I thought I remembered reading that article before, and after skimming it again I was correct.
Since Be is getting into the ever technical legal system with their actions, this could be a very good case, however I feel Microsoft will win this one.
If the contracts Microsoft signed with OEMs stated that theirs was the only OS to be installed on computers, then that is clearly anitcompetitive, and this is what Be is alledging (only Windows on a computer). However, from what I gather from the article Microsoft's contract with OEMs made it so they could be the only OS listed on the boot loader.
Now, this may be cutthroat business, but it's not what Be is alledging. Their software stinks, but Gates is a ruthless business man, which I do admire to a certain extent.
Thus, in this world of legal technicalities, I think Microsoft will win.
Yay, yet another way to be tracked on the Internet.
Well, as I read this article there is yet another person who can complain but doesn't contribute. So in the Open Source philosophy, I have a question for everyone:
What do you want to see in a centralized authentication system that you would use and trust?
For example, would you like it to be overseen by the government, a company, a board of individuals or someone or something else? Should it be Open Source to allow for improvements, or closed source to deter cracking?
I feel rather that simply complain about how terrible this and Hailstorm are, we should discuss what should be in a centralized authentication system we would use and trust.
Wow, I'm amazed by what you're saying. I fully agree with the parent. In situations such as this, when someone asks for something, it's required to give them what they're asking for.
I have a few questions for you:
1 - Do you know why the Red Cross needs this software? Are you sure there is a fully functional Linux alternative for each requested piece?
2 - Do you feel it would speed up and help the relief effort to have the users learn new software and new interfaces or slow it down and hider it? NOTE: I'm not saying the interface is bad, but just different, which requires additional education which takes additional time, which is something that cannot be spared right now.
I'm sure the Red Cross will be happy to have anything up and working and that volunteers will follow their directions to the letter with good humor.
IF this happened, the directions from the Red Cross would be "Input data X". I don't think the Red Cross can provide user assistance as to how to use the new, unfamiliar software software. Even if hardcore Linux hackers get involved with supporting the software, it wll only slow down the efforts, to what extent I do not know.
They may then contribute more with the Free software in their hands.
You're correct, they may. I feel, and others will agree, the situation warrants "give them what they want, not what we think they should have".
It's doubtful that the Red Cross is dependent on such things...
In response to this statement I'll ask you the same thing you asked the parent: What the hell do you know about Red Cross ops? Do you work for them? Have you ever? I have but not much. They are not a lame bunch.. It seems you're speculating, the same thing you ripped into the previous poster for.
...and the usual M$ bugs won't matter.
More Microsoft bashing and at a time like this. I think you need to re-assess your priorities right now.
I would highly recommend a copy of Solaris x86 for anyone who would like to learn, or at the very least tinker around with Solaris. I used Solaris x86 to learn Solaris originally as well as study for my certification since 99% of the commands are the same between SPARC and x86. The only real difference is the absence of the OpenBOOT PROM, which is partially emulated in software on x86.
However, for day to day use, I'm still a Linux or Windows guy. Solaris x86 just doesn't have enough applications and fun stuff to make it useful for day to day non-business use, so don't plan on using it full time.
Per usual, here is where you can purchase a copy of Solaris 8 x86, or this link where you can download it for free.
Yes it is. CPUs run at 100% usage all of the time, even if a process or processes aren't using all of the CPU. Checkout the System Idle Process in the Windows NT task manager.
when SETI is running the CPU can't shutdown into low power mode..
This is only true for Pentium 4 CPUs, which I doubt many government agencies are currently using.
Again, either a CPU is on and using X power and 100% of its capacity, or it's not.
a PC, with Windows 95 or later, or Windows NT 4.0 or later with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.01 or later or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later.
Clearly you can run Netscape, but it must be on Windows or MacOS. I tried hitting the site with Netscape 4.x on Solaris and it won't come up.
The war on drugs is an unfortunate attempt by conservatives to impose their own blind view of proper private behavior upon others.
Isn't this what you're doing, only it is proper public behavior? If a woman and I made a private video of us having sex, would this consititue pornography in your opinion?
