perfect for those too lazy to learn the hotkeys...now all they have to do is learn an equally confusing mouse gesture! why hit backspace instead of the back button on the browser when you can just hold the button and move the mouse?
WSJ: Compact disc shipments fell 7% in the first six months of this year. The recording industry says its data show consumers who download music from the Internet are purchasing fewer CDs
Also note that this says people who download music, not people who download music illegally. This leaves open the possiblity that people (like myself) may also be downloading music legally from bands who do not associate with the RIAA for free rather than buying CDs. I know my whole playlist is made up of songs I got from remix.overclocked.org and mp3.com, and i like it better than the crap I bought pre-boycotting to boot. Just because i downloaded it doesnt mean I stole it.
define useful. Draconian? opressive? interfering? sure...those are "useful" to a small handful of people. But to the masses it makes something utilitarian become considerably more difficult to do anything with.
The question is not will we be able to resist
DRM, but rather, who will be empowered by it?
With the right laws, the answer could be "the
public". It will be hard to get the right laws,
given the evil influences of Microsoft and the
entertainment industry, but it's not a physical
or moral impossibility.
That's where you're even more wrong. Resisting the use of DRM is important. Your comments remind me of the people who are just accepting any restrictions of fredom and "guilty until proven innocent" legislation or motion made since 91101. What we need is a serious revamp of copyright laws to expand fair use and decrease the time of copyrights. Joe Musician creates music in his computer these days or his garage and can make his own music to distribute easily. Therefore, pandering to the music industry, for example, and begging for their table scraps is stupid when there are lots of bands out there who are as good or better who just don't get airplay. Your defeatist attitude towards the future of freedom from DRM systems is not helping.
Don't get carried away admiring the Chinese government and institutions for these "innovations" quite yet.
Free Tibet, then let's talk about basic human rights for the people of China.
Remember, this is an extremely oppressive government that will use technology to harm people. I hope they fail.
Meanwhile, let's completely ignore the fact that if we can get americans into these chinese RISC chips are any good, we could damage the industry giants that threaten our own freedoms silently like a thief in the night! sounds like a brilliant plan, jerry...
no...not true. people with either no reason other than email to have a comptuer buy a computer just for aol, or people who just use it for chat. Most people however use the computer for other things too, as do the people who bought the computers just for AOL, who end up also learning to play Solitaire.
its not my fault you're a presumtuous bastard. i don't care about GNU as an OS. I care about Linux. Presuming that I dont' care about the rest of that shit is the most ignorant thing you could possibly do. The simple fact that i don't give a flying rats ass whether Stallman wants to pout in the corner because nobody wants to call Linus' operating system by Stallman's name does not mean that i do not care about the freedom of information. Just because I hate stallmann's attitude and think he's an arrogant prick doesnt mean that I think the GNU project's accomplishments are shit. It just means that there's no fucking way i think he desrves to rename Linus' operating system, and as such i will never refer to it in any but a sarcastic manner as GNU/Linux. Take the stick out of your ass and get on with your life.
You're not a troll for defending stallman, you're a troll for being a forceful asshole about it. I don't care what GNU is. It could be a top-down re-implementation of the Eiffel Tower for all I care, but it doesnt change the fact taht thats not what I said. I said that GNU is not the only people capable of these things. Whithout GNU, somebody else would have written them. Thats what I'm saying. And if they wanted to give them out for free, they shouldnt be bitching when Linus chooses to use them in his operating system. See, you're getting down to exactly why I don't like stallman and his petty infighting with the software developing community. You put out free software, someone forks it, and calls it something else. Thats what Linux is. He took a bunch of free software, and as the license allows, he integrated them into his operating system, which is distinctly not GNU. If every program that uses a shared library doesnt have to have that appended to the name, then there's no damn good reason why anyone should feel compelled to call Linux by stallman's petty wishes. I don't mean to berate his work, because I realize the GNU tools are excellent. I do however have vehement objections to his whiny, self-centered bitching. Just because Linus wouldnt have been the person who wrote the tools had GNU not made them doesnt make him any less a man than he is. It simply means, give Linus the credit he deserves, and if you want to push the bitch-factor to the limit, call it "linux with the GNU toolset" or something. Linux was initially Linus' compilation of programs, tools, and other software that comprise an operating system. He called that package Linux (after canning the name Freax). That's enough for me, and it should be enough for anyone who wants to use the thing.
dude, i dont want this to turn into a flame war or a giant trolling or any other such crap (despite your efforts, it seems), but it was by sheer chance that the FSF's GNU project provided the tools. If they hadn't somebody else would have. Just because Linux uses the GNU tools and various GNU elements does in no way make it the GNU operating system. Linus did not complete the GNU project, he created Linux. GNU is the bastard stepchild of unix consisting of the HURD kernel, which I've never even seen anyone get running. Just because richard stallman trolls almost incessantly for attention does not make him correct. You're using completely inaccurate analogies. Software is like cooking, not like construction. FSF created a sauce, Linus provided the chicken. If I make bbq chicken, i could make my own sauce, but unless it would be significantly different, why would I when its easily and cheaply available? Linus found a sauce that fit his tastes, and added it to his chicken. That doesnt make it GNU chicken. End of discussion.
