Mr. Oram's long-winded screed on MySql, while interesting, really makes the situation sound much more complicated than it is. You don't need to over-analyze this thing. The truth is simple and readily clear to everybody already.
In a nutshell, MySql is free. Is it great? Hell no, but it's free. The only deep understanding of human nature or the DB marketplace one needs to comprehend here is that given the choice between something great and expensive vs. something mediocre and free, the overwhelming majority will go for free.
MySql has always had huge problems preventing it from being accepted in the real "enterprise" marketplace, but most of us aren't in that market. Most of us need to yank a bit of data and cram it into a web page moderately quickly and as cheaply as possible. MySql does this quite well.
What doesn't MySql do well? For starters, it's much slower than Oracle, MS-Sql, and even Foxpro. It has no row locking, no transaction support, and minimal cross-platform compatibility. But, it's free and it works more or less ok on Linux.
Perhaps the real truth that Oracle fears is that eventually DBAs will come to realize that 99.9% of their storage needs aren't so "mission critical" as they would like to believe. I mean really, how many people out there can truely justify the cost of a full featured, robust database like MS-Sql? 10%? 5%?
For the rest of us, a free - albeit slightly dodgy - solution will work fine.
That's all you space cadets can ever come up with. Have you ever noticed that? Whenever somebody has the temerity to criticize NASA, the only argument in favor is fucking cookware?
Sweet mother of Jesus, how would we ever survive on this planet if it were not for Teflon?!? Why, just think of what it was like back in the olden days! I can not count the number of wars that were directly attributable to some general having his pancake stick to the skillet! And the plagues! God, who could forget those! Recent scientific studies have concluded that the Black Death was not caused by fleas from rats as once suspected, but in fact was due to a unique case of tendonitis that resulted from scouring the fry pan when the yak burgers prevelant at the time where left on a bit too long and some of the icky bits got burned right onto the bottom.
And there's more! Did you know that Teflon has reduced the number of catastrophic earthquakes by over 74%?!? And that non-stick cookware has been identified as a leading candidate as an AIDS vaccine? Or that traffic fatalities involving nuns could be eliminated entirely is their habits were coated with Teflon?
I must say that from the vantage point of 40 years of history, the billions and billions of dollars spent blasting monkeys into space has resulted in some of the mst important developments known to man. Clearly the invention of Teflon was well worth the cost, and the impact on society simply cannot be understated.
I am tired of hearing about the "latest amazing discovery from space". I mean, let's come back to earth for a few moments. What does this mean? What does it do for us? How does it effect you and me?
The simple and undeniable answer is that it doesn't mean anything to us at all. We can't go there. Knowing about it doesn't end world hunger. It doesn't stop war. It doesn't mean a god damn thing in our real lives.
All this space nonsense is just a way to distract us from what is really important in our lives. We are entertained with all these grand science fiction visions of green men and flying saucers while the real world around us desceds further and further into chaos.
You know what the one thing that space exploration really does make an impact on? Our wallets. The government, under the guise of NASA, has not only succeeded in focusing the best minds of our time away from the places where they could really make a difference, they have tricked you and I into paying for it. Your tax dollars are being used to fund a mass conspiracy which would have us believe that alien life both exists and means something.
Maybe aliens DO exist. Great. But it doesn't mean shit. It is all a scam, and the real goal is to amuse the sheep while the wolves rob us blind. Thank you NASA. Thank you for screwing the American public.
If you were to ask the average slobbering Slashbot how they would react if the government prohibited them from installing security cameras in and around their own private property, they would go ballistic. They would say things like "It's my property! I own it! I have a right to protect it! I have a duty to protect it! Who are you to say I can't install security cameras!" And they would be right; property owners have a right to take steps to protect their property. These steps include the use of security cameras, and such cameras are used all over the place (private homes, convenience stores, banks, casinos, etc.)
But now the foaming Slashbots are in an uproar over this very basic principle of private property ownership that they (apparently) have no problem with in any of the above examples. They are ranting and raving as if this is a big deal (which it isn't.. how would it have been any different if individual policemen were working the gates, looking for suspicious people?) As near as I can tell, this primarily amounts to hatred.. hatred of property owners and hatred of owner's rights. Hatred of the Constitution and hatred of freedom.
