Thanks John, you're a wise and generous man: Wise to help foster growth and acceptance of Linux, generous with your dollars. I'd nominate you for sainthood but I suspect da Pope wouldn't understand (yet!)
How about hooks into the next Quake engine to allow for greatly expanded items and attributes? The Quake engine would make a great starting point for a 3D graphical MUD environment. Look at combining a current MUD database (the latest ROM would be best, IMHO) with the graphics engine and voila, the game of the future.
So I go and have a quick read of the MS press release cum article and decide I want to send them a polite note telling someone somewhere within the MS organization what I think about this little piece. When I choose the one button on the page which appears it might be a way to communicate, I get a pre-determined choice of options, not one of which has anything to do with replying to the article.
So, I look around a bit and click on a few items looking for a way to contact _anyone_ with a comment about the story and came up with the big zero: Nada, nothing, no way to say "Hi Microsoft, your story on the Mindcraft debacle has a few problems." This is typical MS in that MS doesn't want to hear from MS customers because MS is too busy trying to dictate what said customer should be doing and thinking -- and totally missing the boat all the while.
Justice will be served when MS turns around one day and finds they are missing many millions of customers. Count me in that rapidly growing group.
One of the most sensible statements made in this thread.
This "journalist" is trolling for flameage which will most likely be used in a follow-up article which shows the world (of Chicago) geeks being rude and intolerant -- the implied comparison is with the nice folks at Microsoft, of course. Haven't we seen enough of this type of crap recently? Playing into it doesn't serve us well. I can understand wanting to counter FUD, but this isn't FUD -- it's base, intentionally antagonistic and meant to irritate and elicit specific reactions.
I agree with Telsa -- time to stop feeding this type of troll.
I ran one card for a month before getting the second and my eyes say it's a big improvement. I'll trust my own eyes before I'll trust someone else's eyes, thank you.:)
Thanks for putting up the screamshots (that's not a typo.) Could you give us more detail about them, like resolution of your screen, video stats, etc? Pics looked really low-quality on my machine, but then I'm rather spoiled (VoodooII SLI running under Mesa3.0 on a PII -- had to build in an extra fan just to keep those bad boys cool and comfy!)
>The future is in using simple scripting languages >and XML...wherein the *DATA*, not code, is the >medium of integration between applications and >systems.
I think you're right on all points, especially the one item quoted above. All this thrashing about by the proprietary vendors will prove to be pointless after XML with XSL enters the game. The CORBA/COM debacle of these past years shows to anyone who is interested just what these vendors really want: Customers tied to proprietary product interacting with other proprietary product.
Fundamental computing/networking tools are too important to the future of our species for us to swollow these types of base, myopic decisions driven by quarterly returns: Get your profits from second tier applications, not first tier tools.
If a tool is not a sensical open standard which is readily used by anyone, then it is flawed and should be avoided. XML is a most sensical open standard readily used by anyone at the tool-building level as well as the application-building level.
>But... RedHat already has commercial investors that in turn have their investors. >
Yes, you're very right. MS, by focusing on making money instead of making quality product, has in fact created a huge vacuum in the OS market -- apparently markets hate vacuums as much as nature. Are Redhat's investors acting in their own best interest by supporting Redhat with investment dollars? Yes, I agree that's true. MS has shown time and again how foolish it is to expect to do well working with MS in an MS-dominated marketplace. GNU/Linux is a more-than-adequate alternative to MS product and these companies see that most clearly.
> Going "Public", on the other hand, is a different animal altogether. >
Again, you're very right -- it's a totally different game when and if Redhat goes public. I'm not so sure that would work. (See further comments in a separate reply message, same string, posted earlier.)
> On the flip side, look at Caldera. >
Yes, Caldera may prove to be another great example of how to blend the profit motive into the GNU/Linux community providing Caldera feeds back into the community to keep it alive and growing. What does Caldera provide the community besides another for-profit distribution? I'm asking because I don't know.
> Money for Linux can't be a bad thing. >
No, I don't think money is a bad thing at all, in fact it's very necessary (I'm not a socialist; my politics are Libertarian and have been for a many years now.) The problem arises when money in the form of profit takes precedence over quality and this happens to businesses _so_ often. MS makes up for quality with slick heavy-handed marketing and by driving (or buying) any competition out of business. I like to think of GNU/Linux, the DoJ suit and a ton of bad press as being white corpuscles attacking a bad germ (granted, a gooey metaphor, but a good one (Oy, that pun even makes me wince.))
