18 posts • joined Wednesday 29th August 2007 23:59 GMT
RIPA --- HA!
Your RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) is nothing, compared to our (US) Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, Yearly Organized, Actualized Security Systems.
(RIPA YO ASS).
Oh yeah, badness incarnate! So secret it's only just now, dropped trowl.
Tampa, Florida, USA.
Competence: the greatest threat to job security.
The trick to getting and keeping a job, is to make the ``executive'' look good. It's what they want; what they do.
If you seem worth a shit, well... you're fired!
Orange....??? This is a UK rag, right?
What's this about an orange?
I keep seeing ``orange'' ``orange'' ``orange''. You guys don't grow oranges! WE grow oranges!
Huh? yp/nis, anyone?? eh?? I think we need to sue.
And I don't NEED yo stinking Oranges!
BTW: be glad you ain't got ``OJ''! He'd kick Bobby's ass in a heartbeat.
David, Tampa, Florida.
God's own Orange grow'n land. (F*ck California!)
At the least, with the coming chip densities and virtualization software, this could really blow up.
We've got dual and quad core kit right now. Fact is, oct core is next, and then what... hex core. Chips are becoming clusters of systems. On the software side, virtualization is growing the size of exploitable code.
Fore warned is fore armed. And yes, design is the answer, because it is the problem.
I think it's a good reminder.
Why don't they simply distribute via a commonly supported format?
We need some serious, global ip law reform. Content is now, has been for some time, and will all the more so --- be a public good, freely available and distributable.
I think this will encourage companies to adopt free and open software.
Let's say company ``A'' is using a prominant piece of software, and they are modifying/enriching the product to better meet their needs, why wouldn't they opt to include their corporate identity to the product? They are a developer/contributor of the product.
Now. Company ``B, C, ...'' sees that this software product really is advantageous, and decides to adopt it. Since A, B, C, ... are competitors in the same market, they'll also want to get their name listed. As adoptors they also contribute, and thus earn equal status with the rest of the contributors.
Further out, once this practice gains the attention of the enterprise market, it will become a thing, to be a contributor of relevent free and open software products. It's a social thing, a publicity thing, and something that would happen anyway should a large organization contribute significantly to the cause.
Ultimately, I think that what will happen with this, is that lots of organization will contribute, exploding the development of free and open software, and instead of full-blown logo saturation (say a two minute logo slide show every time you start the application), it will settle into acknowledgement of contribution, and the right for the company to promote on its own, the status as a free and open software contributor.
That's how I see it.
Where's Dogbert when you need him???
I think I should patent the binary number system. And written language, and the distinctive use of sounds to encode meaning. And the drinking of water. Sex! The right to die. The right to live. The names El Reg, BOFH....
Pay me now!
What I'd really like to see is a viable patent holder, who's been massively violated by M$ in a core technology, win a ``cease and desist'' order. Kind of like M$ NT's blatent ripoff of BSD's ipv4 stack.
``Good bye M$. And go f#$ck! yourself on the way down.''
It could happen. It should have happened. It likely will happen.
FUD back at you, M$, creeps.
- On the matter of shooting down Amazon delivery drones with shotguns
- Review Bring Your Own Disks: The Synology DS214 network storage box
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- IT MELTDOWN ruins Cyber Monday for RBS, Natwest customers
- Google's new cloud CRUSHES Amazon in RAM battle