This is why you can only travel back to when the machine was started. You go into the machine in the future, and come out now. Distance travelled relative to machine = 0.
In fact relativity is why wormholes can be time machines.
Well, a copyrighted Free program could easily be prior art, depending on the filing date. It might even make better prior art because the source is available. So it's not true that copyright is irrelevant to such a patent.
Also note that if any party distributes a GPL'd program, it must license any patents it owns which are implemented in that program, for zero cost, to everybody. So e.g. IBM could not turn around on Linux and start demanding royalties from distributors based on IBM patents.
With a shell that does tab-completion "apropos" can usually be tabbed out after 3 characters ("apr"), for a total of 4 keypresses. "man -k" has to be typed out. 6 keypresses!
MS and Netscape didn't necessarily introduce new HTML features in order to get a monopoly. It seems to me a lot of the new features were added because the devs thought they were cool. Standards bodies were too slow for the devs back then. Nowadays it's the other way round (XHTML 1.1 anyone?).
I agree that Netscape didn't necessarily favour standards, though MS became much much worse.
This isn't insightful unless he is running a server on his machine that might be exploited. (Or any version of IE / OE). Without those, I think win98 will be fairly safe for a long time. Of course this depends on secure practices as well.
Re:Program Not Responding
on
PC Annoyances
·
· Score: 1
That just shows you what terrible usability the 'are you sure you want to quit?' dialog has. It's an awful idea (except when there is unsaved data obviously)
Absolutely. Mac OS > Windows, but cost(Mac) > cost(PC+Windows) big time. Windows wins the market share. This story has been repeated time and again. Cost is how MS won its foothold in operating systems, and it's the one thing it can't outcompete Free software on.
I'm beginning to get really annoyed with these 'Linux needs to innovate' posts. It's like some virulent new troll.
Exactly. And people already have to know whether their legacy (DOS/Win95/98/etc) software will run on Windows XP. Grasping the differences between Windows versions is at least as hard as grasping the difference between JDE and Windows - especially since JDE will LOOK and ACT completely differently to Windows.
The main reason I want accelerated openGL in Linux is to play Unreal Tournament 2003, a closed-source game (and Doom 3 when it's out!). So how much more damage am I doing to my principles (and yes, I do have some) by using the Nvidia binary drivers for this purpose?
I can always switch back to the stock XFree drivers, or just turn off X, if I want to do some kernel debugging for some reason.
I am prepared to help free software developers, you see. I like to send in bug reports when I can. But when I'm not doing that, I want to play UT2003. Is that such a big deal?
Direct democracy is already in action in states like California. It doesn't work very well. Policy 'initiatives' introduced by referendum take up about half the state budget, increasing the tax burden when elected officials try to balance the budget.
The citizens are unable to analyse the cost of each policy proposal in the depth that a government can. In addition, as conflicting proposals may be offered to the citizens simultaneously, the voters have the tricky task of second-guessing which expenditures will pass. For example: I like initiative A, but B (which is horribly expensive) will probably pass. I don't want A to pass if B does. How do I vote?
Introducing complex voting systems to allay this issue will disenfranchise those without time to work out their preferences, and lead to less participation.
Even more problematically, CA's constitution makes repeal of such initiatives, e.g. in times of economic crisis, extremely tricky.
To reiterate: giving the cognitive load of government to part-timers (the public) does not work.
P.S. Source: The Economist's coverage of CA gubernatorial campaign.
Hundreds of thousands protested against the involvement of UK troops in the ultimately pointless invasion of Iraq, and did the government pay any heed? Fuck no.
We elected the MPs. The MPs voted for war. Can't get much fairer than that (sexed up evidence notwithstanding). Remember, we live in a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. Furthermore, a majority of the general population supported the war, both before and after it.
The fringe protesters were numerous, but they weren't a majority by any means. I regret not protesting myself, but there you go.
I can't refute your claims about the electoral commission, although I note you haven't provided any evidence either.
Yes. But trademark, trade secret, contract and patent law would all still apply. Big businesses could easily use these to keep their binary-only software 'safe'.
DRM like Palladium would be used whether copyright exists or not. It will stop copying of proprietary software. You would expect to see a proliferation of dongles, activation, and other copy-prevention hacks as well. The result: lock-in.
Open Source and Free software would be D-E-A-D dead. In short, not a brilliant kind of world to live in.
