The article was a bit short... I'll bet even most Slashdotters read it.
It's interesting the researchers would conclude woman are 20% less effecient than men at spacially processing information.
Assuming this is true (not taking a position), I'm a bit surprised no one tried breaking down the group of women to isolate the cause.
Everyone jumped to the same "genetic" conclusion (women make lousy hunters). It could be as simple as physical and chemical changes after having children (sometimes derridingly called 'placenta brain'): perhaps women's brains go into a rapid form of job-specialization (rearing) which translates into other disadvantages.
I don't have a position on any of this since it's a one pager (and New Scientist), but it would be interesting to see if the causes were genetic, as the article simply assumed.
Re:A (hopefully) unbiased opinion on Perl v. Pytho
on
Python in a Nutshell
·
· Score: 1
>...might be why the Python win32 documentation isn't very strong: it is not done by the core Python team, nor by a company that charges you money, but by one really smart guy (Mark Hammond) who, in addition to doing work that pays the bills, develops and documents the Python win32 bindings pretty much by himself.
>I think that the core Python library reference is excellent.
I back away from my statement. I'm one of those people who bitches about missing Linux manpages, or manpages that refer only to the INFO pages. I am an ass, OK?:-)
I realize - now - there's only a small group on win32-python. For some reason I though ActiveState and others were funding efforts to make the environment better documented and more formal.
I don't know who Mark works for, but I can say he IS helping me with my question which I posted to the list. I also bought his book to further my efforts (but it doesn't cover this API in question).
I may have worded things poorly, but the intent was to say there are a lot of rough edges, and a lot of "learning" users (like me), but it would probably improve if more power/commercial users started using it. Most people on Win32 just use VB so there's tons of independent docs.
Re:A (hopefully) unbiased opinion on Perl v. Pytho
on
Python in a Nutshell
·
· Score: 1
Granted, MORE documentation is always helpful but the """ convention itself is awesome.
you can access the text using:
modulename.__doc__
This is VERY convenient.
I can document my code --and-- give others a hook for getting additional info, generating reports, etc. It's good for outputting -help, usage, higher loglevels, etc.
I think Perl has the same mechanism, but I don't see it in common use within commercial groups.
I may be overstating the "horrible documentation" a bit also. There's bad documentation for Perl also, particulary thirdparty modules (which is what I was using for my Python example... win32 isn't exactly core Python).
Also, by "learning language" I wasn't attempting to deride Python -- which I love. It's appealing to novices because it's clean and safe to experiment with. Python just needs a bigger user base.
Re:A (hopefully) unbiased opinion on Perl v. Pytho
on
Python in a Nutshell
·
· Score: 1
> Overall, as a learner I found Perl's documentation to be the best, and as an advanced developer I find PHP's to be supreme, bar none. Python's is a disgrace, useful to neither beginning nor advanced users.
Yep, I've come to those exact same conclusions. Take a look at the "win32*" API docs hosted at ActiveState, for example win32net.DriveAdd()
The docs basically say "Wrapper for the win32 call -- see MSDN for details".
No examples of usage? Thanks! OK, I go to MSDN and see a C data struct for arguments. I'm not a total moron so I deduce the gist of it, but I spend 30 minutes in the debugger (going mad).
The problem?
One of the dictionary keys this Python wrapper expects is password. Fine. But someone decided the wrapper should call it "passwd" -- not "password", like the MSDN documentation indicates.
If you pass in data['password'], the wrapper will accept this, use a NULL password, and not raise an exception. WTF?
The docs are not only incomplete and a little too terse, but they can be *wrong*. That blows.
I bought "Python Programming with Win32", but it glosses over the wrappers. A lot of trial and error is needed.
I *still* prefer Python over Perl for a general-use language. Python may have a fanatical enforcement of whitespace and coding style, but that's fantastic for reading someone else's code. Perl has lots of unintentionally obfuscated code.
Python's biggest weakness is it's a learning language, which in itself is fine... but no one seems to push the boundries. It could be a great language for application prototyping/automation/etc, if we hadbetter documentation for modules. End rant.:-)
>> A pity there are no KDE applications using gphoto.
>You are incorrect here. There is at least Kamera [thekompany.com] - an IO slave that adds to Konqueror [konqueror.org] abilities to manage pictures in your camera. Effectively, making it a "KDE applications using gphoto".
Awesome! A few more examples like this, and I'll feel a lot better about the levels of sharing.
In time, of course, it'll all fix itself. UNIX code tends not to suffer from forced obsolescence and vendor abandonment, so in a hundred years or so our desktop will be perfect;-)
There are some valid points lost here
on
Too Much Free Software
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
There are some valid points here that should not be lost. Unfortunately they are being overlooked, while people complain about the author and his lack of tact.
Controversial statements around here tend to get classified as trolls and flamebait, even when there's a point behind the ill-worded rant.
Key point: Is there a LOT of overlapping, functionally incomplete and unpolished UNIX software? I would say without a doubt the answer is YES.
Just consider the point and answer this question for yourself, without clouding the issue in emotion or the author's irritating language.