actually I disagree. Linus did not fail to write a compiler at all...to fail to write a compiler, one must first intend to create one. Your post should say "neglected" or "did not need" to write a compiler. However, Linus being the practical man that he is, set out to create a useable operating system using whatever tools were available freely to him as parts of it and a kernel he wrote himself, and being of the opinion that his creation should be freely available to those who wanted to use, modify and scrutinize it, made it free to the public and opensource. GNU has had nearly 20 years to get a useable kernel, but has failed. Their goal included a full unix-like operating system. Linus only set out to make a kernel that could be used as the core of a unix-like operating system, and just happened by chance to use the GNU tools in it. I'm not saying that the GNU project hasn't brought forth several meritous elements to the world of free software, especially the compilers. However, this does not make them any better than anyone else who creates free software, because if everyone had to create a compiler to be respected, then nobody would have time to embark on successful, useful, and widespread projects like Linux. Get off your pro-GNU soapbox and join the pro-free-software throng. Otherwise you'll just be another seething idealist who spends all his time quibbling over semantics rather than accomplishing anything. If Linus wants to call his creation Linux, then I'll call it Linux. Even if you could technically argue he's a fork of GNU, he has the right to call it whatever the hell he wants, and i'll respect that. Stallman whining about wanting the spotlight (in more obfuscated terms) won't change the fact that if it weren't for Linus, Free Operating System would be a much more limited concept.
NASA is hardly an authority on what works best for my car. Sure, it may be better for various conversions and such, but how often do I care how many feet or meters i've driven? For me and for millions of americans, miles are better than kilometers. Same goes for Linux users, IMHO.
I just don't listen to music that i haven't already previously purchased the CD of anymore, unless i legally downloaded it for free. Fueling the RIAA is not something i care to do, whether it be fuelling their arguement that there is demand for their garbage, or whether it be fuelling them with money. I know this is redundant, but support local music.
actually, they want them to be forgotten. otherwise if you listened to good music from times gone by, you wouldnt buy the horrible shit they're pushing nowadays.
well put. Linus created Linux, which is not only a useable kernel, but he also managed to get that kernel packaged by users into a freely distributable package which is gaining users all the time and is a viable operating system. The goal of the GNU project was the same thing more or less, but Linus is the one who accomplished the most important step. The tools are extremely important, but without a kernel to run them on/distribute them with that doesnt suck, they're simply not that useful, especially unless people are making software for it.
1: because Linus does 2: Because Linus succeeded where GNU failed 3: Because GNU/Linux is too damn long to say 4: Because I don't call programs made/depending on MS Visual Studio 6 "MSVS/[program name]" 5: and finally, because Linux is common usage as the name of the OS. This is like trying to force the metric system on me when everything around me right down to my car's odometer is in miles. Let Stallman seethe in his jealous corner...I respect what he's done in creating the FSF, but that doesnt make me want to pander to his ego.
why would anyone want anything along the lines of outlook? If I want mail, I'll use a mail program. If I wan't a calendar or planner, i'll use a program that does those things. Having a giant program that sucks and does a billion things you probably don't want or need isn't the answer...just because people are used to it doesnt make it a good program or idea.
you're implying that because they sell crippled hardware that they should be able to control what you do with it thereafter. If I buy a CD player, am I only able to buy one label or band or independent record store or so on's music? absolutely not! Hacking an xbox to run Linux is nothing more than a legitimate modification to what is essentially a computer, and as it is owned by you, your property to modify as you see fit. This is no different from me dropping a Cobra engine in my Crown Victoria because I choose to do so.
this implies that there is management who can handle running this, or want to. most Managers don't know networking from a hole in the ground. Somebody's gotta set up the desktops and workstations, and keep them running...even if the software can handle it, hardware needs troubleshooting every now and then too
Until they let me do whatever I want with that bandwith, including running a domain server out of my house then there's no point. I'm frankly sick of the business model being used to justify it...if you're on the internet, the fact is that all boxes should be peers. Any company providing access to web sites but not allowing you to host the same isn't providing true internet service...they're just fetching pages from the internet for you.
Slashdot Mirror
perfect for those too lazy to learn the hotkeys...now all they have to do is learn an equally confusing mouse gesture! why hit backspace instead of the back button on the browser when you can just hold the button and move the mouse?
