I totally agree with you; however ESR does not work for Apple Computers. ESR implies that Apple is "a doomed cause", and that Linux accomplished in three years what the Mac platform failed to acheive in five -- that is to find a counter to Microsoft Windows.
This is not self-criticism (it would be if Raymond was critisizing Linux or Open Source), this is pissing on Apple's head so that people with notice Linux or the particular advocate who made the statement.
Can someone please explain to me when we all turned away from Linux Advocacy, in which the strengths/benefits of Linux are placed above marketing and mudslinging?
First we have Miguel proclaiming that Unix Sucks and has been built incorrectly from the ground up, after that came the latest KDE vs. GNOME war, and now we have ESR (does *anyone* remember the last time he even bothered to take part in a discussion around here?) claiming that the Mac is doomed?
Excuse me for picking nits here, but ever time someone says Mozilla is "too little too late" they're creamed with the ClueHammer(tm). What about OS X? I've never bought a Mac in my life, but everything that Apple seems to have accomplished looks really exciting to me. Even if I wasn't impressed by their merging of a slick GUI on top of a BSD base, I wouldn't go around shitting on their heads. Can somebody point ot me where it says that Apple's chief purpose is to attack Microsoft? I thought they were about creating great computer systems. Hell, I used to think that Linux was about the same thing. What happened?
I won't attempt to guess at anyone's motives in all this, but it seems that too much pride is beginning to overtake the "heads" of our little community. Enough of the pot-shots at Windows (it's too easy), enough attacking Unix (we still have a lot of ground to cover before we're on the same level as all of the other 'nixes), and let the Apple guys do their own thing.
>>across AOL's servers - which gives them the legal right to read my message
>I'm not so sure about this. I know that a good sysadmin will never read people's email. I don't know if this is the law, or just ethics.
Generally speaking, yes you're right - a good sysadmin would never read people's mail. However, that means that if I'm going to use IM based on that assumption, I have to trust that all of AOL's sysadmins are trustworthy.
One could even argue that there is such a constant inundation of information passing through their servers that it's unlikely that anyone would ever pick out my messages.
However, when you really think about it, all that's going through is text, which compresses easily and isn't hard to store...
Which leads me to my final point, which is that if IM messages *are* logged by the servers, then your conversations can be requested by federal authorities for the purposes of crime investigation (refer to the Microsoft trial if necessary). I'd prefer to keep my converstations going through my own servers, thank you very much.
Wow, this is fantastic news. Way to be on the cutting edge, AOL. Sorry, but this release doesn't even warrant a copy of our home game.
If you're not impressed, then why are you posting this?
Oh right, I get it, you're trying to beat all of the "this is slashdot, not freshmeat!" crowd to the punch, right?!? (Moderators: Just kidding!)
Seriously though, if AOL is finally getting around to writing their own "official" client for Linux, then that's more Linux software out there, which is good in my book.
Personally, I won't even be using GAIM; I'll be using Jabber since I don't like the idea of *every* message I write being sent not only plaintext, but across AOL's servers - which gives them the legal right to read my message!
Jabber supports SSL connections (at least on the server side, I haven't seen a client that supports it yet), so at some point I'll even be able to have my conversations encrypted! (Of course, I could just ssh into my friend's box and use talk locally...)
A couple of years ago I was doing something similar with Quake 2 - Before MultiHead was available for Windows/XFree86 (Yes, I know there's been multihead for commercial X-Servers for years, but that's not the point)
What you do is connect two separate Quake 2 Clients to the same server. You play normally with one of them, and act as a spectator with the second. I would spectate myself, 3rd-person perspective (on the CTF Servers that would support it), and zoom out and up, so that I'd be looking down at my own charater. It was a great way to see anyone that might be creeping up on me from behind, and watching myself get fragged was usually pretty cool too.
With a third client you could stick with 1st person perspective, and simply "zoom" in as much as possible -- creating a sort of permanent sniper view.
