Slashdot Mirror

So, staff at The Saratogian have used Windows software for years and years and years. They moved to Linux for a day and found that things were different, and "different" was hard to learn. Why am I not surprised?

Here's what they said in TFA:

News Editor Paul Tackett has been working days and nights, on top of his usual job, to set up most of the day's pages in a layout program called Scribus. ... For today's print edition, Tackett has duplicated the familiar components of The Saratogian from scratch, with the goal being that you won't know the difference between the look of today's paper and tomorrow's. ...

That sure sounds hard. Tackett had to spend days to reproduce templates and layouts that have been built up over years. Yes, doing that kind of work would be hard for anyone. I give this guy huge credit for accomplishing it. But I also give kudos out to Scribus for being able to support it.

You know, moving from one environment that you know really well to one that you don't - it's always hard. We Linux users have trouble, too, moving from Linux to Windows. Don't believe me? I did it for my work, and I'm constantly finding things in Windows that "just don't work right" or "work stupidly".

Linux is just easier for me. But I've been using Linux at home since 1993, and running Linux at work since 2002. Until 2009, that is, when I was "asked" to move to Windows for work.

This whole "move to Linux in a day" thing is a neat "publicity stunt within the journalism industry" (their words) but migrating in that short a time is very very hard to do. If you're going to move an organization to Linux, there are ways to do it so you won't stress your users too much.

So, staff at The Saratogian have used Windows software for years and years and years. They moved to Linux for a day and found that things were different, and "different" was hard to learn. Why am I not surprised?

Here's what they said in TFA:

News Editor Paul Tackett has been working days and nights, on top of his usual job, to set up most of the day's pages in a layout program called Scribus. ... For today's print edition, Tackett has duplicated the familiar components of The Saratogian from scratch, with the goal being that you won't know the difference between the look of today's paper and tomorrow's. ...

That sure sounds hard. Tackett had to spend days to reproduce templates and layouts that have been built up over years. Yes, doing that kind of work would be hard for anyone. I give this guy huge credit for accomplishing it. But I also give kudos out to Scribus for being able to support it.

You know, moving from one environment that you know really well to one that you don't - it's always hard. We Linux users have trouble, too, moving from Linux to Windows. Don't believe me? I did it for my work, and I'm constantly finding things in Windows that "just don't work right" or "work stupidly".

Linux is just easier for me. But I've been using Linux at home since 1993, and running Linux at work since 2002. Until 2009, that is, when I was "asked" to move to Windows for work.

This whole "move to Linux in a day" thing is a neat "publicity stunt within the journalism industry" (their words) but migrating in that short a time is very very hard to do. If you're going to move an organization to Linux, there are ways to do it so you won't stress your users too much.

Your "enough Swedish" is indeed good enough to require further commentary ;)

To your point, it's possible to deconstruct "nittonhundratalet" into three parts:

nitton = nineteen
hundra = hundred
talet = "the age"

The best translation would then be "the age of the nineteen hundreds". If that was all there was to it, you'd be correct - and the translation would make perfect sense. However, what goes through a swede's mind could instead be described with a deconstruction into two parts:

nitton = nineteen
hundratalet = the century

... which is why we'd translate "nittonhundratalet" as "the nineteenth century" and back. The perfect literal translation "det nittonde århundradet" has an archaic ring to it and is not in every day use.

This is actually one of the well known caveats when swedes speak English - even more so than trying to translate the Swedish cultural concept of "den lilla människan" into "small people". I'm just glad Carl-Henrik failed at even the literal translation which would've been "the little people/person".

Anyway, pulling a random century/talet example from Google, involving our beloved state-subsidised radio journalists and a politician's blog:

http://brandewall.blogspot.com/2008/08/vilket-rhundrade-var-det-vi-levde-i-nu.html

Are you being disingenuous? That would be $20,000 per annum per home if the plant operated for only one year. If it ran for only 20 years then that would mean $1,000 per annum per home. I am sure that most homes would pay $1000+ per year for power so that makes it look a little more economically feasible. This is of course a back of the envelope type calculation so please feel free to hate my mathematically challenged, liberal tree-hugging ways. BTW it's pitch black(I could say as 'black as the gulf' but that would be in poor taste) here at the moment and this post is being sent via a solar powered completely off the grid PC. I have absolutely no problems at all with solar power as I see it working for me every day of my life as it has been for the last seven or so years.

