The most compelling argument I've heard against your logic is that sometimes you really don't want to obey the law. Laws are not only good, but they come in bad varieties too. Even if you think the laws are good right now, they could change suddenly, and all that invasion of privacy and surveillance that you thought were OK suddenly make it incredibly difficult for you to function as a free man. In fact, the incriminating evidence against you may already have been gathered and is waiting to be used.
Strictly speaking, he didn't just "sit down" and write his own compiler from scratch. He spent a lot of time searching for a free compiler that was already complete, and finally he found one. It wasn't a C compiler, so he made the necessary modifications to get it going. Also, he didn't do it by himself--Leonard Tower was working on it full time, and there were other assistants.
It does not seem that you went to very great lengths. At least tell me you've tried DOSBox, right? DOSBox provides virtual hardware that is exactly perfect for games like the original X-Wing, and the operating system should be 100% compatible. I doubt you would even need to set up EMS.
What is "hard core"? What could that possibly mean?
Take Nintendo's example. They've always been family-oriented. Their games appeal to people of all ages, and their consoles were all common household items. Their success was made by hitting the general audience--that never changed for them.
I never heard the word "hardcore" until people started spending ridiculous amounts of money on things like computer hardware, multiple consoles, etc. Long gone were the days when a 486 and a VGA adapter had you set for a few great years of gaming (if you had a 586 you were really kicking butt). These days you have to be hardcore to keep up with the cost of all the latest hardware, and because of the diminishing returns (the games don't get that much better), you really had to be on the fringe.
Also, I think terms like "hardcore" rose to prominence when games increasingly became networked and multiplayer on a large scale. I theorize that socialization in the gaming community helped reinforce the creation and use of social identifiers within the group.
Could everybody get back to coding and kiss politics goodbye? WTF is everybody doing these days? It seems like every single programming in the world is now a politician...
Well, people with political opinions are not necessarily "politicians." Being concerned about politics is natural and healthy because politics impact your life severely. Programmers are particularly concerned about software licensing because they put in a lot of time and energy to their work, and human beings like to "own" their work.
Long gone are the days where programming was considered a noble art of logics and things were so uncomplicated...
Things are not really so different now than they were back then. Honestly, programming is programming no matter how you look at it.
Instead of producing more, we must complicate things and waste our valuable with egoistic intrigues, politics, strange licence deals, and... oh well...
The software license is important to many because it gives them power over their creation and those who use it. This power lets them decide how others are obligated to use it. If you love GPL, it's because you want your programming work to benefit the general public as much as possible without disappearing into private, competing hands.
That's true, actually. "Linux" is nothing more than hacker code speak for the bastardization of a quality Microsoft operating system called Xenix, the latest version of Unix (even Apple stole code from Microsoft to make OS X). It was stolen long ago by European communists who do little more than copy capitalist inventions and try to subvert the market by destroying private ownership.
Anyone who uses this socialist junk is anti-American, and you're a fool if you think Linux is a real, quality software project.
In many ways, programming is an art. I discovered that when I learned to program, and I took great satisfaction in the feeling my creations gave me. Unfortunately, I also didn't know very much mathematics at the time, and after a few years of programming I realized that without a better understanding of different branches of mathematics, my ability to write programs was uncomfortably limited.
The most interesting and powerful programs in the world are written by people who understand and apply complex forms of mathematics. There are no exceptions (I'm sorry to say).
You know, by the time it's released they might as well have it fully ported to Linux. That would be wicked cool.
If they dared to release it for Linux alone, they could tempt some people to switch platforms out of mere curiosity. "Ok, sure... I'll install Linux... just ONCE. Try it out, you know... man, I really want to play Duke Nukem Forever..."
I wasn't mislead; it seems that percentage is the most relevant piece of information anyway. Obviously, people who are already skilled in developing for Windows are going to keep up with it, but if the market is changing overall as new work goes into it, that is very important.
By that token, are there really any fewer COBOL developers than there have always been? Heheh...
The thing that got my attention in the article was the snappiness of the UI even in frame buffer mode? That's quite a claim if you ask me!
Back when I used FreeBSD every day, I did seem to notice that BSD was a little bit more responsive than Linux when it came to certain things. However, I remember that the GENERIC kernel on FreeBSD was horrendously slow because almost every driver was statically linked. In order to see it run at full speed, you'd have to build a custom kernel with unused drivers removed.
