However, I must warn readers of Slashdot that the terms "crack", "crack cocaine", "crack head", "crack house" are trademarks of El Mellin Cartel & Co. Any use of these terms in the literal context (as compared to "SCO crack me up") is subject to a $699 licensing fee, payable in small bills. The good thing is we supply you with stuff you can smoke, SCO just stuff you with smoke. This aside, I agree with the previous posts, and our records confirm that a Senor D. MCBRIDE is a serious consumer of our prime products.
Further, since you have now pissed me off by ignoring my very apt Dilbert reference, and bringing the subject back to Linux vs. Windows instead of the much more valid and interesting discussion of "why MS is interested in newsnet approx. 10 years after it became principally a vehicle for porn", I will remark that your pro-"MSFT" (I assume you own shares?) remark should be moderated down as a troll. The rational moderators in Slashdot still outweight the "MSFT" serfs, I hope.
You are trolling but I'll take that troll and double it.
If Microsoft listened to what people want instead of living by manipulating every market to suit what they think will capture it best, we'd have moved on from shitty second-class imitations of operating systems called "Windows-whatever" and onto something befitting the 21st century.
It's a sign of the poverty of spirit of the Redmond Boys that the GNU/Linux community has put together (cobbled from free time and gracious will) a system that is better in every single possible defineable aspect _except_ the UI fluff that you think so highly of.
Microsoft is a billion-dollar business, the GNU/Linux community is a community. How dare you compare these? Microsoft simply cannot win such a comparison.
Every single interesting and useful innovation in OS technology for the last 5-10 years that I can think of came into the market from or through the free software community. Not one came from Microsoft.
Is a suitable state of mind when large and powerful groups decide they want to spy on you.
I'm sure MS already spies on Slashdot and tracks every profile here. I have four, and switch between them carefully, unt sometimez I speek in forin lanjuajes just to confooze them.
On the other hand, this reminds me strangely of a scene from Dilbert.
Serf1: Boss, I need to monitor newsnet. PHB: why? Serf1: So we can track our competitors, manipulate public opinion, and run smear campaigns against political opponents. PHB: sounds fine... Serf1: It will take nine months, that's ok? PHB: yes, get someone to help you if you need it.
later..
Serf2: So, did you get it? Serf1: Yes, we're now official newsnet spies. Serf2: porn on, dude!!! alt.binaries, here I come. Serf1: I've asked for some new hard drives too...:)
SCO executives enjoy the notoriety their litigiousness brings...
Yes, so long as the legal cases remain virtual. Actually prosecuting becomes very costly very quickly when you start losing even if (as in SCO's case) you are conducting your own side of the argument.
Pumping up the shares is one possibility, but that is also a federal offense, I believe. Anyone buying SCO's shares following clearly unsustainable comments by the executives would have good grounds for a suit against SCO.
Perhaps the whole thing is a share scam, but if that's the case it is very risky and will probably end up with Darl & co. behind bars.
My hunch is the rising share price is a side effect that was perhaps unexpected but which SCO is taking advantage of. Remember that SCO has been making anti-Linux comments from the start while basing its whole case originally on a license deal with IBM.
It smells of misdirection and mudslinging, of cheap gimmicks designed to fool the press and to spread FUD. Such a construction can't last, it isn't meant to, just long enough to do the damage.
Thus my conclusion is that the "damage" is the intended goal, that profits from shares or publicity are incidental, and that the motivator is Microsoft, paying both with declared monies (their "license") and most likely undeclared monies (anyone be surprised if Darl and his buddies get nice jobs with Microsoft after this debacle is over?)
MS are paying the bill, easing the way, and grinning like madmen every time they see the GPL come under fire once again.
And one last thing... I have this terrible feeling that IBM's famed legal muscle is not being used for a reason we're not being told about. Where is the suit for "defamation and dastardly bandinage"? How can SCO speak of suing IBM's AIX clients (it's core Unix clientel) and still be standing five minutes later? I don't like it, not one bit.
SCO's manoever has never been about anything else than attacking the GPL and the concept of OSS.
IBM and AIX are entirely incidental to the affair, and the connection between AIX and Linux is a spurious convenience.
If SCO were serious about their original "license agreement" allegations with IBM they would stick to this point and not start commenting on the GPL. SCO may be lying, thieving scoundrels, but they are working for someone else, or they would stick to the issues that might pay off.
