Well, I have yet to see any computer that's as portable as a couple of pieces of paper. You can call it a "notebook" computer, but it still weighs three to five pounds, only runs a couple of hours on a charge and is a bitch to read in harsh sunlight. You can fold up a piece of paper and stuff it in your pocket. There's no waiting for the OS to boot when you want to read it, or fiddling with scrollbars. You can more or less instantly flip back and forth between bookmarks. You can read a piece of paper sitting at a desk, or in your easy chair, or at the beach, or sitting up in a tree.
Also, computer screens are still really low resolution compared to even a poor printout. Compare a 28 pitch monitor with a 300DPI printout, and it's no wonder hackers have such problems with their eyes...
Actually, I'd include the positive points too! Is the story interesting, or simply a rehash of what everyone else is saying? Is it funny? Is it mindless drivel (i.e., flamebait)? I think it could be a valuable piece of information.
I don't think the problem is in the GPL itself - the lawyers have been over that again and again, and I think it's clear enough. (You may argue that it's not a perfect license, but that's another issue. I'm just saying it's clear)
The problem is the enforcement. Any legal document is only as strong as the people who stand behind it. If there is no consequence, then companies like Corel will soon learn that they can run roughshod over the GPL and hijack any code they want and incorporate it into their closed systems. If people fight back (either through organizations like OSF, or on their own by letting their feelings be known), then companies will learn that the GPL has some real teeth.
I still have my old Xerox 820. Bought it as a bare board and had to build a wooden box to house the board, power supply and *DUAL* 5.25" floppy drives. The keyboard and monitor had cardboard covers. The SYKES 8" drive a added later was really cool, because it could hold one Meg!
I had a hardware guru friend set it up for me. The first thing he did was to hack (LITERALLY - with an X-Acto knife) the traces on the clock chip to double the CPU speed. Really screamed after that. Only problem was that it made the PackMan game unplayable...:-(
Also: Dragonriders of Pern / Nerilka's Story
on
Ender's Shadow
·
· Score: 1
Ann McCaffrey did the same thing in two of her Pern stories. The first story, Dragonriders of Pern the story is told from the point of view of the "important" characters. In Nerilka's Story, the story is then retold through the eyes of one of the peripheral characters. It does give an interesting different perspective - how the events that swirl around the movers and shakers of the society filter down to the everyday folk.
AH! I have no argument with you that there is room for abuse of the rating system, in particular, if the producers of the shws are doing their own ratings.
What I'm saying is that I still like the concept of being able to apply a filter to what is coming into my house. Once the fundamental mechanism is in place, we can work out the details of implementation. No one says you have to put a filter on your TV. It's just there for those of us who want it.
> BTW, am I the only one who feels that children need to be taught what is approprate to watch through caring and good parenting, and not through technological mandates, or am I in the minority here?
As someone who has been a father for over 18 years, I agree with you on principle, but unfortunately, the world is not so simple. Clearly, the ONLY way to really teach children is by example, however the reality is that there are legions of other forces fighting against you. Unfortunately, the world is not a nice place for the innocent, and I want every advantage I can get to help me instill a true sense of values within my children.
On the other hand, by now it's pretty much a moot point for me. At 15 and 19, both of my kids are at the point where they must learn to make their own decisions. Now it's time for me to sit back and hope that I've taught them well over the past years.
> What the v-chip is about is the government limiting choice.
Arrrgh! Must be another outbreak of the Stupidity Virus...
Why is it that every time someone mentions rating systems and the possibility to filter TV based on content that there is this sudden outbreak of the Stupids??? Providing a rating mechanism for TV is no more about limiting choices than it is for movies. We are talking here about individuals being able to filter out what they consider to be trash. The fact that we have a rating system for movies gives us more choices: I don't restrict your right to go to XXX rated movies... so long as there is a mechanism in place to keep my children out. Rating a TV program doesn't limit your ability to watch that pornographic or violent show (unless you're visiting in my house). It does, however, allow me to have some control over what goes on in my house.
