It's interesting that everone assumes that AOL isn't in the group because they don't want to join. Mabey they were never informed about it's existence? Or they were never invited to join... Just a few thoughts:)
I feel it is up to the owner of each OpenSource project as to how they handle security problems. If I was writing a daemon that someone pointed out had a security hole, I'd fix it furst and then inform the maling lists of a new version to fix hole X. If it is going to take a wile to fix, things would be different.
I've generally found the Mozilla people fairly good with handling startup bugs. I was suffering two of them. Jsut jump over to bugzilla and report it. (after checking for duplicate bugs first:)
Wouldn't Adding a non-GPLed library or non-gpl source code in the tree be a violation of the _Non_ GPLed code's license (depending on how open or not the other license is)
First let me preface this, by saying that I've enver studied law, and could be totally wrong in terms of members of an organisation actually become part of the legal entity.
Say I modified the Linux kernel, to support really useful feature X, As an individual person, Only I cna use it. If I started an organisation or an association, and did the changes as the asociation, I could then charge membership to the association. This membership entitles people access to the binary version of the new kernel. As the binaries arn't distributed outside of my organisation, I don't need to release code. And the GPL doesn't say what has to happen internally in my organisation.
Wether or not this is fair, that is irrelevent. I think we all can aggree on that, even most of the anti-GPL people:)
But is there any legal way for the copyright holder to terminate the licence?
The arguement can be used against Linux as a whole: Most people use Windows, Why should companies release their specs to a small group of people?
People don't like x86. The only reason I'm still using it is becasue of binary programs.
Ideally there'd be minimal DVD stuff in the Kernel andas modules anyway. so that the DVD stuff can be compiled on Unix (and clones), rather than just Linux.
Tell me, who the hell is going to stand in front of the refrigerator for 2 hours surfing the net when there is a computer in the next room? Don't even say "well, they might not HAVE a computer!" Please....If they have one of these things, they have a computer.
So what aobut for those of us who cna't leave the computer long enough to go to the kitchen and cook food for ourselves?:)
Re:No X -- we need a media-savvy, compositing GUI
on
Is X The Future?
·
· Score: 1
Are you saying that X is hard to configure, or that One implementation of X on the PC (XFree86) is hard to configure?
There are several implementations of X Servers on PCs. Just becasue one isn't luser friendly to setup, doesn't mean they all arn't (Sun has one, SCO has one, Plus there are seveal comercial X servers for Linix on x86).
Alot of the complaints I've been reading, are not talkign about X, but one implementation of it. If you find XFree hard to configure, grab the source and fix it, or write your own implementation of X.
PS. The author never mentioned Xfree or any specific implementation of X, but X in general.
I know C&W Optus have local phone lines to houses in Melbourne too (We have 2). Aparently Telstra offer 20c calls, but you need to pay extra for that (You basically come out ahead if you make x amount of local calls (60 or 120?))
Okay, I know I'm probably wrong, but isn't this filer only applicable to the search engine http://www.iseek.com.au ?
Unless the government bans foreign search engines, the filter list is not a problem. Sites will be banned based on ratings by the ABA (i think). Also, AFIK the legislation doesn't mention filter lists anywhere.
Of course having said that, We're still fucked hdown here. (of course the definition of ISP in the legislation is one that supplies content to the PUBLIC. Setup a private ISP and you shouldn't have filtering problems. I don't think the Legislation mentions filtering on the backbone...
Programming teaches you algorithmic problem solving, which is another important skill for everyone. I think that at least Programming 101 should be a requirement, not a discarded option
The problem is not everyone's mind is wired to work that way. There are people who think logically and algorithmically and there are those that just don't. That's in no way a reflection on their intelegence, People jsut think differently.
These are the people who no matter what, won't understand computing. they are the ones who no matter how much effort gets put into it will not understand maths. They arn't stupid (They have, after all managed to survive without appearing stupid in other areas).
Disclaimer: I'm not a psych student. This is just based on observations while being a supportie. PS I appologise for going offtopic.
