I was a systems administrator in a public charter middle school. Naturally, this issue came up several times when our technology plan was being drawn up.
The solution I came up with (which worked very well for our small population) was to keep a log of sites visited. Every couple of days I would scan the list of sites. Didn't take too long, as the "inappropriate" sites tended to jump off the list. A few banned accounts and everyone stayed in line.
Naturally, that solution would not work for a school with say, six thousand students surfing every day (we had 80), which brings up the main point. No cookie cutter solution can possibly address all the scenarios for different schools and libraries. Each place will need to come up with their own solution to what most people will agree is a legitimate problem/concern. Easy examples: should a kindergarten only school have an internet as open as a high school? How about vocational schools (with many adult students)?
If Congress really wants to be helpful about this, let them require that such issues be addressed in each library and school's technology plan, but leave the implementation up to the local level where the administrators and communtity might *gasp* actually know what is needed at that specific locale and for that specific audience.
This may have been brought up earlier, but one thing I never see amidst all the mights and maybes are the things that _will_ definately happen if all these medical breakthroughs take place.
Imagine a world without cancer, heart disease, or other serious diseases. A world where people live many years longer. A world where people stop dying... (at least for a period of time till things catch up again).
If overpopulation is a problem now, what will we it be then... oh, and will the "working age" people still have to support all the population over age 65? even when they live to be 120?
The difference between Hunkapiller and Gates is that people will freely admit there are downsides to software, and at least pretend to consider them, if only briefly. No one bothers to consider that there is a downside to genetic/medical innovation as well.
1) how many people actually look at and suggest improvements for the Linux kernel (honest question, I have no idea) who are _qualified_ to make informed suggestions (by this I mean just not counting the crap that must get mixed into the list)? How does that compare to the number of personell at microsoft plus all their serious beta testers. I would guess it would be larger, but by how much?
2)As far as putting customers first, I think Linux has come a long way in this regard. I purchased the distro I did because it was already set up with the features and add ons that _I_ wanted. In fact, Linux users have an advantage here (at least, the moderately educated ones do) in that different distributions seem to be geared toward different user types, rather than the windows one-size-fits-all (ok, two sizes - secure and unsecure, workstaion and server, ok 4 sizes *grin*) model
The author lost me in the middle somewhere, where apple specifically got dropped from the discussion somewhere, but it seems that Apple (once the mac came) was always a different kind of company in that they made _everything_ proprietary, down to the fonts on the keyboard. They didn't distinguish between hardware and software at all in their marketing, at least when the macs started.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. Mac has been successful being closed in a niche market, but it seems to be shrinking as other machines can now do the publishing and imaging that only macs could do.
Ahh.. but the formatting would get screwed up. I see the dilemma now. Either lose the formatting or spend much time trying to recreate it.
I'm sure I'm missing something here, but
on
From Paper To PDF?
·
· Score: 1
Can't you just scan the pages in and use some OCR software to convert to plain text, then use your method of outputting to postscript and go from there?
With the hardware built to take advantage of a full installation of Windows Pocket PC, many real applications would come up for these things with a much smaller Linux installed.
I'm using a Jornada 548. The thing as as much RAM and a more powerful processor than the desktop computer I was using 5 years ago. Forget for a moment about the battery life (I know, we're entering the "willing suspension of disbelief" zone). You should be able to run just about anything with a specific installation of Linux on this.
As for the people who ask "Why would you want to?" I can only say because you can. Most technological improvements were developed that way, and then other people quickly found applications for them. Heck, most people didn't see a use for portable phones not too long ago...
And, if nothing else, it gives people one more option. And that is always a good thing.
This definitely bring linux one more step closer to universal use. Anything that can conceal the underworkings of the OS and network configurations is a definite plus (so long as it can be easily bypassed by those who know what they're doing).
With Gnome and KDE you can have a predefined desktop GUI ready to go on installation. Now you'll be able to get your printers and scanners hooked up automatically. All that's left (if this hasn't been done already) is something similar to MS Internet Connection tool that acts as mini dhcp/dns/proxy server to automatically set up the network.
Realistically, if Corel's office2000 proves itself (or some other similar office product) and network set up becomes transparent, Linux should gain a huge jump in use.
