he looked at his stocks and realized he was no longer rich enough to fund us.
Sounds like the non-profit foundation I worked at. When the bubble burst, much of our funding dried up, as our formerly-rich funders suddenly started feeling the pinch of tightened belts.
I am curious, where *else* are you going where you don't have to deal with the suits and PHB's? How will new education solve that?
I don't expect it will. But at least I'll have a few years until I have to deal with all that crap again. And at least programming will be fun again, even if my day job isn't.
Alot of dot commers are bitter is because they were truly just in it for the money.
Perhaps. But a lot more of us are bitter because we're not in it for the money, and the industry doesn't appreciate the hard work and dedication we've put into our art. Many of us are tired of being pushed around, disrespected, and generally shat upon. We're tired of pissing away our weekends, vacations, and lives just to watch some greedy, no-talent ass-kissers get the respect and appreciation that should be ours.
I'm not into programming for the money; I was doing it for years, for my own entertainment, before money ever entered the picture. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, money is what ruined it. The industry is being taken over by people who are in it just for the money, and who see the rest of us as nothing more than resources to be used up and thrown away.
I am 16. By all accounts, I should be some dork cracking away at IIS boxen in between my job at Subway
Ye gods no! You should be enjoying being a kid while you still can. Don't rush into being an adult - you'll get there soon enough, and then you'll be stuck with it.
I jumped on the 'net bandwagon in '94, a few years earlier than many. For seven years, I worked twelve hour days, often with no weekends off and with very little vacation. In return for my dedication and hard work, I was treated like a piece of furniture - shuffled from project to project according to the whims of upper management, and discarded like an old newspaper when that was more convenient for the bean counters.
Bitter? Hell yes I'm bitter. I've wasted twenty years of my life, spending every spare moment teaching myself to be a better programmer, when the only skill that gets rewarded in this industry is that of piling a mixture of buzzwords and bullshit. Time and again, I've watched some of the most talented programmers around get fucked over, simply because some hotshot wannabee was a little better than they at self-promotion, and a little less scrupulous about being honest.
Just like the music and movie industries, the computer industry was started by people who sincerely loved their art, and like those industries, it's in the process of being slowly dehumanized and made into a commodity by bean counters in suits. There's no longer any place in the industry for people who do what they do for the joy of it.
I'm a bit luckier than most - having served in the military, I have some educational benefits that I can use to retrain. I have an "escape hatch" of sorts. And, I intend to use it - I'm sick of this whole sordid mess, and I'm getting out of it.
I ordered from McDonald's once, and told the kid behind the counter that my order was for take out. They handed me my food on a plastic tray, so I left with it.
It depends on what you played. A quarter would let me play Time Pilot for basically as long as I felt like it. A quarter in Stargate, however, would last less than two minutes.:-)
In his keynote, Steve Jobs said that Rendezvous would be an open standard
s/would be/is/
Rendezvous is just Apple's marketing name for their Zeroconf implementation, just as FireWire is just their marketroid-friendly name for IEEE1394. What's in a name? Think different!
Using Aqua should give the game a somewhat better appearance on OS X
Why would you think that? The underlying problem here is that the game art is ugly; using a different API to copy the bitmaps into video RAM is not going to help with that.
Linux is a major desktop platform, with user numbers comparable to those of MacOS.
You're dreaming. Linux is about a big a player on the desktop as Macs are in the server room. Numerically, the number of Linux installations is comparable to that of MacOS, but the majority of those by far are server installations. Similarly, the vast majority of Macs in use are desktop machines.
And much of that wonderful software that makes MacOSX such a nice platform comes from that community.
Again, you're dreaming. Lots of well made and reliable low-level software does indeed come from the GNU and OSS communities. Lots of it is indeed in OS X. But the parts that make OS X such a nice platform, rather than Just Another Generic UNIX, are from Apple.
It's not all that good, either. It's kind of like vi; incredibly powerful, once you climb the learning curve - but damn, what a steep curve that is. Not everyone will make it to the top.
In fact, I think that Blender's failure as a commercial product was, in large part, because of its hard to grok interface. For better or for worse, people in general are used to instant gratification; that's why clippy is on millions of computers, and emacs isn't.
