THIS SOUNDS LIKE A REACTIONLESS DRIVE. NOW THAT I HAVE PROPERLY CATEGORIZED IT FOR YOU, YOU CAN JUST GO STRAIGHT ON TO BEING SKEPTICAL, SINCE EVERYONE KNOWS REACTIONLESS DRIVES ARE BALONY. THIS HAS BEEN A SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE STATUS QUO IN ENGINEERING. THANK YOU.
(We had to bribe Slashdot editors to let us write the above in all caps. They are total suckers for lower-case letters. It's a fetish of theirs, probably. Poor little letters. Cut to CmdrTaco doing a lower-case 'a' in the butt. Oh, ffs, will this filter ever let me through? rthwerg erg qergqegqerg qerg qegqegqreghqer gqer gq erg qer gqe gqergqergeqrgerg)
Yeah, but how does that make me look all cool and skeptical about everything that has the word 'tabs' in it? To hell with "very useful" - it's not street, bro', that's what I'm saying!
Hey, wait a minute - aren't they installing a new ion drive on the thing (VASIMR)? Just set it at full speed ahead, and leave it to some alien civilization to find it... (yeah, yeah, I know, escape velocity and all - they can do gravity assist or something)
From TFA: "The security of computation and communication is the primary focus of the U.S. Department of Defense. There is general recognition that the side that can maintain the integrity of its computational resources will dominate the battlefield." Ya, tell that to Bin Laden.
How should Wikipedia face these challenges? Scrap the current monolithic article model, and begin publishing incremental edits in XML instead.
This way, independent third-parties could serve customized edit filters of the main Wikipedia database. For instance, one site could serve only articles composed of edits made by scholars. Another site could serve only articles composed of edits approved by a board of editors whose particular editorial style you like. Yet another site could serve edits based on mass moderation. And yet another site could allow you to select from all the available edits to an article in order to tailor the exact article which meets your particular demands. Companies like Google could mirror the edit database and apply their own proprietary search and ranking technologies. Contributors could discuss and evaluate single edits in detail, and so on.
Wikis has opened up editing. Now let's open up viewing as well.
This point is actually far from "missed by most everyone". The phenomenon is called exclusivism and is often discussed in research dealing with virtual communities.
What I don't understand is why everybody keeps referring to the registration requirement on the New York Times website when everybody seems to hate it so much ("blah, blah"). If people don't already know they will find out when they follow the link.
You gotta be kidding. Oppositional competition is bad, almost by definition.
Let me put it this way: there is two ways to be the world champion of figure skating. You can either keep practicing and be the best or you can hire somebody to smash the kneecaps of all your competitors. The latter is oppositional competition and have nothing to do with 'variation in population' or any of those other routine euphemisms.
'So, err, remind me - how many closed-source word processors can I go out and by? How many web design packages? How many commercial IDEs? How many instance messenging networks can I join? Wouldn't they be scratching the same itch too?'
Yeah, because we all know what a great role model closed-source is, right?
The answer is switching to a user-controlled DNS provider like OpenNIC to shift power back where it belongs. I have been using them on all my home computers for six months now and I have never had a DNS related problem.
Resolving the largest TLD's on the Internet is a great responsibility and a corporate monopoly like VeriSign just can't handle it. Please don't entrust them with it.
That argument is so lame and it certainly won't win over any politicians. Although an avid software user, I have never perused source code or binaries for the purpose of personal enlightenment and I doubt a lot of users have. A piece of software is nothing like a piece of music or literature. It is written for and chiefly used as a device for generating a particular output from a particalur input. I have yet to see a book or a musical score that accept input values. Also, your line of reasoning seem to suggest that any currently patentable device can be considered an artistic expression. A can-opener is a kind of sculpture, right?
Please don't miscredit the anti-software patent community by pushing babble like this. Stick to what matters: software patents hurts innovation.
Ooo, wow, you can distrust authorities, how mature. It has been what, three, four hours since the news began to surface and you are already making up conspiracy theories. Since you are the one making the accusations, perhaps you should provide the evidence, hmm?
Something similar was tried in Denmark not too long ago. As it turned out, the problem was not to determine how much was spent on Microsoft products but rather how much could be saved using Open Source.
In late 2002 the Danish Board of Technology, an independent government body advising the parliament on matters of technology, published a report examining the applicability of Open Source in government. The report estimated that the public sector could save several billion Danish kroner (one Danish krone is approximately 0.15 dollars) per year by switching to Open Source software - which is a lot in a small country like Denmark. The figure caught a lot of average goverment IT managers by surprise and consequently generated a lot of discussion as to the accuracy of the numbers and methodology used in the report but I think the general consensus now is that the only way to find out for sure is to give it a try.
- The system call table is no longer exported. Any module that relied on this previously will no longer work.
What? Does this mean it will no longer be possible to replace a standard kernel API function with a customized one at run-time? I were just about to write a module relying on that feature.
Slashdot Mirror
Ai konzede.
THIS SOUNDS LIKE A REACTIONLESS DRIVE. NOW THAT I HAVE PROPERLY CATEGORIZED IT FOR YOU, YOU CAN JUST GO STRAIGHT ON TO BEING SKEPTICAL, SINCE EVERYONE KNOWS REACTIONLESS DRIVES ARE BALONY. THIS HAS BEEN A SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE STATUS QUO IN ENGINEERING. THANK YOU.