Pornography, in contrast, is a public enterprise dealing in wares that are by definition non-consensual.
No one can consent to participating in pornography...
So you are saying that each and every woman and man who participates in pornography is doing so against his or her own free will? Not only this is a blanket statement, but I don't feel it's true. Please elaborate.
That's false. Law is public morality. Law properly seeks to be moral. The fact that pornography is currently legal is not an argument for allowing to let it remain so, just as the existence of slavery didn't preclude the abolitionist movement.
Ahh, an excellent argument!! I cannot debate this.:)
So does organized crime, at the expense of our neighbors and loved-ones.
You obviously need to see the flip side of organized crime. John Gotti used to have an annual party for everyone in his old neighborhood, and they weren't happy to see him go. There's another side to everything.
Frankly, I understand your argument, however the foundation of that argument (that pornography is non-consentual and exploits women) in my opinion is flawed. Perhaps the law should be changed, but the law, which is "public morality" currently seems to disagree.
If we let Yahoo sell pornography like this, then it's a slippery slope down to having them sell videos of executions.
Isn't this the same argument the War on Drugs uses?
This calls for a boycott.
Are you then prepared to boycott any each and every other business and orginization that sells pornography? Where is the line drawn? Do movies with sex scenes count as "pornography" and should be banned? Take Eyes Wide Shut for example.
The free market cannot thrive unless we police it for criminal activity such as this..
Morality and the law are two completely and totally separate subjects. The current law states pronography is legal, thus it is not criminal activity. Also, if you would look at the numbers the free market DOES thrive because of things such as this. Right, wrong on indifferent, these are the facts.
Here is the problem I have with it. I beta tests Diablo 2 before its release. It spoils your enjoyment of the game. It's great and being able to play a game before anyone else, but when you play a game that is well (I think) for online play, and you are playing with suck a limited crowd in a beta, you will get burned out. As I did, when playing D2 beta, I played it so much, that when it came out, and I got a the final release of the game, I was already burned out. There was no enjoyment really left.
So who's problem was this? Blizzard's for having a public beta test? Blizzard's for making a really fun game? Yours for signing up? Or yours for sitting at your computer for hours playing it?
If you truly want what you say you do (to be able to play it after its official release and enjoy it), perhaps you should exercise some self restraint and wait until it comes out rather than being a beta tester just for bragging rights as you said in your last paragraph.
How does one treat property which has no physical form and can be infinitely reproduced?
The way I see it, any information that can be reproduced over and over is the same as a thought. You can't stop it, because I've already told 10 people about it, they'll tell 10 people and so on.
I don't think this applies to artistic works such as graphics and music, but any type of information or code should be viewed as "speech" or "thoughts".
I was speaking to a co-worker the other day about Sun's UltraSPARC III processor and he was telling me about CPU manufacturing in general.
To actually create a fabrication facility to make CPUs, it takes about 20 billion dollars. $20,000,000,000 dollars. That's more than most companies can afford. Even Intel couldn't make very many new fabrication plants.
If a company can't afford to create their own plant, they have to schedule time at a fabrication facility. This is basically a window (say 48 or 72 hours) where the facility will crank out as many chips as possible. If they miss the window for some reason, they have to re-schedule and it can be months until there is another open time slot.
What I'm getting at is designing Open CPUs is a great idea. It allows developers to really get inside of the hardware and optimize the hell out of applications, which is a good thing. However, the actual cost to make these CPUs is staggering, and unless a big company put up some big bucks, I don't see it happening in the near future.
My co-worker also mentioned how low cost almost everything else is. Video cards, NICs, sound cards and the like. Wouldn't it be better to focus on products like these since they would work with all hardware (how about a video card that worked on Sun and x86 machines?)? With Moore's Law getting us faster and faster CPU speeds, perhaps it's time to make the peripherals first, and focus on a CPU once we have found sucess with smaller projects.
Actually, I feel this goes to show we have a long way to go in the battle to have easy to use, strong encryption for all users.
If the President doesn't use encryption in his e-mail to friends and family, then Joe User certainly doesn't.