Why do people start new projects, where one existed? How often do "new" free software projects (legally) "borrow" code and ideas from other projects? Do people learn MORE doing all the coding themselves, vs. learning to find a niche in an existing project?
Assuming the main argument against consolidation is "fresh ideas" (not to under-represent other concerns or minimize this one..), assuming this, what steps could protect this ideal while at the same time minimizing code waste?
Can this issue be put to rest *without* discouraging new ideas?
People can blame this on GTK vs Qt, but the problem's more widespread than that. You can see this in the "mp3 jukebox" class, as well as "ad blockers", file-sharing clients, etc.
I think part of the problem is ego, and I don't mean that in a BAD way (not entirely). If you disagree with a project design, why offer to rip the guts out and clean the code, all for someone who ultimately gets most credit?
Another problem is immature (or missing) libraries. If someone is writing an ad-blocker, they need to: a) write their own proxy or plug into an existing one, b) create a table of regex's to block, c) create exception tables for allowing images that match the regex, but shouldn't be blocked, d) define a file format for the regex and URLs.
It seems to me that there's an opening for a blocker-library that defines a common format. Then the ad blocker authors can focus on differentation: distributed/collobarative sharing of custom-block lists, user-management, language-of-choice, etc.
Gphoto took this strategy and made a general-purpose library for cameras. It is used bt GTK/GNOME applications, -and- by *text* apps. A pity there are no KDE applications using gphoto. I haven't formed an opinion why this is so because I *don't* want to assume it's due to the "dirty name" (g-something).
Another problem is KDE and GNOME themselves: they both lost focus on the core desktop, and are competing for a wider goal of "the UNIX API" for all desktop applications. It seems there's hope in the form of freedesktop.org defining small improvements in interoperability, but it's maddeningly slow progress. Furthermore, my understanding is these desktop libraries are not well supported for non-GUI applications: if you want to develop a curses-driven GUI for a GNOME or KDE-targeted library, good freakin luck to ya. The functionality doesn't always need to be bound to the widget/GUI stuff but mostly it is.
Lastly, people can learn more by forming their own project and going it alone. That's perfectly valid to practice your coding skills, but there's also benefit in learning teamwork and diplomacy by joining a project (not to imply these are exclusive goals).
(More examples?) "Back in the day" there were two main Napster clients for GNOME: Gnapster, and Lopster. There doesn't seem to be library (GNOME-specific or not) for general-purpose "nap/opennap" communication. These authors each poured long hours into usability and back-end functionality. The gui's were unique, but the back-end can't differ by very much. It would have improved things if GNOME and KDE shared some neutral libnap library.
Just my thoughts. I'm not a real developer (I script:-) but I've been working with software for 20 years and been an SQA Engineer for the last 10. I've seen a lot of useful code go to rot (tho others have seen much, much more)
> This is beginning to remind me of that fat kid in school who only knew one joke, and kept repeating it ALL THE GODDAMNED TIME. >You know him. He was at your school, too.
You may think that's funny, but CowboyNeal has feelings too!
>I've been thinking about this for a while. The trick would be to put a trojan in a real game. When the trojan activates, it exploits some security hole in the Xbox OS to gain full control and then run a boot loader.
I still don't think that would work.
First, X-Box is a training ground for the eventual Microsoft PC, which Dell etc. will "resell" or license. The Xbox security is a prototype of Palledium, and I suspect that everything has it's own memory space. Overflow the game loader? Great.. you crash that segment but not the OS.
This is why people run network daemons as non-root users... you can overflow one, but gain no elevated privleges over the current UID. You CAN elevate yourself, but you need to find a second, elevated account or process to attack.
Microsoft is going to be MUCH more concerned about locking down their profits... I suspect a LOT of testing going on with overflows. This does, after all, affect their bottom line, which makes it more critical than say customer data integrity (which as a monopoly they can ignore)
>Put together a boot loader and ask MS to sign it. If they do not turn around and sue them under the terms of the approved judgement and or a anti-trust suit.
Not likely. The boot loder is not a game title, it's (considered) part of the OS and part of the security. You are asking for control of the hardware, which is NOT the same as asking the hardware to run a title.
Microsoft could easily defend against a request to shoot down their own security.
Look at the version of Linux running on the Sony PS2: the Sony version runs Linux in a sandbox, which grants services to the Linux client. Microsoft would consider this LONG before signing some boot loader...
Some folks could argue "it's Linux... who cares if you 'ask' vs. 'tell' the hardware what to do?" as long as MS signs for some virtual host application that could run Linux.
Well, yeah. That's the issue. Personally I would *not* want a virtualized Linux (I mean... I like VMware, but I run it by *choice*... I still run Linux on the "bare metal").
>Unfortunately, if there is an alternative to a propriatary technology hardware manufacturers will go for it. This is why most PC's don't come with Apple's Firewire (the extra $1).
Well there's a lot of reasons re: firewire. You also had to pay to use the NAME "firewire" (hence "Sony iLink").
Lastly, firewire devices are unnecessarily expensive. Fortunately for the Firewire crowd, Microsoft refuses to release USB2.0 support for Windows 2000, ensuring the USB market will grow as slowly as USB1.0 did.
