Somebody on/. once made a very good point. Developers should be forced to code on vanilla pentiums with 48MB of RAM. Thus, their programs will run quickly on those with mainstream machines.
That would be silly. I want all developpers to have quad SMP machines with a Gig of RAM and 100 gigs disk. That way they can develop and compile and debug FASTER. It would be nice if they all had a small machine like you described on their network so that they could INSTALL their rapidly developped applications for TESTING. That might lead to some optimizations being done that don't happen now. OTOH maybe it would be better if the KDE project started suggesting 400mhz and 256RAM as a minimum for a useable "desktop workstation", and saved time by *not* optimizing the code for old machines. It's an engineering question worthy of debate.
On my old machines (eg < 300 mhz) all versions of MS Windows after Windows95 have had a snappier user desktop application environment and GUI than anything Linux or X could do on the same machine. One exception for me was I found MS-Windows 95 and Office97 (or whatever it was back then) to be slower on my pentium 133 - X was faster because the environment was simpler: Emacs and FVWM. It is sort of odd that Win2K is even able to run on a p233 - let alone run quickly. There's something highly optimized about the MS GUI and highly *unoptimized* about it's guts. After all let's be thankful that Linux/BSD etc. can kick butt in a few areas: eg. ISS and/or Exchange server don't run quite as snappily as the MS desktop/GUI!
What's more compelling for me is that old machines (pentiums etc.) with Linux installed can run a nameserver, mailserver, and webserver *all on one system* and keep a small LAN of 10 machines or so more than satisfied. So maybe it's best to use your old boxen that way: as a Linux or *BSD server only or as a "desktop" but only for Win98/Win95, and then buy honking monster super boxen if you want a fast system under KDE/GNOME or X.
You can always remote the display to your old slow machine;-)
York University bought a truck load of them for financial systems software etc. At one point they even sold them at the University computer store in the late 80s early 90s. I remember watching someone quickly develop a GUI database browsing and query application in about 5 minutes using IB *on the store demo machine*. Compared to the cutting edge technology of Windows and Mac (hypercard was useful I guess) NeXT's were out of this world. The technology excellence and Jobs' megalomania both contributed to NeXT pricing the product out of existence. In those days a single workstation might cost 5-10 times a PC.... sigh
Later after the York U administration began switching people over to the advanced Windows for Worksgroups 3.11 environment (hehe) they'd show up in Lab in labs here and there - but unless you were like a comp. sci. grad student it was hard to get an account on one.
York never did have a firesale on NeXT boxen while I was there. I heard of people getting cubes (with the monitor) for 100$ at other institutions but I never heard what happened at York U.
And BeOS doesn't have vast well organized set of Spanish and Portuguese documentation.
At the present time comparing the usefulness of Conectiva Linux and BeOS to Latin American consumers is like comparing the usefulness of a desktop/server computer with a rock that someone has thrown into a lake and that has sunk to the bottom and disappeared under a thick layer of mud.
At home I have numerous knives, blunt objects, and potentially lethal chemicals that could be used to murder people. From TV I know that I can construct a bomb using the fertilizer I possess (well I might need a bit more). But there is no evidence I will ever engage in these activities and I mostly use my knives for spreading peanut butter and scraping muck off the inside of the microwave. Nonetheless, using the DVD CCA's logic I should be jailed as a potential criminal or at least tied up in expensive court cases for years to come *just in case*... Maybe I've had violent thoughts or dreams involving the use of knives? (I have but they were the result of watching too many movies "Falling Down" especially spawned a number of these).
What the industry fails to see is that what most people want from DeCSS is to be able to view, backup and edit/play with DVD's they *own*. They don't want to redistribute, sell or "pirate" this content. In the case of renting a DVD it would be nice to be able to view it on a platform of my choice. The fact that DeCSS is used in criminal activity has no bearing on these activities. In fact it still appears that no courts have heard any cases dealing with actual criminal "piracy" issues involving DeCSS at all and as the cases go forward it seems more and more obvious they have no understanding of the how concept of "reverse engineering" applies to what they consider "criminal technology".