My view is that copyright law is fine, but the Berne convention should be rescinded. A new copyright model is needed with a new balance of interests (i.e. shorter terms).
Re:Windows for desktop Linux for servers...
on
On The Death Of Unix
·
· Score: 1
Erm, I'm sorry? What fantastic usability feature does Windows have that Gnome/KDE don't?
My grandmother is using KDE + Linux to send email. She had never used a computer before, and hardly even used a typewriter. She is as you describe. She sometimes even forgets what the backspace key does, etc. But she would have exactly the same problems on Windows. Neither interface is trivial to pick up from scratch.
The fact that she has become attached to a particular interface (KDE), and even a particular desktop theme, is NOTHING to do with the usability of KDE versus Windows. It's a simple consequence of being a beginner.
The fact her desktop is low on confusing eye-candy by default, and doesn't have any administrator access out of the box, etc etc, is a bonus.
If a game were 25$ and I could walk and pick it up in 15 mins at the game store near by.. Or spend 1-2 days downloading it...
Check out Steam. It is a game delivery system (with teething troubles, I might add). It is how Counter-Strike players get their patches now. Soon you will be able to buy games like Half-Life 2 via Steam, and pay-as-you-play for other titles. No more walking to the store, hopefully.
TV People don't really 'get' gaming. Gaming does get on TV in the UK occasionally. For instance there is the beat-em-up based gameshow Fightbox. This show is very badly done. Not only are the graphics shoddy, the gameplay itself looks dull and random. The players are strictly amateurs. However, the program does use a 'sports' commentator.
The reason gaming will take a long time to break into the mainstream consciousness as a 'sport' is the same reason any new traditional sport takes a while to get popular. The rules need to be explained to the audience. In a gaming context, the rules are really the control system used by the players - the set of choices they have at any moment and the amount of time they have to make those choices.
For Fightbox the controls are at the same time apparently simple, and obscured from the audience. The producers don't trust the audience with the rules. Unsurprisingly Fightbox is a ratings flop. The results seem essentially random, and the game just doesn't have enough depth. In particular, it is not a team game.
I think gaming on TV might work in a sports format if the rules are known. To put Counter-strike on TV would be quite easy because it is a fairly 'traditional' FPS game. It is also made up of quick rounds. The violence might be a problem, of course; this is a side issue.
But it would take a brave producer to take the step of actually displaying gaming as a sport; and an intelligent one to make it watchable. Although (NFL) football is complicated, NFL spectators are a sophisticated audience. They know what a pooch kick is, for example, and why you might want to use that play. The commentary generally reflects this sophistication. Similarly, gaming on TV needs a game which the audience can and will grasp, and it needs to be presented accordingly, in all its detail.
Plus the whole point of an Ipod is it has all your songs - surely including some that aren't your favourites. You don't just listen to your favourites all the time, do you? Whether on an Ipod or on a walkman.
I still don't see the explanation of how the Ipod has caused this phenomenon. The distinctive white earphones might have something to do with it.
Except the BSDs are old Unix. BSD licensed, no-one can hack on it without being sure their code wouldn't be taken away by a company (like IBM or MS) and used in their proprietary Unix.
Some people want their work to stay free. The GPL offers an incentive for all those people to play the game together.
in the Desktop... it feels like each piece of software is in a different universe.
I think that's a really good point. Hopefully freedesktop.org are able to stop this from getting any worse. The sooner they freeze the API on things like D-BUS, the sooner things will start to 'click'. We'll probably be at Gnome 3 and KDE 4 then though.
Slashdot Mirror
In fact relativity is why wormholes can be time machines.
Also note that if any party distributes a GPL'd program, it must license any patents it owns which are implemented in that program, for zero cost, to everybody. So e.g. IBM could not turn around on Linux and start demanding royalties from distributors based on IBM patents.
With a shell that does tab-completion "apropos" can usually be tabbed out after 3 characters ("apr"), for a total of 4 keypresses. "man -k" has to be typed out. 6 keypresses!
Grandmother, never used a computer before -> Linux.
I agree that Netscape didn't necessarily favour standards, though MS became much much worse.
This isn't insightful unless he is running a server on his machine that might be exploited. (Or any version of IE / OE). Without those, I think win98 will be fairly safe for a long time. Of course this depends on secure practices as well.
