I didn't respond to Dark_Lord_Prime's comment because the statement that "everything's about avoiding personal embarrassment for yourself?" seemed to be in fun. That person got (or at least appeared to) that I was relating what I thought was a personal and funny anecdote about why you might want to pay attention to what you are watching when kids are around for reasons other than morality - which I am sure you would complain about as well.
Did you know he knew the word "twat"...
As a matter of fact, I did not know he knew the word. And, though we all laughed about it, I was in polite company and it was embarrassing - who are you to judge me for that? I am the one whose kid ISN'T running around movie theatres making an ass of himself. While it is very vogue to slam people for having children that are "extensions of themselves," you don't know anything about me or what my philosophy is. When we got home I explained that there were some words we don't say outside of the house and that was one of them. It was never an issue again. Don't project your battered childhood on to me.
Finally, if you consider twat the common vernacular of our society that should readily be applied by children of any age then you are welcome not to give me advice because I suspect I won't be taking it anyway. You sound like one of the "just let kids be" crowd who is then the first to bitch when somebody else's kid bothers you and everyone has to listen to you whine for the next hour about how the parents are doing a shitty job raising their kid.
Quit taking away mod points from moderators. You know they cannot resist moderating you redundant if you ask them not to do so. Such a polite request is baiting the moderators if I ever saw it.
By removing your anterior from your posterior, and stop trying to "protect" them from "naughty" words...
One day you will have children and realize that everything isn't about morality or "protection." It may be that you just don't want your four-year old son asking your boss, when you are at his house for a picnic, "Papa, does this man have a twat?"
I am astonished that it was suggested that China is doing this to prevent a death from game addiction
I agree. Even though, communist governments are always being accused of being nanny states, I have to question the rationale behind whether the loss of one person in 48,422,644 (population of S. Korea per cia.gov) justifies any governmental action. Seriously, do they really want to expend any effort ($$$$) on what has got to be a rather rare occurrence?
They have to see it as a palatable justification to exert new controls over their computer using population. Otherwise, it just doesn't make any sense.
You shouldn't get flamed. As a self-proclaimed Mac zealot (I have never purchased anything but), I have always had to concede the one-button mouse is a dumb idea. I currently use a wireless Logitech three-button, scroll-wheel mouse. (One button is on the side.)
Not to spread FUD, but I once read - I think right here on Slashdot - that Apple Corporate made the "informed" decision to stay with the one-button after consideration and review. If anyone knows anything about this I would be very interested to either have this denied as FUD or to have an explanation of just WHAT THE HELL THEY WERE THINKING?!?
I couldn't believe it. To ignore the issue is one thing, not justifiable but every corporation has to evaluate its priorities. To decide to stay with one button after reasoned consideration, however, just boggles my mind. If the goal is to be different from the rest of the PC world, ship a three-button mouse.
You misunderstand the intent of my post. I was defending my point against being accused of being selective in my civic values, not supporting the DMCA. Point of fact, I do not approve of the DMCA - Customs could seize violative stuff before; even greymarket merchandise (relevant to the international marketing district issue) if certain conditions were met. I included the marketing district comment because, although it is promoted as only being anti-piracy, the DMCA has additional language that directly affects consumers who purchase legitimate product outside of the US market. To be clear, you can import that Japanese play station, but you cannot (legally) import a connector that would enable it to play games designated for the US market.
You are being somewhat selective in your civic values.
I do not think so. As someone who worked as a Customs Inspector for almost a decade and seized many many hardware and software components under the DMCA, I have a keen understanding of the intention and use of the DMCA. It was implemented with the intention of curbing the flow of violative software and the hardware that enabled use of illegal software. It also enabled businesses to better control their marketing districts.
Preventing consumers from fair use activities was never part of the stated reason for the legislation nor were we ever instructed during our briefings to look for articles that would prevent consumers from manipulating legitimate (legally obtained and distributed) software and hardware.
