I just looked through my archive, and I wrote about it on the 30th October 2001! That was nearly three years ago:o/ Mein gott I feel old. Anyway, those guys are simply amaaazing.
CCTV cameras all over the city capture images for face recognition, if you get lost...take your own photo and send it. The server compares the image to those in the face recognition database, and returns the where the most recent match was taken.
Ha!! I tricked you, it isn't a better way at all!!
What what whaaat??? There's a button I can press to "get work done"?? And no-one told me about this?
It's so obvious it should be Gary Oldman..
on
Kernel 2.4.26 Out
·
· Score: 5, Funny
CmdrTaco: You want news?
ScottGant: I think I'm entitled to it.
CmdrTaco: You want news?
ScottGant: I want stuff that matters!
CmdrTaco: You can't handle stuff that matters! Son, we live in a world that has firewalls. And those firewalls have to be guarded by admins with stable kernels. Who's gonna do it? You? You, ScottGant? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Stanford and you curse the/. editors. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that this 2.4 kernel release, while tragically dull, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the stuff that matters.
We use words like integrity, dupes,stability...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very security I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a cheap hosting company and run a website. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!
Not everyone thinks software should be free. RMS's definition, the 4 core freedoms, and the licenses that enforce them are neccessary to make sure those people don't harm the people who do think software should be free.
When people are constantly being assailed with "Free downloads","Free trial","Free viagra" it becomes even more important to get across that we're not just talking about price, but about freedom.
Sometimes people get over-sensitive, but only because they consider the stakes to be so high.
And perhaps you could too..(god I hate dictionary duelling)
2. Distinct from all others.See Synonyms at
strange.
Broader definitions of strange appear to support the use of peculiar in this respect:
1. Out of the ordinary; unusual or striking.
2. Differing from the normal.
However...RMS's "definition" of Free, is hardly *distinct* from all other definitions of the word. In fact, many of the definitions of free which I referenced share similarities with the concept of Free Software. "Governed by consent", "Not subject to arbitrary interference","Unobstructed", "Given,made, or done of one's own accord", " To set at liberty;". The first point I made alluded to "Free as in Free Speech". The meaning of free as in free speech is anything but peculiar for those living in America.
Well, I do excuse you, just as I wish you to excuse me. We're each entitled to our opinions on the matter but I'm not going to be drawn into discussing them right now.:o)
*ahem* It wasn't a misconception, I just didn't make my point clear. I'm well aware that the reward is an incentive. My parent suggested that the purpose of a patent is to "grant a monopoly". Which it is most certainly not. I was just trying to clarify that the granting of a monopoly is a reward for sharing the invention. I'll pick my wording more carefully next time.:o)
You: Offering a reward for catching a criminal.
Result: Informants share information leading to criminals being caught, results in a reward for them.
What I meant: Offering a reward for benefitting society.
Result: Inventors share information benefitting society, results in the reward of a temporary monopoly.
Small niggle, Mr. James K. Polk, if that is your real name....
The "point" of a patent is to reward sharing an innovation with a temporary monopoly. Although this has been subverted in such a way that permanent monopolies are granted for lack of innovation, that's not the point...
You dick. If you write your own software you can do what you want with it. If you want to distribute someone's GNU GPL code within your application then you must abide by their license.
You have the choice whether or not to use the GPL'd code in your program.
If you just want to "use" your software then you can do what the fuck you like, just don't distribute it and you'll never have to worry about the GPL...
If the GPL'd code is such a "little part" of your software, and "owning" your program is *so* important to you then why don't you just write it yourself, go live in your hoarding little society and leave ours alone?
Damn right it's a peculiar definition of free! How about all those kooks who refer to "free speech"..HAH!!!...what...are they saying that you can talk for no cost...those crazy fools. free
I don't think James Gosling understands what RMS is talking about...he says that a developer has to get something back, otherwise the whole damn shooting match just can't continue to exist.
Well sorry, but here...have a big "WTF?". With Free Software, the developer:
1. can get paid, but sometimes doesn't.
2. enjoys doing what he does
3. knows he is benefitting society
4. knows that no-one who builds on his work can harm society
On the other hand, the proprietary software developer gets number 1, often times in greater quantities...and sometimes gets that second one.
Well excuse me if I believe the former situation is better for society and the developer Mr. Gosling.
As for the FUD about developers working on VMs conflicting with developers working on apps..what a load of dingo's kidneys! Is this not what a standard is for? VMs and standard libraries implement the standard and programmers program to the standard. If the VM doesn't implement the standard, then there is a problem with the VM. Someone may choose to use it despite being broken because they believe in free software (gcj,kaffe), but that is their *CHOICE*. If they want to use Sun's non-Free alternative they can.
From: http://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/lawyers.html
A man went to a brain store to get some brain for dinner. He sees a sign
remarking on the quality of proffesional brain offerred at this particular
brain store. So he asks the butcher:
"How much for Engineer brain?"
"3 dollars an ounce."
"How much for Computer Scientist brain?"
"4 dollars an ounce."
"How much for lawyer brain?"
"100 dollars an ounce."
"Why is lawyer brain so much more?"
