Re:"Abadoned"? They're refusing to look very hard.
on
Warez and Abandonware
·
· Score: 1
If and when the "abandoned" crowd can actually clean up their act and bother to remove titles that are legally available for sale, then I might think of them as different from the "warez" groups. For now, they're merely lying about what's truly not available.
"Home of the Underdogs", one of the main sites listed in the article does exactly this. They have a policy that if a game that they have for download is still available, and you inform them of it, they will immediately take down the game, and even provide a link to the place where it can be purchased. Most Abandonware enthusiasts are genuinely committed to preserving old games, and are much more mature than members of "warez" groups.
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he
on
Warez and Abandonware
·
· Score: 1
If I broke into your home and took things out of your attic or basement, then you'd be outraged. But somehow calling it "IP" makes the difference? Does it really?
I often hear people from the Software Industry comparing software 'piracy' to shoplifting, stating that unauthorised copying of software is theft, and should be treated by society the same as any other form of theft. But, as other Slashdotters have noted, when you make a copy of some software, you have not stolen anything, you have made a duplication, but the original software is still available.
Stating that software duplication is theft is wrong. Consider the following situation: if I developed a magical duplication machine, and went into my local grocery store, then duplicated a loaf of bread out of nothingness, and gave it to a starving child outside, would the shopkeeper be angered that I had duplicated his bread? Would I be a thief? Would I have done something wrong? In this situation, most sane people would clearly answer no, what I have done is a good thing. My duplication machine could end world hunger and make the world a better place.
Think about it, does software duplication really differ from the above scenario. There are many people living in poor economic conditions, who could not afford to use a computer if it wasn't for unauthorised software duplication. Budget and second-hand computers are becoming ever more affordable, with the price of software now becoming a larger burden. The division between rich and poor is becoming more marked as computer technology becomes entrenched in society. Software 'piracy' allows people who could otherwise not participate in this exciting new phase of technological development a way to experience it. These people would surely not be purchasing the software otherwise, so who is harmed by these actions?
Free (Open Source) Software is an alternative to the illegal distribution of proprietary software, but it is currently limited to the technically literate. As Free Software becomes easier to use, the need for piracy will decrease, but currently, unauthorised distribution of software is the only way for many people to experience the wonderful new technology that most of us take for granted. I don't see duplication of software as 'piracy' or theft, I see it as sharing. Hopefully Free Sofware will continue to become easier to use, and there will eventually be no need for 'piracy', but that dream has not yet been met, so the only option for many people is illegal (if not immoral) duplication of software.
Re:KDE 2.0 runs well on crappy hardware
on
KDE 2.0.1 is out
·
· Score: 1
The latest HelixGNOME, however, runs quite slowly
Looks like someone forgot to tell my computer about this, I'm running Helix on my P133 with 48M of RAM, no external cache, and an old S3 Trio video card, and it's running quite nicely... I've had to turn off some of the extras like sound and animation, but overall it's running good.
It's not as fast as the blazingly-fast Enlightenment (which doesn't deserve its reputation of being bloated anymore - it's almost as fast and lean as Blackbox), but I quite like Helix - it's much faster than KDE2 on my machine, which is mainly to do with the fact that it eats less memory.
Just to prove that I'm not completely bashing KDE, I have to say that Qt is a much nicer toolkit than GTK, especially now it's GPLed.
If I understand genetics correctly, genes become more common if the people who possess the genes have more children. Thus, evolution in humans will now favour whoever produces the most offspring.
Considering that anecdotal evidence suggests less-educated people generally have more offspring than more-educated professionals (who are busy with their career), evolution will progress to produce less intelligent humans. NOTE: This is of course a gross generalisation, education has more to do with socio-economic conditions than genetic intelligence - and there is also the fact that we do not know if intelligence is affected by genetics at all.
Another observation is that the genes that produce good programmers will die out completely, as everybody knows that hackers have a hard time finding female companions;-)
Well, if you don't have any statistics in front of you, just make up something that fits your argument. 10-15%? Where did you pull that number from?
Although he seems to have pulled the number out of thin air, I would have to agree with him. Actually, about 1 in 5 of my friends in the IT industry are pagan. There are some very prominent pagans in the Hacker/Free-Software community, including ESR.
Well, I'm sorry to say, but you're totally wrong here.
