Well, I know little more than what I read on kerneltrap, but the cdrecord thing has been an absolute nightmare to me. It's basically stopping me upgrading to 2.6 full-time even if I found it stable enough, because my CD burner simply *will not work*. Reiser4 as I understand it only had problems in that it required putting a lot of stuff in the VFS layer, and there was some idea that this layer should be "above" filesystems and there shouldn't be any driver-specific code there. As I said, I only know what I read about kerneltrap. The new development model has given me a kernel which I can't use as it's not stable enough for my system, and one of the lead devs has said that individuals should be leaving it up to their distros to supply them with stable kernel, so I don't think this is a one off problem only affecting me. I don't actually have a distribution as such, my system being an anaglam of slackware and gentoo with bits of mandrake thrown in for good measure. Whilst the gentoo team have proven themselves capable of maintaining a stable kernel tree, and mandrake patch enough that they need to anyway, how the hell is pat volkerding supposed to make the kernel he distributes stable while maintaining the rest of the distribution? No wonder slackware's still on 2.4.
But if you look at it, the porn industry reacts much faster. Porn producers had worked out that the Internet would be big and how to make money from it before the mainstream movie or music producers got the first part.
This *is* the death of Linux. Not the article but the problem it describes. I think it's a symptom, but a pretty major one, of a deeper problem. The developers don't care about the users any more. The kernel devs have said that end users should not be using vanilla 2.6.x. This is the death of Linux as we know it, and ultimately will be the death of linux in any form. Right now I'm giving it about 20 minor versions before I fork linux or switch to one of the BSDs. And I'm not the only one feeling like this.
Yes, I'm sure. Hang around for a few months in any historically popular newsgroup and you'll see someone replying to a thread that ended years ago, and if you look at their user-agent it's almost certain to be google groups.
This is something genuinely different. If, and it's a big if, they have actually got it working, it will be for media streaming what bittorrent was for file downloading. You wouldn't call BT "yet another download accelerator", would you?
The linux groups are still there. I for one will not be moving to a web forum, ever, since I don't believe in them. And if you drop into alt.os.linux and ask a question, I will try and answer it.
No, but they could avoid putting a reply button by any post older than, say, a year. "Normal" news servers don't carry old messages, so you can't reply to them except manually, which is a good thing. Google should be the same.
With 2.6 there seems to be a bad trend towards far too much politics in the kernel. The cdrecord problems and reiser4 business (did that ever get sorted out?) together with the IMO stupid policy of putting new features in the stable branch (making deciding whether a feature can be added much harder, since it needs to be that much more stable and necessary before it can be added, but often you can't prove it's necessary without having some kernel branch running with it in) all smack of too much politics. Why can't people just concentrate on making the best kernel possible?
Wtf? If I share it, it probably doesn't benefit them. It's unlikely to harm them, but I don't think it benefits them very much. I share everything I can legally and some things I can't.
An idea I had: How about we try and reimplement the unreal engine? Not necessarily the same way, just something that will use unreal maps, unreal textures, etc? Because then, with things like Operation Na Pali (a 400mb single player mod for UT, 30 levels of good FPS), we would have our free games. Kind of like freecraft, but for a game which has mods.
Here's how I'd do it: First, we branch it somehow, so there are two copies of each article. Then, alphabetically or some other way, moderators go through all the articles in the "stable" branch. When 3 moderators have approved the stable version, it gets locked. If they disapprove, we grab the "current" version, and then the mods try and approve that, and so on. Eventually we end up with a whole encyclopaedia of locked pages, which can be stable version 1.0. Then we simply have mods periodically check pages against the current version, and if the current version is superior and accurate, move it to stable.
Most modern bioses are flashable to allow them to be upgraded, you just reflash with random data and you have a really nasty virus. But it requires executing custom code, normally assembly code. Just having access to the files on the machine wouldn't be enough.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I know little more than what I read on kerneltrap, but the cdrecord thing has been an absolute nightmare to me. It's basically stopping me upgrading to 2.6 full-time even if I found it stable enough, because my CD burner simply *will not work*. Reiser4 as I understand it only had problems in that it required putting a lot of stuff in the VFS layer, and there was some idea that this layer should be "above" filesystems and there shouldn't be any driver-specific code there. As I said, I only know what I read about kerneltrap. The new development model has given me a kernel which I can't use as it's not stable enough for my system, and one of the lead devs has said that individuals should be leaving it up to their distros to supply them with stable kernel, so I don't think this is a one off problem only affecting me. I don't actually have a distribution as such, my system being an anaglam of slackware and gentoo with bits of mandrake thrown in for good measure. Whilst the gentoo team have proven themselves capable of maintaining a stable kernel tree, and mandrake patch enough that they need to anyway, how the hell is pat volkerding supposed to make the kernel he distributes stable while maintaining the rest of the distribution? No wonder slackware's still on 2.4.