Note that this works far better on "local" games than it does for internet games. The way that I got around this was to use Microsoft Proxy (at the time I was running NT, nowadays I'd just use a linux IP/Masq box) on my main game station, and then hook up the client(s) through a second adapter. That way, your main machine will get all of the packets that it can handle, and the leftover bandwidth would get sent to the client machines. This probably works better with MS Proxy simply because Linux IP/Masq will split up the connection so much better than MS Proxy. Even if your "client" machines are getting 10 fps or less, you don't really need realtime updates to your "rearview mirror" -- it's not like you can look at it all the time anyway.
Making less releases would put us behind all the others (just imagine the slashdot announcement "SomeDistro 10.3 released, has Kernel 2.4.1 and KDE 2.0, while Red Hat is still at Kernel 2.0.38 and KDE 1.0" - nobody (except for some Red Hat haters, maybe) would like that!) - at the pace of development in inux, 6 months can be a major change...
Uhm, actually, as a Debian user, I'm pretty much used to this situation.
Except of course that we don't even have KDE 1.x yet... (c:
Anyone else betting that Kevin Mitnick, seeing as how he's permitted to lecture on hacking/cracking is going to be a "surprise" guest at Hope2k, the 2600-sponsored "hacker" convention this weekend in New York?
The only possible advantages I see in online documentation:
It has the potential to pull fresh, updated content from a remote location.
You can do full-text searches.
You can embed video, audio, 3D worlds, whatever into it.
While I agree with many of yours points as to why books are better in general than digital documents, I can think of a few more situations in which I prefer to have the digital copy around:
No only can you do full-text searches as you've said, but you can hyperlink digital documents, which can make looking something up in an index considerably faster and easier; you can simply spawn a new browser with your index still where you left it, and if it's not what you were looking for, close the new browser and spawn the next item in the index.
Digital documents can be distributed. I have many O'Reilly, and quite a few of the CD Resource kits for the same books. I have a copy of the cd mounted on a personal (pw protected) web server, so that I can search them whenever I need to, whether that be at home, work, or at a friend's place. I can also bookmark sections of the book and bring those bookmarks around with me.
Creating copies of digital documents doesn't require nearly as many resources as copying books, particularly of the dead-tree variety.
Monitor screens don't roll up on you, and don't have to be folded or pinned down in order to keep them open. Sometimes when eating a meal alone, I like to read. It's a pain in the ass when reading a novel on a table top to find a way to keep it open, turn pages, etc. while eating.
Reading off a CRT/LCD leaves your hands free. An example would be preparing a meal. I don't want to have to turn the page of a cookbook after my hands have been touching raw meat. I usually hit the page-down key with an elbow or something if I really have to, or if I'm a little slicker, I can have some simple voice-recognition software take care of it for me.
Text-to-Speech synthesizers can read a book to you. I don't have to buy audio-versions of books if I have the digital format. I can simply cat the book into a t2s program, and have it read to me on the train. What would be even better would be to have software that displays the actual text being read, with each sentence highlighted as the computer reads it.
And finally, at the bottom of an article I read in a magazine, I'm not likely to see reader's comments offering an alternative point of view. Digital magazines (or slashdot for that matter!) offer much better alternatives to static content.
I'd be perfectly happy if manuals for most apps were in digital form only, but when it comes to games, the printed manual is much preferred. This is mainly because when I'm playing a game, it's rather difficult to switch to a text editor to read up on how to do something, and then switch back to the game. Much easier to just keep the manual in my lap.
What I'd really love to see is the manuals for games stored on the game CD in text, html, and pdf formats (just not.doc, thank you), with the printed versions of the manual sold separately. Ideally the reduction in manufacturing costs would be passed onto the consumer (yeah, right!).
The obvious problem with this of course would be that game pirates could get the game for free, and pay for the actual documentation (if the digital versions weren't sufficient), and there would suddenly be one less reason to actually pay $50 for a game. Perhaps if the manuals were only purchasable from the manufacturer directly, and you had to provide a UPC number or OEM code.
