Oh, I'm sure they will. A former ISP I had introduced PPPoE simply because customers complained about not being able to dialup and disconnect with DSL. I'm not even kidding. I switched providers as soon as they started using PPPoE, simply because it was an extra layer of complexity and overhead that I didn't see the point to. I'm on cable now, with a real IP and direct ethernet. Anyway, the point is, don't be surprised if you see specialized hardware... even if there's no good reason for it. Heh, maybe it'll even have something to do with bandwidth caps and other nonsense.
As someone that has been using pppoe for the last ten years, what is wrong with it? I like the fact I can put my modem in bridge mode, have a linux machine establish the pppoe connection and get a real ip. I've never actually seen an implementation of dsl that hasn't used some form of ppp since you are establishing a point to point link.
Yup, the modem/router my ISP just "upgraded" me to is a _complete_ piece of junk (speedstream is anyone is curious) that they've made even worse by overlaying custom firmware.
Put the thing in bridge mode, get an old machine from a few years ago and run ipcop or pfsense on it.
When put under load most consumer modems fail, especially with nat and anything like that. best leave it be a dumb modem and let decent hardware handle everything else further down the line.
H.264 is produced, managed and licenced by a consortium of companies with excellent documentation and a low barrier to entry of said consortium. Patent liabilities are well-known.
At any point, someone not part of the group could pipe up and sue h264 for patent infringement, sure it's the same with webm, but to pretend that h264's patent liabilities are 'well known' is a farce. Sure some known patents are covered for, but there is no denying the possibility that there are submarine patents somewhere for it, just like there could be for webm.
That is the crux of it. All the people who made mpeg would have to do to get everyone on the h264 bandwagon is to say, unlimited royalty free redistributable license for all forever, and there would be no issue, since they won't do that, it's being worked around.
In other words, wait until the law suits start flying before you say webm is a patent minefield, or instead name some yourself that it breaks that it is liable for.
tl;dr H.264 is far more open than WebM.
If that were the case, there would be no issue shipping implementations of it with free operating systems.
Of course, the "open" solution is allowing lots of competing plug-in technologies rather than dropping support for everything which doesn't support your desire for control and resultant bottom line.
Last I checked people can make plugins for both firefox and chromium, what is your issue here? they have to ship in-built support for every third party format now? no, they can support what they want to support and others are free to implement plugins that add extra.
Google might very well be becoming a skynet equivalent, but that doesn't mean you have to hate the nicer things they do for us. Their goal is for an open internet that is completely platform agnostic, it gives them more eyeballs which is what they sell. That it is in googles best interest to provide us with an open internet is convenient and you should never look a gift horse in the mouth.
I think if anyone becomes skynet, it will be google. They have the strongest AI implementations in the world, their entire business model is based off predicting human behaviours. Their latest endeavours in search are to go from 'what you said' (like at present) to "what you meant" meaning attempting to understand context and your most likely intention.
They have google translate, google goggles, granted goggles needs some work in a lot of ways but it's present progress is already quite good.
As much as google as a company says don't be evil, what happens when their algorithms decide on a course of action that gives the best results for a goal while being a more than questionable action?
Don't get me wrong, of course this is all pie in the sky talk, but if any present company had the best position to be skynet, it is google.
Call me paranoid but I would not trust a VM for testing code thats intended use is for the raw metal. While I'm sure there is plenty of code where it would not matter if it was tested on a vm or real hardware it seems to me why test something in a situation it isn't going to be used for in real life.
Most of his donations are self serving, Free medical drugs for african countries? only if you abide by our IP laws so that in future you cannot make your own drugs for cheap that can help the sick by yourselves.
Look at the finer details of what billionaires give to, while it looks good on paper there are usually catches that better off their own business interests.
window managers are harder to program than kernel hacking
Bullshit, with kernel programming if you bollocks something up the entire machine can hang and there is very little comparatively in the way of things you can do to debug the thing. Worse yet, given a bad hardware design some hardware makes it possible to brick things.
Makes window manager programming look like childsplay.
Monster hunter tri, Guilty gear Accent core, Tales of Symphonia: a new world.... and that's just off the top of my head, check stuff out and you may be pleasantly surprised
In other words, are they doing all they can to ensure that we don't end up with an N64/Gamecube/Wii situation where by 2 years after launch, the system settles into a cycle of "first party game every 6 months, nothing else of note in the interim"?
errr.. where have you been the last five years? The wii has so many third party titles it's ridiculous, that most of them are absolute crap makes little difference since the same thing happened with the ps2. The most popular system gets the most games good and bad.
