As the police (theoretically) do not go into people's homes without warrants, the government should only spy on a person's internet connection (e-mail's, homepages, media storage places as xoom's media sharehouse, etc) with a warrant and with the persons knowledge (like in the "real world"). In my opinion, sniffing one's e-mails randomly and without his/her knowledge of it is just like opening every letter you receive: a federal violation in 99% of the countries on Earth.
/* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
You're right. That seems kinda commercial and lame to me. I didn't read that, thanks for pointing it out. /* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
No, their manifesto says the code will be GPL'ed and copyrighted to the Project instead of each developer helding their copyrights on things they write (the linux kernel, for example, does that, and then lists almost everybody in the CREDITS file and the proper source codes, which I think is what they're going to do). /* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
Besides the fact that everything you are saying is completely right, I still think they have a point. Their intention, if true, is amazingly good. Could you think of Linux like it is today, 10 years ago? Could you think of Windows 2000 when you look back at Windows 1.01? It's the crazy ideas that change the world. Contemplating is very easy, but realizing you need to do something hard and doing it, that's the hard part. And we all must go thru that part, whenever we need to choose... /* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
But that can all be fixed, since the source code for everything you mentioned above are open sourced. Linux can support windows binaries. WINE will become better than Windows. It's just a matter of time. /* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
Me too, although the idea is pretty redundant itself: why would someone want to create just a plain clone of MS Windows ME instead of just trying to get WINE better, and then tweaking Linux/*BSD to be a little more 'visual' (i.e.: GUI whenever you want, and the very hidden option to get on a console)? That would leave them much more free time to work on the kernel and other very hard issues they will face. If it wasn't easy for WINE to get an average emulation of linux binaries, how hard would you think it is to just make another Windows? Windows is big and full of features today (yes, it is buggy, but it is a complete system), and at least 9 years of active development. These guys have a long road ahead of them, and I offer them all the luck in the world, too. Open Source is the way!
/* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
That wouldn't be a clone, that would be just a lookalike product. I believe a clone is supposed to be able to, at least, run the binaries produced at the original system, OR has some sort of compatibility (like POSIX, between *nix). Just my guess. /* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
Ok, I admit I was very wrong about AOL. Anyway, I still think Mac *is* dumbed down. I have never used Macs for more than 10 minutes, but I know their mouses have just 1 button, and when you put a diskette inside of them, they seem to automatically open etc. I think this is good, but only for beginners. Like you, I also think ease of use is good, but a mouse is not a standard - at least, it shouldn't be, because many Operating Systems do not even care for it - Linux, *BSD, Solaris, and others, while Windows brags you don't have a mouse attached to your computer. I can't imagine a regular Mac user having to use his computer with the keyboard only. You're right about M$ Office, too. BTW: What is the meaning of non sequitur?:-) /* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
Is quite simple: make it easy to use. It's just like America Online. The goal of Apple since it began to develop Apple wasn't to offer amazing multitasking or extreme power for huge processing, but to let the regular Joe be able to do anything with that single-button mouse. AOL did the same pretty well, at the cost of absolutely no compatibility with anything not-M$ (ie. our baby linux), yet they are making lots of money with it. I think user interfaces will get dumber and dumber from now on - most mac/windows users can spend a lot of their time without a single keypress. The text has a lot of correct propositions and conclusions, I enjoyed skimming it. /* c. hs laviola claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
I use Debian and I'm very proud of saying that out loud to everyone interested. My question is: do you think there is going to be in the near future any attempt of merging the structure of Debian into the [Free/Net/Open]BSD Projects? I ask that because they are great OS'es and many many people I know would love to see such effort. I'd like to ask you also if you think Hurd will be good enough to 'beat' *BSD's and become the 'standard' of Unix systems. Thank you.
