Millions of people are looking for jobs. The most of them want to work for someone and don't have the slightest clue they should work for themselves.
That is the difference between the modern world and the world of 200 years ago. Working for yourself, you acheive:
1) Tax exempt status 2) Ability to choose to work at a schedule of your liking 2a)...as well as discover that wanting time-off and work don't mix well 3) Recognize the importance of business-by-handshake 4) Compelled into fewer contracts 5) ???? 6) Honest compensation for your own time (PROFIT!)
I completly regard your post as +2 insigtful / -1 Flamebait.
I think the "Legacy" technology you refer to is in essence "mature", yet I take an absolute opposite approach you have chosen. I want legacy IO, but not integrated on the motherboard. If any part on your motherboard malfunctions and dies, then you are stuck with a motherboard with bad parts integrated upon it that will either:
1) effect the system performance
2) damage other integrated components
3) require specialized tools and skill to extract or replace them
In my experience, besides the joy of having a motherboard that has many features, I have had integrated parts go bad or I don't utilize them and often am without resources to expand the system with other devices.
IF I COULD CHOOSE BETWEEN A MOTHERBOARD WITH NO INTEGRATED IO AND 1:AGP,6:PCI, and 1:ISA SLOTS, or a BARE MINIMUM MOTHERBOARD WITH 10:PCI SLOTS...
I WOULD CHOOSE THE BARE MINIMUM MOTHERBOARD. My reasoning is:
1) Hardware that fails or is bad are a simple 3-step process to replace without specialized parts 2) I can change User-interface IO technology without the cruft of legacy (If I use a USB keyboard, I have no reason for PS2, and same is true when I use only SCSI data storage and have no desire for unused IDE controllers) 3) Motherboards can be designed to superior form-factor for "other" projects or custom assembly (I don't like the illogical ATX form-factor and its design of the IO on the rear of a PC)
All my claims are valid. I want RS232C, IDE, and Floppy Disk controllers on a separate PCI card so I may remove it for easy and logical upgrade path as well as retain a given computer's upgradability, compatibility, and ease of troubleshooting issues.
Thankyou for the opportunity to respond, glad to contribute my thoughts.:)
AOL is a national-available service for crying-out-loud!
Sure, many people may complain about some time of the day when access is 20% to 50% slower, but AOL lets its users roam!
Broadband is a local service that you can't get up and get access to in another territory! I would subscribe to AOL, but they built their network using Linux and did not create a Linux-client for their PROPRIETARY networking protocol. AOL could be better, like Netzero or Juno, but perhaps they should be a little lighter on the FREEWARE subscriptions because my calculator shows they are passing-on-the-cost-of-freeware to its subscribers.
Linux is a utility; a tool. Use it to the best of your abilities.
To speak in the analogy you implied...
Linux is manure...a verry good manure, the best around. It is also a manure that can be bought for verry low price; only cost of transfer (read the GPL on this statment). Whoever contracts you or I for such work, we spread it on everyone's dead and depleted front and back yards and then install various seeds to grow on it. We're the ones getting payed. After we trim all the other plants back, we install a wrought-iron fence and then a robot that shoots tazers and spazer lasers at any trespasser that tries to shit on or digs holes in the grass. Not even the AOL guy or the Cable man can install their stinking cherubs in the front yard without being spazzed to death.
Everyone once in a while, a penguin walks by and presses the door-bell 6000 times...a Gnome opens the door.
I'm willing to accept my mistake as being correctable by PROOFREADING, only if CmdrTaco and Michael agree to do the same. I bought TuxRacer from a computer store for $29.99 the other day and was thinking of the word "tuxracer" as I typed this. If you check my URL, it pointed to tuxkart's homepage (http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net)./me petitions CmdrTaco and Michael to hold hands with me and join "Proof-Readers Anonymous"
Pick another day for your FUD
on
Corporate KDE
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Moderators, please be gentle...
You are obviously a troll. Your post is well-suited for April 1, 2003.
Linux is a platform that many for-profit people have contributed to. Linux is a non-profit contribution that "fertilizes a medium" to allow a for-profit application of any software that operates upon it. Think of Linux as a system where everyone is in different branches of software development and client usage, and people can choose to contribute their software-work to be of benefit from eachothers work: linux is a form of people being KIND to eachother.
I administer computer networks, I use pppd as well as various utilities and tools licensed by GNU and XFree86. Time is an investment; because you see no physical money doesn't mean you see no ivestment. When companies like IBM, Sun, SGI, and the uncountable others begin merely *L@@KING* at Linux, they are actualy *INVESTING* their time (money) into it. Microsoft, I believe, has invested MORE time in Linux than any company alive! Microsoft knows its enemy: it is Linux; and they are studying it for weeknesses and obviously Microsoft has decided to slander and publish libelous documents on Linux because they see it as a verry PROFITABLE MEDIUM for software growth yet it is young in its acceptance of the CASUAL DESKTOP MARKET which is where Microsoft has dominated by monopoly-tactics. Just as Ghandi has prophetized to the world...
First they ignore you, Then they laugh at you, Then they fight you, Then you win (3. PROFIT!)
I've always enjoyed the quick-play of tuxracer. Many Linux distributions come with tuxracer and it is a cool advertising engine for the various companies that have contributed to the Opensource revolution.
Currently in the limitations of tuxracer, you are Tux (a penguin) and race using gokarts with various abilities (missiles, magnet-grab, rocket-booster) against "Geeko" (the SuSE linux mascot lizard), a computer with an "angry face" (Apple maybe?), and a penguin with a bow on its head. Anyways, as you race on "Tux Tollway", there is just a huge assortment of advertisments for VA Linux, Sourceforge, Slashdot, openGL, Mesa3D, GIMP, and others.
The game is fun, but is still limited and serves a good way to benchmark your hardware. Nice controlls...it'll make a verry fun multiplayer game once it gets into orbit.
