Sign me up for the tryouts for a nationally ranked CTF/Team Fortress league! I'll be more than happy to compete, especially if I can get one of those $10mil contracts for 5 years of game playing! Oh, the wonders of the future and what it holds for a high-tech way of life...
Your last points are good, but a camera won't cost $2000 to do this, and having a dual camera system failover, would fix the problem of a shattered lens. You could put glass 6 inches infront of each camera, and if one glass gets shattered, it costs $20.00 to buy another 4x4 inch glass window that's infront of the camera, now the only othe thing to worry about is lens flare, but that can be taken care of with software I would bet.
I hope this gets to people who may be able to help keep this idea in their minds, as I believe it may be very important
Microsoft has been attacking specific parts of GPL and other similar licenses. Mostly about problems that may arise with IP and open-sourcing any project build on GPL'd software.
With all of this being said by Microsoft, it sounds like Microsoft is setting a stage for the announcement of their own Open-Source license, that would be much like what is out there, except specific parts to protect IP, and allow building off of other Open-Source projects without releasing their own source, or a "private" like open-source/shared between companies type license. discredit the goodness of current licenses, so that they license will be used over current ones. Because of this, it would be a good idea to start a pro current license campaign that states that current licenses are the best solution, and that Microsoft may be planning a license that will appear good, but have deep down portions that will help a comercial company over an individual or a group. Microsoft has one of the best legal departments in the world. They would do this. Our current licenses MUST be pushed now, before Microsoft is able to capture the spotlight. If they do, companies will jump on Microsofts new license, and not take careful analysis of it before so. This would really cause problems for Open-Source as we know it today. You can be sure that Microsoft will have parts of the license that will cause problems for current Open-Source ways, and that are intended to allow Microsoft to gain control and to hurt Linux, Free-BSD, and other non-commercial OS's and software. Please, anyone who can help and has voice, begin to let the public and press know what Microsoft may be up to.Getting it out before, rather than after, can make a serious effect on how software may change in the future. Start letting friends, businesses, the press, government, and anyone else know what may be going on, and to jump on to what Microsoft may release in way of licensing. I would give Microsoft no more than 2 months from today for announcing their license. They have been setting things up, and planning how and what to attack. If we don't get things out now, our efforts may be hurt severally!
Please! Please! don't ignore this, and Please start getting word and annoucements out!
I hope this gets to people who may be able to help keep this idea in their minds, as I believe it may be very important
Microsoft has been attacking specific parts of GPL and other similar licenses. Mostly about problems that may arise with IP and open-sourcing any project build on GPL'd software.
With all of this being said by Microsoft, it sounds like Microsoft is setting a stage for the announcement of their own Open-Source license, that would be much like what is out there, except specific parts to protect IP, and allow building off of other Open-Source projects without releasing their own source, or a "private" like open-source/shared between companies type license. it would be a good idea to start a pro current license campaign that states that current licenses are the best solution, and that Microsoft may be planning a license that will appear good, but have deep down portions that will help a comercial company over an individual or a group. Microsoft has one of the best legal departments in the world. They would do this. Our current licenses MUST be pushed now, before Microsoft is able to capture the spotlight. If they do, companies will jump on Microsofts new license, and not take careful analysis of it before so. This would really cause problems for Open-Source as we know it today. You can be sure that Microsoft will have parts of the license that will cause problems for current Open-Source ways, and that are intended to allow Microsoft to gain control and to hurt Linux, Free-BSD, and other non-commercial OS's and software. Please, anyone who can help and has voice, begin to let the public and press know what Microsoft may be up to. Getting it out before, rather than after, can make a serious effect on how software may change in the future. Start letting friends, businesses, the press, government, and anyone else know what may be going on, and to jump on to what Microsoft may release in way of licensing. I would give Microsoft no more than 2 months from today for announcing their license. They have been setting things up, and planning how and what to attack. If we don't get things out now, our efforts may be hurt severally!
Please! Please! don't ignore this, and Please start getting word and annoucements out!
With all the.Net and complaints about the GPL and other Open-Source ways, it is making me wonder that Microsoft is building their own Open-Source License. Microsoft continues to be attacking specific portions of the GPL. Namely parts related to IP and commercial areas. If Microsoft comes up with a license, they will want as many companies and people to use that license. My belief, is that in that license, it will have a part that will create major problems with software such as Linux and other software using licenses similiar to GPL.
My hope is that Stallman, Linus, and others should consider this, and maybe start getting the medias attention before Microsoft announces their own license, that way companies and people will know that GPL like licenses are what is the best, and not to jump on a license that Microsoft will be coming out with. Getting this out before Microsoft announces their license would be the best, and not let Microsoft try to PR their license above others.
Microsoft says: "The only thing we have a problem with is when the government funds open-source work. Government funding should be for work that is available to everybody."
This is one big bait and switch if I have ever seen one. Microsoft is saying that the governement should be spending tax payers money on things that are Availible to Everybody!
First off, I don't know of any program, or funding, in the government that benifits Everybody. Microsoft claims though that money should only be spent on programs that do... I would like to see Microsoft prove that is even possible.
Second, I guess I missed the headlines that Microsoft was now an advisor to the government. Last I knew, it was voters who choose people to represent the people and their ideas in the Government. Microsoft I guess thinks it has more wisdom than out government, so that they feel they must tell our government what is a good idea or not. That idea scares me, as in they are without any doubt, a dishonest company, and the constitution is for the people, not for the company.
