If you read carefully, he says that only local X applications will have the Aqua feel. What this says to me is that they've made their own widget set, which you can use to develop your own applications. This widget set would then have the Aqua feel to it.
As for the window manager, well, that wouldn't be too difficult I wouldn't think.
That's not a very good example. What would you like, smith.shop? smith.com? smith.net? AFAICS, the *only* decent TLD for a personal site would be a geographic one, e.g. smith.toronto.on.ca. Yes, there still might be some demand for it, but not enough that people will be squatting on it (most likely). First come first serve works well for that.
That said, as the population (both on the Internet and in the Real World) increases, seemingly odd or unique conflicts may come up. There's the eToys thing, etc. For the time being, these conflicts are pretty far between, but I suppose it would be useful to anticipate the future where squatting will become a lot more prevelant and annoying.
It sounds like you're describing "popular" domains, not "good" domains. If you pick a name that accurately describes what it's hosting, then it will undoubtedly be both good and unpopular. Problem solved.
I think your basing a distro's merits on how quickly you can reinstall it not quite good (I would even say bad). I was going to say that Slackware (my distro of choice) can easily be installed within 15 or 20 minutes (which it can), but you have to do a few hours (or more accurately a few hundred hours) to get it just the way you want.
So the easiest way to do it would be to get your Slackware system just the way you want it, burn your root ext2 image to CD (more complicated if you have more than one partition that you need to back up), and then when your hard drive dies, you just pop in tomsrtbt, repartition, dd the.ext2 from the CD to your new partition, and you're reinstalled in hopefully under five minutes (more if you have a slow CD-ROM). Bonus points for compressing the disk image.
I think it would save you a lot of effort (unless you don't have a CDR), and plus you don't have to put with all that Red Hat garbage.
Nice to see that we have the first ever 100% bug-free piece of non-trivial software: it's EROS! I guess you just install that once and then forget about it? No security updates or anything like that?
Not to knock you completely. Capabilities make for a very nice security system, but if you think that it will *ever* be completely secure, or completely impervious to malicious code, which is what the OP was asking, you're kidding yourself.
But going into Device Manager, selecting a piece of hardware and telling Windows to search the WindowsUpdate site for "updated drivers" is what I'm talking about. . ..Anyone who thinks that modules isn't the future of driver development on Linux is fooling themselves. Yes, having specific devices imbedded into the kernel itself is nice (and speeds driver load time), but what about all the drivers that *don't* need to be in there, such as the amateur radio drivers compiled into the kernel up until a few years ago?
I think the issue is not whether the drivers are compiled in the kernel, but whether they're distributed with the kernel. There are a few drivers that are distributed apart from the kernel (OSS/Expensive and ALSA immediately come to mind), but for the most part, your drivers come with your kernel, so doing an "update" in the Win98 sense isn't necessary. The issue of whether modules are good/bad isn't really terribly interesting since they're so mature and people can choose for themselves anyway.
The view that Linux cannot be a gaming platform is clearly amateurish.
Of course it can be a gaming platform. It's just that it can't be a very good one for certain types of games (the types of games which are very popular right now). No doubt that you can get satisfactory out of any game if you put enough effort into it, but it seems kind of silly when you could be spending that effort doing something a lot more useful (such as actually playing the game on a gaming platform, e.g. a Nintendo).
If it cannot, why are companies like Loki even bothering?
Loki is a company. They generally don't do things because they're a good idea; they do things because people demand them. Linux users are stupid people, and Loki can make a lot of money off of them by providing answers to stupid problems. That said, that's not the complete truth, as Loki is doing a number of cool things apart from (and arguably even in spite of) the market.
Why do most distributions include Gnome and KDE games out of box, even when the install is set to "server" mode?
Again, we're not talking about the same kinds of games. You can probably play Space Invaders on even the earliest of TI calculators, but that doesn't really make it a gaming platform.
