Yeah, but U2 by Negativland is actually better than the pretentious drivel by the other band. It's sort of a bait-and-switch where the buyer gets a good deal.
I loved 'The Big U', which depicts the 'campus' culture that Hackers thrive in so well. I can easily see Stallman nestled in there and thriving. And I liked 'Snow Crash' quite a bit. Most of Stephenson's later works seem like he takes himself too damn seriously.
His two books written under psuedonym are pretty good, too. He gets far, far too much adulation in certain circles, and it's affected his writing badly.
They signed an NDA with Microsoft to get the NT source code to create Interix. It runs on the bare NT kernel, you know, the 'API' that Microsoft doesn't give out. I'm not sure it was a 'viral' NDA, and I doubt if they put any Microsoft 'IP' into their code. The difficult that closed-source products being 'opened' usually face is when they have licensed components within them, not what software they link to or run on top of. But you may have a point.
Water under the bridge in any case. It's Microsoft's zombie now.
You don't think that, in real life, a soldier might notice that those with halberds tended to win more engagements, and therefore might choose to adopt its use himself?
You don't get it, apparently. Does everybody play the role of 'a soldier'??
Some of us want to play the role of a master of fighting prowess.
That reminds me of some young 'goth chicks' who I used to hang out with a bit years back. They'd been coaxed into finally showing up at some sort of a SCA event. SCA is the Society for Creative Anacronism. Anyway, they showed up, and as is sometimes the case, the SCA event had degenerated into the tiresome 'fighting' stuff.
The 'goth chicks' told me it 'reminded them of gym class.'
I'm curious if someone's managed to redesign a few billboards out there.
A far more interesting hack would be to 'Own' the billboard and be able to grab ahold and do things to the machines of people driving by. If the billboard is assigning an IP it should try to do something with all those nice machines, afterall.
but wants to reach out to an audience that avoids educational shows.
Why? To get some raw ratings numbers? Why 'reach out' in this way? Is there some educational purpose they have in mind? If it's an educational program, and they do something 'spectacular' to get an audience, but cease in the process to be an educational program.... why?
Depends a lot on your defintion of 'good' hardware.
I am pretty satisfied with the Dell boxes I have been running lately. They're nothing at all special in the speed department (P3s in the 500-800 range) but they have on-board ATI graphics and on-board 3Com ethernet. Not 'generic' ATX hardware as everybody seems to think is best, but, then, they're not embedded the Taiwanese crap chips for Ethernet and Video. And I paid 80 cents apiece for my Dell boxes at auction.
The way to save a lot on energy is to put in a KVM switch. I have a stack of four Dell Optiplexes, one running W2K, one running Slackware, another running Solaris x86, and the fourth slot for hackaround boxes. Only powering one monitor makes a lot of difference and takes up a lot less space in a home environment.
My four-cpu IBM server ($15 at auction), making all that fan noise across the room, probably eats up any power savings, of course. Hell, it has 6 barracuda drives screaming in it. Doesn't seem to dim the lights tho.
You replace your fans once a year? Do you have a little flowchart for keeping track??
I remember back in about 1994 being able to run 5 or 6 copies of the game Doom simultaneously in X Window frames on a single desktop, on a 486-33 system running Linux.
At that same period in time, a lot of people were struggling to get a single session of Doom to run under Windows.
Not really on-topic, but I remember how cool it felt, and how weak it made Windows seem.
Virtual Desktop support has been in the Windows OS since Windows 95, if by 'in the OS' you mean it was a freely downloadable component from Microsoft, included in the 'PowerTools' tool set.
It's great for running X on older hardware. Many, many useful and powerful X apps don't need to be bogged down with all the 'desktop' junk added to modern Window Managers. I run TWM on my 486 laptop and on my Mac SE/30, both on NetBSD.
TWM is the 'reference' Window Manager included by default in the base X11 distribution. And it's quite well documented, being the reference Window Manager implementation, as it's well covered in the O'Reilly X Window System user manual set.
