Who said that you can't have free speech without having fragmentation? Who said that a single, unified interface means there's no free speech? The Linux kernel has a single, unified interface. You are perfectly free to change it - just don't expect the whole world to adopt your changes. You are also perfectly free to use *BSD or Hurd or whatever.
If the Linux application development community decides on one, single unified desktop interface, API, and inter-application communication layer, this will help Linux in the desktop segment. This does not end free speech. You are free to use whatever interface you want. It just won't be the interface that the world uses.
Note, also, that I don't necessarily say that Linux moving into the desktop market is a good thing. I have a very elitist attitude towards my favorite OS, and I don't think it's for the typical PC user. The strengths of Linux are what makes it unfit for the consumer desktop.
You miss some important words. And those important words are
if Linux is going to make it on the desktop.
And not
if Linux is going to become cool.
The fact is, what makes Linux really cool to us geeks is exactly what is keeping it from entering the desktop realm. Like it or not. It's like what Miguel said: there's nothing in Unix that sets policy. If KDE is out there, and GNOME is out there, there is going to be a KDE set of policies, and a GNOME set of policies, and devolopers are going to have to choose between one or the other, and the end users are going to lose their enthusiasm quicker than you can say "embrace and extend."
One of the main points of your argument in this case is that DeCSS is code, and code is speech, protected by the 1st Amendment. I agree. But I think I may draw a distinction between code that describes an algorithm, and an encryption/decryption key used by that algorithm. What makes DeCSS go is the stolen key. Could you not argue that the DeCSS "engine," that portion of the program that takes a key and uses it to descramble CSS is "speech," and the key itself is merely stolen property, owned by the DVD consortium?
As a computer programmer I am very concerned that my right to code whatever I please is protected. By making this distiction (between algorithm and key), am I not preserving that right while at the same time protecting the intellectual property of the consortium? How would the situation change if someone developed a key-generating algorithm?
I think it's the whole way-too-steeped-in-the-free-software-movement thing. They have a directory in their distribution called "non-free." I mean, for one thing, it shows that they think that any commercial software should be segregated and chastised, or something, for being commercial. Furthermore, the term "non-free" just smacks of politically-correct jargon. Why not just call it "commercial?"
There's something about Debian that is generally irritating in the same way that ultra-leftist politically-correct activists or far-right religious conservatives are also irritating. It's difficult to put a finger on, but I know what you are talking about.
BTW, this has nothing to do with the quality of the distribution, which, apart from dselect/dpkg, is pretty good.
tHESE R TEH WORDZ TAHT TEH ANOYNMUS CWOARD ROTE I PUT TAHEM IN TEH ITALCIS SO TATH YOU KNOWS THAY R tEH quOTERZ
do you know jeff k?
No, not at all. Is he one of your friends or associates? I understand that today, in the new digital age, boundaries evaporate and distances seem shorter, making it entirely likely that I could know him as well, but why do you ask?
I'm sure there were several Jedi vs. Sith epic war-thingies in the several hundred generations before TPM. It would be fun to take over teh galaxy as Darth Axel ok bye.
Why is Debian such a puppet of everything that RMS says? Contrary to popular opinion, RMS is not the final arbiter of what open source - er, I'm sorry, free-as-in-speech - should do. I know this will come across as "flamebait," or whatever, but it irks me.
Open source should be about co-operation and mutual benefit of all parties and developers, not about getting into pissing matches over licenses and what not. RMS thinks that the GPL is the only open-source license there is, and if it's not GPL it might as well come from Microsoft. He has an ego the size of the Emacs source tarball, and it annoys me that he has the clout that he has ok bye.
the simple answer to this is that the fab should embed a MHz rating into the chip, that can then be read by the BIOS. SO, remarking is no longer a problem, but enthusiasts who still want to overclock will be able to. then during POST what you see is
CPU: Geniune AMD Athlon 900 MHz CPU Clock: 1000 MHz
the idea that AMD and teh chipzilla multiplier-lock their cpus to "protect consumers" is a load of bs that they dump on us. the reason that they mulitplier-lock is so that if enthusiasts want 1000 MHz, they have to purchase the 1000 MHz part ok bye.
mheh. my friend in SV tried to flash his BIOS while on the phone with me. he goes
"ok, the progress bar is going across.... almost done.... shit."
after toasting his BIOS, he ended up with teh $95 useless pcb. heh. so he took it back to fry's and told them it didn't work right and they gave him a new one.;-)
i was a bit more fortunate. i expect that a BIOS revision from three weeks ago can understand 80 GB drives ok bye.
can you say BUGGY???? those highpoint ATA 66 and ATA 100 controllers that come with teh ABIT mobos suck and blow at once. spend an extra us$30 for a promise ATA card that actually works. not as good as scsi, but damned fast and damned cheap and stable. to do ATA raid on teh promise card go here:
>A word of warning, there are baboons hanging out >here, and they appear to be into gay sex. They >keep propositioning me, no matter how many times >I say no.
perhaps if you used teh deodorant they would stop bugging you ok bye.
