666 was a code for the initials of the emperor Dioclecian(sp?). If A=1, B=2, C=3.... then in the alphabet they were using 666 would equal his initials. In greek translations the number was 686 due to changes in the positions of the relevant letters. Needless to say this has nothing to do Satan, Lucifer, Mephisocles, etc....
The thing to realize about Revelation is that it was meant for the time in which it was written, not our time. Lamebrains and con men have been screaming "the sky is falling, the end times are nigh!!" and using revelation as the basis for almost 2000 years.
That being said I do think the idea of a tracking device that isn't something you can remove is a VERY bad idea. People have forgotten the concept of personal sovereignty and have fallen into the mindset that whatever rights or freedoms they posess are indulgences on the part of the government. If you believe that way then it becomes true. If however, you realize that no one has the right to hold power over you that you do not agree to, then the nature of things like this becomes very clear.
You are right that the hardware isn't much more proprietary than what Dell, IBM, or Compaq are offering, but then I wouldn't buy any of those either. I've been building my own systems since Reagan was president and until I can mix and match my own mac system I'm not interested no matter what kind of OS macs are running.
The core of OSX is Mach, with a BSD userland. While it will run the stuff that is portable enough to compile on Linux and the *BSD's, I haven't seen anything that would suggest it will run things better.
In the end you've got proprietary hardware that is, lets face it, underpowered, with an OS that can only be said to be compatible with other breeds of Unix. That is not a compelling argument to me.
If Apple were to port OS-X to other platforms, such as x86, Alpha, Sparc, etc.. and it offered something in terms of either performance or usability that I can't get from Linux or *BSD, then I might be interested. But as long as the OS is tied to proprietary hardware with a lousy bang for your buck coefficient then its never going to be something I pay money to use.
The true strength of Linux and open source in general is that it puts you in the driver's seat. You decide what the system is going to be. That is on the software side of things. On the hardware side of things you have the ability to build your own system from parts you personally choose. With Macs you have traditionally had neither. Whether OSX gives you much power to choose I can't say, but I do know that you lose that power when it comes to the hardware. Thanks, but no thanks...
So grandma can't install Linux, well she can't install windows either.
Show me a group of people who can sucessfully install windows and all of the necessary drivers, and I'll show you a group of people who can also install Linux. Technical ignorance plagues the Windows world just as much as it does the Linux world, just ask anyone who does tech support. If systems didn't come with windows pre-installed the barrier to entry for it would be just as high as for Linux.
I'd rather have standard hardware based on interchangable parts and only be saddled with a proprietary OS than be stuck with proprietary hardware and a proprietary OS.
Apple is dead, they're just not broke yet. The only people they have left to blow their trumpet are the religious freaks. I don't know of any knowledgable person who likes the mac, let alone would want to use one, Unix-like kernel or not.
I'd use gnome if one simple thing would get fixed. When you click on the titlebar of a window I think it should maximize. This shading business is silly. Shading windows in a GUI that lacks a minimize button/feature is a necessity, but in a proper GUI it doesn't really need to be there, let alone be the ONLY option available. At the very least users should be able to configure this behavior. I keep waiting and hoping that this will be corrected but so far nothing has happened. Until it does I'm sticking with KDE or IceWM sans gnome.
Many of the symptoms that this article described, particularly "stimming" fit me to a T. While I don't do it as much as I did as a kid, I sometime wriggle my hands back and forth very quickly. I'm not sure why I do this really and until I read this article I didn't even think it signified anything. In terms of social skills I used to be a total social misfit. That began to change in high school, but only because I REALLY worked at it long and hard. Today I've got good social skills, but they didn't come easily. I get along well with both "geeks" and with "normal people," although being around geeks is kind of unnerving because I see in them many of the same behaviors I once exhibited, and looking in that kind of mirror is never pleasant. I used to think that those who had bad social skills and so forth were just not trying hard enough. I mean if I could go from being the prime social outcast in the mini-community that is junior and senior high school, to being one of the outlying members of the "in crowd," then why couldn't the other geeks at least have average social skills? I used to think that they gave up on having good relationships with others and instead chose to curl up in a shell away from all the pain. Now I think that maybe it isn't a matter of giving up or not trying hard enough. Maybe it is a matter of being born a certain way and as a result having a much bigger cross to bear socially than others.
There is an oft-used euphemism and linguistic evasion for those who are disabled. Instead of calling a spade a spade they are referred to as "differently abled." In the case of someone with asperger's I think this is an accurate description. I'm VERY good with computers, and things like science and math (except arithmetic) have always seemed more like things I already knew and were reminded of while studying them than anything I actually learned outright. Coinciding with this is a lack of fine motor skills whereby I had a very hard time learning to write and today avoid pencil and paper like the plague, and the early lack of social skills I've already mentioned. I will also sometimes rock back and forth although in my case I'll do it maybe two or three times a month, so I don't know if that means anything.
