I suppose I'll here the buzz about this when I get into work on Monday, but does anyone know if they were suing Lycos (the US company, owned by Daum of Korea) or Lycos Europe (which is owned by Bertelsmann and based in Germany). They are two very different companies, but news sites don't always know this. (Remember the anti-spam screensaver fiasco last year? That was Lycos Europe.)
The news report just says "Lycos", but it's a Dutch lawsuit... so I don't know.
Recent episodes finally have all featured all *five* Mythbusters in the opening sequence. What does this mean for the series? Can we expect less of A&J now? Or does this mean that the "real" stars of the show can finally get some decent myths to bust?:)
(More importantly: Does this signal a more stable roster of second-tier players? Or will Jamie decide he has better things to do than appear on television and blow up stuff? Is there anything better to do?)
LinuxToday did have some value, outside of all of this. It's not terribly well known, but they did help to sponsor and keep me updating the "Wonderful World of Linux" summaries, even when my job and my financial situation made it increasingly hard to do so. Admittably, they were repayed in click-throughs, but they were always very supportive of my writing (and Paul's, too)
Oh well. I don't know whether I should find someplace new to post to, or not...
I've put up an update of my latest "Wonderful World of Linux 2.4" document. (The final one, natch.) It contains a relatively complete list of new features in this release, sans driver updates and things that I either ignored or didn't know about. Right now, it's on LinuxToday http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-01 -05-007-04-NW-LF-KN, but it may also be elsewhere.
Can someone point me to an actual announcement of this? I've searched the RedHat site and I can't find mention that they stopped supporting Sparc, although I can see why they wouldn't want to advertise this.
I did notice that only RedHat 7 i386 is shipping, but that's the way they always start out a new revision. Alpha and Sparc generally come several weeks (to months) behind Intel. Sad, but true?
I've hard reports from friends of mine in the industry that they would have ARM and PPC versions of 7, and that doesn't seem to be the case yet, either. Has anyone heard anything further about this?
Wow. $370 US. That's a lot of money for a game system. Can you think of any other game systems for that much that survived? I can't. But who knows...
The true draw to any new system isn't how quick the processor is or what next-gen features it has (unless it runs Linux, of course), it's the games. Frankly, I don't expect this one to catch on at least until they make a Final Fantasy game for it.:) In the end, that's what brought the first Playstation to life.
One of the new features getting ready for 2.4 is the so called "generic" PPP layer. This is a generic implementation of PPP which supports both modem and ISDN connections and possibly others, I'm not sure. What I'd be curious in knowing is whether it would be easy to make a module for 2.4 that exports the kernel PPP code / pppd into a nice file stream such as used by SLiRP in PPP mode. This would effectively allow Linux machines "internal" SLiRP without any additional cost. Why? I don't know.
This would not however resolve the number one reason for using SLiRP (or, at least the only reason I've ever used it): shell accounts. Most ISPs or places where you would have non-PPP shell accounts would not typically be running Linux and especially would not likely be running a recent kernel. So, there is most definately a continuing need for SLiRP but would a lot of changes and "maintenance" be needed in SLiRP to reach that goal of legacy support? I don't know that either.
So, does anyone know if the Linux 2.3/2.4 ppp layer can be munged in this manner? That could be so much fun...:)
Yes, it was key to supporting IRIX.:) In the right crowds, I'm sure that's an important feature.:)
What's important to note and understand is that everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, has a differnet idea of what is and isn't a good feature. And believe me, I get a fair amount of feedback on my articles and I rarely can please everyone. There's always the person that just isn't happy until the PC internal speaker is supported, or until the kernel can do ISA PnP (it can now), or until it can do some other completely bizarre task that seems trivial to us at first, but them you realize how critical this can be under/just/ the right circumstances.
That's what makes Linux great: we have such a selection of great things that we have to please everyone a little; but we'll never please everyone entirely.
