I followed the company for quite awhile waiting for a dvorak printing of their keyboard to be available. I have to admit I was quite skeptical as more and more delays kept cropping up. I kept following their progress mostly because they were always prompt and informative with responses to question by email -- no run-around whatsoever. When I finally got StealthLP Dvorak I fell in love with in within a week. The zero-force and lack of keys doesn't take more than about that long to get use to, and most of the gestures can be mastered in minutes. I would recommend this product to absolutely anyone interested in an alternative typing surface. Admittedly, at $300 the price is a barrier to entry, but I don't in any way feel that my money was a poor investment. If you have the money to buy a new toy/tool (it does become a tool rather than a toy VERY quickly), it's definately worth it.
If I really need to stay up for anything, wether it's gaming or finishing a paper for an all nighter I reach for the baby food. It has lots of simple carbohydrates tha the body can break down quickly for energy. If your wondering about taste, Gerber's Blueberry Buckle is actually pretty good.
p.s. Thanks Mrs. Way for teaching us something useful in high school chemistry.
When was the last time that you, as the user of a piece of closed source software, benefited from the fact that two related functions were closed to each other in the source code? I realize there are arguable indirect benefits, but I still find that claim funny.
This is an interesting development. I understand MySQL AB's desire to protect their trademark, and not being an MySQL affcionado, I have to say I can see how one could be fooled by the mysql.org site. However, I also don't see a problem with another company hosting a community for MySQL users to get help and help each other. If the issue is simply the domain name, then I would encourage NuSphere to respect MySQL and change it. However, if the MySQL AB has a problem with the site itself, then I would say that they are just being anal.
Like it or not, computers need to becomes more like appliances, more like the TV the be truly accessible to everyone. That means that the system on the computer will be largely static and most of the software and services will be stored on the internet and upgraded by professionals. However, Servers WILL needs to be maintained and upgraded to keep up with the increasing demands of customers. This scenario helps ensure that the parts market will be around for quite a while. Even if it costs a bit of change for the parts, we will always be able to build our own systems. This is largely what will be done by the people who are writing the services because their systems needs to be up to date with server software and compilers and such as a testing and development environment. In short, the developer needs his own servers to do what he needs to do. There's going to be two paradigms and they will coexist without our digital world.
I learned programming on my own starting in the 7th grade and now with 8 years of experience I am well equipped to code professionally (I have for the last 4 summers). The only way to get started is to do it. No matter what language you choose first, it's gong to be difficult. The second language is exponentially easier and so on. Along the way, however, there are two things I found most valuable for me. The first is variety. I have written in C, C++, Java, Python, Perl, Lisp, Basic, Visual Basic, JavaScript, HTML, XML. There are probably a few I forgot too. Now, most of these I've only written a bit in, I've concentrated on Java, C, Perl, and Lisp (in that order). But each language gives me a new perspective on programming and new ideas. This is valuable and can be applied no matter what you are writing in any language. The second thing is a good mentor. Having a mentor in the professional world is how I changed status from Hacker to Programmer. I learned about things such as code maintainance and commenting. If your just looking to hack around and play at home, this is not as necessary, but if you want to write a full blown application it becomes necessary very quickly. Hope that helps!
if you have more questions, dv@nthroot.com
Even if there were a whole bunch of new TLDs, how would they be accessed by the average internet user? They average user depends on her ISP for DNS service, and that ISP would have to set up their DNS servers to know about the new TLD servers or so other global authority that knew about them. So no matter how many new ones there are, if ISPs aren't using these ad hoc root servers they are really pointless beyond a small club of hackers. When it comes down to it, you can't get around hard coding somebody's IP or other identifier in any naming system that will scale well to the internet. Whoever's IP is the one that gets hardcoded automatically becomes the authority.
The idea may not be new, but is will become the way of the future. You will go into a bookstore and use their terminal to look up some book that you want, put in your credit card number, and then the book will be printed for you right there. It will be just like going to LensCrafters and getting your glasses in about an hour (which, by the way, is astonishly accurate in my experience with them). The same thing will happen to the music industry, although in that field it will most likely be a home appliance that can record to the latest media.
As you seem to be in this business, what do you see as a viable economic model for Software and Software/Services companies who want to develop either partially or purely open source for Customers and/or Consumers? What effect does open source have on Business to Business relationships and do you see it as a strength or a weakness for open source companies in this area? Is open source appropriate for software written for business solutions rather than for consumers?
I prefer to use my PC for things other than gaming. If I buy a game for the PS2, I don't have to worry about compatibility issues or software getting screwed up and stuff. I can just buy the game, pop it in and play. In addition, I get neat pressure-sensitive controllers that jiggle without having is configure strange drivers *G*. Of course, I also exclusive run linux, so the PS2 relieves me from keeping a windows parition solely to run games.
