I find that Rammstein is among the best "stress-relief" music available, because my German is not nearly so good as my English, so I am not distracted by the (sometimes kind of stupid) lyrics.
Whadda you mean stupid lyrics?
Don't need a friend, no cocaine.
Need neither doctor nor medicine.
Don't need a wife, just vaseline,
some nitroglycerin.
I need money for gasoline,
explosive like kerosine
with many octane and free from lead
a fuel like
Eh? The whole way watermarking is better than DRM is that it doesn't impose restrictions on what you're doing with your own hardware
It uniquely identifies me in forums where I would otherwise choose to remain anonymous. That's a greater restriction on my freedom than preventing me from playing the latest Hollywood junk because I don't have an OS that phones home to check whether I've paid my dues.
Refusing to allow me to view THEIR masterpieces unless I meet their conditions is fine by me. Forcing me to uniquely identify MY masterpieces in order to protect theirs is not acceptable.
"They" are not one unique set of individuals any more than slashdotters are.
True, but the "They" I referred to was specifically the control freaks. The problem I have with this chip is that it has almost NO use which will benefit the purchaser. It's purpose is to impose restrictions on the person using it, and it's far more likely that it will be imposed on them (sneakily or otherwise) than for them to choose it.
People should not be forced to pay for their own subjugation.
sounds suspiciously like xul (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/) with some flash thrown in.
That's not a bad thing.
I'm very interested in this. It could potentially make OpenLaszlo the tool of choice for quickie desktop applications. Rapid, clean and easy prototyping - what's not to like?
The last thing Microsoft wants is an genuinely interesting discussion on the business case for OSS. Their shill has just deflected the possibility of such a discussion. Instead we have hundreds of repetitions of the standard boring explanations of the GPL's scope that everyone has read a thousand times before.
It's been an extremely effective tactic for a long time here. Post a trollish comment as a red herring at the start of any potentially productive discussion of Linux or FOSS. Any interesting posts promptly are buried in an avalanche of "me too" replies to the troll.
You're reading the blatantly false article summary, not the actual article.
I read the actual article and was extrapolating.
Technologies like this are a wet dream for the government and corporate control freaks. They will endeavour to make it mandatory, not just for video, but eventually for all information uploaded. Individual freedom and anonymity is an anathema to them, and will not be tolerated.
I think this is an outstanding compromise; it leaves legitimate fair use rights in place
This isn't about protecting "Moe and the Big Exit" from piracy, it's about ensuring all video footage loaded onto the net is uniquely identified. It's about ensuring whisleblowers are caught and punished for exposing corporate masters and that (eventually) indie films can be blocked at source.
Tagging illegally recorded video is one thing, and might just be acceptable. Tagging every bit of video you upload is an enormous breach of privacy, and sets a dangerous precedent for removing our right to anonymity on the web.
That's not a compromise, it's an outright surrender.
"Wait, you mean religion might confer some survival advantage?
No, it's religion which is evolving.
In that sense, social structures like religions have many of the characteristics of living multicelled organisms, and the death or mutation of an individual cell rarely affects the whole animal. Over time though, enough changes accumulate that the organism would be barely recognisable to it's progenitors.
To further the analogy, children born into the faith would be a normal growth process, while conversion of athiests from other religions would be equivalent to predation.
This highway leads to the shadowy tip of reality: you're on a through route
to the land of the shill, the different, the bizarre, the unexplainable...Go as far as
you like on this road. Its limits are only those of mind itself. Ladies and
Gentlemen, you're entering the wondrous dimension of imagination, where Windows never crashes. Next
stop....The Twilight Zone.
All of those things you've listed live in application space. A late '80's AmigaOS or Atari STOS running the right apps (and assuming a 3GHz 680x0) could achieve the same results with an OS footprint of less than a meg.
For many of us, that's the problem with the MS monopoly. It's OS development and innovation that those 15 years have passed by, and that's purely because there's been no opportunity for competition.
You're missing the point. Each distro only needs to describe itself. As long as the description is in a standard format, the package manager can work out where each component in the package needs to go as an offset to the distro the package was originally targetted for.
The only way that I can see to fix that is to design a universal package tree, and convince all the major distros to conform to it.
Um, no. The great strength Linux has is its diversity. Every distro was formed because someone had an itch to scratch, and open source gave them the power to do so.
The correct answer is to create a package tree descriptor and include it with each distro. The packaging tool/GUI could then parse the descriptor file to work out where everything should go. That would allow even radically different tree structures such as Plan 9's to be used if the distro developer wanted to.