Communism is not a totalitarian, authoritarian version of socialism. If you read Marx, you will find that it actually favours the abolition of bourgeios totalitarianism, and the management of the state by committees of average workers. It does not favour state ownership, but communal ownership by the people. In fact, a key target of Communism is the abolition of the state, and governance by the workers for the workers.
I think you are making the common mistake of confusing Stalinism and Maoism with Communism. I urge you to go to The Marxist Archive to learn what Communism is really about.
Ok. So I don't know much about communism. Is there a short, easy to read definition anywhere?
You might want to visit www.marxists.org. It's got a lot of information, and it's students section has a nice introduction to Marxism. You might also want to read the Communist Manifesto, but remember, it was written with the aim to incite a revolution, so it's a bit confrontational.
I thought communism was about gov't taking care of most things, like telling people how to work (not what job). A small power class in control... Am I way off?
Well, the aim of Communism is to overthrow the bourgeoisie (the ruling class - the wealthy), and to form an egalitarian society of mutual cooperation, and communal property. So the description you have just given is more like the current Capitalist system than true Communism. Unfortunately, an egalitarian society is hard to maintain, and a new ruling class has always asserted itself whenever a Communist revolution has occurred. You may want to read "Animal Farm" for more information on this.
Having just read the article, I must say that it is inaccurate in several of its statements. Forgive me if I'm wrong (and please correct me), but here are the problems I saw:
A major new release of the Linux operating system will be available in the fall
Ummm... no, not the Linux operating system, the Linux kernel. The 'Linux' operating system is made up of many parts, the kernel being one of them. An operating system is much more than just a kernel.
As a student in his native Finland a decade earlier, he created the basic components of the Linux operating system, then put it on the Internet to let others make improvements to it.
Again, Linus did not write the operating system. he only wrote the kernel. The operating system was mostly completed many years earlier, and was known as GNU. He just initiated design of the final component. And while he deserves credit for this, the people who worked hard to create the rest of the OS, many years before he even thought of writing a unix-like kernel, deserve as much credit as he does for creating the 'Linux operating system'.
Mr. Torvalds coordinates Linux in a somewhat detached manner. He concerns himself only with intricate, technical details of Linux, and won't take a stand on such issues as what sort of user interface the software should have.
Yes, Linus concerns himself with the kernel, because this is the part of the 'Linux operating system' that he wrote. It is true that if he did decree which type of interface people should use, then people would listen, but he should not be expected, or encouraged, to do this. He was instrumental in creating the final (and some would say, most difficult) part of the Free operating system we all know as 'Linux'. But it must be remembered that he did not create the entire operating system, so why should he have any more say to which GUI to use than any other major developer in the GNU project. The kernel and the GUI are as opposed as two elements of an operating system can be, so it would be illogical for a kernel developer, no matter what his status, to dictate which GUI to use.
I wish people would realize that Linus did not create the entire operating system, only the kernel. Many people, especially in business, see him as the person who is 'in charge' of the OS. The 'Linux operating system' (as WSJ call it) is developed by a community, nobody is in charge. A few developers of certain segments of the OS are figureheads, but no one central person is in charge of the OS. The contribution that Linus made to the development of a Free GNU-based operating system cannot be denied, but Linus is not the only developer of any importance, and, while he should be able to control kernel-based matters, he is not the one to consult on non-kernel related matters.
What's the problem with Taco posting his thoughts? Politics is something that permeates every part of life, and Taco should be applauded for voicing his opinion on the election. It's better than keeping quiet, then complaining after the election.
Also, I have a question, I am from Australia, and hence I know very little about US politics (other than the fact it is extremely conservative). Do you have any Socialist candidates running for President?
In Australia, our largest political party is quite socialist (the Labor Party), and they do a far better job at managing the country than the conservatives. Yet I have heard little of Socialist political parties in the US. The closest I've heard of is the Democrats, but they are quite right-wing by Australian standards. So do you have a proper Socialist party in the US, or is the Democrats the closest thing to it?
The whole Australian Internet censorship fiasco is not an indication of the Australian peoples, but is simply a result of an unfortunate political circumstance.
About 5 years ago, the Australian conservative party (ironically called the Liberals) were elected to power for the first time in over a decade. This is generally thought to be a result of the fact that the Labor party had held office for so long, that people thought it was time for "a change", and elected the conservatives. The conservatives generally count the right-wing segment of the populace as their strongest constituents, and so, in an attempt to please them, they have enacted a large-scale Internet censorship campaign.
