Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ubuntu Developer Summits Shifting Online, Increasing Frequency

Unknown Lamer posted about a year ago | from the also-called-irc dept.

Ubuntu 49

hypnosec writes "Ubuntu Developer Summits Community Manager Jono Bacon has announced that the bi-annual Ubuntu Developer Summits, which were held at different locations like Brussels, Oakland, Copenhagen will be replaced by online events by moving to the cloud. Bacon revealed that the event has been successful, but in a bid to bring about improvements and refinement in the openness and accessibility of the event, it is going to transition into an online event." They are also going to be held every three months instead of every six.

cancel ×

49 comments

Hey fuckheads (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026299)

I'm betting lots of you voted for Obama and lots of you have 401k money. Some you you Obama voters may actually have jobs and thus have voted for the socialist *and* have 401k savings.

Do you know that they are making moves to confiscate your savings? How do you like that socialists? Why don't you just withdraw everything and send it in right now?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-18/retirement-savings-accounts-draw-u-s-consumer-bureau-attention.html

Re:Hey fuckheads (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026521)

The jokes on you! I'm broke because I spent all my money on more guns, campaign contributions to Mitt Romney & GOP PACs and gold I bought from Glenn Beck.

Re:Hey fuckheads (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43027083)

You own gold and you claim to be broke? Is that some liberal logic?

First! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026305)

Makes sense to me.

TO THE CLOUD (3, Insightful)

ogar572 (531320) | about a year ago | (#43026365)

AND BEYOND!!!!!!!!!!! I hate marketing jargon especially "cloud".

Re:TO THE CLOUD (3, Informative)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about a year ago | (#43026683)

Didn't you know that Ubuntu, formerly a beloved Linux
distribution, became a PR-Machine some time ago.

Re:TO THE CLOUD (1)

socceroos (1374367) | about a year ago | (#43031345)

Wrong. Canonical market Ubuntu. Ubuntu is just Ubuntu. And to be honest, Canonical have got good reason to market Ubuntu - it's a pretty swell distro with grand visions. They're doing it quite well too - by appealing to the masses on a level they can understand.

Re:TO THE CLOUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43034211)

The masses want an UI meant for touchscreens on desktops?

Re:TO THE CLOUD (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#43028287)

I hate marketing jargon especially "cloud".

It does not take much to annoy you, then. :P

Re:TO THE CLOUD (1)

Larryish (1215510) | about a year ago | (#43029621)

Gentlemen, I would like to make a motion for a "Rule 35" of the Internet.

Anyone who says "cloud" in relation to online services has to PUNCHED IN THE FUCKING HEAD.

All in favor?

Re:TO THE CLOUD (1)

ogar572 (531320) | about a year ago | (#43030561)

Agreed.

Re:TO THE CLOUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43031193)

here! here! punched in the neckbeard

Re:TO THE CLOUD (1)

ogar572 (531320) | about a year ago | (#43030565)

Most of the time, no.

Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad sid (5, Insightful)

Frank T. Lofaro Jr. (142215) | about a year ago | (#43026377)

The bad side of technology (*), those that wanted face to face events are now denied it. The benefits of that are now gone.

Online in addition, ok, but canceling physical events, including one already scheduled and that people have already made arrangements for (travel, time off, etc) is bad.

People can socialize and network at a physical event, there are somethings online only lacks.

(*) Technology has also caused the loss of video stores, CD stores, so many things are hard to buy locally now. Technology should add options, not destroy them!

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (2)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year ago | (#43026389)

I hope this isn't a sign they're having financial issues or that Mark Shuttleworth is starting to back out of the project.

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026489)

Ubuntu was a bad idea

well anythingpost 12.04

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | about a year ago | (#43026757)

I wouldn't start by assuming Canonical ever made money to begin with.

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43027129)

I wouldn't start by assuming Canonical ever made money to begin with.

at some point they were touting around numbers that they were "just about breaking even".

but seriously.. none of the shit they've done in past two years has been the stuff that profitable/healthy os tech company would do.
moving to the cloud? fuck - you can't just move a summit into the cloud. the summit is every fucking day then, hardly a summit. if it's a website, it's not a summit. if they're web streamed shit - then it makes no difference to watch them later so again not a summit. it just becomes a publishing day for a fucking developer BLOG.

how does he except nerds are going to gather together to talk shit and drink brews IN THE FUCKING CLOUD? I mean I'd be all for moving the summits to be done high in Amsterdam but you just don't move an event that's essentially for socializing into the cloud(that's what all summits are, of course regardless of that the interesting stuff should be put online so those who attended can also get the material).

