This is not a case of MS inventing some new, crazy way to controll the minds of the world. This is just a case of thier so called "innovation" (read: taking someones idea and pretending it was theirs). flyswat was doing this exact same thing years ago. Its not that scary, it is more annoying than anything else. I guess some people like it though.
Its not changing the page or anything like that, it just adds its own links to conent from it's own database. Thats it. If you don't like it, don't use it.
This article is completely blowing it out of proportion. As if hate groups could make you see their content. How? You would have to knowingly install their add-ins.
This article is is just FUD. Its anti-MS FUD, so many of you out there may forgive the author. But FUD is FUD, and this article does not even attempt to look at the issue even handedly.
I fear the worst miss will be his prediction of the egalitarian distribution of the fruit of massively-available technology. It's more likely that the physical benefits will be everywhere, and everyone will be sending the monetary benefits to Bill Gates et al in the form of subscription and repair fees
I agree with you. In general, I found his predictions to be very optimistic in terms of the applications of the technology he was using. In some ways it seemed naive
It seems hard to beleive that an insurance compnay would reward good driving, and ignore bad driving, thus providing benefits to good drivers only. I mean, really, it seems to me that they would much rather a system where bad drivers were penalised just as much as good drivers were rewarded.
Perhaps it is their right to know just what sort of drivers they are insuring, but . . . it just seems like such and invasion of privacy. To the point where our entire genetic map is available to the right people, plus full and intricate details of every infection and whatever we have experienced.
I just find it strange that his attitude is so incredibly optimistic about this stuff, and in terms of the threats his only retort is, well we've done OK so far, I think we will still be OK.
I just do not have the same trust in our policy makers.
This technology may be really good for humanity, but ther potential to create incredible damage to humanity by some stupid decisions is enourmous. I think that the future should be approached much more cautiously than James Martin seems to suggest. This sort of tech should not be developed if it is clear that it will be used for unenlightened purposes.
Well, not being a US citizen, I must say that I am damn glad that this tech did not originate in the US. That gives the rest of the world a chance to get a hold of it one day.
The US are such bastards when it comes to crypto that any crypto tech that is being developed there is likely to stay there, or only leave in a watered-down version.
I say hooray that non US companies are developing crypto, and keeping the US governments hands off the tech.
Sorry, but i think that you are wrong. Having lived in Denmark, I have seen a community that is very open to sex. One where parents would rather have their kids having sex in their bedrooms, than sneaking off to do it behind the school.
Danish media is filled with sex. It is portrayed as something common that people do and enjoy. There is very little mistyque to it. Danish school children have informed, mature attitudes to sex.
And yet Denmark has a thriving sex industry, porn is everywhere, usually displayed in front of the counter at news agencies. It is just as big there as anywhere else.
So I don't agree that represion of sex in the US has increased the desire for porn.
Re:Great Movie, great for Americans.
on
Review: The Dish
·
· Score: 1
Yes, some of the Australianisms would be lost in this movie. But I think it is still fine for the US market. I mean we in Australia watch plenty of movies filled with americanisms. It doesn't take away from the enjoyment of the movie.
I wanted to say to JK, don't feel bad about having no idea about the broadcast from Australia. I am an Australian and I had no idea until I saw this movie.
Don't want to give bits away so if you haven't seen the movie stop reading. But my favourite part was when the US ambasador thought he was listening into Neil Armstrong after the link went down, when it was actually the NASA guy downstairs talking shit into a walky-talky. This is definately a must see movie
Yeah, IBM is different in all its different parts. For example my father has been a consultant with IBM GLobal Services Autralia for over a decade, and has worn a suit every single day (because he had to). Now he has been transfered to a new hip office where they have the.com style bright coloured walls, blow up rubber balls to sit on, wireless phones for all employees in the office, and a bunch of other crazy shit.
