One of his comments struck a nerve with me - the fact that hollywood "suits" don't care about the technology. They just follow the hype like dogs in heat.
Sound familiar?
Our little clique isn't the only one that has shoddy solutions foisted upon it by clueless "suits." It sounds to me that Ebert, a flim geek of sorts, is pointing out a case just like this. He touches on the technical problems, the emotional ones, and how the solution works in practice. All arguments that one of us might use against a PHB advocating a 100 box nt cluster using VB scripts and MSSQL as a web solution for a site getting 1/100 the traffic of/. with 80% static content.
Digital film will probably win in the end, but there's no reason to start hiking my ticket prices for the crappy quality we'll get now.
"the possibility of simulaneous worldwide distribution"
don't be silly. you think it takes three months for a film to cross the atlantic from the us to ireland? i can ship books by boat faster then that. i can ship *me* by plane faster.
they delay release due to marketting and legal reasons. censors in each country need to see it, and you need movie stary to wander around each country's talk show circuit to hype the flick.
now digital actors... that might solve the latter problem...
no, bring on the patch. or bug report. how many bugs have you noted in redhat that you've reported or fixed.
their distributions have flaws, but the nice part about free software is you can do much more then whinge: you can fix.
one of the biggest pro's to redhat btw is multiple arch support. what other distributions do that? and redhat's done it for over two years. and while i haven't used debian the direction they're headed with supporting freebsd and the hurd is an equal good mark in their book.
in addition to the "you can fix it" aspect of free software is the "you don't need to be locked in" aspect. both redhat and debian are helping to actually put in place the code to make that true. i think that's a feather in both their caps.
anyway, rambling aside, just like hackers redhat makes mistakes. and just like hackers there are a category of people that bitch at them rather then contribute.
If you'd like some more info on Scientology's actions in the past you can look at http://www.thecia.net/users/rnewman/scientology/home.html. I find them to be a rather disgusting group of people actually. If a Scientologist reads this I'd be interested in whatever reasoning they can provide for their behaviour.
thanks for the explaination, but i think people are aware of that fact. the question is, how much science can you do?
when you have a paper and pencil, and you're looking for patterns in signals, not that much. when you have a single computer, you can do more, but can't go into a lot of depth. deeper with a supercomputer, and even deeper with a distributed setup.
but with a distributed setup small increases in speed on the client can have dramatic increases in the processing power. if there are 1,000,000 keys processed a day, a 1% speedup = 10,000 more keys.
or better yet, more time free for more analysis. in other words they can speed up the current analysis and then add an extra loop to do another type of analysis.
and better still if they open the code, people who love making tight code tighter can focus on speed, and seti researchers can focus on science!
as far as keeping control of variables, the seti team already has control of the variables: the data from the telescope. if a segment proves interesting they'll look at it. and if you read their docs they send each segment multiple times.
free software isn't the answer to everything, but it *is* an answer here; it will lead to more detailed analysis and more science.
i suggest the seti team should try listening a bit more.
i don't own a dvd player, but i would like to get the source so i could mirror that. where can i find it; what website is the project for linux dvd support at? don't moderate this up, but please moderate up answers!
and I must say I'm stunned. There is such a thing as personal and parental responsibility. By legislating away the people's rights and forcing people to "register with the government" to view things "likely to receive an R rating," you're certainly on your way to creating a police state and poisoning any chance of high-tech business in Australia.
I worked a tech support job in college, and a common problem in helping users was that they often didn't ask the right question. I think that's your problem here. The question this legislation is answering is "How do we hide objectionable materials from minors?" That's a poor question because in reality the answer is that you can't. For social and technical reasons it is completely impossible.
Perhaps a better question, is "What can the Australian gov't do to help parents raise children?" The answers there could include:
Reducing taxes so parents bring more money to their homes. Working to increase the time parents spend at home by reducing the # of hours in a work week. Better schools. Adult education classes focusing on high-tech so parents understand what is on the net. Encouraging companies that create "acceptable content."
That seems more likely to help children and it doesn't impose on individual freedoms.
Having lived away from the US for over a year now I almost agree with you. But your perception that the US is a kind and benevolent nation is not shared around the world. People here in Ireland as well as in Europe and elsewhere have a grave distrust in the US. As a citizen and former resident *I* have an even greater distrust. The electoral system in the US is *far* from healthy.
The fact that people like Pat Buchanan and Rush Limbaugh have a following is truly frightening. The fact that people like that could conceivably control nuclear weapons and other elements of mass destruction... well... I find it worrying.
