tried it out on my little eeepc and it definitely made a difference, on average its sped up all loading times by about 30 percent. This is especially good because i upgraded to a 2gig stick of ram but most programs hardly need that much ram and on average im left with about 1.2 gigs just sitting there doing nothing, now the ram is more productive and the loading time is noticably faster eg. firefox on a cold start without preload took 10 seconds to load before, now on a cold start it loads in 6:). Also since the cpu is relatively slow it means fetching data and the overhead of moving it around it cut down alot. I'd love to shake the creators hand for this plucky little piece of software:) thanks!
"if you don't have anything to hide, you don't have a good reason to worry about losing your privacy?"
If a person is an upstanding member of the community that has done nothing wrong in any way, is law abiding, upright, honest and noncontroversial in their actions why should (s)he worry about revealing everything there is to know about (her)himself? Why should this person's privacy be protected? some may assert that the government should be allowed to distribute personal records about people so that they can do their jobs better and make crime more difficult. Right? WRONG! Privacy and its onus on the individual is misplaced and misguided. Privacy and anonymity is to ensure that people are protected from those with malicious intent, privacy and anonymity is never intended to help a person break the law. This is the case people use against privacy.
Privacy and anonymity is not to protect people so they can commit crimes, it is to protect the individual from the many criminal and malicious elements, whether they be political, criminal, mundane or otherwise.
Privacy protects against embarresment and shame of personal secrets, these may be medical ailments (such as that real severe case of haemorroids you got several years ago) and be through no fault of your own, or perhaps the stigma of a family member(goddamn you Uncle Joe! why did he have to do that to the poor horse, again, and again, and again!) with a criminal history or to protect against discrimination (ie. you're too old, fat, black, white, asian, feminine, masculine, ugly, beautiful... whoops maybe not that last one).
Anonymity protects free speech and future reprisals connected with said free speech being employed.
Anonymity protects whistle blowers that see others commiting a crime and allows the person to do the right thing and report the crime safely without jeopardising their job security or become victimised as a result of their actions. (wikileaks yeah!)
Privacy and anonymity protects against Identity theft, the act of stealing another persons identiy can devastate a persons credit history, with resolutions being either difficult or even impossible.
Privacy and anonymity can insulate an individual against premeditated crimes like stalking, premeditated rape or assault or other such crimes, can all be prevented it the person wishing to commit a crime against a person they have met either casually or online are not able to look up the persons personal details in the future and track them down.
Privacy protects against harassment either from other individuals or from companies that make irritating phone calls or send personalised junk mail. If privacy and anonymity were respected we WOULDN'T NEED"do not call lists" or white/black lists! To clarify, cold canvassing is a different story but usually a purchasers identity is bought for a business and they use that to profile and selectively call those most likely to be interested in a product. This happens ALOT.
Privacy and anonymity protects an individual from persons in high office in government that may target a particular individual or group for political reasons.
It doesn't matter who it is, privacy and anonymity should be respected by all individuals, groups, agents, organisations, companies and governments, only you can be trusted fully with your personal details and all the above mentioned should should respect the privacy of others and only release personal information about a person with their consent. In a world that hardly respects privacy to begin with, we have everything to hide. For a law abiding citizen that just wants to live their life their own way ALL the above resonings for privacy and anonymity apply!
I actually posted an email to one of the linux foundation's mailing lists and got this reply from Jim Zemlin. Seems he also hates microsoft and respects them like he would a gweat big gwisowy bear, he clarified to me that he was not, in fact fawning over microsoft.
From : Jim Zemlin Sent : Sunday, 12 August 2007 4:14:23 AM To :.............@hotmail.com Subject : re: s the left hand watching the right?
Simon,
Thanks for the e-mail. While I disagree that I have alienated thousands of supporters, I do want to respond to your concern and be very clear on my message:
If we want to beat Microsoft we should respect them as a competitor.
To be even more clear:
I don't like their software. I don't like their business practices in many cases. I don't like the FUD they spread about Linux. I don't like their software license. I don't like their development methods.
Here are a few quotes that mirror my thoughts:
"You can't defeat a powerful enemy unless you understand him completely, and you can't understand him unless you know the desires of his heart, and you can't know the desires of his heart until you truly love him. Hiding from your enemy is the same as letting him win."
- Seventh Son
"To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy. Know your enemy and know yourself, find naught in fear for 100 battles. Know yourself but not your enemy, find level of loss and victory. Know thy enemy but not yourself, wallow in defeat every time."
