Well, it is an interesting theory. Interesting as in "how in hell can anyway really think that would be true!" So this guy thinks that gravity was less than it is now 65 million or so years ago. So, what could make gravity less? It would mean that 65 million years ago the Earth would have had significantly less mass than it does now. However, despite all the claims made in this "theory" there is not one shred of evidence to support the idea that there was any change in the Earth's gravitational field of that magnitude.
Granted, it's amazing how something that large could support itself and its own massive weight, but there is plenty of evidence which supports the theory that large sauropods like Seismosaurus did spend a considerable amount of time in watery environments to help ease the burden. To say that this isn't true because these sauropods don't have adaptations to watery environments isn't correct. Modern hippos provide a similar example. They are very clunky on land, but spend great deals of time in the water and don't display very many obvious adaptations to a watery environment.
Carbon nanotubes could be the energy source of the future. Not only are they useful for flywheels as the article mentions but they also are being tapped for use in hydrogen fuel cells. The nanotubes can trap hydrogen and make it safe for storage and use as fuel. The nanotubes need to be able to carry 6.5% of their weight in hydrogen. Some researchers have claimed that they have formulated nanotubes which can hold up to 65% of their weight in hydrogen but those results have not been revealed because of "commercial reasons." (Don't these people ever learn? You're not going to make a cent unless your process stands up to scientific review!) Still, carbon nanotubes are an exciting new prospect in the quest for a cleaner burning engine system. Between hydrogen fuel cells and flywheel power, the prospects of these structures are enormous.
Duron is kinda interesting... sounds vaguely like a Klingon name... "Duron will destroy its enemies on the field of silicon battle and drink their blood! Qapla'!"
Then again, that's not the worst naming gaffe that could be made. I will *never* forgive Intel for not naming the Pentium II the Sexium. Even worse is them not then calling the Pentium III the Septium. That way if something went wrong in the manufacturing process it could have been the Deviated Septium. *rimshot*
In all seriousness, the Duron should have enough of a price/performance ration to seriously give Intel some competition. The next computer I plan to be will be a Duron box, and I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
Not to bash X, but I think it's time to seriously think about a better system. As in many projects, there's a lot of compromise involved in X. While it does a fairly good job, the fact is that it's rather crufty. Compare the relative sizes of the X codebase to the Kernel source and you'll see what I mean. Of course, in some ways, a graphic architecture is a more daunting piece of work than a kernel, but it still seems like X is rapidly showing its age.
If we want to have all the spiffy extras like anti-aliasing and alpha-blended transparency, X is going to have to be adapted. In the long run, it may be better and more efficient to build a new architecture from the ground up to meet the need of things like advanced OpenGL and user interfaces. One of the things I admire about the BeOS team (OK, the *only* thing I really admire about BeOS) is their dedication to ending cruft. Eliminating the crufty X Windowing System would greatly aid the stability of Linux and make it more competitive against that other little OS from that little concern in the Pacific Northwest.
Now, having said that, I realize it's easier said than done. However, we have a clear roadmap of what this new system needs to do. This could be another way of showing how Open Source can meet technical challenges better than closed development methods. Yes, it's a daunting project, but one that could have some great benefits to the OSS community at large.
Well, it seems like a good idea, but it would be more harmful than good.
Right now, NVIDIA is cautiously moving towards the Linux world. They don't want to give out their intellectual property for fear of giving the competition an advantage. Let them see that won't be the case. If we were to hit them full-on with a lawsuit the results would be companies would simply not touch Linux with a 10-foot pole for fear of another suit.
Better to talk them into doing the right thing. Considering that they were caught once, they probably won't do it again.
Lawsuits aren't the answer - tactful enforcement and encouragement are.
Well, this is yet another win for the GPL - it looks like it's holding together well as more commercial organizations used GPLed software.
As for NVIDIA choosing closed-source development for their drivers, I have a feeling that they will come around eventually. Creative was not going to release SBLive! drivers as open source, but that changed rather rapidly when they realized that they could harness Open Source development to reduce development costs and keep up with the enternally evolving Linux kernel.
