The problem is, what kind of damage can this thing do when it returns to earth and on it's way gets sucked into a jet engine?
Weatherballoons are usually let up in area's where commercial flight is scarce. If we want to use this technology for relaying radiowaves etc. this will change.. so we have to reroute all commercial airtraffic to avoid accidents?
I don't think this idea would be viable in real life situations..
A company will think twice if it faces possible liability suits when something bad happes during the descent of the payload.
MS has done this same thing for YEARS without being retributed.
Now they are on the receiving end, they are outraged... in my opinion this is outright hypocritical behaviour... Perhaps they should learn their lesson. It is never EVER a good idea to try to look good by throwing dirt at competitors. The only way for them to go is to show they are better by creating better products and take a more modest attitude.
The LSB tries to standardize something completely different then POSIX does. It tries to standardize the minmum aspect that a distro must have to be compatible with others. Like mentioned in an earlier post, try to install a SuSE RPM on a RedHat system to see what the LSB means and tries to standardize.
POSIX is more on a programmers level where LSB and the FHS are more on the disk layout and library standardization.
For example: If i have a program for Linux it needs to use some libraries. There are different kind of these with every distro.. which library to include/use.. What is the disk layout? Do i install my package in/opt or in/usr/whatever. These problems are difficult to tackle when you write a linux program. If FSB and FHS are widely used and are really a standard one wouldn't have to worry about these trivial things..
The only thing this would lead to is a more open form of science. At this moment science is more and more looking like a business. Companies that are claiming a patent on a cancer cell etc.. that kind of thing should be open sourced to enable research for cures.. If things like this keep closed and are only used for getting companies rich then there is something fundamentally wrong.
If your research is important to others, why not grant them the right to use your work to further their goals. As long as they abide by the fact that you grant them this right based on copyleft and have to copyleft their research as well..
It is of course YOUR choice to release your work under the copyleft. And if you use someone else's work that has been copylefted you know what the consquences are. You don't HAVE to use their work.. you can always try to find another way to come up with the same solution or information. I understand that you are required to give citations, but if the original author does not allow you to use his work.. what then?
I thought, and correct me if i'm wrong, that science was to benefit humanity as a whole, not just some parts of it... If you dicovered something that you only want to use for your own ends you rob the rest of the world of something that might enable them to conquer certain situations just because they could have come up with a solution based on something you published. Maybe even something you would have never thought of before.
It happens al too often that a medicine for some disease does not work as they wanted only to find out by accident that it does work for other things. This might have implications to other peoples lives. What if they did never find out by accident that a intended cure for the flu actually cures someone with ebola. The companie throws away their research without knowing it could probaly save thousands of lives.
Damn... i didn't know about this... i wish they did this right in front of my house... you can be damn sure about me guarding it against city cleaners with my bare hands.....
To think of it that this is coming from a respectable company as IBM.. Thumbs up all the way for them...
It's not exactly necessary to use Copyleft. You can take all kinds of Open Source licenses. In your case for instance you could use the BSD style license... It allows others to do whatever they want without having to open source their work as long as they credit the original author/programmer/whatever...
The article is speaking mainly about Copyleft because that's more interesting to the writer.. Most articles/publications are copyrighted. This could become a problem if you want to publicize something based on that article because you would have to need the original authors consent. If articles are copylefted they can be used without having to ask for that consent provided that they give credit where credit is due.
It seems fair that the derivative article needs to be copylefted as well. After all, if they prohibit future derivative work they essentially rip off the original author of his brainchild. By using his work they are morally obliged to use the same kind of license.
It seems like companies such as LinuxCare were too early offering the now needed services.. It's nice to see though that demand for Linux is increasing. This should give new companies a momentum that they need to gain a piece of the market.
Of course it's important to stay levelheaded and don't try to be too big too soon as was one of LC's problems...
"What we're seeing is the maturation of the market," Schescherareg said. "That's really nothing but good news."
This is a very important point. As linux evolves companies are begining to see a mature market where wannabee's and showoff's are a minority. They finally start taking Linux serious. In the Netherlands, where i happen to live, Linux is still mostly used by academia or enthousiasts. Few companies are available offering things like support and services. One of the most important ones over here, Stone IT, almost dissapeared from the market. So hopefully some of the companies working worldwide will start lookin at local services or help so that the market over here can have a boost as well.....
