Re:"Nerds" are interested in more than OSS
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: 1
And you apparently didn't read mine. I DIDN'T say that ALL Windows power users don't know anything about computers. I said that you would be hard pressed to find MANY Windows power users that have the intelligence required to deal with a Linux system. I also didn't attack you or your choice of OS. If you want to use Windows that's perfectly fine. Just don't go around talking down about other people's OS choice. If others are curious about OSS and Linux, then they should explore it and not be frightened away from it by people who don't like it.
What yuo interpret as "poor design" is infinte flexibility. There are tradeoffs in everything. Computers and OSes are no exception. If you want to have a machine that works very well and does some very complex task exactly the way you want it done, then it's going to be inherently complex to use. If you have a set of simple tasks that you want your machine and OS to perform, then the OS needen't be that complex. "Joe Average" out there is typically involved with simple tasks: word processing, e-mail, browsing the web, watching a movie or listening to music. These tasks don't require a lot of complexity in the OS because they don't need to take advantag of every feature on the computer system other than brute force CPU power and potentially tons of RAM and HD. Pretty simple stuff. But when you are working ith more complicated automation tasks that need to run with precision timing and complete accuracy, the task becomes more complicated. This requires and OS that can handle that. Can Windows NT 2K or XP do this? Yes. Can it do it as well as Linux or UNIX? Doubtful. This is all going to depend on what you consider acceptable performance. If you want to throw money at the problem, then get a Wintel box and have at it. But if you are on a tight budget, you are better off with OSS and Linux.
It's great for someone who is new to PCs. But CIOs should not be reading it. It would be like seeing your airplane pilot boarding with a "Flying the Boeing 747 for Dummies" book. It doesn't instill confidence in the crew...;P
You also seemed to miss the point I was making before. I didn't say that 802.11b at 2-10 Mb/s is what people should always use. I was just saying that "Joe Average" never needs the high-end. You don't sound like "Joe Average" to me.
Yeah yeah... too much is never enough and all that jazz. But you know what? DSL at 608K is plenty for streaming movies into the home. I regularly watch MPEGs and DiVX files with my 802.11 card at about 2 Mb/s average speed. No skipping and it looks great. If I had a 802.11g card, it would I could watch these at DVD quality. Your argument still holds no water. BTW... I never thought 1 Gig was enough back then. I have.75 terabytes worth of drives at home right now. Not sure where you are drawing your conclusions...
Re:"Nerds" are interested in more than OSS
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: 1
I'm sure most people here out earn me since I CHOOSE to work for a non-profit organization. Profit and wealth are VASTLY unimportant to me. But OK... shoot:
$52,000/year here
If you want to go work on video games as a pro that's cool. But it's still not a "killer app". Sounds to me like you are more concerned about profit than technology... that makes you sound more like a suit than a tech though.
I also NEVER brought up Linux as a desktop OS. I was only discussing the varying levels of skill and knowledge as they correlate with the choice of OS. You can't argue that someone who uses Linux or UNIX doesn't know anything about computers. But you CAN argue that when talking about Windows users. How many Windows "power users" do you know that can fix a Linux box that has a problem? Not too many, I'd bet. I still have yet to meet a Linux/UNIX user that CAN'T fix a Windows box though. They might gripe about it the whole way and talk about how backwards the system is (I'm not that bad, I save my bile for Slashdot weenies) but they are 100% guaranteed to fix it. The only exceptions are the UNIX guys that have NEVER used Windows.
That's now... just wait a few years and you'll see wireless in the gigabit range. Of course wired will always be faster and will be used for backbone stuff, but "Joe Average" is NEVER going to need the bandwidth that wired provides. Does Joe Average need it today? No.
That difference will fade... That's when it will happen. That's why I said 802.11? The standard that will make it happen isn't here yet. It will need to be at least 100Mb/s for clients and 1000Mb/s for servers/aps. At that point, I think you will see things like cell phones and radios (both analogue and digital) being replaced by a new more flexible digital communications device. One that can carry the dominant forms of media:
-text -audio -video -executable
Re:How many CIOs own Microsoft stock?
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Yup... didn't take long for a moderator with no sense of humor to mod my post down. No surprise as I still assert that Slashdot moderation is BROKEN!
