The fuss is because GNOME is -refusing- to add the button. They're adamant that this is the -right- way to do it, and any user who thinks it's the -wrong- way to do it is -quite- stupid.
Dashes indicate -emphasis-, because that's the -right- way to do it. If they -annoy- you, it's because -you- are -quite- stupid.
Can you see why this approach might warrant.. a -fuss-?
While the spyware types may not particularly give a damn what Google says, a lot of people do. A lot of people look up to Google - a lot of programmers want to work there, and a lot of companies can easily see the success that Google has made for itself by having a good image and a good product.
Google is essentially offering free advice for companies. They're showing what worked for them. Often the CEO of a company will go out and look for information about how people have previously solved the solutions that said CEO is looking to solve in their business plan. It's a 'learn from mistakes and successes' ideal. Right now, spyware is fairly ubiquitous, so is it any surprise that companies start doing it more and more? Whether or not it works, it has a definite presence, and that presence brings it into mind as a company strategy.
Google is bringing their (superior, I think we can all agree) company strategy into view, and saying 'here's something better' for anybody who's willing to listen.
Is it a problem? The initial stated purpose of these 'games' is to have fun. But it seems like a new purpose is evolving; that of -making- fun.
I don't see how purchasing a character in a game is any different than plastic surgery, steroids, drugs, or therapy in the real world. These things are often considered taboo because they're like admitting that you're imperfect, and they often have imperfections and drawbacks. Those factors aren't true in a video game.
Does it disrupt the experience of a "normal" human when you get your hair done up for a hefty sum? Does it disrupt anything when you rent the limo, or buy the clothes, or do any of the other things we normally do with money to improve our status?
The thing about money is that it is value - if people want to use it to bring themselves up to a higher level than you in some area, they will do so. There's nothing wrong with it. They're trading some effort they did for the effort of someone else; it's straight up economics, and it's no different from the real world except that it's not really real.
is a trade agreement. In order for this to happen, the US (or perhaps Japan would be a better place to start) would have to recognize EverQuest, DAoC, SWG, and thelike as actual countries.
Because they -are-, in every sense except that they don't own land. They have citizens, who create valuable products (apparently, since people trade them for real money), make relationships, govern the land, etc. What is lacking in these cyber-countries is a sense of law, to some extent - the crime rate is insane, and governance is a joke. There's simply no way to govern a group of incredibly powerful people. And part of the point of video games is to give you power over the universe you play in.
It's very difficult to reconcile a virtual world with the real one. Should an economic bridge exist at all?.. there's a lot to think about here, and I haven't had my coffee yet.
Re:So, naturalists observe, a flea...
on
A Worm's Worm
·
· Score: 1
Odd...
someone quoted this to me just today while explaining why stochastic processes supposedly do not interrupt determinism.
Re:This is *almost* a wonderful thing
on
A Worm's Worm
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The thing about an infected system is that it's absolutely NO GOOD to anybody except the person who's infected it. So when you infect a machine, you want to make sure it's a CLEAN machine, so that you can use it. There's nothing benevolent about destroying the OTHER invading forces so that you can own the land.
Do you actually work at any of these companies? You'll see that they all have 'personality,' and it's NOT just PR. It's all in the actions of the company. Let's look at this word, 'personality.' How something acts as a person, right? Well, companies are FULL of people, and those people make ALL SORTS of decisions, and they often follow a general set of guidelines while making them.
Microsoft doesn't like open source or linux (although they seem to be getting a little better about the open source part; probably a little scared.) The thing is, if you don't like someone, they often not-like you right back. That's why those of us in the open source community or those of us who spend all our time working specifically on linux (because penguins are just so cool, by geographic definition), don't like Microsoft. (It's also their evil efficiency at pursuing and destroying our "personal" reputation.)
I don't know about you. I don't like Apple. I'm not a graphicy artisty guy. I'm a hard code, massive cluster, text based phreak who likes to have all the universe at his fingertips. Apple has a personality that appeals to certain geeks. They value aesthetics a lot. Probably more than they value money, although who knows the reasons behind their actions - as with any other entity, you can only judge by the actions themselves, not the reasoning, because you don't KNOW the reasoning. Philosophy 101...
