Why _won't_ the internet quickly lose its American influence? Its because of laws like this. Unless other countries adopt the democratic laws of the internet they will be in a weakened position to influence it.
Yes, here in the US we are facing a similar stuggle, but our government is much slower.:)
Is internet access neary as cheap anywhere outside of the US as within it? Doubt it.
Which Robin Williams is going to sing Blame Canada? Is it the young, bold Robin Williams, who includes the topic of illegal drugs in his HBO standup routine? Or is it the older, Disnified Robin Williams, who entertains kids with funny voices and contorted faces?
Microsoft is hardly a user interface leader, but Excel is an easy reference point from which to judge spreadsheet packages. Microsoft products tend to have too many features, many of which are poorly integrated. This is not good interface design. (Anyone up for half a dozen toolbars? How about a talking paperclip?) They've contributed a widget here and there, but nothing more.
My only problem with stealing so many ideas from MS is that we'll end up with a product no better than MS's. It takes a long time to build a good interface - one that balances simplicity of initial use with depth and complexity of options.
This is the future challenge of Open Source software. Sure, Open Source has worked for writing kernels and servers. But how will it get along with the demands of graphical user interface and tight control of design? The democratic system that writes the code CANNOT be applied to the user interface. Good design has always been the work of one person or a very small team of people.
Linux's technical merits far outpace its usability merits. If linux is going to make its way on to desktops, it needs to be as easy to configure as windows. This does not necessarily mean limiting configurations. At minimum, it means having a centralized place accessable from the Xwin desktop where most (all?) configuration changes can be made. Once it can do that, then we can concider putting it in the homes of america.:)
Open Source can write great code, but can it build a rich working environment for the non-technical user?
This is obviously an attempt by MS to confuse the slashdot community! By carefully combining the words "Microsoft" and "Open Source" into one press release, MS was hoping that the Linux community would run pay attention to their Windows 2000 Ads.
Linux user sees Windows 2000 Ad. Thinks to himself, "2000 is a lot larger than 2.4 - and 2000 is the new standard in reliability" and "MS = Open Source = Cool" Still dazed, the user buys a copy of Windows 2000, returns home and installs it, removing linux.
Do not read this press release! Do not become a victim in the OS war!
Nothing short of an asteriod collision will prevent unix for surviving.
20 years of existance seems to me to be proof that its the most likely operating system to survive the next 20 years.
And how are we defining Unix? To some degree, Windows NT could be seen as a version of Unix. Windows NT is the future OS of MS. Mac OS X is unix based. So is linux! Is there any other widely used operating system in use today that doesn't contain a large number of ideas from Unix?
The internet is helping Unix. Certainly a network/distributed computing system would have Unix in it at some level.
How can you even being to expect ANYONE to replace Kubrick?
Do we want an E.T. or a 2001?
Um, well...E.T. did sell a lot more toys...I guess the public would rather have another Spielburg film.:(
I just love how Kubrick was constantly trying to smash people's expectations about film. Spielburg tends to reinforce what we expect out of it, as well as many middle-class-white assumptions about life.
Isn't protecting spam a lot like protecting someone who walks through the streets at night screaming "PANTS ON SALE AT YOUR LOCAL KMART!!!"
If this guy is arrested for disturbing the peace, then Kmart doesn't sell as many pants.
But who cares???
Does commercialism have a right to seek out the consumer at such lengths? I think I'd rather search for a company I want to do business with rather than having companies come to me.
For a short while I was on a committee responsible for spending vast sums of money on undersupported machines for a rather large school district. I'm assuming the situation was no different than others. The committee had two computer knowledgable members and about a dozen teachers.
Pick your battles. Many of the decisions made about computer equipment in a school district will be largely political. There will be a strong push to use ALOT of Microsoft technology simply because it appears to be a good business decision. Don't argue for particular items so much as general goals. Getting them to agree that a WinNT only network has less future than an open network would allow Linux machines to run along side MS boxes. This is much more worthwhile than convincing them that they need linux terminals with RedHat installed.
Make compromises. Everyone wants to see their input have affect, they don't want to see someone overpowering the group.
Back up opinions with other sources. Your crazy opinions aren't so crazy if they've been published elsewhere.
In the Mac and Windows world, QuickTime tends to be the best media player option. It has a simple design and it isn't trying to suck you into any portal.