A large proportion of the population welcome this, as having never used the Internet, they see it as a large cesspool of sex, violence, and immoral behaviour, because that is what the evening news generally portrays it as.
The right-wing constituents are pleased, and so the "Liberal" party continue their campaign of censorship. They also relish using taxpayers' money for large-scale propaganda campaigns to assure they are re-elected.
Thankfully, the voters are starting to see through the propaganda, and realise that the "Liberals" are mismanaging the economy, and implementing unworkable censorship laws. Rest assured that as soon as the Labor party win office at the next election, everything will return to normal.
The Freedom to Innovate Network (FIN) are truer to their name than many of you think
In French, "fin" means "The End".
Is the formation of this group simply a foreshadowing of The End of Microsoft? I think it is a sign when the lobby group formed to influence the future of Microsoft call themselves "The End".
This is being reported very different Down Under
on
Profiling A Nation
·
· Score: 1
This story is being reported very differently in Australia than it is on Slashdot. I don't know which account is true, but the news here has reported that this large data-gathering facility is a private enterprise, like others all over the world, and there has been no mention of government involvement with its establishment, apart from Australian Electoral Rolls being (allegedly) illegally accessed. Also, the Government is drafting a law to restrict activities of these databases.
According to news reports, the Government is investigating how those electoral rolls were accessed, as gaining access to Electoral Rolls is a serious crime in Australia, because voting is compulsory (IMHO a good idea), so almost everyone over the age of 18 is on the roll. The Government is also drafting laws to make sure Private Data-Gathering Warehouses follow strict laws.
So, in Australia the story is being reported VERY differently, with the Government investigating the data gathering facility, rather than supporting it. I would personally like to know which version is true, as the two reports seem in direct contradiction of each other.
Here are some comments by the Australian Attorney-General on the laws the Government is introducing:
"There will be an obligation on ACXIOM when our legislation is passed to maintain the standards that are set out in the bill,"
"In respect of any information that is collected retrospectively, they will have obligations of data security, data openness, data quality and restrictions on transfers overseas."
Further information on this matter is at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/1999/11/item19991130175 007_1.htm
In summary, in Australia it is being reported that the Government is not involved with this data warehouse, and it is similar to many already established overseas. Instead the Government is drafting new laws to RESTRICT the activities of data warehouses such as these.
Slashdot Mirror
If and when the "abandoned" crowd can actually clean up their act and bother to remove titles that are legally available for sale, then I might think of them as different from the "warez" groups. For now, they're merely lying about what's truly not available.
"Home of the Underdogs", one of the main sites listed in the article does exactly this. They have a policy that if a game that they have for download is still available, and you inform them of it, they will immediately take down the game, and even provide a link to the place where it can be purchased. Most Abandonware enthusiasts are genuinely committed to preserving old games, and are much more mature than members of "warez" groups.
If I broke into your home and took things out of your attic or basement, then you'd be outraged. But somehow calling it "IP" makes the difference? Does it really?
I often hear people from the Software Industry comparing software 'piracy' to shoplifting, stating that unauthorised copying of software is theft, and should be treated by society the same as any other form of theft. But, as other Slashdotters have noted, when you make a copy of some software, you have not stolen anything, you have made a duplication, but the original software is still available.
Stating that software duplication is theft is wrong. Consider the following situation: if I developed a magical duplication machine, and went into my local grocery store, then duplicated a loaf of bread out of nothingness, and gave it to a starving child outside, would the shopkeeper be angered that I had duplicated his bread? Would I be a thief? Would I have done something wrong? In this situation, most sane people would clearly answer no, what I have done is a good thing. My duplication machine could end world hunger and make the world a better place.
Think about it, does software duplication really differ from the above scenario. There are many people living in poor economic conditions, who could not afford to use a computer if it wasn't for unauthorised software duplication. Budget and second-hand computers are becoming ever more affordable, with the price of software now becoming a larger burden. The division between rich and poor is becoming more marked as computer technology becomes entrenched in society. Software 'piracy' allows people who could otherwise not participate in this exciting new phase of technological development a way to experience it. These people would surely not be purchasing the software otherwise, so who is harmed by these actions?
