This does not seem to be leading edge research. Someone else posted their suspicion that the team was working with win32 systems looking for a better way.
I agree with them.
I think these guys are looking at win32 systems and wishing they were Unix ones.
1. 'Micro Reboots' - Can you say '/etc/init.d' ? Example, my Linux machine sometimes chokes on sound. I could reboot the machine, but instead, I just start the sound service. '/etc/init.d/sound restart'
2. 'Better tools to pinpoint the sources of faults' Can you say '/var/adm/SYSLOG or Messages?' Anything you want to know about the machine ends up there. If you take a proactive approach to your log, you are going to notice things before they bring the whole thing down. Maybe we could have better logging, but still this is exectution of what we know, not anything new.
3. 'We need an Undo' This one is very easy to setup yourself. It could be automated to a point, but really isn't this just a backup. Too much undo and you can't get anything done. Not enough and you need to know something to get the machine running again. Seems to be that a quality analysis of the system and its potential faults would yield a list of data to be incrementally watched and archived to achieve the same results.
4. I will give them a little credit for this one, though I am not sure I agree. This part of the puzzle would happen as part of #3 for the most part.
I have a big problem with #4 in that it makes the assumption that we are smarter than the tech. I am not sure we are. We can build it, but we don't always have a clue as to what it will do because there are too many subtle interactions to account for.
Better to let the machine bitch about the issue and be well prepared to deal with it. After a while, you and your machine will understand each others issues and all will be fine.
So, in the end, these folks are wishing they had a well planned and configured Unix system when they actually have something less...
Why not take those first three ideas and build a Linux that exectutes them nicely? Maybe people will prefer it to what we have now --maybe not. That would be some research.
This just isn't as big of a deal as it looks. (Sorry guys)
You know a large part of that maintenance cost comes from recurring license fees and forced upgrade schedules don't you?
These two things combined with the intergrated nature of Microsoft software raise costs more than you would think.
Servers that require CALs compared to servers that don't are another area to consider.
Also, it seems that justification of software happens mostly at the initial stage. Once a company is "in" they have a lot of leverage across their products to get more money more often through "Upgrades".
I believe this is what they are most afraid of. What happens when an upgrades triggers a large purchase with the "Consider Open Source" part active?
Seems to me that analysis will lead to fewer upgrades and additional Cost of Ownership realizations that will not go in the proprietary industry favor...
This is not dead yet in Oregon! Please take a moment to contact House Speaker Karen Minnis. She is uninformed, listening to the lobby as if it were god and sitting on the bill.
If public opinion stays high, the issue will be heard.
You can contact her:
Speaker Minnis 900 Court St. NE Room 269 Salem, OR 97301 Phn: 503-986-1200 Fax: 503- 986-1201 Email rep.karenminnis@state.or.us
A phone call is best because you can ask someone the nice and hard questions directly and request a response.
1. Why are Multnomah County residents being asked for additional taxes when obvious money saving bills like HB 2892 are being shelved?
2. Texas is willing to consider the bill. They also see right through the industry lobby thing. Why can't Oregon do the same?
3. How is it that proprietary software prices keep rising along with profit in the face of the worst high tech recession we have seen in years? Could it be the market is failing in this area? Should the State continue to support this by stalling legislation that will bring welcome competition to the state software marketplace?
You can think of others...
If you will forget, send an e-mail today. If you can remember --please do make that phone call.
You have this wrong. Nothing is required at all save the consideration of Open Source software.
Open Source software does not have full time paid lobbyists working the State for sales. Open Source is not *sold* it is used.
Legislation like this basically says: "Before you spend our tax dollars on software, see if you can make the Open Source software work first."
As for not forcing the government, that is a poor point of view as well. That is what we are supposed to do.
You know, "By the People for the People?" Our government is what we make of it and that is how it is supposed to be. Seems the more time passes, the more people seem to be forgetting that.
I *want* my government to work hard to save every dime they can; otherwise, I must pay more.
BTW: This is not dead yet in Oregon. Please take a moment to contact House Speaker Karen Minnis. She is uninformed, listening to the lobby as if it were god and sitting on the bill.
If public opinion stays high, the issue will be heard.
You can contact her:
Speaker Minnis 900 Court St. NE Room 269 Salem, OR 97301 Phn: 503-986-1200 Fax: 503- 986-1201 Email rep.karenminnis@state.or.us
A phone call is best because you can ask someone the nice and hard questions directly and request a response.
1. Why are Multnomah County residents being asked for additional taxes when obvious money saving bills like HB 2892 are being shelved?
2. Texas is willing to consider the bill. They also see right through the industry lobby thing. Why can't Oregon do the same?
3. How is it that proprietary software prices keep rising along with profit in the face of the worst high tech recession we have seen in years? Could it be the market is failing in this area? Should the State continue to support this by stalling legislation that will bring welcome competition to the state software marketplace?
You can think of others...
If you will forget, send an e-mail today. If you can remember --please do make that phone call.
