I'm a little pissed about this. My mother's dissertation is in there, and I'm in graduate school right now.
So let me get this straight:
Large companies own the property on say a DVD to the point that I can't even use it, except under special conditions, even after I have purchased it. The slaving graduate student who spent years of their life with little to no recompense doesn't own a damn thing, and gets jack shit, but a company can sell it if they want?
How in the world has copyright law gotten so twisted from its regular intention. I'm ashamed about what our country is coming to.
But hey, I can still be pacified...., er,.... make myself feel better by watching some TV. Hey! Maybe Brittany Spears will be on? Maybe I'll just go buy some stuff too? That always makes me feel better. My credit cards are maxed..., but what the hell. I deserve it!
Blarg. Another one. Why do people insist on making these proprietary things which nobody finds usefull?
I'm trying to research a project which requires embedded technology. It must be very low power, and modular etc. What I really need is a low power compactpci cpu card. Everyone and their brother just makes 3e6 Ghz Pentium III Cpu modules (which you can use to economically heat your house by the way). I want _under a watt_. This means ARM, or m-core, or dragonball etc (drool.... NEC VR?). Does anybody make low power cpu modules for compactpci?? Geez, seems like there must be a market for it. Why hasn't anybody done it yet?
ARM makes a development platform which does compact pci, but it seems like nobody does a production platform. What gives? Are we poor bastards who can't afford to have PCBs made for us, or buy arm processors in lots of a thousand just out of luck? WTF? Are small powerful microprocessors just for consumer gadgets? Why must we use gigantomongous processors in all our embedded applicatons? SAVE THE ERGS!!!
Anybody know of any ultra low power compact pci boards?
Mozilla does MathML, and was actually pretty much totally independently developed out of netscape by voulunteers. It works great. I think they even want to make LaTex -> MathML programs etc. I think you can go look at sample pages if you get a nightly build. Very impressive.
Yes they do make source available to certain parties after NDA. Certain parties of _their__choice_!
Yeah, they let companies like Corel and Netscape look at the APIs whenever they want after signing an NDA! (yeah right)
What the order says is that Microsoft may no longer use its API (i.e. windows) to leverage its applications. That's all. They aren't opening up the whole source or anything.
Even if this were unfair, Microsoft is continually missing the point. They have been proven to be monopolistic. They loose some of their rights because of it. If the court decides that something could be done to repair some of the damage to the computer industry, even though it be punitive to Microsoft, they must do it. Bill Gates in saying we "have to protect our intilectual property" is merely saying "but we're not _really_ a monopoly! (pout!)"
Bill: shut the hell up and pony up like the court says. The world will be a better place, and you'll still be rich as hell. Christ, I fell like I'm lecturing a little kid who doesn't understand he can't have any more cookies or something.
I saw a Charlie Rose (yes I watch PBS regularly!) where he had the DOJ, MS lawyer, and some colmnists the other day.
Seems like the DOJ is almost counting on the browser being powerful in the way that is mentioned in the article. I think the DOJ wants those two MS companies to be at each other's throats.
What about letting the software company keep IE, but Windows company gets IIS? That way they can't leverage IIS and IE together? I don't like the idea of IE+Windows together for the short term though.
Go Koffice, go Abiword, go whoever!
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
God this is enough to make me want to start helping out with Koffice etc.
Now only if I knew C++!:=)
Seriously, this is bad in general, but could be good for Linux. Even if restricted copyrighted software was to come to Linux one day, if we still have control of the OS, they can kiss our ass if they think they can control us. Does it have to get a restrictive one time use security key over the internet? Write a utility that scavanges it the first time its used. Is it IP or mac address locked? Lie to it every time it asks the operating system for these bits of info. Yes, this is piracy, but I would consider it civil disobedience. As many wonderful people have espoused, we should not blindly obey all laws, only the just ones.
Better yet, just write better free equivalents. My decision to use Linux years ago is continually showing itself to be a wise decision.
I just got Applix 5.0. Seems to be headed in the correct direction in a number of ways. They incorporate GTK widgets and themability. It opens all MS Word and excell stuff (including Word 2000). It comes with an O.K. vectorized graphics program. Its file format is a completely documented XML like text based file. Other neat stuff too: like instead of just cut and paste, you can use a "snap to the clipboard" feature. It allows you to take a bounded screen shot and paste it into the document as a bitmap. It also has drag 'n drop on Gnome and KDE desktops!
It doesn't have _all_ the functionatlity of MS Word, but god, who uses all that stuff anyway? It does do alot. I'm actually quite happy with it.
Also, its UI is much better than StarOffice, and it doesn't seem as bloated and slow.
If their graphics program just imported PostScript in a vectorized format!
1) Most of the results would probably be "nope, don't got that", or "not really". Just don't bother to send the info in unless you are above a certain level of matching.