I could give you a dozen more examples, I'm sure.:)
I have found that, in my experience, the media always seems to pick up on the "errors" and less frequently on the real features. Ah well. I say that it's a "draft" for a reason.
This is definately one of the funniest things that I've seen all week. Some days, I really think Al Gore would be better off working the Funny Bone chain than the Presidental campaign circuit. But that's just me.
So, let's take a look at this web site and see how it ranks as open source? That could be fun...
The Freedom to run the program for any purpose. Hmm. Can we use his website as something other than what it is intended? Can we in fact copy his web page source and make a similar page decrying his ideals and misunderstanding of the world? We can certainly try... I wonder what his lawyers would say? Please note that his copyright statement on that page does explicitly state that they reserve all rights and do not grant any particular license for alternate usage.
The Freedom to stucy how it works. Well, we can do that. But that's the beauty behind the web: you can always do that.
The Freedom to redistribute copies. This is a toughie. International law does saw that it is always legal to cache copies of web pages in your browser (or other means) in order to view a page. But that does not apply to print media and the definition of open source does not include any specific qualifications for what means source may be distributed. (Even if it is silly to print out all that code.) Again I point to the fact that they suggest that all rights are reserved.
The Freedom to improve code and release it to the public. Well, Al Gore certainly wants you to improve his code. But take a look, his implied license states only that you may submit your changes to him (his employees). This violates the spirit of free software by not allowing your changes to be circulated without the consent of a third party. If no part of this farse is wrong but this one, this would truly be funny. The free software guidelines explicitly state: "If you do publish your changes, you should not be required to notify anyone in particular, or in any particular way." I can't see a more blatant misuse of the "Open Source" trademark than a person or organization who breaks this most important of rules.
Irrevocable Freedoms The free software guidelines states that software that is distributed free may not have cluuses or otherwise which would cause you to have your license revoked without cause. We can not explicitly state whether AL Gore violates this practice but we can point out that we don't even know the full text of the source license until after we submit changes: If Gore 2000 selects your material for use on our website we will contact you with further legal requirements.
This kind of blatant misuse of the open source philosophy should not go, in my opinion, without the thundering reminders of many many voting-age open sourceists in the email boxes of those who seek to rape our most sacred of ideologies. Joe
In my mind, there are a couple things to consider here:
1) If you rent out a theather, it usually costs less than actually going. It's like doing anything in bulk. But Lucas still gets the same take no matter what.
2) What is more likely to happen is that there will be a number of oppurtunistic people that will be standing by the door with tickets that they might be willing to give up... for about $100. Scalpers are not to be welcomed at these showings and this is one way to help the problem.
Our group of Pittsburgh people got refunds for our already-reserved showing. In my opinion, what this is designed to do is to level the playing field for the individual viewer rather than the large groups. I, for one, am all for it. Even those of us who are going with groups still want a shot at one of the elusive first showings.
I agree with you that many of the links (most?) that MP3 search engines include are garbage. But you have to look a little deeper than that and wonder why? I can tell you from experience that Lycos's (and other) MP3 search engines that I have used always start out as having a very good catalogue of links. But many of these sites, faced with the increase in traffic that a search engine of this nature causes, end up getting closed down in a hurry. I think that because Lycos had a higher profile search page, this happened more quickly than it would otherwise.
You shouldn't fault the engine either for the content or the lack thereof. It's only a reflection of the internet itself and MP3 are a diffcult commodity to track.
Slashdot Mirror
I suppose I'll here the buzz about this when I get into work on Monday, but does anyone know if they were suing Lycos (the US company, owned by Daum of Korea) or Lycos Europe (which is owned by Bertelsmann and based in Germany). They are two very different companies, but news sites don't always know this. (Remember the anti-spam screensaver fiasco last year? That was Lycos Europe.)
The news report just says "Lycos", but it's a Dutch lawsuit... so I don't know.
