Can we have another new topic "Linux-Kernel-Release-News-Item-Moans" so I don't have to read 86 posts on why this item shouldn't be on slashdot and read some comments from people who have tried the new kernel and what they think about it.
I'm so fed up of reading all this moaning crap - I want some of the advertised "stuff that matters". How fast does the new IDE subsytem go. Does the USB 2.0 patch make life worth living? I am actually interested in these things NOT in this "you're a troll", "no you're a troll", "NO YOU'RE A TROLL" noise. You are wasting my bandwidth. (and now I've wasted yours)
I'm wondering why doom gets so much attention as the one that started it all. Wolfenstein came out before doom and was from ID.
Oh how I loved that game, with its blue bricks and grey floors. It used to run incredibly fast on a crappy old 386 - any one know if there is a version for Linux?
Caldera's per seat licensing - I say good luck to them. The reason Linux has survived while others dies is because it is impossible to attack in Microsoft's standard way (embrace and destroy). If Caldera want to move away from this and think they can compete in that world - then go to it.
The worrying thing is that Microsoft might suddenly figure out that they can just buy Caldera and bin it if it gets too much of a pain (although I suppose that applies to any Linux friendly public company).
Never mind hey - the guiding principal that nothing with Linux should prevent choice allows them to do what they do, we should be happy about this simply as a demonstration of the joy that is Linux:-)
This is a good thing - we are working in an area were we are promoting freedom of choice. As developers licensing is not directly our area - having someone else make us some boilerplate licences (that themselves are open) is great.
Complaining about diversity is not constructive - that way leads Windows.
There is a principal in control system theory that states that for a model to be accurate the model must be at least as complicated as the thing it is modelling. e.g. to truely model the universe you need something as complex as the universe. The same thing applies to the weather system.
Being chaotic does not (in principal) deny the possibility of modelling. In fact we already have an operating implementation of the weather (look up).
The weather is modelable, a distinction should made that modelable does not mean guarenteed accurate. Even if this system says that there is a 75% probablitity that it will rain in spain (mainly on the plain) tomorrow then that is still worth having.
It seems unfair to dismiss work like this so quickly just because it is inherently impossible to predict with 100% accuracy.
Maybe if they bundled every audio player available or they bundled somebody elses audio player it would be fair and be just like every other "defacto standard" OS.
Worrying about the details of Microsoft's behavior is not productive. Their attitude of "we can do whatever the hell we like" is what should concern us.
As Microsoft keep pushing the limit of what the world will tolerate from them, eventually they will trample on the toes of even their most hardened defender.
Re:Web services ARE client/server
on
Shirky On P2P
·
· Score: 1
I appreciate the P2Pness of email. I'll agree that email is peer-to-peer. What I was saying was that just because peer-to-peer has its uses does not make it the be all and end all. It is simply another tool in the kit, we can use it where appropriate; there are many situations where it is not appropriate.
So what happens when we want to store something that no one cares about except us?
I think we are in agreement, there is no need to make everything peer-to-peer. In the end P2P is kind of client/server/server/client. It is just the same technology used twice. If that's what's needed then great, otherwise why waste the bandwidth?
Re:Web services ARE client/server
on
Shirky On P2P
·
· Score: 1
... but about whether 'client' and 'server' are permanent or temporary designations....
Not sure I agree with that wholly. A client is always temporary, the server is fixed. A web service is exactly that - a service. In P2P we are equals, I can serve you, you can serve me. When I connect to a web site there is no possibility that I start serving web sites to it. I agree that there maybe a converstation as it were, but that does not equal P2P.
I agree with you that there are lots of uses for a P2P system, however, web services are not one of them. I'm also not convinced that just because a system uses XML it is P2P. The two are not synonymous.
I suppose a lot of this depends on what your definition of web services is. I am presuming (perhaps incorrectly) that you mean things that are accesses using a web page. If I'm wrong in this then please ignore all my points as they don't make sense anymore:-)
Web services ARE client/server
on
Shirky On P2P
·
· Score: 1
Shirky seems to be suggesting that web services are to be outmoded by his new vision of peer to peer. Peer to peer has its place but for efficiency many things require a centralised location for dealing information.
If I want to send a letter the fastest way is for me to take it to the post office - not to hand it to someone randomly on the street in the hope that eventually it will be handed to someone who is going to the post office.
