So, let me get this straight. Linux, a kernel that started out as a project to learn the quirks of the 80386, and then became a "better Minix than Minix", must now bend to the whims of ISVs?
Linux, possibly the most successful GPL'd project outside of GNU, must stifle experimental development, and lock itself to an arbitrary standard (beyond POSIX), to make life easier for ISVs to keep their source code proprietary?
Well, I only abandoned WinNT 6 months ago or so, but it seems to me that Linux has been doing just fine before all the big names started porting and supporting Linux. And, now that the media attention is glaring, I see no reason for the current system of distributions and flexibility to change.
./configure --switches; make ; make install
After all, even if IBM, Intel, and everybody suddenly stops supporting linux, us Free software and Open source types will still be able to do with linux what we already do with it.
Only, as time goes on, free software alternatives grow stronger and stronger. Any Day Now (tm), gnumeric or KOffice or AbiWord or something will be able to do all that MS Word or Excel does for people. Real Soon Now (tm) Corel or Red Hat or somebody will make a distribution that truly is as comfortable for users to install and configure as Windows 98.
Those of us who like linux are content to bite the bullet and use Windows when we have to, and wait until linux gets all the productivity software it needs, with source code included.
Those of us who have looked at perl, egcs, emacs, KDE, and more know that we don't need no stinkin' linux-specific standards, and we don't need no stinkin' proprietary software.
It may sound like wishful thinking; many people do need proprietary software to get their jobs done. But, those people who need that software aren't using linux right now anyway. So, if ISV's don't develop for them, then it won't hurt linux's market share at all.
linux is already doing just fine, even without a prime-time Desktop Environment. So, barring some foul play on the part of transmeta's flying saucer technology:-), linux isn't going to suddenly DIE because a few ISV's decide it's too hard to support Red Hat, SuSE, AND Debian.
Since when is the ability of the poor to purchase luxuries a BAD thing? Americans have a fairly high standard of living overall... and this is a reason to bash Americans?
One man's luxury is another's necessity (emotionally if not physically).
The author of a work can give permission to use as many licenses as he wants. He can also do whatever he wants with his own code. I mean, if I wrote something and released it to the world with the GPL, I could perfectly legally sell it as a compiled binary, without source.
Now, this dual licensing will only work if people who write patches to the javascript stuff license their patches under both the GPL and the N/MPL. Of course, the js maintainers will probably only accept patches which give permission to use both licenses.
The combined version would only be covered by the GPL. It could not be included by Netscape in proprietary releases.
I think the point of the thing is that anyone who develops for the Mozilla project should also release their code under MPL, NPL, or one of the two + GPL. without MPL or NPL it won't make it into the project.
>This is also true, but the fact is that it feels much nicer than qwerty.
Well, gee. Is that a *fact* now? Well, maybe you could enlighten us on a few other facts, like 1) KDE or GNOME? 2) chocolate ice cream or strawberry? 3) Quake 2 or Quakeworld?
I don't know what's different about newer ones, but I got one not long after the MS Natural keyboards came out, and I love it. My wrists hurt to use any normal keyboard now.
No. Any wavelength of light is possible. Energy is quantized, not wavelength. Therefore, if I have a photon of 632 nm light, it's energy is given by E = hv, where h is Plank's constant, and v is its frequency (c/632nm). I can still have a photon with wavelength 632.0000001 nm.
How are you going to produce your arbitrary photons, though? Photons emitted from collapsing electrons will only come out at fixed wavelengths, determined by the electron energies. And, my understanding of lasers is that all the light from one is produced by the same compound, and by the same electron transition by that compound. So, you're not going to be able to pick any aribtrary wavelength, because you probably won't be able to find just the right compound and be able to excite it perfectly to produce your desired wavelength.
Of course, I grew to hate physics in college, so go ahead, everyone, and point out just how I'm completely wrong and stupid on all this. I won't mind a bit.:-)
One who makes insulting generalizations about people an ocean away had better be perfect, or he leaves himself open to be attacked on any possible front.
Why can't a democracy be totalitarian? Whether it's a politburo or a parliament that takes away your rights, it's still the same effect for the victim.
The reason that many Americans view European socialist economies in such a negative way is that many Americans feel that a concept called "property rights" exists.
The high taxation and regulation of a socialist economy conflicts with a sense of property rights. And, since the USA has such a history of strong individuals and personal freedom, handing over many of these rights to the government sounds very uncomfortable.
