I hate to sound like a karma whore , but have you ever worked in an office that had only halfway migrated to a new version of MSOffice. What a nightmare! I've had better compatability between Open Office and Microsoft Office than Microsoft Office and Microsoft Office.
O.K. since someone thought that was insightful, I guess I'd better respond. Stem cell research is hardly the only issue that make us liberals afraid that the U.S. is turning into a police state. Nor is it the only reason that the previous poster pointed out. Nice way to pretend to be insulted when you quickly dodged all of the other issues. And the Congress seems to vote along straight party lines as to whether they should check or balance (Dem's piss me off as much as Rep's on this one)
here are my fears:
- Patriot act
- "Sometimes the Constitution is a pain in the ass"
- The idea that questioning the whether the president and cabinet are obeying the law is "giving comfort to the enemy"
- The fact that the biggest winners in the war in Iraq so far are the Vice Pres's former company and the Pres's family honor.
- The fact that John Kerry isn't saying anything about any of this
That's an interesting take because watching Rush Limbaugh (My mom's a big fan) and Newt Gingrith is what moved me to the Democratic party. Really I don't see much policy difference between the two, But the Republicans have always seemed much nastier to me.
I agree. It has seemed to me since they posted that (I thought it was 30% more) that one of the best bits of linux advocacy/proselyting would be to put a banner up that quoted that particular line at any gathering that collected a large group of SysAdmins.
I wouldn't have thought this possible before I saw it. But I worked on a project just like you describe.
It was Just under 20 million lines of code. It took two years of development for 10 developers plus two consultants brought in for one month and six months, respectively. We did have about a twenty page requirements document worked out with the president of the company (who was the expert in the field).
Like it or hate it. It was done using an eXtreme Programming (worst. name. ever.) methodology, though not perfectly textbook in implementation. We all sat in the same room with the project manager. The architecht, interestingly, managed to get his own office. I'm not speaking for everyone. But I know *I* am way more productive in a bullpen.
The bad news is that the company had (*cough*) a sudden financial crisis that required a reduction in force as soon as it shipped.
I'd like to submit live CDs as at least an Asault and battery Ap. I can cary "My computer" just the way I'm used to it in my shirt pocket. And I can use it virtualy anywhere.
I think your question is a good one, but your answer is incomplete.
Yes, there is the eletist factor in Linux. I don't have a tremendous amount of sympathy for that situation, myself, I've seen too many cutting edges come and go, and I have a hard enough time keeping up with everything I want to in the tech field to presume I'm more "1337" than someone else. Save that for the teenagers, I say.
But the difference between open source and proprietary software is open source may have USERS but the for-sale stuff has CUSTOMERS. Customers pay for the development process. And so they are the most important people to consider. Users (of open source software, at least) are by-in-large non-contributers.
Yeah, I've read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" I understand the network value thing. But the people who really put down the necessary resources to make F/OSS as cool as it is are the developers/testers/documenters. NOT the average users. Sure, they may contribute a little by the mere presence of more boxes, ands even more importantly, we might as well welcome them since we seem to have the free rider problem licked. But dumbing down the system for the "average user" at the expense of the contributer demographic is not being foar to the people who really make this whole thing work.
By the way, this include me. I haven't really contributed anything to F/OSS, even though I use it. But I also know that means that I don't get to DEMAND anything. I don't think that "fsck you! Write it youself!" is the most positive way to phrase it. But it is still somewhat true.
Unfotunately, if he can show the Canopy group making money on this, and at the same time staying out of jail (both very likely) there will certainly be someone out there who will hire hi to play the same game somewhere else.
I am able to enjoy a 6 figure salary complete
with loving wife, 2000 sq. foot home, and I own two brand new Lexus.
That's what you call a REAL bennefits package!
I was evangelizing the other day, (gave a Knoppix CD to my brother and dad) and realized that Live CDs were even better than "A great way to introduce users to Linux." They may very well be the "killer app" that solidly puts linux at an advantage for the business desktop.
After all, the big thing keeping so many people with Microsoft now is that they don't want to know how to do something differently. But the uniformity of windows is nothing compared to KNoppix or Mandrake move. With these guys, I can cary in a coat pocket "My computer" Anywhere I go I can sit down to a random computer, pop in the CD, and everything is EXACTLY how I expect it. Heck, a CD and USB key could replace a laptop computer for many business travelers.
