Apple has released several of their own projects as OSS. What are the requirements to be "in the OSS camp", 100% open source software?
It is not about requirements, it's just that I don't view Apple (as a company, meaning Steve Jobs & directors, not employees of course) as ideologically committed to free software. They use it, release some non critical software as free if there is direct interest for them (e.g the bonjour protocol they'd like to see on more OS'es or launchd because nobody wants it;)); They're not bad players either. They're like IBM on this matter, but recently IBM has been putting real monney for lot of devel. I'm not putting a good/bad manichean flag on companies anyway, but even if IBM was big bad, I can only thank them daily with Eclipse or improvements on the linux kernel...
RedHat on the other hand has always been committed to FOSS. Even if they ship real, flash et al, it's not their choice that it's closed. They do it to provide a better end-user experience, and it's their choice. I am using Debian and even if it doesn't come with Java, flash,..., I installed them because I needed them. I respect both RH and Debian choice in this case. Debian choice is more ideological, and RH's more practical. However, I think all RedHat code is released under a FSF-happy license.
But hey. Even if it's great to release everything under a free software license, I don't think it would be a so-called "requirement" to be in the OSS camp. The reason why RH is in the FOSS camp is that if someday the capital was overthrown by OSS-haters, all developers would leave. They are in the FOSS camp because Alan Cox and other employees, even in the direction, are FOSS lovers. They think it is great not-only because it's great business. They started before the "Open Source" definition, before the hype. Now maybe I'm wrong but I don't think so (that's why we do have opinions hehe).
Ximian, before being brought by Novell, had several closed products. But in my view, they were still a company in the OSS camp, because they were working for the Linux community. They loved OSS. Miguel De Icaza had the FSF award for good reasons (I can thank him daily for GNOME, and Ximian for Evolution when I used it). And Novell's trying to prove us they do too, now:) (so far it's nice, who would have thought YaST would be free some day?:))
If I was to develop a video game in a game studio (not a mini linux game hehe), I would certainly liberate the source code, but I would certainly keep the artworks, graphics, music (maybe not?), as propriertary. To ensure that someone won't sell it in my place (and legally). But if someone wants to create a similar game, well it's all in the interest of the gamers (since the game is out faster), and if they improved my code, I get the improvements back (if I used a GPL-like license). They just have to create their on content. But I wouldn't shoot in my foot by releasing the whole game as free software. Now, many people on the free software camp would disagree on this, some wouldn't. But I would still view myself as a free software guy.
Ideologically, I think infrastructure software (ie: everything except what's part of the content) should be free (and free content is great too, look at Wikipedia..), and I'm sure one day everything will be free except very specialized software. Everything common will have one or more free (hey all my "free" refer to free as in speech) softwares with most of the market. We're already almost there in terms of free alternatives for everything (I don't miss anything from propriertary OS'es and I've been on Debian for years), but in 15 to 30 years, it won't be "alternatives" but everyone's obvious choice. At least that's what I foresaw in my crystal ball when I was really high;) (but even then, I would not criticize a company for not realising OSS software, because it must be a CHOICE, and it's not the ultimate solution fo
Apple is switching from gcc to intel's compiler?
What the hell is going on here, all of a sudden apple is becomeing less OSS friendly...
IBM compilers (xl* compilers) were proprietary software and still were ported to OS X too, and AFAIK had better performances than gcc on PPC970 (even though Apple did help on optimizing gcc on G4/G5), just like ICC is better than gcc on x86 for most purposes (check benchmarks for yourselves).
No I'm not an Apple fanboy (please! I don't have any Apples nor plan to buy any) and I don't care much about Intel either. I'm more a free software guy trying to run only free software as far as I can for different reasons... And still I don't see how Apple could be less OSS friendly just because some other company (may it be Intel or not) releases closed softwares.
Where does it say Apple will stop using gcc themselves (and distributing it with OSX)? gcc runs on plenty of hardware and os'es... ICC only runs on x86. OS X had its native "made by processor designers' home company(tm)" compiler when it was (and still is) on PowerPC, now that Apple's going to Intel, it just seems logical that Intel does this. At least to show a little support to Apple.
However, I'm not saying Apple is supporting "open source" software. I'd say that they're using FOSS smartly for now, but I don't see them in the OSS camp.