Since then he wears jeans and t-shirts to work
Some parts of IBM are really trying to change their image, but IBM is such a many faced beast, you never know what it is going to do next
Don't knock the mexican food. Anyone in Sydney should check out Azteca's mexican restaraunt on avoca street, Randwick
The guy who runs it is mexican so you know its authentic. The nachos is part of my regular diet. And if you are trully adventurous, there's the kangaroo fajitas
This really is nothing new, phony grassroots activity has been a basic practice of marketing and PR companies for decades
Browse around the prwatch site, they have tons of examples of phony community action being used by corporations. It goes much deeper than generating buzz for a new movie, many of the public action groups that influence government policy are funded by corporate money
Fake fan pages is one of the more benign manifestations of this sort of thing. There is much much more sinister stuff going on all around us.
Don't be surprised by this, it happens all the time
Err, sorry buddy, I don't know what you think is worse than raping someone, but I sure don't hang out with people who talk like that.
What kind of friends do you have?
Apart from that though, the post may be a bit slanted, but thats what the discussion is here for. Who cares about whether you consider this post, news for nerds, stuff that matters. If it gets a discussion going that people are interested in and can contribute meaningfully to, then it has acheived it's purpose, and is a welcome addition to slashdot in my opinion
And remember, if you don't like, don't read it, and don't bother posting to it
I guess now if you write an email virus, and you get caught, you can bring down everyone who ran the attachment for breaching your copyright. So you will be able to pay off all the damages you have done with all the damages you collect from the thousands of victims out there.
I think that it is about more than just credit for FSF. I think that there is a serious desire to be as correct as possible. for example he writes:
I have no opinion "intellectual property rights," and if you are thoughtful you will have none either. That term is a catch-all, covering copyrights, patents, trademarks, and other disparate legal systems; they are so different, in the laws and in their effects, that any statement about all of them at once is almost surely foolish.
I mean yeah, its true, but he doesn't respond to what Allchin says at all. I mean he could say the above and then discuss GPL's impact on several of the systems he points out. But instead he just states that he has no opinion on IP, says why, and thats that.
I am sorry, but this is just being picky for picky's sake. This is not sticking up for the FSF.
What I don't get, right, is why biologists seems to feel the need to constantly throw evidence in the face of creationists.
I mean, what is the point. If you beleive in creationism, then scientific proof is ont going to change anything. I mean, you would already be thinking that all biologists are just tools of satan propogating false evidence to test the true believers, so what difference is some genetic argument going to make?
Creationsists will not believe this no matter what proof you give them, and everyone else already thinks that evolution happended.
Yes, I agree, one of RMS' prime motivations seems to be correctness, or to put it other way, be is bloody pedantic.
In every article of his that I have read, he never lets a single wrong point, or even slightly vague description go by. His dedication to pedantry is trully mind boggling.
Although I really enjoyed this article, and think that ol RMS is trully an awesome character, I really do wonder how he has the energy to be so picky all the time.
RMS has to directly take on Microsoft et al. I work with a third party and I will tell you, high-faluting speech about abe lincoln will not win that war. What will win that war is systemic, on message and practical stuff about pertinent American values- in this case, free enterprise.
I don't think that RMS really gives a shite about taking on Microsoft. From my understanding of his line, it's more like,
"Well free software must exist, so we will providea free alternative to all software so that no one has to ever use non-free software. If you don't want to join us, then go and enjoy loosing your liberties, but we will hold our heads high and look down our noses at you and pity your self-inflicted slavery."
I believe that making everyone use free software is not his plan, he just wants it there so that the elite goup of computer uses in the world who value freedom above all else can use it and form a big community and make him feel special.
Just because he's against them doesn't mean he has to presume that we'd agree with that position. And to frame our disagreement in the language of thoughtfulness/thoughtlessness insults the hours of philosophical and moral debate we have invested in arriving at our own conclusions, be they contrary to his or not.
Don't think you read the article right. RMS is not saying if you are thoughtful you will think the same way as me about intellectual property. He is saying that if you are thoughtful you will see that intellectual property is a catch-all for a bunch of different things, and each of those different things should be discussed seperately.
He actually doesn't state what his opinions are, or tell anyone to agree with them, only that intellectual property as a concept can't really be discussed in the way that Allchin was discussing it.
Just so you can get an idea of how hot it is down there:
100 degrees F = 38 degrees C (rounded)
150 degrees F = 66 degrees C (rounded)
and 1200 feet = 366 m
66! ouch!
I do not think that this article is talking about routers. It seems very clearly to be referring to desktop systems.
