Maybe you could take an old Pentium system and use it with Linux/FreeBSD/etc... You'd only need network and sound cards (well along with a motherbord, memory and a floppy/CDROM drive to boot from). Create a root/boot image that automaticly connects to your MP3 server and plays the music.
I think madplay or mpg123 will do that. The only problem may be if they are compiled with libc, you'll need that too--it'll be hard to fit Glibc and the kernel all on one floppy.:)
You may have to put in a keyboard and video card just so the BIOS won't complain...
It seems to be both. They and some reporters seem to be refering to anything to "protect" copyrighted work as "security". Which really pisses me of, because anyone reading these articles could easily be mislead into believing that they are talking about computer security (ie crackers who break into pentagon computers, virus writers who trash 10,000 people's hard drives, or script kiddies who DoS and deface web servers).
In fact, while reading one of these articles, I was a bit confused until I realised they were talking about copy protection and not some form of computer security. I imagine that was their intention. They probably hope to equate piracy (or the ability to commit the act of piracy) with viruses and online credit card fraud.
The SSSCA should not even have the word security in it! It should be called the FCCLA ("Fascist Content and Computer Lockdown Act")
Exactly. The question is how to get the word out. Maybe stage a massive official boycott of the big media companies--not only refusing to buy their 'content', but also not downloading any of their material off the internet (legal or otherwise). Also encorage people to buy independant music/films or create their own content as part of the boycot.
The only problem with this is the companies will probably send out press releases saying there is a massive upsurge in piracy--even if 'piracy' goes down due to the boycot.
If we were lucky, this would go back and bite the RIAA in the ass. Less garage bands distributing demo CDs means less bands for the RIAA members to sign and rip off...
I don't completely agree with you here. Automated computer programs and minimum wage flunkies could create and remix the RIAA's music. They could use instrument tracks from old songs and have someone bellow random words into a mic for the lyrics. I don't think anyone would notice the difference.;-)
I also think it should be emphasized that this law will affect more than just the entertainment cartel's content.
It could very well destroy the common person's ability to create their own content. Want to create a home movie? You'll have to buy a $10,000 device. Want to record your daughter's piano recital? You'll have to pay $100 in patent fees to some company.
Not only that, it will probably go beyond audio and video. Want a choice of OS? You get Microsoft bloated unstable unsecure ass-fisting Winders 2004 or Sun Microsystems really expensive server OS. Want to send an email with an attachment (such as a spreadsheet)? Sorry, unless it has the proper content codes, you're not allowed to do that. Want to edit an essay you wrote pre-SSSCA? Sorry, that isn't copy controlled.
All of the news media stories I've seen don't even seem to mention this. That and calling it "security" really confuses the issue, so that the average person doesn't understand the true implications.
overlegislation (was Re:Not too serious...)
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 1
The US has already done this...
I remember about 10 years ago when some people were injured due to festival "seating" (which means there are no seats). It was all over the local news.
Later, a rep from the state legislature then said (paraphrasing): "while researching so that we could make a law against festival seating, we discovered it was already Illegal."
If the people who write laws cannot keep track of them, then how can they expect the common citizen to obey them???
I even remember watching some TV show, and a copper saying basicly that everyone is always breaking the law, and police have to constantly make subjective judgement calls wether or not to arrest them.
What's the point??? Well, Hollywood execs will
want it for their next movie. It'll impress girls--
slutty ones too. He can straddle them all on the
case and make his own pr0n--no need for storage
here!!! I just hope he made it sturdy enough!;-)
Aaahhh...but you forget there will be errors (accidental or deliberate) in their genetic code. Just think--they'll be a notice to all those version 1.0 "users" that says "warning: there is a serious problem with v1.0 of our product. Please purchase v1.1, or your teeth will fall out, and you'll die within the year."
After a decade or two, there will be a monopoly called Genetisoft led by a guy named Gill Bates. The justice department will be investigating why people who have the Genetisoft(TM) Mouthwash(TM) bacteria are only able to eat Genetisoft(TM) food, and use Genetisoft(TM) medical products.
