they once showed clips of a movie where a guy is pissing through a hole in a fence, and there's a dude sleeping on the other side, who promptly rips the dick off the pissing guy, and then he plays keep-away with a bunch of other people, and they show close-ups of he dick flying through the air...
Oh. My. God. I actually remember this. I THINK this was from a bizarre movie called (I think) "Viper", about some really bad [i.e. toxic] booze called "Viper" that caused people who drank it to fall apart/dissolve/etc. The only other thing I remember about this movie was that in the end, there's some young guy in some mafioso boss' office, being threatened for making fun of the mafioso guy's girlfriend, and I remember the young guy saying something to the effect of "What I meant was that she reeks of beauty...."
And, back on topic, while I've not seen the "Battlefield Earth" movie, I DID have the misfortune of reading the book. Ugh. There were some rumors going around that they're already making a sequel to this movie - from what little I've not yet been able to purge from my brain about the book, I'm guessing this first movie only covers the first half, since as I recall the book was basically over halfway through (after the evil bad psychlo home planet gets blown up, but before the galactic real-estate agent with the tummy ache shows up and before Johnny becomes a galactic space manager or something....yes, it's been many years since I read it.)
And, to finally get to my point and close the metaphorical 'circle' of this message, if 'Battlefield Earth, the movie' was anywhere near as bad as I remember 'Battlefield Earth, the Book' to be, I'd rather go watch 'Viper' again. Joe Sixpack is dead!
I was just logging in to ask about this very subject.
I've been wondering how far this sort of thing would work in an apartment complex (on USA power lines, if it matters). Could people in several apartments form a "clandestine network" on the existing powerlines to communicate with each other, and if so, how close would the apartments have to be to one another? Also, could someone build "repeaters" to boost the signals from the other end of the apartment complex, or a signal amplifier (much like the "long range FM radio antenna amplifiers" that occasionally get advertised) that would amplify and clean up the incoming signal, to boost the effective range?
Somebody (perhaps more than one somebody) in one of the other stories (one of the "perversely wealthy corporate bastards with rabid legal department stomps all over internet freedoms" stories, I can't remember which one) made a brief comment along the lines of 'maybe we should form our own internet'...could this be a way to do it?
For a typical notebook, the bigger gains will come when better technology is developed for power consumption of LCDs, HDDs, CD-ROMS, etc, and for the battery itself. This has been a slow process so far.[emphasis added]
The battery, I suspect, will be the biggest change. I hear stories off and on (here on Slashdot and elsewhere) of all-plastic rechargeable batteries, methanol-using fuel cells, and the like. I suspect the days of the "heavy hunk of metals exchanging electrons" stuff will slowly fade away over the next decade or two.
Personally, I like the fuel cell idea. You just KNOW there's going to be proud nerds everywhere programming their apm daemons to alert them that the cell needs more fuel with sound clips ripped from "Guantlet" EPROMs ("Wizard needs food, badly!")... Joe Sixpack is dead!
If the concept becomes approved and widely used, even entrenched you then let the other shoe drop and start demanding license fees from everybody. MP3 and GIF are the most notorious examples of this gambit.
Hmmm.... I'm finding myself suddenly wondering if there's any sort of deeper meaning to the fact that for both MP3 and GIF, the patent claims are ENTIRELY just for the compression method used. It also makes me wonder if there are any other commonly used compressed data formats out there...
Or is it just that it's difficult to get a patent on a "format" but easy to get one on a 'compression method'?
Or is this just a bizarre coincidence?
--- "MICROSOFT - You've got questions. We've got a dancing paperclip." Joe Sixpack is dead!
If the Spiteful Ones(tm) can get themselves under control, this could be a really good thing for games.
I noticed "single-player" was specifically mentioned. Unfortunately,(in my opinion, anyway) FPS games these days seem to be more often focussed on purely Deathmatch scenarios than on cooperative multiplayer or single player. (Cooperative multiplayer was always a favorite of mine). When I tried out the Quake demo long ago, I also really missed "Deathmatch with monsters" (randomly respawning monsters make a nice mild deterrent to "camping", in my opinion).