Sure - in a PERFECT world, parents would ALWAYS know what their children are doing, and what shows they are watching, and what their friends are watching, and what their friends' friends are watching on TV. However, we don't live in a perfect world, and we can't drag our children around on leashes. Personally, as a parent, I have to deal with the garbage my kids are exposed to every day. I need all the help I can get.
This is the primary reason why I don't like cloning. As soon as people get the idea into their heads that, "Gee, if species X becomes extinct, then we can just clone them again to bring them back," then they will be less likely to fight for preserving threatened species.
The problem is, cloning does NOT exactly duplicate the original animal, and it certainly can't duplicate any kind of genetic diversity within the species.
Cloning will never take the place of preserving species (and their natural environments) in the first place.
I don't think they have anything to deny yet. We're talking about a bunch of speculation at this point, with little more that what you'd see in a Science Fiction novel.
Show me an actual living creature created from scratch and then we'll have some interesting discussions!
We just had this happen yesterday. I've got this big 350MHz PII with 128MegRAM and 6Gig or disk space sitting on my desk, but where are all my files? Out on the network, where they can be backed up, and where they are accessible to other machines (notably my UNIX account), or served out of the ClearCase SCM server. When one of the servers go down (this whole place teeters on top of a sprawling Netware/NT/Unix pile of spagetti, so servers go down quite often), the whole place can go dead in the water. I can sort of limp along sometimes, but NT gets very flaky when it can't find things.
Contrary to many of the comments I've already seen here, I like the approach. I've seen an office set up with "thin clients" - basically a normal PC with lots of RAM, but no local disk drives. They were running everything under Linux (both client and server side), including the Applixware word processing software and Netscape for email. They aren't for everyone, but they certainly work well in a small office.
That's not to say that this particular model will spell the death knell of Microsoft. It sounds like these are closed boxes with a lot of custom hardware (i.e., no upgrades unless you pay Sun big $$$), though I could be wrong. And, they are not cheap! $9.99/month doesn't sound like a lot, but it adds up to something like $600 over the long term. The boxes I was working with were in the $300 range, with the only custom part being the boot-ROM added into the network cards to get the systems to boot with no local disk drives.
If StarOffice can pull off converting their internal data format to an open standard like XML (almost as much buzzword value as Linux and OSS), then other providers, be they Corel or Microsoft, will suddenly find themselves playing catch-up, just as they did when the Internet first exploded on the scene.
In my opinion, this is one of the few areas where WordPerfect is better than SO - it is much faster to come up and navigate through. On the other hand, SO has gotten better in this regard over the past couple of releases, though I must admit, I've also upgraded to a slightly faster computer...;-) I will say that their UI has improved.
Where'd we ever lose the UNIX mantra of, "Do One Thing and Do It Well"?:-(
Grow up! That is a REALLY good way to get not only fired, but blacklisted too. I know I wouldn't hire anyone who acted like that. Are you really stupid enough to think something like that wouldn't pop up and bite you in the future? People do make complaints about sexual harrassment.
Quit if you think you must, but don't lie about it!!!
Really, you and I are the technology experts, not the educational ones. We should list the available technologies (filtering, internet connections, hardware, networks, etc.) and the pros and cons or each (including details like cost, or the flaws of filtering software), and then let the administration figure out its policy. We have to be honest though, and not fudge the facts with our own prejudices. Then, they are the one's responsible for getting parental permission, and dealing with problems when they come up. Believe me, they've been dealing with these issues for years!! (Whoever said the Internet was the first controversy to hit our school systems???)
Tell them what can and cannot be done. Tell them your recommendation. Let them make policy. If you can live with their policy, then do your work.
Say what you like, but the evidence is starting to come in that children who are flooded with technology - computers, "educational" TV programs, videos, teaching toys, whatever - when done in place of plain old face to face interactions with a parent or teacher, do not learn better than their "technologically deprived" counterparts. This is especially true at younger ages, where most "educational" software is pointing and clicking video games. Even when they are used as a reward (e.g., letting kids play games when they finish their other work) can be unhealthy, since it encourages individual play rather than cooperative (like sitting on the floor together and building with blocks).