If NVIDIA wants to really compete in the Linux marketplace, then the GPL is a powerful enticement. Granted, they may not want to release their latest and greatest drivers quite yet, but it may be in their best interest to do so eventually. Look at how 3dfx makes generally lower-quality hardware (although I use a 3dfx card in my own box) but they've done a great job of capturing the Linux market with quality open-source drivers. Even though I think 3dfx doesn't have the advanced technology of NVIDIA's chips, I am more inclined to buy their products for my Linux box because of their support of the GPL. While people like myself are the minority, we're very vocal about these things.
At least NVIDIA is stepping in the right direction. I can understand their hesitancy to go the Open Source route, but I think that once they see that it will be a positive thing to their bottom line they'll come about in good time. As the article says, be polite about these things and let the power of Open Source speak for itself.
First of all, I agree that the legal risk is probably very small. However, we've all seen how the legal system (doesn't) work, and/. could be opening themselves up to those sorts of arguments.
Second of all, I don't consider copyrighting my posts to be childish. In fact, I make my living as a writer. Not once have I said that "data should be free." Now, unlike some others, all I ask is that I recieve due credit for what I've written. All Rob or Jon Katz or anyone needs do is ask me for permission and I'd be glad to allow them that.
The fact is, I really don't have too much of a beef about the book and its publication. I just don't want/. getting into a legal can of worms over it. I agree that if you post anonymously, you pretty much lose any control over your words. However, if I post in a public forum, I give my consent only for my words to be used in that forum. As the bottom of/. says, I don't give up my rights to those words, and neither do you. You or I can choose to public domain your comments, and that's fine. I was really just trying to make a point with that - since you called me on it here's a better alternative that's more in line with the spirit of the Free and Open Software world that I still consider myself a part of.
This post is covered under the Open Content Public License.
First of all, I do find one aspect of this story troubling. We've been told that these people want their stories out - did they specifically say so or was that just assumed? If they said they wanted their words to be published in a medium other than/. , then that's perfectly fine.
However, if it was just assumed that they wanted their stories told, that's treading on some very thin ice. Legally, it's probably OK, but I think that people are right in pointing out the serious ethical issues this raises. If someone were to tell me anonymously that they were sexually molested by their parents, do I have a right to put that in a book and publish it? Sure, there's probably no chance that anyone would be able to trace it back to that particular person, but would that person ever trust me with confidential information ever again? Probably not.
Now, in all fairness, those posts are still readable, archived on/. for all to see. Publishing them in a book only makes them accessable to a wider audience, most of whom have probably seen the posts already.
There's one final thing I want to point out, a dangerous prescedent that might be set here. If an AC posts something, and/. publishes it in a separate form, that could be considered/. saying that they "own" the content of posts. That would mean that/. has a legal responsiblity as a publisher for the content of *every* post made on/. Should a certain Ms. Portman wish to sue the living blazes out of/. for some very defamatory comments made about her, all her lawyers need do is hold up that book and call/. a publisher. Now, I'm no lawyer, and I make no claims about the legal accuracy of this, but it is something I think could very well be probable.
The addition of an opt-out system should be an A1 priority for the next Slash upgrade, and I'd start seriously looking at the legal ramifications of this move.
The preceding comments are (C)2000 Wombat Control. Reproduction in any form requires the explicit written consent of the author.
Of course nothing you say will make them change their minds. They're so concerned about maintaining "security" that the fact that it may harrass innocent people doesn't really matter to them. They think that what they're doing is morally correct and is in the best interests of all. Those sort of people are so set in their ways that very little can be done to change their mindset. It's unfortunate, but true.
As Jefferson said, "those who would trade Freedom in order to find Security shall not have, nor do they deserve either one." Too bad no one listens to Jefferson anymore.
As a fan of Babylon 5 from day one, I can say that this is news I've been waiting for a long time to hear. TNT terribly mistreated Babylon 5 after doing so much, producing the final season and four telefilms, then screwing over both Babylon 5 and it's short-lived but promising spinoff Crusade.
For those/.ers who haven't seen Babylon 5, give it a try. Especially if you like the epic scope of The Lord Of The Rings, you'll find many parallels to Babylon 5. While Babylon 5 doesn't always have the production values of Star Trek, the compelling stories and characters more than make up for it.
Now that it's on at a decent time, give it a try. You could end up as hooked as me and all my friends...
Don't worry - Farscape is indeed safe. The owners, Hallmark Entertainment and Channel Nine Networks Australia are extremely pleased with the performance of the show and the loyal fan base it has attracted.
