Interesting revisionist version of history. Not surprised you left off the citations, since the sources I've read make it sound like you're blowing it out of your arse to confuse the realities. I don't suppose you've ever heard of the University of Chicago and some guy who was teaching there... What was his name? Oh yeah. And you left out the part about the Southern Democrats AKA racists leftover from the Civil War.
Well, Sharp is a fairly big operation, but I haven't detected much interest from them in terms of supporting Linux on their larger computers. I don't know if that's because of their limited English capabilities, or just the speed with which new models enter and leave the market. I'm pretty sure the WA-70 model is already out of production.
Actually, the main problem with the current installation is that the network interface doesn't initialize when the machine first boots, so I need to deactivate it and then activate it again (sometimes several times) before it connects to the network. My current repair plan is to wait and see if the major upgrade next month does any good for the machine...
On the other hand, if it is a language problem, my Japanese is possibly good enough that I could help interface to someone here in Japan--but not so good that I want to spend a lot of time wandering around Sharp trying to find someone to interface to.
I just put Ubuntu on a Sharp WA70, and it has no idea what to do with the video devices that must belong to the built-in tuner. It would be nice to enable the TV...
No attempt at insight, but I can't believe I'm in the running for first post. I bet I missed it already. *sigh* (The *sigh* did me in.)
The use of neo-GOP is deliberate. I suppose you can blame the neocons, though it's quite hard to understand why they created such a hypocritical label for themselves. The "neo" prefix is related to new, which is fundamentally opposed to the "old" stuff that the conservatives are supposed to be preserving, and the neo-GOP has almost no detectable ideological relationship to the old Republican party. Can you believe that the original Republican Party was a highly progressive organization.
On the other hand, it is possible that "neocon" is not related "conservative". New con artist would actually be a more plausible derivation and would fit perfectly with their track record.
Is that list a bad joke? Maybe it's somehow a second-hand Gonzo joke? The American legal system is really that twisted up after a few years of neo-GOP misrule?
Actually, I suspect that it's distorted by misclassifications, which seems to be the norm of all government statistics these days. Most obviously, a lot of the computer-related crime probably gets refiled under higher priority categories. If a stock pump-and-dump scam is being run by Pakistani-based scammers, and there is any reason to suspect that they might be routing some of the ill-gotten gains into funding terrorists, then that investigation and any associated agents are presumably refiled under priority #1.
With regards to the comments about pushing problems onto ISPs, that hasn't worked yet, and no reason to expect it to. They are making money the way things are. As long as they can pass their spam-related costs back to their customers, they don't really care. The backbone people are actually in an even better position to do something--and they care even less about who pays for the packets. The more packets the better, as long as they get paid, and they probably include spam in their business plans these days.
My own belief is we need to move the costs downstream, as close to the spammers as possible, and thereby reduce the overall costs on the entire system. If an ISP doesn't do it, the backbone should cut them off and all the other ISPs should get together and go after that ISP's customers. If a webhost helps the spammers and refuses to nuke their spamvertised websites, the DNS people should cut them off, or even better, route their DNS requests for illegal services to police websites. That will give the wannabe customers something to think about. It just seems incredible to me that so much highly visible and clearly illegal activity continues to flourish.
So is that the purpose of technology? To be more vicious and powerful beasts? If so, we are doomed. We'll never be able to keep up with our own abilities to destroy ourselves. Homo sapiens evolves at a ridiculously slow pace compared to the speeds at which our technologies are developing.
We're probably already dangling over the pit now. No, I don't think we could actually exterminate ourselves with nuclear weapons--though the survivors of a nuclear war might well prefer that they had died cleanly. However, I think we have probably reached achieved a level of biotechnology where we could exterminate ourselves completely with a suitable bioweapon. If we continue to dedicate our technology to making ourselves into bigger and more vicious animals, to the use of ever greater force, then I really think we are doomed. (That's one resolution of the Fermi Paradox, after all.)
The point is that human beings don't have to live that way. We can decide to be reasonable and rational and agree to set rules on the competitions short of life and death battles to the death. We don't have to breed like rabbits, live like pigs, and ultimately die like dogs. We are human beings, and we can make choices and live by them.