Even the peripheral adding will give many home users a much easier time installing the system (I know I had a heck of a time getting my network card working with linux on my first install...)
Yes, it doesn't do much for people who can already network and do manual installs, but for people who are content with things to just work right with no fuss/no muss, this a *good thing*
Can someone please explain the difference between music which is covered by copyright and software which is covered by the GPL?
On another thread today, I noticed concern by posters that SCO might attempt to use GPL code in a proprietary version of linux, or at least in a proprietary add on. That must be fought against at any cost as it violates the license.
However, music, which is released under copyright, can be freely downloaded by anyone to use as they wish because "information (and music?) wants to be free"? and they can't stop us anyway?
Oh, I forgot. Its because music costs too much... The artists/record companies are making too much money, so its ok to violate their license. And so if a linux distro (say red hat, just for an example) starts charging money, then it's ok to violate the GPL and release your own closed source version of that, right?
I think this is where an SCO distro could really make some serious inroads. These are the companies that have a hard time maintaining fully licensed shops running commercial OS's and software.
Now, they will be able to get a stable, affordable solution from a company that they are already familiar with and can trust to provide the support they will need. (Yes, I know Red Hat provides support, but they're still not proven yet at the suit level).
And for mission critical apps, they can get their Unix box and linux support servers all from the same place now. Bring out a desktop distro with decent office apps and you can have the whole organization outfitted from the same place. Well, maybe not that yet... but this is a great start.
You can. All you need is two 24/7 servers to handle your dns and you can handle your domain's traffic. All you need to do is find somewhere to hook up to the internet.
That, of course is the issue. The "best" place to hook up is through one of the major backbones. If you don't care about performance you can hook up through anyone, (and they hook up through one of the backbones...).
Then just get your ip blocks from internic and you're good to go.
When I was pricing a T1 for my home I checked out uunet and the other carriers. Granted, I don't live too far from a hub, but UUnet's pricing wasn't too far above everyone elses (about $350 more than other local carriers once I got done negotiating).
Plus, they were the only company who guaranteed latencies in north america and transatlantic, as well as constant server monitoring and free paging for detected outages. That and a free days credit for 1 minute of downtime, whether on their end or the local loop.
I couldn't afford the price then, but when I can, they'll be the guys I go with. Yes they're more expensive. But you do get what you pay for.
Personally, I don't see this as ever really stifling IP. But if it does, the free-market has a natural counter for it. People will simply stop producing ideas. No one (read much less people) will enter a field where the prospects of earning a decent living are substantially lower than in other fields.
Eventually, the shortage of new ideas will add value to the ones that are there, and mechanisms will come in place to protect IP again. Even open source programmers need to eat. Intellectual Property is the basis for innovation, and whatever it takes, society will keep innovation coming. The market will demand it.
Actually, the really scary thing here has nothing do with Intel and market share, but how much an educational institution can be beholden to one of its benefactors. This was simply a case of a corportation donating money to a university, then dictating to that university how things ought to be run...
As long as our educational institutions feel the need to play along with corporate sponsors, these situations will continue to occur. And with all the big money grants and donations available, more and more schools will feel the urge to get some of that money for themselves. Unfortunately, this can only hurt the students and faculty, ultimately.
If an institution of higher learning is beholden to _any_ interest, corporate or otherwise, they can longer freely pursue their academic interests in _all_ avenues, if a free, unfettered way. That would be a greater blow to our freedom than anything MS or Intel or any other monopoly has done to date.
I'm sure there will be many posts here about the dangers of digital signatures, and forger, and loss of privacy, etc... most of them both valid and rational. But be sure to consider the plus side as well.
Whenever you purchase something online: a cd, a book, software, etc.. you are entering into a contract with the person/company selling you that item. If you purchase an item in a store, you must either provide cash or credit card with a signature. This adds validity to these contracts which protects both the merchants and the consumer in the case of fraud/bad merchandise/insert other *bad thing* here.
This also enable more sophisticated business to transpire online as well. Opening up stock trading accounts. Purchasing real estate. Leasing cars. All things that require specific contracts, and which involve mail delays if the persons involved are not physically close to each other.
