You know, that's pretty much what they are releasing at this point. I'm mean, seriously, what 'features' are left???? At this point Vista seems to be nothing but a giant security/bug fix upgrade from XP!
I think this is a great and wish I could give you a +10 heartwarming score. I've never met him myself, but I've always heard him described as a very warm, friendly person. My heart goes out to his family and friends. A great man has left us today.
Just FYI: IE only starts faster because MS preloads it into memory at startup. To compare FF to IE on (more)equal footing, start FF and then try to open a new window. This is closer to how IE works on Windows.
They did. Did you see it? I doubt it. I didn't see it. I was busy living my life/trying to live and buy food/pay rent. Most people don't have the time/energy to sit and watch CSPAN2 10 hours a day inorder to understand what is going on in their government. You need the big three in order to truely get your message in front of people: TV, radio, and print in that order. And even if you get your message in front on the people, there is NOTHING to guarenty they will pay attention or even understand what you say. I bet you that almost no one will really understand what this rider bill will do until they are stopped and asked to "present their papers" in order to boared an airplane. Remember, it won't happen all over night, but little by little all of our civil rights and what makes us a great country will/are being chipped away so that, on the whole, we don't notice it.
I doubt the RIAA would be happy with 1c per play. More like $1 per play. I'm serious! They will NEVER accept a reasonable payment structure. They have been and always will be bent on gouging the artists and music lovers for all they can without Congress starting hearings. I think everyone on this board would be very happy if all the money they made (or at least 90% or so) went directly into the artists' pockets. But they don't, they go almost completely into the music companies who are less than model corporate citizens. Anyway, I'm happier with iTunes and Apple's DRM compared to what other music stores us, and I'm just tired of the RIAA saying such a scheme is bad (because deep down they hate seeing the consumer finally get some freedom and flexibility).
In the RIAA's perfect world, you and I would pay every time we listen to a song, on every device that could possibly play the song. And if we didn't pay these fees every time, we would end up in Siberia and never be heard from again.
Apple actually aknowledges than when a person buys a song/album, they should be able to listen to it in their car, on the MP3 player (iPod of course), their computer, etc. No, they don't think you should be able to stand on a street corner and hand out copies to complete strangers. Apple's solution is actually that happy medium where music companies get money for online music downloads and consumers get music in a form that is convenient and easy to move around their different listening devices. So yes, the OP had a legitimate gripe and Hillary Rosen is just being moronic and trying to twist reality into something it isn't.
Part of the reason is just the desire to tinker and learn and do something that most people would never thing of/be able to do. In fact, that's most of the reason! Linux is just a tool to help with that since it's open and free and can be modified to fit into anything a tinkerer can think of. If Windows was open and free and able to be modified by your average garage computer tinkerer, it would be Windows. But you can't do that with Windows, so Linux is used. Plus there is some fun to saying the OS can scale from super large mainframe systems down to a desktop/laptop and all the way down to a hand held device such as a PDA or PSP/DS system.
Just check out www.psp-linux.org. People are working hard to find entry points into the PSP, and reading UMD disks is a small step in that direction. The next woud be to be able to write such disks and attempt to find a way to execute arbitrary code from that disk. Then we will see a PSP Linux distro that you can buy on a little disk and not have to crack it open:) Just give it time.
While I don't usually feed the trolls, I think I'll respond to this to try and clear up any misinformation out there.
Sure, you could do it that way under Linux if you really wanted to, but most modern distros (like FC) provide a very simple way to add the nvidia driver to your system during regular system updates. Then, when a new version/kernel comes out, your system will be upgraded during your next system update.
Does all that require going to the command line again? Sure. There are also 100% graphical ways of doing the same as many helpful websites will tell you how. Will my parents & grandparents know how to do this? Nope. But they don't upgrade their video drivers under Windows either. That only happens when I come over for a visit. So while I wish it was better than Windows, it's no worse.
