I would also like to second this proposition. I attended an SGI Linux univesity road tour about a year 1/2 ago. I watched a detailed presentation about XFS and the potential benefits that such a filesystem would have on Linux. I walked away completely blown away and totally impressed by the capabilities of XFS.
It is also important to note, XFS and CXFS (clustered XFS) will push Linux right into SAN territory. Add to that ACL's + Samba 2.2 and you have a drop in replacement for a win2k PDC. It is high time to push these capabilities in tech articles and in the press. We all hear how great of a web server/firewall/embedded OS Linux is, but I have yet to see a company try to heavily market their distro as a PDC replacement. However, XFS gives us these capabilities and more.
The presentation which I attended was given by Laura Shepard. This same presentation was recorded and put on the web in realplayer format for all who are interested. The presentation is here and a powerpoint presentation about XFS is here. XFS has tremendous potential and I for one am grateful to SGI for releasing such a high quality product for Linux.
I'm American and I'll say this: The US should apologize... They have our people and our plane. You have to also understand their culture... Apology is not necessarily an admission of guilt, but rather politeness. They lost a fighter pilot who is probably dead. They want us to apologize that he is dead, not that we are at fault. There is a big difference in cultural perception here.
If Bush were not such an arrogant bastard trying to be the tough prez and gain approval, we would not be in this position.. What happened to the compassionate conservative line he's always throwing at us. The chinese want a cultural apology saying that we are sorry that the pilot is dead, it's that simple. Again, this is not an admission of guilt from their perspective, only from our arrogant western perspective. The fact that the plane was in international airspace is not the issue to them.
If Bush really wants to ruin our relationship with a multi-billion dollar trade partner because he is so obtuse and culturally shallow than so be it. I hope the rest of the world laughs at him and at us. It is time for America to get off it's high horse and realize we have become too arrogant just like the Roman Empire, The Greeks, The Ottomans, etc. All these empires fell and so will ours if America continues to be an arrogant nation. The only encouraging factor in all of this is that four years from now, Shrub will be probably be out of office.
"it does seem strange that they are going after small local governments, that probably have little organization and poor record keeping,"
....and they are raising taxes for the rest of us. I know linux can't solve every problem, nor is it the panacea for all computing ills. However, the government should be investigating how it can save its constituents money by using free/open software. Hell, they would save money too. Small city governments don't have wads of cash. The money that is saved could go to improve schools, parks, libraries, etc.
Linux has already made it's impact on M$. If we really want to hurt M$s pocketbook, then we need to start on the local front -> city governments! It may not be much, but the pocket change adds up. Think of all the small towns across America and add up all the change. In the end, that's a lot of money that doesn't go to M$ and does go to help small cities build and maintain their infrastructure.
"what I dislike about Debian is that their stable release is constantly out of date"
I have to agree with you here, but since I upgraded to the unstable branch I have not been out of date so to speak. Plus, unstable seems pretty damned stable to me. I have yet to have a crash of any kind using the unstable branch.
"And what about all the people that don't want their songs on napster and want to sell it/distribute it another way?"
well, if those bands don't want their music copied, then they should write in to napster and say so. It's that simple! If I don't want my music shared, I'll write to napster and give them a list of songs to block. Is that so hard? And yes, freedom is the default.
The problem here is that napster is an outstanding distribution medium. The RIAA realizes this and doesn't want any other (non riaa) artists to use this medium to distribute their own works. The RIAA wants to control the very method of music distribution. They don't want people listening to music that they did not distribute.
With this new opt method, only approved titles will be allowed to be given away. This is different than the riaa having to give a list of music it wants denied on default allow system. The RIAA wants a default deny system and now wants to give the tiny allow list to napster. If the RIAA is deciding what goes onto napster, then what about independent artists. Will they be blocked from distribution because the RIAA controls the allow list? Sorry, but that is restraint of trade and that is illegal.
Furthermore, there are titles that I've found on Napster which are impossible to find in any music store. Hence, the CD's are out of print and they can't be losing money on sales due to downloading. In other words, those CD's are not sold anymore so what the hell am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to not download it and let the songs be locked in plastic encased aluminum substrate in some guys garage because that's just the way it's supposed to be?
This is the sad part of it all, the RIAA can take the CD out of production, leave us high and dry, and because the copyright lasts 90 years we are never supposed to listen to it again even if the CD went out of print back in 1988. I'm sorry, but that is bullshit and it is the prostitution of art as we know it. As far as I'm concerned, there is a lack of good music these days and I rarely buy CD's anymore. I download songs that I would have bought in CD form, but the CD is impossible to find and possibly out of print.