I know piracy killed the machine. Yet, I enjoyed having a reasonably open machine.
Today it runs older console games via emulators. Best investment I have ever made. A little more RAM would have made it the perfect MAME box...
Re:Interesting but sort of scary
on
Digital Darwin
·
· Score: 1
That's it!
Seeing that was spooky for sure. It would be interesting to sort through all the 'wanna be' circuts to understand a little about how that thing ended up in there.
What I cannot remember is whether or not the circut worked without it.
Simple as that. There was nothing you could not know about the machine simply by looking at it actually.
Because the system is easily understood, making it do what you want (provided that task is within the limits of the hardware) is easy.
Someone needs to make computers like this today, only with slightly better video. Kids who want to "get good at computers" would be well served learning said machine inside and out.
It could boot regular CD media without any mods. It also still provides a very nice game experience today.
I get the feeling if the timing on the Dreamcast had been just a bit different, Sega would be in a better position today.
Interesting but sort of scary
on
Digital Darwin
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
technique that has always made me think.
I read a magazine article about this a while back. (probably Sci Am.)
One researcher setup a problem to be solved with an analog circut. The problem was to distinguish between the words yes and no.
Nobody can explain how the circut that evolved actually works. Like us, there were parts of the circut that seemed redundant or unnecessary. Sort of like the appendix.
This whole thing makes me wonder just what we don't know that we think we do.
Combat (Atari 2600 ???) I find it ironic that the first pack in game for the most limited system ever made was a two player game. This says a lot about the dynamics of gaming. This game was a lot of fun only if the other player was a lot of fun.
This one fact defined a new class of person to me: Gamer or not. Good gamers were there for the shared experience. Bad gamers were there for the score at your expense.
Adventure (Atari 2600 1979)
First game that had many places to go and dynamic problems to solve. Though the elements of the game remained the same, the solution was different each time. I realized that I could solve the game --or not! First game to give me a sense of 'place'. Adventure was a small simple place you could go for a while and do stuff.
Kaboom! (Atari 2600 ???) First game to generate that sublime state of mind known as the trance. Revealed the addictive nature of games in an up-front way. Still get the machine out once in a while to get my Kaboom fix. This one is best played on the machine. An emulator does not do the trance justice. Last year my oldest daughter gave this one a try after watching me for a while. Her report:
"This game is addictive. I just want to play, but I don't know why. It makes my brain better in a good way. I am learning to concentrate in a new way that I did not know before. Do you have to put it away now?"
This makes me wonder about the simple nature of games. We have largely lost that. Should we just ignore those and move on or not? I know my ability to do some things well today comes directly from games like this.
Another thought here. This game demands nothing short of perfection. It is designed to challenge the upper limit of human perception and reaction. Pretty amazing given the hardware. Nothing short of developing the hand eye skills of the best of us will satisfy the demands of this game. And it's fun!
Warlords (Atari 2600) Man! 4 players and fast simple action. This game is still great when you have the right folks playing. Kids will often ask for this game and play it for hours while yelling, taunting and eating lots of junk food.
Once again, I have often thought about environments as games in and of themselves. The freedom permitted in games like this makes for great games. You don't need graphics and sounds and such, just an environment where humans can be humans.
Madness and the Minoutar (Color Computer) I have always liked the text adventure. Still like 'em, but there are none like this! The environment was real time while your interface was not. Things were going on all around you while you read to grasp what they were. There are a lot of spatial and reasoning skills that are important later in life that are a key part of this game.
I have many spooky images in my mind from this game. All without 3D graphics cards and such.
This game defines the term 'Interactive Fiction'. Did not realize why I liked this one so much until much later.
Defender (Williams) Trance baby trance! That is all I have to say about this title. Guess Robotron belongs here as well. Why don't they make these anymore? I know that anytime I encounter one of these machines, I *will* play no matter what is happening at the time. It is sad really, I often pass an arcade and look for these machines first. Not very many left.
These two games and Kaboom! made me consider games as drugs. For a while, I actually considered this to be a bad thing. Then got over it as soon as I saw the younger generations reaction.
Wolf3D. (ID software) Oh my god! This early 3D game captured a *lot* of my time. So demanding and fast! Simple graphics with an underlying horror theme made for a twisted gaming experience. Got caught one time with no ammo, little health and a long dead end corridor. Used just the knife to scrape my way out to some food. I still remember the feeling afterword. It was as if I just escaped death itself. (I know --wierd
I chose the DSL because of provider choice. End user policy is primary where speed is secondary to me. I get to run what I want how I want when I want. That's pretty valuable.
Speed? No question cable is faster. So, there is both. So long as there are enough DSL'ers maybe that will preserve enough choice to keep Comcast semi-honest:)
Things I miss on cable: SG1, Sopranos, Food Network (Iron Chef!). Ah well, gives me a reason to visit friends.
I like having the content on media. It is a bit more expensive, but I get the final say on how it is used. DVD is open enough for that. (They did not intend it to be, but it is.)
