The reason there is a Linux halflife server is not because they 'care' about the Linux community. Its because there are plenty of people willing to host servers on their Linux boxes even though they have no Linux halflife client. More servers equals more value added to their customer base.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Bioware doesn't care about the Linux community or isn't moving forward on a Linux client. But let's be honest here. They're releasing a Linux client for themselves and their windows players. I am, however, very thankful to rate second. That is infinately more attention then most game companies give us.
Same principles apply as if someone snapped a photo of you. Does the photographer or the model own the rights to the created image? The photograph is owned by the artist. The image of the model belongs to the model, and the photographer must get permission to publish. Permission is usually, "I wave all rights in regards to my image in this photo for the some quantity of cash." Once such permisssion is granted, the photographer is free to do as they like with the photo.
Here's a news flash. A large group of people working together for the common good by giving away the fruits of their labor for FREE don't understand the "big corporate picture." I didn't understand this until I was working at my first real IT job and had to explain to my boss why I was contributing to open source projects. He actually thought he was helping me by recommending I withdraw from these projects and create my own proprietary version to sell for profit. The problem, of course, is that he's thinking software is a finished product, a dry good for sale. I believe that what programmers should sell is their time, not their software. The software is merely advertising, and better than any resume.
I understand the "big corporate picture" and I don't like it. Profit at any cost means you're willing to skimp on quality, your employees, anything to make a few more bucks. I'd rather make a reasonable wage doing work that I believe in and end up with software I can be proud of.
There are those who will read this and think that I just haven't been out in the 'real world' long enough. That harsh reality forces you to compromise your principles and take jobs just to pay the bills. I use to believe that too. Then I realized there are more important things in life than money.
All palladium compounds should be regarded as highly toxic and as carcinogenic.
Crap, that's even better than the Vader quote! "Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The power to destroy a planet (with DRM) is nothing compared to the power of the Source."
How long do we think it'll take for mod chips to sidestep the hardware portion of palladium, and enable you to copy protected information, to come along?
This project involves more than just Microsoft. They're just making the software. They're outsourcing the chip making to Intel and company. And they're outsourcing the legislation to Congress. When S.2048, the "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act" gets passed, it will be illegal to mod your PC. Then they can just round up those pesky Linux hackers at their leisure.
You're adding (even more) spin to the statement. Microsoft realizes that the only way people can trust closed source software is if they trust the people releasing it. And people don't trust Microsoft right now. So in order to get this evil plan off the ground, they need some way to convince people its safe. One way to do that is to release the source.
The rest of us are aware of all the other benefits of Open Source projects, which puts us at a crossroads. If they really do release the source to the general public, do we submit it to our mighty power of peer review and submit patches to it? Probably not... they would credit any perceived security through their own ingenious engineering rather than admit Open Source helped make it more secure.
Based on secondhand reports, it sounds to me as if IE7 is going to bring *major* advances in CSS support for Windows Internet Explorer.
Sounds a lot like the standard MS "the next one will be much better" FUD. Now don't get me wrong, I've sung that party line for Open Source software for a few years now. It's a nice change to be on the side of the fence where the grass is actually greener.
To sum up, for everyone who hasn't bothered to switch from IE to Mozilla yet, "Nanny-nanny Boo-boo!"
Name ONE reason other than piracy that anyone is using bnetd.
Damn trolls. Battle.net runs on Blizzard's servers and Blizzard's bandwidth and is open to the public. bnetd is run on my server and my bandwidth and is used by my friends and myself to play together without depending on outside sources. I use bnetd because it allows our server to be much closer to those playing on it (ie, lower ping times) and I don't have to sit and wait if I can't connect. I maintain the box myself. My friends and I all paid for our copies of Starcraft. And we would like to play it in peace without having to ask Blizzard's permission first.
It might have helped if it had some information other than 'bevaaare!'
Ok, how about the little bit of information that the California District Court ruled in FAVOR of a EULA. It has been a long standing geek tradition that software EULA were not enforceable. At least one judge disagrees. This sets a very bad precedent.
It's always presented as if we're going to wake up one morning and find all the gas stations closed. That won't be the case.
Always the realist, eh? I agree with your theory that vast supplies of oil will not suddenly disappear. I also agree with your logical cycle of "increased price/reduced dependency" which will magically wean us from oil just as a child might be switched from breast milk to formula.