They liked it so much that when Star Wars: Episode II came in and took over the Fox Studios Australia lots where Farscape was filmed, all the Farscape sets where moved, at considerable expense to a new studio for the second season. That's how well the series has done. (It's also the highest rated show on the Sci-Fi network, which is also good news.)
I don't think that they're looking for the actual packet monkeys in California/Oregon, but evidence that will lead them to the real location. By analyzing the logs of the machines used in the attacks they can help narrow down the location of the perps.
However, I doubt they'll have much luck. As has been said, while the machines that were compromised no doubt hold clues to the origin of the attacks, the people involved probably did a good job of covering their tracks. I somehow doubt they just telnetted in from their houses and executed the attacks. Nevertheless, closing in on a point where we know there's been a break-in is simply the best way to start.
I do blame the media for propagating the idea that the perps are in the California/Oregon area, though. This case has shoown just how difficult it is to describe the real way the Internet works to the average person on the street.
Just remember that this is not an official release, if you manage to snag it expect things to be broken, etc. Already the userlimit's been hit, so I can't see what's there, but I expect it to be rather rough.
Still, if you like living on the edge, it's probably at least worth examining.
I'll agree with you on that one. Rather than being a multi-national pissing contest, there was the fear of having one country dominate the other through space. Very good point, and I'm glad you cleared that up.
One of the primary motivating factors of the beginning of the American and Soviet space programs was competition between the two programs and the boost to national pride each sucessful mission started. Now, with China potentially entering the ranks of countries with a manned space we could potentially enter a new space race.
The Chinese government isn't exactly the greatest in the world, in fact, I rank it among the worst, but China could pull this off. From seeing firsthand the industrial prowess the Chinese have it is very possible they could pull this off. However, I'm not so sure that having a Chinese space presence is a good thing. Really, any Chinese space shot is just an extension of ballistic missle technology, just rather than lofting a nuke into suborbit you add some thrust and orbit a spacecraft. Personally, I think we have enough unstable countries with ICBM technology as it is thank you very much.
The only silver lining I can see is that if China starts a manned program, it invigorates others with more peaceful intentions to do the same. If China can expand their space technology to a point where the US feels threatened enough to start seriously looking at space again then that's a good thing. If it takes the Chinese to get us to seriously see what an asset manned space exploration can be for us, then that's what we need. As long as the Chinese are only lobbing men into space rather than nuclear/chemical/biological weapons, then let's see where they take the technology of spaceflight.
Actually, as a web server platform, Solaris is top-notch. The only thing that made it less attractive than Linux was the cost factor. For Sun, releasing a free version is a Very Good Idea. The whole point of the exercise is to get people hooked on your OS and therefore evangelize it to others. The same theory applies to the decision regarding BeOS 5 and others.
This is a good thing for several reasons, even though these aren't being GPLed. First of all, it gives Linux a little extra incentive to progress, as it better have more to offer than just being free. If Linux wants to survive, it had better be able to compete. As we all have learned by now, competition makes for better products.
Also, hobbyists like myself get a chance to play around with a new OS and see how it ticks. I intend to install BeOS when it comes out and see how it runs, and now I'll add Solaris to that list. I probably will only dabble in both, but it is an opportunity to broaden my OS horizons.
The only drawback I can see is that we may yet have an OS market Balkanization. With all these free OSes flying around, we need common standards to make sure that the free exchange of data can continue. Things like XML and other open file formats are crucial. The Linux ELF binary format is supported by both BeOS and Solaris via an emulation layer, but that's only a start. It would be nice to have the same apps work across multiple OSes.
Still, despite that, the release of Solaris is a good idea for all involved. Hopefully this free software boom will continue as companies find new ways to maintain good software development and expand new technologies while keeping the results of that research free for all.
It's nice to see that Caldera is getting some cash, I've used their distro from time to time, and while it isn't as popular as Red Hat, it isn't bad either. Hopefully this cash infusion will be used for the creation of quality software rather than marketing or executive retreats.
Still, this does also vaguely bother me. When I began using Linux is was about freedom and quality software. Now, Linux brings to mind two things: money and litigation. Yes, it's great that VCs everywhere are seeing Linux as The Next Hot Thing (tm) - but is that necessarily a good thing in the long run?
