SCO can't have it both ways. SCO has a clear choice: either pledge not to use any Open Source/Free Software in any of their products, or actively participate in the Open Source/Free Software movement and reap the benefits
Why the hell not? You bitch about restrictive MSFT EULA's but you still run Windows (ya ya only for games, but still). You bitch about proprietary lockdowns, but you buy iPods and G5 Macs.
You dont have to like the GPL to use it. I use GPL'd software, and I personally dont like it, nor do I consider it a truly free license, compared BSD's "do whatever the fuck you want we dont care" mentality.
This just shows that the GPL is more of a cult/religion than a software license.
True, new features cant really be added, but it might be worth it to support faster CPUS and RAM. Like my 645 example would let me use a fancy shmancy new CPU, perhaps with an 800mhz bus, and true DDR400. A 50 dollar upgrade rather than a 200 dollar mobo replacement.
Theres more to the video card than just the GPU, you'd need a new RAMDAC for higher resolutions and faster refresh rates and whatnot, and the memory interfaces video cards use get faster and faster, so that's probably not practical.
But I'm with you in concept.
I've always wondered why the northbridge and southbridge cant be socketed. What technically would prevent me from pulling the SiS 645dx chip out of the computer I'm using now, replace it with a pin compatable 648 that will let me use the fancy new HT enabled processors?
PCs have stayed pretty much the same because the majority of PC owners want something upgradable, and something they can fix themselves without a 200x jewelers loupe and nerves of steel.
Various folks have tried the iMac concept, IBMs little goofy thingamajoo comes to mind (was it the S series?) People dont have a problem with the standard sized box, and slots they can use.
MicroPCs have their place, and that niche will expand. But I cant see any reason I would want my main desktop to be anything but what it is, something I can put together and take apart by myself without a lot of headache.
I've built a couple flexATX form factor PCs for my kids, and they're fun, but it's a bitch to work even that small, I wouldnt want to work with anything much smaller. My big tower desktop, I can replace a video card or add a HDD in about 2 minutes.
Its really not a big deal at all. He just basically has the final say on which bugfixes go into the "official" codebase.
If you ran 2.2, you'd know that there are dozens upon dozens of diffs that you have to manually apply and then rebuild the kernel. Cox basically hasn't been doing his "job" in a long time, but hey, you get what you pay for.
I hope that MBA gets him a nice sweet gig managing a 7-11 or something.
Ya think? Or is it that slashbots just cant handle another opinion.
Yeah, conspiracy theories about the gumment and microsoft in league with the MPAA are all fine and good, but god forbid anyone cast a doubtful eye on the saints of the linux kernel.
I have no doubt that many contributors would have no problem dumping proprietary code on Linus for inclusion, if for no other reason than to see their name in the source tarballs to stroke their own egos.
New development, sure. But there's a CONSTANT stream of bugfixes for the older code. It's shocking, I know, but linux, like any other complex software project, always has another bug or two hundred to be found.
Once SCO wins this lawsuit and everyone has to roll back to the 2.2 kernel, this will be a much bigger deal. You're going to need someone who can handle the stress, because 2.2 will once again become the current codebase. I'd imagine Linus would just take it over again.
Hmm.. There's a thought. Maybe they know more about the legitimacy of the SCO case than they're letting on, perhaps he's stepping aside so Linus can move back in.
Anyways, can't trust any of them if they aren't on the payroll. Eventually IBM will find a way to "own" linux, whether they buy it from SCO or, hell, they could just take it. What are ya gonna do about it, they're IBM.
I think "Blair Witch Project" is probably the best recent example of this. Word of mouth literally catapulted that one into the limelight.
Another good (not so recent) example would be "Rocky". It was a low budget practically independent film (the total budget was well under a million bucks IIRC). It went on to win the Oscar and become one of the most well known franchises in filmdom. (Yeah, all the sequels were dumb but the first was a great movie).