What you fail to take into account is the evil and greed of those who control the oil. Last I checked there are a lot Bad People in the world. The supply of oil to the US can, has been, and will be disrupted. America's oil reserves can't snap into action on a moments notice, and when they are running, the price of oil will be a lot more than what we're used to. Add to that the terror effect and watch the lines at the gas station form up. Look up the 1973 OPEC oil embargo. Here's a bunch of fun data. I doubt the 'end' of fossil fuels will be as peaceful as you predict.
The Berlin Olympics were televised - German Technology.
Not to derail your American bashing (we DO deserve quite a bit), but the Germans didn't invent any TV technology. A couple of days ago they had the Farnsworth widow on National Public Radio talking about all the problems they had with funding and RCA. One thing she mentioned is how Berlin was licensed to use Farnsworth's TV tech to broadcast the Olympics.
From the article: "No stolen trade secret can survive if the courts are powerless to enjoin its widespread disclosure," the brief said.
So they won't ban the felt tip pen... but they WILL ban anyone who posts or links to a post that points out how to 'steal' trade secrets with one. So neither guns NOR bullets kill people, good marksmanship is to blame. All classes teaching us how to fire a weapon must be banned (bye-bye Hollywood) and all texts describing the process must be burned!
One thing I enjoyed most about the article: Some government agencies have saved significantly by using open source.
Now I'm not sure, but it looks to me that both MS and their buddies at the BSA are advertising for us now. They had better freshen up their FUD, cuz it seems to be backfiring.
...Microsoft is now giving away the XBox for free. A spokesperson for the software giant was quoted as saying, "Our stockholders demand that we extend our monopoly in other branches of the economy like the many tentacles of Great Cthulhu. We are confident we can win a price war against anyone."
To avoid spoilers, I'll just say I recommend we NOT use the bloated network protocol used in Lain. I don't have enough bandwidth as it is. Yet another advantage to using open protocols.
Ok, I'll admit it. I was playing netrek before I even knew what Linux was. A simple game that played fine on dial up bandwidth with 16 players, it was pretty revolutionary for its time. But... uh... thats the point. Netrek Paradise has come a long ways from the original game and I don't want to be one that puts down open source game development. But I've always thought Netrek has been a pretty niche market, and the number of players over the years reflects that. I've noticed a serious decline in interest over the years, which is why I eventually stopped playing. With fewer players it was getting harder and harder to get into a game, and Netrek basically needs around 8 players to make for a fun game. Much like the Halflife servers of today, full servers attract players and empty ones tend to stay empty. What I don't understand is why the sudden interest from Slashdot in Netrek? I admit I haven't played in a few years, but I don't see any breaking new developments in the game. As the article points out, the game has been around since 72, why is it worthy of a story now?
So, is this a history lesson, or a recruiting drive? Is it time to carry once again?
I'll admit it took me quite awhile to come around and admit I enjoyed the first one. Despite the implausibility of the plot the movie ends up telling an interesting story with enough action and special effects to keep me interested. And, of course, it makes great brain candy to envision life in a computer controlled world you 'jack' into where you get super human powers and chicks in form fitting leather.
That being said, I can understand why no books have been forthcoming based on the Matrix universe (hard to put flashy special effects in a book). However, it seems like a perfect match to make a computer game based on the movie, since so many game designers seem to enjoy making pretty special effects rather than plot or playability. While I admit that most games based on movies suck wind, I'm willing to reserve some hope that someone could get it right. So where the heck is it?
He then goes on to describe the advantages of open sourced software. Everybody on Slashdot has heard these arguments, so there's not really much to read.
I'll agree that the content of the letter is merely the same things 'we' have been hearing/saying about open source. But it feels damn good to see our arguments being repeated by a politician into the angry ears of Microsoft. Makes me feel all warm in squishy inside, almost like we can make a difference.
This "high tech" device doesn't seem quite in keeping with the times. I don't watch commercials anymore. Their billions of advertising dollars never reach me. I do, however, watch a handful of television shows. I would be willing to pay a fee to keep these shows on the air. I'm not sure if viewer subscriptions could match the money advertisers currently throw at the networks, but I'm pretty sure something has to give. Of course, I AM a criminal by avoiding the commercials. Probably better to ignore me and my money, since I'll be locked up soon and the government will seize my assets to pay the network moguls.
