Only trouble is, I've got this image in my head now that won't go away - all those orphans in Uganda, each with their very own copy of Vim on floppy disk, looking around for a computer to install it on...
That's a question I had, as well... isn't one of the big "selling points" about Linux the fact that there aren't branches and forks everywhere?
When most people think Linux, they think of the operating system as a whole, and on that level we already have many multiple branches and forks. Debian, Redhat, Mandrake, etc...
If I was to pick a big selling point for Linux, it would be based on price and customisability - this branch targets Linux on the workstation whilst the official branch is more aimed at servers, or at least that's how I understand it.
I agree with you to a certain extent that terminology is important. Perhaps it should be given a catchy unofficial slogan, like "Desktop optimised", or "Linux for Workstations", or some such thing.
I am only here challenging one part of your argument - closed source.
There is one very big problem with closed source which open source neatly avoids, and that is the problem of what happens when the original company either stops supporting it, or vanishes off the face of the earth.
Let's take a couple of examples - os/2 and Beos. Without knowing much about either operating system, but from reading the laments of others, if they had been open sourced when the original companies had lost interest, then they would still be alive and in development today.
You may say, and it is a valid argument, that if these operating systems had become a success then they would have been in wider use, and thus wouldn't have been forgotten. Granted, this is true. Now consider the following cases.
Windows 95 and Mac OS 9.
Two operating systems, once widely used. (In the case of Mac OS 9, still widely used). But in Windows 95's case already, and in Max OS 9 it's simply a matter of time, no more security updates will be made. No new minor modifications. People who want to carry on using them, who have no wish to upgrade their hardware simply because the newer versions require higher specced systems, have to live with the bugs on their computer, with no hope of them being fixed.
Now let's take an open source "success", and you may read this however you like - Nautilus. The company that made it, Eazel, no longer exists. Imagine if Nautilus was closed source - what would that mean? Well it's obvious - it wouldn't be developed anymore. It would have vanished into the mists of time. Some people might see this as a good thing. But the truth is, that because it was open source, it still exists, and is still being developed. What it turns into, who knows - perhaps it will be the best software ever, perhaps it will just become more and more bloated. At least it has the chance to find out
This is the nice property of open source - software doesn't die unless everyone loses interest in it, which doesn't happen unless the alternatives are so incredible that they deserve to be forgotten... The fact that it doesn't cost anything is just a bonus.
The bad property of open source is that it places software over the developer, and that we have yet to find an effective way of making sure that the developer does not get left out. but some developers have found effective ways - think Trolltech, for instance. When more companies have successful business models which integrate Open Source software into their philosophy, I think that they will become a very powerful competitor to the closed source models of software development.
Is this really any different from websites having "Needs Real Player to play" or "Needs Microsoft Media Player to play" (download here) links that nigh on every website with streaming media already has on it?
IMHO, one of two things will happen if/(or more likely when) Ogg Vorbis becomes a widely used format - either a particular media player will be picked as the Ogg vorbis 'Champion' - possibly the new version of Winamp which I believe will include the ogg vorbis plugin by default, or a nice download page which let's you choose your operating system, media player and click download to get an executable that will install it.
People have been blindly installing plugins for years now - I don't think that they are particularly likely to stop just because a plugin is opensource.
Hmmm... Great. But we still get a race between the autoinstaller downloading the patch, and the attacks from the all new improved Code Red XP which isn't out yet but which I guess there are at least one or two versions of being written in back bedrooms the world over.
If I recall, on average I was getting one attack every fifteen minutes from Code Red. So how long does this patch take to download? Especially since it's happening in the background, I guess that means it takes a lower priority over a users normal browsing.
Microsoft should have withdrawn XP and fixed it. Expecially as they don't even have any serious competitors. What they showed was that they don't care about the safety of their customers. They just want to make money no matter what.
In my opinion they should _STILL_ withdraw it and fix it.
By this, I mean that they should recall every vulnerable CD off of shelves, and send everyone who they know has bought one a new copy that is already patched.
