Re:License wars are a waste of energy
on
KDE Strikes Back
·
· Score: 1
I didn't say it's more 'freedom' per se. But it encourages 'free' software. If you want to make proprietary software (or as you said, Windows software) you have to pay Troll Tech. But if you want to code open/free software (that isn't commercial) you can without charge. It encourages you to create non-commercial software.
Re:The Reason * I * Quit Watching the News
on
The New Mediascape
·
· Score: 1
You are definitely not alone in that feeling.
I quite watching the news because it's depressing as hell. They do everything they can to capture every negative story that's available, but never, never, ever do they try to put out an uplifting story. If you watch the news every day you start to get the idea that every person in the world is a child-molesting, murdering, theiving, fire-starting, piece of garbage and that we would all be better off dead.
About two months after I stopped watching regular TV news, and started getting my news online (about subjects I actually enjoy no less!), I was a lot happier with the 'human condition'. We are definitely a product of our environment. Until we wake up out of the commercialized coma that the networks want us in, we won't realize that we have a choice of what our environment is.
Damn, that sounded a little pompous didn't it;-).
Re:License wars are a waste of energy
on
KDE Strikes Back
·
· Score: 1
Oh my god! I just had the most amazing thought while reading this comment.
Could it be possible that KDE forces 'freedom' more than GNOME because of the QT dual license situation? I mean, with GNOME, people are able to use the libraries (GTK) to create commercial software (which isn't 'free' software), but with KDE, you cannot develop commercial software without paying a toll to Troll Tech. So, commercial development under KDE is discouraged (by the factor of money). Commercial development under GNOME is OK (because you don't have to pay anyone if you use the code in a commercial product).
Just an interesting thought that sprang up.
Re:License wars are a waste of energy
on
KDE Strikes Back
·
· Score: 1
To be perfectly honest, some of the rabid fanaticism that I see here just strikes me as childish. There's a real need
to grow up in some people and get on with improving the code rather than slating the "opposition".
This comment brings me back to one of my favorite topics of late, what is 'good advocacy'?
It seems that to some people, good advocacy is about slamming as many people as you possibly can, but in fact that doesn't impress anybody but your teenage peers. I've been involved with Linux since the early 90's, and I am getting really sick of seeing these 'my dick is bigger than your dick' style comments go back and forth between different camps.
Now, the EMACS vs VI wars were kind of fun. People respected eachother for the most part, they just took silly potshots at eachother from time to time, but almost always apologized if they happened to cross the line. But now that we have so many younger people (Gen X and younger) into Free/Open software we see a lot of adolescent behavior. Nobody ever aplogizes, and crossing the line is just the start of a conversation. KDE vs. GNOME, Red Hat vs (any other distro), etc.etc.
Peronsally, I wouldn't have a huge problem with it, but we see the same type of FUD and lie based attacks spread through these wars as we accuse MS of launching on our 'baby'. If we made healthy and honest comments, it wouldn't turn into flamewars. There isn't any need for it. It isn't constructive, and all it does is frustrate new users.
A new user says, I use (distro X) and I need help with (problem Y) and the response he gets is:
What the **** is wrong with you you stupid bastard whore. You sold out. You shouldn't be using (distro X). If you weren't such a dumbass and bought (distro X) you wouldn't be having (problem Y). Now, go learn something and come back when you know what the **** you are doing!
We need to get over that kind of attitude. If you don't want to help, remain silent. If you want a war, go to a paintball field.
It's really too bad we tried so hard to attract as many people as we could during the 'growing pains' period of Linux development. It frustrates a lot of new users, and pisses off a lot of 'old timers' like myself. Can't we at least try to pretend to be congenial to eachother? We can point out faults without turning it into a swearing spewing vile foul acid smelling flame-fest.
That is an awesome idea. At least then the 'regular people' would have a chance at getting a congress man's ear. Who knows, if slashdot took a collection, we might even be able to afford our own congressman.
But god forbid the zealots should pay for anything.
I for one would be happy to pay for a 'legal' Linux DVD player if there was one. But I've been getting really, really, REALLY sick of seeing companies say over and over again that they'll have a legal DVD player 'any day now' and then it never even gets to the beta test stage (as far as we know). I've seen at least three companies announce that they are going to release a DVD player app for Linux REAL SOON NOW (TM), but I have yet to see it.
If the MPAA is so worried about us, why didn't they go out of their way to create a player that could be used on Linux, or work with companies/individuals that would. But when asked a question like that we hear that we are a 'fringe' market and there aren't enough of us to matter. But there are enough of us to matter when it comes to these stupid ass lawsuites.
