I'm getting @Home service installed this Friday (ordered it last week), and then I see this announcement, so I called up the local sales rep. Eventually I was propagated high up enough to talk to someone clueful out of their head office in Philadelphia by the name of Tom. He had heard nothing about this, but sounded rather concerned after I explained the consequences of the DP (as he should). He had me mail him the posting to new.admin.announce and said he would contact them folks over in the _real_ head office in CA.
All I can do is suggest everyone do the same. The office in PA is (215) 981-8531. You may or may not get someone knowledgable right off the bat, so be polite (but really, you should be polite anyway!). You might want to even check out the Canons of Conduct from the Linux Advocacy mini-HOWTO for some good pointers.
It seems to me more than anything else that the BSA wants to make an example of those "awful, awful" people who pirate software. Though I hope that fighting warez IRC channels is kind of like "wack the ground hog/prairie dog/octupus" or the like, I have a feeling that people are going to be a lot more wary, and we won't see quite as many popping up after each iteration of this.
Actually, a lot of punishment in the legal system works the same way -- more as a deterrent to others than actual reformation of the "wrongdoer".
I find these extremely interesting questions, especially the last one. It reminds me of the Linux to be Official OS of People's Republic of China story. Granted, China is not quite as repressive as North Korea, but I think there's a connection to these two stories posted here on Slashdot, as well as the "Father of the Web" story being posted on ZDNet. That story basically details Tim Berners-Lee unhappiness with the Web being "merely" a place to access information, rather than sharing ideas.
My point is this: Both question 11 on the Final Exam and the Berners-Lee story point to the capacity for the Web/Internet/Computers to be more than just tools to shop online, download porn, or even really cool things like collaborate on amazing Open Source projects like Linux itself. I say more important because, in conjuction with the (sometimes disparate) philosophies of Open Source / Free Software, we as a community have the chance to really make a difference by applying these philosophies outside not only the domain of software, but also outside the world of business itself. As both a Linux geek and a scholar of things Chinese (BA in Chinese, extensive study of PRC politics, modern and ancient history, and ancient philosophy), it is exciting to think that we just barely might be able to influence on a wide scale an authoritarian regieme through the application of thoughts and ideals that we use to write our software. Gives the phrase "World Domination" a whole new meaning, doesn't it?
So does this make any sense, or am I just rambling?
As a Chinese major, and a student of PRC politics, I think I can safely say that China is in no way other than name a Communist nation. China is certainly an authoritarian nation, but they've mostly discarded any Marxist theory in favor of some Maoist thought and currently a whole lot of Deng Xiaoping style "socialism with Chinese characteristics" (read, state run capitalism).
For example, the Communist Manifesto explicitly states that industrial workers are the true proletariat, while peasants are rather useless from a revolutionary standpoint. Mao turned that on its nose. Furthermore, the entire proletariat is global, and independent of nationality, while the Chinese government promotes intense xenophobia when it suits its needs. Finally, the people have little to no say in government -- the People's Congress being little more than a "yes organization" for the Politburo and senoir officials like Li Peng and Jiang Zemin. It is a "People's Republic" in the minds of very few. I think my friends that I work with here in the US who hail from mainland China would all agree (some of them having grown up in prison camps thanks to the Cultural Revolution).
The arrival of the first Christian computer action game opens a whole new chapter in the never-ending struggle between technology and the self-proclaimed forces of morality.
If this is significant of anything, it's that this is the first time this particular group has been targeted by a video game company (as opposed to retro-gamers, wargamers, arm-chair huntsmen, etc.). Where do you see conflict in this development?
The bad news is that if "The War In Heaven" sells, expect a slew of Christian (and soon, no doubt, Jewish and Muslim) save-the-soul games marketed by greedy Web entrepeneurs who want to appear wholesome while raking in big money.
Why is this bad news if they're good games? Because they're religion based? Or for other reasons?
I'm confused in general by this article -- what is the point you're trying to make?
> Is this testing style in keeping with the spirit > of Open Source software distribution?
> Yes. The recruitment of outside Beta testers is > part of the initial development process of Corel > LINUX and will allow Corel to release the first > version of Corel LINUX to the general public at > an earlier date than would be possible if Corel > relied only on its internal testing resources. > Once Corel LINUX is ready for general > distribution, it will be distributed in > accordance with the criteria for Open Source > software.
Note that the question concerns the beta test style, but the answer never addresses that, but rather ends up stating that the _final_ release will be "distributed in accordance with the criteria for Open Source software," thus effectively skirting the issue entirely. It's obviously something they'd prefer to avoid discussing. If they don't understand free software and the GPL, I have a feeling they're about to learn... from a thousand PO'ed GNU/Linux users.