2) Even if there were a large amount of results, why could't you sort of decentralize that too? You have your own search client on your computer. No centralized search site. You send out a query to several other computers. They talk amongs themselves, expanding at a geometric rate. The info gets collected to say 20 different nodes throughout the internet. Those 20 different nodes send you just one reference to the html/whatever pages summarizing their results. You display that in your browser. I'm not quite sure if that made sense, but you should get the general idea. Why just distribute a little bit?
Finally about your idea, that would keep entities from returning dynamic content. This might not be a bad thing, as other people have pointed out. I've got an idea bout that too. Somewhere in the distributed computing, you'd have a computer actually search the page to see if it matches what you want. You could still have people falsely strew what you wanted in the page, along with porn and printer cartridge deals, I guess. I also like the idea of "moderation". You could even have a search for more "spamlike instances" in the pages. Search for porn, toner cartride deals, etc (unless that's what you serached for of course), and make these more likely to be moderated. Maybe you could also take away the ability to be in the searches if you get moderated as a spammer too much.
If it were proprietary, would anybody have even found it? This isn't exactly a fair comparison, as I'm sure you could find a bunch of bugs like this in proprietary code if you could just look at it. OSS will always be more open to critizism because the source code is actually there to criticize!
Sounds like they are going to make a probably encrypted, traceable, closed source music format. It will probably suck. They probably won't have Linux support, etc.
They want to keep track of everyone downloading music, and they want us to download from and pay only them.
I don't think (atleast I hope not) that people are upset because they think "We want to steal music all we want". If they do, they're wrong. People deserve _fair_ compensation for their music. However, we don't want large corporations coming around ruining what we all find as good on the internet:
1) Things like people starting up compaines based on open formats to disseminate desired information freely and easily. One of the great things about the internet is the empowerment of the non mega-corporations. This sounds like the first step of the large corporations seizing control of the internet. It bothers me that this sounds like "We need to control all music on the internet and squeeze out everyone else by suing the hell out of everyone and making a closed source music format".
2) Having privacy and anonymity is good. The same reason Lars says "Napster is wrong because of the scale and quality of piracy.", anti-anonymity arguments are wrong due to the degree and quality of the monitoring and privacy loss we can become subject to.
3) Protocols, formats, and technical info, etc. should be open and widely available. Encryption to prevent us from copying something is wrong. We should be allowed to make a fair number of copies for our own use, and all the other arguments that have been used for DVD.
Let me put it another way. I'M NOT PISSED BECAUSE I "CAN'T STEAL YOUR MUSIC". I'M PISSED BECAUSE YOUR'RE TRYING TO _FUCK EVERYTHING UP_!!! QUIT IT YOU CORPORATIST ASSHOLE!
Oh, and if you actually think that we buy the "I want to do it to help that poor artist who sells 2000 CDs a year.", you've _got_ to be kidding.
Actually, I bet most working versions of Kerberos don't touch that field in debate like MS does, and will be fully compatible with Kerberos v6 or whatever. Everyone could claim "v6" compatibility without changing a damn thing except MS.
Finally, even if there are other Kerberos implementations that don't work exactly with the MIT version, THEY JUST DON'T FULLY IMPLEMENT THE STANDARD, THEY AREN'T TRYING TO CHANGE/COOPT THE STANDARD! (sorry to yell)
I'm all for looking at the MS side of the situation, and not bashing them just because we hate them, but seriously: How many dumb ass monopolistic things do they have to do before such hatred is justified? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice......
6530157465 Here is your navigator : Mozilla/4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14-15mdk i586) Just a security hole of Slashdot. You can find this kind of hole in all sites which has a forum. I think that in site like e-trade you can make some people asks for stocks. You can contact me there : Krakus.Irus à voila.com If you want to retry. If you want to know more.
6368917837 Here is your navigator : Mozilla/4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14-15mdk i586) Just a security hole of Slashdot. You can find this kind of hole in all sites which has a forum. I think that in site like e-trade you can make some people asks for stocks. You can contact me there : Krakus.Irus à voila.com If you want to retry. If you want to know more.
1) The stated value of measuring accuracy is bogus. For one thing, if he did it with a micrometer, you are getting thickness of the plate, not flatness of the plate. It could be totally flat on the heat sink side, and unflat on the other. Plus stupid things like if his body heat raised the temperature of the plate, I bet that whacked off the last measurments from the first by a good.001' atleast, etc., etc. If you are going to say something like.0005' accuracy or whatever it was, put error bars on it, or just don't say it. Misleading.
2) After lapping the processor, then letting it run to operating temperatures, I bet the processor warps some due to differential coefficients of expansion and just cranking the processor on to the motherboard, and the heat sink on top of that.
3) I _assume_ that the the little numbers next to their psuedocolor matrix is a color bar, which shows all of about 1.2 mm of difference in surface relief. When you take in to account the crudity of their measurments, the error bars are probably about that big.