I do suppose that it was inevitable that Linux would become commercialized, just as the net has. Still, there are times when I think the sense of real community is diminishing. Everyone and their dog is jumping on the Linux bandwagon, but they don't seem to really understand it. (LinuxOne, the fights with Corel, etc...)
So, to actually stay somewhat on topic: I have a suggestion for Caldera. Now that they've got a few extra dollars laying around, they should use that on writing good software. Forget the marketing, forget public relations and Just Code It. When people see companies like RedHat or Corel seemingly more interesting in marketing than in software development (although this is perception, and not neccesarily the truth) it would be a breath of fresh air to remember what Linux was designed around: solid, open code.
For all of you that work in an NT shop, all you need to do is tell your boss that if you don't switch over to Linux before January 20, you'll make the moon disappear. Who knows, it might even work.
On another, related front, I've found that astronomical events make great times to get with your significant other and spend some quality time...
I've always admired Woz for his commitment to computers in education. While I don't think computers will ever replace flesh and blood teachers, (A computer can't be as passionate about a subject as a real teacher, but it can be an excellent tool to reinforce teaching.) I do think that his support of computers in education is A Good Thing (tm).
Also, his comments on the Macintosh are extremely interesting. With MacOS X, I have a feeling that Mac may yet manage to flourish - especially if they can leverage all the software available for BSD/Linux, etc... I don't like the fact that the hardware is closed, but Woz does have a very valid point that Apple is more free to innovate with hardware than the PC world.
All in all, a very enlightening interview. Thanks Woz for your comments!
...make sure to be nice and polite. Here's a sample you can work off of...
To The Honorable XXXXXXXXXX,
My friends in the MILITIA are concerned about the government's Echelon monitoring system. While were were making BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS for our JIHAD, OSAMA BIN-LADEN told me about this system. I was so surprised that I almost dropped my WEAPONS-GRADE PLUTONIUM into the vat of ANTHRAX. The government shoud not attempt to monitor the private communications of others, even if they're talking about VINCE FOSTER or HILLARY CLINTON. Thank you for your time.
You know, now I understand where Microsoft is coming from. Imagine what would happen to the "freedom to innovate" exercised by virus authors and script kiddies if Microsoft were to somehow be made accountable for their lax security? What would bored pre-teens do with their l33t AOL connections? Learn something useful, like programming or writing?
What kind of world would that be, and where do I sign up for it?
I've been thinking (a dangerous thing indeed) that perhaps the reason for Creative adopting open source is the fact that it simply isn't in their best interest to have dedicated Linux coders working on the drivers. In the long run, it could be cheaper for them to open the design rather than pay someone to write drivers for an OS which is still only used by a small fraction of their customers. (Although a very vocal fraction.)
It does make sense, Creative gets the work done for free, and they'll get QA on it to boot. Economically, it makes perfect sense, and it's an all-around good decision. This is a good case to use in citing why Open Source is a Good Thing(tm). Look like the Live! will win over a lot of people who wouldn't have bought it before now.
There are a lot of reasons why Trek is in the state that it's in, but the main ones are Rick Berman and Paramount itself. In some ways, the death of Trek started in its own popularity.
Trek is a massive cash cow for Paramount, a major franchise for them. Because of this, they're far less likely to do anything that would cut off that revenue flow. Basically, they can't take risks whith the story, because that might cause people to stop buying Trek stuff, and take a few precious pennies away from Paramount.
Rick Berman is equally afraid of losing that income, because it would mean him losing his job. Now, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say that perhaps this is because higher-ups have tied his hands. He's not the kind of person who can revitalize the franchise.
By far, the best thing to do is to end Voyager gracefully and end the Trek franchise for a while. Bring it back with new blood in a few years, and bring it back to the spirit of the original, episodes and characters that actually take chances and make the audience think. Then, maybe, Trek can get back to where it should be.
This raises an interesting question. If the price is raised on hot days, would the opposite be true? The colder is gets, the cheaper the soda.
Should that be the case, all you need to do is find a bucket of dry ice and then you won't need to worry about rediculously inflated soft drink prices. Perhaps you could even cool the machine to the point where *it pays you* to take one.