>It is a shame Be never open sourced BeOS before they went out of business and left that sort of thing up to the investors. Sony and Matsushita would be much better off with BeOS than Linux for any media related activities.
Yeah yeah, to borrow a page from the Amiga community.:-)
Sorry, open sourcing BeOS would do NOTHING at this point.
All of the tough questions that apply to Linux-based appliances, also apply to BeOS. You know, those things you have to justify to PHB's and also investors like profit, roadmap, not dilluting your copyrights and patents, etc. Who is going to maintain and extend BeOS to other hardware, as Linux has done?
Open sourcing an OS or environment is no magic pixie dust. I don't think there's enough interest in Be to extend it to odd CPU's, odd audio and video drivers. Be tried positioning itself as a "multimedia" OS, but good luck finding drivers to ALLOW that multimedia.
Linux is MUCH better supported (OSS or not) than BeOS, and remember Linux is just an infant in this arena.
I remember a few years ago, Digital (was it Caldera?) open sourced their version of Digital GEM, the very-thin graphical desktop which was briefly popular on the PC, before Windows. It's open sourced, fits on a floppy, but even with active development it's not up to par with the Atari ST fork of GEM, discontinued about 10 years ago. (The developers of the now OSS version of GEM were hoping to make it a lightweight GUI for cell phones and PDA's).
It's now too late for any new platforms unless there are TRULY new ideas. The way I see it, you have Open Source and you have non-open source Microsoft. Linux, BSD, etc doesn't matter it's the toolchain that is the platform - not the kernel.
The oddball here is Apple Mac OS X. While they are proprietary, the toolchain is (or can be) largely the same as open source. For the position Apple was/is in, they made the wise choice.
Companies who want a "multimedia OS" but DON'T want Linux or Microsoft, I could see an oppurtunity here for Apple (if they don't go after the appliance market all themselves, as they seem to be consiering).
I say boycotting RIAA/MPAA will *hurt* the cause. Furthermore, if you don't buy (license) MORE movies and music, you just might be responsible for new draconian laws designed to keep content dealers afloat.
(irony intended)
Sound absurd? Not really. All of the television and much of the print news has some affiliation with the RIAA/MPAA. On the news, slumping music sales are attributed to piracy by kids. If THAT is true, then declining automobile sales must be caused by little green men from mars, because the media is pretty much ignoring the economy right now.
News outlets like CNN run -- unedited -- the RIAA's claim of 400 burners siezed in that NY piracy raid. Never mind that it is NOT TRUE, the news doesn't care about accuracy and even if they are aware of an error, they have a vested interest in the RIAA/MPAA.
Anyways, they'll just spin it so the boycott gets no mention, and dropping sales is because of filesharing on that evil Gnutella network, and obviously the RIAA needs a license to hack your system looking for loot... blah blah
>If major motion pictures operated on porn-level budgets, would most geeks still be really looking forward to "The Two Towers" or "The Matrix Reloaded"?
I'd say a qualified "yes". Many of my favorite all-time sci-fi movies were done on shoestring budgets: Logan's Run, Farenheit 451, Soylent Green , the first Star Wars, The Blob, Godzilla, etc.
Sure, these are old classics, but for their time they were CHEAP.
Today, the big cinema chains won't carry it if it doesn't have a huge budget. The independents are gone except for in a few large cities. Now instead of sci-fi for the "bookworms", we get sci-fi for the "Happy Meal, Walmart Crowd" (Independence Day, Jurrasic Park, Men In Black, any post-SW EP4 Lucas movie;-)
My old-fashioned thinking is, the Matrix or any other movie can be great on a shoestring budget if it makes you THINK.
Moderators: don't waste karma modding this post up. I'm just building upon the comments aside my own post. (save the karma for the Score:1 postings and the occasional jewel AC post).
Personally, I suspect most Karma whoring here is done to build up points for troll-building. Because of the filtering Slashdot attempts to use to PREVENT this, it has the net effect of NEVER selecting capped karma folks like myself (I post 2x a week and that's not enough stupidity to get knocked off my Karma cap).
>The people who would have to shoot it down to change it are exactly the ones who benefit from it.
The people who would eliminate the Electoral College are the ones who most benefit from it? Really? Hm... and here I was thinking -- regardless of the INTENT of the EC -- nowadays it's really a filter to keep out more liberal, populist candidates and it certainly cements us to a two-party system..
With "benefits" like these, who needs election fraud? Sigh.
I guess in order to comensate for unevenly weighted votes, we just have to convince the inner city folk (1 person= 0.765555552 votes) to pack up and move to the rural states, where their vote will count for greater than one human being.
>>The Electoral Collage is was never necessary and is only kept in place for racist reasons (let's dillute the city vote the cities are full of you-know-who). Districting is a cruel joke. We need run-off elections when no one gets a majority.
>>Nice theory. Too bad the tendancy of "you know who" to live in the cities is more recent than the creation of the Electoral College. Nice try.
