You've probably heard the quote, "BSD is for people that love Unix; Linux is for people that hate Windows." The sad truth is, it's true
Its hard for me reply because I don't see what you are driving at. Are you saying we should all run OSX?
I know a few Linux people who also own an Apple laptop. I recomended one to my sister as well. But people aren't abandoning Linux, unless they are non-technical people satisfied with an alternative.
I run NetBSD on my web servers because I can update the OS without having to totally rethink my own configuration. I run Ubuntu on my laptop because Gnome gives me a nice desktop, provided you don't want it to stay up for months. I run fvwm on fedora on my main workstation because it really does stay up for months.
An improved KDE will attract more people to *NIX. That's a good thing as far as I am concerned.
I liked how you could create a program called IT and type:
RUN IT
and IT would run. Those were the days.
We had apples (and oranges) at high school but before that my Dad built me a system out of a board from Ohio Scientific. It had a 1Mhz 6502 with a basic in ROM. After reset you got a prompt:
D/C/W/M
D was for disk mode (high tech and no prospect it would ever be used). C was cold start and initialised the RAM (4 or 8)k. W jumped straight into the BASIC ROM. M went into a really simple machine code monitor (implemented in a 256 byte ROM) exactly like the 7 segment interface on an evaluation board except implemented in video.
I mucked around in basic for a couple of months (writing a 14000 iteration loop to time a 15 minute interval at one point, I must have been bored) and then figured out what the 6502 instruction set meant. I even bought an assembler for it. You had to load it from tape after startup.
Then we built the CP/M system. I had turbo pascal and hitech C. After a couple of years of that I lost interest. After college computers were work. It was only when java and linux came along that I had a reason to keep a system at home.
Scientists untimately get paid if they (a) get the answers more than one day before the competition and (b) guess right about their chosen line of research long before they have any basis for choice.
Although cool and nifty, who is really going to want a remote desktop which governments can potentially access at their free will?
The whole thing is exactly like the distributed java/network computer model of 10 years ago. I suppose that failed because people didn't want or need it.
overwhelmed by the sheer complexity of the modern videogame and the number of things they must simultaneously
There must be a disipline of user interface undesign within game developent. I must remember this when I am interviewing new UI designers.
My point (if I have a point) is that games are not like any other software, and increasingly are not like other things which employ UI design principles.
"The [video game players] are much harder to mislead, to trick," Prof. Bialystok said.
Well OK, games are often about solving problems and getting around situations which try to trick you.
I think real world exercises would be of equal benefit, assuming that the exposure is broad enough, but this at least confirms that simulations are a good way of training people, which has been understood in aerospace since the 1960's.
So before I needed to get close to an object (whatever had the rfid tag) which under normal circumstances an employee would not be carried around (say they were going home or something) or could have it in a reader blocking case. Now, I simply need to get close to an employ anywhere at any time to copy their data.
Before you ask, any company those does this to its employees, is a company I would never even consider working for.
Its funny. I have a friend with a touch of obsessive compulsive disorder. About three years ago he resigned from a job at one of the less well regarded employers in town on the grounds that under new security requirements he would have had to give them his fingerprints.
I told him he was mad, that giving people your fingerprints is worth it for having a job. Now he is still out of work and I am imagining myself in his position. There is just no way I would allow people to implant me with this stuff. William Gibson writes about this kind of thing but I didn't expect to see it too soon.
Maybe the implant will have "loyalty" functions for people who leave without giving notice.
This is one thing which has disuaded me from trying something similar. This is likely to be a serious offense in China and in the future it is actually going to be more difficult to avoid going there for one reason or another.
I can see several chinese cities becoming transport hubs along the lines of Singapore or LAX before long. You don't want to have to spend the rest of your life avoiding places like that.
Or that users operate their computers negligently because they want to care for and feed their computers?
Yes, I think for the average common user (not the sort of person who would have had a computer at all more than 15 years ago) it is more comforting to think of their computer system as having some of the characteristics of life. They want it to be somewhat unpredictable.
I don't think they go out looking for viruses, etc; but I do think the software market is adapting to this kind of user, in just the way those users choose certain types of software.
