The Free Software Foundation (http://www.gnu.org/) has been working up a license to cover documentation. Not exactly the same as what's being discussed here, but maybe close, if you think that information is information is information. Perhaps with some minor changes it would do the job, or a similar variant could be derived.
This is a work in progress (correct me if I'm wrong). At least I don't yet see it on the Free Software Foundation's license list (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html)
I'm sure the authors would have more appropriate input than myself. Just my two cents.
"We need to study the consequences." I don't even know the consequences of getting out of bed. I won't believe anyone who says they understand the consequences, refereed peer-reviewed panel of published potheads or not.
"Monsanto thinks only of itself." Of itself, yes. Only of itself, no. Someone thinks it's worthwhile enough to spend money on, no?
"Farmers don't re-use seed." They do. Just not hybrids, like the big bags of purple corn kernels covered with lots of good stuff.
"Everyone will starve otherwise." They're starving now.
"We already have too much food." Yes. We don't distribute it well.
"People shouldn't eat chickens." I don't like getting my protein from peanut butter because it sticks to the roof of my mouth.
"Population growth." Needs to stop.
"Someone's making money." From your tone of voice, I assume it's not you.
"The bugs will multiply." Then we'll eat them.
"Why aren't we more like the Europeans?" I thought we were trying to get out of there.
"Mother nature can't keep up." So the world will be covered with potatoes. What's your point?
I don't want to maintain two computers. I don't want my application display limited by a 128K connection. I don't want to slowly suck data over over the airwaves instead of a 100MHz (or faster) system bus. I don't want to share my processor, my disk, my memory, or any other component of my computer. I don't want to be chained to a desk by a fifty pound mess of beige plastic.
I want a freaking fast portable computer!!!
Bigger pipes? Yippy for that too!! I love it. But I'm sick and tired of people telling me that the future will find me slowly circling the mother ship like some kind of semi-concious droid.
Simple physics: things which are closer together can communicate faster. No NC will *ever* match what a stand alone device can muster.
Ever notice how the people who sell NC's the hardest also sell servers? And also want to run the servers?
The NC is just a modern version of central planning. Don't be fooled. Do things your way, not someone else's.
"The Undernet" - I love it! Maybe we could get those peace-loving Canandians to lend a hand. They've got some great gear up there, that's fer sure. I volunteer the barn back on the family farm to help smuggle IP packets across the border. We could mount a microwave dish on the windmill...
Another troll under the toll road.
on
License to Surf
·
· Score: 1
The Internet crosses national boundaries, so just who, exactly, shall reign soveriegn over IP? The United Nations? Is Koffi Annan going to have to learn the in's and out's of IPSec, SSL, and SMTP?
That's silly. Why don't we find someone - I know! - Robert Cailliau, to tell us what to do.
"...which is very interesting because if we can get it to work, that will change the quality of the Web completely." No shit. And not a moment too soon. People don't even want to use the Internet anymore, because it's such a dangerous place. I can't even sleep at night.
There are two proposals here: (1) uniquely identify people, and (2) bill them.
We need (1), we are told, to help the world confront the hordes of evil racist child molesters who want to steal your money. Notice, however, that (1) is also what makes (2) possible.
This is the most recent info on the status of current legislation regarding e-signatures that I could find during my lunch hour: http://www.techlawjournal.com/internet/19991014.ht m
The "Following the approval of S.761 (Millennium Digital Commerce Act)" bit is a little misguiding, I believe. As far as I can tell (disclaimer - I'm a legal ignoramus) the laws governing the use of digital signatures remain unchanged.
If you ask me, this is EXTREMELY importantant legislation. What defines an acceptable digital signature? Who (current debate seems to concern state/national authority) defines acceptable use of digital signatures? Etc.
I think this subject deserves immediate and intense attention by people wise to the issues. E.G. the/. public. Get this on people's radar screens!!! Else don't complain when the federal government passes some kind of fatally misinformed legislation.
I've made some significant donations (for me, anyway) to VA Research and ASL Workstations. I am very much a Linux enthusiast. I'm saving tons of money, and getting excellent quality software.
But I am a recent convert. Why? Because Linux, at least in the backwaters I happen to frequent, wasn't even on radar until recently.
Yes, I'll admit it, I've spent a lot of my life running DOS, Windows, Windows 95, NT, etc. Why? Because for the money I had (then as now, now much), it did the job.
What else was there? Macs? Cost too much. FreeBSD? Some other *nix? Running on what and doing what?
Microsoft made a product people wanted, and in the market segment they targeted (the bottom of the pyramid), they had little real competition. And that market segment was enormous. And they got enormously rich.
And who was in the "glass house" then?
So now Linux is in the same space. I'm glad. I really am. But the comments I'm reading here annoy me in exactly the way that Microsoft does. A lot of arrogant testosterone-laden chest thumping. I'm even reading that Microsoft Word, by virtue of its design, is distorting people's thoughts as they are put into words. Someone's been smoking some fatties, that's for sure.