I can't really offer and constructive suggestions or code, but I hope some of you good people out there will work to make encryption easy to use for everyone.
I can't stand MP3's simply because of their lossy compression and will not support any other format that uses similar compression.
I've heard this from people before. Maybe it's just me, but I don't beleive them when they say this. Could Slashdot readers reply to this and tell me if they can tell the difference between MP3s and CDs?
Surely something so simple could be easily cracked.
To me, if it's encrypted, cracking it is far from "simple". If you're a crypto expert, then yeah, you can reverse engineer it perhaps, but Joe Linux (me) won't be cracking this anytime soon.
I mean, SDMI was a huge failure, how can they expect these not to be?
I think you have it backwards. If I put out a product that was a "huge failure", I would improve upon that product and re-release it, which is what seems to be happening in this instance.
RIAA is pissed, and they probably made a helluva scheme this time.
Is there any problem having such contributions bought and sold?
Frankly, I don't see an issue with this. I could have started archiving Usenet news way back in the day and sold it today. So could you. So could have anyone. However, it was Deja who actually did it, and now they've made some money. Can BBS operators do the same with their message boards?
Is there a way to have nonprofit or academic or research institutions involved in archiving such collaborative contributions like Usenet?
Sure, if there is an organization out there with lots (and I mean lots) of disk space and the correct INN (news server) settings, sure. Just keep the messages around forever and after a while you have an archive.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought I remembered reading that article before, and after skimming it again I was correct.
Since Be is getting into the ever technical legal system with their actions, this could be a very good case, however I feel Microsoft will win this one.
If the contracts Microsoft signed with OEMs stated that theirs was the only OS to be installed on computers, then that is clearly anitcompetitive, and this is what Be is alledging (only Windows on a computer). However, from what I gather from the article Microsoft's contract with OEMs made it so they could be the only OS listed on the boot loader.
Now, this may be cutthroat business, but it's not what Be is alledging. Their software stinks, but Gates is a ruthless business man, which I do admire to a certain extent.
Thus, in this world of legal technicalities, I think Microsoft will win.
...and we are closing bugs faster that you can report them. What are you guys going to do about this huh? HUH?
;)
Use KDE of course.
Yay, yet another way to be tracked on the Internet.
Well, as I read this article there is yet another person who can complain but doesn't contribute. So in the Open Source philosophy, I have a question for everyone:
What do you want to see in a centralized authentication system that you would use and trust?
For example, would you like it to be overseen by the government, a company, a board of individuals or someone or something else? Should it be Open Source to allow for improvements, or closed source to deter cracking?
I feel rather that simply complain about how terrible this and Hailstorm are, we should discuss what should be in a centralized authentication system we would use and trust.
Wow, I'm amazed by what you're saying. I fully agree with the parent. In situations such as this, when someone asks for something, it's required to give them what they're asking for.
...and the usual M$ bugs won't matter.
I have a few questions for you:
1 - Do you know why the Red Cross needs this software? Are you sure there is a fully functional Linux alternative for each requested piece?
2 - Do you feel it would speed up and help the relief effort to have the users learn new software and new interfaces or slow it down and hider it? NOTE: I'm not saying the interface is bad, but just different, which requires additional education which takes additional time, which is something that cannot be spared right now.
I'm sure the Red Cross will be happy to have anything up and working and that volunteers will follow their directions to the letter with good humor.
IF this happened, the directions from the Red Cross would be "Input data X". I don't think the Red Cross can provide user assistance as to how to use the new, unfamiliar software software. Even if hardcore Linux hackers get involved with supporting the software, it wll only slow down the efforts, to what extent I do not know.
They may then contribute more with the Free software in their hands. You're correct, they may. I feel, and others will agree, the situation warrants "give them what they want, not what we think they should have".
It's doubtful that the Red Cross is dependent on such things...
In response to this statement I'll ask you the same thing you asked the parent: What the hell do you know about Red Cross ops? Do you work for them? Have you ever? I have but not much. They are not a lame bunch.. It seems you're speculating, the same thing you ripped into the previous poster for.
