Corel has information on their website about their beta program, including a Corel LINUX Beta FAQ. They claim, in this FAQ, that the testing is "in keeping with the spirit of Open Source software distribution".
The have also created an entire web site specifically for their distro beta. They provide an email address to contact them at on that webpage as well, corellinux@corel.com.
Also included are such items as the press release announcing the launch of the beta, with many other press releases. They do not appear to have responded to this story yet.
You can't compare WindowMaker to Gnome and KDE. They are completely different things. You could compare WM to Enlightenment or KWM, since those are the same product set, but Gnome and KDE are meant to be 'desktop environments', whereas WindowMaker is a window manager. ---
They can tell them, but they cannot legally prevent them from doing it. If the beta testers are not considered in-house, then they can stop them, but if they aren't, the beta testers can do whatever they want with the binaries/code. ---
However, Corel can have the beta testers sign an NDA which says "even though we have these rights, we won't exercise them"
No they can't, according to this clause of the GPL:
6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.
So, if they distribute GPLed software to which they have made changes, they must also make the source available. ---
They're package management system has lagged behind Red Hat's due to lack of developers for a while.
Has it? Is there a feature in RedHat's system allowing you to automatically update from a server? (I honestly want to know, I'm not trying to start a flameware here). That feature is one of the major reasons I use Debian. ---
It is not designed to be inherently multiuser. However, if the player is also treated as an object (like all the "other characters" are), then it should be fairly trivial to add multiplayer code. It depends on how elegantly coded it is. If everything about the player is object-oriented (interface, location, posessions, etc.), then it would only require adding more players and a way to interface with it.
The main problem with making it multiplayer is the possibility for graphics. If it's in text-only mode, though, then it could be connected to with a simple telnet (as MUDs generally are). ---
That's exactly what I said: "one good API for graphics". DirectX is an API. Linux and X don't have a good, fast, standard API, AFAIK. That's what it needs.
Does anyone know what development is going on in this area? ---
Wait, Win95 has a "broad selection of industry recognized multimedia standards"? I see OpenGL and DirectX being the only ones used today. Not exactly a broad selection. And DC has WinCE and Sega's proprietary thing, so no broad selection there, either.
Developers don't want a broad selection of standards, they want one standard, so they only have to support one driver. If the Linux world wants to see more games, then it needs one good API for graphics, and one good API for sound (how about Alsa?). In particular, fast graphics in X is a requirement.
Of course, the thing that will really draw the game companies is more users. Without users, APIs are useless. X needs to be really easy to setup for a wide variety of graphics cards and monitors before there will be more users. The basic Linux install has gotten quite easy, but the X configuration still needs work. ---
If evolution took us from something that wasn't even that complex (as that first 80% shared is extremly complex) why do we not see a greater variety of DNA patterns.
Because the one's that survived are the ones that are most fit. That happened to lead to what we have today. It just so happened that the shared DNA was the best for the job. It didn't have to go straight to bacteria, in fact, it probably didn't. Probability says that it should have taken several other paths at the same time, but the path leading to bacteria was the only one that survived. ---
It should be simple to, in either software or hardware, setup a device that will play the dialtone until it receives input (the phone # the DC is dialing), then run a PPP server over that link. Software would probably be really easy, if someone has written a decent interpreted language for controlling modems. Otherwise it'd probably be easier to implement in hardware, and still really simple. All it has to do is play a tone and wait for input, then wait a few seconds before connecting the two sides (computer and DC). Sure, it's a hack, but it'd work. ---
Plus, the whole point about the/. community is that since (most of) the software is open-source, there is nothing pirate about it.
Did those game manufacturers release the game open source? I didn't think so. Just because you think that all software should be open source is no excuse to steal.
Also, why did you put illegally in quotes? It really is illegal, it's not even unfairly illegal. It's just plain against the law.
I also object to your use of the phrase "has to". No one is forcing you to play the games, if you can't afford it, don't play them. Simple as that. ---
The screen could *be* the computer. It could vibrate for sound (thin speakers have already been created), it just needs to calculate just the right interference pattern. The display tech would be nano, as well, no more CRT crap. Since even using Drexler's design for a mechanical computer, you can fit a 1000 MIPS processor in, IIRC, 1 micron, space for processing power is no problem.
