Actually I already had contempt for the French, for a number of reasons.
1) During the Reagan years they refused to allow our planes from England to overfly France when on the bombing run to Libya. (Oh boy, I know the flames will start now mentioning Reagan) 2) They have this incessant demand that the French language be above all others. I might be mistaken, but I thought French was supposed to be the official language of the UN. 3) The fact is the US has bailed their butts out in two world wars and they are still arrogant (not that we aren't, but I have no problem with conceit if you can back it up). 4) Ever been a tourist in France and tried to speak the language (poorly)? The get rude. At least when I was in Germany and tried speaking German, the waitresses and store clerks might have laughed at my attempts, but they were kind enough to switch to English and help me understand my linguistic mistakes.
Frankly, the only thing I credit France with was aiding a young United States in it's war of independence against the British. But that was really more a situation of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
The question is, though, is this unusual? The past that you refer to isn't that long records wise. Look at some historical documents of massive storms with the early Spanish explorers in the Gulf region. Many ships lost to violent hurricanes, but unfortunately we don't know what category they were.
What we don't know is if this is merely a point in earth's natural cycle, or even if the weather was supposed to be this harsh except our polluting activities of the industrial revolution actually dampened it a bit and now with our efforts to clean up the atmosphere it's just moving back to normal.
As someone who has worked for a couple of very large corporations (DOW 30), most of them are actually self-insured. The insurance company merely handles the paperwork, but the company pays the insurance claims. And believe me, they can sometimes be worse to get payments out of than an independent insurance agency.
But more importantly: because it's the wrong response! It's playing into the terrorist's hands.
But openly criticizing the government and emboldening the attackers doesn't paly into their hands?
And its disadvantages (alienating an enormous group of people) far outweigh its advantages
Then the reverse is true concerning the governments response. The advantages to a target country of requiring the finger printing and picture taking far outweigh the disadvantages to the individual.
See, it goes both ways. Either way you play into the terrorists hands by criticizing them or criticizing the government. Either way there are advantages to one group and disadvantages to another.
Looks like a no win situation. Guess that's the whole point about terrorism.
P.S. I agree with everything you said, and feel the same way. Just wanted to throw out an alternate thought.
Mind you, I'm an American and very much dislike the way the government is knee-jerk reacting and affecting my rights, but </disclaimer>
why all this attack on the US government's response with little attack against the criminals that triggered this response? Instead of complaining about you bing pictured and finger-printed, why not indicate you would have no problems with profiling of middle-eastern visitors?
People complain about what the government is doing in response to an attack on this country, and it may be too much, but I don't hear anyone being as openly vocal against the attackers or proposing actually dealing differently with the demographic most known for causing these problems.
Ok, so here's a 'tin foil hat' suggestion to the whole problem: declare CyberSpace as represented by the Internet as a sovereign nation.
Root servers will now be considered diplomatic territory, no matter what country they exist in.
Allow peoples around the world the opportunity to be considered dual citizens (their home country an the CyperSpace) and allow them to vote for representation to manage the space and then provide a representative to the UN.
This would take some doing as some nations (i.e. the United States) do not recognize dual citizenship, but that would be the 'price' to have diplomatic relationships with CyberSpace.
Ok, so it's totaly crazy, but it is a Friday of a very long week.
You are correct and these were the types of questions we (the developers) asked in response.
The answer was that the language was fuzzy as to whether it could be restricted to just the family of companies. The concept of the GPL, as I understand, is to ensure that the community as a whole benefits from work/changes. Many people point to the fact that if you are using it only internally, then you don't need to share changes. But our legal staff looked at the fact that sharing the code amongst affiliates constitued actual distribution, and determined that could have required the company to share any work back to the software community as a whole.
When it's fuzzy, legal errs on the side of caution. So your points are valid, but as there is no clear distinction between 'distribution amongst a family of companies' and 'distribution to the world as a whole', the legal staff said no.