OK, so probably not very realistic, but no less rediculous than the concept itself. I've the feeling that the flak that Coke will take from this decision will more than outweigh any potential benefits.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it is an interesting theory. Interesting as in "how in hell can anyway really think that would be true!" So this guy thinks that gravity was less than it is now 65 million or so years ago. So, what could make gravity less? It would mean that 65 million years ago the Earth would have had significantly less mass than it does now. However, despite all the claims made in this "theory" there is not one shred of evidence to support the idea that there was any change in the Earth's gravitational field of that magnitude.
Granted, it's amazing how something that large could support itself and its own massive weight, but there is plenty of evidence which supports the theory that large sauropods like Seismosaurus did spend a considerable amount of time in watery environments to help ease the burden. To say that this isn't true because these sauropods don't have adaptations to watery environments isn't correct. Modern hippos provide a similar example. They are very clunky on land, but spend great deals of time in the water and don't display very many obvious adaptations to a watery environment.
Interesting theory... but completely wrong...
Carbon nanotubes could be the energy source of the future. Not only are they useful for flywheels as the article mentions but they also are being tapped for use in hydrogen fuel cells. The nanotubes can trap hydrogen and make it safe for storage and use as fuel. The nanotubes need to be able to carry 6.5% of their weight in hydrogen. Some researchers have claimed that they have formulated nanotubes which can hold up to 65% of their weight in hydrogen but those results have not been revealed because of "commercial reasons." (Don't these people ever learn? You're not going to make a cent unless your process stands up to scientific review!) Still, carbon nanotubes are an exciting new prospect in the quest for a cleaner burning engine system. Between hydrogen fuel cells and flywheel power, the prospects of these structures are enormous.
Duron is kinda interesting... sounds vaguely like a Klingon name... "Duron will destroy its enemies on the field of silicon battle and drink their blood! Qapla'!"
Then again, that's not the worst naming gaffe that could be made. I will *never* forgive Intel for not naming the Pentium II the Sexium. Even worse is them not then calling the Pentium III the Septium. That way if something went wrong in the manufacturing process it could have been the Deviated Septium. *rimshot*
In all seriousness, the Duron should have enough of a price/performance ration to seriously give Intel some competition. The next computer I plan to be will be a Duron box, and I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
Not to bash X, but I think it's time to seriously think about a better system. As in many projects, there's a lot of compromise involved in X. While it does a fairly good job, the fact is that it's rather crufty. Compare the relative sizes of the X codebase to the Kernel source and you'll see what I mean. Of course, in some ways, a graphic architecture is a more daunting piece of work than a kernel, but it still seems like X is rapidly showing its age.
If we want to have all the spiffy extras like anti-aliasing and alpha-blended transparency, X is going to have to be adapted. In the long run, it may be better and more efficient to build a new architecture from the ground up to meet the need of things like advanced OpenGL and user interfaces. One of the things I admire about the BeOS team (OK, the *only* thing I really admire about BeOS) is their dedication to ending cruft. Eliminating the crufty X Windowing System would greatly aid the stability of Linux and make it more competitive against that other little OS from that little concern in the Pacific Northwest.
Now, having said that, I realize it's easier said than done. However, we have a clear roadmap of what this new system needs to do. This could be another way of showing how Open Source can meet technical challenges better than closed development methods. Yes, it's a daunting project, but one that could have some great benefits to the OSS community at large.
Well, it seems like a good idea, but it would be more harmful than good.
Right now, NVIDIA is cautiously moving towards the Linux world. They don't want to give out their intellectual property for fear of giving the competition an advantage. Let them see that won't be the case. If we were to hit them full-on with a lawsuit the results would be companies would simply not touch Linux with a 10-foot pole for fear of another suit.
Better to talk them into doing the right thing. Considering that they were caught once, they probably won't do it again.
Lawsuits aren't the answer - tactful enforcement and encouragement are.
Well, this is yet another win for the GPL - it looks like it's holding together well as more commercial organizations used GPLed software.
As for NVIDIA choosing closed-source development for their drivers, I have a feeling that they will come around eventually. Creative was not going to release SBLive! drivers as open source, but that changed rather rapidly when they realized that they could harness Open Source development to reduce development costs and keep up with the enternally evolving Linux kernel.