Nice strawman: I never stated that was the original reason for the Electoral College (I'm pretty sure it had to do with communication and access since there was no television, interstate highways, and internet and the tiny states felt left out).... I merely stated that's the reason for KEEPING it in place. I'm pretty sure the original reasons have gone away.
I'm pretty sure I was clear, and you're trying to spin what my argument was.
>It ends when people get mad enough about their liberties being taken away and vote.
Unfortunately, the opposite is true. There is a *direct* connection between the public's disguist with government, and declining percentages of the public that actually vote.
The kind of people who don't vote are EXACTLY the kind of people some fear to vote. So we're stuck in a downward spiral of corruption, apathy, resignation and deliberate ignorance. I vote to escape criticism that I don't vote.
I certainly believe a "two party" system is crap. There are a lot of barriers preventing third parties from gaining credibility (reasons other than themselves of course:-) For a healthy exchange of ideas, you need MORE than two viable parties.
I don't see much difference these days between Democrats and Republicans, especially post-September 11: I can choose between having my liberties taken away with zeal, or allowed to happen by resigned defeat. Not much of a choice.
Of course, I can vote my consciensce and not vote either. But *without* a "runoff" elections there's about as much chance of a third party major win, as seeing Linux on the desktop in the White House.:-)
The Electoral Collage is was never necessary and is only kept in place for racist reasons (let's dillute the city vote the cities are full of you-know-who). Districting is a cruel joke. We need run-off elections when no one gets a majority.
That would certainly stimulate the two parties into ideas more original (and mainstream) than constant class warfare.
Isn't voting mandatory in Australia? That would certainly inject some needed spice into the American voting system. >:-D
>Of course they are. Random access means that I can access data directly without having to read the entire volume preceding as in a sequential access device.
You left out writes.
If a device is not read only for both reads and writes, I wouldn't think it's fair to call it "random access".
Heck, even some tape drives like the OnStream offer "random access reads".
>I use dd all the time to verify CDs that I burn.
Try using `dd' to *write* data to a CD. Nope, no random access. Now try it with DVD-RAM.:-)
>Unfortunately some pointy-haired idiot decided to use the term DVD-RAM for what is really a DVD-RW format. This is a mistake (Pioneer BAD).
Um.. DVD-RAM *is* a random-access format. DVD-RAM is an extension of the ages-old "optical" disk formats. Back in the day before the ZIP disk, optical discs were the only "high capacity" random-access format. The other characteristic of those optical disc formats was, there were a million incompatible formats... all vendor-specific. DVD-RAM basically offered a lingua franca for all those vendors.
Yes, yes, DVD-R, -RW, +R, +RW are all use optics to record the media. But they are not "random access" like a hard drive. Magnetic or optical for the bits is not the differentiator... it's the tracking mechanism, head logic, error correction and whatever else goes in there (I'm not afraid to admit I'm not an expert on Slashdot;-)
Think of it this way: Rewritable != random-access
DVD-RAM has a *much* higher shelf life than other "rewritable" media. I've read data stored on DVD-RAM discs expect to survive 100 years, while I've read CD-RW last about 3 years (which is about right in my experience... I mistakenly archived data to a bunch of scratch-free CD-RW and they can't be read any more).
Here's another example: You can use `dd` to read and write to any part of a hard drive. Can you do this to CD-RW or DVD-R+R? No.
Can you `dd` sectors on a DVD-RAM? Yes.
Disclaimer: I don't own a DVD-RAM drive. I did consider one on several occasions, but I'm content to stick with DVD-R (gain some compatability, and shelf life is OK if I avoid the -RW or +RW formats).
>Whether it's in the EULA or not, it's sort of crossing a line- if they decided that they were going to start looking though people's hard drives, that would raise so much crap that they would probably lose a great deal of their huge marketshare, and they know this.
How exactly would Microsoft lose marketshare? Most individuals I know that run Windows, use pirated Windows. Windows XP hardware checks don't deter them either... there are cracks for the service packs.
As far as they are concerned, they feel they are screwing Microsoft "back" by making illegal copies of the Windows CD.
Considering all the angles of the questions you laid out... do you think it is MORE LIKELY that Microsoft's market share would switch to Linux or some other OS that runs on their x86 hardware. I think not. Microsoft can do this if they wish, but they're smart enough to only GRADUALLY make evil changes so as not to be too disruptive.
MS can go "too far" if they want to, and the vast majority will accept it. They just won't go too far "overnight".
Slashdot Mirror
The article was a bit short... I'll bet even most Slashdotters read it.
It's interesting the researchers would conclude woman are 20% less effecient than men at spacially processing information.
Assuming this is true (not taking a position), I'm a bit surprised no one tried breaking down the group of women to isolate the cause.
Everyone jumped to the same "genetic" conclusion (women make lousy hunters). It could be as simple as physical and chemical changes after having children (sometimes derridingly called 'placenta brain'): perhaps women's brains go into a rapid form of job-specialization (rearing) which translates into other disadvantages.
I don't have a position on any of this since it's a one pager (and New Scientist), but it would be interesting to see if the causes were genetic, as the article simply assumed.
