I mean, what if I want to build a Linux machine with an Alpha processor? Or what if I want to use LinuxPPC on an Apple computer? In order for something to count as a DVD player for Linux, it ought to be available for all the different platforms that people run Linux on. Otherwise, it's just a DVD player for i386 Linux, which means that DeCSS is still needed.
I guess you can extend this argument to other operating systems, too. Is there a DVD player for BeOS, and *BSD? If not, DeCSS is necessary.
I've always wanted to see something like this happen. Individuals don't have the credibility and financial resources to fight large legal battles, but if more organizations like Red Hat get involved, it could really make a difference. For instance, it would be damn hard for the MPAA to call Red Hat a group of 1337 hAx0r d00dz trying to pirate movies.
I think it would be cool for these linux companies which have gotten rich through Free Software to establish a dedicated Free Software legal defense fund, or something like that. This fund would be used to fight legal battles that threaten the Free Software community. In addition to being a good ethical thing to do, it would get them buttloads of good PR and could actually help them take care of their own selfish business interests.
I think that if federal money, which comes from American citizens paying federal income tax, is used for scientific research, then it is only fair that American citizens be allowed to make free use of the results.
Of course, I'm sure that the issue is more complicated than that, but I think that the sentiment behind what I'm saying is a good one.
That thing is pretty cool, but I think that aftermarket CD players are ugly, and that one definitely won't match the interior of my car. I want a large-capacity MP3 player that sits in my trunk and is controlled by the CD changer controls built into my factory stereo. That's what I'd pay money for.
I hate that the construction company that lost $1.95 million can't do anything about it, but I do think it is good that the license was upheld. A lot of software is owned by individuals, small companies, and universities, and if they were forced to warranty their stuff, then these sources of software would evaporate.
The real question, though, is why would someone trust Very Big Things (TM) to software that doesn't come with some wort of protection. You wouldn't buy a new car that didn't have a warranty. I don't think that the Pointy-Haried Bosses (TM) out there understand how vulnerable they are under the current system.
I think that this is where Free Software (TM) will shine. I'm not sure whether Free Software on the consumer level will really catch on, but this is, presumably, an important program, which won't be upgraded every three months to take advantage of 3D graphics and shit. Because it is an important program that will last them for a long time, it will be economically feasible to have consultants come in and tinker with the source code if necessary.
I think that if the software in question were Free, then if the bug was present, it would only bite once, before somebody fixed it, which would probably happen before someone lost $1.95 million.
Anyway, I think that consumers should begin to demand more out of their computers and hardware. For software that manages lots of important stuff, they should demand warranties and/or source code to be included in the price of the software.
I really hope that the coolness of Free Software will cause consumers to stick up for their interests more than they've done in the past, and that these software houses have to quit acting like mafia families.
This is, strictly speaking, off-topic, but I think the question is interesting enough to be asked here.
I know next to nothing about encrypting e-mail, but am beginning to think that it might be wise to at least know how to do it and to have a PGP key so if someone wants to send me something private, they can do so (and if nothing else, I'd be s00p3r-d00p3r 31337, or something).
Is there, like, a "PGP for Dummies" page out there, which would explain the system in such a way that a newcower can understand it?
Thanks, and sorry for the WOB. And I was just kidding about the "1337" stuff.
Because americans will use monopolistic and preditory practices to suck the life out of all compeeting languages?
Of course! We perfected the art of unethical, preditory diplomacy way before Bill Gates was even born. Check it out:
Microsoft unfairly bundles its web browser with it's operating system. Americans bundle English with their exports. American Movies? English. American music? English. American operating systems? English. (I'm thinking of UNIX and MS-DOS commands.) American-designed programmic languages? English (if, then, foreach, printf, etc.).
Furthermore, compare Microsoft's relations with other corporations with the history of American diplomacy. Especially the period around the Mexican war and the period around the Spanish American War. During those times we (1) aggressively bought up new territory rather than developing what we already had, (2) picked fights with smaller, weaker countries to get what we wanted from them, (3) didn't give a rat's ass about anyone who wasn't American (4) never gave a damn about the poor and the powerless, even if they were American.