IBM? Honestly, I don't know much about these guys. So I don't have much of an opinion. That's pretty simple right? They don't seem to have a personality, so I'll ignore them.
Now why do we like Google? Let's look at their actions: they give us a great search engine with low interference, high signal to noise ratio, and now they're rolling out all sorts of new features that we like. How could you not like a gigabyte of storage? Well, a lot of people are scared of change, and they're trying not to like it, and that's OKAY. If you don't like change, you don't have to like Google. If you like your privacy, you don't have to like Google (although I personally don't care if some anonymous entity is watching me. Actually, it makes me feel kind of wanted. Sure, target your ads. Maybe I'll find something I like. Bet you didn't think of that, did you, Privacy Pundit?)
There is a trend on Slashdot to hate Microsoft, to love the little guy, and to misjustify our emotional reactions to various stimuli. Don't -fight- the trend, just -be yourself-.
I had a rather interesting experience at Microsoft today, yesterday, and tomorrow.
I talked to a Microsoft engineer, and out of curiousity I asked him whether or not he uses Linux, and what he uses it for. This guy works for Microsoft Research - which publishes more white papers regarding algorithms and technology than anybody else. Essentially they're more open source with their ideas than any other community out there. Now this is a specific niche of Microsoft, and I'm not saying that MS in general is like that at all; obviously they're not.
A lot of microsoft's reputation, however, is out of date. In fact, it's downright obsolete these days. MS shares their code with quite a few people. They approach things from a monied perspective, but hell, if they didn't, a lot of us would be out of a job (and of course, not just those at MS.)
The point is, this guy who works at MS research is aware of the advantages of Linux, the advantages of Windows, and uses them accordingly. There's this huge battle being waged in the mind of geeks everywhere; for some reason a lot of us feel that Microsoft needs to -die-.
MS doesn't need to die; why anyone would want that, from a cognitive standpoint, is beyond me. MS does not hinder open source production. Open Source has its niche and it's not going away any more than MS is. Microsoft employees recognize the value of linux. Why don't open source advocates recognize the value of MS products? There's value in both Linux and Windows - understand the values of each, and you'll be far ahead of everybody else. Try to destroy either one, and you'll find it's impossible no matter how far you dedicate yourself.
A motherboard is a unit designed to integrate a CPU with all the things it requires to do its job. It's not fundamentally designed with the idea of fulfilling a function in itself; that's a ridiculous proposition. It's a -mother- board for a reason. Making a BIOS that will handle your media is assinine; it discards all of the benefits of using a real computer (flexibility, easy troubleshooting/repair, modular operation, expandable functionality) and replaces them with a black box, which is totally NOT THE POINT of the PC! If you want a black box, go buy a DVD player. If you want a cool hack, write it yourself. This piece of hardware is never going anywhere.
Study Chinese medicine; you'll find that they recognize the worth of our body's water. Another key ingredient is breath, and energy -- which could be interpreted (because in many ways it follows similar guidelines) as electricity or magnetism.
Before the Roman Empire, the Chinese recognized this particular pattern of the magnificent rise, subsequent jealous infighting, and collapse of political structure. They harnessed it into their political system, reading it as "favor". Perhaps you have heard of the different "Dynasties" of China? Each one is punctuated by a family falling out of power.
China has been on the "crash and burn" track since before the Roman Empire existed. They still are, I suppose.
China Appreciation Moment, please?
But the point is that even though we're on the "crash and burn" track, we don't necessarily have to do it. If people start -listening- to organizations like the ACLU, MoveOn, and the UCS, maybe we will survive. (Or perhaps we will become such a divided nation that we'll have a new civil war; I can only hope.)
1) I run linux [gentoo]. It doesn't have to worry about failures in security through obscurity. If some hacker wants to gain notoriety or money, good luck to them. Remember that most exploits end up failing.
