Stallman, you just make being a Linux developer such an exciting prospect! Create something worthwhile! Earn the respect and even admiration of your peers! Get slammed by conceited assholes over and over and over again! Be publicly slandered for every titchy little mistake!
Yeah right. Way to make the "Linux Community" feel like a welcome place to bring your skills.
no, it's not incidental. that's the whole goddamned point. if someone wants a copy of my thesis, they can have it for the cost of binding a copy. i didn't write it so that some bitch company like Contentville could turn around and make a buck off of my work.
you can't even compare it to napster. napster isn't taking copyrighted CD's, ripping them to MP3, and then offering them to you for a price. jesus, apples and fucking oranges.
it's all about money. it's always been about money. and it always will be about money.
by default, windows hides the file extension of registered users. thus, the payload attachment "iloveyou.txt.vbs" appeared to the user as the attachemnt "iloveyou.txt" with the vbs icon. that little tweak, imo, helped to spread this virus. then, not only the truly moronic users spread the virus, but many of the usually-not-moronic ones as well.
and i agree with the sentiment that being able to execute vb scripts via email is fucking retarded. just one more reason not to use microsoft. oh, and that incessant ranting by bill actually made me laugh out loud. what's he gonna do next, beat his fists on the floor and cry in court? pussy.
This is just JonKatz (and/., for that matter) showing that they are a true American journalistic entity - shock value is all that matters. Media outlets care about readership, not content.
You are asking a question whose answer is readily apparent. Look at JonKatz's definition of a "Geek" - someone who has, to some degree, been outcasted by society. He normally speaks from an American point of view, of which Christianity in its various incarnations is an integral part. Thus, one of the tenets of being a "geek" in Jon's eyes is the rejection of Christianity.
It seems to me that your question was more of an attempt to gleam sympathy. Just another person whining "don't persecute me!"
Think about the software availability of software on any architechture besides x86. One of the main complaint I hear about Macintosh is shoddy software selection. So, when the same companies start making software for Linux, it's only natural that there are going to be more companies making software for Linux on x86, not PPC or Alpha.
Why is it automatically assumed that if we put computers in the hands of elementary school children that all they are going to do is sit in front of it? I got my first computer when I was 4 years old, and I don't think my development suffered because of it.
We can't allow our fear of changing the environment in which our children are raised stop us from exposing them to technology at an early age. IMO learning about computers and technology as a young child has the same types of benefits as starting foreign language studies at an early age.
My biggest fear is that the increased use of technology in education will further the economic class separation in America. Consider this: the schools most likely to obtain the funding needed to implement computers in all classrooms are in affluent neighborhoods. Meanwhile, children who are not exposed to technology at a young age (read: the poor and/or inner city children) are at a serious disadvantage to catch their more economically advantaged peers. Does free software offer an answer to this problem...?
Re:It's a WebTV problem, not an MS problem
on
WebTV Security Hole
·
· Score: 1
Sorry, but if Microsoft owns a "controlling interest" in WebTV, then it becomes their responsibility to the customers of the previously independent company to ensure quality of product and service.
This bug shows the major flaw in the Microsoft way of doing business: If you simply run around buying other companies with other management and wide varieties of products, the benefits to the customer drop like a rock.
So should Microsoft just say, "What? A company that we own has a serious flaw that is endangering the privacy of its users? Not our fault..."
Um, Katz... as much as you'd apparently like it to be,/. is not Wired Magazine. My subscription to Wired ran out a little under a year ago, and I let it go. I picked up a copy of the January 2000 issue, and I was astounded. Every article in it was as long-winded and speculative as any JonKatz piece.
I mean, come on Katz. You take a goddamned robot at the entrance to a amusement park ride and turn it into the Future of All that is Technology During This Millenium That Will Change Everything. WHATEVER. It seems to me that your desire to be a part of something is causing a distortion in your reality field. You want your time to be the most momentous and glorious period of time in the history of technology, but it's not.
I come to/. to read news. Not to read you envisioning yourself as a key player in some gradoise techological showcase. Get over yourself.
I don't know where to find it online, but the January 2000 issue of Wired features these little bad boys on the first page of the Fetish section. The guy who submitted the article basically paraphrased Wired's blurb on them and included a couple of URL's. It also lists them as available in 2005 for around $70 a set...
Cleary, the development of this technology could come dangerously close to invading the privacy of every one of us. But isn't that the risk we all take with the advancements in technology? Consider nanotechnology, for example. Let us assume that a nanobot is constructed that uses some sort of triangulation device to give a GPS reading. Suddenly, every citizen and enemy of the state is trackable. Computer systems analyze movement patterns, forming more and more conclusions... et cetera. The implications are incredibly far-reaching.
