It happens. I've gotten bsods because of conflicts between programs, such as neoplanet and ie. If you have screwed up settings then it can happen a LOT; at a museum where I volunteer, they have one computer that will literally last no longer than 10 minutes max. without BSODing or otherwise crashing. Hardware problems and such can REALLY destabilize your machine because of priveliges given to device drivers that they shouldn't have (when was the last time Linux crashed because of a device driver?)
Look closely at the text. It says that there will be a Unix/Linux version at the end of the year, but the mac version will not come into 2001.
This is rare right now, but I suspect that we will see a lot more of this happening. As Linux (and to a lesser extent, BSD[*]) grows, we will see much greater acceptance of Linux as an alternative platform at equal or greater standing relative to the Mac.
[*] Nothing against the technical merits of BSD; they just have a smaller marketshare at the moment, thus having a lesser affect as an alternative OS.
what can adequately be explained by stupidity: Why don't they just go after the names they actually plan on using, instead of attacking anything with olympics in it? After all, it's not like the fake names will confuse people -- they will see the web site name from marketing, on TV.
Or maybe they figured that since they were going to the DNS services anyway instead of the individual owners, they would be able to get rid of everything in one fell swoop. How canthey be that callous with other people's resources?
Remember that a large percentage of reviews are bought -- larger than most people think. The way to get an unbiased review is to check out smaller sites, like HappyPuppy.Com for game reviews, to take only one example. The only time reviews can really be biased is with larger sites like ZDNet, whose reviews are read by a sufficiently large number of people that vendors have a strong interest in swinging them in their favor.
So when all is told, I suspect that Linux reviews are just as biased as nay others in the industry. Now that Linux qualifies as being in the "industry", this will happen more often until it is at a norm with the rest of technology.
P.S. Sorry if the spelling and formatting are bad -- IE (stuck with it) has decided to all of a sudden not refresh the screen, making it impossible to read wat I'm typing.
Sorry for yelling at you. I just kinda glossed over the "might" part and jumped to confusions. I see now your original intent, which was speculation rather than stating a conclusion.
Unfortunately, this would require people to distribute sources even if they only modify it internally. This is what RMS called an annoying thorn in the side for Plan 9 -- requiring the distribution of modified versions even for internal use. Even worse, it would mean that all users have to have a copy of the source with them at all times or risk violating the license.
I wasn't going to step in, but after seeing the amount of well-meaning misinformation, I had to say this, even if it may be too late to get moderated up.
The FS does NOT, I'll say it again, does NOT control what is considered a derivative work! This is determined by U.S. Copyright Law. It is impossible to add a clause to the GPL saying that "content generated by this product is a derivative work". It has NOTHING to do with the medium you're sending it through or any of that garbage. It has to do with what copyright law says is a derivative work.
Well-regulated, back in those days, meant the same as "well-oiled" (figuratively, of course!:p). It had nothing to do with laws.
Funny how this comment is in an article about drug prohibition. It didn't work with alcohol, it isn't working with drugs -- Why do you think guns would be any different?. It's not like criminals won't be able to get guns any more. The prohibition of guns would only keep them out of the hands of lawful citizens.
Since order creates chaos somewhere, it might stand to reason that chaos creates order somewhere.
Then logically, it stands that since criminals all drink water, all water drinkers are criminals!
One of the most basic tenets of logic is that just because something is true doesn't mean its converse ("opposite") is true. A=>B does not not always imply B=>A.
Not that I don't agree with your original point...
That's dangerous though. Any time we delegate power, there must always be a way to get the power back. If we vote to allow 20% of the population to vote from now on, we will never be able to vote to give the vote back -- those 20% will have to do that. How many times do you know of that the ruling power has voted itself out of power?
What we do now is just fine: We vote for a fraction of the population (congressman) that are(presumably) smarter than the rest of us. These people act as proxies to do the actual voting on issues; however, we still can vote for those that we delegate.
I found this report on their web server... don't bother looking for it because it seems to have disappeared. Huh.
"Insiders say that they decided to fix the problem after a person named "w3 r00ted ju! ph34r m3!!!" was elected Governer by a margin of 36,000 to 147. Police refuse to comment on the identity of this mysterious person; an anonymous source has stated that they are too busy due to those 147 people all having their credit card number stolen."
