Yet another change that would help in the adoption - tools/nuts/bolts.
If you own a "furrin" car (my preference is German), you know how SIMPLE it is to use metric tools. Example: list the sizes of your wrenches, in order, from smallest to largest. Doing it by 8ths/16ths/halves etc is tough. Millimeters is braindead. I know my socket set goes from 5mm to 19mm. What is the next largest size after 3/8? Uhhhh. How about after 7mm?
I am sure that carpenters and mechanics would have a tough time adjusting, because you do get to know the system you use. But once you use metric tools, they are a breeze. You'll realize how much smarter and efficient the system is.
Why, oh why, can't there be an official release of the kernel that describes the changes in plain language instead of coder-speak? Look, I know what kind of people it takes to hack the kernel - brilliant people. They think like coders. But when new versions of the kernel are released, why can't there be a summary of what is new/changed? In simple terms.
Not everyone who uses Linux is a kernel hacker, especially nowadays. And yes, there are sites out there that give rundowns of what has changed. But wouldn't it be nice to have an *official* release statement that outlines the changes made? It seems logical to me that the people managing the changes would be able to articulate this the best. I think it would go a long way in making Linux seem a bit more mature.
Actually, Brad Sucks is a dork-in-the-basement-with-a-keyboard (And I mean that in the nicest possible way, Brad!;-)... he just happens to be a very talented dork-in-the-basement-with-a-keyboard.
I know, but I wanted to keep that a surprise. I didn't realize it until I listened to his music, liked it, and checked out his bio. He is definitely worth checking out.
This always annoys me. Why do you think it's top 40? Most people like that form of music. Just because YOU don't doesn't mean everyone is clamoring for other music, otherwise the "indie" labels would be much more successful.
At which point they would cease to be considered "indie". I remember when the Red Hot Chili Peppers and Jane's Addiction were alternative (when alternative meant something). Now they are Top 40 for no other reason than the industry owners realized how good they were. But IMO bands are never as good as they were before they became popular. It seems that "the industry" corrupts them or something once they become popular. Metallica, Aerosmith, Guns-n-Roses - their early work is so much better and pure than later stuff. It's like the music that gets them the good record deals is the first thing that suffers.
To rant a little, Metallica is a great example. They were essentially niche music until And Justice For All came out. People started to take notice. Then the Black album hit, and they were all over the place. MTV, award shows, etc. Their music has never been the same. It lost something. Guns-n-Roses first album was 100% pure, and they became popular by word of mouth. I remember listening to that tape a full year and a half before they ever made a video. After that they did some somewhat interesting stuff, but it seemed a little forced. The Beastie Boys is another good example, they were amazing up until they made it big with Ill Communication. They kind of lost it after that. I really liked an album called "Lemonade and Brownies" by a group called Sugar Ray. A couple of years later, they made it to the radio with the pop-garbage that made them famous. It isn't at all like the stuff on the Lemonade album. It is like someone told them "If you change your sound, we'll make you famous!". Wanna see how it works in semi-real-life? Check out Making the Band on MTV. It's all about getting famous and getting paid. Integrity is out the window.
There are naturally exceptions. Some artists have been able to seemingly retain their integrity over the years, but it has to be exceptionally hard to get out from under the thumb of the labels and do things the way you want. And you can certainly like top40 if you want. I like some of it. It can be catchy. You can tell that someone like Avril Lavigne might have a little more to offer, but is being pushed into the cute-pop-girl mold. Gwen Stefani carved her own niche. Michelle Branch has potential too. So does Jessica Simpson. (just kidding) In the end, it should be about the music, but it is not. Britney Spears is probably the most famous performer out there, but she can't sing for shite. Her voice is terrible, her songs are terrible. They are catchy at best. She is famous because she is hot - period. It is all a popularity contest.
Top 40 is a joke. What is it supposed to be, the top 40 requested songs? Call up and request something that is not on their approved playlist, and see if they will play it. They either won't have it, or will say they can't play it. They are essentially dictating what you will hear. If you think it is anything different than that, you are a dadburn fool.