Not that you'll see me giving up mine, I don't even need to get out of be to waste time on slashdot.
I was thinking of a similar thing. Best if it was done by maintainers of one or more GPL projects.
We have been informed that you are using SCO Unix wich ships with our product/*insert name here*/ under the GPL liscence which they have asserted is illegal and unconstitutional. We feel compelled to inform you that if they prevail in this case you will have NO license to use this product and may be liable for civil damages.....
Haven't you noticed? Sco is now the oficial "Love to Hate" company of slashdot now. That's why there are so many (misguided IMHO) Let-em-burn posts on here.
I appreciate seeing a grown up attitudeamong/. posters myself
I didn't see him say that it was easy, just that to do some building is the best way to start.
I'd rather have a LAN administrator who had spent some time playing with chea hubs and linux than someone who just went out and bought a MCSE cert any day.
Red Hat's product is mainly developed by people not employed by Red Hat, but open source community volunteers.
How do you think the recent community backlash will affect Red Hat's bottom line? that
The issue is not necessarily one of piracy, nor lawsuits, but one of a blatent monopoly acting in their own interests and screwing their audence
. . .
To me a music lover is someone that buys a nice set of speakers, and listens to music. In contrast to this is those such as yourself who like to support the RIAA by giving the Spice Girls and N-Sync there day in the spotlight and dollar per disk, and could care less that the other $19 is used for suing 12 year olds and other worthless causes that do nothing to further music
This makes me think about something I've been wondering about since I first heard the filesharing argument on slashdot (that has only been four years, and It's not really a topic that interests me, so I'm sure I've missed a lot BUT...)
When I first heard this argument, seeing as this was then and still is an Open Source Friendly sort of crowd, I expected an Open Source type solution to this problem. The obvious answer to this (to me) would be to simply stop listening to bands that were contracted with RIAA afiliated record labels (presumably all of them). And ONLY listen to groups that release their music freely. (GNU-type Music, as it were). And I expected/. to become a great place to go if you were looking for tips on good indie bands. But I NEVER hear talk like that around here.
Now, I'm NOT a music lover by any serious stretch. I'l listen to the radio in the car, if there is no one to talk to. I have, in my life bought exactly two concert tickets and two albums. Neither of which could I locate right now. So I don't claim to understand either the record industry OR what makes good music.
But, from the outside, it seems that the RIAA isn't really a monopoly. There are thousands of bands out there who do not have record deals, and who jump at any chance to be heard they can. I know that a lot of these bands have music available for download. I alo know (even me) that at least 90% of these bands really suck.
The way I see it, then there are a few possible reasons why people who hate the RIAA still listen to music they at least claim to own.
1. All the good bands are signed to record labels.
2. There are good bands out there but it so much work to find them that it isn't worth doing.
3. Despite what people on/. say, there really IS not way for a band to make money outside the record companies, and so bands either go there or die.
4. I'm completely incorect about the nature of the RIAA, and they also own all of the music produced by people who have never signed a contract with any record label.
Yes, I know that I left out "Intelectual property is inherently wrong. but that's not the way the people who make the laws around here (here being the U.S. in my case) see it. And the arguments that are floating around on/. don't seem to be the kind that will make them change their mind. Even if Valid, it seems better to fight the RIAA by boycott than by just downloading their songs.
If number 4 is the case, then the RIAA and it's members really are a big bunch of bad guys and we need to get rid of them. the best way would be for indie bands to get together and sue them for stealing their music.
But, if 1. or 2. are correct, then the record labels are actualy earning their money. not by being musical geniuses, but by doing the work that no one else seems to be doing. Which is to sort out the good bands from the crap. And look, if your mp3 directory is filled up with label bands, wherether you like it or not. that is what you are saying.
If number three is the case, then the record lables are performing the service of being the only financialy effective patrons of the arts out there.
I'm sure that good answers to these points have already been brought up. Like I said, I haven't been following closely. But it would seem to me that, even if they are stupid for doing it, the artists making this music have signed on with the
>I would much rather not pretend to empathize with
>such people.