Re:"Nerds" are interested in more than OSS
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: 1
Hmmm... so you think that Battlefield 1942 is the "killer app" that will make or break an OS? You must be what... thirteen or fourteen years old? I'll try and educate you:
Why don't you "tweak out" your system and I'll "tweak out" mine and then we both install PERL on it and see whose system grinds to a halt when running simple PERL scripts...
I didn't say that my OS is the best, I just said that people who use Linux are much better with computers in general than most Windows chimps. I can set up a pretty killer Windows box, but it's still not going to satisfy my needs or my desire for preformance the way a Linux/BSD or UNIX box will.
Go play your games little boy, let the men get on with the more important things like running the Internet...
Re:How many CIOs subscribe to PC World?
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You hit the nail on the head with this one. If I hear one more CIO use the word "infrastructure" without actually defining what the hell they are taling about, I'm going to go postal. I hear some of these idiots talking completely out of their asses about things they don't have any idea of. Then after they spin their web of bullshit, they ask the people who do the REAL work to "make it happen". Ten times out of ten, it all winds up being a nightmare and the CIO blames the real workers for not making his "vision" come to pass. Even though his vision couldn't be executed by God himself. That's it though... most of these guys read PC World on the shitter and then go into work the next day saying something like:
"I think we need to optimize our infrastructure by calling in consultants that can build a new architechture for us with rising profits and total lower cost of ownership! To do this we need to stick with Microsoft since they KNOW infrastructures and architectures."
For years now, we've been getting the wireless internet dick tease and it hasn't really happened on a grand scale. I know that a lot of folks are probably going to say "yeah, but this is the real thing..." However, I am going to argure that it isn't. I think that the "REAL THING" will happen when people realize that all the world needs is just one big 802.11? blanket. Everything and anything connecting to each other for standard ports only and blocking everything else. No need for privacy since that is a thing of the past, just open the floodgates and let it happen. Once that happens, the wired Internet will dissipate into the background...
Re:How many CIOs own Microsoft stock?
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: -1, Troll
PARODY TAG ON for HUMOR IMPARIED MODERATORS
Ohhh... I misread that. I thought you said "How many CIOs own Microsoft cock". I'd say all of them. Their asses are always plugged with some of Bill G's limp and tiny member.
CIOs that actually know what they are talking about when it comes to technology? What planet do you come from. I think the real problem is that there are differing levels of skill and knowledge. To most of my co-workers I am seen as some kind of "computer wiz". But, I have met people that know ten times more than me with regard to computers so I think I'm just "average". In the Windows world, I mystify most of my co-workers because they think I know everything about commputers (these are other techs by the way who are pretty good at manageing a Windows domain on their own). The end-users think that I wrote everything that we use here. Hah!! Not even close. So the real deal with CIOs is that they know how to make people think that they know everything and then they sell themselves that way. In my case, I'm happy to admit that I know as much as I need to (bash scripting, a little C and PERL and plenty of basic UNIX and Windows CLI commands. As well as all the stupid GUI based administration crap for Windows networks and SunOne shit too.) but there is A LOT that I don't know. I think the average CIO needs to checkk his head. In general they are just bullhit artists. I have one example of a CIO I knew who couldn't even use a word processor or program his VCR. But he still got paid $2000/day because he knew how to sell himself. Damn shame...
Re:"Nerds" are interested in more than OSS
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: 1, Troll
Uhhhh... this is a site for people who happen to like computers in the truest sens of the word. This means people who are hardcore into the best of everything. The best hardware, the best software and the best OSes. This implies Linux and OSS when we talk about software and OSes.