I think you've been taken in by buzzwords. It takes no planning for a windowing system to be able to "morph" into being able to use X Windows. Take a look at Microsoft Windows. Do you think they had X Windows or network transparency of any kind when they developed Win95? No, but there are X servers out there for Windows that will draw X apps as native Windows apps (so that they are indistinguishable from native Windows apps in terms of look and behaviour).
Personally, I think the correct approach would be for a windowing system to be completely local. That way, you can slap on a light-weight X server or whatever server if you need remote capabilities. No "morphing" required. This is what (I believe) the first incarnation of Berlin was, but unfortunately they've hopped on the remote object bandwagon.
That's your argument? Just for the record: NO! Moderation has not worked well for Slashdot. This a world where "informative" means "misinformed, but over-confident, and the moderators are even more misinformed", where "insightful" means "redundant", where "interesting" means "copying verbatim from the article", where "troll" means "funny", where "funny" means "anti-Microsoft drivel". Personally I hope the idea of moderation never makes it out of Slashdot.
Yes, this is one of the biggest fear about Freenet. Since all the data self-replicating, a "rogue node" could cause a lot of grief for some people. AFAIK, there's really no good way to deal with a "rogue node" other than route around it.
Just thought I'd throw in my support for GNUstep. They are working very hard at getting it API compatible with OpenStep, and eventually Cocoa as well. In fact, I understand that GNUstep's NSDistantObject is already co-operating with Mac OS X's NSDistantObject (and there is/was some talk of creating a CORBA gateway for it). Right now, only a small part of AppKit is implemented (though nearly all of FoundationKit is), and what's there is slow, probably due to the poor performance of the X11 PostScript xgps that I'm using (if you're lucky enough to have a fast PostScript engine for your windowing system, such as on Windows or NeXT or many Unices, it may be quite a bit faster).
Anyway, back to the point: if there is any free software written for OpenStep (e.g. NeXT) or Mac OS X, it should be able to run (eventually) without changes on GNUstep. Plus, the API is much cool. Not to suggest that OpenStep is the sole Wave Of The Future, but it is a very nice alternative to GNOME and KDE (or at least it will be once it gets a bit more mature).
Yes. In fact RMS decided to pronounce the 'G' to get around this very problem, I believe. People seem to have done alright with 'gnu' (the herd animal) vs 'new' for many decades (possibly even centuries), so I don't see why 'GNU' (the software project) vs 'new' should suddenly add new (ho ho) difficulties. Go figure.
It's just stupid. There's no good reason for Microsoft to be able to put a block on all those domains. What if a grocery store called Microsoft starts up? As long as they're not involved in computer technology, then there is no trademark violation, and so I don't see why they shouldn't be able to have a Microsoft domain. Mind you organising domain names according to the US legal system is a bit retarded, not to mention arrogant.
That said, what harm does it do if some rabid anti-MSite decides to register the microsoft.sucks domain? Nobody bloody cares. It's not like someone's going to be wanting their Win98 update, tries to go to win98.update.microsoft and *whoops*, his finger slips and accidentally types in microsoft.sucks. You seem to think that just because Microsoft owns a trademark in one small area (the computer technology area), they have some kind of right to stop everyone in the world from using the name, which, besides being illogical, is not the case in any jurisdiction in the world (that I'm aware of).
Well first of, burning a $100 bill costs more than $1, and I doubt going to a casino would be much fun (or at all possible) for $1. That said, how do you know how much fun they have at doing certain activities? I don't like golf, but that doesn't mean everyone who plays golf is bad at math because they could be doing something (which I consider to be) more fun for less money. Maybe they just like playing the lottery. Who cares?
You are misinformed. The GPL allows private modifications, as it is apparently a "basic right". People are only allowed to demand source from you if they legally obtain a binary from you first (i.e. you give it to them).
1900 House is a bad example because they were living in Victorian England and the Victorians were, well, retarded. All the women did (pretty much) was clean, and it is not hard to find a society (such as the hunter-gatherer ones) where the women didn't really clean at all (though they often did have to construct and mend clothing and blankets and whatnot).
