According to one source, "kernel 2.6 will address PHBs by including a 'boss key' that automatically switches the kernel to 'Fake Windows Mode'. In this mode, Linux will simulate the Windows XP-2005 environment, complete with Dancing Paperclips, bluescreens, and incessant reminders to sign up for a Microsoft Passport.
Now, geeks will be able to install Linux on their company workstations without the knowledge of their PHBs. Productivity will skyrocket, hopefully earning them a fat raise."
I have seen the UltraDNS ads here at Slashdot and thusly decided to read up on their techniques as well.
Basically, they urge large important Web sites to outsource its DNS needs to another company (them). Before this DOS attack on their servers, they provided near perfect stability, security, and performance. If I recall correctly, Hotmail, Forbes, and Oracle have already used the services of UltraDNS.
It's a shame that such a wonderful resource (the Internet) is so often abused by a few rowdy hackers and trolls.
Here is a whitepaper that describes their services in depth and explains the reasons for outsourcing one's DNS needs.
Well, I found this old link in my bookmark manager. It details the history of EMS (sound studio) in vivid detail, including a listing of all their original equipment.
The interesting part is that they posted high resolution images of their setup, which includes PDP-8 microcomputers!
The image: http://www.ems-synthi.demon.co.uk/studiopz.gif The PDP-8s: Left side - Teletype for PDP8 Left bay - PDP8/L Computer ("Leo") 4K x 12 bits (=6K bytes) 1.3 s cycle (0.77MHz), 32K Hard Disk Store Center left bay - PDP8/S Computer
Calling all Electrical/Computer Engineers
on
Bringing Back the PDP8
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Many of you probably have used Xilink's 1000, 2000, or 4000-series FPGA card during laboratories for your undergrad classes.
Well, if you'd like, you can follow this design of an FGPA implementation of the original PDP-8 computer!
If you've used Verilog (a hardware design programming language), like I have, you can even download all the code!
We've now seen nearly a dozen articles on this fire that destroyed several computers at the University of Twente.
It's very upsetting to me, especially considering that the fire was set deliberately.
However, far worse tragedies occur every day around the world. But in these instances, people die. Yes, people. Drive-by shootings, car accidents, birthing troubles, drug overdoses, and many other unfortunate circumstances happen hundreds of times all around the world every day.
I realize this is a tech site, but I'm sure that 1 in 5 disasters involves computers being burnt up or crushed. Why not just post these then?
For the world-record holder as the longest surviving bacteria in space, it turns out that among the multitude of dangers [cold, vacuum, UV, lack of nutrients, etc.] the greatest stress of all is intense ultraviolet radiation.
You know, I'm as much an advocate of information sharing as the next guy, but this kind of disclosure is just not professional, people.
I honestly feel that this type of discourse on an open Web forum such as this one is not advantageous to society as a whole. Why? Well, you just instructed the next generation of criminals how to effectively torture their victims. Don't believe me? Re-read the quote!
For the world-record holder as the longest surviving bacteria in space, it turns out that among the multitude of dangers [cold, vacuum, UV, lack of nutrients, etc.] the greatest stress of all is intense ultraviolet radiation.
I can see the headline on the local paper already: "Local Kitten Faces Grim Outlook After UV Torture".
As if that doesn't sound disheartening enough, just replace "kitten" with "teenager". The Anarchist's Cookbook was disgusting enough, and I honestly have hatred for anyone who reads and even mildly ponders using those recipes for disaster.
But I never...never...thought that the professional, for-pay editors here at Slashdot, the gentleman down in the trenches day in and day out, bringing us the latest from the front lines of Open Source vs. Microsoft, would publish benchmarks on how to most effectively torture bacteria or any other living creature.
As far as I'm concerned, God's creatures are in my jurisdiction, and if you mess with any living thing in a negative manner, you will face my music.
Thank you for hearing me out. I apologize for being perhaps a bit too vocal on the matter, but it's an issue of high concern for me.
People, I'm sure you all realize as much as the next Open Source supporter/coder/documenter/pioneer that efforts from our end are grossly mismanaged when compared to those of our proprietary counterparts. I can admit this, and do so without embarassment, simply because I'm proud of how far we've all come and am excited about what the next few years have in store for us all.
