You are comparing apples and oranges here. The latest round of worms and trojan horses that are moving thru email don't do anything that needs root permissions. It would be quite easy to write a Linux program that would look thru the users mailbox, get a bunch of email address, and send a copy of itself to all of those users. Then, just for kicks, it could do a "find" in the users home directory for all.c,.h,.cpp, files etc. and rm them.
Any system where you implicitly trust unknown users on the internet to send you non-malicious programs is inherently flawed. The reason I will never be hit by an email virus is that my email reader can't spawn other processes on behalf of my email messages. Imagine if each user got to include an X-pager line to tell me to use emacs, or less, or more (or rm -fr ~) to read the email!!
Even if such a virus were to attack and delete all my files, it would be a short walk down the hall to ask our sysadmin to restore my directory from backup files. I'd be bitter about the few day's work I'd lost, but otherwise OK. I realize this doesn't translate to home users that well.
They can stop releasing future changes under the GPL
Can they really do this? I thought the GPL was written to keep free software free. If Kaffe version X is under GPL, then nobody, including the major authors should be able to make version X+1 closed. This would be like me taking the Emacs sources, adding in a handfull of features and then releasing a binary-only version of my Emacs.
text parsing is text parsing whether you are on NT or Unix
Not so fast! A line of text on UNIX ends with a CR, while in the M$ world it is CR + LF. When you use your perl chop() function, will it work on M$ text? also, I have noticed that unlike UNIX programs, windows programs have output that is difficult to parse, assuming that there is a text version of the utility to begin with. Something like expect might be handy.
Imagine all MSWord users in the state of California suddenly having their software nixed, or having every Oracle database in the Pentagon frozen due to "license violation".
I say let them do it, its their foot they are aiming at. M$ may do this but you'll never see Oracle do it.
In a critical failure situation, where a machine dies over the weekend, it is in Oracle's best interests for you to be able to set up on another system on your own and make them look good, rather than telling thousands or tens of thousands of users that the Oracle database is down on Monday. If this means that there is a chance you will be running two copies of the software on one license during the transition, I think they'd take that chance rather than change losing the contract.
The problem I have with this example is that there is nothing physically significant about a time traveling version of me going back in time and killing a former me. It could just as easily be that I travel back in time, sneak into my apartment and spill a glass of water. The old me comes home, has to clean up the spill, making me late to work and missing an invite to lunch where I would have met someone who would help me develop my ideas for time travel.
In other words, as soon as I travel back in time, I have changed something. No matter how small, its effect will grow over time.
If you travel back in time and then come back to the time you left, things will be different.
And this begs the question 10% of what? Of the C source, of the assembly code it produces, or the machine code?
If I write a lex/yacc parser, is my contribution counted by the lines of lex/yacc code I write, or the number of C source lines that they produce?
If I write it in lisp and each paren gets its own line, then you reformat my code so each page fits on one line, has my contribution changed? This restriction sounds stupid and totally unenforcable.
Linux IS battery-friendly. On Tecre520 it lasts at least half an hour longer than Win95 with "cooling" software, and more than hour longer than plain win95.
Perhaps if the computer was given control over the clock speed. Most "green" computers use keyboard or mouse activity as a measure of system activity, so even if you are doing work and the load average is above 1, the system will still switch to the lower clock speed. If the OS could control the clock speed based on the load average and remaining battery power, that would be cool!
What about compatability with work systems? It's nice to be using two very compatible systems at home/work.
Perhaps he's waiting two years so that Linux will be the standard:) Applix, Corel and Star Office could port to the new machine, and you know the free software will be ported. If M$ is forced to open it file formats, there will be no compatibility issue.
I think VA Research even used the "Where do you want to go tomorrow" slogan at one point in a Linux Journal ad. Perhaps this group should receive some award for being trite, but I doubt they will be sued over it, especially in Germany.
Now how about an ad during the Superbowl where a penguin is running around New York and meets a chiuaua and says "Yo quiero Linux!"
