I've never quite understood the "make employees miserable to avoid an explicit layoff" idea. Every time I see conditions worsening and a subsequent exodus, a high percentage of the folks that leave are the awesome employees. Why? Because those employees are more skilled, efficient, and good with people. Their ability to get another job of their choice is greater. Who does that leave you with? No company can be 100% superstars, but you don't want to lose all your superstars, for obvious reasons.
I recognize that I'm being naïve - the management who might pull this kind of stunt are natually not going to realize (or care) about the impact this would have on the organization's effectiveness. In fact, they might prefer a higher percentage of people who believe they have fewer alternatives. Those are the type of employees who won't get "sassy" when you make unreasonable demands on them.
I don't understand those who pin our hopes for space exploration on the private sector and capitalism. The payoff just isn't there, other than possibly in some esoteric fields such as Zero-G manufacturing. But who cares? This is a dream more grand than money. I was hoping that as a species, we were evolving past the need for more and more superfluous accumulation of wealth anyhow. Perhaps I am too naive - I've been told that before.
I know, there is a cost with space exploration. But to thrive, humanity needs to explore and learn. This is a core need, and historically, it is the sign of a society moving forward. I'm not hung up on discovering the next Teflon, or whatever other cool terrestrial inventions may come out of the space program. I DO care that as a child, I watched as we, for the first time, left our own planet and set foot on another place in our cosmos. Sure, it was only a quarter of a million miles away. But it was amazing! And, it was a milestone. We need more of those moments.
Rivalry got us to the moon, no doubt, and political supremacy was the driving force - "We're better than the Ruskies". Blah. I didn't even know about that stuff as a kid - to me, it was amazing that humans were on the moon. Not Americans, humans. We can work together this time, as the world, and achieve something together that we can be even more proud of than what we achieved separately.
I also know that there are many pressing problems in the world, such as hunger, disease and war. I am sensitive to those issues, but I also think it's a strawman to believe we have to focus on one issue to the exclusion of another. We already have the means (transport, agriculture, processing methods) to solve the world's hunger and thirst problems - we just choose not to do it, mostly because we don't have the will. There again, we need the desire to do something that transcends accumulation of wealth. It's about more than making piles of money. If we want to work on those issues first, then go back to space, that's fine - as long as we would really do it. But would we? Perhaps seeing that there are exciting things we can do that amount to more than lining our pockets would be inspiring.
Wealth is not a bad thing, but it's not everything. We should get back to space, and do it for the mountain climber reason ("because it's there"). It's lofty. It's interesting. It's something that makes us proud. Been a long time since I've felt like I did in those days in the late 60s. Go ahead, call me naive, or tell me my priorities are misplaced. But then, tell me about something that we've done as a people that made us more proud than going to the moon.
...and this doesn't solve the problem. The WinTel and LinTel communities have decided, with their pocketbook, that they want "choice", which means a jillion different CPUs, chipsets, video cards, sound devices, network devices, USB and FireWire ports - the list goes on and on. The mere thought of testing relevant combinations/permutations of this makes my skin crawl. Yes, a good driver architecture would help, but hey, if your video card fails, who cares if it takes your system down - your system _is_ down without video.
What we really need are some standard reference models for PCs, and (this is critical) we need hardware manufacturers to stop treating driver interfaces as intellectual property and completely, totally OPEN their interface for software developers. Of course, like I said above, people vote with their pocketbook, and people don't seem to get that worked up about this. They'll continue to buy nVidia or ATI or whoever because the cards really do have great performance, and they'll just suffer with the problems that come with proprietary interfaces. I mean, it's amazing to me - when I buy hardware, it should be OPEN. What you did under the hood is one thing, but how the system interfaces with it - OPEN. My old retro computers came with SCHEMATICS, for crying out loud.
OK, I'm off my soapbox. Just don't think that the driver world will get any better this way, because it won't. Until we're dealing with known, documented hardware and a more elegant driver architecture, a crashin' we will go.
Excellent argument, "I'm right and won't listen to anybody else who differs". How could you have started such an intelligent post and then self-destruct in such a manner?