The condescending attitude many socialists take toward such-minded Americans doesn't help the image of socialism, either.
Now, some Americans may be thinking "Since when do we have property rights? I thought Roosevelt and Johnson got rid of those?" but the 3rd consecutive Republican congress shows there's still hope.
I've always gotten the impression that Carmack loves OpenGL (it was partially his influence that got Apple to announce OpenGL support). So, why would Q3A not use OpenGL?
What's worse is that $50 is awfully high for linux, I think. Bonehead journalists on their Macs keep equating Red Hat with linux, and assuming that you have to buy linux from RedHat.
I think more people would be impressed if they knew Red Hat could be downloaded free of charge, or bought on 2 CDS from linux central for $2.95 + shipping.
or, even better, they might mention other distributions.
Since basically all the processors that have come since the Pentium Pro (Pentium II, Celeron, Pentium III) are based on the same Pentium Pro design.
The biggest thing holding back my PPro right now is the 66MHz bus. That's the only thing that would make me want to upgrade to a K7... faster memory access.
Why is it so many people who claim to be in support of programming and computer "freedom" take every opportunity to compalain about software that isn't free?
Free software won't always be the best option in every circumstance, simply because there are some areas where the free software world hasn't produced any finished products yet. (KDE vs. GNOME anyone?)
Freedom usually includes freedom of choice, including the freedom to choose not to use free software.
Emulators are NOT used to make illegal copies of commercial ROMS. ROM copier hardware is used to do that.
The trouble here is, Nintendo has had trouble fighting the real lawbreakers (distributors of illegal copies of their games), so now they're going after an easier to find target: the emulators themselves. The legality of writing an emulator is an issue wholly separate from the legality of distributing copies of commercial ROMS. Nintendo would like people to think otherwise, and judging by the harsh response the UltraHLE has gotten, Nintendo seems to have succeeded.
Here's Nintendo's attempt at a Microsoft-like EULA, taken from the back of the Star Fox 64 manual. I'm not a lawyer, but it doesn't seem to have much to it in the way of legal force against ROM copiers. It should only hurt people who distribute ROM images.
IMPORTANT:
WARNING: Copying of any Nintendo game is illegal and is strictly prohibited by domestic and international copyright laws. "Back-up" or "archival" copies are not authorized and are not necessary to protect your software. Violators will be prosecuted.
This Nintento game is not designed for use with any unauthorized copying device. Use of any such device will invalidate your Nintendo product warranty. Nintendo (and/or any Nintendo licensee or distributor) is not responsible for any damage or loss caused by the use of any such device. If use of any such device causes your game to stop operating, disconnect the device carefully to avoid damage and resume normal game play. If your game ceases to operate and you have no device attached to it, please contact your local authorized Nintendo retailer.
The contents of this notice do not interfere with your statutory rights.
It seems to me that the first paragraph is a load of hot air, trying to scare people who don't know their rights. Who do they think they're fooling, saying that backup copies aren't necessary? I don't think they'll replace it if it's stolen. Fair use should come into play here. The third paragraph pretty much admits this.
The second paragraph seems to be the one with actual legal merit. I would assume that they can set whatever terms they want for the warranty. But, I don't think that ROM pirates care whether the warranty's voided when they make the copies.
Nintendo should just stick to clear-cut, valid legal ground. They should go after ROM archives, and give incentives ($$$ rewards?) for ISPs to rat out ROM sites that they host. This would be much better than holding ISP's responsible. This way, Nintendo upholds its rights, the ISP's aren't harassed, and only the pirates pay. Everyone wins, in the long run.
Sorting server domains by content reminds me of what Intel's little plan is... to have "internet commerce security" sort people by CPU.
Now, I am aware of virtual domains... but not everyone wants to waste money on registering 4 or 5 different domains just because their server will host 4 or 5 different internet pages/services.
Plus, what's to prevent someone from registering whitehouse.com and putting some sort of "adult" content on it? Will NIC's be put in charge of censoring servers?
Slashdot Mirror
I beg to differ...
The *only* thing to eat at Togo's is a hot #25... loaded with sauce.
mmmm... sauce.
So, let me get this straight. Linux, a kernel that started out as a project to learn the quirks of the 80386, and then became a "better Minix than Minix", must now bend to the whims of ISVs?
:-), linux isn't going to suddenly DIE because a few ISV's decide it's too hard to support Red Hat, SuSE, AND Debian.
Linux, possibly the most successful GPL'd project outside of GNU, must stifle experimental development, and lock itself to an arbitrary standard (beyond POSIX), to make life easier for ISVs to keep their source code proprietary?