That being said, we really need to question these actions of our colleagues who develop the Boa web server. We already have Apache, which is truly a world-class HTTPD server in and of itself. Why do we need to waste the time and effort of so many skilled coders and frontiersmen of the Open Source revolution on a Web server project that should clearly be marked -1, Redundant?
I agree that Apache can seem a bit bloated sometimes, but I assure you that anyone who reads a few man pages could figure out how to install and configure a minimalistic instance of the server. So in the time it took to write Boa, I'd wager that millions upon millions could have read the Apache documentation and put a minimalized install of it into action.
I mean, think about it folks. Then, with their newly saved time, these Boa developers could have embarked on another project that's of high merit, something that we as Open Sourcers truly need, and, to quote typical manager talk, "needed yesterday".
I am doing my part for our revolution, people. I regularly donate to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Free Software Foundation (FSF), and Kuro5hin (K5). Moreover, I also spend at least 7 hours every weekend contributing code to some of the more popular projects that you have seen on SourceForge, such as the mail filtering utility and the Gayme instant messaging program.
I don't know, I guess I just hate to see duplicate work. It's like back in grade school when the teacher would assign "seat" or "busy" work just so she could sneak off to the bathroom and snort some cocaine.
People: most computer users simply do not care about running the latest and greatest applications on their PCs. They are quite content with Windows 95, Office 97, and AOL. To them, this is all that a computer does. The PC is merely a way to send email, instant messages, and write papers. The sad truth is that it's the same way for many college students as well.
From the article: Robert Clemenzi, an electrical engineer who lives in Manassas, is still using an older model that runs Windows 95.
This is another surprising trend in the PC world -- many users don't care about which operating system their computer uses to manage hardware devices and programs. Whether or not their machine's underlying system code is an inherently secure model such as BSD or an inherently virus-prone OS, they simply do not care. They will go to Download.com, perhaps, and install whatever free virus scan is available. Of course, the virus definition files may be a year old and they'll never update them, but they just do not know how to do this.
It's the same way for many users of Unix-type machines. All these hackers care about is getting a command line interface so that they can run a couple instances of the Vi text editor and the Mutt email client. Simple. That's all. It's just that straightforward. Whereas the average Windows users just wants to write and chat, the average Unix user just wants to code and post to mailing lists.
But that's all it really is to folks like you and I.
Windows is a collection of bloated, nonsensical code that isn't necessary in today's world. Just look at modern day *nix-like environments -- Red Hat, Mac OS X, etc.; they are all stable as hell and very worth their pricetag. Red Hat can even be downloaded for free from their Web site or via FTP.
As far as ease of use is concerned, I was never one who felt that Windows is "inherently easy to use". That's just not true -- it's the fact that Windows has been on 95% of all computers since 1995 that makes it seem to be so easy to operate and learn new applications on.
*nix users of 2002 don't need Windows. Microsoft is no longer our sugar daddy who tells us what we can and cannot do. The WINE Is Not an Emulator (WINE) project allows me to run any Windows application under the Sun on my Linux box. Office XP, Windows Media Player 9, AOL Instant Messenger, and Internet Explorer all run wonderfully via WINE. I simply install these core Microsoft applications on another hard disk partition and then instantiate the WINE application layer while booted into Linux. It's really as easy as that.
People, Windows XP and Longhorn may be nice to look at, but like many supermodels, they've got some serious issues underneath it all.
People, I realize that support options for most software products are severely lacking, but you must jump down off your "high horse" so to speak and consider what kinds of support options exist for folks using the preferred software here at Slashdot, "Open Source" (or "Free").
Users of free software are an interesting bunch. They knowingly accept and embrace and are even attracted to the fact that it's traditionally much harder to use than everyday Windows software. This is fine and good until 90% of them realize that they can't even get their freshly-downloaded project to configure/compile itself. Another 8% do manage to do so, but then they run into problems figuring out how to get it to work to do what they want it to do (e.g. "Hmm, was that tar -xfp or -xzfv tar?). Still the meager 2%, or the truly gifted gurus, actually manage to run the program.
