Except the constitution does not place limits on actions of the government in a place. It places limits on the government's actions period.
Now if you'd like to quote a border exception or some part of the constitution that says it no longer is in effect at certain locations or that by stepping outside of the country that our rights with respect to the government disappear.
Good luck. I'll check in time to time to see if you've found it. Now as far as it goes, the federal government has decided to pay less and less respect to the constitution over the past 150 years. This move really isn't surprising. It's more amazing that they bother paying lip service to the constitution anymore.
That's a common misconception about Christianity. The "neighbour" spoken of in the buy-bull meant members of the "in" group, i.e., fellow Jews. Nonmembers of the in-group were fair game. Questions about its historical accuracy aside, genocide against non-Jews, for example, was okay in the bible and even endorsed by the Judeo-Christian god. It follows that it was okay throughout history for good Christians to torture and kill Jews, Muslims, other non-Christians. It was even okay to behave badly toward those Christians not part of your inner circle (e.g., Catholics against Protestants).
I have many issues with Christianity as a religion, which is why I'm not a Christian. I don't however have any hostility towards it, I save it for the annoying Christians who have obviously not read the bible. Personally I'm agnostic with no real affiliation, but I like to joke that I'm an agnostic Buddhist Pagan since it gets such a reaction here in the southern US.
I have studied alot of world religions and I can tell you that you are flat out wrong here. The tale of the Good Samaritan is an example of why you are to love your neighbor and to do unto others as you would have them do onto you.
Samaritans were a splinter group of Jews who were detested in Jesus' time by other Jews. The fact that Jesus would portray them in a positive light was shocking to other Jews.
Now you would have been correct to point out that many so called Christians are hypocrites in how they follow the bible as it suits their desires. There are many Christians today that cherry pick or misrepresent what Jesus said. That's not the fault of the bible. I take very little exception at many of things that are directly attributable to Jesus. I have real issues with alot of what Paul and the Old Testament have to say.
One year on mercury is 87.97 earth days. One sidereal day is 58.65 earth days. The apparent day if you were on the surface is actually 176 days or 2 mercurial years.
So the tidal tug for whatever its effect, is varying.
Don't feel bad. It's only recently that we learned this and in elementary school I learned the whole tidally locked story too.
Fear is what keeps us from doing dangerous things.
Man, you have not met my mother in law. She is deathly afraid of snakes. You cannot show her a fake snake and if there is one on TV she'll leave the room.
My wife told me that when she was little they were driving down a little 2 lane road several miles from their home in North Carolina. There was a black snake (common and harmless) in the road. Mom looked back for it after she drove over it and it was gone. She was convinced it had somehow managed to rear up and slither onto the axle (at 40mph, yeah, right). At the next service station she pulled in and sold the car.
So it is well established that she is absolutely terrified of snakes. What does she do when one is her front yard? She chases it and uses a hoe to chop it up. One day she was spraying weeds and didn't have the hoe. Spotted a snake and started spraying it with weed killer to get it to go towards a utility worker who was at the corner of her front yard and had him kill it. When it was dead she asked him what type it was. It was a copperhead.
My wife and I would love to get her to stop doing these stupid things.
GPL does not allow someone to pick up the code and turn it into a closed source product. BSD does. BSD code can be included into a GPL project, but the reverse is not true.
So the GPL product works hard to create a Broadcomm driver. The code gets included into a BSD driver. Broadcomm picks up the BSD driver and includes it into their closed source product. Broadcomm or some other company benefits from the GPL code and does not honor the orignal license.
I've got the same case and thanks for the warning.
I can also second the "duhhhh". Nice big plexi side so you can see all of the internals and the thumb screws are positively huge and also have philips slots on them.
Give it up on the money though. They're the government and you'll never see it.
Ok. I was going to be lazy and just say that I quite clearly remember from my Environmental Engineering course that this was not the case, but that wouldn't be right.
Short search found this site: http://www.secretsoftheice.org/icecore/sealevel.an swers.html
Their estimate for Antarctica and Greenland, which comprise the vast majority of non-floating ice (remember the north pole ice is floating!), would be a rise of 271 feet. I am not particularly impressed with their calculations. They take the current surface area of the ocean and add the ice melt water on top of the existing ocean surface. This ignores the land that would be subsumed so it is probably even less than 271 feet. We would still probably end up with a number of inland seas that would destroy numerous habitats, but many species would be unaffected. Even heating the water up to get it to expand and somehow getting the air bone dry with all that heat, you'd still most likely have a long way to getting Everest under water.
