That's a fascinating solution, except that generally, the media only reports on successful hoaxes - once before it is clear that it is a hoax, and once to inform the people who read the first report to stop repeating it to their friends.
Indeed, many organizations see fit to report on hoaxes they never reported in the first place, for the benefit of the people it was repeated to.
So is your solution that nothing should ever be reported, because, well, it might be a hoax, and the media shouldn't report hoaxes? Or to immediately stop reporting something as soon as it is discovered to be a hoax, thus increasing the number of people left believing it?
Augh. Surely off-topic, but I'm just so sick of this.
A useful statement of Occam's razor: "When you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better."
I cannot imagine the predictions made by "This is a hoax." and "This is real." to be very similar.
Stronger statements are often made and attributed to being Occam's razor, but they just aren't. It is CERTAINLY not the case that the simplest theory, given an arbitrarily limited amount of data, is likely to be correct. It is MORE likely to be correct than any OTHER given theory, but not as likely to be correct as the set of all theories. If I see a black side of a sheep in Scotland, it's more likely that all sheep in Scotland are black than that for every two black sheep in Scotland there are three white sheep and a Turk. However, I'm not taking 1:1 odds on all sheep in Scotland being black.
I assumed it was a hoax, myself - well, more like a joke than a hoax. A joke authored by someone who thought it was funny. So weird to find out it's something that someone thinks is a good idea, if only they were smart enough to hack a kernel.
Maybe the part about it being a good idea is a hoax, too.
"Someone with no experience with Windows will take about as long with it as he took with Linux."
And the only time I've had to restart a LINUX install more than once on the same machine, it was because the CD-ROM I was installing from across the network kept crapping out. I've often had to restart a Win95 install four or five times, just to get through the 'Detecting your hardware.' phase.
It's much easier to write in the margins and in between the lines on paper for most people, as well. If you just need to correct the document, it's easier to do it all on the computer, but if you need to suggest changes to someone else, especially if there are layout elements, the quickest way is to print it out and get out the red pen.
"On page 3, paragraph 2, the 3d sentence is too wordy."
1) To read them where I don't have a computer - often the toilet. Although at home, I have a laptop, so that's not so much an issue.
2) To give them to people who don't have internet access.
3) To deal with a document which is extremely self-similar. I often find, when reading someone else's code, that I need physical cues to be able to keep my place in the document. The scroll bar isn't as strong a cue as a real location on a real page.
4) Computer monitors still not as easy on the eyes as laser-printed text.
Reasons other people I know print things out:
1) Hard drive too poorly organized to find something which is just saved to disk.
2) Navigating Microsoft Outlook too difficult - must print all e-mail and immediately delete it before finding out that the shared printer is offline and all the printed e-mail has been lost forever.
Why do I print more now than I used to? The dot matrix printer made too much noise and took too long. And I have more information available online.
"Can you image a 0-60, 1g skidpad auto pulling your boat to the lake, and delivering cement to build the basement for your neighbor's house?"
I've seen people try. Really and truly, I should use my bicycle whenever I want to go down the street, a motorcycle when I want to go to Corsicana, a truck when I want to haul construction equipment, and a sedan when my friends and I go out to eat. Indeed, I could do all this for less than the cost of my sport-ute, which does them all.
I think, in general, we agree : there is often one best tool for a given job, and there will always be a market for tools that do one job exquisitely. These will be the tools we love and respect.
I just feel equally confident that there will also always be a strong market for tools which do a large number of tasks very poorly.
The same reason people keep coffeemakers next to their stoves - stoves make coffee, too, but coffeemakers make it better, faster, and with a more appropriate UI.
But all of those are things that can be overcome. No one I know keeps a manual typewriter next to their computer. A lot of people with good internet access don't keep cd players, cassette players, or radios next to their computers. I no longer keep a newspaper in my house - it has been completely integrated with my computer. I know longer keep a TV guide next to my television - even though the TV guide has more information and a better UI than my digital cable, it's easier to find the TV than the TV AND a current periodical.
By contrast, I don't watch TV on my computer - that's too frustrating and expensive. I still keep maps in my car - again, the alternative is too expensive. I don't send e-mail through my cellphone, and even though I wish I could, it wouldn't be the only way I sent e-mail.
In summary - my girlfriend uses a knife to cut food, and scissors to cut paper and cloth, because she often has to do things requiring the precision scissors afford. I will use a knife to cut anything, because it's easier than looking for scissors, and I'm a lazy sod. There are many people who don't want all-in-one devices, but a lot of them will use them once they have them.
"but Torvalds said he does not believe consumers want all-in-one systems."
