So, let's be asinine and assume SCO is in the right, here. Which version of the Linux kernel would be the earliest to possibly have SCO IP in it?
Surely, they aren't expecting someone running Debian potato to buy a license.
EMF/noise/vibration & mutation
on
Ant Farm PC
·
· Score: 1
A friend's son did a couple of science experiments with fruit flies, strapping their container to the side of a PowerMac 5200, and the rate of birth defects was huge, probably due to the EMF, noise or vibration.
He repeated his experiment to negate the difference in heat and had nearly identical results.
A lot of people have said that some sort of VM would be ideal for this (VMWare, JVM, etc.). What about User-Mode Linux? Would it be feasable to either add checkpointing to the UML patches, or to load/unload UML in a frozen state?
Nearly ten years after Last Chance to See, the Earth is still trying desperately to go to hell in a handbasket, despite the basket's excellent functionality as a sieve to a ball of mud. What does working on a project like Last Chance to See mean to you now?
With the advent of items like the wireless PalmPilot and projects like H2G2, do you forsee a time when Lonely Planet will manufacture a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Planet, or does it seem more likely that the frontier of personal gadgetry will end in a suffusion of yellow?
You've already mentioned the great debate happening in this arena. The big thing is, either you have to do (i.e. do it right) it, or you just don't do it at all, and stop wasting time, money, and learning opportunity. So many schools slap a big MS or Apple band-aid on the problem and keep on rolling, to the detriment of the students and the budget.
It's mind-boggling just how many people you would have to pay off just to do things right.
There are a lot of good reasons not to do it at all. Computers in and of themselves don't stimulate thought (at least, not anymore), and much could be learned in the time that passes when the average or sub-average student is still trying to figure out how to center text or find their document after ignoring any and all dialog boxes. There's a writing process that basically goes Ponder, Pre-Write, Produce, Polish, Publish. In education, we try to stick technology in any orifice we can find. Realistically, the whole process can be done on pencil and paper---sometimes with a better result---but it's easy to see where technology can make a difference in the equation, if it's done right.
In the U.S., your school and state is going to be graded on the technological prowess of your students. All of them. Some of your students will try to go through life with their only computer contact coming from your school. You can still ensure that they have the skills to:
Produce a pretty resume
Pass high school
Survive in modern America
by thinking about that five-step process. When I was young, you had to threaten people to get access to a typewriter for that last step, Publish. You knew your grade depended on the end result. Of the 10,000 things we try to instill in elementary school, it would be nice if we focused on that one aspect of integrating technology, and spent the rest of the "tech time" talking about, oh, why the light bulb works, maybe even trying to build one.
With older kids, it would be easy to integrate electronic research, multimedia presentations, etc., that reinforce the process, rather than becoming it. And even then, so many students will turn to the Web for research rather than the library (when any almanac will tell you the annual rainfall in Zimbabwe in 10 sec.), or even an interview. If your students can't figure out the Dewey Decimal system, Alta Vista isn't going to help them much.
Having said that, if I could burn the building and start over, I would want wireless Webpads with keyboards, and something like Amaya. You need a platform that lets you research and publish. You could take your favorite *n[ui]x box and let students push all they want. With the right platform (StrongARM, maybe?) you wouldn't have to worry about your sub-average kids playing games, and grep would go a long way to finding objectionable content. The admin tools are mature, the end-user software is getting there. It wouldn't be so bad.
HTML is always nice, especially in that kind of limited environment, because it forces the kids to focus on content rather than the bells-and-whistles extravaganza that Kid Pix and Hyperstudio encourage. You don't even need the GIMP (or PhotoShop, et. al.). It's amazing how many great works of art were done with a hammer, chisel, and rock. Limiting the tools forces the students to think beyond the tools, and how to manipulate the tools to get what they want, which is what we really want, isn't it?
You could always go ruggedized WinCE like the DreamWriter IT and add wireless cards, which wouldn't be a bad alternative, plus it really exists. Cheap and functional is the key. There's even some company that does little PIM-devices aimed at middle schoolers, with RF networking, that with some modification (a larger keyboard, the right apps) could be ideal for schools.
Just don't give them the world. If you give them the world, they will expect it, every time. Give them functional crap, rather than dysfunctional polish. Let them figure out what they can accomplish with it. Don't resign them to the world of would-have-been-a-better-collage and eye-catching-analysis-of-survey-of-three-people. Oh, and read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance before you make any decisions.
