Ok, tell me, where do most Linux users get their software? From binaries downloaded from various freeware sites or from repositories with carefully scanned open-source software and some reputable proprietary software. What browser do most Linux users use, is it the one filled with Active X security flaws?
While it is true some Linux boxes are bots, 99% are not and will not be, why? Because the average Windows user does generally insecure things to their machine (Surfs using IE, downloads untrusted binaries, uses Outlook for e-mail, is root, doesn't have a proper firewall...) while the average Linux user/newbie will usually do some rather secure things, (Firefox for browsing, nearly all software is from repositories, uses Thunderbird or similar for e-mail, isn't root) all of which put them at significantly less risk for becoming a bot. Its not impossible but the risks are FAR far less.
Consumers should pay for a minimum connection speed, and no matter how much bandwidth they use they should still have that and it would be truly unlimited. You want people to use less bandwidth? Offer more low-bandwidth options. Most of the time the people who use the more bandwidth pay more because they have a better connection then those with lower-bandwidth connections.
We had this "bandwidth bill" back in the form of hours on dial up services. It sucked. We need no "bandwidth bills" the ISPs need to either A) improve their network and offer us unlimited service or B) decrease speed in order to offer unlimited service. All "bandwidth bills" are going to make us do is take a huge step backwards in the form of good software. If someone isn't going to pay the $3 for downloading a 700 MB ISO for Ubuntu to try it the software is no longer really "Free" and we go back to the '80s style of paying for crappy software rather then just downloading it.
Since "Pro open source" seems to mean "Can't cost anything, and can't put any restrictions on it other than requiring the code to be open." That is pretty much going to kill almost anything from being pro open source.
No, it just means that the code when you get it has to be open or you can ask for it. Think of Red Hat, RHEL is open source yet they still make money off of it. Open source != freeware, you can make money off of open source as Red Hat and other companies have shown. Had MS not been a monopoly they would have to be much more open then they are now.
Well, to that we can blame the government-funded monopolies that control 75% of all major broadband, but still, geography comes into play when there are just some places that so far can't even get broadband even if someone was willing.
I think the main point in broadband that people just don't get is that the US is huge while many smaller countries are the size of one of the US's states, its is expensive to get broadband.
Patents, although worrisome will go away in the long run, the main points that MS should get is support Linux , some technologies such as Office would be decent Linux apps that people would pay for if either it was a native Linux version or was seamlessly integrated in WINE. MS needs to stop turning a blind eye to Linux if they ever hope to gain respect and marketshare. Competition improves quality and if MS would port over some of its applications (as badly coded as much of them are) the OSS developers would have to make substantial improvements to get them better then MS's product.
Wow, way to combine three typical slashdot dislikes. First, it was the federal government who gave us the DMCA, not Virginia. Second, a lot of the DMCA makes sense (the safe-harbor provisions). I suppose you are talking about the generality of the term 'encryption scheme' so that it applies to ROT-13 and the law against having mechanisms to get around it? Well, even that seems more carelessly written than evil.
While that is true, government is government is government. I was referring to how it was illegal to do some (seemingly) perfectly legal things such as install modchips, break CSS to duplicate DVDs, break DRM on your media... Im not saying that the DMCA is necessarily evil, but it stops innovation nonetheless.
And even if there was a lot of anti-piracy in the class, that 1) seems valid, as pirated software is more likely to have spyware than the non-pirated alternative (exception that proves the rule, P2P clients). 2) Even if it was used to curb piracy, how does that lead to a lack of innovation? I would understand software patents, but... 3) Even if that was a negative consequence, teaching kids good online habits seems to outweigh it. 4) Piracy *is* illegal, and the government *should* su support upholding the law.
Because, soon enough, what starts out as no "piracy" becomes no P2P, becomes no owning your programs, becomes no owning your media (see how this can grow, we are already to where P2P == piracy and MS/DMCA is pushing to no owning programs/media....)
Most kids already know good online habits, everyone knows you shouldn't go with random strangers online. Sure there are some stupid ones that will do whatever a 50 year old man tells them to, but some people don't think that coffee is going to be hot and sue McDonalds, does that really justify a warning label?
The problem though is, it won't be "piracy is illegal and so don't do it" it will be some online predators use pirated versions of Windows which probably is a fact, then it becomes all online predators use pirated Windows, then it becomes pirating Windows == online stalking.
Bottom line, its not what it is today, it is what it could be tomorrow that I am pointing out.
