I honestly think that Richard would be ok with GNU not getting all the headlines if he thought that the message about the name "Linux" were freedom. The problem is, he feels it isn't, so by forcing "GNU/Linux" on the table, it gives GNU some name recognition, and he hopes it will get people talking about freedom?
I'm sure people thought Jesus was naive. I'm sure people thought the American revolutionaries were naive. I'm sure people thought Steve Jobs was naive.;-) The truth of the matter is, whenever you try to change the fundimental perspective of things, you look naive to the people who have accepted the status quo. Richard is a "fundamentalists free software advocate" in the sense that his views are driven by what he sees as being the right way for the world to be, and traditional pragmatic arguments don't make a lot of sense in that case. If you want to change Richard's mind about his ideas, you have to show him how they'd be harmfull to society. Keep in mind though, his perspective turns traditional notions of what's good for society on it's head.
The comment about Slashdotters thinking it doesn't matter what they do is fair, if you are looking at the barrage of postings that appear on this site. What you have to keep in mind is that a lot of those posting are from people who are largely NOT contributing to the direction of Linux or OpenSource beyond their small little worlds. If you talk with the Linus Torvalds, RMS's, ESR's, and Alan Cox's of the world, they all have well developed perspectives on what they're doing and where they intend to go with it. They don't all have the same idea, but I'm sure fate will sort the good ideas from the ones that aren't as good. The irony of all this is that news.com had an article on the APSL debacle, and it talked about how intelligent and sophisticated all the various free software/open source people were when evaluating the license. It's all about how you spin it I guess.;-)
Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. Mr. Young would say back to Intel, "we can't do that, we'd lose market share." Most of RedHat's investors would be similarly displeased, and Intel wouldn't have a choice. Selling their stock won't reduce the money in RedHat either.
Even if everyone rallies around Intel's move, the Linux community won't be too thrilled about a kernel fork which does them no good. Very shortly you'll find people using other distros. More than likely Mandrake or a similar distribution will offer "RedHat but with an unforked kernel", and RedHat will be dead.
I have a dual processor system, and the problem is still there. My CPU utilization is never hi while playing MP3's, so I doubt that is the souce of the problem.
If you are reading this from Europ, then you may be suing my copright rights. You have a copy of this document in your browser, and in your video driver, and quite possible on swap space. This is ignoring the countless copies of the document that temprorily resided in the numerous routers between your machine and slashdot.
I might be persuaded to forgive you, but if your an MEP I will sue until you are thankful for the shirt on your back.;-)
I can't imagine how ANY heat sink could produce this effect unless it had some kind of a refridgeration unit in it. Furthermore, his comments about the one wire connecting to one part and another wire connecting to another is fairly counter intuitive to normal power mechanisms.
"Digital Audio Music is simly music converted into a very basic computer language know as bnary. A series of commands known as zeros or ones encode the music for future retrieve".
Commands known as 1's and 0's???:):)
Another golden one:
"When a song is retrieve from the Hard Disk 60 Only a replica of the permanently stored song is retrieve. The permanently stored song remains intact on the Hard Disk 60, thus allowing repeated playback."
Imagine that, you can read data from a hard disk and yet STILL have the hard disk store the data!!:)
It's just sad.. These guys shouldn't be allowed near a patent office.
Actually, the guys who developed SML/NJ made a multi-threaded version of the language. As I recall, they developed a multi-threaded X/Server as a demonstration app.
In general, you have to keep in mind a few things: threads have only become a standard part of Linux since glibc2 was adopted (some say that process is still ongoing;-), Linux threads still have some annoying limitations and aren't 100% posix compliant, XFree86 designs their server to run on a plethora of OS's, some of which I suspect either lack threads or have non-standard thread models.
Actually, you coudln't be more wrong. Most PC's today have processors which can easily outrun the I/O subsystems to which they are attached. Multithreading allows the CPU to continue to work on other tasks while it waits for the I/O systems to get back to it. Sure, multi-processing does this too, but multi-threading can be the more correct approach in many situations.
Your point about threads vs. multi-threading is quite correct. This is because a Unix process is essentialy a thread with it's own memory address space. As I said before, this can be a great way to get the job done in many situations, but it's not always appropriate.
DCE does most of this as well. Basically, all this stuff is age-old distributed computing stuff. To think the patent office would grant this is nothing short of increadible.
