I know to some this will sound like a fanatic or hardline approach, but you really don't need them anymore.
I'm finishing up the prep work on a internet radio station and part of that has been to contact every single artist I'd like to play to ask for permission to use their copyrighted material fee-free. This has been (no surprise) a great experience and just adds fuel to my belief that big industry is missing the boat. Artists are releasing their own music and as the web becomes a more and more common means of distribution and exposure the talent pool is going to get much bigger and the artist to listener ratio similarly with be getting smaller.
This is a (at least for now) nightmare for the established industry but is a lot better for the artists and the listeners. As distribution falls into the reach of the average musician music just gets a little more real. I haven't bought a pop album in a long time, but I'm more then happy to send off 10 bucks for a disk from a favorite artist and it feels pretty cool know where its going (and a little more about where it coming from!).
What I'd like to see is an association for fee-free broadcasting, so webcasters who don't have the time or inclination can look up artists who think the exposure is reward enough and stick it to the RIAA at the same time. Reward artists who care.
Yep, its going to take a while for comments like this to be 'heard' but there is still a lot of unnecessary complication in most all Linux distributions (extra software, then application naming and then file system hierarchy).
Its just a wait game at this point and people who are already using its not very troublesome (but sometimes amusing).
You've obviously been watching too much television. Back in the early 80's things were different. Bad boys got in fist fights and had liquor. We did things bad girls liked. Mostly it was about how incredibly horny we were and what kinds of lengths we'd got to. It still impresses girls if you go out of your way for them, only out of high school that would look more like buying flowers or taking her out to a fancy restaurant.
Maybe your should open up to your slightly more primitive side? Underneath were not nearly so civilized.
DOS attacks are the internet equivalent of standing outside someones home playing heavy metal at 140 dB.
Obviously you missed the whole heavy metal thing. Standing outside of someones home playing heavy metal would be about picking up chicks (most likely the daughter of the family who's house your serenading). The SCO/DDOS equivalent would be something like driving around in a drunken stupor taking mailboxes off their posts with a baseball bat (or something equally annoying).
I'm surprised how little about Fee Waivers I've seen. I'm aware of one lable (Artemis Records) who had agreed to waive their fees (statutory licensing).
Why not reward companies (or individuals) who are willing to be more flexable? I'll be sending out a flurry of requests of the next month (preparing to launch my own micro internet radio) and I will only be featuring artists who are willing to be played for the free promotion alone. Why support the RIAA?
Big companies might not be able to do this, but they probably have the budget (and income) to pay for the right to use the music. They probably should pay.
I'd have to say (as you've mentioned) just about all distro's are/have been guilty of this. I'd hope the LSB has adressed that, but I don't honestly know (I've been on since 7.2 and since 8.0 pretty much solely). I can say I've been using Redhat on a (remote) dedicated server and haven't had any trouble finding everything where I expect it and I have been doing a good deal of configuration by hand (ssh, no X, with Pico).
I'd much rather see a FUD section. SCO will go away (how long is anyone's guess) but the FUD is going to be a long term problem.
If not FUD maybe a *nix section, but I think FUD would be more interesting.
Tired of hearing this nice and simple line...
on
Mandrake 9.2 RC1
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I don't get these types of posts. First its as if there's a presumption that Linux should be hard to use in order to be taken seriously. Then there seems to be the insinuation that because its easy(er) to use its somehow lost the 'power' of other less user friendly distributions.
I'd be curious to hear what exactly are the lacking features? I've been using Linux since 1998 and tried quite a few distro's before deciding on Mandrake (Redhat, Debian, Caldera *long before SCO*, FreeBSD, Gentoo, etc). They all function basically the same. My desktop has always been Blackbox, bash is set and gcc is standard.
If your don't like Mandrakes configuration tools you've got all the standard tools: XFree86configuration, Netconf, Vi. I'm not sure of a single package that you can get on another distro that you can't on Mandrake and you can certainly compile anything else you'd like.
To me Mandrake is simple a better thought out distribution, but with all the flexibility of a Linux distribution it can be as full featured or as limited as you'd like.
I think the EULA's aren't honest business so I'm expressing in part my own unproven (I think they will lose eventually) prejustice. When I explicitly click on a piece of software to install that does not mean I intended to install any other software surreptitiously and just because I may be mentioned burried in fine print somewhere does not mean I intended it (EULA as everybody on Slashdot know are not only dodgy agreements, but are circumventable, did I buy the EULA or the software?).
Its not the same. When his spyware runs on my computer its using my resources, my electricity. If it causes problems (and it will) it causes them on my computer. Thats not even considering my privacy rights and concerns.
My own beliefs are the same as Linus Torvalds: "He who writes the code chooses the license". If you don't like spyware, don't friggin run it. I don't.