Now, I have no problem with artists getting paid. I have no problem with the RIAA getting paid. I buy CD's, everyone I know buys CD's. I do have a problem with 10+ year old music that is out of print not being put on napster anymore. Obviously, it is not a money maker so what's it to them. I have a problem with the RIAA wanting to crush every known method of music distribution so they can maintain a monopoly. Another problem I have with the RIAA is that they are completely unfair and unyielding. If they had an ounce of fairness in them, I would not be typing this right now.
"The censorship comes in when they try and regulate which games should never hit the market because they are too violent."
Exactly, Nachoman you are right on target here. Rating a game violent and censoring a violent game are two totally different issues. I have no problem with ratings of the content of a game, movie, music, but I do have a problem with censorship. As long as people are informed of the content and allowed to make their own decisions, that is not a problem to me. It's when government steps in and says "this game is rated 21+ and we can never allow it to be released." That is censorship and that is what I'm opposed to.
Actually, I've never been painted with the Republican paintbrush, so this is a first. First of all, I did not say that I was a full blown libertarian, only that my views regarding certain issues leaned in a libertarian direction. Secondly, Republican != Libertarian. Most republicans can't stand my viewpoints. Finally, mr. AC fred, the good trolls have not gone anywhere. Are you feeling lonely or something? Trolls are still here posting as AC's and making stupid comments. If I had my threshold set higher I probably would not have seen your comment, and probably would not be responding to you right now. See, you're still here so don't worry about where all the good trolls went. As long as slashdot has you, we don't care about those other trolls.
I'm basically libertarian in most of my viewpoints. I believe that adults(not children) should have the freedom to choose, die, drink, smoke, do drugs, etc. I don't believe these freedoms should be granted to minors. Rating video games is not the end of the world people. We have ratings for movies here in the USA and many of you would consider this ok.
There are better things kids could be doing anyway. With age, comes maturity and more responsibility. We don't let minors drink, smoke, or watch porn. Why should graphically violent games be any different. If parents want to buy those games for their children, then they have the right to do so. If a parent wants to rent an "R" rated movie for their teenage son, then they have that right. All that was suggested here is a rating system, not the end of game consoles as we know it.
Just think of the implications here. I could give you a number. The number itself is not illegal. However, you can take that number and a perl script and you could have almost anything. Instead of sharing mp3's, share the number that could be used to convert the output of the perl script into an mp3. What number would represent the gzipped linux kernel? If I post a bunch of numbers on my web page, is that illegal? The implications of this are wide and far reaching. I think that this is one of the more important discoveries made.
Could we then setup a distributed model much like seti@home that would discover source code? I don't see why not. Just imagine what could potentially be discovered this way. What if the NT kernel source were to be discovered? Since the info was never stolen from anyone, but randomly discovered, what would the implications be here?
Both of these scenarios could be possible. The legal ramifications would be a hairy mess. Would it be illegal to randomly convert long numbers into hex for the fear of discovering something? Will there be a new set of laws that cover math research? There are many many more possibilities that I believe we have yet to discover. So, is the second scenario cracking code or is it research and discovery? The laws of IP and the concepts of perception and reality, etc are now even more vulnerable and questionable. Our entire number system may be illegal under this new paradigm.
"Um... Patents have a tendency to be over used..."
Yes this is true, however, we should use the current patent system to our advantage. Open Source folks should start patenting the most ludicrous things as well and making the patent "GPL" if you will. Let's make it ridiculously difficult for them to patent anything that they could use to sue people. Since the implementation would include a GPL type clause, this would definately make them think twice.
Stuff like the "one-click" and this stupid "rpc" patent would not exist if we had gotten to it first. I say, we get into the drivers seat and start patenting. Anyone would be free to implement the idea in our patent as long as they released their blueprints for implementation to the public. Let's give these bastards a taste of their own medicine.
I wish I had still had moderator points....
on
CPRM Smokescreen
·
· Score: 1
Damn man, I'd give you a +5. You are very correct in many of your statements. While the new hard drives will be marketed much like you said, computer manufacturers will ship them in their computers. Imagine: "Our pc's ship with the latest in content protection, while our competitors continue to use hacker friendly drives."
