Re:All about the benji's
on
Sun vs. OpenBSD?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
True, SPARC International does publish (for meager $$) a SPARC reference implementation. The reference is essentially the minimum specifications for a processor to qualify as a SPARC. Unfortunately, this information is not implementation specific, and critical components of the overall CPU architecture, such as the MMU, change frequently with each implementation - these are the performance enhancements that SME makes to the base SPARC.
In many of the older versions of the SPARC specification, the actual SME implementation was close enough to the published spec to get a workable system. At least one implementation, though, was different - the SPARCserver 470 and it's peers used a totally different MMU scheme, and thus there is (to my knowledge) no working BSD/Linux for these systems to this day.
What Theo's fighting for is the actual implementation information. And, for all the buggering that he gets, you have to admit - he is consistent and has an unwavering conception of open source software; I never thought I'd see the day when a Linux geek would say "just sign the NDA and shut the fuck up." Theo has a little more integrity than that.
We've touched on this before, but this issue needs a lot of attention and it has gotten very little from the mainstream press.
AOL/TimeWarner IS the mainstream press. They're not going to publicize this stuff! Their competition won't, either, only because they have similar plans/motives. If we're lucky, AOL will bankrupt the corporation and there will be a deluge of ex-internet users who need new accounts. A new ISP boom, even. Realistically, we the enlightened will eventually be compelled into AOL/TW's ISP consumer base through some shoddy legislation.
Two different setups I have gone to Radio Shack and purchased a pair of 6" fans. I also went to Home Depot to get little rubber grommets to use in mounting the fans to the entertainment center (prevents vibrations and rattling noises). Use a coping saw or large hole saw to open the vent, and use a small bit for the four holes that screw the fans to the cabinet.
I Place one fan blowing in, at the back of the center, right behind the major equipment. I place the other at the top of the cabinet blowing out. Both times I've been lucky enough to have a receiver/amp that has one of those piggy-back plugs in the back - you just plug the fans into that and you have controlled power, as well.
I find that these fans are just quiet enough for general use, but audiophiles may not agree.
It's too easy to do on a *nix-like box: just sit on a tee between/dev/audio and you can get any sound you want. This is why we want OS X to be our desktop going forward, but if we don't keep our voices down about it, somebody's going to throw something better than a legal padlock on it!
Had the FSF created/used a license similar to the BSD license, this wouldn't be an issue; mentioning GNU in the name would be compulsory in such a case, rather than this mock-religious war they're trying to create. If having the GNU name associated with GPL'd code is so important to them, they should have made provision in the license before the fact.
BSD - do what you want, but give us due credit GPL - do what you want, but give your stuff back
Clearly FSF has desire for the BSD licensing style!
No, really - hear me out. The desire to find a system to do the work for you has the tendency to overshadow the work that needs to be done. Some coworkers and myself use a file called/etc/logbook.txt in which we simply document changes to the system. At least by writing down these changes, they become known. By being known, they become useful - I can't begin to tell you how useful! Make the effort to try this, then look at a package solution. We found that this suits our needs perfectly.
Story should read "Dell sells to retailers again"
on
Dell To Sell To Retailers
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I remember the first time I saw a Dell computer. Being from Austin, I took a tour of the Dell facilities when I was in high school, and even met Michael Dell. That was in 1990? 1991? But the first one I saw for sale was in a department store in Toulon, France in 1993 or 1994. I probably would not have taken note if I hadn't been on the tour...
Anyone remember about 10-12 years ago when a rumor was going around that coating the edge of a CD with a green marker would make it play (sound) better? Interesting, this. Almost makes me wish I was more gullible, but I still can't bring myself to purposefully mar my collection... These damned CDs are just too expensive to risk destroying them just so I can play them in my PC.
If you look at a hi-res topograph of the area, it's not inconceivable that a few minor events could have taken a great valley and flooded it. Assume that the Yucatan and Cuba started the mountain ridge that formed this valley. Follow around through Haiti/Dominican, PR, Virgin Islands, Lesser Antilles, and down to Venezuela. The water between these peaks is very, very shallow, comparitively.