The USA can do good things, but there's nothing inheirant there that forces that. And I fear that people in the US are making poor choices in their reps and public policy. Remember, the German people elected a tyrant, the US can do it too.
Back on topic, while Anti-BM tech isn't offensive (though destroying satellites is certainly offensive), I'm almost positive the US signed a treaty with the former-USSR to not develop/deploy such a sytem anyway. I think the thought process here followed the one law makers use when banning radar detectors.
010 Women are good at math 007 Women are used to breaking barriers 006 Many would argue that it takes a rocket scientist to understand men 005 Perhaps Rush Limbaugh is right and there are Feminazis - and they'll target him from space! 004 Actually, size does matter 003 Communication satellites: More Lifetime, less WWF 002 Better priorities: first cargo would be an array of women's toilets in space - if they can't get a reasonable number on Earth they'll get 'em in space! 001 Launch vehicles that look like giant breasts or vaginas finally get some real consideration. 000 Female piloted satellites won't get lost since they'll actually ask for directions (and listen to them) before making a manuever.
The press often refer to Linux as if it is a single entity. In reality Linux systems are comprised of various pieces of software that various people have contributed to make a complete OS. As such it represents some of the most noble aspects of humanity: intelligence, ingenuity and generosity. People from around the world, from completely different backgrounds, have managed to make a reasonably complete system and have done it in such a way that others can (and do) join in the effort.
You want to crush that.
Why?
(If the answer is that he doesn't, then ask him why Microsoft doesn't contribute to Linux, and why they won't at least port their software to it.)
it's quite simple - did the nt box have an service packs applied? if so, then the redhat box should have had it's errata applied. and there's no need to read bugtraq for this, just ftp to the redhat site and snarf all the files.
"admired microsoft for bringing software to the masses..."
huh?
no, i never felt that way. i liked macs because they were dead simple. and later in life found they looked after themselves in an office environment. i liked my c64 because i could write code for it, i liked unix even more because i could write useful stuff for it.
but microsoft i just found to be an annoying pain in the butt. i first saw their stuff with dos 3.3, and i have yet to see anything of quality come from them.
i understand why they made some of their choices technically, but in the end their products have always come across like they were done by someone who *thought* they knew everything but reality kept proving them wrong.
IBM's thing sounds weird and worrisome, but give it a rest with the Pentium ID thing. Intel is a 600lb gorilla, and I'm not a fan of theirs in any way (I own an AMD box, and am planning on a Cyrix palmtop). But this Pentium ID thing is just a goofy windmill to go tilting at.
If you don't like ID's on CPU's then I hope you avoid SPARCs. AFAIK most server oriented processors have ID's. Not for tracking on the net (which is just a moronic and insecure thing to do), but for node-locking an application.
Think of it, an application on a web server asks for your CPUID. It gets the answer across the net - how does it know where it came from?!
How well do you think your message for free software will be received in Europe since you frequently include references to your political position on guns? Since most people in Europe have chosen not to equate guns and freedom, don't you feel that your message on free software gets lost as "rantings of a crazy American?"
first, i hope he's innocent. i generally don't like to think people do things like that. so with that mindset, it's rather easy to see a scenario where he is innocent...
let's say i'm an evil bad guy and i don't like mr. naughton. he fired me, he had an affair with my wife, he used closed source code, or maybe he's a business competitor. whatever, i don't like him. so i end up hunting around until i find one of the many undercover cops trying to snag pedophiles. (as an aside i don't really think it's a bad thing for law enforcement to do this - it just has to be done responsibly)
anyway, i start to feed bits of info to this person. i like little girls, my phone number, and all the damning evidence. in addition i target mr. naughton. i find web sites he likes, or maybe generate some for him. a month before the meeting i set up, i start putting "img src" tags that are scaled to 1x1. the images are child porn.
now i set up the meeting. i get mr. naughton there as well for some reason valid to him. if i'm really nasty i watch from somewhere nearby and laugh my ass off. my unsuspecting enemy thinking he can protect himself hands over his laptop - voila, the fbi see child porn peppered through his browser cache.
i dunno if the img src tag thing would work (perhaps browsers don't load 1x1 pix or something), but one could also do it with email attachments, java applets, a virus, etc.
i would hope the fbi would use backup info (non-computer) for conviction. dates and times of chats vs. the suspect itinerary for example. regardless it seems like an amazingly simple way to discredit someone.
