All a dist is (often) is a collection of apps, the methods of installin them and managing them, around the kernel. Maybe an optimization switch in the kernel that says, "primary use=server/productivity/gaming" or somethin like that:) But it wouldnt be in a dist.
Ofcourse, but it could be useful to make a distribution that comes with a kernel precompiled with this switch:) And the producer of this distribution could focus on things like drivers for the latest video/soundcards.
Was making a better server really one of Linus' goals? I think not. Instead, servers are a niche where we can slide Linux in under the PHB's radar. Also, the only OSs that are entirely optimized for playing games are game consoles.
I agree, but its architecture (resembling that of a Unix-kernel) does make it more suitable for running as a server, although this is changing a bit now that it's becoming more of an all-rounder.
Stability does not have to be compromised by performance or features, not if the OS / Graphics package is designed properly. Did SGI's graphics eye-candy jeopardize it's speed or reliability? (OK, they've fallen on hard times recently, but think back about 5 years.)
Where did I state that Linux' stability compromises performance or features? I only said it often does and this is undoubtedly the case in some parts of the Linux-kernel.
Since Linux was originally much more geared towards and used for server-applications and has only been moving into the desktop-market for a relatively short period, I can imagine the operating system is not entirely optimized for playing games. Stability often comes at the cost of performance and features, so I was wondering, do you think it would be useful to create a Linux distribution that focusses mainly on gaming and other multimedia-related applications?
I don't think the DMCA can really make a big difference in the end. Sure, we'll be seeing lots of lawsuits again and some really weird rip-off licenses from large corporations (so what else is new?) But at the end of the day, someone will always crack any code. And one of the key-benefits of digital media will always be perfect and easy replication.
So does it really matter what laws and other bullsh*t they come up with?
Here's a list of the characters and actors playing them, I got this from an interview with Brian Singer:
Famke Jansen as Jean Grey James Marsden as Cyclops Halle Berry as Storm Hugh Jackson as Wolverine Anna Paquin as Rogue and Patrick Stewart as Professor Xavier
The bad guys:
Ray Parks as Toad Rebecca Romijn-Stamos as Mystique Tyler Mane as Sabretooth and Ian McKellen as Magneto
Apparantly the movie will start off as Wolverine discovers Xavier's X-Men project. Besides trying to stop Magneto and his brotherhood of evil mutants there will also be some complications regarding Senator Robert Kelly, who sees mutants as a threat to society and wants them terminated.
I can't wait:)
Re:Money isn't everything.
on
Giving Back
·
· Score: 1
Will fun put food on the table? Will fun pay for the hospital bills when your kids need surgery and you don't have insurance?
I understand your point. But if you really need to make money, why get involved in free software? It's a bit stupid to code free software when you're not making money any other way to provide for your basic needs.
Money isn't everything.
on
Giving Back
·
· Score: 1
I've never been to one of those Linux conferences but I think I know what it's like in an.org pavilion: I've been visiting demoparties for almost ten years. They're still organised a lot in Europe(where I live) and it's still the same: lots of people along with their computer, hacking away at their demo and trying to get it all to work before the deadline. All these people spend a lot of money: the entrance fees are fairly high and if you want to visit several cool parties a year, you'll need to travel abroad. The parties, bustrips(an idea maybe for the Linux community?) and invitation demos were all created by people who get nothing in return for it (except for perhaps the most important thing: respect from their fellow sceners.)
What I'm trying to say is: who cares about money? I've been coding demos for years and never got anything in return. I'm currently involved in a couple of opensource projects and I'm not getting any money either. Who cares about money when you can have great fun doing what you like and meeting people interested in the same things? It's a shame that almost everything people do these days automatically triggers the question: "How much money will you get for it?"
The world is a complicated place. A lot of pain and misery was caused during the history of mankind because of stereotyping and prejudice.
Katz, after writing a book about geeks and everything concerning the "recent events in Colorado" should know that putting everybody in a neat little box with a label on it is a Bad Thing.
There is no label that fits me. (And it's not because I'm strange, since "strange" itself is so relative it loses all meaning when referring to people.) So why put labels on parts of the Internet? What will it signify? The kind of people that hang around? All this will only fuel prejudice, like fear of the so-called "Undernet".