The Linux distributions are placed at the mercy of seperate development teams, with different goals.
Only in their current models. The major distributions work on a smorgasbord model, trying to include any application the end user might want or need in the distribution. The BSDs take an alternate--and perhaps enlightened--approach, clearly distinguishing the "core" from the rest. From the BSD perspective, I would argue that nearly all the major distributions share the same core, even without the LSB. Where the Linux camps and BSD camps differ is in the definition of the core.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but by FreeBSD having tight control over the inclusion of core tools into the distribution, they can build a secure and stable distribution much more easily than can be done for Linux.
Ask and ye shall receive. Again, you're thinking of distributions like Red Hat, where any project of note is included in the distribution. One could easily create a secure distribution (such as Khaos is working on) simply by taking a more conservative stance on what the core should be.
Increasingly, it doesn't matter whether you run Linux or a BSD, if you check your favorite software it usually compiles for anything remotely Unix-like. Even commercial software, such as Netscape, can be installed, but there is a clear distinction in the BSD camp that it is not part of the "core"--though that courtesy isn't often given to Linux distributions. BSDers might point out Netscape as a potential security flaw in the distribution. Linux users would say,"Duh. You don't install that crap on your production machines."
Also, the issues of package dependancies, upgrades etc become exponentially more simple to handle. In this regard, I doubt FreeBSD can be touched by any Linux distro.
Again, only in the current form. The sheer number of permutations of system libraries under Linux can make for installation nightmares, but it also makes for unbelievable flexibility. Yes, it's possible to run KDE and GNOME apps side by side, and a Caldera user might have to do some hunting to install gnumeric correctly, but those issues are still possible under the BSDs. Anything that's not part of the core will cause the same headaches, and for all the problems with.debs and.rpms the BSDs are eventually going to face the same problems in user-interface-land. Wait until the BSD UI Core Wars come, and all of a sudden Red Hat starts looking good.
In reality, users in both camps know the best way to handle userland software is './configure ; make ; make install', and it'll probably be that way for a very long time. That's how Unix got us here in the first place.
Obviously contributed software or applications is a different matter. I'm speaking of the core tools that form a distribution.
The problem is that some people now consider GNOME and KDE as core tools, much the way most distributions consider X a core tool. What the BSD camp sees as a detriment, the Linux camp sees as a unifying theme of freedom. Yes, it does cause it's share of headaches, but just as there are projects targetted specifically at FreeBSD, there are projects targetted specifically at glibc2.1 systems, or Debian systems. Just as the article's author pointed out, that it's not fragmentation, but differing market niches. The lines are blurry, but they definitely exist. Red Hat isn't for everyone.
Hopefully the LSB can and will solve this problem. I really hope it's sooner than later.
It's interesting that everyone is so hyped on the FBI server getting attacked, but everyone seems to have overlooked the fact that it also seems to be the server for the NIPC. Given the political turmoil of the day (and how the validity of taking credit for cracking servers is like taking credit for terrorist bombs), maybe the FBI isn't forthcoming on details because it wasn't an attack on the FBI at all.
I've actually considered this. You could take a $400 box, maybe double that for a multiport serial board, mix in your favorite Linux distribution and a bunch of old VT's or Mac Pluses and replace the system half of us used in college with something easier to upgrade, support and manage (and it would be faster).
If you were really strapped for cash, you could build a dozen of these and plop one down in each lab/building around the campus and only worry about networking those dozen machines. If they were networked, you could really extend their lifespan using coda and another $400 box with a couple of 20 Gb drives to handle the bulk of the storage (and, of course, centralized backup).
It's a Third World dream come true, for the price of a hot passport...
You know some Amish guy is going to kick everyone's butt with his Altair or his 12-volt, HeathKit, Z80-based freakin' abacus. If anyone has issue 7.01 of Wired handy, date those machines in the Amish article for us.
Look closely at the Slashdot Economic Model. They get paid (marginally, maybe, but paid nonetheless) by advertisers because of their viewers, yet realistically they create no content (no offense, guys). Yes, their equipment has costs, and one can argue that they sell advertisements, but that's solely a matter of perspective, and an inaccurate one.
Billboard owners sell advertisements. They have nothing else to offer. They own eyeballs because of their physical presence, but it's no different than paying some guy to walk around with a sandwich board on his back.
