Ever since Linux became the media darling and it became 'cool' to run Linux, the focus has shifted from competing with superior products such as Solaris and Digital Unix to competing with inferior products - namely Microsoft Windows. This is why Microsoft continue to post FUD rubbish on their web site, and 'accidentally' leak supposedly internal documents. It is to raise the ire of the 16-yr-old 'cool' skript kiddies, make a fuss, show the Linux community to be made up of immature 16-yr-old skript kiddies, and to retain the image that Microsoft is who we are competing with.
It's time everyone woke up and realised we are not competing with Microsoft - we have had a far better operating system for 5 years - there is no competition, Linux wins hands down! Why waste time and energy downgrading Linux so it looks and performs like an inferior product? We're supposed to be on the bleeding edge of software engineering, not the dull edge playing catchup to someone who is already behind!
Let Microsoft claim whatever they want. Let them print whatever lies they feel on their web site. What does it matter when nobody is listening to them? The proof is in the pudding that Unix solutions are the best. Lets concentrate on making better proofs and better puddings, and Microsoft can choke on their own vomit.
I agree, I had a lot of fun messing about with OpenBSD (the only one I got to have close to fully installed) and it is a very nice system. I guess I'm mostly disappointed that I couldn't continue due to the problems I experienced.
One thing that did surprise me was that ssh was not included - I had to grab it from ports. There were buttloads of other security/crypto stuff though.
I gave OpenBSD a go on two systems - the first one it crashed repeatedly while recompiling the kernel, the second it couldn't recognise the ethernet card (couldn't even get up to the stage of recompiling the kernel) FreeBSD did the same thing on the second box - couldn't recognise the ethernet card. While comparing the ethernet driver sections of the OpenBSD kernel source and the Linux kernel source, I noted that Linux supported 4 times as many chipsets as the BSD's, including the one for the card in the second machine. I chuckled actually as *BSD advocates are always claiming that they have better networking than Linux. They can feel free to continue thinking that fallacy, there were some other strong points to OpenBSD that I liked a lot and its a shame that I can't run a BSD system due to severe lack of hardware support in their kernels.
Of course the NetBSD crowd are now going to tell me that its my fault for not using NetBSD - but don't bother, I already checked and the card isn't supported with that either.
I'm related to the scientist who discovered the technology that makes this possible. Actually the real storage size possible is much much greater. The trouble is that there are rather large companies like Seagate, Quantum, et al who, like oil companies with superior car propulsion systems, have vested interests in making this technology never see the light of day.
I don't know about you but I'm growing tired of watching the advancement of the human race being held back by greedy, selfish corporations.
I think this is the main problem with most educational curriculums. Evolution like creation, solid state, dropped-here-by-aliens, any what have you are ALL theories. Ideas. Speculation. Hypothesis. So far no community has been able to _prove_ their theory, yet in most educational curriculums evolution is the only such theory being taught, and it's being taught as if it's proven fact. Lying to children like this is pathetic. It's taking a completely unscientific approach. The correct thing to do would be either a) address the 3-4 most popular theories or b) don't teach it at all. Most kids don't give a crap where they came from, in 5-6 years all they'll be worrying about is how to afford rent and food and pay taxes. Making it non-compulsory to teach evolution is a step forward in actually addressing the issue with a proper scientific approach.
Last time I used fips the source code was available, so not only did they get that bit wrong, they also label it "hard-to-use".
Anybody who thinks fips is hard to use should pack up their computer into the box it came in, take it back to the place they bought it, and tell the salespeople they're too stupid to own a computer.
Now, if only the ACCC would stop Telstra screwing everyone for IP traffic. They are charged nothing from MCI, but charge everybody else 19c/Mb incoming, 8c/Mb outgoing traffic. This means for most ISP's that the money they get from customers goes straight to Telstra - in one hand & out the other. Telstra also run a competing ISP business, BigPond, which I doubt they charge for traffic. (or if they do, its a token accounting book shift of funds that means nothing in real money). ISP's are forced to go throgh Telstra as it's the only provider worth a damn. People think Microsoft have a monopoly, they're nothing compared to Telstra.
That being said, their level of service is pretty good and their tech support are excellent (perhaps the telephone side of Telstra could learn from the Internet side here). I think my major complaint really is that they invented ISDN, yet they resell it here so @#$#@$ expensive yet the bloody yanks get it for next to nix. Should be the other way 'round.
