Am going to read right now. Thanks.
24 posts • joined 20 Oct 2010
Am going to read right now. Thanks.
Urm, Shane, reading outside in the dark doesn't count :)
Or, as Australian's would say "There's not sunshine in Britain anyway" - not that I believe the buggers.
If you have to worry about what you wear when you're reading I'd say THAT'S a problem.
Compared to e-ink readers there really is no comparison. I used to think differently until I started using an e-ink reader regularly. I don't have to worry about the angle I hold it at...nor what colour my clothes are :))
I agree that the function is great - I have a Kindle app on my ASUS Transfomer and Galaxy S2, as well as a Kindle. I like being able to pick up where I left off regardless of the device I'm using. Also have a generic e-book reader (Kogan Touch) and would like the same function on that...
While I appreciate the function, I'm not happy with the DRM'd approach and I buy only V. cheap books <$2 or get ones that are free or reduced to free.
I'd buy more e-books if the whole DRM rubbish was scrapped. I'd even consider paying more if i could on-sell, loan properly or give away my e-books. Until then, I'm selective in a way that reduces my assistance to an industry which wants to rort me while trying to gain some benefit for myself.
I am quite happy to pay people like Cory Doctorow (and Louis CK for his videos) as I know I'm not subsidising people who are trying to restrict my use of the things I buy from them. No DRM, no rip-off. Robert Llwellyn is someone else who when he has control over the product appears to want to make it more freely available (great show on youtube called carpooling).
Most likely not, Chris.
BSD's license allowed Apple to come along, take it add a GUI Apple liked and then sell it on.
Compare the number of people who contribute to BSD and Apple for free (or little) and then compare the number to those who contribute to GNU/Linux and GPL'ed software.
You can also compare the number of people who contribute to GNU/Linux for money and those who contribute to BSD and Apple for money.
The figures are very lopsided.
Mostly it's the licence. A rough summary is that GPL means that each contribution is a contribution to everyone from everyone. No-one gets to take advantage of other peoples work without each party having equal access.
The BSD licence means that each person can take it away and keep it to themselves. Not very social and not very friendly.
I'd say that's the main reason why BSD didn't take off like GNU/Linux has.
At least you should feel better now you've got that off your chest.
I agree that the comments by this person are just silly. The failure to grasp a subject should not mean the person should be 'treated' as if they had some form of disorder or disease.
However, nor should they be considered capable of understanding the issues at hand.
For everyone who says "I don't think so" should come the reply "So?". Unless they're an expert in the area, it really doesn't matter what they 'think' or 'believe'. Most people don't have the ability to understand the maths and the scientific research behind the issue. However, they do look at the weather and so have 'an opinion'.
Professionally I've always listened to people who think something - that doesn't mean they know what they're talking about.
What about General Relativity? What about gravity? How about people express an opinion on that? I guess they don't because they can't 'see it' and can't 'feel it' in the way that makes sense scientifically. I mean we all know 'light exists' and we 'see things' and things 'fall down' but beyond that...
The professor is an idiot...but that doesn't mean those in the general population who 'think' something know what they're talking about either.
Actually it was NOT the consensus of scientists...they didn't exist at the time.
It was the consensus of those who controlled thinking and ideas aka religious bodies.
Please don't confuse the two.
but here's the video :))
Surely you jest???
I don't own one but my wife has one for her business. As simple as. Our kids can use it.
Seriously, what's so hard? The pearl/mini-touch pad is a fantastic device and come into its own when messaging and e-mailing. One click wonder.
Apache is free in in that you can give it away.
GPL is free because you can give it away.
Apache you can do as you like.
GPL you can do as you like.
Apache allows you to act in a self-serving, grasping, greedy manner.
GPL requires that if you use something which has been created by another and wish to then redistribute that thing, you must share with others.
In other words, GPL requires you to play nicely and behave in the same manner as all those who provided you with the software in the first place.
If you don't want to do that, then don't use things that are covered by the GPL.
Find something else.
There's nothing "Not Free" in that because it doesn't restrict you in your use of the software, it just prevents you from taking advantage of other peoples hard work to your own benefit without benefiting others who have helped you.
It's quite simple really: If you are a greedy, self-interested, selfish individual, who doesn't want to play nicely with others, GPL isn't for you.
The socialist-leaning majority KNOW that the socialism inherent in FOSS is alive and well.
I'd say you need to find out what socialism means before you use it in a statement.
Matt Asay lacks a notion of 'self-interest' that is coherent or developed.
The same simplistic and basic arguments that are really circular argument.
"People contribute because it makes them feel good - thus it's self-interest."
The argument is absurd and regularly shot down philosophically.
It is really a claim that there is a simplistic relationship between feeling good about contributing to something, feeling good that others can use it, feeling obliged to do something to help others, to contribute for others.
