Have you ever been blown over, or met anyone who's been blown over, by a semi? I doubt it. I've ridden in traffic for years, and maybe it's that I'm going fast enough, or that the semi's going slow enough, but getting blown over by other traffic has never been a problem for me. Strong winds off of Lake Michigan have made me nervous, but when I fall off my bike it's always because I'm a dumbass but the wind is perfectly still.
I work for these people: the Digital South Asia Library. We have tons of free stuff -- dictionaries and pedagogical stuff being particular focuses. I could try to pitch it, but just check it out. I'd actually be interested to hear what others have to say.
Before I wrote to him, I googled him to see whether he had the clue and decided that he does. So I figured that since it's the AP his shitty editor is the one who is clueless and careless, so I wrote him an email warning him about this. and asking whether what he meant to say was that the GPL doesn't allow payment of royalties.
He says that's what he meant and he is going to correct it. Before you get pissed off, think about what it's like to be a journalist -- you write a good article, and then your editor fucks it up.
Maybe I shouldn't be reading ancient computer books, but I have read some books that had code on a disk that you had to order from them, but when the book goes out of print and the author leaves his university, or the address otherwise changes, there's kind of nothing you can do to get the code again. At least if there'd been a CD (well, the book was old enough that it would have been a floppy) I would have had a fighting chance.
Even in a networked world, it's good to have CDs. If I go on a long trip, I always bring debian-powerpc-nonus disc 1 or 1, so I can boot off of it in case something goes wrong and I can't get to a solid network. I have to burn my own image, of course, but if I had an Official Debian GNU/Linux CD that came with a book I'd probably prefer that, just because it would deteriorate slightly more slowly.
And there's a lot to be said for having a frozen image of how the code looked when the book was released. Updates, and even full code, on the website, yes, but also, if it's like a book that describes a specific version of GCC or something, having exactly the version that the author used has its advantages (and disadvantages).
I think this is what he's talking about. Pretty funny:
http://wigner.cped.ornl.gov/the-gang/1999-01/139 6. html
I've been attending the USENIX NT and LISA NT (Large Installation Systems Administration for NT) conference in downtown Seattle this week. One of those magical Microsoft moments(tm) happened yesterday and I thought that I'd share. Non-geeks may not find this funny at all, but those in geekdom (particularly UNIX geekdom) will appreciate it.
Greg Sullivan, a Microsoft product manager (henceforth MPM), was holding forth on a forthcoming product that will provide Unix style scripting and shell services on NT for compatibility and to leverage UNIX expertise that moves to the NT platform. The product suite includes the MKS (Mortise Kern Systems) windowing Korn shell, a windowing PERL, and lots of goodies like awk, sed and grep. It actually fills a nice niche for which other products (like the MKS suite) have either been too highly priced or not well enough integrated.
An older man, probably mid-50s, stands up in the back of the room and asserts that Microsoft could have done better with their choice of Korn shell. He asks if they had considered others that are more compatible with existing UNIX versions of KSH.
The MPM said that the MKS shell was pretty compatible and should be able to run all UNIX scripts.
The questioner again asserted that the MKS shell was not very compatible and didn't do a lot of things right that are defined in the KSH language spec. The MPM asserted again that the shell was pretty compatible and should work quite well.
This assertion and counter assertion went back and forth for a bit, when another fellow member of the audience announced to the MPM that the questioner was, in fact David Korn of AT&T (now Lucent) Bell Labs. (David Korn is the author of the Korn shell).
Uproarious laughter burst forth from the audience, and it was one of the only times that I have seen a (by then pink cheeked) MPM lost for words or momentarily lacking the usual unflappable confidence. So, what's a body to do when Microsoft reality collides with everyone elses?
That's the caption on the last image on the story, a composite of the earth at night. I've always been a little creeped out by those images of a lighted-up Earth skeleton; I mean, it's neat to see the Megalopoleis of the world, and the way that all these tiny, weak lights come together to make brighter lights, visible from space.
But it's also incredibly apocalyptic, to me.
If my little 75-watt porch light contributes to light pollution enough to be visible from space, it really makes tangible the effect of the other kinds of pollution that that light must create. A tiny bit of coal here, a puff of gas there; without my (or anyone else's) thinking about it, it turns into something that's fucking visible from space.