If NVIDIA wants to really compete in the Linux marketplace, then the GPL is a powerful enticement. Granted, they may not want to release their latest and greatest drivers quite yet, but it may be in their best interest to do so eventually. Look at how 3dfx makes generally lower-quality hardware (although I use a 3dfx card in my own box) but they've done a great job of capturing the Linux market with quality open-source drivers. Even though I think 3dfx doesn't have the advanced technology of NVIDIA's chips, I am more inclined to buy their products for my Linux box because of their support of the GPL. While people like myself are the minority, we're very vocal about these things.
At least NVIDIA is stepping in the right direction. I can understand their hesitancy to go the Open Source route, but I think that once they see that it will be a positive thing to their bottom line they'll come about in good time. As the article says, be polite about these things and let the power of Open Source speak for itself.
First of all, I agree that the legal risk is probably very small. However, we've all seen how the legal system (doesn't) work, and /. could be opening themselves up to those sorts of arguments.
Second of all, I don't consider copyrighting my posts to be childish. In fact, I make my living as a writer. Not once have I said that "data should be free." Now, unlike some others, all I ask is that I recieve due credit for what I've written. All Rob or Jon Katz or anyone needs do is ask me for permission and I'd be glad to allow them that.
The fact is, I really don't have too much of a beef about the book and its publication. I just don't want /. getting into a legal can of worms over it. I agree that if you post anonymously, you pretty much lose any control over your words. However, if I post in a public forum, I give my consent only for my words to be used in that forum. As the bottom of /. says, I don't give up my rights to those words, and neither do you. You or I can choose to public domain your comments, and that's fine. I was really just trying to make a point with that - since you called me on it here's a better alternative that's more in line with the spirit of the Free and Open Software world that I still consider myself a part of.
This post is covered under the Open Content Public License.
First of all, I do find one aspect of this story troubling. We've been told that these people want their stories out - did they specifically say so or was that just assumed? If they said they wanted their words to be published in a medium other than /. , then that's perfectly fine.
However, if it was just assumed that they wanted their stories told, that's treading on some very thin ice. Legally, it's probably OK, but I think that people are right in pointing out the serious ethical issues this raises. If someone were to tell me anonymously that they were sexually molested by their parents, do I have a right to put that in a book and publish it? Sure, there's probably no chance that anyone would be able to trace it back to that particular person, but would that person ever trust me with confidential information ever again? Probably not.
Now, in all fairness, those posts are still readable, archived on /. for all to see. Publishing them in a book only makes them accessable to a wider audience, most of whom have probably seen the posts already.
There's one final thing I want to point out, a dangerous prescedent that might be set here. If an AC posts something, and /. publishes it in a separate form, that could be considered /. saying that they "own" the content of posts. That would mean that /. has a legal responsiblity as a publisher for the content of *every* post made on /. Should a certain Ms. Portman wish to sue the living blazes out of /. for some very defamatory comments made about her, all her lawyers need do is hold up that book and call /. a publisher. Now, I'm no lawyer, and I make no claims about the legal accuracy of this, but it is something I think could very well be probable.
The addition of an opt-out system should be an A1 priority for the next Slash upgrade, and I'd start seriously looking at the legal ramifications of this move.
The preceding comments are (C)2000 Wombat Control. Reproduction in any form requires the explicit written consent of the author.
Of course nothing you say will make them change their minds. They're so concerned about maintaining "security" that the fact that it may harrass innocent people doesn't really matter to them. They think that what they're doing is morally correct and is in the best interests of all. Those sort of people are so set in their ways that very little can be done to change their mindset. It's unfortunate, but true.
As Jefferson said, "those who would trade Freedom in order to find Security shall not have, nor do they deserve either one." Too bad no one listens to Jefferson anymore.
As a fan of Babylon 5 from day one, I can say that this is news I've been waiting for a long time to hear. TNT terribly mistreated Babylon 5 after doing so much, producing the final season and four telefilms, then screwing over both Babylon 5 and it's short-lived but promising spinoff Crusade.
/.ers who haven't seen Babylon 5, give it a try. Especially if you like the epic scope of The Lord Of The Rings, you'll find many parallels to Babylon 5. While Babylon 5 doesn't always have the production values of Star Trek, the compelling stories and characters more than make up for it.
For those
Now that it's on at a decent time, give it a try. You could end up as hooked as me and all my friends...
Hmmm... if they took it outside the US they could be breaking crypto export regulations...
Don't worry - Farscape is indeed safe. The owners, Hallmark Entertainment and Channel Nine Networks Australia are extremely pleased with the performance of the show and the loyal fan base it has attracted.