Or then the assholes with the cutesy polyphonic alert tones, there was this one idiot in a restaurant who had Spongebob Squarepants laugh on the text feature. Wlalalalhahalalhal. (poke with single finger for 5 minutes). Wlahalhallahalala
You win this one. RTFA. They're finally admitting what you scream and holler about every time theres some statement made about internet piracy:
They realize that they're earning less because their product is not worth 15 bucks a head to see, and the public is on to them.
Noone had to tell me Gigli was a terrible movie. I'm already sick to death of "Bennifer", neither have any talent, and it was obvious to me that a vehicle for two pretty airheads was not something I'd be interested in.
Now speaking of movies, who else saw "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"? Geezus christ.
If you ever imagined that Captain Nemo, Jeckle/Hyde, the invisble man, one of the chicks from dracula, the guy from King Solomon's Mines and Dorian Gray got together in some sort of 19th century version of the X-Men to fight Dr Moriarty for some reason? If so, have you ever imagined that this story would be written by someone who'd NEVER READ ANY OF THE ORIGINAL BOOKS AND HAS A SATURDAY MORNING CARTOON IDEA OF THE CHARACTERS? Shit, Jeckle/Hyde was portrayed as an incredible hulk kind of guy. And yeah - that Dorian Gray - the one from the Wilde book "I will destroy you with the power of Sodomy!"
Sad thing is everyone else liked it. When Dorian Gray came onscreen I said "Uh oh Connery, you better watch your butt!", there was a sole fit of laughter from someone way in the back who'd no doubt read the book - or seen a decent movie adaptation of it.
Anyways.
The MPAA is realizing the era of "throw some big names and a pile of FX into any old shlocky script" blockbuster era is over. We've seen all the explosions and stunts we're gonna see. They know they have to either do better - or perhaps do it cheaper. I would have seen the hulk for 5 bucks - IF that included a soda (which is only worth like a dime to them for fuck sakes). Ok, I know the theatres and the movie producers are two seperate entities, but they could work it out.
People want value for their entertainment dollar, and they know they aren't going to get it from Gigli. My 8 and 6 year old kids know that. For the cost to take them to a movie, we can stop by Babbages and pick out a console title and be more entertained.
Ok, end of story. Now relax. And turn your fucking phones off in the theater, text mode or not, it's still annoying. If you dont like the movie, leave, and text/talk/bleep/bloop in the damn parking lot.
Congress has indicated that jurisdictions should be collecting an array of data on homelessness, including unduplicated counts, use of services and the effectiveness of the local homeless assistance system. HUD has been directed by Congress to work with jurisdictions toward this end and be able to analyze local homeless data by 2004.
This is about assessing the actual problem of homelessness with some accuracy, so they can find a solution. The problem is noone knows how many there are that are homeless. Is that kid with the squeegee looking for handouts homeless, or some suburban brat trying to make some easy money? (I personally know middle class douchebags who did just that).
EPIC's writeup puts the whole "individual tracking" spin onto it. The troublesome homeless are already individually tracked in a sense, the local cops already know their names and disorders and whatnot. This is HUD trying to get an idea how many people are homeless, for how long, and where, by way of a Congressional order.
You cant attempt to solve the problem without defining it first.
Ie; most of the homeless funding these days gets concentrated in big urban centers. But there are homeless folks in every little podunk town from coast to coast who are ignored, because Mayberry has no soup kitchen.
I think the idea is you take the electricity from the grid and use it to split water and make hydrogen. You store the hydrogen in a fuel cell, and when the grid gets overloaded the electricity flows back into it.
It's basically about making everyone store some reserve power in big batteries then share it with everyone else in times of need. Hydrogen is just a buzzword to attract the attention of halfwits like michael. It could be a stack of car batteries for the same effect.
Of course, this is silly, how many people would rewire their batteries so that in blackout times, their power stays in their home? Sure, you could outlaw "electricity hoarding", but whos going to police that?
And now they're moving back towards mainframes with terminal services and whatnot. Noone wants to administrate 1000 machines when they can administrate one or two.
Similarly theres no army of power workers to run around and inspect everyones little personal hydrogen generators.