You state that as if it's a fact, when it's that very question, whether "cyberspace" should have its own set of rules, that is the subject of this debate.
If a group of terrorists gather on IRC to plan an attack, is the crime that they're planning to commit changed in any way by the fact that they planned it in "cyberspace," instead of using telephones? If someone is killed with a hammer blow to the head, is the murderer more or less guilty than if he'd used a gun or a knife? If someone burns down a house, does his level of guilt depend on whether he started the fire by rubbing two sticks together, or with a Bic lighter?
To put it more generally, if technology creates a new means of committing a crime, without changing the basic nature of the act itself, then what need is there to create new laws? What useful purpose does it serve to outlaw specific methods of committing a crime, when the basic crime itself is already well covered by our existing laws?
You're getting too caught up in the specifics of the analogy. Here's a better one:
Compare the act of defacing a web site with that of spray-painting a brick and mortar store front. Graffiti is basically the same, whether it's on a web site or in the real world. We don't need a new law that applies specifically to the former; instead, we should simply charge the kiddies with vandalism, just as we would if they did the latter.
The article doesn't say that the internet doesn't change anything, nor does it say that absolutely no new laws will be needed. The article is saying that in some cases, we don't need new laws because existing laws already apply. Murder was already illegal when guns were first invented; it was not necessary to create a new law to make murder by gunshot illegal as well.
It would not surprise me at all to find documented cases of people getting in trouble for "dui" in the 19th century.
For what, getting your horse drunk? You could pass out cold on horseback, and still make it home safely, because the horse knows its own way home. Of course, you'd wake up in the barn...
Re:And you wonder why people hate Linux Supporters
on
DishPVR 721 Review
·
· Score: 1
Nobody is asking them to do this.
Quite the contrary, I'm afraid. Look around - Plenty of folks here are demanding source code before it's even been established that there is any legal obligation to release it, and few of the ones who are loudly complaining are making any distinction at all between kernel modification and device drivers. They don't really care whether they're entitled to source code or not; they want what they want, and they want it now.
It's this small but vocal minority of complainers the subject line of this thread refers to. These people, because they're so vocal about demanding source code from anyone who even thinks about using Linux in their product, are the ones who give the whole movement a bad name.
Ambiguity helps nobody, and saying 'f**k you' to the (presumably polite) enquiry
Unwarranted assumptions are not particularly helpful, either. We have *nothing* to go on here, besides the submitter's original statement, which was highly confrontational in tone. Judging solely by that, as I have nothing else upon which to base my opinion, I think it's likely that he simply called up their phone drones and demanded source code. I also think it's quite likely that the people he talked to were simply front-line tech support people who had no idea what he was talking about.
Why do you assume they've modified the kernel?
on
DishPVR 721 Review
·
· Score: 1
What makes you so certain that they're using a modified kernel? It's far, far more likely that they've written dynamically loadable device drivers for their hardware. And, if that is the case, they're not legally obligated to release the code for their drivers.
Re:And you wonder why people hate Linux Supporters
on
DishPVR 721 Review
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Not everything is GPL.
Excellent point.
If they've made modifications to the Linux kernel itself, they're legally obligated to release their modified kernel source. But in all likelihood, all they've done is develop dynamically loaded device drivers for their hardware. If that's the case, then there's no legal requirement whatsoever for them to release their device driver code.
...because you chose to install your custom Apache in the same location as the stock version that Apple maintains. Apple didn't force you to install it there - you made that choice. The update may have broken your PHP install, but that's only because you put a big sign on it that said "break me."
If you walk out into traffic, you'll get run over. If you hit yourself on the head with a hammer, you'll get a concussion. If you install Apache over top of the copy that Apple provides, then when (not if) they update their install, yours will be overwritten. In each case, the answer is simple: don't fscking do that!
Good lord people, think! This isn't rocket science. It's simple. If you ask for problems, you'll get them.
Slashdot Mirror
he looked at his stocks and realized he was no longer rich enough to fund us.
Sounds like the non-profit foundation I worked at. When the bubble burst, much of our funding dried up, as our formerly-rich funders suddenly started feeling the pinch of tightened belts.
