And I hate to seem indignant here, but when the heck are they going to release a 2.4pre? I know, they're working hard, as the continued releases show. But 41 minor releases and no pre's is just absurd. IMO.
The Beam-It bit works only if the users have a copy of the CD already. They put the CD in their drive, and the Beam-It software does a CDDB lookup. However, you said: mp3.com probably does *not* have the right to stream all of Thriller to you, simply because you happen to own the album. On the contrary! Because I own an album, I have every right to re-record the music in any format I choose. If I've bought an album, I'll be damned if I'm going to be told how I can listen to the music on it.
More to the point--regardless of what they say is legal or illegal, the information contained on a CD once distributed can be considered in the public domain. It's data--once it's out there, it's out there, and there's no way to recover it.
Actually, not entirely. Most or all of the events covered in the LOTR are Third Age, of which Tom is not a part. He is a holdover from a time long before Tolkien's work in question, and as such can be considered a clean lift from the overall framework.
Agreed, I would love to seem him in there for sake of completion, but I have no beef with his omission in general.
Now, in a more civilized tone, the post is not just about Roger Waters, but involves the Web and other stuff. Secondly, I listen to Pink Floyd. I revel in it. It's Good Shit(tm). Am I no longer a geek or something?
Stop your whining and just skim over the post and then ignore it if you don't like the content. Geeks are just as varied as other people, with wide ranges in taste.
So like I said before--y'all can go to Hell. Stop whining.
Don't forget his other stuff--Animals in particular. I agree with you for the most part, but Pink Floyd without Roger Waters is a far cry from Pink Floyd without Syd Barrett.
More importantly, if his lyrics are to be influenced by the Web, I doubt it will do as well as it might on its own--Waters is a powerful lyricist in his own right, carrying much of the band in that respect.
Perhaps you might have been a little clearer in the first place, then, because given your response just now, I agree with what you said. However, remember that Hank Reardon's Metal was a relatively unqualified Good Thing--it performed as expected. Re: your sarcasm, while Microsoft did perform inhouse development, a majority of their technology was imported. OS/2 became NT, Spyglass became IE, etc. And their products certainly aren't the unqualified Good Thing that Rearden Metal is. Remember that following an analogy too far down always leads to disaster for any argument. This is a different industry than simply that of basic production of goods--more, the IT industry is involved in the production of ideas, which are not the same things. You can't, then, take laws that apply to furnished goods and turn around to use them on ideas without modification--that's where the whole mess stems with regards to IP. Literally millions of coders have contributed to our base of knowledge, rather than one man or one company (enter the Open Source movement). My opinions towards Microsoft are not venomous or wrathful--just evaluatory and critical. When a company doesn't cut it, it doesn't cut it. A is A. Perhaps you're right--Atlas may shrug. But try to be clearer in your definitions, to avoid the "venomous, wrathful" replies you have earned with ambiguity.
When he does, it's not going to be the VIPs at Microsoft going on strike. When your product is entirely based on spin and marketing finesse, rather than a brainchild of productivity, creativity, and pride, you're just another looter.
Every time I see one of these articles, I simultaeneously yelp with joy and quiver with fear. The possibilities for technology this intricate are endless, but at the same time, the risks involved with the raw useful potential make me wonder when we'll finally screw up and cancel ourselves out of the evolutionary race. The one thing that keeps that evil, nasty feeling from getting too far is that it's better to allow for uninhibited expression of creativity than to close doors and burn bridges that we never knew existed in the first place. Go techology!
It's good to hear something to dispel the illusion of the Reds in China coming to take over the world; Xiong sounds exactly like I do, as a beginner in appreciating Linux's power. I guess people all over the world are the same inside, no matter what their governments say.
OK, so Microsoft is publishing their protocol. First, that means squat--even if people code around their protocol, they'd still have to develop their own source. Second, I'm afraid that that's what people might do. The article mentions backers like Prodigy...might that be a way to start undermining open source, by attracting commercial companies with something similar (open standards), and yet allowing them to keep their code sacrosanct (closed source)? It's a step in the right direction, for Microsoft--if we look at them 10 years ago. But now it's just another attack on the open source ideology.
...will it be custom-built, or will it be only a stock hardware configuration, to save work by Dell tech support?
...will tech support "tech support?" I know that their warranty policy is very stodgy, and that if you want your computer fixed, they expect it to be in the original configuration as you got it.
...will they match up to VA? Of course, the price will be better, but will we be better off buying Linux pre-shipped from Dell? I bet there's some serious tweaking that the end-user will have to do once it's out of the box to get it the way they like it.
I hope Dell takes these things into account when they're brandishing "Linux" all over the web. It's not just a buzzword--it's a philosophy, almost. If Dell is just looking to get publicity and misled sales, they might as well try to sell BeOS as well.
I can see that recognition of Linux by Microsoft is now solidifying into a real thing now, which is a biiiig step up from their response to the "Halloween" documents. Hopefully, the "scariness" will transform into Microsoft adding quality to their products as opposed to marketing spin. It might be too much to hope that they would want to turn to the Open side of the source, with expectations of beating Unix and Linux at their own games...Unfortunately, my Clue Stick has informed me that as long as their present system earns blind revenue as it does, it won't matter what people like Ballmer think about the competition. The machine will continue to grind.
