In the software world, a 13 year old in his basement with a old P-III 500 and linux has the same tools available to him as the entire microsfot corperation does.
Erm, not exactly. Microsoft has huge resources available in terms of testing and coding and stuff. A 13-year-old with linux doesn't have those things. He does have a lot of great tools, and he's certainly in a good position to "innovate", but he still can't match Microsoft or any other large corporation for resources. One important thing he's missing is the ability to determine if his "innovation" is going to make money. Large corporations have millions (billions?) of dollars to spend on market research to determine if their innovation will sell.
The Basement/garage Electronics inventor Also has the abilities/tools available.. I can solder BGA chips to the home made 4 layer circuit boards I can make (have a board house do it for you for $100.00 is much easier though) A large number of chip makers gladly dole out single or a 3 pack of samples to small companies or hobbiests.
Can you make a processor? More importantly, can you make one that will be "innovative" compared to current bleeding-edge processor technology? For any other electronics project, the issues will be the same. How much do your failures cost you in time and money? How much time and money do you have to spend? For every Jobs and the others that existed in the '80s (the Amiga was designed by a team in their garage as well) there were hundreds of failed garage computers. Even after you've built your innovative piece of electronics, whatever it is, it takes money to manufacture it, and even more to market it. Jobs and Gates and all those guys had a HUGE advantage in their market that we don't have now: there were no PCs. Home computers didn't really exist. As much as I hate to admit it, Jobs and Gates (and Commodore, but they're not around anymore for anybody to remember their significant contributions) made computers available for home users.
Right now the single person has the same capabilities available to them that the largest companies in the world do. Hell we have the "rock-star programmer" building a fricking rocket to launch himself into space.
The first statement is just plain wrong.:) Total up your net worth and then compare it to IBMs net worth and then tell me a single person has the same capabilities as the "largest companies in the world". Your "rock-star programmer" building his X-prize contender just happens also to have a significant personal fortune to put into the project. Can you build a rocket that costs a million dollars? Do you have the resources to do all the R&D required to build a rocket? Check out the Armadillo pages to see the failures they have. Can you even afford to have one of their failures?
Yes, individuals can and will innovate. They will also continue to get rich doing so. But that's not the same as having the same resources available that a large corporation has. It's still David and Goliath no matter how you slice it.
That's an implementation problem. Make it instead so that the vote paper trail is dropped into a locked box that's counted elsewhere, and the implementation problem goes away.
In fact, the whole thing is just an implementation problem. There is NO REASON why electronic voting, whether it's internet-powered or uses a voting booth, should be inherently insecure. Quite the contrary. I suggest that if we had internet-based voting we'd have more people voting!
First, instead of approaching it as a "programming" problem, why don't we approach it as a security problem? How do we ensure the accurate results of the software?
First, we need duplicate copies of all voting data. The logical thing is to provide hooks for anybody to get their own copy of the voting data (it's electronic, right? Why not?). That way, in realtime, as people vote, we can each get a copy of each record. Anonymity is supposed to be assured by the system, we'll assume it is.
Second, cash registers already print out receipts in a variety of ways. They print out a receipt for you, a receipt to put in the sealed black box (white and yellow receipts, respectively), and keep their own internal roll of transactions recorded. I suppose giving you a copy of your own vote is optional.:)
Third, it will be possible to compare the results of the "official" computers with any other computer, because the data has been replicated. It will be possible to compare the accuracy of the results using the paper copies.
Simple. IT's a security problem.:) It's all about making sure the integrity of the data is kept, and that there is a way to check it in case there is something wrong with the data. It's not about accountability (the usual purpose of audit trails). The only issue is making sure the data is accurate. (Well, and the reports)
Still waiting for you to list the attacks on American soil since 9/11.
I'll bite. There have been numerous attacks, but I don't have exact figures on how many ANTHRAX MAILINGS went out. There were also a number of fatalities as a result of the ANTHRAX MAILINGS.
It's been two years since 9/11/2001. How many terrorist attacks happened on American soil in teh two years prior to that? More importantly, how many attacks against Americans have been made? Rest assured, the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq have been attacked numerous times since we went there with our own guns blazing.