>...might be why the Python win32 documentation isn't very strong: it is not done by the core Python team, nor by a company that charges you money, but by one really smart guy (Mark Hammond) who, in addition to doing work that pays the bills, develops and documents the Python win32 bindings pretty much by himself.
:-)
>I think that the core Python library reference is excellent.
I back away from my statement. I'm one of those people who bitches about missing Linux manpages, or manpages that refer only to the INFO pages. I am an ass, OK?
I realize - now - there's only a small group on win32-python. For some reason I though ActiveState and others were funding efforts to make the environment better documented and more formal.
I don't know who Mark works for, but I can say he IS helping me with my question which I posted to the list. I also bought his book to further my efforts (but it doesn't cover this API in question).
I may have worded things poorly, but the intent was to say there are a lot of rough edges, and a lot of "learning" users (like me), but it would probably improve if more power/commercial users started using it. Most people on Win32 just use VB so there's tons of independent docs.
Granted, MORE documentation is always helpful but the """ convention itself is awesome.
you can access the text using:
modulename.__doc__
This is VERY convenient.
I can document my code --and-- give others a hook for getting additional info, generating reports, etc. It's good for outputting -help, usage, higher loglevels, etc.
I think Perl has the same mechanism, but I don't see it in common use within commercial groups.
I may be overstating the "horrible documentation" a bit also. There's bad documentation for Perl also, particulary thirdparty modules (which is what I was using for my Python example... win32 isn't exactly core Python).
Also, by "learning language" I wasn't attempting to deride Python -- which I love. It's appealing to novices because it's clean and safe to experiment with. Python just needs a bigger user base.
> Overall, as a learner I found Perl's documentation to be the best, and as an advanced developer I find PHP's to be supreme, bar none. Python's is a disgrace, useful to neither beginning nor advanced users.
:-)
Yep, I've come to those exact same conclusions. Take a look at the "win32*" API docs hosted at ActiveState, for example win32net.DriveAdd()
The docs basically say "Wrapper for the win32 call -- see MSDN for details".
No examples of usage? Thanks! OK, I go to MSDN and see a C data struct for arguments. I'm not a total moron so I deduce the gist of it, but I spend 30 minutes in the debugger (going mad).
The problem?
One of the dictionary keys this Python wrapper expects is password. Fine. But someone decided the wrapper should call it "passwd" -- not "password", like the MSDN documentation indicates.
If you pass in data['password'], the wrapper will accept this, use a NULL password, and not raise an exception. WTF?
The docs are not only incomplete and a little too terse, but they can be *wrong*. That blows.
I bought "Python Programming with Win32", but it glosses over the wrappers. A lot of trial and error is needed.
I *still* prefer Python over Perl for a general-use language. Python may have a fanatical enforcement of whitespace and coding style, but that's fantastic for reading someone else's code. Perl has lots of unintentionally obfuscated code.
Python's biggest weakness is it's a learning language, which in itself is fine... but no one seems to push the boundries. It could be a great language for application prototyping/automation/etc, if we hadbetter documentation for modules. End rant.
>> A pity there are no KDE applications using gphoto.
;-)
>You are incorrect here. There is at least Kamera [thekompany.com] - an IO slave that adds to Konqueror [konqueror.org] abilities to manage pictures in your camera. Effectively, making it a "KDE applications using gphoto".
Awesome! A few more examples like this, and I'll feel a lot better about the levels of sharing.
In time, of course, it'll all fix itself. UNIX code tends not to suffer from forced obsolescence and vendor abandonment, so in a hundred years or so our desktop will be perfect
There are some valid points here that should not be lost. Unfortunately they are being overlooked, while people complain about the author and his lack of tact.
:-) but I've been working with software for 20 years and been an SQA Engineer for the last 10. I've seen a lot of useful code go to rot (tho others have seen much, much more)
Controversial statements around here tend to get classified as trolls and flamebait, even when there's a point behind the ill-worded rant.
Key point:
Is there a LOT of overlapping, functionally incomplete and unpolished UNIX software? I would say without a doubt the answer is YES.
Just consider the point and answer this question for yourself, without clouding the issue in emotion or the author's irritating language.
Why do people start new projects, where one existed?
How often do "new" free software projects (legally) "borrow" code and ideas from other projects?
Do people learn MORE doing all the coding themselves, vs. learning to find a niche in an existing project?
Assuming the main argument against consolidation is "fresh ideas" (not to under-represent other concerns or minimize this one..), assuming this, what steps could protect this ideal while at the same time minimizing code waste?
Can this issue be put to rest *without* discouraging new ideas?
People can blame this on GTK vs Qt, but the problem's more widespread than that. You can see this in the "mp3 jukebox" class, as well as "ad blockers", file-sharing clients, etc.
I think part of the problem is ego, and I don't mean that in a BAD way (not entirely). If you disagree with a project design, why offer to rip the guts out and clean the code, all for someone who ultimately gets most credit?
Another problem is immature (or missing) libraries. If someone is writing an ad-blocker, they need to: a) write their own proxy or plug into an existing one, b) create a table of regex's to block, c) create exception tables for allowing images that match the regex, but shouldn't be blocked, d) define a file format for the regex and URLs.