That may be true for some computer components, but the CRT monitors we have now are more or less glorified TV sets. TV sets get power-cycled at an unbelievable rate ("wait don't turn that off, I want to wat-. Oh well." "Oops, did I sit on the remote?") and seem to last pretty well. Nearly all monitors use more than 30W during power-saving mode (most around 50W I think), so it would probably be worthwhile to shut them off for the night.
I'm pretty sure the best way to end the distro flamewars is to kill off all the obviously crappy and inferior distributions, specifically SuSE and Solaris. Getting rid of GNOME would also be a good idea, since X is so much better.
Probably a large part of it stems from the fact that there really isn't another word for "hacker".
The happy guy in the example, when he finds out that "gay" doesn't mean "happy" anymore, could suddenly start introducing himself as "the happy guy" instead of "the gay guy" when he goes to dinner parties. For hackers it's not so easy. "Geek"? "Egghead"? Nothing really fits in the same way that "hacker" does.
You also have to keep in mind that "hacker" in the media sense (person who accesses computer resources without permission) comes from a history. A "cracker" is someone who bypasses copyright protection, so calling someone who breaks into mainframes a "cracker" is still quite confusing.
So if everyone started calling gay men 'fags' tomorrow, they'd be right?
Interesting you should bring that up. If you called all happy men 'gay', would you be right? The hacker/cracker thing is exactly the same as the happy/gay thing.
... but no cigar. Putting "Or ILOVEYOU" as a sentence frament to start off a paragraph is not bad, but not quite good enough. The Jon Katz school of writing says that for making meaningless points important, a full paragraph should be devoted to them. Also, you need to victimise your subjects a little bit more. Try putting something in about how if, like 100% of all geeks who have ever lived, the people in Central America with Internet access live a life of torment and go on a shooting spree, it was the fault of random people he's heard rumours about who don't embrace the life of geeks.
Or not.
Keep trying though. The Jon Katz writing style is a very hard thing to get down, and I don't claim to know all the answers.
Slashdot Mirror
If you read carefully, he says that only local X applications will have the Aqua feel. What this says to me is that they've made their own widget set, which you can use to develop your own applications. This widget set would then have the Aqua feel to it.
As for the window manager, well, that wouldn't be too difficult I wouldn't think.
That's not a very good example. What would you like, smith.shop? smith.com? smith.net? AFAICS, the *only* decent TLD for a personal site would be a geographic one, e.g. smith.toronto.on.ca. Yes, there still might be some demand for it, but not enough that people will be squatting on it (most likely). First come first serve works well for that.
That said, as the population (both on the Internet and in the Real World) increases, seemingly odd or unique conflicts may come up. There's the eToys thing, etc. For the time being, these conflicts are pretty far between, but I suppose it would be useful to anticipate the future where squatting will become a lot more prevelant and annoying.
Woz is a teacher now. If you can think of something more admirable than a teacher, I'd like to hear it.
It sounds like you're describing "popular" domains, not "good" domains. If you pick a name that accurately describes what it's hosting, then it will undoubtedly be both good and unpopular. Problem solved.
I think your basing a distro's merits on how quickly you can reinstall it not quite good (I would even say bad). I was going to say that Slackware (my distro of choice) can easily be installed within 15 or 20 minutes (which it can), but you have to do a few hours (or more accurately a few hundred hours) to get it just the way you want.
.ext2 from the CD to your new partition, and you're reinstalled in hopefully under five minutes (more if you have a slow CD-ROM). Bonus points for compressing the disk image.
So the easiest way to do it would be to get your Slackware system just the way you want it, burn your root ext2 image to CD (more complicated if you have more than one partition that you need to back up), and then when your hard drive dies, you just pop in tomsrtbt, repartition, dd the
I think it would save you a lot of effort (unless you don't have a CDR), and plus you don't have to put with all that Red Hat garbage.
Well I hardly think it counts as "stealing" when the government gives it to you willingly.
