Simple answer: stop violating the rights of the RIAA and stealing and distributing their property, or face prosecution and legal fees.
It is illegal to obtain copyrighted material from sources that are not authorized to distribute it - especially knowingly, but knowledge of the illegal act is not neccassary. The buck stops there. Whether or not increased music "sharing" benefits the music industry, or if a lack of good music is to blame for falling profits, or the economy is the cause, etc, is completely irrelevant. Stop stealing.
Burn the karma. Penis bird and goatse. Sup trollkore? big ups. And now, a painfully weak and over played troll - ladies and gentlemen: the *BSD troll.
It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Microsoft doesn't give a shit about the well being of it's customers, nor are they looking to benefit the internet community in any way. Any comments by their spokes people alluding to such intentions are purely facade.
Microsoft is taking legal measures because spammers cost them time and money with their Hotmail and MSN ventures. Microsoft would still consume your entire living toddler given the chance.
Linux passed AIX, HP-UX, etc in market share because it can do everything that companies require of AIX, HP-UX, etc very well (scaling, intensive app serving, massive storage and high speed retrieval, databasing. etc). Furthermore, development in these key areas of the operating system has been and will continue to be very strong. And in the end, of course, IBM kicked in and started marketing Linux heavily in these key areas.
As it stands, Linux can not outperform Macintosh in any area key to desktop use (as it relates to Mac users). Linux can do the same in many respects (like offer a decent web browser and MP3 playback), but overall user interface and major application support from key vendors is lacking and or far behind (Aqua, Photoshop, PageMaker, DreamWeaver, printer support, etc). Until these key desktop areas are addressed, the vast majority of Apple users won't mind paying the extra $$$ for convienence and famailarity.
Despite how much I love Linux, despite the fact that I contributed over $500 dollars to various Linux companies last year out of my very small pocket, and despite the fact that I use Redhat as my desktop operating system, I know that it ain't ready.
How economically feasible is it to sell a decent PDA with a portable Unix OS and develop Unix drivers for it's hardware, and then write and/or port applications to it? How much of these could you hope to sell? This is what the open source community is for: if you desire a small niche, take it upon yourself to develop it - or even better, find the rest of that small niche and develop it together.
As a side note, the intricities of X11 are not well suited to a PDA. It just simply isn't "light" enough.
This is Slashdot, who here would ever ask about OGG? Everyone is too concerned about whether or not it runs Linux, or imagining the implications of running these in a Beowulf driven cluster.
While it may sound like a good idea (and a magnificent way to spend a lunch break), I wouldn't suggest using your PDA to download "adult media" at work, and especially then decide to make use of it in the restroom.
Next time you beat off, focus for a second and think about all of the audible sounds that you are eminating in your pud-pounding fury. Now imagine how those sounds will fill an echo-riddled restroom.
Yes, they (cheap PCs) can. But, that cheap 233mhz system also utilizes and IDE drive, a PCI bus with a PCI video card with at least 16MB of memory, a large operating system complete with at least 200MB of files, and a myriad of drivers and programs. A simple low-end PDA doesn't have the luxury of these things. Pocket PCs or "high-end" PDAs like the $400+ Sony Clies have all kinds of innovations that can. These innovations cost money.
Besides, you can't lug a cheap 233mhz Pentium system around in your pocket. You pay for convienence.
I would imagine that almost all future "high end" PDAs and Pocket PCs
will be heavily media-centric - considering that most already are
(the biggest selling points that marketers tend to focus on when
advertising
their newest hand-held is MP3 playback, image veiwing and
manipulation,
digital photography, and video capture and playback). Afterall, the
PDA has long since evolved past a simple calculator and phone book. I
always assumed that many average users upgrade to a Pocket PC for
more power, power which is usually required to drive digital media
(sure, you can play MP3s on a PDA, but high end media and their
associated tools tend to require more power then a low end Sony Clie).
I really wish that IBM would just buy these whiney babies out and open source Unix. Well, first IBM collects some payments from Microsoft for the "Unix license" that they "bought" from SCO, and then IBM makes it open source.
44% is more then a bit extreme. It was not determined by anyone except the US government that this move resulted in a monopoly of any kind. Granted, this tariff only applies directly to our market (though it certaingly influences all markets) â" nonetheless, caution and some form of open dispute should be exericised first, especially in the precense of a WTO.
PS: who else would love to shove their piece up into the Asian chick on the âoeInsight by WebTrendsâ AD that keeps popping up? Also, that âoeOracle makes Linux unbreakableâ AD is annoying. They ain't do shit but make a partnership with Red Hat.
You have to take a step back and realize just how far we have come in the past hundred and some odd years: steam powered engines to the integrated circuit to the internet to space tourism.