"Do you know how many lawyers you need to kill to get one ounce of brain?"
Ack...yes, yes...v. bad analogy, but it was only intended to be humourful. Apologies to PETA/RSPCA etc.
Maybe a better one is...the difference between sex between consenting adults trying for a baby and sex between consenting adults who just want to spread some love in the world.
A pre-requisite of a program being Free Software is that the source is open, this is pre-supposed by the 2nd and 4th freedoms. The reason for the source of Free Software being open is ideological.
The reason for "Open Source"(N.B. capitals) software having open source is one of practicality/necessity/development methodology.
She clouds the issue, well aware of the "political" implications of doing so, why? Why not just drop the capitals from Open Source? Or better still, use the respective terms as befits the situation.Instead she relegates Free Software to a footnote and expounds on the "sociology"(hah!) of Open Source software.
Ignoring the problem as it relates to a medium to large vendor of Free Software for a second:
If I write an application to suit my needs, I will use alpha and beta versions myself, and address any problems that come up. There's no way I'm going to write test-cases and go through a formal testing procedure, because I'm not motivated to produce a mature and complete application...just to do the bare minimum to satisfy my needs.
As for "asking for input from random people who will use your app on the web", who better to do it? People who are using the software are on many disparate platforms, which may not all be available to a developer. Those same people have just as much interest in seeing problems fixed quickly as the developers..possibly more so. Why do proprietary software vendors release beta versions of their software for interested parties to evaluate? How are *they* any different? Because those betas are released under NDA and not to anyone who wants to use them?
In this post, I use the general term "Violent Puppy Rape", though often I'm exclusively discussing consensual sex between adults.
I enjoy watching violent puppy rape.
Lumping the latter in with the former helps no-one, least of all the puppies.
I wasn't aware there was a sociology behind the "open source" movement, the Free Software movement yes but I thought "open source" was born out of practicality and not sociology...
When I was younger, my mum would always say.."don't sweat it if someone beats you at something...chances are there is *always* going to be someone better than you at *everything*" and this has held true, especially when it comes to being a geek.
I sometimes think *I'm* a geek..then I'll overhear someone discussing the relative pros and cons of a particular train, or quoting entire Star Trek episodes and I think to myself "frickin' geek"..and I know all is right in the world...
Slashdot Mirror
Have a look Here, here and who could ever forget...Sheeeeeep Cuuuuull!!!!.
A U.S. Patent? Shit, I got one of those in my cornflakes this morning. :o)
I knew I'd heard the name before..yeah... http://www.theproduct.de/ that's where.
:o/ Mein gott I feel old.
I just looked through my archive, and I wrote about it on the 30th October 2001! That was nearly three years ago
Anyway, those guys are simply amaaazing.
CCTV cameras all over the city capture images for face recognition, if you get lost...take your own photo and send it. The server compares the image to those in the face recognition database, and returns the where the most recent match was taken.
Ha!! I tricked you, it isn't a better way at all!!
What what whaaat??? There's a button I can press to "get work done"?? And no-one told me about this?
CmdrTaco: You want news? /. editors. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that this 2.4 kernel release, while tragically dull, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the stuff that matters.
ScottGant: I think I'm entitled to it.
CmdrTaco: You want news?
ScottGant: I want stuff that matters!
CmdrTaco: You can't handle stuff that matters!
Son, we live in a world that has firewalls. And those firewalls have to be guarded by admins with stable kernels. Who's gonna do it? You? You, ScottGant? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Stanford and you curse the
We use words like integrity, dupes,stability...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very security I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a cheap hosting company and run a website. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!
I really need some sleep.
What's the problem? It's only 700kb now..oh...that's the patch..
I've been putting off the seemingly arduous task of moving to 2.6.x...maybe I should just scratch my itch by upgrading to a newer 2.4.x kernel..
Not everyone thinks software should be free. RMS's definition, the 4 core freedoms, and the licenses that enforce them are neccessary to make sure those people don't harm the people who do think software should be free.
When people are constantly being assailed with "Free downloads","Free trial","Free viagra" it becomes even more important to get across that we're not just talking about price, but about freedom.
Sometimes people get over-sensitive, but only because they consider the stakes to be so high.
Broader definitions of strange appear to support the use of peculiar in this respect:
However...RMS's "definition" of Free, is hardly *distinct* from all other definitions of the word. In fact, many of the definitions of free which I referenced share similarities with the concept of Free Software. "Governed by consent", "Not subject to arbitrary interference","Unobstructed", "Given,made, or done of one's own accord", " To set at liberty;".
The first point I made alluded to "Free as in Free Speech". The meaning of free as in free speech is anything but peculiar for those living in America.
Well, I do excuse you, just as I wish you to excuse me. We're each entitled to our opinions on the matter but I'm not going to be drawn into discussing them right now.
*ahem* It wasn't a misconception, I just didn't make my point clear. I'm well aware that the reward is an incentive. :o)
My parent suggested that the purpose of a patent is to "grant a monopoly". Which it is most certainly not. I was just trying to clarify that the granting of a monopoly is a reward for sharing the invention. I'll pick my wording more carefully next time.