So when the caption is "Last one out, turn off the light", all that does is drive home for me how even the tiniest decisions I make -- leaving the porch light on all night so robbers can't steal my luxuries -- affect the whole world.
Blimey, we're all killing eachother: cheerio, last one out, be a dear, turn off the light, eh?
Maybe the poster is saying that criticism usually has some grain of truth that praise may have overlooked. It is certainly possible for someone to make up completely unfounded "criticisms", but that is not the case with the c't review. They pointed out at-least-theoretical problems, and the developer said, "maybe, but we didn't write those parts." That's the flawed argument.
Oh, you're right. When I show people things in a gnome-terminal with the 10pt font that I prefer, they almost always laugh at me for expecting them to read those tiny letters, and I blow it up to 20pt for them. I used to have the PBG3 with the 14.1" 1024x768 display, and it *was* huge and majestic, and no one ever complained about the 10pt font. In many ways I think that Wallstreet was the best computer I've ever had, even though I love the compactness of my iBook. Nowadays, when I use my friend's Wallstreet (helping her tweak Debian on it), I am impressed by its size, and everything really is easier to see/read (even though the screen is a little yellower and darker). So I agree: there certainly are compelling reasons for wanting a bigger screen with the same resolution. But I bought the iBook because it was compact and subnotebookish. But it's so small I kind of have to hunch over it, so it's taking its toll on my posture.
For the love of God, don't you remember how to laugh?
I kind of wondered whether someone would say something like this. I love to laugh. I realize there's no evidence of that in my posting, but I do. Let me throw down two possible causes of laughter:
random, silly, funny shit that makes me briefly forget all the stuff that makes want to cry
bitter, angry shit that makes me remember that stuff, but reminds me that that's how life is
I like to laugh at ridiculous, hilarious stuff. I like observational humor, though aesthetically I often find it too predictable/cliché/formulaic. Probably my favorite observational humor is in David Lynch movies -- his dialogue is so lifelike it makes me giddy. But otherwise I love the Kids in the Hall, which tends toward complete comedic chaos, completely out of touch with any reality.
But my favorite joke is such a bitter, life-hating joke that is probably too offensive to put in a post that I don't want to be modded down. It seems to me the joke that contains the most truth of any joke I've ever heard, but it's the kind of 'honesty' that might make you want to kill yourself. But it immediately puts me through to the other side, and I see it as a life-affirming joke that makes me want to live every day to its fullest, as cheesy as that sounds. I'll put it at the end of this post, but don't anybody read it if you're offended by cancer jokes.
He's not trivializing an issue at all. His issue is that he's a computer illiterate and he's using absurdism to show how. This is how he writes.
If you're hoping he'll let himself be co-opted into a political agenda,
I'm not hoping that he'll be co-opted into my political agenda. The./ summary looked to me like it was saying Barry was on an anti-Microsoft political agendum, so I was disappointed somewhat and posted to clarify. And since he's writing on a topic that is one of my quasi-political hot-buttons, I can't help thinking of the politics that I attach to this subject. What if Dave Barry said that he was not just computer-illiterate, but actually reading-illiterate, and joked about his crappy school that couldn't afford books? It would be funny, the way he was self-deprecating, but it would remind me that some schools are underfunded and unable to educate their students properly, and that some people are never given a fair chance to be successful. Here's another example: I think George Bush is a doofus. I enjoy hearing jokes about George Bush's being a doofus, but I put them in the Dilbert category rather than the Lenny Bruce category. Emphasizing that GWB is a doofus makes us forgiving of his mistakes and weakens our other criticisms of him, and makes his crappy politics seem like an accident and an afterthought. But however stupid he may be, he is also powerful and also makes decisions that are making the world a much worse place to live.
I'm not saying that this humor shouldn't exist, or isn't funny, or could be ethically better. In some ways it is good to at least bring up that Windows sucks, that schools are underfunded, that Bush is a doofus, and in most cases it probably is better for the humorist not to propose a solution. But please don't blame me for thinking about the bigger issues when I read humor: I just can't help it.
Oh, the joke: don't read this.
What did the deaf, dumb, blind kid get for Christmas?