Slashdot Mirror
Can we have another new topic "Linux-Kernel-Release-News-Item-Moans" so I don't have to read 86 posts on why this item shouldn't be on slashdot and read some comments from people who have tried the new kernel and what they think about it.
I'm so fed up of reading all this moaning crap - I want some of the advertised "stuff that matters". How fast does the new IDE subsytem go. Does the USB 2.0 patch make life worth living? I am actually interested in these things NOT in this "you're a troll", "no you're a troll", "NO YOU'RE A TROLL" noise. You are wasting my bandwidth. (and now I've wasted yours)
I'm wondering why doom gets so much attention as the one that started it all. Wolfenstein came out before doom and was from ID.
Oh how I loved that game, with its blue bricks and grey floors. It used to run incredibly fast on a crappy old 386 - any one know if there is a version for Linux?
Why not have a look atn alogy
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html#a
for a guide on how to argue a bit better.
Caldera's per seat licensing - I say good luck to them. The reason Linux has survived while others dies is because it is impossible to attack in Microsoft's standard way (embrace and destroy). If Caldera want to move away from this and think they can compete in that world - then go to it.
:-)
The worrying thing is that Microsoft might suddenly figure out that they can just buy Caldera and bin it if it gets too much of a pain (although I suppose that applies to any Linux friendly public company).
Never mind hey - the guiding principal that nothing with Linux should prevent choice allows them to do what they do, we should be happy about this simply as a demonstration of the joy that is Linux
This is a good thing - we are working in an area were we are promoting freedom of choice. As developers licensing is not directly our area - having someone else make us some boilerplate licences (that themselves are open) is great.
Complaining about diversity is not constructive - that way leads Windows.
There is a principal in control system theory that states that for a model to be accurate the model must be at least as complicated as the thing it is modelling. e.g. to truely model the universe you need something as complex as the universe. The same thing applies to the weather system.
Being chaotic does not (in principal) deny the possibility of modelling. In fact we already have an operating implementation of the weather (look up).
The weather is modelable, a distinction should made that modelable does not mean guarenteed accurate. Even if this system says that there is a 75% probablitity that it will rain in spain (mainly on the plain) tomorrow then that is still worth having.
It seems unfair to dismiss work like this so quickly just because it is inherently impossible to predict with 100% accuracy.
Maybe if they bundled every audio player available or they bundled somebody elses audio player it would be fair and be just like every other "defacto standard" OS.
Worrying about the details of Microsoft's behavior is not productive. Their attitude of "we can do whatever the hell we like" is what should concern us.
As Microsoft keep pushing the limit of what the world will tolerate from them, eventually they will trample on the toes of even their most hardened defender.
I appreciate the P2Pness of email. I'll agree that email is peer-to-peer. What I was saying was that just because peer-to-peer has its uses does not make it the be all and end all. It is simply another tool in the kit, we can use it where appropriate; there are many situations where it is not appropriate.
So what happens when we want to store something that no one cares about except us?
I think we are in agreement, there is no need to make everything peer-to-peer. In the end P2P is kind of client/server/server/client. It is just the same technology used twice. If that's what's needed then great, otherwise why waste the bandwidth?
... but about whether 'client' and 'server' are permanent or temporary designations. ...
:-)
Not sure I agree with that wholly. A client is always temporary, the server is fixed. A web service is exactly that - a service. In P2P we are equals, I can serve you, you can serve me. When I connect to a web site there is no possibility that I start serving web sites to it. I agree that there maybe a converstation as it were, but that does not equal P2P.
I agree with you that there are lots of uses for a P2P system, however, web services are not one of them. I'm also not convinced that just because a system uses XML it is P2P. The two are not synonymous.
I suppose a lot of this depends on what your definition of web services is. I am presuming (perhaps incorrectly) that you mean things that are accesses using a web page. If I'm wrong in this then please ignore all my points as they don't make sense anymore
Shirky seems to be suggesting that web services are to be outmoded by his new vision of peer to peer. Peer to peer has its place but for efficiency many things require a centralised location for dealing information.
If I want to send a letter the fastest way is for me to take it to the post office - not to hand it to someone randomly on the street in the hope that eventually it will be handed to someone who is going to the post office.