Please note that Linus hasn't earned a degree. He may be the most brilliant man to ever touch a computer, but there is a lot more to earning a degree than demonstrating that your brilliant. What about a thesis?
I've always seen honorary degrees as nothing more than a way for the academic elite to maintain their stranglehold on 'intelligence'(i.e., the attitude that your not truly intelligent until you have a degree). What happens when great things are created by people without the academic stamp of approval? Some school rushes in to give them the stamp so that they can now be 'officially' intelligent.
Linus, refuse their degree. Tell the world that you were smart enough to guide the development of one of the world's greatest software systems without a degree, and that others can do the same.
People who have earned real doctorate degrees have every reason to be proud. It's something that takes years of hard work to obtain. Those achievements shouldn't be watered down by giving 'honorary' degrees to people who haven't done the work, just so universities can be the gatekeepers of intelligence.
Yeah, that Mean Old George Lucas (MOGL). There he goes wanting to make MONEY from the Star Wars religion. How crass! And all of those evil, tie wearing corporate types out there who would actually defile the images of our great and blessed Saints (Luke, Obi Wan, Yoda, etc) for nothing better than to sell chicken. HOW DARE THEY TAKE THE NAME OF YODA IN VAIN!!!
Katz, you and anyone who agrees with you are nutz. It's a movie. A figment of imagination created by quickly flashing images in a dark room. It is meant to amuse people for a short while. George Lucas (Mr. Mogl) and all the actors worked hard for a long time to make the flickering images as amusing as possible. They did not do it as an atonement for sins. Believe it or not, the people who make movies actually do it to get rich!!! Get over it. If you are bothered by the fact that you have to pay people to amuse you, don't pay them.
Don't buy your kid a Happy Meal. Don't go to Pizza Hut. Fry you own damn chicken. Pay for a billboard to cry out in the darkness that the truly faithful should avoid this abomination that profanes the holy name of the Force. MOGL doesn't care. He has done the movie for mainstream Americans, and we LIKE the hype. (proof? how the hell could so much money be made off of the hype if we didn't like it).
PS. I use Netscape 2.02 on OS/2. Many of your characters appear mangled. You wouldn't happen to be using a Micros~1 product to edit you HTML would you?
Let's see. One of the major American presidential contenders cluelessly claims to have created the Internet, while the other actually does some research to figure out how it works and uses it to his advantage. One throws up a site with lots of open source buzzwords in a transparent and lame attempt to get free labor out of the geek community without any understanding of that community. The other does enough research to realize which domains competitors and detractors would try to register, and takes action to mitigate the threat as quietly as possible.
While Gore claims to be the high-tech candidate, I think Bush is the man for the geek community. Why? His actions show that instead of jumping on buzzwords and trying to jump in front of the crowd so that he can call himself a leader, Bush is actually willing to do his homework and study the nature of our world before he opens his mouth.
Note please do not construe this post as flaim bait. This forum isn't about who supports welfare, abortion, bombing soveriegn countries, etc. It's about technology and which candidate can best drive it forward. Please, please, please, limit responses to this.
Regardless of the sound quality produced by such as system, have any of you ever tried to hang shi^Heetrock? I can't see a wall lasting through more than a few day of heavy base before the nails start popping through. And how do they account for the various thicknesses of the board. This whole thing is a crock.
OK, they might be able to claim to manager types that NT is better than Linux and keep a straight face, but to claim that it is better than Linux, Novell AND Solaris?!? Damn, ZD got balls!!
NT was the only system not to get a grade below a C, while Linux fell to the bottom in nearly everything. Well, it is obvious that Micro~1 cut a deal to put more adds into ZD rags.
Correct me here if I'm wrong, but I have been under the impression that the DNS system was a distributed database. In other words, NSI may control the TLD, but once I have a name registered I would control on names under that. Why are we not moving this way. For example, the computer industry could register one TLD, "comp.com". Then companies could register as linux.comp.com, microcrap.comp.com, ibm.comp.com, etc. Wouldn't this make more sense AND remove NSI as the arbitrator of all-things-good?
Yes, comp.com is longer than.com, but it removes many of the trademark battles. Apple.comp.com will not infringe upon Apple.fruit.com, because the distinction is immediately obvious. Furthermore, the arbitrator at weirdsex.com would have a different view of the world that the arbitrator of church.com (at least in theory). Each one could do their own thing an not worry about NSI.
In short this tempest in a teapot is caused by people refusing to pull their heads from their posteriors and to take a look around for solutions that will satisfy everyone. Now, other than having to type a longer name, can anyone offer a reasonable objection to creating bodies from selling registrations within second level domains?
I, for one, didn't understand this statement. He doesn't want to spread FUD? About what?
About 95 not being ready? Everyone knows that already. How could the statement, "We might provide a patch", be considered FUD?