1. Even Nvidia's installer "Just Works" and doesn't require me to type the traditional./configure; make; make install. It does it for you, in the background, during the installation process. To me this mimicks what people see in Windows. For all the user nows in either case, the installer could be having a tea party in the background, it doesn't matter since it just installs and works.
2. Nvidia's Linux driver's are not fully open source. Sure there is a very small minority of FOSS people who are miffed at Nvidia for not going 100%, but I think most of us here are perfectly fine with them keeping some of it closed since it is true proprietary info that could lead to ATI figuring out some of Nvidia's hardware secrets. This just shows that closed + open software can live together without the world ending or a company going out of business. Just keep open what needs to be open (basic interfaces/API calls) and you can leave closed what needs to be closed (true proprietary information).
Oh I think we will see a few episodes where some spyware vender finds a hole and then FF rushes and fixes it. After all, no piece of software, including FF, is 100% secure. But they will fix it quickly and securly and they will just prove that FOSS/FF can be "just as good" if not better than its MS equivalent software.
I disagree with your premis that MS is better at dealing with spyway/virii right now because of their experience. Here is my line of thinking.
MS is a corporation and employes programers who draw a salary. What ever project they work on has that person's salary listed as part of the cost of that project. Now, in order to produce patches/fixes at least one (most likely several) programmers have to spend time working with the code to produce the patch/fix. That means he is officially listed under the group that maintains IE/etc and his salary is part of that group's expenses. Why did I set all this up? Because MS, like all big corporations, has to see if the cost of fixing the problem is less than the conseqences of the problem going unchecked. So, if the possible damages from a spyware hole costs less than fixing it, it doesn't get fixed. Of course these are generalities and there are definately cases where fixing one or two other issues could close the hole(s) and make the fix a freebee, but those don't consern this conversation. My point is that MS only turns their attention to a problem with it it helps the bottem line.
So what about FOSS/FF programmers? Well, last I looked I didn't see many people getting paid to write FF or patch it, so the concept of the bottom line goes out the window. Then why would anyone fix any problems???? The same reason they wrote the program in the first place: because they want to! This is such a revolutionary idea that most people can't grasp it yet. There is also pride since the code is open and peoples' names are on the code, thus people will want to show that they take pride in their work and projects and will spend the time to fix issues.
So, even though FOSS/FF doesn't have experience yet in dealing with massive spyware/virii issues, I think they have better tools and incentive to fix those issues when they do occure than MS ever will.
DSMT is completely done in hardware because of the dynamic behavior of most commonly used programs. Only the CPU at runtime can accuratley model the dynamic behavior, so the compile does nothing. Sure programs with parallelism in them originaly will do better, but by having the hardware to the thread generation more of the dynamic behavior can be captured (dure to dynamic data) and every program can benifit. It does require a complete redesign of the CPU, but the benifits could be tremendous.
The reason is because going from idea to silicon is BIG, BIG, BIG time & money drain. You can't just throw an engineer or two at the theoretical design and get a silicon mask for the fab. You have to take in account issues such as heat. With more functional units (and more instructions feeding those units) you will generate a LOT of heat. Then there is the question of line delay (RC). With all the extra logic (more register files or other stuff the different implementations add) you may have to drastically drop the clock rate which offsets any gains from the multiple threads. But we don't know until we try, and that requires months (or years) of a large team of highly paid engineers. Intel has the money to do that (and they might be, I don't know) but it's all still in the R&D stages.
And even more intersting idea is DSMT (dynamic simultaneous multithreading) since that's an area I'm working on for my thesis:)
That's true, the ads are (usually) local and independent of the content. But if the content isn't enough to get people to watch TV, they certainly aren't going to watch for the ads! And if people are downloading TV shows with BT, I bet they don't have any ads (let alone local Austrailian ads). So, as an advertisor, I would see the drop in viewer ratings and take my business elsewhere (like the local newspaper or radio). It all comes back to the true problem here: the TV stations are obviously doing a poor job first to the viewers, which leads to doing a poor job for their paying customers, the advertisors. I would extend this claim to many other countries, including the US. Everyone could do better.
