C'mon, you know the next article on Slashdot is going to be Microsoft wins DoJ trial, Linux developers ordered to cease and desist, Alan Cox hired as head of NT development team... etc. etc.
Scott has been talking about the legal problems at Segfault for several weeks. If it weren't 4/1, I would have no reason to doubt that the legal letters to Scott and Illiad are for real.
Everyone who has a Clue about Linux, people like me who can pick up a CD of a distribution he's never seen in his life and install it with no documentation and blindfolded (ok, I'm exaggerating) should be spending their time doing some sort of pro gratis support. I do it on #linux from time to time. This way, as the number of clueful people increases, the number of people helping the clueless become clueful increases, and the system feeds itself.
This is a much better solution than the infuriating snobbery inherant in that article. Computer culture should be inclusive, not exclusive, and if being "geeky and withdrawn" is a qualifier to being a member of the computer culture, I certainly don't want a part of it. I don't see elitism as my reason for using an operating system.
Compaq plans to introduce new servers based on Alpha chips that have been maximized for Linux next week
Alpha chips that have been maximized for Linux? Actually, I think they mean the servers have been maximized for Linux. Still, why do you need to maximize something so that Linux will run on it? Modify? Maybe. Minimize, certainly. Is there some kind of impression out there in the media that Linux is some sort of "special needs" OS, or that it needs ultra-fast-cool hardware to run?
I disagree with those that say that Linux is good because it requires you to learn about your computer. Certainly, it provides more (infinite, actually) views into what's going on inside an operating system. But you shouldn't be forced to become an OS expert and PC hardware expert just so that you can run one OS or another.
I have installed various types of Windows on many different machines. I have also installed RedHat on many different machines. You don't need to be any more clueful to install RedHat than you do to install any Windows variation. Is this a bad thing? NO! I know a lot of people who badmouth RedHat for exactly this reason, I don't think such objections are warranted. There is absolutely no technical aspect of RedHat that makes it any worse than any other Linux distro. In fact, its co-existing libc5 and glibc compatabilities are a great technical strength.
Now, Debian could be just as easy for clueless people to install. The installation manual could be made a little bit more friendly, there could be an automatic X configurator. This would be a start.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Debian. But the idea that it is somehow better because it's harder to install is silly. Linux is not just for computer gurus, like us. I would like to see Linux in the hands of the common man (and woman). Attitudes like the typical "we don't have time for clueless morons like you" really undermines that.
...how business is supposed to make money with Open Source strategy, and how there is going to be any incentive (outside of the "look at me, I can write appz!" crowd) to create new technology if we somehow eliminate IP.
Of course, the one glaring couter-example to this is all of the fine work that GNU and Linux have done. But, where would all of the GNU developers get a living wage in order to write free software, if it weren't for for-profit business?
I see, in the future, OSS and proprietary software working hand-in-hand. The basic platforms and protocols will be open (as if they aren't already), but there will always be a place for proprietary software: production apps, multimedia apps, games, etc. This will be a Good Thing, and profits made from proprietary software will then be turned around to fund OSS projects that will benefit everyone.
Just as "The Road Ahead" in 1995 mentioned nothing about the Internet, this book probably mentions nothing about the most exciting innovation in computing technology to date: Hamilton 2000.
What's really neat about CDDB, is that the RIAA can use it to track CD usage. I imagine eventually, they'll be able to use the secret codes embedded in all Audio CDs to track down pirates and illegal resellers.
I'm sick of people ripping off my music and not paying me for it.
You know, I always wondered about the light saber. Does its slicing ability depend on how hard you swing it? Every time I see a New Hope I'm always afraid that Luke's gonna slice Ben's head off when he first tries out the LS and is swinging it around, not knowing what it does.
Also, does it cauterize? That would make sense, since Luke's arm is not gushing forth blood after getting his had cut off in Empire Strikes Back.
You don't live in Santa Clara, do you? I have a friend who just moved out there, and he says that they have the same affliction. Across the street in San Jose, they get everything.
Let's face it: currently technology allows the government to monitor everything we do. It's only a matter of time before the government IS montioring everything we do.
I'm getting my shotgun and moving to the mountains of Brittish Colombia to hunt and trap for a living, cut off from modern society. Who's with me?