Fourth, trying to imply that any government funding of Open-Source projects is a waste, is poor form, and I think is just disgusting. That's like saying no one should provide any free service to anyone else, regardless what it is. I have always seen much more come out of people caring and helping others, than people being selfish and expecting something in return for everything they do.
On a personal note, I've tried to give Microsoft a break, because they do have something that is pretty darn good, (honestly, they do) but I sure can't believe how they can pretend like they want to help people, but try to stop anything that could help millions of people, and improve the quality of life just so they can make money. That alone makes me upset and disgusted. I hope to see Microsoft put a muzzle on Balmer, and/or fire him with a statement that his statements are the complete oppisite of what the company wants to do for people.
Could it be that Microsoft is trying to annoy people and companies to the point where they demand that software can only run, if it licensed? Microsofts current plan is to one day require online-authentication every time a PC boots. That would annoy the heck out of people, unless the people see it as "better" to the alternative auditing system...
Microsoft I think believes, "If we want to do something annoying and to take away the privacy of people, do something legal that is worse so that our "new alternative" looks better and is accepted.".
One thing that the LDS religion teachers is to be careful about who you associate with. Many people in the LDS church that fall under preasure of others. I know dozens of people that if given a beer and a lot of social pressure, will let their morals fall, but who is to say others wouldn't either? Because of that, members of the church are warned to not associate with people who don't have the same goals as them. They do this because many people couldn't handle the preasure and would end up doing something wrong, hating themselves and feeling like they're going to heck, and end up on prozac for the rest of their life... and that happens a LOT. It's also those weak people that usually speak up and tell other people they're "bad".
For me, I don't care if you drink, smoke, or are immoral. I don't care what you do, as long as you are what I, personally, would consider to be a good friend. Granted, I won't go with you to a bar, but if you invite me over to your house for a bbq, I'd have no problem if you drank a casual beer, just don't get piss drunk.;-) I think anyone who judges someone based on things such as drinking, smoking, etc, is a fool, and there are many of those type of people in the church.
The concern the church has for it's memebers is to me a kinda 'over do it with what you can't do, and they're less likely to do as many bad things'. If the church tells everyone to be careful of being with non-members, the chances of kids in that family drinking and smoking go down a Lot. The stronger members who can think more for themselves and are smarter of the world, step out more. I had a friend who got drunk on way to school, who was a member but never came... his life turned upside down and has a kid, who he never gets to see... out of wedlock. Now, I can pretty much guarentee if he hadn't associated with non-members, he'd be married and had kids.
It's kinda hard to see how the LDS church works, and I don't expect you to. The idea that really runs the church is 'try to make everyones lives better'. The church see's this as a stronger family. A stronger family means less murders, DUI's, etc. Who knows if smoking is bad for you, but for kids under age, it's illegal, so the church also see's parents as smoking as a bad example, hence, it's not permitted by a member. Drinking say coffee, is though of as bad, why? I don't know... I personally can't stand smell of it, and I really enjoy grabbing a nice cream hot-chocolate instead.
Ahh, all the tangets....
Basically, I care less about the 'in croud' and think a lot of those people have no brains. If you're not LDS, who cares? are you happy with life? good, so am I, come to SLC and we can go skiing. If you end up liking mormans, and utah, and think our church may be true (in 99 years), hey, great! maybe we'll send the missionaries out to talk to you (they can be pushy though.. theyr'e taught to be);-)
Many people in Utah who are LDS, are happy with the friends they have, and keep pretty busy and enjoy socializing with other LDS people, because heck, there are so many around them, and it's easier to associate with someone like you.. so they turn others away. __I__ feel bad about this, which is why I have personally set out to thwack each person who thinks like this over the head. They're idiots, and I'm sorry others feel like you said. Granted, many LDS people have been put through a lot of crap because their LDS. (LDS church even had a government order out to kill all of them in the 1800's, just like hitler did to the jews.) People have grudges, and won't let go... That's their choice. If I moved to some places in the US, I'd be an outcast because I was LDS. This isn't fair, but that seams to be life.
We're (LDS members) not all in a bubble. The church see's to it to protect those who are in the bubble, and expects the rest of us who understand to do what we can... (people in bubbles always seem to be the more intersting, and more listened to by media...)
I hope this explains some.. let me know what you think... (please) I'm not perfect, but I need to enjoy life.;-)
Church and state laws do merge, because people choose laws, and many people in Utah are in to church... So laws are merged more in Utah than elsewhere, because the people are more church and family oriented there, then in other states. (or atleast press their ideas more)
I have lived in Utah most of my life. I also attend a University there. As for technology jobs, there are plenty, especially Linux related. (I have worked for several). The cost of living here is pretty high, like most tech places, and I would consider the quality of life/social atmosphere very nice, even though drinking is not very often. (BTW, yes, I am LDS)
Remember that the laws in each state are the laws that people want. The majority of Utah residents do not want certain laws, or to release tight holds on liquor laws. It's the populations choice of what they want, and don't want. I personally like the idea that you can find a job just about anywhere in the US that you want. If you don't like the laws in one state, don't worry about them, work in another state. I think it's pretty nice that here in Utah we keep things more simple. It's the way that many of us like to live, and there shouldn't be anything wrong with that. I enjoy having a higher comfort of security when driving and going to parties, knowing that I'm less likely to be hit by a drunk driver. (This is not to say we don't have any problems)
Now if you still want to get drunk, there are Many bars, micro pubs, and other things to do. Maybe not as many as other places, but it's what the majority of people here want.