My background stated, I will also assert that I have no problem putting copyright violators in jail or with the seizure of illegally produced and distributed works. I am not advocating any type of free-for-all. I believe people should be fairly compensated for their efforts.
However,
since my time as an Inspector, I have observe many businesses try to warp the usage of the DMCA to their own ends. And not just the usual targets of/. dislike: My favorite was the court decision that third-party garage door openers are NOT a violation of the DMCA because Congress never intended the DMCA to limit consumer options. Good ruling but this is why I have become cynical about the current usage of the DMCA. It is no longer being applied to the "bad guys" but instead is being increasingly used by corporations to lock consumers out of their rights and choices.
The manipulation of the DMCA in effort to extort more money out of the consumer or monopolistically control the consumer is unacceptable and unethical.
Since this is being tried in both the courts of law and of public opinion it is important to keep the argument sane, salient and factual. We are only wanting to keep that to which we are already entitled by law.
Those who fight against fair use are behaving unethically.
Contois Music Technology who? What did they ever do for me?
To be fair, maybe they have done quite a bit but I just do not know about it. From my current perspective, however, this is just another entity that comes up with a described, but still rather imprecise concept, never does anything with it, and then sues a second entity that implements something different than originally presented but close enough to fall under the patents' over-reaching definitions.
Show me that Apple suppressed Contois Music Technology's product and I will gleefully applaud any punitive action; we don't need another Microsoft. But, until that time, this is just another example of why software patents should be discontinued.
Yes. Insightful. (At least to that moderator). What it isn't and isn't rated as is Informative, which would appear to be your complaint.
Why do I care? Because I am tired of having to decide whether to meta-moderate down posts that are moderated as insightful that are interesting or informative but not insightful. (Or informative but not insightful, etc.)
They really do not mean the same thing and, if a comment is good, I cannot bring myself to meta-mod as unfair an informative (but not particularly insightful) comment that was modded as insightful.
And then, because I have not moderated with full integrity, Western Civilization as a whole moves one step closer to annihilation!!
No, not really, but it is a gripe I have and that is why I had to comment to an anonymous post.
How could something so critical be so ignored by the masses?
Because they have never tried to get the little green fairy from Moulin Rouge to do her little dance on their desktop when their computer boots.
I was the same way until I tried the above. MIA#? R1Aa? Who are they?
The process I went through: She's cute, I want her, I have purchased a DVD of the movie, so I am not stealing anything (please - no copyright vs. theft, that's not my point), and my computer has a DVD capable drive.
How tough can it be? (Can you feel the suspense?)
Hmmm. Apparently, my DVD player won't copy and paste a small movie sequence. Am I a moron? It can't be that tough...
Six months later (no, I am not a programmer)... You have got to be kidding! I cannot take a fucking 10 second sequence from a DVD that I own?!?
More research...
I had no idea I was being so screwed.
Three years later... I have my fairy. Thanks MacR1pp3r and all you other drm (what was the word? Oh yes,) criminals. Screw the MP#A and the R1Aa.
Until the masses expect more from their digital medium, this whole issue will be beneath their radar. And they will lose rights they never even knew they had.
Does anybody know who designed Wilbur? (I think that is his name.) Having generally no need for either Photoshop or Gimp, I made the investment of time - back when it was more than a simple package install - to install and use Gimp based entirely on that awesome dog.
Re:It's fascinating that we need this book...
on
Got Game
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Your comments, as well as others on this issue, are thought provoking but there is another issue that I have not yet noticed anyone mentioning that gives the book potential value.
Whether or not gamers are best suited to this task or that task in many cases is irrelevant. Like it or not, the many of the people in our workforce are gamers or have touch of gamer culture that affects their work habits and perspective. Unless, however, I want to pay their welfare check, they require employment as we all do and, as a workload supervisor, it is my job to keep them motivated and productive.