One of the biggest strengths I see about linux is that its software base is unbiased. Yeah, most of us are biased agaisnt Microsoft at heart, and could exist without it, but the whole thing about openness is that EVERYTHING should be available..NET should be reverse-engineered if for only this reason. As for attracting new users, how many newbies would use linux much if they couldn't talk to their friends over IM or MSN as they expect to? The same thing is true here, if we don't have it, we block a whole user base. Being free in linux means you have a choice, one of those choices should be the choice to use.NET.
What we really need is a framwork which is ".NET compatible" That is -- every service written for.NET will work with this new framework if everything is configured properly. However, it's true that M$ will control all the authenecation for.NET. For that reason, there need to be other authenication services. Not just one alternative, but competing sources for "Passports". In addition to keeping up with.NET, the system should be extended in an open way (as many have suggested), but NOT in a way that fundamentally breaks.NET. This stategy won't work because M$ has all the leverage. Before any serious extension can be done, the services need to be liberated from the watchful eye of M$,s passports. The fundamental thing is to get it out there in such a way that ANYONE can provide Passports. A service should be able to decide whether a given passport will be allowed (or maybe it will allow all or not even require one) I haven't read much about this yet, so I don't know the details, but rest assured that I will getting a book soon.
While no one really believes that these programs would become closed source, the question of what would happen if they did is a good one. In the case of programs like these, we would immediately see open source clones (e.g. nano for pico) out from the developers who depend on the tools. Of course, this strategy isn't very scalable -- it works only in the case of programs which are fairly easy to write and maintain.
What does this mean for control freaks (like me) who want to make sure that they are as aware as possible about what's going on around them? When your only source of information in through a filter (as it will likely be in the future for most people as the Attention Deficit gets bigger), how can you be sure that you are getting all the info that you need? Sure, you can choose (hopefully) not to use a filter, but there is way to much information out there even today to possibly keep up with it all. Of course, the filter problem is not REALLY a new one, because even if you read the paper, all the people putting together the paper act as a filter determining what information you get. What a tactics used by other control freaks to deal with this problem (apart from reading as much as possible every chance you get)?
Thank you for pointing this out -- you are completely correct. However, quantum mechanics has also produced the most accurate predictions in the history of any physical theory developed, so it deserves to be taken seriously (and most of the physics community does so). Of course, there are no laws of physics really, only theories.
Can you send me a link to more info on this? I would like to know more. How do they make a copy of the particle without observing it?
-- dv@nthroot.com
Yes, your right that the key is discarded after use, but it has to be kept secure while it is being used to prevent a third party from obtaining it during this time and then listening in on whatever data remains to be sent. The feature that the keys are discarded does make them much more secure however.
While this kind of quantum cryptograhy has been around for awhile, the article is correct in stating that such expiraments have only been done across wires until this point. The really neat thing about this is that it really is safe. These technologies do not rely on security through obscurity in any way. The key is sent quantumly, and cannot be intercepted without breaking the quantum entanglement of the particles. Once a secure key has been transmitted, it does need to be protected within the software, but that is much easier than protecting is as it flies through the air. The security of the key as it is transmitted is protected by the laws of physics, which is what makes this so secure. While there is no silver bullet to the problem at hand, this solves fundamental problem of keys being sniffed during transit without anyone knowing. From here there are a lot of other problems to solve, but its a big step toward secure transmissions in the open.
What do you see as a viable economic model for Software and/or Software/Services companies who want to develop purely Open Source software for marketing to Consumers and or Customers? What does this mean for Business to Business relationships involving such companies?
My reaction was similar at first, but after thinking about it for awhile and reading some of the comments here, I have to say more power to Caldera. There are plenty of nice open hackable distributions out there for us computer weenies to use. Those aren't going away. I think Caldera has the right idea to aim at the market linux hasn't been growing as quickly in -- business desktops. By offering per-seat licensces, Caldera will be able to offer better support to its customers. This is turn will encourage busisness to use Linux b/c it is stable and will still be cheaper than Windows. We're just seeing a new phase in the evolution in linux. Free linux will never go away, which is great. But Caldera is in a different market and I hope they do it well.
Unfortunately, this is like most other announcements about the possibilties of life in our universe. It is a perfectly legit (at least I don't see a reason to doubt it) scientific study and the data will be corrupted by the media and E.T. fanatics until the information is useless to most of society. *cough*faceonmars*cough* Nonetheless, I'm glad to hear the announcement and I am fond of the idea of finding an ecology structured differently from ours. That would be a great discovery for biology.