Microsoft, of of course, is famous for (1) aggressively buying up small companies that have innovated rather than innovating on their own (2) picking fights with smaller weaker companies to force them to do their will and (3) not giving a flying fuck about anyone who isn't one of its own employees or stockholders (4) mercilessly screwing the consumer at every opportunity, even though Microsoft employees and stockholders are themselves consumers.
Microsoft is the subject of well-deserved global hatred and resentment, and apparently so are Americans.
American embassies are sometimes attacked by loosely organized bands of anti-American terrorists. Similarly, Microsoft is being attacked by a loosely orgranized community of Linux developers.
So, I'm streching things a little, but, hey, it works!
I'm no expert at all, but I think that there are differences regarding where files are located. For instance, most Linux distributions that ship with KDE install it in something like/opt/kde, but Red Hat 6 dumps it all into/usr/bin , if I recall correctly.
I'm using Red Hat 6.1 right now, and about a month ago I decided that I wanted a newer version of WindowMaker than the one that came with Red Hat 6.1. So, I went to their website and downloaded the tarball. The problem is that, in order for it to compile and run correctly on Red Hat, you have to make a lot of adjustments to this and that (I don't remember what right now). It was really annoying, so I just gave up and switched back to Sawmill and GNOME.
The newest version of GAIM suffers from a similar problem. It compiled fine, but "make install" put the files in strange places, presumably because GAIM is developed on something other than Red Hat.
Another important difference between distros is that they each come with different configuration tools. Red Hat comes with Xconfigurator for setting up XFree86, but SuSE uses something called "sax", I believe.
Crap...I've got to stop writing. Mozilla is doing strange things to this text box.
I'm sorry I don't know more, and I'm sure that there are plenty of mistakes in what I've said above. If anyone out there can correct me, please do so.
No, just set your maximum uploads to 0 (zero). It will start bugging you to re-enable uploads every time you startup Napster, but it works.
I had tried that, but it always said "You cannot set your Max Uploads 1!" So I upgraded to the newest client, and now it works just like you say it should.
The problem with Napster is that your download directory is always open to other Napster users, regardless of anything. The only way to keep people from downloading stuff from your machine is to be sure to notice people trying to connect and disconnect them before they DL anything. This is very difficult to do, and it's the reason I don't use Napster for anything.
I had never heard that before, but it makes sense. I think the whole thing about Vader being Luke's dad was kind of a stretch, after Ben clearly said Anakin was killed by Vader.
Do you think that they didn't think of taking that direction until the second film?
I switched over to GNU/Linux about 18 months ago, when I needed to run GNU Emacs and Scheme on my computer. It turns out that I can do almost everything I need with free software, but I can imagine situations where people who have to use a proprietary OS would still need the benefit of Free Software. They aren't able to switch OS's or maybe they don't have the time or inclination to learn Unix.
Is it acceptable, then, to modify Free Software to run on systems like the Apple Macintosh? Even if by doing so, it could keep people from wanting to switch to GNU/Linux? I know that the GPL gives a programmer almost total freedom, so what I am asking is more about ethics than about law.
Here's my second question. We've all been hearing about Internet Appliances and how they are going to be big in the future (well, maybe). In little gizmos like my Palm Pilot, the software and hardware are very tightly integrated, so replacing, copying, or modifying it wouldn't make sense, even if I could do it. How does Free Software fit into a world filled with little specialized appliances? Is this a threat to Free Software? Or will the emphasis on selling hardware rather than software licenses create a favorable environment for it?
I admire your goals and accomplishments, and thank you for your time.
I first learned of him when read something he write called Travels With Samantha -- it's about a trip around the country he took one summer after his dog George died. It really is worth reading -- his description of Minnesota (where I spent a year in college) is one of the best-written things I've ever read about the state.
First of all, I am not a Linux zealot (though I use it daily), and I'm not a programmer. So, while I am not qualified to say anything, I hope I am seeing it objectively.
Everything in that article seems to be true, but I don't think it tells the whole story.
I remember reading something that Theo DeRaalt (sp?) said about the inherent security of OpenBSD. He said that while you can find at exploit security bugs in any OS, a bug only takes about an hour of work to fix. With OpenBSD, you get the patch as quickly as possible, but with commercial software, you have to wait and wait for an official patch to be released.
