On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 15:04 -0700, Warren Young wrote:> > On Feb 9, 2015, at 12:12 PM, John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com> wrote: > > > > On 2/9/2015 11:06 AM, Always Learning wrote: > >> The third item was a 16.1 MB PDF of 1,344 pages. A quick scan of the PDF > >> shows every page appears to be readable. 11 pages devoted to BASH. > >> Information on other interesting topics too. > > > > on a site hosted in Russia which appears to be FULL of copyright violations. > > Remember, Adobe Flash BAD, Adobe PDF GOOD.> Amazing how quickly security fundamentals ? like declining to download a file which can contain scripts that run on the local machine from a clearly dodgy site ? go out the window when put up against expediency.1. Flash I don't have or use. 2. PDFs can be created by *NON-ADOBE* software. PDF's (well most of them) can be opened by non-Adobe PDF-type software. 3. The Russian's web site is that of a devote cyclist. Most of the films on his web site are of cycling or about cycling. Most of the oldish PDF files are about Linux and in Russian. I do not consider his site presents a malicious danger to me. Warren, it is senseless you wasting your valuable time trying to make me do what you want. The system here just does not work like that - perhaps elsewhere but certainly not here. -- Regards, Paul. England, EU. Je suis Charlie.
On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 23:28 +0000, Always Learning wrote:> 3. The Russian's web site is that of a *devout* cyclist.-- Regards, Paul. England, EU. Je suis Charlie.
On 2/10/2015 3:28 PM, Always Learning wrote:> 3. The Russian's web site is that of a devote cyclist.oh, well, I'm glad that makes the copyright violation of stealing an authors work OK in your book. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast
On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 16:39 -0800, John R Pierce wrote:> On 2/10/2015 3:28 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > 3. The Russian's web site is that of a devote cyclist. > > oh, well, I'm glad that makes the copyright violation of stealing an > authors work OK in your book.Another bored expert desperate for a modicum of excitement ? You have absolutely no prima facie evidence to support your assertion. I refer you to my posting dated Mon, 09 Feb 2015 22:10:35 +0000 which includes, inter alia:- "Keith neither of us know whether or not the Russian man obtained his PDF copy of the book lawfully. In my book-publishing opinion, the PDF appears to have originated from the book's publisher, so the original source must have been *the* official source. Hence the book, in the PDF version, must have been written by the official authors. "The existence of an alleged unpaid-for copy on a foreign web site can not, in any sense whatsoever, denigrate, diminish nor deprecate the official authors distinguished achievement. "There are poor people all around the world who enjoy computers including Linux and whom would benefit from learning more about Linux. Some who can read English sufficiently proficiently to benefit from the book's text, may be too poor to afford the, to them in their country, "exorbitant" Western price for an "official" copy. Some publishers recognise this reality and sell in third-world countries at a small fraction of the "Western" price. In those circumstances selling PDFs for an extremely low price may be the source of this particular PDF especially as hardbacks and paperbacks could never economically be sold as low as a very low cost "official" PDF copy." FACT: Valeri's recommendation is, in my opinion, a useful source of basic knowledge benefiting Centos users regardless whether that book in printed on paper or is a virtual or an electronic "book" (i.e. PDF). ANOTHER FACT: Linux Programmer's Reference, Petersen, Osborne McGraw-Hill 1998 - ISBN 0-07-882587-3, which I obtained on 27 October 2000, is also a good good source of useful information. I've started re-reading the 71 pages on BASH. I never knew the first character on the first line could be a space. -- Regards, Paul. England, EU. Je suis Charlie.
> On Feb 10, 2015, at 4:28 PM, Always Learning <centos at u64.u22.net> wrote: > > 2. PDFs can be created by *NON-ADOBE* software.And SWFs can be generated by non-Adobe software, and JARs can be generated by non-Oracle software. What?s your point? Is it that only Evil Corporations can create software that can be used for evil purposes? Are you back on the ?F/OSS software is invulnerable? bandwagon already, after being knocked off it a week or two back?> PDF's (well most of > them) can be opened by non-Adobe PDF-type software.So what do you do when you get a PDF that *can?t* be opened by your non-Adobe PDF reader? Do you discard it and go find another way to get the content, or do you grumble and fire up acroread?> 3. The Russian's web site is that of a devote cyclist.I?m a devout cyclist, too, yet you?ve apparently decided I?m an enemy. What makes this other guy unimpeachable? I could care less that he?s Russian, or a cyclist. What I care is that he?s purposely providing illicit goods. That?s enough for me to distrust what he?s providing. This Russian cyclist doesn?t even have to be the source of the evil. Chances are that he didn?t buy this PDF from an official source and offer it directly. It?s far more likely that he?s just another step in the chain back to the original source. Why are you trusting all of them, too?> Warren, it is senseless you wasting your valuable time trying to make me > do what you want.Make you? How am I going to accomplish that? I have no power over you. I just thought that, since you were Always Learning, you?d want someone to tell you when they saw you doing something that could compromise your security.
