Short-sightedness on the part of our story poster here. I think natural language processing, or at least work in its direction is "real work". Especially since if computers are going to be fully (in the sense of casual use the same as a telephone) adopted by our society in the future, they'll have be more human-compatable. (For those on/. that didn't realize it already, most average people are still afraid of PC's.)
When you can dictate instructions to your machine - whether it's 16th century English, or modern Nihongo - the world will be a better place. Steps like this will help lead us to the elimination of these primative and clunky UI's and I/O devices we're currently attached to in favor of elegant, natural communication. Age of intelligent machines, anyone?
I hate all the needless anti-MS sentiment here. No, I don't like Microsoft. They are 'bad', but the reasons they are 'bad' are changing. WindowsXP, while big and bloated, has actually demonstrated decent performance on the machines I've seen it running on, and that's only RC1. It's no replacement for Linux, but it's not too shabby. Sorry to see you get flamed for expressing an accurate, but unpopular viewpoint.
Maybe when the world of Linux zealots realize that you can't douse Microsoft like they're just a lit match, they'll learn to work towards co-integration and more progressive advances into the Windows front. Telling Windows users how much they suck isn't going to get them to install Linux on their machines - it's only going to prove lack of tolerance on the part of Linux users/developers.
Apple has been shipping QuickTime with Mac OS for years now. Why is Microsoft not allowed to distribte its multimedia play-back software while Apple can? What about Windows MovieMaker versus iMovie, also included with MacOS? This train of thought makes no sense. I'm all for breaking up Microsoft, but we still have to be fair in these issues, even if Microsoft aren't playing that way. Why is this unfair?
The browser wars were another story. Browsers compete for compatability with one set of standards: those set forth by the W3C. One web, yet many clients trying to gain a one-up over the other. Integrating your browser product into your operating system dominates the userbase of that OS by eliminating their need to look into other browser software for the same purpose.
Now, let's look at the roles of Windows Media Player versus other media clients. WMP, Real*, and QuickTime each have their own formats with their own niches of acceptance. Some content distributers use ASX, others use Real's format, and still others use QuickTime. Chances are, if you want to see all that's out there (and you're a Windows users), you need to have all three of these clients. Therefore, competition is still open; the prize for dominating is still up for grabs. So what if Microsoft includes WMP with Windows. There's many content producers that swear by QuickTime (Lucas for example).
So my point after all that long-windedness is that MS should not be attacked in areas where they are really not doing anything wrong or particularly detrimental.
The cause for the article just seems too convenient for Microsoft. What's written here reads like a kid who go in trouble for breaking the rules, then pointing to another kid who broke the rules afterwards so that the first kid would get into less trouble.
Would it be at all surprising if this "Surf+" nonsense is just a program written by Microsoft drones, released under another name, to generate publicity somewhere else. To make someone else the bad guy (cuz this is worse - common words as ads). BUT, the whole concept seems so absurd, that I get the impression that we are meant to be highly offended by it.
One that can run all the damn binary forms so you aren't stuck with emulation layers and so on.
Running binaries from other platforms not native to your own is emulation. You're platform A pretending to be platform B (no pun;), for the purpose of running code from platform B without changing that code.
a standardization of binary files probably would make applications more platform independent,
A few such standardized formats are ELF (Executable & Linking Format), AOUT, and JAVA. The last of these, with the proper VM, does make applications more platform independent (sort of:).
The whole point of the article was about eliminating or reducing elitism by trying to bring "the rest of us" up closer to the level of scientists. It's not about being elite. It's about making the playing field even. Trying thinking and you won't mistake people who do so for being elitists.
I know NeXT boxen are relics from the past, for all intensive purposes, useless. However, they are antiques from a company that no longer exists. They were, in reality, a milestone in computing technology. Superior to everything else around them, NeXT boxes a testiment to innovation (unlike most of what we see today).
There's a finite number of this machines left in the world, and it's a shame to see such a silly waste. Instead of burning these classic machines, try donating them to people who appreciate them. You wouldn't burn down Abe Lincoln's cabin would you?