MacDrive does a good job of accessing HFS+ from Windows and HFSExplorer or Apple's Boot Camp driver gives read-only support. MacFUSE can access NTFS and ext2/3, but was slow and/or unstable when I last tried it.

NTFS-3G offers excellent (and free as in beer) NTFS read/write support all the way back to OS 10.4 PPC. I've found it very stable.

New punctuation: "~" at the end of a line to indicate 'Snarky'. http://harns.blogspot.com/

You really shouldn't do that. It just encourages the same kind of morons who need tacky emoticons to indicate humor.

And by your logic, the fame one would gain by proving George Bush was a criminal would be the holy grail of liberalism... So why hasnt it happened?

Here is a list of some of the research papers that somehow never made it into the IPCC inner circle of journals.

Here are some scientist associated with the fields of climatology and atmospherics who dissent.

Here's a report on the US Senate Commitee on Environmental and Public Works about 100 scientists (many formerly of the IPCC) who are skeptics and who sent letters to the UN declaring so

Here's a Senate report on scientists who were proponents, but are since turned skeptics of global warming:

If none of that is bad enough, lets talk about the intimidation?

Here is a link, again on the US Senate Committe on Environment and Public works talking about the NASA scientist calling for charges of Treason against for skeptics.

Here's another Senate report on the Intimidation that skeptics face for "climate blasphemy":

Here's a Washington Post article about a skeptic fired from his post as Virginia State Climatologist becuase he used it as a "platform as state climatologist to promote his views on global warming, including that the issue was overemphasized" after clashing with the Governer

Another case of intimidation

Here's an aricle about a man whose career in television as a science journalist ended because of his beliefs about global warming

Here's a Senate report about a climatologist calling for the scientific certifications of skeptics to be revoked:

So yeah... There's no evidence of intimidation or ignoring the legitimate dissent....

(Of course, I am assuming that you DO write code and that your organization ISN'T criminal. Otherwise disregard this.)

Further to my post..
http://mediatomb.cc/
That's what I use.. it's not very user friendly but very customizable.. I have it (almost) setup exactlly how I want it, and doesn't require much

Playstation Media Server is what I recommend when people want something that just works, and the media server is a Windows Box (also runs OSX and Linux I believe). Seems pretty sweet honestly, but haven't tried it myself.
http://ps3mediaserver.blogspot.com/
or
http://code.google.com/p/ps3mediaserver/

Good luck, if you go with MediaTomb and have any questions let me know and I can try to help.

Opening up RDP to the world isn't a good idea:

http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&q=%22remote+desktop%22+vulnerability+site%3Amicrosoft.com&btnG=Search

http://louwrentius.blogspot.com/2008/11/did-you-know-that-rdp-is-s-secure-as.html

http://secunia.com/advisories/15605/

You might want to actually read the articles you link. Esp since they are 2 years old and have edits down at the bottom updating on how the newer versions of rdp have fixed things.

The Egyptian civilization was created as a result of devastating Climate Change (Sahara savannah becoming a desert)

The Egyption Old Kingdom was destroyed as a result of Climate Change (Nile stopped flowing over due to less rain upstream)

http://discoveryenterprise.blogspot.com/2009/09/why-ancient-egypt-fell.html

(I believe that is the correct program)

See "How to Break Out from Inside a Draconian Firewall": http://technotes-fran.blogspot.com/2009/11/how-to-break-out-from-inside-draconian.html

I used to be a steadfast Windows platform supporter. What better gaming platform is there? :p Before Dell acquired AlienWare I purchased one of their systems that worked extremely well for a good long time. After Dell acquired them I purchased another system. It had issues from day one and the quality of AlienWare's support managed to match the quality of the system. When you purchase a desktop replacement system to specifically run games you expect it will actually run games... Not the case this time I'm afraid. Feel free to read here for my trials and tribulations regarding Dell/AlienWare: http://notasaintinca.blogspot.com/2007/06/review-alienware-aurora-m9700.html As far as Apple comparisons go, I have to say that I am a big time fan of the engineering that goes into their systems. The MacBook Pro that I purchased after dealing with the AlienWare issues has been amazing at running both my MacOS as well as Windows XP under my Bootcamp partition. My games run smoother and faster than ever and Windows has been more stable than on any other machine I've ever owned...and that's been a LOT. So, am I an Apple Fanboy? You betcha!! "F" Dell/AlienWare!!