Both companies have embraced Open Source (even if somewhat reservedly, which is to be expected of long-time commercial organisations anyway) and look what benefits the end user is getting already - drivers with source for some of the best 2D/3D cards on the market, GLX, and now these companies are putting aside their differences and working together to create something great for the end user in time to come. Perhaps a cheap SGI Visual Workstation with a 96Mb TNT3?:-) Well, I can dream can't I? This is The Way It Should Be (tm) and these companies deserve our fullest support.
United we stand, divided we fall. Total World Domination is achieved through the uniting of hardware vendors and software authors to produce IT solutions that are powerful, flexible and free. Free in the sense of freedom, not monetary cost.
You're a BSD person, no? One of the things I picked up from Darren Reed's talk at CALU was that in the BSD world, the whole distribution is considered the operating system. In the Linux world, it's just the kernel that is considered the OS. The distinction may be small, but it's important to grasp the concept. You can take a Linux kernel from Debian and compile and run it on a Slackware box. Have fun trying that on a BSD system;-) The differences between the Linux distributions are mainly two-fold, a) the level of FHS compliancy and b) the VAR software included (packaging tools, useless GUI install programs, in some cases commercial software). That software still runs under the same OS - Linux. And in fact you can take that software and run it on any other distribution. From what I gathered from Darren Reed, even the exact same distribution of BSD you can't do that on between minor revisions! ('ps' was a case in point)
They lost the tender for linux.com, so now they go away and have a sook and try to make their own. Yet another case of NIH syndrome that is so rampant at redhat.com.
Get some facts on QNX. It is not a desktop platform; although it can be used on a desktop system as well, it is really targetted at embedded systems. It has been doing this for 15 years or more - you can't call anyone in the market that long "rarely used". They have an X-Windows compatible/compliant GUI in 32K - the only shallowness I can see in that is the depth of the useless bloat. Give me a Linux(or BSD, or whatever) distribution that includes a modular Unix kernel, X windows, a web server, a graphical web browser, TCP/IP and PPP, some graphics demos, and fits with lots of space free on a single 1.4Mb floppy disk. Oh, you can't? Damn, you should have used QNX then.
Umm.. QNX did not offer him a job, read the letter from the QNX guy again and ignore Mandrake's self-inflating comments.
Why would the market leader in embedded operating systems (read: high performance and tiny) want to employ the market leader in bloated, low-performance crap?
I thought "wow, I might buy this game" until I rad the fine print - needs glide. Sorry, but 3dfx screwed over the entire video card industry and it'll be a cold day in hell when I buy a game that requires their non-standard proprietary libraries to do 3D graphics. Come on Loki, OpenGL has been around a long time and is portable across architectures. It is also usable on hardware that simply pisses all over crappy 3dfx cards, like the nVidia TNT2 Ultra, 3dlabs Permedia/3 and Oxygen, etc. You'll get a lot more money out of people if they're actually able to use your software. Locking it into a minority market with proprietary, binary-only drivers like 3dfx is really limiting your potential customer base and profits.
And you really believe that? This is coming from the political party with a track record of going back on promises as soon as they're elected, or re-elected, to government, at both the State and Federal level. It's also the party whose leader is solely responsible for putting the country into hundreds of billions of dollars of debt over 15 years. I'd vote for One Nation over these bozos.
It does not matter if the content is encrypted. The law is about providing access to the content. If you provide access to encrypted content, you're still providing access to the content and are therefore in violation of the law.
How does one tell if encrypted content is in violation or not? You can't, therefore there will no doubt be another law passed saying that all encrypted content is illegal.
Frangbe Evpuneq Nyfgba pna fhpx zl pbpx.
I'm not voting Liberal at the next election. This presents a dilemma, since there's no other party that's worth voting for. Guess I'll have to start the Dust Puppy Party. Platform: sell off the business side of Telstra but keep ownership of the infrastructure and resell that to t/c providers. Free net access to all Australians. Charge Telstra twice as much as everyone else for internet traffic (my, how the tables turn) and use the extra money to boost education and public hospital funding. Weekly sacrificial burnings of Microsoft software.
Please check out Netcraft's Web server survey where it is quite visible what's been happening since Mindcraft-1.
IIS goes up, Apache goes down.
