How do you feel about going to prison? (I hope it's minimum security)
Do you think your 33 month sentence is fair, or do you think a different sort of punishment would be more appropriate for breaking copyright law? Or, do you feel you did nothing wrong and deserve no punishment whatsoever.
How do you feel your own sense of morality compares to those who prosecuted you?
You make a good point. I'd like to expand on that. Microsoft isn't fixing this bug because it's in an older product, and they want users to upgrade to the "newer product", ie. they want to sell you the same thing again.
Even if you have money to burn, this still may not be acceptable. What if the new product is altered in such a way as to not meet your needs? What if you simply can't agree to the new "license agreement"? In such a case, you're totally screwed!
With Open Source software, you have the option of making fixes to any version of the software you want. Sure, it may be expensive, but at least you have that option.
Of course, proprietary vendors can get around these problems pretty easily, by not altering licensing agreements, and supporting products from only a couple years ago(97...), etc. ie. THEY CAN SHOW SOME GOOD FAITH TOWARDS THEIR CUSTOMERS!
"(with the exception that Apple supposedly keeps parts of it locked up from developers on x86)"
See that part of my post in parens? You did read that before you responded to my post, didn't you?
There was a/. story about Apple a couple months ago, and supposedly Apple has done a lot of development of darwin on x86 that they will not release, and which they only use/test internally.
I forget all the specifics, and it could just be/. rumors floating around... hence the "supposedly" in my original post...
File formats could do the same thing. Currently we enjoy the ability to read/write Microsoft.doc files with Open/StarOffice and a number of other programs, but once this hits Microsoft Office could incorporate DRM features into file formats.
And of course, ALL OF THIS will be backed up by legislation.
This is an interesting article, interesting in a very bad (IMHO) way. These movies are being distributed using Microsoft's "DRM" "technology".
Welcome to the future boys and girls. Divx (think circuit city) may have failed, but it's what media companies want, so it's what they'll make consumers "want".
Pretty soon, EVERYTHING will be "licensed" instead of bought. I can't wait to get my Microsoft House(TM) with Human Rights Management(TM), this condo of mine is getting cramped!
Anyway, I don't understand what your problem with Linux on the desktop is. The folks at Gnome and KDE have done some incredible work. They have copied things they like from Mac and Windows, and added things they thought should be added, and just basically improved upon everything that's been done in GUI development over the last 20 years.
You know what I have to say about Apple spending $60M on developing the OS X GUI? Waste of fucking money! I really like the OS X GUI, it's very very pretty. But to be perfectly honest, IT'S NOT THAT GOOD. It is MUCH less intuitive than I expected from Apple after developing a new OS. It is very un-customizable. While working on OS X, I thought of a million tweaks that would have made me much more productive, but the OS X GUI is very restrictive. And window cycling? WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING?
So, is the OS X GUI good, or rather, excellent? Yes, HELL YES. Is it what should be expected after spending $60M? Fuck NO! Another poster had it right, Money != Success.
But it seems to me you are simply a troll. Have you tried the latest KDE beta? It's already fairly stable, and it has most of the nice features of OS X, plus about 100 million more. It's just as easy to use(and if I do say so myself, it's actually easier and more intuitive), and it didn't cost $60M!(well, the developers' time may have been worth that much, but money doesn't buy everything...)
And then there's Gnome. Gnome is still lagging behind KDE, but they have made some great acheivements of their own. Personally, I like Gnome better, because they tend to work on stabalising current features instead of adding new ones. Which makes development slower, but overall more polished(imvho, v=very). I really like both projects, and would feel perfectly comfortable switching between KDE and Gnome.
And finally, who the hell do you think you are to tell the Gnome/KDE guys what they should do? You, who apparently isn't even up to speed with the latest Gnome/KDE releases.
But hey, that's ok, you're entitled to your arrogant pig-headed opinions, as I am with mine;-). At least your using a decent OS...
OS X is not open source. While Darwin is open source(with the exception that Apple supposedly keeps parts of it locked up from developers on x86), the Apple GUI is not. It's completely closed and proprietary, with Apple being the gatekeeper. You want OS X, you HAVE to buy a computer from Apple.
On the other hand, GNU/Linux systems are 100%(usually) open source/free. Everything from the kernel to GUI's runs on super computers to PDA's.
There's a HUGE difference between OS X and Linux.
Personally, I like Apple more than MS, but mostly because Apple doesn't control 95% of the market and is less dangerous to the future of general computing for the masses. Plus OS X runs on top of a Unix... and is prettier...;-)
So, what I'm saying is that everyone has different goals. Some just want to topple Microsoft, some want to push open/free computing. Of course, there's plenty of room in there for these two groups to work together, and I personally believe that Apple can co-exist with Linux a lot better than Microsoft can.