Using something like this, along with Alien, would mean Linux could handle multiple package formats, and could easily adapt to new ones if needed.
Some parts getting warmer, some colder (see the extra snow falling in antarctica
The reason for the extra snow should be obvious. When the world heats up, even slightly, more water evaporates from the oceans. That water will preferentially precipitate out in the coldest parts of the world.
Global effects are not uniform at local levels, so while parts of Antarctica have sub-zero temperatures year round, and therefore capture more than their habitual amount of water as snow, Antarctica as a whole is contracting rapidly. That's evidenced by more than 16,000sq km (Larsen A&B, Wilkins) of ice shelf vanishing over the last ten years.
With Windows Vista for $50, with Novell Linux for $29. I know what most people would choose.
Yep, most, but not all.
And that's why MS is so terrified of allowing Linux in at an OEM level. The biggest barrier to Linux adoption is its scarcity, but once enough of those scarce customers have ticked the $29 option, the applications will come, the hardware support will come and there'll be competition in the market again.
The last thing Microsoft wants is to have to compete on price OR quality.
"published without restrictions or royalties": OpenXML already fulfills this today
Good point. Today yes, OpenXML meets that criteria, but tomorrow may be a different story.
"fully and independently implemented by multiple software providers on multiple platforms without any intellectual property reservations for necessary technology": Once Novell did it for OpenXML, there will be three vendors (Novell, Microsoft and the open-source project doing the ODF-OpenXML converter) on multiple platforms (Windows & all platforms OpenOffice runs on). Sounds like OpenXML has this one in the pocket as well.
Novell is in Microsoft's pocket, and Microsoft is funding the ODF-OpenXML converter. Besides, you forgot to allow for the "without any intellectual property reservations for necessary technology" part, which is not guaranteed with OpenXML.
But for all skeptics, once OpenXML is an ISO standard in 6 months or so, this will be a given.
We'd better wait until then before adopting it then. Mean time, ODF does all of the above, but without any of the "gotchas".
By the way, congratulations on writing a post which very cleverly skirts all the questionable bits of Microsoft's OpenXML push without actually lying. Care to disclose who you work for?
Scott Finnie tests Vista for hundreds of hours, finds nothing wrong with it, so he complains that Microsoft now focuses on " Avoiding negative publicity (especially about security and software quality)". And it's somehow wrong.
Spending six years and six billion dollars to achieve little more than a (debatable) improvement in security and a glossy but irritating GUI is wrong.
Imagine what a company that cared about its customers could do with those resources.
Slashdot Mirror
Whadda you mean stupid lyrics?
That's literary GOLD, man....It uniquely identifies me in forums where I would otherwise choose to remain anonymous. That's a greater restriction on my freedom than preventing me from playing the latest Hollywood junk because I don't have an OS that phones home to check whether I've paid my dues.
Refusing to allow me to view THEIR masterpieces unless I meet their conditions is fine by me. Forcing me to uniquely identify MY masterpieces in order to protect theirs is not acceptable.
True, but the "They" I referred to was specifically the control freaks. The problem I have with this chip is that it has almost NO use which will benefit the purchaser. It's purpose is to impose restrictions on the person using it, and it's far more likely that it will be imposed on them (sneakily or otherwise) than for them to choose it.
People should not be forced to pay for their own subjugation.
Yes, and it's a good idea to embiggen your vocabulary at the same time.
That's not a bad thing.
I'm very interested in this. It could potentially make OpenLaszlo the tool of choice for quickie desktop applications. Rapid, clean and easy prototyping - what's not to like?
You've done more than just feed the troll.
The last thing Microsoft wants is an genuinely interesting discussion on the business case for OSS. Their shill has just deflected the possibility of such a discussion. Instead we have hundreds of repetitions of the standard boring explanations of the GPL's scope that everyone has read a thousand times before.
It's been an extremely effective tactic for a long time here. Post a trollish comment as a red herring at the start of any potentially productive discussion of Linux or FOSS. Any interesting posts promptly are buried in an avalanche of "me too" replies to the troll.
I read the actual article and was extrapolating.
Technologies like this are a wet dream for the government and corporate control freaks. They will endeavour to make it mandatory, not just for video, but eventually for all information uploaded. Individual freedom and anonymity is an anathema to them, and will not be tolerated.
This isn't about protecting "Moe and the Big Exit" from piracy, it's about ensuring all video footage loaded onto the net is uniquely identified. It's about ensuring whisleblowers are caught and punished for exposing corporate masters and that (eventually) indie films can be blocked at source.