I fear Torvalds may have underestimated the powerful attraction between Americans and their chairs. I can think of several million consumers who want nothing less than the world delivered to their couch. Or car. Or CRT. Or PDA. Or forearm. Or brainstem.
Then again, I certainly agree - in the near future, at least, I don't foresee all-in-one devices becoming any more usable.
Re:They did the right thing. Now, give them a brea
on
Corel Clears the Air
·
· Score: 2
"For such a behemoth to change its course in 4 days is certainly not an unacceptable delay!"
Certainly not. I honestly believe that no one got hurt. No blood, no foul.
I do think Corel did themselves a great disservice, however, by not taking those 4 days before the fax went out, instead of after. Then again, who's to say that we would have noticed if they had done things right the first time? Would we have been as friendly then as we were angry?
Nevertheless, they did make themselves look bad - an oversight I think they would have done well to avoid. But they didn't hurt me, they didn't hurt anyone I know, and maybe they've ensured that the next big company to try this sort of thing will know better what they're getting into.
Re:Is this the same thing?
on
WinLinux 2000
·
· Score: 1
Oops. Apparently not. Sorry about that.
Is this the same thing?
on
WinLinux 2000
·
· Score: 2
I wish just one claim in that entire article had been backed up with more than an assertion.
"Linux can't cut it--period. Why is this never mentioned by the Linux proponents who flood the critics with e-mail anytime anyone says anything to disparage the OS?" - Maybe because they'd feel compelled to back up such a claim?
"The modem-equipped machine was good for remote access; then the Web was invented, and now there is nothing left to conquer. For at least a decade, the only thing that's been going on is the debugging of old code. Without the Net, the computer business would have been in the toilet years ago." - Mmm. Nothing like the taste of speculative fiction. I mean, this might be a good point - but why should I even listen to it?
"On a $199 machine, the OS can't cost more than a few bucks." - I found something resembling a fact! Do I win a prize?
He claims that Linux can't handle the strain of running a truly intensive application, and offers not an example of Linux having _failed_, but of two applications, each with a handful of options, and the fact that none of those options is Unix. Obviously, PSOS is the only viable embedded OS because _every_ intelligent battery plant manager in the Telecommunications industry relies on PSOS! (Not that there's more than three intelligent battery plant managers available...)
"Since this is a beta, and not a public release, for the purposes of the GPL it can be considered "internal only" and not a public distribution, and thus the GPL does not apply. The licenses explicitly calls this a pre-release, so the product has not been released yet."
This is certainly a reasonable take on things - and quite possibly the assumption Corel is operating under. If it is, they really should have mentioned it somewhere themselves - they were sending these documents out to people who have been selected in part because of their interest in free software.
This may not be a legal screw-up on their part - it certainly appears that it is not. I don't think the GPL would be a usable license if it mandated that you had to make your software freely distributable at pre-release stages in development. But it is definitely a PR screw up - and one Corel should have anticipated.
This explanation and the "It's just a standard beta agreement" explanation are mutually exclusive.
I was willing to forgive the beta test web site gaffes because, well, they were kind of cute, and nobody got hurt.
But you would think _one_ of their software guys would have sent a memo to legal saying, "Have you guys looked into the fact that we are going to release software that we don't actually own, yet?"
I don't think the, "Oops, we didn't realise our standard beta agreement wouldn't work," excuse works for this one.
http://www.discovery.com/cams/sun/sun.ht ml Although they admit that it's actually four separate cameras, each just capturing one wavelength of UV light - so presumably using different technology?
I think I have a solution. Why not have every encrypted message use a secret key which, through a very lengthy process - several months, with several supercomputers at least - a government agency can break? That way, whenever they come across an encrypted message, if it is truly important, they can get into it, but the cost will be so prohibitive that they will never use it frivolously?
Oh - wait. That's pretty much the status quo, isn't it?
Anyway, don't real criminals have access to more secure methods of encrypting evidence, anyway? Like gasoline fires? I just don't see any reason for a backdoor that doesn't imply overly broad use.
Looks like this interview got hit by the HREF gun we were talking about a while ago. Nice to see someone really taking advantage of an on-line interview format.
Not anytime soon - by using a proprietary (GD-ROM) disk format, Sega has created a chicken/egg problem - nobody's CD-ROM drives read the disks, so who's going to write the software - but who's going to build hardware to read the disks, when there's no software?
Slashdot Mirror
That's a fascinating solution, except that generally, the media only reports on successful hoaxes - once before it is clear that it is a hoax, and once to inform the people who read the first report to stop repeating it to their friends.
Indeed, many organizations see fit to report on hoaxes they never reported in the first place, for the benefit of the people it was repeated to.
