Well, it is much more usable than mozilla was at this point, but yeah- I can't get it to print either. Oh well... I'm sure that will be a priority, since otherwise they won't exactly be attracting QA folks en masse.
~luge
I think lots and lots and lots of people share that concern. I'd expect it to be one of the first things that some enterprising open-sourcer tackles...
~luge
The binaries that are on akamai (look up in this thread) don't depend on anything. They do ask if you have a jre installed, but they seem to work fine with or without the jre (it doesn't recognize my IBM jre- no real surprise there;) Other than that, the binaries run fine.
As far as building it goes... well, there is a/lot/ of ugliness there, at least from what little bit I saw before the site died. Lots of stuff that isn't open source (like some java tools.) I suppose that will be fixed eventually.
Oh well- at least they have binaries out, which is something that mozilla was unable to do for quite some time.
~luge
Well, I think (in bringing in collab.net) Sun was basically saying "we don't know jackshit about handling a project like this" and sub-contracting the management stuff to someone who does (like collab.net). I think, personally, that they should have gone out and re-hired jwz to manage it, and learn from the mozilla experience. That's the only thing comparable to this, and so I don't really think that collab.net has the same level of relevant experience that mozilla does. Oh well...
~luge
Dude- that.png won't render in either netscrape or the latest mozilla. The file is fine (loads in gimp) but I think you have something misconfigured somewhere.
~luge
I got in before the site died:) They are already working on OS 9 and OS X ports. No data on how far along they were, but they did say that the Mac ports weren't "fully supported" yet. I'd post a link, but as you know the site it toast.
I've heard that Sun has about 40-60 folks working full time on the OpenOffic codebase, working on the GTK and Bonobo ports. So, it isn't just up to "us". Now if they would only get someone to work on a "how do I build this thing" doc...
~tieguy
But you can forbid quoting in academic journals (i.e., they'll respect the original author's claims.) That is probably what Froomkin (being an academic) is concerned about. Besides, the big thing is not to be mis-quoted: if he changes things in there (since this is a draft) he doesn't want "bad" (read: thing he has changed his mind about) quotes circulating around as fact. Perfectly reasonable.
~luge
Not quite. More like "all opinions that clearly demonstrate that the poster has not taken the time to research the question at all" are ignorant. And all ignorant posts that deliberately enflame passions (like, say, the anti-RH crap that abounds around here)* are flamebait. That I'm the one who points out that it is flamebait is irrelevant.
~luge
*Not that there aren't plenty of reasons to dislike RH, but the ones frequently cited around here ("they are the next MS""they want to fork Linux""they want to rule the world") are irrational. I challenge you to find the last piece of non-GPL'd code that RH wrote...
Wrong. Among the things I can think of off the top of my head (and considering I use Debian, I'm sure there are lots more that I can't think of) include XFree 4, a brand-spanking new RPM (4.0, IIRC), and a filesystem reorganization to make things FHS compliant. All of these are major changes, striking at the core of how the distro works and is installed, and as a result merit a new release. Please, take the time to actually find things out before you post.
~luge(frustrated that by the time I post this will have been moderated up as "interesting" instead of down as flamebait)
I haven't been following any of the backchannel troll sites lately- can someone post, or post a link to, (or mail to me) the IRC log that I've seen mentioned here? I'm very interested in moderation (not just/.'s, but other places as well) and I'm curious as to what the two of them had to say.
Thanks...
~luge
I lump trolls and spammers together. Most trolls spam. Most spammers troll. They feed off each other. I see little distinction. Then you haven't been paying attention. Really, Michael, if you want to come down off of Olympus, you should show demonstrate a little better understanding of how your own system works, and the sub-cultures it has created. Take a little time out of your busy schedule to read the inchfan, or browse at -1 and realize that there are vast differences between the spammers and the trolls.
It's sequences of posts like these that make me want to start fresh sometimes...
~luge
I don't see why it should sacrifice its roots for big iron that can quite happily run a UNIX designed for big iron.
