The Lisa was apple's first GUI-based computer, not Xerox'.
Xerox did develop the GUI (along with Smalltalk, ethernet, the mouse and a number of other things) at their Palo Alto Research Centre (PARC). It was a lot earlier than 1980, though. Actually, around 1974, I believe.
And it was called the Alto.
Although they did in 1981 release the Star, which was a commercial version of the Alto (which wasn't much more than a prototype), it never really sold much.
ESR was the one who put the whole OSS thing into perspective for me.
For a long time, I was a lurker, reading the posts and articles on/. and occasionally making a comment on some side issue, but basically not making any comment on OSS or free vs. proprietary software.
Not because I didn't understand; I did, on an intellectual level. But basically, I didn't "get" it. I sure as hell wasn't passionate about it; just figured they were 2 equally-valid paradigms. (Please excuse the use of the marketroid-type hype word -- I think this is one of the few places where it is actually appropriate:-)
Until I actually got around to reading "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", at which point I finally "saw the light" and understood where the passion came from.
I previously understood on an intellectual level, but not on the emotional one. I didn't "get" it -- it took ESR's writings to do that for me.
Hell... at this point, I'd follow him just about anywhere...
(ok... that does it... no-one's ever gonna take me seriously again, right?:-)
On the other hand, though, I do think RMS is (more than) a bit of a nutcase...
I personally happen to like his articles. So maybe they aren't the most technically detailed articles on Slashdot... they still have value to me.
And this may not be true of everyone, but I personally happen to like reading articles on the "geek culture" (or whatever) that have some of the flair and language that one tends to find in more "mainstream" publications.
Believe it or not, some people do like reading things for the simple pleasure of reading them, not just because they have any new information. I don't happen to get a lot of new info from Jonkatz' articles, but they still make me think, and they are a lot easier to read than a lot of the other stuff on here. That makes them worthwhile.
If you don't like, then don't read. Jonkatz' name is predominantly placed on the header to the article on the main/. page. But please don't drive him away. I happen to look forward to his articles. They are some of my favourite ones.
I think I understand what the previous poster was trying to say. It wasn't very clear, and at first I thought it was a load of **** as well.
But.
Playboy maight have a legitimate claim.
IF:
Yahoo, et. al. were deliberately selling banner ads on the basis that they would be turned up specifically when the user searched for "Playboy". In which case Playboy would definitely have a legitimate gripe against Yahoo.
OR:
These banner ads were specifically designed to mislead users into thinking that they (the ads) were from Playboy or Playboy-related products. If that were the case, then again, Playboy/could/ have a case against Yahoo for not stipulating that the ads couldn't be misleading in this way. This argument is weaker than the first, but I wouldn't reject it outright.
If, however, Playboy is just complaining that generic porn-site ads were displayed whenever the user entered a porn-related search term (such as "playboy"), then they are total arseholes, and this complaint should be blown out of the galaxy:-)
Basically, what I'm saying, is that the article didn't give enough details for me to be comfortable making a judgement one way or the other. And I think that's what the poster you were responding to was trying to get at as well.
(NB: I use the term "Yahoo" here to reference any search engine portals that Playboy is complaining against, not necessarily Yahoo in particular).
I think I understand what the previous poster was trying to say. It wasn't very clear, and at first I thought it was a load of **** as well.
But.
Playboy maight have a legitimate claim.
IF:
Yahoo, et. al. were deliberately selling banner ads on the basis that they would be turned up specifically when the user searched for "Playboy". In which case Playboy would definitely have a legitimate gripe against Yahoo.
OR:
These banner ads were specifically designed to mislead users into thinking that they (the ads) were from Playboy or Playboy-related products. If that were the case, then again, Playboy/could/ have a case against Yahoo for not stipulating that the ads couldn't be misleading in this way. This argument is weaker than the first, but I wouldn't reject it outright.
If, however, Playboy is just complaining that generic porn-site ads were displayed whenever the user entered a porn-related search term (such as "playboy"), then they are total arseholes, and this complaint should be blown out of the galaxy:-)
Basically, what I'm saying, is that the article didn't give enough details for me to be comfortable making a judgement one way or the other. And I think that's what the poster you were responding to was trying to get at as well.
(NB: I use the term "Yahoo" here to reference any search engine portals that Playboy is complaining agains, not necessarily Yahoo in particular).