Perhaps with Apple releasing MacOS X, they'll make and intel linux port of QuickTime. The market is waiting for a good solution. Maybe using RealPlayer for linux is a good way to say "Apple, we need a linux media player!"
Reading that article fired up the patriot within me!
U.S.A! U.S.A! U.S.A! (chant with me!)
We live in such a great nation! We created the internet and everyone else uses it so we can spy on them! And we have the best satellites for digging up international dirt and if you're military is standing in the way of our economic interests - BAAM!!!
I want to be one of those spies who steals secrets from those stupid europeans! I'd be good at it, I know lots of secrets!
How can you argue that machines could destroy/compromise what is human without defining what it is to be human? We live in a vastly different world than people did 200 years ago. Does this mean that technology has destroyed part of our "humanity"? Perhaps it is Human to hunt and gather - agriculture destroyed Humanity!!!
People today have artificial hearts, limbs, and memories(palm piolots). At what point does someone become a machine? Machines today are becoming better and better at understanding humans. At what point do they become Human?
Ethical concerns have always been a part of technology yet they are rarely recognised. Does anyone else find it funny that we programmed a bit of Christianity into machines that only know of 1's and 0's - Y2K bugs. Technology can be implemented for any range of goals. To say that technology is bad because it can be used to limit individual freedom is to deny our absolute control over it and ignore its benefitial uses.
These ethical concerns are nothing new. User centric models of computing are favored on the desktop because they put the user in control. Microsoft's creation of wizards runs contrary to this goal. They make the user dependant upon the software in such a way that they have reduced control over its effects. Is it a good idea to allow software companies to remotely deactivate their software on machines running it illegally? This makes the company responsible for allowing people to run their software. Why wouldn't these smaller concerns exist on a larger scale as well?
Overall, the idea that we can destroy ourselves is also a bit boastful. Do we really think we're that powerful? Are we really powerful enough to significantly alter the environment and the life within it? (Or does it happen to be changing as we become more technologically powerful?) The idea that we should protect the environment is equally about protecting an environment that we have thrived in. Limiting our advances in technology also preserves a kind of technological environment. But why limit our advances in technology? Are we unable to grasp the consequences it will bring?
Anyone know what it would take to get a linux box respond to Midi events?
This setup would allow linux boxes to be used in theatrical type productions. Most digital light boards can send out a midi signal - you could use your linux box to spit out sound, video...whatever you wanted...
After seeing the movie, I only have one question on my mind: Was Jerry Lawler really in on the wrestling thing?
Before the movie, I had never heard that he was in on the whole idea. However, we know that the movie as semi-biographical and that the producers may have had to accept a revised history to get Lawler on the show.
Lawler was in on it
If Lawler was in on it, why would he give the joke away in the movie? Wouldn't it be better to keep it a secret and keep it larger than life?
Lawler wasn't in on it
If Lawler wasn't in on it, then this was his chance to make it appear like he was. In hindsight, he would have realized that he simply became a prop for Andy. With Andy dead, Lawler can throw in the final "punch."
Has anyone out there REALLY damaged their monitor by misconfiguring their modelines? I've misconfiged monitors plenty of times - you get a distorted image or none at all, and then you set it back to your previous setting and all is fine.
It makes me kind of curious...why shouldn't I misconfig my monitor? Someone is trying to keep the power of misconfiged monitors to themselves!!!
First of all, architecturally, there's no basis for this argument.
You're right with this point
but it is also not any "better for graphics" than the equivalent PC running NT or 98
But you're wrong here. MacOS has ColorSync. Matching the color on your monitor to your printer to your press is much easier on a Mac. Apple has been claiming they'd come out with ColorSync for Win - but why? They can't figure out how they'd profit. This might be a small issue for most slashdot readers, but many people in publishing depend on this.
if one were to install Linux on a Macintosh, almost all the software issues (not that there are many) would vanish
Does Linux have system wide color matching capabilities? I'm not aware of such capabilities...
While I'm all for some healthy competition for MS, I can't help but wonder if this will really replace Windows with something better. Would it really be that big of an improvement oif users bought an equally restrictive OS that just crashed a bit less?
The largest problem I see with MS products is that they don't put the user in control. Wizards DON'T help! They just make up for a bad or confusing interface - or perhaps just a complex interface that is poorly documented.
Is this new product going to put the user in control? Or is this a non-MS OS directly competing with the goals of MS?
