now that i finally brainwashed my wife into "don't expect me to buy diamonds for you since deBeers is evil and a diamond is worth as much as just about any rock but are expensive as they are just because deBeers controls distribution et.." (there was an article out somewhere titled 'ever tried to sell a diamond?' that i made her read).. now this.. if i tell her, "honey, maybe diamonds are really worth something.." she's going to bitchslap me.
couldn't they have used some other friggin' rock? hope i don't live long enough to be programming a diamond cpu that my wife gave me on our anniversary.
if you think about it, the endpoint is actually an application. not just the machine (or more precisely the IP in the TCP/IP world). but the application is not advertized in the communication. ie. the kernel acts as the proxy for the application when the application wants to send and recieve info over the network. more clearly, when the kernel recieves something back in a certain port, the kernel looks up which application it should send the packet to etc. so this too is in violation of non-disclosure of the source/destination of the communication. this means that ALL modern OSs are in clear violation of this bill. i wish i was a lawyer. i could sue every damn OS maker.
i've got the only GNU/linux installation on the desktop at work. all of our servers are GNU/linux. at home i have to run win2k for my wife. or rather, i had to run win2k for my wife. after getting really really pissed when the system locked up on her after her 20+ pages of paper on three different occasions (yeah she's got the autosave turned on but she's pissed that shes spending more time rebooting than writing her term papers) and now she wants me to install GNU/linux with openoffice on there. i'm doing that this weekend. so whoever says their win2k never crashes, well you're one lucky SOB. but now that the boss says it's ok to run GNU/linux on her machine, i'm all Free!! so to answer your question, nothing. nothing is going to keep me from running GNU/linux.
and yes i do prefer to say GNU/linux. because i'm running linux for the GNU part of the equation.
when you work for an organization named "I CAN", how can you not expect to be canned? he was forewarned. it was written in all-caps. not in the fine print.
all MS care about is that there is a licensed copy of Office on the user's machine
and that's exactly why it doesn't mean didly squat for me. you see, i don't use office. i do program a lot tho and it would be nice to be able to export my output in word/excel etc.. for others who do have office. if MS wants me to have a licensed copy of office as well even tho i have no use for it whatsoever, well i'll stick with PDF thank you very much. (yeah PDF is properiatory but the format is open; i don't need acrobat to be able to create PDFs now do i? check out FOP -- they've implemented a decent PDF libs -- in java tho. only thing 'missing' seems to liniarizing the object tree in the PDF for web viewing)
i really don't care about XML to the extreme where i'd implement XML without any direct payoffs. so unless i can write the XML with a simple script (perl or otherwise) without the COM bindings. it's of no use to me if the lock-in moves from the document viewer to the program level.
right now, i have a few apps that dump their output in either GIF/PNG/PDF as an option. i'd consider word/excel format if i could do that from the script without the 'proprietary' modules/COM components. otherwise this new event is a no-op. i'll stick with PDF for right now.
yeah. i agree. i got a few more security inmprovements you might be interested in. like putting an army watchtower at every street corner. with a 360 CCTV no less and a sat-linkup to the feds database. that way we can tell
1. the person signing the check in the local gas station is really that person. 2. The person sitting in front of his/her house is really the legit owner of the house just enjoying a nice quiet evening watching the neighborhood from his/her porch and not a drug dealer looking to make some cash. 3. we can find out if the neighborhood parade is really a parade and not some sort of demonstration that has the potential of any escalation into a violent frenzy of neighborhood destruction by a bunch of no-good hoodlums. 5. we can monitor all persons going in and out of houses in case the person turns out to be a wacked up serial killer.
There is no way to tell those things without... a neighborhood watchtower...assistance.
"It is fine to point out the potential downsides and abuses of this technology but there really are uses for it to improve security! For RMS to pretend otherwise is wrong."
*** wait!! i'm not done yet.
we can do better. why not implant chips that transmit voice and visual of what the person sees and hears right at birth. and not only we do this for all people born in the US we do it worldwide. that way we can tell
1. that it is really the same person you trust and spend a considerable time with and not some person who has a double life as a secret agent. 2. that you are talking to a 'secure' person and not a spy, suicide bomber etc. emulating to be a patriotic citizen leading a 'normal' life. 3. the person is actually living by the same or similar basic human values you think he's running on. and not the secret agenda he aquired during his 5 year leave of absense which he *said* he spent in the bahamas. 4. that the person was brought up in a secure mode. ie. no influences by radical groups. 5. that when you ask for passports it's not the fake he made late last night.