What noone has ever been able to adequately explain to me is, why is MSFT an "evil company" with an "evil product" when Apple is a "angelic company" run by magic pixies and fairies? They're both out for the same thing - to make money for shareholders. They both use the same tactics and make the same types of decisions.
Or, why is MSFT more evil than VA Software? Now theres a company that pays an idiot like michael to make stupid, uninformed and offtopic trolls to deride others work. He talks about trustworthy computing completely out of context - on a "tech oriented" site.
Some MSFT drone says something remotely negative towards linux and the slashbots let loose the dogs (well, hamsters).
I used to like this site as a good source for tech news. I would have once considered subscribing. Now its just fanboy MSFT bashing, and serves no useful purpose.
Now anything that doesnt toe the line with the editors is modded as troll. Dare have a different point of view? You dont think proprietary=evil and free=good in all cases? -1 troll.
So I just troll straight out a lot of the time, I'll be modded that way anyhow, and I have to somehow show my contempt for the groupthink idiocy around here.
I'm not talking about homebrewed stuff and endless tetris clones, but real big-house published and polished games.
So far we pretty much just have Carmacks work to play under linux. So just getting the tools into the hands of serious dev houses is at least a step in the right direction.
Too bad the iDreama was just a wetDreama. A linux based commercial console could have been just the ticket to pave the way for professional desktop linux ports.
Though, the way I see it, PC gaming is dying a slow death anyways, or at least diverging from console gaming in a big way. It used to be the machine on my desk (an Amiga) blew the doors off of the console on my TV (8 bit NES). Now its often the other way around.
Could linux based PDAs be the toe-in-the-door for some real commercial game development for linux? Or productivity and other such apps?
I mean I see major commercial titles hitting Palms and WinCE, if some ported to linux based PDAs, it might snowball into linux, well (get ready to mod me down, zealots), doing something useful for me besides routing packets to my Windows machines and Xbox.
If all you had to do to avoid copyright infringement claims was insert a few whitespaces, then copyrights would hold no value. All of those statements are completely identical.
But you cant copyright an individual statement no more than you can copyright a word. When the code becomes more complex, two programmers could easily come up with the same algorithm and nearly identical code (say both implementing a bubble sort or linked list).
I guess "right way" wasnt what I meant to say, I should have said "best way".
That backroom deals between Apple and Microsoft prevent them from ever bringing their OS out for the x86. They'd make a killing, it's about the only thing that could compete with Windows.
As for their hardware angle, if it's truly superior to off-the-shelf PC, it would still sell. But they wouldnt need it to, they'd be rolling in ridiculous wealth.
Of course, then slashdot would have to change it's slanted view of proprietary software, if MSFT was the underdog and Apple was on top. The world turned upside down for the frothing zealot, indeed.
Anyways, nice review, but redundant, I dont see why anyone should expect anything less than 100% security out of the box. After all, Mac OSX "just works", doesnt it?
Actually it makes me more inclined to believe that the two pieces of source were cloned from each other.
Programming languages (C in this case) are fairly orthoganal. It's easy for two people to both come up with the exact same solution in complete isolation, there's often only one "right" way to accomplish something.
But for two to describe the exact same thing in english and come up with word-for-word the exact same result is fishy indeed. Imagine two english students handing in the same essay, word-for-word compared to two comp students handing in the same code with a few changed variable names.
If comments were cut and pasted, I'm assuming code was too. The issue really is who owns the source in the first place, not whether the same code is in both places.
Your problems are no doubt more systemic than just the main breaker panel. That cloth wrapped wire is in your walls too (which isnt necessarily all that bad, thats what the pro will tell you). Can the existing wiring even support the added load of your new Sun box?
Or, you can get advice from a bunch of halfwits on the internet. It's up to you.
Slashdot Mirror
SCO can't have it both ways. SCO has a clear choice: either pledge not to use any Open Source/Free Software in any of their products, or actively participate in the Open Source/Free Software movement and reap the benefits
Why the hell not? You bitch about restrictive MSFT EULA's but you still run Windows (ya ya only for games, but still). You bitch about proprietary lockdowns, but you buy iPods and G5 Macs.