AltiVec helps a very few things. It ends up that a lot of the instructions are like a lot of other SIMD (Single Instruction Multiple Data) instrcutions that have abbreviations we know and love... MMX, 3DNow, SSE... as it tuns out, it can help some things, such as graphical processing, but isn't so useful for general-purpose stuff. So, AltiVec might be able to improve a certain 3D render or a certain photoshop transform by xxx%, but as far as doing a compile or booting your operating system AltiVec (and MMX and 3DNow and SSE) don't help that much. Plainly, this is wrong. Altivec _IS_NOT_ MMX or 3DNow or SSE. Its performace benefits are not limited to graphics. Altivec (now known as the Velocity engine) is a Single Instruction Multiple Data unit. Any time a calculation is performed repeatedly on data, altivec can be used to accelerate it. Its a 128 bits but can be divided for smaller chunks, such as 4 32-bit values and 8 16 bit values. for more info: http://developer.apple.com/hardware/altivec/summar y.html --Matt
On a broader note, how does "new journalism" validate the things it reports on?
On a yet broader note, how does "old journalism" validate the things it reports on?
Here in Appleton, WI, the local media sucks. The local paper, the Post-Cresent, can't seem to get the facts straight if they were handed to them. The times i've had any first hand account of a story they're reported, i've become nautious reading their report. I suspect just as much distortion happened with the national news, although its reported with better intro music, 3d graphics, and remote corresponders.
What validates the "new journalism" is not the journalism itself. Its the fact that more viewpoints are accessable and the reader decides which viewpoint is valid. While this may produce many viewpoints that are not worthwhile, it can produce viewpoints more worthwhile than the original news report.
When was the last time that Dan Rather asked you to think for yourself?
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I never trust these kind of articles until I've seen the application of theory in Mindstorm Legos.
Unix - what everyone else is trying to copy.
Why _won't_ the internet quickly lose its American influence? Its because of laws like this. Unless other countries adopt the democratic laws of the internet they will be in a weakened position to influence it.
:)
Yes, here in the US we are facing a similar stuggle, but our government is much slower.
Is internet access neary as cheap anywhere outside of the US as within it? Doubt it.
Within hours, Intel announced plans for a 14 qubit processor backwards compatable with x86 instructions.
MS claims they will have a version of windows ready for its release, although its rumored to be months behind schedule.
Its already running linux.
Which Robin Williams is going to sing Blame Canada? Is it the young, bold Robin Williams, who includes the topic of illegal drugs in his HBO standup routine? Or is it the older, Disnified Robin Williams, who entertains kids with funny voices and contorted faces?
Microsoft is hardly a user interface leader, but Excel is an easy reference point from which to judge spreadsheet packages. Microsoft products tend to have too many features, many of which are poorly integrated. This is not good interface design. (Anyone up for half a dozen toolbars? How about a talking paperclip?) They've contributed a widget here and there, but nothing more.
:)
My only problem with stealing so many ideas from MS is that we'll end up with a product no better than MS's. It takes a long time to build a good interface - one that balances simplicity of initial use with depth and complexity of options.
This is the future challenge of Open Source software. Sure, Open Source has worked for writing kernels and servers. But how will it get along with the demands of graphical user interface and tight control of design? The democratic system that writes the code CANNOT be applied to the user interface. Good design has always been the work of one person or a very small team of people.
Linux's technical merits far outpace its usability merits. If linux is going to make its way on to desktops, it needs to be as easy to configure as windows. This does not necessarily mean limiting configurations. At minimum, it means having a centralized place accessable from the Xwin desktop where most (all?) configuration changes can be made. Once it can do that, then we can concider putting it in the homes of america.
Open Source can write great code, but can it build a rich working environment for the non-technical user?
...and for everyone whining about the nytimes.com login.
http://pa rtners.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/03/biztech/arti cles/17blue.html
This is obviously an attempt by MS to confuse the slashdot community! By carefully combining the words "Microsoft" and "Open Source" into one press release, MS was hoping that the Linux community would run pay attention to their Windows 2000 Ads.
Linux user sees Windows 2000 Ad. Thinks to himself, "2000 is a lot larger than 2.4 - and 2000 is the new standard in reliability" and "MS = Open Source = Cool" Still dazed, the user buys a copy of Windows 2000, returns home and installs it, removing linux.
Do not read this press release! Do not become a victim in the OS war!
Nothing short of an asteriod collision will prevent unix for surviving.