If anything, all Bush has done is gotten the terrorists to attack our soldiers instead, but then most of previous terrorist attacks (since about 1990, anyway) have been directed at military targets.
Except for the terrorist attacks perpetrated by Americans for Americans (the Oklahoma City bombing....)
Bush has wasted a bunch of resources and furthered a cause that has made it impossible for there to be a "pro-US" democracy anywhere in the world, except here in the US. Name ONE pro-US democracy. JUST ONE.:)
Wow. I hope someday I'm enough of a badass to be able to flame people like that and get away with it.
Personally, I would feel a certain pride if Linus flamed me.:) If I said something that was important enough to him to flame me, I'd take a point in my favor for being flamed by Linus.
Of course, it's not the same as taking a point in my favor because LInus says "Good question" or "you know exactly what you're talking about".
At the end of the day, though, I figure Linus just sticks his thumb in his mouth and plays with his blanket.
I really can't see how linus can claim copyright to the distribution of any source which happens to run with the linux kerne
He can't. All he can say is that the source for the kernel that the "other" source requires is GPL, and as such the "derived" work must also be GPL. GPL isn't about assigning copyright, it's about distributing copyrighted code and binaries and the user's appropriate rights.
While Linus gets tied up arguing about derived works and wether the code was originally written for Linux, he doesn't actually solve the problem of the "grey area". I don't believe Linus has thought it through totally.
Dammit, Jim, I'm a programmer, not a lawyer!
Maybe Linus doesn't solve that problem because he knows damn well that he can't. It's a problem all the Linux contributors have to solve collectively, or it requires a platoon of lawyers and a jury of their peers. It seems to me that Linus did everything he could to help people understand the issue, but in the end it either takes people agreeing or winning a fight to solve the problem.
Personally, I hope the SciTech guy decides to just go ahead and GPL their kernel module and release it anyway. I think they (and we!) will be better off.
Personally I have always found the argument that linking makes something a derived work very questionable, especially for things like java where linked class files contain little other than the class and method names that they link to. If a java class that calls another is a derived work, then that is yet another dumb copyright law.
In C++, anyway, when you link dynamically, I think the difference is quite clear. First, your application cannot depend on the class. I.e. it must be able to function without the class, or have several alternatives available. Then, consider this code snippet:
class HelloWorld : MyClass, MyOtherClass, GPLClass
In the first class, you have literally derived from the other class. In the second case, you haven't actually derived from the class, you've just used it. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that in the second case, if your program can function if GPLClass isn't available, it doesn't have to be GPL.
Of course, I'd like to see copyright law rewritten to make all software GPL.:)
A D+? Is what you have cited as the thing I got wrong really 30%+ of the history I provided? I figure I get at least a C+/B- for that....;)
Not that I give a shit about grades. I did graduate High School with a 2.5 GPA because I didn't want to do any more work than was necessary to graduate...
Heh, I came back into the computer world to learn that Intel and the x86 clones (AMD) and all the other PC hardware manufacturers had finally started catching up to the Amiga, and they had had to advance processors to 300mhz+ to do it! I have a buddy that says that the Amiga was the first machine with 3d acceleration, and of course we all know that the Amiga with its blitter system (spread across 3 chips, iirc) was MMX before there was any "MMX" from Intel. I seem to remember Intel processors needing to clock 33mhz+ to match Amiga's 7mhz processor for performance. But I also remember it was about '93 when Intel boxes started outperforming Amiga's, even if the architecture was inferior. Dammit, if Commodore hadn't dropped the ball with R&D, Intel and Friends would have *never* caught up. (I know, Mac freaks say they still haven't caught up, but let's not forget that the Mac was the closest competitor to the Amiga, but by nature of Amiga's custom chipset, Mac could never keep up either)
It may happen quite quickly (I remember having the option to use either a rock-solid 2.2 or a "not tested as thoroughly" 2.4) some time ago.
First, because I use parenthetical expressions a lot myself (and I always double check them for this), remove the parenthetical expression from your statement and what are you left with?
It may happen quite quickly some time ago.
