I'm taking college right now for two reasons - the first is that college is less about learning specific things, than the art of learning itself. College students are very adept at picking up skillsets quickly - invaluable for any job, technology especially. My second reason is: everyone believes that right now is the time to enter the job market. The economy is booming, and you can make a nice chunk of change in short order, instead of laboring through college. Let me remind you that capitalism comes in cycles. We are in the longest expansionary period ever - it won't last. Then the job market WILL enter a recession. Will your employer pick you, 5 years experience, no degree, or a college grad with 2 years experience? I leave it to you to decide.
I have to take issue with the "temporary phenomenon" quip. It seems to me that Linux has been around 6 years, UNIX has been around for decades, and Kernigan (inventor of C) released an entire language under "open source". Open source supports much of the vast infrastructure of the internet - sendmail & apache, bind, for example.
To say that it is only temporary is to show a complete disregard for the history of the internet, nay, computers at large.
There are several efforts to list maximum and average uptimes. There's even a section in the high-availablity mini-howto on this.
Fud. fud. fud.
Even assuming the article is 100% correct, by not giving an alternative which is superior, you're being hypocritial, and admitting that linux is the superior solution by omission.
Sorry, but there's only one problem with this arguement - who would buy a bunch of "information appliances" if you have 1 that does everything (even if it costs more).
It's an analogy akin to saying I have a Widget that can function as a dishwasher, can opener, toaster, and microwave oven. Why would I want to replace my widget for all of those other appliances? My Widget can also be upgraded (free of charge) to support Oven Baking and Bread Making.
It may be non-controlling - which means they own x% of the company, but don't have any decision-making power.
As to the installation, you should try it some time. My friend have been working on an X install for quite some time. The main problem is.. size! You're limited to CDROM install then. network won't do because of a chicken/egg problem - you need space to store those files.. but you need to have everything partitioned and formatted first.
This is a midpoint between commercial software and OSS. Essentially you're trying to get the benefits (money) of commercial software in exchange for the rapid development model of OSS. Inevitably the movement will slide down that slippery slope right back to where we were before - heavily licensed software protected by obtuse patents and a incredibly huge beurocracy.
Your primary point of this article was that it does not cost money to distribute software. So once the r&d has been invested in the creation of the product.. distribution is unlimited and costs nothing! This leads to the conclusion that if OSS can produce software for free(dollars, not time here)... and distribute it for free, any such mutation will fail in the long-term.
OSS is indeed a gift culture, but it isn't as noble as you're portraying it - we do expect something in return. We expect our freedom.
Hey, I'm all for business, but I've gotten so tired of having to go into the registry to remove that AIM thing and the AOL bookmarks that I'm considering tracking down a virus maker and creating something to modify the registry to delete this thing AS A SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY. Aaagggh.
First, good essay. But it neatly avoided issue of personalities here. The FSF has been so badly damaged by the "personality" wars of late it's hard to see that any progress can reasonably be made in the near future. Anyway, back to the issue. My proposals for recognition of the GNU utilities in linux.
o Put it in the man page. I have yet to find a gnu utility that was self-explanatory on the command line.:)
o Incorporate it into the kernel system startup. Why not? We have a penguin logo, why not put GNU in the background of it, or something *stylish and eye catching*. Or have a short "credit" on system startup.
o Put "gnu" in the version number and README files. Seems to be the most popular choice, I won't go any further.
o ASK for recognition! If you're really that concerned that GNU be recognized, go to the current community leaders - ESR, Linus T., RMS(duh!), Alan Cox, the *BSD developers, and ask them point blank - do you use the gnu linux utilities, and how useful do you find them? In this community - you are judged by what you contribute. If GNU has contributed as much as it boasts to have, this should be the easiest, and most effective, recognition.
In conclusion, I think the community knows how valuable the gnu utilities are, but all utilities have one thing in common - people take them for granted. Don't be suprised if nobody brings up the gnu utilities - they're UTILITIES!
Eric has been courting corporations to use "open source" for quite some time now - selling the idea, as it were. While this isn't bad in and of itself, witness the squabbling over who gets to represent the "community" on the issue of Business v. The Hackers, part i.
Eric wound up in a messy trademark-dispute, Richard Stallman has gone off the deep end with his insistence on the GNU/Linux designation, and Linus Torvalds is insisting on world domination.
Why is it all our leaders have a perpensity to self-destruct once they become popular?
It's true to a limited extent. There's two ways you can take this.
1. It's the "will of the majority" -> this is a largely homogenious group of people - geeks/hackers/techno-nerds/whatever, and most of the moderators are of the same cut. So *naturally* anything posted will be viewed through the colored lens of that demographic group.
2. The second way you can take it is, Rob's moderator-selection-process is broken. He should choose people who are "open minded", and select as diverse a group as possible, at all points along the "political scale", as it were.
Both methods have their pros and cons, and I shall leave that to the savvy reader to pick up and fill in in more detail.
