Well, that's certainly good in terms of survivability of the source code. But I was thinking more along the lines of infrastructure and disruption to Debian operations. The servers and networks that host Debian development, release management, QA, downloads, etc. Is there a convenient target there for Microsoft to attack? Or is it all so well distributed that it becomes a whack-a-mole problem for Microsoft?
"And if MS chose to sue SPI, I can think of some folks who would put up money for SPI's defense, and it doesn't look at all good for MS to sue a charitable non-profit."
They have plenty of standard defenses for that: "Defending innovation", "Defending their property", "Protecting their shareholders", etc. Plus, Microsoft's done so many despicable and/or illegal things in the past, one more really isn't going to matter that much. If Gates, Ballmer, and company were more concerned with being perceived as "nice" than being rich, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.:)
"I really enjoy when morons talk about Slasdhot as though it were a single entity, rather than a group of distinct people..."
Actually, Slashdot is really just one big giant AI system. All the so-called "users", including this one, are really just dummy accounts for the AI. You're the only human here.
"The left/right divide comes down to the division of Right and Proper..."
The left/right divide comes fromn the fact that human beings love a dichotomy, and it's a lot easier to get elected if all you have to do is point at the other guy and blame all the bad things on him. It makes campaigning so much easier. If you're a Democrat, you blame the Republicans, and vice versa. No need to actually address any issues. No need for the voting public to actually learn anything about the issues. Just blame the other guy.
Water follows the path of least resistance; I've noticed that culture does, too.
While I agree that getting hardware to work under Linux is often harder than getting it work under Windows, there are a couple of popular misconceptions involved here.
One is that getting hardware to work on Windows is easy for the newbie user. This isn't true, either. There's a whole industry that makes its living getting hardware working for Windows (it's called "IT"). The reason Grandma Ethel doesn't encounter this issue so much is that she buys a working system and never uses it for anything but email and web browsing. A pre-built, OEM integrated, turn-key Linux system would work just as well there.
The other misconception is that we can point the finger at Linux developers and say, "It's your fault". We also need to blame hardware manufactuers. If you buy a new widget from Conglomco Technologies, you'll find discs and manuals for Windows, but nothing for Linux. Call Conglomco and complain. If possible, also return the product, inform the reseller why also, and then tell Conglomco you bought a competitor's product because of their lack of Linux support.
No need to train anyone to be paranoid, just take a few mentally ill folks off of their brain meds and leverage their condition.
SF author Larry Niven actually used something very like that idea in his "Known Space" future history. The idea was that society had decided that anyone who was the least bit violent/aggressive was "ill" and gave them meds to make them a happy little camper. Not mindless zombies, just very passive. (That's a difference of degree, of course.) But there was still a need for a police force, to protect against threats both from within and outside human space. So the the police force -- the ARM (Amalgamated Regional Militias) -- were taken off their meds, or even given other meds to make them more paranoid. Only during the work week, of course -- on days off, they took their non-paranoid meds instead.
"You are aware that car makers release the new year models before the new year, right?"
Yes, I'm well aware of that.:-) I just thought it was especially funny because the fact that the "model year" was beyond the actual calendar year only served to highlight just how new his car was.
Which is not to say that the fact that I could buy a 2001 Subaru in April of 2000 isn't stupid. It keeps getting worse, too. We're fast approaching the point where the model year will be *two* years in the future. At this rate, it will be automobile makers who have a Y3K problem first.
"...I allow on the fly with one click, either temporarily or permanently, those sites which I trust and which do need dynamic client side technologies to work properly. To my surprise in 1 year and half I found few sites belonging to this category..."
I had the opposite experience, I'm afraid. I found I was enabling scripts/plugins/etc for probabbly about half the sites I visited more than one page on. Worse, many of those were sites I would most want that stuff disabled on -- e.g., MySpace. Eventually, I decided that I was effectively just browsing the same as without NoScript, but with more clicks and page reloads.
I suspect this has a lot to do with personal browsing habits and preferences. If you haven't tried NoScript yet, it's probabbly worth trying, to see if it will work for you. But, it didn't work for me, I'm afraid.:-/
"... if you buy from a smart car manufacturer, like Toyota, you can get an auxiliary input jack in even the cheapest car. I know as I own a 2007 Toyota Yaris and I regularly enjoy plugging into the car stereo through the aux-in connector in the console between the front seats."
Did it ever occur to you that not everyone has bought a car in the past two years? Toyota didn't start putting those jacks in all their cars until very recently. It's certainly not in my 2000 Camary. So I guess, by your logic, all manufactuers are not smart. I find this especially funny, given you have a 2007 Yaris, when today's date is November 2006.:-)
"I am altering the deal...pray I don't alter it any further."
