If OpenSSH is really in wide enough usage "to destroy everything [T. Ylönen has] built on it during the last several years", then I don't see how see how "SSH" and "Secure Shell" aren't in wide enough usage to void his trademark... That would be like me suggesting that Ylönen's violation of libgmp's license back when it was GPLed (it is now LGPLed) has seriously harmed the free software community... =)
It's more likely that a) OpenSSH would still be in as wide usage if it had originally called itself something else, b) OpenSSH will still be in as wide usage tomorrow, after (I predict) the name changes, and c) this isn't going to stop any BSD or Linux flavour that packages OpenSSH to not create an ssh symlink. =)
What I really don't understand: the complaint about OpenSSH encouraging SSH 1 usage. OpenSSH has supported the SSH2 protocol since June of last year. Sure, it also supports SSH 1. But even SSH will fall back into (absolutely insecure) rsh mode. And it's not like the more restrictive later SSH licensing is helping 1.2.27 dry up any more quickly...
Heh... Induction based on biased association criteria is fun isn't it?
Let me try one.
I'm sick of the human race. I wish it would go away, sometimes. I really do. It's kewl and fun and all that but it's a cancer on our world. It's wiped out entire civilizations and thousands of animal species, it has dehumanized the remaining cultures, it has trashed and polluted the environment, and it has made our lives incredibly complicated and demanding.
Uh... Generally speaking, companies tend to comply with whatever environmental legislation is in force. If your government is willing to sell out to corporations over environmental damage, perhaps you should find a new one.
"there goes any potential jobs health insurance or possible training for local communities"
But there would still be taxation revenue and use royalties, obviously, which can be put to those uses.
Hint: If you punctuate properly, I might be able to figure out what you're saying. E.g. is "there heavy equipment" part of a run-on sentence, or did you just use the wrong "there"?
Tangent: Since when did mech. eng. and the various trades associated with hard rock mining become staffed completely by idiots? Or do you just not know what you're talking about?
I love this guy's post. None of the explanations suggesting that "we need these jobs" are consistent with recorded history. Also, the poster doesn't seem to be interested in supporting anything with sourced evidence, or any evidence at all, for that matter.
"That is why crime has risen in the last 30 years - young, stupid men can no longer find employment, and so they are alienated from society."
Would that also be why the labour force participation rate in the US has gone from ~59.2% (1966) to ~67% (1996), the employment to population ratio has gone from 56.9% (1966) to 63.2% (1996), and the unemployment rate displays only a slight upward trend (3.8% in 1966, 5.4% in 1996, having gone into the high 9% range in the early 80s)?
All stats are from here, because I happened to have it bookmarked.
Poster: I suggest you take a macroeconomics class at some point, if you have the time to spare.
What resources and land? You mean the land that you already bought from them and the resources that have already been spent on services? What do you _think_ the government does with your money? =)
So, I've posted the purely technical comment. Now, it's time for the rant. . . =)
1) I don't support censorship or any other public expression or public gathering limits by governments (and their agents). They almost universally don't make any sense. (e.g. public nudity laws... can these be justified in any rational manner?)
2) Censorship laws which target by age group simply add insult (age discrimination) to injury (see 1).
I live in a country where age discrimination constitutionally prohibited.
Oh, but wait: -- "subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society" -- a limitation big enough to drive a tank through.
I forsee that the "demonstrably" adds a lot of complexity. For example, I have a feeling that the pending supreme court decision about the constitutionality of the child pornography posession law will hinge on that one word and its meaning in context (maybe the law has an indirect effect on child pornography production, but if so, can this be demonstrated?). Although, even then, I have no way to know what the court considers justifiable in a "free and democratic" society. =( My free and democratic society justified law finder box is on the fritz and will be undergoing repairs in the shop until the end of next week. =)
So, you don't mind that web sites for certain environmental groups, religious groups, political parties, etc. that are blocked by every major filtering package will no longer be accessable?
So, what does this requirement mandate: That the filter filter all content that falls in the requested categories (impossible), or only some content that falls in the requested categories (e.g. min 1 item)?
Also, isn't material only legally obscene when it has been deemed so by a court? Or am I confusing US law with Canadian law again? =)
Slashdot Mirror
Why does that mean that the DSP files can't be open sourced?
Maybe abbreviated to eea? Or, how about trg?
This could be a "friendly" request... But, then, why include the apparent SSH1 security FUD?
I think sins is (are) a much cooler choice anyway. =)
"furor over SSH1 security holes"? What does that have to do with OpenSSH?
If OpenSSH is really in wide enough usage "to destroy everything [T. Ylönen has] built on it during the last several years", then I don't see how see how "SSH" and "Secure Shell" aren't in wide enough usage to void his trademark... That would be like me suggesting that Ylönen's violation of libgmp's license back when it was GPLed (it is now LGPLed) has seriously harmed the free software community... =)
It's more likely that a) OpenSSH would still be in as wide usage if it had originally called itself something else, b) OpenSSH will still be in as wide usage tomorrow, after (I predict) the name changes, and c) this isn't going to stop any BSD or Linux flavour that packages OpenSSH to not create an ssh symlink. =)
What I really don't understand: the complaint about OpenSSH encouraging SSH 1 usage. OpenSSH has supported the SSH2 protocol since June of last year. Sure, it also supports SSH 1. But even SSH will fall back into (absolutely insecure) rsh mode. And it's not like the more restrictive later SSH licensing is helping 1.2.27 dry up any more quickly...