So is your solution that nothing should ever be reported, because, well, it might be a hoax, and the media shouldn't report hoaxes? Or to immediately stop reporting something as soon as it is discovered to be a hoax, thus increasing the number of people left believing it?
Augh. Surely off-topic, but I'm just so sick of this.
A useful statement of Occam's razor:
"When you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better."
I cannot imagine the predictions made by "This is a hoax." and "This is real." to be very similar.
Stronger statements are often made and attributed to being Occam's razor, but they just aren't. It is CERTAINLY not the case that the simplest theory, given an arbitrarily limited amount of data, is likely to be correct. It is MORE likely to be correct than any OTHER given theory, but not as likely to be correct as the set of all theories. If I see a black side of a sheep in Scotland, it's more likely that all sheep in Scotland are black than that for every two black sheep in Scotland there are three white sheep and a Turk. However, I'm not taking 1:1 odds on all sheep in Scotland being black.
I assumed it was a hoax, myself - well, more like a joke than a hoax. A joke authored by someone who thought it was funny. So weird to find out it's something that someone thinks is a good idea, if only they were smart enough to hack a kernel.
Maybe the part about it being a good idea is a hoax, too.
"Someone with no experience with Windows will take about as long with it as he took with Linux."
And the only time I've had to restart a LINUX install more than once on the same machine, it was because the CD-ROM I was installing from across the network kept crapping out. I've often had to restart a Win95 install four or five times, just to get through the 'Detecting your hardware.' phase.
This is over a month old - although if they are now shipping it, then that's news...
Not that I wouldn't jump on this in an instant if I had the money. I've always wanted a 50lb refrigeration unit.
It's much easier to write in the margins and in between the lines on paper for most people, as well. If you just need to correct the document, it's easier to do it all on the computer, but if you need to suggest changes to someone else, especially if there are layout elements, the quickest way is to print it out and get out the red pen.
"On page 3, paragraph 2, the 3d sentence is too wordy."
Reasons I print things out:
1) To read them where I don't have a computer - often the toilet. Although at home, I have a laptop, so that's not so much an issue.
2) To give them to people who don't have internet access.
3) To deal with a document which is extremely self-similar. I often find, when reading someone else's code, that I need physical cues to be able to keep my place in the document. The scroll bar isn't as strong a cue as a real location on a real page.
4) Computer monitors still not as easy on the eyes as laser-printed text.
Reasons other people I know print things out:
1) Hard drive too poorly organized to find something which is just saved to disk.
2) Navigating Microsoft Outlook too difficult - must print all e-mail and immediately delete it before finding out that the shared printer is offline and all the printed e-mail has been lost forever.
Why do I print more now than I used to? The dot matrix printer made too much noise and took too long. And I have more information available online.
"Can you image a 0-60, 1g skidpad auto pulling your boat to the lake, and delivering cement to build the basement for your neighbor's house?"
I've seen people try. Really and truly, I should use my bicycle whenever I want to go down the street, a motorcycle when I want to go to Corsicana, a truck when I want to haul construction equipment, and a sedan when my friends and I go out to eat. Indeed, I could do all this for less than the cost of my sport-ute, which does them all.
I think, in general, we agree : there is often one best tool for a given job, and there will always be a market for tools that do one job exquisitely. These will be the tools we love and respect.
I just feel equally confident that there will also always be a strong market for tools which do a large number of tasks very poorly.
The same reason people keep coffeemakers next to their stoves - stoves make coffee, too, but coffeemakers make it better, faster, and with a more appropriate UI.
But all of those are things that can be overcome. No one I know keeps a manual typewriter next to their computer. A lot of people with good internet access don't keep cd players, cassette players, or radios next to their computers. I no longer keep a newspaper in my house - it has been completely integrated with my computer. I know longer keep a TV guide next to my television - even though the TV guide has more information and a better UI than my digital cable, it's easier to find the TV than the TV AND a current periodical.
By contrast, I don't watch TV on my computer - that's too frustrating and expensive. I still keep maps in my car - again, the alternative is too expensive. I don't send e-mail through my cellphone, and even though I wish I could, it wouldn't be the only way I sent e-mail.
In summary - my girlfriend uses a knife to cut food, and scissors to cut paper and cloth, because she often has to do things requiring the precision scissors afford. I will use a knife to cut anything, because it's easier than looking for scissors, and I'm a lazy sod. There are many people who don't want all-in-one devices, but a lot of them will use them once they have them.
"but Torvalds said he does not believe consumers want all-in-one systems."
