Oh yeah, and if you want to fix your machine, something that works better than Ctl-Alt-Del, is the Magic SysRq Keys. Enable them in the kernel, then. Here's what I posted earlier: Well, for some consolation, you can still do a safe reboot with the Magic SysRQ keys: 1) SysRq-E - Send SigTERM to all processes 2) wait for disk activity to stop 3) SysRq-I - Send SigKILL to all processes 4) wait for disk activity to stop 5) SysRq-S - Sync 6) wait for disk activity to stop 7) SysRq-U - Remount all FSs read-only 8) wait for disk activity to stop 9) SysRq-B - Reboot
EISUB! Very useful for recovering from a dead console. - --------
Does anyone here know how to make their (ix86) keyboard have a real vulcan nerve pinch? Basically, reset buttons annoy me, and I'd like a hardware-reset VNP like on the Mac & Amiga.
P.S. No, Ctl-Alt-Del is NOT a vulcan nerve pinch. Real VNPs work *all the time*. --------
Are there really 100,000 kernel hackers? From checking email address in the kernel source it's much more like 1,000. Yes, that's still impressive, but please don't make up numbers.
He said the source code of an OS, not a kernel. Remember the definition of an OS vs a kernel?
Anyway, the reason I think many people like open source is because they are not at the mercy of some other company. If they desperately NEED a feature, they can hire some 18-year-old to implement it for a few bucks, versus being told "your setup is not supported, go spend $10,000 and you'll be fine" by tech support.
Bottom line: Open source prevents monopolies. --------
It doesn't matter what your market share is. No company, no matter what size, should be able to exercise monopolistic practices. And Intel is exercising those practices. --------
As sorry as WinWhatever is, it is still easier to use than Linux.
The only thing that makes Windows easier to use than other OSes is that people are used to its interface. If I put my grandmother in front of a computer, regardless of the operating system, she wouldn't have a clue what to do. I was born and raised on an Amiga (which supports both a GUI and a CLI), and I found the CLI easier to use. Some of my friends were raised on Windows, and don't even know what to do at a DOS prompt, but they'll poke around the registry all the time.
Our main problem is that we allow computer users to be too stupid. I know what tech support people go through every day (eg. the "mug-holder" keeps closing), simply because people don't really know how computers work. Instead of trying to find better ways to make it harder to put a coffee mug onto a CDROM tray, why don't we just tell them what it's really for?
Bottom Line: "Easier to use" can only be defined as "whatever you're used to". Exclusive use of GUIs make stupid users. People live up to what's expected of them. Expect them to be stupid, and they will. --------
Capitalism has failed when an entity achieves a monopoly, and is able to smother any smaller one. What's worse is that capitalism is not failing by itself; our "Intellectual Property" laws which were designed to promote it are choking it to death.
Capitalism, like anything, works only when you know how to use it. --------
This is exactly what OSS should be: competition. OSS will set the standard for good programs. Microsoft has a lot of good ideas, but because they run the market, they don't have to live up to any quality standards. As long as OSS is a viable alternative, companies who push proprietry software will be forced to behave, and be competitive. Windows is not really a competitive OS; it only survives as a result of a monopoly.
The bottom line: Open Source Software will make proprietry programs better. --------
I guess not all governments are braindead. I hope this starts a trend throughout the world. Maybe I'll actually be able to use a credit card online, without it being as stupid as me writing it below:
I agree. I run Linux on a Pentium 120 with 24MB of RAM and a VESA 1.2 video card, and what I like most about it is it doesn't force me to buy a new computer just to use a word processor (like Windows 98 does). What I'd like to see in XFree86 the most would be High/TrueColor support for more SVGA cards.
That said, it would be rather awful to see Linux users being forced to upgrade their systems just to get a few nice features.
Besides, adding a new font server architecture would actually be pretty easy (but it's the X-Consortium's job, not XFree86's). Just make the new font server, and new programs will begin to use it, while maintaining a separate, optional "middleman" server, that behaves just like the old font servers, to link old programs to the new server.
Judging by the nature of the Linux development model. I'd say most of the work gets done on the mailing lists. Without mailing lists, there is no Linux. Period. --------
Here's another topid for ya: A lot of Free Software is governed by the GPL, and most people put the recommended clause: "This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."
This is good, because it allows easy expansion into further versions of the license, but what if, somehow, Microsoft gained some control over the FSF, even for a few months, and released a Version 3 of the GPL, which allows the exception that Microsoft does not have to release derivative works under the same license.
