Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Thanks for the pro tip - it makes it much better with the voices.

In reply to this comment by BoneyD:
Such a fantastic game. A short while back, I played the re-release of Star Control 2 since Toys For Bob made it open source.

You can pick and choose which sound/music packs you want to load with it, from either the PC or 3DO versions. I tried to keep it as close to the original PC settings for nostalgic reasons, but I highly enjoyed the 3DO voice acting! If you feel like cranking it up again, I recommend turning that feature on.

Yeah, Intel is currently the way to go wrt graphic stuff and linux unless you need 3d.

I've also noticed the bandwidth thing, but thought the problem was more due to the different geographical locations of youtubes server clusters. Some work fine, others you'll need to start buffering and come back half an hour later to get decent quality.

With ubuntu, things really took a leap forward for desktop linux stuff. The hard part is actually working through problems rather than just throwing up your hands and going back to windows. So kudos for hanging on; some things are still lacking but all in all the switch is worth it.

And I'm currently busy busy busy in the real world. Too many projects at work and so little time...

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Well the stutter problem came back a little. It only happens on certain video hosts too like YouTube and Metacafe. Vimeo and most others are fine. I did more research on the issue and learned that nVidia's drivers are problematic on a lot of Linux distributions. A bunch of Linux geeks even made an online petition begging nVidia to make their Linux drivers open source so that they could make them work better. Oh well.

I'm also switching my ISP so I can have a faster connection. It will be going from from 1.5 Mbps to 8.0 Mbps. I'm hoping that might help, because I've noticed that the longer it takes the video to buffer, the greater the chance the video will stutter or just plain stop. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Otherwise everything else is fine. It's easier to use than I initially thought it would be, and it only seems to be getting easier. Here's to brave middle-aged men.

Thanks for checking. Hope everything is going well for you.

In reply to this comment by srd:
Hey, just wanted to check back on how things are going with your adventures in linux land. Everything running smoothely I hope.

Well the stutter problem came back a little. It only happens on certain video hosts too like YouTube and Metacafe. Vimeo and most others are fine. I did more research on the issue and learned that nVidia's drivers are problematic on a lot of Linux distributions. A bunch of Linux geeks even made an online petition begging nVidia to make their Linux drivers open source so that they could make them work better. Oh well.

I'm also switching my ISP so I can have a faster connection. It will be going from from 1.5 Mbps to 8.0 Mbps. I'm hoping that might help, because I've noticed that the longer it takes the video to buffer, the greater the chance the video will stutter or just plain stop. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Otherwise everything else is fine. It's easier to use than I initially thought it would be, and it only seems to be getting easier. Here's to brave middle-aged men.

Thanks for checking. Hope everything is going well for you.

In reply to this comment by srd:
Hey, just wanted to check back on how things are going with your adventures in linux land. Everything running smoothely I hope.

http://www.dd-wrt.com

It's an open source wireless router firmware that you can flash on several different models of wireless router.

The flash itself is geeky, but they give detailed instructions on how to do it. Once installed it's got a better UI than most wireless routers do by default, and a boatload more options.

In this case, you're looking for QoS, so that you can throttle bandwidth effectively so that Torrent-porn guy doesn't stop Youtube-Videosift guy or WoW junkie from being able to get their jollies too.

It just takes a little common sense prioritization, make low-bandwidth latency sensitive stuff have the highest priority (e.g. Warcraft), make medium-bandwidth medium-latency stuff like streaming video or http in general the next rung down, and then high-bandwith latency insensitive stuff like torrent/emule/gnutella the lowest possible priority.

You can also block certain types of traffic, but it sounds like you're looking for bandwidth shaping, not a net nanny type setup.

Torrent can be the bane of everyone's existence if it's not properly throttled. If the above is too complex, just do a bandwidth test (when no one else is using the line), and then tell the torrent head to set his max upstream rate to half what the line can do, and you should be fine. It's not a bad idea to throttle downstream too, but filling the upstream pipe is usually the real culprit for torrent-related slowdowns.

My suggestion is to build an OpenBSD-based router network router running pf.

PF is what the United Arab Emirates use to block Skype use in the UAE (to force everyone to use the state-owned telco provider). It's extremely powerful, and while it may seem like overkill, I'm thinking that it would probably be the easiest way to get what you want.

OpenBSD is a open source, free-for-download BSD UNIX, originally branched from the FreeBSD code when one of the developers got an itch to audit the entire codebase for potential security flaws and exploitations. It's been called the most secure OS in the world. Every line of code has been audited for security flaws. PF was added to the kernel a couple years ago.

The PF firewall is extremely configurable.

But all this requires some requisite UNIX-hacking skills.

http://www.openBSD.org
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=pf&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=OpenBSD+Current&arch=i386&format=html

This sift (sieve) is even more unrecognizable! Let's just go with the videoGrater idea! or videoSpork. VideoWaffleIron, clogging all your holes with gooey goodness!
How about this...
On facebook, there is a greasemonkey app called facebook colorizer that pulls a color template from the profile picture and applies it to the rest of the page. I don't know if the code is open-source, but how hard would something like that be? If you want to change the color of your VS, the text colors and all things "default" change with it! (of course saving customized comment boxes and the like)

They should just open-source that shit.

I think if the republicans really wanted a new direction for their party they should look at AHHHNALD. He is introducing open source text books, hes talking about bringing debate about weed, and introducing green job and green initiatives. Had I realized he would make pushes like this, I don't think I would have ridiculed him as much when he ran. Hell, I'd even vote for him, if he was in MN. He is engaged about dealing with the debt, unlike our belligerent, short-sighted Gov. Pawlenty.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'tim oreilly, web, two, technology, acitivist, open source' to 'tim oreilly, web, two, technology, activist, open source' - edited by doogle

Kind of a bit of a cop out answer, but if you're struggling and want to do something (possibly) more straightforward then you could install Mint Linux. It's a version of Linux based on Ubuntu.
It seems to be more "works out of the box" than ordinary ubuntu.
You see a lot of the stuff like Java plugins, proprietary drivers and flash (basically often the non-open-source stuff) aren't all that straightforward to enable on ordinary Ubuntu, but seem to work much more smoothly on Mint.