All new technology is a trade off. This new system of recognizing behavior patterns may make your next plane trip less likely to have a terrorist aboard. Or stop your car from being broken into in a parking garage. We must simply, as a society, decide which is more important to us: our privacy or our safety. But, you might object, we shouldn't be forced to choose. Quite frankly, I couldn't agree more. We, as a community and as a society must not allow corporations to make these choices for us...
Anybody out there tried the Twiddler? It uses chorded strokes for the keyboard and tilting and whatnot for mouse movement. I'd take one just to try it out...
Did you actually read the article? Yeah, the author may be a college student, he may have never successfully installed NT 3.51, but does that mean that he's never used the OS? I think you are the one who's jumping to conclusions, not the author. He doesn't slam NT. He says that the people who approach NT as a respectable piece of software, without bloated preconceptions of ease-of-use, are able to successfully install and administer it. What's wrong with that? I'm an NT admin, and I know very intimately the merits of a quality OS install. I am also a fan of Linux and BSD, as well as open source. Obviously, the author isn't a Microsoft fan, but you appear to have immediately assumed he hates NT, and have taken to personal attacks (i.e., the college student remark...how many/. readers out there are college students? a healthy portion, i'd think). I realize that here on/. there is an incredible amount of defensiveness about operating systems. But please, read the article before you start questioning the author's journalistic credibility...
definitely recommended
on
The Year 1000
·
· Score: 1
I really liked this book. With all of the hoopla surrounding the y2k, the marketing was obvious. But hey, why not? The most appealing thing about this book was how easy it was to read. Reading about history is great, but something that reads like a history textbook isn't.
[rant] It really doesn't matter to me the specific details of how this new section of the licensing will affect ecommerce sites. What pisses me off to no end is the fact that Microsoft will stick its users with more and more semi-hidden costs at whatever junction they can.
To everyone who says "Don't just flame Microsoft, everyone does it," I say this: I don't care if this is a common business practice. I don't care if Microsoft isn't the only company screwing it's users in a very uncomfortable place while stealing their wallets. As a user and admin in a corporate environment, I am currently forced to deal with Microsoft products. So Microsoft's business practices are slapping me in the face every day. And I hate it. Microsoft, hell, corporations in general, nickel-and-dime people to death so often it makes me want to vomit.
I could try to see things from the corporate point of view, but I don't think I can fit my head that far up my ass.
It's so frustrating to hear things like "The place for domain disputes is in the courtroom." I don't know about anyone else, but quite frankly I'm fed up with my tax dollars being wasted on useless lawsuits. I don't want to help pay a judge's salary so that he/she can preside over these frivilous suits. Personally I'm rather torn on the issue. If someone is truly just squatting for the cash that might be made, smack them. That's just abuse of the system of freedom all of us have found and fought to protect with the Internet. But if you're using the domain for a legitimate purpose, and some corporate bully wants to yank it, I draw the line. Like AJ Reznor, a man who has every right to keep his domain regardless of what Thomas & Betts says.
On the other hand, isn't the.com domain supposed to be for commercial use? Hence the "com"? Thus, it makes at least logical sense that, unless the site is being put to commercial use, a company should have prevalance over personal webspace. Is this the case? I honestly don't know the answer to that question. Is this becoming more fuel for the opening of other domain extensions?
Currently we live in a money-based society. Everything is about money- money allows us to fulfill our basic needs like food and shelter. So when the industrial working classes' jobs are automated, where will they go? Nowhere. If (or when) society reaches the point that nearly everything is automated, we face a breakdown of the world as we know it. I don't know what's going to happen; I'm a slave to the mindset of industrialized society. I cannot imagine what would happen in a world where money was not central. Optimists (like Clark) see the return of farmland and the like to hunter-gathering societies. But is that really realistic? Will the concept of "work" or "compensation" just change? It's impossible to say for sure, but it raises interesting questions as well...
The big question seems to be this: could it be true? Or are the Israelis just pulling Europe's chain?
I say this: does it really matter? Since when has the presence of an actual threat over the presence of a perceived threat really meant much in international politics? If the Israelis can convince the world they can do it, without ever proving it, they've succeeded either way.
Personally, I think that better encryption for banking systems is a good thing. I don't want anyone messing with my money, and as stated in a previous post, I like internet banking. So, regardless of whether or not this is a hoax, it's causing an increased notice of cryptography issues. The more people that are aware of security and crypto problems in computing, the better.
