Frankly the "cult of free" generation is coming to an end. We've had it easy for quite a while - free software(free like mp3's and Public radio - not like free beer) free movies - free everything. It's can't last forever, at some point in a capitalist society people need to make a profit.
In fact I've ditched the free paradigm and started buying stocks in the companies who actually charge for stuff - when the gravy train leaves the station I don't plan on being left behind.
As it turns out I mostly play Ernie Ball #9's, the hybrid ones that give you a little more thickness on the upper three strings for that wicked tone that Bob Abooey and the Atomic Blues Corp. is known for.
Once again I'm a leading open source supporter without even knowing it. That's how you can tell the true open source leaders, by the way, we lead by example and are always ahead of the curve.
If you have something that needs to be secure and your house is on a public street then you should take whatever it is that needs to be secure and put it in a safe desposit box, or hire a guard to watch it, or pay security experts to store it, or something along those lines. If you have data that needs to be secure then you keep it offline, much like the FBI does. (I've worked with them on some things in the past, the guy I worked with had two computers, one secure that isn't on the Internet and one insecure that is on the net.)
My home PC is on the net too, but there isn't any data on it (like my SS number or banking info or stuff like that) because I prefer to have that kind of stuff secure.
I'm not saying you can't have a PC on the Internet, I'm saying if your PC is on the net out of necessity then don't have data on it that needs to be secure because, regardless of what OS you use, it can be hacked and your data can be stolen.
If you need to be secure then UNPLUG YOUR FUCKING NETWORK CARD AND TAKE YOUR DATA OFFLINE!!! And yes I know, even if it's offline someone can still get to your data by social engineering or physically breaking into your box and all that, but taking it offline (ie., off any public network) will make it much more secure. LET ME REPEAT THIS: IF YOUR BOX IS CONNECTED TO A PUBLIC NETWORK LIKE THE INTERNET THEN IT'S NOT SECURE. PERIOD.
And isn't it ironic that the department of homeland stupidity just announced they're spending a metric buttload on Microsoft software a few weeks ago, and now they come out to tell us about how insecure it all is?????
I give up, it's all just too retarded for me to deal with anymore...
These guys are shills for Microsoft. What do you expect them to say.
Now then, given that, this could be the most brilliant ploy that MS has ever pulled off if they are indeed behind this whole SCO lawsuit.
They can't fight Lunix like they could a regular company but they can fight it by litigation and things of that nature. Brilliant, just freakin brilliant.
This will certainly put the kabosh on a good percentage of slashdotters who have been emailing the president to whine about how SCO is trying to screw Linux development...
This version will only work with older versions of OS X. Perhaps I can shed some light on why this is.
As a leading developer of OS X software I'd like to clear a few things up regarding some rumours floating about the Mac community. Originally you could gain access to a secret OS X middle layer API which the general developing community wasn't privy to by subscribing to the OS X developers network. On the surface this was designed to keep you current with the technology but if you dug down deep enough you found a treasure trove of data on API's not documented anywhere else. Rather ironic given the way they sued MS over doing virtually the same thing but hey, big business is big business I guess.
All was going along just swell until some benchmarks leaked showing an incredible speed improvement on some apps, along the order of Olog(n) in many cases, which caused much suspicion among the media. And then the legal teams come marching along like General DeGauss leading his troops into Russia with a cease and desist to Apple (which they kept out of the media somehow) and low and behold now none of the API calls work with Jaguar. Heh...
Of course much of what I found out was from people who can't give their names for the obvious reasons but.. well.. it's like Hank Brooks said in classic "The Mythical Man Month", once you eliminate the impossible, whatever left, however improbable, must be the truth.
I guess this would simply take things to the next level, so to speak. You'll have to go back to stealing files from yousenet or maybe even secret bulletin boards and that sort of thing.
Luckily I still have my commodore 64 stashed in a closet so I'll be ready when things come full circle.
The IT industry has continued to work to make high level programming tools and to reduce the barriers of entry until programming has finally become a commodity.
So now we have programmers who are used to getting $80 per hour for highly skilled work demanding the same thing for work that your average self taught hacker can do. Of course it makes sense for business to farm it over seas to have it done at a fraction of the cost. It's pretty straight economics if you can remove your emotions from it.