Just an aside to one sentence in your well spoken comments:
In the real world, where 90% of commercial programming is done in-house to create in-house applications, no license comes closer to meeting corporate requirements
I used to work for a large multinational retailer that did most of its development in house as you mention for in house applications.
We were under restrictions from legal when using GPL'd code because there was no clear definition of 'distribution'. According to some of the legal review of the GPL, we would have been distributing our code when we made it available to solely owned affiliates of the parent company. They were part of a separate business line with their own IT and executive staff, more a maintenance organization than a retailer (they did not have stores).
As an overall enterprise we were consolidating on common platforms (bulk purchasing power) across the board, but were still separate entities. The legal advisors indicated that our sharing of code with GPL components to these affiliates consituted distribution which would have activated the viral nature.
Whether this is accurate or not IANAL and can not answer. All I know is this very large organization with a large legal staff determined it was a possibility, and therefor restricted us to not use GPL code unless it could be alternately licensed or was supplied as part of a software purchase from a vendor that had the liability.
As I understand it, Sun originally looked at TCL to be what Java became for them, a controlled language. However, when Ousterhout went to work for Sun, one of the conditions was that Sun could not take control of the language, as they do with Java.
Because of this, Sun didn't promote TCL as they could have, but jumped immediately to Java (which was Invented Here) as their platform of the future.
Java of course was originally designed to be used to control devices (much like TCL) and Sun pitched it to a set top manufacturer. The deal went south and the Java team went looking for a sponser.
During some late hour negotiations, Sun got Netscape to agree to include Java support in Navigator. This would give Java a wide audience. As part of the deal, Netscape was the only company given permission to use the Java trademark, and thus renamed LiveScript to JavaScript, even though the two have no other real connection.
Because of this, people assume that JavaScript is part of the Java family. Funny though that there are many JavaScript engine implementations in Java, but very few (actually maintained and supported) in other languages (SpiderMonkey being one of the few exceptions). From what I've seen, even the browser implementations of JavaScript are actually written in Java, or at least leverage the browsers JVM to do much of their work.
ECMAScript really should be viewed as a language of it's own, seperate from Java. It would be nice to see it grow in use as it really is a decent language.
I believe we actually agree more than we disagree. I don't consider it illegal to sell a CD you no longer listen to, nor to give it away. So long as you do not maintain a copy and continue to use it, the act of transfering the media to me is not a problem. It's a fine line, I know, but one that is legally accepted.
As for the music sites you mention, if the artists are the copyright holders and give permission for this activity, by all means that is there right.
I think our only difference is that I consider it theft when an illegal activity results in a monetary loss, whether that loss be caused by actually taking something (money, things) or by creating a situation where money could have been made had the illegal activity not occured.
Oh, so now making an opposing argument using logic == saying crime X is ok? Get some glasses will you, we are only saying that the argument is illogical, not that any crime that has occured because of it.
I have to say I am completely baffled by this statement. Are you saying a crime is being committed or not? Is getting music that you did not pay for a crime or not?
"stolen their business"? This makes absolutely no sense, so I can not respond to this except to say that copying and selling a recipie might not be legal, but last time competition was NOT illegal, no matter what euphimism you use. And yes, "stole their business" is just a euphimism.
How does it not make sense? Copying and selling a stolen recipe is not competition. Competition is coming up with something better, legally. If it's OK to take business away from a competitor through illegal means, then that means monopolies should be allowed. And yes, "stole their business" can be a euphimism when all activities are legal. But if it happens as a result of an illegal activity, it ceases to be a euphimism and becomes something with monetary value that can be recovered through the courts.
I was taught that http://slashdot.org/~Travelsonic/journal/ theft requires loss, and as far as I know, that in terms of copyright infringement that in order for theft, it does require loss.
Discounting for a moment whether you agree or disagree with the notion of copyrights, what are they for? What is the purpose of a copyright? Does it not provide a means by which the copyright holder can profit from the work if they so desire, or give it away if they desire? Why is copyright infringement recognized as a crime? I say it is because it does result in a loss - a loss to the copyright holder to decide how and by what means the copyrighted material will be used. And if that meant sale for profit then it is a loss of value the copyright holder had the right to expect by virtue of holding the copyright.