Moving on, I don't understand how that Thompson compiler (which inserts malicious code into the login program, and into itself when recompiled) is a serious problem. I'm running Red Hat 6.0, and my version of gcc came straight off of the install CD. If, for whatever reason, I needed a new one, I'd see if I could get another precompiled version from Red Hat or the FSF. THEY aren't going to screw me over, and if they tried they WOULD be caught very quickly.
It is true that having the source available allows crackers to discover potential targets, but this vulnerability doesn't seem to add up to much when compared to the advantages (securtiy-related, and otherwise) of having an open-source system. When crackers learn something new, it seems to spread very quickly. So quickly, I think, that it balances everything out in the end. In fact, it might actually tip the balance the other way, since you get a bug fix much quicker with open-source systems.
These are just my opinions, and I'm really not qualified to say much, but I thought I'd share them in case other people want to comment on them and correct any misunderstandings that I have.
Lucas is a hollywood businessman, and it's all about money to him. Well, not all about money -- I think he knows that he's going down in history for the Star Wars movies and tries very hard to make them first-rate. But when it comes down to this marketing stuff, it's all about money.
I mean, why else would he have done that god-awful Star Wars Christmas thing that got posted on Slashdot back in December?
I bought the $16 VHS version, but that's all Lucas is getting from me. I have some major reservations about DVD and only collect VHS movies, so it's sort of a non-issue with me. When the DVD movie comes out in 25 years or whatever, I won't buy it unless my VCR eats the VHS tape.
However, boycotting the release of Star Wars on DVD could send a powerful message if people actually got organized and did it.
Question 1: I really like the idea of DVD but am afraid of buying a player and a movie collection only to find that the standard changes on me, or that the weird copy-protection and region codes scare people away and DVD evaporates like that digital audio cassette system from several years back. I don't want to have the 21st century equivalent of an 8-track collection. Do you think that this really will be what replaces VHS? Or should we all wait for these court cases to settle down? Do you think that consumers will be turned off by the fact that they don't have the freedoms that they have with CDs? These are things that churn around in my head when I think about taking the plunge into DVD.
Question 2: In response to the MPAA's charming behavior towards free software developers, people occasionally say that they are going to boycott DVD until the standard gets opened. What do y'all think about this? Is this something people are serious about, and do you think it will be productive? I ask because I'm willing to boycott if I know it is a part of a larger effort and if I think there is a chance it will be productive, but if it isn't going to do any good, then that's different.
If y'all have any opinions,it would be cool to hear them.
I have a silver-blue 1966 Ford Mustang coupe complete with a V8, dual exhausts, and a Pony Interior. My dad and I restored it ourselves when I was in high school. It's in great condition and I can safely say that it is the best looking hard-top Mustang I have ever seen anywhere.
I love my car dearly. But as much as I love it, we are going to have to get rid of it soon because having a car like that just isn't practical. Sure you can fix it yourself, and the abundance of reproduction parts means that you never have to go through dealers. So it seems that you can save a lot of money this way, right? Wrong. I have never heard of someone being able to save money by driving a vintage car. They are mechanically simple (you can open the hood and see through to the ground), but a consequence of that is that they are VERY POORLY ENGINEERED. If you have options like power steering and an automatic transmission, you'd better be ready to spend a lot of time lying on the garage floor with a wrench in your hand. Any money you save on labor and parts you turn around and spend on more tools and stuff.
Someone said once that Linux is only free if your time is worthless. You can say the same thing about DIY auto repair. If you work for X dollars per hour, then DIY repair only makes sense if you earn less than the mechanic charges for labor.
We're probably going to replace the Mustang with a Japanese car, like a Toyota. We have had several rice-burners over the years, and we don't even care that we can't fix them ourselves because they simply never need to be repaired. They were built right from the beginning, so they run forever on nothing but gasoline and regularly scheduled maintenance. We've never had any weird problems with any of the Toyotas we've had, and we put almost 200,000 miles on one of them.
Oh yeah, did I mention that they get over twice the gas mileage of the Mustang? They don't require the expensive 93 Octane gas either.
