1. A bulletproof install. It must work, out of the box, no questions asked. 2.Hardware support for everything. Drivers need to be there for the hardware and they have to be installed automatically. Don't make the user guess what brand of video or sound card they have, 'cause generally, they don't know.
This would be great. Yet no PC operating system I've used yet has either of these features. Yet I have seen systems that come pre-installed, and come with a bullet-resistant install disk tailored for that system. However, upgrading your hardware might 'break' such an install disk. 3. Get rid of the UNIX model. Yeah, no more user IDs, passwords or any of that. It can be too confusing on your grandma to have more names and numbers to remember. 4. Get rid of GNU. Yeah, that's right, drop the command line utilities that you know and love, and lose all that power. If granny can't remember her password how's she supposed to remember arcane commands?
What's this "get rid of" stuff about? The built-in support for multiple users is incredibly useful in a household where more than one person uses the computer. eg: I can screw up my stuff without screwing up everyone elses. Of course, if granny lives alone she might want the option to allow it to automatically log her on. And the Gnu tools are great for some things that a GUI couldn't easily emulate. I do agree forcing someone to use them is not ideal. There should be an alternative. 5. The gui must be the OS. This means, goodbye X. Most of the newbies who ask me for help request help with setting up X (well, networking comes close). X must disappear, or it must become so much a part of Linux that it's just there, and it just works, no matter what video card, RAMDac, or whatever the user has on their machine.
I'm not especially attached to X, but making the GUI part of the kernel or even a built-in part of of the OS just seems like a bad idea to me. If you actually meant that it should be seemless, then yeah, this would be great. As far as it "just [working], no matter what video card..." -- well, keep dreaming & see response to 1 and 2. Video cards (and other hardware) change over the years, so the drivers need to change. The best way to keep your install bulletproof is to buy specifically supported hardware. 6. This GUI must be slicker than whale shit in an ice flow. Yeah, it must blow all other existing GUIs out of the water for ease of use, configurability, etc. 7. Did I mention that this stuff must work, right out of the box? It has to be so simple that the user can install it and configure it without a thought.
Amen! What the world really needs is a new OS (perhaps based on the Linux kernel, perhaps not) that bundles ease of use and robustness in a single package.
I don't know that we need a whole new OS. There are more than just one OS with rock solid foundations to build a nice user interface on. No, linux, the kernel, does not need this GUI. What people, like our grandmothers, need is an easy-to-use, visually appealing user interface with a stable foundation. And that GUI needs Linux or a similar stable and open kernel beneath it.
numb
I want voice recognition on my desktop at home
on
Voice-Op Linux PDA
·
· Score: 2
I'm gonna pre-empt the arguement about an office full of people talking to their computers being too noisy. Right now everyone is talking on the phone and a couple have radios/cd's playing. It's not too noisy. The only downside I can see is that when Windows crashes people might be tempted to shout obscenities at their computer (as opposed to muttering under their breath like they do now.)
I have no fear of the keyboard though. I don't mind typing. In fact I often find it annoying to reach for the mouse. Some voice recognition capabilities would be nice though--especially at home.
Seriously, I can already picture how I can make my whole apartment voice activated. "Turn on fishtank" would turn on the light in the fish tank (X10/firecracker,) "dim lights 75%", "play sublime 40 badfish."
I doubt I'd ever use voice recognition instead of typing in the shell other than for that kind of thing. But could certainly use it in a standalone app that executes shell commands based on voice commands i've specifically taught it. One of these days I'll get around to doing something like this.
I'm kinda in the same boat as the author. I've played around with Python a little, but I know a lot more about Perl.
Like the author, the forced indentation in Python isn't bothersome at all because I do it anyway with Perl. My brain would melt if I tried to read any of my code and it wasn't indented properly. Also I agree with the author about CPAN. It's unbelievably easy to grab a module, compile, and install it. If you have the cpan program installed on your computer it's often as easy as typing "install Module" -- it'll download it from one of the mirrors, compile it, and install it, often with no required user interaction. I love that.
There's something that bugs me about Python, but it's not exactly a good reason not to use it. The code just looks kinda bland to me. Almost like BASIC or something. Maybe I just have a thing for using braces or something. I dunno.
At any rate, I was still very impressed with Python. I might make the switch someday, but at this point it hasn't been able to drag me away from Perl. Python is supposed to be especially good for rapidly developing software. The software can be written in Python, then pieces can be easily replaced with faster C or C++ code later--from what I've been told at least.
One open source project that is using a lot of Python code for development is Worldforge. Worldforge is going to be a massively-multiplayer online game. Neat stuff.
So, in 1996, CD-ROMs through Federal Express will emerge as the information superhighway. Instead of an Internet brimming with Web pages under construction, too few of us will haunt ghost pages.
I used to think the crap that Metcalfe has said in past stemmed from him being a grumpy old man that wanted to rain on the parade. Eventually I realized that he likes being contrary to get attention. This is what we call a troll.
One explanation about why the VLIW set isn't released is because it changes from chip revision to chip revision. The software layer is absolutely necessary to maintain compatability. On the other hand, the details of the code-morphing software are a trade secret that I'm sure competitors would love to get their hands on. This combined with the fact that developers don't need it gives Transmeta very little incentive to realease the source code. How long before Intel or AMD or someone else figures out how to do the same thing on their own? I'm sure Transmeta needs to keep their lead here as long as they can if they want to stay competitive in the processor market.
I also remember a couple years ago when he said that the Internet would suffer massive breakdowns and outages which would render it unusable. He then said he would eat his words if it didn't happen within the year. So in the end he held a press conference where he put his article in a blender then ate it or drank it or something. More publicity for him.
This is business as usual these days for Metcalfe. It's a shame to see him reduced to trolling after all he's accomplished.
I've been using icecast for well over a year and it truly rocks. It uses a tiny amount of resources. L3enc produces excellent sound in a 24kbps stream especially if it's pre-encoded (as opposed to realtime encoding.)
I haven't tried connecting with WMP to my icecast server, however Netscape 4.7 comes with WinAmp, which allows users to connect to icecast streams without needing to install any additional software.
What might be considerred a disadvantage is that icecast uses TCP connections instead of UDP packets. If a TCP packet is dropped the music stops until the packet is re-sent and received. This causes the audio to stop (assuming it's not re-sent before the buffer runs out.) Realaudio inserts static when a UDP packet is not recieved but continues pretty much in realtime.
I said "might be considerred a disadvantage", but in practice it never has been a problem for me. I've remained connected for days with XMMS->icecast with no problems. My server is ~1000 miles and many hops away so there are plenty of opportunities for lost packets. It recovers quite well (using a 12k buffer--about 5 seconds worth of buffering--the standard for XMMS and WinAmp.)
So we've got a great solution already for streaming audio. That leaves streaming video. Other than bandwidth usage, it shouldn't require much more than an video codec to play it. I haven't really followed the XMMS project too closely but I think there is a reason it's called the X MultiMedia System and not the X Audio System. In other words I bet video will be part of XMMS before too long and it will do it well.
The source code is damning evidence against the DVD CAA that the encryption was weak. That in itself would be a big reason for them to bury it. If they truly promised that CSS would protect content producers from piracy and companies invested money and content in DVD media based on that promise they could be held liable. What better way to take the blame off of them then to place it on people that they know don't have the resources to defend themselves.
