It's not popularity that makes money for the networks, it's advertising
I think the price for advertizing on these networks is in relation to the number of viewers they have during various timeslots. Reasons why advertisements at the olympics or superbowl are so expensive, etc. Its true you can't make much money without advertising, but you can't make much money advertising if you don't have any viewers. And that's where TV is headed when broadband catches on. We'll be able to get a ton of content that interrests us without the commercial aspect. It'll kill their ratings and hopefully the cable networks. At least that's what I think.
Then what are KDE and GNOME doing? The advantage of building a bridge between KDE and GNOME and having the functionality of both systems operating interchangably, coupled with the advantages of running on top of X windows, far exceeds the options and flexibility presented to the end user of any other system. But it will take a few years to standardize and stabilize the system. See OSX and XP have standards and are mostly complete right now. But the GNU system will have every option you could ask for, you'll just have to wait a few years. Eventually I predict its rate of growth will climax into some sort of exponential snowball that gets shot up into outer space and causes a virtual big bang, destroying all other forms of data in its wake. Not a happy thought.
I've never had a problem getting cut/paste features to work under linux, but I usually use the middle mouse button feature that I think is the X windows buffer instead of the KDE/GNOME buffer. Its faster that doing -C ; -p too. But my favorite browser is galeon. They take the gecko renderring engine from mozilla and wrap a user friendly interface around it that brings the web to you more or less the way you want it.
That's how I feel about the cyber memory enhancements. I no longer have to worry about smoking all that kind bud. I'm actually quite amazed that marjijuana was not mentioned in the article. You'd think it'd have some impact on our future since the plant can be used to make fuel, cloth/rope/paper/wood, plastics, you name it. We're still finding new uses even with our highly limitted research funds. Its unfortunate that something as pure and simple as a plant (created by god? I don't believe in him, but I hear most people do...) can become so taboo. And that's not saying anything about solar energy. In fact reading this article just makes me depressed about our current administration, just like thinking about anything else related to our future. *sigh* Guess I should get back to hunting terrorists. Sorry for daydreamin' Sir.
Well, let's see. In the last couple years linux and gnu recieved more support and developement from the leading computer corporations than any other OS. Oracle, Sun, IBM, SGI and now HP are all announcing new linux solutions. But maybe this is just coincidence. Afterall a collection of modular free software can't be worth all that much.
Its kernel has undergone rapid development in the last year that offers many solutions for the end user, like multiple virtual memory systems, preemptable kernel patches, etc. Its OS can conform to anything you desire, use any display frontend, includes several free and fully functional display management systems.
I could go on and talk about all the free software and source code that is out there available for all of us to use, for free, and all the advantages that that implies, but the fact of the matter is its not worth anything. Its free, and it'll always be free. So I'm affraid we'll have to wait until Microsoft fixes all the bugs and security holes and sells us a new.NET.
I don't like anarchism, but anarchists are even fucking worse.
I take it you don't like Linux, then. Anarchy exists is many forms and one of the most successful is not always touted as being anarchist. Anarchy is nothing more than the people working for themselves without parental/governmental supervision. If you equate Anarchy with violence and destruction then I'm sorry to be wasting your time. Perhaps the Raisethefists guy is actually a Libertarian?
I wish they could somehow share this info between open and free universities and students and somehow block all those universities that don't share info. They should have to obtain/create their own info, if they're going to sell it.
Yeah, that makes sense. Sourceforge is forced by law to post their position reguarding the DMCA. Its not like we live in a free country where you can say what you want, you know. Why aren't they forced to post all the laws they abide by? Why aren't they posting civil and federal laws and tax codes they obey? Because. They, VA Linux, Slashdot, Linux.com, Sourceforge, whatever, like the DMCA sooo much, they feel it is necessary to let us know.
And I suppose its not enough to state that you will protect copyrighted works. Today you have to state that you will uphold the DMCA, a rather controversial law, to show how faithful you are to copyright holders and wealthy corps.
technology can absolutely never solve more problems than its... use cause
I don't this is always the case. I just think in most capitalist countries we have a lot of lazy people who don't want to learn how technology works, even the very technology they rely on. And any country that isn't capitalist today probably wouldn't have enough technology to cause problems. Its sad that people are more interrested in money that the technology they need to survive, but that's my point of view. Perhaps money really does provide them with food and gasoline.
Don't you know that Business Management is the only secure job. I mean think about it, if you had the choice would you ever choose to lay yourself off?
