Nobody is using ODF for any non-trivial interoperablilty, its just freetard code for "we use OpenOffice".
Sorry, but I believe that's just wrong. Google for "ODF plugfest". I quote:
The previous plugfest in The Hague was visited by over sixtyfive participants from forty different companies, open source projects and governments.
doesn't sound like "OpenOffice only" to me.
Or test your document out at http://officeshots.org/; I spot 12 Linux/BSD word processor programs there and 8 MS Windows word processors. 5 of which are OpenOffice/StarOffice on the different platforms.
Yes, ODF 1.2: It's been worked on since 2007 or so and now in the stage "public review of committee draft" (here (as PDF, replace.pdf by.odt for the ODF). AFAIK, next stage is "committee specification" and that sounds like it's nearing completion.
The formulas are in a separate (IMHO well-written and useful) sub-spec called "OpenFormula".
This is Bavaria we're talking about. They've got beer breweries that are almost 1000 year old. Sheesh..
That being said, I liked the analogy.
Hmm... Hefeweizen...
I must admit I'm not terribly familiar with the problem, but consider XAdES (XML Advanced Electronic Signatures) wikipedia) as requirement of signing your documents, because it seems a reasonably well backed standard if ETSI standardized it since 2002 and the EU encourages it for intergovernmental correspondence. It also seems future-proof if it has the signing algorithm as a parameter instead of predefined.
Also, the upcoming ODF 1.2 supports it (see ODF spec part 3 chapter 4).
If the patents are valid and Linux indeed infringes on those patents, a billion dollars won't matter.
Good point! People are always so optimistic that software patents can be "coded around" but how do you code around trivial and ubiquitous ideas?
Better to lobby the USA government to abolish software patents.
I don't think ACTA or sharper TRIPS treaties are really going to be pushed through anymore, unless someone slips a vote into the EU fisheries ministers' meeting agenda again.
But today's European Parliament has a lot more power and self confidence than in 2004. Trying to force antidemocratic harmonization like ACTA could backfire.
Every time a company like Microsoft sues a company like TomTom for using long filenames, the awareness of the anti-innovative aspects of software patents grows. But nothing seems to be done about it. The SCotUS apparently still hasn't finished deliberating the "in re Bilski" case yet.
I sincerely hope that the USA will, in order to harmonize and balance intellectual property laws worldwide, decide to just abolish software patents. Poof. Problem solved.
Historically, Microsoft licensed the Unix code from AT&T in 1980 to make its own version of Unix: Xenix. At the time, the plan was that Xenix would be Microsoft’s 16-bit operating system. Microsoft quickly found they couldn’t do it on their own, and so started work with what was then a small Unix porting company, SCO. By 1983, SCO XENIX System V had arrived for 8086 and 8088 chips and both companies were marketing it.
It didn’t take long though for Microsoft to decide that Xenix wasn’t for them. In 1984, the combination of AT&T licensing fees and the rise of MS-DOS, made Microsoft decide to start moving out of the Unix business.
So why did MS suddenly decide they needed to buy $ 10M worth of old Unix licenses in 2003?
BTW, Novell claims they're entitled to 95% of those licenses SCO sold, in their 2005: breach of contract counterclaim. We'll soon see how this all plays out because the SCO-Novell case is finally in court now (the part that's still going on, whether Novell has or hasn't sold the Unix copyrights to SCO, is moving forward because SCO is sueing Novell with Novell's own money:-) ). If it turns out Novell owns the copyrights, all other SCO court cases should quickly collapse, which *might* in turn get people to understand that this whole SCOsource anti-Linux FUD was in fact a scam to scare potential customers away--but I digress.. sorry..
2004: Baystar connection (warning: by Enderle), and here in 2006 new info
I quote:
Buried in IBM's recent motion for summary judgment against SCO is a Declaration from BayStar general partner Larry Goldfarb. Near the beginning of the long-running legal soap opera, BayStar invested $50 million in SCO. In exchange for their investment, BayStar received 20,000 shares of preferred stock in SCO.