Surely, someone has already copyrighted all the possible combinations of mouse-movements, clicks, and key sequences such that anything you hear on the radio would subsequently be subject to a licensing fee;)
Wayne Brown points out that It's highly unlikely that Alan withholding information from a handful of US
Linux users and developers will have any effect on US laws. I would go a step further and say that actions like this do us anti-DMCA'rs more harm than good - stupid shit like this doesn't motivate us any better, rather it brings us one step closer to just accepting the fact that we can't do anything about it. Shame on Alan for being such an idealist!
This proposed law, if passed, will affect an increase in the costs of production associated with both hardware and software. These higher costs will be passed to the consumer, of course.
If passed, we will see a whole new sector of industry, mostly consultancies and body shops that will develop and certify these new protection measures.
If passed, the bourgeoning Digital Rights movement (including the EFF, Copyright lawyers, Patent Attorneys, etc.) will find a vital and essential place in the legal world, bolstered by its niche foothold provided by the DMCA.
Normally, I would be in favor of these effects - they all translate into economic growth, which means more money in my pocket. In this case, though, I have to draw the line. I imagine that my feelings now are similar to those of our Founding Fathers, who escaped from religious persecution and inordinate taxation to found a New World. The trouble here is that there is no New World left for those of us who would flee.
It now becomes our responsibility - to ourselves, to our families, to our predecessors - to form a revolution. It is the only option left to us, for there is no land left to conquer. We must stand and fight for our ideas, our ideology. It may be hard for us to come together - it is not in our nature - but only through solidarity can we influence the course of things that affect us as a whole. We are a community, and we still have a few rights left. I urge all to write their congressmen, the President, their employers, their friends and families to stop the coming injustice that got its key to our front door from the DMCA.
We should cause a work-stoppage - all programmers, chip makers, adminitrators, support personnel, and other techies. We can move worlds if we toe the line together and don't budge from our principles. It is clear that the only thing that matters to the people who would bring such law to bear is money. We must communicate to these people the only way they will listen - by stopping the flow of their money.
What is the general take on further copy-control mechanisms, such as CPRM and CSS, within your lobby, and how do you explain this position to Senators, Congressmen, and the like?
Look - it's technology run rampant, threatening the happiness of our daily lives, commerce, education, and perhaps even life itself!
This is nothing new. The frantic and worrisome undertones of this article are merely misdirected fear. People are overtly and incorrectly blaming technology for their problems. Email isn't too cumbersome - people's lives are. Email and IM are tools that are used by people. The tools work fine. There's no added responsibilities or emotional overhead associated with the use of these tools.
The real story here is that the tools work so well, and are so efficient, that younger society members have overtaxed themselves with use of the tools. I don't have a problem with losing or overlooking emails because in my youth I learned how to file and organize information in a manner that was conducive to easy search and retrieval. The real fear, beneath all the blame and finger pointing, is that young people are not responsible enough to be active, productive members of society.
When you look at this in perspective, you'll see that the fault lies with society in general, and is not related to use of any technology, singly or in concert. It's merely a failure on the part of parents to adequately prepare their children for the world ahead. I'm sick of reading stuff like this, and frankly I'm a little troubled that we have sunk so low here to allow this kind of psychobabble touchy feely crap to invade our forums. Next thing you know, we'll have OverEmailers Anonymous and an Inbox Coalition and scholarships for people that are suffering from schizophrenia due to the number of logins to different IM services they are forced to maintain so they can talk to all their friends.
First of all, I would like to know how these news stories keep coming up with monetary figures to represent mostly intangible concepts. Sure, there's a scientific way to go about it, but I know that I wasn't surveyed, so the results of such a process are at least flawed.
Secondly, I have three distinct and conflicting views about virii. Mostly, I find them a nuisance and a pain in the ass to deal with. I also find them entertaining. It's like a great big joke, we get to watch M$ hang its ass in the wind - and we get to see M$'s fervent supporters run around like headless chickens for a while. I also find virii to be a necessary part of our daily electronic lives.