There are people out there who prefer command lines, but there are also people who prefer a GUI. Its fair enough to say that you can mistakes by clicking in the wrong place (although this does not really apply to a keyboard driven GUI, did you read the article properly?). But one thing that I find really frustrating is the precision of the command line. I am a shocking speller, and it often takes me 3 or 4 goes as a complex command before I get it right. With a GUI, I don't need to worry about syntax, I can let the system handle that, and interact with it on a higher level of abstraction.
This is most certainly a desktop-only concept, it is all about usability and making things easier. And there is definately a place for that. The GUI will never do everything a CLI will do, but then the same is true the other way around. Different tools for different jobs.
The status bar for tar was just an example. This article doesn't really explore all the possibilities very well. The concept here is that the GUI and CLI interact in a seamless way. Its not about loading more eye candy for the sake of it. It is really about bridging a gap, to improve the GUI so that you can acheive more with it. I say this is a good thing, and could well add more power to a desktop environment, making more of the UNIX tools readily available to the GUI user.
why would you want to limit the uses of linux? Linux belongs to the community, who are you to say what it should or shouldn't be used for.
If linux is not for playing games, why are people writing games for linux? There is obviously a demand in the community for such things. So who can say that they are wrong.
If you only wish to use linux for so called "serious computing" then good for you. But I don't think you should put people down who are trying to use linux the way they want to.
I agree with you here to a point. I am the youngest developer at my company, but have been made the most senior developemnt position. So in my experience age is not the greatest issue.
It may have somehting to do with the way you conduct yourself, but, on the other hand, it can also have something to do with your employers.
I work in a very open minded atmosphere where my employers are not bogged down by stereotypes. I htink that this makes a big difference as well.
I definately think that education cuts will have long term effects on this country, for IT, and many other industries
Before I left uni, I was one of the last years to attend many of the compulsory subjects. About 4 or 5 of the core subjects of Comp Sci were being axed because the students didn't like them. I mean please, I imagine that faculty would be in a better position to know what sort of thing we need to learn than a bunch of whining undergraduates who don't feel like doing hard work
Australian universities are finding that they have to attract students to their courses, or else they will get axed, and any faculties are adopting a "student friendly" approach which involves letting the students dictate what is and isn't taught.
While I don't have a problem with getting student feedback, this is going to far, and new students will find that they are lacking basic knowledge that previous graduates had. This can only be a bad thing
Not an individual, but a company called Lexicon, I quote from CNET (this was the first reference to them I could find)
The name Itanium was chosen to "reflect the strength and performance of the processor," said Jami Dover, vice president of marketing at Intel. Sausalito, California-based Lexicon, which also coined the chip names Celeron and Xeon, came up with the name, she said.
somehting I am curious about, in the FSF response:
If these three flaws were solved, the APSL would be a free software
license with three major practical problems, reminiscent of the NPL:
It is not a true copyleft, because it allows linking with other
files which may be entirely proprietary.
It is unfair, since it requires you to give Apple rights
to your changes which Apple will not give you for its code.
It is incompatible with the GPL.
The last point intruiges me, can a FSF advocate out there tell me why not being compatible with the GPL is a problem?
I mean if it is free software, then it is free software. Why is it being incompatible with the GPL a problem, if it is free?
Apart from this, though, I like reading these comments form the FSF, I feel its good to know that there are people who care about more than the buck, and who are not afraid to appeal to the heart of others.
I did resize slashdot, down to the size of these screenshots. The resulting page was twice the horizontal size of my browser window.
This is a valid point being raised here, even on those screenshots, you could only see a fragment of the webpage that was loaded into it
Yes, HTML is a markup language, and does not lend itself to the ideas of most graphic designers that think they understand the web, but it is challening to fit content and navigation elements into a document and make it look good in any browser.
And don't tell me that it doesn't matter how it looks. The reality of web design is that your customers want it to look good, and when they go and visit their friend who has IE3 and 640 x 480 resolution with 256 colours to show off their site, and the site looks like crap, they are going to come back to you asking why.
I personaly like the original concept of the web, and I would like to create websites that are functional, not too flashy, and render well in any browser because they don't try and do anything unatural, but I have to make a living, and my customers want their site to look like www.whatever.com that was designed by some new york web design company that thinks HTML is what u generate with a Flash export.