Well, I only abandoned WinNT 6 months ago or so, but it seems to me that Linux has been doing just fine before all the big names started porting and supporting Linux. And, now that the media attention is glaring, I see no reason for the current system of distributions and flexibility to change.
./configure --switches; make ; make install
After all, even if IBM, Intel, and everybody suddenly stops supporting linux, us Free software and Open source types will still be able to do with linux what we already do with it.
Only, as time goes on, free software alternatives grow stronger and stronger. Any Day Now (tm), gnumeric or KOffice or AbiWord or something will be able to do all that MS Word or Excel does for people. Real Soon Now (tm) Corel or Red Hat or somebody will make a distribution that truly is as comfortable for users to install and configure as Windows 98.
Those of us who like linux are content to bite the bullet and use Windows when we have to, and wait until linux gets all the productivity software it needs, with source code included.
Those of us who have looked at perl, egcs, emacs, KDE, and more know that we don't need no stinkin' linux-specific standards, and we don't need no stinkin' proprietary software.
It may sound like wishful thinking; many people do need proprietary software to get their jobs done. But, those people who need that software aren't using linux right now anyway. So, if ISV's don't develop for them, then it won't hurt linux's market share at all.
linux is already doing just fine, even without a prime-time Desktop Environment. So, barring some foul play on the part of transmeta's flying saucer technology
I meant to say:
...doesn't support the [sarcasm] tag.
Since when is the ability of the poor to purchase luxuries a BAD thing? Americans have a fairly high standard of living overall... and this is a reason to bash Americans?
One man's luxury is another's necessity (emotionally if not physically).
The author of a work can give permission to use as many licenses as he wants. He can also do whatever he wants with his own code. I mean, if I wrote something and released it to the world with the GPL, I could perfectly legally sell it as a compiled binary, without source.
Now, this dual licensing will only work if people who write patches to the javascript stuff license their patches under both the GPL and the N/MPL. Of course, the js maintainers will probably only accept patches which give permission to use both licenses.
The combined version would only be covered by the GPL. It could not be included by Netscape in proprietary releases.
I think the point of the thing is that anyone who develops for the Mozilla project should also release their code under MPL, NPL, or one of the two + GPL. without MPL or NPL it won't make it into the project.
>This is also true, but the fact is that it feels much nicer than qwerty.
Well, gee. Is that a *fact* now? Well, maybe you could enlighten us on a few other facts, like 1) KDE or GNOME? 2) chocolate ice cream or strawberry? 3) Quake 2 or Quakeworld?
Matters of personal preference...
I don't know what's different about newer ones, but I got one not long after the MS Natural keyboards came out, and I love it. My wrists hurt to use any normal keyboard now.
No. Any wavelength of light is possible. Energy is quantized, not wavelength. Therefore, if I have a photon of 632 nm light, it's energy is given by E = hv, where h is Plank's constant, and v is its frequency (c/632nm). I can still have a photon with wavelength 632.0000001 nm.
How are you going to produce your arbitrary photons, though? Photons emitted from collapsing electrons will only come out at fixed wavelengths, determined by the electron energies. And, my understanding of lasers is that all the light from one is produced by the same compound, and by the same electron transition by that compound. So, you're not going to be able to pick any aribtrary wavelength, because you probably won't be able to find just the right compound and be able to excite it perfectly to produce your desired wavelength.
Of course, I grew to hate physics in college, so go ahead, everyone, and point out just how I'm completely wrong and stupid on all this. I won't mind a bit. :-)
One who makes insulting generalizations about people an ocean away had better be perfect, or he leaves himself open to be attacked on any possible front.
Why can't a democracy be totalitarian? Whether it's a politburo or a parliament that takes away your rights, it's still the same effect for the victim.
The reason that many Americans view European socialist economies in such a negative way is that many Americans feel that a concept called "property rights" exists.
The high taxation and regulation of a socialist economy conflicts with a sense of property rights. And, since the USA has such a history of strong individuals and personal freedom, handing over many of these rights to the government sounds very uncomfortable.
The condescending attitude many socialists take toward such-minded Americans doesn't help the image of socialism, either.
Now, some Americans may be thinking "Since when do we have property rights? I thought Roosevelt and Johnson got rid of those?" but the 3rd consecutive Republican congress shows there's still hope.
I've always gotten the impression that Carmack loves OpenGL (it was partially his influence that got Apple to announce OpenGL support). So, why would Q3A not use OpenGL?
