No. You can't. Darwin is not the whole operating system. I also suspect that you don't get the source to any of the compatibility layers that help non-OS-X applications run. It's not a troll any more than your original post was. If you don't value software freedom then fine. But DUH, some of us do.
So here's something else you can't do with OS X that you can with YDL: copy it to your friends' computers legally.
As to your "why not x86 then?" post below: DUH again! It's a little thing called dual-booting. Yes, I'd like to have an all free software system, but why not *also* have the best proprietary OS available too?
And for many YDL users, I suspect YDL came *after* the purchase of the PPC hardware. It sure did in my case. In fact, OS X isn't going to run on my old mac, but with YDL I get to do all the fun stuff like code in Perl or Ruby and run the web browsers that give me control rather than the web designer, I get the email client I like, I get GnuPG, I get emacs, the list goes on and on. The only time I boot to Mac OS is to print or get pix off my digital camera.
Interesting points. Sounds like all that is required is for workers to become significant shareholders in the companies at which they work and we'll have essentially communist ownership of capital.
And I strongly disagree that in a pure capitalist system monopolies are inevitable. In fact, I'd suspect that without so much market interference by government (for instance this stupid law being proposed), we'd see *less* monopoly.
Sheesh, if $30 will break your bank you have bigger fish to fry I think. If you're really interested in trying out YDL but are just too cheap to take a $30 chance on a set of CDs, then just use ISOs for 2.0 or 2.1! It's GNU/Linux. It looks just like every other GNU/Linux out there. If you don't like their package choices, or they aren't current enough for your bleeding-edge needs, then compile from source. Personally, I'd prefer paying $30 to Yellow Dog for a distro that works than dinking around all day and night trying to get Debian working. My time is worth more than that to me.
A compressed format is never "high quality". Real digital imaging folks don't store their pix as JPEGs between sessions. Similarly, a real audiofile wouldn't compress stuff without a reason.
FWIW, I agree that Ogg Vorbis is cool. But after ripping several gig of CDs to.ogg, I am now going back and re-ripping them to.mp3 so that the hundreds of.mp3's I've downloaded (legally via emusic.com) can easily use the same tools for cataloging and playback.
This thing is nothing more than a PC with an LCD on the front. I've already got a PC connected to my stereo (which, grumblegrumble, is 5mm too big for my stereo rack, so it's on the floor). Complete with black paint job.
This whole article is an example of the new "Slashvertisment" policy... and you thought they were joking!
I thought the idea of open source was to build the source and not care about what the user does with the software, except selling it. ,br>
Except that even with "business-friendly" sounding open source, selling the software is fine, as long as you provide the source code.
Big difference between him actually saying it and you saying that it's not hard to see him believing. Sorry, but this doesn't wash.
Re:Perl 6 will be a painful (tiny little troll :)
on
Exegesis 4 Out
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Or Ruby for that matter. Ruby is pretty cool as well. So many of the "improvements" to Perl for Perl 6 are things Ruby seems to already have (or have an easy way to get around).
You mean like setting a cron job to run apt-get update or yup or one of the many auto-update features included in the typical Linux distro? The same would work with BSD ports, only it would include a recompile from source.
If you have that many bookmarks, maybe you need to learn to organize them a bit. Most browsers include a tool to help you do this. Don't let the fact that it's a complex point-and-click interface scare you. My biggest problem is whether or not to include Slashdot on my daily PDA download. If I read all the articles on my Visor while riding the bus to the office, what will I do all day at work?
Except that normally you don't stick this in the middle of the article in a way that draws attention to it. And frankly, this guy noting it does nothing to make me think he's somehow magiacally impartial now. As others have noted, his complaints about Xbox games actually read like ads for the console itself-- gameplay sucks, but you can't beat the graphics and the realism. The fact that, in the middle of the article, they wanted to put the word "Microsoft" in my mind while I was in a good mood, laughing even, speaks volumes about their real motives when "disclosing".
Call it what you want, as far as their TOS and privacy policy are concerned it certainly fits the description of "targeted advertising". None of my previous message should be considered approval for anything Yahoo! is doing, if they are finding creative ways to send email to people who've already requested a maximum level of not-receiving.