Slashdot does NOT use doubleclick.net for any of its ads. Apparently you are unware that there are other ways to put images on pages for revenue -- ways that don't involve leaving cookies or tracking you as you surf. This article explains AndOver.Net's ad delivery system, which incidentally is an open-source project hosted on Sourceforge. As a matter of fact,/. only sets one cookie, which contains your login information.
immeadiatly stamping a label on the guy's forehead so that you can trivially dismiss his thesis
Have you read Snow Crash? In it, one form of punishment is stamping "Poor Impulse Control" on one's forehead. Once you've read that book, you'll never be able to use that argument without cracking up.
I still will not back down from my original statement: This guy is a nutcase. The assertion that "They" are against us without exactly describing who "they" are is one sign. Another is that stating the aliens are "right out there", "they" know that, and "they want to hide it from the People for reasons unknown. First off, aliens are still a remote chance. Read the latest issue of SciAm for more info on that. Corporations know that. And why would they want to hide the aliens from us? What does P&G care about aliens? Or maybe it's the government, not corporations. Why would the government be threatened? I could go on all day.
Yes, it is dangerous to get in the practice of calling people crackpots. It can also be used as a label against people who disagree with you, and that is doubleplus ungood (irony intended). However, sometimes they truly deserve it.
Great! Not giving away your IP address is a fantastic idea! As long as we don't need to get information back from the server, it'll work for sure! Exclamation points can make the suckiest idea sound good if used right!
Seriously, though, you need to reveal your IP address so the server can send back the information you requested. That's what servers do.
I bet everyone on/. will be going "Yay! New technology!", but we have to worry about one thing: What happens next? An evil corporation buys a 2x2 foot block of ceiling somewhere and gathers DNA. It then correlates the DNA to your e-mail address, home address, and SSN (if it can get it). Corporations now have a perfect way of identifying someone perfectly -- After all, DNA doesn't lie, does it?
It does. Remember, it can't tell what it's gathering or where it came from. It would be trivial to walk underneath one of those things and shake a vial of someone else's dandruff over its sensor. Voila! You have an effect similar to the cypherpunk/cypherpunk registrations on annoying news sites. Suddenly, this Evil Corporation has one John Smith on 31337 Haxor Lane, New York, NY walking into its store several times per second. It's "Hack life" on a whole new level.
Yikes, was I really that far off? I thougth I knew a little bit more than _that_ about classical music.
Yeah, he was actually a baroque composer, actually one of the first. And yes, he was very advanced compared to the guys before him -- even if now his pieces seem somewhat simplistic in their patterns. But back then, this was the new thing. It was rebel territory. "Wow! Tonality!"
When I mentioned classical music, I was including baroque composers in that category as well, even if they're a bit too early. For the purposes of this article, the same thing applies to Bach as it does to all other composers for the organ. Whatever.
The opera Mephistopheles (sp?), by I-forget-whom. In the prologue, the people say their lines, the devil does his thing, the angels say stupid stuff like "we are the angels that flit about that flit about that flit about we are the angels that..." ad nauseum, to throw some latin into this already academic mix. Everyone goes into a big medley, and you kind of forget about the devil who is absent from this part... until he tears onstage screaming "FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTT TTTTT!!!!!" That part right there has the organ already going full blast with the theme phrase... imagine that with an explosive organ!
Yes, music is full of pieces that could be imporved dramatically merely by the addition of a few explosives.
Slashdot Mirror
"complex bloatware" ... "integrated programming language" ... "web browser" ...
Oh, I get it now! You must be talking about Emacs, right?
It happens. I've gotten bsods because of conflicts between programs, such as neoplanet and ie. If you have screwed up settings then it can happen a LOT; at a museum where I volunteer, they have one computer that will literally last no longer than 10 minutes max. without BSODing or otherwise crashing. Hardware problems and such can REALLY destabilize your machine because of priveliges given to device drivers that they shouldn't have (when was the last time Linux crashed because of a device driver?)
and I don't mean first post.