I personally use Ubuntu, but I put Mint on anyone's PC who doesn't want to get into all the technical stuff too much.

I really enjoy Linux and think it's a great thing, and find it strange when people don't like something that people give away for free, but I can see why other people don't want the hassle.

The only thing with Linux, is that it often is possible to solve the problems, but it quite often will end up with typing in commands, but as the years go by, each new version seems to mean you have to do less of that typing to make it do the common stuff.

There's no getting around it at the moment, if you want to use Linux to do all the other stuff you want to do on your other OSes, then you will have to occasionally do some slightly technical stuff and learning. But there's lots of people perfectly happy to help out with your struggles. Sometimes it may seem like a pain, but there are also a lot of rewards along the way. It's a whole new community to get involved in and find out about, and you'll benefit greatly by embracing what you can do that you can't do with Windows or a Mac, and accepting some things will at least for the time being be easier to do on a PC/Mac.

"I want to see if Open source can benefit to the world of materially deprived."

Interesting, but the misanthrope in me agrees with ponceleon that people are just giving out of curiosity for this new concept. But I hope I'm wrong.

Um, CaveBear, I work in the video game industry. So don't assume.

Also, I buy music through iTunes (now that they've stopped the stupid copy protection) and through Steam. Why those two? Quality and simplicity. And often, they allow the user to sample before purchasing. And afterward, at least on Steam, you can delete and re-download a game as often as you like. That way I know I'll have a good, working copy for a long, long time. And they deliver software patches automatically.

The stuff I download illegally is usually not available on iTunes, or not available anywhere at all like a TV show (another industry that needs to rethink its distribution methods). I honestly don't get many games or other software through torrents because they are unreliable.

I'm fairly sure that open source is going to become the way most software works in the future. Programmers will be employed to customize software for business needs. And games will primarily be online through subscription or micro-payments. Things change man. Go with it or get run over.

^You are confusing socialism with cooperation. Socialism deals with the means of production, and the means of production is a computer, not a brain. That is where your reasoning goes awry. Thousands of people aren't sitting around one computer writing open source code...they each have their own computer which they use to produce code and share it freely. Socialism would be people sharing their computers with everyone else in the world. If I am incorrect, then what would you call it if everyone shared their computers to produce code?

Two people sharing a computer to produce a program are collectivist, just like a bunch of people living in shared housing (communes). Contrastingly, two people using their own computers to produce a program together are cooperating (joint venture).

Open source code is a free market with price = 0, nothing more. It is incorrect to suggest that a market does not exist unless goods have a positive price. Goods can have a positive price, zero price, or negative price. Take for instance trash, which has a negative price...you pay people to take it. Another example of zero prices would be promotional offers such as buy one get one free, etc.

This is becoming mostly a semantic argument, but probably an important semantic difference, since we're both claiming open source as evidence for our beliefs.

I think perhaps the issue is that from your point of view, being "free market", is more about "free of government" than being an actual market. If that's what you mean, I would agree; you don't even need to use any of that dirty government money to participate or benefit from it.

But you have to concede that in many ways open source looks like a collectivist's dream; creative people collaborating freely, and sharing the results with all, even those who don't provide anything to it directly.

The laborers own the means of production (in this case, that means is their mind itself), and the resources come from those with ability, and go to those with needs, and there's no need for money at all.

I don't dispute calling it "free", as it seems to be that in every sense of the word, but calling it a "market" seems a gross misnomer when there is no sale (or price) involved.

Now I do think that what motivates the people who do the bulk of the work in open source projects is that it's a way to advertise their skills in order to get a better paying job. But still, there are also a lot of people chipping in with small fixes or suggestions that add up to a substantial contribution to the overall project, with no real expectation of compensation, and that those contributions can add up to something far more valuable than a single self-interested developer can provide on his own.

Along the way, everyone shares equally in the benefits, or at least gets equal access to the benefits of what was produced.

I don't look at that and see a market; if anything, that sounds very communal. Possibly even small-c communist.

I don't think it'd work with most types of goods, but I think the strategies and methods of open source could be applied to government to good effect; I think democracy really calls for an open-source method of managing the state. The idea of needing to funnel things through elected representatives seems anachronistic in our era of instant communication and mass collaboration.

^Open source code technically has no owner, as you say. The physical implementation of this is the absence of copyright which enforces ownership.

Open source software is compatible with the free market because the free market does not require ownership (or copyright), all it requires is an absence of governmental interference on economic matters. A free market requires property rights for scarce resources (tangible goods) only to the extent that a civil society requires such rights (to protect against theft, murder etc).

Socialism specifically requires public ownership, i.e. the software would be owned by the public through the government or state. The only way to enforce the ownership of patterns (source code) is via some kind of copyright system. Thus, open source software is not compatible with socialism because by definition the government would have to copyright it to have ownership.

To use an example, imagine if in the future humans invented a device which could create any object for free out of thin air. If you think about it, your hard drive is a similar device. It can create an almost infinite amount of electronic objects (books, mp3s, webpages, pictures, etc.) out of "thin air" and for "free" (ignoring electricity costs, etc.).

When the government doesn't restrict your personal use of such a device that is the free market.
When the government owns such a device, that is socialism.
When the government restricts the use of such a device (via copyright) that is authoritarianism.

If you substitute "a device" for "a computer which creates software code" you have the example we are discussing.