That's propaganda too, it's just done by volunteers instead of paid personnel. Non-profit propganda, perhaps.
And speaking of ridiculous and reactionary, calling someone an idiot and saying he's spewing garbage simply because you disagree with him is a wonderful example. Bravo.
The whole problem is that they're not concerned about security. Most security measures are because users aren't concerned about security. They get really concerned when they find out someone's taken all their stuff, but that's a different subject.
Anyway, as computer nerds, we're supposed to be concerned about computer security. Most people aren't. They have their own concerns. I'm glad that they're around to look after other things, so I don't have to be concerned about my bank running out of money, or my medication not being poisoned, or my car falling apart while I drive it, or all those nice other things that could be a really big problem if there weren't people making sure we were safe.
Anyway, a good computer security example is antivirus software. I stay the hell away from the stuff, it's slow and buggy and bogs down my system more than most viruses do. On linux, it's not an issue since security issues there are better handled by better configuration and monitoring, and on my windows box I just use manual system/network diagnostic tools to keep an eye on it and fix whatever's needed.
Does that mean I recommend the same to my friends? Hell no! I make sure they always run both a good antivirus and a firewall at all times. Otherwise they get viruses constantly. They just don't have the background to understand what they should and shouldn't do to avoid the things, not to mention the lack of skill necessary to deal with viruses as they come.
My friends aren't stupid (most of them anyway), it's just not what they do. They use computers as tools to get things done, and if they're not making it safe and easy to do the work they want, then the computers aren't working right. That's just how it is, and that's why services that allow people to use public terminals need to be built from the ground up to make it secure to use a public terminal.
You'd think Apple of all people (er, companies) would understand the need to make the right interface for different kinds of applications. Well, maybe I'm thinking back to the Eighties, way before their brushed metal/colorful candy era. If I had my way, they'd have canonized Raskin by now.
I have similar problems with those people who stand at busy intersections waving bright neon signs advertising sales or whatever. From my point of view, it's a terribly offensive and dangerous practice. I mean, the entire point is fairly obviously to get drivers' attention, which is the same as saying you're trying to distract them from driving. The first couple of times I saw someone flailing those signs at the side of the road, I thought it was a warning of some sort, and after trying to figure out what the hell was going on, I looked at the road and realized that if someone was in the crosswalk I just went by I would have hit them.
They're pretty much everywhere these days, and by now I tune them out like you have to do with everything else. Still, when I'm in a high-traffic area, looking out for pedestrians, someone waving a bright notice right by the road is enough of a distraction that I need to slow down.
What really gets me is that there are going to be more developments like this, with even more bombardments to your senses every time you go out, that it's really going to be dangerous to drive through city streets in a decade or two. I hope they put stricter laws into effect before it gets too terrible, or I'm just going to have to more into the woods or something. All I have to worry about there is bears, and at least they're not in neon colors.
Why? A guy I work with has had one since before they came out. He brings it into work every so often and distracts me from the virtualization project we're supposed to be working on too much already. If we set up the XO in Xen -nothing- would get done.
Anyway, the point would be getting it to work well on the XO's actual hardware. It's slow enough already with the development software he's running on it. I can't imagine running X well on the machine, unless we use twm or something.
Also, I'm a big fan of insanity. What have you got against idle, pointless questions?
Yay, sucked in by a troll. But hey, it's fun sometimes. Here we go.
And a completely open, Free software suite, adaptable and extensible by anyone who chooses, is called 'lock in' now?
Cost is irrelevant when it comes to determining if a lock in exists - only the extent to which the users choices are or are not limited. Preventing acess to a large portion of the software available and preventing compatibility with the largest single OS 'demographic' is lock in by any rational definition of the word. Philosophical spin doesn't change that.
Free with a capital 'F' means without restrictions as much as without costs. They're free to alter the code as they please, and free to use it as they see fit. And cost is a significant factor in the OLPC anyway.
Fiat - it all sounds so authoritarian when you use words like that.
That's because it is authoritarian. OLPC decided what OS the end users get to use - they are allowed no choice. Once again, marketdroid and philosophical spinning doesn't change that fact.