You have none to show. By the way, did I ever tell you about the gold mine that I sold to the government? It's called Alaska! Yeah, I once owned Alaska...before Russia stole it from under my feet, and then after the Civil War; the United States bought it from Russia at an inflated price to secretly compensate the Czar's kindness of stationing Russian troops off the coast of California in preparation to fight against the 8,000 British forces stationed in Canada to await the Union and Confederate armies of America to exhaust themselves and Britain to reclaim the rebel colonies.
I sware I'm not speculating, but if you read your history you will discover that I am correct. However, that is merely on what I am claiming and I can't point you to any reference supporting my claim. You have done the same. So, feh!
Most developers build their own libraries (toolkits) and this difuses compatibility problems on different or flavored operating systems. It is a matter of developers engineering their libraries on a new platform. Microsoft knows this, yet they also know that all consumers are comfortable with Microsoft software and wouldn't want to buy anything that in-the-least appears and acts foreign to them. I remeber when people first bought Windows2000; haha, no Win98 users liked it, nor the cost of it, and they promptly returned Windows2000 to their origin of purchase for a voluntary refund or limited store credit.
The Opensource world has many libraries that have been MASTERED by developers to serve their own purpose. The many companies that are tied into Microsoft operating systems have chosen to refrain from implementations of their software on linux because: 1) They still think they will receive 100% profits from Microsoft's 78% market share 2) Another operating system means another book of compatibility problems 3) Technical support personel may need expensive (time-wise) retraining 4) They received FUD from other organizations (cough*Microsoft*cough) and disagree with any expressed or implied first or second-hand information about the GPL or LGPL, and WERE CONVINCED THEY CAN'T USE THEIR OWN LICENSE (FUD from liars)
Do you expect competitors, holding a monopoly, would provide TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE testimony outside of a courtroom? We hear nothing but RUMORS OF **** passed on to customers! Perhaps they are rumors because nobody can be held accountable for their "rumor" they spread.
"I heard Linux can't *scale* well and doesn't have many *applications* that are easy-to-use."
"Linux is for professionals. I just need somthing to browse the internet and read my eMail."
"Ignore the man behind the curtain... I AM OZ, GREAT AND POWERFUL!"
When we hear rumors, be sure to get the name of the person that spread it first; we like making desktop-calendards of the stupidest things ever said in-three-sentances-or-less.
We stand here today to honor our delightful and late fellow soldier. 'Served diligently as a game hosting and conversation area, worked well with others, was a sanctuary for trolls by employing the honest efforts of NilFilter and Bobz, and held no malice or vice toward its fellow brethren. Our hearts went with linuxgametome as it sank, yet our hearts aren't as heavy and we must rise above and fill the emptyness (...echoing...) linuxgametome had left. Netcraft confirms, linuxgametome has been bumped off the spectrum and we will soarly miss...
(HALEIJLUIA! HALEIJLUIA!)
It's alive! Don't cut the cable yet! linuxgametome's nodes are perculating through! Praise the lord! It's alive! DON'T CUT THE CORD! NOOOO!!
(french horn again)*(people crying louder)
We stand here today, with even heavier hearts: the linuxgametome awakened by the grace of God, and we were not able to save it in time from our own ignorance of it being in a suspended mode of operationg. The flags we fly have been lowered below half-staff; our efforts proved futile and we hold ourselves responsible for linuxgametome's drowning death. We weren't patient with linuxgametome, we hurried to its preparation for burial without checking for a pulse; it's out of our hands now and may god forgive us for our sin.
With all the news on Microsoft's "new" TabletPC (old idea), I am quite intrigued that Microsoft doesn't have any innovative technology to bundle with their TabletPC; Xiph.org has it! The Opensource "revolution" is crumbling many barriers, including the proprietary ones put up just as a "distraction" (yes, inter-operability with Microsoft's proprietary software is a distraction from good programmers to design and implement better software and standards).
Come to think of it, Microsoft has nothing innovative in the audio and video world. Their AVI format, its many subspecies (wsf, wmf, wma, etc), and the general proliferation thereof are a justified (and quite notable) example of how media standards is not as crucial element in a company's survival. Bill Gates (yes his statment still stands as being verry impressive and of his accurate observation) generally stated that Microsoft's goal is to extend itself to its competitors by ussurping them to use Microsoft software. I just saw a black cat, the same one, walk by twice. XIPH has technology that Microsoft wants; loss-less audio. We know S3's S3TC is a loss-less standard of computer graphics and it is the only standing technology that is keep the DRI project from being able to objectionably compete as an opensource platform. So now, where does Microsoft think its going today? Microsoft has no software forcing anyone to use it now; the better of the software is opensourced and freely available.
In the immortal words of Nelson... "Hah ha!"
You misunderstood...I kindly explain.
on
Tetris AI System
·
· Score: 1
I agree that some of my comment was received as being vague. I understand it is vague and would've only been received as being vague had you not actually understood my concept. And so I explain:
Programmers are all trying to re-invent a form of (pseudo) artificial intelligence that is oultined specifically for their application. The idea I propose(d) is for a distributed artificial intelligence network for all software to interact upon via data links. I agree I may yet not be understandable at this point, so I continue...
Rather than build an AI specifically for your software, programmers *should* plan on builing their software to interact with a general AI that is not application-specific in its implementation. To understand this, you must have experience with programming and look at "AI" as a network-oriented service. AI, as a service that can be re-enterant to other applications as well as contribute to its own entropy to improve (think of it as learning) its operation.
Now, you are either a 1) naturally-born sentient individual human being (like me), 2) a gorilla that was taught chinese or sign language and will sooner-or-later ask me for a bannana, or 3) a simulated sentient human being capable of responding to abstracted stimulus through the FORM layout on slashdot's forums.
What are you and can you be a re-usable software interface (cloned) to interact with other human beings as a distributed application service? Are you planning on being maried to Alice(Bot)? I thought so...
Artificial Intelligence
on
Tetris AI System
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
There is no such thing as modern AI. To be accurate, AI is the ability to learn; not the pre-set ability to react in an environment it was programmed for. For this "Tetris AI System" to be considered "AI", it would need to adapt to more than just Tetris; such as Duke Nukem3D.