>And it is just this reason that I would prefer to
>be in an academic or research environment. At least
>its mostly free of this hypocritic attitude.
Excuse me for just a moment.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Hee-Hee-Hee. -Wipes away a tear-.
Ahem.
Yeah. That's a great idea. Go into Academia and research because there is so much LESS politics involved. -snort- (excuse me, must be this cold)
makes me think of a conversation I had with a friend of mine once.
him: You know, people keep saying the word "slut" like it's a bad thing.
me: That's only hard to understand because you don't know the REAL meaning of the word "slut".
him: Oh really, what do YOU think it means?
me: A slut is someone who will sleep with anyone...except *me*.
Several years ago I had a friend go to a development conference where we attended a session put on by Microsoft about (I think, it's bee a long time) COM and DCOM. Someone in the audience mentioned that the interface seemed kind of kludgy, and was harder to use than it ought to be. The M$ rep told him that was a good thing, because making it complicated gave the developer "job security" My friend was infuriated. He claimed (and I agree) that Job security comes from being able to solve problems in the most eficient way possible. and he didn't need cruft like that to give him job security.
Now this guy was the one who introduced me to linux. And he loudly claimed to be the biggest Linux Bigot (his words) out there. But that attitude is pretty prevalent in the Unix community as well. I've often heard "It was hard to write, it should be hard to use" That B.S. is just as stupid coming from the open source community as it is coming from Microsoft. If your claim to fame is being able to use something that could be made simpler, you are doomed to failure.
I also remember when people went to school to learn how to use Word Perfect. With the assumption that knowing how to use Word Perfect was the skill that would keep them employed.
Are you likely to be impressed because someone knows how to use a word processor? I'm not. But I am impressed by someone who knows how to write well. The good thing about being able to write is that you can write something good with a word processor, or a typewriter, or a pencil.
I agree that IT used to be more respected than it is. Just knowing how to administer a system, or progam, or put together a database is a pretty mediocre distinction. But being able to do it WELL is. It sucks that it takes such a long time for the cream to rise to the top. But the real gurus eventualy find themselves in a situation where the people they work for will do anything to keep them, because they remember how much worse it was before they set things straight.
As far as this goes for linux advocacy: Novell used to be the OS of choice for networking. NT kicked their butt because you could set up a passable network with NT without having to read ten manuals to do it. Of course, it takes a lot longer to get it to run well. But once your network is started with NT it's a lot easier to keep going with it than to switch.
Every power user was a newbie once. I applaud the efforts that make Linux Newbie friendly, because that's the only way to draw enough people in to take advantage of the famed Open Source Network Effect. If we can't do that we deserve to get our butts kicked by Microsoft.
What compensation? At some point in the trial, SCO is going to be asked why they distributed Linux if it was full of their own copyrighted code, as they allege. The ONLY answer that they can give that makes any sense is to say "We didn;t realize we were doing that, we quit selling linux as soon as we realized we were shipping proprietary code" ANY other answer legitemizes the more realistic argument that they already deliberately gave away their rights by releasing themselves the code under the GPL.
The great thing about this line of argument is that it means SCO CAN NOT win this fight in the long run. Even if they manage to fool a judge, or pull a Microsoft and buy an election to ensure that the courts go their way, All that is needed if for the Open source community to make the same argument. We're sorry, we acted in good faith. we won't realease any of the code this judge just gave to you. Then hustle to replace the affected code. Really, if they start suing after that, the next step if for everyone who ever installed a copy of caldera linux to sue SCO for selling a product that exposed them to liability.
Heck, if they DO manage to get the GPL overturned, the SAMBA team (and the APACHE team, and Lary Wall, the FSF and all the rest) are soon to be due a LOT of money from SCO for licensing fees. Plenty enough to pay for enough lawyers to scare anyone off from pulling something like this again.
Meanwhile, it is in the best interests of anyone who benifits from free software to make them prove, line by line, where the contested code came from Make them prove that THEY didn't steal the code. AND to keep talking about it so that there will be enough people angry about what is going on that they will be willing to help do whatever it takes to keep Linux alive and kicking (preferably at companies like SCO's shins)
BSD already went through all this crap. And made it out alive. The people betting on SCO really are idiots. Because there really is no way for linux to lose this one.
