Hopefully, trying out XO will involve a few dozen pilot projects in different countries. Given what studies have shown in the U.S. about the value of computers to education, I expect the pilot projects to show that the laptops would be a tremendous waste of money .
Unlike the US in which every child can be issued textbooks, which constantly need to be updated and corrected, the Third World can't always afford new books for all kids. Using broadband text on a laptop can easily and quickly be both updated and corrected. One NGO in Africa is setting just such a project, they setup satellite dishes so current e-text can be used in schools.
Also though I don't know if XO is doing it or plans to but if local manufactures are used to build these laptops they can create jobs locally.
When I say I support separation of infrastructure and services, I mean that I like the idea of the infrastructure owner being a different entity from the ISP. I think it would be more efficient, and less open to conflict-of-interest.
The only way to separate infrastructure from services that use it are laws though.
which suggests to me a co-op (even though I generally consider co-ops less efficient than independently owned corporations).
A co-op is a corporation. Co-op members are stockholders. However they only own one share so everyone has the same votes whereas a C Corporation and S Corporation can have stockholders with a greater vote count, a major stockholder has more votes than a stockholder who only owns one share. ie a co-op is a one member one vote entity. Therefore a co-op can be just as efficient or inefficient as any other corporation.
When you say you support separation of infrastructure and services, you apparently mean that any given group of shareholders shouldn't be permitted to both own the telecommunications infrastructure and provide services over it.
While I didn't say anything about it, I have no problem with a stockholder owning shares in both the infrastructure owner and a service provider. A problem I will have is if the management is the same for both or there is collusion between an owner and service provider which raises a bar for other potential service providers.
Specific ISPs are not important to me; I'd rather have a choice of several providers competing primarily on price and not geography.
In general I prefer to support locally owned and managed businesses, however when I chose my ISP I went with a national provider because I knew, er planned, I'd move. And I have, three tymes since getting access, one of those being across the country. So I want a choice as to who my provider is, but as it is now for cable and fiber there isn't much of a choice. The only way I can there being a choice is if there is a law requiring open access, like Google is asking for for the airwaves being put on auction by the FCC or by requiring infrastructure owners to provide access.
Those in power subvert the lions share of the aid resources leaving the people in a worse state: no food and a well supplied oppressor.
Which is why different groups should provide aid instead of one, the government. Have churches and evangelicals, groups like Save the Children and OxFam, as well as local groups help.
the natural rebuttal is that the money spent on computers for the children might be better spent on things like malaria research/treatment and providing more food.
Giving the poor food and you feed them for a day, but if you give them the chance to earn money and you feed them for life. As the Christian saying goes "give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach him to fish and feed him for a life." Improving education will improve people's lives by allowing them the opportunity to work productive jobs and earn money. It's not an either or situation. More jobs means more can afford health care as well as more food. With a greater demand of healthcare health care jobs will be created. The same with food, the more people can afford for food the greater the demand for farms and farm workers. It's virtually a virtuous circle. Improvement in education creates jobs which both improves education and creates more jobs.
In a sense that's what I see this project being about, improving lives. As it is now most of the aid the First World gives to the Third World makes things worse not better. Either money or food is given. The money given only is used to reinforce the power of those given the money which is usually government and it's frequently corrupt. The food given to the hungry creates dependency. Give food this week, month, or year, and more will be needed next week, month, or year. However giving people the resources to grow food and they can take care of themselves. Having some be able to grow food then others can make things or provide services.
You can't envision a co-op or similar owning the local infrastructure
Sure, co-ops can own the infrastructure how that still doesn't address separation of infrastructure from services. The co-op can still offer said services if members, owners, so choose as well as shutout others. Seeing as how a co-op is based on cooperation I find it difficult seeing a co-op doing it but it's up to the members to decide. Though neither is a utility, I am a member of two co-ops, and we are asked who the co-ops should support.
Conversely, if you needed to use force to make people separate infrastructure from services that would prove that it's a bad idea, which eliminates any reason to make it mandantory.