Lastly, ICC having better results than gcc gives the gcc team a great challenge and gcc4 is already a big improvement. ICC on OSX gives more choices to OSX developpers who would need good optimization for intensive arithmetic operations (where ICC shines). Anyway, gcc has strictly nothing to fear from icc, they're aimed at totally different "markets", and gcc is free, so what's to fear?:)
Works, great, is reliable as hell, and I've yet to see a virus sneak through. Some spam does, but that's mostly because I haven't really setup the bayesian filtering yet.
If you're looking for server-side spam filtering, bayesian filters are not the answer. Bayesian filters depend on each user's usage and definition of spam, so it could work if there was some kind of protocol of reporting junk messages between the mail client and the daemon (for each user), but afaik, it doesn't exist yet or there is no solution ready for production (however this could be a great idea even if I don't know if it's worth it, since most user use only one mail agent. Here I use mutt, Thunderbird, Evolution, and Squirrelmail depending where I am, and I only access my mail by ImapSSL).
Bayesian filters are very efficient at the client level, but on the server side if you want more control on spam you should use Remote Black Lists (but that's not really spam filtering as in SpamAssassin).
Unless they NEED shell access, point all users to/bin/false.
If you don't want to give shell access, don't give an account at all. Create a dummy account (e.g mail-users), and let Postfix manage virtual users linked to this dummy account.
Postfix can manage virtual users pretty easily, and can store them the way you like (e.g, if you want to manage your addresses with a web interface, postfix-mysql is adapted, if you use LDAP, you can use postfix-ldap, etc..)
That way, you can have users with a mail on a single virtual host managed by postfix, instead of local users who have their mail on every vhost and IPs bound by Postfix (or any other mail daemon for that matter, since it is the old way mailds work).
Grandparent said it, he (as well as many) support the Free Software philisophy, it's not the same thing as OpenSource (which is more a label aimed at entreprises).
Each and every free software activist want the opening of ALL source code, no matter if they're actually wanting to have a look at it. As one of many, I don't see any area where I woudln't free my code, but unlike some, I can understand that resources may be non-free (e.g, in a videogame, while the engine should be free, say dual licenced GPL / and commercial licence for the company to make some money, like MySQL, I understand that graphics and creation, music, could be non-free). It doesn't mean music, art in general shouldn't be free but it always depends on your business model.
So to say, Free software isn't about the ability of the user to fix a bug. It's not about users at all, in fact. It's about the software itself, and its freedom. This is why we talk about philosophy when it comes to free software, since it is a movement of idea, whereas opensource is a business model that uses free software (and which was at first aimed at advertising free software).
Programming languages are not about being free. They're about being standards (good) or not (bad). People in the free software community want these languages *implementations* (ie compilers, libraries) to be free because some Linux distro (eg Debian) refuse to have non-free packages (at least in the main branch). See the Debian Social Contract.
Yes and the rapid rise of Linux and the fall of UNIX can only be the result of a pact with the Devil, signed by Linus Torvalds in 91 (poor FSF, they never understood why Hurd is so stuck.. well, Satan is behind it).
Hear, hear! Linux is a pure product of evil designed to ruin the magnificent Microsoft and old UNIX companies.
Wanna proof? Check this. The ascii sum of all characters in all Linux' source code, modulo 666 is equal to 666! Works for every version ever released!
Now let's burn all them so called Linux developpers (aka devil followers) for heresy! Forget the $699 SCO licence, LINUX IS EVIL.
Now don't you think inquisition FUDs were better? SCO must miss those good days. No need for justice, only for a trial (aka the stake)
Damn! I just modded up another comment and sorry for the poster but I can't read THAT and not tell you that you are simply awfully arrogant to think that Gandhi didn't know that!
The "an eye for an eye" thing is an old jewish law called the Talion Law, and damn EVERYBODY ON CIVILIZED EARTH knows that! I'm sure Gandhi did, too, you know... It was made even more famous by the very opposite philosophy proposed by someone you may have heard of, who said "If someone hits you on one cheek, present the other" which was a reversal from the then current (violent) doctrine. It's a fundamental difference between old judaism and early christiannism (which has now become quite irrelevent in both religions). Of course it dealt with justice and reparation, but in an excessive way, and it's clear Gandhi was cultivated enough to know all that.
Gandhi's saying was just a well found formula to reject the world's massive use of the violent justice, as seen in death penalty, zero tolerance, fascism, and of course in his case, expressed that Indian should not take on British with violence, looking for vengeance, but pacifically (and it did work). I think it's a great analogy.