Things like Asperger's syndrome, ADD, dyslexia, etc. illuminate the ways in which people are different, and the gifts and curses those differences can bestow.
I never got the idea that the article was trying to say that being an engineer/hacker/geek somehow made you autistic, let alone that this change would become genetic and be passed down to your kids. Rather what the article was trying to say is that both autism/asperger's and being a geek share a common, or related, cause.
...he is going to be turning state's witness on his employer. I don't see how this is a victory for anyone but the state. Last time I checked the quality of living in a US prison was roughly on par with a middle class existence in the former Soviet Union. Three squares and a cot is a lot more than many russians can claim to have. I think if were him I'd give "the man" the finger and go back to my cell. Besides, what possible impact would a convicion in this country have were he to actually go back home? Would anyone there pay it any heed?
Personally I would pay ten dollars a month just to see to it that Britney Spears, and her clones all disappeared along with the "boy bands" and any other "musicians" that are put together by producers into a money making machine rather than coming together to make music for its own sake.
That is the kind of garbage that dominates top 40. I for one want nothing to do with it.
2) ATI all in wonder radeon that provides not only a TV tuner but svideo/composite A/V inputs and outputs and the ability to do audio/video capture at 720x384 at 30 fps on any of the inputs
3) Sound blaster Live platinum 5.1 for surround sound playback of DVD's etc.
4) four 100 gig hard drives on an IDE raid controller. Total capacity of 400 gigs
5) DVD-R burner, preferably SCSI
6) CD burner, preferably SCSI
7) It will be connected to the internet via a switched 100base-T network connected to a NAT gateway that is itself connected through DSL.
This is the system I'm building right now. Its purpose is much the same as the Bokks device. With it I will be able to play DVD's, vobs, mp3, avi's, mpegs, vcd, divx, etc all on my TV thanks to the all in wonder. Additionally I'll be able to do tivo style recording thanks to that all in wonder. I can rip all my DVD's, encode them to divx, and store them on the raid array or burn them to CD. Or I can just rip them and burn them back to DVD in regionless format with no macrovision. I've got friends overseas that might appreciate that.
By the time this Bokks device becomes available I'll have this system up and running. I haven't decided whether to use Linux or Windows2000 yet. Which one I use will greatly depend upon device support for the all in wonder and SB Live. We've got an HK A/V reciever with dolby surround sound support. If the SB Live drivers for linux support all the features, and the support for the All in wonder is there, then I'd rather use Linux. But if this is not the case I'll use windows instead.
Unfortunately this system is going to cost me a fair bit more than $400. I've already got the MB, CPU, and memory. All I'll need is a good case/PS, the hard drives, the video card, the sound card, and of course the SCSI adapter and burners. Total cost will be upwards of $2000 dollars US.
What group do you think is a greater threat, wackos with guns, bombs, anthrax and kamakaze pilots, or an federally funded and empowered organization intent upon undermining the freedoms and rights that are each American's by birthright?
I don't know about you, but I fear the latter far more than the former. Two skyscrapers, a government office building, a handful of airplanes and a few thousand lives are insignifcant in comparison to the legacy of freedom that has been passed down to us. We can either be the keepers and protectors of that legacy, or we can be neglectful and discover that it is no longer there one day and that our once noble nation has become a police state, which will you choose?
The FBI needs to be reeled in hard and fast and taught a history lesson on exactly who is in charge in this country. We the people run this show and if the FBI is going to be a menace to the people then the FBI can easily be demolished. Never should the people live in fear of those who are supposed to be their servants and protectors. The day that happens is when the FBI becomes the world's foremost terrorist organization.
The first company to do a lawywer-proof "clean room" re-implementation of IBM's BIOS was Compaq. Other cloners were less scrupulous, many copying the IBM roms outright, sometimes leaving in the copyright tags. Phoenix technologies, makers of the well known Phoenix BIOS, was another early player in the BIOS arena.
I mention this as historical background to the main point of this post, which is that neither Microsoft nor Bill Gates ever created or sold a clone or IBMs BIOS for the PC. In fact they would have little reason to do so seeing as how they helped create the original BIOS itself. Remember the version of basic that would pop up when you didn't have a boot disk on the original IBM systems? Guess who wrote that? Yep, thats right Microsoft. Microsoft also had input into the design and feature set of the EGA graphics card. I can't say for certain what else they influenced or helped design on the hardware side of things, but I can tell you that they never created a CLONE of the PC's BIOS, at least not any that ever made it out to the public, what they did in house for a lark I can't say.
I almost expect ignorant journalists to make statements like "Microsoft created the first open BIOS for the PC." But if Gates himself is saying that then someone needs to give him history lesson.