The courts will find that indeed Genetisoft(TM) is a monopoly, and as their punisment, they will find that Genetisoft(TM) must give free samples of their bacteria to all school children. The children will not be given a choice, of course, because the fight against tooth decay is a national initiative.
Linux may already have something similar to this--it appears you can set priorities from 0-99. There are three types available: FIFO, Round Robin, and the old style priority. I don't know much about real time scheduling, so I'm not sure if this it what you wanted or not.
For more info, try man 2 sched_setscheduler, and if you check the kernel syscalls (look in the kernel include files--probably at/usr/include/asm/unistd.h), you'll find that it is an actual Linux system call.
Someone made a little utility called setpriority-check it out at
Freshmeat.net. It appears to only be able to set the schedule after the process is started (like renice), but I imagine it would be trivial to make a utility that will run a program with a specific priority set (like nice does)
I agree. For example, how often would anyone use a MacOS X Server? If you believe that the stats are an absolute benchmark of security, then it'd be one of the best... Plus I think they put zeros at times the system didn't exist or people weren't checking them for security. (Did BeOS really have no security holes 1997-1999?)
I would have liked to see the stats calculated by how many times those computers have been actually compromised. Not to mention, how many of those vulnerabilities were potential security flaws, and not ones that are acutally exploitable? That makes the more paranoid/open systems appear less secure.
However, Win NT/2000 and Redhat scored as the worst on the "Number of OS Vulnerabilities by Year" table. Just as I expected... (Win9x is a OS for users--is it really fair to compare it with server OSs (or systems used for both) in this table?)
Yeah! The TV execs like this idea so much, they're going to give the shows 100% airtime! Just think: no commercial interruptions! (Fine print: the shows will play on the top-left corner of the screen, and the remaining three-quarters will be commericals!);-)
Exactly my point. In assembly you would just do a conditional jump on the overflow flag (or carry for unsigned.) jo label is much easier, yes?
Does GNUs now mean "German Nazi United software"?
on
Free Software Magazine
·
· Score: 1, Troll
Gee, then maybe it should be called XFree86 / BSD / GNU / the name of every person who contributed code to a Linux or Unix project / Linux
Not all of the software in a Linux distro came from GNU. RMS didn't "invent" free software. There have been plenty of non-GNU contributors.
The GNU people seem to be becoming more and more like Microsoft. "We're the only game in town. You couldn't have created any decent software--you must have solen it from us!" All the while putting out the buggiest crappiest junk and trying to push everyone into using their software or licence. GNU libc and the basic utilites are good enough to use, but they aren't that great. Don't even get me started on GNOME.
I used to think GNU was a good organisation and they have produced some good projects (like GIMP), however the thoughtlessness and excessive pride of its advocates makes me want to get as far away from them as possible! A few years ago I probably would have distributed any free software I made under the LGPL, but now I'm afraid if I did, the GNU mongers would take my code away from me and say I'm not allowed to use it anymore. I'm beginning to wonder if I should just keep those GIMP scripts I wrote to myself...
However, there are also languages (basically all except C, and by inheritance C++) where there was more progress in the last decades than finding funny new ways to get root by exploiting new classes of bugs (first buffer overflows, then format string errors...)
Ummm...those problems come from mistakes made by the programmer. Like writing printf(mystring) instead of printf("%s", mystring), using the outdated gets instead of fgets, or incorrectly specifying the amount of space a buffer has--such as coding read(fd, buffer, 256) when your buffer has only 200 byes of space.
Those types of mistakes could just as easily be made in other languages...for example doing something like popen("sort " . $HTTP_GET_VARS['filename']."r") would be a big security mistake in PHP.
What is it that there are so many C advocates? I just don't get it...
Maybe all of the people you are referring to aren't advocates, but people who see the need for a language like C. There are many cases where a low level language is needed, and C is much easier to program and much more portable than assembly. Not to mention there are some cases where using C is a more elegant or easier solution.
There is a reason C has been around for a while--it gives the maximum control for the least amount of coding. There are a few things assembly has over C (just try to figure out if that last addtion operation just overflowed). PHP is far better for web programming. I hear Perl is great for text processing. I have also heard Python is easier to program. However, C still has its uses.
