That might make sense, but SCO does not have enough money to see them through the year. There's no need to draw anything out, they already have far too little money to pay what they owe to Novell, let alone legal fees, or (soon enough) employee salaries.
PF isn't really comparable. In this case work was already ongoing to create a BSD licensed workalike, which has now been stalled or halted.
PF was assumed to be bsd-licensed by many many people, and was only clarified as not by the author in a less than fully forthcoming manner. In this case the license of the original code was clear as a bell, the original author identified the problem, notified the interested parties, and offered to make changes to assist the situation. They're totally different.
And it's not like Theo will write a brilliant driver for this one piece of hardware that will totally change the way that people use that hardware and make it much more useful for everyone. Which is what IPF did.
"The problem with passenger rail transport is it's very difficult to run it at a profit"
Right, unlike the profitable highways or the profitable airline industry (be sure to include the costs of airport maintenance, airport access maintenance, etc). Human transport is generally *not* a profitable sector. This expectation that rail make the big bucks while we heavily subsidize our other transportation forms is a mystery.
As a longstanding, economically significant, democracy that's a political powerhouse on the global stage, you could defend the view that the United States is among the "leaders of the free world". But it's such a terrible way of phrasing things, and quite telling of the nature of the current administration's foreign policy. The notable part to me is not so much the self-importance of the phrase, but that it is clearly addressing the population of the country itself, and no one else.
Any successful executive speaks to his electoral power base, but typically speeches high profile enough to be heard outside the country are moderated to sound at least moderately reasonable. That the current sitting president and his staff feel comfortable using terminology you quote, which is actively alienating to citizens of allies, let alone disinterested countries, is telling of the strong current of isolationism which has defined the United States foreign policy for many decades.
I see no force of change which is capable of altering a society and political landscape this inwardly focused, and this vast, short of a complete and obvious loss of preeminence in global standing. Of course, the country is on track for this, but it is taking a while.
Hmm, I think I was pretty clear I was talking about Motzeuma's Revenge. I don't think it had any pipes. However, looking at your fascinating linked map, it is clear that the C64 version of this was almost but not quite the same game. The colors are obviously different, but the game components are the same. The top four rooms (entrance and next four) are identical. The room 1 to the right, and 2 down from the start, however, is completely different. The C64 version had a vaguely W shaped island in the middle with lots of safe-looking but deadly jump trajectories, similar to the room 3 right and 7 down from the entrance on this map.
How curious to have a game so similar yet so different. The maps are altered, and the concluding goal of the game is changed entirely. Yet nearly every room type is essentially identical to a familiar one, save some changes of exits.
Here are maps of all 9 levels of the C64 Montezuma's revenge. I'm going to guess motezuma was removed to create a feeling of nonfinality at the completion of each level. http://symlink.dk/nostalgia/c64/montezuma/
Well, it is a fact. The fact is that evolution is occurring. The term applies to the theory and the facts it surrounds, both. Language is a funny thing, with meanings oft contextualized. People understand this intuitively in usage, but if you pull it out and make it a point of discussion in isolation, they often get confused.
Evolution haters will try to blur the facts together with the theory and suggest somehow all of it could be found wrong. Ignorant evolution boosters will try to blur the theory together with the facts and suggest somehow the entirety of the theory is factually incontrovertable.
The thing is that the anti-evolutionists typically need the factual components to come into doubt, and so it is an effective and reasonable counterargument to identify the factual nature of evolution, although it is misleading to do so without clear distinction of what is meant by this.
I feel slighted. On the C64 I completed the traverse of Motezuma's Revenge down tot he bottom where you fall through the sky collecting huge numbers of hats. Then you land at the start and the whole map is a little darker, or something like that. I did this over and over until the whole map was pretty much dark, I could do the thing blind, effectively.
But despite going pretty much everywhere in the whole game, I don't think I ever found Montezuma. Was it missing in my version? Where was it on the map?
Buh? Passwords are nearly always resettable via some means. BUt if you're that one IT guy you're the only guy who knows how to deal with the problem anyway.
Yes, people loved disco but pretened they didn't. Then it got renamed to house, and the same. It's not "sophisticated" music, but it's soulful and fun. If you don't get hung up on expecting music to be a particular thing, it's much easier to enjoy.
This is a compelling theory, but for me it doesn't wash because I'm successfully finding lots of new music that I enjoy, some of which is in emerging genres. The dual catches are that most of it is not published by the RIAA, and that I'm finding it via the file sharing services they wish they could stamp out.
The independent labels are doing really well with me, I'm buying more music than I have in many years.
It didn't work for you without significant effort because the GMA X3000/G965 support is innitially baked as of the X.Org 7.2 release, which just happened a few weeks ago. I would phrase your complaint as "it did not work yet".