Hmmm, that got mod'ed mostly as "Funny", yet when I read it, chills ran up and down my spine.
I think there's rather more truth than not in the parent post. Remember, Microsoft owns that "copy of Windows" on that CD; you do not. Microsoft just lets you use it, for a fee. That's the deal, and they reserve the right to alter the deal at any point. That's what the EULA says, and the congress and the courts have largely agreed with them (or been paid to do so; it amounts to the same thing).
Beware the Dark Side. Once you turn down that path, forever will it dominate your destiny.
"when they say "pray" in the Star Wars movies (happens more than once across all six movies) - what are they praying to, exactly? Didn't see a whole lot of religion in those movies..."
There's a couple of lines from the MST3K theme song which answer that pretty nicely:
If you're wondering how he eats and breathes And other science facts (la-la-la) Just repeat to yourself "It's just a show, I should really just relax..."
(Meta-Note: Don't take *that* too literally, either. The point is not to insinuate that you're not relaxed, but rather, to point out that not everything needs to be explained explictly. (Meta-meta-note: The fact that this itself needs to be explained explictly says something, too.))
This prevents JavaScript-spawned windows from having their title bar, address bar, tool bar, menu bar, status bar, scroll bars, or other decorations removed/disabled. Now I can move, resize, or otherwise twiddle with all the windows in my browser, the way I should be able to.
Me to web developers: They're my windows; get your grubby JavaScript off them!
"Four years ago, I purchased a Dell laptop for my son when he went off to college. It lasted all of a year before the hard drive died."
We've got a fleet of notebooks from Dell, Gateway, and HP. The hard drives in laptops all seem to die much more quickly vs those in desktops. I've always assumed it is due to the increased physical traumua a traveling laptop gets subjected to.
"After quite a bit of trouble with customer service reading scripts in Indiglish we finally got an RMA. "
When Dell sells you a computer, they also offer you a choice of service plans. If you go the cheap route, you get the guy in India reading a script in broken English for hours, and mail in service. If you buy the Gold support, you get a native English speaker, 1 minute hold times, and next-business-day, on-site service. Plus Accidental Damage replacement (you drop it, you break it, you get a new one).
ZachPruckowski: "Wikipedia works rather well at the core..." owlnation: "No... maybe... how do you know for sure? There's simply never any guarantee of that."
Where's the guarantee that information in, say, Britannica is accurate?
I'm not just being a smart-ass; it's a serious question. What, exactly, *is* a trusted source? What makes a fact, a fact? How much do we take on faith whenever we accept knowledge without firsthand experience?
These are age-old questions; Wikipedia just forces the issue into stark relief. We tend to assume that a published book is more accurate than some guy ranting on Slashdot, but what basis is there for that assumption? We've seen plenty of books published by people with an agenda, and even nominally objective sources tend to have inadvertant biases.
Wikipedia has a core policy of Verifiability. Anything which does not cite sources should be automatically highly suspect. Anything which does cite sources can be checked. You thus have the ability to make your own determination as to value, or lack thereof.
Wikipedia forces one to realize just how much we rely on the word of others for all our information. The error is not in putting trust in Wikipedia, but in putting blind faith in everything else.
"When you look at it from this perspective, well written, unbiased articles, in my opinion, hold a certain level of sacredness. And when you see it being defiled you can't help but to feel disgust."
You must be new here. Earth, I mean, not Slashdot.
"Now your OEM machine is detecting the 3-in-one inkjet-scanner-fax printer that came bundled free with the computer. Windows is now pompting them to install three items it has detected. Each one throwing up the New hardware wizard."
I've seen plenty of bundles that -- gasp! -- pre-install the software you need for the hardware to work. What a concept. Maybe you just keep buying crap?
"Not to mention the computer's system image was from 4 months ago, so they need to download 55MB of patches on their dial-up connection in order to be "safe"."
From the summary: "...its free client software is accused of acting like badware..."
This is news? Everyone I know has been saying that for *years* about AOL and their software. It tries to take over your system, has odd compatability problems, is extremely difficult to remove, and bombards you with ads. And that's when you *pay* for it!
Slashdot Mirror
Snarf!
"Thunderfox"
Ice Weasel!
Alright, alright, I'm going, I'm going...
"SPI doesn't own too many copyrights..."