I've been using Evolution for the past couple years and I'm giving some thought to making the move back to Kmail or even to..gulp... Mozilla for my email client because Evolution is just butt slow. Butt slow. I'm using version 1.2 that comes with Linux 9.0 and it's slow. I really hope they are working on optimizing the code as well as making it look good because as it stands now you're not going to wow anyone who is using Outlook (which isn't blazing fast by any means) into switching.
My point still stands that Franklin never envisioned anything like the Internet or the immediate global communications network available to everyone. The constitution would look quite different were it written today with todays technology in mind and maybe it's time we investigate making some changes to "modernize" it a bit.
As much as it pains me to say this, I think we need to look at what John Ashcroft wants to do regarding our ability to get information a little closer.
No-one can deny that the Internet has opened a can of worms that the people who wrote the constitution could have never imagined would exist when they put it together. Our Bill of Rights and many other pieces of legislature were designed before the global information network became available to any 6th grade dropout with an AOL account and perhaps we need to look at updating it with this in mind.
I'm not suggesting we should become a police state or anything, just that perhaps we need to take the world as it stands today and re-write parts of the constitution with this in mind.
I can live with less "rights" provided I'm safe and secure.
The problem here is that the general public shouldn't even be concerned with the tech lingo. That's the job of professionals, not lay people. For instance I don't understand a thing about certain cooking terms, like basting or searing, but that's okay because I'm not a chef, so it doesn't affect me.
The truth is probably that the blame for this is squarely on the head of Microsoft for trying to make the PC ubiquitous, like a toaster, when it's really an extremely complicated technology which the common man should not even try to understand, let alone use to it's full potential. But now that the Genie is out of the bottle, so to speak, it's too late to shove her back in and we (the professional IT community) are left to deal with the aftermath of Microsoft's behaviour.
They (MS) got rich by marketing stuff to people with no business using it and we get the shaft.
Well, I have to disagree with your reasoning about SCO's lawyers knowing what they are doing. All I see is a bunch of wild claims with no concrete proof to back them up
So what you're saying is that after reading all the legal briefs and filings in the case, after studying all the evidence from both sides, based upon your expert knowledge of the law, (I'm assuming you're a lawyer who specalizes in this specific area) you don't see any LEGAL basis for their lawsuit???
I mean, I just want to clarify exactly what you're saying here, just so I understand you.
In short, you lack basic reading comprehension skills.
My whole point was that often times what the unwashed masses might consider common sense and what is defined as legally right or wrong don't coincide.
Thusly and thereforely unless you are a lawyer with access to all the facts you are simply willy nilly making up crap and wildly speculating about stuff which makes you seem less than learned.
But hey, that's always been the slashdot zeitgeist, eh?
I just love all you dime-store lawyers who know nothing at all about this case other than what you see specualted upon by myriad Internet "news" sites. I mean, according to the majority of you idiots SCO is just willy nilly making up stuff in a ridiculous lawsuit that has no merit at all.
So tell me, all of you scholorly 15 year olds, do you not think SCO's lawyers would realize if they just made up a bunch of crap that IBM's massive legal team wouldn't crush them to a pulp? Do you not think they would realize that and unless they actually felt they had some claims that LEGALLY hold water they would have gone after some other targets?
I'm not saying SCO will win any lawsuits or is in the right about anything here but the absolute hubris of the posters here, who seemingly live in their own little fantasy world, is quite amazing. Amazing indeed.
What's all this with a bunch of self-absorbed anti-social geeks getting all worked up over people selling their data.
Trust me, you are nothing but a little speck of dust in the wind and besides the other dillusional angest filled teenagers posting here notbody is really all that interested in you or your data on a personal level.
I suggest you all get over yourselves and go ourside and walk around for a while.
The thing will barely outrun my old PII 266 which I bought for $850 about 4 years ago. Sheesh, when will you Mac dunderheads get a clue for Christ sake.
If you want flash and marketing shine then buy a Mac, if you need to be productive and get the job done then buy a generic PC.
This makes perfect sense for them. They're still going to support "between two and four standard Linux distributions", they just don't have to spend the money to maintain their own version.
They are planning on making money on support so this really doesn't change things much in the big picture.
Is this illegal? Isn't that sort of the way business has been done for a million years now? (letting go of expensive help and hiring cheaper help) It's not like the auto industry hasn't been doing this for years by building plants in other countries to take advantage of their cheap labor.
I have to wonder if the USian labor force isn't partly to blame by pricing themselves out of the market.