That being said, I still think computers have a place in the classroom (I've installed a number of them myself), as long as they are not seen as a replacement for human interactions with a teacher (or parent). In older classrooms, where kids can use them in problem solving exercises, review and practice on other traditional subjects, or as a reference (like a Very Big Encyclopedia or instant reference library), they can become a valuable tool. In fact, when you get up into the higher elementary and middleschool grades, I think it is critical that kids learn how to use the Internet.
Suffice it to say, our American tradition of trying to solve educational problems by throwing more money and technology at it is once again comming up short when the facts come in. There is nothing that can take the place of the older generation teaching the younger.
Ever try to create a boot floppy that includes CD-ROM drivers so you can "bootstrap" the install off the Windows CD?
I've got one system I built from various spare parts (classic Linux situation;-). RH5.2 installs on it without a hitch. No problem. Windows95 will not install! I can sort of cobble it on and get it to boot, but I have a NIC, video and sound card. Pick any two... Even turning off the sound card, I have to boot the stupid machine three times after a power-up in order for the PnP cards to configure right, and even then, the NIC uses the same IRQ as the serial (mouse) port, so the mouse works like s--t.
My point is - once people start buying systems designed for Linux, with the OS and basic applications pre-installed a LOT of the perceived difficulty of Linux for the masses will simply fade away...
I agree with your statement that there is little danger of the Linux kernel becoming fragmented, but remember that what we commonly referr to as "Linux" (GNU/Linux if you want to be pedantic) is really a combination of the kernel, libraries, installation packages, tools, directory heirarchies, and the almost infinite dependencies that exist between all these variables!
What happens is that an application, especially if it is distributed in a binary form, must be able to handle all these variables if it's going to function properly. In reality, vendors are starting to certify their applications against only a small subset of the current distributions - typically RH or Caldera - due to limited testing resources. An application that works under one distribution will not necessarily work under another distribution, or even on an updated release of the same distribution. For example, I had to download the new release of StarOffice when I upgraded to RH6.0. I haven't even tried my WordPerfect yet.
Am I hopeful that the Linux community will be able to overcome this hurdle? Yes. Do I think it will be an easy or painless task? Definitely NOT!
Don't get me wrong. I think all the "bad blood" between the Linux and all the various BSD camps is hurting the Open Source movement in general. Seems like they should be helping each other, not going for each other's throats.
However, arrogant, inflamatory posts like this certainly don't help matters any...:-/
Ummm... They don't "own" the protocols. They do, however, own certain implementations of those protocols. When you add a protocol stack, you have to install the software, and you can install it from Microsoft, or Sun or whoever you want (or trust).
I think if you read the posts again, you'll see that people are not saying they agree with AOL. I think they are just indulging in a bit of gloating over the delicious irony of the situation - the King of Proprietary Protocols is now crying foul when someone else hits them with a dose of their own medicine.
That being said, if we do somehow get a standard established (like HTML), and MS bullies their way into the market by giving away free software with every Windows computer (as in IE), then I wonder what's to keep them from perverting the standard once they "own" the market???
Slashdot Mirror
Also, computer screens are still really low resolution compared to even a poor printout. Compare a 28 pitch monitor with a 300DPI printout, and it's no wonder hackers have such problems with their eyes...
Actually, I'd include the positive points too! Is the story interesting, or simply a rehash of what everyone else is saying? Is it funny? Is it mindless drivel (i.e., flamebait)? I think it could be a valuable piece of information.
The problem is the enforcement. Any legal document is only as strong as the people who stand behind it. If there is no consequence, then companies like Corel will soon learn that they can run roughshod over the GPL and hijack any code they want and incorporate it into their closed systems. If people fight back (either through organizations like OSF, or on their own by letting their feelings be known), then companies will learn that the GPL has some real teeth.
