>All he'd have to do is have the requester warrant, in writing, that they are acting as an agent of the organization
?
And if an employee of New York City wanted to sell you a bridge to Kings County, would you go ahead with the deal if he "certified in writing" that he was authorized to sell it?:)
If we already know what the browser's going to look like in five years, why not just release it next year? Do we have to wait 5 years to make the futurists' predictions accurate?
I've been checking into the status of HURD for ever since I heard of free software. It's been slower than watching paint dry.
But I still hold out hope for rapid progress when it starts to get a footing. The one big advantage is its modularity and extensibility. I'd like to think that would mean we'd get a more responsive free desktop one day without the burdens of big-iron Linux.
Wow, thanks for that info, it seems possibly better than even the "Fair Tax".
The most important point of the APT tax seems to be the low rate. At such a low rate (.3%), there's little reason to try to avoid it. Even credit card fees are higher than that (for merchants) at a couple percent.
Same here. Someone comes over, wants to check their mail or whatever, just choose Guest Session from the Ubuntu login menu, and it opens up a "default" non-customized session where your friend can do whatever he wants.
OK, I understand where you're coming from: the scrappy, small garage-based operation trying to invent the Next Big Thing, maxing out their credit cards and eating Ramen while waiting for a huge payoff.
The problem, though, is that in the 21st century, digital video and audio are like the letters and books of yesteryear. People need to be able to create and use video freely, and not have to pay to do so. It's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of principle. You have to pay for a pen and paper, but you don't pay anyone a fee for making the shapes of the Latin letters.
Imposing per-use or even lump-sump payments on freely expressing yourself via digital video is the equivalent of penmanship book publishers (like D'Nealian or Getty-Dubay) getting a commission on every writing from the Declaration of Independence to the manuscript for John Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath to your high school term papers.
The point is, the basic formats for communication among mankind have to be free.
Well, a car analogy would be swapping out an engine for another engine while retaining the chassis. How can we get normal people to understand this, though?
Re:The cost of the OS is not the primary issue.
on
Ubuntu on a Dime
·
· Score: 1
The cost of the OS could be ignored on a $2000 machine.
But it's not just one (desktop) OS anymore. Many people have a lot of computers just for themselves, not to mention the rest of their family.
That adds up. And you're not tied to the office Exchange racket at home.
Ubuntu is just fine for many home needs. That proportion will continue to go up. Because you're not going to need to install some weird 1980s/1990s line-of-business application on your home computer.
Web: Probably 90% of what people do on computers is on the Web. The rise of Firefox has ensured the demise of IE-only sites. And now you've got Chrome, too.
OpenOffice is just fine for writing letters or even term papers.
Digital cameras- I just used to copy files over the USB interface even on Winows. I've heard varying reviews of FSpot, Shotwell, Gwenview, etc. YMMV
Movies: VLC or XBMC.
Email: Most people seem to like webmail these days. Firefox with Gmail works great. There's always Thunderbird/Evolution for POP/IMAP.
Digital photo editing: why do you need to edit them? Do home users actually do this? If a pic comes out dark, or light, you just say "Oopsies, I messed up on this one" before you move on to the next one while showing pictures to your friends. I agree that it'd be handy to have an application strictly focused on light photo editing (as opposed to a general-purpose bitmap graphics like GIMP).
Movie editing remains a possible problem area. Even there, I think most people just take 1-5 minute clips of their kids, and watch them unedited. They do not create 1 hour 25 minute feature films with credits, fades, music, and so on.
True that. Universities used to have Pine installed 15 years ago and normal, incoming freshmen used it with no introduction at all.
Funny how normal secretaries and such were fine with DOS and WordPerfect, etc., in the 1980s and every suddenly became dumb in the late 1990s and 00s to the point where if something is just slightly different from Windows, they can't use it.
When people go into high-level jobs, they do all sorts of things to cut ties to former employers or holdings to avoid being influenced or the appearance of impropriety.
For example, people sell off partnerships and put assets into blind trusts.
Would it have been OK if this exec had gone to work for Microsoft and continued to give updates to Googlers?
While I appreciate the corrupting influence of corporate and other special-interest money on politics, how do you do that (strict public funding) and also not infringe on 1st amendment rights?
I'm not necessarily talking about corporations' free speech, just real people. I'm also not talking about giving to politicians, but rather spending your own money in favor of who or whatever you want to support.
Let's say you were talking to a Iranian, Belarussian, Ossetian, or some such, describing the US of A. "We have free speech in our country; we can freely support our candidates of choice."
Iranian: "OK, can you talk to your friends and tell them to vote for candidate X?"
You: "Yes."
Iranian: "Can you pass out flyers in favor of your candidate?"
You: "As long as it doesn't involve spending money."
Iranian: "??? How do you make flyer without spending money? What a country!"
Slashdot Mirror
In Korea, only old people use Usenet.
>All he'd have to do is have the requester warrant, in writing, that they are acting as an agent of the organization
?
And if an employee of New York City wanted to sell you a bridge to Kings County, would you go ahead with the deal if he "certified in writing" that he was authorized to sell it? :)
Somebody mod this up.
If we already know what the browser's going to look like in five years, why not just release it next year? Do we have to wait 5 years to make the futurists' predictions accurate?
Well, in S. Korea, only old people write their own code.
Yeah, I'd love for HURD to pick up steam.
For those who don't know, HURD is the official GNU kernel.
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html
I've been checking into the status of HURD for ever since I heard of free software. It's been slower than watching paint dry.
But I still hold out hope for rapid progress when it starts to get a footing. The one big advantage is its modularity and extensibility. I'd like to think that would mean we'd get a more responsive free desktop one day without the burdens of big-iron Linux.