At first it was expensive, but now that the backfilling has been largely done, it boils down to a few purchases a month as the new stuff hits...
I have been buying DVDs and using an antenna recently for cost and value reasons. Spent a weekend house sitting for a friend. The number of self-serving Comcast ads is sickening.
It is like listening to Clear Channel vs NPR.
You are better off buying content on removable media you control, getting DSL and ignoring their self serving fat pipes...
I agree with the scientific discovery part, but your statement about food breaks down.
The difference here is simple. The scientist that makes a discovery is paid somehow to do that. They are just going to make another one later. If they make enough, they continue to be valuable.
Their living is new ideas.
OSS people work differently.
They have problems to solve. They make their money solving problems. These solutions typically require tools to build.
By building better tools they are more able to solve problems. Since they can solve more problems, they will make more money.
When you buy a license to run someones software, you are basically paying them to solve your problem. When you hire OSS capable people, you are paying them to solve your problem.
The difference between the two is profound.
When you purchase software, you do not own the solution. You only pay for the right to make use of their solution that you can use according to their terms. It is not your solution.
Spending your money on someone who can build with OSS means that you own that solution. How it is used and what it does is on your terms.
Given the licensing terms today and the potential per user costs they incurr, OSS provides a much better long term value proposition than closed software does.
Anyone who really understands what that means will become a lot more willing to pay for OSS solutions.
Here is another way to look at things. All the money for all the solutions can either go to Redmond, or it can go to the people you have to hire anyway to make that mess work in the first place.
Which will be cheaper in the long run?
Personally, I would much rather support and educate the folks around me and actually get something rather than pay them what I have to and also pay that big and very hungry gorilla in Redmond.
I have already posted this under another thread, but just got the idea after reading a couple other posts.
So, what does your Rep say? Here is mine:
(Positive)
Dear Mr. Potatohead,
Thank you for your email in support of HB 2892. Rep. Dingfelder supports the concept of this bill and realizes the cost savings that it would bring about. At present, the bill is undergoing a few amendments so I am unable to commit to her vote for the bill until the final versions come out. However, my guess is that she will support it. I have passed along your comments to her. In addition, I will place a copy of your email in the bill file. This will assure that she again sees your comments prior to voting on the bill on the house floor.
Thanks for taking the time to contact our office regarding this issue. The representative greatly appreciates your input! Please feel free to contact out office at any time we can be of assistance to you.
Sincerely, (name) Legislative Assistant to Rep. Jackie Dingfelder House District 45 (Phone)
This guy either does not support the bill, or has not really investigated the issue. His office needs a few more phone calls. Lets make sure he gets them.
You all must remember, the process is fluid. There are many ways this bill can continue to move through the legislature.
If this is something we *really* want, and they understand that, then the bill stands a chance. They can move any issue they want to in any number of ways. If this were a sweetheart bill, you can bet it would find a way to move through the house. This bill can too.
The Oregon Legislature is getting a lot of calls and mail on this, and we need to keep it up.
Basically, we have money on one side and political creedence on the other. If enough people continue to remain involved, it remains harder to quietly kill the bill.
The issue of Open Source is alive in the Legislature right now. Getting a work session is important because the objections can be ironed out.
By making Open Source and Open Standards an issue, we at least bring awareness of the problems to a level that is hard any other way.
Just keep your perspective. The other bills died as quickly as the headlines went up. This one is still around with support in the Legislature. That is a WIN, not a loss by any measure!
If you have called, you might wait a day and ask for an update. Its another reason to call and the type of thing that demands a response which clearly shows interest.
Preparing responses takes time. Ask good questions, who when why how? That way a simple form letter does not cover the issue well enough to be considered a response.
If you get a form letter, make a quick phone call. You will get an answer and a chance to take someones time. That matters.
Representitives who simply say it's over do not support the bill. This does not mean it's over, it means you can stop calling now.
Don't do that.
This is what the lobbyists want. They want it because that keeps the status quo.
Take a good look at who opposes the bill. All those companies consider this a direct threat to one of their largest customers; namely, the state of Oregon.
Here is what I got from my Rep. (Encouraging.)
Dear Mr. Potatohead,
Thank you for your email in support of HB 2892. Rep. Dingfelder supports the concept of this bill and realizes the cost savings that it would bring about. At present, the bill is undergoing a few amendments so I am unable to commit to her vote for the bill until the final versions come out. However, my guess is that she will support it. I have passed along your comments to her. In addition, I will place a copy of your email in the bill file. This will assure that she again sees your comments prior to voting on the bill on the house floor.
Thanks for taking the time to contact our office regarding this issue. The representative greatly appreciates your input! Please feel free to contact out office at any time we can be of assistance to you.
Sincerly, (!?!) Legislative Assistant to Rep. Jackie Dingfelder House District 45 (Phone)
I have choice of ISP with DSL here in Portland. (www.spiretech.com BTW.)
