If my laptop reacts to a sugar spike at all like my body does, it'll overclock itself for the morning, the hard drives will ramp up to the next RPM standard and then by afternoon the speed stepping on the CPU will drop to the lowest level, the drive will spin itself down at every possible chance and the screen brightness will be minimal.
Truth be told I don't eDonkey or the like but was referring more to torrents where I have seen compilations of every album an artist has done available as one big.torrent. You are surely right, though, about other p2p methods being more selective. I grovel before you and lick your toes.
I wonder a bit about iTunes vs. peer-to-peer metrics. On iTunes one is liable to buy a single track or two whereas on file sharing services downloading the album is usually the only choice (even if you only want one track). This alone would account for some of why file sharing is so much more voluminous.
Because the market is such a reliable judge of what makes a good technology. Every time the market beats up on RHT (which it loves to do) I buy and I've yet to go wrong with that strategy (granted I will only use this approach so long as I retain faith in the company). Consider the pummeling it got when Oracle announced Unbreakable. Anyone with a clue laughed at Oracle's move but the market reacted by pounding the stock.
So Novell has allied themselves with Microsoft which is questionable at best. From all what I've read the whole bit about cross indemnification was a last-minute "oh yeah, we'll also need you to sign this" from Microsoft. To which they replied, "yes, boss" while staring hungrily at the $240 million check.
Face it, Redhat *is* enterprise linux in the US. It got #2 in CIO magazine in terms of customer satisfaction and that's saying a whole hell of a lot (Novell came in at 23). As far as the Oracle Linux bit, I can't find the article but there was a recent piece about how nobody is adopting the rip-off OS. Even the enterprise clients that Oracle listed replied when contacted that they were either NOT using it or were doing a small pilot project. And who knows how many free licenses of 10g oracle had to give out to get even that much traction.
What a phenomenal waste of electricity. How many kilotons of coal does it take to power this pig? I just hope we can all move into 2nd life when our own planet starts writhing around.
When you single-handedly establish a new field of science you get a little slack. And I'm only agreeing with that particular position, not his entire life's work.
I think Freud had it right when he posited that "God" is a needed projection; it/he/she takes the place of the love and order provided by our parents when we were young. Once you get a bit older and your parents die or you realize that you're basically on your own, inventing a deity that loves and protects you and who even has expectations of you goes a long way to ensuring the continuance of the parental umbrella. On an evolutionary level, belief in a higher power might be enough to encourage one to take that risky ocean voyage or war on a neighbor.
I don't know who I pity most, the devout atheist who lives in the empty materialist world or the blindfolded religious who use faith as anything more than a way of encapsulating the grandeur and humbling nature of our planet and our Universe. I suppose if it's only the subjectivity of the situation that matters then the religious come out on top seeing as they have everlasting glory to look forward to.
I'm a big fan of MIT and most all of what it does but what on Earth does this little gimmick really have to offer? It's like some of the other MIT hackery that makes it onto slashdot such as the teddy bear with the gigabit LAN ports. I'd wager dollars to donuts that were it not for mit.edu at the end of the URL this story would have gone nowhere. I doubt MAKE would bother carrying this bit of cuteness.
I find it mildly amusing that you huff and puff about me having made a subjective argument when you not only offer no position of your own but accuse me of being a zealot.
What bothers me most about individuals such as yourselves is that you're hypocrites who idly claim to be making "a rational argument." I think it was Emerson who wrote that, "I can not hear what you say for what you are shouts too loudly in my ears."
The issues that drive people to become open source developers and supporters are not the issues that motivate everyone else's software purchasing decisions.
And they are not mutually exclusive. Your baseless reference to "cult infighting" demonstrates you have a poor understanding of the nature of Linux, the architecture of the community, and the role played by the dozens of companies that make a profit by supporting open source.
