the suits, which historically make software releases buggy, bloated, and premature
OK, so if it's the suits' faults that software is released buggy & premature, then somebody please tell me when Mozilla (or other OSS projects) will be ready for my mother to use (i.e. it won't crash)
This seems to be rather interesting, since it's based in Virginia - home of both UUNet & AOL. So how does AOL feel about their home state passing a law making their open source based Netscape liable? Particulary when they're still handing out AOL disks with IE on them. Just how long does that damn contract hold for?
this sounds very cool, and could be done very well, but how are you going to get the listening device to ignore what it's playing? I mean what if the song says: "turn the radio up" will it react to itself?
I could also see the potential for infinite loops here - which most consumers aren't terribly familiar with
One of the things that pisses me off when I use windows, or in gnome is inconsistency.
I want to be able to close all my windows with alt-w, I want to be able to quit all my applications with alt-Q. If I lose trust with simple operations such as these, how shall I trust the rest of the environment to be a single integrated package that works together?
Look at other consumer appliances - they joke about nobody being able to program their VCRs to tell the time, so it's always 12:00.
I also have an interest in photography. I am intending to get a slide scanner to read in the various notebooks of slides that I have shot over the years.
I want to display my work on the internet for all to see, but it makes me nervous that someone would take a copy of my work and use it for something that it was never intended for.
They seem to be a "markitecture" company. Marketing first, technology second. So the philosophy that the market will decide which is the better product seems to lead one to the conclusion that they should be headed for doom (I wish). Unfortunately, the people who know the technology aren't always the ones who are making the decisions.
We've seen this before with DOS vs. Mac, and VHS vs. Beta in the mid-80s. I'm a Darwinist myself, but I grow impatient with evolution, and the natural way isn't always the best.
Where do you see their destiny leading, and what kind of a future do other hyped-up cruddy products have?
They are fighting for the same reason that we don't have companies selling "Linux deodarant soap". Because it dillutes the brand.
Now I realize that I'm preaching an element of closed business practices to the wrong crowd, but if Apple had properly beaten Microsoft in the 80's over look and feel, they would have their own unique product. People could be inspired by it, just not do the same thing.
They have a patent on computers looking iMac-ish, not necessarily colored cases, nor translucent colors. I mean come on, just how difficult is it to draw up a new, design for a computer case. The apple line looks cool, but there is soooo much more room for design out there. Take a look at American automobiles in the 50's for an example.
How much time do you take picking out laundry detergent at the supermarket? (I'm trying to pick something that this crowd doesn't obsess over, like computers) If you saw a bunch of ads for Tide, and you went to the supermarket to pick some up, and saw a box with the same colors, and you cared more about the ice cream meling in your shopping cart than grabbing the correct box, you might end up with Snide, the generic detergent that bleaches your favorite clothing.
My aunt comes to visit me, and she shes how much I love one of my Mac products. I tell her that she should pick up an iMac, and she runs out to the store, picks an impostor and ends up forever imprisoned in Winblows.
ar.ro.gant \'ar-*-g*nt\ aj [ME, fr. L arrogant-, arrogans, prp. of arrogare] 1: exaggerating or disposed to exaggerate one's own worth or importance in an overbearing manner 2: proceeding from or characterized by arrogance - ar.ro.gant.ly av
So if the government creates a public utility - let's say a highway, and someone uses that highway to do something illegal, let's use the example of driving drunk and killing people...
Just who is liable? Using this analogy as an example case, the ruling would be against the government for not properly policing their highways. In other words, they would be pushed to create systems where a driver would have to undergo biometric identification and a sobriety test before entering a freeway ramp.
No way, you punish the driver and make sure that it's very difficult for him to get his license back.
If there are companies out there that engage in friendly activities, advertise it. I eat vegetarian, and try to purchase organic foods as much as possible because it's not only friendly for the earth and my body, but tastes better as well. Companies should let it be known on the packaging that they engage in friendly practices, and that your purchase of their prodcut won't go towards enslaving someone else on the other side of the planet to make more of what you bought.
I thought that's what writing programs and building robotics was all about, reducing the amount of labor required by people instead of increasing it, and reducing the pleasure from it.
If computers are more perishable than fruit... (the machine I bought 3 months ago is obsolete already) then where is all this stuff supposed to go after it's lifespan is finished? Why are we leaving behind this wonderful legacy of well constructed open source systems, if there won't be anyone around to use them? Contributing to the source pool adds strength to the group, so does being kind to our planet.