Recent episodes finally have all featured all *five* Mythbusters in the opening sequence. What does this mean for the series? Can we expect less of A&J now? Or does this mean that the "real" stars of the show can finally get some decent myths to bust? :)
(More importantly: Does this signal a more stable roster of second-tier players? Or will Jamie decide he has better things to do than appear on television and blow up stuff? Is there anything better to do?)
Hello,
LinuxToday did have some value, outside of all of this. It's not terribly well known, but they did help to sponsor and keep me updating the "Wonderful World of Linux" summaries, even when my job and my financial situation made it increasingly hard to do so. Admittably, they were repayed in click-throughs, but they were always very supportive of my writing (and Paul's, too)
Oh well. I don't know whether I should find someplace new to post to, or not...
Joe
Hello,
1 -05-007-04-NW-LF-KN, but it may also be elsewhere.
I've put up an update of my latest "Wonderful World of Linux 2.4" document. (The final one, natch.) It contains a relatively complete list of new features in this release, sans driver updates and things that I either ignored or didn't know about. Right now, it's on LinuxToday http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-0
2.6, here we come!
Joe
Hello,
Can someone point me to an actual announcement of this? I've searched the RedHat site and I can't find mention that they stopped supporting Sparc, although I can see why they wouldn't want to advertise this.
I did notice that only RedHat 7 i386 is shipping, but that's the way they always start out a new revision. Alpha and Sparc generally come several weeks (to months) behind Intel. Sad, but true?
I've hard reports from friends of mine in the industry that they would have ARM and PPC versions of 7, and that doesn't seem to be the case yet, either. Has anyone heard anything further about this?
Joe
Hello,
:) In the end, that's what brought the first Playstation to life.
Wow. $370 US. That's a lot of money for a game system. Can you think of any other game systems for that much that survived? I can't. But who knows...
The true draw to any new system isn't how quick the processor is or what next-gen features it has (unless it runs Linux, of course), it's the games. Frankly, I don't expect this one to catch on at least until they make a Final Fantasy game for it.
So, what games are coming out for this puppy?
Joe
Hello,
:)
One of the new features getting ready for 2.4 is the so called "generic" PPP layer. This is a generic implementation of PPP which supports both modem and ISDN connections and possibly others, I'm not sure. What I'd be curious in knowing is whether it would be easy to make a module for 2.4 that exports the kernel PPP code / pppd into a nice file stream such as used by SLiRP in PPP mode. This would effectively allow Linux machines "internal" SLiRP without any additional cost. Why? I don't know.
This would not however resolve the number one reason for using SLiRP (or, at least the only reason I've ever used it): shell accounts. Most ISPs or places where you would have non-PPP shell accounts would not typically be running Linux and especially would not likely be running a recent kernel. So, there is most definately a continuing need for SLiRP but would a lot of changes and "maintenance" be needed in SLiRP to reach that goal of legacy support? I don't know that either.
So, does anyone know if the Linux 2.3/2.4 ppp layer can be munged in this manner? That could be so much fun...
Joe
Hello,
:) In the right crowds, I'm sure that's an important feature. :)
/just/ the right circumstances.
:)
Yes, it was key to supporting IRIX.
What's important to note and understand is that everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, has a differnet idea of what is and isn't a good feature. And believe me, I get a fair amount of feedback on my articles and I rarely can please everyone. There's always the person that just isn't happy until the PC internal speaker is supported, or until the kernel can do ISA PnP (it can now), or until it can do some other completely bizarre task that seems trivial to us at first, but them you realize how critical this can be under
That's what makes Linux great: we have such a selection of great things that we have to please everyone a little; but we'll never please everyone entirely.
As for me, this 4G thing seems pretty silly.
Joe
Hello,
:)
:)
I could give you a dozen more examples, I'm sure.
I have found that, in my experience, the media always seems to pick up on the "errors" and less frequently on the real features. Ah well. I say that it's a "draft" for a reason.
