Wikia Acquires Grub, Releases it Under Open Source 119
An anonymous reader writes "During a keynote address at the O'Reilly Open Source Conference (OSCON), Jimmy Wales announced that Wikia has acquired Grub, the original visionary distributed search project, from LookSmart and released it under an open source license for the first time in four years. Grub operates under a model of users donating their personal computing resources towards a common goal, and is available for download and testing."
FIST SPORT (Score:5, Funny)
Re:FIST SPORT (Score:5, Informative)
Re:FIST SPORT (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
I admit, grub is nice when it automagically works. The problem is when it doesn't. GRUB failures are the only reason I reinstall operating systems anymore.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
And when you're building a server, you can't sit searching the web all day.
Lilo works. I'm not going back to Grub.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I wish someone would acquire the GRUB, and close it. That piece of crap has caused me more pain than any other open source software. If lilo broke, well just grab a boot disk and rerun it. When (not if) grub breaks, god help you trying to figure out what to do.
Are you kidding me? On most Linux systems, you can just run update-grub to reinstall the first-stage bootloader (or grub-install on some). To adjust its settings, you need only edit the file /boot/grub/menu.lst ... you don't even have to re-run GRUB after editing that file.
Unlike Lilo, GRUB offers a full-featured command line so that you can edit your boot settings if it doesn't quite work right. No need for a rescue disk almost ever. GRUB reads it configuration file at boot time, unlike LILO which hid
Re: (Score:1)
Your experiences don't overrule other people's experiences. I'm glad GRUB works for you, and when it worked for me I liked it too - but I've had a lot of problems with it as well, and while it is quite powerful it's also quite complicated to use. At least it was when I tried it. You really seem to have to understand what the various stages of the bootloader are in order to use the "full featured command line", or to get it installed in any slightly non-"standard" environment.
I've had my perfectly working
Re: (Score:1)
Of about 12 machines of different architectures that I own and that run linux, a grand total of 1 (my work laptop) dual boots and uses GRUB.
Every other machine only runs linux, and only uses lilo (or silo, or milo).
Sproggg
Re: (Score:2)
Using separate bootloeader software is what made running Linux or *BSD on x86 possible in the first place. Hardcoding OS loading code into BIOS, beyond the absolute minimum neccessary, is a really bad idea, since it prevents you from running any OS the BIOS loader doesn't support.
Re: (Score:2)
Using separate bootloeader software is what made running Linux or *BSD on x86 possible in the first place. Hardcoding OS loading code into BIOS, beyond the absolute minimum neccessary, is a really bad idea, since it prevents you from running any OS the BIOS loader doesn't support.
Not if the BIOS loader is designed to be extremely flexible and customizable, or if the BIOS itself is open source and can be easily updated to support new operating system :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Customizability implies complexity. I don't think such a system would actually be any more reliable than LiLo or GRUB; in fact it would be more complex, since nothing could be hard-coded. And finally, I simply fail to see the advantage of putting the OS loader into the BIOS chip rather than at the beginning of the hard disk.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't really like LILO, as it is nowhere near as flexible in my experience, but it works fine as well.
As a matter of fact, I don't remember ha
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Hell, the fact that it doesn't have an uninstaller (like LILO does) should be reason enough to avoid it. lilo -u and it's gone. Grub? Hope you have a dos or other bootdisk with fdisk on it handy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Meh... (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, if the set of bootloaders contains two entries (LiLo and GRUB), then the mean is the middle point between them.
Lunch Time (Score:5, Funny)
Release (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Release (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
should be a penny arcade strip!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Dude I need to go take a Vista.......
Re:Release (Score:4, Funny)
[1] including several pamphlet with Rorschach-like art.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Uh-oh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course at that point Google will buy Wikia and whatever other properties seem relevant... and then Google will have completed the transition from "do no evil" to "if you can't beat them, buy them" that started with YouTube.
Of course this might not be the case, but I have trouble trying to come up with a reason why Wikia might want something like Grub.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Not if you use smileys, it isn't! ;) ;) :)
Re: (Score:2)
How is that evil?