Damn.. combine this with the $5k Terabyte array and you get a kick ass network for less than an average years salary... this should enable us to do some nice things for less fortunate countries with just a small fundraising....
As the article points out, the companies hooked up to the Wellington backbone are responsible for their own network.
It states clearly that "It's a normal LAN with client-owned routers at the edge. Clients implement their own firewall protection"
The costs will probably be very low... using opensource and all their overhead will be at a minimum. The costs a company makes is nothing more then they normally would have to pay for materials like a router and firewall.. it can be whatever they want..
What i am interested in is if this scheme would work in rural area's. What would be it's breakeven point....?
The reason why no-one is going after AOL/TimeWarner is because they don't own 90+% of the desktop which they could use to leverage their other products.. this is all about not having a choice.. MSN is tightly integrated in XP. The browser is prominently on the desktop as is the MSN messenger software. Opening Outlook Express starts a signup session with Hotmail, etc. etc. etc... Creating a Passport account is almost done automatically if you do not know better then to use what MS prescribes.
Now, í'm not a MS basher in the way most people do.. i am however VERY concerned about their growing stranglehold on consumer choice. Ever so slightly people are lured into a total MS dominance...
Ah well.. i'll keep on dreaming of the old days...
Why is it that Linus needs to patch these bugs for you? You can easilly do that yourself.. grab the patch from the net and run the likenamed program...
One of the strenghts Linux has is that you can do this.
The real issue here is that some (not all) developers disagree with Linus' point of view. The whole discussion is one of many that have arisen since Linux was created. It isn't "news" in my book.. just gossip and soap opera material...
The underlying problem however is big enough.. if Linus can't be quick to implement a new feature or patches that are deemed nescesary by others there will be a point in time the kernel will split up... one for small systems like PC's and PC servers, one for embedded systems and one for large systems such as the zSeries etc...
Perhaps that wouldn't be all that bad though. If they can maintain compatibility on the userside for running programs i think we should not be worrying about all these new possibilities..
Trying to fit all the functionality for all those different systems in one sourcetree would eventually become the practical problem. Why do i need to download all those sourcecode when i only need a portion of it for my PC..?
Anyway, i will keep on using Linux for the foreseeable future anyway..
Okay.... tell this to someone who does not care about it like my managers... they want to show the fscking to their o so important to impress bussiness partners.... so the backlight is important...
Anyway, the palm devices are recharged each week because at the end of the week most people put it in it's cradle till next monday.. but normally it could go longer without recharging... of course it depends on what's done with it. If the apps are pretty heavy on the power consuming side it's drained more quickly then normal.
But why would i need an iPaq for viewing movies? This is more a coolness thing then a nescesity.. (which i can dig personally;-)
Oh well... everyone's mileage may very of course... i know that some of the managers are not happy with it because of compat problems with Lotus Notes (company standard mail server and cliënt). But what can you expect.. the synchro takes use Lotus EasySync and MS-Activesync as a conduit so this is at the very least a problem causing setup.. (this and the fact that it is used by nitwits...;-)
The same goes for Palm devices.. but somehow the combination works better...
Why is it everyone seems to try and compare the palm devices with the iPaq... it's apple's and pears here...
The way i see it you purchase such a device because you need it's functionality. The palm can go WAY longer without recharging its battery while the iPaq needs to be recharged almost every day. The company for which i work has 2 standards on PDA. iPaq's for those that only need it for coolness factor (i.e. the management... ) and palm devices for those on the actual workfloor... the reason is very simple... the managment almost always leave the damn thing docked most of the day (excpet during meetings because they need to show of the damn things) while the people on the workfloor need to be able to rely on it's durability..
Off course.. an iPaq running linux would be cool enough to forget the low battery life..;-)
About this? It has some geek potential, but to be using it as a server? I don't think many of us would be doing this. Perhaps nice to show off but that's about it.... Or at least not put it to serious use.
Wouldn't it be easier to create a subsection for gaming news like the oné you have for security and programming etc...?
