When the Mydoom virus came out, there was no smoking gun memo about a linux advocate creating the virus. In fact, there was plenty of evidence to the contrary.
We already know Microsoft has contirubuted money to SCO, and this moves in line with that theory. It is much more plausible, considering it's a degree of money and not the fact that money was transferred, than an incorrectly drawn conclusion about a linux zealot.
First, "make money through support"...there I said it!
How about code customization?
How about new jobs based off of that code?
How about increased skill set moves you into new areas that before weren't possible?
You shouldn't dismiss support so quickly. Support contracts don't necessarily mean your program is buggy. You can't foresee all uses of your application, yet alone misuses.
Now, it's absolutely your choice to release your code under a Free software license and as a Free software advocate, I absolutely respect that right. Proprietary licenses make sense to me in certain areas, like vertical applications and complex games. That is, until someone does a better job and is willing to benefit a massive group of others as opposed to himself or some small group.
The point I'm trying to make :
Free software is commoditizing/freeing source code and software applications, which is a good thing for society in general (you might think this is a point of contention, but it's not). You seem to think this is a choice and you won't subscribe until someone shows you a business model that works as effectively as software licenses. Well, the Free software movement isn't slowing down, it's gaining momentum. It will take you screaming and kicking with it, whether you like it or not. You may not think this is the case, and it may take a long time, but information will be freed.
I do installs of most flavors of Linux and installs of every flavor of Windows.
Hands down, the Linux distros that are aimed at your mother, which Debian IS NOT, are far easier to install than XP. If you think your mother will have an easy time installing XP, then you have never done so yourself. I'm tired of hearing this mindless drivel about installation. The war has been won hands down by Mandrake/SuSE/Redhat in ease of installation.
That is system administrators you are talking about, not developers.
Improving code is in fact a development process.
Redhat and Suse are NOT developers
You're so far off the mark, it's obvious you are a troll. Redhat and Suse contribute vast amounts to free software in general.
unless you find someone particuarly stupid who is willing to pay for for something they can get legally for free.
Why stupid? People will pay for something that they get value from period. If they don't, then they probably run cracked copies of proprietary software anyway. Besides, you're approaching the business model from the wrong side. It's not about licensing the software, but about selling value/services. We build a foundation of knowledge / software so people can easily create their own value / services. Take Mandrake Linux for example. They don't demand you join their club, but people understand that it helps them create a better product. Their business model is profitable.
You seem afraid that you might have to create something innovative to make money. That's understandable from your statements.
Free software doesn't cause businesses to fail. Buisnesses cause businesses to fail. Free software does have the side effect of removing high priced, rehashed software from the market. If this is the only thing a business is selling, then they go out of business. Whose fault is that?
You're wrapped up in the idea that free software has no value(monetarily) associated with it. That's simply not true. You can sell free software. It's that simple. That doesn't make you a lot of money, but that's where support/installation/customization comes into play and where the bulk of funds are acquired.
If they choose to create free software, then the value of their labors is... $0? Why would they create something that doesn't have monetary value?
People often forget why we even have copyright. It's not so people can make money, that's just an incentive. People's arguments about making money reminds me of a situation where companies rehash the same proprietary shit and we end up paying for this stagnation in more than just tangible money. Kind of like it is today. That is, however, changing at a fast rate towards open source/free software, open standards... ie..things we can innovate from. We are trying to break free from the proprietary clutch not only for monetary reasons, but for intellectual reasons as well.
OSS/free as in freedom, not necessarily beer. They aren't bankrolling free software, that's the whole point. Software is becoming a commodity and I don't think they look at selling free software as a loss. BTW, Redhat is making it clear that OSS on the desktop is viable, as long as there is a price tag associated with it. Lose the notion that you can't sell free software, and you might be on the right track.
The only difference with OSS and closed source software is that you have the option of paying or not with OSS.
That's just so wrong on so many fronts, I don't even want to begin addressing them all.
MySQL which isn't GPL
From their [mysql.com] website : If your software is licensed under either the GPL-compatible Free Software License as defined by the Free Software Foundation or approved by OSI, then use our GPL licensed version.
Have you tried OpenOffice 1.1? I find it hard to believe ( note: I'm not calling you a liar:> ) that less than half of the word documents won't open correctly. I work in an organisation where everybody uses Office. They mostly create overly formatted Word documents or formula spreadsheets and I have yet to have a single problem opening any of them.
I had a wacky issue with a KT400 mobo. I would get erratic behaviour with keyboard(ps2) + mouse(usb). I finally compiled USB into the kernel instead of a module and that fixed it( I still have a bugzilla entry ). It doesn't sound like that's your problem but you never know.