An article on/. came up a while ago about a worm that did just this called "Cheese Worm".
It fixed a back door created by another worm then goes looking for other systems infected by the l10n worm.
Yes, it's a novel idea. No, it's not the solution. Not everyone runs the same distro/OS and not everyone has them configured the same.
It would take an amazing amount of design and coding work to create one that intelligently fixed configuration problems without creating more nightmares for the admin, and even then, it's likely to cause more problems than it fixes. Then it would no longer be a worm - it'd be a "service pack".:-)
This is an idea I sputtered on IRC a few moments ago, and really didn't get any interesting conversation. But...
Basically, would it be possible and hence beneficial for open source and small organizations to proactively restrict licenses on their own software/products on a case by case basis for big corporations? Perhaps the same way that licensing schemes enfroce embargos on high encryption "munitions" from certain countries.
For example: Dolby tells NetBSD they must have proper licensing to distribute ac3dec. Could the NetBSD project turn around and deny Dolby use of any NetBSD software? How about FreeBSD (or is it Open?) modifying the license of their OS such that Microsoft in particular could not use it on their many BSD production servers (such as Hotmail)?
It seems childish, but big corporations frequently act the same way. It's fighting fire with fire and I am convinced that many businesses depend on the fruit of open source. The obivous drawbacks on this idea are reduce acceptance in the mainstream and angering the public (Hotmail going away because a BSD project said 'no' to using their OS, for instance).
If we can't use their stuff, should they be allowed to use "ours'"?
Thoughts/ideas?
Don't Ban It - Let People Discover
on
Dan Gillmor on WinXP
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Preventing the release of WindowsXP will not help to "turn the tides" against Microsoft. I think the majority of Windows users, frustrated over Microsoft's poor quality or not, will find contempt for an injunction against XP's release. I think that it would be best to let Microsoft push the envelope as far as they can in this case until the consumers get absolutely fed up on their own accord. Don't tell them they're fed up. People will reject MS trash when they want to and in due time.
Corporations are Microsoft's biggest customers. They buy Windows licenses by the thousands or even tens of thousands. Whereas if a corporation uses Linux, they may buy a few copies because any IT dept. with its salt knows you don't have per-seat nonsense. All those thousands of copies of Windows cost a lot of money. With all this money going into paying for software, someone has to absorb it. These costs are passed on to the customer.
I'm sure Slashdot users consume lots of goods and services provided by companies both big and small. Most of these companies probably purchase a lot of Windows licenses. As a result, money spent by Slashdot users may indirectly go to paying for a copy of Windows.
Good work everyone, way to support Microsoft, ya bastards.:-)
My mother complains to me (her IS dept) that she keeps receiving spam and pr0n ads. However, her behavior is one not mentioned as one of the high risk activities on that report. She constantly mass mails her friends chain letters and email jokes (and unfortunately for them does not use blind carbon copy). Most people do not remove that big list of addresses from chain letters and the like before sending them on to the next person (or typically, group of people). As a result, those big long lists of email addresses will eventually get harvested by some agency looking to make money on lists of valid addresses. Even worse for my mother, those agencies do not even have to work any further to verify some of the addresses. They can be guarenteed that the sender(s) addresses are valid. Makes it quicker and easier for them to get your email address sold and sent to spammers.
So, meanwhile, my mother and I'm sure countless other novice computer users will continue to complain about spam, but those chain letters will keep getting sent. I wish this report would have gone into more depth about this practice - I think it's one of the quickest ways to get spam.
My friends and I were having a spectacular battle when I decided to launch a meteor strike as the Lunar Corporation against one of them. The attack never came where I targeted... Spooky.
I like the idea of being able to hack around with my PDA, and since I've owned my Palm Vx, I've done my share of tinkering. One thing I've discovered though is that most hacks that radically change its performance defeated its usefulness almost entirely. For example: I recently tried installing LinuxDA on my Palm Vx. I found that I had lost all of the benefits of PalmOS without gaining any of the joys of Linux. Think about the relationship to this project.