Maybe our views differ on the subject, but anyway I just had to tell my point of view, now take it and do whatever you like with it:). I don't think, of course, you didn't know the Talion law, but still it's a little arrogant to think Gandhi didn't know that, only based on what he said and looking ridiculously to it without seeing that it's just a great piece of rhetoric.
Just have a look at Gandhi's page at Wikipedia to see that he was well aware of the "civilized world" and its religions, having studied in London.
Well, for being French, I certainly hope other countries won't adopt our lame eurovision singer.:). She won't sing properly, she's not even known in France, she's from Israel. Should we care ?
Seriously folks, I always enjoy a good French bashing thread on/. because that's always a good occasion to see how far and disconnected people are when thinking about foreigners.
But hey, how can someone think that votes from a jury expresses the opinion of a NATION? Who do you think watch this Euroshit? ONLY GRANDMAS. Wake up.
We have music. And we have trashmusic. You won't find real french music on TV, sorry.
All in all, it has nothing to do with freedom of thoughts, revolution and lumieres, neighbor relations... It's only a stupid contest which replaces good TV shows one day each year so the TV stays off.
The Nature article is only some more French-european-constitution-vote trolling. That's all, folks.
I have seen the movie yesterday (French theaters:)), and slashdotters who enjoyed the first trilogy and disliked the first to episodes of the prequels should not worry too much.
The first episode was way too childish and had very slow development. The second one had stupid conversations but this time, Star Wars is back.
This time, there isn't much useless talking. Of course there is still some. Even if Anakin/Padme dialogs are better than before, I still find them unnatural. But everything goes fast in the movie and there is no time to get bored at least in the first watching. Don't tried to look it many times yet.;)
The movie starts impressively at the heart of a battle of the Clone Wars. And Palpatine's game is clear from the very start. It's told to be particulary dark, but I don't think so. Of course Darth Vader is not really a good citizen, and he certainly does some things that may be worse if they were filmed by wanting them to be real dark. But in this case, not really. It's just like in the ESB when Darth Vader kills Captain Needa & co. It just happens, plain fact, few emotions.
There is also great comedy in the movie. The audience was laughing many times, especially with Artoo who is the true hero of this movie (just kidding, but it is certainly his best performance!;)). Everyone will enjoy Chewie's appearance too.
About visual effects, well, it's still good, but I'm not that a fan of special effects. I find Yoda is too well rendered, in fact, he doesn't look real in the movie (less than in TaoC I think). But it's not shocking after a while. For fans, there's a lot of light saber fights, of course.
Once again, Ewan McGregor does a good job playing Obi-Wan, he may definitely become that old retired man called Ben on Tatooin. Btw there is real news about his retirement (ie, what was he doing all this time ?).
Palpatine is great too.
Well ROTS is simply the movie it should have been, and the two other prequels should have had the same quality. The matter is, George Lucas hadn't enough to tell. Two movies would have been enough, maybe... Or addind some stories to his "Grand Vision";)
There are *GREAT* moments in the movie too, not only "good enough" moments. There is especially one moment I find really great (think 66 !).
For the first time in the prequels, it felt just like real Star Wars. Certainly makes me (and you, soon) hope for the sequel trilogy, even if I don't think it will come true.
The thing is they present themselve to the world as an official french mandated organization.
Traditionnally (at least in France), a country name in an organization name makes one think it is official, especially if it's in some kind of initials. And grandparent sort of implied it. br
(yeah I know it's more frequent in the US with "American" as prefix but still)
Yeah and the battle scenes of the trailer remind me of LotR movies. It's really inspired...
Hope they don't make it as bad an adaptation the LotR movies were. Even if I don't particulary enjoy Disney/kids movies, when there is really nothing to watch [and/or when I'm really stoned;)], it's actually OK.
Hell, even its name isn't especially French. All the adjectives are in the wrong order. Should be something like L'équipe de Réponse d'Incident de Securité Français. ERISF?
Well it looks like it was meant to melt "CERT" with "FIRST", but it's obvious a national organization would have had a french name (and maybe an official translation in english, but not as its main name).
Your translation is OK (except a few grammar mistakes;)), but too litteral. "Réponse d'Incident de Sécurité" doesn't sound french at all, because "Response" and "Réponse" don't always have the same meaning. (in this very case, the meaning is more "reaction" than "answer")
They (FrSIRT) translate their name to "Centre de Recherche et de Veille en Sécurité Informatique" which now sounds pedantic;).