Free (Open Source) Software is an alternative to the illegal distribution of proprietary software, but it is currently limited to the technically literate. As Free Software becomes easier to use, the need for piracy will decrease, but currently, unauthorised distribution of software is the only way for many people to experience the wonderful new technology that most of us take for granted. I don't see duplication of software as 'piracy' or theft, I see it as sharing. Hopefully Free Sofware will continue to become easier to use, and there will eventually be no need for 'piracy', but that dream has not yet been met, so the only option for many people is illegal (if not immoral) duplication of software.
The latest HelixGNOME, however, runs quite slowly
Looks like someone forgot to tell my computer about this, I'm running Helix on my P133 with 48M of RAM, no external cache, and an old S3 Trio video card, and it's running quite nicely... I've had to turn off some of the extras like sound and animation, but overall it's running good.
It's not as fast as the blazingly-fast Enlightenment (which doesn't deserve its reputation of being bloated anymore - it's almost as fast and lean as Blackbox), but I quite like Helix - it's much faster than KDE2 on my machine, which is mainly to do with the fact that it eats less memory.
Just to prove that I'm not completely bashing KDE, I have to say that Qt is a much nicer toolkit than GTK, especially now it's GPLed.
If I understand genetics correctly, genes become more common if the people who possess the genes have more children. Thus, evolution in humans will now favour whoever produces the most offspring.
;-)
Considering that anecdotal evidence suggests less-educated people generally have more offspring than more-educated professionals (who are busy with their career), evolution will progress to produce less intelligent humans. NOTE: This is of course a gross generalisation, education has more to do with socio-economic conditions than genetic intelligence - and there is also the fact that we do not know if intelligence is affected by genetics at all.
Another observation is that the genes that produce good programmers will die out completely, as everybody knows that hackers have a hard time finding female companions
Well, if you don't have any statistics in front of you, just make up something that fits your argument. 10-15%? Where did you pull that number from?
Although he seems to have pulled the number out of thin air, I would have to agree with him. Actually, about 1 in 5 of my friends in the IT industry are pagan. There are some very prominent pagans in the Hacker/Free-Software community, including ESR.
Well, I'm sorry to say, but you're totally wrong here.
Communism is not a totalitarian, authoritarian version of socialism. If you read Marx, you will find that it actually favours the abolition of bourgeios totalitarianism, and the management of the state by committees of average workers. It does not favour state ownership, but communal ownership by the people. In fact, a key target of Communism is the abolition of the state, and governance by the workers for the workers.
I think you are making the common mistake of confusing Stalinism and Maoism with Communism. I urge you to go to The Marxist Archive to learn what Communism is really about.
Ok. So I don't know much about communism. Is there a short, easy to read definition anywhere?
You might want to visit www.marxists.org. It's got a lot of information, and it's students section has a nice introduction to Marxism. You might also want to read the Communist Manifesto, but remember, it was written with the aim to incite a revolution, so it's a bit confrontational.
I thought communism was about gov't taking care of most things, like telling people how to work (not what job). A small power class in control... Am I way off?
Well, the aim of Communism is to overthrow the bourgeoisie (the ruling class - the wealthy), and to form an egalitarian society of mutual cooperation, and communal property. So the description you have just given is more like the current Capitalist system than true Communism. Unfortunately, an egalitarian society is hard to maintain, and a new ruling class has always asserted itself whenever a Communist revolution has occurred. You may want to read "Animal Farm" for more information on this.
Having just read the article, I must say that it is inaccurate in several of its statements. Forgive me if I'm wrong (and please correct me), but here are the problems I saw:
A major new release of the Linux operating system will be available in the fall
Ummm... no, not the Linux operating system, the Linux kernel. The 'Linux' operating system is made up of many parts, the kernel being one of them. An operating system is much more than just a kernel.
As a student in his native Finland a decade earlier, he created the basic components of the Linux operating system, then put it on the Internet to let others make improvements to it.
Again, Linus did not write the operating system. he only wrote the kernel. The operating system was mostly completed many years earlier, and was known as GNU. He just initiated design of the final component. And while he deserves credit for this, the people who worked hard to create the rest of the OS, many years before he even thought of writing a unix-like kernel, deserve as much credit as he does for creating the 'Linux operating system'.
Mr. Torvalds coordinates Linux in a somewhat detached manner. He concerns himself only with intricate, technical details of Linux, and won't take a stand on such issues as what sort of user interface the software should have.