Also, many non-LDS families enjoy living here because there is less "negitive-effects" on their children. I think most people in Utah would trade "living a little" for being safer and more family oriented.
The question of if it's a good social place, that totally depends on what you consider a social life. People in Utah would mostly rather do things as a family or community, rather than going out and drinking alone. Because of that, people see liquor as a threat to families. I personaly would trade liquor for family, but that's me....... Live where you want, enjoy where you life. I think a social life is very important. Comprimising your personal life for a job I think is one of the biggest mistakes you could make. I could never live in San Fransisco, and I'm sure many people there could never live in Utah, due to social atmosphere. Each state I think needs it's uniqueness. Would everyone like it if every city was the same? same number of bars, churches, malls, crimes, ski resorts, beaches, etc? I Highly doubt it.
For me, when it comes to a place to live and work, I think location is one of the top 5 things considered. I also would think that it is rare that any engineer would give up a social atmosphere that they like, just for a job. For me, I think family comes before a job, and I think many other engineers also do the same.
So in the end, yes, engineers do look at social atmosphere for where they work. Many engineers however put things such as family before drinking in their social life. It all depends on the engineer.
--Brandon
See it as "what if..." rather than "this is real"
on
Antitrust
·
· Score: 1
I saw this movie last Saturday, over 13 days. I thought this was a great movie, however, I wasn't expecting it to be about opensource. I am a senior in college and am less than a year away from my BS in CS. For me, I thought this was a great movie. I don't like microsoft. However, I think the ideas that the CEO of NURV presented to Milo at the begining sounded great. I enjoyed finding out who Milo could trust, and couldn't. and the "Couselor" role that the CEO played for Milo. I treated any good opensource scenes as a iceing on the cake. You can't expect the world to understand opensource fully yet.
I would put this movie as a cross between Sneakers, Net, and a James Bond movie. Lets face it, things in James Bond are stupid, such as the Carver world network, like synapsis in a way, and the corny or unrealistic scenes.
My recomendation is to see the movie as a "what if this happened, or is going on, or will go on". All I knew about the movie going in was it was about some company with to much power and about a programmers friend being killed for some reason.
Just don't look for the errors in the movie. Look for the fun intertaining scenes that are funny. (I personally liked the scene when Milo says, "Don't Bill Gates have that?". It's not often that a movie will take real tech stuff in to a movie. Hackers the movie sucked, but was stupid-funny, the net was unrealistic and dumb in some ways, but I think atitrust is the next movie on the ever-improving tech movie industry.
--Brandon
Find someone on the internet to go into this deal with you. Have them use the internet (mapit/yahoo) to find directions to your house. Have them steal your TV, they go to jail for a month, minor fines.
So now that Mapit/Yahoo have provided a way to break into your house, sue Yahoo/Mapit for 2 million dollars. Split the millions, be happy. Get rid of dumb laws.
CONTENTVILLE.COM COPYRIGHT POLICY Contentville.com will block access to and/or remove any material that it believes in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and submitted to our site. This policy shall cover all aspects of Contentville.com, including, but not limited to user comments or other content submitted to our site. What to do if you think a copyright is being infringed: -- Identify where or whom the material is from. --Tell us how the rightful owner may be contacted. -- Give us a statement of good faith belief that the material is infringing, and that the information provided is accurate and the complaint is authorized by the copyright holder. -- Send the notice of Copyright infringement to the following Designated Copyright Infringement Agent for Contentville.com: Catherine Seda Copyright Agent of Contentville.com Contentville.com 1230 Avenue of the Americas 16th Floor New York, NY 10020 212-332-6400 or via email to: copyright@Contentville.com Once we receive this information, we will: -- Block the infringing material or site -- Notify the infringing user -- In the case of a first time offender, the infringing material will be removed. -- In the case of repeat offenders, we will endeavor to remove them permanently from the site.
Excerpts from the UMI® Dissertation Abstracts database are being used by Contentville, which, in turn, collects orders for full-text dissertations. Dissertation orders are fulfilled by UMI® Dissertations Publishing, whose mission is to expand scholarly communication and improve access to academic research. All Dissertation Publishing Agreements with authors remain in effect. Dissertation authors retain all rights to their dissertations. All sales will be tracked for royalty payments. All contracted royalties will be paid, per the agreement. The UMI program continues to expand access to research and maintain a permanent archive of scholarly works. Wider distribution of dissertation research is intended to support the international scholarly community.
The whole thing about Licensing that really makes me mad is this. When you go to a store and buy a computer or software box, you BUY THE RIGHTS TO USE it. If you read those license agreements that we all skip over and say "ok, just shut up and get on with the install", this is what it really says.
We "The company" hearby give you rights to loan our "software".
You never own it, or anything, you merely get the rights to use it. Go read the microsoft agreement. In in, 3/4ths the way through it says,
Microsoft has the right at any time for any reason to suspend your usage of SOFTWARE.
That is right. They could come out and sa, "Everyone in the world is no longer allowed to use our software, and if you do, we will sue you." And guess what, they can and will Easily win in court. When you installed the software or opened a box, you agree to the license that says they have the right to do this.