Unfortunately, this isn't "Someone in the popular press pointing out that Microsoft Windows doesn't get any more reliable or usable." Any more than Dilbert comics are "Someone in the popular press pointing out that upper management has seriously flawed priorities and is usually much stupider than the drones".
I say this not because Dave Barry is a humorist. It is possible for humorists, comedians or whatever, to really get people pissed off motivated, or at least make people think: think Lenny Bruce; think "A Modest Proposal". But Dave Barry and Dilbert are not that kind of humor. They are both the kind of humor that makes its reader laugh at himself, giggle at the funny things people do, the funny stuff we get ourselves into, without thinking for a moment that any real change is necessary. I've always felt that Dilbert is an oppressive force, because by making people think that incompetent management is normal and funny, it keeps people from bothering to actually demand competent management. Same thing with this column: by commiserating about Windows, by poking fun at the flaws that it has on every level, from technological to social, it serves only to further entrench people in a Windows monopoly. I'm sure this column is making the rounds at Microsoft, and I'm sure it is universally loved. I bet Bill Gates tapes it to his monitor, or invites Dave Barry to his next keynote. The message here is "Windows is crap, but there are 200,000,000 people in America who will NEVER SWITCH TO ANOTHER OS, NO MATTER WHAT. Ha ha ha."
This is not to say that humor necessarily trivializes an issue: maybe it's a distinction between "parody" -- which, we'll say, gently pokes fun without suggesting alternatives, thereby reinforcing norms -- and "satire" -- which, let's say, savagely disillusions people and has at least a shot at changing their minds.
Now we have three open-source/free software doc projects: The featured project, LDP, and OSWG. So much wasted effort by so many people who could do God only knows what if they were to combine their talents,
What are you talking about? Right in the summary it says "The project is not competing with existing documentation project such as the LDP or GDP. It will complement them, both by serving somewhat as a meta-project"
The project is about taking down unnecessary barriers, not putting them up.
Uh, it says in the abstract "(without opening a window).Who looks stupid now?:)
Yeah, but it's a decent solution. An old office of mine had the machine room in the same room as this insane radiator that never stopped working pumping heat, year round. When we installed a cooling/ventilaton system it stressed the wiring in the room so much that it caused a fire. So we just kept the window open all winter. It had bars on it to keep out the criminal elements, and glass in front of it to keep out the meteorological elements.
I'm not necessarily/unqualifiedly recommending that, but if you're already using tons of electricity to run all this useless equipment, you'll just have to use that much again to cool it all. Just keep a window open. I know the abstract said otherwise, but I think he should think again.
OK, developers benefit as consumers of others work, but they lose the right to profit from their work.
I am a developer of free software. My day job is developing free software. I was not looking for a job developing free software, but I got one. I feel lucky in this regard but I do not feel that my experience is unique. Months into my job, I explained to my employer that developing free software had become very important to me, and they understood and said they'd already been planning an "open source" release of the software I'm working on. When other people talk about how developers' making a living from free software does not work in theory, all I can tell them is that it works in practice.
My comment was meant to encourage you to learn more about GNU before you evaluate people's consistency with GNU values. The FSF qua GNU promotes, explicitly and semi-exclusively, software freedom. That is the reason GNU exists and that a large part of the reaason why you have so much Free Software available to you.
Unless GNU is a religous movement, then the whole point should be for "acceptance"
So you're saying that only religious movements prize their values above their popularity? I hope that's not true. The first thing that pops into my head that values popularity above all else is prime-time network sitcom programming. That's not a very good model for a society. GNU is not a religious movement, but it is definitely, and explicitly, a political one. The benefits it promotes are social and explicitly not technological. Yes, acceptance is a goal. But the thing that GNU wants people to accept is not the software, it is the values. It's not about people saying "I love this version of 'ls'! It can use COLORS!" It's about people saying, "I love this version of 'ls'! It gives me the freedom to use, study, modify and redistribute it, and no one can take that away!"
Their cause is not helped by zealots (from either the free or proprietory side) branding them as traitors.
Who branded them as traitors? The matter at hand is just MSDN's republishing an article that orignally appeared on Slashdot. It doesn't sound like Ximian and Microsoft are actually going to make a joint, proprietary release any time soon.
just imagine what it would do for acceptance of Linux if a company worked with MS to produce a reliable up-to-date version of Word for Linux
The GNU/Linux system benefits little from "acceptance". The important thing is that the software be free. If there are ten people using it and it is Free, then it is better than if ten million are using it and it is non-free.
