> What does it matter what a hacker and a cracker is? As if a programmer gets more attention once the media start to call him a hacker and call the phishers crackers. Also: definitions can change, you know that?
Definitions can change, and it is acceptable that they change depending upon certain circumstances. The problem with the misuse of the term "hacker" is that it imposes cultural violence.
That we'll even be able to make it long enough to develop technology that will allow living on the moon feasible seems entirely optimistic, considering recent studies...
Not the end of the world. Enough to be worried about, though. Quite frankly, internet pornography (containing consenting adults) does not create as much damage as the media hypes it up to when underage individuals see it. These are usually teens. My little sister, eight years old, browses the web on my mother's laptop, and I haven't seen any pornography in the browser's history, or seen the history suddenly get really short (in other words, cleared out). She has her very silly, fluffy websites she visits--very kid oriented--and doesn't show any interest in going beyond those.
I bet you anything that when she's a teenager, that will change. No doubt that, curious about sexuality, she'll visit some pornography. I did when I was a teenager, and I don't think that it perverted me.
I'm glad my mother didn't impose tyranical restrictions upon me at that time by installing net nanny or some such thing. (If it was a requirement, it would have made things difficult when I made the switch to GNU/Linux.) I think that, had she done so, I would have trusted her a lot less.
Parents can be tyrants too. We give parents some freedom to be tyranical because parents do need a good degree of control to make sure their kids move in the right directions. But we shouldn't make the problem worse by making unnecessary, and fairly unproductive, accomodations within the system to encourage such tyranny.
Press release: The Department of Homeland Security Corporation has recently released new Terror Alert (tm) software, which all U.S. citizens must mandatorily install on their home computers. This software monitors a users' browsing habits to determine what type of scare tactics are best appropriate for that user.
For the user's convenience, any browsing to terrorist-affiliated websites (like salon.com) will be reported instantly to the government, and the user will be notified that they must remain still until police arrive, cannot call the media, and have no rights under the PATRIOT act, and to have a nice day.
Some Free Software and Open Source advocates were complaining, "Hey wait, I run GNU/Linux! This software only works for Mac and Windows!" Department of Homeland Security Co. officially responds, "Oh yeah? Go get an operating system not run by communists!"
----
*bangs head against wall* WHY? WHY DO WE LET THESE THINGS HAPPEN TO US?
Open Source Community: The license does not sync with our philosophy. No thanks.
Free Software Community: This license is blasphemy in our collective holy eyes! Cast thee away from our presence!
Uh, no. You're drawing on stereotypes... there is nowhere in the article that RMS starts yelling a sermon.
A lot of people don't like RMS, so they start attacking him as if he's an evangelist. But where has he been one? His philosophy has centered on reason and the adherence to freedom and liberty. The "priestly" part of it gets added by people making fun of him.
Disagree with me? Show me some evidence.
I don't mean this as a "let's bash Windows" kind of argument. It is just that, if you aren't running Windows, you'll have to make a lot of adjustments in reading this article.
Just a heads up. If you are using Windows though, looks like this could be very useful. If not, it could probably still be of use anyway.
No, actually, it is quite simple. They want to make a hell of a lot extra money. The thing comes with all the oils available, they just won't let you use them. I doubt they will let you have any control over the software at all, actually. Why pay once when you can pay again and again and again?
Oh, and I am going to predict that this company is going to freak out over any FOSS version which allows you to make the scents yourself, and use intellectual property laws to screw you over with something that's already yours.
Regarless, I think it's clear how SCO will use this... to try and attack the FOSS community.
I think it is time to re-publish Stallman's My Doom and You
My friend Jay and I were hanging out one day, and he started saying all sorts of nutty things. So I looked him square in the eye and said, "You're crazy."
He looked back at me with eyes so horribly deep and said, "I'm not crazy. You're crazy. I'm not even here!"
You're right with the idea that a "better micropayment system early on" may have helped. Unfortunately, all the micropayment systems seem to run off monopolies. I guess there was that article about a more open micropayment system... maybe I should go read it.
And let me just add that the fact that the author of this article wrote this with a misunderstanding of what the phrase "All software should be free" gives a hint at how little research has been put into it.
I for one have forked over money plenty of times to projects. I know that RMS made plenty of money to sustain himself by selling emacs back in the 80's. Now there are certainly a few people in the community that whine any time someone tries to make money off of an open source / free software project (I don't mind using the terms interchangably, most of the time), but these people generally have a misunderstanding of the entire philosophy of the movement themselves.
I think also that a lot of open source/free software hackers (original use of the word) could make money enough to sustain themselves if they made it clear that "we need this much funds in order to complete this piece of software." Take a look at when Daniel Robbins resigned from gentoo and noted his financial situation. All of a sudden, thousands of geeks were donating (myself included). A lot of us noted that we really wished he had made it clear before he resigned. But I think he resigned for other reasons too.
