates from after the SCO code when it's really the other way round. The CVS logs would verify this.
That would be more embarassing than, oh, Microsoft faking evidence in Federal court.
That really puts the wRONG into STRONG.
"You're free to leave at any time. But would you mind telling us why ?"
Okay, maybe Safari isn't exactly innovative. And it does cost you whatever an OS X capable Mac costs.
On the plus side, it's a Really Slick browser. And it is fast. As a bonus, the html rendering engine is Open Source (KHTML as I recall).
Ubi has one bright spot. Their support for IL-2 Sturmovik has been aoutstanding. A lot of that is due to the developer, but Ubi producers have been very active on their flight sim boards.
The consensus from the review sites is: if you're interested in combat flight sims, buy this game.
One of the Creative Directors at work does that. He loves it. There are several LaCie PocketDrives in the office. We love 'em, 40GB goes in the boss' pocket and he's off to a presentation in Europe. The only thing wrong is that they aren't bootable, but they will do USB in partial recompense.