Not only did I once build custom kernels, but also the rest of the base with all the fat cut out. My customized systems were some of the fastest boxes I'd ever used, even on older hardware. Unfortunately, when I compared them to Linux, these custom systems were only slightly faster than generic builds of Linux that shipped with your average distro. Disheartened by the diminishing returns, I pretty much gave up on putting all that work into FreeBSD when I could have run Linux to a similar result with almost 0 work.
I tried going back to BSD last year in the form of NetBSD, but the USB subsystem gave me headaches and massive instability. One of these days I'll give FreeBSD another shot.
I would also recommend PC-BSD to seasoned Unix users that have never tried using FreeBSD before and would prefer a shallower learning curve before getting down to business.
I don't know... I always thought the learning curve for FreeBSD was pretty shallow. I used GNU/Linux for years before trying FreeBSD, and Linux distributions were all over the board; you never knew what bizarre software configuration you were going to get, or how the system was going to behave or configure. Even after steady use, Linux confused the hell out of me. When I tried FreeBSD, it took a little effort to learn the basics of managing the system: installing, updating, removing software packages. After that it was easy street. Tweaking the base system conf files was obvious... a little too obvious. They say editing text files isn't "intuitive", but this is as close as it gets. For the stuff you can't figure out, the documentation is complete and readily accessible.
Having a front end that helps you autoconfig stuff doesn't actually lesson the learning curve, but in my opinion steepens it. When the autoconfig goes wrong, you're pretty much stuck without a clue.
My good friend is a technology nut and a journalist. Every day he reads Digg and Engadget. He probably looks at other sites too, but these are the ones he talks about the most.
I know the Slashdot crowd is meeting this development with skepticism, but by George if Apple can pull off this kind of shenanigans with the iPhone, then Sony can do it too!
The problem that you are having with that line is because there is an implicit statement that you are not seeing or choosing to ignore because the sentence is unjustifiably ambiguous. When he says "longer", there is a reference to some other measurement. What you're reading is "longer in reality" rather than the intended "longer than we originally believed."
So I would rewrite the sentence, "The new mileage estimates mean it will take longer than previously estimated to recoup that extra cost in money saved on gas."
It sounds like that he's really trying to say is that he doesn't want to change his style just to please a particular audience. It doesn't sound to me like he's saying Halo is poorly made or easy to pull off, but that he won't make games like that because it's not his thing.
Of course a search based on meta data is going to be faster and more accurate, but only when the meta data is correct. We've had this since the beginning of the interweb; people would load up their pages with bogus meta data just to generate search traffic. Because of this dishonesty, search engines have had to resort to other methods of evaluating and indexing pages (for example, based on actual content).
I don't see any difference between this new RDF and that old stuff.
put the burned-out bulb in my car, drive a half-dozen miles to the waste facility (they were helpful in telling me how to get to the facility while dodging the most dangerous parts of Richmond)
"Half a dozen" is only 6. That's pretty darn close to home; don't be such a weenie.
Also, since the bulbs are collected so infrequently, you can easily wait for more than one to die and then haul in a whole bunch whenever it is convenient for you.
There are many software licenses to choose one, and everyone should have a license that does exactly what they want it to do. You don't even have to pick a preexisting one; write your own with the help of a lawyer (if you need it).
However, it sounds to me that your intention is to share this software with others. If you want to share it with just those individuals you choose, use some different license and have them sign an nondisclosure agreement or something (ps I am not a lawyer). If your intention, however, is to share your software with the public at large and have the community benefit as a whole, then please use the GPL.
The reason why the GPL is important for this purpose is that it makes your community software stay in the community. Lots of commercial enterprises use the GPL for reasons like this; they have valuable assets they want to give away (in the from of source code), but they don't want their competitors using it to screw them over--they want the world to benefit, and they themselves might benefit from seeing improvements to their code. That's the GPL.
If you use the GPL, not only will you be sharing your hard work with others in a way that you deem appropriate, you are also encouraging them to share their work with you. Whoever uses your project or develops it will assume a mutually beneficial role with everyone else who does the same, including you.
You know how they say...if you love something, set it free? You'd want to take some steps to ensure that it at least STAYS free, right?
Slashdot Mirror
As far as I can tell, no software is redistributed by Micorsoft under GPL v3. So why would it apply to MS?
That's precisely how they're planning to "evade" it. :)
The most compelling argument I've heard against your logic is that sometimes you really don't want to obey the law. Laws are not only good, but they come in bad varieties too. Even if you think the laws are good right now, they could change suddenly, and all that invasion of privacy and surveillance that you thought were OK suddenly make it incredibly difficult for you to function as a free man. In fact, the incriminating evidence against you may already have been gathered and is waiting to be used.