I am curious, where *else* are you going where you don't have to deal with the suits and PHB's? How will new education solve that?
I don't expect it will. But at least I'll have a few years until I have to deal with all that crap again. And at least programming will be fun again, even if my day job isn't.
Alot of dot commers are bitter is because they were truly just in it for the money.
Perhaps. But a lot more of us are bitter because we're not in it for the money, and the industry doesn't appreciate the hard work and dedication we've put into our art. Many of us are tired of being pushed around, disrespected, and generally shat upon. We're tired of pissing away our weekends, vacations, and lives just to watch some greedy, no-talent ass-kissers get the respect and appreciation that should be ours.
I'm not into programming for the money; I was doing it for years, for my own entertainment, before money ever entered the picture. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, money is what ruined it. The industry is being taken over by people who are in it just for the money, and who see the rest of us as nothing more than resources to be used up and thrown away.
I am 16. By all accounts, I should be some dork cracking away at IIS boxen in between my job at Subway
Ye gods no! You should be enjoying being a kid while you still can. Don't rush into being an adult - you'll get there soon enough, and then you'll be stuck with it.
I jumped on the 'net bandwagon in '94, a few years earlier than many. For seven years, I worked twelve hour days, often with no weekends off and with very little vacation. In return for my dedication and hard work, I was treated like a piece of furniture - shuffled from project to project according to the whims of upper management, and discarded like an old newspaper when that was more convenient for the bean counters.
Bitter? Hell yes I'm bitter. I've wasted twenty years of my life, spending every spare moment teaching myself to be a better programmer, when the only skill that gets rewarded in this industry is that of piling a mixture of buzzwords and bullshit. Time and again, I've watched some of the most talented programmers around get fucked over, simply because some hotshot wannabee was a little better than they at self-promotion, and a little less scrupulous about being honest.
Just like the music and movie industries, the computer industry was started by people who sincerely loved their art, and like those industries, it's in the process of being slowly dehumanized and made into a commodity by bean counters in suits. There's no longer any place in the industry for people who do what they do for the joy of it.
I'm a bit luckier than most - having served in the military, I have some educational benefits that I can use to retrain. I have an "escape hatch" of sorts. And, I intend to use it - I'm sick of this whole sordid mess, and I'm getting out of it.
So what's the difference between NASA's duct tape, and the "normal" type I use?
About $150 a roll.
Certainly writing a Cocoa app is tying yourself into nonfree software.
Not if you port it to GNUStep
Seems to me you may want to rethink your analogy. There's a lot more Christians in the world than lions these days...
I ordered from McDonald's once, and told the kid behind the counter that my order was for take out. They handed me my food on a plastic tray, so I left with it.
It depends on what you played. A quarter would let me play Time Pilot for basically as long as I felt like it. A quarter in Stargate, however, would last less than two minutes. :-)
In his keynote, Steve Jobs said that Rendezvous would be an open standard
s/would be/is/
Rendezvous is just Apple's marketing name for their Zeroconf implementation, just as FireWire is just their marketroid-friendly name for IEEE1394. What's in a name? Think different!
the 30$ I paid the first time doesn't cover the royalties?
Seriously? No, it didn't, because the version you paid for didn't include MPEG 4.
Using Aqua should give the game a somewhat better appearance on OS X
Why would you think that? The underlying problem here is that the game art is ugly; using a different API to copy the bitmaps into video RAM is not going to help with that.
Linux is a major desktop platform, with user numbers comparable to those of MacOS.
You're dreaming. Linux is about a big a player on the desktop as Macs are in the server room. Numerically, the number of Linux installations is comparable to that of MacOS, but the majority of those by far are server installations. Similarly, the vast majority of Macs in use are desktop machines.
And much of that wonderful software that makes MacOSX such a nice platform comes from that community.
Again, you're dreaming. Lots of well made and reliable low-level software does indeed come from the GNU and OSS communities. Lots of it is indeed in OS X. But the parts that make OS X such a nice platform, rather than Just Another Generic UNIX, are from Apple.
Good lord, man, his sig is a joke. It's not meant to be taken so seriously, so lighten up already.
But to be honest, it is not all that bad.