The main influence I've always thought children need to be protected from are people in positions of authority, especially those with an agenda and an utter disregard for the rights of others.
EVERYONE knows the NTFS is the best filesystem ever created. All these other filesystems toys compared to NTFS. Microsoft makes it after all, and everyone knows that Microsoft makes the best stuff. If they didn't they wouldn't be such a big rich company and able to buy off the govnerment now would they? I'm going to stop using Linux before I get in trouble. I know what's good for me, I don't want to have to explain to the computer police why I was running a subversive terrorist operating system. I'm not one of those evil hackers that try to take money away from Darth Gates, dark lord of the Sith.
Consent decrees are no replacement for ethics. The core problem is that Microsoft as a company is un-ethical. Making them sign a piece of paper that says they are going to play nice isn't going to change a thing. They have no desire to conform to the spirit of the agreement and so will spend lots of money on lawyers to tell them how to violate it without violating the letter of the agreement.
If you are in charge of any organization, the person you are will be seen in how that organziation behaves since it is in many ways an extension of you. Microsoft behaves the way it does because it is an extension of a handful of greedy and power hungry bastards, primarly Bill Gates and Steve Balmer.
I find it amusing that anyone would talk of consent decrees and similar remedies when the core problem is the personality and purpose of the company itself. A consent decree is not going to reform microsoft any more than a prison sentence is going to reform a hardened criminal.
If by globalization you mean the spread of information and knowledge between nations, companies, individuals, etc. then that is a good thing. The sharing of knowledge from western industrialized countries with our less fortunate neighbors is obviously a good thing to do. But when you're talking about corporations and governments working to extend their control then that is a very bad thing.
Just as a monopoly is a bad thing, so is a single conglomerate, or a club of corporations, with their fingers in too many pies. Power should always be decentralized and spread as thinly as possible. When this is the case freedom is possible. When too much power is held in the hands of too few, tyrrany and abuse of that power is the result. This is why what is commonly called globalization is such a threat. The consolidation of power into the hands of a small group of corporations and governments whose goals and agenda's are too much aligned leaves anyone whose goals aren't the same very much out in the cold and possibly in great danger.
Lee
How hard would it be to make one of your own?
on
TV Networks Sue ReplayTV
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
When I hear about devices like this one it really makes me wonder how hard it would be to recreate one of your own. There are plenty of video capture cards on the market today not to mention the TV cards, many of which are supported by linux. Encoding audio and video streams into MPEG in real time should be no big deal to a 1.4 Ghz athlon provided well written code is used. At worst a dual processor system would be needed. There are plenty of video cards on the market with video out built in. So my question is, why aren't hobbyists homebrewing systems that will do what these devices are designed to?
I'm seriously considering it myself for the simple reasons that it doesn't sound all that hard and the gatekeepers of the thinly veiled propaganda known as television would disapprove.
If one can't say anything bad, one can't say anything bad about Microsoft.
I find it flabbergasting that no one speaks up when the pushers of censorship sneak in through the back door when they say "Oh, well we don't want to offend anyone now do we?" The plain fact is that you can either have freedom of expression, or the freedom to not be offended. You can't have both. So the next time someone wants you to change your language and utilize euphemisms in place of the actual words you mean, tell them to go to hell because they are an enemy of our constitutional rights.
When the government fears the people there is freedom, when the people fear the government there is tyrrany.
Which of these two scenarios do you think the FBI would rather see?
I fear the FBI far more than I fear terrorists, the Mafia, drug smugglers, kiddie pron traders, bank robbers, or any other group or entity the bureau uses to justify its existence.
What gets me is when I hear of members of congress justifying the passage of bills that undermine our rights on the basis that it is what the FBI wants. Last time I checked our representatives were supposed to be there to represent US, not the FBI. What the FBI wants or doesn't want is irrelevant when it goes against what we the people want. I can't think of anyone who wants the government peeking in our windows and looking over our shoulder out of fear that we might be some kind of criminal. There are people of course who are easily fooled into wanting just that because it is sold to them as a means of making the country safer. Crime is the favorite boogeyman of those who would enslave us. Fear of crime combined with the propaganda that the state can protect you better than you can yourself is what leads to things like this, along with attacks on the second amendment. It has long been said that those who would trade freedom for safety will have neither, and this is a very true statement. You want protection from criminals? Get a gun and learn to use it. In every state where legislation was passed making it easy to get a concealed carry permit the violent crime rate dropped significantly. Don't believe me, look up the stats yourself. Compare that to places like New York and Washington DC where it is for all practical purposes illegal to own a gun.
The FBI needs to be taken into hand and taught that it will not conduct a private war on the rights and freedoms of the american people. The best way I can think of to do this is cut its funding to the bone. If they don't have much in the way of funding, then they won't have the ability to be the wolf at the door.