There is really no way to tell those things without hardware (the implanted camera and mic remeber?) assistance.
It is fine to point out the potential downsides and abuses of the technology but there really are uses for it to improve security! For RMS to pretend otherwise is wrong.
I'm all for watchtowers with armed gaurds in every crossing and an AV implant for all newborns. For you to voice a different opinion is wrong.
and just in case you didn't get the sarcasm i'm just trying to point out the fact that this logic of 'forget the potential abuses, there are real security improvements' seems really absurd when we put it into a context that's a lot more closer to home. after all the sercurity guard with the AK47 and the bionic baby sound a lot more intrusive than the little silicon chip that's protecting your computer from you.
But what Red Hat is including is not KDE, it is simply KDE's panel used to launch other applications
And where does it say that one cannot use parts of KDE without using the whole thing? Free Software, baby. Take what suits you. RH has no obligation to keep the KDE package 100% intact. or gnome for that matter. as long as they make their changes public, they're exercising the right granted to them by the GNU software license.
I, for one, really support RH in this. KMail, even tho it does what it does, is light years behind Evolution. why should RH be stuck using KMail when they can pick the best of the breed. i like KDE as much as the next man. but not using the best of everything for everything is suicidal if the company wants to target the desktop. when jon 'sixpack' doe gets RH on his computer and picks gnome he goes.. 'that dang email thing is pretty neat.', picks KDE the next time and goes.. 'that dang xyz is neat.' 'but i can't use both together; this linux thing sucks.' they're not going to know to switch the defaults (hell MS never allowed you to until very recently with XPSP1) in one desktop (windows), how do you expect them to switch the defaults in BOTH kde and gnome? it's great that RH is doing that for them.
I don't see a problem in using whatever is the best by picking and choosing. regardless of what family it belongs to. that's the true spirit of Free Software. it's a GNU given right.
'Campus Net-Radio' is an awesome suggestion. On the other side of things, what is it that you're really looking for? if nationwide frenzy over your band is it then, my friend, you'll need to sell out. indie style is not for you. the only reason n-sync and the likes are nationwide is because the bigwigs are forcing air-play, arranging concerts, pushing them infront of every media thereby creating the mentality of 'they must be really popular with everybody else since they seem to be in such demand in every media. i must therefore like them too.'
sorry to say but without such backing and creating a limited choice for consumers by the big medias, people would choose diverse artists/bands thereby not creating one or a few bands that are 'it' -- that *everyone* listens to. that is the sole premise of the business model of the entertainment industry. few bands 'make it big' (in reality they are 'made big'.) so there is some sense of consolidation for the big media. same as x number of models in a product line etc.. ("pick any color you want as long as it's black." -- Ford). all kinds of combinations and variations that people actually want are really hard to manage. it's also really costly. instead, just put out a certain models, concentrate your finances and efforts there and market them like crazy. So unless you sell out of your indie roots, you're SOL.
But there is hope. it's a well known fact that the bigwigs take most of the cut. i don't know enough about the 'indie process' but i'm sure you get better returns in terms of percentage. so in reality, you have a chance of making decent living even if you reach fewer people. concentrate on that. if you just make it in your hometown, independently, i'm thinking you should be making quite a good living.
if it's rock star status you're thinking about, well, you weren't indie to begin with and you shouldn't be talking to us -- well me anyways. talk to the guy in the grey suit.
but like the above poster (overshoot) said, give away your songs to the campuses running their own radios. then go do shows in the local bars there. when i was going to college, we heard bands on the campus radio and were there to see their show in our favorite local bar whenever they came by.
sergon in the second grade. before i even knew it!! had i realized that i coulda made some serious lunch money. well, i guess i put in my pro-bono time.
if it took them a med-school degree to figure that out maybe i need to start a med-school too. after all, i know all about mag glasses and insects, GI joes... by grade school. talk about the brains!! now all i need to add is the damn optical fiber. I even injected frogs with ink. how many years before *they* figure that one??
Would you rather employ someone who coded a great deal of Gecko, or some gimp who can answer your algorithm questions?
What the hell. Not everything is 1+1. just because someone is great with coding for Gimp/Gecko/what-have-you doesn't mean that the programmers is going to work out for YOU. I have conducted the 'tech' part of the interview. I've been burned a few times. But on an average, I've done well with the people I've recommended.