I had a hardware guru friend set it up for me. The first thing he did was to hack (LITERALLY - with an X-Acto knife) the traces on the clock chip to double the CPU speed. Really screamed after that. Only problem was that it made the PackMan game unplayable... :-(
Ann McCaffrey did the same thing in two of her Pern stories. The first story, Dragonriders of Pern the story is told from the point of view of the "important" characters. In Nerilka's Story, the story is then retold through the eyes of one of the peripheral characters. It does give an interesting different perspective - how the events that swirl around the movers and shakers of the society filter down to the everyday folk.
What I'm saying is that I still like the concept of being able to apply a filter to what is coming into my house. Once the fundamental mechanism is in place, we can work out the details of implementation. No one says you have to put a filter on your TV. It's just there for those of us who want it.
As someone who has been a father for over 18 years, I agree with you on principle, but unfortunately, the world is not so simple. Clearly, the ONLY way to really teach children is by example, however the reality is that there are legions of other forces fighting against you. Unfortunately, the world is not a nice place for the innocent, and I want every advantage I can get to help me instill a true sense of values within my children.
On the other hand, by now it's pretty much a moot point for me. At 15 and 19, both of my kids are at the point where they must learn to make their own decisions. Now it's time for me to sit back and hope that I've taught them well over the past years.
Arrrgh! Must be another outbreak of the Stupidity Virus...
Why is it that every time someone mentions rating systems and the possibility to filter TV based on content that there is this sudden outbreak of the Stupids??? Providing a rating mechanism for TV is no more about limiting choices than it is for movies. We are talking here about individuals being able to filter out what they consider to be trash. The fact that we have a rating system for movies gives us more choices: I don't restrict your right to go to XXX rated movies... so long as there is a mechanism in place to keep my children out. Rating a TV program doesn't limit your ability to watch that pornographic or violent show (unless you're visiting in my house). It does, however, allow me to have some control over what goes on in my house.
Sure - in a PERFECT world, parents would ALWAYS know what their children are doing, and what shows they are watching, and what their friends are watching, and what their friends' friends are watching on TV. However, we don't live in a perfect world, and we can't drag our children around on leashes. Personally, as a parent, I have to deal with the garbage my kids are exposed to every day. I need all the help I can get.
This is the primary reason why I don't like cloning. As soon as people get the idea into their heads that, "Gee, if species X becomes extinct, then we can just clone them again to bring them back," then they will be less likely to fight for preserving threatened species.
The problem is, cloning does NOT exactly duplicate the original animal, and it certainly can't duplicate any kind of genetic diversity within the species.
Cloning will never take the place of preserving species (and their natural environments) in the first place.
And, not all religious people are dimwitted zealouts (contrary to popular belief).
Show me an actual living creature created from scratch and then we'll have some interesting discussions!
Do natural bacteria have a soul? I think not. I'm not Catholic, but I think only humans have a soul and are capable of sin.
Other creatures were created by God, but that doesn't mean we can't fiddle around with them.
When someone creates an entire cell from a pile of dust, then I'll be impressed!
We just had this happen yesterday. I've got this big 350MHz PII with 128MegRAM and 6Gig or disk space sitting on my desk, but where are all my files? Out on the network, where they can be backed up, and where they are accessible to other machines (notably my UNIX account), or served out of the ClearCase SCM server. When one of the servers go down (this whole place teeters on top of a sprawling Netware/NT/Unix pile of spagetti, so servers go down quite often), the whole place can go dead in the water. I can sort of limp along sometimes, but NT gets very flaky when it can't find things.
That's not to say that this particular model will spell the death knell of Microsoft. It sounds like these are closed boxes with a lot of custom hardware (i.e., no upgrades unless you pay Sun big $$$), though I could be wrong. And, they are not cheap! $9.99/month doesn't sound like a lot, but it adds up to something like $600 over the long term. The boxes I was working with were in the $300 range, with the only custom part being the boot-ROM added into the network cards to get the systems to boot with no local disk drives.
