One shouldnt suggest that simply because one is ignorant of OSS, that they shouldnt make suggestions. The author's major complaint with the attitude you're taking is that it discourages the end-user from having any input into the project you're creating. What that does is create a development model similar to that of Microsoft, who ignores end-user input when developing programs. The difference is that you're doing it for a different reason. Large companies have no need to fix problems and implement ideas in their software because their user base is so large that they can afford to lose customers. Not only that, the American capitalist system encourages corporations to produce only the minimal product required to make the largest profit possible, because the consumer accepts that they have no input into the process. For you, its simply because they cant fix it themselves, and dont have time to learn. OSS is different from closed-source software because everyone has input into the development process. Its more socialist and less of an "if you dont like it, TS" concept of a development model. If everyone who used OSS were required to know how to code, that would limit the size of the Open Source community, because not very many people know how to code. Furthermore, a lot of people have full-time jobs. Ignoring the people using the software, because they cant themselves make the software is a very bad policy if you want your user base to grow, because of one of the advantages of OSS: The user can switch to a different piece of software made by a different development group which does the same thing, and does it better. The development philosophy of "fix it yourself" doesnt work very well in a world where most people cant. Imagine what would happen if you had to fix it yourself every time your car broke down, and now imagine that your transmission needed to be replaced. Think about the average person having to do this. Or, a more appropriate analogy, but still following that of the car is that you dont like the color of your interior, but since the dealership/shop/mechanic you go to has adopted the model of "fix it yourself," you have to do all the leather sewing, molding of plastic, bolting, etc. that goes into making a new interior. *breathe* (I'm damn sure that when I post this, a bunch of people will reply suggesting tons of corrections.)
What if one is not too busy? I once spent 6 hours fixing my friend's mother's PC because she had lost all the drivers, the mainboard manual, and the mainboard itself was so generic as to not include any model numbering or brand name, so I ended up looking at each individual "embedded" solution, running across the alley to where a computer with google access was, and typing in each IC number/name/designation. 6 hours later I had done a clean install. To tie in with the "ask Slashdot" part of this, his mother bought the two of us all-you-can-eat food. So I got fed and the other two parties were happy. Of course, the sound went out about two weeks later, so they just decided to buy a new computer.
I thought it was because old drum printers would catch fire. As the paper was rotating around the drum being printed on, a little bit of paper dust would get scraped off and caught between the drum and the thingies spinning it, so that eventually the paper dust would catch fire. When this resulted in no signal being recieved at the computer doing the printing, a "Printer on fire" error would be recieved at which point the operator was to run screaming out of the room.
I'm a complete idiot when it comes to electronics, but doesnt electricity at high enough voltages act much like a waveform? Completely offtopic, but I think what I read about impedence would sorta prove what Neg is saying.
What is the point of IPv6? I used to think it was shiney because my computer would have an IP on the internet without NAT, but now it seems kind of lame to be able to network every blade of grass, ant, fruit fly, and worm on the face of the planet and still have enough space for computers. The amount of IP addresses available for use in IPv6 is rather ludicrous. Isnt there some method of half-assing it that could be used? Or, since we're going to have to switch infrastructures anyway, maybe we could switch addressing schemes entirely?
Heh. He cant state examples, because he cant find any. If one were to confront him about his lack of empirical evidence, the man would probably reply "Just because they havent been discovered doesnt mean they arent there" to which his confrontor would reply "But ether hadnt been found in reality, and it wasnt there!" thus locking the two into an argument of circular reasoning from which there is no escape.
I agree. When the author bitches about not having any control over what happens to the source, because its in the hands of everyone, he purposely leaves out the fact that you have even less control over closed-source software. I wonder how he'll feel 3 or 4 years down the road, when Linux is in heavy competition for the MS market share, and MS decides to use its secret backdoor...
I'm thinking its more of a scare tactic to get end-users and businesses to pay SCO for using Linux since SCO cant get people to buy UNIX. Seems like more of an attempt to use their entire court case as a method of wheedling money out of linux users. Or at least, that was the impression I got from the website. "We at SCO are compassionate toward the plight of you, the end user. Blah blah blah. Pay us money and we wont sue you specifically."
Nahh, its bad publicity to sue the agents of god. Lexmark surely wants everyone to keep buying printers, so they'll just stay quiet about the competition from the catholics. I think its really cool that monks are selling printer cartridges online, maybe I'll put one in just to see if it will make my f*cking canon actually work correctly. Just one more way for my high school to cut corners on their expenses while still making sure everything comes out of the teacher's pockets
This is what happens to any small website when a link gets posted on a larger website with more bandwidth and a readership in the 6 digits. If you run a large-scale website, its the perfect way to get back at your less-powerful competitors. Kind of acts like a DOS attack, except its legal. Someone should've mirrored the images before it crapped out due to lack of bandwidth and posted those instead of the actual website so that those of us reading hours afterwards could get at the pics.
