As we all know, the pornography industry will likely be the first to capitalize on such new technologies. I know it is difficult for the bearded terminal hacker set to associate with such businesses (or businesses in general), but wouldn't it help the Open source user base to help develop such technologies? I know that there has been some work in the Redhat labs on interactivity in multi-user adult situations, however I'm not sure of the extent to which other Linux users and developers are involved. Perhaps an open source project on new video codecs that generate larger video files that can take advantage of the new medium are in order.
Of course, you must always pay the piper, so it may be in our best interests to help the porn industry with this new media format.
And how, pray tell, are they going to use those admin-accessible tracing utilities when there are obvious problems with terminal i/o speed on solaris consoles?
The contest was over before it began, and any true bearded terminal hacker would tell you as such. Even with Solaris's stack protection and pipe extraction techniques to improve security, the Linux kernel tends to shine in performance comparisons. What I would like to see however, is a detailed analysis of how much the Sun filesystem drivers tendency to examine inodes twice per operation affects this. It could be an easy fix.
It's obvious from this that Adobe is rolling out new formats in an effort to minimize the impact the GIMP is having on the bottom dollar of the Adobe company. With more and more features being added by the tireless bearded terminal hackers at SuSE to the Gimp, it's a wonder they haven't done something like this earlier. Perhaps it can be implemented in The GIMP soon. One can only wonder what Adobe's partners in Redhat are thinking at the moment.
You must always pay the piper, so now would be a good time to send the money you would be spending on Photoshop (or CDRs to burn a copy) to the fine bearded terminal hackers that crank out new feature for The Gimp. Swirl filters don't code themselves, gentlemen.
Perhaps this is Intel's first steps toward their own secure implementation of the wireless WEP protection. As any bearded terminal hacker knows, WEP (Wireless Encryption Protocol) is insecure in it's use of shifting between key frames, so perhaps Intel has come up with a solution for this that is more secure than the hacks that Cisco and Lucent have put into place so far.
With the upcoming LookingGlass failing on many hardware setups, it's only natural that they should look for a license that would allow them to capitalize on the efforts of the Bearded Terminal Hackers the oopen source movement provides.
Suppose I'd never seen a car before, and one cruised past. Could I make one in my spare time? No.
And why, pray tell, not? The cost of entry to such a hobby is likely higher than software development, but there's no reason the Junkyard wars set can't do this, just maybe not the bearded terminal hackers.
If the the automobile were still under patent control, and you created one in a different manner, with the same end result, then you would still be in violation.
So you admit you really don't have any experience with this and don't understand the points I put forth? I applaud you for that, most posters on slashdot wouldn't follow up with that. Thanks.
And how, pray tell, is a musical riff any different from a specific combination of gears/pullies to achieve a purpose? What is it about a digital set of computer bytes put together in sequence to fulfill a purpose that sets it apart from combining other basic building blocks into a patentable solution?
Maybe we should allow riffpatentes too!
An Example for us All
on
Ceefax Turns 30
·
· Score: 1, Informative
This is a good example of how the BBC is on the forefront of journalistic technology compared to the majority of US news services. One can only hope that one day soon, the FoxNEWs of the US journalism "scene" will wake up and smell the coffee of pure information display in an easy and nonobtrusively readable manner.
The difference is the degree of hassle to which such "CLUED" software developers must go through. Is it really that difficult to work around? Is it really that difficult to make the money we all so crave without having to step on the ideas of others? The problem with software engineers from the bearded terminal hacker set is that they assume that, even without the blessing of the originator, that building upon the work of others without paying the piper is perfectly acceptable.
Certainly it can be argued that software code source instructions is not a result of creative, abstract, thought processes, in any other way than a steam engine, girdle, or anything else patentable could be considered.
I'm not sure why the bearded-terminal-hacker-set seem to think that the creation of software is in any way more of an artform than any other kind of invention. What would you say to the man who invented the Lava Lamp? Would you be able to look him in the eye?
Note the number of "RL activity... but on the Internet!" patents awarded.
And not too many years ago it would have been "Everyday activity... but with a steam engine!". None of us would claim that the automobile patent is unjust.
So does anybody else think that it's time for software engineers to step up to the plate and take a serious look at software patents? I believe that if you were to look at the sort of things that are patented in software and non-software fields, you'd see that a similar level of complexity/obviousness is involved. What harm is there in allowing someone who is clever enough to come up with something new, that other people can use, to profit from his or her discovery? We can only stay bearded terminal hackers for so long before we have to wake up, smell the koffee, and realize that our work has real value for society. Certainly software patents such as the ones on the rpm binary formats are beneficial to the companies and individuals who own them. Helping the people who make their living on IT and software engineering can help the industry as a whole.
