Because the operating system would tell you what the metadata means.
I don't quite see how 'file.notavirus' and 'file' with metadata saying 'notavirus' makes any difference apart from the latter being more flexible.
Still. nothing prevents us from doing both, and as it stands it's too hard to establish cross-operating system support for it to be feasible.
Gentoo actually has some of the harshest requirements for packages entering stable I've seen, just after debian.
Sure, you can override them, but that goes for the Debian unstable branch too, which a lot of people are running anyway, so where's the difference.
Top Secret has quite specific meanings in American intelligence, above would just mean it goes beyond that. Even Top Secret has limits...
Whether that is what's meant here I don't know though.
Not true. The script runs certain functions in the executable, but it still stays within the call boundaries allowed by the executable that runs the script. Unless the executable have a function for each system function, you cannot simply choose which system functions to call, you will still be limited to what the scripting environment allows.
The problem is the American electorate system. Now, I understand that changing anything in America to anything that even resembles something in Europe is a dealbreaker. However, if the American presidential election worked like many European system, the entire problem would quickly disappear.
The vote that is given to a candidate should be transferable. Meaning if you vote for candidate 3, and he doesn't get enough he can transfer his vote to candidate 2, who might have gotten less votes than candidate 1 but can still win.
In that way, you make it possible for more than 2 candidates to realistically run for president.
Oh, and removing the winner takes it all feature would be nice too, but I do understand the state-by-state thing and see the point of it, I'm not sure it really makes sense for the presidential election.
Not completely true. For normal server usage ACLs are excessive, but for file sharing setups they can really save complexity for the user. The user,group,everyone scenario takes some time to wrap your head around. Also, there are lots of scenarios where you just need to make a small change, where unix permissions force you to make lots of changes to change permissions of an object.
The real issue Linux has over Windows is the lack of recursive group support, aka. 'groups of groups', which can really remove the complexity of a setup. Though the nss_ldap module DOES actually add support for it, which happens to be the scenario where it's most useful.
That said, this is about granular setuid, nothing else.
Not true, that is the function of the LGPL, the GPL however has no such limitations. If you link part of a GPL library into your software, that software must be GPL. In effect you are actually including parts of the GPL code into your own program, and therefore this is viral. (And no, viral isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is the best way to describe it)
Not true, the reason a laptop is more expensive than a normal PC is the heating issues, the battery and the space limitations. If you remove these factors, the mass production advantage of laptops makes them equal in price.
Here is a rule, not just for IT, but for anything to do with production:
If you can produce a complete standalone product from factory, and just ship it, with minimal need for end-user setup, it's always cheaper in the long run.
It's old news that Xensource have put their lawyers on the task of defending their Xen brand. So really, redhat are actually forced to not mention the brand as part of their product, if they did, they'd probably have a lawsuit on their hands.
Sure, it's Xen, but they can't call it Xen, atleast not in their product description, just like CentOS is RHEL, but you can't call it that...
Or, you could ask yourself. If this is the amount of stuff they've been unable to hide, how much have they actually succesfully hidden from you?
Bush may lack the savvy to hide his shady dealings, but much of his staff doesn't, don't presume you know half of it.
Sure, but when are you going to prove that you have a US citizenship or another reason to be there? Before or after you're sent to Guantanamo for interrogation?
You cannot take away Habeas Corpus for specific groups, because the only thing that actually forces law enforcement and state to care about who you are, is the fact that they're forced to let you defend yourself in court.
Hell, as things are right now, they could just arrest you and claim they thought you were someone without a valid reason to be in the US, and they wouldn't technically have done anything wrong!
Without FULL habeas corpus protection of everyone in the entire country, ALL other laws can simply be circumvented!
You may well claim that the US administration wouldn't use the laws in this way, and that it is just a result of paranoia. But the basic rights of everyone in a Democracy should never rely on the morality of the rulers, at the very least such actions should be illegal, which they may not be now, though they are most likely unconstitutional.
The fact of the matter is that Habeas Corpus was not suspended in any way, shape, or form. The Military Commissions Act does not apply to US citizens, permanent residents, or persons with a valid legal status within the United States. Only US citizens have a right to Habeas Corpus (Gonzales' ridiculous statements on the issue aside). MCA only applies to "aliens [that is, not US citizens] with no [US] immigration status who are captured and held outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States"; that is, MCA does not apply to US citizens. Therefore, Habeas Corpus was not suspended, and to argue that it was is puzzling to me.
Sure, but when are you going to prove that you have a US citizenship or another reason to be there? Before or after you're sent to Guantanamo for interrogation?