Computers bought with Windows XP preinstalled should have the offer of being recalled to have the patch applied, and everyone should be sent an updated recovery disk.
Why? Because otherwise, 90% of computers out there, run by the technologically clueless population will never get this patch applied.
This would be a nasty one as well...
on
WinXP Security Flaw
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Imagine this scenario:
1. your off-the-cd version of windows XP is vulnerable.
2. You connect to the internet to download all of the security patches.
3. WAMMO! you get struck by this code red XP exploit.
4. It get's installed before you have had a chance to install the patch.
5. It recognises the security update patch and silently/secretly ignores it.
6. Your system is still rooted, you believe you have patched your system, you don't realise until you run your favourate virus checker, Code Red XP notices and nukes your system.
7. You blame your virus software for destroying your computer and reinstall windows XP off the CD...
The "freedom" that users suffer from is not being able to distribute the software to other users, not being allowed to use the software as they want (for instance, your not allowed/supposed to install a single Windows XP license on multiple machines simultaneously), not being allowed to hire programmers to "add an extra level" in your model above.
Stuff like that, really. Software freedom means being able to use software how you like, whether that means installing it where, how, and as many times as you want, as well as meaning being able to change the code itself to better suit your purpose.
I agree. More to the point, if you want to be paid for writing something, or making something, then obviously - don't make it until people have paid you to.
Imagine if plumbers came into your house, refitted your boiler, checked your pipes, etc. without asking you first. And then tried to charge you afterwards when you start using the new stuff that they have done.
And remember, this problem would be a lot more widespread if we could manage teleportation and duplication of real-life objects - Imagine if you could go down the street and make a copy of your mates Ferrari:-)
The only freedom that is being lost is the freedom to take freedom from other people.
If you have a problem losing this freedom, then ask yourself what your hidden motives are.
I personally, couldn't care less what anyone does with anything I have ever created, whether software, art, whatever. If they can change it into something better, great. They deserve to be able to do that. Why should I restrict their freedom to do this? I cannot think of an answer to my own question, which is why I disagree with what you say.
I've had a couple of Relatively major (if you don't know what your doing and where to look for help)/Relatively minor (if you do know) problems with using unstable, with such great symptoms as xwindows failing to start (someone accidentally put quotes around something they shouldn't have) to gpm failing to detect my mouse and exiting on startup. This happened a couple of days ago, and I haven't figured out exactly what's going wrong - I just told x windows to use the mouse directly.
I just thought I should warn people that if you run unstable and update it regularly, expect the odd - as in once every couple of months - bug which will take a couple of hours of your time to fix.
Umm... In my opinion that is the wrong way of looking at it.
Think about it. These documents are, in effect, a way of saying "security weakness". By making the documents closed, we are promoting security through obscurity, which has been proved time and time again not to work.
Perhaps instead we should be concentrating more on how to secure those places which the documents, well..., document. We've already seen from September 11th that terrorists and the like are capable of incredible ingenuity, and we must not forget that they are capable of doing their own research - just because we consider them to be mad, doesn't mean that they are stupid.
Or to put it another way, burning all of the documents that happen to detail airplane security and it's weaknesses will not stop hijackers from taking a plane. ACTING on those documents and improving security will.
What was the example in the article - a cd containing a dam and resevoir survey? So why not consider the ways that the water system can be attacked, and then safe-guard against these kind of attacks?
Re:current state from a user's perspective:
on
KDE 3.0 Screenshots
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Yes and yes. You can do that in KDE 2, because both are part of the printing system.
You can print to a printer, a post script file, a pdf file, send as a fax, etc. and you can configure your own custom commands as well
Print preview is basically using kghostview to show the postscript file that's going to be printed, so you can see what it looks like there.
Looks cool and I want one but...
on
Virtual Keyboard
·
· Score: 2
Wouldn't this be really bad on the fingers, since there's nothing for them to "bounce" off after each keypress?
[OT] Where can I find coding/art skill demos?
on
Are Videogames Art?