In regards to intel, google, and microsoft. While the parent company is based in the US they are multi-national companies that hire and have bases around the world.
Is it really U.S innovation if you have indians/british/australian people doing the creating?
The pentium M which later became the core series processors were designed in israel.
With companies like that, country doesn't matter, you seriously think they would keep their headquarters in the US if for instance the tax office started cutting down on workarounds for paying tax? they have no loyalty.
They already have the solution to that,..net, it is just in time compiled on x86 too and so once they port the.net framework over all things written in it will work just fine.
Sure you will lose native x86 compatibility, but there are many apps already out in.net that will work just fine, and you can code for x86 windows and arm windows in the same way.
Google apps premier was certified, when the lawsuit started and the contract given google apps for government did not even exist. No microsoft solution ever had certification.
Basically google was already further towards the requirements, and microsoft said, sure, we can make it compliant to whatever for $x, google should not have been ruled out instantly.
It seems ideal to keep a copy on the remote server, and one on your home device, so you don't have to stream except when on the go.
The sane thing to do would be use your home device as the server, and so you can access it from anywhere
But I guess this is what we get for both everyone being behind nat, and everyone having limited upstream these days, servers are a god tier that require dedicated machines as opposed to end user systems being able to serve things too. There is no inherent reason not to.
Make copyright permanent, and make it retroactive like they have done for previous copyright law and this time bring back copyright that has already expired (goodbye public domain, not like they were going to add to you anyway) HOWEVER, hunt down the heir to the copyrights and sue all of the present media companies over it until everything destroys itself and they see what a farce forever minus a day copyright is.
All work builds off prior work. Let them have their perpetual copyright, and make them pay the consequences.
You cannot expect that keeping everything locked inside your proprietary case is going to keep it secure.
I don't know about that... there are plenty of ways to build a really strong case as such that if it's broken open whatever is inside is completely destroyed.
If MS renamed MS Java to MS Coffee would that have made it okay?
Of course it would be okay, OSS advocates love forks so long as a spade keeps getting called a spade and so long as when something claims to be standards compliant to something it is. and how is that situation different from c#? java and c# share many similarities and most of the changes seem to be for the sake of change, because it made no illusion to being java at all nobody kicked up a stink.
People defend google because in comparison to most other companies they are pretty good when it comes to being mindful of the way they act with people.
Not everything has to be open source, what a lot of people here like is the ability to tinker and create your own things and being able to do what you wish with the things you make.
If I wrote from scratch something like android I wouldn't mind the ability to do with it as I please, just as google is. What people don't like are those that sue with patents and the like to stop people having the freedom to think up their own devices and applications.
The OSS advocates that think all source code should be open are a minority, the majority are simply pragmatic and realize the benefits of an open source development model and of using software that uses that model.
The slashdot crowd only have a few common things, but I would think one of them would be wanting freedom to do things as they wish, if they want to write closed software, they are entitled to.
While there are similarities in what aqua uses for it's display in regards to pdf, what mac os draws to the screen is in fact, not pdf at all.
Great it uses vectors and other such things, and comes with a nice conversion utility so screen caps go to pdf nicely, but it does not itself display in pdf.
And Disney made movies out of the brothers grimm tales which if we had the same copyright back then as we do now, WOULD STILL HAVE BEEN UNDER COPYRIGHT.
That's right, no fairy tale reproductions for anyone. It was a great thing that the tales fell in the public domain, because it allowed others to work with them and adapt them, just as it would be excellent for lord of the rings to be public domain by now.
At some point, you have to realize that copyright as it stands essentially acts as a tax upon culture we experience. This is horrible for society to have a perpetual tax on it's own culture.
But more to the point, what incentive has tolkien had to create more books after his death? The aim of copyright is not to make people rich but to provide incentive to create works.
It would be nice if the open source world had an equivalent to 'Unix pipes' for a GUI environment
DBUS handles most gui inter process communication these days. I can't think of anything powershell can do that could not be done over dbus, and it predates it.
Slashdot Mirror
Contract tend to fix that, since even if a company is bought out they generally still have to honour the company they've purchased's contracts.
That being said most companies would never restrict themselves that much intentionally.