Well, unlike CERT in US, FrSIRT is nothing official in France (and I had never heard of it before). It's just a private company. It's more like Secunia, creating an exploit database to get a name. It's all marketing:).
What's fun is that in France, it is now illegal to reveal an exploit (even to the product's owner) because "it shoudln't have been found/tested in the first place". You know, if you find an exploit, it 'obviously' means you were looking for some... Blah. Stupid laws and government.
So yeah it looks like a hacker alias, and I guess it is the "repented" hacker thing ("I used winnuke 10 years ago, now let's create a company who protects netizens, yeah").
IMHO, The name is quite lame for a company that hasn't anything to do with an official mission assigned by the French government (it has nothing especially French, except its nationality and location). This name is misleading.
Anyway, I guess it was a great marketing coup to steal the bug report of another to get the press AND the Slashdot effect:)
I agree that except for the glory, porting Linux to exotic hardware is quite limited.
But remember Linux on XBOX. At the time it went gold, the XBOX had a good hardware configuration for a decent price (and now it's still OK : $150). It doesn't take too much space, and you can have a linux home server.
Now the same thing applies with the DS (or the PSP but no tactile screen...). It's damn hard to get a Zaurus or equivalent in Europe and it's really expensive. If those nintendoDS hackers can get Linux to run on the DS, can get dual boot, and reverse engeener the tactile screen and the wifi connection, it could become one of the best available PDAs : true games (not crappy Palm games...) and a true OS.
So there's a goal. Now do I think that THIS portable console generation will be powerful enough (in term of batteries, processor, and lack of sufficient storage device) so I will get one and install Linux on it ? Nope.
But maybe in a few years it will be possible on the next Sony or Nintendo. And then I can well imagine myself in my university campus browsing the web, and chatting on IRC (that would require a separate wifi mini keyboard ? hardware hacker, anyone ?;)) on the grass under the sun:). The NintendoDS is small enough to take it anywhere with you.
We have a freedom guaranted by free software. When I buy a NintendoDS, it's a closed package. I get what I paid for. But if I can put some free software on it then it goes beyond my first motive of buying it. That's something the current society doesn't want us to do. It wants us to buy prepared food, and they want us to buy prepackaged hardware (which may be excused by pragmatic reasons since it would be impossible to support if we got every hardware piece separated from software). But still if it's my NintendoDS, I can do whatever I want with it. Just like I can buy beef at the chinese and cook my own rice (incredibly cheaper.. not quite as good but heh..)
To sum up, I think that even if such initiatives doesn't always end up as one (= the initiative's founder especially;)) would have wished, they're still great and everyone motivated enough not to follow the standard path (people who cook their own food) can profit from it. So all in all : Kudos to people who port free software to unsupported hardware:)
Actually, I think it was a reference to the comedy Dogma (Kevin Smith).
A very fun movie indeed.
Re:A direct link to file in a Linux-playable forma
on
Donald Knuth On NPR
·
· Score: 1
Thank you very much, the previous direct linked worked but the server was too slow from here to stream the audio file, and I don't think I had the required tools to convert it to mp3.
Thanks again, I can finally listen. (btw, my first post wasn't intended to be a flamebait)
Direct link to file in a Linux-playable format...
on
Donald Knuth On NPR
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
anyone ?
The page seems to set a cookie about your prefered video codec and you can't get direct link to the file, and it can either be a ".wax" or a ?"smil" file I cannot play.
Anyone gentle enough to provide a good ol' torrent or something ? and in a Linux-playable format.
It reminds me of what SUN was talking about in this.
Jonathan Schwartz must be happy to see that finally, his idea of selling cpu time is being realised (and how much he loves IBM;))
Anyway, even if, I guess, the price will be lot higher than Jimi Hendrix (and that's something), the few people getting access to some of the best performing supercomputers is really nice.
Slashdot Mirror
That's exactly what the LGPL is for.
Derivative of your code will be in LGPL, but code linked to it (as plugins or using it as a library) have no license requirement.
Check it out
Apple has released several of their own projects as OSS. What are the requirements to be "in the OSS camp", 100% open source software?