Well, actually, in the case of YouTube, it kind of is -- given that they still haven't unified YouTube with Google Video, and they both still use Flash excessively. (Flash does many things well; a media player isn't one of them.)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
So? (Score:2, Interesting)
\ I'll be excited if they make a working search engine. I'll be even more excited if they do work on the searching algorithms, which is what makes or breaks search engines
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
vi?
If you can use a boot loader I would think a flat file editor would be a big advancement.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Ldap?
Re: (Score:2)
Still, LDAP isn't a database.
Re: (Score:2)
In my experience, not so good at fast searching (especially with wildcards) and lots of data, but I guess that all depends on your LDAP implementation.
Still, LDAP isn't a database.
I know LDAP isn't a database, and while I've dealt with LDAP, I never had the opportunity to compare LDAP to a database in a meaningful way. Being its hard enough to get reasonable benchmarks for side by side database comparisons, or even something like file compression software, I doubt that will ever happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So you're saying it's not the size that matters, but how they use it.
Interesting. I'm sure I've heard this somewhere before...
Re: (Score:2)
Plans for BOINC? (Score:2)
I know BOINC isn't the end-all-be-all of distributed computing, but it seems they gathered a large following once Seti@home project moved there, especially with what I would newbies or laymen to distributed computing in general. It might seem a smart move considering th
wait a second (Score:5, Insightful)
so they want to use other peoples spare CPU cycles to build an empire on top without spending money on servers?
rofl!
all them spare cpu cycles would be better used for distributed research like Folding@Home and other @home projects
Re: (Score:2)
Some people might decide that they like having a good alternative to google. The interesting thing is, if the company gets greedy (say, but putting too many ads, or charging too much to advertisers), it's likely that people will stop helping them out. That is a powerful check on them that doesn't apply to google and others.
Another thing to think about: if they go public, you can always buy their stock, and then let them use your resources....not q
Re:wait a second (Score:5, Insightful)
So why is it so crazy to think that users would be willing to participate in a search engine where you "pay" with your spare CPU cycles? If the search engine generates useful results, it seems like a fair trade-off for me.
I'm not sure what Wikia's business model is here. It's probably not ads, since it would be difficult to reliably enforce and bill an ad-pushing system using software that is open-source and a network that is peer-to-peer. Probably they hope that this will drive more traffic to Wikia projects, or somesuch.
But, ultimately, I don't see what's so crazy about a for-profit company and end users coming to a mutually beneficial agreement. I donate CPU cycles and bandwidth, and get access to search results. Sounds fair to me. If the result is useful and the terms-of-use not onerous, most users will happily use it.
Re: (Score:2)
So why is it so crazy to think that users would be willing to participate in a search engine where you "pay" with your spare CPU cycles? If the search engine generates useful results, it seems like a fair trade-off for me.
If there was not a search engine that already filled these needs, with the only "price" being the viewing of inobtrusive ads, how is giving up my spare CPU cycles to receive the same thing from another source a fair trade? This also assumes that wikia won't begin using ads of their own, which would mean I'm "paying" twice. (CPU + ads)
Re: (Score:1)
You said it yourself: giving up your spare CPU cycles. i.e. something you're not even using! Why would you have a sad over that? It's not as if you can horde them in a box and use them later when you need some extra grunt.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:wait a second (Score:4, Informative)
There are way too many uses of "wiki" in that paragraph...
Anyhow, my point is that while it's a for-profit, it's still "for the public good" in a sense, since it exists to support non-profits, and thus it's not crazy to donate them CPU cycles.
somebody think of the environment! (Score:1)
or at least have them home pcs doing something usefull like folding proteins or other distributed medical projects that will help people
the world doesnt need Yet Another Search Engine
google, live and yahoo do a great job already
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever you're doing is already covered pretty well by something already out there. See the foolishness of that statement?