4) Do the math. Heat flux is inversely propotional to the distance between the two surfaces and proportional to the thermal conductivity of the medium and the temperature gradient (q = -(k dT)/l). If you change the distance between the heat sink and processor only a little tiny bit, you only change the heat flow a little tiny bit. It's linear. As long as you increase k by putting heat sink compound, and the distance l isn't huge, then dT mostly takes over.
In other words: Use a good heat sink that stays cool and will make a large dt. Use a thin coat of thermal compound. If your processor still gets too hot, turn down the clock speed a little! Geez. Talk about too much time on your hands.
You have a right to make money from your music. People who are obtaining and providing you music free of charge are wrong. However, isn't this merely because you haven't done your job in filling the void? I hope you would agree with the following:
1) Digital media is here to stay, whether in the form of CDs, MP3s, DVDs, or what have you. 2) The internet is now, and I hope will continue to be, a very large and somewhat anonymous place, where it is not easy to track people's actions. 3) Software to provide for the network transmission of music isn't going away, nor would it be easy to stop or regulate. 4) The media industry is not embracing the internet as a transmission medium for their product, for whatever reasons. 5) Metallica gets pissed at their fans for trading their music without getting any money. They take legal actions against them.
I don't mean to insult you, but you don't seem to get it. Your actions aren't doing any good, and you are pissing off your fans. Please don't tell me you never did anything slightly illegal! These aren't bad people. They just like your music, and don't have a viable alternative to get your music off of the internet except stealing it.
How would you answer these observations? How do you justify your actions except to say that you prefer the status quo, and don't want to sell your music _cheaply_ and efficiently on the internet? Why don't you see that selling your music cheaply on the internet would give you more freedom over your music as well? You boast you sued your label for more freedom over your music. Was that just talk? Do you care about your music and your fans, or just about money?
Yes I know that was many question, and I'm sorry this turned out sort of long.:-)
I'm beta testing corel draw, and it seems to be about the same. Useable, but a little pokey, dos drive letters etc. It works though, and I can finally edit postscript etc. decently in Linux. Still beta though.
These are all good first efforts. Give them a little time.
I'm a little worried about programs with unavailable source, but I'm certainly going to use what I have to to do my work, until a decent free alternative comes up.
Not a law of engineering. It was orignially coined quite a long time ago as the moto for negotiators/mediators. something like "When looking at two extreme yet valid viewpoints, the mediator realizes the truth is actually inbetween, and tries to move both parties towards that truth."
Unix is any operating system derived from the source code of the original unix developed by Bell Labs. Linux is not a UNIX, but a UNIX-like operating system. A Unix-like operating system is any operating system which reimplements the spirit and designs of the operating system drempt up by Dennis Ritchie et al. *BSD on the other hand has a pedigree which goes all the way back, so is a "true unix", although the definition varys a little depending on who you are talking to. Some people think UNIX is any OS that Bell Labs says. Go look at these web pages:
Fat or thin, Unix doesn't descriminate.
on
The End of Unix?
·
· Score: 1
I've been running Linux on an old PC just good enough to run X, and doing my computing on my big solaris server for a while. Just like an x-terminal ("Xwrapper -query 'server_name'" in case you're interested. Took me a bit to figue out).
A lot of people do it. It's almost the model for working at Universities. Bunch of x-terminals and a big server. I was talking to an admin in our University Computer Center about it the other day. He says he doesn't even buy x-terminals any more. Too expensive. Just get a cheap PC and run Linux.
Wow, I've been hip all this time and didn't even know it. Fat, thin, shmin, whatever. Do whatever works. That's what Linux/Unix does.
The NVidia drivers, however, are in really bad shape because the source they released is obfuscated -- to play on an analogy from Bob Young, it's like being allowed to work on your Ford, but being given only metric tools to do it. Without the necessary information, its simply not possible to create decent NVidia drivers, and until the drivers improve we can't officially support those cards. NVidia has promised to release closed source drivers which will improve performance.
What a bunch of crap. I kept telling myself "Nvidia will do the right thing. They are atleast making motions". Too late now. I'm going to take his advice and let my money do the talking. I have a TNT, and I think I'm upgrading to a voodoo 3, and telling Nvidia why. Probably won't do much good, but atleast I'll feel better (_and_ have better gaming experience).
It's hard to tell what companies to support this way though. Maybe I should buy a G400? They've certainly released info on their card and are playing nice. We need some sort of better info! It would be nice if there could be some sort of more or less official "Playing nice with Linux" approval points or something. Go check their points and buy their stuff. What would be even better, is to somehow let them know that you purchased the whatever because of it. Can you imagine all sorts of companies pandering to get Linux points? Makes me laugh. Probably won't happen. I'll just go buy a voodoo 3 I guess.