But in the end, no matter *what* the systems were programmed to do, that'll be, for the forseeable future, all they're going to do--what some *human* has programmed them to do. Tank or Pokemon, it's made by us.
And here is the fundamental problem that the "fear monger-ers" are pushing. Who is "us"? The Slashdot community? The United States? The UN? Ignoring behavioral evolution/adaptation beyond any original programming, these systems will in fact be programmed by someone who is pursuing their own ends - including people who aren't necessarily interested in the betterment of mankind.
Every couple of days on the local news, you're bound to hear some story meant to frighten/shock the viewing audience, about some individual who snapped, killed their family, and then killed themselves. It's unfortunate, but it happens. Nanotechnology might be out of the hands of humankind for the moment, but it's coming. Someday, the power of nanotech will reach the hands of the common man. What happens when the first person who snaps decides to take out the rest of humanity with them? If you understand the "grey goo" principle, this is entirely within the realm of possibility.
Personally, I feel that the greatest threat to life as we know it will be biological viruses/warfare being developed by rouge organizations. Information, knowledge, and technology are not bad things in an of themselves, but ultimately it comes down to what the individual decides to do with them together.
More than ever, technology is bringing us closer to one another, but at the same time, it permits more individuals to have the power to end it all at any moment.
I dont' like to think about the negative side and possible effects of the advancement of technology, but I believe that responsibility requires it from time to time. Yes, you are correct, machine do not have human intentions, but they can carry out the intensions of the human that programmed them, whether those intentions be good ones or bad ones.
Call me crazy, but I believe that we should look towards building off-planet habitations, not merely for the furtherment of science, but to ensure that the human race would have the capacity to survive any cataclysmic (intended or accidental) event that might occur.
Is it just me (with my mininal familiarity with databases) or did anyone else keep getting hung up in this article's reference to ACID testing?
The OpenACS project refuses to break with the important principles of the ACID test.
I mean, I hear Acid test, I think of the Electric Kool-Aid variety. What I end up with is this image of a bunch of hackers all flipped outta their gorges, with a couple of guys from OpenACS just shaking their head that the MySQL guys can't handle the overstimulation...
As someone whose writing talent and sense of humor many of us in the Slashdot community have come to admire and respect, could you explain to us your stance on some of the current issues regarding distributing copyrighted material over the internet?
For instance, the original BBC recordings of The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy have made frequent appearances on various pirate music sites, and they show up frequently in searches on Napster. What are your feelings on this sort of thing? Also, although I'm not aware of it happening currently, how do you think you might react to discovering that some of your various novels were being traded online?
Finally, many of us feel that the issue revolves around one of availability - for instance, if I knew that I could purchase digital recordings of the original HGTTG broadcast over the internet, I would be happy to do so, but as far as I am aware, such a distribution scheme is not currently available. Do you think that this is merely a cut-and-dry issue of intellectual property theft, or do you feel that issues such as these point out that maybe it is time for the publishing industries of these various forms of media need to redefine the way they do business?
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the OSS racing track. Let's look at today's lineup:
1) Linux 2.4 2) Debian 2.2 (potato) 3) Mozilla 1.0 4) XFree86 4.0 (The real version) 5) The multi-headed XFS/Reiserfs/ext3 beast 6) KDE 2.0 7) Evolution (The upcoming GNOME email app) 8) (insert your favorite software-under-development here)
Anyone willing to make a few bets as to which one we're going to see first? Hmmm, maybe this would make for a descent poll... (c:
According to the BBC Synopsis, "one of cosmology's greatest questions by revealing that the Universe is 'flat'." Does this mean that if one flies in a spaceship far enough, they can "fall" off the end of the universe? Should we send a "Columbus" probe out to find out? (c:
Could someone please take a moment to clarify the major differences between the GPL and the MPL/NPL licenses under which Mozilla is released? The article states "The modifications we made to the source code are publicly available, in accordance with the terms of the Netscape Public License 1.1." which leads me to understand that they must be pretty close, and the MPL passes the Debian Free Software Guidelines but I'm curious as to what the exact differences might be.