Opening up RDP to the world isn't a good idea:

http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&q=%22remote+desktop%22+vulnerability+site%3Amicrosoft.com&btnG=Search

http://louwrentius.blogspot.com/2008/11/did-you-know-that-rdp-is-s-secure-as.html

http://secunia.com/advisories/15605/

NTFS is actually not a bad option. Ubuntu 10.04 supports it out of the box (sic), OS X supports read by default but not write. Several companies supply cheap RW drivers for NTFS on OS X.

Unfortunately, I've found NTFS to be the only real option for sharing disks between Linux and Mac. Oh, and BTW, you don't have to pay for decent NTFS support on OS X: http://macntfs-3g.blogspot.com/ (grab the ones that say ntfs-3g)

You've obviously thought more about this than I gave you credit for. I'm now wandering off-topic into a pet subject of mine, which is in general the viability of AI and specifically the viability of accurate brain simulation, but it seems like you're into that too and you have a different opinion than I do. I'm wondering if you'd be willing to elaborate on a few things you wrote that appear problematic to me.

(In fact, I'm also going to suggest that this is a requirement for "convergent evolution" - that you can't even have parallel implementations if the underlying engines are fundamentally different.)

Perhaps I misunderstand what you mean by "underlying engines," but aren't analog meat and digital silicon more significantly different than two versions of analog meat? I realize you were still talking about convergent evolution here, but aren't the properties of brains and CPUs different enough to make you wonder about the feasibility of emulating the former on the latter?

Again, if I an correct, then only a tiny subset of that brain will be... necessary for high-level intelligence to function...This is not the same as a "seat of intelligence/empathy" or a "seat of consciousness"...It's merely a device that provides the key primitives. The actual "program" lies elsewhere.

Yet the brain has no concept of a separate "program" and "data." Yes, we can stick inputs into one end of a neural network and get outputs on the other, but in a brain every "computation" is accompanied by a physical change. From the first article I linked:

Unfortunately, this appealing hardware/software distinction obscures an important fact: the mind emerges directly from the brain, and changes in the mind are always accompanied by changes in the brain. Any abstract information processing account of cognition will always need to specify how neuronal architecture can implement those processes - otherwise, cognitive modeling is grossly underconstrained. Some blame this misunderstanding for the infamous failure of "symbolic AI."

Doesn't that present some problems for creating an intelligence-complete system? Namely, (a) figuring out what form a "mental task performable by humans" would take, (b) making sense of the output, and (c) accounting for the fact that every "computation" changes the layout of the system, meaning that there is no universal problem-solving configuration, as the neural layout of every brain, or section of brain, is totally unique.

I think (c) represents the biggest challenge to your particular theory (with (a) and (b) being more problematic for AI in general). In the first article I linked, which lists 11 key differences between brains and computers, the relevant ones are #3 (the brain is parallel while computers are serial and modular), #6 (from which I quoted above), #7 (synapses are far more complex than electrical logic gates, into which the second article delves further), and #9 (the brain is a self-organizing system). I won't copypasta the content at you, but if you're interested that's where the distinctions are made; the headings are naturally simplistic.

Back on-topic, I suspect that empathy in particular is a learned behavior. There was a study done on baboons, I think, who had begun foraging in a hotel resort's garbage for their food instead of foraging elsewhere, and they had more than they could ever want. As the old ones died out, their social order began to change: no longer was there an alpha male who beat up on everyone under him and so on down the chain. Instead, the females gained more leverage and the hierarchy became more of an anarchy, and everybody got along better. I think they all got hit with some disease and died out, preventing long-term research, but such a dras

First off, incidents in India, Bangladesh, and another report (disturbing graphic warning).

Second: "Second, do you advocate Christians persecuting others by trying to have their religion codified into law, having their religion taught in public schools, and their desire to disallow homosexuals to marry even if such a marriage is allowed in the homosexuals' religion?"

This is a more difficult and substantive challenge, thank you.

ALL legislation is someone's morality. When gay marriage is being proposed, it is someone's morality being presented for inclusion and acceptance. In the particular issue of marriage, I don't think opposition to gay marraige is exclusive to Christians, or even Judeo-Christian faith. Even Islam opposes this.

