I wonder if Microsoft knows if someone is using a pirated copy of their OS?
Most computer users are connected to the internet. If every Windows user registered his copy, or if the OS was sending IP packets back to MS (maybe through some sort of proxy, so it's not too obvious) it would be rather easy to track pirated copies for them.
Let's say, for argument's sake, that my friend was using Win2K for 3 months, then I borrowed/copied his Win2K CD and installed it on my machine using his verification number or whatever it's called. Then MS would know that machine A with IP address IP_A used their CD CD1 with verification number C for 3 months, and now both machines A and B with IP addresses IP_A and IP_B are using OSes installed off their CD CD1 using verification number C. They should come to the obvious conclusion that we pirated their product, right?
I've heard this rumor a long time ago (I'm Russian). According to this conspiracy theory, Gagarin was killed because he, obviously, new about the deaths and wanted to speak up about them. (The official version is that Gagarin died in a jet flight accident)
Having said this, let me state that the whole story defies common sense. Why would we (Soviets) try to send a man into space without having succeeded at sending unmanned satellites (Sputnik) and animals first? Now, if we did succeed at sending animals to the outer space, how could we possibly fail so miserably when sending humans? (0 out of 3?) It just doesn't make any sense. The whole hoax is as credible that Appollo landings never happened and even if they did, they were scrapped because of the UFOs.
Redhat is investing money into developing their product and it is making money through CD sales, literature and support, including Redhat network. Did you consider the possibility of other companies offering added value service based on Redhat's distribution, updates, etc.? If some company guaranteed identically the same updates, for example, but for less (or for free), wouldn't a lot of customers go for it?
You need to know the following facts to avoid having your butts kicked when you talk to me:
Ziolkovsky (Tsiolkovsky) is Russian Goddard.
Korolev is the Father of Soviet cosmonautics.
"Sputnik" was the first artificial sattelite.
Gagarin was the first man to travel to "cosmos".
Sputnik was launched Oct 4, 1957.
The first man travelled to the outer space on Apr 12, 1961. BTW, if you are in NY, join the Russian orgy to celebrate 40 years since Gagarin's feat.
If anything, most of the scientists I know are perfectly happy to write in FORTRAN (gack) and could care less about the marketability of personal computers.
Because of certain language features, such as anti-aliasing, FORTRAN compilers can optimize code and take advantage of hierarchical memory (i.e. RAM vs. different levels of cache) better than most modern C/C++ compilers. I experimented with it myself and saw FORTRAN to be several times faster for things like matrix multiplication than equivalent C/C++ code.
I still don't write in FORTRAN because g77 (GNU FORTRAN compiler) is archaic (Fortran77 doesn't even have dynamic memory allocation) while modern compilers aren't Free/GPL'ed. BTW, it's a shame GCC settles for the 24 year old standard.
... and the authors of this paper do not represent me.
Contrary to what some may believe, most scientists are quite intelligent, especially in fields like physics and math. Non-analytical or less analytical fields like biology are where you could actually encounter cry-babies complaining about how their computers aren't user-friendly enough (Yes, biologists do need to use computers for things like DNA sequence analysis, spectroscopy, X-ray crystallography, etc.)
Just trying to clear up the matter. The title should say "Some scientists say computers suck." instead.
OTOH, I don't buy the magic self-programming computer. This sort of prognostication is much like the now-laughable predictions in the early 1950's by an MIT professor that "I think that within five years we will have computers that can think."
Well, people have been know to overestimate as well as underestimate the progress of technology in the future.
Check out this quote. I saw it on slashdot and then looked up the original:
"Where a computer like the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1 1/2 tons."
Can you kill DOS? Some people are still happy with what it can do. For some hardware, it's the only available OS. I've met an old lady in my university computer center who would restart a Pentium PC in DOS mode simply because she "didn't know Windows". She's been using DOS and WordPerfect since Lincoln administration. You can't kill DOS.
</sarcasm>
Wroot
Outlaw "funny" moderations. Trust me, the best way for a geek to be funny, is to just be normal. Any attempts at being "funny" on purpose appear lame to non-geeks as well as to recovering geeks and simply geeks of different flava.
