Mentec US is gone! - DEC

This is a discussion on Mentec US is gone! - DEC ; wrote in message news:emjak5$8qk_002@s952.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.co m... > In article , > "Kelvin Smith" wrote: >>IMHO, people who live in European houses shouldn't throw stones... The >>problems may be different; the severity is at least as bad. >> > Especially when they ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 187

Thread: Mentec US is gone!

  1. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    wrote in message
    news:emjak5$8qk_002@s952.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.co m...
    > In article ,
    > "Kelvin Smith" wrote:
    >>IMHO, people who live in European houses shouldn't throw stones... The
    >>problems may be different; the severity is at least as bad.
    >>

    > Especially when they are in missle range of unfriendly regimes.
    >

    The whole world is within US missile range...



  2. Re: Booting a new OS on DEC equipment [was Re: Mentec US is gone!]

    On 23 Dec 2006 14:20:43 -0500, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

    > wrote:
    >>
    >>They are just 12 numbers, and numbers can't be copyrighted. You could
    >>copyright the PERFORMANCE of setting each switch, but you would have to
    >>CR every possible sequence. Expensive.

    >
    >But that's true of _all_ software. It's all just numbers.
    >
    >I think there is some common law on the subject, having to do with copyrighting
    >log tables.


    That could be interesting... how did that case turn out, do you know?
    (you mean case law, not common law?) Log tables, it's nothing
    creative... it involves work but it's just writing down numbers. How
    far can this be reduced? Could you copyright a physical constant?

    Mike
    --
    http://www.corestore.org
    'As I walk along these shores
    I am the history within'

  3. Re: Booting a new OS on DEC equipment [was Re: Mentec US is gone!]

    In article ,
    kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
    > wrote:
    >>
    >>They are just 12 numbers, and numbers can't be copyrighted. You could
    >>copyright the PERFORMANCE of setting each switch, but you would have to
    >>CR every possible sequence. Expensive.

    >
    > But that's true of _all_ software. It's all just numbers.
    >


    And every song is just a combination of the same notes and the same
    words/letters that have been in use for decades if not centuries.
    And still the RIAA is having no problem getting courts to issue hefty
    fines.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  4. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article <4v57bvF1ark3kU1@mid.individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    > In article ,
    > kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
    >> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>Well, the reason I'm doubting this is because you have hundreds.
    >>>Ultrix didn't seem to be that busy and were hanging on by the
    >>>skin of their bits (the product was barely selling enough hardware).
    >>>So hundreds doesn't compute ;-).

    >>
    >> I have a bunch of Ultrix-16 licenses _because_ it didn't sell well, and
    >> when the machines were shut down nobody wanted the old licenses.

    >
    > What was Ultrix-16? PDP-11 ran Ultrix-11. VAX ran Ultrix-32. Maybe they
    > didn't sell well because there was none. :-)
    >
    >>
    >> Ultrix/Vax didn't sell very well (because it was really just 4.xBSD+bugs
    >> and DEC had no real idea how to sell it anyway), but later Ultrix on the
    >> DECStation machines were very popular. The Decstation 3100 and 5000 were
    >> really slick machines... the 5000 had graphics hardware better than Suns
    >> at a fraction of the price.

    >
    > I had a VAXStation 3100 when I first got to the University. If you want
    > to now my opinion of it, consider that I now have at least a half-dozen
    > VAXStation 3100 but not a single DECStation 3100. When I got my first
    > Sparcstation I it ran circles around the DECStation. Come to think of
    > it, so did the SUN-3's.
    >
    >>
    >> I worked at one site, though, where we had lots of uVax II machines
    >> and wound up relicensing them for Ultrix because they were basically
    >> available for the asking from the surplus property guys and users wanted
    >> Unix.

    >
    > That's why I would have liked to see HP relases Ultrix-32 like Ultrix-11.
    > BUt sadly, they are not interested in even talking about it and send you
    > off looking for NetBSD. Unfortunately, NetBSD has moved forward so far
    > in its efforts to support other architectures with more horsepower it
    > is now too much of a dog to run on something the size of a MicroVAX or
    > VAXStation. Nevermind the fact that much of the VAX Hardware is still
    > and never will be supported. Litt;e things like DSSI and Graphics, :-)


    It may not be possible for HP to release Ultrix-32. I don't know/recall
    which part of Ultrix-32 was licensed from AT&T, but DEC had some type of
    agreement with AT&T which I believe included royalty payments. I know
    because I was our DEC CSLG and AT&T Unix license administrator. Before
    we could run Ultrix-32 on a VAX under CSLG, we had to have a valid AT&T
    Educational Unix license. The AT&T paperwork had to be forwarded to DEC
    as part of the CSLG paperwork.


