No, you can run it as a normal user. So long as you don't mind having to enter the root password every time you run the software, or turn off that security function altogether. .
IBM don't invest in Linux out of philanthropy, and they don't do it to "get at" Microsoft. They invest because Linux is a huge cash-cow, IBM knows how to milk it, and thus it makes them large amounts of cash. And that's what matters to a big company. They make money, we get something like a billion dollars a year invested in Linux, and everybody's happy.
I used to spend 8 hours a day sitting on my specially-ordered ergonomic chair, tapping away at my ergonomic keybaord, wearing wrist supports, popping pain killers, and contemplating quitting my job because I had RSI in both wrists so badly my hands actually burned with pain. I started the excercises listed for wrist pain in that book one weekend, and when I came back to work on Monday, I chucked my wrist supports into my desk drawer, along with my painkillers, and never used them again. The chair went back to the suppliers a few days later.
RSI is *not* caused by too much movement - the body exists for no other purpose than movement, and it was "designed" for a hell of a lot more movement than we give it by sitting in chairs all day. The cause of RSI is *bad* movement: Movement in a bad posture, using the wrong muscle groups, etc. A primary cause of my burning hands was that I typed with my hands bent back so the tendons in my forearm were scraping over the bones, rubbing them raw: sitting up straighter so my hands naturally bent forward/downward eliminated 90% of my pain overnight.
The problem is with the body, not the office equipment. So don't waste your money on a new mouse: Fix the real problem.
Stopping MS selling anything new in Europe wouldn't disable any of the current MS installations - They could sanction MS without hurting themselves much.
I think it'd be more poetic if they just revoked MS's copyrights and declared Windows "freeware", tho - chairs would wind up hurled into orbit when that one got announced;o)
You might just as well ask: Why would anyone store their email on any outside corporation's server, much less one with a demonstrated committment and ability to mine those documents?
Answer: Because they find it convenient to do so. Hence the immense success of hotmail, yahoo, gmail. . .
I had a fewthoughts about desktops going 3D a while ago, if you're interested.
It basically says that, instead of making 2D windows go 3D, we should throw away the whole concept of "windows" and switch to multiple 3D layers instead
Essentially, they could bring a "Spotlight"-like functionality to Linux, tie it into the package manger, and leverage their partnership with Sun to get a really easy-to-maintain desktop. . .
Some of the comments are nonsense like applying this to file permissions. So before you flame the decision, read it. Excerpt from the GPL:
As a free software license, this License intrinsically disfavors technical attempts to restrict users' freedom to copy, modify, and share copyrighted works. Each of its provisions shall be interpreted in light of this specific declaration of the licensor's intent. Regardless of any other provision of this License, no permission is given to distribute covered works that illegally invade users' privacy, nor for modes of distribution that deny users that run covered works the full exercise of the legal rights granted by this License.
In other words: This applies only to DRM that attempts to block copying of copyright material. Not Trusted Computing, not file permissions, not anything else.
IE at my workplace sucks more than usual because all the settings are locked down & we can't change so much as the default start page.
Portable Firefox was a godsend, initially running off a flash drive, and then moving onto a USB hard drive, which subsequently received all the rest of the portable apps. OOo is a bit slow to start, but it's nice to have the ODF support available.
Now if somebody could just create an extension so I could use the same profile for both my home Linux FF and work XP FF, I'd be really happy:o)
The actual quote is Windows and Linux, are 25 years old -- they're going to need updating to adequately carry video - so he's not really implying "They're dinosaurs and need to die out & be replaced", more "They're not yet ready for future demands" - which is pretty much a given: How can you create functionality for something that doesn't exist yet?
If peer review is good enough for the scientific community (they put a man on the moon, the register has yet to accomplish that) and the medical community (they have done heart transplants, the Register has not) and the Linux Kernel, as any open source project, is subject to peer review (they have a very good perating system, the Register has yet to boot a machine) why would we not subject our historical data to such a process?
The problem is, peer-review isn't used on Wikipedia.
Seriously.
When information is made available for peer review, people look at it, and point out mistakes & omissions. The mistakes are corrected, ommissions filled in, and it gets sent out for review again.
