It sounds to me that the Wachowsky brothers did "The Matrix" just for the Sequels. This is true with Star Wars. I mean the movie started out as "Episode IV". Now that takes guts.
They (the brothers) have a good story line to tell, and probably a bunch of stories to go with it. "The Matrix" was just to get things rolling. So I have no doubt that the sequels will be an embarrassment to the original. The could even be better, like T2.
This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important- you're insane.
Guys (and Gals), this is an Internet poll. If you take any of them (Internet polls) seriously, then you should really get your head examined, and I have some really nice Ocean-front property to sell you in Arizona.
Actually, they had proprietary code, so they thought that it was hidden. The article says that the Xing code was reversed engineered. And that their key just wasn't encrypted. So those at Xing probably never thought that their software would be reversed engineered. Idiots, more likely than disgruntled employees.
1) It doesn't look like the thing is even flying yet. Much less having independant operation, much less sending back a signal, much less actually having a camera mounted on it. Sounds like this article is VERY, VERY premature. Sounds a bit like writing up Star Trek as a news story...reality is probably going to look a lot different.
Totally agree.
I *really* have trouble imagining a solar power collection system providing enough power to actually make it fly.
I understand your point, but I believe that this can actually be done. Think of the wings as solar panels, They probably be big enough to collect the energy needed. I also don't see plants walking around, and I have seen solar powered robots, so I don't agree with your argument.
Processor The faster the processors today, the less power it takes to operate them. I can see how nanochips can be used here (although 20 years or more from now).
Propulsion System Some sort of gyro system will probably be used. This was stated in the article, and will probably be very efficient.
Video camera This could be the main problem, and a good point. But it will only need to transmit the signals that the camera picks up. I would assume that this would not even have to convert to digital, just send the analog signal. But I'm not sure about this.
Transmiter I stated this in the last bullet. This and the camera will probably work together. And obviously be short range. You could have another device picking up the signals and amplifying them.
Receiver Probably some sort of device that can be manipulated by external signals. Not actually a receiver that converts the signals to commands, but maybe the processor can be effected by some external signal that would change the direction of the flight. Of course this could then be susceptible to noise, but I'm sure they'll come up with something.
Some kind of energy storage system I don't think this is too much a problem. I have a solar powered watch that makes it through the night;)
fortune statement : "People who say that it can't be done should not interfere with those that are doing it"
I feel this is going to be a new trend in technology. Every time you have some advancement in technology you also have a countermeasure. Like radar guns and radar detectors. I'm sure that if these are used for spying, someone will come out with some sort of jamming device. Although spying can be a big problem, another thing that worries me more, is using these as weapons. Imagine if they simulate a RoboBee, that carries a poison stinger capable of killing. Forget about nature's "killer bees" I'm now worried about man kind's "killer RoboBees". This can take warfare to a new direction.
What was that movie with Tom Selek and Gene Simmonds? With all the killer robotics.
Steven Rostedt
Re:What we need now is a RoboFlyBot.
on
RoboFly
·
· Score: 1
Or if they come out with RoboSlug, we could reuse the SlogBot to harness them out. But I don't think the decomposing of RoboSlug will produce gases needed to power SlugBot!
Or we could have a RoboSpider that makes webs to catch RoboFlys. This would be the counter-measure of the RoboFly.
Image "RoboInsect Wars", where you control the insects and you fight it out. This could be better than Quake!
somehow this reminds me of watching the movie "The Matrix"
I thought the exact same thing! Imagine if the SlugBots get artificial intelligence! I can see it now. Little cocoons with slugs inside, and hooked up to a machine so that the slugs are in an imaginary world, believing that they are eating real leaves. And the agents will be supper powered snails. Until one day the slug "Noa" gets in contact with the slug "Trinity" and wakes up to find the truth behind the SlugMatrix. The slugs overcome the AI and come back to the real world just to be eaten by birds.
I could see RedHat putting money in the open source projects like gcc, gtk, gimp, and other open source utilities that they use. But why would they put money into another distribution. Although Debian is considered the pure open source distribution, why would another distribution put money into it????