Sun Tzu
I think it's clear that you must respect your enemy to effectively compete against them. If you don't respect that Microsoft has a great marketing, legal & business development department, you aren't going to get far. Know your enemy, understand them, respect them--only then can you become greater than them.
Jim
>An article linked through slashdot has made alot of linux users angry about comments made by Jim Zemlin in a San Francisco confrence. I for one >agree, I hope you guys are ready for some fallout, because whoever you put on the poduium didn't sound like a representative of the linux >community, they simply sounded (or were quoted to be precise) like they were another paid microsoft puppet or an astroturfed organisation. In my >opinion, these comments completely undermined and sabotaged any trust or confidence you may have been trying to garner in your organisation. Well >done, you have effectively alienated thousands of (potential)supporters in one fell swoop.
"requires that the Linux community respects Microsoft rather than ridicule it"
Respect microsoft? after it litigates through a proxy (SCO), threatens via patent litigation, disavows the gpl v3 license, astroturfs, tries to subvert the OOXML standardisation process and DRMs everything (not to mention locking up its own software) so that the CIA has a hard time getting its hands on its "trade secrets"? Is this the company you want me to respect? I have two words to deliver to this so-called "linux community" the first word starts with "get" and end with "-ed!".
This time Microsoft gets to dance to our tune. And believe me, Microsoft is going to give a whole new definition to the word "flexible".
This is a brave (NOT foolish) attempt to pull the "reckless and selfish" companies that abuse the spirit of the GPL licence for their own gains back into their place. Make no mistake this is the COMMUNITY'S code, not microsoft et al's. I am happy for microsoft to turn their back on linux, free software, open source and the whole gamut of freebies that I have at the pointy points of my fingertips. Or haven't you already noticed microsoft trying to lock/ban any user from using linux code with the whole SCO debarcle. Wake up and smell the legal action you idiot. The world is extremely hostile towards free software and the fact that it has become so successful has meant many companies want to hitch a ride on the free software train and carve out their own "open source" fortress. Now that they've seen how good it is, some companies are trying to keep it for themselves and not share. Just like patents, patenting was tool to help the underdog to get an edge, not for big companies to hoarde and lock up the market with their "ideas" it was supposed to provide innovation and protection to those less privileged and thanks to big corporation's influence and flooding the system with inane grabs at ip, the system has failed.
Then along comes the GPL, meant to protect users and developers and fuel innovative concepts that all of us (the less fortunate) can benefit from, and we see history repeating itself, the big corps have shon their big shiny eye on the treasure trove of ip, innovation and code and thought "how can we make all of this ours? and if we can't make it ours how can we force people to stop using it". Now microsoft is swinging it big patent clad IP hammer at the founding pillar of the GPL and you have the GAUL to say amending the GPL to stop these greedy slugs is reckless and selfish? Who the fuck do you think you are? I don't CARE if it causes problems for companies, COMPANIES are the main cause of all this crap that is going on in the first place.
And lets get one thing straight, when it came to Tivo "giving the source back", lets be crystal clear, it was NEVER THEIRS to begin with, they modified code that belonged to the community and tried to keep it for themselves. And the point about hardware vendors losing their IP is a crock of shit also, patent protection is passed only to users for the software being used, it is hardly as broad as you think, and anyone that locks their hardware is literally locking themselves out of the market anyway, bluray and hd players can go get stuffed if they have the nerve to thikn i'll buy their drives, they'd be better suited as paper weights.
He points out
"we need to be prepared to go to the rights holders for these proprietary codecs and say, we'll give you money, give us a license; and this is something that the Linux community has a huge antipathy to doing because we've got all this idealism about open source"
So he knows what sets linux and all open source software apart, "idealism" is all about not compromising, its what gives open source its reputation, a reputation that sets linux apart from the commercial "beasts" that sponge peoples money and ideas. Open source doesnt bend knee to other companies asking for handmedowns of their technology. Open source stands on its own two feet and speaks for itself (even if it is shorter in stature than the rest). Shelling out money for closed drivers may be ok for those wanting a quick fix but it intrinsically hurts open source. But hey lets listen to this guy how about we get licences for as many programs/technologies/codecs/etc? Suddenly 80-90% of your software is closed, but hey, the users are happy, right, is this really what "open source" wants to do?
