Why do you think it's so hard to take away guns from people here in the US? Because it's our right to have guns. Law abiding citizens have the right, given to us by our government, to own firearms. I don't know if that was a good idea, and that isn't the point of the argument. The point is that when the government makes movements to abridge that right, people get angry. Because they have learned to exercise the right.
We need to learn to exercize our right to use strong encryption. I'm not a lawyer, but it appears to me that not only is encryption covered by the First Amendment (freedom of speech), but also the Second (right to bear arms..the US gov't. has declared cryptology to be a weapon) and possibly the Fifth (right not to incriminate yourself...giving up your keys *could* be considered self-incrimination).
How about sending your Senator and Representative a list of strong-crypto products based outside the United States (as well as homepages to such products)? Let them know that the genie is out of the bottle already and that criminals both inside and outside the US have plenty of opportunities to get the high level of encryption that they want.
We also need to figure out what to do in the worst-case scenario (Congress actually passes the bill). How about lobbying for a provision that products where the source is available would be exempt? I think that's even a provision in the Wassenar "Agreement".
RH is doing EVERYTHING they can to become the Microsoft of Linux (granted its not a perfect parallel, but be imaginative).
What source have they closed? What competitors have they bought out or crushed? What FUD have they spread about other distributions?
They are distancing themselves from the community and breaking the original spirit by becoming money-hungry competitors instead of contributors.
Nothing wrong with competition (as long as it remains friendly). Red Hat is a business -- one that directly and indirectly supports kernel development and device driver writing. Also, they release their software under the GPL, so that all distros can benefit if they choose (RPM is a major example).
They don't want to HELP Linux, they want to BECOME Linux. Suits.
See above. They're building mindshare, but to say that they want to become Linux is a stretch. They have plenty of competition in the commercial distribution area (and plenty more on the way)...some of them based on Red Hat itself.
Next we'll see proprietary "RH ONLY!" extensions and file formats.
Ever heard of a little thing called the GPL? If the programs are Open Source, how long would it take for them to be reverse-engineered? Also, that would only be to Red Hat's detriment, as then people would simply switch to another distro, find other sources of support, etc.
Goodbye RH, hello Debian.
You do realize that a claim could be made for Debian having lost its soul (by publicly linking itself with Corel, whose FAQ states that despite using Debian as the base for their (Corel's) distro, they're not open-sourcing their products).
Technologically ahead maybe, but not by "years" (as you claim). Please think before you FUD -- both are basically the kernel + common UNIX/Linux programs.
I've asked this before, but I'll ask again: *why* won't SuSE open up their installer? Red Hat & Debian don't seem to have a problem with distros based off of them, why does SuSE?
Regardless, even if M$ could only buy 10% of the stock - they would have a seat on the board and they could make life hell for Red Hat.
I doubt it...like someone said, it would be easier to make their own distro (or possibly even a *BSD, as the licensing would be a little more favorable in their point of view) than to buy a significant amount of Red Hat stock (why not spend the money on subsidizing their own distro?).
From previous poster: If you've got nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Its not like they're capturing your dirty little deeds to make them public; just the dirty deeds of a select criminal element.
From BBC article: Channel 4 said sources told the programme that "although the primary justification for building the tower was anti-terrorism, the information it gathered was also of economic and commercial significance".
Now what do you think that meant? (Hint: implies that industrial espionage was carried out by the *government*.)
Jesus preached love, peace, non-violence and helping your fellow man. So what have Christians done over the years?
War on those that didn't agree with them (and even on some groups that did); genocide; slavery; spread intolerance; destroyed ancient texts (especially in the New World); kept countless groups in subjugation (mostly by preaching that suffering in this world is ok...you'll get your reward after you're dead); and forced conversions by swordpoint and gunpoint; etc. etc. etc....
Oh, and one more thing...the movie also made fun of Jews, Muslims, Satanists *and* atheists. Christianity isn't the only religion in the world, you know.
My view of the movie? Don't take your kids to see it. Don't see it yourself if South Park offends you. But as for me, I've seen it 3 times (once after reading the Christian page on it) and will probably see it one more time (need to get a few more quotes straight).