More Microsoft bashing and at a time like this. I think you need to re-assess your priorities right now.
I would highly recommend a copy of Solaris x86 for anyone who would like to learn, or at the very least tinker around with Solaris. I used Solaris x86 to learn Solaris originally as well as study for my certification since 99% of the commands are the same between SPARC and x86. The only real difference is the absence of the OpenBOOT PROM, which is partially emulated in software on x86.
However, for day to day use, I'm still a Linux or Windows guy. Solaris x86 just doesn't have enough applications and fun stuff to make it useful for day to day non-business use, so don't plan on using it full time.
Per usual, here is where you can purchase a copy of Solaris 8 x86, or this link where you can download it for free.
If you had three (3) wishes, what would you use them for?
Idle CPU time is not free
Yes it is. CPUs run at 100% usage all of the time, even if a process or processes aren't using all of the CPU. Checkout the System Idle Process in the Windows NT task manager.
when SETI is running the CPU can't shutdown into low power mode..
This is only true for Pentium 4 CPUs, which I doubt many government agencies are currently using.
Again, either a CPU is on and using X power and 100% of its capacity, or it's not.
To quote the web site:
a PC, with Windows 95 or later, or Windows NT 4.0 or later with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.01 or later or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later.
Clearly you can run Netscape, but it must be on Windows or MacOS. I tried hitting the site with Netscape 4.x on Solaris and it won't come up.
That's a good idea. I know I would vote for it. ;)
The war on drugs is an unfortunate attempt by conservatives to impose their own blind view of proper private behavior upon others.
:)
Isn't this what you're doing, only it is proper public behavior? If a woman and I made a private video of us having sex, would this consititue pornography in your opinion?
Pornography, in contrast, is a public enterprise dealing in wares that are by definition non-consensual.
Dictionary.com states the definition of pornography is Pictures, writing, or other material that is sexually explicit and sometimes equates sex with power and violence.. I don't see anything mentioning non-consentual, do you?
No one can consent to participating in pornography...
So you are saying that each and every woman and man who participates in pornography is doing so against his or her own free will? Not only this is a blanket statement, but I don't feel it's true. Please elaborate.
That's false. Law is public morality. Law properly seeks to be moral. The fact that pornography is currently legal is not an argument for allowing to let it remain so, just as the existence of slavery didn't preclude the abolitionist movement.
Ahh, an excellent argument!! I cannot debate this.
So does organized crime, at the expense of our neighbors and loved-ones.
You obviously need to see the flip side of organized crime. John Gotti used to have an annual party for everyone in his old neighborhood, and they weren't happy to see him go. There's another side to everything.
Frankly, I understand your argument, however the foundation of that argument (that pornography is non-consentual and exploits women) in my opinion is flawed. Perhaps the law should be changed, but the law, which is "public morality" currently seems to disagree.
If we let Yahoo sell pornography like this, then it's a slippery slope down to having them sell videos of executions.
Isn't this the same argument the War on Drugs uses?
This calls for a boycott.
Are you then prepared to boycott any each and every other business and orginization that sells pornography? Where is the line drawn? Do movies with sex scenes count as "pornography" and should be banned? Take Eyes Wide Shut for example.
The free market cannot thrive unless we police it for criminal activity such as this..
Morality and the law are two completely and totally separate subjects. The current law states pronography is legal, thus it is not criminal activity. Also, if you would look at the numbers the free market DOES thrive because of things such as this. Right, wrong on indifferent, these are the facts.
yawn.
Here is the problem I have with it. I beta tests Diablo 2 before its release. It spoils your enjoyment of the game. It's great and being able to play a game before anyone else, but when you play a game that is well (I think) for online play, and you are playing with suck a limited crowd in a beta, you will get burned out. As I did, when playing D2 beta, I played it so much, that when it came out, and I got a the final release of the game, I was already burned out. There was no enjoyment really left.
So who's problem was this? Blizzard's for having a public beta test? Blizzard's for making a really fun game? Yours for signing up? Or yours for sitting at your computer for hours playing it?