Now comes the tough part -- tech support.
After using pico or more software to read the INSTALL and README files, a user is still baffled by certain run-time characteristics of the Free Software project. They then turn to (as indicated on the project website) to the appropriate IRC channel.
You guys all know what happens next; after a series of RTFM j00 dumb n00bie!!1 and Wow your dumb comments, 99.1% of these folks who were initially awe-inspired by Open Source turn severely sour on it and give up. They then reinstall Windows and go along their merry way.
This is all (mostly) truth, people, and the figures prove it. There are probably a couple million people who use Linux as their preferred desktop. Everyone else uses Windows or OS X because support options with these types of licensed proprietary products are paramount when compared to Linux-class code and support.
Your parents run Windows for a reason, and trust me -- it's not because it looks that incredible. It's just easier to use, and easier to get support for. End of story.
Sure, I use Linux and really respect myself and others who do the same. But even the most unexpected people turn to another platform after awhile because the support that we all give for our Linux projects just simply sucks. I know I personally don't have time to support apps I write, and you folks probably don't either.
Re:I think we're forgetting something
on
Software For Ransom
·
· Score: 1, Troll
Yeah, that'd work.
Maybe I'll try the same thing with my brand new sports coupe. If I leave the door's unlocked, it will allow people to just look through it and admire its outer *and* inner beauty.
Yeah. That might work.;-)
I think we're forgetting something
on
Software For Ransom
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Rights to the source code remain restricted until a set amount of money is collected or a set date passes, at which point the code is freed.
What happened to the "more eyes = better code" paradigm that so many Slashdotters and Open-/Free- Source gurus so frequently praise.
Listen, people -- if these new, deviant "random" coders start projects with expiration ("freed code") dates of 10 years down the road, no one will ever learn, improve, or assist innovation in the realm of software engineering. We will simply end up with thousands of under-funded vapourware applications, which in turn will stifle innovation for years to come when one considers all that *could have* been produced in the same amount of time with a more reasonable development model, such as Microsoft's Shared Source or ESR's Open Source.
The C programming language does everything I need it to do.
Writing a new operating system? I choose C.
Coding up your own desktop environment? I choose C.
Desire to write the next award-winning PC game? I choose C.
I'm not sure why so many man months were spent trying to hook into.NET. Couldn't we have spent more time refining the applications, utilities, and system code that we already have rather than wasting time extending the Microsoft monopoly?
Sorry, but you people really confuse me sometimes. I write a few sentences of praise for Microsoft's latest operating systems just a few hours ago and I get marked as a troll. Now I see an article praising those who work hard to let Microsoft's.NET succeed.
People: Make up your mind, or find a new hobby. people.
Is charging $200 for an American operating system honest?
Yes it is. When you consider the years and years of research, planning, development, testing, documentation, and support that comes along with that pricetag, it seems very fair to me.
Microsoft products all have a similar look and feel and the interfaces are intuitive. That's much more than one can say for competing products. The cost of user training alone to use three dozen different GNU-ish applications would far outweight the licensing costs to obtain Windows. Teaching a secretary how to download, configure, and compile the latest version of OpenOffice via a command line interface would probably take a good 3 or 4 weeks (months?) of training.
If you don't wish to use the best product of its type on the market, that's your prerogative. But doing so would be shunning capitalism.
People, before you reply stating how utterly evil the Microsofts, Nintendos, and other large corporations are, ask yourself this: "What happened to making an honest living?"
Software piracy runs rampant in Asia as it is. Now that Asians are experts at stealing and distributing and profiting from hard Americans' work, they have moved on to bigger and better things, such as violating the contractual agreements of home entertainment consoles by producing illegal modification chips and selling them at a profit.
It would be one thing if they were donating all their profit to some poor country in Africa or something, but as it stands now they're simply pocketing the cash and then crying to all of us about how unfortunate they are.
So, gentlemen, please bite your tongues before you begin to speak out against our corporations and speak out in favor of these evil pirates who stifle good ol' American ingenuity and innovation.
HOLLAND, MI -- Popular geek news site Slashdot (www.slashdot.org) has come under fire recently for featuring articles on the Visa, Inc. credit card company. Visa has trademarked any combination/permutation of the English letters "v", "i", "s", and "a".