A) Realize that no matter how much you warn them of the "dangers" of the Internet, kids will still get on it
B) Realize that many teenagers will rebel and still get on
C) Realize that by teaching ways that predators will stalk them, they will think they are safe if they don't have those
D) And lastly, realize that this opens up an avenue for propaganda by MS and the *AA to try to squash innovation by spreading FUD with how "pirated" things always has viruses and can lead to identity theft and being stalked!!!One!11!!
Sure it seems like a good idea, but remember the government gave us the DMCA and most likely doesn't know anything about what the 'Net is really like.
But most of Ford's cars today are still doing well. If they made a car that was slow (barely would go 80 MPH) was not fuel-efficient (got like 12 Miles/Gallon) and was expensive (Twice as much as the competition) it would be right for them to extend support for cars that were good. That is just was MS is doing, Vista is slow, not using resources well along with expensive. XP was relatively fast, didn't seem to hog as much RAM and was cheaper.
If Gore was receiving the same intelligence reports that Bush had recived about there being WMDs in Iraq, and 9/11 put together we would still be in Iraq. We might be doing better, we might be doing worse, but with the intelligence reports (which by the way were from the FBI that Clinton had in power) that would later turn out to be faulty, what else would you do?
Republicans, you're getting what you wanted. Hope it works out for you.
Its not just republicans, democrats are guilty too. In fact, I would go as far as to say that conservatives (not necessarily republicans) are the lesser of two evils. I don't see the democrats supporting free software any more then republicans. I don't see democrats striking down draconian laws such as the DMCA. Now they have supported some needed things such as the toning-down of the patriot act because 85% of it wasn't needed 6 months after 9/11. The moment some candidate supports true freedom, and not burning the Constitution (That means, true freedom of speech, and also the right to bear arms) So, before you place this blame on the republicans, look at the democrats, they aren't exactly saints either.
I don't think the purpose of the book was for just a newbie to learn how do everything via the GUI because that is easy. But, if you really want to learn how Ubuntu works I think this book is more geared towards that audience.
From http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Guide-Ubuntu-Linux-R/dp/013236039X considering that Ubuntu 7.10 hasn't been out until October of 2007 and when this was published in December it was only out for 2-3 months, that's still 3 months till Hardy stable comes out. This is just a late review of it.
Well just look at video game copyrights. Its still illegal to download old NES ROMs even though most aren't making money (the old companies, not like Super Mario Bros.)
Well, seeing how both Windows Mobile and CE aren't as well known and would put the EEE as more of an "internet tablet" then a real computer, and how there is no way to get Vista on those things to run well without increasing the price by 100% or more, I don't see any other choice of how MS can get Windows on those things and there is no way MS is going to want to let Linux trample all over the low-end market.
No, It would be like taking monkeys, giving them RPG style intelligence points, and running them via an RNG and see which one can write the book to stay on the best seller list for the longest time.
We have NO free market here in the US. Why? Because now you can practically get a patent for breathing, and copyright doesn't expire till the next geologic age. Gone are the days that you can easily start up a new tech-based company like Apple did without a really good lawyer because of the patent trolls, this along with such laws like the DMCA. We have no free market, we have a somewhat free market, but a "Market of Freedom" you have to be joking.
We could really do with agreed international standards - so that I know that if I am compliant by one set of rules that I can download/read/... then I am OK everywhere.
Haven't you realized by now that 99% of international standards/treaties are simply bad laws that can't be repealed? Internationalization usually means that the US/EU can basically tell whatever country they want to sign this or they might get no imports/exports like Cuba has. Good idea in theory however almost every international treaty/standard has somehow been screwed up with the exception of some standardizing done by the ISO.
The problem is, outside of external HDs most cables are USB only. Think about it, most phones now have a USB port, MP3 players, cameras, even if you wanted to use Firewire unless there is a USB to firewire converter there isn't any way you can really use it.
Yes, in all that is the worst thing, but think of adware/spyware that could also run, while your computer might not become some zombie and it would be easy to just nuke the user and create a new one, it still allows adware and other annoyware to be on there even with Unix style permissions and if Firefox gets more integrated what is to say that your Desktop environment might not be your browser and from there, the implications of what adware could do are then very bad.
No, we should not attempt to foam pad the entire world so the precious little ones don't get hurt, but that doesn't mean we should just toss them out in the woods and let them fend for themselves either. Certain safety regulations are required for the functioning of an advanced society, many of which are created at least in part to keep children safe (school zones, crosswalks, etc).
