It's worked great for me.. and you can sort based on score.
Here is the configuration I've found useful...
Required hits : 4 -- This marks all messages with a score of 4 or higher as Spam. This still marks some legitimate mail as spam but read on
Mailfilterrc rules:
1) Don't do anything to messages with score 5 or lower (This delivers some messages marked *SPAM* to my inbox, but it catches most of the legitimate mail)
2) Move all messages with a score of 6 - 9 to a folder called Spam (I've never had a legitimate mail with a score higher than 9. This also limits the messages I have to scan through quickly to see if any legitimate messages got filtered)
3) Move everything with a score of 10 or higher to a folder called Crap. (Normally I just delete all messages in this folder. But if I ever feel like looking a ads for hot chicks... this is where I'd go:) )
This has worked fine for me. I get about 2-3 spam messages delivered to my inbox everyday, around 30 messages in my spam folder of which about 1-2 per week is a legitimate mail, and about 40-60 delivered to my Crap folder
* It's a lot harder to lie if you're being watched by your own developer community and quite a bit of your user base is part of the developer community. Debian is Dogfood * I don't understand your point? But in any case, if you're refering to the packaging system, then you're right. Just by saying one uses RPM or deb, does not help, but having used both, I find that if a package is available as deb, I'm a lot more inclined to get it. (RPM is installable on debian systems as well BTW -- alien) * Do try using debian for a while. Go through some updates and upgrades. You'll see why everyone harks so much about debian. BTW it seems like you too are aware of these advantages since you'd like to see these features implemented on rpm. Maybe it is easier to implement on rpm. But how will you implement the culture on rpm?
Natural Selection. Hmmm.... thats a law chance has forced us into. Why are we limited to following these laws? We won't know until we experiment. Sure you might say that we might end up destroying humanity in experimenting. But isn't that better than not expermenting? Would you rather still be in the dark ages? In the iron age? In the stone age? Stating that natural selection is the only form of evolution is silly. We've already got genetically engineered crops, chicken, cows, pigs. We are the better for this.
Ok now to weaknesses.... Sure there is a point to your argument that genetically engineerd selection may result in a new class heirarchy ala Gataca. But then there are social and political issues no matter what changes you do. We have to deal with them and figure out a way to properly integrate them into our lives.
Look at it from the parent's perspective. As a parent don't you want to provide your child with the best possible future? Dosen't a parent select the best school a child can go to. The right kind of food. The right kind of doctor. The right kind of daiper. The right kind of friends. The right kind of environment?
Why should all this only start arter the baby is born? Why not provide the best even before birth? Why is screening weak genes any more morally unacceptable than screening for a school which has a good reputation?
I've been using xine for watching DVD's on my debian box for a while now. It works great.
I tried the oms but had a hard time getting it to work properly. For now xine works great for me. Xine also has a great plugin architecture. You can view mpeg videos with it and other stuff too. It can also use the windows video codecs for decoding video files that are not otherwise supported on Linux.
And anyways competition is always good right?
You can get xine at
http://xine.sourceforge.net/xine_frame.php?page= do wnload.html
Rochester has two distinct Universities. The University of Rochester (U of R) and Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). The breakthrough was made at RIT.
1) We are the moderators. So when you say that we are letting the moderators thing for us, we are infact thinking for ourselves.
2) With enough moderators, you'll find that there is enough difference of opinion to get "Good" posts from all different opinions moderated up.
Think about it this way. I the scientific journals start ublishing everything, well then how'll you ever know whats worth reading and whats not? I'm not saying that the method of selection used is perfect, but if you get enough scientific journals togather, you'll find that most opinions are covered.
The advantage with slashdot of course is that if someone really wants, all the other crap is available for access. If you don't like slashdot's moderating. Just set your filter level to -1.
As an aside, I've normally find +5 informative messages to be fairly non opinianated and fact stating.
