I'm having a really hard time figuring out what you're trying to say, but as far as I can tell, you're completely wrong. You're right about this being obscure, since there are very few proprietary applications for Linux/PPC, but you say "Now with this port it will rn those Linx propriatery apps writen for the x86 architectre." As if. It's going to take a lot more than a compatibility layer to run x86 binaries on Linux/PPC. All that this will do is enable people to run
Netscape
Applix
Civilization: Call to Power
Myth II
Intel binary compatibility is quite another matter, and I don't think anyone is working on it (non-commercially). So if I understand you correctly, this is much, much more obscure than you think.
"I think far and away the vast majority of the public applaud the Tampa Police's efforts to keep Super Bowl XXXV as safe as we did," Durkin said. "If something happened at Super Bowl XXXV, I think the press would have been screaming that we didn't do all that we could to keep it safe. Or maybe not them, but the public."
Because the press is obedient enough not to scream when people fuck up?
Man, there were some pretty wicked "fusion reactions" going on in my Sun (SparcStation 10) a couple of months ago. Every time it booted it had an asynchronous fault, and would just keep rebooting, for hours at a time. I couldn't even apply some recommended patches because logins tended to trigger this async fault as well. We just bought a new Ultra to replace it, but I am hopeful that data from the SNO might help me figure out what the problem is and get the machine back in some limited service. I checked for neutrino emissions in OpenBoot but it was a dead end.
The nightmare that immediately jumped into my mind is that this "protection layer" could come to involve brief advertisements from our favorite corporations, prepended to the beginning of every song. Otherwise, this seems like not much of a problem or hindrance--if the idea is to keep people from burning MP3s to CDs, there's nothing to keep them from writing dummy device drivers as an intermediate step. More power to them.
In other words, Microsoft representatives warned, "anyone who adds or innovates under the GPL
agrees to make the resulting code, in its entirety, available for all to use... [which] might constrain innovating stemming from
taxpayer-funded software development."
"...Because if you are taxpaying, you are not deserving of the innovating stemming from your tax-paying-paid developing, which, because, uh, if everyone can be using and adding to the source coding, this innovating will be belonging to the tax-paying, and not to whomever the tax-paying are paying to be developing.
"And then maybe your base will not be belong to us," he added.
Since when is the purpose of a "love interest" to "pull in women"? Are you stupid? If love interest pulls in anyone, it's gentlemen like myself, who hope to catch a glimpse of booty. And booty is hard science if ever there was such a thing. Don't be a snob.
If you'd taken the time to read the article, you would know that the title was spelled correctly.
"Global" [the subject of the sentence] is "warming" [the main verb] "worse" [not a comparative but a substantive adjective, referring to bad people] "then thought" [after that, Global is warming thought].
The article is about Global, a company in California that is providing free heat to cold convicts, but has so much extra power that they have decided to start "warming" cold smart people as well.
I hate mouses. Everytime I'm on my Solaris workstation and have to move my hand over twelve inches just to paste the text I've highlighted, I look longingly at my LinuxPPC Powerbook G3 and smile at its clever mousebutton emulation, which lets my hands stay on the keyboard where they belong. I recognize the value of multiple mousebuttons, and am very glad that they exist, but I hate using the mouse and hate losing valuable seconds when I have to move between the two input methods. Oh, that's right: Suns have those cut/paste/copy buttons off to the left side of the keyboard. It's still too far to travel. I use emacs so my fingers can stay on the keyboard for eight hours straight. I also have CTS.
>You must remember that while they aplude the free
>distrobution of ideas in the film the company >behind it all (MGM)is one of the groups sueing >2600 over DeCSS. Now if thats not hypocricy i dont >know what is.
That is a good point. I think it falls short of hypocrisy, though: it's not as though screenplays are written by teams of studio lawyers. Well, actually, it can be kind of like that. But the studios are sometimes just distributors of a film that was made independently, though that is not the case with this movie. The screenwriter is credited as Howard Franklin, who also has a credit for "The Man Who Knew Too Little", and who directed "Larger than life." These movies sound pretty bad, and I've never seen them. He seems to have some sort of MGM contract and also has random producer credits and stuff. Hmm, actually, there might not be many things closer to a puppet of the studio than Howard Franklin. But in light of his other credits, I think it's more fair to call it "stupid" than "hypocritical" -- it doesn't seem to me that MGM is trying to align themselves with Free Software hackers, which is why the movie is not good Free Software publicity. Howard Franklin probably doesn't know a whole hell of a lot about DeCSS, if anything, and since he's clearly not a Free Software ideologue he'd probably prefer that the studios had their way. It might be hypocritical if the studio'd received a script treatment from someone and then had Howard Franklin develop it and did not give credit to the person who had the idea. At some point one has to separate the film-as-art or film-as-entertainment from the people who made it. RMS might disagree, and I kind of disagree too, but a movie does have value on its own, independent of the circumstances of its production.
