I've been using PR3 today.
I like Nautilus. It feels good to use, and it's pretty to look at. But there's a few things that bother me.
Mozilla-in-Nautilus doesn't let me download.tgz files, or anything else there is no Gnome MIME type defined for. Also, no context menus to let me choose "copy link" or "save target."
"Medusa". They included gnome-findfast, apparently. I could get over that, except that my RH6.2 desktop already has an slocate database. Woo, now I have two.
Reading large directories (like the RPMS dir on the RH CD-ROM) is SLOW. And this is on my 600MHz, 256MB Athlon system. It needs incremental display badly.
Cannot set background with "solid color." It has to be a pixmap! So the Gnome control center setting I made for solid dark blue gets overridden by Nautilus.
Seems to be unaware of the "menu panel" at the top of the screen; it insists on arranging my little "home" icon under the bar. Also, there's no "tidy icons," only "arrange."
Nautilus does some pretty spiffy anti-aliased text using libart; it should be even spiffer when GDK is set up to use the Render extension (slated for GTK 1.2.9, I think).
It would also be nice if Nautilus was using Gecko stripped of XUL and made to use GTK, rather than all of Mozilla embedded.
And it would be nice if Helix^W Ximian and Eazel would get together on their libs. Nautilus killed Evolution.
That said, it's looking good, actually installs, runs reasonably fast, and hasn't crashed!
A competing fork/implementation would be good for both the Linus version and the "industry consortium" version. It's all GPL, so mix, match and cross-breed at will.
Linus has stated that he cares more about small devices than 'enterprise' features, and the industry really wants the reverse, so that would give everyone something they like.
A company called Skinux is developing an eponymously named GUI for Linux that features anti-aliased fonts, alpha compositing, arbitrary transforms, etc. There's a
screenshot up, and you can browse their site for more info.
It came from Frontpage... it was pulled along on wires...
I'm sure that every cutting-edge, change-the-industry startup company does their web site with Frontpage. I can't wait to see their saran-wrap substrate processors.
The government put the utilities in an impossible position as part of their "deregulation." They fixed the price they could sell at, while allowing the price they buy at to float. Then they shut down SIX power plants. Then demand went up. Hmmm... decreasing supply and increasing demand; let me check ny Econ 101 book. Says here that price will go up. And it did, for the utilities! So they were put into a position of losing money, since they were mandated by law to sell power to anyone who wants it at a fixed price below the market price.
That's why all communist countries made strikes illegal-- because strikers were automatically rebelling against the good of the people, as already determined. That's why it's illegal in Cuba to be absent from work, punishable with imprisonment.
Interestingly, capitalism is the only system that is made healthier by strikes, unions, etc. Peaceful association is a right because it helpf keep people free and limit the power of the government and its deputies. People who are free to engage in collective bargaining -- i.e., strikes -- and chose freely to work or not to work for any government or business -- have control over their own lives. I.e., they are free; or can be if they wish to be. Authoritarian states (like Cuba, the USSR, etc). cannot tolerate that.
I guess Communism is beginning to look alot more appealing, eh? Imagine: State owned business (no monopolies screwing us)
... except, of course, the state, which runs those monopoly businesses.
and a planned economy (what advantage do proprietary standards and IP have?)?
Mmm... central planning. Where's the bread line? I'll get in now. Under a "planned economy," some people get to decide what the rest do, and they have the force of government coercion to make the proles "cooperate." That's "better?"
For 50 years the Monied Elite in America have destroyed Socialist Ideals with a transparent campaign of propaganda
This is almost the exact opposite of the actual situation. For the whole last century, the leaders of the U.S. have denounced "socialism" and "communism" while nurturing it here. Check out the Socialist Party Platform from the early 1900s. Notice how 100% of it is law in one form or another. The U.S. has a mixed economy, but vast sections of it are, in fact, government-controlled and even centrally planned in some cases. Very few markets are "free" in the U.S. Take banking and finance, for instance -- heavily regulated, with a central bank that has the power to define the value of the currency; the dollar is worth more or less depending on how the Fed inflates or deflates the money supply. Agriculture: almost totally government-controlled. They set prices, quotas and provide subsidies. They allow or disallow any particular thing from being produced or sold. Everything is licensed. Power: nearly 100% state-controlled, if not owned, monopolies. Health: largely overnment controlled, nad moreso every day. Since 1965, control has increased steadily. One day, the outright nationalization of health care will be announced. Right now, it's just controlled through medicare, medicaid, FICA, HMO regulations, and lawsuits. Witness the creeping control of government over TV, Radio, computers, the internet, and even political speech -- which is specifically protected by the consitution. Not that the constitution matters a whole lot; it's pretty much just the overheated and failing brakes on the busride to hell these days.
is there anyone who dosnt think that Capatalist Corporatism has gone too far?