Some people will never be happy. That's primarily what that is.
Sounds like a few people from clan RMS broke away from the FSF and are going after anything that isn't completely free.
As far as I'm concerned, if it meets The Debian Free Software Guidelines in every respect, it's OSS, and I'll consider using it and developing for it. If it doesn't meet that criterion, I simply won't develop it, and I won't use it unless absolutely necessary.
The article points out a key tenet of FUD - "there's no such thing as a free lunch". Almost everyone I've talked to considering linux has one burning question - what's the catch?
Linux has proven itself technically several times over. It is now battling social prejudices and entrenched corporate philosophies. As often occurs in such event, unless a significant industry event occurs, it will not progress much farther in! If linux is to gain widespread acceptance, it's community must produce a significant event which redefines the boundaries of the corporation and marketplace. Thus far, the closest thing is the the OSS movement itself - which now supports and develops linux.
Didn't troll-tech already meet the definition of open source? I thought the "patching issue" was the only one left that the developers had any concern about. And as far as I know, KDE is the only set of linux utilities that uses Qt at all.
I disagree. If their editorial is worth reading, why are they making it so hard to read? I'll go to the nytimes because it has *quality* articles.. But they have some cookie/login system that is pure hell on proxies (lpwa.com for one) and other things so that *you can't login*. Makes you wonder.
Can someone please post a working login/pw? Nytimes seems to be quite busy trying to track everyone. What do you guys think? Shouldn't they just give up? Why do they need to do this?!
Other people have already posted similar, but I'll throw my hat in the ring anyway..
Jon Katz isn't "news for nerds". Obviously.. the only things I can think of that are even remotely of interest to me are online democracy that has been posted on Freedom Forum. That applies to geeks. But this whole "book" thing?
I want technical issues, not the "libertarian view of object-oriented" whatever it was he was blubbering about.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm taking college right now for two reasons - the first is that college is less about learning specific things, than the art of learning itself. College students are very adept at picking up skillsets quickly - invaluable for any job, technology especially. My second reason is: everyone believes that right now is the time to enter the job market. The economy is booming, and you can make a nice chunk of change in short order, instead of laboring through college. Let me remind you that capitalism comes in cycles. We are in the longest expansionary period ever - it won't last. Then the job market WILL enter a recession. Will your employer pick you, 5 years experience, no degree, or a college grad with 2 years experience? I leave it to you to decide.
--
I have to take issue with the "temporary phenomenon" quip. It seems to me that Linux has been around 6 years, UNIX has been around for decades, and Kernigan (inventor of C) released an entire language under "open source". Open source supports much of the vast infrastructure of the internet - sendmail & apache, bind, for example.
To say that it is only temporary is to show a complete disregard for the history of the internet, nay, computers at large.
--
There are several efforts to list maximum and average uptimes. There's even a section in the high-availablity mini-howto on this.
Fud. fud. fud.
Even assuming the article is 100% correct, by not giving an alternative which is superior, you're being hypocritial, and admitting that linux is the superior solution by omission.
--
Hmm. Within 10 seconds of posting to slashdot, you'll have 10 people.
The question I want answered is - what do you plan on doing with the other 10,000 e-mail addresses?
--
Is open source in there? Does it say who owns the "trademark"?
--
Sorry, but there's only one problem with this arguement - who would buy a bunch of "information appliances" if you have 1 that does everything (even if it costs more).
It's an analogy akin to saying I have a Widget that can function as a dishwasher, can opener, toaster, and microwave oven. Why would I want to replace my widget for all of those other appliances? My Widget can also be upgraded (free of charge) to support Oven Baking and Bread Making.
--
It may be non-controlling - which means they own x% of the company, but don't have any decision-making power.
As to the installation, you should try it some time. My friend have been working on an X install for quite some time. The main problem is.. size! You're limited to CDROM install then. network won't do because of a chicken/egg problem - you need space to store those files.. but you need to have everything partitioned and formatted first.
--
Hey! Wasn't dell the one to put those "by opening this package you agree to the terms of the EULA listed inside" stickies all over their laptops?
--
> What if hackers finally had enough of this crap and they all went on strike?
Umm.. they have. They're running linux now. >:)
Down with the evil empire!
--
This is a midpoint between commercial software and OSS. Essentially you're trying to get the benefits (money) of commercial software in exchange for the rapid development model of OSS. Inevitably the movement will slide down that slippery slope right back to where we were before - heavily licensed software protected by obtuse patents and a incredibly huge beurocracy.
Your primary point of this article was that it does not cost money to distribute software. So once the r&d has been invested in the creation of the product.. distribution is unlimited and costs nothing! This leads to the conclusion that if OSS can produce software for free(dollars, not time here)... and distribute it for free, any such mutation will fail in the long-term.
OSS is indeed a gift culture, but it isn't as noble as you're portraying it - we do expect something in return. We expect our freedom.