Re:Free games!
on
Pay to Play
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Yeah, that's one thing they need to do to be successful--create client software that only works with their pay online service that you can download for free, and a retail version that you
pay for that you can play offline, online as a client and/or server, and use their pay service as well. That way the hardcore (or offline) gamer can buy the retail package, while someone who just wants to play the pay online version just has to enter their credit card # and download a file...
They should also have multiple games for a base subscription price. Say a FPS, an RPG, and a strategy game. That kind of selection would attract many more users--especially those that like to play all three types.
Why does it seem that governments always come to be dominated by special interests, e.g., big business, religious zealots, etc., at the expense of the people at large?...
That is because the people/organizations you mention are willing to go to extreme mesures to push their view. They'll spend all their free time passing out fliers. They're willing to start protest rallys, picket lines, and riots. Some of them are even willing to murder for their ideas.
Normal people just want to live their lives. Normal people worry about what will happen to their familes if they are arrested or anger an opposing faction.
From what I understand, this is how the Taliban and the Nazis came to power.
HEY SLASHDOT PEOPLE! Let's have a Poll - best free MP3/ogg/wav/cd player...
Goody! A poll
MP3 - That would have to be madplay, although I currently don't have it installed as I don't use MP3s much anymore, and mpg123 is good enough...
OGG -- ogg123 works great, why shouldn't I use the one directly from the source!
WAV -- I made my own little player--the binary is less than 3k stripped, and has no library dependancies (including libc!) I also has the ability to play gzipped wavs by piping through gzip.
CD player -- Again I made my own little one, although I don't use it much as I play my CDs from my harddrive nowadays (I saved them using cdda2wav and oggenc)
What was my point in telling you that? Well, for one thing, I'm just demonstrating that such a poll wouldn't help your point--as/. users probably choose between a diverse number of media players. However, if such a poll were to take place I bet the #1 would probably end up being MS's "Windows Media Player"--most likely a narrow margin for this crowd though. Xmms would probably be #2. I doubt Winamp would even make the top ten.
...and your point about Netscape/Mozilla being better than IE is a crap point. That's like saying using a blender instead of a lawn mower is better for keeping your hand attached!;-) Yeah, I know the other guy made the opposite argument--same comment applies.;-)
You say that AOL pushes technology...then 2 lines downy you say they care nothing for technology, just money.
I think his point was that AOL exploits technology to make money and attract then exploit customers.
I don't believe that AOL buying RedHat would be good for RedHat, but they (IMHO) are a crappy company anyway. It may be good for the Linux community: the more Linux is on the desktop, the more hardware manufacturers will be willing to write device drivers for Linux (or at least release enough specs so that others can.) I don't know...maybe they'll bastardize RedHat's version of the kernel so much that it wouldn't help...who knows?
If you need compatible chat clients, just get an account and use Gaim or Jabber or Imici or Trillian (so far Trill is win-only, i am not sure what your rant is about there).
I'm not sure what his argument might be, but mine is that IM systems shouldn't be tied to one organization. They should be able to implement them so that you can use anyone's servers, not just AOL's--kind of like email. One of the major reasons that instant messaging has this problem, like Microsoft in its spheres of dominance, AOL has fought portibility on every front in this area.
I was putting out all the CPU time and bandwidth and getting nothing in return.
This is one of the biggest problems with P2P file sharing programs. Nearly everyone wants great content for free, but very few are willing to give back and supply any of it.
Yeah, after
the last story about DNS, I started considering switching to one of the alternate DNS systems. Hmmm...I wonder if uber.geek is taken?
The claim that they're worried about lawsuits seems silly to me (at least to some degree). They can at least try to increase their redundancy, security and stability--then just put some blurb in their agreements that they don't guarantee stability (just like many modern corporations do). The article said they weren't even paying the companies/organizations that ran the root level servers! Isn't this a big part of what they are supposed to be doing? What kind of crap is that?
I have to wonder if this is just some ploy so that the players can stuff their wallets with ICANN money...