Not at this keyboard. Of course, I object to the term "Capitalism" being used that way. I think "Fascism" is a more accurate term. Or perhaps "Corporate Statism." But what we have is is definitely not capitalism -- taxing the users of products on the assumption that they are criminals, for the benefit of a specific group of people? Please. Take that back to Harrison Bergeron where you found it. The problem with using the term "capitalism" to describe a situation where the government takes away the rights/money/freedom on one group in order to give it to another and/or increase its own power is that, it will make people want "not capitalism," i.e., something like socialism or fascism -- systems that are, by definition, the government taking away the rights/money/freedom on one group in order to give it to another and/or increase its own power. I see it as a trap. What I want is more freedom, not more bondage. Corporate statism, socialism, fascism, communism -- all the collectivisms -- result in more bondage and less freedom.
They seem to keep forgetting that, if you really want to be "secure," you can never trust the client. Of course, consumer media consumption will always require a client... so there wil lalways be a way to work around whatever fuckage they put into the product.
I doubt they will ever learn to not do it, though. I do imagine that they will make their next target open-source systems.
> Of course, you need experts. Experts who are willing to judge any fact on its correctness
No, thanks. I don't want the government taking ANY pro-active stance on that. I prefer reactive government, i.e., existing libel, slander and fraud laws.
I imagine this same type of thing happened when Gutenburg took control of the printed word away from those currently in power -- the Church and the government. It was a good thing then, and it's a good thing now. Widespread use of "information technology" can be a boon to citizens wishing to keep its institutions -- government and business -- in check. It's already happening. Internet news puts organizations who are used to controlling the media into a reactive position. It's a wonderful thing! And we don't need any "approved" or "authorized" raters/censors to protect us from "bad" information.
For Linux Gaming to succeed, a number of things will be needed:
Linux users will have to overcome their desire for Open-Source. Gamers probably don't have this problem, but it bears mentioning. See also #3.
Distributiuons will have to adhere to standards. For instance, a game that uses C++ will probably require a special version for RedHat 7, because it's broken. Libc will have to be the same, or compaitble enough. XFree3 vs Xfree4. KDE Vs Gnome Vs whatever for menu icons or base libraries, etc; Etc.
Linux users will have to get used to the idea of paying for software. If the games are ripped off left and right, then there will be no money for the people producing the games. And then there will be no games.
- - - - -
Re:This _would_ make a damn cool bootloader
on
GTK+ without X!
·
· Score: 2
And then you boot the first kernel with...?
- - - - -
Re:This _would_ make a damn cool bootloader
on
GTK+ without X!
·
· Score: 2
I'm not sure how you'd be making a bootloader with GTK+ -- which uses the linux framebuffer, or X.
It's not "BugFree." It's just finally feature-frozen. Read Linus' email, above. Now that it's a released kernel. the API has to stop changing and the developers REALLY, ACTUALLY have to limit themselves to bugfixes. Unless they don't.:)
Apt Apt, a. F. apte, L. aptus, fr. obsolete apere to fasten, to join, to fit, akin to apisci to reach, attain: cf. Gr. ? to fasten, Skr. =apta fit, fr. =ap to reach attain.
1. Fit or fitted; suited; suitable; appropriate.
It runs on Solaris, has a native (although Motif) client, does everything Exchange does (including the vaunted shared calendaring), and has the lowest TCO of any groupware package. This is in contrast to Exchange, which has the highest TCO.
Notice that it says "exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." On the surface, this would seem to allow assignment of "exclusive right" to "discoveries." New math, new genes, etc. Things that were unknown until they were discovered by someone. "Discovered" can mean "invented," as in, "discovered a new way to separate cotton fiber from the rest of the plant." The Cotton Gin was the invention embodying the discovery of an improved method for doing that work. I do not think it is appropriate to patent or copyright genes; how could anyone claim ownership oer something that's been in our bodies (or those of animals, plants, etc.) long before any "discovery" work was even begun? I think this is solved by reading "discovery" with its "invented" meaning; after all, the constitution assigns exclusive right to an inventor for his discovery. After all, no one seriously thinks that other things pre-existing in nature can be assigned exclusively to their first discoverer -- think stars and planets. Discovery of new land is often awarded exclusively to people; this would seem to contradict what I just said. However, people are not awarded exclusive right over Land (i.e., all land-type things), but over a specific bit of land meticulously staked out and measured. The adjoining land, which is more of less identical, may be assigned exclusively to someone else, and often is.