Why do all the world's cultures have a flood story? My answer is simply that fathers the world round had to explain to their inquisitve children why they could find impressions of shells at the top of high mountains. These fathers had no idea of plate techtonics, but certainly could not say "I don't know."
Now I've done alot of research on the Chicxulub event and I'd say that it is a testiment to how tenacious life really is.
Speaking as an IBM employee, you've only got part of that right. Yes there are monetary rewards for a filing and then when the patent is awarded, but you're 100% wrong when it comes to the spamming. Each division at each site has a patent review board. You have to first convince this board that you are on to something (Having been involved in the process I can say it is not easy and most get shot down at this point). Next you are referred to IBM legal for the writing of the patent application and a prior art search. Only if you've made it to this point does the filing go in.
If you work at IBM and want to make bonus money it is much easier to write articles at Developer Works and get recognition through the Author Awards Program.
As much as I like newsforge, I have an issue with the fact that I have only seen the rebuff there. Going to the yahoo summary page for SCOX shows the story on HP's indemnity offer, SCO's stupid press release, and then a couple of newswire articles about the offer and SCO's pr with no rebuttal to the SCO position.
HP needs to clarify its position in the main stream press. What impression are investors being left with?
Is it just a coincidence that people may be recieving invoices at the same time that SCO must answer IBM's countersuit? Could they be trying to bury that news in the noise of news about people getting invoiced? Hmm, naaaah. Wait, what am I thinking, this is SCO! Of course it's another scheme!
Copyright is exactly what it says "copy" "right". It means that the author of a work has exclusive rights on how it will be distributed. Infrigement is defined by para 501 of copyright law. The salient bit is
Anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner as provided by sections 106 through 122 or of the author as provided in section 106A(a), or who imports copies or phonorecords into the United States in violation of section 602, is an infringer of the copyright or right of the author,
para 106-122 of copyright law. I won't bore you with details here (its very long), but it boils down that there is nothing that says that having a copy of a work is a violation. It is all about reproduction and distribution.
Real world example time. I write a book and I sell First North American publishing rights to XYZ publisher. They publish a european edition of my book, which is a violation of my copyright, since I did not sell them those rights. Do I sue or invoice everyone with a copy of my book in europe or do I sue the publisher. The publisher of course since they are the infringing party.
The simple matter of this is that SCO should be suing the distributors and not the end users, since they have no right to do so!
Their legal thinking on this whole debacle has been laughable from the beginning. What is my opinion? I think they're trying to get a bunch of gullable folks to send them money. And, oh yeah, their claims are full of shit.
The one claim by SCO's legal group that really bothers me (as an unpublished author) is the whole "GPL contravene's federal law by allowing more than one copy" crap. That would be in reference to Para 117: Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs, section a. This is a limitation on me as a developer to say that I do not have the right to claim that someone making a copy in order to use or archive is infringing. This in no way can be construed to mean that I as the author of a program cannot give people additional rights. It just means that I have to give them AT LEAST the right to make those copies. Heise and Boies both should be disbarred for those statements. Ok rant over, I feel better.
I'm sure it goes without saying, but IANAL. Just someone who knows enough to read the law.
You see! This is why they didn't show their evidence! You all have gone and poked holes in it. Shame on you, you're going to be responsible for the death of a corporation!
Important note for the sarcasm impared: yes, the above is sarcasm.
Basically you borrow shares of stock X from your broker which are sold at price Y. Later after the stock price has fallen to Z you buy the same number of shares you borrowed and return them to your broker. Your gain is Y-Z. Your gain is limited since a stock can't fall below 0, but your risk is limitless since theoretically a stock price can keep going up (which is why brokerages have short stop prices). The benefit is that you can create a gain without an initial investment
Example:
You short 100 shares of SCOX at $13 ($1300 sale price) and when the price is $10 you buy the 100 shares to return ($1000 purchase price). Your gain is $300.
If it goes to $15 and you have a stop placed there you loose $200.
All of the infighting only weakens the players in the unix arena. Microsoft is already trying to the server market or haven't you noticed the "we saved a nickel" ad they play each night.
Notes on SCO Conference Call, 2003-08-05 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
Copyright 2003, Michael Elizabeth Chastain. Permission granted to copy and reproduce in any medium.
2003-08-05T14:01:59-0400
800-238-9007 / 274040 / The SCO Group
Called in. There is a queue to get to an operator.
2003-08-05T14:06:16-0400
Opening remarks, Blake Stowell.
Stowell: Today, McBride and Sontag.
2003-08-05T14:06:56-0400
McBride:
Yesterday, SCO filed a legal action against the SCO Group...
Purpose of this call is to comment on these actions.