I do make sure that the person is up to the (algoirthmic) challange. I mean if the person doesn't have any brains, a thousand monkeys could eventually come up with the code... Then it's your gut feeling. (we do do the psyc test too.) Just talk to the guy. Get a feel for the person. Then go with whatever your gut says. You just can't judge a person by adding numbers -- be that the algo-tests, psyc test...
i believe that MS actually asked Dell to ship FreeDOS for one reason and one reason only.
MS is in the middle of an antitrust trial the core of which is the accusation that MS strongarms OEMs with exclusive deals. Now wouldn't it be convinient for MS to demo the fact that an OEM could indeed *not have to* ship with MS OSs even with the existing licences with MS. Enter Dell and FreeDOS. Who is actually using FreeDOS (well i am but i don't think that's the norm.)? From a shippers perspective Linux/xBSD would have been a better choice because of the market share. If Dell truly wanted to provide alternative OSs for the benefit of consumers wouldn't they pick from the list of OSs that are higher up in market-share-ranked list? ie. since they ship the top ranked OS -- windows -- woulnd't they pick the second next? But then MS wouldn't like that too much now would it? Solution: ship FreeDOS with the machines -- that way people are at least still in the DOS mindset. Then MS goes back to court saying -- "Look, Look, the OEMs can and are shipping machines with other OSs. We didn't strongarm them into exclusivity!! The OEMs *can* choose other OSs and that's not restricted by our *existing* license. The only reason they haven't taken advantage of that is because they didn't want to. Not because we threatened them in any way!"
So me thinks this idea hatched somewhere in the northwest US. NOT at Dell. Do you really think that if Dell wanted to piss off MS by shipping an alternative OS they would ship FreeDOS as opposed to something with more demand -- linux? Unless of course MS wanted Dell to *ship* (or at least look like they offer) another OS. That OS would have to be close to MSs own. But very very outdated version of MSs own.
Slashdot Mirror
now that i finally brainwashed my wife into "don't expect me to buy diamonds for you since deBeers is evil and a diamond is worth as much as just about any rock but are expensive as they are just because deBeers controls distribution et.." (there was an article out somewhere titled 'ever tried to sell a diamond?' that i made her read).. now this.. if i tell her, "honey, maybe diamonds are really worth something.." she's going to bitchslap me.
couldn't they have used some other friggin' rock? hope i don't live long enough to be programming a diamond cpu that my wife gave me on our anniversary.
if you think about it, the endpoint is actually an application. not just the machine (or more precisely the IP in the TCP/IP world). but the application is not advertized in the communication. ie. the kernel acts as the proxy for the application when the application wants to send and recieve info over the network. more clearly, when the kernel recieves something back in a certain port, the kernel looks up which application it should send the packet to etc. so this too is in violation of non-disclosure of the source/destination of the communication. this means that ALL modern OSs are in clear violation of this bill. i wish i was a lawyer. i could sue every damn OS maker.
speak for yourself. this is a turing test complient computer speaking ASCII.
because, all the other information residing on that machine that aren't under one of the My* 'folders' belongs not to you but is just licensed to you.
therefore it actually makes sense.
Let's just hope we accidentally build God we already did.
i've got the only GNU/linux installation on the desktop at work. all of our servers are GNU/linux. at home i have to run win2k for my wife. or rather, i had to run win2k for my wife. after getting really really pissed when the system locked up on her after her 20+ pages of paper on three different occasions (yeah she's got the autosave turned on but she's pissed that shes spending more time rebooting than writing her term papers) and now she wants me to install GNU/linux with openoffice on there. i'm doing that this weekend. so whoever says their win2k never crashes, well you're one lucky SOB. but now that the boss says it's ok to run GNU/linux on her machine, i'm all Free!! so to answer your question, nothing. nothing is going to keep me from running GNU/linux.
and yes i do prefer to say GNU/linux. because i'm running linux for the GNU part of the equation.