Is this a legitimate possibility? Could Version 3 severely damage the Free Software movement, making all our work proprietry?
Or worse, I'm not sure, but if copyright law allows the legal owner of the software to change licenses at will, could someone buy Linux from Linus, change the license, and make it proprietry?
Maybe someone with a legel background (US and other countries) could give us some info here. (Or will the SPI have to use its funds for that?;) )
Well, the money could go into defending free/open licenses, hiring a lawyer to get patents on stuff we created first (so some stupid company doesn't get it), maybe even advertising. People really take something a lot more seriously when they see it on the tube.
Let's remember that the US is not the only country that has programmers. If the US government meddles with us too much, they will only be missing the boat. The only thing that scares me is the braindead politicians in Canada, Australia and the UK. They might adopt similar laws, a very scary idea. If worst comes to worst, Linus may have to move out of the US, or appoint someone else as head of the Linux project (someone in the Netherlands, for instance).
Just because OSS is outlawed in the US doesn't mean the rest of us should suffer. They'll simply miss the boat in OSS, as they are missing the boat in encryption. --------
Actually, contrary to popular belief, if someone leaves the door to his house unlocked, it is perfectly legel for someone to walk in and sit at your dinner table. It only becomes illegal if: - He breaks anything - You ask him to leave and he doesn't (This includes a NO TRESSPASSING sign) - He removes anything from your house (reading your diary is not stealing, nor is it illegal) - He picks your lock to get in
I think we're forgetting what a computer is. It's an appliance. If you want to make analogies, think of it this way: You bought a newspaper. You place it on a table at work. Someone picks it up and reads it, and you're going to try to say they "stole your information" or they "trespassed into the pages of your newspaper"? Even if you took a black marker and wrote down your PIN for your bank card, that's not what your co-workers are interested in. They just want to read the paper.
On the internet, crackers will see you write your PIN in the newspaper, and stealthily try to take the newspaper, read the PIN, burn the newspaper so their fingerprints cannot be traced, and then withdrawl all the money from your bank account. The hacker will see you write the PIN in the newspaper, casually walk past, pick up the newspaper, read the PIN, hand the paper back, and say "You know, you really should write that number in a safer place. But, if you really need to have it in the newspaper, I suggest look at the first six letters of the front page, then lightly write the digits in the middle of the corresponding pages with a pencil, then fill some of the other pages with bogus numbers..."
Remember: crackers crack for personal gain and for kicks, while hackers use their abilities for knowledge and understanding, and to help others fix potential problems.
P.S. Let's just let the crackers (and the media) have the name "Hackers" and give ourselves a better name. Suggestions, anyone? --------
That will just make it look like we agree that what we are doing is actually illegal. I agree we should defend our own, but we must never go underground, because that defeats the purpose of freedom. --------
Technically a ZIP, GIF, JPEG, or and compression or imaging format is a computer program. They all contain instructions for the computer to execute. So what's the difference if the program is executed in hardware, or through software? Nothing. --------
I personally know what kind of crappy lawyers are out there. They're called criminal prosecutors. No offence, but they just aren't that good. We need a fund, so we can afford some good lawyers (instead of the bad ones that IPIX obviously has). By getting free lawyers, we will end up shooting ourselves in the foot [sic]. --------
Yeah. Wouldn't it be just sad if suddenly all of IPIX's programmers either went on strike, or demanded a 200% pay hike!
It's time to see if all those companies (expecially RedHat) who claim they support Open Source software are going to put their money where their mouth is and give us a hand here. It would be great Public Relations. "Big Business Backs the Little Guy" or even "Microsoft gains footing in antitrust trial."
There's a North American Union of Truckers, so why can't there be a Global Union of Open Source Programmers? We can't be a lynch mob, but we also must defend our own and stop anyone from trying to "divide and conquor".
Just a little quote from King of the Hill: "Uh... No, Mr. Hudson, we don't recommend using propane to fill party balloons. "Well, yeah it is a gas, but it's in a liquid state. "Well...okay but, you might want to blow out those candles..."
Slashdot Mirror
Oh yeah, and if you want to fix your machine, something that works better than Ctl-Alt-Del, is the Magic SysRq Keys. Enable them in the kernel, then. Here's what I posted earlier:
Well, for some consolation, you can still do a safe reboot with the Magic SysRQ keys:
1) SysRq-E - Send SigTERM to all processes
2) wait for disk activity to stop
3) SysRq-I - Send SigKILL to all processes
4) wait for disk activity to stop
5) SysRq-S - Sync
6) wait for disk activity to stop
7) SysRq-U - Remount all FSs read-only
8) wait for disk activity to stop
9) SysRq-B - Reboot
EISUB! Very useful for recovering from a dead console.