Look at it in terms of "car guys":
Windows 9x = Ford Escort owner Windows NT/2K = Ford SUV owner Windows XP = Ford SUV with DVD player owner Linux = Volvo owner UNIX (Sun, HP, etc...) = BMW owner
The guys who are REALLY into their cars are all going to vary at each of these levels. The Escort guy is probably going to do all he can to "soup up" his escort and he'll wind up with a Riceboy special. No matter what he does, you can't take him seriously. The NT/2K user is likely just a business user (ie. Soccer mom) and will do what he can to tweak his system, but he isn't going to know how to really get the most performance out of it since MS won't let him actually tweak the code. The XP guy is like the soccer mom with the husband who could afford a few extra options. No real change in true performance, but this type of person can show all their neighbors what they've got and make them jealous. It's all superficial though. The Linux user is more concerned about performance and knows the ins and outs of his system, much like a Volvo owner who is completely in love with their car. Every setting is committed to memory so that any change needed can be made with just a simple keystroke. There are so many variables that would make the average driver/user's head spin, but this option performs extremely well. Finally, the UNIX/BMW user. This person only wants one thing; precision performance. They want to tune their system to do EXACTLY what they want, when they want it with every drop of horsepower. And this is what they get because they know how to coax it out of their system. So tell me... why do we care that YOU can't deal with OSS and Linux? If you are a Windows monkey, then fine... go be a Windows monkey. We won't hold it against you. But don't expect to see that kind of news and information here because YOU are not Slashdot's target.
Re:"Nerds" are interested in more than OSS
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Fuck off NineNine. YOU are tiresome. Does every post you make have to tear down OSS? We're all really tired of reading your bullshit. But I suppose you'll do anything to bend over for Bill.
Amen! I've befriended you because this is the first time I've seen an anti-SUV post on/. outside of my own in the past. SUVs are such a stupid and inappropriate thing in this day and age. But stupid and insecure people in America seem to need these vehicles to soothe their egos without regard to the damage they cause.
-Buying SUVs supports terrorism in a BIG way since those gas guzzling mosters put money in the hands of the criminals doing horrible things worldwide. If they were true patriots, they would stop buying SUVs and demand that our auto industry provide us with alternative fuels. -Damaging the environment seems to not matter to these fools as well. So what if their grand children or great grand children won't bea ble to play outside because it's too polluted. It doesn't directlry affect them. Selfish bastards.
And then when you confront these idiots with these facts, they get all defensive because they don't want to think about it and hope that some solution will magically appear. Well you know what idiot! You're wrong. It won't! And YOU are a huge part of the problem!
Fuck the war for oil... What we need is a war on US business. Force the auto industry out of business so that someone else can come in to replace it. We need alternative fuels, better mass transportation, and in the end... electric cars. The money being spent on this ridiculous conflict in Iraq would be better spent on re-tooling the auto industry for electric cars, fuel cells and charging station infrastructure. Imagine that... being free of the middle eastern grip. That whole part of the world would be relegated to status: irrelevant. They could nuke each other off the planet for all we care.
I really like these new NAKED POSTS. They are a much better alternative to the silly first posts. A lot more "with the times" if you know what I mean... Kind of like the folks that used to streak back in the 70s. I hope more trolls start using NAKED POSTS instead of first posts. I am not a troll myself, so I will not be posting these. (I've already posted one, and that's my quota. I typically only post one troll if it's a new trend) So... take it away Slashtrolls... I'm not a troll, I just like to make friends with trolls. BTW... read ">this and comment please. If you like it then befriend me.:)
And business matters to us for what reason? What a lot of you Slashbots seem NOT to understand is this:
Most Linux users and coders don't care about business or profit. We care about computers and software. The fact that a few companies have been able to take advantage of the software (GNU, the linux kernel, etc...) is just a happy accident for the capitalist system. But does ANYONE out there honestly think that the programmers who've worked on these projects would not have done so if profit was not guaranteed? Would Linus have just said to himself, "Oh, I think I'll just keep this thing to myself since it's not really going to make me any money."? Would Stallman have said to himself, "Fine! If those fools don't want to open up their source in a truly free sense without me paying for/agreeing with a disagreeable licence, I'll just make my own and never show anyone else the code!"? Hell NO! The reason that a majority of the coders who work on Open Source/Free software, is because we LIKE to. It's a KICK! A HIGH!!
It just seems to me that the guys who always complain about the GNU GPL are just jealous idiots who can't write their own decent stuff. They hate the idea that someone might be able to make something as good as, or better than their product and give it away. You guys just don't get it. You are probably all better off being suits than coders since you seem to care about business and profit more than coding. Maybe it's time for a career change since coding is obviously not your forte?