New math is not really invented, as it is a language for describing the behavior of numbers. Pre-existing genes are not invented. However, a novel, strictly man-made gene could be patented. And methods for isolating, duplicating and transferring genes can be patented.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope, still ugly:
http://www.motifzone.net/themes/aqua.jpg
:P
- - - - -
Yeah... no thanks. I'll stick with 6.2 :P
...
Maybe if you compiled all of RH7.1 with "kgcc"
- - - - -
I like Nautilus. It feels good to use, and it's pretty to look at. But there's a few things that bother me.
Nautilus does some pretty spiffy anti-aliased text using libart; it should be even spiffer when GDK is set up to use the Render extension (slated for GTK 1.2.9, I think).
It would also be nice if Nautilus was using Gecko stripped of XUL and made to use GTK, rather than all of Mozilla embedded.
And it would be nice if Helix^W Ximian and Eazel would get together on their libs. Nautilus killed Evolution.
That said, it's looking good, actually installs, runs reasonably fast, and hasn't crashed!
- - - - -
A competing fork/implementation would be good for both the Linus version and the "industry consortium" version. It's all GPL, so mix, match and cross-breed at will.
Linus has stated that he cares more about small devices than 'enterprise' features, and the industry really wants the reverse, so that would give everyone something they like.
Better than using SCO.
- - - - -
A company called Skinux is developing an eponymously named GUI for Linux that features anti-aliased fonts, alpha compositing, arbitrary transforms, etc. There's a
screenshot up, and you can browse their site for more info.
- - - - -
It came from Frontpage... it was pulled along on wires...
I'm sure that every cutting-edge, change-the-industry startup company does their web site with Frontpage. I can't wait to see their saran-wrap substrate processors.
- - - - -
www.nokia.com is temporarily off-line for scheduled maintenance.
www.nokia.com will return by Thursday evening, January 18 2001. (GMT)
- - - - -
The fact is that the temporary (until 2002) freeze on prices was mandated by the power producers themselves
That's actually irrelevant, isn't it? Regardless of whether the industry asked for it, it's still government price controls.
The fixed price was, at the time, above predicted market rates.
Ah, the miracle of central planning.
Just because the companies thought it would work out in their interest, and asked for it specifically, doesn't mean it's a good thing to do.
- - - - -
The government put the utilities in an impossible position as part of their "deregulation." They fixed the price they could sell at, while allowing the price they buy at to float. Then they shut down SIX power plants. Then demand went up. Hmmm... decreasing supply and increasing demand; let me check ny Econ 101 book. Says here that price will go up. And it did, for the utilities! So they were put into a position of losing money, since they were mandated by law to sell power to anyone who wants it at a fixed price below the market price.
- - - - -
Maybe we can use some of the 100,000,000 surplus unused cuecats to do our voting!
On second thought, maybe the chads are better...
- - - - -
That's why all communist countries made strikes illegal-- because strikers were automatically rebelling against the good of the people, as already determined. That's why it's illegal in Cuba to be absent from work, punishable with imprisonment.
Interestingly, capitalism is the only system that is made healthier by strikes, unions, etc. Peaceful association is a right because it helpf keep people free and limit the power of the government and its deputies. People who are free to engage in collective bargaining -- i.e., strikes -- and chose freely to work or not to work for any government or business -- have control over their own lives. I.e., they are free; or can be if they wish to be. Authoritarian states (like Cuba, the USSR, etc). cannot tolerate that.
- - - - -
I guess Communism is beginning to look alot more appealing, eh? Imagine: State owned business (no monopolies screwing us)
... except, of course, the state, which runs those monopoly businesses.
and a planned economy (what advantage do proprietary standards and IP have?)?
Mmm... central planning. Where's the bread line? I'll get in now. Under a "planned economy," some people get to decide what the rest do, and they have the force of government coercion to make the proles "cooperate." That's "better?"
For 50 years the Monied Elite in America have destroyed Socialist Ideals with a transparent campaign of propaganda
This is almost the exact opposite of the actual situation. For the whole last century, the leaders of the U.S. have denounced "socialism" and "communism" while nurturing it here. Check out the Socialist Party Platform from the early 1900s. Notice how 100% of it is law in one form or another. The U.S. has a mixed economy, but vast sections of it are, in fact, government-controlled and even centrally planned in some cases. Very few markets are "free" in the U.S. Take banking and finance, for instance -- heavily regulated, with a central bank that has the power to define the value of the currency; the dollar is worth more or less depending on how the Fed inflates or deflates the money supply. Agriculture: almost totally government-controlled. They set prices, quotas and provide subsidies. They allow or disallow any particular thing from being produced or sold. Everything is licensed. Power: nearly 100% state-controlled, if not owned, monopolies. Health: largely overnment controlled, nad moreso every day. Since 1965, control has increased steadily. One day, the outright nationalization of health care will be announced. Right now, it's just controlled through medicare, medicaid, FICA, HMO regulations, and lawsuits. Witness the creeping control of government over TV, Radio, computers, the internet, and even political speech -- which is specifically protected by the consitution. Not that the constitution matters a whole lot; it's pretty much just the overheated and failing brakes on the busride to hell these days.
