Imagen the US passed a law that said that the US government would only use windows. Would you care? I wouldn't, since the gov't already uses windows for lots of stuff.
Incase you hadn't noticed, this only applies to the chinese government not the chinese people
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
I'd be willing to bet that more people are able to speak English then chinese. Remember, English is also the offical language of India, witch also has over a billion people.
and dont forget that in many nations English is taught as an offical second language, including China.
In fact, in order to go to colage in china you have to be able to speak english, most linux hackers are colage students/graduates, or at least on the way to collage, and i'd be willing to bet the case will be the same there.
If they already speak english, then I'd think that they'd continue to use the language the code was written in (linus was finish, and he still wrote in english, right?)
suiran wo xi.huan zhong-wen, ke.shi wo jue.de ying.wen haishi hen hao:)
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Its not that hard, I usualy write my longer comments in MS-word beacuse of the realtime spellchecker. I have to manualy edit out the 'special' quotation mark characters though.:(
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Ridiculous... as is software patents IMHO. By the way, if we see it from a philosophical point of view, whats the difference between a program and a gene anyway? =)
I don't know, whats the diffrence between software and a physical device? Ether could be described as seqences of mathimatical formulas. Just look at the current state of CPU design, everything's done with Veralog or whatever as opposed to laying out the transisors by hand.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Actualy, I'd say roblimo is one of the *best* slashdot posters, I'm not sure I actualy dissagree with you though, since your post could be interpreted as sarcastic in tone.
Really, Roblimo corrects his storys when he makes mistakes, without a "it wasn't my fault" tone. And he doublechecks his storys more then the others do.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
how do software patents make writing code imposible?
Look, While software patents can hamper work by not alowing you to use everything you know about, It dosn't really matter. If you can't program somthing without using someone elses protected ideas, then you should really pay them royaltys. If its an open source project, and they don't want you to use it, its there call. I mean, it was there Idea right?
Just beacuse you can't create a program that uses fractal image compression dosn't mean that your really hindered, you can use Jpeg or somthing. Sure the result will be a little worse, but you're still doing what you want.
If the patent isn't obvious, then you wouldn't get to use there tech ether. So whats the problem, if it was obvious, then it shouldn't have been patented. Unfortunetly the USPO is doing a pretty bad job of letting bad patents through, but thats a flaw in the implementation, not the theory.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Meyer, Gabor, Daubechies, Donoho and other scientists that made this methods possible do not own any patents on these discoveries. Why should some jerk be able to rip off their hard work, package it nicely and get a monopoly on a useful method? Greatly delaying its widespread use?
Well, they shouldn't, but those that *Did* make the breakthrough should have been able to get patents if they wanted to.
every idea is a scientific discovery or a mathimatical equasion at some level, no matter what. Take the example of a steam engine. It can be reduced to a mathimatical equasion, or it could be said that it was a sciantific discovery that you could use steam to create mechanical engergy. The real question is simply where to draw the line, I belive that drawing the line inside the relm of computers is valid.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
The spirit of the current patent law seems to already say that "algorithms and laws of nature should not be patentable."
Well, I think that depends, really.This post earlier in the discussion got me thinking, it's the one right before yours, and I think he has a point.
But, one could go even farther to say that all things are collections of algorithms. I mean at the base level atoms are really just mathematical functions, right? psy^2 or whatever defines there shape (They wouldn't tell me what psy was though...).
Beyond that even, any device could be described by a collection of mathematical formulas based on Newtonian physics as well (Unless your talking about really high density microchips where you have to take quantum effects into consideration, or spaceships where you need relativity).
While I agree that some patents are silly, such as the Amazon.com one, some software patents are pretty valid in my mind, and some of those "collections of algorithms" are far more complex then the "Collections of algorithms" use to create, say, a steam engine.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
While I don't see a problem with people patenting DNA that they come up with themselves, hardly anyone is doing that at all. There all just running around trying to patent stuff that's already been there forever.
I mean, someone tried to patent the fucking AIDS virus for christ sakes, (so they could make money off any cures that came around in 17 years, smart move....)
