There are may types of jobs out there for people who know how to use Linux. One of my favorites was a guy that I met at the library who promotes the use of Linux and other open source programs by teaching the public about them. He gives out free Ubuntu CDs and discusses other ways to get free software. Of course he is also a Linux expert and works with the library system on expanding their network and systems to using Linux and other open source software.
Most of the jobs I see online are for Linux administrators. They use Linux to build servers for businesses or to convert from Windows servers. Another position is for Linux Developers who actually program for Linux/Unix. They use the shell as well as other programing languages like PEARL and C++ to write programs and applications for companies who need them.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Linux Penguin
I honestly think that Mr. Torvalds is like me. He loves penguins! How can you not, they are short, waddle and hope around like they are a little drunk, when the get in the water they swim like highly maneuverable torpedoes, and wear a suit wherever they go. I once got to see them in the wild and they were hilarious the way they walked and played!
Really, after some research, Mr. Torvalds just wanted to give an image of a "lovable, cuddly, stuffed penguin sitting down after having gorged itself on herring" (http://www.linux.org/info/penguin.html).
He wanted an image that would show a fun creature at peace with the world who is contented not to have to use and pay for Windows anymore. A creature that is free to roam the oceans from the equator to the pole without any navigational problems. I could go on trying to be poetic about this but I think that you all get the idea.
Really, after some research, Mr. Torvalds just wanted to give an image of a "lovable, cuddly, stuffed penguin sitting down after having gorged itself on herring" (http://www.linux.org/info/penguin.html).
He wanted an image that would show a fun creature at peace with the world who is contented not to have to use and pay for Windows anymore. A creature that is free to roam the oceans from the equator to the pole without any navigational problems. I could go on trying to be poetic about this but I think that you all get the idea.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Net Neutrality
What is "net neutrality"? What does the FCC and Comcast have to do with it? Take a side and defend your position. Make is interesting for me.
Net neutrality is basically about freedom to use the internet for whatever you want without limitations. Currently there are no laws to enforce this freedom and there are lobbyists on both sides trying to either get it into law or keep it out.
It breaks down like this... Some ISPs may in the future decide that it is in their financial interest to direct traffic to a search engine or other site with whom they have partnered with. They could do this by blocking your access to the other search engines.
Also they could use this to offer tiered service. For example, if you are a web designer and upload a lot of info via FTP or a gamer who likes to play online games the ISP could limit your services if you don't pay more. They could say to the web designer that they have to pay for a more expensive business account or the online gamer to pay for faster access to their games.
The FCC is the regulatory agency that currently doesn't have adequate regulations to allow for net neutrality. Comcast was found to be blocking or delaying BitTorrent uploads on their network. Comcast was penalized for doing so but never had to admit that it did anything wrong. Within a year the FCC ruled that Comcast broke the law by limiting access to bandwidth.
I believe that net neutrality is important but I do not think that we have to go around making laws in favor of it. Congress placing laws against net netrality can just make it harder to change later if those laws are abused. It seems like the FCC did address the problem with Comcast in the end.
Another reason I disagree with making laws is because it goes against the basic idea of capitalization. If a company decides to limit service or offer a tiered system they will most likely fail because everyone will go to a different provider. It is their risk to institute a such a system. If the public decides to go for it, it will be societies fault for not boycotting it. According to Wikipedia, Time Warner Cable "introduced their intention to move to a 'consumption based billing' plan." Basically they where going to charge people more for higher usage. When the put their plan into action the public got pretty angry and they had to abandon their efforts. Regulations can be made as serious abuses are committed but there is no need to overreact.
Net neutrality is basically about freedom to use the internet for whatever you want without limitations. Currently there are no laws to enforce this freedom and there are lobbyists on both sides trying to either get it into law or keep it out.
It breaks down like this... Some ISPs may in the future decide that it is in their financial interest to direct traffic to a search engine or other site with whom they have partnered with. They could do this by blocking your access to the other search engines.