By 'homosexuals' religion', I assume you mean mostly those Christian denominations that perform same-sex marriages. Without getting into the theology and disputes, legalizing same-sex marriage is not, for me, limited to marriages peformed by religious institutions. Any legal marriage would be expected to be covered. Where the ceremony is performed and by whom is irrelevant.

I do NOT support changing the marriage laws to permit same-sex marriage, but I have three points to make here;

1. I believe this position is consistent with Scripture and with Christianity. God is entirely plain about His attitude towards homosexuality. You know the references as well as I do.

2. Despite that, I cannot condemn homosexuals merely for being homosexual. And in fact, they are welcome in my church if they are not practicing sex. Same goes for unmarried heterosexuals. Actually, they are welcome anyways, but will not be invited to hold leadership positions, etc. As far as I know, a church member who divorces their spouse for reasons other than infidelity is also subject to that limitation. And yes, I know at least some of our leaders are secretly sinning, as we all are. We at least acknowledge the obvious or admitted sin.

3. While I vote against same-sex marriage, I am also not concerned that our culture will further devolve into an even more depreaved state if it passes, nor am I concerned that it will cause the ruination of our country. That's going to happen no matter. I have an opinion, I vote that way, but I do not make it a cause of mine to oppose it. If I believe God is who He says He is, then I know this is in His plan, and I must still have faith.

And one last thing. If same-sex couples want to act married, live together, adopt children, etc., I am not overly concerned about that. I have a sister-in-law who lives with a woman, has a child she adopted, and in every way they act married save for the legal recognition and, of course, the legal benefits inherited by marriage. They have living wills, powers-of-attorney, and specific HIPAA releases to handle the legal issues that may arise. My wife and I would not consider interfering in those agreements even if it were possible - they have made their choice well known. The argument that same-sex couples are just as loving and able as any other couple to make a family is a good one. You'll want to make that argument for clemency for murderers, extortionists, and thieves who are also kind and loving husbands and wives.

That last comment is harsh, and might leave the impression that I equate homosexuality with murder and other cirmes. Not true. But claiming that a loving husband or wife is proof that a particular behavior is acceptable or without harm is specious. don't make that argument. It doesn't work.

I am much more sympathetic to the simple argument that civil rights should be granted to persons regardless of their race, sex, creed,

This exploit reveals your passwords to a website that you visit (although I have not RTFA), which is a bit different.

The slashvertized tool does not send passwords to a website. It reveals passwords to you when you run the tool locally. This is not news.

At the risk of putting this company out of business here's a 'cracker' for passwords stored by most browsers.

The court said that, at the very least, most "business methods" shouldn't be patentable. That's a big win.

So we'll make a narrow ruling

That's what courts do. They don't have a mandate to rule beyond the scope of the case before them. The people arguing their case (for either side) don't have the obligation of addressing anything outside the scope of their case either - that would be an unconstitutional burden. So it is what it is, and we got what we needed.

In short, nobody got what they wanted,

How so? Until the judgment came down, everyone was whining that the Supremes were going to say that business patents were ok. Now, because we didn't get 100% at the first kick at the can, this is a loss? That's just revisionist history.

When you get 80% of what you want, plus a wedge to get the other 20% at the next case - and you also get the chilling effect on software patents as a side effect - that's a big win.

Also, Muller's not against software patents. All the DPL does is create even more problems. It's stupid. Let me rephrase that - the Defensive Patent License is REALLY stupid. It's like trying to fix a site with too much flash by adding even more flash, or trying to clean up spaghetti code by adding even more spaghetti code.

It's the sort of "solution" that people who want to insert themselves into the process (read: lobbyists) love, but that doesn't solve the problem - it just perpetuates the patents race.