I've said this for months now: the most likely director of SCO's actions is Microsoft, the only significant player to benefit from this mess. Every time the "validity" of the GPL is discussed Microsoft get a thrill and achieve what they could not do directly - no-one takes Microsoft's propaganda seriously anymore.
At least one goal appears to be working, namely to discuss the "validity" of the GPL as if it were a law or a contract. The GPL is a license that an author (that is, the person who's sweat, blood and tears were spent on making a work) can choose as the vehicle for licensing his or her work. Period. Anyone taking this work must obey the license conditions.
If I choose to license my work with an agreement that says that you must wear only red, that is my right. SCO may say "we choose not to use the GPL for our work", but to attack it like this is purely malicious.
And, so, we come back to the people who have in the past spent so much effort attacking the GPL because they realize that it frames their demise. The Redmond Gang, the company that believs might makes right, that laws are for buying, not obeying, and that lawyers are for suing other people.
Sigh.
On the bright side, I assume if they sue me for using Linux, and they lose, then they will pay my legal fees?
The case is very cool (metaphorically) but looks like it will cost somewhat more than the innards of the PC. In that case, I would hope that it'd last at least 5-10 years, meaning several upgrades. Given that motherboard changes seem to make this pretty much impossible, I would rather buy a cheap case and stick the whole thing in a separate room.
For notebooks, this looks like a good technology: notebooks cost more anyhow and you can't really stick them away in a room somewhere. Plus, most notebooks really suffer from heating issues, and an on-off fan tends to be more annoying than a constant hum.
But best of all would be a way to turn excess heat back into power. Heatpumps of some kind?
And so they think that everyone else is too. It's the classic syndrome called "projection".
The SystemV code shown is mroe recent than the Linux code, with added comments. No-one, ever, removes comments when copying code.
All their presentation shows is that the two functions have a shared pedigree, and this code is so old that the pedigree can be found in at least two books, and multiple versions of Unix.
SCO are lying, thieving, scurilous rumour mongers and sadly getting much too much attention.
Which makes me think: could the whole thing be simply intended to distract our attention from something else happening...? It is a classic ploy.
We recently searched for a part-time office admin for our company, and got _lots_ of CVs. But we rejected them all: far too qualified for the job. It sounds bizarre but when someone has too much experience they get bored doing banal things, and when someone has too much training, they often become too arrogant to do banal things.
And banal work is the bulk of it.
Then there is also the question of money: people with more experience and more qualifications expect more pay, and if the job does not justify this, there is a mismatch that will often cause problems.
Finally, many companies have a specific culture (social, business, technical), and it takes time to learn the culture. Extra training and experience can be useful but can also simply get in the way.
Lastly, as people get older, they appear to become more cynical and (in some cases) corrupt. "Sure, I can steal from my employer, after all everyone does that, right?" Perhaps it's an attitude that is there in young and old alike, but I've seen it much more in older people.
Give me a smart, young, motivated mind and I can do more with it than with an older mind with experience and training.
Sad, but for me (and I have lots of experience, ironically), true.
Scientist 1: So, all the giant redwoods have died... Scientist 2: Jawhol, even ze von I vaz keepig for my bar-b-q... terrible, terrible... but vat a lot of excellent vood! Scientist 1: But, our smart dust worked! Scientist 2: You hef ze data, zen? Scientist 1: Five hundred and thiry terrabytes of it! Scientist 2: That vill take years to process... Scientist 1: Decades! Scientist 2: Zank God for ze taxpayer. Zo, ve must be starting a New Project... Scientist 1: Yes, I've already filled in the Grant Application Form, I just need your co-signature... Scientist 2: Let me see: "Microsensors for Measuring Domestic Charcoal Consumption". You are meaning ze bar-b-queues? Scientist 1: We also have a study on the long-term quality of Amazonian beef. Scientist 2: A match made in heaven! Scientist 1: And our first shipment of barbeques arrives next week... Scientist 2: Pity ve didn't get ze beer study as vell. Scientist 1: Well, I know this guy, see...