Thus far Redhat has provided the best example of how a profit driven company might deal with the quality driven GNU/Linux community. They give back support for important development projects by funding those projects. The amount of goodwill Redhat has in this community is phenomenal and well earned at that. I can't think of any other business which, within the context of their potential-customer community, has the same amount of respect as Redhat has in the GNU/Linux community. Even people who don't use their distro and don't like the RPM package management format don't bad mouth Redhat the company. This works to generate even more profits for Redhat -- that's the way you do it.
I suspect you're right and any move away from the spirit of the GNU GPL would be preceived as a form of damage and the community would route around it (sounds familiar, hmmm) leaving Redhat to die an isolated death.
If, on the other hand, Redhat were to push even harder with their support for software development for the community as a whole (support more things like the Gnome and Enlightenment projects) then they would probably do outrageously well. This would prove most interesting since it would be a case of a publicly held company giving away its goodies in order to make a profit. Talk about yanking the concepts of the business world inside out! *chuckle*
Utopian dream: OSS under the GNU GPL leads to a solution to the artifically-enforced scarcity model of modern business and we finally see the solution to many of the world's current problems: By making sure everyone has the basics to work with (food, housing, education, information) we ensure that we have vastly larger markets inwhich to sell everything we build and make beyond those basics.
Redhat going IPO has both good and (potentially) bad aspects:
It'll be good if Young and company honor the spirit and letter of the GNU GPL, but this could prove to be rather hard to do since the value from the GNU/Linux community's work is measured in quality while the value of a compay in measured in dollars. Stockholders want dollars, GNU/Linux folks want quality software, but dollar driven software is what lead to the formation of the GNU/Linux community in the first place. Can the two co-exist this closely without one killing the other?
It'll be bad if Redhat breaks with the spirit of the community and tries to impose de facto standards for Linux distributions. Redhat history suggests this is unlikely -- they've been great for the community thus far -- but then they've not felt the pressure from owners, either. Pressure from stockholders for bottomline return is, again, measured in dollars and they couldn't care less about quality (just look at MS stock values if you think this isn't valid.)
I wish Redhat the best, but can't help feeling this IPO idea is somewhat at odds with the whole idea of software with freedom. I hope my misgivings on this are unfounded, but the idea of a group of stockholders directing a Linux distribution makes me rather queasy.
Your logic is flawed -- you blame the tools used to do the deed when it's the desire to do the deed which needs resolved. Any skilled person with a good katana could kill as many as these two did in the same amount of time (but with much less noise being made, they'd probably be able to kill many more.)
It's the desire to do this which needs to be addressed and resolved -- placing the blame on the tool does nothing to solve the problem.
Much ado about the wrong thing
on
Why Kids Kill
·
· Score: 3
Why would individuals want to do this? Media and authority types will not grok the answer because they are culpable, hence all the scape-goating of the net, games, etc.
In a society such as ours which is saturated with advertising-related media, the major effect--and end result--will always be homogenization of culture. The end result of homogenization of a culture is intolerance towards those who either aren't or refuse to be homogenized and who are thus cast out of the system or otherwise marginalized. Once marginalized, they are targeted by those who are willingly homogenized: Think peer-pressure as condoned and encouraged by those in authority at various levels of society (those who run schools, businesses, governments, etc.)
The primary culpret in this tragedy, even if indirectly, is the U.S. media/advertising monstrosity. The secondary culpret is the schools themselves, which are far more oriented towards socialization than towards education, where those who run the schools actively encourage young people to either become homogenized or marginalized. The whole push towards school uniforms for everyone is a push towards homogenization and will result in even more marginalization and acting out by those who don't and won't agree that life is like a Gap commercial.
In summation: Any school in this country where individuals or groups of individuals are exposed to ridicule, ostracism and other forms of punishment for expressing individuality or difference is a breeding ground for just this type of incident. Specifically, I've gleaned that this school in Colorado is typical in that the jock/cheerleader crowd are the "favorites" (very predictable) and ridicule and harrasement of other groups of students is common.
Jeez, don't you aussies have any rights? Perhaps you need to work on getting yourself a Bill of Rights. This will at least slow down your various governments when they want to trample your rights and freedoms whilst pursuing your money, which is what I suspect is their chief motive in this maneuver: getting more of your money.
Governments rarely care about protecting anything except their own powerbase, which goes a long way towards explaining the current state of organized humanity. The person who finds a viable replacement for our "modern" governments (which are mostly reconstituted variations on the Church from the Dark Ages) will lead humanity up the evolutionary ladder in a big, big jump.
I loved my Atari ST and ran it for years. Of course I had tricked it out with a CLI and other sorts of goodies (NeoDesk, UIS III, etc.) and it was a speedy little machine. Between my Atari ST and beginning with Linux I ran WIN95 for two month: Going from the ST to WIN95 was a big step down in terms of reliability and performance.