Slashdot Mirror
no gotchas if you are using ubuntu or eeexubuntu, just follow the instructions on the preload homepage.
tried it out on my little eeepc and it definitely made a difference, on average its sped up all loading times by about 30 percent. This is especially good because i upgraded to a 2gig stick of ram but most programs hardly need that much ram and on average im left with about 1.2 gigs just sitting there doing nothing, now the ram is more productive and the loading time is noticably faster eg. firefox on a cold start without preload took 10 seconds to load before, now on a cold start it loads in 6 :). Also since the cpu is relatively slow it means fetching data and the overhead of moving it around it cut down alot. I'd love to shake the creators hand for this plucky little piece of software :) thanks!
If a person is an upstanding member of the community that has done nothing wrong in any way, is law abiding, upright, honest and noncontroversial in their actions why should (s)he worry about revealing everything there is to know about (her)himself? Why should this person's privacy be protected? some may assert that the government should be allowed to distribute personal records about people so that they can do their jobs better and make crime more difficult. Right? WRONG! Privacy and its onus on the individual is misplaced and misguided. Privacy and anonymity is to ensure that people are protected from those with malicious intent, privacy and anonymity is never intended to help a person break the law. This is the case people use against privacy.
Privacy and anonymity is not to protect people so they can commit crimes, it is to protect the individual from the many criminal and malicious elements, whether they be political, criminal, mundane or otherwise.
Privacy protects against embarresment and shame of personal secrets, these may be medical ailments (such as that real severe case of haemorroids you got several years ago) and be through no fault of your own, or perhaps the stigma of a family member(goddamn you Uncle Joe! why did he have to do that to the poor horse, again, and again, and again!) with a criminal history or to protect against discrimination (ie. you're too old, fat, black, white, asian, feminine, masculine, ugly, beautiful... whoops maybe not that last one).
Anonymity protects free speech and future reprisals connected with said free speech being employed.
Anonymity protects whistle blowers that see others commiting a crime and allows the person to do the right thing and report the crime safely without jeopardising their job security or become victimised as a result of their actions. (wikileaks yeah!)
Privacy and anonymity protects against Identity theft, the act of stealing another persons identiy can devastate a persons credit history, with resolutions being either difficult or even impossible.
Privacy and anonymity can insulate an individual against premeditated crimes like stalking, premeditated rape or assault or other such crimes, can all be prevented it the person wishing to commit a crime against a person they have met either casually or online are not able to look up the persons personal details in the future and track them down.
Privacy protects against harassment either from other individuals or from companies that make irritating phone calls or send personalised junk mail. If privacy and anonymity were respected we WOULDN'T NEED "do not call lists" or white/black lists! To clarify, cold canvassing is a different story but usually a purchasers identity is bought for a business and they use that to profile and selectively call those most likely to be interested in a product. This happens ALOT.
Privacy and anonymity protects an individual from persons in high office in government that may target a particular individual or group for political reasons.
It doesn't matter who it is, privacy and anonymity should be respected by all individuals, groups, agents, organisations, companies and governments, only you can be trusted fully with your personal details and all the above mentioned should should respect the privacy of others and only release personal information about a person with their consent. In a world that hardly respects privacy to begin with, we have everything to hide. For a law abiding citizen that just wants to live their life their own way ALL the above resonings for privacy and anonymity apply!
I actually posted an email to one of the linux foundation's mailing lists and got this reply from Jim Zemlin. Seems he also hates microsoft and respects them like he would a gweat big gwisowy bear, he clarified to me that he was not, in fact fawning over microsoft.
.............@hotmail.com
From : Jim Zemlin
Sent : Sunday, 12 August 2007 4:14:23 AM
To :
Subject : re: s the left hand watching the right?
Simon,
Thanks for the e-mail. While I disagree that I have alienated thousands of supporters, I do want to respond to your concern and be very clear on my message:
If we want to beat Microsoft we should respect them as a competitor.
To be even more clear:
I don't like their software. I don't like their business practices in many cases. I don't like the FUD they spread about Linux. I don't like their software license. I don't like their development methods.
Here are a few quotes that mirror my thoughts:
"You can't defeat a powerful enemy unless you understand him completely, and you can't understand him unless you know the desires of his heart, and you can't know the desires of his heart until you truly love him. Hiding from your enemy is the same as letting him win."
- Seventh Son
"To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy. Know your enemy and know yourself, find naught in fear for 100 battles. Know yourself but not your enemy, find level of loss and victory. Know thy enemy but not yourself, wallow in defeat every time."
