Yes, but what you call piracy is just a right of all us. circletimessquare is just right. Facts are there is a new distribution model, and all whinings about piracy and DRM and copyright become moot points, simply because there's a completely new distribution model.
Imagine once grain seeds were only expensively available from seed companies: plants weren't able to do new seeds, so every time you had to buy new seeds. Then someone figured out how to make your own plants make new seeds. That's just what happened. No need to buy new seeds - you can replicate your own.
And please stop the idiocy "oh but this will destroy artists". Artist existed much time before the foolishness of copyright, and they will continue to exist. Bach had no copyright on his works, yet he did what he did. The only who suffer will be bad, useless Britney Spears-like fake artists. They simply won't exist more, because they exist only because record companies exist. But I won't care about them.
It's not a fact of civil disobedience. It's that what RIAA makes us call piracy is a right we all have naturally. We MUST be able to share freely EVERY kind of information we have. There is no other logical way to go for mankind. Call me a zealot, a punk, whatever. Facts are that information must be free to all mankind: anything less is just a loss for all of us, and a win to only a really few.
If they're right, Google is building my dream
on
Reining in Google
·
· Score: 1
Our laws say if you wish to copy someone's work, you must get their permission. Google wants to trash that.
That's what I want to trash,too.
Google envisions a world in which all content is free
That's exactly the world in which I want to live.
These lawsuits are needed to halt theft of intellectual property. To see it any other way is intellectually dishonest.
I believe in freedom of access and distribution of all information content for all mankind. These lawsuits are theft of intellectual works that belongs to all mankind, and they belong to all mankind for the simple fact of being intellectual works.
SourceForge has the WindowsInstaller.msi listed as 'platform independent'."
Ehm... Since when WindowsInstaller(s) have been 'platform independent'? Do I miss something?
Re:Too many eyes on the code?
on
OpenOffice Bloated?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The difference is: you don't have to load all applications of a Linux distro at once (haha, it would be nice to try), so you don't feel the "bloat" unless you somehow decide to open all these apps together.
I'm fully aware of gaim-vv, but on their webpage they declare: Yahoo receive only. NOT YET BROADCAST CAPABLE! Broadcast is slated for an upcoming release.
Yahoo receive only is not what I call full webcam support for a multiprotocol chat program. OTOH, it seems the aMSN CVS version has MSN webcam support. Things are coming,yes,but are still very immature.
I agree with you about all. When my MSN buddies tell me "oh, bad luck you cant' see my new animated emoticon" I always reply "No, it's good luck I can't see all the billion kitschy animated things that my roommate is always flooded by on his MSN Messenger"
I also love the clean interface of Gaim. Many friends of mine seeing my desktop or receiving my screenshots told me "oh, what is that cool messenger program with tabs?" when looking at Gaim. Not all, but a lot, love the cleanness of the Gaim interface. And, oh, file transfer just works on my stable Gentoo.
There are two things I miss from MSN that I would love. First is webcam support. Second is games, it would be nice to have platform-independent GAIM games (via XUL? via AJAX?), if supporting the MSN ones is impossible.
I remember an old/. story in which a hypothetical Gaim plugin giving the ability to buddies to browse directories and share files. This would probably be a really f****g cool thing for Gaim, and it could shuffle the deck of IM clients. Has anyone news about something like this?
Push your bloody rich government to help and take care of these people -it's their duty to do it, AFAIK- and be a volunteer in some third world country that really needs volunteer people.
If you seriously talk to creationists, treating them as scientist, you acknowledge them. You recognize them as rational opponents. You give them visibility and let the public opinion feel they're just different scientists, not f*****g crackpots.
The world of science should and does reply to creationist pseudoscience with science facts. It should do it visibly and clearly, and it does it. But never forget they're harmful, idiot crackpots, not rational scientific opponents.
You can't but do mockery of creationists and such people. It's plain impossible for any rational creature to treat them seriously. And the Flat Earth Society or the Noodly Appendage cult are damn funny indeed.
who thinks I'm an idiot for not believing in a theory that's never been proven by scientific process.
Wrong. We're in the age of genome sequencing, and this means evolution now is overwhelmingly backed by proof.