Then whining about the number of gaming articles could be minimized because they can deselect the topic in their customisation.
It's great to see that the gaming industry is doing it's best to influence the graph card manufacturers.. up untill now it was the otherway around so developers were having to release games that were not fully endorsed.
Nothing more depressing if things were not as you want them to be.. now it's easier to do... however... it also means the unreal engine will be the dominant factor in the industry ruling out almost all other engine's...
Can't wait to get my hands on Neverwinter for Linux... This would certainly be a game in which i'm interested.
I also noticed that they were going to release a Star Wars game... would that be coming out on the Linux platform as well? Because that would be great news if it did.. this would mean that there is a good chance that the games industry is getting geared up on Linux. With the demise of Loki this would be a welcoming change...
So.. when he was able to pay you, even for the 2 hours you played around he was good enough but when he couldn't anymore he deserved a severe pounding....
God forbids you would have worked those two hours on friday to prevent bankruptcy...
Sheesh.....
Now if you had other reasons like for instance he bought some nice Ferrari Testa Rossa on eBay with company funds i could have understand it...
I always make a copy of cd's i buy to be able to play them in my car stereo. That way i have still the original cd when some drugaddict breaks into my car and steals the cd's...
If this is going to be the standard i have to use the originals. So, when they are stolen i have to buy them again (if possible because some are limited editions). I can't claim the insurance company (i can but that would result in a significant raise in insurance fees.. )
Nice "protection". It doesn't protect me from loosing to much money does it..
It will however ensure revenue for the companies... so.. hire drugaddicts to steal the cd's from cars and the consumers have to buy them again... (if any company is going to use this idea on a large scale basis... i patented it...)
It isn't just the US. In the Netherlands we just had a 23% raise of the fees for ADSL. The reason in this case is that the service is losing money instead of making money for the price they previously had. Or so they claim....
I think it has alot to do with the auction of frequencies they had to enter in. It has cost our national telco (KPN) billions. That money needs to come back as quickly as possible so they just raise the prices for their other services...
In my opinion governements need to regulate the frequencies and infrastructure at a non-profit basis. This would allow more and better services (if of course research at those is done) for less money from different competitors. For ADSL in the Netherlands there is little competition. I for one can not choose any other broadband solution because in my town there simply is none to choose from. The reason for that is that all infrastructure is owned by the same company that also has the same kind of services to offer as their competitors. So for a competitor to penetrate the same market it's alot more difficult then if the infrastructure was owned by the government.. or at least, that's how i see it.
I guess that in the US it's fairly the same. The companies owning the infrastructure decides who, and who not, have access to their infrastructure.. creating basicly a monopoly. They can do as they see fit within reasonable boundaries of course. If there is no real competition prices can be set as high as they want.. and since they have shareholders to satisfy...
I didn't say it was practical... however.. when i read the specs at: http://www.maximog.com/specs.html#TOP i really see alot of things of which a poser probably would know nothing about.
Reading is difficult isn't it?
on
The Ultimate S.U.V.
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Why is it people are making comments about this thing making VERY clear that they did not read the site's FAQ or even visited the site?
The vehicle is not for sale, another one could be build if you have enough money. But i bet that there won't be alot of these things sold.. if people just look at the site they would have found out that this truck, bike, UAV, powerboat etc, was entirely build for EXPEDITIONS ! It isn't meant to be used as a recreational vehicle.
I do know that when i want to have my free speech i am obliged to let someone else with different views have that same right..
But where is that right in the Sklyarov case? Wasn't that freedom of speech? Say.. i reverse engineer a program (which is still legal over here in Europe) and i pay a visit to the US and freely speak about it.. i would like to think that my right of free speech would still be upheld...
In the case at hand (Yahoo vs France) i think it is something similar.. in the US Nazi's may do what they want.. in France they are not allowed to even give the salute... so.. when US courts decide that another country can't do this they should also take a look at themselves and waive the sklyarov case.. i believe that when it will be otherwise europeans will view the US with different eyes.. (at least for some countrys)
Now, don't get me wrong. it is not US bashing here.. i just don't believe that this ruling is just..