Can someone post a link to the entryin the IBM patent database? I couldn't find it, but from what I read of the press release, there is so much prior art on this it's laughable. Heck, I can think of *RFC's* that cover some of the areas mentiond.
Things which come to mind: NTP, IIP, various VRML technologies, multicaste IP, etc. Why is it that the Patent Office turns technology into such a joke?
Oh, and I love how this was all part of a government contract.
No. I can have the same IPv4 address here or in New York, without a problem. In IPv6 your IP address pretty much defines the routing rules on how to get to your system.
God, this is further proof that a paranoid, reactionary bunch runs things around here. There are so many OTHER unique identifiers in a persons computer it's just silly. There are so many ways to bypass this also silly.
Next thing you know, we'll be arguing that digital certificates, ethernet MAC addresses, IP addresses, credit card numbers, and phone numbers violate our privacy! I can't wait until they figure out that IPv6 will mean your IP address will effectively describe exactly how to route packets TO YOUR HOME!!! My God!! Imagine!
Here's some facts: a) You are not required to tell the banks any of this information. b) The only reason they get all these demographics is because people choose to use cheques or VISA. c) Consumer trials of stored value cards have consistently returned poor results d) The bulk of Cybercash's revenue comes from processing credit card transactions, as opposed to their electronic cash transations. So much so that it's now very hard to convince a client to build a Cyrbercoin enabled site.
All this shows that customers really don't place much value on their privacy. Banks have been doing this kind of stuff for centuries, although now it's done with the help of a computer. With all the emphasis on electronic banking these days, I'm glad for it. I still remember trying to get a bank to release the funds on a cheque I'd deposited electronically the day before. They said if there was someone at the bank who could vouch for me, they'd do it. I said, "For years you guys have been encouraging me to do electronic banking, so I've only been in here once before. However, if you check with the computer, *it* will vouch for me, because it will show that I have consistently deposited a pay cheque at this time of the month for 2 years, and that I've never been overdrawn." It wasn't good enough for them. I changed banks.
That being said, banks should not be able to pass on this information to other busnesses that they are involved in, and I believe this is legislated by law. If not, I'll be using a bank that agrees not to pass on my info to any other businesses without my express written consent.
Has anyone thought about how this would work for those who own SMP boxes? Supposedly SMP is the way of the future, so you'd think they'd have thought about this.
I'd just like to point out that two weeks ago, I sent in an e-mail to Creative Labs informing them of how their policies on Soundcard drivers for Linux had influenced my purchasing decisions. I don't know if it made a difference, but you have to think that if there were a lot of letters of that nature, it would make a difference.
My second thought: doesn't Creative already work with OSS developing drivers for their cards (for example SB Live!). How does OSS feel about this new development? I don't see any evidence that the drivers would be released as open source.
Can anyone figure out what the difference is between the GS and the DM machines? It seems to me like the DM is a much better deal, even with the rebate.
An Alpha??!?!? That's crazy. They need RAID more than they need killer CPU. I think all they should do is get a fancy hot-swappable RAID system and be done with it.
Ok, I looked at the new Freshmeat this morning, and very much liked it. I noticed there were comments below, and I read over a fair number of them. Most people, much like myself, were complimenting him on the look. Other were raising some objections about what he'd done (renders slow, etc.), others like the old look better.
I think I missed the flames, but I'd like to say that the criticisms that I did see were fair. Sure scoop puts in a lot of work for no reward, but that doesn't make him above criticism. If someone thinks the site could be better, let them send their advice in to scoop. If scoop wants to, he can listen to it, and maybe improve the site, or he can ignore it (I mean, he is doing it for nothing, so there's nothing stopping him from doing absoluting nothing).
Maybe the flaming was bad and out of control. I don't know, because I don't think I saw it. Still, you have to know that people who do flame that bad don't deserve scoop's attention. This actually is a sad example of what Katz was talking about, with a few screaming flamers pushing everyone around, while the lurkers lose their freshmeat. Scoop needs to take a page from Katz, and learn to recognize the flamers for what they are: adolecent idiots who are desperately seeking attention.
The irony of all this is that I didn't think Katz's argument was right. Talk about fate proving me wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
I honestly think that Richard would be ok with GNU not getting all the headlines if he thought that the message about the name "Linux" were freedom. The problem is, he feels it isn't, so by forcing "GNU/Linux" on the table, it gives GNU some name recognition, and he hopes it will get people talking about freedom?