Regardless of whether the people behind the recent DoS-attack took enough precautions to cover their tracks, the simple truth is that it's possible to do something like this without ever getting caught (as in: starting your telnet-to-telnet-sessions on a FreeBSD 0.8 machine in Siberia where nobody even knows what logfiles are)
The FBI should be investigating how they can change this. I don't think they can ever truly "secure" the Internet the way they'd like, but it would be more useful than tracking down the person responsible for this. What will they find even if they do catch him? Probably an idealist techno-anarchist student, a 16-year-old scriptkiddie or an "IRC wargroup" that rooted a couple of machines and decided to have some fun with it. Either way he won't be able to pay for the damages or help solve the problem in any way.
And who cares about bringing this person to justice? Locking him up will sooner turn him into a martyr, only evoking more DoS-attacks.
I don't get it, I was a geek 10 years ago and I was happy about it. I never used the word to describe myself back then but looking back I suppose I was. Today, I still am. I'm still behind my computer most of the time and although my worldview has changed over time (whose hasn't?) nothing really changed. I'm just a bit wary with all this hype going around these days. The book will probably turn into a movie and create a worldwide understanding and acceptance of geekdom. Everybody on earth, including suits will visit slashdot and nod approvingly. In the future, companies will be asking for a "geek" when they need an experienced developer (this is probably already happening.)
I'm getting sick of it. Being a geek is not something special. It's not about being elite. It's not about running the world now that computers are becoming very important (Hey I'm starting to sound like Jon Katz now:))
I just want the old technoanarchic culture back were advertisements on your site didn't mean you kick ass because people give you money because you're such a cool geek. I don't want to take the corporate world by storm with the GPL, a license that in essence has nothing to do with freedom (at least not for developers) and I don't want to see anymore IPOs where everybody and his brother invests all his money in absolutely nothing.
Can't we just forget about all this shit and have fun again?
I don't really get it when people claim a 64Meg player will store two hours. I never use anything below 128kbps, as a matter of fact, 160kbps is sometimes even needed to really get it right. And at 160kbps, this things doesn't store an hour.
Not that that has to be a bad thing. I just think it's a bad idea to put marketing-blah in a/. submission:)
I don't understand how someone can wonder what we can do with mobile processors. I can't wait to get one that'll fit in my ear and is capable of interpreting signals directly from my brain and responding to them accordingly. It'll need a highspeed connection to the internet (as in: latency < amount of time to think of something) and some good AI software to make it pleasant to use (I just want to think "Where the hell did I park my car last night?" instead of "Computer, locate transport.")
And it should have loads of add-ons to change personality (ofcourse it'll run Linux so you can do whatever you want) like one that'll say "This sucks!" when you go out and it just started raining:) You'll hear quite a lot of people saying "Hehe, yeah!" when they go out:)
I'm wondering: if you manage to change a bot by talking to him over IRC and the bot is licensed under the GPL, should you commit your therapy back to the opensource community?:)
I agree. But still, I can imagine someone starting a website in two years that would still be worthy of a domainname like linux.com - so what should he do? Get xyzzyx123321.com and pray for good searchengines? Ofcourse people will always abuse a new system by simply buying loads of names, but it would at least create some space for people to get a name that fits their site.
And about a site covering multiple subjects, I'm not saying everything should be organised into extremely specialised categories. Their could be general TLDs too.
The problem with stuff like this going on, is that it'll make all those people who pay a lot of money for their domainnames very pissed if the naming-scheme were to change in the future. And people with a lot of money usually have a lot of influence...
I'd personally be happy if the 3letter TLDs would have a lot more granularity instead of just "commercial", "network" and "organisation" (and some others...) How about "OS:Linux:Development"? Would make searching way simpler too:)
They were basically creating products to complement the stuff from Microsoft. But Microsoft expanding their productline and functionality in the direction of whatever Novell made to enhance the platform was inevitable. Novell has actually been a great help to Microsoft, pointing out were their products lacked. And, in a way, steering towards their own demise.
Flaming is never neccesary, it's just that sometimes you get tired of reading through loads of posts and suddenly you realize: nobody understands. I have been flamed more than I care to remember, the thing that bothers me however, is that as soon as the flaming starts, the exchange of knowledge ceases. Which is a shame.