"That movie has warped my fragile little mind" -- Eric T. Cartman (think he's in on the Eric rule?:))
I don't mind constructive criticism. However, the problem comes when someone gets irrationally flamed for having an unpopular position and/or outright attacked. That propagates a common misconception (that SlashDot readers are a bunch of immature jerks).
Who holds the rights to Pac-Man? For a long time, I thought Midway was the original copyright owner, but now it appears (or at least I just noticed) that Namco owns them (and sold the US rights to Midway). Any resource where I could look this up?
(Side note: looks like Midway owns Atari now...that kinda rocks)
Yes, you can (on some). If you ever looked inside an early Midway game cabinet, there's a tilt sensor that would shut down the machine (if the sensor was connected, and the BIOS setting was activated...a lot of operators I know would de-activate one or both).
/me speaks from 3 years of experience working for an arcade chain..this thread is bringing back memories:)
Linux has its place, as do the BSDs, but it does seem kind of silly to see Linux users on here insisting that everything be GPLed, and everything be free, as if the GPL is some kind of ultimate saviour.
Not *every* Linux user wants everything to be free (I'm willing to buy software or use closed-source if it suits my needs). I'd say a bigger problem is stereotyping platform/distro users (RedHat's for newbies, Slackware's for experts, *BSD is for the 31337, etc.). Any *nix can be as easy or difficult as you make it.
Real-life example: my mother couldn't care less about why a car runs. My father's a mechanic that can rebuild a car almost from scratch. Yet they can drive the same family car, at roughly the same skill level. Get the point?
Now, let me jack up this here RedHat GPL system & take me look at what's goin' on 'neath the hood...:)
Thanks for clearing that up (the part about SuSE not wanting to spawn a knock-off distro).
Does TurboLinux use any proprietary or non-Open Source stuff in its install or setup? I've been thinking about switching over to it (or maybe I'll just stick with the Cheapbytes-RedHat devil I know:)).
Why free for personal use? Why couldn't I, say, make a complete distro based on SuSE? (Using their installer). All the other GPL based distros don't seem to have this problem (note the number of distros based on Red Hat, Debian or Slackware). Would it really kill them to GPL the installer?
Slashdot Mirror
The People's Republic of China is a nuclear power.
Any more rhetorical questions?
We need to learn to exercize our right to use strong encryption. I'm not a lawyer, but it appears to me that not only is encryption covered by the First Amendment (freedom of speech), but also the Second (right to bear arms..the US gov't. has declared cryptology to be a weapon) and possibly the Fifth (right not to incriminate yourself...giving up your keys *could* be considered self-incrimination).
How about sending your Senator and Representative a list of strong-crypto products based outside the United States (as well as homepages to such products)? Let them know that the genie is out of the bottle already and that criminals both inside and outside the US have plenty of opportunities to get the high level of encryption that they want.
We also need to figure out what to do in the worst-case scenario (Congress actually passes the bill). How about lobbying for a provision that products where the source is available would be exempt? I think that's even a provision in the Wassenar "Agreement".
What source have they closed? What competitors have they bought out or crushed? What FUD have they spread about other distributions?
They are distancing themselves from the community and breaking the original spirit by becoming money-hungry competitors instead of contributors.
Nothing wrong with competition (as long as it remains friendly). Red Hat is a business -- one that directly and indirectly supports kernel development and device driver writing. Also, they release their software under the GPL, so that all distros can benefit if they choose (RPM is a major example).
They don't want to HELP Linux, they want to BECOME Linux. Suits.
See above. They're building mindshare, but to say that they want to become Linux is a stretch. They have plenty of competition in the commercial distribution area (and plenty more on the way)...some of them based on Red Hat itself.
Next we'll see proprietary "RH ONLY!" extensions and file formats.
Ever heard of a little thing called the GPL? If the programs are Open Source, how long would it take for them to be reverse-engineered? Also, that would only be to Red Hat's detriment, as then people would simply switch to another distro, find other sources of support, etc.
Goodbye RH, hello Debian.
You do realize that a claim could be made for Debian having lost its soul (by publicly linking itself with Corel, whose FAQ states that despite using Debian as the base for their (Corel's) distro, they're not open-sourcing their products).
Same kernel, same programs. BTW, Linus uses Red Hat at work and SuSE at home. You calling him a newbie?