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
While I agree that some patents are idiotic (IE the amazon.com one), others are not. There are real advances in computer sciance, and I think that the people thinking them up should get some compensation. Look at wavelet or fractal image compression. I would hardly call those "obvious."
As for hardware patents, well that's the very purpose of patents. I mean, if we had no software patents, or hardware patents, then what the hell would we be able to patent?
I agree that the patent process needs to be reformed, but as far as I can tell those wanting its complete removal from the software feild is mostly from people to stupid to come up with there own cool stuff.
Sorry for my spelling errors, I'm away from a spellchecker:(
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Actualy, I'd rather have 9x and MS-DOS backwards compatibility then somethign with the NT kernel, NT has always bugged me, I don't know why
Your right, it is posible for an app to bring down a windows9x macine, and it shouldn't be, this is beacuse the OS is buggy. Its far better then a mac, however. I know, I've used them both.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
you stated that Windows 9x was just a shell for MS-DOS, with absolutly no resoning. When I corrected you, you posted this:
>And thank you for that one sentence post. That's what the "No Score +1 Bonus" radio >button is for.
>The point here is that I fail to see how Windows9x is not merely a graphical shell for >DOS. Now, I don't have much of a conception of the way WIN.COM works, but I'm >curious. It seems that I can still prevent Windows from loading by setting BootGUI=1 in >my MSDOS.SYS file. Obviously, something does some pretty crazy stuff to make the >graphical part Windows. Isn't this just a shell? If not, what is your definition of a shell, >and how does it differ from WIN.COM (or whatever)? Forgive me for my lack of >knowledge on this subject; I'm merely curious.
The reason you fail to see it, I'm assuming is beacuse you don't know how Operating systems work, what exactly they do, or even what they really are. Yes, you can stop windows from booting by holding the f8 key, or setting BootGUI to one. But you can also prevent it from starting by not turning on the computer. Does this make windows a graphical shell for the power button as well?
If I wanted to, I could download and install VMare for windows NT and run Linux from there. Would that make Linux a UNIX shell for windows NT? no, it wouldn't.
The reason is, an opperating system isn't defined by how it *starts* but by what it *does*. A shell is a simple program that exsposes the user to the operating system, in this way, command.com is a shell for DOS, it lets you move files around and run programs, basicaly the only thing dos can do.
For Unix and Linux you have things like bash, the bourn again shell, that exsposes the system's functionality to the user. This is what the defintion of a shell is, a program that alows the user to access the Operating System's functions.
Windows9x is an operating system, when it loads the DOS underneth it dissapears. The reason DOS is still there is to provide compatibility for older games/apps that won't run in a windows DOS box (if they use there own protected memory modes or somthing, I think).
Win.com dosn't do much of anything, actualy other then call a few other applications that actualy start windows. The main functionality of witch is in vmm32.vxd, I think.
The main reason that windows is not a "Shell" is beacuse it can do things that DOS cannot. Windows has protected memory, TCP/IP, premtive multitasking and multithreading, and advanced graphics systems. DOS has none of these things.
Windows uses it's own procedures to start applications, having nothing to do with DOS, even DOS apps are started by windows in there own little DOS 'boxes' emulations of entire DOS systems that they can play around in.
Just beacuse DOS is there before windows Boots, does not make it a shell for DOS anymore then DOS is a shell for the ROM-BIOS.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but anyone else who tries to trademark Linux should be shot.
you are aware that Linus Torvlads owns the US copyright to the word "linux" right?
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Linus is from finland
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Imagen the US passed a law that said that the US government would only use windows. Would you care? I wouldn't, since the gov't already uses windows for lots of stuff.
Incase you hadn't noticed, this only applies to the chinese government not the chinese people
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
you are shockingly stupid.
the USSR broke up, but it mainly lost a smal persentage of there land in eastern europe.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
chinese programers speak english, how would they understand the code to begin with if they didn't?
Linus's native language is finish, but linux is in english. I suspect the situation in china will be the same.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
uh, china is mandating that there be no w2k in the government people can still use whatever OS they want.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
I agree, simplified Chinese does suck. I think traditional is much easyer to read.