Lee
P.S. For all you "liberals" out there I am not in fact a Republican. I'm proud to be a Libertarian.
Hardware is the cheapest thing to change? Gets replaced on a regular basis? I don't know where you work, but where I'm from the hardware is the most expensive thing and only gets changed when absolutely necessary. We don't run out every year and drop money on new systems just because something faster is available. We stick with what we have for as long as possible. We've still got Pentium 200 boxes from 1997 running NT4 and office 97. We've upgraded the memory in them to 128megs and installed new 30 gig hard drives, but other than that they are the same as the day they shipped to us. They of course do not have the same capacity as more recent systems, but then we're not trying to run XP and OfficeXP on them, we're running software that is contemporary with the hardware.
The point of diminishing marginal returns on increases in hardware speed was reached long ago. New computers nowadays are made a periodic necessity due to the decrease in speed and efficiency of software, not because increases in speed allow good programmers to add new features that will actually make a difference in anyone's life. Rather the speed increases allow software companies to create and ship crap code and get away with it. I've got an Apple IIe in a closet at home that I bought back in 1985. This computer has a 68k upgrade card bringing the total ammount of memory up to 128k. I used a WYSIWYG word processor on this computer called Multiscribe that featured a true GUI and multiple font types. The program did not have all of the features of something like StarWriter, WordPerfect, or Word, but when you consider that its base functionality was similar and that it ran on an 8-bit 1 mhz processor under 128k of ram it becomes clear just how sloppy the coding of something like Word 2000 really is. I of course understand that the larger a program becomes, the more difficult it is to create relatively bug free code that is also efficient. The problem is I doubt anyone is even trying to create good code.
It has long been said that what Grove giveth, Gates taketh away. This is quite true, now more than ever when programmers almost have to go out of their way to intentionally make code that will slow current systems down so that consumers will be forced to waste their money on new hardware, at which point the cycle will repeat itself.
My advice, use what works until such point that it doesn't work anymore. That goes for hardware and software. If your copy of Office 95 or Wordperfect 7.0 still does the job for you on your pentium 133, and you don't have a compelling reason to upgrade to something new, don't. Save your money now so that when you do have a good reason to upgrade you'll be able to buy the computer you really want.
As for making a switch to OS-X you're solving one problem by replacing it with several others. First there is the fact that OS-X isn't the fastest operating system to begin with yet. Most mac applications are created for the older MacOS, which means you'll have to run a "Classic" VM on top of OS-X in order to run most software. This is a memory and cpu cycle hogging process that I wouldn't want anyone to have to make continual use of. Then there is the fact that changing platforms like this means that all the software you currently own won't run anymore. Unless of course you use a product like Virtual PC at which point you're worse off than with the MacOS Classic VM since you're emulating the hardware now too. Then there is the problem of the lack of available software for the mac. Lets say you're willing to replace all your software with mac stuff. Where are you going to get it from? Things like office are of course available, but what about that niche product you've bought to do a specific thing in your business? How much do you want to bet there isn't a mac version and that the company would laugh if you asked them to create one? Macs are simply not used in corporate america outside of specific industries such as graphic design and desktop publishing. Even there the PC is putting the hurt on the platform. This is why Apple has had to target the iMac as a HOME computer, they can't sell them as a business system. The truth is that the iMac is a superior home system. Its self contained, reliable, and geared towards the luddites who are the only first time buyers left to sell a computer to anymore. My 80 year old grandfather owns one and aside from having to remind him to be careful when he buys software there have been no problems with the computer. For him it is the best system to have. That doesn't mean I'd expect my users to have to put up with one here at the office though. Windows isn't exactly the best OS, but compared to the classic MacOS it is a work of art. OS-X isn't quite there yet and the apps aren't either. One day that might change. If Apple offered a computer with a mature OS that was technologically up to date and ran a sufficiently wide selection of software pertinent to a work environment I might consider trying one out. That day has not arrived yet however and might never do so. I expect Linux to get there long before Apple does.
I thought email was the primary means of written communication nowadays. Snail mail is of course still used for business letters, especially form letters, contracts, junk mail, etc. Email is the preferred medium for just about everything else though. Why would anyone want to send a paper letter to someone when they didn't have to? If you ask me, email ranks up there with the invention of the radio, television, telephone, and written language itself.
FreeBSD, VM, etc. etc.. What about Festus and Miss Kitty and the other goings on in Dodge City? Slashdot isn't just about computers you know, its about people too!
Slashdot Mirror
666 was a code for the initials of the emperor Dioclecian(sp?). If A=1, B=2, C=3.... then in the alphabet they were using 666 would equal his initials. In greek translations the number was 686 due to changes in the positions of the relevant letters. Needless to say this has nothing to do Satan, Lucifer, Mephisocles, etc....