Most of the things talked about aren't safety. Is the kid going to get hurt if they see something that scares them? Or if they see violence and no way should they ever be exposed to swear words. While some things are for safety this article isn't one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, tell me, where do most Linux users get their software? From binaries downloaded from various freeware sites or from repositories with carefully scanned open-source software and some reputable proprietary software. What browser do most Linux users use, is it the one filled with Active X security flaws?
While it is true some Linux boxes are bots, 99% are not and will not be, why? Because the average Windows user does generally insecure things to their machine (Surfs using IE, downloads untrusted binaries, uses Outlook for e-mail, is root, doesn't have a proper firewall...) while the average Linux user/newbie will usually do some rather secure things, (Firefox for browsing, nearly all software is from repositories, uses Thunderbird or similar for e-mail, isn't root) all of which put them at significantly less risk for becoming a bot. Its not impossible but the risks are FAR far less.
Consumers should pay for a minimum connection speed, and no matter how much bandwidth they use they should still have that and it would be truly unlimited. You want people to use less bandwidth? Offer more low-bandwidth options. Most of the time the people who use the more bandwidth pay more because they have a better connection then those with lower-bandwidth connections.
We had this "bandwidth bill" back in the form of hours on dial up services. It sucked. We need no "bandwidth bills" the ISPs need to either A) improve their network and offer us unlimited service or B) decrease speed in order to offer unlimited service. All "bandwidth bills" are going to make us do is take a huge step backwards in the form of good software. If someone isn't going to pay the $3 for downloading a 700 MB ISO for Ubuntu to try it the software is no longer really "Free" and we go back to the '80s style of paying for crappy software rather then just downloading it.
No, it just means that the code when you get it has to be open or you can ask for it. Think of Red Hat, RHEL is open source yet they still make money off of it. Open source != freeware, you can make money off of open source as Red Hat and other companies have shown. Had MS not been a monopoly they would have to be much more open then they are now.
Well, to that we can blame the government-funded monopolies that control 75% of all major broadband, but still, geography comes into play when there are just some places that so far can't even get broadband even if someone was willing.
I think the main point in broadband that people just don't get is that the US is huge while many smaller countries are the size of one of the US's states, its is expensive to get broadband.
Patents, although worrisome will go away in the long run, the main points that MS should get is support Linux , some technologies such as Office would be decent Linux apps that people would pay for if either it was a native Linux version or was seamlessly integrated in WINE. MS needs to stop turning a blind eye to Linux if they ever hope to gain respect and marketshare. Competition improves quality and if MS would port over some of its applications (as badly coded as much of them are) the OSS developers would have to make substantial improvements to get them better then MS's product.
While that is true, government is government is government. I was referring to how it was illegal to do some (seemingly) perfectly legal things such as install modchips, break CSS to duplicate DVDs, break DRM on your media... Im not saying that the DMCA is necessarily evil, but it stops innovation nonetheless.
And even if there was a lot of anti-piracy in the class, that 1) seems valid, as pirated software is more likely to have spyware than the non-pirated alternative (exception that proves the rule, P2P clients). 2) Even if it was used to curb piracy, how does that lead to a lack of innovation? I would understand software patents, but... 3) Even if that was a negative consequence, teaching kids good online habits seems to outweigh it. 4) Piracy *is* illegal, and the government *should* su support upholding the law.
Because, soon enough, what starts out as no "piracy" becomes no P2P, becomes no owning your programs, becomes no owning your media (see how this can grow, we are already to where P2P == piracy and MS/DMCA is pushing to no owning programs/media....)
Most kids already know good online habits, everyone knows you shouldn't go with random strangers online. Sure there are some stupid ones that will do whatever a 50 year old man tells them to, but some people don't think that coffee is going to be hot and sue McDonalds, does that really justify a warning label?
The problem though is, it won't be "piracy is illegal and so don't do it" it will be some online predators use pirated versions of Windows which probably is a fact, then it becomes all online predators use pirated Windows, then it becomes pirating Windows == online stalking.
Bottom line, its not what it is today, it is what it could be tomorrow that I am pointing out.
Not really....