RedHat is out to make money, if it were not then it shouldn't have had an IPO. RedHat is not afraid of competition, but it doesn't need to support it!!!
Your kind of both right. I just read the LGPL again, and it states :
A "library" means a collection of software functions and/or data prepared so as to be conveniently linked with application programs (which use some of those functions and data) to form executables.
And also
The "Library", below, refers to any such software library or work which has been distributed under these terms.
The "or work which has been distributed under these terms" seems to imply something other than a library. But the license goes back and forth on this. Every so often it states a "library or other" and then talks only about Libraries.
This is why I say there should be a LLGPL Lesser Lesser GPL that is writen for normal apps. But can use the LGPL and state that all functions and datatypes in the application act like a "library" and any modifications, for compling and other, are all FREE. I know RMS wouldn't like this, but I sit on the boarder. I like GPL but I don't want you to have to have you own routines GPL to use it with mine. But if you modify mine, I still want that FREE.
I guess I'm missing out on the new poetry slam revolution.
Although I disagree with it completely, and not to mention that your post is slightly (Score: -1 Offtopic), I would say it is interesting. Fearing another BSD,SCSL,GPL license war, I will say this.
GPL actually helps against forks. Although several say that it was the cause for the GNOME and KDE separation. And then you get the comments of those who point out that GNOME and KDE have no common point, so it is not a fork. It was a licensing issue that caused GNOME to be created, but it looks like every release, the two become more compatible.
GPL is not FREE for you, it is FREE for the code. The code shall always remain FREE. You don't have the right to make it not FREE, so the code to you is not FREE. But the code itself is. I don't like the "viral" effect of GPL. I prefer something like LGPL, and I wish there would be a license that would be like LGPL for applications and not just libraries. ie. You can use my code as long as all the functions remain FREE. If you modify one of my functions or datatypes, then that too must be FREE. But if you write your own function that simply calls my function, then that code is yours to do what you want.
If a license comes out that is like the above,then that would be my prefered one.
Forks usually happen because of open source becoming closed source. Forks don't happen often in open source to open source unless there is a political reason. But it is more suseptible for open source to fork if it becomes closed, since once it is closed, you can't learn from it. This is what I credit the fork of the Unixs with.
----- Looks like you can stop posting as "negative karma" since you are becoming "wiser" and have reached the depths of "bacteria" in the positive karma;)
Working in this industry, you usually have long hours. Then with the passion of the geek, we work on Open Source when we get home. I personally love the code, but trying to raise two kids, and working full time as well as going to school for my MS in CS it gets hard. I tried to work with Xfree86, I'm still on the development list. But I have yet to submit anything. I was able to work with GTK a while ago, but that slipped too. Now my only saving grace is with college, I can work on a Open Source database for my thesis.
I'm not alone, the hardest thing for Open Source people is time to do it. The learning curve, then the work. And if you get pulled away from it for a while then it's hard to catch back up. When things get slower I want to start my own little project, but that is for later.
Also, looking at the Talk Backs, a lot of reference is made by clueless people that Open Source is done to take down Microsoft. This is sooooo untrue. I don't even think about Microsoft when I work with Linux. Of course RedHat and Caldera have to, to help get MS newbies over to Linux, but those that are writing code, do it for the pleasure of it. How could you accomplish anything if you only work to undermine something else. Negative energy is not easily turned into positive energy. But coding for the love of it will never die. Linus wrote Linux because he wanted an OS that he could live with. Not to undermind MS, but to not have to be stuck with it.
At work we have a mirrored Slackware site, so naturally I started on Slackware (back in Jan 97). To this day I run Slackware at work and have a quad boot at home: Slackware, RedHat, Windows95 and Windows NT. I still need 95 for Quicken, but I'm about to zap NT (disk hog!) cause my use with it is about gone.