Red Hat's lawsuit confirms what we have been saying all along:
Linux developers are unable/unwilling to screen code.
Red Hat is selling Linux that contains verbatim / obfuscated code
from System 5.
Red Hat is selling Linux that contains derivative code...
Some of those companies (IBM / Sequent) have had their licenses terminated.
Red Hat claims we have not shown examples of infringing code.
This claim is simply not true... viewing center in Linden, Utah.
Red Hat is apparently trying to pretend that no problem exists.
Red Hat claims that SCO is at fault for its loss of recent Linux business.
We suggest that Red Hat has adopted a faulty business model.... new risk factor disclosure in SEC statement...
Quotes from GPL Section 7, distributors may need to stop distributing.
It has no control to prevent infringing code from going into Linux.
If infringing code goes in, then Red Hat must stop shipping.
This is the problem with Red Hat's business model.
Red Hat has established $1 million fund.
SCO is not suing developers, just their employers.
We suggest that Red Hat needs to increase the size of the fund.
Over 2.5 million servers running linux kernel 2.4.
Red Hat thinks that SCO should show them every line of infringing code.
Red Hat thinks that they can... just remove the infringing code.
What is at issue is more than SCO and Red Hat.
What is at issue is intellectual property rights in the age of the Internet.
"don't ask, don't tell" policy.... important debate...
proprietary or communal property according to Richard Stallman's vision.
Rolling out licenses to run SCO IP in binary form only.
Because the SCO license authorizes run-time use only,
customers also comply with the GPL.
2003-08-05T14:15:00-0400
Assemble roster for Q and A.
#1 Lee Gomez, Wall Street Journal
Q: Why don't you release the examples of infringement?
A: Actually, We have been releasing them.
Q: Are they on your web site?
A: NUMA, RCU, are direct violations.
Q: Do you have specific examples?
A: We've been showing?
Q: Publically available, to anyone?
A: Absolutely.
A: The minute we open it up, we can't restrict it in the future.
A: Over 100 people under NDA.
Q: Can you make available a list of people?
A: I have to go back to my PR team?
Q: Linux/open source advocates?
A: I don't remember his name
Chris: I don't remember his name but I can provide that to you.
#2 David Becker, CNET
Q: Terms of the new license?
A: Chris, comment on that?
Chris: single cpu, $699, October 15, after which it will climb to a higher price
Chris: contract their SCO representative
#3 M??? Greenmeyer, e-week
Q: Letter about possible global resolution.
What were you referring to?
A: We had those discussions... now we're going to take matters in our own hands.
A: It's time to start marching onward again.
Slashdot Mirror
Except the constitution does not place limits on actions of the government in a place. It places limits on the government's actions period.
Now if you'd like to quote a border exception or some part of the constitution that says it no longer is in effect at certain locations or that by stepping outside of the country that our rights with respect to the government disappear.
Good luck. I'll check in time to time to see if you've found it. Now as far as it goes, the federal government has decided to pay less and less respect to the constitution over the past 150 years. This move really isn't surprising. It's more amazing that they bother paying lip service to the constitution anymore.
I have studied alot of world religions and I can tell you that you are flat out wrong here. The tale of the Good Samaritan is an example of why you are to love your neighbor and to do unto others as you would have them do onto you.
Samaritans were a splinter group of Jews who were detested in Jesus' time by other Jews. The fact that Jesus would portray them in a positive light was shocking to other Jews.
Now you would have been correct to point out that many so called Christians are hypocrites in how they follow the bible as it suits their desires. There are many Christians today that cherry pick or misrepresent what Jesus said. That's not the fault of the bible. I take very little exception at many of things that are directly attributable to Jesus. I have real issues with alot of what Paul and the Old Testament have to say.
Because it's legal and the government gets their cut?
One year on mercury is 87.97 earth days. One sidereal day is 58.65 earth days. The apparent day if you were on the surface is actually 176 days or 2 mercurial years.
So the tidal tug for whatever its effect, is varying.
Don't feel bad. It's only recently that we learned this and in elementary school I learned the whole tidally locked story too.
Fear is what keeps us from doing dangerous things.
Man, you have not met my mother in law. She is deathly afraid of snakes. You cannot show her a fake snake and if there is one on TV she'll leave the room.
My wife told me that when she was little they were driving down a little 2 lane road several miles from their home in North Carolina. There was a black snake (common and harmless) in the road. Mom looked back for it after she drove over it and it was gone. She was convinced it had somehow managed to rear up and slither onto the axle (at 40mph, yeah, right). At the next service station she pulled in and sold the car.
