You mean Leela, not Teela. Also, I though Romanadvoratrelundar (aka Romana) was the hottest sidekick myself. Who could forget her outfit in her very first scene! Magnificent!
One thing you should also keep in mind is that when they talk about "initial cost", they are in part referring to the amount of energy (and thus pollution) needed to create the solar cells themselves. With current cells, it takes a lot of energy to make them, so although they are pollution free when they run, they caused a lot of pollution when they were made so the net benefit can be limited. As someone who lives in a relatively sunny climate, I can't wait for improvements to the technology so I can get my house off the grid!
Right now, a closed source software company could easily pick up some GPL'd code, hack it bit and include it into their products and noone would be the wiser. The most important thing to understand about this issue is that with respect to protecting intellectual property, open source code is a more accountable system than the closed source model. With open source, any one can look at any code at any time, and using ESR's analysis tool for example one could find evidence of stolen code. If the theft was inadvertent, I am sure the open source industry would be willing to forgive it, assuming it was removed. On the other hand, doing the opposite with closed source code would be impossible unless the company in question specifically allowed it. And if they know they are guilty of copyright violations, they wouldn't allow it.
Now IANAL, but I think one strategy we might employ would be to formally request a closed source company to run the chunking tool and to provide the results (which demonstratably contain NO intellectual property in and of themselves) to the open source community. If they refuse, it becomes a nugget of evidence that the company is not accountably performing due diligence on their software, and could be used against them in the future if another IP issue ever goes to court.
HP may have some small relationship with SCO, but Sun is far far more involved in funding the SCO Scam(tm). Their words have been quite specific in their contempt for Linux and support for SCO's legal efforts.
"Also, let me really clear about our Linux strategy. We don't have one. We don't at all. We do not believe that Linux plays a role on the server. Period."
"If you use Linux on the server, even if we sold the distribution to you, you are on your own."
"While they [IBM] have done a superb job of telling the world that Linux is the future, but sadly it may be true for them because they don't own an OS. We, on the other hand, have a safe, compelling and affordable product called Solaris that runs on Intel, Opteron and SPARC."
"Meanwhile, Sun hopes to capitalize on its strong contract relationship with SCO for the Solaris operating system to cherry pick IBM AIX customers worried by the revocation."
"They made a buy versus build decision (for Solaris x86 Platform Edition) to get access to a bunch of drivers for contemporary versions of Intel (Corp.) hardware,"
[sarcasm]Because, you know, SCO's Unix is just so well supported by hardware vendors![/sarcasm]
Re:New light to shed on Bill Gates, Microsoft and
on
SCO's Plan Examined
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I post this anonymously to avoid endangering my reputation at my company.
What a co-incidence! I am the CEO of a ginormous fortune 1 company that is doing exactly that! Joe, is that you? Don't even think of showing up to work on monday!
Slashdot Mirror
In Canada (esp. Vancouver), we can smoke pot in public.
You mean Leela, not Teela. Also, I though Romanadvoratrelundar (aka Romana) was the hottest sidekick myself. Who could forget her outfit in her very first scene! Magnificent!
One thing you should also keep in mind is that when they talk about "initial cost", they are in part referring to the amount of energy (and thus pollution) needed to create the solar cells themselves. With current cells, it takes a lot of energy to make them, so although they are pollution free when they run, they caused a lot of pollution when they were made so the net benefit can be limited. As someone who lives in a relatively sunny climate, I can't wait for improvements to the technology so I can get my house off the grid!
Now IANAL, but I think one strategy we might employ would be to formally request a closed source company to run the chunking tool and to provide the results (which demonstratably contain NO intellectual property in and of themselves) to the open source community. If they refuse, it becomes a nugget of evidence that the company is not accountably performing due diligence on their software, and could be used against them in the future if another IP issue ever goes to court.
Some relevant quotes from Sun on Linux, wrt SCO's case
"Also, let me really clear about our Linux strategy. We don't have one. We don't at all. We do not believe that Linux plays a role on the server. Period."
"If you use Linux on the server, even if we sold the distribution to you, you are on your own."
"While they [IBM] have done a superb job of telling the world that Linux is the future, but sadly it may be true for them because they don't own an OS. We, on the other hand, have a safe, compelling and affordable product called Solaris that runs on Intel, Opteron and SPARC."
On Sun's relationship to SCO:
"Meanwhile, Sun hopes to capitalize on its strong contract relationship with SCO for the Solaris operating system to cherry pick IBM AIX customers worried by the revocation."
Also, it is interesting to note that Sun didn't pay SCO for rights to Unix, they paid for access to the source of some unnamed device drivers:
"They made a buy versus build decision (for Solaris x86 Platform Edition) to get access to a bunch of drivers for contemporary versions of Intel (Corp.) hardware,"
[sarcasm]Because, you know, SCO's Unix is just so well supported by hardware vendors![/sarcasm]
What a co-incidence! I am the CEO of a ginormous fortune 1 company that is doing exactly that! Joe, is that you? Don't even think of showing up to work on monday!