Comcast has the cable service here. They fuck with you and my Spiretech does not.
So I trade speed for:
- Shell access via SSH to my account on their server.
- Some web space and basic services on their end.
- Sane user policy
- Good service
- Flexible billing. (I run a 6 month plan)
- Choice of computing platform and modem.
Unless I am downloading ISOs every day, the connection speed really does not matter. Most wait times are due to server side crap (mainly ad servers and such) not transfer speed.
Sure the cable is fast, but you have to register each computer, cannot run servers, get port scanned to make sure, vpn not allowed unless you pay commercial rates, poor customer service, drain bramaged techs, phone calls and letters and e-mail for additional cable TV services (Pay Per view) and I suspect content discrimination.
That is what choice is about.
Choose wisely, choose a service that lets you choose your provider.
I asked them to clearly state their goals and budget one more time.
Then, I did an honest cost analysis with their goals and current process in mind. This analysis was over a 2 year period. Shorter than that and you are not considering all costs. Go longer if it makes sense depending on the situation.
Don't forget hidden soft costs. A quick example. A day of lost engineering department time could cost many times that in the downstream operations that follow. These numbers get big in a hurry and are often forgotten in your typical information systems analysis.
In my case, I stood to make more if they made the foolish decision!
Always present this stuff in writing. Always. Get another person you trust to sanity check it for you.
So, I presented the written analysis with my option, theirs and one other potential path that occured to me as I was putting the project together. This was followed with a summary of my recommendations along with quick financial reasons why.
I agree with you about the distance this bill has to go.
Interesting observation though about the wealth of Oregon. We are at a weak time right now. I say this bill has a better than usual chance of going somewhere because the money problems are not. (At least for a few years.)
Interesting times for Open Source in Oregon for sure. I will be watching with interest.
IE: cracking, (as opposed to hacking) picking locks, how to pick pocket, building bombs...
Knowing how people go about cracking into systems could be harmful if one does it and it could be useful when building a defence for said crackers.
When you learn how to pick locks, you gain an understanding of what makes a good lock and what doesn't. Nice to know when buying locks...
Pick pocket? Walking through the airport and get bumped? No big deal right? Unless you know how these people work.
Building bombs? Surely this is a terrorist only thing right? How about knowing what is a bomb and what is not? What if you are in a position to disarm one?
Crypto. Same as locks really. How does one know what is going to be effective and what is not? The DVD guys sure didn't. (Heh Heh) For that matter, using the crypto knowledge to solve a simple problem like playing the DVD under Linux? Legal? Not in many places. Moral and ethical. I would say yes, provided you own the thing and have a clear right to use it.
So is the knowledge itself bad? What about the teaching and access? Should everyone be able to know and decide for themselves or not?
Each of these things is under attack right now. Why?
we have a clueless person, or at the least one who has been out of the loop for a while.
This person has been using the same tools for a long time. The expectation that a different set of tools is just going to work is unrealistic.
So the article correctly documented their trouble working through that new toolset.
Does this mean Linux is not ready for a desktop?
No.
The software this person needs is there for the downloading, or a modest purchase cost.
Should things just work for that price? Did they under Win 95?
The setup for this machine would have taken 2 hours tops. Compare that to the cost of WinXP / 2000 + Office.
Linux is a lot closer than we think.
I agree with the idea the autoconfiguration needs more polish, but that is not the show stopper it once was.
Would be nice to see the same person write another article, only this time they budget $200 for upgrade and configuration services.
I believe they would be very happy with the result.
Just think, if every win32 user had to actually pay for the regular thrashing they get friends to do, the perception of Linux would be different wouldn't it?
Personally, I now charge for such services and people get pretty frustrated. They are also a lot more careful with their machine.
So if you are going to perform a free technology refresh for someone, do it with Linux for free, or charge for the service under win32.
Make them show the license while you are at it.
Don't have one? Great, looks like it is either pay what you should pay, or I can do Linux right now.
$200 Install and configure
Assuming they can't show licenses
Retail WinXP license
Retail Office.
So lets say $600 total?
Given that you can get a nice machine for that, or fix your car or pay rent, that seems to be a strong incentive to give Linux a shot.
So users are now faced with a choice. They can pay Bill and keep paying, or they can pay for some services and invest a little time learning and pay very little going into the future.
For many users, Linux will do what they need. They just don't see the value because they are getting services for free...
Slashdot Mirror
this one rubs me the wrong way.
This does not seem to be leading edge research. Someone else posted their suspicion that the team was working with win32 systems looking for a better way.
I agree with them.
I think these guys are looking at win32 systems and wishing they were Unix ones.
1. 'Micro Reboots' - Can you say '/etc/init.d' ? Example, my Linux machine sometimes chokes on sound. I could reboot the machine, but instead, I just start the sound service. '/etc/init.d/sound restart'
2. 'Better tools to pinpoint the sources of faults' Can you say '/var/adm/SYSLOG or Messages?' Anything you want to know about the machine ends up there. If you take a proactive approach to your log, you are going to notice things before they bring the whole thing down. Maybe we could have better logging, but still this is exectution of what we know, not anything new.