Though the point is well made elsewhere that much of this information appears anecdotal, I really must suggest that so is most of the "team building" and "be a better boss" information with which I am presented. Point of fact, the book sounds like a useful tool in understanding how to motivate another type of employee. Tips that assist me do this are valuable - round peg round hole, square peg square hole, that kind of thing - and, ultimately, having happy productive employees helps keep the bitching down so I can make my next character level before my boss gets back:o).
They were also the only (at least the only that I heard of) charity that publicly announced when they had received enough for the Tsunami effort. Though they took a lot of heat for this announcement from other charities, their spokesman indicated that people had to be confident that the organization's integrity was beyond reproach.
I found this very impressive and it encouraged me to donate to them for other causes.
If this post is redundant I apologize but I have never seen discussed on/. the issue of excluding software from patenting while retaining copyright eligibility. It seems to me this would be an ideal solution. IANAL but my understanding is that the original concept of patenting is to place a patented article into the public arena to allow for and encourage its utilization in technological advancement while, at the same time, ensuring the entity filing the patent has an advantage in marketing the new invention. I think it is widely recognized that this works well for steam shovels and physics but fails drastically in the software world because, well primarily, it is used to stifle rather than encourage creativity.
My thought is that preventing software patenting while allowing copyrighting ensures that a second party does not steal code from the first party and market it as their own; or, at least, has a remedy available if that happens. It does allow two entities to compete to produce a similar product based upon the same technology which is of benefit to the consumer. (At least, I heard that once in an class on capitalism.)
What about the company who invented the technology and their investment? IANAP(rogrammer) but I expect that good code takes time to write. (If it doesn't, then how innovative is it?) If a second party cannot use the copywrited code, which they already cannot, then they will have to write their own. This gives the developing company time to establish its product in the market, giving them an advantage but not a consumer lock that, considering how patents are used, may as well be until the end of time. At the same time, a second company will not be precluded or sued out of existence for developing a better product and perhaps developing further innovations in the technology in the process.
As a final question, does anyone know if EFF or anyone else has brought legal action demonstrating that software patents stifle rather than encourage innovation?
Practical difference between Apache 1.3 & 2.0
on
Apache 1.3.32 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
What is the practical difference between Apache 1.3.# and Apache 2.0.#?
1.3 ships with OS X (yes, I am one of those) and has always performed great. Plus, it is integrated in the operating system. I have always been curious about what advantages 2.0 might have and whether I should upgrade. I have installed it a couple of times, both from source and from binary but found it had to be executed from the shell. No big deal but the fact that I have not seen where anyone has integrated 2.0 into OS X's GUI web server makes me wonder why. I also do not want to ignorantly hand my bandwidth and personal files to everyone on the internet so I have been hesitant to simply jump in and begin serving with 2.0 without fully understanding what I am doing. (I am shell comfortable but not savvy.)
I appreciate anyone who is willing to share their experience or knowledge or has a good link.
Though the Anonymous Coward post explains it with good reasoning (Cross platform compatibility...), I think there is a secondary reason why Linux users would be excited about another PC configuration on which to install Linux that is a little alien to the typical Mac user.
At a Linux meeting I attended a while back a woman (an ex-windows user) asked the group, "about how much time one should allocate to installing a Linux network of four or five workstations in a new accounting office: an afternoon, a day, a weekend?" After some discussion, the final response was, "well... I suppose you could get it done in a day or two. But, really, Linux is a lifetime of fun."
The look on her face was priceless. And the guy who responded, along with the rest of the group, was absolutely sincere. They genuinely could not even comprehend the idea of creating a production environment and walking away once it was operational.
So, aside from the entirely reasonable answers given elsewhere, "Linux is a lifetime of fun."