The fact that full blown browsers may appear on a PDA is scary, cause if that gets in the hands of one of my customers, they will want their site to look awesome on it, as well as on the 20" monitor they have at their office. And they don't want to make design compromises to account for that.
Konqueror running on a PDA is cool as long as it stays fringe, otherwise its going to be a big shit for web designers
Slashdot Mirror
This is not a case of MS inventing some new, crazy way to controll the minds of the world. This is just a case of thier so called "innovation" (read: taking someones idea and pretending it was theirs). flyswat was doing this exact same thing years ago. Its not that scary, it is more annoying than anything else. I guess some people like it though.
Its not changing the page or anything like that, it just adds its own links to conent from it's own database. Thats it. If you don't like it, don't use it.
This article is completely blowing it out of proportion. As if hate groups could make you see their content. How? You would have to knowingly install their add-ins.
This article is is just FUD. Its anti-MS FUD, so many of you out there may forgive the author. But FUD is FUD, and this article does not even attempt to look at the issue even handedly.
--
I agree with you. In general, I found his predictions to be very optimistic in terms of the applications of the technology he was using. In some ways it seemed naive
It seems hard to beleive that an insurance compnay would reward good driving, and ignore bad driving, thus providing benefits to good drivers only. I mean, really, it seems to me that they would much rather a system where bad drivers were penalised just as much as good drivers were rewarded.
Perhaps it is their right to know just what sort of drivers they are insuring, but . . . it just seems like such and invasion of privacy. To the point where our entire genetic map is available to the right people, plus full and intricate details of every infection and whatever we have experienced.
I just find it strange that his attitude is so incredibly optimistic about this stuff, and in terms of the threats his only retort is, well we've done OK so far, I think we will still be OK.
I just do not have the same trust in our policy makers.
This technology may be really good for humanity, but ther potential to create incredible damage to humanity by some stupid decisions is enourmous. I think that the future should be approached much more cautiously than James Martin seems to suggest. This sort of tech should not be developed if it is clear that it will be used for unenlightened purposes.
--
Well, not being a US citizen, I must say that I am damn glad that this tech did not originate in the US. That gives the rest of the world a chance to get a hold of it one day.
The US are such bastards when it comes to crypto that any crypto tech that is being developed there is likely to stay there, or only leave in a watered-down version.
I say hooray that non US companies are developing crypto, and keeping the US governments hands off the tech.
--
Sorry, but i think that you are wrong. Having lived in Denmark, I have seen a community that is very open to sex. One where parents would rather have their kids having sex in their bedrooms, than sneaking off to do it behind the school.
Danish media is filled with sex. It is portrayed as something common that people do and enjoy. There is very little mistyque to it. Danish school children have informed, mature attitudes to sex.
And yet Denmark has a thriving sex industry, porn is everywhere, usually displayed in front of the counter at news agencies. It is just as big there as anywhere else.
So I don't agree that represion of sex in the US has increased the desire for porn.
Yes, some of the Australianisms would be lost in this movie. But I think it is still fine for the US market. I mean we in Australia watch plenty of movies filled with americanisms. It doesn't take away from the enjoyment of the movie.
I wanted to say to JK, don't feel bad about having no idea about the broadcast from Australia. I am an Australian and I had no idea until I saw this movie.
Don't want to give bits away so if you haven't seen the movie stop reading. But my favourite part was when the US ambasador thought he was listening into Neil Armstrong after the link went down, when it was actually the NASA guy downstairs talking shit into a walky-talky. This is definately a must see movie
Yeah, IBM is different in all its different parts. For example my father has been a consultant with IBM GLobal Services Autralia for over a decade, and has worn a suit every single day (because he had to). Now he has been transfered to a new hip office where they have the .com style bright coloured walls, blow up rubber balls to sit on, wireless phones for all employees in the office, and a bunch of other crazy shit.
Since then he wears jeans and t-shirts to work
Some parts of IBM are really trying to change their image, but IBM is such a many faced beast, you never know what it is going to do next
Don't knock the mexican food. Anyone in Sydney should check out Azteca's mexican restaraunt on avoca street, Randwick
The guy who runs it is mexican so you know its authentic. The nachos is part of my regular diet. And if you are trully adventurous, there's the kangaroo fajitas
Australia rocks, and don't deny it.