Power conversion can be done with nano devices, it just requires the right end on the cord. Of course, if it doesn't need much energy, then the energy of its environment could suffice. This would not allow luminescent screens however, as that requires a lot of energy. However, energy storage can be very dense, especially with the many conversion methods that the atomic level makes simpler.
Networking can be wireless. With the increase in the availability of wireless telecomm, the networks should be in place for fairly high speed connectivity by the time the other technologies needed for this product are available.
The main problem that I see currently is input. A stylus could be used for a pointer, but I do not want to use that for writing. I type a *lot* faster than I write. So, the question of input still remains. Voice is a possibility, but it would be disruptive in public settings (as this would be an extremely portable device). A virtual keyboard is a possibility, if the eyeglass method is used for the screen (and all of the other parts as well, it would easily fit, properly designed). It doesn't have the same tactile properties, of course, though those could possibly be simulated through the use of gloves (using nanotech to get the force feedback small enough).
I have a feeling, however, that entire new paradigms will need to be developed for input for a truly portable, bring-everywhere device, so that it is transparent, fluid, and unobtrusive. ---
I surf with my threshhold at -1, but with the sort set to "highest scores first", so I see the most moderated posts first, and can be sure to read them, and I can go on and read the lower posts if I want to. So, while I want to see everything, the moderation is still useful to me. ---
Trying to make linux do something it can't will result in linux being able to do that, eventually. This is true for every single new creation, ever. It couldn't be done before, but now it can. ---
I think it would benifit the community greatly were companies like Red Hat to pay people to document the more obscure parts of the kernel.
It's not just the kernel. Everything needs to be commented. And Red Hat should have the people working for them comment their code, sure. But people who are not being paid need to comment as well, or it won't work. If you write it, you comment it. Simple as that. ---
As an idea maybe RH could sell support for copies of their CDs. I.e. you buy a RHL CD off somone on Amazon. Turns out its not 'Official'. Well hey you only paid $10 for it. Call up RH. They can't help cuz its not their supported version. Pay $x. Get support. Not the perfect solution, but a reasonable one. I'm not suggesting they support Caldera, Debian, or even Mandrake. But their official distro that someone downloaded and then bought support for.
That has a major problem with it though: what if it turns out that whay they have is not an exact copy of the Official distrobution? Big problems with training tech supp reps then, if they have to deal with figuring out whether it's really the distro or not. After all, just because it's says it has the RHAT distrobution doesn't mean it does, or that it's not modified. ---
Once it's created, you can tinker with it all you want.
You might think that, but it's not true. Most genetic algorithms are structured such that humans cannot understand them, let alone modify them successfully. They usually use methods that humans would never have thought of, either. ---
I imagine creating new brain cells cloned from the originals wouldn't be that difficult (relatively speaking) You imagine indeed. It would be more difficult than you think, because every cell in your brain is specialized for its function, and this specialization is reflected in the DNA. Certain functions get turned off, others get turned on. So in order to grow new brain cells, you need to either find unspecialized "brain" cells (if those exist), or take unspecialized cells from reproductive organ (ala Dolly) and force them to specialize in the correct way. Then you need to get a lot of them, and figure out how to make the brain integrate them. It's not easy.
Possibly the first part could be solved with DNA synthesizers (which we've had for many years), but that will require the human genome project to be completed so we can turn the correct flags on and off.
And then you need thousands of copies, in the cells. So that part won't work until you can find an efficient way to put the DNA in the cells. Short of re-engineered viruses injecting the DNA, that would probably require a technology with control over very small things which is cheap to manufacture, so you can have enough of it to do all those thousands of cells. So, it basically requires nanotech, as I can't think of any other possibilites.
*IF* it is possible to get the brain to accept the new cells, and connect with them, then this would be a more viable path than simply regenerating the existing cells, particularly early on in the molecular machine stage, as creating healing nanobots will require time and experience, especially to get past the government safety committees on medical procedures.
The window on the right is a console window with the text browser they created in the process open. If you look in the upper right of the Opera window, you can see the grey where there is no browser window, but there is Opera.
Multiple windows, yes, but in a Starofficeish style. They are all within one larger window. ---
Slashdot Mirror
Corel has information on their website about their beta program, including a Corel LINUX Beta FAQ. They claim, in this FAQ, that the testing is "in keeping with the spirit of Open Source software distribution".
The have also created an entire web site specifically for their distro beta. They provide an email address to contact them at on that webpage as well, corellinux@corel.com.
