What the whole free software and MP3 movements seems to be a forerunner of is the free access of all information.
Whether or not that's a good thing is another matter, but copy protection has NEVER been unbreakable, afaik, and probably never will be unbreakable. After all, if there's a way to read the content at all, there will be a way to write it again elsewhere.
Hmmm. Sure, there have been times when copy protection works, and I'm sure M$ would love to see us head that way again. After all, during the middle ages, the Catholic Church had the perfect copy protection: copies could only be made by monks, and no one but the priesthood could read. In fact, until the renaissance, even the rich and powerful lords and kings were usually illiterate. Before that, there were other societies where the priesthood executed control through exclusive knowledge. And M$ wants us to head that way again. Why do you think they want us to use VB/VC++? because it eliminates the understanding that comes with stuff like knowledge of assembler and the arcane world of microprocessors and memory management etc.etc. So if you're John Q. CEO and you have lots of money invested in software written with VB/VC++, and Billy boy tells you he wants more money for an upgrade or your stuff won't work right any more, you pay him right freakin' quick. And again, the base-level processes where hackers work their magic, become closed off to most people. And it doesn't hurt that the media portrays hackers as evil. It's not that much of a logical leap for the average sheep to go from "doing it [cracking, breaking encryption, using encryption] is bad" to "knowing how to do it is bad." Just ask your average person whether people should know how to make bombs. Most will tell you it's bad. Middle ages, people thought that if they read the bible, or questioned a priest, they were on the Amtrak to hell. And in another 25 years, if we aren't vigilant, (for that is the price of freedom,) we will have a general population that believes that knowing the intricacies of how an OS works is dangerous.
On a lighter (?) note, a coworker thought that Office 97 was an OS. Okay, maybe on a "pretty damned scary" note, that is.
Good point. The only thing I would like to see (not sure if they have it yet) is a screen that was true b&w. That is, like black type on bleached, William Randolph Hearst brand white paper. I much preferred web pages with background color simply because they could have white, rather than grey, backgrounds.
Don't you get it, Crow? Corporate philanthropy is like mainstream nihilism: it can't be trusted. Let's analyze what these fruitcakes get for giving a bit of money to charity, shall we?
1. Free publicity with the glitterati. After all, who has $3000 (price after airfare and hotel, my estimate) to spend on a movie ticket? That's right, celebrities. Which of course means E! and friends will show up, yammering about how wonderful it is that hollywood and the studio care this much blah blah blah.
2. A big tax write-off. The biggest inspiration for corporate charity is the IRS. After all, after the lawyers get through with it, it'll look more like several million dollars of charity... I actually think this is the reason that we hear about studios losing money: a tax write-off.
So that's my analysis. If I kick my snideness and cynicism up a few more notches, I can start submitting to Suck.
You mean like the switch to a gift economy? The fact that software is a "product" that you can duplicate for just about nothing (an increasingly less expensive amount of CPU time and storage) is seen by some (me) as the model for a new economy where what you know, what you can dream up, is what makes you rich or poor. A lot of things seem to support this: the free software movement for one, the increase in independent films, and the move to music distribution by mp3 rather than by CD. I think Neal Stephenson had a good grasp of it when he wrote the Diamond Age, even if that was about nanotechnology.
Communism is a form of government where the government tells everyone what job they have and what they do with their lives. Linux is more like socialism, if not tribalism. Of course, it's really none of the above, according to traditional political theory. If Microsoft simply eliminated competition (if? I mean, "like when") it's a monopoly. If the government eliminated the competition for them, it would be a government-mandated monopoly (see: Every country's telcos but ours.) Linux is really more like a big club of people who work on the same project all the time.
I think the only meaningful use of the term communism these days is a less-insulting version of calling someone a nazi. Like "what are you, a commie?"
Actually, that reminds me of something I was wondering, and it seems on topic, so here goes: why don't hardware manufacturers offer open sources of their drivers? I mean, I understand closed source software where the software is the product, but you've already bought the freakin' hardware, why do they bother to keep the drivers secret? Seems to me they only stand to gain, because if they make some kickass hardware, and then let people port the drivers to other OSes and work bugs out, it should be all good.
"Apparently, this, ah, 'LINUX,' has a great number of, ah, hidden messages. 'Gnome' is a homosexual reference, and appparently there are other, ah, messages that promote drug use and fornication. Mr. Torvalds should be, ah, strung up and burned for this, ah, flagrant communistic effort to corrupt our youth."
Then Pat Robertson would lead a prayer to burn the evil Linux spawn.
Personally, I'd rather have some commie pinko from the Village Voice on our side. Anyone know if Rage Against the Machine use it?