I'm really not trying to incite a flame war, but even Linus himself admits that Linux has to make better progress on the desktop. Maybe other people interpret this differently, but the desktop to me is, well, let's see: word processing, spreadsheets, CADD (give me a real CADD package in Linux, please!!!), and so on. Who's the competition here? Who's on top?
Sure, you can do most anything you'd like w/ Linux. You can. My mom can't. And I bet yours can't either. Do you care? I do.
Have some humility.
Linux will be big and important. So grow up. Don't repeat the past.
Frank Ghery, as you may know, is designing MIT's new computer lab. I don't know how much time Frank himself spends in front of a computer, but his designers use a program called CATIA. On UNIX workstations.
In case you're unfamiliar w/ Frank Ghery's work, it's very sculptural. I did a quick search w/ Google and found a link w/ a couple of pictures: http://www.vandaaz.com/vandaaz/titanium/titanium.h tml.
Now, as you might imagine, creating construction documents for such a beast requires extraordinary measures. I used to be the CADD manager at the local firm (Cannon) in Boston that has been contracted by Ghery's office to assist w/ the project. I stopped by last week to have lunch w/ some friends, and got to take a look at the drawings. One of the interesting things I found out is that the 3D CADD file itself is considered to be a construction document. In other words, the people contracted to build stuff are not only reading information on paper, they are required to use the CADD file itself to obtain information necessary to construct the building. Considering that almost every nook and cranny of a building like this is unique, that makes a lot of sense.
This is not at all typical. CADD files, even 2D drawings, are usually considered "instruments of service", or some such thing. When you get an operation, the doctor doesn't give you the scalpel when he's done. Ditto for CADD drawings (not that they're never provided, but I stray...). CADD drawings are used to create paper construction documents, which are stamped, signed, and used to build the building.
What does this have to do w/ Microsoft? Nothing. That's the point. Of course there are people working on this project using Microsoft products, but I think it's interesting to note that what may well be the most significant document of all is done on UNIX.
How will this filesystem work on a switch? Will all traffic be routed through a single server port, or can the distributed data be moved through the most appropriate switch port?
Slashdot Mirror
Do you believe in an arrow of time? How does the notion of time relate to determinism?
I understand there's some debate in this area, but the deep thinking behind the debate has always eluded me.
ASL Workstations
The Free Software Foundation (http://www.gnu.org/) has been working up a license to cover documentation. Not exactly the same as what's being discussed here, but maybe close, if you think that information is information is information. Perhaps with some minor changes it would do the job, or a similar variant could be derived.
This is a work in progress (correct me if I'm wrong). At least I don't yet see it on the Free Software Foundation's license list (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html)
I'm sure the authors would have more appropriate input than myself. Just my two cents.
"We need to study the consequences." I don't even know the consequences of getting out of bed. I won't believe anyone who says they understand the consequences, refereed peer-reviewed panel of published potheads or not.
"Monsanto thinks only of itself." Of itself, yes. Only of itself, no. Someone thinks it's worthwhile enough to spend money on, no?
"Farmers don't re-use seed." They do. Just not hybrids, like the big bags of purple corn kernels covered with lots of good stuff.
"Everyone will starve otherwise." They're starving now.
"We already have too much food." Yes. We don't distribute it well.
"People shouldn't eat chickens." I don't like getting my protein from peanut butter because it sticks to the roof of my mouth.
"Population growth." Needs to stop.
"Someone's making money." From your tone of voice, I assume it's not you.
"The bugs will multiply." Then we'll eat them.
"Why aren't we more like the Europeans?" I thought we were trying to get out of there.
"Mother nature can't keep up." So the world will be covered with potatoes. What's your point?
Roundup Rules!
I don't want to maintain two computers. I don't want my application display limited by a 128K connection. I don't want to slowly suck data over over the airwaves instead of a 100MHz (or faster) system bus. I don't want to share my processor, my disk, my memory, or any other component of my computer. I don't want to be chained to a desk by a fifty pound mess of beige plastic.
I want a freaking fast portable computer!!!
Bigger pipes? Yippy for that too!! I love it. But I'm sick and tired of people telling me that the future will find me slowly circling the mother ship like some kind of semi-concious droid.
Simple physics: things which are closer together can communicate faster. No NC will *ever* match what a stand alone device can muster.
Ever notice how the people who sell NC's the hardest also sell servers? And also want to run the servers?
The NC is just a modern version of central planning. Don't be fooled. Do things your way, not someone else's.
"The Undernet" - I love it! Maybe we could get those peace-loving Canandians to lend a hand. They've got some great gear up there, that's fer sure. I volunteer the barn back on the family farm to help smuggle IP packets across the border. We could mount a microwave dish on the windmill...
The Internet crosses national boundaries, so just who, exactly, shall reign soveriegn over IP? The United Nations? Is Koffi Annan going to have to learn the in's and out's of IPSec, SSL, and SMTP?