Umm, maybe because the real roots of Linux are "why have reverse compabitility when you can make the OS more useful?" Yes, it is nice that Linux will run on older boxes. But there is no reason to impede progress for everyone just because a few people don't want to blow $50 for a Pentium.
Can you imaging how quickly Netscape 1.0 would render its pages on one of today's fast computers? Now that really boggles the mind!
Can you imagine how useless Netscape 1.0 would be on today's web? No JS, no https, no HTML 4.0, no CSS, etc. Mozilla is huge because it attempts to follow all the standards and implement all the technologies, which have grown exponentially since the time of 1.0. If 1.0 had had to do all of that, it wouldn't have run at all.
Point being- don't get nostalgic. In this case, at least, it reeks of not knowing what is going on.
More importantly, because of the patent, it was released years ago. Remember, the tradeoff in filing a patent is that the government publishes it when you file. So, everyone and their sister has had access to RSA- it's in just about every encrytion textbook, and has been widely discussed and tested (which is why the other poster can confidently discuss how long it takes to brute force it.) The original poster just doesn't have a clue, that's all.
~luge
A friend of my worked for store.apple.com over the summer, and he told me that this was coming. He said this came from Jobs himself. Apparently, Jobs was in a meeting with some of the web design team and said "I want one click." Someone pointed out that it was patented by Amazon, so Steve got Bezos on the phone right then and there and said "Jeff, we want to use one click." No one heard what was said on the other end, but Steve said "OK, thanks Jeff" and hung up, and told them to go ahead and do one click.
I'm not really sure what the point of that story was, except that this kind of licensing and agreement between two mega-companies doesn't have to have rhyme or reason to it: it can happen because Steve Jobs is nuts and knows Jeff Bezos personally. So, if Steve knows the head of BT, maybe he will license links from them too:) Otherwise, I doubt it...
~luge
The FSF does have such a team- Eben Moglen, at Columbia, is the de facto head of it. It's just that people come here first instead of going to the FSF or even (duh!) going to Compag. Had the AC who submitted this gone to the FSF (or had/. referred him there) then maybe the lawyers might have gotten involved and it'd be solved by now... (or not, but at least it'd be on it's way...)
~luge
Yeah, but... the first thing Compaq's lawyers would do is talk to the violators. Now, they might not talk very nicely (the phrase "cease and desist" comes to mind) but they'd talk. They wouldn't go whining to news.com and wired first- they'd do that only if the license violators didn't say "oops, sorry." The media ia a great way to create a jihad once your initial advance has been spurned (which is occasionally necessary) but it should never, ever be the first option, which is what it looks like it was in this case.
~luge
True, but if/. were being responsible they'd wait until they got some confirmation from someone that some kind of attempt had been made, and not post the second one. I don't think that is too much to ask.
~luge
P.S. Don't get me wrong- I'm not one of the "/. used to be good now it sucks" crowd. Just that this is really blatantly silly- doesn't achieve the desired goal of getting Compaq to change.
/. is not the place for this kind of thing. Both posters and/. should know this by now-/. is an 800-lb gorilla, with strength and manners to match. Oddly enough, it also has about the effectiveness of an 800-lb gorilla when trying to explain things to lawyers- the lawyers laugh, sic their guards on the gorilla, and go on their merry way.
For this kind of thing, you should drop a note to bruce at technocrat: he knows how to speak lawyer-speak, has lots of experience dealing with it, and has the respect needed to get a foot in the door and begin to solve the problem instead of just screaming and whining (like we tend to do here at/.).
/.- you guys should know better. Posting this kind of stuff here (especially when the original poster has made absolutely no attempt to contact the alleged infringer) does no one any good at all. Get a grip, and when Compaq comes back and says "screw the GPL, yours truly, Compaq" then bring out the masses. Until then, this kind of post does more harm than good.
~luge
The "paint peeling" was actually magnesium corroding out from underneath the paint and causing the paint to bubble and crack. Not much corrosion (thank goodness) but enough.