What the courts need to ask themselves as a "test" perhaps is: "what's so hard about "pirating" DVDs *without* DeCSS?" After all one can just get a DVD burner/copier - sure these are expensive but you can make a lot of money with one;-) Or for that matter just watch the DVD on your sanctioned operating system or industry approved player and make a copy of it using your VCR.
Why do you need DeCSS to do any of this? What does DeCSS have to do with criminal activity? DeCSS is neither sufficient or necessary to engage in criminal "content piracy".
What these kinds of cases and issues do for me is to make me into motivated consumer: motivated to not consume any hollywood produced or distributed media (this is easy - in fact it is **soo** easy to do without that crap and save your money and brain for something useful); and motivated to support *any* alternative. Home made Ogg/Tarkin based media distributed over the net anyone? I'm in...
Let us all remember now what Francis Ford Coppola said about film as an art form and the day the "a fat kid in Minnesota makes a movie with a video camera". I will do everything I can to hasten the day when that art form can undo Jack Valenti and his ilk.
Most Americans like to think they understand what "free" means in that usage what's so hard about to understand about "freedom" when it comes to speech, ideas and technological development?
"wow... That's the second company who'd rather have visual basic support then protection... and the first one owns a monopoly..."
Adobe has a "monopoly" too, walled off by patents... it's just that it's on PostScript and PDF so it isn't as noticeable. They're going to get more agressive defending it too.
Dissolving that is into ideas. It used to be you'd patent a process or implementation method - but of course never a mathematical model or abstract idea - and then you'd go about manufacturing the physical product that embodied it.
But when more and more products become primarily composed of services and are "manufactured" in the digital realm of bits and bytes, it becomes difficult to see where the idea stops and the product/implementation begins. "Code is law"... it practically conjoins implementation and idea in one object. The production process is a mere adjunct, almost an afterthought: just a set of instructions to a computer to make one million digital copies of the digitally expressed "idea".
The quandary becomes (macroenomically) how to prevent deflation and (microeconomically) how to seek revenue and profit opportunities to shore up accumulation Both problems beget agressive solutions since capital must always constantly accumulate - or it dies at the rate of inflation and deflation results in a direct reduction of capital assets *despite* production. In other words for companies it becomes: how do we extend revenue generation out of and beyond production and into other areas like "branding", licensing, insurance, financing. etc. A quick perusal of annual reports will reveal that most automobile manufacturers have had numerous years where income from financial services and leasing of automobiles is much higher than income derived from production. The same goes for companies that build large buildings which can serve as collateral or income streams for the issuance of bonds, notes, selling of secondary mortgages etc. You see? Netscape's idea of making a product and giving it away to create opportunities for services isn't all that strange! (cars as loss-leaders for related financial and customer services).
To me this is a bit of a category error in the economy (and not in my brain! no! never!) brought about by technological advance. Or at least that's how it seems at this point - I may change my mind. To make it this clear imagine for example if - instead of "knowledge" or IP - another "composant" of production, viz. labour, was considered to be purely the property of the corporate interests that fund its reproduction. It is assumed that while your labour is being paid for (i.e. while you are on the job) - your employer owns what you produce. But what if your employer demanded a cut of the profit you make on your house, or a piece of the action from your kid's paper route? I mean after all they are the one that "invests", and "maintains" you and your family via your primary occupation so why shouldn't they own a percentage of *everything* you do and not just what you do while you are officially "on the job". Think of the vast legal apparatus that would be required to support this!
This is a bit like how IP works - at first glance it doesn't make sense and in practice it is a bundle of contradictions. After all, no company wants IP to be *totally* protected (say beyond the internal organizational limits of the firm) otherwise each production meeting would be reduced to an accounting of who thought of what and what percentage of the take on a particular product they were due etc. (a bit like the way movie production takes place!). But they do sort of want an endless upply of revenue for their own "innovations" - as I point out in other posting.