You can read my submissions supporting Groklaw in the past (I have, what? Maybe 10 accepted SCO stories with Groklaw as a source? I don't remember any more.). I have trumpeted her site quite loudly for several years and cheered SCO's slow demise. I hope you're not going to lump me in with shills & astro-turfers. I honestly question how many of those there are, because PJ lumps *anyone* who disagrees with her in with them, or so it seems. I've also fought against Microsoft on OOXML and the rest and supported IBM's Rob Weir when discussing how much OOXML sucks ass (seriously, he's a good guy, his blog also has some information on wine making, if you're into that). If I'm some kind of shill who hates Groklaw or IBM for no reason, well, I must have been replaced by a doppleganger recently. Here are a few links that go allllll the way back to 2004, when hardly anybody knew who the hell Groklaw was and show me agreeing with and promoting the site. I've read her site daily since the RU days and remember when she had a hard time surviving a Slashdotting, before she moved to iBiblio. I think I contributed one or two of those early, hard-to-survive Slashdottings, for that matter.

That support is in the past, I'm afraid. PJ is a huge jerk, mostly in private, and you'll probably only see that if you disagree with her. I can give you her real email (it's close to the public email, pj@groklaw.net, which has more filtering), if you want me to prove that I've been in contact. I don't think it's a big deal to put that out here because she's more than capable of switching it if the spammers get hold of it.

She's had way more than three fallings-out, incidentally. But most of the people feel like they're the only ones. AllParadox is a good example because he wrote stories for Groklaw once upon a time. It's not like he's some nobody who lurked for a little while. It's more like almost anyone who worked with her closely got driven out. Except for Mathfox, I guess.

There are quite a few people she's parted ways with. Heck, ESR may be next on that list for saying that she "jumped the shark" when she attacked his friend, Jay Maynard (who got booted from Groklaw, even though he has nothing to do with TurboHercules the company; even if he's a friend of some of the founders thereof). His crime? Saying he felt threatened when IBM called the QPL-licensed Hercules emulator an "infringing platform." He's not Darl McBride. He's not a party to the EU complaint. He's a guy who dresses up in a Tron outfit and writes an emulator, for crying out loud. We're not talking "conspirator" here. But PJ sees "conspiracy" everywhere these days. I can't blame her, after SCO, but I won't agree, either.

You can read AllParadox's account of his departure here, incidentally.

Sadly, now, apparently, anyone who refers to "AllParadox" risks having their post deleted. If past complaints by former Groklaw regulars are any guide, anyone who naively trys to re-post a deleted post, or innocently inquires of PJ about the problem, also risks having their Groklaw account deleted.

I wish I could agree that the ruling is at least a draw, but unfortunately I can't. It clearly favors an expansive patent system, assuming that new technologies must fall within the scope of patentable subject matter unless there's legislation that sets limits (mentioned in this analysis, for an example). Such legislation is a long shot to say the least, given the lobbying power of all those favoring software patents.

Through my work on the NoSoftwarePatents campaign (which I founded and managed until 2005) I spent a lot of time with patent experts and policy-makers, so when I read a reasoning like the one in the Bilski case, I can tell when an expansive view prevails over a restrictive one. There's really nothing in the ruling (apart from minority opinions that don't really matter for the future) suggesting in any way that the Supreme Court might do away with software patents. In fact, the ruling made it clear that even straightforward business method patents aren't an endangered species for the time being, unless they're just too abstract, such as the Bilski application.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

1. 1. The free software and open source communities
2. 2. Software patent abolitionists
3. 3. Small and medium-sized companies who can't or don't want to play the patent game
4. 4. The proponents of bogus treatments: Linux Foundation, Open Invention Network etc.
5. 5. The Patent Absurdity movie
6. 6. Red Hat
7. 7. Google's foray into new markets (Android, WebM)
8. 8.Salesforce.com (Marc Benioff)
9. 9. The "captive court" theory
10. 10. IBM's open source credibility

It was kind of surprising to see on Twitter that not only open source advocates such as Steven Vaughan-Nichols and Brian Proffitt considered that list a good summary but also ACT, a lobby organization that supports software patents all the way (we lobbied against each other several times). But ACT pointed out that they didn't agree with all I wrote. That didn't surprise me.

However, patents aren't the real issue, it's the closed and proprietary nature of the vocoder. Patent it all you like, the encoding technique needs to be published in order to be in compliance with US FCC rules, a fact that escapes the FCC and ARRL.

Also worth mentioning, is that Google acquired YouTube in 2006, and Google is a supporter of Open Source with an open source operating system. If they did look at this from an outside, objective perspective, I trust Google will do anything they can to speed up HTML5 video support.

