What the hell are you talking about??! +4?? Has the whole world gone mad??
What security updates are you talking about? MS writes security updates for Linux? What DRM? And why are you railing away at M$ like the most rabid linux user (disclaimer-I am a linux user, just not rabid) and then copping to running win98 and IE4?
I wish I could suicide-bomb the parent post, and lose two karma to knock it down two points or so. It's not logical, not well formed, not grammatically correct, not contributive... at least it has certainly captured the primal rage that I often find so illuminative in rational conversations...
This article is obviously another troll, along the same lines as yesterday's ".NET Server is Longhorn is cancelled". I was reading along nicely at 3* and listening to people complain about how unfair the editors have been recently, and then I found this post. Knocked out my whole theory of "intelligence floats, stupid sinks".
Sometimes wealthy people favor a certain taxation system because they apparently were smart enough to get rich in the first place...it's safe to assume that alot of them know what to do with money.
Haha. Most specious argument *ever*. They don't favor it because they're smart, they favor it because they're rich. Whether they're rich because they're smart, or because they inherited it, or won it in the lottery back when they lived in a shack, doesn't matter. They're smart (and selfish) because they prefer a tax system that favors them at the expense of others, and have the political and financial wherewithal to make other people think that's a good idea. I wouldn't draw intelligence in to it. It's safe to assume they know what to do with their money -- keep it! Is it safe to say that they know what to do with your money? Namely, take it to pay for the lion's share of government programs? Let's just stop before someone says "Well, might makes right."
I am NOT rich
I won't hold it against you =)
and I have no problem with a good capitalist system...
Neither do I, but if history has taught us anything, it's that a good capitalist system should not only be good for the people at the top of it. A good capitalist system assumes that the government is a fair arbiter in the battle between the upper and lower classes. Obviously we don't have that, but most politicians and rich folk keep quiet about it. When the system becomes too lopsided, usually the middle classes realize they could be at the top, and convince the lower classes to revolt. Middle becomes Upper, Upper becomes Middle (or dead), and Lower stays Lower. I'm not sure if that could happen in modern America, probably because of television. It seems like, in this country, the lower down on the economic spectrum you are, the more proud you are of the way the country works. It's the Upper classes that relocate to Jamaica to avoid paying federal taxes, and their Republican lapdogs that celebrate them for having the guts to do it. Sigh.
And holy bonehead - ALOT of companies get certain tax breaks...with damn good reasons. If they are allowed to grow and thrive, the benefits to the location they are in are tremendous. It means jobs, which in turn means tax revenue and employee spending...
There's a difference between business-friendly and business-sponsored tax legislation. Hell, the term "loophole" was coined to refer to tax legislation. "Everytime I close one hole, you find a new one." Hence the loop. I don't think it makes economic sense for Washington to oppose a state income-tax. If they had one, industry wouldn't pick up and blow away (anymore than they are without one - Boeing is now a Chicago-based corporation). I mean, where are they going to find another state where they'd have it any better? They're running away from income tax! It's pretty standard!
And the state would probably know how to solve some of its current budget nightmares. Washington state politics are hilarious, but that's soooo tangent.. Now we're building a $100 million per mile monorail, that goes from nowhere to BFE. Without federal money. Without income tax. How? By putting a 1% tax on non-new vehicles. I hear those single-mothers being ground a little bit further into the dust. Shameless...
By "compensate", I meant giving something back. There are things that groups of people with lots of money, ie governments, can do that most individuals would have a tough time doing on their own. For example, building roads, building parks, providing water and electricity, etc. What I'm saying is that, if they took it all, I wouldn't complain as long as I was getting back everything in the form of these improvements.
It goes without saying (I mean it! Don't say it!) that there's no way any government's going to achieve 100% efficiency. I'd be happy with 60%. I would also get a little bothered by having to constantly fill out PO's to buy anything I wanted...
I'd quite like that system because I'd be freed from the rather annoying burden of ever working again.
Ahh, yes, unfreeze me when all work is voluntary, and robot wives are cheap and effective.
No, he's right. There's usually just an md5 file stored in the same directory, and it is the dumbest thing in the world. The system would work if everyone just signed their damn md5 file, and their public key was available on a different server, say the web server, emails, public key root servers, etc. etc. Why don't they do this? I dunno, next time you see a distro this way, write the admin and ask them.
Damn but we do have some bitter 'merican slashdotters...
People gripe about taxes. But then they say, "Hell, could be worse, couldn't it? I mean, we could be livin in one o' them Yuro-peein countries and paying fifty percent in taxes. Hell, I don't know how they stand it."
