lol, they were one of the last ones to promote it. I saw it on many other sites (including Fark) before on here, so I don't think it was an automatic promotion.
I think it would be "Method of configuring a computer to spread viruses"
That would be "Method of configuring computers for extremely quick and reliable spread of various software without user interaction" This is a lawyer talking, remember?
why not? Douglas Adams was mostly famous for a work of science fiction about a journey through space. I can't think of anything more fitting (except perhaps a star!)
no it wasn't designed for large files. It was designed purely to reduce server load, be it a large quantity of small files or a quantity of large files. In my example using the traditional server output, the Firefox servers crashed, and the only way to get it for a few hours was through bit torrent, so obviously servers can crash from only serving small files.
Bit torrent was designed only to reduce server load, nothing else.
sites like Machinima.com use bittorrent to distribute legal files. Legal torrents is a site like suprnova that doesn't tolerate illegal content. A mod team that I'm in in fact uses bit torrent to distribute, and a service like this would be well appreciated. By the way, a file doesn't have to be overly large to justify using bit torrent. I've downloaded *legal* files that are only a few megabytes big. (Firefox comes to my mind quite quickly)
That could be because they need to pay twice as much to keep them in check. (That was a joke, I'm an Australian, I have no idea.)
I think he might have just been saying republicans because republicans are in power (and/or) republicans have a history of complaining about this sort of thing, not directly because of his political beliefs. I may be wrong though.
*sigh* it's a name for a dedicated firewall appliance that is seperate from your main computer, just like watermelon isn't purely made out of water with nothing else in it. A hardware firewall includes only a computer (hardware) with a firewall on it, and nothing else. That is why it is called a hardware firewall.
not to mention that Firefox is Microsoft's main competitor to IE, which gives them every motivation to want to drive it into the ground. This doesn't apply to Google either.
Huh? Since when? I think someone's tooting his own horn. But anyway, this blog is mostly just an indignant "pretty please help us", offering silly remarks whilst asking what's pretty simply a favour. I don't see why this should even make slashdot.
Thank you for such a thorough reply for the article. Most people have trouble differentiating the legal aspects of a successful company and an anticompetative company, as is the case here.
In my opinion the main problem with Microsoft is that having a popular closed commercial operating system that does not follow a standard interface as does unix, they automatically have a monopoly, and should they branch into other areas, I don't think that it's possible (or at least, plausable) for them not to abuse their monopoly. That's my two cents anyway.
The Mandrake Linux machine does not get compromised, mail out your documents all over the ether, or instill in the operator a terror of clicking on new mail or links. I don't know how to cost that.
Perhaps $2500 that was in my uncle's internet bill one month will suffice?
However here we have P2P networks, that are used almost exclusively to commit copyright infringement.
The problem is that that isn't true in plenty of cases. The most famous of cases involve copyright infringement, but that's not all they're used for. Bit Torrent, for example, was created with no intension of using it illegally. Plenty of sites, most linux and open source distrobutions, and even software I've been developing, use Bit Torrent for legal ethical purposes because it cuts costs down enormously.
You could also say that SMB is used almost exclusively for copyright infringement because "I saw a guy share warez at a lan!!!" However a lot of companies and home users etc use it for ethical purposes.
But my point is, just because you can use it for illegal purposes, doesn't mean that it can't be used for ethical and moral purposes.
Maybe the tiny market share of home PCs Linux has, has something to do with it.
I think that's the only thing to do with it.
It's definitely not "the complexity of getting hardware-accelerated drivers on Linux" because nvidia devs have said that linux developing hardware-accelerated drivers is easier (rather his exact words were "more streamlined").
The biggest reason why nvidia are concentrating a lot on linux drivers is because there's a lot of development in special effects and 3d graphical work in business that goes on on linux. Linux most definitely not have anything going badly in the 3d area.
"Unless the games industries are willing to invest millions on developing something for Linux to do what DirectX does on Windows"
Yes, that's called OpenGL...
"(and then open-source it, otherwise they'll be bitched about, see nVidia)"
in the past people have bitched a bit because the linux drivers weren't on par with Windows, and they thought open sourcing the drivers might speed up the development a bit. Bitching has dimmed a lot since the last release, when nvidia finally did get pretty much up to par
"Just because they're both operating systems, both on PC, doesn't mean they CAN be capable of the same thing."
Linux is most definitely capable of gaming. Just see the latest Doom 3 benchmarks, linux with the latest nvidia drivers gets only slightly lower than their windows counterparts. Besides for someone who loves linux wondering how "a bunch of seperate developers is going to get together and build something MUCH better, with practically no money", just look at the history behind the operating system you're using!
well for one there are over 500 games here that I can install by just writing "apt-get install gamename" in the console, or, alternatively, select it from synaptic. apt then will then download, install, and set up shortcuts to the game for me.
Is that straightforward enough?
I'm not badmouthing something when I don't have the information, I'm simply pointing out the accurate fact that gaming on Linux is a lot more complex than gaming on Windows and almost always involves some user input and/or configuration beyond "click, click, click, play". The fact that the example that you mention involves dropping down to the command line only proves my point.
UT2004 doesn't require going to the command line at all. I mentioned that because it is the latest commercial game I've installed for linux. There is nothing difficult at all with writing a graphical installer for linux (as you can see if you try this program. If there is need for any more work than what is required with Windows then the application developer is doing something wrong.
You state "the accurate fact" as you put it, yet you have failed to provide any game that is actually difficult to install and run. I don't see any evidence that that's anything but badmouthing something you don't have information about.
Slashdot Mirror
Well Linux is one I can think of offhand...
lol, they were one of the last ones to promote it. I saw it on many other sites (including Fark) before on here, so I don't think it was an automatic promotion.