What's the difference between
sudo apt-get install
and
sudo aptitude safe-upgrade ?
I assume "apt-get update" and "aptitude update" are the same underneath.
Wow, thanks for that info, it seems possibly better than even the "Fair Tax".
The most important point of the APT tax seems to be the low rate. At such a low rate (.3%), there's little reason to try to avoid it. Even credit card fees are higher than that (for merchants) at a couple percent.
To boldy not go where man has gone before.
Don't tase me, baaahh!
Same here. Someone comes over, wants to check their mail or whatever, just choose Guest Session from the Ubuntu login menu, and it opens up a "default" non-customized session where your friend can do whatever he wants.
When he logs out, you log back in.
the Year of the Windows Desktop?
Yeah, it used to be that people would buy half-ton Curtis-Mathes TV, and keep it for 15 years. Ditto for an RCA VCR.
But China's putting out so much cheap junk, people generally buy new TVs and other digital equipment instead of repairing.
That accelerates the pace of change (of formats, codecs, etc.) by an order of magnitude.
OK, I understand where you're coming from: the scrappy, small garage-based operation trying to invent the Next Big Thing, maxing out their credit cards and eating Ramen while waiting for a huge payoff.
The problem, though, is that in the 21st century, digital video and audio are like the letters and books of yesteryear. People need to be able to create and use video freely, and not have to pay to do so. It's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of principle. You have to pay for a pen and paper, but you don't pay anyone a fee for making the shapes of the Latin letters.
Imposing per-use or even lump-sump payments on freely expressing yourself via digital video is the equivalent of penmanship book publishers (like D'Nealian or Getty-Dubay) getting a commission on every writing from the Declaration of Independence to the manuscript for John Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath to your high school term papers.
The point is, the basic formats for communication among mankind have to be free.
Well, a car analogy would be swapping out an engine for another engine while retaining the chassis. How can we get normal people to understand this, though?
The cost of the OS could be ignored on a $2000 machine.
But it's not just one (desktop) OS anymore. Many people have a lot of computers just for themselves, not to mention the rest of their family.
That adds up. And you're not tied to the office Exchange racket at home.
Ubuntu is just fine for many home needs. That proportion will continue to go up. Because you're not going to need to install some weird 1980s/1990s line-of-business application on your home computer.
Web: Probably 90% of what people do on computers is on the Web. The rise of Firefox has ensured the demise of IE-only sites. And now you've got Chrome, too.
OpenOffice is just fine for writing letters or even term papers.
Digital cameras- I just used to copy files over the USB interface even on Winows. I've heard varying reviews of FSpot, Shotwell, Gwenview, etc. YMMV
Movies: VLC or XBMC.
Email: Most people seem to like webmail these days. Firefox with Gmail works great. There's always Thunderbird/Evolution for POP/IMAP.
Digital photo editing: why do you need to edit them? Do home users actually do this? If a pic comes out dark, or light, you just say "Oopsies, I messed up on this one" before you move on to the next one while showing pictures to your friends. I agree that it'd be handy to have an application strictly focused on light photo editing (as opposed to a general-purpose bitmap graphics like GIMP).
Movie editing remains a possible problem area. Even there, I think most people just take 1-5 minute clips of their kids, and watch them unedited. They do not create 1 hour 25 minute feature films with credits, fades, music, and so on.
What use do budget/home users have for Photoshop, Premiere, and Word specifically?
How many home users need to write a letter, much less a thesis or book?
How many home users need to create (professional-level) movies?
How many home users need to create print-ready (as opposed to web-ready) advertisements to insert into Vogue/Time/People?
True that. Universities used to have Pine installed 15 years ago and normal, incoming freshmen used it with no introduction at all.
Funny how normal secretaries and such were fine with DOS and WordPerfect, etc., in the 1980s and every suddenly became dumb in the late 1990s and 00s to the point where if something is just slightly different from Windows, they can't use it.
Do you have this thing?
How's it work for playing movies or transcoding?
Also, can you replace the hard drive? Is this an Atom?
Well, aren't registers the fastest and easiest place to put parameters?
Does "real UNIX" handle things differently?
Also, DOS would invoke system calls through interrupts. Linux doesn't do that, you actually call the procedures.
>You would not find him making such comments about a Bush appointee.
Probably not, but that's the point of an opposition. It's the same theory in law courts: the adversarial justice system.
>Than'queue for you're co'operation.
Do you mean Thank'cue ?
When people go into high-level jobs, they do all sorts of things to cut ties to former employers or holdings to avoid being influenced or the appearance of impropriety.
For example, people sell off partnerships and put assets into blind trusts.
Would it have been OK if this exec had gone to work for Microsoft and continued to give updates to Googlers?
While I appreciate the corrupting influence of corporate and other special-interest money on politics, how do you do that (strict public funding) and also not infringe on 1st amendment rights?
I'm not necessarily talking about corporations' free speech, just real people. I'm also not talking about giving to politicians, but rather spending your own money in favor of who or whatever you want to support.
Let's say you were talking to a Iranian, Belarussian, Ossetian, or some such, describing the US of A. "We have free speech in our country; we can freely support our candidates of choice."
Iranian: "OK, can you talk to your friends and tell them to vote for candidate X?"
You: "Yes."
Iranian: "Can you pass out flyers in favor of your candidate?"
You: "As long as it doesn't involve spending money."
Iranian: "??? How do you make flyer without spending money? What a country!"
You probably already know this, but some may not:
If you log into Google, it'll let you adjust your likes and dislikes of various search results (sort of like Slashdot firehose moderation).
Over time, you may see results that are more to your liking.