Slashdot Mirror

I can't speak for Theo, but... if you look for it, you can find the attribution in Microsoft's stuff.

http://www.terminally-incohere...

As for your understanding about ISC, MIT, etc: can you point where exactly any of these licenses grants anyone the permission to change the license or sublicense or whatever? The copyright holder holds the right to do that. Where do the licenses grant the right to change the license? Last time I looked, they only granted rights to modify, distribute and sell the work the license covers. Not the license itself. In fact they explicitly ask you to retain the license.

And why the gripe about Linux using BSD code? Well I have a gripe with them claiming to be "free" and then change the license of free code to a non-free one, making it impossible for any useful modifications to flow back to the original free code. That is hypocrisy, and it is in my opinion extremely rude and disrespectful towards the original authors.

Much of "Linux people" are such hypocrites all the time, not just during this one incident. And there are many other incidents with "Linux people" switching over to more restrictive licenses. All the while still claiming to be free.

You contradict yourself. If ""good enough" is good enough." then you just write the text once, render it, finish.
There are technical limitations to wysiwyg, and the core issue is: wysiwyg is a lie:
http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/2008/10/16/wysiwyg-is-a-lie/

... connected to my smartphone. Perhaps even one without maximum privacy impact. Existing designs: terminally-incoherent.com blog

Those of us who are old enough remember the "portions copyright the regents of the University of California Berkeley" (or words to that effect) that used to be part of the Windows legal declarations from 95 onward. It has been considered common knowledge that their pre-Vista TCP/IP stack was taken from BSD, as was their FTP executable

The "common knowledge" here is an euphemism for myth. Back in Windows NT 3.1 (!) MS licensed a TCP/IP stack from Spider. That *may* have been based partially or entirely on the BSD stack of the time. However, as of Windows NT 3.5 and Windows 95 that stack had been replaced by Microsofts own stack. Some of the utilities (ftp client, ping?) were still the original BSD utilities, or based on them. The network stack has not been BSD since Windows NT 3.1.

If you're going to claim otherwise, you should offer some citations please.

here you go: https://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2001/6/19/05641/7357

Nope, the "from the ground up" rewrite was for Vista, although they had previously partially rewritten the stack for Win 2K and for XP I believe.

Incorrect, it had been previously rewritten for Windows NT 3.5. See above.

But if you were paying attention back during the interminable Vista beta process, you would've remembered the noise about those old TCP/IP vulnerabilities, solved long ago, that Microsoft re-introduced with their new stack.

Citation? or should I write

If you're going to claim otherwise, you should offer some citations please"

You got marked troll, and it's deserved. But better that someone else explain - MS never used a BSD stack. They licensed the Spider Systems STREAMS stack which was a wholly separate implementation (for one, it was STREAMS which BSD, AFAIK has never implemented).

Those of us who are old enough remember the "portions copyright the regents of the University of California Berkeley" (or words to that effect) that used to be part of the Windows legal declarations from 95 onward. It has been considered common knowledge that their pre-Vista TCP/IP stack was taken from BSD, as was their FTP executable. If you're going to claim otherwise, you should offer some citations please.

However, my understanding is that MS did eventually roll their own stack, iirc it was for XP.

Nope, the "from the ground up" rewrite was for Vista, although they had previously partially rewritten the stack for Win 2K and for XP I believe. And there were definitely a number of bugs in that new Vista stack - here's one example. But if you were paying attention back during the interminable Vista beta process, you would've remembered the noise about those old TCP/IP vulnerabilities, solved long ago, that Microsoft re-introduced with their new stack.

ChromeOS is the perfect fit for the very basic computer user. The person who use webmail, facebook and checks out some web pages occasionally.

It's cheaper than Windows, runs better on lower end machines, it's so locked down it's almost unbreakable by mistake (the "family IT guys" will appreciate that), you never lose your data due to hardware failures (it's all in the "cloud"), etc.

I think Luke Maciak described it perfectly:

It's basically just a browser window, with bunch of pre-set favorites that take you to online services. There is nothing to explore and nothing to learn. Seriously - it just works. It's easy, intuitive and hassle free. And I guess that's the whole point. As a technology enthusiast this is a bit of a letdown. I mean, the damn thing doesn't even have a terminal app or a file system. How the hell am I supposed to use an OS without a CLI interface? How can you even do anything without a file system?

But alas, I am not the target audience here. Target audience is your regular village idiot computer user, who doesn't know what a terminal or file system is. And since they don't know, they don't need it. Hell, most people I know have no clue how would one use a file system to begin with. Files and folders hopelessly confuse them. If they must save something, they save it to the desktop. If they can however, they try to bypass the file system altogether by opening files from within the email and then sending them without ever hitting the save button.

This is why I think Chrome OS will be a success. It is so simple even a caveman could do it. It either works or it doesn't work. There is nothing to configure, nothing to fix and nothing to break. Seriously, there is literally no way to delete something by accident or mess with the system files. There are no local applications and everything is held in the cloud so there is no need for backups either.

http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/2009/12/18/chromium-os-first-impression/

Haven't watched Futurama

Inconceivable!

I'll send slashdot an invoice for the credit hours I end up re-taking because I was busy watching cartoons instead of studying.

You should be sending slashdot a bill for all that time you've been reading slashdot, when you could have been watching Futurama.

Oh well, maybe you've at least absorbed some subliminally. For a long time, slashdot had Futurama quotes in its HTML headers.

So I've had the idea for a while now, of trying to find a console MP3 player. Even though I haven't ascended to LAN SSH jockey status yet, I have long been disgusted by the bloated abominations that are GNOME and KDE, (I'm a little less averse to KDE, truth be told, but it is even more bloated than GNOME) and thus have been looking for a better way.

Yesterday I found this wonderful gem of a blog post, which told me about a lot of applications which I can use from the CLI, as well as a series of blog posts from this guy, which give you a lot more ideas in terms of applications and how to set them up.

The end result is a realisation that just about any old junk you've got lying around, north of 400 Mhz, can be used for doing pretty much anything you want. Servers of all kinds, jukebox appliances, even incremental render/compiling nodes if you've got distcc or blender.

Even people who've got 3Ghz+ machines should take a serious look at these CLI apps, IMHO. Cplay as a media player for example works great, and because it is only a front end rather than the app itself, as well as a media player, I can also plug something like mikmod into it to listen to my old mod files as well, which is awesome.

Then of course there are the possibilities for a ram stick you can carry around in your pocket, as well. The command line is the single best thing about a UNIX system; if you don't use it, you're basically missing the entire point of it as a unique operating system. Ubuntu users and GUI junkies, take note! ;)

http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/curves.jpg