Second, Mandrake 9.2 has a contributed 2.6.0testXX kernel, but you have to get it from ftp. It's on the discs if you BUY them, but if you leech--er, download the isos like I did, you'll have to hit an ftp server for them. Of course, if you configure your urpmi sources properly, you can just select the appropriate kernel from the Mandrake Control Panel software installation applet (whatever the fuck it's called).
I'm likely to talk about the Amiga in a bitter fashion, since I'm very bitter about Commodore, and a few other unrelated things going on in my life at the time. I actually swore off computers for 7 years and went and got a life. So I look back at my Amiga days and can't help but think "I wasted my time with that company?". First time a company wasted my time that it really mattered, and the only time I paid THEM for it.
I still love the Amigas as a line of computers, and they really were cutting edge (nevermind that Atari was able to do some of the things they did because of a lawsuit involving the Amiga technology:) ), and it really did take 10+ years for the rest of the computing industry to catch up. ANd if it weren't for the stupid patents and the fact that commodore went under the way they did, it would NOT have taken 10+ years for the rest of the industry to catch up. Moreover, the rest of the industry would be a LOT FARTHER ALONG than it is *now*, because Commodore was a big player in the desktop market before they fell apart (they were crushing APple left and right, and with Atari dropping out of business Commodore was poised to defeat Microsoft before the monopoly was even built).
I'd like to see what the world would be like today if Commodore had truly supported the Amiga and kept up R&D on it and remained competitive. I really and truly think the world would be better as a whole, and computing specifically would be tons better.
The A3000 (desktop, which came before or at the same time as the T model... didn't it?) wasn't just an "A2000 with all the standard expansions."
I seem to remember the 3000T coming out WAAAAAY before the 3000 desktop, but I could be wrong about that. Yes, yes, all the stuff you said falls under what I called "some other minor stuff".:)
Also, why would the AGA line be "infamous?"
Perhaps you recall waiting all those years for those things to be released while, unknowing we were the company was sucked dry by a couple of scoundrels. It came out later that the rumors were correct and Commodore SAT on teh AGA line for 2+ years without doing any more research and development. They lost their competitive edge, meanwhile trying to turn the Amiga into a gaming console (THAT never took off).
*sigh* It was a great machine that got crushed by a couple of very evil people. We're talking guys that make Bill Gates look like mutherfuckin' Santa Claus, dude. They weren't even interested in taking over the world. They didn't give a shit about the millions of people that PAID THEIR SALARY. They only cared about how much they could steal from the company, delaying R&D, product releases, and so forth, just so they would have more "working capital" to take when the left the country. They let marketing run the company, which is exactly why we got slammed with a stupid gaming console when what we *really* wanted was teh AGA line!
The AGA line was only grudgingly released because the shareholders demanded it. Something about "You say you have been spending all this money on R&D, why don't you have a product? Why are you losing your competitive edge?" and a threatened lawsuit, and WHAM! we get teh AGA line.
So yeah, the AGA line was quite notorious. For the record.;)
You missed the second "=". (variable1 = variable2) or (variable = constant) has always been true. Just what we need, some excuse for a programmer talking about the kernel. Humph.
Mmmm, maybe he was using BASIC? That's a perfectly valid statement in basic, dude.
From 1991-1996 to be exact and it was actually a pass me down from my father who upgraded to the Amiga 1000
If your father "upgraded" from an A500 to an A1000, you should shoot him for being an idiot.:)
The A1000 was the first amiga built, sorta. First, there was the "Amiga" which had a few stupid problems that fell through Commodore's notoriously great quality control. So they fixed those problems and re-released it, and it was called the Amiga 1000. They also added RAM, so it had a whopping 256K, but it only had the Agnus in it.
THEN Commodore's notoriously stupendous marketing department decided that people LOVED the C-64 and the C-128 SOMUCH, that the Amiga needed to be put in a case with the keyboard, a more "compact" model. At the same time, they put a standard 512K of RAM and the Fat Agnus, and upgraded some of the minor chips as well, iirc. They packaged it TWICE, once to appeal to the original A1000 owners, and once because their marketing department were a bunch of fascists. The fascist version was called the A500, and the loose, modular, and mostly upgradeable version, the A2000.