I'm sure people thought Jesus was naive. I'm sure people thought the American revolutionaries were naive. I'm sure people thought Steve Jobs was naive. ;-)
;-)
The truth of the matter is, whenever you try to change the fundimental perspective of things, you look naive to the people who have accepted the status quo. Richard is a "fundamentalists free software advocate" in the sense that his views are driven by what he sees as being the right way for the world to be, and traditional pragmatic arguments don't make a lot of sense in that case.
If you want to change Richard's mind about his ideas, you have to show him how they'd be harmfull to society. Keep in mind though, his perspective turns traditional notions of what's good for society on it's head.
The comment about Slashdotters thinking it doesn't matter what they do is fair, if you are looking at the barrage of postings that appear on this site. What you have to keep in mind is that a lot of those posting are from people who are largely NOT contributing to the direction of Linux or OpenSource beyond their small little worlds.
If you talk with the Linus Torvalds, RMS's, ESR's, and Alan Cox's of the world, they all have well developed perspectives on what they're doing and where they intend to go with it. They don't all have the same idea, but I'm sure fate will sort the good ideas from the ones that aren't as good.
The irony of all this is that news.com had an article on the APSL debacle, and it talked about how intelligent and sophisticated all the various free software/open source people were when evaluating the license.
It's all about how you spin it I guess.
Well, I'd argue glibc is pretty key too.
They have had an unstable tree for quite a while..... Did somebody somehow miss the press releases on RawHide?
More importantly, why didn't they run LinuxPPC on the same hardware? The price would have effectively been cheaper!
Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. Mr. Young would say back to Intel, "we can't do that, we'd lose market share." Most of RedHat's investors would be similarly displeased, and Intel wouldn't have a choice. Selling their stock won't reduce the money in RedHat either.
Even if everyone rallies around Intel's move, the Linux community won't be too thrilled about a kernel fork which does them no good. Very shortly you'll find people using other distros. More than likely Mandrake or a similar distribution will offer "RedHat but with an unforked kernel", and RedHat will be dead.
I have a dual processor system, and the problem is still there. My CPU utilization is never hi while playing MP3's, so I doubt that is the souce of the problem.
If you are reading this from Europ, then you may be suing my copright rights. You have a copy of this document in your browser, and in your video driver, and quite possible on swap space. This is ignoring the countless copies of the document that temprorily resided in the numerous routers between your machine and slashdot.
;-)
I might be persuaded to forgive you, but if your an MEP I will sue until you are thankful for the shirt on your back.
I can't imagine how ANY heat sink could produce this effect unless it had some kind of a refridgeration unit in it. Furthermore, his comments about the one wire connecting to one part and another wire connecting to another is fairly counter intuitive to normal power mechanisms.
Here are some of my favourite quotes:
:) :)
:)
"Digital Audio Music is simly music converted into a very basic computer language know as bnary. A series of commands known as zeros or ones encode the music for future retrieve".
Commands known as 1's and 0's???
Another golden one:
"When a song is retrieve from the Hard Disk 60 Only a replica of the permanently stored song is retrieve. The permanently stored song remains intact on the Hard Disk 60, thus allowing repeated playback."
Imagine that, you can read data from a hard disk and yet STILL have the hard disk store the data!!
It's just sad.. These guys shouldn't be allowed near a patent office.
Actually, the guys who developed SML/NJ made a multi-threaded version of the language. As I recall, they developed a multi-threaded X/Server as a demonstration app.
;-), Linux threads still have some annoying limitations and aren't 100% posix compliant, XFree86 designs their server to run on a plethora of OS's, some of which I suspect either lack threads or have non-standard thread models.
In general, you have to keep in mind a few things: threads have only become a standard part of Linux since glibc2 was adopted (some say that process is still ongoing
Actually, you coudln't be more wrong. Most PC's today have processors which can easily outrun the I/O subsystems to which they are attached. Multithreading allows the CPU to continue to work on other tasks while it waits for the I/O systems to get back to it. Sure, multi-processing does this too, but multi-threading can be the more correct approach in many situations.
Your point about threads vs. multi-threading is quite correct. This is because a Unix process is essentialy a thread with it's own memory address space. As I said before, this can be a great way to get the job done in many situations, but it's not always appropriate.
DCE does most of this as well. Basically, all this stuff is age-old distributed computing stuff. To think the patent office would grant this is nothing short of increadible.