A lot of people argue that flaming is a way to make people think, which is true, but in a case where both sides simply view things differently, flaming won't do any good.
The Kerberos system authenticates individual users in a network environment. After authenticating yourself to Kerberos, you can use network utilities such as rlogin, rcp, and rsh without having to present passwords to remote hosts and without having to bother with.rhosts files. Note that these utilities will work without passwords only if the remote machines you deal with support the Kerberos system.
``Clearly, we would like to either reach a settlement with 3Com out of court, or continue to pursue the remedies that are available through the court action,'' Simek said, adding that Xerox ``has always been open'' to a settlement.
Has always been open... but heaven forbid someone would create something cool using something they invented - isn't that supposed to be the greatest compliment?
I usually get flamed when I state that patents in general are a Bad Thing. Ofcourse the requirement of putting your invention in the open is good, but why the protection? Just remember the words of Benjamin Franklin...
I used to tell people years ago, that I would never tell them what they should or should not do with the code I gave them. This means I won't be able to use a license that restricts in *any* way.
What is the difference between being chained to a huge vendor like Microsoft or to a license that tells you exactly what you can and can not do with the code you just incorporated into a piece of sourcecode you downloaded? In the end, you are deprived of your right to do whatever the hell you want, which is never good.
O'Reilly has (as everyone here knows) published some good ones and most other publishers of computer-related books have done some general Unix books. My Unix-related books are rarely on my own desk (except for the programming references:))
Besides that it's important to have a good installer. Redhat, Suse and some others are doing a great job at this but it needs to get better. People will more likely try longer to understand their system if they can at least read their mail, browse a bit and do other basic tasks. I think most people (with only a single computer) need to have some kind of guarantee that they won't be isolated while trying out Linux.
NSI is the problem here.
on
Etoy Update
·
· Score: 4
I don't really care about all the legal problems concerning trademarks and patents. It'll probably be a long time before we see the end of those, but I'm disappointed in NSI. I more or less expected them to be around long enough to understand that they should simply stand-by and wait for the judge to actually tell them to pull etoy from their database.
Because no matter what the actual result in this case is, companies might start getting ideas like "hmm I can always start some lame campaign against my competitor to have his domainname set on hold for a while." This could only be the beginning, and it's already bad:(
Slashdot Mirror
Ofcourse, but it could be useful to make a distribution that comes with a kernel precompiled with this switch :) And the producer of this distribution could focus on things like drivers for the latest video/soundcards.
I agree, but its architecture (resembling that of a Unix-kernel) does make it more suitable for running as a server, although this is changing a bit now that it's becoming more of an all-rounder.
Stability does not have to be compromised by performance or features, not if the OS / Graphics package is designed properly. Did SGI's graphics eye-candy jeopardize it's speed or reliability? (OK, they've fallen on hard times recently, but think back about 5 years.)
Where did I state that Linux' stability compromises performance or features? I only said it often does and this is undoubtedly the case in some parts of the Linux-kernel.
Since Linux was originally much more geared towards and used for server-applications and has only been moving into the desktop-market for a relatively short period, I can imagine the operating system is not entirely optimized for playing games. Stability often comes at the cost of performance and features, so I was wondering, do you think it would be useful to create a Linux distribution that focusses mainly on gaming and other multimedia-related applications?
So does it really matter what laws and other bullsh*t they come up with?
Famke Jansen as Jean Grey
James Marsden as Cyclops
Halle Berry as Storm
Hugh Jackson as Wolverine
Anna Paquin as Rogue
and Patrick Stewart as Professor Xavier
The bad guys:
Ray Parks as Toad
Rebecca Romijn-Stamos as Mystique
Tyler Mane as Sabretooth
and Ian McKellen as Magneto
Apparantly the movie will start off as Wolverine discovers Xavier's X-Men project. Besides trying to stop Magneto and his brotherhood of evil mutants there will also be some complications regarding Senator Robert Kelly, who sees mutants as a threat to society and wants them terminated.
I can't wait :)
What I'm trying to say is: who cares about money? I've been coding demos for years and never got anything in return. I'm currently involved in a couple of opensource projects and I'm not getting any money either. Who cares about money when you can have great fun doing what you like and meeting people interested in the same things? It's a shame that almost everything people do these days automatically triggers the question: "How much money will you get for it?"