This is the exact opposite of the previous trend over many years, which just goes to show that Microsoft's Marketing Department haven't lost their mind control quite as much as many people believe. FUD still works. Meaningless benchmarks showing that my mini accellerates faster than your Ferrari (carefully ignoring the fact that the mini was being driven off a cliff and the ferrari was towing a double-b up a steep hill) still work.
I think it's time that people just give up advocation and accept the fact that there will always be stupid people, and those stupid people will easily be duped by marketing departments of large corporations. Stupid people deserve to run Microsoft Windows. Let them run it. Let them put up with its incompatibilities, its pathetic security, its poor performance, its total instability, its lack of standards conformance. Their smart competitors will soon crush their business. Their systems will run into the ground. It happens on a daily basis all around the world already. And what do the smart consultants say when they're called in to fix the problem?
I told you in the first place you should have run Unix. By the way, my fee has tripled.
* One condition of the re-test was that the Linux system could not use patches available after some date back in April before the first test. Therefore it could not use the patches that fix the TCP/IP bottleneck that are already in the 2.3 kernels. Microsoft, however, were allowed to use patches they made to NT after, such as the NTFS fixes.
* They still use Apache even though everyone knows Zeus is faster. They make a claim that it was "not much different" but there is no data given to back this up. Even Apache Group ppl will tell you that Zeus is much faster, since Apache is designed for flexibility and not raw speed.
* On that subject, the IIS server used has a fast path to spit out static pages. Apache does not.
So pretty much we have the same situation as the first test - highly tuned NT beats poorly tuned Linux. Except this time, as many people feared, the results have some kind of "stamp of approval" on it since Redhat were involved. Even if it was some guy nobody has ever heard of before (which, judging from past experience with Redhat, generally means some college kid on summer vacation). I can see the headlines now: "College Kid can't tune Linux as well as professional NT engineers from Microsoft can tune NT"
Oh, hang on, that would require truth in journalism.
People are just going to have to get used to the fact that the distribution aimed at the majority of the userbase is going to be including software and be setup so that userbase can use it, and attract software with similar goals from the commercial sector.
IDE's are for clueless gumbies. Redhat Linux is for clueless gumbies.
I think it's a good match. And I praise Redhat for taking the time to keep software real hackers don't need, and users real hackers don't want to deal with, away from the distributions real hackers use.
Let Redhat pitch themselves at Microsoft, let their users think Linux is the alternative to Microsoft. The real hackers know Microsoft don't even enter the equation.
Actually the history is the reverse - aterm was started when Sasha Vasko took wterm, changed all the credits to him/her/itself, and relabeled it aterm. It used to be fun to count how long it would take him/her/it after a new wterm was released to change all the credits again and release a new aterm, also you could appear like an oracle to newbies by predicting an aterm release and what it's new features would be.
In fact the whole afterstep camp seem to suffer from the same problem - following in the footsteps of Window Maker. What a neat idea those external rendering libraries are! Never seen that before in Window Maker (or Blackbox either, where the author was nice enough to let us know beforehand and even ask permission even though that's not really required but a nice gesture anyway). How about we include that in our ripped-off terminal emulator? How original! Never seen Eterm do that for 4 years now, and we'll ignore the existence of wterm in case anybody wises up and runs a diff across aterm and wterm sources and realises all we did was change the credits for it to ourselves.
Once all you can do is rip off everyone else, your project and community is dead.
Senator Stott-Despoja pointed out in "The Australian" a few weeks back that there already exists legislation against activities that this bill is trying to stop. Paedophilia is illegal already. Providing pornography to minors is illegal already. She states, and I agree wholeheartedly, that what is necessary is not yet another piece of legislation, but simply the enforcement of the existing laws.
What I find most irritating is the fact that many (albeit clueless) people will be joining up with those so-called "Kidsafe" service providers. Doesn't sound so bad until you discover that many of the providers of those services are also the providers of the largest porn sites in the country. So the big winners with this new bill if it becomes law are the very people the law is trying to stop.
What I also find offensive is that this bill is _forcing_ ISP's (apart from the aforementioned of course who only have to block their own servers) to waste time searching for pornography to block before they are sued for three months income before tax/expenses, instead of simply doing their jobs providing internet access. I don't think that's going to impress the many Christian system administrators at ISP's having to search for pornography by law.