It's not all that good, either. It's kind of like vi; incredibly powerful, once you climb the learning curve - but damn, what a steep curve that is. Not everyone will make it to the top.
In fact, I think that Blender's failure as a commercial product was, in large part, because of its hard to grok interface. For better or for worse, people in general are used to instant gratification; that's why clippy is on millions of computers, and emacs isn't.
Cyberspace has it's own set of rules
You state that as if it's a fact, when it's that very question, whether "cyberspace" should have its own set of rules, that is the subject of this debate.
If a group of terrorists gather on IRC to plan an attack, is the crime that they're planning to commit changed in any way by the fact that they planned it in "cyberspace," instead of using telephones? If someone is killed with a hammer blow to the head, is the murderer more or less guilty than if he'd used a gun or a knife? If someone burns down a house, does his level of guilt depend on whether he started the fire by rubbing two sticks together, or with a Bic lighter?
To put it more generally, if technology creates a new means of committing a crime, without changing the basic nature of the act itself, then what need is there to create new laws? What useful purpose does it serve to outlaw specific methods of committing a crime, when the basic crime itself is already well covered by our existing laws?
You're getting too caught up in the specifics of the analogy. Here's a better one:
Compare the act of defacing a web site with that of spray-painting a brick and mortar store front. Graffiti is basically the same, whether it's on a web site or in the real world. We don't need a new law that applies specifically to the former; instead, we should simply charge the kiddies with vandalism, just as we would if they did the latter.
The article doesn't say that the internet doesn't change anything, nor does it say that absolutely no new laws will be needed. The article is saying that in some cases, we don't need new laws because existing laws already apply. Murder was already illegal when guns were first invented; it was not necessary to create a new law to make murder by gunshot illegal as well.
It would not surprise me at all to find documented cases of people getting in trouble for "dui" in the 19th century.
For what, getting your horse drunk? You could pass out cold on horseback, and still make it home safely, because the horse knows its own way home. Of course, you'd wake up in the barn...
Nobody is asking them to do this.
Quite the contrary, I'm afraid. Look around - Plenty of folks here are demanding source code before it's even been established that there is any legal obligation to release it, and few of the ones who are loudly complaining are making any distinction at all between kernel modification and device drivers. They don't really care whether they're entitled to source code or not; they want what they want, and they want it now.
It's this small but vocal minority of complainers the subject line of this thread refers to. These people, because they're so vocal about demanding source code from anyone who even thinks about using Linux in their product, are the ones who give the whole movement a bad name.
Ambiguity helps nobody, and saying 'f**k you' to the (presumably polite) enquiry
Unwarranted assumptions are not particularly helpful, either. We have *nothing* to go on here, besides the submitter's original statement, which was highly confrontational in tone. Judging solely by that, as I have nothing else upon which to base my opinion, I think it's likely that he simply called up their phone drones and demanded source code. I also think it's quite likely that the people he talked to were simply front-line tech support people who had no idea what he was talking about.
What makes you so certain that they're using a modified kernel? It's far, far more likely that they've written dynamically loadable device drivers for their hardware. And, if that is the case, they're not legally obligated to release the code for their drivers.
Not everything is GPL.
Excellent point.
If they've made modifications to the Linux kernel itself, they're legally obligated to release their modified kernel source. But in all likelihood, all they've done is develop dynamically loaded device drivers for their hardware. If that's the case, then there's no legal requirement whatsoever for them to release their device driver code.
Then the 10.1.4 update broke PHP...
...because you chose to install your custom Apache in the same location as the stock version that Apple maintains. Apple didn't force you to install it there - you made that choice. The update may have broken your PHP install, but that's only because you put a big sign on it that said "break me."
If you walk out into traffic, you'll get run over. If you hit yourself on the head with a hammer, you'll get a concussion. If you install Apache over top of the copy that Apple provides, then when (not if) they update their install, yours will be overwritten. In each case, the answer is simple: don't fscking do that!
Good lord people, think! This isn't rocket science. It's simple. If you ask for problems, you'll get them.
It runs as a daemon, and is started by a shell script, just like on every other UNIX.
No, of course not. It only overwrites stuff if you installed it in the same location as Apple's stuff.