Do NOT compare TWM to Windows 1.0. TWM gives you all the same X11 'goodness' of any other Window manager, just in a no-frills, no-bloat package. It actually has most of what anybody needs on a basic system.
I know, I know. It's not very 'pretty' and it's all configured in flat textfiles. And it doesn't give us an excuse to buy new systems.
The product now called 'Services for Unix' from Microsoft started out as a third party product called 'Interix' by Softway Systems. The earliest versions of it were called 'Open NT'.
Software became a licencee under NDA of Microsoft's NT code and developed Interix as an alternative and far more robust Posix subsystem.
One of the things that makes it radically different (and superior) to things like Cygwin is that Interix is a whole seperate subsystem that talks directly to the NT kernel, in parallel with the Win32 subsystem. Cygwin is a DLL kludge that rides on top of the Win32 subsystem. Everything is translated through an entire extra layer for Cygwin.
I licensed a copy of Interix before Microsoft acquired Softway Systems. My copy came as a nice bundle, with the Interix POSIX subsystem, Motif, the Motif libraries, and the Exceed X server. It included binaries for NT-x86 and NT-Alpha. It included a complete GNU toolchain, including the GNU C Compiler, etc.
The latest incarnation of Interix, since Microsoft bought Softway Systems, is somewhat 'dumbed down' from what it was in it's glory. With Interix installed on an NT4 system back in the day you could set it up with Inetd and make it a remotely accessable system that nobody even had to know was running on an NT box. Some of that is probably still possible, but Microsoft has pared away a lot of the useful binaries, i.e. it doesn't even have the vi editor anymore.
At a point shortly before Microsoft purchased Softway Systems, the Softway people put out 'feelers' to see if anybody in the OSS community was interested in Interix being 'open sourced'. Near as I can tell nobody at all responded. Microsoft bought it shortly after.
" I used an 1854 Albion letter press for fine press printing. "
I didn't think there was anybody else but me left in the world who would know what a California Job Case is. I used to be able to compose a line of type fast from one.
I brought one home from auction awhile back. My wife said 'nice shadow box' and depressed me greatly.
As Linux becomes increasingly popular, the 'peer group' will grow substancially. More and more 'mere users' will be involved. 'Peer review' will cease to be review by 'peers' and become more a 'review' by an 'elite' subgroup of the peers.
The 'peer review' model won't scale to the whole world as well as some people seem to think it will.
Besides which, as every joe sixpack gets involved using the software, all the shysters will come along as well. Right now they're scarce because there isn't a pool of knobs for them to rip off.
There are many factors, and obviously since many, many comments have been made on this topic here today, your 'Lets move on' attitude is a grave error.
Or maybe it's a marketing issue. "The geeks all seem satisfied with the hardware they presently have. How can we convince them they need to spend lots of money on an expensive first generation of something new?"
Anytime someone tries to impose a closed enumeration, a 'grand theory' of how everything works, it's time to look a little further at what their agenda might be. There are only 'two fundamental models' if you're an ideologue deeply invested in 'A True Way'. Let's let the Crusades be part of history, please.
Linux and Free/Net/OpenBSD are not real time operating systems.
Sure, you can transform them into RTOSes. But by changing them that much you lose a lot of the advantage of 'just using' them.
'Get with the program' makes it sound like there's a 'One Operating System to rule them all' mentality. That's not good.
This is an example where a non-Windows alternative to Linux is actually the better choice. People need to drop the notion that because 'Windows' is so bad (in the application they have direct experience with) that everything else is 'bad' too and Linux/OSS is inevitably better. The Raymond koolaide is not the universal elixir of life.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but U2 by Negativland is actually better than the pretentious drivel by the other band. It's sort of a bait-and-switch where the buyer gets a good deal.
I loved 'The Big U', which depicts the 'campus' culture that Hackers thrive in so well. I can easily see Stallman nestled in there and thriving. And I liked 'Snow Crash' quite a bit. Most of Stephenson's later works seem like he takes himself too damn seriously.