1) Get source from cvs 2) Edit config/cf/site.def to your needs and set ProjectRoot to/usr/local/X11R6 3) make World 4) make install 5) cd nls 6) make Makefiles 7) make install 8) edit/etc/ld.so.conf and add the first line to be/usr/local/X11R6/lib 9) edit/etc/X11/Xserver and set the server to be/usr/local/X11R6/lib/XFree86 10) Set the PATH variable in you.rc file to include/usr/local/X11R6/bin before/usr/X11R6/bin 11) use xf86config to create a XFree4.0 config file and save it as/etc/X11/XF86Config.4.0 12) Move/etc/X11/XF86Config to/etc/X11/XF86Config.3.3.6 13) ln -s/etc/X11/XF86Config.4.0/etc/X11/XG86Config
Thats it. This will not overwrite you existing Debian installed packages, and whenever you want to change over, just edit/etc/ld.so.conf to get rid of the/usr/local/X11R6, change/etc/X11/Xserver to point to the XFree 3.3.6 server and symlink/etc/X11/XF86Config.3.3.6 to/etc/X11/XF86Config.
You do realize "contribution" to Linux is not just in the form of source code...
Today when people say Linux, they mostly mean Linux+supporting software making up a Distribution. Everyone who has filed a legitimate bug report, provided a kernel oops output leading to a bug fix, written a man page, contributed to documentation, proof read documentation, installed linux on their machine or bought a I love Linux mug is a contributor. I think this number might well be closer to 40,000 than to 4000.
1) What does Rambus own patents for?? -- Does Rambus own patents for all kinds of SDRAMs available? Does this mean that the current low prices of SDRAM are going to go up due to manufacturers paying royalties to Rambus? -- Does Rambus own patents for the newer DDR SDRAMs so that they will be a lot more expensive than without the royalties? (I saw a comment somewhere that Rambus' stock price went down when IBM announced DDR SDRAM suggesting that Rambus does not own patents to that)
2) Why? -- Obviously this seems a ploy by intel to get RDRAM memory into the mainstream market. Since Rambus has not too much to gain. Their RDRAM royalties are lower than SDRAM, and SDRAM volume can't even be touched by RDRAM. So Rambus gains very little by pusing RDRAM. -- If Rambus does not own patents to all kinds of SDRAM and DDR SDRAM, then whats to prevent manufacturers settling on the kinds for which they don't have to pay licensing fees to Rambus? -- Did Rambus/intel/Sony coerce/bribe/threten Hitachi and Toshiba (Will not provide chipsets/peripherels/CPUs if you guys do not publicly state that you are paying us royalties). This makes Rambus' case stronger. Maybe Hitachi and Toshiba are not really paying Rambus any money (Undisclosed amount), or maybe infact they getting some perks (cheaper prices/licensing fees) for this public announcement.
3) What can we do? -- What kind of memory can I buy that Rambus does not get a cent for? Obviously I don't want any performance hits. So are there and DDR SDRAMs available that Rambus does not get any money for? So that when I buy that Athelon MB with DDR SDRAM support, I can buy memory without paying Rambus tax?
4) When will Athelon/Duron MultiProcessor MBs come out? -- Sorry just had to put this one in. If you know then please please please let me know:)
Umm.. what makes you think that Debian removing Non-free from it's system will not cause as much friction in the camps of debian?
Debian packages exist because there is some maintainer who wants it and is willing to contribute his time to maintain that package. This goes for non-free packages too. Accepting this proposal would be rejecting and throwing out the work of these volunteers.
Non-free exists in Debian because of convinence and because there are people who want this. Debian first and formost is the peoples distribution. If someone wants it, it is giveable and some one is ready to support it, Debian will include it in the distro.
Non-free should not (does not?) effect the release schedule for debian. A release critical bug in non-free should not hold up a new Debian distro. But removing Non-free means ignoring the needs of many Debian users and the efforts of many Debian maintainers.
In all these posts on Slashdot, I have not seen one good reason for removing non-free!! People please realise that Debian exists because of the people who use it and maintain it. And anything that exists in Debian is because of someones need and someones effort. Nobody has the right to throw away any part of Debian. If no one is willing to maintain it, then it will go away automatically. But as long as the license allows it, and the need and effort exists, let the packages stay!!