The only reason to mandate separation is because the current system where the same entity that owns the infrastructure can offer services using it while shutting out other potential service providers, ie the system is broken now! Not only that but much of the infrastructure was build with taxpayer money and it uses the public Right of Way.
I guess that those 16 bits are per color (16x16x16 = 48 bits??) but I am not sure (could someone please better explain this?).
I thought CinePaint had 32 bit colour depths, however it only has 16 bit per colour which as you state has a total depth of 48 bits. Photoshop though does have 32 bit depths per channel, colour, for a total of 96 bits.
You've also got the upgrade path: The next version of Photoshop will set you back $199. The next version of your DSLR camera will still cost you full retail.
Sometime back I was talking with an employee in one of the Camera chain stores, Ritz I believe, and mentioned I was concerned about getting a DSLR and finding out it was outdated some months or a year later. He said that with the extended service plan they had if a better camera with the same price came out before the service plan expired if the camera covered by the plan was brought in ruined it would be replaced with the new camera. He even went so far as to suggest checking the store occasionally to see if a better camera came out and if so then drop or throw the old camera on the ground and bring it in to be replaced. I got a kick out it but was wondering if that was a scam, I don't think so because I've had stuff replaced before, or a selling tactic for the service plan.
Also, if you're not a professional and qualify for the educational discount, a full copy of PhotoShop CS3 Extended will only set you back $299. The educational version of your DSLR... doesn't exist.
The educational version of Photoshop doesn't qualify for an upgrade. However some camera manufacturers do offer educational discounts. Several years ago I got a list of companies that did at the college I was attending. Searching Photo.net you can find some companies that offer educational discounts. However you might have to have a professor sign a statement, when I got the list instructions came with it saying an order had to be signed by a professor certifying that you was a photography student.
I have installed Neo-Office on the Macs belonging to our graphics designers, plus a couple other open-source tools(main tool is In-Design).
A few weeks ago I installed NeoOffice on my new Macbook Pro and I plan on trying out other FOOS programs. Maybe the next I plan on trying is CinePaint aka Film GIMP.
what are these deep colors you speak of? Can you show me a picture saved in gimp and one saved in photoshop that uses deep colors?
Unfortunately I doubt the web, browsers, can handle colour bit depths past 12 bits. While GIMP has 8 bit colour depths Photoshop has 32 bit colour depths, as does CinePaint aka Film GIMP. It may not make much difference here, both on the web and on/., but it matters a lot for any sort of professional graphics.
I've been using photoshop for about 10 years now and have become very proficient. I recently made the switch to linux. The only real application i havn't found a replacement for is photoshop. I have tried using GIMP but their are just too many problems with it.
Have you tried CinePaint aka FilmGIMP? I'll be getting into photography, well professionally I'm hoping, and because it would be a real stretch for me to afford Photoshop right now I'm been looking for a FOOS photo editor. Also as some have offered there are other editors available such as Bibble, Xara Xtreme, and Light Crafts. I'll start with CinePaint and work my way down 'til I find one that works for me, if I don't find one I guess I'll be stuck getting Photoshop. If I do what I'll do is buy an older version of PS from eBay and upgrade it. You can get PS pretty cheaply on eBay but you have to make sure what you get is eligible for upgrades and there's a Transfer of Ownership form filled out.
Unless they have recently added support for higher depths than 16 bits, no one will be able to take it seriously. I'd love to use gimp for something more than a quick rescale of jpegs, but when you're constrained to working with 8 bits per channel, everything just gets too tedious.
CinePaint aka Film Gimp supports 32 bit colour depths. However it's based on an older version of GIMP. Seeing as how it was made by and for the movie industry it's great for motion pictures.
Whenever I use that program, I always feel like a GIMP. Even though it is free, and is the PS equivalent for Linux users, more or less, the UI is terrible. Most people aren't programmers, so I find that point moot. Luckily, however, I recall a digg story indicating on a blog the GIMP team were taking in suggestions on how to improve the UI (as well as the program itself).