Whoever wrote the artificial intelligence algorithms for 3DRealms' Duke Nukem3D multiplayer-mode "Fake Duke" deserves more recognition than anyone.
Those of you, like me, that were stranded to play by yourself and had no internetwork-ed access to deathmatch with others, know what I am talking about in Duke Nukem3D. How it worked was the game simulated a multiplayer game and was pre-set to "spawn" fake players. The AI system was in effect actually more "unforgiving" than say Unreal Tournament or Quake3. The "Fake Duke" was intelligent to hunt you down based on line-of-sight and quite naturally if he had to run through a laser beam or a lava pit he'll do it all while keeping his "+" (cross-hairs) painted on the center of your forehead. The AI was limited and I think a more accurate project for AI would be to actually host an AI service that offered network-accessed primitives for supreme entropy to contribute to a work of data; such centralized AI system would allow gamers as well as scientific computing to benefit from a verry good entropy pool of numbers as well as improve the funfactor of gaming.
Instead of this, we have many skilled people having to roll-their-own; not implying they are effectivly wasint their time/resources, yet let's keep our eyes on the prize on what a real system of "sharing" (distributed) can do for the many simulations upon computers that can benefit by a shared resource (thinking AI and entropy) as well as contribute to a centralized AI generator. I know SETI would benefit from such a noble cause, rather having to role-their-own client (software) and have their client (software) wastfully "leech" idle resources of computers around the world. It comes to that conclusion of efficiency, in a sense. Perhaps distributed computing across the internet is a real plan that would benefit from being re-thought. Don't let me fool you: Microsoft is attempting this feat; maybe someone has already started working on this! Doh! Someone recognize the inherent corruption that can ensue if a corrupt organization was holding licenses for your obligation to use their distributed resources as being a client for an applications service provider!
Am I the only one to confirm these truths or forever does everyone hold their peace?
Today, on a slashback-like release, Michael of the slashdot.org forums presented to the world the secret behind business plans:
1. Distributed Denial of Service 2. Fun 3. Profit!!
Yes, it is true! Fun is part of being in a successful (profitable) business. Michael will be presented the Nobel Peice Prize today, as well as later Knighted by the Queen, and will be visiting the local Arvada Tavern to be meet with the Filthy Critic and break-open a keg or two for the "free as in beer" crowd!
>This looks like stealing. Does it look like stealing to anyone else?
You have provided no evidence of anyone stealing; you have no reason to show guilt: some people are buying Radeon 9500 models and behold they are owned by them and discovered they are realy a 9700 model in disguise! Speaking in another capacity, this is truly grounds for lawsuit unto ATI for deceptive marketing.
Of'course, I think ATI is making good products, yet the age-old concern of theft still arises and you have honestly and bravly asked that age-old question: Is it stealing when we bought a product and discovered it to be another more costly product and by our respect of returning products for refund that occur in the opposite occurence, do we return our products to ATI? Here's your answer: a financial transaction took place, you are under contracted law that may or may not allow you to return a product that had been sold upon the truths as being lawfully or unlawfully guise.
So, my joke for you is...Take it back to ATI, tell them they sold you a ATI Radeon 9700 and they'll give you company credit of the value of that Radeon 9700 to apply for the selection of another product and possibly you will get a refund.
OK I'M JOKING! Think of it as another way: ATI has given you a benefit (or blessing, if you will) and they have given you an incompletly implemented Radeon 9700, marketed as a 9500 and sold half price, and it is up to your own time or skill or merit to finish their incomplete manufacture to a complete Radeon 9700.
Hey, if someone gave you a Manshion that was half-finished/half-destroyed, would you thank them or tell them it would be a steal for you to purchase it from them at such a low cost? It's the market, buddy. ATI is aware of this and perhaps due to the 9500 and 9700 being under ATI's poor marketers, they'll change or have already changed the future Radeon 9500 to be a more deceptive and unmodifiable Radeon 9700 product that proves to require more time or skill or merit for the owner to complete its manufacture.
I remember the ol' Total Recal movie that makes me laugh... Douglas Quait wakes up in a Taxi, the driver is a robot. The transcript is like this:
Quait: How did I get here?
Taxi: I'm sorry, will you please re-phrase your question.
Quait: How did I get in this Taxi?
Taxi: The door opened, you got in...Hell of a day, isn't it?
An egg is crackable: it is able to be broken. Hence a "cracker" can break either an egg OR other devices including but not limited to Computers and its related technologies.
The application of Hacker and Cracker has now been resolved from verbs unto nouns. In this application, I protest the improper usage of Hacker as the act of breaking things. Hacker is the proper usage, applicable to the act of developing the software. It is the usage of such software that defines classifies the user as a "cracker."
So forth, in my most kind and thankfulness for you to allow me to correct you on these regard, greatful of your consideration and concerns, peacfully, I continue my protest of this article.
I respectfully reply to you, without pre-judice. A cracker is by intent. A hacker is by talent.
ESR is a hacker because; he declared, if I remember correctly, 1977 is the last day he acted as cracker and hacker. ESR now proclaims he is only hacker and follows his self-published "Hacker Ethics" and proclaims the evils of cracking.
I protest this article because I believe Michael did not imply a distinction that properly justifies the Hacker and the Cracker. I think Michael emplored a respectable effort to build this article, I simply protest on this small mis-enumeration of the qualities and a hacker. The use of this software would be justified as by crackers. Not all crackers have the skills of hackers; this is observed by "script kiddies" using works that have been "hacked" (as in hacked-together) by other authors and are simply serving as an element of the delivery agent for the respective intent of the "software."
This article has many merits, yet its slander of my hacker ethics is one that I protest. By the mis-placed truth in this article, I respectably submit the evident truths, by my own testimony, that the proper noun that addresses the intent of this article is "CRACKER". Please do not confuse a hacker with a cracker. Crackers break things, hackers build things. For example, a hacker cuts down a tree to build beautiful Amish furniture to sell on the internet; versus a cracker cuts down a telephone line to disrupt services that have been contracted.