I think this is the beginning of a new trend. There's a good chance that hackers will become the corporate equivalent of "the dog ate my homework." This kind of thing either needs to be nipped in the bud now, or we might as well get used to it.
We really need more discussion about how we can fight back. Can we change public perceptions of hackers? Can we expose the fact that corporations are attacking our freedoms? What CAN we do? I really wish I knew the answer. Someone suggested a couple days ago to donate to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I grabbed my credit card and did it. It only takes a minute and you can get a cool book if you donate $65 or more. If you haven't donated to the cause yet, make sure you do--NOW.
The only way the comments would help is as evidence the EFF could use in court that DeCSS's intent is not piracy, but playback of legitimate content.
This is a little short-sighted. The MPAA, RIAA, DVD CAA, and many others will abuse the hell out of the DMCA as long as it is profitable to do so. The guidelines might at least make it a little harder (and less profitable) for them to do so in the future.
We're obviously dealing with organizations that don't give a rat's ass who they hurt (even if it's everybody) as long as there is profit to be made. They have tremendous amounts of resources that they can use against individuals and smaller organizations to silence them even when they aren't doing anything illegal.
I'm sure they see the DMCA as a way to strengthen their position even more, to give them that much more ammo to use against would-be competition and anyone else that gets between them and potential profit. Comments submitted stand to dilute the added power the DMCA gives them. The comments could possibly even undermine other laws that the industry abuses but that's probably overly-optimistic on my part--I'd love to have someone tell me I'm wrong.
They're too powerful already. They are not scared to threaten our freedoms publicly in courts of law. They think they are untouchable, but I hope they are wrong. One thing that I am certain of is that we can't afford to miss any opportunity to erode their power.
These organizations may claim that piracy over the Internet will be a death sentence for them. This is not true, but if it was it would be well deserved. Maybe if we can make an example of them other corporations will learn to step a little more lightly. We have a great equalizer now--we'd best use it.
Sorry about the rant and topic drift. I'm going out for a pint or six of Guinness.
I don't think there is anything inherently anti-girl about computer games. It's not as if their poor girly minds can't understand computers. It's just that nobody is making games for girls with any brains. Remember the Sierra line of role-playing games? Those were the coolest. I have copies of almost every one. They don't make those games any more. I'm sure girls would like games other than action games if they were just presented. But I don't really see anything like that out there. It's just bone-crushing and flaming-death in 3D or real-time strategy. Not too appealing. Myst had somewhat of a success, but that was banal at best.
Hmmm, I used to have Cranston Manor for my Apple ][+. It was one of the only computer games I actually had to share with my mom and my sister. I never really thought about it until this article, but back then Sierra was a husband and wife team and a couple other friends. Didn't Slashdot link to an article about the wife not long before the holidays? At any rate there was a proportionately large female influence in the creation of the game compared to what you see today. This didn't make it a girlie game. What it did was make it more well-rounded so it appealed to both sexes.
I guess bone-crushing and 3D death is what guys are best at creating. I don't think it's necessarily that the guys writing games for girls are brainless--just probably ill-equipped for the job. Unless there are hordes of brilliant female coders that are dying to write computer games I doubt game companies will be able to produce anything for women on a level with what they produce for guys. Eventually someone will get together enough women to write good games targeted towards women or balanced for both sexes. Then they'll be able to produce something worthy and make some money off of it. Merely having a game designed by women isn't going to be enough. The most talented coders will work on the games that appeal to them. As I see it, it basically boils down to is this: there have to be enough women that want it bad enough to write it themselves. They'll have to dedicate years of their life to it, or their entire careers to writing games that they want. After all, Quake didn't happen because a group of disinterested programmers were paid to create games. Carmack and Romero were probably obessed with creating the ultimate game for themselves.
Show me where there is a team of talented female coders that are obsessed with creating a game that means the world to them and I'll show you the start-up company that will change the future of 'games for girls' as we know them.
By excluding what has the potential to be a significant part of the market (intentionally or no), gaming companies are shooting themselves in the foot. There are *tons* of women out there who like to game. Yet we find ourselves excluded, pushed aside. Everyday we have to deal with the mentality that those with tits can't possibly know computers. Those who cry loudest for female geeks are often the same people who trivialize us. Really. I've been there.
Actually the article seemed to be more about magazines and advertising than the games themselves. I don't read gaming mags anymore so I haven't seen any of the ads the author was describing. From the descriptions they sound cheesy and immature. It seems that their target audience is a bit narrower than the male gender or even male geeks.
The games themselves have come a long way though. Take Unreal TE for example. I'm sure most Unreal fans are guys but they've made the effort to include both male and female players in the game. Yet they haven't compromised the game for its fans by trying to cater to everyone in every way possible.
Yeah it's important to make games and mags as appealing to the largest possible audience. But making them one-size-fits-all will make them dull. WomenGamers.com (the source of this article) is targeted at women. They're going after an unclaimed part of the market--they are "female-focused." This is cool as well as important. More choice is just better.
For me personally, I'd like a gaming mag that was targeted at the 25-35yo nerd crowd (gender-neutral.) In the meantime I'm not going to begrudge anyone having gaming mags/sites that are targeted more directly at them.
Back to the message that this is a reply to: I don't doubt that there are *tons* of women who like to game. OTOH there seem to be a lot less that are as fanatical about it than guys that are fanatical about it. As long as the guys are out in force designing, developing, and writing about the games, the industry will be primarily geared towards them. The same idea works for Slashdot. As long as the contributors are primarily male the site will be geared towards us. Even if we wanted to give female geeks a free ride and we did our best to be female-friendly we probably wouldn't do very well at it anyway.
WorldForge is an open source game that is currently being developed. There are some females involved in the project, but I'm sure that there is room for a lot more and that your involvement will be appreciated. More female involvement will make the game more diverse. But female participation is key--you can't exactly expect a bunch of guys to do it on their own. BTW, I personally am not involved in the WorldForge project but I've been following it and it sounds very interesting. irc.worldforge.org #forge is a good place to get more info about it after you've checked out the web site.
The current instruction sets of most processors are probably designed based on certain price:performance ratios taking the cost of producing them as hardware as a major consideration. Transmeta could come up with their own virtual instruction set that would be optimized for thier chips. It would be an easy move for the software developers since their old code could still run on the processor anyway until they recompile to the virtual instruction set. I didn't read the whole Ars article because it's past my bedtime (I'll read it tomorrow at work.) But the author made a comment about framerates "(yet)" -- I didn't see what he was eluding to by the "(yet)" but I got the impression he expects Transmeta compete beyond the mobile arena.
Another thought I've had is that things just got harder for a company like Intel. It was no easy task for AMD to get big enough where they could afford to be competitive with Intel. But Crusoe-type processors sound like they would be much easier to design and produce...new companies will have a much lower barrier for entry into the competition. Lucky for Transmeta that they have their patents;)
First, I'd like to say everything that '/' said--but since he already said it I won't. Now I'd like to add a little...
One thing Jon mentioned that struck me as interesting was about mentors. I don't agree exactly with what he said, but I'm glad that he realizes that there must be talent lurking in Slashdot's -1 playpen. I think if he'd followed that train of thought a little farther he might realize that we already are mentoring. Slashdot is actually giving them a playground where they can act out at the same time as they are learning how others more effectively communicate in a public forum. This goes for those that aren't literally children as well.
