What made the first Nanoloop so incredibly awesome was its aphexy 8-bit glitch aesthetic. The new one looks like a great piece of software for music creation, but will it be able to have the same degree of crazy bleepy soul?
Listen, TiVo needs to make money. They're a company selling a product. Everyone seems to forget that and whine when they don't give you everything for free. I applaud them for coming up with a way to sell ad space without interfering with normal use of the product.
What people like you tend to forget is that while yes, they are "a company selling a product", the fact is that isn't any good unless people actually buy or use the product. Tivo may "need" to make money, but actually making money is a privilege, not a right, and we as customers are the ones who will ultimately decide whether Tivo gets this privilege. If Tivo or any other company does not provide what we want in the manner we want it we can and will go elsewhere.
So you apparently don't have a problem with this commercial thingy. That's fine, that is your opinion. However, not everyone shares your opinions. Learn to deal with it.
The LSB requires RPM be available. I.E. it requires that the distro be able to elegantly deal with and properly install a package presented to it in RPM format. It doesn't say anything about what the distribution's primary package manager is.
I wouldn't give them credit for the Miyazaki thing. The initial release of Spirited Away was embarrasing. In order to see it you had to live near a major city, be following the internet news sites that tell you about these kinds of things closely enough to know it was happening, and be able to get to the one indie theatre they decided to put it in in the span of like one week or something. I couldn't manage to find a way to see it and I was trying. The rumor was they purposefully screwed up Spirited Away's release to keep it from interfering with the release of Treasure Planet (which bombed on its own merits anyway).
Then Spirited Away won the Oscar, and Disney just kind of went "oh, crap, maybe we should have actually let people see that one".
The second release of Spirited Away, after it won the Oscar was barely acceptable, somewhat similar to the release Mononoke got. They also did minimal promotion for it and I hear they even ran some commercials. It still wasn't done in a way you'd be likely to wind up seeing it unless you sought it out, but at least you could see it if you wanted to, even if (like me) you had to drive a few hours to do so.
Princess Mononoke I was actually very impressed with Disney on because the release was more or less reasonable considering the film (it wasn't the kind of thing Americans would generally go for, but they got it a good showing on the indie circuit) and they did (in my opinion) a really great job on the dub. If Disney hadn't picked that one up I don't think I would have gotten to see it in theatres. Spirited Away, they did a mediocre job on the dub and seemed to be actively interfering with it administratively, and the movie was something that might have been able to succeed in America if given the chance, plus it won an Oscar. With Spirited Away I think it's safe to say it would have done far better had anyone except Disney been the distributor.
Then there's the DVDs thing, which I probably just shouldn't get into.
Actually, it seems like Retro Studios is being treated pretty well, there aren't reports of people there getting laid off, and in fact Nintendo keeps asking them to make more games. Meanwhile some of the games they've made-- MP:Hunters and the original Metroid Prime itself come to mind-- have been uncommonly creative.
Whatever they're doing with this one game, it doesn't seem like this one dev house is going with the depressing flow of the rest of the industry in general. So with all they've done, shouldn't Retro get the license to create a game just to make people happy and make some money once in a while?
Meanwhile, I for one am glad they did what they did with MP2. The original MP just felt too unrefined, and the setting was too familiar (Oh gee.. I'm fighting Ridley... again...) for me to really get anything out of it. I rented it once and couldn't be bothered to go back to it, it just wasn't worth it too me. But I'm really looking forward to MP2 because from what I heard they were able to take the formula they experimented with in MP1, refine it to perfection, and put it in a much more interesting setting. This, I want to play.
Doesn't Sun's UNIX licensing agreement predate SCO's switch to a screw-with-Linux-and-live-off-the-tips business model? I mean, unlike MSFT, it would seem Sun has the excuse they're actually selling a SysV derivative.
I wonder if there is any off-line search engine like X1, Copernic, or that one, for Windows that support search plugins via some kind of API. So a developer can add e.g. mp3 ID3 tag search, DVD metadata search and other things like that.
Well, it isn't for Windows, but Apple's Spotlight, which will be part of the OS X update released early next year, will feature exactly that.
Didn't Internet Explorer teach them that integrating something that connects to the web, like this, into the OS is bad?
Well, their single major competitor of the time is dead, many people are unaware web browsers other than Internet Explorer exist, and there were no negative side-effects of any sort for Microsoft other than an utterly insignificant "settlement" fee with the Bush administration. It seems to me IE would have taught Microsoft that integrating something that connects to the web into the OS is.. well.. good.
I'm just waiting for a security hole to pop up and leave even more reason to bash Windows security.
Is this what you were referring to as far as why this would be "bad"? Because I don't see this as a bad thing for Microsoft. The security disaster that has been Microsoft's products in the last few years has yet to produce any significant negative repercussions I can see for Microsoft. Further security disasters in Microsoft products likely will turn out just the same; bad for Microsoft's customers, neither good nor bad for Microsoft.