I respectibly submit this evident as truth that hackers and crackers are created equal and due process of the law has slandered "HACKERS" and their most holy past-time of "HACKING."
It's not written in aramaic...it's English! That's the language of the trolls! Maybe this message will tell us where we can find CowboyNeal's golden fingernail clippings and set an example for all of the slashdot kingdom! It reads,
"To f## the #i#Cl#p#ngs##, y#u se##ch woo## of C##ada in backpa#k# of AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH."
Strange, it just says "ahhhhhhhhhhhhh" at the end. Perhaps this troll was dictating to another troll as he died? The only "ahhhhhhhhhh" I know of is an old folk-lore tail about a wizard of "ahhhhhhhhhh-zzzz"; "oz" for short. Perhaps he was dictating and died as he was trying to mention Wozniack's codename: WOZ. It wouldn't make sense for him to dictate "ahhhhhhhhhhh" if he were dying, I think it... IT IT GOT ESR, RUN !!! IT'S A MOUNTY!
I think some of the purpose of having Virtual Memmory (VM) is to address the constraints of any given architecture's idle processes being in a state of inactivity and their data in the system's RAM is "swapped" unto a file on the harddrive for the system's RAM to be available to processes that are still active and will benefit from the performance all ans while the processes don't recognize any VM subsystem or may choose to interact with it and this is one crazy run-on sentance. So, what's the problem and why do they feel the need to re-design and re-implement Linux VM support? Maybe you should first understand the scope of the principle of VM: applications do not know it is happening. Then slowly appen to your implementation hooks that allow applications to reschedule the kernel's interaction with virtual memmory and you lost scope of the *purpose*.
That's how I implemented VM in one of my applications! The difference between kernel-based VM is the application is not built to recognize and interact with VM, it is just there as a condition. VM-enabled kernels ARE SUPPOSED TO RELEASE KERNEL INFORMATION that instead of having 2GB of system RAM 4GB is available: not that bullshit "2GB free swap available" stuff. Relying on applications to interact with kernel-based VM decides the portability of applications./drinks small glass of whisky and passes out.
No matter what, DRM will be part of the modern world. Software developers are not in control of the distribution of their software. Software developers, although responsible for an actual product, are simply a small chain in a company that will receive any implementation to regulate its products market penetration. The plan of DRM technology is not to give people an option to disable it. It will be used or your software will not be able to install unless a crack is released that subjugates the "DRM" and viably will put the user of such technology within legal liability to the patent holders of the DRM and the Software Distributors. This is a combination of efforts from the United States' employees (pseudo-politicians), Software *Distributors* (whoever receives such responsibility), and the various platforms of computer hardware and software developers that received the duty to implement DRM into an operating system! Think of the legal implications of DRM in a computer; you have received an agent of the United States by the contractual purchase of your computer hardware and software! DRM is in violation of Article III of the Constitution of the united States of America, yet by being contracted through a license approving an agreed conditional voluntary purchase of such software and/or hardware it is made legal! DRM is a legal abridgment of everyone's constitutional rights! This puts the United States government in competition with fellow private business and this is also a violation of Article I of the Constitution of the united States of America by abridging the freedom of speech! Think about it, what kind of people would abridge a freedom of speech clause while maintaning a "State of War" that it does not revoke in the absence of war? Constitutionaly, this allows a world of possibility to construe Article V of the Constitution of the united States of America for unwaranted search and seizure of property and effects! It's mass fraud that is attempted by mis-leading implied contractual agreements!
The perpetration of DRM began with a private company attempting to illegally enforce the honor of patents and intellectual property. This demand has caused a "domino-effect" of the SNAFU theorom to reach Software Distributors to consider the ability of regulating the sale of software by enacting agents within software! This opens a completly new concept of software-use. And over at Transmeta, I thought the many Linux-users would lobby against DRM due to Unix being an actual technology contructed to regulate the use of software via principle accounting feature in the system environment. I may consider an alternative Unix-like software project that is Public Domain and not bound by licenses whether implied or traditionaly interactive.
Anyone know of any Public Domain projects, and when I mean "Public Domain" I understand it to be not regulated by any authority of its use via a terms-of-use license?
Sincerily,
Saddened by everyone's violation of my constitution...that honors my independence from tyranical governors.
All we need to purchase Alpha is a good liar (Dr. Evil) and $2...million...dollars.
ermm I mean we need a good lawyer (EFF) and $5...hundred...billion...dollars.
The Blender project received $100K in less than 5 days, we should be able to petition everyone and receive $5...hundred...billion...dollars in time for...Intel to release the AlphitaniXParcMeta (about 20 years or most-likly never).
I said to be of good cheer, not of irrational criticism.
Yes, it is true. The United States is a corporation which incorporated in Costa Rica and their borders are within Washington D.C. The United States offers services; these services are initiated by contract. If you do not agree to them, then you retain your sovereignty as one of many States. Being a private company, the United States shares the same trates as a Church; it dictated laws and morality by contract. Regardless of morality, the regulation imposed upon you is either granted by contract or is not constitutional.
Speaking as Jesus Christ's advocate, give them your money because you participate in their services. Give them all your money and they have no interests in you. Speaking in my own pesona, association of your assets with an artificial entity created within their borders, originating from an affirmation in th form of a birst certificate to provide constructive notice for creation of such an artificial entity, the Untied States is the owner and administrator of all property and effects you associate with the name on your birth certificate or Social Security Trust Fund relative to your benefit of participating in the use of Federal Reserve Notes.
This is not theory, this is administrative procedure of a corporation that operates under Tort Law, Contract Law, Uniform Commercial Law, and honors such. If you disagree with their administrative goals, I suggest you separate from them and be sovereign as was declared 200 years ago as the many states that united together to be beneficiaries as "We, The People."
Yes, many people have shit their pants...including me. I am still having a Good(TM) day.
Slashdot Mirror
Millions of people are looking for jobs. The most of them want to work for someone and don't have the slightest clue they should work for themselves.