Then there are the people that are being scared off by the hostility. The lurkers that Jon says should take responsibility and stand up to the 'hostiles.' I less than half-agree with what Jon is saying here. I get the impression that Jon is looking at it as joining together and fighting back. Definately the wrong way to deal with it. I'd say this to the lurkers instead: "If you have something to say, stand up and say it. If you fear repercussions then get a free hushmail account and use a psuedonym on Slashdot." I have a feeling though that people are more scared of getting nailed with a well-thought-out but not-so-friendly criticism by some 200 IQ mental bully. No matter what you do, you will be criticized eventually. Accept it, learn from it, deny it, or throw it away, the choice is yours. Just don't cry over it because it's not that big of a deal.
newsflash: The moderation system isn't perfect. Still, it works incredibly well despite its flaws. I think any attempt to abolish the offending posts will turn out to be a huge waste of time at best, but more likely it will fsck things up. Rob, I sincerely hope you aren't considering doing this.
numb
Do you want to rule the world and control it? I don't think it can ever be done. The world is sacred vessel and it can not be controlled. You will only it make it worse if you try. It may slip through your fingers and disappear. -- Lao-Tzu
OK, i think it's a given that there's no way to get everyone to stop flaming. There are always going to be people that flame. There will always be people that have nothing to say but need to post something to get attention anyway. There will always be people without enough balls to tell you what they think to your face. There will always be people that will cut you off in traffic. Do I let it ruin my day? NO.
I understand Jon's point about how this causes people that DO have something to say to remain silent. But the fact is, no matter how hard you try, there will always be someone who's going to have a problem with you or what you have to say. It's something you have to learn how to deal with. Not everyone is going to feel comfortable posting in a public forum. Not everyone feels comfortable with speaking in front of a large group of people in RL either.
Anyone who is a public figure has to deal with this stuff. And anyone that deals with public. Have you ever worked at McDonalds, a grocery store, or tech support hotline? There are people everywhere that just can't deal with their emotions in a civilized manner. Get used to it!
If you can't deal with it, learn to deal with it. Learn to meditate, read the Tao Te Ching a couple times (it's short enough,) learn to laugh or feel pity--whatever suits you. Don't take yourself too seriously, and don't take your detractors too seriously. And of course, if you burn easily, it's important to understand the importance of wearing sunscreen.
very strength that Linux has, from stability to the versatility of it's X-Windows GUI, is probably already the focus of a Windows project team deciding how to best surpass that particular feature in Windows 2001. No matter what you think of M!crosoft, they're a powerful company that's used to competing on a difficult playing field. Their tactics aren't always totally above the belt, but don't let that lull you into believing that they can't produce some very good products when provoked into proper competition. They're not nice, but they're not incompetent either.
I agree--we'll all do well to keep that in mind. I have a couple days worth of Win2k experience to back up your point. A quick run-through:
GOOD: It's noticably faster than NT or 98. It generally has a lot less of that bloated feeling. In fact, most basic operations from the desktop are FASTER than what I experience with Enlightenment/Gnome. Definately has a nice feel to it.
GOOD: Win2k doesn't seem to waste memory as badly as NT 4 did. I don't seem to want to use all available memory until it needs it--though Linux still seems to be a little better at this.
GOOD: Unreal TE loads and runs MUCH faster for my in 2k than it did in Win98.
BAD: Win2k installation would not complete normally for me without forcing it to boot into VGA only mode. As far as I can tell the TNT2 drivers that come with it were completely unusable. I was able to download some beta drivers for it to get it working (somewhat.)
BAD: Win2k would knock my SCSI CD-RW offline on bootup (only powering off would make it usuable again at all.) I had to download new drivers from Tekram for my scsi card to get it to work properly.
BAD: Win2k is locking up constantly. I'm sure that some of it has to do with the beta video drivers. However it's been getting noticibly worse after only being installed 4 or 5 days.
SUMMARY: From my experience so far it seems that Microsoft has put a lot of effort into making the end-user-on-a-preinstalled-system experience much nicer. It's prettier. It's faster. Installation was no less of a hassle than RedHat 6.1. But let me put it this way: If I knew nothing about computers and walked into a computer store and compared a Linux/E/Gnome box to the Win2k box, I'd probably be going home with the Win2k machine. (I haven't used WM or KDE enough to know how they'd stack up.)
BTW, it's the Win2k Professional OEM multi-proc version.
So... This story looks like another small victory towards the future where we can get our information faster and easier. Right now, it is a tool for helping the handicapped, but perhaps it will be a status symbol once it reaches technological maturity. Be honest! Who would not be tempted to become one of the "linked"?
I'd be tempted, but I know plenty of people that would absolutely have to have it if it were available. People like to do some wierd stuff to their bodies (and minds)...some even claim to be 'addicted' to piercings and tattoos. Tatts and piercings are kinda lo-tech, but the point is that there are tons of people that love enhancing their bodies--some are even fanatical about it. If high-tech enhancements become available to them, they'll get them in a heartbeat.
So, my theory is (this is assuming that the MPAA isn't just stupendously dumb...which is a rather large assumption), the reason they're suing now isn't to get DeCSS taken off the net, because they know that it's quite a bit too late for that. Instead, it's to get a legal precedent, so that any company thinking of making a "universal" DVD player like the one I described above would know that they'd lose in court.
I doubt that they're stupendously dumb, but my bet is that your conspiracy theory is true. Of course, I think there are probably additional reasons as well.
Undermining fair use precedents is probably a big goal. You know, I know, and they know that there is always a way to make a pirated copy (whether it's an exact duplicate or not.) Maybe they've just been waiting for an excuse to go to court to make sure that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act would be able to be used to circument those pesky rights we've been given that allow for fair use copying. At any rate, I wouldn't be suprised if they haven't been planning for a case like this since before the DMCA was passed into law.
ESR has a nice essay on this case as well; avaiable here. Here's an excerpt:
Why is the DVDCA lying? That's easy -- because the lie sounds a lot better than admitting that DVD is a fraud designed to line the pockets of a few selected players in the consumer-electronics industry. The DVDCA's real issue isn't protection of the market for DVD films, it's control of the market for DVD *players*.
I know I'm missing a piece of the puzzle here. How does CSS prevent piracy of a DVD? If the disc is read bit for bit, then written bit for bit (with encryption intact) how does the new disc or DVD player know that the copy isn't the original? I'm assuming the decryption comes in when it comes to converting the bits to video.
What about people that want to create their own DVD content? Does it have to be encrypted to work on DVD players? The cynical side of me says that what it's really about is controlling the dissemination of content. Or at least finding a way to stay in the loop in a world where people would otherwise no longer need media companies to publish for them. Admittedly, my knowledge of this subject is a little weak...thus all the questions.
The only people this is a major bonus for is US vendors not users around the world or at least not on the same scale.
I'd have to disagree with this part. Yes, this will benefit US vendors (or stop hurting them if you want to look at it from that angle.) Obviously a lot of software is developed in the US. Since the US companies have to jump through all sorts of hoops to include encryption without incuring the wrath of our government, they avoid it.