the man is innocent until proven guilty. my desire to think the best of my fellow man wants him to be proven innocent (an adversary is much more paletable to me then a pedophile), but my desire for compotent law enforcement hopes he's proven guilty and that the fbi isn't just some dupe in an effort to destroy someone's life. either way, i hope justice is allowed to happen
i think he's violating his agreement with mediaone. anyone care to check? instead of tilting at the linux vs. *bsd windmill, why doesn't he exercise his mouth in battling annoying cable company policies?
in a word, this is yet another benefit of open source. think of it - how many places does nt and other microsoft source exist? the latest redhat sources are her in ireland. they're all over the usa, europe, australia...
in fact depending on what the shuttle astronauts took up with them the source to linux (debian) was even in space.
so even if the redhat office gets washed away, redhat development can keep going. the same is true for any gpl'ed linux distro.
while bruno and userfriendly are my regular staples, now that/. has introduced me to your strip i think i've got a new stop to make each morning.
my question(s):
both programming and cartooning seem to be very heavily male dominated fields in both creation and consumption. being male myself it's often hard to see, but a vast majority of people in the field seem to be male, and the content seems directed at my age/gender more so then women and/or older/younger folks. that's my perception so...
do you disagree? and if you don't what from your perspective would *you* like to see more of in open source development and/or online comics?
ok, another query. i keep encouraging christopher baldwin (author of bruno) from time to time because i think he's pushing publishing in new directions in his attempts to fund his work. i see it as very empowering (to use a buzzword) and makes me eager to see new artists and new ideas at play. current publishing (due to people and tech constraints) presents a limited number of perspectives (i'm a big fan of perspectives if you can't tell) (and parenthetical comments), where online publishing seems to lower the barrier to accessing an audience.
do you feel the net is enabling people to more easily express themselves creatively? do you worry about current or impending obstacles to that access?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm surprised at you people!
/. with 80% static content.
One of his comments struck a nerve with me - the fact that hollywood "suits" don't care about the technology. They just follow the hype like dogs in heat.
Sound familiar?
Our little clique isn't the only one that has shoddy solutions foisted upon it by clueless "suits." It sounds to me that Ebert, a flim geek of sorts, is pointing out a case just like this. He touches on the technical problems, the emotional ones, and how the solution works in practice. All arguments that one of us might use against a PHB advocating a 100 box nt cluster using VB scripts and MSSQL as a web solution for a site getting 1/100 the traffic of
Digital film will probably win in the end, but there's no reason to start hiking my ticket prices for the crappy quality we'll get now.
"the possibility of simulaneous worldwide distribution"
don't be silly. you think it takes three months for a film to cross the atlantic from the us to ireland? i can ship books by boat faster then that. i can ship *me* by plane faster.
they delay release due to marketting and legal reasons. censors in each country need to see it, and you need movie stary to wander around each country's talk show circuit to hype the flick.
now digital actors... that might solve the latter problem...
airport?
and of course there's something to be said for being able to use web sites when you can't even see...
"do the right thing. that is, make money."
yep, and by then we'll all know that free software does just that.
no, bring on the patch. or bug report. how many bugs have you noted in redhat that you've reported or fixed.
their distributions have flaws, but the nice part about free software is you can do much more then whinge: you can fix.
one of the biggest pro's to redhat btw is multiple arch support. what other distributions do that? and redhat's done it for over two years. and while i haven't used debian the direction they're headed with supporting freebsd and the hurd is an equal good mark in their book.
in addition to the "you can fix it" aspect of free software is the "you don't need to be locked in" aspect. both redhat and debian are helping to actually put in place the code to make that true. i think that's a feather in both their caps.
anyway, rambling aside, just like hackers redhat makes mistakes. and just like hackers there are a category of people that bitch at them rather then contribute.
If you'd like some more info on Scientology's actions in the past you can look at http://www.thecia.net/users /rnewman/scientology/home.html. I find them to be a rather disgusting group of people actually. If a Scientologist reads this I'd be interested in whatever reasoning they can provide for their behaviour.
"You time is better spent recruiting cycles than developers."
definitely.
now let's compare: linux kernel development requires how many hr people compared to sun's kernel development team?
if you free the code, developers will just show up. heck, they might even recruit people to run clients. wow, two for none!