FP
when you work for an organization named "I CAN", how can you not expect to be canned? he was forewarned. it was written in all-caps. not in the fine print.
and that's exactly why it doesn't mean didly squat for me. you see, i don't use office. i do program a lot tho and it would be nice to be able to export my output in word/excel etc.. for others who do have office. if MS wants me to have a licensed copy of office as well even tho i have no use for it whatsoever, well i'll stick with PDF thank you very much. (yeah PDF is properiatory but the format is open; i don't need acrobat to be able to create PDFs now do i? check out FOP -- they've implemented a decent PDF libs -- in java tho. only thing 'missing' seems to liniarizing the object tree in the PDF for web viewing)
i really don't care about XML to the extreme where i'd implement XML without any direct payoffs. so unless i can write the XML with a simple script (perl or otherwise) without the COM bindings. it's of no use to me if the lock-in moves from the document viewer to the program level.
right now, i have a few apps that dump their output in either GIF/PNG/PDF as an option. i'd consider word/excel format if i could do that from the script without the 'proprietary' modules/COM components. otherwise this new event is a no-op. i'll stick with PDF for right now.
yeah. i agree. i got a few more security inmprovements you might be interested in. like putting an army watchtower at every street corner. with a 360 CCTV no less and a sat-linkup to the feds database. that way we can tell
... a neighborhood watchtower ...assistance.
1. the person signing the check in the local gas station is really that person.
2. The person sitting in front of his/her house is really the legit owner of the house just enjoying a nice quiet evening watching the neighborhood from his/her porch and not a drug dealer looking to make some cash.
3. we can find out if the neighborhood parade is really a parade and not some sort of demonstration that has the potential of any escalation into a violent frenzy of neighborhood destruction by a bunch of no-good hoodlums.
5. we can monitor all persons going in and out of houses in case the person turns out to be a wacked up serial killer.
There is no way to tell those things without
"It is fine to point out the potential downsides and abuses of this technology but there really are uses for it to improve security! For RMS to pretend otherwise is wrong."
*** wait!! i'm not done yet.
we can do better. why not implant chips that transmit voice and visual of what the person sees and hears right at birth. and not only we do this for all people born in the US we do it worldwide. that way we can tell
1. that it is really the same person you trust and spend a considerable time with and not some person who has a double life as a secret agent.
2. that you are talking to a 'secure' person and not a spy, suicide bomber etc. emulating to be a patriotic citizen leading a 'normal' life.
3. the person is actually living by the same or similar basic human values you think he's running on. and not the secret agenda he aquired during his 5 year leave of absense which he *said* he spent in the bahamas.
4. that the person was brought up in a secure mode. ie. no influences by radical groups.
5. that when you ask for passports it's not the fake he made late last night.
There is really no way to tell those things without hardware (the implanted camera and mic remeber?) assistance.
It is fine to point out the potential downsides and abuses of the technology but there really are uses for it to improve security! For RMS to pretend otherwise is wrong.
I'm all for watchtowers with armed gaurds in every crossing and an AV implant for all newborns. For you to voice a different opinion is wrong.
and just in case you didn't get the sarcasm i'm just trying to point out the fact that this logic of 'forget the potential abuses, there are real security improvements' seems really absurd when we put it into a context that's a lot more closer to home. after all the sercurity guard with the AK47 and the bionic baby sound a lot more intrusive than the little silicon chip that's protecting your computer from you.
do you get an "Elvis has left the building" message?
what? taiwan won't follow orders from the US? time to carpet bomb 'em.
I've read slashdot for a long time. but that's gotta be the best .sig i've read so far. can i borrow it?
no shit. i was in my (graduate) class and one guy goes "what's telnet?" ... and i think to myself.. what a wonderful world...
And where does it say that one cannot use parts of KDE without using the whole thing? Free Software, baby. Take what suits you. RH has no obligation to keep the KDE package 100% intact. or gnome for that matter. as long as they make their changes public, they're exercising the right granted to them by the GNU software license.
I, for one, really support RH in this. KMail, even tho it does what it does, is light years behind Evolution. why should RH be stuck using KMail when they can pick the best of the breed. i like KDE as much as the next man. but not using the best of everything for everything is suicidal if the company wants to target the desktop. when jon 'sixpack' doe gets RH on his computer and picks gnome he goes.. 'that dang email thing is pretty neat.', picks KDE the next time and goes .. 'that dang xyz is neat.' 'but i can't use both together; this linux thing sucks.' they're not going to know to switch the defaults (hell MS never allowed you to until very recently with XPSP1) in one desktop (windows), how do you expect them to switch the defaults in BOTH kde and gnome? it's great that RH is doing that for them.
