The moment Microsoft or any other software giant has their filthy mitts inside of open source code, they're going to start pushing for ways to get $$$ out of the deal. I wouldn't be surprised to see a company like Microsoft starting a lawsuit, demanding a portion of an open source foundation's revenue (after all, they are making money off of service contracts supporting software Microsoft helped write.) Besides, what a better way to stave off a potential threat from Linux servers than to take it over legally?
Oh please, those of us editing the political entries see the end of Wikipedia every time a new news story hits the web. Wikipedia has seen far darker days (see: 08' elections.)
GNUNB: GNU's not BING;
GNU's not unix not BING is not google. GNU's not unix not unix not BING is not google is not google. *beats head into the ground.* I should plug this into a fractal generator.
I could definitely see something like this heading our way; While I'm not a Mac fan myself, they do seem keen on making "nifty" products (e.g. the iPhone, iMusicPlayers, etc.) If they do make something like this, it will probably have unique features (maybe a camera that lets you interact via hand motions, facial expressions?) Still, this seems fairly realistic.
I have a bad habit of thinking over bugs while lying in bed before going to sleep.
I've lost more than a few hours sleep over this. Usually though, I sleep like a
baby if I manage to find a good solution to a problem.
I'm tired of companies trying to blur the line between local and remote data by making an "OS Web Browser." If companies want to push an OS Web Browser, then they should pick up the Linux Kernel and make a nice Desktop to go with it. Instead, companies are basically moving towards an AOL browser (bloated with a bunch of windows floating inside of it...)
I can't believe this story only got a little under 200 replies. While W|A may not have knowledge of every subject at the moment, it is incredibly capable of answering questions about what it does have knowledge regarding. In otherwords, it's a system that has displayed the capability of answering questions based off of reserve knowledge; as that knowledge grows, the system will become extrordinarily powerful. I would have expected a lot more interest in the potential for this system, as opposed to a bunch of people complaining it doesn't already know everything.
I guess this is my temper talking, but this guy should be given at least five digits and rights to kick the judge in the crotch. Hard. With boots. Metal boots. Not only is this idiotic, it makes a mockery of the justice system. Use some goddamned ****ing common sense for godssake. The man is a man, not a criminal. This makes the U.S. look as bat**** insane as Syria.
You don't need to be a SysAdmin with Ubuntu or many other modern Linux systems; Synaptic and other nice package managers have made many installation tasks easier than even Windows. Now, you complain that Linux couldn't live up to WinAmp: that's pretty specialized.
I loaded up Totem for free and started watching DVDs on my laptop, but the Window's side of my box (dual booting) I had to install PowerDVD for decent features (which, for the record, costs.) Linux isn't supposed to play Window's software, it has its own software ecosystem. So if you're dead-set on running WinAmp, well of course you didn't like Ubuntu -- you've already decided you want the Window's software ecosystem.
Much of the problem here comes from the fact computers aren't preloaded: yes, Linux can be confusing if you're installing it yourself, considering you have to do a lot of configuration, but a preloaded computer won't have those complexities.
I'm not saying you can't dislike Linux for certain things (I'm dual booting specifically because I want to play games, which Linux isn't very good for) but in general, modern Linux systems are just as simple as a Window's box, ~if you have it configured properly~.
We have copywrite for a reason. Companies are able to make cheap-knockoffs because they don't have to spend millions creating something from scratch. If I disassemble Excel, make a few changes, and then resell it, I'm going to make a lot of cash off of Microsoft's development work. Copywrite goes too far when it begins to force itself onto the ~consumer~ or tries to steal concepts and ideas. I agree copywriting concepts like multi-touch is silly, but we do need to keep people from stealing ideas. China is a very, very bad example. They're an example of why we have copywrite.
Not to jump off topic, but personally, I don't think market shares are as important as having the systems preloaded on off-the-shelf computers from places like BestBuy. While it may be gaining popularity among tech savvy fellows with an iPod, it's a simple matter of fact that most average folk are ~afraid~ to reload their OS. The "year of the Linux desktop" will never come until you can buy one off the shelf. Once it happens, ordinary people will ~finally~ be exposed. Also, the economy of Linux systems will become apparent when consumers have to pay -extra- to "upgrade" to Windows.
This or doling out huge fines to boost revenue. Maybe every major corporation will pull the plug on their UK operations and let them feel what freemarket can do; I'm normally not the type to get bent out of shape over taxing companies (I even voted for Obama) but the UK is getting on my bad side; especially after the huge funding they've decided to dump into spying on the Internet. If they're really needing more money, they should cut massive spending projects that do nothing but violate privacy.