Afterall, if they're so close, why didn't Netscape just go with the GPL?
That doesn't mean that I think the RIAA are the good guys here. They're not. They have consistently opposed reasonable, fair use of music that I bought and have a right to do with what I want. But Napster is not reasonable or fair. They have a legitimate point, and I hope they stick it to Napster and stick it good.
You obviously are not aware of the greater issues at stake here. In your arguement, you appear to believe that both the RIAA are "not the good guys" and that Napster users are theives, to say nothing of your opinion of the company itself. You begin by saying:
Napster is a tool that is used exclusively to steal from legitimate artists.
The important point is that stealing from legitimate artists is not the only use of Napster. Napster is merely a program that uses a database and protocol to allow individuals to share files across the internet. It happens to be designed for the sharing of a particular file format, but as witnessed by the "Wrapster" hack, the files you share need not be exclusively music files. You can't hold the Napster company responsible for the actions of it's users, no matter how large of a percent of those users are using the software for illegitimate purposes. To do so would be to take away a freedom from any current legitimate users, as well as any potential future users. Period.
I hope Joe's estimate is conservative on getting CDs shipping with point-four; usually it seems like the distro houses are pretty swift to incorporate.
I find this has everything to do with the particular distribution's target audience.
For instance, with Mandrake you see shipments of not only the latest stable kernel, but pratically all of the available patches towards the next stable release already applied. Who is Mandrake's target audience? Desktop users - or at least the Desktop/Workstation sector is where you'll find many of the Mandrake installations. Mandrake is known for it's ease-of-use and execellent default window manager settings. I would predict that many of the desktop/gamer/cutting edge-targetted distributions will be shipping with 2.4 shortly after it becomes available.
The more corporate-oriented distributions will quite likely wait until 2.4 has had a chance to stabelize a bit longer, especially the distributions targetted at servers - Redhat for instance, and probably Caldera and Corel as well.
I further predict that the distributions that aren't shipping with 2.4 running by default will at least include a 2.4-compiled kernel available for install at some point during the installation process - not only so that they are not perceived as "behind the pack" but also to get some feedback from their userbase as to where problems have cropped up.
Also bear in mind that XFree 4.0 was released recently, and at this point can't be considered fully stable/complete since many video card drivers have not been released yet, and there has not be enough time to throughly test it. Many distributions will wait for their next point-oh release until after 2.4 and XFree 4.0 have stabilized somewhat
And of course, some distributions like -ahem- Debian will simply wait until the next stable kernel is just around the corner before a release in say... q1 2001 (c:
Ouch! Bruce... put down that stick! I was just kidding... ouch!
I think that in the near future programs such as this are going to bring about a new feature to the Linux landscape: Linux Warez.
Linux Ware are already beginning to crop up slowly but surely. Run a quick search on "VMWare" and "serialz" in google, and you probably won't have much trouble finding registered license generators for VMWare. Whenever a program, such as this software DVD player, is found to be useful, closed source, and there is no comparable "free" alternative (beer or speech, doesn't matter), two things will begin to occur: the "right" open source approach, with rampant piracy in the interim. The "right" approach of course will be for a few dedicated hackers to go about replacing the software by writing a free (as in speech) version (such as plex86 replacing VMWare). However, until a free version becomes available, I would expect to see a great deal of pirating of the proprietary software.
This may not seem like a major issue to the legitimate-use-only hacker community, but what happens when we begin to see more software that cannot, often for legal reasons be replaced by "open" alternatives? DeCSS was never able to be developed into a full-fledged Open Source player (at least not so far) due to legal action by the MPAA, but that's only part of the picture. Many people in the community are pushing to have as many computer games as possible ported to linux. Most computer games can not be replaced by OSS versions, even if the game engines could be replaced by OSS, the actual art and music is still held in copyright.