Oh, and putting words in italics to make a point doesn't make it any more correct.
And just a note, the use of italics was for emphisis of the point. I've never heard where italics was intended to make something more or less correct, merely to call attention to a particular section.
So, by all the above comments the consensus is that when one person's illegal activities deprive another person of their lively hood, just because the injured party never had the money in the first place, no crime has been committed? You haven't stolen their right to a lively hood?
That said then, and with regards to previous posts, it should be perfectly legal for me to then come to your house, hook up an electrical cord and use the electricity you pay for at no charge to me. Since I intercept it before you have it, well you never had it any way (even though your meter records it).
Or better yet, your wife is a really good cook and creates a cookie recipe that allows her to make and sell cookies that people really want to buy. I can make a copy of her recipe and give it away to anyone who wants it. Because she still has the original I've not stolen her recipe, even though I have stolen her business. Nope, no crime here.
Or how about if I just zombie your computer and use it for my own needs, depriving you the ability to use it to do your job (I know, you are all uber-geeks and that could never happen...it's an analogy) so you don't get paid. You never had the money, I never took anything other than electronic resources (in this case I didn't even violate a copyright), but I prevent you from making a living. Guess I didn't commit a crime. I guess DoS attacks really aren't criminal either.
For the argument that "there is no entitlement to the money", fine. But then why do you feel entitled to the music? Why do you get something for nothing that normally you should have to pay for and think that's ok, but if someone feels you've taken money from their pockets, well, this whole entitlement mentality is bogus?
As another poster mentioned, theft is not necessarily the act of taking, but of having something to which you don't have the right. Using the example s/he provided, if you break into a company, copy their plans, use or give the plans away such that the company doesn't make money they otherwise would have, there is precendent in law that that is considered theft and a value is placed on the lost revenue to determine if is grand theft or petty theft.
But not by your definitions.
So, I guess I'll make arrangements to make use of the electricity you pay for to run the computers you own, that have your wife's famous cookie recipe that I will SPAM email to millions using your mail server and you'll be happy to let me do so since nothing physical was ever lost, and that is your definition of theft.
And "stealing" only applies to physical items, not when dealing with all-digital content.
I keep seeing statements like this when discussing the issue of making digital copies of music or other files and giving them away. Not trying to start a flamewar here, but just because it is digital and nothing physical changed hands, does not mean it is not stealing.
It is stealing. Consider the situation. If there is a CD you like and it isn't online, you go buy it. The seller makes X dollars. Your friend likes the CD too, but instead of buying it, he burns a copy of yours. You have effectively stolen X dollars from the seller.
Now, some people will say "well I won't pay for it but will take it if free", but that is a diversion. The fact is if you take a copy of the merchandise and do not pay the seller you have infact stolen dollars out of the seller's pocket. If you say you wouldn't have paid for it, then you should never have taken it.
So, just because it is digitally reproducible does not just mean 'copyright infringement'. It is theft, maybe not of the actual media, but of the profit the seller SHOULD have been allowed to make on the item.
And don't confuse the issue with who the seller is. The current contracts for music make the record labels the sellers. Whether you like them or not, you do not have the right to steal their money.
Re:IBM Commercial Products and a good Book for fre
on
Deploying OpenLDAP
·
· Score: 1
Be careful with this however. Because it is DB2 backed, modifying the expected object schema is a bit of a pain. Netscape's LDAP and OpenLDAP are better in this regard.
If you have no need to change the schema and are comfortable with DB2 admin issues, go ahead and look at this. It really didn't work well where I used to be (as a replacement for the old Netscape LDAP) and was being removed.
Exactly what victims of the tobacco companies are you referring to? Last time I looked, smoking was a choice. I've never seen anyone held down and forced to smoke.
This is the exact problem. These companies made a perfectly legal product available. There are warnings all over the place, even on the product. People chose to indulge in this vice even though they knew it to be harmful, then when they got sick its poor me, make them pay. How about some personal accountability?