Also included are such items as the press release announcing the launch of the beta, with many other press releases. They do not appear to have responded to this story yet.
---
You can't compare WindowMaker to Gnome and KDE. They are completely different things. You could compare WM to Enlightenment or KWM, since those are the same product set, but Gnome and KDE are meant to be 'desktop environments', whereas WindowMaker is a window manager.
---
If I'm trying to figure out how to do something, I go in a different order:
I've been using Linux for around 4 months now, so a near-newbie as of yet. Once I started, though, I didn't go back (ever).
Anyone have any better suggestions?
---
They can tell them, but they cannot legally prevent them from doing it. If the beta testers are not considered in-house, then they can stop them, but if they aren't, the beta testers can do whatever they want with the binaries/code.
---
However, Corel can have the beta testers sign an NDA which says "even though we have these rights, we won't exercise them"
No they can't, according to this clause of the GPL:
6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.
So, if they distribute GPLed software to which they have made changes, they must also make the source available.
---
They're package management system has lagged behind Red Hat's due to lack of developers for a while.
Has it? Is there a feature in RedHat's system allowing you to automatically update from a server? (I honestly want to know, I'm not trying to start a flameware here). That feature is one of the major reasons I use Debian.
---
It is not designed to be inherently multiuser. However, if the player is also treated as an object (like all the "other characters" are), then it should be fairly trivial to add multiplayer code. It depends on how elegantly coded it is. If everything about the player is object-oriented (interface, location, posessions, etc.), then it would only require adding more players and a way to interface with it.
The main problem with making it multiplayer is the possibility for graphics. If it's in text-only mode, though, then it could be connected to with a simple telnet (as MUDs generally are).
---
That's exactly what I said: "one good API for graphics". DirectX is an API. Linux and X don't have a good, fast, standard API, AFAIK. That's what it needs.
Does anyone know what development is going on in this area?
---
Wait, Win95 has a "broad selection of industry recognized multimedia standards"? I see OpenGL and DirectX being the only ones used today. Not exactly a broad selection. And DC has WinCE and Sega's proprietary thing, so no broad selection there, either.
Developers don't want a broad selection of standards, they want one standard, so they only have to support one driver. If the Linux world wants to see more games, then it needs one good API for graphics, and one good API for sound (how about Alsa?). In particular, fast graphics in X is a requirement.
Of course, the thing that will really draw the game companies is more users. Without users, APIs are useless. X needs to be really easy to setup for a wide variety of graphics cards and monitors before there will be more users. The basic Linux install has gotten quite easy, but the X configuration still needs work.
---
If evolution took us from something that wasn't even that complex (as that first 80% shared is extremly complex) why do we not see a greater variety of DNA patterns.
Because the one's that survived are the ones that are most fit. That happened to lead to what we have today. It just so happened that the shared DNA was the best for the job. It didn't have to go straight to bacteria, in fact, it probably didn't. Probability says that it should have taken several other paths at the same time, but the path leading to bacteria was the only one that survived.
---
It should be simple to, in either software or hardware, setup a device that will play the dialtone until it receives input (the phone # the DC is dialing), then run a PPP server over that link. Software would probably be really easy, if someone has written a decent interpreted language for controlling modems. Otherwise it'd probably be easier to implement in hardware, and still really simple. All it has to do is play a tone and wait for input, then wait a few seconds before connecting the two sides (computer and DC). Sure, it's a hack, but it'd work.
---
Plus, the whole point about the /. community is that since (most of) the software is open-source, there is nothing pirate about it.
Did those game manufacturers release the game open source? I didn't think so. Just because you think that all software should be open source is no excuse to steal.
Also, why did you put illegally in quotes? It really is illegal, it's not even unfairly illegal. It's just plain against the law.
I also object to your use of the phrase "has to". No one is forcing you to play the games, if you can't afford it, don't play them. Simple as that.
---
The screen could *be* the computer. It could vibrate for sound (thin speakers have already been created), it just needs to calculate just the right interference pattern. The display tech would be nano, as well, no more CRT crap. Since even using Drexler's design for a mechanical computer, you can fit a 1000 MIPS processor in, IIRC, 1 micron, space for processing power is no problem.
Power conversion can be done with nano devices, it just requires the right end on the cord. Of course, if it doesn't need much energy, then the energy of its environment could suffice. This would not allow luminescent screens however, as that requires a lot of energy. However, energy storage can be very dense, especially with the many conversion methods that the atomic level makes simpler.