Heh - nice play on US foreign policy
on
Linux on Dilbert
·
· Score: 1
How many plagues have we had? How many worldwide floods and famines have we had? If you think about it, crediting the peacekeeper missiles with averting nuclear war is just as specious.
How about this policy. Everyone by default is behind a firewall. This will satisfy many of the students who only want to browse the web. Students who want to have their box on the other side of the firewall have to ask to have this done, and then have to attend a monthly security meeting, or subscribe to a local security mailing list. If they install the patches and secure their system, good for them. If not, they should have stayed on the other side of the firewall.
You could even have the leader of the security meeting or mailing list be a student work/study position, or tie this in with the student sysadmin staff.
I don't know about the rest of you, but just looking at this thing makes my knuckles hurt. I think it would be better if the hands were more open (think drumming your fingers on a table).
Many distributions are based on RPM to manage their installed software. RedHat _GAVE_ this away and doesn't require royalties for its use. It may give them jollies to see how many people are making use of their software, but isn't that what free software is all about? When was the last time that M$ gave anything away without an ulterior motive to destroy competition? One could argue that by giving away RPM, RedHat actually increased competition.
The problem I had with the book is that the code examples contain many errors:
o "gtk-config -libs" instead of "gtk-config --libs"
o using the callback function destroy() without defining it
Granted, I was able to figure these out, but come on. These weren't code fragments, they were complete programs, couldn't somebody have taken the time to try compiling them before comitting to paper?
Expensive.. and no sound
on
Mini Board PC
·
· Score: 1
Too bad it doesn't have built in sound or you could convert old boom boxes to MP-3 jukeboxes.
Writing a compiler from the ground up may have academic utility, but I don't think it makes a better compiler. Where are they going to get the poeple to test a buggy compiler when everyone else is using GCC? And you can't just use egcs because it was based on GCC. ARRHGH The GPL may be a bit restrictive and based on an extreme philosophy, but rewriting almost 10% of the applications just so you can say there's no GNU software on the system is much worse. If its not broken, don't fix it.
Who knew it was so easy to be a journalist?
on
Linux on CNN
·
· Score: 1
It seems like anyone who knew enough about Linux to write a decent article would know enough to get a better paying job as a sysadmin or programmer. This sometimes goes for technical documentation and Q/A departments too. If you want to read good technology articles from the "mainstream" press, check out The Economist.
Slashdot Mirror
My vote is for Adam Sandler. I can just immagine him wielding a light saber with that goofy look on his face.
Any system where you implicitly trust unknown users on the internet to send you non-malicious programs is inherently flawed. The reason I will never be hit by an email virus is that my email reader can't spawn other processes on behalf of my email messages. Imagine if each user got to include an X-pager line to tell me to use emacs, or less, or more (or rm -fr ~) to read the email!!
Even if such a virus were to attack and delete all my files, it would be a short walk down the hall to ask our sysadmin to restore my directory from backup files. I'd be bitter about the few day's work I'd lost, but otherwise OK. I realize this doesn't translate to home users that well.
Can they really do this? I thought the GPL was written to keep free software free. If Kaffe version X is under GPL, then nobody, including the major authors should be able to make version X+1 closed. This would be like me taking the Emacs sources, adding in a handfull of features and then releasing a binary-only version of my Emacs.
Not so fast! A line of text on UNIX ends with a CR, while in the M$ world it is CR + LF. When you use your perl chop() function, will it work on M$ text? also, I have noticed that unlike UNIX programs, windows programs have output that is difficult to parse, assuming that there is a text version of the utility to begin with. Something like expect might be handy.
Imagine all MSWord users in the state of California suddenly having their software nixed,
or having every Oracle database in the Pentagon frozen due to "license violation".
I say let them do it, its their foot they are aiming at. M$ may do this but you'll never see Oracle do it.
In a critical failure situation, where a machine dies over the weekend, it is in Oracle's best interests for you to be able to set up on another system on your own and make them look good, rather than telling thousands or tens of thousands of users that the Oracle database is down on Monday. If this means that there is a chance you will be running two copies of the software on one license during the transition, I think they'd take that chance rather than change losing the contract.