O.K., I'm getting sort of pissed. Everybody is bashing, but nobodys being very constructive. "Yeah, Linux isn't ready for the desktop yet. If only KDE/Gnome would...." This is a bunch of bullshit. Sure KDE and Gnome could both be better, but they are both O.K. The worst part about Linux is the lack of thought the distributions put in to the end user experience. They think so much about security, the newest software, making graphical installations, etc. they miss out on one of the biggest bestest things they could do. Fortunately, I think even the average Linux user can contribute quite a bit to the cause here, and everyone is just bitching.
The underlying software of Linux isn't what is making it a difficult desktop transition, things just need a little more thought, polish, and work that isn't even really _technical_ work. Don't you spend atleast a couple hours after a fresh install "taking care of all those things the distribution didn't". You get rid of all the supurflous crap on the panel, change the clock to am/pm from military, fix Netscape's fonts, make shortcuts to the good programs that aren't in any menu, etc. It's like you go and buy a car, but after you get it home, you notice nobody bothered to take the plastic off the seat at the dealers, remove the sticker on the window, fill the tank with gas, or make sure there was air in the tires. We couldn't fix that stuff in windows, because its proprietary, what's your excuse now?
Another example: How many times do you really get to grok a piece of software after using it alot and dragging yourself through poor documentation time and again? Then you think: "Geez, I could write better documentation than that now!" Well guess what, it would probably only take a couple hours on the weekend for a couple weeks, and you could! Why don't you?
How many times do you install Linux, and the grammar and content of some or all of the messages is really, really bad? You catch yourself thinking: "Crap, I understand what that info screen means because I've used Linux for 5 years, but geeez, did they have a native english speaker look at these sentences before they burned the CD?"
We're all creative people. Go be creative. How can we make a better desktop in the framework we have now. I think _ALOT_ can be done.
For instance, one thing I've been contemplating is a "unix-philosophy-howto". Most people find Linux confusing because they don't understand the unix philosophy of doing things. If they did, and had a guided tour through some features at a _conceptual_ level, they'd probably think Unix was damn cool, and not that complicated. I've always wondered why distributions don't have such a thing as the first chapter. That way people would have a good conceptual framework to statr their unix love affair. There are some documents which sort of do this, like the DOS->Linux howto, but not really. I hereby proclaim I will write such a thing.
What about you? When you find something irksome, and you can fix it with just a little work, maybe a couple hours on the weekend, why don't you?
If we all do these things, when Linux gets apps galore, it will be a terrifically wonderful desktop environment.
Just some thoughts. Everyone quit being so negative!
I've been using MATLAB for years, and have the Linux version. I find MATLAB frustrating once you get to a high enough level in their programming language. Their scoping is awful and their iteration is butt slow, among other things. They also can't handle strings and system stuff very well. I've seriously though about getting involved in perldl, the data language using perl. It is in an early developmental stage, but seems to rock over every other language, atleast in concept. I would strongly suggest that anyone interested in free mathematics packages invest their time in perldl. Why do you want to copy all the mistakes of packages like MATLAB! Perldl promises to be something better.
No, it wasn't Jefferson, although I wouldn't doubt that he used the term. The term was coined by John Stuart Mill, in "On Liberty". It's easy to get confused though, as Jefferson enjoyed almost plagerizing from people like Mill, Hobbes, etc. Everyone is so remarkably amazed that Jefferson did such a great job in the Declaration of Independence so quickly, even though you can recognize whole groups of sentences almost word for word from written works of prominent philosophers. Mills writes about the problems with democracy:
It was now perceived that such phrases as "self-government," and "the power of the people over themselves," do not express the true state of the case. The "people" who exercise the power, are not always the same people with those over whom it is exercised, and the "self-government" spoken of, is not the government of each by himself, but of each by all the rest. The will of the people, moreover, practically means, the will of the most numerous or the most active part of the people; the majority, or those who succeed in making themselves accepted as the majority; the people, consequently, may desire to oppress a part of their number; and precautions are as much needed against this, as against any other abuse of power...... the "tyranny of the majority" is now generally included among the evils against which society requires to be on its guard.
and
Society can and does execute its own mandates: and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practises a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling; against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development, and, if possible, prevent the formation, of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own.
further,
That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinions of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil, in case he do otherwise.
Anyway. Sorry for the long post, but Mill is one of my favorite philosophers, and he's damn cool. It seemed to fit with the debate, anyway. If you are interested, "On Liberty" is on the web Here. Go read it and become a Libertarian! (Mill is the father of the Libertarian movement by the way)
I'm getting really tired of most of the universe not understanding evolutionary theory. It's a simple theory, but few seemingly understand it correctly. Even in conversations with intelligent people they'll say things like "blah blah evolved into blah blah....", without putting much thought in to evolution. Christ, don't they teach it in biology class any more? (well, there's that Kansas thing.....)