Regardless, if it's not a hoax, imagine the implications of the quantum computing! Is it closer than we think?
Looks like Cringely was wrong again. It seems that the popular business model coming from the valley is (frighteningly) starting to model that one company from up the coast. If you can't beat them, buy them. If you can't buy them, merge and rake in the dough, at the expense of your customers.
Let's just hope it's a trend that doesn't continue.
I realize that this has been commented to death, so I'll attempt to be concise.
Ever been surfing the web at work, stumble across a nifty page, and then your boss walks in? Or you are called away for some urgent business? Bye-bye, nifty page. Ever receive an email at work that you didn't want to leave on a server for fear that someone else would read it? Print the baby out, and hit Delete. This is at least one direction from which the "print out everything in sight" mentality comes from.
I'm not endorsing this kind of activity. Personally, I think it's ridiculous. It all boils down to a basic lack of trust in electronic formats. Stop your average guy on the street and ask him how you make paper. Chances are he can tell you to some rudimentary degree. However, ask him how a computer stores his email, and he'll probably look at you like you're speaking Swahili. When given a choice, many, many people are going to choose a legal pad and a Bic over their PDA.
The Scene... A long line of Mac users in front of Steve Jobs' desk, who is personally handing out all of the new iMacs.
Jobs: "Here is your pre-configured box. We've decided everything that you might possibly need. You may change the configuration at your mortal peril. Give me $1500, and leave."
Buyer: "Why, thank you sir! I have been blessed. All praise the intellectual force that is Herr Jobs! I will worship this sickly colored box forever! I will praise its merits to the ends of the Earth!"
Jobs: "Next!"
Buyer#2: Smiling ear-to-ear "It's an honor to meet you, Mr. Jobs. I have a ques..ques...question." Loses his smile "Could I get my iMac in bl...bl...black?"
Jobs stares coldly at the young man, their icy gaze grabbing the buyer about the throat. Then, Jobs laughes loud and hard. The young man seems to relax, smiling again, looking sure of himself in the praise of his idol. With a flick of his wrist, Jobs releases the trapdoor under the poor fool's feet, his screams as he falls silenced only by the dull thud of the trapdoor locking shut.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're surprised, you're not paying attention.
Stallman, you just make being a Linux developer such an exciting prospect! Create something worthwhile! Earn the respect and even admiration of your peers! Get slammed by conceited assholes over and over and over again! Be publicly slandered for every titchy little mistake!
Yeah right. Way to make the "Linux Community" feel like a welcome place to bring your skills.
no, it's not incidental. that's the whole goddamned point. if someone wants a copy of my thesis, they can have it for the cost of binding a copy. i didn't write it so that some bitch company like Contentville could turn around and make a buck off of my work.
you can't even compare it to napster. napster isn't taking copyrighted CD's, ripping them to MP3, and then offering them to you for a price. jesus, apples and fucking oranges.
it's all about money. it's always been about money. and it always will be about money.
by default, windows hides the file extension of registered users. thus, the payload attachment "iloveyou.txt.vbs" appeared to the user as the attachemnt "iloveyou.txt" with the vbs icon. that little tweak, imo, helped to spread this virus. then, not only the truly moronic users spread the virus, but many of the usually-not-moronic ones as well.
and i agree with the sentiment that being able to execute vb scripts via email is fucking retarded. just one more reason not to use microsoft. oh, and that incessant ranting by bill actually made me laugh out loud. what's he gonna do next, beat his fists on the floor and cry in court? pussy.
And how exactly is Napster violating this law? If the law is worded how you have posted, they're fully in compliant with the law.
This is just JonKatz (and /., for that matter) showing that they are a true American journalistic entity - shock value is all that matters. Media outlets care about readership, not content.
You are asking a question whose answer is readily apparent. Look at JonKatz's definition of a "Geek" - someone who has, to some degree, been outcasted by society. He normally speaks from an American point of view, of which Christianity in its various incarnations is an integral part. Thus, one of the tenets of being a "geek" in Jon's eyes is the rejection of Christianity.
It seems to me that your question was more of an attempt to gleam sympathy. Just another person whining "don't persecute me!"
Sorry for the flamebait, but get over it.
Think about the software availability of software on any architechture besides x86. One of the main complaint I hear about Macintosh is shoddy software selection. So, when the same companies start making software for Linux, it's only natural that there are going to be more companies making software for Linux on x86, not PPC or Alpha.
If he says "Fully Internet Compatiable" one more time, I think I'm gonna puke.
From the last line of the article:
"Caldera Systems was spawned from Caldera Corporation, but is independent and not involved in its progenitor's suit against Microsoft."
