The magic of english is that you can throw anything into it.
Sorry to burst your bubble concerning the omnipotence of the english language, but english in no way more "magical" than any other naturally evolved language. Languages absorb influences and words from other languages all the time (unless you want to be French and fight it all the way).
This proves it. The fact that this article was posted just goes to show that slashdot is aiming at a dual-booting audience.
Yes, slashdot is full of Windows kids. You think technology news only interests Linux/BSD users ? Think again.
On the other hand, slashdot is also full of Linux users. Hell, there probably is even a sizable chunk of people who don't feel that the existence of articles by Jon Katz is an offense to the their intelligence. This just goes to show that whenever one tries to define the "average slashdot", the attempt fails. It's a very diverse community with people having different interests and different backgrounds.
Any generalization by you or anyone else is doomed to fail.
First of all, dear Anonymous Scientologist, let me congratulate you on your successful application of copycatting. And - you made me see this - my justifications for making my proclamations may not have been sound, and this has led me into verifying my views.
The result isn't favorable to scientology, though. It was not my intention to even consider changing my opinion about scientology; Microsoft was the target of my ponderings.
The question I used to evaluate whether the organization (Microsoft/CoS) is evil was:
"Is the fact that some people are made happy by the operation of the organisation merely an accidental side effect, or is it the result of the good intentions of the people behind the organization ?"
On the surface, Microsoft looks like a money-making machine. On the other hand, Bill Gates says that he wants to make computing easier for everyone (while making a bucketload of money in the process). I believe he sincerely means this. The fact that he may not have been doing a very good job at it is irrelevant, and so is also the fact that he has obviously lost this focus while trying to defend his enterprise from the legal assault. By definition, Bill Gates - and Microsoft - isn't [completely] evil.
Scientology is also a money-making organization. As a religion, it is free of many of the constraints holding Microsoft back. Based on what I've read on the procedures and documents of the religion, I see no benevolent desire to make people happy. Some people have be made happy to keep the money flowing in, so that the religion can go on.
The fact that some people are made happy is irrelevant. What matters is that this is not the goal of scientology; the goal is to make money for their leaders.
Thus, if a single scientogist is happy and not evil doesn't mean that scientology cannot be evil, and your testimony, dear Anonymous Scientologist, is irrelevant. Based on other evidence, I still consider scientology evil.
First of all, let me congratulate Jamie for writing a well-thought and well-researched piece of solid information - and of stuff that really matters. Unfortunaly, articles with comparable quality are a genuine rarity in/.
Another thing is the stance of/. towards. A lot of things are critized and bashed on/., but very few of them can be considered truly, completely evil. Microsoft certainly isn't - there have been some benefits from its existence to the society as a whole (that is, other people than their shareholders and employees). Neither are patents evil, they are just being misapplied.
In this article, two issues are brought forward that are evil: DMCA and scientology. I am not going to start explaining why they are thoroughly evil; the reasons for this have been explained more articulately and "insightfully" than I have talent for by other posters.
I was just wondering what might happen if/. started more frequently and openly critisizing scientology. Would they dare to start harassing a public forum like this ? Negative publicity hasn't stopped them before, though..
Has anyone noticed that Microsoft seems to be deliberately trying to piss of the DOJ and state's attorneys general?
The opinion of DOJ is irrelevant. What matters is the opinion of the judge. Strangely enough (at least on the surface) they have managed to piss him off, too with their faked video evidence and snotty behavior. I'm surprised he hasn't fined them for being in contempt of the court.
Given that judge Jackson is already familiar with judging Microsoft, and that one of his decisions - namely the infamous "consent ruling" - was overthrown in the appeals court, one has to wonder whether their strategy is deliberate.
If Microsoft were to manage to get Judge Jackson enough, it might prompt him to give out an extremely unfavorable, which in turn would a better chance of being revoked through the appeals process.