If you truly want what you say you do (to be able to play it after its official release and enjoy it), perhaps you should exercise some self restraint and wait until it comes out rather than being a beta tester just for bragging rights as you said in your last paragraph.
How does one treat property which has no physical form and can be infinitely reproduced?
The way I see it, any information that can be reproduced over and over is the same as a thought. You can't stop it, because I've already told 10 people about it, they'll tell 10 people and so on.
I don't think this applies to artistic works such as graphics and music, but any type of information or code should be viewed as "speech" or "thoughts".
Correction, my bad. That's 2 billion, not 20 billion per the AC's link.
I was speaking to a co-worker the other day about Sun's UltraSPARC III processor and he was telling me about CPU manufacturing in general.
To actually create a fabrication facility to make CPUs, it takes about 20 billion dollars. $20,000,000,000 dollars. That's more than most companies can afford. Even Intel couldn't make very many new fabrication plants.
If a company can't afford to create their own plant, they have to schedule time at a fabrication facility. This is basically a window (say 48 or 72 hours) where the facility will crank out as many chips as possible. If they miss the window for some reason, they have to re-schedule and it can be months until there is another open time slot.
What I'm getting at is designing Open CPUs is a great idea. It allows developers to really get inside of the hardware and optimize the hell out of applications, which is a good thing. However, the actual cost to make these CPUs is staggering, and unless a big company put up some big bucks, I don't see it happening in the near future.
My co-worker also mentioned how low cost almost everything else is. Video cards, NICs, sound cards and the like. Wouldn't it be better to focus on products like these since they would work with all hardware (how about a video card that worked on Sun and x86 machines?)? With Moore's Law getting us faster and faster CPU speeds, perhaps it's time to make the peripherals first, and focus on a CPU once we have found sucess with smaller projects.
Sounds like some subliminal messaging from AMD as to what to use on your Intel processors.
I've heard that there are miles and miles of "dark fiber" in the US, fiber that hasn't been used yet.
If this is true, why aren't we using it? Can anyone confirm or deny this?
Progress marches on, but sometimes a solution is right in front of our eyes.
Yo man, $100 says you pre-created this message since you knew there would be a Mir story. What a whore.
The CONSOLE= line in /etc/default/login. Comment it out.
You're pathetic yo.
Whoever moderated this as a "troll" is full of shit. This is a perfectly valid question, you just can't take it because of who is asking the question.
Grow up, you shouldn't be trusted with moderator points.
Actually, I feel this goes to show we have a long way to go in the battle to have easy to use, strong encryption for all users.
If the President doesn't use encryption in his e-mail to friends and family, then Joe User certainly doesn't.
I can't really offer and constructive suggestions or code, but I hope some of you good people out there will work to make encryption easy to use for everyone.
I can't stand MP3's simply because of their lossy compression and will not support any other format that uses similar compression.
I've heard this from people before. Maybe it's just me, but I don't beleive them when they say this. Could Slashdot readers reply to this and tell me if they can tell the difference between MP3s and CDs?
Surely something so simple could be easily cracked.
To me, if it's encrypted, cracking it is far from "simple". If you're a crypto expert, then yeah, you can reverse engineer it perhaps, but Joe Linux (me) won't be cracking this anytime soon.
I mean, SDMI was a huge failure, how can they expect these not to be?
I think you have it backwards. If I put out a product that was a "huge failure", I would improve upon that product and re-release it, which is what seems to be happening in this instance.
RIAA is pissed, and they probably made a helluva scheme this time.
Is there any problem having such contributions bought and sold?
Frankly, I don't see an issue with this. I could have started archiving Usenet news way back in the day and sold it today. So could you. So could have anyone. However, it was Deja who actually did it, and now they've made some money. Can BBS operators do the same with their message boards?
Is there a way to have nonprofit or academic or research institutions involved in archiving such collaborative contributions like Usenet?
Sure, if there is an organization out there with lots (and I mean lots) of disk space and the correct INN (news server) settings, sure. Just keep the messages around forever and after a while you have an archive.