What makes PDA's effective for organizational purposes is their utter simplicity. Palm, I think, spent a lot of time engineering their products to be zero-thought devices that worked just how you expected them to work. I think other PDA platforms lack this almost entirely.
Now emulating a Palm Pilot on other PDA architectures? Other than for sheer geek value, why bother? You still lack all the simplicity and easy access. I'm not arguing against the idea of an emulator. It's a neat idea. Just an utter waste when it comes functionality. It's silly.
Don't emulate PalmOS on a PocketPC in hopes of gaining the elegance of a Palm Pilot. Just my two cents.:)
I've been informed that SquareSoft promised its investors it would never do another movie. Appearantly, to finish the project, SS had to supliment their existing budget by nearly two-fold. Basically, it took a LOT longer and a lot more hardware to make than originally anticipated.
The movie is absolutely spectacular - and while SquareSoft will continue to develop their technology and techniques for games, they may not make another movie without support for this one. Personally, I'd like to see more FF movies. I hope it cleans up at the box office!
On city highways around Pittsburgh, PA (and probably elsewhere), I've seen what I'm told are traffic density radar units. Little polls with solar cells on them and white boxes. I could be wrong, but this is where our various local new services get their traffic report data. Why not just sign on a deal with cities already providing this service rather than invading our privacy?
Free access to information is critical to the development of our societies. Everyone needs equal opportunity to whatever data is available from which they can formulate opinions, draw conclusions, and act appropriately for their good or the good of others. The Internet was designed with this in mind. Now while, there's a cost involved with getting access to the Net, this cost is necessary to provide a service that eagerly tries to serve information.
Paying for online content is another story however. Any time you set a price on something, you are saying "No!" to certain groups of people. The higher the cost, the more people you restrict. It prevents the underprivaledged in society to have the same rights and access to information as the more fortunate. In a sense, this gives the wealthy an even greater upper hand. It unbalances the scales.
So long as everyone has access to information, the playing field is level. Whether or not anyone - rich or poor, educated or not - wants to use that information to their own benefit or of others' is a different story. What's important is the equal opportunity.
While setting prices on cellphone ringer songs may seem trivial (even in the tiny expense mentioned here), it opens the door - sets a precedence - to more and more charging for various forms of information. Would you want/. to become a paid service? How about Kuro5hin, dictionary.com? Why don't we just start paying for open source software while we're at it? The possibilities are endless and they are all detremental. So, let's say no to content pricing. Let information be free as it wants to be.
It's been the popular opinion to blame the republican party now in the executive branch of our government. It's easy to complain about a number of other things. But considering how Microsoft has learned from other companies (Bell, AT&T, et. al), they used techniques to save themselves that would have worked with anyone. They quickly jumped in to get people paid off to have strings pulled that prevented the case from going to the Supreme Court (which happened to be very anti-MS, and everyone knew it). They simply moved their case to a court that rested in a region that would "benefit" (for the immediate future) from Microsoft's continued success.
None of us should have expected things to go the right way though. We all know what MS is. We all know how much money it has. We all knew that they were going to weasel out of this one.
Just that this morning (0300EST,06/28/01) is in the range of activity. The article states: Although the shower peaks on June 27th, it takes place at lower intensities from June 26th until July 2nd.
Standing north of Pittsburgh, PA about 20km, I was able to spot one 'meteor' that I'm certain of (sudden point of light with tail appearing for a moment) to the upper-left of Big Dipper, and a few others that seemed really faint, so I'm not sure.
So, if you didn't watch it last night, keep your eyes fixed on that region. You may be lucky enough to catch at least one - which is a treat well worth the effort.:-)
Research studies have shown that too many bright colors can detract from an elderly person's ability to see. Create an image with a pale, light red with black text over top versus a deep, dark red with black text over top. Then squint and unfocus your vision. Which is easier to see?