That being said, it would be very very nice to have a runtime environment (read: VM) besides Java that runs on most systems and also provides compatible api for GUI and such
Doesn't TCL/TK fit the bill here? Not really a VM, but a powerful scripting language, completely crossplatform with a GUI system? Granted many people complain about the GUI, but there are some decent looking enhanced widgets. And now, with Starkits, a fully functional TCL/TK application can be installed as a single file copy.
Before I start, understand that come from a long Java background in a large enterprise. We were doing Java/CORBA 5+ years ago (I represented our company at the OMG), and have begun the migration off CORBA to J2EE using WebSphere.
In my off time I've starting writing a system for a self-employed friend. When I'm finished, the system may be usable by other independents in his field. It is web accessible, so I needed some form of web application.
I strongly considered Java+Struts+Apache+Tomcat+MySQL, but the installation, management and configuration are more than I want to deal with. Installing a PHP+Apache+MySQL application will be less complex than the alternative, unless I want to baby sit every installation. Granted, in an environment that already has a J2EE container system, just deploying a WAR file is not too complex. Fewer moving parts to worry about.
And as to the comments about the Java persistence model, as one of the primary people that gets called when any Java application in our environment (and most of these have literally thousands of concurrent users) is too slow or mis-behaves, you really DO NOT what massive amounts of information presisted between calls. Java's performance in the J2EE space degrades rapidly when your application server must utilize large amounts of RAM (one of the apps I initially debugged ended up requiring the JVM be configured for a 1 gig! heap due to session object persistence) do to the memory management issues.
What I'm seeing is that for the applications in an enterprise, a large portion really boil down to table maintenance applications. If they are for a small user community that doesn't need web access, I'd recommend (don't laugh) Visual Basic (can't use VB.net, we are a Unix (AIX/HP-UX) and MVS shop). Other wise, if we didn't already have a J2EE presence, I would certainly oppose going that route.
Perhaps what the original poster was referring to was the fact that early versions of VB generated P-Code for interpreting, just like in the original versions of Pascal did? As I recall, even early versions of Visual C++ would allow the generation of P-Code, though it's been quite some time since I coded C/C++ on Windows.
I agree with joining the Army, but not in the infantry. The poster speaks 3 languages, join military intelligence. I was in for 4 years in MI in the signal interception arena. You can be a morse code interceptor, voice interceptor or other. I was other (radio printer, computer-to-computer).
Army is always looking for linguists. They generally offer a good sign on bonus for linguists and the work isn't too demanding. I lived in Augsburg Germany for 2 years, worked 6 days on 2 days off, 8 hour shifts. Had plenty of time to travel, and being in MI you get a security clearance that, depending on how high, keeps you out of combat. Finished out my tour at Ft. Meade (NSA). Had a great time.
For those stating that it only takes skills, be careful. You are correct that it only takes skills, to reach a certain level. But if you have any desire to move into higher levels of a corporation (you may not want to be a PHB while your young, but that may change later), then you hit a glass ceiling where not having the degree is a problem.
In my case, I'm well paid where I work at the level I have. Unfortunately, I can't move up here without a degree and I'm paid more than folks with my job description outside of my company. My next logical move is into a junior management position (Director or equivalent). However, the executive recruiters I have spoken with all same the same thing:
I could place you with half dozen companies today, if you only had a degree.
Like it or not, the lack of degree is a limiting factor in advancement opportunity, unless you work for yourself. People outside IS (i.e. the financiers and backers of the company you work for), don't know anything about your skill set, they only know the suffixes attached to your name.
Maybe this is a topic for another discussion, but I don't expect business user to supply me with specs. They aren't software guys, they are business users. I expect them to supply me with business requirements and business process definitions, from which we will together develop the software process definitions from which the specs evolve.
Microsoft executives acknowledged the shift in strategy and said the company was still contemplating how it would bring out a revised version of the My Services technology. The decision resulted in a relocation of several dozen programmers in December from a consumer products development group run by Robert Muglia to the company's operating systems division.
and not think that they would just embed this directly into the OS?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually I already had contempt for the French, for a number of reasons.