Yes, Linus concerns himself with the kernel, because this is the part of the 'Linux operating system' that he wrote. It is true that if he did decree which type of interface people should use, then people would listen, but he should not be expected, or encouraged, to do this. He was instrumental in creating the final (and some would say, most difficult) part of the Free operating system we all know as 'Linux'. But it must be remembered that he did not create the entire operating system, so why should he have any more say to which GUI to use than any other major developer in the GNU project. The kernel and the GUI are as opposed as two elements of an operating system can be, so it would be illogical for a kernel developer, no matter what his status, to dictate which GUI to use.
I wish people would realize that Linus did not create the entire operating system, only the kernel. Many people, especially in business, see him as the person who is 'in charge' of the OS. The 'Linux operating system' (as WSJ call it) is developed by a community, nobody is in charge. A few developers of certain segments of the OS are figureheads, but no one central person is in charge of the OS. The contribution that Linus made to the development of a Free GNU-based operating system cannot be denied, but Linus is not the only developer of any importance, and, while he should be able to control kernel-based matters, he is not the one to consult on non-kernel related matters.
What's the problem with Taco posting his thoughts? Politics is something that permeates every part of life, and Taco should be applauded for voicing his opinion on the election. It's better than keeping quiet, then complaining after the election.
Also, I have a question, I am from Australia, and hence I know very little about US politics (other than the fact it is extremely conservative). Do you have any Socialist candidates running for President?
In Australia, our largest political party is quite socialist (the Labor Party), and they do a far better job at managing the country than the conservatives. Yet I have heard little of Socialist political parties in the US. The closest I've heard of is the Democrats, but they are quite right-wing by Australian standards. So do you have a proper Socialist party in the US, or is the Democrats the closest thing to it?
The whole Australian Internet censorship fiasco is not an indication of the Australian peoples, but is simply a result of an unfortunate political circumstance.
About 5 years ago, the Australian conservative party (ironically called the Liberals) were elected to power for the first time in over a decade. This is generally thought to be a result of the fact that the Labor party had held office for so long, that people thought it was time for "a change", and elected the conservatives. The conservatives generally count the right-wing segment of the populace as their strongest constituents, and so, in an attempt to please them, they have enacted a large-scale Internet censorship campaign.
A large proportion of the population welcome this, as having never used the Internet, they see it as a large cesspool of sex, violence, and immoral behaviour, because that is what the evening news generally portrays it as.
The right-wing constituents are pleased, and so the "Liberal" party continue their campaign of censorship. They also relish using taxpayers' money for large-scale propaganda campaigns to assure they are re-elected.
Thankfully, the voters are starting to see through the propaganda, and realise that the "Liberals" are mismanaging the economy, and implementing unworkable censorship laws. Rest assured that as soon as the Labor party win office at the next election, everything will return to normal.
The Freedom to Innovate Network (FIN) are truer to their name than many of you think
In French, "fin" means "The End".
Is the formation of this group simply a foreshadowing of The End of Microsoft? I think it is a sign when the lobby group formed to influence the future of Microsoft call themselves "The End".
This story is being reported very differently in Australia than it is on Slashdot. I don't know which account is true, but the news here has reported that this large data-gathering facility is a private enterprise, like others all over the world, and there has been no mention of government involvement with its establishment, apart from Australian Electoral Rolls being (allegedly) illegally accessed. Also, the Government is drafting a law to restrict activities of these databases.
5 007_1.htm
According to news reports, the Government is investigating how those electoral rolls were accessed, as gaining access to Electoral Rolls is a serious crime in Australia, because voting is compulsory (IMHO a good idea), so almost everyone over the age of 18 is on the roll. The Government is also drafting laws to make sure Private Data-Gathering Warehouses follow strict laws.
So, in Australia the story is being reported VERY differently, with the Government investigating the data gathering facility, rather than supporting it. I would personally like to know which version is true, as the two reports seem in direct contradiction of each other.
Here are some comments by the Australian Attorney-General on the laws the Government is introducing:
"There will be an obligation on ACXIOM when our legislation is passed to maintain the standards
that are set out in the bill,"
"In respect of any information that is collected retrospectively, they will have obligations of data security, data openness, data quality and restrictions on transfers overseas."
Further information on this matter is at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/1999/11/item1999113017
In summary, in Australia it is being reported that the Government is not involved with this data warehouse, and it is similar to many already established overseas. Instead the Government is drafting new laws to RESTRICT the activities of data warehouses such as these.