20 years of existance seems to me to be proof that its the most likely operating system to survive the next 20 years.
And how are we defining Unix? To some degree, Windows NT could be seen as a version of Unix. Windows NT is the future OS of MS. Mac OS X is unix based. So is linux! Is there any other widely used operating system in use today that doesn't contain a large number of ideas from Unix?
The internet is helping Unix. Certainly a network/distributed computing system would have Unix in it at some level.
How can you even being to expect ANYONE to replace Kubrick?
:(
Do we want an E.T. or a 2001?
Um, well...E.T. did sell a lot more toys...I guess the public would rather have another Spielburg film.
I just love how Kubrick was constantly trying to smash people's expectations about film. Spielburg tends to reinforce what we expect out of it, as well as many middle-class-white assumptions about life.
Do we have an Kubrick DNA? Bring him back!!!!
This is old news. I've been encoding the DeCSS algorithm in the DNA of the apples I grow on my farm.
Sure, people might be forced to take DeCSS off the web - but have you ever heard of a food recall based on information?
Isn't protecting spam a lot like protecting someone who walks through the streets at night screaming "PANTS ON SALE AT YOUR LOCAL KMART!!!"
If this guy is arrested for disturbing the peace, then Kmart doesn't sell as many pants.
But who cares???
Does commercialism have a right to seek out the consumer at such lengths? I think I'd rather search for a company I want to do business with rather than having companies come to me.
For a short while I was on a committee responsible for spending vast sums of money on undersupported machines for a rather large school district. I'm assuming the situation was no different than others. The committee had two computer knowledgable members and about a dozen teachers.
Pick your battles. Many of the decisions made about computer equipment in a school district will be largely political. There will be a strong push to use ALOT of Microsoft technology simply because it appears to be a good business decision. Don't argue for particular items so much as general goals. Getting them to agree that a WinNT only network has less future than an open network would allow Linux machines to run along side MS boxes. This is much more worthwhile than convincing them that they need linux terminals with RedHat installed.
Make compromises. Everyone wants to see their input have affect, they don't want to see someone overpowering the group.
Back up opinions with other sources. Your crazy opinions aren't so crazy if they've been published elsewhere.
Good luck!
In the Mac and Windows world, QuickTime tends to be the best media player option. It has a simple design and it isn't trying to suck you into any portal.
Perhaps with Apple releasing MacOS X, they'll make and intel linux port of QuickTime. The market is waiting for a good solution. Maybe using RealPlayer for linux is a good way to say "Apple, we need a linux media player!"
Reading that article fired up the patriot within me!
U.S.A! U.S.A! U.S.A! (chant with me!)
We live in such a great nation! We created the internet and everyone else uses it so we can spy on them! And we have the best satellites for digging up international dirt and if you're military is standing in the way of our economic interests - BAAM!!!
I want to be one of those spies who steals secrets from those stupid europeans! I'd be good at it, I know lots of secrets!
Anyone for a game of Quake?
How can you argue that machines could destroy/compromise what is human without defining what it is to be human? We live in a vastly different world than people did 200 years ago. Does this mean that technology has destroyed part of our "humanity"? Perhaps it is Human to hunt and gather - agriculture destroyed Humanity!!!
People today have artificial hearts, limbs, and memories(palm piolots). At what point does someone become a machine? Machines today are becoming better and better at understanding humans. At what point do they become Human?
Ethical concerns have always been a part of technology yet they are rarely recognised. Does anyone else find it funny that we programmed a bit of Christianity into machines that only know of 1's and 0's - Y2K bugs. Technology can be implemented for any range of goals. To say that technology is bad because it can be used to limit individual freedom is to deny our absolute control over it and ignore its benefitial uses.
These ethical concerns are nothing new. User centric models of computing are favored on the desktop because they put the user in control. Microsoft's creation of wizards runs contrary to this goal. They make the user dependant upon the software in such a way that they have reduced control over its effects. Is it a good idea to allow software companies to remotely deactivate their software on machines running it illegally? This makes the company responsible for allowing people to run their software. Why wouldn't these smaller concerns exist on a larger scale as well?
Overall, the idea that we can destroy ourselves is also a bit boastful. Do we really think we're that powerful? Are we really powerful enough to significantly alter the environment and the life within it? (Or does it happen to be changing as we become more technologically powerful?) The idea that we should protect the environment is equally about protecting an environment that we have thrived in. Limiting our advances in technology also preserves a kind of technological environment. But why limit our advances in technology? Are we unable to grasp the consequences it will bring?