Just thought I'd let you know that. Lindows does not violate the trademark of Windows. Do your research. If you knew anything about trademark law then you would not make such bold assumptions. Whether this fight is to squash Linux does not matter. Enjoy your Windows servers you idiot.
It's a DNS round robin :
rsync.gentoo.org. 1200 IN A 206.169.166.57
rsync.gentoo.org. 1200 IN A 128.227.212.225
rsync.gentoo.org. 1200 IN A 132.207.4.160
rsync.gentoo.org. 1200 IN A 146.186.218.75..meaning that if you have a cached copy of this dns entry, you can look up the missing one and figure out who it is...
I'm not arguing about Linux being ready. I think it is for some people, isn't for others.
Two things I'm calling bullshit on :
1. I can take a PC running Windows XP, plug in any of thousands of pieces of hardware, and they'll just work.
This is so far from false I can't even believe you think it's true. I can think of 5 recent instances off the top of my head of devices that DO NOT run out of the box. Not to mention the countless calls from friends that need me to fix this, fix that, fix this, fix that!!!! ARGH!!!!! AND not to mention the F#$#$King viruses... ARGH!!!!
2. despite all the KDE vs. Gnome flamewars, it doesn't matter which you choose, because they both suck! Say what you want about XP's playschool UI (which can be skinned very easily, by the way); it's still years ahead of anything I've ever seen running on *nix.
Bonehead, bonehead. I watch users daily trying to figure out XP. What does this mean? Why is it asking me that? I also see Linux users daily. They ask questions too, no big surprise. But to say one is years ahead of the other is just wrong. MacOSX is nicer that Linux or Windows, but is not the dream UI everyone imagines it to be. It leaves users puzzled just as often. Thing is, they often *eventually* figure it out. Everyone I know who has switched to KDE from Windows prefers the interface. That may not be more than around 8 people, but that's 8 for 8. that prefer it. To say it sucks tells me you don't know what you are talking about.
It's a conflict of effort to try to keep children pure but let adults run wild.
who's effort? what are we? slaves?...RUN adults RUN!!
context and tone are everything - compare Schindler's List to GTA3)
OK..watching a real-life event of genocide portrayed by real people..v. an obviously fictitious computer GAME..yeah good point.
Most of you don't think there's enough evidence of the influence of video games.
Enough?!? more like...most of you realize there's no real evidence linking violent games to causing violent behavior. Violent people who play violent games is not the same thing, and is by no means indicative.
Advertisers certainly have full confidence that what appears on the screen powerfully both affects and effects (produces) behavior.It's ironic that the video game-producing companies argue that their games don't influence behavior, but then turn around and spend lots of money on advertising which they obviously believe does influence behavior. Your talking about two totally different things : advertising and games...no correlation at least in your usage
Follow the money - that's what they really know to be true. I followed the money and ended up in your corrupt church being fondled by your priest...I guess that's just a NEW form of advertising.
Many corporations line up every year to pay up to $2,200,000 for 30 seconds of screen time during the Super Bowl. Maybe they have some research you don't know about? C'mon! We need evidence that media influences behavior like we need evidence that gravity influences behavior. Remember this story [slashdot.org] about the fast and furious influence of TV in Bhutan (the last place on earth to legalize TV)? The fact that TV (a passive medium) profoundly influences people is well established. Doesn't it make sense that an active medium such as video games would also have a powerful influence (albeit different in some ways)? No, not really.
It troubles me that people have an appetite for violent content in the first place.
Hey, at least they're simulating their violence. If your weak little mind thinks you can figure out human nature...be my fucking guest. Welcome to the insanity we like to call humans.
Is amusement more important than character? Ha, stupid question . good point.
It sounds to me like you probably DON'T need to playing games...yeah, you sound different...
Yes, I'm really bored enough to repsond to this bullshit!
ProselytiZing..hmm...let's see...we have a government who's been disseminating false information and outright lying about cannabis for nearly THIRTY years...yet you call one small image proselytizing.....sounds like your the dogmatist.
What is the average Joe going to think when he searches for "linux games" on Google ...hmmm...maybe the average Joe WILL THINK...that's the point! Our government can't very well bend around on it's own ass when it's been pushing false propaganda for so long. It's up to brave people who have the guts to say hey "it's really not that bad, and people shouldn't be imprisoned for possessing it."
Linux games pages in not the place to raise it...well your just wrong for too many reasons... besides one could argue that/. is not the place to debate this (it's really not, but hey, I didn't start it!).
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, I didn't know anyone actually lived in North Dakota ;>
We should post peoples info more often, it's a lot more interesting when you know where someone is from.
Serenity NOW!!!
Serenity NOW!!!
When the Mydoom virus came out, there was no smoking gun memo about a linux advocate creating the virus. In fact, there was plenty of evidence to the contrary.