I think you are missunderstanding what GPLv2 allows end users to do. Could you take a current GPLv2 work that you download, make a small modification, and release it under the BSD license? No, you can't, because you don't have the right to change the license which the work is released under since it is based on a GPLv2 work. Same will go for the GPLv3 issue. If someone takes your code and makes a derivative of it they have to release it as a GPLv2. You can then put the code back into your project. The basic rule of thumb is that only the original developer, or copyright holder, can change the license a project and all derivatives are distributed under.
As for the issue about the kernel, I doubt very much that they will make GPLv3 completely different from GPLv2. If anything, they will just add clarification to international law and some patent issues like they have mentioned. And all this is YEARS away from happening, so there is a lot of time to make sure that GPLv3 is pretty much GPLv2 but with a few extra lines that doesn't make it incompatible with the previous version. Remember, this isn't some corporation making descision based on what's best for their bottom line. This is a a community driven and controled decision, so let them know what you want and what you don't want or stop whining.
After reading the article, it seems like those who think there will be a "division" don't really understand the whole of the Linux world. There are MANY licenses in use by the FOSS world right now, and adding a new version (which addresses international copyright laws and patent issues) will not cause Linux to split into multiple camps. If GPLv3 turns out to be bad, then no one will use it and GPLv2 will remain the most used license. In the FOSS world, no one forces you to do anything like use a specific license when you want to use anyone instead (the developer that is, not the end user).
Oh they'll sacrafice security for easy of use, until they get hacked or turned into a zombie, etc. Then it's all "security, security, security", until they get tired of typing in passwords again and switch back to the easy ways again. Repeat.
If MS really wanted to provide security for their users, they could, but it would piss off many of them since they are used to password less logons. If the users aren't educated, all the crypto and security systems in the world aren't worth anything.
Re:I'm just as competitive as the next guy
on
Women Leaving I.T.
·
· Score: 2, Informative
From my perspective (as a male) it's women who are more guilty of this than men. Men will compete over silly things, but in the end we can get over it and get the work done. I've seen women who are locked in the high school mode their entire lives, where they are more interested in back stabbing, cat fighting, and refuse to work with certain other women because of these issues.
But in the end these are all antidocial(sic) evidence and not real scientific evidence. A good cross country, cross gender study of these aspects of men and women in the work place needs to be done, but good luck trying that in our society without being called sexist or bigoted.
My point was more along the lines that the people running these businesses/banks are very inhuman and amoral. Do I have a solution short of a revolution (probably very bloody ala Russion revolution)? Nope, not a one. If I did, I'd either be running for public office or I would be jailed/missing/dead/etc before my ideas got out. There is no single answer or even a bunch of easy answers. Humans are a varied and conflicting species, and because of that it's pretty much impossible to find a set of rules/limitations/requirements that works for everyone without hurting at least someone. If you can think of a solution, I'd be happy to listen to it.
One of the greatest victories in the class warfare that they upper class has achieved is having everyone in the middle and lower classes think there isn't a war going on. No one is entitled to make money at the expense of another human being's life. Once you start from that one little rule and build on it, you will find that most of our modern socialeconomic practices do not benifit anyone but those who already have money. Those without money have little to no chance to make their lives better because of how the upper class has structured society. Sure, a few have pulled themselves up from the bottoms of the economic classes, but those are the exceptions and not the rule.
I have no entitlement to other peoples' money as you have said. But when you have no way of staying alive except digging yourself deeper and deeper into debt, and therefore further under the control of the upper class, I would say that it is inhumain of the lenders to charge what they do. If we were all on a level playing field then sure the lenders can ethically do whatever they want. But we aren't on a level playing field, nor have we been since the introduction of society. What lenders are doing is just furthering the class warfare that is occuring and doing it with the inhuman logical of dollars and cents.