In short, simplicity isn't a virtue when it comes at the expense of functionality and reliability. Furthermore, something as incomprehensibly complex as a modern automobile doesn't have to be unreliable, provided that it was done right from the beginning.
The complexity of cars will continue to increase dramatically. Gas in South Carolina has doubled in price in two years, and if this continues, people will simply need the fuel efficiency.
Oh well -- I don't have time to finish, but I hope I've said enough so that my point makes sense.
Gee... I wonder when they're gonna ban ICQ. Technically it's sitting there listening on a TCP port, waiting for chat and file transfer requests, which I believe qualifies it as a being a server.
The college I go to has banned ICQ, along with just about everything else. When I go back in the fall, I'm going to have to dream up some sort of work-around.
What a pigfaced moron you are. I'm going to hunt you down and make you sorry that your mother ever spread her legs to your father, even though the best part of you ran down her thigh after the deed was done. I'm going to peel off your fingernails with a rusty pair of pliers, then stick them in your eyes. I'm going to anally violate your small child like I'm Jon Katz. You won't be able to see her bloody asshole, on account of the fingernails stuck in your eyes, but the screams of pain and humilation will be enough to drive you insane.
OK, lets see if I understand this correctly. Discussing Netwinder, which uses Linux and StrongARM, on a message board about Linux and StrongARM is offtopic, but threats of torture and rape are welcome and appropriate. Of course! Why didn't I think of that??
With so much garbage like this showing up on Slashdot, I am surprised that Rob doesn't resort to censorship. I sure as hell would. If I had my way, your post would be deleted and your IP would be permanently banned.
All the guy did was ask a fucking question. While in the strictest sense, it was offtopic, it was no more offtopic that 85% of what appears on Slashdot. I thought it was interesting, and wanted to see what people had to say about it. I certainly didn't want to read about raping small children while they scream in pain.
It is comforting to know that your mother probably came in 15 minutes after you posted and made you shut off your computer and go to bed, because tomorrow's a school day.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, what if I want to build a Linux machine with an Alpha processor? Or what if I want to use LinuxPPC on an Apple computer? In order for something to count as a DVD player for Linux, it ought to be available for all the different platforms that people run Linux on. Otherwise, it's just a DVD player for i386 Linux, which means that DeCSS is still needed.
I guess you can extend this argument to other operating systems, too. Is there a DVD player for BeOS, and *BSD? If not, DeCSS is necessary.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
HAMSTER WHEEL!!
Imagine how cool that would be.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I've always wanted to see something like this happen. Individuals don't have the credibility and financial resources to fight large legal battles, but if more organizations like Red Hat get involved, it could really make a difference. For instance, it would be damn hard for the MPAA to call Red Hat a group of 1337 hAx0r d00dz trying to pirate movies.
I think it would be cool for these linux companies which have gotten rich through Free Software to establish a dedicated Free Software legal defense fund, or something like that. This fund would be used to fight legal battles that threaten the Free Software community. In addition to being a good ethical thing to do, it would get them buttloads of good PR and could actually help them take care of their own selfish business interests.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I think that if federal money, which comes from American citizens paying federal income tax, is used for scientific research, then it is only fair that American citizens be allowed to make free use of the results.
Of course, I'm sure that the issue is more complicated than that, but I think that the sentiment behind what I'm saying is a good one.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
...writing the PHP script so that it makes people's browsers post the following:
===================
Subject: Can You Imagine...
Body:
...a Beowulf Cluster of these?
Thank you.
===================
You would have earned a place in the annals of Slashdot history.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
That thing is pretty cool, but I think that aftermarket CD players are ugly, and that one definitely won't match the interior of my car. I want a large-capacity MP3 player that sits in my trunk and is controlled by the CD changer controls built into my factory stereo. That's what I'd pay money for.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I hate that the construction company that lost $1.95 million can't do anything about it, but I do think it is good that the license was upheld. A lot of software is owned by individuals, small companies, and universities, and if they were forced to warranty their stuff, then these sources of software would evaporate.