Katz, after writing a book about geeks and everything concerning the "recent events in Colorado" should know that putting everybody in a neat little box with a label on it is a Bad Thing.
There is no label that fits me. (And it's not because I'm strange, since "strange" itself is so relative it loses all meaning when referring to people.) So why put labels on parts of the Internet? What will it signify? The kind of people that hang around? All this will only fuel prejudice, like fear of the so-called "Undernet".
The FBI should be investigating how they can change this. I don't think they can ever truly "secure" the Internet the way they'd like, but it would be more useful than tracking down the person responsible for this. What will they find even if they do catch him? Probably an idealist techno-anarchist student, a 16-year-old scriptkiddie or an "IRC wargroup" that rooted a couple of machines and decided to have some fun with it. Either way he won't be able to pay for the damages or help solve the problem in any way.
And who cares about bringing this person to justice? Locking him up will sooner turn him into a martyr, only evoking more DoS-attacks.
I'm getting sick of it. Being a geek is not something special. It's not about being elite. It's not about running the world now that computers are becoming very important (Hey I'm starting to sound like Jon Katz now :))
I just want the old technoanarchic culture back were advertisements on your site didn't mean you kick ass because people give you money because you're such a cool geek. I don't want to take the corporate world by storm with the GPL, a license that in essence has nothing to do with freedom (at least not for developers) and I don't want to see anymore IPOs where everybody and his brother invests all his money in absolutely nothing.
Can't we just forget about all this shit and have fun again?
Not that that has to be a bad thing. I just think it's a bad idea to put marketing-blah in a /. submission :)
Now this is what I call a point'n'click-interface!
And it should have loads of add-ons to change personality (ofcourse it'll run Linux so you can do whatever you want) like one that'll say "This sucks!" when you go out and it just started raining :) You'll hear quite a lot of people saying "Hehe, yeah!" when they go out :)
I'm wondering: if you manage to change a bot by talking to him over IRC and the bot is licensed under the GPL, should you commit your therapy back to the opensource community? :)
And about a site covering multiple subjects, I'm not saying everything should be organised into extremely specialised categories. Their could be general TLDs too.
I'd personally be happy if the 3letter TLDs would have a lot more granularity instead of just "commercial", "network" and "organisation" (and some others...) How about "OS:Linux:Development"? Would make searching way simpler too :)
So, is this stuff going to be _BIG_ or what? :)
They were basically creating products to complement the stuff from Microsoft. But Microsoft expanding their productline and functionality in the direction of whatever Novell made to enhance the platform was inevitable. Novell has actually been a great help to Microsoft, pointing out were their products lacked. And, in a way, steering towards their own demise.
A lot of people argue that flaming is a way to make people think, which is true, but in a case where both sides simply view things differently, flaming won't do any good.
The Kerberos system authenticates individual users in a network environment. After authenticating yourself to Kerberos, you can use network utilities such as rlogin, rcp, and rsh without having to present passwords to remote hosts and without having to bother with .rhosts files. Note that these utilities will work without passwords only if the remote machines you deal with support the Kerberos system.
For more, read it online at http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bi n/man.cgi?query=kerberos.
Has always been open... but heaven forbid someone would create something cool using something they invented - isn't that supposed to be the greatest compliment?
I usually get flamed when I state that patents in general are a Bad Thing. Ofcourse the requirement of putting your invention in the open is good, but why the protection? Just remember the words of Benjamin Franklin...
What is the difference between being chained to a huge vendor like Microsoft or to a license that tells you exactly what you can and can not do with the code you just incorporated into a piece of sourcecode you downloaded? In the end, you are deprived of your right to do whatever the hell you want, which is never good.
Besides that it's important to have a good installer. Redhat, Suse and some others are doing a great job at this but it needs to get better. People will more likely try longer to understand their system if they can at least read their mail, browse a bit and do other basic tasks. I think most people (with only a single computer) need to have some kind of guarantee that they won't be isolated while trying out Linux.
Because no matter what the actual result in this case is, companies might start getting ideas like "hmm I can always start some lame campaign against my competitor to have his domainname set on hold for a while." This could only be the beginning, and it's already bad :(
I thought furbies were introduced in '98 :)