Its funny how it is always the people with the cheap pentium 133, old scsi hardware and slow fvwm graphics that REALLY know their stuff about computers and networks while the rest of us stroke our dicks with our Gigahertz and Gigabytes systems and yet we can't even keep an uptime of more than a week.
And I have yet to see an all Linux LAN party.
No technology is 100% foolproof. Network communications, local memory and disks have all taken many measures to ensure than data is 99.999% reliably managed. If you think your systems and networks will never corrupt your data you must not have much experience working on computers. Now a real computer professional realizes this and programs additional countermeasures to doublecheck their work. For example instead of storing your votes as boolean values they would store them as 'yes' or 'no' strings and test the strings later for its value. You would offer the user a quick summary of their votes after they've input them all into your system so they have the oportunity to double check as well. You would probably use a web-based tool utilizing encryption and monitoring all traffic to and from your nets. Anything that isn't directed at port 80 or appears suspicious should have our Secret Agents showing up at their door asking questions, etc. Unfortunately our secret service agents are too busy busting kids for chatting on IRC and sharing music.
I mean come on, we're running the economy on these systems I think we could trust them for something as worthless as voting. Its not like our votes really count for anything anyway. I didn't vote for Bush, did you?;)
You know you're right. There needs to be some form of waiver everyone needs to sign before being allowed to get on the internet. Something that states that it is a free community of computer experts that share bandwidth and information to provide you with a ton of intellectual property that you are allowed to consumer and share with your friends, etc, etc, etc. The cost to host a site is near nothing compared to the cost of the ISPs to provide the networks for all of us to communitcate with eachother. I don't see anyone complaining about how much money those large corps are losing everyday, running all those switches and routers and pumping billions of bits through all those miles of fibre and copper just to give you your daily email. Of course it cost money to host a site, stupid, did you think the internet was free? But it is the responsibility of the person paying and hosting their site to understand the people will be downloading data from their servers. They need to limit access as they see fit, supply only the data they don't mind becoming public (If its intellectual property I hope you agree with fair use). And I can go on, but you get my point. Too many adults act like children when they don't get their way. And children should not be allowed on the internet. Perhaps we need some form of commercial net that would be safer for them.... oh, yeah, how about AOL?
Exactly. I block anyone I don't want to recieve email. You can block anyone you don't want accessing your website in a similar manner. I prefer recieving spam email more than regular commercial snail mail, but I end up recieving both.:( But shouldn't you also be allowed to ask someone not to link to your site or send you commercial mail? I think all commercial spam emailers should be required to have a valid reply email address or face severe legal charges. If we can't hold them accountable or waste their bandwidth the same way they waste ours then we'll always have the same problems we do today. Making something illegal does not make it go away. It just makes the criminals grow smarter to avoid the law.
I think everyone already knows they are risking trouble just by being on the internet. Its a new technology far more dangerous than anything we've ever had before. Impossible to police and protect.
But but but... when I break the law I have to break it in front of a cop before they'll ticket me. Does the BSA have to get a court order to "raid" a legitimate business or do they already have the full support of my government to "raid" anyone they choose based on their secret evidence? Secret evidence is good enough for the US government. It doesn't make sense to me that software companies breaking the law get fined instead of completely shutdown. If breaking the law is really so bad then shouldn't the punishment fit the crime? Why should stealing lying corporations be allowed to exist? Why, then, when Microsoft is called a Monopoly and Monopolies are illegal, does Microsoft get to use services like the BSA and US Marshalls to punish other businesses breaking laws that are just as illegal?
Why?
Can you answer me that?
Why?
Fuck! Everything's against the law, as long as its YOUR law, isn't it?!?!. I hate Americans! God gave them a brain but they just don't think.
I don't know about you, but I've read a lot about Richard Stallman. This man is a genius. Did you know he left MIT to start GNU?
I heard of Miguel through Ximian / Eazel / Helixcode and now Mono. Eazel was notorious for putting small logos and advertisements in their code, similar to Ximian in some ways. And now he's carrying the GNOME flag preaching Microsoft APIs and the future of open source and free software. Miguel probably didn't mean what he said, but none the less, he irritates me. I don't like someone betting my desktop on untested APIs without much public debate and discussion.
Hearing Richard Stallman's slight protest of Miguel's public comments this morning brought a smile to my face. At least a strong voice in the free software community is stating that Miguel doesn't speak for all of us.