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43027325)

Well, none of their attempts at being profitable came to fruition - not Ubuntu desktops, not Ubuntu server, not Ubuntu TV, not Myth TV. Ubuntu is the latest example of why companies tied to the GPL can't make money on GPL software, unless they are from one of the blessed 4 - hardware, services, advertizing or donations. Donations never are good enough - let's get that out of the way. Hardware is now at the point where its margins couldn't be thinner. Services is something that Red Hat has succeeded w/, but in this economy, fewer companies are availing of them. As for servers, they'd be in an already crowded market on the Unix side alone - Solaris, the BSDs, RHEL, Debian, et al.

As I pointed out elsewhere, they would have done well to have entered the market using something like PC-BSD to begin w/. That way, they could have kept themselves different from the rest of the pack (I'm not talking about making themselves different w/ things like Unity, which are double edged swords). But there is no reason for people to buy Ubuntu when they could get Mint, Trisquel or any number of Ubuntu based distros. So at the end of the day, Ubuntu is left doing all this work and no revenue stream to show for it. At some point, Shuttleworth was going to get fedup of it and pull the plug on the free funding - nobody can afford to keep pissing cash away like that, not even Gates or Buffet.

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026457)

Yes, technology also denied me my opportunity for my horse-drawn carriage ride to work this morning. Brutes! Philistines! Savages!

Sorry, couldn't resist. Or didn't want to, I'm not sure. :)

The few times I did attend UDS I had a great time drinking great beer with great people and realizing how much I didn't know. I also tried not to think about what it was doing to my carbon footprint.

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026493)

Technology and options are two completely different things. Do you really think that technology shouldn't have "destroyed" the horse carriage business, "obliterated" the hand weaving industry and (in the western world) "killed" manual wheat harvesting? Well... it didn't, it simply added options that were much more popular, just as it has with video and CD stores. And it's not technology, which can't really "cause" the loss of anything, but people who make the choice.

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026789)

Modern people socialize and network just fine online.

The people actually hurt by this are the prostitutes who work conventions. Won't anyone think of the prostitutes?

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (1)

Kjella (173770) | about a year ago | (#43026879)

(*) Technology has also caused the loss of video stores, CD stores, so many things are hard to buy locally now. Technology should add options, not destroy them!

Technology is invented not unvented, you can only abandon it. CD and video stores are dying because neither I nor anyone I know go there anymore. Should we keep pizza places open if everybody wants to eat sushi instead? Don't be silly, technology adds options and when people overwhelmingly choose them over the old ones, the old will go away just like people all sorts of fashions and trends and other fads.

Re:Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43027553)

the old will go away just like people all sorts of fashions and trends and other fads.

You say that now, but fashion is cyclic. One day I will have a use for my crates of mood rings and parachute pants.

"Refining" Openness and Accessibility = Reducing (2, Insightful)

TrueSatan (1709878) | about a year ago | (#43026537)

Forcing anyone who might wish to participate to join Google+ Hangouts also forces them to allow Google access to their real names and personal data thus Canonical yet again sjows that it has no, real, understanding, nor interest, in openness or accessibility and still less personal freedom and privacy. As they have with their Amazon affiliate contract they care more about commercial interests than the rights of their users or developers. Like the EFF and the FSF I never include Ubuntu GNU/Linux in any recommendation list...actually I steer people away from it.

Re:"Refining" Openness and Accessibility = Reducin (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026573)

Ubuntu £inux is the root cause of bad government. Did you know that Ubuntu collects your personal information and files and sends them to the NSA and Amazon for inspection? Reputable companies like Apple, Google, and Microsoft never disclose your personal information. Did you know that Ubuntu can't run the smash hit Aliens: Colonial Marines (on its war to becoming the game of the year 2013)? Who could use such shitty software! Shuttleworth likes to talk about how advanced their tablets and phones will be when they hit market, but they contains black ops GPS tracking ribbons (the kind used to track you using $20) bills. Why aren't any of these heavily advertised products on the market yet? Some believe that the technology to build them doesn't exist yet, and they are waiting for delivery.... Does this mean that Shuttleworth is involved in a conspiracy with aliens? I don't know, I'm just asking questions. I personally installed Windows 8 and signed up for the cloud, and now I have a worry free desktop. Microsoft is doing their best to beat back the Ubuntu monopolists but so far the Canonical conspiracy is unbeatable.

Re:"Refining" Openness and Accessibility = Reducin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43052525)

I don't know why you're getting down-modded; your post is one of the funnier things I've read all day. Thanks!