Tagging illegally recorded video is one thing, and might just be acceptable. Tagging every bit of video you upload is an enormous breach of privacy, and sets a dangerous precedent for removing our right to anonymity on the web.
That's not a compromise, it's an outright surrender.
Well Duh!.
I don't know what planet you're from Sparky, but here on Earth, we call them "women" and "men"
No, it's religion which is evolving.
In that sense, social structures like religions have many of the characteristics of living multicelled organisms, and the death or mutation of an individual cell rarely affects the whole animal. Over time though, enough changes accumulate that the organism would be barely recognisable to it's progenitors.
To further the analogy, children born into the faith would be a normal growth process, while conversion of athiests from other religions would be equivalent to predation.
Like the GP said; "Good on paper."
I installed Microsoft Bob on a Turion 64 laptop with a gig of ram a couple of months ago. It ran ok.
It's not as bad as you'd expect, and certainly less intrusive than Vista.
Using a Windows computer?
Just a guess...
All of those things you've listed live in application space. A late '80's AmigaOS or Atari STOS running the right apps (and assuming a 3GHz 680x0) could achieve the same results with an OS footprint of less than a meg.
For many of us, that's the problem with the MS monopoly. It's OS development and innovation that those 15 years have passed by, and that's purely because there's been no opportunity for competition.
A better word: Cartel.
You're missing the point. Each distro only needs to describe itself. As long as the description is in a standard format, the package manager can work out where each component in the package needs to go as an offset to the distro the package was originally targetted for.
Um, no. The great strength Linux has is its diversity. Every distro was formed because someone had an itch to scratch, and open source gave them the power to do so.
The correct answer is to create a package tree descriptor and include it with each distro. The packaging tool/GUI could then parse the descriptor file to work out where everything should go. That would allow even radically different tree structures such as Plan 9's to be used if the distro developer wanted to.
Using something like this, along with Alien, would mean Linux could handle multiple package formats, and could easily adapt to new ones if needed.
The reason for the extra snow should be obvious. When the world heats up, even slightly, more water evaporates from the oceans. That water will preferentially precipitate out in the coldest parts of the world.
Global effects are not uniform at local levels, so while parts of Antarctica have sub-zero temperatures year round, and therefore capture more than their habitual amount of water as snow, Antarctica as a whole is contracting rapidly. That's evidenced by more than 16,000sq km (Larsen A&B, Wilkins) of ice shelf vanishing over the last ten years.
There is still NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER
None that you're capable of comprehending, sadly.
Yep, most, but not all.
And that's why MS is so terrified of allowing Linux in at an OEM level. The biggest barrier to Linux adoption is its scarcity, but once enough of those scarce customers have ticked the $29 option, the applications will come, the hardware support will come and there'll be competition in the market again.
The last thing Microsoft wants is to have to compete on price OR quality.
No, probably not. Microsoft's attempt at a swift flanking move on our stampede to format freedom has (temporarily) been blocked http://www.computing.co.uk/itweek/news/2173717/ope n-standards-bodies-call-halt.
"published without restrictions or royalties": OpenXML already fulfills this today
Good point. Today yes, OpenXML meets that criteria, but tomorrow may be a different story.
"fully and independently implemented by multiple software providers on multiple platforms without any intellectual property reservations for necessary technology": Once Novell did it for OpenXML, there will be three vendors (Novell, Microsoft and the open-source project doing the ODF-OpenXML converter) on multiple platforms (Windows & all platforms OpenOffice runs on). Sounds like OpenXML has this one in the pocket as well.
Novell is in Microsoft's pocket, and Microsoft is funding the ODF-OpenXML converter. Besides, you forgot to allow for the "without any intellectual property reservations for necessary technology" part, which is not guaranteed with OpenXML.
But for all skeptics, once OpenXML is an ISO standard in 6 months or so, this will be a given.
We'd better wait until then before adopting it then. Mean time, ODF does all of the above, but without any of the "gotchas".
By the way, congratulations on writing a post which very cleverly skirts all the questionable bits of Microsoft's OpenXML push without actually lying. Care to disclose who you work for?
Then why does it cost so much?
Spending six years and six billion dollars to achieve little more than a (debatable) improvement in security and a glossy but irritating GUI is wrong.
Imagine what a company that cared about its customers could do with those resources.
I just tried this with my own camera.
You owe me a new Canon 350D.
Try reinstalling the drivers.