Wasn't the Internet self-policing? Usenet certainly was at the beginning...How will eLiza handle scaling? Or, more importantly, how will it handle the inevitable dickwad looking to make a fast buck on someone else's dime?
So, even if they get smacked back with Prior Art, what's stopping the person with the Prior Art from establishing the same dumb-ass patent? (Kind of OT, but I've always been curious about that - what if this hoopla just makes someone say to themselves, "Oh, I can patent this? Why didn't someone tell me?")
I don't care so much if this new technology will be priced for home use - I'm more interested whether this new fibre cable will cause the current higher bandwidth technologies to drop in price...I'd be quite satisfied with a home T-3. I'd even settle for a good T-1, even.
I, for one, am a big fan of links to "friends" (see fark.com for example). I think that, if I like this site, I'll probably like his friends, too.
If that's too limited a scope (Yahoo couldn't do this, of course), having a given page be sponsored by someone as a method of advertising is reasonable to me. Just a basic text link of "This news story brought to you by Joe's Shoe Repair and Tattoo Shop - get your wingtips polished and some new ink while you wait!" - much less intrusive. I mean, really, I'm never going to click a banner. I might click a very basic, more-or-less informative link like that.
...that people take the time to find the "right" way to do things - patch panel(s) in a closet, CAT5 even though CAT3 is cheaper, and running the wires though conduit (or at least a fair distance from power lines). The latter being most important,, here. Just because there's already a channel/path to shove that LAN cabling through, don't run it next to your electric power lines - you'll be hating your crap LAN in no time from all the interference.
Or, if you have no choice, get shielded cables. It really is a Big Deal. I'm sure there is plenty of anecdotal "evidence" of your people having "fine" networks with the cable running with power cables, but they don't know what it's like without it. TCP/IP is pretty good about fixing itself, but it obviously works better if it doesn't have to every other packet!
Well, I think work wouldn't care much for me asking "sure, I'm running a 'rogue' operating system, but could you please get me more RAM so I can run my bloated desktop-of-choice?"
I've met a few Microsoft folks over the past few years. These have been salesmen, support people and technical consultants (the salesman's backup for when they let the geeks in on the meetings, generally). I must say that this is the first time I've heard a Microsoftian actually know UNIX/Linux beyond the few items that are published on the mystical anti-anything-un-microsoft hit sheet (which used to include "There's no Office App!" and "The installer is so hard - you have to be a guru!" - good thing we're on our toes). I am impressed.
This won't change my stance of never giving MS a penny of my money, ever, if I can help it. I would say the most powerful emotion I'm feeling about this interview is wariness. If they have a few more of these guys in their ranks, they're going to be able to do more damage to the Linux "PR" than I'd expected.
I honestly don't think they'll "win", but it's going to be a tougher battle than I had anticipated.
If I may dream a little dream, what I would love to see is allowing me to pay extra (that they can give to the advertising asses) to not watch any commercials on taped shows. It'd be a simple thing to do - just a binary code embedded into the stream - 1s when it's the show, 0s when it's the commerical. I only watch 1s for an extra $10 a month...I'd pay that in a heartbeat!
I work much faster/better than expected already. If I had to have someone sitting next to me all the time, I'd have no "down time" to relax. Sure, sometimes, I can crank on something for 12 or 14 hours, but my average day involves a good amount of checking slashdot, FARK, my site, fuck-you.org and a few others. I know my work outperforms most others around me, so, why shouldn't I be allowed to work how I want (which involves a lot of non-working)?
And don't pretend you work like you're possesed every hour on the clock, either. Or you wouldn't be reading this right now!
Is what iPaq's offer really worth the pain in the ass of proprietary equipment? I can build a comparable system from scraps, or at the very least, low-end purchasing from discount vendors. What would compel me to go for a name-brand iPaq?
But it will become more and more monopolistic. As electronics and "traditional" appliances merge more and more, various technologies will emerge. Most will, of course, die off as useless, convoluted, expensive or whatever. But those that stay will usher in new monopolies and with the current overwhelming trend of Patent-or-Copyright-anything-We-can, there isn't going to be any "open" options in many arenas. Whatever the next Big Thing is, I'm sure it'll have some corporations stamp on every iteration of it. They got close with Divx (the Circuit City one, not the new, unrelated one), but the next such thing will, I'm sure, be a little more stealthy in its implementation (by being more stealthy on the negative implications, I imagine).
Anyway, my point is - soon the frivilous "unpatentable" crap will sift itself out (One-Click, anyone?), but I'm quite sure we'll be left with the New-VHSs and the New-Refigerater-coils and the New-Heater-elements-in-Toasters and each new thing will have the stamp of whoever had the minion that thought of it. Whoever happens to get The Big One will gain more influence over the technologies emerging at that time and they'll get their stamp on more things and so on...Soon, there will be the Microsoft Of The Kitchen and the Microsoft Of Home Theatre and so on.