I'm not saying you pin the plans to the outside of the building once it's done or that fixing problems will be easy to do. I am saying the plans exist and are available for review by security consultants. And in fact, some sort of safety review is probably required by law in most places before you can start building.
My point was that buildings are actually open source by nature (and by tradition, i.e. blueprints). It is certainly better to make plans and get them reviewed before building rather than after, but revising buildings for better security is common. I did it myself when I bought my house by changing out the locks for a type I considered much more secure. That was a cheap repair. An expensive repair would be fixing the windows I've got that are too close to the ground. We solve that one by planting prickly bushes under those windows. Would've been nice if someone had reviewed the plans with an eye for security before they built the place, but life goes on.:)
Even so, lawyers have been known to have differing opinions about and interpretations of law. That's why as a final tie-breaker in tough cases we sometimes refer people to a group of nine highly respected lawyers.
They're plain and simply not free to change this or to use information you provided for other purposes.
Prove it. If all this does is result in you getting email from them then they have only contacted their own customers, which is not illegal. In fact, their terms of service clearly state "Yahoo provides its service to you, subject to the following Terms of Service ('TOS'), which may be updated by us from time to time without notice to you." Which is pretty much carte blanche to do what they want.
Furthermore their privacy policy states: Yahoo! does not rent, sell, or share personal information about you with other people or nonaffiliated companies except to provide products or services you've requested, when we have your permission, or under the following circumstances: We provide the information to trusted partners who work on behalf of or with Yahoo! under confidentiality agreements. These companies may use your personal information to help Yahoo! communicate with you about offers from Yahoo! and our marketing partners. However, these companies do not have any independent right to share this information.... Which is pretty much whenever they feel like it.
Finally, they clearly are in the business of providing services in exchange for your acceptance of targeted advertising. This is not SPAM (which is not typically targeted in any way). This is simply targeted advertising delivered via email.
Why can't you open source the building? All buildings require blueprints and plans before construction. Odds are high that plans for these sites are deposited with (or at least shown to) local government for use in inspection and zoning regulation.
Because simply reporting unit sales doesn't accurately represent how much of the world's data is being processed by what OS, probably. As to the Ford example, I'm not sure they would do this by fuel type, but if they did it wouldn't be HP they reported, rather hauling capacity. Now if Ford had a stake in diesel fuel (like IBM seems to be taking in Linux), then you probably would see ads like this to make it look like Ford & diesel fuel were truly good options. Internally, this allows the business analysts to understand whether to devote resources. If I'm IBM I don't want to devote R&D time to Linux or any other OS simply based on machines running it, or licenses sold, I want to know how many customers are using it, and how much.
Abortion rights was not the result of protests in the streets but of a Supreme Court decision. Gay marriage does not exist in the US. The civil war was not about slavery any more than WWII was a war against the Holocaust. You may have a point with Vietnam, but it doesn't take too many dead sons before a nation's taste for war requires something to really believe in, which Vietnam did not.
I'm surprised you left out civil rights. Although in the end, it appears to have been Northern stubbornness and the deployment of the the National Guard and the federal invalidation of Jim Crow laws that really did the trick. Oh, and again, some Supreme Court decisions played key roles. For the Supreme Court to be a useful body, they must be *immune* to the pleas made at protests. They must be willing to stand against the mob (which is all a protest really is) and say what they say regardless of popular opinion because they feel it is right, not popular.
If you are encouraging me to put myself in harm's way by going to confrontational protests to prevent passage of this law, you are crazy. You need to re-read your Thoreau, even your Goldman. Activism is not about creating a public nuisance. Civil disobedience isn't about carrying some signs down the Mall in Washington. You do what you think is right and moral, and you tell people why instead of hiding like a criminal. And instead of being a part of a riot, you live an otherwise upstanding life, so that when you get hauled in for something stupid, people are sympathetic.
Interesting. It's frequently attributed to Flynt in a slightly longer version than what I've got showing. But a saying like this seems ripe for being passed around and slightly modified by lots of different public figures-- and put into any context where minority rights must be protected (be that unpopular speech or taxation). Many of the references I'm finding with this saying in them are a whole list of different forms of government. Relating them back to the theme of sheep, wolves, and voting on dinner.
Guess I'll have to find a new and improved Larry Flynt quote.:)
There are no Napster people protesting anything. What you are calling a protest is, in fact, illegal copying. People know it too. They don't care. Just like they don't much care about driving 65 when the road is posted 55. But they're not going to go to the polls to get these things they see as petty crimes made legal.