Uh... Was that sarcasm? If so, good work. If not, then why would you suggest that this story deserves a repost?
Huh? Moore's Law is about processing power. What does that have to do with this?
The blatant reposts are getting annoying.
This technology will be ready for market in two years? Is that two years from now or two years from when an almost word-for-word identical article about this was posted a year and a half ago? =)
How often do you vote for yourself in slashdot polls?
-rak (the former holder of account 31337, which mysteriously went foom)
Wouldn't the pitch changes be proportionally less, not more, at high speeds?
Heh... Induction based on biased association criteria is fun isn't it?
Let me try one.
I'm sick of the human race. I wish it would go away, sometimes. I really do. It's kewl and fun and all that but it's a cancer on our world. It's wiped out entire civilizations and thousands of animal species, it has dehumanized the remaining cultures, it has trashed and polluted the environment, and it has made our lives incredibly complicated and demanding.
Wow. Now, wasn't that fun?
Uh... Generally speaking, companies tend to comply with whatever environmental legislation is in force. If your government is willing to sell out to corporations over environmental damage, perhaps you should find a new one.
"there goes any potential jobs health insurance or possible training for local communities"
But there would still be taxation revenue and use royalties, obviously, which can be put to those uses.
Hint: If you punctuate properly, I might be able to figure out what you're saying. E.g. is "there heavy equipment" part of a run-on sentence, or did you just use the wrong "there"?
Hint: Hard rock mining of any kind is much less dangerous than coal mining. Not that it's completely danger free, though.
"We need these jobs."
Tangent: Since when did mech. eng. and the various trades associated with hard rock mining become staffed completely by idiots? Or do you just not know what you're talking about?
I love this guy's post. None of the explanations suggesting that "we need these jobs" are consistent with recorded history. Also, the poster doesn't seem to be interested in supporting anything with sourced evidence, or any evidence at all, for that matter.
"That is why crime has risen in the last 30 years - young, stupid men can no longer find employment, and so they are alienated from society."
Would that also be why the labour force participation rate in the US has gone from ~59.2% (1966) to ~67% (1996), the employment to population ratio has gone from 56.9% (1966) to 63.2% (1996), and the unemployment rate displays only a slight upward trend (3.8% in 1966, 5.4% in 1996, having gone into the high 9% range in the early 80s)?
All stats are from here, because I happened to have it bookmarked.
Poster: I suggest you take a macroeconomics class at some point, if you have the time to spare.
What resources and land? You mean the land that you already bought from them and the resources that have already been spent on services? What do you _think_ the government does with your money? =)
So, I've posted the purely technical comment. Now, it's time for the rant. . . =)
1) I don't support censorship or any other public expression or public gathering limits by governments (and their agents). They almost universally don't make any sense. (e.g. public nudity laws... can these be justified in any rational manner?)
2) Censorship laws which target by age group simply add insult (age discrimination) to injury (see 1).
I live in a country where age discrimination constitutionally prohibited.
Oh, but wait: -- "subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society" -- a limitation big enough to drive a tank through.
I forsee that the "demonstrably" adds a lot of complexity. For example, I have a feeling that the pending supreme court decision about the constitutionality of the child pornography posession law will hinge on that one word and its meaning in context (maybe the law has an indirect effect on child pornography production, but if so, can this be demonstrated?). Although, even then, I have no way to know what the court considers justifiable in a "free and democratic" society. =( My free and democratic society justified law finder box is on the fritz and will be undergoing repairs in the shop until the end of next week. =)
So, you don't mind that web sites for certain environmental groups, religious groups, political parties, etc. that are blocked by every major filtering package will no longer be accessable?
So, what does this requirement mandate: That the filter filter all content that falls in the requested categories (impossible), or only some content that falls in the requested categories (e.g. min 1 item)?
Also, isn't material only legally obscene when it has been deemed so by a court? Or am I confusing US law with Canadian law again? =)
Huh...? A simple player app that uses the library is included. Couldn't you have even looked it up on freshmeat before posting that crap?
How is this flamebait?
Uh... Obviously any overlay problems would be a driver issue. You did try falling back from DirectDraw+DCI, right?
Next time, read the article first. Hint: "increased cloud cover"
(If you don't know why increased cloud cover causes blizzards, then there's nothing we can do for you. =)
"Inuits" - Hint: Inuit = plural form of Innu. What is that "s" doing there? =)
Iqualuit, Nunavut spent some time above freezing during the last half of December; extremely wierd weather for that time of year.
Also, the Evil Chinese masterminds need something to stroke as they ponder their next threat to the world....
Mandatory off-colour remark omitted. =)