But oh well. I just saw an episode of The X-Files in which Sculley uses the improper form of the phrase, so I guess if she uses it this way then it must be cool.
Actually, cool refers to temperature. It really bothers me when people use it only for style.
...but really, what's the point of hashing out linguistic description vs perscription?
Don't quote headlines from embarassing articles that bash your company in the first paragraph. Especially if they're the first hit for that phrase in google.
Opinion: Now if only SCO wasn't such a loser. There are two real reasons that OpenServer can't win a recommendation.
I'd be surprised if many people on Slashdot have even heard the original quote:
"Information wants To Be Free. Information also wants to be expensive. Information wants to be free because it has become so cheap to distribute, copy, and recombine---too cheap to meter. It wants to be expensive because it can be immeasurably valuable to the recipient. That tension will not go away. It leads to endless wrenching debate about price, copyright, 'intellectual property', the moral rightness of casual distribution, because each round of new devices makes the tension worse, not better."
--Stewart Brand, writing in 1984
Makes a lot more sense in context, doesn't it? I find it surprising how old this quote is and how perfectly it is proven by the Internet and modern file sharing.
It is also obvious that he is talking about free "as in beer."
Don't lose sight of how the web works, or you will be deceived by illusions. Sending a header like that, isn't any different than browser spoofing. It isn't a social requirement or a indicator of a user making a decision; it is just a constant hard-coded into a defacto protocol. The web is too dumb and automatically processed in too many ways, for a header to actually mean something real.
Why is it that geeks always over-simplify everything like a five-year-old? "I didn't hit you, I just was swinging my hand and you walked into it." How would you expect online commerce to work otherwise? You need to enter into an agreement for your credit card terms, the sale itself, etc.
I'm not arguing the enforcability of UPS's terms and conditions, but saying that you can't enter into a contract by a form-element is asinine.
"Don't lose sight of how drawing works, or you will be deceived by illusions. Signing a contract like that, isn't any different that signing an autograph...."
You've got a good point. However, I've seen client fail to reestablish communication with a new server after the existing server is shut down. The transition isn't as easy as you describe all of the time.
Agreed. Snort is an excellent way to monitor botnets. But that's not the best part: The best part is shutting them down.
Most people don't realize that the IRC server itself is being hosted on an infected zombie machine. (Think supernodes on P2P.) An email to that IP's abuse contact will often get the server shutdown quickly. Educational institutions are usually especially good about taking care of the problem.
That's a good question. I live in Bellingham, WA and know several people who make biodiesel. The reason it's cheaper is because the raw materials are cheaper. Instead of digging for crude oil, R&D, etc, you go to your local Teriyaki place and ask them for their old vegetable oil. Take it home, make some Sodium Methoxide -- and you're ready to go.
The quality of biodiesel is actually quite good if produced and filtered properly. We were going to analyze some by GC/MS in my analytical chem class, but the prof yanked the lab because it was too boring -- not much to see.
Anyone actually read that article and notice where Dvorak tries to blame Google for ruining Usenet? (Indeed, most of the article.)
Google still has to explain to the community what happened to Usenet. People still recall how DejaNews, one of the great resources of the Net, began as a large database of every Usenet post ever made in a massive archive.
I remember when I heard that Google bought Deja -- I was estatic. Deja by that point really blew, and the Google interface was much better. Don't tell me that the old Deja crap was better, it's not.
At first the ability to search Usenet was on the Google home page. Then it disappeared, and now it's on a subpage that you have to dig for, and the search totally stinks.
WTF? The Groups link is still present on the main site. And it works, say what you will about the new interface "improvements." However, even if you don't like the new interface -- how the hell do you read that as "Google is going to ruin Wikipedia?"
Summary of the article: Google ruined my Usenet, I'm gonna blame them on Usenet being marginalized. Usenet, Google groups sucks, la, la, la. Wikipedia is in bed with Google, Google is a corporation! Bad, bad, bad!!!
