My $0.02 US is that the ancient city they just found is a colony of Atlantis. Atlantis was supposedly a powerhouse of a civilization. All great imperial powers set up colonies. The Greeks, the Romans, and the British. Just because this place has the rings and the temple does not mean its the *Real Slim Shady*. Think about how many places in the US are named after older cities and counties of Ireland and England (or for that matter, other cities in Europe). This could be a colony of Atlantis and the colonists chose to set up their colony just like from their homeland.
What I do find interesting that nobody has brought up here on Slashdot that's read the article is how this explains the Basques. The "homeland" of the Basques is in portions of Spain and France. Their language is not related to any other language in Europe. They claim they are the descendents of the Atlanteans. So finding this city, whether it be Atlantis or a colony thereof, easily now explains where the Basques came from.
"One thing I've been thinking about recently is what if there was an intelligent dinosaur? If said intelligent dino only built structures from wood I highly doubt any evidence would exist 65million years after they died out."
C'mon, you are sampling off an episode of *Star Trek Voyager* with that assumption (or the advanced ancestors of the imbletards known as the Sleestaks on *Land of the Lost*).:) In the episode of Voyager, they encountered a humanoid species of dinosaurs who had left the Earth and were spacefaring, but they believed in a primitive version of monotheism that didn't accept the concept of evolution so the Earth was a myth. They had left the planet before the asteroid hit the planet 65 million years before.
There is one scientist connected to SETI that did speculate that the Velociraptors did evolve into a humanoid species and could've become advanced. He did note that there would be no physical trace of any of their buildings considering how long ago that would've happened. What is fascinating about that idea is that if Atlantis did exist and is under the Antartic ice, then perhaps it wasn't a human city and we have this cultural myth that is a prehistorical remembrance of a different species (*interestingly enough, they found remains of velociraptors on an island off Antartica a couple of months ago - it made the headlines, again by BBC News). This isn't a hard leap of faith considering many scientists claim that legends of things like Bigfoot and the Yeti are prehistorical remembrances of a particular 10 ft. tall ape that existed before Homo Erectus and the Neanderthals supposedly hunted them into extinction.
"There are, incidentaly, plenty of explanations for the Pyrimids. The egyptians had a written language which makes it easier to figure things out. Mostly because we can read their language. The pyrimids are giant piles of stone. Technology wise they are relatively simple. The real challenge was organization."
The funniest piece of speculation about the nature of the pyramids I heard on "Unscrewed with Martin Sargent" on G4TechTV. The guest claimed the pyramids were an elaborate form of an ancient sewage system. I laughed so hard when I heard that.
"And according to him, he beleaved that in Noah's time, there was very advance people who thought they were better than god, hence the reason why god floodded the earth. Now I don't have a bible time line in front of me, but Noahs time was about 9000 years before Plato . . . And the flood would most certainly make a city sink."
The problem with that is that Noah WASN'T Noah. The Babylonian account of the flood and the "Noah" character is far older than the Hebrew account. Moses pulled a "Puff Daddy" and sampled the Babylonian account he learned from studying in the Egyptian King's library and remixed it into a Hebrew account. Notice I didn't call the Egyptian King "Pharaoh" because that wasn't a real title. Pharaoh means "king's palace." Its a Hebrew mistranslation. Its like referring to President Bush as "White House."
You also have to contend with the Egyptian accounts of the Great Flood as well as people like the Mayans who also claimed they were from an island to their East that sank.
"And in the case of Palm in particular, it's not like the company is investing a lot of money in research--their rate of software innovation is glacial, and they are nearly invisible at scientific conferences. Microsoft makes a far bigger investment in research (both absolute and relative) than Palm."
Considering Microsoft has $60 billion in the bank that is all due to ill gotten gains, they should be the most innovative company on the planet. At this point, Windows should be more secure than any Unix or Linux distribution, it should look better than OS X, and it should have voice recognition already. But it doesn't have any of those things I just mentioned. How much money does PalmSource have in comparison? Not much. Apples and oranges.