I dunno if anyone else has noticed this, but I've been getting tons of broken links, garbled pages, self-referencing links (that should be referencing the next comment), hopelessly fubared formatting, and so on recently. Also stories that appear and disappear, as well as comments that do the same. Now the icons along the top bar are shot.
/methinks something's wrong with the back-end DB...
If they refuse to give my money back, I know exactly what I would do. I would inform them right then and there that I/still/ didn't agree with their licensing clause, that I couldn't be bound by it, and that I was going to set up a warez site with my copy of Windows, which I was forced to pay for against my will, available for anyone to download for free.
I believe you only own the air above your land up to a certain height (can't remember what that height is, something like a mile or 2, I think). Above that, nada.
I'm not the person that originally asked, but if anyone knows, I would also appreciate a good reference/tutorial on assembly language.
Specifically, assembly for the Intel x86 microprocessor. I'm sure there's a glut of stuff out there, but does anyone have any reccomendations?
I'm fine with high-level languages, and have some experience with the Motorola Z80, so am not looking for a "beginner's" book, but something that assumes familiarity with high-level languages (C/C++ is fine), and some understanding of assembly would be ideal.
This reminds me of it in some ways. The ringworld was an artificially constructed ring around a star that held a living population.
Except it died (the population, that is). No new materials. Which meant no new construction and only limited advances in technology. And, as someone mentioned above, what civilization can go even 500 years, let alone 10,000, without running into wars, religious fanaticism, et al. ?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, one of the best posts I've seen in a long time. I know this isn't "long and literary," but I agree with you the proverbial 110%.
- Sean
- SeanNi
The Lisa was apple's first GUI-based computer, not Xerox'.
:-)
Xerox did develop the GUI (along with Smalltalk, ethernet, the mouse and a number of other things) at their Palo Alto Research Centre (PARC). It was a lot earlier than 1980, though. Actually, around 1974, I believe.
And it was called the Alto.
Although they did in 1981 release the Star, which was a commercial version of the Alto (which wasn't much more than a prototype), it never really sold much.
But you were heading in the right direction
- Sean
- SeanNi
ESR was the one who put the whole OSS thing into perspective for me.
/. and occasionally making a comment on some side issue, but basically not making any comment on OSS or free vs. proprietary software.
:-)
:-)
For a long time, I was a lurker, reading the posts and articles on
Not because I didn't understand; I did, on an intellectual level. But basically, I didn't "get" it. I sure as hell wasn't passionate about it; just figured they were 2 equally-valid paradigms. (Please excuse the use of the marketroid-type hype word -- I think this is one of the few places where it is actually appropriate
Until I actually got around to reading "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", at which point I finally "saw the light" and understood where the passion came from.
I previously understood on an intellectual level, but not on the emotional one. I didn't "get" it -- it took ESR's writings to do that for me.
Hell... at this point, I'd follow him just about anywhere...
(ok... that does it... no-one's ever gonna take me seriously again, right?
On the other hand, though, I do think RMS is (more than) a bit of a nutcase...
- Sean
- SeanNi
I personally happen to like his articles. So maybe they aren't the most technically detailed articles on Slashdot... they still have value to me.
/. page. But please don't drive him away. I happen to look forward to his articles. They are some of my favourite ones.
And this may not be true of everyone, but I personally happen to like reading articles on the "geek culture" (or whatever) that have some of the flair and language that one tends to find in more "mainstream" publications.
Believe it or not, some people do like reading things for the simple pleasure of reading them, not just because they have any new information. I don't happen to get a lot of new info from Jonkatz' articles, but they still make me think, and they are a lot easier to read than a lot of the other stuff on here. That makes them worthwhile.
If you don't like, then don't read. Jonkatz' name is predominantly placed on the header to the article on the main
Thanks.
- Sean
- SeanNi
I know what my next system purchase will be!
- SeanNi
The guy's comment was obviously a response to the fact that IBM is looking into making their own Linux distro.
At least, I thought it was obvious.
Please don't instantly and unthinkingly go into flame mode as soon as you see the word "Microsoft"; at least use some judgement.
Like I said, I thought it was pretty funny myself.
- Sean
- SeanNi
'nuff said.
- SeanNi
...which is why MS will /never/ adopt it.
- SeanNi
I think I understand what the previous poster was trying to say. It wasn't very clear, and at first I thought it was a load of **** as well.
