Slashdot Mirror
Bill Gates Puts Classic Feynman Lectures Online
theodp writes "Okay Tux fans, let's see how badly you want to see Feynman's Messenger Lectures on Physics. Bill Gates has the goods over at Microsoft Research's Project Tuva site. Also, CNET's Ina Fried has an interesting interview with Gates. He goes into why he spent his own money to make a series of classic physics lectures available free on the Web, talks about the possibility of Project Natal bringing gesture recognition to Windows, gives his thoughts on Google's Chrome OS, and discusses plans to patent 'cows that don't fart.' The last is a joke. I think."
...how did you come up with all this conclusions? Because from what I imagine to be most likely, you know close to nothing about Bill Gates's thoughts, Microsoft internals, Google internals, etc. So I can only guess you have no idea what you are talking about and in typical pundit fashion, pull things out of your ass, that support your p.o.v.
I really hope I am totally wrong with my guesses, and that you have some special insight. But if, then why did you not base your arguments on it by stating it?
So correct me if I'm wrong, and I will thank you for having learned something.
But if I am right, please just shut up. :)
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
What's wrong with offering content for free as an incentive to push your tech?
Flash needs to be taken out back and shot anyways.
m00
So when Mircosoft do something it's "bastardizing", but when it's Apple (Quicktime) or Real Player then it's "part of browsers"?
erroneous: look me up in a dictionary
Heh, looks like Microsoft shills with mod points lack a sense of humor... But that's understandable, I guess.
Free Martian Whores!
...because of all the possible video formats out there, he just happens to choose Silverlight? How convenient.
Summing up: I don't want yet another passing Microsoft fad installed on my machine which will add more vulnerabilities and be downloading weekly "reboot required" updates for the next ten years.
No sig today...
You don`t have to be RMS to reject Microsoft`s "me too" technologies cloned by their clowns.
Perhaps not, but why reject them completely out of hand? I like to see competition in the technology space, it keeps everyone sharp and allows the best ideas to rise to the top. Also, different companies and projects are good at different things. Some do new product development really well, exploring interesting concepts, but botch the implementation or don't get the details quite right while others are good at refining and perfecting a concept (open source is especially good at this), which someone else originated, but are not as good at coming up with novel or new ideas.
IMHO, the open source community has been particularly hard on .NET and Mono because of the connections between Novell, Microsoft, and Miguel. If you are concerned about patents then, as RMS has said many times before, even writing all of the code or using GPL only code is not a defense; if the patent holder wants to show up and file suit then he can. In other words, software patents are a problem no matter whether you use .NET or Mono or not; open source and even open standards (which generally include the "reasonable licensing terms" clauses for patents) will not protect you from that threat. That being said the CLI and .NET really have contributed novel new implementations, even if the concepts have been floating around academia for a while now. So can we please stop condemning all that Microsoft touches without at least acknowledging when something they had a hand in was done well?