Anyway, yeah, I don't expect to make as much money off of the software I write in the open source world... but honestly, I don't think I'd make any money in the proprietary world, either. It's only a few big companies that ever make any money. And without the free (libre) software world (and I'll stop trying to make so many comments on what the difference between the two uses of free here, since I'm almost done) I wouldn't have actually gotten into programming in the first place. I wouldn't have gotten into art as much either, with out the GIMP, or 3d animation, without Blender.
Oh, and did I mention that I'm buying a copy of the Blender manual, to support the project? (I also like printed copies better than PDF files.) See, I'm very pleased with what it has allowed me to do since it became free (and I mean free as in freedom... heck, I'm giving them money, so it isn't free as in no cost for me) and how far it has developed and foster the community I am part of.
I understand the concept of free as in freedom, and not as in free beer. I recognize that they are not always the same thing. And I am an advocate of free software, quite frankly.
But one night when I was driving home with my father, I explained to him the concept behind wikipedia. He thought it was fascinating, and yet it dumbfounded him. How can such a thing afford to exist? What about the massive server costs?
I did the usual explaining of donations and such. However, he raised a valid point: It would be difficult for us to have many successful projects donation-wise.
How do you think free as in freedom content can continue to exist in the future, and where do you see it going... financially?
Your original argument had nothing to do with cost, it had to do with GNU/Linux lacking certain applications. It had nothing to do with you paying your rent.
Actually, there is a group helping make an extension to blender to use it as a CAD program. As I understand it, they've only released a tech demo so far, but it has been fairly well received.
One last bit: The concept that since not everything is free yet is a dumb reason to attempt to be free is stupidity itself. Freedom is a work-in-progress. The beta looks pretty good, however.
Yes, indeed, the number of applications you have for GNU/Linux is sufficiently lacking in comparison to those for Windows. However, I really do have more than everything I need on my Gentoo-based GNU/Linux system. Though I would like some better sound editing suites, that's really minor. I have Blender, the GIMP, and everything else I need. And I'm free.
not to mention what he did with those crippled kids at K-Mart.
Wait a minute... I can see where you might be coming from on a few of your other points, but Moore wasn't exactly dragging those kids along with him. Could be that I massively overlooked something, but I kind of suspect it's the other way around.
I'm no american, so american political views be damned; I just want to see the guy piss over several people!
And from the standpoint of someone who is an American, I think many of us would like to see that too... if only because it would be a great change of pace after having our civil liberties pissed on by.... certain individuals.
Slashdot Mirror
> What does it matter what a hacker and a cracker is? As if a programmer gets more attention once the media start to call him a hacker and call the phishers crackers. Also: definitions can change, you know that?
Definitions can change, and it is acceptable that they change depending upon certain circumstances. The problem with the misuse of the term "hacker" is that it imposes cultural violence.
That we'll even be able to make it long enough to develop technology that will allow living on the moon feasible seems entirely optimistic, considering recent studies...
Not the end of the world. Enough to be worried about, though. Quite frankly, internet pornography (containing consenting adults) does not create as much damage as the media hypes it up to when underage individuals see it. These are usually teens. My little sister, eight years old, browses the web on my mother's laptop, and I haven't seen any pornography in the browser's history, or seen the history suddenly get really short (in other words, cleared out). She has her very silly, fluffy websites she visits--very kid oriented--and doesn't show any interest in going beyond those.
I bet you anything that when she's a teenager, that will change. No doubt that, curious about sexuality, she'll visit some pornography. I did when I was a teenager, and I don't think that it perverted me.
I'm glad my mother didn't impose tyranical restrictions upon me at that time by installing net nanny or some such thing. (If it was a requirement, it would have made things difficult when I made the switch to GNU/Linux.) I think that, had she done so, I would have trusted her a lot less.
Parents can be tyrants too. We give parents some freedom to be tyranical because parents do need a good degree of control to make sure their kids move in the right directions. But we shouldn't make the problem worse by making unnecessary, and fairly unproductive, accomodations within the system to encourage such tyranny.
Binary incompatibility is just one way the GNU project makes sure software stays free!
It's a feature!
Press release:
The Department of Homeland Security Corporation has recently released new Terror Alert (tm) software, which all U.S. citizens must mandatorily install on their home computers. This software monitors a users' browsing habits to determine what type of scare tactics are best appropriate for that user.
For the user's convenience, any browsing to terrorist-affiliated websites (like salon.com) will be reported instantly to the government, and the user will be notified that they must remain still until police arrive, cannot call the media, and have no rights under the PATRIOT act, and to have a nice day.
Some Free Software and Open Source advocates were complaining, "Hey wait, I run GNU/Linux! This software only works for Mac and Windows!" Department of Homeland Security Co. officially responds, "Oh yeah? Go get an operating system not run by communists!"
