Music is non-essential. I know that some people will say that, if they couldn't listen to music while they do their 20 minutes on the stair climber, life would lose its meaning. Still, it is a luxury. No one gets dragged into court on anti-trust grounds for establishing a monopoly on non-essential commodity items. No one monopolizes the resources or means of production for music.
Oh, I get it - - you're one of those "fuck the rich" people? Well, I'm old enough to remember the flower children of the sixties, the same ones who loved using such verbage as "capitalist pigs." They're the ones fucking us now by drawing from Social Security five times what they put in, and bailing out of Enrons with their golden parachutes.
So, now, you're deciding it's okay to steal from people as long as they don't meet your definition of "struggling"? Heh heh - - you'd make a fine CEO.
"The majority of people involved with sharing still care about music."
Hmmmm . . . I'd say that's a stretch. Probably more accurate to say that this "majority" just likes to acquire other peoples' property without paying for it, don't you think? Really now, this isn't a complicated issue, as much as "sharers" would like to make it one. This is about treating a non-essential item - - music - - as if it were water or air that we must have in order to live. File traders seem to think that they can demonize the record industry by suggesting that it gouges listeners and treats musicians life offal. But the truth is that music is like any other non-essential item that people buy: if you can afford it, you may choose to buy it. If you can't, you don't, or you acquire it illegally and take your chances on getting caught.
How can one pity the Winona Ryders of the world, who steal $1000 scarves because they think they can do so with impunity? Who can feel sorry for the "super sharers" that the RIAA is reaming - - the ones who thought they were making a stand, when they were merely breaking the law? If it were electricity you were stealing because your children were freezing, I could give you some slack. But people who just want to fill their MP3 players with pirated tunes deserve the same thing that cable TV thieves get - - a harder slap than they ever expected.
Come on, folks - - I know that the average IQ of readers who come here is well above that of, say, the Bush cabinet. And that's even with Rice and Rumsfeld throwing the curve way up. That means you know that "file sharing" is not kosher when the traded goods don't belong to you.
Those twits still calling for record company boycotts, etc., may someday run a business. And when they do, they will see - - as pointed out in this piece - - that for every hit they score, there will be many swings at air. They'll compensate for misses by charging more for hits. Believe me, they will. Don't start believing that all goods are released under the GPL, or anything like it.
In the real world, you pay for what you want. If you can't afford it, you can make it yourself or you can steal it; but then, you can also go to jail. It's been that way for a long, long time.
You might be correct on this, but I first spotted it on the T-shirt of some guy walking around the south rim of the Grand Canyon. And it wasn't attributed there, either.
Regardless, I salute the originator, whoever s/he is. It's so true. You don't suppose SCO wrote it, do you?
Journalists with degrees from prestigious schools, writing about issues and events that have implications beyond how many Zokar-Blaster rounds one has left in his Zokar-Blaster, get paid little enough. You would not believe how little. These are people who can spell and use proper grammar, typing at 100 wpm whilst talking to both an editor and some bloke on the phone who says he has an Earth-shaking lead for your next investigative piece. I can't even conceive of the depths to which one's self esteem and savings account balance would have to fall before s/he would consider doing "serious" reviews of video games. But then, I never could fathom sports writers, either.
. . . . Linux is, in its entirety, now and forever, SCO Unix. All of it. Why did we ever believe the "Open Source/independent developers working in concert" lie? Didn't we all suspect it was too good to be true? Darl, it will be seen, is the reluctant messiah bringing us the painful, but timeless and inescapable truth: Any attempt to write non-SCO code fails.
If you've been using KDE, Gnome, or Blackbox for any length of time, you look for ways to make it work on your company's MS network. Am I right? I've downloaded everything the KDE team has done since its first beta, I do believe, and I can't tell you how superb it feels to sit down at my workstation in the a.m. with my cup of asphalt-like java, fire up rdesktop and Citrix ICA client, and LEAVE THEM ON DESKTOP #6. Heh heh. Well, it's particularly nice to run Outlook that way. I set it to pop up when a message comes in. Otherwise, I play in Linux GUI land all day long. When you've had a nice Linux desktop, Windows seems anemic and limiting. But I will say that the Windows GUI is sharp and fast, and some work still needs to be done in that area of XFree86 and Open Source GUIs.
I think we all understand what I mean when I use the "blindfolded monkey" hyperbole. Let's not take things too literally.
With regard to training products and institutes, it seems to me that they understandably adopt the commercially intelligent position of "Whew, boy - - this stuff is hard. Good thing you have us to show you how to sum an Excel column!!" If you look carefully into the faces of people attending, say, MS Office training classes, what you see is an expression only a few brain waves away from sleep. Is it hard to use these products? For the most part, no. Are employees often sent to stultifying training courses because their employers want to "get more from their software investment? Yep. It's not about the software being hard to use.