But if you look at it, the porn industry reacts much faster. Porn producers had worked out that the Internet would be big and how to make money from it before the mainstream movie or music producers got the first part.
Fedora has SELinux that works similarly, and it will be in the next RHEL version.
This *is* the death of Linux. Not the article but the problem it describes. I think it's a symptom, but a pretty major one, of a deeper problem. The developers don't care about the users any more. The kernel devs have said that end users should not be using vanilla 2.6.x. This is the death of Linux as we know it, and ultimately will be the death of linux in any form. Right now I'm giving it about 20 minor versions before I fork linux or switch to one of the BSDs. And I'm not the only one feeling like this.
Yes, I'm sure. Hang around for a few months in any historically popular newsgroup and you'll see someone replying to a thread that ended years ago, and if you look at their user-agent it's almost certain to be google groups.
This is something genuinely different. If, and it's a big if, they have actually got it working, it will be for media streaming what bittorrent was for file downloading. You wouldn't call BT "yet another download accelerator", would you?
It's not just the domain name. A reverse lookup on me gives a .com, and I still get directed to google.co.uk.
The linux groups are still there. I for one will not be moving to a web forum, ever, since I don't believe in them. And if you drop into alt.os.linux and ask a question, I will try and answer it.
No, but they could avoid putting a reply button by any post older than, say, a year. "Normal" news servers don't carry old messages, so you can't reply to them except manually, which is a good thing. Google should be the same.
With 2.6 there seems to be a bad trend towards far too much politics in the kernel. The cdrecord problems and reiser4 business (did that ever get sorted out?) together with the IMO stupid policy of putting new features in the stable branch (making deciding whether a feature can be added much harder, since it needs to be that much more stable and necessary before it can be added, but often you can't prove it's necessary without having some kernel branch running with it in) all smack of too much politics. Why can't people just concentrate on making the best kernel possible?
Wtf? If I share it, it probably doesn't benefit them. It's unlikely to harm them, but I don't think it benefits them very much. I share everything I can legally and some things I can't.
Yep. But as with copy protection, the cheaters can cheat anyway. You could probably do some digital signing which would protect the game...maybe.
An idea I had: How about we try and reimplement the unreal engine? Not necessarily the same way, just something that will use unreal maps, unreal textures, etc? Because then, with things like Operation Na Pali (a 400mb single player mod for UT, 30 levels of good FPS), we would have our free games. Kind of like freecraft, but for a game which has mods.
Here's how I'd do it: First, we branch it somehow, so there are two copies of each article. Then, alphabetically or some other way, moderators go through all the articles in the "stable" branch. When 3 moderators have approved the stable version, it gets locked. If they disapprove, we grab the "current" version, and then the mods try and approve that, and so on. Eventually we end up with a whole encyclopaedia of locked pages, which can be stable version 1.0. Then we simply have mods periodically check pages against the current version, and if the current version is superior and accurate, move it to stable.
/still going to see it as soon as I get out of my mother's basement
Where! Where! Give us a link, NOW!
Most modern bioses are flashable to allow them to be upgraded, you just reflash with random data and you have a really nasty virus. But it requires executing custom code, normally assembly code. Just having access to the files on the machine wouldn't be enough.
And what about when a trusted site gets cracked? Don't pretend it won't happen, because it does.
OK, you find me a more critical vulnerability. One that allows nuking the bios maybe, but other than that I can't think of such a thing.
The way your windows license becomes worthless if you ever connect to your computer over vnc from a non-windows machine is pretty awful though.
I think the why in this case is a nothing word for emphasis, something like "er".
I would mod down because it's a fricking dupe. I only know because I M2ed the original yesterday.
We have laws because we think they make things better, and because some people don't do what they think is best. That's all.
If that's the problem, not that I think it is, it should still be able to handle it as gracefully as 2.4 does.
Refusing to license the DRM to Real was abusing their position.