Umm.. what makes you think that Debian removing Non-free from it's system will not cause as much friction in the camps of debian? Debian packages exist because there is some maintainer who wants it and is willing to contribute his time to maintain that package. This goes for non-free packages too. Accepting this proposal would be rejecting and throwing out the work of these volunteers. Non-free exists in Debian because of convinence and because there are people who want this. Debian first and formost is the peoples distribution. If someone wants it, it is giveable and some one is ready to support it, Debian will include it in the distro. Non-free should not (does not?) effect the release schedule for debian. A release critical bug in non-free should not hold up a new Debian distro. But removing Non-free means ignoring the needs of many Debian users and the efforts of many Debian maintainers. In all these posts on Slashdot, I have not seen one good reason for removing non-free!! People please realise that Debian exists because of the people who use it and maintain it. And anything that exists in Debian is because of someones need and someones effort. Nobody has the right to throw away any part of Debian. If no one is willing to maintain it, then it will go away automatically. But as long as the license allows it, and the need and effort exists, let the packages stay!! cheers, YAH00
Well up until a couple of years ago Linux was not mainstream. Most (All?) of it's users were people of similar ideology. What you just stated in you comment actually. Forget closed source until you can't.
Now linux is mainstream (Hooray?). With that comes the invasion of the journalists. And journalists will be journalises. The can't code. So they take it upon themselves as theire moral responibility to evangalise linux. And what better way to get attention then by being sensationalist?
Don't get the intent wrong. I completely agree with the articles point. It would be great to have some good open source benchmarks. But since the author can't code, he's trying to seed a few ideas out there in the only way he knows. By doing a "call to arms"
Oh and about RMS.. I think at this point there is no better person than RMS to represent the community. With the rapid commercialization of Linux, RMS is the only true GNU proponent left with any clout. All other are hybrids. And make no mistake. GNU is as much responsible for Linux' success as Linus himself is. If it weren't for RMS' ideals you woulden't be posting your comments here.
Think of him as the concience of the community. Let the companies ask themselves... would RMS approve? If the answer is yes then they are on the right track to pleasing the community. And we do need such a concience today a mirror to look at which will never lie, but say the cold hard truth.
Ummm... If checking for unauthorised programs on the users harddrive is the best they could come up with, then it's a pretty short sighted solution. Getting around this can be quite easy (Like masqueratind as MS notepad).
How would you like it if the Television industry said that it will be monitoring everything that you watch to make sure that you don't watch stolen cable? Or if the Telephone industry said that they would be monitoring every conversation you had on their lines just to make sure you weren't a spy?
No. User monitoring is just stupid. Instead invent a better client-server protocol. That's the only way to go. And if you don't want to spend the effort in doing this. Well then.. people are going to take advantage of you.
>I can tell you right now that very few people care of Linux and its freeness Yes but the few who do are the ones who have made linux what it is. But for them, those who don't care about Linux' freeness (speach) woulden't have anything to care about in the first place without the few who do.
As far as I see it, technoloty is not competing with us in the most evolved entity race. It is enhancing and complementing our state of evolution.
We stopped evolving sometime after the emergence of the homo sapien sapien (Yes two sapiens). In our day and age survival of the fittest no longer means survival of the fittest 'physically'.
Our medical skills have made it possible for us to let even people with highly 'deficient' genes and for them to reproduce. Genetic physical afflictions are no longer rooted out by natural selection except in the most drastic cases (The Romonov family).
No we are no longer evolving physically. We are evolving technologically. Consider laser eye surgery, pace makers and even artifical hearts, Viagra (Sorry coulden't resist:)). Technology is only contributing in our being better evolved creatures. And with recent advances in cloning, if scientists could control the division and differentiation of cells, instead of creating whole humans, we could just create hearts, livers, lungs, even eyes and hands and legs.
Just think about it. You could pratically live forever until your brain gave way. And with advances in neural cell division (Currently neural cells do not divide. Once they die, they die. They are not replaced.) we could even get around that limitation for a while. In fact thees advances are already being experimented in regenerating damaged spinal column injuries to treat paralysis.
So technology is not going to take away our crown. It is only going to polish it for us. At least for the forseeable future.
Do these comments have any impact on the outcome of any legistlation that the beaucracies adopt? It seems to me that we have been asked to give such comments in the past as well, but haven't seen any results. Will the Copy right office post an acknowledgement saying that the overwhelming response was negative or positive or non comittal? Therefore we will or will not or further consider this legistlation? Is there any means of getting feedback on weather our comments are being heard or not? -- YAH00
... to the non-developer masses who use Linux? Will this translate into end user apps any time soon?
IBM released their VIA-Voice SDK many months ago, but I am still to see a single useful application come out of it. Not even an announcement of a project trying to use it.
You are right about the fact there are finite Developer resources. Which is why you can never have too many choices.
