I also read it that way and on a site like/. have come to accept (no matter how annoying it can be) that US English will prevail in most cases. What would have been nice would have been some consistency though. To use "check" in the title and "cheque" in TFS is confusing.
> But Google doesn't try to get it completely right the first time. They release and iterate... and it is that philosophy which is (one of) the foundations of their speed.
You know right up until the last word I could have sworn you were describing Microsoft.
Here in the UK, pretty much every netbook on sale at any retailer I have been to and/or searched online has Windows pre-installed. Anyone care to point me in the direction of one?
If you get a chance you could try and see a bit more of the UK than just London. The Lake District is very nice and I hear that the small village of Cockermouth is very popular right now.
> Where are you staying? If it's a secure place, then bring your laptop
"secure place" - this *is* London you know? We have cameras galore. All pointing at you and all accompanied by signs which say they are for "your security and safety".
> Did the judge consider the possibility that the boy in question might be a momma's boy and deserved the online abuse?
Hmm that reminds me of when I did Jury service some years back. It was a GBH case and one of the jurors said "To be honest if the victim was as annoying that night as he was in court today, he was probably asking for a slap - but that doesn't mean they should have done it"
Well there's always the argument that MS could actually make their OS more secure (from the core up) in the first place thus negating the *need* for any anti-virus product.
NZ is a lot smaller than the UK. The SUVs are smaller there too.
Did you mean smaller than the USA (as that's what the GP referred to)?
Isn't NZ slightly bigger than the UK. And while it has a smaller populace, they're likely spread out more. That said the UK will have more schools with thus more parents doing the school run in their MPV/SUV/4x4/whatever. Except right now which is half term and thus they're all at home and I get to ride into work on nice empty(ish) roads;)
> Most people aren't thinking about you, they are too busy wondering what you think about them. > To think otherwise shows an incredible ego, thinking that everyone's focus is on you, what you look like or are doing.
So by that definition, most people have incredible egos? Sounds about right if you ask me but why wouldn't "most people" include the GP?
By definition, a "copyright industry" would be an industry that produces copyrighted works. Such industries would not necessarily be creating "innovation in either the creation or distribution of works" and to suggest so is disingenuous.
He did not define what he meant by "copyright industry" so you had to guess. If you do that you can't then argue against it because it's your definition not his. Welcome to strawman country.
What you describe is probably more like a copyrighting industry not the copyright industry. I had assumed he was referring to the industry of copyrighting works (and also of enforcing those copyrights). By that definition he is correct. Innovation has come from the creative side not the part involved in copyrighting. In fact creativity has been regularly shown to be stiffled by forceful copyrighting. Note that copyright in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing: for example the copyright on a GPL product enables the author to dictate that it cannot be redistributed under a proprietary licence. It is the use of copyright law that seems to be at issue here.
> I'm no fan of the ridiculous terms of copyright law, but I suspect a lot of innovation has happened as an indirect cause of it. The creation of high tech rendering would likely have never materialized if...
> 1. Its creators thought their software could/would be freely copied. ILM and Pixar have spent a lot of bones to do what they can do. > 2. The creators of movies (Toy Story, Wall-E, Monsters Inc, LOTR, etc)used with that technology thought they couldn't get a return on their multi million $$ investments.
So the software would not have materialised if they had been unable to make it proprietary? Rubbish! I would imagine that rendering software (being an investment which would be spread over several movies) is a small part of a movie's budget - particularly if you have to pay the actors so much for their voices. Has it not occurred to you that other movie studios have bought and use Pixar's Renderman software and yet not all movies that are rendered on it are of the same quality? I doubt Pixar make enough money on Renderman alone to make it a viable part of their business without it being subsidised by what the movie's gross at the box office.
The software - like many software innovations - could well have materialised sooner had it not been for draconian copyright laws and proprietarism (not sure that's a word actually). Certainly something like Blender would have moved ahead a lot quicker.
...all those shows have vessels that produce sound when moving in outer space!
So what? It's called science *fiction* for a reason. Sometimes the writer focusses more towards the "fiction" and sometimes on the "science" but in either case good writing shows through. TV shows can rarely compete with printed matter in the same genre (regardless of that genre). But good writing is about more than a good plot, the execution of that plot, the dialog, the description, the general prose all contribute and guess what, sometimes a writer doesn't get it all spot on every time.
I've not read any of Stross' stuff but his point seems moot really.
> Why do I keep thinking of the "hoverchairs" from Wall-E... and the resulting balloons of blubber everybody turned into whenever I see articles like this???
Perhaps because in this case there was a photo of a scene from Wall-E included in the article?
> Now, if Linux is being cracked, it may indicate that FINALLY windows is coming up in it. If so, then the OSS world needs to get their act together and focus on security again.