In short, I'd LOVE to see a remake of "doom classic" with modern technology, putting back cooperative multiplayer and "deathmatch with monsters".
(Of course, it doesn't hurt that, coincidentally, I've just 're-discovered' DooM in the last week or so, downloading and playing with lsdldoom and related programs...) Joe Sixpack is dead!
Pairs of chromosomes can swap "sections" at times ("Crossing over"). The question then is - can wooly-mammoth-compatible chromosomes be harvested or "built" from existing (presumably elephant) species? If so, this would provide some biodiversity to work with.
Theoretically, one can get a few different genotypes from the one specimen, IF a technically feasible way to pick and choose individual chromosomes is ever worked out (How many pairs of chromosomes do wooly mammoths have, anyway?)
It is possible to fuse protoplasts (plant cells with the cell walls removed) from different plant species and sometimes get a viable plant as a result...could some form of biological "nuclear fusion" be used to mix chromosomes artificially between animal cells?
Literally about a week ago, the idea of building autonomous hobby robots suddenly struck me as a fun idea. I picked up a copy of "Robot Science and Technology" magazine and thumbed through it, and unfortunately, just about everything seems to only have software support for Windows (other than the hobbyist-developed stuff for Mindstorms mentioned here.) However, I noticed one other thing - some articles about "Battlebots" and "Robot Wars" and such implied to me that most of the robots in such contests aren't autonomous, but are actually radio-controlled... So...it seems that if one isn't "stuck" on the idea that the processor of an autonomous robot "must" be an integral part of the robot, it seems that there's no reason you couldn't build a set of R/C hardware robotics...then write a nice, standard C, C++, Java, etc. etc. program that runs from an old Linux box, and controls the robot from an R/C controller plugged into a serial or parallel port, or something of the sort. You'd have to put a transmitter on the robot to send sensor data back, but I imagine (in a purely academic if not outright naive way) that this isn't that big of a problem.
Plus, then you can take that old Beowulf cluster that's gathering dust in a corner of your apartment and build a supercomputer brain for your bot....
Which all leads, in a rambling, incoherent sort of way, to my question, which is - are there any good sites for "Hobby robotics with Linux" floating around on the net that anyone can recommend?
>Of course, die hard Linux users will never go >away, but convincing other people to use Linux >(read: the US Gov.) may grow more difficult.
>Though it is a good, stable OS, it may be killed >by paranoid politicians crying "commies! >commies!" ("wolf! wolf!").
Are you kidding? With the right attitude, this could get Linux into other Governments quite nicely. Remember the "space race"? Remember attitudes towards communist countries possibly developing more weapons than us, or new weapons technologies that we didn't have?
Here's what we do - call or email your local government representative and, in your best imitation of a severely concerned voice, shout:
"Oh my God! We have an OS Gap!"
"We can't allow Those Dirty Reds(tm) to have better OS technology, or more legal installations of reliable computers than we do! DO SOMETHING! BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!"
There are bound to be a few more good "spins" that could go with this. Any suggestions?
Where do I sign and/or who do I email? I'm missing my Blizzard games since I dumped Windows in disgust for Linux a year-and-a-half ago.
Lokisoft could even do the port, so Blizzard's coders could rest (or get started on Starcraft II or something...)
Of course, for a company who's official line is "We have announced no products for Linux" (but refuse to say whether they're seriously considering it or if they think Linux is just a fad, or what), I don't know how far this'll get.
It's worth a shot, though. Maybe they'll realize that they, perhaps more than any other game company, have a HUGE potential market in those of us who emigrated to Linux long ago but still badly miss Blizzard's games.
What's with all these sissy "menus" and "GUI's" and such?
Nerdly nerds don't need such things! Where's the thrill of the struggle? The triumph of mind over machine? The urge to bang your head on the desk until there's a dent in it? (The desk or your head, whichever seems appropriate)? Why, when *I* was your age....