In other words, if it wasn't for the ridiculous encryption laws here in the US, there would be a lot more software (and hardware) with encryption included available to everyone. So, in effect, these laws have been hurting everyone by making encryption harder to get and harder to use.
By "hurting" I mean that there is a serious lack of privacy and security that is completely unnecessary. If you've ever run "ngrep" or "tcpdump" from a server with a lot of Internet packets passing by, then you probably understand the implications of not using encryption. I'd have to guess that most people haven't.
Since encryption is not just about computers and/or the Internet, I'll give a real world example. Do you use a cordless phone? Chances are that if it uses encryption it is very weak, but more likely it doesn't use it at all. I used to have a neighbor that would do nothing all day but play on his computer and listen to every un-encrypted cordless phone conversation in the apartment complex. He knew which women were cheating on their husbands, which neighbors had kinky fetishes, their personal problems, who was buying/selling drugs, and who was having pizza delivered...he could point them out and tell me just about any detail about any of them. This is a true story. No exagerration whatsoever. It makes me very uncomfortable talking on the phone, especially when I'm talking to the bank or credit card company. I need the ability to have a conversation encrypted end-to-end to feel comfortable talking on the phone about anything more personal than the weather. If US companies are freed from restrictions on encryption, this kind of technology could be widely available.
I seem to remember YaHooka.com having some kind of run-in with Yahoo a while ago. Since they are still online I guess things were worked out. Some very educational links on their site btw |-)
Don't get me wrong, I'm doing the dance of joy for the breakup of M$, I'm just a little leery (no not Denis) of what the future holds for us.....C'mon B.G. is so used to falling face first in feces and come up smiling and fresh as a daisy he makes the other Bill (Clinton) pale in comparison.
I think that's a wise observation. BG certainly does have a way of turning things around. BTW, I'm not sure how many of you guys have had the opportunity to take Win2k for a spin--Microsoft hasn't exactly been sitting on their hands when it comes to fixing their OS. Win2k is a decent improvement over NT, and a huge improvement over Win95/98. It still crashes plenty (probably due to the fact that I couldn't find a decent driver for my TNT2) but I think they've done a lot of work to keep themselves on the desktop for a couple more years.
In other words people, don't get too comfortable with the idea that Microsoft is only capable of producing crappy bloatware. When they have competition they seem to be able to escape this mode--at least for as long as it takes to kill the competition. Just a thought...
If we organized, could we get ~50 million votes for our candidate? Not that we should elect Rob, but maybe it is time for a tech party.
I think a "tech party" might be a little too limited in scope. But I do think that Slashdotters could have a lot of influence--not necessarily with politicians directly, but with the people they deal with everyday--based on their ability to understand issues and communicate with others about them.
Coming up with a common candidate that most of us support would be helpful. When election time rolls around and people in RL want to talk about candidates, it would be nice if all of us had something to say that would help "our" candidate.
I'm not talking about Slashdot picking an "official Slashdot candidate." I'd rather see the readers moderate up the best explanations of which candidate would help our combined causes the most. Also, the best answers to opposing views would be nice as well. A couple articles a month on Slashdot that specifically debate candidates would be really nice IMHO.
The fact is, I can debate the relative merits of different technologies all day long and never run out of breath. But when it comes to politics I run out of steam rather quickly. I learn more everytime I read people's arguments here on Slashdot, which helps to an extent.
The key here is this: if we (readers of Slashdot) work together to find the candidates we agree on and learn how to formulate our best arguments, we can then educate others. I'm not implying that everyone here needs to be more well-rounded when it comes to politics...just that I'm not the only one here that might be lacking.
If we could all debate politics as cleary, and with as much fervor as we debate technology, we would make a difference.
numb
PS: Some issues that influence my vote: EFF and NORML
If we organized, could we get ~50 million votes for our candidate? Not that we should elect Rob, but maybe it is time for a tech party.
I think a "tech party" might be a little too limited in scope. But I do think that Slashdotters could have a lot of influence--not necessarily with politicians directly, but with the people they deal with everyday--based on their ability to understand issues and communicate with others about them.
Coming up with a common candidate that most of us support would be helpful. When election time rolls around and people in RL want to talk about candidates, it would be nice if all of us had something to say that would help "our" candidate.
I'm not talking about Slashdot picking an "official Slashdot candidate." I'd rather see the readers moderate up the best explanations of which candidate would help our combined causes the most. Also, the best answers to opposing views would be nice as well. A couple articles a month on Slashdot that specifically debate candidates would be really nice IMHO.
The fact is, I can debate the relative merits of different technologies all day long and never run out of breath. But when it comes to politics I run out of steam rather quickly. I learn more everytime I read people's arguments here on Slashdot, which helps to an extent.
The key here is this: if we (readers of Slashdot) work together to find the candidates we agree on and learn how to formulate our best arguments, we can then educate others. I'm not implying that everyone here needs to be more well-rounded when it comes to politics...just that I'm not the only one here that might be lacking.
If we could all debate politics as cleary, and with as much fervor as we debate technology, we would make a difference.
If we organized, could we get ~50 million votes for our candidate? Not that we should elect Rob, but maybe it is time for a tech party.
I think a "tech party" might be a little too limited in scope. But I do think that Slashdotters could have a lot of influence--not necessarily with politicians directly, but with the people they deal with everyday--based on their ability to understand issues and communicate with others about them.
Coming up with a common candidate that most of us support would be helpful. When election time rolls around and people in RL want to talk about candidates, it would be nice if all of us had something to say that would help "our" candidate.
I'm not talking about Slashdot picking an "official Slashdot candidate." I'd rather see the readers moderate up the best explanations of which candidate would help our combined causes the most. Also, the best answers to opposing views would be nice as well. A couple articles a month on Slashdot that specifically debate candidates would be really nice IMHO.
The fact is, I can debate the relative merits of different technologies all day long and never run out of breath. But when it comes to politics I run out of steam rather quickly. I learn more everytime I read people's arguments here on Slashdot, which helps to an extent.
The key here is this: if we (readers of Slashdot) work together to find the candidates we agree on and learn how to formulate our best arguments, we can then educate others. I'm not implying that everyone here needs to be more well-rounded when it comes to politics...just that I'm not the only one here that might be lacking.
If we could all debate politics as cleary, and with as much fervor as we debate technology, we would make a difference.
numb
PS: Some issues that will influence my vote: EFF and NORML
800 base MHz + (800*33%-clockup for cryo)= 800 + 266.66 = 1066 So unless the article was updated and I didn't catch it, this is not based on the 800MHz, though nothing stops you from taking a preexisting SuperG's 750 out and putting an 800 in...
yes, you are correct. The article is from Nov 15th--way before the 800Mhz Athlon came out.
Has anyone thought to contact Trudel on the phone to get his opinion. I can't right now since I'm at work. But there is a number on his web site. I'm just curious who will answer the phone: a receptionist, John Trudel, or a cheap analog answering machine.
The Trudel Group 33470 Chinook PL Scappoose, OR 97056 503-638-8644
I also have a question for the guy that sumbitted this to Ask Slashdot. What is your relationship to John Trudel? Have you heard of him before? If not, what led you to his web site?
Slashdot Mirror
1. A bulletproof install. It must work, out of the box, no questions asked.
2.Hardware support for everything. Drivers need to be there for the hardware and they have to be installed automatically. Don't make the user guess what brand of video or sound card they have, 'cause generally, they don't know.