Here is a cool slideshow about the subject from 2000, when the theory was "complete speculation". And here is an article from Sciecne Watch that was written in 2001, when it was considered "somehwat speculative". There wasn't much news about it in 2002. And now, we have this story in 2003.
OK, you web "coders", listen up. We, the general surfing public, are sick of Java, Flash, Javascript, CSS and "dynamic" anything. HTML was good enough for our grandparents and parents, HTML is good enough for us. It's a content description language, not a layout engine. We want data. When we click a link, we don't expect to see spinning globes or slowly assembling menus--we just want the next piece of data. Recent studies have found that up to 95% of bandwidth is wasted through over-designed websites. Add to that the cost of paying the glorified typists who create these sites and you are looking right at the reason the Internet bubble burst.
Look at Slashdot. With just a few lines of elegant Perl, Taco et al have created a slick, funcational, speedy, high-reliability site that eschews beauty in favor of pure information. Take your queue from these guys, web monkey.
It sounds like Win FS will operate a lot like a completely closed ReiserFS. Like the author (and probably many here) I don't like the idea of using a relational database as a FS very much. ext2 might be a bitch to bring up after a crash, but I'll be damned if it isn't stable and well documented. Imagine how well refined ext3 will be in another 12 months.
In any event, Microsoft still has a few years to refine this "Future Storage" file system, so all judgements concerning it's effectiveness are a bit premature on some levels. Then again, it's always good to start planning as early as possible - especially when you consider that it may be introduced into Windows Server 2003 some time during the next 12-18 months. For now, all we can base judegement off of is Microsoft marketing hype and comparisons to existing file systems that operate in a similar way.
I like the military (particularly the US's) because they protect my interests, food supply, and territory. We (the US) have accrued the deepest coffers. We therefore have the most to lose - we therefore have the most to protect.
It should be noted that it is not the human intelligence that elevates us above the competition of our own species, but rather, what elevated us above the rest of the animal kingdom.
Strife and warfare are part of nature in the animal kingdom. We are part of nature. Our military organizations are therefore only natural and expected - an inevitable result of our civilization.
But I digress, sorry for the inane philosophical troll - that's what my blog is for.
I can't wait to see the logo for the official city site, a wonderful college in honor of such an amazing city: A pimp strolling down the av', jack-slap cocked and ready, aimed at a cowering hoe..... The blurred image of a 1990 Honda Civic racing through Watts - gang bangers adorned in blue dew rags and wielding automatic weapons hanging from the windows, teeth capped in magnificent gold..... A heavily armed police officer forcing a terrified black youth to the pavement amidst a flurry of panic - night stick held high and proud, ready to strike.
A finer city does not exist, and a no city deserves it's own domain more then the great Los Angelas.
Nope, it's too slippery of a slope. Though spammers are highly annoying and wreak actual financial loss, their actions are largely legal. Therefore, like it or not, the bastards are entitled to all of their rights under the law.
If we let them do it to spammers, who will be next? P2P file sharers? Oh wait....
Oh boy! Now I can watch the entire Jersey Trilogy without the elaborate strings of curses and insults! Thanks Walmart. We may even be able to get a family-friendly "Pulp Fiction" available for rent soon. Junior will love it.
We live in a global economy of corporations now. It is irrelevant in what country a corporation resides in. Microsoft exists everywhere, and offers their coin to any government that will listen. Hell, they (MS) offered both Britian and Germany a ton of bucks to stick with MS across the board.
It isn't a question nationalism, but rather a test of common sense.
Politicians answer to the almighty dollar. Very few open source advocacy groups and/or companies can compete with Microsoft or UNIX vendors when it comes to lobbying. Therefore, the majority of politicians that even mention technology will often opt for closed source corporations, as they are paid handsomely to do so by closed-sourceinterests.
It's why open source is a grass roots movement. We aim to capture hearts and minds on a fundamental and righteous level. We target the wallet second.
Open source saves the government money. Open source would create more governemnt jobs, by not only keeping existing support personnel, but also by creating openings for developers that would tailor systems to the ever-evolving government technology base and needs. It makes complete sense to switch to open source. Why we don't switch is easy to see: Microsoft gives military politicians plenty of incentive not too.
Britian, France, Japan, Peru, China and Germany are all moving to Linux and open source. Hell, some are even writing up legislation that gives incentives to businesses that do so as well. Why aren't we (the United States)?
Slashdot Mirror
It is illegal to obtain copyrighted material from sources that are not authorized to distribute it - especially knowingly, but knowledge of the illegal act is not neccassary. The buck stops there. Whether or not increased music "sharing" benefits the music industry, or if a lack of good music is to blame for falling profits, or the economy is the cause, etc, is completely irrelevant. Stop stealing.
WTF is Bigpond? Who gives a fuck?
Burn the karma. Penis bird and goatse. Sup trollkore? big ups. And now, a painfully weak and over played troll - ladies and gentlemen: the *BSD troll.
