It's beyond me how these things get moderated up, really it is. Come on, for encryption to work, you have to have a key. Where would you store the key? In the keyboard? The keyboard sends key codes, and these say *exactly* what keys were pressed.
So you'd need a "smart" keyboard to do that -- and even that won't work, if the put the tap between the smart part and the keys. Unless you think a person would keep the key in his head, and, say, use the key to the right of the key he intends to.
Well, that would make it harder for the white hat then for the black hat.
The article MainFunction.com points at is from
the 8th International Python Conference. As someone who personally knows the teacher involved, and talked to him a lot about that, let me just mention that he's using Linux to teach Python.
In fact, part of the work his students are doing is in Zope (http://www.zope.org). So, Microsoft is essentially pointing to an article by a teacher who believes in 100% open source. They're doing our work for us!
Yes, but technology is on our side. What should we do? Use technology to break the law! Yes, I am preaching for breaking the law -- the law is old and outdated. Use FreeNet, use Gnutella, use all those technologies which allow us to bypass the law and get or will. The "music pirates" are the natural ally of the free software community: we both battle copyright law wherever we can. If we make that alliance, the free software community wll win because it will have a much larger installed base (how about an easy to use GNU/Linux distribution which comes installed with FreeNet?) and the music sharers will win because there will be more free music. And, eventually, RIAA will lose and so artists will win, because fans will be able to pay artists directly.
Theft according to whom? Some 200-years old, irrelevant law, only there because big business control government? Yes. If you think it's illegal -- you're right. So was the boston tea party. So was the Greek Slaves revlot in ancient Greece. So? If you think the law is moral, then do not download music. If you think the law is wrong, then maybe it is high time for civil rebellion. You might go to jail -- but then again, you may just change society.
Yes, we're crooks. Yes, we're doing illegal things. And no, I don't have a fscking problem with that. The laws are evil. The system is evil. It is the *right* and *duty* of the individual to oppose immoral use of government power, even when it means breaking the law. That's what civil rebellion is all about -- and the fact is, the people who founded America, or Israel, were criminals in the legal systems in which they operatred. But they won, and so they are heros in retrospect. And so will we, the anonymous slashdotters with RMS to lead us, be viewed as heros: the people who set information free.
Re:It's just that fewer girls are religions loons
on
Want More Geek Chicks?
·
· Score: 1
Of course Bjarne should be shot on site -- any one who tries to put OOP as assembler macros should be shot on site.
I'm kind of sad that you didn't mention Python (http://www.python.org) as an OO language. One advantage of Python is that you can actually *do* things with it.
__import__('SimpleHTTPServer').test()-ly y'rs. (if you're wondering, that's an HTTP server in standard Python. Yes. That's it.)
Re:Design of Mozilla must address fears of busines
on
Mozilla Status Update
·
· Score: 1
Well, considering I can even (today) use lynx, and set the browser string to "Mozilla 5.0", well, you can't. I'm not even talking about wget, Python's httplib or Perl's libwww or Tcl's (whatever) or Guile's (something). Anyone with fourth a brain can get into any site he wants, if that site filters by broswer string.
Of course, simply stating you only *support* some versions of broswers (as in, our tech-support won't talk to clients with other browsers) is just too easy, isn't it?
ObMozilla: wonderful! Finally, the Free Software world is managing to get a decent, modern broswer. I'll continue to use lynx myself.
Outdated modes? What exactly outdated the command/command-line/text mode? Alt and Ctrl were *always* available. On the contrary, now that computers are much faster then humans, having an editor which is fast to use (never move the fingers away from the keyboard) is a much, much bigger advantage.
BTW: You do know you don't need Motif for NEdit? Lesstif would do quite nicely, thank you very much.
Linux is a good OS: I run it myself, and it's handling what it's supposed to handle just fine. However, there are a lot of problem with monolithic systems, which most Unices, and Linux, are: for one thing, they scale very badly to SMP, since each processor must run it's own OS. Running a microkernel is much lighter, and the server processes could just use whatever processor is available.
Another thing is that as module as linux tries, and largely succeeds in being, it is still hard to debug, and replace parts. It is doubly true on a true multi-user system, where you have to be root to do anything at all, so normal users can't do anything. Just consider: why do I need root to make ftp.gnu.org seem like a local fs to me?
So Hurd has a lot of potential. And besides, it's always fun to work on an OS which isn't working...
In the words of someone we all admire: ``When men were men, and wrote their own device drivers''.
(And of course, Linux and Hurd aren't competitors in the same way, say, Netscape and MS are (or were): the Hurd team freely copies code from Linux when it helps, and I do hope that one day Linus will "cut costs" by copying from Hurd. This is the essence of free software, and this is why free software will win)
Well, it's true that the Linux community does not realize how much they have, but for other reasons: for one thing, I want to point out the difference between open source and close source: true, almost every open source product works on Linux, usually because that's what the developer uses. The closed source products do support Linux better, for commercial reasons. But let us remember, open source is what made Linux what it is...if you want open source to support VMS, you have the code!
Unfortunately, this shows a common phyisicist approach to quantum dynamic, which totally misses the whole concept. In many ways, quantum physics is a simply a different viewpoint on classical physics. However, relativity is a very big change, and I don't believe anyone has a decent theory which relates to realtivity as quantum physics relates to classical physics. However, one of the better attempts has resulted in the theory that anti-matter exists, so it is an interesting area.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have any evidence whatsoever that
*any* strong encryption scheme has been broken
by someone? Or are you just talking out of your
ass?