Slashdot Mirror
I hate to sound like a karma whore , but have you ever worked in an office that had only halfway migrated to a new version of MSOffice. What a nightmare! I've had better compatability between Open Office and Microsoft Office than Microsoft Office and Microsoft Office.
ymmv - I am hardly an office suite power user.
O.K. since someone thought that was insightful, I guess I'd better respond. Stem cell research is hardly the only issue that make us liberals afraid that the U.S. is turning into a police state. Nor is it the only reason that the previous poster pointed out. Nice way to pretend to be insulted when you quickly dodged all of the other issues. And the Congress seems to vote along straight party lines as to whether they should check or balance (Dem's piss me off as much as Rep's on this one) here are my fears: - Patriot act
- "Sometimes the Constitution is a pain in the ass"
- The idea that questioning the whether the president and cabinet are obeying the law is "giving comfort to the enemy"
- The fact that the biggest winners in the war in Iraq so far are the Vice Pres's former company and the Pres's family honor.
- The fact that John Kerry isn't saying anything about any of this
That's an interesting take because watching Rush Limbaugh (My mom's a big fan) and Newt Gingrith is what moved me to the Democratic party. Really I don't see much policy difference between the two, But the Republicans have always seemed much nastier to me.
I agree. It has seemed to me since they posted that (I thought it was 30% more) that one of the best bits of linux advocacy/proselyting would be to put a banner up that quoted that particular line at any gathering that collected a large group of SysAdmins.
-1 BLASPHEMOUS
I wouldn't have thought this possible before I saw it. But I worked on a project just like you describe. It was Just under 20 million lines of code. It took two years of development for 10 developers plus two consultants brought in for one month and six months, respectively. We did have about a twenty page requirements document worked out with the president of the company (who was the expert in the field).
Like it or hate it. It was done using an eXtreme Programming (worst. name. ever.) methodology, though not perfectly textbook in implementation. We all sat in the same room with the project manager. The architecht, interestingly, managed to get his own office. I'm not speaking for everyone. But I know *I* am way more productive in a bullpen.
The bad news is that the company had (*cough*) a sudden financial crisis that required a reduction in force as soon as it shipped.
I'd like to submit live CDs as at least an Asault and battery Ap. I can cary "My computer" just the way I'm used to it in my shirt pocket. And I can use it virtualy anywhere.
Yes, there is the eletist factor in Linux. I don't have a tremendous amount of sympathy for that situation, myself, I've seen too many cutting edges come and go, and I have a hard enough time keeping up with everything I want to in the tech field to presume I'm more "1337" than someone else. Save that for the teenagers, I say.
But the difference between open source and proprietary software is open source may have USERS but the for-sale stuff has CUSTOMERS. Customers pay for the development process. And so they are the most important people to consider. Users (of open source software, at least) are by-in-large non-contributers.
Yeah, I've read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" I understand the network value thing. But the people who really put down the necessary resources to make F/OSS as cool as it is are the developers/testers/documenters. NOT the average users. Sure, they may contribute a little by the mere presence of more boxes, ands even more importantly, we might as well welcome them since we seem to have the free rider problem licked. But dumbing down the system for the "average user" at the expense of the contributer demographic is not being foar to the people who really make this whole thing work.
By the way, this include me. I haven't really contributed anything to F/OSS, even though I use it. But I also know that means that I don't get to DEMAND anything. I don't think that "fsck you! Write it youself!" is the most positive way to phrase it. But it is still somewhat true.
Unfotunately, if he can show the Canopy group making money on this, and at the same time staying out of jail (both very likely) there will certainly be someone out there who will hire hi to play the same game somewhere else.
I am able to enjoy a 6 figure salary complete with loving wife, 2000 sq. foot home, and I own two brand new Lexus.
That's what you call a REAL bennefits package!
I was evangelizing the other day, (gave a Knoppix CD to my brother and dad) and realized that Live CDs were even better than "A great way to introduce users to Linux." They may very well be the "killer app" that solidly puts linux at an advantage for the business desktop.