Sorry, but these sorts of things are starting to eat at me. One more victory for big business, one more loss for the little people.
As far as the law is concerned its there to steal from,
murder, and destroy the movie industry.
And as far as the law is concerned we need to make sure that big business is protected from us big bad and scary people. What should probably happen is that big business should find a way to just 'own' people (which is close to what this case makes it look like is happening). Don't try to gloss it over by going through a governmental body. Just let them fricken own us. That way we at least know that we are having our freedom ripped from us.
I don't know, personally at the moment I feel like government is just the blindfold that big business uses to keep us from seeing while they ram us up the rear. Personally, I'd rather see my assailant and know I'm gonna get it, than to be blindfolded and just waiting for someone to jump me from behind.
BTW, just to clarify, I'm not angry with the previous poster. I'm angry with this ruling, and I'm angry that a judge can be so easily bought in a decision like this. I mean, come on, the guy never once gave the 'little guy's' side of the story a chance. He came into it convinced that MPAA was right, and that everyone else was a criminally operated business. Payoff anyone?
I thought that was because the development was started on Windows (something about no access to DVD on alternatives at the time)?
And the rest of your post kind of sounds like it is the perfect way to impress the MPAA. If we have enough people say (paraphrasing your post) "Yeah, I'm gonna rent and copy to CDR" then there will be no reason whatsoever to try and defend the creator of the software.
Would you believe that there are some people that use MP3 for things in a legal way? Yeah, I know, it can't be done. I purchase a CD, rip and MP3 encode it and store the CD in a cabinet. I have done nothing illegal (and this is exactly what I do with every CD I own, and I haven't downloaded any MP3s from bands that don't put them out themselves), yet the record companies would still say that I am using an illegal method of copying. I paid for the music, I didn't sell it afterwards (all of my CDs remain in that cabinet), I'm just listening to it off of a hard drive. And if hard drives were bigger, I would do the same thing with DeCSS and DVDs.
Which brings me to an interesting point. Could the MP3 scare be what caused the MPAA to go out of their collective heads over DeCSS? They didn't want to see something get as ingrained as MP3 currently is before they tried to fight it. The whole thing seems to be crazy. If people want to steal something, they are going to steal it. But you can't make a method of doing something illegal just because it might be used illegally. If that were the case we would all be laying on our backs with our arms and legs cut off, drooling out the side of our mouths. Why, well, because we might use our hands to commit a crime, and we might use our legs to run away from the scene. Gimme a break!
The point is that 2600 were linking to the material as a specifically as a means to distribute information on how to
make a device to circumvent copy protection.
Um, huh?
I didn't know we were talking about a 'device'.
And as far as I knew, DeCSS was created so that someone could view a legally purchased DVD on a non-Windows computer. Unless of course you swallowed the other side's story hook line and sinker.
I guess we should know by now that the government, and the judicial system, are there to protect the poor little business from us big bad and nasty consumers that actually want to use the products we purchase. Silly me.
I hate the fact that Star Wars fans want to make it out to be "deep &
dark" and "epic". Just enjoy the damn movie, it ain't rocket science...
Finally someone talking some sense. I for one am a huge, HUGE Star Wars fan. But I have to say that the original films appeared 'dark and epic' to us when we were young-uns, but when we watch it now it isn't that dark and epic at all. It is a good story, maybe even a great story, but it isn't the be-all, end-all that some people make it out to be.
I love Star Wars, but I'm getting sick and tired of the 'it's a affront to fans' attitude that has transpired since the previous movie (episode I). I personally liked episode 1. I didn't see it as a tragic piece of crap like everyone seems to be saying. If you watched it once, you missed a lot of important crap. How many times have you watched the original three? And you are expecting to get the same feeling from watching a movie once as you did from watching three movies for 20 years over and over and over...?
Please, try to keep your perspective. Episode I was not bad as movies go now, and it wasn't bad for another Star Wars movie either. Don't pay attention to the media hype about it (as nothing short of a movie four hundred times better than any human is capable of pulling off could live up to that) and you won't be nearly as disappointed.
Well, I hope the moderators will be kind, but here is what you are talking about:
It was kinda scratchy, but this is what I heard, more or less:
"They're made out of meat."
"Meat?"
"Meat. They're made out of meat."
"Meat?"
"There's no doubt about it. We picked several from different parts of
the planet, took them aboard our recon vessels, probed them all the way
through. They're completely meat."
"That's impossible. What about the radio signals? The messages to the
stars."
"They use the radio waves to talk, but the signals don't come from them.
The signals come from machines."
"So who made the machines? That's who we want to contact."
"They made the machines. That's what I'm trying to tell you. Meat made
the machines."