I know this post is redundant/offtopic/flamebait. But somebody needs to get a clue. If all you know about GNU is what you read on linux.com.net.org.mil.gov, spend some time on http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/. GNU is not "Linux". If Microsoft developed a Free version of Word, that would be awful nice. But it would have to compete with real programs, like emacs/vi/OpenOffice/abiword, programs with an established userbase, longstanding reputation, and 90% fewer NSA backdoors.
By far the most interesting thing on the microwave fun page is here
It's about how the Yugoslav army used microwave ovens as decoys against NATO troops. Quote: "It was funny listening to NATO claiming to have destroyed some 20-30 MiG-29s when I knew that we have had only 16 of them at the beginning of their attacks."
I just got back from a week in Rome. I brought my iBook (running debian-powerpc (Sid), plus one extra battery, and the awesome "Road Warrior" travel plug adapter made by some Japanese company. I never had to use my spare battery: I just charged the first battery at night in the hotel. I took the iBook with me to internet cafes, begged (in vain) to connect to their networks, and answered some of my enormous email backlog when I had spare moments. On the plane there and back I also used it as much as my flagging attention would allow (KLM hottie flight attendants consuming the rest of my attention) and although I came close to having to change the battery, I decided to take a nap rather than work further.
Yes, the battery life could have been longer. In MacOS I understand it is. But I got plenty of value out of my experience -- and if I'd found any friendly hackers in Rome I would have been able to do the network thing. Anybody know any Roman internet cafes that will let you plug in to their network?
I got my first computer only a couple of years ago. In the first week
I had it, I spent about 48 hours (20 consecutive) on the GNU website,
reading and re-reading everything they had, and finding out more about
the Free Software movement. The ideals of the Free Software
Foundation correspond very closely to my ideals for the world at
large. Although I last wrote a computer program in fifth-grade LOGO
class, I decided that I wanted to do my part, and slowly made the
transition from MacOS to GNU/Linux (first LinuxPPC, then Debian).
I think the freedoms that GNU describes -- to use, study, redistribute
and modify -- are essential, and because of the hard work of many
hackers, they are now within reach. I knew I wanted to write only
Free Software before I even knew how to code. I now have a job that
lets me write Free Software, and I will never take a job that requires
me to write non-free software. Maybe it was easy for me to make these
decisions because I made them before I learned to code.
Well, during the transition period between MacOS and GNU/Linux, I used
BBEdit, a good-but-proprietary editor, on the MacOS. When you edit
HTML with it there's a little check-box to "Give BBEdit Credit" --
embedding a little meta-creator tag saying that you'd written the HTML
in BBEdit. I always had to uncheck that box, because I was not using
BBEdit in a manner compliant with the terms of its license -- I had
not paid for it. Later, using the GIMP, when I saved an image in a
format that allowed embedded comments, I saw an option to say "Made
with the GIMP". I reflexively moved to uncheck the box -- after all,
I had not paid for the software. Then I realized that I was still
using it in compliance with its license, and I proudly, and giddily,
left the box checked: Made with the GIMP.
I now use, write and recommend only Free Software. I do it because
I'm a pretty hard-line GNU devotee, so that's obviously why I don't
call it "Open Source". I worry that there might not be enough people
who cherish the freedoms of Free Software, too many who think that
it's just cool and convenient. What the FSF, GNU, and other Free
Software projects have achieved is amazing and incredible. I write
Free Software because I believe it must exist, and I want my actions
to be in line with my beliefs.
Has there ever been such a flagrant troll in an initial article? The only explanation for calling Sears Tower the world's tallest building/structure/whatever, without qualification, is (-1 Troll) or (-1 Flamebait). Maybe we do need a moderation system for articles themselves.
It fits all the requirements for a masterful troll, as described in trolltalk and on geekizoid. Masterful! Has a single troll ever gotten so many responses? I would call Taco the king of the trolls, but I guess he probably already holds that title.