After all, the big thing keeping so many people with Microsoft now is that they don't want to know how to do something differently. But the uniformity of windows is nothing compared to KNoppix or Mandrake move. With these guys, I can cary in a coat pocket "My computer" Anywhere I go I can sit down to a random computer, pop in the CD, and everything is EXACTLY how I expect it. Heck, a CD and USB key could replace a laptop computer for many business travelers.
Not that you'll see me giving up mine, I don't even need to get out of be to waste time on slashdot.
If I remember correctly, They've already done that one. Back when they were caldera.
I was thinking of a similar thing. Best if it was done by maintainers of one or more GPL projects.
/*insert name here*/ under the GPL liscence which they have asserted is illegal and unconstitutional. We feel compelled to inform you that if they prevail in this case you will have NO license to use this product and may be liable for civil damages.....
We have been informed that you are using SCO Unix wich ships with our product
How's that for poetic justice?
Haven't you noticed? Sco is now the oficial "Love to Hate" company of slashdot now. That's why there are so many (misguided IMHO) Let-em-burn posts on here. I appreciate seeing a grown up attitudeamong /. posters myself
I didn't see him say that it was easy, just that to do some building is the best way to start. I'd rather have a LAN administrator who had spent some time playing with chea hubs and linux than someone who just went out and bought a MCSE cert any day.
Red Hat's product is mainly developed by people not employed by Red Hat, but open source community volunteers.
How do you think the recent community backlash will affect Red Hat's bottom line? that
The issue is not necessarily one of piracy, nor lawsuits, but one of a blatent monopoly acting in their own interests and screwing their audence /. to become a great place to go if you were looking for tips on good indie bands. But I NEVER hear talk like that around here.
/. say, there really IS not way for a band to make money outside the record companies, and so bands either go there or die.
4. I'm completely incorect about the nature of the RIAA, and they also own all of the music produced by people who have never signed a contract with any record label. /. don't seem to be the kind that will make them change their mind. Even if Valid, it seems better to fight the RIAA by boycott than by just downloading their songs.
.
.
. To me a music lover is someone that buys a nice set of speakers, and listens to music. In contrast to this is those such as yourself who like to support the RIAA by giving the Spice Girls and N-Sync there day in the spotlight and dollar per disk, and could care less that the other $19 is used for suing 12 year olds and other worthless causes that do nothing to further music This makes me think about something I've been wondering about since I first heard the filesharing argument on slashdot (that has only been four years, and It's not really a topic that interests me, so I'm sure I've missed a lot BUT...) When I first heard this argument, seeing as this was then and still is an Open Source Friendly sort of crowd, I expected an Open Source type solution to this problem. The obvious answer to this (to me) would be to simply stop listening to bands that were contracted with RIAA afiliated record labels (presumably all of them). And ONLY listen to groups that release their music freely. (GNU-type Music, as it were). And I expected
Now, I'm NOT a music lover by any serious stretch. I'l listen to the radio in the car, if there is no one to talk to. I have, in my life bought exactly two concert tickets and two albums. Neither of which could I locate right now. So I don't claim to understand either the record industry OR what makes good music.
But, from the outside, it seems that the RIAA isn't really a monopoly. There are thousands of bands out there who do not have record deals, and who jump at any chance to be heard they can. I know that a lot of these bands have music available for download. I alo know (even me) that at least 90% of these bands really suck.
The way I see it, then there are a few possible reasons why people who hate the RIAA still listen to music they at least claim to own.
1. All the good bands are signed to record labels.
2. There are good bands out there but it so much work to find them that it isn't worth doing.
3. Despite what people on
Yes, I know that I left out "Intelectual property is inherently wrong. but that's not the way the people who make the laws around here (here being the U.S. in my case) see it. And the arguments that are floating around on
If number 4 is the case, then the RIAA and it's members really are a big bunch of bad guys and we need to get rid of them. the best way would be for indie bands to get together and sue them for stealing their music.
But, if 1. or 2. are correct, then the record labels are actualy earning their money. not by being musical geniuses, but by doing the work that no one else seems to be doing. Which is to sort out the good bands from the crap. And look, if your mp3 directory is filled up with label bands, wherether you like it or not. that is what you are saying.
If number three is the case, then the record lables are performing the service of being the only financialy effective patrons of the arts out there.