WSJ: Compact disc shipments fell 7% in the first six months of this year. The recording industry says its data show consumers who download music from the Internet are purchasing fewer CDs
Also note that this says people who download music, not people who download music illegally. This leaves open the possiblity that people (like myself) may also be downloading music legally from bands who do not associate with the RIAA for free rather than buying CDs. I know my whole playlist is made up of songs I got from remix.overclocked.org and mp3.com, and i like it better than the crap I bought pre-boycotting to boot. Just because i downloaded it doesnt mean I stole it.
DRM is coming -- it's too useful not to catch on.
define useful. Draconian? opressive? interfering? sure...those are "useful" to a small handful of people. But to the masses it makes something utilitarian become considerably more difficult to do anything with.
The question is not will we be able to resist DRM, but rather, who will be empowered by it? With the right laws, the answer could be "the public". It will be hard to get the right laws, given the evil influences of Microsoft and the entertainment industry, but it's not a physical or moral impossibility.
That's where you're even more wrong. Resisting the use of DRM is important. Your comments remind me of the people who are just accepting any restrictions of fredom and "guilty until proven innocent" legislation or motion made since 91101. What we need is a serious revamp of copyright laws to expand fair use and decrease the time of copyrights. Joe Musician creates music in his computer these days or his garage and can make his own music to distribute easily. Therefore, pandering to the music industry, for example, and begging for their table scraps is stupid when there are lots of bands out there who are as good or better who just don't get airplay. Your defeatist attitude towards the future of freedom from DRM systems is not helping.
Don't get carried away admiring the Chinese government and institutions for these "innovations" quite yet.
Free Tibet, then let's talk about basic human rights for the people of China.
Remember, this is an extremely oppressive government that will use technology to harm people. I hope they fail.
Meanwhile, let's completely ignore the fact that if we can get americans into these chinese RISC chips are any good, we could damage the industry giants that threaten our own freedoms silently like a thief in the night! sounds like a brilliant plan, jerry...
Bring on the Dragon!
I mean, it's not rocket science...oh, wait...
no...not true. people with either no reason other than email to have a comptuer buy a computer just for aol, or people who just use it for chat. Most people however use the computer for other things too, as do the people who bought the computers just for AOL, who end up also learning to play Solitaire.
its not my fault you're a presumtuous bastard. i don't care about GNU as an OS. I care about Linux. Presuming that I dont' care about the rest of that shit is the most ignorant thing you could possibly do. The simple fact that i don't give a flying rats ass whether Stallman wants to pout in the corner because nobody wants to call Linus' operating system by Stallman's name does not mean that i do not care about the freedom of information. Just because I hate stallmann's attitude and think he's an arrogant prick doesnt mean that I think the GNU project's accomplishments are shit. It just means that there's no fucking way i think he desrves to rename Linus' operating system, and as such i will never refer to it in any but a sarcastic manner as GNU/Linux. Take the stick out of your ass and get on with your life.
They weren't technically operating systems
You're not a troll for defending stallman, you're a troll for being a forceful asshole about it. I don't care what GNU is. It could be a top-down re-implementation of the Eiffel Tower for all I care, but it doesnt change the fact taht thats not what I said. I said that GNU is not the only people capable of these things. Whithout GNU, somebody else would have written them. Thats what I'm saying. And if they wanted to give them out for free, they shouldnt be bitching when Linus chooses to use them in his operating system. See, you're getting down to exactly why I don't like stallman and his petty infighting with the software developing community. You put out free software, someone forks it, and calls it something else. Thats what Linux is. He took a bunch of free software, and as the license allows, he integrated them into his operating system, which is distinctly not GNU. If every program that uses a shared library doesnt have to have that appended to the name, then there's no damn good reason why anyone should feel compelled to call Linux by stallman's petty wishes. I don't mean to berate his work, because I realize the GNU tools are excellent. I do however have vehement objections to his whiny, self-centered bitching. Just because Linus wouldnt have been the person who wrote the tools had GNU not made them doesnt make him any less a man than he is. It simply means, give Linus the credit he deserves, and if you want to push the bitch-factor to the limit, call it "linux with the GNU toolset" or something. Linux was initially Linus' compilation of programs, tools, and other software that comprise an operating system. He called that package Linux (after canning the name Freax). That's enough for me, and it should be enough for anyone who wants to use the thing.
dude, i dont want this to turn into a flame war or a giant trolling or any other such crap (despite your efforts, it seems), but it was by sheer chance that the FSF's GNU project provided the tools. If they hadn't somebody else would have. Just because Linux uses the GNU tools and various GNU elements does in no way make it the GNU operating system. Linus did not complete the GNU project, he created Linux. GNU is the bastard stepchild of unix consisting of the HURD kernel, which I've never even seen anyone get running. Just because richard stallman trolls almost incessantly for attention does not make him correct. You're using completely inaccurate analogies. Software is like cooking, not like construction. FSF created a sauce, Linus provided the chicken. If I make bbq chicken, i could make my own sauce, but unless it would be significantly different, why would I when its easily and cheaply available? Linus found a sauce that fit his tastes, and added it to his chicken. That doesnt make it GNU chicken. End of discussion.