3. 'We need an Undo' This one is very easy to setup yourself. It could be automated to a point, but really isn't this just a backup. Too much undo and you can't get anything done. Not enough and you need to know something to get the machine running again. Seems to be that a quality analysis of the system and its potential faults would yield a list of data to be incrementally watched and archived to achieve the same results.
4. I will give them a little credit for this one, though I am not sure I agree. This part of the puzzle would happen as part of #3 for the most part.
I have a big problem with #4 in that it makes the assumption that we are smarter than the tech. I am not sure we are. We can build it, but we don't always have a clue as to what it will do because there are too many subtle interactions to account for.
Better to let the machine bitch about the issue and be well prepared to deal with it. After a while, you and your machine will understand each others issues and all will be fine.
So, in the end, these folks are wishing they had a well planned and configured Unix system when they actually have something less...
Why not take those first three ideas and build a Linux that exectutes them nicely? Maybe people will prefer it to what we have now --maybe not. That would be some research.
This just isn't as big of a deal as it looks. (Sorry guys)
on second thought, spammers should be kicked off the net for good.
Bag, tag and blacklist them. Make damn sure they *never* get on the net again.
The message should be loud and clear:
Don't spam ever. It is not worth it.
after the legislation passes ok?
(Heh Heh)
You know a large part of that maintenance cost comes from recurring license fees and forced upgrade schedules don't you?
These two things combined with the intergrated nature of Microsoft software raise costs more than you would think.
Servers that require CALs compared to servers that don't are another area to consider.
Also, it seems that justification of software happens mostly at the initial stage. Once a company is "in" they have a lot of leverage across their products to get more money more often through "Upgrades".
I believe this is what they are most afraid of. What happens when an upgrades triggers a large purchase with the "Consider Open Source" part active?
Seems to me that analysis will lead to fewer upgrades and additional Cost of Ownership realizations that will not go in the proprietary industry favor...
This is not dead yet in Oregon! Please take a moment to contact House Speaker Karen Minnis. She is uninformed, listening to the lobby as if it were god and sitting on the bill.
If public opinion stays high, the issue will be heard.
You can contact her:
Speaker Minnis
900 Court St. NE
Room 269
Salem, OR 97301
Phn: 503-986-1200
Fax: 503- 986-1201
Email rep.karenminnis@state.or.us
A phone call is best because you can ask someone the nice and hard questions directly and request a response.
1. Why are Multnomah County residents being asked for additional taxes when obvious money saving bills like HB 2892 are being shelved?
2. Texas is willing to consider the bill. They also see right through the industry lobby thing. Why can't Oregon do the same?
3. How is it that proprietary software prices keep rising along with profit in the face of the worst high tech recession we have seen in years? Could it be the market is failing in this area? Should the State continue to support this by stalling legislation that will bring welcome competition to the state software marketplace?
You can think of others...
If you will forget, send an e-mail today. If you can remember --please do make that phone call.
It will matter in Oregon.
You have this wrong. Nothing is required at all save the consideration of Open Source software.
Open Source software does not have full time paid lobbyists working the State for sales. Open Source is not *sold* it is used.
Legislation like this basically says: "Before you spend our tax dollars on software, see if you can make the Open Source software work first."
As for not forcing the government, that is a poor point of view as well. That is what we are supposed to do.
You know, "By the People for the People?" Our government is what we make of it and that is how it is supposed to be. Seems the more time passes, the more people seem to be forgetting that.
I *want* my government to work hard to save every dime they can; otherwise, I must pay more.
BTW: This is not dead yet in Oregon. Please take a moment to contact House Speaker Karen Minnis. She is uninformed, listening to the lobby as if it were god and sitting on the bill.
If public opinion stays high, the issue will be heard.
You can contact her:
Speaker Minnis
900 Court St. NE
Room 269
Salem, OR 97301
Phn: 503-986-1200
Fax: 503- 986-1201
Email rep.karenminnis@state.or.us
A phone call is best because you can ask someone the nice and hard questions directly and request a response.
1. Why are Multnomah County residents being asked for additional taxes when obvious money saving bills like HB 2892 are being shelved?
2. Texas is willing to consider the bill. They also see right through the industry lobby thing. Why can't Oregon do the same?
3. How is it that proprietary software prices keep rising along with profit in the face of the worst high tech recession we have seen in years? Could it be the market is failing in this area? Should the State continue to support this by stalling legislation that will bring welcome competition to the state software marketplace?
You can think of others...
If you will forget, send an e-mail today. If you can remember --please do make that phone call.
It will matter in Oregon.
Yes and no.
I know piracy killed the machine. Yet, I enjoyed having a reasonably open machine.
Today it runs older console games via emulators. Best investment I have ever made. A little more RAM would have made it the perfect MAME box...