That being said, the reason I find this article (and others like it) so disturbing is because we are seemingly paving the way for a whole new onslaught of legislation against computer virii. Let's be realistic: virii do -for free- what an entire industry fails to do with regularity - identify security holes. Almost 100% of the time, these holes are found in M$ products, which we all know are used by virtually every person in the online world. If virus writers didn't exploit these holes for their own entertainment, it would be much, much easier for malicious people to exploit these holes for their own gain and/or to the serious detriment of the victim.
Based on that, the only news in this article is found between the lines.
Lots of people use highly-vulnerable Microsoft products
Lots of companies have underqualified people supporting Microsoft products
Procmail (on a *NIX, with any MTA) is a sysadmin's best friend
This could be a very scary thing for Linux - arguably, the economy of the entire world will be riding on Linux. Should something go wrong, Linux just made a whole lot more enemies. If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd say that IBM is putting Linux in play to finally make its Big Failure. When (if) Linux fails, IBM is already in the door with SIAC, so they can offer a competitive upgrade to AIX. IBM saves the day, Linux takes the dive, and the UN, along with Microsoft, launch a campaign against Linux - declaring Marshall law and forcibly replacing every remaining Linux installation with Windows XP.
Everyone knows that MP3.com is tanking. Ask yourself this: what's the value of a company that has little or no market capitalization?
You want the answer? Neil Stephenson knows. The only thing to be gained from such a lawsuit is a majority share (read: control) of the company. MP3.com screwed up, and now a consortium of independent artists are going to step up and try to do it better. This makes perfect sense. The RIAA is going to end up owning Napster, so the Indies need a way into the market, too.
Unix Hints & Hacks has a chapter or two devoted to this subject. It talks about interviewing candidates, and also about being a candidate. Worthwhile reading, even if most of the stuff in the book is for beginners. UH&H is, I believe, a compendium of best practices collected from Unix Guru Universe.
The other half of this solution requires a registration process - in order to have something on Napster, you have to submit it to a reviewing entity that will determine whether or not the material is unencumbered. Once it is determined free and clear, the fingerprint is stored in the "accepted" database, and trading can commense. This fits right in with the popular view of "Why should Napster have to determine if material is copyrighted or not?" as it places the burden of proof on the artist, label, or individual submitting the piece to be shared.
This may be a little hard to understand, for those of us that are thinking in the purely P2P model. P2P is merely the transport protocol - it takes additional technology to manage content.
The CNET article mentions that the audio-fingerprinting technology is a barrier to creating a database of "forbidden" songs... I invoke the complement rule: Napster should maintain a database of "acceptable" songs - this has two benefits, assuming RIAA wants all the songs that they own protected from piracy:
The subset of all songs that are not blacklisted is likely to be much, much less than the songs we can trade freely
Storage and processing for this smaller set of songs is - duh! - smaller! Less overhead in checking if a song is allowed than checking if it's blacklisted.
This is also a strategy that could get RIAA off Napster's back: working under the assumption that all songs are blacklisted until proven otherwise.
Admittedly, this probably sounds easier than it really is...
Several factors contribute to people's general unwillingness to pay for online content:
Most people already pay a fee just to be online - it seems extraneous to pay for additional service once you are online (compare this to the number of people getting premium channels vs. basic cable)
There is such a great wealth of free content that people are discouraged from paying for something.
There is still a general fear of the internet when it comes to monetary transactions.
Most people will short-circuit if you try to explain the 9/10 of a cent gasoline prices. Micropayments? Forget about it!
Wouldn't be easier to just get everything in one bill? See Item 1, above, also America Online, Compuserve, etc. This also has strong ties to the cable or satellite pricing plan (you don't pay a cable bill and then an HBO bill).
What about the laughs?
on
Review: A.I.
·
· Score: 1
SOME SPOILAGE
I went to see this movie with my fiance and my best friend. I think, perhaps, I was the only one of the three that could see the genious in the movie, masked though it was. In a word, the movie is disturbing. From the opening, your sense of morality is attacked, but it's done in a tasteful way that challenges you to re-evaluate your previous stance.
There are some spectacular laughs, though, to offset the deep nature of the film. Luckily, for the majority of dumbed-down America, these laughs permeate the work, and are distributed throughout the film so as not to lose (many) people before the end.