I think the biggest problem people have with crashes and lock-ups is all the stuff they install on their PCs. All the support files that get installed can cause quit a mess. Regardless of what OS you use, you'll run into software conflicts of one nature or another by installing too much stuff or installing software that was poorly written.
<sarcasm>Yeah, people should avoid installing extra software on their computer, like drivers for their video card or hard drive</sarcasm>
I suppose not "installing software that was poorly written" means only running notepad and solitare? That is the only way your post would make sense, as the context implies you are talking about systems running a Microsoft OS. Those are the only programs in MS Windows that don't cause the "conflicts" you describe.
I've been using computers since 1983. From a TI 49A to an Atari ST, and I've never seen as many lock-ups and stupid problems as I have with MS Windows--except for when I was messing around with assembly language and had a bug in my code or testing network cards and they had a short somewhere.
Windows 3.11 and 98 constantly crash on me no matter what I do, and I'm not alone. I'd happily run Windows 98 if it didn't have constant stupid problems like this.
And your point would be??? Who cares if MS touched the project. The only thing that would matter to me (on that subject) is if it has lots of bugs or MS is trying to control it.
How would you suggest we pursue that patent reform?
How about get rid of the patent process and leave it to trade secret laws. Just make it illegal to "steal" trade secrets/IP from companies through reverse-engineering or spying. Also develop laws that permit licensing of trade secrets, so that companies may still sell rights to their ideas. However, the laws must require that proof be presented that the defendant actually acquired the information through illegal means--not just the fact that the defendant implements the same idea as the plaintiff. I suspect there are many laws in place that already do much of this, so writing new ones may not even be necessary. (For example, I heard about a law that makes corporate "spying" illegal in the US--The "Economic Espionage and Protection of Proprietary Information Act of 1996")
This method would have the following advantages:
obvious ideas wouldn't be protected
companies would be able to spend lots of money on R&D and still have a resonable assurance that it won't go down the drain as soon as they release products that were developed.
A company could continue research efforts even when a second company releases a similar/same product that they developed independently (with the patent system, the first company would then be liable to the second for licensing--even though they spend lots of money on R&D too.) Neither company would be infringing on the other's rights, because they both did all their reasearch separately.
Yes, this could lead to abuse too, but IMO this model is better as the courts wouldn't need to understand the state of whatever industry, and they wouldn't have to worry about who came up with the idea first.
What do you call them then? You can't call them just PCs because that refers to the Apple IIe!;-)
Do we have to start calling them Wintel machines? Wouldn't fit mine--I'm running a AMD K6-2 on Linux. Should I call mine a Linamd?;-)
As for the article, I don't think it's big news if IBM is getting out of the desktop market. From what I've seen in the past decade, they haven't had any noticible market share.
The only possiblilty they had was with OS/2, and that seems to be down the drain... It's a shame too. I would much rather be running OS/2 than MS Windows any day...but they never got enough support from software and hardware vendors (among other things).
That's much like Linux, but at least Linux comes with plenty of developer tools, so I can easily write my own software and rewrite others' if/when I want.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe you could take an old Pentium system and use it with Linux/FreeBSD/etc... You'd only need network and sound cards (well along with a motherbord, memory and a floppy/CDROM drive to boot from). Create a root/boot image that automaticly connects to your MP3 server and plays the music.
I think madplay or mpg123 will do that. The only problem may be if they are compiled with libc, you'll need that too--it'll be hard to fit Glibc and the kernel all on one floppy. :)
You may have to put in a keyboard and video card just so the BIOS won't complain...
It seems to be both. They and some reporters seem to be refering to anything to "protect" copyrighted work as "security". Which really pisses me of, because anyone reading these articles could easily be mislead into believing that they are talking about computer security (ie crackers who break into pentagon computers, virus writers who trash 10,000 people's hard drives, or script kiddies who DoS and deface web servers).
In fact, while reading one of these articles, I was a bit confused until I realised they were talking about copy protection and not some form of computer security. I imagine that was their intention. They probably hope to equate piracy (or the ability to commit the act of piracy) with viruses and online credit card fraud.
