Just like the scientific community, Open Source developers and their work are under the constant scrutiy of other Open Source (and even closed source) developers. The more popular and active the project, the more people reviewing the code.
Secondly, Open Source projects are predominantly not products; they are solutions, proof of concepts, etc. Their sole reason for existance is to be the best possible solution to the problem that the developers are able to produce, without deadlines, budget cuts or preasure to out-do a market competitor. As such, the "commercial standards of quality" attached to so many software products have no meaning for Open Source.
As long as Open Source remains open, as long as skilled programmers around the world have the ability to review their peer's code throught the development process, Open Source will continue to have it's own built-in form of quality assurance.
Just look at the major Open Source projects available today. The results speak for themselves.
So TV executives are scared that we might actually want to burden others with the garbage they vomit daily into our living rooms free of charge anyway.
Well, maybe I'll just stop watching TV. Nothing but crap on anyway.
Don't despair, folks! If you really hate the changes made to these movies, you have plenty of time before the 2010, 2016 and 2023 (etc) re-releases to make your opinions heard!
Yes, all user apps would be in bytecode. Java bytecode would be the native binary format of the platform, in the same way that x86 machine language is the native format on PCs. The point is to have a completley self-contained Linux environment running inside a Java virtual machine. Obviously, you would need to port the compiler and other components of the toolchain, user space apps, etc. JVM would become an architecture, like i386, ppc, ia64 and anything else under the '/usr/src/linux/arch' directory.
It would be useful only as an excercise 'to prove it can be done'; I doubt it would serve any practical purpose. But as I implied earlier, simply to prove something can be done is often a good enough reason in itself for us geeks. If nothing else, we would learn a hell of a lot about Java and bytecode in general.
Actually, I would be interested to see the Linux kernel ported to the Java Virtual Machine. I don't mean re-write the kernel in Java, I mean port it; make it possible to compile from the original C sources into Java bytecode (wrapped up in a standard ELF file) and deploy in on a JVM using the JRE for interaction with the outside world. Then you could run Linux running on Java running on Linux running on Java running on Windows running on VMWare running on Linux running on oh no I've gone cross-eyed.
Obviously it would be totally useless, but that's never stopped us before (think HTTP servers on Commodore 64s).
There's already been over 600 comments on this article as I write this, and I bet all of them are of the line "You would have to be mad to install Windows in your car", so there's really nothing more I could add to this discussion, except...
You would have to be mad to install Windows in your car!
Lets all hope Bill and Steve will test drive the prototype, eh?
The Millenium Bug will whipe out all computer records and reduce all computer systems to nothing more then elaborate paper weights and... oh... wait... never mind.
Y'know, here in Oz we're about to lose our national telecomunications carrier, Telstra, into private hands. Telstra has a long history of obstinant behaviour and generally pissing people off. And I suspect that this is because the government has mandadted to the Telstra chiefs (who, or the time being, technically still work for the government) to mismanage Telstra as much as possible so that when the do sell it they can say "See? We told you Tesltra would function better in private hands!".
I wonder if NASA is suffering a similar problem, i.e. being starved of funds to prevent them from being an effective compeditor to future commercial space operations.
Who is it that truly has control over the software industry? Who is it that developes the software, tests it, fixes it, improves it? Is it the marketroid with his thousand dollar suits? Is it the CEO, the Compay President? HR? No, it's us. The geeks, the only bunch of people on this planet what have a complete grasp of the technologies upon which everyone has placed their future prosperity and dependency.
It's about time we realized that no matter what technology the business types come up with to protect their so-called "intellectual property", no matter how subtle or insidious the technique, they will requrie one if us to implement it. This one fact means we will forever have access to information that others do not, and the attempt to prevent us access to this information is futile. We are smarter then you. We will figure out problems in your design before it's even implemented, because that's what we have been trained to do.
It's about time the rest of the world learned that it is in *everybody's* best interest, including the marketroids, to let us fuck around with technology without restriction. You can do whetever you like with what we create, we don't really care. All we want to do is to create new and ingeneous solutions to difficult problems, and to find newer and more difficult problems to create solutions for.