Several of my peers have started migrating from Slackware to RedHat. In fact, one of them even made a RedHat mirror. I stuck with Slackware because I prefer the level near the guts of the Machine. I needed to install RedHat at home to understand what others were talking about (utilities and such). But I upgraded Slackware to glibc myself. I'm slowly starting to boot up in RedHat more and more (at home) because it is easier IMO. But there comes a problem: "The dummying effect". Just the other day, a former Unix/Slackware Guru, now on RedHat, could not remember how to set up the/etc/fstab file. He said that most his work is done through GUI's that he forgot how to do it by hand. This is what scares me. And is why I still keep Slackware.
Although (as mentioned in the article) linuxconf is nice, I like AIX Smit, better. Mainly because it would show you the command line command as it executed. I was thinking of writing an equivalent , when I get time, for Linux, and call it something like "Spit".
But if you get too use to using those GUIs and don't play with the files themselves though vi, then you will probably suffer "The Dummying Effect" and forget how. Not to say that its bad, but I don't want to be stuck with depending on a tool for administration. It should only be a tool to help your job, and not just always do it. Tools are usually not to flexible, and cause special needs to be hacked. Sofar I havn't had a problem with Linuxconf, except that to use Netscape mail I need/var/spool/mail with mode 01777 and everytime I activate changes with linuxconf, it changes it back to mode 0775. This ticks me off!!!
Ok, I really can't think of anything witty right now, but I'm a fan of Warner Brothers and think that this should some how be the Marvin's (the WB Martian) pet. If Marvin invented, Linux what would it be called? Marvix? Marvux? Martux? Or what would Marvin name his pet? Tuxin? or How about "I must destroy the world Tux"? or "World Dominence Tux"?
Ok I've had very little sleep. Please ignore this;^)
and talking about tux, don't forget to check out my sig. And don't click on any of the "you"s that are in the words. Steven Rostedt
OK, my original post wasn't a slam against Rob for allowing moderation to get out of hand but that the consequences of letting these problems continue could be very damaging to the credibility of Slashdot. It's just true.
Actually, Rob is constantly changing how moderation works. If you read the moderation page you'll see the history. Rob is trying to make it work, but unfortunately, like all things that are govern by a community, it's impossible to make it perfect. You try different things, and you stick to what you believe is the best. The metamoderation is relatively new, so we can police the moderators. It's a step in the right direction but still needs to have work. Rob will try something new, and see how that works. You should mail Rob your suggestions. He's actually good at reading his mail, as long as you have a good subject line. He's human, and is willing to listen. Steven Rostedt
I've delt with large coorporations before. And I personally know how tough they can be. I will say that IDG may just be looking out for themselves and don't want to bother with this, but if there is a large up roar, then they may get defensive.
Its not your neck on the line, it's "Plumpy"'s. And posting as a AC doesn't show that you are willing to stick your neck out.
Yes, I thought it was a witty letter, but I also believe that you should fight for your rights, and not cross the line to being on the offensive.
Actually I was upset that "Linux for dummies" came out. I always made the statement about, "Windows for dummies", "Windows for idiots", "The Non-Geeks Guide to Windows" and then I would say "Do you see a trend here?" Noting that *nix was for the advanced intellectual, and better than the rest. But than IDG had to go out and publish "Linux for dummies" and ruin it for me:-(
Reason: Lawyers don't like to be insulted. Although others feel they would not be nearly as polite, I caution you to be even more so. Both security and lawyers DO NOT have a sense of humor.
First: change the subject. IDG has too many lawyers will probably be offensive. Maybe "Trade mark problem" or something that is just a topic and not a statement.
Second: It's good up to the point of since anyone else who published that title would get a rather nasty letter from IDG's trigger-happy lawyers) Again, this is insulting. Yes I'm being paranoid, but if you don't want to go to court, you should be paranoid.
The rest looks good. But again, others will probably disagree with me and say "tell them to blow me" but if you just want to be left alone, I would be as serious as possible. Politely tell them the mistake, and see if you can work things out. If you want to make a scene, then you better becareful or they will sue you.
I'm being off topic for the subject, but not for what this thread became.