Of course, this conspiracy theory of mine might give too much credit to those criminals.. after all, one shouldn't explain with malice what can be explained with ignorance (or incompetence).
if slashdot wants to become a forum for marketeer surveys and focus groups, maybe it should require that requesters pay the participants, just like in non-electronic forums. Most of these surveys pay $20
<theory class="conspiracy"> How do you know they aren't already paying slashdot ? </theory>
It seems that those folks who are pro-Linux and anti-BSD might be getting more competition from FreeBSD with this advent.
Well, if those "pro-Linux-anti-BSD" folks (hereby defined as Linux zealots) are getting more competition, then that is just too bad. If they don't like it, then it is their problem. Like all zealots, they can (and should) be ignored.
Competition is good, and it is only in the best interests of Open Source that FreeBSD, too, gets commercial support. One should not forget that, in the grander scheme of things, Linux and FreeBSD and in the same boat.
I'm a Linux user, btw, with little experience in using *BSD.
I've never really understood the fuss about voice recognition. Sure, it is nice and Cool(tm) to have the computer obey your commands, but it just seems like a cumbersome way to use a computer.
For simple stuff it may be appropriate, like 'turn on lights', but for anything more complex - with today's computers - it's just too difficult. It may require significant advances in artificial intelligence research and the maturing of intelligent agents before any useful stuff with voice can be done; voice recognition alone won't be enough.
And consider PDAs with voice recognition. Would you like to blabber into your Palm in a public place ? I know I wouldn't. One could used to it, though - no-one here pays any attention to people talking to mobile phones, since pretty much everyone has a cell phone here.
Am I just a relic in the age of technology when I fail to understand the benefits of voice recognition with computers ? Is there something crucial I am missing here ?
Don't snicker - I think we may actually be seeing winds of change. Slashdot might become a better site, with unbiased journalism
.. and after this, it will be reported that Microsoft is releasing Office for Linux and Bill Gates publicly apologizes to the world for producing such crappy software. Two days after this, australian scientists will be claimed to have combined a pig and an ostrich through genetic engineering.
he has
offered to help formulate a remedy that, in my opinion, can be categorized as regulation.
I don't agree with your interpretation. The
overall feel of his article is that, in his view, intervention is bad. Like he says, he is only
choosing a lesser evil. If there is to be
a remedy, it should be this. Look at the following
excerpts, for example:
it is notable that not a single major influence leader of the open-source
community has stepped forward to endorse the DOJ [Department of Justice] antitrust action.
most (though not all) of us believe we can punish Microsoft's misbehavior
and hubris more effectively and more ethically than could be done through government action.
most of us would much prefer to bulldoze Microsoft on technical merit of our own
If the
government isn't willing to let the market work and trust us to take Microsoft down
No.. I really don't agree with your interpretation
at all.
I guess the real issue is, that he's never really programmed anything.
I agree with you totally. All the
software that he mentions on his home page
appeared there through divine intervention,
and he can in no way be held accountable for
their creation.
He abhors regulation (governmental or otherwise) in
one breath, but in the next, he seems to promote government intervention - in one form or
another - as a solution to the MS problem.
Sorry - I've never seen ESR advocate government
intervention in the case of MS, quite the
opposite. In fact I've heard him say - many times - that we should let market do its thing, let it
take Microsoft down, and to government: Hands off !
(If a view that contradicts the above has been
brought forth in the article referenced in
the beginning of this story, then I apologize -
I haven't read it all).
See what comes of this "Open Source" hoobla ?
People fighting and trying to dispute
each other, when they all are wrong.
I wish we could just go back to the old days,
when the only way was the Way of the Microsoft,
and the only right opinion was the one of
Bill Gates. Damn you, Eric ! Damn you, Linus !
Everytime I think that my life is just about normal, there comes Katz with some sensationalist
hoobla, stating that this is the time when
everything will change, nothing will be
the same anymore, Internet is the crown
of all creation, the digital world will take
over, and so on, and so on..
It is truly remarkable that you, Jon, can still feel child-like awe when discussing Internet..
but you are as much a visionary as Bill Gates
in his own books.