The thing to realize about Revelation is that it was meant for the time in which it was written, not our time. Lamebrains and con men have been screaming "the sky is falling, the end times are nigh!!" and using revelation as the basis for almost 2000 years.
That being said I do think the idea of a tracking device that isn't something you can remove is a VERY bad idea. People have forgotten the concept of personal sovereignty and have fallen into the mindset that whatever rights or freedoms they posess are indulgences on the part of the government. If you believe that way then it becomes true. If however, you realize that no one has the right to hold power over you that you do not agree to, then the nature of things like this becomes very clear.
Lee
You are right that the hardware isn't much more proprietary than what Dell, IBM, or Compaq are offering, but then I wouldn't buy any of those either. I've been building my own systems since Reagan was president and until I can mix and match my own mac system I'm not interested no matter what kind of OS macs are running.
The core of OSX is Mach, with a BSD userland. While it will run the stuff that is portable enough to compile on Linux and the *BSD's, I haven't seen anything that would suggest it will run things better.
In the end you've got proprietary hardware that is, lets face it, underpowered, with an OS that can only be said to be compatible with other breeds of Unix. That is not a compelling argument to me.
If Apple were to port OS-X to other platforms, such as x86, Alpha, Sparc, etc.. and it offered something in terms of either performance or usability that I can't get from Linux or *BSD, then I might be interested. But as long as the OS is tied to proprietary hardware with a lousy bang for your buck coefficient then its never going to be something I pay money to use.
The true strength of Linux and open source in general is that it puts you in the driver's seat. You decide what the system is going to be. That is on the software side of things. On the hardware side of things you have the ability to build your own system from parts you personally choose. With Macs you have traditionally had neither. Whether OSX gives you much power to choose I can't say, but I do know that you lose that power when it comes to the hardware. Thanks, but no thanks...
Lee
"So go screw yourself"
I'd expect more from someone with your education.
So grandma can't install Linux, well she can't install windows either.
Show me a group of people who can sucessfully install windows and all of the necessary drivers, and I'll show you a group of people who can also install Linux. Technical ignorance plagues the Windows world just as much as it does the Linux world, just ask anyone who does tech support. If systems didn't come with windows pre-installed the barrier to entry for it would be just as high as for Linux.
Lee
I'd rather have standard hardware based on interchangable parts and only be saddled with a proprietary OS than be stuck with proprietary hardware and a proprietary OS.
Apple is dead, they're just not broke yet. The only people they have left to blow their trumpet are the religious freaks. I don't know of any knowledgable person who likes the mac, let alone would want to use one, Unix-like kernel or not.
Lee
I'd use gnome if one simple thing would get fixed. When you click on the titlebar of a window I think it should maximize. This shading business is silly. Shading windows in a GUI that lacks a minimize button/feature is a necessity, but in a proper GUI it doesn't really need to be there, let alone be the ONLY option available. At the very least users should be able to configure this behavior. I keep waiting and hoping that this will be corrected but so far nothing has happened. Until it does I'm sticking with KDE or IceWM sans gnome.
Lee
Many of the symptoms that this article described, particularly "stimming" fit me to a T. While I don't do it as much as I did as a kid, I sometime wriggle my hands back and forth very quickly. I'm not sure why I do this really and until I read this article I didn't even think it signified anything. In terms of social skills I used to be a total social misfit. That began to change in high school, but only because I REALLY worked at it long and hard. Today I've got good social skills, but they didn't come easily. I get along well with both "geeks" and with "normal people," although being around geeks is kind of unnerving because I see in them many of the same behaviors I once exhibited, and looking in that kind of mirror is never pleasant. I used to think that those who had bad social skills and so forth were just not trying hard enough. I mean if I could go from being the prime social outcast in the mini-community that is junior and senior high school, to being one of the outlying members of the "in crowd," then why couldn't the other geeks at least have average social skills? I used to think that they gave up on having good relationships with others and instead chose to curl up in a shell away from all the pain. Now I think that maybe it isn't a matter of giving up or not trying hard enough. Maybe it is a matter of being born a certain way and as a result having a much bigger cross to bear socially than others.
There is an oft-used euphemism and linguistic evasion for those who are disabled. Instead of calling a spade a spade they are referred to as "differently abled." In the case of someone with asperger's I think this is an accurate description. I'm VERY good with computers, and things like science and math (except arithmetic) have always seemed more like things I already knew and were reminded of while studying them than anything I actually learned outright. Coinciding with this is a lack of fine motor skills whereby I had a very hard time learning to write and today avoid pencil and paper like the plague, and the early lack of social skills I've already mentioned. I will also sometimes rock back and forth although in my case I'll do it maybe two or three times a month, so I don't know if that means anything.
Things like Asperger's syndrome, ADD, dyslexia, etc. illuminate the ways in which people are different, and the gifts and curses those differences can bestow.