More like "steal it from the people, then give it to the people".
Nice to see that we have the first ever 100% bug-free piece of non-trivial software: it's EROS! I guess you just install that once and then forget about it? No security updates or anything like that?
Not to knock you completely. Capabilities make for a very nice security system, but if you think that it will *ever* be completely secure, or completely impervious to malicious code, which is what the OP was asking, you're kidding yourself.
So the answer is: NO.
But going into Device Manager, selecting a piece of hardware and telling Windows to search the WindowsUpdate site for "updated drivers" is what I'm talking about. . . .Anyone who thinks that modules isn't the future of driver development on Linux is fooling themselves. Yes, having specific devices imbedded into the kernel itself is nice (and speeds driver load time), but what about all the drivers that *don't* need to be in there, such as the amateur radio drivers compiled into the kernel up until a few years ago?
I think the issue is not whether the drivers are compiled in the kernel, but whether they're distributed with the kernel. There are a few drivers that are distributed apart from the kernel (OSS/Expensive and ALSA immediately come to mind), but for the most part, your drivers come with your kernel, so doing an "update" in the Win98 sense isn't necessary. The issue of whether modules are good/bad isn't really terribly interesting since they're so mature and people can choose for themselves anyway.
The view that Linux cannot be a gaming platform is clearly amateurish.
Of course it can be a gaming platform. It's just that it can't be a very good one for certain types of games (the types of games which are very popular right now). No doubt that you can get satisfactory out of any game if you put enough effort into it, but it seems kind of silly when you could be spending that effort doing something a lot more useful (such as actually playing the game on a gaming platform, e.g. a Nintendo).
If it cannot, why are companies like Loki even bothering?
Loki is a company. They generally don't do things because they're a good idea; they do things because people demand them. Linux users are stupid people, and Loki can make a lot of money off of them by providing answers to stupid problems. That said, that's not the complete truth, as Loki is doing a number of cool things apart from (and arguably even in spite of) the market.
Why do most distributions include Gnome and KDE games out of box, even when the install is set to "server" mode?
Again, we're not talking about the same kinds of games. You can probably play Space Invaders on even the earliest of TI calculators, but that doesn't really make it a gaming platform.
I think you've been taken in by buzzwords. It takes no planning for a windowing system to be able to "morph" into being able to use X Windows. Take a look at Microsoft Windows. Do you think they had X Windows or network transparency of any kind when they developed Win95? No, but there are X servers out there for Windows that will draw X apps as native Windows apps (so that they are indistinguishable from native Windows apps in terms of look and behaviour).
Personally, I think the correct approach would be for a windowing system to be completely local. That way, you can slap on a light-weight X server or whatever server if you need remote capabilities. No "morphing" required. This is what (I believe) the first incarnation of Berlin was, but unfortunately they've hopped on the remote object bandwagon.
That's your argument? Just for the record: NO! Moderation has not worked well for Slashdot. This a world where "informative" means "misinformed, but over-confident, and the moderators are even more misinformed", where "insightful" means "redundant", where "interesting" means "copying verbatim from the article", where "troll" means "funny", where "funny" means "anti-Microsoft drivel". Personally I hope the idea of moderation never makes it out of Slashdot.
Yes, this is one of the biggest fear about Freenet. Since all the data self-replicating, a "rogue node" could cause a lot of grief for some people. AFAIK, there's really no good way to deal with a "rogue node" other than route around it.
Anyway, back to the point: if there is any free software written for OpenStep (e.g. NeXT) or Mac OS X, it should be able to run (eventually) without changes on GNUstep. Plus, the API is much cool. Not to suggest that OpenStep is the sole Wave Of The Future, but it is a very nice alternative to GNOME and KDE (or at least it will be once it gets a bit more mature).
Yes. In fact RMS decided to pronounce the 'G' to get around this very problem, I believe. People seem to have done alright with 'gnu' (the herd animal) vs 'new' for many decades (possibly even centuries), so I don't see why 'GNU' (the software project) vs 'new' should suddenly add new (ho ho) difficulties. Go figure.