Yep I learned my entire American history from Colonization, great game!
I was in a way trying to be funny, but it was a serious question. Good answer too.
Wait a second, does this mean we like Sun again? I'm confused.
I think it would be "Method of configuring a computer to spread viruses"
That would be "Method of configuring computers for extremely quick and reliable spread of various software without user interaction" This is a lawyer talking, remember?
why not? Douglas Adams was mostly famous for a work of science fiction about a journey through space. I can't think of anything more fitting (except perhaps a star!)
no it wasn't designed for large files. It was designed purely to reduce server load, be it a large quantity of small files or a quantity of large files. In my example using the traditional server output, the Firefox servers crashed, and the only way to get it for a few hours was through bit torrent, so obviously servers can crash from only serving small files.
Bit torrent was designed only to reduce server load, nothing else.
sites like Machinima.com use bittorrent to distribute legal files. Legal torrents is a site like suprnova that doesn't tolerate illegal content. A mod team that I'm in in fact uses bit torrent to distribute, and a service like this would be well appreciated. By the way, a file doesn't have to be overly large to justify using bit torrent. I've downloaded *legal* files that are only a few megabytes big. (Firefox comes to my mind quite quickly)
But yes, there are plenty of legal files.
That could be because they need to pay twice as much to keep them in check. (That was a joke, I'm an Australian, I have no idea.)
I think he might have just been saying republicans because republicans are in power (and/or) republicans have a history of complaining about this sort of thing, not directly because of his political beliefs. I may be wrong though.
*sigh* it's a name for a dedicated firewall appliance that is seperate from your main computer, just like watermelon isn't purely made out of water with nothing else in it. A hardware firewall includes only a computer (hardware) with a firewall on it, and nothing else. That is why it is called a hardware firewall.
not to mention that Firefox is Microsoft's main competitor to IE, which gives them every motivation to want to drive it into the ground. This doesn't apply to Google either.
why would it be a trap? You do know that there are files other than warez and tv shows that you want to distribute using bit torrent don't you?
It's the most secure OS the world has ever seen
Huh? Since when? I think someone's tooting his own horn. But anyway, this blog is mostly just an indignant "pretty please help us", offering silly remarks whilst asking what's pretty simply a favour. I don't see why this should even make slashdot.
Thank you for such a thorough reply for the article. Most people have trouble differentiating the legal aspects of a successful company and an anticompetative company, as is the case here.
In my opinion the main problem with Microsoft is that having a popular closed commercial operating system that does not follow a standard interface as does unix, they automatically have a monopoly, and should they branch into other areas, I don't think that it's possible (or at least, plausable) for them not to abuse their monopoly. That's my two cents anyway.
The Mandrake Linux machine does not get compromised, mail out your documents all over the ether, or instill in the operator a terror of clicking on new mail or links. I don't know how to cost that.
Perhaps $2500 that was in my uncle's internet bill one month will suffice?
Ah yeah, the one with the mutant dogs, I loved that one.
it's not very good karma whoring when you accidentely put an extra / at the end of the URL!
This is better!
The problem is that that isn't true in plenty of cases. The most famous of cases involve copyright infringement, but that's not all they're used for. Bit Torrent, for example, was created with no intension of using it illegally. Plenty of sites, most linux and open source distrobutions, and even software I've been developing, use Bit Torrent for legal ethical purposes because it cuts costs down enormously.
You could also say that SMB is used almost exclusively for copyright infringement because "I saw a guy share warez at a lan!!!" However a lot of companies and home users etc use it for ethical purposes.
But my point is, just because you can use it for illegal purposes, doesn't mean that it can't be used for ethical and moral purposes.
Do I have to go to prison now?
have you seen Doomsday or Doom Legacy? Doom is still a pretty fun game, so lets not lose that part of computer history now shall we?
Why do I keep looking at that post and reading "German Federation of the Pornographic Industry"?
because AOL will package it with every internet deal they give from now on?
Maybe the tiny market share of home PCs Linux has, has something to do with it.
I think that's the only thing to do with it.
It's definitely not "the complexity of getting hardware-accelerated drivers on Linux" because nvidia devs have said that linux developing hardware-accelerated drivers is easier (rather his exact words were "more streamlined").
The biggest reason why nvidia are concentrating a lot on linux drivers is because there's a lot of development in special effects and 3d graphical work in business that goes on on linux. Linux most definitely not have anything going badly in the 3d area.
"Unless the games industries are willing to invest millions on developing something for Linux to do what DirectX does on Windows"
Yes, that's called OpenGL...
"(and then open-source it, otherwise they'll be bitched about, see nVidia)"
in the past people have bitched a bit because the linux drivers weren't on par with Windows, and they thought open sourcing the drivers might speed up the development a bit. Bitching has dimmed a lot since the last release, when nvidia finally did get pretty much up to par
"Just because they're both operating systems, both on PC, doesn't mean they CAN be capable of the same thing."
Linux is most definitely capable of gaming. Just see the latest Doom 3 benchmarks, linux with the latest nvidia drivers gets only slightly lower than their windows counterparts. Besides for someone who loves linux wondering how "a bunch of seperate developers is going to get together and build something MUCH better, with practically no money", just look at the history behind the operating system you're using!
Is that straightforward enough?
UT2004 doesn't require going to the command line at all. I mentioned that because it is the latest commercial game I've installed for linux. There is nothing difficult at all with writing a graphical installer for linux (as you can see if you try this program. If there is need for any more work than what is required with Windows then the application developer is doing something wrong.
You state "the accurate fact" as you put it, yet you have failed to provide any game that is actually difficult to install and run. I don't see any evidence that that's anything but badmouthing something you don't have information about.