What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
50 Comments
- warmcat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24Dangnabbit, the garbage continues.
''Raymond believes Linux will get locked out for 30-odd years until the next platform shift as it's so far not doing enough to reach out to non-technical users.''
The content is licensed at the whim of the rightsholder already, they currently shun open formats. Unless Linux is converted to some hobbled, closed weapon against the user like Windows then it won't be seeing encrypted WMV support. "Locked out for $RANDOM years" is just scaremongering nonsense. See for example the Myspace promotion where you can get a WMV copy of the first episode of the latest series of "24", but you can't play it outside of WIndows. What kind of Microsoft dicksucking does ESR propose to remedy that by getting a player for Linux? MSFT won't do such a thing because they know proprietary media formats is a major plank Windows rests on.
Instead of begging incumbants for a pat on the head, what ESR should be putting his energies behind liberally licensed content like that found at http://jamendo.com. Not only is that licensed for a Free OS already, but it and its ethos can be grown to undermine traditional media from the ground up just like FOSS is undermining proprietary software. - smith, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Encrypted media is doomed anyway IMO.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12i agree with warmcat, raymond is way off here.
look how far linux and OSS has come in 10 years, and it's only done so by maintaining an uncompromising stance, if this changes now it will be absorbed and perverted till there is no point to it.
"as it's so far not doing enough to reach out to non-technical users.''
and i also think that statement is ***** crap to, you need only look at all the distro's out there with the stated goal of making linux easier to use. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16I already jumped all over this one last week; and here it is on Digg.
To recap; ESR was never a guru; at best a tribal bard. Until five years ago when he got a horn in on the Netscape-to-Mozilla deal, and whoops, made a ton of money. Since then he has come out of the closest as the most extreme FOX-watching, liberal-bashing, terrorist-fearing, Bush-cheering, O'Reilly-watching right-winger, second-amendment-first and all. His blog:
http://www.ibiblio.org/esrblog/
Becoming a sell-out and a turncoat against free software is only a logical step. I have been watching and agonizing over the situation for a couple of years, in fact, and though I have linked to him I think I may remove that link from my own site and give him his RIP, as a dead hero whom I once was naive enough to idolize.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm moderate. But I prefer openness and freedom for absolutely everything. I will grant the necessity for works of art (including games) to charge something, and I think people should be paid for working, even if their work will be released for free. Yeah, I really live this way! Freelance job and all! Don't run a stick of Windows and haven't for years. Anyway, accepting a non-free solution is at best a temporary compromise which we have to make at an ever-decreasing rate; free and open source software did not get where it is today from backing down and wussing out on it's principles.
Here, trolls, let me flame it for you: "LINUX WILL NEVER MAKE IT ON THE DESKTOP, AND U R THE SUXOR COMMUNIST! GO BACK TO RUSSIA blah blah blah." There, I saved you the trouble, hint hint.
Let me explain something to you; the only people who want to PUSH Linux on the people are the people who do NOT see the evil of proprietary software, but are only envious of Bill Gates because Gates has all the money and they don't. This is just one greedy swine wanting to take all the slop from the other greedy swine; nobody else but the swine stands to benefit. Free and Open Source software as it stands today benefits ALL of us, equally; I make money off of it, but I do not expect to be rich. There's room for everybody who can read this to make some money off of it, but probably not get rich. Pass it on. And FOSS can keep on the same path it's been on and get to the same place, just slower and with more owners.
Or you can choose stupid greed. The slow, stable, assured path to success, or the fast, bloody, risky one. I optimistically hope for the former but prepare for the latter by keeping one foot in other systems like BSD, Solaris, and ReactOS. And, speaking as one who is a *fire-baptized* Linux zealot, I have to regrettably say that were Linux to suddenly become Microsoft overnight, I would have no choice but to be ten times the enemy of Linux that I ever was of Microsoft; I never had a chance to know and love a free Microsoft for ten years like I have with Linux.
Final analysis; fat chance. And memo to ESR: nobody's that stupid. The world was fooled once, but in a big enough way the first time. Anyway, the vast majority of it is GNU software anyway. Stallman may be zealous at the other end of the scale, but I never have to worry about Stallman turning coat for greed's sake no matter how nutty he gets. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7in the process, you must not comprimose your orginal stand point or there is simply no point.