So it is well established that she is absolutely terrified of snakes. What does she do when one is her front yard? She chases it and uses a hoe to chop it up. One day she was spraying weeds and didn't have the hoe. Spotted a snake and started spraying it with weed killer to get it to go towards a utility worker who was at the corner of her front yard and had him kill it. When it was dead she asked him what type it was. It was a copperhead.
My wife and I would love to get her to stop doing these stupid things.
GPL does not allow someone to pick up the code and turn it into a closed source product.
BSD does. BSD code can be included into a GPL project, but the reverse is not true.
So the GPL product works hard to create a Broadcomm driver. The code gets included into a BSD driver. Broadcomm picks up the BSD driver and includes it into their closed source product. Broadcomm or some other company benefits from the GPL code and does not honor the orignal license.
1 nautical mile == 1.2 standard miles.
So it missed him by 6 miles. Seriously, doesn't anybody around here own a real boat?
Actually compared to what is on G4, this may be a step up in quality.
I've got the same case and thanks for the warning.
I can also second the "duhhhh". Nice big plexi side so you can see all of the internals and the thumb screws are positively huge and also have philips slots on them.
Give it up on the money though. They're the government and you'll never see it.
As a NaNoWriMo participant, I had wondered where my creativity had gone last night. Damn you, Google! Now I'll never make it beyond 50,000 words.
I didn't really see a point in arguing the "All" point. Just decided to point out that there's at least one simpler answer.
Ok. I was going to be lazy and just say that I quite clearly remember from my Environmental Engineering course that this was not the case, but that wouldn't be right.
n swers.html
Short search found this site: http://www.secretsoftheice.org/icecore/sealevel.a
Their estimate for Antarctica and Greenland, which comprise the vast majority of non-floating ice (remember the north pole ice is floating!), would be a rise of 271 feet. I am not particularly impressed with their calculations. They take the current surface area of the ocean and add the ice melt water on top of the existing ocean surface. This ignores the land that would be subsumed so it is probably even less than 271 feet. We would still probably end up with a number of inland seas that would destroy numerous habitats, but many species would be unaffected. Even heating the water up to get it to expand and somehow getting the air bone dry with all that heat, you'd still most likely have a long way to getting Everest under water.
Why do all the world's cultures have a flood story? My answer is simply that fathers the world round had to explain to their inquisitve children why they could find impressions of shells at the top of high mountains. These fathers had no idea of plate techtonics, but certainly could not say "I don't know."
Now I've done alot of research on the Chicxulub event and I'd say that it is a testiment to how tenacious life really is.
My appologies to those who have seen Spaceballs.
"Spaceballs, the flame thrower. The kids love that one."
If you work at IBM and want to make bonus money it is much easier to write articles at Developer Works and get recognition through the Author Awards Program.
Of course you want to see it and here it is aPC
As much as I like newsforge, I have an issue with the fact that I have only seen the rebuff there. Going to the yahoo summary page for SCOX shows the story on HP's indemnity offer, SCO's stupid press release, and then a couple of newswire articles about the offer and SCO's pr with no rebuttal to the SCO position.
HP needs to clarify its position in the main stream press. What impression are investors being left with?
Ruled for just 4 years and murdered by two of his closest advisors.
Is it just a coincidence that people may be recieving invoices at the same time that SCO must answer IBM's countersuit? Could they be trying to bury that news in the noise of news about people getting invoiced? Hmm, naaaah. Wait, what am I thinking, this is SCO! Of course it's another scheme!
para 106-122 of copyright law. I won't bore you with details here (its very long), but it boils down that there is nothing that says that having a copy of a work is a violation. It is all about reproduction and distribution.
Real world example time. I write a book and I sell First North American publishing rights to XYZ publisher. They publish a european edition of my book, which is a violation of my copyright, since I did not sell them those rights. Do I sue or invoice everyone with a copy of my book in europe or do I sue the publisher. The publisher of course since they are the infringing party.
The simple matter of this is that SCO should be suing the distributors and not the end users, since they have no right to do so!
Their legal thinking on this whole debacle has been laughable from the beginning. What is my opinion? I think they're trying to get a bunch of gullable folks to send them money. And, oh yeah, their claims are full of shit.
The one claim by SCO's legal group that really bothers me (as an unpublished author) is the whole "GPL contravene's federal law by allowing more than one copy" crap. That would be in reference to Para 117: Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs, section a. This is a limitation on me as a developer to say that I do not have the right to claim that someone making a copy in order to use or archive is infringing. This in no way can be construed to mean that I as the author of a program cannot give people additional rights. It just means that I have to give them AT LEAST the right to make those copies. Heise and Boies both should be disbarred for those statements. Ok rant over, I feel better.