'"The motto of Linux is "World Domination." If you can't get that simple concept through your head, then go find another community to hang out it.'
I see. Perhaps you need to find a nice little plot of land where you can issue brown shirts and little black mustaches to all your domineering buddies. As for me, I'll go over to CheapBytes and see what's new . . . . .
Friend, that is not far from what I'm saying, but it also isn't quite what I was trying to communicate. The idea is that I have access to my favorite Open Source apps while not needing a second PC in order to have access to necessary MS applications. Yes, I DO find that MS apps are necessary in the business world today, and I won't be so hypocritical as to say they aren't. And, yes, I could just as well accomplish something similar with costly VMWare plus the cost of hosted OSes. Or I could just do rdesktop to our terminal servers. But the Citrix solution, you see, is very handy, as well as economical. I get what I want without having to ask my boss for a few more bucks. And I prefer Citrix over Terminal Services, anyway. Let's not even talk about VNC.
I have a quick observation that comes from demonstrating Linux to such disparate folks as a VMS database admin, an intelligent, 68-year-old man who remembers when he first saw an electric lightbulb, and an 18-year-old who grasps anything having to do with computers in seconds.
And the observation is this: Linux on the desktop does not give current users of Microsoft products anything that makes them want to leave the Microsoft world. Even the price argument fails, because people of even moderate means will tell you that the cost of a "loaded" PC isn't prohibitive. The 68-year-old said it was too much trouble to learn a new way of doing things, particularly if it meant not having Office and IE. The DB admin said it looked interesting, but she wasn't impressed with the availability of front ends for MySQL and Postgres. And the 18-year-old asked what games were available.
Friends, we should not be looking for mass adoption. Linux on the desktop is for inquiring minds, people who want change. Most users out there just want it to be easier or faster than it presently is - - scary, considering a blindfolded monkey could operate the Windows GUI. Can we fill a need for these people? Can we make it easier, and faster?
It's not about getting them all - - it's about nailing a few and scaring the rest. State highway patrolmen are effective pulling over maybe one of every several thousand cars that pass. Ditto, in principle, for the RIAA.
Well, here's a setup any geek would love. On our mostly-MS network, we have Citrix Metaframe XP on Win2K servers. The latest ICA client for Linux, though not as slick as I suspect it will one day be, is fully functional. I run RedHat 8.0 all day while running all my MS Office apps out of Citrix, as well as all the MS management utilities that run from the Microsoft Management Console. From the MMS, I use Systems Management Server remote control to manage servers and assist end users. The Citrix client even put all my ICA Program Neighborhood icons into my KDE start menu - - you really have to see it to believe it. My colleagues, though not enamored of Linux enough to learn it, are amazed to see me popping between 6 KDE desktops, each having assortments of native Linux apps and Citrix-launched Microsoft stuff. I know I'm spoiled, but, for me, this may be as good as it will ever get. Unless, of course, the Linux terminal services project progresses to the point were we can deploy MS apps from an open source OS platform with relative ease.
Even a swaggering Anonymous Coward might deign to educate himself regarding Linux desktop sales in recent times. The numbers do not make for parades and fireworks. Growth projections, ditto. Therefore, even if said announcement comes, it would not be saying much for a Linux seller to say that it plans to continue sales of its desktop OS on only preconfigured units.
What this says to me is that RedHat is pulling out of the "mainstream" desktop arena in a less than subtle way. It's going to be a slug-out between RedHat and SuSE for the server side of things, and RedHat wants to get lean and mean for the fight. I'd say that, in the eyes of RH execs, getting in shape means dumping the pounds associated with desktop distribution support. Sorta sad, but also sorta not. RH has been getting its butt kicked on the desktop for a while now, but has a chance to extend its lead in the back office. Time to have another look at SuSE desktop, maybe?
So another disposable, computer generated blob of mediocrity is available on reflective plastic discs before the next disposable, computer generated blob of mediocrity hits the big screen like a fistful of hurled feces. Big F-ing Deal.
. . . and I'm not being cynical here - - but WHY would anyone want to port anything, Linux or otherwise, to an XBox? Is it just for the challenge? If so, I understand that, I guess. But what would be the motivation otherwise? Are there not enough cheap hardware platforms available that would make a better PC?
Slashdot Mirror
Music is non-essential. I know that some people will say that, if they couldn't listen to music while they do their 20 minutes on the stair climber, life would lose its meaning. Still, it is a luxury. No one gets dragged into court on anti-trust grounds for establishing a monopoly on non-essential commodity items. No one monopolizes the resources or means of production for music.