- bieber, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I've gotten used to the "Your stuff won't become popular if you don't compromise your freedom," argument, but I never thought I'd hear it coming from someone as well-regarded as ESR. He forgets that the purpose of GNU (the vast majority of a GNU/Linux system) is _not_ to be popular, it's to make it possible to use a computer in freedom. If we start accepting proprietary software, instead of writing free replacements for it when neccesary, we'll slowly but surely lose the ability to use a computer with only free software. We compromise on the Flash player and some codecs, next thing you know it'll be a shiny new media player. Then maybe a browser, or an office suite, or an image editor. Before you realize what hit you, your core system utilities have become dependent on proprietary software.
As I've said before, if you get into the habit of trading bits of your freedom for bits of convenience, what do you do when you look up and realize you have nothing left to trade? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7exactly, and when you lose freedom, you never EVER get it back.
- grakker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Don't piss him off. The gun guy will threaten you. If not your life, then just a "defamation of character".
"high priest" Whatever. - JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Ever since Raymond said "we don't need the GPL" I don't really take him seriously even though he is a cool guy. Freedom is more important than popularity. The GNU/Linux system shouldn't stoop or do horrible things in order to appeal to stupid users. A user worth crippling a system's (or system's component's) ideals for isn't the user who: "BUT IT WON'T PLAY MY DRM WMV FILEZ I DOWNLEDEDED LOL!"
- ahawks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Everyone ripping on ESR here, or whining that he's wrong, or "how the hell are we supposed to do that?" etc.... shut up and listen.
Linux/OSS's recent moves to exclude ANY closed-source software is a strong dividing line, and it's not a good one.
Every since Fedora, Ubuntu, etc made the choice not to even have mp3 support, or Adobe Acrobat, or Real player in their default repositories, it has hurt Linux on the desktop front.
Yes, a lot of tihs isn't stuff that can be addressed in a Wiki or a bugzilla record. It's politicial. It requires philosophical and business model shifts. MP3 and DVD codecs CAN be purchased. But the important first step is to stop excluding *available* packages simply because they are closed-source (real, adobe Acrobat, Java, Flash, etc).
No, we won't see encrypted WMV's playing on Linux. The goal is to get Linux more popular, step by step, to where content providers can't *afford* to use proprietary Windows-only codecs. - Kazrog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Interesting perspective. I've followed Linux over the last several years and installed several distros on several different hardware configs. I can respect different arguments on this issue and I have no definite opinion about it, but I will provide a quick anecdote, for what it's worth.
Most recently, I installed OpenSUSE 10.1 on a friend's HP laptop, because she was getting fed up with Windows and its various evils. The OS worked great overall, but there were a number of problems, all of which combined resulted in switching BACK to Windows...
1) Her iPod Nano became corrupted and started behaving strangely after using it with Banshee several times. Only doing an erase and factory reset from iTunes in Windows has saved it.
2) OpenSUSE wouldn't support sleep or suspend-to-disk without insane crashing, so I set close-lid operation to shutdown. Annoying since boot time was around 2 minutes.
3) Software that had been installed using YaST would sometimes randomly disappear, including shared libraries. Very frustrating to say the least.
4) OpenSUSE lacked any kind of touchpad configuration settings, and the touchpad would randomly copy/paste URLs into the front application. I could never find a place where this preference was stored.
These are the kinds of issues that are keeping Linux away from adoption as a desktop OS. In that respect, I think it's important that the Linux community be realistic and stop touting it as a desktop-friendly OS. It just isn't (yet)! - JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I agree with you, available packages should be used, however DeCSS and MP3 codecs bring about legal issues. Patent issues and such. That's why Ogg Vorbis and Ogg Theora are supported while others aren't because they are patent free.
Bundling DeCSS and MP3 codecs is perfectly fine, they are open. Proprietary drivers are not, are illegal, give the middle finger to the whole system, threaten the security and stability of the whole system. I agree with you, but if you agree proprietary drivers are a good idea for the sake of popularity, you are wrong. Popularity isn't important. What is important is popularity with the people who matter. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The people that want these features are going to continue to move more and more towards upcoming service-centric devices rather than full-fledged computers. They are not going to be looking at OS features, but at something automated that downloads their crap for them.
The age of the set-top box (only it won't be set-top, it'll be lap-top and mobile) may finally be upon us. - Awal, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I will take Ubuntu with its ipod support and amaroK over itunes anyday.
- ll350, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I think it is kind of silly to talk about reaching out to non-Technical Users, and then turn around an use the 64-bit computing era as the deadline. The switch to 64 bit processors will have the least impact on non-technical users. I know that he wasn't implying that OSS needs to appeal to non-technical users, because they are all eagerly awaiting 64-bit computing, but I think bringing up the two in the same discussion muddles the individual issues.