35mm... Ummm. Where to begin. The only limit on film is the factor of enlargement/grain. Not so with digital - you have a FIXED resolution. It'll look just as shitty blown up three times as the 35mm, if not worse. Grain is normal - people are used to it. Pixelation is really obvious. Ever look at an IMAX theater? That's 70mm film. Looks DAMN good to me, dude.
Of course, none of that matters. You only get the effects of 35mm when you show it on a big screen. Gone to a theater recently? They are all small screens, which is why "Clerks" looks as good as "Hamlet" (which was shot in 70mm.)
And I swear this is my last comment on this topic. Ever watch "Boogie Nights?" This is the scene where it's December 31 1979, and Jack Horner is saying he'll never shoot on video because it looks and sounds like shite. All you filmophiles are Jack. The fact is, there will always be a small group of people who will pay more for better quality. But just like porn and music, regualar movies are gonna go digital. Think of it this way. You and a classmate both get out of your film majors at the same time. You both go to the same money people with the same quality script and demo reels. Now. Do the money people finance you, who insists on using film, preferably 35mm? Or do they finance your classmate, who'll shoot on a borrowed Canon digital camera? That's right. Because film is too damn expensive, for too little a jump in quality, to be justified.
You guys are missing the point completely. When Robert Rodriguez made "El Mariachi," he shot on 16mm film, edited on 3/4 video and copied his video master to VHS. Digital cameras are more and more getting on par with film in terms of quality. When filmmakers go digital, it will make a number of things easier:
editing. Assuming they use firewire, this means anyone with a digital camera will be able to edit at home on their PC/Mac/SGI.
effects. one of the expensive parts about effects is getting the film transferred into a computer so you can put in all that nice CGI. Then you have to spit the composited shots back out onto another piece of film. Digital cuts both transfers out.
distribution. Digital will allow you to send movies all over for cheap. Much cheaper than printing a copy of your reel. This is not just limited to theaters, either. If you hook up a regular vcr, you can print dozens of copies off your digital master.
I long for the day when wannabe Robert Rodriguez's like me can make movies that easily.
What you two are missing is that this isn't even for script kids. This is for the same people that a year ago were going to spiceworld.com. So the password is not going to be hard. It'll be an english word, one that has something VERY VERY basic to do with the internet. I'm talking not even as complex as TCP/IP here. So you're probably talking like 50 possibilities.
And here I was, thinking that just like everyone else, hackers were individuals that had their own tastes. Man, I sure am dumb.
Serious, though. What should we expect after movies like "hackers?" The thing is, hacking as a concept is cool to lots of people. Hacking as an actual activity is really boring to lots of people. It's easy to make breaking into computer systems and so on cool when it's MTV. It's really hard to make it cool when it's PBS. I guess junk food, C, and 50-hour days just aren't sexy anymore.
And here I was, thinking that just like everyone else, hackers were individuals that had their own tastes. Man, I sure am dumb.
Serious, though. What should we expect after movies like "hackers?" The thing is, hacking as a concept is cool to lots of people. Hacking as an actual activity is really boring to lots of people. It's easy to make breaking into computer systems and so on cool when it's MTV. It's really hard to make it cool when it's PBS. I guess junk food, C, and 50-hour days just aren't sexy anymore.
Please refrain from using racial epithets. Now. When I lived in Hawaii, the Harley dealership gave you a bus pass when you bought a new bike. Not by coincidence. They are the Jaguar of the motorcycle world. A japanese or german bike, however, will go and go and go. And they don't just make crotch rockets. But this is about emulation, so to remain on topic...
I'm all for it. I liked the economist article, I think it did well for a general-consumption magazine. It's funny to me that there has been no mention of this (afaik) in the US press. Pretty sad when a european magazine is our best news source for US news.
Besides, his neighbors probably don't have one yet.
Mmmm, car mp3s. Now, for the first site to push mp3 music to this player over a cell connection. That would be sweet. Just tune in to www.carmuse.com. Yes.
I think you might have mistyped. Netscape had to go because if the _browser_ became a commodity, and people realized that hey, we can use this instead, then it was possible that people would also realize that they could buy a Mac or set up Linux and do the same thing they did on their Wintel.
I think IE needs to be written separately because of it's connection to the OS and performance needs. Also, if you've ever tried to take IE out of Win95, it's harder than taking the jungle out of the tiger. Or, more appropriately, it's harder than getting the Herpes virus out of your spinal column.
And yes. Office, like many Microsquash products, has definite usability issues. Such as Word, which seems to think I need help typing. Emacs, anyone?