The SSSCA should not even have the word security in it! It should be called the FCCLA ("Fascist Content and Computer Lockdown Act")
Exactly. The question is how to get the word out. Maybe stage a massive official boycott of the big media companies--not only refusing to buy their 'content', but also not downloading any of their material off the internet (legal or otherwise). Also encorage people to buy independant music/films or create their own content as part of the boycot.
The only problem with this is the companies will probably send out press releases saying there is a massive upsurge in piracy--even if 'piracy' goes down due to the boycot.
I don't completely agree with you here. Automated computer programs and minimum wage flunkies could create and remix the RIAA's music. They could use instrument tracks from old songs and have someone bellow random words into a mic for the lyrics. I don't think anyone would notice the difference. ;-)
I also think it should be emphasized that this law will affect more than just the entertainment cartel's content.
It could very well destroy the common person's ability to create their own content. Want to create a home movie? You'll have to buy a $10,000 device. Want to record your daughter's piano recital? You'll have to pay $100 in patent fees to some company.
Not only that, it will probably go beyond audio and video. Want a choice of OS? You get Microsoft bloated unstable unsecure ass-fisting Winders 2004 or Sun Microsystems really expensive server OS. Want to send an email with an attachment (such as a spreadsheet)? Sorry, unless it has the proper content codes, you're not allowed to do that. Want to edit an essay you wrote pre-SSSCA? Sorry, that isn't copy controlled.
All of the news media stories I've seen don't even seem to mention this. That and calling it "security" really confuses the issue, so that the average person doesn't understand the true implications.
The US has already done this...
I remember about 10 years ago when some people were injured due to festival "seating" (which means there are no seats). It was all over the local news. Later, a rep from the state legislature then said (paraphrasing): "while researching so that we could make a law against festival seating, we discovered it was already Illegal."
If the people who write laws cannot keep track of them, then how can they expect the common citizen to obey them???
I even remember watching some TV show, and a copper saying basicly that everyone is always breaking the law, and police have to constantly make subjective judgement calls wether or not to arrest them.
What's the point??? Well, Hollywood execs will want it for their next movie. It'll impress girls-- slutty ones too. He can straddle them all on the case and make his own pr0n--no need for storage here!!! I just hope he made it sturdy enough! ;-)
Aaahhh...but you forget there will be errors (accidental or deliberate) in their genetic code. Just think--they'll be a notice to all those version 1.0 "users" that says "warning: there is a serious problem with v1.0 of our product. Please purchase v1.1, or your teeth will fall out, and you'll die within the year."
After a decade or two, there will be a monopoly called Genetisoft led by a guy named Gill Bates. The justice department will be investigating why people who have the Genetisoft(TM) Mouthwash(TM) bacteria are only able to eat Genetisoft(TM) food, and use Genetisoft(TM) medical products.
The courts will find that indeed Genetisoft(TM) is a monopoly, and as their punisment, they will find that Genetisoft(TM) must give free samples of their bacteria to all school children. The children will not be given a choice, of course, because the fight against tooth decay is a national initiative.
Linux may already have something similar to this--it appears you can set priorities from 0-99. There are three types available: FIFO, Round Robin, and the old style priority. I don't know much about real time scheduling, so I'm not sure if this it what you wanted or not.
For more info, try man 2 sched_setscheduler, and if you check the kernel syscalls (look in the kernel include files--probably at /usr/include/asm/unistd.h), you'll find that it is an actual Linux system call.
Someone made a little utility called setpriority-check it out at Freshmeat.net. It appears to only be able to set the schedule after the process is started (like renice), but I imagine it would be trivial to make a utility that will run a program with a specific priority set (like nice does)
I agree. For example, how often would anyone use a MacOS X Server? If you believe that the stats are an absolute benchmark of security, then it'd be one of the best... Plus I think they put zeros at times the system didn't exist or people weren't checking them for security. (Did BeOS really have no security holes 1997-1999?)