Solution? USE LINUX! and you're safe.
(If you were a store, would you like to tell people. "You can lease this software until you die for only $4000.00 per copy of w2k advanced server; or until we tell you you can't. *and they could come out the next day after you use it and say "sorry, you can't use our software because I don't like you, and I'll sue you for damages of $2 million.* And they CAN. Stores tell you, "You bought it." BURN THE STORES!;-)
Linux would be a great solution, but the reason I got this caller ID box instead of the rest was that it wsa the cheapest. (It also didn't have those anoying red LED's that blink each time you get a call, man, those things really get anoying. It had the largest LCD display also. It wasn't small, but not to big. I'll post the name of it tomorrow.:-)
For all of you crazed -want-to-get-upset-, you can contact: Voice Mail Broadcasting in Irvine, Calif. (sorry, not link) and let them know of your discust with this process. They do this for many businesses, and give the user a busy signal or a beep if a human answers the phone. (I'd still be pretty upset if I was taking a nap to get woken up by a busy signal)
However, ABC has pulled this decision to do this idea... BUT this has not stopped all of their ignorance though. Look at this idea:
(From NYTimes Artical) ABC is, however, sticking with a plan for the 2000-2001 season to have restrooms in bars or restaurants fitted with digital audio chips that deliver spots promoting "Norm," using recordings of Mr. MacDonald that begin playing when people move around. Mr. Cohen said that plan "makes sense for 'Norm'; it's such a guy show."
I personally don't want to have to listen to some guy talking about TV shows while being in the restroom. What restaurant would do this, and not have customers get upset?
Whats your opinion, and what can we do to let ABC know that the world thinks they should fire their merketing team?
At my house we have several caller ID's. I don't remember the make (if you want it, post and I'll get back tomorrow) that does the call rejection with hardware at my house. The caller ID box it's self picks up the phone and simply says "This person does not accept anounymous calls, please hangup and turn off....." You can also pick up the phone if you do want it. I just wait for 2 rings. If I hear 1 ring, it was anonymous and rejected. This takes care of a LOT of solicitation.
My point is, don't pay the phone company to reject calls, pay an extra $1 or 2 and get it done on the caller ID box it's self. Then you don't have to worry about caller ID blocking override.
Go read the article, it's not "hacking". That is just what the author of the story put because he doesn't know better. It's accually a complex system that they have been/very/ slowly adding pieces to. The author called it hacking possibly because the sensors for detecting these blasts are piggy-backed on other satalites. It's quite a complex system how they detect, send information back to earth, and possition radio telescopes to detect the few second blasts. If the author is out there and reading this, why don't you tell us why you call this "hacking"? It's a fairly complex system that has been worked in since 1978!
They have been doing it for years, but many of the satalites were damaged and destroyed. It appears that they are finally getting more attention and in return more funding. Their sensors seem to piggy-back on other satalites. (Many of those satalites they want to use, arn't being launched) In 1978 they launched the first one that could just detect them. Then in the 80's they launched a second for more accuaracy. Then in the late 1990's a third went up and they could triangulate to see them. They have only been able to see "1" so far, that lasted 5 seconds. As they put newer ones up, it will give them a little bit extra time to get radio satalites into possition to see them, before the signals pass by earth. Pretty cool stuff. Second powerful explosion (next to big bang with can't exist, otherwise we never would have existed, but thats another topic).
Check out the link, pretty cool reading for history,science,math, and "cool tech stuff".
Can someone explain, since the site isn't that technical in communication protocal, how they can track the blast in a few seconds, when it will take maybe years to be seen (depending on where it goes off at)...
Also, doesn't it take a few seconds to ping satalites 300k miles away?
Oh, besides my favorite 19inch LCD, are the 6x9 inch LCD's in the back of the driver and passenger's headrests. It's pretty cool how they fit them in. The front passenger has a 8x11 inch LCD that is build into the glove-box cover.
The amazing thing is how nicely they have been designed into the car, and how stream line they look.
Goto www.megacar.com and take a look, it's very impressive.
A stupid idea? NONE of you must have even looked at the site. The car has about 6 LCDs, one of which is a 19inch! It has 1 GPS, 2GSM devices, full video conferencing. It has a DVD player. What do you mean stupid idea?
Turthfully, that may be the way of the future. It's a little tight in the car, but hey! Look what it has. It's a dang nice car, not sure what type(s) they install it in.
Sadly, it has a NT server in it. (doh) That I'm sure can be fixed. However, the setup they have in that car is incredible. You have to be crazy to pay how much they are asking, but it's still a "cool car". I would like having a car to watch dvd's on a 19 inch LCD. Or video conference with friends while I'm driving. The 16 cell phones is what they need in it to do full video/audio conferencing. It's pretty incredible. It's like having your own moving conference room. It's mostly built for people in the back seat, so just get a driver. If your going to spend that much on that car, a driver is worth it.
Anyway, it's not a dumb idea at all. It's pretty incredible to see what kind of hardware they have in a car now.
Slashdot Mirror
Sign me up for the tryouts for a nationally ranked CTF/Team Fortress league! I'll be more than happy to compete, especially if I can get one of those $10mil contracts for 5 years of game playing! Oh, the wonders of the future and what it holds for a high-tech way of life...
