Boy there are some categories of goods that Internet shopping is just awful for. Auto parts are one. The major chains like Autozone's websites are okay, but try looking for used parts or things not normally carried by major chains like crash parts. Today I tried to find a inner taillight housing/lens for a 2000 Toyota Sienna and just gave up in frustration after no one seemed to have it and I went onto the same site 3 times which is listed under 3 different names. Even if you find your part you can't do a price comparison with anyone else without great difficulty. Appliance parts are a little better but still chaotic. I just wonder why for these categories the Internet is lousy?
Unlike you, I'm old enough to remember that IBM did in fact sell some shoddy goods at very high prices. During the late 80's, they would keep on trying to shoehorn a mainframe running MVS in somewhere with their PC deals. There are countless other examples. I have personal experience with MVS and VM machines and it SUCKED compared to its competitors despite costing far more. There are countless other examples of poor quality and high price. IBM was very happy to produce vaporware to stifle its competitors. Not to mention the EBCDIC vs. ASCII lock-in. Those kinds of shenanigans nearly cost IBM its life in the early 1990's. Your painting of IBM as some kind of shining example of innovation and superiority is rose-colored. Having said that, there were some things about the company that were exemplary and I consider it exemplary now. It has changed dramatically since I worked there. -- IV
My own personal gripe/opinion is that this has always been about the desktop, not the server. That having it be a great, enterprise class server OS was just gravy on its way to being a killer desktop. My personal fantasy was that the server income would finance desktop development because that was really ground zero in the war for hearts and minds. I thought Redhat understood this. I was wrong about Redhat, but I think Redhat has made a big mistake with so much apparent emphasis on the enterprise.
Actually, Stallman may consider Public Domain software to be free software. There was a controversy once on my news site: Linux Medical News about the Veterans Administration hospitals medical record software that is most assuredly public domain. The controversy was whether it was considered to be free software. RMS seemed to consider public domain software as GPL compatible.
Excerpt: "...I am not a lawyer, but I have spoken extensively with lawyers about copyright questions. Presuming that the VistA software is in the public domain, if you combine it with a GPL-covered program you must release the combination *as a whole* under the GPL. Using the VistA code in this way is allowed because public domain status permits practically anything.
However, the specific code that was in the public domain remains in the public domain. In other words, the fact that person A released the VistA code in a GPL-covered combination does not stop person B from using the VistA code in some other way.
You could even extract the VistA code from the GPL-covered combination and use it as public domain material, as long as it really is the unmodified VistA code. If you want to use the VistA code as public domain material, the safest way is to get a copy of the original VistA code, because if people have changed that code since, they don't have to put their changes in the public domain. Still, in principle, the VistA code remains in the public domain even inside the GPL-covered combination.
Another way of putting this is that the GPL is not "contagious". The GPL applies through inclusion, not through contact. It applies to the combination because the combination (given the assumed scenario) includes some code that was released under the GPL. But the VistA code retains its own status, despite being in a combination with the GPL-covered code..."
Draw your own conclusions from this. You can see his response in its entirety here.
Yes, that's a possiblity as well as many other possible medical causes. However, without knowing anything more than what the article states, it clearly sounds like mania. Mania used to be quite deadly until good psychotropic medications came along. You go and go until you literally drop dead.
. The Add/Remove packages is very powerful and would make sense to my Grandmother.
. Being able to change display settings in GUI are a huge step forward.
. Typefaces all look sharp, sharp.
. Nautilus rocks! Very speedy.
. Upgrade worked well with 1 exception:
. System performance overall seems faster, but I didn't do an empiric test.
The bad:
. You have to install OpenOffice from the distro CD. A previous install before upgrading won't work. However, Add/Remove packages works VERY well.
. Menus are moved all around again and not that intuitive. Lots of redundancies. Have to re-find everything. They need to stick with a specific layout in the future.
. Cut/paste to and fro the shipped Mozilla doesn't work well. Works great if you download and use 1.2Alpha.
'...While I am not a mental health professional, from what I have seen published from such persons, the vast majority seem to hold that the young people of normal sort who play RPGs are not harmed in any way, are likely to benefit from the activity.'
I am a mental health professional, and the research I am aware of shows the above statement to be false. There have been many, many studies on modeling of behavior that absolutely shows an increase in violent behavior when exposed to media with violent content. The simplest and most well known of these was an experiment exposing children to movies of other children hitting life-sized dolls with a control group of children doing regular play without violent content. The children where then placed in a room full of toys which also contained similar dolls and the children who had seen the violent movie would hit the dolls at a significantly higher rate than the children exposed to non-violent content.
None of the colleagues I know of say that people are likely to benefit from simulated violence.
-- IV
Slashdot Mirror
Boy there are some categories of goods that Internet shopping is just awful for. Auto parts are one. The major chains like Autozone's websites are okay, but try looking for used parts or things not normally carried by major chains like crash parts. Today I tried to find a inner taillight housing/lens for a 2000 Toyota Sienna and just gave up in frustration after no one seemed to have it and I went onto the same site 3 times which is listed under 3 different names. Even if you find your part you can't do a price comparison with anyone else without great difficulty. Appliance parts are a little better but still chaotic. I just wonder why for these categories the Internet is lousy?