It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Microsoft is taking legal measures because spammers cost them time and money with their Hotmail and MSN ventures. Microsoft would still consume your entire living toddler given the chance.
As it stands, Linux can not outperform Macintosh in any area key to desktop use (as it relates to Mac users). Linux can do the same in many respects (like offer a decent web browser and MP3 playback), but overall user interface and major application support from key vendors is lacking and or far behind (Aqua, Photoshop, PageMaker, DreamWeaver, printer support, etc). Until these key desktop areas are addressed, the vast majority of Apple users won't mind paying the extra $$$ for convienence and famailarity.
Despite how much I love Linux, despite the fact that I contributed over $500 dollars to various Linux companies last year out of my very small pocket, and despite the fact that I use Redhat as my desktop operating system, I know that it ain't ready.
Marketing people overstate the usefulness of their products in order to sell them.
Wow.
As a side note, the intricities of X11 are not well suited to a PDA. It just simply isn't "light" enough.
This is Slashdot, who here would ever ask about OGG? Everyone is too concerned about whether or not it runs Linux, or imagining the implications of running these in a Beowulf driven cluster.
Next time you beat off, focus for a second and think about all of the audible sounds that you are eminating in your pud-pounding fury. Now imagine how those sounds will fill an echo-riddled restroom.
Besides, you can't lug a cheap 233mhz Pentium system around in your pocket. You pay for convienence.
I would imagine that almost all future "high end" PDAs and Pocket PCs will be heavily media-centric - considering that most already are (the biggest selling points that marketers tend to focus on when advertising their newest hand-held is MP3 playback, image veiwing and manipulation, digital photography, and video capture and playback). Afterall, the PDA has long since evolved past a simple calculator and phone book. I always assumed that many average users upgrade to a Pocket PC for more power, power which is usually required to drive digital media (sure, you can play MP3s on a PDA, but high end media and their associated tools tend to require more power then a low end Sony Clie).
I really wish that IBM would just buy these whiney babies out and open source Unix. Well, first IBM collects some payments from Microsoft for the "Unix license" that they "bought" from SCO, and then IBM makes it open source.
ft
eetuk
ZDNET
e-insite
Other links:
ft.com
eetuk
ZDNET
e-insite.net
PS: who else would love to shove their piece up into the Asian chick on the âoeInsight by WebTrendsâ AD that keeps popping up? Also, that âoeOracle makes Linux unbreakableâ AD is annoying. They ain't do shit but make a partnership with Red Hat.
Holy shit.
What part of "first" don't you get?
YOU LIKEWISE FAIL IT
- YOU LIKEWISE FAIL IT
2003
Pretty cool.
Look at Slashdot. With just a few lines of elegant Perl, Taco et al have created a slick, funcational, speedy, high-reliability site that eschews beauty in favor of pure information. Take your queue from these guys, web monkey.
In any event, Microsoft still has a few years to refine this "Future Storage" file system, so all judgements concerning it's effectiveness are a bit premature on some levels. Then again, it's always good to start planning as early as possible - especially when you consider that it may be introduced into Windows Server 2003 some time during the next 12-18 months. For now, all we can base judegement off of is Microsoft marketing hype and comparisons to existing file systems that operate in a similar way.
It should be noted that it is not the human intelligence that elevates us above the competition of our own species, but rather, what elevated us above the rest of the animal kingdom.
Strife and warfare are part of nature in the animal kingdom. We are part of nature. Our military organizations are therefore only natural and expected - an inevitable result of our civilization.
But I digress, sorry for the inane philosophical troll - that's what my blog is for.
A finer city does not exist, and a no city deserves it's own domain more then the great Los Angelas.
I triple E, 8 Oh 2 point eleven, G.
Yeeaa. Fo shizzle my wi'ahless using nizzles, wi-fi all day players.
Fizzle pizzle
If we let them do it to spammers, who will be next? P2P file sharers? Oh wait....
Oh boy! Now I can watch the entire Jersey Trilogy without the elaborate strings of curses and insults! Thanks Walmart. We may even be able to get a family-friendly "Pulp Fiction" available for rent soon. Junior will love it.
It isn't a question nationalism, but rather a test of common sense.
It's why open source is a grass roots movement. We aim to capture hearts and minds on a fundamental and righteous level. We target the wallet second.
Open source saves the government money. Open source would create more governemnt jobs, by not only keeping existing support personnel, but also by creating openings for developers that would tailor systems to the ever-evolving government technology base and needs. It makes complete sense to switch to open source. Why we don't switch is easy to see: Microsoft gives military politicians plenty of incentive not too.
Britian, France, Japan, Peru, China and Germany are all moving to Linux and open source. Hell, some are even writing up legislation that gives incentives to businesses that do so as well. Why aren't we (the United States)?