Oh, I get it - - you're one of those "fuck the rich" people? Well, I'm old enough to remember the flower children of the sixties, the same ones who loved using such verbage as "capitalist pigs." They're the ones fucking us now by drawing from Social Security five times what they put in, and bailing out of Enrons with their golden parachutes.
So, now, you're deciding it's okay to steal from people as long as they don't meet your definition of "struggling"? Heh heh - - you'd make a fine CEO.
Are you trying to say that giving away someone else's property is WRONG? What about the hundreds of zillions of people who don't think it is????
I have an MP3 player, and I VOTE! (or will when I'm old enough to).
:)
"The majority of people involved with sharing still care about music."
Hmmmm . . . I'd say that's a stretch. Probably more accurate to say that this "majority" just likes to acquire other peoples' property without paying for it, don't you think? Really now, this isn't a complicated issue, as much as "sharers" would like to make it one. This is about treating a non-essential item - - music - - as if it were water or air that we must have in order to live. File traders seem to think that they can demonize the record industry by suggesting that it gouges listeners and treats musicians life offal. But the truth is that music is like any other non-essential item that people buy: if you can afford it, you may choose to buy it. If you can't, you don't, or you acquire it illegally and take your chances on getting caught.
How can one pity the Winona Ryders of the world, who steal $1000 scarves because they think they can do so with impunity? Who can feel sorry for the "super sharers" that the RIAA is reaming - - the ones who thought they were making a stand, when they were merely breaking the law? If it were electricity you were stealing because your children were freezing, I could give you some slack. But people who just want to fill their MP3 players with pirated tunes deserve the same thing that cable TV thieves get - - a harder slap than they ever expected.
Come on, folks - - I know that the average IQ of readers who come here is well above that of, say, the Bush cabinet. And that's even with Rice and Rumsfeld throwing the curve way up. That means you know that "file sharing" is not kosher when the traded goods don't belong to you.
Those twits still calling for record company boycotts, etc., may someday run a business. And when they do, they will see - - as pointed out in this piece - - that for every hit they score, there will be many swings at air. They'll compensate for misses by charging more for hits. Believe me, they will. Don't start believing that all goods are released under the GPL, or anything like it.
In the real world, you pay for what you want. If you can't afford it, you can make it yourself or you can steal it; but then, you can also go to jail. It's been that way for a long, long time.
Yup.
You might be correct on this, but I first spotted it on the T-shirt of some guy walking around the south rim of the Grand Canyon. And it wasn't attributed there, either.
Regardless, I salute the originator, whoever s/he is. It's so true. You don't suppose SCO wrote it, do you?
Heh heh. Just checking your reflexes.
Journalists with degrees from prestigious schools, writing about issues and events that have implications beyond how many Zokar-Blaster rounds one has left in his Zokar-Blaster, get paid little enough. You would not believe how little. These are people who can spell and use proper grammar, typing at 100 wpm whilst talking to both an editor and some bloke on the phone who says he has an Earth-shaking lead for your next investigative piece. I can't even conceive of the depths to which one's self esteem and savings account balance would have to fall before s/he would consider doing "serious" reviews of video games. But then, I never could fathom sports writers, either.
. . . . Linux is, in its entirety, now and forever, SCO Unix. All of it. Why did we ever believe the "Open Source/independent developers working in concert" lie? Didn't we all suspect it was too good to be true? Darl, it will be seen, is the reluctant messiah bringing us the painful, but timeless and inescapable truth: Any attempt to write non-SCO code fails.
Prepare to repartition your discs. Long live SCO.
Oh, sorry. You said "Elvish," not "Elvis."
If you've been using KDE, Gnome, or Blackbox for any length of time, you look for ways to make it work on your company's MS network. Am I right? I've downloaded everything the KDE team has done since its first beta, I do believe, and I can't tell you how superb it feels to sit down at my workstation in the a.m. with my cup of asphalt-like java, fire up rdesktop and Citrix ICA client, and LEAVE THEM ON DESKTOP #6. Heh heh. Well, it's particularly nice to run Outlook that way. I set it to pop up when a message comes in. Otherwise, I play in Linux GUI land all day long. When you've had a nice Linux desktop, Windows seems anemic and limiting. But I will say that the Windows GUI is sharp and fast, and some work still needs to be done in that area of XFree86 and Open Source GUIs.
I think we all understand what I mean when I use the "blindfolded monkey" hyperbole. Let's not take things too literally.
With regard to training products and institutes, it seems to me that they understandably adopt the commercially intelligent position of "Whew, boy - - this stuff is hard. Good thing you have us to show you how to sum an Excel column!!" If you look carefully into the faces of people attending, say, MS Office training classes, what you see is an expression only a few brain waves away from sleep. Is it hard to use these products? For the most part, no. Are employees often sent to stultifying training courses because their employers want to "get more from their software investment? Yep. It's not about the software being hard to use.