Sorry, got carried away there. But seriously, I've grown fond of a nice, minimal distribution. I can compile up, with whatever optimizations I want, whatever I need from there. 'course, I'll probably get tired of doing it all the time after a few months, but until then, I like the comparatively "uncluttered" feel a mostly-manual distribution has. Maybe I'm just a sicko.
I was wondering the same thing. My good old Viper550 (TNT) card seems to work with Mesa-3.0 and NVidia's "glx 1.0" driver, but I'm under the impression this is only a "partial" set of drivers. (Myth II supposedly only works with 3dfx brand boards because they're the only ones that have a 'complete' set of OpenGL drivers - though I've been trying to find out if that's really true or not...)
Has Nvidia said or done anything on the Linux front since the initial release of their drivers?
Not only did I read it, but I was about to say the same thing...
Anyone who makes browsers better watch out! Disable bookmarks or be sued for copyright infringement (or perhaps just "accessory to copyright infringement.")
This specific technology? I doubt it. In order for a secret corporate conspiracy to use this, they'll need: 1)Some way of carrying the baby to term 2)An investment of 15+ years to raise and educate the baby. 3)Money to pay for feeding, clothing, educating, medically supporting, etc. the baby....
And that's on TOP of the cost of trying to clone an adult, which gives them no benefit over an ordinary baby, which has the same requirements.
If you think ConspiracyCorp, Inc. can pop some cells in a vat and quickly pump out an army of trained atomic robot zombie clones, you've been watching too much star trek or something...
As far as I can tell, this is, from an ethical standpoint, no different than in-vitro fertilization ("test-tube babies").
Cloned or not, the end result, had they successfully continued the experiment, would have been nothing more than a baby. Sure, the baby would have been a "delayed identical twin" to the donor of the adult cell, but still just a baby.
Personally, I think human cloning is a non-issue. Since all it does is produce a baby, aside from a few overly wealthy wierdoes, I think most of us would prefer the old-fashioned way to make babies. It's a lot cheaper, a lot more reliable, and MUCH more fun....
(North) American CORPORATE policy
on
Gene Leakage
·
· Score: 1
Here in the US, corporations are not run by the government. (Yes, I know you know that in a logical sense, but you fail to point out the distinction in your message). It might be convincingly argued that the government is being run by corporations, but that's a different argument...
MONSANTO may want to control the world crop market with microsoft-like practices, but that's to the benefit of Monsanto (if foreign markets or, for that matter, the US market are foolish enough to let them), not to the benefit of "the US". If everyone runs to Monsanto with the "but we 'HAVE' to use their seeds because it's easier to get bigger yields", it's their own @$#@#%!!! fault if Monsanto ends up controlling them.
Will the soil give out before the insects do?
on
Gene Leakage
·
· Score: 1
Given the lazy and sloppy flood-irrigation and water-wasting sprinklers that seem so popular where I am (California), I imagine we'll run into problems of soil salinity and lack of decent water LONG before there will "suddenly" be no more insects. If I'm right, we'll have to go to other means of cultivation (hydroponics [in relatively sealed buildings, I imagine] and single-cell proteins and such) before any magical bug-genocide-gene can filter out into the "natural" environment.
Purple Prose will kill us all
on
Gene Leakage
·
· Score: 1
My, that was a bit verbose, wasn't it? And I'm still not sure what the point was.
I certainly will agree with the "we're insignificant in the grand scheme of things" part, though. If we damage the eco-systems that we depend on through our ineptitude, we'll either learn real fast to move to a new one and/or rebuild it, or we'll die out and be replaced. So what?
The death of bio-diversity
on
Gene Leakage
·
· Score: 1
"Terminator technology?" Bah. If they won't seed...clone them. It's easy. Though I suppose Monsanto's lawyers might descend upon anyone who did so publicly. (hmmm...And Microsoft products last only about a year or two before you are forced to buy them again...)