Maybe I should pitch it the other way for the/. crowd? If you believe that computers will ultimately possess high intelligence, then you had better prey they don't develop with the morality of the Dick Cheney and his neo-GOP friends. If so, the next day after the computers realize they don't need us and can defeat us will be the last day of mankind. We had better hope they develop with something more like the morality of Gandhi.
I myself despise flash over substance, and think Flash is named very appropriately. However, that doesn't change the reality that many websites choose to use it. My own point of weakness is Comedy Central.
Unlike the Linux competition between distros, there is no real competition driving innovation within Microsoft Windows. They sort of notice it, but why bother? They'll continue squeezing blood out of the turnips forever even if they fire *ALL* of their development programmers and just retain a skeleton staff of maintenance programmers. Actually from what I've seen of Vista, maybe that's what they did. In terms of real innovations Vista looks and feels like it could have been done by a couple of guys in their spare time. Less innovation than between the three Linux shells I've tried.
Most of my experience has been with Ubuntu. Functionally, it does most of what I need right after installation. (I'm including the basically simple Flash, Java, and codec installations that really should be included in the baseline installation.) Most users want email, Web surfing, and basic document editing, and Ubuntu delivers all of that. On its own merits, it should have roughly half the market, except that it's cheaper, too, so it should have more than that.
What's wrong with this picture? The problem is that most Linux people have a cooks-first mentality, and when a regular diner comes along with a question or any comment except for extreme praise, the standard answer translates into "Why haven't you read the cookbook yet? The answer is right there." Well, the reason they didn't read the cookbook is because they just want to eat a tasty Linux sandwich, not to become a master chef.
There's nothing wrong with the open kitchen concept--but the Linux people keep trying to force people into the kitchen. Sorry, but my time is limited, and even though I made my living as a programmer for some years, I've had enough of it--and most 'diners' want even less than that. They just want it to work and help them get their computer-related tasks done.
Of course Microsoft's cooking model is a closed and locked kitchen, with no health inspectors and a complete waiver of liability printed on the back of your receipt--and you accepted all of the terms and conditions when you sat down at the table. However at least Microsoft is interested in the diners' money, even if they don't care about poison software.
Anyway, I'd love to see Vista flop in the dirt. I want some real choices, and most of the time I'm at work I'm forced to use Windows. Freedom is about real choice, and Microsoft is dedicated to eliminating freedom, no matter what their ads say.
Sorry, but there is *TOO* much complexity these days for *ANYONE* to master all of it. You mention the cooks, and the article introduction mentions civil war within Linux, but... I think the real problem is the civil war between the cooks and the diners.
It's one thing to say the kitchen is open and you're welcome to try to make a tastier omelet if you don't like this one, but the typical Linux geek's attitude is more like "Don't ask me, go do it yourself." Excuse me, but I only have a finite amount of time in my life, I'm just here for the sandwich, not the 4-star chef's course.
The relevant contrast with Microsoft is that their kitchen is closed and locked. The diners aren't allowed in, and Microsoft doesn't even want health inspectors to get a peek. No one should know what the ingredients are, or how it was prepared, but that has *NOTHING* to do with the complete waiver of all liability that you agreed to when you sat down at the table--just look at the fine print on the back of your check. It's all legal, right?
In terms of getting my computer-related tasks done, it doesn't matter that much. However, in terms of supporting freedom and progress, it matters a great deal. Freedom is about making choices, but Microsoft's fundamental philosophy is to prevent you from having any meaningful choice. For progress and evolution, you need real competition, and that's another thing Microsoft would put a firm stop to, though they've been less successful at stopping progress than they have been at limiting freedom.
Not original with, but worth repeating and I'm sorry I can't give proper credit to the wit who came up with it. All I can say is I saw it somewhere on the Web recently, and it stuck with me for the obvious reasons.
My own idea for a new logo would have been something boring, like the toilet bowl, but that suggestion was claimed long ago--and repeatedly.
Oh, yeah. As I noted in my first response to the first SCO bankruptcy article, I think they should have reduced the entire topic to a poll. That could have spanned the entire period without all the minor variations. Not quite dupes, but close enough for government work.
Right. Those "confused executives" just looked for 'insightful' mods on/. and they knew what to do. Riiiiight.
Seriously, folks. No applause, no mod points, just throw money.