Imagine you design a new CPU, totally incompatible with anything else you have. It may take you a year or two to get the first real models ready for use in systems. During that time, you can simulate the CPU in software. This lets you write software for the CPU even before it exists. Basically I'm assuming it will take several years, maybe a decade or more, to get a DNA computer up and running to the point where it can be actually produced. Without software simulation, that time is lost to developers. But, if a decent simulation can be made in software, people can start developing software for the computer long before it's actually "live". This is important, because it takes time to build up the software tools (such as compilers) that allow new architectures to be used. If the DNA computer really works, it will use such a different architecture that a software "headstart" is vital if the thing is to be used. That's all.
Because building the tools needed to build tools takes time, and too much time. If you can model the DNA machines on today's computers, you can simulate enough of an environment to bootstrap the whole process.
It's like building a compiler for a CPU when all you have is a simulation of the CPU. Then you compile the compiler with itself, and finally get native code that lets you compile the compiler using a compiled compiler instead of a similated compiler. Make sense?
Game playing comes second only to porn as the driver of new technologies.
More seriously, this is a good time to look at how to model DNA computers on "normal" computers so that we can start abstracting the tools and techniques needed to design (breed?) the really complex patterns we'll need to exploit DNA technology.
Good stuff - in 20 years this may seem like the only way to compute, with silicon being as quaint as valve transistors.
With a 3% profit margin, life as an exile in a foggy central American jungle, too much drink, too much stress and not even enough time to learn Spanish and enjoy the local nightlife?
Merde, someone's idea of lucrative ain't the same as mine.
I almost have pity on the poor bookmakers, humbly trying to make their million the only way they know how. What amazes me is the Fed's repressive attitude to what is after all simply a service industry. Creating criminals always seems to be good business for government agencies. Allowing adults to do what they want without hurting others, damn, that can't be allowed, can it?
My choice of "lucrative Internet business" would be something involving porn, I guess. That, or selling routers and firewalls.
After the famous musician who was formerly known as Prince, and who was retagged "his formerliness" by a well-known music magazine...
The Company Formerly Known as Palm has also decided upon an unpronouncable glyph as their name. But it makes much sense, since in any case they will soon become a division of Sony and their name will be recast in Hirigana.
Is it possible that the FCC benefits from the artificial scarcity that its own policies impose on frequencies? There exist technologies to make much more efficient use of frequencies and to eliminate all interference, but mysteriously we still get all our services squashed into a small and crowded space where the right to broadcast commands high fees and prestige for the authorizing body (=FCC).
Wow... you got a live acoustical band at your disposal?
Yeah, sure, I thought everyone had this...?
Re:Two schools of thought about blackouts...
on
Blackout Week Continues
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Excellent question. My answer is that it's exactly this challenge which makes the party such fun. I've seen several options. Portable generators are great, as are battery-powered decks (remember, those things we had before the walkman). Car steroes are good too, giving those youths who spend all their money putting in explosive car HiFis a good return on their investment. Open the doors, pump up the volume, instant street party. Be ready to ask your neighbours to contribute their car batteries temporarily (here options A and B overlap somewhat).
But barring that, drums are very good in converting energy into noise, so are fiddles and bagpipes. I'd personally recommend conga, djembe, and doun-doun (all three, naturally) as giving the most bang for the buck. Make sure your goatskins (not to be confused with goatse.ks) are nice and tight, but watch out for rain. Personally I'd avoid acoustic guitars since they don't give enough punch, and pianos since they are not portable enough, and tend to spliter nastily when falling down stairs. Two hard sticks on an empty oil drum (and after enough power cuts, you will find that oil drums tend to be empty) can also work very well. Experienced street artists can do wonders with drumsticks and empty containers of various types. If your area is plagued by frequent black-outs, I'd recommend you get some percussion training now, it's a much better survival skill than - say - sniper 101. Either skill will keep you amused for an entire night, but remember, there is always tomorrow!
Do not attempt to sing unless you are seriously drunk (see last point), or a trained choirist. Spontaneous and unlubricated vocal work can give you a nasty cough the next day. Leave the singing and dancing for the ladies: men tend to be better at making music by hitting things.
If all else fails, strong alcohol will usually generate spontaneous acappela music from any crowd, and my final recommendation for those living in third-world conditions along the US eastern seaboard would be to always carry an emergency case of 12 bottles of scotch or vodka. Avoid rum, it needs too much mixing.
Two schools of thought about blackouts...
on
Blackout Week Continues
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
a) Relax, everyone's in the same boat as you, open a beer while it's cool and put on some music.
b) Head over to the neighbour's house and rob them at gunpoint before they jump to conclusion (b) as well.