"it's science."
no, really?!
thanks for the explaination, but i think people are aware of that fact. the question is, how much science can you do?
when you have a paper and pencil, and you're looking for patterns in signals, not that much. when you have a single computer, you can do more, but can't go into a lot of depth. deeper with a supercomputer, and even deeper with a distributed setup.
but with a distributed setup small increases in speed on the client can have dramatic increases in the processing power. if there are 1,000,000 keys processed a day, a 1% speedup = 10,000 more keys.
or better yet, more time free for more analysis. in other words they can speed up the current analysis and then add an extra loop to do another type of analysis.
and better still if they open the code, people who love making tight code tighter can focus on speed, and seti researchers can focus on science!
as far as keeping control of variables, the seti team already has control of the variables: the data from the telescope. if a segment proves interesting they'll look at it. and if you read their docs they send each segment multiple times.
free software isn't the answer to everything, but it *is* an answer here; it will lead to more detailed analysis and more science.
i suggest the seti team should try listening a bit more.
i don't own a dvd player, but i would like to get the source so i could mirror that. where can i find it; what website is the project for linux dvd support at? don't moderate this up, but please moderate up answers!
I just read:
m
http://www.aba.gov.au/what/online/restricted.ht
and I must say I'm stunned. There is such a thing as personal and parental responsibility. By legislating away the people's rights and forcing people to "register with the government" to view things "likely to receive an R rating," you're certainly on your way to creating a police state and poisoning any chance of high-tech business in Australia.
I worked a tech support job in college, and a common problem in helping users was that they often didn't ask the right question. I think that's your problem here. The question this legislation is answering is "How do we hide objectionable materials from minors?" That's a poor question because in reality the answer is that you can't. For social and technical reasons it is completely impossible.
Perhaps a better question, is "What can the Australian gov't do to help parents raise children?" The answers there could include:
Reducing taxes so parents bring more money to their homes.
Working to increase the time parents spend at home by reducing
the # of hours in a work week.
Better schools.
Adult education classes focusing on high-tech so parents understand
what is on the net.
Encouraging companies that create "acceptable content."
That seems more likely to help children and it doesn't impose on individual freedoms.
Kevin Lyda
why does the name "ross perot" cross my mind here? oh wait, there goes "pat buchanan."
Having lived away from the US for over a year now I almost agree with you. But your perception that the US is a kind and benevolent nation is not shared around the world. People here in Ireland as well as in Europe and elsewhere have a grave distrust in the US. As a citizen and former resident *I* have an even greater distrust. The electoral system in the US is *far* from healthy.
The fact that people like Pat Buchanan and Rush Limbaugh have a following is truly frightening. The fact that people like that could conceivably control nuclear weapons and other elements of mass destruction... well... I find it worrying.
The USA can do good things, but there's nothing inheirant there that forces that. And I fear that people in the US are making poor choices in their reps and public policy. Remember, the German people elected a tyrant, the US can do it too.
Back on topic, while Anti-BM tech isn't offensive (though destroying satellites is certainly offensive), I'm almost positive the US signed a treaty with the former-USSR to not develop/deploy such a sytem anyway. I think the thought process here followed the one law makers use when banning radar detectors.
010 Women are good at math
007 Women are used to breaking barriers
006 Many would argue that it takes a rocket scientist to understand men
005 Perhaps Rush Limbaugh is right and there are Feminazis - and they'll target him from space!
004 Actually, size does matter
003 Communication satellites: More Lifetime, less WWF
002 Better priorities: first cargo would be an array of women's toilets in space - if they can't get a reasonable number on Earth they'll get 'em in space!
001 Launch vehicles that look like giant breasts or vaginas finally get some real consideration.
000 Female piloted satellites won't get lost since they'll actually ask for directions (and listen to them) before making a manuever.
My question:
The press often refer to Linux as if it is a single entity. In reality Linux systems are comprised of various pieces of software that various people have contributed to make a complete OS. As such it represents some of the most noble aspects of humanity: intelligence, ingenuity and generosity. People from around the world, from completely different backgrounds, have managed to make a reasonably complete system and have done it in such a way that others can (and do) join in the effort.
You want to crush that.
Why?
(If the answer is that he doesn't, then ask him why Microsoft doesn't contribute to Linux, and why they won't at least port their software to it.)
They're correct, there isn't one. But there is a central place to get updates for RedHat Linux:
ftp://updates.redhat.com
They can't make it easier then that, and unlike Microsoft's update site you don't need to click through gobs of advertisements.
it's quite simple - did the nt box have an service packs applied? if so, then the redhat box should have had it's errata applied. and there's no need to read bugtraq for this, just ftp to the redhat site and snarf all the files.