To bad I can't figure out how to enter Traditional into my computer...
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
I'd be willing to bet that more people are able to speak English then chinese. Remember, English is also the offical language of India, witch also has over a billion people.
:)
and dont forget that in many nations English is taught as an offical second language, including China.
In fact, in order to go to colage in china you have to be able to speak english, most linux hackers are colage students/graduates, or at least on the way to collage, and i'd be willing to bet the case will be the same there.
If they already speak english, then I'd think that they'd continue to use the language the code was written in (linus was finish, and he still wrote in english, right?)
suiran wo xi.huan zhong-wen, ke.shi wo jue.de ying.wen haishi hen hao
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Cut their pipe and tell them they can have it back when the Chinese government is run by the people, not the commie turds.
And just how the hell would you that? do you think all Pipes are controlled by the US government? or perhaps by you?
Most arn't even controled by US companies we could no more cut there pipe then they could cut ours.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Its not that hard, I usualy write my longer comments in MS-word beacuse of the realtime spellchecker. I have to manualy edit out the 'special' quotation mark characters though. :(
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Yes, the phisical device is not math, but the design is, and the design is what you patent.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Ridiculous... as is software patents IMHO. By the way, if we see it from a philosophical point of view, whats the difference between a program and a gene anyway? =)
I don't know, whats the diffrence between software and a physical device? Ether could be described as seqences of mathimatical formulas. Just look at the current state of CPU design, everything's done with Veralog or whatever as opposed to laying out the transisors by hand.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Actualy, I'd say roblimo is one of the *best* slashdot posters, I'm not sure I actualy dissagree with you though, since your post could be interpreted as sarcastic in tone.
Really, Roblimo corrects his storys when he makes mistakes, without a "it wasn't my fault" tone. And he doublechecks his storys more then the others do.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
how do software patents make writing code imposible?
Look, While software patents can hamper work by not alowing you to use everything you know about, It dosn't really matter. If you can't program somthing without using someone elses protected ideas, then you should really pay them royaltys. If its an open source project, and they don't want you to use it, its there call. I mean, it was there Idea right?
Just beacuse you can't create a program that uses fractal image compression dosn't mean that your really hindered, you can use Jpeg or somthing. Sure the result will be a little worse, but you're still doing what you want.
If the patent isn't obvious, then you wouldn't get to use there tech ether. So whats the problem, if it was obvious, then it shouldn't have been patented. Unfortunetly the USPO is doing a pretty bad job of letting bad patents through, but thats a flaw in the implementation, not the theory.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Meyer, Gabor, Daubechies, Donoho and other scientists that made this methods possible do not own any patents on these discoveries. Why should some jerk be able to rip off their hard work, package it nicely and get a monopoly on a useful method? Greatly delaying its widespread use?
Well, they shouldn't, but those that *Did* make the breakthrough should have been able to get patents if they wanted to.
every idea is a scientific discovery or a mathimatical equasion at some level, no matter what. Take the example of a steam engine. It can be reduced to a mathimatical equasion, or it could be said that it was a sciantific discovery that you could use steam to create mechanical engergy. The real question is simply where to draw the line, I belive that drawing the line inside the relm of computers is valid.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
I think there was one or two back when Microsoft was trying to create an open standard for Instant messageing, and keep AOL from owning it all.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
The spirit of the current patent law seems to already say that "algorithms and laws of nature should not be patentable."
Well, I think that depends, really.This post earlier in the discussion got me thinking, it's the one right before yours, and I think he has a point.
But, one could go even farther to say that all things are collections of algorithms. I mean at the base level atoms are really just mathematical functions, right? psy^2 or whatever defines there shape (They wouldn't tell me what psy was though...).
Beyond that even, any device could be described by a collection of mathematical formulas based on Newtonian physics as well (Unless your talking about really high density microchips where you have to take quantum effects into consideration, or spaceships where you need relativity).
While I agree that some patents are silly, such as the Amazon.com one, some software patents are pretty valid in my mind, and some of those "collections of algorithms" are far more complex then the "Collections of algorithms" use to create, say, a steam engine.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
It wasn't Cliff who said it, the passage you are refering to is part of the quoted text from Ken Hendrickson N8KH .