That's like saying Mac users weren't allowed a choice back before they were moved to Intel, or Blackberry users aren't allowed a choice because they're not running Windows CE. The OLPC is a platform specifically designed to be built inexpensively and run their learning software package. Redesigning it to be able to run XP has nothing to do with their goals and increases costs. They're not going for a general purpose PC here. They're going for a learning tool for children.
Oh, I couldn't agree more. Wake me up if Gates ever shows even a fraction of Negroponte's open-mindedness and enlightenment.
In other words, while agreeing that everyone should be held to the same standard - you issue Negroponte a free pass, thus negating the agreement. You've drunk so deeply of the kool aid, the logical inconsistency of this utterly escapes you. Pretty much as it does throughout your whole response.
The difference the GP is alluding to is that Negroponte wants it to run open environments and software for the children to be able to alter and share, while the Windows platform doesn't allow that. And considering the likely business reasons for trying to push aside adoption of the OLPC, it's hard to believe that Microsoft wants them using Windows for altruistic reasons. Hell, I don't fault them for their reasoning. I'm sure they're kicking themselves for not moving on this earlier and increasing their user base in developing countries. They're completely different goals though.
Negroponte's strategy leaves to game open to anyone to pick up the ball and play. Microsoft, on the other hand, won't even play until the lines are re-drawn to favour them.
If as an administrator, I can't buy a piece of Window educational software and run it on the XO - it isn't open. I can't play in the way I want, I'm forced to play by Negroponte's rules.
Theoretically it could use Wine to run the Windows educational software, and if someone wants to port it, they're free to do so. That's part of being open.
Anyway, the OLPC has USB 2.0 ports and uses open firmware. Theoretically it should be able to hack it to allow booting from a USB stick or external drive running Windows if they really want to. The article is more about compromising the design of the OLPC in order to ease Microsoft's process of getting Windows onto it, which could increase the cost of the laptop and is not the reason OLPC was designed anyway. There's no reason for them to do so.
You can run other apps on the XO if you'd like, at least from a console point of view. The versions I've seen even come with yum. I'll have to ask if anyone's tried installing X, which would probably be insane, but it would be interesting at least.
I would expect your reactions to differ over time, but I would not expect them to change dramatically in a short period of time, and that's the key to such a system. Unless you started hanging out on 4chan all of a sudden. That really warps your brain's response to viewing images.
All those recommendations are just awkward workarounds that more or less admit that the original idea is bad. It's forcing people into a situation they don't like and then giving them options to make it slightly less uncomfortable, rather than just not putting them in that situation.
Honestly, if people like the idea of working in a lounge, then none of it will be needed. If they want to work in their own space, then giving them a bucket or making them stake out a table for themselves just adds extra things they have to worry about every day.
Personally, this open layout sounds like a good idea in addition to cubicles, instead of replacing them. Letting employees get up and go work in an open area, maybe with a cafe, would be a nice change of pace and allow them to refresh themselves when they're burning out. Taking away all their space and forcing them to work in a big group would probably just drive off a good portion of the workforce.
Someday perhaps scientists will finally rebel against the awful state of science journalism. Until then, it's best to just ignore it.
Rebel how? I'm imagining giant robots with eye lasers, and maybe the occasional 50 foot tall giant slug, myself. That's what we get for misinterpreting those scientists!
The writers just pulled nonsense out of their asses, and somehow that passes as valuable information.
I don't think they're trying to pass it as valuable information at all. As far as I've seen from Crave, it seems to be a techie humor site more than anything. Everything seems to be going for a "Hey, remember this? Yeah, that was pretty (great|awful). Let's chuckle about it." The entire purpose of the site seems to be to be something to distract people at work. Kind of like slashdot, I guess.
In this so-called Information Age, one would think better writing would rise to the top.
That assumes there's any kind of quality control assigned to the filters, which is something a lot of people miss. The internet these days is more about a slough of pointless, unrelated information being sifted through by hordes of bored people with short attention spans. They'll grab at whatever shiny object they see and wave it around until they find something shinier. Ain't modern technology grand?