That is the difference between the modern world and the world of 200 years ago. Working for yourself, you acheive:
1) Tax exempt status
2) Ability to choose to work at a schedule of your liking
2a)
3) Recognize the importance of business-by-handshake
4) Compelled into fewer contracts
5) ????
6) Honest compensation for your own time (PROFIT!)
I completly regard your post as +2 insigtful / -1 Flamebait.
:)
I think the "Legacy" technology you refer to is in essence "mature", yet I take an absolute opposite approach you have chosen. I want legacy IO, but not integrated on the motherboard. If any part on your motherboard malfunctions and dies, then you are stuck with a motherboard with bad parts integrated upon it that will either:
1) effect the system performance
2) damage other integrated components
3) require specialized tools and skill to extract or replace them
In my experience, besides the joy of having a motherboard that has many features, I have had integrated parts go bad or I don't utilize them and often am without resources to expand the system with other devices.
IF I COULD CHOOSE BETWEEN A MOTHERBOARD WITH NO INTEGRATED IO AND 1:AGP,6:PCI, and 1:ISA SLOTS, or a BARE MINIMUM MOTHERBOARD WITH 10:PCI SLOTS...
I WOULD CHOOSE THE BARE MINIMUM MOTHERBOARD. My reasoning is:
1) Hardware that fails or is bad are a simple 3-step process to replace without specialized parts
2) I can change User-interface IO technology without the cruft of legacy (If I use a USB keyboard, I have no reason for PS2, and same is true when I use only SCSI data storage and have no desire for unused IDE controllers)
3) Motherboards can be designed to superior form-factor for "other" projects or custom assembly (I don't like the illogical ATX form-factor and its design of the IO on the rear of a PC)
All my claims are valid. I want RS232C, IDE, and Floppy Disk controllers on a separate PCI card so I may remove it for easy and logical upgrade path as well as retain a given computer's upgradability, compatibility, and ease of troubleshooting issues.
Thankyou for the opportunity to respond, glad to contribute my thoughts.
AOL is a national-available service for crying-out-loud!
Sure, many people may complain about some time of the day when access is 20% to 50% slower, but AOL lets its users roam!
Broadband is a local service that you can't get up and get access to in another territory! I would subscribe to AOL, but they built their network using Linux and did not create a Linux-client for their PROPRIETARY networking protocol. AOL could be better, like Netzero or Juno, but perhaps they should be a little lighter on the FREEWARE subscriptions because my calculator shows they are passing-on-the-cost-of-freeware to its subscribers.
AOL *gasp*
Linux is a utility; a tool. Use it to the best of your abilities.
To speak in the analogy you implied...
Linux is manure...a verry good manure, the best around. It is also a manure that can be bought for verry low price; only cost of transfer (read the GPL on this statment). Whoever contracts you or I for such work, we spread it on everyone's dead and depleted front and back yards and then install various seeds to grow on it. We're the ones getting payed. After we trim all the other plants back, we install a wrought-iron fence and then a robot that shoots tazers and spazer lasers at any trespasser that tries to shit on or digs holes in the grass. Not even the AOL guy or the Cable man can install their stinking cherubs in the front yard without being spazzed to death.
Everyone once in a while, a penguin walks by and presses the door-bell 6000 times...a Gnome opens the door.
Haha!
/me petitions CmdrTaco and Michael to hold hands with me and join "Proof-Readers Anonymous"
I'm willing to accept my mistake as being correctable by PROOFREADING, only if CmdrTaco and Michael agree to do the same. I bought TuxRacer from a computer store for $29.99 the other day and was thinking of the word "tuxracer" as I typed this. If you check my URL, it pointed to tuxkart's homepage (http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net).
Moderators, please be gentle...
You are obviously a troll.
Your post is well-suited for April 1, 2003.
Linux is a platform that many for-profit people have contributed to. Linux is a non-profit contribution that "fertilizes a medium" to allow a for-profit application of any software that operates upon it. Think of Linux as a system where everyone is in different branches of software development and client usage, and people can choose to contribute their software-work to be of benefit from eachothers work: linux is a form of people being KIND to eachother.
I administer computer networks, I use pppd as well as various utilities and tools licensed by GNU and XFree86. Time is an investment; because you see no physical money doesn't mean you see no ivestment. When companies like IBM, Sun, SGI, and the uncountable others begin merely *L@@KING* at Linux, they are actualy *INVESTING* their time (money) into it. Microsoft, I believe, has invested MORE time in Linux than any company alive! Microsoft knows its enemy: it is Linux; and they are studying it for weeknesses and obviously Microsoft has decided to slander and publish libelous documents on Linux because they see it as a verry PROFITABLE MEDIUM for software growth yet it is young in its acceptance of the CASUAL DESKTOP MARKET which is where Microsoft has dominated by monopoly-tactics. Just as Ghandi has prophetized to the world...
First they ignore you,
Then they laugh at you,
Then they fight you,
Then you win (3. PROFIT!)
Tuxracer is chock-full of advertising
I've always enjoyed the quick-play of tuxracer. Many Linux distributions come with tuxracer and it is a cool advertising engine for the various companies that have contributed to the Opensource revolution.
Currently in the limitations of tuxracer, you are Tux (a penguin) and race using gokarts with various abilities (missiles, magnet-grab, rocket-booster) against "Geeko" (the SuSE linux mascot lizard), a computer with an "angry face" (Apple maybe?), and a penguin with a bow on its head. Anyways, as you race on "Tux Tollway", there is just a huge assortment of advertisments for VA Linux, Sourceforge, Slashdot, openGL, Mesa3D, GIMP, and others.
The game is fun, but is still limited and serves a good way to benchmark your hardware. Nice controlls...it'll make a verry fun multiplayer game once it gets into orbit.
You have none to show. By the way, did I ever tell you about the gold mine that I sold to the government? It's called Alaska! Yeah, I once owned Alaska...before Russia stole it from under my feet, and then after the Civil War; the United States bought it from Russia at an inflated price to secretly compensate the Czar's kindness of stationing Russian troops off the coast of California in preparation to fight against the 8,000 British forces stationed in Canada to await the Union and Confederate armies of America to exhaust themselves and Britain to reclaim the rebel colonies.