Not to lose many people before the end - this is important, given the length of the movie - 2.5 hours, nearly, is very tricky. Quite a few walked out from my showing about an hour and three quarters through. Granted, it was a 10:30 PM showing, but it was Friday night! I could understand their frustration, though, if that's indeed what it was. The movie would have had ended well when David decided to take the plunge into the strangely calm waters that were Manhattan island.
Actually, there were a few points immediately prior to the "suicide" scene where the movie could have ended on an acceptably Kubrick quasi-ending. I felt that the story dragged out unneccessarily after this point to leave the audience feeling generally good about themselves - essentially, the last thirty minutes of the film is the fairytale part. In fact, it reeked of Disney. I got the feeling that this last piece was not in line with Kubrick's original view of the movie; it seemed to lack his personal touch, which Spielberg did a tremendous job of emulating through the first two hours.
On a final note, the visuals are high quality, what we've come to expect from Dreamworks SKG. Unfortunately, it's what we've come to expect from them, not anything truly ground-breaking.
In summary, I give AI a fair review. Not my favorite movie, but I may watch it again. It satisfied my requirements - I laughed, I was challenged, and I left with having experienced something worthy of discussion and critique. Remember, not everyone really likes the Mona Lisa, but nobody argues that it's a unique and a tremendous work of art.
Don Henley, not John Henley in the original post, came through with a nice soundbite about how the recording industry failed to take steps to embrace and extend new technology (read: Napster), condemning them as Old Fashioned and scared of the digital revolution. He did make it clear, however, that if Napster is allowed to continue that "compulsory licenses" should be implemented if no good licensing scheme/distribution channel is contrived in the immediate future by the RIAA member corporations.
There's a part of me, indeed I believe a part of everyone, that pines for the utopian-socialist environment portrayed in popular media (Star Trek among the chief offenders). Most of me, however, is a realist (and materialist): I need to make more money to get what I want in life. I make money as a hacker, so the erroneous use of the word hack and all its derivatives by the media and, now it seems, educational institutions is a direct affront to my way of life.
Unfortunately, especially in recent years, I have to be very careful in using that word to describe myself. In some circles, I will openly declare myself a hacker: I hack code for a living. I hack code for fun. In others, I simply say that I work with computers. I've never written a so-called email "virus" (another sad misnomer), nor defaced a website, nor participated in any type of DOS attack, nor any of the other malicious activities that are typically associated with the term hacking. If these activities are now labeled Hacktivism by some idiot sociology professor in another country, I want no part of that term.
On the flip side, I like the term Hacktivism if used in a more positive light: people that author such fabulous applications as gimp, gcc, cvs, and other tools that allow others to work in a more cost-effective manner (and indeed to extend and modify these applications for other purposes) are the true Hacktivists. People that write something for their own use and then give the code to the public domain or offer it under an open source license of some guise - even though there is no quantifiable market for such - these are the true Hacktivists. People that write DeCSS in haiku as a method of demonstrating the power the First Amendment affords to the people, people that port perfectly good UNIX applications to Win32, people that speak out on/. - these are the true Hacktivists.
Let us grab this term and make it our own before it serves to hurt us! Has anyone registered Hacktivism.[insert-your-TLD-here]???
Slashdot Mirror
True, SPARC International does publish (for meager $$) a SPARC reference implementation. The reference is essentially the minimum specifications for a processor to qualify as a SPARC. Unfortunately, this information is not implementation specific, and critical components of the overall CPU architecture, such as the MMU, change frequently with each implementation - these are the performance enhancements that SME makes to the base SPARC.
In many of the older versions of the SPARC specification, the actual SME implementation was close enough to the published spec to get a workable system. At least one implementation, though, was different - the SPARCserver 470 and it's peers used a totally different MMU scheme, and thus there is (to my knowledge) no working BSD/Linux for these systems to this day.
What Theo's fighting for is the actual implementation information. And, for all the buggering that he gets, you have to admit - he is consistent and has an unwavering conception of open source software; I never thought I'd see the day when a Linux geek would say "just sign the NDA and shut the fuck up." Theo has a little more integrity than that.
