A very good point, sir. If anyone is interested, wikipedia has a very good article on this. The jist of it is that as long as you are displaying content to the user, there is absolutely no way you can stop people making copies of it.
This is the problem execs have, they're out of touch with the whole engineering side of their projects, and when it comes to "plugging the analog hole" they can't just say "stop people from downloading it". The moment you start streaming the content you're caching it, at least in your RAM
What? The suits are powered by the astronauts' movement, and that energy is provided by food? It's more conserving energy than anything. If we could somehow train our astronauts not to play golf on missions, we could save billions on R&D.
Anyway, I just love the capitalisation of "Could" in mid-sentence.
Well I agree, to tell you the truth. I wasn't trying to be confrontational, and what you say about us being consumers is completely correct.
More, its the general market for software which is stuck in the same old ways. Generally speaking, something thats free is lesser quality than something that costs. In the normal product world, you might go out looking for an oven. Companies sell them so they can make a certain profit, while making the price attractive to a consumer. The consumers know that, so a more expensive oven means a better oven. Usually.
The advent of the internet and alternative business models means this doesn't have to be the case, yet those who live their lives in shopping malls and highstreets woudln't know it. I've had a few fun times trying to explain to friends why something so good can be free, and not illegal. I'm under the impression that businesses, in trying to visualise what consumers want, stay as narrow minded as them. Hence they make the assumption that free software lovers are not not consumers, just very lousy and cheap consumers.
I don't want things to be this way, of course. I (with a little help) built the PC I'm typing this with, and tend to use linux maybe 80% of the time (20% on windows for graphics work).
My previous post was based off the stereotype more than anything else.
The better solution is what OS X does: extend "sudo" to the GUI. The first time the app needs escalated privileges, prompt for the user's password. Then, cache those privileges for a reasonable amount of time and don't prompt. Unless the app in question is compromised in that interval, it doesn't matter.
To be fair, that isn't a stunning piece of innovation. Take out the "GUI" and the command line does that anyway. Add the GUI and you have gksudo or kdesu. Ubuntu has been based on that baby for quite some time, ya know. I won't get into a who-did-it-first arguement because it seems pointless. Chances are are Mac OSX and GNOME would have thought it up at about the same time anyway, and as usual microsoft would have copied it off either one (very, very badly)
This makes an awful lot of sense. Currently, a lot of hardware gets drivers but without the assistance of the companies. This way, consumers benefit (if you can call us basement-bound linuxers consumers) and the companies benefit by reaching more people.
Well usually its microsoft leeching off everyone elses' good ideas (including apple's) and not the other way round. With any luck, a DRM-Free iTunes/Mac will quickly be copied into microsoft's next [in line for "second worst OS ever after Vista" award] operating system.
Wait, what? Linux has a steeper learning curve than Windows, yet Windows admins have a "misconception" that Linux is harder for them to use?
Actually that is fine. Initially, linux can have a steep learning curve (first week or two) but after that it is easy. Windows admins have to misconception it starts difficult and stays difficult.
A COMPUTER uses the internet, he uses the computer
Nice use of black and white. Clearly he can't use a library's website to check if a book is in stock, but if he went to the library and took out a book, and they asked him for his name, address, phone number, and the data is sent to their online server, is he using it then? If the librarian sudden got a bout of Carpal tunnel syndrome and asked him to type in the details would he be allowed to do that?
Does he simply have to ask someone else to enter things in order not to "use" the internet?
If he shares his computer with his roommate, and the computer updates the definitions of the firewall he installed, who's using the internet? if it asks for confirmation? if he presses the "update definitions now" button?
Untrue, my friend. The media player Audacious [audacious-media-player.org] uses GTK+ for its file open dialogs. Recently, the open dialog was recoded into C (it was previously a medley of lots of languages). The guy behind the recode got an awful lot of jit from the lead dev after space was wasted, various inconsistencies, etc. In all, they spent over an hour on IRC debating where to move a single checkbox, and various other parts of the open dialog.
Sounds like New Coke to me. Make it so bad that consumer's won't take it, then bring back the original (in this case, free as in beer device drivers) and reap the rewards. Consumers pay for 2 versions.
I'd imagine they'll go after the Georgia ISPs for helping to break the law... It can't exactly be prosecuted on a federal level (I hope I'm using the right terminology here, I'm not from the US) because there is no law that has been broken.
I do partially disagree with you mind. The laws are already pretty absurd when it comes to censorship, this is just expanding into the infinite democracy of the internet.
But yeah, this shouldn't be done. Teenagers have rights too. Who says that the moment you turn 18 you don't have to do this? Education, not terrible laws should be the force driving people to understand the implications of posting stuff on myspace.
And anyway, myspace will never give in. Murdoch is a greedy bastard, a blip on his empire will mean nothing.
I have to say the audio department is already pretty good. But video? Video editing packages for ubuntu are very limited at best. I've tried editing video on more than one occasion and drawn a complete blank after 4 or 5 apps. Same goes for graphics, I absolutely cannot stand The GIMP. I try to emulate paint shop pro 7, but its pretty shakey...