And, obviously, 14.6% of the drop is due to increased use of corp syrup, making people too fat and lazy to bother committing violent crime, and the last.4% is due to the reduction in Satanists since the scare in the 1980s. Woo! I can pretend I'm a scientist too!
I'm sure they'd do something about it. They'd get together to pass a non-binding resolution formally condemning his actions as impolite. Of course, it would fail by 2 votes short of the 60% needed to keep the Republicans from filibustering, and they'd have to take it off the table until next year.
You are called to serve when I call you to serve and how I call you to serve. It is all part of my plan and you are not to question it. You are not to question how I call others to serve, but know that all serve in my plan.
Holy shit. Is that you, God? I'd never figure You for trolling on slashdot, but I hear You work in mysterious ways.
What I love is that the whole concept of "pleasures of the flesh" being grave sin in and of themselves is an import from St. Augustine's former gnosticism, which the church has always viewed as a heretic and blasphemous religion. Damn gnostics.
I figure you could put it in a faraday cage of some sort. Still, I'd prefer a little planning and cable management to several hundred machines and peripherals transmitting wirelessly anyday. Especially since I have to spend days on end in there every so often.
I'd kind of like to see them respond by disabling caching of any site in the.be tld. Suddenly Belgium's news and information sites stop getting any hits and their media industry freaks out. Normally I'm against corporations throwing their weight around but I'm even more against countries tossing around poorly planned regulation.
*grumbling about all the wonderful daylight savings patches*
Asserting one's personal opinion is pretty much the opposite of flamebait, even if people disagree.
From wikipedia:
Flamebait is a message posted to a public Internet discussion group, such as a forum, newsgroup or mailing list, with the intent of provoking an angry response (a "flame") or argument over a topic the troll often has no real interest in. (This is not to be confused with tweaking someone.)
He doesn't like the look of Ubuntu. That's a valid opinion to have. Just because it may not be the same opinion as a lot of other people doesn't mean he's flamebaiting.
Personally, I'm not a big fan of the brown scheme either. It ignores most ease of use studies.
It depends on how you define "poorest." Medicaid is available to the poorest citizens, yes, but the restrictions are such that holding practically any job prevents you from being eligible unless you're on really expensive medication. So the options available for medicaid coverage are either quitting your job or getting really sick. Once you get on Medicaid it's easier to keep it, but the initial hurdle will prevent most people from benefiting.
If you don't think Saget is funny, watch him on the Aristocrats. I've seen him live, and his bit in the movie is tame compared to that. Seriously, you'd think he has Tourette's.
Actually, he has a bit about the various snuff movies he enjoyed that were sent in to America's Funniest. There's some seriously messed up stuff in there.
Slashdot Mirror
That's propaganda too, it's just done by volunteers instead of paid personnel. Non-profit propganda, perhaps.
And speaking of ridiculous and reactionary, calling someone an idiot and saying he's spewing garbage simply because you disagree with him is a wonderful example. Bravo.
The whole problem is that they're not concerned about security. Most security measures are because users aren't concerned about security. They get really concerned when they find out someone's taken all their stuff, but that's a different subject.
Anyway, as computer nerds, we're supposed to be concerned about computer security. Most people aren't. They have their own concerns. I'm glad that they're around to look after other things, so I don't have to be concerned about my bank running out of money, or my medication not being poisoned, or my car falling apart while I drive it, or all those nice other things that could be a really big problem if there weren't people making sure we were safe.
Anyway, a good computer security example is antivirus software. I stay the hell away from the stuff, it's slow and buggy and bogs down my system more than most viruses do. On linux, it's not an issue since security issues there are better handled by better configuration and monitoring, and on my windows box I just use manual system/network diagnostic tools to keep an eye on it and fix whatever's needed.
Does that mean I recommend the same to my friends? Hell no! I make sure they always run both a good antivirus and a firewall at all times. Otherwise they get viruses constantly. They just don't have the background to understand what they should and shouldn't do to avoid the things, not to mention the lack of skill necessary to deal with viruses as they come.
My friends aren't stupid (most of them anyway), it's just not what they do. They use computers as tools to get things done, and if they're not making it safe and easy to do the work they want, then the computers aren't working right. That's just how it is, and that's why services that allow people to use public terminals need to be built from the ground up to make it secure to use a public terminal.