Nah, I'd rater pay my $15 so a company that seems to actually listen to it's customers and try their harderst to fix issues with specific games than download Wine, maybe get it to compile, and then have it not run anything. Cedega is a good company that supports its users and produces a product that works. That is why I buy Cedega and why I will continue to buy it.
Intel actually likes to promote from within, not hire outside people to become managers. So a lot of the managers in the design and process engineering groups are all engineers first and managers second. Sometimes making an engineer a manager doesn't work, but sometimes it works really well. Look at Craige Berette. He was a professor of material science at (I may have this wrong) Standford before he came to work at Intel. The same can't always be said for the marketing/sales/HR departments, but in the engineering departments they are almost always run by engineers. Just wanted to clear that up a bit.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, that's pretty much what they are releasing at this point. I'm mean, seriously, what 'features' are left???? At this point Vista seems to be nothing but a giant security/bug fix upgrade from XP!
I'd trust a Firefox version 0.X more than a MS version 10 any day!
I think this is a great and wish I could give you a +10 heartwarming score. I've never met him myself, but I've always heard him described as a very warm, friendly person. My heart goes out to his family and friends. A great man has left us today.
Just FYI: IE only starts faster because MS preloads it into memory at startup. To compare FF to IE on (more)equal footing, start FF and then try to open a new window. This is closer to how IE works on Windows.
They did. Did you see it? I doubt it. I didn't see it. I was busy living my life/trying to live and buy food/pay rent. Most people don't have the time/energy to sit and watch CSPAN2 10 hours a day inorder to understand what is going on in their government. You need the big three in order to truely get your message in front of people: TV, radio, and print in that order. And even if you get your message in front on the people, there is NOTHING to guarenty they will pay attention or even understand what you say. I bet you that almost no one will really understand what this rider bill will do until they are stopped and asked to "present their papers" in order to boared an airplane. Remember, it won't happen all over night, but little by little all of our civil rights and what makes us a great country will/are being chipped away so that, on the whole, we don't notice it.
I doubt the RIAA would be happy with 1c per play. More like $1 per play. I'm serious! They will NEVER accept a reasonable payment structure. They have been and always will be bent on gouging the artists and music lovers for all they can without Congress starting hearings. I think everyone on this board would be very happy if all the money they made (or at least 90% or so) went directly into the artists' pockets. But they don't, they go almost completely into the music companies who are less than model corporate citizens. Anyway, I'm happier with iTunes and Apple's DRM compared to what other music stores us, and I'm just tired of the RIAA saying such a scheme is bad (because deep down they hate seeing the consumer finally get some freedom and flexibility).
Apple actually aknowledges than when a person buys a song/album, they should be able to listen to it in their car, on the MP3 player (iPod of course), their computer, etc. No, they don't think you should be able to stand on a street corner and hand out copies to complete strangers. Apple's solution is actually that happy medium where music companies get money for online music downloads and consumers get music in a form that is convenient and easy to move around their different listening devices. So yes, the OP had a legitimate gripe and Hillary Rosen is just being moronic and trying to twist reality into something it isn't.
Part of the reason is just the desire to tinker and learn and do something that most people would never thing of/be able to do. In fact, that's most of the reason! Linux is just a tool to help with that since it's open and free and can be modified to fit into anything a tinkerer can think of. If Windows was open and free and able to be modified by your average garage computer tinkerer, it would be Windows. But you can't do that with Windows, so Linux is used. Plus there is some fun to saying the OS can scale from super large mainframe systems down to a desktop/laptop and all the way down to a hand held device such as a PDA or PSP/DS system.
Just check out www.psp-linux.org. People are working hard to find entry points into the PSP, and reading UMD disks is a small step in that direction. The next woud be to be able to write such disks and attempt to find a way to execute arbitrary code from that disk. Then we will see a PSP Linux distro that you can buy on a little disk and not have to crack it open :) Just give it time.
Sure, you could do it that way under Linux if you really wanted to, but most modern distros (like FC) provide a very simple way to add the nvidia driver to your system during regular system updates. Then, when a new version/kernel comes out, your system will be upgraded during your next system update.