All I can figure is that his real concern was that customers might hold off on buying 100,000 copies of 98. There is real concern here since 98 has been repeatedly described as nothing but a lame bug-fix for 95. If the only reason to upgrade is to fix bugs, then you'd better leave in as many as possible.
and i dare say the amount of consumers using the web now - wouldn't be anywhere near what it is right now without microsoft
And I dare say that you are full of . I postulate that if not for the fact that Microsoft as a company has been so adept at crushing competitors before they even have a chance, there would be a greater acceptance of computers than now exist. Can you prove me wrong? No more that I can discount your statement.
The only thing that we know for positive is that we have witnessed the birth of the digital age over the past 30 years or so, and that Microsoft has been part of that process. Would another company have taken the place as reigning desktop OS vendor if Mr. Kildair hadn't been golfing on a particular day circa 1980? Would people have simply ignored personal computing and the inherint productivity improvements the devices provided if Bill Gates hadn't shown up to guide the way?
Are leader bred, trained, or just fall into the position by luck? An old principal I had described luck as the point where opportunity meets preparation. Bill Gates was lucky, and the personal computer industry has advanced while he got rich. However, it does not follow that he caused the advancement.
This place is full of whiney children. "Nobody liked me 'cause I was was different and smarter than them. Boo-hoo-hoo" Well, if you were so much smarter, why were you getting you're butt kicked?!
Society is a wall just like Pink Floyd said. And just like him, you want to break out of it and still be comforted by having it around you. Well, it don't work that way. If you want to be a part of the wall, you have to be willing to be cut to conform and then peacefully take your place in it. If you want to be completely free to move as you please, then the world will lonely place. If you attempt to remain in the wall and not conform, the wall will kick you out.
I was smart in HS, too. I was especially hated in chemistry. The teacher graded on a curve. I made 100 on nearly every test, and it wasn't until after mid-year that the teacher could get other students to consistenly grade above 80 (some of those preps were really suprised to get their first F in their lives). I was also poor. I never had the right clothes, and what I did have was usually tattered. I was also ethnically wrong, being a Native American/Caucasian mix. The Piedmont of North Carolina consist of blacks and whites, and they tend to stick to their own groups. I was just SOL, as far as that was concerned, since I didn't fit into either group.
At my senior awards ceremony, the entire student body gave me a standing ovation. Why?
In my sophmore year, I decided that I was tired of being the school laughing stock. I decided that I was going to be me for me. The rest of the school could chase whatever fad they chose, but I was going to develope MY mind and body to its fullest extent.
I joined the wrestling team (to the geek complaining about not being able to join any team, my school had 1000 student -- you'll have no problem joining the wrestling team, and your intelligence will make up for athleticism). I joined the cross country team (to the geek complaining about not being able to join any team, my school had 1000 student -- you'll have no problem joining the cross country team, and you don't have to be athletic, just determined). Note that neither sport was cool. You had to play football or basketball for that.I did neither for popularity, I did it because I wanted to win.
Some continued to make me a laughing stock, but they could never get a rise out of me. I ignored them. Eventually, the mockers gave up.
I refused to be impressed by fancy clothes. If I drew snickers because my socks weren't the right color, I either ignored it or commented that the snickerer might actually pass a chemistry test some day if they would give it the attention they gave to their underwear.
I refused to hangout in the 'commons' during break time. I was not accepted there, so why present myself for ridicule? Instead, I went to class early and prepared for the class. If one of the 'in' crowd graciously asked me for academic help, I graciously offered it. If one of the 'in' crowd acted as if it were my duty to help them, I told them to RTFM.
I still graduated without having a date (but that had more to do with falling in love with Teresa Barnette who still doesn't know I exist. I had offers, but not from Teresa.), but at least I had respect. I had respect for ME first, and after awhile, other followed.
Those kids in Colorado weren't smart. Need proof? They're DEAD!! The smart animal will adapt to their environment.
Once again, we have technology introduced that solves one problem, and people call it crap because it doesn't solve THEIR problem. I've used VoiceType (the predecessor [sp?]) of ViaVoice on OS/2 for several years now (it came with Warp 4). No, it wasn't any good for coding. But when you got to the documentation it was a god-send. Unfortunately, they computer is not 'intelligent' and will type what it hears. So if you pause to say 'uh' and 'hmm', it types 'uh' and 'hmm'. It's also neat to see what rustling papers say. However, if you scribble up a rough outline so that you can dictate in a semi-fluid manner, it makes for an excellent first draft system. You'll still have to go back and proofread, but not any more than you would with manual typing and the dictation is WAY faster. (note: try typing several paragraphs w/o hitting the backspace key.)
I have two boy, 7 and 5, who are constantly complemented on their good behavior and politeness. (though the younger continues to interrupt adult conversations...gotta work on that).