·
· Score: 1
What I'm wondering is why demos (the ones created to show off coding/art skills - not a product taster) aren't being considered. They're the computer equivalent of a music video.
Does anyone know any good sites to go to view this kind of demo? It just occured to me that the last time I saw one was back on the good ol' Atari ST, and I'd forgotten all about them.
Household CD Player +
pair of phono to quarter inch jack +
Decent soundcard +
Computer +
WAV Recorder +
WAV -> MP3 converter
= circumvention device.
How about :
Radio + Cassette tape + a bit of patience = circumvention device.
How about :
Sky Satellite dish + Digital box + The Box (music channel) + Decent TV Card + computer
= circumvention device letting you get music videos as a bonus
Think that the computer is the common denominator? How about:
Home CD PLayer +
Phono leads +
mp3 recorder
= circumvention device
Hmm... maybe ban phono -> jack leads?
finally:
Home CD player +
Speakers +
Microphone +
Computer +
WAV Recorder +
WAV -> MP3 convertor
So it looks like the only way to get rid of all circumvention devices is, in fact, to ban computers, leads, speakers, microphones, mp3's, wavs, and, just to be on the safe side, let's lock up anyone who happens to hum whilst walking down the street, just in case they are humming copy-protected material.
It's a java based client, so the interface is a bit clunky, but last time I tried it, it did better than any other client I tried at searching for stuff you want. (That was about a year ago though)
And last I heard, Limewire was made opensource, so you can feel nice and warm and pleasant inside whilst your enlargening your pron collection.
Because the GPL is giving extras rights to the people who use the software, and violating the GPL is removing these rights.
That's the easy one. Now for the controversial one, cos it's technically stealing, but most people don't see it that way, and there's lot's of good reasons why.
Downloading music off the internet is quite often a very easy way to find out whether or not you like a band, or whether or not the latest Jamiroquai album is worth buying (my verdict - yes it is). And then there's those times when perhaps you like ONE song on an album, and it was never released as a single. Not many people are going to buy the album for one song. Download it off the internet? Sure they will.
If someone is that keen on pirating songs anyway, they normally find a copy of the CD from somewhere (mates, library, whatever) and rip the songs from there, because it doesn't take so long - stopping services like Napster won't halt piracy much.
Again, most people who use Napster I guess are the same kind who visit Warez sites. They might happen to have several gigs worth of downloaded stuff which they would have NEVER bought, but hey, they don't actually use it for anything worthwile either so who cares?
And that's the thing, if you really like a particular band, then you will buy their stuff. I love reading Terry Pratchett, so I buy all of the books. I don't have enough money to buy the Hardback editions, so I wait for paperback. I love listening to Jamiroquai, so I go out and buy their albums. I'm not a fan of Robert Palmer, but I liked Addicted to love, so I downloaded it. I don't like it enough to go out and buy it though, and I don't listen to it enough to warrant buying it either. So Robert Palmers not lost anything (I wouldn't have bought it anyway), I've gained a bit because I can listen to it occasionally.
But hey, maybe I'll start downloading and listening to some of his other stuff, and maybe I'll like it. Then I'd go out and buy the album, if for no other reason than to rip it to ogg vorbis cleanly at 160bps:-)
Have I done this in the past? Yes, I bought the Bloodhound Gand single "The Bad Touch" after finding it on Napster.
And then there are all those songs on Napster which you can't find in the shops easily, such as that Irish Drinking Song, "Bugger Off" (If I see an album in the shops with that on, I'd buy it too:-)
But hey, that's just why I download stuff. Perhaps other people have more compelly reasons.
Slashdot Mirror
Charityware is a nice idea!
Only trouble is, I've got this image in my head now that won't go away - all those orphans in Uganda, each with their very own copy of Vim on floppy disk, looking around for a computer to install it on...
That's a question I had, as well... isn't one of the big "selling points" about Linux the fact that there aren't branches and forks everywhere?
When most people think Linux, they think of the operating system as a whole, and on that level we already have many multiple branches and forks. Debian, Redhat, Mandrake, etc...