I see absolutely no connection between your post and the one you are responding to. So you're trying to compare different two different ways in which a hypothetical shoplifter claims that an item they have just stolen was their legal property before they entered the store to the difference between possessing a copy of an intellectual property without purchasing a license and selling the intellectual property as another as your own? This analogy does not seem to connect at all.
Of course, I'm sure you'll point out that copyright violation isn't the same as physical theft
That sounds like an excellent idea, since copyright infringement isn't the same as theft.
fundamentally moral positions don't need mental gymnastics to justify themselves. They tend to be self-evident.
As counterevidence to this strange statement I offer the last 7,000 years of human history, much of which concerns the side-effects of occasionally rather large divergences of opinion on what "fundamentally moral positions" should be.
But were this statement accurate, then wouldn't it follow that if something were a fundamentally moral position, it would be self-evident rather than requiring strained analogies?
Your point (1) is faulty. Linux may be Asterisk's primary platform but since it's open source you are just as free to go ahead and run it on, say, BSD or Solaris or Mac OS X. Meanwhile ports to more esoteric platforms are certainly an option, and it's already possible to run it on Windows if you have compatibility layer software. Linux will probably be the most likely platform to benefit from Asterisk being popular, but Asterisk definitely has potential outside of Linux.
So it looks to me like "the/. crowd" has a general lack of moral outrage over people sharing copyrighted material for free without the person being shared with buying a license, but does have moral outrage over people taking copyrighted material, repackaging it, presenting it as their own work, and selling it to others for a profit in violation of license.
So... congratulations! You have demonstrated that the slashdot community has two different consensus viewpoints on two different issues.
Something analogous to gpl violations in the music world would be not file-sharing, but bootlegging-- people who bulk-fabricate copies of commercial CDs and then sell them-- a practice which I've yet to see anyone on slashdot defend.
> > Bottom line seems to be that nobody is going to be switching over to MSN Search from Google anytime soon.
> The bottom line is not quite so overcast as this statement seems to imply. None were negative, but most mentioned that this is beta quality and had the potential to tackle google in the future.
So... what is the difference, exactly, between "the future" and "not anytime soon"?
Because while maybe if we drastically change what is expected of evoting contractors we could someday reach the point where electronic voting is almost as secure and accurate as paper ballots kept in locked boxes, this point won't represent evoting being "ready" because there will never be a good reason for these things to exist. Electronic vote storage is a solution looking for a problem, and once punchcard voting disappears in 2006 evoting companies will no longer have "hey, look, there ARE voting methods worse than ours!" to prop themselves up.
Re:Google makes minor change to website - news at
on
Google Index Doubles
·
· Score: 1
Uh...
Google, the foremost search engine, makes a pretty serious change (doubling their index size while suddenly announcing a new dedication to increasing their index) on the exact same day that an intended major competitor of theirs (MSN search, which slashdot already had a story on) launches...
I'd say that's pretty significant. Since you apparently don't want any Apple or Google news, why not just disable those stories...?
No, I didn't miss that sentence. It still doesn't matter. Who cares about Novell's internal politics?
They're selling good open source products
They're releasing previously closed-source products to the community
They're making money off of all of this
Sounds to me like everyone wins here.
Yes, much of the time the people the Open Source community works with have their own profit in mind and not the benefit of the Open Source community. This isn't a bad thing. This is how things are supposed to work. One of the main strengths of copyleft is its capacity to leverage human greed to a productive end.
Is it possible that once this slander of title suit is tossed, Novell could actually take steps toward trying to have themselves declared owners of UNIX?
And whether they do that or not, will they at least have the right to say to the public/media, once the slander of title suit is tossed, "we believe we own UNIX"? Since it appears the copyright is, at the least, in dispute?
Is there any way to potentially later challenge the side letter with a "valid Novell signature", the one SCO has a copy of, by which SCO claims ownership of UNIX? Is there any way in corporate contract law to claim something like this side letter was accidental, or unauthorized, in a case such as this when apparently nobody at Novell was aware that someone had signed away the UNIX copyright? Does the fact Novell has not yet done so mean that they don't have a way of doing so, or does it mean they're waiting until an appropriate moment (say, when it comes up in someone's court case)?
Slashdot Mirror
Nanoloop is a synth/sequencer. You can't record sound to it.
The Nintendo DS, however, will have a microphone built in... I can't wait to see what the Nanoloop people eventually release for it ^_^
What made the first Nanoloop so incredibly awesome was its aphexy 8-bit glitch aesthetic. The new one looks like a great piece of software for music creation, but will it be able to have the same degree of crazy bleepy soul?
