Since Woody became testing the nature of a freeze has changed. Now instead of freezing a codebase and trying to test it til it's stable, there is a start point already present (anything that has made it into testing). To quote:
So, what I've been thinking, and what I'm (belatedly) proposing, is to
roughly invert the test cycles and the freeze itself, so that instead of
freezing everything then doing test cycles to work out where we're at,
we instead choose some part of Debian to test, test it, and, if it's
good enough, freeze it. Once everything's successfully tested and frozen,
we release.
The three main test cycles I think we'll need are as follows:
The base system
Boot-floppies, standard packages and tasks
Optional and extra packages
This is a proposal as to how Debian should move from where it is now to a released woody and as the following quote shows it's about time to
Now, I've screwed up a bit here, because I haven't taken the time to
properly discuss how we're going to do the freeze.
I have to say I think that the testing distro is going to do wonders for Debian and the problems it has had (old packages in stable). A release with Kernel 2.4, X4, Kde2, mozilla1.0 in 2001 would stand up respectebly to anything anyone else has done to date, and I'll take a Debian release over a commercial release any-day (a la mozilla V nutscrape 0.6!=6.0, but 1.0~=6.1)
I agree with you wholeheartedly that joe punter wants his computer to be that ever-desirable video recorder where not only is play, stop, rewind, record easy enough for your 6 year old or granny, but that the ones who got that far can all make it to the advanced levels of timed recordings. The fact of the matter is that this is a long way away! Just look at how long it takes Joe Bloggs to get used to the whole point+click unilook interface windows success is built on, my mum has gone from 20 years of typing to wordstar and wordperfect to word97, and I am constantly having to reshow her things that were simply a right click on what she wanted away. But we are not talking about Joe Bloggs here, we are talking about your representative who we would like to have some knowledge of the "information age" that they all want to be associated with (at least they want to be seen to understand it).
Is it too much to ask of our representatives that before they go and exercise the temporary power granted unto them by their constiuents (and the power comes from the people who did and did not vote for them) that they should do some investigation (even if it is reading the executive summary of the civil servants report on the subject)? If we give all the represntatives a copy of a Free operating system (source and all) as I say one may try/succedd in installing it, or may just even ask someone else to tell them what it means (if that happens I hope the person telling them is not a MS jockey, but then again after this outburst maybe a MS VP would be right, or his lord gates himself full arrogance brandished). How many of our represntatives would like the idea of the government they represent co-owning as much of the software it runs as possible? Hell even the simple argument (and I think it should work on people from the Swiss through the Irish to the Chinese) that running a closed source OS is a National Security risk should do (tell me how again you check that X-OS whose source I cannot see has no back-doors for the local secret police). If you are going to go open source at a governmental level it would have to be Free as only insanity leads down the road of governements investing in their own choices of non-Free software to develop work that only people who pay the original authors (or the government if it is their system) can use. Lets just get as much of our tax money going on developing Free solutions as possible and as little as possible feeding the corporate monster.
And finally mbr and partition table aren't hard to explain, you just have to use "lies to children" as explained in the Science of the Discworld (great book). They aren't easy concepts, but a quick gloss a paint over the detail explaining the principle (the Bios man tells the mbr man to take over and he reads his notes and finds the note on the disk that tells him what to do next).
The way I see it, if any of them install Corel Linux they will look at it for a while, wonder what all the fuss is about and then get pissed off when they try to figure out how to stop it doing all those annoying little things (I worked for Corel Linux Tech Support so don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about AYE). If they install Debian (note I say install, not try to install) then they will already have learnt a lot about a computer and the relationship it has with its software and they will be far more knowledgable for the result. They will also have access to the entire source code for everything they choose to install (can any other distro boast this? most seem to have an abundance of "extras" from netscape to oss sound drivers via acrobat and realplayer). If they make it as far as a complete installation and if they discover the battle that the IP lawyers have made for Debian to pick through to work with the commercial world (apt-get install xanim-modules and let it download the extra files from somewhere completely different despite the warning it gives you, etc., etc.) we could have a serious advocate on our hands. If however they simply install a toy linux like Corel (hamstrung if you like it like that) they will simply get an impression of how far along the road to desktop competition we are.
Perhaps we should throw in a printed copy of that lovely open licensced Learning Debian GNU/Linux to help them on their way:-) though I really don't think it is all that hard to get Debian up and running once you can understand mbr and partition table, then gnome-apt is your friend to find more. If Linux is for dummies Corel is the LCD, if Linux is for everyone Debian is the LCD.