actually I disagree. Linus did not fail to write a compiler at all...to fail to write a compiler, one must first intend to create one. Your post should say "neglected" or "did not need" to write a compiler. However, Linus being the practical man that he is, set out to create a useable operating system using whatever tools were available freely to him as parts of it and a kernel he wrote himself, and being of the opinion that his creation should be freely available to those who wanted to use, modify and scrutinize it, made it free to the public and opensource. GNU has had nearly 20 years to get a useable kernel, but has failed. Their goal included a full unix-like operating system. Linus only set out to make a kernel that could be used as the core of a unix-like operating system, and just happened by chance to use the GNU tools in it. I'm not saying that the GNU project hasn't brought forth several meritous elements to the world of free software, especially the compilers. However, this does not make them any better than anyone else who creates free software, because if everyone had to create a compiler to be respected, then nobody would have time to embark on successful, useful, and widespread projects like Linux. Get off your pro-GNU soapbox and join the pro-free-software throng. Otherwise you'll just be another seething idealist who spends all his time quibbling over semantics rather than accomplishing anything. If Linus wants to call his creation Linux, then I'll call it Linux. Even if you could technically argue he's a fork of GNU, he has the right to call it whatever the hell he wants, and i'll respect that. Stallman whining about wanting the spotlight (in more obfuscated terms) won't change the fact that if it weren't for Linus, Free Operating System would be a much more limited concept.
NASA is hardly an authority on what works best for my car. Sure, it may be better for various conversions and such, but how often do I care how many feet or meters i've driven? For me and for millions of americans, miles are better than kilometers. Same goes for Linux users, IMHO.
I just don't listen to music that i haven't already previously purchased the CD of anymore, unless i legally downloaded it for free. Fueling the RIAA is not something i care to do, whether it be fuelling their arguement that there is demand for their garbage, or whether it be fuelling them with money. I know this is redundant, but support local music.
actually, they want them to be forgotten. otherwise if you listened to good music from times gone by, you wouldnt buy the horrible shit they're pushing nowadays.
well put. Linus created Linux, which is not only a useable kernel, but he also managed to get that kernel packaged by users into a freely distributable package which is gaining users all the time and is a viable operating system. The goal of the GNU project was the same thing more or less, but Linus is the one who accomplished the most important step. The tools are extremely important, but without a kernel to run them on/distribute them with that doesnt suck, they're simply not that useful, especially unless people are making software for it.
1: because Linus does
2: Because Linus succeeded where GNU failed
3: Because GNU/Linux is too damn long to say
4: Because I don't call programs made/depending on MS Visual Studio 6 "MSVS/[program name]"
5: and finally, because Linux is common usage as the name of the OS. This is like trying to force the metric system on me when everything around me right down to my car's odometer is in miles. Let Stallman seethe in his jealous corner...I respect what he's done in creating the FSF, but that doesnt make me want to pander to his ego.
why would anyone want anything along the lines of outlook? If I want mail, I'll use a mail program. If I wan't a calendar or planner, i'll use a program that does those things. Having a giant program that sucks and does a billion things you probably don't want or need isn't the answer...just because people are used to it doesnt make it a good program or idea.
Looks like Compaq's hiding their shady business behind the HP name again...
Step 1: Control HP
Step 2: Publicly announce evil plans under HP's name
Step 3: Profit????
you're implying that because they sell crippled hardware that they should be able to control what you do with it thereafter. If I buy a CD player, am I only able to buy one label or band or independent record store or so on's music? absolutely not! Hacking an xbox to run Linux is nothing more than a legitimate modification to what is essentially a computer, and as it is owned by you, your property to modify as you see fit. This is no different from me dropping a Cobra engine in my Crown Victoria because I choose to do so.
this implies that there is management who can handle running this, or want to. most Managers don't know networking from a hole in the ground. Somebody's gotta set up the desktops and workstations, and keep them running...even if the software can handle it, hardware needs troubleshooting every now and then too
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1149.txt
Until they let me do whatever I want with that bandwith, including running a domain server out of my house then there's no point. I'm frankly sick of the business model being used to justify it...if you're on the internet, the fact is that all boxes should be peers. Any company providing access to web sites but not allowing you to host the same isn't providing true internet service...they're just fetching pages from the internet for you.
Ontario, here I come!
i agree with the learning part...though i don't really think certification is the answer. I think that what needs to happen is people need to:
-look at resumes for experience
-provide ways to get experience, like internships or apprenticeships
Without these in place, certification is just another money pit of memorization.
thank you...much better. i had intended to hit the "plain old text" option but forgot.