The "New Economy" doesn't care about IP. The new economy is Seinfeld. You could rip off his jokes, even steal his script, run a different cast on an alternate network, and who would have watched? Economics is about getting what you want, and IP is about protecting mediocre product.
A good idea, like a good product, sells itself, and needs no protection. Try buying a Rolex from the corner junkie, or a BMW knock-off and you'll see what I mean.
Or better, try both pine and mutt, and pick one. It doesn't matter which. You'll prefer one, and though they share the same ideas (and probably some code), had they not been free you still would have had a preference. That preference is what has value, not the product.
Alan, you're a god. I even did the requisite bows in my office before reaching for the keyboard. And I agree with you on all counts EXCEPT the last: in networking, FreeBSD may hold it's own with Linux.
I used to believe otherwise, until I saw the info on the CIDER/SHADOW Project and FreeBSD's implementation of the Berkeley Packet Filter. When the NSA recommends FreeBSD, you have to look twice.
Modern? Come on. It's 1999, and Apple is just now adding features that are fifteen years old. They tout NetBoot like it's the America's Cup, but I bet a quarter of the slashdot readers already know how to do that with their linux/*BSD boxes.
And in a perfect world, you wouldn't have to have an HFS+ partition to do it. What's that all about?
Yes, it's nice to see Apple pull its head out of the sand. Yes, I'll probably be running MacOS X on a server around here, but let's also get real: it isn't revolutionary, it's evolutionary.
Hell, I'd even take NeXTstep over MacOS X...
We're just saying Apple should be realistic (instead of marketing mavens). Look at Corel and the Netwinders. They didn't say,"It'll blow a PC out of the water!" They said,"It's small, fairly cheap, it rips compiling the kernel, but don't do any floating point..." Those of us who are enlightened consumers can understand that, and appreciate the cander.
As opposed to you, who probably still thinks Chicago is a cool font.
GNOME 1.0 was by far the WORST set of RPMs I've seen in a while (sorry, guys). It was like a downgrade from the whole.99 set. There's some nice stability in the applets, but gnomecc is just GONE from the menus (sorry, newbies), the help browser can't find the table of contents, and three of the packages won't even install due to all the changes (so why include them in the 1.0 directory?).
I way prefer GNOME over KDE, even aside from the philosophical reasons, but they really should have pulled a Debian and just said,"Be PATIENT, guys. It'll be worth it."
Now that would be awesome. I bet it would make the booth bimbo think twice (or at least blink twice) about what it means to take a job like that, too.
And, of course women like to see attractive sales guys. I'm just saying I doubt they'd buy that extra mouse pad or sit through the 20 minute infomercial on the off-chance that he might smile at them. Whereas, lonely, greasy male admins will eat hot coals if there's even a remote chance that someone with breasts (including the other lonely, greasy, male admins) will give them a free T-shirt, or even a pen.
You're exactly right, on all counts, but I think you'll also find that there are a lot of men--many of whom are/.ers--who fall somewhere in between: wouldn't mind seeing a beautiful woman (or person, as the case may be), but also won't put up with other people farting and vomiting around them, much less the odd duck hunt.
The crux of the problem lies in the fact that at conventions such as these, there are a lot of libido sales. Women never seem to fall for that like we do. (Yet, how is it that bulemic heroin addicts can sell shoes to women but Antonio Banderas cannot? Even Calvin Klein needs naked women to peddle his jeans. Maybe it's simply that women can sell anything.)
Hypothetically, if Rob were, say, Roberta, and Slashdot more frequented by women, and had he mentioned some guy at the LinuxCare booth, you probably wouldn't hear the same clamoring for pictures of him, thus showing that men are, yes, inferior.
Unless it all comes back to men's unyielding assimilation of all trivia, therefore putting us back on level ground.
Besides, the engineer in us also realizes that slobbering won't hinder an already zero chance.
I do not think this book is of particular interest to the slashdot following.
If you haven't noticed, there are thousands of people from all walks of life hounding slashdot. On it's own, the fact that Katz sold a few hundred books means that it's of interest to some of us.
Just what kind of site do you think this is? If it's OSS, why the Corel posts? We have both Linux and *BSD camps. And what's with all the Mac people here? Or hell, Rob and his Legos? Or Star Wars?
This site is for all of us, not just the stuff that's relevant to you. Hell, it's not even for us, it's for Rob and Jeff and the gang, and we just happen to like it.
