Who here talks about Linux without using it? And why in the world would they bother to do that?
Or are you simply wanting to denigrate Linux zealots for their clear unreasonableness in running Linux? In which case, why do you bother to hang out on the Slashdot boards?
Or better yet, if it's still playing in your area, go see The Fellowship of the Ring one more time, and see the 3 minute preview for The Two Towers that they tacked on to the end of the last reel of the movie back in March.
There's little in the new trailer that wasn't in the preview, aside from Cate Blanchett's voice over, and there's a lot of cool stuff in the preview that isn't in the trailer.
They had good writing. As a modest literary magazine, along the lines of the Atlantic or the Nation, they had potential. But no way should they have ever become a major public company. That was sheer arrogance.
They have good writing, actually.
I've been a premium subscriber from the beginning, and have never regretted it. I don't look forward to a day without Salon.
Sure, of course. I did say 'when you can'. And it is far easier to compile and link with a 2.0.x version than it was with 1.3, being as it does come with mod_ssl, and all of the build scripts are integrated.
There is a lot that doesn't yet go so well on 2.0.x, mostly in the form of third party modules that have not been ported and/or certified for use with 2.0.x.
I won't be telling people not to buy it.. I'll be first in line at the store when the Linux clients become available.
Although, with the kernel oops I just got (probably) from using the NVidia kernel driver, I wonder how smart an idea it is to try and do 3d gaming on Linux. Sure would be nice if there was some way for NVidia to take the source code for their kernel driver over to RedHat or SuSe or somebody and have it checked out.
There's no point in spinning this, nor any real need. It's a bug, it has specific consequences cited in the story, it should be fixed.
Spinning would be to point out how few remote exploits have been discovered in Apache over the last 4 years compared to IIS, and the fact that Apache's exploit count (if this is exploitable) is not zero doesn't mean that it's not still a whole lot less so far than IIS.
Re:Days of denial are over.
on
Baked Alaska
·
· Score: 2
That junkscience.com article is hardly persuasive. He cites one or two scientists and studies and uses them to cheerlead for his personal view of political reality, while offhandedly dismissing any widely held opinions which are not so convenient for him.
Millroy's argument seems to be that we don't know enough about global warming, so therefore scientists who claim there is a problem are full of crap and that we shouldn't do anything risky, like anything at all other than perhaps right-wing political feel-good voluntary recommendations.
If the science isn't certain, fine, why not do more science? But presenting science through an anti-regulation filter doesn't do anything to improve the science, however much pointing out flaws or assumptions may helpfully bring about greater skepticism generally.
Re:oh no... more global warming (...not...??)
on
Baked Alaska
·
· Score: 2
If anything, the theory of Man-made Global Warming is more like the Malthusian population theory. They're both doomsdays scenarios and they are both suppose to result from our sins.
True enough. Of course, the fact that Malthus' doomsday population explosion has not manifested itself as severely as he anticipated does not a priori invalidate his reasoning. Even if it did, there would be no logical connection between Malthus' theory and the factual truth of greenhouse gas warming of the Earth.
Actually, I found that the biggest problem with Mozilla in RedHat 7.3 was that I had installed the AbiWord word processor when I installed the system. AbiWord happens to have some really poor quality fonts named according to the Microsoft convention.. Arial, etc. So any web page that gives you something like
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
will cause Mozilla on X to go and find the lousy AbiWord fonts, no matter what you try and do in the Mozilla font preferences.
The solution is to comment out the reference to the AbiSuite fonts in/etc/X11/fs/config from finding the AbiWord MS-named fonts.
Mozilla on RedHat 7.3 was totally unusable until I did this.
In this eventuality, what would happen would be that the copyright holder for that 100 hours of labor would sue the infringer, and in the best of all worlds, the infringer would be obligated through an injunction to cease distribution of the offending code.