We've touched on this before, but this issue needs a lot of attention and it has gotten very little from the mainstream press.
AOL/TimeWarner IS the mainstream press. They're not going to publicize this stuff! Their competition won't, either, only because they have similar plans/motives. If we're lucky, AOL will bankrupt the corporation and there will be a deluge of ex-internet users who need new accounts. A new ISP boom, even. Realistically, we the enlightened will eventually be compelled into AOL/TW's ISP consumer base through some shoddy legislation.
Two different setups I have gone to Radio Shack and purchased a pair of 6" fans. I also went to Home Depot to get little rubber grommets to use in mounting the fans to the entertainment center (prevents vibrations and rattling noises). Use a coping saw or large hole saw to open the vent, and use a small bit for the four holes that screw the fans to the cabinet.
I Place one fan blowing in, at the back of the center, right behind the major equipment. I place the other at the top of the cabinet blowing out. Both times I've been lucky enough to have a receiver/amp that has one of those piggy-back plugs in the back - you just plug the fans into that and you have controlled power, as well.
I find that these fans are just quiet enough for general use, but audiophiles may not agree.
It's too easy to do on a *nix-like box: just sit on a tee between /dev/audio and you can get any sound you want. This is why we want OS X to be our desktop going forward, but if we don't keep our voices down about it, somebody's going to throw something better than a legal padlock on it!
Had the FSF created/used a license similar to the BSD license, this wouldn't be an issue; mentioning GNU in the name would be compulsory in such a case, rather than this mock-religious war they're trying to create. If having the GNU name associated with GPL'd code is so important to them, they should have made provision in the license before the fact.
BSD - do what you want, but give us due credit
GPL - do what you want, but give your stuff back
Clearly FSF has desire for the BSD licensing style!
No, really - hear me out. The desire to find a system to do the work for you has the tendency to overshadow the work that needs to be done. Some coworkers and myself use a file called /etc/logbook.txt in which we simply document changes to the system. At least by writing down these changes, they become known. By being known, they become useful - I can't begin to tell you how useful! Make the effort to try this, then look at a package solution. We found that this suits our needs perfectly.
I remember the first time I saw a Dell computer. Being from Austin, I took a tour of the Dell facilities when I was in high school, and even met Michael Dell. That was in 1990? 1991? But the first one I saw for sale was in a department store in Toulon, France in 1993 or 1994. I probably would not have taken note if I hadn't been on the tour...
Anyone remember about 10-12 years ago when a rumor was going around that coating the edge of a CD with a green marker would make it play (sound) better? Interesting, this. Almost makes me wish I was more gullible, but I still can't bring myself to purposefully mar my collection... These damned CDs are just too expensive to risk destroying them just so I can play them in my PC.
I've keep asking them, but noone seems to know. I would prefer a quality-of-service agreement with them.
If you look at a hi-res topograph of the area, it's not inconceivable that a few minor events could have taken a great valley and flooded it. Assume that the Yucatan and Cuba started the mountain ridge that formed this valley. Follow around through Haiti/Dominican, PR, Virgin Islands, Lesser Antilles, and down to Venezuela. The water between these peaks is very, very shallow, comparitively.
Surely, someone has already copyrighted all the possible combinations of mouse-movements, clicks, and key sequences such that anything you hear on the radio would subsequently be subject to a licensing fee ;)
Wayne Brown points out that It's highly unlikely that Alan withholding information from a handful of US
Linux users and developers will have any effect on US laws. I would go a step further and say that actions like this do us anti-DMCA'rs more harm than good - stupid shit like this doesn't motivate us any better, rather it brings us one step closer to just accepting the fact that we can't do anything about it. Shame on Alan for being such an idealist!
Normally, I would be in favor of these effects - they all translate into economic growth, which means more money in my pocket. In this case, though, I have to draw the line. I imagine that my feelings now are similar to those of our Founding Fathers, who escaped from religious persecution and inordinate taxation to found a New World. The trouble here is that there is no New World left for those of us who would flee.