This would be great. Yet no PC operating system I've used yet has either of these features. Yet I have seen systems that come pre-installed, and come with a bullet-resistant install disk tailored for that system. However, upgrading your hardware might 'break' such an install disk.
3. Get rid of the UNIX model. Yeah, no more user IDs, passwords or any of that. It can be too confusing on your grandma to have more names and numbers to remember.
4. Get rid of GNU. Yeah, that's right, drop the command line utilities that you know and love, and lose all that power. If granny can't remember her password how's she supposed to remember arcane commands?
What's this "get rid of" stuff about? The built-in support for multiple users is incredibly useful in a household where more than one person uses the computer. eg: I can screw up my stuff without screwing up everyone elses. Of course, if granny lives alone she might want the option to allow it to automatically log her on. And the Gnu tools are great for some things that a GUI couldn't easily emulate. I do agree forcing someone to use them is not ideal. There should be an alternative.
5. The gui must be the OS. This means, goodbye X. Most of the newbies who ask me for help request help with setting up X (well, networking comes close). X must disappear, or it must become so much a part of Linux that it's just there, and it just works, no matter what video card, RAMDac, or whatever the user has on their machine.
I'm not especially attached to X, but making the GUI part of the kernel or even a built-in part of of the OS just seems like a bad idea to me. If you actually meant that it should be seemless, then yeah, this would be great. As far as it "just [working], no matter what video card..." -- well, keep dreaming & see response to 1 and 2. Video cards (and other hardware) change over the years, so the drivers need to change. The best way to keep your install bulletproof is to buy specifically supported hardware.
6. This GUI must be slicker than whale shit in an ice flow. Yeah, it must blow all other existing GUIs out of the water for ease of use, configurability, etc.
7. Did I mention that this stuff must work, right out of the box? It has to be so simple that the user can install it and configure it without a thought.
Amen!
What the world really needs is a new OS (perhaps based on the Linux kernel, perhaps not) that bundles ease of use and robustness in a single package.
I don't know that we need a whole new OS. There are more than just one OS with rock solid foundations to build a nice user interface on. No, linux, the kernel, does not need this GUI. What people, like our grandmothers, need is an easy-to-use, visually appealing user interface with a stable foundation. And that GUI needs Linux or a similar stable and open kernel beneath it.
numb
I'm gonna pre-empt the arguement about an office full of people talking to their computers being too noisy. Right now everyone is talking on the phone and a couple have radios/cd's playing. It's not too noisy. The only downside I can see is that when Windows crashes people might be tempted to shout obscenities at their computer (as opposed to muttering under their breath like they do now.)
I have no fear of the keyboard though. I don't mind typing. In fact I often find it annoying to reach for the mouse. Some voice recognition capabilities would be nice though--especially at home.
Seriously, I can already picture how I can make my whole apartment voice activated. "Turn on fishtank" would turn on the light in the fish tank (X10/firecracker,) "dim lights 75%", "play sublime 40 badfish."
I doubt I'd ever use voice recognition instead of typing in the shell other than for that kind of thing. But could certainly use it in a standalone app that executes shell commands based on voice commands i've specifically taught it. One of these days I'll get around to doing something like this.
numb
I'm kinda in the same boat as the author. I've played around with Python a little, but I know a lot more about Perl.
Like the author, the forced indentation in Python isn't bothersome at all because I do it anyway with Perl. My brain would melt if I tried to read any of my code and it wasn't indented properly. Also I agree with the author about CPAN. It's unbelievably easy to grab a module, compile, and install it. If you have the cpan program installed on your computer it's often as easy as typing "install Module" -- it'll download it from one of the mirrors, compile it, and install it, often with no required user interaction. I love that.
There's something that bugs me about Python, but it's not exactly a good reason not to use it. The code just looks kinda bland to me. Almost like BASIC or something. Maybe I just have a thing for using braces or something. I dunno.
At any rate, I was still very impressed with Python. I might make the switch someday, but at this point it hasn't been able to drag me away from Perl. Python is supposed to be especially good for rapidly developing software. The software can be written in Python, then pieces can be easily replaced with faster C or C++ code later--from what I've been told at least.
One open source project that is using a lot of Python code for development is Worldforge. Worldforge is going to be a massively-multiplayer online game. Neat stuff.
numb
So, in 1996, CD-ROMs through Federal Express will emerge as the information superhighway. Instead of an Internet brimming with Web pages under construction, too few of us will haunt ghost pages.
I used to think the crap that Metcalfe has said in past stemmed from him being a grumpy old man that wanted to rain on the parade. Eventually I realized that he likes being contrary to get attention. This is what we call a troll.
One explanation about why the VLIW set isn't released is because it changes from chip revision to chip revision. The software layer is absolutely necessary to maintain compatability. On the other hand, the details of the code-morphing software are a trade secret that I'm sure competitors would love to get their hands on. This combined with the fact that developers don't need it gives Transmeta very little incentive to realease the source code. How long before Intel or AMD or someone else figures out how to do the same thing on their own? I'm sure Transmeta needs to keep their lead here as long as they can if they want to stay competitive in the processor market.
I also remember a couple years ago when he said that the Internet would suffer massive breakdowns and outages which would render it unusable. He then said he would eat his words if it didn't happen within the year. So in the end he held a press conference where he put his article in a blender then ate it or drank it or something. More publicity for him.
This is business as usual these days for Metcalfe. It's a shame to see him reduced to trolling after all he's accomplished.
numb
I've been using icecast for well over a year and it truly rocks. It uses a tiny amount of resources. L3enc produces excellent sound in a 24kbps stream especially if it's pre-encoded (as opposed to realtime encoding.)
I haven't tried connecting with WMP to my icecast server, however Netscape 4.7 comes with WinAmp, which allows users to connect to icecast streams without needing to install any additional software.
What might be considerred a disadvantage is that icecast uses TCP connections instead of UDP packets. If a TCP packet is dropped the music stops until the packet is re-sent and received. This causes the audio to stop (assuming it's not re-sent before the buffer runs out.) Realaudio inserts static when a UDP packet is not recieved but continues pretty much in realtime.
I said "might be considerred a disadvantage", but in practice it never has been a problem for me. I've remained connected for days with XMMS->icecast with no problems. My server is ~1000 miles and many hops away so there are plenty of opportunities for lost packets. It recovers quite well (using a 12k buffer--about 5 seconds worth of buffering--the standard for XMMS and WinAmp.)
So we've got a great solution already for streaming audio. That leaves streaming video. Other than bandwidth usage, it shouldn't require much more than an video codec to play it. I haven't really followed the XMMS project too closely but I think there is a reason it's called the X MultiMedia System and not the X Audio System. In other words I bet video will be part of XMMS before too long and it will do it well.
numb
The source code is damning evidence against the DVD CAA that the encryption was weak. That in itself would be a big reason for them to bury it. If they truly promised that CSS would protect content producers from piracy and companies invested money and content in DVD media based on that promise they could be held liable. What better way to take the blame off of them then to place it on people that they know don't have the resources to defend themselves.
I think this is the beginning of a new trend. There's a good chance that hackers will become the corporate equivalent of "the dog ate my homework." This kind of thing either needs to be nipped in the bud now, or we might as well get used to it.