But Google has sided with Adobe in their spat against Apple, and YouTube has a lot invested in DRM, at the behest of the media cartel. That DRM is included in Adobe products, and not in the html5 spec. That's an internal conflict for Google, and in the "principles VS revenue" conflicts, the principles rarely win.

Plus, once I got an android I realized how much the iPhone was stifling my inner geek. I've loaded custom roms, overclocked, rooted, everything..

so you just did not even try this on the iPhone? You have been able to do ALL of these for longer than andriod phones have existed.

Dont make crap up like you cant do this on an Iphone, Jailbrake and root an iphone for some serious fun... Hell one dude has Linux running on the iphone. http://linuxoniphone.blogspot.com/

http://www.appletell.com/apple/comment/overclock-your-jailbroken-iphone-or-ipod-touch/

Also worth mentioning, is that Google acquired YouTube in 2006, and Google is a supporter of Open Source with an open source operating system. If they did look at this from an outside, objective perspective, I trust Google will do anything they can to speed up HTML5 video support.

Well, if someone made a port of Halo (using the same name, which also happens to be a common word) for the PS3, I'm sure Microsoft would kill them in court. Notice that people CAN legally play Lemmings on recent hardware, so availability isn't an issue and the brand isn't dead.

Well, if someone made a port of Halo (using the same name, which also happens to be a common word) for the PS3, I'm sure Microsoft would kill them in court. Notice that people CAN legally play Lemmings on recent hardware, so availability isn't an issue and the brand isn't dead.

Probably has something to do with showrunner John Rogers' knowledge of how the new media landscape works. His highly entertaining blog:

http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/

Too damn bad:

The current Tea Party movement initially came up with the 'clever' idea of sending Tea bags to members of Congress. It was in their initial rallys that they started referring to this act of sending their representatives boxes of tea bags as 'TEABAGGING":

Now this may be a generational thing but somebody should have told these people that the term was already in wide use as a term for performing oral sex on a man. Now you got people like Tucker Carlson crying: "Stop saying Teabagger". I got news for all of you Teabaggers that are opposed to the use of the word Teabagging when they are out doing their Teabagging protest; You really shot yourself in the foot (or other appendage) when you started this mess. But then what do you expect from the extremist that our on a highly successful mission to divide and destroy the once Grand Old Party, GOP. Oh yeah, and they really didn't mean to destroy the country their supposed to be saving either. Collateral Damage its called!

But what do you expect from people who start holding anti-tax protests after Obama signed the largest middle class tax cut in history? What do you expect from the kind of geniuses that hold up signs saying "Keep Your Government Hands off My Medicare".

Google need an IPC license to continue to operate 'in the light' - these licenses are given by the Chinese government. Google's license is up for renewal (which they applied for today). They're hoping that by making the redirection to Hong Kong servers manual they'll be on right side of the law and so get a their license renewed.

The original blog post makes the mention of "going dark" - but that's only if Google's IPC license isn't renewed by the Chinese government.

The BBC have a good article on this too.

We have therefore been looking at possible alternatives, and instead of automatically redirecting all our users, we have started taking a small percentage of them to a landing page on Google.cn that links to Google.com.hk—where users can conduct web search or continue to use Google.cn services like music and text translate, which we can provide locally without filtering. This approach ensures we stay true to our commitment not to censor our results on Google.cn and gives users access to all of our services from one page.

Over the next few days we’ll end the redirect entirely, taking all our Chinese users to our new landing page—and today we re-submitted our ICP license renewal application based on this approach.

It's kind of funny, the "landing page" is a false image of a search box and when you click anywhere on the page, you go to Google Hong Kong. How this is okay as opposed to a redirect, I'll never know ... and once that page starts eventually taking users to unfiltered results of Tiananmen Square, I think the Chinese Government will take a few more steps to stop it.

Of course it looks like ibtimes has a policy that only allows them to link to more ibtimes sites instead of -- you know -- the original source of all their quotes.

Yep, Groklaw apparently have a habit of blocking commenters whose opinions disagree with the site's viewpoints. This has a few interesting aspects. Firstly, [...] Secondly, [...] Thirdly, [...].

Thank you for this information. I have heard this from several independdent sources, some of which have documented it with screenshots and sent them to me. I would like to ask you to also send me your information and material. I can't promise that I will publish it, and if I do so, I can't promise when, but there is a possibility that I will expose Groklaw for the propaganda tool that it is.