Look closely at the text. It says that there will be a Unix/Linux version at the end of the year, but the mac version will not come into 2001.
This is rare right now, but I suspect that we will see a lot more of this happening. As Linux (and to a lesser extent, BSD[*]) grows, we will see much greater acceptance of Linux as an alternative platform at equal or greater standing relative to the Mac.
[*] Nothing against the technical merits of BSD; they just have a smaller marketshare at the moment, thus having a lesser affect as an alternative OS.
what can adequately be explained by stupidity: Why don't they just go after the names they actually plan on using, instead of attacking anything with olympics in it? After all, it's not like the fake names will confuse people -- they will see the web site name from marketing, on TV.
Or maybe they figured that since they were going to the DNS services anyway instead of the individual owners, they would be able to get rid of everything in one fell swoop. How canthey be that callous with other people's resources?
Remember that a large percentage of reviews are bought -- larger than most people think. The way to get an unbiased review is to check out smaller sites, like HappyPuppy.Com for game reviews, to take only one example. The only time reviews can really be biased is with larger sites like ZDNet, whose reviews are read by a sufficiently large number of people that vendors have a strong interest in swinging them in their favor.
So when all is told, I suspect that Linux reviews are just as biased as nay others in the industry. Now that Linux qualifies as being in the "industry", this will happen more often until it is at a norm with the rest of technology.
P.S. Sorry if the spelling and formatting are bad -- IE (stuck with it) has decided to all of a sudden not refresh the screen, making it impossible to read wat I'm typing.
Sorry for yelling at you. I just kinda glossed over the "might" part and jumped to confusions. I see now your original intent, which was speculation rather than stating a conclusion.
Unfortunately, this would require people to distribute sources even if they only modify it internally. This is what RMS called an annoying thorn in the side for Plan 9 -- requiring the distribution of modified versions even for internal use. Even worse, it would mean that all users have to have a copy of the source with them at all times or risk violating the license.
I wasn't going to step in, but after seeing the amount of well-meaning misinformation, I had to say this, even if it may be too late to get moderated up.
The FS does NOT, I'll say it again, does NOT control what is considered a derivative work! This is determined by U.S. Copyright Law. It is impossible to add a clause to the GPL saying that "content generated by this product is a derivative work". It has NOTHING to do with the medium you're sending it through or any of that garbage. It has to do with what copyright law says is a derivative work.
Well-regulated, back in those days, meant the same as "well-oiled" (figuratively, of course! :p). It had nothing to do with laws.
Funny how this comment is in an article about drug prohibition. It didn't work with alcohol, it isn't working with drugs -- Why do you think guns would be any different?. It's not like criminals won't be able to get guns any more. The prohibition of guns would only keep them out of the hands of lawful citizens.
Since order creates chaos somewhere, it might stand to reason that chaos creates order somewhere.
Then logically, it stands that since criminals all drink water, all water drinkers are criminals!
One of the most basic tenets of logic is that just because something is true doesn't mean its converse ("opposite") is true. A=>B does not not always imply B=>A.
Not that I don't agree with your original point...
They say that bad licenses are good because they encourage people to write workalikes with good licenses.
Grade A prime bull.
If the license was free, then there would be no need to write a clone. Coders could instead work on othe, new projects instead of duplicating effort.
That's dangerous though. Any time we delegate power, there must always be a way to get the power back. If we vote to allow 20% of the population to vote from now on, we will never be able to vote to give the vote back -- those 20% will have to do that. How many times do you know of that the ruling power has voted itself out of power?
What we do now is just fine: We vote for a fraction of the population (congressman) that are(presumably) smarter than the rest of us. These people act as proxies to do the actual voting on issues; however, we still can vote for those that we delegate.
I found this report on their web server... don't bother looking for it because it seems to have disappeared. Huh.
"Insiders say that they decided to fix the problem after a person named "w3 r00ted ju! ph34r m3!!!" was elected Governer by a margin of 36,000 to 147. Police refuse to comment on the identity of this mysterious person; an anonymous source has stated that they are too busy due to those 147 people all having their credit card number stolen."