So money into Caldera System != money in the case against Microsoft...
Why is it automatically assumed that if we put computers in the hands of elementary school children that all they are going to do is sit in front of it? I got my first computer when I was 4 years old, and I don't think my development suffered because of it.
We can't allow our fear of changing the environment in which our children are raised stop us from exposing them to technology at an early age. IMO learning about computers and technology as a young child has the same types of benefits as starting foreign language studies at an early age.
My biggest fear is that the increased use of technology in education will further the economic class separation in America. Consider this: the schools most likely to obtain the funding needed to implement computers in all classrooms are in affluent neighborhoods. Meanwhile, children who are not exposed to technology at a young age (read: the poor and/or inner city children) are at a serious disadvantage to catch their more economically advantaged peers. Does free software offer an answer to this problem...?
Sorry, but if Microsoft owns a "controlling interest" in WebTV, then it becomes their responsibility to the customers of the previously independent company to ensure quality of product and service.
This bug shows the major flaw in the Microsoft way of doing business: If you simply run around buying other companies with other management and wide varieties of products, the benefits to the customer drop like a rock.
So should Microsoft just say, "What? A company that we own has a serious flaw that is endangering the privacy of its users? Not our fault..."
Um, Katz... as much as you'd apparently like it to be, /. is not Wired Magazine. My subscription to Wired ran out a little under a year ago, and I let it go. I picked up a copy of the January 2000 issue, and I was astounded. Every article in it was as long-winded and speculative as any JonKatz piece.
/. to read news. Not to read you envisioning yourself as a key player in some gradoise techological showcase. Get over yourself.
I mean, come on Katz. You take a goddamned robot at the entrance to a amusement park ride and turn it into the Future of All that is Technology During This Millenium That Will Change Everything. WHATEVER. It seems to me that your desire to be a part of something is causing a distortion in your reality field. You want your time to be the most momentous and glorious period of time in the history of technology, but it's not.
I come to
I don't know where to find it online, but the January 2000 issue of Wired features these little bad boys on the first page of the Fetish section. The guy who submitted the article basically paraphrased Wired's blurb on them and included a couple of URL's. It also lists them as available in 2005 for around $70 a set...
Cleary, the development of this technology could come dangerously close to invading the privacy of every one of us. But isn't that the risk we all take with the advancements in technology? Consider nanotechnology, for example. Let us assume that a nanobot is constructed that uses some sort of triangulation device to give a GPS reading. Suddenly, every citizen and enemy of the state is trackable. Computer systems analyze movement patterns, forming more and more conclusions... et cetera. The implications are incredibly far-reaching.
All new technology is a trade off. This new system of recognizing behavior patterns may make your next plane trip less likely to have a terrorist aboard. Or stop your car from being broken into in a parking garage. We must simply, as a society, decide which is more important to us: our privacy or our safety. But, you might object, we shouldn't be forced to choose. Quite frankly, I couldn't agree more. We, as a community and as a society must not allow corporations to make these choices for us...
Anybody out there tried the Twiddler? It uses chorded strokes for the keyboard and tilting and whatnot for mouse movement. I'd take one just to try it out...
Did you actually read the article? Yeah, the author may be a college student, he may have never successfully installed NT 3.51, but does that mean that he's never used the OS? I think you are the one who's jumping to conclusions, not the author. He doesn't slam NT. He says that the people who approach NT as a respectable piece of software, without bloated preconceptions of ease-of-use, are able to successfully install and administer it. What's wrong with that? I'm an NT admin, and I know very intimately the merits of a quality OS install. I am also a fan of Linux and BSD, as well as open source. Obviously, the author isn't a Microsoft fan, but you appear to have immediately assumed he hates NT, and have taken to personal attacks (i.e., the college student remark...how many /. readers out there are college students? a healthy portion, i'd think). I realize that here on /. there is an incredible amount of defensiveness about operating systems. But please, read the article before you start questioning the author's journalistic credibility...
I really liked this book. With all of the hoopla surrounding the y2k, the marketing was obvious. But hey, why not? The most appealing thing about this book was how easy it was to read. Reading about history is great, but something that reads like a history textbook isn't.
[rant]
It really doesn't matter to me the specific details of how this new section of the licensing will affect ecommerce sites. What pisses me off to no end is the fact that Microsoft will stick its users with more and more semi-hidden costs at whatever junction they can.