I believe that RPM 3.0 addresses the issue of package dependencies now. Also, with alien it's possible to convert to/from .debs, .rpms, etc.
Technologically ahead maybe, but not by "years" (as you claim). Please think before you FUD -- both are basically the kernel + common UNIX/Linux programs.
http://www.nsa.gov:8080/
"Providing and protecting vital information through cryptology"
Does anyone else find that ironic & hypocritcal?
You forgot about the convenient PIII User ID embedded into every chip (so they can keep track of our Internet habits, software, etc.)
--Proud owner of a K6/133 here...
I've asked this before, but I'll ask again: *why* won't SuSE open up their installer? Red Hat & Debian don't seem to have a problem with distros based off of them, why does SuSE?
I doubt it...like someone said, it would be easier to make their own distro (or possibly even a *BSD, as the licensing would be a little more favorable in their point of view) than to buy a significant amount of Red Hat stock (why not spend the money on subsidizing their own distro?).
From BBC article: Channel 4 said sources told the programme that "although the primary justification for building the tower was anti-terrorism, the information it gathered was also of economic and commercial significance".
Now what do you think that meant? (Hint: implies that industrial espionage was carried out by the *government*.)
All I need to do is 1 kernel recompile (and probably update a few IP tools) :P. Thus is the power of Linux...
Think they use Red Hat? (ducking)
OK, let's read through our history books...
:))
Jesus preached love, peace, non-violence and helping your fellow man. So what have Christians done over the years?
War on those that didn't agree with them (and even on some groups that did); genocide; slavery; spread intolerance; destroyed ancient texts (especially in the New World); kept countless groups in subjugation (mostly by preaching that suffering in this world is ok...you'll get your reward after you're dead); and forced conversions by swordpoint and gunpoint; etc. etc. etc....
Oh, and one more thing...the movie also made fun of Jews, Muslims, Satanists *and* atheists. Christianity isn't the only religion in the world, you know.
My view of the movie? Don't take your kids to see it. Don't see it yourself if South Park offends you. But as for me, I've seen it 3 times (once after reading the Christian page on it) and will probably see it one more time (need to get a few more quotes straight).
"That movie has warped my fragile little mind" -- Eric T. Cartman (think he's in on the Eric rule?
Who cares? As I said when I submitted this article a few days ago (Gee, thanx Taco):
:).
They have a right to their opinion. Just as we have a right to laugh at their opinion
Any chance they could open up TiK (the UNIX/LINUX version of AIM)? would be nice to expand the feature set a bit.
I don't mind constructive criticism. However, the problem comes when someone gets irrationally flamed for having an unpopular position and/or outright attacked. That propagates a common misconception (that SlashDot readers are a bunch of immature jerks).
How about forwarding this to some "mainstream" news organizations? They're the ones that really need to disseminate this.
(Side note: looks like Midway owns Atari now...that kinda rocks)
Yes, you can (on some). If you ever looked inside an early Midway game cabinet, there's a tilt sensor that would shut down the machine (if the sensor was connected, and the BIOS setting was activated...a lot of operators I know would de-activate one or both).
Not *every* Linux user wants everything to be free (I'm willing to buy software or use closed-source if it suits my needs). I'd say a bigger problem is stereotyping platform/distro users (RedHat's for newbies, Slackware's for experts, *BSD is for the 31337, etc.). Any *nix can be as easy or difficult as you make it.
Real-life example: my mother couldn't care less about why a car runs. My father's a mechanic that can rebuild a car almost from scratch. Yet they can drive the same family car, at roughly the same skill level. Get the point?
Now, let me jack up this here RedHat GPL system & take me look at what's goin' on 'neath the hood... :)
Thanks for clearing that up (the part about SuSE not wanting to spawn a knock-off distro).
:)).
Does TurboLinux use any proprietary or non-Open Source stuff in its install or setup? I've been thinking about switching over to it (or maybe I'll just stick with the Cheapbytes-RedHat devil I know
Why free for personal use? Why couldn't I, say, make a complete distro based on SuSE? (Using their installer). All the other GPL based distros don't seem to have this problem (note the number of distros based on Red Hat, Debian or Slackware). Would it really kill them to GPL the installer?
WHY is the installer proprietary? Why won't they open it up? (source code for installer)