I'm not sure if you can grep this through your pipes or not, but if you take a step back from your editors/compilers/shells for a while, it starts to make sense.
Great news for Bearded Terminal Hackers
on
iMac G5 Porn Roundup
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The new IMac presents a wonderful new opportunity for those of us stuck on the old terminal hacking mode of operation to get with the program. This article even shows that the innards of this machine can be beautiful and may win some appreciation among the Linux and GNU crowd. Despite some of the issues with sound, hopefully this will result in the development of more software for the currently undersupported Mac X OS.
If you or I were to walk into a bank with a note that said "I have a gun." and walked away with a few $K, once caught we'd be in jail longer than the white collar criminals that steal tens or hundreds of millions of dollars.
If we (in the US) are even allowed to own guns by the time we get one of those urges >:(
Seriously, can't the tech industry rise above this Enron-ish nonsense? Whatever happened to the old days of being ethical and honest with regard to your responsibilities to the consumer. You would think that an industry with roots in the old hacker movement that this would not be as big of an issue as in the world of business as a whole. With the problems with accounting at SCO, Adobe, Redhat, Microsoft, and now this, we should take a long hard look at what's going on now.
What will be interesting to see if Google will implement the improvements to the algorithm. This is, of course, a given, so long as the researchers haven't gone for a patent, and it really has the a 5x speedup. The only questions are matters of what additional hardware would be needed, and how much development effort it will take to integrate it. I doubt Google will simply ignore the research.
What will really be interesting to see, is if they decide to use it in the way the researchers recommended, bringing the power of ranking down to individual users with preferences. On one hand, they can boost performance and cut costs and have a little more green in their pockets from ads. On the other, they can maintain the sort of "geek cred" they've had up to this point, adding interesting features here and there, and take it the next mile by really adding something nice and useful.
Also, for bonus points, will they see personalization as a money making opportunity, selling personal information and/or aggregated preferences?
With, say, a 10 ms ping to your wireless router, and an optimistic figure of 30,000 routers coast to coast (ripped from another post doing some math) to make the connection, you're going to have latency of 300 seconds on that ping.
TTL on an IP packet is only 255 seconds, right? I realize this isn't usually done as a function of seconds in practice, rather as a decrement per hop, but in this situation, that's rather worse, isn't it?
The funny thing is, the more you change something to be harder to counterfeit, the easier it gets. With bills like this changing so much, you can get an awful lot wrong before a lot of untrained people will notice. There's just not the same familiarity with what it's supposed to look like.
So a half-assed attempt, plus perhaps a little social engineering or selection of a victim, and things have gotten a lot easier for a while at least.
Ever tried dragging the IE window around during a windows update scan?
Doesn't seem to have any problems on my machine with that... perhaps your system isn't quite up to par for XP, or you upgraded your video drivers to UNSTABLE and UNSIGNED versions so you could get a frame per second extra playing as the orcas or whatever in Warcraft III.
You see, this is yet another opportunity that I'm sure the open source community will miss out on. Letting Transmeta pick up and move to Microsoft and soon this are both events that, if open source does make it's mark on history, will be remembered as wasted chances.
This might be a good time for the bearded terminal hackers out there to get their heads out of the sand waiting for an X Windows driver for electronic paper devices, and start changing the way they think about computing in these contexts.
GUIs must change for the medium. You don't want to have to edit your.xinitrc to decide what loads up on a piece of paper. Apple, I'm sure, will be all over this, which is unfortunate, considering the hardware limitations.
So are you going to let this one slip through your fingers too?
I appreciate your response, but I think you're taking what I said at too much of a kneejerk reaction. I never said the operating system was bad, nor the support. Those are credits I gave to Apple in my post, and I think that it speaks for itself that there are still a handful of diehard Apple users because of these reasons, despite the hardware issues.
Darwin is a token attempt at putting an open source face on, at best, and at worse (and likely), is an attempt to get some free code from the community to roll into their own projects. When there are more than a couple of dozen people using Darwin on a daily basis as a desktop or production server, then call me back.
I have no problem with people who think the Apple OS is better; I started the thread talking about the hardware. If the Apple OS were ported to x86, I'm sure we could have the best of both worlds.
And I certainly respect your opinion more than the one I replied to who dismissed XP after not even trying it. You're obviously one of the good ones.
