Well, I think we should see the writing on the wall for this one. No large monopolistic corporation can make good enough money on a free (as in Paul Revere) internet, so they are trying to divvy it up with proprietary systems and protocols to impose artificial monopolies.
Big companies may be able to undercut the competition at first, but the total cost of ownership will hurt you in the end.
Where is format published? I've never heard of this.
Okay, a little google search later and: http://www.openswf.org/spec.html
This is very interesting. Questions though, is the spec updated to reflect changes that Macromedia creates? And would a player be restricted by patents that Macromedia controls or licenses? Has anyone really created a new swf player?
Just wanted to point out that an application written for flash uses a proprietary application to run and a proprietary ide to develop. This should cause people concern.
Market infrastructure should not be based on monopolistic proprietary technologies.
"Well he can always walk 1000 miles instead" is not a good argument. Americans have a right to travel, the means of transportation is irrelevant.
Besides, I doubt he is directly affected by any of the things that you mentioned. In American courts you have to show that you are directly affected by what you are bringing suit against. Certainly not being allowed to travel is easy to show in court. This should allow the courts to better focus on the legality of the governments actions.
Sounds like second guessing those that actually are fighting for basic freedoms. Of which the freedom to leave your home and travel to other places without harassment, suspicion and anal probes is a pretty basic one.
It is stupid to call this action counterproductive, unless you honestly think the grounds for the action aren't solid. Because people have been convinced that these measures are good and proper that people have to fight them.
Remember reason for a bill of rights was to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. To protect me from the whims of distant leader or morally irresponsible legislature and ultimately from you.
Orwell's vision shows that technology could enable a form of totalitarianism that was much more invasive than what was possible at the time. Would anyone disagree with this part of the vision?
With new technology every aspect of peoples lives can be under the scrutiny of governments. Transponders on our cars, checkins at airports servailance cameras could easily track our movements. Credit Cards largely track our purchases. The government knows where we work and how much we make. Public school systems are homogenizing their curriculums under state standards. Larger and larger databases keep information on the most trivial aspects of our lives for much longer than has been the case before. People in debt themselves to large institutions through studentloans, mortgages credit cards because this is the only way to buy your way into the greater society. We become more specialized in our jobs becoming more and more dependent on others for our survival. The system we are creating is almost ripe for the taking. All that is needed is a unifying vision.
The only reason you want mass is for traction not for safety in a collision. Being a death trap has more to do with acceleration. ie an air bag slows you down more slowly, than the windshield or dashboard.
Ideally to save yourself your car has a hard shell with a squishy interior. but you want to protect the shell itself so you put on another squishy layer which we call a bumper.
Although, mass would make some difference on slippery surfaces like ice, so we shouldn't dismiss safety concerns. But maybe car designers will make further use of spoilers and body shapes to push the car down at speed, so these things will be much more interesting looking.
The power companies would just sell the fuel to power the fuel cells, I doubt they would just go out of business. And we might get rid of those ugly power lines.
Of course, that would mean your kids couldn't watch tv while you were away from the house.
Seriously, I doubt powering your home with your car would be simple enough to do practically, but it doesn't violate any known laws of physics. Calling it "excess" does sound like you are getting something for free, but really it is just that it would be an efficient power supply and perhaps cheaper than being hooked up to the grid.
More likely you just get a seperate fuel cell for your home from somebody like ballard
Pretty much. Yahoo is a distant second from the last polls I saw. Kinda makes me a bit worried that we have all our eggs in one basket, but I think this and most other of their actions have shown them to be worthy of our trust.
yeah, a computer tax sounds like a real good idea for the poor.
If the government sees that these would be good for it's beaurocracy or good to put in schools as a better way to teach kids and transmit information, but don't call this computing for the poor. It just isn't.
Real Computing for the poor would empower people to manage their own information and business in a way that adds value to their lives.
This is nothing, but a marketing ploy which could do more harm than good. Hell, I wouldn't even give a poor person a computer given the huge waste of time and money it could be.
I think $200 is still too expensive to be of much use to craftsman and farmers. And what happens when one of these things breaks and you lose all your inventory information or records of who owes you what? I think paper and pencil is probably a much better use of people's time. People should be taught how to use computers in schools, but it does them a disservice to tell them they really need these machines. I fear this is just another way big companies wish to tell people how to live their lives and have gotten the intelectuals to prmote their agendas.
Reminds me of the big chemical companies promoting pesticides in the third world thus putting entire populations and countries into debt.
