Romantic is what you can get out of that money and that's a decent life with a house, a car and a family.
LOL! I can't think of anything less romantic.
The whole thing about ``free software'' is a lie. It's a dream created and made popular by people who have a keen interest in having cheap software so that they can drive down their own cost and profit more or by people who can easily demand it, because they make their money out of speaking at conferences or write books about how nice it is to have free software. At the bottom of the food chain are people like you, who are easily fooled by the ``let's make the world a better place'' rhetoric and who are so enthusiastic about technology that writing open-source - or any source for that matter - is the absolutely best imaginable way to spend their time. It doesn't matter whether you love what you are doing and consider this the hobby you want to spend 110% of your time on: It's exploitation by companies who are not at all interested in creating stuff. They want to use your stuff for free. That's why they trick you into doing it.
This nonsense hardly merits a response. The writer is seriously delusional and projecting his own fears and inadequacies on to an ecosystem and value-system he doesn't understand. Perhaps he is jealous of the Tim O'Reillys of the world.
What's spooky is the writer's random sprinkling of the word "family" throughout the text... he is making a subliminal emotional appeal instead of making his points with evidence.
The way it's written, it could have been planted as part of a coordinated FUD-Astroturf campaign to attack free/open source software on a "populist" level. A groklaw user has summarised the lies which comprise this "strategy":
Open source destroys the value of programmers' labor
Programmers who code OSS are putting other programmers out of work
Programmers should stop coding OSS and start thinking from a traditional career value perspective (they will present this as an either-or choice)
The OSS ideologues (Stallman et al.) want all software to be free (as in beer) and you to be out of work
The gimmick here is that they're trying to radicalize the debate and to portray both sides as slippery slopes. This is a way of herding people and excluding the middle.
The middle of course is that OSS represents a way for the free market to escape from the lock-in entrapments of commercial operating systems by commoditizing the basic OS and working environment of computing. In turn, this provides an open platform on which any kind of solution (commercial, free, hybrid, etc.) can be developed without the encumberance of proprietary lock-in to a single platform.
This is the reality and the excluded middle that they don't want you to see: FOSS as a free-market response to lock-in and a mechanism for constructing an open platform on which to build new levels of business and technology.
I have added emphasis to the points which specifically refute the bullshit quoted at top.
Jef Raskin wrote the following rebuttal to the same old disinformation when it appeared in the NYT and Macintouch [emphasis mine]:
I contacted John Markoff when I saw the fine NYT article on the history of the Alto that has been discussed here by Lopez, Thain, and Horn. I've known Markoff for years, and he is one of the best and most knowledgeable writers about the personal computer era.
My comment to Markoff was that his wording would lead a reader to conclude that Jobs got the inspiration for the Lisa and Mac on a visit to PARC, came back after that, and created the computers. That is the standard mythology, and it's wrong. I hate to see it promulgated, and certainly the word "after" is simply incorrect.
More accurate would have been "In many ways, the Alto served as an inspiration in the development of Apple's Lisa and Macintosh computers, which in turn inspired the Windows operating system."
Markoff agreed, and said, "I'll save this and do it that way next time."
Aside from this one error, I share with Horn the opinion that the article was excellent and accurate.
I do consider the Alto and lots of other work at PARC to have helped inspire many aspects of the Macintosh. Other inspirations came from great pioneers such as Englebart, Shannon, and Sutherland. As Bruce Horn noted, much that was new and improved over what PARC had done was created at Apple. He contributed to some of it. I will forever be proud that I created the Mac project itself, changed the Lisa architecture to a bit-mapped display from its original hardware-character-generator design, and invented interface widgets which are now so universal that they are considered as natural as breathing.
As was pointed out by Lopez, I had already come to the concept of interface-first, graphics-based computing before PARC was even started (I published my thoughts in 1967, PARC began in 1972), so it is clear that not all the inspiration for the Mac originated with PARC. I participated in many discussions at PARC from 1973 to 1978, and a few of my ideas found their way into the work there. (Many of us from Stanford's AI lab, where I was a visiting scholar, were frequent visitors to PARC, and vice versa. I have rarely seen the AI lab credited with the contributions it made to PARC's thinking). Some precise and documented details of how the PARC interfaces differed from the Mac's are in available in an appendix to my book, "The Humane Interface" (Addison-Wesley 2000). An independent source and timeline for this period is in Linzmayer, Owen, "Apple Confidential". For those who want to see for themselves, Stanford University's History of Technology project has a website with many original Mac documents, some from before the infamous visit, and more information appears on my site, www.jefraskin.com, including reprints of early Mac and Apple documents.