But you can still like Top 40 music, just don't kid yourself about it.
I have found Magnatune to be very good. Not a massive selection, but at least they are all of good quality. No "dork-in-the-basement-with-a-keyboard" like some other free music sites have. Some of these are really good. "Brad Sucks" is interesting, "Rocket City Riot" and "The Napolean Blown Aparts" are good ol' rock-n-roll. I am sure there is more there, I just haven't gotten through it all yet.
Is not every place with free speech and relative stealthness a breedingplace for: -terrorists -virusmakers -worms -terroris ts -porn -terrorists
Umm, I believe that those things exist whether there is free speech or not. And you can be stealthy anywhere. It all depends on what you/media/government want to attribute those things to...
Whoop-de-doo. Good games don't need stuff like this, and that's something that I'm afraid the game industry is losing sight of.
Agreed.
The only game I play online - Quake Mega Team Fortress (the original, not Q3). I have tried some others, but I keep going back to what I think is the best. No, the graphics aren't close to what newer games have, but what it does have is gameplay. There are so many cool maps that alter the purpose of the game (capture the flag, fragfest, multiple teams, retain the flag, maintain control of certain areas, etc) There are several cool mods to the game that add weapons, capabilitites, etc. You don't need a massive machine to run a server or a client.
The downside is that there are fewer and fewer servers out there. People have pretty much abandoned it for prettier games.
Jeez, who ever thought that someone could sound like an old fogey when talking about video games? I guess I am getting old, I used to walk 2 miles uphill in the snow just to play Pac-Man.
Not on a global scale I'd figure. Since the music industry as a whole is global. RIAA is just the U.S.A.
And guess what, I'm not American:)
But it has been shown with things like the DMCA that the USA is not alone in its idiocy. Just because the RIAA is a bunch of sniveling, greedy bastards doesn't mean the rest of the world should emulate them. I don't know what the music industry is like in other parts of the world, but I can only guess that they will sink to the level that we have in this country. Hey, we didn't invent American Idol!:-)
I don't understand why the government has not seen the RIAA as an orginization that doesn't adhear to the rules that it's set for everyone else.
Who says they haven't? You are making the assumption that the government believes that the rules apply equally to everyone. If that were the case, then Oprah Winfrey would have been fined or taken off the air for indecency. Microsoft would have been punished under anti-trust laws and for illegally maintaining a monopoly. There are many many many other examples, these are just some of the more high profile ones.
I'd guess the music swappers are just a pinprick. The real hurt in the music industry is the RIAA itself, so it seems.
Until they got caught, this didn't hurt the music industry at all. It hurt the artists, yes. But the RIAA *IS* the music industry, and they were the benefactors of this "mistake".
So while I agree with your sentiment, I'd have to disagree with your statement.
still am of the opinion that it doesn't matter how many patches M$ releases. The fact is, we need an educated user base. So many people continue to use computers without knowing the full risks associated with them.
Really? Who do you know that knows the FULL risks associated with using computers? Before this worm, I didn't know what port 445 was for - but I knew I had it blocked on my firewall. Maybe you are talking in a perfect world, but there is ZERO chance that all computer users will realize the full risk of using them. If they did, they wouldn't be using computers. I have been using computers since the early 80s, and I don't claim to know all the risks associated with using them.
I am not anti-computer-education, but what you are talking about is a pipe dream. For jebus sake, we still have people wiring their life savings to people in Nigeria, and guys buying penis enlargement pills.
Morphix is definitely interesting, but it's not for the faint of heart. Building a Morphix ISO is one part education, one part command line voodoo, and one part dumb luck.;-)
Not so any more. I switched my custom Knoppix ISO over to Morphix. There is a nice little perl script that can help you make a minimodule. Download a main module, and whichever minimodules you like, and burn them to a CD. It really has gotten much easier. Easier than building a Knoppix distro (which wasn't too hard either).