It seems to me that there's an opening for a blocker-library that defines a common format. Then the ad blocker authors can focus on differentation: distributed/collobarative sharing of custom-block lists, user-management, language-of-choice, etc.
Gphoto took this strategy and made a general-purpose library for cameras. It is used bt GTK/GNOME applications, -and- by *text* apps. A pity there are no KDE applications using gphoto. I haven't formed an opinion why this is so because I *don't* want to assume it's due to the "dirty name" (g-something).
Another problem is KDE and GNOME themselves: they both lost focus on the core desktop, and are competing for a wider goal of "the UNIX API" for all desktop applications. It seems there's hope in the form of freedesktop.org defining small improvements in interoperability, but it's maddeningly slow progress. Furthermore, my understanding is these desktop libraries are not well supported for non-GUI applications: if you want to develop a curses-driven GUI for a GNOME or KDE-targeted library, good freakin luck to ya. The functionality doesn't always need to be bound to the widget/GUI stuff but mostly it is.
Lastly, people can learn more by forming their own project and going it alone. That's perfectly valid to practice your coding skills, but there's also benefit in learning teamwork and diplomacy by joining a project (not to imply these are exclusive goals).
(More examples?)
"Back in the day" there were two main Napster clients for GNOME: Gnapster, and Lopster. There doesn't seem to be library (GNOME-specific or not) for general-purpose "nap/opennap" communication. These authors each poured long hours into usability and back-end functionality. The gui's were unique, but the back-end can't differ by very much. It would have improved things if GNOME and KDE shared some neutral libnap library.
Just my thoughts. I'm not a real developer (I script
> Avoiding the "Slahdot Effect"
:-)
Were you refering to the Slashdot-caused bandwidth spike?
Or did you mean the "I can't spell" Slahdot effect?
Sorry... it's so unclear what you meant..
> This is beginning to remind me of that fat kid in school who only knew one joke, and kept repeating it ALL THE GODDAMNED TIME.
>You know him. He was at your school, too.
You may think that's funny, but CowboyNeal has feelings too!
>It is precisely because it makes a great little dedicated box :)
:-)
that I have 4 dedicated X-Boxes in my closet and one behind
my TV.
Pictures?
4 of them? I considered a modded Xbox, but not seriously dedicating it as a Linux box. So I got a PS2, because I'll use it more for games.
>I've been thinking about this for a while. The trick would be to put a trojan in a real game. When the trojan activates, it exploits some security hole in the Xbox OS to gain full control and then run a boot loader.
I still don't think that would work.
First, X-Box is a training ground for the eventual Microsoft PC, which Dell etc. will "resell" or license. The Xbox security is a prototype of Palledium, and I suspect that everything has it's own memory space. Overflow the game loader? Great.. you crash that segment but not the OS.
This is why people run network daemons as non-root users... you can overflow one, but gain no elevated privleges over the current UID. You CAN elevate yourself, but you need to find a second, elevated account or process to attack.
Microsoft is going to be MUCH more concerned about locking down their profits... I suspect a LOT of testing going on with overflows. This does, after all, affect their bottom line, which makes it more critical than say customer data integrity (which as a monopoly they can ignore)
>Put together a boot loader and ask MS to sign it. If they do not turn around and sue them under the terms of the approved judgement and or a anti-trust suit.
Not likely. The boot loder is not a game title, it's (considered) part of the OS and part of the security. You are asking for control of the hardware, which is NOT the same as asking the hardware to run a title.
Microsoft could easily defend against a request to shoot down their own security.
Look at the version of Linux running on the Sony PS2: the Sony version runs Linux in a sandbox, which grants services to the Linux client. Microsoft would consider this LONG before signing some boot loader...
Some folks could argue "it's Linux... who cares if you 'ask' vs. 'tell' the hardware what to do?" as long as MS signs for some virtual host application that could run Linux.
Well, yeah. That's the issue. Personally I would *not* want a virtualized Linux (I mean... I like VMware, but I run it by *choice*... I still run Linux on the "bare metal").
>Nice point. The question you stirred up in *my* head is "what alternatives to PDF are there?"
.doc format?
How about binary Word
I get most of my documents this way (wish as I might that they were PDF).
>Unfortunately, if there is an alternative to a propriatary technology hardware manufacturers will go for it. This is why most PC's don't come with Apple's Firewire (the extra $1).
Well there's a lot of reasons re: firewire. You also had to pay to use the NAME "firewire" (hence "Sony iLink").
Lastly, firewire devices are unnecessarily expensive. Fortunately for the Firewire crowd, Microsoft refuses to release USB2.0 support for Windows 2000, ensuring the USB market will grow as slowly as USB1.0 did.
>It is a shame Be never open sourced BeOS before they went out of business and left that sort of thing up to the investors. Sony and Matsushita would be much better off with BeOS than Linux for any media related activities.
:-)
Yeah yeah, to borrow a page from the Amiga community.
Sorry, open sourcing BeOS would do NOTHING at this point.