"He is reportedly "not the sharpest knife in the drawer," but nevertheless is able to converse with many intelligent people, and is accepted at fine restaurants and hotels around the world."
Was that last comment meant to be funny or witty? Being accepted at "fine restaurants and hotels around the world" has nothing to do with ones intelligence, only liquid capital (mainly) and connections.
Even better:
"one of the first papers to raise serious questions about the security of open- and hybrid-source computer software, a point recently raised by the president of Symantec Corporation."
Oooh, Symantec raised a red flag over open source software, especially after open source based firewalls have shown up Norton Firewall so much. That would be like Star Trek producer Rick Berman critiquing George Lucas on the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy.
I stand by my prior statement, the guy is an imbletard (imho).
"You make a good point, but I never said cost couldn't drop, I merely said value, and there is a big difference between the two."
True. I wasn't taking issue with what you said; I was merely twisting Brown's argument into fitting into the equation. Adding Linux to a product doesn't detract from the value of the device to the consumer (it can definitely be argued that it adds value due to the code's strength), but it certainly devalues proprietary operating system software licenses.:)
"The Samizdat report recommends that the U.S. government should invest $5 billion in research and development efforts that produce true open source products, such as BSD and MIT license-based open source."
Interesting, his choice of BSD, considering that Microsoft has used BSD code in Windows before. Getting the U.S. government to pay for research that will benefit Microsoft ($60 billion in the bank) is nothing short of corporate welfare, especially when said corporation pays so little tax to the U.S. Government with the exception of campaign contributions for the Capitol Hill gang.
Then the author (similar to SCO) shoots his own foot with the following statement:
"The disturbing reality is that the hybrid source model depends heavily upon sponging talent from U.S. corporations and/or U.S. proprietary software."
How is the *hybrid source* of Linux being more of a sponge than BSD? Linux requires the community to give back improvements so the entire Linux community profits. Anyone can use BSD without giving anything back (thankfully some companies like Apple do, and unlike MSFT). So how does BSD get a free sponging pass in this guy's logic?
So I propose that Brown (in my opinion) is an imbletard. That is the byproduct of a union between an imbecile and a retard.
"This is just another "Linus couldn't have written Linux himself!"
I agree completely with your post. When people claim the Linux kernel was too difficult to write by one person, I would remind those very naysayers that television was created by a 13 year old. Individuals can do extraordinary things.
"Let's see....PDA's, routers, cell phones, dvd players....yup, they all run Linux, and I don't see the value of these pieces of hardware spiraling downwards."
Consider the source (and I don't mean code). That foundation receives monies from Microsoft. You bring up the PDA market. Both Microsoft and PalmOne receive $10 in royalties for the use of their operating systems (PocketPC and PalmOS) and intellectual property per licensed machine sold. Linux does have the potential of degrading those royalties down to nothing. First, licensees will pressure M$ and PalmOne into lowering their payments by using the "we can use Linux for free" argument. It could be argued that eventually, this means the PocketPC and PalmOS licenses will go down to $1 or less per machine sold. Microsoft would wave the licensing fee just to save face against Linux, but that would cripple PalmSource completely.
"Going from BSD to OS X was something that took 20 years of continuous development from NeXT and Apple, not something that happened overnight."
Apple today is NeXT. It was a reverse buyout afterall, Apple buying NeXT to save it from itself. Kinda like what happened with the original Time, Inc. and Warner Communications "merger." Time bought Warner so that Steve Ross could ring out the synergy and ring out profits on both sides of the combined company. Mr. Amellio (sic) purchased NeXT to quickly replace MacOS after Apple failed to bring out their next generation OS.
"All it takes is them retaining the rights to the Java (TM) name, ala TeX. I.e. you can't call it Java (TM) if it's not compatible."