PARODY TAG ON Did you make sure to use gold plated power cords? That will keep any interference that minor power fluctuations might induce into the amplifier out of the system. Also make sure you have the green dots placed in the proper locations of the listening space. All the sounds that have a harmonic relationship with green light will be properly reflected and enhanced by the dots resulting in a much more realistic listening experience. Of course you can't forget to keep the humidity in the room within 59 and 72% otherwise the magnetic fields in the room will be thrown off by 0.00000000000725 millimags and offset the sound field's imaging. Did you makes sure that the room is pyramidal in shape? Only the highest end of audiophiles realizes that the accoustics of a pyramid shaped room combined with the harmonic resonances therein can properly create a nearly realistic 3D image. END PARODY
I'm going to go listen to my Chintek portable CD playwer with MP3 capability and some earbuds. All the MP3s are encoded at 64K. But I do have my pyramid shaped hat which should correct any imbalances...
Keep the love flowing... the time has come to abandon the first post for the naked post, because... With the naked post, you don't have to be first, you just have to be NAKED!!!!
To each his own. I hate "live" music. It's so... imperfect. I have a friend who swears up and down that live jazz sounds better, but all the jazz shows I've gone to see (a good number since my wife loves jazz) have pretty crappy production values. On the other hand, give me any album by Lyle Mays and I'll be on cloud nine. There is just something wonderful about well produced music that retains artistic integrity. Crap like Britney and Christina need not apply. The production is pretty shoddy there too.
Then there is also music that just sounds awesome because it is totally artificial. Check out the latest glitch stuff by the likes of Plaid, Autechre and DNTEL. That stuff really gets inside your head and moves you more than any old bum with a beat guitar ever could. Of course... it's all subjective. Chances are if you liked the bum, you probably won't like a clean square wave being modulated six ways to Sunday...
And that's the point. It's all subjective. I hate live music. But I love electronica. But that's just me.:P
As much as it would have inconvenienced this guy to have to go through the process of opting out and then just waiting to see if it worked, it would have gone a long way to validating his case. If he was, indeed recieving mail from the people he intended to opt out from.
What did bother me about the article was that they somehow seemed to make a distinction between unsolicited commercial e-mail and commercial e-mail from third parties whom you've had contact with. I think what bother me about it is that opt-out only works for people who read the contract/agreement/license they are OKing. the problem is that (as they well should know), NOBODY ever reads this stuff. That's why old people will always get scammed by people selling things they "need" or the computer illiterate who buys into CD-ROMs purported to teach them how to use a computer.
What is really needed is a blanket non-commercial sign up list which basically says:
"I do not wish to receive any commercial solicitations of any kind (electronic, published, etc...). This applies to opt-in and opt-out lists as well as unsolicited ads. For any, and every bit of communication that I recieve of this nature, I will charge no less than $25."
But that would never happen since it stomps over what people percieve to be the American Way: "Profit at any cost or inconvenience to everyone else".
Oh well... hopefully someone will come up with a more interesting case in the future.
My prediction: Once we have much more bandwidth, the "infrastructure" for more fluid content will be in place. The "Web" of the future will bring together the free-for-all of P2P, realtime multimedia and portable devices. Although media pundits have been preaching "convergence" since the early 90s, they have it all wrong. Convergence is not something that is ever likely to happen since there is always going to be a new form of media/communication to add to the mix. Right now we have:
That's a limited sample anyway. There is no telling what new forms will arrive on the scene that vastly change the way we experience media. MP3s are a perfect example. 1992... nothing, 1993... nothing, 1994... MP3, 1995... MP3 picks up more followers, 2003... MP3 players can be purchased at WalMart. That all happened in less than a 10 year period. (I realize the research behind MP3 probably started well before then, but who knows what's in the labs right now...)
So beyond the obvious:
-massive increase in bandwidth
-portable devices
-pervasive wireless networking
-expanded P2P/Web
I would suggest:
-completely embedded systems in nearly every facet of society
-more fluid devices (can be pressed into service to do something outside of the realm they were designed for)
-integration into biological systems (Anyone see an RFC for EtherTelepathy in the future?;P )
-everything is the network...
--For my comments on the new difficulties in first posting and the "broken-ness" of metamoderation, go here:
Slashdot Mirror
And you apparently didn't read mine. I DIDN'T say that ALL Windows power users don't know anything about computers. I said that you would be hard pressed to find MANY Windows power users that have the intelligence required to deal with a Linux system. I also didn't attack you or your choice of OS. If you want to use Windows that's perfectly fine. Just don't go around talking down about other people's OS choice. If others are curious about OSS and Linux, then they should explore it and not be frightened away from it by people who don't like it.