If I was to pick a big selling point for Linux, it would be based on price and customisability - this branch targets Linux on the workstation whilst the official branch is more aimed at servers, or at least that's how I understand it.
I agree with you to a certain extent that terminology is important. Perhaps it should be given a catchy unofficial slogan, like "Desktop optimised", or "Linux for Workstations", or some such thing.
It seems relevant that this link should be noted. Seems like the project's run out of funding?
I am only here challenging one part of your argument - closed source.
There is one very big problem with closed source which open source neatly avoids, and that is the problem of what happens when the original company either stops supporting it, or vanishes off the face of the earth.
Let's take a couple of examples - os/2 and Beos. Without knowing much about either operating system, but from reading the laments of others, if they had been open sourced when the original companies had lost interest, then they would still be alive and in development today.
You may say, and it is a valid argument, that if these operating systems had become a success then they would have been in wider use, and thus wouldn't have been forgotten. Granted, this is true. Now consider the following cases.
Windows 95 and Mac OS 9.
Two operating systems, once widely used. (In the case of Mac OS 9, still widely used). But in Windows 95's case already, and in Max OS 9 it's simply a matter of time, no more security updates will be made. No new minor modifications. People who want to carry on using them, who have no wish to upgrade their hardware simply because the newer versions require higher specced systems, have to live with the bugs on their computer, with no hope of them being fixed.
Now let's take an open source "success", and you may read this however you like - Nautilus. The company that made it, Eazel, no longer exists. Imagine if Nautilus was closed source - what would that mean? Well it's obvious - it wouldn't be developed anymore. It would have vanished into the mists of time. Some people might see this as a good thing. But the truth is, that because it was open source, it still exists, and is still being developed. What it turns into, who knows - perhaps it will be the best software ever, perhaps it will just become more and more bloated. At least it has the chance to find out
This is the nice property of open source - software doesn't die unless everyone loses interest in it, which doesn't happen unless the alternatives are so incredible that they deserve to be forgotten... The fact that it doesn't cost anything is just a bonus.
The bad property of open source is that it places software over the developer, and that we have yet to find an effective way of making sure that the developer does not get left out. but some developers have found effective ways - think Trolltech, for instance. When more companies have successful business models which integrate Open Source software into their philosophy, I think that they will become a very powerful competitor to the closed source models of software development.
Is this really any different from websites having "Needs Real Player to play" or "Needs Microsoft Media Player to play" (download here) links that nigh on every website with streaming media already has on it?
IMHO, one of two things will happen if/(or more likely when) Ogg Vorbis becomes a widely used format - either a particular media player will be picked as the Ogg vorbis 'Champion' - possibly the new version of Winamp which I believe will include the ogg vorbis plugin by default, or a nice download page which let's you choose your operating system, media player and click download to get an executable that will install it.
People have been blindly installing plugins for years now - I don't think that they are particularly likely to stop just because a plugin is opensource.
...and you only have to download it once, anyway.
Hmmm... Great. But we still get a race between the autoinstaller downloading the patch, and the attacks from the all new improved Code Red XP which isn't out yet but which I guess there are at least one or two versions of being written in back bedrooms the world over.
If I recall, on average I was getting one attack every fifteen minutes from Code Red. So how long does this patch take to download? Especially since it's happening in the background, I guess that means it takes a lower priority over a users normal browsing.
Microsoft should have withdrawn XP and fixed it. Expecially as they don't even have any serious competitors. What they showed was that they don't care about the safety of their customers. They just want to make money no matter what.
In my opinion they should _STILL_ withdraw it and fix it.
By this, I mean that they should recall every vulnerable CD off of shelves, and send everyone who they know has bought one a new copy that is already patched.
Computers bought with Windows XP preinstalled should have the offer of being recalled to have the patch applied, and everyone should be sent an updated recovery disk.
Why? Because otherwise, 90% of computers out there, run by the technologically clueless population will never get this patch applied.
Imagine this scenario:
:-)
1. your off-the-cd version of windows XP is vulnerable.