First I do agree that Moderation is sometimes a problem (I travel at -1 to read all). Sometimes I think people get to hyped up about it. But give Rob a break, he's trying really hard to make it work. It may not be the perfect system (maybe far from it) but I believe it's the best system out there for now.
Only allow those who have been moderated up with "informative" posts to have moderator priviledges. Especially don't allow folks who have only been given positive karma for "Funny" posts, because a funny poster doesn't necessarily imply a clued poster.
I think this is a good comment. It may make Rob work a little to get it to work. But this means we need to have a double karma. Or just have karma affected by "insightful" and "informative" posts.
Allow Meta-Moderators to moderate not only whether a specific post's moderation was fair, but also whether the score total was fair as well.
You can't blame all moderators for this. Once as a moderator, I saw a good post at a one, and thought it should be a two and moderated it up. But because I didn't refresh recently, two others did the same. The post ended up as a 4 which it should have only have been a 2. But you can't help it.
Only allow one moderation per comment per moderator.
Rob has stated that this is actually the case. Although you will loose points if you moderate a comment twice, it won't affect the actual score of the comment. If you think you've done this, see my prior remark.
Prevent moderation (except for first post trolls and flamebait) for the first thirty minutes after a new top level topic.
Good comment, but how do you determine a first post troll or flamebait automatically? F1R$T p0sY and how do you automatically determine a flamebait comment? (or do you call first posts: "trolls" and "flamebait", I read it as "first post trolls" and "flamebait")
I tried looking for libapt-pkg with no avail, so I don't know if it is licensed under GPL or LGPL. If it is GPL, then this is a major problem, if it is LGPL, then isn't this ok?
I have stated before that I prefer the LGPL license. Of course this is primarily for libraries (Was Library GPL, but now it is Lesser GPL). Although RMS wants libraries to be under GPL to give GPL programs only a better advantage. But then those GPL programs are limited to using ONLY GPL licensed libraries. If a library has another license it can't link to it. I prefer licenses to state that you must keep my code free (as in speech), even if you modify it. But if you make an add-on that does not modify my code, then that can be under any license you want. I have yet to see a license that states this, except for LGPL, which I don't think can be used with non-libraries.
I don't like BSD, because I don't want someone to take my code and modify it for a proprietary system without giving anything back to the community. If they don't modify it and only use it, then I really don't care. That's their work, not mine. I'm no lawyer, but I would like to see a good license that is like GPL but without the "viral" effect. Label it down to not modifying any of the "functions/procedures and data types". And state that they may only be modified if they are given back to the public. Would anyone argue this license?
I have not much against any license that people use, it's just that if I have two libraries with two licenses, I should be able to use both if I satisfy the license agreement, and not have to have the two libraries having to do the same!
Checking out the whois database, I noticed that the majority of names are not used. I mean, I just hit my head against the keyboard, attached a.com after the result and THAT was also registared!!! There is no nslookup or anything that I can find.
Maybe we should have a regulation that states that "if the domain name is NOT attached to an actual server after 270 days that it goes back into the pool". (the 270 was just made up out of my head). Kind of like DHCP and leases. This way you can't just squat on a domain for a long time or you will loose it. Maybe even get a refund (with a small penalty taken out).
Passion is what makes a geek. It's what drives the time, effort and study. How many of us stay up late at nights debugging code just because "you almost have it working!", and by 4am you get it to work. It feels great, except you have to be at work by 7am.
No matter how someone tries to be a geek, if you don't have the passion, then you are not a geek. Last night I stayed up late because I had to understand "exactly" how the formula of Hue is created from RGB. Now half asleep (and my wife wanting to kill me) I solved the problem, and I'm thrilled. -- side note, I'm a network person trying to understand graphics:)
Also, off topic: The article says Eric Raymond was Luke Skywalker, I thought he was Obe-Own(sp?), and the dust puppy was Luke.
I've heard stories of people going to jail for writing threats against the President in Library books. And when they return the books, they get reported and arrested.
Of course I believe it was ment for Mr. Gates, but Hey, you never know!
