I just received the patent #143224345323 for a system of electronic purchase designed so to minimise the number of mouse-clicks to zero mouse-clicks. Everybody using an interface allowing people to shop without even touching the mouse will have to contact our legal department to discuss a contract to allow you use our technology.
This include but is not restricted to text-based interfaces not using the mouse.
And after stupid laws like that they say that America is the land of freedom. Bouah!
When you did DOOM you created a new isometric 3D engine.
When you did Quake you created a new 3D engine (polygonal this time).
Do you think this technology will be able to look as close to the reality as possible (I mean, not looking "plastified") or do you thing we will need to find a new technology to achieve a quasi perfect looking world?
If you think that we will need a new technology, how do you think it will look like (technically)?
No, this is not a flamebait, but probably offtopic.
Last year I made a new friend that seemed not to be a Microsoft droid (i.e. he didn't like Windows) and I encouraged him to give Linux a try. I gave him some advices and warned him because Linux is very different in philosophy to Windows.
Today, he thanked me by e-mail to help him make the plounge and said he didn't regret it.
So, why am I disgusted?
Because I'm stuck in England (which is a foreign country for me) with only windows boxes and a Unix account via Telnet on Tru(e?)64 Unix (Alphas) while he has got a Linux box for him alone.
I'm disgusted to have to support MS crapware while my friends can enjoy Linux. True64 may be a better technology than Linux for many things but they just didn't install all the cool stuff that come with quite every Linux distros. I don't even have GCC (and so no Objective-C/C++ compiler AFAIK).
Please everyone, make Linux (or another Free Unix, I don't care) world domination break MS monopoly so we can have the choice between crap and a true OS.
I'm jealous of all of you, so take the most fun out of it while you can. Many of you don't like Enlightenment, so what? You can switch to Window Maker/Sawmill/YAWM (Yet Another Window Manager) but all of us windows users (by will or by force) are stuck with only one interface, only one desktop, only one type of BSOD...
Being forced to use Windows after having used Linux for quite two years is worse than a nightmare, it is a curse. And a curse don't disappear before winning over the originator of the curse. So don't forget to have a thought for all the people that make all this great software, they are worth your respect.
What I want is not to have creationism taught in schools, creationism is a belief, school is not made to teach you religious believes but what we know about the nature at one point of the time.
What I want is teacher stopping to say evolutionnism is the definite TRUTH as they are doing now. When they do that they are as bad as teacher teaching creationism as the only TRUTH. Evolution is a theory and should be taught as a theory and not as an immovable law. A theory is made to explain things we see in the most satisfactory way, when we have nwe clues we affine/change the theory. If you begin to teach a theory like a truth then you forbid students to question the theory and to come with another explanation that may be better.
So stop to teach evolutionism as the ultimate answer to the question to life, the universe and everything and begin to teach it as the most probable theory we have so far to explain fossils and things like that.
I'd just like to point out that if Microsoft had spent this long releasing a long-awaited product (like, say....Windows 2000?) the release of a new beta would be an opportunity to mock them rather than celebrate them.
Mozilla and Win2k both are considered like new products (Mozilla have been rebuild quite from the ground up and MS say that people should consider win2k like a new OS rather than an extension of NT) and that when you makes new products this take time.
But you forgot to point out that Mozilla didn't drop a lot of feature they planned to do like win2k (or feature that will be buggy). Mozilla is a step in the right direction, Win2k may be a step in the right direction but given MS track on new products (say win 1.0/3.0/95) we can think they won't manage to do thing well from the first time (i.e. wait for SP 5/6 or for win2002).
>> There are no commercially proven clustering >>technologies to provide High Availability for >>Linux." > Can you say beowulf?
is false. Beowulf is a high performance clustering technologie. We still don't have a good high availability clustering solution AFAIK. There is work being done here but we aren't here yet.
But I am still waiting to see a NT machine on the top 500 list (the 500 more powerful supercomputers).
"The author can accomplish what they seem to be looking for with a dual release license."
I have already thought about double licensing but this don't always work. If the project is well developped and only need a few small bugfixes then you can easily double license because you don't risk your IP but if their are a lot of contribution you can't easily double license it because you have to remove everyone else's code in the other version or ask them to allow you to use this code(The TGPL model is kind of GPL+you agree to let me use your code in my release so i don't have to ask you every time). There is a risk to have a forking occuring with the GPL version well ahead of the other.
How do you deal with that?
I find it particulary useful in the case of Libraries.