And I always have the same response. "I don't care how much I pay, as long as it's spent efficiently." If the State takes 100% of my paycheck, then efficient spending provides that they are able to find a way to compensate me for 100% of the value I contribute to my company.
In the 'States we're definitely burning about 92 cents on the dollar, I agree. But most of the people clamoring for "reform" really want a system that is worse at stopping them from screwing people more than they are. Flat taxers are invariably rich. Rich people are almost invariably flat taxers. Rich people that aren't flat taxers have more heart than brains, and poor folk who are flat taxers just really don't know who to trust. Let's just say there are reasons they aren't rich.
I always thought Washington state was full of peacenik hippie freaks. Turns out it is, except they keep electing Democrats who keep out a state income tax (you read that right) in favor of a single-mother-crippling 9-percent sales tax.
Microsoft pays no federal income tax. Bill Gates pays no state income tax. Why do people vote for legislators that would rather have a dollar from a working mom than ten dollars from a billionaire? I can't say, but I intend to find out. I think it has something to do with how rare it would be finding Republicans campaigning on a state income-tax platform... Ah, another fine benefit of the two-party system.
I gotta go with TGK on this one. If you want to play conspiracy theory, walk with me.
The number of people that are able to download movies P2P *
the percentage that want to watch Harry Potter period *
the percentage that want to watch a crappy version on their crappy computers *
the percentage that won't also want to see it in the theatre *
the percentage that would have seen it if it hadn't been leaked...
is probably going to cost them about $200 bucks.
Then factor in how much they'd lose in DVD sales eventually to the hard-core fans that aren't morally shy about downloading a DivX rip off Kazaa. If that would be substantial, they can release their own crappy-quality leak that will be instantly proliferated throughout the community, since it's the only one there at first. This will make finding the high-quality rip that will eventually be made from a DVD that much harder. It's much more insidious a way to spoof than just having void files that are the same size, ala the RIAA, because plenty of people will download and share it, thinking they've got the "real" version and not knowing there's a much better one out there.
Add to that the publicity value in the war against terrori^H^H^H^H err pirates to "Congresscritters" and the public. "Hollywood bribes Democrats, Republicans" doesn't capture the public headlines as well as "Hollywood campaigns to combat pirates" - "Avast, ye scurvy dogs" says Jack Valenti.
I'm not saying the MPAA is behind this leak, I'm just saying that, if they weren't, the might want to think about it...
"Many millions of dollars were at stake. The contract for Dolby was one of the best things ever to happen to that company. They are now the audio system for every television that will ever be sold."
And MIT settled for 30 million dollars??! I would have auctioned my vote off! Get Phillips and Dolby in a bidding match? Sky's the limit!
Haha. I hope Lim feels like a greedy idiot. "Man, if I'd been a little more principled, I'd still have my reputation, and if I'd been a little less principled, I'd be the seventh wealthiest man on the planet. As it is, all I've got is my lousy 8 million bucks, glaven..."
"So you see, Mr. Bigglesworth, I didn't want to destroy the entire frickin' world, but those Linux geeks really left me no choice. Reversing the earth's magnetic polarity was the only way it could be done without violating the DoJ consent agreement."
"Let's see...Start...Programs...World Control Devices...Disasters...Microsoft...where the hell..?"
"You seem to be trying to destroy the world. Would you like some help with that?"
"Clippy! Oh thank god. Begin 'Gates-Plan-B'. So long, Mr. Stallman. I hope there's a GNU version of 'Microsoft 1000-year Radiation Shield.NET'.
Ah, but I'm using Mozilla as we speak, and I enjoy that I can watch flash movies in it.
I'm fairly confident of MS on this one. If Eolas prevents anyone but MS from using plug-ins, the Web will probably shift around the new environment. Pages will still be IEML, but that will now mean they won't include lots of executable content. If Eolas wants to prevent anyone but one browser from using plug-ins, and plans to sell to AOL, AOL will probably cut a deal with MS to license the patent. MS has a lot of money. AOL needs a lot of money. Makes sense.
Don't forget, this patent runs out in 2014, plenty of time for IE to be back to normal by Longhorn... =)
Geez, didn't realize this was such a touchy subject with the masses... I thought the/. mentality understood that any large body can be understood by a system of statistical processes, such that, even while two people might disagree with the idea that the current patent system is broken, it is an opinion shared by a large enough percentage to be considered "the/. mentality".