Now, let me digress into some responses to the many posts here: Senator Brian Harradine for whom this bill was to appease is a former Labor Party member who was ejected from the Party for going against party lines back in the 70's with the Whitlam government. He founded the trade union movement in Tasmania before joining federal politics. The issue was not the GST, it was the sale of Telstra. Harradine was never going to be sold on the GST as his very strong Labor ties/beliefs are against it. As for the idea to encrypt content, that's irrelevent as the bill is about the access to the content, it makes no difference if it is encrypted, should this bill be passed the encrypted stuff has to be blocked as well. I hope this scares you, because the next step of course is that since it it obviously impossible in any decent time frame to decrypt encrypted data to see if it is illegal content or not, ALL encrypted data will have to be blocked lest some of it be illegal. Goodbye E-commerce.
Finally, the US Government are supposed to be enforcing trade sanctions against Australia if this becomes law as the bill violates a treaty signed just 5 months ago by the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (and other things he has no clue about) Senator Richard Alston (the main person responsible for this bill - that goes to show how competent he is).
The media contact at DCITA (notice how its phonetically "deceiter"?) is Terry O'Conner, you can reach him on 02 6277 7480 (place a +63 in front of that if you're overseas).
XFree86, among a ton of other common programs, are not GPL either. Quick! You better delete them before anybody finds out you're using non-GPL'd programs!;-)
Hang on a minute, your computer hardware was not released under the GPL either! Better put it back in the box, take it back to where you bought it, and tell the salesperson that you're too stupid to own a computer.
Because Linus doesn't like it (that's the official response).
If you check out http://www.bitmover.com/bitkeeper/ you will find the program that _will_ be used (was meant to be for 2.3 but I guess they started that a little early)
Slashdot Mirror
Ever since Linux became the media darling and it became 'cool' to run Linux, the focus has shifted from competing with superior products such as Solaris and Digital Unix to competing with inferior products - namely Microsoft Windows. This is why Microsoft continue to post FUD rubbish on their web site, and 'accidentally' leak supposedly internal documents. It is to raise the ire of the 16-yr-old 'cool' skript kiddies, make a fuss, show the Linux community to be made up of immature 16-yr-old skript kiddies, and to retain the image that Microsoft is who we are competing with.
It's time everyone woke up and realised we are not competing with Microsoft - we have had a far better operating system for 5 years - there is no competition, Linux wins hands down! Why waste time and energy downgrading Linux so it looks and performs like an inferior product? We're supposed to be on the bleeding edge of software engineering, not the dull edge playing catchup to someone who is already behind!
Let Microsoft claim whatever they want. Let them print whatever lies they feel on their web site. What does it matter when nobody is listening to them? The proof is in the pudding that Unix solutions are the best. Lets concentrate on making better proofs and better puddings, and Microsoft can choke on their own vomit.
If Unix is as old and decrepid as Micros~1 want everyone to believe, why didn't they post the TPC rating of Oracle on a Sun Enterprise 10000 ?
Oh wait, Oracle beat them to that, where the 30-year-old technology was over two orders of magnitude better than Windows NT.
I agree, I had a lot of fun messing about with OpenBSD (the only one I got to have close to fully installed) and it is a very nice system. I guess I'm mostly disappointed that I couldn't continue due to the problems I experienced.
One thing that did surprise me was that ssh was not included - I had to grab it from ports. There were buttloads of other security/crypto stuff though.
I gave OpenBSD a go on two systems - the first one it crashed repeatedly while recompiling the kernel, the second it couldn't recognise the ethernet card (couldn't even get up to the stage of recompiling the kernel)
FreeBSD did the same thing on the second box - couldn't recognise the ethernet card. While comparing the ethernet driver sections of the OpenBSD kernel source and the Linux kernel source, I noted that Linux supported 4 times as many chipsets as the BSD's, including the one for the card in the second machine. I chuckled actually as *BSD advocates are always claiming that they have better networking than Linux. They can feel free to continue thinking that fallacy, there were some other strong points to OpenBSD that I liked a lot and its a shame that I can't run a BSD system due to severe lack of hardware support in their kernels.
Of course the NetBSD crowd are now going to tell me that its my fault for not using NetBSD - but don't bother, I already checked and the card isn't supported with that either.
