I said it for years... Apple only looked better because they were small. I was modded down and called ignorant and a Linux neckbeard.
And now we see who was right all along, while facing an actual threat of Apple dominance in several markets (either by way if clueless users who think lock-in is a good thing, or legal force destroying competition). Given every Apple system is either built on an Apple-controlled "appstore" already or is one update away from it, that prospect should scare the shit out of every person on this site.
Microsoft was mostly evil in their methods, primarily EEE. Apple is evil in their methods and goal. Just say no.
It is less clueless to stay on a ship that might sink, than jump into ice cold water with no land in sight. Obama might be a complete failure (not that the president has much power, but what he does have, he has misused), but Mittens and Rand's Wife are arguably a whole classification scheme worse.
Its purpose is to make people feel they are having an effect, when they are not doing a damned thing. Basically the same as other petition sites, but official. Same scam the British have been running for a few years now.
It's kind of ironic they don't realize that censoring the thing actually makes it a net negative to them. The best policy is to just keep paying some English major to write meaningless, feel-good responses to anything that gets enough votes. The moment they start monkeying with the system is the moment people become extremely angry.
Do you pay attention? The last thing the average Republican wants is "diversity" in their candidate. Most of them are still trying to justify that odd feeling they have Obama is not an American.
Compare to the copyright-proponent's argument: I control this information, I can tell you how you can use it, I say who can use it, and I can revoke that whenever I want. BTW, I didn't even make it, I just bought it.
"So the automated vehicle is statistically better in every category."
In controlled conditions.
Let us not forget that incredibly important clause. Nothing tends to fail when you control 95% of the input. It is reality that tends to suck. Comparing general driving to developer supervised testing on clearly defined, unpopulated roads in broad daylight is dishonest and you know it.
The real reason this is a marketing gimmick is not insurance, but PR. If a Google car kills a baby, just imagine the news stories. Now imagine that happening on a weekly basis. I don't see it happening, nor do I see Google putting themselves into the liability, nor do I see states allowing this insane scheme in general.
This is all about Google getting huge amounts of publicity showing off its "amazing" algorithms, while spending far less than it would have cost to buy the equivalent advertising. Great idea, really. I just wonder how they're going to explain it away when it reaches critical mass.
"The question that we must ask is, how long will it take before AI reaches the point where it can deal with situations that cannot be pre-programmed for and, while we wait for such advances, are the risks of such situations worth the benefits of better driving the rest of the time?"
Play a computer game. They happen to be one of the only places where AI is actually used in a production environment. Then you'll know the answer is "not in my lifetime."
What really worries me the worst is badly designed roads. Here there are quite a few intersections with the number of lights not matching the number of lanes, and of lights not matching up properly with lanes. It is pretty easy for a human to tell what is going on, but I can very easily see a computer being misled into thinking it is in a lane it is not.
Technology is good and all, but I do not trust this, and not much is going to make me. As it stands, they control all the conditions; IRL, crap happens. If I can be confused enough by an intersection to have to wait a moment, I don't want to think about what these things would do. Nice toy, nice marketing gimmick, but a state would be insane to allow this to actually reach the consumer market - and so would Google.
I just wonder how we're going to get rid of this false concept of ownership, which is what needs to happen for us to have any chance of keeping our free speech and open internet, considering the last time it required a civil war. "Occupying" a park certainly isn't going to change things, nor is voting, nor is the libertarian dream of "voting with your feet."
Pirates themselves in fact did the same thing to a good extent. Stealing from rich government convoys, and spending the profit in local ports. Hurt the European homeland, helped the poor Caribbean islands.
"there is a LARGE amount of "purists" that believe GPL is law"
Are you implying it isnt't?
"anything that doesn't have the 4 freedoms is poison"
You realize why Linux was made in the first place, right? To be a free and open system. Complaining people want to keep it such kind of strikes me as missing the point entirely, likely intentionally.
You also realize that you CAN, in fact, get proprietary software from repos of varying degrees of officialness in almost every distro? Java, flash, drivers... however, we are not your app store marketing device.