2. You connect to the internet to download all of the security patches.
3. WAMMO! you get struck by this code red XP exploit.
4. It get's installed before you have had a chance to install the patch.
5. It recognises the security update patch and silently/secretly ignores it.
6. Your system is still rooted, you believe you have patched your system, you don't realise until you run your favourate virus checker, Code Red XP notices and nukes your system.
7. You blame your virus software for destroying your computer and reinstall windows XP off the CD...
8. goto 1
Believable scare-mongering?
Perhaps if you set your threshold higher than 1 then you would solve the problem, no?
i mean, if I had then I wouldn't have had to bother reading your post, would I? (unless it gets modded up in the future)
How about RMS - is he Gandalf, or Saruman?
Reports have come from a source close to Stallman
Would that be emacs, or gcc?
The "freedom" that users suffer from is not being able to distribute the software to other users, not being allowed to use the software as they want (for instance, your not allowed/supposed to install a single Windows XP license on multiple machines simultaneously), not being allowed to hire programmers to "add an extra level" in your model above.
Stuff like that, really. Software freedom means being able to use software how you like, whether that means installing it where, how, and as many times as you want, as well as meaning being able to change the code itself to better suit your purpose.
I agree. More to the point, if you want to be paid for writing something, or making something, then obviously - don't make it until people have paid you to.
:-)
Imagine if plumbers came into your house, refitted your boiler, checked your pipes, etc. without asking you first. And then tried to charge you afterwards when you start using the new stuff that they have done.
And remember, this problem would be a lot more widespread if we could manage teleportation and duplication of real-life objects - Imagine if you could go down the street and make a copy of your mates Ferrari
The only freedom that is being lost is the freedom to take freedom from other people.
If you have a problem losing this freedom, then ask yourself what your hidden motives are.
I personally, couldn't care less what anyone does with anything I have ever created, whether software, art, whatever. If they can change it into something better, great. They deserve to be able to do that. Why should I restrict their freedom to do this? I cannot think of an answer to my own question, which is why I disagree with what you say.
There won't be any trouble claiming "prior art" though, will there?
I've had a couple of Relatively major (if you don't know what your doing and where to look for help)/Relatively minor (if you do know) problems with using unstable, with such great symptoms as xwindows failing to start (someone accidentally put quotes around something they shouldn't have) to gpm failing to detect my mouse and exiting on startup. This happened a couple of days ago, and I haven't figured out exactly what's going wrong - I just told x windows to use the mouse directly.
I just thought I should warn people that if you run unstable and update it regularly, expect the odd - as in once every couple of months - bug which will take a couple of hours of your time to fix.
Sheesh, some guys just cannot _bare_ to buy a new modem for oohh... 30 quid?
(Note that this is a joke so don't start arguing with me)
Umm... In my opinion that is the wrong way of looking at it.
Think about it. These documents are, in effect, a way of saying "security weakness". By making the documents closed, we are promoting security through obscurity, which has been proved time and time again not to work.
Perhaps instead we should be concentrating more on how to secure those places which the documents, well..., document. We've already seen from September 11th that terrorists and the like are capable of incredible ingenuity, and we must not forget that they are capable of doing their own research - just because we consider them to be mad, doesn't mean that they are stupid.
Or to put it another way, burning all of the documents that happen to detail airplane security and it's weaknesses will not stop hijackers from taking a plane. ACTING on those documents and improving security will.
What was the example in the article - a cd containing a dam and resevoir survey? So why not consider the ways that the water system can be attacked, and then safe-guard against these kind of attacks?
Yes and yes. You can do that in KDE 2, because both are part of the printing system.
You can print to a printer, a post script file, a pdf file, send as a fax, etc. and you can configure your own custom commands as well
Print preview is basically using kghostview to show the postscript file that's going to be printed, so you can see what it looks like there.
Wouldn't this be really bad on the fingers, since there's nothing for them to "bounce" off after each keypress?
What I'm wondering is why demos (the ones created to show off coding/art skills - not a product taster) aren't being considered. They're the computer equivalent of a music video.
