Slashdot Mirror
Linux Kernel 2.6.30 Released
diegocgteleline.es writes "Linux kernel 2.6.30 has been released. The list of new features includes NILFS2 (a new, log-structured filesystem), a filesystem for object-based storage devices called exofs, local caching for NFS, the RDS protocol (which delivers high-performance reliable connections between the servers of a cluster), a new distributed networking filesystem (POHMELFS), automatic flushing of files on renames/truncates in ext3, ext4 and btrfs, preliminary support for the 802.11w drafts, support for the Microblaze architecture, the Tomoyo security MAC, DRM support for the Radeon R6xx/R7xx graphic cards, asynchronous scanning of devices and partitions for faster bootup, the preadv/pwritev syscalls, several new drivers and many other small improvements."
Hmm, let me see: Nerd I'd Like to Fuck? Nope, doesn't do it for me.
Try win 7 - 20 minutes install and everything works. Seeks out its own drivers and codecs are included.
I have no idea what DRM in this case stands for when applied to the Radeon cards named, however I'd like to make a point about Digital Rights Management technology.
I think that DRM technology is morally neutral. Fundamentally nearly all technology is morally neutral. There are a few exceptions I can think of. I have a hard time envisioning ethical uses for technology to weaponize pathogens, although I cannot prove there are NO sufficient justifications for doing so that might apply in some hypothetical situation I haven't considered. In the real world, efforts to develop that technology fill me with revulsion. But revulsion is no guide to morality. There are also technologies that fill me with revulsion that I recognize as unquestionably useful and good, such as corneal surgery.
DRM is a somewhere in between, I think. It is not unquestionably beneficial in every case it is likely to be used, but it is not difficult to envision reasonable uses for it either. I think the problem is the agenda that advocates of DRM technology have. They want to force a fundamental change in how society uses information, and they're doing so under the false flag of getting artists their just compensation. It takes considerable chutzpah for many of these companies to present themselves as the champions of artists' economic interests, but we needn't bring that into this discussion to see that giving special interests greater and unhindered control over the bulk of information in society is a bad idea.
I believe that the immediate objective of DRM advocates is to monetize more uses of copyrighted information. I am neither thrilled nor appalled by that prospect. I would not oppose the creation of new mechanisms of revenue generation, but these require a considerable extension of corporate control over information. I have no problem with corporations benefiting from new technologies, but they have not addressed the possible impact on individual freedom.
Since this is an era in which technology is changing how we distribute and use information, I don't think we should welcome any one economic interest group using their influence with government (or their ability to form a private cartels) to steer that change to their exclusive benefit. I would accept legally mandated DRM provided those mandates were balanced with other measures to safeguard free expression and the public interest in a healthy, growing public domain. For example, I'd like to see:
* shortened copyright terms,
* key escrow to guarantee usage rights in case of corporate failure and to ensure that DRM protected materials fall into the public domain in due course,
* mandated provision for traditional fair use practices,
* limitations on unreasonable license terms, and
* restrictions on the use of strategic lawsuits to create new de facto "rights" for information "owners".
In exchange for that package, I'd be happy to participate in a DRM mediated digital download economy. In fact, I think this is a bona fide *conservative* position (in the Edmund Burke sense). It protects the traditional value of freedom of information, while not unduly hindering the development of new business models.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Yeah, it is overdone, but when we get "Flying Chair" or "640k" jokes you hike them up to +5 funny. Hike up your skirt, there are better things to complain about.
"When you see a unixer brainwashed beyond saving, kick him out of the door." - Xah Lee
NTFS first off isn't right. Never has been.
Could you please be more vague?
"When you see a unixer brainwashed beyond saving, kick him out of the door." - Xah Lee
Seriously?
First, the poster is an obvious AC troll so that pretty much automatically makes the discussion moot. But, supposing that wasn't the case...
The poster gave absolutely no information as to what sort of problem he was having. All we know is that it involves USB wireless. This is more or less the equivalent of "Our ship is broken. Will you make it go?"
And if the completely vague and generic complaint wasn't enough, the poster made generous use of colorful metaphors. This, more than anything else, is probably why he got the sarcastic response.
If you're going to complain about the user--developer communication challenge, next time please pick a better example than an AC troll.
Elrond, Duke of URL
"This is the most fun I've had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"-Sam&Max