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Very good point.
While I don't see a problem with people patenting DNA that they come up with themselves, hardly anyone is doing that at all. There all just running around trying to patent stuff that's already been there forever.
I mean, someone tried to patent the fucking AIDS virus for christ sakes, (so they could make money off any cures that came around in 17 years, smart move....)
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
While I agree that some patents are idiotic (IE the amazon.com one), others are not. There are real advances in computer sciance, and I think that the people thinking them up should get some compensation. Look at wavelet or fractal image compression. I would hardly call those "obvious."
:(
As for hardware patents, well that's the very purpose of patents. I mean, if we had no software patents, or hardware patents, then what the hell would we be able to patent?
I agree that the patent process needs to be reformed, but as far as I can tell those wanting its complete removal from the software feild is mostly from people to stupid to come up with there own cool stuff.
Sorry for my spelling errors, I'm away from a spellchecker
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Um, GPFs don't cause the entire system to go down, you're thinking of the MAC. What you've discribed for OS2 has been my experience with windows 98.
Windows 95/98 does have memory protection, but it also has bugs.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Actualy, I'd rather have 9x and MS-DOS backwards compatibility then somethign with the NT kernel, NT has always bugged me, I don't know why
Your right, it is posible for an app to bring down a windows9x macine, and it shouldn't be, this is beacuse the OS is buggy. Its far better then a mac, however. I know, I've used them both.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
I found that out. I guess thats what I get for posting at 4 am or whatever...
And I don't have that much karma, only 31 points right now.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
that was clearly a two sentance post
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
you stated that Windows 9x was just a shell for MS-DOS, with absolutly no resoning. When I corrected you, you posted this:
>And thank you for that one sentence post. That's what the "No Score +1 Bonus" radio >button is for.
>The point here is that I fail to see how Windows9x is not merely a graphical shell for >DOS. Now, I don't have much of a conception of the way WIN.COM works, but I'm >curious. It seems that I can still prevent Windows from loading by setting BootGUI=1 in >my MSDOS.SYS file. Obviously, something does some pretty crazy stuff to make the >graphical part Windows. Isn't this just a shell? If not, what is your definition of a shell, >and how does it differ from WIN.COM (or whatever)? Forgive me for my lack of >knowledge on this subject; I'm merely curious.
The reason you fail to see it, I'm assuming is beacuse you don't know how Operating systems work, what exactly they do, or even what they really are. Yes, you can stop windows from booting by holding the f8 key, or setting BootGUI to one. But you can also prevent it from starting by not turning on the computer. Does this make windows a graphical shell for the power button as well?
If I wanted to, I could download and install VMare for windows NT and run Linux from there. Would that make Linux a UNIX shell for windows NT? no, it wouldn't.
The reason is, an opperating system isn't defined by how it *starts* but by what it *does*. A shell is a simple program that exsposes the user to the operating system, in this way, command.com is a shell for DOS, it lets you move files around and run programs, basicaly the only thing dos can do.
For Unix and Linux you have things like bash, the bourn again shell, that exsposes the system's functionality to the user. This is what the defintion of a shell is, a program that alows the user to access the Operating System's functions.
Windows9x is an operating system, when it loads the DOS underneth it dissapears. The reason DOS is still there is to provide compatibility for older games/apps that won't run in a windows DOS box (if they use there own protected memory modes or somthing, I think).
Win.com dosn't do much of anything, actualy other then call a few other applications that actualy start windows. The main functionality of witch is in vmm32.vxd, I think.
The main reason that windows is not a "Shell" is beacuse it can do things that DOS cannot. Windows has protected memory, TCP/IP, premtive multitasking and multithreading, and advanced graphics systems. DOS has none of these things.
Windows uses it's own procedures to start applications, having nothing to do with DOS, even DOS apps are started by windows in there own little DOS 'boxes' emulations of entire DOS systems that they can play around in.
Just beacuse DOS is there before windows Boots, does not make it a shell for DOS anymore then DOS is a shell for the ROM-BIOS.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",