Sure, Morphix needs some improvements, but that is happening. Not only that, but the minimod generator builds a compressed filesystem. For instance - if you want a full, working Quake MegaTF server for Linux, you could download the Morphix mod for that, burn it to a CD with the LightGUI mainmod, and have a bootable Quake Server. OR you could just download the minimod file, uncompress it, and just have everything you need for a local Quake server.
It's great that FreeType exists, but it's still missing the point. You shouldn't need to scour the web looking for plugins to make your program do the (simple) things you want it to do.
Funny that this is the argument for using Mozilla/Opera/whatever browser over IE. I have popup blocking, mouse gestures, Google search bar, etc out of the box with them. With IE you have to hunt down the add-ons.
And I do use the Gimp, because I don't muck with photos that much. It is good enough for me. The pros use pro tools. It is always about the right tools for the job.
In my software engineering class, my teacher vehemently states that Requirements are the Enemy of Design. You need to have an idea of what you are doing for the project, but you honestly cannot know how much space it will take, how fast it will be, etc. Its sheer folly.
Sorry, but your teacher is an idiot. He isn't teaching software engineering then, he is teaching programming. HUGE difference.
Requirements are not required. What? You heard me. There is a concept called FURPS+ that you can use to classify your requirements.
Functionality Usability Reliability Performan ce Supportability
The "+" in FURPS+ reminds you to include such requirements as: design constraints implementation requirements interface requirements physical requirements.
But here is what I meant by my first statement - you don't have to have requirements for all of these categories. You don't HAVE to have performance requirements - but you have to consider whether you do or not. Same goes for the other categories.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to requirements. I love how people always complain that software engineering doesn't get the respect that other types of engineering get, but they don't really want to do engineering. They just want to program. There is such a huge difference between software engineering and coding. And I am not saying that everything needs to be engineered - but you can't just write off requirements as unnecessary for all software projects.
How on earth can a software engineering professor think that they are useless? No, you don't know how fast something will go - but you had damn well better know if it is required to be "X fast" or be "Y big" BEFORE you start building it. That is the point of requirements, to state what is (duh) REQUIRED of the system before you build it. When you are done building it, you can test to see if it actually meets the requirements. Otherwise, you are just playing grab-ass in the dark.
There is no evil plot here, no more than any normal corporation.
Whoo boy, is that a loaded statement.
Or maybe ol' Steve has realized to keep his damn mouth shut on these "all internal" memos because they have been publicly humiliated by them in the past. They know enough about PR to spread FUD in their "internal" memos now. Because they know they can't stop them from being leaked.
FACT: Microsoft plays dirty, and has since day one.
This is nothing new. This internal memo clearly shows that they consider Linux and other non-commercial software to be a threat. Just because the language is leak-friendly doesn't mean that there are no dirty tactics in the works. I'll go with the overwhelming odds and say that they are probably trying to figure out how to be total bastards to preserve their monopoly.
I used to think I might be paranoid, but I am starting to believe that I am not. Which saddens me, I wish I was just paranoid.
Some hardware it's illegal to hack with or without the DMCA. Wireless equipment, for example, requires FCC-vetting before it can be used.
Yeah, we wouldn't want the public to use the "public" airwaves.:-)
You say "hacking your hardware", but you really mean "hacking your copy of someone else's software, which they're letting you use under certain terms and conditions, which you have agreed to follow by using the hardware in question". Written like that it makes your point seem a lot less valid.
No, I mean hacking hardware. But when you jam a software lock on things then make it illegal to bypass that lock, the hardware isn't really yours either. If it isn't mine, then don't "sell" it to me. And I think that I do own that software when I buy it. I feel I should be able to do what I want with it as long as I don't redistribute it.If I want to destroy it, it is my business. If I want to modify it, I should be allowed to - as long as it is for my personal use. It's a slippery slope when you start to regulate what people can do with something they supposedly own.
Of course, if you think it's a plot to kill Tux, fine.:)
Actually, it is a plot to kill what Tux represents.