Owning a computer now is a bit like having a pet rabbit. It never just is. You have to feed it the right stuff or it gets sick. If you leave the hutch door open it might run away then you have to search the street for the bloody thing.
People could choose to have computers which just do their job from year to year but they seem to want to believe that the thing is alive, just like the pet. They want it to have issues and risks, to get "infected" and require "cleaning".
They won't be happy with something which just browses the web and shows them pictures. It won't be as entertaining and involving that way.
If you donate blood, you are "insured" for 1 year, along with your immediate family. If you have to receive blood, without this insurance, they'll give you what you need, but you have to either pay for it yourself with a donation at a later date
This sounds like a good way to encourage sick people to donate blood, which is how diseases, prions, etc get into the blood supply.
Now defy Bush's grand plan for the boondoggle of manned Mars exploration and keep doing good science.
Thats right, lets never go anywhere. How about we explore Antarctica with robots while we are at it. Much cheaper in the long run. Find a rock you can't climb to the top of: send a better robot next year.
I'm sorry, some people (not slashdot people, I know) want to do more than sit on their backsides for their entire life. Some of us were born to go places.
Not for a minute do I expect the US government to pay for that to happen. What I do expect is for them to not feed billions of dollars into the companies who have the expertise to provide launch services, to the point where it costs 100 million dollars to get anything into orbit at all.
Sorry for the rant. We are not going to get cost effective access to space (for humans and machines) while LM and Boeing are so addicted to revenue from NASA.
Especially since Babbage never got one of his designs to work in a complete form. Now this (partial) implementation has been thrown together out of an off the shelf toy.
I am not sure Babbage would appreciate knowing about this.
NOTHING in GPLv3 disallows implementing DRM with GPLv3 code. However there are some extra provisions that insure that if such implementations are made, the right to change that code (which is one of the most protected rights in the context of the GPL) can not be taken away from the users by a means of a DMCA-based lawsuits.
Isn't this just a roundabout way of saying that you can build DRM into GPLv3 code but you must provide a backdoor for anybody to use to get around it?
A bit like saying yes you can build that prison but it must have fire escapes like any other building.
I am pretty sure that what you actually want is to get access to DRM-protected content
I don't care about being able to copy DVD's on my computer. I want to retain the ability to create my own flat files on my system and do what I want with them.
DRM, taken to the extremes which it demands, removes my ability to do that.
would the fact that something like this *could* happen cause developers who would have improved Linux to stay away?
Linus Torvalds doesn't seem to be concerned about that. I think he expects to get all the developer resources he needs from "A major network equipment manufacturer"
Slashdot Mirror
Won't it be ready until April? Stranger things have happened.
Its hard for me reply because I don't see what you are driving at. Are you saying we should all run OSX?
I know a few Linux people who also own an Apple laptop. I recomended one to my sister as well. But people aren't abandoning Linux, unless they are non-technical people satisfied with an alternative.
I run NetBSD on my web servers because I can update the OS without having to totally rethink my own configuration. I run Ubuntu on my laptop because Gnome gives me a nice desktop, provided you don't want it to stay up for months. I run fvwm on fedora on my main workstation because it really does stay up for months.
An improved KDE will attract more people to *NIX. That's a good thing as far as I am concerned.
I liked how you could create a program called IT and type:
RUN IT
and IT would run. Those were the days.
We had apples (and oranges) at high school but before that my Dad built me a system out of a board from Ohio Scientific. It had a 1Mhz 6502 with a basic in ROM. After reset you got a prompt:
D/C/W/M
D was for disk mode (high tech and no prospect it would ever be used). C was cold start and initialised the RAM (4 or 8)k. W jumped straight into the BASIC ROM. M went into a really simple machine code monitor (implemented in a 256 byte ROM) exactly like the 7 segment interface on an evaluation board except implemented in video.
I mucked around in basic for a couple of months (writing a 14000 iteration loop to time a 15 minute interval at one point, I must have been bored) and then figured out what the 6502 instruction set meant. I even bought an assembler for it. You had to load it from tape after startup.
Then we built the CP/M system. I had turbo pascal and hitech C. After a couple of years of that I lost interest. After college computers were work. It was only when java and linux came along that I had a reason to keep a system at home.