I said that? Check again. I was specifically referring to assertions such as made in the previous paragraph:
...Tell me how it's OK, because India and China are doing it too, right? I mean, if other people are doing it, it's not "fair" if we can't. Tell me that the permafrost would have "melted anyhow". Tell me about the volcanoes, and that they put out more emissions than we do, which, of course, makes ours "OK"...
As I replied to the other similar comment, I don't want to discuss those kind of red herrings. I want to discuss the issue, and I am (as stated) completely open to all sides of it. But I have no inclination to process the disinformation and intentional attempts to mislead. From this point forward, as soon as I smell a rat, I will dump those comments straight into the recycle bin where they belong. Less stress, more time, better result. Who can argue with that.
Also, please note, some other commenters have posted links that refute the assertion that the US is a net carbon sink. Even if that assertion is true, all that means is that our forests are taking up slack. There is still just as much carbon being dumped into the environment, and there is a net increase, so, less carbon still could mean less warming. Just because we have more forests means we can spew more pollution? China could make a similar argument - because they have the most people, they should be able to spew a commensurate amount of carbon. That's only fair, right? Not according to our leaders...
Note the paragraph that precedes what you quoted. While some may differ, I have no desire to dismiss any honest dissent. My quarrel is with red herring arguments that don't address the point.
The real question is to what extent are we influencing climate change, and what corrective actions are appropriate. Today, an unfortunate percentage of the discussion is meant to confuse and mislead. We've got to knock that stuff off!
The world is getting warmer. The world is very big, so a small change (e.g., 1 degree Celsius) is a big deal. About this fact, there is little to no dissent.
Mankind is contributing to this change. There is disagreement about how much, but don't be fooled - we are having an impact, and why shouldn't we? There are six billion of us, and rapidly growing. We think that our legacy of burning wood, coal, and now petroleum products, is going to have no impact, and that the exotic chemicals we have used (e.g., CFCs) have no role in this? Come on. Don't make me Google it for you, do the work.
This change IS going to make a difference. Did it cause Katrina? I don't know. Could it cause floods, rise of global sea levels, famine, thirst, and the loss of thousands of species? Probably. Is it already killing polar bears, bleaching coral, and melting permafrost? Yep. Already.
I want to move on to "how much _really_ is a result of our actions" and "what can we do now".
Despite the misinformation campaign from a particular political agenda, this is NOT a political issue, and it IS something to be concerned about. Our lives are on the line, and people are still engaging in lobbyist games and misleading science, just to, what? Get some more power and money for a generation, so the next one can perish? Do we have no conscience at all?
So, please, certain fellow folks in the US, bring the arguments. Tell me how it's OK for a country with 4 percent of the world's population to produce the most emissions, because we don't want to "slow" our economy. Tell me why we should ignore the problem because, of course, there's a big "scientific conspiracy". Tell me how it's OK, because India and China are doing it too, right? I mean, if other people are doing it, it's not "fair" if we can't. Tell me that the permafrost would have "melted anyhow". Tell me about the volcanoes, and that they put out more emissions than we do, which, of course, makes ours "OK".
And, please send all these arguments to/dev/null. Because it's time for the rest of us to talk seriously about what is going on.
I am not an alarmist. I am not part of a left-wing conspiracy. There are people who know 1,000,000 times more than I do (and more than you do...) about climate change and our role in it. And many, many of them believe there is a real issue, one that could get deadly serious in the not too distant future. Maybe they have a point? Have you checked it out - I mean, really, with an open mind, and not through the filter of the talking points you heard on AM radio this morning?
And the fact that someone denies something doesn't make it untrue.
Precisely. So we've established that we don't know if it's true or not. There is no video of the chair throwing (although that would be kind of fun to see, and would likely be on Google Video). There were apparently no other witnesses to the chair throwage. So why is this unsubstantiated, condescending and disparaging accusation included in an article from a company that claims to not "be evil"? They could have just as well left that out, and I would have respected them more. Now, I will reluctantly join the growing ranks of those who are suspicious of Google.
As anyone who reads past "Steve Ballmer was quoted as saying..." might recall, Ballmer denies the chair throwing incident. The fact that someone is accused of something doesn't make it true. Yes, Slashdotters, even if it is Steve Ballmer:-)
If accusations are automatically true, then I accuse all Slashdot readers of being pathetic geeks with no life.