Lawyers from both sides have slated a preliminary meeting and hope to settle outside of court.
Slashdot's head honcho, Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda, was unavailable for comments. Members of his site appear to be concerned about dealing with Visa's behemoth legal team, and plan on purchasing hot grit and goat insurance just to be safe.
Stay tuned as further details from this shocking case come to light.
... before these things were working 99+% of the time during real failures.
I read that it was difficult to get the parachute to open quickly with minimal altitude loss if deployed at low airspeeds, while at the same time limiting the inflation loads to a tolerable level if deployed at high airspeeds.
"The concept is comparable to automotive safety systems, which utilize energy absorbing structures, airbags, inertial restraint systems, padded interiors, and occupant protection cages working in unison to promote a very controlled and survivable crash condition." - http://www.aviation-engines.co.za/brs.htm
I'm not joking. The #1 rule of computer science is that computer scientists are lazy.
We need to stop working just to accomplish the minimal functionality desired and start testing the hell out of our software to ensure that it's secure.
It's fun to joke about marijuana use, but the joke may be on you if you ever try to get a nice job some day.
I have an on-site interview with a top defense contractor here in the U.S. in two weeks, and it concludes with a comprehensive drug test. If I was a user of marijuana (and I have never tried the stuff), I would most definitely fail the test, even if trying some method of flushing the drugs out of my system.
It may seem cruel to any drug users here, but the bottom line is that no one trusts a druggie. Glazed-over, bloodshot eyes are not the kind of things that the United States government reps want to start into while signing a $5 billion contract for a new anti-missile defense system.
I'm a lucky guy in that I have been able to withstand peer pressure and remain drug-free.
Slashdot Mirror
According to one source, "kernel 2.6 will address PHBs by including a 'boss key' that automatically switches the kernel to 'Fake Windows Mode'. In this mode, Linux will simulate the Windows XP-2005 environment, complete with Dancing Paperclips, bluescreens, and incessant reminders to sign up for a Microsoft Passport.
;-)
Now, geeks will be able to install Linux on their company workstations without the knowledge of their PHBs. Productivity will skyrocket, hopefully earning them a fat raise."
More details are available at http://humorix.org
I, for one, am quite excited about this, although I guess that depends on if any of you actually have a job at the moment
Either way, I'm glad to see the kernel hackers working hard to fulfill our feature requests. Here's to a great 2.6!
Cheers,
-- Eric
I have seen the UltraDNS ads here at Slashdot and thusly decided to read up on their techniques as well.
Basically, they urge large important Web sites to outsource its DNS needs to another company (them). Before this DOS attack on their servers, they provided near perfect stability, security, and performance. If I recall correctly, Hotmail, Forbes, and Oracle have already used the services of UltraDNS.
It's a shame that such a wonderful resource (the Internet) is so often abused by a few rowdy hackers and trolls.
Here is a whitepaper that describes their services in depth and explains the reasons for outsourcing one's DNS needs.
From: http://www.grillet.co.uk/biog.html
"My mother was a Fortran programmer using computers that looked like this [picture of an ancient IBM 608-series supercomputer]"
Well, I found this old link in my bookmark manager. It details the history of EMS (sound studio) in vivid detail, including a listing of all their original equipment.
The interesting part is that they posted high resolution images of their setup, which includes PDP-8 microcomputers!
The image: http://www.ems-synthi.demon.co.uk/studiopz.gif
The PDP-8s:
Left side - Teletype for PDP8
Left bay - PDP8/L Computer ("Leo") 4K x 12 bits (=6K bytes) 1.3 s cycle (0.77MHz), 32K Hard Disk Store
Center left bay - PDP8/S Computer
Many of you probably have used Xilink's 1000, 2000, or 4000-series FPGA card during laboratories for your undergrad classes.
Well, if you'd like, you can follow this design of an FGPA implementation of the original PDP-8 computer!
If you've used Verilog (a hardware design programming language), like I have, you can even download all the code!
We've now seen nearly a dozen articles on this fire that destroyed several computers at the University of Twente.
It's very upsetting to me, especially considering that the fire was set deliberately.