You make that sound like the security of a system is the responsibility of those who create the software on it. It is but only up to a point. One of the key things about sysadmin work is that responsibility for the security of *your* systems is *yours*. Regardless of the software that you are using, it's up to you to keep it secure and stable. I would guess that one reason so many sysadmins choose FOSS is because it makes that side easier. It's always been *possible* to crack free software systems but as with Windows boxes it's significantly easier to do on those where patches have not been applied or simple passwords are used. What differs between free software and Windows servers is a) what you can do once you are in and b) the scope of method for cracking is narrower. It's wrong to presume that Linux is or has been "uncrackable" and I've not met many successful Linux sysadmins who do.
> Then get the absolute minimum number of packages you need for a working system, such that you've got some chance of keeping them updated. Firefox for web browsing, maybe. A single media player; VLC or Xine. Vim/Emacs as an editor. OpenOffice.org if you need that. Whatever servers you need, but keep that list small. A firewall, which is hopefully obvious.
Umm - Firefox, VLC, OpenOffice.org on a web server? I think not. Why would you even be running X on a web server (bearing in mind those three packages require that)?
> The Silmarillion is a book with many stories loosely joined by a single theme.
Just as Pulp Fiction or Crash were films in the same vein. It's not impossible to film such stories but it is hard to pull off. Especially when the book in question is bloomin' hard to follow in the first place.
> I think that the Silmarillion is a niche subject that many LOTR fans haven't read. How do you expect the general population th get interested.
Agree it's a niche subject but the public will go because they'll think it's the same sort of thing as LotR. It's not of course but they won't find out until they're in their seats.
Surely the point of such trusts is to prevent the original works from being abused^H^H^H^H^H^H interpreted by media companies set on profit and little else. Without this trust Disney (or somebody else, they are not the only cuplrits) would have done the same thing to LotR as they did with the Jungle Book & Peter Pan.
except that voice recognition software is like the paperless office; a nice idea but so difficult to implement that it becomes easier to work around it with the current system. The major issue with both ideals being that human beings are the key variable factor.
What is AMC? I am guessing it's a US TV channel but I've never heard of it. A simple "US TV channel AMC" the first time it's mentioned in TFS would have helped!
Slashdot Mirror
> does that mean we should call Simon Cowell , SiCo ? :D
I take it you have not noticed that the production company behind X-Factor is "SyCo"?
> Where did those extra 2.2 pounds come from?
Clearly the groom was trying to impress the first four times but after that he reverted to being British and left his socks on
What interests me is that this is a British man and the *Washington Post* has the story first.
I also read it that way and on a site like /. have come to accept (no matter how annoying it can be) that US English will prevail in most cases. What would have been nice would have been some consistency though. To use "check" in the title and "cheque" in TFS is confusing.
> But Google doesn't try to get it completely right the first time. They release and iterate... and it is that philosophy which is (one of) the foundations of their speed.
You know right up until the last word I could have sworn you were describing Microsoft.
> Anyone care to point me in the direction of one?
doh! In the direction of one selling pre-installed Linux netbooks that is
Here in the UK, pretty much every netbook on sale at any retailer I have been to and/or searched online has Windows pre-installed. Anyone care to point me in the direction of one?
> But how much false information has been published by these same newspapers?
In the case of the Daily Mail: that's quite a bit
If you get a chance you could try and see a bit more of the UK than just London. The Lake District is very nice and I hear that the small village of Cockermouth is very popular right now.
> Where are you staying? If it's a secure place, then bring your laptop
"secure place" - this *is* London you know? We have cameras galore. All pointing at you and all accompanied by signs which say they are for "your security and safety".
Secure place, indeed.
> Did the judge consider the possibility that the boy in question might be a momma's boy and deserved the online abuse?
Hmm that reminds me of when I did Jury service some years back. It was a GBH case and one of the jurors said "To be honest if the victim was as annoying that night as he was in court today, he was probably asking for a slap - but that doesn't mean they should have done it"
Well there's always the argument that MS could actually make their OS more secure (from the core up) in the first place thus negating the *need* for any anti-virus product.
Did you mean smaller than the USA (as that's what the GP referred to)? Isn't NZ slightly bigger than the UK. And while it has a smaller populace, they're likely spread out more. That said the UK will have more schools with thus more parents doing the school run in their MPV/SUV/4x4/whatever. Except right now which is half term and thus they're all at home and I get to ride into work on nice empty(ish) roads ;)
> Most people aren't thinking about you, they are too busy wondering what you think about them.
> To think otherwise shows an incredible ego, thinking that everyone's focus is on you, what you look like or are doing.
So by that definition, most people have incredible egos? Sounds about right if you ask me but why wouldn't "most people" include the GP?
He did not define what he meant by "copyright industry" so you had to guess. If you do that you can't then argue against it because it's your definition not his. Welcome to strawman country.