"I'm unconvinced- I think webmail will soon be replacing client side readers for all but power users."
Sorry, this only works if you assume ubiquitous connectivity to your e-mail server. Not true today, not likely to be true anytime soon (at least in the US) for many business users. Price is too high, coverage too spotty, standards need to converge, etc., etc.
Standalone personal organizers (e.g., Outlook) are going to be around for a while. In fact, the whole notion in general that web apps can provide the same user experience as thick client apps (AJAX and so on notwithstanding) is suspect, and I am "unconvinced" this will change soon. The lack of any standards for the "Web UI" user experience has caused a mess. Windows, Linux, Mac OS, etc solve this with a unified windowing interface. It's good, and users like it.
I agree with the risk of lapses in history. I want my shows to remain as they were! They are interesting as artifacts of technical art, cultural norms, even fashion.
Just last night, I was watching a DVD version of the sci-fi series UFO. First time I've seen it in many years. The interesting thing - everyone was chain smoking, drinking hard liquor, etc. The episodes had tons of short skirts, borderline harrassing behavior and innuendo, albeit expressed in a very Austin Powers-like way. Most was innocent by today's standards, but much different than what you would see in modern programs (the chain smoking, for instance). Not only was it fun to see my old sci-fi again, but it was *really* interesting to see the cultural nuances.
If someone retroactively changed that stuff to avoid offending someone, I'd be really hacked off (not that they would for a one-season cheesy sci-fi, but you get the point).
I pay $10/month for Napster (subscription). I currently have about 1,000 songs bookmarked, and from time to time, I listen to all of them. At 99 cents per song, that would be close to $1,000 if I wanted to buy them. It would take me 9 years of my Napster subscription to spend $1,000. And by then, many of those 1,000 songs would be old to me, and I'd want to move on to other songs. But I would have already paid the money for them.
I'm not sure what people here have against the subscription model, but trust me, it makes sense for a lot of people, especially those like myself who don't know from one week to the next what I might want to hear.
The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not represent the views of my employer, my family, my cats, or that yucky stuff that gets stuck between the bathroom tiles.
You folks are obviously forgetting about quantum echo (QE). The algorithm for deleting illegal content is trivial, and can be coded in something as simple as Timex/Sinclair BASIC.
Normally, it would be necessary to delete the files first, and then see if the user gets ticked off because legitimate, legal files got deleted. But by using quantum "echo", where effect comes before cause, the program can see the user's anger ahead of time, and avoid deleting the files in the first place.
Now, bear in mind, there's really no way to "trick" the algorithm. Quantum cryptography and the Heisenberg principle precludes any kind of "fooling" the program. You cannot know both the velocity and position of the illegal MP3 bits, so they are impossible to "hide", even if they are on media completely separate from your computer.
Glad that's settled...
My opinions are my own, and do not represent the views of my employer, spouse, children, cats, or sock remnants under my toenails.
If the communications infrastructure goes down, being friends with a ham radio operator would be a very good idea. Hams use both short and long range radio gear, and both types of gear can operate independent of the power grid and relays/repeaters when needed. Failing that, as another commenter noted, having a battery-operated AM or shortware radio is good too. Be sure to have fresh batteries! AM travels a long way at night. Signals in a 100-200 mile radius are typically not difficult, and would be the most useful, as they would be close to home but probably outside the disaster zone.
My comments are mine alone, and do not represent the views of my employer, friends, family or cats.
I understand that a key issue here is whether or not the (potential) defendants violated copyright. But a lot of the responses have been variations of "what can we do about the RIAA, and the unchecked power of corporate America".
So, I say, we sidestep the whole issue, and just start enjoying media that artists release under Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org/ licensing. That is, tell the RIAA, in your face! There is LOTS of good music (and other work) out there that can be had freely. Sure, it's not the bubblegum stuff you're hearing on KRAP radio, but lots of it is really worth listening to.
The more we adopt alternate methods, the more the power will slip away from the current abusers. It's not a total solution, but it's a place to start.
You folks don't get it. Oregon is just slowing down a bit, growing a spare tire - when you get older, you'll understand how difficult it is to keep the weight off.