A couple of points:
While I'm not a complete fan of Occam's razor, I think it fits here. There isn't anything _wrong_ with evolutionary theory the way it is. It works fine. Why make it more complicated than necessary. Hell, let's start talking about super strings and plate tectonics next.
He ignores how the mutated DNA gets passed on. Fine a cell becomes somehow isolated, dips into the multiverse and mutates. Fine. Unless this happens to all the cells in my body it isn't going to help me a damn bit. If it doesn't get translated to the genetic code my sperm carries, it won't get passed on to my offspring. Come on! What crap.
Why in the world would a cell, if it had all the multiverses of choice possible pick a disadvantageous mutation? This is observed in nature you know.
Anyway, I could go on and on. Please don't post this stupid psuedo-science crap.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a little pissed about this. My mother's dissertation is in there, and I'm in graduate school right now.
So let me get this straight:
Large companies own the property on say a DVD to the point that I can't even use it, except under special conditions, even after I have purchased it. The slaving graduate student who spent years of their life with little to no recompense doesn't own a damn thing, and gets jack shit, but a company can sell it if they want?
How in the world has copyright law gotten so twisted from its regular intention. I'm ashamed about what our country is coming to.
But hey, I can still be pacified...., er,.... make myself feel better by watching some TV. Hey! Maybe Brittany Spears will be on? Maybe I'll just go buy some stuff too? That always makes me feel better. My credit cards are maxed..., but what the hell. I deserve it!
I think I'm gonna go throw up.
Blarg. Another one. Why do people insist on making these proprietary things which nobody finds usefull?
I'm trying to research a project which requires embedded technology. It must be very low power, and modular etc. What I really need is a low power compactpci cpu card. Everyone and their brother just makes 3e6 Ghz Pentium III Cpu modules (which you can use to economically heat your house by the way). I want _under a watt_. This means ARM, or m-core, or dragonball etc (drool.... NEC VR?). Does anybody make low power cpu modules for compactpci?? Geez, seems like there must be a market for it. Why hasn't anybody done it yet?
ARM makes a development platform which does compact pci, but it seems like nobody does a production platform. What gives? Are we poor bastards who can't afford to have PCBs made for us, or buy arm processors in lots of a thousand just out of luck? WTF? Are small powerful microprocessors just for consumer gadgets? Why must we use gigantomongous processors in all our embedded applicatons? SAVE THE ERGS!!!
Anybody know of any ultra low power compact pci boards?
Mozilla does MathML, and was actually pretty much totally independently developed out of netscape by voulunteers. It works great. I think they even want to make LaTex -> MathML programs etc. I think you can go look at sample pages if you get a nightly build. Very impressive.
Yes they do make source available to certain parties after NDA. Certain parties of _their__choice_!
Yeah, they let companies like Corel and Netscape look at the APIs whenever they want after signing an NDA! (yeah right)
What the order says is that Microsoft may no longer use its API (i.e. windows) to leverage its applications. That's all. They aren't opening up the whole source or anything.
Even if this were unfair, Microsoft is continually missing the point. They have been proven to be monopolistic. They loose some of their rights because of it. If the court decides that something could be done to repair some of the damage to the computer industry, even though it be punitive to Microsoft, they must do it. Bill Gates in saying we "have to protect our intilectual property" is merely saying "but we're not _really_ a monopoly! (pout!)"
Bill: shut the hell up and pony up like the court says. The world will be a better place, and you'll still be rich as hell. Christ, I fell like I'm lecturing a little kid who doesn't understand he can't have any more cookies or something.
I saw a Charlie Rose (yes I watch PBS regularly!)
where he had the DOJ, MS lawyer, and some
colmnists the other day.
Seems like the DOJ is almost counting on the
browser being powerful in the way that
is mentioned in the article. I think the DOJ
wants those two MS companies to be at each
other's throats.
What about letting the software company keep
IE, but Windows company gets IIS? That way
they can't leverage IIS and IE together?
I don't like the idea of IE+Windows together
for the short term though.
God this is enough to make me want to start helping out with Koffice etc.
:=)
Now only if I knew C++!
Seriously, this is bad in general, but could be good for Linux. Even if restricted copyrighted software was to come to Linux one day, if we still have control of the OS, they can kiss our ass if they think they can control us. Does it have to get a restrictive one time use security key over the internet? Write a utility that scavanges it the first time its used. Is it IP or mac address locked? Lie to it every time it asks the operating system for these bits of info. Yes, this is piracy, but I would consider it civil disobedience. As many wonderful people have espoused, we should not blindly obey all laws, only the just ones.
Better yet, just write better free equivalents. My decision to use Linux years ago is continually showing itself to be a wise decision.