…and start to run more native X applications
on
The Ultimate MacDate
·
· Score: 1
Running the risk of suggesting a Lexus when you have a Rolls-Royce (I don't know that much about Gentoo), I have had fantastic luck running X
applications using FinkCommander
via Fink. It requires that Apple's X11
(or OSS equivalent) be installed but I have been running Gimp, OpenOffice, and GNUCash with no troubles.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, this brings up two questions: ...
Wow, what a remarkably hostile response.
I didn't respond to Dark_Lord_Prime's comment because the statement that "everything's about avoiding personal embarrassment for yourself?" seemed to be in fun. That person got (or at least appeared to) that I was relating what I thought was a personal and funny anecdote about why you might want to pay attention to what you are watching when kids are around for reasons other than morality - which I am sure you would complain about as well.
Did you know he knew the word "twat"...
As a matter of fact, I did not know he knew the word. And, though we all laughed about it, I was in polite company and it was embarrassing - who are you to judge me for that? I am the one whose kid ISN'T running around movie theatres making an ass of himself. While it is very vogue to slam people for having children that are "extensions of themselves," you don't know anything about me or what my philosophy is. When we got home I explained that there were some words we don't say outside of the house and that was one of them. It was never an issue again. Don't project your battered childhood on to me.
Finally, if you consider twat the common vernacular of our society that should readily be applied by children of any age then you are welcome not to give me advice because I suspect I won't be taking it anyway. You sound like one of the "just let kids be" crowd who is then the first to bitch when somebody else's kid bothers you and everyone has to listen to you whine for the next hour about how the parents are doing a shitty job raising their kid.
(Please don't mod me redundant!)
Quit taking away mod points from moderators. You know they cannot resist moderating you redundant if you ask them not to do so. Such a polite request is baiting the moderators if I ever saw it.
By removing your anterior from your posterior, and stop trying to "protect" them from "naughty" words...
One day you will have children and realize that everything isn't about morality or "protection." It may be that you just don't want your four-year old son asking your boss, when you are at his house for a picnic, "Papa, does this man have a twat?"
Damn, was that embarrassing.
I am astonished that it was suggested that China is doing this to prevent a death from game addiction
I agree. Even though, communist governments are always being accused of being nanny states, I have to question the rationale behind whether the loss of one person in 48,422,644 (population of S. Korea per cia.gov) justifies any governmental action. Seriously, do they really want to expend any effort ($$$$) on what has got to be a rather rare occurrence?
They have to see it as a palatable justification to exert new controls over their computer using population. Otherwise, it just doesn't make any sense.
Wouldn't that be: GooooGle !!
Most insightful comment on the page. Wish I had mod points.
Assistant: Well, sir, I have the rest untied. What do you want me to do now?
Very well said. Wish I had mod points for you.
Maybe I will go pick up a copy.
Wish I had mod points, you've hit the nail on the head.
'nuff said
You shouldn't get flamed. As a self-proclaimed Mac zealot (I have never purchased anything but), I have always had to concede the one-button mouse is a dumb idea. I currently use a wireless Logitech three-button, scroll-wheel mouse. (One button is on the side.)
Not to spread FUD, but I once read - I think right here on Slashdot - that Apple Corporate made the "informed" decision to stay with the one-button after consideration and review. If anyone knows anything about this I would be very interested to either have this denied as FUD or to have an explanation of just WHAT THE HELL THEY WERE THINKING?!?
I couldn't believe it. To ignore the issue is one thing, not justifiable but every corporation has to evaluate its priorities. To decide to stay with one button after reasoned consideration, however, just boggles my mind. If the goal is to be different from the rest of the PC world, ship a three-button mouse.
Sheesh.
You misunderstand the intent of my post. I was defending my point against being accused of being selective in my civic values, not supporting the DMCA. Point of fact, I do not approve of the DMCA - Customs could seize violative stuff before; even greymarket merchandise (relevant to the international marketing district issue) if certain conditions were met. I included the marketing district comment because, although it is promoted as only being anti-piracy, the DMCA has additional language that directly affects consumers who purchase legitimate product outside of the US market. To be clear, you can import that Japanese play station, but you cannot (legally) import a connector that would enable it to play games designated for the US market.