On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 17:59 -0700, Warren Young wrote:> > On Feb 10, 2015, at 4:28 PM, Always Learning <centos at u64.u22.net> wrote: > > > > 2. PDFs can be created by *NON-ADOBE* software. > > And SWFs can be generated by non-Adobe software, and JARs can be generated by non-Oracle software. What?s your point? Is it that only Evil Corporations can create software that can be used for evil purposes? > > Are you back on the ?F/OSS software is invulnerable? bandwagon already, after being knocked off it a week or two back? > > > PDF's (well most of > > them) can be opened by non-Adobe PDF-type software. > > So what do you do when you get a PDF that *can?t* be opened by your non-Adobe PDF reader? Do you discard it and go find another way to get the content, or do you grumble and fire up acroread? > > > 3. The Russian's web site is that of a devote cyclist. > > I?m a devout cyclist, too, yet you?ve apparently decided I?m an enemy.Warren, I have never declared you to be an "enemy". I am an all weather cyclist who used take his bike as luggage on aircraft.> What makes this other guy unimpeachable? > > I could care less that he?s Russian, or a cyclist. What I care is that he?s purposely providing illicit goods.Then go and complain to the USA's FBI on +1.202-324 3000. It is not a Centos issue !> That?s enough for me to distrust what he?s providing.> This Russian cyclist doesn?t even have to be the source of the evil. Chances are that he didn?t buy this PDF from an official source and offer it directly. It?s far more likely that he?s just another step in the chain back to the original source. Why are you trusting all of them, too?> > Warren, it is senseless you wasting your valuable time trying to make me > > do what you want.Please don't waste your time moaning about something which is not related to Centos.> Make you? How am I going to accomplish that? I have no power over you. > > I just thought that, since you were Always Learning, you?d want someone to tell you when they saw you doing something that could compromise your security.I never stated I was stupid. Being in the world's top 2% of brainy people neither deprives me of decisiveness nor of thoughtful consideration. Having encountered my first M$ boot virus circa 1987 ? and having seen others experiencing M$ viruses, I am aware of the dangers. This thread is unproductive. -- Regards, Paul. England, EU. Je suis Charlie.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 5:39 PM, John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com> wrote:> On 2/10/2015 3:28 PM, Always Learning wrote: >> >> 3. The Russian's web site is that of a devote cyclist. > > > oh, well, I'm glad that makes the copyright violation of stealing an authors > work OK in your book.This thread has gone quite off topic. But as a published author, which should give me no more authority on the subject than anyone else, who happens to have had his copyright ripped off, I have to say that I don't really give a crap. Maybe I give a tiny crap. For one, the freeloader problem is well understood economically, and isn't that big of a problem so long as the price and distribution mechanisms are appropriate in the first place. Second, not everyone on this planet is on the same page (or even book) when it comes to property rights; this can't be construed to mean "we're right and they're wrong". Someone who buys my book and now has these ideas, who then replicates them with his own physical property (ink and paper) really hasn't cost me anything. The idea I've lost sales royalties is sort of a b.s. argument, chances are these people wouldn't have ever bought the book to begin with. OK, so the argument goes, then these people shouldn't benefit from these ideas. Well, in my case, they're not really ideas, they're facts - it's a technical book. And you can't copyright facts. You can only copyright the prose by which those facts are presented. An incomplete search suggests the average middle class Russian annual income is around $10k-$15k. This book is 0.2% of that salary. The average U.S. salary is nearly 4x that amount. Does anything think the price of this book is 1/4 the price in Russian? *shrug* The whole valuation and pricing of this sort of stuff is bullcrap. It's a less than a $40 book on Amazon, chances are each author is making much less than $1 in royalties per book. So who's being ripped off the most by downloading a bootleg PDF? The publisher. The authors aren't being injured that much. -- Chris Murphy