I just got Applix 5.0. Seems to be headed in the correct direction in a number of ways. They incorporate GTK widgets and themability. It opens all MS Word and excell stuff (including Word 2000). It comes with an O.K. vectorized graphics program. Its file format is a completely documented XML like text based file. Other neat stuff too: like instead of just cut and paste, you can use a "snap to the clipboard" feature. It allows you to take a bounded screen shot and paste it into the document as a bitmap. It also has drag 'n drop on Gnome and KDE desktops!
It doesn't have _all_ the functionatlity of MS Word, but god, who uses all that stuff anyway? It does do alot. I'm actually quite happy with it.
Also, its UI is much better than StarOffice, and it doesn't seem as bloated and slow.
If their graphics program just imported PostScript in a vectorized format!
As far as do it yourself DDOS:
1) Most of the results would probably be "nope, don't got that", or "not really". Just don't bother to send the info in unless you are above a certain level of matching.
2) Even if there were a large amount of results, why could't you sort of decentralize that too? You have your own search client on your computer. No centralized search site. You send out a query to several other computers. They talk amongs themselves, expanding at a geometric rate. The info gets collected to say 20 different nodes throughout the internet. Those 20 different nodes send you just one reference to the html/whatever pages summarizing their results. You display that in your browser. I'm not quite sure if that made sense, but you should get the general idea. Why just distribute a little bit?
Finally about your idea, that would keep entities from returning dynamic content. This might not be a bad thing, as other people have pointed out. I've got an idea bout that too. Somewhere in the distributed computing, you'd have a computer actually search the page to see if it matches what you want. You could still have people falsely strew what you wanted in the page, along with porn and printer cartridge deals, I guess. I also like the idea of "moderation". You could even have a search for more "spamlike instances" in the pages. Search for porn, toner cartride deals, etc (unless that's what you serached for of course), and make these more likely to be moderated. Maybe you could also take away the ability to be in the searches if you get moderated as a spammer too much.
Just some thoughts.
If it were proprietary, would anybody have even found it? This isn't exactly a fair comparison, as I'm sure you could find a bunch of bugs like this in proprietary code if you could just look at it. OSS will always be more open to critizism because the source code is actually there to criticize!
I have some problems with what he said.
Sounds like they are going to make a probably encrypted, traceable, closed source music format. It will probably suck. They probably won't have Linux support, etc.
They want to keep track of everyone downloading music, and they want us to download from and pay only them.
I don't think (atleast I hope not) that people are upset because they think "We want to steal music all we want". If they do, they're wrong. People deserve _fair_ compensation for their music. However, we don't want large corporations coming around ruining what we all find as good on the internet:
1) Things like people starting up compaines based on open formats to disseminate desired information freely and easily. One of the great things about the internet is the empowerment of the non mega-corporations. This sounds like the first step of the large corporations seizing control of the internet. It bothers me that this sounds like "We need to control all music on the internet and squeeze out everyone else by suing the hell out of everyone and making a closed source music format".
2) Having privacy and anonymity is good. The same reason Lars says "Napster is wrong because of the scale and quality of piracy.", anti-anonymity arguments are wrong due to the degree and quality of the monitoring and privacy loss we can become subject to.
3) Protocols, formats, and technical info, etc. should be open and widely available. Encryption to prevent us from copying something is wrong. We should be allowed to make a fair number of copies for our own use, and all the other arguments that have been used for DVD.
Let me put it another way. I'M NOT PISSED BECAUSE I "CAN'T STEAL YOUR MUSIC". I'M PISSED BECAUSE YOUR'RE TRYING TO _FUCK EVERYTHING UP_!!! QUIT IT YOU CORPORATIST ASSHOLE!
Oh, and if you actually think that we buy the "I want to do it to help that poor artist who sells 2000 CDs a year.", you've _got_ to be kidding.
Actually, I bet most working versions of Kerberos don't touch that field in debate like MS does, and will be fully compatible with Kerberos v6 or whatever. Everyone could claim "v6" compatibility without changing a damn thing except MS.
Finally, even if there are other Kerberos implementations that don't work exactly with the MIT version, THEY JUST DON'T FULLY IMPLEMENT THE STANDARD, THEY AREN'T TRYING TO CHANGE/COOPT THE STANDARD! (sorry to yell)
I'm all for looking at the MS side of the situation, and not bashing them just because we hate them, but seriously: How many dumb ass monopolistic things do they have to do before such hatred is justified? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice......
6530157465
Here is your navigator : Mozilla/4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14-15mdk i586)
Just a security hole of Slashdot. You can find this kind of hole in all sites which has a forum. I think that in site like e-trade you can make some people asks for stocks.
You can contact me there : Krakus.Irus à voila.com
If you want to retry.
If you want to know more.
6368917837
Here is your navigator : Mozilla/4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14-15mdk i586)
Just a security hole of Slashdot. You can find this kind of hole in all sites which has a forum. I think that in site like e-trade you can make some people asks for stocks.