In his declaration, Goldfarb testifies that former Microsoft senior VP for corporate development and strategy Richard Emerson discussed "a variety of investment structures wherein Microsoft would 'backstop,' or guarantee in some way, BayStar's investment." Goldfarb then said that after BayStar committed the $50 million to SCO's cause, Microsoft "stopped returning my phone calls and e-mails, and to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Emerson was fired from Microsoft."
Besides if they stop their industry by no longer exporting to us they're stuck with a billion out of work and hungry people with nothing to do but to contemplate the difference between them and the party officials.
If I interpret tables 4 and 7 on this site correctly, in 2008 China would have lost 17.7% of their exports if they stopped exporting to the USA. So, problems on the scale of strikes and maybe riots, but probably not "a billion out of work and hungry people" because they can still manufacture for the remaining 82.3% of their customers.
We've got 10,000 years worth of coal laying around that could be liquefied into diesel fuel,
using the Fischer-Tropsch process (syncrude). Which is so incredibly polluting that only governments desperate for oil turned to it (Nazi Germany, Apartheid South-Africa):
India's black agenda in a climate change era (strong political slant but that doesn't disprove the environmental impact).
From an economical perspective, (wikipedia article)
The F-T process has been applied on a large scale in some industrial sectors, although its popularity is hampered by high capital costs, high operation and maintenance costs, the uncertain and volatile price of crude oil, and environmental concerns.
NB I"m not saying Fischer-Tropsch is a Godwin-worthy chemical process;-), only that the pollution can be so bad that only authoritarian governments can "persuade" their people to put up with it.
Maybe it's less bad if you start the process with clean methane instead of coal. But how clean is frozen rotting swamp gas from under a tundra? Can you say "catalyst poisoning"?
Fischer-Tropsch catalysts are notoriously sensitive to poisoning by sulfur-containing compounds. The sensitivity of the catalyst to sulfur is greater for cobalt-based catalysts than for their iron counterparts.
That being said, if your government just waits long enough doing nothing, it may seem to be the only viable path left to keep those infernal-combustion-engine vehicles moving.
So if the US is pro freedom, pro liberty, pro openness, but also pro capitalism, the question instead becomes: What takes priority among these values ?
Well I was particularly impressed with the EP motion B7-0180/2010 as it is very clear and logical (and long-winded..):
B. having regard to the necessity to fight counterfeiting and to protect certain rights which, however, cannot take precedence over human rights and fundamental freedoms that are the keystone of our societies and of democracy[emphasis mine]; considering the various domains that the negotiators aim to cover in their agreements and the fact that they negotiate secretly,
So basically, your right to fight counterfeiting and protect your trademarks, copyrights and patents ends where it infringes on your fellow human beings' fundamental human rights.
Spread the word, otherwise only old people will know this;-)
III – The remedies and fine imposed on Microsoft
26
The two abuses which the Commission identified in the Decision were penalised by the imposition of a fine amounting to EUR 497 196 304 (Article 3 of the Decision).