The real question, though, is why would someone trust Very Big Things (TM) to software that doesn't come with some wort of protection. You wouldn't buy a new car that didn't have a warranty. I don't think that the Pointy-Haried Bosses (TM) out there understand how vulnerable they are under the current system.
I think that this is where Free Software (TM) will shine. I'm not sure whether Free Software on the consumer level will really catch on, but this is, presumably, an important program, which won't be upgraded every three months to take advantage of 3D graphics and shit. Because it is an important program that will last them for a long time, it will be economically feasible to have consultants come in and tinker with the source code if necessary.
I think that if the software in question were Free, then if the bug was present, it would only bite once, before somebody fixed it, which would probably happen before someone lost $1.95 million.
Anyway, I think that consumers should begin to demand more out of their computers and hardware. For software that manages lots of important stuff, they should demand warranties and/or source code to be included in the price of the software.
I really hope that the coolness of Free Software will cause consumers to stick up for their interests more than they've done in the past, and that these software houses have to quit acting like mafia families.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
if someone with moderator access sees this, Fix Archie Bunker's comment. Only a crackhead would mark comment #1 as redundant!!
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
This is, strictly speaking, off-topic, but I think the question is interesting enough to be asked here.
I know next to nothing about encrypting e-mail, but am beginning to think that it might be wise to at least know how to do it and to have a PGP key so if someone wants to send me something private, they can do so (and if nothing else, I'd be s00p3r-d00p3r 31337, or something).
Is there, like, a "PGP for Dummies" page out there, which would explain the system in such a way that a newcower can understand it?
Thanks, and sorry for the WOB. And I was just kidding about the "1337" stuff.
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
Of course! We perfected the art of unethical, preditory diplomacy way before Bill Gates was even born. Check it out:
Microsoft unfairly bundles its web browser with it's operating system. Americans bundle English with their exports. American Movies? English. American music? English. American operating systems? English. (I'm thinking of UNIX and MS-DOS commands.) American-designed programmic languages? English (if, then, foreach, printf, etc.).
Furthermore, compare Microsoft's relations with other corporations with the history of American diplomacy. Especially the period around the Mexican war and the period around the Spanish American War. During those times we (1) aggressively bought up new territory rather than developing what we already had, (2) picked fights with smaller, weaker countries to get what we wanted from them, (3) didn't give a rat's ass about anyone who wasn't American (4) never gave a damn about the poor and the powerless, even if they were American.
Microsoft, of of course, is famous for (1) aggressively buying up small companies that have innovated rather than innovating on their own (2) picking fights with smaller weaker companies to force them to do their will and (3) not giving a flying fuck about anyone who isn't one of its own employees or stockholders (4) mercilessly screwing the consumer at every opportunity, even though Microsoft employees and stockholders are themselves consumers.
Microsoft is the subject of well-deserved global hatred and resentment, and apparently so are Americans.
American embassies are sometimes attacked by loosely organized bands of anti-American terrorists. Similarly, Microsoft is being attacked by a loosely orgranized community of Linux developers.
So, I'm streching things a little, but, hey, it works!
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
It isn't!
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I'm no expert at all, but I think that there are differences regarding where files are located. For instance, most Linux distributions that ship with KDE install it in something like /opt/kde, but Red Hat 6 dumps it all into /usr/bin , if I recall correctly.
I'm using Red Hat 6.1 right now, and about a month ago I decided that I wanted a newer version of WindowMaker than the one that came with Red Hat 6.1. So, I went to their website and downloaded the tarball. The problem is that, in order for it to compile and run correctly on Red Hat, you have to make a lot of adjustments to this and that (I don't remember what right now). It was really annoying, so I just gave up and switched back to Sawmill and GNOME.
The newest version of GAIM suffers from a similar problem. It compiled fine, but "make install" put the files in strange places, presumably because GAIM is developed on something other than Red Hat.
Another important difference between distros is that they each come with different configuration tools. Red Hat comes with Xconfigurator for setting up XFree86, but SuSE uses something called "sax", I believe.
Crap...I've got to stop writing. Mozilla is doing strange things to this text box.
I'm sorry I don't know more, and I'm sure that there are plenty of mistakes in what I've said above. If anyone out there can correct me, please do so.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
No, just set your maximum uploads to 0 (zero). It will start bugging you to re-enable uploads every time you startup Napster, but it works.