I think the problem is with Free or Open Source but not free. IE, IIS and ASP are all under a EULA? Do they all have to be run on a MS OS (or if can I get one running under wine without MS code is that OK, never having purchased any MS code?). MS want shut of code that the user is free to be more powerful with. MS do not want power to slip from their grasp. MS will do whatever it takes to stay with the money. Resistance is futile, Death is irrelevant. spamisirrelevant____me@billofb.org
One RH6.1 server without UPS setup incompetently by a complete newbie and assisted to life by a slighly lesser newbie, running a business e-mail and net connection thorugh a 56k modem mtb attendences 4months, interuptions in service
I play cricket with a poor sod who spends his weekends with his mobile waiting to have to run to service any problems....he's an MS employee. He dosn't see how it could be different without a serious network connection (he might try at 128k). The thought of simply dialing a modem on a box from his laptop via his mobile to telnet in and grep out the problem (or whatever takes your fancy) to tell the grunts to fix (if it will take him longer than he can wait to drink, he has grunts even at the weekend) just doesn't work for him. He earns a lot of money. Go figure!
How about every LUG sends their representitives as complete a copy as possible of the free debian. That should amount to at least 10 CDs per rep (src and i386 but come on, lets give them testing and unstable, kde, OMS and on.. ). Let's all give our LUGs something and do this. They should notice a 24CD case of Free Software:-) Especially if we can find a cuddly Penguin to hold it (cause I ain't looking for a Hurd). If even one of them actually installed it we could have millions of dollars of humour (what do you mean VB-Scripting virus? reboot power surges? Buying/pirating software to rip mp3s? need I continue?)
Linux currently falls short of an educated users all round computing platform for one reason alone (IMHO) and that is audio. If you are working with audio (as opposed to simply listening to it) you use ProTools (generallt Mac), SGI (rare) or Win9x. If MS where to actually enforce the above a lot of people would dump them for an OS where they could play with their audio (and the audio crackers and hackers are an extremely bright bunch imho). All that will happen is that you will need to by an audio production card with audio production drivers to do these things OR software (like Cubase to take an extreme example) will be able to bypass this and then a hack will appear in 2 days to let any program do it. MS are not about to let the audio crew find another OS.... they are trying to get them to find some way to use a MS OS that isn't still based on dos.
slightly OT but, i have recently been wondering if the following idea might help the linux audio architecture out and wonder if it is implemented in any form anywhere already. The big stumbling block for audio on *nix is the multi-user nature which combats the ability to deliver processed audio streams on time (real-time....talking at MOST 10ms but 3 is what we are looking for). Surely what we need is for the audio effects channels (this is for audio production systems now, not a common desktop) to be handled by loadable kernel realtime modules (using one of the two rt kernel camps work), and for effects to be added to streams through dynamic loading of instances of the required filter/effect/modules. All that is required (hehe) is to provide a user level means of manipulating the streams (I only dread to think of the rebirth et al clones that would grow from this, some people would write great filters, some poeple would write great interfaces to filters). The critical part is for it to take part under some form of real-time kerneling, and afaiunderstand this means kernel-code and that means modules or unnacceptable reboots. Anyway...my 2 cents
I've made one or two comments before about Corel and my opinion of what happened them....go back and find them if you like cause I have other fish to fry here! To contextualise this I am an ex-Corel employee who worked supporting their Linux offerings.
To do that right now, you have to get a server version from some company, a desktop from somebody else, and utilities from a few other people, and it's not something that's going to happen, because [end users] don't want to trade 1 support call for 15.
Explain Netwinder (that was Corel wasn't it!) and your plans for creating a server version of Corel Linux? Oh yeah, you also provided the core ingredients for an end to end system with your OS. Some hacking was required to get routers and the like out of it (they didn't support dual nics properly). You did however give people a ftpd, httpd, sambad, nfsd, Desktop (plus your Office if you wanted) not much more to do really.
We did some back-of-the-envelope calculations, and making the appropriate acquisitions to fill in the holes would have cost us around $300 million.
Yep, those calulations were definetly done on the back of an envelope! Good to see those new pen and ink technologies are taking hold.
No, it was the perfect approach. If you remember, the first thing we announced was that our applications were going to be coming out on Linux. We were definitely headed down that road. But, at that time, there was not a single easy-to-use Linux distribution.... Rather than waiting for somebody to come up with [a distribution], we decided to do one ourselves.