Yeah, when I tried to put OS X Tiger on my Mac SE/30, I was hoping it would really take off like a missile. But I couldn't load the CD. Still trying to make that work, will get back to you all next week.
Wow, if you're 56, you are using language and making comments that are way beneath your age and wisdom. That is seriously too bad.
My comments here can be simply explained - I want to see some real dialogue, not more useless (and often unsubstantiated) babble about how bad Microsoft is. I don't depend on them for my living. Perhaps you depend on them losing ground for your living? Do you work for Sun, or RealNetworks? Come on, fess up:-)
The fact that you're looking for them to do something bad/illegal, etc. in order to "catch them in the act", shows just how out of whack you are. Get some help, Dude. Really.
And by the way, what did I advertise? I don't remember mentioning a specific product, endorsing a course of action, or making a purchasing suggestion. Guess your silly web forum enforcement hobby wouldn't have worked out even if you were right about my employment.
Take care, and do try to release some of that stress more constructively.
Wonder if anyone really checked out Microsoft's side of this story?:-)
Wonder if anyone would accept it if Microsoft cured a major disease or effected World Peace:-)
Wonder if anyone spouting their venomous comments has actually used the MS Anti-Spyware product:-)
Wonder how many nasty comments were posted by someone from IE/Windows:-)
I have programmed the following template to create surprisingly realistic Slashdot posts. Quasi-original words are substituted for "blah" with a RegEx processor.
TEMPLATE
Blah blah Microsoft is horrible blah I am so happy I'm using Linux now blah blah Microsoft is evil and they are lying to you blah Linux is the greatest thing since the discovery of fire blah blah Bill Gates is a terrible horrible person who stinks blah Linux is innovative blah blah Microsoft is not innovative they just steal all their ides blah blah Anything bad said about Microsoft is true blah Anything good said about Microsoft is by a fanboy blah blah PR spin lies horrible Microsoft Great innovative wonderful Linux and oh by the way BSD is cool blah so is the Mac it rulez blah blah
/TEMPLATE
I _know_ I will lose some Karma on this one. But I am so fatigued with the anti-MS bent here. Come on folks, you are intelligent and thoughtful. Let's have some real dialogue here, and keep it credible.
The opinions expressed in this post are my own, and do not represent the views of my employer, my family, my friends, or my cats.
There is a built-in barrier to entry with any new OS, and that is the undocumented nature of the hardware. The motherboards, video cards, chipsets, sound cards, etc. are all supported by Windows because the information for writing and validating the drivers is available to the right people. But in many cases it is not publicly available, leaving Linux and other alternatives on x86 the difficult job of reverse-engineering. This is a dubious exercise at best. An upstart OS will have an even harder time, because it probably won't have a curious and intelligent army of FOSS programmers to tackle new and existing hardware.
No, to make real OS choice feasible will require hardware that is open in it's specifications, and hardware companies that have a vested interest in encouraging development for any and all OS choices. I don't see that happening any time soon.
Slashdot Mirror
I recognize that I'm being naïve - the management who might pull this kind of stunt are natually not going to realize (or care) about the impact this would have on the organization's effectiveness. In fact, they might prefer a higher percentage of people who believe they have fewer alternatives. Those are the type of employees who won't get "sassy" when you make unreasonable demands on them.
I don't understand those who pin our hopes for space exploration on the private sector and capitalism. The payoff just isn't there, other than possibly in some esoteric fields such as Zero-G manufacturing. But who cares? This is a dream more grand than money. I was hoping that as a species, we were evolving past the need for more and more superfluous accumulation of wealth anyhow. Perhaps I am too naive - I've been told that before.
I know, there is a cost with space exploration. But to thrive, humanity needs to explore and learn. This is a core need, and historically, it is the sign of a society moving forward. I'm not hung up on discovering the next Teflon, or whatever other cool terrestrial inventions may come out of the space program. I DO care that as a child, I watched as we, for the first time, left our own planet and set foot on another place in our cosmos. Sure, it was only a quarter of a million miles away. But it was amazing! And, it was a milestone. We need more of those moments.
Rivalry got us to the moon, no doubt, and political supremacy was the driving force - "We're better than the Ruskies". Blah. I didn't even know about that stuff as a kid - to me, it was amazing that humans were on the moon. Not Americans, humans. We can work together this time, as the world, and achieve something together that we can be even more proud of than what we achieved separately.
