I'm a permanent expat, and I go much further than that. I have several expired passports kept in separate locations just in case the original gets lost, stolen, or mutilated. When I first left government service, I even kept my official passport just in case I needed it. I'm sure that using it would have gotten my ass in trouble, but if I needed out of a country in that much of a hurry, I would have chanced the hot water I'd have been in.
Well, in reality, Google already has quite a few desktop apps that don't really get them any advertising but just increase their product image
The real problem with this idea is the lossy nature of an OO.o document on GDocs. Docs doesn't have anywhere near the document fidelity that OO.o has -- in fact, it's really more like HTML. You could actually edit the HTML by hand until recently (which I used to do quite often in GDocs early days).
I totally agree. XPeed gives 100Mb/s service with no cap for about USD30/mo. I use Megapass, though, and I never get my speed reduced or my bandwidth shaped (that I can tell, and I push it hard and long).
Well, I know you're joking, but I live in South Korea, where one of the cable channels is On-Net, featuring 24 hour starcraft and Special Forces play by pro gamers.
Is the channel successful? Go to any lunch place near a high school during break time and see fifty Korean teenager eating ramen and huddling around the TV and cheering on their heroes.
So... yeah... SF Channel could put the best cuts of the game on with commentary (and color) and I'm pretty sure a lot of people would watch it to see what they missed while they were out of the game.
Linux was non-hobbyist from very early on. Back in 94(?), Noorda was doing Caldera when NT 3.51 was still trying to figure out how to network properly. In fact, Even before that, Young was selling Linux. He became CEO of Red Hat in 1995.
Your view of how Linux was supported until IBM came along is wrong, and you need to amend it.
Most home Windows machines are infested with spyware. People that understand it can avoid it, on any version of Windows.
You know what? I've been hearing Windows users say this for a long time. It's rubbish
I assume whether they're free is determined by the client. That's the same for any work-for-hire. Even if RMS says that his speech is under the "SGPL," the client would only have to provide a transcript if they rebroadcast.
Oh, I quit. This whole "RMS is a hypocrite" nonsense is too difficult to even pretend.
An airport story from before 9/11. In 1997, I was going through security and had my key chain confiscated because it had a.44 cartridge on it. I tried to explain that the mounting drilled through where the primer used to be, that the powder was missing, and that the bullet being loose from the casing really showed that the cartridge was unusable, but they wouldn't let me through. I always suspected that one of the guards just thought it was cool and wanted it for himself.
Another theater, though not in the airport. The security theater that I just learned about last night was MS's Information Rights Management. No_Ax_to_Grind was going on and on on ZDNET about how a lack of IRM made OO.o useless for him, and that he could send someone a document and keep that person from forwarding it or even reading it until he gave permission.
I was intrigued, so I looked it up. From the description, it appears to be a system which only works when everyone is using MS Windows (with the Rights Management Services Client Service Pack 1!) and Office 2007. Other respondents who seemed to know about it said that the protection is simply a tag which non-compliant office suites simply ignore.
I didn't assume that it was an altruistic move. I just said to look at their record and the facts. Don't assume that profit is the explanation. Google does a lot of data mining. They also do a lot of stuff which isn't related to that.
You have to consider that Google is a for-profit business and hosting these files represents a bandwidth cost and a maintainence cost for them.
The bandwidth cost should be small since Google uses these libraries already and the whole idea is to improve browser caching. The maintenance cost of hosting static content shouldn't be that high, either. I mean, really.
Since the labor, hardware, and bandwidth costs all seem to be low, Google wouldn't be under pressure to make the investment pay. Google hosts lots of things that don't benefit them directly and from which they gain no real advantage except image.. Despite being a data-mining machine, Google does a lot of truly altruistic stuff.
I agree with the "too bad" part, but the fact is that Flash isn't used only to deliver the video. That same frame shows related videos and even sponsored content on some sites. Right now, that's a big part of the business. I don't see Flash players going away anytime soon.
He's a developer. He wants to develop. He wants to use Mono. Legal issues aside, Mono allows quick development of full-function applications. Why do you believe that Mono would have MS's DRM? Why would something written in Mono be required to listen to the broadcast flag?
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the link to the PPA: https://launchpad.net/~netbook-remix-team/+archive
Just add it to your sources and install the packages.
I'm a permanent expat, and I go much further than that. I have several expired passports kept in separate locations just in case the original gets lost, stolen, or mutilated. When I first left government service, I even kept my official passport just in case I needed it. I'm sure that using it would have gotten my ass in trouble, but if I needed out of a country in that much of a hurry, I would have chanced the hot water I'd have been in.
Ummm ... the RT in RTS?