Yes forgery and privacy issues will be found here, but Guess what? Cases of forgery and violation of privacy occur with written contracts too.
I think this a necessary thing, which like all other things, must be used carefully and with both eyes open.
We're finally reaching a point in technology where the line between techno-savvy administrator and computer end-user is being blurred - not in terms of their knowledge (that's wider than ever) - but in terms of what they are setting up and runnning.
With tools like MS internet connection sharing and cheap networking cable, clueless users are now capable of setting up (almost setting up?) ethernet networks from the comfort of their recliners. Of course, this added ability does nothing to impart new information to the users.
It is possible to set up secure MS networks (this is what I do...) but its not easy, especially when the default settings for so many things are open access to everyone. Unless MS changes the settings (not very likely from what I've seen) or someone comes up with an easy and well publicized way for users to set up at least moderate security, these things will only continue to grow.
Actually, one other thing that could help is for the ISP's to use short lease DNS and keep everyones IP address changing. That would at least make things a little more difficult for crackers.
I've helped check and set up connections for my friends and found that more than a few of them had permitted open file sharing with their computers when all they wanted to do was share a printer.
Oh, and for people who think this is just a MS problem so linux users don't have to worry, if they get enough computers, they can start attacking backbone segments. Then everyone gets shut out.
Could this be used to communicate with a boat cruising around a lake with the base from home? A two mile radius isn't the world, but it would be fine for an afternoon cruise.
I'm sure there are lots of other applications around for connecting houses, stuff like that too.
This sounds similar to the mail order tax tried here in the U.S where states may require out of state businesses to collect sales tax, but where there is little means of enforcement.
And as this crosses national lines, not just state/province lines, how can the EU hope to enforce this. Will they block sites which offer items for sale? Restrict deliveries?
It seems like an idea that's bad on paper and could only get worse in its implementation.
To become a big brand is the goal of all the small brands competing. This is the American Dream, and is quickly becoming a worldwide dream as well. Nothing wrong with that.
Of course, power corrupts, yadda yadda yadda see microsoft, etc... Businesses do need people to keep an eye on their practices and keep them in check, otherwise they will quite happily run roughshod over each other and everyone else to maintain their position: Power is not a means. It is an end.
Having said that, I don't think we will ever be free of large brands, nor should we want to be. Large brands can afford to put money into risky things like development and research. Smaller corporations have all they can do to produce and survive. Brands need to be managed, and perhaps replaced from time to time with newer, more "friendly" brands, who will then need to be watched as they corrupt over time.
Its easy to be "good" when you don't have the power to be "evil".
Games have always been a defining and shaping force of culture since ancient times. Notable examples would include the Olympic Games of Ancient Greece (and modern times), the gladitorial games of Rome, and chess and pachisi(sp?) among the nobility of europe and india.
Until recently, most games in our culture (I live in the US) were played outdoors by groups of people. Baseball, football, soccer, etc... However today, few people have the time or outdoor space to engage in these activities, and there are very few adult leagues set up on a purely recreational (ie not very competitive) level. As a replacement for these, online gaming has developed.
I both play and administer muds and have come to know people from literally all across the globe through my play and work on these. Much of what used to occur on street corners and ball fields now happens over computer screens, simply because that is what we all have free or relatively free and easy access to.
As Kirk observed (rough quote) "The more advanced the culture, the greater the need for the simplicity of play"
Games will continue to develop and become more a part of our culture, just as chat-rooms, messanging, and email have become.
This is one of the key pieces to the Linux puzzle that needs to be put into place for Linux to move up to the next level of acceptance. This will enable many more people to develop applications for linux, which will lead to more people using linux, which will lead to a larger market, which brings more commercial apps, which brings more people, etc...
For those of you complaining that linux is just for the l33t people, let me remind you that no one is talking about taking your precious command line away. You can still gcc to your hearts content. This just lets other people enjoy the stability of linux as well. Sorry if you feel your exclusive little club is threatened.
The _Real_ Reason these worms keep going
on
Gnutella VBS Worm
·
· Score: 2
Dialog of a true phone conversation held this morning:
(L)user: I just received an email titled: RESUME. Should I open it?