You dont have to like the GPL to use it. I use GPL'd software, and I personally dont like it, nor do I consider it a truly free license, compared BSD's "do whatever the fuck you want we dont care" mentality.
This just shows that the GPL is more of a cult/religion than a software license.
True, new features cant really be added, but it might be worth it to support faster CPUS and RAM. Like my 645 example would let me use a fancy shmancy new CPU, perhaps with an 800mhz bus, and true DDR400. A 50 dollar upgrade rather than a 200 dollar mobo replacement.
Yeah! Device support in linux rocks! It's even better with BSD!
Now if I can only figure out why the fuck my printer, mouse, modem, network, wifi and video card dont work with my l337 slackware box.
-1: We already know what a joke linux "device support" is.
Theres more to the video card than just the GPU, you'd need a new RAMDAC for higher resolutions and faster refresh rates and whatnot, and the memory interfaces video cards use get faster and faster, so that's probably not practical.
But I'm with you in concept.
I've always wondered why the northbridge and southbridge cant be socketed. What technically would prevent me from pulling the SiS 645dx chip out of the computer I'm using now, replace it with a pin compatable 648 that will let me use the fancy new HT enabled processors?
PCs have stayed pretty much the same because the majority of PC owners want something upgradable, and something they can fix themselves without a 200x jewelers loupe and nerves of steel.
Various folks have tried the iMac concept, IBMs little goofy thingamajoo comes to mind (was it the S series?) People dont have a problem with the standard sized box, and slots they can use.
MicroPCs have their place, and that niche will expand. But I cant see any reason I would want my main desktop to be anything but what it is, something I can put together and take apart by myself without a lot of headache.
I've built a couple flexATX form factor PCs for my kids, and they're fun, but it's a bitch to work even that small, I wouldnt want to work with anything much smaller. My big tower desktop, I can replace a video card or add a HDD in about 2 minutes.
If it ain't broke, dont fix it.
From his part time hobby?
I need to take a year off from playing playstation, it's hard work, I need to focus on my edumcation.
Its really not a big deal at all. He just basically has the final say on which bugfixes go into the "official" codebase.
If you ran 2.2, you'd know that there are dozens upon dozens of diffs that you have to manually apply and then rebuild the kernel. Cox basically hasn't been doing his "job" in a long time, but hey, you get what you pay for.
I hope that MBA gets him a nice sweet gig managing a 7-11 or something.
Ya think? Or is it that slashbots just cant handle another opinion.
Yeah, conspiracy theories about the gumment and microsoft in league with the MPAA are all fine and good, but god forbid anyone cast a doubtful eye on the saints of the linux kernel.
I have no doubt that many contributors would have no problem dumping proprietary code on Linus for inclusion, if for no other reason than to see their name in the source tarballs to stroke their own egos.
Pull your head out of the sand and look around.
New development, sure. But there's a CONSTANT stream of bugfixes for the older code. It's shocking, I know, but linux, like any other complex software project, always has another bug or two hundred to be found.
Once SCO wins this lawsuit and everyone has to roll back to the 2.2 kernel, this will be a much bigger deal. You're going to need someone who can handle the stress, because 2.2 will once again become the current codebase. I'd imagine Linus would just take it over again.
Hmm.. There's a thought. Maybe they know more about the legitimacy of the SCO case than they're letting on, perhaps he's stepping aside so Linus can move back in.
Anyways, can't trust any of them if they aren't on the payroll. Eventually IBM will find a way to "own" linux, whether they buy it from SCO or, hell, they could just take it. What are ya gonna do about it, they're IBM.
I think "Blair Witch Project" is probably the best recent example of this. Word of mouth literally catapulted that one into the limelight.
Another good (not so recent) example would be "Rocky". It was a low budget practically independent film (the total budget was well under a million bucks IIRC). It went on to win the Oscar and become one of the most well known franchises in filmdom. (Yeah, all the sequels were dumb but the first was a great movie).
No its not. Beep Beep. Beep Beep.