It was, of course, a given that NetBSD would support the architechture, but I'm glad to hear all of the support coming from AMD for development before the chip is even out. This bodes well for a smooth transition to 64 bit.
This is really what we need at this point in the development of popular Open Source and openess in general. We have much of the software in place to keep most people happy in linux. Printing and gaming are a bit of an issue, but most of the applications are coming along. The one thing we lack is a real REASON for the average Joe Q. Public user to use Linux or any other open source OS over Windows. Trying to raise the awareness of where our freedom is going in general is the right thing to do. Whether or not the GPL or Linux survives is really irrelevant to the issue. The issue is that having one entity control the industry, any industry, is not good for the consumer. I truly hope The Center for the Public Domain spearheads a movement to get these issues out and in the public eye.
If only it were that simple. It's true that that is what the license says. However, consider
(b) License to Device Adapter Code. In addition to the rights granted in Section 1(a), Microsoft grants to Recipient the right to use, copy and modify the source code version of those portions of the Software identified as "Device Adapter Code" ("Device Adapter Code") for the sole purposes of designing, developing, and testing Recipient's Applications, and to reproduce and distribute the Device Adapter Code, along with any modifications thereof, solely in object code form as a part of Recipient's Applications in accordance with Section 3 of this Agreement. In addition to the conditions set forth in Section 3 of this Agreement, the foregoing license is subject to the following conditions: (i) any modifications or derivatives made by Recipient to the Device Adapter Code shall only be used in conjunction with the Software; and (ii) Recipient shall not distribute the Device Adapter Code, or any portion thereof, on a stand-alone basis or otherwise permit further distribution of the Device Adapter Code and/or derivatives thereof by third parties.
This implies to me that there is some annoying cookie-cutter code that companies aren't going to want to re-write on their own. The license doesn't prevent them from writing Open Source code, but it does prevent them from including the Device Adapter Code with code that they write. That makes it inconvenient for companies to write Open Source Code. And of course, it's the companies that we really need participating in the Open Source movement. While it may not be the biggest deal, because you can still write free code, that's not the issue -- the issue is that Micro$otf doesn't want people writing free code, so it's giving them incentive not too.
- qxjit
That's my two cents -- sorry to rip you off.
Slashdot Mirror
I followed the company for quite awhile waiting for a dvorak printing of their keyboard to be available. I have to admit I was quite skeptical as more and more delays kept cropping up. I kept following their progress mostly because they were always prompt and informative with responses to question by email -- no run-around whatsoever. When I finally got StealthLP Dvorak I fell in love with in within a week. The zero-force and lack of keys doesn't take more than about that long to get use to, and most of the gestures can be mastered in minutes. I would recommend this product to absolutely anyone interested in an alternative typing surface. Admittedly, at $300 the price is a barrier to entry, but I don't in any way feel that my money was a poor investment. If you have the money to buy a new toy/tool (it does become a tool rather than a toy VERY quickly), it's definately worth it.
If I really need to stay up for anything, wether it's gaming or finishing a paper for an all nighter I reach for the baby food. It has lots of simple carbohydrates tha the body can break down quickly for energy. If your wondering about taste, Gerber's Blueberry Buckle is actually pretty good.
p.s. Thanks Mrs. Way for teaching us something useful in high school chemistry.
When was the last time that you, as the user of a piece of closed source software, benefited from the fact that two related functions were closed to each other in the source code? I realize there are arguable indirect benefits, but I still find that claim funny.
This is an interesting development. I understand MySQL AB's desire to protect their trademark, and not being an MySQL affcionado, I have to say I can see how one could be fooled by the mysql.org site. However, I also don't see a problem with another company hosting a community for MySQL users to get help and help each other. If the issue is simply the domain name, then I would encourage NuSphere to respect MySQL and change it. However, if the MySQL AB has a problem with the site itself, then I would say that they are just being anal.
Like it or not, computers need to becomes more like appliances, more like the TV the be truly accessible to everyone. That means that the system on the computer will be largely static and most of the software and services will be stored on the internet and upgraded by professionals. However, Servers WILL needs to be maintained and upgraded to keep up with the increasing demands of customers. This scenario helps ensure that the parts market will be around for quite a while. Even if it costs a bit of change for the parts, we will always be able to build our own systems. This is largely what will be done by the people who are writing the services because their systems needs to be up to date with server software and compilers and such as a testing and development environment. In short, the developer needs his own servers to do what he needs to do. There's going to be two paradigms and they will coexist without our digital world.
