This is just not true. On "Nerd conventions", there is more intervention than on most other events, because nerds do not like people being asshats. Sometimes they are even to strict to people, who do not contribute enough. They may look down on you, if you do not contribute to oss community, but make closed source programs. Now imagine someone being a real asshole, like molesting some woman at the convention, (s)he will have no friends there instantly. Nerd culture is a culture, which strongly enforces an positive attitude.
i speak about a client-server model of having the gui here, and the server doing the work there, not about having the compositor here and the gui there.
for example have a look at mysql-workbench. You have a nice gui. on your pc. It connects via tcp or tcp-via-ssh to your server, where the db is running. nobody wants to have this program running on the server, forwarded via X11, rdp, NX or VNC.
so, mysql has the client-server model? What about having something like this for R and the display of its charts?
wayland is just the way to go. You see, that they are taking it serious. They made a concept, they made a reference implementation, they are still calling it alpha, they are waiting for the toolkits and main desktops, they are reacting to feedback, they are looking at the distros and graphic card vendors. It seems the concept was well thought from scratch instead of building on X11, clean and without old cruft.
So i guess wayland is like IPv6. Incompatible for a good reason, but using the fact that its incompatible anyway to implement stuff which would be impossible to add to X11. And like IPv6, the transition is not easy, but i guess the compatiblity layers are easier to do.
Maybe they are right, because they are not circumventing DRM.
But they are wrong with the idea of DRM. If you copy a DVD to harddisk with intact DRM and then play it, you can copy the harddisk and play the copy, too. So its circumventing DRM while keeping the DRM(-System) intact.
> As soon as you send one-to-many e-mails (newsletter, mailing-list, announcement, or just corresponding with lots of friends) this starts to be a problem, as you need to recalculate a new hash for all mail recipient. This is a plus.
If you have a legitimate use for such an amount of recipients, it will be worth the computing power. If not, it will stop your silly newsletter i do not want to receive anyway.
Why does everyone need to be a programmer? Why does someone imply, programming is a pain? Todays tools are okay, and who can't be a programmer, doesn't need to. We do not need to simplify laws, so everyone can be a lawyer, so we do not need to change programming just to have everyone as a programmer.
So what? People are pirating. People are pirating despite DRM. People are willing to pay a certain price, which is more than they pay, when they are pirating. So try to find the price people are willing to pay, that's the best you can get.
The whole DRM is just blaming the piracy to another company. The publisher blames google, google blames adobe, just to have another scapegoat. If one of the companys doesn't act, the content provider will blame this company. This does not mean, that there is no piracy, if every link in the chain implements the DRM as good as possible, it just means nobody can tell "hey, i am not playing along".
The problem: As long as other big players support DRM, the browser where "i can watch videos" will get more users, the others less.
One good thing would be to say: Fuck DRM, we are making a browser as we like it, if we're the only users thats no problem for open source software.
On the other hand, this would mean for users, who want to consume content, that they need to use other possibly even non-free browsers to do so. If mozilla supports this DRM, they may be able to influence it, i.e. force companies to accept a sandbox around the DRM. So they might help to keep the problem small.
So of course you can fork, but you will gain nothing. The sandbox for DRM does not hurt, if you do not use it. What hurts is, that all major browser support DRM now, so that the publishers can use it. Assume i.e. 75% of the browser market would not support DRM, then we might get a free web. But if 30% do not support it, the 30% will shrink as users will use other browsers, at least to watch videos.
So mozilla may be right about this. But they are wrong, as they should be a good example. But the next big opensource browser is chromium, which will support DRM, because google wants to use DRM (i.e. for play videos)
what about the cleanup? Nilfs2 is quite cool, but the cleaner-daemon causes a lot of disk io, which is not only annoying, but makes me think about disk lifetime as well.
Slashdot Mirror
> They tend to just watch.
[citation needed]
This is just not true. On "Nerd conventions", there is more intervention than on most other events, because nerds do not like people being asshats. Sometimes they are even to strict to people, who do not contribute enough. They may look down on you, if you do not contribute to oss community, but make closed source programs. Now imagine someone being a real asshole, like molesting some woman at the convention, (s)he will have no friends there instantly. Nerd culture is a culture, which strongly enforces an positive attitude.
Make it short: You cannot blame someone, because you changed your mind anytime later.