*Goes off to watch his karma drop and wonder
about what Katz would've been like, had he been
around when the radio (or TV) was invented.*
Weather forecasting ? All right, I'm sure it's
useful, but let's look at the more interesting
uses this technology may have.
As everyone knows, forecas^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hresearch
agencies like Gartner Group have been using
paraller supercomputers for the predictions.
However, without cheap equipment that Linux
makes possible, their predictions have been
less than spectacular, because they haven't
been able to include all the important factors -
like the antitrust coefficient, PocketPC parabolism,/. effect and Natalie Portman.
Now that they can be taken into account,
let us see what some of the older predictions
might have looked like.
In March 1999, IDC predicted that Linux will
25 % each year until 2003. The real result,
of course, is that Linux will grow without
bounds until it hits/. barrier (this is
known as the/. effect). An immediate conclusion
is that Linux will run all computers by the
end of 2003 - if IDC were to run this forecast
again, they would tell you this, except they
don't want to create wide-spread panic.
There are been a couple of surveys that
indicate a lot of companies would like to
start using Linux instead of Windows. This
is completely false. The more
powerful forecasting engine would consider
the antitrust coefficient and find that
all these people have been paid by Microsoft
to speak favorably of Linux, so that the
trial would proceed to the right direction.
Quite recently, some analysts predicted that
PocketPC is no 'Palm killer'. What futility !
Careful forecasts would show that since
PocketPC can run Quake (well, at least it
can play mp3s) and Palm cannot, PocketPC
would beat Palm on Quake death match every time.
Palm is dead. Case closed.
Any apparent inconsistencies concerning my predictions are caused by Natalie Portman.
I'd like to see a return of music to the days before the synthesizer took over, when music
required skill and talent to create and produce.
Yeah, let's go back to the old days. On the same
line of thought, let's make computing as hard
as it used to be decades ago, when you had
to be an engineer to be able to use a computer..
instead of these dead-simple point-and-click
things.
It's not that I don't, in general, agree with
your views about electronic music. You have to
remember, though, that you don't have to listen
to it, even though those millions of sheep
do. It's like Microsoft software: neither
brilliant nor spectacular, but simply good
not be a financial success. Such it is with
this "music" produced today.
Of course he does, what do you think he is, a dummy ?
Uh.. oh wait. You probably do think that way, let's try another line.
It was his idea to bring Internet to the rest of the world. This way he could use this in his campaign.. imagine: he expanded America to cover the rest of the globe via the Internet. Mighty dude, he.
This is absolutely the most horrible, devastating idea of all. First, think of obfuscated perl. Does this send shivers down your spine and make it feel like thousands of/. trolls, disguised as slimy worms, were crawling up your legs ? This is worse.
Source code in French - how would anyone be able to read it? Except the French, of course, but as we all know, civilization hasn't made it that far yet. This is just another plot by the French to take over the world. First they made Bill make all those obscene sex stuff (and the cigar was probably from Havana, too).. and did I mention Bill Gates was French ? George W. Bush isn't French, but he certainly thinks in French, and that's a crime comparable to trolling.
We must be vigorous and fight this plague now. Liberate France from the French !
Oh, forgive me, dearest Pearl - I have had forbidden thoughts about other computer languages. How can I stand this assault of venomous exclamations - they keep calling you ugly, unwieldy; they say you do not possess a warm heart of pure OO. You know, don't you, my love, that this is not how I feel.
Even then, I have lingering glances to others - python, with it's elegance and - the whitespace ! Oh, those sinful temptations. And don't forget PHP - riding on top of that Apache, all the time - they banished you from there, too.
But none of them can spin poetry like you do, and that is - I know it now - the best virtue a programming language can have. And I feel so ashamed that I have ever doubted your beauty. O~ sweet Pearl, I will never leave you.
(Besides, you are pretty too damned handy with regexps.)
Will breaking up MS not just make them a more powerful force?
Yes, it is entirely possible that they will end up being more powerful and profitable. It is a proven economic fact that monopolies are inefficient; thus breaking up will increase the competitiveness of the parts.