If you don't like GIMP's GUI interface, there's a version of GIMP with a Photoshop type interface, GIMPShop.
I would imagine that a large number of photographers have switched over to Adobe Lightroom. It's tailor made for photo work (workflow, organization and processing). It's a very nice piece of software and a lot cheaper than PS CS3!
Like Aperture, Lightroom is basically a workflow tool. They can both do some basic editing and adjustments, but neither is for full bore editing.
Cinepaint has forked a long time ago and so many other features are missing from it, so don't even mention it as an alternative.
What is CinePaint missing? As I don't want to fork over money I could use elsewhere, like my new Macbook Pro, I've been planning on trying CinePaint. I know it supports 32 bit colour depths like Photoshop so what's missing? What I might do is get an older version of PS off of eBay, I'll make sure a transfer form from Adobe is filled out first. I could then use it, to upgrade. I'm pretty sure that by getting an old version then upgrading it will cost less.
Wacom support, I don't know but as far as photography is concerned I don't think there is much use for one of those.
For many photographers using a tablet is much easier and natural than using a mouse. And like a trackball, which also have the above advantages, it offers more precise control.
While most casual users don't have their monitors calibrated for color management, GIMP 2.4.0 RC3 for Windows turns on color management when first installed, and it applies some wild guess at a monitor profile.
Did you report it as a bug? On Linux, it seems to be able to get a fairly decent profile from the X server, so it works there.
It doesn't help to report colour management as a bug, nor does it help if the monitor is calibrated when GIMP is first installed. Monitors have to constantly be calibrated and a colorimeter is needed to calibrate the monitor for predictable colour reproduction.
Interface and everything aside, the big stumbling block with the Gimp was its lack of support for more then 8 bits per channel. I would love to be able to use the GIMP, I can't afford to keep up with Photoshop, but without support for more then 8 bits per channel you wind up with some pretty nasty artifacts if you do any major editing.
Have you checked out CinePaint or FilmGimp? Like Photoshop it has 32 bit colour depths.
Thing is, it isn't, and never has been as good as photoshop, so the professional world aren't going to accept it while photoshop is better.
For photographers what's better is CinePaint or FilmGimp. Like Photoshop, PS, it has a 32 bit colour depth whereas the last version of GIMP I checked out didn't even have 16 bit colour depth. It has more features than GIMP as well. I'm not sure how it stacks up to PS for most things dealing photos however it's better for movies. That's why it was created, for those in the motion picture industry.
...as long as the FCC is staffed with smart, intelligent individuals, why shouldn't they have a chance to hear everyone's opinion before they meet to discuss the topic. The extra time is useful for those who want to study the arguments and opinions of the lobbyists, and check the facts and logic behind them.
The problem is is not everyone has the amount of tyme in which they can talk to the FCC. Those favored by being given info two weeks earlier than everyone else have a distinct advantage.
Don't see how Congress has a role here. After all, the FCC rules are already in the law, it's just that the FCC is violating those laws. This sounds like a job for the Executive branch, charged with enforcing law!
Congress has at least two tools it can use, three really. First congress holds the purse strings and if an executive office won't uphold it's mandate it can withhold funds as well. Secondly congress can sue the executive branch, which as you say the FCC is part of, in the Supreme Court. Third congress can inform citizens the FCC and Bush isn't following the law. With emperor Bush it may not matter much though.
Slashdot Mirror
Hopefully, trying out XO will involve a few dozen pilot projects in different countries. Given what studies have shown in the U.S. about the value of computers to education, I expect the pilot projects to show that the laptops would be a tremendous waste of money .
Unlike the US in which every child can be issued textbooks, which constantly need to be updated and corrected, the Third World can't always afford new books for all kids. Using broadband text on a laptop can easily and quickly be both updated and corrected. One NGO in Africa is setting just such a project, they setup satellite dishes so current e-text can be used in schools.
Also though I don't know if XO is doing it or plans to but if local manufactures are used to build these laptops they can create jobs locally.