Don't fall for this crap. If it is a choice between a computer and a cleaner water supply, then go for the water.
It should be very clear that Microsoft is very much interested in using experienced gained making a closed system with licensed developers (the X box)and approved software and moving that to the business and consumer desktop OS.
This is the ultimate in hubris. They are in the penalty phase of a federal decision that seeks to punish them for doing the exact same thing with their restrictive licensing. Now they want to have even more restrictive licensing enforced by software and hardware that makes certain nothing unauthorized by them runs on windows.
Or Maybe they are just shooting the moon on this one, so their other business practices look nice in comparison. Either way this stinks.
"perhaps given to suspicions that Microsoft always makes decisions with the aim of frustrating competitors of the Windows empire rather than for the good of consumers"
taken seriously yes, but desktop development doesn't require vaste resources like rocket science. This goes to the point of the previous poster who thought only organizations with vaste resources could put together a good desktop. I disagree. The desktop, like many software applications, lends itself to individual contribution and collaboration. Although, it is important that a central group/person/organization pulls it all together to make a system that makes sense. It just takes time and a lot of hard work and smart people to bring it all together and it seems like Ximian gnome is almost there and in some ways is much nicer than Windows.
well, I guess I just have to speak from my experience. Redhat 6 and previous kde gnome versions I tried sucked and wasted many hours of my time trying to install. Redhat 7.2 was easy to install and I installed ximian gnome (not sure what version) right on top. It was cake.
My biggest problem has been associating file types with appropriate executables and installing new software. But redcarpet is pretty good with installs and updates. I would still like to see some basic stuff like compression utilities associated with executables by default so you can just double click icons and such.
The Desktop ain't rocket science... It just takes time effort and experience to get it workng the way most people want it to. Ximianis doing a pretty decent job at it and will only get better. I personally love the redcarpet feature for installing updates or new software. It just handles everything for you like it should.
I think this guy got into it too early and bailed at the wrong time. This is just the start of Linux on the desktop, before now nobody but a commited hacker could install and work with a linux desktop, now I think things are changing. Still could be better, but I would say things are in some ways better than the windows desktop. How many people install windows from scratch?
Linux just needs to come pre installed and pre configured on desktops and laptops, then we can start having some real fun.
These companies should not be free to decide who their customers are. And should not be free to decide how their services are used. They are providing a public utility under a public license. This is not like buying soap or corn flakes. This is like getting electric service and using it for whatever I damn well like. Their are bandwidth issues to be accounted for for sure, but that is it.
These are just a bunch of greedy bastards that want to charge me hundreds of dollars a month for services that have virtually no real operating costs and could be provided for with a minimum of techical knowledge
But apparently we are going back to the days when Ma Bell takes 30 years to implement touch tone service or call waiting or the next great thing and then pat themselves on the back (and charge us an arm and a leg) for a job well done. Jeez... I can't wait to be charged per email or per authorized web page I load into my next generation cell phone that costs me $300 and displays ads from the phone companies in the middle of my 911 call!
Just a few years ago these same companies were arguing that people shouldn't be able to hook up their own phones to the network because of the risks. Now we see that the risk was that people would take it upon themselves to revolutionize communications first with BBS and then with the inter connected internet and email, thus circumventing the big bells.
People easily forget that the phone company didn't want the internet and it was Congress and the Universities that forced it to open it's lines to data traffic. Let's not let them put in tolls at every corner. Keep the air free.
I have put together a few well used sites and have forgotten to check something new on IE and I feel stupid when somone tells me that it don't work on the browser they are using... Nothing works like shame.
Unfortunately, Microsoft and Macromedia have used the embrace and extend model successfully and if you want to add something fancier to a web site you are starting down the path towards platform dependency.
I worked for a company that mulled over prohibiting deep linking, but it was a technological fix not a legal one. It is fairly easy to keep people from deep linking if you don't want them to. Just check the referrer... Shouldn't the burden be placed on the company providing the content, if it's content is so valuable then it should protect it. This is just a link for gosh sakes!
The situation is pretty simple. The current batches of movies are good and are reaching all audiences. The current batches of music and pop stars aren't even worth the download for the most part.
2,000 square kilometres is a lot of destroyed real estate if one of these things ever hits a populated or coastal area. Give the Defense Department the responsibility for defending us against these things. They are the only ones that might get the budget to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I think we should see the writing on the wall for this one. No large monopolistic corporation can make good enough money on a free (as in Paul Revere) internet, so they are trying to divvy it up with proprietary systems and protocols to impose artificial monopolies.