Actually, when I ask questions to the/. crowd, I'm looking for both sides of the issue, as I suspect many others are. Saying "you don't speak for me, bub" doesn't really contribute much to the discourse. How about, "I don't think the current patent system is flawed, because I'm a dot-com millionaire" or something. Then we have a rational argument, and a primary-source. Useful information.
Hell, the parent probably does agree that the patent system is flawed, he just resents being grouped with everyone else.
It's true. In the article, he specifically says, "What if only *one* browser was allowed to use plug-ins?" Not, "What if *everyone* but MS was allowed to use them."
Re:A better way - have computers do more work.
on
Just One Page a Day
·
· Score: 2
There is a company called Paper of Record that is archiving old newspapers using OCR technology. They scan the newspaper pages, OCR it, and create a searchable database you can scan for keywords. You do a search, and can read view the original scanned page or the OCR'd text.
I bet their software/hardware combination would greatly help an effort such as this.
Heh... Block-quoted for 2 free mod-points. =)
Anyway, I just checked them out, and they have a really great idea. Except for the expensive membership part. They have searchable full-page images of a lot of *old* newspapers (like, early 1800s through present). The problem with using them for something like PG is that they want money. They're in the business of selling their work through subscriptions to their newspaper service, and selling their technology to media companies that want to put their newspaper online. Still, definitely worth checking out. Their parent company is Canadian, so they carry Canadian, US, and UK newspapers. Would be perfect without that "expensive as a regular newspaper that you don't pay for because you read it online"...
This post and subsequent moderation is why there is M2. Don't rubberstamp moderation results, take the time to investigate. Warning: under the current consensus system, you may never moderate again for insightfully metamoderating. =) I M2 twice a day, and haven't moderated in a month.
Re:Aren't APPS the real issue?
on
Halloween VII
·
· Score: 2
but in order to displace Microsoft we are going to need tools that Windows users can use.
But you missed my entire point! Why is that our goal?? Why should that be the goal of anyone who does not have a direct financial incentive to get people to switch (ie, people who work for RedHat)? What happened to our goal of just having a system that does what we want it to do, because Windows doesn't? Why limit our goals to just killing Microsoft?
Re:Aren't APPS the real issue?
on
Halloween VII
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The real goal should be to get to the point where the line between it and Windows is transparent.
You know, I can't figure this out at all. Here we have the Linux community who, in large part, is not being compensated for their contributions. Therefore they are free to make whatever sort of contribution they want. And you know what sort of alternative to Microsoft platform they come up with? Something that attempts to look and feel identical to its Microsoft counterpart!
Why? Why, why, why? We have the freedom to explore completely different paradigms in computing and user-interaction, and we insist on just writing open-source applications that clone their MS-equivalents. So the best that anyone can do, on any platform of their choice, is the Microsoft vision.
"But we have to clone MS so that we can get Mom and Dad, and Pointy-Haired Boss, to switch to Linux!"
-- Why?
"Well, duh, so that we can kill Microsoft!"
-- Why?
"Because Microsoft is Evil, like the Nazis!"
-- You lose.
Why are we competing with MS on MS's own ground? When did Linux shift from being an alternative to being a clone? When did we stop being a bunch of people that wanted an OS that did what we wanted it to, and start being a bunch of people whose only driving goal is to kick MS off the desktop? What do we have to gain from that? I understand that RedHat has a financial interest in making software that looks and feels like Redmond's - they want enterprises to switch, so that they can sell systems, and enterprises will switch if it's not hard. Simple. But why does everyone else, that doesn't have a financial incentive, jump on that wagon? Why do people invest their limited time and energy, not to writing better software, but writing same software? Why do people in the Slashdot community constantly talk about how much better the world will be when there's no difference between Linux and Windows?
The best software on *nix does it differently. Look at Apache. Anyone who wants it can figure out how to edit an httpd.conf file. It's not terribly hard. Why would anyone want to give it an IIS-like interface?
I like linux because all the security tools are written for it, they're free, and I have the source to them. It's a hacker's playground. These tools don't have GUIs, let alone ones that look like they came from MS. Doesn't bother me. I'm going to use Linux so that I can use these tools, and when I write tools, I'm going to build them from the ones that are already successful at what they do.
As an aside, anyone notice how much better the command-line paradigm deals with chaining/piping programs together? When something terminates at the GUI, it's really hard to make use of it without rewriting it. Maybe if everyone on Windows started using COM and.NET whenever they wrote anything, it wouldn't be as difficult to make a program collaborate. But a lot of people don't bother, often because it doesn't occur to them that someone would want to chain their program together; or because they don't want other people using their program in a non-approved way. Do we want to clone that paradigm? That apps should be feature-laden, bloated, and only useful in one specific way? As opposed to the typical Unix "do one thing really well (and make it a link in a chain)" paradigm? I dunno...