;)); They're not bad players either. They're like IBM on this matter, but recently IBM has been putting real monney for lot of devel. I'm not putting a good/bad manichean flag on companies anyway, but even if IBM was big bad, I can only thank them daily with Eclipse or improvements on the linux kernel...
..., I installed them because I needed them. I respect both RH and Debian choice in this case. Debian choice is more ideological, and RH's more practical. However, I think all RedHat code is released under a FSF-happy license.
:) (so far it's nice, who would have thought YaST would be free some day? :))
;) (but even then, I would not criticize a company for not realising OSS software, because it must be a CHOICE, and it's not the ultimate solution fo
It is not about requirements, it's just that I don't view Apple (as a company, meaning Steve Jobs & directors, not employees of course) as ideologically committed to free software. They use it, release some non critical software as free if there is direct interest for them (e.g the bonjour protocol they'd like to see on more OS'es or launchd because nobody wants it
RedHat on the other hand has always been committed to FOSS. Even if they ship real, flash et al, it's not their choice that it's closed. They do it to provide a better end-user experience, and it's their choice. I am using Debian and even if it doesn't come with Java, flash,
But hey. Even if it's great to release everything under a free software license, I don't think it would be a so-called "requirement" to be in the OSS camp. The reason why RH is in the FOSS camp is that if someday the capital was overthrown by OSS-haters, all developers would leave. They are in the FOSS camp because Alan Cox and other employees, even in the direction, are FOSS lovers. They think it is great not-only because it's great business. They started before the "Open Source" definition, before the hype. Now maybe I'm wrong but I don't think so (that's why we do have opinions hehe).
Ximian, before being brought by Novell, had several closed products. But in my view, they were still a company in the OSS camp, because they were working for the Linux community. They loved OSS. Miguel De Icaza had the FSF award for good reasons (I can thank him daily for GNOME, and Ximian for Evolution when I used it). And Novell's trying to prove us they do too, now
If I was to develop a video game in a game studio (not a mini linux game hehe), I would certainly liberate the source code, but I would certainly keep the artworks, graphics, music (maybe not?), as propriertary. To ensure that someone won't sell it in my place (and legally). But if someone wants to create a similar game, well it's all in the interest of the gamers (since the game is out faster), and if they improved my code, I get the improvements back (if I used a GPL-like license). They just have to create their on content. But I wouldn't shoot in my foot by releasing the whole game as free software. Now, many people on the free software camp would disagree on this, some wouldn't. But I would still view myself as a free software guy.
Ideologically, I think infrastructure software (ie: everything except what's part of the content) should be free (and free content is great too, look at Wikipedia..), and I'm sure one day everything will be free except very specialized software. Everything common will have one or more free (hey all my "free" refer to free as in speech) softwares with most of the market. We're already almost there in terms of free alternatives for everything (I don't miss anything from propriertary OS'es and I've been on Debian for years), but in 15 to 30 years, it won't be "alternatives" but everyone's obvious choice. At least that's what I foresaw in my crystal ball when I was really high
Apple is switching from gcc to intel's compiler? What the hell is going on here, all of a sudden apple is becomeing less OSS friendly...
... ICC only runs on x86. OS X had its native "made by processor designers' home company(tm)" compiler when it was (and still is) on PowerPC, now that Apple's going to Intel, it just seems logical that Intel does this. At least to show a little support to Apple.
:)
IBM compilers (xl* compilers) were proprietary software and still were ported to OS X too, and AFAIK had better performances than gcc on PPC970 (even though Apple did help on optimizing gcc on G4/G5), just like ICC is better than gcc on x86 for most purposes (check benchmarks for yourselves).
No I'm not an Apple fanboy (please! I don't have any Apples nor plan to buy any) and I don't care much about Intel either. I'm more a free software guy trying to run only free software as far as I can for different reasons... And still I don't see how Apple could be less OSS friendly just because some other company (may it be Intel or not) releases closed softwares.
Where does it say Apple will stop using gcc themselves (and distributing it with OSX)? gcc runs on plenty of hardware and os'es
However, I'm not saying Apple is supporting "open source" software. I'd say that they're using FOSS smartly for now, but I don't see them in the OSS camp.
Lastly, ICC having better results than gcc gives the gcc team a great challenge and gcc4 is already a big improvement. ICC on OSX gives more choices to OSX developpers who would need good optimization for intensive arithmetic operations (where ICC shines). Anyway, gcc has strictly nothing to fear from icc, they're aimed at totally different "markets", and gcc is free, so what's to fear?