Slashdot Mirror
It sounds to me that the Wachowsky brothers did "The Matrix" just for the Sequels. This is true with Star Wars. I mean the movie started out as "Episode IV". Now that takes guts.
They (the brothers) have a good story line to tell, and probably a bunch of stories to go with it. "The Matrix" was just to get things rolling. So I have no doubt that the sequels will be an embarrassment to the original. The could even be better, like T2.
Steven Rostedt
Guys (and Gals), this is an Internet poll. If you take any of them (Internet polls) seriously, then you should really get your head examined, and I have some really nice Ocean-front property to sell you in Arizona.
Steven Rostedt
Actually, they had proprietary code, so they thought that it was hidden. The article says that the Xing code was reversed engineered. And that their key just wasn't encrypted. So those at Xing probably never thought that their software would be reversed engineered. Idiots, more likely than disgruntled employees.
Steven Rostedt
it. Sounds like this article is VERY, VERY premature. Sounds a bit like writing up Star Trek as a news story...reality is probably going to look a lot different.
Totally agree.
I *really* have trouble imagining a solar power collection system providing enough power to actually make it fly.
I understand your point, but I believe that this can actually be done. Think of the wings as solar panels, They probably be big enough to collect the energy needed. I also don't see plants walking around, and I have seen solar powered robots, so I don't agree with your argument.
fortune statement : "People who say that it can't be done should not interfere with those that are doing it"
Steven Rostedt
A buddy of mine is named "Noa" and I keep confusing his name instead of the name for the character in "The Matrix".
Steven Rostedt
I feel this is going to be a new trend in technology. Every time you have some advancement in technology you also have a countermeasure. Like radar guns and radar detectors. I'm sure that if these are used for spying, someone will come out with some sort of jamming device. Although spying can be a big problem, another thing that worries me more, is using these as weapons. Imagine if they simulate a RoboBee, that carries a poison stinger capable of killing. Forget about nature's "killer bees" I'm now worried about man kind's "killer RoboBees". This can take warfare to a new direction.
What was that movie with Tom Selek and Gene Simmonds? With all the killer robotics.
Steven Rostedt
Or if they come out with RoboSlug, we could reuse the SlogBot to harness them out. But I don't think the decomposing of RoboSlug will produce gases needed to power SlugBot!
Or we could have a RoboSpider that makes webs to catch RoboFlys. This would be the counter-measure of the RoboFly.
Image "RoboInsect Wars", where you control the insects and you fight it out. This could be better than Quake!
Steven Rostedt
somehow this reminds me of watching the movie "The Matrix"
;)
I thought the exact same thing! Imagine if the SlugBots get artificial intelligence! I can see it now. Little cocoons with slugs inside, and hooked up to a machine so that the slugs are in an imaginary world, believing that they are eating real leaves. And the agents will be supper powered snails. Until one day the slug "Noa" gets in contact with the slug "Trinity" and wakes up to find the truth behind the SlugMatrix. The slugs overcome the AI and come back to the real world just to be eaten by birds.
Just a thought!
Steven Rostedt
I could see RedHat putting money in the open source projects like gcc, gtk, gimp, and other open source utilities that they use. But why would they put money into another distribution. Although Debian is considered the pure open source distribution, why would another distribution put money into it????
RedHat is out to make money, if it were not then it shouldn't have had an IPO. RedHat is not afraid of competition, but it doesn't need to support it!!!
Steven Rostedt
Moderators, Moderate this up. It's a good relief for a Friday afternoon ;)
Steven Rostedt
Your kind of both right. I just read the LGPL again, and it states :
A "library" means a collection of software functions and/or data prepared so as to be conveniently linked with application programs (which use some of those functions and data) to
form executables.
And also
The "Library", below, refers to any such software library or work which has been distributed under these terms.
The "or work which has been distributed under these terms" seems to imply something other than a library. But the license goes back and forth on this. Every so often it states a "library or other" and then talks only about Libraries.