Just thinking about this is starting to make me sick to my stomach. I've said this before and I'll say it again - RIAA needs to keep their noses out of the hard drive business. They have no business messing with technology that really has nothing to do with them. What's next? Will Texaco require that all gas caps be locked so only they can open them and perform a full-service fill up? NO, for the same reason that I shouldn't have to tolerate CPRM - it's unnecessary.
"I just hate getting nailed to a cross for stating something in terminology that doesn't jive with the 'standard'"
actually, there is nothing wrong with not jiving. This is just FYI so you can jive with the best of em! The technical term for what you were experiencing was poor throughput.
Bandwidth is the total capacity of your datapipe - example: I have a 10mbit(megabit per second) network.
Throughput is a measurement of your bandwidth at a particular moment - example: I have a 10mbit connection, but I may be downloading at 900kbs at this very moment.
Even though an office building may have a 10baseT network, no one individual can have all that bandwith to himself. That bandwidth is shared with 50 other people. Thus, MY throughput will be a fraction of the total bandwidth available. See the difference? Anyhow, I hope this helps.
yes it is bankrupt. Now aren't you glad the debian folks still exist? just change the apt sources list to point to debian.org and continue to happily upgrade your box.
I've discussed this with some linux using friends of mine before. Debian is a non-profit company and Redhat is here to make money. What does that have to do with anything, you ask? Debian users upgraded from 2.1 to 2.2 with a one line command. That was it, that simple, nothing to it, and it was almost a non-event. If you're not understanding, they upgraded their entire box, every library, binary, etc to become debian 2.2.
Redhat and other RPM distros, could have serious dependency headaches in order to go from one version release to another. The main catch is, this forces people to buy a newer version to stay on the forefront of linux. If I could buy Redhat 6.0 and just 'apt-get distupgrade' all the way up to 7.0 and to future releases, I wouldn't have to buy any more releases from Redhat EVER AGAIN! Unless Redhat makes an apt repository and charges a subscription service, their older customers are not going to need to buy newer releases.
Conclusion: Debian is a non-proft organization. Debian has an excellent packaging system. A debian user can type in a command and upgrade the entire distro to a newer version. Debian has no fiscal incentive to push point releases as we all know. This is because stability and robustness are of utmost importance to debianites. How long did it take from the 2.1 release to 2.2 again?
Redhat is a for-profit company. Redhat has a decent packaging system. Installing a package may be troublesome if you have to find a package that contains the file that the program you're trying to install depends on. It is easier for most users to either buy/download a newer version to stay current. Thus, redhat sells more copies because people can't buy just one distro and upgrade ad infinitum. In other words, money may be the reason.
I believe you make a good point here. Even though I do agree that software patents are stupid, jumping in and beating them at their own game might just be the way to go...
What's the big fuss? I'll tell you. Why should you punish many for the actions of a few? Why should raid 1(mirroring) become useless or the network storage industry go under because the RIAA is greedy? Why should my life as an administrator become hell because people download music and I can no longer backup my data? I don't give a rat's ass about the RIAA, nor do I listen to "popular" brittany spears crap music that is out today. Why should the hard drives in my servers be crippled because the music industry is pissed off?
This has nothing to do with them. As an IT professional, I have no sympathy for them. As an IT professional, I resent any technology that makes my job hell! FSCK YOU RIAA! Just because some dork is downloading songs is no reason to cripple perfectly good technology. So, what is next, I ask you? I have some good examples.
I can buy a single container of Dannon yogurt and a gallon of milk and make a tub of yogurt using the Dannon as a starter. I can then infinately make yogurt from that yogurt. Is Dannon going to sue me because I'm replicating lactobacillus acidophilus bacteria? If I buy an expensive cook book and learn how to make a delicious tortellini dish and then I show others how to do it, I am a somehow a bad guy? If I share this information with ten other people and they in turn show others, am I going to be targeted because some Italian italian cook lost money on book sales? Where are we going to draw the line?
In the first of the two aforementioned examples, do you really see me having to sign a non-disclosure agreement stating that I will not use their yogurt to make more yogurt - In other words, I will not copy? There is already a piracy tax placed on certain types of blank media. Will there be a piracy tax placed on jugs of milk to recompensate Dannon because I have not bought their yogurt but merely replicated it by using warm milk?