THEN, giving in once again to market pressures (for the last time, I might add) they released the A3000T, which was just an A2000 with all the standard expansions (1MB RAM, a couple of minor things) in a tower case.
Then, they did a bunch of stupid things that nobody understood, which resulted in a NEW line of amigas (the infamous AGA line).
Finally, the President and the accountant took off with a bunch of cash, and left commodore bankrupt, and we finally understood all the stupid things they had done.
(If you detect any bitterness over the whole deal, you don't need to recalibrate your bitterness-detector)
Goddamn you're young, dude. Strike me as not even being able to remember the Apple II/C64/Atari (whatever, Atari model numbers are irrelevant) wars going on. Remember Atari suing Amiga? So Commodore bought them? Hell, I remember when the 2600 came out and it was HOT SHIT. Paddles! What a worthless intervace. Heh.
I remember the old Mac commercials, saying "What's the point of point and click?" ANd then when the Amiga came out saying "We've got Macs beat hands down." And we did.:)
1633 is a sequel to the 1632 novel by Eric Flint ( YOU KNOW.. the ONE WHO POSTS HIS NOVELS on the NET for FREE??)
I like Eric Flint. I like him a lot.
But I get really damn sick of his nationalistic attitude. I do, man. I really liked 1632, and that was completely in *spite* of the dominant theme of Americans being the greatest thing in the fucking universe. I got sick of hearing about how this small-town America was such a wonderful fucking place. A bunch of rednecks show up in 1632 and start shooting up knights and crap.
Don't get me wrong, I liked the book. But he does much better with David Drake in the Belisarius series, which is really great. It's funny, and it's very serious at the same time. I love it! (of course, if you do a half-decent job writing any Roman-based fiction, I'll probably love it)
Man, I finally read non-Retief Laumer, and that guy's great! Retief is pretty kick-ass in general, but it's really too bad he's best known for Retief, because having read some of his other stuff, Retief really is in the lower part of his writing abilities. Man. I can't get over Laumer, I just can't.
No story on bad Sci-Fi is complete without mention the Second Foundation trilogy.
Or any other Asimov, for that matter. R. Daneel Whateverthefuck? Come on! My 8-bit 2mhz C-64 had more personality than that sick fuck. I never understood why Asimov is so highly respected as a sci-fi writer, and I really don't think I ever will.
There's two types of sci-fi. There's story-driven sci-fi, in which you expect 3 dimensional characters but usually only get 2. Most people cite Heinlein when they like this kind of story (like me). Then there's gratuitous sci-fi that exists for the sole purpose of having a stinkin' universe. One word: Asimov. Why bother with characters in the first place? (Admittedly Jules Vernes leans that way as well, but he did at least make an attempt to explore Phileas Fogg as a serious character, which is something in his favor)
First off, if you're really wanting to support Baen in this effort, why don't you put up #3 and #4? That way, those of us that haven't read anything later than #2 can keep reading while we save up our money....;)
Second, do I get any points for pointing out that Ghostwheel is the computer that Merlin built?
I really liked that series. However, the one you mentioned, that shall not be mentioned again, was bad. Very bad.
Mutineer's Moon is a series? What, they only put the first book on the free library? Damn. I read that one and loved it, so I just tore into the HONOR HARRINGTON SERIES. I think HONOR HARRINGTON is awesome! I get turned on whenever HONOR HARRINGTON holds that damn 'cat up to her breasts, and HONOR HARRINGTON does that fairly often. After reading one book's worth of HONOR HARRINGTON I have to go whack myself silly.
Hmmm, I need to do something real quick. I'll bbiab.
I forced myself to continue, certain that it had improve. Long story short, upon finishing the last page, I through the damned book across the room in frustration.
I did that with Fellowship of the Ring....
Seriously! That's not flamebait, it's plain truth.
Slashdot Mirror
In the software world, a 13 year old in his basement with a old P-III 500 and linux has the same tools available to him as the entire microsfot corperation does.