I'm not sure how the situation is on other campuses, but at my school, long distance was never a cash cow. They used to offer optional services through AT&T, but most students abandoned the plan when Cosco et al started offering really cheap calling cards. (This was years ago.) The university wasn't making enough to make the billing overhead worth it.
The problem now for us is just the opposite: our on-campus telecom group charges outrageous rates for long distance, making it expensive to call students on their cell phones. (We're talking connect fee + high per minute fee...) Because it is so expensive, it is prohibited in many departments to call students back on their cell phones.
So while we escaped one classic phone company rip-off, we're still ensnarled in another.
It's like the the people who abused the ATMs in New York after 9/11. When they made the first withdrawal and saw that their balance didn't decline, they should have called the bank and reported it. Nothing gave them the right to keep making withdrawals. If I leave me door unlocked, it may make me an idiot, but it doesn't give some dude the right to come in to my house, and take something and walk out the door, even if you come right back in and put it back.
But the Internet also has produced many unexpected benefits. Stern, for instance, notes that the Web provides an anonymous outlet to troubled young people who want to talk about everything from suicide and self-mutilation to eating disorders.
You've got to be kidding me. This article wasn't that great to begin with, but phrases like this kill me.
There's no way you could consider anonymity an "unexpected benefit" of the Internet. Forget it. It's one of the most obvious features you could imagine.
Anyone else remember anon.penet.fi? It made great use of the anonymous nature of the Internet for many purposes beginning in the early 90s. Not the first use of anonymous communication on the Internet, I'm sure... But a very popular one for the time.
Verizon is now qualifying and accepting installations for FTTP (Fiber To the Premises)! $39.95 for 5MB/2MB, $49.95 for 15MB/2MB, and $199.95 for 30MB/5MB.
Is anyone else surprised that no comment to this story on a "News for Nerds" site that points out the obvious misuse of "MB" for "megabit"?
That big "B" in "MB" means Bytes. This isn't a base-2 vs base-10 nit-pick -- there is almost an order of magnitude difference between the two, Mb and MB!
Their webpage doesn't have their entire product line listed, and it focuses more on their laptop offerings. They have many more backpacks (not made for laptops) which aren't listed on the page. Some of their packs are pricey, but they have some backpacks under $60 or 70 which would probably work great.
All of their backpacks are made in NW Washington, and I've been very happy with every one I've owned. They make very sturdy backpacks and are a great company in general.
Remember, YOU may not mind them doing this, and in reality it probably wont effect you much if at all. But someone somewhere, will want to make their own redistributable modifications to this. Sveasoft is making that just that little bit more difficult for them.
I agree. I most likely will not find myself in a position where I want to modify and redistribute the source code. However, Sveasoft must stay within the terms of the GPL for me to support them morally, and I don't have any sympathy for them if they don't. The new $49 CD seems unreasonable to me, but I'm no GPL expert
Their business model and their reasoning behind it makes a lot of sense. If someone wants to fork the project and redistribute it, they're fully within their rights to do so. However, Sveasoft wants nothing to do with it for support reasons. They're hacking up cool new firmware very quickly, and I wouldn't want tech support or documentation to take up much of my time either. I seriously doubt profit has much (if anything) to do with their motives.
As the (amazed) owner of a Linksys WRT54G, I've been following this issue for a while, but not as closely as some other have, I'm sure. Here are my impressions.
Sveasoft is indeed walking the line of GPL compliance, but they're doing a good job at it. The firmware they produce is quickly adding features with very fast release cycles. They welcome community involvement with the firmware and accept new features and patches readily.
Because the firmware is being used by many people who don't use Linux normally, the GPL is new to most of them. Early posts in the Sveasoft forums confirm this, calling the original whistle-blowers "GPL whiners," as if people asking for GPL compliance were simply cheap. Little did they realize that Sveasoft is building on Linksys who built upon GPL software to begin with.