:-)
Your last points are good, but a camera won't cost $2000 to do this, and having a dual camera system failover, would fix the problem of a shattered lens. You could put glass 6 inches infront of each camera, and if one glass gets shattered, it costs $20.00 to buy another 4x4 inch glass window that's infront of the camera, now the only othe thing to worry about is lens flare, but that can be taken care of with software I would bet.
Linus, Stallman, ESR, and others.
I hope this gets to people who may be able to help keep this idea in their minds, as I believe it may be very important
Microsoft has been attacking specific parts of GPL and other similar licenses. Mostly about problems that may arise with IP and open-sourcing any project build on GPL'd software.
With all of this being said by Microsoft, it sounds like Microsoft is setting a stage for the announcement of their own Open-Source license, that would be much like what is out there, except specific parts to protect IP, and allow building off of other Open-Source projects without releasing their own source, or a "private" like open-source/shared between companies type license.
discredit the goodness of current licenses, so that they license will be used over current ones. Because of this, it would be a good idea to start a pro current license campaign that states that current licenses are the best solution, and that Microsoft may be planning a license that will appear good, but have deep down portions that will help a comercial company over an individual or a group. Microsoft has one of the best legal departments in the world. They would do this. Our current licenses MUST be pushed now, before Microsoft is able to capture the spotlight. If they do, companies will jump on Microsofts new license, and not take careful analysis of it before so. This would really cause problems for Open-Source as we know it today. You can be sure that Microsoft will have parts of the license that will cause problems for current Open-Source ways, and that are intended to allow Microsoft to gain control and to hurt Linux, Free-BSD, and other non-commercial OS's and software. Please, anyone who can help and has voice, begin to let the public and press know what Microsoft may be up to. Getting it out before, rather than after, can make a serious effect on how software may change in the future. Start letting friends, businesses, the press, government, and anyone else know what may be going on, and to jump on to what Microsoft may release in way of licensing. I would give Microsoft no more than 2 months from today for announcing their license. They have been setting things up, and planning how and what to attack. If we don't get things out now, our efforts may be hurt severally!
Please! Please! don't ignore this, and Please start getting word and annoucements out!
--Brandon
Linus, Stallman, ESR, and others/.
I hope this gets to people who may be able to help keep this idea in their minds, as I believe it may be very important
Microsoft has been attacking specific parts of GPL and other similar licenses. Mostly about problems that may arise with IP and open-sourcing any project build on GPL'd software.
With all of this being said by Microsoft, it sounds like Microsoft is setting a stage for the announcement of their own Open-Source license, that would be much like what is out there, except specific parts to protect IP, and allow building off of other Open-Source projects without releasing their own source, or a "private" like open-source/shared between companies type license.
it would be a good idea to start a pro current license campaign that states that current licenses are the best solution, and that Microsoft may be planning a license that will appear good, but have deep down portions that will help a comercial company over an individual or a group. Microsoft has one of the best legal departments in the world. They would do this. Our current licenses MUST be pushed now, before Microsoft is able to capture the spotlight. If they do, companies will jump on Microsofts new license, and not take careful analysis of it before so. This would really cause problems for Open-Source as we know it today. You can be sure that Microsoft will have parts of the license that will cause problems for current Open-Source ways, and that are intended to allow Microsoft to gain control and to hurt Linux, Free-BSD, and other non-commercial OS's and software. Please, anyone who can help and has voice, begin to let the public and press know what Microsoft may be up to. Getting it out before, rather than after, can make a serious effect on how software may change in the future. Start letting friends, businesses, the press, government, and anyone else know what may be going on, and to jump on to what Microsoft may release in way of licensing. I would give Microsoft no more than 2 months from today for announcing their license. They have been setting things up, and planning how and what to attack. If we don't get things out now, our efforts may be hurt severally!
Please! Please! don't ignore this, and Please start getting word and annoucements out!
With all the .Net and complaints about the GPL and other Open-Source ways, it is making me wonder that Microsoft is building their own Open-Source License. Microsoft continues to be attacking specific portions of the GPL. Namely parts related to IP and commercial areas. If Microsoft comes up with a license, they will want as many companies and people to use that license. My belief, is that in that license, it will have a part that will create major problems with software such as Linux and other software using licenses similiar to GPL.
My hope is that Stallman, Linus, and others should consider this, and maybe start getting the medias attention before Microsoft announces their own license, that way companies and people will know that GPL like licenses are what is the best, and not to jump on a license that Microsoft will be coming out with. Getting this out before Microsoft announces their license would be the best, and not let Microsoft try to PR their license above others.
Microsoft says:
"The only thing we have a problem with is when the government funds open-source work. Government funding should be for work that is available to everybody." This is one big bait and switch if I have ever seen one. Microsoft is saying that the governement should be spending tax payers money on things that are Availible to Everybody!
First off, I don't know of any program, or funding, in the government that benifits Everybody. Microsoft claims though that money should only be spent on programs that do... I would like to see Microsoft prove that is even possible.
Second, I guess I missed the headlines that Microsoft was now an advisor to the government. Last I knew, it was voters who choose people to represent the people and their ideas in the Government. Microsoft I guess thinks it has more wisdom than out government, so that they feel they must tell our government what is a good idea or not. That idea scares me, as in they are without any doubt, a dishonest company, and the constitution is for the people, not for the company.