We really need more discussion about how we can fight back. Can we change public perceptions of hackers? Can we expose the fact that corporations are attacking our freedoms? What CAN we do? I really wish I knew the answer. Someone suggested a couple days ago to donate to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I grabbed my credit card and did it. It only takes a minute and you can get a cool book if you donate $65 or more. If you haven't donated to the cause yet, make sure you do--NOW.
numb
The only way the comments would help is as evidence the EFF could use in court that DeCSS's intent is not piracy, but playback of legitimate content.
This is a little short-sighted. The MPAA, RIAA, DVD CAA, and many others will abuse the hell out of the DMCA as long as it is profitable to do so. The guidelines might at least make it a little harder (and less profitable) for them to do so in the future.
We're obviously dealing with organizations that don't give a rat's ass who they hurt (even if it's everybody) as long as there is profit to be made. They have tremendous amounts of resources that they can use against individuals and smaller organizations to silence them even when they aren't doing anything illegal.
I'm sure they see the DMCA as a way to strengthen their position even more, to give them that much more ammo to use against would-be competition and anyone else that gets between them and potential profit. Comments submitted stand to dilute the added power the DMCA gives them. The comments could possibly even undermine other laws that the industry abuses but that's probably overly-optimistic on my part--I'd love to have someone tell me I'm wrong.
They're too powerful already. They are not scared to threaten our freedoms publicly in courts of law. They think they are untouchable, but I hope they are wrong. One thing that I am certain of is that we can't afford to miss any opportunity to erode their power.
These organizations may claim that piracy over the Internet will be a death sentence for them. This is not true, but if it was it would be well deserved. Maybe if we can make an example of them other corporations will learn to step a little more lightly. We have a great equalizer now--we'd best use it.
Sorry about the rant and topic drift. I'm going out for a pint or six of Guinness.
numb
I don't think there is anything inherently anti-girl about computer games. It's not as if their poor girly minds can't understand computers. It's just that nobody is making games for girls with any brains. Remember the Sierra line of role-playing games? Those were the coolest. I have copies of almost every one. They don't make those games any more. I'm sure girls would like games other than action games if they were just presented. But I don't really see anything like that out there. It's just bone-crushing and flaming-death in 3D or real-time strategy. Not too appealing. Myst had somewhat of a success, but that was banal at best.
Hmmm, I used to have Cranston Manor for my Apple ][+. It was one of the only computer games I actually had to share with my mom and my sister. I never really thought about it until this article, but back then Sierra was a husband and wife team and a couple other friends. Didn't Slashdot link to an article about the wife not long before the holidays? At any rate there was a proportionately large female influence in the creation of the game compared to what you see today. This didn't make it a girlie game. What it did was make it more well-rounded so it appealed to both sexes.
I guess bone-crushing and 3D death is what guys are best at creating. I don't think it's necessarily that the guys writing games for girls are brainless--just probably ill-equipped for the job. Unless there are hordes of brilliant female coders that are dying to write computer games I doubt game companies will be able to produce anything for women on a level with what they produce for guys. Eventually someone will get together enough women to write good games targeted towards women or balanced for both sexes. Then they'll be able to produce something worthy and make some money off of it. Merely having a game designed by women isn't going to be enough. The most talented coders will work on the games that appeal to them. As I see it, it basically boils down to is this: there have to be enough women that want it bad enough to write it themselves. They'll have to dedicate years of their life to it, or their entire careers to writing games that they want. After all, Quake didn't happen because a group of disinterested programmers were paid to create games. Carmack and Romero were probably obessed with creating the ultimate game for themselves.
Show me where there is a team of talented female coders that are obsessed with creating a game that means the world to them and I'll show you the start-up company that will change the future of 'games for girls' as we know them.
numb
By excluding what has the potential to be a significant part of the market (intentionally or no), gaming companies are shooting themselves in the foot. There are *tons* of women out there who like to game. Yet we find ourselves excluded, pushed aside. Everyday we have to deal with the mentality that those with tits can't possibly know computers. Those who cry loudest for female geeks are often the same people who trivialize us. Really. I've been there.
Actually the article seemed to be more about magazines and advertising than the games themselves. I don't read gaming mags anymore so I haven't seen any of the ads the author was describing. From the descriptions they sound cheesy and immature. It seems that their target audience is a bit narrower than the male gender or even male geeks.
The games themselves have come a long way though. Take Unreal TE for example. I'm sure most Unreal fans are guys but they've made the effort to include both male and female players in the game. Yet they haven't compromised the game for its fans by trying to cater to everyone in every way possible.
Yeah it's important to make games and mags as appealing to the largest possible audience. But making them one-size-fits-all will make them dull. WomenGamers.com (the source of this article) is targeted at women. They're going after an unclaimed part of the market--they are "female-focused." This is cool as well as important. More choice is just better.
For me personally, I'd like a gaming mag that was targeted at the 25-35yo nerd crowd (gender-neutral.) In the meantime I'm not going to begrudge anyone having gaming mags/sites that are targeted more directly at them.
Back to the message that this is a reply to: I don't doubt that there are *tons* of women who like to game. OTOH there seem to be a lot less that are as fanatical about it than guys that are fanatical about it. As long as the guys are out in force designing, developing, and writing about the games, the industry will be primarily geared towards them. The same idea works for Slashdot. As long as the contributors are primarily male the site will be geared towards us. Even if we wanted to give female geeks a free ride and we did our best to be female-friendly we probably wouldn't do very well at it anyway.
WorldForge is an open source game that is currently being developed. There are some females involved in the project, but I'm sure that there is room for a lot more and that your involvement will be appreciated. More female involvement will make the game more diverse. But female participation is key--you can't exactly expect a bunch of guys to do it on their own. BTW, I personally am not involved in the WorldForge project but I've been following it and it sounds very interesting. irc.worldforge.org #forge is a good place to get more info about it after you've checked out the web site.
numb
The current instruction sets of most processors are probably designed based on certain price:performance ratios taking the cost of producing them as hardware as a major consideration. Transmeta could come up with their own virtual instruction set that would be optimized for thier chips. It would be an easy move for the software developers since their old code could still run on the processor anyway until they recompile to the virtual instruction set. I didn't read the whole Ars article because it's past my bedtime (I'll read it tomorrow at work.) But the author made a comment about framerates "(yet)" -- I didn't see what he was eluding to by the "(yet)" but I got the impression he expects Transmeta compete beyond the mobile arena.
;)
Another thought I've had is that things just got harder for a company like Intel. It was no easy task for AMD to get big enough where they could afford to be competitive with Intel. But Crusoe-type processors sound like they would be much easier to design and produce...new companies will have a much lower barrier for entry into the competition. Lucky for Transmeta that they have their patents
numb
First, I'd like to say everything that '/' said--but since he already said it I won't. Now I'd like to add a little...
One thing Jon mentioned that struck me as interesting was about mentors. I don't agree exactly with what he said, but I'm glad that he realizes that there must be talent lurking in Slashdot's -1 playpen. I think if he'd followed that train of thought a little farther he might realize that we already are mentoring. Slashdot is actually giving them a playground where they can act out at the same time as they are learning how others more effectively communicate in a public forum. This goes for those that aren't literally children as well.