Too many of these people have called for restrictions on what private property owners can do on their own property and furthermore have suggested that owners be severely restricted in the steps that they can take to protect their property. Well, guess what, kiddies; that sort of idea might have been wildly popular with Josef Stalin and his ilk, but it's not going to fly here in the good old U.S. of A. The agenda of the anti-camera people is clear: the gradual erosion of private property rights and ownership until all is owned and controlled by a collectivist government/society.
Well, it ain't gonna happen.
To what purpose, I wonder
on
The Social Web
·
· Score: 5
I often wonder about the long-term effects of putting so much effort into creating - and now analysing - digital "culture". I'm not advocating being a luddite or anything, but more and more often these days we see online social interaction not adding to but replacing more traditional forms of human contact.
Usually you replace something that is broken or flawed. So what's so flawed about normal socializing that we feel this need to supplant it with something that is in reality more isolating?
Seeing as how the Xbox will most likely play the majority of existing PC games, they'll have at least 10% right out of the gate. By the end of 2002 I estimate that over 50% of released titles wil be playable on the Xbox.
Yes, PC gamers will be very likely to dual boot, but most gamers are console gamers. They are frat boys playing EA Sports titles and 10 yr. olds playing Mario. PC games have played 2nd string to consoles ever since the Atari, and they always will.
The video game industry will generate more revenue this year than the motion picture industry. Think about that for a second. All that income is not coming from computer geeks. It's coming from people who just want to hit the 'On' switch and play. They don't care what's under the hood.
Just like the people who will port Linux to the Xbox, you don't count. If you are doing serious computation then chances are you're not running Windows anyway, so the net gain is 0.
And once Linux is installed you can't play games anymore. Suddenly this hacked box is only appealing to geeks; people who are already running Linux anyway.
Why would the average consumer bother installing Linux on an X-box? What would be the benefit?
We all like to think that Microsoft is slowly but surely losing the battle over free software, but sadly this is not the case. The X-box will deliver a crushing blow against freedom and the GNU flag wavers are going to be blindsided by it.
Gnome? KDE? The desktop is dead. The future of computing has nothing to do with computers as we know them, because the computers we hve now are 10x more powerful than they need to be for the tasks they are used for - with one exception: Entertainment.
Games and other forms of digital entertainment are the only things that continue to push the limits of comuting power, and in case you haven't been paying attention, all entertainment systems are closed source. The abysmal failure of a Linux-based gaming platform just goes to show that Open Source has absolutely no chance of making any headway against proprietary systems.
You can all pat yourselves on the back and cheer the Perens-penned tirade against Microsoft, but it doesn't matter. The folks in Redmond really don't give a rat's ass about the GPL, they are just making sure you are all distracted over something that is uterly trivial in the long term. Meanwhile, they are preparing their jugernaut for the coming holiday shopping season while the free software leaders are wasting time trying to attack a portion of the industry that is increasingly irrelevant.
It will not be entirely a Microsft world. It will be a Sony/Nintendo/EA/Microsoft world. And none of it will be Open Source.
Geometry is the descriptor of everyting all around us. I have been working on a mathematics D.Phill in which I explore new geometries. People often make the mistake that we live in a 4 dimensional universe (3 of space, 1 of time). Well, this is utterly untrue.
The Universe can be considered 5 dimensional. Imagine that the universe is a sphere, for a moment. When it started off at the big bang, it was a point. Then it quite literally blew up, like an expanding balloon. This was called inflation.
This is not the whole story, though. For inside the balloon is another ballon, and inside that one another. It is like an Onion, with all these different shells expanding outwards from the central fire of Creation. Extrapolate this to our 4 dimensional universe, and you can see that the Metaverse is 5 dimensional. There is some reason to believe that the metaverse will not be of infinite age, in which case there may be another 6th dimension of other metaverses constantly being created.