Those are my questions. If you have answers, I'm all ears.
Want to find out if the feds are monitoring a couple of people's book lists, or everyone's requests for a few books? Join me in padding our FBI files by checking out as many books as you dare on the subjects of:
Islam Middle-Eastern history Anything by Chomsky 1984 and Animal Farm A People's History of the United States
then wait and watch for white window-less paneled vans parked on your street, with "Flowers By Irene" or "Two FBI Guys Pizza" stenciled on the side.
True terrorists - please continue your normal reading habits, as you may already be under surveillance, and any results under this system would only distort our survey.
I know, I know, I'm preaching to the choir. Everyone on Slashdot that expresses their concern about an issue goes out and tells 100 people about it, and gets them all active in progressive change. Example: do you know who Maher Arar is?
I don't mean to get too bitter here, guys, but regime change starts at home. It's like the old Steven Stills song. If you can't have a system you love, umm, change the system you've got until it more closely resembles the system you'd love. =)
LOL. That's a great idea. I must be the one guy without mod points, but have an imaginary +1 on me.
When I recently had to negotiate a clause in my contract, I didn't do it in perl, but I did find it necessary to break the complex clause into subclauses inside parantheses, linked together with AND and OR operators, so that I could be sure the recruiter knew what he was passing back and forth between myself and the lawyers...
I wish I would have thought to have written it somewhat obscurely... seems like, if you can make them agree to it, you're playing their game ; )
Then again, some of the mainstream news commentary at the time suggested, conspiracy theory-esque, that maybe this was all calculated.
Dude, I seriously doubt that mainstream news was speculating anything that crack-pot.
I invoke Occam's Razor on this one. The man got carried away, shot off his mouth, and blew his chances at the fame he coveted so much. Now he'll be remembered as the guy that cost America the Microsoft case. No way he tanked his reputation on some whacked-out conspiracy theory. If he had wanted to throw it to MS, he could have done it in a way that wouldn't have put himself into jeopardy... talk about being a martyr.
I'm with squigglesqlash on this one, but I think you'd leave the argument incomplete if you didn't mention that this was Microsoft's plan from the start!
I'd have to check the books to figure out when they decided it, but it was probably back in 1996 when Clinton got re-elected. Delay until the next election. Makes sense, doesn't it? Nothing to lose and everything to gain. Another election gives you another roll of the dice. Clinton picked this fight - anyone else would be better.
The second tactic was a little more shrewd. Get Jackson out. The MS lawyers deliberately baited him, trying to get evidence (ie statements) that could be used to get him thrown off the case. Jackson's an idiot. He should have seen it coming and kept his dumb mouth shut. If he wanted to punish MS that bad (and it was obvious, from his statements, that he did), he should have known he'd have to be less of a glory-hound until after the trial.
After seeing Bill's videotaped deposition in '94, I thought MS lawyers were as bad as their PR and Advertising people. But they've definitely reinvented themselves...
What it reminds me of is the SNL sketch of Bill Clinton after the impeachment aquittal. He trots out to the podium, leans forward, and intones, "I...am...bulletproof." Walks away, stops, turns back around and adds, "Next time, y'all best bring kryptonite."
Personally, I think it should have been the States' strategy to, like MS for so long, delay until the next election. I am not convinced the Republicans will be in power in two weeks, let alone two years. Stupid to always give MS the initiative...
It's about as painful to watch as someone playing chess badly.
"The Senate has got a lousy record on my judges. We need to change the Senate for a lot of reasons, and one reason is to make sure we've got a sound judiciary," he said Monday in Denver.
"This comprehensive plan calls for a clean start..." added the President's lapdog, Ari Fleisher.
(ok so it's not as bad as i made it sound, but it's still pretty funny, in context)
To be considered for the Hinman program, students must have a 3.0 grade-point average...
Umm, it's been my experience that the folks with the real drive have shitty GPA's, because they want to spend all their time and energy on their other projects. Perhaps they should say, "To be considered for the Hinman program, students may not have more than a 3.0 grade-point average." =)
Slashdot Mirror
What the hell are you talking about??! +4?? Has the whole world gone mad??
What security updates are you talking about? MS writes security updates for Linux? What DRM? And why are you railing away at M$ like the most rabid linux user (disclaimer-I am a linux user, just not rabid) and then copping to running win98 and IE4?