This is a very interesting view of the way gaming works - I like it. I have first noticed something like that years ago, when I got myself really interacting with people during a Quake match - that was interesting. The possibilities are endless, now that there are more and more games, some very specific, some with nothing but gun-shooting and noise, and really clever ones, like Warcraft, Simcity, The Sims, C&C... The meaning of gaming is not clear to most people not into computers. They mostly think games are for geeks, and that only nerds like videogames (or teenagers). A guy was arrested in my country, after shooting more than 5 people in a theatre at his town (Sao Paulo), and the accusation blamed it on influence coming from Duke Nukem (I even think there is an article about that right here at/.). Anyway, gaming is more and more close to a real life experience - I hope to be expanding my knowledge and my icq list more and more from now on, as games keep going better and better (which is kinda bad, because my computer is sooo slow:P). Quake anyone?:)
You know what? Fuck you all. Fuck the RIAA, Metallica, Offspring, Dr. Dre, Britney Spears, I don't give a fuck. Everyone has been copying audio decades ago, and nobody has said shit about that. Give me a break. Tecnically, and that's what matters, Napster is not doing anything illegal, period! Is that so fucking hard to realize? I think there is a little difference between acting as a mean to let ANYONE do WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO (i.e. trade good public domain music like Bach, Stravinsky songs, or trade hiphop trash, who cares). If people are so excited about Napster, then something is kinda wrong. CD's are nice, but not everyone can afford all they want - hell, at least not me, I am poor. If you want to make me stop using Napster, or having quick access to information, then you better pay my CDs, bills, cut off my telephone line or something. Something funny that I think nobody has ever realized is that trading MP3s has been possible for years - _lots_ of years, in fact. Again, only because of the fucking stupid 'internet media' hype and all the shitheads getting online, there has been this enormous impact of the program. Hell, go sue CuteMX, gnutella, sue ICQ, sue the guy who made IRC for including file-sharing functions, make the FTP RFC classified. Fuck you all hypocrates. And for all pop artists who can no longer eat: I HOPE YOU DIE. Thank you for your time.
I guess the discussion is coming to a point whether we are no longer discussing Motorola's product, as stated in the article itself, but to the option the user does to the service being provided to him. You see, it's pretty much like somebody else told in the main thread: we are paying for the signal. What scares me is when we have money talking louder than quality of service. When we talk about high-speed connections, we want freedom too. I mean, what if I just connect a DSL machine to another machine thru another ethernet card and don't let it get nothing from the Internet, but still be able to get files I got from the Internet with that machine? Will that bypass the ToS? I guess so. It's time to stop with stupid commercial contracts obligating you to not do what you want to with things you've already paid for. I have heard true rumors that the new Brazilian DSL company named Speedy is limiting the number of TCP connections you can make at the same time! What is that? The same thing about a Cable Modem ISP, called Virtua, which is charging for bandwidth (you get 1GB/MONTH with the standard access plan). Come on, give us a break. -- Carlos Laviola
Well, seems to me like another big democracy issue. I have not read the story yet, but it seems logical to me not to buy proprietary software. Why would anyone buy for things they can get very well done on a free environment? In fact, on more than one. (Linux/3 BSD's/...) So, at that point, the Government of China is correct, but it is lacking on freedom of the people. They can choose what is good or not for them. No one is ever going to do a complete change from Win9x to *NIX systems. I believe nobody has the perfect conditions to do so. I guess using Linux as in the Brazillian project, as a priority, would be much better than in this "project" (which I guess its an order).
Where are the feminists right now? Give us female geeks! We need our matching souls! =] Just kidding..:)) I think many women aren't so crazy about "computer stuff":(... Too bad, we'll be here waiting! We have Open Hearts (r):)
I don't work (yet), but I can clearly see the stupidity of this matters. This should be enough to sue someone. How come one pays millions to keep their company's systems updated, every single device looking for a year date Y2K compliant, and then, at the last, "invites" a tech to stay at the company on 31-12 or get invited to be out of here. HOW do they do that? WHY do they do that? I think mostly because of the media hype. I don't know, it was just silly. Everybody knew nothing bad was going to happen really, because of all the measures everybody took (and all that obscure billion dollars, where are them now? on some smart guy's swiss bank account, probably...). You see, this is a complicated world. "Just in case" is just great. I wish I could have eg a guarantee of keeping the money from stuff I buy "just in case I don't like it, I promise I'll pay if I do".
