Maybe it would be like something that checks if the file you downloaded comes from a trusted platform, maybe do checksums..
Something clever enough to understand the context from which the file comes from, and give it only as much privileges as it deserves/needs.
Something that could understand the risk of a proprietary software, "trusted" or not, in critical parts of the system, and the benefits of an opensource one. Maybe even, if it's clever enough analyse its traffic and source code, but that's a lot to ask, and it may simply rely on other, more competent and independent, neutral entities to spot backdoors in the code/protocol.
You can't compare a space station (a more or less complex set of tubes and solar panels) and an entire rocket.
The space stations has to deal with a lot less of parts, dangers, energy, movement, calculations, calibrations.. It's still hard as fuck to do on earth, so on orbit, until we have a very advanced space factory, it's just too much to do manually, piece bu piece, with astronauts to do the details.
Yes, il *will* be possible some day, but not before we build an efficient way to construct space rockets in space, and building this will take decades.
Most of Linux GUIs (window manager/desktop environment, etc) either disable Desktop icons by default, or allow to disable them easily.
In fact, most of linux innovative GUIs (yes, by windows' standards, 2007 Fluxbox is innovative.) are built around a minimal-to-no-desktop-icon paradigm, using the desktop as a menu generator, or widget emplacement
the only ones still using this 1998-ish idea of letting you flood your screen with a shitton of pointless icons with no organisation whatsoever are those who admit imitating windows' interface to make the transition easier for noobs.
I haven't used a single linux GUI that didn't organize launch icons in a logic and structured menu for like 5 years.
Gone are the icons that drive Windows, OS X, and Linux operating systems of past and present.
Well, yeah, but slashdot has to keep some retro style. If it looked "cool/new/hi-tech/unicode-ready", it would attract even more underage facebook-addict and break their 30+yo demographic.
That said, retro design never saved 4chan... but eh, they deserve it.
This is very very insightful and deserves to be read.
I'll quote it to be sure people see it. (I don't have mod points)
Actually, it's a lot more complicated than that.
Near my international airport (KSEA for those interested) is a public park on the north end of the airport, from there it is a ridiculously easy shoot into the cockpit with a laser at around 3 miles when aircraft are landing to the north (runways 34). At that range most green lasers beams are actually fairly wide, but still plenty bright, especially to eyes that have spent the last 6 hours acclimated to almost total darkness (pilots routinely turn the lights down at night) Since you bring up geometry, I submit to you that the angle from ground to cockpit at that distance is probably in the 10 degree range. And consider that these aircraft are landing from the south, facing north. The pilot is required to maintain contact with the runway lighting system at all times, including the lights leading up to the runway. If they can see lights 1/2 mile ahead of them, I think they can see the lights 3 miles ahead of them. If you'd like i'll get out my FAR/AIM (FAA rule bible) and quote you the regs.
Now, lets talk the pussies argument. Would you want YOUR pilot to be even 1/4 blinded when operating at 175mph and 300 feet off the ground? Safety says you go around and let your eyes reacclimate. It's not that they could NEVER land the plane, but that given the other stressors already in place, why would you risk it? Remember we are in the plane with you, and we have just as much interest in going home to our families as you do.
My credentials: Commerial rated, Multi-engine and Single-engine, with an unrestricted IFR rating.
Posting AC due to lack of account, long time reader.
Wait a few years and most of the internet restrictions will be implemented here, too.
I assume you don't live in the US or in France or in Germany or in Italy or in half of Europe.
If you were, you'd know that it has begun a few years ago, and for some countries, we're getting really close.
Just look at laquadrature.net 's articles about French HADOPI and LOPPSI laws, that go even further than China in internet control and censorship, in most western countries it's also illegal to use VoIP with a GPRS/EDGE/3G/whatever data connection, too bad if it's the one you use for your home's internet. (how they advertise you to do nowadays)
The internet is in danger, everywhere. Open your eyes and you'll see that we're almost already fucked.
Long term support is something that only exists in OSS ecosystems. No matter how long a company is going to try to support a hardware, the community will support it longer.
It all comes down to "supporting old stuff does not bring new sales, therefore is really bad in the long term" vs "I still use/want to use old stuff, therefore I want it to work, and as long as it fits me, I'll support it."
In the OSS community, the only hardware that's not supported is really the hardware that's not used. Hell they even managed to support closed nvidia hardware without any help from nvidia (see nouveau 2D/3D driver)
Also i'm more confident about OSS drivers being stable than closed source ones. Agreed OSS ones right now are still a bit unfinished, but they really are working fine on r600-700 with classic mesa. In fact I've been playing through all Stalker games recently with decent performances.
Chances are, OSS drivers are good enough for the vast majority of you. Maybe hardcore gamers will bitch, but that's all.