Slashdot Mirror
As we all know, the pornography industry will likely be the first to capitalize on such new technologies. I know it is difficult for the bearded terminal hacker set to associate with such businesses (or businesses in general), but wouldn't it help the Open source user base to help develop such technologies? I know that there has been some work in the Redhat labs on interactivity in multi-user adult situations, however I'm not sure of the extent to which other Linux users and developers are involved. Perhaps an open source project on new video codecs that generate larger video files that can take advantage of the new medium are in order.
Of course, you must always pay the piper, so it may be in our best interests to help the porn industry with this new media format.
And how, pray tell, are they going to use those admin-accessible tracing utilities when there are obvious problems with terminal i/o speed on solaris consoles?
The contest was over before it began, and any true bearded terminal hacker would tell you as such. Even with Solaris's stack protection and pipe extraction techniques to improve security, the Linux kernel tends to shine in performance comparisons. What I would like to see however, is a detailed analysis of how much the Sun filesystem drivers tendency to examine inodes twice per operation affects this. It could be an easy fix.
It's obvious from this that Adobe is rolling out new formats in an effort to minimize the impact the GIMP is having on the bottom dollar of the Adobe company. With more and more features being added by the tireless bearded terminal hackers at SuSE to the Gimp, it's a wonder they haven't done something like this earlier. Perhaps it can be implemented in The GIMP soon. One can only wonder what Adobe's partners in Redhat are thinking at the moment.
You must always pay the piper, so now would be a good time to send the money you would be spending on Photoshop (or CDRs to burn a copy) to the fine bearded terminal hackers that crank out new feature for The Gimp. Swirl filters don't code themselves, gentlemen.
Perhaps this is Intel's first steps toward their own secure implementation of the wireless WEP protection. As any bearded terminal hacker knows, WEP (Wireless Encryption Protocol) is insecure in it's use of shifting between key frames, so perhaps Intel has come up with a solution for this that is more secure than the hacks that Cisco and Lucent have put into place so far.
With the upcoming LookingGlass failing on many hardware setups, it's only natural that they should look for a license that would allow them to capitalize on the efforts of the Bearded Terminal Hackers the oopen source movement provides.
Now that was uncalled for.
Suppose I'd never seen a car before, and one cruised past. Could I make one in my spare time? No.
And why, pray tell, not? The cost of entry to such a hobby is likely higher than software development, but there's no reason the Junkyard wars set can't do this, just maybe not the bearded terminal hackers.
If the the automobile were still under patent control, and you created one in a different manner, with the same end result, then you would still be in violation.
So you admit you really don't have any experience with this and don't understand the points I put forth? I applaud you for that, most posters on slashdot wouldn't follow up with that. Thanks.
And how, pray tell, is a musical riff any different from a specific combination of gears/pullies to achieve a purpose? What is it about a digital set of computer bytes put together in sequence to fulfill a purpose that sets it apart from combining other basic building blocks into a patentable solution?
Maybe we should allow riffpatentes too!
This is a good example of how the BBC is on the forefront of journalistic technology compared to the majority of US news services. One can only hope that one day soon, the FoxNEWs of the US journalism "scene" will wake up and smell the coffee of pure information display in an easy and nonobtrusively readable manner.
The difference is the degree of hassle to which such "CLUED" software developers must go through. Is it really that difficult to work around? Is it really that difficult to make the money we all so crave without having to step on the ideas of others? The problem with software engineers from the bearded terminal hacker set is that they assume that, even without the blessing of the originator, that building upon the work of others without paying the piper is perfectly acceptable.
you must ALWASY pay the piper
Certainly it can be argued that software code source instructions is not a result of creative, abstract, thought processes, in any other way than a steam engine, girdle, or anything else patentable could be considered.
I'm not sure why the bearded-terminal-hacker-set seem to think that the creation of software is in any way more of an artform than any other kind of invention. What would you say to the man who invented the Lava Lamp? Would you be able to look him in the eye?
Note the number of "RL activity... but on the Internet!" patents awarded.
And not too many years ago it would have been "Everyday activity... but with a steam engine!". None of us would claim that the automobile patent is unjust.