You'd think Apple of all people (er, companies) would understand the need to make the right interface for different kinds of applications. Well, maybe I'm thinking back to the Eighties, way before their brushed metal/colorful candy era. If I had my way, they'd have canonized Raskin by now.
I have similar problems with those people who stand at busy intersections waving bright neon signs advertising sales or whatever. From my point of view, it's a terribly offensive and dangerous practice. I mean, the entire point is fairly obviously to get drivers' attention, which is the same as saying you're trying to distract them from driving. The first couple of times I saw someone flailing those signs at the side of the road, I thought it was a warning of some sort, and after trying to figure out what the hell was going on, I looked at the road and realized that if someone was in the crosswalk I just went by I would have hit them.
They're pretty much everywhere these days, and by now I tune them out like you have to do with everything else. Still, when I'm in a high-traffic area, looking out for pedestrians, someone waving a bright notice right by the road is enough of a distraction that I need to slow down.
What really gets me is that there are going to be more developments like this, with even more bombardments to your senses every time you go out, that it's really going to be dangerous to drive through city streets in a decade or two. I hope they put stricter laws into effect before it gets too terrible, or I'm just going to have to more into the woods or something. All I have to worry about there is bears, and at least they're not in neon colors.
Why? A guy I work with has had one since before they came out. He brings it into work every so often and distracts me from the virtualization project we're supposed to be working on too much already. If we set up the XO in Xen -nothing- would get done.
Anyway, the point would be getting it to work well on the XO's actual hardware. It's slow enough already with the development software he's running on it. I can't imagine running X well on the machine, unless we use twm or something.
Also, I'm a big fan of insanity. What have you got against idle, pointless questions?
Cost is irrelevant when it comes to determining if a lock in exists - only the extent to which the users choices are or are not limited. Preventing acess to a large portion of the software available and preventing compatibility with the largest single OS 'demographic' is lock in by any rational definition of the word. Philosophical spin doesn't change that.
Free with a capital 'F' means without restrictions as much as without costs. They're free to alter the code as they please, and free to use it as they see fit. And cost is a significant factor in the OLPC anyway.
That's because it is authoritarian. OLPC decided what OS the end users get to use - they are allowed no choice. Once again, marketdroid and philosophical spinning doesn't change that fact.
That's like saying Mac users weren't allowed a choice back before they were moved to Intel, or Blackberry users aren't allowed a choice because they're not running Windows CE. The OLPC is a platform specifically designed to be built inexpensively and run their learning software package. Redesigning it to be able to run XP has nothing to do with their goals and increases costs. They're not going for a general purpose PC here. They're going for a learning tool for children.
In other words, while agreeing that everyone should be held to the same standard - you issue Negroponte a free pass, thus negating the agreement. You've drunk so deeply of the kool aid, the logical inconsistency of this utterly escapes you. Pretty much as it does throughout your whole response.
The difference the GP is alluding to is that Negroponte wants it to run open environments and software for the children to be able to alter and share, while the Windows platform doesn't allow that. And considering the likely business reasons for trying to push aside adoption of the OLPC, it's hard to believe that Microsoft wants them using Windows for altruistic reasons. Hell, I don't fault them for their reasoning. I'm sure they're kicking themselves for not moving on this earlier and increasing their user base in developing countries. They're completely different goals though.
If as an administrator, I can't buy a piece of Window educational software and run it on the XO - it isn't open. I can't play in the way I want, I'm forced to play by Negroponte's rules.
Theoretically it could use Wine to run the Windows educational software, and if someone wants to port it, they're free to do so. That's part of being open.
Anyway, the OLPC has USB 2.0 ports and uses open firmware. Theoretically it should be able to hack it to allow booting from a USB stick or external drive running Windows if they really want to. The article is more about compromising the design of the OLPC in order to ease Microsoft's process of getting Windows onto it, which could increase the cost of the laptop and is not the reason OLPC was designed anyway. There's no reason for them to do so.
You can run other apps on the XO if you'd like, at least from a console point of view. The versions I've seen even come with yum. I'll have to ask if anyone's tried installing X, which would probably be insane, but it would be interesting at least.
