is that we are looking at our own light. Can't it be possible that the light travels in a cirkle?
..that would be possible, although highly unlikely.. it would mean that the entire universe as we know it (or a significant bit of it) is within the point of no return of some huge black hole, which pulls the light around it in a sort of galactic lasso.. does that work?
M$ is NOT the better product - they only say they are, and their tactics give them a louder voice.
Except that they are: The browser has the cleanest, nicest interface of anything that I've seen, and clearly takes the cake when it comes to graphical browsers. (Lynx gets it done with text based stuff).
And that it's not really a faster browser - we pay the browser start-up fee each time we boot up Windows. But don't you see that, even if that is a bad thing, I'm willing to wait a couple of seconds while Windows starts to have IE load faster. Even if it isn't 'good', or 'right', or even 'legal', the fact is that IE loads faster than Netscape, and goes faster than Netscape. I have put the two next to eachother and IE clearly goes faster. I don't care how Microsoft has engineered it, they made a faster browser. If that involved writing part of it in the kernal, more power to them. The problem is, you think that if they didn't have this advantage, Netscape would win. Clearly, Netscape Corp. is just as much of a company as Microsoft is. That's what this article is about. Netscape wouldn't make a cleaner, nicer, more standards-compliant browser, they would make one with e-commerce and one click shopping. Microsoft cannot do much worse! (Aside from security.. but that is being fixed, although slowly)
And it's not more compliant with Web standards, only with Microsoft extensions to some of those standards. But Microsoft is setting the standards. Obviously the W3 et all are not doing a good job of enforcing their web standards. What the internet really needs, it's sad to say, but is Microsoft to win the browser wars and create a standard that everybody will obey.
What would happen if people chose their Presidential candidate not on the issues and records of those people, or the consequences of their election, but on the number of mispronounciations that they make during speaches... Uhhh... That would be Baaaaaad!
I agree.. the current state of the electoral process is horrid... but almost 1/3 of the likely voters know the names of the candidates and their running mates!
IPv4 provides for about 4 billion addresses.
IPv6 provides for about 3*(10^38) addresses.
If scanning 4 billion people was hard, scanning IPv6 should be next to impossible.
Actually, this sounds exactly like what MacOS is doing with OS X emulating the previous architectures.. not something bad by any measure, just a tad problematic for raw assembler, etc.. that relies on timed interrupts and not using independant constants.
The thing i notice more than anthing else when using windows (besides BSOD etc) is the lack of virtual desktops...
Well, if you want virtual desktops, take some initiatize and code some!
Or you can download a freeware version at here. I like this one because it's simple and gnu-ey.
If you want to try out this *very* small operating system, you can make yourself a demo disk here. The demodisk is a standard 1.44 meg floppy, used as a boot disk, and has a full microkernal architecture, a GUI, a web browser, 3d vector animation support, and a text editor. All on a floppy disk.
Am I the only one that is disturbed by that? I mean, what if IBM does something bad to Arizona. Arizona government is dependant on IBM, so if they sue IBM, their network stops. Packets get dropped in their tracks. Of course, IBM has already had their era of being the evil, market dominating monopoly. What we need to watch out for is the government making a deal with AOL. AOL is positioned to become the next Microsoft, and if they get sued for Antitrust, and they destroy a chunk of the government network when they go down, that's a very bad thing.
It's been shown throughout history that making deals with companies (especially big evil ones) is the first step to becoming depedant on, and eventually absorbed into, those same companies. The next step is AOL-Time Warner-United States Government. We must be very careful.
While that may be all true it doesn't change the fact that Napster is NOT doing anything wrong
napster helps people find copyrighted material to download. I think its called aiding and abedding (sp)??
Napster helps people find material to download. If the material people are looking up is copyrighted, the most Napster can do is kick the people from the service. Which they do, however ineffective.
All it is doing is routing packets without ever knowing if it is legal or no
And winnuke only sending out packets so whats the big deal?
WinNuke is maliciously sending out packets. Napster isn't only used to distribute copyrighted material, only mostly.
If they get the axe then what happens to the thousands of routers out there which do the exact same thing, or any other server/protocol for that matter
They would go about their day without the added workload of all those copyrighted MP3's flying around that napster helped people find.
No, they would be illegal, because illegal material could, and often does, travel over them. I think that was the point trying to be made.