Slashdot Mirror
Short-sightedness on the part of our story poster here. I think natural language processing, or at least work in its direction is "real work". Especially since if computers are going to be fully (in the sense of casual use the same as a telephone) adopted by our society in the future, they'll have be more human-compatable. (For those on /. that didn't realize it already, most average people are still afraid of PC's.)
When you can dictate instructions to your machine - whether it's 16th century English, or modern Nihongo - the world will be a better place. Steps like this will help lead us to the elimination of these primative and clunky UI's and I/O devices we're currently attached to in favor of elegant, natural communication. Age of intelligent machines, anyone?
I hate all the needless anti-MS sentiment here. No, I don't like Microsoft. They are 'bad', but the reasons they are 'bad' are changing. WindowsXP, while big and bloated, has actually demonstrated decent performance on the machines I've seen it running on, and that's only RC1. It's no replacement for Linux, but it's not too shabby. Sorry to see you get flamed for expressing an accurate, but unpopular viewpoint.
Maybe when the world of Linux zealots realize that you can't douse Microsoft like they're just a lit match, they'll learn to work towards co-integration and more progressive advances into the Windows front. Telling Windows users how much they suck isn't going to get them to install Linux on their machines - it's only going to prove lack of tolerance on the part of Linux users/developers.
Apple has been shipping QuickTime with Mac OS for years now. Why is Microsoft not allowed to distribte its multimedia play-back software while Apple can? What about Windows MovieMaker versus iMovie, also included with MacOS? This train of thought makes no sense. I'm all for breaking up Microsoft, but we still have to be fair in these issues, even if Microsoft aren't playing that way. Why is this unfair?
The browser wars were another story. Browsers compete for compatability with one set of standards: those set forth by the W3C. One web, yet many clients trying to gain a one-up over the other. Integrating your browser product into your operating system dominates the userbase of that OS by eliminating their need to look into other browser software for the same purpose.
Now, let's look at the roles of Windows Media Player versus other media clients. WMP, Real*, and QuickTime each have their own formats with their own niches of acceptance. Some content distributers use ASX, others use Real's format, and still others use QuickTime. Chances are, if you want to see all that's out there (and you're a Windows users), you need to have all three of these clients. Therefore, competition is still open; the prize for dominating is still up for grabs. So what if Microsoft includes WMP with Windows. There's many content producers that swear by QuickTime (Lucas for example).
So my point after all that long-windedness is that MS should not be attacked in areas where they are really not doing anything wrong or particularly detrimental.
The cause for the article just seems too convenient for Microsoft. What's written here reads like a kid who go in trouble for breaking the rules, then pointing to another kid who broke the rules afterwards so that the first kid would get into less trouble.
Would it be at all surprising if this "Surf+" nonsense is just a program written by Microsoft drones, released under another name, to generate publicity somewhere else. To make someone else the bad guy (cuz this is worse - common words as ads). BUT, the whole concept seems so absurd, that I get the impression that we are meant to be highly offended by it.
We got that. It's called .NET common language runtimes
.NET crap ties you even closer to one platform in particular.
Uhm, no. Microsoft's
One that can run all the damn binary forms so you aren't stuck with emulation layers and so on.
;), for the purpose of running code from platform B without changing that code.
:).
:)
:)
Running binaries from other platforms not native to your own is emulation. You're platform A pretending to be platform B (no pun
a standardization of binary files probably would make applications more platform independent,
A few such standardized formats are ELF (Executable & Linking Format), AOUT, and JAVA. The last of these, with the proper VM, does make applications more platform independent (sort of
but what do I know, I'm just a 15 year old nerd
Keep learning!
The whole point of the article was about eliminating or reducing elitism by trying to bring "the rest of us" up closer to the level of scientists. It's not about being elite. It's about making the playing field even. Trying thinking and you won't mistake people who do so for being elitists.