I just want to state a few things out of this. Okay, they're digital predictions etc. But I really believe there is much much more stuff to do with poor countries, using technology to grow plants, get their economies up, using the technology to the man. Wireless stuff would be fine, if we lived in this ideal world we don't. There is poor people everywhere. The world is sick tired of problems. Why don't we just take care of the important stuff first, rather than make the richs richer and the poor dead?
BTW, a message to the first post/nonsense message guys: get a life.
I know this is 10% off-topic, but since I saw a post regarding on small issues like "small third world power outages", I think you're not being smart when you say that. AFAIK, most (concerned about themselves) governments are really taking care of the bug. For example, here in Brazil, the government will have a 24-hour comittee to watch things going from New Zealand to wherever the time zones get us to. we are being as careful as "first world" countries here. I don't want to start a flame war, or something, but that's the truth.
Currently, we see AMD and Intel fighting hert after hert for being at the top of the market. To have the best, the fastest computer. But, really, what will that be useful for? And I answer myself: to increase W*ndows requirements. As it has always been in the past: they release something faster, Windows gets slower, user is fooled. But, now, we are reaching a bigger level, where home computers are reaching semi-workstation processing values. Why don't they investigate on new technologies to make microchips cheaper than boosting CPU's to 1 GHz? (I think that may be the 'tryumph' they're looking for). Why not put more money on useful research? Today, we already have fine, *very fast* pc's. Of course we want more. Someday, we'll need more. But the question, to me, is: every 6 months? No, thank you. Maybe next year, I'll buy "today next's generation".
Well, first of all, I would like to make a few comments, as KGBear does sometimes:):
1) We are not talking about explicit open source software. It is FREE. The source is closed? It doesn't matter. If they can give us, we will use it. That's the idea. 2) Probably that will save huge amounts of money, of course. But there is a lot of piracy, even into the government (many agencies have illegal copies of very expensive software). That will keep going. 3) The lack of supervision will probably throw this law into complete dust. Who will be assuring people are using 'as much as there is possible' of free software? What will be the _penalties_ for people running commercial software? Those questions intrigate me.
Now to the good point. This will lead to something very very good, and completely new: thousands of people using software like *nix. That will make the understanding of such systems much more common between everyone. And, we all know no jobs will vanish from such acts. Software bought was bought. Future software running will be free, and programmers won't have to work more (or less) so they can sell his new applications. If the functions of the program are very needed, like, let's say, PhotoShop (there is always GIMP =D), the program will be bought. What I mean is, good programmers will always have their places. So, concluding: why not? less budgets, and, besides, just wonder how much people will begin using real os'es? how many people will get to know the real possibilites his computer had but he never experienced? I think some other countries should take a look at the idea.
Don't give your opinion on subjects you aren't into. There are state-of-the-art computers here for the best price you can get from our broken economy. The common computer here is an AMD K6 300/400, at least. (I got one P200MMX for free from a friend upgrading to Pentium II, btw.)
I think I agree with you. But we cannot just forget that gov'ts are not always that smart. Besides, it was not a "government" decision, it was a justice's decision. (it is different) maybe the judge had the same intention, may be not -- but, as I saw in one of the posts out there, it is much easier to blame on the most unknown, "wierd" stuff (computers?) than on simple stuff (drug addicted person). What I noticed that was strange is the fact that here, in Brazil, we do not have such of a problem on hearing someone murdered 3 people because of drugs (unfortunately, such news are daily). I think that this law was solely approved for popularity's sake.