As the level of technoloy increases, and the complexity of that technology also increases, it will take a special kind of brain to keep up with those changes. A geek brain. C'mon folks, most people can't even program their VCR! How will they react to a world where everything, from currency to shoe leather, has some kind of "smart" technology embedded in it? They wont - they'll get us to deal with it. Like they always have.
The so-called 'Christian Right' is an irrelevant force in Australian politics. Even the last bit of Internet Censorship legistlation was inacted only to buy the vote of a single Tasmanina Senator who held the balance of power. It certainly hasn't affected *my* browsing habits.
With a (possible) change of government imminent here in Australia, to a less conservative party, this idea will die the quick and quiet death it deserves.
> Sun's view is that Linux is nothing more than Red Hat. The operating system is not about > world peace and the charitable work of the world's great programmers. It's like every > other operating system ever created: It's about the foibles, greed, mistakes and > engineering prowess (or lack thereof) of one vendor -- in this case, Red Hat."
If this is truly Sun's view, then they're fucked. Nothing can save them.
Anyway, Linux isn't an operating system. It's a kernel.
Not that I'm suggesting that this time has come, but should it happen that the Law no longer represents the interests of the people it's supposed to, is it not time for those people to defy the Law?
Slashdot Mirror
Since half the people in the I.T. industry don't know what they're doing anyway, I say good riddance.
An Harkonnens, watch out for them too.
Just like the scientific community, Open Source developers and their work are under the constant scrutiy of other Open Source (and even closed source) developers. The more popular and active the project, the more people reviewing the code.
Secondly, Open Source projects are predominantly not products; they are solutions, proof of concepts, etc. Their sole reason for existance is to be the best possible solution to the problem that the developers are able to produce, without deadlines, budget cuts or preasure to out-do a market competitor. As such, the "commercial standards of quality" attached to so many software products have no meaning for Open Source.
As long as Open Source remains open, as long as skilled programmers around the world have the ability to review their peer's code throught the development process, Open Source will continue to have it's own built-in form of quality assurance.
Just look at the major Open Source projects available today. The results speak for themselves.
So TV executives are scared that we might actually want to burden others with the garbage they vomit daily into our living rooms free of charge anyway.
Well, maybe I'll just stop watching TV. Nothing but crap on anyway.
Short answer: Yes, with an if; Long answer: No, with a but.
Oh, wait, I thought it said Lonely coder.
Don't despair, folks! If you really hate the changes made to these movies, you have plenty of time before the 2010, 2016 and 2023 (etc) re-releases to make your opinions heard!
Yes, all user apps would be in bytecode. Java bytecode would be the native binary format of the platform, in the same way that x86 machine language is the native format on PCs. The point is to have a completley self-contained Linux environment running inside a Java virtual machine. Obviously, you would need to port the compiler and other components of the toolchain, user space apps, etc. JVM would become an architecture, like i386, ppc, ia64 and anything else under the '/usr/src/linux/arch' directory.
It would be useful only as an excercise 'to prove it can be done'; I doubt it would serve any practical purpose. But as I implied earlier, simply to prove something can be done is often a good enough reason in itself for us geeks. If nothing else, we would learn a hell of a lot about Java and bytecode in general.
3 steps to help ensure your PC is protected:
:-P )
1) Format you hard drive.
2) Install Linux.
3) I lied. There are only 2 steps.
(Sorry, I couldn't resist
Actually, I would be interested to see the Linux kernel ported to the Java Virtual Machine. I don't mean re-write the kernel in Java, I mean port it; make it possible to compile from the original C sources into Java bytecode (wrapped up in a standard ELF file) and deploy in on a JVM using the JRE for interaction with the outside world. Then you could run Linux running on Java running on Linux running on Java running on Windows running on VMWare running on Linux running on oh no I've gone cross-eyed.
:)
Obviously it would be totally useless, but that's never stopped us before (think HTTP servers on Commodore 64s).