That's it!
Seeing that was spooky for sure. It would be interesting to sort through all the 'wanna be' circuts to understand a little about how that thing ended up in there.
What I cannot remember is whether or not the circut worked without it.
due to the fact we have sent things there. I know that anything that might have survived has not yet had time to spread, but you never know.
There are so many buggers here on earth, do we know for sure that our missions were clean?
open!
Simple as that. There was nothing you could not know about the machine simply by looking at it actually.
Because the system is easily understood, making it do what you want (provided that task is within the limits of the hardware) is easy.
Someone needs to make computers like this today, only with slightly better video. Kids who want to "get good at computers" would be well served learning said machine inside and out.
buy Sega, but I know I still miss the Dreamcast.
It could boot regular CD media without any mods. It also still provides a very nice game experience today.
I get the feeling if the timing on the Dreamcast had been just a bit different, Sega would be in a better position today.
technique that has always made me think.
I read a magazine article about this a while back. (probably Sci Am.)
One researcher setup a problem to be solved with an analog circut. The problem was to distinguish between the words yes and no.
Nobody can explain how the circut that evolved actually works. Like us, there were parts of the circut that seemed redundant or unnecessary. Sort of like the appendix.
This whole thing makes me wonder just what we don't know that we think we do.
this guy if you want all the Microsoft dirt present and future.
http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit021.html
That is his latest. Look around on the site a little. Lots of stuff there with many current references.
Combat (Atari 2600 ???) I find it ironic that the first pack in game for the most limited system ever made was a two player game. This says a lot about the dynamics of gaming. This game was a lot of fun only if the other player was a lot of fun.
This one fact defined a new class of person to me: Gamer or not. Good gamers were there for the shared experience. Bad gamers were there for the score at your expense.
Adventure (Atari 2600 1979)
First game that had many places to go and dynamic problems to solve. Though the elements of the game remained the same, the solution was different each time. I realized that I could solve the game --or not! First game to give me a sense of 'place'. Adventure was a small simple place you could go for a while and do stuff.
Kaboom! (Atari 2600 ???) First game to generate that sublime state of mind known as the trance. Revealed the addictive nature of games in an up-front way. Still get the machine out once in a while to get my Kaboom fix. This one is best played on the machine. An emulator does not do the trance justice. Last year my oldest daughter gave this one a try after watching me for a while. Her report:
"This game is addictive. I just want to play, but I don't know why. It makes my brain better in a good way. I am learning to concentrate in a new way that I did not know before. Do you have to put it away now?"
This makes me wonder about the simple nature of games. We have largely lost that. Should we just ignore those and move on or not? I know my ability to do some things well today comes directly from games like this.
Another thought here. This game demands nothing short of perfection. It is designed to challenge the upper limit of human perception and reaction. Pretty amazing given the hardware. Nothing short of developing the hand eye skills of the best of us will satisfy the demands of this game. And it's fun!
Warlords (Atari 2600) Man! 4 players and fast simple action. This game is still great when you have the right folks playing. Kids will often ask for this game and play it for hours while yelling, taunting and eating lots of junk food.
Once again, I have often thought about environments as games in and of themselves. The freedom permitted in games like this makes for great games. You don't need graphics and sounds and such, just an environment where humans can be humans.
Madness and the Minoutar (Color Computer) I have always liked the text adventure. Still like 'em, but there are none like this! The environment was real time while your interface was not. Things were going on all around you while you read to grasp what they were. There are a lot of spatial and reasoning skills that are important later in life that are a key part of this game.
I have many spooky images in my mind from this game. All without 3D graphics cards and such.
This game defines the term 'Interactive Fiction'. Did not realize why I liked this one so much until much later.
Defender (Williams) Trance baby trance! That is all I have to say about this title. Guess Robotron belongs here as well. Why don't they make these anymore? I know that anytime I encounter one of these machines, I *will* play no matter what is happening at the time. It is sad really, I often pass an arcade and look for these machines first. Not very many left.
These two games and Kaboom! made me consider games as drugs. For a while, I actually considered this to be a bad thing. Then got over it as soon as I saw the younger generations reaction.
Wolf3D. (ID software) Oh my god! This early 3D game captured a *lot* of my time. So demanding and fast! Simple graphics with an underlying horror theme made for a twisted gaming experience. Got caught one time with no ammo, little health and a long dead end corridor. Used just the knife to scrape my way out to some food. I still remember the feeling afterword. It was as if I just escaped death itself. (I know --wierd
You are right on, but not the first. I have been bitching about that aspect of the DMCA from its inception.
The DMCA treats us all like little kids. The knowing is wrongly connected to the doing, even if it is ethical.
The way I grew up and how I make my living today is being slowly criminalized and I resent every last day of it.
Fuckers.
Yeah that is a lot of ads.
:)
I chose the DSL because of provider choice. End user policy is primary where speed is secondary to me. I get to run what I want how I want when I want. That's pretty valuable.