Slashdot Mirror
As the police (theoretically) do not go into people's homes without warrants, the government should only spy on a person's internet connection (e-mail's, homepages, media storage places as xoom's media sharehouse, etc) with a warrant and with the persons knowledge (like in the "real world"). In my opinion, sniffing one's e-mails randomly and without his/her knowledge of it is just like opening every letter you receive: a federal violation in 99% of the countries on Earth.
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
You're right. That seems kinda commercial and lame to me. I didn't read that, thanks for pointing it out.
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
No, their manifesto says the code will be GPL'ed and copyrighted to the Project instead of each developer helding their copyrights on things they write (the linux kernel, for example, does that, and then lists almost everybody in the CREDITS file and the proper source codes, which I think is what they're going to do).
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
Besides the fact that everything you are saying is completely right, I still think they have a point. Their intention, if true, is amazingly good. Could you think of Linux like it is today, 10 years ago? Could you think of Windows 2000 when you look back at Windows 1.01? It's the crazy ideas that change the world. Contemplating is very easy, but realizing you need to do something hard and doing it, that's the hard part. And we all must go thru that part, whenever we need to choose...
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
But that can all be fixed, since the source code for everything you mentioned above are open sourced. Linux can support windows binaries. WINE will become better than Windows. It's just a matter of time.
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
Me too, although the idea is pretty redundant itself: why would someone want to create just a plain clone of MS Windows ME instead of just trying to get WINE better, and then tweaking Linux/*BSD to be a little more 'visual' (i.e.: GUI whenever you want, and the very hidden option to get on a console)? That would leave them much more free time to work on the kernel and other very hard issues they will face. If it wasn't easy for WINE to get an average emulation of linux binaries, how hard would you think it is to just make another Windows? Windows is big and full of features today (yes, it is buggy, but it is a complete system), and at least 9 years of active development. These guys have a long road ahead of them, and I offer them all the luck in the world, too. Open Source is the way!
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
That wouldn't be a clone, that would be just a lookalike product. I believe a clone is supposed to be able to, at least, run the binaries produced at the original system, OR has some sort of compatibility (like POSIX, between *nix). Just my guess.
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
Ok, I admit I was very wrong about AOL. Anyway, I still think Mac *is* dumbed down. I have never used Macs for more than 10 minutes, but I know their mouses have just 1 button, and when you put a diskette inside of them, they seem to automatically open etc. I think this is good, but only for beginners. Like you, I also think ease of use is good, but a mouse is not a standard - at least, it shouldn't be, because many Operating Systems do not even care for it - Linux, *BSD, Solaris, and others, while Windows brags you don't have a mouse attached to your computer. I can't imagine a regular Mac user having to use his computer with the keyboard only. You're right about M$ Office, too. BTW: What is the meaning of non sequitur? :-)
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
Is quite simple: make it easy to use. It's just like America Online. The goal of Apple since it began to develop Apple wasn't to offer amazing multitasking or extreme power for huge processing, but to let the regular Joe be able to do anything with that single-button mouse. AOL did the same pretty well, at the cost of absolutely no compatibility with anything not-M$ (ie. our baby linux), yet they are making lots of money with it. I think user interfaces will get dumber and dumber from now on - most mac/windows users can spend a lot of their time without a single keypress. The text has a lot of correct propositions and conclusions, I enjoyed skimming it.
/* c. hs laviola
claviola@rj.sol.com.br, uin# 55799523 */
I use Debian and I'm very proud of saying that out loud to everyone interested. My question is: do you think there is going to be in the near future any attempt of merging the structure of Debian into the [Free/Net/Open]BSD Projects? I ask that because they are great OS'es and many many people I know would love to see such effort. I'd like to ask you also if you think Hurd will be good enough to 'beat' *BSD's and become the 'standard' of Unix systems.
Thank you.