In other words, as soon as I travel back in time, I have changed something. No matter how small, its effect will grow over time.
If you travel back in time and then come back to the time you left, things will be different.
Or ATM machine, or the LaBrea Tar Pits. :)
If I write a lex/yacc parser, is my contribution counted by the lines of lex/yacc code I write, or the number of C source lines that they produce?
If I write it in lisp and each paren gets its own line, then you reformat my code so each page fits on one line, has my contribution changed? This restriction sounds stupid and totally unenforcable.
Perhaps if the computer was given control over the clock speed. Most "green" computers use keyboard or mouse activity as a measure of system activity, so even if you are doing work and the load average is above 1, the system will still switch to the lower clock speed. If the OS could control the clock speed based on the load average and remaining battery power, that would be cool!
Perhaps he's waiting two years so that Linux will be the standard :) Applix, Corel and Star Office could port to the new machine, and you know the free software will be ported. If M$ is forced to open it file formats, there will be no compatibility issue.
% gcc foo.c -o foo
This compile is brought to you by Bud Light.
When you're tired of coging, nothing beats a Bud.
I think VA Research even used the "Where do you want to go tomorrow" slogan at one point in a Linux Journal ad. Perhaps this group should receive some award for being trite, but I doubt they will be sued over it, especially in Germany.
Now how about an ad during the Superbowl where a penguin is running around New York and meets a chiuaua and says "Yo quiero Linux!"
Or just FUD missiles (FUD rhymes with SCUD) :)
How many plagues have we had? How many worldwide floods and famines have we had? If you think about it, crediting the peacekeeper missiles with averting nuclear war is just as specious.
How about this policy. Everyone by default is behind a firewall. This will satisfy many of the students who only want to browse the web. Students who want to have their box on the other side of the firewall have to ask to have this done, and then have to attend a monthly security meeting, or subscribe to a local security mailing list. If they install the patches and secure their system, good for them. If not, they should have stayed on the other side of the firewall.
You could even have the leader of the security meeting or mailing list be a student work/study position, or tie this in with the student sysadmin staff.
I don't know about the rest of you, but just looking at this thing makes my knuckles hurt. I think it would be better if the hands were more open (think drumming your fingers on a table).
Case in point - RPM
Many distributions are based on RPM to manage their installed software. RedHat _GAVE_ this away and doesn't require royalties for its use. It may give them jollies to see how many people are making use of their software, but isn't that what free software is all about? When was the last time that M$ gave anything away without an ulterior motive to destroy competition? One could argue that by giving away RPM, RedHat actually increased competition.
The problem I had with the book is that the code examples contain many errors:
o "gtk-config -libs" instead of "gtk-config --libs"
o using the callback function destroy() without defining it
Granted, I was able to figure these out, but come on. These weren't code fragments, they were complete programs, couldn't somebody have taken the time to try compiling them before comitting to paper?
Too bad it doesn't have built in sound or you could convert old boom boxes to MP-3 jukeboxes.
This could also be a reference to Moby Dick, or to a certain coffee shop. Just what we need, another Starbucks !@#$#@E@#.
Writing a compiler from the ground up may have academic utility, but I don't think it makes a better compiler. Where are they going to get the poeple to test a buggy compiler when everyone else is using GCC? And you can't just use egcs because it was based on GCC. ARRHGH The GPL may be a bit restrictive and based on an extreme philosophy, but rewriting almost 10% of the applications just so you can say there's no GNU software on the system is much worse. If its not broken, don't fix it.
It seems like anyone who knew enough about Linux to write a decent article would know enough to get a better paying job as a sysadmin or programmer. This sometimes goes for technical documentation and Q/A departments too. If you want to read good technology articles from the "mainstream" press, check out The Economist.
How about a form to perform a lookup on FOLDOC (the Free OnLine Dictionary of Computing)
oops, wrong article.
The sad thing is that Al Gore is (or is spun as) one of the more technology savvy politicians. Rob for president anyone? /. the vote.