Speed? No question cable is faster. So, there is both. So long as there are enough DSL'ers maybe that will preserve enough choice to keep Comcast semi-honest
Things I miss on cable: SG1, Sopranos, Food Network (Iron Chef!). Ah well, gives me a reason to visit friends.
I like having the content on media. It is a bit more expensive, but I get the final say on how it is used. DVD is open enough for that. (They did not intend it to be, but it is.)
At first it was expensive, but now that the backfilling has been largely done, it boils down to a few purchases a month as the new stuff hits...
with ads for their own add-on services.
I have been buying DVDs and using an antenna recently for cost and value reasons. Spent a weekend house sitting for a friend. The number of self-serving Comcast ads is sickening.
It is like listening to Clear Channel vs NPR.
You are better off buying content on removable media you control, getting DSL and ignoring their self serving fat pipes...
I agree with the scientific discovery part, but your statement about food breaks down.
The difference here is simple. The scientist that makes a discovery is paid somehow to do that. They are just going to make another one later. If they make enough, they continue to be valuable.
Their living is new ideas.
OSS people work differently.
They have problems to solve. They make their money solving problems. These solutions typically require tools to build.
By building better tools they are more able to solve problems. Since they can solve more problems, they will make more money.
When you buy a license to run someones software, you are basically paying them to solve your problem. When you hire OSS capable people, you are paying them to solve your problem.
The difference between the two is profound.
When you purchase software, you do not own the solution. You only pay for the right to make use of their solution that you can use according to their terms. It is not your solution.
Spending your money on someone who can build with OSS means that you own that solution. How it is used and what it does is on your terms.
Given the licensing terms today and the potential per user costs they incurr, OSS provides a much better long term value proposition than closed software does.
Anyone who really understands what that means will become a lot more willing to pay for OSS solutions.
Here is another way to look at things. All the money for all the solutions can either go to Redmond, or it can go to the people you have to hire anyway to make that mess work in the first place.
Which will be cheaper in the long run?
Personally, I would much rather support and educate the folks around me and actually get something rather than pay them what I have to and also pay that big and very hungry gorilla in Redmond.
Stealing food indeed.
I have already posted this under another thread, but just got the idea after reading a couple other posts.
So, what does your Rep say? Here is mine:
(Positive)
Dear Mr. Potatohead,
Thank you for your email in support of HB 2892. Rep. Dingfelder supports
the concept of this bill and realizes the cost savings that it would
bring about. At present, the bill is undergoing a few amendments so I am
unable to commit to her vote for the bill until the final versions come
out. However, my guess is that she will support it. I have passed along
your comments to her. In addition, I will place a copy of your email in
the bill file. This will assure that she again sees your comments prior
to voting on the bill on the house floor.
Thanks for taking the time to contact our office regarding this issue.
The representative greatly appreciates your input! Please feel free to
contact out office at any time we can be of assistance to you.
Sincerely,
(name)
Legislative Assistant to Rep. Jackie Dingfelder
House District 45
(Phone)
This guy either does not support the bill, or has not really investigated the issue. His office needs a few more phone calls. Lets make sure he gets them.
You all must remember, the process is fluid. There are many ways this bill can continue to move through the legislature.
If this is something we *really* want, and they understand that, then the bill stands a chance. They can move any issue they want to in any number of ways. If this were a sweetheart bill, you can bet it would find a way to move through the house. This bill can too.
The Oregon Legislature is getting a lot of calls and mail on this, and we need to keep it up.
Basically, we have money on one side and political creedence on the other. If enough people continue to remain involved, it remains harder to quietly kill the bill.
The issue of Open Source is alive in the Legislature right now. Getting a work session is important because the objections can be ironed out.
By making Open Source and Open Standards an issue, we at least bring awareness of the problems to a level that is hard any other way.
Just keep your perspective. The other bills died as quickly as the headlines went up. This one is still around with support in the Legislature. That is a WIN, not a loss by any measure!
If you have called, you might wait a day and ask for an update. Its another reason to call and the type of thing that demands a response which clearly shows interest.
Preparing responses takes time. Ask good questions, who when why how? That way a simple form letter does not cover the issue well enough to be considered a response.
If you get a form letter, make a quick phone call. You will get an answer and a chance to take someones time. That matters.
Representitives who simply say it's over do not support the bill. This does not mean it's over, it means you can stop calling now.
Don't do that.
This is what the lobbyists want. They want it because that keeps the status quo.
Take a good look at who opposes the bill. All those companies consider this a direct threat to one of their largest customers; namely, the state of Oregon.
Here is what I got from my Rep. (Encouraging.)
Dear Mr. Potatohead,
Thank you for your email in support of HB 2892. Rep. Dingfelder supports
the concept of this bill and realizes the cost savings that it would
bring about. At present, the bill is undergoing a few amendments so I am
unable to commit to her vote for the bill until the final versions come
out. However, my guess is that she will support it. I have passed along
your comments to her. In addition, I will place a copy of your email in
the bill file. This will assure that she again sees your comments prior
to voting on the bill on the house floor.