"That's ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You're asking me to
believe in sentient meat."
"I'm not asking you, I'm telling you. These creatures are the only
sentient race in the sector and they're made out of meat."
"Maybe they're like the Orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence
that goes through a meat stage."
"Nope. They're born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several
of their life spans, which didn't take too long. Do you have any idea the
life span of meat?"
"Spare me. Okay, maybe they're only part meat. You know, like the Weddilei.
A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside."
"Nope. We thought of that, since they do have meat heads like the Weddilei.
But I told you, we probed them. They're meat all the way through."
"No brain?"
"Oh, there is a brain all right. It's just that the brain is made out of
meat!"
"So... what does the thinking?"
"You're not understanding, are you? The brain does the thinking. The
meat."
"Thinking meat! You're asking me to believe in thinking meat!"
"Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The
meat is the whole deal! Are you getting the picture?"
"Omigod. You're serious then. They're made out of meat."
"Finally, Yes. They are indeed made out meat. And they've been trying to
get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years."
"So what does the meat have in mind?"
"First it wants to talk to us. Then I imagine it wants to explore the
universe, contact other sentients, swap ideas and information. The usual."
"We're supposed to talk to meat?"
"That's the idea. That's the message they're sending out by radio. 'Hello.
Anyone out there? Anyone home?' That sort of thing."
"They actually do talk, then. They use words, ideas, concepts?"
"Oh, yes. Except they do it with meat."
"I thought you just told me they used radio."
"They do, but what do you think is on the radio? Meat sounds. You know
how when you slap or flap meat it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their
meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat."
"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much. So what do you advise?"
"Officially or unofficially?"
"Both."
"Officially, we are required to contact, welcome, and log in any and all
sentient races or multibeings in the quadrant, without prejudice, fear, or
favor. Unofficially, I advise that we erase the records and forget the
whole thing."
"I was hoping you would say that."
"It seems harsh, but there is a limit. Do we really want to make contact
with meat?"
"I agree one hundred percent. What's there to say?" `Hello, meat. How's
it going?' But will this work? How many planets are we dealing with here?"
"Just one. They can travel to other planets in special meat containers,
but they can't live on them. And being meat, they only travel through C
space. Which limits them to the speed of light and makes the possibility
of their ever making contact pretty slim. Infinitesimal, in fact."
"So we just pretend there's no one home in the universe."
"That's it."
"Cruel. But you said it yourself, who wants to meet meat? And the ones
who have been aboard our vessels, the ones you have probed? You're sure
they won't remember?"
"They'll be considered crackpots if they do. We went into their heads and
smoothed out their meat so that we're just a dream to them."
"A dream to meat! How strangely appropriate, that we should be meat's
dream."
"And we can mark this sector unoccupied."
"Good. Agreed, officially and unofficially. Case closed. Any others?
Anyone interesting on that side of the galaxy?"
"Yes, a rather shy but sweet hydrogen core cluster intelligence in a class
nine star in G445 zone. Was in contact two galactic rotations ago, wants
to be friendly again."
"They always come around."
"And why not? Imagine how unbearably, how unutterably cold the universe
would be if one were all alone."
Now, isn't that interesting? Kind of tells us why all those stories of the Aliens 'wiping us out' are probably wrong:-).
And BTW, I care about this. The concept of other life in the universe, in whatever form it takes, is intriguing to me. If you don't agree, why did you read the story?
If the piece of metal DID
evolve and begin to grow and reproduce would it not then become biological?
I remember a sci-fi story that came up with a plausible explaination for non-biological, non-carbon based life.
It was a world primarily made of various metals and such, with an extremely electicity friendly atmosphere with lots and lots of thunderstorms. Eventually a 'pool' of metals was struck by lightening and formed a type of 'metallic life' in the pool. It was very simple life, but it could replicate itself (through electrical charges manipulating the other metals around it) and developed in similar ways to biological life. Through that worlds form of evolution the machines eventually developed to large and myriad 'creatures' all made of metal and various materials that allowed them to 'think', yet they were not biological, and they had no biological 'parent race'.
I wish I could remember more details of that story. I do remember that there was a huge amount of text dedicated to explaining how 'metal-life' could have/did develop, but I don't remember all the little details of it. I know that there was a lot of sand-as-insulators to create circuts and such. It was a very interesting theory in the story anyway.
I think the human mind has real difficulty accepting anything that hasn't already been 'seen' as even being possible. I would bet that there are things living out there, and some of them are probably trying to contact us right at this minute, but we are too simple to understand thier attempts, and they are too complex to understand our simplicity. This also explains why, when we finally develop our super-intelligent machines, the human race will not be instantly wiped out. The machines will see us as a novelty, something to be studied. We will seem so simplistic to them that we couldn't possibly be a threat, just an interesting distraction. Will we be kept in aquariums/terrariums? Probably not. Don't scientists enjoy studying animals in thier natural habitat? It's tough to understand a creature if you remove that creature from its native surroundings.