I don't see a problem in using whatever is the best by picking and choosing. regardless of what family it belongs to. that's the true spirit of Free Software. it's a GNU given right.
Well i certainly do hope your arse is a 'small Niche'.
...and fucking proud.
Is that a cron job? with some beautiful screensavers (the dreams) running while the cpu goes off and makes this memory dump to tape backup?
What's there to do? They just want all the 'free porn website accounts.'
sorry to say but without such backing and creating a limited choice for consumers by the big medias, people would choose diverse artists/bands thereby not creating one or a few bands that are 'it' -- that *everyone* listens to. that is the sole premise of the business model of the entertainment industry. few bands 'make it big' (in reality they are 'made big'.) so there is some sense of consolidation for the big media. same as x number of models in a product line etc.. ("pick any color you want as long as it's black." -- Ford). all kinds of combinations and variations that people actually want are really hard to manage. it's also really costly. instead, just put out a certain models, concentrate your finances and efforts there and market them like crazy. So unless you sell out of your indie roots, you're SOL.
But there is hope. it's a well known fact that the bigwigs take most of the cut. i don't know enough about the 'indie process' but i'm sure you get better returns in terms of percentage. so in reality, you have a chance of making decent living even if you reach fewer people. concentrate on that. if you just make it in your hometown, independently, i'm thinking you should be making quite a good living.
if it's rock star status you're thinking about, well, you weren't indie to begin with and you shouldn't be talking to us -- well me anyways. talk to the guy in the grey suit.
but like the above poster (overshoot) said, give away your songs to the campuses running their own radios. then go do shows in the local bars there. when i was going to college, we heard bands on the campus radio and were there to see their show in our favorite local bar whenever they came by.
... fake pussy!!
sergon in the second grade. before i even knew it!! had i realized that i coulda made some serious lunch money. well, i guess i put in my pro-bono time.
if it took them a med-school degree to figure that out maybe i need to start a med-school too. after all, i know all about mag glasses and insects, GI joes... by grade school. talk about the brains!! now all i need to add is the damn optical fiber. I even injected frogs with ink. how many years before *they* figure that one??
What the hell. Not everything is 1+1. just because someone is great with coding for Gimp/Gecko/what-have-you doesn't mean that the programmers is going to work out for YOU. I have conducted the 'tech' part of the interview. I've been burned a few times. But on an average, I've done well with the people I've recommended.
I do make sure that the person is up to the (algoirthmic) challange. I mean if the person doesn't have any brains, a thousand monkeys could eventually come up with the code... Then it's your gut feeling. (we do do the psyc test too.) Just talk to the guy. Get a feel for the person. Then go with whatever your gut says. You just can't judge a person by adding numbers -- be that the algo-tests, psyc test ...
with (100/2/6)% accuracy.
you have "sex" on your mind.
(2 for males being half the population and 6 for well the every six second thing.. so sex is on your mind 1/6th the time.)
and NASA is getting funded for that??!!
MS is in the middle of an antitrust trial the core of which is the accusation that MS strongarms OEMs with exclusive deals. Now wouldn't it be convinient for MS to demo the fact that an OEM could indeed *not have to* ship with MS OSs even with the existing licences with MS. Enter Dell and FreeDOS. Who is actually using FreeDOS (well i am but i don't think that's the norm.)? From a shippers perspective Linux/xBSD would have been a better choice because of the market share. If Dell truly wanted to provide alternative OSs for the benefit of consumers wouldn't they pick from the list of OSs that are higher up in market-share-ranked list? ie. since they ship the top ranked OS -- windows -- woulnd't they pick the second next? But then MS wouldn't like that too much now would it? Solution: ship FreeDOS with the machines -- that way people are at least still in the DOS mindset. Then MS goes back to court saying -- "Look, Look, the OEMs can and are shipping machines with other OSs. We didn't strongarm them into exclusivity!! The OEMs *can* choose other OSs and that's not restricted by our *existing* license. The only reason they haven't taken advantage of that is because they didn't want to. Not because we threatened them in any way!"
So me thinks this idea hatched somewhere in the northwest US. NOT at Dell. Do you really think that if Dell wanted to piss off MS by shipping an alternative OS they would ship FreeDOS as opposed to something with more demand -- linux? Unless of course MS wanted Dell to *ship* (or at least look like they offer) another OS. That OS would have to be close to MSs own. But very very outdated version of MSs own.