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, what kind of damage can this thing do when it returns to earth and on it's way gets sucked into a jet engine?
Weatherballoons are usually let up in area's where commercial flight is scarce. If we want to use this technology for relaying radiowaves etc. this will change.. so we have to reroute all commercial airtraffic to avoid accidents?
I don't think this idea would be viable in real life situations..
A company will think twice if it faces possible liability suits when something bad happes during the descent of the payload.
MS has done this same thing for YEARS without being retributed.
Now they are on the receiving end, they are outraged... in my opinion this is outright hypocritical behaviour... Perhaps they should learn their lesson. It is never EVER a good idea to try to look good by throwing dirt at competitors. The only way for them to go is to show they are better by creating better products and take a more modest attitude.
The LSB tries to standardize something completely different then POSIX does. It tries to standardize the minmum aspect that a distro must have to be compatible with others. Like mentioned in an earlier post, try to install a SuSE RPM on a RedHat system to see what the LSB means and tries to standardize.
/opt or in /usr/whatever. These problems are difficult to tackle when you write a linux program. If FSB and FHS are widely used and are really a standard one wouldn't have to worry about these trivial things..
POSIX is more on a programmers level where LSB and the FHS are more on the disk layout and library standardization.
For example: If i have a program for Linux it needs to use some libraries. There are different kind of these with every distro.. which library to include/use.. What is the disk layout? Do i install my package in
The only thing this would lead to is a more open form of science. At this moment science is more and more looking like a business. Companies that are claiming a patent on a cancer cell etc.. that kind of thing should be open sourced to enable research for cures.. If things like this keep closed and are only used for getting companies rich then there is something fundamentally wrong.
If your research is important to others, why not grant them the right to use your work to further their goals. As long as they abide by the fact that you grant them this right based on copyleft and have to copyleft their research as well..
It is of course YOUR choice to release your work under the copyleft. And if you use someone else's work that has been copylefted you know what the consquences are. You don't HAVE to use their work.. you can always try to find another way to come up with the same solution or information. I understand that you are required to give citations, but if the original author does not allow you to use his work.. what then?
I thought, and correct me if i'm wrong, that science was to benefit humanity as a whole, not just some parts of it... If you dicovered something that you only want to use for your own ends you rob the rest of the world of something that might enable them to conquer certain situations just because they could have come up with a solution based on something you published. Maybe even something you would have never thought of before.
It happens al too often that a medicine for some disease does not work as they wanted only to find out by accident that it does work for other things. This might have implications to other peoples lives. What if they did never find out by accident that a intended cure for the flu actually cures someone with ebola. The companie throws away their research without knowing it could probaly save thousands of lives.
Damn... i didn't know about this... i wish they did this right in front of my house... you can be damn sure about me guarding it against city cleaners with my bare hands.....
To think of it that this is coming from a respectable company as IBM.. Thumbs up all the way for them...
It's not exactly necessary to use Copyleft. You can take all kinds of Open Source licenses. In your case for instance you could use the BSD style license... It allows others to do whatever they want without having to open source their work as long as they credit the original author/programmer/whatever...
The article is speaking mainly about Copyleft because that's more interesting to the writer.. Most articles/publications are copyrighted. This could become a problem if you want to publicize something based on that article because you would have to need the original authors consent. If articles are copylefted they can be used without having to ask for that consent provided that they give credit where credit is due.
It seems fair that the derivative article needs to be copylefted as well. After all, if they prohibit future derivative work they essentially rip off the original author of his brainchild. By using his work they are morally obliged to use the same kind of license.
Of course it's important to stay levelheaded and don't try to be too big too soon as was one of LC's problems...
This is a very important point. As linux evolves companies are begining to see a mature market where wannabee's and showoff's are a minority. They finally start taking Linux serious. In the Netherlands, where i happen to live, Linux is still mostly used by academia or enthousiasts. Few companies are available offering things like support and services. One of the most important ones over here, Stone IT, almost dissapeared from the market. So hopefully some of the companies working worldwide will start lookin at local services or help so that the market over here can have a boost as well.....