-
--------
Does anyone here know how to make their (ix86) keyboard have a real vulcan nerve pinch? Basically, reset buttons annoy me, and I'd like a hardware-reset VNP like on the Mac & Amiga.
P.S. No, Ctl-Alt-Del is NOT a vulcan nerve pinch. Real VNPs work *all the time*.
--------
Are there really 100,000 kernel hackers? From checking email address in the kernel source it's much more like 1,000. Yes, that's still impressive, but please don't make up numbers.
He said the source code of an OS, not a kernel. Remember the definition of an OS vs a kernel?
Anyway, the reason I think many people like open source is because they are not at the mercy of some other company. If they desperately NEED a feature, they can hire some 18-year-old to implement it for a few bucks, versus being told "your setup is not supported, go spend $10,000 and you'll be fine" by tech support.
Bottom line: Open source prevents monopolies.
--------
It doesn't matter what your market share is. No company, no matter what size, should be able to exercise monopolistic practices. And Intel is exercising those practices.
--------
As sorry as WinWhatever is, it is still easier to use than Linux.
The only thing that makes Windows easier to use than other OSes is that people are used to its interface. If I put my grandmother in front of a computer, regardless of the operating system, she wouldn't have a clue what to do. I was born and raised on an Amiga (which supports both a GUI and a CLI), and I found the CLI easier to use. Some of my friends were raised on Windows, and don't even know what to do at a DOS prompt, but they'll poke around the registry all the time.
Our main problem is that we allow computer users to be too stupid. I know what tech support people go through every day (eg. the "mug-holder" keeps closing), simply because people don't really know how computers work. Instead of trying to find better ways to make it harder to put a coffee mug onto a CDROM tray, why don't we just tell them what it's really for?
Bottom Line: "Easier to use" can only be defined as "whatever you're used to". Exclusive use of GUIs make stupid users. People live up to what's expected of them. Expect them to be stupid, and they will.
--------
Capitalism has failed when an entity achieves a monopoly, and is able to smother any smaller one. What's worse is that capitalism is not failing by itself; our "Intellectual Property" laws which were designed to promote it are choking it to death.
Capitalism, like anything, works only when you know how to use it.
--------
2 years. And in 5 years, it will sport that standard sticker that nobody will even notice anymore, "Designed for Linux 2.6".
--------
This is exactly what OSS should be: competition. OSS will set the standard for good programs. Microsoft has a lot of good ideas, but because they run the market, they don't have to live up to any quality standards. As long as OSS is a viable alternative, companies who push proprietry software will be forced to behave, and be competitive. Windows is not really a competitive OS; it only survives as a result of a monopoly.
The bottom line: Open Source Software will make proprietry programs better.
--------
http://babelfish.altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/tra nslate?urltext=http://www.bmwi.de/presse /1999/0602prm1.html&lp=de_en&doit=done
Sorry I couldn't make it a link, but Slashdot is putting in an arbitrary margin.
--------
I guess not all governments are braindead. I hope this starts a trend throughout the world. Maybe I'll actually be able to use a credit card online, without it being as stupid as me writing it below:
;)
4 4002312 4991029348
--------
I agree. I run Linux on a Pentium 120 with 24MB of RAM and a VESA 1.2 video card, and what I like most about it is it doesn't force me to buy a new computer just to use a word processor (like Windows 98 does). What I'd like to see in XFree86 the most would be High/TrueColor support for more SVGA cards.
That said, it would be rather awful to see Linux users being forced to upgrade their systems just to get a few nice features.
Besides, adding a new font server architecture would actually be pretty easy (but it's the X-Consortium's job, not XFree86's). Just make the new font server, and new programs will begin to use it, while maintaining a separate, optional "middleman" server, that behaves just like the old font servers, to link old programs to the new server.
--------
Judging by the nature of the Linux development model. I'd say most of the work gets done on the mailing lists. Without mailing lists, there is no Linux. Period.
--------
Here's another topid for ya:
;) )
A lot of Free Software is governed by the GPL, and most people put the recommended clause:
"This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."
This is good, because it allows easy expansion into further versions of the license, but what if, somehow, Microsoft gained some control over the FSF, even for a few months, and released a Version 3 of the GPL, which allows the exception that Microsoft does not have to release derivative works under the same license.