I use virtual desktops all the time and love them, I think they are a great way to keep things organized and uncluttered and they without question do increase my productivity but again that's very different from trying to put everything on one giant 3d screen.
Sorry, I've never used a Mac so I can't relate to what you're trying to say about the dock.
The problem as I see it is that all the examples I've ever seen of 3d desktops only seem to add confusion and don't seem to simplify anything. Oh sure, perhaps if my monitor is 60 inches wide then it might help but otherwise I still don't see it. Actually since there is more "wasted" space I could even make an argument that it makes things worse.
Sure it makes for some neat screenshots and for fun hollywood matrix type stuff in movies but unless I'm missing something it's not enhancing my productivity at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Frankly the "cult of free" generation is coming to an end. We've had it easy for quite a while - free software(free like mp3's and Public radio - not like free beer) free movies - free everything. It's can't last forever, at some point in a capitalist society people need to make a profit.
In fact I've ditched the free paradigm and started buying stocks in the companies who actually charge for stuff - when the gravy train leaves the station I don't plan on being left behind.
Once again I'm a leading open source supporter without even knowing it. That's how you can tell the true open source leaders, by the way, we lead by example and are always ahead of the curve.
If you have something that needs to be secure and your house is on a public street then you should take whatever it is that needs to be secure and put it in a safe desposit box, or hire a guard to watch it, or pay security experts to store it, or something along those lines. If you have data that needs to be secure then you keep it offline, much like the FBI does. (I've worked with them on some things in the past, the guy I worked with had two computers, one secure that isn't on the Internet and one insecure that is on the net.)
My home PC is on the net too, but there isn't any data on it (like my SS number or banking info or stuff like that) because I prefer to have that kind of stuff secure.
I'm not saying you can't have a PC on the Internet, I'm saying if your PC is on the net out of necessity then don't have data on it that needs to be secure because, regardless of what OS you use, it can be hacked and your data can be stolen.
If you need to be secure then UNPLUG YOUR FUCKING NETWORK CARD AND TAKE YOUR DATA OFFLINE!!! And yes I know, even if it's offline someone can still get to your data by social engineering or physically breaking into your box and all that, but taking it offline (ie., off any public network) will make it much more secure. LET ME REPEAT THIS: IF YOUR BOX IS CONNECTED TO A PUBLIC NETWORK LIKE THE INTERNET THEN IT'S NOT SECURE. PERIOD.
And isn't it ironic that the department of homeland stupidity just announced they're spending a metric buttload on Microsoft software a few weeks ago, and now they come out to tell us about how insecure it all is?????
I give up, it's all just too retarded for me to deal with anymore...
These guys are shills for Microsoft. What do you expect them to say.
Now then, given that, this could be the most brilliant ploy that MS has ever pulled off if they are indeed behind this whole SCO lawsuit.
They can't fight Lunix like they could a regular company but they can fight it by litigation and things of that nature. Brilliant, just freakin brilliant.
This will certainly put the kabosh on a good percentage of slashdotters who have been emailing the president to whine about how SCO is trying to screw Linux development...
As a leading developer of OS X software I'd like to clear a few things up regarding some rumours floating about the Mac community. Originally you could gain access to a secret OS X middle layer API which the general developing community wasn't privy to by subscribing to the OS X developers network. On the surface this was designed to keep you current with the technology but if you dug down deep enough you found a treasure trove of data on API's not documented anywhere else. Rather ironic given the way they sued MS over doing virtually the same thing but hey, big business is big business I guess.
All was going along just swell until some benchmarks leaked showing an incredible speed improvement on some apps, along the order of Olog(n) in many cases, which caused much suspicion among the media. And then the legal teams come marching along like General DeGauss leading his troops into Russia with a cease and desist to Apple (which they kept out of the media somehow) and low and behold now none of the API calls work with Jaguar. Heh...
Of course much of what I found out was from people who can't give their names for the obvious reasons but.. well.. it's like Hank Brooks said in classic "The Mythical Man Month", once you eliminate the impossible, whatever left, however improbable, must be the truth.
Luckily I still have my commodore 64 stashed in a closet so I'll be ready when things come full circle.
What the hell are all those guys doing there?
So now we have programmers who are used to getting $80 per hour for highly skilled work demanding the same thing for work that your average self taught hacker can do. Of course it makes sense for business to farm it over seas to have it done at a fraction of the cost. It's pretty straight economics if you can remove your emotions from it.