    George Cook
    WVNET

  5. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    On Sat, 23 Dec 06 13:04:03 GMT in vmsnet.pdp-11, jmfbahciv@aol.com
    wrote:

    >In article <4v2b6dF1aducbU1@mid.individual.net>,
    > bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >>In article ,
    >> jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
    >>>
    >>> What I don't understand is why these people have to run the
    >>> hardware as if it were the old system. If they got the gear
    >>> out of a dumpster, there shouldn't any emotional attachment
    >>> to the installed software. So all they have to do is zero
    >>> the disk and install something they can get permission to run.
    >>>
    >>> I don't understand this mentality.

    >>
    >>I think it is because we both come from a bery different era in the
    >>computing industry. :-)

    >
    >oh...[blushing emoticon here]
    >
    >So the work that has to be done is training the youngsters how
    >to be a real systems programmer and not the foo-foos that are
    >showing up in today's biz.
    >
    >HMM....I don't think I would know how to get that project started.


    Linus started it.

    --
    Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada

    Brian.Inglis@CSi.com (Brian[dot]Inglis{at}SystematicSW[dot]ab[dot]ca)
    fake address use address above to reply

  6. Re: Booting a new OS on DEC equipment [was Re: Mentec US is gone!]

    On Sat, 23 Dec 2006 14:34:47 -0500 in vmsnet.pdp-11, Mike Ross
    wrote:

    >On 23 Dec 2006 14:20:43 -0500, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
    >
    >> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>They are just 12 numbers, and numbers can't be copyrighted. You could
    >>>copyright the PERFORMANCE of setting each switch, but you would have to
    >>>CR every possible sequence. Expensive.

    >>
    >>But that's true of _all_ software. It's all just numbers.
    >>
    >>I think there is some common law on the subject, having to do with copyrighting
    >>log tables.

    >
    >That could be interesting... how did that case turn out, do you know?
    >(you mean case law, not common law?) Log tables, it's nothing
    >creative... it involves work but it's just writing down numbers. How
    >far can this be reduced? Could you copyright a physical constant?


    *Works* are copyrighted and the inevitable errors are used to prove
    origin: if you took someone else's tables, checked and corrected the
    errors (with Whiteout or paste-up) imaged and printed the results, it
    would be very hard to prove derivation.
    OTOH nowadays you would be much better just producing your own tables
    directly in postscript with high quality high precision libraries and
    software to do the checking as the values are generated.

    --
    Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada

    Brian.Inglis@CSi.com (Brian[dot]Inglis{at}SystematicSW[dot]ab[dot]ca)
    fake address use address above to reply

  7. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article <8ldso2hjsr6ervogs4u3rvv347rttfa4d9@4ax.com>,
    Brian Inglis wrote:
    >On Sat, 23 Dec 06 13:04:03 GMT in vmsnet.pdp-11, jmfbahciv@aol.com
    >wrote:
    >
    >>In article <4v2b6dF1aducbU1@mid.individual.net>,
    >> bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >>>In article ,
    >>> jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
    >>>>
    >>>> What I don't understand is why these people have to run the
    >>>> hardware as if it were the old system. If they got the gear
    >>>> out of a dumpster, there shouldn't any emotional attachment
    >>>> to the installed software. So all they have to do is zero
    >>>> the disk and install something they can get permission to run.
    >>>>
    >>>> I don't understand this mentality.
    >>>
    >>>I think it is because we both come from a bery different era in the
    >>>computing industry. :-)

    >>
    >>oh...[blushing emoticon here]
    >>
    >>So the work that has to be done is training the youngsters how
    >>to be a real systems programmer and not the foo-foos that are
    >>showing up in today's biz.
    >>
    >>HMM....I don't think I would know how to get that project started.

    >
    >Linus started it.
    >

    One of the reasons knowledge about how bare machine works is
    because noone codes in machines language nor assembler anymore.