1) Your logic is also incorrect, by the way. For one thing, there really aren't all that many people who're capable of writing an exploit that will compromise windows. For another, if 99% of them report the bugs they find, in all likelihood those 99% will find the same bugs that the 1% finds. The bugs will be fixed, and the 1% will do no damage. There simply aren't enough people for the equation to reach a dangerous level. Now, I'm not saying no exploits will come out - I think your numbers are wrong. Most of the people who go looking for bugs are going to be looking to exploit them, or at least store them away for their own private use at a later date.
2) Cool. Security through obscurity is a bad practice for exactly this reason, and MS is only getting what they deserve.
3) Cool. MS deserves to look bad if they write bad code. MS -has- looked bad for a long time; this is just confirmation of what everyone already know.
Here's some good REAL reasons it might be a bad thing that the MS source was released:
1) Microsoft gets free press and looks like a victim. 2) Open Source gets bad press because of the exploits that come from MS source being visible. 3) Open Source advocates will probably be blamed for the leak. 4) The only people who will know/care about bad MS code are the people who already knew it - the tech elite. 5) MS gets a chance to add people to its 'dangerous' database, if they have one. And I assure you, if they're sending out snailmail to people, those mail addresses are going in a database -somewhere-. 6) The economy will take a hit as people become less sure of their allegiance to Microsoft. Sorry, but it's true; monopolies help the economy to some extent. 7)
Now why's it a good thing that the source was released?
1) This either validates or invalidates claims that Microsoft has stolen code from Open Source locations and violated the GPL. Either way, it resolves that legal battle.
2) The hackers who're really looking to exploit MS source code usually know how to use a decompiler. This release frees up those who're less dedicated to the Black Hat approach, who may fix bugs instead of exploiting them.
3) Reading the code comments is amusing, particularly the fuck/shit/BUGBUG comments.
4) You can now suggest fixes to Microsoft if your computer is not working properly, the same way you can for Open Source. You may not get the same turnaround, but if you supply them with a patch, it'll probably be pretty quick and you'll get on Microsoft's Good Side(TM).
5) Some few companies and end users may become less sure of Microsoft and switch over to Linux. Whether or not this is a good thing right now (personally I'm not sure linux is ready for the desktop) is debatable.
Decide for yourself. But really, those source code comments -ARE- amusing.:)
Hey! You can't use that name! I used "Jprogjorjfwwfffffffwweewer33111l" for a VERY popular novella; a touching tale regaling the woes of Princess Jpprogjorj!
Try to appreciate the art in this. Gaston Julia revelled in repeating patterns. He found them beautiful. The people at this Australian university must love repeating patterns as well. Slashdot is just repeating a pattern. It's art.
I lived in Portland and couldn't find a job anywhere, until I got a job offer from all the way in New York. Portland is filled with incredibly talented programmers, and yet no businesses seem to be catching on. What gives? Portland is ripe for picking, not to mention starving for it. If I had a chance, I'd move back in an instant.
I've noticed a lot of complaining about text selection, click-and-drag, and interference with mouse gestures.
I've got a hint for you.
Use the right mouse button as the gesture indicator. When was the last time you selected text with the right mouse button?
Personally, I love these things. I don't have a fancy keyboard, so my mouse and keyboard aren't integrated. My options are moving the mouse to the 'back' button, gesturing, or moving my hand back to the keyboard.
The fastest solution for some things (forward/back in history, reload page, close window, new window) is a simple gesture. But Javascript? Come on. That's just sick. "Gesture up-left-right to see the boyscouts dance!"... no.
"Farscape, a television show with Alf at the wheel"
While Farscape is a little... odd, it's obviously interesting to the/. community, or it wouldn't be part of the so-called "news" that's published here.
So don't bash it, k? It's just your personal opinion; if you want to make a personal comment about Farscape or anything else, why don't you post a comment to your own story? Powertripping might be fun, but it's rather unprofessional.
Slashdot Mirror
mv direc[tab to complete filename] ..
..
;)
Key presses: 10
ctrl+x alt+left ctrl+v
Key presses: 6
Wow, I guess windows -is- better.
mv *
Key presses: 7
ctrl+a ctrl+x alt+left ctrl+v
Key presses: 8
I guess linux just scales better
The fuss is because GNOME is -refusing- to add the button. They're adamant that this is the -right- way to do it, and any user who thinks it's the -wrong- way to do it is -quite- stupid.