27
Moreover, Microsoft was required, under Article 4 of the Decision, to bring to an end the abuses established in Article 2 in accordance with Articles 5 and 6 of the Decision. Microsoft is also required to refrain from repeating any act or conduct described in Article 2 and from any act or conduct having the same or equivalent object or effect.[emphasis mine]
28
By way of remedy for the abusive refusal identified in the Decision, Article 5 of the Decision orders Microsoft to act as follows:
‘(a) Microsoft shall, within 120 days of the date of notification of this Decision, make the interoperability information available to any undertaking having an interest in developing and distributing work group server operating system products and shall, on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, allow the use of the interoperability information by such undertakings for the purpose of developing and distributing work group server operating system products;
(b) Microsoft shall ensure that the interoperability information made available is kept updated on an ongoing basis and in a timely manner;
(c) Microsoft shall, within 120 days of the date of notification of this Decision, set up an evaluation mechanism that will give interested undertakings a workable possibility of informing themselves about the scope and terms of use of the interoperability information; as regards this evaluation mechanism, Microsoft may impose reasonable and non-discriminatory conditions to ensure that access to the interoperability information is granted for evaluation purposes only;
I can't find much about Samba, but item 178 reads:
(...) Neither is it obvious to the Commission that a competitor of Microsoft taking advantage of the implementation of the Decision will be infringing some of the claims in those patents. The doubts expressed as to whether a developer of server software using the relevant protocols in order to communicate with Windows clients would infringe the claims in question are confirmed by Microsoft’s behaviour towards Samba, an ‘open source’ product which implements certain Microsoft communications protocols that the Samba group developers have identified using reverse-engineering techniques. Samba appears to have incorporated SMB’s ‘opportunistic locking’ as early as January 1998 (version 1.9.18) and Dfs as early as April 2001 (version 2.2.0). So far as the Commission is aware, the Samba group has never licensed the patents in question from Microsoft and Microsoft has never claimed that its patents were being infringed by the Samba group.(...)
and item 185 (this is a claim by the prosecutor, FSFE)
185
FSF-Europe submits, in essence, that the information which the Decision requires Microsoft to disclose has little value in terms of innovation and contains a number of incompatibilities deliberately introduced in pre-existing written protocols. Microsoft’s approach consists in adopting pre
i remember 10 years ago i had to move about 300 people's data from a Novell file server to a Windows NT server. we divided the task between myself and a UNIX/Novell admin. It took me 3 hours using all the mouse/keyboard and GUI shortcuts i knew. This guy spent 3 days writing a script that ran for 30 minutes to copy the data.
So what you're saying is, if you'd have a similar situation but with 30000 people's data, it would cost you 2 months and give you RSI, and it would cost that Unix guy 3 days work + 2 days run-time.
Unless it's the exact same situation in which case the script is already written so it's more like 2 days run-time.
Or Microsoft is behind this and they want full control of Novell...
It's too early.. IIRC the Microsoft--Novell "I won't sue your customers[*] with my massive patent portfolio which you had to publicly agree was valid, for a limited number of years" agreement only runs out next year.
Curious what will happen though.. maybe even nothing!
[footnote *: a patent is a grant of monopoly, you can sue, or withold a license, or charge very much for a license, to whomever you pick. End-users are NOT exempt unless indemnified.]
What the scientific community needs is better PR and stating that essentially those who think AGW is not happening are gullible, misguided people, whackjobs and paid ex-tobacco lobbyists.
The other error -- regarding the percentage of the Netherlands that is below sea level -- came from no lesser a source than the Dutch government [www.pbl.nl] (oops).
Yes, I found that one hilarious. The error was that it was reported that 55% of the country would be below sea level, but in fact the original report stated 55% of the country at risk of floods, and only 26% of the country under water.
Only 26%
We're talking here about the 26% most densely populated part of the 16th richest country in the world, the 6th largest exporter of the world (after China, Germany, USA, Japan and France), being *under water*.
When the country looks like this, most of The Hague and Utrecht will still be dry, but Rotterdam (3rd largest port in the world after Shanghai and Singapore) and Amsterdam (famous for its tourism) will have to make radical changes in industrial and living areas.
Sure, nobody dies because it's a slow process, but that's an expensive loss in world transport and trade.
"The review process had utterly failed; important questions have not been asked... the methodological basis for such a conclusion (that the 20th century is probably not the warmest nor a uniquely extreme climate period of the last millennium) was simply not given."
before resigning. The publisher (Inter-Research) wrote the following editorial afterwards. Funnily enough they also publish a journal titled "Ethics in Science":-) I hate to be in their shoes.