This is why I say there should be a LLGPL Lesser Lesser GPL that is writen for normal apps. But can use the LGPL and state that all functions and datatypes in the application act like a "library" and any modifications, for compling and other, are all FREE. I know RMS wouldn't like this, but I sit on the boarder. I like GPL but I don't want you to have to have you own routines GPL to use it with mine. But if you modify mine, I still want that FREE.
Steven Rostedt
I guess I'm missing out on the new poetry slam revolution.
;)
Although I disagree with it completely, and not to mention that your post is slightly (Score: -1 Offtopic), I would say it is interesting. Fearing another BSD,SCSL,GPL license war, I will say this.
GPL actually helps against forks. Although several say that it was the cause for the GNOME and KDE separation. And then you get the comments of those who point out that GNOME and KDE have no common point, so it is not a fork. It was a licensing issue that caused GNOME to be created, but it looks like every release, the two become more compatible.
GPL is not FREE for you, it is FREE for the code. The code shall always remain FREE. You don't have the right to make it not FREE, so the code to you is not FREE. But the code itself is. I don't like the "viral" effect of GPL. I prefer something like LGPL, and I wish there would be a license that would be like LGPL for applications and not just libraries. ie. You can use my code as long as all the functions remain FREE. If you modify one of my functions or datatypes, then that too must be FREE. But if you write your own function that simply calls my function, then that code is yours to do what you want.
If a license comes out that is like the above,then that would be my prefered one.
Forks usually happen because of open source becoming closed source. Forks don't happen often in open source to open source unless there is a political reason. But it is more suseptible for open source to fork if it becomes closed, since once it is closed, you can't learn from it. This is what I credit the fork of the Unixs with.
-----
Looks like you can stop posting as "negative karma" since you are becoming "wiser" and have reached the depths of "bacteria" in the positive karma
Steven Rostedt
Working in this industry, you usually have long hours. Then with the passion of the geek, we work on Open Source when we get home. I personally love the code, but trying to raise two kids, and working full time as well as going to school for my MS in CS it gets hard. I tried to work with Xfree86, I'm still on the development list. But I have yet to submit anything. I was able to work with GTK a while ago, but that slipped too. Now my only saving grace is with college, I can work on a Open Source database for my thesis.
I'm not alone, the hardest thing for Open Source people is time to do it. The learning curve, then the work. And if you get pulled away from it for a while then it's hard to catch back up. When things get slower I want to start my own little project, but that is for later.
Also, looking at the Talk Backs, a lot of reference is made by clueless people that Open Source is done to take down Microsoft. This is sooooo untrue. I don't even think about Microsoft when I work with Linux. Of course RedHat and Caldera have to, to help get MS newbies over to Linux, but those that are writing code, do it for the pleasure of it. How could you accomplish anything if you only work to undermine something else. Negative energy is not easily turned into positive energy. But coding for the love of it will never die. Linus wrote Linux because he wanted an OS that he could live with. Not to undermind MS, but to not have to be stuck with it.
Steven Rostedt
At work we have a mirrored Slackware site, so naturally I started on Slackware (back in Jan 97). To this day I run Slackware at work and have a quad boot at home: Slackware, RedHat, Windows95 and Windows NT. I still need 95 for Quicken, but I'm about to zap NT (disk hog!) cause my use with it is about gone.
/etc/fstab file. He said that most his work is done through GUI's that he forgot how to do it by hand. This is what scares me. And is why I still keep Slackware.
/var/spool/mail with mode 01777 and everytime I activate changes with linuxconf, it changes it back to mode 0775. This ticks me off!!!
Several of my peers have started migrating from Slackware to RedHat. In fact, one of them even made a RedHat mirror. I stuck with Slackware because I prefer the level near the guts of the Machine. I needed to install RedHat at home to understand what others were talking about (utilities and such). But I upgraded Slackware to glibc myself. I'm slowly starting to boot up in RedHat more and more (at home) because it is easier IMO. But there comes a problem: "The dummying effect". Just the other day, a former Unix/Slackware Guru, now on RedHat, could not remember how to set up the
Although (as mentioned in the article) linuxconf is nice, I like AIX Smit, better. Mainly because it would show you the command line command as it executed. I was thinking of writing an equivalent , when I get time, for Linux, and call it something like "Spit".