Journaling file systems are in their infance for the linux kernel. So we need to explore as many possibilities as possible. And because there are only finite developer resources, only the best ones will survive. It's called survival of the fitest and thats how the open source movement works.
After all just think if there were only one journaling filesystem. Ever heard of the saying "too many cooks spoil the broth" ? So you have lots of people with different philosophies working on this single choice that you have. The results can only be horrifying. Just look at the BSD projects for an example. They have a great product, and they started with a single code base, but philosophical goals differed and eventually they evloved into many different varients. After much bad feelings is what I get from various conversations that I have followed on mailing lists and news groups.
This is the reason that you have very few people working on the linux kernel itself, and only one who decides what goes in. His philosophy decides where the linux kernel goes. If you don't like this, work on something else. Like the hurd. Eventually the better/more practical philosophy will win. And there dosen't have to be a single winner even. Many can win. And although people will flame me for this, the opensource philosophy has already proven to be the better and more praticle way of developing the support infrastructure software. And it's winning. And there are many winners. Like GPL, lGPL, BSD, artistic, NPL etc. Even in these, the better ones will survive, and others will evolve to take on the good things from their betters.
Besides, with all these codebases released under GPL/compatible licenses, you have the option of borrowing from each other to make a better product. And you have something to compare your product with. After all how would you know that there isn't a better way of doing things, if they were always done only one way and you've never even seen/thought about another?
So you see variaty is the mother of evolution. Choice is good and let the best man win.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm... what crimes against people of OTHER countries pray tell?
I guess they need to look at
Debian FreeBSD
They've come quite a long way and have installable systems available
Glibc Based Debian Freebsd
Seems like this is what Dragon fly FreeBSD is trying to do
Just one word -- spamassassin
:
... this is where I'd go :) )
It's worked great for me.. and you can sort based on score.
Here is the configuration I've found useful...
Required hits : 4 -- This marks all messages with a score of 4 or higher as Spam. This still marks some legitimate mail as spam but read on
Mailfilterrc rules
1) Don't do anything to messages with score 5 or lower (This delivers some messages marked *SPAM* to my inbox, but it catches most of the legitimate mail)
2) Move all messages with a score of 6 - 9 to a folder called Spam (I've never had a legitimate mail with a score higher than 9. This also limits the messages I have to scan through quickly to see if any legitimate messages got filtered)
3) Move everything with a score of 10 or higher to a folder called Crap. (Normally I just delete all messages in this folder. But if I ever feel like looking a ads for hot chicks
This has worked fine for me. I get about 2-3 spam messages delivered to my inbox everyday, around 30 messages in my spam folder of which about 1-2 per week is a legitimate mail, and about 40-60 delivered to my Crap folder
* It's a lot harder to lie if you're being watched by your own developer community and quite a bit of your user base is part of the developer community. Debian is Dogfood
* I don't understand your point? But in any case, if you're refering to the packaging system, then you're right. Just by saying one uses RPM or deb, does not help, but having used both, I find that if a package is available as deb, I'm a lot more inclined to get it. (RPM is installable on debian systems as well BTW -- alien)
* Do try using debian for a while. Go through some updates and upgrades. You'll see why everyone harks so much about debian. BTW it seems like you too are aware of these advantages since you'd like to see these features implemented on rpm. Maybe it is easier to implement on rpm. But how will you implement the culture on rpm?
Ok... let's see...
Natural Selection. Hmmm.... thats a law chance has forced us into. Why are we limited to following these laws? We won't know until we experiment. Sure you might say that we might end up destroying humanity in experimenting. But isn't that better than not expermenting? Would you rather still be in the dark ages? In the iron age? In the stone age? Stating that natural selection is the only form of evolution is silly. We've already got genetically engineered crops, chicken, cows, pigs. We are the better for this.
Ok now to weaknesses.... Sure there is a point to your argument that genetically engineerd selection may result in a new class heirarchy ala Gataca. But then there are social and political issues no matter what changes you do. We have to deal with them and figure out a way to properly integrate them into our lives.
Look at it from the parent's perspective. As a parent don't you want to provide your child with the best possible future? Dosen't a parent select the best school a child can go to. The right kind of food. The right kind of doctor. The right kind of daiper. The right kind of friends. The right kind of environment?