They both play Doom (combat mode). They have a Laser Tag set and all types of other toy guns. I've started teaching the older how to a small.22 caliber rifle.
I spank my children on occasion.
According to the media my children should be salivating lunatics. Why are they not?
I have taught them that Doom is a GAME and that hurting each other in meatspace is a punishable offense. I am teaching my son how to shoot, not the drive-by wrapper boys. I take my boys to ball practice, get on to them when they don't respect the coach or other team members in any way. The common thread is that I am their to lead them to being good people. Maybe I'll fail at some point in the future, but by the grace of God I will be there to guide my children, and if they ever do something horrible they'll at least know beforehand that it is wrong.
The article said that only sites run by the government and sites that do business with the government will be affected. Slashdot will remain free to abuse all the standards it chooses 8*) If I choose to be a lamer and post gifs without the alt tags I will be free to do so.
The government is only saying that if you want to do business with us through a web site you have to make your site accessible to all of our citizens. While not a 'basic right' as the clueless advocate in the article would like to believe, moving to make government information accessible to the largest number of citizens is a good thing.
But I reiterare for the 'loosers' who still haven't got the point. This is not a W3 standard. This is a requirement to do business with the government. If you don't like the requirement, don't do business with them.
The article gave a good history of Linux growth and it then gave the suits some good advice on how to play nice. But why would the suit care? If Compaq can take a Linux distribution, modify it with a proprietary desktop and some closed device drivers they could possibly make a system that would run all the available apps but yet be different enough to make it a Compag and not a Wintel machine. HP tried to do this with Winblows (my brother-in-law has a Pavilion). They added a desktop on top of Windoze that make the "computing experience" something that could only be had from HP. Of course, you have to pay a lot more for this experience. A "Compaq Linux" would also demand a premium.
So, the suits will try to differentiate the Linux that goes into their boxes. How do we convince them to stick with the community and not fork off into writing lock-in code? What happens when Compag writes a closed-source kernel module for a processor based modem (commonly called winmodems, but this term tends to give Micros~1 to much credit)? What will be the long term ramifications for Compaq? Will people turn away from such lock-in, in fear that the MicroDOS thing will happen all over again?
Maddog seems to understand the suits, but he isn't speaking their language completely. The suits don't care for anything but the bottom line. They wouldn't care if only 5 people used Linux, if they could be convinced that a sizable profit could be made. We must convince the suits that the Linux community is a shared commons problem. One company can overuse the commons to their own gain for a short period of time, but eventually it will hurt when everyone else follows suit and the commons is destroyed.
An illegal tactic to kill competition by giving a product away for free until the competition goes out of business, and then charging enough for the product to make up for lost time. So if a product like a browser is so expensive to make that it can't be given away for free, why the hell is MS doing it?
A high profile Linux provider (such as VA Research) should start a Server OS Shootout.
Set up 3 weight classes: single, dual, quad. Publish the specs of the system.
Invite contestants from various consultancies or OS vendors. They arrive at 8 in the morning with their CD in hand. They are presented with a machine in the weight class they are competing in. They can do anything to the system they damn well please other than adding hardware (they may remove parts, but if one of the performance test depends on it, well...). At 10:00 the performance test begin. They last system standing wins.
The hardware company will get tons of PR. The consultants will surely get loads of work if they present a good standing. MS can show up to make sure NT looks good (ROTFL). But most of all everybody will be assured that the best OS won.
Why have a rotary voice coil. One of the limiting factors in the drive is positioning the coil accurately. Just put an array of heads across the disk on a static arm -- one head for each track. You get an average seek time of only 1/2 rotation and no alignment issues. A lot of complex circuitry is eliminated, further shrinking the drive. Futhermore, you could get 1024 tracks read in parallel -- transfer rates would skyrocket.
I'm sorry I have to stop now, I'm drooling on my keyboard.
The message the writers are sending is a good warning not only to Micros~1, but to any other closed source vendor. It should help to battle some of the coming FUD. I see the same problem infecting Sun, Apple and Al Gore. They believe that if they call their code open and post the source that 1000s of talented developers will magically show up to work on the code and then hand it back to them -- no strings attached. The corps (and Al) have taken the quote and changed it to, "Don't think of it as free software, but free labor." (of course, the worst part is they forgot the beer 8*)
To herd people (or cats) you've got to give them a reason to go in a particular direction. For this community, that reason is ALWAYS to scratch an itch. What itches us in MS code? The fact that it doesn't integrate with other OSs as well as we'd like. If MS opens the source what will be the first thing 'fixed'? All the sh** that makes it break OS/2, Samba, etc., or 'decommoditizes' protocols.