I could go on and on about this, but I think I've said enough. Just open your mind to the possibilities.
Again I risk getting marked as flamebait, but I really do think that you are far too much of a conspiracy theorist.
This is not what Microsoft wants.
That's not flamebait, this is flamebait:
What the hell happened to the sense of humor of not only the moderators, but also the general readership around here. It seems in the past couple of days any attempt at humor is marked down as -1 Troll or worse. At least my first reply just got ignored until I get told I'm a conspiracy theorist.
BTW, are you suggesting that MS is incapable of doing this for these reasons? Don't forget, MS loves squashing competition in any way they can.
So if I do any MS bashing I have to do it in a way that basically makes it look like I'm making myself sick? Damn, this is getting complicated. Oh for the simple days when Slashdot just marked up any MS bashing post as +5 funny, just because.
who the hell wants M$ apps on Linux? It'll stifle the coding spirit that makes Linux what it is today.
Didn't you just answer your own question?
If you don't get it:
MS wants to stifle the coding spirit that makes Linux what it is today. So, who wants to put M$ apps on Linux? M$ does, that's who.
Re:Isn't Lego a bit childish for /. ?
on
Lego + Linux HOWTO
·
· Score: 3
I went through a stage called growing up.
It doesn't sound like you grew up so much as grew older. Your post sounds like a typical bitter old-timer, "Damn kids, when are ye gonna learn ye gots to grow up!"
I'm 26, happily married, have good financial investments and am a systems/network administrator for a small company with a good salary and bonus. However, I still play with toys (and the old Transformers and Legos are my favorites) and I still watch cartoons (Cartoon Network is only second to the sci-fi channel in my book, and those two occassionally trade places during certain months). Does that make me a child? Hardly. I work my butt off, I pay my bills, and I treat my wife with respect (or she wouldn't be my wife). Yet I'm still able to enjoy a good 'childish' thing like cartoons and toys.
You knock Legos as childish. The funny thing is that Legos are designed with the basic premise of helping you develop your mind and your imagination. You are never too old to give up on those sorts of ideals. You need to constantly exercise your brain to keep it growing. And just because it is targetted at kids doesn't mean you can't use it as an adult. If you feel that way, you've already lost part of your humanity. Hopefully you'll get it back.
Oh yeah, and if you think my wife has a problem with my 'childish' endeavors, why the hell did she pull me through Valley Fair, running from ride to ride, screaming her head off and in general acting like a big kid? Simple, she (like myself) hasn't grown old.
You can grow up without growing old. We choose to seperate those two things. It looks like you choose to combine them into one process. In a way I feel for you, but it's your choice. However, don't knock it just cause you don't like it. It's a lot more fun than you might think.
(Now, my hypothesis is you are either a troll, or the following applies: You have avoided using Legos and other 'toys' because you know deep down inside that if you went anywhere near them you would play with them and have a great time. This fear of looking 'childish' has kept you from exploring something you may enjoy. It's too bad, but it happens.)
Although I have never meet any personally, I'm sure there are seven or eight rednecks out there that are not
bigotted white trash. They might even wear socks and would refrain from leaving an old Dodge on cinder blocks
in the front lawn.
Your post (while funny) smacks of irony that you probably didn't even understand yourself. (Now I'll be the one to get marked troll!)
I know one 'regional' band
that can't get signed (their sound doesn't seem to be mainstream enough), yet they're popular enough to make
regular, albeit small west-coast tours? Who drive to their local gigs in an ugly, blue bus that putters up hills at
about 40mph max...What happened to the dedication to your art?
What's the band's name? This is usually the type of stuff I prefer. Especially if they 'aren't mainstream enough'. I can't think of one 'popular' artist I've bought in about the past 15 years (unless you count Stevie Ray Vaughan, that guy could play).
And BTW, the dedication to your art got sold down the river along with the idea of integrity in general. Take a look around you. A society produces artists that are just as shitty as the society itself (will that earn a flamebait?). There are a few of us out here trying to create good 'art' without wussing out. But most are quick to 'sell' when they get the (quickly broken) promise of a 'mint'. Hopefully that will change soon. But don't hold your breath.
(useless starwars rant)
Does the above post give anyone else the image of the Corellian (sp?) war ship in Empire Strikes Back 'releasing' the herd of probes?