Big companies may be able to undercut the competition at first, but the total cost of ownership will hurt you in the end.
Where is format published? I've never heard of this.
Okay, a little google search later and: http://www.openswf.org/spec.html
This is very interesting. Questions though, is the spec updated to reflect changes that Macromedia creates? And would a player be restricted by patents that Macromedia controls or licenses? Has anyone really created a new swf player?
Just wanted to point out that an application written for flash uses a proprietary application to run and a proprietary ide to develop. This should cause people concern.
Market infrastructure should not be based on monopolistic proprietary technologies.
"Well he can always walk 1000 miles instead" is not a good argument. Americans have a right to travel, the means of transportation is irrelevant.
Besides, I doubt he is directly affected by any of the things that you mentioned. In American courts you have to show that you are directly affected by what you are bringing suit against. Certainly not being allowed to travel is easy to show in court. This should allow the courts to better focus on the legality of the governments actions.
counterproductive?
Sounds like second guessing those that actually are fighting for basic freedoms. Of which the freedom to leave your home and travel to other places without harassment, suspicion and anal probes is a pretty basic one.
It is stupid to call this action counterproductive, unless you honestly think the grounds for the action aren't solid. Because people have been convinced that these measures are good and proper that people have to fight them.
Remember reason for a bill of rights was to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. To protect me from the whims of distant leader or morally irresponsible legislature and ultimately from you.
Orwell's vision shows that technology could enable a form of totalitarianism that was much more invasive than what was possible at the time. Would anyone disagree with this part of the vision?
With new technology every aspect of peoples lives can be under the scrutiny of governments. Transponders on our cars, checkins at airports servailance cameras could easily track our movements. Credit Cards largely track our purchases. The government knows where we work and how much we make. Public school systems are homogenizing their curriculums under state standards. Larger and larger databases keep information on the most trivial aspects of our lives for much longer than has been the case before. People in debt themselves to large institutions through studentloans, mortgages credit cards because this is the only way to buy your way into the greater society. We become more specialized in our jobs becoming more and more dependent on others for our survival. The system we are creating is almost ripe for the taking. All that is needed is a unifying vision.
The only reason you want mass is for traction not for safety in a collision. Being a death trap has more to do with acceleration. ie an air bag slows you down more slowly, than the windshield or dashboard.
Ideally to save yourself your car has a hard shell with a squishy interior. but you want to protect the shell itself so you put on another squishy layer which we call a bumper.
Although, mass would make some difference on slippery surfaces like ice, so we shouldn't dismiss safety concerns. But maybe car designers will make further use of spoilers and body shapes to push the car down at speed, so these things will be much more interesting looking.
The power companies would just sell the fuel to power the fuel cells, I doubt they would just go out of business. And we might get rid of those ugly power lines.
Of course, that would mean your kids couldn't watch tv while you were away from the house.
Seriously, I doubt powering your home with your car would be simple enough to do practically, but it doesn't violate any known laws of physics. Calling it "excess" does sound like you are getting something for free, but really it is just that it would be an efficient power supply and perhaps cheaper than being hooked up to the grid.
More likely you just get a seperate fuel cell for your home from somebody like ballard
Pretty much. Yahoo is a distant second from the last polls I saw. Kinda makes me a bit worried that we have all our eggs in one basket, but I think this and most other of their actions have shown them to be worthy of our trust.
For now.
yeah, a computer tax sounds like a real good idea for the poor.
If the government sees that these would be good for it's beaurocracy or good to put in schools as a better way to teach kids and transmit information, but don't call this computing for the poor. It just isn't.
Real Computing for the poor would empower people to manage their own information and business in a way that adds value to their lives.
This is nothing, but a marketing ploy which could do more harm than good. Hell, I wouldn't even give a poor person a computer given the huge waste of time and money it could be.
I think $200 is still too expensive to be of much use to craftsman and farmers. And what happens when one of these things breaks and you lose all your inventory information or records of who owes you what? I think paper and pencil is probably a much better use of people's time. People should be taught how to use computers in schools, but it does them a disservice to tell them they really need these machines. I fear this is just another way big companies wish to tell people how to live their lives and have gotten the intelectuals to prmote their agendas.
Reminds me of the big chemical companies promoting pesticides in the third world thus putting entire populations and countries into debt.
Don't fall for this crap. If it is a choice between a computer and a cleaner water supply, then go for the water.