Just to be clear, in this sentence, the offending code refers to the 100 hours of code, not the 5100 hours of code. The copyright holder for the 5000 hours of code is perfectly free to distribute the 5000 hours of code with the 100 hours of GPL'ed code removed.
first of all, if the 100 hours is GPLd, then the GPL isn't 'arguing' anything -- the rest *is* GPLd, according to the GPL.
People make this mistake all the time, but it is a mistake. If someone includes some GPL'ed work into a larger work, the larger work is not magically licensed under the GPL. (Nor, for that matter, is the copyright of the larger work magically made the property of the FSF). Instead, what becomes true is that the ensemble work cannot be legally distributed without violating the terms of the (GPL) license for the 100 hours.
In this eventuality, what would happen would be that the copyright holder for that 100 hours of labor would sue the infringer, and in the best of all worlds, the infringer would be obligated through an injunction to cease distribution of the offending code. If the copyright holder for the 100 hours was willing, some monetary arrangement might be reached in return for an alternate license for the 100 hours of code.
The problematic case is where the 100 hours of code was written by five coders spread over the planet, and nobody bothered to track who had copyright over what piece of the code. In that instance, all five coders should agree to the relicensing. If one of the coders does not agree to the relicensing, then the problem of how to clean up the 5000+100 hours of code devolves into one of cleaning up the 100 hours of code.
There is nothing in the GPL that forces anyone to license code under the GPL, no matter how Microsoft may wish to construe it.
I used a DataHand exclusively at work for over 3 years, after having experienced some RSI issues, and wrote many tens of thousands of lines of code using it.
It turned out that the DataHand didn't do nearly as much for me as getting out and exercising (yoga!) did. The DataHand actually encourages you to _not_ move your hands, which is actually a big negative when it comes to blood circulation issues. As a diabetic, blood circulation is actually a big deal.
The DataHand also proved stressful to my little fingers, which had to do a lot of side-to-side motions that one normally does not encounter.
If you like the DataHand, more power to you, but despite my very extensive experience with it, I am happier with a simple (and reliable) Microsoft Natural keyboard and exercise.
Well, there's the sidebar, for one, and the tabs, everything under the tools menu, everything under the 'Window' menu that relates to email, newsgroups, irc, html page editing..
Mozilla does a lot more than IE does. As some have pointed out, in so doing, it helps maintain the original vision of Netscape as a tool to wrest the center of gravity away from Microsoft's API's and towards the panoply of open network standards.
That does make it a meatier enchilada than some IE users may be used to.
They are still working on NTLM. Look up bugzilla bug 23679 for details. Or copy the following URL and enter it into your browser (to work around bugzilla's slashdot referer filter): http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23679
I hope this guy gets blasted for his crappy review.
Yeah, that's exactly what Mozilla needs. Nothing like a good bit of rabid flaming to make a reviewer understand the perils of crossing the one true faith, eh?
Yea, how could Loki expect crap like Quake3 to compete with any of the rogue games...
I bought 10 games from Loki, what are you talking about?
Sorry, but free games suck and Linux users wouldn't buy commercial games. You can say what you want about the games being available for Windows first,
The big knock on Loki was that they were selling games that dual-booters already had for Windows. I wouldn't know, I don't dual-boot, but apparently a lot of people do. If you're a part-time Windows user, then sure, it makes a lot of sense to buy your games for Windows up front rather than waiting for months (years?) for the Linux version.
Of course, you're then a Linux user buying commercial software, you're just buying it on Windows.;-)
but the same is true of _every_ application. There is no case where the "free" version is the undisputed "best" version.
Other than Apache, you mean?;-)
The free version doesn't have to be the _undisputed_ best version to cause real problems for the commercial versions.. just look at IE on Windows for evidence of that. The free version has to just be good enough to make the customer think twice before pulling his wallet for the commercial stuff.
In other words, this has the ability to kill all the crap about "you need FOO player to see this video".
Would that this were so, but the only thing that MPEG-4 took from Quicktime is the media wrapper, IIRC. The extremely low-bit-rate, high compression codec wasn't Apple's.