The RIAA has become way to hungry for power. They are trying to extend their reach into an area where they have no right to interfere. The problem here is, if I tell people they can't share recipies out of a cookbook I wrote, I guarantee you those people would laugh at the idea. So what's next? Are we going to shutdown kinko's because pages of books can be copied at their facilities? Will libraries suddenly only store "hard to find" and "out of print books" so that Amazon can churn a profit? The answer is NO. Why should the RIAA be any different?
Not so. Remember X is network transparent so that could mean the apps actually reside on another box across the network while the display is exported to the OSX box. The two computers have different times set and that is all.
Man... If I still had my moderator points I'd mod you up. That is a very good point. I am American and I do realize that Americans are a very arrogant bunch. Microsoft execs are even more arrogant to boot. Microsoft will eat it's words.
You're right on the money. International businesses could take this as an insult and I hope they do. Microsoft realizes that their international customers no longer have to rely on them. A country like Brazil, for example, has talented programmers who made their own distro called connectiva linux. If more countries rely less and less on Microsoft and more on local distro makers for their software, then they can become self-reliant - something Microsoft fears more than linux. The fear, that people will no longer rely on them for software, services, or support.
I don't really disagree with you on your points here, but there is one thing about this that really pisses me off. I'm not saying that artists or corporations don't deserve compensation for their work. What I am saying is that laws are being skewed to protect corporations instead of the individual. Do you really think the police would go after people downloading recordings of amateur/unestablished musicians whose recordings are copyrighted?
Maybe the Belgian police are trying to make an example out of somebody in order to scare others and deliver a clear message, but then again maybe not. The point is this: Don't the police have anything better to do than go after downloaders? Why are they not sitting in their cars in the red light district? Why are they not walking the streets to insure peoples safety? Surely there has to be more important criminals to go after.
I'm not justifying the actions of those who were warned about downloading. I'm simply saying that if this example is setting a precedent of what is to come, then we have more to worry about than Napster closing it's doors.
"Or how about the hundred times I've asked where I could start from to be able to tweak the virtual memory management of Linux because I have certain needs to take care of. No one can tell me."
Well, I'll tell you. Or rather, I'll give you this link. It's a good start.
Slashdot Mirror
I would also like to second this proposition. I attended an SGI Linux univesity road tour about a year 1/2 ago. I watched a detailed presentation about XFS and the potential benefits that such a filesystem would have on Linux. I walked away completely blown away and totally impressed by the capabilities of XFS.
It is also important to note, XFS and CXFS (clustered XFS) will push Linux right into SAN territory. Add to that ACL's + Samba 2.2 and you have a drop in replacement for a win2k PDC. It is high time to push these capabilities in tech articles and in the press. We all hear how great of a web server/firewall/embedded OS Linux is, but I have yet to see a company try to heavily market their distro as a PDC replacement. However, XFS gives us these capabilities and more.
The presentation which I attended was given by Laura Shepard. This same presentation was recorded and put on the web in realplayer format for all who are interested. The presentation is here and a powerpoint presentation about XFS is here. XFS has tremendous potential and I for one am grateful to SGI for releasing such a high quality product for Linux.
I agree with this idea. While many of use could do samba config manually, having a migration tool in place would be a very nice selling point.
I'm American and I'll say this: The US should apologize... They have our people and our plane. You have to also understand their culture... Apology is not necessarily an admission of guilt, but rather politeness. They lost a fighter pilot who is probably dead. They want us to apologize that he is dead, not that we are at fault. There is a big difference in cultural perception here.
If Bush were not such an arrogant bastard trying to be the tough prez and gain approval, we would not be in this position.. What happened to the compassionate conservative line he's always throwing at us. The chinese want a cultural apology saying that we are sorry that the pilot is dead, it's that simple. Again, this is not an admission of guilt from their perspective, only from our arrogant western perspective. The fact that the plane was in international airspace is not the issue to them.
If Bush really wants to ruin our relationship with a multi-billion dollar trade partner because he is so obtuse and culturally shallow than so be it. I hope the rest of the world laughs at him and at us. It is time for America to get off it's high horse and realize we have become too arrogant just like the Roman Empire, The Greeks, The Ottomans, etc. All these empires fell and so will ours if America continues to be an arrogant nation. The only encouraging factor in all of this is that four years from now, Shrub will be probably be out of office.
"it does seem strange that they are going after small local governments, that probably have little organization and poor record keeping,"
....and they are raising taxes for the rest of us. I know linux can't solve every problem, nor is it the panacea for all computing ills. However, the government should be investigating how it can save its constituents money by using free/open software. Hell, they would save money too. Small city governments don't have wads of cash. The money that is saved could go to improve schools, parks, libraries, etc.