Slashdot Mirror
So, let's be asinine and assume SCO is in the right, here. Which version of the Linux kernel would be the earliest to possibly have SCO IP in it?
Surely, they aren't expecting someone running Debian potato to buy a license.
A friend's son did a couple of science experiments with fruit flies, strapping their container to the side of a PowerMac 5200, and the rate of birth defects was huge, probably due to the EMF, noise or vibration.
He repeated his experiment to negate the difference in heat and had nearly identical results.
Crap like that always makes me a little nervous.
A lot of people have said that some sort of VM would be ideal for this (VMWare, JVM, etc.). What about User-Mode Linux? Would it be feasable to either add checkpointing to the UML patches, or to load/unload UML in a frozen state?
One red flag might be if a closed-source program exhibits the same bug that an open-source program does.
Thank you for plainly stating the One True Answer.
Nearly ten years after Last Chance to See, the Earth is still trying desperately to go to hell in a handbasket, despite the basket's excellent functionality as a sieve to a ball of mud. What does working on a project like Last Chance to See mean to you now?
With the advent of items like the wireless PalmPilot and projects like H2G2, do you forsee a time when Lonely Planet will manufacture a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Planet, or does it seem more likely that the frontier of personal gadgetry will end in a suffusion of yellow?
You've already mentioned the great debate happening in this arena. The big thing is, either you have to do (i.e. do it right) it, or you just don't do it at all, and stop wasting time, money, and learning opportunity. So many schools slap a big MS or Apple band-aid on the problem and keep on rolling, to the detriment of the students and the budget.
It's mind-boggling just how many people you would have to pay off just to do things right.
There are a lot of good reasons not to do it at all. Computers in and of themselves don't stimulate thought (at least, not anymore), and much could be learned in the time that passes when the average or sub-average student is still trying to figure out how to center text or find their document after ignoring any and all dialog boxes. There's a writing process that basically goes Ponder, Pre-Write, Produce, Polish, Publish. In education, we try to stick technology in any orifice we can find. Realistically, the whole process can be done on pencil and paper---sometimes with a better result---but it's easy to see where technology can make a difference in the equation, if it's done right.
In the U.S., your school and state is going to be graded on the technological prowess of your students. All of them. Some of your students will try to go through life with their only computer contact coming from your school. You can still ensure that they have the skills to:
- Produce a pretty resume
- Pass high school
- Survive in modern America
by thinking about that five-step process. When I was young, you had to threaten people to get access to a typewriter for that last step, Publish. You knew your grade depended on the end result. Of the 10,000 things we try to instill in elementary school, it would be nice if we focused on that one aspect of integrating technology, and spent the rest of the "tech time" talking about, oh, why the light bulb works, maybe even trying to build one.With older kids, it would be easy to integrate electronic research, multimedia presentations, etc., that reinforce the process, rather than becoming it. And even then, so many students will turn to the Web for research rather than the library (when any almanac will tell you the annual rainfall in Zimbabwe in 10 sec.), or even an interview. If your students can't figure out the Dewey Decimal system, Alta Vista isn't going to help them much.
Having said that, if I could burn the building and start over, I would want wireless Webpads with keyboards, and something like Amaya. You need a platform that lets you research and publish. You could take your favorite *n[ui]x box and let students push all they want. With the right platform (StrongARM, maybe?) you wouldn't have to worry about your sub-average kids playing games, and grep would go a long way to finding objectionable content. The admin tools are mature, the end-user software is getting there. It wouldn't be so bad.
HTML is always nice, especially in that kind of limited environment, because it forces the kids to focus on content rather than the bells-and-whistles extravaganza that Kid Pix and Hyperstudio encourage. You don't even need the GIMP (or PhotoShop, et. al.). It's amazing how many great works of art were done with a hammer, chisel, and rock. Limiting the tools forces the students to think beyond the tools, and how to manipulate the tools to get what they want, which is what we really want, isn't it?
You could always go ruggedized WinCE like the DreamWriter IT and add wireless cards, which wouldn't be a bad alternative, plus it really exists. Cheap and functional is the key. There's even some company that does little PIM-devices aimed at middle schoolers, with RF networking, that with some modification (a larger keyboard, the right apps) could be ideal for schools.
Just don't give them the world. If you give them the world, they will expect it, every time. Give them functional crap, rather than dysfunctional polish. Let them figure out what they can accomplish with it. Don't resign them to the world of would-have-been-a-better-collage and eye-catching-analysis-of-survey-of-three-people. Oh, and read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance before you make any decisions.