Now what I'd like to see it a keyboard, mouse and case to be made out of wood, and have some nice detail carved in.
of course politics is going to enter into the arena here. It's not like this thing hasn't been political from the start. Big money always gets political, and it's the republicans who saddle up to the big boys.
Let's not forget that Judge Jackson was a Reagan appointee.
so far all the software that they've bought has been closed. There is nothing necessarily wrong with closed source, and bringing more apps to Linux is never a bad thing. The main reason that "the mainstream" doesn't use Linux yet is because "there just aren't enough easy applications to use yet".
I mean where's my paperclip at? (j/k)
This is the prime ailment that the BeOS is suffering from. A great OS w/out many apps. Linux is lucky to have picked from the great pool of GNU resources to leapfrog the startup development time of doing something from scratch.
Anyways, my point is that more choice is always better.
Cryptonomicon was the lead-up, the theft makes the press, and the movie with Harvey Keitel, Bill Paxton ("game over man!"), and Jon Bon Jovi caps it off:
U-571 (2000) Plot Outline: World War II action drama about a U.S. Navy submarine captain on a risky mission to swipe a decoding device from a stranded German ship.
Re:Mozilla is not Netscape
on
Netscape 6
·
· Score: 1
People should realise that *anyone* can take the Mozilla source code, hack it and release an own version.
So - does this mean that we could see in the future: RedHat Mozilla, and Mandrake Mozilla, and Debian Mozilla, etc...?
much like the DeCSS code - can they really nab you if you only have 2-3 lines of the code including a pointer to another site that contains the next 2-3 lines?
Slashdot Mirror
This whole thing gets sillier all the time. "You can reverse engineer, except things we protect so that you dont."
Or even lamer, you can reverse engineer, except things that we try in a half-ass manner to protect.
the suits, which historically make software releases buggy, bloated, and premature
OK, so if it's the suits' faults that software is released buggy & premature, then somebody please tell me when Mozilla (or other OSS projects) will be ready for my mother to use (i.e. it won't crash)
I would take it to Antartica. That way you could pull all-nighters, and nobody would be the wiser.
How is he supposed to make a living?
flipping burgers?
This seems to be rather interesting, since it's based in Virginia - home of both UUNet & AOL. So how does AOL feel about their home state passing a law making their open source based Netscape liable? Particulary when they're still handing out AOL disks with IE on them. Just how long does that damn contract hold for?
perhaps we should just blame Canada
this sounds very cool, and could be done very well, but how are you going to get the listening device to ignore what it's playing? I mean what if the song says: "turn the radio up" will it react to itself?
I could also see the potential for infinite loops here - which most consumers aren't terribly familiar with
I'd love to see chuck D drop his gloves with Dr. Dre.
One of the things that pisses me off when I use windows, or in gnome is inconsistency.
I want to be able to close all my windows with alt-w, I want to be able to quit all my applications with alt-Q. If I lose trust with simple operations such as these, how shall I trust the rest of the environment to be a single integrated package that works together?
Look at other consumer appliances - they joke about nobody being able to program their VCRs to tell the time, so it's always 12:00.
I also have an interest in photography. I am intending to get a slide scanner to read in the various notebooks of slides that I have shot over the years.
I want to display my work on the internet for all to see, but it makes me nervous that someone would take a copy of my work and use it for something that it was never intended for.
I notice that on your site, you've placed © on all your photos. (Would the GPL have some sort of logical fit here?) Shooting a photograph probably cost me a lot more time and money to place on the web than a chunk of code. I guess that I just want to maintain initial artist recognition of my work.
you seem to be rather critical of Vignette's StoryServer.
http://www.photo.net/wtr/vignette.html
http://www.photo.net/wtr/vignette-old.ht ml
They seem to be a "markitecture" company. Marketing first, technology second. So the philosophy that the market will decide which is the better product seems to lead one to the conclusion that they should be headed for doom (I wish). Unfortunately, the people who know the technology aren't always the ones who are making the decisions.
We've seen this before with DOS vs. Mac, and VHS vs. Beta in the mid-80s. I'm a Darwinist myself, but I grow impatient with evolution, and the natural way isn't always the best.
Where do you see their destiny leading, and what kind of a future do other hyped-up cruddy products have?
They are fighting for the same reason that we don't have companies selling "Linux deodarant soap". Because it dillutes the brand.
Now I realize that I'm preaching an element of closed business practices to the wrong crowd, but if Apple had properly beaten Microsoft in the 80's over look and feel, they would have their own unique product. People could be inspired by it, just not do the same thing.