Re:"Refining" Openness and Accessibility = Reducin (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026999)

Professionals already use their real names on forums where they discuss professional topics. Did you expect people to take someone called TrueSatan seriously in a professional environment? Anonymity is for people under tyrannical regimes, and for recreational forums where we don't want our unprofessional posts to merge with our professional life.

Re:"Refining" Openness and Accessibility = Reducin (1)

pavon (30274) | about a year ago | (#43027965)

Yes, but there is a difference between using your real name when discussing professional topics, and giving your real name to Google who can now associate it with everything you do online, professional, recreational or otherwise.

Re:"Refining" Openness and Accessibility = Reducin (1)

drjzzz (150299) | about a year ago | (#43028091)

wait a minute "Anonymous Coward", if that is your real name*... are you suggesting this, our beloved /., is not a "professional environment"?
*Dr. Strangelove reference

Re:"Refining" Openness and Accessibility = Reducin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43027471)

Glad that you said Ubuntu GNU/Linux instead of 'Ubuntu Linux'. That shows you're the kind of loser nobody takes seriously anyway. I'm sure your employer would be sending you to a conference registered as TrueSatan. Good luck with that in the real world.

The best part! (3, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43026547)

Even better, the online summits will feature a constant "Sponsor sidebar" containing products selected algorithmically based on keywords detected within the conversation! It's going to be the ultimate in integrated consumer infotainment...

Still better than having to deal with the TSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43029447)

This NoScript user would still strongly prefer adverts over having to deal with the TSA by travelling to the US.

I really like the US, but thanks to your paranoia and TSA thugs, there's no way I will be visiting any time soon.

Stop drinking the Kool AID (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026565)

Stop drinking the Kool AID! And start thinking about Ancient Geo Engineering. like hello is everyone on this planet stupid enough to believe that the Pyramids are TOMBS?
Like Hello one more time for possible penetration into the dense minds of Earthlings The pyramids on the Giza plateau control the Hawaiian hot spot Now why would a bunch of Highly intelligent beings want to control a Volcano? anyone.? yes you in the back.! what’s that you say? Thats correct! did you hear that people your not a stupid as you look down here after all The semi bright human in the back said to control temperatures by controlling ASH discharge into the atmosphere Very Good..Grass hopper! And how do we do this with Pyramids on the approximate same latitude of the Hawaiian Hot Spot on the other side of the planet? yes, yes, spit it out son! By gravity control.! very good my son very good By gravity control Now how do you disable a pyramid that was set up to control the temperatures on Earth? right again you open them up and turn them into amusement parks So And how do we place the pyramids back on line? yes, yes Right again! We repair the damage CRAZY humans did to the Earths thermostats i.e. the Great Pyramids of Giza."Pyramid Gravity Force" the only answer to CLIMATE CHANGE The Ice Man Cometh The Great Pyramid of Giza is an MBH

No loss (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43026637)

Ubuntu was crap to begin with and still is today. It almost raised itself out of the muck with Jaunty Jackalope but then fell apart again.

Here's why I'm glad it's all open source (2)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#43027119)

I don't have to concern myself with Ubuntu anymore. They've had their run, and have pretty clearly jumped the shark. And thankfully, because most of their work is on GPL'd code, we can abandon the organization entirely without losing any of the work that they did.

In other words, Mr Shuttleworth, so long and thanks for all the fish.

Re:Here's why I'm glad it's all open source (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43027237)

And that, ladies & gentlemen, in a nutshell, summarizes why Shuttleworth would have done well to have made Ubuntu a BSD distro, instead of a Linux one. That way, they could have kept any innovations restricted only to customers w/o opening it up to the whole world, and made themselves indispensible for any work done by them. There wouldn't have been umpty distros based on Ubuntu either.

Re:Here's why I'm glad it's all open source (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#43027559)

It sounds like we're operating from two completely different goals: My goal is to have a great operating system that's basically free and can run well on servers, desktops, laptops, phones, toasters, etc. Your goal seems to be extract as much revenue as possible from customers, advertisers, sponsors, etc for an organization that builds that operating system.

If your definition of "success" is defined by a quarterly earnings report, then yes, this will lead to Ubuntu's ultimate failure. If your definition of "success" is satisfied users, then the benefits of the Ubuntu project will last long after Canonical is consigned to the dustbin.

Re:Here's why I'm glad it's all open source (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43028335)

Except what has Ubuntu really given us? There are plenty of distros becoming available (Solus os, LMDE, etc..) that are based on debian and have things like automatic driver installation. So what benefit does Ubuntu have for users aside from a slower interface?