I thank Mr. Lopez and Mr. Thain for sticking up for me, and I must chide Mr. Horn for crediting me with "helping to bring the vision of the graphical user interface back [from PARC] to Apple." As noted above, and as he should know by now (I have long since informed him), the chronology proves that I had the vision before there was a PARC.
<RANT>
Macintouch is an excellent resource for current Mac news and issues, BUT they are completely useless when it comes to archiving their material. They don't even let Google catalogue it (last time I checked), and gems such as Raskin's piece above are completely lost as a result. They need to start managing their textual product far more effectively. </RANT>
The idea that Apple just took what was on Xerox's table is nothing more than a modern myth - accepted and passed down as Gospel by those unwilling to dig for facts. Many GUI innovations were developed inside Apple; its interface pioneers were led by Jef Raskin. I cannot summarise this historical error better than Jef himself:
It was not, as many accounts anachronistically relate, stolen from PARC by Steve Jobs after he saw the Alto running SmallTalk on a visit. For one thing the usual account (as in Levy's book, "Insanely Great" and others) denigrates the original and creative work done by all the Apple employees that put their hearts into the Mac.
Unfortunately Jef's paper The Mac and Me doesn't seem to be on the net (I thought it was), but that's the document that anyone interested in Mac history needs to read, if they want to hear the truth. It has lots of juicy Steve anecdotes too, for those who think he's just a turtlenecked marketer (but a bloody effective one).
Enderle is an idiot. Don't give him any more readers. It will only encourage him to produce more wrongheaded, destructive FUD at the behest of his corporate masters. This is the twit who wrote nonsense like:
Remember that the open-source community uses the thousands-of-monkeys method to ensure security. This method hearkens back to the college theory about a thousand monkeys who -- if given all eternity and endless typewriter ribbon -- eventually type out the complete works of Shakespeare.
Thanks, Rob, for connecting those two concepts for the first time. They've never been related except in your head.
So, in the face of the Microsoft code leak, I have to think the old saying that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones applies here very well. My sense is that these stones, tossed by the open-source community, will be coming back like boomerangs with booster rockets.
I predict that in the near future, a large number of folks relying on open-source software will suddenly see that while auditors can be funny, when it comes to source-code leaks -- including the entire source code freely available in the open-source community -- they have no sense of humor whatsoever.
Maybe ex-auditor Mr Enderle is upset because Open Source is under continuous audit. He's the archetypical soi disant "Analyst" Who Does Not Get Open Source; and having signed his name to so much FUD, can't afford to recant any time soon.
Columns of figures will still line up nicely, because almost all post-digital fonts (including Times Roman, one of the core 13 fonts in the first PostScript printers) use tabular figures - where the digits are all the same width.
However, as a consequence, the spacing all figures in non-tabular setting (that is, in run-on text - which is most setting) looks worse. As a typographer I spend time nearly every day manually fixing bad spacing caused by this unfortunate decision by the PostScript architects at Adobe - perhaps Warnock himself.
Other early digital font blunders by Adobe, mostly uncorrected, include:
poor quality digitisations;
short font families (missing weights);
incomplete glyph sets (e.g. lacking ligatures, small caps, non-lining figures);
Although this country has been using the Systeme Internationale for decades, we Australians also refer to the other system as Imperial, which is increasingly appropriate these days...
He should try adding a couple of other emulators to his system - that would increase his O/S options by another 100 or so - e.g. Bob Supnik's simh. That way he could claim to run DG RDOS, RT11, RSX-11, VMS, OS/8 and a host of far more obscure systems and a couple of dozen different machine architectures. Many software kits are included. Now that's fun.
The archetypal example of this kind of double-dealing are arms dealers who sell to both sides - a practice which is common among Western companies (particularly American and British). The Rothschild dynasty (and dozens of others) made its fortune this way and it does not surprise me in the least to find a Micro$oft connection here. "M$ put the security holes in, we make money exploiting them, then we make more money selling a so-called 'fix'."
Clearly Max has overlooked drum scanners in making his "first" claim. It's quite feasible to get images of this resolution or greater from a medium or (more likely) large format transparency or negative.