Linux is a big step up *cheer* and has made this Atari user love his hobby again (I still post an Atari.gif on my WindowMaker Desktop in honor and rememberance of my beloved ST.)
You're very right, no amount of policy at any level will prevent this kind of action by individuals.
The question to ask and answer is: Why would individuals want to do this?
You and a couple of others here know the reason why, but I'll expand upon your answer for the benefit of those who need to hear it aloud.
In a society such as ours which is saturated with advertising-related media, the major effect--and end result--will always be homogenization of culture. The end result of homogenization of a culture is intolerance towards those who either aren't or refuse to be homogenized and who are thus cast out of the system or otherwise marginalized. Once marginalized, they are targeted by those who are willingly homogenized: Think peer-pressure as condoned and encouraged by those in authority at various levels of society (those who run schools, businesses, governments, etc.)
The primary culpret in this tragedy, even if indirectly, is the U.S. media/advertising monstrosity. The secondary culpret is the schools themselves, which are far more oriented towards socialization than towards education, where those who run the schools actively encourage young people to either become homogenized or marginalized. The whole push towards school uniforms for everyone is a push towards homogenization and will result in even more marginalization and acting out by those who don't and won't agree that life is like a Gap commercial.
In summation: Any school in this country where individuals or groups of individuals are exposed to ridicule, ostracism and other forms of punishment for expressing individuality or difference is a breeding ground for just this type of incident. Specifically, I've gleaned that this school in Colorado is typical in that the jock/cheerleader crowd are the "favorites" (very typical) and ridicule and harrasement of other groups of students is common.
One last related point: Any society which reduces to the value of a dollar any and every aspect of life will end up valueing only dollars and will lose all other sense of value. This is what's happening to us.
Be careful what you swollow when dealing with news media of any sort -- they make their living by convincing folks to consume their product and thus reply on all the same bs tactics used by business in general. In short, they'll say and do just about anything to get you to consume their product and have very little regard for truth, honesty or any sort of ethics.
Two wackos in Colorado go on a bang-binge and kill a bunch of people they don't like but, because they like to play Quake and they have web pages on AOL, the "internet" and violent computer games are a "contributing factor" in their decision to do shoot up their school.
I'm convinced that reporters and commentators for news businesses are hired only after they've been verified as being logic-free morons who are quite ready to voice opinions in the absence of knowledge and facts so deadlines can be met, ratings can be acquired and advertising can be sold.
>there is nothing propietary, nothing secret, in Redhat Linux distribution
Yes, isn't it wonderful!
What you seem to be pursuing is the answer to this question: How can Redhat differentiate themselves from other distribution vendors in a significant way within the context of a sensical, effective business model?
The answer is obvious as Redhat has already done it. They differentiate by adding value to Linux and aiming their marketing at the Linux newbie. Linux newbies aren't going to know about $2 CDs generally and are going to want the manual that comes with the CD -- a good deal for $50 (especially since it provides some initial handholding which is often a good thing for newbies.)
Once the newbie gets past the newbie stage and graduates to a more involved distribution, he's already shown his system to his friends and talked up Linux to just about anyone who'll listen and has helped generate a new batch of newbies, some of whom will buy Redhat Linux for $50.
To augment newbie creation via word of mouth from happy ex-newbies, Redhat funds certain development tracks (Enlightenment, Gnome, etc.) which, in addition to providing great new software, generates huge amounts of goodwill within the general community where the denizens are happy to direct newbies to Redhat Linux as a good place to start. To further augment newbie creation, Redhat advertises in those few magazines which the Linux curious are most likely to buy, as well as advertises on certain websites the Linux curious might hit when looking for information on which to base a purchasing decision.
Redhat has shown nothing but excellence with their marketing/positioning (*bow* Bob Young) and have maintained an exceptionally high ethical standard of behavior with the Linux community. Even if I don't use their product (I'm a content Slackware junkie) I do very much admire Redhat and feel they have made great contributions to the advancement of Linux overall. Redhat has proven themselves generous yet judicious in spreading the wealth around the community where it helps foster growth in the direction Linux most needs to grow -- the general-purpose computer user (coming soon to a computer near you!)
My compliments, kudos and gratitude to the Redhat Linux folks.
1. Yes, business wants to sell you more stuff, so they collect information about you any way they can. All this information goes into huge databases which are almost always for sale to whomever has the bucks to pay for the info.
2. Certain businesses make their money by buying these databases, compiling information on individuals and groups and selling the results to whomever has the bucks to pay for the info.
3. The biggest customer for all commercial databases for more than a decade now has been -- surprise of surprises -- the U.S. federal government. What do they want to sell to you?