Linux has already made it's impact on M$. If we really want to hurt M$s pocketbook, then we need to start on the local front -> city governments! It may not be much, but the pocket change adds up. Think of all the small towns across America and add up all the change. In the end, that's a lot of money that doesn't go to M$ and does go to help small cities build and maintain their infrastructure.
"what I dislike about Debian is that their stable release is constantly out of date"
I have to agree with you here, but since I upgraded to the unstable branch I have not been out of date so to speak. Plus, unstable seems pretty damned stable to me. I have yet to have a crash of any kind using the unstable branch.
I'm also having the same issue with klisa. What the hell is klisa anyway?
"And what about all the people that don't want their songs on napster and want to sell it/distribute it another way?"
well, if those bands don't want their music copied, then they should write in to napster and say so. It's that simple! If I don't want my music shared, I'll write to napster and give them a list of songs to block. Is that so hard? And yes, freedom is the default.
The problem here is that napster is an outstanding distribution medium. The RIAA realizes this and doesn't want any other (non riaa) artists to use this medium to distribute their own works. The RIAA wants to control the very method of music distribution. They don't want people listening to music that they did not distribute.
With this new opt method, only approved titles will be allowed to be given away. This is different than the riaa having to give a list of music it wants denied on default allow system. The RIAA wants a default deny system and now wants to give the tiny allow list to napster. If the RIAA is deciding what goes onto napster, then what about independent artists. Will they be blocked from distribution because the RIAA controls the allow list? Sorry, but that is restraint of trade and that is illegal.
Furthermore, there are titles that I've found on Napster which are impossible to find in any music store. Hence, the CD's are out of print and they can't be losing money on sales due to downloading. In other words, those CD's are not sold anymore so what the hell am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to not download it and let the songs be locked in plastic encased aluminum substrate in some guys garage because that's just the way it's supposed to be?
This is the sad part of it all, the RIAA can take the CD out of production, leave us high and dry, and because the copyright lasts 90 years we are never supposed to listen to it again even if the CD went out of print back in 1988. I'm sorry, but that is bullshit and it is the prostitution of art as we know it. As far as I'm concerned, there is a lack of good music these days and I rarely buy CD's anymore. I download songs that I would have bought in CD form, but the CD is impossible to find and possibly out of print.
Now, I have no problem with artists getting paid. I have no problem with the RIAA getting paid. I buy CD's, everyone I know buys CD's. I do have a problem with 10+ year old music that is out of print not being put on napster anymore. Obviously, it is not a money maker so what's it to them. I have a problem with the RIAA wanting to crush every known method of music distribution so they can maintain a monopoly. Another problem I have with the RIAA is that they are completely unfair and unyielding. If they had an ounce of fairness in them, I would not be typing this right now.
Personally, I think this mod is way cooler. Check it out.
"The censorship comes in when they try and regulate which games should never hit the market because they are too violent."
Exactly, Nachoman you are right on target here. Rating a game violent and censoring a violent game are two totally different issues. I have no problem with ratings of the content of a game, movie, music, but I do have a problem with censorship. As long as people are informed of the content and allowed to make their own decisions, that is not a problem to me. It's when government steps in and says "this game is rated 21+ and we can never allow it to be released." That is censorship and that is what I'm opposed to.
Well Fred,
Actually, I've never been painted with the Republican paintbrush, so this is a first. First of all, I did not say that I was a full blown libertarian, only that my views regarding certain issues leaned in a libertarian direction. Secondly, Republican != Libertarian. Most republicans can't stand my viewpoints. Finally, mr. AC fred, the good trolls have not gone anywhere. Are you feeling lonely or something? Trolls are still here posting as AC's and making stupid comments. If I had my threshold set higher I probably would not have seen your comment, and probably would not be responding to you right now. See, you're still here so don't worry about where all the good trolls went. As long as slashdot has you, we don't care about those other trolls.
I'm basically libertarian in most of my viewpoints. I believe that adults(not children) should have the freedom to choose, die, drink, smoke, do drugs, etc. I don't believe these freedoms should be granted to minors. Rating video games is not the end of the world people. We have ratings for movies here in the USA and many of you would consider this ok.