We already know Microsoft has contirubuted money to SCO, and this moves in line with that theory. It is much more plausible, considering it's a degree of money and not the fact that money was transferred, than an incorrectly drawn conclusion about a linux zealot.
First, "make money through support"...there I said it!
How about code customization?
How about new jobs based off of that code?
How about increased skill set moves you into new areas that before weren't possible?
You shouldn't dismiss support so quickly. Support contracts don't necessarily mean your program is buggy. You can't foresee all uses of your application, yet alone misuses.
Now, it's absolutely your choice to release your code under a Free software license and as a Free software advocate, I absolutely respect that right. Proprietary licenses make sense to me in certain areas, like vertical applications and complex games. That is, until someone does a better job and is willing to benefit a massive group of others as opposed to himself or some small group.
The point I'm trying to make :
Free software is commoditizing/freeing source code and software applications, which is a good thing for society in general (you might think this is a point of contention, but it's not). You seem to think this is a choice and you won't subscribe until someone shows you a business model that works as effectively as software licenses. Well, the Free software movement isn't slowing down, it's gaining momentum. It will take you screaming and kicking with it, whether you like it or not. You may not think this is the case, and it may take a long time, but information will be freed.
You're comment is bogus.
I do installs of most flavors of Linux and installs of every flavor of Windows.
Hands down, the Linux distros that are aimed at your mother, which Debian IS NOT, are far easier to install than XP. If you think your mother will have an easy time installing XP, then you have never done so yourself. I'm tired of hearing this mindless drivel about installation. The war has been won hands down by Mandrake/SuSE/Redhat in ease of installation.
That is system administrators you are talking about, not developers.
Improving code is in fact a development process.
Redhat and Suse are NOT developers
You're so far off the mark, it's obvious you are a troll. Redhat and Suse contribute vast amounts to free software in general.
unless you find someone particuarly stupid who is willing to pay for for something they can get legally for free.
Why stupid? People will pay for something that they get value from period. If they don't, then they probably run cracked copies of proprietary software anyway. Besides, you're approaching the business model from the wrong side. It's not about licensing the software, but about selling value/services. We build a foundation of knowledge / software so people can easily create their own value / services. Take Mandrake Linux for example. They don't demand you join their club, but people understand that it helps them create a better product. Their business model is profitable.
You seem afraid that you might have to create something innovative to make money. That's understandable from your statements.
Free software doesn't cause businesses to fail. Buisnesses cause businesses to fail. Free software does have the side effect of removing high priced, rehashed software from the market. If this is the only thing a business is selling, then they go out of business. Whose fault is that?
Cake? Sure! Eat it? Sure!
Thanks!
You're wrapped up in the idea that free software has no value(monetarily) associated with it. That's simply not true. You can sell free software. It's that simple. That doesn't make you a lot of money, but that's where support/installation/customization comes into play and where the bulk of funds are acquired.
If they choose to create free software, then the value of their labors is... $0? Why would they create something that doesn't have monetary value?
People often forget why we even have copyright. It's not so people can make money, that's just an incentive. People's arguments about making money reminds me of a situation where companies rehash the same proprietary shit and we end up paying for this stagnation in more than just tangible money. Kind of like it is today. That is, however, changing at a fast rate towards open source/free software, open standards... ie..things we can innovate from. We are trying to break free from the proprietary clutch not only for monetary reasons, but for intellectual reasons as well.
OSS/free as in freedom, not necessarily beer. They aren't bankrolling free software, that's the whole point. Software is becoming a commodity and I don't think they look at selling free software as a loss. BTW, Redhat is making it clear that OSS on the desktop is viable, as long as there is a price tag associated with it. Lose the notion that you can't sell free software, and you might be on the right track.
The only difference with OSS and closed source software is that you have the option of paying or not with OSS.
That's just so wrong on so many fronts, I don't even want to begin addressing them all.
MySQL which isn't GPL
From their [mysql.com] website : If your software is licensed under either the GPL-compatible Free Software License as defined by the Free Software Foundation or approved by OSI, then use our GPL licensed version.
This person is wrong elsewhere too.
Who moderated this idiot so high?
Hi,
:> ) that less than half of the word documents won't open correctly. I work in an organisation where everybody uses Office. They mostly create overly formatted Word documents or formula spreadsheets and I have yet to have a single problem opening any of them.
Have you tried OpenOffice 1.1? I find it hard to believe ( note: I'm not calling you a liar
There is an updated k3b, although you will probably have to compile from source. Works great for me!
I had a wacky issue with a KT400 mobo. I would get erratic behaviour with keyboard(ps2) + mouse(usb). I finally compiled USB into the kernel instead of a module and that fixed it( I still have a bugzilla entry ). It doesn't sound like that's your problem but you never know.