Or then the assholes with the cutesy polyphonic alert tones, there was this one idiot in a restaurant who had Spongebob Squarepants laugh on the text feature. Wlalalalhahalalhal. (poke with single finger for 5 minutes). Wlahalhallahalala
BOOT TO THE HEAD
You win this one. RTFA. They're finally admitting what you scream and holler about every time theres some statement made about internet piracy:
They realize that they're earning less because their product is not worth 15 bucks a head to see, and the public is on to them.
Noone had to tell me Gigli was a terrible movie. I'm already sick to death of "Bennifer", neither have any talent, and it was obvious to me that a vehicle for two pretty airheads was not something I'd be interested in.
Now speaking of movies, who else saw "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"? Geezus christ.
If you ever imagined that Captain Nemo, Jeckle/Hyde, the invisble man, one of the chicks from dracula, the guy from King Solomon's Mines and Dorian Gray got together in some sort of 19th century version of the X-Men to fight Dr Moriarty for some reason? If so, have you ever imagined that this story would be written by someone who'd NEVER READ ANY OF THE ORIGINAL BOOKS AND HAS A SATURDAY MORNING CARTOON IDEA OF THE CHARACTERS? Shit, Jeckle/Hyde was portrayed as an incredible hulk kind of guy. And yeah - that Dorian Gray - the one from the Wilde book "I will destroy you with the power of Sodomy!"
Sad thing is everyone else liked it. When Dorian Gray came onscreen I said "Uh oh Connery, you better watch your butt!", there was a sole fit of laughter from someone way in the back who'd no doubt read the book - or seen a decent movie adaptation of it.
Anyways.
The MPAA is realizing the era of "throw some big names and a pile of FX into any old shlocky script" blockbuster era is over. We've seen all the explosions and stunts we're gonna see. They know they have to either do better - or perhaps do it cheaper. I would have seen the hulk for 5 bucks - IF that included a soda (which is only worth like a dime to them for fuck sakes). Ok, I know the theatres and the movie producers are two seperate entities, but they could work it out.
People want value for their entertainment dollar, and they know they aren't going to get it from Gigli. My 8 and 6 year old kids know that. For the cost to take them to a movie, we can stop by Babbages and pick out a console title and be more entertained.
Ok, end of story. Now relax. And turn your fucking phones off in the theater, text mode or not, it's still annoying. If you dont like the movie, leave, and text/talk/bleep/bloop in the damn parking lot.
Congress has indicated that jurisdictions should be collecting an array of data on homelessness, including unduplicated counts, use of services and the effectiveness of the local homeless assistance system. HUD has been directed by Congress to work with jurisdictions toward this end and be able to analyze local homeless data by 2004.
This is about assessing the actual problem of homelessness with some accuracy, so they can find a solution. The problem is noone knows how many there are that are homeless. Is that kid with the squeegee looking for handouts homeless, or some suburban brat trying to make some easy money? (I personally know middle class douchebags who did just that).
EPIC's writeup puts the whole "individual tracking" spin onto it. The troublesome homeless are already individually tracked in a sense, the local cops already know their names and disorders and whatnot. This is HUD trying to get an idea how many people are homeless, for how long, and where, by way of a Congressional order.
You cant attempt to solve the problem without defining it first.
Ie; most of the homeless funding these days gets concentrated in big urban centers. But there are homeless folks in every little podunk town from coast to coast who are ignored, because Mayberry has no soup kitchen.
I think the idea is you take the electricity from the grid and use it to split water and make hydrogen. You store the hydrogen in a fuel cell, and when the grid gets overloaded the electricity flows back into it.
It's basically about making everyone store some reserve power in big batteries then share it with everyone else in times of need. Hydrogen is just a buzzword to attract the attention of halfwits like michael. It could be a stack of car batteries for the same effect.
Of course, this is silly, how many people would rewire their batteries so that in blackout times, their power stays in their home? Sure, you could outlaw "electricity hoarding", but whos going to police that?
And now they're moving back towards mainframes with terminal services and whatnot. Noone wants to administrate 1000 machines when they can administrate one or two.
Similarly theres no army of power workers to run around and inspect everyones little personal hydrogen generators.