--
Wow! At long last... real news!
No april fools!
Hoorrraaayyy!!!
--
Hey, I'm all for business, but I've gotten so tired of having to go into the registry to remove that AIM thing and the AOL bookmarks that I'm considering tracking down a virus maker and creating something to modify the registry to delete this thing AS A SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY. Aaagggh.
--
I take it you don't use any of the following:
ls, cp, mv, rm, sed, awk, grep, ps, X, startx, glibc/libc, gnome, or Afterstep?
None of those are on your system?
Wow.
--
First, good essay. But it neatly avoided issue of personalities here. The FSF has been so badly damaged by the "personality" wars of late it's hard to see that any progress can reasonably be made in the near future. Anyway, back to the issue. My proposals for recognition of the GNU utilities in linux.
:)
o Put it in the man page. I have yet to find a gnu utility that was self-explanatory on the command line.
o Incorporate it into the kernel system startup. Why not? We have a penguin logo, why not put GNU in the background of it, or something *stylish and eye catching*. Or have a short "credit" on system startup.
o Put "gnu" in the version number and README files. Seems to be the most popular choice, I won't go any further.
o ASK for recognition! If you're really that concerned that GNU be recognized, go to the current community leaders - ESR, Linus T., RMS(duh!), Alan Cox, the *BSD developers, and ask them point blank - do you use the gnu linux utilities, and how useful do you find them? In this community - you are judged by what you contribute. If GNU has contributed as much as it boasts to have, this should be the easiest, and most effective, recognition.
In conclusion, I think the community knows how valuable the gnu utilities are, but all utilities have one thing in common - people take them for granted. Don't be suprised if nobody brings up the gnu utilities - they're UTILITIES!
--
I'm sorry, but I have to politely disagree.
Eric has been courting corporations to use "open source" for quite some time now - selling the idea, as it were. While this isn't bad in and of itself, witness the squabbling over who gets to represent the "community" on the issue of Business v. The Hackers, part i.
Eric wound up in a messy trademark-dispute, Richard Stallman has gone off the deep end with his insistence on the GNU/Linux designation, and Linus Torvalds is insisting on world domination.
Why is it all our leaders have a perpensity to self-destruct once they become popular?
--
It's true to a limited extent. There's two ways you can take this.
1. It's the "will of the majority" -> this is a largely homogenious group of people - geeks/hackers/techno-nerds/whatever, and most of the moderators are of the same cut. So *naturally* anything posted will be viewed through the colored lens of that demographic group.
2. The second way you can take it is, Rob's moderator-selection-process is broken. He should choose people who are "open minded", and select as diverse a group as possible, at all points along the "political scale", as it were.
Both methods have their pros and cons, and I shall leave that to the savvy reader to pick up and fill in in more detail.
--
Sorry, I mean we can still buy all the tickets that day.
--
We can still rent out a theatre, so it looks.
:)
Anyone else going to the Expo?
Anyway, is there a reason why lucas is doing this?
--
Some people will never be happy. That's primarily what that is.
Sounds like a few people from clan RMS broke away from the FSF and are going after anything that isn't completely free.
As far as I'm concerned, if it meets The Debian Free Software Guidelines in every respect, it's OSS, and I'll consider using it and developing for it. If it doesn't meet that criterion, I simply won't develop it, and I won't use it unless absolutely necessary.
--
The article points out a key tenet of FUD - "there's no such thing as a free lunch". Almost everyone I've talked to considering linux has one burning question - what's the catch?
Linux has proven itself technically several times over. It is now battling social prejudices and entrenched corporate philosophies. As often occurs in such event, unless a significant industry event occurs, it will not progress much farther in! If linux is to gain widespread acceptance, it's community must produce a significant event which redefines the boundaries of the corporation and marketplace. Thus far, the closest thing is the the OSS movement itself - which now supports and develops linux.
--
Didn't troll-tech already meet the definition of open source? I thought the "patching issue" was the only one left that the developers had any concern about. And as far as I know, KDE is the only set of linux utilities that uses Qt at all.
--
I disagree. If their editorial is worth reading, why are they making it so hard to read? I'll go to the nytimes because it has *quality* articles.. But they have some cookie/login system that is pure hell on proxies (lpwa.com for one) and other things so that *you can't login*. Makes you wonder.
--
This is slashdot, not the psychic friends network.
--
Can someone please post a working login/pw? Nytimes seems to be quite busy trying to track everyone. What do you guys think? Shouldn't they just give up? Why do they need to do this?!
--
Other people have already posted similar, but I'll throw my hat in the ring anyway..
Jon Katz isn't "news for nerds". Obviously.. the only things I can think of that are even remotely of interest to me are online democracy that has been posted on Freedom Forum. That applies to geeks. But this whole "book" thing?
I want technical issues, not the "libertarian view of object-oriented" whatever it was he was blubbering about.
Adios, me amigo.
--