Duh. I didn't realize it was unclear that I was talking about binaries-compiled-for-the-intel-instruction-set-an d-the-Linux-kernel-with-glibc. If we're talking about running a particular application on PPC as opposed to on x86 processors, and if we accept "Intel" as a synonym for "x86", then I think "intel binary" is pretty comprehensible shorthand. Yes, if you're writing in a crossplatorm language all you need to do is recompile, but the whole purpose of this exercise is that the source is not available and so it is not possible to recompile and so it is necessary to have this compatibility layer.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you ever been blown over, or met anyone who's been blown over, by a semi? I doubt it. I've ridden in traffic for years, and maybe it's that I'm going fast enough, or that the semi's going slow enough, but getting blown over by other traffic has never been a problem for me. Strong winds off of Lake Michigan have made me nervous, but when I fall off my bike it's always because I'm a dumbass but the wind is perfectly still.
I work for these people: the Digital South Asia Library. We have tons of free stuff -- dictionaries and pedagogical stuff being particular focuses. I could try to pitch it, but just check it out. I'd actually be interested to hear what others have to say.
He says that's what he meant and he is going to correct it. Before you get pissed off, think about what it's like to be a journalist -- you write a good article, and then your editor fucks it up.
Well, you can order online. Thus simultaneously supporting the Amazon boycott.
Maybe I shouldn't be reading ancient computer books, but I have read some books that had code on a disk that you had to order from them, but when the book goes out of print and the author leaves his university, or the address otherwise changes, there's kind of nothing you can do to get the code again. At least if there'd been a CD (well, the book was old enough that it would have been a floppy) I would have had a fighting chance.
Even in a networked world, it's good to have CDs. If I go on a long trip, I always bring debian-powerpc-nonus disc 1 or 1, so I can boot off of it in case something goes wrong and I can't get to a solid network. I have to burn my own image, of course, but if I had an Official Debian GNU/Linux CD that came with a book I'd probably prefer that, just because it would deteriorate slightly more slowly.
And there's a lot to be said for having a frozen image of how the code looked when the book was released. Updates, and even full code, on the website, yes, but also, if it's like a book that describes a specific version of GCC or something, having exactly the version that the author used has its advantages (and disadvantages).
http://wigner.cped.ornl.gov/the-gang/1999-01/13
But it's also incredibly apocalyptic, to me.
If my little 75-watt porch light contributes to light pollution enough to be visible from space, it really makes tangible the effect of the other kinds of pollution that that light must create. A tiny bit of coal here, a puff of gas there; without my (or anyone else's) thinking about it, it turns into something that's fucking visible from space.
So when the caption is "Last one out, turn off the light", all that does is drive home for me how even the tiniest decisions I make -- leaving the porch light on all night so robbers can't steal my luxuries -- affect the whole world.
Blimey, we're all killing eachother: cheerio, last one out, be a dear, turn off the light, eh?
I agree. That is the funniest post I've ever seen ever on Slashdot or anywhere else ever.
And someone said that to me once, about one of my posts. But it wasn't as funny as this.
Best wishes.
Maybe the poster is saying that criticism usually has some grain of truth that praise may have overlooked. It is certainly possible for someone to make up completely unfounded "criticisms", but that is not the case with the c't review. They pointed out at-least-theoretical problems, and the developer said, "maybe, but we didn't write those parts." That's the flawed argument.
Oh, you're right. When I show people things in a gnome-terminal with the 10pt font that I prefer, they almost always laugh at me for expecting them to read those tiny letters, and I blow it up to 20pt for them. I used to have the PBG3 with the 14.1" 1024x768 display, and it *was* huge and majestic, and no one ever complained about the 10pt font. In many ways I think that Wallstreet was the best computer I've ever had, even though I love the compactness of my iBook. Nowadays, when I use my friend's Wallstreet (helping her tweak Debian on it), I am impressed by its size, and everything really is easier to see/read (even though the screen is a little yellower and darker). So I agree: there certainly are compelling reasons for wanting a bigger screen with the same resolution. But I bought the iBook because it was compact and subnotebookish. But it's so small I kind of have to hunch over it, so it's taking its toll on my posture.
the 14" model is 1024x768. They seem to expect people to buy a computer just so it will take up more room in their briefcase/backback.
I was hoping the 14" would be at least 1280x1024 or something: it's really not out of the question.