And what's this about the 30 year architecture lockout? I don't see how he made that assumption. I don't think there is any credible evidence to back that up, because where in the world have non-technical users been working on their PC's for 30 years? I'd give the 64 bit architecture 10 years tops. In 30 years I expect every computer to be running on optical processing systems with who-knows-what bit processing.
What will really drive Linux adoption and OSS in general is when the generation that was reared dealing with the frustrations of DRM and proprietary realizes there's a better way. The average non-technical user today probably doesn't even know what OSS means, much less why they should use it.
Just because people use a technology, doesn't mean that they understand the ethical implications of their actions. I'd assume that most non-technical users view their computers strictly as a consumer electronics device, and the concept freedom as in speech applied to consumer electronics is not one that has come up in society for the most part. What I mean is if you consider your computer on the same level as your TV, Stereo, VCR then your not going to get F/OSS intuitively. The people who can't live without their computers, and whose computers have replaced their TV, Stereo, and VCR will get it. - Colindean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3ESR is a Libertarian. He's on the conservative side of it, though.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/libertarianism.html - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2See, the simple fact I point out that shows this whole retarded reasoning for what it is: why can any commercial software company on the planet pull whatever codec or spec or format they want to out of their ass, patent it, sue competition who even gets close to it, and the burden is on Linux to support it immediately anyway? If it's such a huge issue, then it's Apple's fault for not sending the kernel patch to Torvalds the day before they released the iPod.
So what if we cracked the iPod (after all, it will even run Linux itself!) music format tomorrow? We'd get sued for months until we arrived at some kind of settlement, and the next day there's a new secret-sauce format called "MP4.5 reloaded" or some damn thing. This is all a stupid game they use to smear Linux, and don't anybody pretend it isn't.
Here, I've invented my own secret format and I won't show it to anybody or even tell them what it is. Support it immediately! - V1ncent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Linux has to develop into easily usable straight out of the box for the common man to adopt it. Web browsing, multimedia from the web, graphic cards, iPod support and all common web tools to surf and view content on the web HAS to be there for what is desire to happen; wider adoptability.
- flash200, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2adolfojp: If OSS doesn't become a little more flexible to appeal to the masses it will never outgrow its niche market.
The only sector in the computer industry where Linux is a niche player is the desktop. In all other sectors--clusters, web servers, enterprise servers, appliances, embedded devices--it's either thriving or dominating. Linux doesn't have to do anything on the desktop to succeed. It's already thoroughly permeating the industrialized world.
If Linux succeeds on the desktop, it won't be because of software or drivers, it'll be from the adoption of open standards, like ODF. Open standards render the platform irrelevant, and make it reasonable for the average person to use Linux, or whatever other platform they choose. - JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"People will mod me down because my comment is not popular. In a perfect world they would mod me down if my comment were nothing more than a troll."
Shades of gray. Like it or not, popularity is the driving force behind Digg. Popularity has only a casual relationship with perfection, truth, insight, intellect, etc.. - mipadi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3In life, there are very few absolutes. Most often, you DO have to compromise. I'm a big supporter of open standards and, to some extent, open-source software, mostly because it offers a CHOICE. The monopoly Microsoft software has on the desktop is bad for a lot of reasons. How many webpages are properly viewable only in IE? How much multimedia content only works with Windows Media Player?
The Internet is a powerful tool, but only when it is truly platform independent, in the sense that any and all platforms have equal opportunities to properly view content. This won't happen until non-Windows systems have penetrated the market more thoroughly. For this reason, it's good for everyone if Linux gains marketshare.
But it won't unless the average joe CAN make his iPod EASILY work with Linux, watch movies, and so forth. And that's difficult with Linux. For example, a lot of Linux distros simply DON'T have MP3 and DVD support available out of the box. Okay, sure, maybe Ogg IS better, and maybe it's WRONG to force developers to pay a license to use a particular file format, but the average joe doesn't know that, or care--he just wants that stuff to work LIKE IT DOES ON WINDOWS.
So I think it's important for Linux to make some compromises. To me, gaining market share so that data transmission (i.e. the Internet) will be equal on all platforms is more important than whether my graphics card driver is binary-only, or my music software supports MP3s. Linux has a change to make big strides--and force big changes--in the world of desktop computing IF it is willing to make a few concessions here and there. From an absolute standpoint, this is breaking the core Linux philosophy, but I think that helping to enable REAL change is much, much more important than sticking absolutely to a philosophy, regardless of circumstance or situation. And I think it's acceptable to make SOME concessions in terms of free and open software, if those concessions ultimately lead to open--or at least more widespread and platform-neutral--standards. - adolfojp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I believe that his views are quite insightful and maybe even correct. OSS zealotry might work for you and me, however, most people see their computer as a tool, not as a statement of ideology. Hardware and software vendors make their products to carter to most people. If OSS doesn't become a little more flexible to appeal to the masses it will never outgrow its niche market.