You cannot take away Habeas Corpus for specific groups, because the only thing that actually forces law enforcement and state to care about who you are, is the fact that they're forced to let you defend yourself in court.
Hell, as things are right now, they could just arrest you and claim they thought you were someone without a valid reason to be in the US, and they wouldn't technically have done anything wrong!
Without FULL habeas corpus protection of everyone in the entire country, ALL other laws can simply be circumvented!
You may well claim that the US administration wouldn't use the laws in this way, and that it is just a result of paranoia. But the basic rights of everyone in a Democracy should never rely on the morality of the rulers, at the very least such actions should be illegal, which they may not be now, though they are most likely unconstitutional.
That is simply not true, it is not anything near double the work.
While there is clearly a lot of work in a writing a renderer, most of it is testing work. All you have to do is map your drawing functions to the appropriate OpenGL/DirectX functions, which is fairly trivial work. Yes sure, you need people with a through understanding of OpenGL/DirectX, but I don't think that's a big problem for id.
Because if you do that, you can't trust the access times in case of a crash.
Furthermore, since the access times are a property of the seperate files, your harddrive will still have to write multiple places.
One solution to the problem, might be to write the atimes to the journal, and then just update it once in a while, or perhaps even link the atimes to some seperate part of the disk, so the atimes can be written in one go somehow.
But caching the atimes in memory is a recipe for disaster and inconsistency!
Well actually, from the POV of copyright law this is even more simple. There are only two situations that can occur when you're using a software license, either you conform or you don't. You cannot partly conform or conform "if you release something".
So what is happening here is that id and valve are breaking the GPL license, that makes them copyright violators and enables the offended party to sue for copyright violation. This enables them to do the following:
- Ask for restitution. (eg. money or something else of value, to make up for the costs the violation may have incured.)
- Force the violator into compliance.
The last can include many things, but it'll never force the party to release something, at worst it may force them to stop using the software. But they don't need to release the modifications, if they don't want to use the software.
Not that strange, when you think about Microsofts "it's good to have more standards" argument. Knowing that the standard would be added anyway, they probably voted for it, to make that argument more credible, when OOXML is up for the ISO vote, besides ANSI is more or less irrelevant when ODF is already ISO certified.
I would be very surprised if Microsoft doesn't later use this as part of an argument for accepting OOXML, directly or as a response to critics.
Oops, to finish my post.
Salt was at that time enormously expensive, the romans would have gone broke had they tried to salt the carthagian farmland. It didn't happen... They did however, burn the city to the ground, which might have been part of the reason.
It's obvious that this will not exactly earn microsoft any friends, by doing this they're actually trying to take the power out of the hands of the EC, and at the same time halfway calling them incompetent, by questioning their procedure.
The EC isn't a very beloved institution, neither is Microsoft, so when you bring in the public, you bring in a lot of feelings.
If I was part of the EC, and saw that a company was trying to make this kind of case into a witch hunt, i'd be pissed, and I think MS is going to feel the hammer (garvel) after this one.
Slashdot Mirror
Because the operating system would tell you what the metadata means. I don't quite see how 'file.notavirus' and 'file' with metadata saying 'notavirus' makes any difference apart from the latter being more flexible. Still. nothing prevents us from doing both, and as it stands it's too hard to establish cross-operating system support for it to be feasible.
Gentoo actually has some of the harshest requirements for packages entering stable I've seen, just after debian. Sure, you can override them, but that goes for the Debian unstable branch too, which a lot of people are running anyway, so where's the difference.
Top Secret has quite specific meanings in American intelligence, above would just mean it goes beyond that. Even Top Secret has limits... Whether that is what's meant here I don't know though.
Not true. The script runs certain functions in the executable, but it still stays within the call boundaries allowed by the executable that runs the script. Unless the executable have a function for each system function, you cannot simply choose which system functions to call, you will still be limited to what the scripting environment allows.
The problem is the American electorate system. Now, I understand that changing anything in America to anything that even resembles something in Europe is a dealbreaker. However, if the American presidential election worked like many European system, the entire problem would quickly disappear. The vote that is given to a candidate should be transferable. Meaning if you vote for candidate 3, and he doesn't get enough he can transfer his vote to candidate 2, who might have gotten less votes than candidate 1 but can still win. In that way, you make it possible for more than 2 candidates to realistically run for president. Oh, and removing the winner takes it all feature would be nice too, but I do understand the state-by-state thing and see the point of it, I'm not sure it really makes sense for the presidential election.
Not completely true. For normal server usage ACLs are excessive, but for file sharing setups they can really save complexity for the user. The user,group,everyone scenario takes some time to wrap your head around. Also, there are lots of scenarios where you just need to make a small change, where unix permissions force you to make lots of changes to change permissions of an object.