    /BAH

  8. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article <73qqo2lu79nsnkctr8f2jq88uvucib6or3@4ax.com>,
    Mike Ross wrote:
    >On Sat, 23 Dec 06 13:21:05 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
    >
    >>In article ,
    >> Mike Ross wrote:

    >
    >>>It's a matter of historical accuracy; wherever possible you keep the
    >>>system as close to the working configuration as possible. 'this was
    >>>system x, running jobs y and z at company a from 1977-1998'. You don't
    >>>mess with the installed OS or anything else. If you can get every
    >>>record right back to the original invoices and make a paper trail so
    >>>much the better.

    >>
    >>Oh, dear. I've run into people like you before. You are wrong.
    >>First of all if you insist on running pristine, off the shelf,
    >>specific software, you cannot use the code that is currently on
    >>your system. It has been patched, restored, edited, and fixedup.
    >>That is how the world worked back then.

    >
    >No no no no no, you don't get it...


    I do get it. You don't get what software is all about.

    > it's a matter of preserving the
    >system *exactly as-is*;


    This is impossible. Computing is always a process of evolution.
    Time cannot be repeated.

    >with whatever customer mods, patches, fixes,
    >and bespoke software have or have not been applied. Running 'pristine,
    >off the shelf' software is a poor third or fourth best... better than
    >nothing, so long as it's contemporary and as close as possible to what
    >the customer was actually running. 'off the shelf' software is exactly
    >what I *don't* want to use, if at all possible. I want to use exactly
    >what the customer used, when they last switched the system off.


    But you can't. Time did not stop. Any time-specific bugs will
    appear. Any disk-full bugs will appear. The reason that machine
    was turned off still exists.

    >
    >>Second of all, which date and time are you going to enter when
    >>you boot up this pristine system? It will have to be pre-Y2K,
    >>plus any date-time specific bugs, answers.

    >
    >Yep. Date the system was switched off is usually a good bet.


    No, it is not. There were known bugs. Mentec fixed them.
    >
    >>This is software. You cannot run pristine.

    >
    >Nor would I want to - see above.


    What are you going to do when Murphy's cosmic ray destorys a
    vital bit? You will have to patch or rebuild or both.

    >
    >>>When a museum digs an ancient pot out of the ground, do they take
    >>>fresh paint and paint it up nicely so it looks like new? Exactly the
    >>>same situation and motivation.

    >>
    >>But they also don't use that pot to cook all their meals in either.

    >
    >Of course not - they keep it in as near 'as found' condition as
    >possible, consistent with long-term preservation.


    And never use it. To apply that reasoning to a computer system
    means that you never turn it on.

    >Same as my aim with
    >ancient computers. This includes whatever OS and applications they
    >were running.


    I don't think you will ever achieve your goal because software just
    doesn't work that way.
    >
    >>>This is where I have an issue with people like Bill and Johnny who
    >>>talk about theft and stealing and make a song and dance about taking
    >>>the extreme moral high ground; to me it's a very debateable question
    >>>as to whether doing posterity a favour by preserving computing's past
    >>>in as much detail as possible is not a more *moral* act than
    >>>scrupulously obeying the somewhat artificial dictates of IP law as
    >>>presently understood in our society. In terms of benefit to society
    >>>and posterity I mean.

    >>
    >>But you are not interested in posterity. To keep the -11 business
    >>alive and evolving, Mentec has to be profitable. If it is not,
    >>it will go out of business, and EVERYTHING they have will be lost.
    >>That is not posterity.

    >
    >No... I don't know what the future holds for current and evolving
    >versions of the -11 OSes. And (meaning no disrespect to those who are
    >very interested in this), that's not *my* primary concern - I'm only
    >interested in the past.
    >
    >>I know what I'm talking about. I've seen knowledge go away. I
    >>know what knowledge has disappeared. I have been working for
    >>the last 12 years to keep more knowledge from disappearing.

    >
    >I know enough LCG history to know what you're talking about and
    >believe me I'm in total agreement and sympathy. But that doesn't have
    >any bearing on *my* chosen mission, preservation of entire systems
    >from the past.


    But your goal is impossible to do. Look, to avoid the date-time
    bugs with no patching you would have to boot the system with
    a [emoticon picks a random] date of 26-Jun-1984. Now all of a
    sudden, all files created after that date have an illegal format.
    OSes were programmed to be very allergic to dates that haven't
    happened yet. Depending on the OS you could have problems
    from not being able to do a system startup to wiping the disk
    clean.