That just shows you what terrible usability the 'are you sure you want to quit?' dialog has. It's an awful idea (except when there is unsaved data obviously)
Presumably MAS will throw the sound straight to Dmix if it is available, and the X clients are on the same host as the server.
I'm beginning to get really annoyed with these 'Linux needs to innovate' posts. It's like some virulent new troll.
Exactly. And people already have to know whether their legacy (DOS/Win95/98/etc) software will run on Windows XP. Grasping the differences between Windows versions is at least as hard as grasping the difference between JDE and Windows - especially since JDE will LOOK and ACT completely differently to Windows.
I can always switch back to the stock XFree drivers, or just turn off X, if I want to do some kernel debugging for some reason.
I am prepared to help free software developers, you see. I like to send in bug reports when I can. But when I'm not doing that, I want to play UT2003. Is that such a big deal?
The citizens are unable to analyse the cost of each policy proposal in the depth that a government can. In addition, as conflicting proposals may be offered to the citizens simultaneously, the voters have the tricky task of second-guessing which expenditures will pass. For example: I like initiative A, but B (which is horribly expensive) will probably pass. I don't want A to pass if B does. How do I vote?
Introducing complex voting systems to allay this issue will disenfranchise those without time to work out their preferences, and lead to less participation.
Even more problematically, CA's constitution makes repeal of such initiatives, e.g. in times of economic crisis, extremely tricky.
To reiterate: giving the cognitive load of government to part-timers (the public) does not work.
P.S. Source: The Economist's coverage of CA gubernatorial campaign.
We elected the MPs. The MPs voted for war. Can't get much fairer than that (sexed up evidence notwithstanding). Remember, we live in a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. Furthermore, a majority of the general population supported the war, both before and after it.
The fringe protesters were numerous, but they weren't a majority by any means. I regret not protesting myself, but there you go.
I can't refute your claims about the electoral commission, although I note you haven't provided any evidence either.
DRM like Palladium would be used whether copyright exists or not. It will stop copying of proprietary software. You would expect to see a proliferation of dongles, activation, and other copy-prevention hacks as well. The result: lock-in.
Open Source and Free software would be D-E-A-D dead. In short, not a brilliant kind of world to live in.
My view is that copyright law is fine, but the Berne convention should be rescinded. A new copyright model is needed with a new balance of interests (i.e. shorter terms).
My grandmother is using KDE + Linux to send email. She had never used a computer before, and hardly even used a typewriter. She is as you describe. She sometimes even forgets what the backspace key does, etc. But she would have exactly the same problems on Windows. Neither interface is trivial to pick up from scratch.
The fact that she has become attached to a particular interface (KDE), and even a particular desktop theme, is NOTHING to do with the usability of KDE versus Windows. It's a simple consequence of being a beginner.
The fact her desktop is low on confusing eye-candy by default, and doesn't have any administrator access out of the box, etc etc, is a bonus.
And does it detect big fish?
The reason gaming will take a long time to break into the mainstream consciousness as a 'sport' is the same reason any new traditional sport takes a while to get popular. The rules need to be explained to the audience. In a gaming context, the rules are really the control system used by the players - the set of choices they have at any moment and the amount of time they have to make those choices.
For Fightbox the controls are at the same time apparently simple, and obscured from the audience. The producers don't trust the audience with the rules. Unsurprisingly Fightbox is a ratings flop. The results seem essentially random, and the game just doesn't have enough depth. In particular, it is not a team game.
I think gaming on TV might work in a sports format if the rules are known. To put Counter-strike on TV would be quite easy because it is a fairly 'traditional' FPS game. It is also made up of quick rounds. The violence might be a problem, of course; this is a side issue.
But it would take a brave producer to take the step of actually displaying gaming as a sport; and an intelligent one to make it watchable. Although (NFL) football is complicated, NFL spectators are a sophisticated audience. They know what a pooch kick is, for example, and why you might want to use that play. The commentary generally reflects this sophistication. Similarly, gaming on TV needs a game which the audience can and will grasp, and it needs to be presented accordingly, in all its detail.
And are marksmen atheletes?
Oh god. Please, no.
Plus the whole point of an Ipod is it has all your songs - surely including some that aren't your favourites. You don't just listen to your favourites all the time, do you? Whether on an Ipod or on a walkman.
I still don't see the explanation of how the Ipod has caused this phenomenon. The distinctive white earphones might have something to do with it.
Some people want their work to stay free. The GPL offers an incentive for all those people to play the game together.