I received some stuff in reply to another call on the community, on this page of my blog. You can find an email address there that I don't check extremely frequently, but I do read everything that gets sent there.

There are ever more indications that Groklaw indeed blocks people simply for disagreement, without justification under a resaonable standard such as promotion of commercial websites, offensive or off-topic content. That's what sets them apart from how unbiased websites operate and raises serious questions even concerning Groklaw's purpose. It certainly doesn't detract from concerns some others have previously had about Groklaw.

Again, you can find a contact email address here.

Yep, Groklaw apparently have a habit of blocking commenters whose opinions disagree with the site's viewpoints. This has a few interesting aspects. Firstly, [...] Secondly, [...] Thirdly, [...].

Thank you for this information. I have heard this from several independdent sources, some of which have documented it with screenshots and sent them to me. I would like to ask you to also send me your information and material. I can't promise that I will publish it, and if I do so, I can't promise when, but there is a possibility that I will expose Groklaw for the propaganda tool that it is.

I received some stuff in reply to another call on the community, on this page of my blog. You can find an email address there that I don't check extremely frequently, but I do read everything that gets sent there.

There are ever more indications that Groklaw indeed blocks people simply for disagreement, without justification under a resaonable standard such as promotion of commercial websites, offensive or off-topic content. That's what sets them apart from how unbiased websites operate and raises serious questions even concerning Groklaw's purpose. It certainly doesn't detract from concerns some others have previously had about Groklaw.

Again, you can find a contact email address here.

You're living in a fantasy world

Or maybe you're living in relationship-hell. Why date someone so insecure that you have to lie to them?

I'm guessing that you've never dated any real women.

Considering I'm dating two real women, I'd say grand-parent is actually living in a relationship-hell.

Source. As in, that is me.

aren't services like Google Wave written without Flash, just loads of Javascript?

Google Wave also relies on a lot of HTML5 features which aren't available in IE7 or IE8 (never mind IE6). The only reason that Wave appears to run in IE is that Google came up with a way to embed Chrome in the IE window. That means getting the end-user to install another add-in.

You can.

The post the parent linked to goes into extensive detail about the technical aspects of the codec

Like completely ignoring alternate reference frames and then only updating, after Google brought attention to them, with a dismissal about how they aren't B-Frames, so they suck anyway, no matter if they are more flexible in other ways?

There is absolutely no motive for them to lie about this sort of thing.

Free software projects dismiss unfamiliar aspects of competing projects all the time, and the linked article doesn't give VP8 a fair treatment on its own merits, it just picks apart the places where x264 optimizations are not applicable.

Here are some quotes from my analysis (I'm the founder and former director of the NoSoftwarePatents campaign):

• "Unfortunately, the Supreme Court delivered an opinion that doesn't help the cause of partial or complete abolition of software patents at all."
• "[T]he court's majority position is about the most liberal reasoning that it could have been. Only a decision to uphold the Bilski patent could have been any less restrictive.
• "The decision announced today makes it clear that a majority of the Supreme Court wanted to give the abolition of even only a small percentage of all software patents the widest berth possible."
• "This US decision is even more disappointing when taking into account the global trend." [then mentions political process in New Zealand and court decision in Germany]
• "The position that software patents should be abolished isn't nearly as popular among judges and politicians as it is in the free and open source software community."
• The upcoming Defensive Patent License (DPL) is recommended at the end of the blog posting.

Again, here's the full text.

Here are some quotes from my analysis (I'm the founder and former director of the NoSoftwarePatents campaign):

• "Unfortunately, the Supreme Court delivered an opinion that doesn't help the cause of partial or complete abolition of software patents at all."
• "[T]he court's majority position is about the most liberal reasoning that it could have been. Only a decision to uphold the Bilski patent could have been any less restrictive.
• "The decision announced today makes it clear that a majority of the Supreme Court wanted to give the abolition of even only a small percentage of all software patents the widest berth possible."
• "This US decision is even more disappointing when taking into account the global trend." [then mentions political process in New Zealand and court decision in Germany]
• "The position that software patents should be abolished isn't nearly as popular among judges and politicians as it is in the free and open source software community."
• The upcoming Defensive Patent License (DPL) is recommended at the end of the blog posting.

Again, here's the full text.