If the goal is make Microsoft lose money, then, yeah, slap a few billions on fines on them, make the investors flee in panic so the share price may drop. This interpretation - that the DOJ is off to kill Microsoft as a corporation - might be common in their minds of M$droids.
However, this is not case. The goal is to create to more competivive landscape where - in the end - everyone benefits from the results of the breakup of Microsoft: competitors, consumers, the computing industry, the whole economy - and, yes, also Microsoft shareholders.
Of course, this is just day dreaming. I'll withdraw back into my Linux hole now:)
ibm likes linux more than sun [...] hey probably upgraded for performance reasons.
Well, of course ! The whole reason it performs better is because of Linux. Imagine millions of Linux developers coding and sweating, saying "IBM is cool". Their effort then will naturally turn into CPU power, making all IBM CPUs magically run faster. The box itself doesn't have to run Linux (of course, it would be *at least* 10 times faster if it did).
It certainly is because of Linux. Anyone suggesting any other alternatives are deranged.
By embracing Linux, IBM has been able to fully harness the collective abilities of the Linux community, turning them into raw processing power. Sun, however, wastes its resources by fighting Linux - thus their Enterprise line of servers lacks power. It's all because of Linux. QED.
In related news, Scott McNealy has resigned from the post of Sun's CEO, citing "IBM does have a point in supporting Linux". A successor hasn't been appointed yet, but rumors from trusted sources indicate that a known Linux supporter, Eric S. Raymond, will be selected.
No officials from Microsoft were harmed in the making of this report.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry to burst your bubble concerning the omnipotence of the english language, but english in no way more "magical" than any other naturally evolved language. Languages absorb influences and words from other languages all the time (unless you want to be French and fight it all the way).
Yes, slashdot is full of Windows kids. You think technology news only interests Linux/BSD users ? Think again.
On the other hand, slashdot is also full of Linux users. Hell, there probably is even a sizable chunk of people who don't feel that the existence of articles by Jon Katz is an offense to the their intelligence. This just goes to show that whenever one tries to define the "average slashdot", the attempt fails. It's a very diverse community with people having different interests and different backgrounds.
Any generalization by you or anyone else is doomed to fail.
The result isn't favorable to scientology, though. It was not my intention to even consider changing my opinion about scientology; Microsoft was the target of my ponderings.
The question I used to evaluate whether the organization (Microsoft/CoS) is evil was:
"Is the fact that some people are made happy by the operation of the organisation merely an accidental side effect, or is it the result of the good intentions of the people behind the organization ?"
On the surface, Microsoft looks like a money-making machine. On the other hand, Bill Gates says that he wants to make computing easier for everyone (while making a bucketload of money in the process). I believe he sincerely means this. The fact that he may not have been doing a very good job at it is irrelevant, and so is also the fact that he has obviously lost this focus while trying to defend his enterprise from the legal assault. By definition, Bill Gates - and Microsoft - isn't [completely] evil.
Scientology is also a money-making organization. As a religion, it is free of many of the constraints holding Microsoft back. Based on what I've read on the procedures and documents of the religion, I see no benevolent desire to make people happy. Some people have be made happy to keep the money flowing in, so that the religion can go on.
The fact that some people are made happy is irrelevant. What matters is that this is not the goal of scientology; the goal is to make money for their leaders.
Thus, if a single scientogist is happy and not evil doesn't mean that scientology cannot be evil, and your testimony, dear Anonymous Scientologist, is irrelevant. Based on other evidence, I still consider scientology evil.
What I do want is a portable player that can play mp3s from a cd - or from some other cheap and spacious media.
If I wanted a device that uses a media that can only hold 10 songs, I'd buy a regular CD player.
I have nothing more to say on this subject. Thank you for your attention.
Another thing is the stance of /. towards. A lot of things are critized and bashed on /., but very few of them can be considered truly, completely evil. Microsoft certainly isn't - there have been some benefits from its existence to the society as a whole (that is, other people than their shareholders and employees). Neither are patents evil, they are just being misapplied.