I learned programming on my own starting in the 7th grade and now with 8 years of experience I am well equipped to code professionally (I have for the last 4 summers). The only way to get started is to do it. No matter what language you choose first, it's gong to be difficult. The second language is exponentially easier and so on. Along the way, however, there are two things I found most valuable for me. The first is variety. I have written in C, C++, Java, Python, Perl, Lisp, Basic, Visual Basic, JavaScript, HTML, XML. There are probably a few I forgot too. Now, most of these I've only written a bit in, I've concentrated on Java, C, Perl, and Lisp (in that order). But each language gives me a new perspective on programming and new ideas. This is valuable and can be applied no matter what you are writing in any language. The second thing is a good mentor. Having a mentor in the professional world is how I changed status from Hacker to Programmer. I learned about things such as code maintainance and commenting. If your just looking to hack around and play at home, this is not as necessary, but if you want to write a full blown application it becomes necessary very quickly. Hope that helps! if you have more questions, dv@nthroot.com
Even if there were a whole bunch of new TLDs, how would they be accessed by the average internet user? They average user depends on her ISP for DNS service, and that ISP would have to set up their DNS servers to know about the new TLD servers or so other global authority that knew about them. So no matter how many new ones there are, if ISPs aren't using these ad hoc root servers they are really pointless beyond a small club of hackers. When it comes down to it, you can't get around hard coding somebody's IP or other identifier in any naming system that will scale well to the internet. Whoever's IP is the one that gets hardcoded automatically becomes the authority.
The idea may not be new, but is will become the way of the future. You will go into a bookstore and use their terminal to look up some book that you want, put in your credit card number, and then the book will be printed for you right there. It will be just like going to LensCrafters and getting your glasses in about an hour (which, by the way, is astonishly accurate in my experience with them). The same thing will happen to the music industry, although in that field it will most likely be a home appliance that can record to the latest media.
As you seem to be in this business, what do you see as a viable economic model for Software and Software/Services companies who want to develop either partially or purely open source for Customers and/or Consumers? What effect does open source have on Business to Business relationships and do you see it as a strength or a weakness for open source companies in this area? Is open source appropriate for software written for business solutions rather than for consumers?
I prefer to use my PC for things other than gaming. If I buy a game for the PS2, I don't have to worry about compatibility issues or software getting screwed up and stuff. I can just buy the game, pop it in and play. In addition, I get neat pressure-sensitive controllers that jiggle without having is configure strange drivers *G*. Of course, I also exclusive run linux, so the PS2 relieves me from keeping a windows parition solely to run games.
One of the biggest strengths I see about linux is that its software base is unbiased. Yeah, most of us are biased agaisnt Microsoft at heart, and could exist without it, but the whole thing about openness is that EVERYTHING should be available. .NET should be reverse-engineered if for only this reason. As for attracting new users, how many newbies would use linux much if they couldn't talk to their friends over IM or MSN as they expect to? The same thing is true here, if we don't have it, we block a whole user base. Being free in linux means you have a choice, one of those choices should be the choice to use .NET.
What we really need is a framwork which is ".NET compatible" That is -- every service written for .NET will work with this new framework if everything is configured properly. However, it's true that M$ will control all the authenecation for .NET. For that reason, there need to be other authenication services. Not just one alternative, but competing sources for "Passports". In addition to keeping up with .NET, the system should be extended in an open way (as many have suggested), but NOT in a way that fundamentally breaks .NET. This stategy won't work because M$ has all the leverage. Before any serious extension can be done, the services need to be liberated from the watchful eye of M$,s passports. The fundamental thing is to get it out there in such a way that ANYONE can provide Passports. A service should be able to decide whether a given passport will be allowed (or maybe it will allow all or not even require one) I haven't read much about this yet, so I don't know the details, but rest assured that I will getting a book soon.
While no one really believes that these programs would become closed source, the question of what would happen if they did is a good one. In the case of programs like these, we would immediately see open source clones (e.g. nano for pico) out from the developers who depend on the tools. Of course, this strategy isn't very scalable -- it works only in the case of programs which are fairly easy to write and maintain.
What does this mean for control freaks (like me) who want to make sure that they are as aware as possible about what's going on around them? When your only source of information in through a filter (as it will likely be in the future for most people as the Attention Deficit gets bigger), how can you be sure that you are getting all the info that you need? Sure, you can choose (hopefully) not to use a filter, but there is way to much information out there even today to possibly keep up with it all. Of course, the filter problem is not REALLY a new one, because even if you read the paper, all the people putting together the paper act as a filter determining what information you get. What a tactics used by other control freaks to deal with this problem (apart from reading as much as possible every chance you get)?
Strange -- attracting women by flashing my butt never worked for me...
