If you are a member of the press/media (or are just interested) and are unable to attend LinuxWorld, you can visit the LinuxWorld LinuxQuestions.org Virtual Press Office to keep up with the latest news and view the LQ Press Kit.
–jeremy
Archive for July, 2004
The Linux Show will once again be broadcasting live from the LinuxWorld Expo in San Francisco. I am happy to report that I have just been confirmed as a guest. Make sure to tune in on Thursday August 5th at 11:30AM.
–jeremy
I'm proud to announce that a LinuxQuestions.org Book is potentially in the works. While a lot of the details (mainly the TOC) still need to be worked out, I think this is a very exciting possibility. I'd like to handle this book much the way I handle LQ itself - by getting member feedback and giving you what you want. So, what I would like to know is:
- what do you want to see in a Linux book?
- what topics would you like to see covered?
- what don't you like about the Linux books you have read?
- what *do* you like about the Linux books you have read?
To give you an idea of the format the book will follow, it will (as you may have guessed), go along the same lines as the site. It will try to offer clear newbie friendly solutions to actual problems, using real-world examples and experience. It will cover from the newbie to the mid-level user I would say. I have created a mailing list for the purpose of discussing the LQ book. Any feedback or comments are appreciated. Thanks.
–jeremy
While on the topic of LinuxWorld. If you are interested in attending and would like a free expo pass courtesy of LinuxQuestions.org, just let me know. The expo is great and it doesn't get much better then free.
–jeremy
An article by Dan O'Dowd declares “No Defense for Linux - Inadequate Security Poses National Security Threat”. From the article:
“The Linux operating system is developed by an open source process. With the knowledge that Linux is going to control our most advanced defense systems, foreign intelligence agencies and terrorists can easily infiltrate the Linux community to contribute subversive software. The risk is particularly acute since many Linux contributors are based in countries from which the U.S. would never purchase commercial defense software. Some embedded Linux providers even outsource their development to China and Russia.”
I'll ignore the fact that he leaves out the fact that code can easily be snuck into non-OSS software, and the fact that the code would have much less chance of detection since one of the couple people with access to the code would have to notice it, and the fact that many non-OSS companies outsource to countries with questionable practices. What he really means to say in that last sentence though, is that embedded Linux is no good, so you should buy embedded stuff from Green Hills Software Inc. Oh, by the way…he is the CEO. The transparency of some of these things is simple astounding.
This is, BTW, not the first time GHS and Dan O'Dowd have posted something like this.
–jeremy
Another reminder that LinuxQuestions.org will be in the .org Pavilion next week at the LinuxWorld Expo in San Francisco. Stop by and say hello!
–jeremy
I'm just about to post another one of my Linux Magazine “Tech Support” columns, so a reminder that they can be read online seemed appropriate.
–jeremy
An interesting article by Lawrence Rosen about patents and Open Source. While he brings up some very good points, he seems to miss one key issue. From the article:
“Don't be too paranoid about the patent problem. It's a real problem, but not a catastrophe. Any patent owner that tries to assert its patents against open source software has many hurdles to leap before the royalty checks start to arrive.”
The part missing here is that some of the patent suits against Open Source may not have getting a royalty check as a goal at all. If you look at the motivation a company like Microsoft would have in bringing a patent suit, it wouldn't be in the additional revenue that the royalty checks would bring in. The motivation would be in scaring companies and slowing down the adoption of OSS, which it eating into their revenues. Luckily, MSFT's first attempt at this with SCO has become a laughable issue, but what if their next pawn is not so incompetent?
–jeremy
In releasing the LinuxQuestions.org Wiki I had to choose between multiple free licenses. When it came down to making a decision it was the GFDL (GNU Free Documentation License) vs. the Create Commons by-sa. I ended up choosing the Creative Commons license for two main reasons: I wanted single articles from the wiki to be easily redistributable and the CC license is much more straight forward. This now unfortunately means that many of the great GFDL documents out there cannot be included. The LQ Wiki is aimed at becoming a large free/open resource for the Linux community and the potential duplication of effort caused by this seems like a waste. I am now considering adding the ability to choose a license for documents entered into the LQ Wiki, but this will not only greatly complicate things, but it will also mean that the entire wiki will no longer be distributable under a single license. While it seems the desired end result of both licenses is similar, the fact that they are not at all compatible really does seem like a shame. IANAL though, so is there anything that can be done?
–jeremy
A nice article has been posted at LinuxJournal. From the article:
“If you are considering deploying open-source software in your organization, this article aims to help you draw appropriate distinctions for your business case. We address economic issues, issues of security and administration and the availability of applications. We also discuss myths and perceptions of the dominant operating systems in the market today.”
With distributions from Red Hat and Novell now Common Criteria certified, and Microsoft breaking a fair amount of backward compatibility - this is a great time for Large enterprises and Governments to start evaluating what Linux can do for them.
–jeremy
Subscribe