Listen, TiVo needs to make money. They're a company selling a product. Everyone seems to forget that and whine when they don't give you everything for free. I applaud them for coming up with a way to sell ad space without interfering with normal use of the product.
What people like you tend to forget is that while yes, they are "a company selling a product", the fact is that isn't any good unless people actually buy or use the product. Tivo may "need" to make money, but actually making money is a privilege, not a right, and we as customers are the ones who will ultimately decide whether Tivo gets this privilege. If Tivo or any other company does not provide what we want in the manner we want it we can and will go elsewhere.
So you apparently don't have a problem with this commercial thingy. That's fine, that is your opinion. However, not everyone shares your opinions. Learn to deal with it.
The LSB requires RPM be available. I.E. it requires that the distro be able to elegantly deal with and properly install a package presented to it in RPM format. It doesn't say anything about what the distribution's primary package manager is.
Integrating optional RPM support into your distro's native package manager is not hard.
I wouldn't give them credit for the Miyazaki thing. The initial release of Spirited Away was embarrasing. In order to see it you had to live near a major city, be following the internet news sites that tell you about these kinds of things closely enough to know it was happening, and be able to get to the one indie theatre they decided to put it in in the span of like one week or something. I couldn't manage to find a way to see it and I was trying. The rumor was they purposefully screwed up Spirited Away's release to keep it from interfering with the release of Treasure Planet (which bombed on its own merits anyway).
Then Spirited Away won the Oscar, and Disney just kind of went "oh, crap, maybe we should have actually let people see that one".
The second release of Spirited Away, after it won the Oscar was barely acceptable, somewhat similar to the release Mononoke got. They also did minimal promotion for it and I hear they even ran some commercials. It still wasn't done in a way you'd be likely to wind up seeing it unless you sought it out, but at least you could see it if you wanted to, even if (like me) you had to drive a few hours to do so.
Princess Mononoke I was actually very impressed with Disney on because the release was more or less reasonable considering the film (it wasn't the kind of thing Americans would generally go for, but they got it a good showing on the indie circuit) and they did (in my opinion) a really great job on the dub. If Disney hadn't picked that one up I don't think I would have gotten to see it in theatres. Spirited Away, they did a mediocre job on the dub and seemed to be actively interfering with it administratively, and the movie was something that might have been able to succeed in America if given the chance, plus it won an Oscar. With Spirited Away I think it's safe to say it would have done far better had anyone except Disney been the distributor.
Then there's the DVDs thing, which I probably just shouldn't get into.
Yes, but they redeemed themselves 100% for that in the movie based solely on the line "SHE BIT MY HEAD"...
...yes, obviously I'm joking and this is not the sort of thing that could realistically be implemented as an Action Replay code.
BUT I CAN DREAM
Actually, it seems like Retro Studios is being treated pretty well, there aren't reports of people there getting laid off, and in fact Nintendo keeps asking them to make more games. Meanwhile some of the games they've made-- MP:Hunters and the original Metroid Prime itself come to mind-- have been uncommonly creative.
Whatever they're doing with this one game, it doesn't seem like this one dev house is going with the depressing flow of the rest of the industry in general. So with all they've done, shouldn't Retro get the license to create a game just to make people happy and make some money once in a while?
Meanwhile, I for one am glad they did what they did with MP2. The original MP just felt too unrefined, and the setting was too familiar (Oh gee.. I'm fighting Ridley... again...) for me to really get anything out of it. I rented it once and couldn't be bothered to go back to it, it just wasn't worth it too me. But I'm really looking forward to MP2 because from what I heard they were able to take the formula they experimented with in MP1, refine it to perfection, and put it in a much more interesting setting. This, I want to play.
No text
Just curious: Are there any webcomics you read?
Doesn't Sun's UNIX licensing agreement predate SCO's switch to a screw-with-Linux-and-live-off-the-tips business model? I mean, unlike MSFT, it would seem Sun has the excuse they're actually selling a SysV derivative.
I wonder if there is any off-line search engine like X1, Copernic, or that one, for Windows that support search plugins via some kind of API. So a developer can add e.g. mp3 ID3 tag search, DVD metadata search and other things like that.
Well, it isn't for Windows, but Apple's Spotlight, which will be part of the OS X update released early next year, will feature exactly that.
Didn't Internet Explorer teach them that integrating something that connects to the web, like this, into the OS is bad?
Well, their single major competitor of the time is dead, many people are unaware web browsers other than Internet Explorer exist, and there were no negative side-effects of any sort for Microsoft other than an utterly insignificant "settlement" fee with the Bush administration. It seems to me IE would have taught Microsoft that integrating something that connects to the web into the OS is.. well.. good.
I'm just waiting for a security hole to pop up and leave even more reason to bash Windows security.