The Perfect approach? So why were the applications released for all platforms simultaneously (well rpm and deb, no slackware support)? Your distro's distinctive features were KDE on Debian with a "simple" installer and control panel.....how did these have anything to do with a Wine Application?
Well, it's the open source concept, but one notch better, because the source wouldn't be open... so the companies that write them can keep them and sell them, but from the user's perspective you get the benefit of open source because you can have the content coming from a variety of companies.
And that about sums it up, this guy is a fscking idiot (or a spin doctor, but their the same thing aren't they? ask Peter Mandelson). The Open Source concept but better cause the users can't get the source so people can make money of it. Come on, Corel have never and seemingly will never get the idea of Open Source, let alone Free software. While I worked there all their servers ran Solaris and that about says it all for the corporate commitment to Linux.
I think it is a big pity that the Borland merger never happened as maybe then someone might have managed to do something with Corel (Copeland long ago lost his worth to the company, probably as soon as it first turned profit) and judging by what has come since I don't think they are going anywhere. Corel gambling on.NET is pure submission to Microsft and their business model and it leads to failure. If MS succeed with.NET it will be because they price their basic lineup cheaply enough for Joe Schmoe to "rent" it, and that is going to have to be damn cheap to stop people looking elsewhere (how many people do you know who don't pay a penny for software and only run proprietry software). If MS is releasing a range cheaply enough, where is the space for Corel? They get to exploit the same pathetic niche of the people who are willing to look beyond their nose (MS Office and Adobe) AND prefer the Corel way....good luck Guys.
PCW: That would seem to dispel the notion that you decided to spin off the distribution as a result of Microsoft's investment.
Burney: Oh, the two are completely unrelated.
What hope on someone doing either of the following:
Coming up with a cheap and re-usable method to go to the International Space Station
building a space elevator
Seriously, we need to expand and not by simply sending probes. The first step to any advancement beyond the level we reached with the Manned Moon landings was the shuttle program but it was just a miniscule step along the path to riches. It makes far more sense for a miniscule amount of money to be spent on rockets and the vast bulk to be spent on R&D work to come up with a way to lower the dry/wet ratio of a "shuttle", preferably losing the disposable rockets. Then when we can start thinking about housing a few thousand people in space (first station, then craft, then moon, then planet, once the first is broken I cannot imagine the others will take any significant amount of time and that each will fuel and develop the next) we can really start to exploit it (both commercially so the R&D guys can recoup and scientifically/socialogically etc.).
Anyone working on the first "non-atmospheric" space craft i.e. one that flys from spacestation to space station?
These damn self-serving corporate money grabbing bastards (and their political exploite[er]s)
with their moral imperative to have the most money possible now instead of the best future are just making it harder and harder to dream....sigh
Plus, even if they heard the call immeadiately, think about how hard it would be for the TV spy to relay it to the defensive co-ordinater to relay it to the defensive captain on the field to relay it to the squad? A tad longer than 3 seconds before the ball gets snapped...
This could be the most fun part of the whole experience (if I ever get to see it...I'm in Ireland). Imagine the quarterback calling a play action sweep but in fact they aren't running a sweep at all but actually giving the hand off for a draw play. The D thinks it's managed to be quick enough this time to "out smart" them and that they have the jump, in fact the just have the jump on a fake play. Oh yeah and what team doesn't use audibles (call a shotgun 5 wide-receiver play but have your tight-end formation in and then audible it...what's a D going to do)? Is anyone trying to tell me that there is no way anyone has ever tried to use a long range mic to aid an NFL team, or at least tried to have someone evesdropping?
Well a few years ago (like 30 months) I sat around my friends office watching some footage his boss had brought back from the Italian Grand Prix (mainly of womens' behinds). The reason his boss had been there was helping with tests they were doing for camera-selecting....you see his boss worked for DPS (god I loved playing with the Perception RT.....even if it was under the sith:-)
When I worked for Corel (in Ireland on Linux Support, not Canada on code, remember that let's you know the sort of people I could get too and hence how much the following is about personal opinions rather thatn corporate policy, it's just what I think), I tried (in the limited ways that I could) to get them to do just this! I suggested that if they can give away free to use WP8 than surely they can dig back somewhere and give away a Free version (say the first draw+wp versions released for unix). Alas, while a few people thought perhaps, they generally couldn't grasp any benefits to them. As for GPL or even Open Source WP9/10... I don't think they had the stomach for that AND I don't think they thought anyone else would have a clue how to work with the code... I'm not even sure if they knew if they could work with the code. When I heard talk of a re-write of some of the programs I always suggested it again (if anyone who might be worth saying it to and I knew wasn't against the idea was around) because it could offer someone like them the opportunity to ditch being toolkit writers and let them focus on the important stuff.
tv (guide) (on||off) (channel) (n)
e.g. "tv on sky1"
play (media) (by||like||match||move) (query)
e.g. "play music by britney"
Turning the tv on and off and changing the chanel, all without even having to find a control....throw in the full power of a decent set-top box. I think this is a killer app!