This shows why the universe must be Open - it cannot contract again because it would collide with the universe underneath us. Eventually, our universe will slough off the edge of the onion, and that will be the end of us.
Unless, that is, we start researching technologies to transverse the universes, and travel to the younger universes below us. Then eventually we can approach the everlasting point of creation at the nucleus of the onion.
This is a worthy long term destiny for us to aim for, and I urge that we start preparing now. Why bother with the petty details of day to day life - we should be thinking of the destiny of our race, our species, our Universe, and striving to make tommorrow ours.
The idea that any kind of centralised service such as UDDI will ever manage to provide an easy, reliable and most importantly, a timely way of finding content online is pretty much preposterous to anyone who has ever used the net seriously. The net is just too anarchic and constantly changing for any such service to ever be reliable, and services like Yahoo have shown this, despite the millions of dollars of venture capital wasted.
Only search engines like Google have any hope of ever allowing people to discover information they need. The honeymoon days of web directories are over, and the technology has been shown to be the turkey it is. The net is a constantly changing place, and any static technology is doomed to failure.
I doubt this very much. Certainly 2000 was better than 1995, due to economic growth. This economic growth improved living standards, raised consumer happiness, improved employment, reduced unhappiness, etc. The reason for this growth was enterprise in the computer industry. Enterprise caused by companies hungry to make money.
The activities of companies such as Microsoft made billions of dollars for people - not just for their employees but for the economy. Now recently as these companies have started to do less well, beset by open source, antitrust and so on, the economy has done badly. The results of this have been layoffs, reduced consumer confidence (which means, eventually, that the guy who runs the bagel shop on the corner loses his job) and general economic decline.
The omens are that this will get worse. It seems that open source's time has come. It has been said that open source will provide 50% of software for the country. The result of this is less money into the economy. If people now buy one $50 Redhat installer instead of 10,000 Microsoft licenses, there is that much less money into the economy. Companies such as Microsoft will find that they will do less well, and the knockon effect will be on the economy - not just that of the US but economies around the world. The potential is for global recession without the growth caused by the IT industry.
This is regrettable; people assume that open source simply means 'free software'. This is incorrect. Free software is no different from Communism - a country where you have, say, 'free cars' - cars owned by everyone - open source cars if you will, do not do better. They do worse. Growth in society depends on the greed of man - the greed of brokers propelling the stockmarket higher. Unfortunately communism does not cater to this most important of human instincts. This is why, just as communist societies damage the people (communist countries, without exception, are very poor countries), so too communist software damages society.
It removes the greed/growth that fuels our economy, our sandwich shops and our luxury goods, and replaces that with a communistic ideal which leaves no potential for any advancement.
That's just the PR cover story. EA has been slowly killing Origin since they bought it, and the rumor mill strongly suggests that's why L.B. left the company. Not only did they kill UO2, they also laid off over half their staff, and the ones still there are earnestly putting resumes together as we speak.
Origin has had numerous promising new projects that have been killed and/or shifted to other EA companies in the past year. With UO2 getting the ax, they now have nothing in the pipeline for new releases. Yes, you read that right. Origin is no longer working on anything other than UO maintenance.
UO still makes money, so EA won't kill Origin altogether. At least not yet. But their actions have led to the inescapable conclusion that Lord British's once-mighty empire will soon be nothing but a memory.
Thank you for proudly waving the GNUflag in our faces. Pity we're not talking about PostgreSQL.
btw, if Oracle released a report stating that they had benchmarks proving that their DB was the best at everything, but you couldn't actually see those benchmarks, would you give the claim any credence? If not, why should we trust someone else's rumor? Just because it says good things about an OS application?
You can hate Microsoft as much as you want, but MS-SQL is a whole hell of a lot better than MySQL. There's places where all these wonderful OS applications don't work nearly as well as a proprietary solution, and databases is definitely one of those places.
MySQL is a great DB for fast read access where things like row locking aren't very important. Great for the web when you don't want to spend a lot of money. But if you've already got SQL then using MySQL is just plain dumb. SQL on NT will out-perform MySQL in just about every way. Not using it just because you don't like Microsoft could get you fired, and IMO it would be justified.