I don't think Linus was talking about either EULA's or spyware, so it's an irrelevant quote.
You want to coerce me into running spyware? Don't bury it in a user agreement, come right out and make me click a radio button mentioning it directly, watch the popularity of the product drop and then decide if its worth it.
It's simply dishonest. I don't care if its buried in some agreement, thats not good enough.
Stealing isn't justification for running nannyware on my computer. That's invasive, intrusive, not to mention the possibility of poorly written nannyware causing memory leak and instability like existing adware.
And FALSE-POSITIVES. This seems like another good place for responsible developer (business people) to draw the line, or get smacked with a lawsuit.
EULA? Its less then a slip of paper and begging to be invalidated.
And it almost always is. Sneaky is sneaky however it obfuscated. Its a sleaze ball parlor trick, I hope EULA's are successfully challenged and we can get back honest business. Its like because software is so 'new' we think all the regular rules of good (honest) business somehow go out the window.
Thats the thing, aside from all the sleasy EULA stuff that goes along with this stuff.
I understand why a developer would *want* to use it, but that doesn't actually justify it unless they want to reimburse me for the cost of owning and maintaining my computer, with the understanding that (god forbid) should anything go *wrong* while their software is running they might possibly be sued for damages and data loss if I can make the case that their software may have somehow been involved.
Self limiting. Its like you have the wonderfull product and you really want people to use it, but you give it an unfortunate name (Le Mans) and it flops. I doesn't matter that the name has nothing to do with the quality of the technology, it just wont get used. Seems like if the name is trivial then renaming it should the next issue (suggestions and voting on Slashdot!).
Anyway, after reading the Slashdot heading I was prepared to be enraged by another example of corporate stupidity and instead found a perfectly legitimate comment had been grossly misinterpreted by the Slashdot editor.
SCO lies or exaggerates its worth mentioning, same goes for us. Slashdot and honesty, its still here and we can look at our mistakes.
Slashdot Mirror
I know to some this will sound like a fanatic or hardline approach, but you really don't need them anymore.
I'm finishing up the prep work on a internet radio station and part of that has been to contact every single artist I'd like to play to ask for permission to use their copyrighted material fee-free. This has been (no surprise) a great experience and just adds fuel to my belief that big industry is missing the boat. Artists are releasing their own music and as the web becomes a more and more common means of distribution and exposure the talent pool is going to get much bigger and the artist to listener ratio similarly with be getting smaller.
This is a (at least for now) nightmare for the established industry but is a lot better for the artists and the listeners. As distribution falls into the reach of the average musician music just gets a little more real. I haven't bought a pop album in a long time, but I'm more then happy to send off 10 bucks for a disk from a favorite artist and it feels pretty cool know where its going (and a little more about where it coming from!).
What I'd like to see is an association for fee-free broadcasting, so webcasters who don't have the time or inclination can look up artists who think the exposure is reward enough and stick it to the RIAA at the same time. Reward artists who care.
Yep, its going to take a while for comments like this to be 'heard' but there is still a lot of unnecessary complication in most all Linux distributions (extra software, then application naming and then file system hierarchy).
Its just a wait game at this point and people who are already using its not very troublesome (but sometimes amusing).
And because of the license (good ole GPL) even if they did another dozen vendors would spring up.
But I'm sure Redhat would lodge like a bone in their throat. I'd love to watch them choke.
Aw, Coward.
You've obviously been watching too much television. Back in the early 80's things were different. Bad boys got in fist fights and had liquor. We did things bad girls liked. Mostly it was about how incredibly horny we were and what kinds of lengths we'd got to. It still impresses girls if you go out of your way for them, only out of high school that would look more like buying flowers or taking her out to a fancy restaurant.
Maybe your should open up to your slightly more primitive side? Underneath were not nearly so civilized.
DOS attacks are the internet equivalent of standing outside someones home playing heavy metal at 140 dB.
Obviously you missed the whole heavy metal thing. Standing outside of someones home playing heavy metal would be about picking up chicks (most likely the daughter of the family who's house your serenading). The SCO/DDOS equivalent would be something like driving around in a drunken stupor taking mailboxes off their posts with a baseball bat (or something equally annoying).
I'm surprised how little about Fee Waivers I've seen. I'm aware of one lable (Artemis Records) who had agreed to waive their fees (statutory licensing).
Why not reward companies (or individuals) who are willing to be more flexable? I'll be sending out a flurry of requests of the next month (preparing to launch my own micro internet radio) and I will only be featuring artists who are willing to be played for the free promotion alone. Why support the RIAA?
Big companies might not be able to do this, but they probably have the budget (and income) to pay for the right to use the music. They probably should pay.