But if you get too use to using those GUIs and don't play with the files themselves though vi, then you will probably suffer "The Dummying Effect" and forget how. Not to say that its bad, but I don't want to be stuck with depending on a tool for administration. It should only be a tool to help your job, and not just always do it. Tools are usually not to flexible, and cause special needs to be hacked. Sofar I havn't had a problem with Linuxconf, except that to use Netscape mail I need
Ok I'm nit picking...
Steven Rostedt
Ok, I really can't think of anything witty right now, but I'm a fan of Warner Brothers and think that this should some how be the Marvin's (the WB Martian) pet. If Marvin invented, Linux what would it be called? Marvix? Marvux? Martux? Or what would Marvin name his pet? Tuxin? or How about "I must destroy the world Tux"? or "World Dominence Tux"?
;^)
Ok I've had very little sleep. Please ignore this
and talking about tux, don't forget to check out my sig. And don't click on any of the "you"s that are in the words.
Steven Rostedt
I'm just going to comment to your first statement
OK, my original post wasn't a slam against Rob for allowing moderation to get out of hand but that the consequences of letting these problems continue could be very
damaging to the credibility of Slashdot. It's just true.
Actually, Rob is constantly changing how moderation works. If you read the moderation page you'll see the history. Rob is trying to make it work, but unfortunately, like all things that are govern by a community, it's impossible to make it perfect. You try different things, and you stick to what you believe is the best. The metamoderation is relatively new, so we can police the moderators. It's a step in the right direction but still needs to have work. Rob will try something new, and see how that works. You should mail Rob your suggestions. He's actually good at reading his mail, as long as you have a good subject line. He's human, and is willing to listen.
Steven Rostedt
I've delt with large coorporations before. And I personally know how tough they can be. I will say that IDG may just be looking out for themselves and don't want to bother with this, but if there is a large up roar, then they may get defensive.
Its not your neck on the line, it's "Plumpy"'s. And posting as a AC doesn't show that you are willing to stick your neck out.
Yes, I thought it was a witty letter, but I also believe that you should fight for your rights, and not cross the line to being on the offensive.
I'm just sticking out for plumpy.
Steven Rostedt
Actually I was upset that "Linux for dummies" came out. I always made the statement about, "Windows for dummies", "Windows for idiots", "The Non-Geeks Guide to Windows" and then I would say "Do you see a trend here?" Noting that *nix was for the advanced intellectual, and better than the rest. But than IDG had to go out and publish "Linux for dummies" and ruin it for me :-(
Steven Rostedt
Yes, I would even be more polite.
Reason: Lawyers don't like to be insulted. Although others feel they would not be nearly as polite, I caution you to be even more so. Both security and lawyers DO NOT have a sense of humor.
First: change the subject.
IDG has too many lawyers will probably be offensive. Maybe "Trade mark problem" or something that is just a topic and not a statement.
Second: It's good up to the point of since anyone else who published that title would get a rather nasty letter from IDG's trigger-happy lawyers)
Again, this is insulting. Yes I'm being paranoid, but if you don't want to go to court, you should be paranoid.
The rest looks good. But again, others will probably disagree with me and say "tell them to blow me" but if you just want to be left alone, I would be as serious as possible. Politely tell them the mistake, and see if you can work things out. If you want to make a scene, then you better becareful or they will sue you.
Steven Rostedt
I'm being off topic for the subject, but not for what this thread became.
First I do agree that Moderation is sometimes a problem (I travel at -1 to read all). Sometimes I think people get to hyped up about it. But give Rob a break, he's trying really hard to make it work. It may not be the perfect system (maybe far from it) but I believe it's the best system out there for now.
Only allow those who have been moderated up with "informative" posts to have moderator priviledges. Especially don't allow folks who have only been given
positive karma for "Funny" posts, because a funny poster doesn't necessarily imply a clued poster.