"admired microsoft for bringing software to the masses..."
huh?
no, i never felt that way. i liked macs because they were dead simple. and later in life found they looked after themselves in an office environment. i liked my c64 because i could write code for it, i liked unix even more because i could write useful stuff for it.
but microsoft i just found to be an annoying pain in the butt. i first saw their stuff with dos 3.3, and i have yet to see anything of quality come from them.
i understand why they made some of their choices technically, but in the end their products have always come across like they were done by someone who *thought* they knew everything but reality kept proving them wrong.
IBM's thing sounds weird and worrisome, but give it a rest with the Pentium ID thing. Intel is a 600lb gorilla, and I'm not a fan of theirs in any way (I own an AMD box, and am planning on a Cyrix palmtop). But this Pentium ID thing is just a goofy windmill to go tilting at.
If you don't like ID's on CPU's then I hope you avoid SPARCs. AFAIK most server oriented processors have ID's. Not for tracking on the net (which is just a moronic and insecure thing to do), but for node-locking an application.
Think of it, an application on a web server asks for your CPUID. It gets the answer across the net - how does it know where it came from?!
Sheesh! Give it a rest.
How well do you think your message for free software will be received in Europe since you frequently include references to your political position on guns? Since most people in Europe have chosen not to equate guns and freedom, don't you feel that your message on free software gets lost as "rantings of a crazy American?"
first, i hope he's innocent. i generally don't like to think people do things like that. so with that mindset, it's rather easy to see a scenario where he is innocent...
let's say i'm an evil bad guy and i don't like mr. naughton. he fired me, he had an affair with my wife, he used closed source code, or maybe he's a business competitor. whatever, i don't like him. so i end up hunting around until i find one of the many undercover cops trying to snag pedophiles. (as an aside i don't really think it's a bad thing for law enforcement to do this - it just has to be done responsibly)
anyway, i start to feed bits of info to this person. i like little girls, my phone number, and all the damning evidence. in addition i target mr. naughton. i find web sites he likes, or maybe generate some for him. a month before the meeting i set up, i start putting "img src" tags that are scaled to 1x1. the images are child porn.
now i set up the meeting. i get mr. naughton there as well for some reason valid to him. if i'm really nasty i watch from somewhere nearby and laugh my ass off. my unsuspecting enemy thinking he can protect himself hands over his laptop - voila, the fbi see child porn peppered through his browser cache.
i dunno if the img src tag thing would work (perhaps browsers don't load 1x1 pix or something), but one could also do it with email attachments, java applets, a virus, etc.
i would hope the fbi would use backup info (non-computer) for conviction. dates and times of chats vs. the suspect itinerary for example. regardless it seems like an amazingly simple way to discredit someone.
the man is innocent until proven guilty. my desire to think the best of my fellow man wants him to be proven innocent (an adversary is much more paletable to me then a pedophile), but my desire for compotent law enforcement hopes he's proven guilty and that the fbi isn't just some dupe in an effort to destroy someone's life. either way, i hope justice is allowed to happen
i think he's violating his agreement with mediaone. anyone care to check? instead of tilting at the linux vs. *bsd windmill, why doesn't he exercise his mouth in battling annoying cable company policies?
what platforms does/will berlin support? if i write an app for berlin can a {solaris|hp/ux|sco|unixware|aix|*bsd|etc} box run it?
what architectures does/will berlin support under linux?
backup.
in a word, this is yet another benefit of open source. think of it - how many places does nt and other microsoft source exist? the latest redhat sources are her in ireland. they're all over the usa, europe, australia...
in fact depending on what the shuttle astronauts took up with them the source to linux (debian) was even in space.
so even if the redhat office gets washed away, redhat development can keep going. the same is true for any gpl'ed linux distro.
while bruno and userfriendly are my regular staples, now that /. has introduced me to your strip i think i've got a new stop to make each morning.
my question(s):
both programming and cartooning seem to be very heavily male dominated fields in both creation and consumption. being male myself it's often hard to see, but a vast majority of people in the field seem to be male, and the content seems directed at my age/gender more so then women and/or older/younger folks. that's my perception so...
do you disagree? and if you don't what from your perspective would *you* like to see more of in open source development and/or online comics?
ok, another query. i keep encouraging christopher baldwin (author of bruno) from time to time because i think he's pushing publishing in new directions in his attempts to fund his work. i see it as very empowering (to use a buzzword) and makes me eager to see new artists and new ideas at play. current publishing (due to people and tech constraints) presents a limited number of perspectives (i'm a big fan of perspectives if you can't tell) (and parenthetical comments), where online publishing seems to lower the barrier to accessing an audience.
do you feel the net is enabling people to more easily express themselves creatively? do you worry about current or impending obstacles to that access?