Without a VM? A virtual memory manager? Linux already has more of those than it can handle, IMO. Or did you mean a virtual machine, like java? How many implementations of java do we need? Let's see, java, C#, and that other C-like language thingy. Hell, ANSI-C was supposed to solve this from the beginning. But what is really happenning is a lot of people are speculating about how a cross-platform API is supposed to work yet no one is implementing anything stable, standardized, efficient or fully functional. And everyone seems to be forgetting the rule, "Keep it simple, stupid!"
I feel that if we continue supporting this fragmentation of the GNU community on various proprietary corporate interrests it will do nothing but waste our time and spin our wheels hopelessly. By the time we implement.NET microsoft will already be on to their next plan for world domination. Do you think we should follow suit at that time? When does the cycle end? When do we as free software advocates and smart people finally grow a brain, begin some open-forum discussions of the technical issues surrounding the desktop and inter-process communications and quickly find solutions the clean, simple unix way that won't break what we've built already?
I can't tell you how many countless hours I've spent trying to find all the dependencies for GNOME apps. And no linux distro comes close to the level of support I would like. As always it seems you have to do it yourself if you ever want to get it done right.:(
That's an interresting way to put it. I don't understand why, if Miguel de Icaza likes Microsoft's API so much, doesn't he just code for Microsoft and forget about the Mono project. He isn't a die-hard GNU advocate. He dropped the GPL/LGPL for the X windows license. Not that that is a bad move for opensource, but it is a bad move for the free software movement. And GNU/Linux is all about the free software movement, not open source. I personaly suspect that Miguel loves the Microsoft corporate environment and prefer the happy obscure GUI that crashes once in a while over the cold dark stable command line. And all I want to do is implement a happy stable GUI that provides all the functionality of the command line without the corporate advertisements or interrests. Frankly Miguel is in our way, in my opinion.
Don't laugh, I've heard rumors of Novell infected even some of the largest corporations. I have to wonder how anyone would want to move to Novell years after its demise. Or am I wrong, has Novell gone through major revisions, improvements and supports an entirely new set of protocols, standards and features? But look at the bright side, everyone adopts Novell and drops all their unix and M$ techs for some cheap green Novell guys.
Redhat's also made a lot of other improvements? to 7.0 that we just won't mention here.;) But firewalling is good idea when you have a desktop system that only serves one port to the network and wants to maintain security or if you want to prevent anyone from connecting to non-service ports such as in a DMZ environment. If you want to secure a web server, mail server, sql server, etc. You can use both a DMZ/firewall network architecture as well as a chroot environment to trap any hackers inside a quaranteened area to keep them from accessing the systems' main configuration files. So, in other words, if your database gets hacked, all that gets hacked is your database, not the server it relies on, etc. And the hacker most likely would not have the tools they need to move your data, so you would be relatively secure.
Between chroot and some virtual machine software you can secure a unix system pretty well. I'd like to see examples of how windows or any alternative OS can be configured as securely.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not popularity that makes money for the networks, it's advertising
I think the price for advertizing on these networks is in relation to the number of viewers they have during various timeslots. Reasons why advertisements at the olympics or superbowl are so expensive, etc. Its true you can't make much money without advertising, but you can't make much money advertising if you don't have any viewers. And that's where TV is headed when broadband catches on. We'll be able to get a ton of content that interrests us without the commercial aspect. It'll kill their ratings and hopefully the cable networks. At least that's what I think.
I wouldn't bet on any comercial company in a product space to compete directly with microsoft.
:)
That's because you're not one of us.
Then what are KDE and GNOME doing? The advantage of building a bridge between KDE and GNOME and having the functionality of both systems operating interchangably, coupled with the advantages of running on top of X windows, far exceeds the options and flexibility presented to the end user of any other system. But it will take a few years to standardize and stabilize the system. See OSX and XP have standards and are mostly complete right now. But the GNU system will have every option you could ask for, you'll just have to wait a few years. Eventually I predict its rate of growth will climax into some sort of exponential snowball that gets shot up into outer space and causes a virtual big bang, destroying all other forms of data in its wake. Not a happy thought.
I've never had a problem getting cut/paste features to work under linux, but I usually use the middle mouse button feature that I think is the X windows buffer instead of the KDE/GNOME buffer. Its faster that doing -C ; -p too. But my favorite browser is galeon. They take the gecko renderring engine from mozilla and wrap a user friendly interface around it that brings the web to you more or less the way you want it.