I sware I'm not speculating, but if you read your history you will discover that I am correct. However, that is merely on what I am claiming and I can't point you to any reference supporting my claim. You have done the same. So, feh!
What software are you speaking of?
Most developers build their own libraries (toolkits) and this difuses compatibility problems on different or flavored operating systems. It is a matter of developers engineering their libraries on a new platform. Microsoft knows this, yet they also know that all consumers are comfortable with Microsoft software and wouldn't want to buy anything that in-the-least appears and acts foreign to them. I remeber when people first bought Windows2000; haha, no Win98 users liked it, nor the cost of it, and they promptly returned Windows2000 to their origin of purchase for a voluntary refund or limited store credit.
The Opensource world has many libraries that have been MASTERED by developers to serve their own purpose. The many companies that are tied into Microsoft operating systems have chosen to refrain from implementations of their software on linux because:
1) They still think they will receive 100% profits from Microsoft's 78% market share
2) Another operating system means another book of compatibility problems
3) Technical support personel may need expensive (time-wise) retraining
4) They received FUD from other organizations (cough*Microsoft*cough) and disagree with any expressed or implied first or second-hand information about the GPL or LGPL, and WERE CONVINCED THEY CAN'T USE THEIR OWN LICENSE (FUD from liars)
Do you expect competitors, holding a monopoly, would provide TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE testimony outside of a courtroom? We hear nothing but RUMORS OF **** passed on to customers! Perhaps they are rumors because nobody can be held accountable for their "rumor" they spread.
"I heard Linux can't *scale* well and doesn't have many *applications* that are easy-to-use."
"Linux is for professionals. I just need somthing to browse the internet and read my eMail."
"Ignore the man behind the curtain... I AM OZ, GREAT AND POWERFUL!"
When we hear rumors, be sure to get the name of the person that spread it first; we like making desktop-calendards of the stupidest things ever said in-three-sentances-or-less.
(playing french horn)*(people crying)
We stand here today to honor our delightful and late fellow soldier. 'Served diligently as a game hosting and conversation area, worked well with others, was a sanctuary for trolls by employing the honest efforts of NilFilter and Bobz, and held no malice or vice toward its fellow brethren. Our hearts went with linuxgametome as it sank, yet our hearts aren't as heavy and we must rise above and fill the emptyness (...echoing...) linuxgametome had left. Netcraft confirms, linuxgametome has been bumped off the spectrum and we will soarly miss...
(HALEIJLUIA! HALEIJLUIA!)
It's alive! Don't cut the cable yet! linuxgametome's nodes are perculating through! Praise the lord! It's alive! DON'T CUT THE CORD! NOOOO!!
(french horn again)*(people crying louder)
We stand here today, with even heavier hearts: the linuxgametome awakened by the grace of God, and we were not able to save it in time from our own ignorance of it being in a suspended mode of operationg. The flags we fly have been lowered below half-staff; our efforts proved futile and we hold ourselves responsible for linuxgametome's drowning death. We weren't patient with linuxgametome, we hurried to its preparation for burial without checking for a pulse; it's out of our hands now and may god forgive us for our sin.
(BANG*21 salute)*(birds falling)
With all the news on Microsoft's "new" TabletPC (old idea), I am quite intrigued that Microsoft doesn't have any innovative technology to bundle with their TabletPC; Xiph.org has it! The Opensource "revolution" is crumbling many barriers, including the proprietary ones put up just as a "distraction" (yes, inter-operability with Microsoft's proprietary software is a distraction from good programmers to design and implement better software and standards).
Come to think of it, Microsoft has nothing innovative in the audio and video world. Their AVI format, its many subspecies (wsf, wmf, wma, etc), and the general proliferation thereof are a justified (and quite notable) example of how media standards is not as crucial element in a company's survival. Bill Gates (yes his statment still stands as being verry impressive and of his accurate observation) generally stated that Microsoft's goal is to extend itself to its competitors by ussurping them to use Microsoft software. I just saw a black cat, the same one, walk by twice. XIPH has technology that Microsoft wants; loss-less audio. We know S3's S3TC is a loss-less standard of computer graphics and it is the only standing technology that is keep the DRI project from being able to objectionably compete as an opensource platform. So now, where does Microsoft think its going today? Microsoft has no software forcing anyone to use it now; the better of the software is opensourced and freely available.
In the immortal words of Nelson... "Hah ha!"
I agree that some of my comment was received as being vague. I understand it is vague and would've only been received as being vague had you not actually understood my concept. And so I explain:
Programmers are all trying to re-invent a form of (pseudo) artificial intelligence that is oultined specifically for their application. The idea I propose(d) is for a distributed artificial intelligence network for all software to interact upon via data links. I agree I may yet not be understandable at this point, so I continue...
Rather than build an AI specifically for your software, programmers *should* plan on builing their software to interact with a general AI that is not application-specific in its implementation. To understand this, you must have experience with programming and look at "AI" as a network-oriented service. AI, as a service that can be re-enterant to other applications as well as contribute to its own entropy to improve (think of it as learning) its operation.
Now, you are either a 1) naturally-born sentient individual human being (like me), 2) a gorilla that was taught chinese or sign language and will sooner-or-later ask me for a bannana, or 3) a simulated sentient human being capable of responding to abstracted stimulus through the FORM layout on slashdot's forums.
What are you and can you be a re-usable software interface (cloned) to interact with other human beings as a distributed application service? Are you planning on being maried to Alice(Bot)? I thought so...
There is no such thing as modern AI. To be accurate, AI is the ability to learn; not the pre-set ability to react in an environment it was programmed for. For this "Tetris AI System" to be considered "AI", it would need to adapt to more than just Tetris; such as Duke Nukem3D.
Whoever wrote the artificial intelligence algorithms for 3DRealms' Duke Nukem3D multiplayer-mode "Fake Duke" deserves more recognition than anyone.