I had a very similar experience--fortunately, I picked up the rpms and Glint'd it into existence. However, the KDE 1.1 has a very schweet install script that GNOME would do well to check out. For now, then, my bet's with KDE. Each to his own, though.
Consider, John, that there are thousands of people reading these articles daily. If every one of them sent a message only once via email, the load on the servers would still be rather high. Do you really think that this was intentional DoS?/.ers have just as much of a right as any other to send email voicing their opinion, especially if the lawyers and the company provide a method for us to do that. How do stars who get tons of fan mail, or criminals who get tons of hate mail (before/., I mean snail mail) handle theirs? What makes Theos, Inc. any less responsible of their own mail system? One earns the mess they put themselves in. Do you expect people to hold back, not say anything, because the servers will crash? Certainly not--you can't shut people up like that. Just take a reality check before you criticize free speech.
I asked for his source...Needless to say, no response yet. I will send his response and anygthing else I can dig up.
I bet this is more FUD, but in the other direction. Consider: micros~1 sets these things up, paying (or asking loyal Men-NTites) reporters to say these things, and get the Linux community enraged, and then in an ensuing investigation be clear of wrongdoing.
I can see the similarities; I bet he was. You're right, on the books, too--excellent reading material. I bought Throne as soon as it came out. Did you read The Integral Trees or The Smoke Ring? Is your offer still open?;-)
OK, we have here two operating systems. One gives you choice; the other fetters you with restrictions. For instance, a Linux webserver can run on as little as 16M (maybe less) of ram, on a 486, with 400M of disk space. NT, just sitting there, takes 34M of ram. Another example--the licensing. You laugh because the glibc 2.1 had a case of mistaken licensing. Look, however, at the results that emerge from previous glibc's (amongst other gpl'd code): success by fixability. While NT users rely on sendings from the mothership at Redmond (bugfix packages, euphemized as "service packs"), each user of gpl'd software is empowered to enact their own fix, if they can. It's called freedom to use you machine any damn way you want, not the way Microsoft tells you to.
Absolutely not. Would you back Microsoft if they decided to sue each competitor for using the string "office" in their office-suite products? It's a similar situation--one cannot proprietize a string of letters and all related or similar-sounding words. It's worth making noise over. "First they went after the ______, and I said nothing."
Slashdot Mirror
And I hate to seem indignant here, but when the heck are they going to release a 2.4pre? I know, they're working hard, as the continued releases show. But 41 minor releases and no pre's is just absurd. IMO.
The ONCe-fired, ONCe-killed gun!
The Beam-It bit works only if the users have a copy of the CD already. They put the CD in their drive, and the Beam-It software does a CDDB lookup. However, you said: mp3.com probably does *not* have the right to stream all of Thriller to you, simply because you happen to own the album. On the contrary! Because I own an album, I have every right to re-record the music in any format I choose. If I've bought an album, I'll be damned if I'm going to be told how I can listen to the music on it.
More to the point--regardless of what they say is legal or illegal, the information contained on a CD once distributed can be considered in the public domain. It's data--once it's out there, it's out there, and there's no way to recover it.
To think that I missed the results by sheer instinct. I installed AOL on my dad's computer. 5.0. Boy am I glad that I said no!
Agreed, I would love to seem him in there for sake of completion, but I have no beef with his omission in general.
Now, in a more civilized tone, the post is not just about Roger Waters, but involves the Web and other stuff. Secondly, I listen to Pink Floyd. I revel in it. It's Good Shit(tm). Am I no longer a geek or something?
Stop your whining and just skim over the post and then ignore it if you don't like the content. Geeks are just as varied as other people, with wide ranges in taste.
So like I said before--y'all can go to Hell. Stop whining.
More importantly, if his lyrics are to be influenced by the Web, I doubt it will do as well as it might on its own--Waters is a powerful lyricist in his own right, carrying much of the band in that respect.
Perhaps you might have been a little clearer in the first place, then, because given your response just now, I agree with what you said. However, remember that Hank Reardon's Metal was a relatively unqualified Good Thing--it performed as expected. Re: your sarcasm, while Microsoft did perform inhouse development, a majority of their technology was imported. OS/2 became NT, Spyglass became IE, etc. And their products certainly aren't the unqualified Good Thing that Rearden Metal is. Remember that following an analogy too far down always leads to disaster for any argument. This is a different industry than simply that of basic production of goods--more, the IT industry is involved in the production of ideas, which are not the same things. You can't, then, take laws that apply to furnished goods and turn around to use them on ideas without modification--that's where the whole mess stems with regards to IP. Literally millions of coders have contributed to our base of knowledge, rather than one man or one company (enter the Open Source movement). My opinions towards Microsoft are not venomous or wrathful--just evaluatory and critical. When a company doesn't cut it, it doesn't cut it. A is A. Perhaps you're right--Atlas may shrug. But try to be clearer in your definitions, to avoid the "venomous, wrathful" replies you have earned with ambiguity.