~luge
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it is much more usable than mozilla was at this point, but yeah- I can't get it to print either. Oh well... I'm sure that will be a priority, since otherwise they won't exactly be attracting QA folks en masse.
~luge
I think lots and lots and lots of people share that concern. I'd expect it to be one of the first things that some enterprising open-sourcer tackles...
~luge
The binaries that are on akamai (look up in this thread) don't depend on anything. They do ask if you have a jre installed, but they seem to work fine with or without the jre (it doesn't recognize my IBM jre- no real surprise there ;) Other than that, the binaries run fine.
/lot/ of ugliness there, at least from what little bit I saw before the site died. Lots of stuff that isn't open source (like some java tools.) I suppose that will be fixed eventually.
As far as building it goes... well, there is a
Oh well- at least they have binaries out, which is something that mozilla was unable to do for quite some time.
~luge
Well, I think (in bringing in collab.net) Sun was basically saying "we don't know jackshit about handling a project like this" and sub-contracting the management stuff to someone who does (like collab.net). I think, personally, that they should have gone out and re-hired jwz to manage it, and learn from the mozilla experience. That's the only thing comparable to this, and so I don't really think that collab.net has the same level of relevant experience that mozilla does. Oh well...
~luge
Please, please mod it down until I get my copy ;)
~luge
Dude- that .png won't render in either netscrape or the latest mozilla. The file is fine (loads in gimp) but I think you have something misconfigured somewhere.
~luge
I got in before the site died :) They are already working on OS 9 and OS X ports. No data on how far along they were, but they did say that the Mac ports weren't "fully supported" yet. I'd post a link, but as you know the site it toast.
I've heard that Sun has about 40-60 folks working full time on the OpenOffic codebase, working on the GTK and Bonobo ports. So, it isn't just up to "us". Now if they would only get someone to work on a "how do I build this thing" doc...
~tieguy
But you can forbid quoting in academic journals (i.e., they'll respect the original author's claims.) That is probably what Froomkin (being an academic) is concerned about. Besides, the big thing is not to be mis-quoted: if he changes things in there (since this is a draft) he doesn't want "bad" (read: thing he has changed his mind about) quotes circulating around as fact. Perfectly reasonable.
~luge
Not quite. More like "all opinions that clearly demonstrate that the poster has not taken the time to research the question at all" are ignorant. And all ignorant posts that deliberately enflame passions (like, say, the anti-RH crap that abounds around here)* are flamebait. That I'm the one who points out that it is flamebait is irrelevant.
~luge
*Not that there aren't plenty of reasons to dislike RH, but the ones frequently cited around here ("they are the next MS""they want to fork Linux""they want to rule the world") are irrational. I challenge you to find the last piece of non-GPL'd code that RH wrote...
Wrong. Among the things I can think of off the top of my head (and considering I use Debian, I'm sure there are lots more that I can't think of) include XFree 4, a brand-spanking new RPM (4.0, IIRC), and a filesystem reorganization to make things FHS compliant. All of these are major changes, striking at the core of how the distro works and is installed, and as a result merit a new release. Please, take the time to actually find things out before you post.
~luge(frustrated that by the time I post this will have been moderated up as "interesting" instead of down as flamebait)
Never mind, found a link below...
I haven't been following any of the backchannel troll sites lately- can someone post, or post a link to, (or mail to me) the IRC log that I've seen mentioned here? I'm very interested in moderation (not just /.'s, but other places as well) and I'm curious as to what the two of them had to say.
Thanks...
~luge
I lump trolls and spammers together. Most trolls spam. Most spammers troll. They feed off each other. I see little distinction. Then you haven't been paying attention. Really, Michael, if you want to come down off of Olympus, you should show demonstrate a little better understanding of how your own system works, and the sub-cultures it has created. Take a little time out of your busy schedule to read the inchfan, or browse at -1 and realize that there are vast differences between the spammers and the trolls.
It's sequences of posts like these that make me want to start fresh sometimes...
~luge
I don't see why it should sacrifice its roots for big iron that can quite happily run a UNIX designed for big iron.