    /BAH

  9. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article <458d83f1$1_4@news.bluewin.ch>,
    "Giorgio Ungarelli" wrote:
    > wrote in message
    >news:emjak5$8qk_002@s952.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.co m...
    >> In article ,
    >> "Kelvin Smith" wrote:
    >>>IMHO, people who live in European houses shouldn't throw stones... The
    >>>problems may be different; the severity is at least as bad.
    >>>

    >> Especially when they are in missle range of unfriendly regimes.
    >>

    >The whole world is within US missile range...


    Sigh! Get a globe. Cut a piece of string. Put one endpoint on
    North Korea. Now measure the distance that the news broadcast about
    the range of their missles, IIRC Washington state. Now swing that
    endpoint around and see how far towards Europe such a missle could
    go. Do the same thing with Iran although I haven't heard any
    distance estimates of their missles. These two governments have
    declared their intention to use their bombs.

    /BAH


  10. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article <87bqluhe4a.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>, prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:
    >jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
    >
    >> But you couldn't do that (order an OS without the media kit). There
    >> is no infrastructure that allowed this.

    >
    >But you could with 11s at least, I saw it happen. Had more media kits
    >than you could throw a cat at, had an 11 that had been removed from a
    >now defunct lab and wanted to drop RSX on it. Oh dear, it used to run
    >RT. So a new licence only was ordered and delivered, no problem any
    >more.


    Please note that you had the hardware. I am not aware of anybody
    being able to buy an OS without any gear.

    /BAH

  11. Re: pussification of newsgroups

    In article <873b76hdqb.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>, prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:
    >bob.birch@gmail.com writes:
    >
    >> A bootstrap as copyright property ? You gotta be kidding !

    >
    >True, The DLV11 boot would not work on a 73 as it had odd addresses in
    >it, which the fonz ignored. The `owner' of the code was lost or
    >something so the whole process wedged.
    >
    >A couple of other boot had 3rd party owners too I think.


    TYPE BOOT.EXE

    But do it on a hardcopy TTY. You should see a complete
    copyright statement. This is also the case for any -10 EXE
    that we supported. I don't know how the -11 world did this.
    We spent 1/2-man-century putting copyright statements into
    files so that a judge, who had no computer experience, could
    see which files were copyrighted.

    /BAH

  12. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
    > In article <8ldso2hjsr6ervogs4u3rvv347rttfa4d9@4ax.com>,
    > Brian Inglis wrote:
    >
    >>On Sat, 23 Dec 06 13:04:03 GMT in vmsnet.pdp-11, jmfbahciv@aol.com
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>In article <4v2b6dF1aducbU1@mid.individual.net>,
    >>> bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>In article ,
    >>>> jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>>What I don't understand is why these people have to run the
    >>>>>hardware as if it were the old system. If they got the gear
    >>>>>out of a dumpster, there shouldn't any emotional attachment
    >>>>>to the installed software. So all they have to do is zero
    >>>>>the disk and install something they can get permission to run.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I don't understand this mentality.
    >>>>
    >>>>I think it is because we both come from a bery different era in the
    >>>>computing industry. :-)
    >>>
    >>>oh...[blushing emoticon here]
    >>>
    >>>So the work that has to be done is training the youngsters how
    >>>to be a real systems programmer and not the foo-foos that are
    >>>showing up in today's biz.
    >>>
    >>>HMM....I don't think I would know how to get that project started.

    >>
    >>Linus started it.
    >>

    >
    > One of the reasons knowledge about how bare machine works is
    > because noone codes in machines language nor assembler anymore.
    >
    > /BAH


    I quite agree - learning at least one assembler to fluency level should
    be required for anyone becoming a programmer. If you start off with a
    hardware background, even better...