Is this a legitimate possibility? Could Version 3 severely damage the Free Software movement, making all our work proprietry?
Or worse, I'm not sure, but if copyright law allows the legal owner of the software to change licenses at will, could someone buy Linux from Linus, change the license, and make it proprietry?
Maybe someone with a legel background (US and other countries) could give us some info here. (Or will the SPI have to use its funds for that?
--------
Well, the money could go into defending free/open licenses, hiring a lawyer to get patents on stuff we created first (so some stupid company doesn't get it), maybe even advertising. People really take something a lot more seriously when they see it on the tube.
Stuff like that.
--------
Let's remember that the US is not the only country that has programmers. If the US government meddles with us too much, they will only be missing the boat. The only thing that scares me is the braindead politicians in Canada, Australia and the UK. They might adopt similar laws, a very scary idea. If worst comes to worst, Linus may have to move out of the US, or appoint someone else as head of the Linux project (someone in the Netherlands, for instance).
Just because OSS is outlawed in the US doesn't mean the rest of us should suffer. They'll simply miss the boat in OSS, as they are missing the boat in encryption.
--------
Actually, contrary to popular belief, if someone leaves the door to his house unlocked, it is perfectly legel for someone to walk in and sit at your dinner table. It only becomes illegal if:
- He breaks anything
- You ask him to leave and he doesn't (This includes a NO TRESSPASSING sign)
- He removes anything from your house (reading your diary is not stealing, nor is it illegal)
- He picks your lock to get in
I think we're forgetting what a computer is. It's an appliance. If you want to make analogies, think of it this way: You bought a newspaper. You place it on a table at work. Someone picks it up and reads it, and you're going to try to say they "stole your information" or they "trespassed into the pages of your newspaper"? Even if you took a black marker and wrote down your PIN for your bank card, that's not what your co-workers are interested in. They just want to read the paper.
On the internet, crackers will see you write your PIN in the newspaper, and stealthily try to take the newspaper, read the PIN, burn the newspaper so their fingerprints cannot be traced, and then withdrawl all the money from your bank account. The hacker will see you write the PIN in the newspaper, casually walk past, pick up the newspaper, read the PIN, hand the paper back, and say "You know, you really should write that number in a safer place. But, if you really need to have it in the newspaper, I suggest look at the first six letters of the front page, then lightly write the digits in the middle of the corresponding pages with a pencil, then fill some of the other pages with bogus numbers..."
Remember: crackers crack for personal gain and for kicks, while hackers use their abilities for knowledge and understanding, and to help others fix potential problems.
P.S. Let's just let the crackers (and the media) have the name "Hackers" and give ourselves a better name. Suggestions, anyone?
--------
Is that all the thanks I get for being an overtired jackass?
--------
I'd hate to be redundant and repeat myself, but this is a very creative approach and deserves a better rating than 1.
--------
That will just make it look like we agree that what we are doing is actually illegal. I agree we should defend our own, but we must never go underground, because that defeats the purpose of freedom.
--------
Technically a ZIP, GIF, JPEG, or and compression or imaging format is a computer program. They all contain instructions for the computer to execute. So what's the difference if the program is executed in hardware, or through software? Nothing.
--------
I personally know what kind of crappy lawyers are out there. They're called criminal prosecutors. No offence, but they just aren't that good. We need a fund, so we can afford some good lawyers (instead of the bad ones that IPIX obviously has). By getting free lawyers, we will end up shooting ourselves in the foot [sic].
--------
Yeah. Wouldn't it be just sad if suddenly all of IPIX's programmers either went on strike, or demanded a 200% pay hike!
It's time to see if all those companies (expecially RedHat) who claim they support Open Source software are going to put their money where their mouth is and give us a hand here. It would be great Public Relations. "Big Business Backs the Little Guy" or even "Microsoft gains footing in antitrust trial."
There's a North American Union of Truckers, so why can't there be a Global Union of Open Source Programmers? We can't be a lynch mob, but we also must defend our own and stop anyone from trying to "divide and conquor".
JMHO.
--------
And doesn't Copyright law state that copyrighted material may be used freely in criticism, humour, etc?
--------
"Yes, and here's a version with the black line on the South side instead, if you prefer...And here's the diff file between the two..."
--------
Just a little quote from King of the Hill:
"Uh... No, Mr. Hudson, we don't recommend using propane to fill party balloons.
"Well, yeah it is a gas, but it's in a liquid state.
"Well...okay but, you might want to blow out those candles..."
Propane? Oil? Methanol? KaBOOM?
--------