It's beyond me how these things get moderated up, really it is. Come on, for encryption to work, you have to have a key. Where would you store the key? In the keyboard? The keyboard sends key codes, and these say *exactly* what keys were pressed.
So you'd need a "smart" keyboard to do that -- and even that won't work, if the put the tap between the smart part and the keys. Unless you think a person would keep the key in his head, and, say, use the key to the right of the key he intends to.
Well, that would make it harder for the white hat then for the black hat.
The article MainFunction.com points at is from
the 8th International Python Conference. As someone who personally knows the teacher involved, and talked to him a lot about that, let me just mention that he's using Linux to teach Python.
In fact, part of the work his students are doing is in Zope (http://www.zope.org). So, Microsoft is essentially pointing to an article by a teacher who believes in 100% open source. They're doing our work for us!
> The law is one their side
Yes, but technology is on our side. What should we do? Use technology to break the law! Yes, I am preaching for breaking the law -- the law is old and outdated. Use FreeNet, use Gnutella, use all those technologies which allow us to bypass the law and get or will. The "music pirates" are the natural ally of the free software community: we both battle copyright law wherever we can. If we make that alliance, the free software community wll win because it will have a much larger installed base (how about an easy to use GNU/Linux distribution which comes installed with FreeNet?) and the music sharers will win because there will be more free music. And, eventually, RIAA will lose and so artists will win, because fans will be able to pay artists directly.
Theft according to whom? Some 200-years old, irrelevant law, only there because big business control government? Yes. If you think it's illegal -- you're right. So was the boston tea party. So was the Greek Slaves revlot in ancient Greece. So? If you think the law is moral, then do not download music. If you think the law is wrong, then maybe it is high time for civil rebellion. You might go to jail -- but then again, you may just change society.
Yes, we're crooks. Yes, we're doing illegal things. And no, I don't have a fscking problem with that. The laws are evil. The system is evil. It is the *right* and *duty* of the individual to oppose immoral use of government power, even when it means breaking the law. That's what civil rebellion is all about -- and the fact is, the people who founded America, or Israel, were criminals in the legal systems in which they operatred. But they won, and so they are heros in retrospect. And so will we, the anonymous slashdotters with RMS to lead us, be viewed as heros: the people who set information free.
Of course Bjarne should be shot on site -- any one
who tries to put OOP as assembler macros should
be shot on site.
I'm kind of sad that you didn't mention Python
(http://www.python.org) as an OO language. One advantage of Python is that you can actually *do* things with it.
__import__('SimpleHTTPServer').test()-ly y'rs.
(if you're wondering, that's an HTTP server in
standard Python. Yes. That's it.)
Well, considering I can even (today) use lynx, and
set the browser string to "Mozilla 5.0", well, you
can't. I'm not even talking about wget, Python's
httplib or Perl's libwww or Tcl's (whatever) or
Guile's (something). Anyone with fourth a brain can get into any site he wants, if that site filters by broswer string.
Of course, simply stating you only *support* some versions of broswers (as in, our tech-support won't talk to clients with other browsers) is just too easy, isn't it?
ObMozilla: wonderful! Finally, the Free Software world is managing to get a decent, modern broswer.
I'll continue to use lynx myself.
Oh, come on, pleeeeese!!!!
Outdated modes? What exactly outdated the
command/command-line/text mode? Alt and Ctrl
were *always* available. On the contrary, now
that computers are much faster then humans, having an editor which is fast to use (never move the fingers away from the keyboard) is a much, much bigger advantage.
BTW:
You do know you don't need Motif for NEdit? Lesstif would do quite nicely, thank you very much.
Linux is a good OS: I run it myself, and it's handling what it's supposed to handle just fine.
However, there are a lot of problem with monolithic systems, which most Unices, and Linux, are: for one thing, they scale very badly to SMP, since each processor must run it's own OS. Running a microkernel is much lighter, and the server processes could just use whatever processor is available.
Another thing is that as module as linux tries, and largely succeeds in being, it is still hard to debug, and replace parts. It is doubly true on a true multi-user system, where you have to be root to do anything at all, so normal users can't do anything. Just consider: why do I need root to make ftp.gnu.org seem like a local fs to me?
So Hurd has a lot of potential. And besides, it's always fun to work on an OS which isn't working...
In the words of someone we all admire:
``When men were men, and wrote their own device drivers''.
(And of course, Linux and Hurd aren't competitors in the same way, say, Netscape and MS are (or were): the Hurd team freely copies code from Linux when it helps, and I do hope that one day Linus will "cut costs" by copying from Hurd. This is the essence of free software, and this is why free software will win)
Well, it's true that the Linux community does not realize how much they have, but for other reasons:
for one thing, I want to point out the difference between open source and close source: true, almost every open source product works on Linux, usually because that's what the developer uses. The closed source products do support Linux better, for commercial reasons. But let us remember, open source is what made Linux what it is...if you want open source to support VMS, you have the code!
Unfortunately, this shows a common phyisicist approach to quantum dynamic, which totally misses the whole concept. In many ways, quantum physics is a simply a different viewpoint on classical physics. However, relativity is a very big change, and I don't believe anyone has a decent theory which relates to realtivity as quantum physics relates to classical physics. However, one of the better attempts has resulted in the theory that anti-matter exists, so it is an interesting area.