Can someone post a link to the entryin the IBM patent database? I couldn't find it, but from what I read of the press release, there is so much prior art on this it's laughable. Heck, I can think of *RFC's* that cover some of the areas mentiond.
Things which come to mind: NTP, IIP, various VRML technologies, multicaste IP, etc. Why is it that the Patent Office turns technology into such a joke?
Oh, and I love how this was all part of a government contract.
No. I can have the same IPv4 address here or in New York, without a problem. In IPv6 your IP address pretty much defines the routing rules on how to get to your system.
God, this is further proof that a paranoid, reactionary bunch runs things around here. There are so many OTHER unique identifiers in a persons computer it's just silly. There are so many ways to bypass this also silly.
Next thing you know, we'll be arguing that digital certificates, ethernet MAC addresses, IP addresses, credit card numbers, and phone numbers violate our privacy! I can't wait until they figure out that IPv6 will mean your IP address will effectively describe exactly how to route packets TO YOUR HOME!!! My God!! Imagine!
Here's some facts:
a) You are not required to tell the banks any of this information.
b) The only reason they get all these demographics is because people choose to use cheques or VISA.
c) Consumer trials of stored value cards have consistently returned poor results
d) The bulk of Cybercash's revenue comes from processing credit card transactions, as opposed to their electronic cash transations. So much so that it's now very hard to convince a client to build a Cyrbercoin enabled site.
All this shows that customers really don't place much value on their privacy. Banks have been doing this kind of stuff for centuries, although now it's done with the help of a computer. With all the emphasis on electronic banking these days, I'm glad for it. I still remember trying to get a bank to release the funds on a cheque I'd deposited electronically the day before. They said if there was someone at the bank who could vouch for me, they'd do it. I said, "For years you guys have been encouraging me to do electronic banking, so I've only been in here once before. However, if you check with the computer, *it* will vouch for me, because it will show that I have consistently deposited a pay cheque at this time of the month for 2 years, and that I've never been overdrawn." It wasn't good enough for them. I changed banks.
That being said, banks should not be able to pass on this information to other busnesses that they are involved in, and I believe this is legislated by law. If not, I'll be using a bank that agrees not to pass on my info to any other businesses without my express written consent.
Has anyone thought about how this would work for those who own SMP boxes? Supposedly SMP is the way of the future, so you'd think they'd have thought about this.
I would, but I built my system from scratch, AND I actually have to use Windows NT to do work related things.
I'd just like to point out that two weeks ago, I sent in an e-mail to Creative Labs informing them of how their policies on Soundcard drivers for Linux had influenced my purchasing decisions. I don't know if it made a difference, but you have to think that if there were a lot of letters of that nature, it would make a difference.
My second thought: doesn't Creative already work with OSS developing drivers for their cards (for example SB Live!). How does OSS feel about this new development? I don't see any evidence that the drivers would be released as open source.
Use the DSP capabilities.... ;-) For MP3 decoding, that should be better than an FPU.
Can anyone figure out what the difference is between the GS and the DM machines? It seems to me like the DM is a much better deal, even with the rebate.
Well, I have this controller, but I have to admit I haven't used my CD in a while. ;-) I'll test it out for you.
An Alpha??!?!? That's crazy. They need RAID more than they need killer CPU. I think all they should do is get a fancy hot-swappable RAID system and be done with it.
2mbps is nothing for a P120 running Linux.
Ok, I looked at the new Freshmeat this morning, and very much liked it. I noticed there were comments below, and I read over a fair number of them. Most people, much like myself, were complimenting him on the look. Other were raising some objections about what he'd done (renders slow, etc.), others like the old look better.
I think I missed the flames, but I'd like to say that the criticisms that I did see were fair. Sure scoop puts in a lot of work for no reward, but that doesn't make him above criticism. If someone thinks the site could be better, let them send their advice in to scoop. If scoop wants to, he can listen to it, and maybe improve the site, or he can ignore it (I mean, he is doing it for nothing, so there's nothing stopping him from doing absoluting nothing).
Maybe the flaming was bad and out of control. I don't know, because I don't think I saw it. Still, you have to know that people who do flame that bad don't deserve scoop's attention. This actually is a sad example of what Katz was talking about, with a few screaming flamers pushing everyone around, while the lurkers lose their freshmeat. Scoop needs to take a page from Katz, and learn to recognize the flamers for what they are: adolecent idiots who are desperately seeking attention.
The irony of all this is that I didn't think Katz's argument was right. Talk about fate proving me wrong.