Does all that require going to the command line again? Sure. There are also 100% graphical ways of doing the same as many helpful websites will tell you how. Will my parents & grandparents know how to do this? Nope. But they don't upgrade their video drivers under Windows either. That only happens when I come over for a visit. So while I wish it was better than Windows, it's no worse.
1. Even Nvidia's installer "Just Works" and doesn't require me to type the traditional ./configure; make; make install. It does it for you, in the background, during the installation process. To me this mimicks what people see in Windows. For all the user nows in either case, the installer could be having a tea party in the background, it doesn't matter since it just installs and works.
2. Nvidia's Linux driver's are not fully open source. Sure there is a very small minority of FOSS people who are miffed at Nvidia for not going 100%, but I think most of us here are perfectly fine with them keeping some of it closed since it is true proprietary info that could lead to ATI figuring out some of Nvidia's hardware secrets. This just shows that closed + open software can live together without the world ending or a company going out of business. Just keep open what needs to be open (basic interfaces/API calls) and you can leave closed what needs to be closed (true proprietary information).
Oh I think we will see a few episodes where some spyware vender finds a hole and then FF rushes and fixes it. After all, no piece of software, including FF, is 100% secure. But they will fix it quickly and securly and they will just prove that FOSS/FF can be "just as good" if not better than its MS equivalent software.
MS is a corporation and employes programers who draw a salary. What ever project they work on has that person's salary listed as part of the cost of that project. Now, in order to produce patches/fixes at least one (most likely several) programmers have to spend time working with the code to produce the patch/fix. That means he is officially listed under the group that maintains IE/etc and his salary is part of that group's expenses. Why did I set all this up? Because MS, like all big corporations, has to see if the cost of fixing the problem is less than the conseqences of the problem going unchecked. So, if the possible damages from a spyware hole costs less than fixing it, it doesn't get fixed. Of course these are generalities and there are definately cases where fixing one or two other issues could close the hole(s) and make the fix a freebee, but those don't consern this conversation. My point is that MS only turns their attention to a problem with it it helps the bottem line.
So what about FOSS/FF programmers? Well, last I looked I didn't see many people getting paid to write FF or patch it, so the concept of the bottom line goes out the window. Then why would anyone fix any problems???? The same reason they wrote the program in the first place: because they want to! This is such a revolutionary idea that most people can't grasp it yet. There is also pride since the code is open and peoples' names are on the code, thus people will want to show that they take pride in their work and projects and will spend the time to fix issues.
So, even though FOSS/FF doesn't have experience yet in dealing with massive spyware/virii issues, I think they have better tools and incentive to fix those issues when they do occure than MS ever will.
DSMT is completely done in hardware because of the dynamic behavior of most commonly used programs. Only the CPU at runtime can accuratley model the dynamic behavior, so the compile does nothing. Sure programs with parallelism in them originaly will do better, but by having the hardware to the thread generation more of the dynamic behavior can be captured (dure to dynamic data) and every program can benifit. It does require a complete redesign of the CPU, but the benifits could be tremendous.
The reason is because going from idea to silicon is BIG, BIG, BIG time & money drain. You can't just throw an engineer or two at the theoretical design and get a silicon mask for the fab. You have to take in account issues such as heat. With more functional units (and more instructions feeding those units) you will generate a LOT of heat. Then there is the question of line delay (RC). With all the extra logic (more register files or other stuff the different implementations add) you may have to drastically drop the clock rate which offsets any gains from the multiple threads. But we don't know until we try, and that requires months (or years) of a large team of highly paid engineers. Intel has the money to do that (and they might be, I don't know) but it's all still in the R&D stages. And even more intersting idea is DSMT (dynamic simultaneous multithreading) since that's an area I'm working on for my thesis :)
That's true, the ads are (usually) local and independent of the content. But if the content isn't enough to get people to watch TV, they certainly aren't going to watch for the ads! And if people are downloading TV shows with BT, I bet they don't have any ads (let alone local Austrailian ads). So, as an advertisor, I would see the drop in viewer ratings and take my business elsewhere (like the local newspaper or radio). It all comes back to the true problem here: the TV stations are obviously doing a poor job first to the viewers, which leads to doing a poor job for their paying customers, the advertisors. I would extend this claim to many other countries, including the US. Everyone could do better.