How do you figure? The Open Group owns the name "Unix" and has somewhat frothed at the mouth over Apple claiming in its P.R. that OS X is "built from Unix" when it is (technically) built from FreeBSD. Yet Apple still continues to market OS X that way. The Feds didn't prevents Microsoft from claiming their Java client was "Java" despite Sun's protestations to the contrary.
"so your gonna be an ipod when apple supports ogg?"
Har de har har, laugh at my expense over a typo. Then again, I guess that typo is better than typing "bi" in that argument. Of course, that might mean that you like AAC AND OGG...
"This sort of reminds me of plastic surgeons who claim silicone breast implants have the same look and feel as the real deal."
Microsoft Boobs XP. Specify if you want the Home User Edition (Ballmer) or Pro (Gates) editions. You also get to select if you want them with one lump or two... Granted, since neither individuals mentioned have probably ever handled the real thing before, why would you trust them? The same can be said of similar offerings from Apple, but at least with them, they haven't handled the real thing before because it was a lifestyle choice, not a lack of opportunity.:)
"When cool people start saying "Levis are dead - I can buy jeans for 1/5 the price at Target" then maybe, just maybe, Apple should start to worry...."
Cool people haven't worn Levis in well over a decade. If you are still wearing them, you might as well be wearing Bugle Boy or Hammer harem pants. I guess you didn't get the memo but then again, it was restricted just to cool people.
"That's just the way it is. I want my open-source, patent-free, DRM-free codec."
Instead of bitching about the lack of OGG support on Slashdot where it won't help matters, why don't you email Apple and tell them that you would be an iPod if they'd ship with OGG support? That would be the more constructive argument to make. Here, I'll even help you out and provide the proper link to submit your comment:
Yusuf Mehdi, a Microsoft VP, is quoted as saying that the player will give customers more choices than Apple."
How exactly is a Microsoft portable MP3 player going to give more choice to consumers than an iPod? Is he referencing that the end user can use all of the other commercial download services that are in competition with Apple's iTunes? (you know, all the ones that deal in WMA, and yes, I said "deal"). In that case, the "choice" is like Henry Ford saying the consumer could have his Model T "in any color, as long as it is black." I'm sorry, but unless the Microsoft player supports Ogg and "unencrypted" AAC, then again, its the illusion of choice on the part of Microsoft. In other words, more of the smoke and mirrors routine from Redmond. Considering this product will be another expense bankrolled by the ill-gotten gains of their operating system (and office applications) monopoly, they should (IMHO) instead invest the money spent on this ill-conceived project on further securing their bread-and-butter offerings. Or buyout Rockstar Games and break the exclusive PS2/3 contract they have for the next GTA title so the Xbox Next has a fighting chance against the PS3.
Regardless, I will lay down dollars or euros that Microsoft will include an (unencrypted) AAC to WMA conversion program, to answer Apple's tit-for-tat from last month's announcement. Just like I will bet green that Apple will be the first computer manufacturer to ship machines with Blue Ray drives as a way of spiting the DVD Forum for supporting WMP9 as the compression scheme for HD-DVD.
"Basing it on Linux or BSD allows them to rely on others for those services. The only "feature" is that the device is cheaper to the consumer."
'Cept SCO mouthed off that they wanted a $75 licensing fee for all embedded Linux devices (per unit). No word on if they took out a licensing agreement with Trolltech, the leading supplier of embedded Linux systems and (like SCO) also owned by the Canopy Group. Of course, we probably won't have to worry about them in another month if IBM is granted the summary judgment they asked for...:0
"That's what they get for not using a production ready operating system. Why would anyone choose Linux when they can use Windows CE?"
The NSA uses Linux. It is more than production ready. I've never modified my Xbox, but it does crash from time to time. My TiVo has not. And let us not forget that Microsoft has used its OS in a PVR before, their very own UltimateTV, which failed in the face of TiVo.