You can contact me there : Krakus.Irus à voila.com
If you want to retry.
If you want to know more.
I think you mean thermal conductivity there guy, not specific heat.
1) The stated value of measuring accuracy is bogus. For one thing, if he did it with a micrometer, you are getting thickness of the plate, not flatness of the plate. It could be totally flat on the heat sink side, and unflat on the other. Plus stupid things like if his body heat raised the temperature of the plate, I bet that whacked off the last measurments from the first by a good .001' atleast, etc., etc. If you are going to say something like .0005' accuracy or whatever it was, put error bars on it, or just don't say it. Misleading.
2) After lapping the processor, then letting it run to operating temperatures, I bet the processor warps some due to differential coefficients of expansion and just cranking the processor on to the motherboard, and the heat sink on top of that.
3) I _assume_ that the the little numbers next to their psuedocolor matrix is a color bar, which shows all of about 1.2 mm of difference in surface relief. When you take in to account the crudity of their measurments, the error bars are probably about that big.
4) Do the math. Heat flux is inversely propotional to the distance between the two surfaces and proportional to the thermal conductivity of the medium and the temperature gradient (q = -(k dT)/l). If you change the distance between the heat sink and processor only a little tiny bit, you only change the heat flow a little tiny bit. It's linear. As long as you increase k by putting heat sink compound, and the distance l isn't huge, then dT mostly takes over.
In other words: Use a good heat sink that stays cool and will make a large dt. Use a thin coat of thermal compound. If your processor still gets too hot, turn down the clock speed a little! Geez. Talk about too much time on your hands.
You have a right to make money from your music. People who are obtaining and providing you music free of charge are wrong. However, isn't this merely because you haven't done your job in filling the void? I hope you would agree with the following:
:-)
1) Digital media is here to stay, whether in the
form of CDs, MP3s, DVDs, or what have you.
2) The internet is now, and I hope will continue
to be, a very large and somewhat anonymous
place, where it is not easy to track people's actions.
3) Software to provide for the network transmission
of music isn't going away, nor would it be easy
to stop or regulate.
4) The media industry is not embracing the
internet as a transmission medium for their
product, for whatever reasons.
5) Metallica gets pissed at their fans for trading
their music without getting any money. They take
legal actions against them.
I don't mean to insult you, but you don't seem to get it. Your actions aren't doing any good, and you are pissing off your fans. Please don't tell me you never did anything slightly illegal! These aren't bad people. They just like your music, and don't have a viable alternative to get your music off of the internet except stealing it.
How would you answer these observations? How do you justify your actions except to say that you prefer the status quo, and don't want to sell your music _cheaply_ and efficiently on the internet? Why don't you see that selling your music cheaply on the internet would give you more freedom over your music as well? You boast you sued your label for more freedom over your music. Was that just talk? Do you care about your music and your fans, or just about money?
Yes I know that was many question, and I'm sorry this turned out sort of long.
Hello all,
I'm beta testing corel draw, and it seems to be about the same. Useable, but a little pokey, dos drive letters etc. It works though, and I can finally edit postscript etc. decently in Linux. Still beta though.
These are all good first efforts. Give them a little time.
I'm a little worried about programs with unavailable source, but I'm certainly going to use what I have to to do my work, until a decent free alternative comes up.
Not a law of engineering. It was orignially coined quite a long time ago as the moto for negotiators/mediators. something like "When looking at two extreme yet valid viewpoints, the mediator realizes the truth is actually inbetween, and tries to move both parties towards that truth."
Unix is any operating system derived from the source code of the original unix developed by Bell Labs. Linux is not a UNIX, but a UNIX-like operating system. A Unix-like operating system is any operating system which reimplements the spirit and designs of the operating system drempt up by Dennis Ritchie et al. *BSD on the other hand has a pedigree which goes all the way back, so is a "true unix", although the definition varys a little depending on who you are talking to. Some people think UNIX is any OS that Bell Labs says. Go look at these web pages:
Unix History
and be sure to visit the history of unix written by Dennis Ritchie himself:
Dennis Ritchie's History of Unix.
I've been running Linux on an old PC just good enough to run X, and doing my computing on my big solaris server for a while. Just like an x-terminal ("Xwrapper -query 'server_name'" in case you're interested. Took me a bit to figue out).
A lot of people do it. It's almost the model for working at Universities. Bunch of x-terminals and a big server. I was talking to an admin in our University Computer Center about it the other day. He says he doesn't even buy x-terminals any more. Too expensive. Just get a cheap PC and run Linux.
Wow, I've been hip all this time and didn't even know it. Fat, thin, shmin, whatever. Do whatever works. That's what Linux/Unix does.