A friend of mine lives in a flat upstairs from a Karaoke bar. As one of the few places in town in range for broadband we drag our PCs over there for LAN parties and such. Friday and Saturday nights usually end up in battles between our stereo equipment and theirs. There are no winners... only causalities. Something like this could really save lives.
...scared to see the people with the greatest potential to control my future all gather together under the theme of how to milk us for all we're worth. After losing a little more than a year of my life to Everquest I'm a lot more leery of these persistent on-line worlds. I mean, I lost a lot of my life to MUDs, but I managed to fit those around a real life (well, for a geek) and still get a college education out of it. During my Evercrack phase, I gained nothing but a serious loss in productivity at work, and a nonexistent social life.
Nothing in the gamespy article gave me the feeling that these game designers were looking to make better online worlds for us to play in. This was a business meeting designed to maximize profits and reduce risks. And these people are suppose to be competitors. When major industry leaders get together like this it doesn't bode well for their consumers. "Higher prices, less content, join today!"
I read an article in the Wall Street Journey describing how kids today no longer fall prey to conventional advertising, as if a resistance has been built up to it over the years. I'm thinking the same thing applies to the geek community, and we don't yet have what it takes to say no to these escapist fantasy worlds. I predict a dark age in computing is coming and I weep for the future of us all.
Slashdot Mirror
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Bioware doesn't care about the Linux community or isn't moving forward on a Linux client. But let's be honest here. They're releasing a Linux client for themselves and their windows players. I am, however, very thankful to rate second. That is infinately more attention then most game companies give us.
Same principles apply as if someone snapped a photo of you. Does the photographer or the model own the rights to the created image? The photograph is owned by the artist. The image of the model belongs to the model, and the photographer must get permission to publish. Permission is usually, "I wave all rights in regards to my image in this photo for the some quantity of cash." Once such permisssion is granted, the photographer is free to do as they like with the photo.
Here's a news flash. A large group of people working together for the common good by giving away the fruits of their labor for FREE don't understand the "big corporate picture." I didn't understand this until I was working at my first real IT job and had to explain to my boss why I was contributing to open source projects. He actually thought he was helping me by recommending I withdraw from these projects and create my own proprietary version to sell for profit. The problem, of course, is that he's thinking software is a finished product, a dry good for sale. I believe that what programmers should sell is their time, not their software. The software is merely advertising, and better than any resume.
I understand the "big corporate picture" and I don't like it. Profit at any cost means you're willing to skimp on quality, your employees, anything to make a few more bucks. I'd rather make a reasonable wage doing work that I believe in and end up with software I can be proud of.
There are those who will read this and think that I just haven't been out in the 'real world' long enough. That harsh reality forces you to compromise your principles and take jobs just to pay the bills. I use to believe that too. Then I realized there are more important things in life than money.
Crap, that's even better than the Vader quote! "Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The power to destroy a planet (with DRM) is nothing compared to the power of the Source."
This project involves more than just Microsoft. They're just making the software. They're outsourcing the chip making to Intel and company. And they're outsourcing the legislation to Congress. When S.2048, the "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act" gets passed, it will be illegal to mod your PC. Then they can just round up those pesky Linux hackers at their leisure.
The rest of us are aware of all the other benefits of Open Source projects, which puts us at a crossroads. If they really do release the source to the general public, do we submit it to our mighty power of peer review and submit patches to it? Probably not... they would credit any perceived security through their own ingenious engineering rather than admit Open Source helped make it more secure.
Sounds a lot like the standard MS "the next one will be much better" FUD. Now don't get me wrong, I've sung that party line for Open Source software for a few years now. It's a nice change to be on the side of the fence where the grass is actually greener.
To sum up, for everyone who hasn't bothered to switch from IE to Mozilla yet, "Nanny-nanny Boo-boo!"
Actually, besides the obvious bloat, a nationality byte would be like the 'digital watermark' crap that involves a DRM Helmet.
Damn trolls. Battle.net runs on Blizzard's servers and Blizzard's bandwidth and is open to the public. bnetd is run on my server and my bandwidth and is used by my friends and myself to play together without depending on outside sources. I use bnetd because it allows our server to be much closer to those playing on it (ie, lower ping times) and I don't have to sit and wait if I can't connect. I maintain the box myself. My friends and I all paid for our copies of Starcraft. And we would like to play it in peace without having to ask Blizzard's permission first.
