Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Suse origins (Score 3, Informative) 189

Slackware does sell its distribution on DVD/CD, which I think makes its a 'vendor'. SUSE may have been 'in the Linux business' since 1992, but only as a service provider and third party re-distributor of existing distributions (SLS and Slackware). They didn't actually sell a distribution under their own branding until 1994, and that was really just Slackware translated into German. So Hannes Kuehnemund is being a bit cheeky here!

Comment Vintage polycarbonate (Score 1) 564

For about $2 apiece, tapes can be produced in small quantities much more quickly than vinyl records, whose own resurgence has slammed pressing plants with so much demand that a new record can take up to six months to turn around. And unlike with vinyl, musicians can produce new copies of cassettes in their apartment in a pinch.

Imagine the excitement when, in a decade or so, hipsters re-discover the antiquated 'CD' format...

Comment Re: the smell of E-6 in the morning (Score 1) 213

That's an automated Rolls-Royce solution, though. You can keep everything warm with a laboratory-style thermostat-controlled water bath (available quite cheaply on ebay or from lab surplus suppliers), and just use a conventional daylight developing tank. But it's still possible to get commercial E6 done for probably less than the price of the film, which is what I suspect most Ektachrome users will do - Fuji's E6 films are still in production, and have kept this industry ticking along on a small scale (though you may well have to use a mail order lab these days).

Comment Re: great (Score 1) 380

I think I remember reading about a study done in Africa where somebody found old blood samples from the 1950s (maybe earlier?), tested them for HIV antibodies, and found not one, but *several* that subsequent testing confirmed. HIV might not have reached *America* until the 60s or 70s, but it was *definitely* making its way around Africa at least a decade or two earlier.

The two earliest confirmed HIV samples are from Leopoldville (now Kinshasa in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) and were collected in 1959 and 1960. Their genomes are about 12% different to each other, suggesting divergent evolution of virus strains had already been going on in infected humans for years or decades. Current estimates suggest the true 'patient zero' probably dates back to the early 20th or possibly even the late 19th century.

Comment Re:Too Late (Score 1) 394

He has zero chance of winning, which makes his being better or worse irrelevant.

Hardly. Neutral predictions put his odds of winning at about 1 in 6 at the moment, and a lot can happen in the next 3 weeks. Voting for a third candidate might make sense when there are two sane though unappealing mainstream candidates. But Trump is as close to Mussolini as the US is likely to see. It's harder to think of a more dangerous time to use a protest vote.

Comment Re:Not really open source if the source isn't open (Score 1) 117

So, not open source, eh?

No, not Open Source, which rather makes my point. The Open Source Definition explicitly forbids restrictions on commercial use ('No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor'). The developers claim there are 'many definitions' of Open Source, which isn't correct for software, and the current version of the Wikipedia page they link to doesn't support this claim. This is not the main problem with the LinuxSampler licence, however. Instead of writing their own licence, they've added a restriction to the GPL, which isn't allowed if you still want to call it the GPL. This means that their licence contradicts itself, which is one reason why you won't find Linuxsampler in (say) Debian non-free. The developers are of course perfectly free to distribute their software for non-commercial use only, but they just haven't gone about it in the right way. They should just drop the 'Open Source' claim and come up with their own licence (which could be based on the GPL, but should not include the preamble, GPL branding, or anything else that conflicts with their non-commercial clause).

Comment Re:Why? (Score 2) 127

There are any number of Unix/Linux applications that have never been ported to Windows by their developers and have no direct equivalent in the MS world. If most of your work is in Windows, it makes obvious sense to run that as your main OS, but having the ability to use additional Unix/Linux packages fills a real need. I've been doing this by varous means since the 90s, using Cygwin, VMs, and now this thing. It may possible to (e.g.) use Windows-native GNU tools (MinGW, etc.) to build the software you need, but that's not always straightforward or worth the bother - much easier to 'apt-get install' and get on with your work.

Comment Re:Not really open source if the source isn't open (Score 2) 117

I wonder if some developers genuinely don't understand what Open Source means, and just use the tag as a convenient buzzphrase? Describing projects that aren't really Open as Open Source is a problem that goes back to the early days, and affects software as well as hardware. e.g. LinuxSampler still defiantly claims to be Open Source a decade or so after after being dropped from major Linux distributions because it clearly isn't (and has a contradictory licence that doesn't make it properly non-free either).

Slashdot Top Deals

When you make your mark in the world, watch out for guys with erasers. -- The Wall Street Journal