Nah, I'm snobbish about that stuff. (No surprise there, right?). I even find it difficult to call the '82 album a Floyd one because Rick Wright got the boot from Roger Waters right after The Wall.
Stupid Floyd trivia: Nick Mason, the drummer, is the only member to have appeared on every album made by Pink Floyd.
No, I am an arrogant prick who really doesn't like any of you one bit. You are loathsome people, and as an arrogant prick I choose to insult you in your own forum rather than go do something productive with my time. Since the opions expressed above are for the most part genuine, your label of troll doesn't fit.
btw, if you are indeed eliminating possession of your curent collection, how are you doing so? If you are selling or giving away the stuff then you are willingly giving up your right to use, and as such have no legal grounds to retain copies in mp3 format. The only possible way you could still claim a valid license is if you destroy the physical copies, and even that is legally dubious.
Most of the leachers probley own the right to download said music, prove otherwise.
Oh please. Where is this rose-tinted world of yours, exactly?
And as I clearly stated one thread up, I have no problem with these people anyway. At least not until they start spouting off on slashdot about "musician's rights". Ingrate thieves have no place championing the rights of those they steal from.
You are not "ditching" your collection, you are archiving it. Fundamental difference.
You are a bit brainwashed by the media as far as the common napster user, as I am a common napster user.
You are a bit brainwashed by slashdot as far as the common napster user, as you are not a common napster user.
Show me somewhere else that says otherwise that found this out by asking each user
Yes, indeed please show me where you have gotten your facts that aren't equally biased. Fact is, there isn't any valid study, only anecdotal evidence. And you know what? Of course there's more people claiming your side then mine. Do you really expect all the thieves to stand up en masse to be counted? Check the leech ratios of any file sharing service, be it Napster, Gnutella, FTP, whatever. Lots and lots of downlaoders and damn few hosts.
Implied extension of the sentence you quoted is ...as their primary form of having music they love.
Yes, there is an elitism here, and it has nothing to do with the cost of my collection. It has to do with all these people posting to this story claiming that they have all this respect for music and the people who create it when most of them couldn't find the way to the nearest record store if you dragged them by the mouse they were clinging to like it was their primary life support.
If you are, and have been, a music purchaser then you know that both sides of the "record sales are being affected" battle are total bullshit. Sales are up because the economy is up. Record sales aren't being altered one way or the other in any significant manner by the existance of Napster.
What we have instead are a bunch of johnny-come-lately's who now have huge collections of music when prior to the existence of Napster they had virtually none. If you take any kind of objective look around you will see that this is primarily the case with Napster users.
But I have no problem with this. It's great that more people are listening to more music. What I take serious issue with is all this bleating by these same people about how fucking concerned they are with music and artist's rights. They cheapen the devotion of those of us who truly care about these things in the same way that the drunken wife abuser next door cheapens the WWII veterans when he makes a big deal about hoisting up the flag every July 4th just so he can feel better about getting drunk on his day off.
The only people who have any valid claim to caring about music when they primarily just collect mp3's are very young teenagers. If you haven't been a true listener and collector since you were under 18 then you missed something fundamental about music. I'm sorry, but you just don't know what it's about. You missed it. It's too late, and no matter how hard you try you can't recapture what you missed.
That is the elitism. If you never spent significant time in a record store then you aren't a part of what makes music what it is. Yes, it is an elitist group. We have a bond and you can't share it. You can't even understand it.
And to loudly advocate the rights of music and musicians without ever being a part of the fundamentals of that scene is bullshit. If you truly cared, and you aren't under 15, then you would have been there. You weren't, so shut up. If you weren't there then you didn't care. Jumping on the bandwagon now that music collecting is easy doesn't cut it.
Go ahead and leech all that you can. I'm glad you've finally got some decent music in your car. But don't take some moral high ground because you aren't fucking entitled to it.
Slashdot Mirror
In a nutshell, MySql is free. Is it great? Hell no, but it's free. The only deep understanding of human nature or the DB marketplace one needs to comprehend here is that given the choice between something great and expensive vs. something mediocre and free, the overwhelming majority will go for free.