Eventually, with this process, you (ideally) get an article that has had all mistakes found and all blanks filled in. This is a useful article. It's useful, because it's a one-way process: Once a mistake is removed, it doesn't get put back in. Once missing information has been added, it doesn't get removed.
With Wikipedia, the process looses the one-way process that makes peer review work. An article is put up. Somebody sees a problem and changes it. Somebody else doesn't like the change, and reverts the article back to the original.
Because Wikipedia uses a dynamic, two-way process, it never acheives authoritive status: Mistakes can always be, and often are, put back into a corrected article. For instance, one person's experience:
I corrected some howling, stupid, this-will-get-you-a-fail-in-first-year-engineering -exams mistakes in the article on the Joule cycle (gas turbine). My corrections were undone - back to the howling mistakes - within less than an hour.
The collaborative approach works great for things like the Linux kernel: If somebody makes a change, (a) it gets examined by experts before being accepted, and (b) if the change is inappropriate, the kernel breaks. A simple acid test: It works or it doesn't. Just writing isn't enough, it has to be written right
If somebody changes Wikipedia, it gets no expert examination, and it doesn't matter if the change is truth or fiction: You don't have to write accurately, you just have to write.
So whilst I agree that peer review is a good system, that's not relevant, because Wikipedia doesn't use it. Mistakes get introduced as well as eliminated using the Wikipedia approach.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you can run it as a normal user. So long as you don't mind having to enter the root password every time you run the software, or turn off that security function altogether. .
IBM don't invest in Linux out of philanthropy, and they don't do it to "get at" Microsoft. They invest because Linux is a huge cash-cow, IBM knows how to milk it, and thus it makes them large amounts of cash. And that's what matters to a big company. They make money, we get something like a billion dollars a year invested in Linux, and everybody's happy.
Except MS. But that's their problem ;o)
You can get a lot of the info. & details of the exercises from the website: http://www.egoscue.com/
Specifically, this one
I used to spend 8 hours a day sitting on my specially-ordered ergonomic chair, tapping away at my ergonomic keybaord, wearing wrist supports, popping pain killers, and contemplating quitting my job because I had RSI in both wrists so badly my hands actually burned with pain. I started the excercises listed for wrist pain in that book one weekend, and when I came back to work on Monday, I chucked my wrist supports into my desk drawer, along with my painkillers, and never used them again. The chair went back to the suppliers a few days later.
RSI is *not* caused by too much movement - the body exists for no other purpose than movement, and it was "designed" for a hell of a lot more movement than we give it by sitting in chairs all day. The cause of RSI is *bad* movement: Movement in a bad posture, using the wrong muscle groups, etc. A primary cause of my burning hands was that I typed with my hands bent back so the tendons in my forearm were scraping over the bones, rubbing them raw: sitting up straighter so my hands naturally bent forward/downward eliminated 90% of my pain overnight.
The problem is with the body, not the office equipment. So don't waste your money on a new mouse: Fix the real problem.
Stopping MS selling anything new in Europe wouldn't disable any of the current MS installations - They could sanction MS without hurting themselves much.
;o)
I think it'd be more poetic if they just revoked MS's copyrights and declared Windows "freeware", tho - chairs would wind up hurled into orbit when that one got announced
IBM have stated previously that they'll be building ODF support into Lotus Notes
am i the only one who thinks all these codecs, DRM tools and other garbage are just a waste of time?
Amongst geeks? No - we all know that already.
Amongst media executives? Yes - none of them have a clue.
...for a sudden rush of paedophiles attempting to gain employment with ISPs so they can access this database :)
I prefer I'll CLI ;o)
Answer: Because they find it convenient to do so. Hence the immense success of hotmail, yahoo, gmail. . .
I'd take politicians funded by porn ads over the bastards taking a chunk out of my salary any day :o)
Eh, they probably figure that if you're smart enough to be able to write Java, you're smart enough to know how to install it ;o)
That's what I said yesterday, funnily enough...
There is no way to compensate for an Administator who is computer illiterate.