Networking can be wireless. With the increase in the availability of wireless telecomm, the networks should be in place for fairly high speed connectivity by the time the other technologies needed for this product are available.
The main problem that I see currently is input. A stylus could be used for a pointer, but I do not want to use that for writing. I type a *lot* faster than I write. So, the question of input still remains. Voice is a possibility, but it would be disruptive in public settings (as this would be an extremely portable device). A virtual keyboard is a possibility, if the eyeglass method is used for the screen (and all of the other parts as well, it would easily fit, properly designed). It doesn't have the same tactile properties, of course, though those could possibly be simulated through the use of gloves (using nanotech to get the force feedback small enough).
I have a feeling, however, that entire new paradigms will need to be developed for input for a truly portable, bring-everywhere device, so that it is transparent, fluid, and unobtrusive.
---
I surf with my threshhold at -1, but with the sort set to "highest scores first", so I see the most moderated posts first, and can be sure to read them, and I can go on and read the lower posts if I want to. So, while I want to see everything, the moderation is still useful to me.
---
Trying to make linux do something it can't will result in linux being able to do that, eventually. This is true for every single new creation, ever. It couldn't be done before, but now it can.
---
I think it would benifit the community greatly were companies like Red Hat to pay people to document the more obscure parts of the kernel.
It's not just the kernel. Everything needs to be commented. And Red Hat should have the people working for them comment their code, sure. But people who are not being paid need to comment as well, or it won't work. If you write it, you comment it. Simple as that.
---
Before he does that, why don't you read the text.
---
Properly done, a genetic algorithm will be both correct and efficient, as one of the things that can be bred for is speed (ie efficiency).
---
So basically, anyone with some math and knowlege of even Basic can never leave the country. That's a good plan, fedgov, real good plan.
---
How the @#%$ does this get moderated up?
It appears to me that some people actually start with a 2 score. Or a 0 score. Or a -3 score (happened to one person).
---
As an idea maybe RH could sell support for copies of their CDs. I.e. you buy a RHL CD off somone on Amazon. Turns out its not 'Official'. Well hey you only paid $10 for it. Call up RH. They can't help cuz its not their supported version. Pay $x. Get support. Not the perfect solution, but a reasonable one. I'm not suggesting they support Caldera, Debian, or even Mandrake. But their official distro that someone downloaded and then bought support for.
That has a major problem with it though: what if it turns out that whay they have is not an exact copy of the Official distrobution? Big problems with training tech supp reps then, if they have to deal with figuring out whether it's really the distro or not. After all, just because it's says it has the RHAT distrobution doesn't mean it does, or that it's not modified.
---
Once it's created, you can tinker with it all you want.
You might think that, but it's not true. Most genetic algorithms are structured such that humans cannot understand them, let alone modify them successfully. They usually use methods that humans would never have thought of, either.
---
I imagine creating new brain cells cloned from the originals wouldn't be that difficult (relatively speaking)
You imagine indeed. It would be more difficult than you think, because every cell in your brain is specialized for its function, and this specialization is reflected in the DNA. Certain functions get turned off, others get turned on. So in order to grow new brain cells, you need to either find unspecialized "brain" cells (if those exist), or take unspecialized cells from reproductive organ (ala Dolly) and force them to specialize in the correct way. Then you need to get a lot of them, and figure out how to make the brain integrate them. It's not easy.
Possibly the first part could be solved with DNA synthesizers (which we've had for many years), but that will require the human genome project to be completed so we can turn the correct flags on and off.
And then you need thousands of copies, in the cells. So that part won't work until you can find an efficient way to put the DNA in the cells. Short of re-engineered viruses injecting the DNA, that would probably require a technology with control over very small things which is cheap to manufacture, so you can have enough of it to do all those thousands of cells. So, it basically requires nanotech, as I can't think of any other possibilites.
*IF* it is possible to get the brain to accept the new cells, and connect with them, then this would be a more viable path than simply regenerating the existing cells, particularly early on in the molecular machine stage, as creating healing nanobots will require time and experience, especially to get past the government safety committees on medical procedures.
Rhys Dyfrgi
---
The window on the right is a console window with the text browser they created in the process open. If you look in the upper right of the Opera window, you can see the grey where there is no browser window, but there is Opera.
Multiple windows, yes, but in a Starofficeish style. They are all within one larger window.
---
What is MDI?
---