4. Those who cry and whine about privacy are much, much too late to do anything about it. You have no privacy if: you use credit cards, have an address, have a phone number, have a bank account of any kind, have a job, have a car, have a drivers license -- the only people in the U.S. who have any privacy at all are those who are homeless and who avoid shelters, charities and government assistance.
Americans were warned by the founders of this country that they'd loose their freedom if they weren't forever viligant. When your parents and grandparents agreed to the social security system, they sold your freedom away and you won't get it back for any price less than civil war.
And for the fool who thinks you can have freedom without privacy: Think again!
One hundred years from now all the techie questions asked here of Mr. Moore will be moot because we'll be:
- bionantech* computers and have to go see a doctor when it's time for an OS update ("Here for your new kernel, Mr. Clued? Sit down, jack into the wall and the doctor will be right with you. Would you like some coffee and a muffin? We have a newer model Sexy Susie if you'd like release before revision?")
- permanently wired into a universally-accessable network where the concept of privacy is a quaint thought which provides a great and continous source for rather banal jokes traded amongst teenagers, exceptionally bored adults and certain breeds of bionanteched pets.
- looking forward to vacations where the whole point is to crawl into a dark hole for two weeks and not be "wired" into anything, which often results in two week vacations becoming two year vacations as the unplugged run off into the hills of Peru to avoid the twenty-four/seven deluge of plactic-nosed, silicon breasted babes selling cars, toasters, tweasers and "your very own set of custom-crafted twins -- no mate required!"
- envious of those lucky enough to have a job that lets one use one's hands and body in the process of doing something constructive, destructive, deconstructive, instructive, obstructive....
- wondering who the hell ever thought that having a life span of four hundred years was a good idea and if it's possible to find and kill the bastard in such a way as to fully express the totality of hatred for one's tormentors to which a human can aspire and actually achieve.
bionantech:
bio, or biosphere - refers to the fifty percent of your grey matter which has been harnessed to provide storage and processing power for your "personal" onboard computer;
nan - refers to the artificially grown interface between the biosphere (see above) and the "real you" whatever that may or might have been. Includes all accoutrements for sensory enhancement.
tech - a term once used to refer to external mechanical devices of relatively recent design, now indicative of one's status as belonging to either of the two human groups "tech" or "notech," (or in the vernacular, "tech" or "trash")
Yikes, I knew I should've taken that nap earlier. *shake*
Isn't it supposed to be a joke?
on
Linuxnewbie.org
·
· Score: 1
I did a quickie search using the string "ATI" and got an immediate server error. Granted, ATI cards are a royal pain, but that's the first time I've seen a search routine choke on the idea of even searching for the string.
I thought the site was meant to be a joke, so is the joke on me, he, thee or all three?
>You have absolutely NO FUCKING IDEA what they will do to protect their monopoly
You're very right about MS vs.Linux being a war -- when the DoJ gig is up MS will begin spewing FUDdy crap about Linux to the six corners of the universe, buying off any and every Linux developer with big bucks and hitting with lawyers in every way possible. Marketing & PR comprise much of the battle ground in the "business as warfare" metaphor and the stakes in this war are very, very high.
Combine with this the fact that a huge number of middle and upper IS/IT managers in this country have been socking away their retirement bucks in MS and MS-related stocks (whether they know it or not) and you'll begin to grok just how pervasive the resistance against Linux will be. Better check your own portfolio while you're at it, eh? You'd be surprised at the many ways MS and related stocks effect all sorts of markets.
Linux is very strong in its foundations and can withstand "idiot proof" layers on top provided the foundation is not compromised. The biggest technological mistake MS made was to build their OS foundations on top of a GUI (i.e., they considered the GUI more important) and they ended up with a really crappy OS. Linux builds GUIs on top of an exceptionally strong foundation, which is the way to build anything really complex -- the facade is added after the main structure is built, not before.
To sum up my points: -it's going to get really ugly if the feds and states wimp out and let MS off with a wrist slap for public consumption (while shaking one another's hand all the while -- if you think the feds are going to risk fscking up the economy, you're dreaming;) -Linux needs to bring into the fold every single living human body it can; this is best done by appealing to all levels of computer users, from newbies to gods, at their own level.
Linux can win this war easily. Indeed, I think it's our war to lose at this point, so remember:
No contribution is so small that anyone can't make one -- all players have effect.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks John, you're a wise and generous man: Wise to help foster growth and acceptance of Linux, generous with your dollars. I'd nominate you for sainthood but I suspect da Pope wouldn't understand (yet!)