However, far worse tragedies occur every day around the world. But in these instances, people die. Yes, people. Drive-by shootings, car accidents, birthing troubles, drug overdoses, and many other unfortunate circumstances happen hundreds of times all around the world every day.
I realize this is a tech site, but I'm sure that 1 in 5 disasters involves computers being burnt up or crushed. Why not just post these then?
For the world-record holder as the longest surviving bacteria in space, it turns out that among the multitude of dangers [cold, vacuum, UV, lack of nutrients, etc.] the greatest stress of all is intense ultraviolet radiation.
You know, I'm as much an advocate of information sharing as the next guy, but this kind of disclosure is just not professional, people.
I honestly feel that this type of discourse on an open Web forum such as this one is not advantageous to society as a whole. Why? Well, you just instructed the next generation of criminals how to effectively torture their victims. Don't believe me? Re-read the quote!
For the world-record holder as the longest surviving bacteria in space, it turns out that among the multitude of dangers [cold, vacuum, UV, lack of nutrients, etc.] the greatest stress of all is intense ultraviolet radiation.
I can see the headline on the local paper already: "Local Kitten Faces Grim Outlook After UV Torture".
As if that doesn't sound disheartening enough, just replace "kitten" with "teenager". The Anarchist's Cookbook was disgusting enough, and I honestly have hatred for anyone who reads and even mildly ponders using those recipes for disaster.
But I never...never...thought that the professional, for-pay editors here at Slashdot, the gentleman down in the trenches day in and day out, bringing us the latest from the front lines of Open Source vs. Microsoft, would publish benchmarks on how to most effectively torture bacteria or any other living creature.
As far as I'm concerned, God's creatures are in my jurisdiction, and if you mess with any living thing in a negative manner, you will face my music.
Thank you for hearing me out. I apologize for being perhaps a bit too vocal on the matter, but it's an issue of high concern for me.
Thanks again.
People, I'm sure you all realize as much as the next Open Source supporter/coder/documenter/pioneer that efforts from our end are grossly mismanaged when compared to those of our proprietary counterparts. I can admit this, and do so without embarassment, simply because I'm proud of how far we've all come and am excited about what the next few years have in store for us all.
That being said, we really need to question these actions of our colleagues who develop the Boa web server. We already have Apache, which is truly a world-class HTTPD server in and of itself. Why do we need to waste the time and effort of so many skilled coders and frontiersmen of the Open Source revolution on a Web server project that should clearly be marked -1, Redundant?
I agree that Apache can seem a bit bloated sometimes, but I assure you that anyone who reads a few man pages could figure out how to install and configure a minimalistic instance of the server. So in the time it took to write Boa, I'd wager that millions upon millions could have read the Apache documentation and put a minimalized install of it into action.
I mean, think about it folks. Then, with their newly saved time, these Boa developers could have embarked on another project that's of high merit, something that we as Open Sourcers truly need, and, to quote typical manager talk, "needed yesterday".
I am doing my part for our revolution, people. I regularly donate to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Free Software Foundation (FSF), and Kuro5hin (K5). Moreover, I also spend at least 7 hours every weekend contributing code to some of the more popular projects that you have seen on SourceForge, such as the mail filtering utility and the Gayme instant messaging program.
I don't know, I guess I just hate to see duplicate work. It's like back in grade school when the teacher would assign "seat" or "busy" work just so she could sneak off to the bathroom and snort some cocaine.
Write once, never upgrade ;-)
People: most computer users simply do not care about running the latest and greatest applications on their PCs. They are quite content with Windows 95, Office 97, and AOL. To them, this is all that a computer does. The PC is merely a way to send email, instant messages, and write papers. The sad truth is that it's the same way for many college students as well.
From the article: Robert Clemenzi, an electrical engineer who lives in Manassas, is still using an older model that runs Windows 95.
This is another surprising trend in the PC world -- many users don't care about which operating system their computer uses to manage hardware devices and programs. Whether or not their machine's underlying system code is an inherently secure model such as BSD or an inherently virus-prone OS, they simply do not care. They will go to Download.com, perhaps, and install whatever free virus scan is available. Of course, the virus definition files may be a year old and they'll never update them, but they just do not know how to do this.