I'm not sure how they plan on doing this, but it seems a little dangerous to have a system with so much power. What exactly is going to happen if someone manages to turn this into a botnet? Something that big could probably knock out the root servers.
Does anyone have more information on the structure of the system? Who came up with this idea? How many experienced opinions were brought into the discussion? From what I've seen in my own local government, a lot of politicians have warped visions of how the internet actually works, and what the dangers are (see: A Series Of Tubes.)
Really, this seems like a radical case of the client who has grand visions of his super awesome website idea, but actually has no idea what he ~really~ needs. It just seems dangerous to have non-experts on the subject mandating what we do with the net.
I don't mind seeing justice served, but I'm not a fan of the EU pocketing money. Can anyone confirm where the hell this money is going? I would hate to see the EU using this as a nice way to boost their books during the economic downturn.
I'm currently paying $80.00 per month for a damn 1mb connection. Unfortunately, I live in the country, so I need special equipment (some micro-wave broadband or something.) Still, the only reason they can get away with it is because they're the only broadband providers in the area.
I've heard of some locations that have the same service for half the cost -- but they actually have local competition. If that's any indicator, this sort of service will drop in price, too, once more providers start offering these speeds.
The first google search result for "sealed court case duration".
[url]http://www.leg.state.nv.us/CourtRules/SCR_RGSRCR.html[/url]
- " (c) Sealing of entire court file prohibited. Under no circumstances shall the court seal an entire court file. An order entered under these rules must, at a minimum, require that the following information is available for public viewing on court indices: (i) the case number(s) or docket code(s) or number(s); (ii) the date that the action was commenced; (iii) the names of the parties, counsel of record, and the assigned judge; (iv) the notation âoecase sealedâ; (v) the case type and cause(s) of action, which may be obtained from the Civil Cover Sheet; (vi) the order to seal and written findings supporting the order; and (vii) the identity of the party or other person who filed the motion to seal.
6. Scope and duration of order. If the court enters an order sealing or redacting a court record, the court shall use the least restrictive means and duration."
Slashdot Mirror
The moment Microsoft or any other software giant has their filthy mitts inside of open source code, they're going to start pushing for ways to get $$$ out of the deal. I wouldn't be surprised to see a company like Microsoft starting a lawsuit, demanding a portion of an open source foundation's revenue (after all, they are making money off of service contracts supporting software Microsoft helped write.) Besides, what a better way to stave off a potential threat from Linux servers than to take it over legally?
Oh please, those of us editing the political entries see the end of Wikipedia every time a new news story hits the web. Wikipedia has seen far darker days (see: 08' elections.)
GNUNB: GNU's not BING; GNU's not unix not BING is not google. GNU's not unix not unix not BING is not google is not google. *beats head into the ground.* I should plug this into a fractal generator.
Well to be fair, the topic classification tags say "!news", that's g++k speak for "not news."
I could definitely see something like this heading our way; While I'm not a Mac fan myself, they do seem keen on making "nifty" products (e.g. the iPhone, iMusicPlayers, etc.) If they do make something like this, it will probably have unique features (maybe a camera that lets you interact via hand motions, facial expressions?) Still, this seems fairly realistic.
will finally be attained when we can harness all of the hot air being blown our way by these researchers.
I have a bad habit of thinking over bugs while lying in bed before going to sleep. I've lost more than a few hours sleep over this. Usually though, I sleep like a baby if I manage to find a good solution to a problem.
I'm tired of companies trying to blur the line between local and remote data by making an "OS Web Browser." If companies want to push an OS Web Browser, then they should pick up the Linux Kernel and make a nice Desktop to go with it. Instead, companies are basically moving towards an AOL browser (bloated with a bunch of windows floating inside of it...)
I can't believe this story only got a little under 200 replies. While W|A may not have knowledge of every subject at the moment, it is incredibly capable of answering questions about what it does have knowledge regarding. In otherwords, it's a system that has displayed the capability of answering questions based off of reserve knowledge; as that knowledge grows, the system will become extrordinarily powerful. I would have expected a lot more interest in the potential for this system, as opposed to a bunch of people complaining it doesn't already know everything.
http:///..org, making clear sense since of things other than URLs since a long time ago.
I guess this is my temper talking, but this guy should be given at least five digits and rights to kick the judge in the crotch. Hard. With boots. Metal boots. Not only is this idiotic, it makes a mockery of the justice system. Use some goddamned ****ing common sense for godssake. The man is a man, not a criminal. This makes the U.S. look as bat**** insane as Syria.
To be fair, online stores seem like a fairly obvious and natural progression for entertainment consoles.