That's silly. Why don't we find someone - I know! - Robert Cailliau, to tell us what to do.
"...which is very interesting because if we can get it to work, that will change the quality of the Web completely." No shit. And not a moment too soon. People don't even want to use the Internet anymore, because it's such a dangerous place. I can't even sleep at night.
There are two proposals here: (1) uniquely identify people, and (2) bill them.
We need (1), we are told, to help the world confront the hordes of evil racist child molesters who want to steal your money. Notice, however, that (1) is also what makes (2) possible.
Who REALLY wants to steal your money?
I'm certainly no marketing genius, but does anyone else think the name could use a powder? How would average Joe pronounce XFce?
Not trying to rain on anyone's parade or anything, but might help the cause to change the name.
This is the most recent info on the status of current legislation regarding e-signatures that I could find during my lunch hour: http://www.techlawjournal.com/internet/19991014.ht m
/. public. Get this on people's radar screens!!! Else don't complain when the federal government passes some kind of fatally misinformed legislation.
The "Following the approval of S.761 (Millennium Digital Commerce Act)" bit is a little misguiding, I believe. As far as I can tell (disclaimer - I'm a legal ignoramus) the laws governing the use of digital signatures remain unchanged.
If you ask me, this is EXTREMELY importantant legislation. What defines an acceptable digital signature? Who (current debate seems to concern state/national authority) defines acceptable use of digital signatures? Etc.
I think this subject deserves immediate and intense attention by people wise to the issues. E.G. the
I've made some significant donations (for me, anyway) to VA Research and ASL Workstations. I am very much a Linux enthusiast. I'm saving tons of money, and getting excellent quality software.
But I am a recent convert. Why? Because Linux, at least in the backwaters I happen to frequent, wasn't even on radar until recently.
Yes, I'll admit it, I've spent a lot of my life running DOS, Windows, Windows 95, NT, etc. Why? Because for the money I had (then as now, now much), it did the job.
What else was there? Macs? Cost too much. FreeBSD? Some other *nix? Running on what and doing what?
Microsoft made a product people wanted, and in the market segment they targeted (the bottom of the pyramid), they had little real competition. And that market segment was enormous. And they got enormously rich.
And who was in the "glass house" then?
So now Linux is in the same space. I'm glad. I really am. But the comments I'm reading here annoy me in exactly the way that Microsoft does. A lot of arrogant testosterone-laden chest thumping. I'm even reading that Microsoft Word, by virtue of its design, is distorting people's thoughts as they are put into words. Someone's been smoking some fatties, that's for sure.
I'm really not trying to incite a flame war, but even Linus himself admits that Linux has to make better progress on the desktop. Maybe other people interpret this differently, but the desktop to me is, well, let's see: word processing, spreadsheets, CADD (give me a real CADD package in Linux, please!!!), and so on. Who's the competition here? Who's on top?
Sure, you can do most anything you'd like w/ Linux. You can. My mom can't. And I bet yours can't either. Do you care? I do.
Have some humility.
Linux will be big and important. So grow up. Don't repeat the past.
Frank Ghery, as you may know, is designing MIT's new computer lab. I don't know how much time Frank himself spends in front of a computer, but his designers use a program called CATIA. On UNIX workstations.
h tml.
In case you're unfamiliar w/ Frank Ghery's work, it's very sculptural. I did a quick search w/ Google and found a link w/ a couple of pictures: http://www.vandaaz.com/vandaaz/titanium/titanium.
Now, as you might imagine, creating construction documents for such a beast requires extraordinary measures. I used to be the CADD manager at the local firm (Cannon) in Boston that has been contracted by Ghery's office to assist w/ the project. I stopped by last week to have lunch w/ some friends, and got to take a look at the drawings. One of the interesting things I found out is that the 3D CADD file itself is considered to be a construction document. In other words, the people contracted to build stuff are not only reading information on paper, they are required to use the CADD file itself to obtain information necessary to construct the building. Considering that almost every nook and cranny of a building like this is unique, that makes a lot of sense.
This is not at all typical. CADD files, even 2D drawings, are usually considered "instruments of service", or some such thing. When you get an operation, the doctor doesn't give you the scalpel when he's done. Ditto for CADD drawings (not that they're never provided, but I stray...). CADD drawings are used to create paper construction documents, which are stamped, signed, and used to build the building.
What does this have to do w/ Microsoft? Nothing. That's the point. Of course there are people working on this project using Microsoft products, but I think it's interesting to note that what may well be the most significant document of all is done on UNIX.
How will this filesystem work on a switch? Will all traffic be routed through a single server port, or can the distributed data be moved through the most appropriate switch port?
Everyone seems to agree that Unisys bites. Bite back. Don't buy products that profit Unisys.
I'm not familiar with Unisys' product line. I'd like to be. Anyone able to help me out?