Sure there is: It's called Trusted Computing and it takes away the end user's ability to be the administrator of his/her own computer ;o)
It basically says that, instead of making 2D windows go 3D, we should throw away the whole concept of "windows" and switch to multiple 3D layers instead
Blog post on the subject
Essentially, they could bring a "Spotlight"-like functionality to Linux, tie it into the package manger, and leverage their partnership with Sun to get a really easy-to-maintain desktop. . .
No, that also is outside the scope of the license.
The GPL v3 forbids "technical attempts to restrict users' freedom to copy, modify, and share copyrighted works"
So the BIOS being copyright isn't a problem. Only an attempt to make the software unable to copy the BIOS would be an issue.
Some of the comments are nonsense like applying this to file permissions. So before you flame the decision, read it. Excerpt from the GPL:
As a free software license, this License intrinsically disfavors technical attempts to restrict users' freedom to copy, modify, and share copyrighted works. Each of its provisions shall be interpreted in light of this specific declaration of the licensor's intent. Regardless of any other provision of this License, no permission is given to distribute covered works that illegally invade users' privacy, nor for modes of distribution that deny users that run covered works the full exercise of the legal rights granted by this License.
In other words: This applies only to DRM that attempts to block copying of copyright material. Not Trusted Computing, not file permissions, not anything else.
Ok?
RTFA: GPL software cannot use "digital restrictions" on copyright material
Is your hardware copyright material? No? Then you can do what you like, can't you?
IE at my workplace sucks more than usual because all the settings are locked down & we can't change so much as the default start page.
Portable Firefox was a godsend, initially running off a flash drive, and then moving onto a USB hard drive, which subsequently received all the rest of the portable apps. OOo is a bit slow to start, but it's nice to have the ODF support available.
Now if somebody could just create an extension so I could use the same profile for both my home Linux FF and work XP FF, I'd be really happy :o)
The actual quote is Windows and Linux, are 25 years old -- they're going to need updating to adequately carry video - so he's not really implying "They're dinosaurs and need to die out & be replaced", more "They're not yet ready for future demands" - which is pretty much a given: How can you create functionality for something that doesn't exist yet?
It's called "Freenet" - http://freenet.sourceforge.net/
Just shouting and insulting the developers is not the right approach and somebody needs to tell Linus that.
His email is public knowledge: Go ahead and tell him.
If peer review is good enough for the scientific community (they put a man on the moon, the register has yet to accomplish that) and the medical community (they have done heart transplants, the Register has not) and the Linux Kernel, as any open source project, is subject to peer review (they have a very good perating system, the Register has yet to boot a machine) why would we not subject our historical data to such a process?
The problem is, peer-review isn't used on Wikipedia.
Seriously.
When information is made available for peer review, people look at it, and point out mistakes & omissions. The mistakes are corrected, ommissions filled in, and it gets sent out for review again.
Eventually, with this process, you (ideally) get an article that has had all mistakes found and all blanks filled in. This is a useful article. It's useful, because it's a one-way process: Once a mistake is removed, it doesn't get put back in. Once missing information has been added, it doesn't get removed.
With Wikipedia, the process looses the one-way process that makes peer review work. An article is put up. Somebody sees a problem and changes it. Somebody else doesn't like the change, and reverts the article back to the original.
Because Wikipedia uses a dynamic, two-way process, it never acheives authoritive status: Mistakes can always be, and often are, put back into a corrected article. For instance, one person's experience:
I corrected some howling, stupid, this-will-get-you-a-fail-in-first-year-engineering -exams mistakes in the article on the Joule cycle (gas turbine). My corrections were undone - back to the howling mistakes - within less than an hour.
The collaborative approach works great for things like the Linux kernel: If somebody makes a change, (a) it gets examined by experts before being accepted, and (b) if the change is inappropriate, the kernel breaks. A simple acid test: It works or it doesn't. Just writing isn't enough, it has to be written right
If somebody changes Wikipedia, it gets no expert examination, and it doesn't matter if the change is truth or fiction: You don't have to write accurately, you just have to write.
So whilst I agree that peer review is a good system, that's not relevant, because Wikipedia doesn't use it. Mistakes get introduced as well as eliminated using the Wikipedia approach.
Take a look at Groklaw's comparison of XML formats and tell me if you think MS's XML is human-readable! :o)