"These people like makers of Roku, in my opinion, lacks a business minded person on their board of directors, at least one very good example of this kind. Idea is good but marketing it half-baked is not going to do this company any favor."
It should be noted that the founders of Roku created the ReplayTV. You know, Replay. The DVR unit that has bankrupted two former holding companies of the technology and despite being on the market as long as TiVo, has only secured 100,000 + users.
"This is one place I will give props to the military. They require Quality Assurance and testing by the user before they will sign off on something."
Hold on there a sec. Quality Assurance gave our soldiers in 'Nam the jamming problems of the M-16. Granted, that was because they used an inferior powder through a corrupt contract, but still! And in recent times, the military spent a fortune on developing the Sargeant York tank that didn't work, the V-22, the B-1's stealth scheme that doesn't foil (early) post WWII Soviet radar, the Patriot missles that didn't work as advertised (well, in the first Persian Gulf War), etc. etc. etc. Although I will commend the military for ditching Windows, and that America's Army game is pretty sweet...:0
"These people need to understand, Linux is NOT a feature! In a device like this, the OS (whatever it is) should be as transparent to the user as possible."
I'd have to disagree on this point as a TiVo owner. TiVo implements upgrades to their OS every once in awhile, and that includes when patches and new driver updates for Linux are made available. Thus indirectly to the user, Linux is a feature of the TiVo platform.
"Dear lintard,Canada doesn't have the "DMCA" nor the DCMA"
Dear imbletard,
The posting I was responding to concerned an article from USA Today and it had nothing to do with Canada. So before you pipe in your $0.02 Canadian, try reading the posts first. And how about getting a Slashdot account instead of using an anonymous coward login? Thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
My $0.02 US is that the ancient city they just found is a colony of Atlantis. Atlantis was supposedly a powerhouse of a civilization. All great imperial powers set up colonies. The Greeks, the Romans, and the British. Just because this place has the rings and the temple does not mean its the *Real Slim Shady*. Think about how many places in the US are named after older cities and counties of Ireland and England (or for that matter, other cities in Europe). This could be a colony of Atlantis and the colonists chose to set up their colony just like from their homeland.
What I do find interesting that nobody has brought up here on Slashdot that's read the article is how this explains the Basques. The "homeland" of the Basques is in portions of Spain and France. Their language is not related to any other language in Europe. They claim they are the descendents of the Atlanteans. So finding this city, whether it be Atlantis or a colony thereof, easily now explains where the Basques came from.
"One thing I've been thinking about recently is what if there was an intelligent dinosaur? If said intelligent dino only built structures from wood I highly doubt any evidence would exist 65million years after they died out."
:) In the episode of Voyager, they encountered a humanoid species of dinosaurs who had left the Earth and were spacefaring, but they believed in a primitive version of monotheism that didn't accept the concept of evolution so the Earth was a myth. They had left the planet before the asteroid hit the planet 65 million years before.
C'mon, you are sampling off an episode of *Star Trek Voyager* with that assumption (or the advanced ancestors of the imbletards known as the Sleestaks on *Land of the Lost*).
There is one scientist connected to SETI that did speculate that the Velociraptors did evolve into a humanoid species and could've become advanced. He did note that there would be no physical trace of any of their buildings considering how long ago that would've happened. What is fascinating about that idea is that if Atlantis did exist and is under the Antartic ice, then perhaps it wasn't a human city and we have this cultural myth that is a prehistorical remembrance of a different species (*interestingly enough, they found remains of velociraptors on an island off Antartica a couple of months ago - it made the headlines, again by BBC News). This isn't a hard leap of faith considering many scientists claim that legends of things like Bigfoot and the Yeti are prehistorical remembrances of a particular 10 ft. tall ape that existed before Homo Erectus and the Neanderthals supposedly hunted them into extinction.
But again, its all speculation.