I also know that there are many pressing problems in the world, such as hunger, disease and war. I am sensitive to those issues, but I also think it's a strawman to believe we have to focus on one issue to the exclusion of another. We already have the means (transport, agriculture, processing methods) to solve the world's hunger and thirst problems - we just choose not to do it, mostly because we don't have the will. There again, we need the desire to do something that transcends accumulation of wealth. It's about more than making piles of money. If we want to work on those issues first, then go back to space, that's fine - as long as we would really do it. But would we? Perhaps seeing that there are exciting things we can do that amount to more than lining our pockets would be inspiring.
Wealth is not a bad thing, but it's not everything. We should get back to space, and do it for the mountain climber reason ("because it's there"). It's lofty. It's interesting. It's something that makes us proud. Been a long time since I've felt like I did in those days in the late 60s. Go ahead, call me naive, or tell me my priorities are misplaced. But then, tell me about something that we've done as a people that made us more proud than going to the moon.
...and this doesn't solve the problem. The WinTel and LinTel communities have decided, with their pocketbook, that they want "choice", which means a jillion different CPUs, chipsets, video cards, sound devices, network devices, USB and FireWire ports - the list goes on and on. The mere thought of testing relevant combinations/permutations of this makes my skin crawl. Yes, a good driver architecture would help, but hey, if your video card fails, who cares if it takes your system down - your system _is_ down without video.
What we really need are some standard reference models for PCs, and (this is critical) we need hardware manufacturers to stop treating driver interfaces as intellectual property and completely, totally OPEN their interface for software developers. Of course, like I said above, people vote with their pocketbook, and people don't seem to get that worked up about this. They'll continue to buy nVidia or ATI or whoever because the cards really do have great performance, and they'll just suffer with the problems that come with proprietary interfaces. I mean, it's amazing to me - when I buy hardware, it should be OPEN. What you did under the hood is one thing, but how the system interfaces with it - OPEN. My old retro computers came with SCHEMATICS, for crying out loud.
OK, I'm off my soapbox. Just don't think that the driver world will get any better this way, because it won't. Until we're dealing with known, documented hardware and a more elegant driver architecture, a crashin' we will go.
welcome our new, intuitive, portable music playing overlords.
Where were you, folks? Come on, this one cries out for the joke...
I said that? Check again. I was specifically referring to assertions such as made in the previous paragraph:
As I replied to the other similar comment, I don't want to discuss those kind of red herrings. I want to discuss the issue, and I am (as stated) completely open to all sides of it. But I have no inclination to process the disinformation and intentional attempts to mislead. From this point forward, as soon as I smell a rat, I will dump those comments straight into the recycle bin where they belong. Less stress, more time, better result. Who can argue with that.
Also, please note, some other commenters have posted links that refute the assertion that the US is a net carbon sink. Even if that assertion is true, all that means is that our forests are taking up slack. There is still just as much carbon being dumped into the environment, and there is a net increase, so, less carbon still could mean less warming. Just because we have more forests means we can spew more pollution? China could make a similar argument - because they have the most people, they should be able to spew a commensurate amount of carbon. That's only fair, right? Not according to our leaders...
The real question is to what extent are we influencing climate change, and what corrective actions are appropriate. Today, an unfortunate percentage of the discussion is meant to confuse and mislead. We've got to knock that stuff off!
The world is getting warmer. The world is very big, so a small change (e.g., 1 degree Celsius) is a big deal. About this fact, there is little to no dissent.
Mankind is contributing to this change. There is disagreement about how much, but don't be fooled - we are having an impact, and why shouldn't we? There are six billion of us, and rapidly growing. We think that our legacy of burning wood, coal, and now petroleum products, is going to have no impact, and that the exotic chemicals we have used (e.g., CFCs) have no role in this? Come on. Don't make me Google it for you, do the work.
This change IS going to make a difference. Did it cause Katrina? I don't know. Could it cause floods, rise of global sea levels, famine, thirst, and the loss of thousands of species? Probably. Is it already killing polar bears, bleaching coral, and melting permafrost? Yep. Already.
I want to move on to "how much _really_ is a result of our actions" and "what can we do now".