-- IV
Unlike you, I'm old enough to remember that IBM did in fact sell some shoddy goods at very high prices. During the late 80's, they would keep on trying to shoehorn a mainframe running MVS in somewhere with their PC deals. There are countless other examples. I have personal experience with MVS and VM machines and it SUCKED compared to its competitors despite costing far more. There are countless other examples of poor quality and high price. IBM was very happy to produce vaporware to stifle its competitors. Not to mention the EBCDIC vs. ASCII lock-in. Those kinds of shenanigans nearly cost IBM its life in the early 1990's. Your painting of IBM as some kind of shining example of innovation and superiority is rose-colored. Having said that, there were some things about the company that were exemplary and I consider it exemplary now. It has changed dramatically since I worked there. -- IV
My own personal gripe/opinion is that this has always been about the desktop, not the server. That having it be a great, enterprise class server OS was just gravy on its way to being a killer desktop. My personal fantasy was that the server income would finance desktop development because that was really ground zero in the war for hearts and minds. I thought Redhat understood this. I was wrong about Redhat, but I think Redhat has made a big mistake with so much apparent emphasis on the enterprise.
-- IV
Pure sensationalism. The article contradicts itself many times and attributes sinister motives to the FSF for enforcing the GPL. Just move along.
-- IV
Yep, I have it and its good. I want to get this kernel because USB is very broken on my VIA based Asus A7V333 and I want to use my little pen drive.
-- IV
Sorry for the fundamental question, but where might I find a RPM for this for Redhat 9? I've hunted some without success. Thanks!
-- IV
Whew, the 'poor little innocent victim of others nefarious plots' wore thin after about the fifth victimization. It seems clear why it was cut. -- IV
...by one full day: http://www.linuxmednews.com/linuxmednews/104136357 3/index_html
-- Ignacio Valdes, MD, MS
All the things he wrote are exactly why Linux Medical News was started coming up on 3 years ago. -- IV
Excerpt:
"...I am not a lawyer, but I have spoken extensively with lawyers about copyright questions. Presuming that the VistA software is in the public domain, if you combine it with a GPL-covered program you must release the combination *as a whole* under the GPL. Using the VistA code in this way is allowed because public domain status permits practically anything.
However, the specific code that was in the public domain remains in the public domain. In other words, the fact that person A released the VistA code in a GPL-covered combination does not stop person B from using the VistA code in some other way.
You could even extract the VistA code from the GPL-covered combination and use it as public domain material, as long as it really is the unmodified VistA code. If you want to use the VistA code as public domain material, the safest way is to get a copy of the original VistA code, because if people have changed that code since, they don't have to put their changes in the public domain. Still, in principle, the VistA code remains in the public domain even inside the GPL-covered combination.
Another way of putting this is that the GPL is not "contagious". The GPL applies through inclusion, not through contact. It applies to the combination because the combination (given the assumed scenario) includes some code that was released under the GPL. But the VistA code retains its own status, despite being in a combination with the GPL-covered code..."
Draw your own conclusions from this. You can see his response in its entirety here.
-- IV
Yes, that's a possiblity as well as many other possible medical causes. However, without knowing anything more than what the article states, it clearly sounds like mania. Mania used to be quite deadly until good psychotropic medications came along. You go and go until you literally drop dead.
-- IV
Redhat has really put some depth into this one:
. The Add/Remove packages is very powerful and would make sense to my Grandmother.
. Being able to change display settings in GUI are a huge step forward.
. Typefaces all look sharp, sharp.
. Nautilus rocks! Very speedy.
. Upgrade worked well with 1 exception:
. System performance overall seems faster, but I didn't do an empiric test.
The bad:
. You have to install OpenOffice from the distro CD. A previous install before upgrading won't work. However, Add/Remove packages works VERY well.
. Menus are moved all around again and not that intuitive. Lots of redundancies. Have to re-find everything. They need to stick with a specific layout in the future.
. Cut/paste to and fro the shipped Mozilla doesn't work well. Works great if you download and use 1.2Alpha.
Two very big thumbs up!!
-- IV
Proof that you are a complete geek when you can actually identify each of the parts on X-ray. Har, har.
-- IV
The Open Infrastructure for Outcomes (OIO) project is already GPL'ed. It is also Zope based and awesome. Why not just use it? -- Saint
I am a mental health professional, and the research I am aware of shows the above statement to be false. There have been many, many studies on modeling of behavior that absolutely shows an increase in violent behavior when exposed to media with violent content. The simplest and most well known of these was an experiment exposing children to movies of other children hitting life-sized dolls with a control group of children doing regular play without violent content. The children where then placed in a room full of toys which also contained similar dolls and the children who had seen the violent movie would hit the dolls at a significantly higher rate than the children exposed to non-violent content.
None of the colleagues I know of say that people are likely to benefit from simulated violence. -- IV