I fear Torvalds may have underestimated the powerful attraction between Americans and their chairs. I can think of several million consumers who want nothing less than the world delivered to their couch. Or car. Or CRT. Or PDA. Or forearm. Or brainstem.
Then again, I certainly agree - in the near future, at least, I don't foresee all-in-one devices becoming any more usable.
"For such a behemoth to change its course in 4 days is certainly not an unacceptable delay!"
Certainly not. I honestly believe that no one got hurt. No blood, no foul.
I do think Corel did themselves a great disservice, however, by not taking those 4 days before the fax went out, instead of after. Then again, who's to say that we would have noticed if they had done things right the first time? Would we have been as friendly then as we were angry?
Nevertheless, they did make themselves look bad - an oversight I think they would have done well to avoid. But they didn't hurt me, they didn't hurt anyone I know, and maybe they've ensured that the next big company to try this sort of thing will know better what they're getting into.
Oops. Apparently not. Sorry about that.
Is this the same thing: http://winlinux.tip.nu/?
Any heart-attack inducing teasers in the future MUST include non-slashdottable links/mirrors!
I wish just one claim in that entire article had been backed up with more than an assertion.
"Linux can't cut it--period. Why is this never mentioned by the Linux proponents who flood
the critics with e-mail anytime anyone says
anything to disparage the OS?" - Maybe because they'd feel compelled to back up such a claim?
"The modem-equipped machine was good for
remote access; then the Web was invented, and
now there is nothing left to conquer. For at least
a decade, the only thing that's been going on is
the debugging of old code. Without the Net, the
computer business would have been in the toilet
years ago." - Mmm. Nothing like the taste of speculative fiction. I mean, this might be a good point - but why should I even listen to it?
"On a $199 machine, the OS can't cost more
than a few bucks." - I found something resembling a fact! Do I win a prize?
He claims that Linux can't handle the strain of running a truly intensive application, and offers not an example of Linux having _failed_, but of two applications, each with a handful of options, and the fact that none of those options is Unix. Obviously, PSOS is the only viable embedded OS because _every_ intelligent battery plant manager in the Telecommunications industry relies on PSOS! (Not that there's more than three intelligent battery plant managers available...)
"Since this is a beta, and not a public release, for the purposes of the GPL it can be considered "internal only" and not a public distribution, and
thus the GPL does not apply. The licenses explicitly calls this a pre-release, so the product has not been released yet."
This is certainly a reasonable take on things - and quite possibly the assumption Corel is operating under. If it is, they really should have mentioned it somewhere themselves - they were sending these documents out to people who have been selected in part because of their interest in free software.
This may not be a legal screw-up on their part - it certainly appears that it is not. I don't think the GPL would be a usable license if it mandated that you had to make your software freely distributable at pre-release stages in development. But it is definitely a PR screw up - and one Corel should have anticipated.
This explanation and the "It's just a standard beta agreement" explanation are mutually exclusive.
I was willing to forgive the beta test web site gaffes because, well, they were kind of cute, and nobody got hurt.
But you would think _one_ of their software guys would have sent a memo to legal saying, "Have you guys looked into the fact that we are going to release software that we don't actually own, yet?"
I don't think the, "Oops, we didn't realise our standard beta agreement wouldn't work," excuse works for this one.
http://www.discovery.com/cams/sun/sun.ht ml
Although they admit that it's actually four separate cameras, each just capturing one wavelength of UV light - so presumably using different technology?
I think I have a solution. Why not have every encrypted message use a secret key which, through a very lengthy process - several months, with several supercomputers at least - a government agency can break? That way, whenever they come across an encrypted message, if it is truly important, they can get into it, but the cost will be so prohibitive that they will never use it frivolously?
Oh - wait. That's pretty much the status quo, isn't it?
Anyway, don't real criminals have access to more secure methods of encrypting evidence, anyway? Like gasoline fires? I just don't see any reason for a backdoor that doesn't imply overly broad use.
Looks like this interview got hit by the HREF gun we were talking about a while ago. Nice to see someone really taking advantage of an on-line interview format.
"The company's web site displays no images, no logo-just a plain gray screen with this sentence..."
The Transmeta web page is a plain _avocado_ screen, on my computer. I'd be willing to bet it's a plain black screen on my WYSE term.
Someone should tell Time Digital that they can configure settings for their desktop _and_ their browser.
Is there a site somewhere that tracks all the different licensing schemes, boiling them down to the differences between them?
Now we just need /. to legitimize the transfers, and we're there.
Not anytime soon - by using a proprietary (GD-ROM) disk format, Sega has created a chicken/egg problem - nobody's CD-ROM drives read the disks, so who's going to write the software - but who's going to build hardware to read the disks, when there's no software?
Works for me...