Support: Did you ask for this resume to be sent to you?
(L)user: No
Support: Do you know the person who sent it to you?
(L)user: No
Support: Do you get resumes as part of your job function?
(L)user: No
Support: Then please delete the email without opening it.
(L)user: Are you sure? I don't want to lose anything important?
Actually, I considered it a not so small victory for training that the user called, but it shows the point. The biggest security hole in any operating system will always be the carbon interface banging on the keys. Once these users get loose on an any system, security becomes much, much more difficult.
The thought of possibly corrupting everyones email must be weighed against the possiblility of missing a funny chain letter... Anyone's guess who wins that one.
(And yes, I freely acknowledge that MS makes exploiting these poor creatures incredibly easy, but its only a matter of time before they move on to linux and other OS's)
Well, finally a publically known virus that can attack linux users. Of course, this virus isn't automatically given root access to the system. Oh, and this virus can't automatically replicate itself to hundreds of your friends. Hmmm... this virus can't even go into your system and change files that you don't have rights to. I guess Linux still has a long way to go before it catches up to Microsoft.
The written word has always been held to a higher standard in many ways than oral speech. For one thing, it is far more permanent and far reaching. I'm sure the comparison has been made, but consider a school newspaper, even a completely underground one. If such a paper were to print the comments made on the website, charges may well have been filed, equipment seized, etc...
Several references were made about the early days of the net when information was "more free" and not scrutinized. Years ago, in the wild west, the land was more free, and people were more free to shoot each other. Eventually though, the land was tamed a bit. The same thing is happening to the internet. This happens with any frontier that becomes populated. It simply can't remain the free lawless space it once was, whether a physical frontier or a cyber one.
Perhaps dangerous precedents may be being set in this case, but consider the alternative for a moment. What if we teach our children that its ok to say and write whatever you want, without regard for facts or the consequences to others, as long as you do it on the internet and make it free for all the world to see. I find that idea a bit scary as well.
Slashdot Mirror
If MS is asking that the lower court ruling be completely vacated, does this mean that the SC can re-examine any remedies (ie: breakup)?
I was a systems administrator in a public charter middle school. Naturally, this issue came up several times when our technology plan was being drawn up.
The solution I came up with (which worked very well for our small population) was to keep a log of sites visited. Every couple of days I would scan the list of sites. Didn't take too long, as the "inappropriate" sites tended to jump off the list. A few banned accounts and everyone stayed in line.
Naturally, that solution would not work for a school with say, six thousand students surfing every day (we had 80), which brings up the main point. No cookie cutter solution can possibly address all the scenarios for different schools and libraries. Each place will need to come up with their own solution to what most people will agree is a legitimate problem/concern. Easy examples: should a kindergarten only school have an internet as open as a high school? How about vocational schools (with many adult students)?
If Congress really wants to be helpful about this, let them require that such issues be addressed in each library and school's technology plan, but leave the implementation up to the local level where the administrators and communtity might *gasp* actually know what is needed at that specific locale and for that specific audience.
This may have been brought up earlier, but one thing I never see amidst all the mights and maybes are the things that _will_ definately happen if all these medical breakthroughs take place.
Imagine a world without cancer, heart disease, or other serious diseases. A world where people live many years longer. A world where people stop dying... (at least for a period of time till things catch up again).
If overpopulation is a problem now, what will we it be then... oh, and will the "working age" people still have to support all the population over age 65? even when they live to be 120?
The difference between Hunkapiller and Gates is that people will freely admit there are downsides to software, and at least pretend to consider them, if only briefly. No one bothers to consider that there is a downside to genetic/medical innovation as well.
The article got me thinking about a few points:
1) how many people actually look at and suggest improvements for the Linux kernel (honest question, I have no idea) who are _qualified_ to make informed suggestions (by this I mean just not counting the crap that must get mixed into the list)? How does that compare to the number of personell at microsoft plus all their serious beta testers. I would guess it would be larger, but by how much?