I would have liked to see the stats calculated by how many times those computers have been actually compromised. Not to mention, how many of those vulnerabilities were potential security flaws, and not ones that are acutally exploitable? That makes the more paranoid/open systems appear less secure.
However, Win NT/2000 and Redhat scored as the worst on the "Number of OS Vulnerabilities by Year" table. Just as I expected... (Win9x is a OS for users--is it really fair to compare it with server OSs (or systems used for both) in this table?)
Yeah! The TV execs like this idea so much, they're going to give the shows 100% airtime! Just think: no commercial interruptions! (Fine print: the shows will play on the top-left corner of the screen, and the remaining three-quarters will be commericals!) ;-)
Exactly my point. In assembly you would just do a conditional jump on the overflow flag (or carry for unsigned.) jo label is much easier, yes?
Gee, then maybe it should be called XFree86 / BSD / GNU / the name of every person who contributed code to a Linux or Unix project / Linux
Not all of the software in a Linux distro came from GNU. RMS didn't "invent" free software. There have been plenty of non-GNU contributors.
The GNU people seem to be becoming more and more like Microsoft. "We're the only game in town. You couldn't have created any decent software--you must have solen it from us!" All the while putting out the buggiest crappiest junk and trying to push everyone into using their software or licence. GNU libc and the basic utilites are good enough to use, but they aren't that great. Don't even get me started on GNOME.
I used to think GNU was a good organisation and they have produced some good projects (like GIMP), however the thoughtlessness and excessive pride of its advocates makes me want to get as far away from them as possible! A few years ago I probably would have distributed any free software I made under the LGPL, but now I'm afraid if I did, the GNU mongers would take my code away from me and say I'm not allowed to use it anymore. I'm beginning to wonder if I should just keep those GIMP scripts I wrote to myself...
Ummm...those problems come from mistakes made by the programmer. Like writing printf(mystring) instead of printf("%s", mystring), using the outdated gets instead of fgets, or incorrectly specifying the amount of space a buffer has--such as coding read(fd, buffer, 256) when your buffer has only 200 byes of space.
Those types of mistakes could just as easily be made in other languages...for example doing something like popen("sort " . $HTTP_GET_VARS['filename']."r") would be a big security mistake in PHP.
Maybe all of the people you are referring to aren't advocates, but people who see the need for a language like C. There are many cases where a low level language is needed, and C is much easier to program and much more portable than assembly. Not to mention there are some cases where using C is a more elegant or easier solution.
There is a reason C has been around for a while--it gives the maximum control for the least amount of coding. There are a few things assembly has over C (just try to figure out if that last addtion operation just overflowed). PHP is far better for web programming. I hear Perl is great for text processing. I have also heard Python is easier to program. However, C still has its uses.
Yeah, that's one thing they need to do to be successful--create client software that only works with their pay online service that you can download for free, and a retail version that you pay for that you can play offline, online as a client and/or server, and use their pay service as well. That way the hardcore (or offline) gamer can buy the retail package, while someone who just wants to play the pay online version just has to enter their credit card # and download a file...
They should also have multiple games for a base subscription price. Say a FPS, an RPG, and a strategy game. That kind of selection would attract many more users--especially those that like to play all three types.
Yes.
The solid waste matter excreted from said ass is purple and emits a sweet fragrance much like flowers. ;-)
That is because the people/organizations you mention are willing to go to extreme mesures to push their view. They'll spend all their free time passing out fliers. They're willing to start protest rallys, picket lines, and riots. Some of them are even willing to murder for their ideas.
Normal people just want to live their lives. Normal people worry about what will happen to their familes if they are arrested or anger an opposing faction.
From what I understand, this is how the Taliban and the Nazis came to power.
Goody! A poll
What was my point in telling you that? Well, for one thing, I'm just demonstrating that such a poll wouldn't help your point--as /. users probably choose between a diverse number of media players. However, if such a poll were to take place I bet the #1 would probably end up being MS's "Windows Media Player"--most likely a narrow margin for this crowd though. Xmms would probably be #2. I doubt Winamp would even make the top ten.