What's worse is that $50 is awfully high for linux, I think. Bonehead journalists on their Macs keep equating Red Hat with linux, and assuming that you have to buy linux from RedHat.
I think more people would be impressed if they knew Red Hat could be downloaded free of charge, or bought on 2 CDS from linux central for $2.95 + shipping.
or, even better, they might mention other distributions.
Since basically all the processors that have come since the Pentium Pro (Pentium II, Celeron, Pentium III) are based on the same Pentium Pro design.
The biggest thing holding back my PPro right now is the 66MHz bus. That's the only thing that would make me want to upgrade to a K7... faster memory access.
It's my understanding that the Euro Parliament's laws have no binding effect. They have to be implemented by each individual nation's government.
Does this rule apply everywhere in the EU?
granted, the 2D performance may be speedy... but comparisons to the "null driver" don't answer the allegation that the cards have blurry 2D output.
Mac OS X Server is based on BSD.. the client is not, as near as I can make out...
Well, considering the previous EU Presidency to the current one WAS the UK, it's pretty clear that the UK is part of the EU.
You're probably thinking of the new currency (Euro), in which the UK is not joining.
Then don't buy intel... the computer sitting behind me is running a 300 MHz AMD K6-2 on a Microstar 5169 board, which has an Aladdin V chipset.
Why is it so many people who claim to be in support of programming and computer "freedom" take every opportunity to compalain about software that isn't free?
Free software won't always be the best option in every circumstance, simply because there are some areas where the free software world hasn't produced any finished products yet. (KDE vs. GNOME anyone?)
Freedom usually includes freedom of choice, including the freedom to choose not to use free software.
Emulators are NOT used to make illegal copies of commercial ROMS. ROM copier hardware is used to do that.
The trouble here is, Nintendo has had trouble fighting the real lawbreakers (distributors of illegal copies of their games), so now they're going after an easier to find target: the emulators themselves. The legality of writing an emulator is an issue wholly separate from the legality of distributing copies of commercial ROMS. Nintendo would like people to think otherwise, and judging by the harsh response the UltraHLE has gotten, Nintendo seems to have succeeded.
Here's Nintendo's attempt at a Microsoft-like EULA, taken from the back of the Star Fox 64 manual. I'm not a lawyer, but it doesn't seem to have much to it in the way of legal force against ROM copiers. It should only hurt people who distribute ROM images.
IMPORTANT:
WARNING: Copying of any Nintendo game is illegal and is strictly prohibited by domestic and international copyright laws. "Back-up" or "archival" copies are not authorized and are not necessary to protect your software. Violators will be prosecuted.
This Nintento game is not designed for use with any unauthorized copying device. Use of any such device will invalidate your Nintendo product warranty. Nintendo (and/or any Nintendo licensee or distributor) is not responsible for any damage or loss caused by the use of any such device. If use of any such device causes your game to stop operating, disconnect the device carefully to avoid damage and resume normal game play. If your game ceases to operate and you have no device attached to it, please contact your local authorized Nintendo retailer.
The contents of this notice do not interfere with your statutory rights.
It seems to me that the first paragraph is a load of hot air, trying to scare people who don't know their rights. Who do they think they're fooling, saying that backup copies aren't necessary? I don't think they'll replace it if it's stolen. Fair use should come into play here. The third paragraph pretty much admits this.
The second paragraph seems to be the one with actual legal merit. I would assume that they can set whatever terms they want for the warranty. But, I don't think that ROM pirates care whether the warranty's voided when they make the copies.
Nintendo should just stick to clear-cut, valid legal ground. They should go after ROM archives, and give incentives ($$$ rewards?) for ISPs to rat out ROM sites that they host. This would be much better than holding ISP's responsible. This way, Nintendo upholds its rights, the ISP's aren't harassed, and only the pirates pay. Everyone wins, in the long run.
it's good to see at least a few people avoid zdnet here at /.
The first time I noticed that "Do you want to know more..." I started laughing out loud, because I had seen Starship Troopers pretty recently.
Sorting server domains by content reminds me of what Intel's little plan is... to have "internet commerce security" sort people by CPU.
Now, I am aware of virtual domains... but not everyone wants to waste money on registering 4 or 5 different domains just because their server will host 4 or 5 different internet pages/services.
Plus, what's to prevent someone from registering whitehouse.com and putting some sort of "adult" content on it? Will NIC's be put in charge of censoring servers?