Even if you *could* get the non-voting half of the nation to vote, they'd just end up voting for the lesser of two evils because they don't want the other guy to win. And in this case, they'll probably vote for putzes like Hollings, because he's a Democrat which means he is probably a feminist, pro-choice, supportive of gay rights, not fanatically pro-military, sensitive to racial issues, and says lots of nice things about spending money on schools and helping people live when they're out of work (those are just examples, real liberals aren't fooled by the Democrats, we recognize that the root of the word "liberal" is the Latin "liber", "free").
Protest away, but you're not going to be changing the world by ranting in the streets-- you're better off communicating as directly as possible with your elected officials (and don't start at the top, start at the bottom, the people at the top do go to party events, and they do have colleagues). I doubt most Americans are going to understand this one until it's too late. These are the same people who generally support the war on drugs, because how can you possibly support drugs, unless your doctor gives them to you so that you can cope with being so unhappy about your pathetic American life.
You really want to make a difference? Run for office yourself.
And protesting in the streets has worked when exactly? I've talked to plenty of people about this face to face, and they don't seem to care. If they saw me out in the street yelling about it and waving a sign, not only wouldn't they care, but they'd think I was a loon.
More importantly, can it pick up on hand gestures and such? I saw a woman on the bus this morning waving her free hand all over, like the person on the line could possibly see that.
For passive media like television the only way to detect activity is to detect changes. If I leave my tv on the same channel for four hours, I might be watching a movie, or I might be dead.
WWW is even worse since it's stateless. I could download a long article on a single page and spend the next hour reading it or I might get into a game of Minesweeper. This is one of the reasons I think some online journals broke articles into bits (although cynics say it was to increase ad impressions): you can check interest by how many people click to the next page. But as long as the methodology is the same from study to study, the conclusions are at least as valid as the assumptions. Since so different people will use different methods and have different assumptions these sorts of studies are fairly subjective.
Slashdot Mirror
No. You can't. Darwin is not the whole operating system. I also suspect that you don't get the source to any of the compatibility layers that help non-OS-X applications run. It's not a troll any more than your original post was. If you don't value software freedom then fine. But DUH, some of us do.
So here's something else you can't do with OS X that you can with YDL: copy it to your friends' computers legally.
As to your "why not x86 then?" post below: DUH again! It's a little thing called dual-booting. Yes, I'd like to have an all free software system, but why not *also* have the best proprietary OS available too?
And for many YDL users, I suspect YDL came *after* the purchase of the PPC hardware. It sure did in my case. In fact, OS X isn't going to run on my old mac, but with YDL I get to do all the fun stuff like code in Perl or Ruby and run the web browsers that give me control rather than the web designer, I get the email client I like, I get GnuPG, I get emacs, the list goes on and on. The only time I boot to Mac OS is to print or get pix off my digital camera.
Interesting points. Sounds like all that is required is for workers to become significant shareholders in the companies at which they work and we'll have essentially communist ownership of capital.
And I strongly disagree that in a pure capitalist system monopolies are inevitable. In fact, I'd suspect that without so much market interference by government (for instance this stupid law being proposed), we'd see *less* monopoly.
Sheesh, if $30 will break your bank you have bigger fish to fry I think. If you're really interested in trying out YDL but are just too cheap to take a $30 chance on a set of CDs, then just use ISOs for 2.0 or 2.1! It's GNU/Linux. It looks just like every other GNU/Linux out there. If you don't like their package choices, or they aren't current enough for your bleeding-edge needs, then compile from source. Personally, I'd prefer paying $30 to Yellow Dog for a distro that works than dinking around all day and night trying to get Debian working. My time is worth more than that to me.
How about view the source code for the operating system? Can you do that with OS X?
A compressed format is never "high quality". Real digital imaging folks don't store their pix as JPEGs between sessions. Similarly, a real audiofile wouldn't compress stuff without a reason.
.ogg, I am now going back and re-ripping them to .mp3 so that the hundreds of .mp3's I've downloaded (legally via emusic.com) can easily use the same tools for cataloging and playback.