Erm, not exactly. Microsoft has huge resources available in terms of testing and coding and stuff. A 13-year-old with linux doesn't have those things. He does have a lot of great tools, and he's certainly in a good position to "innovate", but he still can't match Microsoft or any other large corporation for resources. One important thing he's missing is the ability to determine if his "innovation" is going to make money. Large corporations have millions (billions?) of dollars to spend on market research to determine if their innovation will sell.
The Basement/garage Electronics inventor Also has the abilities/tools available.. I can solder BGA chips to the home made 4 layer circuit boards I can make (have a board house do it for you for $100.00 is much easier though) A large number of chip makers gladly dole out single or a 3 pack of samples to small companies or hobbiests.
Can you make a processor? More importantly, can you make one that will be "innovative" compared to current bleeding-edge processor technology? For any other electronics project, the issues will be the same. How much do your failures cost you in time and money? How much time and money do you have to spend? For every Jobs and the others that existed in the '80s (the Amiga was designed by a team in their garage as well) there were hundreds of failed garage computers. Even after you've built your innovative piece of electronics, whatever it is, it takes money to manufacture it, and even more to market it. Jobs and Gates and all those guys had a HUGE advantage in their market that we don't have now: there were no PCs. Home computers didn't really exist. As much as I hate to admit it, Jobs and Gates (and Commodore, but they're not around anymore for anybody to remember their significant contributions) made computers available for home users.
Right now the single person has the same capabilities available to them that the largest companies in the world do. Hell we have the "rock-star programmer" building a fricking rocket to launch himself into space.
The first statement is just plain wrong. :) Total up your net worth and then compare it to IBMs net worth and then tell me a single person has the same capabilities as the "largest companies in the world". Your "rock-star programmer" building his X-prize contender just happens also to have a significant personal fortune to put into the project. Can you build a rocket that costs a million dollars? Do you have the resources to do all the R&D required to build a rocket? Check out the Armadillo pages to see the failures they have. Can you even afford to have one of their failures?
Yes, individuals can and will innovate. They will also continue to get rich doing so. But that's not the same as having the same resources available that a large corporation has. It's still David and Goliath no matter how you slice it.
That's an implementation problem. Make it instead so that the vote paper trail is dropped into a locked box that's counted elsewhere, and the implementation problem goes away.
In fact, the whole thing is just an implementation problem. There is NO REASON why electronic voting, whether it's internet-powered or uses a voting booth, should be inherently insecure. Quite the contrary. I suggest that if we had internet-based voting we'd have more people voting!
First, instead of approaching it as a "programming" problem, why don't we approach it as a security problem? How do we ensure the accurate results of the software?
First, we need duplicate copies of all voting data. The logical thing is to provide hooks for anybody to get their own copy of the voting data (it's electronic, right? Why not?). That way, in realtime, as people vote, we can each get a copy of each record. Anonymity is supposed to be assured by the system, we'll assume it is.
Second, cash registers already print out receipts in a variety of ways. They print out a receipt for you, a receipt to put in the sealed black box (white and yellow receipts, respectively), and keep their own internal roll of transactions recorded. I suppose giving you a copy of your own vote is optional. :)
Third, it will be possible to compare the results of the "official" computers with any other computer, because the data has been replicated. It will be possible to compare the accuracy of the results using the paper copies.
Simple. IT's a security problem. :) It's all about making sure the integrity of the data is kept, and that there is a way to check it in case there is something wrong with the data. It's not about accountability (the usual purpose of audit trails). The only issue is making sure the data is accurate. (Well, and the reports)
excuse me if I am wrong, but isn't that what would be considered a lack of conscious?
No, it doesn't resemble sleeping in any way. :)
Still waiting for you to list the attacks on American soil since 9/11.
I'll bite. There have been numerous attacks, but I don't have exact figures on how many ANTHRAX MAILINGS went out. There were also a number of fatalities as a result of the ANTHRAX MAILINGS.
It's been two years since 9/11/2001. How many terrorist attacks happened on American soil in teh two years prior to that? More importantly, how many attacks against Americans have been made? Rest assured, the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq have been attacked numerous times since we went there with our own guns blazing.