Those of you, like me, that were stranded to play by yourself and had no internetwork-ed access to deathmatch with others, know what I am talking about in Duke Nukem3D. How it worked was the game simulated a multiplayer game and was pre-set to "spawn" fake players. The AI system was in effect actually more "unforgiving" than say Unreal Tournament or Quake3. The "Fake Duke" was intelligent to hunt you down based on line-of-sight and quite naturally if he had to run through a laser beam or a lava pit he'll do it all while keeping his "+" (cross-hairs) painted on the center of your forehead. The AI was limited and I think a more accurate project for AI would be to actually host an AI service that offered network-accessed primitives for supreme entropy to contribute to a work of data; such centralized AI system would allow gamers as well as scientific computing to benefit from a verry good entropy pool of numbers as well as improve the funfactor of gaming.
Instead of this, we have many skilled people having to roll-their-own; not implying they are effectivly wasint their time/resources, yet let's keep our eyes on the prize on what a real system of "sharing" (distributed) can do for the many simulations upon computers that can benefit by a shared resource (thinking AI and entropy) as well as contribute to a centralized AI generator. I know SETI would benefit from such a noble cause, rather having to role-their-own client (software) and have their client (software) wastfully "leech" idle resources of computers around the world. It comes to that conclusion of efficiency, in a sense. Perhaps distributed computing across the internet is a real plan that would benefit from being re-thought. Don't let me fool you: Microsoft is attempting this feat; maybe someone has already started working on this! Doh! Someone recognize the inherent corruption that can ensue if a corrupt organization was holding licenses for your obligation to use their distributed resources as being a client for an applications service provider!
Am I the only one to confirm these truths or forever does everyone hold their peace?
Today, on a slashback-like release, Michael of the slashdot.org forums presented to the world the secret behind business plans:
1. Distributed Denial of Service
2. Fun
3. Profit!!
Yes, it is true! Fun is part of being in a successful (profitable) business. Michael will be presented the Nobel Peice Prize today, as well as later Knighted by the Queen, and will be visiting the local Arvada Tavern to be meet with the Filthy Critic and break-open a keg or two for the "free as in beer" crowd!
Michael, you 'da' man!
>This looks like stealing. Does it look like stealing to anyone else?
You have provided no evidence of anyone stealing; you have no reason to show guilt: some people are buying Radeon 9500 models and behold they are owned by them and discovered they are realy a 9700 model in disguise! Speaking in another capacity, this is truly grounds for lawsuit unto ATI for deceptive marketing.
Of'course, I think ATI is making good products, yet the age-old concern of theft still arises and you have honestly and bravly asked that age-old question: Is it stealing when we bought a product and discovered it to be another more costly product and by our respect of returning products for refund that occur in the opposite occurence, do we return our products to ATI? Here's your answer: a financial transaction took place, you are under contracted law that may or may not allow you to return a product that had been sold upon the truths as being lawfully or unlawfully guise.
So, my joke for you is...Take it back to ATI, tell them they sold you a ATI Radeon 9700 and they'll give you company credit of the value of that Radeon 9700 to apply for the selection of another product and possibly you will get a refund.
OK I'M JOKING! Think of it as another way: ATI has given you a benefit (or blessing, if you will) and they have given you an incompletly implemented Radeon 9700, marketed as a 9500 and sold half price, and it is up to your own time or skill or merit to finish their incomplete manufacture to a complete Radeon 9700.
Hey, if someone gave you a Manshion that was half-finished/half-destroyed, would you thank them or tell them it would be a steal for you to purchase it from them at such a low cost? It's the market, buddy. ATI is aware of this and perhaps due to the 9500 and 9700 being under ATI's poor marketers, they'll change or have already changed the future Radeon 9500 to be a more deceptive and unmodifiable Radeon 9700 product that proves to require more time or skill or merit for the owner to complete its manufacture.
I remember the ol' Total Recal movie that makes me laugh... Douglas Quait wakes up in a Taxi, the driver is a robot. The transcript is like this:
Quait: How did I get here?
Taxi: I'm sorry, will you please re-phrase your question.
Quait: How did I get in this Taxi?
Taxi: The door opened, you got in...Hell of a day, isn't it?
Yes, a cracker is also salty.
An egg is crackable: it is able to be broken. Hence a "cracker" can break either an egg OR other devices including but not limited to Computers and its related technologies.
The application of Hacker and Cracker has now been resolved from verbs unto nouns. In this application, I protest the improper usage of Hacker as the act of breaking things. Hacker is the proper usage, applicable to the act of developing the software. It is the usage of such software that defines classifies the user as a "cracker."
So forth, in my most kind and thankfulness for you to allow me to correct you on these regard, greatful of your consideration and concerns, peacfully, I continue my protest of this article.
I respectfully reply to you, without pre-judice. A cracker is by intent. A hacker is by talent.
ESR is a hacker because; he declared, if I remember correctly, 1977 is the last day he acted as cracker and hacker. ESR now proclaims he is only hacker and follows his self-published "Hacker Ethics" and proclaims the evils of cracking.
I protest this article because I believe Michael did not imply a distinction that properly justifies the Hacker and the Cracker. I think Michael emplored a respectable effort to build this article, I simply protest on this small mis-enumeration of the qualities and a hacker. The use of this software would be justified as by crackers. Not all crackers have the skills of hackers; this is observed by "script kiddies" using works that have been "hacked" (as in hacked-together) by other authors and are simply serving as an element of the delivery agent for the respective intent of the "software."
This article has many merits, yet its slander of my hacker ethics is one that I protest. By the mis-placed truth in this article, I respectably submit the evident truths, by my own testimony, that the proper noun that addresses the intent of this article is "CRACKER". Please do not confuse a hacker with a cracker. Crackers break things, hackers build things. For example, a hacker cuts down a tree to build beautiful Amish furniture to sell on the internet; versus a cracker cuts down a telephone line to disrupt services that have been contracted.
I respectibly submit this evident as truth that hackers and crackers are created equal and due process of the law has slandered "HACKERS" and their most holy past-time of "HACKING."
ESR has prophetized unto me these truths.
"To f## the #i#Cl#p#ngs##, y#u se##ch woo## of C##ada in backpa#k# of AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH."