Oh, I'm sure they will. A former ISP I had introduced PPPoE simply because customers complained about not being able to dialup and disconnect with DSL. I'm not even kidding. I switched providers as soon as they started using PPPoE, simply because it was an extra layer of complexity and overhead that I didn't see the point to. I'm on cable now, with a real IP and direct ethernet. Anyway, the point is, don't be surprised if you see specialized hardware... even if there's no good reason for it. Heh, maybe it'll even have something to do with bandwidth caps and other nonsense.
As someone that has been using pppoe for the last ten years, what is wrong with it? I like the fact I can put my modem in bridge mode, have a linux machine establish the pppoe connection and get a real ip. I've never actually seen an implementation of dsl that hasn't used some form of ppp since you are establishing a point to point link.
Yup, the modem/router my ISP just "upgraded" me to is a _complete_ piece of junk (speedstream is anyone is curious) that they've made even worse by overlaying custom firmware.
Put the thing in bridge mode, get an old machine from a few years ago and run ipcop or pfsense on it.
When put under load most consumer modems fail, especially with nat and anything like that. best leave it be a dumb modem and let decent hardware handle everything else further down the line.
H.264 is produced, managed and licenced by a consortium of companies with excellent documentation and a low barrier to entry of said consortium. Patent liabilities are well-known.
At any point, someone not part of the group could pipe up and sue h264 for patent infringement, sure it's the same with webm, but to pretend that h264's patent liabilities are 'well known' is a farce. Sure some known patents are covered for, but there is no denying the possibility that there are submarine patents somewhere for it, just like there could be for webm.
That is the crux of it. All the people who made mpeg would have to do to get everyone on the h264 bandwagon is to say, unlimited royalty free redistributable license for all forever, and there would be no issue, since they won't do that, it's being worked around.
In other words, wait until the law suits start flying before you say webm is a patent minefield, or instead name some yourself that it breaks that it is liable for.
tl;dr H.264 is far more open than WebM.
If that were the case, there would be no issue shipping implementations of it with free operating systems.
Of course, the "open" solution is allowing lots of competing plug-in technologies rather than dropping support for everything which doesn't support your desire for control and resultant bottom line.
Last I checked people can make plugins for both firefox and chromium, what is your issue here? they have to ship in-built support for every third party format now? no, they can support what they want to support and others are free to implement plugins that add extra.
Google might very well be becoming a skynet equivalent, but that doesn't mean you have to hate the nicer things they do for us. Their goal is for an open internet that is completely platform agnostic, it gives them more eyeballs which is what they sell. That it is in googles best interest to provide us with an open internet is convenient and you should never look a gift horse in the mouth.
I think if anyone becomes skynet, it will be google. They have the strongest AI implementations in the world, their entire business model is based off predicting human behaviours. Their latest endeavours in search are to go from 'what you said' (like at present) to "what you meant" meaning attempting to understand context and your most likely intention.
They have google translate, google goggles, granted goggles needs some work in a lot of ways but it's present progress is already quite good.
As much as google as a company says don't be evil, what happens when their algorithms decide on a course of action that gives the best results for a goal while being a more than questionable action?
Don't get me wrong, of course this is all pie in the sky talk, but if any present company had the best position to be skynet, it is google.
anyone else manually dismantle the things and remove the magnets because they're decently strong?
Call me paranoid but I would not trust a VM for testing code thats intended use is for the raw metal. While I'm sure there is plenty of code where it would not matter if it was tested on a vm or real hardware it seems to me why test something in a situation it isn't going to be used for in real life.
You are writing 100 page documents and you were using word or open office?
LaTeX is what you need, handles typesetting for you nicely and everything.
Most of his donations are self serving, Free medical drugs for african countries? only if you abide by our IP laws so that in future you cannot make your own drugs for cheap that can help the sick by yourselves.
Look at the finer details of what billionaires give to, while it looks good on paper there are usually catches that better off their own business interests.
window managers are harder to program than kernel hacking
Bullshit, with kernel programming if you bollocks something up the entire machine can hang and there is very little comparatively in the way of things you can do to debug the thing. Worse yet, given a bad hardware design some hardware makes it possible to brick things.
Makes window manager programming look like childsplay.
Monster hunter tri, Guilty gear Accent core, Tales of Symphonia: a new world.... and that's just off the top of my head, check stuff out and you may be pleasantly surprised
In other words, are they doing all they can to ensure that we don't end up with an N64/Gamecube/Wii situation where by 2 years after launch, the system settles into a cycle of "first party game every 6 months, nothing else of note in the interim"?
errr.. where have you been the last five years? The wii has so many third party titles it's ridiculous, that most of them are absolute crap makes little difference since the same thing happened with the ps2. The most popular system gets the most games good and bad.