They have a patent on computers looking iMac-ish, not necessarily colored cases, nor translucent colors. I mean come on, just how difficult is it to draw up a new, design for a computer case. The apple line looks cool, but there is soooo much more room for design out there. Take a look at American automobiles in the 50's for an example.
How much time do you take picking out laundry detergent at the supermarket? (I'm trying to pick something that this crowd doesn't obsess over, like computers) If you saw a bunch of ads for Tide, and you went to the supermarket to pick some up, and saw a box with the same colors, and you cared more about the ice cream meling in your shopping cart than grabbing the correct box, you might end up with Snide, the generic detergent that bleaches your favorite clothing.
My aunt comes to visit me, and she shes how much I love one of my Mac products. I tell her that she should pick up an iMac, and she runs out to the store, picks an impostor and ends up forever imprisoned in Winblows.
If the primary factor in using a mac is the product design, then the OS must be irrelevant. It's not - the Mac is the MacOS, not the hardware.
Take a second look:
http://www.linuxppc.com/about/hardwar e/apple/
Cross references:
1. proud
ar.ro.gant \'ar-*-g*nt\ aj [ME, fr. L arrogant-, arrogans, prp. of arrogare] 1: exaggerating or disposed to exaggerate one's own worth or importance in an overbearing manner 2: proceeding from or characterized by arrogance - ar.ro.gant.ly av
So if the government creates a public utility - let's say a highway, and someone uses that highway to do something illegal, let's use the example of driving drunk and killing people...
Just who is liable? Using this analogy as an example case, the ruling would be against the government for not properly policing their highways. In other words, they would be pushed to create systems where a driver would have to undergo biometric identification and a sobriety test before entering a freeway ramp.
No way, you punish the driver and make sure that it's very difficult for him to get his license back.
unruly patents...
"Do business how I say
not how I do it."
mighty Amazon,
screams with pain when burnt by
their own inferno.
If there are companies out there that engage in friendly activities, advertise it. I eat vegetarian, and try to purchase organic foods as much as possible because it's not only friendly for the earth and my body, but tastes better as well. Companies should let it be known on the packaging that they engage in friendly practices, and that your purchase of their prodcut won't go towards enslaving someone else on the other side of the planet to make more of what you bought.
I thought that's what writing programs and building robotics was all about, reducing the amount of labor required by people instead of increasing it, and reducing the pleasure from it.
If computers are more perishable than fruit... (the machine I bought 3 months ago is obsolete already) then where is all this stuff supposed to go after it's lifespan is finished? Why are we leaving behind this wonderful legacy of well constructed open source systems, if there won't be anyone around to use them? Contributing to the source pool adds strength to the group, so does being kind to our planet.
Now what I'd like to see it a keyboard, mouse and case to be made out of wood, and have some nice detail carved in.
of course politics is going to enter into the arena here. It's not like this thing hasn't been political from the start. Big money always gets political, and it's the republicans who saddle up to the big boys.
Let's not forget that Judge Jackson was a Reagan appointee.
Shit, that's what I thought when I bought my RedHat at 110... (down to 35 or so)
so far all the software that they've bought has been closed. There is nothing necessarily wrong with closed source, and bringing more apps to Linux is never a bad thing. The main reason that "the mainstream" doesn't use Linux yet is because "there just aren't enough easy applications to use yet".
I mean where's my paperclip at? (j/k)
This is the prime ailment that the BeOS is suffering from. A great OS w/out many apps. Linux is lucky to have picked from the great pool of GNU resources to leapfrog the startup development time of doing something from scratch.
Anyways, my point is that more choice is always better.
Well, if ESR is right and
Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.
then perhaps this AOL-ization of Linux may be a good thing. A good idea might be to get the Netscape-like bug feedback modules working
I don't think that they've taken the time to do code optimizations yet...
Cryptonomicon was the lead-up, the theft makes the press, and the movie with Harvey Keitel, Bill Paxton ("game over man!"), and Jon Bon Jovi caps it off:
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0141926
U-571 (2000)
Plot Outline: World War II action drama about a U.S. Navy submarine captain on a risky mission to swipe a decoding device from a stranded German ship.
People should realise that *anyone* can take the Mozilla source code, hack it and release an own version.
So - does this mean that we could see in the future: RedHat Mozilla, and Mandrake Mozilla, and Debian Mozilla, etc...?
Mach is the basic kernel that various flavors of Mac Linux is based on: http://mach-linux.org/
mirror only part of it
much like the DeCSS code - can they really nab you if you only have 2-3 lines of the code including a pointer to another site that contains the next 2-3 lines?
I'm Spartacus! No, I'm Spartacus!