Despite the misinformation campaign from a particular political agenda, this is NOT a political issue, and it IS something to be concerned about. Our lives are on the line, and people are still engaging in lobbyist games and misleading science, just to, what? Get some more power and money for a generation, so the next one can perish? Do we have no conscience at all?
So, please, certain fellow folks in the US, bring the arguments. Tell me how it's OK for a country with 4 percent of the world's population to produce the most emissions, because we don't want to "slow" our economy. Tell me why we should ignore the problem because, of course, there's a big "scientific conspiracy". Tell me how it's OK, because India and China are doing it too, right? I mean, if other people are doing it, it's not "fair" if we can't. Tell me that the permafrost would have "melted anyhow". Tell me about the volcanoes, and that they put out more emissions than we do, which, of course, makes ours "OK".
And, please send all these arguments to /dev/null. Because it's time for the rest of us to talk seriously about what is going on.
I am not an alarmist. I am not part of a left-wing conspiracy. There are people who know 1,000,000 times more than I do (and more than you do...) about climate change and our role in it. And many, many of them believe there is a real issue, one that could get deadly serious in the not too distant future. Maybe they have a point? Have you checked it out - I mean, really, with an open mind, and not through the filter of the talking points you heard on AM radio this morning?
Precisely. So we've established that we don't know if it's true or not. There is no video of the chair throwing (although that would be kind of fun to see, and would likely be on Google Video). There were apparently no other witnesses to the chair throwage. So why is this unsubstantiated, condescending and disparaging accusation included in an article from a company that claims to not "be evil"? They could have just as well left that out, and I would have respected them more. Now, I will reluctantly join the growing ranks of those who are suspicious of Google.
If accusations are automatically true, then I accuse all Slashdot readers of being pathetic geeks with no life.
Hey, wait a minute...
Sorry, this only works if you assume ubiquitous connectivity to your e-mail server. Not true today, not likely to be true anytime soon (at least in the US) for many business users. Price is too high, coverage too spotty, standards need to converge, etc., etc.
Standalone personal organizers (e.g., Outlook) are going to be around for a while. In fact, the whole notion in general that web apps can provide the same user experience as thick client apps (AJAX and so on notwithstanding) is suspect, and I am "unconvinced" this will change soon. The lack of any standards for the "Web UI" user experience has caused a mess. Windows, Linux, Mac OS, etc solve this with a unified windowing interface. It's good, and users like it.
Revenge is a dish best served at high frequencies.
Just last night, I was watching a DVD version of the sci-fi series UFO. First time I've seen it in many years. The interesting thing - everyone was chain smoking, drinking hard liquor, etc. The episodes had tons of short skirts, borderline harrassing behavior and innuendo, albeit expressed in a very Austin Powers-like way. Most was innocent by today's standards, but much different than what you would see in modern programs (the chain smoking, for instance). Not only was it fun to see my old sci-fi again, but it was *really* interesting to see the cultural nuances.
If someone retroactively changed that stuff to avoid offending someone, I'd be really hacked off (not that they would for a one-season cheesy sci-fi, but you get the point).
I pay $10/month for Napster (subscription). I currently have about 1,000 songs bookmarked, and from time to time, I listen to all of them. At 99 cents per song, that would be close to $1,000 if I wanted to buy them. It would take me 9 years of my Napster subscription to spend $1,000. And by then, many of those 1,000 songs would be old to me, and I'd want to move on to other songs. But I would have already paid the money for them.
I'm not sure what people here have against the subscription model, but trust me, it makes sense for a lot of people, especially those like myself who don't know from one week to the next what I might want to hear.
The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not represent the views of my employer, my family, my cats, or that yucky stuff that gets stuck between the bathroom tiles.
You folks are obviously forgetting about quantum echo (QE). The algorithm for deleting illegal content is trivial, and can be coded in something as simple as Timex/Sinclair BASIC.
Normally, it would be necessary to delete the files first, and then see if the user gets ticked off because legitimate, legal files got deleted. But by using quantum "echo", where effect comes before cause, the program can see the user's anger ahead of time, and avoid deleting the files in the first place.