I'm not attempting to say that programs such as LinDVD or video games should be boycotted, nor am I suggesting that they are even bad for the community. What I am suggesting is that the face of the linux scene is bound to change in the coming years as more users are drawn into the linux fold. Many of these new users will not give a second thought to pirating copies of their favorite "appz" and "gamez" because outside of the corporate arena, this is the norm for many individuals. The GPL does not require that one subscribes to the notion of free software in order for a user to be permitted access to GPL'd software (an how interesting things would be if it did!), and I think that it's important for the current community to realize that it may not be a very long time before geocities and angelfire are populated by sites with porn banners and links to the latest 'leet linux warez...
Re:Only the paranoid survive...
on
Intel Roadmap
·
· Score: 2
Intel make great chips. There, I said it. They also have a history of making good decisions.
Unfortunately, much like your first sentence, they also have a history of trying to get things out too quickly, and end up with buggy results (eg. logic errors, arithmatic errors, etc.)... (c:
I had a laptop stoling a couple years ago and was just wondering what typically happens to them?
I've always assumed that they end up being bought and sold on the internet's own black market... you know... EBay.
I'm only half-joking. Think about it, you have an open market where people all over the world can legally bid on your merchandise, and no effort is ever made to verify that the product being sold is not stolen (though there is some insurance the the product actually exists). Once someone buys it from you it becomes a legal item again, as that person has their "reciept" from the EBay auction...
String ShamelessSelfPromotion=" Anyone interesting in creating their own Zork/Myst style games (read "interactive fiction") using a simple, straight-forward, GPL'd engine that can played via any java-enabled browser might want to check out The COG Engine. The first beta was released this past weekend, and we're looking for more developers over at the SourceForge site right now.";
Gee... just think what could have happened if the nutty little gamers behind the Columbine atrocity had gotten their hands on some *serious* weapontry.
Seems to me that it's the big boys in office playing their video games that might be the *real* threat in the years to come...
Slashdot Mirror
I totally agree with you; however ESR does not work for Apple Computers. ESR implies that Apple is "a doomed cause", and that Linux accomplished in three years what the Mac platform failed to acheive in five -- that is to find a counter to Microsoft Windows.
This is not self-criticism (it would be if Raymond was critisizing Linux or Open Source), this is pissing on Apple's head so that people with notice Linux or the particular advocate who made the statement.
--Cycon
First we have Miguel proclaiming that Unix Sucks and has been built incorrectly from the ground up, after that came the latest KDE vs. GNOME war, and now we have ESR (does *anyone* remember the last time he even bothered to take part in a discussion around here?) claiming that the Mac is doomed?
Excuse me for picking nits here, but ever time someone says Mozilla is "too little too late" they're creamed with the ClueHammer(tm). What about OS X? I've never bought a Mac in my life, but everything that Apple seems to have accomplished looks really exciting to me. Even if I wasn't impressed by their merging of a slick GUI on top of a BSD base, I wouldn't go around shitting on their heads. Can somebody point ot me where it says that Apple's chief purpose is to attack Microsoft? I thought they were about creating great computer systems. Hell, I used to think that Linux was about the same thing. What happened?
I won't attempt to guess at anyone's motives in all this, but it seems that too much pride is beginning to overtake the "heads" of our little community. Enough of the pot-shots at Windows (it's too easy), enough attacking Unix (we still have a lot of ground to cover before we're on the same level as all of the other 'nixes), and let the Apple guys do their own thing.
This article is nothing but verbal wanking.
--Cycon
--Cycon
>I'm not so sure about this. I know that a good sysadmin will never read people's email. I don't know if this is the law, or just ethics.