'Frankly I would be VERY surprised if some of those vocal members of the kernel team didn't just "accidently" make changes that broke Steam every. damned. time. if for no other reason than to be able to say "See? if you gave us your code then that wouldn't be happening now would it?" to "prove" their way is not only the right way but the ONLY way.'
Right. Because this has happened... exactly zero times in the past. It is no secret the kernel developers HATE proprietary drivers. Yet this conspiracy has not come to pass.
Making up insane bullshit only makes you look like a lunatic.
"So whether one wishes to acknowledge the truth or not it simply doesn't change the fact that the community is split in two, with the pragmatists that simply want to see Linux grow and as long as the core is free they are happy, and the purists that believe that the four freedoms should be held inviolate and nothing should be allowed to 'contaminate" Linux, especially not DRM which again, like it or not, is EXACTLY what Steam is."
Has it occurred to you that these might actually be, in fact, the same position? Linux exist in spite of repeated corporate attacks, not because of proprietary software.
"Sure its a harmless and pretty hassle free form of DRM"
Phone-home DRM... harmless, yeah, right. Screw your DRM. It does not belong on Linux. It certainly does not belong in any official repo of any respectable distro.
Tell that to Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Apple, Google....
There are many reasons for a large company to want to control its own platform. None of the major distros are going to sign up to take marching orders from Valve, which is what anyone paying attention ought to expect. That leaves them either being just another software developer, or starting a distro to leverage the whole OS.
And that's fine, as long as the kernels are all relatively identical. I really do not foresee that remaining true. They will modify the kernel - possibly even fork it eventually - and drivers will be targeted to that. Say goodbye to most hardware support unless you run the Valve distro. After all, why bother supporting a tiny portion of users that insist on using some hippy open kernel? They should just use Valve's....
Again, it's my prediction. It is not like this has not happened in the computing world before. Hell, Valve actually going about moving to Linux in the first place is because of the delayed effects of the LAST time this happened.
And if Valve manages to get even 10% of windows users to switch to Valvebrand Linux, what do you suspect will happen then? I suspect exactly what I said: dropping of support for any other distro by hardware manufacturers.
A company like Valve won't simply float around in Linux. It is going to cause problems, and I suspect won't solve a single one of the current problems in the long run. We'll see how it goes, but as far as I care, history repeats.
"Hardware support sucks on Linux. Sorry slashdotters but more than half use crappy intel graphics with 2002 era performance and can't run any modern games unless they dumb the graphics down big time."
I think you're talking out your ass to suit your obvious agenda.
Can I run $newgame? Probably not. That's not because of drivers, though; that's because the vast majority of demanding programs made use DirectX, and the best we have to make up for that is wine's reverse engineered interfaces to translate DirectX to OpenGL. They are astoundingly good for what they are, but obviously, are about 2 years behind in support and somewhat touchy.
I might have some graphical glitches and update issues from time to time, but even using a fairly new ATI card (generally regarded as the worst possible situation to be in), I still have perfectly and fully functioning 3D acceleration, including shaders. Performance of what I can run is effectively identical to that of the same programs on windows. Native OpenGL applications (try the Ogre demos) in fact run substantially better.
As for lowering the quality to make it run better? That basically proves you are clueless. Anyone who has actually run into driver issues on Linux can identify that speed is not an issue unless it is an extreme issue, ie, it is not that the drivers are magically slower (think about it...), but that sometimes they do cause issues that drag the system into the dirt. These are rare. The common driver problems are generally visual corruption and general failure, NEVER performance.
Don't let the facts get in the way of your screed, though.
Slashdot Mirror
I said it for years... Apple only looked better because they were small. I was modded down and called ignorant and a Linux neckbeard.
And now we see who was right all along, while facing an actual threat of Apple dominance in several markets (either by way if clueless users who think lock-in is a good thing, or legal force destroying competition). Given every Apple system is either built on an Apple-controlled "appstore" already or is one update away from it, that prospect should scare the shit out of every person on this site.
Microsoft was mostly evil in their methods, primarily EEE. Apple is evil in their methods and goal. Just say no.