Fourth, trying to imply that any government funding of Open-Source projects is a waste, is poor form, and I think is just disgusting. That's like saying no one should provide any free service to anyone else, regardless what it is. I have always seen much more come out of people caring and helping others, than people being selfish and expecting something in return for everything they do.
On a personal note, I've tried to give Microsoft a break, because they do have something that is pretty darn good, (honestly, they do) but I sure can't believe how they can pretend like they want to help people, but try to stop anything that could help millions of people, and improve the quality of life just so they can make money. That alone makes me upset and disgusted. I hope to see Microsoft put a muzzle on Balmer, and/or fire him with a statement that his statements are the complete oppisite of what the company wants to do for people.
Could it be that Microsoft is trying to annoy people and companies to the point where they demand that software can only run, if it licensed? Microsofts current plan is to one day require online-authentication every time a PC boots. That would annoy the heck out of people, unless the people see it as "better" to the alternative auditing system...
Microsoft I think believes, "If we want to do something annoying and to take away the privacy of people, do something legal that is worse so that our "new alternative" looks better and is accepted.".
--Brandon
One thing that the LDS religion teachers is to be careful about who you associate with. Many people in the LDS church that fall under preasure of others. I know dozens of people that if given a beer and a lot of social pressure, will let their morals fall, but who is to say others wouldn't either? Because of that, members of the church are warned to not associate with people who don't have the same goals as them. They do this because many people couldn't handle the preasure and would end up doing something wrong, hating themselves and feeling like they're going to heck, and end up on prozac for the rest of their life... and that happens a LOT. It's also those weak people that usually speak up and tell other people they're "bad".
;-) I think anyone who judges someone based on things such as drinking, smoking, etc, is a fool, and there are many of those type of people in the church.
;-)
;-)
For me, I don't care if you drink, smoke, or are immoral. I don't care what you do, as long as you are what I, personally, would consider to be a good friend. Granted, I won't go with you to a bar, but if you invite me over to your house for a bbq, I'd have no problem if you drank a casual beer, just don't get piss drunk.
The concern the church has for it's memebers is to me a kinda 'over do it with what you can't do, and they're less likely to do as many bad things'. If the church tells everyone to be careful of being with non-members, the chances of kids in that family drinking and smoking go down a Lot. The stronger members who can think more for themselves and are smarter of the world, step out more. I had a friend who got drunk on way to school, who was a member but never came... his life turned upside down and has a kid, who he never gets to see... out of wedlock. Now, I can pretty much guarentee if he hadn't associated with non-members, he'd be married and had kids.
It's kinda hard to see how the LDS church works, and I don't expect you to. The idea that really runs the church is 'try to make everyones lives better'. The church see's this as a stronger family. A stronger family means less murders, DUI's, etc. Who knows if smoking is bad for you, but for kids under age, it's illegal, so the church also see's parents as smoking as a bad example, hence, it's not permitted by a member. Drinking say coffee, is though of as bad, why? I don't know... I personally can't stand smell of it, and I really enjoy grabbing a nice cream hot-chocolate instead.
Ahh, all the tangets....
Basically, I care less about the 'in croud' and think a lot of those people have no brains. If you're not LDS, who cares? are you happy with life? good, so am I, come to SLC and we can go skiing. If you end up liking mormans, and utah, and think our church may be true (in 99 years), hey, great! maybe we'll send the missionaries out to talk to you (they can be pushy though.. theyr'e taught to be)
Many people in Utah who are LDS, are happy with the friends they have, and keep pretty busy and enjoy socializing with other LDS people, because heck, there are so many around them, and it's easier to associate with someone like you.. so they turn others away. __I__ feel bad about this, which is why I have personally set out to thwack each person who thinks like this over the head. They're idiots, and I'm sorry others feel like you said. Granted, many LDS people have been put through a lot of crap because their LDS. (LDS church even had a government order out to kill all of them in the 1800's, just like hitler did to the jews.) People have grudges, and won't let go... That's their choice. If I moved to some places in the US, I'd be an outcast because I was LDS. This isn't fair, but that seams to be life.
We're (LDS members) not all in a bubble. The church see's to it to protect those who are in the bubble, and expects the rest of us who understand to do what we can... (people in bubbles always seem to be the more intersting, and more listened to by media...)
I hope this explains some.. let me know what you think... (please) I'm not perfect, but I need to enjoy life.
--Brandon
Church and state laws do merge, because people choose laws, and many people in Utah are in to church... So laws are merged more in Utah than elsewhere, because the people are more church and family oriented there, then in other states. (or atleast press their ideas more)
I have lived in Utah most of my life. I also attend a University there. As for technology jobs, there are plenty, especially Linux related. (I have worked for several). The cost of living here is pretty high, like most tech places, and I would consider the quality of life/social atmosphere very nice, even though drinking is not very often. (BTW, yes, I am LDS)
Remember that the laws in each state are the laws that people want. The majority of Utah residents do not want certain laws, or to release tight holds on liquor laws. It's the populations choice of what they want, and don't want. I personally like the idea that you can find a job just about anywhere in the US that you want. If you don't like the laws in one state, don't worry about them, work in another state. I think it's pretty nice that here in Utah we keep things more simple. It's the way that many of us like to live, and there shouldn't be anything wrong with that. I enjoy having a higher comfort of security when driving and going to parties, knowing that I'm less likely to be hit by a drunk driver. (This is not to say we don't have any problems)
Now if you still want to get drunk, there are Many bars, micro pubs, and other things to do. Maybe not as many as other places, but it's what the majority of people here want.