This really is nothing new, phony grassroots activity has been a basic practice of marketing and PR companies for decades
Browse around the prwatch site, they have tons of examples of phony community action being used by corporations. It goes much deeper than generating buzz for a new movie, many of the public action groups that influence government policy are funded by corporate money
Fake fan pages is one of the more benign manifestations of this sort of thing. There is much much more sinister stuff going on all around us.
Don't be surprised by this, it happens all the time
Err, sorry buddy, I don't know what you think is worse than raping someone, but I sure don't hang out with people who talk like that.
What kind of friends do you have?
Apart from that though, the post may be a bit slanted, but thats what the discussion is here for. Who cares about whether you consider this post, news for nerds, stuff that matters. If it gets a discussion going that people are interested in and can contribute meaningfully to, then it has acheived it's purpose, and is a welcome addition to slashdot in my opinion
And remember, if you don't like, don't read it, and don't bother posting to it
I guess now if you write an email virus, and you get caught, you can bring down everyone who ran the attachment for breaching your copyright. So you will be able to pay off all the damages you have done with all the damages you collect from the thousands of victims out there.
Now that is a sure way to cause some chaos
I think that it is about more than just credit for FSF. I think that there is a serious desire to be as correct as possible. for example he writes:
I mean yeah, its true, but he doesn't respond to what Allchin says at all. I mean he could say the above and then discuss GPL's impact on several of the systems he points out. But instead he just states that he has no opinion on IP, says why, and thats that.
I am sorry, but this is just being picky for picky's sake. This is not sticking up for the FSF.
What I don't get, right, is why biologists seems to feel the need to constantly throw evidence in the face of creationists.
I mean, what is the point. If you beleive in creationism, then scientific proof is ont going to change anything. I mean, you would already be thinking that all biologists are just tools of satan propogating false evidence to test the true believers, so what difference is some genetic argument going to make?
Creationsists will not believe this no matter what proof you give them, and everyone else already thinks that evolution happended.
sheesh!
Yes, I agree, one of RMS' prime motivations seems to be correctness, or to put it other way, be is bloody pedantic.
In every article of his that I have read, he never lets a single wrong point, or even slightly vague description go by. His dedication to pedantry is trully mind boggling.
Although I really enjoyed this article, and think that ol RMS is trully an awesome character, I really do wonder how he has the energy to be so picky all the time.
I don't think that RMS really gives a shite about taking on Microsoft. From my understanding of his line, it's more like,
"Well free software must exist, so we will providea free alternative to all software so that no one has to ever use non-free software. If you don't want to join us, then go and enjoy loosing your liberties, but we will hold our heads high and look down our noses at you and pity your self-inflicted slavery."
I believe that making everyone use free software is not his plan, he just wants it there so that the elite goup of computer uses in the world who value freedom above all else can use it and form a big community and make him feel special.
Don't think you read the article right. RMS is not saying if you are thoughtful you will think the same way as me about intellectual property. He is saying that if you are thoughtful you will see that intellectual property is a catch-all for a bunch of different things, and each of those different things should be discussed seperately.
He actually doesn't state what his opinions are, or tell anyone to agree with them, only that intellectual property as a concept can't really be discussed in the way that Allchin was discussing it.
Just so you can get an idea of how hot it is down there:
100 degrees F = 38 degrees C (rounded)
150 degrees F = 66 degrees C (rounded)
and 1200 feet = 366 m
66! ouch!
Just so you can get an idea of how hot it is down there: 100 degrees F = 38 degrees C (rounded) 150 degrees F = 66 degrees C (rounded) and 1200 feet = 366 m 66! ouch!
I do not think that this article is talking about routers. It seems very clearly to be referring to desktop systems.
There are people out there who prefer command lines, but there are also people who prefer a GUI. Its fair enough to say that you can mistakes by clicking in the wrong place (although this does not really apply to a keyboard driven GUI, did you read the article properly?). But one thing that I find really frustrating is the precision of the command line. I am a shocking speller, and it often takes me 3 or 4 goes as a complex command before I get it right. With a GUI, I don't need to worry about syntax, I can let the system handle that, and interact with it on a higher level of abstraction.