Given the crisis of capitalist production (yup the signs are everywhere) wherein it is more and more difficult to profit on the production of physical commodities (except in highly subsidized or regulated markets like agriculture or mining), and the shift of production into more and more "virtual" formats, the pressure to commodify fields of activity beyond labour, capital and land is intense. There is also a vast sloshing pool of capital (not well distributed) that provides ample motivation for legal services to pursue the protection of other than physical property by restricting the rights of competitors, purhcasers etc. -- in other words "regulating" markets in a fairly heavy handed way themselves.
But hey, at least it's lawyers doing it and not the dreaded gov't so we can rest easy in the belief we live in a "free enterprise" economy rather than a "state regulated" one...
The one cool thing this points up is the fundamental lack of efficiency in this kind of arrangement. The incapacity of legacy capitalist organizations to scale to the task of collaborative "knowledge network" based economic development using this kind of "regulation" (it's market based - sort of - but it is "red tape" nonetheless) means OSS has a fundamental advantage:
fewer lawyers to pay
faster to market
unencumbered "innovation"
no need to regulate licensing, just charge for something else.
And, yes, you can still make money. I mean how big, rich and revenue dependent does Dolby have to be in order to "innovate" for music listeners? How much bigger say compared to dozens of small Vorbis like creatures/companies? Permit me one more metaphor: mammals beat dinosaurs because then needed less space, less time, less food and were better at reproducing. Lots of smaller companies making less money may be more efficient and innovative and in any case means bad things for large companies with huge staff levels and lots of share-holders to piss off. The reaction? More aggressive marketing (often negative), more aggressive protection of IP, more aggressive pursuit of IP as a business strategy.... etc. etc. more aggressive payola and influence vis-a-vis governments around the world to have them step in and enshrine the interests of large companies in law and treaties... So I guess we shouldn't be surprised; at the same time perhaps there's reason for hope.
Of course on the whole dinosaur/mammal thing the meteor from outer space helped too... hmm....
So it's come to this: a company which makes its money identifying the numerous "computer viruses" that affect bug infested and strangely designed consumer operating system is able claims a patent on the idea of server-client computing (that's basically what it comes down to, it's so general) and the sober government "authorities" give their stamp of approval to this high-tech innovation.
Gotta keep that "knowledge economy" going.
Thank goodness society is perhaps not as stupid as it appears.
"you do something with a web browser and something happens on your computer"
Muwahahaha!!! I'm on my way to the patent office with your idea right now... just how difficult do you think it will it be for me to make them think it's mine?
... these days. In fact you are not supposed specifically describe any processes or technologies in a patent any more heheh;-) Errm heh And down is up and up is down and everything is double plus good!
I think the idea is a good one... and the weakness of copyright vis-a-vis patents is apparent. Music should be *patentable* not merely copyrightable. But "music" is pretty specific for a modern day patent application: something like "nice sounds" may be better...
I will tell you, though, that these little punks writing these things need to be dragged into the street and publicly shot
Me oh my. And what fate would you reserve to the designers of programs that enable this silliness? It's sort of odd how Microsoft seems to get off the hook *completely* on this...
At $2000, wearables might finally hit a lot of toylists.
Uhh or if your 18 then you could invest it now and that same 2000$ could help you retire 5 years earlier. As a donation to a worthy cause 2000$ could help build homes in areas of the world hit by natural disasters (where they are often cheaper to build) and pay for medicine where needed... You could also buy a lot of beer, or chocolate pudding and take at least 20 trips to *really good* restaurants.
Or of course you could also spend the money on a ***toy computer to wear***...
I guess it really just depends on your priorities.
depends a lot on having the right C libraries, the right fonts (tweaking fonts will help with stability on java an javascript) and the right X set up...
Most of the info on this can be easily found on the web admittedly it's a hassle but NS is quite stable for me and has been for years.
FreeBSD and NetBSD have admirable and excellent update and build systems (ports, kernel, etc)
Debian was surely inspired by these systems (which use CVS and CVSup)... Debian's *.deb/apt system may now have surpassed *BSD but *BSD is certainly worth mentioning.