That's how I feel about the cyber memory enhancements. I no longer have to worry about smoking all that kind bud. I'm actually quite amazed that marjijuana was not mentioned in the article. You'd think it'd have some impact on our future since the plant can be used to make fuel, cloth/rope/paper/wood, plastics, you name it. We're still finding new uses even with our highly limitted research funds. Its unfortunate that something as pure and simple as a plant (created by god? I don't believe in him, but I hear most people do...) can become so taboo. And that's not saying anything about solar energy. In fact reading this article just makes me depressed about our current administration, just like thinking about anything else related to our future. *sigh* Guess I should get back to hunting terrorists. Sorry for daydreamin' Sir.
Well, let's see. In the last couple years linux and gnu recieved more support and developement from the leading computer corporations than any other OS. Oracle, Sun, IBM, SGI and now HP are all announcing new linux solutions. But maybe this is just coincidence. Afterall a collection of modular free software can't be worth all that much.
Its kernel has undergone rapid development in the last year that offers many solutions for the end user, like multiple virtual memory systems, preemptable kernel patches, etc. Its OS can conform to anything you desire, use any display frontend, includes several free and fully functional display management systems.
I could go on and talk about all the free software and source code that is out there available for all of us to use, for free, and all the advantages that that implies, but the fact of the matter is its not worth anything. Its free, and it'll always be free. So I'm affraid we'll have to wait until Microsoft fixes all the bugs and security holes and sells us a new
I don't like anarchism, but anarchists are even fucking worse.
I take it you don't like Linux, then. Anarchy exists is many forms and one of the most successful is not always touted as being anarchist. Anarchy is nothing more than the people working for themselves without parental/governmental supervision. If you equate Anarchy with violence and destruction then I'm sorry to be wasting your time. Perhaps the Raisethefists guy is actually a Libertarian?
I wish they could somehow share this info between open and free universities and students and somehow block all those universities that don't share info. They should have to obtain/create their own info, if they're going to sell it.
Yeah, that makes sense. Sourceforge is forced by law to post their position reguarding the DMCA. Its not like we live in a free country where you can say what you want, you know. Why aren't they forced to post all the laws they abide by? Why aren't they posting civil and federal laws and tax codes they obey? Because. They, VA Linux, Slashdot, Linux.com, Sourceforge, whatever, like the DMCA sooo much, they feel it is necessary to let us know.
And I suppose its not enough to state that you will protect copyrighted works. Today you have to state that you will uphold the DMCA, a rather controversial law, to show how faithful you are to copyright holders and wealthy corps.
technology can absolutely never solve more problems than its ... use cause
I don't this is always the case. I just think in most capitalist countries we have a lot of lazy people who don't want to learn how technology works, even the very technology they rely on. And any country that isn't capitalist today probably wouldn't have enough technology to cause problems. Its sad that people are more interrested in money that the technology they need to survive, but that's my point of view. Perhaps money really does provide them with food and gasoline.
Don't you know that Business Management is the only secure job. I mean think about it, if you had the choice would you ever choose to lay yourself off?
Its funny how it is always the people with the cheap pentium 133, old scsi hardware and slow fvwm graphics that REALLY know their stuff about computers and networks while the rest of us stroke our dicks with our Gigahertz and Gigabytes systems and yet we can't even keep an uptime of more than a week.
And I have yet to see an all Linux LAN party.
No technology is 100% foolproof. Network communications, local memory and disks have all taken many measures to ensure than data is 99.999% reliably managed. If you think your systems and networks will never corrupt your data you must not have much experience working on computers. Now a real computer professional realizes this and programs additional countermeasures to doublecheck their work. For example instead of storing your votes as boolean values they would store them as 'yes' or 'no' strings and test the strings later for its value. You would offer the user a quick summary of their votes after they've input them all into your system so they have the oportunity to double check as well. You would probably use a web-based tool utilizing encryption and monitoring all traffic to and from your nets. Anything that isn't directed at port 80 or appears suspicious should have our Secret Agents showing up at their door asking questions, etc. Unfortunately our secret service agents are too busy busting kids for chatting on IRC and sharing music.
I mean come on, we're running the economy on these systems I think we could trust them for something as worthless as voting. Its not like our votes really count for anything anyway. I didn't vote for Bush, did you?
You know you're right. There needs to be some form of waiver everyone needs to sign before being allowed to get on the internet. Something that states that it is a free community of computer experts that share bandwidth and information to provide you with a ton of intellectual property that you are allowed to consumer and share with your friends, etc, etc, etc. The cost to host a site is near nothing compared to the cost of the ISPs to provide the networks for all of us to communitcate with eachother. I don't see anyone complaining about how much money those large corps are losing everyday, running all those switches and routers and pumping billions of bits through all those miles of fibre and copper just to give you your daily email. Of course it cost money to host a site, stupid, did you think the internet was free? But it is the responsibility of the person paying and hosting their site to understand the people will be downloading data from their servers. They need to limit access as they see fit, supply only the data they don't mind becoming public (If its intellectual property I hope you agree with fair use). And I can go on, but you get my point. Too many adults act like children when they don't get their way. And children should not be allowed on the internet. Perhaps we need some form of commercial net that would be safer for them.... oh, yeah, how about AOL?