I think it's The Big Lebowski that begins with a narrative describing the protagonist as "a man who never found much use for himself." I'm in a similar boat in that I'm a couple years shy of 30, graduated with a BA in public relations and have ended up settling in as a linux systems admin. I am paid well enough, work from home, head up a small 501c3 non-profit and cavort around town more than most. I have racked up a bunch of certs (CISSP, RHCE, CCNP, etc) but place little faith in what they signify. In short, I do not think SA is not going to cut it for more than another year. It's just so damned circular, chasing all the usual listing systems, debugging the usual faulty driver, blah blah ad nauseum.
My temptation is that in attaining "professional" status in IT (and I'm generally regarded as competent by my peers), I'd like to believe I could segue into another field without going in for the typical grad school track. Granted, my odds of becoming a theoretical physicist without a grad degree are admittedly slim, but I believe an intelligent and dedicated individual really can teach themselves most of what they need to know to accomplish a particular project goal without having to settle in for four years of tuna and ramen. I would argue further that such an individual can attain a level of competence much faster than a PhD or masters candidate as they are working to solve a particular goal and can afford to skip or skim over material which plays no supporting role. There are enough tools out there (MIT's open courseware, for example) such that a prospective self-learner can see what entails a PhD in XXXX, pick out the most applicable courses, subselect further from that, and, yes, of course, spend some extra time learning necessary foundational materials to adequately comprehend the prior.
I mean I read published papers in biology or surgery and know that none of it is that radically incomprehensible.
Am I maverick that has gone as far as he's going to go without grad school, a brat dreaming that he can build a rocketship in his garage? Or am I right to recognize that knowledge and expertise are not locked solely in the halls of academia?
I'll conclude by saying that you can all save your breaths about grad school giving one great connections, advanced degrees being necessary for most positions, needing access to labs, etc. Assume I'm intelligent enough to pick an area where I could reasonably "go the distance" on my own -- economics / market behavior, algorithms, artificial intelligence, etc. Heck, one could argue that by self-learning one has more avenues for true field advancement in that they are not locked into the framework of a particular program or are poo-pood by professors who have their own regimented bias.
Hans Reiser, I believe, taught himself most everything he needed to know for ReiserFS (and skip comments about the trial). The founder of FedEx was told his idea would never work by a professor in his MBA department. Rare examples, sure, but examples all the same.
You ask "who wants to risk going with a vendor who's at risk of being tied up by a bunch of lawyers" as if the GPL is just some frivolous bit of txt that prepends Linux source code. Guess what, bucko, it's not. It's the framework around which Linux branched and grew. Novell's deal with Microsoft was craftily crafted such that it didn't challenge the GPL outright but started the FUD engine that MSFT just might go after clients who are not covered under some bogus IP protection deal. In essence, MSFT took a Linux distro (novell) and said, "You'll be our lap dop. Your sales team can now run around and say that your product is Microsoft compliant. We will milk you on this for a bit to fragment and confuse the Linux community and then we'll ram a knife into your lungs and walk away whistling while you aspirate on the sidewalk."
Novell, in firmly attaching itself to Microsoft's teat, is actively working to subvert the open source movement by giving Microsoft some high ground upon which it can launch an assault on the rest of the movement. And your reaction to the FSF working to protect the community is, "oh noes, the lawyers are getting involved, nobody likes that."
It strikes me as a little unusual that nobody is making a bigger deal out of GPLv3 and how it will essentially nullify this deal or at the least put Novell in a very awkward situation. Even if Linus doesn't move the kernel over to v3, you can bet that glibc, gcc, etc, are all going to go that way. Try shipping a distro without either of those two.
Obviously Msft and Novl are more than aware of the licensing change so the question is what sort of insidious deal has msft given Novl in the back room? Truth is, if Novell ships GPLv3 software in SuSe then they stand to be liable for enormous damages, injunctions, etc. The patent indemnification nonsense they got from msft will be more than overshadowed by the ruckus created when Novell ignores the license that a significant section of code it ships is released under. Nothing would make msft happier than another round of FUD about Linux but what gain to Novell? cui bono for this upcoming crime? When asked about GPLv3 the Novl CEO said something casually dismissive like "oh, that license, it's still in development."
Something far more sinister is afoot than just Novl opting to be msft's lap dog.