- - - - -
is there anyone who dosnt think that Capatalist Corporatism has gone too far?
Not at this keyboard. Of course, I object to the term "Capitalism" being used that way. I think "Fascism" is a more accurate term. Or perhaps "Corporate Statism." But what we have is is definitely not capitalism -- taxing the users of products on the assumption that they are criminals, for the benefit of a specific group of people? Please. Take that back to Harrison Bergeron where you found it. The problem with using the term "capitalism" to describe a situation where the government takes away the rights/money/freedom on one group in order to give it to another and/or increase its own power is that, it will make people want "not capitalism," i.e., something like socialism or fascism -- systems that are, by definition, the government taking away the rights/money/freedom on one group in order to give it to another and/or increase its own power. I see it as a trap. What I want is more freedom, not more bondage. Corporate statism, socialism, fascism, communism -- all the collectivisms -- result in more bondage and less freedom.
- - - - -
They seem to keep forgetting that, if you really want to be "secure," you can never trust the client. Of course, consumer media consumption will always require a client... so there wil lalways be a way to work around whatever fuckage they put into the product.
I doubt they will ever learn to not do it, though. I do imagine that they will make their next target open-source systems.
- - - - -
There is a mirror at http://www.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/mirrors/ftp.mozil la.org/pub/mozilla/releases/mozilla0.7/
- - - - -
cat /dev/dvhs0 | gzip > movie.gz
- - - - -
> Of course, you need experts. Experts who are willing to judge any fact on its correctness
No, thanks. I don't want the government taking ANY pro-active stance on that. I prefer reactive government, i.e., existing libel, slander and fraud laws.
I imagine this same type of thing happened when Gutenburg took control of the printed word away from those currently in power -- the Church and the government. It was a good thing then, and it's a good thing now. Widespread use of "information technology" can be a boon to citizens wishing to keep its institutions -- government and business -- in check. It's already happening. Internet news puts organizations who are used to controlling the media into a reactive position. It's a wonderful thing! And we don't need any "approved" or "authorized" raters/censors to protect us from "bad" information.
- - - - -
> Your point nr 3 goes for most software, not just games.
Well, moreso for games, because they're more ephemeral, single-purpose and short-lived than other kinds of software.
- - - - -
- - - - -
And then you boot the first kernel with...?
- - - - -
I'm not sure how you'd be making a bootloader with GTK+ -- which uses the linux framebuffer, or X.
- - - - -
It's not "BugFree." It's just finally feature-frozen. Read Linus' email, above. Now that it's a released kernel. the API has to stop changing and the developers REALLY, ACTUALLY have to limit themselves to bugfixes. Unless they don't. :)
- - - - -
Apt Apt, a. F. apte, L. aptus, fr. obsolete apere to fasten, to join, to fit, akin to apisci to reach, attain: cf. Gr. ? to fasten, Skr. =apta fit, fr. =ap to reach attain.
1. Fit or fitted; suited; suitable; appropriate.
- - - - -
It runs on Solaris, has a native (although Motif) client, does everything Exchange does (including the vaunted shared calendaring), and has the lowest TCO of any groupware package. This is in contrast to Exchange, which has the highest TCO.
- - - - -
Notice that it says "exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." On the surface, this would seem to allow assignment of "exclusive right" to "discoveries." New math, new genes, etc. Things that were unknown until they were discovered by someone. "Discovered" can mean "invented," as in, "discovered a new way to separate cotton fiber from the rest of the plant." The Cotton Gin was the invention embodying the discovery of an improved method for doing that work. I do not think it is appropriate to patent or copyright genes; how could anyone claim ownership oer something that's been in our bodies (or those of animals, plants, etc.) long before any "discovery" work was even begun? I think this is solved by reading "discovery" with its "invented" meaning; after all, the constitution assigns exclusive right to an inventor for his discovery. After all, no one seriously thinks that other things pre-existing in nature can be assigned exclusively to their first discoverer -- think stars and planets. Discovery of new land is often awarded exclusively to people; this would seem to contradict what I just said. However, people are not awarded exclusive right over Land (i.e., all land-type things), but over a specific bit of land meticulously staked out and measured. The adjoining land, which is more of less identical, may be assigned exclusively to someone else, and often is.
New math is not really invented, as it is a language for describing the behavior of numbers. Pre-existing genes are not invented. However, a novel, strictly man-made gene could be patented. And methods for isolating, duplicating and transferring genes can be patented.
- - - - -