Do yourself a favor: next clean install, apply XP-SP1, then Clean=(Delete LocalSettings\Temp, Windows\Temp, Defrag) & boot Knoppix and backup your partition with Partimage (to a network location mounted with NFS), if needed.
Better yet, if you need to reinstall every month, just use Knoppix. Sheesh. Every month?
I can see doing it for fun, trying out different distros and whatnot, but my main machine is Redhat 7.3 w/some updates. My main Windows machine is Win98, which only gets booted up to burn a DVD or to play a game. I have a few other machines that I do some distro experimentation on.
It's the same with drivers, and owing to the fact it's easier and cheaper to change something in sofware than hardware, more and more will be done in drivers/firmware, which means this will get even more common.
And with the DMCA firmly in place, it will be illegal to hack YOUR hardware.
Jeez, I used to think I might be a little paranoid, but not any more...
Slashdot Mirror
If you own a "furrin" car (my preference is German), you know how SIMPLE it is to use metric tools. Example: list the sizes of your wrenches, in order, from smallest to largest. Doing it by 8ths/16ths/halves etc is tough. Millimeters is braindead. I know my socket set goes from 5mm to 19mm. What is the next largest size after 3/8? Uhhhh. How about after 7mm?
I am sure that carpenters and mechanics would have a tough time adjusting, because you do get to know the system you use. But once you use metric tools, they are a breeze. You'll realize how much smarter and efficient the system is.
Not everyone who uses Linux is a kernel hacker, especially nowadays. And yes, there are sites out there that give rundowns of what has changed. But wouldn't it be nice to have an *official* release statement that outlines the changes made? It seems logical to me that the people managing the changes would be able to articulate this the best. I think it would go a long way in making Linux seem a bit more mature.
I know, but I wanted to keep that a surprise. I didn't realize it until I listened to his music, liked it, and checked out his bio. He is definitely worth checking out.
At which point they would cease to be considered "indie". I remember when the Red Hot Chili Peppers and Jane's Addiction were alternative (when alternative meant something). Now they are Top 40 for no other reason than the industry owners realized how good they were. But IMO bands are never as good as they were before they became popular. It seems that "the industry" corrupts them or something once they become popular. Metallica, Aerosmith, Guns-n-Roses - their early work is so much better and pure than later stuff. It's like the music that gets them the good record deals is the first thing that suffers.
To rant a little, Metallica is a great example. They were essentially niche music until And Justice For All came out. People started to take notice. Then the Black album hit, and they were all over the place. MTV, award shows, etc. Their music has never been the same. It lost something. Guns-n-Roses first album was 100% pure, and they became popular by word of mouth. I remember listening to that tape a full year and a half before they ever made a video. After that they did some somewhat interesting stuff, but it seemed a little forced. The Beastie Boys is another good example, they were amazing up until they made it big with Ill Communication. They kind of lost it after that. I really liked an album called "Lemonade and Brownies" by a group called Sugar Ray. A couple of years later, they made it to the radio with the pop-garbage that made them famous. It isn't at all like the stuff on the Lemonade album. It is like someone told them "If you change your sound, we'll make you famous!". Wanna see how it works in semi-real-life? Check out Making the Band on MTV. It's all about getting famous and getting paid. Integrity is out the window.
There are naturally exceptions. Some artists have been able to seemingly retain their integrity over the years, but it has to be exceptionally hard to get out from under the thumb of the labels and do things the way you want. And you can certainly like top40 if you want. I like some of it. It can be catchy. You can tell that someone like Avril Lavigne might have a little more to offer, but is being pushed into the cute-pop-girl mold. Gwen Stefani carved her own niche. Michelle Branch has potential too. So does Jessica Simpson. (just kidding) In the end, it should be about the music, but it is not. Britney Spears is probably the most famous performer out there, but she can't sing for shite. Her voice is terrible, her songs are terrible. They are catchy at best. She is famous because she is hot - period. It is all a popularity contest.
Top 40 is a joke. What is it supposed to be, the top 40 requested songs? Call up and request something that is not on their approved playlist, and see if they will play it. They either won't have it, or will say they can't play it. They are essentially dictating what you will hear. If you think it is anything different than that, you are a dadburn fool.