Do you think Microsoft is spreading a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt about the risk of IP violations if companies adopt Linux?
They were sharing their position in the marketplace as they saw it through their lens. And we figured, "Shucks!" so what if the deal drives a wedge in the Linux community, creates more FUD, and makes us Microsoft's "approved" version of Linux. A buck is a buck, baby. I gots to feed the monkey, know what I'm sayin'?
I couldn't agree more. I'm not a sleep scientist but find it alarming how willing people are to submit to the "hey, it works!" credo as if they were putting some new additive in their car's fuel tank.
The problem is:
So how does modafinil work? "No one really knows," admits Vaught.
Of course should this drug turn out to cause major depression later in life I'm sure the pharma world will be waiting with open arms and a handful of prescriptions. It's pitiful how quality of life, savoring being human (yes, damn it, savoring being an absolute loaf for a day or month or year), is so readily sacrificed for the treadmill of modernity.
Work harder, get a bonus, go ski with friends in Aspen! Buy an Audi! Vacation in Bali! You too can have "it" if you peddle just a little harder!!
Pass me a good book and a sunset any day. I used to subscribe to the rat race and am eternally grateful that I learned early on what a farce it is. Sadly this country's economic model is based on the "more, more" mindset and, almost necessarily, popular culture reinforces it at every turn.
I disagree. I think the judge's ruling was reasonable. There is no way legislation will ever keep up with technology. That's why Sarbanes-Oxley is deliberately vague when it sets for requirements like "reasonable safeguards" and the like.
If you break it down to the net effect, a person using an electronic medium to send harassing text, then who cares if it's over port 25 or over IM.
Can you even begin to imagine the snafus that would appear if the legislature tried to always define technical boundaries to their law? I mean, I know the internet is a series of tubes and all, but it gets complicated in places.. like when the tubes are of different sizes and colors!
Ah, how I miss the term "sysop." Systems administrator is just so banal. It makes me sound like a clerk and not the kung-fu master of the electron that I am.
True... but I guess what strikes as me improbable is that I believe M$ originally sold the X-BOX at a loss to gain market share (and hopefully make the money back in games). I don't know if that's the case for the 360 but if people are buying a share of the hardware on M$ dime, only to rip out the guts for other uses... it doesn't take a bean counter to see a revenue hiccup.
Since I'm sure the EULA prohibits one from tampering with the hardware of the X360, I'm sure M$ will patch XP to disable any such hack. Get it to work on Linux though.../didn't RTFA, can't.
You are completely missing the point. It's not that the agreement between Novell and MSFT has resulted in any immediate damages to end users, it is that the agreement raises the specter of litigation to all non-Novell Linux distributors and their clients. FUD. Microsoft is trying to drive a great big wedge in the open source community by appointing Novell, the distributor with the least market share, as the "approved" Linux distributor. Balmer himself said that everyone else is open to legal action as they're not covered by this bogus cross patent licensing. Just because you Joe-six-pack might not wind up in court doesn't mean that enormous damage hasn't been done to the community as a whole.
Boycott Novell. If you have servers on SuSe, move them to another distro.
""Wickline said that the pact means that there will now be a Microsoft-blessed path for such people to make use of Open Source... 'A logical next move for Microsoft could be to crack down on 'unlicensed Linux' and 'unlicensed Free Software,' now that it can tell the courts that there is a Microsoft-licensed path. Or they can just passively let that threat stay there as a deterrent to anyone who would use Open Source without going through the Microsoft-approved Novell path,' Wickline said.""
What is so hard to understand here? Novell is basically lending credit to the MSFT bogeyman of patent infringement. They have given MSFT a helping hand. It's as if they signed up with SCO to sell "authorized" copies of Linux. I take it you work for Novell.
Slashdot Mirror
but still made me chuckle cereal onto my keyboard.. From the microsoft technet forum:
Microsoft just released an update, but you have to download it separately. Go to http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download and following the insructions.