Then again, I also believe that digg's comment system is flawed. People will mod me down because my comment is not popular. In a perfect world they would mod me down if my comment were nothing more than a troll. - JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3In order to really be successful, Open Source needs to figure out a way to stop capitalism.
There are simply too many corporations building too many proprietary products that are too popular ... like the iPod for example. People just don't get it, ideology is way more important than things like convenience, ease of use and entertainment. I mean, aren't Bash shell scripts enough fun anymore?
Stupid users, who needs them. - overlordmead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thirty years is a decent forecast if you ask me; this guy makes it sound like it happening in our lifetimes is something we should look forward to as some milestone. In thirty years, if we make it, data will exist in a pervasive global network where your personal computing security and privacy will be primarily your own responsibility. Open source and "free" software will be part of anyone who wants to be part of the new paradigm of information freedom. If it goes the other way, I hope I'm not part of the system.
I - bobbknight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This discussion should have taken place, oh about 3 years ago.
When longhorn was scrapped in favor of the code base for win 2003.
Next year the lockout starts with so-called trusted computing.
Look how long it took to get good USB support in GNU/Linux. - Lobster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Why should we compromise when the GNU Linux model is working and growing for those using it? Our model is growing and market share aka usage for other systems is weakening. An integrated commercial Apple is also growing.
Unix / Linux has been around 30 years. Here is to the next 30 years . . . - HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@JonForTheWin
Ok, what you're talking about is another topic altogether. I see no indication that he was intending linux embrace legally shady stuff like DeCSS. Rather, he mentioned java and acrobat as examples. There's nothing wrong with embracing closed source stuff like that.
As for stuff like drivers, maybe I'm not getting the picture, but I find the arguments against closed source linux hardware support very weak.
Bottom line: There's evil stuff in closed source, but closed source itself is NOT EVIL, and it's very valuable besides. What's more, if Joe big corporation who is trying to make a profit can't do it on linux, it's more than happy to give linux the shaft and develop its mad-cool software for OtherOS (TM) only, making OtherOS (TM) that much more attractive. It's this kind of unprofitability that would hedge linux OUT of general public use even if it HAD that now.
Oh, and popularity does so matter for anyone about to bring that up. zero popularity = non-survival (not that that'll ever happen), and popularity level => vendor/developer support level and rate of evolution (which is frikkin important). - bieber, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Try a different distro. I, too, have had bad experiences with SuSE (but it was at least usable enough to get me started). My current distro is Ubuntu, and I've heard good things about that PCLinuxOS thing...
- adolfojp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I always read what Eric Raymond has to say here:
http://geekz.co.uk/lovesraymond/
It is also a good insightful and "accurate" view into the lives of Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds in the form of a web comic.
Enjoy! :-) - barfnz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1LINUZ WILL AMKE IT ON THE DESKTOP U R JUST A BLOGGING EMO
or for the non-trolls; yes, I think Linux will have some success on the desktop. - djoek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3dugg coz ESR is evil incarnate :)
- babbling, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You're the one that needs to get a grip. For most people, the appeal of Linux operating systems is the fact that most of them are Free Software. We value freedom. We like convenience, but not at the expense of freedom.
- adolfojp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Popularity has only a casual relationship with perfection, truth, insight, intellect, etc. "
Mind if I quote you? :-) - flash200, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@JQP123
That would help too. There are efforts underway, like LSB and the Portland project. The OSDL has been doing a lot of work on this. - JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Go for it. Feel free to attribute it to "Anonymous Digg User" or something similar.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Made a lot of noise. Maintained the Jargon file, which is an enjoyable read. Wrote cathedral and bazaar, some books, but only a total of about three. Has made the manual for nethack and wrote the sendmail program (or fetchmail, or some kind of mail?), and has hacked out a couple of other gizmos.
Made a pile of money off of some deal involving Linux, and had something to do with Netscape-to-Mozilla right around the time they sold out to AOL. In other words, has made a lot of noise. I once read the "New Hacker's Dictionary" and thought he was the gas, but that was before I met the rest of the FOSS regulars.