It's just stupid. There's no good reason for Microsoft to be able to put a block on all those domains. What if a grocery store called Microsoft starts up? As long as they're not involved in computer technology, then there is no trademark violation, and so I don't see why they shouldn't be able to have a Microsoft domain. Mind you organising domain names according to the US legal system is a bit retarded, not to mention arrogant.
That said, what harm does it do if some rabid anti-MSite decides to register the microsoft.sucks domain? Nobody bloody cares. It's not like someone's going to be wanting their Win98 update, tries to go to win98.update.microsoft and *whoops*, his finger slips and accidentally types in microsoft.sucks. You seem to think that just because Microsoft owns a trademark in one small area (the computer technology area), they have some kind of right to stop everyone in the world from using the name, which, besides being illogical, is not the case in any jurisdiction in the world (that I'm aware of).
Well first of, burning a $100 bill costs more than $1, and I doubt going to a casino would be much fun (or at all possible) for $1. That said, how do you know how much fun they have at doing certain activities? I don't like golf, but that doesn't mean everyone who plays golf is bad at math because they could be doing something (which I consider to be) more fun for less money. Maybe they just like playing the lottery. Who cares?
Trust the tale, not the teller. The above is not a troll.
You are misinformed. The GPL allows private modifications, as it is apparently a "basic right". People are only allowed to demand source from you if they legally obtain a binary from you first (i.e. you give it to them).
1900 House is a bad example because they were living in Victorian England and the Victorians were, well, retarded. All the women did (pretty much) was clean, and it is not hard to find a society (such as the hunter-gatherer ones) where the women didn't really clean at all (though they often did have to construct and mend clothing and blankets and whatnot).
That may be true for some computer components, but the CRT monitors we have now are more or less glorified TV sets. TV sets get power-cycled at an unbelievable rate ("wait don't turn that off, I want to wat-. Oh well." "Oops, did I sit on the remote?") and seem to last pretty well. Nearly all monitors use more than 30W during power-saving mode (most around 50W I think), so it would probably be worthwhile to shut them off for the night.
I'm pretty sure the best way to end the distro flamewars is to kill off all the obviously crappy and inferior distributions, specifically SuSE and Solaris. Getting rid of GNOME would also be a good idea, since X is so much better.
Probably a large part of it stems from the fact that there really isn't another word for "hacker".
The happy guy in the example, when he finds out that "gay" doesn't mean "happy" anymore, could suddenly start introducing himself as "the happy guy" instead of "the gay guy" when he goes to dinner parties. For hackers it's not so easy. "Geek"? "Egghead"? Nothing really fits in the same way that "hacker" does.
You also have to keep in mind that "hacker" in the media sense (person who accesses computer resources without permission) comes from a history. A "cracker" is someone who bypasses copyright protection, so calling someone who breaks into mainframes a "cracker" is still quite confusing.
Interesting you should bring that up. If you called all happy men 'gay', would you be right? The hacker/cracker thing is exactly the same as the happy/gay thing.
:0
* ^From.*mymaillist@list\.com
MailListFolder
:0:
* ^(To|Cc).*me@mydomain\.com
/dev/null
or something like that. HOORAY FOR POKEY THE PENGUIN!!
Why would somebody use a copyright act to sue under trademark law?
... but no cigar. Putting "Or ILOVEYOU" as a sentence frament to start off a paragraph is not bad, but not quite good enough. The Jon Katz school of writing says that for making meaningless points important, a full paragraph should be devoted to them. Also, you need to victimise your subjects a little bit more. Try putting something in about how if, like 100% of all geeks who have ever lived, the people in Central America with Internet access live a life of torment and go on a shooting spree, it was the fault of random people he's heard rumours about who don't embrace the life of geeks.
Or not.
Keep trying though. The Jon Katz writing style is a very hard thing to get down, and I don't claim to know all the answers.