Happily most people tend to stay firmly in camp (a), even when blackouts are extensive and pervasive. I know this from much time spent in places like Luanda and Kinshasa, where blackouts are the norm and power & water is exceptional.
The default state of humanity in such circumstances, I'm glad to report, is generally "party on!!!"
Civilisation is not quite as fragile as we sometimes assume. Perhaps the US could use some more blackouts.
This was in December 1999, in NYC at an open source conference. I spoke to a few familiar faces, but RMS struck me as the only truly serious person there. OK, it was the heyday of the dot-com boom, everyone was throwing money around, IBM had just decided to go with Apache, Corel was pushing their Linux, and there was RMS, hacking on his little Toshiba, saying "no, I won't wear a t-shirt with a slogan on it".
We'd been making free software since 1995 or so, under a BSD-like license. It was only in 2002 when I re-read RMS's article on why the GPL was better (even for libraries) than the LGPL that I realized what a clear thinker he was. We have since switched all our packages to GPL, pure and simple, with a commercial opt-out license for customers who want it.
When RMS speaks on a subject - like software patents - you see an amazing mind taking complex issues and clarifying them in terms of freedoms, lost or protected. Now maybe he has excellent speech writers. But somehow I think it's really RMS speaking.
Perhaps it's a shame he spends so little effort on playing political correctness. He does not mind annoying an entire generation of geeks with his "GNU/Linux" arguments, and somehow I suspect GNU/LinEx gets his vote mainly because of the name, but these are minor foibles.
The fact remains that free software exists today largely because of one man's vision and struggle, and this man is RMS. The GPL is a constition for protecting the freedom of intellectual thought as expressed in software, and it's a document that demands reverence, or hate.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent nomination.
However, I must warn readers of Slashdot that the terms "crack", "crack cocaine", "crack head", "crack house" are trademarks of El Mellin Cartel & Co. Any use of these terms in the literal context (as compared to "SCO crack me up") is subject to a $699 licensing fee, payable in small bills.
The good thing is we supply you with stuff you can smoke, SCO just stuff you with smoke.
This aside, I agree with the previous posts, and our records confirm that a Senor D. MCBRIDE is a serious consumer of our prime products.
Further, since you have now pissed me off by ignoring my very apt Dilbert reference, and bringing the subject back to Linux vs. Windows instead of the much more valid and interesting discussion of "why MS is interested in newsnet approx. 10 years after it became principally a vehicle for porn", I will remark that your pro-"MSFT" (I assume you own shares?) remark should be moderated down as a troll. The rational moderators in Slashdot still outweight the "MSFT" serfs, I hope.
You are trolling but I'll take that troll and double it.
If Microsoft listened to what people want instead of living by manipulating every market to suit what they think will capture it best, we'd have moved on from shitty second-class imitations of operating systems called "Windows-whatever" and onto something befitting the 21st century.
It's a sign of the poverty of spirit of the Redmond Boys that the GNU/Linux community has put together (cobbled from free time and gracious will) a system that is better in every single possible defineable aspect _except_ the UI fluff that you think so highly of.
Microsoft is a billion-dollar business, the GNU/Linux community is a community. How dare you compare these? Microsoft simply cannot win such a comparison.
Every single interesting and useful innovation in OS technology for the last 5-10 years that I can think of came into the market from or through the free software community. Not one came from Microsoft.
Is a suitable state of mind when large and powerful groups decide they want to spy on you.
:)
I'm sure MS already spies on Slashdot and tracks every profile here. I have four, and switch between them carefully, unt sometimez I speek in forin lanjuajes just to confooze them.
On the other hand, this reminds me strangely of a scene from Dilbert.
Serf1: Boss, I need to monitor newsnet.
PHB: why?
Serf1: So we can track our competitors, manipulate public opinion, and run smear campaigns against political opponents.
PHB: sounds fine...
Serf1: It will take nine months, that's ok?
PHB: yes, get someone to help you if you need it.
later..
Serf2: So, did you get it?
Serf1: Yes, we're now official newsnet spies.
Serf2: porn on, dude!!! alt.binaries, here I come.
Serf1: I've asked for some new hard drives too...
Sorry, bad joke. Ahem...
Dear Alan,
Thanks for the good work. We owe you one.