Strange, it just says "ahhhhhhhhhhhhh" at the end. Perhaps this troll was dictating to another troll as he died? The only "ahhhhhhhhhh" I know of is an old folk-lore tail about a wizard of "ahhhhhhhhhh-zzzz"; "oz" for short. Perhaps he was dictating and died as he was trying to mention Wozniack's codename: WOZ. It wouldn't make sense for him to dictate "ahhhhhhhhhhh" if he were dying, I think it ... IT IT GOT ESR, RUN !!! IT'S A MOUNTY!
Correct me if you think YOU are wrong...
/drinks small glass of whisky and passes out.
I think some of the purpose of having Virtual Memmory (VM) is to address the constraints of any given architecture's idle processes being in a state of inactivity and their data in the system's RAM is "swapped" unto a file on the harddrive for the system's RAM to be available to processes that are still active and will benefit from the performance all ans while the processes don't recognize any VM subsystem or may choose to interact with it and this is one crazy run-on sentance. So, what's the problem and why do they feel the need to re-design and re-implement Linux VM support? Maybe you should first understand the scope of the principle of VM: applications do not know it is happening. Then slowly appen to your implementation hooks that allow applications to reschedule the kernel's interaction with virtual memmory and you lost scope of the *purpose*.
That's how I implemented VM in one of my applications! The difference between kernel-based VM is the application is not built to recognize and interact with VM, it is just there as a condition. VM-enabled kernels ARE SUPPOSED TO RELEASE KERNEL INFORMATION that instead of having 2GB of system RAM 4GB is available: not that bullshit "2GB free swap available" stuff. Relying on applications to interact with kernel-based VM decides the portability of applications.
No matter what, DRM will be part of the modern world. Software developers are not in control of the distribution of their software. Software developers, although responsible for an actual product, are simply a small chain in a company that will receive any implementation to regulate its products market penetration. The plan of DRM technology is not to give people an option to disable it. It will be used or your software will not be able to install unless a crack is released that subjugates the "DRM" and viably will put the user of such technology within legal liability to the patent holders of the DRM and the Software Distributors. This is a combination of efforts from the United States' employees (pseudo-politicians), Software *Distributors* (whoever receives such responsibility), and the various platforms of computer hardware and software developers that received the duty to implement DRM into an operating system! Think of the legal implications of DRM in a computer; you have received an agent of the United States by the contractual purchase of your computer hardware and software! DRM is in violation of Article III of the Constitution of the united States of America, yet by being contracted through a license approving an agreed conditional voluntary purchase of such software and/or hardware it is made legal! DRM is a legal abridgment of everyone's constitutional rights! This puts the United States government in competition with fellow private business and this is also a violation of Article I of the Constitution of the united States of America by abridging the freedom of speech! Think about it, what kind of people would abridge a freedom of speech clause while maintaning a "State of War" that it does not revoke in the absence of war? Constitutionaly, this allows a world of possibility to construe Article V of the Constitution of the united States of America for unwaranted search and seizure of property and effects! It's mass fraud that is attempted by mis-leading implied contractual agreements!
The perpetration of DRM began with a private company attempting to illegally enforce the honor of patents and intellectual property. This demand has caused a "domino-effect" of the SNAFU theorom to reach Software Distributors to consider the ability of regulating the sale of software by enacting agents within software! This opens a completly new concept of software-use. And over at Transmeta, I thought the many Linux-users would lobby against DRM due to Unix being an actual technology contructed to regulate the use of software via principle accounting feature in the system environment. I may consider an alternative Unix-like software project that is Public Domain and not bound by licenses whether implied or traditionaly interactive.
Anyone know of any Public Domain projects, and when I mean "Public Domain" I understand it to be not regulated by any authority of its use via a terms-of-use license?
Sincerily,
Saddened by everyone's violation of my constitution...that honors my independence from tyranical governors.
The Alpha platform is up for grabs!
All we need to purchase Alpha is a good liar (Dr. Evil) and $2...million...dollars.
ermm I mean we need a good lawyer (EFF) and $5...hundred...billion...dollars.
The Blender project received $100K in less than 5 days, we should be able to petition everyone and receive $5...hundred...billion...dollars in time for...Intel to release the AlphitaniXParcMeta (about 20 years or most-likly never).
Can you moderators understand that you are degrading slashdot by slandering legitimate questions?
This is a good question that was modded down as troll:
[WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CLOCK AND PERFORMANCE SCALABILITY OF RISC DESIGN]?
Why do all the moderators become employed to prevent actual trolls and by the concept of moderation the moderators become trolls themselves?
You few moderators that received mod-points, be warned because your actions are cosmic events that will NEVER be erased!
I said to be of good cheer, not of irrational criticism.
Yes, it is true. The United States is a corporation which incorporated in Costa Rica and their borders are within Washington D.C. The United States offers services; these services are initiated by contract. If you do not agree to them, then you retain your sovereignty as one of many States. Being a private company, the United States shares the same trates as a Church; it dictated laws and morality by contract. Regardless of morality, the regulation imposed upon you is either granted by contract or is not constitutional.
Speaking as Jesus Christ's advocate, give them your money because you participate in their services. Give them all your money and they have no interests in you. Speaking in my own pesona, association of your assets with an artificial entity created within their borders, originating from an affirmation in th form of a birst certificate to provide constructive notice for creation of such an artificial entity, the Untied States is the owner and administrator of all property and effects you associate with the name on your birth certificate or Social Security Trust Fund relative to your benefit of participating in the use of Federal Reserve Notes.
This is not theory, this is administrative procedure of a corporation that operates under Tort Law, Contract Law, Uniform Commercial Law, and honors such. If you disagree with their administrative goals, I suggest you separate from them and be sovereign as was declared 200 years ago as the many states that united together to be beneficiaries as "We, The People."
Yes, many people have shit their pants...including me. I am still having a Good(TM) day.
The only *APPROPRIATE* punisment for Crackers *SHOULD* be...
under regulation of Nabisco(R), dipped until they are soggy.