Joe
This is definately one of the funniest things that I've seen all week. Some days, I really think Al Gore would be better off working the Funny Bone chain than the Presidental campaign circuit. But that's just me.
So, let's take a look at this web site and see how it ranks as open source? That could be fun...
The Freedom to run the program for any purpose.
Hmm. Can we use his website as something other than what it is intended? Can we in fact copy his web page source and make a similar page decrying his ideals and misunderstanding of the world? We can certainly try... I wonder what his lawyers would say? Please note that his copyright statement on that page does explicitly state that they reserve all rights and do not grant any particular license for alternate usage.
The Freedom to stucy how it works.
Well, we can do that. But that's the beauty behind the web: you can always do that.
The Freedom to redistribute copies.
This is a toughie. International law does saw that it is always legal to cache copies of web pages in your browser (or other means) in order to view a page. But that does not apply to print media and the definition of open source does not include any specific qualifications for what means source may be distributed. (Even if it is silly to print out all that code.) Again I point to the fact that they suggest that all rights are reserved.
The Freedom to improve code and release it to the public.
Well, Al Gore certainly wants you to improve his code. But take a look, his implied license states only that you may submit your changes to him (his employees). This violates the spirit of free software by not allowing your changes to be circulated without the consent of a third party. If no part of this farse is wrong but this one, this would truly be funny. The free software guidelines explicitly state: "If you do publish your changes, you should not be required to notify anyone in particular, or in any particular way." I can't see a more blatant misuse of the "Open Source" trademark than a person or organization who breaks this most important of rules.
Irrevocable Freedoms
The free software guidelines states that software that is distributed free may not have cluuses or otherwise which would cause you to have your license revoked without cause. We can not explicitly state whether AL Gore violates this practice but we can point out that we don't even know the full text of the source license until after we submit changes: If Gore 2000 selects your material for use on our website we will contact you with further legal requirements.
All in all, I highly recommend that everyone send mail to Gore 2000 explining to them this misuse of the "Open Source" trademark. A good place to start would be legalteam@algore2000.com or sourcecodevolunteers@algore2000.com.
This kind of blatant misuse of the open source philosophy should not go, in my opinion, without the thundering reminders of many many voting-age open sourceists in the email boxes of those who seek to rape our most sacred of ideologies. Joe
Hello,
In my mind, there are a couple things to consider here:
1) If you rent out a theather, it usually costs less than actually going. It's like doing anything in bulk. But Lucas still gets the same take no matter what.
2) What is more likely to happen is that there will be a number of oppurtunistic people that will be standing by the door with tickets that they might be willing to give up... for about $100. Scalpers are not to be welcomed at these showings and this is one way to help the problem.
Joe
Hello,
Our group of Pittsburgh people got refunds for our already-reserved showing. In my opinion, what this is designed to do is to level the playing field for the individual viewer rather than the large groups. I, for one, am all for it. Even those of us who are going with groups still want a shot at one of the elusive first showings.
Joe
All the links in mp3.lycos.com are FTP links. They do not have associated pages to them so there is nothing to link.
A quick browsing of the page is all you need to do to understand how the system works. There's nothing being, in my opinion, hidden.
Joe Pranevich
While there is no porn.lycos.com, there is a www.lycos.com/adult -- The adult web guide that has been around for quite a while.
Sorry, no warez though.
Joe Pranevich
I agree with you that many of the links (most?) that MP3 search engines include are garbage. But you have to look a little deeper than that and wonder why? I can tell you from experience that Lycos's (and other) MP3 search engines that I have used always start out as having a very good catalogue of links. But many of these sites, faced with the increase in traffic that a search engine of this nature causes, end up getting closed down in a hurry. I think that because Lycos had a higher profile search page, this happened more quickly than it would otherwise.
You shouldn't fault the engine either for the content or the lack thereof. It's only a reflection of the internet itself and MP3 are a diffcult commodity to track.
Joe Pranevich