This is a very interesting view of the way gaming works - I like it. I have first noticed something like that years ago, when I got myself really interacting with people during a Quake match - that was interesting. The possibilities are endless, now that there are more and more games, some very specific, some with nothing but gun-shooting and noise, and really clever ones, like Warcraft, Simcity, The Sims, C&C... /.). Anyway, gaming is more and more close to a real life experience - I hope to be expanding my knowledge and my icq list more and more from now on, as games keep going better and better (which is kinda bad, because my computer is sooo slow :P). :)
The meaning of gaming is not clear to most people not into computers. They mostly think games are for geeks, and that only nerds like videogames (or teenagers). A guy was arrested in my country, after shooting more than 5 people in a theatre at his town (Sao Paulo), and the accusation blamed it on influence coming from Duke Nukem (I even think there is an article about that right here at
Quake anyone?
You know what? Fuck you all. Fuck the RIAA, Metallica, Offspring, Dr. Dre, Britney Spears, I don't give a fuck. Everyone has been copying audio decades ago, and nobody has said shit about that. Give me a break. Tecnically, and that's what matters, Napster is not doing anything illegal, period! Is that so fucking hard to realize? I think there is a little difference between acting as a mean to let ANYONE do WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO (i.e. trade good public domain music like Bach, Stravinsky songs, or trade hiphop trash, who cares). If people are so excited about Napster, then something is kinda wrong. CD's are nice, but not everyone can afford all they want - hell, at least not me, I am poor. If you want to make me stop using Napster, or having quick access to information, then you better pay my CDs, bills, cut off my telephone line or something.
Something funny that I think nobody has ever realized is that trading MP3s has been possible for years - _lots_ of years, in fact. Again, only because of the fucking stupid 'internet media' hype and all the shitheads getting online, there has been this enormous impact of the program. Hell, go sue CuteMX, gnutella, sue ICQ, sue the guy who made IRC for including file-sharing functions, make the FTP RFC classified. Fuck you all hypocrates. And for all pop artists who can no longer eat: I HOPE YOU DIE.
Thank you for your time.
I guess the discussion is coming to a point whether we are no longer discussing Motorola's product, as stated in the article itself, but to the option the user does to the service being provided to him. You see, it's pretty much like somebody else told in the main thread: we are paying for the signal. What scares me is when we have money talking louder than quality of service. When we talk about high-speed connections, we want freedom too. I mean, what if I just connect a DSL machine to another machine thru another ethernet card and don't let it get nothing from the Internet, but still be able to get files I got from the Internet with that machine? Will that bypass the ToS? I guess so. It's time to stop with stupid commercial contracts obligating you to not do what you want to with things you've already paid for. I have heard true rumors that the new Brazilian DSL company named Speedy is limiting the number of TCP connections you can make at the same time! What is that? The same thing about a Cable Modem ISP, called Virtua, which is charging for bandwidth (you get 1GB/MONTH with the standard access plan). Come on, give us a break.
--
Carlos Laviola
Well, seems to me like another big democracy issue. I have not read the story yet, but it seems logical to me not to buy proprietary software. Why would anyone buy for things they can get very well done on a free environment? In fact, on more than one. (Linux/3 BSD's/...) So, at that point, the Government of China is correct, but it is lacking on freedom of the people. They can choose what is good or not for them. No one is ever going to do a complete change from Win9x to *NIX systems. I believe nobody has the perfect conditions to do so. I guess using Linux as in the Brazillian project, as a priority, would be much better than in this "project" (which I guess its an order).
Where are the feminists right now? Give us female geeks! We need our matching souls! =] Just kidding.. :)) I think many women aren't so crazy about "computer stuff" :(... Too bad, we'll be here waiting! We have Open Hearts (r) :)
I don't work (yet), but I can clearly see the stupidity of this matters. This should be enough to sue someone. How come one pays millions to keep their company's systems updated, every single device looking for a year date Y2K compliant, and then, at the last, "invites" a tech to stay at the company on 31-12 or get invited to be out of here. HOW do they do that? WHY do they do that? I think mostly because of the media hype. I don't know, it was just silly. Everybody knew nothing bad was going to happen really, because of all the measures everybody took (and all that obscure billion dollars, where are them now? on some smart guy's swiss bank account, probably...). You see, this is a complicated world. "Just in case" is just great. I wish I could have eg a guarantee of keeping the money from stuff I buy "just in case I don't like it, I promise I'll pay if I do".