Exactly. I block anyone I don't want to recieve email. You can block anyone you don't want accessing your website in a similar manner. I prefer recieving spam email more than regular commercial snail mail, but I end up recieving both.
I think everyone already knows they are risking trouble just by being on the internet. Its a new technology far more dangerous than anything we've ever had before. Impossible to police and protect.
But but but... when I break the law I have to break it in front of a cop before they'll ticket me. Does the BSA have to get a court order to "raid" a legitimate business or do they already have the full support of my government to "raid" anyone they choose based on their secret evidence? Secret evidence is good enough for the US government. It doesn't make sense to me that software companies breaking the law get fined instead of completely shutdown. If breaking the law is really so bad then shouldn't the punishment fit the crime? Why should stealing lying corporations be allowed to exist? Why, then, when Microsoft is called a Monopoly and Monopolies are illegal, does Microsoft get to use services like the BSA and US Marshalls to punish other businesses breaking laws that are just as illegal?
Why?
Can you answer me that?
Why?
Fuck! Everything's against the law, as long as its YOUR law, isn't it?!?!. I hate Americans! God gave them a brain but they just don't think.
Maybe so, but as long as the blood still splats in GTA3 the PS2 will remain the king of the consoles. :)
I don't know about you, but I've read a lot about Richard Stallman. This man is a genius. Did you know he left MIT to start GNU?
I heard of Miguel through Ximian / Eazel / Helixcode and now Mono. Eazel was notorious for putting small logos and advertisements in their code, similar to Ximian in some ways. And now he's carrying the GNOME flag preaching Microsoft APIs and the future of open source and free software. Miguel probably didn't mean what he said, but none the less, he irritates me. I don't like someone betting my desktop on untested APIs without much public debate and discussion.
Hearing Richard Stallman's slight protest of Miguel's public comments this morning brought a smile to my face. At least a strong voice in the free software community is stating that Miguel doesn't speak for all of us.
Without a VM? A virtual memory manager? Linux already has more of those than it can handle, IMO. Or did you mean a virtual machine, like java? How many implementations of java do we need? Let's see, java, C#, and that other C-like language thingy. Hell, ANSI-C was supposed to solve this from the beginning. But what is really happenning is a lot of people are speculating about how a cross-platform API is supposed to work yet no one is implementing anything stable, standardized, efficient or fully functional. And everyone seems to be forgetting the rule, "Keep it simple, stupid!"
I feel that if we continue supporting this fragmentation of the GNU community on various proprietary corporate interrests it will do nothing but waste our time and spin our wheels hopelessly. By the time we implement
I can't tell you how many countless hours I've spent trying to find all the dependencies for GNOME apps. And no linux distro comes close to the level of support I would like. As always it seems you have to do it yourself if you ever want to get it done right.
That's an interresting way to put it. I don't understand why, if Miguel de Icaza likes Microsoft's API so much, doesn't he just code for Microsoft and forget about the Mono project. He isn't a die-hard GNU advocate. He dropped the GPL/LGPL for the X windows license. Not that that is a bad move for opensource, but it is a bad move for the free software movement. And GNU/Linux is all about the free software movement, not open source. I personaly suspect that Miguel loves the Microsoft corporate environment and prefer the happy obscure GUI that crashes once in a while over the cold dark stable command line. And all I want to do is implement a happy stable GUI that provides all the functionality of the command line without the corporate advertisements or interrests. Frankly Miguel is in our way, in my opinion.
Don't laugh, I've heard rumors of Novell infected even some of the largest corporations. I have to wonder how anyone would want to move to Novell years after its demise. Or am I wrong, has Novell gone through major revisions, improvements and supports an entirely new set of protocols, standards and features? But look at the bright side, everyone adopts Novell and drops all their unix and M$ techs for some cheap green Novell guys.
Redhat's also made a lot of other improvements? to 7.0 that we just won't mention here.
Between chroot and some virtual machine software you can secure a unix system pretty well. I'd like to see examples of how windows or any alternative OS can be configured as securely.
Yeah! I don't want to see Sun go. I'd miss 'em. They gave us OpenOffice. But I kinda like Oracle too... do we have to choose?