In light of Antitrust's website, one might again cry hypocrisy, what with their (very vapid) interviews with maddog and Miguel. But that's just the work of somebody in the MGM's web department. An organization the size of a studio has all kinds of people working for it, and it's pretty simpleminded to say that the entire movie is bullshit just because people at the top are doing a terrible, terrible thing. At the very least it has entertainment value. When I said I clapped without noticing, I meant to suggest that it was a mindless kind of fun, though empty of real ideological value.
Antitrust is not great cinema. Neither is it great Free Software propaganda. Neither do all of its main plot points make a whole lot of sense.
That said, I loved Antitrust. I loved it loved it loved it. It was refreshingly unselfconscious and un-"ironic". I was hoping to see geeks in the audience but it looked like the main draw for the people in my theatre was Ryan Phillippe.
This posting might have mild spoilers, but nothing terrible -- I've taken everything very far out of context.
In order to reach the non-geek audience they had to make Nurv kill people, which weakens the films utility as GNU propaganda but makes the issue more black-and-white. Black and white is actually the biggest problem in the quality of the film, shifting allegiances notwithstanding. The politics of the Nurv headquarters pits geeks against nongeeks (in the form of Security staff and, to a lesser extent, lawyers) in a way that seems kind of stereotypical, if reflective of the "research" someone clearly did. The extent of geek/nongeek animosity rang false to me, but my experience may be atypical. Ryan Phillippe's orientation buddy says, "Everybody makes fun of the security chief 'cause he's not a geek"; later, we see how the security chief sees computers: when the Nurv product logo shows up on a TV, he asks, like child, "Does that mean we did it?"
But there are things in the movie that filled me with absolute glee. There is a scene involving the release of source code that make me clap, and possibly hoot/holler, without realizing I was doing so. In the preview we see that Tim Robbins has the BillGatesHouse thing with the artwork that changes according to user preferences; later in the movie they are used brilliantly as an element of suspense that had me squirming in my seat.
The ending was very tidy, as were a good many things in the movie, but the movie was enjoyable if lightweight. I'd put it on a shelf next to 'Sneakers' and 'Wargames'.
Slashdot Mirror
- Netscape
- Applix
- Civilization: Call to Power
- Myth II
Intel binary compatibility is quite another matter, and I don't think anyone is working on it (non-commercially). So if I understand you correctly, this is much, much more obscure than you think.Man, there were some pretty wicked "fusion reactions" going on in my Sun (SparcStation 10) a couple of months ago. Every time it booted it had an asynchronous fault, and would just keep rebooting, for hours at a time. I couldn't even apply some recommended patches because logins tended to trigger this async fault as well. We just bought a new Ultra to replace it, but I am hopeful that data from the SNO might help me figure out what the problem is and get the machine back in some limited service. I checked for neutrino emissions in OpenBoot but it was a dead end.
The nightmare that immediately jumped into my mind is that this "protection layer" could come to involve brief advertisements from our favorite corporations, prepended to the beginning of every song. Otherwise, this seems like not much of a problem or hindrance--if the idea is to keep people from burning MP3s to CDs, there's nothing to keep them from writing dummy device drivers as an intermediate step. More power to them.
Are they, ahem, "fully functional"?
"...Because if you are taxpaying, you are not deserving of the innovating stemming from your tax-paying-paid developing, which, because, uh, if everyone can be using and adding to the source coding, this innovating will be belonging to the tax-paying, and not to whomever the tax-paying are paying to be developing.
"And then maybe your base will not be belong to us," he added.
Can Unrealty model/simulate the growth of space fungus?
Since when is the purpose of a "love interest" to "pull in women"? Are you stupid? If love interest pulls in anyone, it's gentlemen like myself, who hope to catch a glimpse of booty. And booty is hard science if ever there was such a thing. Don't be a snob.