How about hooks into the next Quake engine to allow for greatly expanded items and attributes? The Quake engine would make a great starting point for a 3D graphical MUD environment. Look at combining a current MUD database (the latest ROM would be best, IMHO) with the graphics engine and voila, the game of the future.
So I go and have a quick read of the MS press release cum article and decide I want to send them a polite note telling someone somewhere within the MS organization what I think about this little piece. When I choose the one button on the page which appears it might be a way to communicate, I get a pre-determined choice of options, not one of which has anything to do with replying to the article.
So, I look around a bit and click on a few items looking for a way to contact _anyone_ with a comment about the story and came up with the big zero: Nada, nothing, no way to say "Hi Microsoft, your story on the Mindcraft debacle has a few problems." This is typical MS in that MS doesn't want to hear from MS customers because MS is too busy trying to dictate what said customer should be doing and thinking -- and totally missing the boat all the while.
Justice will be served when MS turns around one day and finds they are missing many millions of customers. Count me in that rapidly growing group.
1 1/2 years of livin' and lovin' Linux!
One of the most sensible statements made in this thread.
This "journalist" is trolling for flameage which will most likely be used in a follow-up article which shows the world (of Chicago) geeks being rude and intolerant -- the implied comparison is with the nice folks at Microsoft, of course. Haven't we seen enough of this type of crap recently? Playing into it doesn't serve us well. I can understand wanting to counter FUD, but this isn't FUD -- it's base, intentionally antagonistic and meant to irritate and elicit specific reactions.
I agree with Telsa -- time to stop feeding this type of troll.
I ran one card for a month before getting the second and my eyes say it's a big improvement. I'll trust my own eyes before I'll trust someone else's eyes, thank you.:)
I went and had a look at Nate Fox's pics and they view much better on my machine (see Nate's message with URL in this thread.)
Lookin' good!
Thanks for putting up the screamshots (that's not a typo.) Could you give us more detail about them, like resolution of your screen, video stats, etc? Pics looked really low-quality on my machine, but then I'm rather spoiled (VoodooII SLI running under Mesa3.0 on a PII -- had to build in an extra fan just to keep those bad boys cool and comfy!)
Thanks again for the screenshots.
>The future is in using simple scripting languages
>and XML...wherein the *DATA*, not code, is the
>medium of integration between applications and
>systems.
I think you're right on all points, especially the one item quoted above. All this thrashing about by the proprietary vendors will prove to be pointless after XML with XSL enters the game. The CORBA/COM debacle of these past years shows to anyone who is interested just what these vendors really want: Customers tied to proprietary product interacting with other proprietary product.
Fundamental computing/networking tools are too important to the future of our species for us to swollow these types of base, myopic decisions driven by quarterly returns: Get your profits from second tier applications, not first tier tools.
If a tool is not a sensical open standard which is readily used by anyone, then it is flawed and should be avoided. XML is a most sensical open standard readily used by anyone at the tool-building level as well as the application-building level.
So, what level is it, how much exp does it give, does it have any gold and do you get dragon steaks when it finally goes TU? *slurp*
Ditto this -- tcl is da shite, perl is for wienie boys.
>But... RedHat already has commercial investors that in turn have their investors.
>
Yes, you're very right. MS, by focusing on making money instead of making quality product, has in fact created a huge vacuum in the OS market -- apparently markets hate vacuums as much as nature. Are Redhat's investors acting in their own best interest by supporting Redhat with investment dollars? Yes, I agree that's true. MS has shown time and again how foolish it is to expect to do well working with MS in an MS-dominated marketplace. GNU/Linux is a more-than-adequate alternative to MS product and these companies see that most clearly.
> Going "Public", on the other hand, is a different animal altogether.
>
Again, you're very right -- it's a totally different game when and if Redhat goes public. I'm not so sure that would work. (See further comments in a separate reply message, same string, posted earlier.)
> On the flip side, look at Caldera.
>
Yes, Caldera may prove to be another great example of how to blend the profit motive into the GNU/Linux community providing Caldera feeds back into the community to keep it alive and growing. What does Caldera provide the community besides another for-profit distribution? I'm asking because I don't know.
> Money for Linux can't be a bad thing.
>
No, I don't think money is a bad thing at all, in fact it's very necessary (I'm not a socialist; my politics are Libertarian and have been for a many years now.) The problem arises when money in the form of profit takes precedence over quality and this happens to businesses _so_ often. MS makes up for quality with slick heavy-handed marketing and by driving (or buying) any competition out of business. I like to think of GNU/Linux, the DoJ suit and a ton of bad press as being white corpuscles attacking a bad germ (granted, a gooey metaphor, but a good one (Oy, that pun even makes me wince.))