So the letter writers are correct. MS shouldn't expect to open their code under a ridiculous 'give-it-all-back-to-me' license and have us finish their dirty work for them. But this is exactly what MS will do, and then they'll FUD to high-heaven when their tactics don't improve their code (see, we released the code as open source and in a year only got two contributions and they were both ridiculous. All they did was move our data structures back under the 512M memory limit so that OS/2's Win32 implementation isn't broken anymore. This whole open-source thing is a crock, and if you use it for your business you'll never get updates.)
Ya'll are gonna have to help me out here, 'cause I don't understand several of the arguments against the UDI?
First, if the UDI is an interface specification, and the Linux kernal is modified to accept drivers written to that interface, why would the kernel EVER need to be modified in order to work with a binary driver? Isn't it the point of the UDI to remove the need to modify the kernel for driver compatibility?
Second, if Matrox as a company woke up one morning and decided to open their video drivers under the GPL, what effect would that have on OS/2 or Windblows? Would IBM or Micros~1 feel compelled to open their source?
Put these two together, and I don't see how making the Linux kernel compliant with the UDI (and thereby encouraging binary only drivers) could possibly be bad for Linux. VendorA will think it in their best interest to keep their buggy drivers closed, while VendorB will open theirs up to peer review. Guess who'll end up with the better driver support/more stable product. As VendorB gets more and more support, people ignore VendorA, until eventually VendorA catches a clue.
However, in the interim, I can't see how VendorA hiding his source can hurt the GPL as long as the interface to the kernel is through PUBLISHED interfaces. If you say the drivers have to be open, then there isn't any program that would be able to run under Linux without being GPLed (unless of course, the program didn't use the keyboard, screen, disk drive, or memory which are all managed by the kernel 8*).
I find this argument nearly as ridiculous as those silly executives stating publicly that Linux needs standards because it is going mainstream and and that the Linux community is just going to have to get used to it. I can peacefully tell them all to go screw themselves. This community doesn't have to accept anything from the corporate elite. If you like our work use it, if you don't, that's fine, too. But Linux got where it is because some hackers wanted to play. Those hackers will continue to play wherever they like. We'll release a new version every day or once a year, corporate IT be damned.
If some corporate types want to publish an interface spec, GREAT!! If it's good we'll use it, if it's not we'll ignore it. If we modify the kernel to take advantage of some binary drivers that will open up another choice. If the binary drivers are good they'll get used, if not they'll be ignored.
So, since we are the ones in control (because we don't NEED anything from IBM, SUN, SCO, etc), how can compliance with a published spec be detrimental to the GPL, the Linux community, or Open Source?
If your not quick your likely to be crushed by the upcoming avalanche of new apps, drivers, investments, useless add-ons, etc...
Look at it this way, business people tend to be risk averse. Like cows. They'd rather stick with the slightly brown grass rather than risk their necks climbing the fence to get to the untouched pasture on the other side. But once someone shows them a break in the fence -- once they see the herd headed that way in droves -- nothing can stop them even if it means busting the fence into splinters. These people pay companies like IDC large sums of money to show them where the breaks in the fence and green grass are.
IDC just told the world that there is a large gate (name Linux) and that there are hundreds of acres of untouched grass on the other side of it. Microsoft has been pissing on the PC OS field for so many years that most of the grass is dead and they've horded what's left for themselves. Other vendors are starved to the point of near-death. Futhermore, they know that if they find a morsel of grass they'd better keep quiet about it or Microsoft will come either take it or piss on it.
Now here is Linux, a beautiful pasture full of tall, green, delicious grass. Microsoft can't control this pasture because Microsoft starts to shrivel whenever it leaves it's own fence, and it's too large for Microsoft to ever piss on even half of it. The choice for the bovine business community is clear.
People, get OUT OF THE WAY, or these half-starved MicroRefugees will trample you in the effort to stake out their claim in the new territory first. The circle is broken (i.e., Vendors don't develope drivers/apps for the platform, because there are no users. Users don't migrate to the platform because there are no drivers/apps.) IDC has said that LINUX is where the growth is, and that is where the money will be invested. Good-bye MicroShit.
Trust me on this -- no student wants to be caught with their pants down. Run a script that searches the network for security holes. If it finds one, send the offender the following message:
"There is a security hole in your computer. If it is not fixed within 3 days all of your files will be transferred to a public server and made accessible to the entire student body. Futhermore, (add more scary stuff here). Access http://documentation.site to learn how to block this action."
Then have faculty spread scary rumors about how - some guys got put in jail when it was discovered they were dealing drugs using their computers to track their business
-some guys got mugged when their gay love letters were made public
-any other extremely explosive/controversial subject tied to using computers
The object here is to make security the 'fad'. The buzz will increase knowledge. Most people with knowledge (especially those in college) like to flout it. Eventually, "You're running POP3 and you don't even serve mail!?!" will be as derogatory as "You took a dump and didn't wipe? And then TOLD you're girlfriend!?!"