If you really mean that about sticking a knife in someone to feed your children, then you are a horrible parent. It is your job to teach your children to grow up to be decent people; sticking knives in people to feed them is just going to turn them into the fucking losers you see on Jerry Springer and Cops.
Please, for the sake of everything that is still good and decent in the world, DO NOT BREED!
Configuring X to use new fonts isn't the problem at all, there are already solutions to that particular problem, you simply don't know about them. Sorry, I can't help there, I know how to configure everything manually.
The current problems are exactly what I stated, myriads of programs rendering fonts in myriads of different, incompatible, non-extensible manners.
So now we have tons of applications that can't take advantage of the new TT, AA, etc. rendering features.
Currently, there are thousands of programs written in GTK 1.x, Qt 1/2.x, Motif, etc., all of which render fonts in different manners, using different font configurations of their own, etc.
Plus the lack of good, standard, open source fonts included with distibutions.
I agree with you that fonts in Linux are really messed up at this point, but your completely wrong about why. It has nothing to do with WHERE they are kept on a system.
No, the reason fonts are so messed up right now is that there has never been a good standard way of rendering fonts, forcing people to come up with their own solutions. So now, we've got tons of old programs using GTK
This is all being solved now, but unfortuneately it is being solved woefully late in the game! This should have been addressed at least 5 years ago, and then now we would have this mess and every program/gui toolkit would render fonts in the same, sane manner.
Hopefully Fontconfig will help with straightening this mess out.
You know, it's funny... for all the *AA's talk about "perfect digital copies" being such a terrible thing, I cannot remember a single instance in my life where I or someone I knew went out and bought a tape (vhs or audio) to get better picture/audio quality than the copy they just made from a friend. I don't dispute that it never happened at all, I just don't think video/audio quality was ever much of a factor for most people.
Considering that, and considering that the vcr and tape recorders never killed the entertainment industry, I can only conclude that the *AA is actually attacking something entirely different than piracy.
I conclude, that because of the falling cost of the necessary tools to make movies/music of just as high audio/visual quality of the companies that the *AA represent, I think their ultimate goal is to artifically shut out these soon to be emerging competitors. I believe that is the true reason the *AA wants to gain more and more control over your computer.
Right now the *AA is recruiting our political representitives and Microsoft to help them. To politicians they give money under the table, passes to private celebrity parties, etc. To Microsoft they are offering legal solidification of their Monopoly.
This is just more fuel for the fire in the backlash against MLB. MLB, players and execs, has turned into nothing but a big stupid corporate game, not a sport.
I hope the sport dies, then maybe it can be reborn as what it should be, an American pasttime.
Personally, I don't care for baseball, I think it's a boring sport. But, I know people who like it, and most of them have quit paying attention to it these days because they're sick of the BS, except for tuning in now and then for a good laugh at the players, etc. I really hope the sport will eventually be reborn for these fans who actually enjoy the sport.
I'm sure there will be a hundred more comments just like mine, but that will certainly say something about America's "pasttime"...
mod_perl is as easy to install as PHP, I've done both myself plenty of times.
In answer to your questions, they are yes and yes.
For mixing HTML and Perl code, there are plenty of template solutions, html mason, ASP... can't name any others right off but there are lots. Personally, I don't like the Apache::ASP module because it depends on too many other modules for features I don't even want. There are different template modules for different needs, some are much like PHP.
As for the Perl DBI, the syntax is somewhat similar to that of PHP's and nearly functionally equivalent. So yes, it's just as easy.
but you contradict yourself
on
Ask Larry Wall
·
· Score: 2
"Perhaps mod_perl might do the same for me"
Ok, let me follow your logic here. You say Perl CGI is less easy/intuitive to use than PHP, which is usually used as an Apache module. You then say that mod_perl might do the same for you, which is correct BTW, but then you go on to say that PHP "is a lot easier to use in that particular niche"...
So, you are comparing PHP to mod_perl, which you admittedly have not learned anything about, and then conclude that PHP is easier?
I'll be blunt, you're a fool.
yes they will work
on
GCC 3.2 Released
·
· Score: 5, Informative
All your existing binaries will still work, you just won't be able to link against them when compiling with GCC 3.2. Most commercial apps are statically linked against whatever GUI toolkit they use (as for games, all Loki's games are), so you have nothing to worry about.
If you had children, they'd learn to speak as well as you, but that doesn't appear to be the case with gorillas.