Market pressure should kick in here - ARE there many people who will be willing to buy "one-generation-only" seeds as long as normal seeds are still available? Biotechnology is a booming field. Relatively low-cost biotech workers could conceivably "program" new seeds for smaller companies instead of being forced to use Monsanto's seeds. Heck, barring excessive obnoxious government regulation, a plant-tissue-culture hobbyist in a basement somewhere could conceivably come up with his/her own new GM plant and make it freely available...
(Hmmm...could a GM plant be released under a license based loosely on the GPL?)
From the description (no, I don't want to use up any of my precious brain cells checking this), it sounds like the book is possibly dull and pointless enough that perhaps it was written by some new Secret Microsoft Technology(tm) that writes books for people....
Hmmmm..."IntelliActiveDirectCrapX". Works for me. (With Al Gore as co-author?)
The "Cheap for manufacturers" trend toward "integration" disturbs me to no end. Modular IS better. From a good supplier, buying decent separate mainboard, video card, and sound doesn't cost significantly more than an "integrated lump" mainboard, and saves you hassle and money later if any of the components go bad or get damaged, or if you just want to upgrade. A decent video card is cheap these days, as is decent sound. Separate components is just much easier, safer, quicker, and cheaper overall.
Pirating Windows software is like scratching a poison ivy rash. It feels good for a moment, but causes the rash to spread.
I honestly and truly believe that software piracy is responsible for Microsoft's stranglehold on the OS market - what proportion of small offices bought one copy of Windows 3.1, then went ahead and copied it to all of their office PC's, despite the license limitation? How many of the employees of said small offices "borrowed" the same windows disks to take them home and install them?
And...how many would have done so if they'd been FORCED to PAY full price for a license for each use? A much smaller proportion, I suspect. Now, all of those pirates are stuck in a metaphorical rut. Every new Microsoft release gets bought (because the One Copy doesn't cost that much, and 'the boss' isn't familiar with the problems, and merely assumes that the 'new version will fix everything'.). Everyone in the office who's pirated the software has to also pirate the New Product so that they can use the files produced on the one legally licensed machine. The cycle repeats itself, the problem spreads....
All I have to say is I hope Microsoft's anti-piracy crusade succeeds wildly...when it comes down to "pay up or get rid of Windows", hopefully a few people will think, and choose the latter option...
Slashdot Mirror
Oh. My. God.
I actually remember this. I THINK this was from a bizarre movie called (I think) "Viper", about some really bad [i.e. toxic] booze called "Viper" that caused people who drank it to fall apart/dissolve/etc.
The only other thing I remember about this movie was that in the end, there's some young guy in some mafioso boss' office, being threatened for making fun of the mafioso guy's girlfriend, and I remember the young guy saying something to the effect of "What I meant was that she reeks of beauty...."
And, back on topic, while I've not seen the "Battlefield Earth" movie, I DID have the misfortune of reading the book. Ugh. There were some rumors going around that they're already making a sequel to this movie - from what little I've not yet been able to purge from my brain about the book, I'm guessing this first movie only covers the first half, since as I recall the book was basically over halfway through (after the evil bad psychlo home planet gets blown up, but before the galactic real-estate agent with the tummy ache shows up and before Johnny becomes a galactic space manager or something....yes, it's been many years since I read it.)
And, to finally get to my point and close the metaphorical 'circle' of this message, if 'Battlefield Earth, the movie' was anywhere near as bad as I remember 'Battlefield Earth, the Book' to be, I'd rather go watch 'Viper' again.
Joe Sixpack is dead!
I've been wondering how far this sort of thing would work in an apartment complex (on USA power lines, if it matters). Could people in several apartments form a "clandestine network" on the existing powerlines to communicate with each other, and if so, how close would the apartments have to be to one another? Also, could someone build "repeaters" to boost the signals from the other end of the apartment complex, or a signal amplifier (much like the "long range FM radio antenna amplifiers" that occasionally get advertised) that would amplify and clean up the incoming signal, to boost the effective range?
Somebody (perhaps more than one somebody) in one of the other stories (one of the "perversely wealthy corporate bastards with rabid legal department stomps all over internet freedoms" stories, I can't remember which one) made a brief comment along the lines of 'maybe we should form our own internet'...could this be a way to do it?