Sincerely,
Geeks of the World
SCO executives enjoy the notoriety their litigiousness brings...
Yes, so long as the legal cases remain virtual. Actually prosecuting becomes very costly very quickly when you start losing even if (as in SCO's case) you are conducting your own side of the argument.
Pumping up the shares is one possibility, but that is also a federal offense, I believe. Anyone buying SCO's shares following clearly unsustainable comments by the executives would have good grounds for a suit against SCO.
Perhaps the whole thing is a share scam, but if that's the case it is very risky and will probably end up with Darl & co. behind bars.
My hunch is the rising share price is a side effect that was perhaps unexpected but which SCO is taking advantage of. Remember that SCO has been making anti-Linux comments from the start while basing its whole case originally on a license deal with IBM.
It smells of misdirection and mudslinging, of cheap gimmicks designed to fool the press and to spread FUD. Such a construction can't last, it isn't meant to, just long enough to do the damage.
Thus my conclusion is that the "damage" is the intended goal, that profits from shares or publicity are incidental, and that the motivator is Microsoft, paying both with declared monies (their "license") and most likely undeclared monies (anyone be surprised if Darl and his buddies get nice jobs with Microsoft after this debacle is over?)
MS are paying the bill, easing the way, and grinning like madmen every time they see the GPL come under fire once again.
And one last thing... I have this terrible feeling that IBM's famed legal muscle is not being used for a reason we're not being told about. Where is the suit for "defamation and dastardly bandinage"? How can SCO speak of suing IBM's AIX clients (it's core Unix clientel) and still be standing five minutes later? I don't like it, not one bit.
And it is (surprise) the images that cause the server to die.
SCO's manoever has never been about anything else than attacking the GPL and the concept of OSS.
IBM and AIX are entirely incidental to the affair, and the connection between AIX and Linux is a spurious convenience.
If SCO were serious about their original "license agreement" allegations with IBM they would stick to this point and not start commenting on the GPL. SCO may be lying, thieving scoundrels, but they are working for someone else, or they would stick to the issues that might pay off.
I've said this for months now: the most likely director of SCO's actions is Microsoft, the only significant player to benefit from this mess. Every time the "validity" of the GPL is discussed Microsoft get a thrill and achieve what they could not do directly - no-one takes Microsoft's propaganda seriously anymore.
At least one goal appears to be working, namely to discuss the "validity" of the GPL as if it were a law or a contract. The GPL is a license that an author (that is, the person who's sweat, blood and tears were spent on making a work) can choose as the vehicle for licensing his or her work. Period. Anyone taking this work must obey the license conditions.
If I choose to license my work with an agreement that says that you must wear only red, that is my right. SCO may say "we choose not to use the GPL for our work", but to attack it like this is purely malicious.
And, so, we come back to the people who have in the past spent so much effort attacking the GPL because they realize that it frames their demise. The Redmond Gang, the company that believs might makes right, that laws are for buying, not obeying, and that lawyers are for suing other people.
Sigh.
On the bright side, I assume if they sue me for using Linux, and they lose, then they will pay my legal fees?
The case is very cool (metaphorically) but looks like it will cost somewhat more than the innards of the PC. In that case, I would hope that it'd last at least 5-10 years, meaning several upgrades. Given that motherboard changes seem to make this pretty much impossible, I would rather buy a cheap case and stick the whole thing in a separate room.
For notebooks, this looks like a good technology: notebooks cost more anyhow and you can't really stick them away in a room somewhere. Plus, most notebooks really suffer from heating issues, and an on-off fan tends to be more annoying than a constant hum.
But best of all would be a way to turn excess heat back into power. Heatpumps of some kind?
And so they think that everyone else is too. It's the classic syndrome called "projection".
The SystemV code shown is mroe recent than the Linux code, with added comments. No-one, ever, removes comments when copying code.
All their presentation shows is that the two functions have a shared pedigree, and this code is so old that the pedigree can be found in at least two books, and multiple versions of Unix.
SCO are lying, thieving, scurilous rumour mongers and sadly getting much too much attention.
Which makes me think: could the whole thing be simply intended to distract our attention from something else happening...? It is a classic ploy.
And over-qualification is definitely one of them.