The real issue Linux has over Windows is the lack of recursive group support, aka. 'groups of groups', which can really remove the complexity of a setup. Though the nss_ldap module DOES actually add support for it, which happens to be the scenario where it's most useful.
That said, this is about granular setuid, nothing else.
Not true, that is the function of the LGPL, the GPL however has no such limitations. If you link part of a GPL library into your software, that software must be GPL. In effect you are actually including parts of the GPL code into your own program, and therefore this is viral. (And no, viral isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is the best way to describe it)
Not true, the reason a laptop is more expensive than a normal PC is the heating issues, the battery and the space limitations. If you remove these factors, the mass production advantage of laptops makes them equal in price.
Here is a rule, not just for IT, but for anything to do with production:
If you can produce a complete standalone product from factory, and just ship it, with minimal need for end-user setup, it's always cheaper in the long run.
It's old news that Xensource have put their lawyers on the task of defending their Xen brand. So really, redhat are actually forced to not mention the brand as part of their product, if they did, they'd probably have a lawsuit on their hands. Sure, it's Xen, but they can't call it Xen, atleast not in their product description, just like CentOS is RHEL, but you can't call it that...
Or, you could ask yourself. If this is the amount of stuff they've been unable to hide, how much have they actually succesfully hidden from you? Bush may lack the savvy to hide his shady dealings, but much of his staff doesn't, don't presume you know half of it.
And that MIT is located right next to Harvard...
Sure, but when are you going to prove that you have a US citizenship or another reason to be there? Before or after you're sent to Guantanamo for interrogation? You cannot take away Habeas Corpus for specific groups, because the only thing that actually forces law enforcement and state to care about who you are, is the fact that they're forced to let you defend yourself in court. Hell, as things are right now, they could just arrest you and claim they thought you were someone without a valid reason to be in the US, and they wouldn't technically have done anything wrong! Without FULL habeas corpus protection of everyone in the entire country, ALL other laws can simply be circumvented! You may well claim that the US administration wouldn't use the laws in this way, and that it is just a result of paranoia. But the basic rights of everyone in a Democracy should never rely on the morality of the rulers, at the very least such actions should be illegal, which they may not be now, though they are most likely unconstitutional.
That is simply not true, it is not anything near double the work. While there is clearly a lot of work in a writing a renderer, most of it is testing work. All you have to do is map your drawing functions to the appropriate OpenGL/DirectX functions, which is fairly trivial work. Yes sure, you need people with a through understanding of OpenGL/DirectX, but I don't think that's a big problem for id.
Because if you do that, you can't trust the access times in case of a crash. Furthermore, since the access times are a property of the seperate files, your harddrive will still have to write multiple places. One solution to the problem, might be to write the atimes to the journal, and then just update it once in a while, or perhaps even link the atimes to some seperate part of the disk, so the atimes can be written in one go somehow. But caching the atimes in memory is a recipe for disaster and inconsistency!
Well actually, from the POV of copyright law this is even more simple. There are only two situations that can occur when you're using a software license, either you conform or you don't. You cannot partly conform or conform "if you release something". So what is happening here is that id and valve are breaking the GPL license, that makes them copyright violators and enables the offended party to sue for copyright violation. This enables them to do the following: - Ask for restitution. (eg. money or something else of value, to make up for the costs the violation may have incured.) - Force the violator into compliance. The last can include many things, but it'll never force the party to release something, at worst it may force them to stop using the software. But they don't need to release the modifications, if they don't want to use the software.
Not that strange, when you think about Microsofts "it's good to have more standards" argument. Knowing that the standard would be added anyway, they probably voted for it, to make that argument more credible, when OOXML is up for the ISO vote, besides ANSI is more or less irrelevant when ODF is already ISO certified. I would be very surprised if Microsoft doesn't later use this as part of an argument for accepting OOXML, directly or as a response to critics.
Oops, to finish my post. Salt was at that time enormously expensive, the romans would have gone broke had they tried to salt the carthagian farmland. It didn't happen... They did however, burn the city to the ground, which might have been part of the reason.
Right, salt during
It's obvious that this will not exactly earn microsoft any friends, by doing this they're actually trying to take the power out of the hands of the EC, and at the same time halfway calling them incompetent, by questioning their procedure. The EC isn't a very beloved institution, neither is Microsoft, so when you bring in the public, you bring in a lot of feelings. If I was part of the EC, and saw that a company was trying to make this kind of case into a witch hunt, i'd be pissed, and I think MS is going to feel the hammer (garvel) after this one.