The fact that Apple's QuickTime 6 tools can produce MPEG-4 files doesn't mean that Apple is going to put its proprietary Sorenson codecs to bed, and as long as those codecs are used, the files won't be viewable on Linux without some sort of emulator or convertor.
But Apple knows that Linux users, as a rule, don't buy software. No third party would license QuickTime for Linux, because they couldn't make any money on their product. So there's zero motivation for Apple to port QuickTime to Linux.
Could we please let this trope die? The fact is, Linux users, as a rule, don't _have_ to buy software, because there is such a vast library of free software out there. Speaking personally, however, I do buy quite a bit of software that is only available commercially, and happily do so.
If companies want to sell software to Linux users, they should try, um, selling software to Linux users. If they want to make money at it, the software should ideally be substantially different/better than the free software available for the platform. This isn't necessarily easy to do.. no one is going to be able to come out with a basic web server that is so compellingly better than Apache to get large sales on Linux. QuickTime, however, could work, due to the large body of QuickTime-specific content out there.
It may be that if Apple released QuickTime for Linux, they might not make the porting costs on it, true. But there are more Linux users this year than there were last year, and from all the news reports about new institutional commitments to Linux, I firmly expect there will be more Linux users next year than this year. At some point some brave company will discover that they can make a decent living at selling software on Linux.
They won't make it, though, if they believe that Linux users are constitutionally allergic to
commercial software, when many Linux users are simply allergic to paying more for a piece of software than they have to for the competition, which is just as true in the Windows and Macintosh world.
You are delusional. Even Id has publicly stated, Game Developer Magazine, that Linux games do not make business sense, that they support various Unix platforms because they think it is cool to do so.
Just to be clear, John Carmack's opinion that porting an Id game to Linux does not make business sense does not mean that it never makes business sense for anyone to produce games for Linux. Any Carmack game will sell in the bazillions on Windows, and sure, the Linux version will be in the noise on that. That doesn't mean that there aren't enough Linux users to support smaller games.
Yeah. I spent my senior year of high school (86) dialing up to San Antonio BBSes with my Amiga and a 300 baud RadioShack direct-connect modem, before moving on up to 1200 baud.
BBSing was quite simply _the_ shit, and the kinds of small-town cyber communities you'd build then were really special. Knowing a dozen or so really intelligent geeks and spending weeks debating topics of the day one post at a time.. super cool.
If only there were still small town online communities instead of the vast crowds that are USENET and IRC. Some sort of real time direct telnet thing, maybe.
Yeah. I think Lucas wants to go the boiling frog route. You know, throw in a quick shot by Greedo here, a new digital background there, then keep turning up the crap until Jar-Jar in the original Star Wars (the new, 'Complete Vision' edition) is just another minor sacrilege.
Took a walk in my neighborhood here in west Austin (Tarrytown), and chanced upon a very nice new house for sale with a box of flyers out front.
Picked up a flyer, saw that they were asking $650,000 for it.
The problem is that, by and large, our congress people are from the upper class, and write laws for the upper class. The uncontrolled technology of the Internet, with any computer able to freely send any data to any other computer, does nothing to help anyone buy a $650,000 house. For that reason, it's hard to imagine congress ever caring about our concerns about castrated technology and the disempowerment of individuals to shape and use technology. The MPAA and the RIAA can invite your representatives and mine to enjoy a wine and cheese reception in their million dollar houses with genteel conversation, and what greater evidence could there possibly be for the virtue of tight copyright controls? 'See all this beautiful wealth, all this accomplishment? All this will be lost if you don't outlaw this technology.'
Against that, your average geek simply doesn't matter. If congress feels they have the choice between ruining it for wealthy industry executives or removing warez from millions of people's computers, how could they possibly resist kicking off the warez?
Slashdot Mirror
Second that. C.J. Date's book is an utter classic.
Who here talks about Linux without using it? And why in the world would they bother to do that?