Lee
I never got the idea that the article was trying to say that being an engineer/hacker/geek somehow made you autistic, let alone that this change would become genetic and be passed down to your kids. Rather what the article was trying to say is that both autism/asperger's and being a geek share a common, or related, cause.
...he is going to be turning state's witness on his employer. I don't see how this is a victory for anyone but the state. Last time I checked the quality of living in a US prison was roughly on par with a middle class existence in the former Soviet Union. Three squares and a cot is a lot more than many russians can claim to have. I think if were him I'd give "the man" the finger and go back to my cell. Besides, what possible impact would a convicion in this country have were he to actually go back home? Would anyone there pay it any heed?
Lee
Personally I would pay ten dollars a month just to see to it that Britney Spears, and her clones all disappeared along with the "boy bands" and any other "musicians" that are put together by producers into a money making machine rather than coming together to make music for its own sake.
That is the kind of garbage that dominates top 40. I for one want nothing to do with it.
Lee
Imagine this.....
1) 1.2 Ghz athlon with 512 megs of memory
2) ATI all in wonder radeon that provides not only a TV tuner but svideo/composite A/V inputs and outputs and the ability to do audio/video capture at 720x384 at 30 fps on any of the inputs
3) Sound blaster Live platinum 5.1 for surround sound playback of DVD's etc.
4) four 100 gig hard drives on an IDE raid controller. Total capacity of 400 gigs
5) DVD-R burner, preferably SCSI
6) CD burner, preferably SCSI
7) It will be connected to the internet via a switched 100base-T network connected to a NAT gateway that is itself connected through DSL.
This is the system I'm building right now. Its purpose is much the same as the Bokks device. With it I will be able to play DVD's, vobs, mp3, avi's, mpegs, vcd, divx, etc all on my TV thanks to the all in wonder. Additionally I'll be able to do tivo style recording thanks to that all in wonder. I can rip all my DVD's, encode them to divx, and store them on the raid array or burn them to CD. Or I can just rip them and burn them back to DVD in regionless format with no macrovision. I've got friends overseas that might appreciate that.
By the time this Bokks device becomes available I'll have this system up and running. I haven't decided whether to use Linux or Windows2000 yet. Which one I use will greatly depend upon device support for the all in wonder and SB Live. We've got an HK A/V reciever with dolby surround sound support. If the SB Live drivers for linux support all the features, and the support for the All in wonder is there, then I'd rather use Linux. But if this is not the case I'll use windows instead.
Unfortunately this system is going to cost me a fair bit more than $400. I've already got the MB, CPU, and memory. All I'll need is a good case/PS, the hard drives, the video card, the sound card, and of course the SCSI adapter and burners. Total cost will be upwards of $2000 dollars US.
Lee
What group do you think is a greater threat, wackos with guns, bombs, anthrax and kamakaze pilots, or an federally funded and empowered organization intent upon undermining the freedoms and rights that are each American's by birthright?
I don't know about you, but I fear the latter far more than the former. Two skyscrapers, a government office building, a handful of airplanes and a few thousand lives are insignifcant in comparison to the legacy of freedom that has been passed down to us. We can either be the keepers and protectors of that legacy, or we can be neglectful and discover that it is no longer there one day and that our once noble nation has become a police state, which will you choose?
The FBI needs to be reeled in hard and fast and taught a history lesson on exactly who is in charge in this country. We the people run this show and if the FBI is going to be a menace to the people then the FBI can easily be demolished. Never should the people live in fear of those who are supposed to be their servants and protectors. The day that happens is when the FBI becomes the world's foremost terrorist organization.
Lee
The first company to do a lawywer-proof "clean room" re-implementation of IBM's BIOS was Compaq. Other cloners were less scrupulous, many copying the IBM roms outright, sometimes leaving in the copyright tags. Phoenix technologies, makers of the well known Phoenix BIOS, was another early player in the BIOS arena.
I mention this as historical background to the main point of this post, which is that neither Microsoft nor Bill Gates ever created or sold a clone or IBMs BIOS for the PC. In fact they would have little reason to do so seeing as how they helped create the original BIOS itself. Remember the version of basic that would pop up when you didn't have a boot disk on the original IBM systems? Guess who wrote that? Yep, thats right Microsoft. Microsoft also had input into the design and feature set of the EGA graphics card. I can't say for certain what else they influenced or helped design on the hardware side of things, but I can tell you that they never created a CLONE of the PC's BIOS, at least not any that ever made it out to the public, what they did in house for a lark I can't say.
I almost expect ignorant journalists to make statements like "Microsoft created the first open BIOS for the PC." But if Gates himself is saying that then someone needs to give him history lesson.
Lee
The main influence I've always thought children need to be protected from are people in positions of authority, especially those with an agenda and an utter disregard for the rights of others.