So does anybody else think that it's time for software engineers to step up to the plate and take a serious look at software patents? I believe that if you were to look at the sort of things that are patented in software and non-software fields, you'd see that a similar level of complexity/obviousness is involved. What harm is there in allowing someone who is clever enough to come up with something new, that other people can use, to profit from his or her discovery? We can only stay bearded terminal hackers for so long before we have to wake up, smell the koffee, and realize that our work has real value for society. Certainly software patents such as the ones on the rpm binary formats are beneficial to the companies and individuals who own them. Helping the people who make their living on IT and software engineering can help the industry as a whole. I'm not sure if you can grep this through your pipes or not, but if you take a step back from your editors/compilers/shells for a while, it starts to make sense.
The new IMac presents a wonderful new opportunity for those of us stuck on the old terminal hacking mode of operation to get with the program. This article even shows that the innards of this machine can be beautiful and may win some appreciation among the Linux and GNU crowd. Despite some of the issues with sound, hopefully this will result in the development of more software for the currently undersupported Mac X OS.
If you or I were to walk into a bank with a note that said "I have a gun." and walked away with a few $K, once caught we'd be in jail longer than the white collar criminals that steal tens or hundreds of millions of dollars.
If we (in the US) are even allowed to own guns by the time we get one of those urges >:(
Seriously, can't the tech industry rise above this Enron-ish nonsense? Whatever happened to the old days of being ethical and honest with regard to your responsibilities to the consumer. You would think that an industry with roots in the old hacker movement that this would not be as big of an issue as in the world of business as a whole. With the problems with accounting at SCO, Adobe, Redhat, Microsoft, and now this, we should take a long hard look at what's going on now.
What will be interesting to see if Google will implement the improvements to the algorithm. This is, of course, a given, so long as the researchers haven't gone for a patent, and it really has the a 5x speedup. The only questions are matters of what additional hardware would be needed, and how much development effort it will take to integrate it. I doubt Google will simply ignore the research.
What will really be interesting to see, is if they decide to use it in the way the researchers recommended, bringing the power of ranking down to individual users with preferences. On one hand, they can boost performance and cut costs and have a little more green in their pockets from ads. On the other, they can maintain the sort of "geek cred" they've had up to this point, adding interesting features here and there, and take it the next mile by really adding something nice and useful.
Also, for bonus points, will they see personalization as a money making opportunity, selling personal information and/or aggregated preferences?
With, say, a 10 ms ping to your wireless router, and an optimistic figure of 30,000 routers coast to coast (ripped from another post doing some math) to make the connection, you're going to have latency of 300 seconds on that ping.
TTL on an IP packet is only 255 seconds, right? I realize this isn't usually done as a function of seconds in practice, rather as a decrement per hop, but in this situation, that's rather worse, isn't it?
The funny thing is, the more you change something to be harder to counterfeit, the easier it gets. With bills like this changing so much, you can get an awful lot wrong before a lot of untrained people will notice. There's just not the same familiarity with what it's supposed to look like.
So a half-assed attempt, plus perhaps a little social engineering or selection of a victim, and things have gotten a lot easier for a while at least.
Ever tried dragging the IE window around during a windows update scan?
Doesn't seem to have any problems on my machine with that... perhaps your system isn't quite up to par for XP, or you upgraded your video drivers to UNSTABLE and UNSIGNED versions so you could get a frame per second extra playing as the orcas or whatever in Warcraft III.
You see, this is yet another opportunity that I'm sure the open source community will miss out on. Letting Transmeta pick up and move to Microsoft and soon this are both events that, if open source does make it's mark on history, will be remembered as wasted chances.
This might be a good time for the bearded terminal hackers out there to get their heads out of the sand waiting for an X Windows driver for electronic paper devices, and start changing the way they think about computing in these contexts.
GUIs must change for the medium. You don't want to have to edit your .xinitrc to decide what loads up on a piece of paper. Apple, I'm sure, will be all over this, which is unfortunate, considering the hardware limitations.
So are you going to let this one slip through your fingers too?
I appreciate your response, but I think you're taking what I said at too much of a kneejerk reaction. I never said the operating system was bad, nor the support. Those are credits I gave to Apple in my post, and I think that it speaks for itself that there are still a handful of diehard Apple users because of these reasons, despite the hardware issues.
Darwin is a token attempt at putting an open source face on, at best, and at worse (and likely), is an attempt to get some free code from the community to roll into their own projects. When there are more than a couple of dozen people using Darwin on a daily basis as a desktop or production server, then call me back.
Thank you for the correction.
I have no problem with people who think the Apple OS is better; I started the thread talking about the hardware. If the Apple OS were ported to x86, I'm sure we could have the best of both worlds.
And I certainly respect your opinion more than the one I replied to who dismissed XP after not even trying it. You're obviously one of the good ones.