2)As far as putting customers first, I think Linux has come a long way in this regard. I purchased the distro I did because it was already set up with the features and add ons that _I_ wanted. In fact, Linux users have an advantage here (at least, the moderately educated ones do) in that different distributions seem to be geared toward different user types, rather than the windows one-size-fits-all (ok, two sizes - secure and unsecure, workstaion and server, ok 4 sizes *grin*) model
The author lost me in the middle somewhere, where apple specifically got dropped from the discussion somewhere, but it seems that Apple (once the mac came) was always a different kind of company in that they made _everything_ proprietary, down to the fonts on the keyboard. They didn't distinguish between hardware and software at all in their marketing, at least when the macs started.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. Mac has been successful being closed in a niche market, but it seems to be shrinking as other machines can now do the publishing and imaging that only macs could do.
Ahh.. but the formatting would get screwed up. I see the dilemma now. Either lose the formatting or spend much time trying to recreate it.
Can't you just scan the pages in and use some OCR software to convert to plain text, then use your method of outputting to postscript and go from there?
With the hardware built to take advantage of a full installation of Windows Pocket PC, many real applications would come up for these things with a much smaller Linux installed.
I'm using a Jornada 548. The thing as as much RAM and a more powerful processor than the desktop computer I was using 5 years ago. Forget for a moment about the battery life (I know, we're entering the "willing suspension of disbelief" zone). You should be able to run just about anything with a specific installation of Linux on this.
As for the people who ask "Why would you want to?" I can only say because you can. Most technological improvements were developed that way, and then other people quickly found applications for them. Heck, most people didn't see a use for portable phones not too long ago...
And, if nothing else, it gives people one more option. And that is always a good thing.
This definitely bring linux one more step closer to universal use. Anything that can conceal the underworkings of the OS and network configurations is a definite plus (so long as it can be easily bypassed by those who know what they're doing).
With Gnome and KDE you can have a predefined desktop GUI ready to go on installation. Now you'll be able to get your printers and scanners hooked up automatically. All that's left (if this hasn't been done already) is something similar to MS Internet Connection tool that acts as mini dhcp/dns/proxy server to automatically set up the network.
Realistically, if Corel's office2000 proves itself (or some other similar office product) and network set up becomes transparent, Linux should gain a huge jump in use.
Even the peripheral adding will give many home users a much easier time installing the system (I know I had a heck of a time getting my network card working with linux on my first install...)
Yes, it doesn't do much for people who can already network and do manual installs, but for people who are content with things to just work right with no fuss/no muss, this a *good thing*
Can someone please explain the difference between music which is covered by copyright and software which is covered by the GPL?
On another thread today, I noticed concern by posters that SCO might attempt to use GPL code in a proprietary version of linux, or at least in a proprietary add on. That must be fought against at any cost as it violates the license.
However, music, which is released under copyright, can be freely downloaded by anyone to use as they wish because "information (and music?) wants to be free"? and they can't stop us anyway?
Oh, I forgot. Its because music costs too much... The artists/record companies are making too much money, so its ok to violate their license. And so if a linux distro (say red hat, just for an example) starts charging money, then it's ok to violate the GPL and release your own closed source version of that, right?
Or am I missing something?
I think this is where an SCO distro could really make some serious inroads. These are the companies that have a hard time maintaining fully licensed shops running commercial OS's and software.
Now, they will be able to get a stable, affordable solution from a company that they are already familiar with and can trust to provide the support they will need. (Yes, I know Red Hat provides support, but they're still not proven yet at the suit level).
And for mission critical apps, they can get their Unix box and linux support servers all from the same place now. Bring out a desktop distro with decent office apps and you can have the whole organization outfitted from the same place. Well, maybe not that yet... but this is a great start.
You can. All you need is two 24/7 servers to handle your dns and you can handle your domain's traffic. All you need to do is find somewhere to hook up to the internet.
That, of course is the issue. The "best" place to hook up is through one of the major backbones. If you don't care about performance you can hook up through anyone, (and they hook up through one of the backbones...).
Then just get your ip blocks from internic and you're good to go.
When I was pricing a T1 for my home I checked out uunet and the other carriers. Granted, I don't live too far from a hub, but UUnet's pricing wasn't too far above everyone elses (about $350 more than other local carriers once I got done negotiating).