I'd have to say (as you've mentioned) just about all distro's are/have been guilty of this. I'd hope the LSB has adressed that, but I don't honestly know (I've been on since 7.2 and since 8.0 pretty much solely). I can say I've been using Redhat on a (remote) dedicated server and haven't had any trouble finding everything where I expect it and I have been doing a good deal of configuration by hand (ssh, no X, with Pico).
Ya, but there are those who'd rather it wasn't (news for nerds, not Nix). I love it personally, I'd go for the FUD section though.
Just seperate (although intertwining) issues. Rights pretty much touches on everything.
I'd much rather see a FUD section. SCO will go away (how long is anyone's guess) but the FUD is going to be a long term problem.
If not FUD maybe a *nix section, but I think FUD would be more interesting.
I don't get these types of posts. First its as if there's a presumption that Linux should be hard to use in order to be taken seriously. Then there seems to be the insinuation that because its easy(er) to use its somehow lost the 'power' of other less user friendly distributions.
I'd be curious to hear what exactly are the lacking features? I've been using Linux since 1998 and tried quite a few distro's before deciding on Mandrake (Redhat, Debian, Caldera *long before SCO*, FreeBSD, Gentoo, etc). They all function basically the same. My desktop has always been Blackbox, bash is set and gcc is standard.
If your don't like Mandrakes configuration tools you've got all the standard tools: XFree86configuration, Netconf, Vi. I'm not sure of a single package that you can get on another distro that you can't on Mandrake and you can certainly compile anything else you'd like.
To me Mandrake is simple a better thought out distribution, but with all the flexibility of a Linux distribution it can be as full featured or as limited as you'd like.
As much attention (and general discussion) as the desktop is getting I'd love to see a couple of 'Ask Slashdot's' with people like Matthias.
I can think of a few questions I'd love to ask.
I think the EULA's aren't honest business so I'm expressing in part my own unproven (I think they will lose eventually) prejustice. When I explicitly click on a piece of software to install that does not mean I intended to install any other software surreptitiously and just because I may be mentioned burried in fine print somewhere does not mean I intended it (EULA as everybody on Slashdot know are not only dodgy agreements, but are circumventable, did I buy the EULA or the software?).
Are they free to use your computer? Your resources? To potentially crash your system?
Its simply not an open and shut case.
Its not the same. When his spyware runs on my computer its using my resources, my electricity. If it causes problems (and it will) it causes them on my computer. Thats not even considering my privacy rights and concerns.
My own beliefs are the same as Linus Torvalds: "He who writes the code chooses the license". If you don't like spyware, don't friggin run it. I don't.
I don't think Linus was talking about either EULA's or spyware, so it's an irrelevant quote.
You want to coerce me into running spyware? Don't bury it in a user agreement, come right out and make me click a radio button mentioning it directly, watch the popularity of the product drop and then decide if its worth it.
It's simply dishonest. I don't care if its buried in some agreement, thats not good enough.
Stealing isn't justification for running nannyware on my computer. That's invasive, intrusive, not to mention the possibility of poorly written nannyware causing memory leak and instability like existing adware.
And FALSE-POSITIVES. This seems like another good place for responsible developer (business people) to draw the line, or get smacked with a lawsuit.
EULA? Its less then a slip of paper and begging to be invalidated.
Warning: Babysitter software included. May cause unexpected software instability. Will report all suspicious users. Thank you for your business.
And it almost always is. Sneaky is sneaky however it obfuscated. Its a sleaze ball parlor trick, I hope EULA's are successfully challenged and we can get back honest business. Its like because software is so 'new' we think all the regular rules of good (honest) business somehow go out the window.
Thats the thing, aside from all the sleasy EULA stuff that goes along with this stuff.
I understand why a developer would *want* to use it, but that doesn't actually justify it unless they want to reimburse me for the cost of owning and maintaining my computer, with the understanding that (god forbid) should anything go *wrong* while their software is running they might possibly be sued for damages and data loss if I can make the case that their software may have somehow been involved.
Then I have no problem with it.
The mashall is the one with the warrent and I think they (BSA) are acting as representatives and witnesses for the industry.
Disgruntled employees are just as likely to be people with attitude problems to begin with.
Self limiting. Its like you have the wonderfull product and you really want people to use it, but you give it an unfortunate name (Le Mans) and it flops. I doesn't matter that the name has nothing to do with the quality of the technology, it just wont get used. Seems like if the name is trivial then renaming it should the next issue (suggestions and voting on Slashdot!).
Sounds like they are just coming around the the effects of the communication age.
Why?
Anyway, after reading the Slashdot heading I was prepared to be enraged by another example of corporate stupidity and instead found a perfectly legitimate comment had been grossly misinterpreted by the Slashdot editor.
SCO lies or exaggerates its worth mentioning, same goes for us. Slashdot and honesty, its still here and we can look at our mistakes.