This is most certainly a desktop-only concept, it is all about usability and making things easier. And there is definately a place for that. The GUI will never do everything a CLI will do, but then the same is true the other way around. Different tools for different jobs.
The status bar for tar was just an example. This article doesn't really explore all the possibilities very well. The concept here is that the GUI and CLI interact in a seamless way. Its not about loading more eye candy for the sake of it. It is really about bridging a gap, to improve the GUI so that you can acheive more with it. I say this is a good thing, and could well add more power to a desktop environment, making more of the UNIX tools readily available to the GUI user.
why would you want to limit the uses of linux? Linux belongs to the community, who are you to say what it should or shouldn't be used for.
If linux is not for playing games, why are people writing games for linux? There is obviously a demand in the community for such things. So who can say that they are wrong.
If you only wish to use linux for so called "serious computing" then good for you. But I don't think you should put people down who are trying to use linux the way they want to.
I agree with you here to a point. I am the youngest developer at my company, but have been made the most senior developemnt position. So in my experience age is not the greatest issue.
It may have somehting to do with the way you conduct yourself, but, on the other hand, it can also have something to do with your employers.
I work in a very open minded atmosphere where my employers are not bogged down by stereotypes. I htink that this makes a big difference as well.
I definately think that education cuts will have long term effects on this country, for IT, and many other industries
Before I left uni, I was one of the last years to attend many of the compulsory subjects. About 4 or 5 of the core subjects of Comp Sci were being axed because the students didn't like them. I mean please, I imagine that faculty would be in a better position to know what sort of thing we need to learn than a bunch of whining undergraduates who don't feel like doing hard work
Australian universities are finding that they have to attract students to their courses, or else they will get axed, and any faculties are adopting a "student friendly" approach which involves letting the students dictate what is and isn't taught.
While I don't have a problem with getting student feedback, this is going to far, and new students will find that they are lacking basic knowledge that previous graduates had. This can only be a bad thing
Not an individual, but a company called Lexicon, I quote from CNET (this was the first reference to them I could find)
They are the ones responsible for this weird name trend, I can't seem to find their website though, can anyone help me out?
somehting I am curious about, in the FSF response:
The last point intruiges me, can a FSF advocate out there tell me why not being compatible with the GPL is a problem?
I mean if it is free software, then it is free software. Why is it being incompatible with the GPL a problem, if it is free?
Apart from this, though, I like reading these comments form the FSF, I feel its good to know that there are people who care about more than the buck, and who are not afraid to appeal to the heart of others.
malkes me go all warm and fuzzy
How about an email with a flash file attacment.
while its running, it sends a message to your server telling you the email address of the person stupid enough to launch the attachment.
The next wave of emaiil you send out only to those addresses, and attach the virus instead
OR, instead just sell your database ov stupid users
certainly very evil possibilites exist here
I did resize slashdot, down to the size of these screenshots. The resulting page was twice the horizontal size of my browser window.
This is a valid point being raised here, even on those screenshots, you could only see a fragment of the webpage that was loaded into it
Yes, HTML is a markup language, and does not lend itself to the ideas of most graphic designers that think they understand the web, but it is challening to fit content and navigation elements into a document and make it look good in any browser.
And don't tell me that it doesn't matter how it looks. The reality of web design is that your customers want it to look good, and when they go and visit their friend who has IE3 and 640 x 480 resolution with 256 colours to show off their site, and the site looks like crap, they are going to come back to you asking why.
I personaly like the original concept of the web, and I would like to create websites that are functional, not too flashy, and render well in any browser because they don't try and do anything unatural, but I have to make a living, and my customers want their site to look like www.whatever.com that was designed by some new york web design company that thinks HTML is what u generate with a Flash export.
The fact that full blown browsers may appear on a PDA is scary, cause if that gets in the hands of one of my customers, they will want their site to look awesome on it, as well as on the 20" monitor they have at their office. And they don't want to make design compromises to account for that.
Konqueror running on a PDA is cool as long as it stays fringe, otherwise its going to be a big shit for web designers