"There are, incidentaly, plenty of explanations for the Pyrimids. The egyptians had a written language which makes it easier to figure things out. Mostly because we can read their language. The pyrimids are giant piles of stone. Technology wise they are relatively simple. The real challenge was organization."
The funniest piece of speculation about the nature of the pyramids I heard on "Unscrewed with Martin Sargent" on G4TechTV. The guest claimed the pyramids were an elaborate form of an ancient sewage system. I laughed so hard when I heard that.
"And according to him, he beleaved that in Noah's time, there was very advance people who thought they were better than god, hence the reason why god floodded the earth. Now I don't have a bible time line in front of me, but Noahs time was about 9000 years before Plato . . . And the flood would most certainly make a city sink."
The problem with that is that Noah WASN'T Noah. The Babylonian account of the flood and the "Noah" character is far older than the Hebrew account. Moses pulled a "Puff Daddy" and sampled the Babylonian account he learned from studying in the Egyptian King's library and remixed it into a Hebrew account. Notice I didn't call the Egyptian King "Pharaoh" because that wasn't a real title. Pharaoh means "king's palace." Its a Hebrew mistranslation. Its like referring to President Bush as "White House."
You also have to contend with the Egyptian accounts of the Great Flood as well as people like the Mayans who also claimed they were from an island to their East that sank.
"And in the case of Palm in particular, it's not like the company is investing a lot of money in research--their rate of software innovation is glacial, and they are nearly invisible at scientific conferences. Microsoft makes a far bigger investment in research (both absolute and relative) than Palm."
Considering Microsoft has $60 billion in the bank that is all due to ill gotten gains, they should be the most innovative company on the planet. At this point, Windows should be more secure than any Unix or Linux distribution, it should look better than OS X, and it should have voice recognition already. But it doesn't have any of those things I just mentioned. How much money does PalmSource have in comparison? Not much. Apples and oranges.
And to further my point regaring Mr Brown:
"He is reportedly "not the sharpest knife in the drawer," but nevertheless is able to converse with many intelligent people, and is accepted at fine restaurants and hotels around the world."
Was that last comment meant to be funny or witty? Being accepted at "fine restaurants and hotels around the world" has nothing to do with ones intelligence, only liquid capital (mainly) and connections.
Even better:
"one of the first papers to raise serious questions about the security of open- and hybrid-source computer software, a point recently raised by the president of Symantec Corporation."
Oooh, Symantec raised a red flag over open source software, especially after open source based firewalls have shown up Norton Firewall so much. That would be like Star Trek producer Rick Berman critiquing George Lucas on the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy.
I stand by my prior statement, the guy is an imbletard (imho).
"You make a good point, but I never said cost couldn't drop, I merely said value, and there is a big difference between the two."
:)
True. I wasn't taking issue with what you said; I was merely twisting Brown's argument into fitting into the equation. Adding Linux to a product doesn't detract from the value of the device to the consumer (it can definitely be argued that it adds value due to the code's strength), but it certainly devalues proprietary operating system software licenses.
I want to highlight some of Brown's flawed logic:
"The Samizdat report recommends that the U.S. government should invest $5 billion in research and development efforts that produce true open source products, such as BSD and MIT license-based open source."
Interesting, his choice of BSD, considering that Microsoft has used BSD code in Windows before. Getting the U.S. government to pay for research that will benefit Microsoft ($60 billion in the bank) is nothing short of corporate welfare, especially when said corporation pays so little tax to the U.S. Government with the exception of campaign contributions for the Capitol Hill gang.
Then the author (similar to SCO) shoots his own foot with the following statement:
"The disturbing reality is that the hybrid source model depends heavily upon sponging talent from U.S. corporations and/or U.S. proprietary software."
How is the *hybrid source* of Linux being more of a sponge than BSD? Linux requires the community to give back improvements so the entire Linux community profits. Anyone can use BSD without giving anything back (thankfully some companies like Apple do, and unlike MSFT). So how does BSD get a free sponging pass in this guy's logic?