Napster is NOT only used to transfer copyrighted material
But it is MOSTLY used to trasnfer copyrighted material. When was the last time you downlaoded a song with napster that wasn't copyrighted material?
Yeah, and the internet is MOSTLY used to download pornography and warez. You might use it to do that, but many people don't. Napster is essentially a bare-bones, centralized internet, without the HTML-based interface.
It is also a valuable informational and promotional tool. Much like the world wide web.
Yes, just yesterday I used napster to look up some information on the former Austrian Archduke Metternich.
Hey, it could happen:)
Then i typed in "show me new artist that need to be promoted" and it fucking gave me a list man.
You started off your post with the words "you're missing the point". To be honest I think you do get the point, you're just too busy hiding behind excuses. Again i have to ask, "when was the last time you downloaded a song that WASN'T copyrighted?"
Just because a service is mostly used to do something doesn't mean that the service is created to do that. Napster is a huge public FTP directory, essentially. Just because people use it illegally doesn't mean that Napster itself is evil. Napster does all it can to kick those people that do bad things on it.
Nano-terrorism is a real issue. However, just as we were (and still are) concerned about bio-terrorism, and we were (and still are) concerned about nuclear terrorism, yes, although there is a potential for total destruction of the Earth and all surrounding planets, it won't happen.
My thinking is this: The reason terrorists don't build nuclear weapons is because of the dangers of either them accidentally detonating (ouch!), or more likely because of radiation leakage. The reason they don't build (large scale) biological weapons is because of the dangers of building the things. The reason they won't create nano-bot-evil-killing-machines is because they will have a (highly justified) fear of what would happen if it misfired. Anyway, wouldn't nanotech bots be able to be put out with a powerful EMP? The U.S. Military is in the process of testing new EMP weaponry, and if nano-terrorism becomes a problem, it can be put to a quick end.
In addition, terrorists are not usually the most intelligant people. Many fear technology. The ones that don't really aren't the kind of people that would be putting together nanobots. Maybe in fifty or a hundred years, but not now. If you want to fear something about nanotechnology, think about when it's used as a weapon by a hostile government. The United States, Russia or China could turn nanotechnology into something very evil if the military needed to.
The Inventors Hall of Fame can have living people in it, too, although it's been playing catchup because it only started in 1973, so most of the members are dead. Woz and Helen Free are the only two living members of the Hall of Fame.
That would probably be because the article is written in a Sans Serif font, which some browsers thoughfully seem to like to reduce as small as they can. I can't check yet, though, because the thing got Slashdotted. Maybe later.
terms of design being proprietary has probably helped Mac OS maintain the system-wide consistency that makes it so easy to use and so pleasant.
You know... I heard about this same problem during the Microsoft thing. Something about Microsoft not being supposed to have 'system-wide consistency', and being able to let vendors mangle the system in any way they wish. Good thing the DOJ has shown that Mac and Linux users don't exist (so that Microsoft has a monopoly, of course).
but navigation and interface similarities are definitely its strong points.
I remember reading about this. I believe that Microsoft originally made Windows 3.1 mouse-only, but then the Department of Defense threatened to cut their contract if they didn't include keyboard support. Something about being really hard to navigate with a mouse when you're inside a tank. Of course, they were using various other (read:Unix) operating systems for their important systems, because it isn't pleasant to get a GPF while driving a tank, but I do remember that being the reason why Windows has such good keyboard support. If you get a keyboard with one of those nifty 'Windows' keys, you can access 99% of the features in Windows and most Windows programs without moving the mouse.
...and doesn't work well with source code. When you release the source code, you can simply look at it, extract the algorithms, and reimplement them under your own user interface, with a new product name slapped on top of it. Copyright law doesn't prevent that. Copyright law says that you can't just run the source through GCC, call it Linux Office, and sell it. However, if the actual code is signifigantly different (a different implementation of the same algorithms), then it's fine. This is why licenses were created, to fill the gap between patents and copyrights.
Slashdot Mirror
"you get what you pay for."
Umm... is it just me, or is it really bad when open source people start saying that? Sounds like something from Microsoft...
Sounds like a... Blinding Flash of the Obvious !
is that we are looking at our own light. Can't it be possible that the light travels in a cirkle?
..that would be possible, although highly unlikely.. it would mean that the entire universe as we know it (or a significant bit of it) is within the point of no return of some huge black hole, which pulls the light around it in a sort of galactic lasso.. does that work?
Everything that I know about hypothetical astrophysics I learned on the side of a box of cereal.