Slashdot does NOT use doubleclick.net for any of its ads. Apparently you are unware that there are other ways to put images on pages for revenue -- ways that don't involve leaving cookies or tracking you as you surf. This article explains AndOver.Net's ad delivery system, which incidentally is an open-source project hosted on Sourceforge. As a matter of fact, /. only sets one cookie, which contains your login information.
Slashdot does NOT use doubleclick.net for any of its ads. Apparently you are unware that there are other ways to put images on pages for revenue -- ways that don't involve leaving cookies or tracking you as you surf. f orge</a>. As a matter of fact, /. only sets one cookie, which contains your login information.
immeadiatly stamping a label on the guy's forehead so that you can trivially dismiss his thesis
Have you read Snow Crash? In it, one form of punishment is stamping "Poor Impulse Control" on one's forehead. Once you've read that book, you'll never be able to use that argument without cracking up.
I still will not back down from my original statement: This guy is a nutcase. The assertion that "They" are against us without exactly describing who "they" are is one sign. Another is that stating the aliens are "right out there", "they" know that, and "they want to hide it from the People for reasons unknown. First off, aliens are still a remote chance. Read the latest issue of SciAm for more info on that. Corporations know that. And why would they want to hide the aliens from us? What does P&G care about aliens? Or maybe it's the government, not corporations. Why would the government be threatened? I could go on all day.
Yes, it is dangerous to get in the practice of calling people crackpots. It can also be used as a label against people who disagree with you, and that is doubleplus ungood (irony intended). However, sometimes they truly deserve it.
(-1, Crackpot)
A wristband company called Vertex RSI... that is just NOT RIGHT in the slightest.
That's like calling a cruise ship the Titanic; you can if you want, but it's something you just DON'T DO...
"from the can't-get-more-alliteration-than-that-sorry dept."
:-)
Yes, there _could_ be more alliteration than that... if the story was about RAMBUS.
Great! Not giving away your IP address is a fantastic idea! As long as we don't need to get information back from the server, it'll work for sure! Exclamation points can make the suckiest idea sound good if used right!
Seriously, though, you need to reveal your IP address so the server can send back the information you requested. That's what servers do.
I bet everyone on /. will be going "Yay! New technology!", but we have to worry about one thing: What happens next? An evil corporation buys a 2x2 foot block of ceiling somewhere and gathers DNA. It then correlates the DNA to your e-mail address, home address, and SSN (if it can get it). Corporations now have a perfect way of identifying someone perfectly -- After all, DNA doesn't lie, does it?
It does. Remember, it can't tell what it's gathering or where it came from. It would be trivial to walk underneath one of those things and shake a vial of someone else's dandruff over its sensor. Voila! You have an effect similar to the cypherpunk/cypherpunk registrations on annoying news sites. Suddenly, this Evil Corporation has one John Smith on 31337 Haxor Lane, New York, NY walking into its store several times per second. It's "Hack life" on a whole new level.
Please tell me that was a joke...
Wow!
Okay, okay, I surrender. I bow to your superior music knowledge. I post without the +1 to humble myself before thee.
Yikes, was I really that far off? I thougth I knew a little bit more than _that_ about classical music.
Yeah, he was actually a baroque composer, actually one of the first. And yes, he was very advanced compared to the guys before him -- even if now his pieces seem somewhat simplistic in their patterns. But back then, this was the new thing. It was rebel territory. "Wow! Tonality!"
When I mentioned classical music, I was including baroque composers in that category as well, even if they're a bit too early. For the purposes of this article, the same thing applies to Bach as it does to all other composers for the organ. Whatever.
The opera Mephistopheles (sp?), by I-forget-whom. In the prologue, the people say their lines, the devil does his thing, the angels say stupid stuff like "we are the angels that flit about that flit about that flit about we are the angels that..." ad nauseum, to throw some latin into this already academic mix. Everyone goes into a big medley, and you kind of forget about the devil who is absent from this part... until he tears onstage screaming "FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTT TTTTT!!!!!" That part right there has the organ already going full blast with the theme phrase... imagine that with an explosive organ!
:-)
Yes, music is full of pieces that could be imporved dramatically merely by the addition of a few explosives.
Funny, that seems to apply to most of life too