Who knows? Maybe they'll be the same Microsoft we have today.
I read it, too...Did I miss when they said what actual atom does it? All I remember reading is all of the peripheral atoms/molecules, but not the "core" guy.
The argument has come up again and again - comparing this kid's web site to a paper pamphlet. The difference is that there is choice involved. I would draw a closer parallel to something like whispering about a phone number you can call and the answering machine you get is a message about how terrible the assistant principal is. Just because that number's there doesn't mean you HAVE to call it - it's all up to the person dialling the phone.
Slashdot Mirror
Wasn't the Internet self-policing? Usenet certainly was at the beginning...How will eLiza handle scaling? Or, more importantly, how will it handle the inevitable dickwad looking to make a fast buck on someone else's dime?
How does this compare to CORBA - it seems to me to be questing for the same protocol standard... (or am I missing the point?)
So, even if they get smacked back with Prior Art, what's stopping the person with the Prior Art from establishing the same dumb-ass patent? (Kind of OT, but I've always been curious about that - what if this hoopla just makes someone say to themselves, "Oh, I can patent this? Why didn't someone tell me?")
I don't care so much if this new technology will be priced for home use - I'm more interested whether this new fibre cable will cause the current higher bandwidth technologies to drop in price...I'd be quite satisfied with a home T-3. I'd even settle for a good T-1, even.
If that's too limited a scope (Yahoo couldn't do this, of course), having a given page be sponsored by someone as a method of advertising is reasonable to me. Just a basic text link of "This news story brought to you by Joe's Shoe Repair and Tattoo Shop - get your wingtips polished and some new ink while you wait!" - much less intrusive. I mean, really, I'm never going to click a banner. I might click a very basic, more-or-less informative link like that.
Just my two cents.
Or, if you have no choice, get shielded cables. It really is a Big Deal. I'm sure there is plenty of anecdotal "evidence" of your people having "fine" networks with the cable running with power cables, but they don't know what it's like without it. TCP/IP is pretty good about fixing itself, but it obviously works better if it doesn't have to every other packet!
thank you.
From the release notes, there seems to be no implication of a GUI - am I wrong?
Nice try, kids. Look here if you want the release info.
Makes you wonder what that extra 1% is...
Well, I think work wouldn't care much for me asking "sure, I'm running a 'rogue' operating system, but could you please get me more RAM so I can run my bloated desktop-of-choice?"
I still use my Newton 2100. It kicks ass.
So, now, the world can think "Look, some company finally puts out a PDA that runs Linux and it sucks! See? Told you. Where'd I put my Psion?"
This won't change my stance of never giving MS a penny of my money, ever, if I can help it. I would say the most powerful emotion I'm feeling about this interview is wariness. If they have a few more of these guys in their ranks, they're going to be able to do more damage to the Linux "PR" than I'd expected.
I honestly don't think they'll "win", but it's going to be a tougher battle than I had anticipated.
Are we supposed to watch that odd stuff in the middle, or is that really intermission?
If I may dream a little dream, what I would love to see is allowing me to pay extra (that they can give to the advertising asses) to not watch any commercials on taped shows. It'd be a simple thing to do - just a binary code embedded into the stream - 1s when it's the show, 0s when it's the commerical. I only watch 1s for an extra $10 a month...I'd pay that in a heartbeat!
And don't pretend you work like you're possesed every hour on the clock, either. Or you wouldn't be reading this right now!
I was referring to the in-dash comment. Sorry that wasn't more clear.
Is what iPaq's offer really worth the pain in the ass of proprietary equipment? I can build a comparable system from scraps, or at the very least, low-end purchasing from discount vendors. What would compel me to go for a name-brand iPaq?
Anyway, my point is - soon the frivilous "unpatentable" crap will sift itself out (One-Click, anyone?), but I'm quite sure we'll be left with the New-VHSs and the New-Refigerater-coils and the New-Heater-elements-in-Toasters and each new thing will have the stamp of whoever had the minion that thought of it. Whoever happens to get The Big One will gain more influence over the technologies emerging at that time and they'll get their stamp on more things and so on...Soon, there will be the Microsoft Of The Kitchen and the Microsoft Of Home Theatre and so on.
Who knows? Maybe they'll be the same Microsoft we have today.
(and, if it was in the article, what was it??)
So, if it's a single atom, is it an existing element, or do we now get Transistorium? Just curious.
Why go to a third party to learn how to write unmaintainable code when you can go to the "factory".
The argument has come up again and again - comparing this kid's web site to a paper pamphlet. The difference is that there is choice involved. I would draw a closer parallel to something like whispering about a phone number you can call and the answering machine you get is a message about how terrible the assistant principal is. Just because that number's there doesn't mean you HAVE to call it - it's all up to the person dialling the phone.