:)
Well, that's certainly good in terms of survivability of the source code. But I was thinking more along the lines of infrastructure and disruption to Debian operations. The servers and networks that host Debian development, release management, QA, downloads, etc. Is there a convenient target there for Microsoft to attack? Or is it all so well distributed that it becomes a whack-a-mole problem for Microsoft?
"And if MS chose to sue SPI, I can think of some folks who would put up money for SPI's defense, and it doesn't look at all good for MS to sue a charitable non-profit."
They have plenty of standard defenses for that: "Defending innovation", "Defending their property", "Protecting their shareholders", etc. Plus, Microsoft's done so many despicable and/or illegal things in the past, one more really isn't going to matter that much. If Gates, Ballmer, and company were more concerned with being perceived as "nice" than being rich, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
"Debian. It's not a company."
What about Software in the Public Interest? Microsoft can still sue them into oblivion. How much damage would the Debian project take if SPI folded?
I'm not (just) being a smart ass, it's a serious question. I imagine Microsoft could probabbly at least cause some serious disruption for Debian.
"Information may want to be free, but infrastructure wants cash." -- me
"This isn't the place for your dreams. Here I will step on them... like this... and that."
*sniff* Hey, check your shoes. I think you might have stepped in something.
"I really enjoy when morons talk about Slasdhot as though it were a single entity, rather than a group of distinct people..."
Actually, Slashdot is really just one big giant AI system. All the so-called "users", including this one, are really just dummy accounts for the AI. You're the only human here.
Sincerely,
The Slashdot Overmind
Maybe all complex life eventually develops their version of Myspace?
The left/right divide comes fromn the fact that human beings love a dichotomy, and it's a lot easier to get elected if all you have to do is point at the other guy and blame all the bad things on him. It makes campaigning so much easier. If you're a Democrat, you blame the Republicans, and vice versa. No need to actually address any issues. No need for the voting public to actually learn anything about the issues. Just blame the other guy.
Water follows the path of least resistance; I've noticed that culture does, too.
While I agree that getting hardware to work under Linux is often harder than getting it work under Windows, there are a couple of popular misconceptions involved here.
One is that getting hardware to work on Windows is easy for the newbie user. This isn't true, either. There's a whole industry that makes its living getting hardware working for Windows (it's called "IT"). The reason Grandma Ethel doesn't encounter this issue so much is that she buys a working system and never uses it for anything but email and web browsing. A pre-built, OEM integrated, turn-key Linux system would work just as well there.
The other misconception is that we can point the finger at Linux developers and say, "It's your fault". We also need to blame hardware manufactuers. If you buy a new widget from Conglomco Technologies, you'll find discs and manuals for Windows, but nothing for Linux. Call Conglomco and complain. If possible, also return the product, inform the reseller why also, and then tell Conglomco you bought a competitor's product because of their lack of Linux support.
SF author Larry Niven actually used something very like that idea in his "Known Space" future history. The idea was that society had decided that anyone who was the least bit violent/aggressive was "ill" and gave them meds to make them a happy little camper. Not mindless zombies, just very passive. (That's a difference of degree, of course.) But there was still a need for a police force, to protect against threats both from within and outside human space. So the the police force -- the ARM (Amalgamated Regional Militias) -- were taken off their meds, or even given other meds to make them more paranoid. Only during the work week, of course -- on days off, they took their non-paranoid meds instead.
Yes, I'm well aware of that.
Which is not to say that the fact that I could buy a 2001 Subaru in April of 2000 isn't stupid. It keeps getting worse, too. We're fast approaching the point where the model year will be *two* years in the future. At this rate, it will be automobile makers who have a Y3K problem first.
And me, too!
Not that I'm stating an opinion either way, I just think I've got as good a reason as the parent, or most posts, for that matter.
I had the opposite experience, I'm afraid. I found I was enabling scripts/plugins/etc for probabbly about half the sites I visited more than one page on. Worse, many of those were sites I would most want that stuff disabled on -- e.g., MySpace. Eventually, I decided that I was effectively just browsing the same as without NoScript, but with more clicks and page reloads.
I suspect this has a lot to do with personal browsing habits and preferences. If you haven't tried NoScript yet, it's probabbly worth trying, to see if it will work for you. But, it didn't work for me, I'm afraid.
"Personally I think WebDAV should get the "Internet's Most Unappreciated Technology Award"
Too late, IMAP already won that one.
"... if you buy from a smart car manufacturer, like Toyota, you can get an auxiliary input jack in even the cheapest car. I know as I own a 2007 Toyota Yaris and I regularly enjoy plugging into the car stereo through the aux-in connector in the console between the front seats."