MySql has always had huge problems preventing it from being accepted in the real "enterprise" marketplace, but most of us aren't in that market. Most of us need to yank a bit of data and cram it into a web page moderately quickly and as cheaply as possible. MySql does this quite well.
What doesn't MySql do well? For starters, it's much slower than Oracle, MS-Sql, and even Foxpro. It has no row locking, no transaction support, and minimal cross-platform compatibility. But, it's free and it works more or less ok on Linux.
Perhaps the real truth that Oracle fears is that eventually DBAs will come to realize that 99.9% of their storage needs aren't so "mission critical" as they would like to believe. I mean really, how many people out there can truely justify the cost of a full featured, robust database like MS-Sql? 10%? 5%?
For the rest of us, a free - albeit slightly dodgy - solution will work fine.
Oh, what a witty comeback.
That's all you space cadets can ever come up with. Have you ever noticed that? Whenever somebody has the temerity to criticize NASA, the only argument in favor is fucking cookware?
Sweet mother of Jesus, how would we ever survive on this planet if it were not for Teflon?!? Why, just think of what it was like back in the olden days! I can not count the number of wars that were directly attributable to some general having his pancake stick to the skillet! And the plagues! God, who could forget those! Recent scientific studies have concluded that the Black Death was not caused by fleas from rats as once suspected, but in fact was due to a unique case of tendonitis that resulted from scouring the fry pan when the yak burgers prevelant at the time where left on a bit too long and some of the icky bits got burned right onto the bottom.
And there's more! Did you know that Teflon has reduced the number of catastrophic earthquakes by over 74%?!? And that non-stick cookware has been identified as a leading candidate as an AIDS vaccine? Or that traffic fatalities involving nuns could be eliminated entirely is their habits were coated with Teflon?
I must say that from the vantage point of 40 years of history, the billions and billions of dollars spent blasting monkeys into space has resulted in some of the mst important developments known to man. Clearly the invention of Teflon was well worth the cost, and the impact on society simply cannot be understated.
The simple and undeniable answer is that it doesn't mean anything to us at all. We can't go there. Knowing about it doesn't end world hunger. It doesn't stop war. It doesn't mean a god damn thing in our real lives.
All this space nonsense is just a way to distract us from what is really important in our lives. We are entertained with all these grand science fiction visions of green men and flying saucers while the real world around us desceds further and further into chaos.
You know what the one thing that space exploration really does make an impact on? Our wallets. The government, under the guise of NASA, has not only succeeded in focusing the best minds of our time away from the places where they could really make a difference, they have tricked you and I into paying for it. Your tax dollars are being used to fund a mass conspiracy which would have us believe that alien life both exists and means something.
Maybe aliens DO exist. Great. But it doesn't mean shit. It is all a scam, and the real goal is to amuse the sheep while the wolves rob us blind. Thank you NASA. Thank you for screwing the American public.
If you were to ask the average slobbering Slashbot how they would react if the government prohibited them from installing security cameras in and around their own private property, they would go ballistic. They would say things like "It's my property! I own it! I have a right to protect it! I have a duty to protect it! Who are you to say I can't install security cameras!" And they would be right; property owners have a right to take steps to protect their property. These steps include the use of security cameras, and such cameras are used all over the place (private homes, convenience stores, banks, casinos, etc.)
.. how would it have been any different if individual policemen were working the gates, looking for suspicious people?) As near as I can tell, this primarily amounts to hatred .. hatred of property owners and hatred of owner's rights. Hatred of the Constitution and hatred of freedom.
But now the foaming Slashbots are in an uproar over this very basic principle of private property ownership that they (apparently) have no problem with in any of the above examples. They are ranting and raving as if this is a big deal (which it isn't
Too many of these people have called for restrictions on what private property owners can do on their own property and furthermore have suggested that owners be severely restricted in the steps that they can take to protect their property. Well, guess what, kiddies; that sort of idea might have been wildly popular with Josef Stalin and his ilk, but it's not going to fly here in the good old U.S. of A. The agenda of the anti-camera people is clear: the gradual erosion of private property rights and ownership until all is owned and controlled by a collectivist government/society.