Slashdot Mirror
Axel
Who said that you can't have free speech without having fragmentation? Who said that a single, unified interface means there's no free speech? The Linux kernel has a single, unified interface. You are perfectly free to change it - just don't expect the whole world to adopt your changes. You are also perfectly free to use *BSD or Hurd or whatever.
If the Linux application development community decides on one, single unified desktop interface, API, and inter-application communication layer, this will help Linux in the desktop segment. This does not end free speech. You are free to use whatever interface you want. It just won't be the interface that the world uses.
Note, also, that I don't necessarily say that Linux moving into the desktop market is a good thing. I have a very elitist attitude towards my favorite OS, and I don't think it's for the typical PC user. The strengths of Linux are what makes it unfit for the consumer desktop.
HTH.
Axel
if Linux is going to make it on the desktop.
And not
if Linux is going to become cool.
The fact is, what makes Linux really cool to us geeks is exactly what is keeping it from entering the desktop realm. Like it or not. It's like what Miguel said: there's nothing in Unix that sets policy. If KDE is out there, and GNOME is out there, there is going to be a KDE set of policies, and a GNOME set of policies, and devolopers are going to have to choose between one or the other, and the end users are going to lose their enthusiasm quicker than you can say "embrace and extend."
HTH.
Axel
If Linux is going to make it on the desktop, there needs to be a single, unified desktop layer. Fragmentation is bad.
Axel
troll.
Axel
The answer should be obvious. HTH.
Axel
As a computer programmer I am very concerned that my right to code whatever I please is protected. By making this distiction (between algorithm and key), am I not preserving that right while at the same time protecting the intellectual property of the consortium? How would the situation change if someone developed a key-generating algorithm?
Thank you.
Axel
Porting Office to a non-MS OS that runs on PCs is... I will stop short of saying "suicide" ...a really bad idea for Microsoft's "business model."
This /. luser is not fooled.
Axel
There's something about Debian that is generally irritating in the same way that ultra-leftist politically-correct activists or far-right religious conservatives are also irritating. It's difficult to put a finger on, but I know what you are talking about.
BTW, this has nothing to do with the quality of the distribution, which, apart from dselect/dpkg, is pretty good.
Axel
loev,
do you know jeff k?
No, not at all. Is he one of your friends or associates? I understand that today, in the new digital age, boundaries evaporate and distances seem shorter, making it entirely likely that I could know him as well, but why do you ask?
loev,
loev,
Open source should be about co-operation and mutual benefit of all parties and developers, not about getting into pissing matches over licenses and what not. RMS thinks that the GPL is the only open-source license there is, and if it's not GPL it might as well come from Microsoft. He has an ego the size of the Emacs source tarball, and it annoys me that he has the clout that he has ok bye.
loev,
oh shit i can't remember if cum takes teh ablative or teh accusative ok bye.
loev,
CPU: Geniune AMD Athlon 900 MHz
CPU Clock: 1000 MHz
the idea that AMD and teh chipzilla multiplier-lock their cpus to "protect consumers" is a load of bs that they dump on us. the reason that they mulitplier-lock is so that if enthusiasts want 1000 MHz, they have to purchase the 1000 MHz part ok bye.
loev,
i think that lord macdonald in scotland should sue the panties off of that stupid-ass red-haired clown ok bye.
loev,
Dothead.
loev,
tu stultus es.-IneptE
loev,
loev,
loev,
loev,
"ok, the progress bar is going across.... almost done.... shit."
after toasting his BIOS, he ended up with teh $95 useless pcb. heh. so he took it back to fry's and told them it didn't work right and they gave him a new one.
i was a bit more fortunate. i expect that a BIOS revision from three weeks ago can understand 80 GB drives ok bye.
loev,
can you say BUGGY???? those highpoint ATA 66 and ATA 100 controllers that come with teh ABIT mobos suck and blow at once. spend an extra us$30 for a promise ATA card that actually works. not as good as scsi, but damned fast and damned cheap and stable. to do ATA raid on teh promise card go here:
http://detonate.net/raid/
have fun ok bye.
loev,
ittm four surface, not four platter. unless they don't read from the bottom side of the platter, or something.
also, i think it would be hard to fit four platters in a 1" high drive, but i'm only guessing ok bye.
loev,
>>Fuckhead.
>shpxurnq
zrbj
>(You guys do get around, don't you? :)
it is teh good work when you can get it.
>A word of warning, there are baboons hanging out
>here, and they appear to be into gay sex. They
>keep propositioning me, no matter how many times
>I say no.
perhaps if you used teh deodorant they would stop bugging you ok bye.
loev,