"Global" [the subject of the sentence] is "warming" [the main verb] "worse" [not a comparative but a substantive adjective, referring to bad people] "then thought" [after that, Global is warming thought].
The article is about Global, a company in California that is providing free heat to cold convicts, but has so much extra power that they have decided to start "warming" cold smart people as well.
I hate mouses. Everytime I'm on my Solaris workstation and have to move my hand over twelve inches just to paste the text I've highlighted, I look longingly at my LinuxPPC Powerbook G3 and smile at its clever mousebutton emulation, which lets my hands stay on the keyboard where they belong. I recognize the value of multiple mousebuttons, and am very glad that they exist, but I hate using the mouse and hate losing valuable seconds when I have to move between the two input methods. Oh, that's right: Suns have those cut/paste/copy buttons off to the left side of the keyboard. It's still too far to travel.
I use emacs so my fingers can stay on the keyboard for eight hours straight. I also have CTS.
>distrobution of ideas in the film the company
>behind it all (MGM)is one of the groups sueing
>2600 over DeCSS. Now if thats not hypocricy i dont
>know what is.
That is a good point. I think it falls short of hypocrisy, though: it's not as though screenplays are written by teams of studio lawyers. Well, actually, it can be kind of like that. But the studios are sometimes just distributors of a film that was made independently, though that is not the case with this movie. The screenwriter is credited as Howard Franklin, who also has a credit for "The Man Who Knew Too Little", and who directed "Larger than life." These movies sound pretty bad, and I've never seen them. He seems to have some sort of MGM contract and also has random producer credits and stuff. Hmm, actually, there might not be many things closer to a puppet of the studio than Howard Franklin. But in light of his other credits, I think it's more fair to call it "stupid" than "hypocritical" -- it doesn't seem to me that MGM is trying to align themselves with Free Software hackers, which is why the movie is not good Free Software publicity. Howard Franklin probably doesn't know a whole hell of a lot about DeCSS, if anything, and since he's clearly not a Free Software ideologue he'd probably prefer that the studios had their way. It might be hypocritical if the studio'd received a script treatment from someone and then had Howard Franklin develop it and did not give credit to the person who had the idea. At some point one has to separate the film-as-art or film-as-entertainment from the people who made it. RMS might disagree, and I kind of disagree too, but a movie does have value on its own, independent of the circumstances of its production.
In light of Antitrust's website, one might again cry hypocrisy, what with their (very vapid) interviews with maddog and Miguel. But that's just the work of somebody in the MGM's web department. An organization the size of a studio has all kinds of people working for it, and it's pretty simpleminded to say that the entire movie is bullshit just because people at the top are doing a terrible, terrible thing. At the very least it has entertainment value. When I said I clapped without noticing, I meant to suggest that it was a mindless kind of fun, though empty of real ideological value.
That said, I loved Antitrust. I loved it loved it loved it. It was refreshingly unselfconscious and un-"ironic". I was hoping to see geeks in the audience but it looked like the main draw for the people in my theatre was Ryan Phillippe.
This posting might have mild spoilers, but nothing terrible -- I've taken everything very far out of context.
In order to reach the non-geek audience they had to make Nurv kill people, which weakens the films utility as GNU propaganda but makes the issue more black-and-white. Black and white is actually the biggest problem in the quality of the film, shifting allegiances notwithstanding. The politics of the Nurv headquarters pits geeks against nongeeks (in the form of Security staff and, to a lesser extent, lawyers) in a way that seems kind of stereotypical, if reflective of the "research" someone clearly did. The extent of geek/nongeek animosity rang false to me, but my experience may be atypical. Ryan Phillippe's orientation buddy says, "Everybody makes fun of the security chief 'cause he's not a geek"; later, we see how the security chief sees computers: when the Nurv product logo shows up on a TV, he asks, like child, "Does that mean we did it?"
But there are things in the movie that filled me with absolute glee. There is a scene involving the release of source code that make me clap, and possibly hoot/holler, without realizing I was doing so. In the preview we see that Tim Robbins has the BillGatesHouse thing with the artwork that changes according to user preferences; later in the movie they are used brilliantly as an element of suspense that had me squirming in my seat.
The ending was very tidy, as were a good many things in the movie, but the movie was enjoyable if lightweight. I'd put it on a shelf next to 'Sneakers' and 'Wargames'.
I don't think descramble.mp3 was taken down--it just seems to be getting /.ed, (as does the trisomy mirror) so I've mirrored it myself.