(We had to bribe Slashdot editors to let us write the above in all caps. They are total suckers for lower-case letters. It's a fetish of theirs, probably. Poor little letters. Cut to CmdrTaco doing a lower-case 'a' in the butt. Oh, ffs, will this filter ever let me through? rthwerg erg qergqegqerg qerg qegqegqreghqer gqer gq erg qer gqe gqergqergeqrgerg)
Yeah, but how does that make me look all cool and skeptical about everything that has the word 'tabs' in it? To hell with "very useful" - it's not street, bro', that's what I'm saying!
fuck you faggot (yeah i fed the troll, sue me)
The Augustine commision presents options - not recommendations.
What?
Hey, wait a minute - aren't they installing a new ion drive on the thing (VASIMR)? Just set it at full speed ahead, and leave it to some alien civilization to find it... (yeah, yeah, I know, escape velocity and all - they can do gravity assist or something)
dogatemyhomework
From TFA:
"The security of computation and communication is the primary focus of the U.S. Department of Defense. There is general recognition that the side that can maintain the integrity of its computational resources will dominate the battlefield."
Ya, tell that to Bin Laden.
Do you need a paper trail for your ATM transactions?
How should Wikipedia face these challenges? Scrap the current monolithic article model, and begin publishing incremental edits in XML instead.
This way, independent third-parties could serve customized edit filters of the main Wikipedia database. For instance, one site could serve only articles composed of edits made by scholars. Another site could serve only articles composed of edits approved by a board of editors whose particular editorial style you like. Yet another site could serve edits based on mass moderation. And yet another site could allow you to select from all the available edits to an article in order to tailor the exact article which meets your particular demands. Companies like Google could mirror the edit database and apply their own proprietary search and ranking technologies. Contributors could discuss and evaluate single edits in detail, and so on.
Wikis has opened up editing. Now let's open up viewing as well.
This point is actually far from "missed by most everyone". The phenomenon is called exclusivism and is often discussed in research dealing with virtual communities.
What I don't understand is why everybody keeps referring to the registration requirement on the New York Times website when everybody seems to hate it so much ("blah, blah"). If people don't already know they will find out when they follow the link.
'They are all competing with each other as well. There is no oppositional logic at all here.'
;)
Are you trying to work the Jedi mind trick on me?
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you but I see a lot of Open Source developers discrediting each other publicly instead of hacking.
You gotta be kidding. Oppositional competition is bad, almost by definition.
Let me put it this way: there is two ways to be the world champion of figure skating. You can either keep practicing and be the best or you can hire somebody to smash the kneecaps of all your competitors. The latter is oppositional competition and have nothing to do with 'variation in population' or any of those other routine euphemisms.
'So, err, remind me - how many closed-source word processors can I go out and by? How many web design packages? How many commercial IDEs? How many instance messenging networks can I join? Wouldn't they be scratching the same itch too?'
Yeah, because we all know what a great role model closed-source is, right?
Oh my god. It's pseudo-PC morons like you who fuel the Ku Klux Klan.
The answer is switching to a user-controlled DNS provider like OpenNIC to shift power back where it belongs. I have been using them on all my home computers for six months now and I have never had a DNS related problem.
Resolving the largest TLD's on the Internet is a great responsibility and a corporate monopoly like VeriSign just can't handle it. Please don't entrust them with it.
That argument is so lame and it certainly won't win over any politicians. Although an avid software user, I have never perused source code or binaries for the purpose of personal enlightenment and I doubt a lot of users have. A piece of software is nothing like a piece of music or literature. It is written for and chiefly used as a device for generating a particular output from a particalur input. I have yet to see a book or a musical score that accept input values. Also, your line of reasoning seem to suggest that any currently patentable device can be considered an artistic expression. A can-opener is a kind of sculpture, right?
Please don't miscredit the anti-software patent community by pushing babble like this. Stick to what matters: software patents hurts innovation.
Ooo, wow, you can distrust authorities, how mature. It has been what, three, four hours since the news began to surface and you are already making up conspiracy theories. Since you are the one making the accusations, perhaps you should provide the evidence, hmm?
No, it's martians.
Something similar was tried in Denmark not too long ago. As it turned out, the problem was not to determine how much was spent on Microsoft products but rather how much could be saved using Open Source.
In late 2002 the Danish Board of Technology, an independent government body advising the parliament on matters of technology, published a report examining the applicability of Open Source in government. The report estimated that the public sector could save several billion Danish kroner (one Danish krone is approximately 0.15 dollars) per year by switching to Open Source software - which is a lot in a small country like Denmark. The figure caught a lot of average goverment IT managers by surprise and consequently generated a lot of discussion as to the accuracy of the numbers and methodology used in the report but I think the general consensus now is that the only way to find out for sure is to give it a try.
"Vikings spoke... something"
The Vikings spoke Old Norse, a Germanic language quite similar to the languages spoken on the Faeroe Islands and Iceland today.
Sounds interesting but is there any reason why a standard VPN bridge wouldn't do the trick?