(end useless starwars rant)
The question brought to mind by your obvious attempt at humor is this:
When these "super-speed" 1.4 Ghz monsters 'come-to-market' (as they say) will they be as 'real' as the 1 Ghz monsters are now?
I have yet to hear of anyone other than some reviewer getting a 1 Ghz chip from Intel. However, I do know a few people that managed to snag a 1 Ghz AMD chip. So, which really matters, who 'comes to market' first, or which chip you can actually *BUY* first? Just a question.
These problems should go into bugzilla, where actual developers can read them and take care of them. (Unless
you have a support contract, the support people will help you with installation; some of them aren't qualified to
fix bugs.)
I reported problems back when I used Red Hat *a lot*. I pretty much stopped after 5.0-5.2 and trying out 6.0 made me feel like Red Hat was a pointless endeavor.
We're trying not to do that - and I'd really like to know if any of your problems are still occuring with the 7.0
beta version.
Well, I went through quite a few versions of Red Hat (started with 4.2 waaaaay back when and went to 6.0). Now I pretty much install it, play with it for an hour, then trash it and install a distro I feel I can trust. I don't try the betas of Red Hat (as I've kind of gotten the feeling that the 'releases' are beta enough).
I guess every software company is a bit guilty about this one - if something works perfectly for you, then
someone tells you it doesn't work, what would you blame first, if you don't know how much the other person
knows about the piece of software?
Well, I'm guessing this isn't a good way to make friends and influence people. Telling a user he is a moron when the software screws up without listening to what *was* done with it should be a no-no.
screw the user if you can make a buck
If that was our intention, we'd be making proprietary software.
I was speaking of my own personal experience. It sure felt like a screwing for money to me.
and sling mud when you have no facts
That's Microsoft's job, not ours.
I was speaking of the 'KDE sucks!' campaign that seemed to start with Red Hat. (Considering the first indication I got of that little sentiment was on a RH hosted site bragging up GNOME, I always figured that was a Red Hat sentiment.)
Sorry to be an ass about this, but I did get burned. Just because you happen to work there (and you seem reasonable) doesn't mean you know the entire story. I'm sure you are being true to yourself in your work with/for Red Hat, and I don't begrudge you that, but Red Hat in general has pissed me off in enough ways that I'm not going to say, "Oh you're right. I was the asshole all along. And Red Hat is the greatest thing in the world." Sorry, that's not going to happen.
If any non-Linux company had screwed up this badly I would have the same reaction (or any other Linux company for that matter). I feel I had problems. I explain those problems when it's necissary. And I'm not going to 'give another chance' to Red Hat. I have real work to do. I've been using SuSE, Debian, and Caldera since that time without problems at all, and have even traipsed into the BSD realm without problems. So my personal feeling is that there is something particular about the Red Hat way that just doesn't work (at least it doesn't for me). So that's that.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't say it's more 'freedom' per se. But it encourages 'free' software. If you want to make proprietary software (or as you said, Windows software) you have to pay Troll Tech. But if you want to code open/free software (that isn't commercial) you can without charge. It encourages you to create non-commercial software.
You are definitely not alone in that feeling.
I quite watching the news because it's depressing as hell. They do everything they can to capture every negative story that's available, but never, never, ever do they try to put out an uplifting story. If you watch the news every day you start to get the idea that every person in the world is a child-molesting, murdering, theiving, fire-starting, piece of garbage and that we would all be better off dead.
About two months after I stopped watching regular TV news, and started getting my news online (about subjects I actually enjoy no less!), I was a lot happier with the 'human condition'. We are definitely a product of our environment. Until we wake up out of the commercialized coma that the networks want us in, we won't realize that we have a choice of what our environment is.
Damn, that sounded a little pompous didn't it;-).
Oh my god! I just had the most amazing thought while reading this comment.
Could it be possible that KDE forces 'freedom' more than GNOME because of the QT dual license situation? I mean, with GNOME, people are able to use the libraries (GTK) to create commercial software (which isn't 'free' software), but with KDE, you cannot develop commercial software without paying a toll to Troll Tech. So, commercial development under KDE is discouraged (by the factor of money). Commercial development under GNOME is OK (because you don't have to pay anyone if you use the code in a commercial product).
Just an interesting thought that sprang up.
This comment brings me back to one of my favorite topics of late, what is 'good advocacy'?
It seems that to some people, good advocacy is about slamming as many people as you possibly can, but in fact that doesn't impress anybody but your teenage peers. I've been involved with Linux since the early 90's, and I am getting really sick of seeing these 'my dick is bigger than your dick' style comments go back and forth between different camps.