We _do_ have every right to be upset. There is in fact a point at which something, whether it be a work of art, a story, or a movie, becomes such a large part of a culture (or subculture), that its influence moves beyond profound. It is at this point that there is a kind of cultural ownership as well.
This is aggravated in the case of Star Wars by Lucas' intense push to make the franchise as "universal" as possible. Not only was there extensive reference to myth, but Lucas himself continually hyped that aspect of it. Anyone who has the digitally remastered trilogy tapes that came out before the 2nd edition knows this: The ads at the beginning with their blathering on about how "Star Wars is for all times, and all peoples" or whatever.
The end result is this:
Lucas has burrowed into our collective psyche, quite intentionally. It's his creation, but he has sought to involve us (not collaboratively, but mentally) in it as much as he can.
He then proceeds to do something that feels rather yucky (makes bad preachy movie, endless product tie-ins, blaming Internet users for bad press).
Of course we have a right to say what he may or may not do at this point. Will he listen? Probably not, but I do not doubt that the movie would have been better if he _had_ been willing to listen to his fans, as opposed to using the "benevolent despot" approach to filmmaking.
Seriously people, could cracking be justified in a case like this: A company without my consent makes copies of my photgraphs for a purpose I believe is illegitimate, and refuses to remove the copies at my request. Argh....
When will humanity stop trying to screw itself over in its endless quest of the almighty dollar?
I suppose [3dfx|3Dfx]'s legal dept. has gotten tired of running around threatening high school students with suits for writing Glide wrappers. Having warmed up, I suppose they think it's time to graduate to the big leagues and threaten someone who can fight back.
When was the cool, underdog 3dfx replaced with this corporate nightmare? *sigh*
>> no slots of any kind whatsoever > This is a GoodThing(tm). Think about it for a > second? Do you actually think that the way we do > things now (open up > the case and plug one circuit board into > another) is the right way of doing things?!?!? > Do you actually think "normal" people are > comfortable with this paradigm.
So is the correct paradigm instead to _prevent_ them from being able to do it in the first place?
How does this help "normal people"? I can understand making computers smaller and prettier, but upgrades, other than buying a whole new computer, will be impossible. This makes complete sense, considering who's promoting the Easy PC initiative and why (sell more PCs). In fact, the final step on Intel's PC roadmap is the removal of _all_ user-accessable slots. Scary. Check out their site for more info.
I sent the following to search-support@altavista.com. I hope as many of you as possible protest in a similar fashion. It is indeed/. time.
I am quite distressed to see that AltaVista is selling out search results to the highest bidder (see http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/19 110.html ). When I search the web through AltaVista, I expect to get actual hits, not ads some company has paid you to return as hits. As an "old-time Internet user" in Doubleclick's words, I find this abhorrent. AltaVista is no longer my search engine of choice.
Slashdot Mirror
All I can do is suggest everyone do the same. The office in PA is (215) 981-8531. You may or may not get someone knowledgable right off the bat, so be polite (but really, you should be polite anyway!). You might want to even check out the Canons of Conduct from the Linux Advocacy mini-HOWTO for some good pointers.
Good luck!
Actually, a lot of punishment in the legal system works the same way -- more as a deterrent to others than actual reformation of the "wrongdoer".
*Sigh*
My point is this: Both question 11 on the Final Exam and the Berners-Lee story point to the capacity for the Web/Internet/Computers to be more than just tools to shop online, download porn, or even really cool things like collaborate on amazing Open Source projects like Linux itself. I say more important because, in conjuction with the (sometimes disparate) philosophies of Open Source / Free Software, we as a community have the chance to really make a difference by applying these philosophies outside not only the domain of software, but also outside the world of business itself. As both a Linux geek and a scholar of things Chinese (BA in Chinese, extensive study of PRC politics, modern and ancient history, and ancient philosophy), it is exciting to think that we just barely might be able to influence on a wide scale an authoritarian regieme through the application of thoughts and ideals that we use to write our software. Gives the phrase "World Domination" a whole new meaning, doesn't it?
So does this make any sense, or am I just rambling?
For example, the Communist Manifesto explicitly states that industrial workers are the true proletariat, while peasants are rather useless from a revolutionary standpoint. Mao turned that on its nose. Furthermore, the entire proletariat is global, and independent of nationality, while the Chinese government promotes intense xenophobia when it suits its needs. Finally, the people have little to no say in government -- the People's Congress being little more than a "yes organization" for the Politburo and senoir officials like Li Peng and Jiang Zemin. It is a "People's Republic" in the minds of very few. I think my friends that I work with here in the US who hail from mainland China would all agree (some of them having grown up in prison camps thanks to the Cultural Revolution).