Damn.. combine this with the $5k Terabyte array and you get a kick ass network for less than an average years salary... this should enable us to do some nice things for less fortunate countries with just a small fundraising....
As the article points out, the companies hooked up to the Wellington backbone are responsible for their own network.
It states clearly that "It's a normal LAN with client-owned routers at the edge. Clients implement their own firewall protection"
The costs will probably be very low... using opensource and all their overhead will be at a minimum. The costs a company makes is nothing more then they normally would have to pay for materials like a router and firewall.. it can be whatever they want..
What i am interested in is if this scheme would work in rural area's. What would be it's breakeven point....?
The reason why no-one is going after AOL/TimeWarner is because they don't own 90+% of the desktop which they could use to leverage their other products.. this is all about not having a choice.. MSN is tightly integrated in XP. The browser is prominently on the desktop as is the MSN messenger software. Opening Outlook Express starts a signup session with Hotmail, etc. etc. etc... Creating a Passport account is almost done automatically if you do not know better then to use what MS prescribes.
Now, í'm not a MS basher in the way most people do.. i am however VERY concerned about their growing stranglehold on consumer choice. Ever so slightly people are lured into a total MS dominance...
Ah well.. i'll keep on dreaming of the old days...
Why is it that Linus needs to patch these bugs for you? You can easilly do that yourself.. grab the patch from the net and run the likenamed program...
One of the strenghts Linux has is that you can do this.
The real issue here is that some (not all) developers disagree with Linus' point of view. The whole discussion is one of many that have arisen since Linux was created. It isn't "news" in my book.. just gossip and soap opera material...
The underlying problem however is big enough.. if Linus can't be quick to implement a new feature or patches that are deemed nescesary by others there will be a point in time the kernel will split up... one for small systems like PC's and PC servers, one for embedded systems and one for large systems such as the zSeries etc...
Perhaps that wouldn't be all that bad though. If they can maintain compatibility on the userside for running programs i think we should not be worrying about all these new possibilities..
Trying to fit all the functionality for all those different systems in one sourcetree would eventually become the practical problem. Why do i need to download all those sourcecode when i only need a portion of it for my PC..?
Anyway, i will keep on using Linux for the foreseeable future anyway..
Okay.... tell this to someone who does not care about it like my managers... they want to show the fscking to their o so important to impress bussiness partners.... so the backlight is important...
;-)
;-)
Anyway, the palm devices are recharged each week because at the end of the week most people put it in it's cradle till next monday.. but normally it could go longer without recharging... of course it depends on what's done with it. If the apps are pretty heavy on the power consuming side it's drained more quickly then normal.
But why would i need an iPaq for viewing movies? This is more a coolness thing then a nescesity.. (which i can dig personally
Oh well... everyone's mileage may very of course... i know that some of the managers are not happy with it because of compat problems with Lotus Notes (company standard mail server and cliënt). But what can you expect.. the synchro takes use Lotus EasySync and MS-Activesync as a conduit so this is at the very least a problem causing setup.. (this and the fact that it is used by nitwits...
The same goes for Palm devices.. but somehow the combination works better...
Why is it everyone seems to try and compare the palm devices with the iPaq... it's apple's and pears here...
;-)
The way i see it you purchase such a device because you need it's functionality. The palm can go WAY longer without recharging its battery while the iPaq needs to be recharged almost every day. The company for which i work has 2 standards on PDA. iPaq's for those that only need it for coolness factor (i.e. the management... ) and palm devices for those on the actual workfloor... the reason is very simple... the managment almost always leave the damn thing docked most of the day (excpet during meetings because they need to show of the damn things) while the people on the workfloor need to be able to rely on it's durability..
Off course.. an iPaq running linux would be cool enough to forget the low battery life..
About this? It has some geek potential, but to be using it as a server? I don't think many of us would be doing this. Perhaps nice to show off but that's about it.... Or at least not put it to serious use.
Ah well... it does look nice...
EUh.. yeah.. your right :-)
How come there are still people whining about it?
Wouldn't it be easier to create a subsection for gaming news like the oné you have for security and programming etc...?
Then whining about the number of gaming articles could be minimized because they can deselect the topic in their customisation.
