Do I have that right?
No, not at all.
Linus comments had nothing to do with using COW for User-Space to User-Space. In fact Linux do use that technic for user-space fork()
He is taking about Using COW to avoid copying data from User-Space to Kernel.
I am not familiar enough with the subject to know if is claims are true, but at least I read it with enough attention not to make a Strawman out of it.
"the metric of whether sources are protected in the past has been if maintaining the anonynomity of the sources of the leaked information serves the great public good. This is why the leaker of the Pentagon Papers was protected."
Would the the 'Halloween Documents' be eligible ? could MS sue under trade secret for divulging them to the public ? why ? why not ?
He he was sued to 'reveal' his source (in this case himself', yes.
If he was sue for being the leak, that would be another story.
But again imagine this:
Miss Doe over-heard at a PT meeting that her husband is cheeting on her. Does she has the right to supeana the person she over-heard ?
What if that info is put on a web-site ?
What if Miss Does own a mariage concelling business, (and therefore that news may have adverse business concequece- that may be soemthing her business try to expoit later to illustrate how to resolve marital dispute...)
What if Miss Doe is the First Lady ?
Apple is certainly entiltled to search who did leak the info, but the web site is not obligated to help them doing their whitch hunt, especially when it is not unheard of that such business do use, on occsion, these 'leak' to stir up some publicity.
Slashdot Mirror
Do I have that right?
No, not at all.
Linus comments had nothing to do with using COW for User-Space to User-Space. In fact Linux do use that technic for user-space fork()
He is taking about Using COW to avoid copying data from User-Space to Kernel.
I am not familiar enough with the subject to know if is claims are true, but at least I read it with enough attention not to make a Strawman out of it.
"the metric of whether sources are protected in the past has been if maintaining the anonynomity of the sources of the leaked information serves the great public good. This is why the leaker of the Pentagon Papers was protected."
Would the the 'Halloween Documents' be eligible ? could MS sue under trade secret for divulging them to the public ? why ? why not ?
He he was sued to 'reveal' his source (in this case himself', yes. If he was sue for being the leak, that would be another story. But again imagine this: Miss Doe over-heard at a PT meeting that her husband is cheeting on her. Does she has the right to supeana the person she over-heard ? What if that info is put on a web-site ? What if Miss Does own a mariage concelling business, (and therefore that news may have adverse business concequece- that may be soemthing her business try to expoit later to illustrate how to resolve marital dispute...) What if Miss Doe is the First Lady ? Apple is certainly entiltled to search who did leak the info, but the web site is not obligated to help them doing their whitch hunt, especially when it is not unheard of that such business do use, on occsion, these 'leak' to stir up some publicity.