So now large corporations want to alter *my* content and use it for input in their audience production process.
OK... as long as I can alter and reuse their content in any production process I have in mind. So bring on the TopText and MS "Smart Links" and let's clear the air: corporate media can have their cake and my cake and eat it too... but I get to have *their* cake and eat it too... err... too.
It's only fair (use)... heheh
Brushed stainless steel case & PPC chips?
on
An Amiga Round-up
·
· Score: 1
Yummy...
Hope they're available sans OS (and sans firmware wierdness) so's I can easily install my own (i.e. NetBSD and YellowDog;-) )
... of the music industry are legendary. Perhaps that's why 40 years after a recording has been made and 20 years after an artist's death I am asked to pay 30 dollars for a CD that costs the recording industry 0.10$ to manufacture - and this for an artist they no longer support, advertise, or even know about half the time. If I use my friend's copy or borrow one from the library and record it I might be liable to being classified as a "pirate", or being compared to a terrorist (see recent statements about librarians who, acting within their legal rights by sharing materials, are compared to terrorist extremists).
People like Jack Valenti have demonstrated they have no understanding of current technology, that they are inefficient and stupid (see his alt2600 deposition - it would be laugable if it weren't so sad). I mean this is a guy who needs more cars and houses at his disposal than whole towns in order to live "comfortably" and he is a small fry compared to others. In other industries (like coal mining, steel production) this state of affairs leads either to the end of whole industries (with mass layoffs) or to a huge reduction in output. But the backers of DMCA want to change the legal system to support their entirely unnecessary industry (Courtney Love's description of which is not flattering) and seem to believe their companies deserve to be protected. They are using their influence to achieve these ends.
I suppose it isn't surprising though - I mean in the US the oil industry names tankers after members of cabinet (a cabinet that is rabidly pro-oil and with zero support for alternative energies) and the government proposes changes to tax laws that will likely save just Bush and his cabinet over a billion dollars. Wealth and power is what it's all about. The wealthy need their power to feel safe about all the money they have and are naturally more greedy (since they have more stuff) - I don't blame them. It's when their greed results in anti-democratic law-making that impedes innovation that it needs to be pointed out and resisted.
I went there once in another life (~ 1,000,000 years before this incarnation) - and I'm telling you the place is small cold and there is nobody around (kind of like Winnipeg). Hmm now that I think of it I think I remember I was eating sunflower seeds and... doh!! I left the bag behind!!
The Internet is an important cultural phenomenon, but that doesn't excuse its failure to comply with basic economic laws," said Thomas Nolle, a New
Jersey telecommunications consultant. "The problem is that it was devised by a bunch of hippie anarchists who didn't have a strong profit motive. But this is
a business, not a government-sponsored network."
Well, I say, Thomas Nolle is a consultant living in New Jersey but that doesn't excuse his total and complete lack of a clue...
It's sad to think someone pays this guy for his ideas when they could be paying me to watch TV instead.
You get the drift. Something that can't be claimed to be the same as the competing products but still benefits from word association and is obvious about what it can do...
Slashdot Mirror
or I mean to make itself immune to the slashdot effect.
... sounds interesting. Be sure to post the results of your meta slashdoting for all to see.
hmmm
http://www.berlin-consortium.org/
....
...
OpenGL, CORBA and Unicode display server
We'll all be writing 3D super life like games in Python in a while
On my old machines (eg < 300 mhz) all versions of MS Windows after Windows95 have had a snappier user desktop application environment and GUI than anything Linux or X could do on the same machine. One exception for me was I found MS-Windows 95 and Office97 (or whatever it was back then) to be slower on my pentium 133 - X was faster because the environment was simpler: Emacs and FVWM. It is sort of odd that Win2K is even able to run on a p233 - let alone run quickly. There's something highly optimized about the MS GUI and highly *unoptimized* about it's guts. After all let's be thankful that Linux/BSD etc. can kick butt in a few areas: eg. ISS and/or Exchange server don't run quite as snappily as the MS desktop/GUI!