.. a -fuss-?
Dashes indicate -emphasis-, because that's the -right- way to do it. If they -annoy- you, it's because -you- are -quite- stupid.
Can you see why this approach might warrant
While the spyware types may not particularly give a damn what Google says, a lot of people do. A lot of people look up to Google - a lot of programmers want to work there, and a lot of companies can easily see the success that Google has made for itself by having a good image and a good product.
Google is essentially offering free advice for companies. They're showing what worked for them. Often the CEO of a company will go out and look for information about how people have previously solved the solutions that said CEO is looking to solve in their business plan. It's a 'learn from mistakes and successes' ideal. Right now, spyware is fairly ubiquitous, so is it any surprise that companies start doing it more and more? Whether or not it works, it has a definite presence, and that presence brings it into mind as a company strategy.
Google is bringing their (superior, I think we can all agree) company strategy into view, and saying 'here's something better' for anybody who's willing to listen.
--
Mr Google Advocate
Is it a problem? The initial stated purpose of these 'games' is to have fun. But it seems like a new purpose is evolving; that of -making- fun.
I don't see how purchasing a character in a game is any different than plastic surgery, steroids, drugs, or therapy in the real world. These things are often considered taboo because they're like admitting that you're imperfect, and they often have imperfections and drawbacks. Those factors aren't true in a video game.
Does it disrupt the experience of a "normal" human when you get your hair done up for a hefty sum? Does it disrupt anything when you rent the limo, or buy the clothes, or do any of the other things we normally do with money to improve our status?
The thing about money is that it is value - if people want to use it to bring themselves up to a higher level than you in some area, they will do so. There's nothing wrong with it. They're trading some effort they did for the effort of someone else; it's straight up economics, and it's no different from the real world except that it's not really real.
is a trade agreement. In order for this to happen, the US (or perhaps Japan would be a better place to start) would have to recognize EverQuest, DAoC, SWG, and thelike as actual countries.
.. there's a lot to think about here, and I haven't had my coffee yet.
Because they -are-, in every sense except that they don't own land. They have citizens, who create valuable products (apparently, since people trade them for real money), make relationships, govern the land, etc. What is lacking in these cyber-countries is a sense of law, to some extent - the crime rate is insane, and governance is a joke. There's simply no way to govern a group of incredibly powerful people. And part of the point of video games is to give you power over the universe you play in.
It's very difficult to reconcile a virtual world with the real one. Should an economic bridge exist at all?
Odd...
someone quoted this to me just today while explaining why stochastic processes supposedly do not interrupt determinism.
The thing about an infected system is that it's absolutely NO GOOD to anybody except the person who's infected it. So when you infect a machine, you want to make sure it's a CLEAN machine, so that you can use it. There's nothing benevolent about destroying the OTHER invading forces so that you can own the land.
Do you actually work at any of these companies? You'll see that they all have 'personality,' and it's NOT just PR. It's all in the actions of the company. Let's look at this word, 'personality.' How something acts as a person, right? Well, companies are FULL of people, and those people make ALL SORTS of decisions, and they often follow a general set of guidelines while making them.
Microsoft doesn't like open source or linux (although they seem to be getting a little better about the open source part; probably a little scared.) The thing is, if you don't like someone, they often not-like you right back. That's why those of us in the open source community or those of us who spend all our time working specifically on linux (because penguins are just so cool, by geographic definition), don't like Microsoft. (It's also their evil efficiency at pursuing and destroying our "personal" reputation.)
I don't know about you. I don't like Apple. I'm not a graphicy artisty guy. I'm a hard code, massive cluster, text based phreak who likes to have all the universe at his fingertips. Apple has a personality that appeals to certain geeks. They value aesthetics a lot. Probably more than they value money, although who knows the reasons behind their actions - as with any other entity, you can only judge by the actions themselves, not the reasoning, because you don't KNOW the reasoning. Philosophy 101...
IBM? Honestly, I don't know much about these guys. So I don't have much of an opinion. That's pretty simple right? They don't seem to have a personality, so I'll ignore them.