What you describe is probably more like a copyrighting industry not the copyright industry. I had assumed he was referring to the industry of copyrighting works (and also of enforcing those copyrights). By that definition he is correct. Innovation has come from the creative side not the part involved in copyrighting. In fact creativity has been regularly shown to be stiffled by forceful copyrighting. Note that copyright in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing: for example the copyright on a GPL product enables the author to dictate that it cannot be redistributed under a proprietary licence. It is the use of copyright law that seems to be at issue here.
> I'm no fan of the ridiculous terms of copyright law, but I suspect a lot of innovation has happened as an indirect cause of it. The creation of high tech rendering would likely have never materialized if...
> 1. Its creators thought their software could/would be freely copied. ILM and Pixar have spent a lot of bones to do what they can do.
> 2. The creators of movies (Toy Story, Wall-E, Monsters Inc, LOTR, etc)used with that technology thought they couldn't get a return on their multi million $$ investments.
So the software would not have materialised if they had been unable to make it proprietary? Rubbish! I would imagine that rendering software (being an investment which would be spread over several movies) is a small part of a movie's budget - particularly if you have to pay the actors so much for their voices. Has it not occurred to you that other movie studios have bought and use Pixar's Renderman software and yet not all movies that are rendered on it are of the same quality? I doubt Pixar make enough money on Renderman alone to make it a viable part of their business without it being subsidised by what the movie's gross at the box office.
The software - like many software innovations - could well have materialised sooner had it not been for draconian copyright laws and proprietarism (not sure that's a word actually). Certainly something like Blender would have moved ahead a lot quicker.
...all those shows have vessels that produce sound when moving in outer space!
So what? It's called science *fiction* for a reason. Sometimes the writer focusses more towards the "fiction" and sometimes on the "science" but in either case good writing shows through. TV shows can rarely compete with printed matter in the same genre (regardless of that genre). But good writing is about more than a good plot, the execution of that plot, the dialog, the description, the general prose all contribute and guess what, sometimes a writer doesn't get it all spot on every time.
I've not read any of Stross' stuff but his point seems moot really.
> Why do I keep thinking of the "hoverchairs" from Wall-E ... and the resulting balloons of blubber everybody turned into whenever I see articles like this???
Perhaps because in this case there was a photo of a scene from Wall-E included in the article?
> Now, if Linux is being cracked, it may indicate that FINALLY windows is coming up in it. If so, then the OSS world needs to get their act together and focus on security again.
You make that sound like the security of a system is the responsibility of those who create the software on it. It is but only up to a point. One of the key things about sysadmin work is that responsibility for the security of *your* systems is *yours*. Regardless of the software that you are using, it's up to you to keep it secure and stable. I would guess that one reason so many sysadmins choose FOSS is because it makes that side easier. It's always been *possible* to crack free software systems but as with Windows boxes it's significantly easier to do on those where patches have not been applied or simple passwords are used. What differs between free software and Windows servers is a) what you can do once you are in and b) the scope of method for cracking is narrower. It's wrong to presume that Linux is or has been "uncrackable" and I've not met many successful Linux sysadmins who do.
> Then get the absolute minimum number of packages you need for a working system, such that you've got some chance of keeping them updated. Firefox for web browsing, maybe. A single media player; VLC or Xine. Vim/Emacs as an editor. OpenOffice.org if you need that. Whatever servers you need, but keep that list small. A firewall, which is hopefully obvious.
Umm - Firefox, VLC, OpenOffice.org on a web server? I think not. Why would you even be running X on a web server (bearing in mind those three packages require that)?
> The Silmarillion is a book with many stories loosely joined by a single theme.
Just as Pulp Fiction or Crash were films in the same vein. It's not impossible to film such stories but it is hard to pull off. Especially when the book in question is bloomin' hard to follow in the first place.
> I think that the Silmarillion is a niche subject that many LOTR fans haven't read. How do you expect the general population th get interested.
Agree it's a niche subject but the public will go because they'll think it's the same sort of thing as LotR. It's not of course but they won't find out until they're in their seats.
Surely the point of such trusts is to prevent the original works from being abused^H^H^H^H^H^H interpreted by media companies set on profit and little else. Without this trust Disney (or somebody else, they are not the only cuplrits) would have done the same thing to LotR as they did with the Jungle Book & Peter Pan.
except that voice recognition software is like the paperless office; a nice idea but so difficult to implement that it becomes easier to work around it with the current system. The major issue with both ideals being that human beings are the key variable factor.
What is AMC? I am guessing it's a US TV channel but I've never heard of it. A simple "US TV channel AMC" the first time it's mentioned in TFS would have helped!
Sorry replying to myself..
It seems MS have copped a plea to editing the photo and taking the black man out..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8221896.stm