From that perspective, in any case. It is merely another tool of communication, which can be used in ways both dangerous and beneficial. It brings together people of shared interest, whether that interest be spiritual community or child pornography. It likewise brings together people of differing interests.
In essence, you don't really have a paper, because there is no "dark side of the Internet". It is people that can have dark sides, and focussing on the Internet only serves to bury heads deeper in the sand.
In general, USW is a pain, but they actually seem to be doing DSL right. I don't use them as my ISP, and that normally isn't a problem. It only went down badly once in the three months or so that I've had it, and it did take USW a day to figure out that it really was their problem and not the ISPs. My ISP includes dialup access as part of the plan, so I survived quite painlessly.
As far as telling them you have Windows, I recommend *against* it. Saying such a thing tends to turn on the "moron" switch with phone support. When I had the above mentioned outage, I told the USW tech that, while I did have a PC, I was running Linux, we actually got into a nice conversation about it since he was planning on installing RedHat on his home PC that weekend! In general, large corporations need to be reminded that a significant market segment is interested in something other than Windows. If you hush up your involvement, it will only take that much longer for them to get a clue.
Why don't you bitch and moan about standard dialup
on
Feature: Getting DSL
·
· Score: 1
The restrictions you mention are no different than those of a "personal" dialup account. ISPs around here charge about the same for DSL and "unlimited dialup accounts" (now there's a lie to complain about), around $20-30/month. If you want an IP and DNS to run your own servers, web or otherwise, just about all the ISPs allow you to upgrade to a business grade connection, at somewhere around $150-275/month here.
As far as one machine goes, that is bull and they know it. Proxy and masquerade at the gateway and it simply isn't a factor. Again, a business grade account will give you a subnet with real IPs if you need them.
So please don't complain about getting the same account features at the same price. All you pay for is the speed, yes, and you are a fool if you expect anything more. If you don't need the speed, don't buy the pipe.
There are two kinds of projects, interesting ones and uninteresting ones (valuation is, of course, based on personal preference). I don't know about most people, but money alone won't get me to work on a project I find uninteresting, and I'd like to think that is a common trait among the current crop of open source developers. We prefer interesting work, we will do it at no cost, and we will make the source free. If someone want to pay for our time, we should be that much more willing to direct our attention to things we find interesting. Ultimately, we end up supporting ourselves with "work" we enjoy. Oh, the horrors!
This seems to be yet another case of Slashdot reporting old news. We at Subsume Technologies have been trying to get the boat floating in the "pay for your open source" movement since last year.
Put quite simply, nobody seems to be eager to to give funding to projects that may potentially help a competetor, regardless of the benefits of the open source model. For some reason, it is OK to buy the same word processor as your competetor if it comes from Microsoft or some other closed-source shop, but the second you want to release the source, they think they're just giving a free ride to someone else, which doesn't sit well with them.
We've taken pitches for software a company wants implemented, we've given pitches to companies for software they need implemented, and we've done software in advance in hopes of finding the market that will support it. In all cases, the mention of our intention to make the source open has been met with massive resistance.
In short, it simply won't fly. The market is not yet ready to contribute to the open source movement, they are only ready to plunder the works that already exist. It will be a good five or ten years before the more clueful companies show enough benefits to topple the old model of proprietary computing.
Sure, there is an awful lot of hype surrounding this release, but to say Mr. Lucas sold out because of that is going too far. Until you see the movie, you simply don't know if he has compromised artistic integrity for the almighty dollar. Given his already extreme wealth, I don't think he's doing this for the money. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, and perhaps Mr. Katz should too. I have every reason to believe that this will be a quality picture in spite of the hype.
Slashdot Mirror
From that perspective, in any case. It is merely another tool of communication, which can be used in ways both dangerous and beneficial. It brings together people of shared interest, whether that interest be spiritual community or child pornography. It likewise brings together people of differing interests.
In essence, you don't really have a paper, because there is no "dark side of the Internet". It is people that can have dark sides, and focussing on the Internet only serves to bury heads deeper in the sand.
In general, USW is a pain, but they actually seem to be doing DSL right. I don't use them as my ISP, and that normally isn't a problem. It only went down badly once in the three months or so that I've had it, and it did take USW a day to figure out that it really was their problem and not the ISPs. My ISP includes dialup access as part of the plan, so I survived quite painlessly.
As far as telling them you have Windows, I recommend *against* it. Saying such a thing tends to turn on the "moron" switch with phone support. When I had the above mentioned outage, I told the USW tech that, while I did have a PC, I was running Linux, we actually got into a nice conversation about it since he was planning on installing RedHat on his home PC that weekend! In general, large corporations need to be reminded that a significant market segment is interested in something other than Windows. If you hush up your involvement, it will only take that much longer for them to get a clue.
The restrictions you mention are no different than those of a "personal" dialup account. ISPs around here charge about the same for DSL and "unlimited dialup accounts" (now there's a lie to complain about), around $20-30/month. If you want an IP and DNS to run your own servers, web or otherwise, just about all the ISPs allow you to upgrade to a business grade connection, at somewhere around $150-275/month here.
As far as one machine goes, that is bull and they know it. Proxy and masquerade at the gateway and it simply isn't a factor. Again, a business grade account will give you a subnet with real IPs if you need them.
So please don't complain about getting the same account features at the same price. All you pay for is the speed, yes, and you are a fool if you expect anything more. If you don't need the speed, don't buy the pipe.
There are two kinds of projects, interesting ones and uninteresting ones (valuation is, of course, based on personal preference). I don't know about most people, but money alone won't get me to work on a project I find uninteresting, and I'd like to think that is a common trait among the current crop of open source developers. We prefer interesting work, we will do it at no cost, and we will make the source free. If someone want to pay for our time, we should be that much more willing to direct our attention to things we find interesting. Ultimately, we end up supporting ourselves with "work" we enjoy. Oh, the horrors!
This seems to be yet another case of Slashdot reporting old news. We at Subsume Technologies have been trying to get the boat floating in the "pay for your open source" movement since last year.
Put quite simply, nobody seems to be eager to to give funding to projects that may potentially help a competetor, regardless of the benefits of the open source model. For some reason, it is OK to buy the same word processor as your competetor if it comes from Microsoft or some other closed-source shop, but the second you want to release the source, they think they're just giving a free ride to someone else, which doesn't sit well with them.
We've taken pitches for software a company wants implemented, we've given pitches to companies for software they need implemented, and we've done software in advance in hopes of finding the market that will support it. In all cases, the mention of our intention to make the source open has been met with massive resistance.
In short, it simply won't fly. The market is not yet ready to contribute to the open source movement, they are only ready to plunder the works that already exist. It will be a good five or ten years before the more clueful companies show enough benefits to topple the old model of proprietary computing.
Sure, there is an awful lot of hype surrounding this release, but to say Mr. Lucas sold out because of that is going too far. Until you see the movie, you simply don't know if he has compromised artistic integrity for the almighty dollar. Given his already extreme wealth, I don't think he's doing this for the money. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, and perhaps Mr. Katz should too. I have every reason to believe that this will be a quality picture in spite of the hype.