You don't need to be a SysAdmin with Ubuntu or many other modern Linux systems; Synaptic and other nice package managers have made many installation tasks easier than even Windows. Now, you complain that Linux couldn't live up to WinAmp: that's pretty specialized. I loaded up Totem for free and started watching DVDs on my laptop, but the Window's side of my box (dual booting) I had to install PowerDVD for decent features (which, for the record, costs.) Linux isn't supposed to play Window's software, it has its own software ecosystem. So if you're dead-set on running WinAmp, well of course you didn't like Ubuntu -- you've already decided you want the Window's software ecosystem. Much of the problem here comes from the fact computers aren't preloaded: yes, Linux can be confusing if you're installing it yourself, considering you have to do a lot of configuration, but a preloaded computer won't have those complexities. I'm not saying you can't dislike Linux for certain things (I'm dual booting specifically because I want to play games, which Linux isn't very good for) but in general, modern Linux systems are just as simple as a Window's box, ~if you have it configured properly~.
No wonder they're taking so long, they just got slammed with over a hundred thousand entries! I'll bet most of them aren't even legit.
We have copywrite for a reason. Companies are able to make cheap-knockoffs because they don't have to spend millions creating something from scratch. If I disassemble Excel, make a few changes, and then resell it, I'm going to make a lot of cash off of Microsoft's development work. Copywrite goes too far when it begins to force itself onto the ~consumer~ or tries to steal concepts and ideas. I agree copywriting concepts like multi-touch is silly, but we do need to keep people from stealing ideas. China is a very, very bad example. They're an example of why we have copywrite.
Not to jump off topic, but personally, I don't think market shares are as important as having the systems preloaded on off-the-shelf computers from places like BestBuy. While it may be gaining popularity among tech savvy fellows with an iPod, it's a simple matter of fact that most average folk are ~afraid~ to reload their OS. The "year of the Linux desktop" will never come until you can buy one off the shelf. Once it happens, ordinary people will ~finally~ be exposed. Also, the economy of Linux systems will become apparent when consumers have to pay -extra- to "upgrade" to Windows.
Agree'd. I want to see some action between the girl with the green dress and her fairy sisters. It's only a matter of time before \b\ produces.
This or doling out huge fines to boost revenue. Maybe every major corporation will pull the plug on their UK operations and let them feel what freemarket can do; I'm normally not the type to get bent out of shape over taxing companies (I even voted for Obama) but the UK is getting on my bad side; especially after the huge funding they've decided to dump into spying on the Internet. If they're really needing more money, they should cut massive spending projects that do nothing but violate privacy.
I'm not sure how they plan on doing this, but it seems a little dangerous to have a system with so much power. What exactly is going to happen if someone manages to turn this into a botnet? Something that big could probably knock out the root servers. Does anyone have more information on the structure of the system? Who came up with this idea? How many experienced opinions were brought into the discussion? From what I've seen in my own local government, a lot of politicians have warped visions of how the internet actually works, and what the dangers are (see: A Series Of Tubes.) Really, this seems like a radical case of the client who has grand visions of his super awesome website idea, but actually has no idea what he ~really~ needs. It just seems dangerous to have non-experts on the subject mandating what we do with the net.
I don't mind seeing justice served, but I'm not a fan of the EU pocketing money. Can anyone confirm where the hell this money is going? I would hate to see the EU using this as a nice way to boost their books during the economic downturn.
I'm currently paying $80.00 per month for a damn 1mb connection. Unfortunately, I live in the country, so I need special equipment (some micro-wave broadband or something.) Still, the only reason they can get away with it is because they're the only broadband providers in the area. I've heard of some locations that have the same service for half the cost -- but they actually have local competition. If that's any indicator, this sort of service will drop in price, too, once more providers start offering these speeds.
The first google search result for "sealed court case duration". [url]http://www.leg.state.nv.us/CourtRules/SCR_RGSRCR.html[/url] - " (c) Sealing of entire court file prohibited. Under no circumstances shall the court seal an entire court file. An order entered under these rules must, at a minimum, require that the following information is available for public viewing on court indices: (i) the case number(s) or docket code(s) or number(s); (ii) the date that the action was commenced; (iii) the names of the parties, counsel of record, and the assigned judge; (iv) the notation âoecase sealedâ; (v) the case type and cause(s) of action, which may be obtained from the Civil Cover Sheet; (vi) the order to seal and written findings supporting the order; and (vii) the identity of the party or other person who filed the motion to seal. 6. Scope and duration of order. If the court enters an order sealing or redacting a court record, the court shall use the least restrictive means and duration."
... when you're not a computer expert and didn't realize they were logging your IP.