If my laptop reacts to a sugar spike at all like my body does, it'll overclock itself for the morning, the hard drives will ramp up to the next RPM standard and then by afternoon the speed stepping on the CPU will drop to the lowest level, the drive will spin itself down at every possible chance and the screen brightness will be minimal.
Personally I like use UNIX "split" to chunk the files into 3 kilobyte segments.
Truth be told I don't eDonkey or the like but was referring more to torrents where I have seen compilations of every album an artist has done available as one big .torrent. You are surely right, though, about other p2p methods being more selective. I grovel before you and lick your toes.
I wonder a bit about iTunes vs. peer-to-peer metrics. On iTunes one is liable to buy a single track or two whereas on file sharing services downloading the album is usually the only choice (even if you only want one track). This alone would account for some of why file sharing is so much more voluminous.
Because the market is such a reliable judge of what makes a good technology. Every time the market beats up on RHT (which it loves to do) I buy and I've yet to go wrong with that strategy (granted I will only use this approach so long as I retain faith in the company). Consider the pummeling it got when Oracle announced Unbreakable. Anyone with a clue laughed at Oracle's move but the market reacted by pounding the stock.
So Novell has allied themselves with Microsoft which is questionable at best. From all what I've read the whole bit about cross indemnification was a last-minute "oh yeah, we'll also need you to sign this" from Microsoft. To which they replied, "yes, boss" while staring hungrily at the $240 million check.
Face it, Redhat *is* enterprise linux in the US. It got #2 in CIO magazine in terms of customer satisfaction and that's saying a whole hell of a lot (Novell came in at 23). As far as the Oracle Linux bit, I can't find the article but there was a recent piece about how nobody is adopting the rip-off OS. Even the enterprise clients that Oracle listed replied when contacted that they were either NOT using it or were doing a small pilot project. And who knows how many free licenses of 10g oracle had to give out to get even that much traction.
What a phenomenal waste of electricity. How many kilotons of coal does it take to power this pig? I just hope we can all move into 2nd life when our own planet starts writhing around.
When you single-handedly establish a new field of science you get a little slack. And I'm only agreeing with that particular position, not his entire life's work.
I think Freud had it right when he posited that "God" is a needed projection; it/he/she takes the place of the love and order provided by our parents when we were young. Once you get a bit older and your parents die or you realize that you're basically on your own, inventing a deity that loves and protects you and who even has expectations of you goes a long way to ensuring the continuance of the parental umbrella. On an evolutionary level, belief in a higher power might be enough to encourage one to take that risky ocean voyage or war on a neighbor.
I don't know who I pity most, the devout atheist who lives in the empty materialist world or the blindfolded religious who use faith as anything more than a way of encapsulating the grandeur and humbling nature of our planet and our Universe. I suppose if it's only the subjectivity of the situation that matters then the religious come out on top seeing as they have everlasting glory to look forward to.
I'm a big fan of MIT and most all of what it does but what on Earth does this little gimmick really have to offer? It's like some of the other MIT hackery that makes it onto slashdot such as the teddy bear with the gigabit LAN ports. I'd wager dollars to donuts that were it not for mit.edu at the end of the URL this story would have gone nowhere. I doubt MAKE would bother carrying this bit of cuteness.
I find it mildly amusing that you huff and puff about me having made a subjective argument when you not only offer no position of your own but accuse me of being a zealot. What bothers me most about individuals such as yourselves is that you're hypocrites who idly claim to be making "a rational argument." I think it was Emerson who wrote that, "I can not hear what you say for what you are shouts too loudly in my ears."
The issues that drive people to become open source developers and supporters are not the issues that motivate everyone else's software purchasing decisions.
And they are not mutually exclusive. Your baseless reference to "cult infighting" demonstrates you have a poor understanding of the nature of Linux, the architecture of the community, and the role played by the dozens of companies that make a profit by supporting open source.