Now, the EMACS vs VI wars were kind of fun. People respected eachother for the most part, they just took silly potshots at eachother from time to time, but almost always apologized if they happened to cross the line. But now that we have so many younger people (Gen X and younger) into Free/Open software we see a lot of adolescent behavior. Nobody ever aplogizes, and crossing the line is just the start of a conversation. KDE vs. GNOME, Red Hat vs (any other distro), etc.etc.
Peronsally, I wouldn't have a huge problem with it, but we see the same type of FUD and lie based attacks spread through these wars as we accuse MS of launching on our 'baby'. If we made healthy and honest comments, it wouldn't turn into flamewars. There isn't any need for it. It isn't constructive, and all it does is frustrate new users.
A new user says, I use (distro X) and I need help with (problem Y) and the response he gets is:
What the **** is wrong with you you stupid bastard whore. You sold out. You shouldn't be using (distro X). If you weren't such a dumbass and bought (distro X) you wouldn't be having (problem Y). Now, go learn something and come back when you know what the **** you are doing!
We need to get over that kind of attitude. If you don't want to help, remain silent. If you want a war, go to a paintball field.
It's really too bad we tried so hard to attract as many people as we could during the 'growing pains' period of Linux development. It frustrates a lot of new users, and pisses off a lot of 'old timers' like myself. Can't we at least try to pretend to be congenial to eachother? We can point out faults without turning it into a swearing spewing vile foul acid smelling flame-fest.
CAN'T WE?
That is an awesome idea. At least then the 'regular people' would have a chance at getting a congress man's ear. Who knows, if slashdot took a collection, we might even be able to afford our own congressman.
I for one would be happy to pay for a 'legal' Linux DVD player if there was one. But I've been getting really, really, REALLY sick of seeing companies say over and over again that they'll have a legal DVD player 'any day now' and then it never even gets to the beta test stage (as far as we know). I've seen at least three companies announce that they are going to release a DVD player app for Linux REAL SOON NOW (TM), but I have yet to see it.
If the MPAA is so worried about us, why didn't they go out of their way to create a player that could be used on Linux, or work with companies/individuals that would. But when asked a question like that we hear that we are a 'fringe' market and there aren't enough of us to matter. But there are enough of us to matter when it comes to these stupid ass lawsuites.
Sorry, but these sorts of things are starting to eat at me. One more victory for big business, one more loss for the little people.
And as far as the law is concerned we need to make sure that big business is protected from us big bad and scary people. What should probably happen is that big business should find a way to just 'own' people (which is close to what this case makes it look like is happening). Don't try to gloss it over by going through a governmental body. Just let them fricken own us. That way we at least know that we are having our freedom ripped from us.
I don't know, personally at the moment I feel like government is just the blindfold that big business uses to keep us from seeing while they ram us up the rear. Personally, I'd rather see my assailant and know I'm gonna get it, than to be blindfolded and just waiting for someone to jump me from behind.
BTW, just to clarify, I'm not angry with the previous poster. I'm angry with this ruling, and I'm angry that a judge can be so easily bought in a decision like this. I mean, come on, the guy never once gave the 'little guy's' side of the story a chance. He came into it convinced that MPAA was right, and that everyone else was a criminally operated business. Payoff anyone?
I thought that was because the development was started on Windows (something about no access to DVD on alternatives at the time)?
And the rest of your post kind of sounds like it is the perfect way to impress the MPAA. If we have enough people say (paraphrasing your post) "Yeah, I'm gonna rent and copy to CDR" then there will be no reason whatsoever to try and defend the creator of the software.
Would you believe that there are some people that use MP3 for things in a legal way? Yeah, I know, it can't be done. I purchase a CD, rip and MP3 encode it and store the CD in a cabinet. I have done nothing illegal (and this is exactly what I do with every CD I own, and I haven't downloaded any MP3s from bands that don't put them out themselves), yet the record companies would still say that I am using an illegal method of copying. I paid for the music, I didn't sell it afterwards (all of my CDs remain in that cabinet), I'm just listening to it off of a hard drive. And if hard drives were bigger, I would do the same thing with DeCSS and DVDs.
Which brings me to an interesting point. Could the MP3 scare be what caused the MPAA to go out of their collective heads over DeCSS? They didn't want to see something get as ingrained as MP3 currently is before they tried to fight it. The whole thing seems to be crazy. If people want to steal something, they are going to steal it. But you can't make a method of doing something illegal just because it might be used illegally. If that were the case we would all be laying on our backs with our arms and legs cut off, drooling out the side of our mouths. Why, well, because we might use our hands to commit a crime, and we might use our legs to run away from the scene. Gimme a break!
Um, huh?
I didn't know we were talking about a 'device'.