Either way, I still like the movies. Yeah, even Phantom Menace. Yes, I do. If you don't, bite me.
Okay. *CHOMP*
JonKatz writes:
The arrival of the first Christian computer action game opens a whole new chapter in the never-ending struggle between technology and the self-proclaimed forces of morality.
If this is significant of anything, it's that this is the first time this particular group has been targeted by a video game company (as opposed to retro-gamers, wargamers, arm-chair huntsmen, etc.). Where do you see conflict in this development?
The bad news is that if "The War In Heaven" sells, expect a slew of Christian (and soon, no doubt, Jewish and Muslim) save-the-soul games marketed by greedy Web entrepeneurs who want to appear wholesome while raking in big money.
Why is this bad news if they're good games? Because they're religion based? Or for other reasons?
I'm confused in general by this article -- what is the point you're trying to make?
From the Beta Test FAQ on the Corel Linux home:
... from a thousand PO'ed GNU/Linux users.
> Is this testing style in keeping with the spirit
> of Open Source software distribution?
> Yes. The recruitment of outside Beta testers is
> part of the initial development process of Corel
> LINUX and will allow Corel to release the first
> version of Corel LINUX to the general public at
> an earlier date than would be possible if Corel
> relied only on its internal testing resources.
> Once Corel LINUX is ready for general
> distribution, it will be distributed in
> accordance with the criteria for Open Source
> software.
Note that the question concerns the beta test style, but the answer never addresses that, but rather ends up stating that the _final_ release will be "distributed in accordance with the criteria for Open Source software," thus effectively skirting the issue entirely. It's obviously something they'd prefer to avoid discussing. If they don't understand free software and the GPL, I have a feeling they're about to learn
I'm sorry, but I believe this is false.
We _do_ have every right to be upset. There is in fact a point at which something, whether it be a work of art, a story, or a movie, becomes such a large part of a culture (or subculture), that its influence moves beyond profound. It is at this point that there is a kind of cultural ownership as well.
This is aggravated in the case of Star Wars by Lucas' intense push to make the franchise as "universal" as possible. Not only was there extensive reference to myth, but Lucas himself continually hyped that aspect of it. Anyone who has the digitally remastered trilogy tapes that came out before the 2nd edition knows this: The ads at the beginning with their blathering on about how "Star Wars is for all times, and all peoples" or whatever.
The end result is this:
Lucas has burrowed into our collective psyche, quite intentionally. It's his creation, but he has sought to involve us (not collaboratively, but mentally) in it as much as he can.
He then proceeds to do something that feels rather yucky (makes bad preachy movie, endless product tie-ins, blaming Internet users for bad press).
Of course we have a right to say what he may or may not do at this point. Will he listen? Probably not, but I do not doubt that the movie would have been better if he _had_ been willing to listen to his fans, as opposed to using the "benevolent despot" approach to filmmaking.
Seriously people, could cracking be justified in a case like this: A company without my consent makes copies of my photgraphs for a purpose I believe is illegitimate, and refuses to remove the copies at my request. Argh....
When will humanity stop trying to screw itself over in its endless quest of the almighty dollar?
My God....
I suppose [3dfx|3Dfx]'s legal dept. has gotten tired of running around threatening high school students with suits for writing Glide wrappers.
Having warmed up, I suppose they think it's time to graduate to the big leagues and threaten someone who can fight back.
When was the cool, underdog 3dfx replaced with this corporate nightmare? *sigh*
>> no slots of any kind whatsoever
> This is a GoodThing(tm). Think about it for a
> second? Do you actually think that the way we do
> things now (open up
> the case and plug one circuit board into
> another) is the right way of doing things?!?!?
> Do you actually think "normal" people are
> comfortable with this paradigm.
So is the correct paradigm instead to _prevent_ them from being able to do it in the first place?
How does this help "normal people"? I can understand making computers smaller and prettier, but upgrades, other than buying a whole new computer, will be impossible. This makes complete sense, considering who's promoting the Easy PC initiative and why (sell more PCs). In fact, the final step on Intel's PC roadmap is the removal of _all_ user-accessable slots. Scary. Check out their site for more info.
I added this line to conf.modules:
install sblive insmod -f sblive
Though it still reports failure,
it seems to work.
I sent the following to search-support@altavista.com. I hope as many of you as possible protest in a similar fashion. It is indeed /. time.
9 110.html ). When I search the web through AltaVista, I expect to get actual hits, not ads some company has paid you to return as hits. As an "old-time Internet user" in Doubleclick's words, I find this abhorrent. AltaVista is no longer my search engine of choice.
I am quite distressed to see that AltaVista is selling out search results to the highest bidder (see http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/1
Sincerely,
Daniel Wislocki