See what is a pseudogene, for example. Analysis of human chromosome 21, for example, reveals we host a lot of no-more-working but still recognizable genes that encoded olfactory receptors. This seems to imply that we descend from an ancestor that had more olfactory receptors than us, and that relied on smell more than us. Guess what? Rodents are the probable ancestors of primates, and rodents have much more smell receptors than us. Vestiges of ancient genes that mutated and became useless are exactly what we expect to find in an evolving genome. What's the sense of pseudogenes in a creationist theory?
Comparison of genome sequences can be used to create trees that often match quite well paleontological evidence (although sometimes there are surprises). And they directly show evolution in action. For example, mammals derived a fundamental gene for placental development from a virus. Our genome -and the genome of every living creature- is full of the watermarks of evolution. It is odd that this fundamental evidence is rarely shown in debates about evolution theory.
I don't say devfs is good, just that it works on my machine right now and I don't feel committed to change. They could leave devfs in the kernel, perhaps saying something like *deprecated-use at your own risk* and dropping it in 2.8, not in 2.6.13
I read it on/. comments, but now I checked the 2.6.13 changelog. It seems it's true. Sigh. See for example below.
[PATCH] devfs: remove devfs from Kconfig preventing it from being built
Here's a much smaller patch to simply disable devfs from the build. If
this goes well, and there are no complaints for a few weeks, I'll resend
my big "devfs-die-die-die" series of patches that rip the whole thing
out of the kernel tree.
I don't hotplug. I don't want to hotplug. Hotplugging is evil. My system shouldn't be doing anything with a device until I say I'm good and ready for it. Except for hotplugging, there's no real need for udev.
I'm with you on this. That's why I'm pissed off at the lack of support for devfs from 2.6.13
My god, the Linux kernel still supports dinosaur-era things like Minix file systems or m68k cpus (and it's good it supports them IMHO) but suddenly stops to support the device filesystem management it had until a week ago? Maybe udev will be a better choice in the end, but in the meantime, why am I forced to lose time switching to udev if I want to upgrade my kernel for, let's say, fix a buggy driver?
I still suffer from an oesophagus inflammation due to an antibiotic. I remember when it happened I was a bit puzzled, but I easily understood from the informative sheet in the medicine box that it could have been the case. Nevertheless, symptoms were somehow strange (sensation of foreign body in the throat, cough, difficulties in swallowing).
I went to the emergency care to know what to do, but doctors didn't listen to me, saying that my throatache was just some flu. I suspected it was not flu at all, but I went home and I looked on the Internet. I found various coherent descriptions of my symptoms after less than 1 hour of googling.
So I went back to the doctors, and I carefully explained what symptoms I had and I explained what I suspect they are and why, thanks to what I found on the net. They still didn't listen to me. I therefore asked for a specialist. The specialist visited me, and she did easily found I was right, that I had strong oesophagus inflammation. I took some esomeprazol and advice (no more coffee!argh!) and everything is going right. Thanks to the Internet I had sufficient knowledge to understand I needed a specialist, instead to listen to generic doctors. This saved me A LOT of pain. of course you must took all with a grain of salt, but it can give you useful advice.
Frankly I am not into the compiler world (I'm no C/Fortran programmer), so I didn't expect that programs compiled with the Intel compiler would even try to work on an AMD CPU. I'm not at all surprised. These are just candies on a big, stinky cake.
Sure if this kind of behaviour is not documented, and the ICC is advertised as "AMD compliant" it is a plain swindle.
I haven't seen too many people sit in front of a really well designed interface - on a computer or otherwise - and fume about not being able to modify it; they just use it. Some people want to twiddle, but they're the minority.
They're not that small minority. And anyway, users that don't want to tweak simply won't tweak. That's why I agree reasonable defaults are important. But they must be default settings, nothing more. Who wants/needs to tweak them, can and will do. It's that simple. Everyone wins this way.
...minus the typos/spelling and some formatting issues. If you clean it up and tighten it up in parts, it could be submitted to OSNews (etc) as a good article.
Thank you a lot. In fact it was what I wanted to do once I write down the other parts and I clean them. Typos and spelling come from the fact I'm not native English speaker, I think. I'm quite fluent but I was just randomly writing down thoughts so probably errors slipped. Sorry.
Slashdot Mirror
except DRM is the direct result of piracy.
Yes, but what you call piracy is just a right of all us. circletimessquare is just right. Facts are there is a new distribution model, and all whinings about piracy and DRM and copyright become moot points, simply because there's a completely new distribution model.