Then there are the people that are being scared off by the hostility. The lurkers that Jon says should take responsibility and stand up to the 'hostiles.' I less than half-agree with what Jon is saying here. I get the impression that Jon is looking at it as joining together and fighting back. Definately the wrong way to deal with it. I'd say this to the lurkers instead: "If you have something to say, stand up and say it. If you fear repercussions then get a free hushmail account and use a psuedonym on Slashdot." I have a feeling though that people are more scared of getting nailed with a well-thought-out but not-so-friendly criticism by some 200 IQ mental bully. No matter what you do, you will be criticized eventually. Accept it, learn from it, deny it, or throw it away, the choice is yours. Just don't cry over it because it's not that big of a deal.
newsflash: The moderation system isn't perfect. Still, it works incredibly well despite its flaws. I think any attempt to abolish the offending posts will turn out to be a huge waste of time at best, but more likely it will fsck things up. Rob, I sincerely hope you aren't considering doing this.
numb
Do you want to rule the world and control it? I don't think it can ever be done. The world is sacred vessel and it can not be controlled. You will only it make it worse if you try. It may slip through your fingers and disappear. -- Lao-Tzu
OK, i think it's a given that there's no way to get everyone to stop flaming. There are always going to be people that flame. There will always be people that have nothing to say but need to post something to get attention anyway. There will always be people without enough balls to tell you what they think to your face. There will always be people that will cut you off in traffic. Do I let it ruin my day? NO.
I understand Jon's point about how this causes people that DO have something to say to remain silent. But the fact is, no matter how hard you try, there will always be someone who's going to have a problem with you or what you have to say. It's something you have to learn how to deal with. Not everyone is going to feel comfortable posting in a public forum. Not everyone feels comfortable with speaking in front of a large group of people in RL either.
Anyone who is a public figure has to deal with this stuff. And anyone that deals with public. Have you ever worked at McDonalds, a grocery store, or tech support hotline? There are people everywhere that just can't deal with their emotions in a civilized manner. Get used to it!
If you can't deal with it, learn to deal with it. Learn to meditate, read the Tao Te Ching a couple times (it's short enough,) learn to laugh or feel pity--whatever suits you. Don't take yourself too seriously, and don't take your detractors too seriously. And of course, if you burn easily, it's important to understand the importance of wearing sunscreen.
numb
very strength that Linux has, from stability to the versatility of it's X-Windows GUI, is probably already the focus of a Windows project team deciding how to best surpass that particular feature in Windows 2001. No matter what you think of M!crosoft, they're a powerful company that's used to competing on a difficult playing field. Their tactics aren't always totally above the belt, but don't let that lull you into believing that they can't produce some very good products when provoked into proper competition. They're not nice, but they're not incompetent either.
I agree--we'll all do well to keep that in mind. I have a couple days worth of Win2k experience to back up your point. A quick run-through:
GOOD: It's noticably faster than NT or 98. It generally has a lot less of that bloated feeling. In fact, most basic operations from the desktop are FASTER than what I experience with Enlightenment/Gnome. Definately has a nice feel to it.
GOOD: Win2k doesn't seem to waste memory as badly as NT 4 did. I don't seem to want to use all available memory until it needs it--though Linux still seems to be a little better at this.
GOOD: Unreal TE loads and runs MUCH faster for my in 2k than it did in Win98.
BAD: Win2k installation would not complete normally for me without forcing it to boot into VGA only mode. As far as I can tell the TNT2 drivers that come with it were completely unusable. I was able to download some beta drivers for it to get it working (somewhat.)
BAD: Win2k would knock my SCSI CD-RW offline on bootup (only powering off would make it usuable again at all.) I had to download new drivers from Tekram for my scsi card to get it to work properly.
BAD: Win2k is locking up constantly. I'm sure that some of it has to do with the beta video drivers. However it's been getting noticibly worse after only being installed 4 or 5 days.
SUMMARY: From my experience so far it seems that Microsoft has put a lot of effort into making the end-user-on-a-preinstalled-system experience much nicer. It's prettier. It's faster. Installation was no less of a hassle than RedHat 6.1. But let me put it this way: If I knew nothing about computers and walked into a computer store and compared a Linux/E/Gnome box to the Win2k box, I'd probably be going home with the Win2k machine. (I haven't used WM or KDE enough to know how they'd stack up.)
BTW, it's the Win2k Professional OEM multi-proc version.
numb
So... This story looks like another small victory towards the future where we can get our information faster and easier. Right now, it is a tool for helping the handicapped, but perhaps it will be a status symbol once it reaches technological maturity. Be honest! Who would not be tempted to become one of the "linked"?
I'd be tempted, but I know plenty of people that would absolutely have to have it if it were available. People like to do some wierd stuff to their bodies (and minds)...some even claim to be 'addicted' to piercings and tattoos. Tatts and piercings are kinda lo-tech, but the point is that there are tons of people that love enhancing their bodies--some are even fanatical about it. If high-tech enhancements become available to them, they'll get them in a heartbeat.
numb
So, my theory is (this is assuming that the MPAA isn't just stupendously dumb...which is a rather large assumption), the reason they're suing now isn't to get DeCSS taken off the net, because they know that it's quite a bit too late for that. Instead, it's to get a legal precedent, so that any company thinking of making a "universal" DVD player like the one I described above would know that they'd lose in court.
I doubt that they're stupendously dumb, but my bet is that your conspiracy theory is true. Of course, I think there are probably additional reasons as well.
Undermining fair use precedents is probably a big goal. You know, I know, and they know that there is always a way to make a pirated copy (whether it's an exact duplicate or not.) Maybe they've just been waiting for an excuse to go to court to make sure that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act would be able to be used to circument those pesky rights we've been given that allow for fair use copying. At any rate, I wouldn't be suprised if they haven't been planning for a case like this since before the DMCA was passed into law.
ESR has a nice essay on this case as well; avaiable here. Here's an excerpt:
Why is the DVDCA lying? That's easy -- because the lie sounds a lot better than admitting that DVD is a fraud designed to line the pockets of a few selected players in the consumer-electronics industry. The DVDCA's real issue isn't protection of the market for DVD films, it's control of the market for DVD *players*.
numb
Moderate this down (-1, You Don't Even Own A DVD)
:P
It's true...I can't deny it. I may invest in some after I have a player though
numb
I know I'm missing a piece of the puzzle here. How does CSS prevent piracy of a DVD? If the disc is read bit for bit, then written bit for bit (with encryption intact) how does the new disc or DVD player know that the copy isn't the original? I'm assuming the decryption comes in when it comes to converting the bits to video.
What about people that want to create their own DVD content? Does it have to be encrypted to work on DVD players? The cynical side of me says that what it's really about is controlling the dissemination of content. Or at least finding a way to stay in the loop in a world where people would otherwise no longer need media companies to publish for them. Admittedly, my knowledge of this subject is a little weak...thus all the questions.
numb
The only people this is a major bonus for is US vendors not users around the world or at least not on the same scale.
I'd have to disagree with this part. Yes, this will benefit US vendors (or stop hurting them if you want to look at it from that angle.) Obviously a lot of software is developed in the US. Since the US companies have to jump through all sorts of hoops to include encryption without incuring the wrath of our government, they avoid it.