Well, it ain't gonna happen.
I often wonder about the long-term effects of putting so much effort into creating - and now analysing - digital "culture". I'm not advocating being a luddite or anything, but more and more often these days we see online social interaction not adding to but replacing more traditional forms of human contact.
Usually you replace something that is broken or flawed. So what's so flawed about normal socializing that we feel this need to supplant it with something that is in reality more isolating?
Just some idle thought on my part. Feedback?
Seeing as how the Xbox will most likely play the majority of existing PC games, they'll have at least 10% right out of the gate. By the end of 2002 I estimate that over 50% of released titles wil be playable on the Xbox.
Yes, PC gamers will be very likely to dual boot, but most gamers are console gamers. They are frat boys playing EA Sports titles and 10 yr. olds playing Mario. PC games have played 2nd string to consoles ever since the Atari, and they always will.
The video game industry will generate more revenue this year than the motion picture industry. Think about that for a second. All that income is not coming from computer geeks. It's coming from people who just want to hit the 'On' switch and play. They don't care what's under the hood.
Loki has, what, maybe 0.5% of the gaming market? Sorry, but that doesn't count for much.
Just like the people who will port Linux to the Xbox, you don't count. If you are doing serious computation then chances are you're not running Windows anyway, so the net gain is 0.
And once Linux is installed you can't play games anymore. Suddenly this hacked box is only appealing to geeks; people who are already running Linux anyway.
Why would the average consumer bother installing Linux on an X-box? What would be the benefit?
We all like to think that Microsoft is slowly but surely losing the battle over free software, but sadly this is not the case. The X-box will deliver a crushing blow against freedom and the GNU flag wavers are going to be blindsided by it.
Gnome? KDE? The desktop is dead. The future of computing has nothing to do with computers as we know them, because the computers we hve now are 10x more powerful than they need to be for the tasks they are used for - with one exception: Entertainment.
Games and other forms of digital entertainment are the only things that continue to push the limits of comuting power, and in case you haven't been paying attention, all entertainment systems are closed source. The abysmal failure of a Linux-based gaming platform just goes to show that Open Source has absolutely no chance of making any headway against proprietary systems.
You can all pat yourselves on the back and cheer the Perens-penned tirade against Microsoft, but it doesn't matter. The folks in Redmond really don't give a rat's ass about the GPL, they are just making sure you are all distracted over something that is uterly trivial in the long term. Meanwhile, they are preparing their jugernaut for the coming holiday shopping season while the free software leaders are wasting time trying to attack a portion of the industry that is increasingly irrelevant.
It will not be entirely a Microsft world. It will be a Sony/Nintendo/EA/Microsoft world. And none of it will be Open Source.
The Universe can be considered 5 dimensional. Imagine that the universe is a sphere, for a moment. When it started off at the big bang, it was a point. Then it quite literally blew up, like an expanding balloon. This was called inflation.
This is not the whole story, though. For inside the balloon is another ballon, and inside that one another. It is like an Onion, with all these different shells expanding outwards from the central fire of Creation. Extrapolate this to our 4 dimensional universe, and you can see that the Metaverse is 5 dimensional. There is some reason to believe that the metaverse will not be of infinite age, in which case there may be another 6th dimension of other metaverses constantly being created.
This shows why the universe must be Open - it cannot contract again because it would collide with the universe underneath us. Eventually, our universe will slough off the edge of the onion, and that will be the end of us.
Unless, that is, we start researching technologies to transverse the universes, and travel to the younger universes below us. Then eventually we can approach the everlasting point of creation at the nucleus of the onion.
This is a worthy long term destiny for us to aim for, and I urge that we start preparing now. Why bother with the petty details of day to day life - we should be thinking of the destiny of our race, our species, our Universe, and striving to make tommorrow ours.