Or are you simply wanting to denigrate Linux zealots for their clear unreasonableness in running Linux? In which case, why do you bother to hang out on the Slashdot boards?
Or better yet, if it's still playing in your area, go see The Fellowship of the Ring one more time, and see the 3 minute preview for The Two Towers that they tacked on to the end of the last reel of the movie back in March.
There's little in the new trailer that wasn't in the preview, aside from Cate Blanchett's voice over, and there's a lot of cool stuff in the preview that isn't in the trailer.
They had good writing. As a modest literary magazine, along the lines of the Atlantic or the Nation, they had potential. But no way should they have ever become a major public company. That was sheer arrogance.
They have good writing, actually.
I've been a premium subscriber from the beginning, and have never regretted it. I don't look forward to a day without Salon.
Only saw 7 games running when I went online with this new patch. I'm assuming it's only showing servers running with the patch beta?
Anyone know?
Sure, of course. I did say 'when you can'. And it is far easier to compile and link with a 2.0.x version than it was with 1.3, being as it does come with mod_ssl, and all of the build scripts are integrated.
There is a lot that doesn't yet go so well on 2.0.x, mostly in the form of third party modules that have not been ported and/or certified for use with 2.0.x.
It'll be a better world when they are, though.
mod_ssl is baked into the Apache releases 2.0.35 and later, and is _far_ easier to compile and install than the old Apache 1.3 + external mod_ssl was.
Get to Apache 2.0.x when you can.
I won't be telling people not to buy it.. I'll be first in line at the store when the Linux clients become available.
Although, with the kernel oops I just got (probably) from using the NVidia kernel driver, I wonder how smart an idea it is to try and do 3d gaming on Linux. Sure would be nice if there was some way for NVidia to take the source code for their kernel driver over to RedHat or SuSe or somebody and have it checked out.
There's no point in spinning this, nor any real need. It's a bug, it has specific consequences cited in the story, it should be fixed.
Spinning would be to point out how few remote exploits have been discovered in Apache over the last 4 years compared to IIS, and the fact that Apache's exploit count (if this is exploitable) is not zero doesn't mean that it's not still a whole lot less so far than IIS.
That junkscience.com article is hardly persuasive. He cites one or two scientists and studies and uses them to cheerlead for his personal view of political reality, while offhandedly dismissing any widely held opinions which are not so convenient for him.
Millroy's argument seems to be that we don't know enough about global warming, so therefore scientists who claim there is a problem are full of crap and that we shouldn't do anything risky, like anything at all other than perhaps right-wing political feel-good voluntary recommendations.
If the science isn't certain, fine, why not do more science? But presenting science through an anti-regulation filter doesn't do anything to improve the science, however much pointing out flaws or assumptions may helpfully bring about greater skepticism generally.
If anything, the theory of Man-made Global Warming is more like the Malthusian population theory. They're both doomsdays scenarios and they are both suppose to result from our sins.
True enough. Of course, the fact that Malthus' doomsday population explosion has not manifested itself as severely as he anticipated does not a priori invalidate his reasoning. Even if it did, there would be no logical connection between Malthus' theory and the factual truth of greenhouse gas warming of the Earth.
Actually, I found that the biggest problem with Mozilla in RedHat 7.3 was that I had installed the AbiWord word processor when I installed the system. AbiWord happens to have some really poor quality fonts named according to the Microsoft convention.. Arial, etc. So any web page that gives you something like
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
will cause Mozilla on X to go and find the lousy AbiWord fonts, no matter what you try and do in the Mozilla font preferences.
The solution is to comment out the reference to the AbiSuite fonts in /etc/X11/fs/config from finding the AbiWord MS-named fonts.
Mozilla on RedHat 7.3 was totally unusable until I did this.
In this eventuality, what would happen would be that the copyright holder for that 100 hours of labor would sue the infringer, and in the best of all worlds, the infringer would be obligated through an injunction to cease distribution of the offending code.