I've been using Evolution for the past couple years and I'm giving some thought to making the move back to Kmail or even to ..gulp... Mozilla for my email client because Evolution is just butt slow. Butt slow. I'm using version 1.2 that comes with Linux 9.0 and it's slow. I really hope they are working on optimizing the code as well as making it look good because as it stands now you're not going to wow anyone who is using Outlook (which isn't blazing fast by any means) into switching.
My point still stands that Franklin never envisioned anything like the Internet or the immediate global communications network available to everyone. The constitution would look quite different were it written today with todays technology in mind and maybe it's time we investigate making some changes to "modernize" it a bit.
No-one can deny that the Internet has opened a can of worms that the people who wrote the constitution could have never imagined would exist when they put it together. Our Bill of Rights and many other pieces of legislature were designed before the global information network became available to any 6th grade dropout with an AOL account and perhaps we need to look at updating it with this in mind.
I'm not suggesting we should become a police state or anything, just that perhaps we need to take the world as it stands today and re-write parts of the constitution with this in mind.
I can live with less "rights" provided I'm safe and secure.
The truth is probably that the blame for this is squarely on the head of Microsoft for trying to make the PC ubiquitous, like a toaster, when it's really an extremely complicated technology which the common man should not even try to understand, let alone use to it's full potential. But now that the Genie is out of the bottle, so to speak, it's too late to shove her back in and we (the professional IT community) are left to deal with the aftermath of Microsoft's behaviour.
They (MS) got rich by marketing stuff to people with no business using it and we get the shaft.
So what you're saying is that after reading all the legal briefs and filings in the case, after studying all the evidence from both sides, based upon your expert knowledge of the law, (I'm assuming you're a lawyer who specalizes in this specific area) you don't see any LEGAL basis for their lawsuit???
I mean, I just want to clarify exactly what you're saying here, just so I understand you.
My whole point was that often times what the unwashed masses might consider common sense and what is defined as legally right or wrong don't coincide.
Thusly and thereforely unless you are a lawyer with access to all the facts you are simply willy nilly making up crap and wildly speculating about stuff which makes you seem less than learned.
But hey, that's always been the slashdot zeitgeist, eh?
So tell me, all of you scholorly 15 year olds, do you not think SCO's lawyers would realize if they just made up a bunch of crap that IBM's massive legal team wouldn't crush them to a pulp? Do you not think they would realize that and unless they actually felt they had some claims that LEGALLY hold water they would have gone after some other targets?
I'm not saying SCO will win any lawsuits or is in the right about anything here but the absolute hubris of the posters here, who seemingly live in their own little fantasy world, is quite amazing. Amazing indeed.
Trust me, you are nothing but a little speck of dust in the wind and besides the other dillusional angest filled teenagers posting here notbody is really all that interested in you or your data on a personal level.
I suggest you all get over yourselves and go ourside and walk around for a while.
Sheesh.
What ever happened to the days when slashdot posted cool computer stuff about linux and Unix and crap like that.
All this sissy fanboy Apple/Mac stuff has to be driving the real technical computer people away from the site.
The thing will barely outrun my old PII 266 which I bought for $850 about 4 years ago. Sheesh, when will you Mac dunderheads get a clue for Christ sake.
If you want flash and marketing shine then buy a Mac, if you need to be productive and get the job done then buy a generic PC.
It's really that simple.
They are planning on making money on support so this really doesn't change things much in the big picture.
Is this illegal? Isn't that sort of the way business has been done for a million years now? (letting go of expensive help and hiring cheaper help) It's not like the auto industry hasn't been doing this for years by building plants in other countries to take advantage of their cheap labor.
I have to wonder if the USian labor force isn't partly to blame by pricing themselves out of the market.
I claim this first post in the name of the anti-war coalition for baby Jesus!!!!!
I use virtual desktops all the time and love them, I think they are a great way to keep things organized and uncluttered and they without question do increase my productivity but again that's very different from trying to put everything on one giant 3d screen.
Sorry, I've never used a Mac so I can't relate to what you're trying to say about the dock.
The problem as I see it is that all the examples I've ever seen of 3d desktops only seem to add confusion and don't seem to simplify anything. Oh sure, perhaps if my monitor is 60 inches wide then it might help but otherwise I still don't see it. Actually since there is more "wasted" space I could even make an argument that it makes things worse.
Sure it makes for some neat screenshots and for fun hollywood matrix type stuff in movies but unless I'm missing something it's not enhancing my productivity at all.