So I propose that Brown (in my opinion) is an imbletard. That is the byproduct of a union between an imbecile and a retard.
"This is just another "Linus couldn't have written Linux himself!"
I agree completely with your post. When people claim the Linux kernel was too difficult to write by one person, I would remind those very naysayers that television was created by a 13 year old. Individuals can do extraordinary things.
"Let's see....PDA's, routers, cell phones, dvd players....yup, they all run Linux, and I don't see the value of these pieces of hardware spiraling downwards."
Consider the source (and I don't mean code). That foundation receives monies from Microsoft. You bring up the PDA market. Both Microsoft and PalmOne receive $10 in royalties for the use of their operating systems (PocketPC and PalmOS) and intellectual property per licensed machine sold. Linux does have the potential of degrading those royalties down to nothing. First, licensees will pressure M$ and PalmOne into lowering their payments by using the "we can use Linux for free" argument. It could be argued that eventually, this means the PocketPC and PalmOS licenses will go down to $1 or less per machine sold. Microsoft would wave the licensing fee just to save face against Linux, but that would cripple PalmSource completely.
"Going from BSD to OS X was something that took 20 years of continuous development from NeXT and Apple, not something that happened overnight."
Apple today is NeXT. It was a reverse buyout afterall, Apple buying NeXT to save it from itself. Kinda like what happened with the original Time, Inc. and Warner Communications "merger." Time bought Warner so that Steve Ross could ring out the synergy and ring out profits on both sides of the combined company. Mr. Amellio (sic) purchased NeXT to quickly replace MacOS after Apple failed to bring out their next generation OS.
"All it takes is them retaining the rights to the Java (TM) name, ala TeX. I.e. you can't call it Java (TM) if it's not compatible."
How do you figure? The Open Group owns the name "Unix" and has somewhat frothed at the mouth over Apple claiming in its P.R. that OS X is "built from Unix" when it is (technically) built from FreeBSD. Yet Apple still continues to market OS X that way. The Feds didn't prevents Microsoft from claiming their Java client was "Java" despite Sun's protestations to the contrary.
"I wonder if sun will accept comments on their system from those who write linux and BSD?"
:)
Why wouldn't they? They do have those licenses from SCO to shield them from violating SCO's alleged intellectual property...
"so your gonna be an ipod when apple supports ogg?"
Har de har har, laugh at my expense over a typo. Then again, I guess that typo is better than typing "bi" in that argument. Of course, that might mean that you like AAC AND OGG...
"This sort of reminds me of plastic surgeons who claim silicone breast implants have the same look and feel as the real deal."
:)
Microsoft Boobs XP. Specify if you want the Home User Edition (Ballmer) or Pro (Gates) editions. You also get to select if you want them with one lump or two... Granted, since neither individuals mentioned have probably ever handled the real thing before, why would you trust them? The same can be said of similar offerings from Apple, but at least with them, they haven't handled the real thing before because it was a lifestyle choice, not a lack of opportunity.
"When cool people start saying "Levis are dead - I can buy jeans for 1/5 the price at Target" then maybe, just maybe, Apple should start to worry...."
Cool people haven't worn Levis in well over a decade. If you are still wearing them, you might as well be wearing Bugle Boy or Hammer harem pants. I guess you didn't get the memo but then again, it was restricted just to cool people.
"That's just the way it is. I want my open-source, patent-free, DRM-free codec."
Instead of bitching about the lack of OGG support on Slashdot where it won't help matters, why don't you email Apple and tell them that you would be an iPod if they'd ship with OGG support? That would be the more constructive argument to make. Here, I'll even help you out and provide the proper link to submit your comment:
http://www.apple.com/feedback/ipod.html
Happy codec hunting!
Yusuf Mehdi, a Microsoft VP, is quoted as saying that the player will give customers more choices than Apple."