Just to be clear, in this sentence, the offending code refers to the 100 hours of code, not the 5100 hours of code. The copyright holder for the 5000 hours of code is perfectly free to distribute the 5000 hours of code with the 100 hours of GPL'ed code removed.
first of all, if the 100 hours is GPLd, then the GPL isn't 'arguing' anything -- the rest *is* GPLd, according to the GPL.
People make this mistake all the time, but it is a mistake. If someone includes some GPL'ed work into a larger work, the larger work is not magically licensed under the GPL. (Nor, for that matter, is the copyright of the larger work magically made the property of the FSF). Instead, what becomes true is that the ensemble work cannot be legally distributed without violating the terms of the (GPL) license for the 100 hours.
In this eventuality, what would happen would be that the copyright holder for that 100 hours of labor would sue the infringer, and in the best of all worlds, the infringer would be obligated through an injunction to cease distribution of the offending code. If the copyright holder for the 100 hours was willing, some monetary arrangement might be reached in return for an alternate license for the 100 hours of code.
The problematic case is where the 100 hours of code was written by five coders spread over the planet, and nobody bothered to track who had copyright over what piece of the code. In that instance, all five coders should agree to the relicensing. If one of the coders does not agree to the relicensing, then the problem of how to clean up the 5000+100 hours of code devolves into one of cleaning up the 100 hours of code.
There is nothing in the GPL that forces anyone to license code under the GPL, no matter how Microsoft may wish to construe it.
I used a DataHand exclusively at work for over 3 years, after having experienced some RSI issues, and wrote many tens of thousands of lines of code using it.
It turned out that the DataHand didn't do nearly as much for me as getting out and exercising (yoga!) did. The DataHand actually encourages you to _not_ move your hands, which is actually a big negative when it comes to blood circulation issues. As a diabetic, blood circulation is actually a big deal.
The DataHand also proved stressful to my little fingers, which had to do a lot of side-to-side motions that one normally does not encounter.
If you like the DataHand, more power to you, but despite my very extensive experience with it, I am happier with a simple (and reliable) Microsoft Natural keyboard and exercise.
Well, there's the sidebar, for one, and the tabs, everything under the tools menu, everything under the 'Window' menu that relates to email, newsgroups, irc, html page editing..
Mozilla does a lot more than IE does. As some have pointed out, in so doing, it helps maintain the original vision of Netscape as a tool to wrest the center of gravity away from Microsoft's API's and towards the panoply of open network standards.
That does make it a meatier enchilada than some IE users may be used to.
They are still working on NTLM. Look up bugzilla bug 23679 for details. Or copy the following URL and enter it into your browser (to work around bugzilla's slashdot referer filter): http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23679
I hope this guy gets blasted for his crappy review.
Yeah, that's exactly what Mozilla needs. Nothing like a good bit of rabid flaming to make a reviewer understand the perils of crossing the one true faith, eh?
Dude, that's so 1989 Amiga user.
Yea, how could Loki expect crap like Quake3 to compete with any of the rogue games...
I bought 10 games from Loki, what are you talking about?
Sorry, but free games suck and Linux users wouldn't buy commercial games. You can say what you want about the games being available for Windows first,
The big knock on Loki was that they were selling games that dual-booters already had for Windows. I wouldn't know, I don't dual-boot, but apparently a lot of people do. If you're a part-time Windows user, then sure, it makes a lot of sense to buy your games for Windows up front rather than waiting for months (years?) for the Linux version.
Of course, you're then a Linux user buying commercial software, you're just buying it on Windows. ;-)
but the same is true of _every_ application. There is no case where the "free" version is the undisputed "best" version.
Other than Apache, you mean? ;-)
The free version doesn't have to be the _undisputed_ best version to cause real problems for the commercial versions.. just look at IE on Windows for evidence of that. The free version has to just be good enough to make the customer think twice before pulling his wallet for the commercial stuff.
In other words, this has the ability to kill all the crap about "you need FOO player to see this video".