All those recommendations are just awkward workarounds that more or less admit that the original idea is bad. It's forcing people into a situation they don't like and then giving them options to make it slightly less uncomfortable, rather than just not putting them in that situation.
Honestly, if people like the idea of working in a lounge, then none of it will be needed. If they want to work in their own space, then giving them a bucket or making them stake out a table for themselves just adds extra things they have to worry about every day.
Personally, this open layout sounds like a good idea in addition to cubicles, instead of replacing them. Letting employees get up and go work in an open area, maybe with a cafe, would be a nice change of pace and allow them to refresh themselves when they're burning out. Taking away all their space and forcing them to work in a big group would probably just drive off a good portion of the workforce.
Rebel how? I'm imagining giant robots with eye lasers, and maybe the occasional 50 foot tall giant slug, myself. That's what we get for misinterpreting those scientists!
I don't think they're trying to pass it as valuable information at all. As far as I've seen from Crave, it seems to be a techie humor site more than anything. Everything seems to be going for a "Hey, remember this? Yeah, that was pretty (great|awful). Let's chuckle about it." The entire purpose of the site seems to be to be something to distract people at work. Kind of like slashdot, I guess.
That assumes there's any kind of quality control assigned to the filters, which is something a lot of people miss. The internet these days is more about a slough of pointless, unrelated information being sifted through by hordes of bored people with short attention spans. They'll grab at whatever shiny object they see and wave it around until they find something shinier. Ain't modern technology grand?
And, obviously, 14.6% of the drop is due to increased use of corp syrup, making people too fat and lazy to bother committing violent crime, and the last .4% is due to the reduction in Satanists since the scare in the 1980s. Woo! I can pretend I'm a scientist too!
I'm sure they'd do something about it. They'd get together to pass a non-binding resolution formally condemning his actions as impolite. Of course, it would fail by 2 votes short of the 60% needed to keep the Republicans from filibustering, and they'd have to take it off the table until next year.
Wait, they have sex with Cheetos? What the hell college did you go to?
I thought that was the point.
Sorry! I mean, "Holy crap." Er, damn. Er, darn. Er... Shit.
Holy shit. Is that you, God? I'd never figure You for trolling on slashdot, but I hear You work in mysterious ways.
Really? Explain why Java is so popular then.
What I love is that the whole concept of "pleasures of the flesh" being grave sin in and of themselves is an import from St. Augustine's former gnosticism, which the church has always viewed as a heretic and blasphemous religion. Damn gnostics.
Wow, I never thought of it that way. Your convincing argument totally changes my mind about everything. I'm never using Linux again!
I figure you could put it in a faraday cage of some sort. Still, I'd prefer a little planning and cable management to several hundred machines and peripherals transmitting wirelessly anyday. Especially since I have to spend days on end in there every so often.
I see Satan is a wise investor. He is a master of diversification.
I'd kind of like to see them respond by disabling caching of any site in the .be tld. Suddenly Belgium's news and information sites stop getting any hits and their media industry freaks out. Normally I'm against corporations throwing their weight around but I'm even more against countries tossing around poorly planned regulation.
*grumbling about all the wonderful daylight savings patches*
From wikipedia:
He doesn't like the look of Ubuntu. That's a valid opinion to have. Just because it may not be the same opinion as a lot of other people doesn't mean he's flamebaiting.
Personally, I'm not a big fan of the brown scheme either. It ignores most ease of use studies.
It depends on how you define "poorest." Medicaid is available to the poorest citizens, yes, but the restrictions are such that holding practically any job prevents you from being eligible unless you're on really expensive medication. So the options available for medicaid coverage are either quitting your job or getting really sick. Once you get on Medicaid it's easier to keep it, but the initial hurdle will prevent most people from benefiting.
If you don't think Saget is funny, watch him on the Aristocrats. I've seen him live, and his bit in the movie is tame compared to that. Seriously, you'd think he has Tourette's.
Actually, he has a bit about the various snuff movies he enjoyed that were sent in to America's Funniest. There's some seriously messed up stuff in there.