In other words, if it wasn't for the ridiculous encryption laws here in the US, there would be a lot more software (and hardware) with encryption included available to everyone. So, in effect, these laws have been hurting everyone by making encryption harder to get and harder to use.
By "hurting" I mean that there is a serious lack of privacy and security that is completely unnecessary. If you've ever run "ngrep" or "tcpdump" from a server with a lot of Internet packets passing by, then you probably understand the implications of not using encryption. I'd have to guess that most people haven't.
Since encryption is not just about computers and/or the Internet, I'll give a real world example. Do you use a cordless phone? Chances are that if it uses encryption it is very weak, but more likely it doesn't use it at all. I used to have a neighbor that would do nothing all day but play on his computer and listen to every un-encrypted cordless phone conversation in the apartment complex. He knew which women were cheating on their husbands, which neighbors had kinky fetishes, their personal problems, who was buying/selling drugs, and who was having pizza delivered...he could point them out and tell me just about any detail about any of them. This is a true story. No exagerration whatsoever. It makes me very uncomfortable talking on the phone, especially when I'm talking to the bank or credit card company. I need the ability to have a conversation encrypted end-to-end to feel comfortable talking on the phone about anything more personal than the weather. If US companies are freed from restrictions on encryption, this kind of technology could be widely available.
numb
I seem to remember YaHooka.com having some kind of run-in with Yahoo a while ago. Since they are still online I guess things were worked out. Some very educational links on their site btw |-)
numb
Don't get me wrong, I'm doing the dance of joy for the breakup of M$, I'm just a little leery (no not Denis) of what the future holds for us.....C'mon B.G. is so used to falling face first in feces and come up smiling and fresh as a daisy he makes the other Bill (Clinton) pale in comparison.
I think that's a wise observation. BG certainly does have a way of turning things around. BTW, I'm not sure how many of you guys have had the opportunity to take Win2k for a spin--Microsoft hasn't exactly been sitting on their hands when it comes to fixing their OS. Win2k is a decent improvement over NT, and a huge improvement over Win95/98. It still crashes plenty (probably due to the fact that I couldn't find a decent driver for my TNT2) but I think they've done a lot of work to keep themselves on the desktop for a couple more years.
In other words people, don't get too comfortable with the idea that Microsoft is only capable of producing crappy bloatware. When they have competition they seem to be able to escape this mode--at least for as long as it takes to kill the competition. Just a thought...
numb
If we organized, could we get ~50 million votes for our candidate? Not that we should elect Rob, but maybe it is time for a tech party.
I think a "tech party" might be a little too limited in scope. But I do think that Slashdotters could have a lot of influence--not necessarily with politicians directly, but with the people they deal with everyday--based on their ability to understand issues and communicate with others about them.
Coming up with a common candidate that most of us support would be helpful. When election time rolls around and people in RL want to talk about candidates, it would be nice if all of us had something to say that would help "our" candidate.
I'm not talking about Slashdot picking an "official Slashdot candidate." I'd rather see the readers moderate up the best explanations of which candidate would help our combined causes the most. Also, the best answers to opposing views would be nice as well. A couple articles a month on Slashdot that specifically debate candidates would be really nice IMHO.
The fact is, I can debate the relative merits of different technologies all day long and never run out of breath. But when it comes to politics I run out of steam rather quickly. I learn more everytime I read people's arguments here on Slashdot, which helps to an extent.
The key here is this: if we (readers of Slashdot) work together to find the candidates we agree on and learn how to formulate our best arguments, we can then educate others. I'm not implying that everyone here needs to be more well-rounded when it comes to politics...just that I'm not the only one here that might be lacking.
If we could all debate politics as cleary, and with as much fervor as we debate technology, we would make a difference.
numb
PS: Some issues that influence my vote:
EFF and NORML
If we organized, could we get ~50 million votes for our candidate? Not that we should elect Rob, but maybe it is time for a tech party.
I think a "tech party" might be a little too limited in scope. But I do think that Slashdotters could have a lot of influence--not necessarily with politicians directly, but with the people they deal with everyday--based on their ability to understand issues and communicate with others about them.
Coming up with a common candidate that most of us support would be helpful. When election time rolls around and people in RL want to talk about candidates, it would be nice if all of us had something to say that would help "our" candidate.
I'm not talking about Slashdot picking an "official Slashdot candidate." I'd rather see the readers moderate up the best explanations of which candidate would help our combined causes the most. Also, the best answers to opposing views would be nice as well. A couple articles a month on Slashdot that specifically debate candidates would be really nice IMHO.
The fact is, I can debate the relative merits of different technologies all day long and never run out of breath. But when it comes to politics I run out of steam rather quickly. I learn more everytime I read people's arguments here on Slashdot, which helps to an extent.
The key here is this: if we (readers of Slashdot) work together to find the candidates we agree on and learn how to formulate our best arguments, we can then educate others. I'm not implying that everyone here needs to be more well-rounded when it comes to politics...just that I'm not the only one here that might be lacking.
If we could all debate politics as cleary, and with as much fervor as we debate technology, we would make a difference.
numb
PS: Some issues that influence my vote:
EFF and NORML
If we organized, could we get ~50 million votes for our candidate? Not that we should elect Rob, but maybe it is time for a tech party.
I think a "tech party" might be a little too limited in scope. But I do think that Slashdotters could have a lot of influence--not necessarily with politicians directly, but with the people they deal with everyday--based on their ability to understand issues and communicate with others about them.
Coming up with a common candidate that most of us support would be helpful. When election time rolls around and people in RL want to talk about candidates, it would be nice if all of us had something to say that would help "our" candidate.
I'm not talking about Slashdot picking an "official Slashdot candidate." I'd rather see the readers moderate up the best explanations of which candidate would help our combined causes the most. Also, the best answers to opposing views would be nice as well. A couple articles a month on Slashdot that specifically debate candidates would be really nice IMHO.
The fact is, I can debate the relative merits of different technologies all day long and never run out of breath. But when it comes to politics I run out of steam rather quickly. I learn more everytime I read people's arguments here on Slashdot, which helps to an extent.
The key here is this: if we (readers of Slashdot) work together to find the candidates we agree on and learn how to formulate our best arguments, we can then educate others. I'm not implying that everyone here needs to be more well-rounded when it comes to politics...just that I'm not the only one here that might be lacking.
If we could all debate politics as cleary, and with as much fervor as we debate technology, we would make a difference.
numb
PS: Some issues that will influence my vote:
EFF and NORML
800 base MHz + (800*33%-clockup for cryo)= 800 + 266.66 = 1066
So unless the article was updated and I didn't catch it, this is not based on the 800MHz, though nothing stops you from taking a preexisting SuperG's 750 out and putting an 800 in...
yes, you are correct. The article is from Nov 15th--way before the 800Mhz Athlon came out.
Has anyone thought to contact Trudel on the phone to get his opinion. I can't right now since I'm at work. But there is a number on his web site. I'm just curious who will answer the phone: a receptionist, John Trudel, or a cheap analog answering machine.
The Trudel Group
33470 Chinook PL
Scappoose, OR 97056
503-638-8644
I also have a question for the guy that sumbitted this to Ask Slashdot. What is your relationship to John Trudel? Have you heard of him before? If not, what led you to his web site?
numb