What yuo interpret as "poor design" is infinte flexibility. There are tradeoffs in everything. Computers and OSes are no exception. If you want to have a machine that works very well and does some very complex task exactly the way you want it done, then it's going to be inherently complex to use. If you have a set of simple tasks that you want your machine and OS to perform, then the OS needen't be that complex. "Joe Average" out there is typically involved with simple tasks: word processing, e-mail, browsing the web, watching a movie or listening to music. These tasks don't require a lot of complexity in the OS because they don't need to take advantag of every feature on the computer system other than brute force CPU power and potentially tons of RAM and HD. Pretty simple stuff. But when you are working ith more complicated automation tasks that need to run with precision timing and complete accuracy, the task becomes more complicated. This requires and OS that can handle that. Can Windows NT 2K or XP do this? Yes. Can it do it as well as Linux or UNIX? Doubtful. This is all going to depend on what you consider acceptable performance. If you want to throw money at the problem, then get a Wintel box and have at it. But if you are on a tight budget, you are better off with OSS and Linux.
It's great for someone who is new to PCs. But CIOs should not be reading it. It would be like seeing your airplane pilot boarding with a "Flying the Boeing 747 for Dummies" book. It doesn't instill confidence in the crew... ;P
You also seemed to miss the point I was making before. I didn't say that 802.11b at 2-10 Mb/s is what people should always use. I was just saying that "Joe Average" never needs the high-end. You don't sound like "Joe Average" to me.
Yeah yeah... too much is never enough and all that jazz. But you know what? DSL at 608K is plenty for streaming movies into the home. I regularly watch MPEGs and DiVX files with my 802.11 card at about 2 Mb/s average speed. No skipping and it looks great. If I had a 802.11g card, it would I could watch these at DVD quality. Your argument still holds no .75 terabytes worth of drives at home right now. Not sure where you are drawing your conclusions...
water. BTW... I never thought 1 Gig was enough back then. I have
I'm sure most people here out earn me since I CHOOSE to work for a non-profit organization. Profit and wealth are VASTLY unimportant to me. But OK... shoot:
$52,000/year here
If you want to go work on video games as a pro that's cool. But it's still not a "killer app". Sounds to me like you are more concerned about profit than technology... that makes you sound more like a suit than a tech though.
I also NEVER brought up Linux as a desktop OS. I was only discussing the varying levels of skill and knowledge as they correlate with the choice of OS. You can't argue that someone who uses Linux or UNIX doesn't know anything about computers. But you CAN argue that when talking about Windows users. How many Windows "power users" do you know that can fix a Linux box that has a problem? Not too many, I'd bet. I still have yet to meet a Linux/UNIX user that CAN'T fix a Windows box though. They might gripe about it the whole way and talk about how backwards the system is (I'm not that bad, I save my bile for Slashdot weenies) but they are 100% guaranteed to fix it. The only exceptions are the UNIX guys that have NEVER used Windows.
That's now... just wait a few years and you'll see wireless in the gigabit range. Of course wired will always be faster and will be used for backbone stuff, but "Joe Average" is NEVER going to need the bandwidth that wired provides. Does Joe Average need it today? No.
That difference will fade... That's when it will happen. That's why I said 802.11? The standard that will make it happen isn't here yet. It will need to be at least 100Mb/s for clients and 1000Mb/s for servers/aps. At that point, I think you will see things like cell phones and radios (both analogue and digital) being replaced by a new more flexible digital communications device. One that can carry the dominant forms of media:
-text
-audio
-video
-executable
Yup... didn't take long for a moderator with no sense of humor to mod my post down. No surprise as I still assert that Slashdot moderation is BROKEN!
Hmmm... so you think that Battlefield 1942 is the "killer app" that will make or break an OS? You must be what... thirteen or fourteen years old? I'll try and educate you:
Why don't you "tweak out" your system and I'll "tweak out" mine and then we both install PERL on it and see whose system grinds to a halt when running simple PERL scripts...
I didn't say that my OS is the best, I just said that people who use Linux are much better with computers in general than most Windows chimps. I can set up a pretty killer Windows box, but it's still not going to satisfy my needs or my desire for preformance the way a Linux/BSD or UNIX box will.