FWIW, I agree that Ogg Vorbis is cool. But after ripping several gig of CDs to
This thing is nothing more than a PC with an LCD on the front. I've already got a PC connected to my stereo (which, grumblegrumble, is 5mm too big for my stereo rack, so it's on the floor). Complete with black paint job.
This whole article is an example of the new "Slashvertisment" policy... and you thought they were joking!
wouldn't this be similar to say you're watching friends and while you're watching someone enters your house and paints your television pink,
One can only hope. This would be infinitely more amusing than "Friends".
I thought the idea of open source was to build the source and not care about what the user does with the software, except selling it.
,br> Except that even with "business-friendly" sounding open source, selling the software is fine, as long as you provide the source code.
Big difference between him actually saying it and you saying that it's not hard to see him believing. Sorry, but this doesn't wash.
Or Ruby for that matter. Ruby is pretty cool as well. So many of the "improvements" to Perl for Perl 6 are things Ruby seems to already have (or have an easy way to get around).
You mean like setting a cron job to run apt-get update or yup or one of the many auto-update features included in the typical Linux distro? The same would work with BSD ports, only it would include a recompile from source.
If you have that many bookmarks, maybe you need to learn to organize them a bit. Most browsers include a tool to help you do this. Don't let the fact that it's a complex point-and-click interface scare you. My biggest problem is whether or not to include Slashdot on my daily PDA download. If I read all the articles on my Visor while riding the bus to the office, what will I do all day at work?
Except that normally you don't stick this in the middle of the article in a way that draws attention to it. And frankly, this guy noting it does nothing to make me think he's somehow magiacally impartial now. As others have noted, his complaints about Xbox games actually read like ads for the console itself-- gameplay sucks, but you can't beat the graphics and the realism. The fact that, in the middle of the article, they wanted to put the word "Microsoft" in my mind while I was in a good mood, laughing even, speaks volumes about their real motives when "disclosing".
Call it what you want, as far as their TOS and privacy policy are concerned it certainly fits the description of "targeted advertising". None of my previous message should be considered approval for anything Yahoo! is doing, if they are finding creative ways to send email to people who've already requested a maximum level of not-receiving.
I'm not saying you pin the plans to the outside of the building once it's done or that fixing problems will be easy to do. I am saying the plans exist and are available for review by security consultants. And in fact, some sort of safety review is probably required by law in most places before you can start building.
My point was that buildings are actually open source by nature (and by tradition, i.e. blueprints). It is certainly better to make plans and get them reviewed before building rather than after, but revising buildings for better security is common. I did it myself when I bought my house by changing out the locks for a type I considered much more secure. That was a cheap repair. An expensive repair would be fixing the windows I've got that are too close to the ground. We solve that one by planting prickly bushes under those windows. Would've been nice if someone had reviewed the plans with an eye for security before they built the place, but life goes on. :)
I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advice.
... Which is pretty much whenever they feel like it.
Even so, lawyers have been known to have differing opinions about and interpretations of law. That's why as a final tie-breaker in tough cases we sometimes refer people to a group of nine highly respected lawyers.
They're plain and simply not free to change this or to use information you provided for other purposes. Prove it. If all this does is result in you getting email from them then they have only contacted their own customers, which is not illegal. In fact, their terms of service clearly state "Yahoo provides its service to you, subject to the following Terms of Service ('TOS'), which may be updated by us from time to time without notice to you." Which is pretty much carte blanche to do what they want.
Furthermore their privacy policy states: Yahoo! does not rent, sell, or share personal information about you with other people or nonaffiliated companies except to provide products or services you've requested, when we have your permission, or under the following circumstances: We provide the information to trusted partners who work on behalf of or with Yahoo! under confidentiality agreements. These companies may use your personal information to help Yahoo! communicate with you about offers from Yahoo! and our marketing partners. However, these companies do not have any independent right to share this information.
Finally, they clearly are in the business of providing services in exchange for your acceptance of targeted advertising. This is not SPAM (which is not typically targeted in any way). This is simply targeted advertising delivered via email.
Why can't you open source the building? All buildings require blueprints and plans before construction. Odds are high that plans for these sites are deposited with (or at least shown to) local government for use in inspection and zoning regulation.