'"The motto of Linux is "World Domination." If you can't get that simple concept through your head, then go find another community to hang out it.'
I see. Perhaps you need to find a nice little plot of land where you can issue brown shirts and little black mustaches to all your domineering buddies. As for me, I'll go over to CheapBytes and see what's new . . . . .
Friend, that is not far from what I'm saying, but it also isn't quite what I was trying to communicate. The idea is that I have access to my favorite Open Source apps while not needing a second PC in order to have access to necessary MS applications. Yes, I DO find that MS apps are necessary in the business world today, and I won't be so hypocritical as to say they aren't. And, yes, I could just as well accomplish something similar with costly VMWare plus the cost of hosted OSes. Or I could just do rdesktop to our terminal servers. But the Citrix solution, you see, is very handy, as well as economical. I get what I want without having to ask my boss for a few more bucks. And I prefer Citrix over Terminal Services, anyway. Let's not even talk about VNC.
MS Office/SBE does not include PowerPoint. And a CFO from a Fortune 500 company will soon find out the many ways in which OO is NOT Microsoft Office.
Assuming, of course, that he uses Excel a lot. And Powerpoint.
I have a quick observation that comes from demonstrating Linux to such disparate folks as a VMS database admin, an intelligent, 68-year-old man who remembers when he first saw an electric lightbulb, and an 18-year-old who grasps anything having to do with computers in seconds.
And the observation is this: Linux on the desktop does not give current users of Microsoft products anything that makes them want to leave the Microsoft world. Even the price argument fails, because people of even moderate means will tell you that the cost of a "loaded" PC isn't prohibitive. The 68-year-old said it was too much trouble to learn a new way of doing things, particularly if it meant not having Office and IE. The DB admin said it looked interesting, but she wasn't impressed with the availability of front ends for MySQL and Postgres. And the 18-year-old asked what games were available.
Friends, we should not be looking for mass adoption. Linux on the desktop is for inquiring minds, people who want change. Most users out there just want it to be easier or faster than it presently is - - scary, considering a blindfolded monkey could operate the Windows GUI. Can we fill a need for these people? Can we make it easier, and faster?
ROFLMAO
It's not about getting them all - - it's about nailing a few and scaring the rest. State highway patrolmen are effective pulling over maybe one of every several thousand cars that pass. Ditto, in principle, for the RIAA.
Well, here's a setup any geek would love. On our mostly-MS network, we have Citrix Metaframe XP on Win2K servers. The latest ICA client for Linux, though not as slick as I suspect it will one day be, is fully functional. I run RedHat 8.0 all day while running all my MS Office apps out of Citrix, as well as all the MS management utilities that run from the Microsoft Management Console. From the MMS, I use Systems Management Server remote control to manage servers and assist end users. The Citrix client even put all my ICA Program Neighborhood icons into my KDE start menu - - you really have to see it to believe it. My colleagues, though not enamored of Linux enough to learn it, are amazed to see me popping between 6 KDE desktops, each having assortments of native Linux apps and Citrix-launched Microsoft stuff. I know I'm spoiled, but, for me, this may be as good as it will ever get. Unless, of course, the Linux terminal services project progresses to the point were we can deploy MS apps from an open source OS platform with relative ease.
Even a swaggering Anonymous Coward might deign to educate himself regarding Linux desktop sales in recent times. The numbers do not make for parades and fireworks. Growth projections, ditto. Therefore, even if said announcement comes, it would not be saying much for a Linux seller to say that it plans to continue sales of its desktop OS on only preconfigured units.
What this says to me is that RedHat is pulling out of the "mainstream" desktop arena in a less than subtle way. It's going to be a slug-out between RedHat and SuSE for the server side of things, and RedHat wants to get lean and mean for the fight. I'd say that, in the eyes of RH execs, getting in shape means dumping the pounds associated with desktop distribution support. Sorta sad, but also sorta not. RH has been getting its butt kicked on the desktop for a while now, but has a chance to extend its lead in the back office. Time to have another look at SuSE desktop, maybe?
Just kidding. : )
So another disposable, computer generated blob of mediocrity is available on reflective plastic discs before the next disposable, computer generated blob of mediocrity hits the big screen like a fistful of hurled feces. Big F-ing Deal.
PS - Yes, I thought it sucked.
. . . and I'm not being cynical here - - but WHY would anyone want to port anything, Linux or otherwise, to an XBox? Is it just for the challenge? If so, I understand that, I guess. But what would be the motivation otherwise? Are there not enough cheap hardware platforms available that would make a better PC?