What? You do realise that we here about more of these cases not because they happen more often, but because they are against the flow? Pointing out exceptions is bringing god-of-the-gaps to a copyright dispute.
Although I'm not big fan of the RIAA, that analogy seems a bit bad... Artists are payed for records, radio broadcasts generate profits from exposure. The artists were more afraid of change rather than fear of no pay... However, non-DRMed music is less exposure and more free music... We've had continued arguments about whether non-DRMed music makes more or less money for the artists. It works entirely on exposure, but unlike radio you can get what you want with minimal effort. Radio involves waiting for the song to come back on.
Thats a very small argument though. The big labels are filthy stinking rich from underpaying artists. The medium-sized labels usually just keep their heads above water, and smaller labels will be lucky to succeed unless they find a hot new band (for example, Flogging Molly signed to a very small label)
What on earth are you talking about? Rock has greatly defined the majority of the music we listen today. Before the advent of rock and roll, the structure of the pop song didn't exist. The use of synths, etc, was largely pioneered by rock. Before music production software on the computer what were backing tracks thought up on? The electric guitar.
I appreciate the arguement that hip hop has had a big influence on rock. I'm a big fan of RATM and its a prime example of how rap (de la rocha) and metal (rest of the band) aren't that dissimilar. However, the door swings both ways, and a lot of the artists we consider pop, or r & b, take influences (even unknowingly) from rock music of the last 50 years
A lot of the stuff which was fixed was the stuff which had novel workarounds. Two of the most glaringly obvious and terrible oversights in IE7 are:
1) display:table*. Seems like we're still stuck in prehistory here... how hard can it be to implement? I'll give everyone an example. You have a nice, fixed with layout with a single column. You want to center a form. Tough luck, bud. Forms are block elements, and by default will expand to fit available space. You can't float it center, that won't work. display:table; is the most sensible solution, as the form will "shrink wrap" to fit its content, and still be treated as a block element. E.g. centering, borders, etc. If you think you can get away with simply centering elements in the form, it will be ugly as labels etc will be out of place. And if you set them to a fixed width, it'll get uglier whenever someone has a nonstandard font or font size.
2) selectors. Why oh why haven't we got them on every element? It seems insane to me...:hover just isn't good enough
Slashdot Mirror
A very good point, sir. If anyone is interested, wikipedia has a very good article on this. The jist of it is that as long as you are displaying content to the user, there is absolutely no way you can stop people making copies of it.
This is the problem execs have, they're out of touch with the whole engineering side of their projects, and when it comes to "plugging the analog hole" they can't just say "stop people from downloading it". The moment you start streaming the content you're caching it, at least in your RAM
6. ???
7. PROFIT!!!
Nothing really worked
Even the requested stuff
Wasn't for our eyes
They were impressed though
Impressed with their SVG
I found it useless
What did I get out?
Nothing, really. What a load!
Bad presentation.
From this point forward
You will write all your comments
In a haiku form
If cuba uses free software, the terrorists have won.
"I hate patriotism. I can't stand it, man -- makes me fuckin' sick. It's a round world last time I checked."
Take some advice from our good friend Bill Hicks
What? The suits are powered by the astronauts' movement, and that energy is provided by food? It's more conserving energy than anything. If we could somehow train our astronauts not to play golf on missions, we could save billions on R&D.
Anyway, I just love the capitalisation of "Could" in mid-sentence.
I'm from northern england (almsot) so I say short "a"s (as in caffeine), so ass seems a more natural spelling for me, even though I'm from england.
"You scumbag you maggot! You cheap lazy faggot! New OS your ass and thank god its your last!"
HEY! Its valentines day! You and a server should go out an have a romantic meal.
Well I agree, to tell you the truth. I wasn't trying to be confrontational, and what you say about us being consumers is completely correct.
More, its the general market for software which is stuck in the same old ways. Generally speaking, something thats free is lesser quality than something that costs. In the normal product world, you might go out looking for an oven. Companies sell them so they can make a certain profit, while making the price attractive to a consumer. The consumers know that, so a more expensive oven means a better oven. Usually.
The advent of the internet and alternative business models means this doesn't have to be the case, yet those who live their lives in shopping malls and highstreets woudln't know it. I've had a few fun times trying to explain to friends why something so good can be free, and not illegal. I'm under the impression that businesses, in trying to visualise what consumers want, stay as narrow minded as them. Hence they make the assumption that free software lovers are not not consumers, just very lousy and cheap consumers.
I don't want things to be this way, of course. I (with a little help) built the PC I'm typing this with, and tend to use linux maybe 80% of the time (20% on windows for graphics work).
My previous post was based off the stereotype more than anything else.
To be fair, that isn't a stunning piece of innovation. Take out the "GUI" and the command line does that anyway. Add the GUI and you have gksudo or kdesu. Ubuntu has been based on that baby for quite some time, ya know. I won't get into a who-did-it-first arguement because it seems pointless. Chances are are Mac OSX and GNOME would have thought it up at about the same time anyway, and as usual microsoft would have copied it off either one (very, very badly)
This makes an awful lot of sense. Currently, a lot of hardware gets drivers but without the assistance of the companies. This way, consumers benefit (if you can call us basement-bound linuxers consumers) and the companies benefit by reaching more people.