Actually, in Wired's 83 reasons Microsquash's reign is over, they pointed out that there are only so many features you can add to an application before they hinder you more than helping you. One example: I was making up a form, and when I typed more than a couple of underscores, and hit return, there was some kind of oversized, bold line. Stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Good point. The only thing I would like to see (not sure if they have it yet) is a screen that was true b&w. That is, like black type on bleached, William Randolph Hearst brand white paper. I much preferred web pages with background color simply because they could have white, rather than grey, backgrounds.
even more detailed solution to #1: Oracle on linux is free. Join the Oracle tech network and download Oracle8 for free. Can I get a thank you larry?
I thought I could!
Don't you get it, Crow? Corporate philanthropy is like mainstream nihilism: it can't be trusted. Let's analyze what these fruitcakes get for giving a bit of money to charity, shall we?
1. Free publicity with the glitterati. After all, who has $3000 (price after airfare and hotel, my estimate) to spend on a movie ticket? That's right, celebrities. Which of course means E! and friends will show up, yammering about how wonderful it is that hollywood and the studio care this much blah blah blah.
2. A big tax write-off. The biggest inspiration for corporate charity is the IRS. After all, after the lawyers get through with it, it'll look more like several million dollars of charity...
I actually think this is the reason that we hear about studios losing money: a tax write-off.
So that's my analysis. If I kick my snideness and cynicism up a few more notches, I can start submitting to Suck.
You mean like the switch to a gift economy? The fact that software is a "product" that you can duplicate for just about nothing (an increasingly less expensive amount of CPU time and storage) is seen by some (me) as the model for a new economy where what you know, what you can dream up, is what makes you rich or poor. A lot of things seem to support this: the free software movement for one, the increase in independent films, and the move to music distribution by mp3 rather than by CD. I think Neal Stephenson had a good grasp of it when he wrote the Diamond Age, even if that was about nanotechnology.
Communism is a form of government where the government tells everyone what job they have and what they do with their lives. Linux is more like socialism, if not tribalism. Of course, it's really none of the above, according to traditional political theory. If Microsoft simply eliminated competition (if? I mean, "like when") it's a monopoly. If the government eliminated the competition for them, it would be a government-mandated monopoly (see: Every country's telcos but ours.) Linux is really more like a big club of people who work on the same project all the time.
I think the only meaningful use of the term communism these days is a less-insulting version of calling someone a nazi. Like "what are you, a commie?"
Actually, that reminds me of something I was wondering, and it seems on topic, so here goes: why don't hardware manufacturers offer open sources of their drivers? I mean, I understand closed source software where the software is the product, but you've already bought the freakin' hardware, why do they bother to keep the drivers secret? Seems to me they only stand to gain, because if they make some kickass hardware, and then let people port the drivers to other OSes and work bugs out, it should be all good.
Write your hardware vendor today!
Keyboard commands are natural to me-I use AutoCAD (probably the best piece of win32 software I've ever used.)
Good point on blender. It's beautiful. I thought I was nuts when I saw the size of the download. This is what free software is all about, no?
Yeah. I gots it so my slow-ass connection at work doesn't take a half-century to load.
Just a question: with all the concentration on Linux, do you (or why don't you) have links to Linux sites (like the documentation project)?
"Apparently, this, ah, 'LINUX,' has a great number of, ah, hidden messages. 'Gnome' is a homosexual reference, and appparently there are other, ah, messages that promote drug use and fornication. Mr. Torvalds should be, ah, strung up and burned for this, ah, flagrant communistic effort to corrupt our youth."
Then Pat Robertson would lead a prayer to burn the evil Linux spawn.
Personally, I'd rather have some commie pinko from the Village Voice on our side. Anyone know if Rage Against the Machine use it?
Zagmar
35mm... Ummm. Where to begin. The only limit on film is the factor of enlargement/grain. Not so with digital - you have a FIXED resolution. It'll look just as shitty blown up three times as the 35mm, if not worse. Grain is normal - people are used to it. Pixelation is really obvious. Ever look at an IMAX theater? That's 70mm film. Looks DAMN good to me, dude.
Of course, none of that matters. You only get the effects of 35mm when you show it on a big screen. Gone to a theater recently? They are all small screens, which is why "Clerks" looks as good as "Hamlet" (which was shot in 70mm.)
And I swear this is my last comment on this topic.