I kind of wondered whether someone would say something like this. I love to laugh. I realize there's no evidence of that in my posting, but I do. Let me throw down two possible causes of laughter:
- random, silly, funny shit that makes me briefly forget all the stuff that makes want to cry
- bitter, angry shit that makes me remember that stuff, but reminds me that that's how life is
I like to laugh at ridiculous, hilarious stuff. I like observational humor, though aesthetically I often find it too predictable/cliché/formulaic. Probably my favorite observational humor is in David Lynch movies -- his dialogue is so lifelike it makes me giddy. But otherwise I love the Kids in the Hall, which tends toward complete comedic chaos, completely out of touch with any reality.But my favorite joke is such a bitter, life-hating joke that is probably too offensive to put in a post that I don't want to be modded down. It seems to me the joke that contains the most truth of any joke I've ever heard, but it's the kind of 'honesty' that might make you want to kill yourself. But it immediately puts me through to the other side, and I see it as a life-affirming joke that makes me want to live every day to its fullest, as cheesy as that sounds. I'll put it at the end of this post, but don't anybody read it if you're offended by cancer jokes.
He's not trivializing an issue at all. His issue is that he's a computer illiterate and he's using absurdism to show how. This is how he writes. If you're hoping he'll let himself be co-opted into a political agenda,
I'm not hoping that he'll be co-opted into my political agenda. The ./ summary looked to me like it was saying Barry was on an anti-Microsoft political agendum, so I was disappointed somewhat and posted to clarify. And since he's writing on a topic that is one of my quasi-political hot-buttons, I can't help thinking of the politics that I attach to this subject. What if Dave Barry said that he was not just computer-illiterate, but actually reading-illiterate, and joked about his crappy school that couldn't afford books? It would be funny, the way he was self-deprecating, but it would remind me that some schools are underfunded and unable to educate their students properly, and that some people are never given a fair chance to be successful. Here's another example: I think George Bush is a doofus. I enjoy hearing jokes about George Bush's being a doofus, but I put them in the Dilbert category rather than the Lenny Bruce category. Emphasizing that GWB is a doofus makes us forgiving of his mistakes and weakens our other criticisms of him, and makes his crappy politics seem like an accident and an afterthought. But however stupid he may be, he is also powerful and also makes decisions that are making the world a much worse place to live.
I'm not saying that this humor shouldn't exist, or isn't funny, or could be ethically better. In some ways it is good to at least bring up that Windows sucks, that schools are underfunded, that Bush is a doofus, and in most cases it probably is better for the humorist not to propose a solution. But please don't blame me for thinking about the bigger issues when I read humor: I just can't help it.
Oh, the joke: don't read this.
What did the deaf, dumb, blind kid get for Christmas?
Cancer.
I say this not because Dave Barry is a humorist. It is possible for humorists, comedians or whatever, to really get people pissed off motivated, or at least make people think: think Lenny Bruce; think "A Modest Proposal". But Dave Barry and Dilbert are not that kind of humor. They are both the kind of humor that makes its reader laugh at himself, giggle at the funny things people do, the funny stuff we get ourselves into, without thinking for a moment that any real change is necessary. I've always felt that Dilbert is an oppressive force, because by making people think that incompetent management is normal and funny, it keeps people from bothering to actually demand competent management. Same thing with this column: by commiserating about Windows, by poking fun at the flaws that it has on every level, from technological to social, it serves only to further entrench people in a Windows monopoly. I'm sure this column is making the rounds at Microsoft, and I'm sure it is universally loved. I bet Bill Gates tapes it to his monitor, or invites Dave Barry to his next keynote. The message here is "Windows is crap, but there are 200,000,000 people in America who will NEVER SWITCH TO ANOTHER OS, NO MATTER WHAT. Ha ha ha."
This is not to say that humor necessarily trivializes an issue: maybe it's a distinction between "parody" -- which, we'll say, gently pokes fun without suggesting alternatives, thereby reinforcing norms -- and "satire" -- which, let's say, savagely disillusions people and has at least a shot at changing their minds.
The project is about taking down unnecessary barriers, not putting them up.
I'm not necessarily/unqualifiedly recommending that, but if you're already using tons of electricity to run all this useless equipment, you'll just have to use that much again to cool it all. Just keep a window open. I know the abstract said otherwise, but I think he should think again.