Strictly speaking, he didn't just "sit down" and write his own compiler from scratch. He spent a lot of time searching for a free compiler that was already complete, and finally he found one. It wasn't a C compiler, so he made the necessary modifications to get it going. Also, he didn't do it by himself--Leonard Tower was working on it full time, and there were other assistants.
It does not seem that you went to very great lengths. At least tell me you've tried DOSBox, right? DOSBox provides virtual hardware that is exactly perfect for games like the original X-Wing, and the operating system should be 100% compatible. I doubt you would even need to set up EMS.
What is "hard core"? What could that possibly mean?
Take Nintendo's example. They've always been family-oriented. Their games appeal to people of all ages, and their consoles were all common household items. Their success was made by hitting the general audience--that never changed for them.
I never heard the word "hardcore" until people started spending ridiculous amounts of money on things like computer hardware, multiple consoles, etc. Long gone were the days when a 486 and a VGA adapter had you set for a few great years of gaming (if you had a 586 you were really kicking butt). These days you have to be hardcore to keep up with the cost of all the latest hardware, and because of the diminishing returns (the games don't get that much better), you really had to be on the fringe.
Also, I think terms like "hardcore" rose to prominence when games increasingly became networked and multiplayer on a large scale. I theorize that socialization in the gaming community helped reinforce the creation and use of social identifiers within the group.
Could everybody get back to coding and kiss politics goodbye? WTF is everybody doing these days? It seems like every single programming in the world is now a politician...
Well, people with political opinions are not necessarily "politicians." Being concerned about politics is natural and healthy because politics impact your life severely. Programmers are particularly concerned about software licensing because they put in a lot of time and energy to their work, and human beings like to "own" their work.
Long gone are the days where programming was considered a noble art of logics and things were so uncomplicated...
Things are not really so different now than they were back then. Honestly, programming is programming no matter how you look at it.
Instead of producing more, we must complicate things and waste our valuable with egoistic intrigues, politics, strange licence deals, and... oh well...
The software license is important to many because it gives them power over their creation and those who use it. This power lets them decide how others are obligated to use it. If you love GPL, it's because you want your programming work to benefit the general public as much as possible without disappearing into private, competing hands.
That's true, actually. "Linux" is nothing more than hacker code speak for the bastardization of a quality Microsoft operating system called Xenix, the latest version of Unix (even Apple stole code from Microsoft to make OS X). It was stolen long ago by European communists who do little more than copy capitalist inventions and try to subvert the market by destroying private ownership.
Anyone who uses this socialist junk is anti-American, and you're a fool if you think Linux is a real, quality software project.
UMD possesses many strengths, from size to form factor to portability,
That's not many strengths; that's one. It's SMALL. Also, this attribute is not necessarily a strength. It could have many downsides too.
In many ways, programming is an art. I discovered that when I learned to program, and I took great satisfaction in the feeling my creations gave me. Unfortunately, I also didn't know very much mathematics at the time, and after a few years of programming I realized that without a better understanding of different branches of mathematics, my ability to write programs was uncomfortably limited.
The most interesting and powerful programs in the world are written by people who understand and apply complex forms of mathematics. There are no exceptions (I'm sorry to say).
You know, by the time it's released they might as well have it fully ported to Linux. That would be wicked cool.
If they dared to release it for Linux alone, they could tempt some people to switch platforms out of mere curiosity. "Ok, sure... I'll install Linux... just ONCE. Try it out, you know... man, I really want to play Duke Nukem Forever..."
I wasn't mislead; it seems that percentage is the most relevant piece of information anyway. Obviously, people who are already skilled in developing for Windows are going to keep up with it, but if the market is changing overall as new work goes into it, that is very important.
By that token, are there really any fewer COBOL developers than there have always been? Heheh...
The thing that got my attention in the article was the snappiness of the UI even in frame buffer mode? That's quite a claim if you ask me!
Back when I used FreeBSD every day, I did seem to notice that BSD was a little bit more responsive than Linux when it came to certain things. However, I remember that the GENERIC kernel on FreeBSD was horrendously slow because almost every driver was statically linked. In order to see it run at full speed, you'd have to build a custom kernel with unused drivers removed.