Well usually its microsoft leeching off everyone elses' good ideas (including apple's) and not the other way round. With any luck, a DRM-Free iTunes/Mac will quickly be copied into microsoft's next [in line for "second worst OS ever after Vista" award] operating system.
Wait, what? Linux has a steeper learning curve than Windows, yet Windows admins have a "misconception" that Linux is harder for them to use? Actually that is fine. Initially, linux can have a steep learning curve (first week or two) but after that it is easy. Windows admins have to misconception it starts difficult and stays difficult.
A COMPUTER uses the internet, he uses the computer
Nice use of black and white. Clearly he can't use a library's website to check if a book is in stock, but if he went to the library and took out a book, and they asked him for his name, address, phone number, and the data is sent to their online server, is he using it then? If the librarian sudden got a bout of Carpal tunnel syndrome and asked him to type in the details would he be allowed to do that?
Does he simply have to ask someone else to enter things in order not to "use" the internet?
If he shares his computer with his roommate, and the computer updates the definitions of the firewall he installed, who's using the internet? if it asks for confirmation? if he presses the "update definitions now" button?
Untrue, my friend. The media player Audacious [audacious-media-player.org] uses GTK+ for its file open dialogs. Recently, the open dialog was recoded into C (it was previously a medley of lots of languages). The guy behind the recode got an awful lot of jit from the lead dev after space was wasted, various inconsistencies, etc. In all, they spent over an hour on IRC debating where to move a single checkbox, and various other parts of the open dialog.
Sounds like New Coke to me. Make it so bad that consumer's won't take it, then bring back the original (in this case, free as in beer device drivers) and reap the rewards. Consumers pay for 2 versions.
I'd imagine they'll go after the Georgia ISPs for helping to break the law... It can't exactly be prosecuted on a federal level (I hope I'm using the right terminology here, I'm not from the US) because there is no law that has been broken.
I do partially disagree with you mind. The laws are already pretty absurd when it comes to censorship, this is just expanding into the infinite democracy of the internet.
But yeah, this shouldn't be done. Teenagers have rights too. Who says that the moment you turn 18 you don't have to do this? Education, not terrible laws should be the force driving people to understand the implications of posting stuff on myspace.
And anyway, myspace will never give in. Murdoch is a greedy bastard, a blip on his empire will mean nothing.
Or the group who just use muBlinder, and pass the WGA check? I would expect the number to be well above 40% to be honest.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=266678
I don't know if anyone will find that interesting. The votes are basically deadlocked between CD and DVD... Turning point in the format wars?
I have to say the audio department is already pretty good. But video? Video editing packages for ubuntu are very limited at best. I've tried editing video on more than one occasion and drawn a complete blank after 4 or 5 apps. Same goes for graphics, I absolutely cannot stand The GIMP. I try to emulate paint shop pro 7, but its pretty shakey...
What? You do realise that we here about more of these cases not because they happen more often, but because they are against the flow? Pointing out exceptions is bringing god-of-the-gaps to a copyright dispute.
And so, the last horse crosses the finish line...
Although I'm not big fan of the RIAA, that analogy seems a bit bad... Artists are payed for records, radio broadcasts generate profits from exposure. The artists were more afraid of change rather than fear of no pay... However, non-DRMed music is less exposure and more free music... We've had continued arguments about whether non-DRMed music makes more or less money for the artists. It works entirely on exposure, but unlike radio you can get what you want with minimal effort. Radio involves waiting for the song to come back on.
Thats a very small argument though. The big labels are filthy stinking rich from underpaying artists. The medium-sized labels usually just keep their heads above water, and smaller labels will be lucky to succeed unless they find a hot new band (for example, Flogging Molly signed to a very small label)
What on earth are you talking about? Rock has greatly defined the majority of the music we listen today. Before the advent of rock and roll, the structure of the pop song didn't exist. The use of synths, etc, was largely pioneered by rock. Before music production software on the computer what were backing tracks thought up on? The electric guitar.
I appreciate the arguement that hip hop has had a big influence on rock. I'm a big fan of RATM and its a prime example of how rap (de la rocha) and metal (rest of the band) aren't that dissimilar. However, the door swings both ways, and a lot of the artists we consider pop, or r & b, take influences (even unknowingly) from rock music of the last 50 years
A lot of the stuff which was fixed was the stuff which had novel workarounds. Two of the most glaringly obvious and terrible oversights in IE7 are:
:hover just isn't good enough
1) display:table*. Seems like we're still stuck in prehistory here... how hard can it be to implement? I'll give everyone an example. You have a nice, fixed with layout with a single column. You want to center a form. Tough luck, bud. Forms are block elements, and by default will expand to fit available space. You can't float it center, that won't work. display:table; is the most sensible solution, as the form will "shrink wrap" to fit its content, and still be treated as a block element. E.g. centering, borders, etc. If you think you can get away with simply centering elements in the form, it will be ugly as labels etc will be out of place. And if you set them to a fixed width, it'll get uglier whenever someone has a nonstandard font or font size. 2) selectors. Why oh why haven't we got them on every element? It seems insane to me...