Thousands of such images will have been digitised in this way, since the 1980s when drum scanners were linked to digital front-ends. (One would hardly label these "scientific" - such uses are more likely to belong under advertising or publishing headings.)
On a related note - until the recent release of Adobe Photoshop CS, earlier versions of the program were limited to working with images no larger than 30,000x30,000 (900,000,000) pixels.
That's because it's a totally f*cking stupid idea. Thanks for murdering the books for future generations, Jackson. Thanks for nothing. It's an insult to every artist alive and dead. Die, Hollywood, die, and the sooner the better, you percentage driven scum.
About the only way Microsoft could stop Virtual PC from running Linux (or any other OS for that matter) without breaking other apps would be to put code in that explicity looks to see if its Linux you're installing, and if so Blue Screen. Even Microsoft isn't going to be that openly blatant.
Why wouldn't they do it? They've been convicted of worse!
I actually believe all energy is massively underpriced right now (electricity, fossil fuel, etc). What I was getting at with my original post was that I simply don't know what the energy-in/energy-out equation is for this, or any other generating technology for that matter. I'd like to see a comparison, including this nuclear battery design versus conventional nuclear.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL! I can't think of anything less romantic.
This nonsense hardly merits a response. The writer is seriously delusional and projecting his own fears and inadequacies on to an ecosystem and value-system he doesn't understand. Perhaps he is jealous of the Tim O'Reillys of the world.What's spooky is the writer's random sprinkling of the word "family" throughout the text... he is making a subliminal emotional appeal instead of making his points with evidence.
The way it's written, it could have been planted as part of a coordinated FUD-Astroturf campaign to attack free/open source software on a "populist" level. A groklaw user has summarised the lies which comprise this "strategy":
I have added emphasis to the points which specifically refute the bullshit quoted at top.
Sorry, the pullquote was from this site.
What, would you prefer to entrust important things to Windows, id10t?
Where are the pictures of Julia... and does she get nekkid.
However, as a consequence, the spacing all figures in non-tabular setting (that is, in run-on text - which is most setting) looks worse. As a typographer I spend time nearly every day manually fixing bad spacing caused by this unfortunate decision by the PostScript architects at Adobe - perhaps Warnock himself.
Other early digital font blunders by Adobe, mostly uncorrected, include:
The Bitstream type library avoids many of these problems, and I strongly recommend it over Adobe's if you care about quality type.
Although this country has been using the Systeme Internationale for decades, we Australians also refer to the other system as Imperial, which is increasingly appropriate these days...
According to Apple's web site, "for its Web page rendering engine, Safari draws on KHTML and KJS software from the KDE open source project".
No, it stands for So Completely Over it.
Well done, Apple, for fixing the driver issue that prevented this combination from working in earlier releases of 10.3.
From the simh web page:
and...
10) It makes the baby jesus cry
Uh, did it ever look like he wasn't?
"it will mean he has decided" - who has decided? Who is supposed to decide these things? He's making an awful lot of decisions on his own lately.
The archetypal example of this kind of double-dealing are arms dealers who sell to both sides - a practice which is common among Western companies (particularly American and British). The Rothschild dynasty (and dozens of others) made its fortune this way and it does not surprise me in the least to find a Micro$oft connection here. "M$ put the security holes in, we make money exploiting them, then we make more money selling a so-called 'fix'."
Clearly Max has overlooked drum scanners in making his "first" claim. It's quite feasible to get images of this resolution or greater from a medium or (more likely) large format transparency or negative.
Thousands of such images will have been digitised in this way, since the 1980s when drum scanners were linked to digital front-ends. (One would hardly label these "scientific" - such uses are more likely to belong under advertising or publishing headings.)
On a related note - until the recent release of Adobe Photoshop CS, earlier versions of the program were limited to working with images no larger than 30,000x30,000 (900,000,000) pixels.
That's because it's a totally f*cking stupid idea. Thanks for murdering the books for future generations, Jackson. Thanks for nothing. It's an insult to every artist alive and dead. Die, Hollywood, die, and the sooner the better, you percentage driven scum.
"Greedy" often looks and acts a lot like "stupid". Let's call them stupid greedy assholes and be done with it. :-)
Anyone with common sense should be outraged...
I actually believe all energy is massively underpriced right now (electricity, fossil fuel, etc).
What I was getting at with my original post was that I simply don't know what the energy-in/energy-out equation is for this, or any other generating technology for that matter. I'd like to see a comparison, including this nuclear battery design versus conventional nuclear.