To everyone who says "Don't just flame Microsoft, everyone does it," I say this: I don't care if this is a common business practice. I don't care if Microsoft isn't the only company screwing it's users in a very uncomfortable place while stealing their wallets. As a user and admin in a corporate environment, I am currently forced to deal with Microsoft products. So Microsoft's business practices are slapping me in the face every day. And I hate it. Microsoft, hell, corporations in general, nickel-and-dime people to death so often it makes me want to vomit.
I could try to see things from the corporate point of view, but I don't think I can fit my head that far up my ass.
[/rant]
It's so frustrating to hear things like "The place for domain disputes is in the courtroom." I don't know about anyone else, but quite frankly I'm fed up with my tax dollars being wasted on useless lawsuits. I don't want to help pay a judge's salary so that he/she can preside over these frivilous suits. Personally I'm rather torn on the issue. If someone is truly just squatting for the cash that might be made, smack them. That's just abuse of the system of freedom all of us have found and fought to protect with the Internet. But if you're using the domain for a legitimate purpose, and some corporate bully wants to yank it, I draw the line. Like AJ Reznor, a man who has every right to keep his domain regardless of what Thomas & Betts says.
.com domain supposed to be for commercial use? Hence the "com"? Thus, it makes at least logical sense that, unless the site is being put to commercial use, a company should have prevalance over personal webspace. Is this the case? I honestly don't know the answer to that question. Is this becoming more fuel for the opening of other domain extensions?
On the other hand, isn't the
Currently we live in a money-based society. Everything is about money- money allows us to fulfill our basic needs like food and shelter. So when the industrial working classes' jobs are automated, where will they go? Nowhere. If (or when) society reaches the point that nearly everything is automated, we face a breakdown of the world as we know it. I don't know what's going to happen; I'm a slave to the mindset of industrialized society. I cannot imagine what would happen in a world where money was not central. Optimists (like Clark) see the return of farmland and the like to hunter-gathering societies. But is that really realistic? Will the concept of "work" or "compensation" just change? It's impossible to say for sure, but it raises interesting questions as well...
The big question seems to be this: could it be true? Or are the Israelis just pulling Europe's chain?
I say this: does it really matter? Since when has the presence of an actual threat over the presence of a perceived threat really meant much in international politics? If the Israelis can convince the world they can do it, without ever proving it, they've succeeded either way.
Personally, I think that better encryption for banking systems is a good thing. I don't want anyone messing with my money, and as stated in a previous post, I like internet banking. So, regardless of whether or not this is a hoax, it's causing an increased notice of cryptography issues. The more people that are aware of security and crypto problems in computing, the better.
Regardless, if it's not a hoax, imagine the implications of the quantum computing! Is it closer than we think?
Looks like Cringely was wrong again. It seems that the popular business model coming from the valley is (frighteningly) starting to model that one company from up the coast. If you can't beat them, buy them. If you can't buy them, merge and rake in the dough, at the expense of your customers.
Let's just hope it's a trend that doesn't continue.
I realize that this has been commented to death, so I'll attempt to be concise.
Ever been surfing the web at work, stumble across a nifty page, and then your boss walks in? Or you are called away for some urgent business? Bye-bye, nifty page. Ever receive an email at work that you didn't want to leave on a server for fear that someone else would read it? Print the baby out, and hit Delete. This is at least one direction from which the "print out everything in sight" mentality comes from.
I'm not endorsing this kind of activity. Personally, I think it's ridiculous. It all boils down to a basic lack of trust in electronic formats. Stop your average guy on the street and ask him how you make paper. Chances are he can tell you to some rudimentary degree. However, ask him how a computer stores his email, and he'll probably look at you like you're speaking Swahili. When given a choice, many, many people are going to choose a legal pad and a Bic over their PDA.
The Scene... A long line of Mac users in front of Steve Jobs' desk, who is personally handing out all of the new iMacs.
Jobs: "Here is your pre-configured box. We've decided everything that you might possibly need. You may change the configuration at your mortal peril. Give me $1500, and leave."
Buyer: "Why, thank you sir! I have been blessed. All praise the intellectual force that is Herr Jobs! I will worship this sickly colored box forever! I will praise its merits to the ends of the Earth!"
Jobs: "Next!"
Buyer#2: Smiling ear-to-ear "It's an honor to meet you, Mr. Jobs. I have a ques..ques...question." Loses his smile "Could I get my iMac in bl...bl...black?"
Jobs stares coldly at the young man, their icy gaze grabbing the buyer about the throat. Then, Jobs laughes loud and hard. The young man seems to relax, smiling again, looking sure of himself in the praise of his idol. With a flick of his wrist, Jobs releases the trapdoor under the poor fool's feet, his screams as he falls silenced only by the dull thud of the trapdoor locking shut.
Jobs: "Next!"