Tony, you are an *idiot*.
Just thought I'd let you know that.
Lindows does not violate the trademark of Windows. Do your research. If you knew anything about trademark law then you would not make such bold assumptions. Whether this fight is to squash Linux does not matter. Enjoy your Windows servers you idiot.
It's a DNS round robin : rsync.gentoo.org. 1200 IN A 206.169.166.57 rsync.gentoo.org. 1200 IN A 128.227.212.225 rsync.gentoo.org. 1200 IN A 132.207.4.160 rsync.gentoo.org. 1200 IN A 146.186.218.75 ..meaning that if you have a cached copy of this dns entry, you can look up the missing one and figure out who it is...
I'm not arguing about Linux being ready. I think it is for some people, isn't for others.
Two things I'm calling bullshit on : 1. I can take a PC running Windows XP, plug in any of thousands of pieces of hardware, and they'll just work.
This is so far from false I can't even believe you think it's true. I can think of 5 recent instances off the top of my head of devices that DO NOT run out of the box. Not to mention the countless calls from friends that need me to fix this, fix that, fix this, fix that!!!! ARGH!!!!! AND not to mention the F#$#$King viruses... ARGH!!!!
2. despite all the KDE vs. Gnome flamewars, it doesn't matter which you choose, because they both suck! Say what you want about XP's playschool UI (which can be skinned very easily, by the way); it's still years ahead of anything I've ever seen running on *nix.
Bonehead, bonehead. I watch users daily trying to figure out XP. What does this mean? Why is it asking me that? I also see Linux users daily. They ask questions too, no big surprise. But to say one is years ahead of the other is just wrong. MacOSX is nicer that Linux or Windows, but is not the dream UI everyone imagines it to be. It leaves users puzzled just as often. Thing is, they often *eventually* figure it out. Everyone I know who has switched to KDE from Windows prefers the interface. That may not be more than around 8 people, but that's 8 for 8. that prefer it. To say it sucks tells me you don't know what you are talking about.
When did Trolltech get involved in this?!? and when is QT4 coming out again :>
It's a conflict of effort to try to keep children pure but let adults run wild. ...RUN adults RUN!!
who's effort? what are we? slaves?
context and tone are everything - compare Schindler's List to GTA3)
OK..watching a real-life event of genocide portrayed by real people..v. an obviously fictitious computer GAME..yeah good point.
Most of you don't think there's enough evidence of the influence of video games.
Enough?!? more like...most of you realize there's no real evidence linking violent games to causing violent behavior. Violent people who play violent games is not the same thing, and is by no means indicative.
Advertisers certainly have full confidence that what appears on the screen powerfully both affects and effects (produces) behavior.It's ironic that the video game-producing companies argue that their games don't influence behavior, but then turn around and spend lots of money on advertising which they obviously believe does influence behavior.
Your talking about two totally different things : advertising and games...no correlation at least in your usage
Follow the money - that's what they really know to be true.
I followed the money and ended up in your corrupt church being fondled by your priest...I guess that's just a NEW form of advertising.
Many corporations line up every year to pay up to $2,200,000 for 30 seconds of screen time during the Super Bowl. Maybe they have some research you don't know about? C'mon! We need evidence that media influences behavior like we need evidence that gravity influences behavior. Remember this story [slashdot.org] about the fast and furious influence of TV in Bhutan (the last place on earth to legalize TV)? The fact that TV (a passive medium) profoundly influences people is well established. Doesn't it make sense that an active medium such as video games would also have a powerful influence (albeit different in some ways)?
No, not really.
It troubles me that people have an appetite for violent content in the first place.
Hey, at least they're simulating their violence. If your weak little mind thinks you can figure out human nature...be my fucking guest. Welcome to the insanity we like to call humans.
Is amusement more important than character? Ha, stupid question .
good point.
It sounds to me like you probably DON'T need to playing games...yeah, you sound different...
Yes, I'm really bored enough to repsond to this bullshit!
ProselytiZing..hmm...let's see...we have a government who's been disseminating false information and outright lying about cannabis for nearly THIRTY years...yet you call one small image proselytizing.....sounds like your the dogmatist.
...hmmm...maybe the average Joe WILL THINK...that's the point! Our government can't very well bend around on it's own ass when it's been pushing false propaganda for so long. It's up to brave people who have the guts to say hey "it's really not that bad, and people shouldn't be imprisoned for possessing it."
...well your just wrong for too many reasons... besides one could argue that /. is not the place to debate this (it's really not, but hey, I didn't start it!).
What is the average Joe going to think when he searches for "linux games" on Google
Linux games pages in not the place to raise it