That quote comes from
here ("Global warming: a load of hot air?") which has a nice summary of the politics (in 2004).
Lemme see if I can find the stolen CRU e-mails themselves..
Ah here, on the quite climate-skeptical looking website the Air Vent blog.
Can't find anything specific about the Soon and Baliunas article though.
The people at realclimate.org have done their utmost best to clarify and debunk the e-mails here.
To quote: "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants". In my personal opinion, the RealClimate debunking was believable, although it definitely showed us all that the CRU scientists were biased against the climate sceptics. They look a bit paler and more faded under the shock of sunlight they received on their e-mails:-).
Still, if the CRU climate scientists are petty and biased and spiteful but their scientific argumentation is solid (as I believe it still is--but I'm not a climate scientist), then I think we should look forward to reducing our CO2 production to the levels of 1990 and then even lower. On a worldwide level this becomes a problem for sociology or politics.
<incoherent_rant_mode>
I strongly suggest to read the last chapter of Jared Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, he mentions how a societal (in this case, even global) problem can be recognized, even on time, but still the governing elite can be unwilling or powerless to do what is necessary to mitigate it due to social or cultural constraints (i.e. as if the Greenland Norse refused to live in igloos because it was "un-european" and "un-civilized"). Maybe I should even try to read Joseph Tainter whom Diamond refers to.
I was alive and conscious in the '90's, and I can tell the young ones, that to live at a level of industrial production similar to in the '90's (Kyoto protocol proposal, a reduction of 5%, which the USA refused to sign) doesn't mean abject poverty while being enslaved to the CO2-measuring communist overlords, as some climate sceptics try to paint it. But then again I was born in Europe, not in one of the Asian Tigers for example, so that colours my perspective strongly.
</incoherent_rant_mode>
AFAIK, the problem with Microsoft-TomTom was not that they used FAT32 per sé, but that they dared to use long filenames (oh noes!). THAT's still patented.
This has apparently been remedied since: LWN article on 2009-06-27. I don't know in which versions of the kernel it is patched, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Their "Eierlegende Wollmux" also sounds useful. (translation: "including the kitchensink"??)
LinEX !
Dunno.. The Extremadureans seem to use it for agribusiness.
Sorry, but I believe that's just wrong. Google for "ODF plugfest". I quote:
doesn't sound like "OpenOffice only" to me.
Or test your document out at http://officeshots.org/; I spot 12 Linux/BSD word processor programs there and 8 MS Windows word processors. 5 of which are OpenOffice/StarOffice on the different platforms.
Yes, ODF 1.2: It's been worked on since 2007 or so and now in the stage "public review of committee draft" (here (as PDF, replace .pdf by .odt for the ODF). AFAIK, next stage is "committee specification" and that sounds like it's nearing completion.
The formulas are in a separate (IMHO well-written and useful) sub-spec called "OpenFormula".
This is Bavaria we're talking about. They've got beer breweries that are almost 1000 year old. Sheesh..
That being said, I liked the analogy.
Hmm... Hefeweizen...
I must admit I'm not terribly familiar with the problem, but consider XAdES (XML Advanced Electronic Signatures) wikipedia) as requirement of signing your documents, because it seems a reasonably well backed standard if ETSI standardized it since 2002 and the EU encourages it for intergovernmental correspondence. It also seems future-proof if it has the signing algorithm as a parameter instead of predefined.
Also, the upcoming ODF 1.2 supports it (see ODF spec part 3 chapter 4).
Good point! People are always so optimistic that software patents can be "coded around" but how do you code around trivial and ubiquitous ideas?
Better to lobby the USA government to abolish software patents.
I don't think ACTA or sharper TRIPS treaties are really going to be pushed through anymore, unless someone slips a vote into the EU fisheries ministers' meeting agenda again.
But today's European Parliament has a lot more power and self confidence than in 2004. Trying to force antidemocratic harmonization like ACTA could backfire.