It's not like I did the research, it was much more involved than what I explained I'm sure. Plus I'm sure they didn't consider it to be entirely conclusive.
Personally, I find it interesting that the other gorillas picked up the language at all.
I heard of some research done where a gorilla that had been taught to sign was reintroduced into a population of gorilla's to see what would happen. The other gorilla's caught on and started doing some signing as well, but never reached the same level as the original signing gorilla. So, while gorilla's can be taught to sign quite well, they cannot retain this ability through generations.
If AOL wants to remain in existence, AOL needs to help topple the MS monopoly, first in browsers and then the desktop OS would help.
The DOJ isn't going to do anything to MS, MS will be allowed to continue doing business how they please. Pretty soon, MS is going to start pushing MSN even harder. People will buy their PC and it will come with an MSN subscription and will come preconfigured to connect to the Internet via MSN. It will most likely use completely proprietary windows only connection and communication protocols. All software that people need will come on their PC, and they'll pay per use or rent monthly, and pay via their MSN bill.
Whether that really happens that way or not is yet to be seen, but the danger to AOL from MS/MSN is very obvious, and if AOL wants to stay in business they had better start pushing to bring MS down off it's pedestal.
AOL could start by spending less money giving me coasters, and use standard connection protocols, etc.
Most people who use AOL continue to use AOL because that's what they've been using for a long time... AOL needs to start worrying about it's future.
Just this weekend my fiancee was trying to pay her credit card bill online. However, the bank's site wouldn't allow any browser other than IE into their site to pay. So she used Opera and masqueraded as IE.
So, why on earth would a bank, or all companies, only allow what is probably the most insecure browser around to access the site? A bank for cryin out loud! A company that people trust to handle their hard earned cash, allows only IE to handle "secure" transactions on their site!
And don't get me started on payment processing companies partnering with MS to develop secure payment solutions... You'd think they'd partner with IBM or any other company with a decent track record of reasonable security.
You are clueless, completely clueless. The current economy that Mr. Bush has inherited was created during a Democratic administration, so if it's anyone's fault it is Clinton's.
With that said, I agree with the other stuff you said. I do not think government should be run like a business, large businesses are usually just as corrupt and inefficient as government. Big businesses grow and grow, just like government. Government needs to be kept on reigns, it needs to be constantly poked and prodded by the people to keep it from getting too large and out of control, like it currently is to the extreme.
So, don't vote Republican if you don't want, but for the love of all that is good, don't vote fucking Democratic either!
Keep in mind, it's the Democrats who have done more to harm "your right online". The DMCA had more support among Democrats, and so do the new CBDTA^H^H^H^H^Hrights removal type laws.
I raised the point that the windows GUI is a copy, and a poor one at that. You refute that by questioning WHAT it's a copy of, instead of defending the GUI itself.
You then go on to imply that windows users don't have time to learn anything because they have lives. Well, I have a life, and I used to be a windows user, but I sure had time enough to learn some things.
So, some advice for you. Instead of feeling insecure by your lack of knowledge about the world of computing outside of MS, try learning about it instead of mindlessly going along with and accepting the status quo.
And FYI, I never said the Mac, Gnome or KDE GUIs were any better.
Ummm... right. What you mean is a copy, and a very poor one at that, of someone else's GUI. It is highly debatable how good MS GUI's are, and most people are simply comfortable with it because they have used it before. This in no way means it's good. On the contrary, I'd personally argue that it's horrendous because even though people have been using it for years many still have trouble with it!
"the ability to copy and paste between applications"
WTF? Why the hell do people always come back to this? I have not one single application that has trouble copying/pasting to/from other apps! Drop this FUD already!
"and the best support the industry has to offer"
<flaimbait>
Yep, because with the shit MS calls software, you're gonna need it
</flaimbait>
Slashdot Mirror
A couple related questions...
How do you feel about going to prison? (I hope it's minimum security)
Do you think your 33 month sentence is fair, or do you think a different sort of punishment would be more appropriate for breaking copyright law? Or, do you feel you did nothing wrong and deserve no punishment whatsoever.
How do you feel your own sense of morality compares to those who prosecuted you?
This is truly great news for Linux gamers, and for Linux on the desktop.
Even if you have money to burn, this still may not be acceptable. What if the new product is altered in such a way as to not meet your needs? What if you simply can't agree to the new "license agreement"? In such a case, you're totally screwed!
With Open Source software, you have the option of making fixes to any version of the software you want. Sure, it may be expensive, but at least you have that option.
Of course, proprietary vendors can get around these problems pretty easily, by not altering licensing agreements, and supporting products from only a couple years ago(97...), etc. ie. THEY CAN SHOW SOME GOOD FAITH TOWARDS THEIR CUSTOMERS!