Plus, they were the only company who guaranteed latencies in north america and transatlantic, as well as constant server monitoring and free paging for detected outages. That and a free days credit for 1 minute of downtime, whether on their end or the local loop.
I couldn't afford the price then, but when I can, they'll be the guys I go with. Yes they're more expensive. But you do get what you pay for.
Personally, I don't see this as ever really stifling IP. But if it does, the free-market has a natural counter for it. People will simply stop producing ideas. No one (read much less people) will enter a field where the prospects of earning a decent living are substantially lower than in other fields.
Eventually, the shortage of new ideas will add value to the ones that are there, and mechanisms will come in place to protect IP again. Even open source programmers need to eat. Intellectual Property is the basis for innovation, and whatever it takes, society will keep innovation coming. The market will demand it.
Actually, the really scary thing here has nothing do with Intel and market share, but how much an educational institution can be beholden to one of its benefactors. This was simply a case of a corportation donating money to a university, then dictating to that university how things ought to be run...
As long as our educational institutions feel the need to play along with corporate sponsors, these situations will continue to occur. And with all the big money grants and donations available, more and more schools will feel the urge to get some of that money for themselves. Unfortunately, this can only hurt the students and faculty, ultimately.
If an institution of higher learning is beholden to _any_ interest, corporate or otherwise, they can longer freely pursue their academic interests in _all_ avenues, if a free, unfettered way. That would be a greater blow to our freedom than anything MS or Intel or any other monopoly has done to date.
I'm sure there will be many posts here about the dangers of digital signatures, and forger, and loss of privacy, etc... most of them both valid and rational. But be sure to consider the plus side as well.
Whenever you purchase something online: a cd, a book, software, etc.. you are entering into a contract with the person/company selling you that item. If you purchase an item in a store, you must either provide cash or credit card with a signature. This adds validity to these contracts which protects both the merchants and the consumer in the case of fraud/bad merchandise/insert other *bad thing* here.
This also enable more sophisticated business to transpire online as well. Opening up stock trading accounts. Purchasing real estate. Leasing cars. All things that require specific contracts, and which involve mail delays if the persons involved are not physically close to each other.
Yes forgery and privacy issues will be found here, but Guess what? Cases of forgery and violation of privacy occur with written contracts too.
I think this a necessary thing, which like all other things, must be used carefully and with both eyes open.
We're finally reaching a point in technology where the line between techno-savvy administrator and computer end-user is being blurred - not in terms of their knowledge (that's wider than ever) - but in terms of what they are setting up and runnning.
With tools like MS internet connection sharing and cheap networking cable, clueless users are now capable of setting up (almost setting up?) ethernet networks from the comfort of their recliners. Of course, this added ability does nothing to impart new information to the users.
It is possible to set up secure MS networks (this is what I do...) but its not easy, especially when the default settings for so many things are open access to everyone. Unless MS changes the settings (not very likely from what I've seen) or someone comes up with an easy and well publicized way for users to set up at least moderate security, these things will only continue to grow.
Actually, one other thing that could help is for the ISP's to use short lease DNS and keep everyones IP address changing. That would at least make things a little more difficult for crackers.
I've helped check and set up connections for my friends and found that more than a few of them had permitted open file sharing with their computers when all they wanted to do was share a printer.
Oh, and for people who think this is just a MS problem so linux users don't have to worry, if they get enough computers, they can start attacking backbone segments. Then everyone gets shut out.
Could this be used to communicate with a boat cruising around a lake with the base from home? A two mile radius isn't the world, but it would be fine for an afternoon cruise.
I'm sure there are lots of other applications around for connecting houses, stuff like that too.
This sounds similar to the mail order tax tried here in the U.S where states may require out of state businesses to collect sales tax, but where there is little means of enforcement.
And as this crosses national lines, not just state/province lines, how can the EU hope to enforce this. Will they block sites which offer items for sale? Restrict deliveries?
It seems like an idea that's bad on paper and could only get worse in its implementation.
To become a big brand is the goal of all the small brands competing. This is the American Dream, and is quickly becoming a worldwide dream as well. Nothing wrong with that.
