Once the primaries and caucuses start, Dean will have to find a way to get to all the voters and caucusers who aren't internet geeks.
He's got this right now. All those internet geeks are getting tapped for donations (check out his Q3 numbers tomorrow morning, they should be $14+ million) and are being organized into canvassing groups.
Right now he's got a sizeable (informal, ad-hoc, mostly inexperienced, but very enthusiastic) campaign organization in every state. Most of it is being organized over the Web, but the actions themselves are taking place on the ground.
Another memorable EULA quote: I'm forbidden to use Visual Studio tools to make any word processing or spreadsheet application, unless it's a small part of a larger application. Unlike Open Source, if a Microsoft-enchained programmer (like me) invents a better mousetrap, they're verboten to release it.
If I recall correctly, that provision also exists in their license for.NET v1.1 -- not Visual Studio.NET, just the vanilla.NET SDK.
I think there are a few factors that work in Dean's favor, which you may be ignoring because of his anti-war stance.
He's got an A rating from the NRA and his views on gun control are virtually identical to those of Bush. A lot of people who voted Freedom First last time are going to be more sympathetic toward Dean than they were toward Gore.
This last war didn't have nearly as much support as the Gulf War of 1991 or the invasion of Afghanistan (both of which Dean publicly stated that he supported). In addition, there are a lot of Republicans who were against this war, and they will probably find Dean's open skepticism about Gulf War II refreshing and appealing.
Given Dean's record with the Vermont budget, it will be virtually impossible for the President to cast Dean as a Tax-And-Spend-Liberal.
If the job market doesn't substantially improve soon, it will be easy for Dean to depict Bush's policies as detrimental to the economy. That message does sell in Middle America.
For the record, I'm a Dean supporter myself, because I like where he stands on the issues and because I think he stands the only real chance of beating Bush in 2004. I agree that Dean's chances aren't great, but beating Bush in 2004 is a long-shot for any candidate, once you factor in the $200 million warchest that Bush plans to deploy.
If there has been no infringement then logically there would be no need for this fund as, again logically, it could be demonstrated in every court that Linux doesn't contain any SCO material.
This is a non-sequitur. The simple fact is that it is going to cost money -- a lot of money -- in order to prove that Linux doesn't contain any SCO material. Lawyers need to be paid, witnesses need to be briefed, exhibits need to be made, etc. All that takes cash, regardless of the merits of the case.
The post to which you refer announces the countersuit. This post announces the actual launching of the fund, complete with a website where you can join and make contributions.
"His final statement-- that Red Hat's "decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux--" is chilling in light of the business strategy that SCO has adopted in its sales of UnixWare licenses to actual and potential users of the Linux kernel."
Whatever. If SCO proves their claims, then it won't be long before the Linux community re-writes those parts that IBM contributed and makes the Linux kernel "UNIX-free."
But with this system, they won't have to care. The computer will flag at-risk students for them based on known behavior patterns, and send them to a cookie-cutter behavior modification program that fits the criteria of the special interests that elected the political leadership. This way we'll guarantee the next generation of Stepford Consumers.
If you have a problem with this, then you must be a terrorist.
I don't disagree with you. Chances are that this type of development will shrink as open source software replaces proprietary software. It will shrink, but it won't die away. Companies that make their living off of selling systems (IBM) or hardware (Intel) will continue to fund open-source develeopment.
If Open Source were the only software solution there would become a lack of demand for paid developers
Most of the software development happening today is for code that runs in house, so that businesses can handle their accounting, inventory, transportation and personnel needs. This will still be the case down the road, regardless of whether the dominant commercial software model is proprietary, open-source, or public domain.
They're going to need coders to develop that software, and those coders ain't gonna work for free.
Granted, this means that there's less work available to develop one-size-fits all solutions for word processing, operating systems, databases, compilers, etc. But, frankly, the market for these items is pretty crowded as it is anyway.
(BTW -- I haven't done this yet, and I can't do it at work, but maybe someone should check this SRPM for GPL notices and compare it against the "vanilla" kernel. If the notices are present, then SCO released the source under GPL. If the notices are not present, then SCO has committed a GPL violation. I think. I am not a lawyer etc.)
Slashdot Mirror
Laws never stopped criminals from carrying illegal firearms, though stricter enforcement might do the trick.
Everyone knows she wears thongs!
Once the primaries and caucuses start, Dean will have to find a way to get to all the voters and caucusers who aren't internet geeks. He's got this right now. All those internet geeks are getting tapped for donations (check out his Q3 numbers tomorrow morning, they should be $14+ million) and are being organized into canvassing groups. Right now he's got a sizeable (informal, ad-hoc, mostly inexperienced, but very enthusiastic) campaign organization in every state. Most of it is being organized over the Web, but the actions themselves are taking place on the ground.
Indeed, Microsoft has it both ways. And sometimes in other ways, too.
If I recall correctly, that provision also exists in their license for .NET v1.1 -- not Visual Studio .NET, just the vanilla .NET SDK.
This post does *not* deserve a "troll" rating.
Put it this way: try dating off campus. Hey, Harvard hotties are just a short hike away!
How about I give you the finger, and you go sell your scam to someone else?
Thank you.
In typical webizen fashion, I warned everyone about it via blog, and told them not to use Outlook for a while.
For the record, I'm a Dean supporter myself, because I like where he stands on the issues and because I think he stands the only real chance of beating Bush in 2004. I agree that Dean's chances aren't great, but beating Bush in 2004 is a long-shot for any candidate, once you factor in the $200 million warchest that Bush plans to deploy.
This is a non-sequitur. The simple fact is that it is going to cost money -- a lot of money -- in order to prove that Linux doesn't contain any SCO material. Lawyers need to be paid, witnesses need to be briefed, exhibits need to be made, etc. All that takes cash, regardless of the merits of the case.
The post to which you refer announces the countersuit. This post announces the actual launching of the fund, complete with a website where you can join and make contributions.
I've got your $699 right here
Whatever. If SCO proves their claims, then it won't be long before the Linux community re-writes those parts that IBM contributed and makes the Linux kernel "UNIX-free."
You'll pardon me if I'm not frightened.
Things like:
- Intro to Linux
- Word processing with OpenOffice.org
- Graphics with the GIMP
- Programming with Python
You can charge them a $5 materials fee that includes a CD-ROM of the software!
If you have a problem with this, then you must be a terrorist.
I don't disagree with you. Chances are that this type of development will shrink as open source software replaces proprietary software. It will shrink, but it won't die away. Companies that make their living off of selling systems (IBM) or hardware (Intel) will continue to fund open-source develeopment.
They're going to need coders to develop that software, and those coders ain't gonna work for free.
Granted, this means that there's less work available to develop one-size-fits all solutions for word processing, operating systems, databases, compilers, etc. But, frankly, the market for these items is pretty crowded as it is anyway.
(BTW -- I haven't done this yet, and I can't do it at work, but maybe someone should check this SRPM for GPL notices and compare it against the "vanilla" kernel. If the notices are present, then SCO released the source under GPL. If the notices are not present, then SCO has committed a GPL violation. I think. I am not a lawyer etc.)
And Portland really is beautiful.
And we can use the money. (No joke. We have everything you could possibly want here except jobs.)
A pointer to a socket function?
I don't know, I just play here.
Just as a note: both green tea and black tea contain caffiene.
Try the Drop Dead Diet. It's guaranteed to work, and to be the last diet you ever try.
Mea culpa; mea maxima culpa.
ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/updates/OpenLinux/3.1.1/Serv er/CSSA-2003-020.0/SRPMS/