If anything, all Bush has done is gotten the terrorists to attack our soldiers instead, but then most of previous terrorist attacks (since about 1990, anyway) have been directed at military targets.
Except for the terrorist attacks perpetrated by Americans for Americans (the Oklahoma City bombing....)
Bush has wasted a bunch of resources and furthered a cause that has made it impossible for there to be a "pro-US" democracy anywhere in the world, except here in the US. Name ONE pro-US democracy. JUST ONE. :)
Wow. I hope someday I'm enough of a badass to be able to flame people like that and get away with it.
Personally, I would feel a certain pride if Linus flamed me. :) If I said something that was important enough to him to flame me, I'd take a point in my favor for being flamed by Linus.
Of course, it's not the same as taking a point in my favor because LInus says "Good question" or "you know exactly what you're talking about".
At the end of the day, though, I figure Linus just sticks his thumb in his mouth and plays with his blanket.
I really can't see how linus can claim copyright to the distribution of any source which happens to run with the linux kerne
He can't. All he can say is that the source for the kernel that the "other" source requires is GPL, and as such the "derived" work must also be GPL. GPL isn't about assigning copyright, it's about distributing copyrighted code and binaries and the user's appropriate rights.
While Linus gets tied up arguing about derived works and wether the code was originally written for Linux, he doesn't actually solve the problem of the "grey area". I don't believe Linus has thought it through totally.
Dammit, Jim, I'm a programmer, not a lawyer!
Maybe Linus doesn't solve that problem because he knows damn well that he can't. It's a problem all the Linux contributors have to solve collectively, or it requires a platoon of lawyers and a jury of their peers. It seems to me that Linus did everything he could to help people understand the issue, but in the end it either takes people agreeing or winning a fight to solve the problem.
Personally, I hope the SciTech guy decides to just go ahead and GPL their kernel module and release it anyway. I think they (and we!) will be better off.
Personally I have always found the argument that linking makes something a derived work very questionable, especially for things like java where linked class files contain little other than the class and method names that they link to. If a java class that calls another is a derived work, then that is yet another dumb copyright law.
In C++, anyway, when you link dynamically, I think the difference is quite clear. First, your application cannot depend on the class. I.e. it must be able to function without the class, or have several alternatives available. Then, consider this code snippet:
In the first class, you have literally derived from the other class. In the second case, you haven't actually derived from the class, you've just used it. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that in the second case, if your program can function if GPLClass isn't available, it doesn't have to be GPL.
Of course, I'd like to see copyright law rewritten to make all software GPL. :)
A D+? Is what you have cited as the thing I got wrong really 30%+ of the history I provided? I figure I get at least a C+/B- for that.... ;)
Not that I give a shit about grades. I did graduate High School with a 2.5 GPA because I didn't want to do any more work than was necessary to graduate...
You didn't miss much...
Heh, I came back into the computer world to learn that Intel and the x86 clones (AMD) and all the other PC hardware manufacturers had finally started catching up to the Amiga, and they had had to advance processors to 300mhz+ to do it! I have a buddy that says that the Amiga was the first machine with 3d acceleration, and of course we all know that the Amiga with its blitter system (spread across 3 chips, iirc) was MMX before there was any "MMX" from Intel. I seem to remember Intel processors needing to clock 33mhz+ to match Amiga's 7mhz processor for performance. But I also remember it was about '93 when Intel boxes started outperforming Amiga's, even if the architecture was inferior. Dammit, if Commodore hadn't dropped the ball with R&D, Intel and Friends would have *never* caught up. (I know, Mac freaks say they still haven't caught up, but let's not forget that the Mac was the closest competitor to the Amiga, but by nature of Amiga's custom chipset, Mac could never keep up either)
It may happen quite quickly (I remember having the option to use either a rock-solid 2.2 or a "not tested as thoroughly" 2.4) some time ago.
First, because I use parenthetical expressions a lot myself (and I always double check them for this), remove the parenthetical expression from your statement and what are you left with?
It may happen quite quickly some time ago.