Security bug days open =
The number of days that the OS spends with an open security bug in its release. A company could cheat this by not distributing anything or by pulling effected packages until a fix appears but so what. Think about it, when it comes to security what I want is the system where I am least likely to be sitting vulnerable to a known exploit (the fewer unknown exploits the less likely this is). So in an ideal world you would expect a company to have less than 6 security bugs on a release in a year (the release can include all patches, and even a complete upgrade) and for each of the bugs to be fixed within 24 hours of arrival......my estimate of 32 bugdays for Debian shows how far from my ideals my ideally constructed distribution is (well Debian policy isn't perfect but it's close imho).
I am so dissappointed the book is it home so I can't provide the full quotation(s) but I think the clearest prior art has to be the auto-updating hitch-hickers guide which used a wireless network to broadcast updates to a hand-held/lap-top device. I thought patents were only meant to protect original ideas....oh I forgot this was issued by the US patents department.
How about a sweepstake where everyone has to guess the number of security bug days open in the first year of the firstdefault 2.4 releases of slackware, debian, suse, redhat and mandrake. My guess goes for 40,32,127,1357,220. What's the prize/.?
6.-Q: How do I install it...I can't find a package called "kde"?
A: 27 Jan 2001
Go to http://kde.tdyc.com/ find a mirror close to you...throw that apt line in...apt-get install task-kde
if you want 2.1 beta packages you need to add a "beta" to the end of the apt line.
The problem with the entire privacy argument is that both sides have trouble understanding each other AND like many important issues cases are easily conceived that clearly support either side.
To address the particular cases you quote, I would fear for the privacy of the area locals if the police installed CCTV. The aims for using the system would be noble and true, however the poliemen would be prone to spend more time watching the cameras and more time busting people "we know are up to no good" for anything they catch them on camera doing (e.g. loitering because their is nothing to do!). When they see people walking home drunk, wearing a "legalise it"/DeCSS T-Shirt or even just meeting another group of people to exchange something and then walking away they will start to look at them as possible suspects. Their privacy has been invaded although all they have done is A: taken advantage of licensed premises adding plenty to the public coffers; B: Visibly used their right to free expression or C: Seen an old friend and exchanged business cards. When I am out in public I expect to be caught for any crimes I commit which are not victimless and that I still have my fundamental civil liberties e.g. a policeman cannot stop and search me randomly or routinely or even stand there and watch/follow me for an hour randomly or routinely....he needs a reason.
In the case of the Swiss protection for prostitutes, one must only ask what footage will be shown if any VIP walks down that street or talks to someone. If the area is simply a "shopping mall" than I think CCTV is appropriate. However if it is public streets which are used nefariously (or even legally if that's Swiss law) alternative solutions should be found, by whatever means necessary. If not, you better watch out and think carefully about anything you do as it may be shown back and used against you and context is a hard thing to prove!
Ok, to take the easiest example to blow you out of the water...If MS retain the ability to get every manufacturer who wishes to ship any MS software to pay for a windows licence for each processor (and hence 90% of machines+ ship with Whistler) and they track all the world's Whistler's users data and sell it and statistics from it you are going to tell me that good old US competition is going to sort it out? The question is what should be regulated and what should not, and the laws of rhe real world should apply, i.e. this is equivalent to building a tracking device into all Cars and reselling that data and should be regarded as spying or stalking.
If your legal system does not provide any level of defence you must read every single piece of fine print on every site to discover if you agree with their policies or not AND checkup against an external source to find out if they honour them and any history. I'd rather spend my time surfing the net knowing that I have a level of privacy by default (at least on servers/companies who I know are under a suitable legal system).
Having nearly not noticed when the Royal Rumble was on (as it was not a Sky Sports event they wern't constantly advertising it on their own channels:-) I was sitting in front of the TV half an hour before the show started (01:45) when our entire service went (all channels).....but the service was ok 20 minutes walk away (Dublin 6w)...I waited....I waited....and 20 minutes later I got on my board and did it in about 5 to enjoy the show in plenty of time.