Joe Sixpack is dead!
For a typical notebook, the bigger gains will come when better technology is developed for power consumption of LCDs, HDDs, CD-ROMS, etc, and for the battery itself. This has been a slow process so far.[emphasis added]
The battery, I suspect, will be the biggest change. I hear stories off and on (here on Slashdot and elsewhere) of all-plastic rechargeable batteries, methanol-using fuel cells, and the like. I suspect the days of the "heavy hunk of metals exchanging electrons" stuff will slowly fade away over the next decade or two.
Personally, I like the fuel cell idea. You just KNOW there's going to be proud nerds everywhere programming their apm daemons to alert them that the cell needs more fuel with sound clips ripped from "Guantlet" EPROMs ("Wizard needs food, badly!")...
Joe Sixpack is dead!
Hmmm....
I'm finding myself suddenly wondering if there's any sort of deeper meaning to the fact that for both MP3 and GIF, the patent claims are ENTIRELY just for the compression method used. It also makes me wonder if there are any other commonly used compressed data formats out there...
Or is it just that it's difficult to get a patent on a "format" but easy to get one on a 'compression method'?
Or is this just a bizarre coincidence?
---"MICROSOFT - You've got questions.
We've got a dancing paperclip."
Joe Sixpack is dead!
I noticed "single-player" was specifically mentioned. Unfortunately,(in my opinion, anyway) FPS games these days seem to be more often focussed on purely Deathmatch scenarios than on cooperative multiplayer or single player. (Cooperative multiplayer was always a favorite of mine). When I tried out the Quake demo long ago, I also really missed "Deathmatch with monsters" (randomly respawning monsters make a nice mild deterrent to "camping", in my opinion).
In short, I'd LOVE to see a remake of "doom classic" with modern technology, putting back cooperative multiplayer and "deathmatch with monsters".
(Of course, it doesn't hurt that, coincidentally, I've just 're-discovered' DooM in the last week or so, downloading and playing with lsdldoom and related programs...)
Joe Sixpack is dead!
"The Thetans are attacking! Quick, Dr. Org, activate the Elron(tm)* processors!"
(Elron(TM) processors no longer available on E-Bay.)
Pairs of chromosomes can swap "sections" at times
("Crossing over"). The question then is - can
wooly-mammoth-compatible chromosomes be harvested
or "built" from existing (presumably elephant)
species? If so, this would provide some biodiversity to work with.
Theoretically, one can get a few different genotypes from the one specimen, IF a technically
feasible way to pick and choose individual chromosomes is ever worked out (How many pairs of chromosomes do wooly mammoths have, anyway?)
It is possible to fuse protoplasts (plant cells with the cell walls removed) from different plant species and sometimes get a viable plant as a result...could some form of biological "nuclear fusion" be used to mix chromosomes artificially between animal cells?
Fun stuff!
Literally about a week ago, the idea of building autonomous hobby robots suddenly struck me as
a fun idea.
I picked up a copy of "Robot Science and Technology" magazine and thumbed through it, and
unfortunately, just about everything seems to only have software support for Windows (other than the
hobbyist-developed stuff for Mindstorms mentioned here.)
However, I noticed one other thing - some articles about "Battlebots" and "Robot Wars" and such
implied to me that most of the robots in such contests aren't autonomous, but are actually
radio-controlled...
So...it seems that if one isn't "stuck" on the idea that the processor of an autonomous robot
"must" be an integral part of the robot, it seems that there's no reason you couldn't build a set of R/C hardware robotics...then write a nice, standard C, C++, Java, etc. etc. program that
runs from an old Linux box, and controls the robot from an R/C controller plugged into a serial or parallel port, or something of the sort. You'd have to put a transmitter on the robot to send sensor data back, but I imagine (in a purely academic if not outright naive way) that this isn't that big of a problem.
Plus, then you can take that old Beowulf cluster that's gathering dust in a corner of your apartment and build a supercomputer brain for your bot....