I'm related to the scientist who discovered the technology that makes this possible. Actually the real storage size possible is much much greater.
The trouble is that there are rather large companies like Seagate, Quantum, et al who, like oil companies with superior car propulsion systems, have vested interests in making this technology never see the light of day.
I don't know about you but I'm growing tired of watching the advancement of the human race being held back by greedy, selfish corporations.
I think this is the main problem with most educational curriculums. Evolution like creation, solid state, dropped-here-by-aliens, any what have you are ALL theories. Ideas. Speculation. Hypothesis. So far no community has been able to _prove_ their theory, yet in most educational curriculums evolution is the only such theory being taught, and it's being taught as if it's proven fact. Lying to children like this is pathetic. It's taking a completely unscientific approach. The correct thing to do would be either a) address the 3-4 most popular theories or b) don't teach it at all. Most kids don't give a crap where they came from, in 5-6 years all they'll be worrying about is how to afford rent and food and pay taxes.
Making it non-compulsory to teach evolution is a step forward in actually addressing the issue with a proper scientific approach.
Last time I used fips the source code was available, so not only did they get that bit wrong, they also label it "hard-to-use".
Anybody who thinks fips is hard to use should pack up their computer into the box it came in, take it back to the place they bought it, and tell the salespeople they're too stupid to own a computer.
Now, if only the ACCC would stop Telstra screwing everyone for IP traffic. They are charged nothing from MCI, but charge everybody else 19c/Mb incoming, 8c/Mb outgoing traffic. This means for most ISP's that the money they get from customers goes straight to Telstra - in one hand & out the other. Telstra also run a competing ISP business, BigPond, which I doubt they charge for traffic.
(or if they do, its a token accounting book shift of funds that means nothing in real money). ISP's are forced to go throgh Telstra as it's the only provider worth a damn.
People think Microsoft have a monopoly, they're nothing compared to Telstra.
That being said, their level of service is pretty good and their tech support are excellent (perhaps the telephone side of Telstra could learn from the Internet side here). I think my major complaint really is that they invented ISDN, yet they resell it here so @#$#@$ expensive yet the bloody yanks get it for next to nix. Should be the other way 'round.
Both companies have embraced Open Source (even if somewhat reservedly, which is to be expected of long-time commercial organisations anyway) and look what benefits the end user is getting already - drivers with source for some of the best 2D/3D cards on the market, GLX, and now these companies are putting aside their differences and working together to create something great for the end user in time to come. Perhaps a cheap SGI Visual Workstation with a 96Mb TNT3? :-) Well, I can dream can't I?
This is The Way It Should Be (tm) and these companies deserve our fullest support.
United we stand, divided we fall. Total World Domination is achieved through the uniting of hardware vendors and software authors to produce IT solutions that are powerful, flexible and free. Free in the sense of freedom, not monetary cost.
You're a BSD person, no? One of the things I picked up from Darren Reed's talk at CALU was that in the BSD world, the whole distribution is considered the operating system. In the Linux world, it's just the kernel that is considered the OS. The distinction may be small, but it's important to grasp the concept. You can take a Linux kernel from Debian and compile and run it on a Slackware box. Have fun trying that on a BSD system ;-)
The differences between the Linux distributions are mainly two-fold, a) the level of FHS compliancy and b) the VAR software included (packaging tools, useless GUI install programs, in some cases commercial software).
That software still runs under the same OS - Linux. And in fact you can take that software and run it on any other distribution. From what I gathered from Darren Reed, even the exact same distribution of BSD you can't do that on between minor revisions! ('ps' was a case in point)
They lost the tender for linux.com, so now they go away and have a sook and try to make their own.
Yet another case of NIH syndrome that is so rampant at redhat.com.
Get some facts on QNX. It is not a desktop platform; although it can be used on a desktop system as well, it is really targetted at embedded systems. It has been doing this for 15 years or more - you can't call anyone in the market that long "rarely used". They have an X-Windows compatible/compliant GUI in 32K - the only shallowness I can see in that is the depth of the useless bloat.
Give me a Linux(or BSD, or whatever) distribution that includes a modular Unix kernel, X windows, a web server, a graphical web browser, TCP/IP and PPP, some graphics demos, and fits with lots of space free on a single 1.4Mb floppy disk.
Oh, you can't? Damn, you should have used QNX then.