Works, great, is reliable as hell, and I've yet to see a virus sneak through. Some spam does, but that's mostly because I haven't really setup the bayesian filtering yet.
If you're looking for server-side spam filtering, bayesian filters are not the answer. Bayesian filters depend on each user's usage and definition of spam, so it could work if there was some kind of protocol of reporting junk messages between the mail client and the daemon (for each user), but afaik, it doesn't exist yet or there is no solution ready for production (however this could be a great idea even if I don't know if it's worth it, since most user use only one mail agent. Here I use mutt, Thunderbird, Evolution, and Squirrelmail depending where I am, and I only access my mail by ImapSSL).
Bayesian filters are very efficient at the client level, but on the server side if you want more control on spam you should use Remote Black Lists (but that's not really spam filtering as in SpamAssassin).
Unless they NEED shell access, point all users to /bin/false.
If you don't want to give shell access, don't give an account at all. Create a dummy account (e.g mail-users), and let Postfix manage virtual users linked to this dummy account.
Postfix can manage virtual users pretty easily, and can store them the way you like (e.g, if you want to manage your addresses with a web interface, postfix-mysql is adapted, if you use LDAP, you can use postfix-ldap, etc..)
That way, you can have users with a mail on a single virtual host managed by postfix, instead of local users who have their mail on every vhost and IPs bound by Postfix (or any other mail daemon for that matter, since it is the old way mailds work).
Damn man don't sound so realistic in your sarcasms, I'm too high to make a difference. Damn pot smokers. Sorry for the down mod, you're up again.
Grandparent said it, he (as well as many) support the Free Software philisophy, it's not the same thing as OpenSource (which is more a label aimed at entreprises).
Each and every free software activist want the opening of ALL source code, no matter if they're actually wanting to have a look at it. As one of many, I don't see any area where I woudln't free my code, but unlike some, I can understand that resources may be non-free (e.g, in a videogame, while the engine should be free, say dual licenced GPL / and commercial licence for the company to make some money, like MySQL, I understand that graphics and creation, music, could be non-free). It doesn't mean music, art in general shouldn't be free but it always depends on your business model.
So to say, Free software isn't about the ability of the user to fix a bug. It's not about users at all, in fact. It's about the software itself, and its freedom. This is why we talk about philosophy when it comes to free software, since it is a movement of idea, whereas opensource is a business model that uses free software (and which was at first aimed at advertising free software).
Programming languages are not about being free. They're about being standards (good) or not (bad). People in the free software community want these languages *implementations* (ie compilers, libraries) to be free because some Linux distro (eg Debian) refuse to have non-free packages (at least in the main branch). See the Debian Social Contract.
Yes, 666 % 666 would be 0.... [google.com] Or are you being sarchastic somehow?
:>
Me? Not anyhow!
Damn.. You mean, 666%666 would be equal to 0? Fortunately you're here to teach me maths! Thanks AC, you saved my day.
.... (and fortunately others understood it was part of the joke).
Yes and the rapid rise of Linux and the fall of UNIX can only be the result of a pact with the Devil, signed by Linus Torvalds in 91 (poor FSF, they never understood why Hurd is so stuck.. well, Satan is behind it).
Hear, hear! Linux is a pure product of evil designed to ruin the magnificent Microsoft and old UNIX companies.
Wanna proof? Check this. The ascii sum of all characters in all Linux' source code, modulo 666 is equal to 666! Works for every version ever released!
Now let's burn all them so called Linux developpers (aka devil followers) for heresy! Forget the $699 SCO licence, LINUX IS EVIL.
Now don't you think inquisition FUDs were better? SCO must miss those good days. No need for justice, only for a trial (aka the stake)
Damn! I just modded up another comment and sorry for the poster but I can't read THAT and not tell you that you are simply awfully arrogant to think that Gandhi didn't know that!
:). I don't think, of course, you didn't know the Talion law, but still it's a little arrogant to think Gandhi didn't know that, only based on what he said and looking ridiculously to it without seeing that it's just a great piece of rhetoric.
The "an eye for an eye" thing is an old jewish law called the Talion Law, and damn EVERYBODY ON CIVILIZED EARTH knows that! I'm sure Gandhi did, too, you know... It was made even more famous by the very opposite philosophy proposed by someone you may have heard of, who said "If someone hits you on one cheek, present the other" which was a reversal from the then current (violent) doctrine. It's a fundamental difference between old judaism and early christiannism (which has now become quite irrelevent in both religions). Of course it dealt with justice and reparation, but in an excessive way, and it's clear Gandhi was cultivated enough to know all that.