Generally speaking, yes you're right - a good sysadmin would never read people's mail. However, that means that if I'm going to use IM based on that assumption, I have to trust that all of AOL's sysadmins are trustworthy.
One could even argue that there is such a constant inundation of information passing through their servers that it's unlikely that anyone would ever pick out my messages. However, when you really think about it, all that's going through is text, which compresses easily and isn't hard to store...
Which leads me to my final point, which is that if IM messages *are* logged by the servers, then your conversations can be requested by federal authorities for the purposes of crime investigation (refer to the Microsoft trial if necessary). I'd prefer to keep my converstations going through my own servers, thank you very much.
--Cycon
If you're not impressed, then why are you posting this?
Oh right, I get it, you're trying to beat all of the "this is slashdot, not freshmeat!" crowd to the punch, right?!? (Moderators: Just kidding!)
Seriously though, if AOL is finally getting around to writing their own "official" client for Linux, then that's more Linux software out there, which is good in my book.
Personally, I won't even be using GAIM; I'll be using Jabber since I don't like the idea of *every* message I write being sent not only plaintext, but across AOL's servers - which gives them the legal right to read my message!
Jabber supports SSL connections (at least on the server side, I haven't seen a client that supports it yet), so at some point I'll even be able to have my conversations encrypted! (Of course, I could just ssh into my friend's box and use talk locally...)
--Cycon
What you do is connect two separate Quake 2 Clients to the same server. You play normally with one of them, and act as a spectator with the second. I would spectate myself, 3rd-person perspective (on the CTF Servers that would support it), and zoom out and up, so that I'd be looking down at my own charater. It was a great way to see anyone that might be creeping up on me from behind, and watching myself get fragged was usually pretty cool too.
With a third client you could stick with 1st person perspective, and simply "zoom" in as much as possible -- creating a sort of permanent sniper view.
Note that this works far better on "local" games than it does for internet games. The way that I got around this was to use Microsoft Proxy (at the time I was running NT, nowadays I'd just use a linux IP/Masq box) on my main game station, and then hook up the client(s) through a second adapter. That way, your main machine will get all of the packets that it can handle, and the leftover bandwidth would get sent to the client machines. This probably works better with MS Proxy simply because Linux IP/Masq will split up the connection so much better than MS Proxy. Even if your "client" machines are getting 10 fps or less, you don't really need realtime updates to your "rearview mirror" -- it's not like you can look at it all the time anyway.
--Cycon
Uhm, actually, as a Debian user, I'm pretty much used to this situation.
Except of course that we don't even have KDE 1.x yet... (c:
(of course, I still *use* Debian...)p.--Cycon
I know I'll be expecting to see him there...
--Cycon
While I agree with many of yours points as to why books are better in general than digital documents, I can think of a few more situations in which I prefer to have the digital copy around:
--Cycon
What I'd really love to see is the manuals for games stored on the game CD in text, html, and pdf formats (just not .doc, thank you), with the printed versions of the manual sold separately. Ideally the reduction in manufacturing costs would be passed onto the consumer (yeah, right!).
The obvious problem with this of course would be that game pirates could get the game for free, and pay for the actual documentation (if the digital versions weren't sufficient), and there would suddenly be one less reason to actually pay $50 for a game. Perhaps if the manuals were only purchasable from the manufacturer directly, and you had to provide a UPC number or OEM code.
--Cycon
And here is the fundamental problem that the "fear monger-ers" are pushing. Who is "us"? The Slashdot community? The United States? The UN? Ignoring behavioral evolution/adaptation beyond any original programming, these systems will in fact be programmed by someone who is pursuing their own ends - including people who aren't necessarily interested in the betterment of mankind.
Every couple of days on the local news, you're bound to hear some story meant to frighten/shock the viewing audience, about some individual who snapped, killed their family, and then killed themselves. It's unfortunate, but it happens. Nanotechnology might be out of the hands of humankind for the moment, but it's coming. Someday, the power of nanotech will reach the hands of the common man. What happens when the first person who snaps decides to take out the rest of humanity with them? If you understand the "grey goo" principle, this is entirely within the realm of possibility.