Any takers? Didn't think so
There's already been over 600 comments on this article as I write this, and I bet all of them are of the line "You would have to be mad to install Windows in your car", so there's really nothing more I could add to this discussion, except ...
You would have to be mad to install Windows in your car!
Lets all hope Bill and Steve will test drive the prototype, eh?
The Millenium Bug will whipe out all computer records and reduce all computer systems to nothing more then elaborate paper weights and ... oh ... wait ... never mind.
But can it run Linux?
Y'know, here in Oz we're about to lose our national telecomunications carrier, Telstra, into private hands. Telstra has a long history of obstinant behaviour and generally pissing people off. And I suspect that this is because the government has mandadted to the Telstra chiefs (who, or the time being, technically still work for the government) to mismanage Telstra as much as possible so that when the do sell it they can say "See? We told you Tesltra would function better in private hands!".
I wonder if NASA is suffering a similar problem, i.e. being starved of funds to prevent them from being an effective compeditor to future commercial space operations.
Maybe Im just paranoid.
So two presidential candidates were prevented from even attending a presidential debate.
And you call yourself a democracy. More like a two-tier tyranny!
Get it together America - No one out here will respect you until you practice what you preach.
A FAQ on FAQs on FAQs, or a FAQ on FAQs on FAQs on FAQs, or ...
My head hurts.
Yes, Linux (or it's successor) will be a dominant OS in ten years time. Windows will not.
Who is it that truly has control over the software industry? Who is it that developes the software, tests it, fixes it, improves it? Is it the marketroid with his thousand dollar suits? Is it the CEO, the Compay President? HR? No, it's us. The geeks, the only bunch of people on this planet what have a complete grasp of the technologies upon which everyone has placed their future prosperity and dependency.
It's about time we realized that no matter what technology the business types come up with to protect their so-called "intellectual property", no matter how subtle or insidious the technique, they will requrie one if us to implement it. This one fact means we will forever have access to information that others do not, and the attempt to prevent us access to this information is futile. We are smarter then you. We will figure out problems in your design before it's even implemented, because that's what we have been trained to do.
It's about time the rest of the world learned that it is in *everybody's* best interest, including the marketroids, to let us fuck around with technology without restriction. You can do whetever you like with what we create, we don't really care. All we want to do is to create new and ingeneous solutions to difficult problems, and to find newer and more difficult problems to create solutions for.
As the level of technoloy increases, and the complexity of that technology also increases, it will take a special kind of brain to keep up with those changes. A geek brain. C'mon folks, most people can't even program their VCR! How will they react to a world where everything, from currency to shoe leather, has some kind of "smart" technology embedded in it? They wont - they'll get us to deal with it. Like they always have.
The so-called 'Christian Right' is an irrelevant force in Australian politics. Even the last bit of Internet Censorship legistlation was inacted only to buy the vote of a single Tasmanina Senator who held the balance of power. It certainly hasn't affected *my* browsing habits.
With a (possible) change of government imminent here in Australia, to a less conservative party, this idea will die the quick and quiet death it deserves.
Quoted from the article:
> Sun's view is that Linux is nothing more than Red Hat. The operating system is not about
> world peace and the charitable work of the world's great programmers. It's like every
> other operating system ever created: It's about the foibles, greed, mistakes and
> engineering prowess (or lack thereof) of one vendor -- in this case, Red Hat."
If this is truly Sun's view, then they're fucked. Nothing can save them.
Anyway, Linux isn't an operating system. It's a kernel.
Not that I'm suggesting that this time has come, but should it happen that the Law no longer represents the interests of the people it's supposed to, is it not time for those people to defy the Law?
There is a God!
It must mbe Thursday. I never could get the hand of Thursdays.
Ok, that's Apple and Sun taken care of. Novell and IBM are on our side (for now) and SCO will annihilate itself in court. That just leaves Microsoft.
We're looking good people!
(1) Build an insecure and unstable operating system and get everyone to use it.
(2) Make security patches and bug fixes available to a set of 'premium' customers before you make them available to regular customers.
(3) Profit!
The Doctor third? I'm mortified!