It should be very clear that Microsoft is very much interested in using experienced gained making a closed system with licensed developers (the X box)and approved software and moving that to the business and consumer desktop OS.
This is the ultimate in hubris. They are in the penalty phase of a federal decision that seeks to punish them for doing the exact same thing with their restrictive licensing. Now they want to have even more restrictive licensing enforced by software and hardware that makes certain nothing unauthorized by them runs on windows.
Or Maybe they are just shooting the moon on this one, so their other business practices look nice in comparison. Either way this stinks.
"perhaps given to suspicions that Microsoft always makes decisions with the aim of frustrating competitors of the Windows empire rather than for the good of consumers"
Yes, I believe that was the verdict.
Female slashdotters? When did that happen?
taken seriously yes, but desktop development doesn't require vaste resources like rocket science. This goes to the point of the previous poster who thought only organizations with vaste resources could put together a good desktop. I disagree. The desktop, like many software applications, lends itself to individual contribution and collaboration. Although, it is important that a central group/person/organization pulls it all together to make a system that makes sense. It just takes time and a lot of hard work and smart people to bring it all together and it seems like Ximian gnome is almost there and in some ways is much nicer than Windows.
well, I guess I just have to speak from my experience. Redhat 6 and previous kde gnome versions I tried sucked and wasted many hours of my time trying to install. Redhat 7.2 was easy to install and I installed ximian gnome (not sure what version) right on top. It was cake.
My biggest problem has been associating file types with appropriate executables and installing new software. But redcarpet is pretty good with installs and updates. I would still like to see some basic stuff like compression utilities associated with executables by default so you can just double click icons and such.
The Desktop ain't rocket science... It just takes time effort and experience to get it workng the way most people want it to. Ximianis doing a pretty decent job at it and will only get better. I personally love the redcarpet feature for installing updates or new software. It just handles everything for you like it should.
I think this guy got into it too early and bailed at the wrong time. This is just the start of Linux on the desktop, before now nobody but a commited hacker could install and work with a linux desktop, now I think things are changing. Still could be better, but I would say things are in some ways better than the windows desktop. How many people install windows from scratch?
Linux just needs to come pre installed and pre configured on desktops and laptops, then we can start having some real fun.
These companies should not be free to decide who their customers are. And should not be free to decide how their services are used. They are providing a public utility under a public license.
This is not like buying soap or corn flakes. This is like getting electric service and using it for whatever I damn well like. Their are bandwidth issues to be accounted for for sure, but that is it.
These are just a bunch of greedy bastards that want to charge me hundreds of dollars a month for services that have virtually no real operating costs and could be provided for with a minimum of techical knowledge
But apparently we are going back to the days when Ma Bell takes 30 years to implement touch tone service or call waiting or the next great thing and then pat themselves on the back (and charge us an arm and a leg) for a job well done. Jeez... I can't wait to be charged per email or per authorized web page I load into my next generation cell phone that costs me $300 and displays ads from the phone companies in the middle of my 911 call!
Just a few years ago these same companies were arguing that people shouldn't be able to hook up their own phones to the network because of the risks. Now we see that the risk was that people would take it upon themselves to revolutionize communications first with BBS and then with the inter connected internet and email, thus circumventing the big bells.
People easily forget that the phone company didn't want the internet and it was Congress and the Universities that forced it to open it's lines to data traffic. Let's not let them put in tolls at every corner. Keep the air free.
I have put together a few well used sites and have forgotten to check something new on IE and I feel stupid when somone tells me that it don't work on the browser they are using... Nothing works like shame.
Unfortunately, Microsoft and Macromedia have used the embrace and extend model successfully and if you want to add something fancier to a web site you are starting down the path towards platform dependency.
Any news on standards based vector animation?
I worked for a company that mulled over prohibiting deep linking, but it was a technological fix not a legal one. It is fairly easy to keep people from deep linking if you don't want them to. Just check the referrer... Shouldn't the burden be placed on the company providing the content, if it's content is so valuable then it should protect it. This is just a link for gosh sakes!
We have finally assimilated them!
The situation is pretty simple. The current batches of movies are good and are reaching all audiences. The current batches of music and pop stars aren't even worth the download for the most part.
ummm....remember Jose?
/ ne wsid_2040000/2040675.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas
Those who live in glass cubicles should not throw stones
2,000 square kilometres is a lot of destroyed real estate if one of these things ever hits a populated or coastal area. Give the Defense Department the responsibility for defending us against these things. They are the only ones that might get the budget to do it.