HTH/. to survive.
Wroot
Yeah, but will you get ENOUGH kernel hackers and application developers to keep on creating if practically all users turn their backs on Linux (hypothetically speaking)?
As a more short-term issue: doesn't it make a lot of difference to you what OS you use at work as opposed to home? One has to convince the employers to use Linux, and for them idealistic considerations are not a factor at all. Personally, I'm lucky to work in a research field where Linux has become a standard. I'm more worried about going into IT industry someday though.
Just like any other OS, Linux has to fight to survive in the long run.
I like SystemV scripts. Maybe because of my OO programming background. Each service has a set of "member functions": start, stop, restart (and maybe others) I think it's neat. All you have to do is "instantiate" a service (similar to class instatiation) by simply putting a link.
1) Auto-detection of all hardware during installation
2) A linuxconf port to KDE (as part of the KDE control center, which currently configures only desktop itself) How is a newbie supposed to figure out that he has to do
/bin/su; linuxfconf ?
All this misspelling business is ridiculous, when the 'default' linux mp3 sharing program will not be affected (In Gnapster, click file / browse opennap servers) That's all there is to it. Besides, I'm sure there are Windows and Mac versions connecting to OpenNap and alike.
And don't forget gnutella! They can't possibly shut down gnutella.
The only thing this ruling will do is hurt the company (i.e. Napster) itself. That's it.
Let's look at history: Israelis settled in a desert, built a Western type of country and eventually prevailed over Arabs. All of it mostly due to their KNOWLEDGE (i.e. education)
Knowledge is power
I think, in your scenario, we would recreate computer industry pretty quickly, maybe within a year, short-circuiting punch-cards and vacuum lamps, of course.
I think life was/is/will be plentiful in the Universe. The only reason why aliens don't bother us is that civilizations degenerate at some point when they learn to manipulate their brains and/or when they create artificial superintellect (AI) superior to their original life forms.
Why would you want to go out and find other civilizations and get SOME satisfaction from doing it when you can get (and probably are getting) INSTANT COMPLETE statisfaction and TOTAL pleasure without doing anything?
As to AI, once it's smarter than the original lifeforms, the original lifeforms make little difference. Unless AI has some sort of an 'objective function' making it go to other planets and pester other civilizations, WHY would it?
Wroot
P.S. Mood-altering drugs are not quite there yet, AFAIK.
I'm not sure about clarifications, but there definitely are pre-emptive apologies:
"I apologize in advance for what I'll do after I drink all of that vodka. You all are going to totally regret inviting me to the party" (Wroot's usual repertoire)
Slashdot Mirror
Most computer users are connected to the internet. If every Windows user registered his copy, or if the OS was sending IP packets back to MS (maybe through some sort of proxy, so it's not too obvious) it would be rather easy to track pirated copies for them.
Let's say, for argument's sake, that my friend was using Win2K for 3 months, then I borrowed/copied his Win2K CD and installed it on my machine using his verification number or whatever it's called. Then MS would know that machine A with IP address IP_A used their CD CD1 with verification number C for 3 months, and now both machines A and B with IP addresses IP_A and IP_B are using OSes installed off their CD CD1 using verification number C. They should come to the obvious conclusion that we pirated their product, right?
Wroot
It's over a kilometer!
Having said this, let me state that the whole story defies common sense. Why would we (Soviets) try to send a man into space without having succeeded at sending unmanned satellites (Sputnik) and animals first? Now, if we did succeed at sending animals to the outer space, how could we possibly fail so miserably when sending humans? (0 out of 3?) It just doesn't make any sense. The whole hoax is as credible that Appollo landings never happened and even if they did, they were scrapped because of the UFOs.
Wroot
Redhat is investing money into developing their product and it is making money through CD sales, literature and support, including Redhat network. Did you consider the possibility of other companies offering added value service based on Redhat's distribution, updates, etc.? If some company guaranteed identically the same updates, for example, but for less (or for free), wouldn't a lot of customers go for it?
Thanks
Wroot
KARMA WHORE
Why is it funny? Could somebody explain it to me please? Is "W" supposed to refer to Mr. Clinton? Really, I don't understand.