If StarOffice can pull off converting their internal data format to an open standard like XML (almost as much buzzword value as Linux and OSS), then other providers, be they Corel or Microsoft, will suddenly find themselves playing catch-up, just as they did when the Internet first exploded on the scene.
Where'd we ever lose the UNIX mantra of, "Do One Thing and Do It Well"? :-(
Quit if you think you must, but don't lie about it!!!
Really, you and I are the technology experts, not the educational ones. We should list the available technologies (filtering, internet connections, hardware, networks, etc.) and the pros and cons or each (including details like cost, or the flaws of filtering software), and then let the administration figure out its policy. We have to be honest though, and not fudge the facts with our own prejudices. Then, they are the one's responsible for getting parental permission, and dealing with problems when they come up. Believe me, they've been dealing with these issues for years!! (Whoever said the Internet was the first controversy to hit our school systems???)
Tell them what can and cannot be done. Tell them your recommendation. Let them make policy. If you can live with their policy, then do your work.
That being said, I still think computers have a place in the classroom (I've installed a number of them myself), as long as they are not seen as a replacement for human interactions with a teacher (or parent). In older classrooms, where kids can use them in problem solving exercises, review and practice on other traditional subjects, or as a reference (like a Very Big Encyclopedia or instant reference library), they can become a valuable tool. In fact, when you get up into the higher elementary and middleschool grades, I think it is critical that kids learn how to use the Internet.
Suffice it to say, our American tradition of trying to solve educational problems by throwing more money and technology at it is once again comming up short when the facts come in. There is nothing that can take the place of the older generation teaching the younger.
Ever try to create a boot floppy that includes CD-ROM drivers so you can "bootstrap" the install off the Windows CD?
I've got one system I built from various spare parts (classic Linux situation ;-). RH5.2 installs on it without a hitch. No problem. Windows95 will not install! I can sort of cobble it on and get it to boot, but I have a NIC, video and sound card. Pick any two... Even turning off the sound card, I have to boot the stupid machine three times after a power-up in order for the PnP cards to configure right, and even then, the NIC uses the same IRQ as the serial (mouse) port, so the mouse works like s--t.
My point is - once people start buying systems designed for Linux, with the OS and basic applications pre-installed a LOT of the perceived difficulty of Linux for the masses will simply fade away...
I agree with your statement that there is little danger of the Linux kernel becoming fragmented, but remember that what we commonly referr to as "Linux" (GNU/Linux if you want to be pedantic) is really a combination of the kernel, libraries, installation packages, tools, directory heirarchies, and the almost infinite dependencies that exist between all these variables!
What happens is that an application, especially if it is distributed in a binary form, must be able to handle all these variables if it's going to function properly. In reality, vendors are starting to certify their applications against only a small subset of the current distributions - typically RH or Caldera - due to limited testing resources. An application that works under one distribution will not necessarily work under another distribution, or even on an updated release of the same distribution. For example, I had to download the new release of StarOffice when I upgraded to RH6.0. I haven't even tried my WordPerfect yet.
Am I hopeful that the Linux community will be able to overcome this hurdle? Yes. Do I think it will be an easy or painless task? Definitely NOT!
Where are all the desktop applications?
Where are any applications?
Don't get me wrong. I think all the "bad blood" between the Linux and all the various BSD camps is hurting the Open Source movement in general. Seems like they should be helping each other, not going for each other's throats.
However, arrogant, inflamatory posts like this certainly don't help matters any... :-/
Ummm... They don't "own" the protocols. They do, however, own certain implementations of those protocols. When you add a protocol stack, you have to install the software, and you can install it from Microsoft, or Sun or whoever you want (or trust).
That being said, if we do somehow get a standard established (like HTML), and MS bullies their way into the market by giving away free software with every Windows computer (as in IE), then I wonder what's to keep them from perverting the standard once they "own" the market???