And as far as I knew, DeCSS was created so that someone could view a legally purchased DVD on a non-Windows computer. Unless of course you swallowed the other side's story hook line and sinker.
I guess we should know by now that the government, and the judicial system, are there to protect the poor little business from us big bad and nasty consumers that actually want to use the products we purchase. Silly me.
Finally someone talking some sense. I for one am a huge, HUGE Star Wars fan. But I have to say that the original films appeared 'dark and epic' to us when we were young-uns, but when we watch it now it isn't that dark and epic at all. It is a good story, maybe even a great story, but it isn't the be-all, end-all that some people make it out to be.
I love Star Wars, but I'm getting sick and tired of the 'it's a affront to fans' attitude that has transpired since the previous movie (episode I). I personally liked episode 1. I didn't see it as a tragic piece of crap like everyone seems to be saying. If you watched it once, you missed a lot of important crap. How many times have you watched the original three? And you are expecting to get the same feeling from watching a movie once as you did from watching three movies for 20 years over and over and over...?
Please, try to keep your perspective. Episode I was not bad as movies go now, and it wasn't bad for another Star Wars movie either. Don't pay attention to the media hype about it (as nothing short of a movie four hundred times better than any human is capable of pulling off could live up to that) and you won't be nearly as disappointed.
Now, isn't that interesting? Kind of tells us why all those stories of the Aliens 'wiping us out' are probably wrong:-).
And BTW, I care about this. The concept of other life in the universe, in whatever form it takes, is intriguing to me. If you don't agree, why did you read the story?
I remember a sci-fi story that came up with a plausible explaination for non-biological, non-carbon based life.
It was a world primarily made of various metals and such, with an extremely electicity friendly atmosphere with lots and lots of thunderstorms. Eventually a 'pool' of metals was struck by lightening and formed a type of 'metallic life' in the pool. It was very simple life, but it could replicate itself (through electrical charges manipulating the other metals around it) and developed in similar ways to biological life. Through that worlds form of evolution the machines eventually developed to large and myriad 'creatures' all made of metal and various materials that allowed them to 'think', yet they were not biological, and they had no biological 'parent race'.
I wish I could remember more details of that story. I do remember that there was a huge amount of text dedicated to explaining how 'metal-life' could have/did develop, but I don't remember all the little details of it. I know that there was a lot of sand-as-insulators to create circuts and such. It was a very interesting theory in the story anyway.
I think the human mind has real difficulty accepting anything that hasn't already been 'seen' as even being possible. I would bet that there are things living out there, and some of them are probably trying to contact us right at this minute, but we are too simple to understand thier attempts, and they are too complex to understand our simplicity. This also explains why, when we finally develop our super-intelligent machines, the human race will not be instantly wiped out. The machines will see us as a novelty, something to be studied. We will seem so simplistic to them that we couldn't possibly be a threat, just an interesting distraction. Will we be kept in aquariums/terrariums? Probably not. Don't scientists enjoy studying animals in thier natural habitat? It's tough to understand a creature if you remove that creature from its native surroundings.
I could go on and on about this, but I think I've said enough. Just open your mind to the possibilities.
That's not flamebait, this is flamebait:
What the hell happened to the sense of humor of not only the moderators, but also the general readership around here. It seems in the past couple of days any attempt at humor is marked down as -1 Troll or worse. At least my first reply just got ignored until I get told I'm a conspiracy theorist.
BTW, are you suggesting that MS is incapable of doing this for these reasons? Don't forget, MS loves squashing competition in any way they can.
So if I do any MS bashing I have to do it in a way that basically makes it look like I'm making myself sick? Damn, this is getting complicated. Oh for the simple days when Slashdot just marked up any MS bashing post as +5 funny, just because.
BTW, I just made myself sick. (is that better?)
Well, I'm glad to see the moderators don't suffer from that nasty thing we call a sense of humor.
Didn't you just answer your own question?
If you don't get it: MS wants to stifle the coding spirit that makes Linux what it is today. So, who wants to put M$ apps on Linux? M$ does, that's who.
It doesn't sound like you grew up so much as grew older. Your post sounds like a typical bitter old-timer, "Damn kids, when are ye gonna learn ye gots to grow up!"
I'm 26, happily married, have good financial investments and am a systems/network administrator for a small company with a good salary and bonus. However, I still play with toys (and the old Transformers and Legos are my favorites) and I still watch cartoons (Cartoon Network is only second to the sci-fi channel in my book, and those two occassionally trade places during certain months). Does that make me a child? Hardly. I work my butt off, I pay my bills, and I treat my wife with respect (or she wouldn't be my wife). Yet I'm still able to enjoy a good 'childish' thing like cartoons and toys.