It's the same way for many users of Unix-type machines. All these hackers care about is getting a command line interface so that they can run a couple instances of the Vi text editor and the Mutt email client. Simple. That's all. It's just that straightforward. Whereas the average Windows users just wants to write and chat, the average Unix user just wants to code and post to mailing lists.
Dude, haven't you read the FAQ?
Slashdot karma is valid legal tender at eBay, man.
HTML: http://www.eg.bucknell.edu/~ekrout/ugvm.htm
http://www.eg.bucknell.edu/~ekrout/ugvm03lo.pdf
But that's all it really is to folks like you and I.
Windows is a collection of bloated, nonsensical code that isn't necessary in today's world. Just look at modern day *nix-like environments -- Red Hat, Mac OS X, etc.; they are all stable as hell and very worth their pricetag. Red Hat can even be downloaded for free from their Web site or via FTP.
As far as ease of use is concerned, I was never one who felt that Windows is "inherently easy to use". That's just not true -- it's the fact that Windows has been on 95% of all computers since 1995 that makes it seem to be so easy to operate and learn new applications on.
*nix users of 2002 don't need Windows. Microsoft is no longer our sugar daddy who tells us what we can and cannot do. The WINE Is Not an Emulator (WINE) project allows me to run any Windows application under the Sun on my Linux box. Office XP, Windows Media Player 9, AOL Instant Messenger, and Internet Explorer all run wonderfully via WINE. I simply install these core Microsoft applications on another hard disk partition and then instantiate the WINE application layer while booted into Linux. It's really as easy as that.
People, Windows XP and Longhorn may be nice to look at, but like many supermodels, they've got some serious issues underneath it all.
People, I realize that support options for most software products are severely lacking, but you must jump down off your "high horse" so to speak and consider what kinds of support options exist for folks using the preferred software here at Slashdot, "Open Source" (or "Free").
Users of free software are an interesting bunch. They knowingly accept and embrace and are even attracted to the fact that it's traditionally much harder to use than everyday Windows software. This is fine and good until 90% of them realize that they can't even get their freshly-downloaded project to configure/compile itself. Another 8% do manage to do so, but then they run into problems figuring out how to get it to work to do what they want it to do (e.g. "Hmm, was that tar -xfp or -xzfv tar?). Still the meager 2%, or the truly gifted gurus, actually manage to run the program.
Now comes the tough part -- tech support.
After using pico or more software to read the INSTALL and README files, a user is still baffled by certain run-time characteristics of the Free Software project. They then turn to (as indicated on the project website) to the appropriate IRC channel.
You guys all know what happens next; after a series of RTFM j00 dumb n00bie!!1 and Wow your dumb comments, 99.1% of these folks who were initially awe-inspired by Open Source turn severely sour on it and give up. They then reinstall Windows and go along their merry way.
This is all (mostly) truth, people, and the figures prove it. There are probably a couple million people who use Linux as their preferred desktop. Everyone else uses Windows or OS X because support options with these types of licensed proprietary products are paramount when compared to Linux-class code and support.
Your parents run Windows for a reason, and trust me -- it's not because it looks that incredible. It's just easier to use, and easier to get support for. End of story.
Sure, I use Linux and really respect myself and others who do the same. But even the most unexpected people turn to another platform after awhile because the support that we all give for our Linux projects just simply sucks. I know I personally don't have time to support apps I write, and you folks probably don't either.
Yeah, that'd work.
;-)
Maybe I'll try the same thing with my brand new sports coupe. If I leave the door's unlocked, it will allow people to just look through it and admire its outer *and* inner beauty.
Yeah. That might work.
Rights to the source code remain restricted until a set amount of money is collected or a set date passes, at which point the code is freed.
What happened to the "more eyes = better code" paradigm that so many Slashdotters and Open-/Free- Source gurus so frequently praise.
Listen, people -- if these new, deviant "random" coders start projects with expiration ("freed code") dates of 10 years down the road, no one will ever learn, improve, or assist innovation in the realm of software engineering. We will simply end up with thousands of under-funded vapourware applications, which in turn will stifle innovation for years to come when one considers all that *could have* been produced in the same amount of time with a more reasonable development model, such as Microsoft's Shared Source or ESR's Open Source.