I think this is a good comment. It may make Rob work a little to get it to work. But this means we need to have a double karma. Or just have karma affected by "insightful" and "informative" posts.
Allow Meta-Moderators to moderate not only whether a specific post's moderation was fair, but also whether the score total was fair as well.
You can't blame all moderators for this. Once as a moderator, I saw a good post at a one, and thought it should be a two and moderated it up. But because I didn't refresh recently, two others did the same. The post ended up as a 4 which it should have only have been a 2. But you can't help it.
Only allow one moderation per comment per moderator.
Rob has stated that this is actually the case. Although you will loose points if you moderate a comment twice, it won't affect the actual score of the comment. If you think you've done this, see my prior remark.
Prevent moderation (except for first post trolls and flamebait) for the first thirty minutes after a new top level topic.
Good comment, but how do you determine a first post troll or flamebait automatically? F1R$T p0sY and how do you automatically determine a flamebait comment? (or do you call first posts: "trolls" and "flamebait", I read it as "first post trolls" and "flamebait")
Steven Rostedt
Yes you are correct, since LGPL is an extension(?) of GPL, there really isn't a conflict. But can GPL apps be linked to BSD licenses libraries???
Steven Rostedt
I tried looking for libapt-pkg with no avail, so I don't know if it is licensed under GPL or LGPL. If it is GPL, then this is a major problem, if it is LGPL, then isn't this ok?
I have stated before that I prefer the LGPL license. Of course this is primarily for libraries (Was Library GPL, but now it is Lesser GPL). Although RMS wants libraries to be under GPL to give GPL programs only a better advantage. But then those GPL programs are limited to using ONLY GPL licensed libraries. If a library has another license it can't link to it. I prefer licenses to state that you must keep my code free (as in speech), even if you modify it. But if you make an add-on that does not modify my code, then that can be under any license you want. I have yet to see a license that states this, except for LGPL, which I don't think can be used with non-libraries.
I don't like BSD, because I don't want someone to take my code and modify it for a proprietary system without giving anything back to the community. If they don't modify it and only use it, then I really don't care. That's their work, not mine. I'm no lawyer, but I would like to see a good license that is like GPL but without the "viral" effect. Label it down to not modifying any of the "functions/procedures and data types". And state that they may only be modified if they are given back to the public. Would anyone argue this license?
I have not much against any license that people use, it's just that if I have two libraries with two licenses, I should be able to use both if I satisfy the license agreement, and not have to have the two libraries having to do the same!
"Why can't we all just get along?" -- RK
Steven Rostedt
Checking out the whois database, I noticed that the majority of names are not used. I mean, I just hit my head against the keyboard, attached a .com after the result and THAT was also registared!!! There is no nslookup or anything that I can find.
Maybe we should have a regulation that states that "if the domain name is NOT attached to an actual server after 270 days that it goes back into the pool". (the 270 was just made up out of my head). Kind of like DHCP and leases. This way you can't just squat on a domain for a long time or you will loose it. Maybe even get a refund (with a small penalty taken out).
Just a thought, what do you think?
Steven Rostedt
Passion is what makes a geek. It's what drives the time, effort and study. How many of us stay up late at nights debugging code just because "you almost have it working!", and by 4am you get it to work. It feels great, except you have to be at work by 7am.
:)
No matter how someone tries to be a geek, if you don't have the passion, then you are not a geek. Last night I stayed up late because I had to understand "exactly" how the formula of Hue is created from RGB. Now half asleep (and my wife wanting to kill me) I solved the problem, and I'm thrilled. -- side note, I'm a network person trying to understand graphics
Also, off topic: The article says Eric Raymond was Luke Skywalker, I thought he was Obe-Own(sp?), and the dust puppy was Luke.
Steven Rostedt
Maybe (s)he ment President Bill Clinton?
I've heard stories of people going to jail for writing threats against the President in Library books. And when they return the books, they get reported and arrested.
Of course I believe it was ment for Mr. Gates, but Hey, you never know!
Steven Rostedt