I wish I could suicide-bomb the parent post, and lose two karma to knock it down two points or so. It's not logical, not well formed, not grammatically correct, not contributive... at least it has certainly captured the primal rage that I often find so illuminative in rational conversations...
This article is obviously another troll, along the same lines as yesterday's ".NET Server is Longhorn is cancelled". I was reading along nicely at 3* and listening to people complain about how unfair the editors have been recently, and then I found this post. Knocked out my whole theory of "intelligence floats, stupid sinks".
Sometimes wealthy people favor a certain taxation system because they apparently were smart enough to get rich in the first place...it's safe to assume that alot of them know what to do with money.
Haha. Most specious argument *ever*. They don't favor it because they're smart, they favor it because they're rich. Whether they're rich because they're smart, or because they inherited it, or won it in the lottery back when they lived in a shack, doesn't matter. They're smart (and selfish) because they prefer a tax system that favors them at the expense of others, and have the political and financial wherewithal to make other people think that's a good idea. I wouldn't draw intelligence in to it. It's safe to assume they know what to do with their money -- keep it! Is it safe to say that they know what to do with your money? Namely, take it to pay for the lion's share of government programs? Let's just stop before someone says "Well, might makes right."
I am NOT rich
I won't hold it against you =)
and I have no problem with a good capitalist system...
Neither do I, but if history has taught us anything, it's that a good capitalist system should not only be good for the people at the top of it. A good capitalist system assumes that the government is a fair arbiter in the battle between the upper and lower classes. Obviously we don't have that, but most politicians and rich folk keep quiet about it. When the system becomes too lopsided, usually the middle classes realize they could be at the top, and convince the lower classes to revolt. Middle becomes Upper, Upper becomes Middle (or dead), and Lower stays Lower. I'm not sure if that could happen in modern America, probably because of television. It seems like, in this country, the lower down on the economic spectrum you are, the more proud you are of the way the country works. It's the Upper classes that relocate to Jamaica to avoid paying federal taxes, and their Republican lapdogs that celebrate them for having the guts to do it. Sigh.
And holy bonehead - ALOT of companies get certain tax breaks...with damn good reasons. If they are allowed to grow and thrive, the benefits to the location they are in are tremendous. It means jobs, which in turn means tax revenue and employee spending...
There's a difference between business-friendly and business-sponsored tax legislation. Hell, the term "loophole" was coined to refer to tax legislation. "Everytime I close one hole, you find a new one." Hence the loop. I don't think it makes economic sense for Washington to oppose a state income-tax. If they had one, industry wouldn't pick up and blow away (anymore than they are without one - Boeing is now a Chicago-based corporation). I mean, where are they going to find another state where they'd have it any better? They're running away from income tax! It's pretty standard!
And the state would probably know how to solve some of its current budget nightmares. Washington state politics are hilarious, but that's soooo tangent.. Now we're building a $100 million per mile monorail, that goes from nowhere to BFE. Without federal money. Without income tax. How? By putting a 1% tax on non-new vehicles. I hear those single-mothers being ground a little bit further into the dust. Shameless...
Compensate you? This is not how government works.
By "compensate", I meant giving something back. There are things that groups of people with lots of money, ie governments, can do that most individuals would have a tough time doing on their own. For example, building roads, building parks, providing water and electricity, etc. What I'm saying is that, if they took it all, I wouldn't complain as long as I was getting back everything in the form of these improvements.
It goes without saying (I mean it! Don't say it!) that there's no way any government's going to achieve 100% efficiency. I'd be happy with 60%. I would also get a little bothered by having to constantly fill out PO's to buy anything I wanted...
I'd quite like that system because I'd be freed from the rather annoying burden of ever working again.
Ahh, yes, unfreeze me when all work is voluntary, and robot wives are cheap and effective.
No, he's right. There's usually just an md5 file stored in the same directory, and it is the dumbest thing in the world. The system would work if everyone just signed their damn md5 file, and their public key was available on a different server, say the web server, emails, public key root servers, etc. etc. Why don't they do this? I dunno, next time you see a distro this way, write the admin and ask them.
Damn but we do have some bitter 'merican slashdotters...
People gripe about taxes. But then they say, "Hell, could be worse, couldn't it? I mean, we could be livin in one o' them Yuro-peein countries and paying fifty percent in taxes. Hell, I don't know how they stand it."
And I always have the same response. "I don't care how much I pay, as long as it's spent efficiently." If the State takes 100% of my paycheck, then efficient spending provides that they are able to find a way to compensate me for 100% of the value I contribute to my company.