Thus far Redhat has provided the best example of how a profit driven company might deal with the quality driven GNU/Linux community. They give back support for important development projects by funding those projects. The amount of goodwill Redhat has in this community is phenomenal and well earned at that. I can't think of any other business which, within the context of their potential-customer community, has the same amount of respect as Redhat has in the GNU/Linux community. Even people who don't use their distro and don't like the RPM package management format don't bad mouth Redhat the company. This works to generate even more profits for Redhat -- that's the way you do it.
I suspect you're right and any move away from the spirit of the GNU GPL would be preceived as a form of damage and the community would route around it (sounds familiar, hmmm) leaving Redhat to die an isolated death.
If, on the other hand, Redhat were to push even harder with their support for software development for the community as a whole (support more things like the Gnome and Enlightenment projects) then they would probably do outrageously well. This would prove most interesting since it would be a case of a publicly held company giving away its goodies in order to make a profit. Talk about yanking the concepts of the business world inside out! *chuckle*
Utopian dream: OSS under the GNU GPL leads to a solution to the artifically-enforced scarcity model of modern business and we finally see the solution to many of the world's current problems: By making sure everyone has the basics to work with (food, housing, education, information) we ensure that we have vastly larger markets inwhich to sell everything we build and make beyond those basics.
Redhat going IPO has both good and (potentially) bad aspects:
It'll be good if Young and company honor the spirit and letter of the GNU GPL, but this could prove to be rather hard to do since the value from the GNU/Linux community's work is measured in quality while the value of a compay in measured in dollars. Stockholders want dollars, GNU/Linux folks want quality software, but dollar driven software is what lead to the formation of the GNU/Linux community in the first place. Can the two co-exist this closely without one killing the other?
It'll be bad if Redhat breaks with the spirit of the community and tries to impose de facto standards for Linux distributions. Redhat history suggests this is unlikely -- they've been great for the community thus far -- but then they've not felt the pressure from owners, either. Pressure from stockholders for bottomline return is, again, measured in dollars and they couldn't care less about quality (just look at MS stock values if you think this isn't valid.)
I wish Redhat the best, but can't help feeling this IPO idea is somewhat at odds with the whole idea of software with freedom. I hope my misgivings on this are unfounded, but the idea of a group of stockholders directing a Linux distribution makes me rather queasy.
Your logic is flawed -- you blame the tools used to do the deed when it's the desire to do the deed which needs resolved. Any skilled person with a good katana could kill as many as these two did in the same amount of time (but with much less noise being made, they'd probably be able to kill many more.)
It's the desire to do this which needs to be addressed and resolved -- placing the blame on the tool does nothing to solve the problem.
Why would individuals want to do this? Media and authority types will not grok the answer because they are culpable, hence all the scape-goating of the net, games, etc.
In a society such as ours which is saturated with advertising-related media, the major effect--and end result--will always be homogenization of culture. The end result of homogenization of a culture is intolerance towards those who either aren't or refuse to be homogenized and who are thus cast out of the system or otherwise marginalized. Once marginalized, they are targeted by those who are willingly homogenized: Think peer-pressure as condoned and encouraged by those in authority at various levels of society (those who run schools, businesses, governments, etc.)
The primary culpret in this tragedy, even if indirectly, is the U.S. media/advertising monstrosity. The secondary culpret is the schools themselves, which are far more oriented towards socialization than towards education, where those who run the schools actively encourage young people to either become homogenized or marginalized. The whole push towards school uniforms for everyone is a push towards homogenization and will result in even more marginalization and acting out by those who don't and won't agree that life is like a Gap commercial.
In summation: Any school in this country where individuals or groups of individuals are exposed to ridicule, ostracism and other forms of punishment for expressing individuality or difference is a breeding ground for just this type of incident. Specifically, I've gleaned that this school in Colorado is typical in that the jock/cheerleader crowd are the "favorites" (very predictable) and ridicule and harrasement of other groups of students is common.
Jeez, don't you aussies have any rights? Perhaps you need to work on getting yourself a Bill of Rights. This will at least slow down your various governments when they want to trample your rights and freedoms whilst pursuing your money, which is what I suspect is their chief motive in this maneuver: getting more of your money.
Governments rarely care about protecting anything except their own powerbase, which goes a long way towards explaining the current state of organized humanity. The person who finds a viable replacement for our "modern" governments (which are mostly reconstituted variations on the Church from the Dark Ages) will lead humanity up the evolutionary ladder in a big, big jump.
Can't happen soon enough, IMHO.