Second, Mandrake 9.2 has a contributed 2.6.0testXX kernel, but you have to get it from ftp. It's on the discs if you BUY them, but if you leech--er, download the isos like I did, you'll have to hit an ftp server for them. Of course, if you configure your urpmi sources properly, you can just select the appropriate kernel from the Mandrake Control Panel software installation applet (whatever the fuck it's called).
I'm likely to talk about the Amiga in a bitter fashion, since I'm very bitter about Commodore, and a few other unrelated things going on in my life at the time. I actually swore off computers for 7 years and went and got a life. So I look back at my Amiga days and can't help but think "I wasted my time with that company?". First time a company wasted my time that it really mattered, and the only time I paid THEM for it.
I still love the Amigas as a line of computers, and they really were cutting edge (nevermind that Atari was able to do some of the things they did because of a lawsuit involving the Amiga technology :) ), and it really did take 10+ years for the rest of the computing industry to catch up. ANd if it weren't for the stupid patents and the fact that commodore went under the way they did, it would NOT have taken 10+ years for the rest of the industry to catch up. Moreover, the rest of the industry would be a LOT FARTHER ALONG than it is *now*, because Commodore was a big player in the desktop market before they fell apart (they were crushing APple left and right, and with Atari dropping out of business Commodore was poised to defeat Microsoft before the monopoly was even built).
I'd like to see what the world would be like today if Commodore had truly supported the Amiga and kept up R&D on it and remained competitive. I really and truly think the world would be better as a whole, and computing specifically would be tons better.
The A3000 (desktop, which came before or at the same time as the T model... didn't it?) wasn't just an "A2000 with all the standard expansions."
I seem to remember the 3000T coming out WAAAAAY before the 3000 desktop, but I could be wrong about that. Yes, yes, all the stuff you said falls under what I called "some other minor stuff". :)
Also, why would the AGA line be "infamous?"
Perhaps you recall waiting all those years for those things to be released while, unknowing we were the company was sucked dry by a couple of scoundrels. It came out later that the rumors were correct and Commodore SAT on teh AGA line for 2+ years without doing any more research and development. They lost their competitive edge, meanwhile trying to turn the Amiga into a gaming console (THAT never took off).
*sigh* It was a great machine that got crushed by a couple of very evil people. We're talking guys that make Bill Gates look like mutherfuckin' Santa Claus, dude. They weren't even interested in taking over the world. They didn't give a shit about the millions of people that PAID THEIR SALARY. They only cared about how much they could steal from the company, delaying R&D, product releases, and so forth, just so they would have more "working capital" to take when the left the country. They let marketing run the company, which is exactly why we got slammed with a stupid gaming console when what we *really* wanted was teh AGA line!
The AGA line was only grudgingly released because the shareholders demanded it. Something about "You say you have been spending all this money on R&D, why don't you have a product? Why are you losing your competitive edge?" and a threatened lawsuit, and WHAM! we get teh AGA line.
So yeah, the AGA line was quite notorious. For the record. ;)
You missed the second "=". (variable1 = variable2) or (variable = constant) has always been true. Just what we need, some excuse for a programmer talking about the kernel. Humph.
Mmmm, maybe he was using BASIC? That's a perfectly valid statement in basic, dude.
From 1991-1996 to be exact and it was actually a pass me down from my father who upgraded to the Amiga 1000
If your father "upgraded" from an A500 to an A1000, you should shoot him for being an idiot. :)
The A1000 was the first amiga built, sorta. First, there was the "Amiga" which had a few stupid problems that fell through Commodore's notoriously great quality control. So they fixed those problems and re-released it, and it was called the Amiga 1000. They also added RAM, so it had a whopping 256K, but it only had the Agnus in it.
THEN Commodore's notoriously stupendous marketing department decided that people LOVED the C-64 and the C-128 SOMUCH, that the Amiga needed to be put in a case with the keyboard, a more "compact" model. At the same time, they put a standard 512K of RAM and the Fat Agnus, and upgraded some of the minor chips as well, iirc. They packaged it TWICE, once to appeal to the original A1000 owners, and once because their marketing department were a bunch of fascists. The fascist version was called the A500, and the loose, modular, and mostly upgradeable version, the A2000.