1) During the Reagan years they refused to allow our planes from England to overfly France when on the bombing run to Libya. (Oh boy, I know the flames will start now mentioning Reagan)
2) They have this incessant demand that the French language be above all others. I might be mistaken, but I thought French was supposed to be the official language of the UN.
3) The fact is the US has bailed their butts out in two world wars and they are still arrogant (not that we aren't, but I have no problem with conceit if you can back it up).
4) Ever been a tourist in France and tried to speak the language (poorly)? The get rude. At least when I was in Germany and tried speaking German, the waitresses and store clerks might have laughed at my attempts, but they were kind enough to switch to English and help me understand my linguistic mistakes.
Frankly, the only thing I credit France with was aiding a young United States in it's war of independence against the British. But that was really more a situation of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
The question is, though, is this unusual? The past that you refer to isn't that long records wise. Look at some historical documents of massive storms with the early Spanish explorers in the Gulf region. Many ships lost to violent hurricanes, but unfortunately we don't know what category they were.
What we don't know is if this is merely a point in earth's natural cycle, or even if the weather was supposed to be this harsh except our polluting activities of the industrial revolution actually dampened it a bit and now with our efforts to clean up the atmosphere it's just moving back to normal.
Who knows?
As someone who has worked for a couple of very large corporations (DOW 30), most of them are actually self-insured. The insurance company merely handles the paperwork, but the company pays the insurance claims. And believe me, they can sometimes be worse to get payments out of than an independent insurance agency.
But more importantly: because it's the wrong response! It's playing into the terrorist's hands.
But openly criticizing the government and emboldening the attackers doesn't paly into their hands?
And its disadvantages (alienating an enormous group of people) far outweigh its advantages
Then the reverse is true concerning the governments response. The advantages to a target country of requiring the finger printing and picture taking far outweigh the disadvantages to the individual.
See, it goes both ways. Either way you play into the terrorists hands by criticizing them or criticizing the government. Either way there are advantages to one group and disadvantages to another.
Looks like a no win situation. Guess that's the whole point about terrorism.
P.S. I agree with everything you said, and feel the same way. Just wanted to throw out an alternate thought.
Mind you, I'm an American and very much dislike the way the government is knee-jerk reacting and affecting my rights, but
</disclaimer>
why all this attack on the US government's response with little attack against the criminals that triggered this response? Instead of complaining about you bing pictured and finger-printed, why not indicate you would have no problems with profiling of middle-eastern visitors?
People complain about what the government is doing in response to an attack on this country, and it may be too much, but I don't hear anyone being as openly vocal against the attackers or proposing actually dealing differently with the demographic most known for causing these problems.
Try Miracle Mile.
Ok, so here's a 'tin foil hat' suggestion to the whole problem: declare CyberSpace as represented by the Internet as a sovereign nation.
Root servers will now be considered diplomatic territory, no matter what country they exist in.
Allow peoples around the world the opportunity to be considered dual citizens (their home country an the CyperSpace) and allow them to vote for representation to manage the space and then provide a representative to the UN.
This would take some doing as some nations (i.e. the United States) do not recognize dual citizenship, but that would be the 'price' to have diplomatic relationships with CyberSpace.
Ok, so it's totaly crazy, but it is a Friday of a very long week.
You are correct and these were the types of questions we (the developers) asked in response.
The answer was that the language was fuzzy as to whether it could be restricted to just the family of companies. The concept of the GPL, as I understand, is to ensure that the community as a whole benefits from work/changes. Many people point to the fact that if you are using it only internally, then you don't need to share changes. But our legal staff looked at the fact that sharing the code amongst affiliates constitued actual distribution, and determined that could have required the company to share any work back to the software community as a whole.
When it's fuzzy, legal errs on the side of caution. So your points are valid, but as there is no clear distinction between 'distribution amongst a family of companies' and 'distribution to the world as a whole', the legal staff said no.