In this article, two issues are brought forward that are evil: DMCA and scientology. I am not going to start explaining why they are thoroughly evil; the reasons for this have been explained more articulately and "insightfully" than I have talent for by other posters.
I was just wondering what might happen if /. started more frequently and openly critisizing scientology. Would they dare to start harassing a public forum like this ? Negative publicity hasn't stopped them before, though..
The opinion of DOJ is irrelevant. What matters is the opinion of the judge. Strangely enough (at least on the surface) they have managed to piss him off, too with their faked video evidence and snotty behavior. I'm surprised he hasn't fined them for being in contempt of the court.
Given that judge Jackson is already familiar with judging Microsoft, and that one of his decisions - namely the infamous "consent ruling" - was overthrown in the appeals court, one has to wonder whether their strategy is deliberate.
If Microsoft were to manage to get Judge Jackson enough, it might prompt him to give out an extremely unfavorable, which in turn would a better chance of being revoked through the appeals process.
Of course, this conspiracy theory of mine might give too much credit to those criminals.. after all, one shouldn't explain with malice what can be explained with ignorance (or incompetence).
<theory class="conspiracy">
How do you know they aren't already paying slashdot ?
</theory>
Well, if those "pro-Linux-anti-BSD" folks (hereby defined as Linux zealots) are getting more competition, then that is just too bad. If they don't like it, then it is their problem. Like all zealots, they can (and should) be ignored.
Competition is good, and it is only in the best interests of Open Source that FreeBSD, too, gets commercial support. One should not forget that, in the grander scheme of things, Linux and FreeBSD and in the same boat.
I'm a Linux user, btw, with little experience in using *BSD.
For simple stuff it may be appropriate, like 'turn on lights', but for anything more complex - with today's computers - it's just too difficult. It may require significant advances in artificial intelligence research and the maturing of intelligent agents before any useful stuff with voice can be done; voice recognition alone won't be enough.
And consider PDAs with voice recognition. Would you like to blabber into your Palm in a public place ? I know I wouldn't. One could used to it, though - no-one here pays any attention to people talking to mobile phones, since pretty much everyone has a cell phone here.
Am I just a relic in the age of technology when I fail to understand the benefits of voice recognition with computers ? Is there something crucial I am missing here ?
Don't snicker - I think we may actually be seeing winds of change. Slashdot might become a better site, with unbiased journalism
I don't agree with your interpretation. The overall feel of his article is that, in his view, intervention is bad. Like he says, he is only choosing a lesser evil. If there is to be a remedy, it should be this. Look at the following excerpts, for example:
No.. I really don't agree with your interpretation at all.
I agree with you totally. All the software that he mentions on his home page appeared there through divine intervention, and he can in no way be held accountable for their creation.
Sorry - I've never seen ESR advocate government intervention in the case of MS, quite the opposite. In fact I've heard him say - many times - that we should let market do its thing, let it take Microsoft down, and to government: Hands off !
(If a view that contradicts the above has been brought forth in the article referenced in the beginning of this story, then I apologize - I haven't read it all).
I wish we could just go back to the old days, when the only way was the Way of the Microsoft, and the only right opinion was the one of Bill Gates. Damn you, Eric ! Damn you, Linus !
It is truly remarkable that you, Jon, can still feel child-like awe when discussing Internet.. but you are as much a visionary as Bill Gates in his own books.
*Goes off to watch his karma drop and wonder about what Katz would've been like, had he been around when the radio (or TV) was invented.*
As everyone knows, forecas^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hresearch agencies like Gartner Group have been using paraller supercomputers for the predictions. However, without cheap equipment that Linux makes possible, their predictions have been less than spectacular, because they haven't been able to include all the important factors - like the antitrust coefficient, PocketPC parabolism, /. effect and Natalie Portman.
Now that they can be taken into account, let us see what some of the older predictions might have looked like.
In March 1999, IDC predicted that Linux will 25 % each year until 2003. The real result, of course, is that Linux will grow without bounds until it hits /. barrier (this is
known as the /. effect). An immediate conclusion
is that Linux will run all computers by the
end of 2003 - if IDC were to run this forecast
again, they would tell you this, except they
don't want to create wide-spread panic.