Umm.. QNX did not offer him a job, read the letter from the QNX guy again and ignore Mandrake's self-inflating comments.
Why would the market leader in embedded operating systems (read: high performance and tiny) want to employ the market leader in bloated, low-performance crap?
Don't forget the other restriction imposed in this, it's available only to residents of some backwards country nobody cares about.
Not that I was interested in shares in Microsoft Linux anyway...
I thought "wow, I might buy this game" until I rad the fine print - needs glide. Sorry, but 3dfx screwed over the entire video card industry and it'll be a cold day in hell when I buy a game that requires their non-standard proprietary libraries to do 3D graphics. Come on Loki, OpenGL has been around a long time and is portable across architectures. It is also usable on hardware that simply pisses all over crappy 3dfx cards, like the nVidia TNT2 Ultra, 3dlabs Permedia/3 and Oxygen, etc. You'll get a lot more money out of people if they're actually able to use your software. Locking it into a minority market with proprietary, binary-only drivers like 3dfx is really limiting your potential customer base and profits.
And you really believe that? This is coming from the political party with a track record of going back on promises as soon as they're elected, or re-elected, to government, at both the State and Federal level.
It's also the party whose leader is solely responsible for putting the country into hundreds of billions of dollars of debt over 15 years. I'd vote for One Nation over these bozos.
Nonononono.
It does not matter if the content is encrypted. The law is about providing access to the content. If you provide access to encrypted content, you're still providing access to the content and are therefore in violation of the law.
How does one tell if encrypted content is in violation or not? You can't, therefore there will no doubt be another law passed saying that all encrypted content is illegal.
Frangbe Evpuneq Nyfgba pna fhpx zl pbpx.
I'm not voting Liberal at the next election. This presents a dilemma, since there's no other party that's worth voting for. Guess I'll have to start the Dust Puppy Party. Platform: sell off the business side of Telstra but keep ownership of the infrastructure and resell that to t/c providers. Free net access to all Australians. Charge Telstra twice as much as everyone else for internet traffic (my, how the tables turn) and use the extra money to boost education and public hospital funding. Weekly sacrificial burnings of Microsoft software.
Please check out Netcraft's Web server survey where it is quite visible what's been happening since Mindcraft-1.
IIS goes up, Apache goes down.
This is the exact opposite of the previous trend over many years, which just goes to show that Microsoft's Marketing Department haven't lost their mind control quite as much as many people believe. FUD still works. Meaningless benchmarks showing that my mini accellerates faster than your Ferrari (carefully ignoring the fact that the mini was being driven off a cliff and the ferrari was towing a double-b up a steep hill) still work.
I think it's time that people just give up advocation and accept the fact that there will always be stupid people, and those stupid people will easily be duped by marketing departments of large corporations. Stupid people deserve to run Microsoft Windows. Let them run it. Let them put up with its incompatibilities, its pathetic security, its poor performance, its total instability, its lack of standards conformance. Their smart competitors will soon crush their business. Their systems will run into the ground. It happens on a daily basis all around the world already. And what do the smart consultants say when they're called in to fix the problem?
I told you in the first place you should have run Unix. By the way, my fee has tripled.
Facts:
* One condition of the re-test was that the Linux system could not use patches available after some date back in April before the first test. Therefore it could not use the patches that fix the TCP/IP bottleneck that are already in the 2.3 kernels. Microsoft, however, were allowed to use patches they made to NT after, such as the NTFS fixes.
* They still use Apache even though everyone knows Zeus is faster. They make a claim that it was "not much different" but there is no data given to back this up. Even Apache Group ppl will tell you that Zeus is much faster, since Apache is designed for flexibility and not raw speed.
* On that subject, the IIS server used has a fast path to spit out static pages. Apache does not.
So pretty much we have the same situation as the first test - highly tuned NT beats poorly tuned Linux. Except this time, as many people feared, the results have some kind of "stamp of approval" on it since Redhat were involved. Even if it was some guy nobody has ever heard of before (which, judging from past experience with Redhat, generally means some college kid on summer vacation). I can see the headlines now: "College Kid can't tune Linux as well as professional NT engineers from Microsoft can tune NT"
Oh, hang on, that would require truth in journalism.
People are just going to have to get used to the fact that the distribution aimed at the majority of the userbase is going to be including software and be setup so that userbase can use it, and attract software with similar goals from the commercial sector.