Sun Tzu
I think it's clear that you must respect your enemy to effectively compete against them. If you don't respect that Microsoft has a great marketing, legal & business development department, you aren't going to get far. Know your enemy, understand them, respect them--only then can you become greater than them.
Jim
>An article linked through slashdot has made alot of linux users angry about comments made by Jim Zemlin in a San Francisco confrence. I for one >agree, I hope you guys are ready for some fallout, because whoever you put on the poduium didn't sound like a representative of the linux >community, they simply sounded (or were quoted to be precise) like they were another paid microsoft puppet or an astroturfed organisation. In my >opinion, these comments completely undermined and sabotaged any trust or confidence you may have been trying to garner in your organisation. Well >done, you have effectively alienated thousands of (potential)supporters in one fell swoop.
"requires that the Linux community respects Microsoft rather than ridicule it" Respect microsoft? after it litigates through a proxy (SCO), threatens via patent litigation, disavows the gpl v3 license, astroturfs, tries to subvert the OOXML standardisation process and DRMs everything (not to mention locking up its own software) so that the CIA has a hard time getting its hands on its "trade secrets"? Is this the company you want me to respect? I have two words to deliver to this so-called "linux community" the first word starts with "get" and end with "-ed!". This time Microsoft gets to dance to our tune. And believe me, Microsoft is going to give a whole new definition to the word "flexible".
How about we approch things with an open mind. Well? Is that too "out there" for you?
Let me be plain for a moment, you are an idiot.
But this license is reckless and selfish.
This is a brave (NOT foolish) attempt to pull the "reckless and selfish" companies that abuse the spirit of the GPL licence for their own gains back into their place. Make no mistake this is the COMMUNITY'S code, not microsoft et al's. I am happy for microsoft to turn their back on linux, free software, open source and the whole gamut of freebies that I have at the pointy points of my fingertips. Or haven't you already noticed microsoft trying to lock/ban any user from using linux code with the whole SCO debarcle. Wake up and smell the legal action you idiot. The world is extremely hostile towards free software and the fact that it has become so successful has meant many companies want to hitch a ride on the free software train and carve out their own "open source" fortress. Now that they've seen how good it is, some companies are trying to keep it for themselves and not share. Just like patents, patenting was tool to help the underdog to get an edge, not for big companies to hoarde and lock up the market with their "ideas" it was supposed to provide innovation and protection to those less privileged and thanks to big corporation's influence and flooding the system with inane grabs at ip, the system has failed.
Then along comes the GPL, meant to protect users and developers and fuel innovative concepts that all of us (the less fortunate) can benefit from, and we see history repeating itself, the big corps have shon their big shiny eye on the treasure trove of ip, innovation and code and thought "how can we make all of this ours? and if we can't make it ours how can we force people to stop using it". Now microsoft is swinging it big patent clad IP hammer at the founding pillar of the GPL and you have the GAUL to say amending the GPL to stop these greedy slugs is reckless and selfish? Who the fuck do you think you are? I don't CARE if it causes problems for companies, COMPANIES are the main cause of all this crap that is going on in the first place.
And lets get one thing straight, when it came to Tivo "giving the source back", lets be crystal clear, it was NEVER THEIRS to begin with, they modified code that belonged to the community and tried to keep it for themselves. And the point about hardware vendors losing their IP is a crock of shit also, patent protection is passed only to users for the software being used, it is hardly as broad as you think, and anyone that locks their hardware is literally locking themselves out of the market anyway, bluray and hd players can go get stuffed if they have the nerve to thikn i'll buy their drives, they'd be better suited as paper weights.
He points out
"we need to be prepared to go to the rights holders for these proprietary codecs and say, we'll give you money, give us a license; and this is something that the Linux community has a huge antipathy to doing because we've got all this idealism about open source"
So he knows what sets linux and all open source software apart, "idealism" is all about not compromising, its what gives open source its reputation, a reputation that sets linux apart from the commercial "beasts" that sponge peoples money and ideas. Open source doesnt bend knee to other companies asking for handmedowns of their technology. Open source stands on its own two feet and speaks for itself (even if it is shorter in stature than the rest). Shelling out money for closed drivers may be ok for those wanting a quick fix but it intrinsically hurts open source. But hey lets listen to this guy how about we get licences for as many programs/technologies/codecs/etc? Suddenly 80-90% of your software is closed, but hey, the users are happy, right, is this really what "open source" wants to do?