I just want to state a few things out of this. Okay, they're digital predictions etc. But I really believe there is much much more stuff to do with poor countries, using technology to grow plants, get their economies up, using the technology to the man. Wireless stuff would be fine, if we lived in this ideal world we don't. There is poor people everywhere. The world is sick tired of problems. Why don't we just take care of the important stuff first, rather than make the richs richer and the poor dead?
BTW, a message to the first post/nonsense message guys: get a life.
I know this is 10% off-topic, but since I saw a post regarding on small issues like "small third world power outages", I think you're not being smart when you say that. AFAIK, most (concerned about themselves) governments are really taking care of the bug. For example, here in Brazil, the government will have a 24-hour comittee to watch things going from New Zealand to wherever the time zones get us to. we are being as careful as "first world" countries here. I don't want to start a flame war, or something, but that's the truth.
Currently, we see AMD and Intel fighting hert after hert for being at the top of the market. To have the best, the fastest computer. But, really, what will that be useful for? And I answer myself: to increase W*ndows requirements. As it has always been in the past: they release something faster, Windows gets slower, user is fooled. But, now, we are reaching a bigger level, where home computers are reaching semi-workstation processing values. Why don't they investigate on new technologies to make microchips cheaper than boosting CPU's to 1 GHz? (I think that may be the 'tryumph' they're looking for). Why not put more money on useful research? Today, we already have fine, *very fast* pc's. Of course we want more. Someday, we'll need more. But the question, to me, is: every 6 months? No, thank you. Maybe next year, I'll buy "today next's generation".
Okay, I understand that certain point now.
Funny, we too.
Well, first of all, I would like to make a few comments, as KGBear does sometimes :):
1) We are not talking about explicit open source software. It is FREE. The source is closed? It doesn't matter. If they can give us, we will use it. That's the idea.
2) Probably that will save huge amounts of money, of course. But there is a lot of piracy, even into the government (many agencies have illegal copies of very expensive software). That will keep going.
3) The lack of supervision will probably throw this law into complete dust. Who will be assuring people are using 'as much as there is possible' of free software? What will be the _penalties_ for people running commercial software? Those questions intrigate me.
Now to the good point. This will lead to something very very good, and completely new: thousands of people using software like *nix. That will make the understanding of such systems much more common between everyone. And, we all know no jobs will vanish from such acts. Software bought was bought. Future software running will be free, and programmers won't have to work more (or less) so they can sell his new applications. If the functions of the program are very needed, like, let's say, PhotoShop (there is always GIMP =D), the program will be bought. What I mean is, good programmers will always have their places.
So, concluding: why not? less budgets, and, besides, just wonder how much people will begin using real os'es? how many people will get to know the real possibilites his computer had but he never experienced?
I think some other countries should take a look at the idea.
Don't give your opinion on subjects you aren't into. There are state-of-the-art computers here for the best price you can get from our broken economy. The common computer here is an AMD K6 300/400, at least. (I got one P200MMX for free from a friend upgrading to Pentium II, btw.)
It is translated. We speak portuguese, btw.
I think I agree with you. But we cannot just forget that gov'ts are not always that smart. Besides, it was not a "government" decision, it was a justice's decision. (it is different) maybe the judge had the same intention, may be not -- but, as I saw in one of the posts out there, it is much easier to blame on the most unknown, "wierd" stuff (computers?) than on simple stuff (drug addicted person). What I noticed that was strange is the fact that here, in Brazil, we do not have such of a problem on hearing someone murdered 3 people because of drugs (unfortunately, such news are daily). I think that this law was solely approved for popularity's sake.