His two books written under psuedonym are pretty good, too. He gets far, far too much adulation in certain circles, and it's affected his writing badly.
They can always sign up at Apple.
Seems to be more money in that lately around here.
Whoah! You have your phone powered with a big lead acid battery?
They signed an NDA with Microsoft to get the NT source code to create Interix. It runs on the bare NT kernel, you know, the 'API' that Microsoft doesn't give out. I'm not sure it was a 'viral' NDA, and I doubt if they put any Microsoft 'IP' into their code. The difficult that closed-source products being 'opened' usually face is when they have licensed components within them, not what software they link to or run on top of. But you may have a point.
Water under the bridge in any case. It's Microsoft's zombie now.
Or a cascading worm. Laptop passes first billboard, is infected. Passes second billboard, infects it...
You don't think that, in real life, a soldier might notice that those with halberds tended to win more engagements, and therefore might choose to adopt its use himself?
You don't get it, apparently. Does everybody play the role of 'a soldier'??
Some of us want to play the role of a master of fighting prowess.
That reminds me of some young 'goth chicks' who I used to hang out with a bit years back. They'd been coaxed into finally showing up at some sort of a SCA event. SCA is the Society for Creative Anacronism. Anyway, they showed up, and as is sometimes the case, the SCA event had degenerated into the tiresome 'fighting' stuff.
The 'goth chicks' told me it 'reminded them of gym class.'
'Powergamers' sound like fricking jocks to me.
I'm curious if someone's managed to redesign a few billboards out there.
A far more interesting hack would be to 'Own' the billboard and be able to grab ahold and do things to the machines of people driving by. If the billboard is assigning an IP it should try to do something with all those nice machines, afterall.
Certainly not the Win16 apps OS/2 was capable of running.
but wants to reach out to an audience that avoids educational shows.
Why? To get some raw ratings numbers? Why 'reach out' in this way? Is there some educational purpose they have in mind? If it's an educational program, and they do something 'spectacular' to get an audience, but cease in the process to be an educational program.... why?
Depends a lot on your defintion of 'good' hardware.
I am pretty satisfied with the Dell boxes I have been running lately. They're nothing at all special in the speed department (P3s in the 500-800 range) but they have on-board ATI graphics and on-board 3Com ethernet. Not 'generic' ATX hardware as everybody seems to think is best, but, then, they're not embedded the Taiwanese crap chips for Ethernet and Video. And I paid 80 cents apiece for my Dell boxes at auction.
The way to save a lot on energy is to put in a KVM switch. I have a stack of four Dell Optiplexes, one running W2K, one running Slackware, another running Solaris x86, and the fourth slot for hackaround boxes. Only powering one monitor makes a lot of difference and takes up a lot less space in a home environment.
My four-cpu IBM server ($15 at auction), making all that fan noise across the room, probably eats up any power savings, of course. Hell, it has 6 barracuda drives screaming in it. Doesn't seem to dim the lights tho.
You replace your fans once a year? Do you have a little flowchart for keeping track??
I remember back in about 1994 being able to run 5 or 6 copies of the game Doom simultaneously in X Window frames on a single desktop, on a 486-33 system running Linux.
At that same period in time, a lot of people were struggling to get a single session of Doom to run under Windows.
Not really on-topic, but I remember how cool it felt, and how weak it made Windows seem.
Many of us run the X Window System, even some of us with TWM, on systems that have no, none, zippo versions of Linux on them.
Hell, you could run X on Windows 3.1 if you bought DesqView/X.
Virtual Desktop support has been in the Windows OS since Windows 95, if by 'in the OS' you mean it was a freely downloadable component from Microsoft, included in the 'PowerTools' tool set.
Don't knock the Tab Window Manager.
It's great for running X on older hardware. Many, many useful and powerful X apps don't need to be bogged down with all the 'desktop' junk added to modern Window Managers. I run TWM on my 486 laptop and on my Mac SE/30, both on NetBSD.
TWM is the 'reference' Window Manager included by default in the base X11 distribution. And it's quite well documented, being the reference Window Manager implementation, as it's well covered in the O'Reilly X Window System user manual set.