Also, many non-LDS families enjoy living here because there is less "negitive-effects" on their children. I think most people in Utah would trade "living a little" for being safer and more family oriented.
The question of if it's a good social place, that totally depends on what you consider a social life. People in Utah would mostly rather do things as a family or community, rather than going out and drinking alone. Because of that, people see liquor as a threat to families. I personaly would trade liquor for family, but that's me....... Live where you want, enjoy where you life. I think a social life is very important. Comprimising your personal life for a job I think is one of the biggest mistakes you could make. I could never live in San Fransisco, and I'm sure many people there could never live in Utah, due to social atmosphere. Each state I think needs it's uniqueness. Would everyone like it if every city was the same? same number of bars, churches, malls, crimes, ski resorts, beaches, etc? I Highly doubt it.
For me, when it comes to a place to live and work, I think location is one of the top 5 things considered. I also would think that it is rare that any engineer would give up a social atmosphere that they like, just for a job. For me, I think family comes before a job, and I think many other engineers also do the same.
So in the end, yes, engineers do look at social atmosphere for where they work. Many engineers however put things such as family before drinking in their social life. It all depends on the engineer.
--Brandon
I saw this movie last Saturday, over 13 days. I thought this was a great movie, however, I wasn't expecting it to be about opensource. I am a senior in college and am less than a year away from my BS in CS. For me, I thought this was a great movie. I don't like microsoft. However, I think the ideas that the CEO of NURV presented to Milo at the begining sounded great. I enjoyed finding out who Milo could trust, and couldn't. and the "Couselor" role that the CEO played for Milo. I treated any good opensource scenes as a iceing on the cake. You can't expect the world to understand opensource fully yet. I would put this movie as a cross between Sneakers, Net, and a James Bond movie. Lets face it, things in James Bond are stupid, such as the Carver world network, like synapsis in a way, and the corny or unrealistic scenes. My recomendation is to see the movie as a "what if this happened, or is going on, or will go on". All I knew about the movie going in was it was about some company with to much power and about a programmers friend being killed for some reason. Just don't look for the errors in the movie. Look for the fun intertaining scenes that are funny. (I personally liked the scene when Milo says, "Don't Bill Gates have that?". It's not often that a movie will take real tech stuff in to a movie. Hackers the movie sucked, but was stupid-funny, the net was unrealistic and dumb in some ways, but I think atitrust is the next movie on the ever-improving tech movie industry. --Brandon
Ok, here's a good one ;-)
Find someone on the internet to go into this deal with you. Have them use the internet (mapit/yahoo) to find directions to your house. Have them steal your TV, they go to jail for a month, minor fines.
So now that Mapit/Yahoo have provided a way to break into your house, sue Yahoo/Mapit for 2 million dollars. Split the millions, be happy. Get rid of dumb laws.
Yeah, so why don't they outlaw computers and the internet since you can break about every law in existance using it?!
I think Koplans quote should go down in history as he thinks Linux and everyone are a bunch of crackers and law breakers.
What needs to be done to get this judge disbared so it sets an example to other judges to not make bad orders?
This link..
CONTENTVILLE.COM COPYRIGHT POLICY Contentville.com will block access to and/or remove any material that it believes in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and submitted to our site. This policy shall cover all aspects of Contentville.com, including, but not limited to user comments or other content submitted to our site. What to do if you think a copyright is being infringed: -- Identify where or whom the material is from. --Tell us how the rightful owner may be contacted. -- Give us a statement of good faith belief that the material is infringing, and that the information provided is accurate and the complaint is authorized by the copyright holder. -- Send the notice of Copyright infringement to the following Designated Copyright Infringement Agent for Contentville.com: Catherine Seda Copyright Agent of Contentville.com Contentville.com 1230 Avenue of the Americas 16th Floor New York, NY 10020 212-332-6400 or via email to: copyright@Contentville.com Once we receive this information, we will: -- Block the infringing material or site -- Notify the infringing user -- In the case of a first time offender, the infringing material will be removed. -- In the case of repeat offenders, we will endeavor to remove them permanently from the site.
According to this link: Here They will track you down and give you your money, but it sounds like they will do this after they sell things.
Please see this link:
http://www.contentville.com/c ontent/dissertations.asp
*from the page*
Excerpts from the UMI® Dissertation Abstracts database are being used by Contentville, which, in turn, collects orders for full-text dissertations. Dissertation orders are fulfilled by UMI® Dissertations Publishing, whose mission is to expand scholarly communication and improve access to academic research. All Dissertation Publishing Agreements with authors remain in effect. Dissertation authors retain all rights to their dissertations. All sales will be tracked for royalty payments. All contracted royalties will be paid, per the agreement. The UMI program continues to expand access to research and maintain a permanent archive of scholarly works. Wider distribution of dissertation research is intended to support the international scholarly community.
--Brandon
Actually, your wrong about the prhase "buying".
;-)
The whole thing about Licensing that really makes me mad is this. When you go to a store and buy a computer or software box, you BUY THE RIGHTS TO USE it. If you read those license agreements that we all skip over and say "ok, just shut up and get on with the install", this is what it really says.
We "The company" hearby give you rights to loan our "software".
You never own it, or anything, you merely get the rights to use it. Go read the microsoft agreement. In in, 3/4ths the way through it says,
Microsoft has the right at any time for any reason to suspend your usage of SOFTWARE.