In regards to intel, google, and microsoft. While the parent company is based in the US they are multi-national companies that hire and have bases around the world.
Is it really U.S innovation if you have indians/british/australian people doing the creating?
The pentium M which later became the core series processors were designed in israel.
With companies like that, country doesn't matter, you seriously think they would keep their headquarters in the US if for instance the tax office started cutting down on workarounds for paying tax? they have no loyalty.
soon as you get away with it enough you get complacent and let your guard down, thinking you are better than other criminals
They already have the solution to that,. .net, it is just in time compiled on x86 too and so once they port the .net framework over all things written in it will work just fine.
Sure you will lose native x86 compatibility, but there are many apps already out in .net that will work just fine, and you can code for x86 windows and arm windows in the same way.
My question now is, do I buy the season of TV episodes I wanted and install them on my home media server
capture the stream to a file?
Google apps premier was certified, when the lawsuit started and the contract given google apps for government did not even exist. No microsoft solution ever had certification.
Basically google was already further towards the requirements, and microsoft said, sure, we can make it compliant to whatever for $x, google should not have been ruled out instantly.
It seems ideal to keep a copy on the remote server, and one on your home device, so you don't have to stream except when on the go.
The sane thing to do would be use your home device as the server, and so you can access it from anywhere
But I guess this is what we get for both everyone being behind nat, and everyone having limited upstream these days, servers are a god tier that require dedicated machines as opposed to end user systems being able to serve things too. There is no inherent reason not to.
Here is an experiment.
Make copyright permanent, and make it retroactive like they have done for previous copyright law and this time bring back copyright that has already expired (goodbye public domain, not like they were going to add to you anyway) HOWEVER, hunt down the heir to the copyrights and sue all of the present media companies over it until everything destroys itself and they see what a farce forever minus a day copyright is.
All work builds off prior work. Let them have their perpetual copyright, and make them pay the consequences.
You cannot expect that keeping everything locked inside your proprietary case is going to keep it secure.
I don't know about that... there are plenty of ways to build a really strong case as such that if it's broken open whatever is inside is completely destroyed.
they open sourced webkit because they had to, because it was based off the gpl khtml from kde.
If MS renamed MS Java to MS Coffee would that have made it okay?
Of course it would be okay, OSS advocates love forks so long as a spade keeps getting called a spade and so long as when something claims to be standards compliant to something it is. and how is that situation different from c#? java and c# share many similarities and most of the changes seem to be for the sake of change, because it made no illusion to being java at all nobody kicked up a stink.
People defend google because in comparison to most other companies they are pretty good when it comes to being mindful of the way they act with people.
Not everything has to be open source, what a lot of people here like is the ability to tinker and create your own things and being able to do what you wish with the things you make.
If I wrote from scratch something like android I wouldn't mind the ability to do with it as I please, just as google is. What people don't like are those that sue with patents and the like to stop people having the freedom to think up their own devices and applications.
The OSS advocates that think all source code should be open are a minority, the majority are simply pragmatic and realize the benefits of an open source development model and of using software that uses that model.
The slashdot crowd only have a few common things, but I would think one of them would be wanting freedom to do things as they wish, if they want to write closed software, they are entitled to.
While there are similarities in what aqua uses for it's display in regards to pdf, what mac os draws to the screen is in fact, not pdf at all.
Great it uses vectors and other such things, and comes with a nice conversion utility so screen caps go to pdf nicely, but it does not itself display in pdf.
And Disney made movies out of the brothers grimm tales which if we had the same copyright back then as we do now, WOULD STILL HAVE BEEN UNDER COPYRIGHT. That's right, no fairy tale reproductions for anyone. It was a great thing that the tales fell in the public domain, because it allowed others to work with them and adapt them, just as it would be excellent for lord of the rings to be public domain by now. At some point, you have to realize that copyright as it stands essentially acts as a tax upon culture we experience. This is horrible for society to have a perpetual tax on it's own culture. But more to the point, what incentive has tolkien had to create more books after his death? The aim of copyright is not to make people rich but to provide incentive to create works.
It would be nice if the open source world had an equivalent to 'Unix pipes' for a GUI environment
DBUS handles most gui inter process communication these days. I can't think of anything powershell can do that could not be done over dbus, and it predates it.