As for the issue about the kernel, I doubt very much that they will make GPLv3 completely different from GPLv2. If anything, they will just add clarification to international law and some patent issues like they have mentioned. And all this is YEARS away from happening, so there is a lot of time to make sure that GPLv3 is pretty much GPLv2 but with a few extra lines that doesn't make it incompatible with the previous version. Remember, this isn't some corporation making descision based on what's best for their bottom line. This is a a community driven and controled decision, so let them know what you want and what you don't want or stop whining.
After reading the article, it seems like those who think there will be a "division" don't really understand the whole of the Linux world. There are MANY licenses in use by the FOSS world right now, and adding a new version (which addresses international copyright laws and patent issues) will not cause Linux to split into multiple camps. If GPLv3 turns out to be bad, then no one will use it and GPLv2 will remain the most used license. In the FOSS world, no one forces you to do anything like use a specific license when you want to use anyone instead (the developer that is, not the end user).
If MS really wanted to provide security for their users, they could, but it would piss off many of them since they are used to password less logons. If the users aren't educated, all the crypto and security systems in the world aren't worth anything.
But in the end these are all antidocial(sic) evidence and not real scientific evidence. A good cross country, cross gender study of these aspects of men and women in the work place needs to be done, but good luck trying that in our society without being called sexist or bigoted.
My point was more along the lines that the people running these businesses/banks are very inhuman and amoral. Do I have a solution short of a revolution (probably very bloody ala Russion revolution)? Nope, not a one. If I did, I'd either be running for public office or I would be jailed/missing/dead/etc before my ideas got out. There is no single answer or even a bunch of easy answers. Humans are a varied and conflicting species, and because of that it's pretty much impossible to find a set of rules/limitations/requirements that works for everyone without hurting at least someone. If you can think of a solution, I'd be happy to listen to it.
One of the greatest victories in the class warfare that they upper class has achieved is having everyone in the middle and lower classes think there isn't a war going on. No one is entitled to make money at the expense of another human being's life. Once you start from that one little rule and build on it, you will find that most of our modern socialeconomic practices do not benifit anyone but those who already have money. Those without money have little to no chance to make their lives better because of how the upper class has structured society. Sure, a few have pulled themselves up from the bottoms of the economic classes, but those are the exceptions and not the rule.
I have no entitlement to other peoples' money as you have said. But when you have no way of staying alive except digging yourself deeper and deeper into debt, and therefore further under the control of the upper class, I would say that it is inhumain of the lenders to charge what they do. If we were all on a level playing field then sure the lenders can ethically do whatever they want. But we aren't on a level playing field, nor have we been since the introduction of society. What lenders are doing is just furthering the class warfare that is occuring and doing it with the inhuman logical of dollars and cents.
Nah, I'd rater pay my $15 so a company that seems to actually listen to it's customers and try their harderst to fix issues with specific games than download Wine, maybe get it to compile, and then have it not run anything. Cedega is a good company that supports its users and produces a product that works. That is why I buy Cedega and why I will continue to buy it.
Intel actually likes to promote from within, not hire outside people to become managers. So a lot of the managers in the design and process engineering groups are all engineers first and managers second. Sometimes making an engineer a manager doesn't work, but sometimes it works really well. Look at Craige Berette. He was a professor of material science at (I may have this wrong) Standford before he came to work at Intel. The same can't always be said for the marketing/sales/HR departments, but in the engineering departments they are almost always run by engineers. Just wanted to clear that up a bit.
I know, but sometimes it takes such horrible events to cause great changes.