Personally, I feel that the greatest threat to life as we know it will be biological viruses/warfare being developed by rouge organizations. Information, knowledge, and technology are not bad things in an of themselves, but ultimately it comes down to what the individual decides to do with them together.
More than ever, technology is bringing us closer to one another, but at the same time, it permits more individuals to have the power to end it all at any moment.
I dont' like to think about the negative side and possible effects of the advancement of technology, but I believe that responsibility requires it from time to time. Yes, you are correct, machine do not have human intentions, but they can carry out the intensions of the human that programmed them, whether those intentions be good ones or bad ones.
Call me crazy, but I believe that we should look towards building off-planet habitations, not merely for the furtherment of science, but to ensure that the human race would have the capacity to survive any cataclysmic (intended or accidental) event that might occur.
--Cycon
It's quite obviously the bone thrown up into space at the beginning of 2001!
The OpenACS project refuses to break with the important principles of the ACID test.
I mean, I hear Acid test, I think of the Electric Kool-Aid variety. What I end up with is this image of a bunch of hackers all flipped outta their gorges, with a couple of guys from OpenACS just shaking their head that the MySQL guys can't handle the overstimulation...
(c:
For instance, the original BBC recordings of The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy have made frequent appearances on various pirate music sites, and they show up frequently in searches on Napster. What are your feelings on this sort of thing? Also, although I'm not aware of it happening currently, how do you think you might react to discovering that some of your various novels were being traded online?
Finally, many of us feel that the issue revolves around one of availability - for instance, if I knew that I could purchase digital recordings of the original HGTTG broadcast over the internet, I would be happy to do so, but as far as I am aware, such a distribution scheme is not currently available. Do you think that this is merely a cut-and-dry issue of intellectual property theft, or do you feel that issues such as these point out that maybe it is time for the publishing industries of these various forms of media need to redefine the way they do business?
Thanks again for your time.
1) Linux 2.4
2) Debian 2.2 (potato)
3) Mozilla 1.0
4) XFree86 4.0 (The real version)
5) The multi-headed XFS/Reiserfs/ext3 beast
6) KDE 2.0
7) Evolution (The upcoming GNOME email app)
8) (insert your favorite software-under-development here)
Anyone willing to make a few bets as to which one we're going to see first? Hmmm, maybe this would make for a descent poll... (c:
--Cycon
According to the BBC Synopsis, "one of cosmology's greatest questions by revealing that the Universe is 'flat'." Does this mean that if one flies in a spaceship far enough, they can "fall" off the end of the universe? Should we send a "Columbus" probe out to find out? (c:
Afterall, if they're so close, why didn't Netscape just go with the GPL?
--Cycon
You obviously are not aware of the greater issues at stake here. In your arguement, you appear to believe that both the RIAA are "not the good guys" and that Napster users are theives, to say nothing of your opinion of the company itself. You begin by saying:
Napster is a tool that is used exclusively to steal from legitimate artists.
The important point is that stealing from legitimate artists is not the only use of Napster. Napster is merely a program that uses a database and protocol to allow individuals to share files across the internet. It happens to be designed for the sharing of a particular file format, but as witnessed by the "Wrapster" hack, the files you share need not be exclusively music files. You can't hold the Napster company responsible for the actions of it's users, no matter how large of a percent of those users are using the software for illegitimate purposes. To do so would be to take away a freedom from any current legitimate users, as well as any potential future users. Period.
I find this has everything to do with the particular distribution's target audience.
For instance, with Mandrake you see shipments of not only the latest stable kernel, but pratically all of the available patches towards the next stable release already applied. Who is Mandrake's target audience? Desktop users - or at least the Desktop/Workstation sector is where you'll find many of the Mandrake installations. Mandrake is known for it's ease-of-use and execellent default window manager settings. I would predict that many of the desktop/gamer/cutting edge-targetted distributions will be shipping with 2.4 shortly after it becomes available.