Pretty slick, huh?
You are being somewhat selective in your civic values.
I do not think so. As someone who worked as a Customs Inspector for almost a decade and seized many many hardware and software components under the DMCA, I have a keen understanding of the intention and use of the DMCA. It was implemented with the intention of curbing the flow of violative software and the hardware that enabled use of illegal software. It also enabled businesses to better control their marketing districts.
Preventing consumers from fair use activities was never part of the stated reason for the legislation nor were we ever instructed during our briefings to look for articles that would prevent consumers from manipulating legitimate (legally obtained and distributed) software and hardware.
My background stated, I will also assert that I have no problem putting copyright violators in jail or with the seizure of illegally produced and distributed works. I am not advocating any type of free-for-all. I believe people should be fairly compensated for their efforts.
However, /. dislike: My favorite was the court decision that third-party garage door openers are NOT a violation of the DMCA because Congress never intended the DMCA to limit consumer options. Good ruling but this is why I have become cynical about the current usage of the DMCA. It is no longer being applied to the "bad guys" but instead is being increasingly used by corporations to lock consumers out of their rights and choices.
since my time as an Inspector, I have observe many businesses try to warp the usage of the DMCA to their own ends. And not just the usual targets of
The manipulation of the DMCA in effort to extort more money out of the consumer or monopolistically control the consumer is unacceptable and unethical.
I stand by my previous statement.
Good point. Thank-you.
Since this is being tried in both the courts of law and of public opinion it is important to keep the argument sane, salient and factual. We are only wanting to keep that to which we are already entitled by law.
Those who fight against fair use are behaving unethically.
I agree
Contois Music Technology who? What did they ever do for me?
To be fair, maybe they have done quite a bit but I just do not know about it. From my current perspective, however, this is just another entity that comes up with a described, but still rather imprecise concept, never does anything with it, and then sues a second entity that implements something different than originally presented but close enough to fall under the patents' over-reaching definitions.
Show me that Apple suppressed Contois Music Technology's product and I will gleefully applaud any punitive action; we don't need another Microsoft. But, until that time, this is just another example of why software patents should be discontinued.
Yes. Insightful. (At least to that moderator). What it isn't and isn't rated as is Informative, which would appear to be your complaint.
Why do I care? Because I am tired of having to decide whether to meta-moderate down posts that are moderated as insightful that are interesting or informative but not insightful. (Or informative but not insightful, etc.)
They really do not mean the same thing and, if a comment is good, I cannot bring myself to meta-mod as unfair an informative (but not particularly insightful) comment that was modded as insightful.
And then, because I have not moderated with full integrity, Western Civilization as a whole moves one step closer to annihilation!!
No, not really, but it is a gripe I have and that is why I had to comment to an anonymous post.
my tin-foil hat they said...
see? SEE?
mmmble grmble
How could something so critical be so ignored by the masses?
Because they have never tried to get the little green fairy from Moulin Rouge to do her little dance on their desktop when their computer boots.
I was the same way until I tried the above. MIA#? R1Aa? Who are they?
The process I went through: She's cute, I want her, I have purchased a DVD of the movie, so I am not stealing anything (please - no copyright vs. theft, that's not my point), and my computer has a DVD capable drive.
How tough can it be? (Can you feel the suspense?)
Hmmm. Apparently, my DVD player won't copy and paste a small movie sequence. Am I a moron? It can't be that tough...
Six months later (no, I am not a programmer)... You have got to be kidding! I cannot take a fucking 10 second sequence from a DVD that I own?!?
More research...
I had no idea I was being so screwed.
Three years later... I have my fairy. Thanks MacR1pp3r and all you other drm (what was the word? Oh yes,) criminals. Screw the MP#A and the R1Aa.