Dead companies can't write FOSS (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43031879)

Like the fable of the goose that laid golden eggs, /. readers like yourself don't really seem to care whether the goose lives or not. Well, newsflash - if Canonical or Red Hat cease to exist, they won't keep writing FOSS. And when companies/organizations - profit or non-profit - can't fund themselves for their daily operations, writing great software would be one of the last things on their mind.

Also, despite the theoretical possibility that everybody in the world can edit it and make a great system, in fact, few do. For starters, few people are actually programmers, and even in the event that they are, they are probably applying that towards their day jobs (something else that GPL would, under the laws of unintended consequences, kill off if they were successful), and are usually not available to work on that software, except maybe for a sporadic bug fix or more, unless they are contracted to regularly work on it. How many people outside Mozilla work on Firefox? How many people outside Debian work on their ports? How many people outside Mint refine Cinnamon? The bazaar theory is all very good, but even in the bazaar, people need their stalls - shopkeepers don't try to push their neighbor's products, since they are too busy working on their own. Similarly, anybody who thinks that Ubuntu will last over the remains of Canonical is living in a dream world. And no - knock-offs, like Mint, Zorin, Hybride, Trisquel, et al do NOT count - they are different distros, even if derived from Ubuntu.

Re:Here's why I'm glad it's all open source (3, Informative)

bigredradio (631970) | about a year ago | (#43027777)

In other words, Mr Shuttleworth, so long and thanks for all the fish.

Actually, I would say thanks for spending a lot of money to create and promote a Linux distribution that even non-linux geeks have heard about. He has done more to increase exposure of Linux than most anyone. It's unfortunate that Canonical isn't doing well since I think most people would say that building a sustainable model to keep Linux in the spotlight is a good thing for the community as a whole. Guess what?... servers and bandwidth cost money. Advertising and putting on events cost money. When was the last time you contributed to your local LUG to keep it afloat?

Re:Here's why I'm glad it's all open source (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43031941)

That's the point. Too many Linux users seem to miss the fact that for their beloved OS and assorted software to exist, companies like Red Hat, Canonical and so on have to actually survive. Yet, they are only too happy to cheer knock-offs like CentOS - which brings nothing to the table. In the case of Canonical, everybody loved them when they were pissing away cash throwing CDs around, but the moment Canonical needs help in staying afloat, these leeches are gone.

I agree that Canonical did a lot of their own damage in introducing Unity as the only UX, as opposed to offering it as one of, albeit a default, a few options, such as GNOME2, GNOME3 and Unity. Also, by letting go of Kubuntu, they've shot the notion that they are all about choice. One thing I will say about Canonical's knock offs is that unlike CentOS, they bring something to the table - Mint brings in Cinnamon, Hybride brings in the ability to seamlessly switch b/w Window managers, and so on. Having said all that, I firmly believe that Canonical's example demonstrates that companies would be better off doing their software using BSD/Minix rather than Linux: that way, they can contain their improvements, and not have to share it w/ anybody other than their customers. No more copyleft clauses destroying their business.

Canonical is bankrupt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43027323)

The company can't or at least won't be indefinitely sustained by Mark Shuttlesworth's billions. It would appear Canonical is just copying Linspire right down to the "bankruptcy" strategy. For anybody who followed the "Desktop Linux Summit" (an almost completely Linspire focused and funded event) it was cut about a year before the company went belly up. Canonical hired many Linspire employees and cloned click-n-run and many of Linspires mistakes (not so much CNR, but other things unsurprisingly).

Re:Canonical is bankrupt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43027343)

£inux is a financial singularity that destroys all businesses in its path. £inux is corporate death.

Re:Canonical is bankrupt (1)

bregmata (1749266) | about a year ago | (#43027877)

The problem with Linspire was there was no "there" there. Their office was a wiring closet in San Diego.

Canonical hired no Linspire employees. Zero. None. Nada. Not that the six of them didn't need work after they were sold to Xandros, which itself then disappeared in a puff of debtload and sold themselves to the devil.

Bi-annual != biennial (1)

punkrockguy318 (808639) | about a year ago | (#43027923)

Bi-annual == once every two years

Biennial == twice a year

c'mon now /. ...

Re:Bi-annual != biennial (2)

bipbop (1144919) | about a year ago | (#43028155)

The OED says biannual is twice a year and biennial is every two years. That appears to be the opposite of what you're claiming.

Re:Bi-annual != biennial (1)

punkrockguy318 (808639) | about a year ago | (#43028187)

The OED says biannual is twice a year and biennial is every two years. That appears to be the opposite of what you're claiming.

You're right. It's been a long day

Bi-Annual versus Semi-Annual (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43031217)

Another grammar nazi here. Bi-Annual means every 2 years. Semi-annual means every half-year, every 6 months.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...