The C programming language does everything I need it to do.
.NET. Couldn't we have spent more time refining the applications, utilities, and system code that we already have rather than wasting time extending the Microsoft monopoly?
.NET succeed.
Writing a new operating system? I choose C.
Coding up your own desktop environment? I choose C.
Desire to write the next award-winning PC game? I choose C.
I'm not sure why so many man months were spent trying to hook into
Sorry, but you people really confuse me sometimes. I write a few sentences of praise for Microsoft's latest operating systems just a few hours ago and I get marked as a troll. Now I see an article praising those who work hard to let Microsoft's
People: Make up your mind, or find a new hobby. people.
Is charging $200 for an American operating system honest?
Yes it is. When you consider the years and years of research, planning, development, testing, documentation, and support that comes along with that pricetag, it seems very fair to me.
Microsoft products all have a similar look and feel and the interfaces are intuitive. That's much more than one can say for competing products. The cost of user training alone to use three dozen different GNU-ish applications would far outweight the licensing costs to obtain Windows. Teaching a secretary how to download, configure, and compile the latest version of OpenOffice via a command line interface would probably take a good 3 or 4 weeks (months?) of training.
If you don't wish to use the best product of its type on the market, that's your prerogative. But doing so would be shunning capitalism.
People, before you reply stating how utterly evil the Microsofts, Nintendos, and other large corporations are, ask yourself this: "What happened to making an honest living?"
Software piracy runs rampant in Asia as it is. Now that Asians are experts at stealing and distributing and profiting from hard Americans' work, they have moved on to bigger and better things, such as violating the contractual agreements of home entertainment consoles by producing illegal modification chips and selling them at a profit.
It would be one thing if they were donating all their profit to some poor country in Africa or something, but as it stands now they're simply pocketing the cash and then crying to all of us about how unfortunate they are.
So, gentlemen, please bite your tongues before you begin to speak out against our corporations and speak out in favor of these evil pirates who stifle good ol' American ingenuity and innovation.
HOLLAND, MI -- Popular geek news site Slashdot (www.slashdot.org) has come under fire recently for featuring articles on the Visa, Inc. credit card company. Visa has trademarked any combination/permutation of the English letters "v", "i", "s", and "a".
Lawyers from both sides have slated a preliminary meeting and hope to settle outside of court.
Slashdot's head honcho, Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda, was unavailable for comments. Members of his site appear to be concerned about dealing with Visa's behemoth legal team, and plan on purchasing hot grit and goat insurance just to be safe.
Stay tuned as further details from this shocking case come to light.
I hate Klerck, aka Kevin Ealy who resides at 14 Stanhope Road in Goose Creek, SC.
... before these things were working 99+% of the time during real failures.
I read that it was difficult to get the parachute to open quickly with minimal altitude loss if deployed at low airspeeds, while at the same time limiting the inflation loads to a tolerable level if deployed at high airspeeds.
"The concept is comparable to automotive safety systems, which utilize energy absorbing structures, airbags, inertial restraint systems, padded interiors, and occupant protection cages working in unison to promote a very controlled and survivable crash condition." - http://www.aviation-engines.co.za/brs.htm
Start writing secure software!
I'm not joking. The #1 rule of computer science is that computer scientists are lazy.
We need to stop working just to accomplish the minimal functionality desired and start testing the hell out of our software to ensure that it's secure.
It's fun to joke about marijuana use, but the joke may be on you if you ever try to get a nice job some day.
I have an on-site interview with a top defense contractor here in the U.S. in two weeks, and it concludes with a comprehensive drug test. If I was a user of marijuana (and I have never tried the stuff), I would most definitely fail the test, even if trying some method of flushing the drugs out of my system.
It may seem cruel to any drug users here, but the bottom line is that no one trusts a druggie. Glazed-over, bloodshot eyes are not the kind of things that the United States government reps want to start into while signing a $5 billion contract for a new anti-missile defense system.
I'm a lucky guy in that I have been able to withstand peer pressure and remain drug-free.