:-)
Did it ever occur to you that not everyone has bought a car in the past two years? Toyota didn't start putting those jacks in all their cars until very recently. It's certainly not in my 2000 Camary. So I guess, by your logic, all manufactuers are not smart. I find this especially funny, given you have a 2007 Yaris, when today's date is November 2006.
"I am altering the deal...pray I don't alter it any further."
Hmmm, that got mod'ed mostly as "Funny", yet when I read it, chills ran up and down my spine.
I think there's rather more truth than not in the parent post. Remember, Microsoft owns that "copy of Windows" on that CD; you do not. Microsoft just lets you use it, for a fee. That's the deal, and they reserve the right to alter the deal at any point. That's what the EULA says, and the congress and the courts have largely agreed with them (or been paid to do so; it amounts to the same thing).
Beware the Dark Side. Once you turn down that path, forever will it dominate your destiny.
There's a couple of lines from the MST3K theme song which answer that pretty nicely:
(Meta-Note: Don't take *that* too literally, either. The point is not to insinuate that you're not relaxed, but rather, to point out that not everything needs to be explained explictly. (Meta-meta-note: The fact that this itself needs to be explained explictly says something, too.))
"I'm looking forward to this election shaking up the entire political establishment."
We need a "-1, Naive" moderation option.
(Notice: Lower-case 'w' in subject.)
Enter "about:config" in to the Address bar.
Filter on "dom.disable_window".
Make sure every resulting knob is set to "True".
This prevents JavaScript-spawned windows from having their title bar, address bar, tool bar, menu bar, status bar, scroll bars, or other decorations removed/disabled. Now I can move, resize, or otherwise twiddle with all the windows in my browser, the way I should be able to.
Me to web developers: They're my windows; get your grubby JavaScript off them!
"Four years ago, I purchased a Dell laptop for my son when he went off to college. It lasted all of a year before the hard drive died."
We've got a fleet of notebooks from Dell, Gateway, and HP. The hard drives in laptops all seem to die much more quickly vs those in desktops. I've always assumed it is due to the increased physical traumua a traveling laptop gets subjected to.
"After quite a bit of trouble with customer service reading scripts in Indiglish we finally got an RMA. "
When Dell sells you a computer, they also offer you a choice of service plans. If you go the cheap route, you get the guy in India reading a script in broken English for hours, and mail in service. If you buy the Gold support, you get a native English speaker, 1 minute hold times, and next-business-day, on-site service. Plus Accidental Damage replacement (you drop it, you break it, you get a new one).
With Dell, you get exactly what you pay for.
Hello, sterility and genetic damge! Pleased to meet you.
ZachPruckowski: "Wikipedia works rather well at the core..."
owlnation: "No... maybe... how do you know for sure? There's simply never any guarantee of that."
Where's the guarantee that information in, say, Britannica is accurate?
I'm not just being a smart-ass; it's a serious question. What, exactly, *is* a trusted source? What makes a fact, a fact? How much do we take on faith whenever we accept knowledge without firsthand experience?
These are age-old questions; Wikipedia just forces the issue into stark relief. We tend to assume that a published book is more accurate than some guy ranting on Slashdot, but what basis is there for that assumption? We've seen plenty of books published by people with an agenda, and even nominally objective sources tend to have inadvertant biases.
Wikipedia has a core policy of Verifiability. Anything which does not cite sources should be automatically highly suspect. Anything which does cite sources can be checked. You thus have the ability to make your own determination as to value, or lack thereof.
Wikipedia forces one to realize just how much we rely on the word of others for all our information. The error is not in putting trust in Wikipedia, but in putting blind faith in everything else.
"When you look at it from this perspective, well written, unbiased articles, in my opinion, hold a certain level of sacredness. And when you see it being defiled you can't help but to feel disgust."
You must be new here. Earth, I mean, not Slashdot.
Ha ha. Only serious.
"Now your OEM machine is detecting the 3-in-one inkjet-scanner-fax printer that came bundled free with the computer. Windows is now pompting them to install three items it has detected. Each one throwing up the New hardware wizard."
7 98
I've seen plenty of bundles that -- gasp! -- pre-install the software you need for the hardware to work. What a concept. Maybe you just keep buying crap?
"Not to mention the computer's system image was from 4 months ago, so they need to download 55MB of patches on their dial-up connection in order to be "safe"."
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=61
From the summary: "...its free client software is accused of acting like badware..."
This is news? Everyone I know has been saying that for *years* about AOL and their software. It tries to take over your system, has odd compatability problems, is extremely difficult to remove, and bombards you with ads. And that's when you *pay* for it!