That wasn't his father. That was his father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate.
Ok, how about the little bit of information that the California District Court ruled in FAVOR of a EULA. It has been a long standing geek tradition that software EULA were not enforceable. At least one judge disagrees. This sets a very bad precedent.
Always the realist, eh? I agree with your theory that vast supplies of oil will not suddenly disappear. I also agree with your logical cycle of "increased price/reduced dependency" which will magically wean us from oil just as a child might be switched from breast milk to formula.
What you fail to take into account is the evil and greed of those who control the oil. Last I checked there are a lot Bad People in the world. The supply of oil to the US can, has been, and will be disrupted. America's oil reserves can't snap into action on a moments notice, and when they are running, the price of oil will be a lot more than what we're used to. Add to that the terror effect and watch the lines at the gas station form up. Look up the 1973 OPEC oil embargo. Here's a bunch of fun data. I doubt the 'end' of fossil fuels will be as peaceful as you predict.
Not to derail your American bashing (we DO deserve quite a bit), but the Germans didn't invent any TV technology. A couple of days ago they had the Farnsworth widow on National Public Radio talking about all the problems they had with funding and RCA. One thing she mentioned is how Berlin was licensed to use Farnsworth's TV tech to broadcast the Olympics.
So they won't ban the felt tip pen... but they WILL ban anyone who posts or links to a post that points out how to 'steal' trade secrets with one. So neither guns NOR bullets kill people, good marksmanship is to blame. All classes teaching us how to fire a weapon must be banned (bye-bye Hollywood) and all texts describing the process must be burned!
Err... this IS Slashdot. Obviously NO ONE is correcting spelling around here.
...by the Star Leage to defend against Xur and the Kodan armada....
Now I'm not sure, but it looks to me that both MS and their buddies at the BSA are advertising for us now. They had better freshen up their FUD, cuz it seems to be backfiring.
...Microsoft is now giving away the XBox for free. A spokesperson for the software giant was quoted as saying, "Our stockholders demand that we extend our monopoly in other branches of the economy like the many tentacles of Great Cthulhu. We are confident we can win a price war against anyone."
To avoid spoilers, I'll just say I recommend we NOT use the bloated network protocol used in Lain. I don't have enough bandwidth as it is. Yet another advantage to using open protocols.
So, is this a history lesson, or a recruiting drive? Is it time to carry once again?
That being said, I can understand why no books have been forthcoming based on the Matrix universe (hard to put flashy special effects in a book). However, it seems like a perfect match to make a computer game based on the movie, since so many game designers seem to enjoy making pretty special effects rather than plot or playability. While I admit that most games based on movies suck wind, I'm willing to reserve some hope that someone could get it right. So where the heck is it?
I'll agree that the content of the letter is merely the same things 'we' have been hearing/saying about open source. But it feels damn good to see our arguments being repeated by a politician into the angry ears of Microsoft. Makes me feel all warm in squishy inside, almost like we can make a difference.
This "high tech" device doesn't seem quite in keeping with the times. I don't watch commercials anymore. Their billions of advertising dollars never reach me. I do, however, watch a handful of television shows. I would be willing to pay a fee to keep these shows on the air. I'm not sure if viewer subscriptions could match the money advertisers currently throw at the networks, but I'm pretty sure something has to give. Of course, I AM a criminal by avoiding the commercials. Probably better to ignore me and my money, since I'll be locked up soon and the government will seize my assets to pay the network moguls.
A friend of mine lives in a flat upstairs from a Karaoke bar. As one of the few places in town in range for broadband we drag our PCs over there for LAN parties and such. Friday and Saturday nights usually end up in battles between our stereo equipment and theirs. There are no winners... only causalities. Something like this could really save lives.
Nothing in the gamespy article gave me the feeling that these game designers were looking to make better online worlds for us to play in. This was a business meeting designed to maximize profits and reduce risks. And these people are suppose to be competitors. When major industry leaders get together like this it doesn't bode well for their consumers. "Higher prices, less content, join today!"
I read an article in the Wall Street Journey describing how kids today no longer fall prey to conventional advertising, as if a resistance has been built up to it over the years. I'm thinking the same thing applies to the geek community, and we don't yet have what it takes to say no to these escapist fantasy worlds. I predict a dark age in computing is coming and I weep for the future of us all.