/could/ have a case against Yahoo for not stipulating that the ads couldn't be misleading in this way. This argument is weaker than the first, but I wouldn't reject it outright.
:-)
But.
Playboy maight have a legitimate claim.
IF:
Yahoo, et. al. were deliberately selling banner ads on the basis that they would be turned up specifically when the user searched for "Playboy". In which case Playboy would definitely have a legitimate gripe against Yahoo.
OR:
These banner ads were specifically designed to mislead users into thinking that they (the ads) were from Playboy or Playboy-related products. If that were the case, then again, Playboy
If, however, Playboy is just complaining that generic porn-site ads were displayed whenever the user entered a porn-related search term (such as "playboy"), then they are total arseholes, and this complaint should be blown out of the galaxy
Basically, what I'm saying, is that the article didn't give enough details for me to be comfortable making a judgement one way or the other. And I think that's what the poster you were responding to was trying to get at as well.
(NB: I use the term "Yahoo" here to reference any search engine portals that Playboy is complaining against, not necessarily Yahoo in particular).
- Sean
- SeanNi
I think I understand what the previous poster was trying to say. It wasn't very clear, and at first I thought it was a load of **** as well.
/could/ have a case against Yahoo for not stipulating that the ads couldn't be misleading in this way. This argument is weaker than the first, but I wouldn't reject it outright.
:-)
But.
Playboy maight have a legitimate claim.
IF:
Yahoo, et. al. were deliberately selling banner ads on the basis that they would be turned up specifically when the user searched for "Playboy". In which case Playboy would definitely have a legitimate gripe against Yahoo.
OR:
These banner ads were specifically designed to mislead users into thinking that they (the ads) were from Playboy or Playboy-related products. If that were the case, then again, Playboy
If, however, Playboy is just complaining that generic porn-site ads were displayed whenever the user entered a porn-related search term (such as "playboy"), then they are total arseholes, and this complaint should be blown out of the galaxy
Basically, what I'm saying, is that the article didn't give enough details for me to be comfortable making a judgement one way or the other. And I think that's what the poster you were responding to was trying to get at as well.
(NB: I use the term "Yahoo" here to reference any search engine portals that Playboy is complaining agains, not necessarily Yahoo in particular).
- Sean
- SeanNi
An old Z-80-based thing...
(With a couple of custom modifications)
- Sean
- SeanNi
I dunno if anyone else has noticed this, but I've been getting tons of broken links, garbled pages, self-referencing links (that should be referencing the next comment), hopelessly fubared formatting, and so on recently. Also stories that appear and disappear, as well as comments that do the same. Now the icons along the top bar are shot.
/methinks something's wrong with the back-end DB...
- Sean
- SeanNi
If they refuse to give my money back, I know exactly what I would do. I would inform them right then and there that I /still/ didn't agree with their licensing clause, that I couldn't be bound by it, and that I was going to set up a warez site with my copy of Windows, which I was forced to pay for against my will, available for anyone to download for free.
And I would do exactly that.
- Sean
- SeanNi
I believe you only own the air above your land up to a certain height (can't remember what that height is, something like a mile or 2, I think). Above that, nada.
   - Sean
- SeanNi
I'm not the person that originally asked, but if anyone knows, I would also appreciate a good reference/tutorial on assembly language.
Specifically, assembly for the Intel x86 microprocessor. I'm sure there's a glut of stuff out there, but does anyone have any reccomendations?
I'm fine with high-level languages, and have some experience with the Motorola Z80, so am not looking for a "beginner's" book, but something that assumes familiarity with high-level languages (C/C++ is fine), and some understanding of assembly would be ideal.
Any ideas? TIA
- Sean
- SeanNi
Isn't it nice to be idealistic?
*sigh*
I only wish I could still have your optimism, and still make a living in the real world.
- Sean
- SeanNi
Anyone ever read Larry Niven's book Ringworld?
This reminds me of it in some ways. The ringworld was an artificially constructed ring around a star that held a living population.
Except it died (the population, that is). No new materials. Which meant no new construction and only limited advances in technology. And, as someone mentioned above, what civilization can go even 500 years, let alone 10,000, without running into wars, religious fanaticism, et al. ?
Sorry... not feasable. Not with that timeline.
- Sean
- FiReStOrM
Nono!
"World Domination for Dummies"!
Pitr's choice!
User Friendly
- Sean
- FiReStOrM