All of the tough questions that apply to Linux-based appliances, also apply to BeOS. You know, those things you have to justify to PHB's and also investors like profit, roadmap, not dilluting your copyrights and patents, etc. Who is going to maintain and extend BeOS to other hardware, as Linux has done?
Open sourcing an OS or environment is no magic pixie dust. I don't think there's enough interest in Be to extend it to odd CPU's, odd audio and video drivers. Be tried positioning itself as a "multimedia" OS, but good luck finding drivers to ALLOW that multimedia.
Linux is MUCH better supported (OSS or not) than BeOS, and remember Linux is just an infant in this arena.
I remember a few years ago, Digital (was it Caldera?) open sourced their version of Digital GEM, the very-thin graphical desktop which was briefly popular on the PC, before Windows. It's open sourced, fits on a floppy, but even with active development it's not up to par with the Atari ST fork of GEM, discontinued about 10 years ago. (The developers of the now OSS version of GEM were hoping to make it a lightweight GUI for cell phones and PDA's).
It's now too late for any new platforms unless there are TRULY new ideas. The way I see it, you have Open Source and you have non-open source Microsoft. Linux, BSD, etc doesn't matter it's the toolchain that is the platform - not the kernel.
The oddball here is Apple Mac OS X. While they are proprietary, the toolchain is (or can be) largely the same as open source. For the position Apple was/is in, they made the wise choice.
Companies who want a "multimedia OS" but DON'T want Linux or Microsoft, I could see an oppurtunity here for Apple (if they don't go after the appliance market all themselves, as they seem to be consiering).
I say boycotting RIAA/MPAA will *hurt* the cause. Furthermore, if you don't buy (license) MORE movies and music, you just might be responsible for new draconian laws designed to keep content dealers afloat.
(irony intended)
Sound absurd? Not really. All of the television and much of the print news has some affiliation with the RIAA/MPAA. On the news, slumping music sales are attributed to piracy by kids. If THAT is true, then declining automobile sales must be caused by little green men from mars, because the media is pretty much ignoring the economy right now.
News outlets like CNN run -- unedited -- the RIAA's claim of 400 burners siezed in that NY piracy raid. Never mind that it is NOT TRUE, the news doesn't care about accuracy and even if they are aware of an error, they have a vested interest in the RIAA/MPAA.
Anyways, they'll just spin it so the boycott gets no mention, and dropping sales is because of filesharing on that evil Gnutella network, and obviously the RIAA needs a license to hack your system looking for loot... blah blah
-S
"They're grups! bonk, bonk, on the head."
>If major motion pictures operated on porn-level budgets, would most geeks still be really looking forward to "The Two Towers" or "The Matrix Reloaded"?
;-)
I'd say a qualified "yes". Many of my favorite all-time sci-fi movies were done on shoestring budgets: Logan's Run, Farenheit 451, Soylent Green , the first Star Wars, The Blob, Godzilla, etc.
Sure, these are old classics, but for their time they were CHEAP.
Today, the big cinema chains won't carry it if it doesn't have a huge budget. The independents are gone except for in a few large cities. Now instead of sci-fi for the "bookworms", we get sci-fi for the "Happy Meal, Walmart Crowd" (Independence Day, Jurrasic Park, Men In Black, any post-SW EP4 Lucas movie
My old-fashioned thinking is, the Matrix or any other movie can be great on a shoestring budget if it makes you THINK.
What a coincidence:: www.penny-arcade.com/+%22Equilibrium+%22+%22most+p eople+who+review+things+are+the+very+people+who+se em+to+have+the+most+hang+ups%22&hl=en&lr=lang_en&i e=UTF-8
http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:s33jDY3bjPwC
Moderators: don't waste karma modding this post up. I'm just building upon the comments aside my own post. (save the karma for the Score:1 postings and the occasional jewel AC post). Personally, I suspect most Karma whoring here is done to build up points for troll-building. Because of the filtering Slashdot attempts to use to PREVENT this, it has the net effect of NEVER selecting capped karma folks like myself (I post 2x a week and that's not enough stupidity to get knocked off my Karma cap).
>The people who would have to shoot it down to change it are exactly the ones who benefit from it.
The people who would eliminate the Electoral College are the ones who most benefit from it? Really? Hm... and here I was thinking -- regardless of the INTENT of the EC -- nowadays it's really a filter to keep out more liberal, populist candidates and it certainly cements us to a two-party system..
With "benefits" like these, who needs election fraud? Sigh.
I guess in order to comensate for unevenly weighted votes, we just have to convince the inner city folk (1 person= 0.765555552 votes) to pack up and move to the rural states, where their vote will count for greater than one human being.
>>The Electoral Collage is was never necessary and is only kept in place for racist reasons (let's dillute the city vote the cities are full of you-know-who). Districting is a cruel joke. We need run-off elections when no one gets a majority.
... I merely stated that's the reason for KEEPING it in place. I'm pretty sure the original reasons have gone away.
>>Nice theory. Too bad the tendancy of "you know who" to live in the cities is more recent than the creation of the Electoral College. Nice try.