I'm sure it goes without saying, but IANAL. Just someone who knows enough to read the law.
I was there on Saturday (and Sunday, damn Delta, never flying with them again) and the dialog was warning them about critical updates.
You see! This is why they didn't show their evidence! You all have gone and poked holes in it. Shame on you, you're going to be responsible for the death of a corporation!
Important note for the sarcasm impared: yes, the above is sarcasm.
Basically you borrow shares of stock X from your broker which are sold at price Y. Later after the stock price has fallen to Z you buy the same number of shares you borrowed and return them to your broker. Your gain is Y-Z. Your gain is limited since a stock can't fall below 0, but your risk is limitless since theoretically a stock price can keep going up (which is why brokerages have short stop prices). The benefit is that you can create a gain without an initial investment
Example:
You short 100 shares of SCOX at $13 ($1300 sale price) and when the price is $10 you buy the 100 shares to return ($1000 purchase price). Your gain is $300.
If it goes to $15 and you have a stop placed there you loose $200.
All of the infighting only weakens the players in the unix arena. Microsoft is already trying to the server market or haven't you noticed the "we saved a nickel" ad they play each night.
Notes on SCO Conference Call, 2003-08-05
... ...
... viewing center in Linden, Utah.
... new risk factor disclosure in SEC statement ...
... just remove the infringing code.
... important debate ...
... now we're going to take matters in our own hands.
Michael Elizabeth Chastain
Copyright 2003, Michael Elizabeth Chastain.
Permission granted to copy and reproduce in any medium.
2003-08-05T14:01:59-0400
800-238-9007 / 274040 / The SCO Group
Called in. There is a queue to get to an operator.
2003-08-05T14:06:16-0400
Opening remarks, Blake Stowell.
Stowell: Today, McBride and Sontag.
2003-08-05T14:06:56-0400
McBride:
Yesterday, SCO filed a legal action against the SCO Group
Purpose of this call is to comment on these actions.
Red Hat's lawsuit confirms what we have been saying all along:
Linux developers are unable/unwilling to screen code.
Red Hat is selling Linux that contains verbatim / obfuscated code
from System 5.
Red Hat is selling Linux that contains derivative code
Some of those companies (IBM / Sequent) have had their licenses terminated.
Red Hat claims we have not shown examples of infringing code.
This claim is simply not true
Red Hat is apparently trying to pretend that no problem exists.
Red Hat claims that SCO is at fault for its loss of recent Linux business.
We suggest that Red Hat has adopted a faulty business model.
Quotes from GPL Section 7, distributors may need to stop distributing.
It has no control to prevent infringing code from going into Linux.
If infringing code goes in, then Red Hat must stop shipping.
This is the problem with Red Hat's business model.
Red Hat has established $1 million fund.
SCO is not suing developers, just their employers.
We suggest that Red Hat needs to increase the size of the fund.
Over 2.5 million servers running linux kernel 2.4.
Red Hat thinks that SCO should show them every line of infringing code.
Red Hat thinks that they can
What is at issue is more than SCO and Red Hat.
What is at issue is intellectual property rights in the age of the Internet.
"don't ask, don't tell" policy.
proprietary or communal property according to Richard Stallman's vision.
Rolling out licenses to run SCO IP in binary form only.
Because the SCO license authorizes run-time use only,
customers also comply with the GPL.
2003-08-05T14:15:00-0400
Assemble roster for Q and A.
#1 Lee Gomez, Wall Street Journal
Q: Why don't you release the examples of infringement?
A: Actually, We have been releasing them.
Q: Are they on your web site?
A: NUMA, RCU, are direct violations.
Q: Do you have specific examples?
A: We've been showing?
Q: Publically available, to anyone?
A: Absolutely.
A: The minute we open it up, we can't restrict it in the future.
A: Over 100 people under NDA.
Q: Can you make available a list of people?
A: I have to go back to my PR team?
Q: Linux/open source advocates?
A: I don't remember his name
Chris: I don't remember his name but I can provide that to you.
#2 David Becker, CNET
Q: Terms of the new license?
A: Chris, comment on that?
Chris: single cpu, $699, October 15, after which it will climb to a higher price
Chris: contract their SCO representative
#3 M??? Greenmeyer, e-week
Q: Letter about possible global resolution.
What were you referring to?
A: We had those discussions
A: It's time to start marching onward again.
#4 Michael Singer, Jupiter Media
Just in case you weren't sure, but that look was him trying to figure out what the word "morals" meant.