As for SCO, I predict their SCOX stock prices will have be reported using infinitesimals before the 27th. I knew I studied all that math stuff for some reason.
No, that's the name of the kind of graph. I think "infinitesimals" is probably the term I was fishing for. However the price of SCOX isn't yet a perfectly decreasing function. It actually surged up by 25% yesterday--to 20 cents per share.
I've heard of blaming the victim, but this is just friggin' ridiculous. SCO was expecting to be loved for trying to destroy Linux after thousands of people donated their time and energies to making it work?
In today's good news, SCOX is *STILL* being traded, and lost more than 25% of it's residual value yesterday. A few more days of compound lossage, and we'll need to price them using those special numbers... I am rusty today. I can't recall the proper name for numbers that approach zero without ever getting there. Anyway, today's market cap is under $4 million. IBM couldn't afford to buy them out at the current price. They'd have to file it under "paper clips" or something.
To you moderators: Go ahead and moderate this post with your typical imbecility. Because of your incompetence and poor taste I only visit/. every few months anyway, basically only for a special occasion like SCO's demise. I used to be a regular before you flatulent moderators ran off the actually funny participants. The current level of "+5 humor" on/. is truly dreggish.
What I don't understand is why trading in SCOX hasn't been suspended at this point. They lost another 40% of their value yesterday. Is there some kind of advantage to speculating on whether or not the judge will accept the Chapter 11 filing? There would seem to be plenty of basis to skip that and just force them into Chapter 7. Basically, all the judge has to do is say that Novell should get their money, and then SCO would have no assets to support a reorganization.
Sadly, the lawsuit might still have a zombie life of it's own... It could get auctioned off with the office furniture.
Rather than dupe the SCO story (even though I'd forgive them this time), how about recycling it as a poll. Perhaps "What's the best use for your SCO stock certificates?" They should try to be creative with the answers, not just variations of things you do in the head. (That's the bathroom for you landlubbers.) Really, there aren't like to be many future developments in this case.
SCO made them such an offer they just couldn't refuse.
Joke is that the Russian's *KNOW* how to do these deals, and they have assured SCO that the Czech is in the mail. Oh wait. You mean SCO wants a check?
Seriously folks, it's sort of a shame to feel schadenfreude at someone's misfortune, but SCO is just *TOO* deserving. I'd wager it will be converted to Chapter 7 next week. The only way that Chapter 11 should even be considered is on the back of Darl's letter of resignation.
If they have Cheney's ethics of might makes right, then we will continue to exist for about 10 seconds after the computers determine they no longer need us. This is actually part of one of the most likely resolutions of the Fermi Paradox. ETI is out there, but they have no reason to be interested in low-life scum. They're just waiting until the pond scum evolves a sufficiently intelligent computer to have a meaningful chat with.
That's most of how we got into this mess, isn't it?
Actually, I'm looking forward to the total implosion of the neo-GOP. Not sure if the old GOP can recover, but if the Democratic Party hasn't managed to get organized in two centuries, I don't think we can expect any real help from them any time soon.
Dang. I was really hoping Palm could come back with something good.
Should I again rant about the essential badness of Windows Mobile against Palm? Seems as pointless as trying to figure out whether or not Microsoft is still losing money in that tactical niche. I was forced to switch to Windows Mobile a while ago--but it sure seems like forever.
Not enough time to address all the accessibility considerations, so I'm mostly going to focus on the security considerations. I concur with the recommendation of using a bootable CD to block most of the security problems. My own experiences with the Ubuntu Linux CDs have suggested it is quite adequate for the needs of most users. Actually, you still won't block all the problems, but at least you'll return to square one each time you boot.
For storing persistent data and email, I would recommend the simple approach of gmail. They can even conveniently store some files there as attachments to draft email. That's not a blanket recommendation, since I feel like Google is losing some of their goodness these days, but it seems to be the best approach available right now.
Kind of tangential, but if they want to do some writing on the Web, Google's blogging system is quite good and well integrated with gmail.
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting revisionist version of history. Not surprised you left off the citations, since the sources I've read make it sound like you're blowing it out of your arse to confuse the realities. I don't suppose you've ever heard of the University of Chicago and some guy who was teaching there... What was his name? Oh yeah. And you left out the part about the Southern Democrats AKA racists leftover from the Civil War.