I think it's The Big Lebowski that begins with a narrative describing the protagonist as "a man who never found much use for himself." I'm in a similar boat in that I'm a couple years shy of 30, graduated with a BA in public relations and have ended up settling in as a linux systems admin. I am paid well enough, work from home, head up a small 501c3 non-profit and cavort around town more than most. I have racked up a bunch of certs (CISSP, RHCE, CCNP, etc) but place little faith in what they signify. In short, I do not think SA is not going to cut it for more than another year. It's just so damned circular, chasing all the usual listing systems, debugging the usual faulty driver, blah blah ad nauseum.
My temptation is that in attaining "professional" status in IT (and I'm generally regarded as competent by my peers), I'd like to believe I could segue into another field without going in for the typical grad school track. Granted, my odds of becoming a theoretical physicist without a grad degree are admittedly slim, but I believe an intelligent and dedicated individual really can teach themselves most of what they need to know to accomplish a particular project goal without having to settle in for four years of tuna and ramen. I would argue further that such an individual can attain a level of competence much faster than a PhD or masters candidate as they are working to solve a particular goal and can afford to skip or skim over material which plays no supporting role. There are enough tools out there (MIT's open courseware, for example) such that a prospective self-learner can see what entails a PhD in XXXX, pick out the most applicable courses, subselect further from that, and, yes, of course, spend some extra time learning necessary foundational materials to adequately comprehend the prior.
I mean I read published papers in biology or surgery and know that none of it is that radically incomprehensible.
Am I maverick that has gone as far as he's going to go without grad school, a brat dreaming that he can build a rocketship in his garage? Or am I right to recognize that knowledge and expertise are not locked solely in the halls of academia?
I'll conclude by saying that you can all save your breaths about grad school giving one great connections, advanced degrees being necessary for most positions, needing access to labs, etc. Assume I'm intelligent enough to pick an area where I could reasonably "go the distance" on my own -- economics / market behavior, algorithms, artificial intelligence, etc. Heck, one could argue that by self-learning one has more avenues for true field advancement in that they are not locked into the framework of a particular program or are poo-pood by professors who have their own regimented bias.
Hans Reiser, I believe, taught himself most everything he needed to know for ReiserFS (and skip comments about the trial). The founder of FedEx was told his idea would never work by a professor in his MBA department. Rare examples, sure, but examples all the same.
Let me flame you a bit.. Newb!
You ask "who wants to risk going with a vendor who's at risk of being tied up by a bunch of lawyers" as if the GPL is just some frivolous bit of txt that prepends Linux source code. Guess what, bucko, it's not. It's the framework around which Linux branched and grew. Novell's deal with Microsoft was craftily crafted such that it didn't challenge the GPL outright but started the FUD engine that MSFT just might go after clients who are not covered under some bogus IP protection deal. In essence, MSFT took a Linux distro (novell) and said, "You'll be our lap dop. Your sales team can now run around and say that your product is Microsoft compliant. We will milk you on this for a bit to fragment and confuse the Linux community and then we'll ram a knife into your lungs and walk away whistling while you aspirate on the sidewalk."
Novell, in firmly attaching itself to Microsoft's teat, is actively working to subvert the open source movement by giving Microsoft some high ground upon which it can launch an assault on the rest of the movement. And your reaction to the FSF working to protect the community is, "oh noes, the lawyers are getting involved, nobody likes that."
It strikes me as a little unusual that nobody is making a bigger deal out of GPLv3 and how it will essentially nullify this deal or at the least put Novell in a very awkward situation. Even if Linus doesn't move the kernel over to v3, you can bet that glibc, gcc, etc, are all going to go that way. Try shipping a distro without either of those two.
Obviously Msft and Novl are more than aware of the licensing change so the question is what sort of insidious deal has msft given Novl in the back room? Truth is, if Novell ships GPLv3 software in SuSe then they stand to be liable for enormous damages, injunctions, etc. The patent indemnification nonsense they got from msft will be more than overshadowed by the ruckus created when Novell ignores the license that a significant section of code it ships is released under. Nothing would make msft happier than another round of FUD about Linux but what gain to Novell? cui bono for this upcoming crime? When asked about GPLv3 the Novl CEO said something casually dismissive like "oh, that license, it's still in development."