    Chris

  13. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article ,
    ChrisQuayle wrote:
    >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
    >> In article <8ldso2hjsr6ervogs4u3rvv347rttfa4d9@4ax.com>,
    >> Brian Inglis wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 23 Dec 06 13:04:03 GMT in vmsnet.pdp-11, jmfbahciv@aol.com
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>In article <4v2b6dF1aducbU1@mid.individual.net>,
    >>>> bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>In article ,
    >>>>> jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>What I don't understand is why these people have to run the
    >>>>>>hardware as if it were the old system. If they got the gear
    >>>>>>out of a dumpster, there shouldn't any emotional attachment
    >>>>>>to the installed software. So all they have to do is zero
    >>>>>>the disk and install something they can get permission to run.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>I don't understand this mentality.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I think it is because we both come from a bery different era in the
    >>>>>computing industry. :-)
    >>>>
    >>>>oh...[blushing emoticon here]
    >>>>
    >>>>So the work that has to be done is training the youngsters how
    >>>>to be a real systems programmer and not the foo-foos that are
    >>>>showing up in today's biz.
    >>>>
    >>>>HMM....I don't think I would know how to get that project started.
    >>>
    >>>Linus started it.
    >>>

    >>
    >> One of the reasons knowledge about how bare machine works is
    >> because noone codes in machines language nor assembler anymore.
    >>
    >> /BAH

    >
    >I quite agree - learning at least one assembler to fluency level should
    >be required for anyone becoming a programmer. If you start off with a
    >hardware background, even better...


    Sure. How do you design the criteria? There are only so many
    hours in a semester. I think this hardware stuff should be in
    grade school. But those classes never allow the babies to look
    inside the box.

    /BAH

  14. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

    >>
    >>I quite agree - learning at least one assembler to fluency level should
    >>be required for anyone becoming a programmer. If you start off with a
    >>hardware background, even better...

    >
    >
    > Sure. How do you design the criteria? There are only so many
    > hours in a semester. I think this hardware stuff should be in
    > grade school. But those classes never allow the babies to look
    > inside the box.
    >
    > /BAH


    I don't know, but every subject mushrooms over the years. If you go a
    long way bay to the forties, a book like Terman's Electronic and Radio
    Engineering could devote a little material within the one book to every
    topic in the field. Now, all is specialisation, because modern systems
    have become complex to the point of needing specialists in more than a
    single discipline and few individuals have the time and motivation to
    cover all of it.

    What's important is for educators to stimulate interest and develop a
    passion for the subject in students, because that's the only way to
    generate the curiosity to think outside the specialist box. A college
    course really only teaches the basics and how to learn, not to know
    everything, but where to find it and how to analyse a problem. A job as
    a gig isn't enough, it's got to be a lifelong passion for the subject if
    you are to become really good.

    What did they say at dec ?, "enquiring minds want to know"...

    Chris

  15. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article <8ldso2hjsr6ervogs4u3rvv347rttfa4d9@4ax.com>,
    Brian Inglis writes:
    > On Sat, 23 Dec 06 13:04:03 GMT in vmsnet.pdp-11, jmfbahciv@aol.com
    > wrote:
    >
    >>So the work that has to be done is training the youngsters how
    >>to be a real systems programmer and not the foo-foos that are
    >>showing up in today's biz.
    >>
    >>HMM....I don't think I would know how to get that project started.

    >
    > Linus started it.


    No, actually Linus helped create the environment where you have kids
    with a Linux box in their mom's basement claiming they are unemployed
    computer professionals thus skewing the labor statistics into making
    people think the IT business is dead and thus reducing the number of
    people interested in taking things like CS, CIS and SE in school.
    Quite the opposite of what we really need.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  16. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    On Sun, 24 Dec 06 12:22:56 GMT in vmsnet.pdp-11, jmfbahciv@aol.com
    wrote:

    >In article <8ldso2hjsr6ervogs4u3rvv347rttfa4d9@4ax.com>,
    > Brian Inglis wrote:
    >>On Sat, 23 Dec 06 13:04:03 GMT in vmsnet.pdp-11, jmfbahciv@aol.com
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>>In article <4v2b6dF1aducbU1@mid.individual.net>,
    >>> bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >>>>In article ,
    >>>> jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> What I don't understand is why these people have to run the
    >>>>> hardware as if it were the old system. If they got the gear
    >>>>> out of a dumpster, there shouldn't any emotional attachment
    >>>>> to the installed software. So all they have to do is zero
    >>>>> the disk and install something they can get permission to run.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I don't understand this mentality.
    >>>>
    >>>>I think it is because we both come from a bery different era in the
    >>>>computing industry. :-)
    >>>
    >>>oh...[blushing emoticon here]
    >>>
    >>>So the work that has to be done is training the youngsters how
    >>>to be a real systems programmer and not the foo-foos that are
    >>>showing up in today's biz.
    >>>
    >>>HMM....I don't think I would know how to get that project started.