Now why do we like Google? Let's look at their actions: they give us a great search engine with low interference, high signal to noise ratio, and now they're rolling out all sorts of new features that we like. How could you not like a gigabyte of storage? Well, a lot of people are scared of change, and they're trying not to like it, and that's OKAY. If you don't like change, you don't have to like Google. If you like your privacy, you don't have to like Google (although I personally don't care if some anonymous entity is watching me. Actually, it makes me feel kind of wanted. Sure, target your ads. Maybe I'll find something I like. Bet you didn't think of that, did you, Privacy Pundit?)
There is a trend on Slashdot to hate Microsoft, to love the little guy, and to misjustify our emotional reactions to various stimuli. Don't -fight- the trend, just -be yourself-.
Hey, stop the google-hate!
LMAO @ the mods :-)
A collective sense of humor is a good thing!
Contributions by MS:
/
http://research.microsoft.com/research/projects
I had a rather interesting experience at Microsoft today, yesterday, and tomorrow.
I talked to a Microsoft engineer, and out of curiousity I asked him whether or not he uses Linux, and what he uses it for. This guy works for Microsoft Research - which publishes more white papers regarding algorithms and technology than anybody else. Essentially they're more open source with their ideas than any other community out there. Now this is a specific niche of Microsoft, and I'm not saying that MS in general is like that at all; obviously they're not.
A lot of microsoft's reputation, however, is out of date. In fact, it's downright obsolete these days. MS shares their code with quite a few people. They approach things from a monied perspective, but hell, if they didn't, a lot of us would be out of a job (and of course, not just those at MS.)
The point is, this guy who works at MS research is aware of the advantages of Linux, the advantages of Windows, and uses them accordingly. There's this huge battle being waged in the mind of geeks everywhere; for some reason a lot of us feel that Microsoft needs to -die-.
MS doesn't need to die; why anyone would want that, from a cognitive standpoint, is beyond me. MS does not hinder open source production. Open Source has its niche and it's not going away any more than MS is. Microsoft employees recognize the value of linux. Why don't open source advocates recognize the value of MS products? There's value in both Linux and Windows - understand the values of each, and you'll be far ahead of everybody else. Try to destroy either one, and you'll find it's impossible no matter how far you dedicate yourself.
Unfortunately, money is protected a lot more carefully than human lives.
A motherboard is a unit designed to integrate a CPU with all the things it requires to do its job. It's not fundamentally designed with the idea of fulfilling a function in itself; that's a ridiculous proposition. It's a -mother- board for a reason. Making a BIOS that will handle your media is assinine; it discards all of the benefits of using a real computer (flexibility, easy troubleshooting/repair, modular operation, expandable functionality) and replaces them with a black box, which is totally NOT THE POINT of the PC! If you want a black box, go buy a DVD player. If you want a cool hack, write it yourself. This piece of hardware is never going anywhere.
Study Chinese medicine; you'll find that they recognize the worth of our body's water. Another key ingredient is breath, and energy -- which could be interpreted (because in many ways it follows similar guidelines) as electricity or magnetism.
*sigh*
I was joking about all three, dear.
Before the Roman Empire, the Chinese recognized this particular pattern of the magnificent rise, subsequent jealous infighting, and collapse of political structure. They harnessed it into their political system, reading it as "favor". Perhaps you have heard of the different "Dynasties" of China? Each one is punctuated by a family falling out of power.
China has been on the "crash and burn" track since before the Roman Empire existed. They still are, I suppose.
China Appreciation Moment, please?
But the point is that even though we're on the "crash and burn" track, we don't necessarily have to do it. If people start -listening- to organizations like the ACLU, MoveOn, and the UCS, maybe we will survive. (Or perhaps we will become such a divided nation that we'll have a new civil war; I can only hope.)
WHY is this NOT bad?
:)
1) I run linux [gentoo]. It doesn't have to worry about failures in security through obscurity. If some hacker wants to gain notoriety or money, good luck to them. Remember that most exploits end up failing.