A few time ago RMS was talking about using more the GPL for libraries that give an advantage to Free Software over proprietary software.
If one day I do a revolutionary library (one can dream) I would want to release it under GPL so other people can use it, but I would like to be able to make money out of it by selling licenses to companies that want to use this library for a proprietary product. The problem arise when other people contribute to the code and have a copyright on it. I can't relicense their code unless they allow me to do so, which lead to a code forking sooner or later (or a hell of maintenance).
How would you do yourself in that case? And no, saying "I wouldn't allow proprietary vultures to use it" don't help, I love Free Software, their certainly are some way to make money one support and other models but they aren't the easiest way either.
It's funny, being an European I use the metric system and I thought that 6' was too short for an Elf (I was basing their usual height on Tolkien) and that was because that actor was too short that he was standing up when in fact it was because he was too tall. Funny isn't it?
How much meters does 6' do? 1,90 or something like that?
You forgot to mention that the NT car was furnished with a driver seat as default when the Linux car was furnished with ten different seats that you can can install instead of thedefault seat, an autoradio with Tapes and CD's, lateral security, ABS, Airbag for everyone (but you can disable them), and plenty other stuff included in the default package.
Well, the most things I learned were on my third OS Linux after Tos (Atari ST) and DOS/Windows... ho wait, these weren't OS'es so this make two finally;)
Congratulation John. You're right when you say that Open Source (or Free Software) is a big thing and that fun is important. Fun and Freedom are the two biggest reasons I love Linux/Free Software (I love it also because I'm a poor student but this is temporary).
Quote from CatB about Brooks law (in The Mythical Man Month):"adding developers to a late software project makes it later."
Another quote "But if Brooks's Law were the whole picture, Linux would be impossible."
That is why I love the bazaar model and the Free Software philosophy. You can check that tyou are using good software and fix it/improve it if this is not the case.
Why add a feature that would add more bug. If this feature is usefull this will be in the next release, if it is not usefull enough nobody will care.
This is very good for the Free Softwares. A lot of people have heard about Linux because of Id's games and because their were a lot of Linux Doom/Quake servers.
When they released Doom source code, this was even cooler because you cold look at a good professional pseudo-3D engine.
Now this is even cooler and will help Open source games (for this kind of game of course).
It reminds me of a comic (Spirou et Fantasio: Z like Zorglub)in which the bad guy was kind of hypnotizing people to make them work for him.
At the end of the comic you find out that he didn't want to destroy the world or things like that but he wanted to use the moon as a big advertising area.
The only problem was that he trained is troops to talk from right to left (ex: tfel ot thgir morf) and because of this when he tried his first launch he wrote aloc acoc on the face of the moon instead of coca cola.
I totally agree with your vision of the GPL, this is the way I feel about the GPL/BSD license. But the fact still is that the GPL restrict you to use it with other license, that is the whole point of the GPL: Thou shall not enslave the code I gave you. The BSD is about the programmer freedom, the GPL about the program freedom.
After a second sought that is true that there is no problem if the originator keep his rights even if he do nothing to the source code any more. After all, if he do nothing the other people still have the same rights as with the GPL.
But I think that there must be a way to give your originator's rights (or, why not, sell them). If you don't contribute to a codebase you may not be forced legally to give your rights but you may want to do it "morally" because you think that the new maintener deserve the rights you had over this code.
Slashdot Mirror
I just received the patent #143224345323 for a system of electronic purchase designed so to minimise the number of mouse-clicks to zero mouse-clicks. Everybody using an interface allowing people to shop without even touching the mouse will have to contact our legal department to discuss a contract to allow you use our technology.
This include but is not restricted to text-based interfaces not using the mouse.
And after stupid laws like that they say that America is the land of freedom. Bouah!
Hi john,
When you did DOOM you created a new isometric 3D engine.
When you did Quake you created a new 3D engine (polygonal this time).
Do you think this technology will be able to look as close to the reality as possible (I mean, not looking "plastified") or do you thing we will need to find a new technology to achieve a quasi perfect looking world?
If you think that we will need a new technology, how do you think it will look like (technically)?
AC discusses this term at some length and makes...
Sorry, but I don't read AC's (Anonymous Coward) production, their to much of it.
(note: for those that think I am nut I completely understood that he was talking about Alan Cooper, this is just a (bad?) joke
Yes, I am disgusted.
No, this is not a flamebait, but probably offtopic.
Last year I made a new friend that seemed not to be a Microsoft droid (i.e. he didn't like Windows) and I encouraged him to give Linux a try. I gave him some advices and warned him because Linux is very different in philosophy to Windows.
