That would be a SOFTWARE problem. This bill seems to apply to HARDWARE problems only. This won't cover your missing drivers. What it would cover, however, is if it short-circuits and goes up in flames.
"They will have look no different from Open Source software, except you will have to pay for them. Eventually people will figure out that paying for software that works the same as free software is stupid."
No. What many OS/FS advocates don't seem to realize is that they don't look the same. The reason why Microsoft Internet Explorer, Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office are such good programs is because Microsoft is a big company which is paying thousands of people to create good software. If UCITA passes, and prices go up, then they can pay more people to create software, and they'll far surpass Free Software equivalents. I don't like it either, but it's true.
P.S. I submitted this two weeks ago: 2000-08-16 00:45:24 Open Source World Domination Scheduled for 2004 (articles,gnu) (rejected)
It would be cool. But we've seen how Hollywood reacts to fan input. Fan sites are shut down, Free software is outlawed. People who want to see movies using their own software can't. It's highly doubtful that they'd let people crunch numbers for a movie, although it would still be very cool.
Hasn't Judge Kaplan already ruled on this subject? While stopping just short of saying "open source", he did imply that we're all freeloaders with just about the same type of comments in his ruling. If I were a lawyer it would make sense to repeat those comments.
Why is it this is only wrong if it's hypocritical? I realize we can poke fun at CNN because they're owned by Time-Warner, but if they weren't, would it make it any more right?
"Who was the first human?" is another interesting question, but is impossible to answer unless the term can be defined somehow. Having just previously asked what an OS really is, one cannot effectively determine what the first OS really was.
The unanswerableness and questionable use of this question aside, I have certainly enjoyed the debate.
Is the author speaking of Unix-like OSes or Unix itself? Is Linux included in this? This person seems to have the idea that all Unix-based OSes are equal and should be grouped together.
This author also seems to have the idea that an OS includes software applications. Most people see the OS as everything included on the OS CD. If Windows comes with Media Player, then it's part of the OS. If Red Hat comes with Mozilla, then that's part of the OS. What if I download just the kernel? Is that all I have for my OS? Where is the line drawn between Operating System and Application?
Of course, not to belittle any fans of other Operating Systems, but it doesn't surprise me that this comes from a Mac user. For Macs, the OS is what comes pre-installed on the computer, including the embedded GUI, tools, and QuickTIme.
There's a difference between technical correctness and laymen's terms. It's like "what makes a computer" in that it's all subjective. The author isn't wrong, but I don't agree. I prefer the more technical definition.
Even if this is technologically sound, how easy would it be to implement something like this? Digital radio was supposed to be the "next best thing" and for some reason has failed miserably. Why? Because everyone has the same kind of radio, and not everyone can upgrade on a moment's notice. There won't be any people on the new system, so stations will stay on the old system (ratings, remember?). Since there won't be any stations on the new system, everyone will stay on the old and have no reason to upgrade.
Hopefully the Caldera Open-Linux book will explain the difference between Caldera Open-Linux and Corel Open-Linux (?). Methinks the Slashdot authors need another proofreader.
Defendants [AOL], [...] are adherents of a movement that believes that information should be available without charge to anyone clever enough to break into the computer systems or data storage media in which it is located.
So obviously, by promoting this open not-controlled-by-the-RIAA file exchange system, that AOL is necessarily guilty.
Based on this insane decision by the judge, one can only guess how this would affect Napster, which undoubtedly fits the judge's descriptions better than DeCSS. Whereas one is merely an access issue, the other involves actual files being shared, and let's face it, most people use Napster specifically because they have copyrighted songs on them.
Would you want someone to have a transcript of a meeting if you had them sign a non-disclosure agreement? Isn't this like showing a list of addresses to a child molester so that he'll know which houses not to go to?
It's probably not, but the idea is still a bit insane.
"In one particularly memorable episode of The Simpsons a commercial for the Itchy & Scratchy Movie claimed that their new film would contain 40% new footage."
It was actually 53% new footage. I am appalled and outraged that these people could not check their sources. On a Simpsons quote no less!
I understand why they'd want to port "internet clients" to unix, and not anything else. Think of it this way: MS ports IE to unix/linux (whatever) - so now all (major) OSes have Internet Explorer, and any website that doesn't want to code for anything else doesn't have any reason to, because everyone can use IE. IE becomes standard, MS rules universe.
Same deal with Windows Media Player. WiMP for linux means it's already on more OSes than Quicktime, and if they can do a better job than RealPlayer, then WiMP becomes the standard too. MS rules universe.
Now don't get me started on Outlook Express.
In short, they're giving them away free already, so having them embrace and extend to linux/unix can be beneficial. No way in hell they'll be porting Office though.
People don't need to know the minimum size of a kernel in bytes in order to appreciate an operating system. This isn't about technical terms, it's about opinions vs facts. If someone has a computer and is in a position to determine what operating system will go on it, chances are the person will have at least some knowledge of computers. Technical discussions aren't necessary here.
Why is it pro-linux FUD is always considered correct whereas anti-linux FUD is wrong? (I know the answer, this is/.).
I think what we need is a non-biased version of a myths website. Something that will dispell anti-linux and anti-windows myths so people can make an informed decision about which operating system they want to use. If people were to see a site admitting that an OS has its problems, they'll probably be easier to trust.
You can't expect a linux zealot to speak negatively of the GNU/Linux OS anymore than you can ask Bill Gates to speak negatively about Microsoft.
Frankly, I think the best answer to "Linux is difficult to install" is not "Linux is easy to install" which is just another opinion. Things like the possibility of FTP/NFS installs, bootable CDs, and the fact that once something's installed you don't have to look at it ever again are things that can be mentioned. It doesn't have to make any anti-linux statements, but telling the full story is a very good idea.