They liked it so much that when Star Wars: Episode II came in and took over the Fox Studios Australia lots where Farscape was filmed, all the Farscape sets where moved, at considerable expense to a new studio for the second season. That's how well the series has done. (It's also the highest rated show on the Sci-Fi network, which is also good news.)
I don't think that they're looking for the actual packet monkeys in California/Oregon, but evidence that will lead them to the real location. By analyzing the logs of the machines used in the attacks they can help narrow down the location of the perps.
However, I doubt they'll have much luck. As has been said, while the machines that were compromised no doubt hold clues to the origin of the attacks, the people involved probably did a good job of covering their tracks. I somehow doubt they just telnetted in from their houses and executed the attacks. Nevertheless, closing in on a point where we know there's been a break-in is simply the best way to start.
I do blame the media for propagating the idea that the perps are in the California/Oregon area, though. This case has shoown just how difficult it is to describe the real way the Internet works to the average person on the street.
Just remember that this is not an official release, if you manage to snag it expect things to be broken, etc. Already the userlimit's been hit, so I can't see what's there, but I expect it to be rather rough.
Still, if you like living on the edge, it's probably at least worth examining.
I'll agree with you on that one. Rather than being a multi-national pissing contest, there was the fear of having one country dominate the other through space. Very good point, and I'm glad you cleared that up.
One of the primary motivating factors of the beginning of the American and Soviet space programs was competition between the two programs and the boost to national pride each sucessful mission started. Now, with China potentially entering the ranks of countries with a manned space we could potentially enter a new space race.
The Chinese government isn't exactly the greatest in the world, in fact, I rank it among the worst, but China could pull this off. From seeing firsthand the industrial prowess the Chinese have it is very possible they could pull this off. However, I'm not so sure that having a Chinese space presence is a good thing. Really, any Chinese space shot is just an extension of ballistic missle technology, just rather than lofting a nuke into suborbit you add some thrust and orbit a spacecraft. Personally, I think we have enough unstable countries with ICBM technology as it is thank you very much.
The only silver lining I can see is that if China starts a manned program, it invigorates others with more peaceful intentions to do the same. If China can expand their space technology to a point where the US feels threatened enough to start seriously looking at space again then that's a good thing. If it takes the Chinese to get us to seriously see what an asset manned space exploration can be for us, then that's what we need. As long as the Chinese are only lobbing men into space rather than nuclear/chemical/biological weapons, then let's see where they take the technology of spaceflight.
Actually, as a web server platform, Solaris is top-notch. The only thing that made it less attractive than Linux was the cost factor. For Sun, releasing a free version is a Very Good Idea. The whole point of the exercise is to get people hooked on your OS and therefore evangelize it to others. The same theory applies to the decision regarding BeOS 5 and others.
This is a good thing for several reasons, even though these aren't being GPLed. First of all, it gives Linux a little extra incentive to progress, as it better have more to offer than just being free. If Linux wants to survive, it had better be able to compete. As we all have learned by now, competition makes for better products.
Also, hobbyists like myself get a chance to play around with a new OS and see how it ticks. I intend to install BeOS when it comes out and see how it runs, and now I'll add Solaris to that list. I probably will only dabble in both, but it is an opportunity to broaden my OS horizons.
The only drawback I can see is that we may yet have an OS market Balkanization. With all these free OSes flying around, we need common standards to make sure that the free exchange of data can continue. Things like XML and other open file formats are crucial. The Linux ELF binary format is supported by both BeOS and Solaris via an emulation layer, but that's only a start. It would be nice to have the same apps work across multiple OSes.
Still, despite that, the release of Solaris is a good idea for all involved. Hopefully this free software boom will continue as companies find new ways to maintain good software development and expand new technologies while keeping the results of that research free for all.
It's nice to see that Caldera is getting some cash, I've used their distro from time to time, and while it isn't as popular as Red Hat, it isn't bad either. Hopefully this cash infusion will be used for the creation of quality software rather than marketing or executive retreats.
Still, this does also vaguely bother me. When I began using Linux is was about freedom and quality software. Now, Linux brings to mind two things: money and litigation. Yes, it's great that VCs everywhere are seeing Linux as The Next Hot Thing (tm) - but is that necessarily a good thing in the long run?