New hardware that doesn't have support yet is a tired story on Linux, we're all sad about it, but sort of used to it. But what was really galling was Intel trumpeting the announcement back in summer of 2006, when it wasn't available to normal users who aren't up to building and installing their own copies of X and Mesa (I did, it wasn't pretty). Many of us recommended and purchased the hardware only to find out it wasn't ready.
This problem is far more serious, btw, than a kernel driver addition, because the replacement of the linux kernel is a fairly well defined procedure in most distributions, often with supporting documentation and tools. The replacement of Mesa and X.Org leaves you largely on your own. Not to mention the vastly inferior build support.
Let this be a lesson to us all not to buy into the hype of press releases or even driver source availability until we can get confirmation that the stuff is available and working.
Note that the "open source" 2d drivers for nvidia are largely unmaintainable (by those without inside knowledge) precisely because of the lack of documentation. Documentation for products purchased is a reasonable baseline expectation from a manufacturer. We need to insist on this point.
I'd say supporting building linux on windows is of limited value. It's not like they can't afford Linux. I agree it would be nice if you could unpack the tree safely on most common systems, but I agree with Harald that prioritizing it in the face of significant redesign work is a bad idea.
Maybe someone should add a case-sensitive filesystem to Windows (or is that not possible?). You can certainly get a case insensitive filesystem on Linux.
The wording implies a grater amount. "more or less about the same" which is usually a large group doesn't imply equality, but rather a non-notable level of change.
Sure, the response is dumb. But the response should not be _surprising_ when you realize that it was done in a back-room-deal fashion and brought to the greater community fait accompli. It's supposed to be a community project and doing things (sun java include, dunc tank) out of sight weakens that sensibility, which engenders ill will.
That people could have expressed their views and then moved on is given. That some people did not is no shock. Dunc tank, while not a bad idea, was poorly executed, and I'm really surprised at how it was done. Essentially I'm ticked off at the dunc tank group for refusing to recognize the problem. They wanted to avoid thrashing and whinging ahead of time, and short circuited it, only to get MORE thrashing and whinging after the fact.
Social engineering is important, and hard, and by that I mean the "making societies work" engineering, not stealing passwords. Can anyone especially clever in these matters point to research on how to make cooperative distributed projects work?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, they got a large cash infusion, but they're a public company, and the books are open. THe money is done.
What about existing trademark law prevents it from being applied here?
That might make sense, but SCO does not have enough money to see them through the year. There's no need to draw anything out, they already have far too little money to pay what they owe to Novell, let alone legal fees, or (soon enough) employee salaries.
PF isn't really comparable. In this case work was already ongoing to create a BSD licensed workalike, which has now been stalled or halted.
PF was assumed to be bsd-licensed by many many people, and was only clarified as not by the author in a less than fully forthcoming manner. In this case the license of the original code was clear as a bell, the original author identified the problem, notified the interested parties, and offered to make changes to assist the situation. They're totally different.
And it's not like Theo will write a brilliant driver for this one piece of hardware that will totally change the way that people use that hardware and make it much more useful for everyone. Which is what IPF did.
"The problem with passenger rail transport is it's very difficult to run it at a profit"
Right, unlike the profitable highways or the profitable airline industry (be sure to include the costs of airport maintenance, airport access maintenance, etc). Human transport is generally *not* a profitable sector. This expectation that rail make the big bucks while we heavily subsidize our other transportation forms is a mystery.
Froth != religion.
As a longstanding, economically significant, democracy that's a political powerhouse on the global stage, you could defend the view that the United States is among the "leaders of the free world". But it's such a terrible way of phrasing things, and quite telling of the nature of the current administration's foreign policy. The notable part to me is not so much the self-importance of the phrase, but that it is clearly addressing the population of the country itself, and no one else.
Any successful executive speaks to his electoral power base, but typically speeches high profile enough to be heard outside the country are moderated to sound at least moderately reasonable. That the current sitting president and his staff feel comfortable using terminology you quote, which is actively alienating to citizens of allies, let alone disinterested countries, is telling of the strong current of isolationism which has defined the United States foreign policy for many decades.
I see no force of change which is capable of altering a society and political landscape this inwardly focused, and this vast, short of a complete and obvious loss of preeminence in global standing. Of course, the country is on track for this, but it is taking a while.
Hmm, I think I was pretty clear I was talking about Motzeuma's Revenge. I don't think it had any pipes. However, looking at your fascinating linked map, it is clear that the C64 version of this was almost but not quite the same game. The colors are obviously different, but the game components are the same. The top four rooms (entrance and next four) are identical. The room 1 to the right, and 2 down from the start, however, is completely different. The C64 version had a vaguely W shaped island in the middle with lots of safe-looking but deadly jump trajectories, similar to the room 3 right and 7 down from the entrance on this map.
How curious to have a game so similar yet so different. The maps are altered, and the concluding goal of the game is changed entirely. Yet nearly every room type is essentially identical to a familiar one, save some changes of exits.