See that part of my post in parens? You did read that before you responded to my post, didn't you?
There was a /. story about Apple a couple months ago, and supposedly Apple has done a lot of development of darwin on x86 that they will not release, and which they only use/test internally.
I forget all the specifics, and it could just be /. rumors floating around... hence the "supposedly" in my original post...
I'm not sure if this behavior has been changed in more recent releases. I haven't used OS X in a couple months.
And of course, ALL OF THIS will be backed up by legislation.
Welcome to the future boys and girls. Divx (think circuit city) may have failed, but it's what media companies want, so it's what they'll make consumers "want".
Pretty soon, EVERYTHING will be "licensed" instead of bought. I can't wait to get my Microsoft House(TM) with Human Rights Management(TM), this condo of mine is getting cramped!
Anyway, I don't understand what your problem with Linux on the desktop is. The folks at Gnome and KDE have done some incredible work. They have copied things they like from Mac and Windows, and added things they thought should be added, and just basically improved upon everything that's been done in GUI development over the last 20 years.
You know what I have to say about Apple spending $60M on developing the OS X GUI? Waste of fucking money! I really like the OS X GUI, it's very very pretty. But to be perfectly honest, IT'S NOT THAT GOOD. It is MUCH less intuitive than I expected from Apple after developing a new OS. It is very un-customizable. While working on OS X, I thought of a million tweaks that would have made me much more productive, but the OS X GUI is very restrictive. And window cycling? WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING?
So, is the OS X GUI good, or rather, excellent? Yes, HELL YES. Is it what should be expected after spending $60M? Fuck NO! Another poster had it right, Money != Success.
But it seems to me you are simply a troll. Have you tried the latest KDE beta? It's already fairly stable, and it has most of the nice features of OS X, plus about 100 million more. It's just as easy to use(and if I do say so myself, it's actually easier and more intuitive), and it didn't cost $60M!(well, the developers' time may have been worth that much, but money doesn't buy everything...)
And then there's Gnome. Gnome is still lagging behind KDE, but they have made some great acheivements of their own. Personally, I like Gnome better, because they tend to work on stabalising current features instead of adding new ones. Which makes development slower, but overall more polished(imvho, v=very). I really like both projects, and would feel perfectly comfortable switching between KDE and Gnome.
And finally, who the hell do you think you are to tell the Gnome/KDE guys what they should do? You, who apparently isn't even up to speed with the latest Gnome/KDE releases.
But hey, that's ok, you're entitled to your arrogant pig-headed opinions, as I am with mine ;-). At least your using a decent OS...
On the other hand, GNU/Linux systems are 100%(usually) open source/free. Everything from the kernel to GUI's runs on super computers to PDA's.
There's a HUGE difference between OS X and Linux.
Personally, I like Apple more than MS, but mostly because Apple doesn't control 95% of the market and is less dangerous to the future of general computing for the masses. Plus OS X runs on top of a Unix... and is prettier... ;-)
So, what I'm saying is that everyone has different goals. Some just want to topple Microsoft, some want to push open/free computing. Of course, there's plenty of room in there for these two groups to work together, and I personally believe that Apple can co-exist with Linux a lot better than Microsoft can.
Please, for the sake of everything that is still good and decent in the world, DO NOT BREED!
The current problems are exactly what I stated, myriads of programs rendering fonts in myriads of different, incompatible, non-extensible manners.
So now we have tons of applications that can't take advantage of the new TT, AA, etc. rendering features.
Currently, there are thousands of programs written in GTK 1.x, Qt 1/2.x, Motif, etc., all of which render fonts in different manners, using different font configurations of their own, etc.
Plus the lack of good, standard, open source fonts included with distibutions.
No, the reason fonts are so messed up right now is that there has never been a good standard way of rendering fonts, forcing people to come up with their own solutions. So now, we've got tons of old programs using GTK This is all being solved now, but unfortuneately it is being solved woefully late in the game! This should have been addressed at least 5 years ago, and then now we would have this mess and every program/gui toolkit would render fonts in the same, sane manner.
Hopefully Fontconfig will help with straightening this mess out.
Considering that, and considering that the vcr and tape recorders never killed the entertainment industry, I can only conclude that the *AA is actually attacking something entirely different than piracy.
I conclude, that because of the falling cost of the necessary tools to make movies/music of just as high audio/visual quality of the companies that the *AA represent, I think their ultimate goal is to artifically shut out these soon to be emerging competitors. I believe that is the true reason the *AA wants to gain more and more control over your computer.