I loved my Atari ST and ran it for years. Of course I had tricked it out with a CLI and other sorts of goodies (NeoDesk, UIS III, etc.) and it was a speedy little machine. Between my Atari ST and beginning with Linux I ran WIN95 for two month: Going from the ST to WIN95 was a big step down in terms of reliability and performance.
.gif on my WindowMaker Desktop in honor and rememberance of my beloved ST.)
Linux is a big step up *cheer* and has made this Atari user love his hobby again (I still post an Atari
You're very right, no amount of policy at any level will prevent this kind of action by individuals.
The question to ask and answer is: Why would individuals want to do this?
You and a couple of others here know the reason why, but I'll expand upon your answer for the benefit of those who need to hear it aloud.
In a society such as ours which is saturated with advertising-related media, the major effect--and end result--will always be homogenization of culture. The end result of homogenization of a culture is intolerance towards those who either aren't or refuse to be homogenized and who are thus cast out of the system or otherwise marginalized. Once marginalized, they are targeted by those who are willingly homogenized: Think peer-pressure as condoned and encouraged by those in authority at various levels of society (those who run schools, businesses, governments, etc.)
The primary culpret in this tragedy, even if indirectly, is the U.S. media/advertising monstrosity. The secondary culpret is the schools themselves, which are far more oriented towards socialization than towards education, where those who run the schools actively encourage young people to either become homogenized or marginalized. The whole push towards school uniforms for everyone is a push towards homogenization and will result in even more marginalization and acting out by those who don't and won't agree that life is like a Gap commercial.
In summation: Any school in this country where individuals or groups of individuals are exposed to ridicule, ostracism and other forms of punishment for expressing individuality or difference is a breeding ground for just this type of incident. Specifically, I've gleaned that this school in Colorado is typical in that the jock/cheerleader crowd are the "favorites" (very typical) and ridicule and harrasement of other groups of students is common.
One last related point: Any society which reduces to the value of a dollar any and every aspect of life will end up valueing only dollars and will lose all other sense of value. This is what's happening to us.
Be careful what you swollow when dealing with news media of any sort -- they make their living by convincing folks to consume their product and thus reply on all the same bs tactics used by business in general. In short, they'll say and do just about anything to get you to consume their product and have very little regard for truth, honesty or any sort of ethics.
Two wackos in Colorado go on a bang-binge and kill a bunch of people they don't like but, because they like to play Quake and they have web pages on AOL, the "internet" and violent computer games are a "contributing factor" in their decision to do shoot up their school.
I'm convinced that reporters and commentators for news businesses are hired only after they've been verified as being logic-free morons who are quite ready to voice opinions in the absence of knowledge and facts so deadlines can be met, ratings can be acquired and advertising can be sold.
>there is nothing propietary, nothing secret, in Redhat Linux distribution
Yes, isn't it wonderful!
What you seem to be pursuing is the answer to this question: How can Redhat differentiate themselves from other distribution vendors in a significant way within the context of a sensical, effective business model?
The answer is obvious as Redhat has already done it. They differentiate by adding value to Linux and aiming their marketing at the Linux newbie. Linux newbies aren't going to know about $2 CDs generally and are going to want the manual that comes with the CD -- a good deal for $50 (especially since it provides some initial handholding which is often a good thing for newbies.)
Once the newbie gets past the newbie stage and graduates to a more involved distribution, he's already shown his system to his friends and talked up Linux to just about anyone who'll listen and has helped generate a new batch of newbies, some of whom will buy Redhat Linux for $50.
To augment newbie creation via word of mouth from happy ex-newbies, Redhat funds certain development tracks (Enlightenment, Gnome, etc.) which, in addition to providing great new software, generates huge amounts of goodwill within the general community where the denizens are happy to direct newbies to Redhat Linux as a good place to start. To further augment newbie creation, Redhat advertises in those few magazines which the Linux curious are most likely to buy, as well as advertises on certain websites the Linux curious might hit when looking for information on which to base a purchasing decision.
Redhat has shown nothing but excellence with their marketing/positioning (*bow* Bob Young) and have maintained an exceptionally high ethical standard of behavior with the Linux community. Even if I don't use their product (I'm a content Slackware junkie) I do very much admire Redhat and feel they have made great contributions to the advancement of Linux overall. Redhat has proven themselves generous yet judicious in spreading the wealth around the community where it helps foster growth in the direction Linux most needs to grow -- the
general-purpose computer user (coming soon to a computer near you!)
My compliments, kudos and gratitude to the Redhat Linux folks.
That was a good laugh, thanks!
Some things to consider:
1. Yes, business wants to sell you more stuff, so they collect information about you any way they can. All this information goes into huge databases which are almost always for sale to whomever has the bucks to pay for the info.