I know NeXT boxen are relics from the past, for all intensive purposes, useless. However, they are antiques from a company that no longer exists. They were, in reality, a milestone in computing technology. Superior to everything else around them, NeXT boxes a testiment to innovation (unlike most of what we see today).
There's a finite number of this machines left in the world, and it's a shame to see such a silly waste. Instead of burning these classic machines, try donating them to people who appreciate them. You wouldn't burn down Abe Lincoln's cabin would you?
An article on /. came up a while ago about a worm that did just this called "Cheese Worm".
:-)
It fixed a back door created by another worm then goes looking for other systems infected by the l10n worm.
Yes, it's a novel idea. No, it's not the solution. Not everyone runs the same distro/OS and not everyone has them configured the same.
It would take an amazing amount of design and coding work to create one that intelligently fixed configuration problems without creating more nightmares for the admin, and even then, it's likely to cause more problems than it fixes. Then it would no longer be a worm - it'd be a "service pack".
This is an idea I sputtered on IRC a few moments ago, and really didn't get any interesting conversation. But...
Basically, would it be possible and hence beneficial for open source and small organizations to proactively restrict licenses on their own software/products on a case by case basis for big corporations? Perhaps the same way that licensing schemes enfroce embargos on high encryption "munitions" from certain countries.
For example: Dolby tells NetBSD they must have proper licensing to distribute ac3dec. Could the NetBSD project turn around and deny Dolby use of any NetBSD software? How about FreeBSD (or is it Open?) modifying the license of their OS such that Microsoft in particular could not use it on their many BSD production servers (such as Hotmail)?
It seems childish, but big corporations frequently act the same way. It's fighting fire with fire and I am convinced that many businesses depend on the fruit of open source. The obivous drawbacks on this idea are reduce acceptance in the mainstream and angering the public (Hotmail going away because a BSD project said 'no' to using their OS, for instance).
If we can't use their stuff, should they be allowed to use "ours'"?
Thoughts/ideas?
Preventing the release of WindowsXP will not help to "turn the tides" against Microsoft. I think the majority of Windows users, frustrated over Microsoft's poor quality or not, will find contempt for an injunction against XP's release. I think that it would be best to let Microsoft push the envelope as far as they can in this case until the consumers get absolutely fed up on their own accord. Don't tell them they're fed up. People will reject MS trash when they want to and in due time.
Corporations are Microsoft's biggest customers. They buy Windows licenses by the thousands or even tens of thousands. Whereas if a corporation uses Linux, they may buy a few copies because any IT dept. with its salt knows you don't have per-seat nonsense. All those thousands of copies of Windows cost a lot of money. With all this money going into paying for software, someone has to absorb it. These costs are passed on to the customer.
:-)
I'm sure Slashdot users consume lots of goods and services provided by companies both big and small. Most of these companies probably purchase a lot of Windows licenses. As a result, money spent by Slashdot users may indirectly go to paying for a copy of Windows.
Good work everyone, way to support Microsoft, ya bastards.
asdf@asdf.com - I can only imagine what they get.
I sent that one to my parental unit in question, and she understood it. Maybe she'll think about it a little more before she sends her next deluge. ;)
My mother complains to me (her IS dept) that she keeps receiving spam and pr0n ads. However, her behavior is one not mentioned as one of the high risk activities on that report. She constantly mass mails her friends chain letters and email jokes (and unfortunately for them does not use blind carbon copy). Most people do not remove that big list of addresses from chain letters and the like before sending them on to the next person (or typically, group of people). As a result, those big long lists of email addresses will eventually get harvested by some agency looking to make money on lists of valid addresses. Even worse for my mother, those agencies do not even have to work any further to verify some of the addresses. They can be guarenteed that the sender(s) addresses are valid. Makes it quicker and easier for them to get your email address sold and sent to spammers.
So, meanwhile, my mother and I'm sure countless other novice computer users will continue to complain about spam, but those chain letters will keep getting sent. I wish this report would have gone into more depth about this practice - I think it's one of the quickest ways to get spam.