So, can anyone confirm if the time could be a connection, cause I love to freak out the call centres of places like this who don't like to be helpful. I'll just add it to my next call to try and find out where I can find a cable modem service (soon I will be listing addresses from the phone book out to them cause they'll tell you if an address can get it or not, just not where you can get it) and when it'll be where I want it!
I cannot face going through the turgid legal ramblings again to find the links again BUT the simple fact is that the international treaties on patents specifically do not extend the recognition for "methods et al" which would not be patentable in the other nation... So international treaties say the search engines go non-US. Now any particular country could choose to extend their system and recognise the unpatentable patents so you just gotta make sure you don't move there.
If you look at a map of Europe and a map of the U.S. you cannot argue that America is a fundamentally different geography and hence requires cheap petrol. If your petrol costs were responsible, how many more train stations would be built to ensure that freight was more economical? Again you describe a symptom of the problem and not a cause. Do you really think that Europeans don't have to collect from trains and then transport by truck to get to more remote areas? The fact is though that IF they are going less than 100 miles (your suggested figure) it is because they have built a reasonable rail system as it is more economical!
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you wholeheartedly that joe punter wants his computer to be that ever-desirable video recorder where not only is play, stop, rewind, record easy enough for your 6 year old or granny, but that the ones who got that far can all make it to the advanced levels of timed recordings. The fact of the matter is that this is a long way away! Just look at how long it takes Joe Bloggs to get used to the whole point+click unilook interface windows success is built on, my mum has gone from 20 years of typing to wordstar and wordperfect to word97, and I am constantly having to reshow her things that were simply a right click on what she wanted away. But we are not talking about Joe Bloggs here, we are talking about your representative who we would like to have some knowledge of the "information age" that they all want to be associated with (at least they want to be seen to understand it).
Is it too much to ask of our representatives that before they go and exercise the temporary power granted unto them by their constiuents (and the power comes from the people who did and did not vote for them) that they should do some investigation (even if it is reading the executive summary of the civil servants report on the subject)? If we give all the represntatives a copy of a Free operating system (source and all) as I say one may try/succedd in installing it, or may just even ask someone else to tell them what it means (if that happens I hope the person telling them is not a MS jockey, but then again after this outburst maybe a MS VP would be right, or his lord gates himself full arrogance brandished). How many of our represntatives would like the idea of the government they represent co-owning as much of the software it runs as possible? Hell even the simple argument (and I think it should work on people from the Swiss through the Irish to the Chinese) that running a closed source OS is a National Security risk should do (tell me how again you check that X-OS whose source I cannot see has no back-doors for the local secret police). If you are going to go open source at a governmental level it would have to be Free as only insanity leads down the road of governements investing in their own choices of non-Free software to develop work that only people who pay the original authors (or the government if it is their system) can use. Lets just get as much of our tax money going on developing Free solutions as possible and as little as possible feeding the corporate monster.
And finally mbr and partition table aren't hard to explain, you just have to use "lies to children" as explained in the Science of the Discworld (great book). They aren't easy concepts, but a quick gloss a paint over the detail explaining the principle (the Bios man tells the mbr man to take over and he reads his notes and finds the note on the disk that tells him what to do next).
The way I see it, if any of them install Corel Linux they will look at it for a while, wonder what all the fuss is about and then get pissed off when they try to figure out how to stop it doing all those annoying little things (I worked for Corel Linux Tech Support so don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about AYE). If they install Debian (note I say install, not try to install) then they will already have learnt a lot about a computer and the relationship it has with its software and they will be far more knowledgable for the result. They will also have access to the entire source code for everything they choose to install (can any other distro boast this? most seem to have an abundance of "extras" from netscape to oss sound drivers via acrobat and realplayer). If they make it as far as a complete installation and if they discover the battle that the IP lawyers have made for Debian to pick through to work with the commercial world (apt-get install xanim-modules and let it download the extra files from somewhere completely different despite the warning it gives you, etc., etc.) we could have a serious advocate on our hands. If however they simply install a toy linux like Corel (hamstrung if you like it like that) they will simply get an impression of how far along the road to desktop competition we are.
Perhaps we should throw in a printed copy of that lovely open licensced Learning Debian GNU/Linux to help them on their way:-) though I really don't think it is all that hard to get Debian up and running once you can understand mbr and partition table, then gnome-apt is your friend to find more. If Linux is for dummies Corel is the LCD, if Linux is for everyone Debian is the LCD.