Today, he thanked me by e-mail to help him make the plounge and said he didn't regret it.
So, why am I disgusted?
Because I'm stuck in England (which is a foreign country for me) with only windows boxes and a Unix account via Telnet on Tru(e?)64 Unix (Alphas) while he has got a Linux box for him alone.
I'm disgusted to have to support MS crapware while my friends can enjoy Linux. True64 may be a better technology than Linux for many things but they just didn't install all the cool stuff that come with quite every Linux distros. I don't even have GCC (and so no Objective-C/C++ compiler AFAIK).
Please everyone, make Linux (or another Free Unix, I don't care) world domination break MS monopoly so we can have the choice between crap and a true OS.
I'm jealous of all of you, so take the most fun out of it while you can. Many of you don't like Enlightenment, so what? You can switch to Window Maker/Sawmill/YAWM (Yet Another Window Manager) but all of us windows users (by will or by force) are stuck with only one interface, only one desktop, only one type of BSOD...
Being forced to use Windows after having used Linux for quite two years is worse than a nightmare, it is a curse. And a curse don't disappear before winning over the originator of the curse. So don't forget to have a thought for all the people that make all this great software, they are worth your respect.
'nuff said.
The bit you quoted was preceeded by "the glitch would more likely effect more-efficient embedded operating systems."
Could it be that Linux on Macs can be affected it is more efficient than MacOS(X)? Or is that just non-embedded OS's against embedded ones?
Anyone wanna place bets on whether this show is going to be bad, or really bad?
It reminds me of an Humorist: "You see worse? Ok, this will be even worse"
Well, I believe in God and am a creationist.
What I want is not to have creationism taught in schools, creationism is a belief, school is not made to teach you religious believes but what we know about the nature at one point of the time.
What I want is teacher stopping to say evolutionnism is the definite TRUTH as they are doing now. When they do that they are as bad as teacher teaching creationism as the only TRUTH. Evolution is a theory and should be taught as a theory and not as an immovable law. A theory is made to explain things we see in the most satisfactory way, when we have nwe clues we affine/change the theory. If you begin to teach a theory like a truth then you forbid students to question the theory and to come with another explanation that may be better.
So stop to teach evolutionism as the ultimate answer to the question to life, the universe and everything and begin to teach it as the most probable theory we have so far to explain fossils and things like that.
I'd just like to point out that if Microsoft had spent this long releasing a long-awaited product (like, say....Windows 2000?) the release of a new beta would be an opportunity to mock them rather than celebrate them.
Mozilla and Win2k both are considered like new products (Mozilla have been rebuild quite from the ground up and MS say that people should consider win2k like a new OS rather than an extension of NT) and that when you makes new products this take time.
But you forgot to point out that Mozilla didn't drop a lot of feature they planned to do like win2k (or feature that will be buggy). Mozilla is a step in the right direction, Win2k may be a step in the right direction but given MS track on new products (say win 1.0/3.0/95) we can think they won't manage to do thing well from the first time (i.e. wait for SP 5/6 or for win2002).
"It reads like a Babelfish translation!"
Well, in fact the article was a babelfish translation...from English to American
Good rebuttal but:
>> There are no commercially proven clustering >>technologies to provide High Availability for >>Linux."
> Can you say beowulf?
is false. Beowulf is a high performance clustering technologie. We still don't have a good high availability clustering solution AFAIK. There is work being done here but we aren't here yet.
But I am still waiting to see a NT machine on the top 500 list (the 500 more powerful supercomputers).
"The author can accomplish what they seem to be looking for with a dual release license."
I have already thought about double licensing but this don't always work. If the project is well developped and only need a few small bugfixes then you can easily double license because you don't risk your IP but if their are a lot of contribution you can't easily double license it because you have to remove everyone else's code in the other version or ask them to allow you to use this code(The TGPL model is kind of GPL+you agree to let me use your code in my release so i don't have to ask you every time). There is a risk to have a forking occuring with the GPL version well ahead of the other.
How do you deal with that?
I find it particulary useful in the case of Libraries.
A few time ago RMS was talking about using more the GPL for libraries that give an advantage to Free Software over proprietary software.
If one day I do a revolutionary library (one can dream) I would want to release it under GPL so other people can use it, but I would like to be able to make money out of it by selling licenses to companies that want to use this library for a proprietary product. The problem arise when other people contribute to the code and have a copyright on it. I can't relicense their code unless they allow me to do so, which lead to a code forking sooner or later (or a hell of maintenance).