Only in their current models. The major distributions work on a smorgasbord model, trying to include any application the end user might want or need in the distribution. The BSDs take an alternate--and perhaps enlightened--approach, clearly distinguishing the "core" from the rest. From the BSD perspective, I would argue that nearly all the major distributions share the same core, even without the LSB. Where the Linux camps and BSD camps differ is in the definition of the core.
Ask and ye shall receive. Again, you're thinking of distributions like Red Hat, where any project of note is included in the distribution. One could easily create a secure distribution (such as Khaos is working on) simply by taking a more conservative stance on what the core should be.
Increasingly, it doesn't matter whether you run Linux or a BSD, if you check your favorite software it usually compiles for anything remotely Unix-like. Even commercial software, such as Netscape, can be installed, but there is a clear distinction in the BSD camp that it is not part of the "core"--though that courtesy isn't often given to Linux distributions. BSDers might point out Netscape as a potential security flaw in the distribution. Linux users would say,"Duh. You don't install that crap on your production machines."
Again, only in the current form. The sheer number of permutations of system libraries under Linux can make for installation nightmares, but it also makes for unbelievable flexibility. Yes, it's possible to run KDE and GNOME apps side by side, and a Caldera user might have to do some hunting to install gnumeric correctly, but those issues are still possible under the BSDs. Anything that's not part of the core will cause the same headaches, and for all the problems with .debs and .rpms the BSDs are eventually going to face the same problems in user-interface-land. Wait until the BSD UI Core Wars come, and all of a sudden Red Hat starts looking good.
In reality, users in both camps know the best way to handle userland software is './configure ; make ; make install', and it'll probably be that way for a very long time. That's how Unix got us here in the first place.
The problem is that some people now consider GNOME and KDE as core tools, much the way most distributions consider X a core tool. What the BSD camp sees as a detriment, the Linux camp sees as a unifying theme of freedom. Yes, it does cause it's share of headaches, but just as there are projects targetted specifically at FreeBSD, there are projects targetted specifically at glibc2.1 systems, or Debian systems. Just as the article's author pointed out, that it's not fragmentation, but differing market niches. The lines are blurry, but they definitely exist. Red Hat isn't for everyone.
Don't we all.
We've all read how it's ludicrously expensive to live/work/etc. in the Valley. How do you make ends meet?
It's interesting that everyone is so hyped on the FBI server getting attacked, but everyone seems to have overlooked the fact that it also seems to be the server for the NIPC. Given the political turmoil of the day (and how the validity of taking credit for cracking servers is like taking credit for terrorist bombs), maybe the FBI isn't forthcoming on details because it wasn't an attack on the FBI at all.
I've actually considered this. You could take a $400 box, maybe double that for a multiport serial board, mix in your favorite Linux distribution and a bunch of old VT's or Mac Pluses and replace the system half of us used in college with something easier to upgrade, support and manage (and it would be faster).
If you were really strapped for cash, you could build a dozen of these and plop one down in each lab/building around the campus and only worry about networking those dozen machines. If they were networked, you could really extend their lifespan using coda and another $400 box with a couple of 20 Gb drives to handle the bulk of the storage (and, of course, centralized backup).
It's a Third World dream come true, for the price of a hot passport...
You know some Amish guy is going to kick everyone's butt with his Altair or his 12-volt, HeathKit, Z80-based freakin' abacus. If anyone has issue 7.01 of Wired handy, date those machines in the Amish article for us.
No Linux drivers yet, but those 30-50 Gb tape backups from OnStream look like they could be the ticket. Cheap, too.
Whenever I hear the word cracker, I think of every other pro golfer except Tiger Woods. But that's just me...
Look closely at the Slashdot Economic Model. They get paid (marginally, maybe, but paid nonetheless) by advertisers because of their viewers, yet realistically they create no content (no offense, guys). Yes, their equipment has costs, and one can argue that they sell advertisements, but that's solely a matter of perspective, and an inaccurate one.
Billboard owners sell advertisements. They have nothing else to offer. They own eyeballs because of their physical presence, but it's no different than paying some guy to walk around with a sandwich board on his back.
The "New Economy" doesn't care about IP. The new economy is Seinfeld. You could rip off his jokes, even steal his script, run a different cast on an alternate network, and who would have watched? Economics is about getting what you want, and IP is about protecting mediocre product.
A good idea, like a good product, sells itself, and needs no protection. Try buying a Rolex from the corner junkie, or a BMW knock-off and you'll see what I mean.
Or better, try both pine and mutt, and pick one. It doesn't matter which. You'll prefer one, and though they share the same ideas (and probably some code), had they not been free you still would have had a preference. That preference is what has value, not the product.
The product is nearly irrelevant...
Alan, you're a god. I even did the requisite bows in my office before reaching for the keyboard. And I agree with you on all counts EXCEPT the last: in networking, FreeBSD may hold it's own with Linux.
I used to believe otherwise, until I saw the info on the CIDER/SHADOW Project and FreeBSD's implementation of the Berkeley Packet Filter. When the NSA recommends FreeBSD, you have to look twice.
Modern? Come on. It's 1999, and Apple is just now adding features that are fifteen years old. They tout NetBoot like it's the America's Cup, but I bet a quarter of the slashdot readers already know how to do that with their linux/*BSD boxes.
And in a perfect world, you wouldn't have to have an HFS+ partition to do it. What's that all about?
Yes, it's nice to see Apple pull its head out of the sand. Yes, I'll probably be running MacOS X on a server around here, but let's also get real: it isn't revolutionary, it's evolutionary.
Hell, I'd even take NeXTstep over MacOS X...
We're just saying Apple should be realistic (instead of marketing mavens). Look at Corel and the Netwinders. They didn't say,"It'll blow a PC out of the water!" They said,"It's small, fairly cheap, it rips compiling the kernel, but don't do any floating point..." Those of us who are enlightened consumers can understand that, and appreciate the cander.
As opposed to you, who probably still thinks Chicago is a cool font.
GNOME 1.0 was by far the WORST set of RPMs I've seen in a while (sorry, guys). It was like a downgrade from the whole .99 set. There's some nice stability in the applets, but gnomecc is just GONE from the menus (sorry, newbies), the help browser can't find the table of contents, and three of the packages won't even install due to all the changes (so why include them in the 1.0 directory?).
I way prefer GNOME over KDE, even aside from the philosophical reasons, but they really should have pulled a Debian and just said,"Be PATIENT, guys. It'll be worth it."
Now that would be awesome. I bet it would make the booth bimbo think twice (or at least blink twice) about what it means to take a job like that, too.
And, of course women like to see attractive sales guys. I'm just saying I doubt they'd buy that extra mouse pad or sit through the 20 minute infomercial on the off-chance that he might smile at them. Whereas, lonely, greasy male admins will eat hot coals if there's even a remote chance that someone with breasts (including the other lonely, greasy, male admins) will give them a free T-shirt, or even a pen.
You're exactly right, on all counts, but I think you'll also find that there are a lot of men--many of whom are /.ers--who fall somewhere in between: wouldn't mind seeing a beautiful woman (or person, as the case may be), but also won't put up with other people farting and vomiting around them, much less the odd duck hunt.
The crux of the problem lies in the fact that at conventions such as these, there are a lot of libido sales. Women never seem to fall for that like we do. (Yet, how is it that bulemic heroin addicts can sell shoes to women but Antonio Banderas cannot? Even Calvin Klein needs naked women to peddle his jeans. Maybe it's simply that women can sell anything.)
Hypothetically, if Rob were, say, Roberta, and Slashdot more frequented by women, and had he mentioned some guy at the LinuxCare booth, you probably wouldn't hear the same clamoring for pictures of him, thus showing that men are, yes, inferior.
Unless it all comes back to men's unyielding assimilation of all trivia, therefore putting us back on level ground.
Besides, the engineer in us also realizes that slobbering won't hinder an already zero chance.
All that free crap? It's not booty, it's schwag.
...a few hundred out of 100,000 chose to take part in the Windows Refund Day. By your own criteria, it doesn't belong on slashdot either.
I can't believe you even said this:
If you haven't noticed, there are thousands of people from all walks of life hounding slashdot. On it's own, the fact that Katz sold a few hundred books means that it's of interest to some of us.
Just what kind of site do you think this is? If it's OSS, why the Corel posts? We have both Linux and *BSD camps. And what's with all the Mac people here? Or hell, Rob and his Legos? Or Star Wars?
This site is for all of us, not just the stuff that's relevant to you. Hell, it's not even for us, it's for Rob and Jeff and the gang, and we just happen to like it.
Get a grip...