Honestly, I suscribed for a premium account two weeks ago, and I love it, but even if it's the best way to enjoy legally copyrighted music without spending all the money I have on every single track of the 80 000 ones I listen to, I'm still not sure it's the best way to pay artists back.
I know the more people use and buy premium accounts on spotify, the bigger the share that spotify gives to the "artists" (in reality it's given to the Labels...), but there is no proof that those Labels give a fair amount to the artists.
So, what do you guys think of the Spotify option ?
Of course I know that, my point is that maybe it shouldn't be presented as a missing feature, but rather as an error leading to a(nother) threat to Net Neutrality in the first place.
I'm not unaware of buisness rules, borders, or anything, just saying that when(if) "concent control" will appear, I will not see this as un upgrade of my Internet Experience.
I understand the reasons why it has preferred H.264 over Theora, but it is really nice to see that it also understands the reasons why we should be preferring an open format instead.
Am I the only one seeing the contradiction here ? Really ?
Sometimes I think that Google is about the only company that "gets it."
Sometimes I think that Google just didn't "get it" in the first place when choosing H.264 for youtube.
Maybe it was nothing more than a "Microsoft-ish" tactic to push Google Chrome over Firefox, Opera, Chromium etc.
You know, one of these "if your product isn't used enough, make an every-day used platform/technology incompatible with its competitors."
Promotion by incompatibility is the reason I use Linux and look for open standards and technologies. And I don't think Google's contradictory position is helping those.
You see, as long as you use H.264 in real life, promoting Vorbis-Theora is nothing more than hypocrisy and getting good publicity.
Slashdot Mirror
Never underestimate the stupidity of fanboys in great number.
Maybe it would be like something that checks if the file you downloaded comes from a trusted platform, maybe do checksums..
Something clever enough to understand the context from which the file comes from, and give it only as much privileges as it deserves/needs.
Something that could understand the risk of a proprietary software, "trusted" or not, in critical parts of the system, and the benefits of an opensource one.
Maybe even, if it's clever enough analyse its traffic and source code, but that's a lot to ask, and it may simply rely on other, more competent and independent, neutral entities to spot backdoors in the code/protocol.
Something like... the user ?
You can't compare a space station (a more or less complex set of tubes and solar panels) and an entire rocket.
The space stations has to deal with a lot less of parts, dangers, energy, movement, calculations, calibrations.. It's still hard as fuck to do on earth, so on orbit, until we have a very advanced space factory, it's just too much to do manually, piece bu piece, with astronauts to do the details.
Yes, il *will* be possible some day, but not before we build an efficient way to construct space rockets in space, and building this will take decades.
Captain Obvious is SO shitting bricks when he reads this.
building the thing in space with chemical rocket or projectile launch methods and then assembling it in orbit
Do you have any idea of the time and complexity needed to do even minor operations in space ? (i.e. doing some structural work on a space station)
This would take ages. Really, several generations. And cost trillions of dollars.
it sound cool, but it just isn't realistic.
bugs in you reyes, maybe.
Most of Linux GUIs (window manager/desktop environment, etc) either disable Desktop icons by default, or allow to disable them easily.
In fact, most of linux innovative GUIs (yes, by windows' standards, 2007 Fluxbox is innovative.) are built around a minimal-to-no-desktop-icon paradigm, using the desktop as a menu generator, or widget emplacement
the only ones still using this 1998-ish idea of letting you flood your screen with a shitton of pointless icons with no organisation whatsoever are those who admit imitating windows' interface to make the transition easier for noobs.
I haven't used a single linux GUI that didn't organize launch icons in a logic and structured menu for like 5 years.
Gone are the icons that drive Windows, OS X, and Linux operating systems of past and present.
Seriously GP, try harder. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_environment#Gallery
Its what ever the copy write holders say it is.
People who can't be bothered to understand that the term is "copyright" should avoid expressing an opinion on the matter.
People with no sense of humor should not post on /.
Yes but, can it run crysis ?
Because the weight of a gram is defined as a 1/1024th of a kilogram, dumbass.
Nothing is more open than a x86 pc platform. (even more with linux installed).
Still, gaming works pretty well there, and cheat is decently managed. How can that be ?
Maybe locking every bit of a platform, hardware included is not the only way to deal with cheating ?
Just saying.
Well, yeah, but slashdot has to keep some retro style. If it looked "cool/new/hi-tech/unicode-ready", it would attract even more underage facebook-addict and break their 30+yo demographic.
That said, retro design never saved 4chan... but eh, they deserve it.
Actually, it's a lot more complicated than that.