There are been a couple of surveys that indicate a lot of companies would like to start using Linux instead of Windows. This is completely false. The more powerful forecasting engine would consider the antitrust coefficient and find that all these people have been paid by Microsoft to speak favorably of Linux, so that the trial would proceed to the right direction.
Quite recently, some analysts predicted that PocketPC is no 'Palm killer'. What futility ! Careful forecasts would show that since PocketPC can run Quake (well, at least it can play mp3s) and Palm cannot, PocketPC would beat Palm on Quake death match every time. Palm is dead. Case closed.
Any apparent inconsistencies concerning my predictions are caused by Natalie Portman.
Yeah, let's go back to the old days. On the same line of thought, let's make computing as hard as it used to be decades ago, when you had to be an engineer to be able to use a computer.. instead of these dead-simple point-and-click things.
It's not that I don't, in general, agree with your views about electronic music. You have to remember, though, that you don't have to listen to it, even though those millions of sheep do. It's like Microsoft software: neither brilliant nor spectacular, but simply good not be a financial success. Such it is with this "music" produced today.
Of course he does, what do you think he is, a dummy ?
Uh.. oh wait. You probably do think that way, let's try another line.
It was his idea to bring Internet to the rest of the world. This way he could use this in his campaign.. imagine: he expanded America to cover the rest of the globe via the Internet. Mighty dude, he.
Source code in French - how would anyone be able to read it? Except the French, of course, but as we all know, civilization hasn't made it that far yet. This is just another plot by the French to take over the world. First they made Bill make all those obscene sex stuff (and the cigar was probably from Havana, too).. and did I mention Bill Gates was French ? George W. Bush isn't French, but he certainly thinks in French, and that's a crime comparable to trolling.
We must be vigorous and fight this plague now. Liberate France from the French !
Aw, dammit ! It was supposed to be a secret ! First you find out that there is life outside of the US , and now this.. what is this world coming to ?
Please, don't tell anyone about this. Let's just keep it our secret, ok ?
) The infamous McDonald expedition in the 1950's
Even then, I have lingering glances to others - python, with it's elegance and - the whitespace ! Oh, those sinful temptations. And don't forget PHP - riding on top of that Apache, all the time - they banished you from there, too.
But none of them can spin poetry like you do, and that is - I know it now - the best virtue a programming language can have. And I feel so ashamed that I have ever doubted your beauty. O~ sweet Pearl, I will never leave you.
(Besides, you are pretty too damned handy with regexps.)
Yes, it is entirely possible that they will end up being more powerful and profitable. It is a proven economic fact that monopolies are inefficient; thus breaking up will increase the competitiveness of the parts.
If the goal is make Microsoft lose money, then, yeah, slap a few billions on fines on them, make the investors flee in panic so the share price may drop. This interpretation - that the DOJ is off to kill Microsoft as a corporation - might be common in their minds of M$droids.
However, this is not case. The goal is to create to more competivive landscape where - in the end - everyone benefits from the results of the breakup of Microsoft: competitors, consumers, the computing industry, the whole economy - and, yes, also Microsoft shareholders.
Of course, this is just day dreaming. I'll withdraw back into my Linux hole now :)
Well, of course ! The whole reason it performs better is because of Linux. Imagine millions of Linux developers coding and sweating, saying "IBM is cool". Their effort then will naturally turn into CPU power, making all IBM CPUs magically run faster. The box itself doesn't have to run Linux (of course, it would be *at least* 10 times faster if it did).
It certainly is because of Linux. Anyone suggesting any other alternatives are deranged.
In related news, Scott McNealy has resigned from the post of Sun's CEO, citing "IBM does have a point in supporting Linux". A successor hasn't been appointed yet, but rumors from trusted sources indicate that a known Linux supporter, Eric S. Raymond, will be selected.
No officials from Microsoft were harmed in the making of this report.