Every time a company like Microsoft sues a company like TomTom for using long filenames, the awareness of the anti-innovative aspects of software patents grows. But nothing seems to be done about it. The SCotUS apparently still hasn't finished deliberating the "in re Bilski" case yet.
I sincerely hope that the USA will, in order to harmonize and balance intellectual property laws worldwide, decide to just abolish software patents. Poof. Problem solved.
Thanks to the always entertaining Darl McBride, Definitely!
2003: Microsoft to license SCO Group Unix rights
2003: Cyber Cynic: The Microsoft-SCO Connection
So why did MS suddenly decide they needed to buy $ 10M worth of old Unix licenses in 2003? :-) ). If it turns out Novell owns the copyrights, all other SCO court cases should quickly collapse, which *might* in turn get people to understand that this whole SCOsource anti-Linux FUD was in fact a scam to scare potential customers away--but I digress.. sorry..
BTW, Novell claims they're entitled to 95% of those licenses SCO sold, in their 2005: breach of contract counterclaim. We'll soon see how this all plays out because the SCO-Novell case is finally in court now (the part that's still going on, whether Novell has or hasn't sold the Unix copyrights to SCO, is moving forward because SCO is sueing Novell with Novell's own money
2004: Baystar connection (warning: by Enderle), and here in 2006 new info
I quote:
Six weeks ago, this story was posted on Slashdot: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/02/03/1528242/MPEG-LA-Extends-H264-Royalty-Free-Period. Seemingly indicating that six more years of baiting were required to get all content providers thorougly hooked on H.264 before tightening the thumbscrews.
If I interpret tables 4 and 7 on this site correctly, in 2008 China would have lost 17.7% of their exports if they stopped exporting to the USA. So, problems on the scale of strikes and maybe riots, but probably not "a billion out of work and hungry people" because they can still manufacture for the remaining 82.3% of their customers.
Thank you!
As a reward, I give you this picture.
Naah.. in- con- ceivable.
using the Fischer-Tropsch process (syncrude). Which is so incredibly polluting that only governments desperate for oil turned to it (Nazi Germany, Apartheid South-Africa): India's black agenda in a climate change era (strong political slant but that doesn't disprove the environmental impact).
From an economical perspective, (wikipedia article)
NB I"m not saying Fischer-Tropsch is a Godwin-worthy chemical process ;-), only that the pollution can be so bad that only authoritarian governments can "persuade" their people to put up with it.
Maybe it's less bad if you start the process with clean methane instead of coal. But how clean is frozen rotting swamp gas from under a tundra? Can you say "catalyst poisoning"?
That being said, if your government just waits long enough doing nothing, it may seem to be the only viable path left to keep those infernal-combustion-engine vehicles moving.
Well I was particularly impressed with the EP motion B7-0180/2010 as it is very clear and logical (and long-winded..):
So basically, your right to fight counterfeiting and protect your trademarks, copyrights and patents ends where it infringes on your fellow human beings' fundamental human rights. ;-)
Spread the word, otherwise only old people will know this
Yes. Now get off my $%!$!#$% intergalactic intertube!!!
signed: your local Galactic Overlord
The lawsuit started in 2003, though, so SCO got away with 7 years of spreading FUD about Linux..
That's actually one thing we can be quite sure of they *won't* dare sue anybody for, because they just lost an anti-trust lawsuit about file server interoperability in 2004: Commission concludes on Microsoft investigation, imposes conduct remedies and a fine
From the appeal decision: Order of the President of the Court of First Instance
The verdict:
I can't find much about Samba, but item 178 reads:
and item 185 (this is a claim by the prosecutor, FSFE)
So what you're saying is, if you'd have a similar situation but with 30000 people's data, it would cost you 2 months and give you RSI, and it would cost that Unix guy 3 days work + 2 days run-time.
Unless it's the exact same situation in which case the script is already written so it's more like 2 days run-time.