Engineers get paid for the work they do.
Scientists untimately get paid if they (a) get the answers more than one day before the competition and (b) guess right about their chosen line of research long before they have any basis for choice.
So its no wonder that science is screwey.
The whole thing is exactly like the distributed java/network computer model of 10 years ago. I suppose that failed because people didn't want or need it.
Are we really different now?
Mmmm foreign aid project on Titan. Ideal.
There must be a disipline of user interface undesign within game developent. I must remember this when I am interviewing new UI designers.
My point (if I have a point) is that games are not like any other software, and increasingly are not like other things which employ UI design principles.
Well OK, games are often about solving problems and getting around situations which try to trick you.
I think real world exercises would be of equal benefit, assuming that the exposure is broad enough, but this at least confirms that simulations are a good way of training people, which has been understood in aerospace since the 1960's.
Yep.
Its funny. I have a friend with a touch of obsessive compulsive disorder. About three years ago he resigned from a job at one of the less well regarded employers in town on the grounds that under new security requirements he would have had to give them his fingerprints.
I told him he was mad, that giving people your fingerprints is worth it for having a job. Now he is still out of work and I am imagining myself in his position. There is just no way I would allow people to implant me with this stuff. William Gibson writes about this kind of thing but I didn't expect to see it too soon.
Maybe the implant will have "loyalty" functions for people who leave without giving notice.
This is one thing which has disuaded me from trying something similar. This is likely to be a serious offense in China and in the future it is actually going to be more difficult to avoid going there for one reason or another.
I can see several chinese cities becoming transport hubs along the lines of Singapore or LAX before long. You don't want to have to spend the rest of your life avoiding places like that.
Yes, I think for the average common user (not the sort of person who would have had a computer at all more than 15 years ago) it is more comforting to think of their computer system as having some of the characteristics of life. They want it to be somewhat unpredictable.
I don't think they go out looking for viruses, etc; but I do think the software market is adapting to this kind of user, in just the way those users choose certain types of software.
Owning a computer now is a bit like having a pet rabbit. It never just is. You have to feed it the right stuff or it gets sick. If you leave the hutch door open it might run away then you have to search the street for the bloody thing.
People could choose to have computers which just do their job from year to year but they seem to want to believe that the thing is alive, just like the pet. They want it to have issues and risks, to get "infected" and require "cleaning".
They won't be happy with something which just browses the web and shows them pictures. It won't be as entertaining and involving that way.
This sounds like a good way to encourage sick people to donate blood, which is how diseases, prions, etc get into the blood supply.
Thats right, lets never go anywhere. How about we explore Antarctica with robots while we are at it. Much cheaper in the long run. Find a rock you can't climb to the top of: send a better robot next year.
I'm sorry, some people (not slashdot people, I know) want to do more than sit on their backsides for their entire life. Some of us were born to go places.
Not for a minute do I expect the US government to pay for that to happen. What I do expect is for them to not feed billions of dollars into the companies who have the expertise to provide launch services, to the point where it costs 100 million dollars to get anything into orbit at all.
Sorry for the rant. We are not going to get cost effective access to space (for humans and machines) while LM and Boeing are so addicted to revenue from NASA.
Well, yes and no
Especially since Babbage never got one of his designs to work in a complete form. Now this (partial) implementation has been thrown together out of an off the shelf toy.
I am not sure Babbage would appreciate knowing about this.
Sounds like a blast to me.
What if TiVo changed over to OpenBSD? I don't think the BSD license could be changed to prevent that.
I wonder what Theo would do if Tivio switched to OpenBSD? Would he change the BSD license?
Its a draft.
Isn't this just a roundabout way of saying that you can build DRM into GPLv3 code but you must provide a backdoor for anybody to use to get around it?
A bit like saying yes you can build that prison but it must have fire escapes like any other building.
You will need a very small soldering iron to do that.
I don't care about being able to copy DVD's on my computer. I want to retain the ability to create my own flat files on my system and do what I want with them.
DRM, taken to the extremes which it demands, removes my ability to do that.
Linus Torvalds doesn't seem to be concerned about that. I think he expects to get all the developer resources he needs from "A major network equipment manufacturer"