What noone has ever been able to adequately explain to me is, why is MSFT an "evil company" with an "evil product" when Apple is a "angelic company" run by magic pixies and fairies? They're both out for the same thing - to make money for shareholders. They both use the same tactics and make the same types of decisions.
Or, why is MSFT more evil than VA Software? Now theres a company that pays an idiot like michael to make stupid, uninformed and offtopic trolls to deride others work. He talks about trustworthy computing completely out of context - on a "tech oriented" site.
Some MSFT drone says something remotely negative towards linux and the slashbots let loose the dogs (well, hamsters).
I used to like this site as a good source for tech news. I would have once considered subscribing. Now its just fanboy MSFT bashing, and serves no useful purpose.
Now anything that doesnt toe the line with the editors is modded as troll. Dare have a different point of view? You dont think proprietary=evil and free=good in all cases? -1 troll.
So I just troll straight out a lot of the time, I'll be modded that way anyhow, and I have to somehow show my contempt for the groupthink idiocy around here.
I'm not talking about homebrewed stuff and endless tetris clones, but real big-house published and polished games.
So far we pretty much just have Carmacks work to play under linux. So just getting the tools into the hands of serious dev houses is at least a step in the right direction.
Too bad the iDreama was just a wetDreama. A linux based commercial console could have been just the ticket to pave the way for professional desktop linux ports.
Though, the way I see it, PC gaming is dying a slow death anyways, or at least diverging from console gaming in a big way. It used to be the machine on my desk (an Amiga) blew the doors off of the console on my TV (8 bit NES). Now its often the other way around.
Dude,
Its Free.
Free as in 300 bucks!
People pay twice as much for half the machine if it runs OSX, why not transfer that to the PDA market?
What you need is a blitz marketing campaign with testimonials from tech-savvy individuals like tony hawk and ellen feiss.
Could linux based PDAs be the toe-in-the-door for some real commercial game development for linux? Or productivity and other such apps?
I mean I see major commercial titles hitting Palms and WinCE, if some ported to linux based PDAs, it might snowball into linux, well (get ready to mod me down, zealots), doing something useful for me besides routing packets to my Windows machines and Xbox.
If all you had to do to avoid copyright infringement claims was insert a few whitespaces, then copyrights would hold no value. All of those statements are completely identical.
But you cant copyright an individual statement no more than you can copyright a word. When the code becomes more complex, two programmers could easily come up with the same algorithm and nearly identical code (say both implementing a bubble sort or linked list).
I guess "right way" wasnt what I meant to say, I should have said "best way".
That backroom deals between Apple and Microsoft prevent them from ever bringing their OS out for the x86. They'd make a killing, it's about the only thing that could compete with Windows.
As for their hardware angle, if it's truly superior to off-the-shelf PC, it would still sell. But they wouldnt need it to, they'd be rolling in ridiculous wealth.
Of course, then slashdot would have to change it's slanted view of proprietary software, if MSFT was the underdog and Apple was on top. The world turned upside down for the frothing zealot, indeed.
Anyways, nice review, but redundant, I dont see why anyone should expect anything less than 100% security out of the box. After all, Mac OSX "just works", doesnt it?
Actually it makes me more inclined to believe that the two pieces of source were cloned from each other.
Programming languages (C in this case) are fairly orthoganal. It's easy for two people to both come up with the exact same solution in complete isolation, there's often only one "right" way to accomplish something.
But for two to describe the exact same thing in english and come up with word-for-word the exact same result is fishy indeed. Imagine two english students handing in the same essay, word-for-word compared to two comp students handing in the same code with a few changed variable names.
If comments were cut and pasted, I'm assuming code was too. The issue really is who owns the source in the first place, not whether the same code is in both places.
If you have to ask...
Your problems are no doubt more systemic than just the main breaker panel. That cloth wrapped wire is in your walls too (which isnt necessarily all that bad, thats what the pro will tell you). Can the existing wiring even support the added load of your new Sun box?
Or, you can get advice from a bunch of halfwits on the internet. It's up to you.