Slashdot Mirror
Please note that Linus hasn't earned a degree. He may be the most brilliant man to ever touch a computer, but there is a lot more to earning a degree than demonstrating that your brilliant. What about a thesis?
I've always seen honorary degrees as nothing more than a way for the academic elite to maintain their stranglehold on 'intelligence'(i.e., the attitude that your not truly intelligent until you have a degree). What happens when great things are created by people without the academic stamp of approval? Some school rushes in to give them the stamp so that they can now be 'officially' intelligent.
Linus, refuse their degree. Tell the world that you were smart enough to guide the development of one of the world's greatest software systems without a degree, and that others can do the same.
People who have earned real doctorate degrees have every reason to be proud. It's something that takes years of hard work to obtain. Those achievements shouldn't be watered down by giving 'honorary' degrees to people who haven't done the work, just so universities can be the gatekeepers of intelligence.
Yeah, that Mean Old George Lucas (MOGL). There he goes wanting to make MONEY from the Star Wars religion. How crass! And all of those evil, tie wearing corporate types out there who would actually defile the images of our great and blessed Saints (Luke, Obi Wan, Yoda, etc) for nothing better than to sell chicken. HOW DARE THEY TAKE THE NAME OF YODA IN VAIN!!!
Katz, you and anyone who agrees with you are nutz. It's a movie. A figment of imagination created by quickly flashing images in a dark room. It is meant to amuse people for a short while. George Lucas (Mr. Mogl) and all the actors worked hard for a long time to make the flickering images as amusing as possible. They did not do it as an atonement for sins. Believe it or not, the people who make movies actually do it to get rich!!! Get over it. If you are bothered by the fact that you have to pay people to amuse you, don't pay them.
Don't buy your kid a Happy Meal. Don't go to Pizza Hut. Fry you own damn chicken. Pay for a billboard to cry out in the darkness that the truly faithful should avoid this abomination that profanes the holy name of the Force. MOGL doesn't care. He has done the movie for mainstream Americans, and we LIKE the hype. (proof? how the hell could so much money be made off of the hype if we didn't like it).
PS. I use Netscape 2.02 on OS/2. Many of your characters appear mangled. You wouldn't happen to be using a Micros~1 product to edit you HTML would you?
Let's see. One of the major American presidential contenders cluelessly claims to have created the Internet, while the other actually does some research to figure out how it works and uses it to his advantage. One throws up a site with lots of open source buzzwords in a transparent and lame attempt to get free labor out of the geek community without any understanding of that community. The other does enough research to realize which domains competitors and detractors would try to register, and takes action to mitigate the threat as quietly as possible.
While Gore claims to be the high-tech candidate, I think Bush is the man for the geek community. Why? His actions show that instead of jumping on buzzwords and trying to jump in front of the crowd so that he can call himself a leader, Bush is actually willing to do his homework and study the nature of our world before he opens his mouth.
Note please do not construe this post as flaim bait. This forum isn't about who supports welfare, abortion, bombing soveriegn countries, etc. It's about technology and which candidate can best drive it forward. Please, please, please, limit responses to this.
Regardless of the sound quality produced by such as system, have any of you ever tried to hang shi^Heetrock? I can't see a wall lasting through more than a few day of heavy base before the nails start popping through. And how do they account for the various thicknesses of the board. This whole thing is a crock.
OK, they might be able to claim to manager types that NT is better than Linux and keep a straight face, but to claim that it is better than Linux, Novell AND Solaris?!? Damn, ZD got balls!!
NT was the only system not to get a grade below a C, while Linux fell to the bottom in nearly everything. Well, it is obvious that Micro~1 cut a deal to put more adds into ZD rags.
'Nuff said. Move on.
Correct me here if I'm wrong, but I have been under the impression that the DNS system was a distributed database. In other words, NSI may control the TLD, but once I have a name registered I would control on names under that. Why are we not moving this way. For example, the computer industry could register one TLD, "comp.com". Then companies could register as linux.comp.com, microcrap.comp.com, ibm.comp.com, etc. Wouldn't this make more sense AND remove NSI as the arbitrator of all-things-good?
.com, but it removes many of the trademark battles. Apple.comp.com will not infringe upon Apple.fruit.com, because the distinction is immediately obvious. Furthermore, the arbitrator at weirdsex.com would have a different view of the world that the arbitrator of church.com (at least in theory). Each one could do their own thing an not worry about NSI.
Yes, comp.com is longer than
In short this tempest in a teapot is caused by people refusing to pull their heads from their posteriors and to take a look around for solutions that will satisfy everyone. Now, other than having to type a longer name, can anyone offer a reasonable objection to creating bodies from selling registrations within second level domains?
I, for one, didn't understand this statement. He doesn't want to spread FUD? About what?
About 95 not being ready? Everyone knows that already. How could the statement, "We might provide a patch", be considered FUD?