We recently searched for a part-time office admin for our company, and got _lots_ of CVs. But we rejected them all: far too qualified for the job. It sounds bizarre but when someone has too much experience they get bored doing banal things, and when someone has too much training, they often become too arrogant to do banal things.
And banal work is the bulk of it.
Then there is also the question of money: people with more experience and more qualifications expect more pay, and if the job does not justify this, there is a mismatch that will often cause problems.
Finally, many companies have a specific culture (social, business, technical), and it takes time to learn the culture. Extra training and experience can be useful but can also simply get in the way.
Lastly, as people get older, they appear to become more cynical and (in some cases) corrupt. "Sure, I can steal from my employer, after all everyone does that, right?" Perhaps it's an attitude that is there in young and old alike, but I've seen it much more in older people.
Give me a smart, young, motivated mind and I can do more with it than with an older mind with experience and training.
Sad, but for me (and I have lots of experience, ironically), true.
Scientist 1: So, all the giant redwoods have died...
Scientist 2: Jawhol, even ze von I vaz keepig for my bar-b-q... terrible, terrible... but vat a lot of excellent vood!
Scientist 1: But, our smart dust worked!
Scientist 2: You hef ze data, zen?
Scientist 1: Five hundred and thiry terrabytes of it!
Scientist 2: That vill take years to process...
Scientist 1: Decades!
Scientist 2: Zank God for ze taxpayer. Zo, ve must be starting a New Project...
Scientist 1: Yes, I've already filled in the Grant Application Form, I just need your co-signature...
Scientist 2: Let me see: "Microsensors for Measuring Domestic Charcoal Consumption". You are meaning ze bar-b-queues?
Scientist 1: We also have a study on the long-term quality of Amazonian beef.
Scientist 2: A match made in heaven!
Scientist 1: And our first shipment of barbeques arrives next week...
Scientist 2: Pity ve didn't get ze beer study as vell.
Scientist 1: Well, I know this guy, see...
A joke told once is funny.
A joke told twice is tolerated.
BUT A JOKE TOLD FOR THE TEN THOUSANDTH TIME IS JUST A TROLL!!!
And that, oh friendly AC, includes you.
Imagine you design a new CPU, totally incompatible with anything else you have. It may take you a year or two to get the first real models ready for use in systems. During that time, you can simulate the CPU in software. This lets you write software for the CPU even before it exists.
Basically I'm assuming it will take several years, maybe a decade or more, to get a DNA computer up and running to the point where it can be actually produced. Without software simulation, that time is lost to developers. But, if a decent simulation can be made in software, people can start developing software for the computer long before it's actually "live".
This is important, because it takes time to build up the software tools (such as compilers) that allow new architectures to be used.
If the DNA computer really works, it will use such a different architecture that a software "headstart" is vital if the thing is to be used.
That's all.
Why model it off of current computers...
Because building the tools needed to build tools takes time, and too much time. If you can model the DNA machines on today's computers, you can simulate enough of an environment to bootstrap the whole process.
It's like building a compiler for a CPU when all you have is a simulation of the CPU. Then you compile the compiler with itself, and finally get native code that lets you compile the compiler using a compiled compiler instead of a similated compiler. Make sense?
I agree... I mean, how do we know that these so-called "girls" actually exist?
It could all be a hoax! Like the famous 9" penis and everlasting printer cartridge. Yes, yes, it all makes sense now.
Parent insightful, parent insightful!
Game playing comes second only to porn as the driver of new technologies.
More seriously, this is a good time to look at how to model DNA computers on "normal" computers so that we can start abstracting the tools and techniques needed to design (breed?) the really complex patterns we'll need to exploit DNA technology.
Good stuff - in 20 years this may seem like the only way to compute, with silicon being as quaint as valve transistors.
With a 3% profit margin, life as an exile in a foggy central American jungle, too much drink, too much stress and not even enough time to learn Spanish and enjoy the local nightlife?
Merde, someone's idea of lucrative ain't the same as mine.
I almost have pity on the poor bookmakers, humbly trying to make their million the only way they know how. What amazes me is the Fed's repressive attitude to what is after all simply a service industry. Creating criminals always seems to be good business for government agencies. Allowing adults to do what they want without hurting others, damn, that can't be allowed, can it?
My choice of "lucrative Internet business" would be something involving porn, I guess. That, or selling routers and firewalls.
After the famous musician who was formerly known as Prince, and who was retagged "his formerliness" by a well-known music magazine...