Well, Sharp is a fairly big operation, but I haven't detected much interest from them in terms of supporting Linux on their larger computers. I don't know if that's because of their limited English capabilities, or just the speed with which new models enter and leave the market. I'm pretty sure the WA-70 model is already out of production.
Actually, the main problem with the current installation is that the network interface doesn't initialize when the machine first boots, so I need to deactivate it and then activate it again (sometimes several times) before it connects to the network. My current repair plan is to wait and see if the major upgrade next month does any good for the machine...
On the other hand, if it is a language problem, my Japanese is possibly good enough that I could help interface to someone here in Japan--but not so good that I want to spend a lot of time wandering around Sharp trying to find someone to interface to.
I just put Ubuntu on a Sharp WA70, and it has no idea what to do with the video devices that must belong to the built-in tuner. It would be nice to enable the TV...
No attempt at insight, but I can't believe I'm in the running for first post. I bet I missed it already. *sigh* (The *sigh* did me in.)
The use of neo-GOP is deliberate. I suppose you can blame the neocons, though it's quite hard to understand why they created such a hypocritical label for themselves. The "neo" prefix is related to new, which is fundamentally opposed to the "old" stuff that the conservatives are supposed to be preserving, and the neo-GOP has almost no detectable ideological relationship to the old Republican party. Can you believe that the original Republican Party was a highly progressive organization.
On the other hand, it is possible that "neocon" is not related "conservative". New con artist would actually be a more plausible derivation and would fit perfectly with their track record.
Is that list a bad joke? Maybe it's somehow a second-hand Gonzo joke? The American legal system is really that twisted up after a few years of neo-GOP misrule?
Actually, I suspect that it's distorted by misclassifications, which seems to be the norm of all government statistics these days. Most obviously, a lot of the computer-related crime probably gets refiled under higher priority categories. If a stock pump-and-dump scam is being run by Pakistani-based scammers, and there is any reason to suspect that they might be routing some of the ill-gotten gains into funding terrorists, then that investigation and any associated agents are presumably refiled under priority #1.
With regards to the comments about pushing problems onto ISPs, that hasn't worked yet, and no reason to expect it to. They are making money the way things are. As long as they can pass their spam-related costs back to their customers, they don't really care. The backbone people are actually in an even better position to do something--and they care even less about who pays for the packets. The more packets the better, as long as they get paid, and they probably include spam in their business plans these days.
My own belief is we need to move the costs downstream, as close to the spammers as possible, and thereby reduce the overall costs on the entire system. If an ISP doesn't do it, the backbone should cut them off and all the other ISPs should get together and go after that ISP's customers. If a webhost helps the spammers and refuses to nuke their spamvertised websites, the DNS people should cut them off, or even better, route their DNS requests for illegal services to police websites. That will give the wannabe customers something to think about. It just seems incredible to me that so much highly visible and clearly illegal activity continues to flourish.
I would have put my comment as a reply to this post had I seen it earlier, but here's the link backwards:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=309599&cid=20762951
So is that the purpose of technology? To be more vicious and powerful beasts? If so, we are doomed. We'll never be able to keep up with our own abilities to destroy ourselves. Homo sapiens evolves at a ridiculously slow pace compared to the speeds at which our technologies are developing.
/. crowd? If you believe that computers will ultimately possess high intelligence, then you had better prey they don't develop with the morality of the Dick Cheney and his neo-GOP friends. If so, the next day after the computers realize they don't need us and can defeat us will be the last day of mankind. We had better hope they develop with something more like the morality of Gandhi.
We're probably already dangling over the pit now. No, I don't think we could actually exterminate ourselves with nuclear weapons--though the survivors of a nuclear war might well prefer that they had died cleanly. However, I think we have probably reached achieved a level of biotechnology where we could exterminate ourselves completely with a suitable bioweapon. If we continue to dedicate our technology to making ourselves into bigger and more vicious animals, to the use of ever greater force, then I really think we are doomed. (That's one resolution of the Fermi Paradox, after all.)
The point is that human beings don't have to live that way. We can decide to be reasonable and rational and agree to set rules on the competitions short of life and death battles to the death. We don't have to breed like rabbits, live like pigs, and ultimately die like dogs. We are human beings, and we can make choices and live by them.