Imagine once grain seeds were only expensively available from seed companies: plants weren't able to do new seeds, so every time you had to buy new seeds. Then someone figured out how to make your own plants make new seeds. That's just what happened. No need to buy new seeds - you can replicate your own.
And please stop the idiocy "oh but this will destroy artists". Artist existed much time before the foolishness of copyright, and they will continue to exist. Bach had no copyright on his works, yet he did what he did. The only who suffer will be bad, useless Britney Spears-like fake artists. They simply won't exist more, because they exist only because record companies exist. But I won't care about them.
I can't but agree.
It's not a fact of civil disobedience. It's that what RIAA makes us call piracy is a right we all have naturally. We MUST be able to share freely EVERY kind of information we have. There is no other logical way to go for mankind. Call me a zealot, a punk, whatever. Facts are that information must be free to all mankind: anything less is just a loss for all of us, and a win to only a really few.
Our laws say if you wish to copy someone's work, you must get their permission. Google wants to trash that.
That's what I want to trash,too.
Google envisions a world in which all content is free
That's exactly the world in which I want to live.
These lawsuits are needed to halt theft of intellectual property. To see it any other way is intellectually dishonest.
I believe in freedom of access and distribution of all information content for all mankind. These lawsuits are theft of intellectual works that belongs to all mankind, and they belong to all mankind for the simple fact of being intellectual works.
SourceForge has the WindowsInstaller.msi listed as 'platform independent'."
Ehm... Since when WindowsInstaller(s) have been 'platform independent'? Do I miss something?
The difference is: you don't have to load all applications of a Linux distro at once (haha, it would be nice to try), so you don't feel the "bloat" unless you somehow decide to open all these apps together.
I'm fully aware of gaim-vv, but on their webpage they declare: Yahoo receive only. NOT YET BROADCAST CAPABLE! Broadcast is slated for an upcoming release.
Yahoo receive only is not what I call full webcam support for a multiprotocol chat program. OTOH, it seems the aMSN CVS version has MSN webcam support. Things are coming,yes,but are still very immature.
I agree with you about all. When my MSN buddies tell me "oh, bad luck you cant' see my new animated emoticon" I always reply "No, it's good luck I can't see all the billion kitschy animated things that my roommate is always flooded by on his MSN Messenger"
I also love the clean interface of Gaim. Many friends of mine seeing my desktop or receiving my screenshots told me "oh, what is that cool messenger program with tabs?" when looking at Gaim. Not all, but a lot, love the cleanness of the Gaim interface. And, oh, file transfer just works on my stable Gentoo.
There are two things I miss from MSN that I would love. First is webcam support. Second is games, it would be nice to have platform-independent GAIM games (via XUL? via AJAX?), if supporting the MSN ones is impossible.
I remember an old /. story in which a hypothetical Gaim plugin giving the ability to buddies to browse directories and share files. This would probably be a really f****g cool thing for Gaim, and it could shuffle the deck of IM clients. Has anyone news about something like this?
Gaim does not support personalized MSN emoticons, has practically no webcam support, no background support for windows...
All pretty useless things, that I don't miss at all, but that most MSN users take for granted.
Ejecting a CD-ROM from that PC will be fun, I think!
Push your bloody rich government to help and take care of these people -it's their duty to do it, AFAIK- and be a volunteer in some third world country that really needs volunteer people.
(BTW: welcome to /. , where expressing your own POV automagically becomes trolling in the eyes of moderators!)
If you seriously talk to creationists, treating them as scientist, you acknowledge them. You recognize them as rational opponents. You give them visibility and let the public opinion feel they're just different scientists, not f*****g crackpots.
The world of science should and does reply to creationist pseudoscience with science facts. It should do it visibly and clearly, and it does it. But never forget they're harmful, idiot crackpots, not rational scientific opponents.
You can't but do mockery of creationists and such people. It's plain impossible for any rational creature to treat them seriously. And the Flat Earth Society or the Noodly Appendage cult are damn funny indeed.
Wrong. We're in the age of genome sequencing, and this means evolution now is overwhelmingly backed by proof.