When he does, it's not going to be the VIPs at Microsoft going on strike. When your product is entirely based on spin and marketing finesse, rather than a brainchild of productivity, creativity, and pride, you're just another looter.
Every time I see one of these articles, I simultaeneously yelp with joy and quiver with fear. The possibilities for technology this intricate are endless, but at the same time, the risks involved with the raw useful potential make me wonder when we'll finally screw up and cancel ourselves out of the evolutionary race. The one thing that keeps that evil, nasty feeling from getting too far is that it's better to allow for uninhibited expression of creativity than to close doors and burn bridges that we never knew existed in the first place. Go techology!
It's good to hear something to dispel the illusion of the Reds in China coming to take over the world; Xiong sounds exactly like I do, as a beginner in appreciating Linux's power. I guess people all over the world are the same inside, no matter what their governments say.
Take off, you hoser.
Better 'n mp3.com any day. And stop whining.
OK, so Microsoft is publishing their protocol. First, that means squat--even if people code around their protocol, they'd still have to develop their own source. Second, I'm afraid that that's what people might do. The article mentions backers like Prodigy...might that be a way to start undermining open source, by attracting commercial companies with something similar (open standards), and yet allowing them to keep their code sacrosanct (closed source)? It's a step in the right direction, for Microsoft--if we look at them 10 years ago. But now it's just another attack on the open source ideology.
...will it be custom-built, or will it be only a stock hardware configuration, to save work by Dell tech support?
...will tech support "tech support?" I know that their warranty policy is very stodgy, and that if you want your computer fixed, they expect it to be in the original configuration as you got it.
...will they match up to VA? Of course, the price will be better, but will we be better off buying Linux pre-shipped from Dell? I bet there's some serious tweaking that the end-user will have to do once it's out of the box to get it the way they like it.
I hope Dell takes these things into account when they're brandishing "Linux" all over the web. It's not just a buzzword--it's a philosophy, almost. If Dell is just looking to get publicity and misled sales, they might as well try to sell BeOS as well.
I can see that recognition of Linux by Microsoft is now solidifying into a real thing now, which is a biiiig step up from their response to the "Halloween" documents. Hopefully, the "scariness" will transform into Microsoft adding quality to their products as opposed to marketing spin. It might be too much to hope that they would want to turn to the Open side of the source, with expectations of beating Unix and Linux at their own games...Unfortunately, my Clue Stick has informed me that as long as their present system earns blind revenue as it does, it won't matter what people like Ballmer think about the competition. The machine will continue to grind.
I had a very similar experience--fortunately, I picked up the rpms and Glint'd it into existence. However, the KDE 1.1 has a very schweet install script that GNOME would do well to check out. For now, then, my bet's with KDE. Each to his own, though.
Consider, John, that there are thousands of people reading these articles daily. If every one of them sent a message only once via email, the load on the servers would still be rather high. Do you really think that this was intentional DoS? /.ers have just as much of a right as any other to send email voicing their opinion, especially if the lawyers and the company provide a method for us to do that. /., I mean snail mail) handle theirs? What makes Theos, Inc. any less responsible of their own mail system? One earns the mess they put themselves in. Do you expect people to hold back, not say anything, because the servers will crash? Certainly not--you can't shut people up like that.
How do stars who get tons of fan mail, or criminals who get tons of hate mail (before
Just take a reality check before you criticize free speech.
I asked for his source...Needless to say, no response yet. I will send his response and anygthing else I can dig up.
I bet this is more FUD, but in the other direction. Consider: micros~1 sets these things up, paying (or asking loyal Men-NTites) reporters to say these things, and get the Linux community enraged, and then in an ensuing investigation be clear of wrongdoing.
I wouldn't put it past 'em.
I can see the similarities; I bet he was. ;-)
You're right, on the books, too--excellent reading material. I bought Throne as soon as it came out. Did you read The Integral Trees or The Smoke Ring?
Is your offer still open?
You couldn't have been more right.
Although, the frozen-tableau was a great shot, too.
OK, we have here two operating systems. One gives you choice; the other fetters you with restrictions. For instance, a Linux webserver can run on as little as 16M (maybe less) of ram, on a 486, with 400M of disk space. NT, just sitting there, takes 34M of ram. Another example--the licensing. You laugh because the glibc 2.1 had a case of mistaken licensing. Look, however, at the results that emerge from previous glibc's (amongst other gpl'd code): success by fixability. While NT users rely on sendings from the mothership at Redmond (bugfix packages, euphemized as "service packs"), each user of gpl'd software is empowered to enact their own fix, if they can. It's called freedom to use you machine any damn way you want, not the way Microsoft tells you to.
Absolutely not. Would you back Microsoft if they decided to sue each competitor for using the string "office" in their office-suite products? It's a similar situation--one cannot proprietize a string of letters and all related or similar-sounding words.
It's worth making noise over. "First they went after the ______, and I said nothing."