I think the problem is with Free or Open Source but not free. IE, IIS and ASP are all under a EULA? Do they all have to be run on a MS OS (or if can I get one running under wine without MS code is that OK, never having purchased any MS code?). MS want shut of code that the user is free to be more powerful with. MS do not want power to slip from their grasp. MS will do whatever it takes to stay with the money. Resistance is futile, Death is irrelevant. spamisirrelevant____me@billofb.org
One RH6.1 server without UPS setup incompetently by a complete newbie and assisted to life by a slighly lesser newbie, running a business e-mail and net connection thorugh a 56k modem mtb attendences 4months, interuptions in service
I play cricket with a poor sod who spends his weekends with his mobile waiting to have to run to service any problems....he's an MS employee. He dosn't see how it could be different without a serious network connection (he might try at 128k). The thought of simply dialing a modem on a box from his laptop via his mobile to telnet in and grep out the problem (or whatever takes your fancy) to tell the grunts to fix (if it will take him longer than he can wait to drink, he has grunts even at the weekend) just doesn't work for him. He earns a lot of money. Go figure!
How about every LUG sends their representitives as complete a copy as possible of the free debian. That should amount to at least 10 CDs per rep (src and i386 but come on, lets give them testing and unstable, kde, OMS and on .. ). Let's all give our LUGs something and do this. They should notice a 24CD case of Free Software :-) Especially if we can find a cuddly Penguin to hold it (cause I ain't looking for a Hurd). If even one of them actually installed it we could have millions of dollars of humour (what do you mean VB-Scripting virus? reboot power surges? Buying/pirating software to rip mp3s? need I continue?)
Linux currently falls short of an educated users all round computing platform for one reason alone (IMHO) and that is audio. If you are working with audio (as opposed to simply listening to it) you use ProTools (generallt Mac), SGI (rare) or Win9x. If MS where to actually enforce the above a lot of people would dump them for an OS where they could play with their audio (and the audio crackers and hackers are an extremely bright bunch imho). All that will happen is that you will need to by an audio production card with audio production drivers to do these things OR software (like Cubase to take an extreme example) will be able to bypass this and then a hack will appear in 2 days to let any program do it. MS are not about to let the audio crew find another OS.... they are trying to get them to find some way to use a MS OS that isn't still based on dos.
slightly OT but, i have recently been wondering if the following idea might help the linux audio architecture out and wonder if it is implemented in any form anywhere already. The big stumbling block for audio on *nix is the multi-user nature which combats the ability to deliver processed audio streams on time (real-time....talking at MOST 10ms but 3 is what we are looking for). Surely what we need is for the audio effects channels (this is for audio production systems now, not a common desktop) to be handled by loadable kernel realtime modules (using one of the two rt kernel camps work), and for effects to be added to streams through dynamic loading of instances of the required filter/effect/modules. All that is required (hehe) is to provide a user level means of manipulating the streams (I only dread to think of the rebirth et al clones that would grow from this, some people would write great filters, some poeple would write great interfaces to filters). The critical part is for it to take part under some form of real-time kerneling, and afaiunderstand this means kernel-code and that means modules or unnacceptable reboots. Anyway...my 2 cents
I've made one or two comments before about Corel and my opinion of what happened them....go back and find them if you like cause I have other fish to fry here! To contextualise this I am an ex-Corel employee who worked supporting their Linux offerings.
Explain Netwinder (that was Corel wasn't it!) and your plans for creating a server version of Corel Linux? Oh yeah, you also provided the core ingredients for an end to end system with your OS. Some hacking was required to get routers and the like out of it (they didn't support dual nics properly). You did however give people a ftpd, httpd, sambad, nfsd, Desktop (plus your Office if you wanted) not much more to do really.
Yep, those calulations were definetly done on the back of an envelope! Good to see those new pen and ink technologies are taking hold.
The Perfect approach? So why were the applications released for all platforms simultaneously (well rpm and deb, no slackware support)? Your distro's distinctive features were KDE on Debian with a "simple" installer and control panel.....how did these have anything to do with a Wine Application?
And that about sums it up, this guy is a fscking idiot (or a spin doctor, but their the same thing aren't they? ask Peter Mandelson). The Open Source concept but better cause the users can't get the source so people can make money of it. Come on, Corel have never and seemingly will never get the idea of Open Source, let alone Free software. While I worked there all their servers ran Solaris and that about says it all for the corporate commitment to Linux.