Lee
EVERYONE knows the NTFS is the best filesystem ever created. All these other filesystems toys compared to NTFS. Microsoft makes it after all, and everyone knows that Microsoft makes the best stuff. If they didn't they wouldn't be such a big rich company and able to buy off the govnerment now would they? I'm going to stop using Linux before I get in trouble. I know what's good for me, I don't want to have to explain to the computer police why I was running a subversive terrorist operating system. I'm not one of those evil hackers that try to take money away from Darth Gates, dark lord of the Sith.
Consent decrees are no replacement for ethics. The core problem is that Microsoft as a company is un-ethical. Making them sign a piece of paper that says they are going to play nice isn't going to change a thing. They have no desire to conform to the spirit of the agreement and so will spend lots of money on lawyers to tell them how to violate it without violating the letter of the agreement.
If you are in charge of any organization, the person you are will be seen in how that organziation behaves since it is in many ways an extension of you. Microsoft behaves the way it does because it is an extension of a handful of greedy and power hungry bastards, primarly Bill Gates and Steve Balmer.
I find it amusing that anyone would talk of consent decrees and similar remedies when the core problem is the personality and purpose of the company itself. A consent decree is not going to reform microsoft any more than a prison sentence is going to reform a hardened criminal.
Lee
If by globalization you mean the spread of information and knowledge between nations, companies, individuals, etc. then that is a good thing. The sharing of knowledge from western industrialized countries with our less fortunate neighbors is obviously a good thing to do. But when you're talking about corporations and governments working to extend their control then that is a very bad thing.
Just as a monopoly is a bad thing, so is a single conglomerate, or a club of corporations, with their fingers in too many pies. Power should always be decentralized and spread as thinly as possible. When this is the case freedom is possible. When too much power is held in the hands of too few, tyrrany and abuse of that power is the result. This is why what is commonly called globalization is such a threat. The consolidation of power into the hands of a small group of corporations and governments whose goals and agenda's are too much aligned leaves anyone whose goals aren't the same very much out in the cold and possibly in great danger.
Lee
When I hear about devices like this one it really makes me wonder how hard it would be to recreate one of your own. There are plenty of video capture cards on the market today not to mention the TV cards, many of which are supported by linux. Encoding audio and video streams into MPEG in real time should be no big deal to a 1.4 Ghz athlon provided well written code is used. At worst a dual processor system would be needed. There are plenty of video cards on the market with video out built in. So my question is, why aren't hobbyists homebrewing systems that will do what these devices are designed to?
I'm seriously considering it myself for the simple reasons that it doesn't sound all that hard and the gatekeepers of the thinly veiled propaganda known as television would disapprove.
Lee
If one can't say anything bad, one can't say anything bad about Microsoft.
I find it flabbergasting that no one speaks up when the pushers of censorship sneak in through the back door when they say "Oh, well we don't want to offend anyone now do we?" The plain fact is that you can either have freedom of expression, or the freedom to not be offended. You can't have both. So the next time someone wants you to change your language and utilize euphemisms in place of the actual words you mean, tell them to go to hell because they are an enemy of our constitutional rights.
Lee
When the government fears the people there is freedom, when the people fear the government there is tyrrany.
Which of these two scenarios do you think the FBI would rather see?
I fear the FBI far more than I fear terrorists, the Mafia, drug smugglers, kiddie pron traders, bank robbers, or any other group or entity the bureau uses to justify its existence.
What gets me is when I hear of members of congress justifying the passage of bills that undermine our rights on the basis that it is what the FBI wants. Last time I checked our representatives were supposed to be there to represent US, not the FBI. What the FBI wants or doesn't want is irrelevant when it goes against what we the people want. I can't think of anyone who wants the government peeking in our windows and looking over our shoulder out of fear that we might be some kind of criminal. There are people of course who are easily fooled into wanting just that because it is sold to them as a means of making the country safer. Crime is the favorite boogeyman of those who would enslave us. Fear of crime combined with the propaganda that the state can protect you better than you can yourself is what leads to things like this, along with attacks on the second amendment. It has long been said that those who would trade freedom for safety will have neither, and this is a very true statement. You want protection from criminals? Get a gun and learn to use it. In every state where legislation was passed making it easy to get a concealed carry permit the violent crime rate dropped significantly. Don't believe me, look up the stats yourself. Compare that to places like New York and Washington DC where it is for all practical purposes illegal to own a gun.
The FBI needs to be taken into hand and taught that it will not conduct a private war on the rights and freedoms of the american people. The best way I can think of to do this is cut its funding to the bone. If they don't have much in the way of funding, then they won't have the ability to be the wolf at the door.
Lee
P.S. For all you "liberals" out there I am not in fact a Republican. I'm proud to be a Libertarian.