The more corporate-oriented distributions will quite likely wait until 2.4 has had a chance to stabelize a bit longer, especially the distributions targetted at servers - Redhat for instance, and probably Caldera and Corel as well.
I further predict that the distributions that aren't shipping with 2.4 running by default will at least include a 2.4-compiled kernel available for install at some point during the installation process - not only so that they are not perceived as "behind the pack" but also to get some feedback from their userbase as to where problems have cropped up.
Also bear in mind that XFree 4.0 was released recently, and at this point can't be considered fully stable/complete since many video card drivers have not been released yet, and there has not be enough time to throughly test it. Many distributions will wait for their next point-oh release until after 2.4 and XFree 4.0 have stabilized somewhat
And of course, some distributions like -ahem- Debian will simply wait until the next stable kernel is just around the corner before a release in say... q1 2001 (c:
Ouch! Bruce... put down that stick! I was just kidding... ouch!
-Cycon
Linux Ware are already beginning to crop up slowly but surely. Run a quick search on "VMWare" and "serialz" in google, and you probably won't have much trouble finding registered license generators for VMWare. Whenever a program, such as this software DVD player, is found to be useful, closed source, and there is no comparable "free" alternative (beer or speech, doesn't matter), two things will begin to occur: the "right" open source approach, with rampant piracy in the interim. The "right" approach of course will be for a few dedicated hackers to go about replacing the software by writing a free (as in speech) version (such as plex86 replacing VMWare). However, until a free version becomes available, I would expect to see a great deal of pirating of the proprietary software.
This may not seem like a major issue to the legitimate-use-only hacker community, but what happens when we begin to see more software that cannot, often for legal reasons be replaced by "open" alternatives? DeCSS was never able to be developed into a full-fledged Open Source player (at least not so far) due to legal action by the MPAA, but that's only part of the picture. Many people in the community are pushing to have as many computer games as possible ported to linux. Most computer games can not be replaced by OSS versions, even if the game engines could be replaced by OSS, the actual art and music is still held in copyright.
I'm not attempting to say that programs such as LinDVD or video games should be boycotted, nor am I suggesting that they are even bad for the community. What I am suggesting is that the face of the linux scene is bound to change in the coming years as more users are drawn into the linux fold. Many of these new users will not give a second thought to pirating copies of their favorite "appz" and "gamez" because outside of the corporate arena, this is the norm for many individuals. The GPL does not require that one subscribes to the notion of free software in order for a user to be permitted access to GPL'd software (an how interesting things would be if it did!), and I think that it's important for the current community to realize that it may not be a very long time before geocities and angelfire are populated by sites with porn banners and links to the latest 'leet linux warez...
Unfortunately, much like your first sentence, they also have a history of trying to get things out too quickly, and end up with buggy results (eg. logic errors, arithmatic errors, etc.)... (c:
I've always assumed that they end up being bought and sold on the internet's own black market... you know... EBay.
I'm only half-joking. Think about it, you have an open market where people all over the world can legally bid on your merchandise, and no effort is ever made to verify that the product being sold is not stolen (though there is some insurance the the product actually exists). Once someone buys it from you it becomes a legal item again, as that person has their "reciept" from the EBay auction...
Well you know what they say...
"Five a day for better health"
Anyone interesting in creating their own Zork/Myst style games (read "interactive fiction") using a simple, straight-forward, GPL'd engine that can played via any java-enabled browser might want to check out The COG Engine. The first beta was released this past weekend, and we're looking for more developers over at the SourceForge site right now.";
System.out.println(ShameLessSelfPromotion);
Gee... just think what could have happened if the nutty little gamers behind the Columbine atrocity had gotten their hands on some *serious* weapontry.
Seems to me that it's the big boys in office playing their video games that might be the *real* threat in the years to come...