    >>
    >>Linus started it.
    >>

    >One of the reasons knowledge about how bare machine works is
    >because noone codes in machines language nor assembler anymore.


    Linus and his cohorts understand architectures and instructions quite
    well: why he was hired by TransMeta as a consultant for their machine
    to run x86 code, and why Linux now runs on a variety of architectures
    that MS used to, hasn't yet, and will never support.

    --
    Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada

    Brian.Inglis@CSi.com (Brian[dot]Inglis{at}SystematicSW[dot]ab[dot]ca)
    fake address use address above to reply

  17. Re: Booting a new OS on DEC equipment [was Re: Mentec US is gone!]

    Mike Ross wrote:

    (snip)

    >>I think there is some common law on the subject, having to do with copyrighting
    >>log tables.


    > That could be interesting... how did that case turn out, do you know?
    > (you mean case law, not common law?) Log tables, it's nothing
    > creative... it involves work but it's just writing down numbers. How
    > far can this be reduced? Could you copyright a physical constant?


    My understanding of this is that copyright protects the expression
    of the idea, not the idea itself. If you made a direct copy of
    a log table you might be infringing, but just copying the numbers
    should not be.

    I believe this question also comes up with Linux distributions,
    for example.

    -- glen


  18. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    Bill Gunshannon wrote:

    (I wrote)

    >>Also, there is no reason that fair use wouldn't apply to software,
    >>in addition to other copyright materials. I don't know that it
    >>has been tested very well, though.


    > Well, "fair use" when it comes to things like copyrighted books means
    > a paragraph or two from the entire book. so I guess in this case it
    > would bean you are free to pull out 12 words from anywhere in the soft-
    > ware package in question and use it wiothout paying for a license. Hey,
    > I'll bet that covers the boot code! :-)


    Well, that is one way to look at it, but another is on the loss of
    revenue to the copyright holder, and/or revenue gain to the user.
    For non-commercial/hobby usage both should be pretty close to zero.

    Both would likely come up in any actual court case.

    -- glen


  19. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    wrote in message
    news:emls6u$8qk_002@s942.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.co m...
    >>The whole world is within US missile range...

    >
    > Sigh! Get a globe. Cut a piece of string. Put one endpoint on
    > North Korea. Now measure the distance that the news broadcast about
    > the range of their missles, IIRC Washington state. Now swing that
    > endpoint around and see how far towards Europe such a missle could
    > go. Do the same thing with Iran although I haven't heard any
    > distance estimates of their missles. These two governments have
    > declared their intention to use their bombs.
    >
    > /BAH


    Regardless of what range North Korea and Iran's missiles are, the US missles
    have a global reach, and with the current president and policy, I am more
    afraid of the US using their missiles than any other country. Its easy for
    you, living in the US, to underestimate your Big Brother and how little it
    takes for the US to declare war on anybody, anywhere.



  20. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

    >>I don't know, but every subject mushrooms over the years. If you go a
    >>long way bay to the forties, a book like Terman's Electronic and Radio
    >>Engineering could devote a little material within the one book to every
    >>topic in the field. Now, all is specialisation, because modern systems
    >>have become complex to the point of needing specialists in more than a
    >>single discipline and few individuals have the time and motivation to
    >>cover all of it.
    >>
    >>What's important is for educators to stimulate interest and develop a
    >>passion for the subject in students, because that's the only way to
    >>generate the curiosity to think outside the specialist box. A college
    >>course really only teaches the basics and how to learn, not to know
    >>everything, but where to find it and how to analyse a problem. A job as
    >>a gig isn't enough, it's got to be a lifelong passion for the subject if
    >>you are to become really good.
    >>
    >>What did they say at dec ?, "enquiring minds want to know"...

    >
    >
    > Say about what? People at DEC were given a task to do and
    > they got it done. But then, this was before the disease known
    > as careeritis set in.
    >
    > /BAH


    It was just a common expression at CSS Reading (uk, 1980's) during the
    time I worked there. Dec culture was a bit more than just "given a job
    to do" though. I'm not sure if I even still have a copy, but there was a
    company culture / dec way of doing business document at the time as well...

    Chris


+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast