proprietary software comes with a given level of incompatability and constraints as to what you can do with it. Speed of implimentation of something new doesn't mean the users will adapt it as quick as the implimentor installs it. On the other end there is the company politics and red tape to get approval to impliment something new and cost considerations of purchase.
On the open software comparison side, the implimentation of something new..... being free to integrate via compatability or the openness to make compatable......
There are two completely different methodologies here dealing with the primary subject matter of software.
Microsoft has a reputation of being faster to market because they cut corners in quality to do so.
Open Source Software is in no big rush to get anywhere, but moves forward more so because those involved genuinely want to move it forward, Someone who is getting paid to get something to market fast will not only sacrifice quality but may also get a bit blind as to what people would really want if they were allowed to know better.
There was a time when MS ignored Open Source software such as Linux. Believe it or not. But today, its a historical provable fact that they are not doing that any more. Slow and stead has a stronger and more stable foundation.
On innovation? Maybe that's one of the reasons MS is doing this! Maybe they just want open source software developer to hurry up and innovate something that the great imitatior (not innovator) will imitate but get to mass market sooner....and again claim they did it first...
Someone really should teach MS how to count..... grounded zero comes before 1st level distortion.
Analogy -- Why Neo will always be faster...
on
Bad Day To Be Sony
·
· Score: 1
... the analogy here is that any overhead of copy protection take up computing cycles and slows down the matrix...
We have know for years and years that copy protection adds a level of complexity that only murphy truely loves... as it gives murphy more to play with and cause to fall...
What many have yet to undrstand is that this not needed constraint applies to IP protection schemes as well.... only the problem is in teh faqilure of eyesight of to many, to be able to so clearly see it for the damage it is doing.
I'm not against those responsible for creative and technical works benefiting from their work, but if things would just be allowed to move forward without riding the brakes, they would move forward fast enough that the overall social/economic statut oif the world would raise fast enough that the real reward is living in a time of far better value
Someday the patent system brakes will burn out.... and then in hindsight we all will know how foolish it was.
Uh, weren't you paying attention to the news? It was researched, probably by the FBI or CIA or perhaps teh military themselves... actually all of them were probably involved... It was determined that the anthrax came from a US based military base and they even tried to find a scape goat to blame, but it turned even more sour than when Richard Jewell was blamed for teh Olympic Park Mombing... he sued and won....so did the guy they tried to blame for the anthrax.
So yeah, it came from a US military base.... and for it to be only one person with enough authority and security clearance, it wouldn't even be conspiracy... but plausable deniability....for the rest of those who took advantage of it to beat unfounded war drums...
What happens when you don't have one hand of the government investigating another hand of the same? Shit happens and things get shut up when they start figuring it out.... and that is exactly what happened.
Control it by simply not producing it. the after effect of 9/11 showed the world that teh US military is guilty of having and selling anthrax while having stores of it outside of the country.
And it also showed how the US military can be abused by as little as one person with enough military athority to not have to deal with security protocals but to use it to help the Bush administration to terroriseand threaten the American media which inturn then helpped the bush administration to terrorise teh American public to support an erronious war on iraq. Which had nothing to do with 9/11.
It gets worse too. If you know the real reason for 9/11, then you will also know the US wrongful world stock market manipulation was in fact the motivation and excuse of fanitics born out of the oil industry to be able to convince enough to follow.
simply start with a google search on "trillion dollar bet" and then realize who teh big losers were (enron, worldcom, etc.) and who benefitted from investment firms needing to put the enormus gains somewhere and found the dot coms...)
Anthrax? Who really needs it, but to play unneeded war games by the idiots who simply don't know better how to spend tax payer money. Of the 6 billion plus people on this planet, what fractional percentage are responsible for the hardships of the rest of us?
Anthrax? To control it, get rid of the all the war mongers and power mongers responsible for creating it and worse..... we do know who they are! Just like indonesia knew it was the Americans who were draining their economy, but they just didn't know how (CNN did a story... so did ABC, but ABC removed their news link around teh time war on iraq started)
... search for activa holdings and the womans name --- but use teh cache of found links...
What little I read... and there is alot more to read such as city council meetings etc... and having worked in a related field of cabinetry (one of the later things to install). It is not completely reasonabe to enforce some of her complaints as the environment of a construction site is going to be influenced by the construction. (I have no doubts that personnel at the construction site dislikes nails in the parking lot as mush as she dislikes nails elsewhere.
On the other hand and in recognition of this above fact, is she lying? The odds are she is telling the truth but perhaps expecting to much and as such... being a mother and motivated to address her fear that she can't keep kids from being kids.. and getting into things they should not.
Should a construction company and sub contractors police (control teh level of hazards and garbage and etc..) the sites they work at? Yes, they should if only as a matter of public relations marketing. Otherwise it seems to me that there is a matter of private property where kids and anyone else at the construction site, that shouldn't be there, is trespassing.
When I pass by a construction site the way it is kept makes an impression on me as to the quality and attention to detail I can expect from the general contractor. Their expectations on the sub-contractors to maintain a reasonably clean appearance of the property. I get this from working on multi million dollar sites.
But I also recognize a trespassing issue.
Activa should not sue her, thats very bad PR. Instead they should require their subcontractors to maintain their trash and such, as well as post no tresspassing signs.
They should pay her any expense they have cost her in this legal mess and then do the right thing....... AS A MATTER OF SIMPLE PUBLIC RELATIONS MARKETING.
its an idea that has been around for alt least 8 years, probably more like 20. It's nice to see others comming up with it too, as that keeps it from being bitch slapped with patent crap.
The smaller the OS the more room you potentially have for applications and data.
Its obvious that technology allows storage media to get smaller in size, bigger in space and faster in access.
This is where virus, worm and whatever badness can be stopped cold in its tracks.
Whan you have write protected media to hold the OS and applications you don't have to worry about getting corrupted, like a CD ROM. And as storage of the multi-write once kind comes along of inexpensive, small and terabyte size it'll be enough to never really need to erase anything, but only disable access to old or bad stuff.
Even today this sort of thing is possible though on a much reduced scale.
OS and Applications can be pretty much static, so upgrading would only be making a new rom device with whatever upgraded software you want. A secondary device for your personal data and configuration...
A device that combines both.... something to patent bitchslap and crap?
Two USB based drives on one comnnector, providing two write protect switches.
Like car keys --- you physically take it with you and plug it into whatever hardware you have access to.
Now here is the most interesting part of such a personal device.....you no longer need the overhead of multi-user security.... And removing it provides a huge boost to speed and user friendliness.
A small OS like AROS (an open source Amiga Research Operating System) will do well with such a device.
I am a ubuntu user, A knoppix user, an Amiga use...and less and less a windows users.
anyone know of a screen bug un Breezy? one where after a long period of inactivity the screen won't come back up?
On Drake (sorta):
read thru the few comments here so far... If you don't like Gnome then use Kubuntu or even just add KDE and have a choice. This is not an isse of the distro, but of you personal choice. Same applies to the theme. If you don't like it then stop being lazy and change it.... Jeez. maybe we need a tutorial added to it to teach people that they can do this and how...(rolls eyes)
Reading about the goals of Drake, I get this feeling that out of the linux development evolution there is comming a time when companies, such as MS, just don't have the dev bandwidth to compete or even keep up. And it seem this will happen well within ten years.
At such a time, where do we then go? What is the next stepping stone towards completely free software? (where software won't be genunily free until it is easy enough to create or cause the computer to create it for you at your direction, like the results of using a claculator to get a free for you result)...... the building of user friendly dev interfaces?
This is really nothing more than another Microsoft expression of arrogance.
I mean they do have the singularity OS....
making claims true...after the claim is made...
on
Yahoo's Geek Statue
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm the richest man in the world, I have all the great looking girls, all the sex I want, best food in the world and well respected worldwise. I'll tell you how to do the same, just send me $20.
...comprehend knowledge and even apply it.... that is the brain recorder and playback
Social development does require more time simply because of the time it takes the body to change enough to expreience and know.
However, on the matter of social skill/knowledge, there are many different customs around the world but one constant, the constant of dishonesty, the ability to understand human nature and manipulate it to fit your needs, desires, etc..
This too can be taught, however, the avoidance of learning this will be detrimental to this kids ability to make breakthrus in physics.
If you don't know how to manipulate people, then how will you handle the most powerful force in nature... human ignorance and denial.
You can know how to bring all the wonderful things to mankind, but what good will it do, when nobody listens because they are to afraid of what they do not understand or what threatens their personal ways, beliefs, etc..
for example: Galelio was exonerated around 1990, by the catholic church, which finally accepted the fact that the earth is not the center of the universe. Alot of good it did him in his life time to be exonerated long past his death.
As another example.... google and how so many are becomming to "fear" it and wage a war on them. imitate them , etc...
This kid needs to learn the truth about dishonesty, for that is where he will find the answer to how to lie to gravity. And he is not going to learn that without genuine real time feedback..The difference between theory and practical application.
it is done just like everyone else who contribute to open source.
If the governemnt contributes funds then it must be without strings.
What would make sence, is to simply focus in on development of the applications the government themselves would use and to make this open source on teh grounds that it is the tax payers who have paid for it. If they want to hire open source programmers to do so, then so be it. But to subsidize open source development in general is against the legal scope of the government and contridicts the competitive economic system we are supposed to have.
Open source doesn't need that kind of help from the government.
But in teh spirit and intent of open source, it is within the scope of the government to make use of and even contribute to open source as other do, by contributing code or sponsoring projects of potential use by the governemt themselves.
It is teh ability to create and modify for your use, that makes open source more what the usrs want than software dictated to the user (i.e. proprietary).
someone is going to start making converters of signals and formats cause I ain't buying no HDTV to replace the working 32" TV I have and certainly not going to buy this new fangled tech... to only then deal with the next latest and greatest tech video....
and that converter is gonna have to be less then $40 before I'll buy it.... Who loses? Well I don't see the commercials then do I?
I'm not sure I understand what/who is being protected with this insurance.
But regardless of that, there is the matter of "UNEXPECTED events"..... with nature there can be unexpected events due our limited understanding of nature, and in the physical world there can be unexpected human events such as unintentional traffic accidents, again due a lack of knowledge or applied knowledge.
Hmm, is this open source insurance along the lines of uninsured motorist insurance?
But regarding "Unexpected events" in the area of software development. When you have a military powerful country wrongly supporting software patents and a software industry that either doesn't understand the nature of software or does and abuses it with intentional acts of consumer fraud or at best consumer misdirection...The ability to determine what is right vs. what is wrong comes down to politics and the ability to manipulate the abstract by those who do just that for a living.
There is no place for honesty in the current development methodologies and economics of software.
Would you today provide insurance for the practice of the belief that the earth is the center of the universe? Insurance that would help to protect against any events contrary to such belief?
I don't think so, not today, but back then? Perhaps someone would.
The Genuine Science of software developemt has been on a detour since number crunching for decription of war time code provided monitary incentive to detour.
To understand software, that it is a reflection of the programmers mindset. A mindset influenced by those before them. As such how can there be "unexpected events"? Unless there is a failure of understanding the primary functionality of the human mind in creating and using abstraction.... and what happens to such insurance when a better understanding comes about?
Try this on for size:
Software patents are understood to be obviously fraudlent.
The Economy changes it's common point of operation to the common user, just as mathmatics and accounting moved from the roman numeral accountants to the everyday user upon a better understanding via a better numercal tool set.
Most proprietry software is limited to inhouse developed and used software, proprietary as a secondary effect of common employment confidentuality agreement.
Infringment on Open Source Software licenses, such as the GPL? There is nothing in the GPL that prevents inhouse confidentuality of software used only inhouse.
Proper fundamental software development research will show it is not only a human right but a human duty to advance by building upon the values of those who came before. It is that which makes us unique in the animal world.
Programming is the act of automating complexity in order to make that complexity easy to use and reuse by the user of the complexity. It is a recursive act, where programmers today create software using th e automations those before them, have created. Exception is perhaps those who program in pure machine language of 1's and 0's. The projected and ultimate goal of such an act as programming, will achieve a level of ease of use that the everyday user can instruct the system to create automations based upon the users instructions or direction.
So this insurance, what exactly is it for?
Fitting the chess game practice of the likes of...
on
Open-Source Insurance
·
· Score: 1
microsoft...
If you know how much it is going to cost you in the event you get busted, allowing for thios, you can determine how worth it, it will be to risk such an endevor.
Now if you can make the cost of getting busted reduced even further then you will have better opportunity to profit over this unfair (anti-trust was named that for a reason) practice expense to you (should you get caught).
Now, with all this, if you can gain 100 million in income in exchange for, at worst, a 1 million dollar cost (should you get busted) which way will you go?
To cheat or not to cheat?
This insurance is not only FUD but promotes dishonesty by providing an excuse level of disconnection from the responsibility of commiting a wrong intentionally.
And who pays for the pay out? (cause we all know it will happen, being busted)
The company doing the wrong has just limited their potential losses but the wronged party collects the insurance????
what are the differences in actually getting paid by court order vs. insurance claim?
company A steals code from coder B who then collects 100 million in insurance that company A only paid 1 million for...
Where does the other 99 million come from?
Who is really getting screwed here?
The concept of disconnection comes to mind such that totally disconnected parties pay higher insurance rates...
And what of fair competition? Where is the motive to be fair?
There shouldn't be insurance that protects the dishonest.
Or maybe someone should start selling murder insurance.
If there is anything notable about this it's classic MS methodology of product creation.
Take what others have done, change some thing just enough to market speak "it's new and aren't we innovative" and then sell it to....
those who don't know better..... which seems to be in endless supply...
Let's face it, if there is anything that says Linux and the likes are becomming a serious competitor to MS, its what extream changes MS seems to be making so to parrallel Open Source Software.
Apparently even they see the direction of the market and they certainly want to detour it towards them.
We all know what deceptive tactics MS applies.
See FOSS really is good for the market.... Real competition works.
And its ony real because MS couldn't find dishonest tactics to work against FOSS. And they Did try, and Try and Try...
But it doesn't mean they won't stop trying to apply dishonest tactics.
The Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) is nothing more than the collecting up what others have done in the way of programming concepts and datatypes and presenting it in a single package in a non conflicting manner. The CIL (Common intermediate Language) is only translating these higher level abstraction into a lower common denominator which is then runs on an engine.
Even the concepts of these different levels/layers is of the works of others.
Its like taking advanced math and translating it down to processes of addition before doing the calculation.
eventually all programs get translated down to binary.... machine language, the machines language..... its all nothing but translation.
How many ways can you translate something?
That's not what matters here. What matters here is how well what ever way you come up with or decide upon, how you market it.
MS is a Marketing Software Company first and formost, followed by its legal staff to insure where ever it breaks the law it will have gained more then any judgement against them. And third place still is NOT its department of innovation but its department of buying out, shutting out and otherwise reinventing what others have done and claiming its their mastery of innovation, in their marketing spill.
This is not Bashing MS.... Its verified fact.
Support Criminals, buy MS....
I've read the article and many of the comments here both in support of and against this shell.
The stupid part about it all is that it really just comes down to being another langauge. As such many of the arguement against are obviously biased towards their individual mindset of what they are use to. And those in support are typically not so set in their ways regarding scripting.
But the world is not going to stop all the other languages they speak and start suddenly using MS speak.
Ultimately programming languages are just higher level abstractions that get translated down to flipping binary bits. Translation that can be done in many different ways.
MS has long promoted user stupidity in regards to the shell.... That alone will retard acceptance and use of this. And the competition of FOSS will keep on keeping on. Without competition or developers outside of MS, MS would have neither the motive nor source of ideas... to advance at all.
... intent to commit fraud. The Fact we have a governing body supporting it doesn't help the matter but instead exposes what seems to be support for criminal actions.
This XML pantent thing is of course fraudulent but its also good news in a round about way.
It contributes to the exposure of this system of government supported fraud. For the bigger a software patent claim, as this is, the greater the pressure that builds up to what will be, in essence.... not a reform, not an overhaul, but a dumping of a government system that is NOT doing what it is supposed to be doing.
When patents hurt the consumer benefit of competition, suppress technology advancement and worst of all promote fraud, then it is time to simply remove the system all together.
I do not recognize software patents at all, but that doesn't mean I don't respect copyrights of the subject of patent.
The US did not involve the people in its decission to allow software patents. That alone is a contridiction of the intents of "For the People, By the People" of which this country was formed.
By its very nature, Software is NOT matter of patentability, it falls out of the scope of patents on core patentability qualifications. It is Abstract, It is a Natural Phenomenon of human consciousness that has simply moved from one media to another as we have developed such medias. From the grunts and sounds of unconscious (consciousness as defined by Julian Jaynes) human beings thru the technology advancements such as writing and all other forms of recording and playback or access of record to the non-static media of computing.
Programming is tha act of automating abstract complexity. Done so for the purpose of making the complexity easy to use and reuse by the users of the complexity. It is a recursive act all the way down to programming by flipping switches... or machine language on up the "automation of complexity ladder" to the point where we are today and will improve upon tomorrow....
This is a character attribute of being human, and regardless of whether or not you are using a computer. Establishing routines in your daily life or work process in order to simplify and perhaps allow your to think about other things, do other things, etc...No different than programming and the result of. This is the natural law of Man, who we are.
Software Patents are Fraud, simply because at the core scope of patents, they do not fit voidance of the abstract, physical phenomenon or natural law.
Fraud is the act of presenting something that is not what it is presented to be. The act of presenting an illusion with the intent of wrongfully taking from another.
Software is copyrightable.
Knowing this makes its very clear that when someone claims there is no IP protection for software if there is not software patents...... OBVIOUS Supporters of the software Patent FRAUD!!!
Invasion of privacy...it better not be....
on
Google Terror Threat
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
... a double standard.
As governments (made up of people) pursue the invasion of privacy of individuals in the name of anti-terrorism than it should not be a double standard.
What would happen if the whole world was able to look at any area and/or spot on the planet in various resolutions and as it currently is (up to date), as well as time lapse sections?
The arguement for invasion of privacy is to prevent wrong doings and identify those pursuing such criminal direction.
So lets apply open source software methodology to the world view of google maps and earth!!!
Lets' identify the fuckers with their war machines and intentions....and when they argue against it, throw them in the prison of total world exposure for being intentional unfair and supporting double standards.
Lets get Google Maps up to speed of being current!
We need it to apply open source software methodology in riding the world of terrorism.
Actually it has been proven that many things can assist terrorist.
From a car which anyone can use to kill another person or persons, etc.. To political propoganda used to gain public support for terrorism and its promotion. US government generated more terrorism in response to 9/11 than what 9/11 did.
And then there is the stock market to manipulate and drain whole regions (like the trillion dollar beat did to south east asia in the mid to late 1990's)....and how that motivated and created support for "terriorism" leading up to 9/11...
So if most anything can be used to generate terriorism, directly or indirectly... whats the exceptions?
Acid, LSD, Mescaline, Pyote, Magic Mushrooms, etc.. does for brain cell growth..
But I'm confused a bit... Wasn't all the propoganda we were feed saying just the opposite?
Hmmm, Oh wow, reverse psychology for teen age rebellion... cool.....
Wow man, guess that means they were cool too.
Wow Wow.... man what a bummer... if we are being told this now, it must mean its really now killing brain cells...
My head hurts.. either I'm growing brain cells of I'm killing some... which is it? Hey dude, What would Bush or Gates want?
On another note: considering the number of highly moderated "Funny" comments in this slashdot crowd.... It struck me that those without experience might not see the humor. Uh, but this is slashdot, is there anyone without some experience?
Didn't somebody say something about the decline of science, technology and R&D in the US? Maybe its time to make pot legal.
Allowing software patents is fraudlent and very discourging to genuine research. Amoung other discourging acts in politics and military and business.
And so long as foolish act such as this continue and are allowed, the US is simply just getting what it diserves and apparently wanted by the psuedo leaders.
I can agree that software should be less buggy, however there are many factors influencing bugginess, from hardware issues to motivation to generate repeat sales (upgrades).
There is a way to fix this industry wide problem howver the solution direction is not compatable with the current methodology of repeat sales and support for a dollar price.
I recall some research that dealt with why the Mac wasn't a bigger success and the reason is that its simpler to use than the typicaly windows PC. As such it requires less service and support and this equates to causing less money to flow in the service and support industry.
Bugginess in software follows the logic of why not to fix it...
Licensings is another issue all together.... there is no fair way that many licenses read.... you give us your first born and we are not responsible for any bugs that kill the rest of your family....
If a software producer is not going to take responsibility for their product then as far as I'm concerned they have no rights to impose upon me any restrictions that prevent me from fixing their product so I can use it without damage... and that includes getting the help of others outside of them to fix it.
It is this that contributes to my support of free open source software.
I understand he difficulty of making sure your software works in the endless hardware and software configurations, Likewise software producers must understand our RIGHTS as Consumers to be allowed to fix it, outside of them.
Proprietary software without responsibility is intentionally a double standard and the courts really should recognize this.
But considering the US courts don't understand the unpatentable nature fo software and never ever consulted the public on the..... there is certainly breading grounds for dishonesty and double standards.
Boston tea party.... for software...... What will it be called should the public ever take a stand for their fair rights?
Microsoft is first and formost a marketing company followed second a chess playing legal firm in support of the marketing goals...and even innovation doesn't come in a distant third and that is the place of the buyout/shutout division... fromn which they buy whatever innovation they then claim inventorship of.
This goes all the way back to how Bill Gates got his start...a law school drop out, yet with law connections (good ol' daddy judge), with his porting of BASIC to tha altair (Porting - for those who do not know the term, doen't mean being innovative but taking the innovations of another and making it available on another platform)... and of course lets not forget the selling of DOS to IBM before Microsoft even approached the guy who wrote and owned it...
Success by Microsofts standards is accomplished by "Making people need them" and this is done by the practice of never really giving customers a full products by which they might themselves then not need MS.
If the is any innovation out of Microsoft it is either by accident of trying to "make people need them" of is of the type of innovation you could do without, such as the "manifested integrated user frustration function"... that you can taste in the complete lack of advancing the shell to be even halfway to where the rest of the world is shell wise (Oh yeah.. it'll be in longhorn....Uh not really...) to simpler innovations such as the hard drive formating utility in windows XP in comparison earlier versions... of uh... windows.. not the rest of the world... Oh it nice they are making improvements except they complixicate it enough to sum to much less then it could have been...
Microsofts Common Language infrastructure research and resulting CIL, etc..is an example not of innovation but of effort to simply sum up all the many works of others... a summary of the more common programming concept and datatypes integrated in sum to be non conflicting. An accident or by the way look what we did in the process of trying to corner the industry...
Right is right and wrong is wrong.... the eolas patent is wrong and two wrongs don't make a right. Not only is the eolas patent wrong in what its claims of uniqueness are but software itself is by it's nature is not patentable and this is provable. This is important to understand when you bring MS into the picture with their claims of "software factories" and other things in that direction.
It's important because if MicroSoft really genuinely knew about what it is they make claims to, then they would have been able to defeat the eolas patent crap.
As a marketing company applying market testing and using art of war tactics to apply the same "market testing" concept in their marketing but in sole effort to suppress the competition, discourage the competition.... If they were genuine innovators of software (instead of at best innovators of applying art of war tactics in marketing...) then they really wouldn't have felt they ever needed to break the anti-trust laws..... in so many countries...
They don't lack marketing skill.... but to resort to unfair play..... thats not consistant with innovation competition but consistant with knowing you are a little guy (read on to understand this evident self perspective)
They are not olympic material and never will be, even if they throw their art of war marketing tactic at it to convince the masses.
Innovation competition of the olympic level is that of being a competitor, even if you lose, you win. Like the way open source works. Once the four minute mile was achieved and then broken... others then knew it was possible and worked to do better, even using the same tools, mental and physical.
Unlike the proprietary closed source which in essence says that you cannot use the values accomplished to then do better than.
Standing on the shoulders of giants vs. being a giant that other then stand on your shoulders....
Microsoft will never be that giant, no matter how damn rich and big they are, have been or might be. Bill Gates Himself Knows this!!! How else could he even think to even today claim he's the little guy being picked on (as he has done)?
Slashdot Mirror
... and here is the main reason why!!
..... being free to integrate via compatability or the openness to make compatable ......
proprietary software comes with a given level of incompatability and constraints as to what you can do with it.
Speed of implimentation of something new doesn't mean the users will adapt it as quick as the implimentor installs it.
On the other end there is the company politics and red tape to get approval to impliment something new and cost considerations of purchase.
On the open software comparison side, the implimentation of something new
There are two completely different methodologies here dealing with the primary subject matter of software.
Microsoft has a reputation of being faster to market because they cut corners in quality to do so.
Open Source Software is in no big rush to get anywhere, but moves forward more so because those involved genuinely want to move it forward, Someone who is getting paid to get something to market fast will not only sacrifice quality but may also get a bit blind as to what people would really want if they were allowed to know better.
There was a time when MS ignored Open Source software such as Linux. Believe it or not. But today, its a historical provable fact that they are not doing that any more. Slow and stead has a stronger and more stable foundation.
On innovation? Maybe that's one of the reasons MS is doing this! Maybe they just want open source software developer to hurry up and innovate something that the great imitatior (not innovator) will imitate but get to mass market sooner....and again claim they did it first...
Someone really should teach MS how to count..... grounded zero comes before 1st level distortion.
... the analogy here is that any overhead of copy protection take up computing cycles and slows down the matrix...
We have know for years and years that copy protection adds a level of complexity that only murphy truely loves... as it gives murphy more to play with and cause to fall...
What many have yet to undrstand is that this not needed constraint applies to IP protection schemes as well.... only the problem is in teh faqilure of eyesight of to many, to be able to so clearly see it for the damage it is doing.
I'm not against those responsible for creative and technical works benefiting from their work, but if things would just be allowed to move forward without riding the brakes, they would move forward fast enough that the overall social/economic statut oif the world would raise fast enough that the real reward is living in a time of far better value
Someday the patent system brakes will burn out.... and then in hindsight we all will know how foolish it was.
Uh, weren't you paying attention to the news? It was researched, probably by the FBI or CIA or perhaps teh military themselves... actually all of them were probably involved... It was determined that the anthrax came from a US based military base and they even tried to find a scape goat to blame, but it turned even more sour than when Richard Jewell was blamed for teh Olympic Park Mombing... he sued and won....so did the guy they tried to blame for the anthrax.
So yeah, it came from a US military base.... and for it to be only one person with enough authority and security clearance, it wouldn't even be conspiracy... but plausable deniability....for the rest of those who took advantage of it to beat unfounded war drums...
What happens when you don't have one hand of the government investigating another hand of the same? Shit happens and things get shut up when they start figuring it out.... and that is exactly what happened.
Control it by simply not producing it. the after effect of 9/11 showed the world that teh US military is guilty of having and selling anthrax while having stores of it outside of the country.
2 /www.worldgame.org/wwwproject/index.shtml
And it also showed how the US military can be abused by as little as one person with enough military athority to not have to deal with security protocals but to use it to help the Bush administration to terroriseand threaten the American media which inturn then helpped the bush administration to terrorise teh American public to support an erronious war on iraq. Which had nothing to do with 9/11.
It gets worse too. If you know the real reason for 9/11, then you will also know the US wrongful world stock market manipulation was in fact the motivation and excuse of fanitics born out of the oil industry to be able to convince enough to follow.
simply start with a google search on "trillion dollar bet" and then realize who teh big losers were (enron, worldcom, etc.) and who benefitted from investment firms needing to put the enormus gains somewhere and found the dot coms...)
Anthrax? Who really needs it, but to play unneeded war games by the idiots who simply don't know better how to spend tax payer money. Of the 6 billion plus people on this planet, what fractional percentage are responsible for the hardships of the rest of us?
http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/theme_a/mod0
Anthrax? To control it, get rid of the all the war mongers and power mongers responsible for creating it and worse..... we do know who they are! Just like indonesia knew it was the Americans who were draining their economy, but they just didn't know how (CNN did a story... so did ABC, but ABC removed their news link around teh time war on iraq started)
... search for activa holdings and the womans name --- but use teh cache of found links...
... being a mother and motivated to address her fear that she can't keep kids from being kids.. and getting into things they should not.
....... AS A MATTER OF SIMPLE PUBLIC RELATIONS MARKETING.
What little I read... and there is alot more to read such as city council meetings etc...
and having worked in a related field of cabinetry (one of the later things to install). It is not completely reasonabe to enforce some of her complaints as the environment of a construction site is going to be influenced by the construction. (I have no doubts that personnel at the construction site dislikes nails in the parking lot as mush as she dislikes nails elsewhere.
On the other hand and in recognition of this above fact, is she lying? The odds are she is telling the truth but perhaps expecting to much and as such
Should a construction company and sub contractors police (control teh level of hazards and garbage and etc..) the sites they work at? Yes, they should if only as a matter of public relations marketing. Otherwise it seems to me that there is a matter of private property where kids and anyone else at the construction site, that shouldn't be there, is trespassing.
When I pass by a construction site the way it is kept makes an impression on me as to the quality and attention to detail I can expect from the general contractor. Their expectations on the sub-contractors to maintain a reasonably clean appearance of the property. I get this from working on multi million dollar sites.
But I also recognize a trespassing issue.
Activa should not sue her, thats very bad PR. Instead they should require their subcontractors to maintain their trash and such, as well as post no tresspassing signs.
They should pay her any expense they have cost her in this legal mess and then do the right thing
its an idea that has been around for alt least 8 years, probably more like 20.
.... something to patent bitchslap and crap?
It's nice to see others comming up with it too, as that keeps it from being bitch slapped with patent crap.
The smaller the OS the more room you potentially have for applications and data.
Its obvious that technology allows storage media to get smaller in size, bigger in space and faster in access.
This is where virus, worm and whatever badness can be stopped cold in its tracks.
Whan you have write protected media to hold the OS and applications you don't have to worry about getting corrupted, like a CD ROM. And as storage of the multi-write once kind comes along of inexpensive, small and terabyte size it'll be enough to never really need to erase anything, but only disable access to old or bad stuff.
Even today this sort of thing is possible though on a much reduced scale.
OS and Applications can be pretty much static, so upgrading would only be making a new rom device with whatever upgraded software you want. A secondary device for your personal data and configuration...
A device that combines both
Two USB based drives on one comnnector, providing two write protect switches.
Like car keys --- you physically take it with you and plug it into whatever hardware you have access to.
Now here is the most interesting part of such a personal device.....you no longer need the overhead of multi-user security.... And removing it provides a huge boost to speed and user friendliness.
A small OS like AROS (an open source Amiga Research Operating System) will do well with such a device.
I am a ubuntu user, A knoppix user, an Amiga use...and less and less a windows users.
.... mindset failure of teh US patent office.
anyone know of a screen bug un Breezy? one where after a long period of inactivity the screen won't come back up?
On Drake (sorta):
read thru the few comments here so far... If you don't like Gnome then use Kubuntu or even just add KDE and have a choice. This is not an isse of the distro, but of you personal choice. Same applies to the theme. If you don't like it then stop being lazy and change it.... Jeez. maybe we need a tutorial added to it to teach people that they can do this and how...(rolls eyes)
Reading about the goals of Drake, I get this feeling that out of the linux development evolution there is comming a time when companies, such as MS, just don't have the dev bandwidth to compete or even keep up. And it seem this will happen well within ten years.
At such a time, where do we then go? What is the next stepping stone towards completely free software? (where software won't be genunily free until it is easy enough to create or cause the computer to create it for you at your direction, like the results of using a claculator to get a free for you result)...... the building of user friendly dev interfaces?
This is really nothing more than another Microsoft expression of arrogance.
I mean they do have the singularity OS....
I'm the richest man in the world, I have all the great looking girls, all the sex I want, best food in the world and well respected worldwise. I'll tell you how to do the same, just send me $20.
hint: marketing
...comprehend knowledge and even apply it.... that is the brain recorder and playback
Social development does require more time simply because of the time it takes the body to change enough to expreience and know.
However, on the matter of social skill/knowledge, there are many different customs around the world but one constant, the constant of dishonesty, the ability to understand human nature and manipulate it to fit your needs, desires, etc..
This too can be taught, however, the avoidance of learning this will be detrimental to this kids ability to make breakthrus in physics.
If you don't know how to manipulate people, then how will you handle the most powerful force in nature... human ignorance and denial.
You can know how to bring all the wonderful things to mankind, but what good will it do, when nobody listens because they are to afraid of what they do not understand or what threatens their personal ways, beliefs, etc..
for example:
Galelio was exonerated around 1990, by the catholic church, which finally accepted the fact that the earth is not the center of the universe. Alot of good it did him in his life time to be exonerated long past his death.
As another example.... google and how so many are becomming to "fear" it and wage a war on them. imitate them , etc...
This kid needs to learn the truth about dishonesty, for that is where he will find the answer to how to lie to gravity.
And he is not going to learn that without genuine real time feedback..The difference between theory and practical application.
it is done just like everyone else who contribute to open source.
If the governemnt contributes funds then it must be without strings.
What would make sence, is to simply focus in on development of the applications the government themselves would use and to make this open source on teh grounds that it is the tax payers who have paid for it. If they want to hire open source programmers to do so, then so be it. But to subsidize open source development in general is against the legal scope of the government and contridicts the competitive economic system we are supposed to have.
Open source doesn't need that kind of help from the government.
But in teh spirit and intent of open source, it is within the scope of the government to make use of and even contribute to open source as other do, by contributing code or sponsoring projects of potential use by the governemt themselves.
It is teh ability to create and modify for your use, that makes open source more what the usrs want than software dictated to the user (i.e. proprietary).
someone is going to start making converters of signals and formats cause I ain't buying no HDTV to replace the working 32" TV I have and certainly not going to buy this new fangled tech... to only then deal with the next latest and greatest tech video....
and that converter is gonna have to be less then $40 before I'll buy it.... Who loses? Well I don't see the commercials then do I?
I'm not sure I understand what/who is being protected with this insurance.
But regardless of that, there is the matter of "UNEXPECTED events"..... with nature there can be unexpected events due our limited understanding of nature, and in the physical world there can be unexpected human events such as unintentional traffic accidents, again due a lack of knowledge or applied knowledge.
Hmm, is this open source insurance along the lines of uninsured motorist insurance?
But regarding "Unexpected events" in the area of software development. When you have a military powerful country wrongly supporting software patents and a software industry that either doesn't understand the nature of software or does and abuses it with intentional acts of consumer fraud or at best consumer misdirection...The ability to determine what is right vs. what is wrong comes down to politics and the ability to manipulate the abstract by those who do just that for a living.
There is no place for honesty in the current development methodologies and economics of software.
Would you today provide insurance for the practice of the belief that the earth is the center of the universe? Insurance that would help to protect against any events contrary to such belief?
I don't think so, not today, but back then? Perhaps someone would.
The Genuine Science of software developemt has been on a detour since number crunching for decription of war time code provided monitary incentive to detour.
To understand software, that it is a reflection of the programmers mindset. A mindset influenced by those before them. As such how can there be "unexpected events"? Unless there is a failure of understanding the primary functionality of the human mind in creating and using abstraction.... and what happens to such insurance when a better understanding comes about?
Try this on for size:
Software patents are understood to be obviously fraudlent.
The Economy changes it's common point of operation to the common user, just as mathmatics and accounting moved from the roman numeral accountants to the everyday user upon a better understanding
via a better numercal tool set.
Most proprietry software is limited to inhouse developed and used software, proprietary as a secondary effect of common employment confidentuality agreement.
Infringment on Open Source Software licenses, such as the GPL? There is nothing in the GPL that prevents inhouse confidentuality of software used only inhouse.
Proper fundamental software development research will show it is not only a human right but a human duty to advance by building upon the values of those who came before. It is that which makes us unique in the animal world.
Programming is the act of automating complexity in order to make that complexity easy to use and reuse by the user of the complexity. It is a recursive act, where programmers today create software using th e automations those before them, have created. Exception is perhaps those who program in pure machine language of 1's and 0's. The projected and ultimate goal of such an act as programming, will achieve a level of ease of use that the everyday user can instruct the system to create automations based upon the users instructions or direction.
So this insurance, what exactly is it for?
microsoft...
If you know how much it is going to cost you in the event you get busted, allowing for thios, you can determine how worth it, it will be to risk such an endevor.
Now if you can make the cost of getting busted reduced even further then you will have better opportunity to profit over this unfair (anti-trust was named that for a reason) practice expense to you (should you get caught).
Now, with all this, if you can gain 100 million in income in exchange for, at worst, a 1 million dollar cost (should you get busted) which way will you go?
To cheat or not to cheat?
This insurance is not only FUD but promotes dishonesty by providing an excuse level of disconnection from the responsibility of commiting a wrong intentionally.
And who pays for the pay out? (cause we all know it will happen, being busted)
The company doing the wrong has just limited their potential losses but the wronged party collects the insurance????
what are the differences in actually getting paid by court order vs. insurance claim?
company A steals code from coder B who then collects 100 million in insurance that company A only paid 1 million for...
Where does the other 99 million come from?
Who is really getting screwed here?
The concept of disconnection comes to mind such that totally disconnected parties pay higher insurance rates...
And what of fair competition? Where is the motive to be fair?
There shouldn't be insurance that protects the dishonest.
Or maybe someone should start selling murder insurance.
the rest of us..
small kernel OSs have their place and as technology makes things smaller and to some point a bit more dedicated...
The time will come where the small kernel OSs are being used more then the big kernel Os's..
If there is anything notable about this it's classic MS methodology of product creation.
Take what others have done, change some thing just enough to market speak "it's new and aren't we innovative" and then sell it to....
those who don't know better..... which seems to be in endless supply...
Let's face it, if there is anything that says Linux and the likes are becomming a serious competitor to MS, its what extream changes MS seems to be making so to parrallel Open Source Software.
Apparently even they see the direction of the market and they certainly want to detour it towards them.
We all know what deceptive tactics MS applies.
See FOSS really is good for the market.... Real competition works.
And its ony real because MS couldn't find dishonest tactics to work against FOSS. And they Did try, and Try and Try...
But it doesn't mean they won't stop trying to apply dishonest tactics.
The Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) is nothing more than the collecting up what others have done in the way of programming concepts and datatypes and presenting it in a single package in a non conflicting manner. The CIL (Common intermediate Language) is only translating these higher level abstraction into a lower common denominator which is then runs on an engine.
Even the concepts of these different levels/layers is of the works of others.
Its like taking advanced math and translating it down to processes of addition before doing the calculation.
eventually all programs get translated down to binary.... machine language, the machines language..... its all nothing but translation.
How many ways can you translate something?
That's not what matters here. What matters here is how well what ever way you come up with or decide upon, how you market it.
MS is a Marketing Software Company first and formost, followed by its legal staff to insure where ever it breaks the law it will have gained more then any judgement against them. And third place still is NOT its department of innovation but its department of buying out, shutting out and otherwise reinventing what others have done and claiming its their mastery of innovation, in their marketing spill.
This is not Bashing MS.... Its verified fact.
Support Criminals, buy MS....
I've read the article and many of the comments here both in support of and against this shell.
The stupid part about it all is that it really just comes down to being another langauge. As such many of the arguement against are obviously biased towards their individual mindset of what they are use to. And those in support are typically not so set in their ways regarding scripting.
But the world is not going to stop all the other languages they speak and start suddenly using MS speak.
Ultimately programming languages are just higher level abstractions that get translated down to flipping binary bits.
Translation that can be done in many different ways.
MS has long promoted user stupidity in regards to the shell.... That alone will retard acceptance and use of this.
And the competition of FOSS will keep on keeping on. Without competition or developers outside of MS, MS would have neither the motive nor source of ideas... to advance at all.
... intent to commit fraud. The Fact we have a governing body supporting it doesn't help the matter but instead exposes what seems to be support for criminal actions.
This XML pantent thing is of course fraudulent but its also good news in a round about way.
It contributes to the exposure of this system of government supported fraud. For the bigger a software patent claim, as this is, the greater the pressure that builds up to what will be, in essence.... not a reform, not an overhaul, but a dumping of a government system that is NOT doing what it is supposed to be doing.
When patents hurt the consumer benefit of competition, suppress technology advancement and worst of all promote fraud, then it is time to simply remove the system all together.
I do not recognize software patents at all, but that doesn't mean I don't respect copyrights of the subject of patent.
The US did not involve the people in its decission to allow software patents. That alone is a contridiction of the intents of "For the People, By the People" of which this country was formed.
By its very nature, Software is NOT matter of patentability, it falls out of the scope of patents on core patentability qualifications. It is Abstract, It is a Natural Phenomenon of human consciousness that has simply moved from one media to another as we have developed such medias. From the grunts and sounds of unconscious (consciousness as defined by Julian Jaynes) human beings thru the technology advancements such as writing and all other forms of recording and playback or access of record to the non-static media of computing.
Programming is tha act of automating abstract complexity. Done so for the purpose of making the complexity easy to use and reuse by the users of the complexity. It is a recursive act all the way down to programming by flipping switches... or machine language on up the "automation of complexity ladder" to the point where we are today and will improve upon tomorrow....
This is a character attribute of being human, and regardless of whether or not you are using a computer. Establishing routines in your daily life or work process in order to simplify and perhaps allow your to think about other things, do other things, etc...No different than programming and the result of. This is the natural law of Man, who we are.
Software Patents are Fraud, simply because at the core scope of patents, they do not fit voidance of the abstract, physical phenomenon or natural law.
Fraud is the act of presenting something that is not what it is presented to be.
The act of presenting an illusion with the intent of wrongfully taking from another.
Software is copyrightable.
Knowing this makes its very clear that when someone claims there is no IP protection for software if there is not software patents...... OBVIOUS Supporters of the software Patent FRAUD!!!
Wow, man... bummer .... and cool man...
... a double standard.
As governments (made up of people) pursue the invasion of privacy of individuals in the name of anti-terrorism than it should not be a double standard.
What would happen if the whole world was able to look at any area and/or spot on the planet in various resolutions and as it currently is (up to date), as well as time lapse sections?
The arguement for invasion of privacy is to prevent wrong doings and identify those pursuing such criminal direction.
So lets apply open source software methodology to the world view of google maps and earth!!!
Lets' identify the fuckers with their war machines and intentions....and when they argue against it, throw them in the prison of total world exposure for being intentional unfair and supporting double standards.
Lets get Google Maps up to speed of being current!
We need it to apply open source software methodology in riding the world of terrorism.
life itself... or is that fear itself?