Not only did I once build custom kernels, but also the rest of the base with all the fat cut out. My customized systems were some of the fastest boxes I'd ever used, even on older hardware. Unfortunately, when I compared them to Linux, these custom systems were only slightly faster than generic builds of Linux that shipped with your average distro. Disheartened by the diminishing returns, I pretty much gave up on putting all that work into FreeBSD when I could have run Linux to a similar result with almost 0 work.
I tried going back to BSD last year in the form of NetBSD, but the USB subsystem gave me headaches and massive instability. One of these days I'll give FreeBSD another shot.
I would also recommend PC-BSD to seasoned Unix users that have never tried using FreeBSD before and would prefer a shallower learning curve before getting down to business.
I don't know... I always thought the learning curve for FreeBSD was pretty shallow. I used GNU/Linux for years before trying FreeBSD, and Linux distributions were all over the board; you never knew what bizarre software configuration you were going to get, or how the system was going to behave or configure. Even after steady use, Linux confused the hell out of me. When I tried FreeBSD, it took a little effort to learn the basics of managing the system: installing, updating, removing software packages. After that it was easy street. Tweaking the base system conf files was obvious... a little too obvious. They say editing text files isn't "intuitive", but this is as close as it gets. For the stuff you can't figure out, the documentation is complete and readily accessible.
Having a front end that helps you autoconfig stuff doesn't actually lesson the learning curve, but in my opinion steepens it. When the autoconfig goes wrong, you're pretty much stuck without a clue.
My good friend is a technology nut and a journalist. Every day he reads Digg and Engadget. He probably looks at other sites too, but these are the ones he talks about the most.
That pretty much sums up the experience that 90% of use have had with Linux.
I know the Slashdot crowd is meeting this development with skepticism, but by George if Apple can pull off this kind of shenanigans with the iPhone, then Sony can do it too!
The problem that you are having with that line is because there is an implicit statement that you are not seeing or choosing to ignore because the sentence is unjustifiably ambiguous. When he says "longer", there is a reference to some other measurement. What you're reading is "longer in reality" rather than the intended "longer than we originally believed."
So I would rewrite the sentence, "The new mileage estimates mean it will take longer than previously estimated to recoup that extra cost in money saved on gas."
It sounds like that he's really trying to say is that he doesn't want to change his style just to please a particular audience. It doesn't sound to me like he's saying Halo is poorly made or easy to pull off, but that he won't make games like that because it's not his thing.
God made us a high ceiling (the atmosphere)
He wants us to be free
lol
And I do.
Nyaaah =p
Of course a search based on meta data is going to be faster and more accurate, but only when the meta data is correct. We've had this since the beginning of the interweb; people would load up their pages with bogus meta data just to generate search traffic. Because of this dishonesty, search engines have had to resort to other methods of evaluating and indexing pages (for example, based on actual content).
I don't see any difference between this new RDF and that old stuff.
put the burned-out bulb in my car, drive a half-dozen miles to the waste facility (they were helpful in telling me how to get to the facility while dodging the most dangerous parts of Richmond)
"Half a dozen" is only 6. That's pretty darn close to home; don't be such a weenie.
Also, since the bulbs are collected so infrequently, you can easily wait for more than one to die and then haul in a whole bunch whenever it is convenient for you.
That's the best definition I've ever heard. It also explains why many parents and governments try to keep their little ones away from it.
There are many software licenses to choose one, and everyone should have a license that does exactly what they want it to do. You don't even have to pick a preexisting one; write your own with the help of a lawyer (if you need it).
However, it sounds to me that your intention is to share this software with others. If you want to share it with just those individuals you choose, use some different license and have them sign an nondisclosure agreement or something (ps I am not a lawyer). If your intention, however, is to share your software with the public at large and have the community benefit as a whole, then please use the GPL.
The reason why the GPL is important for this purpose is that it makes your community software stay in the community. Lots of commercial enterprises use the GPL for reasons like this; they have valuable assets they want to give away (in the from of source code), but they don't want their competitors using it to screw them over--they want the world to benefit, and they themselves might benefit from seeing improvements to their code. That's the GPL.
If you use the GPL, not only will you be sharing your hard work with others in a way that you deem appropriate, you are also encouraging them to share their work with you. Whoever uses your project or develops it will assume a mutually beneficial role with everyone else who does the same, including you.
You know how they say...if you love something, set it free? You'd want to take some steps to ensure that it at least STAYS free, right?
How can BILL require this? Aren't Vista's licensing policies strict enough? Argh! I can't believe the government would let anyone get away with this.