Go play your games little boy, let the men get on with the more important things like running the Internet...
You hit the nail on the head with this one. If I hear one more CIO use the word "infrastructure" without actually defining what the hell they are taling about, I'm going to go postal. I hear some of these idiots talking completely out of their asses about things they don't have any idea of. Then after they spin their web of bullshit, they ask the people who do the REAL work to "make it happen". Ten times out of ten, it all winds up being a nightmare and the CIO blames the real workers for not making his "vision" come to pass. Even though his vision couldn't be executed by God himself. That's it though... most of these guys read PC World on the shitter and then go into work the next day saying something like:
"I think we need to optimize our infrastructure by calling in consultants that can build a new architechture for us with rising profits and total lower cost of ownership! To do this we need to stick with Microsoft since they KNOW infrastructures and architectures."
Blah blah blah... stupid monkeys.
For years now, we've been getting the wireless internet dick tease and it hasn't really happened on a grand scale. I know that a lot of folks are probably going to say "yeah, but this is the real thing..." However, I am going to argure that it isn't. I think that the "REAL THING" will happen when people realize that all the world needs is just one big 802.11? blanket. Everything and anything connecting to each other for standard ports only and blocking everything else. No need for privacy since that is a thing of the past, just open the floodgates and let it happen. Once that happens, the wired Internet will dissipate into the background...
Find out why it is that Slashdot's moderation system is broken by clicking here...
PARODY TAG ON for HUMOR IMPARIED MODERATORS
Ohhh... I misread that. I thought you said "How many CIOs own Microsoft cock". I'd say all of them. Their asses are always plugged with some of Bill G's limp and tiny member.
PARODY TAG OFF
CIOs that actually know what they are talking about when it comes to technology? What planet do you come from. I think the real problem is that there are differing levels of skill and knowledge. To most of my co-workers I am seen as some kind of "computer wiz". But, I have met people that know ten times more than me with regard to computers so I think I'm just "average". In the Windows world, I mystify most of my co-workers because they think I know everything about commputers (these are other techs by the way who are pretty good at manageing a Windows domain on their own). The end-users think that I wrote everything that we use here. Hah!! Not even close. So the real deal with CIOs is that they know how to make people think that they know everything and then they sell themselves that way. In my case, I'm happy to admit that I know as much as I need to (bash scripting, a little C and PERL and plenty of basic UNIX and Windows CLI commands. As well as all the stupid GUI based administration crap for Windows networks and SunOne shit too.) but there is A LOT that I don't know. I think the average CIO needs to checkk his head. In general they are just bullhit artists. I have one example of a CIO I knew who couldn't even use a word processor or program his VCR. But he still got paid $2000/day because he knew how to sell himself. Damn shame...
Uhhhh... this is a site for people who happen to like computers in the truest sens of the word. This means people who are hardcore into the best of everything. The best hardware, the best software and the best OSes. This implies Linux and OSS when we talk about software and OSes.
Look at it in terms of "car guys":
Windows 9x = Ford Escort owner
Windows NT/2K = Ford SUV owner
Windows XP = Ford SUV with DVD player owner
Linux = Volvo owner
UNIX (Sun, HP, etc...) = BMW owner
The guys who are REALLY into their cars are all going to vary at each of these levels. The Escort guy is probably going to do all he can to "soup up" his escort and he'll wind up with a Riceboy special. No matter what he does, you can't take him seriously. The NT/2K user is likely just a business user (ie. Soccer mom) and will do what he can to tweak his system, but he isn't going to know how to really get the most performance out of it since MS won't let him actually tweak the code. The XP guy is like the soccer mom with the husband who could afford a few extra options. No real change in true performance, but this type of person can show all their neighbors what they've got and make them jealous. It's all superficial though. The Linux user is more concerned about performance and knows the ins and outs of his system, much like a Volvo owner who is completely in love with their car. Every setting is committed to memory so that any change needed can be made with just a simple keystroke. There are so many variables that would make the average driver/user's head spin, but this option performs extremely well. Finally, the UNIX/BMW user. This person only wants one thing; precision performance. They want to tune their system to do EXACTLY what they want, when they want it with every drop of horsepower. And this is what they get because they know how to coax it out of their system. So tell me... why do we care that YOU can't deal with OSS and Linux? If you are a Windows monkey, then fine... go be a Windows monkey. We won't hold it against you. But don't expect to see that kind of news and information here because YOU are not Slashdot's target.