Just an aside to one sentence in your well spoken comments:
In the real world, where 90% of commercial programming is done in-house to create in-house applications, no license comes closer to meeting corporate requirements
I used to work for a large multinational retailer that did most of its development in house as you mention for in house applications.
We were under restrictions from legal when using GPL'd code because there was no clear definition of 'distribution'. According to some of the legal review of the GPL, we would have been distributing our code when we made it available to solely owned affiliates of the parent company. They were part of a separate business line with their own IT and executive staff, more a maintenance organization than a retailer (they did not have stores).
As an overall enterprise we were consolidating on common platforms (bulk purchasing power) across the board, but were still separate entities. The legal advisors indicated that our sharing of code with GPL components to these affiliates consituted distribution which would have activated the viral nature.
Whether this is accurate or not IANAL and can not answer. All I know is this very large organization with a large legal staff determined it was a possibility, and therefor restricted us to not use GPL code unless it could be alternately licensed or was supplied as part of a software purchase from a vendor that had the liability.
As I understand it, Sun originally looked at TCL to be what Java became for them, a controlled language. However, when Ousterhout went to work for Sun, one of the conditions was that Sun could not take control of the language, as they do with Java.
Because of this, Sun didn't promote TCL as they could have, but jumped immediately to Java (which was Invented Here) as their platform of the future.
Java of course was originally designed to be used to control devices (much like TCL) and Sun pitched it to a set top manufacturer. The deal went south and the Java team went looking for a sponser.
During some late hour negotiations, Sun got Netscape to agree to include Java support in Navigator. This would give Java a wide audience. As part of the deal, Netscape was the only company given permission to use the Java trademark, and thus renamed LiveScript to JavaScript, even though the two have no other real connection.
Because of this, people assume that JavaScript is part of the Java family. Funny though that there are many JavaScript engine implementations in Java, but very few (actually maintained and supported) in other languages (SpiderMonkey being one of the few exceptions). From what I've seen, even the browser implementations of JavaScript are actually written in Java, or at least leverage the browsers JVM to do much of their work.
ECMAScript really should be viewed as a language of it's own, seperate from Java. It would be nice to see it grow in use as it really is a decent language.
I believe we actually agree more than we disagree. I don't consider it illegal to sell a CD you no longer listen to, nor to give it away. So long as you do not maintain a copy and continue to use it, the act of transfering the media to me is not a problem. It's a fine line, I know, but one that is legally accepted.
As for the music sites you mention, if the artists are the copyright holders and give permission for this activity, by all means that is there right.
I think our only difference is that I consider it theft when an illegal activity results in a monetary loss, whether that loss be caused by actually taking something (money, things) or by creating a situation where money could have been made had the illegal activity not occured.
Oh, so now making an opposing argument using logic == saying crime X is ok? Get some glasses will you, we are only saying that the argument is illogical, not that any crime that has occured because of it.
I have to say I am completely baffled by this statement. Are you saying a crime is being committed or not? Is getting music that you did not pay for a crime or not?
"stolen their business"? This makes absolutely no sense, so I can not respond to this except to say that copying and selling a recipie might not be legal, but last time competition was NOT illegal, no matter what euphimism you use. And yes, "stole their business" is just a euphimism.
How does it not make sense? Copying and selling a stolen recipe is not competition. Competition is coming up with something better, legally. If it's OK to take business away from a competitor through illegal means, then that means monopolies should be allowed. And yes, "stole their business" can be a euphimism when all activities are legal. But if it happens as a result of an illegal activity, it ceases to be a euphimism and becomes something with monetary value that can be recovered through the courts.
I was taught that http://slashdot.org/~Travelsonic/journal/ theft requires loss, and as far as I know, that in terms of copyright infringement that in order for theft, it does require loss.
Discounting for a moment whether you agree or disagree with the notion of copyrights, what are they for? What is the purpose of a copyright? Does it not provide a means by which the copyright holder can profit from the work if they so desire, or give it away if they desire? Why is copyright infringement recognized as a crime? I say it is because it does result in a loss - a loss to the copyright holder to decide how and by what means the copyrighted material will be used. And if that meant sale for profit then it is a loss of value the copyright holder had the right to expect by virtue of holding the copyright.