Which all leads, in a rambling, incoherent sort of way, to my question, which is - are there any good sites for "Hobby robotics with Linux" floating around on the net that anyone can recommend?
>Of course, die hard Linux users will never go
>away, but convincing other people to use Linux
>(read: the US Gov.) may grow more difficult.
>Though it is a good, stable OS, it may be killed
>by paranoid politicians crying "commies!
>commies!" ("wolf! wolf!").
Are you kidding? With the right attitude, this could get Linux into other Governments quite nicely. Remember the "space race"? Remember
attitudes towards communist countries possibly developing more weapons than us, or new weapons technologies that we didn't have?
Here's what we do - call or email your local government representative and, in your best imitation of a severely concerned voice, shout:
"Oh my God! We have an OS Gap!"
"We can't allow Those Dirty Reds(tm) to have better OS technology, or more legal installations of reliable computers than we do! DO SOMETHING! BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!"
There are bound to be a few more good "spins" that could go with this. Any suggestions?
Where do I sign and/or who do I email?
I'm missing my Blizzard games since I dumped
Windows in disgust for Linux a year-and-a-half ago.
Lokisoft could even do the port, so Blizzard's coders could rest (or get started on Starcraft II or something...)
Of course, for a company who's official line is "We have announced no products for Linux" (but refuse to say whether they're seriously considering it or if they think Linux is just a fad, or what), I don't know how far this'll get.
It's worth a shot, though. Maybe they'll realize that they, perhaps more than any other game company, have a HUGE potential market in those of us who emigrated to Linux long ago but still badly miss Blizzard's games.
While we're on the subject of grammatical pet peeves -
LOSE only has one "o"!
I still frequently see things like "this will
cause you to loose your connection".
It's petty...but it still makes me twitch.
For a group of highly educated people, we just
can't spell worth a dam!
(Yes...I did that on purpose!)
------------
There are three kinds of people in this world. Those who can count, and those who can't.
What's with all these sissy "menus" and "GUI's" and such?
Nerdly nerds don't need such things! Where's the thrill of the struggle? The triumph of mind over machine? The urge to bang your head on the desk until there's a dent in it? (The desk or your head, whichever seems appropriate)? Why, when *I* was your age....
Sorry, got carried away there. But seriously, I've grown fond of a nice, minimal distribution. I can compile up, with whatever optimizations I want, whatever I need from there. 'course, I'll probably get tired of doing it all the time after a few months, but until then, I like the comparatively "uncluttered" feel a mostly-manual distribution has. Maybe I'm just a sicko.
I was wondering the same thing. My good old Viper550 (TNT) card seems to work with Mesa-3.0 and NVidia's "glx 1.0" driver, but I'm under the impression this is only a "partial" set of drivers. (Myth II supposedly only works with 3dfx brand boards because they're the only ones that have a 'complete' set of OpenGL drivers - though I've been trying to find out if that's really true or not...)
Has Nvidia said or done anything on the Linux front since the initial release of their drivers?
Not only did I read it, but I was about to say the
same thing...
Anyone who makes browsers better watch out! Disable bookmarks or be sued for copyright infringement (or perhaps just "accessory to copyright infringement.")
This specific technology? I doubt it. In order
for a secret corporate conspiracy to use this, they'll need:
1)Some way of carrying the baby to term
2)An investment of 15+ years to raise and educate the baby.
3)Money to pay for feeding, clothing, educating, medically supporting, etc. the baby....
And that's on TOP of the cost of trying to clone an adult, which gives them no benefit over an ordinary baby, which has the same requirements.
If you think ConspiracyCorp, Inc. can pop some cells in a vat and quickly pump out an army of trained atomic robot zombie clones, you've been watching too much star trek or something...
As far as I can tell, this is, from an ethical standpoint, no different than in-vitro fertilization ("test-tube babies").
Cloned or not, the end result, had they successfully continued the experiment, would have been nothing more than a baby. Sure, the baby would have been a "delayed identical twin" to the donor of the adult cell, but still just a baby.