...and your point about Netscape/Mozilla being better than IE is a crap point. That's like saying using a blender instead of a lawn mower is better for keeping your hand attached! ;-) Yeah, I know the other guy made the opposite argument--same comment applies. ;-)
I think his point was that AOL exploits technology to make money and attract then exploit customers.
I don't believe that AOL buying RedHat would be good for RedHat, but they (IMHO) are a crappy company anyway. It may be good for the Linux community: the more Linux is on the desktop, the more hardware manufacturers will be willing to write device drivers for Linux (or at least release enough specs so that others can.) I don't know...maybe they'll bastardize RedHat's version of the kernel so much that it wouldn't help...who knows?
I'm not sure what his argument might be, but mine is that IM systems shouldn't be tied to one organization. They should be able to implement them so that you can use anyone's servers, not just AOL's--kind of like email. One of the major reasons that instant messaging has this problem, like Microsoft in its spheres of dominance, AOL has fought portibility on every front in this area.
This is one of the biggest problems with P2P file sharing programs. Nearly everyone wants great content for free, but very few are willing to give back and supply any of it.
Yeah, after the last story about DNS, I started considering switching to one of the alternate DNS systems. Hmmm...I wonder if uber.geek is taken?
The claim that they're worried about lawsuits seems silly to me (at least to some degree). They can at least try to increase their redundancy, security and stability--then just put some blurb in their agreements that they don't guarantee stability (just like many modern corporations do). The article said they weren't even paying the companies/organizations that ran the root level servers! Isn't this a big part of what they are supposed to be doing? What kind of crap is that?
I have to wonder if this is just some ploy so that the players can stuff their wallets with ICANN money...
...that lawyers can now submit their briefs in their briefs? ;-)
<sarcasm>Yeah, people should avoid installing extra software on their computer, like drivers for their video card or hard drive</sarcasm>
I suppose not "installing software that was poorly written" means only running notepad and solitare? That is the only way your post would make sense, as the context implies you are talking about systems running a Microsoft OS. Those are the only programs in MS Windows that don't cause the "conflicts" you describe.
I've been using computers since 1983. From a TI 49A to an Atari ST, and I've never seen as many lock-ups and stupid problems as I have with MS Windows--except for when I was messing around with assembly language and had a bug in my code or testing network cards and they had a short somewhere.
Windows 3.11 and 98 constantly crash on me no matter what I do, and I'm not alone. I'd happily run Windows 98 if it didn't have constant stupid problems like this.
And your point would be??? Who cares if MS touched the project. The only thing that would matter to me (on that subject) is if it has lots of bugs or MS is trying to control it.
Sounds a lot like a human brain to me. ;-)
How about get rid of the patent process and leave it to trade secret laws. Just make it illegal to "steal" trade secrets/IP from companies through reverse-engineering or spying. Also develop laws that permit licensing of trade secrets, so that companies may still sell rights to their ideas. However, the laws must require that proof be presented that the defendant actually acquired the information through illegal means--not just the fact that the defendant implements the same idea as the plaintiff. I suspect there are many laws in place that already do much of this, so writing new ones may not even be necessary. (For example, I heard about a law that makes corporate "spying" illegal in the US--The "Economic Espionage and Protection of Proprietary Information Act of 1996")
This method would have the following advantages:
Yes, this could lead to abuse too, but IMO this model is better as the courts wouldn't need to understand the state of whatever industry, and they wouldn't have to worry about who came up with the idea first.
What do you call them then? You can't call them just PCs because that refers to the Apple IIe! ;-)
Do we have to start calling them Wintel machines? Wouldn't fit mine--I'm running a AMD K6-2 on Linux. Should I call mine a Linamd? ;-)
As for the article, I don't think it's big news if IBM is getting out of the desktop market. From what I've seen in the past decade, they haven't had any noticible market share.
The only possiblilty they had was with OS/2, and that seems to be down the drain... It's a shame too. I would much rather be running OS/2 than MS Windows any day...but they never got enough support from software and hardware vendors (among other things).
That's much like Linux, but at least Linux comes with plenty of developer tools, so I can easily write my own software and rewrite others' if/when I want.