Fuck off NineNine. YOU are tiresome. Does every post you make have to tear down OSS? We're all really tired of reading your bullshit. But I suppose you'll do anything to bend over for Bill.
Amen! I've befriended you because this is the first time I've seen an anti-SUV post on /. outside of my own in the past. SUVs are such a stupid and inappropriate thing in this day and age. But stupid and insecure people in America seem to need these vehicles to soothe their egos without regard to the damage they cause.
-Buying SUVs supports terrorism in a BIG way since those gas guzzling mosters put money in the hands of the criminals doing horrible things worldwide. If they were true patriots, they would stop buying SUVs and demand that our auto industry provide us with alternative fuels.
-Damaging the environment seems to not matter to these fools as well. So what if their grand children or great grand children won't bea ble to play outside because it's too polluted. It doesn't directlry affect them. Selfish bastards.
And then when you confront these idiots with these facts, they get all defensive because they don't want to think about it and hope that some solution will magically appear. Well you know what idiot! You're wrong. It won't! And YOU are a huge part of the problem!
Fuck the war for oil... What we need is a war on US business. Force the auto industry out of business so that someone else can come in to replace it. We need alternative fuels, better mass transportation, and in the end... electric cars. The money being spent on this ridiculous conflict in Iraq would be better spent on re-tooling the auto industry for electric cars, fuel cells and charging station infrastructure. Imagine that... being free of the middle eastern grip. That whole part of the world would be relegated to status: irrelevant. They could nuke each other off the planet for all we care.
I really like these new NAKED POSTS. They are a much better alternative to the silly first posts. A lot more "with the times" if you know what I mean... Kind of like the folks that used to streak back in the 70s. I hope more trolls start using NAKED POSTS instead of first posts. I am not a troll myself, so I will not be posting these. (I've already posted one, and that's my quota. I typically only post one troll if it's a new trend) So... take it away Slashtrolls... I'm not a troll, I just like to make friends with trolls. BTW... read ">this and comment please. If you like it then befriend me. :)
I got the IP ban, but I want to see if it affect my subnet or not. Lots of fun testing Slashdot's limits...
Someone mod this up. This is the funniest post I've seen on Slashdot in years. Even funnier than the recent NAKED POSTs.
And business matters to us for what reason? What a lot of you Slashbots seem NOT to understand is this:
Most Linux users and coders don't care about business or profit. We care about computers and software. The fact that a few companies have been able to take advantage of the software (GNU, the linux kernel, etc...) is just a happy accident for the capitalist system. But does ANYONE out there honestly think that the programmers who've worked on these projects would not have done so if profit was not guaranteed? Would Linus have just said to himself, "Oh, I think I'll just keep this thing to myself since it's not really going to make me any money."? Would Stallman have said to himself, "Fine! If those fools don't want to open up their source in a truly free sense without me paying for/agreeing with a disagreeable licence, I'll just make my own and never show anyone else the code!"? Hell NO! The reason that a majority of the coders who work on Open Source/Free software, is because we LIKE to. It's a KICK! A HIGH!!
It just seems to me that the guys who always complain about the GNU GPL are just jealous idiots who can't write their own decent stuff. They hate the idea that someone might be able to make something as good as, or better than their product and give it away. You guys just don't get it. You are probably all better off being suits than coders since you seem to care about business and profit more than coding. Maybe it's time for a career change since coding is obviously not your forte?
PARODY TAG ON
Did you make sure to use gold plated power cords? That will keep any interference that minor power fluctuations might induce into the amplifier out of the system. Also make sure you have the green dots placed in the proper locations of the listening space. All the sounds that have a harmonic relationship with green light will be properly reflected and enhanced by the dots resulting in a much more realistic listening experience. Of course you can't forget to keep the humidity in the room within 59 and 72% otherwise the magnetic fields in the room will be thrown off by 0.00000000000725 millimags and offset the sound field's imaging. Did you makes sure that the room is pyramidal in shape? Only the highest end of audiophiles realizes that the accoustics of a pyramid shaped room combined with the harmonic resonances therein can properly create a nearly realistic 3D image.