... they are still trying to send a man up there. So, in this respect, they are 40 years behind USSR.
Wroot
You need to know the following facts to avoid having your butts kicked when you talk to me:
Ziolkovsky (Tsiolkovsky) is Russian Goddard.
Korolev is the Father of Soviet cosmonautics.
"Sputnik" was the first artificial sattelite.
Gagarin was the first man to travel to "cosmos".
Wroot
Sputnik was launched Oct 4, 1957.
The first man travelled to the outer space on Apr 12, 1961. BTW, if you are in NY, join the Russian orgy to celebrate 40 years since Gagarin's feat.
Wroot
P.S. Peace!
F you!
HTH
Wroot
I still don't write in FORTRAN because g77 (GNU FORTRAN compiler) is archaic (Fortran77 doesn't even have dynamic memory allocation) while modern compilers aren't Free/GPL'ed. BTW, it's a shame GCC settles for the 24 year old standard.
Wroot
Contrary to what some may believe, most scientists are quite intelligent, especially in fields like physics and math. Non-analytical or less analytical fields like biology are where you could actually encounter cry-babies complaining about how their computers aren't user-friendly enough (Yes, biologists do need to use computers for things like DNA sequence analysis, spectroscopy, X-ray crystallography, etc.)
Just trying to clear up the matter. The title should say "Some scientists say computers suck." instead.
Wroot
Well, people have been know to overestimate as well as underestimate the progress of technology in the future.
Check out this quote. I saw it on slashdot and then looked up the original:
Wroot
Next time you telnet to a nuclear site computer, try
/usr/local/bin/launch --longitude +60 \
--latitude +55 --number_of_warheads 4
and see if you can destroy my hometown
Wroot
Can you kill DOS? Some people are still happy with what it can do. For some hardware, it's the only available OS. I've met an old lady in my university computer center who would restart a Pentium PC in DOS mode simply because she "didn't know Windows". She's been using DOS and WordPerfect since Lincoln administration. You can't kill DOS.
</sarcasm>
Wroot
Outlaw "funny" moderations. Trust me, the best way for a geek to be funny, is to just be normal. Any attempts at being "funny" on purpose appear lame to non-geeks as well as to recovering geeks and simply geeks of different flava. HTH /. to survive.
Wroot
Yeah, but will you get ENOUGH kernel hackers and application developers to keep on creating if practically all users turn their backs on Linux (hypothetically speaking)?
As a more short-term issue: doesn't it make a lot of difference to you what OS you use at work as opposed to home? One has to convince the employers to use Linux, and for them idealistic considerations are not a factor at all. Personally, I'm lucky to work in a research field where Linux has become a standard. I'm more worried about going into IT industry someday though.
Just like any other OS, Linux has to fight to survive in the long run.
Wroot
Wroot
1) Auto-detection of all hardware during installation
2) A linuxconf port to KDE (as part of the KDE control center, which currently configures only desktop itself) How is a newbie supposed to figure out that he has to do
/bin/su; linuxfconf ?
Just my $.02
Wroot
Wroot
And don't forget gnutella! They can't possibly shut down gnutella.
The only thing this ruling will do is hurt the company (i.e. Napster) itself. That's it.
Wroot
Knowledge is power
I think, in your scenario, we would recreate computer industry pretty quickly, maybe within a year, short-circuiting punch-cards and vacuum lamps, of course.
Wroot
Wroot
P.S. Suck-up moderator karma whores will probably mod this down. I don't care.
Why would you want to go out and find other civilizations and get SOME satisfaction from doing it when you can get (and probably are getting) INSTANT COMPLETE statisfaction and TOTAL pleasure without doing anything?
As to AI, once it's smarter than the original lifeforms, the original lifeforms make little difference. Unless AI has some sort of an 'objective function' making it go to other planets and pester other civilizations, WHY would it?
Wroot
P.S. Mood-altering drugs are not quite there yet, AFAIK.
"I apologize in advance for what I'll do after I drink all of that vodka. You all are going to totally regret inviting me to the party" (Wroot's usual repertoire)
Wroot