I'm sure that good answers to these points have already been brought up. Like I said, I haven't been following closely. But it would seem to me that, even if they are stupid for doing it, the artists making this music have signed on with the
>I would much rather not pretend to empathize with
>such people.
>And it is just this reason that I would prefer to
>be in an academic or research environment. At least
>its mostly free of this hypocritic attitude.
Excuse me for just a moment.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Hee-Hee-Hee. -Wipes away a tear-.
Ahem.
Yeah. That's a great idea. Go into Academia and research because there is so much LESS politics involved. -snort- (excuse me, must be this cold)
Enjoy!
makes me think of a conversation I had with a friend of mine once. him: You know, people keep saying the word "slut" like it's a bad thing. me: That's only hard to understand because you don't know the REAL meaning of the word "slut". him: Oh really, what do YOU think it means? me: A slut is someone who will sleep with anyone...except *me*.
Now this guy was the one who introduced me to linux. And he loudly claimed to be the biggest Linux Bigot (his words) out there. But that attitude is pretty prevalent in the Unix community as well. I've often heard "It was hard to write, it should be hard to use" That B.S. is just as stupid coming from the open source community as it is coming from Microsoft. If your claim to fame is being able to use something that could be made simpler, you are doomed to failure.
I also remember when people went to school to learn how to use Word Perfect. With the assumption that knowing how to use Word Perfect was the skill that would keep them employed.
Are you likely to be impressed because someone knows how to use a word processor? I'm not. But I am impressed by someone who knows how to write well. The good thing about being able to write is that you can write something good with a word processor, or a typewriter, or a pencil.
I agree that IT used to be more respected than it is. Just knowing how to administer a system, or progam, or put together a database is a pretty mediocre distinction. But being able to do it WELL is. It sucks that it takes such a long time for the cream to rise to the top. But the real gurus eventualy find themselves in a situation where the people they work for will do anything to keep them, because they remember how much worse it was before they set things straight.
As far as this goes for linux advocacy: Novell used to be the OS of choice for networking. NT kicked their butt because you could set up a passable network with NT without having to read ten manuals to do it. Of course, it takes a lot longer to get it to run well. But once your network is started with NT it's a lot easier to keep going with it than to switch.
Every power user was a newbie once. I applaud the efforts that make Linux Newbie friendly, because that's the only way to draw enough people in to take advantage of the famed Open Source Network Effect. If we can't do that we deserve to get our butts kicked by Microsoft.
What compensation? At some point in the trial, SCO is going to be asked why they distributed Linux if it was full of their own copyrighted code, as they allege. The ONLY answer that they can give that makes any sense is to say "We didn;t realize we were doing that, we quit selling linux as soon as we realized we were shipping proprietary code" ANY other answer legitemizes the more realistic argument that they already deliberately gave away their rights by releasing themselves the code under the GPL. The great thing about this line of argument is that it means SCO CAN NOT win this fight in the long run. Even if they manage to fool a judge, or pull a Microsoft and buy an election to ensure that the courts go their way, All that is needed if for the Open source community to make the same argument. We're sorry, we acted in good faith. we won't realease any of the code this judge just gave to you. Then hustle to replace the affected code. Really, if they start suing after that, the next step if for everyone who ever installed a copy of caldera linux to sue SCO for selling a product that exposed them to liability. Heck, if they DO manage to get the GPL overturned, the SAMBA team (and the APACHE team, and Lary Wall, the FSF and all the rest) are soon to be due a LOT of money from SCO for licensing fees. Plenty enough to pay for enough lawyers to scare anyone off from pulling something like this again. Meanwhile, it is in the best interests of anyone who benifits from free software to make them prove, line by line, where the contested code came from Make them prove that THEY didn't steal the code. AND to keep talking about it so that there will be enough people angry about what is going on that they will be willing to help do whatever it takes to keep Linux alive and kicking (preferably at companies like SCO's shins) BSD already went through all this crap. And made it out alive. The people betting on SCO really are idiots. Because there really is no way for linux to lose this one.
when the dust collecter in my father-in-law's workshop broke down, he just tied a furnace filter to a box fan with a rope.
"No one ever lost money underestimating human inteligence"
- P.T. Barnum.