What's more compelling for me is that old machines (pentiums etc.) with Linux installed can run a nameserver, mailserver, and webserver *all on one system* and keep a small LAN of 10 machines or so more than satisfied. So maybe it's best to use your old boxen that way: as a Linux or *BSD server only or as a "desktop" but only for Win98/Win95, and then buy honking monster super boxen if you want a fast system under KDE/GNOME or X.
You can always remote the display to your old slow machine ;-)
York University bought a truck load of them for financial systems software etc. At one point they even sold them at the University computer store in the late 80s early 90s. I remember watching someone quickly develop a GUI database browsing and query application in about 5 minutes using IB *on the store demo machine*. Compared to the cutting edge technology of Windows and Mac (hypercard was useful I guess) NeXT's were out of this world. The technology excellence and Jobs' megalomania both contributed to NeXT pricing the product out of existence. In those days a single workstation might cost 5-10 times a PC. ... sigh
Later after the York U administration began switching people over to the advanced Windows for Worksgroups 3.11 environment (hehe) they'd show up in Lab in labs here and there - but unless you were like a comp. sci. grad student it was hard to get an account on one.
York never did have a firesale on NeXT boxen while I was there. I heard of people getting cubes (with the monitor) for 100$ at other institutions but I never heard what happened at York U.
And BeOS doesn't have vast well organized set of Spanish and Portuguese documentation.
At the present time comparing the usefulness of Conectiva Linux and BeOS to Latin American consumers is like comparing the usefulness of a desktop/server computer with a rock that someone has thrown into a lake and that has sunk to the bottom and disappeared under a thick layer of mud.
At home I have numerous knives, blunt objects, and potentially lethal chemicals that could be used to murder people. From TV I know that I can construct a bomb using the fertilizer I possess (well I might need a bit more). But there is no evidence I will ever engage in these activities and I mostly use my knives for spreading peanut butter and scraping muck off the inside of the microwave. Nonetheless, using the DVD CCA's logic I should be jailed as a potential criminal or at least tied up in expensive court cases for years to come *just in case* ... Maybe I've had violent thoughts or dreams involving the use of knives? (I have but they were the result of watching too many movies "Falling Down" especially spawned a number of these).
;-) Or for that matter just watch the DVD on your sanctioned operating system or industry approved player and make a copy of it using your VCR.
...
...
What the industry fails to see is that what most people want from DeCSS is to be able to view, backup and edit/play with DVD's they *own*. They don't want to redistribute, sell or "pirate" this content. In the case of renting a DVD it would be nice to be able to view it on a platform of my choice. The fact that DeCSS is used in criminal activity has no bearing on these activities. In fact it still appears that no courts have heard any cases dealing with actual criminal "piracy" issues involving DeCSS at all and as the cases go forward it seems more and more obvious they have no understanding of the how concept of "reverse engineering" applies to what they consider "criminal technology".
What the courts need to ask themselves as a "test" perhaps is: "what's so hard about "pirating" DVDs *without* DeCSS?" After all one can just get a DVD burner/copier - sure these are expensive but you can make a lot of money with one
Why do you need DeCSS to do any of this? What does DeCSS have to do with criminal activity? DeCSS is neither sufficient or necessary to engage in criminal "content piracy".
What these kinds of cases and issues do for me is to make me into motivated consumer: motivated to not consume any hollywood produced or distributed media (this is easy - in fact it is **soo** easy to do without that crap and save your money and brain for something useful); and motivated to support *any* alternative. Home made Ogg/Tarkin based media distributed over the net anyone? I'm in
Let us all remember now what Francis Ford Coppola said about film as an art form and the day the "a fat kid in Minnesota makes a movie with a video camera". I will do everything I can to hasten the day when that art form can undo Jack Valenti and his ilk.
Hollywood delenda est
... as the New Hampshire license plates put it.
Most Americans like to think they understand what "free" means in that usage what's so hard about to understand about "freedom" when it comes to speech, ideas and technological development?