I had tried that, but it always said "You cannot set your Max Uploads 1!" So I upgraded to the newest client, and now it works just like you say it should.
Thanks,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
The problem with Napster is that your download directory is always open to other Napster users, regardless of anything. The only way to keep people from downloading stuff from your machine is to be sure to notice people trying to connect and disconnect them before they DL anything. This is very difficult to do, and it's the reason I don't use Napster for anything.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
This quote from Aliens comes to mind:
"My mom said there are no such things as monsters, but there are, aren't there?"
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
That sounds pretty cool -- it can run Linux too.
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I had never heard that before, but it makes sense. I think the whole thing about Vader being Luke's dad was kind of a stretch, after Ben clearly said Anakin was killed by Vader.
Do you think that they didn't think of taking that direction until the second film?
Oh well -- take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I switched over to GNU/Linux about 18 months ago, when I needed to run GNU Emacs and Scheme on my computer. It turns out that I can do almost everything I need with free software, but I can imagine situations where people who have to use a proprietary OS would still need the benefit of Free Software. They aren't able to switch OS's or maybe they don't have the time or inclination to learn Unix.
Is it acceptable, then, to modify Free Software to run on systems like the Apple Macintosh? Even if by doing so, it could keep people from wanting to switch to GNU/Linux? I know that the GPL gives a programmer almost total freedom, so what I am asking is more about ethics than about law.
Here's my second question. We've all been hearing about Internet Appliances and how they are going to be big in the future (well, maybe). In little gizmos like my Palm Pilot, the software and hardware are very tightly integrated, so replacing, copying, or modifying it wouldn't make sense, even if I could do it. How does Free Software fit into a world filled with little specialized appliances? Is this a threat to Free Software? Or will the emphasis on selling hardware rather than software licenses create a favorable environment for it?
I admire your goals and accomplishments, and thank you for your time.
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I first learned of him when read something he write called Travels With Samantha -- it's about a trip around the country he took one summer after his dog George died. It really is worth reading -- his description of Minnesota (where I spent a year in college) is one of the best-written things I've ever read about the state.
Oh well, sorry for the WOB.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
First of all, I am not a Linux zealot (though I use it daily), and I'm not a programmer. So, while I am not qualified to say anything, I hope I am seeing it objectively.
Everything in that article seems to be true, but I don't think it tells the whole story.
I remember reading something that Theo DeRaalt (sp?) said about the inherent security of OpenBSD. He said that while you can find at exploit security bugs in any OS, a bug only takes about an hour of work to fix. With OpenBSD, you get the patch as quickly as possible, but with commercial software, you have to wait and wait for an official patch to be released.
Moving on, I don't understand how that Thompson compiler (which inserts malicious code into the login program, and into itself when recompiled) is a serious problem. I'm running Red Hat 6.0, and my version of gcc came straight off of the install CD. If, for whatever reason, I needed a new one, I'd see if I could get another precompiled version from Red Hat or the FSF. THEY aren't going to screw me over, and if they tried they WOULD be caught very quickly.
It is true that having the source available allows crackers to discover potential targets, but this vulnerability doesn't seem to add up to much when compared to the advantages (securtiy-related, and otherwise) of having an open-source system. When crackers learn something new, it seems to spread very quickly. So quickly, I think, that it balances everything out in the end. In fact, it might actually tip the balance the other way, since you get a bug fix much quicker with open-source systems.
These are just my opinions, and I'm really not qualified to say much, but I thought I'd share them in case other people want to comment on them and correct any misunderstandings that I have.
take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
Lucas is a hollywood businessman, and it's all about money to him. Well, not all about money -- I think he knows that he's going down in history for the Star Wars movies and tries very hard to make them first-rate. But when it comes down to this marketing stuff, it's all about money.
I mean, why else would he have done that god-awful Star Wars Christmas thing that got posted on Slashdot back in December?
I bought the $16 VHS version, but that's all Lucas is getting from me. I have some major reservations about DVD and only collect VHS movies, so it's sort of a non-issue with me. When the DVD movie comes out in 25 years or whatever, I won't buy it unless my VCR eats the VHS tape.