M$ is NOT the better product - they only say they are, and their tactics give them a louder voice.
Except that they are: The browser has the cleanest, nicest interface of anything that I've seen, and clearly takes the cake when it comes to graphical browsers. (Lynx gets it done with text based stuff).
And that it's not really a faster browser - we pay the browser start-up fee each time we boot up Windows.
But don't you see that, even if that is a bad thing, I'm willing to wait a couple of seconds while Windows starts to have IE load faster. Even if it isn't 'good', or 'right', or even 'legal', the fact is that IE loads faster than Netscape, and goes faster than Netscape. I have put the two next to eachother and IE clearly goes faster. I don't care how Microsoft has engineered it, they made a faster browser. If that involved writing part of it in the kernal, more power to them.
The problem is, you think that if they didn't have this advantage, Netscape would win. Clearly, Netscape Corp. is just as much of a company as Microsoft is. That's what this article is about. Netscape wouldn't make a cleaner, nicer, more standards-compliant browser, they would make one with e-commerce and one click shopping. Microsoft cannot do much worse! (Aside from security.. but that is being fixed, although slowly)
And it's not more compliant with Web standards, only with Microsoft extensions to some of those standards.
But Microsoft is setting the standards. Obviously the W3 et all are not doing a good job of enforcing their web standards. What the internet really needs, it's sad to say, but is Microsoft to win the browser wars and create a standard that everybody will obey.
What would happen if people chose their Presidential candidate not on the issues and records of those people, or the consequences of their election, but on the number of mispronounciations that they make during speaches... Uhhh... That would be Baaaaaad!
I agree.. the current state of the electoral process is horrid... but almost 1/3 of the likely voters know the names of the candidates and their running mates!
Heck No!
IPv4 provides for about 4 billion addresses.
IPv6 provides for about 3*(10^38) addresses.
If scanning 4 billion people was hard, scanning IPv6 should be next to impossible.
Actually, this sounds exactly like what MacOS is doing with OS X emulating the previous architectures.. not something bad by any measure, just a tad problematic for raw assembler, etc.. that relies on timed interrupts and not using independant constants.
The thing i notice more than anthing else when using windows (besides BSOD etc) is the lack of virtual desktops...
Well, if you want virtual desktops, take some initiatize and code some! Or you can download a freeware version at here. I like this one because it's simple and gnu-ey.
ph33r ph33r
does he draw the line on idealistic issues?
john
signature geterated by a swarm of rival attack goats
Violence... BAD.
If you want to try out this *very* small operating system, you can make yourself a demo disk here. The demodisk is a standard 1.44 meg floppy, used as a boot disk, and has a full microkernal architecture, a GUI, a web browser, 3d vector animation support, and a text editor. All on a floppy disk.
slashdot freaks
I have yet to see a Slashdot freak with cookies turned off.
This is great for all of the overclockers out there. Just when other companies are taking steps against overclocking, AMD comes in and saves the day.
Partnerships with private businesses.
Am I the only one that is disturbed by that? I mean, what if IBM does something bad to Arizona. Arizona government is dependant on IBM, so if they sue IBM, their network stops. Packets get dropped in their tracks. Of course, IBM has already had their era of being the evil, market dominating monopoly. What we need to watch out for is the government making a deal with AOL. AOL is positioned to become the next Microsoft, and if they get sued for Antitrust, and they destroy a chunk of the government network when they go down, that's a very bad thing.
It's been shown throughout history that making deals with companies (especially big evil ones) is the first step to becoming depedant on, and eventually absorbed into, those same companies. The next step is AOL-Time Warner-United States Government. We must be very careful.
While that may be all true it doesn't change the fact that Napster is NOT doing anything wrong
:)
napster helps people find copyrighted material to download. I think its called aiding and abedding (sp)??
Napster helps people find material to download. If the material people are looking up is copyrighted, the most Napster can do is kick the people from the service. Which they do, however ineffective.
All it is doing is routing packets without ever knowing if it is legal or no
And winnuke only sending out packets so whats the big deal?
WinNuke is maliciously sending out packets. Napster isn't only used to distribute copyrighted material, only mostly.
If they get the axe then what happens to the thousands of routers out there which do the exact same thing, or any other server/protocol for that matter
They would go about their day without the added workload of all those copyrighted MP3's flying around that napster helped people find.
No, they would be illegal, because illegal material could, and often does, travel over them. I think that was the point trying to be made.