Personally, I think human cloning is a non-issue. Since all it does is produce a baby, aside from a few overly wealthy wierdoes, I think most of us would prefer the old-fashioned way to make babies. It's a lot cheaper, a lot more reliable, and MUCH more fun....
Here in the US, corporations are not run by the government. (Yes, I know you know that in a logical sense, but you fail to point out the distinction in your message). It might be convincingly argued that the government is being run by corporations, but that's a different argument...
MONSANTO may want to control the world crop market with microsoft-like practices, but that's to the benefit of Monsanto (if foreign markets or, for that matter, the US market are foolish enough to let them), not to the benefit of "the US".
If everyone runs to Monsanto with the "but we 'HAVE' to use their seeds because it's easier to get bigger yields", it's their own @$#@#%!!! fault if Monsanto ends up controlling them.
Given the lazy and sloppy flood-irrigation and water-wasting sprinklers that seem so popular where I am (California), I imagine we'll run into problems of soil salinity and lack of decent water LONG before there will "suddenly" be no more insects. If I'm right, we'll have to go to other means of cultivation (hydroponics [in relatively sealed buildings, I imagine] and single-cell proteins and such) before any magical bug-genocide-gene can filter out into the "natural" environment.
My, that was a bit verbose, wasn't it? And I'm
still not sure what the point was.
I certainly will agree with the "we're insignificant in the grand scheme of things" part, though. If we damage the eco-systems that we depend on through our ineptitude, we'll either learn real fast to move to a new one and/or rebuild it, or we'll die out and be replaced. So
what?
"Terminator technology?" Bah. If they won't seed...clone them. It's easy. Though I suppose Monsanto's lawyers might descend upon anyone who did so publicly. (hmmm...And Microsoft products last only about a year or two before you are forced to buy them again...)
Market pressure should kick in here - ARE there many people who will be willing to buy "one-generation-only" seeds as long as normal seeds are still available? Biotechnology is a booming field. Relatively low-cost biotech workers could conceivably "program" new seeds for smaller companies instead of being forced to use Monsanto's seeds. Heck, barring excessive obnoxious government regulation, a plant-tissue-culture hobbyist in a basement somewhere could conceivably come up with his/her own new GM plant and make it freely available...
(Hmmm...could a GM plant be released under a license based loosely on the GPL?)
From the description (no, I don't want to use up any of my precious brain cells checking this), it sounds like the book is possibly dull and pointless enough that perhaps it was written by some new Secret Microsoft Technology(tm) that writes books for people....
Hmmmm..."IntelliActiveDirectCrapX". Works for me.
(With Al Gore as co-author?)
The "Cheap for manufacturers" trend toward "integration" disturbs me to no end. Modular IS better. From a good supplier, buying decent separate mainboard, video card, and sound doesn't cost significantly more than an "integrated lump" mainboard, and saves you hassle and money later if any of the components go bad or get damaged, or
if you just want to upgrade. A decent video card is cheap these days, as is decent sound. Separate components is just much easier, safer, quicker, and cheaper overall.
Pirating Windows software is like scratching a
poison ivy rash. It feels good for a moment, but
causes the rash to spread.
I honestly and truly believe that software piracy
is responsible for Microsoft's stranglehold on
the OS market - what proportion of small offices
bought one copy of Windows 3.1, then went ahead
and copied it to all of their office PC's, despite
the license limitation? How many of the employees of said small offices "borrowed" the same windows disks to take them home and install them?
And...how many would have done so if they'd been FORCED to PAY full price for a license for each use? A much smaller proportion, I suspect. Now, all of those pirates are stuck in a metaphorical rut. Every new Microsoft release gets bought (because the One Copy doesn't cost that much, and 'the boss' isn't familiar with the problems, and merely assumes that the 'new version will fix everything'.). Everyone in the office who's pirated the software has to also pirate the New Product so that they can use the files produced on the one legally licensed machine. The cycle repeats itself, the problem spreads....
All I have to say is I hope Microsoft's anti-piracy crusade succeeds wildly...when it comes down to "pay up or get rid of Windows", hopefully a few people will think, and choose the latter option...