Also they could use this to offer tiered service. For example, if you are a web designer and upload a lot of info via FTP or a gamer who likes to play online games the ISP could limit your services if you don't pay more. They could say to the web designer that they have to pay for a more expensive business account or the online gamer to pay for faster access to their games.
The FCC is the regulatory agency that currently doesn't have adequate regulations to allow for net neutrality. Comcast was found to be blocking or delaying BitTorrent uploads on their network. Comcast was penalized for doing so but never had to admit that it did anything wrong. Within a year the FCC ruled that Comcast broke the law by limiting access to bandwidth.
I believe that net neutrality is important but I do not think that we have to go around making laws in favor of it. Congress placing laws against net netrality can just make it harder to change later if those laws are abused. It seems like the FCC did address the problem with Comcast in the end.
Another reason I disagree with making laws is because it goes against the basic idea of capitalization. If a company decides to limit service or offer a tiered system they will most likely fail because everyone will go to a different provider. It is their risk to institute a such a system. If the public decides to go for it, it will be societies fault for not boycotting it. According to Wikipedia, Time Warner Cable "introduced their intention to move to a 'consumption based billing' plan." Basically they where going to charge people more for higher usage. When the put their plan into action the public got pretty angry and they had to abandon their efforts. Regulations can be made as serious abuses are committed but there is no need to overreact.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Buying an iPad?
Basically this article is saying that the iPad may be a wonderful and exciting new toy, but it is just the first product to come out. There will be many more companies that will be bringing out similar tablets that will have many more options. Apple doesn't a wonderful job at putting together sleek cool toys like iPhones and such but many time there are other products that do the job just as well for a much smaller price.
Why would you want to buy an iPad now? For one thing you know that they will just drop the price significantly in another 6 months. Also, as the article says there are Linux based pads coming out. This means that the will be more options and downloads, many of which will be open-source. Do you want to pay Apple for every app you download? Another thing, the iPad is already out of date if you can't even use Flash on it. How many websites are out there that use flash (especially ones like youtube.com)? How much fun can you have with an iPad that runs only one app at a time and you can't even enjoy half of the sites that are out there?
If I were you I would wait and see what happens. Now that Apple has some competition they will have to find a way to upgrade the firmware to allow for more options and lower their price. I wouldn't even buy the iPad because I like that other pads will be open for more development. This means more free stuff! And if Google is getting in on it even better. Then we will see some clean software that runs well and offers ease of use on top.
Why would you want to buy an iPad now? For one thing you know that they will just drop the price significantly in another 6 months. Also, as the article says there are Linux based pads coming out. This means that the will be more options and downloads, many of which will be open-source. Do you want to pay Apple for every app you download? Another thing, the iPad is already out of date if you can't even use Flash on it. How many websites are out there that use flash (especially ones like youtube.com)? How much fun can you have with an iPad that runs only one app at a time and you can't even enjoy half of the sites that are out there?
If I were you I would wait and see what happens. Now that Apple has some competition they will have to find a way to upgrade the firmware to allow for more options and lower their price. I wouldn't even buy the iPad because I like that other pads will be open for more development. This means more free stuff! And if Google is getting in on it even better. Then we will see some clean software that runs well and offers ease of use on top.
Friday, April 2, 2010
SCO v. Novell Trial
Basically this lawsuit boils down to who had the right to use the UNIX software. Everything started with a deal in 1995 where Novell transferred certain rights and royalties of said software to what eventually became The SCO Group. The problem then developed when SCO filed a suit against IBM claiming it owned Unix. Novell then stated that it never sold the copyrights and eventually registered several key Unix copyrights later that year.
This really pissed off SCO and they filed a lawsuit against Novell. After years of trials, appeals, etc. Novell finally won the case and as of a couple days ago now officially owns the copyrights.
This really pissed off SCO and they filed a lawsuit against Novell. After years of trials, appeals, etc. Novell finally won the case and as of a couple days ago now officially owns the copyrights.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