I do suppose that it was inevitable that Linux would become commercialized, just as the net has. Still, there are times when I think the sense of real community is diminishing. Everyone and their dog is jumping on the Linux bandwagon, but they don't seem to really understand it. (LinuxOne, the fights with Corel, etc...)
So, to actually stay somewhat on topic: I have a suggestion for Caldera. Now that they've got a few extra dollars laying around, they should use that on writing good software. Forget the marketing, forget public relations and Just Code It. When people see companies like RedHat or Corel seemingly more interesting in marketing than in software development (although this is perception, and not neccesarily the truth) it would be a breath of fresh air to remember what Linux was designed around: solid, open code.
For all of you that work in an NT shop, all you need to do is tell your boss that if you don't switch over to Linux before January 20, you'll make the moon disappear. Who knows, it might even work.
On another, related front, I've found that astronomical events make great times to get with your significant other and spend some quality time...
I've always admired Woz for his commitment to computers in education. While I don't think computers will ever replace flesh and blood teachers, (A computer can't be as passionate about a subject as a real teacher, but it can be an excellent tool to reinforce teaching.) I do think that his support of computers in education is A Good Thing (tm).
Also, his comments on the Macintosh are extremely interesting. With MacOS X, I have a feeling that Mac may yet manage to flourish - especially if they can leverage all the software available for BSD/Linux, etc... I don't like the fact that the hardware is closed, but Woz does have a very valid point that Apple is more free to innovate with hardware than the PC world.
All in all, a very enlightening interview. Thanks Woz for your comments!
...make sure to be nice and polite. Here's a sample you can work off of...
To The Honorable XXXXXXXXXX,
My friends in the MILITIA are concerned about the government's Echelon monitoring system. While were were making BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS for our JIHAD, OSAMA BIN-LADEN told me about this system. I was so surprised that I almost dropped my WEAPONS-GRADE PLUTONIUM into the vat of ANTHRAX. The government shoud not attempt to monitor the private communications of others, even if they're talking about VINCE FOSTER or HILLARY CLINTON. Thank you for your time.
You know, now I understand where Microsoft is coming from. Imagine what would happen to the "freedom to innovate" exercised by virus authors and script kiddies if Microsoft were to somehow be made accountable for their lax security? What would bored pre-teens do with their l33t AOL connections? Learn something useful, like programming or writing?
What kind of world would that be, and where do I sign up for it?
I've been thinking (a dangerous thing indeed) that perhaps the reason for Creative adopting open source is the fact that it simply isn't in their best interest to have dedicated Linux coders working on the drivers. In the long run, it could be cheaper for them to open the design rather than pay someone to write drivers for an OS which is still only used by a small fraction of their customers. (Although a very vocal fraction.)
It does make sense, Creative gets the work done for free, and they'll get QA on it to boot. Economically, it makes perfect sense, and it's an all-around good decision. This is a good case to use in citing why Open Source is a Good Thing(tm). Look like the Live! will win over a lot of people who wouldn't have bought it before now.
There are a lot of reasons why Trek is in the state that it's in, but the main ones are Rick Berman and Paramount itself. In some ways, the death of Trek started in its own popularity.
Trek is a massive cash cow for Paramount, a major franchise for them. Because of this, they're far less likely to do anything that would cut off that revenue flow. Basically, they can't take risks whith the story, because that might cause people to stop buying Trek stuff, and take a few precious pennies away from Paramount.
Rick Berman is equally afraid of losing that income, because it would mean him losing his job. Now, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say that perhaps this is because higher-ups have tied his hands. He's not the kind of person who can revitalize the franchise.
By far, the best thing to do is to end Voyager gracefully and end the Trek franchise for a while. Bring it back with new blood in a few years, and bring it back to the spirit of the original, episodes and characters that actually take chances and make the audience think. Then, maybe, Trek can get back to where it should be.
This raises an interesting question. If the price is raised on hot days, would the opposite be true? The colder is gets, the cheaper the soda.
Should that be the case, all you need to do is find a bucket of dry ice and then you won't need to worry about rediculously inflated soft drink prices. Perhaps you could even cool the machine to the point where *it pays you* to take one.
OK, so probably not very realistic, but no less rediculous than the concept itself. I've the feeling that the flak that Coke will take from this decision will more than outweigh any potential benefits.