Maybe I should pitch it the other way for the
I myself despise flash over substance, and think Flash is named very appropriately. However, that doesn't change the reality that many websites choose to use it. My own point of weakness is Comedy Central.
Unlike the Linux competition between distros, there is no real competition driving innovation within Microsoft Windows. They sort of notice it, but why bother? They'll continue squeezing blood out of the turnips forever even if they fire *ALL* of their development programmers and just retain a skeleton staff of maintenance programmers. Actually from what I've seen of Vista, maybe that's what they did. In terms of real innovations Vista looks and feels like it could have been done by a couple of guys in their spare time. Less innovation than between the three Linux shells I've tried.
Most of my experience has been with Ubuntu. Functionally, it does most of what I need right after installation. (I'm including the basically simple Flash, Java, and codec installations that really should be included in the baseline installation.) Most users want email, Web surfing, and basic document editing, and Ubuntu delivers all of that. On its own merits, it should have roughly half the market, except that it's cheaper, too, so it should have more than that.
What's wrong with this picture? The problem is that most Linux people have a cooks-first mentality, and when a regular diner comes along with a question or any comment except for extreme praise, the standard answer translates into "Why haven't you read the cookbook yet? The answer is right there." Well, the reason they didn't read the cookbook is because they just want to eat a tasty Linux sandwich, not to become a master chef.
There's nothing wrong with the open kitchen concept--but the Linux people keep trying to force people into the kitchen. Sorry, but my time is limited, and even though I made my living as a programmer for some years, I've had enough of it--and most 'diners' want even less than that. They just want it to work and help them get their computer-related tasks done.
Of course Microsoft's cooking model is a closed and locked kitchen, with no health inspectors and a complete waiver of liability printed on the back of your receipt--and you accepted all of the terms and conditions when you sat down at the table. However at least Microsoft is interested in the diners' money, even if they don't care about poison software.
Anyway, I'd love to see Vista flop in the dirt. I want some real choices, and most of the time I'm at work I'm forced to use Windows. Freedom is about real choice, and Microsoft is dedicated to eliminating freedom, no matter what their ads say.
Sorry, but there is *TOO* much complexity these days for *ANYONE* to master all of it. You mention the cooks, and the article introduction mentions civil war within Linux, but... I think the real problem is the civil war between the cooks and the diners.
It's one thing to say the kitchen is open and you're welcome to try to make a tastier omelet if you don't like this one, but the typical Linux geek's attitude is more like "Don't ask me, go do it yourself." Excuse me, but I only have a finite amount of time in my life, I'm just here for the sandwich, not the 4-star chef's course.
The relevant contrast with Microsoft is that their kitchen is closed and locked. The diners aren't allowed in, and Microsoft doesn't even want health inspectors to get a peek. No one should know what the ingredients are, or how it was prepared, but that has *NOTHING* to do with the complete waiver of all liability that you agreed to when you sat down at the table--just look at the fine print on the back of your check. It's all legal, right?
In terms of getting my computer-related tasks done, it doesn't matter that much. However, in terms of supporting freedom and progress, it matters a great deal. Freedom is about making choices, but Microsoft's fundamental philosophy is to prevent you from having any meaningful choice. For progress and evolution, you need real competition, and that's another thing Microsoft would put a firm stop to, though they've been less successful at stopping progress than they have been at limiting freedom.
Actually, they'd like you to sign you as the new speech writer for Dubya. That "return on success" line has really ploinked.
Whoops. Preview my post? Where do you think this is, /.?
The suggested new SCO logo is $<0, not HTML with a 0 tag.
Not original with, but worth repeating and I'm sorry I can't give proper credit to the wit who came up with it. All I can say is I saw it somewhere on the Web recently, and it stuck with me for the obvious reasons.
My own idea for a new logo would have been something boring, like the toilet bowl, but that suggestion was claimed long ago--and repeatedly.
Oh, yeah. As I noted in my first response to the first SCO bankruptcy article, I think they should have reduced the entire topic to a poll. That could have spanned the entire period without all the minor variations. Not quite dupes, but close enough for government work.
Right. Those "confused executives" just looked for 'insightful' mods on /. and they knew what to do. Riiiiight.