But you can still like Top 40 music, just don't kid yourself about it.
I have found Magnatune to be very good. Not a massive selection, but at least they are all of good quality. No "dork-in-the-basement-with-a-keyboard" like some other free music sites have. Some of these are really good. "Brad Sucks" is interesting, "Rocket City Riot" and "The Napolean Blown Aparts" are good ol' rock-n-roll. I am sure there is more there, I just haven't gotten through it all yet.
Check it out.
Doesn't the O in TCO stand for Ownership? What exactly do you own with Microsoft products? Aren't you really just Licensing them?
-terrorists
-virusmakers
-worms
-terrori
-porn
-terrorists
Umm, I believe that those things exist whether there is free speech or not. And you can be stealthy anywhere. It all depends on what you/media/government want to attribute those things to...
Agreed.
The only game I play online - Quake Mega Team Fortress (the original, not Q3). I have tried some others, but I keep going back to what I think is the best. No, the graphics aren't close to what newer games have, but what it does have is gameplay. There are so many cool maps that alter the purpose of the game (capture the flag, fragfest, multiple teams, retain the flag, maintain control of certain areas, etc) There are several cool mods to the game that add weapons, capabilitites, etc. You don't need a massive machine to run a server or a client.
The downside is that there are fewer and fewer servers out there. People have pretty much abandoned it for prettier games.
Jeez, who ever thought that someone could sound like an old fogey when talking about video games? I guess I am getting old, I used to walk 2 miles uphill in the snow just to play Pac-Man.
But it has been shown with things like the DMCA that the USA is not alone in its idiocy. Just because the RIAA is a bunch of sniveling, greedy bastards doesn't mean the rest of the world should emulate them. I don't know what the music industry is like in other parts of the world, but I can only guess that they will sink to the level that we have in this country. Hey, we didn't invent American Idol! :-)
Who says they haven't? You are making the assumption that the government believes that the rules apply equally to everyone. If that were the case, then Oprah Winfrey would have been fined or taken off the air for indecency. Microsoft would have been punished under anti-trust laws and for illegally maintaining a monopoly. There are many many many other examples, these are just some of the more high profile ones.
The rules do not apply equally to everyone.
Until they got caught, this didn't hurt the music industry at all. It hurt the artists, yes. But the RIAA *IS* the music industry, and they were the benefactors of this "mistake".
So while I agree with your sentiment, I'd have to disagree with your statement.
He wasn't talking about memory, he was talking about dollars earned per minute. And he didn't mean anyone, he meant himself.
Really? Who do you know that knows the FULL risks associated with using computers? Before this worm, I didn't know what port 445 was for - but I knew I had it blocked on my firewall. Maybe you are talking in a perfect world, but there is ZERO chance that all computer users will realize the full risk of using them. If they did, they wouldn't be using computers. I have been using computers since the early 80s, and I don't claim to know all the risks associated with using them.
I am not anti-computer-education, but what you are talking about is a pipe dream. For jebus sake, we still have people wiring their life savings to people in Nigeria, and guys buying penis enlargement pills.
Not so any more. I switched my custom Knoppix ISO over to Morphix. There is a nice little perl script that can help you make a minimodule. Download a main module, and whichever minimodules you like, and burn them to a CD. It really has gotten much easier. Easier than building a Knoppix distro (which wasn't too hard either).
Sure, Morphix needs some improvements, but that is happening. Not only that, but the minimod generator builds a compressed filesystem. For instance - if you want a full, working Quake MegaTF server for Linux, you could download the Morphix mod for that, burn it to a CD with the LightGUI mainmod, and have a bootable Quake Server. OR you could just download the minimod file, uncompress it, and just have everything you need for a local Quake server.
Check out morphix.org for all the details.
Uhh, don't listen to this guy, he is obviously insane. Now if you have any to spare, I could probably take it off your hands...
You deserve a "+1 cool" for having a Clutch song lyric in your sig. Now pass that mic....