Here are maps of all 9 levels of the C64 Montezuma's revenge. I'm going to guess motezuma was removed to create a feeling of nonfinality at the completion of each level. http://symlink.dk/nostalgia/c64/montezuma/
Well, it is a fact. The fact is that evolution is occurring. The term applies to the theory and the facts it surrounds, both. Language is a funny thing, with meanings oft contextualized. People understand this intuitively in usage, but if you pull it out and make it a point of discussion in isolation, they often get confused.
Evolution haters will try to blur the facts together with the theory and suggest somehow all of it could be found wrong. Ignorant evolution boosters will try to blur the theory together with the facts and suggest somehow the entirety of the theory is factually incontrovertable.
The thing is that the anti-evolutionists typically need the factual components to come into doubt, and so it is an effective and reasonable counterargument to identify the factual nature of evolution, although it is misleading to do so without clear distinction of what is meant by this.
I feel slighted. On the C64 I completed the traverse of Motezuma's Revenge down tot he bottom where you fall through the sky collecting huge numbers of hats. Then you land at the start and the whole map is a little darker, or something like that. I did this over and over until the whole map was pretty much dark, I could do the thing blind, effectively.
But despite going pretty much everywhere in the whole game, I don't think I ever found Montezuma. Was it missing in my version? Where was it on the map?
I prefer 'echo'.
Same delicious taste, with entirely no content.
Buh? Passwords are nearly always resettable via some means. BUt if you're that one IT guy you're the only guy who knows how to deal with the problem anyway.
He did say "small company", which could mean they only have one admin.
Of course, if you are that small, you can't reasonably provide super-reliable 24x7 support for your IT anyway. Moreover, it's doubtful you'd need to.
Yes, people loved disco but pretened they didn't. Then it got renamed to house, and the same. It's not "sophisticated" music, but it's soulful and fun. If you don't get hung up on expecting music to be a particular thing, it's much easier to enjoy.
This is a compelling theory, but for me it doesn't wash because I'm successfully finding lots of new music that I enjoy, some of which is in emerging genres. The dual catches are that most of it is not published by the RIAA, and that I'm finding it via the file sharing services they wish they could stamp out.
The independent labels are doing really well with me, I'm buying more music than I have in many years.
If the only thing you ever want out of products is "seems to work, for now" then you will eventually be saddled with all kinds of misery.
It didn't work for you without significant effort because the GMA X3000/G965 support is innitially baked as of the X.Org 7.2 release, which just happened a few weeks ago. I would phrase your complaint as "it did not work yet".
New hardware that doesn't have support yet is a tired story on Linux, we're all sad about it, but sort of used to it. But what was really galling was Intel trumpeting the announcement back in summer of 2006, when it wasn't available to normal users who aren't up to building and installing their own copies of X and Mesa (I did, it wasn't pretty). Many of us recommended and purchased the hardware only to find out it wasn't ready.
This problem is far more serious, btw, than a kernel driver addition, because the replacement of the linux kernel is a fairly well defined procedure in most distributions, often with supporting documentation and tools. The replacement of Mesa and X.Org leaves you largely on your own. Not to mention the vastly inferior build support.
Let this be a lesson to us all not to buy into the hype of press releases or even driver source availability until we can get confirmation that the stuff is available and working.
Note that the "open source" 2d drivers for nvidia are largely unmaintainable (by those without inside knowledge) precisely because of the lack of documentation. Documentation for products purchased is a reasonable baseline expectation from a manufacturer. We need to insist on this point.
Thank you captain asperger.
Us normal humans got it the first time around.
Is it even _possible_ to support such a statement?
Civil discussion leading to established consesnsus.
Who replaced my slashdot?
I'd say supporting building linux on windows is of limited value. It's not like they can't afford Linux. I agree it would be nice if you could unpack the tree safely on most common systems, but I agree with Harald that prioritizing it in the face of significant redesign work is a bad idea.
Maybe someone should add a case-sensitive filesystem to Windows (or is that not possible?). You can certainly get a case insensitive filesystem on Linux.
The wording implies a grater amount. "more or less about the same" which is usually a large group doesn't imply equality, but rather a non-notable level of change.
Sure, the response is dumb. But the response should not be _surprising_ when you realize that it was done in a back-room-deal fashion and brought to the greater community fait accompli. It's supposed to be a community project and doing things (sun java include, dunc tank) out of sight weakens that sensibility, which engenders ill will.
That people could have expressed their views and then moved on is given. That some people did not is no shock. Dunc tank, while not a bad idea, was poorly executed, and I'm really surprised at how it was done. Essentially I'm ticked off at the dunc tank group for refusing to recognize the problem. They wanted to avoid thrashing and whinging ahead of time, and short circuited it, only to get MORE thrashing and whinging after the fact.
Social engineering is important, and hard, and by that I mean the "making societies work" engineering, not stealing passwords. Can anyone especially clever in these matters point to research on how to make cooperative distributed projects work?