FalconWhen I say I support separation of infrastructure and services, I mean that I like the idea of the infrastructure owner being a different entity from the ISP. I think it would be more efficient, and less open to conflict-of-interest.
The only way to separate infrastructure from services that use it are laws though.
which suggests to me a co-op (even though I generally consider co-ops less efficient than independently owned corporations).
A co-op is a corporation. Co-op members are stockholders. However they only own one share so everyone has the same votes whereas a C Corporation and S Corporation can have stockholders with a greater vote count, a major stockholder has more votes than a stockholder who only owns one share. ie a co-op is a one member one vote entity. Therefore a co-op can be just as efficient or inefficient as any other corporation.
When you say you support separation of infrastructure and services, you apparently mean that any given group of shareholders shouldn't be permitted to both own the telecommunications infrastructure and provide services over it.
While I didn't say anything about it, I have no problem with a stockholder owning shares in both the infrastructure owner and a service provider. A problem I will have is if the management is the same for both or there is collusion between an owner and service provider which raises a bar for other potential service providers.
Specific ISPs are not important to me; I'd rather have a choice of several providers competing primarily on price and not geography.
In general I prefer to support locally owned and managed businesses, however when I chose my ISP I went with a national provider because I knew, er planned, I'd move. And I have, three tymes since getting access, one of those being across the country. So I want a choice as to who my provider is, but as it is now for cable and fiber there isn't much of a choice. The only way I can there being a choice is if there is a law requiring open access, like Google is asking for for the airwaves being put on auction by the FCC or by requiring infrastructure owners to provide access.
Those in power subvert the lions share of the aid resources leaving the people in a worse state: no food and a well supplied oppressor.
Which is why different groups should provide aid instead of one, the government. Have churches and evangelicals, groups like Save the Children and OxFam, as well as local groups help.
Falconthe natural rebuttal is that the money spent on computers for the children might be better spent on things like malaria research/treatment and providing more food.
Giving the poor food and you feed them for a day, but if you give them the chance to earn money and you feed them for life. As the Christian saying goes "give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach him to fish and feed him for a life." Improving education will improve people's lives by allowing them the opportunity to work productive jobs and earn money. It's not an either or situation. More jobs means more can afford health care as well as more food. With a greater demand of healthcare health care jobs will be created. The same with food, the more people can afford for food the greater the demand for farms and farm workers. It's virtually a virtuous circle. Improvement in education creates jobs which both improves education and creates more jobs.
In a sense that's what I see this project being about, improving lives. As it is now most of the aid the First World gives to the Third World makes things worse not better. Either money or food is given. The money given only is used to reinforce the power of those given the money which is usually government and it's frequently corrupt. The food given to the hungry creates dependency. Give food this week, month, or year, and more will be needed next week, month, or year. However giving people the resources to grow food and they can take care of themselves. Having some be able to grow food then others can make things or provide services.
FalconYou can't envision a co-op or similar owning the local infrastructure
Sure, co-ops can own the infrastructure how that still doesn't address separation of infrastructure from services. The co-op can still offer said services if members, owners, so choose as well as shutout others. Seeing as how a co-op is based on cooperation I find it difficult seeing a co-op doing it but it's up to the members to decide. Though neither is a utility, I am a member of two co-ops, and we are asked who the co-ops should support.
Conversely, if you needed to use force to make people separate infrastructure from services that would prove that it's a bad idea, which eliminates any reason to make it mandantory.
The only reason to mandate separation is because the current system where the same entity that owns the infrastructure can offer services using it while shutting out other potential service providers, ie the system is broken now! Not only that but much of the infrastructure was build with taxpayer money and it uses the public Right of Way.
FalconI guess that those 16 bits are per color (16x16x16 = 48 bits??) but I am not sure (could someone please better explain this?).
I thought CinePaint had 32 bit colour depths, however it only has 16 bit per colour which as you state has a total depth of 48 bits. Photoshop though does have 32 bit depths per channel, colour, for a total of 96 bits.
FalconYou've also got the upgrade path: The next version of Photoshop will set you back $199. The next version of your DSLR camera will still cost you full retail.