IDE's are for clueless gumbies.
Redhat Linux is for clueless gumbies.
I think it's a good match. And I praise Redhat for taking the time to keep software real hackers don't need, and users real hackers don't want to deal with, away from the distributions real hackers use.
Let Redhat pitch themselves at Microsoft, let their users think Linux is the alternative to Microsoft. The real hackers know Microsoft don't even enter the equation.
Actually the history is the reverse - aterm was started when Sasha Vasko took wterm, changed all the credits to him/her/itself, and relabeled it aterm.
It used to be fun to count how long it would take him/her/it after a new wterm was released to change all the credits again and release a new aterm, also you could appear like an oracle to newbies by predicting an aterm release and what it's new features would be.
In fact the whole afterstep camp seem to suffer from the same problem - following in the footsteps of Window Maker. What a neat idea those external rendering libraries are! Never seen that before in Window Maker (or Blackbox either, where the author was nice enough to let us know beforehand and even ask permission even though that's not really required but a nice gesture anyway).
How about we include that in our ripped-off terminal emulator? How original! Never seen Eterm do that for 4 years now, and we'll ignore the existence of wterm in case anybody wises up and runs a diff across aterm and wterm sources and realises all we did was change the credits for it to ourselves.
Once all you can do is rip off everyone else, your project and community is dead.
Afterstep is dead.
http://wm.current.nu/files.html#wterm
Also note that the changes Alfredo did have been rolled back into the standard rxvt from http://www.rxvt.org/
Senator Stott-Despoja pointed out in "The Australian" a few weeks back that there already exists legislation against activities that this bill is trying to stop. Paedophilia is illegal already. Providing pornography to minors is illegal already. She states, and I agree wholeheartedly, that what is necessary is not yet another piece of legislation, but simply the enforcement of the existing laws.
9 1
What I find most irritating is the fact that many (albeit clueless) people will be joining up with those so-called "Kidsafe" service providers. Doesn't sound so bad until you discover that many of the providers of those services are also the providers of the largest porn sites in the country. So the big winners with this new bill if it becomes law are the very people the law is trying to stop.
What I also find offensive is that this bill is _forcing_ ISP's (apart from the aforementioned of course who only have to block their own servers) to waste time searching for pornography to block before they are sued for three months income before tax/expenses, instead of simply doing their jobs providing internet access.
I don't think that's going to impress the many Christian system administrators at ISP's having to search for pornography by law.
Now, let me digress into some responses to the many posts here: Senator Brian Harradine for whom this bill was to appease is a former Labor Party member who was ejected from the Party for going against party lines back in the 70's with the Whitlam government. He founded the trade union movement in Tasmania before joining federal politics. The issue was not the GST, it was the sale of Telstra. Harradine was never going to be sold on the GST as his very strong Labor ties/beliefs are against it.
As for the idea to encrypt content, that's irrelevent as the bill is about the access to the content, it makes no difference if it is encrypted, should this bill be passed the encrypted stuff has to be blocked as well. I hope this scares you, because the next step of course is that since it it obviously impossible in any decent time frame to decrypt encrypted data to see if it is illegal content or not, ALL encrypted data will have to be blocked lest some of it be illegal. Goodbye E-commerce.
Finally, the US Government are supposed to be enforcing trade sanctions against Australia if this becomes law as the bill violates a treaty signed just 5 months ago by the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (and other things he has no clue about) Senator Richard Alston (the main person responsible for this bill - that goes to show how competent he is).
The media contact at DCITA (notice how its phonetically "deceiter"?) is Terry O'Conner, you can reach him on 02 6277 7480 (place a +63 in front of that if you're overseas).
You can also see this web site:
http://www.dcita.gov.au/cgi-bin/trap.pl?path=38
Uh, what does the GPL have to do with anything?
;-)
XFree86, among a ton of other common programs, are not GPL either. Quick! You better delete them before anybody finds out you're using non-GPL'd programs!
Hang on a minute, your computer hardware was not released under the GPL either! Better put it back in the box, take it back to where you bought it, and tell the salesperson that you're too stupid to own a computer.
Because Linus doesn't like it (that's the official response).
If you check out http://www.bitmover.com/bitkeeper/ you will find the program that _will_ be used (was meant to be for 2.3 but I guess they started that a little early)