However, boycotting the release of Star Wars on DVD could send a powerful message if people actually got organized and did it.
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I know this is offtopic -- get over it.
Question 1: I really like the idea of DVD but am afraid of buying a player and a movie collection only to find that the standard changes on me, or that the weird copy-protection and region codes scare people away and DVD evaporates like that digital audio cassette system from several years back. I don't want to have the 21st century equivalent of an 8-track collection. Do you think that this really will be what replaces VHS? Or should we all wait for these court cases to settle down? Do you think that consumers will be turned off by the fact that they don't have the freedoms that they have with CDs? These are things that churn around in my head when I think about taking the plunge into DVD.
Question 2: In response to the MPAA's charming behavior towards free software developers, people occasionally say that they are going to boycott DVD until the standard gets opened. What do y'all think about this? Is this something people are serious about, and do you think it will be productive? I ask because I'm willing to boycott if I know it is a part of a larger effort and if I think there is a chance it will be productive, but if it isn't going to do any good, then that's different.
If y'all have any opinions,it would be cool to hear them.
Take care,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
I have a silver-blue 1966 Ford Mustang coupe complete with a V8, dual exhausts, and a Pony Interior. My dad and I restored it ourselves when I was in high school. It's in great condition and I can safely say that it is the best looking hard-top Mustang I have ever seen anywhere.
I love my car dearly. But as much as I love it, we are going to have to get rid of it soon because having a car like that just isn't practical. Sure you can fix it yourself, and the abundance of reproduction parts means that you never have to go through dealers. So it seems that you can save a lot of money this way, right? Wrong. I have never heard of someone being able to save money by driving a vintage car. They are mechanically simple (you can open the hood and see through to the ground), but a consequence of that is that they are VERY POORLY ENGINEERED. If you have options like power steering and an automatic transmission, you'd better be ready to spend a lot of time lying on the garage floor with a wrench in your hand. Any money you save on labor and parts you turn around and spend on more tools and stuff.
Someone said once that Linux is only free if your time is worthless. You can say the same thing about DIY auto repair. If you work for X dollars per hour, then DIY repair only makes sense if you earn less than the mechanic charges for labor.
We're probably going to replace the Mustang with a Japanese car, like a Toyota. We have had several rice-burners over the years, and we don't even care that we can't fix them ourselves because they simply never need to be repaired. They were built right from the beginning, so they run forever on nothing but gasoline and regularly scheduled maintenance. We've never had any weird problems with any of the Toyotas we've had, and we put almost 200,000 miles on one of them.
Oh yeah, did I mention that they get over twice the gas mileage of the Mustang? They don't require the expensive 93 Octane gas either.
In short, simplicity isn't a virtue when it comes at the expense of functionality and reliability. Furthermore, something as incomprehensibly complex as a modern automobile doesn't have to be unreliable, provided that it was done right from the beginning.
The complexity of cars will continue to increase dramatically. Gas in South Carolina has doubled in price in two years, and if this continues, people will simply need the fuel efficiency.
Oh well -- I don't have time to finish, but I hope I've said enough so that my point makes sense.
Gotta run,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
The college I go to has banned ICQ, along with just about everything else. When I go back in the fall, I'm going to have to dream up some sort of work-around.
========
Stephen C. VanDahm
OK, lets see if I understand this correctly. Discussing Netwinder, which uses Linux and StrongARM, on a message board about Linux and StrongARM is offtopic, but threats of torture and rape are welcome and appropriate. Of course! Why didn't I think of that??
With so much garbage like this showing up on Slashdot, I am surprised that Rob doesn't resort to censorship. I sure as hell would. If I had my way, your post would be deleted and your IP would be permanently banned.
All the guy did was ask a fucking question. While in the strictest sense, it was offtopic, it was no more offtopic that 85% of what appears on Slashdot. I thought it was interesting, and wanted to see what people had to say about it. I certainly didn't want to read about raping small children while they scream in pain.
It is comforting to know that your mother probably came in 15 minutes after you posted and made you shut off your computer and go to bed, because tomorrow's a school day.
Rot in hell,
Steve
========
Stephen C. VanDahm