In the 'States we're definitely burning about 92 cents on the dollar, I agree. But most of the people clamoring for "reform" really want a system that is worse at stopping them from screwing people more than they are. Flat taxers are invariably rich. Rich people are almost invariably flat taxers. Rich people that aren't flat taxers have more heart than brains, and poor folk who are flat taxers just really don't know who to trust. Let's just say there are reasons they aren't rich.
I always thought Washington state was full of peacenik hippie freaks. Turns out it is, except they keep electing Democrats who keep out a state income tax (you read that right) in favor of a single-mother-crippling 9-percent sales tax.
Microsoft pays no federal income tax. Bill Gates pays no state income tax. Why do people vote for legislators that would rather have a dollar from a working mom than ten dollars from a billionaire? I can't say, but I intend to find out. I think it has something to do with how rare it would be finding Republicans campaigning on a state income-tax platform... Ah, another fine benefit of the two-party system.
Damn. Guess I'm one of them bitter 'mericans.
The number of people that are able to download movies P2P *
is probably going to cost them about $200 bucks.
Then factor in how much they'd lose in DVD sales eventually to the hard-core fans that aren't morally shy about downloading a DivX rip off Kazaa. If that would be substantial, they can release their own crappy-quality leak that will be instantly proliferated throughout the community, since it's the only one there at first. This will make finding the high-quality rip that will eventually be made from a DVD that much harder. It's much more insidious a way to spoof than just having void files that are the same size, ala the RIAA, because plenty of people will download and share it, thinking they've got the "real" version and not knowing there's a much better one out there.
Add to that the publicity value in the war against terrori^H^H^H^H err pirates to "Congresscritters" and the public. "Hollywood bribes Democrats, Republicans" doesn't capture the public headlines as well as "Hollywood campaigns to combat pirates" - "Avast, ye scurvy dogs" says Jack Valenti.
I'm not saying the MPAA is behind this leak, I'm just saying that, if they weren't, the might want to think about it...
"Many millions of dollars were at stake. The contract for Dolby was one of the best things ever to happen to that company. They are now the audio system for every television that will ever be sold."
And MIT settled for 30 million dollars??! I would have auctioned my vote off! Get Phillips and Dolby in a bidding match? Sky's the limit!
Haha. I hope Lim feels like a greedy idiot. "Man, if I'd been a little more principled, I'd still have my reputation, and if I'd been a little less principled, I'd be the seventh wealthiest man on the planet. As it is, all I've got is my lousy 8 million bucks, glaven..."
=)
"So you see, Mr. Bigglesworth, I didn't want to destroy the entire frickin' world, but those Linux geeks really left me no choice. Reversing the earth's magnetic polarity was the only way it could be done without violating the DoJ consent agreement."
"Let's see...Start...Programs...World Control Devices...Disasters...Microsoft...where the hell..?"
"You seem to be trying to destroy the world. Would you like some help with that?"
"Clippy! Oh thank god. Begin 'Gates-Plan-B'. So long, Mr. Stallman. I hope there's a GNU version of 'Microsoft 1000-year Radiation Shield
*maniacal laughter*
Ah, but I'm using Mozilla as we speak, and I enjoy that I can watch flash movies in it.
I'm fairly confident of MS on this one. If Eolas prevents anyone but MS from using plug-ins, the Web will probably shift around the new environment. Pages will still be IEML, but that will now mean they won't include lots of executable content. If Eolas wants to prevent anyone but one browser from using plug-ins, and plans to sell to AOL, AOL will probably cut a deal with MS to license the patent. MS has a lot of money. AOL needs a lot of money. Makes sense.
Don't forget, this patent runs out in 2014, plenty of time for IE to be back to normal by Longhorn... =)
If I worked for Eolas, I'd be saving my receipts under lock and key for 10 years in case of "surprise audits".
I'd also be tagging my family members with GPS in case of sudden "enemy combatant" status. I'd want to know which Navy brig they were being unlawfully imprisoned in, or which Syrian hell-hole they'd been deported to.
Heaven help them if the Ministry of Justice gets involved...
Geez, didn't realize this was such a touchy subject with the masses... I thought the /. mentality understood that any large body can be understood by a system of statistical processes, such that, even while two people might disagree with the idea that the current patent system is broken, it is an opinion shared by a large enough percentage to be considered "the /. mentality".