It's great to see that the gaming industry is doing it's best to influence the graph card manufacturers.. up untill now it was the otherway around so developers were having to release games that were not fully endorsed.
Nothing more depressing if things were not as you want them to be.. now it's easier to do... however... it also means the unreal engine will be the dominant factor in the industry ruling out almost all other engine's...
Can't wait to get my hands on Neverwinter for Linux... This would certainly be a game in which i'm interested.
I also noticed that they were going to release a Star Wars game... would that be coming out on the Linux platform as well? Because that would be great news if it did.. this would mean that there is a good chance that the games industry is getting geared up on Linux. With the demise of Loki this would be a welcoming change...
So.. when he was able to pay you, even for the 2 hours you played around he was good enough but when he couldn't anymore he deserved a severe pounding....
God forbids you would have worked those two hours on friday to prevent bankruptcy...
Sheesh.....
Now if you had other reasons like for instance he bought some nice Ferrari Testa Rossa on eBay with company funds i could have understand it...
Ah... well... past times and memories....
I always make a copy of cd's i buy to be able to play them in my car stereo. That way i have still the original cd when some drugaddict breaks into my car and steals the cd's...
If this is going to be the standard i have to use the originals. So, when they are stolen i have to buy them again (if possible because some are limited editions). I can't claim the insurance company (i can but that would result in a significant raise in insurance fees.. )
Nice "protection". It doesn't protect me from loosing to much money does it..
It will however ensure revenue for the companies... so.. hire drugaddicts to steal the cd's from cars and the consumers have to buy them again... (if any company is going to use this idea on a large scale basis... i patented it...)
It isn't just the US. In the Netherlands we just had a 23% raise of the fees for ADSL. The reason in this case is that the service is losing money instead of making money for the price they previously had. Or so they claim....
I think it has alot to do with the auction of frequencies they had to enter in. It has cost our national telco (KPN) billions. That money needs to come back as quickly as possible so they just raise the prices for their other services...
In my opinion governements need to regulate the frequencies and infrastructure at a non-profit basis. This would allow more and better services (if of course research at those is done) for less money from different competitors. For ADSL in the Netherlands there is little competition. I for one can not choose any other broadband solution because in my town there simply is none to choose from. The reason for that is that all infrastructure is owned by the same company that also has the same kind of services to offer as their competitors. So for a competitor to penetrate the same market it's alot more difficult then if the infrastructure was owned by the government.. or at least, that's how i see it.
I guess that in the US it's fairly the same. The companies owning the infrastructure decides who, and who not, have access to their infrastructure.. creating basicly a monopoly. They can do as they see fit within reasonable boundaries of course. If there is no real competition prices can be set as high as they want.. and since they have shareholders to satisfy...
I didn't say it was practical... however.. when i read the specs at: http://www.maximog.com/specs.html#TOP i really see alot of things of which a poser probably would know nothing about.
Why is it people are making comments about this thing making VERY clear that they did not read the site's FAQ or even visited the site?
The vehicle is not for sale, another one could be build if you have enough money. But i bet that there won't be alot of these things sold.. if people just look at the site they would have found out that this truck, bike, UAV, powerboat etc, was entirely build for EXPEDITIONS ! It isn't meant to be used as a recreational vehicle.
Okay.. i stand corrected...
I do know that when i want to have my free speech i am obliged to let someone else with different views have that same right..
But where is that right in the Sklyarov case? Wasn't that freedom of speech? Say.. i reverse engineer a program (which is still legal over here in Europe) and i pay a visit to the US and freely speak about it.. i would like to think that my right of free speech would still be upheld...
In the case at hand (Yahoo vs France) i think it is something similar.. in the US Nazi's may do what they want.. in France they are not allowed to even give the salute... so.. when US courts decide that another country can't do this they should also take a look at themselves and waive the sklyarov case.. i believe that when it will be otherwise europeans will view the US with different eyes.. (at least for some countrys)
Now, don't get me wrong. it is not US bashing here.. i just don't believe that this ruling is just..
First it was SAMBA, now it's SNARE. What have these Aussies got with 5 letter 'S' names?
Maybe the same deviation as the Americans with their 3 letter acronyms...