That is right. They could come out and sa, "Everyone in the world is no longer allowed to use our software, and if you do, we will sue you." And guess what, they can and will Easily win in court. When you installed the software or opened a box, you agree to the license that says they have the right to do this.
Solution? USE LINUX! and you're safe.
(If you were a store, would you like to tell people. "You can lease this software until you die for only $4000.00 per copy of w2k advanced server; or until we tell you you can't. *and they could come out the next day after you use it and say "sorry, you can't use our software because I don't like you, and I'll sue you for damages of $2 million.* And they CAN. Stores tell you, "You bought it." BURN THE STORES!
--Brandon
Linux would be a great solution, but the reason I got this caller ID box instead of the rest was that it wsa the cheapest. (It also didn't have those anoying red LED's that blink each time you get a call, man, those things really get anoying. It had the largest LCD display also. It wasn't small, but not to big. I'll post the name of it tomorrow. :-)
--Brandon
For all of you crazed -want-to-get-upset-, you can contact: Voice Mail Broadcasting in Irvine, Calif. (sorry, not link) and let them know of your discust with this process. They do this for many businesses, and give the user a busy signal or a beep if a human answers the phone. (I'd still be pretty upset if I was taking a nap to get woken up by a busy signal)
However, ABC has pulled this decision to do this idea... BUT this has not stopped all of their ignorance though. Look at this idea:
(From NYTimes Artical)
ABC is, however, sticking with a plan for the 2000-2001 season to have restrooms in bars or restaurants fitted with digital audio chips that deliver spots promoting "Norm," using recordings of Mr. MacDonald that begin playing when people move around. Mr. Cohen said that plan "makes sense for 'Norm'; it's such a guy show."
I personally don't want to have to listen to some guy talking about TV shows while being in the restroom. What restaurant would do this, and not have customers get upset?
Whats your opinion, and what can we do to let ABC know that the world thinks they should fire their merketing team?
At my house we have several caller ID's. I don't remember the make (if you want it, post and I'll get back tomorrow) that does the call rejection with hardware at my house. The caller ID box it's self picks up the phone and simply says "This person does not accept anounymous calls, please hangup and turn off....." You can also pick up the phone if you do want it. I just wait for 2 rings. If I hear 1 ring, it was anonymous and rejected. This takes care of a LOT of solicitation.
My point is, don't pay the phone company to reject calls, pay an extra $1 or 2 and get it done on the caller ID box it's self. Then you don't have to worry about caller ID blocking override.
--Brandon
Go read the article, it's not "hacking". That is just what the author of the story put because he doesn't know better. It's accually a complex system that they have been /very/ slowly adding pieces to. The author called it hacking possibly because the sensors for detecting these blasts are piggy-backed on other satalites. It's quite a complex system how they detect, send information back to earth, and possition radio telescopes to detect the few second blasts. If the author is out there and reading this, why don't you tell us why you call this "hacking"? It's a fairly complex system that has been worked in since 1978!
They have been doing it for years, but many of the satalites were damaged and destroyed. It appears that they are finally getting more attention and in return more funding. Their sensors seem to piggy-back on other satalites. (Many of those satalites they want to use, arn't being launched) In 1978 they launched the first one that could just detect them. Then in the 80's they launched a second for more accuaracy. Then in the late 1990's a third went up and they could triangulate to see them. They have only been able to see "1" so far, that lasted 5 seconds. As they put newer ones up, it will give them a little bit extra time to get radio satalites into possition to see them, before the signals pass by earth. Pretty cool stuff. Second powerful explosion (next to big bang with can't exist, otherwise we never would have existed, but thats another topic).
Check out the link, pretty cool reading for history,science,math, and "cool tech stuff".
--Brandon
Can someone explain, since the site isn't that technical in communication protocal, how they can track the blast in a few seconds, when it will take maybe years to be seen (depending on where it goes off at)...
Also, doesn't it take a few seconds to ping satalites 300k miles away?
--Brandon
Oh, besides my favorite 19inch LCD, are the 6x9 inch LCD's in the back of the driver and passenger's headrests. It's pretty cool how they fit them in. The front passenger has a 8x11 inch LCD that is build into the glove-box cover.
The amazing thing is how nicely they have been designed into the car, and how stream line they look.
Goto www.megacar.com and take a look, it's very impressive.
A stupid idea? NONE of you must have even looked at the site. The car has about 6 LCDs, one of which is a 19inch! It has 1 GPS, 2GSM devices, full video conferencing. It has a DVD player. What do you mean stupid idea?
Turthfully, that may be the way of the future. It's a little tight in the car, but hey! Look what it has. It's a dang nice car, not sure what type(s) they install it in.
Sadly, it has a NT server in it. (doh) That I'm sure can be fixed. However, the setup they have in that car is incredible. You have to be crazy to pay how much they are asking, but it's still a "cool car". I would like having a car to watch dvd's on a 19 inch LCD. Or video conference with friends while I'm driving. The 16 cell phones is what they need in it to do full video/audio conferencing. It's pretty incredible. It's like having your own moving conference room. It's mostly built for people in the back seat, so just get a driver. If your going to spend that much on that car, a driver is worth it.
Anyway, it's not a dumb idea at all. It's pretty incredible to see what kind of hardware they have in a car now.
--Brandon