You knock Legos as childish. The funny thing is that Legos are designed with the basic premise of helping you develop your mind and your imagination. You are never too old to give up on those sorts of ideals. You need to constantly exercise your brain to keep it growing. And just because it is targetted at kids doesn't mean you can't use it as an adult. If you feel that way, you've already lost part of your humanity. Hopefully you'll get it back.
Oh yeah, and if you think my wife has a problem with my 'childish' endeavors, why the hell did she pull me through Valley Fair, running from ride to ride, screaming her head off and in general acting like a big kid? Simple, she (like myself) hasn't grown old.
You can grow up without growing old. We choose to seperate those two things. It looks like you choose to combine them into one process. In a way I feel for you, but it's your choice. However, don't knock it just cause you don't like it. It's a lot more fun than you might think.
(Now, my hypothesis is you are either a troll, or the following applies: You have avoided using Legos and other 'toys' because you know deep down inside that if you went anywhere near them you would play with them and have a great time. This fear of looking 'childish' has kept you from exploring something you may enjoy. It's too bad, but it happens.)
What, are they gonna hire Eric Cartman as primary FUDster?
It's all a bunch of hippie crap. You can use Win2K. Ah, screw you guys, I'm going home
My point precisely.
Your post (while funny) smacks of irony that you probably didn't even understand yourself. (Now I'll be the one to get marked troll!)
Oh god, an actual intelligently humorous post? On slashdot (checking URL to make sure I didn't screw up)?
Now, having said that I realize I just posted another un-intelligently humorous post. (hanging head in shame, like Bud Bundy.)
Anyway, someone needs to mod up +5 funny for the parent post.
What's the band's name? This is usually the type of stuff I prefer. Especially if they 'aren't mainstream enough'. I can't think of one 'popular' artist I've bought in about the past 15 years (unless you count Stevie Ray Vaughan, that guy could play).
And BTW, the dedication to your art got sold down the river along with the idea of integrity in general. Take a look around you. A society produces artists that are just as shitty as the society itself (will that earn a flamebait?). There are a few of us out here trying to create good 'art' without wussing out. But most are quick to 'sell' when they get the (quickly broken) promise of a 'mint'. Hopefully that will change soon. But don't hold your breath.
(useless starwars rant) Does the above post give anyone else the image of the Corellian (sp?) war ship in Empire Strikes Back 'releasing' the herd of probes? (end useless starwars rant)
The question brought to mind by your obvious attempt at humor is this:
When these "super-speed" 1.4 Ghz monsters 'come-to-market' (as they say) will they be as 'real' as the 1 Ghz monsters are now?
I have yet to hear of anyone other than some reviewer getting a 1 Ghz chip from Intel. However, I do know a few people that managed to snag a 1 Ghz AMD chip. So, which really matters, who 'comes to market' first, or which chip you can actually *BUY* first? Just a question.
I reported problems back when I used Red Hat *a lot*. I pretty much stopped after 5.0-5.2 and trying out 6.0 made me feel like Red Hat was a pointless endeavor.
Well, I went through quite a few versions of Red Hat (started with 4.2 waaaaay back when and went to 6.0). Now I pretty much install it, play with it for an hour, then trash it and install a distro I feel I can trust. I don't try the betas of Red Hat (as I've kind of gotten the feeling that the 'releases' are beta enough).
Well, I'm guessing this isn't a good way to make friends and influence people. Telling a user he is a moron when the software screws up without listening to what *was* done with it should be a no-no.
I was speaking of my own personal experience. It sure felt like a screwing for money to me.
I was speaking of the 'KDE sucks!' campaign that seemed to start with Red Hat. (Considering the first indication I got of that little sentiment was on a RH hosted site bragging up GNOME, I always figured that was a Red Hat sentiment.)
Sorry to be an ass about this, but I did get burned. Just because you happen to work there (and you seem reasonable) doesn't mean you know the entire story. I'm sure you are being true to yourself in your work with/for Red Hat, and I don't begrudge you that, but Red Hat in general has pissed me off in enough ways that I'm not going to say, "Oh you're right. I was the asshole all along. And Red Hat is the greatest thing in the world." Sorry, that's not going to happen.
If any non-Linux company had screwed up this badly I would have the same reaction (or any other Linux company for that matter). I feel I had problems. I explain those problems when it's necissary. And I'm not going to 'give another chance' to Red Hat. I have real work to do. I've been using SuSE, Debian, and Caldera since that time without problems at all, and have even traipsed into the BSD realm without problems. So my personal feeling is that there is something particular about the Red Hat way that just doesn't work (at least it doesn't for me). So that's that.