I think it is a big pity that the Borland merger never happened as maybe then someone might have managed to do something with Corel (Copeland long ago lost his worth to the company, probably as soon as it first turned profit) and judging by what has come since I don't think they are going anywhere. Corel gambling on .NET is pure submission to Microsft and their business model and it leads to failure. If MS succeed with .NET it will be because they price their basic lineup cheaply enough for Joe Schmoe to "rent" it, and that is going to have to be damn cheap to stop people looking elsewhere (how many people do you know who don't pay a penny for software and only run proprietry software). If MS is releasing a range cheaply enough, where is the space for Corel? They get to exploit the same pathetic niche of the people who are willing to look beyond their nose (MS Office and Adobe) AND prefer the Corel way....good luck Guys.
- Coming up with a cheap and re-usable method to go to the International Space Station
- building a space elevator
Seriously, we need to expand and not by simply sending probes. The first step to any advancement beyond the level we reached with the Manned Moon landings was the shuttle program but it was just a miniscule step along the path to riches. It makes far more sense for a miniscule amount of money to be spent on rockets and the vast bulk to be spent on R&D work to come up with a way to lower the dry/wet ratio of a "shuttle", preferably losing the disposable rockets. Then when we can start thinking about housing a few thousand people in space (first station, then craft, then moon, then planet, once the first is broken I cannot imagine the others will take any significant amount of time and that each will fuel and develop the next) we can really start to exploit it (both commercially so the R&D guys can recoup and scientifically/socialogically etc.).Anyone working on the first "non-atmospheric" space craft i.e. one that flys from spacestation to space station?
These damn self-serving corporate money grabbing bastards (and their political exploite[er]s) with their moral imperative to have the most money possible now instead of the best future are just making it harder and harder to dream....sigh
Well a few years ago (like 30 months) I sat around my friends office watching some footage his boss had brought back from the Italian Grand Prix (mainly of womens' behinds). The reason his boss had been there was helping with tests they were doing for camera-selecting....you see his boss worked for DPS (god I loved playing with the Perception RT.....even if it was under the sith :-)
When I worked for Corel (in Ireland on Linux Support, not Canada on code, remember that let's you know the sort of people I could get too and hence how much the following is about personal opinions rather thatn corporate policy, it's just what I think), I tried (in the limited ways that I could) to get them to do just this! I suggested that if they can give away free to use WP8 than surely they can dig back somewhere and give away a Free version (say the first draw+wp versions released for unix). Alas, while a few people thought perhaps, they generally couldn't grasp any benefits to them. As for GPL or even Open Source WP9/10 ... I don't think they had the stomach for that AND I don't think they thought anyone else would have a clue how to work with the code ... I'm not even sure if they knew if they could work with the code. When I heard talk of a re-write of some of the programs I always suggested it again (if anyone who might be worth saying it to and I knew wasn't against the idea was around) because it could offer someone like them the opportunity to ditch being toolkit writers and let them focus on the important stuff.
- tv (guide) (on||off) (channel) (n)
- play (media) (by||like||match||move) (query)
Turning the tv on and off and changing the chanel, all without even having to find a control....throw in the full power of a decent set-top box. I think this is a killer app!e.g. "tv on sky1"
e.g. "play music by britney"
Security bug days open =
The number of days that the OS spends with an open security bug in its release. A company could cheat this by not distributing anything or by pulling effected packages until a fix appears but so what. Think about it, when it comes to security what I want is the system where I am least likely to be sitting vulnerable to a known exploit (the fewer unknown exploits the less likely this is). So in an ideal world you would expect a company to have less than 6 security bugs on a release in a year (the release can include all patches, and even a complete upgrade) and for each of the bugs to be fixed within 24 hours of arrival......my estimate of 32 bugdays for Debian shows how far from my ideals my ideally constructed distribution is (well Debian policy isn't perfect but it's close imho).
I am so dissappointed the book is it home so I can't provide the full quotation(s) but I think the clearest prior art has to be the auto-updating hitch-hickers guide which used a wireless network to broadcast updates to a hand-held/lap-top device. I thought patents were only meant to protect original ideas....oh I forgot this was issued by the US patents department.
How about a sweepstake where everyone has to guess the number of security bug days open in the first year of the first default 2.4 releases of slackware, debian, suse, redhat and mandrake. My guess goes for 40,32,127,1357,220. What's the prize /.?
kde.tdyc.com
In fact 2.1b2 has been there for over 4 days
From the freshly started kde-debian FAQ:
6.-Q: How do I install it...I can't find a package called "kde"?