Do NOT compare TWM to Windows 1.0. TWM gives you all the same X11 'goodness' of any other Window manager, just in a no-frills, no-bloat package. It actually has most of what anybody needs on a basic system.
I know, I know. It's not very 'pretty' and it's all configured in flat textfiles. And it doesn't give us an excuse to buy new systems.
The product now called 'Services for Unix' from Microsoft started out as a third party product called 'Interix' by Softway Systems. The earliest versions of it were called 'Open NT'.
Software became a licencee under NDA of Microsoft's NT code and developed Interix as an alternative and far more robust Posix subsystem.
One of the things that makes it radically different (and superior) to things like Cygwin is that Interix is a whole seperate subsystem that talks directly to the NT kernel, in parallel with the Win32 subsystem. Cygwin is a DLL kludge that rides on top of the Win32 subsystem. Everything is translated through an entire extra layer for Cygwin.
I licensed a copy of Interix before Microsoft acquired Softway Systems. My copy came as a nice bundle, with the Interix POSIX subsystem, Motif, the Motif libraries, and the Exceed X server. It included binaries for NT-x86 and NT-Alpha. It included a complete GNU toolchain, including the GNU C Compiler, etc.
The latest incarnation of Interix, since Microsoft bought Softway Systems, is somewhat 'dumbed down' from what it was in it's glory. With Interix installed on an NT4 system back in the day you could set it up with Inetd and make it a remotely accessable system that nobody even had to know was running on an NT box. Some of that is probably still possible, but Microsoft has pared away a lot of the useful binaries, i.e. it doesn't even have the vi editor anymore.
At a point shortly before Microsoft purchased Softway Systems, the Softway people put out 'feelers' to see if anybody in the OSS community was interested in Interix being 'open sourced'. Near as I can tell nobody at all responded. Microsoft bought it shortly after.
If I remember correctly, it was not anything that anybody wanted. I never knew anybody who bought it.
" I used an 1854 Albion letter press for fine press printing. "
I didn't think there was anybody else but me left in the world who would know what a California Job Case is. I used to be able to compose a line of type fast from one.
I brought one home from auction awhile back. My wife said 'nice shadow box' and depressed me greatly.
Then, the followup question is:
As Linux becomes increasingly popular, the 'peer group' will grow substancially. More and more 'mere users' will be involved. 'Peer review' will cease to be review by 'peers' and become more a 'review' by an 'elite' subgroup of the peers.
The 'peer review' model won't scale to the whole world as well as some people seem to think it will.
Besides which, as every joe sixpack gets involved using the software, all the shysters will come along as well. Right now they're scarce because there isn't a pool of knobs for them to rip off.
There are many factors, and obviously since many, many comments have been made on this topic here today, your 'Lets move on' attitude is a grave error.
Sung to Peter, Paul, and Mary's melody:
...I'd a hammer in your fo-ore-head"
"If I had a haaaaamer...
Laptops with a defective display are also often a good deal. As long as they have a VGA jack for setting them up.
Or maybe it's a marketing issue. "The geeks all seem satisfied with the hardware they presently have. How can we convince them they need to spend lots of money on an expensive first generation of something new?"
Anytime someone tries to impose a closed enumeration, a 'grand theory' of how everything works, it's time to look a little further at what their agenda might be. There are only 'two fundamental models' if you're an ideologue deeply invested in 'A True Way'. Let's let the Crusades be part of history, please.
Linux and Free/Net/OpenBSD are not real time operating systems.
Sure, you can transform them into RTOSes. But by changing them that much you lose a lot of the advantage of 'just using' them.
'Get with the program' makes it sound like there's a 'One Operating System to rule them all' mentality. That's not good.
This is an example where a non-Windows alternative to Linux is actually the better choice. People need to drop the notion that because 'Windows' is so bad (in the application they have direct experience with) that everything else is 'bad' too and Linux/OSS is inevitably better. The Raymond koolaide is not the universal elixir of life.