Does anyone know any good sites to go to view this kind of demo? It just occured to me that the last time I saw one was back on the good ol' Atari ST, and I'd forgotten all about them.
Hmmm....
Household CD Player +
pair of phono to quarter inch jack +
Decent soundcard +
Computer +
WAV Recorder +
WAV -> MP3 converter
= circumvention device.
How about :
Radio + Cassette tape + a bit of patience = circumvention device.
How about :
Sky Satellite dish + Digital box + The Box (music channel) + Decent TV Card + computer
= circumvention device letting you get music videos as a bonus
Think that the computer is the common denominator? How about:
Home CD PLayer +
Phono leads +
mp3 recorder
= circumvention device
Hmm... maybe ban phono -> jack leads?
finally:
Home CD player +
Speakers +
Microphone +
Computer +
WAV Recorder +
WAV -> MP3 convertor
So it looks like the only way to get rid of all circumvention devices is, in fact, to ban computers, leads, speakers, microphones, mp3's, wavs, and, just to be on the safe side, let's lock up anyone who happens to hum whilst walking down the street, just in case they are humming copy-protected material.
Well, I got it off Napster originally on Windows,
:-0
Then, when I moved to Linux, I rebuilt my small mp3 collection, I downloaded it again off gnutella.
Strange, but I can't actually find it there, probably because people have migrated to morpheus and stuff again.
Browse a couple of the different services, and search for "bugger off" - the artist is normally listed as something like "Irish Drinking Songs".
Another good one if you like that kind of thing is "the ball of kerrymuir". (That's a Scottish one)
Sometimes I wish I wasn't English, everywhere else seems to have really good folk songs, whilst I can't think of a single one from England
I'd recommend Limewire as a gnutella client.
It's a java based client, so the interface is a bit clunky, but last time I tried it, it did better than any other client I tried at searching for stuff you want. (That was about a year ago though)
And last I heard, Limewire was made opensource, so you can feel nice and warm and pleasant inside whilst your enlargening your pron collection.
Because the GPL is giving extras rights to the people who use the software, and violating the GPL is removing these rights.
:-)
:-)
That's the easy one. Now for the controversial one, cos it's technically stealing, but most people don't see it that way, and there's lot's of good reasons why.
Downloading music off the internet is quite often a very easy way to find out whether or not you like a band, or whether or not the latest Jamiroquai album is worth buying (my verdict - yes it is). And then there's those times when perhaps you like ONE song on an album, and it was never released as a single. Not many people are going to buy the album for one song. Download it off the internet? Sure they will.
If someone is that keen on pirating songs anyway, they normally find a copy of the CD from somewhere (mates, library, whatever) and rip the songs from there, because it doesn't take so long - stopping services like Napster won't halt piracy much.
Again, most people who use Napster I guess are the same kind who visit Warez sites. They might happen to have several gigs worth of downloaded stuff which they would have NEVER bought, but hey, they don't actually use it for anything worthwile either so who cares?
And that's the thing, if you really like a particular band, then you will buy their stuff. I love reading Terry Pratchett, so I buy all of the books. I don't have enough money to buy the Hardback editions, so I wait for paperback. I love listening to Jamiroquai, so I go out and buy their albums. I'm not a fan of Robert Palmer, but I liked Addicted to love, so I downloaded it. I don't like it enough to go out and buy it though, and I don't listen to it enough to warrant buying it either. So Robert Palmers not lost anything (I wouldn't have bought it anyway), I've gained a bit because I can listen to it occasionally.
But hey, maybe I'll start downloading and listening to some of his other stuff, and maybe I'll like it. Then I'd go out and buy the album, if for no other reason than to rip it to ogg vorbis cleanly at 160bps
Have I done this in the past? Yes, I bought the Bloodhound Gand single "The Bad Touch" after finding it on Napster.
And then there are all those songs on Napster which you can't find in the shops easily, such as that Irish Drinking Song, "Bugger Off" (If I see an album in the shops with that on, I'd buy it too
But hey, that's just why I download stuff. Perhaps other people have more compelly reasons.