2 /www.worldgame.org/wwwproject/index.shtml
Actually it has been proven that many things can assist terrorist.
From a car which anyone can use to kill another person or persons, etc..
To political propoganda used to gain public support for terrorism and its promotion. US government generated more terrorism in response to 9/11 than what 9/11 did.
And then there is the stock market to manipulate and drain whole regions (like the trillion dollar beat did to south east asia in the mid to late 1990's)....and how that motivated and created support for "terriorism" leading up to 9/11...
So if most anything can be used to generate terriorism, directly or indirectly... whats the exceptions?
How about http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/theme_a/mod0
Lets genuinely start fixing things and putting under the microscope that which opposes such a direction.
Google maps can help that direction too.
Choice...which is it?
Acid, LSD, Mescaline, Pyote, Magic Mushrooms, etc.. does for brain cell growth..
But I'm confused a bit... Wasn't all the propoganda we were feed saying just the opposite?
Hmmm, Oh wow, reverse psychology for teen age rebellion... cool.....
Wow man, guess that means they were cool too.
Wow Wow.... man what a bummer... if we are being told this now, it must mean its really now killing brain cells...
My head hurts.. either I'm growing brain cells of I'm killing some... which is it? Hey dude, What would Bush or Gates want?
On another note: considering the number of highly moderated "Funny" comments in this slashdot crowd.... It struck me that those without experience might not see the humor. Uh, but this is slashdot, is there anyone without some experience?
Didn't somebody say something about the decline of science, technology and R&D in the US? Maybe its time to make pot legal.
We all really know the answer to the problem.
Allowing software patents is fraudlent and very discourging to genuine research.
Amoung other discourging acts in politics and military and business.
And so long as foolish act such as this continue and are allowed, the US is simply just getting what it diserves and apparently wanted by the psuedo leaders.
I can agree that software should be less buggy, however there are many factors influencing bugginess, from hardware issues to motivation to generate repeat sales (upgrades).
...... What will it be called should the public ever take a stand for their fair rights?
There is a way to fix this industry wide problem howver the solution direction is not compatable with the current methodology of repeat sales and support for a dollar price.
I recall some research that dealt with why the Mac wasn't a bigger success and the reason is that its simpler to use than the typicaly windows PC. As such it requires less service and support and this equates to causing less money to flow in the service and support industry.
Bugginess in software follows the logic of why not to fix it...
Licensings is another issue all together.... there is no fair way that many licenses read.... you give us your first born and we are not responsible for any bugs that kill the rest of your family....
If a software producer is not going to take responsibility for their product then as far as I'm concerned they have no rights to impose upon me any restrictions that prevent me from fixing their product so I can use it without damage... and that includes getting the help of others outside of them to fix it.
It is this that contributes to my support of free open source software.
I understand he difficulty of making sure your software works in the endless hardware and software configurations, Likewise software producers must understand our RIGHTS as Consumers to be allowed to fix it, outside of them.
Proprietary software without responsibility is intentionally a double standard and the courts really should recognize this.
But considering the US courts don't understand the unpatentable nature fo software and never ever consulted the public on the..... there is certainly breading grounds for dishonesty and double standards.
Boston tea party.... for software
... again and again.
...and even innovation doesn't come in a distant third and that is the place of the buyout/shutout division... fromn which they buy whatever innovation they then claim inventorship of.
... that you can taste in the complete lack of advancing the shell to be even halfway to where the rest of the world is shell wise (Oh yeah.. it'll be in longhorn....Uh not really...) to simpler innovations such as the hard drive formating utility in windows XP in comparison earlier versions... of uh... windows.. not the rest of the world... Oh it nice they are making improvements except they complixicate it enough to sum to much less then it could have been...
... a summary of the more common programming concept and datatypes integrated in sum to be non conflicting. An accident or by the way look what we did in the process of trying to corner the industry...
Microsoft is first and formost a marketing company followed second a chess playing legal firm in support of the marketing goals
This goes all the way back to how Bill Gates got his start...a law school drop out, yet with law connections (good ol' daddy judge), with his porting of BASIC to tha altair (Porting - for those who do not know the term, doen't mean being innovative but taking the innovations of another and making it available on another platform)... and of course lets not forget the selling of DOS to IBM before Microsoft even approached the guy who wrote and owned it...
Success by Microsofts standards is accomplished by "Making people need them" and this is done by the practice of never really giving customers a full products by which they might themselves then not need MS.
If the is any innovation out of Microsoft it is either by accident of trying to "make people need them" of is of the type of innovation you could do without, such as the "manifested integrated user frustration function"
Microsofts Common Language infrastructure research and resulting CIL, etc..is an example not of innovation but of effort to simply sum up all the many works of others
Right is right and wrong is wrong.... the eolas patent is wrong and two wrongs don't make a right. Not only is the eolas patent wrong in what its claims of uniqueness are but software itself is by it's nature is not patentable and this is provable. This is important to understand when you bring MS into the picture with their claims of "software factories" and other things in that direction.
It's important because if MicroSoft really genuinely knew about what it is they make claims to, then they would have been able to defeat the eolas patent crap.
As a marketing company applying market testing and using art of war tactics to apply the same "market testing" concept in their marketing but in sole effort to suppress the competition, discourage the competition.... If they were genuine innovators of software (instead of at best innovators of applying art of war tactics in marketing...) then they really wouldn't have felt they ever needed to break the anti-trust laws..... in so many countries...
They don't lack marketing skill.... but to resort to unfair play..... thats not consistant with innovation competition but consistant with knowing you are a little guy (read on to understand this evident self perspective)
They are not olympic material and never will be, even if they throw their art of war marketing tactic at it to convince the masses.
Innovation competition of the olympic level is that of being a competitor, even if you lose, you win. Like the way open source works. Once the four minute mile was achieved and then broken... others then knew it was possible and worked to do better, even using the same tools, mental and physical.
Unlike the proprietary closed source which in essence says that you cannot use the values accomplished to then do better than.
Standing on the shoulders of giants vs. being a giant that other then stand on your shoulders....
Microsoft will never be that giant, no matter how damn rich and big they are, have been or might be. Bill Gates Himself Knows this!!! How else could he even think to even today claim he's the little guy being picked on (as he has done)?