Now, bear in mind, there's really no way to "trick" the algorithm. Quantum cryptography and the Heisenberg principle precludes any kind of "fooling" the program. You cannot know both the velocity and position of the illegal MP3 bits, so they are impossible to "hide", even if they are on media completely separate from your computer.
Glad that's settled...
My opinions are my own, and do not represent the views of my employer, spouse, children, cats, or sock remnants under my toenails.
My comments are mine alone, and do not represent the views of my employer, friends, family or cats.
So, I say, we sidestep the whole issue, and just start enjoying media that artists release under Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org/ licensing. That is, tell the RIAA, in your face! There is LOTS of good music (and other work) out there that can be had freely. Sure, it's not the bubblegum stuff you're hearing on KRAP radio, but lots of it is really worth listening to.
The more we adopt alternate methods, the more the power will slip away from the current abusers. It's not a total solution, but it's a place to start.
After all, now there's just more of it to love.
Yeah, when I tried to put OS X Tiger on my Mac SE/30, I was hoping it would really take off like a missile. But I couldn't load the CD. Still trying to make that work, will get back to you all next week.
Mmmmmmm, Honeymonkey...
These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of my employer, my family, my friends, or my cats.
Right now it's collecting dust in the basement at MIT. They have to move it every now and then when they need to get to the chemistry set.
Oh yeah. Follow it up with a Gentoo install, purely from source. If the first thing didn't get 'em, this will be the hook.
My comments here can be simply explained - I want to see some real dialogue, not more useless (and often unsubstantiated) babble about how bad Microsoft is. I don't depend on them for my living. Perhaps you depend on them losing ground for your living? Do you work for Sun, or RealNetworks? Come on, fess up :-)
The fact that you're looking for them to do something bad/illegal, etc. in order to "catch them in the act", shows just how out of whack you are. Get some help, Dude. Really.
And by the way, what did I advertise? I don't remember mentioning a specific product, endorsing a course of action, or making a purchasing suggestion. Guess your silly web forum enforcement hobby wouldn't have worked out even if you were right about my employment.
Take care, and do try to release some of that stress more constructively.
Well, so much for the credible dialogue. But, since I've probably worked in tech longer than you've been alive, I will forgive your juvenile comments.
I should have pointed out that I've never worked for Microsoft or any company associated with them in any way.
Guess I'll need to add some lines in my template, I forgot about inappropriate profanity and accusing people of working for Microsoft. Thanks man.
Wonder if anyone would accept it if Microsoft cured a major disease or effected World Peace :-)
Wonder if anyone spouting their venomous comments has actually used the MS Anti-Spyware product :-)
Wonder how many nasty comments were posted by someone from IE/Windows :-)
I have programmed the following template to create surprisingly realistic Slashdot posts. Quasi-original words are substituted for "blah" with a RegEx processor.
TEMPLATE
Blah blah Microsoft is horrible blah I am so happy I'm using Linux now blah blah Microsoft is evil and they are lying to you blah Linux is the greatest thing since the discovery of fire blah blah Bill Gates is a terrible horrible person who stinks blah Linux is innovative blah blah Microsoft is not innovative they just steal all their ides blah blah Anything bad said about Microsoft is true blah Anything good said about Microsoft is by a fanboy blah blah PR spin lies horrible Microsoft Great innovative wonderful Linux and oh by the way BSD is cool blah so is the Mac it rulez blah blah
I _know_ I will lose some Karma on this one. But I am so fatigued with the anti-MS bent here. Come on folks, you are intelligent and thoughtful. Let's have some real dialogue here, and keep it credible.
The opinions expressed in this post are my own, and do not represent the views of my employer, my family, my friends, or my cats.
There is a built-in barrier to entry with any new OS, and that is the undocumented nature of the hardware. The motherboards, video cards, chipsets, sound cards, etc. are all supported by Windows because the information for writing and validating the drivers is available to the right people. But in many cases it is not publicly available, leaving Linux and other alternatives on x86 the difficult job of reverse-engineering. This is a dubious exercise at best. An upstart OS will have an even harder time, because it probably won't have a curious and intelligent army of FOSS programmers to tackle new and existing hardware. No, to make real OS choice feasible will require hardware that is open in it's specifications, and hardware companies that have a vested interest in encouraging development for any and all OS choices. I don't see that happening any time soon.