Hopefully when this site becomes ready for prime-time, its contents will be based more on facts than opinions, even if it stays pro-linux.
I've always found the idea of internet appliances rather interesting. Until IPv6 comes around, we won't have enough IP addresses for all these appliances that supposedly would be in every home. Secondly, where I live, internet access still comes at $30 a month for unlimited access. I suppose these things won't be connected constantly, but I haven't seen prices go much below $10/month for, say, 10 hours. Not to mention how you'd have to set something like this up, and that it would tie up a phone line while connecting. And what about cable modems? That just brings in more problems.
Of course a better idea is to just attach it to a home LAN, which would have to be on just about 100% of the time. Of course, if you already have a computer, and enough computers to necessitate a LAN, why the information appliance? Why not just use Google? That, aside from the fact that most ISPs have TOS that forbid home LANs and anything more than one computer from accessing the internet.
In short, internet access technology has to advance by leaps and bounds before information appliances can be really useful.
Slashdot Mirror
That would be a SOFTWARE problem. This bill seems to apply to HARDWARE problems only. This won't cover your missing drivers. What it would cover, however, is if it short-circuits and goes up in flames.
No. What many OS/FS advocates don't seem to realize is that they don't look the same. The reason why Microsoft Internet Explorer, Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office are such good programs is because Microsoft is a big company which is paying thousands of people to create good software. If UCITA passes, and prices go up, then they can pay more people to create software, and they'll far surpass Free Software equivalents. I don't like it either, but it's true.
P.S. I submitted this two weeks ago:
2000-08-16 00:45:24 Open Source World Domination Scheduled for 2004 (articles,gnu) (rejected)
Now where was the first "how do I unsubscribe from this mailing list?" post?
It would be cool. But we've seen how Hollywood reacts to fan input. Fan sites are shut down, Free software is outlawed. People who want to see movies using their own software can't. It's highly doubtful that they'd let people crunch numbers for a movie, although it would still be very cool.
Hasn't Judge Kaplan already ruled on this subject? While stopping just short of saying "open source", he did imply that we're all freeloaders with just about the same type of comments in his ruling. If I were a lawyer it would make sense to repeat those comments.
Why is it this is only wrong if it's hypocritical? I realize we can poke fun at CNN because they're owned by Time-Warner, but if they weren't, would it make it any more right?
Wired covers the story here. Misconceptions about the vulnerability abound.
The unanswerableness and questionable use of this question aside, I have certainly enjoyed the debate.
This author also seems to have the idea that an OS includes software applications. Most people see the OS as everything included on the OS CD. If Windows comes with Media Player, then it's part of the OS. If Red Hat comes with Mozilla, then that's part of the OS. What if I download just the kernel? Is that all I have for my OS? Where is the line drawn between Operating System and Application?
Of course, not to belittle any fans of other Operating Systems, but it doesn't surprise me that this comes from a Mac user. For Macs, the OS is what comes pre-installed on the computer, including the embedded GUI, tools, and QuickTIme.
There's a difference between technical correctness and laymen's terms. It's like "what makes a computer" in that it's all subjective. The author isn't wrong, but I don't agree. I prefer the more technical definition.
Even if this is technologically sound, how easy would it be to implement something like this? Digital radio was supposed to be the "next best thing" and for some reason has failed miserably. Why? Because everyone has the same kind of radio, and not everyone can upgrade on a moment's notice. There won't be any people on the new system, so stations will stay on the old system (ratings, remember?). Since there won't be any stations on the new system, everyone will stay on the old and have no reason to upgrade.
And where's the Slackware For Dummies book?
So obviously, by promoting this open not-controlled-by-the-RIAA file exchange system, that AOL is necessarily guilty.
Error executing SELF_DESTRUCT.EXE. Program is valid in Win32 mode.
Unrecoverable error. Please reinstall torpedo. Returning to submarine...
Based on this insane decision by the judge, one can only guess how this would affect Napster, which undoubtedly fits the judge's descriptions better than DeCSS. Whereas one is merely an access issue, the other involves actual files being shared, and let's face it, most people use Napster specifically because they have copyrighted songs on them.
This is a sad day indeed. It seems BSD isn't getting enough German support in web servers.
It's probably not, but the idea is still a bit insane.
Mine just kept flashing 12:00.
It was actually 53% new footage. I am appalled and outraged that these people could not check their sources. On a Simpsons quote no less!
Same deal with Windows Media Player. WiMP for linux means it's already on more OSes than Quicktime, and if they can do a better job than RealPlayer, then WiMP becomes the standard too. MS rules universe.
Now don't get me started on Outlook Express.
In short, they're giving them away free already, so having them embrace and extend to linux/unix can be beneficial. No way in hell they'll be porting Office though.
Thank God.
I think what we need is a non-biased version of a myths website. Something that will dispell anti-linux and anti-windows myths so people can make an informed decision about which operating system they want to use. If people were to see a site admitting that an OS has its problems, they'll probably be easier to trust.
Frankly, I think the best answer to "Linux is difficult to install" is not "Linux is easy to install" which is just another opinion. Things like the possibility of FTP/NFS installs, bootable CDs, and the fact that once something's installed you don't have to look at it ever again are things that can be mentioned. It doesn't have to make any anti-linux statements, but telling the full story is a very good idea.
Hopefully when this site becomes ready for prime-time, its contents will be based more on facts than opinions, even if it stays pro-linux.
Of course a better idea is to just attach it to a home LAN, which would have to be on just about 100% of the time. Of course, if you already have a computer, and enough computers to necessitate a LAN, why the information appliance? Why not just use Google? That, aside from the fact that most ISPs have TOS that forbid home LANs and anything more than one computer from accessing the internet.
In short, internet access technology has to advance by leaps and bounds before information appliances can be really useful.