A: 27 Jan 2001
Go to http://kde.tdyc.com/ find a mirror close to you...throw that apt line in...apt-get install task-kde
if you want 2.1 beta packages you need to add a "beta" to the end of the apt line.
Seems to still miss one ... Sorenson :-( Oh well, can't have it all.
The problem with the entire privacy argument is that both sides have trouble understanding each other AND like many important issues cases are easily conceived that clearly support either side.
To address the particular cases you quote, I would fear for the privacy of the area locals if the police installed CCTV. The aims for using the system would be noble and true, however the poliemen would be prone to spend more time watching the cameras and more time busting people "we know are up to no good" for anything they catch them on camera doing (e.g. loitering because their is nothing to do!). When they see people walking home drunk, wearing a "legalise it"/DeCSS T-Shirt or even just meeting another group of people to exchange something and then walking away they will start to look at them as possible suspects. Their privacy has been invaded although all they have done is A: taken advantage of licensed premises adding plenty to the public coffers; B: Visibly used their right to free expression or C: Seen an old friend and exchanged business cards. When I am out in public I expect to be caught for any crimes I commit which are not victimless and that I still have my fundamental civil liberties e.g. a policeman cannot stop and search me randomly or routinely or even stand there and watch/follow me for an hour randomly or routinely....he needs a reason.
In the case of the Swiss protection for prostitutes, one must only ask what footage will be shown if any VIP walks down that street or talks to someone. If the area is simply a "shopping mall" than I think CCTV is appropriate. However if it is public streets which are used nefariously (or even legally if that's Swiss law) alternative solutions should be found, by whatever means necessary. If not, you better watch out and think carefully about anything you do as it may be shown back and used against you and context is a hard thing to prove!
Ok, to take the easiest example to blow you out of the water...If MS retain the ability to get every manufacturer who wishes to ship any MS software to pay for a windows licence for each processor (and hence 90% of machines+ ship with Whistler) and they track all the world's Whistler's users data and sell it and statistics from it you are going to tell me that good old US competition is going to sort it out? The question is what should be regulated and what should not, and the laws of rhe real world should apply, i.e. this is equivalent to building a tracking device into all Cars and reselling that data and should be regarded as spying or stalking.
If your legal system does not provide any level of defence you must read every single piece of fine print on every site to discover if you agree with their policies or not AND checkup against an external source to find out if they honour them and any history. I'd rather spend my time surfing the net knowing that I have a level of privacy by default (at least on servers/companies who I know are under a suitable legal system).
I wish I could see this thing aswell...but not just the trailer
I wish I could install a sorenson codec from Debian stable (not non-free)...but it's not going to happen
I wish I could go into the cinema to watch this...but it's not going to happen
I wish I could buy or rent a DVD or Video when it is released...but it's not going to happen
In fact I will see this film when:
- I'm in a friends where they are watching it
- One of my local free to air stations shows it
I guess I'll see the trailer before then though just to make it a bit more painful.NO WAY!
Having nearly not noticed when the Royal Rumble was on (as it was not a Sky Sports event they wern't constantly advertising it on their own channels :-) I was sitting in front of the TV half an hour before the show started (01:45) when our entire service went (all channels).....but the service was ok 20 minutes walk away (Dublin 6w)...I waited....I waited....and 20 minutes later I got on my board and did it in about 5 to enjoy the show in plenty of time.
So, can anyone confirm if the time could be a connection, cause I love to freak out the call centres of places like this who don't like to be helpful. I'll just add it to my next call to try and find out where I can find a cable modem service (soon I will be listing addresses from the phone book out to them cause they'll tell you if an address can get it or not, just not where you can get it) and when it'll be where I want it!
I cannot face going through the turgid legal ramblings again to find the links again BUT the simple fact is that the international treaties on patents specifically do not extend the recognition for "methods et al" which would not be patentable in the other nation... So international treaties say the search engines go non-US. Now any particular country could choose to extend their system and recognise the unpatentable patents so you just gotta make sure you don't move there.
And from the amici:
If you look at a map of Europe and a map of the U.S. you cannot argue that America is a fundamentally different geography and hence requires cheap petrol. If your petrol costs were responsible, how many more train stations would be built to ensure that freight was more economical? Again you describe a symptom of the problem and not a cause. Do you really think that Europeans don't have to collect from trains and then transport by truck to get to more remote areas? The fact is though that IF they are going less than 100 miles (your suggested figure) it is because they have built a reasonable rail system as it is more economical!