/. crowd, I'm looking for both sides of the issue, as I suspect many others are. Saying "you don't speak for me, bub" doesn't really contribute much to the discourse. How about, "I don't think the current patent system is flawed, because I'm a dot-com millionaire" or something. Then we have a rational argument, and a primary-source. Useful information.
Actually, when I ask questions to the
Hell, the parent probably does agree that the patent system is flawed, he just resents being grouped with everyone else.
"Yes, we are all different."
--"I'm not."
How about you?
It's true. In the article, he specifically says, "What if only *one* browser was allowed to use plug-ins?" Not, "What if *everyone* but MS was allowed to use them."
There is a company called Paper of Record that is archiving old newspapers using OCR technology. They scan the newspaper pages, OCR it, and create a searchable database you can scan for keywords. You do a search, and can read view the original scanned page or the OCR'd text.
http://www.paperofrecord.com
I bet their software/hardware combination would greatly help an effort such as this.
Heh... Block-quoted for 2 free mod-points. =)
Anyway, I just checked them out, and they have a really great idea. Except for the expensive membership part. They have searchable full-page images of a lot of *old* newspapers (like, early 1800s through present). The problem with using them for something like PG is that they want money. They're in the business of selling their work through subscriptions to their newspaper service, and selling their technology to media companies that want to put their newspaper online. Still, definitely worth checking out. Their parent company is Canadian, so they carry Canadian, US, and UK newspapers. Would be perfect without that "expensive as a regular newspaper that you don't pay for because you read it online"...
This post and subsequent moderation is why there is M2. Don't rubberstamp moderation results, take the time to investigate. Warning: under the current consensus system, you may never moderate again for insightfully metamoderating. =) I M2 twice a day, and haven't moderated in a month.
but in order to displace Microsoft we are going to need tools that Windows users can use.
But you missed my entire point! Why is that our goal?? Why should that be the goal of anyone who does not have a direct financial incentive to get people to switch (ie, people who work for RedHat)? What happened to our goal of just having a system that does what we want it to do, because Windows doesn't? Why limit our goals to just killing Microsoft?
The real goal should be to get to the point where the line between it and Windows is transparent.
.NET whenever they wrote anything, it wouldn't be as difficult to make a program collaborate. But a lot of people don't bother, often because it doesn't occur to them that someone would want to chain their program together; or because they don't want other people using their program in a non-approved way. Do we want to clone that paradigm? That apps should be feature-laden, bloated, and only useful in one specific way? As opposed to the typical Unix "do one thing really well (and make it a link in a chain)" paradigm? I dunno...
You know, I can't figure this out at all. Here we have the Linux community who, in large part, is not being compensated for their contributions. Therefore they are free to make whatever sort of contribution they want. And you know what sort of alternative to Microsoft platform they come up with? Something that attempts to look and feel identical to its Microsoft counterpart!
Why? Why, why, why? We have the freedom to explore completely different paradigms in computing and user-interaction, and we insist on just writing open-source applications that clone their MS-equivalents. So the best that anyone can do, on any platform of their choice, is the Microsoft vision.
"But we have to clone MS so that we can get Mom and Dad, and Pointy-Haired Boss, to switch to Linux!"
-- Why?
"Well, duh, so that we can kill Microsoft!"
-- Why?
"Because Microsoft is Evil, like the Nazis!"
-- You lose.
Why are we competing with MS on MS's own ground? When did Linux shift from being an alternative to being a clone? When did we stop being a bunch of people that wanted an OS that did what we wanted it to, and start being a bunch of people whose only driving goal is to kick MS off the desktop? What do we have to gain from that? I understand that RedHat has a financial interest in making software that looks and feels like Redmond's - they want enterprises to switch, so that they can sell systems, and enterprises will switch if it's not hard. Simple. But why does everyone else, that doesn't have a financial incentive, jump on that wagon? Why do people invest their limited time and energy, not to writing better software, but writing same software? Why do people in the Slashdot community constantly talk about how much better the world will be when there's no difference between Linux and Windows?
The best software on *nix does it differently. Look at Apache. Anyone who wants it can figure out how to edit an httpd.conf file. It's not terribly hard. Why would anyone want to give it an IIS-like interface?
I like linux because all the security tools are written for it, they're free, and I have the source to them. It's a hacker's playground. These tools don't have GUIs, let alone ones that look like they came from MS. Doesn't bother me. I'm going to use Linux so that I can use these tools, and when I write tools, I'm going to build them from the ones that are already successful at what they do.