It now becomes our responsibility - to ourselves, to our families, to our predecessors - to form a revolution. It is the only option left to us, for there is no land left to conquer. We must stand and fight for our ideas, our ideology. It may be hard for us to come together - it is not in our nature - but only through solidarity can we influence the course of things that affect us as a whole. We are a community, and we still have a few rights left. I urge all to write their congressmen, the President, their employers, their friends and families to stop the coming injustice that got its key to our front door from the DMCA.
We should cause a work-stoppage - all programmers, chip makers, adminitrators, support personnel, and other techies. We can move worlds if we toe the line together and don't budge from our principles. It is clear that the only thing that matters to the people who would bring such law to bear is money. We must communicate to these people the only way they will listen - by stopping the flow of their money.
What is the general take on further copy-control mechanisms, such as CPRM and CSS, within your lobby, and how do you explain this position to Senators, Congressmen, and the like?
Look - it's technology run rampant, threatening the happiness of our daily lives, commerce, education, and perhaps even life itself!
This is nothing new. The frantic and worrisome undertones of this article are merely misdirected fear. People are overtly and incorrectly blaming technology for their problems. Email isn't too cumbersome - people's lives are. Email and IM are tools that are used by people. The tools work fine. There's no added responsibilities or emotional overhead associated with the use of these tools.
The real story here is that the tools work so well, and are so efficient, that younger society members have overtaxed themselves with use of the tools. I don't have a problem with losing or overlooking emails because in my youth I learned how to file and organize information in a manner that was conducive to easy search and retrieval. The real fear, beneath all the blame and finger pointing, is that young people are not responsible enough to be active, productive members of society.
When you look at this in perspective, you'll see that the fault lies with society in general, and is not related to use of any technology, singly or in concert. It's merely a failure on the part of parents to adequately prepare their children for the world ahead. I'm sick of reading stuff like this, and frankly I'm a little troubled that we have sunk so low here to allow this kind of psychobabble touchy feely crap to invade our forums. Next thing you know, we'll have OverEmailers Anonymous and an Inbox Coalition and scholarships for people that are suffering from schizophrenia due to the number of logins to different IM services they are forced to maintain so they can talk to all their friends.
First of all, I would like to know how these news stories keep coming up with monetary figures to represent mostly intangible concepts. Sure, there's a scientific way to go about it, but I know that I wasn't surveyed, so the results of such a process are at least flawed.
Secondly, I have three distinct and conflicting views about virii. Mostly, I find them a nuisance and a pain in the ass to deal with. I also find them entertaining. It's like a great big joke, we get to watch M$ hang its ass in the wind - and we get to see M$'s fervent supporters run around like headless chickens for a while. I also find virii to be a necessary part of our daily electronic lives.
That being said, the reason I find this article (and others like it) so disturbing is because we are seemingly paving the way for a whole new onslaught of legislation against computer virii. Let's be realistic: virii do -for free- what an entire industry fails to do with regularity - identify security holes. Almost 100% of the time, these holes are found in M$ products, which we all know are used by virtually every person in the online world. If virus writers didn't exploit these holes for their own entertainment, it would be much, much easier for malicious people to exploit these holes for their own gain and/or to the serious detriment of the victim.
Based on that, the only news in this article is found between the lines.
This is probably a troll, but...
This could be a very scary thing for Linux - arguably, the economy of the entire world will be riding on Linux. Should something go wrong, Linux just made a whole lot more enemies. If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd say that IBM is putting Linux in play to finally make its Big Failure. When (if) Linux fails, IBM is already in the door with SIAC, so they can offer a competitive upgrade to AIX. IBM saves the day, Linux takes the dive, and the UN, along with Microsoft, launch a campaign against Linux - declaring Marshall law and forcibly replacing every remaining Linux installation with Windows XP.
You want the answer? Neil Stephenson knows. The only thing to be gained from such a lawsuit is a majority share (read: control) of the company. MP3.com screwed up, and now a consortium of independent artists are going to step up and try to do it better. This makes perfect sense. The RIAA is going to end up owning Napster, so the Indies need a way into the market, too.
Unix Hints & Hacks has a chapter or two devoted to this subject. It talks about interviewing candidates, and also about being a candidate. Worthwhile reading, even if most of the stuff in the book is for beginners. UH&H is, I believe, a compendium of best practices collected from Unix Guru Universe.