To hack means "to accomplish a goal through lazy and or unconventional means." This is a definition that goes back before the time that tweaking and fine tuning of computer systems came to be known as "hacking." This is the definition one would use when saying that someone was a "useless hack." For example, a writer with no talent. Fixing your car with duct tape is, to me, also a "hack," or "hacking."
Cracking into computer systems certainly is an unconventional way to solve a problem (e.g., how do I get root and screw everything up), so I have no problem with this definition of "hacking."
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, well, it's a fun day.
I'm not sure. Scott Remnant has been complaining about these legal problems for quite some time. I just don't know what to think......
Scott has been talking about the legal problems at Segfault for several weeks. If it weren't 4/1, I would have no reason to doubt that the legal letters to Scott and Illiad are for real.
Everyone who has a Clue about Linux, people like me who can pick up a CD of a distribution he's never seen in his life and install it with no documentation and blindfolded (ok, I'm exaggerating) should be spending their time doing some sort of pro gratis support. I do it on #linux from time to time. This way, as the number of clueful people increases, the number of people helping the clueless become clueful increases, and the system feeds itself.
This is a much better solution than the infuriating snobbery inherant in that article. Computer culture should be inclusive, not exclusive, and if being "geeky and withdrawn" is a qualifier to being a member of the computer culture, I certainly don't want a part of it. I don't see elitism as my reason for using an operating system.
Alpha chips that have been maximized for Linux? Actually, I think they mean the servers have been maximized for Linux. Still, why do you need to maximize something so that Linux will run on it? Modify? Maybe. Minimize, certainly. Is there some kind of impression out there in the media that Linux is some sort of "special needs" OS, or that it needs ultra-fast-cool hardware to run?
Sounds like more FUD to me.
Just you wait and see.
I have installed various types of Windows on many different machines. I have also installed RedHat on many different machines. You don't need to be any more clueful to install RedHat than you do to install any Windows variation. Is this a bad thing? NO! I know a lot of people who badmouth RedHat for exactly this reason, I don't think such objections are warranted. There is absolutely no technical aspect of RedHat that makes it any worse than any other Linux distro. In fact, its co-existing libc5 and glibc compatabilities are a great technical strength.
Now, Debian could be just as easy for clueless people to install. The installation manual could be made a little bit more friendly, there could be an automatic X configurator. This would be a start.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Debian. But the idea that it is somehow better because it's harder to install is silly. Linux is not just for computer gurus, like us. I would like to see Linux in the hands of the common man (and woman). Attitudes like the typical "we don't have time for clueless morons like you" really undermines that.
Just a top-level reorg. Same Evil Empire. Same One Company controlling Windows, the Browser, and all of the most popular apps. This changes nothing.
Of course, the one glaring couter-example to this is all of the fine work that GNU and Linux have done. But, where would all of the GNU developers get a living wage in order to write free software, if it weren't for for-profit business?
I see, in the future, OSS and proprietary software working hand-in-hand. The basic platforms and protocols will be open (as if they aren't already), but there will always be a place for proprietary software: production apps, multimedia apps, games, etc. This will be a Good Thing, and profits made from proprietary software will then be turned around to fund OSS projects that will benefit everyone.
That's my Utopia, right there.
Someday you'll all be one of us.
I'm sick of people ripping off my music and not paying me for it.
Team Hamilton has been pushing other OSes to do this for years, and no one listened. Now look what's happened. Not like we didn't warn you.
I'm glad I'm not a lawyer.
Slashdot: the Burger King of Websites!
Is Quake 3 going to have a port to Hamilton 97?
Also, does it cauterize? That would make sense, since Luke's arm is not gushing forth blood after getting his had cut off in Empire Strikes Back.
I think you're missing the point. :-)
You don't live in Santa Clara, do you? I have a friend who just moved out there, and he says that they have the same affliction. Across the street in San Jose, they get everything.
I'm getting my shotgun and moving to the mountains of Brittish Colombia to hunt and trap for a living, cut off from modern society. Who's with me?
To hack means "to accomplish a goal through lazy and or unconventional means." This is a definition that goes back before the time that tweaking and fine tuning of computer systems came to be known as "hacking." This is the definition one would use when saying that someone was a "useless hack." For example, a writer with no talent. Fixing your car with duct tape is, to me, also a "hack," or "hacking."
Cracking into computer systems certainly is an unconventional way to solve a problem (e.g., how do I get root and screw everything up), so I have no problem with this definition of "hacking."
BTW, when are they starting the 2.3.x tree?