All I can figure is that his real concern was that customers might hold off on buying 100,000 copies of 98. There is real concern here since 98 has been repeatedly described as nothing but a lame bug-fix for 95. If the only reason to upgrade is to fix bugs, then you'd better leave in as many as possible.
and i dare say the amount of consumers using the web now - wouldn't be anywhere near what it is right now without microsoft
And I dare say that you are full of . I postulate that if not for the fact that Microsoft as a company has been so adept at crushing competitors before they even have a chance, there would be a greater acceptance of computers than now exist. Can you prove me wrong? No more that I can discount your statement.
The only thing that we know for positive is that we have witnessed the birth of the digital age over the past 30 years or so, and that Microsoft has been part of that process. Would another company have taken the place as reigning desktop OS vendor if Mr. Kildair hadn't been golfing on a particular day circa 1980? Would people have simply ignored personal computing and the inherint productivity improvements the devices provided if Bill Gates hadn't shown up to guide the way?
Are leader bred, trained, or just fall into the position by luck? An old principal I had described luck as the point where opportunity meets preparation. Bill Gates was lucky, and the personal computer industry has advanced while he got rich. However, it does not follow that he caused the advancement.
This place is full of whiney children. "Nobody liked me 'cause I was was different and smarter than them. Boo-hoo-hoo" Well, if you were so much smarter, why were you getting you're butt kicked?!
Society is a wall just like Pink Floyd said. And just like him, you want to break out of it and still be comforted by having it around you. Well, it don't work that way. If you want to be a part of the wall, you have to be willing to be cut to conform and then peacefully take your place in it. If you want to be completely free to move as you please, then the world will lonely place. If you attempt to remain in the wall and not conform, the wall will kick you out.
I was smart in HS, too. I was especially hated in chemistry. The teacher graded on a curve. I made 100 on nearly every test, and it wasn't until after mid-year that the teacher could get other students to consistenly grade above 80 (some of those preps were really suprised to get their first F in their lives). I was also poor. I never had the right clothes, and what I did have was usually tattered. I was also ethnically wrong, being a Native American/Caucasian mix. The Piedmont of North Carolina consist of blacks and whites, and they tend to stick to their own groups. I was just SOL, as far as that was concerned, since I didn't fit into either group.
At my senior awards ceremony, the entire student body gave me a standing ovation. Why?
In my sophmore year, I decided that I was tired of being the school laughing stock. I decided that I was going to be me for me. The rest of the school could chase whatever fad they chose, but I was going to develope MY mind and body to its fullest extent.
I joined the wrestling team (to the geek complaining about not being able to join any team, my school had 1000 student -- you'll have no problem joining the wrestling team, and your intelligence will make up for athleticism). I joined the cross country team (to the geek complaining about not being able to join any team, my school had 1000 student -- you'll have no problem joining the cross country team, and you don't have to be athletic, just determined). Note that neither sport was cool. You had to play football or basketball for that.I did neither for popularity, I did it because I wanted to win.
Some continued to make me a laughing stock, but they could never get a rise out of me. I ignored them. Eventually, the mockers gave up.
I refused to be impressed by fancy clothes. If I drew snickers because my socks weren't the right color, I either ignored it or commented that the snickerer might actually pass a chemistry test some day if they would give it the attention they gave to their underwear.
I refused to hangout in the 'commons' during break time. I was not accepted there, so why present myself for ridicule? Instead, I went to class early and prepared for the class. If one of the 'in' crowd graciously asked me for academic help, I graciously offered it. If one of the 'in' crowd acted as if it were my duty to help them, I told them to RTFM.
I still graduated without having a date (but that had more to do with falling in love with Teresa Barnette who still doesn't know I exist. I had offers, but not from Teresa.), but at least I had respect. I had respect for ME first, and after awhile, other followed.
Those kids in Colorado weren't smart. Need proof? They're DEAD!! The smart animal will adapt to their environment.
Once again, we have technology introduced that solves one problem, and people call it crap because it doesn't solve THEIR problem. I've used VoiceType (the predecessor [sp?]) of ViaVoice on OS/2 for several years now (it came with Warp 4). No, it wasn't any good for coding. But when you got to the documentation it was a god-send. Unfortunately, they computer is not 'intelligent' and will type what it hears. So if you pause to say 'uh' and 'hmm', it types 'uh' and 'hmm'. It's also neat to see what rustling papers say. However, if you scribble up a rough outline so that you can dictate in a semi-fluid manner, it makes for an excellent first draft system. You'll still have to go back and proofread, but not any more than you would with manual typing and the dictation is WAY faster. (note: try typing several paragraphs w/o hitting the backspace key.)
I have two boy, 7 and 5, who are constantly complemented on their good behavior and politeness. (though the younger continues to interrupt adult conversations...gotta work on that).
.22 caliber rifle.