Of course, power corrupts, yadda yadda yadda see microsoft, etc... Businesses do need people to keep an eye on their practices and keep them in check, otherwise they will quite happily run roughshod over each other and everyone else to maintain their position: Power is not a means. It is an end.
Having said that, I don't think we will ever be free of large brands, nor should we want to be. Large brands can afford to put money into risky things like development and research. Smaller corporations have all they can do to produce and survive. Brands need to be managed, and perhaps replaced from time to time with newer, more "friendly" brands, who will then need to be watched as they corrupt over time.
Its easy to be "good" when you don't have the power to be "evil".
Games have always been a defining and shaping force of culture since ancient times. Notable examples would include the Olympic Games of Ancient Greece (and modern times), the gladitorial games of Rome, and chess and pachisi(sp?) among the nobility of europe and india.
Until recently, most games in our culture (I live in the US) were played outdoors by groups of people. Baseball, football, soccer, etc... However today, few people have the time or outdoor space to engage in these activities, and there are very few adult leagues set up on a purely recreational (ie not very competitive) level. As a replacement for these, online gaming has developed.
I both play and administer muds and have come to know people from literally all across the globe through my play and work on these. Much of what used to occur on street corners and ball fields now happens over computer screens, simply because that is what we all have free or relatively free and easy access to.
As Kirk observed (rough quote) "The more advanced the culture, the greater the need for the simplicity of play"
Games will continue to develop and become more a part of our culture, just as chat-rooms, messanging, and email have become.
This is one of the key pieces to the Linux puzzle that needs to be put into place for Linux to move up to the next level of acceptance. This will enable many more people to develop applications for linux, which will lead to more people using linux, which will lead to a larger market, which brings more commercial apps, which brings more people, etc...
For those of you complaining that linux is just for the l33t people, let me remind you that no one is talking about taking your precious command line away. You can still gcc to your hearts content. This just lets other people enjoy the stability of linux as well. Sorry if you feel your exclusive little club is threatened.
Dialog of a true phone conversation held this morning:
(L)user: I just received an email titled: RESUME. Should I open it?
Support: Did you ask for this resume to be sent to you?
(L)user: No
Support: Do you know the person who sent it to you?
(L)user: No
Support: Do you get resumes as part of your job function?
(L)user: No
Support: Then please delete the email without opening it.
(L)user: Are you sure? I don't want to lose anything important?
Actually, I considered it a not so small victory for training that the user called, but it shows the point. The biggest security hole in any operating system will always be the carbon interface banging on the keys. Once these users get loose on an any system, security becomes much, much more difficult.
The thought of possibly corrupting everyones email must be weighed against the possiblility of missing a funny chain letter... Anyone's guess who wins that one.
(And yes, I freely acknowledge that MS makes exploiting these poor creatures incredibly easy, but its only a matter of time before they move on to linux and other OS's)
I'm sorry for the lack of technical accuracy in the post. I was trying to add a dose of humor to my (and hopefully your) perhaps otherwise dull day.
Well, finally a publically known virus that can attack linux users. Of course, this virus isn't automatically given root access to the system. Oh, and this virus can't automatically replicate itself to hundreds of your friends. Hmmm... this virus can't even go into your system and change files that you don't have rights to. I guess Linux still has a long way to go before it catches up to Microsoft.
The written word has always been held to a higher standard in many ways than oral speech. For one thing, it is far more permanent and far reaching.
I'm sure the comparison has been made, but consider a school newspaper, even a completely underground one. If such a paper were to print the comments made on the website, charges may well have been filed, equipment seized, etc...
Several references were made about the early days of the net when information was "more free" and not scrutinized. Years ago, in the wild west, the land was more free, and people were more free to shoot each other. Eventually though, the land was tamed a bit. The same thing is happening to the internet. This happens with any frontier that becomes populated. It simply can't remain the free lawless space it once was, whether a physical frontier or a cyber one.
Perhaps dangerous precedents may be being set in this case, but consider the alternative for a moment. What if we teach our children that its ok to say and write whatever you want, without regard for facts or the consequences to others, as long as you do it on the internet and make it free for all the world to see. I find that idea a bit scary as well.