Oh, and putting words in italics to make a point doesn't make it any more correct.
And just a note, the use of italics was for emphisis of the point. I've never heard where italics was intended to make something more or less correct, merely to call attention to a particular section.
So, by all the above comments the consensus is that when one person's illegal activities deprive another person of their lively hood, just because the injured party never had the money in the first place, no crime has been committed? You haven't stolen their right to a lively hood?
That said then, and with regards to previous posts, it should be perfectly legal for me to then come to your house, hook up an electrical cord and use the electricity you pay for at no charge to me. Since I intercept it before you have it, well you never had it any way (even though your meter records it).
Or better yet, your wife is a really good cook and creates a cookie recipe that allows her to make and sell cookies that people really want to buy. I can make a copy of her recipe and give it away to anyone who wants it. Because she still has the original I've not stolen her recipe, even though I have stolen her business. Nope, no crime here.
Or how about if I just zombie your computer and use it for my own needs, depriving you the ability to use it to do your job (I know, you are all uber-geeks and that could never happen...it's an analogy) so you don't get paid. You never had the money, I never took anything other than electronic resources (in this case I didn't even violate a copyright), but I prevent you from making a living. Guess I didn't commit a crime. I guess DoS attacks really aren't criminal either.
For the argument that "there is no entitlement to the money", fine. But then why do you feel entitled to the music? Why do you get something for nothing that normally you should have to pay for and think that's ok, but if someone feels you've taken money from their pockets, well, this whole entitlement mentality is bogus?
As another poster mentioned, theft is not necessarily the act of taking, but of having something to which you don't have the right. Using the example s/he provided, if you break into a company, copy their plans, use or give the plans away such that the company doesn't make money they otherwise would have, there is precendent in law that that is considered theft and a value is placed on the lost revenue to determine if is grand theft or petty theft.
But not by your definitions.
So, I guess I'll make arrangements to make use of the electricity you pay for to run the computers you own, that have your wife's famous cookie recipe that I will SPAM email to millions using your mail server and you'll be happy to let me do so since nothing physical was ever lost, and that is your definition of theft.
And "stealing" only applies to physical items, not when dealing with all-digital content.
I keep seeing statements like this when discussing the issue of making digital copies of music or other files and giving them away. Not trying to start a flamewar here, but just because it is digital and nothing physical changed hands, does not mean it is not stealing.
It is stealing. Consider the situation. If there is a CD you like and it isn't online, you go buy it. The seller makes X dollars. Your friend likes the CD too, but instead of buying it, he burns a copy of yours. You have effectively stolen X dollars from the seller.
Now, some people will say "well I won't pay for it but will take it if free", but that is a diversion. The fact is if you take a copy of the merchandise and do not pay the seller you have infact stolen dollars out of the seller's pocket. If you say you wouldn't have paid for it, then you should never have taken it.
So, just because it is digitally reproducible does not just mean 'copyright infringement'. It is theft, maybe not of the actual media, but of the profit the seller SHOULD have been allowed to make on the item.
And don't confuse the issue with who the seller is. The current contracts for music make the record labels the sellers. Whether you like them or not, you do not have the right to steal their money.
Be careful with this however. Because it is DB2 backed, modifying the expected object schema is a bit of a pain. Netscape's LDAP and OpenLDAP are better in this regard.
If you have no need to change the schema and are comfortable with DB2 admin issues, go ahead and look at this. It really didn't work well where I used to be (as a replacement for the old Netscape LDAP) and was being removed.
This is the exact problem. These companies made a perfectly legal product available. There are warnings all over the place, even on the product. People chose to indulge in this vice even though they knew it to be harmful, then when they got sick its poor me, make them pay. How about some personal accountability?
And no I am not and never have been a smoker.