Hardware is the cheapest thing to change? Gets replaced on a regular basis? I don't know where you work, but where I'm from the hardware is the most expensive thing and only gets changed when absolutely necessary. We don't run out every year and drop money on new systems just because something faster is available. We stick with what we have for as long as possible. We've still got Pentium 200 boxes from 1997 running NT4 and office 97. We've upgraded the memory in them to 128megs and installed new 30 gig hard drives, but other than that they are the same as the day they shipped to us. They of course do not have the same capacity as more recent systems, but then we're not trying to run XP and OfficeXP on them, we're running software that is contemporary with the hardware.
The point of diminishing marginal returns on increases in hardware speed was reached long ago. New computers nowadays are made a periodic necessity due to the decrease in speed and efficiency of software, not because increases in speed allow good programmers to add new features that will actually make a difference in anyone's life. Rather the speed increases allow software companies to create and ship crap code and get away with it. I've got an Apple IIe in a closet at home that I bought back in 1985. This computer has a 68k upgrade card bringing the total ammount of memory up to 128k. I used a WYSIWYG word processor on this computer called Multiscribe that featured a true GUI and multiple font types. The program did not have all of the features of something like StarWriter, WordPerfect, or Word, but when you consider that its base functionality was similar and that it ran on an 8-bit 1 mhz processor under 128k of ram it becomes clear just how sloppy the coding of something like Word 2000 really is. I of course understand that the larger a program becomes, the more difficult it is to create relatively bug free code that is also efficient. The problem is I doubt anyone is even trying to create good code.
It has long been said that what Grove giveth, Gates taketh away. This is quite true, now more than ever when programmers almost have to go out of their way to intentionally make code that will slow current systems down so that consumers will be forced to waste their money on new hardware, at which point the cycle will repeat itself.
My advice, use what works until such point that it doesn't work anymore. That goes for hardware and software. If your copy of Office 95 or Wordperfect 7.0 still does the job for you on your pentium 133, and you don't have a compelling reason to upgrade to something new, don't. Save your money now so that when you do have a good reason to upgrade you'll be able to buy the computer you really want.
As for making a switch to OS-X you're solving one problem by replacing it with several others. First there is the fact that OS-X isn't the fastest operating system to begin with yet. Most mac applications are created for the older MacOS, which means you'll have to run a "Classic" VM on top of OS-X in order to run most software. This is a memory and cpu cycle hogging process that I wouldn't want anyone to have to make continual use of. Then there is the fact that changing platforms like this means that all the software you currently own won't run anymore. Unless of course you use a product like Virtual PC at which point you're worse off than with the MacOS Classic VM since you're emulating the hardware now too. Then there is the problem of the lack of available software for the mac. Lets say you're willing to replace all your software with mac stuff. Where are you going to get it from? Things like office are of course available, but what about that niche product you've bought to do a specific thing in your business? How much do you want to bet there isn't a mac version and that the company would laugh if you asked them to create one? Macs are simply not used in corporate america outside of specific industries such as graphic design and desktop publishing. Even there the PC is putting the hurt on the platform. This is why Apple has had to target the iMac as a HOME computer, they can't sell them as a business system. The truth is that the iMac is a superior home system. Its self contained, reliable, and geared towards the luddites who are the only first time buyers left to sell a computer to anymore. My 80 year old grandfather owns one and aside from having to remind him to be careful when he buys software there have been no problems with the computer. For him it is the best system to have. That doesn't mean I'd expect my users to have to put up with one here at the office though. Windows isn't exactly the best OS, but compared to the classic MacOS it is a work of art. OS-X isn't quite there yet and the apps aren't either. One day that might change. If Apple offered a computer with a mature OS that was technologically up to date and ran a sufficiently wide selection of software pertinent to a work environment I might consider trying one out. That day has not arrived yet however and might never do so. I expect Linux to get there long before Apple does.
Lee
I thought email was the primary means of written communication nowadays. Snail mail is of course still used for business letters, especially form letters, contracts, junk mail, etc. Email is the preferred medium for just about everything else though. Why would anyone want to send a paper letter to someone when they didn't have to? If you ask me, email ranks up there with the invention of the radio, television, telephone, and written language itself.
FreeBSD, VM, etc. etc.. What about Festus and Miss Kitty and the other goings on in Dodge City? Slashdot isn't just about computers you know, its about people too!
Do you have too much money? Scientology can help you with that.
Do you have a tendency to think for yourself more than those around you? Scientology can help you with that too.
Would you like to eat beans and rice and work for free for a billion years towards enslaving all mankind? Has scientology got a job for you!
http://www.xenu.net
What about the hundreds of politicians in Washington who do nothing but look for innovative ways to hurt the party opposite their own?
Party politics and blind partisanship is the root cause of an awful lot of bullshit in our government.
Lee