Why should Sveasoft get money for something which is mostly configuration and frontend polishes of what the original programmers created?
Because they do it really well. They provide the service which falls perfectly into a "profit for the service, not the product" business model. I use Linux heavily, but I'm really not interested in cross-compiling source code which could easily turn my $70 router into a brick. Yes, I can reflash it by cracking the case and setting up a tftp server -- but It's just not something I want to mess with. To me the $20 they ask for an annual subscription (including informal tech support) is worth it.
I would check out a sourceforge fork if it was created and developed, but I am skeptical that it could match the features of the Sveasoft firmware.
They've developed a good community, and I'm not too bothered that it's slightly off the beaten path of the normal Open Source development process.
Slashdot Mirror
I've tried twice, and I must be lucky because it compiled perfectly both times (rc2 and rc3) using Gentoo.
So it may be temperamental for some, but it's far from being "damn near impossible."
Actually, cool refers to temperature. It really bothers me when people use it only for style.
Two circus tents full of coal eh? In your last post you claimed that it was 17 swimming pools.
Karma whoring by repeating essentially the same post is lame, I really hope nobody mods you up this time around.
I'd be surprised if many people on Slashdot have even heard the original quote:
Makes a lot more sense in context, doesn't it? I find it surprising how old this quote is and how perfectly it is proven by the Internet and modern file sharing.
It is also obvious that he is talking about free "as in beer."
Are you sure there isn't another reason why SLC has it's own SEC office?
Why is it that geeks always over-simplify everything like a five-year-old? "I didn't hit you, I just was swinging my hand and you walked into it." How would you expect online commerce to work otherwise? You need to enter into an agreement for your credit card terms, the sale itself, etc.
I'm not arguing the enforcability of UPS's terms and conditions, but saying that you can't enter into a contract by a form-element is asinine.
"Don't lose sight of how drawing works, or you will be deceived by illusions. Signing a contract like that, isn't any different that signing an autograph.
Hahaha. Troll. But I'm afraid someone is actually going to believe you, so I bite.
Utah has lower than average teen pregnancy rates
You've got a good point. However, I've seen client fail to reestablish communication with a new server after the existing server is shut down. The transition isn't as easy as you describe all of the time.
Agreed. Snort is an excellent way to monitor botnets. But that's not the best part: The best part is shutting them down.
Most people don't realize that the IRC server itself is being hosted on an infected zombie machine. (Think supernodes on P2P.) An email to that IP's abuse contact will often get the server shutdown quickly. Educational institutions are usually especially good about taking care of the problem.
That's a good question. I live in Bellingham, WA and know several people who make biodiesel. The reason it's cheaper is because the raw materials are cheaper. Instead of digging for crude oil, R&D, etc, you go to your local Teriyaki place and ask them for their old vegetable oil. Take it home, make some Sodium Methoxide -- and you're ready to go.
The quality of biodiesel is actually quite good if produced and filtered properly. We were going to analyze some by GC/MS in my analytical chem class, but the prof yanked the lab because it was too boring -- not much to see.
See the National Biodiesel Board if you want more info
I remember when I heard that Google bought Deja -- I was estatic. Deja by that point really blew, and the Google interface was much better. Don't tell me that the old Deja crap was better, it's not.
WTF? The Groups link is still present on the main site. And it works, say what you will about the new interface "improvements." However, even if you don't like the new interface -- how the hell do you read that as "Google is going to ruin Wikipedia?"
Summary of the article: Google ruined my Usenet, I'm gonna blame them on Usenet being marginalized. Usenet, Google groups sucks, la, la, la. Wikipedia is in bed with Google, Google is a corporation! Bad, bad, bad!!!
What a weird robots.txt file.
Try this link:
http://www.orbitz.com/creditcard/
WTF is that? (It redirects to Microsoft's homepage...)