Gandhi's saying was just a well found formula to reject the world's massive use of the violent justice, as seen in death penalty, zero tolerance, fascism, and of course in his case, expressed that Indian should not take on British with violence, looking for vengeance, but pacifically (and it did work). I think it's a great analogy.
Maybe our views differ on the subject, but anyway I just had to tell my point of view, now take it and do whatever you like with it
Just have a look at Gandhi's page at Wikipedia to see that he was well aware of the "civilized world" and its religions, having studied in London.
A logician tells a collegue his wife just had a baby.
- Is it a boy or a girl?
- Yes.
(translated from french, but should be understandable...)
Well, for being French, I certainly hope other countries won't adopt our lame eurovision singer. :). She won't sing properly, she's not even known in France, she's from Israel. Should we care ?
/. because that's always a good occasion to see how far and disconnected people are when thinking about foreigners.
Seriously folks, I always enjoy a good French bashing thread on
But hey, how can someone think that votes from a jury expresses the opinion of a NATION? Who do you think watch this Euroshit? ONLY GRANDMAS. Wake up.
We have music. And we have trashmusic. You won't find real french music on TV, sorry.
All in all, it has nothing to do with freedom of thoughts, revolution and lumieres, neighbor relations... It's only a stupid contest which replaces good TV shows one day each year so the TV stays off.
The Nature article is only some more French-european-constitution-vote trolling. That's all, folks.
I have seen the movie yesterday (French theaters :)), and slashdotters who enjoyed the first trilogy and disliked the first to episodes of the prequels should not worry too much.
;)
;)). Everyone will enjoy Chewie's appearance too.
;)
The first episode was way too childish and had very slow development. The second one had stupid conversations but this time, Star Wars is back.
This time, there isn't much useless talking. Of course there is still some. Even if Anakin/Padme dialogs are better than before, I still find them unnatural. But everything goes fast in the movie and there is no time to get bored at least in the first watching. Don't tried to look it many times yet.
The movie starts impressively at the heart of a battle of the Clone Wars. And Palpatine's game is clear from the very start. It's told to be particulary dark, but I don't think so. Of course Darth Vader is not really a good citizen, and he certainly does some things that may be worse if they were filmed by wanting them to be real dark. But in this case, not really. It's just like in the ESB when Darth Vader kills Captain Needa & co. It just happens, plain fact, few emotions.
There is also great comedy in the movie. The audience was laughing many times, especially with Artoo who is the true hero of this movie (just kidding, but it is certainly his best performance!
About visual effects, well, it's still good, but I'm not that a fan of special effects. I find Yoda is too well rendered, in fact, he doesn't look real in the movie (less than in TaoC I think). But it's not shocking after a while. For fans, there's a lot of light saber fights, of course.
Once again, Ewan McGregor does a good job playing Obi-Wan, he may definitely become that old retired man called Ben on Tatooin. Btw there is real news about his retirement (ie, what was he doing all this time ?).
Palpatine is great too.
Well ROTS is simply the movie it should have been, and the two other prequels should have had the same quality. The matter is, George Lucas hadn't enough to tell. Two movies would have been enough, maybe... Or addind some stories to his "Grand Vision"
There are *GREAT* moments in the movie too, not only "good enough" moments. There is especially one moment I find really great (think 66 !).
For the first time in the prequels, it felt just like real Star Wars. Certainly makes me (and you, soon) hope for the sequel trilogy, even if I don't think it will come true.
The thing is they present themselve to the world as an official french mandated organization.
Traditionnally (at least in France), a country name in an organization name makes one think it is official, especially if it's in some kind of initials. And grandparent sort of implied it.
br (yeah I know it's more frequent in the US with "American" as prefix but still)
Yeah and the battle scenes of the trailer remind me of LotR movies. It's really inspired...
;)], it's actually OK.
Hope they don't make it as bad an adaptation the LotR movies were. Even if I don't particulary enjoy Disney/kids movies, when there is really nothing to watch [and/or when I'm really stoned
Let's all /. AOL !
Hell, even its name isn't especially French. All the adjectives are in the wrong order. Should be something like L'équipe de Réponse d'Incident de Securité Français. ERISF?