Thank you for pointing this out -- you are completely correct. However, quantum mechanics has also produced the most accurate predictions in the history of any physical theory developed, so it deserves to be taken seriously (and most of the physics community does so). Of course, there are no laws of physics really, only theories.
Can you send me a link to more info on this? I would like to know more. How do they make a copy of the particle without observing it? -- dv@nthroot.com
Yes, your right that the key is discarded after use, but it has to be kept secure while it is being used to prevent a third party from obtaining it during this time and then listening in on whatever data remains to be sent. The feature that the keys are discarded does make them much more secure however.
While this kind of quantum cryptograhy has been around for awhile, the article is correct in stating that such expiraments have only been done across wires until this point. The really neat thing about this is that it really is safe. These technologies do not rely on security through obscurity in any way. The key is sent quantumly, and cannot be intercepted without breaking the quantum entanglement of the particles. Once a secure key has been transmitted, it does need to be protected within the software, but that is much easier than protecting is as it flies through the air. The security of the key as it is transmitted is protected by the laws of physics, which is what makes this so secure. While there is no silver bullet to the problem at hand, this solves fundamental problem of keys being sniffed during transit without anyone knowing. From here there are a lot of other problems to solve, but its a big step toward secure transmissions in the open.
What do you see as a viable economic model for Software and/or Software/Services companies who want to develop purely Open Source software for marketing to Consumers and or Customers? What does this mean for Business to Business relationships involving such companies?
My reaction was similar at first, but after thinking about it for awhile and reading some of the comments here, I have to say more power to Caldera. There are plenty of nice open hackable distributions out there for us computer weenies to use. Those aren't going away. I think Caldera has the right idea to aim at the market linux hasn't been growing as quickly in -- business desktops. By offering per-seat licensces, Caldera will be able to offer better support to its customers. This is turn will encourage busisness to use Linux b/c it is stable and will still be cheaper than Windows. We're just seeing a new phase in the evolution in linux. Free linux will never go away, which is great. But Caldera is in a different market and I hope they do it well.
Unfortunately, this is like most other announcements about the possibilties of life in our universe. It is a perfectly legit (at least I don't see a reason to doubt it) scientific study and the data will be corrupted by the media and E.T. fanatics until the information is useless to most of society. *cough*faceonmars*cough* Nonetheless, I'm glad to hear the announcement and I am fond of the idea of finding an ecology structured differently from ours. That would be a great discovery for biology.
It was, of course, a given that NetBSD would support the architechture, but I'm glad to hear all of the support coming from AMD for development before the chip is even out. This bodes well for a smooth transition to 64 bit.
This is really what we need at this point in the development of popular Open Source and openess in general. We have much of the software in place to keep most people happy in linux. Printing and gaming are a bit of an issue, but most of the applications are coming along. The one thing we lack is a real REASON for the average Joe Q. Public user to use Linux or any other open source OS over Windows. Trying to raise the awareness of where our freedom is going in general is the right thing to do. Whether or not the GPL or Linux survives is really irrelevant to the issue. The issue is that having one entity control the industry, any industry, is not good for the consumer. I truly hope The Center for the Public Domain spearheads a movement to get these issues out and in the public eye.
If only it were that simple. It's true that that is what the license says. However, consider
(b) License to Device Adapter Code. In addition to the rights granted in Section 1(a), Microsoft grants to Recipient the right to use, copy and modify the source code version of those portions of the Software identified as "Device Adapter Code" ("Device Adapter Code") for the sole purposes of designing, developing, and testing Recipient's Applications, and to reproduce and distribute the Device Adapter Code, along with any modifications thereof, solely in object code form as a part of Recipient's Applications in accordance with Section 3 of this Agreement. In addition to the conditions set forth in Section 3 of this Agreement, the foregoing license is subject to the following conditions: (i) any modifications or derivatives made by Recipient to the Device Adapter Code shall only be used in conjunction with the Software; and (ii) Recipient shall not distribute the Device Adapter Code, or any portion thereof, on a stand-alone basis or otherwise permit further distribution of the Device Adapter Code and/or derivatives thereof by third parties.
This implies to me that there is some annoying cookie-cutter code that companies aren't going to want to re-write on their own. The license doesn't prevent them from writing Open Source code, but it does prevent them from including the Device Adapter Code with code that they write. That makes it inconvenient for companies to write Open Source Code. And of course, it's the companies that we really need participating in the Open Source movement. While it may not be the biggest deal, because you can still write free code, that's not the issue -- the issue is that Micro$otf doesn't want people writing free code, so it's giving them incentive not too.
- qxjit
That's my two cents -- sorry to rip you off.