Ever watch "Boogie Nights?" This is the scene where it's December 31 1979, and Jack Horner is saying he'll never shoot on video because it looks and sounds like shite. All you filmophiles are Jack. The fact is, there will always be a small group of people who will pay more for better quality. But just like porn and music, regualar movies are gonna go digital. Think of it this way. You and a classmate both get out of your film majors at the same time. You both go to the same money people with the same quality script and demo reels. Now. Do the money people finance you, who insists on using film, preferably 35mm? Or do they finance your classmate, who'll shoot on a borrowed Canon digital camera? That's right. Because film is too damn expensive, for too little a jump in quality, to be justified.
Zagmar
From my data communication book last year:
"never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of digital tapes cruising down the highway."
Zagmar
You guys are missing the point completely. When Robert Rodriguez made "El Mariachi," he shot on 16mm film, edited on 3/4 video and copied his video master to VHS. Digital cameras are more and more getting on par with film in terms of quality. When filmmakers go digital, it will make a number of things easier:
editing. Assuming they use firewire, this means anyone with a digital camera will be able to edit at home on their PC/Mac/SGI.
effects. one of the expensive parts about effects is getting the film transferred into a computer so you can put in all that nice CGI. Then you have to spit the composited shots back out onto another piece of film. Digital cuts both transfers out.
distribution. Digital will allow you to send movies all over for cheap. Much cheaper than printing a copy of your reel. This is not just limited to theaters, either. If you hook up a regular vcr, you can print dozens of copies off your digital master.
I long for the day when wannabe Robert Rodriguez's like me can make movies that easily.
So there.
Zagmar
Yes. It's something to do with a monopoly on domain name registrations.
Zagmar
Cygnus is the name of a star.
Zagmar
Actually, Rob could start charging for storage time.
Wouldn't THAT be funny.
Zagmar
Actually, a lot of people do use his preferred terminology: ever hear of Con Edison? Edison electricity, that.
Zagmar
What you two are missing is that this isn't even for script kids. This is for the same people that a year ago were going to spiceworld.com. So the password is not going to be hard. It'll be an english word, one that has something VERY VERY basic to do with the internet. I'm talking not even as complex as TCP/IP here. So you're probably talking like 50 possibilities.
Zagmar
And here I was, thinking that just like everyone else, hackers were individuals that had their own tastes. Man, I sure am dumb.
Serious, though. What should we expect after movies like "hackers?" The thing is, hacking as a concept is cool to lots of people. Hacking as an actual activity is really boring to lots of people. It's easy to make breaking into computer systems and so on cool when it's MTV. It's really hard to make it cool when it's PBS. I guess junk food, C, and 50-hour days just aren't sexy anymore.
Zagmar
And here I was, thinking that just like everyone else, hackers were individuals that had their own tastes. Man, I sure am dumb.
Serious, though. What should we expect after movies like "hackers?" The thing is, hacking as a concept is cool to lots of people. Hacking as an actual activity is really boring to lots of people. It's easy to make breaking into computer systems and so on cool when it's MTV. It's really hard to make it cool when it's PBS. I guess junk food, C, and 50-hour days just aren't sexy anymore.
Please refrain from using racial epithets. Now. When I lived in Hawaii, the Harley dealership gave you a bus pass when you bought a new bike. Not by coincidence. They are the Jaguar of the motorcycle world. A japanese or german bike, however, will go and go and go. And they don't just make crotch rockets. But this is about emulation, so to remain on topic...
I'm all for it. I liked the economist article, I think it did well for a general-consumption magazine. It's funny to me that there has been no mention of this (afaik) in the US press. Pretty sad when a european magazine is our best news source for US news.
Zagmar
Besides, his neighbors probably don't have one yet.
Mmmm, car mp3s. Now, for the first site to push mp3 music to this player over a cell connection. That would be sweet. Just tune in to www.carmuse.com. Yes.
Zagmar
But that would put them in the same place as Corel and Lotus. At least then there would be some competition. As it is, there is M$.
Zagmar
I think you might have mistyped. Netscape had to go because if the _browser_ became a commodity, and people realized that hey, we can use this instead, then it was possible that people would also realize that they could buy a Mac or set up Linux and do the same thing they did on their Wintel.
Zagmar
I think IE needs to be written separately because of it's connection to the OS and performance needs. Also, if you've ever tried to take IE out of Win95, it's harder than taking the jungle out of the tiger. Or, more appropriately, it's harder than getting the Herpes virus out of your spinal column.
And yes. Office, like many Microsquash products, has definite usability issues. Such as Word, which seems to think I need help typing. Emacs, anyone?
Actually, in Wired's 83 reasons Microsquash's reign is over, they pointed out that there are only so many features you can add to an application before they hinder you more than helping you. One example: I was making up a form, and when I typed more than a couple of underscores, and hit return, there was some kind of oversized, bold line. Stupid.
Zagmar