The idea that any kind of centralised service such as UDDI will ever manage to provide an easy, reliable and most importantly, a timely way of finding content online is pretty much preposterous to anyone who has ever used the net seriously. The net is just too anarchic and constantly changing for any such service to ever be reliable, and services like Yahoo have shown this, despite the millions of dollars of venture capital wasted.
Only search engines like Google have any hope of ever allowing people to discover information they need. The honeymoon days of web directories are over, and the technology has been shown to be the turkey it is. The net is a constantly changing place, and any static technology is doomed to failure.
I doubt this very much. Certainly 2000 was better than 1995, due to economic growth. This economic growth improved living standards, raised consumer happiness, improved employment, reduced unhappiness, etc. The reason for this growth was enterprise in the computer industry. Enterprise caused by companies hungry to make money.
The activities of companies such as Microsoft made billions of dollars for people - not just for their employees but for the economy. Now recently as these companies have started to do less well, beset by open source, antitrust and so on, the economy has done badly. The results of this have been layoffs, reduced consumer confidence (which means, eventually, that the guy who runs the bagel shop on the corner loses his job) and general economic decline.
The omens are that this will get worse. It seems that open source's time has come. It has been said that open source will provide 50% of software for the country. The result of this is less money into the economy. If people now buy one $50 Redhat installer instead of 10,000 Microsoft licenses, there is that much less money into the economy. Companies such as Microsoft will find that they will do less well, and the knockon effect will be on the economy - not just that of the US but economies around the world. The potential is for global recession without the growth caused by the IT industry.
This is regrettable; people assume that open source simply means 'free software'. This is incorrect. Free software is no different from Communism - a country where you have, say, 'free cars' - cars owned by everyone - open source cars if you will, do not do better. They do worse. Growth in society depends on the greed of man - the greed of brokers propelling the stockmarket higher. Unfortunately communism does not cater to this most important of human instincts. This is why, just as communist societies damage the people (communist countries, without exception, are very poor countries), so too communist software damages society.
It removes the greed/growth that fuels our economy, our sandwich shops and our luxury goods, and replaces that with a communistic ideal which leaves no potential for any advancement.
That's just the PR cover story. EA has been slowly killing Origin since they bought it, and the rumor mill strongly suggests that's why L.B. left the company. Not only did they kill UO2, they also laid off over half their staff, and the ones still there are earnestly putting resumes together as we speak.
Origin has had numerous promising new projects that have been killed and/or shifted to other EA companies in the past year. With UO2 getting the ax, they now have nothing in the pipeline for new releases. Yes, you read that right. Origin is no longer working on anything other than UO maintenance.
UO still makes money, so EA won't kill Origin altogether. At least not yet. But their actions have led to the inescapable conclusion that Lord British's once-mighty empire will soon be nothing but a memory.
Kiss Origin goodbye. This was the final blow.
Thank you for proudly waving the GNUflag in our faces. Pity we're not talking about PostgreSQL.
btw, if Oracle released a report stating that they had benchmarks proving that their DB was the best at everything, but you couldn't actually see those benchmarks, would you give the claim any credence? If not, why should we trust someone else's rumor? Just because it says good things about an OS application?
That's hypocrisy, my friend.
You can hate Microsoft as much as you want, but MS-SQL is a whole hell of a lot better than MySQL. There's places where all these wonderful OS applications don't work nearly as well as a proprietary solution, and databases is definitely one of those places.
MySQL is a great DB for fast read access where things like row locking aren't very important. Great for the web when you don't want to spend a lot of money. But if you've already got SQL then using MySQL is just plain dumb. SQL on NT will out-perform MySQL in just about every way. Not using it just because you don't like Microsoft could get you fired, and IMO it would be justified.
Well I stopped considering it Pink Floyd after Syd Barrett left, but there you go.
One album and a handful of singles? No much of a career, was it? ;)
Have you heard "his" tracks on Ummagumma? Aieieieie. Less, please.
You think that's bad, try listening to his solo stuff. The only thing worse is, um... Mason's solo stuff.
but it's probably getting too cruel already...
Not at all. Nothing is more entertaining than making fun of old, bloated, washed-up musicians who don't know when to throw in the towel.