It is less clueless to stay on a ship that might sink, than jump into ice cold water with no land in sight. Obama might be a complete failure (not that the president has much power, but what he does have, he has misused), but Mittens and Rand's Wife are arguably a whole classification scheme worse.
Its purpose is to make people feel they are having an effect, when they are not doing a damned thing. Basically the same as other petition sites, but official. Same scam the British have been running for a few years now.
It's kind of ironic they don't realize that censoring the thing actually makes it a net negative to them. The best policy is to just keep paying some English major to write meaningless, feel-good responses to anything that gets enough votes. The moment they start monkeying with the system is the moment people become extremely angry.
This is why no one believes you, and why the best you can hope for is "not as bad as the Republican alternative."
Too bad we can't get a real left wing in this country.
Call me when they drive in rush hour traffic in LA.
I have actually come to appreciate Palin's antics since the last election. She horribly scared me back then - now she seems harmless and amusing.
Do you pay attention? The last thing the average Republican wants is "diversity" in their candidate. Most of them are still trying to justify that odd feeling they have Obama is not an American.
The wonderful state of NC (sarcasm) opened a plate-recognition toll road here about a year ago.
Compare to the copyright-proponent's argument: I control this information, I can tell you how you can use it, I say who can use it, and I can revoke that whenever I want. BTW, I didn't even make it, I just bought it.
Copyright is a failed concept.
* Lack of moral, economic, or rational justification for the existence of copyright in the first place.
To start punishing Google in my internet usage habits. If Google wants to censor, then they are no longer the best search engine for my needs.
"So the automated vehicle is statistically better in every category."
In controlled conditions.
Let us not forget that incredibly important clause. Nothing tends to fail when you control 95% of the input. It is reality that tends to suck. Comparing general driving to developer supervised testing on clearly defined, unpopulated roads in broad daylight is dishonest and you know it.
The real reason this is a marketing gimmick is not insurance, but PR. If a Google car kills a baby, just imagine the news stories. Now imagine that happening on a weekly basis. I don't see it happening, nor do I see Google putting themselves into the liability, nor do I see states allowing this insane scheme in general.
This is all about Google getting huge amounts of publicity showing off its "amazing" algorithms, while spending far less than it would have cost to buy the equivalent advertising. Great idea, really. I just wonder how they're going to explain it away when it reaches critical mass.
"The question that we must ask is, how long will it take before AI reaches the point where it can deal with situations that cannot be pre-programmed for and, while we wait for such advances, are the risks of such situations worth the benefits of better driving the rest of the time?"
Play a computer game. They happen to be one of the only places where AI is actually used in a production environment. Then you'll know the answer is "not in my lifetime."
What really worries me the worst is badly designed roads. Here there are quite a few intersections with the number of lights not matching the number of lanes, and of lights not matching up properly with lanes. It is pretty easy for a human to tell what is going on, but I can very easily see a computer being misled into thinking it is in a lane it is not.
Technology is good and all, but I do not trust this, and not much is going to make me. As it stands, they control all the conditions; IRL, crap happens. If I can be confused enough by an intersection to have to wait a moment, I don't want to think about what these things would do. Nice toy, nice marketing gimmick, but a state would be insane to allow this to actually reach the consumer market - and so would Google.
I just wonder how we're going to get rid of this false concept of ownership, which is what needs to happen for us to have any chance of keeping our free speech and open internet, considering the last time it required a civil war. "Occupying" a park certainly isn't going to change things, nor is voting, nor is the libertarian dream of "voting with your feet."
Pirates themselves in fact did the same thing to a good extent. Stealing from rich government convoys, and spending the profit in local ports. Hurt the European homeland, helped the poor Caribbean islands.
'Why, you ask? To embed ads in it. They would have to name it "ad-fucked Linux."'
Actually, it is called "Android" last I checked.
"there is a LARGE amount of "purists" that believe GPL is law"
Are you implying it isnt't?