See what is a pseudogene, for example. Analysis of human chromosome 21, for example, reveals we host a lot of no-more-working but still recognizable genes that encoded olfactory receptors. This seems to imply that we descend from an ancestor that had more olfactory receptors than us, and that relied on smell more than us. Guess what? Rodents are the probable ancestors of primates, and rodents have much more smell receptors than us. Vestiges of ancient genes that mutated and became useless are exactly what we expect to find in an evolving genome. What's the sense of pseudogenes in a creationist theory?
Comparison of genome sequences can be used to create trees that often match quite well paleontological evidence (although sometimes there are surprises). And they directly show evolution in action. For example, mammals derived a fundamental gene for placental development from a virus. Our genome -and the genome of every living creature- is full of the watermarks of evolution. It is odd that this fundamental evidence is rarely shown in debates about evolution theory.
But that's gzip or bzip2 that do the compression.
I'm just so used to "right click; Extract here"
That's why I love Konqueror.
I don't say devfs is good, just that it works on my machine right now and I don't feel committed to change. They could leave devfs in the kernel, perhaps saying something like *deprecated-use at your own risk* and dropping it in 2.8, not in 2.6.13
I read it on /. comments, but now I checked the 2.6.13 changelog. It seems it's true. Sigh. See for example below.
[PATCH] devfs: remove devfs from Kconfig preventing it from being built
Here's a much smaller patch to simply disable devfs from the build. If this goes well, and there are no complaints for a few weeks, I'll resend my big "devfs-die-die-die" series of patches that rip the whole thing out of the kernel tree.
I don't hotplug. I don't want to hotplug. Hotplugging is evil. My system shouldn't be doing anything with a device until I say I'm good and ready for it. Except for hotplugging, there's no real need for udev.
I'm with you on this. That's why I'm pissed off at the lack of support for devfs from 2.6.13
My god, the Linux kernel still supports dinosaur-era things like Minix file systems or m68k cpus (and it's good it supports them IMHO) but suddenly stops to support the device filesystem management it had until a week ago? Maybe udev will be a better choice in the end, but in the meantime, why am I forced to lose time switching to udev if I want to upgrade my kernel for, let's say, fix a buggy driver?
this release dropped support of devfs ? From now on, you'll need a udev system.
My god. My laziness has finally to wake up. As obsolete as devfs is, it still worked ok for me on my Gentoo...
I heard there was people able to use VST plugins with Linux, using the WINE remapping layer.
About the success, extent and so on of this, don't ask me.
I still suffer from an oesophagus inflammation due to an antibiotic. I remember when it happened I was a bit puzzled, but I easily understood from the informative sheet in the medicine box that it could have been the case. Nevertheless, symptoms were somehow strange (sensation of foreign body in the throat, cough, difficulties in swallowing).
I went to the emergency care to know what to do, but doctors didn't listen to me, saying that my throatache was just some flu. I suspected it was not flu at all, but I went home and I looked on the Internet. I found various coherent descriptions of my symptoms after less than 1 hour of googling.
So I went back to the doctors, and I carefully explained what symptoms I had and I explained what I suspect they are and why, thanks to what I found on the net. They still didn't listen to me. I therefore asked for a specialist. The specialist visited me, and she did easily found I was right, that I had strong oesophagus inflammation. I took some esomeprazol and advice (no more coffee!argh!) and everything is going right. Thanks to the Internet I had sufficient knowledge to understand I needed a specialist, instead to listen to generic doctors. This saved me A LOT of pain. of course you must took all with a grain of salt, but it can give you useful advice.
Hi akaimbatman, we meet again ;)!
Frankly I am not into the compiler world (I'm no C/Fortran programmer), so I didn't expect that programs compiled with the Intel compiler would even try to work on an AMD CPU. I'm not at all surprised. These are just candies on a big, stinky cake.
Sure if this kind of behaviour is not documented, and the ICC is advertised as "AMD compliant" it is a plain swindle.
They're not that small minority. And anyway, users that don't want to tweak simply won't tweak. That's why I agree reasonable defaults are important. But they must be default settings, nothing more. Who wants/needs to tweak them, can and will do. It's that simple. Everyone wins this way.
Great reply. I agree with almost all parts of it
Thank you :D
Thank you a lot. In fact it was what I wanted to do once I write down the other parts and I clean them. Typos and spelling come from the fact I'm not native English speaker, I think. I'm quite fluent but I was just randomly writing down thoughts so probably errors slipped. Sorry.
As for your comments, I'm all with you.