You know when you switch bars and are immediately befriended by the village idiot at the new bar, about whom you learn his true nature after everybody else in the bar has finally had a chance to talk to you? - mipadi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I can certainly understand your point about the iPod, and admittedly it was a bad example. But I think in terms of the larger point of my statement, yours is a bit short-sighted. My idea is that, if other platforms (Mac OS X, Linux, and other versions of Unix) became more widespread, commercial vendors couldn't AFFORD to not support other platforms. I think this is the biggest change in computing that non-Windows platforms could bring to the desktop market. Right now, it's often not that big of a deal for a vendor of a product such as an MP3 player, or a multimedia codec, to only support Windows; if other systems were more widespread, it would be.
- JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"If Linux succeeds on the desktop, it won't be because of software or drivers, it'll be from the adoption of open standards, like ODF."
If Linux succeeds on the desktop, it'll be because some standards were finally applied to Linux itself, at least enough to define what a "Linux desktop" is. - flash200, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ESR worked on fetchmail (not sendmail). He helped Netscape draft the license they used to open source their web browser; "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" was fairly influential in bringing this about. He co-founded the Open Source Initiative, and coined the term "open source", along with Bruce Perens. And he also published the infamous Halloween Documents (which were my initial introduction into FOSS).
So, he was a significant figure, historically speaking. But he's been irrelevant for years now. The paper-money millions he was worth from VA Linux quickly disappeared when the dot-com bubble collapsed. And he pretty much imploded when some code he wrote for automatically configuring the Linux kernel was rejected. I'm not aware of anything significant he's done since. - walkerj, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Does anyone think that ESR is still relevant? Was he ever relevant, or did he just make a lot of noise? That's the only reason I can think of that he is (or at least was) so high-profile. What has he ever _done_?
- divatri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Awesome. I'm not impressed. Not even a bit.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1adolfojp: "If OSS doesn't become a little more flexible to appeal to the masses it will never outgrow its niche market."
And?
Outgrowing a niche market is only worrisome if you want to monopolize the market. Linux does not have that goal, and God forbid it should. Go find some other rogue army to mobilize. - spitenmalice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0IMO I think Wine support needs to take off not just support for hardware or popular media formats, sure it's a crappy solution however I think the way to get the desktop crowd is to ween them off what they are use to. I know the biggest problem for me to switch completely to Linux, was not being able to find Linux equivalent software for what I was doing in windows. Wine has now helped me to over come that obstacle, however I know it is still not a solution for everyone as it doesn't always work. I know a lot of people are going to say "If they can run windows progs under Linux, then why bother coding for Linux" Well that's true as well, but I think something that would be remedied if there were more people using Linux and interested in it.
- Smoov, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2LINUX WILL NEVER MAKE IT ON THE DESKTOP, AND U R THE SUXOR COMMUNIST! GO BACK TO RUSSIA blah blah blah
- HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@ahawks, dead on.
Holding closed source at arm's length is equivalent to holding the software industry at arm's length. As long as the platform itself is free as in speech, then closed source software will still have to make a presentable offering that doesn't compromise (pragmatic) open source principles.
As things stand now, any company that develops end-user software for linux is either pushing their own "universal" format (ie adobe/pdf) or is simply doing charity work. If market share for linux gets high enough (maybe eventually, but I won't be holding my breath) then for-profit companies will start selling/releasing software for linux a lot more, but it would happen much sooner/at lower market share if GNU wasn't bent on souring the deal.
Don't get me wrong, I'm big on free (as in beer and speech), but it's not really free if it goes "racist" on non-free stuff, and I also care about BETTER. Linux can be better; I'd love to see a lot more day-jobs devoted to building on it, because that's what better will look like...corporate and free development on a free platform that's too important to be ignored when targetting a market. - Burmask, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Finally, a realistic assessment.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Well, if you can condense all that to a one-liner, let me know.
- Unavoidable, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2People who are ripping this guy and what he said, and defending the status quo of the Linux movement, are completely missing the point. Right now, the only people who use Linux are the people who develop Linux. Sure, the community is called "open-source", but from the outside, it's no different than a CLOSED community.
The vast majority of computer users don't give a damn about the code behind the pretty windows and their media players. If you want Linux to succeed, and I want to see this thing do well as much as anyone else here, you're going to have to give the consumer what they want - something simple, that works with 'everything'. No ten-step convoluted installation processes just to run a video.
Get a grip, or it'll never go mainstream. Or is that not the goal of the Linux/open-source movement? - n0xie, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Wow that made absolutely no sense at all
- gregregreg, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1ESR is a ***** fag.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is