;)), but too litteral. "Réponse d'Incident de Sécurité" doesn't sound french at all, because "Response" and "Réponse" don't always have the same meaning. (in this very case, the meaning is more "reaction" than "answer")
;).
Well it looks like it was meant to melt "CERT" with "FIRST", but it's obvious a national organization would have had a french name (and maybe an official translation in english, but not as its main name).
Your translation is OK (except a few grammar mistakes
They (FrSIRT) translate their name to "Centre de Recherche et de Veille en Sécurité Informatique" which now sounds pedantic
Well, unlike CERT in US, FrSIRT is nothing official in France (and I had never heard of it before). It's just a private company. It's more like Secunia, creating an exploit database to get a name. It's all marketing :).
:)
What's fun is that in France, it is now illegal to reveal an exploit (even to the product's owner) because "it shoudln't have been found/tested in the first place". You know, if you find an exploit, it 'obviously' means you were looking for some... Blah. Stupid laws and government.
So yeah it looks like a hacker alias, and I guess it is the "repented" hacker thing ("I used winnuke 10 years ago, now let's create a company who protects netizens, yeah").
IMHO, The name is quite lame for a company that hasn't anything to do with an official mission assigned by the French government (it has nothing especially French, except its nationality and location). This name is misleading.
Anyway, I guess it was a great marketing coup to steal the bug report of another to get the press AND the Slashdot effect
I agree that except for the glory, porting Linux to exotic hardware is quite limited.
;)) on the grass under the sun :). The NintendoDS is small enough to take it anywhere with you.
.. not quite as good but heh..)
;)) would have wished, they're still great and everyone motivated enough not to follow the standard path (people who cook their own food) can profit from it. So all in all : Kudos to people who port free software to unsupported hardware :)
But remember Linux on XBOX. At the time it went gold, the XBOX had a good hardware configuration for a decent price (and now it's still OK : $150). It doesn't take too much space, and you can have a linux home server.
Now the same thing applies with the DS (or the PSP but no tactile screen...). It's damn hard to get a Zaurus or equivalent in Europe and it's really expensive. If those nintendoDS hackers can get Linux to run on the DS, can get dual boot, and reverse engeener the tactile screen and the wifi connection, it could become one of the best available PDAs : true games (not crappy Palm games...) and a true OS.
So there's a goal. Now do I think that THIS portable console generation will be powerful enough (in term of batteries, processor, and lack of sufficient storage device) so I will get one and install Linux on it ? Nope.
But maybe in a few years it will be possible on the next Sony or Nintendo. And then I can well imagine myself in my university campus browsing the web, and chatting on IRC (that would require a separate wifi mini keyboard ? hardware hacker, anyone ?
We have a freedom guaranted by free software. When I buy a NintendoDS, it's a closed package. I get what I paid for. But if I can put some free software on it then it goes beyond my first motive of buying it. That's something the current society doesn't want us to do. It wants us to buy prepared food, and they want us to buy prepackaged hardware (which may be excused by pragmatic reasons since it would be impossible to support if we got every hardware piece separated from software). But still if it's my NintendoDS, I can do whatever I want with it. Just like I can buy beef at the chinese and cook my own rice (incredibly cheaper
To sum up, I think that even if such initiatives doesn't always end up as one (= the initiative's founder especially
Thank you, it's working perfectly. It had been a long time since I had last seen Photoshop and it is quite a shock, but it looks nice.
Actually, I think it was a reference to the comedy Dogma (Kevin Smith).
A very fun movie indeed.
Thank you very much, the previous direct linked worked but the server was too slow from here to stream the audio file, and I don't think I had the required tools to convert it to mp3.
Thanks again, I can finally listen. (btw, my first post wasn't intended to be a flamebait)
anyone ?
The page seems to set a cookie about your prefered video codec and you can't get direct link to the file, and it can either be a ".wax" or a ?"smil" file I cannot play.
Anyone gentle enough to provide a good ol' torrent or something ? and in a Linux-playable format.
Thanks
It reminds me of what SUN was talking about in this.
;))
Jonathan Schwartz must be happy to see that finally, his idea of selling cpu time is being realised (and how much he loves IBM
Anyway, even if, I guess, the price will be lot higher than Jimi Hendrix (and that's something), the few people getting access to some of the best performing supercomputers is really nice.
To sum up : nice business plan.