Is an insult to everyone, who was raped. Like real rape.
jep, thats okay. But i think a thick client is more suitable for many tasks, especially where the server part runs as privilgeded user.
i speak about a client-server model of having the gui here, and the server doing the work there, not about having the compositor here and the gui there.
for example have a look at mysql-workbench. You have a nice gui. on your pc. It connects via tcp or tcp-via-ssh to your server, where the db is running. nobody wants to have this program running on the server, forwarded via X11, rdp, NX or VNC.
so, mysql has the client-server model? What about having something like this for R and the display of its charts?
shouldn't such tools have some kind of client-server model?
> Have fun watching YouTube in Lynx.
Have fun with youtube via x-forwarding.
wayland is just the way to go. You see, that they are taking it serious.
They made a concept, they made a reference implementation, they are still calling it alpha, they are waiting for the toolkits and main desktops, they are reacting to feedback, they are looking at the distros and graphic card vendors.
It seems the concept was well thought from scratch instead of building on X11, clean and without old cruft.
So i guess wayland is like IPv6. Incompatible for a good reason, but using the fact that its incompatible anyway to implement stuff which would be impossible to add to X11.
And like IPv6, the transition is not easy, but i guess the compatiblity layers are easier to do.
some simple thought: Do you think slashdotters here are the only ones thinking about "X Forwarding" for wayland?
I guess they know its easy to do and best to be done, when the other stuff is api-stable and maybe working stable as well ;).
Maybe they are right, because they are not circumventing DRM.
But they are wrong with the idea of DRM. If you copy a DVD to harddisk with intact DRM and then play it, you can copy the harddisk and play the copy, too. So its circumventing DRM while keeping the DRM(-System) intact.
one word: realnames
> As soon as you send one-to-many e-mails (newsletter, mailing-list, announcement, or just corresponding with lots of friends) this starts to be a problem, as you need to recalculate a new hash for all mail recipient.
This is a plus.
If you have a legitimate use for such an amount of recipients, it will be worth the computing power. If not, it will stop your silly newsletter i do not want to receive anyway.
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/fire...
finally proven wrong?
look at the graphic in the spec at w3.org. The module is allowed to display the graphics by itself, bypassing the browser.
Why does everyone need to be a programmer? Why does someone imply, programming is a pain?
Todays tools are okay, and who can't be a programmer, doesn't need to. We do not need to simplify laws, so everyone can be a lawyer, so we do not need to change programming just to have everyone as a programmer.
http://www.w3.org/TR/encrypted...
sandbox? i do not think so. lets talk about DMA and other holes to get system access.
So what?
People are pirating. People are pirating despite DRM.
People are willing to pay a certain price, which is more than they pay, when they are pirating. So try to find the price people are willing to pay, that's the best you can get.
The whole DRM is just blaming the piracy to another company. The publisher blames google, google blames adobe, just to have another scapegoat. If one of the companys doesn't act, the content provider will blame this company. This does not mean, that there is no piracy, if every link in the chain implements the DRM as good as possible, it just means nobody can tell "hey, i am not playing along".
its for google play video.
you can just consume no (online) content at all. And maybe lend the dvd in your video library.
the masses want content, the publishers want DRM. As long as drm content works for both, nothing will change.
> Pale Moon has a 64-bit version. Firefox doesn't.
still wrong. Why is everybody still telling this?
$ file firefox
firefox: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.18, BuildID[sha1]=e06519b9e2b09c1b4e56b7ad11afc0d84e1b5aad, stripped
the loophole of a sandbox around the drm.
The problem: As long as other big players support DRM, the browser where "i can watch videos" will get more users, the others less.
One good thing would be to say: Fuck DRM, we are making a browser as we like it, if we're the only users thats no problem for open source software.
On the other hand, this would mean for users, who want to consume content, that they need to use other possibly even non-free browsers to do so. If mozilla supports this DRM, they may be able to influence it, i.e. force companies to accept a sandbox around the DRM. So they might help to keep the problem small.
So of course you can fork, but you will gain nothing. The sandbox for DRM does not hurt, if you do not use it. What hurts is, that all major browser support DRM now, so that the publishers can use it. Assume i.e. 75% of the browser market would not support DRM, then we might get a free web. But if 30% do not support it, the 30% will shrink as users will use other browsers, at least to watch videos.
So mozilla may be right about this. But they are wrong, as they should be a good example. But the next big opensource browser is chromium, which will support DRM, because google wants to use DRM (i.e. for play videos)
what about the cleanup?
Nilfs2 is quite cool, but the cleaner-daemon causes a lot of disk io, which is not only annoying, but makes me think about disk lifetime as well.