Nah, I'm snobbish about that stuff. (No surprise there, right?). I even find it difficult to call the '82 album a Floyd one because Rick Wright got the boot from Roger Waters right after The Wall.
Stupid Floyd trivia: Nick Mason, the drummer, is the only member to have appeared on every album made by Pink Floyd.
You're a pathetic troll. Nothing more.
No, I am an arrogant prick who really doesn't like any of you one bit. You are loathsome people, and as an arrogant prick I choose to insult you in your own forum rather than go do something productive with my time. Since the opions expressed above are for the most part genuine, your label of troll doesn't fit.
btw, if you are indeed eliminating possession of your curent collection, how are you doing so? If you are selling or giving away the stuff then you are willingly giving up your right to use, and as such have no legal grounds to retain copies in mp3 format. The only possible way you could still claim a valid license is if you destroy the physical copies, and even that is legally dubious.
Most of the leachers probley own the right to download said music, prove otherwise.
Oh please. Where is this rose-tinted world of yours, exactly?
And as I clearly stated one thread up, I have no problem with these people anyway. At least not until they start spouting off on slashdot about "musician's rights". Ingrate thieves have no place championing the rights of those they steal from.
You are not "ditching" your collection, you are archiving it. Fundamental difference.
You are a bit brainwashed by the media as far as the common napster user, as I am a common napster user.
You are a bit brainwashed by slashdot as far as the common napster user, as you are not a common napster user.
Show me somewhere else that says otherwise that found this out by asking each user
Yes, indeed please show me where you have gotten your facts that aren't equally biased. Fact is, there isn't any valid study, only anecdotal evidence. And you know what? Of course there's more people claiming your side then mine. Do you really expect all the thieves to stand up en masse to be counted? Check the leech ratios of any file sharing service, be it Napster, Gnutella, FTP, whatever. Lots and lots of downlaoders and damn few hosts.
Pink Floyd hasn't recorded an album since 1982. What took you so long?
And yes, you're right. Your Audiovox "Rack System" sounds like horse shit.
Implied extension of the sentence you quoted is
Yes, there is an elitism here, and it has nothing to do with the cost of my collection. It has to do with all these people posting to this story claiming that they have all this respect for music and the people who create it when most of them couldn't find the way to the nearest record store if you dragged them by the mouse they were clinging to like it was their primary life support.
If you are, and have been, a music purchaser then you know that both sides of the "record sales are being affected" battle are total bullshit. Sales are up because the economy is up. Record sales aren't being altered one way or the other in any significant manner by the existance of Napster.
What we have instead are a bunch of johnny-come-lately's who now have huge collections of music when prior to the existence of Napster they had virtually none. If you take any kind of objective look around you will see that this is primarily the case with Napster users.
But I have no problem with this. It's great that more people are listening to more music. What I take serious issue with is all this bleating by these same people about how fucking concerned they are with music and artist's rights. They cheapen the devotion of those of us who truly care about these things in the same way that the drunken wife abuser next door cheapens the WWII veterans when he makes a big deal about hoisting up the flag every July 4th just so he can feel better about getting drunk on his day off.
The only people who have any valid claim to caring about music when they primarily just collect mp3's are very young teenagers. If you haven't been a true listener and collector since you were under 18 then you missed something fundamental about music. I'm sorry, but you just don't know what it's about. You missed it. It's too late, and no matter how hard you try you can't recapture what you missed.
That is the elitism. If you never spent significant time in a record store then you aren't a part of what makes music what it is. Yes, it is an elitist group. We have a bond and you can't share it. You can't even understand it.
And to loudly advocate the rights of music and musicians without ever being a part of the fundamentals of that scene is bullshit. If you truly cared, and you aren't under 15, then you would have been there. You weren't, so shut up. If you weren't there then you didn't care. Jumping on the bandwagon now that music collecting is easy doesn't cut it.
Go ahead and leech all that you can. I'm glad you've finally got some decent music in your car. But don't take some moral high ground because you aren't fucking entitled to it.