As an aside, anyone notice how much better the command-line paradigm deals with chaining/piping programs together? When something terminates at the GUI, it's really hard to make use of it without rewriting it. Maybe if everyone on Windows started using COM and
Those are my questions. If you have answers, I'm all ears.
is civil disobedience (barely).
Want to find out if the feds are monitoring a couple of people's book lists, or everyone's requests for a few books? Join me in padding our FBI files by checking out as many books as you dare on the subjects of:
Islam
Middle-Eastern history
Anything by Chomsky
1984 and Animal Farm
A People's History of the United States
then wait and watch for white window-less paneled vans parked on your street, with "Flowers By Irene" or "Two FBI Guys Pizza" stenciled on the side.
True terrorists - please continue your normal reading habits, as you may already be under surveillance, and any results under this system would only distort our survey.
No one's mentioned this yet, but in Amerika, it is Election Day.
Has everyone worried about AshKroft et al voted?
I know, I know, I'm preaching to the choir. Everyone on Slashdot that expresses their concern about an issue goes out and tells 100 people about it, and gets them all active in progressive change. Example: do you know who Maher Arar is?
I don't mean to get too bitter here, guys, but regime change starts at home. It's like the old Steven Stills song. If you can't have a system you love, umm, change the system you've got until it more closely resembles the system you'd love. =)
LOL. That's a great idea. I must be the one guy without mod points, but have an imaginary +1 on me.
When I recently had to negotiate a clause in my contract, I didn't do it in perl, but I did find it necessary to break the complex clause into subclauses inside parantheses, linked together with AND and OR operators, so that I could be sure the recruiter knew what he was passing back and forth between myself and the lawyers...
I wish I would have thought to have written it somewhat obscurely... seems like, if you can make them agree to it, you're playing their game ; )
Then again, some of the mainstream news commentary at the time suggested, conspiracy theory-esque, that maybe this was all calculated.
Dude, I seriously doubt that mainstream news was speculating anything that crack-pot.
I invoke Occam's Razor on this one. The man got carried away, shot off his mouth, and blew his chances at the fame he coveted so much. Now he'll be remembered as the guy that cost America the Microsoft case. No way he tanked his reputation on some whacked-out conspiracy theory. If he had wanted to throw it to MS, he could have done it in a way that wouldn't have put himself into jeopardy... talk about being a martyr.
I'm with squigglesqlash on this one, but I think you'd leave the argument incomplete if you didn't mention that this was Microsoft's plan from the start!
I'd have to check the books to figure out when they decided it, but it was probably back in 1996 when Clinton got re-elected. Delay until the next election. Makes sense, doesn't it? Nothing to lose and everything to gain. Another election gives you another roll of the dice. Clinton picked this fight - anyone else would be better.
The second tactic was a little more shrewd. Get Jackson out. The MS lawyers deliberately baited him, trying to get evidence (ie statements) that could be used to get him thrown off the case. Jackson's an idiot. He should have seen it coming and kept his dumb mouth shut. If he wanted to punish MS that bad (and it was obvious, from his statements, that he did), he should have known he'd have to be less of a glory-hound until after the trial.
After seeing Bill's videotaped deposition in '94, I thought MS lawyers were as bad as their PR and Advertising people. But they've definitely reinvented themselves...
What it reminds me of is the SNL sketch of Bill Clinton after the impeachment aquittal. He trots out to the podium, leans forward, and intones, "I...am...bulletproof." Walks away, stops, turns back around and adds, "Next time, y'all best bring kryptonite."
Personally, I think it should have been the States' strategy to, like MS for so long, delay until the next election. I am not convinced the Republicans will be in power in two weeks, let alone two years. Stupid to always give MS the initiative...
It's about as painful to watch as someone playing chess badly.
No, the President dissolved the Senate!
"Fear will keep the local systems in line."
"The Senate has got a lousy record on my judges. We need to change the Senate for a lot of reasons, and one reason is to make sure we've got a sound judiciary," he said Monday in Denver.
"This comprehensive plan calls for a clean start..." added the President's lapdog, Ari Fleisher.
(ok so it's not as bad as i made it sound, but it's still pretty funny, in context)
Yep, and it works, too. Feel free to use it when you
get old enough to start thinking about college ; )
hehehe... my favorite "proud parent" bumper sticker is still "My kid reads your email" from Thinkgeek =)
To be considered for the Hinman program, students must have a 3.0 grade-point average ...
Umm, it's been my experience that the folks with the real drive have shitty GPA's, because they want to spend all their time and energy on their other projects. Perhaps they should say, "To be considered for the Hinman program, students may not have more than a 3.0 grade-point average." =)