----
*bangs head against wall*
WHY? WHY DO WE LET THESE THINGS HAPPEN TO US?
I don't mean this as a "let's bash Windows" kind of argument. It is just that, if you aren't running Windows, you'll have to make a lot of adjustments in reading this article. Just a heads up. If you are using Windows though, looks like this could be very useful. If not, it could probably still be of use anyway.
Never! The .but extension will never die!
I like to think of it this way.... More sex with less children.
No, actually, it is quite simple. They want to make a hell of a lot extra money. The thing comes with all the oils available, they just won't let you use them. I doubt they will let you have any control over the software at all, actually.
Why pay once when you can pay again and again and again?
Oh, and I am going to predict that this company is going to freak out over any FOSS version which allows you to make the scents yourself, and use intellectual property laws to screw you over with something that's already yours.
Regarless, I think it's clear how SCO will use this... to try and attack the FOSS community. I think it is time to re-publish Stallman's My Doom and You
Probably because that woman's writing "Hacked by Whoeverthatisicantreadit"
I don't know about the Washington Post, but I just found this ad in the Washington Times.
Oh yeah. LEFT wing media bias, for sure.
nerd nerd / /
\
Computer Computer
\
-----------
| hub |
-----------
add more users, and sometime connect hubs to other hubs.
My friend Jay and I were hanging out one day, and he started saying all sorts of nutty things. So I looked him square in the eye and said, "You're crazy."
Just seemed kind of relevant.He looked back at me with eyes so horribly deep and said, "I'm not crazy. You're crazy. I'm not even here!"
You're right with the idea that a "better micropayment system early on" may have helped. Unfortunately, all the micropayment systems seem to run off monopolies. I guess there was that article about a more open micropayment system... maybe I should go read it.
And let me just add that the fact that the author of this article wrote this with a misunderstanding of what the phrase "All software should be free" gives a hint at how little research has been put into it.
I for one have forked over money plenty of times to projects. I know that RMS made plenty of money to sustain himself by selling emacs back in the 80's. Now there are certainly a few people in the community that whine any time someone tries to make money off of an open source / free software project (I don't mind using the terms interchangably, most of the time), but these people generally have a misunderstanding of the entire philosophy of the movement themselves.
I think also that a lot of open source/free software hackers (original use of the word) could make money enough to sustain themselves if they made it clear that "we need this much funds in order to complete this piece of software." Take a look at when Daniel Robbins resigned from gentoo and noted his financial situation. All of a sudden, thousands of geeks were donating (myself included). A lot of us noted that we really wished he had made it clear before he resigned. But I think he resigned for other reasons too.
Anyway, yeah, I don't expect to make as much money off of the software I write in the open source world... but honestly, I don't think I'd make any money in the proprietary world, either. It's only a few big companies that ever make any money. And without the free (libre) software world (and I'll stop trying to make so many comments on what the difference between the two uses of free here, since I'm almost done) I wouldn't have actually gotten into programming in the first place. I wouldn't have gotten into art as much either, with out the GIMP, or 3d animation, without Blender.
Oh, and did I mention that I'm buying a copy of the Blender manual, to support the project? (I also like printed copies better than PDF files.) See, I'm very pleased with what it has allowed me to do since it became free (and I mean free as in freedom... heck, I'm giving them money, so it isn't free as in no cost for me) and how far it has developed and foster the community I am part of.
Post early, be mindless, get good karma. It's a proven method.
I understand the concept of free as in freedom, and not as in free beer. I recognize that they are not always the same thing. And I am an advocate of free software, quite frankly.
But one night when I was driving home with my father, I explained to him the concept behind wikipedia. He thought it was fascinating, and yet it dumbfounded him. How can such a thing afford to exist? What about the massive server costs?
I did the usual explaining of donations and such. However, he raised a valid point: It would be difficult for us to have many successful projects donation-wise.
How do you think free as in freedom content can continue to exist in the future, and where do you see it going... financially?
Your original argument had nothing to do with cost, it had to do with GNU/Linux lacking certain applications. It had nothing to do with you paying your rent.
Actually, there is a group helping make an extension to blender to use it as a CAD program. As I understand it, they've only released a tech demo so far, but it has been fairly well received.
One last bit: The concept that since not everything is free yet is a dumb reason to attempt to be free is stupidity itself. Freedom is a work-in-progress. The beta looks pretty good, however.
Yes, indeed, the number of applications you have for GNU/Linux is sufficiently lacking in comparison to those for Windows. However, I really do have more than everything I need on my Gentoo-based GNU/Linux system. Though I would like some better sound editing suites, that's really minor. I have Blender, the GIMP, and everything else I need. And I'm free.
And from the standpoint of someone who is an American, I think many of us would like to see that too... if only because it would be a great change of pace after having our civil liberties pissed on by.... certain individuals.