There are better things kids could be doing anyway. With age, comes maturity and more responsibility. We don't let minors drink, smoke, or watch porn. Why should graphically violent games be any different. If parents want to buy those games for their children, then they have the right to do so. If a parent wants to rent an "R" rated movie for their teenage son, then they have that right. All that was suggested here is a rating system, not the end of game consoles as we know it.
Just think of the implications here. I could give you a number. The number itself is not illegal. However, you can take that number and a perl script and you could have almost anything. Instead of sharing mp3's, share the number that could be used to convert the output of the perl script into an mp3. What number would represent the gzipped linux kernel? If I post a bunch of numbers on my web page, is that illegal? The implications of this are wide and far reaching. I think that this is one of the more important discoveries made.
Could we then setup a distributed model much like seti@home that would discover source code? I don't see why not. Just imagine what could potentially be discovered this way. What if the NT kernel source were to be discovered? Since the info was never stolen from anyone, but randomly discovered, what would the implications be here?
Both of these scenarios could be possible. The legal ramifications would be a hairy mess. Would it be illegal to randomly convert long numbers into hex for the fear of discovering something? Will there be a new set of laws that cover math research? There are many many more possibilities that I believe we have yet to discover. So, is the second scenario cracking code or is it research and discovery? The laws of IP and the concepts of perception and reality, etc are now even more vulnerable and questionable. Our entire number system may be illegal under this new paradigm.
"Um... Patents have a tendency to be over used..."
Yes this is true, however, we should use the current patent system to our advantage. Open Source folks should start patenting the most ludicrous things as well and making the patent "GPL" if you will. Let's make it ridiculously difficult for them to patent anything that they could use to sue people. Since the implementation would include a GPL type clause, this would definately make them think twice.
Stuff like the "one-click" and this stupid "rpc" patent would not exist if we had gotten to it first. I say, we get into the drivers seat and start patenting. Anyone would be free to implement the idea in our patent as long as they released their blueprints for implementation to the public. Let's give these bastards a taste of their own medicine.
Damn man, I'd give you a +5. You are very correct in many of your statements. While the new hard drives will be marketed much like you said, computer manufacturers will ship them in their computers. Imagine: "Our pc's ship with the latest in content protection, while our competitors continue to use hacker friendly drives."
Just thinking about this is starting to make me sick to my stomach. I've said this before and I'll say it again - RIAA needs to keep their noses out of the hard drive business. They have no business messing with technology that really has nothing to do with them. What's next? Will Texaco require that all gas caps be locked so only they can open them and perform a full-service fill up? NO, for the same reason that I shouldn't have to tolerate CPRM - it's unnecessary.
"I just hate getting nailed to a cross for stating something in terminology that doesn't jive with the 'standard'"
actually, there is nothing wrong with not jiving. This is just FYI so you can jive with the best of em! The technical term for what you were experiencing was poor throughput.
Bandwidth is the total capacity of your datapipe - example: I have a 10mbit(megabit per second) network.
Throughput is a measurement of your bandwidth at a particular moment - example: I have a 10mbit connection, but I may be downloading at 900kbs at this very moment.
Even though an office building may have a 10baseT network, no one individual can have all that bandwith to himself. That bandwidth is shared with 50 other people. Thus, MY throughput will be a fraction of the total bandwidth available. See the difference? Anyhow, I hope this helps.
cheers,
erotus
yes it is bankrupt. Now aren't you glad the debian folks still exist? just change the apt sources list to point to debian.org and continue to happily upgrade your box.
I've discussed this with some linux using friends of mine before. Debian is a non-profit company and Redhat is here to make money. What does that have to do with anything, you ask? Debian users upgraded from 2.1 to 2.2 with a one line command. That was it, that simple, nothing to it, and it was almost a non-event. If you're not understanding, they upgraded their entire box, every library, binary, etc to become debian 2.2.
Redhat and other RPM distros, could have serious dependency headaches in order to go from one version release to another. The main catch is, this forces people to buy a newer version to stay on the forefront of linux. If I could buy Redhat 6.0 and just 'apt-get distupgrade' all the way up to 7.0 and to future releases, I wouldn't have to buy any more releases from Redhat EVER AGAIN! Unless Redhat makes an apt repository and charges a subscription service, their older customers are not going to need to buy newer releases.
Conclusion: Debian is a non-proft organization. Debian has an excellent packaging system. A debian user can type in a command and upgrade the entire distro to a newer version. Debian has no fiscal incentive to push point releases as we all know. This is because stability and robustness are of utmost importance to debianites. How long did it take from the 2.1 release to 2.2 again?