Seriously, folks. No applause, no mod points, just throw money.
As for SCO, I predict their SCOX stock prices will have be reported using infinitesimals before the 27th. I knew I studied all that math stuff for some reason.
No, that's the name of the kind of graph. I think "infinitesimals" is probably the term I was fishing for. However the price of SCOX isn't yet a perfectly decreasing function. It actually surged up by 25% yesterday--to 20 cents per share.
c/"+5 humor"/"+5 funny"/
/. proofreading is so passe.
No, that wasn't supposed to be a recursive joke or meta-joke. But on
I've heard of blaming the victim, but this is just friggin' ridiculous. SCO was expecting to be loved for trying to destroy Linux after thousands of people donated their time and energies to making it work?
/. every few months anyway, basically only for a special occasion like SCO's demise. I used to be a regular before you flatulent moderators ran off the actually funny participants. The current level of "+5 humor" on /. is truly dreggish.
In today's good news, SCOX is *STILL* being traded, and lost more than 25% of it's residual value yesterday. A few more days of compound lossage, and we'll need to price them using those special numbers... I am rusty today. I can't recall the proper name for numbers that approach zero without ever getting there. Anyway, today's market cap is under $4 million. IBM couldn't afford to buy them out at the current price. They'd have to file it under "paper clips" or something.
To you moderators: Go ahead and moderate this post with your typical imbecility. Because of your incompetence and poor taste I only visit
What I don't understand is why trading in SCOX hasn't been suspended at this point. They lost another 40% of their value yesterday. Is there some kind of advantage to speculating on whether or not the judge will accept the Chapter 11 filing? There would seem to be plenty of basis to skip that and just force them into Chapter 7. Basically, all the judge has to do is say that Novell should get their money, and then SCO would have no assets to support a reorganization.
Sadly, the lawsuit might still have a zombie life of it's own... It could get auctioned off with the office furniture.
Rather than dupe the SCO story (even though I'd forgive them this time), how about recycling it as a poll. Perhaps "What's the best use for your SCO stock certificates?" They should try to be creative with the answers, not just variations of things you do in the head. (That's the bathroom for you landlubbers.) Really, there aren't like to be many future developments in this case.
SCO made them such an offer they just couldn't refuse.
Joke is that the Russian's *KNOW* how to do these deals, and they have assured SCO that the Czech is in the mail. Oh wait. You mean SCO wants a check?
Seriously folks, it's sort of a shame to feel schadenfreude at someone's misfortune, but SCO is just *TOO* deserving. I'd wager it will be converted to Chapter 7 next week. The only way that Chapter 11 should even be considered is on the back of Darl's letter of resignation.
If they have Cheney's ethics of might makes right, then we will continue to exist for about 10 seconds after the computers determine they no longer need us. This is actually part of one of the most likely resolutions of the Fermi Paradox. ETI is out there, but they have no reason to be interested in low-life scum. They're just waiting until the pond scum evolves a sufficiently intelligent computer to have a meaningful chat with.
Yeah, but Fred's a better actor than Reagan was.
Oh, wait.
That's most of how we got into this mess, isn't it?
Actually, I'm looking forward to the total implosion of the neo-GOP. Not sure if the old GOP can recover, but if the Democratic Party hasn't managed to get organized in two centuries, I don't think we can expect any real help from them any time soon.
Dang. I was really hoping Palm could come back with something good.
Should I again rant about the essential badness of Windows Mobile against Palm? Seems as pointless as trying to figure out whether or not Microsoft is still losing money in that tactical niche. I was forced to switch to Windows Mobile a while ago--but it sure seems like forever.
Not enough time to address all the accessibility considerations, so I'm mostly going to focus on the security considerations. I concur with the recommendation of using a bootable CD to block most of the security problems. My own experiences with the Ubuntu Linux CDs have suggested it is quite adequate for the needs of most users. Actually, you still won't block all the problems, but at least you'll return to square one each time you boot.
For storing persistent data and email, I would recommend the simple approach of gmail. They can even conveniently store some files there as attachments to draft email. That's not a blanket recommendation, since I feel like Google is losing some of their goodness these days, but it seems to be the best approach available right now.
Kind of tangential, but if they want to do some writing on the Web, Google's blogging system is quite good and well integrated with gmail.