THEN, giving in once again to market pressures (for the last time, I might add) they released the A3000T, which was just an A2000 with all the standard expansions (1MB RAM, a couple of minor things) in a tower case.
Then, they did a bunch of stupid things that nobody understood, which resulted in a NEW line of amigas (the infamous AGA line).
Finally, the President and the accountant took off with a bunch of cash, and left commodore bankrupt, and we finally understood all the stupid things they had done.
(If you detect any bitterness over the whole deal, you don't need to recalibrate your bitterness-detector)
Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
I like to refer to that as Mexican Roulette, although it would be more accurately described as Catholic Roulette. ;)
Thank you! I've been wanting another Flint book for awhile!
Goddamn you're young, dude. Strike me as not even being able to remember the Apple II/C64/Atari (whatever, Atari model numbers are irrelevant) wars going on. Remember Atari suing Amiga? So Commodore bought them? Hell, I remember when the 2600 came out and it was HOT SHIT. Paddles! What a worthless intervace. Heh.
I remember the old Mac commercials, saying "What's the point of point and click?" ANd then when the Amiga came out saying "We've got Macs beat hands down." And we did. :)
Both IIRC are available via the free library, and are very fun reads, particularly if you have a history bent.
Nope, 1633 is not in the baen free library, sorry.
1633 is a sequel to the 1632 novel by Eric Flint ( YOU KNOW.. the ONE WHO POSTS HIS NOVELS on the NET for FREE??)
I like Eric Flint. I like him a lot.
But I get really damn sick of his nationalistic attitude. I do, man. I really liked 1632, and that was completely in *spite* of the dominant theme of Americans being the greatest thing in the fucking universe. I got sick of hearing about how this small-town America was such a wonderful fucking place. A bunch of rednecks show up in 1632 and start shooting up knights and crap.
Don't get me wrong, I liked the book. But he does much better with David Drake in the Belisarius series, which is really great. It's funny, and it's very serious at the same time. I love it! (of course, if you do a half-decent job writing any Roman-based fiction, I'll probably love it)
Baen has been reprinting a lot of Laumer's stuff.
Man, I finally read non-Retief Laumer, and that guy's great! Retief is pretty kick-ass in general, but it's really too bad he's best known for Retief, because having read some of his other stuff, Retief really is in the lower part of his writing abilities. Man. I can't get over Laumer, I just can't.
No story on bad Sci-Fi is complete without mention the Second Foundation trilogy.
Or any other Asimov, for that matter. R. Daneel Whateverthefuck? Come on! My 8-bit 2mhz C-64 had more personality than that sick fuck. I never understood why Asimov is so highly respected as a sci-fi writer, and I really don't think I ever will.
There's two types of sci-fi. There's story-driven sci-fi, in which you expect 3 dimensional characters but usually only get 2. Most people cite Heinlein when they like this kind of story (like me). Then there's gratuitous sci-fi that exists for the sole purpose of having a stinkin' universe. One word: Asimov. Why bother with characters in the first place? (Admittedly Jules Vernes leans that way as well, but he did at least make an attempt to explore Phileas Fogg as a serious character, which is something in his favor)
First off, if you're really wanting to support Baen in this effort, why don't you put up #3 and #4? That way, those of us that haven't read anything later than #2 can keep reading while we save up our money.... ;)
Second, do I get any points for pointing out that Ghostwheel is the computer that Merlin built?
I really liked that series. However, the one you mentioned, that shall not be mentioned again, was bad. Very bad.
Mutineer's Moon is a series? What, they only put the first book on the free library? Damn. I read that one and loved it, so I just tore into the HONOR HARRINGTON SERIES . I think HONOR HARRINGTON is awesome! I get turned on whenever HONOR HARRINGTON holds that damn 'cat up to her breasts, and HONOR HARRINGTON does that fairly often. After reading one book's worth of HONOR HARRINGTON I have to go whack myself silly.
Hmmm, I need to do something real quick. I'll bbiab.
I forced myself to continue, certain that it had improve. Long story short, upon finishing the last page, I through the damned book across the room in frustration.
I did that with Fellowship of the Ring....
Seriously! That's not flamebait, it's plain truth.