Slashdot Mirror
IPF has been removed from -current (The development version) OpenBSD 2.9 (Due out RSN) will still have ipf in it.
The plan appears to be replacing IPF before the next release.
It's interesting that everone assumes that AOL isn't in the group because they don't want to join. Mabey they were never informed about it's existence? Or they were never invited to join... :)
Just a few thoughts
The initial news post says that some of the bugs are in the Netscape branded beta 1, so this does affect Netscape directly.
I feel it is up to the owner of each OpenSource project as to how they handle security problems. If I was writing a daemon that someone pointed out had a security hole, I'd fix it furst and then inform the maling lists of a new version to fix hole X. If it is going to take a wile to fix, things would be different.
DCMA is AFIK a USA thing... We can do anything we want in whatever country we live in, provided we don't break the law where we live.
I've generally found the Mozilla people fairly good with handling startup bugs. I was suffering two of them. Jsut jump over to bugzilla and report it. (after checking for duplicate bugs first :)
Thanks for the clarification. Just one question, does that cover associations too? (Are associations a legal entity at all in the US?)
Wouldn't Adding a non-GPLed library or non-gpl source code in the tree be a violation of the _Non_ GPLed code's license (depending on how open or not the other license is)
First let me preface this, by saying that I've enver studied law, and could be totally wrong in terms of members of an organisation actually become part of the legal entity.
:)
Say I modified the Linux kernel, to support really useful feature X, As an individual person, Only I cna use it. If I started an organisation or an association, and did the changes as the asociation, I could then charge membership to the association. This membership entitles people access to the binary version of the new kernel.
As the binaries arn't distributed outside of my organisation, I don't need to release code. And the GPL doesn't say what has to happen internally in my organisation.
Wether or not this is fair, that is irrelevent. I think we all can aggree on that, even most of the anti-GPL people
But is there any legal way for the copyright holder to terminate the licence?
The arguement can be used against Linux as a whole:
Most people use Windows, Why should companies release their specs to a small group of people?
People don't like x86. The only reason I'm still using it is becasue of binary programs.
Ideally there'd be minimal DVD stuff in the Kernel andas modules anyway. so that the DVD stuff can be compiled on Unix (and clones), rather than just Linux.
So what aobut for those of us who cna't leave the computer long enough to go to the kitchen and cook food for ourselves? :)
Are you saying that X is hard to configure, or that One implementation of X on the PC (XFree86) is hard to configure?
There are several implementations of X Servers on PCs. Just becasue one isn't luser friendly to setup, doesn't mean they all arn't (Sun has one, SCO has one, Plus there are seveal comercial X servers for Linix on x86).
Alot of the complaints I've been reading, are not talkign about X, but one implementation of it. If you find XFree hard to configure, grab the source and fix it, or write your own implementation of X.
PS. The author never mentioned Xfree or any specific implementation of X, but X in general.
I know C&W Optus have local phone lines to houses in Melbourne too (We have 2). Aparently Telstra offer 20c calls, but you need to pay extra for that (You basically come out ahead if you make x amount of local calls (60 or 120?))
Okay, I know I'm probably wrong, but isn't this filer only applicable to the search engine http://www.iseek.com.au ?
Unless the government bans foreign search engines, the filter list is not a problem. Sites will be banned based on ratings by the ABA (i think). Also, AFIK the legislation doesn't mention filter lists anywhere.
Of course having said that, We're still fucked hdown here. (of course the definition of ISP in the legislation is one that supplies content to the PUBLIC. Setup a private ISP and you shouldn't have filtering problems. I don't think the Legislation mentions filtering on the backbone...
The problem is not everyone's mind is wired to work that way. There are people who think logically and algorithmically and there are those that just don't. That's in no way a reflection on their intelegence, People jsut think differently.
These are the people who no matter what, won't understand computing. they are the ones who no matter how much effort gets put into it will not understand maths. They arn't stupid (They have, after all managed to survive without appearing stupid in other areas).
Disclaimer: I'm not a psych student. This is just based on observations while being a supportie. PS I appologise for going offtopic.