Something far more sinister is afoot than just Novl opting to be msft's lap dog.
Unless it's a double-fake..
"Putin couldn't be THAT stupid."
There are layers upon layers, all the way to rotten core that is man's heart.
Do you think Microsoft is spreading a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt about the risk of IP violations if companies adopt Linux?
They were sharing their position in the marketplace as they saw it through their lens. And we figured, "Shucks!" so what if the deal drives a wedge in the Linux community, creates more FUD, and makes us Microsoft's "approved" version of Linux. A buck is a buck, baby. I gots to feed the monkey, know what I'm sayin'?
Good eye (brain, too). A happy accident.
I couldn't agree more. I'm not a sleep scientist but find it alarming how willing people are to submit to the "hey, it works!" credo as if they were putting some new additive in their car's fuel tank.
The problem is:
So how does modafinil work? "No one really knows," admits Vaught.
Of course should this drug turn out to cause major depression later in life I'm sure the pharma world will be waiting with open arms and a handful of prescriptions. It's pitiful how quality of life, savoring being human (yes, damn it, savoring being an absolute loaf for a day or month or year), is so readily sacrificed for the treadmill of modernity.
Work harder, get a bonus, go ski with friends in Aspen! Buy an Audi! Vacation in Bali! You too can have "it" if you peddle just a little harder!!
Pass me a good book and a sunset any day. I used to subscribe to the rat race and am eternally grateful that I learned early on what a farce it is. Sadly this country's economic model is based on the "more, more" mindset and, almost necessarily, popular culture reinforces it at every turn.
I disagree. I think the judge's ruling was reasonable. There is no way legislation will ever keep up with technology. That's why Sarbanes-Oxley is deliberately vague when it sets for requirements like "reasonable safeguards" and the like.
If you break it down to the net effect, a person using an electronic medium to send harassing text, then who cares if it's over port 25 or over IM.
Can you even begin to imagine the snafus that would appear if the legislature tried to always define technical boundaries to their law? I mean, I know the internet is a series of tubes and all, but it gets complicated in places.. like when the tubes are of different sizes and colors!
Ah, how I miss the term "sysop." Systems administrator is just so banal. It makes me sound like a clerk and not the kung-fu master of the electron that I am.
True... but I guess what strikes as me improbable is that I believe M$ originally sold the X-BOX at a loss to gain market share (and hopefully make the money back in games). I don't know if that's the case for the 360 but if people are buying a share of the hardware on M$ dime, only to rip out the guts for other uses... it doesn't take a bean counter to see a revenue hiccup.
Since I'm sure the EULA prohibits one from tampering with the hardware of the X360, I'm sure M$ will patch XP to disable any such hack. Get it to work on Linux though... /didn't RTFA, can't.
You are completely missing the point. It's not that the agreement between Novell and MSFT has resulted in any immediate damages to end users, it is that the agreement raises the specter of litigation to all non-Novell Linux distributors and their clients. FUD. Microsoft is trying to drive a great big wedge in the open source community by appointing Novell, the distributor with the least market share, as the "approved" Linux distributor. Balmer himself said that everyone else is open to legal action as they're not covered by this bogus cross patent licensing. Just because you Joe-six-pack might not wind up in court doesn't mean that enormous damage hasn't been done to the community as a whole.
Boycott Novell. If you have servers on SuSe, move them to another distro.
From an earlier slashdot headline:
... 'A logical next move for Microsoft could be to crack down on 'unlicensed Linux' and 'unlicensed Free Software,' now that it can tell the courts that there is a Microsoft-licensed path. Or they can just passively let that threat stay there as a deterrent to anyone who would use Open Source without going through the Microsoft-approved Novell path,' Wickline said.""
""Wickline said that the pact means that there will now be a Microsoft-blessed path for such people to make use of Open Source
What is so hard to understand here? Novell is basically lending credit to the MSFT bogeyman of patent infringement. They have given MSFT a helping hand. It's as if they signed up with SCO to sell "authorized" copies of Linux. I take it you work for Novell.