This from someone who still wears a Members Only jacket.
Funny that this is the argument for using Mozilla/Opera/whatever browser over IE. I have popup blocking, mouse gestures, Google search bar, etc out of the box with them. With IE you have to hunt down the add-ons.
And I do use the Gimp, because I don't muck with photos that much. It is good enough for me. The pros use pro tools. It is always about the right tools for the job.
In my software engineering class, my teacher vehemently states that Requirements are the Enemy of Design. You need to have an idea of what you are doing for the project, but you honestly cannot know how much space it will take, how fast it will be, etc. Its sheer folly.
n ce
Sorry, but your teacher is an idiot. He isn't teaching software engineering then, he is teaching programming. HUGE difference.
Requirements are not required. What? You heard me. There is a concept called FURPS+ that you can use to classify your requirements.
Functionality
Usability
Reliability
Performa
Supportability
The "+" in FURPS+ reminds you to include such requirements as:
design constraints
implementation requirements
interface requirements
physical requirements.
But here is what I meant by my first statement - you don't have to have requirements for all of these categories. You don't HAVE to have performance requirements - but you have to consider whether you do or not. Same goes for the other categories.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to requirements. I love how people always complain that software engineering doesn't get the respect that other types of engineering get, but they don't really want to do engineering. They just want to program. There is such a huge difference between software engineering and coding. And I am not saying that everything needs to be engineered - but you can't just write off requirements as unnecessary for all software projects.
How on earth can a software engineering professor think that they are useless? No, you don't know how fast something will go - but you had damn well better know if it is required to be "X fast" or be "Y big" BEFORE you start building it. That is the point of requirements, to state what is (duh) REQUIRED of the system before you build it. When you are done building it, you can test to see if it actually meets the requirements. Otherwise, you are just playing grab-ass in the dark.
@#(*&>>@#*()& At least that is what perl looks like to me.
Whoo boy, is that a loaded statement.
Or maybe ol' Steve has realized to keep his damn mouth shut on these "all internal" memos because they have been publicly humiliated by them in the past. They know enough about PR to spread FUD in their "internal" memos now. Because they know they can't stop them from being leaked.
FACT: Microsoft plays dirty, and has since day one.
This is nothing new. This internal memo clearly shows that they consider Linux and other non-commercial software to be a threat. Just because the language is leak-friendly doesn't mean that there are no dirty tactics in the works. I'll go with the overwhelming odds and say that they are probably trying to figure out how to be total bastards to preserve their monopoly.
I used to think I might be paranoid, but I am starting to believe that I am not. Which saddens me, I wish I was just paranoid.
Yeah, we wouldn't want the public to use the "public" airwaves. :-)
You say "hacking your hardware", but you really mean "hacking your copy of someone else's software, which they're letting you use under certain terms and conditions, which you have agreed to follow by using the hardware in question". Written like that it makes your point seem a lot less valid.
No, I mean hacking hardware. But when you jam a software lock on things then make it illegal to bypass that lock, the hardware isn't really yours either. If it isn't mine, then don't "sell" it to me. And I think that I do own that software when I buy it. I feel I should be able to do what I want with it as long as I don't redistribute it.If I want to destroy it, it is my business. If I want to modify it, I should be allowed to - as long as it is for my personal use. It's a slippery slope when you start to regulate what people can do with something they supposedly own.
Of course, if you think it's a plot to kill Tux, fine. :)
Actually, it is a plot to kill what Tux represents.
Better yet, if you need to reinstall every month, just use Knoppix. Sheesh. Every month?
I can see doing it for fun, trying out different distros and whatnot, but my main machine is Redhat 7.3 w/some updates. My main Windows machine is Win98, which only gets booted up to burn a DVD or to play a game. I have a few other machines that I do some distro experimentation on.
And with the DMCA firmly in place, it will be illegal to hack YOUR hardware.
Jeez, I used to think I might be a little paranoid, but not any more...
The only Zen you find at the top of a mountain is the Zen you bring with you.