They both play Doom (combat mode). They have a Laser Tag set and all types of other toy guns. I've started teaching the older how to a small
I spank my children on occasion.
According to the media my children should be salivating lunatics. Why are they not?
I have taught them that Doom is a GAME and that hurting each other in meatspace is a punishable offense. I am teaching my son how to shoot, not the drive-by wrapper boys. I take my boys to ball practice, get on to them when they don't respect the coach or other team members in any way. The common thread is that I am their to lead them to being good people. Maybe I'll fail at some point in the future, but by the grace of God I will be there to guide my children, and if they ever do something horrible they'll at least know beforehand that it is wrong.
The article said that only sites run by the government and sites that do business with the government will be affected. Slashdot will remain free to abuse all the standards it chooses 8*) If I choose to be a lamer and post gifs without the alt tags I will be free to do so.
The government is only saying that if you want to do business with us through a web site you have to make your site accessible to all of our citizens. While not a 'basic right' as the clueless advocate in the article would like to believe, moving to make government information accessible to the largest number of citizens is a good thing.
But I reiterare for the 'loosers' who still haven't got the point. This is not a W3 standard. This is a requirement to do business with the government. If you don't like the requirement, don't do business with them.
The article gave a good history of Linux growth and it then gave the suits some good advice on how to play nice. But why would the suit care? If Compaq can take a Linux distribution, modify it with a proprietary desktop and some closed device drivers they could possibly make a system that would run all the available apps but yet be different enough to make it a Compag and not a Wintel machine. HP tried to do this with Winblows (my brother-in-law has a Pavilion). They added a desktop on top of Windoze that make the "computing experience" something that could only be had from HP. Of course, you have to pay a lot more for this experience. A "Compaq Linux" would also demand a premium.
So, the suits will try to differentiate the Linux that goes into their boxes. How do we convince them to stick with the community and not fork off into writing lock-in code? What happens when Compag writes a closed-source kernel module for a processor based modem (commonly called winmodems, but this term tends to give Micros~1 to much credit)? What will be the long term ramifications for Compaq? Will people turn away from such lock-in, in fear that the MicroDOS thing will happen all over again?
Maddog seems to understand the suits, but he isn't speaking their language completely. The suits don't care for anything but the bottom line. They wouldn't care if only 5 people used Linux, if they could be convinced that a sizable profit could be made. We must convince the suits that the Linux community is a shared commons problem. One company can overuse the commons to their own gain for a short period of time, but eventually it will hurt when everyone else follows suit and the commons is destroyed.
An illegal tactic to kill competition by giving a product away for free until the competition goes out of business, and then charging enough for the product to make up for lost time. So if a product like a browser is so expensive to make that it can't be given away for free, why the hell is MS doing it?
HELLO..., Mr. DOJ person? Did you get all this?
A high profile Linux provider (such as VA Research) should start a Server OS Shootout.
...). At 10:00 the performance test begin. They last system standing wins.
Set up 3 weight classes: single, dual, quad. Publish the specs of the system.
Invite contestants from various consultancies or OS vendors. They arrive at 8 in the morning with their CD in hand. They are presented with a machine in the weight class they are competing in. They can do anything to the system they damn well please other than adding hardware (they may remove parts, but if one of the performance test depends on it, well
The hardware company will get tons of PR. The consultants will surely get loads of work if they present a good standing. MS can show up to make sure NT looks good (ROTFL). But most of all everybody will be assured that the best OS won.
Why have a rotary voice coil. One of the limiting factors in the drive is positioning the coil accurately. Just put an array of heads across the disk on a static arm -- one head for each track. You get an average seek time of only 1/2 rotation and no alignment issues. A lot of complex circuitry is eliminated, further shrinking the drive. Futhermore, you could get 1024 tracks read in parallel -- transfer rates would skyrocket.
I'm sorry I have to stop now, I'm drooling on my keyboard.
The message the writers are sending is a good warning not only to Micros~1, but to any other closed source vendor. It should help to battle some of the coming FUD. I see the same problem infecting Sun, Apple and Al Gore. They believe that if they call their code open and post the source that 1000s of talented developers will magically show up to work on the code and then hand it back to them -- no strings attached. The corps (and Al) have taken the quote and changed it to, "Don't think of it as free software, but free labor." (of course, the worst part is they forgot the beer 8*)
To herd people (or cats) you've got to give them a reason to go in a particular direction. For this community, that reason is ALWAYS to scratch an itch. What itches us in MS code? The fact that it doesn't integrate with other OSs as well as we'd like. If MS opens the source what will be the first thing 'fixed'? All the sh** that makes it break OS/2, Samba, etc., or 'decommoditizes' protocols.