A) Realize that no matter how much you warn them of the "dangers" of the Internet, kids will still get on it
B) Realize that many teenagers will rebel and still get on
C) Realize that by teaching ways that predators will stalk them, they will think they are safe if they don't have those
D) And lastly, realize that this opens up an avenue for propaganda by MS and the *AA to try to squash innovation by spreading FUD with how "pirated" things always has viruses and can lead to identity theft and being stalked!!!One!11!!
Sure it seems like a good idea, but remember the government gave us the DMCA and most likely doesn't know anything about what the 'Net is really like.
But most of Ford's cars today are still doing well. If they made a car that was slow (barely would go 80 MPH) was not fuel-efficient (got like 12 Miles/Gallon) and was expensive (Twice as much as the competition) it would be right for them to extend support for cars that were good. That is just was MS is doing, Vista is slow, not using resources well along with expensive. XP was relatively fast, didn't seem to hog as much RAM and was cheaper.
If Gore was receiving the same intelligence reports that Bush had recived about there being WMDs in Iraq, and 9/11 put together we would still be in Iraq. We might be doing better, we might be doing worse, but with the intelligence reports (which by the way were from the FBI that Clinton had in power) that would later turn out to be faulty, what else would you do?
Republicans, you're getting what you wanted. Hope it works out for you.
Its not just republicans, democrats are guilty too. In fact, I would go as far as to say that conservatives (not necessarily republicans) are the lesser of two evils. I don't see the democrats supporting free software any more then republicans. I don't see democrats striking down draconian laws such as the DMCA. Now they have supported some needed things such as the toning-down of the patriot act because 85% of it wasn't needed 6 months after 9/11. The moment some candidate supports true freedom, and not burning the Constitution (That means, true freedom of speech, and also the right to bear arms) So, before you place this blame on the republicans, look at the democrats, they aren't exactly saints either.
I don't think the purpose of the book was for just a newbie to learn how do everything via the GUI because that is easy. But, if you really want to learn how Ubuntu works I think this book is more geared towards that audience.
# Paperback: 1200 pages # Publisher: Prentice Hall PTR; 1 Pap/Cdr edition (December 28, 2007)
From http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Guide-Ubuntu-Linux-R/dp/013236039X considering that Ubuntu 7.10 hasn't been out until October of 2007 and when this was published in December it was only out for 2-3 months, that's still 3 months till Hardy stable comes out. This is just a late review of it.
Well just look at video game copyrights. Its still illegal to download old NES ROMs even though most aren't making money (the old companies, not like Super Mario Bros.)
Well, seeing how both Windows Mobile and CE aren't as well known and would put the EEE as more of an "internet tablet" then a real computer, and how there is no way to get Vista on those things to run well without increasing the price by 100% or more, I don't see any other choice of how MS can get Windows on those things and there is no way MS is going to want to let Linux trample all over the low-end market.
AOL users. Enough said.
No, It would be like taking monkeys, giving them RPG style intelligence points, and running them via an RNG and see which one can write the book to stay on the best seller list for the longest time.
We have NO free market here in the US. Why? Because now you can practically get a patent for breathing, and copyright doesn't expire till the next geologic age. Gone are the days that you can easily start up a new tech-based company like Apple did without a really good lawyer because of the patent trolls, this along with such laws like the DMCA. We have no free market, we have a somewhat free market, but a "Market of Freedom" you have to be joking.
Haven't you realized by now that 99% of international standards/treaties are simply bad laws that can't be repealed? Internationalization usually means that the US/EU can basically tell whatever country they want to sign this or they might get no imports/exports like Cuba has. Good idea in theory however almost every international treaty/standard has somehow been screwed up with the exception of some standardizing done by the ISO.
Or acquire others more legitimately via http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page .
The problem is, outside of external HDs most cables are USB only. Think about it, most phones now have a USB port, MP3 players, cameras, even if you wanted to use Firewire unless there is a USB to firewire converter there isn't any way you can really use it.
Hmmm... I have never though of it that way. That was a truly, insightful post. If I had mod points I would mod this post up.
Yes, in all that is the worst thing, but think of adware/spyware that could also run, while your computer might not become some zombie and it would be easy to just nuke the user and create a new one, it still allows adware and other annoyware to be on there even with Unix style permissions and if Firefox gets more integrated what is to say that your Desktop environment might not be your browser and from there, the implications of what adware could do are then very bad.
Most of the things talked about aren't safety. Is the kid going to get hurt if they see something that scares them? Or if they see violence and no way should they ever be exposed to swear words. While some things are for safety this article isn't one of them.