Anyone know what it would take to get a linux box respond to Midi events?
This setup would allow linux boxes to be used in theatrical type productions. Most digital light boards can send out a midi signal - you could use your linux box to spit out sound, video...whatever you wanted...
Now that we are in the New Dawn of Gigahertz processors, the following questions must be answered:
Which is faster? An Intel gigahertz processor or an AMD gigahertz processor?
Which is heavier? A pound of Intel chips or a pound of AMD chips?
In your opinion, is Apple a hardware or a software company, or both?
Can they survive as both?
--Matt
After seeing the movie, I only have one question on my mind: Was Jerry Lawler really in on the wrestling thing?
Before the movie, I had never heard that he was in on the whole idea. However, we know that the movie as semi-biographical and that the producers may have had to accept a revised history to get Lawler on the show.
Lawler was in on itIf Lawler was in on it, why would he give the joke away in the movie? Wouldn't it be better to keep it a secret and keep it larger than life?
Lawler wasn't in on itIf Lawler wasn't in on it, then this was his chance to make it appear like he was. In hindsight, he would have realized that he simply became a prop for Andy. With Andy dead, Lawler can throw in the final "punch."
Does anyone out there know what really happened?
Has anyone out there REALLY damaged their monitor by misconfiguring their modelines? I've misconfiged monitors plenty of times - you get a distorted image or none at all, and then you set it back to your previous setting and all is fine.
It makes me kind of curious...why shouldn't I misconfig my monitor? Someone is trying to keep the power of misconfiged monitors to themselves!!!
--Matt
First of all, architecturally, there's no basis for this argument.
You're right with this point
but it is also not any "better for graphics" than the equivalent PC running NT or 98
But you're wrong here. MacOS has ColorSync. Matching the color on your monitor to your printer to your press is much easier on a Mac. Apple has been claiming they'd come out with ColorSync for Win - but why? They can't figure out how they'd profit. This might be a small issue for most slashdot readers, but many people in publishing depend on this.
if one were to install Linux on a Macintosh, almost all the software issues (not that there are many) would vanish
Does Linux have system wide color matching capabilities? I'm not aware of such capabilities...
While I'm all for some healthy competition for MS, I can't help but wonder if this will really replace Windows with something better. Would it really be that big of an improvement oif users bought an equally restrictive OS that just crashed a bit less?
The largest problem I see with MS products is that they don't put the user in control. Wizards DON'T help! They just make up for a bad or confusing interface - or perhaps just a complex interface that is poorly documented.
Is this new product going to put the user in control? Or is this a non-MS OS directly competing with the goals of MS?
AltiVec helps a very few things. It ends up that a lot of the instructions are like a lot of other SIMD (Single Instruction Multiple Data) instrcutions that have abbreviations we know and love... MMX, 3DNow, SSE... as it tuns out, it can help some things, such as graphical processing, but isn't so useful for general-purpose stuff. So, AltiVec might be able to improve a certain 3D render or a certain photoshop transform by xxx%, but as far as doing a compile or booting your operating system AltiVec (and MMX and 3DNow and SSE) don't help that much. Plainly, this is wrong. Altivec _IS_NOT_ MMX or 3DNow or SSE. Its performace benefits are not limited to graphics. Altivec (now known as the Velocity engine) is a Single Instruction Multiple Data unit. Any time a calculation is performed repeatedly on data, altivec can be used to accelerate it. Its a 128 bits but can be divided for smaller chunks, such as 4 32-bit values and 8 16 bit values. for more info: http://developer.apple.com/hardware/altivec/summar y.html --Matt
On a broader note, how does "new journalism" validate the things it reports on?
On a yet broader note, how does "old journalism" validate the things it reports on?
Here in Appleton, WI, the local media sucks. The local paper, the Post-Cresent, can't seem to get the facts straight if they were handed to them. The times i've had any first hand account of a story they're reported, i've become nautious reading their report. I suspect just as much distortion happened with the national news, although its reported with better intro music, 3d graphics, and remote corresponders.
What validates the "new journalism" is not the journalism itself. Its the fact that more viewpoints are accessable and the reader decides which viewpoint is valid. While this may produce many viewpoints that are not worthwhile, it can produce viewpoints more worthwhile than the original news report.
When was the last time that Dan Rather asked you to think for yourself?