Why should all this only start arter the baby is born? Why not provide the best even before birth? Why is screening weak genes any more morally unacceptable than screening for a school which has a good reputation?
cheers
I've been using xine for watching DVD's on my debian box for a while now. It works great.
= do wnload.html
I tried the oms but had a hard time getting it to work properly. For now xine works great for me. Xine also has a great plugin architecture. You can view mpeg videos with it and other stuff too. It can also use the windows video codecs for decoding video files that are not otherwise supported on Linux.
And anyways competition is always good right?
You can get xine at
http://xine.sourceforge.net/xine_frame.php?page
Debian packages are also available (Go Xine!!!)
The css plugin is available at
http://gape.ist.utl.pt/ment00/linuxdvd.html
cheers
YAH00
Anyone hear of Flight gear?
www.flightgear.com
The screenshots look really cool, and now with Xfree864.01 having 3D accleration, it should be even more playable.
I haven't been able to get it working on my machine, but if someone know of debs available, I'd be really interested in knowing.
cheers.
http://www.apple.com/powermaccube
Rochester has two distinct Universities. The University of Rochester (U of R) and Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). The breakthrough was made at RIT.
Just clarifying since I went to RIT.
You're right. BUT
1) We are the moderators. So when you say that we are letting the moderators thing for us, we are infact thinking for ourselves.
2) With enough moderators, you'll find that there is enough difference of opinion to get "Good" posts from all different opinions moderated up.
Think about it this way. I the scientific journals start ublishing everything, well then how'll you ever know whats worth reading and whats not? I'm not saying that the method of selection used is perfect, but if you get enough scientific journals togather, you'll find that most opinions are covered.
The advantage with slashdot of course is that if someone really wants, all the other crap is available for access. If you don't like slashdot's moderating. Just set your filter level to -1.
As an aside, I've normally find +5 informative messages to be fairly non opinianated and fact stating.
cheers
Anyone read Stephen King's Nightshift?
Easy Debian install instructions from cvs
/usr/local/X11R6 /etc/ld.so.conf and add the first line to be /usr/local/X11R6/lib /etc/X11/Xserver and set the server to be /usr/local/X11R6/lib/XFree86 .rc file to include /usr/local/X11R6/bin before /usr/X11R6/bin /etc/X11/XF86Config.4.0 /etc/X11/XF86Config to /etc/X11/XF86Config.3.3.6 /etc/X11/XF86Config.4.0 /etc/X11/XG86Config
/etc/ld.so.conf to get rid of the /usr/local/X11R6, change /etc/X11/Xserver to point to the XFree 3.3.6 server and symlink /etc/X11/XF86Config.3.3.6 to /etc/X11/XF86Config.
1) Get source from cvs
2) Edit config/cf/site.def to your needs and set ProjectRoot to
3) make World
4) make install
5) cd nls
6) make Makefiles
7) make install
8) edit
9) edit
10) Set the PATH variable in you
11) use xf86config to create a XFree4.0 config file and save it as
12) Move
13) ln -s
Thats it. This will not overwrite you existing Debian installed packages, and whenever you want to change over, just edit
cheers
You do realize "contribution" to Linux is not just in the form of source code...
Today when people say Linux, they mostly mean Linux+supporting software making up a Distribution. Everyone who has filed a legitimate bug report, provided a kernel oops output leading to a bug fix, written a man page, contributed to documentation, proof read documentation, installed linux on their machine or bought a I love Linux mug is a contributor. I think this number might well be closer to 40,000 than to 4000.
cheers
Ok can someone clear up the muddied waters
:)
1) What does Rambus own patents for??
-- Does Rambus own patents for all kinds of SDRAMs available? Does this mean that the current low prices of SDRAM are going to go up due to manufacturers paying royalties to Rambus?
-- Does Rambus own patents for the newer DDR SDRAMs so that they will be a lot more expensive than without the royalties? (I saw a comment somewhere that Rambus' stock price went down when IBM announced DDR SDRAM suggesting that Rambus does not own patents to that)
2) Why?
-- Obviously this seems a ploy by intel to get RDRAM memory into the mainstream market. Since Rambus has not too much to gain. Their RDRAM royalties are lower than SDRAM, and SDRAM volume can't even be touched by RDRAM. So Rambus gains very little by pusing RDRAM.
-- If Rambus does not own patents to all kinds of SDRAM and DDR SDRAM, then whats to prevent manufacturers settling on the kinds for which they don't have to pay licensing fees to Rambus?