Umm, maybe because the real roots of Linux are "why have reverse compabitility when you can make the OS more useful?" Yes, it is nice that Linux will run on older boxes. But there is no reason to impede progress for everyone just because a few people don't want to blow $50 for a Pentium.
The ultimate site for lego news is probably http://news.lugnet.com. It's where all the cool lego'ers hang out :)
~luge (lugnet member #482)
Can you imagine how useless Netscape 1.0 would be on today's web? No JS, no https, no HTML 4.0, no CSS, etc. Mozilla is huge because it attempts to follow all the standards and implement all the technologies, which have grown exponentially since the time of 1.0. If 1.0 had had to do all of that, it wouldn't have run at all.
Point being- don't get nostalgic. In this case, at least, it reeks of not knowing what is going on.
~luge
More importantly, because of the patent, it was released years ago. Remember, the tradeoff in filing a patent is that the government publishes it when you file. So, everyone and their sister has had access to RSA- it's in just about every encrytion textbook, and has been widely discussed and tested (which is why the other poster can confidently discuss how long it takes to brute force it.) The original poster just doesn't have a clue, that's all.
~luge
A friend of my worked for store.apple.com over the summer, and he told me that this was coming. He said this came from Jobs himself. Apparently, Jobs was in a meeting with some of the web design team and said "I want one click." Someone pointed out that it was patented by Amazon, so Steve got Bezos on the phone right then and there and said "Jeff, we want to use one click." No one heard what was said on the other end, but Steve said "OK, thanks Jeff" and hung up, and told them to go ahead and do one click. :) Otherwise, I doubt it...
I'm not really sure what the point of that story was, except that this kind of licensing and agreement between two mega-companies doesn't have to have rhyme or reason to it: it can happen because Steve Jobs is nuts and knows Jeff Bezos personally. So, if Steve knows the head of BT, maybe he will license links from them too
~luge
Amen, brother... AMEN.
~luge
The FSF does have such a team- Eben Moglen, at Columbia, is the de facto head of it. It's just that people come here first instead of going to the FSF or even (duh!) going to Compag. Had the AC who submitted this gone to the FSF (or had /. referred him there) then maybe the lawyers might have gotten involved and it'd be solved by now... (or not, but at least it'd be on it's way...)
~luge
Yeah, but... the first thing Compaq's lawyers would do is talk to the violators. Now, they might not talk very nicely (the phrase "cease and desist" comes to mind) but they'd talk. They wouldn't go whining to news.com and wired first- they'd do that only if the license violators didn't say "oops, sorry." The media ia a great way to create a jihad once your initial advance has been spurned (which is occasionally necessary) but it should never, ever be the first option, which is what it looks like it was in this case.
~luge
True, but if /. were being responsible they'd wait until they got some confirmation from someone that some kind of attempt had been made, and not post the second one. I don't think that is too much to ask.
~luge
P.S. Don't get me wrong- I'm not one of the "/. used to be good now it sucks" crowd. Just that this is really blatantly silly- doesn't achieve the desired goal of getting Compaq to change.
/. is not the place for this kind of thing. Both posters and /. should know this by now- /. is an 800-lb gorilla, with strength and manners to match. Oddly enough, it also has about the effectiveness of an 800-lb gorilla when trying to explain things to lawyers- the lawyers laugh, sic their guards on the gorilla, and go on their merry way.
/.).
For this kind of thing, you should drop a note to bruce at technocrat: he knows how to speak lawyer-speak, has lots of experience dealing with it, and has the respect needed to get a foot in the door and begin to solve the problem instead of just screaming and whining (like we tend to do here at
/.- you guys should know better. Posting this kind of stuff here (especially when the original poster has made absolutely no attempt to contact the alleged infringer) does no one any good at all. Get a grip, and when Compaq comes back and says "screw the GPL, yours truly, Compaq" then bring out the masses. Until then, this kind of post does more harm than good.
~luge
The "paint peeling" was actually magnesium corroding out from underneath the paint and causing the paint to bubble and crack. Not much corrosion (thank goodness) but enough.
~luge