Until the masses expect more from their digital medium, this whole issue will be beneath their radar. And they will lose rights they never even knew they had.
Does anybody know who designed Wilbur? (I think that is his name.) Having generally no need for either Photoshop or Gimp, I made the investment of time - back when it was more than a simple package install - to install and use Gimp based entirely on that awesome dog.
Your comments, as well as others on this issue, are thought provoking but there is another issue that I have not yet noticed anyone mentioning that gives the book potential value.
Whether or not gamers are best suited to this task or that task in many cases is irrelevant. Like it or not, the many of the people in our workforce are gamers or have touch of gamer culture that affects their work habits and perspective. Unless, however, I want to pay their welfare check, they require employment as we all do and, as a workload supervisor, it is my job to keep them motivated and productive.
Though the point is well made elsewhere that much of this information appears anecdotal, I really must suggest that so is most of the "team building" and "be a better boss" information with which I am presented. Point of fact, the book sounds like a useful tool in understanding how to motivate another type of employee. Tips that assist me do this are valuable - round peg round hole, square peg square hole, that kind of thing - and, ultimately, having happy productive employees helps keep the bitching down so I can make my next character level before my boss gets back :o).
They were also the only (at least the only that I heard of) charity that publicly announced when they had received enough for the Tsunami effort. Though they took a lot of heat for this announcement from other charities, their spokesman indicated that people had to be confident that the organization's integrity was beyond reproach.
I found this very impressive and it encouraged me to donate to them for other causes.
My thought is that preventing software patenting while allowing copyrighting ensures that a second party does not steal code from the first party and market it as their own; or, at least, has a remedy available if that happens. It does allow two entities to compete to produce a similar product based upon the same technology which is of benefit to the consumer. (At least, I heard that once in an class on capitalism.)
What about the company who invented the technology and their investment? IANAP(rogrammer) but I expect that good code takes time to write. (If it doesn't, then how innovative is it?) If a second party cannot use the copywrited code, which they already cannot, then they will have to write their own. This gives the developing company time to establish its product in the market, giving them an advantage but not a consumer lock that, considering how patents are used, may as well be until the end of time. At the same time, a second company will not be precluded or sued out of existence for developing a better product and perhaps developing further innovations in the technology in the process.
As a final question, does anyone know if EFF or anyone else has brought legal action demonstrating that software patents stifle rather than encourage innovation?
1.3 ships with OS X (yes, I am one of those) and has always performed great. Plus, it is integrated in the operating system. I have always been curious about what advantages 2.0 might have and whether I should upgrade. I have installed it a couple of times, both from source and from binary but found it had to be executed from the shell. No big deal but the fact that I have not seen where anyone has integrated 2.0 into OS X's GUI web server makes me wonder why. I also do not want to ignorantly hand my bandwidth and personal files to everyone on the internet so I have been hesitant to simply jump in and begin serving with 2.0 without fully understanding what I am doing. (I am shell comfortable but not savvy.)
I appreciate anyone who is willing to share their experience or knowledge or has a good link.
Thanks.
At a Linux meeting I attended a while back a woman (an ex-windows user) asked the group, "about how much time one should allocate to installing a Linux network of four or five workstations in a new accounting office: an afternoon, a day, a weekend?" After some discussion, the final response was, "well... I suppose you could get it done in a day or two. But, really, Linux is a lifetime of fun."
The look on her face was priceless. And the guy who responded, along with the rest of the group, was absolutely sincere. They genuinely could not even comprehend the idea of creating a production environment and walking away once it was operational.
So, aside from the entirely reasonable answers given elsewhere, "Linux is a lifetime of fun."
Running the risk of suggesting a Lexus when you have a Rolls-Royce (I don't know that much about Gentoo), I have had fantastic luck running X applications using FinkCommander via Fink. It requires that Apple's X11 (or OSS equivalent) be installed but I have been running Gimp, OpenOffice, and GNUCash with no troubles.