You: Offering a reward for catching a criminal.
Result: Informants share information leading to criminals being caught, results in a reward for them.
What I meant: Offering a reward for benefitting society.
Result: Inventors share information benefitting society, results in the reward of a temporary monopoly.
Small niggle, Mr. James K. Polk, if that is your real name....
The "point" of a patent is to reward sharing an innovation with a temporary monopoly. Although this has been subverted in such a way that permanent monopolies are granted for lack of innovation, that's not the point...
You dick. If you write your own software you can do what you want with it. If you want to distribute someone's GNU GPL code within your application then you must abide by their license. You have the choice whether or not to use the GPL'd code in your program.
If you just want to "use" your software then you can do what the fuck you like, just don't distribute it and you'll never have to worry about the GPL...
If the GPL'd code is such a "little part" of your software, and "owning" your program is *so* important to you then why don't you just write it yourself, go live in your hoarding little society and leave ours alone?
Damn right it's a peculiar definition of free! How about all those kooks who refer to "free speech"..HAH!!!...what...are they saying that you can talk for no cost...those crazy fools.
;o)
free
I don't think James Gosling understands what RMS is talking about...he says that a developer has to get something back, otherwise the whole damn shooting match just can't continue to exist.
Well sorry, but here...have a big "WTF?". With Free Software, the developer:
1. can get paid, but sometimes doesn't.
2. enjoys doing what he does
3. knows he is benefitting society
4. knows that no-one who builds on his work can harm society
On the other hand, the proprietary software developer gets number 1, often times in greater quantities...and sometimes gets that second one.
Well excuse me if I believe the former situation is better for society and the developer Mr. Gosling.
As for the FUD about developers working on VMs conflicting with developers working on apps..what a load of dingo's kidneys! Is this not what a standard is for? VMs and standard libraries implement the standard and programmers program to the standard. If the VM doesn't implement the standard, then there is a problem with the VM.
Someone may choose to use it despite being broken because they believe in free software (gcj,kaffe), but that is their *CHOICE*. If they want to use Sun's non-Free alternative they can.
Kudos on that Java thing though
...I thought lower was better for uptime...
...a beowulf cluster of self-fulfilling /. posts.
From: http://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/lawyers.html
A man went to a brain store to get some brain for dinner. He sees a sign remarking on the quality of proffesional brain offerred at this particular brain store. So he asks the butcher:
"How much for Engineer brain?"
"3 dollars an ounce."
"How much for Computer Scientist brain?"
"4 dollars an ounce."
"How much for lawyer brain?"
"100 dollars an ounce."
"Why is lawyer brain so much more?"
"Do you know how many lawyers you need to kill to get one ounce of brain?"
...do they like lawyers or not? ;o)
Ack...yes, yes...v. bad analogy, but it was only intended to be humourful. Apologies to PETA/RSPCA etc.
Maybe a better one is...the difference between sex between consenting adults trying for a baby and sex between consenting adults who just want to spread some love in the world.
A pre-requisite of a program being Free Software is that the source is open, this is pre-supposed by the 2nd and 4th freedoms. The reason for the source of Free Software being open is ideological.
The reason for "Open Source"(N.B. capitals) software having open source is one of practicality/necessity/development methodology.
She clouds the issue, well aware of the "political" implications of doing so, why? Why not just drop the capitals from Open Source? Or better still, use the respective terms as befits the situation.Instead she relegates Free Software to a footnote and expounds on the "sociology"(hah!) of Open Source software.
Ya know...is all...
Ignoring the problem as it relates to a medium to large vendor of Free Software for a second:
If I write an application to suit my needs, I will use alpha and beta versions myself, and address any problems that come up. There's no way I'm going to write test-cases and go through a formal testing procedure, because I'm not motivated to produce a mature and complete application...just to do the bare minimum to satisfy my needs.
As for "asking for input from random people who will use your app on the web", who better to do it? People who are using the software are on many disparate platforms, which may not all be available to a developer. Those same people have just as much interest in seeing problems fixed quickly as the developers..possibly more so. Why do proprietary software vendors release beta versions of their software for interested parties to evaluate? How are *they* any different? Because those betas are released under NDA and not to anyone who wants to use them?
...most documentation isn't even good enough to wipe your arse on, free, open source or otherwise..
In this post, I use the general term "Violent Puppy Rape", though often I'm exclusively discussing consensual sex between adults.
I enjoy watching violent puppy rape.
Lumping the latter in with the former helps no-one, least of all the puppies.
I wasn't aware there was a sociology behind the "open source" movement, the Free Software movement yes but I thought "open source" was born out of practicality and not sociology...
They are not so distantly related as you think...peanuts are legumes...
As an aside..I'm greatly disturbed that there is a "peanut institute".
When I was younger, my mum would always say.."don't sweat it if someone beats you at something...chances are there is *always* going to be someone better than you at *everything*" and this has held true, especially when it comes to being a geek.
I sometimes think *I'm* a geek..then I'll overhear someone discussing the relative pros and cons of a particular train, or quoting entire Star Trek episodes and I think to myself "frickin' geek"..and I know all is right in the world...