The Company Formerly Known as Palm has also decided upon an unpronouncable glyph as their name. But it makes much sense, since in any case they will soon become a division of Sony and their name will be recast in Hirigana.
ParmOS, I saruta you!
Is it possible that the FCC benefits from the artificial scarcity that its own policies impose on frequencies? There exist technologies to make much more efficient use of frequencies and to eliminate all interference, but mysteriously we still get all our services squashed into a small and crowded space where the right to broadcast commands high fees and prestige for the authorizing body (=FCC).
Wow... you got a live acoustical band at your disposal?
Yeah, sure, I thought everyone had this...?
Excellent question. My answer is that it's exactly this challenge which makes the party such fun. I've seen several options. Portable generators are great, as are battery-powered decks (remember, those things we had before the walkman). Car steroes are good too, giving those youths who spend all their money putting in explosive car HiFis a good return on their investment. Open the doors, pump up the volume, instant street party. Be ready to ask your neighbours to contribute their car batteries temporarily (here options A and B overlap somewhat).
But barring that, drums are very good in converting energy into noise, so are fiddles and bagpipes. I'd personally recommend conga, djembe, and doun-doun (all three, naturally) as giving the most bang for the buck. Make sure your goatskins (not to be confused with goatse.ks) are nice and tight, but watch out for rain. Personally I'd avoid acoustic guitars since they don't give enough punch, and pianos since they are not portable enough, and tend to spliter nastily when falling down stairs. Two hard sticks on an empty oil drum (and after enough power cuts, you will find that oil drums tend to be empty) can also work very well. Experienced street artists can do wonders with drumsticks and empty containers of various types. If your area is plagued by frequent black-outs, I'd recommend you get some percussion training now, it's a much better survival skill than - say - sniper 101. Either skill will keep you amused for an entire night, but remember, there is always tomorrow!
Do not attempt to sing unless you are seriously drunk (see last point), or a trained choirist. Spontaneous and unlubricated vocal work can give you a nasty cough the next day. Leave the singing and dancing for the ladies: men tend to be better at making music by hitting things.
If all else fails, strong alcohol will usually generate spontaneous acappela music from any crowd, and my final recommendation for those living in third-world conditions along the US eastern seaboard would be to always carry an emergency case of 12 bottles of scotch or vodka. Avoid rum, it needs too much mixing.
a) Relax, everyone's in the same boat as you, open a beer while it's cool and put on some music.
b) Head over to the neighbour's house and rob them at gunpoint before they jump to conclusion (b) as well.
Happily most people tend to stay firmly in camp (a), even when blackouts are extensive and pervasive. I know this from much time spent in places like Luanda and Kinshasa, where blackouts are the norm and power & water is exceptional.
The default state of humanity in such circumstances, I'm glad to report, is generally "party on!!!"
Civilisation is not quite as fragile as we sometimes assume. Perhaps the US could use some more blackouts.
This was in December 1999, in NYC at an open source conference. I spoke to a few familiar faces, but RMS struck me as the only truly serious person there. OK, it was the heyday of the dot-com boom, everyone was throwing money around, IBM had just decided to go with Apache, Corel was pushing their Linux, and there was RMS, hacking on his little Toshiba, saying "no, I won't wear a t-shirt with a slogan on it".
We'd been making free software since 1995 or so, under a BSD-like license. It was only in 2002 when I re-read RMS's article on why the GPL was better (even for libraries) than the LGPL that I realized what a clear thinker he was. We have since switched all our packages to GPL, pure and simple, with a commercial opt-out license for customers who want it.
When RMS speaks on a subject - like software patents - you see an amazing mind taking complex issues and clarifying them in terms of freedoms, lost or protected. Now maybe he has excellent speech writers. But somehow I think it's really RMS speaking.
Perhaps it's a shame he spends so little effort on playing political correctness. He does not mind annoying an entire generation of geeks with his "GNU/Linux" arguments, and somehow I suspect GNU/LinEx gets his vote mainly because of the name, but these are minor foibles.
The fact remains that free software exists today largely because of one man's vision and struggle, and this man is RMS. The GPL is a constition for protecting the freedom of intellectual thought as expressed in software, and it's a document that demands reverence, or hate.
(My English sucks, I meant that I have written various free packages - it would be redundant to say that RMS had done this).