I'm not sure how the situation is on other campuses, but at my school, long distance was never a cash cow. They used to offer optional services through AT&T, but most students abandoned the plan when Cosco et al started offering really cheap calling cards. (This was years ago.) The university wasn't making enough to make the billing overhead worth it.
The problem now for us is just the opposite: our on-campus telecom group charges outrageous rates for long distance, making it expensive to call students on their cell phones. (We're talking connect fee + high per minute fee...) Because it is so expensive, it is prohibited in many departments to call students back on their cell phones.
So while we escaped one classic phone company rip-off, we're still ensnarled in another.
More information on post 9/11 ATM Withdrawls
Press Release from the DAs office
Fairly interesting story -- one that I hadn't heard before.
Black bean looking things are boring.
BatMax makes the background orange!!!!! (Without affecting the ion reading!)
Ready for another?
Unaliased graphs are gross!
Mmmmm... Much better. Notice the change in the shape of the graph, especially at the start... Who knew that aliasing a graph could be so useful?
Boy, it's really sad that you got modded +5 for just ripping off other people's posts which have been posted over and over again already.
You're not karma whoring because you're an AC, so please stop. This is one form of copyright infringement which does suck.
The poster was very kind to refer to it as FC...
You've got to be kidding me. This article wasn't that great to begin with, but phrases like this kill me.
There's no way you could consider anonymity an "unexpected benefit" of the Internet. Forget it. It's one of the most obvious features you could imagine.
Anyone else remember anon.penet.fi? It made great use of the anonymous nature of the Internet for many purposes beginning in the early 90s. Not the first use of anonymous communication on the Internet, I'm sure... But a very popular one for the time.
...Because I'm posting this from a pirated version of XP.
That big "B" in "MB" means Bytes. This isn't a base-2 vs base-10 nit-pick -- there is almost an order of magnitude difference between the two, Mb and MB!
Their webpage doesn't have their entire product line listed, and it focuses more on their laptop offerings. They have many more backpacks (not made for laptops) which aren't listed on the page. Some of their packs are pricey, but they have some backpacks under $60 or 70 which would probably work great.
All of their backpacks are made in NW Washington, and I've been very happy with every one I've owned. They make very sturdy backpacks and are a great company in general.
Who the hell says "one balmy May evening" on Slashdot?
Their business model and their reasoning behind it makes a lot of sense. If someone wants to fork the project and redistribute it, they're fully within their rights to do so. However, Sveasoft wants nothing to do with it for support reasons. They're hacking up cool new firmware very quickly, and I wouldn't want tech support or documentation to take up much of my time either. I seriously doubt profit has much (if anything) to do with their motives.
As the (amazed) owner of a Linksys WRT54G, I've been following this issue for a while, but not as closely as some other have, I'm sure. Here are my impressions.
Sveasoft is indeed walking the line of GPL compliance, but they're doing a good job at it. The firmware they produce is quickly adding features with very fast release cycles. They welcome community involvement with the firmware and accept new features and patches readily.
Because the firmware is being used by many people who don't use Linux normally, the GPL is new to most of them. Early posts in the Sveasoft forums confirm this, calling the original whistle-blowers "GPL whiners," as if people asking for GPL compliance were simply cheap. Little did they realize that Sveasoft is building on Linksys who built upon GPL software to begin with.
Why should Sveasoft get money for something which is mostly configuration and frontend polishes of what the original programmers created?
Because they do it really well. They provide the service which falls perfectly into a "profit for the service, not the product" business model. I use Linux heavily, but I'm really not interested in cross-compiling source code which could easily turn my $70 router into a brick. Yes, I can reflash it by cracking the case and setting up a tftp server -- but It's just not something I want to mess with. To me the $20 they ask for an annual subscription (including informal tech support) is worth it.
I would check out a sourceforge fork if it was created and developed, but I am skeptical that it could match the features of the Sveasoft firmware.
They've developed a good community, and I'm not too bothered that it's slightly off the beaten path of the normal Open Source development process.