Nice strawman: I never stated that was the original reason for the Electoral College (I'm pretty sure it had to do with communication and access since there was no television, interstate highways, and internet and the tiny states felt left out).
I'm pretty sure I was clear, and you're trying to spin what my argument was.
>It ends when people get mad enough about their liberties being taken away and vote.
:-) For a healthy exchange of ideas, you need MORE than two viable parties.
:-)
Unfortunately, the opposite is true. There is a *direct* connection between the public's disguist with government, and declining percentages of the public that actually vote.
The kind of people who don't vote are EXACTLY the kind of people some fear to vote. So we're stuck in a downward spiral of corruption, apathy, resignation and deliberate ignorance. I vote to escape criticism that I don't vote.
I certainly believe a "two party" system is crap. There are a lot of barriers preventing third parties from gaining credibility (reasons other than themselves of course
I don't see much difference these days between Democrats and Republicans, especially post-September 11: I can choose between having my liberties taken away with zeal, or allowed to happen by resigned defeat. Not much of a choice.
Of course, I can vote my consciensce and not vote either. But *without* a "runoff" elections there's about as much chance of a third party major win, as seeing Linux on the desktop in the White House.
The Electoral Collage is was never necessary and is only kept in place for racist reasons (let's dillute the city vote the cities are full of you-know-who). Districting is a cruel joke. We need run-off elections when no one gets a majority.
That would certainly stimulate the two parties into ideas more original (and mainstream) than constant class warfare.
Isn't voting mandatory in Australia? That would certainly inject some needed spice into the American voting system. >:-D
AH. Next we'll have the Saudi's here at the beaches of the United States, monitoring who's wearing a swimsuit.
Such clothing is illegal in Saudi Arabia.
Who knows, they might jail a few tourists for crimes never commited on their soil... hmm?
Where does it end?
>Of course they are. Random access means that I can access data directly without having to read the entire volume preceding as in a sequential access device.
:-)
You left out writes.
If a device is not read only for both reads and writes, I wouldn't think it's fair to call it "random access".
Heck, even some tape drives like the OnStream offer "random access reads".
>I use dd all the time to verify CDs that I burn.
Try using `dd' to *write* data to a CD. Nope, no random access. Now try it with DVD-RAM.
>Unfortunately some pointy-haired idiot decided to use the term DVD-RAM for what is really a DVD-RW format. This is a mistake (Pioneer BAD).
;-)
Um.. DVD-RAM *is* a random-access format. DVD-RAM is an extension of the ages-old "optical" disk formats. Back in the day before the ZIP disk, optical discs were the only "high capacity" random-access format. The other characteristic of those optical disc formats was, there were a million incompatible formats... all vendor-specific. DVD-RAM basically offered a lingua franca for all those vendors.
Yes, yes, DVD-R, -RW, +R, +RW are all use optics to record the media. But they are not "random access" like a hard drive. Magnetic or optical for the bits is not the differentiator... it's the tracking mechanism, head logic, error correction and whatever else goes in there (I'm not afraid to admit I'm not an expert on Slashdot
Think of it this way:
Rewritable != random-access
DVD-RAM has a *much* higher shelf life than other "rewritable" media. I've read data stored on DVD-RAM discs expect to survive 100 years, while I've read CD-RW last about 3 years (which is about right in my experience... I mistakenly archived data to a bunch of scratch-free CD-RW and they can't be read any more).
Here's another example:
You can use `dd` to read and write to any part of a hard drive. Can you do this to CD-RW or DVD-R+R? No.
Can you `dd` sectors on a DVD-RAM? Yes.
Disclaimer: I don't own a DVD-RAM drive. I did consider one on several occasions, but I'm content to stick with DVD-R (gain some compatability, and shelf life is OK if I avoid the -RW or +RW formats).
The website asks that you do not mirror the content.
:-)
:-)
OK, you will do this anyways (I did some months back
IF you're going to do this, you can go easy on Kevin's site. Pick one:
1) "cron" or "at" the wget for some date in the future. Really, are you going to read it all tomorrow??
2) Add in a --wait=1 to put a 1 sec pause between gets.
Seriously, this is a labor of love and I don't think advertising pays the bills. Don't swamp his bandwidth for data you will just slap on a CD.
This reminds me.. I still need to return Kevin's magazines..
>Whether it's in the EULA or not, it's sort of crossing a line- if they decided that they were going to start looking though people's hard drives, that would raise so much crap that they would probably lose a great deal of their huge marketshare, and they know this.
How exactly would Microsoft lose marketshare? Most individuals I know that run Windows, use pirated Windows. Windows XP hardware checks don't deter them either... there are cracks for the service packs.
As far as they are concerned, they feel they are screwing Microsoft "back" by making illegal copies of the Windows CD.
Considering all the angles of the questions you laid out... do you think it is MORE LIKELY that Microsoft's market share would switch to Linux or some other OS that runs on their x86 hardware. I think not. Microsoft can do this if they wish, but they're smart enough to only GRADUALLY make evil changes so as not to be too disruptive.
MS can go "too far" if they want to, and the vast majority will accept it. They just won't go too far "overnight".