How exactly is a Microsoft portable MP3 player going to give more choice to consumers than an iPod? Is he referencing that the end user can use all of the other commercial download services that are in competition with Apple's iTunes? (you know, all the ones that deal in WMA, and yes, I said "deal"). In that case, the "choice" is like Henry Ford saying the consumer could have his Model T "in any color, as long as it is black." I'm sorry, but unless the Microsoft player supports Ogg and "unencrypted" AAC, then again, its the illusion of choice on the part of Microsoft. In other words, more of the smoke and mirrors routine from Redmond. Considering this product will be another expense bankrolled by the ill-gotten gains of their operating system (and office applications) monopoly, they should (IMHO) instead invest the money spent on this ill-conceived project on further securing their bread-and-butter offerings. Or buyout Rockstar Games and break the exclusive PS2/3 contract they have for the next GTA title so the Xbox Next has a fighting chance against the PS3.
Regardless, I will lay down dollars or euros that Microsoft will include an (unencrypted) AAC to WMA conversion program, to answer Apple's tit-for-tat from last month's announcement. Just like I will bet green that Apple will be the first computer manufacturer to ship machines with Blue Ray drives as a way of spiting the DVD Forum for supporting WMP9 as the compression scheme for HD-DVD.
"Basing it on Linux or BSD allows them to rely on others for those services. The only "feature" is that the device is cheaper to the consumer."
:0
'Cept SCO mouthed off that they wanted a $75 licensing fee for all embedded Linux devices (per unit). No word on if they took out a licensing agreement with Trolltech, the leading supplier of embedded Linux systems and (like SCO) also owned by the Canopy Group. Of course, we probably won't have to worry about them in another month if IBM is granted the summary judgment they asked for...
"That's what they get for not using a production ready operating system. Why would anyone choose Linux when they can use Windows CE?"
The NSA uses Linux. It is more than production ready. I've never modified my Xbox, but it does crash from time to time. My TiVo has not. And let us not forget that Microsoft has used its OS in a PVR before, their very own UltimateTV, which failed in the face of TiVo.
"These people like makers of Roku, in my opinion, lacks a business minded person on their board of directors, at least one very good example of this kind. Idea is good but marketing it half-baked is not going to do this company any favor."
It should be noted that the founders of Roku created the ReplayTV. You know, Replay. The DVR unit that has bankrupted two former holding companies of the technology and despite being on the market as long as TiVo, has only secured 100,000 + users.
"And this is news how? I won't even look at this unless it supports Ogg-Vorbis and Bob's crazy obscure audio format"
Other Roku hardware streams AAC files, unlike my TiVo.
AAC is obviously not as widespread as MP3s, but it isn't obscure.
"This is one place I will give props to the military. They require Quality Assurance and testing by the user before they will sign off on something."
:0
Hold on there a sec. Quality Assurance gave our soldiers in 'Nam the jamming problems of the M-16. Granted, that was because they used an inferior powder through a corrupt contract, but still! And in recent times, the military spent a fortune on developing the Sargeant York tank that didn't work, the V-22, the B-1's stealth scheme that doesn't foil (early) post WWII Soviet radar, the Patriot missles that didn't work as advertised (well, in the first Persian Gulf War), etc. etc. etc. Although I will commend the military for ditching Windows, and that America's Army game is pretty sweet...
"These people need to understand, Linux is NOT a feature! In a device like this, the OS (whatever it is) should be as transparent to the user as possible."
I'd have to disagree on this point as a TiVo owner. TiVo implements upgrades to their OS every once in awhile, and that includes when patches and new driver updates for Linux are made available. Thus indirectly to the user, Linux is a feature of the TiVo platform.
"Dear lintard,Canada doesn't have the "DMCA" nor the DCMA"
Dear imbletard,
The posting I was responding to concerned an article from USA Today and it had nothing to do with Canada. So before you pipe in your $0.02 Canadian, try reading the posts first. And how about getting a Slashdot account instead of using an anonymous coward login? Thanks.