Redhat is a for-profit company. Redhat has a decent packaging system. Installing a package may be troublesome if you have to find a package that contains the file that the program you're trying to install depends on. It is easier for most users to either buy/download a newer version to stay current. Thus, redhat sells more copies because people can't buy just one distro and upgrade ad infinitum. In other words, money may be the reason.
What do you guys think?
I believe you make a good point here. Even though I do agree that software patents are stupid, jumping in and beating them at their own game might just be the way to go...
What's the big fuss? I'll tell you. Why should you punish many for the actions of a few? Why should raid 1(mirroring) become useless or the network storage industry go under because the RIAA is greedy? Why should my life as an administrator become hell because people download music and I can no longer backup my data? I don't give a rat's ass about the RIAA, nor do I listen to "popular" brittany spears crap music that is out today. Why should the hard drives in my servers be crippled because the music industry is pissed off?
This has nothing to do with them. As an IT professional, I have no sympathy for them. As an IT professional, I resent any technology that makes my job hell! FSCK YOU RIAA! Just because some dork is downloading songs is no reason to cripple perfectly good technology. So, what is next, I ask you? I have some good examples.
I can buy a single container of Dannon yogurt and a gallon of milk and make a tub of yogurt using the Dannon as a starter. I can then infinately make yogurt from that yogurt. Is Dannon going to sue me because I'm replicating lactobacillus acidophilus bacteria? If I buy an expensive cook book and learn how to make a delicious tortellini dish and then I show others how to do it, I am a somehow a bad guy? If I share this information with ten other people and they in turn show others, am I going to be targeted because some Italian italian cook lost money on book sales? Where are we going to draw the line?
In the first of the two aforementioned examples, do you really see me having to sign a non-disclosure agreement stating that I will not use their yogurt to make more yogurt - In other words, I will not copy? There is already a piracy tax placed on certain types of blank media. Will there be a piracy tax placed on jugs of milk to recompensate Dannon because I have not bought their yogurt but merely replicated it by using warm milk?
The RIAA has become way to hungry for power. They are trying to extend their reach into an area where they have no right to interfere. The problem here is, if I tell people they can't share recipies out of a cookbook I wrote, I guarantee you those people would laugh at the idea. So what's next? Are we going to shutdown kinko's because pages of books can be copied at their facilities? Will libraries suddenly only store "hard to find" and "out of print books" so that Amazon can churn a profit? The answer is NO. Why should the RIAA be any different?
good point you've made here. We should really be opposed to the optional copy control as well.
Not so. Remember X is network transparent so that could mean the apps actually reside on another box across the network while the display is exported to the OSX box. The two computers have different times set and that is all.
Damn... I wish you could be modded up. This is funny as hell. Why did you post as AC? Who is the talented man behind the AC mask?
Man... If I still had my moderator points I'd mod you up. That is a very good point. I am American and I do realize that Americans are a very arrogant bunch. Microsoft execs are even more arrogant to boot. Microsoft will eat it's words.
You're right on the money. International businesses could take this as an insult and I hope they do. Microsoft realizes that their international customers no longer have to rely on them. A country like Brazil, for example, has talented programmers who made their own distro called connectiva linux. If more countries rely less and less on Microsoft and more on local distro makers for their software, then they can become self-reliant - something Microsoft fears more than linux. The fear, that people will no longer rely on them for software, services, or support.
I don't really disagree with you on your points here, but there is one thing about this that really pisses me off. I'm not saying that artists or corporations don't deserve compensation for their work. What I am saying is that laws are being skewed to protect corporations instead of the individual. Do you really think the police would go after people downloading recordings of amateur/unestablished musicians whose recordings are copyrighted?
Maybe the Belgian police are trying to make an example out of somebody in order to scare others and deliver a clear message, but then again maybe not. The point is this: Don't the police have anything better to do than go after downloaders? Why are they not sitting in their cars in the red light district? Why are they not walking the streets to insure peoples safety? Surely there has to be more important criminals to go after.
I'm not justifying the actions of those who were warned about downloading. I'm simply saying that if this example is setting a precedent of what is to come, then we have more to worry about than Napster closing it's doors.
"Or how about the hundred times I've asked where I could start from to be able to tweak the virtual memory management of Linux because I have certain needs to take care of. No one can tell me."
Well, I'll tell you. Or rather, I'll give you this link. It's a good start.