Well, in reality, Google already has quite a few desktop apps that don't really get them any advertising but just increase their product image
The real problem with this idea is the lossy nature of an OO.o document on GDocs. Docs doesn't have anywhere near the document fidelity that OO.o has -- in fact, it's really more like HTML. You could actually edit the HTML by hand until recently (which I used to do quite often in GDocs early days).
Dude. I think version 1.0 was released in 2000. X-over-SSH has been usable since the 90's (forgiving the patent on SSH back then)
O3Spaces already is.
I totally agree. XPeed gives 100Mb/s service with no cap for about USD30/mo. I use Megapass, though, and I never get my speed reduced or my bandwidth shaped (that I can tell, and I push it hard and long).
If you install AptZeroConf on every machine, then you won't have to any work at all -- it's all handled transparently.
Well, I know you're joking, but I live in South Korea, where one of the cable channels is On-Net, featuring 24 hour starcraft and Special Forces play by pro gamers.
... yeah ... SF Channel could put the best cuts of the game on with commentary (and color) and I'm pretty sure a lot of people would watch it to see what they missed while they were out of the game.
Is the channel successful? Go to any lunch place near a high school during break time and see fifty Korean teenager eating ramen and huddling around the TV and cheering on their heroes.
So
Exactly my point.
Yes. Motive always matters at some level.
This seems silly. Why waste the bandwidth? I use apt-get. I don't want to download something just to send it to the bin.
Oh, yeah, and the new comment system sucks.
I meant that you can't avoid the infestation. One drive-by install of a trojan and it's over. If they root you, you'll never know.
This is true on all OSes, not just Windows. "I'm safe because I know my business" is just BS. No one is safe.
Win95 drove me to Linux. Considering the state of desktop Linux at that time, I think that statement says a bunch about Win95.
Linux was non-hobbyist from very early on. Back in 94(?), Noorda was doing Caldera when NT 3.51 was still trying to figure out how to network properly. In fact, Even before that, Young was selling Linux. He became CEO of Red Hat in 1995.
Your view of how Linux was supported until IBM came along is wrong, and you need to amend it.
Most home Windows machines are infested with spyware. People that understand it can avoid it, on any version of Windows.
You know what? I've been hearing Windows users say this for a long time. It's rubbish
I assume whether they're free is determined by the client. That's the same for any work-for-hire. Even if RMS says that his speech is under the "SGPL," the client would only have to provide a transcript if they rebroadcast.
Oh, I quit. This whole "RMS is a hypocrite" nonsense is too difficult to even pretend.
No. YOU missed the final point. Windows is hobby software. Other operating systems aren't. ;)
An airport story from before 9/11. In 1997, I was going through security and had my key chain confiscated because it had a .44 cartridge on it. I tried to explain that the mounting drilled through where the primer used to be, that the powder was missing, and that the bullet being loose from the casing really showed that the cartridge was unusable, but they wouldn't let me through. I always suspected that one of the guards just thought it was cool and wanted it for himself.
Another theater, though not in the airport. The security theater that I just learned about last night was MS's Information Rights Management. No_Ax_to_Grind was going on and on on ZDNET about how a lack of IRM made OO.o useless for him, and that he could send someone a document and keep that person from forwarding it or even reading it until he gave permission.
I was intrigued, so I looked it up. From the description, it appears to be a system which only works when everyone is using MS Windows (with the Rights Management Services Client Service Pack 1!) and Office 2007. Other respondents who seemed to know about it said that the protection is simply a tag which non-compliant office suites simply ignore.
What a joke.
Kudos. That was funny. No mod points, though.
I didn't assume that it was an altruistic move. I just said to look at their record and the facts. Don't assume that profit is the explanation. Google does a lot of data mining. They also do a lot of stuff which isn't related to that.
You have to consider that Google is a for-profit business and hosting these files represents a bandwidth cost and a maintainence cost for them.
The bandwidth cost should be small since Google uses these libraries already and the whole idea is to improve browser caching. The maintenance cost of hosting static content shouldn't be that high, either. I mean, really.
Since the labor, hardware, and bandwidth costs all seem to be low, Google wouldn't be under pressure to make the investment pay. Google hosts lots of things that don't benefit them directly and from which they gain no real advantage except image.. Despite being a data-mining machine, Google does a lot of truly altruistic stuff.
I agree with the "too bad" part, but the fact is that Flash isn't used only to deliver the video. That same frame shows related videos and even sponsored content on some sites. Right now, that's a big part of the business. I don't see Flash players going away anytime soon.
Hell, I am a Windows developer, so I develop on Windows.
And here I just thought you were Twitter.
Hey Twat ... er ... Twit. How's it going?
He's a developer. He wants to develop. He wants to use Mono. Legal issues aside, Mono allows quick development of full-function applications. Why do you believe that Mono would have MS's DRM? Why would something written in Mono be required to listen to the broadcast flag?
You're even less coherent than usual today.