Sometime back I was talking with an employee in one of the Camera chain stores, Ritz I believe, and mentioned I was concerned about getting a DSLR and finding out it was outdated some months or a year later. He said that with the extended service plan they had if a better camera with the same price came out before the service plan expired if the camera covered by the plan was brought in ruined it would be replaced with the new camera. He even went so far as to suggest checking the store occasionally to see if a better camera came out and if so then drop or throw the old camera on the ground and bring it in to be replaced. I got a kick out it but was wondering if that was a scam, I don't think so because I've had stuff replaced before, or a selling tactic for the service plan.
Also, if you're not a professional and qualify for the educational discount, a full copy of PhotoShop CS3 Extended will only set you back $299. The educational version of your DSLR... doesn't exist.
The educational version of Photoshop doesn't qualify for an upgrade. However some camera manufacturers do offer educational discounts. Several years ago I got a list of companies that did at the college I was attending. Searching Photo.net you can find some companies that offer educational discounts. However you might have to have a professor sign a statement, when I got the list instructions came with it saying an order had to be signed by a professor certifying that you was a photography student.
FalconI know nothing of Paint.net but so far GIMP is the best and most functional free software of it's nature out there.
If you like GIMP you may like CinePaint aka Film GIMP more.
FalconI have installed Neo-Office on the Macs belonging to our graphics designers, plus a couple other open-source tools(main tool is In-Design).
A few weeks ago I installed NeoOffice on my new Macbook Pro and I plan on trying out other FOOS programs. Maybe the next I plan on trying is CinePaint aka Film GIMP.
Falconwhat are these deep colors you speak of? Can you show me a picture saved in gimp and one saved in photoshop that uses deep colors?
Unfortunately I doubt the web, browsers, can handle colour bit depths past 12 bits. While GIMP has 8 bit colour depths Photoshop has 32 bit colour depths, as does CinePaint aka Film GIMP. It may not make much difference here, both on the web and on /., but it matters a lot for any sort of professional graphics.
FalconI've been using photoshop for about 10 years now and have become very proficient. I recently made the switch to linux. The only real application i havn't found a replacement for is photoshop. I have tried using GIMP but their are just too many problems with it.
Have you tried CinePaint aka FilmGIMP? I'll be getting into photography, well professionally I'm hoping, and because it would be a real stretch for me to afford Photoshop right now I'm been looking for a FOOS photo editor. Also as some have offered there are other editors available such as Bibble, Xara Xtreme, and Light Crafts. I'll start with CinePaint and work my way down 'til I find one that works for me, if I don't find one I guess I'll be stuck getting Photoshop. If I do what I'll do is buy an older version of PS from eBay and upgrade it. You can get PS pretty cheaply on eBay but you have to make sure what you get is eligible for upgrades and there's a Transfer of Ownership form filled out.
FalconUnless they have recently added support for higher depths than 16 bits, no one will be able to take it seriously. I'd love to use gimp for something more than a quick rescale of jpegs, but when you're constrained to working with 8 bits per channel, everything just gets too tedious.
CinePaint aka Film Gimp supports 32 bit colour depths. However it's based on an older version of GIMP. Seeing as how it was made by and for the movie industry it's great for motion pictures.
FalconWhenever I use that program, I always feel like a GIMP. Even though it is free, and is the PS equivalent for Linux users, more or less, the UI is terrible. Most people aren't programmers, so I find that point moot. Luckily, however, I recall a digg story indicating on a blog the GIMP team were taking in suggestions on how to improve the UI (as well as the program itself).
If you don't like GIMP's GUI interface, there's a version of GIMP with a Photoshop type interface, GIMPShop.
FalconI would imagine that a large number of photographers have switched over to Adobe Lightroom. It's tailor made for photo work (workflow, organization and processing). It's a very nice piece of software and a lot cheaper than PS CS3!
Like Aperture, Lightroom is basically a workflow tool. They can both do some basic editing and adjustments, but neither is for full bore editing.