My friends and I were having a spectacular battle when I decided to launch a meteor strike as the Lunar Corporation against one of them. The attack never came where I targeted... Spooky.
I like the idea of being able to hack around with my PDA, and since I've owned my Palm Vx, I've done my share of tinkering. One thing I've discovered though is that most hacks that radically change its performance defeated its usefulness almost entirely. For example: I recently tried installing LinuxDA on my Palm Vx. I found that I had lost all of the benefits of PalmOS without gaining any of the joys of Linux. Think about the relationship to this project.
:)
What makes PDA's effective for organizational purposes is their utter simplicity. Palm, I think, spent a lot of time engineering their products to be zero-thought devices that worked just how you expected them to work. I think other PDA platforms lack this almost entirely.
Now emulating a Palm Pilot on other PDA architectures? Other than for sheer geek value, why bother? You still lack all the simplicity and easy access. I'm not arguing against the idea of an emulator. It's a neat idea. Just an utter waste when it comes functionality. It's silly.
Don't emulate PalmOS on a PocketPC in hopes of gaining the elegance of a Palm Pilot. Just my two cents.
See my post here about how SquareSoft blew their budget on this movie. They may not make another. :-(
The movie is absolutely spectacular - and while SquareSoft will continue to develop their technology and techniques for games, they may not make another movie without support for this one. Personally, I'd like to see more FF movies. I hope it cleans up at the box office!
On city highways around Pittsburgh, PA (and probably elsewhere), I've seen what I'm told are traffic density radar units. Little polls with solar cells on them and white boxes. I could be wrong, but this is where our various local new services get their traffic report data. Why not just sign on a deal with cities already providing this service rather than invading our privacy?
Paying for online content is another story however. Any time you set a price on something, you are saying "No!" to certain groups of people. The higher the cost, the more people you restrict. It prevents the underprivaledged in society to have the same rights and access to information as the more fortunate. In a sense, this gives the wealthy an even greater upper hand. It unbalances the scales.
So long as everyone has access to information, the playing field is level. Whether or not anyone - rich or poor, educated or not - wants to use that information to their own benefit or of others' is a different story. What's important is the equal opportunity.
While setting prices on cellphone ringer songs may seem trivial (even in the tiny expense mentioned here), it opens the door - sets a precedence - to more and more charging for various forms of information. Would you want /. to become a paid service? How about Kuro5hin, dictionary.com? Why don't we just start paying for open source software while we're at it? The possibilities are endless and they are all detremental. So, let's say no to content pricing. Let information be free as it wants to be.
Apple failed to set up themselves the latest trends. They not know to shape 'cube' like 'zig'.
It's been the popular opinion to blame the republican party now in the executive branch of our government. It's easy to complain about a number of other things. But considering how Microsoft has learned from other companies (Bell, AT&T, et. al), they used techniques to save themselves that would have worked with anyone. They quickly jumped in to get people paid off to have strings pulled that prevented the case from going to the Supreme Court (which happened to be very anti-MS, and everyone knew it). They simply moved their case to a court that rested in a region that would "benefit" (for the immediate future) from Microsoft's continued success.
None of us should have expected things to go the right way though. We all know what MS is. We all know how much money it has. We all knew that they were going to weasel out of this one.
Just that this morning (0300EST,06/28/01) is in the range of activity. The article states: Although the shower peaks on June 27th, it takes place at lower intensities from June 26th until July 2nd.
:-)
Standing north of Pittsburgh, PA about 20km, I was able to spot one 'meteor' that I'm certain of (sudden point of light with tail appearing for a moment) to the upper-left of Big Dipper, and a few others that seemed really faint, so I'm not sure.
So, if you didn't watch it last night, keep your eyes fixed on that region. You may be lucky enough to catch at least one - which is a treat well worth the effort.
Research studies have shown that too many bright colors can detract from an elderly person's ability to see. Create an image with a pale, light red with black text over top versus a deep, dark red with black text over top. Then squint and unfocus your vision. Which is easier to see?