How would you do yourself in that case? And no, saying "I wouldn't allow proprietary vultures to use it" don't help, I love Free Software, their certainly are some way to make money one support and other models but they aren't the easiest way either.
It's funny, being an European I use the metric system and I thought that 6' was too short for an Elf (I was basing their usual height on Tolkien) and that was because that actor was too short that he was standing up when in fact it was because he was too tall. Funny isn't it?
How much meters does 6' do? 1,90 or something like that?
It seems to be true (check yourself in his book) but I hadn't any copy of the book myself.
Don't forget that anybody make stupid errors sometimes...except me of course
You forgot to mention that the NT car was furnished with a driver seat as default when the Linux car was furnished with ten different seats that you can can install instead of thedefault seat, an autoradio with Tapes and CD's, lateral security, ABS, Airbag for everyone (but you can disable them), and plenty other stuff included in the default package.
"with the new Itanium 64 bit you can ever more enjoy you pron site surfing: Itanium 64, the viagra of the processors."
Ok, now that RedHat have a graphical installer and (apparently) is easier to install that windows I want to know:
How do the new installer deal with the partition problem. Have they a Partition Magic version like Caldera? Have they a clone?
Do they autodetect the Graphic card and (more important) the monitor?
I also heard about an easier way to upgrade your RPM's. What are the extr-functionality compared to GnoRPM or things like that?
I had a few more question but I forgot them.
Thanks
Jon,
One day a newbie will complain about a problem he has with Linux.
This day you will be close enough to him to hear him groaning.
You will ask him what is the problem.
You will help him get his problem solved.
You will wonder how you did THAT.
You will realize that you are beginning to geekify, that what looked difficult and boring at a time is powerfull when mastered and fascinating.
You will wonder where is your old self, this naive man that had no idea how wonderful the world of computing is from inside.
You will not be a mere writer any more.
You will be a Geek writer.
Well, the most things I learned were on my third OS Linux after Tos (Atari ST) and DOS/Windows... ho wait, these weren't OS'es so this make two finally
Congratulation John. You're right when you say that Open Source (or Free Software) is a big thing and that fun is important. Fun and Freedom are the two biggest reasons I love Linux/Free Software (I love it also because I'm a poor student but this is temporary).
"I will give you control of penix.com"
... like orgasme ;)
No, give control of penix.org
Quote from CatB about Brooks law (in The Mythical Man Month):"adding developers to a late
software project makes it later."
Another quote "But if Brooks's Law were the whole picture, Linux would be impossible."
That is why I love the bazaar model and the Free Software philosophy. You can check that tyou are using good software and fix it/improve it if this is not the case.
Why add a feature that would add more bug. If this feature is usefull this will be in the next release, if it is not usefull enough nobody will care.
This is very good for the Free Softwares. A lot of people have heard about Linux because of Id's games and because their were a lot of Linux Doom/Quake servers.
When they released Doom source code, this was even cooler because you cold look at a good professional pseudo-3D engine.
Now this is even cooler and will help Open source games (for this kind of game of course).
Thanks John, thanks.
'"their only victims are the little people that are customers" -- the people who purchase products like Windows 2000.'
Buying windows is already asking for being a victim.
It reminds me of a comic (Spirou et Fantasio: Z like Zorglub)in which the bad guy was kind of hypnotizing people to make them work for him.
At the end of the comic you find out that he didn't want to destroy the world or things like that but he wanted to use the moon as a big advertising area.
The only problem was that he trained is troops to talk from right to left (ex: tfel ot thgir morf) and because of this when he tried his first launch he wrote aloc acoc on the face of the moon instead of coca cola.
"You just have to make sure that other people _can_ take it back to the main tree"
I never said anything else (but I may have expressed myself badly, since English isn't my natural language).
"or any other tree if they want to."
As long as the tree is under the GPL.
I totally agree with your vision of the GPL, this is the way I feel about the GPL/BSD license. But the fact still is that the GPL restrict you to use it with other license, that is the whole point of the GPL: Thou shall not enslave the code I gave you. The BSD is about the programmer freedom, the GPL about the program freedom.
After a second sought that is true that there is no problem if the originator keep his rights even if he do nothing to the source code any more. After all, if he do nothing the other people still have the same rights as with the GPL.
But I think that there must be a way to give your originator's rights (or, why not, sell them).
If you don't contribute to a codebase you may not be forced legally to give your rights but you may want to do it "morally" because you think that the new maintener deserve the rights you had over this code.