Would that this were so, but the only thing that MPEG-4 took from Quicktime is the media wrapper, IIRC. The extremely low-bit-rate, high compression codec wasn't Apple's.
The fact that Apple's QuickTime 6 tools can produce MPEG-4 files doesn't mean that Apple is going to put its proprietary Sorenson codecs to bed, and as long as those codecs are used, the files won't be viewable on Linux without some sort of emulator or convertor.
But Apple knows that Linux users, as a rule, don't buy software. No third party would license QuickTime for Linux, because they couldn't make any money on their product. So there's zero motivation for Apple to port QuickTime to Linux.
Could we please let this trope die? The fact is, Linux users, as a rule, don't _have_ to buy software, because there is such a vast library of free software out there. Speaking personally, however, I do buy quite a bit of software that is only available commercially, and happily do so.
If companies want to sell software to Linux users, they should try, um, selling software to Linux users. If they want to make money at it, the software should ideally be substantially different/better than the free software available for the platform. This isn't necessarily easy to do.. no one is going to be able to come out with a basic web server that is so compellingly better than Apache to get large sales on Linux. QuickTime, however, could work, due to the large body of QuickTime-specific content out there.
It may be that if Apple released QuickTime for Linux, they might not make the porting costs on it, true. But there are more Linux users this year than there were last year, and from all the news reports about new institutional commitments to Linux, I firmly expect there will be more Linux users next year than this year. At some point some brave company will discover that they can make a decent living at selling software on Linux.
They won't make it, though, if they believe that Linux users are constitutionally allergic to commercial software, when many Linux users are simply allergic to paying more for a piece of software than they have to for the competition, which is just as true in the Windows and Macintosh world.
You are delusional. Even Id has publicly stated, Game Developer Magazine, that Linux games do not make business sense, that they support various Unix platforms because they think it is cool to do so.
Just to be clear, John Carmack's opinion that porting an Id game to Linux does not make business sense does not mean that it never makes business sense for anyone to produce games for Linux. Any Carmack game will sell in the bazillions on Windows, and sure, the Linux version will be in the noise on that. That doesn't mean that there aren't enough Linux users to support smaller games.
Yeah. I spent my senior year of high school (86) dialing up to San Antonio BBSes with my Amiga and a 300 baud RadioShack direct-connect modem, before moving on up to 1200 baud.
BBSing was quite simply _the_ shit, and the kinds of small-town cyber communities you'd build then were really special. Knowing a dozen or so really intelligent geeks and spending weeks debating topics of the day one post at a time.. super cool.
If only there were still small town online communities instead of the vast crowds that are USENET and IRC. Some sort of real time direct telnet thing, maybe.
Yeah. I think Lucas wants to go the boiling frog route. You know, throw in a quick shot by Greedo here, a new digital background there, then keep turning up the crap until Jar-Jar in the original Star Wars (the new, 'Complete Vision' edition) is just another minor sacrilege.
Took a walk in my neighborhood here in west Austin (Tarrytown), and chanced upon a very nice new house for sale with a box of flyers out front.
Picked up a flyer, saw that they were asking $650,000 for it.
The problem is that, by and large, our congress people are from the upper class, and write laws for the upper class. The uncontrolled technology of the Internet, with any computer able to freely send any data to any other computer, does nothing to help anyone buy a $650,000 house. For that reason, it's hard to imagine congress ever caring about our concerns about castrated technology and the disempowerment of individuals to shape and use technology. The MPAA and the RIAA can invite your representatives and mine to enjoy a wine and cheese reception in their million dollar houses with genteel conversation, and what greater evidence could there possibly be for the virtue of tight copyright controls? 'See all this beautiful wealth, all this accomplishment? All this will be lost if you don't outlaw this technology.'
Against that, your average geek simply doesn't matter. If congress feels they have the choice between ruining it for wealthy industry executives or removing warez from millions of people's computers, how could they possibly resist kicking off the warez?