Is this what you were referring to as far as why this would be "bad"? Because I don't see this as a bad thing for Microsoft. The security disaster that has been Microsoft's products in the last few years has yet to produce any significant negative repercussions I can see for Microsoft. Further security disasters in Microsoft products likely will turn out just the same; bad for Microsoft's customers, neither good nor bad for Microsoft.
Well, atleast this is optional, unlike IE.
How long will that last, I wonder?
Or more clearly - the /. community thinks it's ok to steal as long as it's not their work being stolen
No, that would not be an accurate way of stating things, nor was it what I said.
I see absolutely no connection between your post and the one you are responding to. So you're trying to compare different two different ways in which a hypothetical shoplifter claims that an item they have just stolen was their legal property before they entered the store to the difference between possessing a copy of an intellectual property without purchasing a license and selling the intellectual property as another as your own? This analogy does not seem to connect at all.
Of course, I'm sure you'll point out that copyright violation isn't the same as physical theft
That sounds like an excellent idea, since copyright infringement isn't the same as theft.
fundamentally moral positions don't need mental gymnastics to justify themselves. They tend to be self-evident.
As counterevidence to this strange statement I offer the last 7,000 years of human history, much of which concerns the side-effects of occasionally rather large divergences of opinion on what "fundamentally moral positions" should be.
But were this statement accurate, then wouldn't it follow that if something were a fundamentally moral position, it would be self-evident rather than requiring strained analogies?
Your point (1) is faulty. Linux may be Asterisk's primary platform but since it's open source you are just as free to go ahead and run it on, say, BSD or Solaris or Mac OS X. Meanwhile ports to more esoteric platforms are certainly an option, and it's already possible to run it on Windows if you have compatibility layer software. Linux will probably be the most likely platform to benefit from Asterisk being popular, but Asterisk definitely has potential outside of Linux.
So it looks to me like "the /. crowd" has a general lack of moral outrage over people sharing copyrighted material for free without the person being shared with buying a license, but does have moral outrage over people taking copyrighted material, repackaging it, presenting it as their own work, and selling it to others for a profit in violation of license.
So... congratulations! You have demonstrated that the slashdot community has two different consensus viewpoints on two different issues.
Something analogous to gpl violations in the music world would be not file-sharing, but bootlegging-- people who bulk-fabricate copies of commercial CDs and then sell them-- a practice which I've yet to see anyone on slashdot defend.
It looks like the Asterisk mailing list is already aware of this.
> > Bottom line seems to be that nobody is going to be switching over to MSN Search from Google anytime soon.
> The bottom line is not quite so overcast as this statement seems to imply. None were negative, but most mentioned that this is beta quality and had the potential to tackle google in the future.
So... what is the difference, exactly, between "the future" and "not anytime soon"?
If I had the talent that the EA guys likely do I'm sure it would not be difficult.
I will take this statement to mean that you are not actually familiar with EA's products.
If your employer is not following employment practices laws, you could ask the courts to force them to comply.
Because while maybe if we drastically change what is expected of evoting contractors we could someday reach the point where electronic voting is almost as secure and accurate as paper ballots kept in locked boxes, this point won't represent evoting being "ready" because there will never be a good reason for these things to exist. Electronic vote storage is a solution looking for a problem, and once punchcard voting disappears in 2006 evoting companies will no longer have "hey, look, there ARE voting methods worse than ours!" to prop themselves up.
Uh...
Google, the foremost search engine, makes a pretty serious change (doubling their index size while suddenly announcing a new dedication to increasing their index) on the exact same day that an intended major competitor of theirs (MSN search, which slashdot already had a story on) launches...
I'd say that's pretty significant. Since you apparently don't want any Apple or Google news, why not just disable those stories...?
- They're selling good open source products
- They're releasing previously closed-source products to the community
- They're making money off of all of this
Sounds to me like everyone wins here.Yes, much of the time the people the Open Source community works with have their own profit in mind and not the benefit of the Open Source community. This isn't a bad thing. This is how things are supposed to work. One of the main strengths of copyleft is its capacity to leverage human greed to a productive end.
Is it possible that once this slander of title suit is tossed, Novell could actually take steps toward trying to have themselves declared owners of UNIX?
And whether they do that or not, will they at least have the right to say to the public/media, once the slander of title suit is tossed, "we believe we own UNIX"? Since it appears the copyright is, at the least, in dispute?
Is there any way to potentially later challenge the side letter with a "valid Novell signature", the one SCO has a copy of, by which SCO claims ownership of UNIX? Is there any way in corporate contract law to claim something like this side letter was accidental, or unauthorized, in a case such as this when apparently nobody at Novell was aware that someone had signed away the UNIX copyright? Does the fact Novell has not yet done so mean that they don't have a way of doing so, or does it mean they're waiting until an appropriate moment (say, when it comes up in someone's court case)?