"I love this version of 'ls'! It can use COLORS!" It's about people saying,
"I love this version of 'ls'! It gives me the freedom to use, study, modify and redistribute it, and no one can take that away!"
Who branded them as traitors? The matter at hand is just MSDN's republishing an article that orignally appeared on Slashdot. It doesn't sound like Ximian and Microsoft are actually going to make a joint, proprietary release any time soon.
I know this post is redundant/offtopic/flamebait. But somebody needs to get a clue. If all you know about GNU is what you read on linux.com.net.org.mil.gov, spend some time on http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/. GNU is not "Linux". If Microsoft developed a Free version of Word, that would be awful nice. But it would have to compete with real programs, like emacs/vi/OpenOffice/abiword, programs with an established userbase, longstanding reputation, and 90% fewer NSA backdoors.
It's about how the Yugoslav army used microwave ovens as decoys against NATO troops. Quote: "It was funny listening to NATO claiming to have destroyed some 20-30 MiG-29s when I knew that we have had only 16 of them at the beginning of their attacks."
I just got back from a week in Rome. I brought my iBook (running debian-powerpc (Sid), plus one extra battery, and the awesome "Road Warrior" travel plug adapter made by some Japanese company. I never had to use my spare battery: I just charged the first battery at night in the hotel. I took the iBook with me to internet cafes, begged (in vain) to connect to their networks, and answered some of my enormous email backlog when I had spare moments. On the plane there and back I also used it as much as my flagging attention would allow (KLM hottie flight attendants consuming the rest of my attention) and although I came close to having to change the battery, I decided to take a nap rather than work further.
Yes, the battery life could have been longer. In MacOS I understand it is. But I got plenty of value out of my experience -- and if I'd found any friendly hackers in Rome I would have been able to do the network thing. Anybody know any Roman internet cafes that will let you plug in to their network?
Warning: dogma ahead. But sincerely-felt dogma.
I got my first computer only a couple of years ago. In the first week
I had it, I spent about 48 hours (20 consecutive) on the GNU website,
reading and re-reading everything they had, and finding out more about
the Free Software movement. The ideals of the Free Software
Foundation correspond very closely to my ideals for the world at
large. Although I last wrote a computer program in fifth-grade LOGO
class, I decided that I wanted to do my part, and slowly made the
transition from MacOS to GNU/Linux (first LinuxPPC, then Debian).
I think the freedoms that GNU describes -- to use, study, redistribute
and modify -- are essential, and because of the hard work of many
hackers, they are now within reach. I knew I wanted to write only
Free Software before I even knew how to code. I now have a job that
lets me write Free Software, and I will never take a job that requires
me to write non-free software. Maybe it was easy for me to make these
decisions because I made them before I learned to code.
Well, during the transition period between MacOS and GNU/Linux, I used
BBEdit, a good-but-proprietary editor, on the MacOS. When you edit
HTML with it there's a little check-box to "Give BBEdit Credit" --
embedding a little meta-creator tag saying that you'd written the HTML
in BBEdit. I always had to uncheck that box, because I was not using
BBEdit in a manner compliant with the terms of its license -- I had
not paid for it. Later, using the GIMP, when I saved an image in a
format that allowed embedded comments, I saw an option to say "Made
with the GIMP". I reflexively moved to uncheck the box -- after all,
I had not paid for the software. Then I realized that I was still
using it in compliance with its license, and I proudly, and giddily,
left the box checked: Made with the GIMP.
I now use, write and recommend only Free Software. I do it because
I'm a pretty hard-line GNU devotee, so that's obviously why I don't
call it "Open Source". I worry that there might not be enough people
who cherish the freedoms of Free Software, too many who think that
it's just cool and convenient. What the FSF, GNU, and other Free
Software projects have achieved is amazing and incredible. I write
Free Software because I believe it must exist, and I want my actions
to be in line with my beliefs.
A MicroSystems Certified Engineer --- Sun's answer to MCSE.
It fits all the requirements for a masterful troll, as described in trolltalk and on geekizoid. Masterful! Has a single troll ever gotten so many responses? I would call Taco the king of the trolls, but I guess he probably already holds that title.
Hmm. Have I just been trolled? Fuck.
I guess the Java JDK is a pretty good reason for it, actually. If you go for that sort of thing.