Napster is NOT only used to transfer copyrighted material
But it is MOSTLY used to trasnfer copyrighted material. When was the last time you downlaoded a song with napster that wasn't copyrighted material?
Yeah, and the internet is MOSTLY used to download pornography and warez. You might use it to do that, but many people don't. Napster is essentially a bare-bones, centralized internet, without the HTML-based interface.
It is also a valuable informational and promotional tool. Much like the world wide web.
Yes, just yesterday I used napster to look up some information on the former Austrian Archduke Metternich.
Hey, it could happen
Then i typed in "show me new artist that need to be promoted" and it fucking gave me a list man.
You started off your post with the words "you're missing the point". To be honest I think you do get the point, you're just too busy hiding behind excuses. Again i have to ask, "when was the last time you downloaded a song that WASN'T copyrighted?"
Just because a service is mostly used to do something doesn't mean that the service is created to do that. Napster is a huge public FTP directory, essentially. Just because people use it illegally doesn't mean that Napster itself is evil. Napster does all it can to kick those people that do bad things on it.
The real problem is with nano-terrorism
Nano-terrorism is a real issue. However, just as we were (and still are) concerned about bio-terrorism, and we were (and still are) concerned about nuclear terrorism, yes, although there is a potential for total destruction of the Earth and all surrounding planets, it won't happen.
My thinking is this: The reason terrorists don't build nuclear weapons is because of the dangers of either them accidentally detonating (ouch!), or more likely because of radiation leakage. The reason they don't build (large scale) biological weapons is because of the dangers of building the things. The reason they won't create nano-bot-evil-killing-machines is because they will have a (highly justified) fear of what would happen if it misfired. Anyway, wouldn't nanotech bots be able to be put out with a powerful EMP? The U.S. Military is in the process of testing new EMP weaponry, and if nano-terrorism becomes a problem, it can be put to a quick end.
In addition, terrorists are not usually the most intelligant people. Many fear technology. The ones that don't really aren't the kind of people that would be putting together nanobots. Maybe in fifty or a hundred years, but not now. If you want to fear something about nanotechnology, think about when it's used as a weapon by a hostile government. The United States, Russia or China could turn nanotechnology into something very evil if the military needed to.
...would there be enough drivers for Linux based cars?
The Inventor's Hall of Fame can be found here.
From the page: Inventors selected for induction are honored annually at a ceremony held in Akron, Ohio.
Is Woz going to be there?
The Inventor's Hall of Fame.
The Inventors Hall of Fame can have living people in it, too, although it's been playing catchup because it only started in 1973, so most of the members are dead. Woz and Helen Free are the only two living members of the Hall of Fame.
That would probably be because the article is written in a Sans Serif font, which some browsers thoughfully seem to like to reduce as small as they can. I can't check yet, though, because the thing got Slashdotted. Maybe later.
terms of design being proprietary has probably helped Mac OS maintain the system-wide consistency that makes it so easy to use and so pleasant.
You know... I heard about this same problem during the Microsoft thing. Something about Microsoft not being supposed to have 'system-wide consistency', and being able to let vendors mangle the system in any way they wish. Good thing the DOJ has shown that Mac and Linux users don't exist (so that Microsoft has a monopoly, of course).
OS X won't run X apps natively?
I think he meant X11 Apps.
P.C. recycle bin
Hey now, the recycle bin is environmentally friendly!
but navigation and interface similarities are definitely its strong points.
I remember reading about this. I believe that Microsoft originally made Windows 3.1 mouse-only, but then the Department of Defense threatened to cut their contract if they didn't include keyboard support. Something about being really hard to navigate with a mouse when you're inside a tank. Of course, they were using various other (read:Unix) operating systems for their important systems, because it isn't pleasant to get a GPF while driving a tank, but I do remember that being the reason why Windows has such good keyboard support. If you get a keyboard with one of those nifty 'Windows' keys, you can access 99% of the features in Windows and most Windows programs without moving the mouse.
...and doesn't work well with source code. When you release the source code, you can simply look at it, extract the algorithms, and reimplement them under your own user interface, with a new product name slapped on top of it. Copyright law doesn't prevent that. Copyright law says that you can't just run the source through GCC, call it Linux Office, and sell it. However, if the actual code is signifigantly different (a different implementation of the same algorithms), then it's fine. This is why licenses were created, to fill the gap between patents and copyrights.