Adobe has a "monopoly" too, walled off by patents ... it's just that it's on PostScript and PDF so it isn't as noticeable. They're going to get more agressive defending it too.
My other posts explain it all ;-)
The quandary becomes (macroenomically) how to prevent deflation and (microeconomically) how to seek revenue and profit opportunities to shore up accumulation Both problems beget agressive solutions since capital must always constantly accumulate - or it dies at the rate of inflation and deflation results in a direct reduction of capital assets *despite* production. In other words for companies it becomes: how do we extend revenue generation out of and beyond production and into other areas like "branding", licensing, insurance, financing. etc. A quick perusal of annual reports will reveal that most automobile manufacturers have had numerous years where income from financial services and leasing of automobiles is much higher than income derived from production. The same goes for companies that build large buildings which can serve as collateral or income streams for the issuance of bonds, notes, selling of secondary mortgages etc. You see? Netscape's idea of making a product and giving it away to create opportunities for services isn't all that strange! (cars as loss-leaders for related financial and customer services).
To me this is a bit of a category error in the economy (and not in my brain! no! never!) brought about by technological advance. Or at least that's how it seems at this point - I may change my mind. To make it this clear imagine for example if - instead of "knowledge" or IP - another "composant" of production, viz. labour, was considered to be purely the property of the corporate interests that fund its reproduction. It is assumed that while your labour is being paid for (i.e. while you are on the job) - your employer owns what you produce. But what if your employer demanded a cut of the profit you make on your house, or a piece of the action from your kid's paper route? I mean after all they are the one that "invests", and "maintains" you and your family via your primary occupation so why shouldn't they own a percentage of *everything* you do and not just what you do while you are officially "on the job". Think of the vast legal apparatus that would be required to support this!
This is a bit like how IP works - at first glance it doesn't make sense and in practice it is a bundle of contradictions. After all, no company wants IP to be *totally* protected (say beyond the internal organizational limits of the firm) otherwise each production meeting would be reduced to an accounting of who thought of what and what percentage of the take on a particular product they were due etc. (a bit like the way movie production takes place!). But they do sort of want an endless upply of revenue for their own "innovations" - as I point out in other posting.
Given the crisis of capitalist production (yup the signs are everywhere) wherein it is more and more difficult to profit on the production of physical commodities (except in highly subsidized or regulated markets like agriculture or mining), and the shift of production into more and more "virtual" formats, the pressure to commodify fields of activity beyond labour, capital and land is intense. There is also a vast sloshing pool of capital (not well distributed) that provides ample motivation for legal services to pursue the protection of other than physical property by restricting the rights of competitors, purhcasers etc. -- in other words "regulating" markets in a fairly heavy handed way themselves. But hey, at least it's lawyers doing it and not the dreaded gov't so we can rest easy in the belief we live in a "free enterprise" economy rather than a "state regulated" one ...
The one cool thing this points up is the fundamental lack of efficiency in this kind of arrangement. The incapacity of legacy capitalist organizations to scale to the task of collaborative "knowledge network" based economic development using this kind of "regulation" (it's market based - sort of - but it is "red tape" nonetheless) means OSS has a fundamental advantage:
And, yes, you can still make money. I mean how big, rich and revenue dependent does Dolby have to be in order to "innovate" for music listeners? How much bigger say compared to dozens of small Vorbis like creatures/companies? Permit me one more metaphor: mammals beat dinosaurs because then needed less space, less time, less food and were better at reproducing. Lots of smaller companies making less money may be more efficient and innovative and in any case means bad things for large companies with huge staff levels and lots of share-holders to piss off. The reaction? More aggressive marketing (often negative), more aggressive protection of IP, more aggressive pursuit of IP as a business strategy. ... etc. etc. more aggressive payola and influence vis-a-vis governments around the world to have them step in and enshrine the interests of large companies in law and treaties ... So I guess we shouldn't be surprised; at the same time perhaps there's reason for hope.