Because simply reporting unit sales doesn't accurately represent how much of the world's data is being processed by what OS, probably. As to the Ford example, I'm not sure they would do this by fuel type, but if they did it wouldn't be HP they reported, rather hauling capacity. Now if Ford had a stake in diesel fuel (like IBM seems to be taking in Linux), then you probably would see ads like this to make it look like Ford & diesel fuel were truly good options. Internally, this allows the business analysts to understand whether to devote resources. If I'm IBM I don't want to devote R&D time to Linux or any other OS simply based on machines running it, or licenses sold, I want to know how many customers are using it, and how much.
Abortion rights was not the result of protests in the streets but of a Supreme Court decision. Gay marriage does not exist in the US. The civil war was not about slavery any more than WWII was a war against the Holocaust. You may have a point with Vietnam, but it doesn't take too many dead sons before a nation's taste for war requires something to really believe in, which Vietnam did not.
I'm surprised you left out civil rights. Although in the end, it appears to have been Northern stubbornness and the deployment of the the National Guard and the federal invalidation of Jim Crow laws that really did the trick. Oh, and again, some Supreme Court decisions played key roles. For the Supreme Court to be a useful body, they must be *immune* to the pleas made at protests. They must be willing to stand against the mob (which is all a protest really is) and say what they say regardless of popular opinion because they feel it is right, not popular.
If you are encouraging me to put myself in harm's way by going to confrontational protests to prevent passage of this law, you are crazy. You need to re-read your Thoreau, even your Goldman. Activism is not about creating a public nuisance. Civil disobedience isn't about carrying some signs down the Mall in Washington. You do what you think is right and moral, and you tell people why instead of hiding like a criminal. And instead of being a part of a riot, you live an otherwise upstanding life, so that when you get hauled in for something stupid, people are sympathetic.
Interesting. It's frequently attributed to Flynt in a slightly longer version than what I've got showing. But a saying like this seems ripe for being passed around and slightly modified by lots of different public figures-- and put into any context where minority rights must be protected (be that unpopular speech or taxation). Many of the references I'm finding with this saying in them are a whole list of different forms of government. Relating them back to the theme of sheep, wolves, and voting on dinner.
:)
Guess I'll have to find a new and improved Larry Flynt quote.
Lay off the crackpipe.
There are no Napster people protesting anything. What you are calling a protest is, in fact, illegal copying. People know it too. They don't care. Just like they don't much care about driving 65 when the road is posted 55. But they're not going to go to the polls to get these things they see as petty crimes made legal.
Even if you *could* get the non-voting half of the nation to vote, they'd just end up voting for the lesser of two evils because they don't want the other guy to win. And in this case, they'll probably vote for putzes like Hollings, because he's a Democrat which means he is probably a feminist, pro-choice, supportive of gay rights, not fanatically pro-military, sensitive to racial issues, and says lots of nice things about spending money on schools and helping people live when they're out of work (those are just examples, real liberals aren't fooled by the Democrats, we recognize that the root of the word "liberal" is the Latin "liber", "free").
Protest away, but you're not going to be changing the world by ranting in the streets-- you're better off communicating as directly as possible with your elected officials (and don't start at the top, start at the bottom, the people at the top do go to party events, and they do have colleagues). I doubt most Americans are going to understand this one until it's too late. These are the same people who generally support the war on drugs, because how can you possibly support drugs, unless your doctor gives them to you so that you can cope with being so unhappy about your pathetic American life.
You really want to make a difference? Run for office yourself.
And protesting in the streets has worked when exactly? I've talked to plenty of people about this face to face, and they don't seem to care. If they saw me out in the street yelling about it and waving a sign, not only wouldn't they care, but they'd think I was a loon.
More importantly, can it pick up on hand gestures and such? I saw a woman on the bus this morning waving her free hand all over, like the person on the line could possibly see that.
For passive media like television the only way to detect activity is to detect changes. If I leave my tv on the same channel for four hours, I might be watching a movie, or I might be dead.
WWW is even worse since it's stateless. I could download a long article on a single page and spend the next hour reading it or I might get into a game of Minesweeper. This is one of the reasons I think some online journals broke articles into bits (although cynics say it was to increase ad impressions): you can check interest by how many people click to the next page. But as long as the methodology is the same from study to study, the conclusions are at least as valid as the assumptions. Since so different people will use different methods and have different assumptions these sorts of studies are fairly subjective.
It happens to all of us sooner or later.