So the letter writers are correct. MS shouldn't expect to open their code under a ridiculous 'give-it-all-back-to-me' license and have us finish their dirty work for them. But this is exactly what MS will do, and then they'll FUD to high-heaven when their tactics don't improve their code (see, we released the code as open source and in a year only got two contributions and they were both ridiculous. All they did was move our data structures back under the 512M memory limit so that OS/2's Win32 implementation isn't broken anymore. This whole open-source thing is a crock, and if you use it for your business you'll never get updates.)
Watch for the coming FUD!!
Ya'll are gonna have to help me out here, 'cause I don't understand several of the arguments against the UDI?
First, if the UDI is an interface specification, and the Linux kernal is modified to accept drivers written to that interface, why would the kernel EVER need to be modified in order to work with a binary driver? Isn't it the point of the UDI to remove the need to modify the kernel for driver compatibility?
Second, if Matrox as a company woke up one morning and decided to open their video drivers under the GPL, what effect would that have on OS/2 or Windblows? Would IBM or Micros~1 feel compelled to open their source?
Put these two together, and I don't see how making the Linux kernel compliant with the UDI (and thereby encouraging binary only drivers) could possibly be bad for Linux. VendorA will think it in their best interest to keep their buggy drivers closed, while VendorB will open theirs up to peer review. Guess who'll end up with the better driver support/more stable product. As VendorB gets more and more support, people ignore VendorA, until eventually VendorA catches a clue.
However, in the interim, I can't see how VendorA hiding his source can hurt the GPL as long as the interface to the kernel is through PUBLISHED interfaces. If you say the drivers have to be open, then there isn't any program that would be able to run under Linux without being GPLed (unless of course, the program didn't use the keyboard, screen, disk drive, or memory which are all managed by the kernel 8*).
I find this argument nearly as ridiculous as those silly executives stating publicly that Linux needs standards because it is going mainstream and and that the Linux community is just going to have to get used to it. I can peacefully tell them all to go screw themselves. This community doesn't have to accept anything from the corporate elite. If you like our work use it, if you don't, that's fine, too. But Linux got where it is because some hackers wanted to play. Those hackers will continue to play wherever they like. We'll release a new version every day or once a year, corporate IT be damned.
If some corporate types want to publish an interface spec, GREAT!! If it's good we'll use it, if it's not we'll ignore it. If we modify the kernel to take advantage of some binary drivers that will open up another choice. If the binary drivers are good they'll get used, if not they'll be ignored.
So, since we are the ones in control (because we don't NEED anything from IBM, SUN, SCO, etc), how can compliance with a published spec be detrimental to the GPL, the Linux community, or Open Source?
If your not quick your likely to be crushed by the upcoming avalanche of new apps, drivers, investments, useless add-ons, etc...
Look at it this way, business people tend to be risk averse. Like cows. They'd rather stick with the slightly brown grass rather than risk their necks climbing the fence to get to the untouched pasture on the other side. But once someone shows them a break in the fence -- once they see the herd headed that way in droves -- nothing can stop them even if it means busting the fence into splinters. These people pay companies like IDC large sums of money to show them where the breaks in the fence and green grass are.
IDC just told the world that there is a large gate (name Linux) and that there are hundreds of acres of untouched grass on the other side of it. Microsoft has been pissing on the PC OS field for so many years that most of the grass is dead and they've horded what's left for themselves. Other vendors are starved to the point of near-death. Futhermore, they know that if they find a morsel of grass they'd better keep quiet about it or Microsoft will come either take it or piss on it.
Now here is Linux, a beautiful pasture full of tall, green, delicious grass. Microsoft can't control this pasture because Microsoft starts to shrivel whenever it leaves it's own fence, and it's too large for Microsoft to ever piss on even half of it. The choice for the bovine business community is clear.
People, get OUT OF THE WAY, or these half-starved MicroRefugees will trample you in the effort to stake out their claim in the new territory first. The circle is broken (i.e., Vendors don't develope drivers/apps for the platform, because there are no users. Users don't migrate to the platform because there are no drivers/apps.) IDC has said that LINUX is where the growth is, and that is where the money will be invested. Good-bye MicroShit.
Trust me on this -- no student wants to be caught with their pants down. Run a script that searches the network for security holes. If it finds one, send the offender the following message:
"There is a security hole in your computer. If it is not fixed within 3 days all of your files will be transferred to a public server and made accessible to the entire student body. Futhermore, (add more scary stuff here). Access http://documentation.site to learn how to block this action."
Then have faculty spread scary rumors about how
- some guys got put in jail when it was discovered they were dealing drugs using their computers to track their business
-some guys got mugged when their gay love letters were made public
-any other extremely explosive/controversial subject tied to using computers
The object here is to make security the 'fad'. The buzz will increase knowledge. Most people with knowledge (especially those in college) like to flout it. Eventually, "You're running POP3 and you don't even serve mail!?!" will be as derogatory as "You took a dump and didn't wipe? And then TOLD you're girlfriend!?!"