Near my international airport (KSEA for those interested) is a public park on the north end of the airport, from there it is a ridiculously easy shoot into the cockpit with a laser at around 3 miles when aircraft are landing to the north (runways 34). At that range most green lasers beams are actually fairly wide, but still plenty bright, especially to eyes that have spent the last 6 hours acclimated to almost total darkness (pilots routinely turn the lights down at night) Since you bring up geometry, I submit to you that the angle from ground to cockpit at that distance is probably in the 10 degree range. And consider that these aircraft are landing from the south, facing north. The pilot is required to maintain contact with the runway lighting system at all times, including the lights leading up to the runway. If they can see lights 1/2 mile ahead of them, I think they can see the lights 3 miles ahead of them. If you'd like i'll get out my FAR/AIM (FAA rule bible) and quote you the regs.
Now, lets talk the pussies argument. Would you want YOUR pilot to be even 1/4 blinded when operating at 175mph and 300 feet off the ground? Safety says you go around and let your eyes reacclimate. It's not that they could NEVER land the plane, but that given the other stressors already in place, why would you risk it? Remember we are in the plane with you, and we have just as much interest in going home to our families as you do.
My credentials: Commerial rated, Multi-engine and Single-engine, with an unrestricted IFR rating.
Posting AC due to lack of account, long time reader.
Wait a few years and most of the internet restrictions will be implemented here, too.
I assume you don't live in the US or in France or in Germany or in Italy or in half of Europe.
If you were, you'd know that it has begun a few years ago, and for some countries, we're getting really close.
Just look at laquadrature.net 's articles about French HADOPI and LOPPSI laws, that go even further than China in internet control and censorship, in most western countries it's also illegal to use VoIP with a GPRS/EDGE/3G/whatever data connection, too bad if it's the one you use for your home's internet. (how they advertise you to do nowadays)
The internet is in danger, everywhere. Open your eyes and you'll see that we're almost already fucked.
Long term support is something that only exists in OSS ecosystems. No matter how long a company is going to try to support a hardware, the community will support it longer.
It all comes down to "supporting old stuff does not bring new sales, therefore is really bad in the long term" vs "I still use/want to use old stuff, therefore I want it to work, and as long as it fits me, I'll support it."
In the OSS community, the only hardware that's not supported is really the hardware that's not used. Hell they even managed to support closed nvidia hardware without any help from nvidia (see nouveau 2D/3D driver)
Also i'm more confident about OSS drivers being stable than closed source ones. Agreed OSS ones right now are still a bit unfinished, but they really are working fine on r600-700 with classic mesa. In fact I've been playing through all Stalker games recently with decent performances.
Chances are, OSS drivers are good enough for the vast majority of you. Maybe hardcore gamers will bitch, but that's all.
Owl my god.
inb4 : RIAA/MPAA trolling 4chan...
Tits or GTFO.
...take the prime directive into account ?
(because it should.)
it does not require any of the distortions of spacetime that traditional time machines rely on.
Wait, did I missed the part where time machines were something traditional or common or anything like that ?
Seriously, time travel became mainstream and nobody told me ?
No ! You're lying !!!111!1!1!
Everyone knows that Linus is forever !!
Just like Steve Jobs !
Wait, what did you say about cancer again ?
What do you guys think of spotify ?
Honestly, I suscribed for a premium account two weeks ago, and I love it, but even if it's the best way to enjoy legally copyrighted music without spending all the money I have on every single track of the 80 000 ones I listen to, I'm still not sure it's the best way to pay artists back.
I know the more people use and buy premium accounts on spotify, the bigger the share that spotify gives to the "artists" (in reality it's given to the Labels...), but there is no proof that those Labels give a fair amount to the artists.
So, what do you guys think of the Spotify option ?
Of course I know that, my point is that maybe it shouldn't be presented as a missing feature, but rather as an error leading to a(nother) threat to Net Neutrality in the first place.
I'm not unaware of buisness rules, borders, or anything, just saying that when(if) "concent control" will appear, I will not see this as un upgrade of my Internet Experience.
Without content protection, we would not be able to offer videos like this.
*click*
This video is currently unavailable for rent in your country.
Yes, I see how with content protection you are not able to offer me videos like this.
how is it open ?
I understand the reasons why it has preferred H.264 over Theora, but it is really nice to see that it also understands the reasons why we should be preferring an open format instead.
Am I the only one seeing the contradiction here ? Really ?
Sometimes I think that Google is about the only company that "gets it."
Sometimes I think that Google just didn't "get it" in the first place when choosing H.264 for youtube.
Maybe it was nothing more than a "Microsoft-ish" tactic to push Google Chrome over Firefox, Opera, Chromium etc.
You know, one of these "if your product isn't used enough, make an every-day used platform/technology incompatible with its competitors."
Promotion by incompatibility is the reason I use Linux and look for open standards and technologies. And I don't think Google's contradictory position is helping those.
You see, as long as you use H.264 in real life, promoting Vorbis-Theora is nothing more than hypocrisy and getting good publicity.
Anyway, there is no way I ever forgive Google anytime soon.