2. Certain businesses make their money by buying these databases, compiling information on individuals and groups and selling the results to whomever has the bucks to pay for the info.
3. The biggest customer for all commercial databases for more than a decade now has been -- surprise of surprises -- the U.S. federal government. What do they want to sell to you?
4. Those who cry and whine about privacy are much, much too late to do anything about it. You have no privacy if: you use credit cards, have an address, have a phone number, have a bank account of any kind, have a job, have a car, have a drivers license -- the only people in the U.S. who have any privacy at all are those who are homeless and who avoid shelters, charities and government assistance.
Americans were warned by the founders of this country that they'd loose their freedom if they weren't forever viligant. When your parents and grandparents agreed to the social security system, they sold your freedom away and you won't get it back for any price less than civil war.
And for the fool who thinks you can have freedom without privacy: Think again!
That be some serious cheese -- gave me gas.
What's the point with the cheesiness, anyway -- Trollng for Portal VCaps checks?
Here are some predictions!
One hundred years from now all the techie questions asked here of Mr. Moore will be moot because we'll be:
- bionantech* computers and have to go see a doctor when it's time for an OS update ("Here for your new kernel, Mr. Clued? Sit down, jack into the wall and the doctor will be right with you. Would you like some coffee and a muffin? We have a newer model Sexy Susie if you'd like release before revision?")
- permanently wired into a universally-accessable network where the concept of privacy is a quaint thought which provides a great and continous source for rather banal jokes traded amongst teenagers, exceptionally bored adults and certain breeds of bionanteched pets.
- looking forward to vacations where the whole point is to crawl into a dark hole for two weeks and not be "wired" into anything, which often results in two week vacations becoming two year vacations as the unplugged run off into the hills of Peru to avoid the twenty-four/seven deluge of plactic-nosed, silicon breasted babes selling cars, toasters, tweasers and "your very own set of custom-crafted twins -- no mate required!"
- envious of those lucky enough to have a job that lets one use one's hands and body in the process of doing something constructive, destructive, deconstructive, instructive, obstructive....
- wondering who the hell ever thought that having a life span of four hundred years was a good idea and if it's possible to find and kill the bastard in such a way as to fully express the totality of hatred for one's tormentors to which a human can aspire and actually achieve.
bionantech:
bio, or biosphere - refers to the fifty percent of your grey matter which has been harnessed to provide storage and processing power for your "personal" onboard computer;
nan - refers to the artificially grown interface between the biosphere (see above) and the "real you" whatever that may or might have been. Includes all accoutrements for sensory enhancement.
tech - a term once used to refer to external mechanical devices of relatively recent design, now indicative of one's status as belonging to either of the two human groups "tech" or "notech," (or in the vernacular, "tech" or "trash")
Yikes, I knew I should've taken that nap earlier. *shake*
I did a quickie search using the string "ATI" and got an immediate server error. Granted, ATI cards are a royal pain, but that's the first time I've seen a search routine choke on the idea of even searching for the string.
I thought the site was meant to be a joke, so is the joke on me, he, thee or all three?
>You have absolutely NO FUCKING IDEA what they will do to protect their monopoly
You're very right about MS vs.Linux being a war -- when the DoJ gig is up MS will begin spewing FUDdy crap about Linux to the six corners of the universe, buying off any and every Linux developer with big bucks and hitting with lawyers in every way possible. Marketing & PR comprise much of the battle ground in the "business as warfare" metaphor and the stakes in this war are very, very high.
Combine with this the fact that a huge number of middle and upper IS/IT managers in this country have been socking away their retirement bucks in MS and MS-related stocks (whether they know it or not) and you'll begin to grok just how pervasive the resistance against Linux will be. Better check your own portfolio while you're at it, eh? You'd be surprised at the many ways MS and related stocks effect all sorts of markets.
Linux is very strong in its foundations and can withstand "idiot proof" layers on top provided the foundation is not compromised. The biggest technological mistake MS made was to build their OS foundations on top of a GUI (i.e., they considered the GUI more important) and they ended up with a really crappy OS. Linux builds GUIs on top of an exceptionally strong foundation, which is the way to build anything really complex -- the facade is added after the main structure is built, not before.
To sum up my points:
-it's going to get really ugly if the feds and states wimp out and let MS off with a wrist slap for public consumption (while shaking one another's hand all the while -- if you think the feds are going to risk fscking up the economy, you're dreaming;)
-Linux needs to bring into the fold every single living human body it can; this is best done by appealing to all levels of computer users, from newbies to gods, at their own level.
Linux can win this war easily. Indeed, I think it's our war to lose at this point, so remember:
No contribution is so small that anyone can't make one -- all players have effect.