It's too early.. IIRC the Microsoft--Novell "I won't sue your customers[*] with my massive patent portfolio which you had to publicly agree was valid, for a limited number of years" agreement only runs out next year.
Curious what will happen though.. maybe even nothing!
[footnote *: a patent is a grant of monopoly, you can sue, or withold a license, or charge very much for a license, to whomever you pick. End-users are NOT exempt unless indemnified.]
You mean something like this I presume.
This was actually difficult to find: Woodward & McDowell lobbying firm, AB 32 Implementation Group.
Other maybe interesting links:here, or this slightly more activist website.
Yes, I found that one hilarious. The error was that it was reported that 55% of the country would be below sea level, but in fact the original report stated 55% of the country at risk of floods, and only 26% of the country under water.
Only 26%
We're talking here about the 26% most densely populated part of the 16th richest country in the world, the 6th largest exporter of the world (after China, Germany, USA, Japan and France), being *under water*.
When the country looks like this, most of The Hague and Utrecht will still be dry, but Rotterdam (3rd largest port in the world after Shanghai and Singapore) and Amsterdam (famous for its tourism) will have to make radical changes in industrial and living areas.
Sure, nobody dies because it's a slow process, but that's an expensive loss in world transport and trade.
Soon W, Baliunas S (2003) Proxy climatic and environmental changes of the past 1000 years. Clim Res 23:89-110
wikipedia meta-article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soon_and_Baliunas_controversy
The Wikipedia article claims that Climate Research's chief editor, Hans von Storch, has said:
before resigning. The publisher (Inter-Research) wrote the following editorial afterwards. Funnily enough they also publish a journal titled "Ethics in Science" :-) I hate to be in their shoes.
:-).
That quote comes from here ("Global warming: a load of hot air?") which has a nice summary of the politics (in 2004).
Lemme see if I can find the stolen CRU e-mails themselves..
Ah here, on the quite climate-skeptical looking website the Air Vent blog.
Can't find anything specific about the Soon and Baliunas article though.
The people at realclimate.org have done their utmost best to clarify and debunk the e-mails here.
To quote: "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants". In my personal opinion, the RealClimate debunking was believable, although it definitely showed us all that the CRU scientists were biased against the climate sceptics. They look a bit paler and more faded under the shock of sunlight they received on their e-mails
Still, if the CRU climate scientists are petty and biased and spiteful but their scientific argumentation is solid (as I believe it still is--but I'm not a climate scientist), then I think we should look forward to reducing our CO2 production to the levels of 1990 and then even lower. On a worldwide level this becomes a problem for sociology or politics.
<incoherent_rant_mode>
I strongly suggest to read the last chapter of Jared Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, he mentions how a societal (in this case, even global) problem can be recognized, even on time, but still the governing elite can be unwilling or powerless to do what is necessary to mitigate it due to social or cultural constraints (i.e. as if the Greenland Norse refused to live in igloos because it was "un-european" and "un-civilized"). Maybe I should even try to read Joseph Tainter whom Diamond refers to.
I was alive and conscious in the '90's, and I can tell the young ones, that to live at a level of industrial production similar to in the '90's (Kyoto protocol proposal, a reduction of 5%, which the USA refused to sign) doesn't mean abject poverty while being enslaved to the CO2-measuring communist overlords, as some climate sceptics try to paint it. But then again I was born in Europe, not in one of the Asian Tigers for example, so that colours my perspective strongly.
</incoherent_rant_mode>
Pound pastrami.. can of kraut..
Oh wait, different Middle Ages. So sorry.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canticle_for_Leibowitz)
AFAIK, the problem with Microsoft-TomTom was not that they used FAT32 per sé, but that they dared to use long filenames (oh noes!). THAT's still patented.
This has apparently been remedied since: LWN article on 2009-06-27. I don't know in which versions of the kernel it is patched, though.