Thanks for taking the time to contact our office regarding this issue.
The representative greatly appreciates your input! Please feel free to
contact out office at any time we can be of assistance to you.
Sincerly,
(!?!)
Legislative Assistant to Rep. Jackie Dingfelder
House District 45
(Phone)
I have choice of ISP with DSL here in Portland. (www.spiretech.com BTW.)
Comcast has the cable service here. They fuck with you and my Spiretech does not.
So I trade speed for:
- Shell access via SSH to my account on their server.
- Some web space and basic services on their end.
- Sane user policy
- Good service
- Flexible billing. (I run a 6 month plan)
- Choice of computing platform and modem.
Unless I am downloading ISOs every day, the connection speed really does not matter. Most wait times are due to server side crap (mainly ad servers and such) not transfer speed.
Sure the cable is fast, but you have to register each computer, cannot run servers, get port scanned to make sure, vpn not allowed unless you pay commercial rates, poor customer service, drain bramaged techs, phone calls and letters and e-mail for additional cable TV services (Pay Per view) and I suspect content discrimination.
That is what choice is about.
Choose wisely, choose a service that lets you choose your provider.
For me that is clearly DSL regardless of speed.
Too bad they did not do the same for AIDS...
this is what I did.
I asked them to clearly state their goals and budget one more time.
Then, I did an honest cost analysis with their goals and current process in mind. This analysis was over a 2 year period. Shorter than that and you are not considering all costs. Go longer if it makes sense depending on the situation.
Don't forget hidden soft costs. A quick example. A day of lost engineering department time could cost many times that in the downstream operations that follow. These numbers get big in a hurry and are often forgotten in your typical information systems analysis.
In my case, I stood to make more if they made the foolish decision!
Always present this stuff in writing. Always. Get another person you trust to sanity check it for you.
So, I presented the written analysis with my option, theirs and one other potential path that occured to me as I was putting the project together. This was followed with a summary of my recommendations along with quick financial reasons why.
Money talks, they did the right thing.
I agree with you about the distance this bill has to go.
Interesting observation though about the wealth of Oregon. We are at a weak time right now. I say this bill has a better than usual chance of going somewhere because the money problems are not. (At least for a few years.)
Interesting times for Open Source in Oregon for sure. I will be watching with interest.
IE: cracking, (as opposed to hacking) picking locks, how to pick pocket, building bombs...
Knowing how people go about cracking into systems could be harmful if one does it and it could be useful when building a defence for said crackers.
When you learn how to pick locks, you gain an understanding of what makes a good lock and what doesn't. Nice to know when buying locks...
Pick pocket? Walking through the airport and get bumped? No big deal right? Unless you know how these people work.
Building bombs? Surely this is a terrorist only thing right? How about knowing what is a bomb and what is not? What if you are in a position to disarm one?
Crypto. Same as locks really. How does one know what is going to be effective and what is not? The DVD guys sure didn't. (Heh Heh) For that matter, using the crypto knowledge to solve a simple problem like playing the DVD under Linux? Legal? Not in many places. Moral and ethical. I would say yes, provided you own the thing and have a clear right to use it.
So is the knowledge itself bad? What about the teaching and access? Should everyone be able to know and decide for themselves or not?
Each of these things is under attack right now. Why?
we have a clueless person, or at the least one who has been out of the loop for a while.
This person has been using the same tools for a long time. The expectation that a different set of tools is just going to work is unrealistic.
So the article correctly documented their trouble working through that new toolset.
Does this mean Linux is not ready for a desktop?
No.
The software this person needs is there for the downloading, or a modest purchase cost.
Should things just work for that price? Did they under Win 95?
The setup for this machine would have taken 2 hours tops. Compare that to the cost of WinXP / 2000 + Office.
Linux is a lot closer than we think.
I agree with the idea the autoconfiguration needs more polish, but that is not the show stopper it once was.
Would be nice to see the same person write another article, only this time they budget $200 for upgrade and configuration services.
I believe they would be very happy with the result.
Just think, if every win32 user had to actually pay for the regular thrashing they get friends to do, the perception of Linux would be different wouldn't it?
Personally, I now charge for such services and people get pretty frustrated. They are also a lot more careful with their machine.
So if you are going to perform a free technology refresh for someone, do it with Linux for free, or charge for the service under win32.
Make them show the license while you are at it.
Don't have one? Great, looks like it is either pay what you should pay, or I can do Linux right now.
$200 Install and configure
Assuming they can't show licenses
Retail WinXP license
Retail Office.
So lets say $600 total?
Given that you can get a nice machine for that, or fix your car or pay rent, that seems to be a strong incentive to give Linux a shot.
So users are now faced with a choice. They can pay Bill and keep paying, or they can pay for some services and invest a little time learning and pay very little going into the future.
For many users, Linux will do what they need. They just don't see the value because they are getting services for free...