FalconCinepaint has forked a long time ago and so many other features are missing from it, so don't even mention it as an alternative.
What is CinePaint missing? As I don't want to fork over money I could use elsewhere, like my new Macbook Pro, I've been planning on trying CinePaint. I know it supports 32 bit colour depths like Photoshop so what's missing? What I might do is get an older version of PS off of eBay, I'll make sure a transfer form from Adobe is filled out first. I could then use it, to upgrade. I'm pretty sure that by getting an old version then upgrading it will cost less.
FalconWhy would super-expensive software be so dumb that it can not detect that I am editing an 128x128 pixel icon and adjust undo steps automatically?
Why in the world would you use Photoshop to edit icons? That's not what it's meant for, it's meant for editing photographs.
FalconWacom support, I don't know but as far as photography is concerned I don't think there is much use for one of those.
For many photographers using a tablet is much easier and natural than using a mouse. And like a trackball, which also have the above advantages, it offers more precise control.
Some pictures from me: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gomox/ (all processed in Gimp)
Some nice shots.
FalconMore basically, what is it feature-wise that puts PS so far ahead of the very solid product that is The GIMP
24 bit colour depths. GIMP doesn't even do 16 bit depths while Photoshop does 32 bit colour depths, as does CinePaint or FilmGimp.
FalconOooh, ooh, hear that, Apple fans? Look what he called OS X. I say you organize yourself a lynchin'.
Photoshop runs on both OS X and Windows, what it does not run on natively is Linux.
FalconWhile most casual users don't have their monitors calibrated for color management, GIMP 2.4.0 RC3 for Windows turns on color management when first installed, and it applies some wild guess at a monitor profile.
Did you report it as a bug? On Linux, it seems to be able to get a fairly decent profile from the X server, so it works there.
It doesn't help to report colour management as a bug, nor does it help if the monitor is calibrated when GIMP is first installed. Monitors have to constantly be calibrated and a colorimeter is needed to calibrate the monitor for predictable colour reproduction.
* Foveon makes a sensor where each pixel is RGB, but its light sensitivity is not very good and hence is not widely used in cameras.
Really? I haven't heard of that. Maybe that's why I've been waiting in vain for a full frame DSLR based on the Foveon.
FalconInterface and everything aside, the big stumbling block with the Gimp was its lack of support for more then 8 bits per channel. I would love to be able to use the GIMP, I can't afford to keep up with Photoshop, but without support for more then 8 bits per channel you wind up with some pretty nasty artifacts if you do any major editing.
Have you checked out CinePaint or FilmGimp? Like Photoshop it has 32 bit colour depths.
FalconThing is, it isn't, and never has been as good as photoshop, so the professional world aren't going to accept it while photoshop is better.
For photographers what's better is CinePaint or FilmGimp. Like Photoshop, PS, it has a 32 bit colour depth whereas the last version of GIMP I checked out didn't even have 16 bit colour depth. It has more features than GIMP as well. I'm not sure how it stacks up to PS for most things dealing photos however it's better for movies. That's why it was created, for those in the motion picture industry.
Falcon...as long as the FCC is staffed with smart, intelligent individuals, why shouldn't they have a chance to hear everyone's opinion before they meet to discuss the topic. The extra time is useful for those who want to study the arguments and opinions of the lobbyists, and check the facts and logic behind them.
The problem is is not everyone has the amount of tyme in which they can talk to the FCC. Those favored by being given info two weeks earlier than everyone else have a distinct advantage.
FalconDon't see how Congress has a role here. After all, the FCC rules are already in the law, it's just that the FCC is violating those laws. This sounds like a job for the Executive branch, charged with enforcing law!
Congress has at least two tools it can use, three really. First congress holds the purse strings and if an executive office won't uphold it's mandate it can withhold funds as well. Secondly congress can sue the executive branch, which as you say the FCC is part of, in the Supreme Court. Third congress can inform citizens the FCC and Bush isn't following the law. With emperor Bush it may not matter much though.
Falcon