I've had it with nvidia:
What a bunch of crap. I kept telling myself "Nvidia will do the right thing. They are atleast making motions". Too late now. I'm going to take his advice and let my money do the talking. I have a TNT, and I think I'm upgrading to a voodoo 3, and telling Nvidia why. Probably won't do much good, but atleast I'll feel better (_and_ have better gaming experience).
It's hard to tell what companies to support this way though. Maybe I should buy a G400? They've certainly released info on their card and are playing nice. We need some sort of better info! It would be nice if there could be some sort of more or less official "Playing nice with Linux" approval points or something. Go check their points and buy their stuff. What would be even better, is to somehow let them know that you purchased the whatever because of it. Can you imagine all sorts of companies pandering to get Linux points? Makes me laugh. Probably won't happen. I'll just go buy a voodoo 3 I guess.
O.K., I'm getting sort of pissed. Everybody is bashing, but nobodys being very constructive. "Yeah, Linux isn't ready for the desktop yet. If only KDE/Gnome would...." This is a bunch of bullshit. Sure KDE and Gnome could both be better, but they are both O.K. The worst part about Linux is the lack of thought the distributions put in to the end user experience. They think so much about security, the newest software, making graphical installations, etc. they miss out on one of the biggest bestest things they could do. Fortunately, I think even the average Linux user can contribute quite a bit to the cause here, and everyone is just bitching.
The underlying software of Linux isn't what is making it a difficult desktop transition, things just need a little more thought, polish, and work that isn't even really _technical_ work. Don't you spend atleast a couple hours after a fresh install "taking care of all those things the distribution didn't". You get rid of all the supurflous crap on the panel, change the clock to am/pm from military, fix Netscape's fonts, make shortcuts to the good programs that aren't in any menu, etc. It's like you go and buy a car, but after you get it home, you notice nobody bothered to take the plastic off the seat at the dealers, remove the sticker on the window, fill the tank with gas, or make sure there was air in the tires. We couldn't fix that stuff in windows, because its proprietary, what's your excuse now?
Another example: How many times do you really get to grok a piece of software after using it alot and dragging yourself through poor documentation time and again? Then you think: "Geez, I could write better documentation than that now!" Well guess what, it would probably only take a couple hours on the weekend for a couple weeks, and you could! Why don't you?
How many times do you install Linux, and the grammar and content of some or all of the messages is really, really bad? You catch yourself thinking: "Crap, I understand what that info screen means because I've used Linux for 5 years, but geeez, did they have a native english speaker look at these sentences before they burned the CD?"
We're all creative people. Go be creative. How can we make a better desktop in the framework we have now. I think _ALOT_ can be done.
For instance, one thing I've been contemplating is a "unix-philosophy-howto". Most people find Linux confusing because they don't understand the unix philosophy of doing things. If they did, and had a guided tour through some features at a _conceptual_ level, they'd probably think Unix was damn cool, and not that complicated. I've always wondered why distributions don't have such a thing as the first chapter. That way people would have a good conceptual framework to statr their unix love affair. There are some documents which sort of do this, like the DOS->Linux howto, but not really. I hereby proclaim I will write such a thing.
What about you? When you find something irksome, and you can fix it with just a little work, maybe a couple hours on the weekend, why don't you?
If we all do these things, when Linux gets apps galore, it will be a terrifically wonderful desktop environment.
Just some thoughts. Everyone quit being so negative!
I've been using MATLAB for years, and have the Linux version. I find MATLAB frustrating once you get to a high enough level in their programming language. Their scoping is awful and their iteration is butt slow, among other things. They also can't handle strings and system stuff very well. I've seriously though about getting involved in perldl, the data language using perl. It is in an early developmental stage, but seems to rock over every other language, atleast in concept. I would strongly suggest that anyone interested in free mathematics packages invest their time in perldl. Why do you want to copy all the mistakes of packages like MATLAB! Perldl promises to be something better.
I'm getting really tired of most of the universe not understanding evolutionary theory. It's a simple theory, but few seemingly understand it correctly. Even in conversations with intelligent people they'll say things like "blah blah evolved into blah blah....", without putting much thought in to evolution. Christ, don't they teach it in biology class any more? (well, there's that Kansas thing.....)
A couple of points:
While I'm not a complete fan of Occam's razor, I think it fits here. There isn't anything _wrong_ with evolutionary theory the way it is. It works fine. Why make it more complicated than necessary. Hell, let's start talking about super strings and plate tectonics next.
He ignores how the mutated DNA gets passed on. Fine a cell becomes somehow isolated, dips into the multiverse and mutates. Fine. Unless this happens to all the cells in my body it isn't going to help me a damn bit. If it doesn't get translated to the genetic code my sperm carries, it won't get passed on to my offspring. Come on! What crap.
Why in the world would a cell, if it had all the multiverses of choice possible pick a disadvantageous mutation? This is observed in nature you know.
Anyway, I could go on and on. Please don't post this stupid psuedo-science crap.