Doesn't TCL/TK fit the bill here? Not really a VM, but a powerful scripting language, completely crossplatform with a GUI system? Granted many people complain about the GUI, but there are some decent looking enhanced widgets. And now, with Starkits, a fully functional TCL/TK application can be installed as a single file copy.
The last cylon model to walk in was Boomer. Since Boomer rescued the kids, it appears that the Cyclons may have a soft spot for kids.
Before I start, understand that come from a long Java background in a large enterprise. We were doing Java/CORBA 5+ years ago (I represented our company at the OMG), and have begun the migration off CORBA to J2EE using WebSphere.
In my off time I've starting writing a system for a self-employed friend. When I'm finished, the system may be usable by other independents in his field. It is web accessible, so I needed some form of web application.
I strongly considered Java+Struts+Apache+Tomcat+MySQL, but the installation, management and configuration are more than I want to deal with. Installing a PHP+Apache+MySQL application will be less complex than the alternative, unless I want to baby sit every installation. Granted, in an environment that already has a J2EE container system, just deploying a WAR file is not too complex. Fewer moving parts to worry about.
And as to the comments about the Java persistence model, as one of the primary people that gets called when any Java application in our environment (and most of these have literally thousands of concurrent users) is too slow or mis-behaves, you really DO NOT what massive amounts of information presisted between calls. Java's performance in the J2EE space degrades rapidly when your application server must utilize large amounts of RAM (one of the apps I initially debugged ended up requiring the JVM be configured for a 1 gig! heap due to session object persistence) do to the memory management issues.
What I'm seeing is that for the applications in an enterprise, a large portion really boil down to table maintenance applications. If they are for a small user community that doesn't need web access, I'd recommend (don't laugh) Visual Basic (can't use VB.net, we are a Unix (AIX/HP-UX) and MVS shop). Other wise, if we didn't already have a J2EE presence, I would certainly oppose going that route.
Isn't this nothing more than a process for auto-generating an synonyms list for any search engine? PO=Pokemon
Perhaps what the original poster was referring to was the fact that early versions of VB generated P-Code for interpreting, just like in the original versions of Pascal did? As I recall, even early versions of Visual C++ would allow the generation of P-Code, though it's been quite some time since I coded C/C++ on Windows.
I agree with joining the Army, but not in the infantry. The poster speaks 3 languages, join military intelligence. I was in for 4 years in MI in the signal interception arena. You can be a morse code interceptor, voice interceptor or other. I was other (radio printer, computer-to-computer).
Army is always looking for linguists. They generally offer a good sign on bonus for linguists and the work isn't too demanding. I lived in Augsburg Germany for 2 years, worked 6 days on 2 days off, 8 hour shifts. Had plenty of time to travel, and being in MI you get a security clearance that, depending on how high, keeps you out of combat. Finished out my tour at Ft. Meade (NSA). Had a great time.
For those stating that it only takes skills, be careful. You are correct that it only takes skills, to reach a certain level. But if you have any desire to move into higher levels of a corporation (you may not want to be a PHB while your young, but that may change later), then you hit a glass ceiling where not having the degree is a problem.
In my case, I'm well paid where I work at the level I have. Unfortunately, I can't move up here without a degree and I'm paid more than folks with my job description outside of my company. My next logical move is into a junior management position (Director or equivalent). However, the executive recruiters I have spoken with all same the same thing:
I could place you with half dozen companies today, if you only had a degree.
Like it or not, the lack of degree is a limiting factor in advancement opportunity, unless you work for yourself. People outside IS (i.e. the financiers and backers of the company you work for), don't know anything about your skill set, they only know the suffixes attached to your name.
Maybe this is a topic for another discussion, but I don't expect business user to supply me with specs. They aren't software guys, they are business users. I expect them to supply me with business requirements and business process definitions, from which we will together develop the software process definitions from which the specs evolve.
Microsoft executives acknowledged the shift in strategy and said the company was still contemplating how it would bring out a revised version of the My Services technology. The decision resulted in a relocation of several dozen programmers in December from a consumer products development group run by Robert Muglia to the company's operating systems division.
and not think that they would just embed this directly into the OS?