Linus is good at what he does, but he's not a philosopher and his grasp of social relationships is not strong. Furthermore, other people did the work that kept and keeps the larger companies from crushing him and defeating his work and the work of others.
No, this is not paranoia, merely that many things are banned in various places for no reason other than they threaten already existing monopolies or powerful groups - growing hemp for instance.
I think the EFF would have a few things to say about ensuring FOSS remains so.
They are presented as an either/or proposition when this is not accurate.
They are complex ways of thinking about and representing the world and there is no way of avoiding them...they're merely ways of patterning relationships and of determining whether something should or should not be accepted.
Each individual creates them and lives by them and can generally be placed within them.
I really like the following quote, said to be by Linus himself:
"So the only ideology I really despise and dislike is the kind that is about exclusion of other ones."
I'm assuming he has a lot of self-loathing!
It's obviously contradictory and expresses a lack of knowledge of the subject.
BTW I appreciate all the work Linus T has put in to the very kernel I use everyday.
Having worked with lots of people who use Windows, EVERY version is confusing to them and every version requires training.
Changing over to GNU/Linux is no more difficult than changing over to a new version of Windows.
Any claims to the contrary are such absolute, baseless FUD.
Please provide some evidence of your claims...I'm afraid I cannot find any reputable evidence that a properly implemented 'Nix desktop is somehow more difficult to use.
Really? She and hers husband watch some porn and she claims it on her expenses.
Now she's decided that if it wasn't so easily available, they wouldn't have done it.
Sounds so much like a self-righteous failure to take personal responsibility.
I've no problem with ISPs being forced to 'attempt' to restrict the traffic in illegal pornography (child pornography for instance) but if something is legal to trade in, then it has nothing to do with the ISPs.
Smith should take personal responsibility for what happened and stop trying to externalise the issues as if they belong to someone or somebody else.
I know what you mean, Syren.
I've got a N95 8G, N97 and N8. Though the first and last phones are the better and the last one the best, I find the GUI perfectly fine.
I've played with iPhones and found that while the glitzy bits are nice, the hardware is quite ordinary when compared to the N8, for instance.
There is some bling on the iPhone3/4 that looks nice, but this doesn't make it a good phone. It makes it a nice UI.
An upgrade, if done well, to the GUI for the Nokia's would be nice, but I don't find myself hampered by the UI to be honest. I do find myself hampered by the iPhone (and others, for that matter) having such ordinary specs (eg. ordinary camera, flash is either not present or just plain ordinary, no HDMI output, no USB on the go, no FM transmitter).
The current review seem quite okay, until they start to make iPhone comparisons.
Each time I put my N8 on the desk and people compare it to the iPhone (4 included) the only thing they come away with is that 'it's got more bling/glitz' and there are some apps which are not half bad. The browser is REALLY crap and, as I've said, the hardware is generally pretty ordinary when stacked up next to the N8 - hell, the iPhone4 can't even do proper (3G) video conferencing.
In summary, the iPhone has major limitations in its hardware which are (for some people) covered up by the Paris Hilton factor - lots of glitz but not much else.
I cannot think of a powerful anything on the iPad. Please provide a list.
...are you talking about??
"This fabled "openness" is resulting on peoples identities and personal data being spread around the Interne..."
I'm assuming you mean the 'openness' results in peoples person information being illegally obtained via the Internet as a result of the 'openness' of the system?
If this is what you mean, you seriously lack even the beginnings of an understanding of how 'the tubes' and free and open source software works.
It is the proprietary systems which are largely responsible for these problems - even a general reading of tech magazines, research and online-available material will show this.
Seriously, you are better of in the garden. You need someone to take you in and lock the gate.
If you don't like iTunes...hmmmmmmmm...hang on! Ring daddy Steve and ask him nicely to "let you" try something else, you know, through the App store. I wonder what daddy Steve would say???
OSX is not open and so you cannot 'do what you want'.
There are obvious limitations. Even if you were completely au fai with BSD, there are limitations to what you can do because of the proprietary layers used by OSX.
So while you are partly correct, there is a BIG difference between GNU Linux and the Mac OS.
“will it run on my network, and does the store I shop at have it?”
In Australia, for instance, I'm not aware of any instance in which a particular phone will not run on a particular network.
I'm not certain, but I'm fairly sure that it would be illegal for a provider to ensure a phone didn't work - give there is no real technical reason here for that to be the case.
Your commentary about protecting Windows machines is not accurate.
There is a plethora of software out there which is both free or/and open source which can be freely obtained for the protection of Windows machines.
I don't use Windows but I do provide support to those who do and continually suggest these as options to people.
Additionally debates about 'comparisons' between machines is replete with confusion, I'd suggest this:
as an example of the price difference.
The issue, for me, about Macs and OSX and Apple in general is that you have your dad telling you what you can do with a machine you bought - the iPhone being the worst example.
You may have bought it, but you don't own or have control over it.