Of course on the whole dinosaur/mammal thing the meteor from outer space helped too ... hmm ....
I invite others to add further examples on this thread ...
Gotta keep that "knowledge economy" going.
Thank goodness society is perhaps not as stupid as it appears.
Muwahahaha!!! I'm on my way to the patent office with your idea right now ... just how difficult do you think it will it be for me to make them think it's mine?
Thanks, Joe ... you schmoe!!
... these days. In fact you are not supposed specifically describe any processes or technologies in a patent any more heheh ;-) Errm heh And down is up and up is down and everything is double plus good!
I think the idea is a good one ... and the weakness of copyright vis-a-vis patents is apparent. Music should be *patentable* not merely copyrightable. But "music" is pretty specific for a modern day patent application: something like "nice sounds" may be better ...
Me oh my. And what fate would you reserve to the designers of programs that enable this silliness? It's sort of odd how Microsoft seems to get off the hook *completely* on this ...
Uhh or if your 18 then you could invest it now and that same 2000$ could help you retire 5 years earlier. As a donation to a worthy cause 2000$ could help build homes in areas of the world hit by natural disasters (where they are often cheaper to build) and pay for medicine where needed ... You could also buy a lot of beer, or chocolate pudding and take at least 20 trips to *really good* restaurants.
Or of course you could also spend the money on a ***toy computer to wear*** ...
I guess it really just depends on your priorities.
Most of the info on this can be easily found on the web admittedly it's a hassle but NS is quite stable for me and has been for years.
FreeBSD and NetBSD have admirable and excellent update and build systems (ports, kernel, etc)
... Debian's *.deb/apt system may now have surpassed *BSD but *BSD is certainly worth mentioning.
Debian was surely inspired by these systems (which use CVS and CVSup)
Dewd you would be like soooo busted!!!
So now large corporations want to alter *my* content and use it for input in their audience production process.
... as long as I can alter and reuse their content in any production process I have in mind. So bring on the TopText and MS "Smart Links" and let's clear the air: corporate media can have their cake and my cake and eat it too ... but I get to have *their* cake and eat it too ... err ... too.
... heheh
OK
It's only fair (use)
Yummy ...
;-) )
Hope they're available sans OS (and sans firmware wierdness) so's I can easily install my own (i.e. NetBSD and YellowDog
People like Jack Valenti have demonstrated they have no understanding of current technology, that they are inefficient and stupid (see his alt2600 deposition - it would be laugable if it weren't so sad). I mean this is a guy who needs more cars and houses at his disposal than whole towns in order to live "comfortably" and he is a small fry compared to others. In other industries (like coal mining, steel production) this state of affairs leads either to the end of whole industries (with mass layoffs) or to a huge reduction in output. But the backers of DMCA want to change the legal system to support their entirely unnecessary industry (Courtney Love's description of which is not flattering) and seem to believe their companies deserve to be protected. They are using their influence to achieve these ends.
I suppose it isn't surprising though - I mean in the US the oil industry names tankers after members of cabinet (a cabinet that is rabidly pro-oil and with zero support for alternative energies) and the government proposes changes to tax laws that will likely save just Bush and his cabinet over a billion dollars. Wealth and power is what it's all about. The wealthy need their power to feel safe about all the money they have and are naturally more greedy (since they have more stuff) - I don't blame them. It's when their greed results in anti-democratic law-making that impedes innovation that it needs to be pointed out and resisted.
So much for the prime directive ...
Well, I say, Thomas Nolle is a consultant living in New Jersey but that doesn't excuse his total and complete lack of a clue ...
It's sad to think someone pays this guy for his ideas when they could be paying me to watch TV instead.
... like KDraw (oops "Draw" is taken).
...
err KDrawingTool KIllustrationDrawer ??
You get the drift. Something that can't be claimed to be the same as the competing products but still benefits from word association and is obvious about what it can do
Maybe some PHP javascript wizardry along with liberal doses of perl could easily turn a page into ...
extra bit:
[into] ... a forest of "fake" smarttag links.