1) Your logic is also incorrect, by the way. For one thing, there really aren't all that many people who're capable of writing an exploit that will compromise windows. For another, if 99% of them report the bugs they find, in all likelihood those 99% will find the same bugs that the 1% finds. The bugs will be fixed, and the 1% will do no damage. There simply aren't enough people for the equation to reach a dangerous level. Now, I'm not saying no exploits will come out - I think your numbers are wrong. Most of the people who go looking for bugs are going to be looking to exploit them, or at least store them away for their own private use at a later date.
2) Cool. Security through obscurity is a bad practice for exactly this reason, and MS is only getting what they deserve.
3) Cool. MS deserves to look bad if they write bad code. MS -has- looked bad for a long time; this is just confirmation of what everyone already know.
Here's some good REAL reasons it might be a bad thing that the MS source was released:
1) Microsoft gets free press and looks like a victim.
2) Open Source gets bad press because of the exploits that come from MS source being visible.
3) Open Source advocates will probably be blamed for the leak.
4) The only people who will know/care about bad MS code are the people who already knew it - the tech elite.
5) MS gets a chance to add people to its 'dangerous' database, if they have one. And I assure you, if they're sending out snailmail to people, those mail addresses are going in a database -somewhere-.
6) The economy will take a hit as people become less sure of their allegiance to Microsoft. Sorry, but it's true; monopolies help the economy to some extent.
7)
Now why's it a good thing that the source was released?
1) This either validates or invalidates claims that Microsoft has stolen code from Open Source locations and violated the GPL. Either way, it resolves that legal battle.
2) The hackers who're really looking to exploit MS source code usually know how to use a decompiler. This release frees up those who're less dedicated to the Black Hat approach, who may fix bugs instead of exploiting them.
3) Reading the code comments is amusing, particularly the fuck/shit/BUGBUG comments.
4) You can now suggest fixes to Microsoft if your computer is not working properly, the same way you can for Open Source. You may not get the same turnaround, but if you supply them with a patch, it'll probably be pretty quick and you'll get on Microsoft's Good Side(TM).
5) Some few companies and end users may become less sure of Microsoft and switch over to Linux. Whether or not this is a good thing right now (personally I'm not sure linux is ready for the desktop) is debatable.
Decide for yourself. But really, those source code comments -ARE- amusing.
Hey! You can't use that name! I used "Jprogjorjfwwfffffffwweewer33111l" for a VERY popular novella; a touching tale regaling the woes of Princess Jpprogjorj!
Try to appreciate the art in this.
Gaston Julia revelled in repeating patterns. He found them beautiful.
The people at this Australian university must love repeating patterns as well.
Slashdot is just repeating a pattern. It's art.
I lived in Portland and couldn't find a job anywhere, until I got a job offer from all the way in New York. Portland is filled with incredibly talented programmers, and yet no businesses seem to be catching on. What gives? Portland is ripe for picking, not to mention starving for it. If I had a chance, I'd move back in an instant.
Who cares about trust? There's all sorts of p2p encryption, and they're using it.
I've noticed a lot of complaining about text selection, click-and-drag, and interference with mouse gestures.
... no.
I've got a hint for you.
Use the right mouse button as the gesture indicator. When was the last time you selected text with the right mouse button?
Personally, I love these things. I don't have a fancy keyboard, so my mouse and keyboard aren't integrated. My options are moving the mouse to the 'back' button, gesturing, or moving my hand back to the keyboard.
The fastest solution for some things (forward/back in history, reload page, close window, new window) is a simple gesture. But Javascript? Come on. That's just sick. "Gesture up-left-right to see the boyscouts dance!"
"Farscape, a television show with Alf at the wheel"
... odd, it's obviously interesting to the /. community, or it wouldn't be part of the so-called "news" that's published here.
While Farscape is a little
So don't bash it, k? It's just your personal opinion; if you want to make a personal comment about Farscape or anything else, why don't you post a comment to your own story? Powertripping might be fun, but it's rather unprofessional.
I don't know if google is ready to show this to the world yet, but it's in their labs, and most of you should already know about it anyway.
When MS comes out with a full version of this, I'll consider going to their site. Until then, I'll just read my email for news...
Google is teh r0x0r.