Right now the *AA is recruiting our political representitives and Microsoft to help them. To politicians they give money under the table, passes to private celebrity parties, etc. To Microsoft they are offering legal solidification of their Monopoly.
I hope the sport dies, then maybe it can be reborn as what it should be, an American pasttime.
Personally, I don't care for baseball, I think it's a boring sport. But, I know people who like it, and most of them have quit paying attention to it these days because they're sick of the BS, except for tuning in now and then for a good laugh at the players, etc. I really hope the sport will eventually be reborn for these fans who actually enjoy the sport.
I'm sure there will be a hundred more comments just like mine, but that will certainly say something about America's "pasttime"...
In answer to your questions, they are yes and yes.
For mixing HTML and Perl code, there are plenty of template solutions, html mason, ASP... can't name any others right off but there are lots. Personally, I don't like the Apache::ASP module because it depends on too many other modules for features I don't even want. There are different template modules for different needs, some are much like PHP.
As for the Perl DBI, the syntax is somewhat similar to that of PHP's and nearly functionally equivalent. So yes, it's just as easy.
Ok, let me follow your logic here. You say Perl CGI is less easy/intuitive to use than PHP, which is usually used as an Apache module. You then say that mod_perl might do the same for you, which is correct BTW, but then you go on to say that PHP "is a lot easier to use in that particular niche"...
So, you are comparing PHP to mod_perl, which you admittedly have not learned anything about, and then conclude that PHP is easier?
I'll be blunt, you're a fool.
It's not like I did the research, it was much more involved than what I explained I'm sure. Plus I'm sure they didn't consider it to be entirely conclusive.
Personally, I find it interesting that the other gorillas picked up the language at all.
The DOJ isn't going to do anything to MS, MS will be allowed to continue doing business how they please. Pretty soon, MS is going to start pushing MSN even harder. People will buy their PC and it will come with an MSN subscription and will come preconfigured to connect to the Internet via MSN. It will most likely use completely proprietary windows only connection and communication protocols. All software that people need will come on their PC, and they'll pay per use or rent monthly, and pay via their MSN bill.
Whether that really happens that way or not is yet to be seen, but the danger to AOL from MS/MSN is very obvious, and if AOL wants to stay in business they had better start pushing to bring MS down off it's pedestal.
AOL could start by spending less money giving me coasters, and use standard connection protocols, etc.
Most people who use AOL continue to use AOL because that's what they've been using for a long time... AOL needs to start worrying about it's future.
So, why on earth would a bank, or all companies, only allow what is probably the most insecure browser around to access the site? A bank for cryin out loud! A company that people trust to handle their hard earned cash, allows only IE to handle "secure" transactions on their site!
And don't get me started on payment processing companies partnering with MS to develop secure payment solutions... You'd think they'd partner with IBM or any other company with a decent track record of reasonable security.
FWIW, I plan to vote Libertarian next election ;-)
IMO, the Libertarian party is the only party these days that cares about the freedom of the citizens.
You are clueless, completely clueless. The current economy that Mr. Bush has inherited was created during a Democratic administration, so if it's anyone's fault it is Clinton's.
With that said, I agree with the other stuff you said. I do not think government should be run like a business, large businesses are usually just as corrupt and inefficient as government. Big businesses grow and grow, just like government. Government needs to be kept on reigns, it needs to be constantly poked and prodded by the people to keep it from getting too large and out of control, like it currently is to the extreme.
So, don't vote Republican if you don't want, but for the love of all that is good, don't vote fucking Democratic either!
Keep in mind, it's the Democrats who have done more to harm "your right online". The DMCA had more support among Democrats, and so do the new CBDTA^H^H^H^H^Hrights removal type laws.
You then go on to imply that windows users don't have time to learn anything because they have lives. Well, I have a life, and I used to be a windows user, but I sure had time enough to learn some things.
So, some advice for you. Instead of feeling insecure by your lack of knowledge about the world of computing outside of MS, try learning about it instead of mindlessly going along with and accepting the status quo.
And FYI, I never said the Mac, Gnome or KDE GUIs were any better.
Ummm... right. What you mean is a copy, and a very poor one at that, of someone else's GUI. It is highly debatable how good MS GUI's are, and most people are simply comfortable with it because they have used it before. This in no way means it's good. On the contrary, I'd personally argue that it's horrendous because even though people have been using it for years many still have trouble with it!
"the ability to copy and paste between applications"
WTF? Why the hell do people always come back to this? I have not one single application that has trouble copying/pasting to/from other apps! Drop this FUD already!
"and the best support the industry has to offer"
<flaimbait> Yep, because with the shit MS calls software, you're gonna need it </flaimbait>