"anything that doesn't have the 4 freedoms is poison"
You realize why Linux was made in the first place, right? To be a free and open system. Complaining people want to keep it such kind of strikes me as missing the point entirely, likely intentionally.
You also realize that you CAN, in fact, get proprietary software from repos of varying degrees of officialness in almost every distro? Java, flash, drivers... however, we are not your app store marketing device.
'Frankly I would be VERY surprised if some of those vocal members of the kernel team didn't just "accidently" make changes that broke Steam every. damned. time. if for no other reason than to be able to say "See? if you gave us your code then that wouldn't be happening now would it?" to "prove" their way is not only the right way but the ONLY way.'
Right. Because this has happened... exactly zero times in the past. It is no secret the kernel developers HATE proprietary drivers. Yet this conspiracy has not come to pass.
Making up insane bullshit only makes you look like a lunatic.
"So whether one wishes to acknowledge the truth or not it simply doesn't change the fact that the community is split in two, with the pragmatists that simply want to see Linux grow and as long as the core is free they are happy, and the purists that believe that the four freedoms should be held inviolate and nothing should be allowed to 'contaminate" Linux, especially not DRM which again, like it or not, is EXACTLY what Steam is."
Has it occurred to you that these might actually be, in fact, the same position? Linux exist in spite of repeated corporate attacks, not because of proprietary software.
"Sure its a harmless and pretty hassle free form of DRM"
Phone-home DRM... harmless, yeah, right. Screw your DRM. It does not belong on Linux. It certainly does not belong in any official repo of any respectable distro.
Tell that to Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Apple, Google....
There are many reasons for a large company to want to control its own platform. None of the major distros are going to sign up to take marching orders from Valve, which is what anyone paying attention ought to expect. That leaves them either being just another software developer, or starting a distro to leverage the whole OS.
And that's fine, as long as the kernels are all relatively identical. I really do not foresee that remaining true. They will modify the kernel - possibly even fork it eventually - and drivers will be targeted to that. Say goodbye to most hardware support unless you run the Valve distro. After all, why bother supporting a tiny portion of users that insist on using some hippy open kernel? They should just use Valve's....
Again, it's my prediction. It is not like this has not happened in the computing world before. Hell, Valve actually going about moving to Linux in the first place is because of the delayed effects of the LAST time this happened.
And if Valve manages to get even 10% of windows users to switch to Valvebrand Linux, what do you suspect will happen then? I suspect exactly what I said: dropping of support for any other distro by hardware manufacturers.
A company like Valve won't simply float around in Linux. It is going to cause problems, and I suspect won't solve a single one of the current problems in the long run. We'll see how it goes, but as far as I care, history repeats.
This distro would not be supported by the Linux community. At least not for long. I wouldn't be worried about THAT aspect of it.
"Hardware support sucks on Linux. Sorry slashdotters but more than half use crappy intel graphics with 2002 era performance and can't run any modern games unless they dumb the graphics down big time."
I think you're talking out your ass to suit your obvious agenda.
Can I run $newgame? Probably not. That's not because of drivers, though; that's because the vast majority of demanding programs made use DirectX, and the best we have to make up for that is wine's reverse engineered interfaces to translate DirectX to OpenGL. They are astoundingly good for what they are, but obviously, are about 2 years behind in support and somewhat touchy.
I might have some graphical glitches and update issues from time to time, but even using a fairly new ATI card (generally regarded as the worst possible situation to be in), I still have perfectly and fully functioning 3D acceleration, including shaders. Performance of what I can run is effectively identical to that of the same programs on windows. Native OpenGL applications (try the Ogre demos) in fact run substantially better.
As for lowering the quality to make it run better? That basically proves you are clueless. Anyone who has actually run into driver issues on Linux can identify that speed is not an issue unless it is an extreme issue, ie, it is not that the drivers are magically slower (think about it...), but that sometimes they do cause issues that drag the system into the dirt. These are rare. The common driver problems are generally visual corruption and general failure, NEVER performance.
Don't let the facts get in the way of your screed, though.
They will. Drivers will come to only support its modified kernel, likely with DRM plugs built in.
Embrace, extend, extinguish.