Slashdot Mirror
One shouldnt suggest that simply because one is ignorant of OSS, that they shouldnt make suggestions. The author's major complaint with the attitude you're taking is that it discourages the end-user from having any input into the project you're creating. What that does is create a development model similar to that of Microsoft, who ignores end-user input when developing programs. The difference is that you're doing it for a different reason. Large companies have no need to fix problems and implement ideas in their software because their user base is so large that they can afford to lose customers. Not only that, the American capitalist system encourages corporations to produce only the minimal product required to make the largest profit possible, because the consumer accepts that they have no input into the process. For you, its simply because they cant fix it themselves, and dont have time to learn. OSS is different from closed-source software because everyone has input into the development process. Its more socialist and less of an "if you dont like it, TS" concept of a development model. If everyone who used OSS were required to know how to code, that would limit the size of the Open Source community, because not very many people know how to code. Furthermore, a lot of people have full-time jobs. Ignoring the people using the software, because they cant themselves make the software is a very bad policy if you want your user base to grow, because of one of the advantages of OSS: The user can switch to a different piece of software made by a different development group which does the same thing, and does it better. The development philosophy of "fix it yourself" doesnt work very well in a world where most people cant. Imagine what would happen if you had to fix it yourself every time your car broke down, and now imagine that your transmission needed to be replaced. Think about the average person having to do this. Or, a more appropriate analogy, but still following that of the car is that you dont like the color of your interior, but since the dealership/shop/mechanic you go to has adopted the model of "fix it yourself," you have to do all the leather sewing, molding of plastic, bolting, etc. that goes into making a new interior. *breathe*
(I'm damn sure that when I post this, a bunch of people will reply suggesting tons of corrections.)
What if one is not too busy? I once spent 6 hours fixing my friend's mother's PC because she had lost all the drivers, the mainboard manual, and the mainboard itself was so generic as to not include any model numbering or brand name, so I ended up looking at each individual "embedded" solution, running across the alley to where a computer with google access was, and typing in each IC number/name/designation. 6 hours later I had done a clean install. To tie in with the "ask Slashdot" part of this, his mother bought the two of us all-you-can-eat food. So I got fed and the other two parties were happy. Of course, the sound went out about two weeks later, so they just decided to buy a new computer.
I thought it was because old drum printers would catch fire. As the paper was rotating around the drum being printed on, a little bit of paper dust would get scraped off and caught between the drum and the thingies spinning it, so that eventually the paper dust would catch fire. When this resulted in no signal being recieved at the computer doing the printing, a "Printer on fire" error would be recieved at which point the operator was to run screaming out of the room.
I'm a complete idiot when it comes to electronics, but doesnt electricity at high enough voltages act much like a waveform? Completely offtopic, but I think what I read about impedence would sorta prove what Neg is saying.
What is the point of IPv6? I used to think it was shiney because my computer would have an IP on the internet without NAT, but now it seems kind of lame to be able to network every blade of grass, ant, fruit fly, and worm on the face of the planet and still have enough space for computers. The amount of IP addresses available for use in IPv6 is rather ludicrous. Isnt there some method of half-assing it that could be used? Or, since we're going to have to switch infrastructures anyway, maybe we could switch addressing schemes entirely?
You're white, arent you?
Heh. He cant state examples, because he cant find any. If one were to confront him about his lack of empirical evidence, the man would probably reply "Just because they havent been discovered doesnt mean they arent there" to which his confrontor would reply "But ether hadnt been found in reality, and it wasnt there!" thus locking the two into an argument of circular reasoning from which there is no escape.
I agree. When the author bitches about not having any control over what happens to the source, because its in the hands of everyone, he purposely leaves out the fact that you have even less control over closed-source software. I wonder how he'll feel 3 or 4 years down the road, when Linux is in heavy competition for the MS market share, and MS decides to use its secret backdoor...
I'm thinking its more of a scare tactic to get end-users and businesses to pay SCO for using Linux since SCO cant get people to buy UNIX. Seems like more of an attempt to use their entire court case as a method of wheedling money out of linux users. Or at least, that was the impression I got from the website. "We at SCO are compassionate toward the plight of you, the end user. Blah blah blah. Pay us money and we wont sue you specifically."
I just want to know where the hell he gets this from the airbags on the lander. I know there's a superficial link there, but... what the hell?
Nahh, its bad publicity to sue the agents of god. Lexmark surely wants everyone to keep buying printers, so they'll just stay quiet about the competition from the catholics. I think its really cool that monks are selling printer cartridges online, maybe I'll put one in just to see if it will make my f*cking canon actually work correctly. Just one more way for my high school to cut corners on their expenses while still making sure everything comes out of the teacher's pockets
I was just questioning the morality of it all. Oh the humanity!! OH THE HUMANITY!!
This is what happens to any small website when a link gets posted on a larger website with more bandwidth and a readership in the 6 digits. If you run a large-scale website, its the perfect way to get back at your less-powerful competitors. Kind of acts like a DOS attack, except its legal. Someone should've mirrored the images before it crapped out due to lack of bandwidth and posted those instead of the actual website so that those of us reading hours afterwards could get at the pics.