-- Did Rambus/intel/Sony coerce/bribe/threten Hitachi and Toshiba (Will not provide chipsets/peripherels/CPUs if you guys do not publicly state that you are paying us royalties). This makes Rambus' case stronger. Maybe Hitachi and Toshiba are not really paying Rambus any money (Undisclosed amount), or maybe infact they getting some perks (cheaper prices/licensing fees) for this public announcement.
3) What can we do?
-- What kind of memory can I buy that Rambus does not get a cent for? Obviously I don't want any performance hits. So are there and DDR SDRAMs available that Rambus does not get any money for? So that when I buy that Athelon MB with DDR SDRAM support, I can buy memory without paying Rambus tax?
4) When will Athelon/Duron MultiProcessor MBs come out?
-- Sorry just had to put this one in. If you know then please please please let me know
cheers.
Umm.. what makes you think that Debian removing Non-free from it's system will not cause as much friction in the camps of debian?
Debian packages exist because there is some maintainer who wants it and is willing to contribute his time to maintain that package. This goes for non-free packages too. Accepting this proposal would be rejecting and throwing out the work of these volunteers.
Non-free exists in Debian because of convinence and because there are people who want this. Debian first and formost is the peoples distribution. If someone wants it, it is giveable and some one is ready to support it, Debian will include it in the distro.
Non-free should not (does not?) effect the release schedule for debian. A release critical bug in non-free should not hold up a new Debian distro. But removing Non-free means ignoring the needs of many Debian users and the efforts of many Debian maintainers.
In all these posts on Slashdot, I have not seen one good reason for removing non-free!! People please realise that Debian exists because of the people who use it and maintain it. And anything that exists in Debian is because of someones need and someones effort. Nobody has the right to throw away any part of Debian. If no one is willing to maintain it, then it will go away automatically. But as long as the license allows it, and the need and effort exists, let the packages stay!!
cheers,
YAH00
Umm.. what makes you think that Debian removing Non-free from it's system will not cause as much friction in the camps of debian? Debian packages exist because there is some maintainer who wants it and is willing to contribute his time to maintain that package. This goes for non-free packages too. Accepting this proposal would be rejecting and throwing out the work of these volunteers. Non-free exists in Debian because of convinence and because there are people who want this. Debian first and formost is the peoples distribution. If someone wants it, it is giveable and some one is ready to support it, Debian will include it in the distro. Non-free should not (does not?) effect the release schedule for debian. A release critical bug in non-free should not hold up a new Debian distro. But removing Non-free means ignoring the needs of many Debian users and the efforts of many Debian maintainers. In all these posts on Slashdot, I have not seen one good reason for removing non-free!! People please realise that Debian exists because of the people who use it and maintain it. And anything that exists in Debian is because of someones need and someones effort. Nobody has the right to throw away any part of Debian. If no one is willing to maintain it, then it will go away automatically. But as long as the license allows it, and the need and effort exists, let the packages stay!! cheers, YAH00
Well up until a couple of years ago Linux was not mainstream. Most (All?) of it's users were people of similar ideology. What you just stated in you comment actually. Forget closed source until you can't.
Now linux is mainstream (Hooray?). With that comes the invasion of the journalists. And journalists will be journalises. The can't code. So they take it upon themselves as theire moral responibility to evangalise linux. And what better way to get attention then by being sensationalist?
Don't get the intent wrong. I completely agree with the articles point. It would be great to have some good open source benchmarks. But since the author can't code, he's trying to seed a few ideas out there in the only way he knows. By doing a "call to arms"
Oh and about RMS.. I think at this point there is no better person than RMS to represent the community. With the rapid commercialization of Linux, RMS is the only true GNU proponent left with any clout. All other are hybrids. And make no mistake. GNU is as much responsible for Linux' success as Linus himself is. If it weren't for RMS' ideals you woulden't be posting your comments here.
Think of him as the concience of the community. Let the companies ask themselves... would RMS approve? If the answer is yes then they are on the right track to pleasing the community. And we do need such a concience today a mirror to look at which will never lie, but say the cold hard truth.
cheers.
Ummm... If checking for unauthorised programs on the users harddrive is the best they could come up with, then it's a pretty short sighted solution. Getting around this can be quite easy (Like masqueratind as MS notepad).