This may be a little hard to understand, for those of us that are thinking in the purely P2P model. P2P is merely the transport protocol - it takes additional technology to manage content.
This is also a strategy that could get RIAA off Napster's back: working under the assumption that all songs are blacklisted until proven otherwise.
Admittedly, this probably sounds easier than it really is...
I went to see this movie with my fiance and my best friend. I think, perhaps, I was the only one of the three that could see the genious in the movie, masked though it was. In a word, the movie is disturbing. From the opening, your sense of morality is attacked, but it's done in a tasteful way that challenges you to re-evaluate your previous stance.
There are some spectacular laughs, though, to offset the deep nature of the film. Luckily, for the majority of dumbed-down America, these laughs permeate the work, and are distributed throughout the film so as not to lose (many) people before the end.
Not to lose many people before the end - this is important, given the length of the movie - 2.5 hours, nearly, is very tricky. Quite a few walked out from my showing about an hour and three quarters through. Granted, it was a 10:30 PM showing, but it was Friday night! I could understand their frustration, though, if that's indeed what it was. The movie would have had ended well when David decided to take the plunge into the strangely calm waters that were Manhattan island.
Actually, there were a few points immediately prior to the "suicide" scene where the movie could have ended on an acceptably Kubrick quasi-ending. I felt that the story dragged out unneccessarily after this point to leave the audience feeling generally good about themselves - essentially, the last thirty minutes of the film is the fairytale part. In fact, it reeked of Disney. I got the feeling that this last piece was not in line with Kubrick's original view of the movie; it seemed to lack his personal touch, which Spielberg did a tremendous job of emulating through the first two hours.
On a final note, the visuals are high quality, what we've come to expect from Dreamworks SKG. Unfortunately, it's what we've come to expect from them, not anything truly ground-breaking.
In summary, I give AI a fair review. Not my favorite movie, but I may watch it again. It satisfied my requirements - I laughed, I was challenged, and I left with having experienced something worthy of discussion and critique. Remember, not everyone really likes the Mona Lisa, but nobody argues that it's a unique and a tremendous work of art.
Don Henley, not John Henley in the original post, came through with a nice soundbite about how the recording industry failed to take steps to embrace and extend new technology (read: Napster), condemning them as Old Fashioned and scared of the digital revolution. He did make it clear, however, that if Napster is allowed to continue that "compulsory licenses" should be implemented if no good licensing scheme/distribution channel is contrived in the immediate future by the RIAA member corporations.
There's a part of me, indeed I believe a part of everyone, that pines for the utopian-socialist environment portrayed in popular media (Star Trek among the chief offenders). Most of me, however, is a realist (and materialist): I need to make more money to get what I want in life. I make money as a hacker, so the erroneous use of the word hack and all its derivatives by the media and, now it seems, educational institutions is a direct affront to my way of life.
Unfortunately, especially in recent years, I have to be very careful in using that word to describe myself. In some circles, I will openly declare myself a hacker: I hack code for a living. I hack code for fun. In others, I simply say that I work with computers. I've never written a so-called email "virus" (another sad misnomer), nor defaced a website, nor participated in any type of DOS attack, nor any of the other malicious activities that are typically associated with the term hacking. If these activities are now labeled Hacktivism by some idiot sociology professor in another country, I want no part of that term.
On the flip side, I like the term Hacktivism if used in a more positive light: people that author such fabulous applications as gimp, gcc, cvs, and other tools that allow others to work in a more cost-effective manner (and indeed to extend and modify these applications for other purposes) are the true Hacktivists. People that write something for their own use and then give the code to the public domain or offer it under an open source license of some guise - even though there is no quantifiable market for such - these are the true Hacktivists. People that write DeCSS in haiku as a method of demonstrating the power the First Amendment affords to the people, people that port perfectly good UNIX applications to Win32, people that speak out on /. - these are the true Hacktivists.
Let us grab this term and make it our own before it serves to hurt us! Has anyone registered Hacktivism.[insert-your-TLD-here]???