END PARODY
I'm going to go listen to my Chintek portable CD playwer with MP3 capability and some earbuds. All the MP3s are encoded at 64K. But I do have my pyramid shaped hat which should correct any imbalances...
Uhhh... Dude. You need to be logged in for that. And by the way... NAKED POST!!! I am totally NAKED!!!!
I claim this naked post in name of the CLiT!
I am not a troll
Keep the love flowing... the time has come to abandon the first post for the naked post, because... With the naked post, you don't have to be first, you just have to be NAKED!!!!
To each his own. I hate "live" music. It's so... imperfect. I have a friend who swears up and down that live jazz sounds better, but all the jazz shows I've gone to see (a good number since my wife loves jazz) have pretty crappy production values. On the other hand, give me any album by Lyle Mays and I'll be on cloud nine. There is just something wonderful about well produced music that retains artistic integrity. Crap like Britney and Christina need not apply. The production is pretty shoddy there too.
:P
Then there is also music that just sounds awesome because it is totally artificial. Check out the latest glitch stuff by the likes of Plaid, Autechre and DNTEL. That stuff really gets inside your head and moves you more than any old bum with a beat guitar ever could. Of course... it's all subjective. Chances are if you liked the bum, you probably won't like a clean square wave being modulated six ways to Sunday...
And that's the point. It's all subjective. I hate live music. But I love electronica. But that's just me.
As much as it would have inconvenienced this guy to have to go through the process of opting out and then just waiting to see if it worked, it would have gone a long way to validating his case. If he was, indeed recieving mail from the people he intended to opt out from.
What did bother me about the article was that they somehow seemed to make a distinction between unsolicited commercial e-mail and commercial e-mail from third parties whom you've had contact with. I think what bother me about it is that opt-out only works for people who read the contract/agreement/license they are OKing. the problem is that (as they well should know), NOBODY ever reads this stuff. That's why old people will always get scammed by people selling things they "need" or the computer illiterate who buys into CD-ROMs purported to teach them how to use a computer.
What is really needed is a blanket non-commercial sign up list which basically says:
"I do not wish to receive any commercial solicitations of any kind (electronic, published, etc...). This applies to opt-in and opt-out lists as well as unsolicited ads. For any, and every bit of communication that I recieve of this nature, I will charge no less than $25."
But that would never happen since it stomps over what people percieve to be the American Way: "Profit at any cost or inconvenience to everyone else".
Oh well... hopefully someone will come up with a more interesting case in the future.
Denver Snuffer
My prediction: Once we have much more bandwidth, the "infrastructure" for more fluid content will be in place. The "Web" of the future will bring together the free-for-all of P2P, realtime multimedia and portable devices. Although media pundits have been preaching "convergence" since the early 90s, they have it all wrong. Convergence is not something that is ever likely to happen since there is always going to be a new form of media/communication to add to the mix. Right now we have:
-Text (HTML, XML, etc...)
-Audio (MP3, Ogg Vorbis, Realmedia, Cellular telephony, IP telephony etc...)
-Video (MPEG4, Ogg Theora/Tarkin, WMV, Realvideo, Sattelite, Broadcast and HDTV, etc...)
-Executable (Java, ActiveX, etc...)
That's a limited sample anyway. There is no telling what new forms will arrive on the scene that vastly change the way we experience media. MP3s are a perfect example. 1992... nothing, 1993... nothing, 1994... MP3, 1995... MP3 picks up more followers, 2003... MP3 players can be purchased at WalMart. That all happened in less than a 10 year period. (I realize the research behind MP3 probably started well before then, but who knows what's in the labs right now...)
So beyond the obvious:
-massive increase in bandwidth
-portable devices
-pervasive wireless networking
-expanded P2P/Web
I would suggest: ;P )
-completely embedded systems in nearly every facet of society
-more fluid devices (can be pressed into service to do something outside of the realm they were designed for)
-integration into biological systems (Anyone see an RFC for EtherTelepathy in the future?
-everything is the network...
--For my comments on the new difficulties in first posting and the "broken-ness" of metamoderation, go here:
http://slashdot.org/~Trolling4Dollars/journal/2699 5