How would you like it if the Television industry said that it will be monitoring everything that you watch to make sure that you don't watch stolen cable? Or if the Telephone industry said that they would be monitoring every conversation you had on their lines just to make sure you weren't a spy?
No. User monitoring is just stupid. Instead invent a better client-server protocol. That's the only way to go. And if you don't want to spend the effort in doing this. Well then.. people are going to take advantage of you.
>I can tell you right now that very few people care of Linux and its freeness Yes but the few who do are the ones who have made linux what it is. But for them, those who don't care about Linux' freeness (speach) woulden't have anything to care about in the first place without the few who do.
Hi, Is Darwin compatible with the DFSG?
As far as I see it, technoloty is not competing with us in the most evolved entity race. It is enhancing and complementing our state of evolution.
:)). Technology is only contributing in our being better evolved creatures. And with recent advances in cloning, if scientists could control the division and differentiation of cells, instead of creating whole humans, we could just create hearts, livers, lungs, even eyes and hands and legs.
We stopped evolving sometime after the emergence of the homo sapien sapien (Yes two sapiens). In our day and age survival of the fittest no longer means survival of the fittest 'physically'.
Our medical skills have made it possible for us to let even people with highly 'deficient' genes and for them to reproduce. Genetic physical afflictions are no longer rooted out by natural selection except in the most drastic cases (The Romonov family).
No we are no longer evolving physically. We are evolving technologically. Consider laser eye surgery, pace makers and even artifical hearts, Viagra (Sorry coulden't resist
Just think about it. You could pratically live forever until your brain gave way. And with advances in neural cell division (Currently neural cells do not divide. Once they die, they die. They are not replaced.) we could even get around that limitation for a while. In fact thees advances are already being experimented in regenerating damaged spinal column injuries to treat paralysis.
So technology is not going to take away our crown. It is only going to polish it for us. At least for the forseeable future.
Do these comments have any impact on the outcome of any legistlation that the beaucracies adopt? It seems to me that we have been asked to give such comments in the past as well, but haven't seen any results. Will the Copy right office post an acknowledgement saying that the overwhelming response was negative or positive or non comittal? Therefore we will or will not or further consider this legistlation? Is there any means of getting feedback on weather our comments are being heard or not? -- YAH00
... to the non-developer masses who use Linux? Will this translate into end user apps any time soon?
IBM released their VIA-Voice SDK many months ago, but I am still to see a single useful application come out of it. Not even an announcement of a project trying to use it.
Is this what is fated for this SDK as well???
You are right about the fact there are finite Developer resources. Which is why you can never have too many choices.
Journaling file systems are in their infance for the linux kernel. So we need to explore as many possibilities as possible. And because there are only finite developer resources, only the best ones will survive. It's called survival of the fitest and thats how the open source movement works.
After all just think if there were only one journaling filesystem. Ever heard of the saying "too many cooks spoil the broth" ? So you have lots of people with different philosophies working on this single choice that you have. The results can only be horrifying. Just look at the BSD projects for an example. They have a great product, and they started with a single code base, but philosophical goals differed and eventually they evloved into many different varients. After much bad feelings is what I get from various conversations that I have followed on mailing lists and news groups.
This is the reason that you have very few people working on the linux kernel itself, and only one who decides what goes in. His philosophy decides where the linux kernel goes. If you don't like this, work on something else. Like the hurd. Eventually the better/more practical philosophy will win. And there dosen't have to be a single winner even. Many can win. And although people will flame me for this, the opensource philosophy has already proven to be the better and more praticle way of developing the support infrastructure software. And it's winning. And there are many winners. Like GPL, lGPL, BSD, artistic, NPL etc. Even in these, the better ones will survive, and others will evolve to take on the good things from their betters.
Besides, with all these codebases released under GPL/compatible licenses, you have the option of borrowing from each other to make a better product. And you have something to compare your product with. After all how would you know that there isn't a better way of doing things, if they were always done only one way and you've never even seen/thought about another?
So you see variaty is the mother of evolution. Choice is good and let the best man win.
Obviously, the pure challange (was it really?) of figuring out the DVD encryption would appeal to any hacker worth his salt.
But for many people having DeCSS is also a matter of principle. A matter of freedom. Of not being sidelined because you are a minority.
My question is.. What were (if any) the other considerations part of your motivation to write DeCSS, or was the challenge the only motivation?