Yes. The existing search engines do a pretty good job. However, I've been brainstorming lately to try and figure out what the next big thing will be for search engines (so I can buy a load of stock when something shows up that does this) and the thing I keep coming back to is context. When I search for Chaos Theory, am I looki
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Who then get paid in Wikidollars for every Wikihour worked. If they add the prefix Wiki to their variables they get double pay.
it is not the for-profit arm of Wikimedia (Score:3, Informative)
There is some synergy, partly because of the fact that Jimmy Wales runs Wikia and sort-of runs Wikimedia, partly because Wikia needs community goodwill to succeed, and partly because Wikia uses the MediaWiki software on its own servers so has an interest in it working well. However it isn't anywhere nea
Re: (Score:1)
Microsoft is a force of good in the universe! Who knew!?
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Wikia is a separate entity from the Wikimedia Foundation. And all Wikimedia cash comes from donations, not from Wikia's accounts.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting (Score:5, Funny)
[Note: This selection may be too technical for the average user. Please help revise to improve.]
[Note: This entry has been locked from new and anonymous users due to ongoing controversy. See also: WGA]
[Note: This OS requires cleanup to conform to quality standards. Please get involved.]
[Note: Link appears dead. This has been tagged since July, 2007]
[This operating system is a stub. Please help to expand and improve it. This entry has been tagged since 1981]
Re: (Score:2)
Is this a good thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Wikia is a for-profit company. Users running portions of their crawler should be paid. At least in stock of the company. Otherwise it's a ripoff. It's reminiscent of Kazaa's approach to "peer to peer": user machines do the work; Kazaa collects the money.
Distributing the web crawl isn't that big a win. The crawl is a batch job, but replying to search requests is a near real time application. The expensive part of a search engine is the system that generates fast search responses. That's where you need the systems with gigabytes of RAM and tight coupling to the other machines of the cluster.
Doing the web crawl on user machines offloads some of the effort, but not all that much of it. If you want to cut crawl costs, some of the query machines can be devoted to crawling during slow periods.
Remember, you can't trust the client. Web spammers can modify their copies of the crawler to report extra, phony links to their web sites and boost their stats. This gives a whole new meaning to the term "link farming". Until Wikia, there was no easy way for "search engine optimization" types to mess with the internals of the search engine. Now there is.
Besides, what's the selling point? "Our search costs less to use than Google?" Hello?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Presuming this includes the server code, this isn't as bad as it sounds. Yes, Wikia is for profit, but so are IBM and Red Hat. So long as there is a public license on the code, they're at least significantly lowering the barriers to entry and empowering users to revolt if they can't trust Wikia, which is more than you can say for Google. Even if users don't revolt and go elsewhere, the pressure exerted on Wikia to stay
Re: (Score:2)
>Wikia is a
Comparing Kazaa to Wikia is rather over the top as Wikia doesn't install spyware and ad-serving crap. A bit of FUD?
>Distributing the web crawl isn't that big a win
>Besides, what's the s
Re:Is this a good thing? (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not the part the parent is comparing. The parent's comparison has NOTHING to do with the spyware issue. It has to do with using the "communities" resources to make money without paying for those resources. But hey, if *you* like to work for free, have at it.
Re: (Score:1)
You may have heard the metaphors here:
1. Free as in Beer.
2. Free as in Speech.
While Google has #1 covered, #2 is still restricted by them as you do not have any idea how they are picking your results, nor what they are doing with your search terms (citation needed for the AOL Leak...)
I, for one, welcome our new Wiki overlords (Score:2, Insightful)
Translated Press Release (Score:2)
Wikia has aquired the Grub sourcecode from LookSmart. We will be posting the complete, current codebase as soon as possible, here on Grub.org. In the meantime, signup and stay tuned to developments regarding getting Grub going again.
Translation: Development had slowed to a SNAIL's pace(*), but now casting off its SHELL, we bring you a new and improved (TM) GRUB!
(*) From: Member Statistics [grub.org] (as of 20070730 at 14:47 EDT)
Let's see here:
38.3737 YEARS!
Re: (Score:1)
Celebrity Deathmatch! (Score:1)
Compared to others? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Welcome Back Grubby (Score:5, Informative)
Unfortunately that didn't happen with the situation, and I decided to move on to other opportunities. Now here I am again, and I fully support what Wikia is doing with Grub, and what their resources can do for the project and the problem it can solve.
Myself (Kord Campbell), Igor Stojanovski and Ledio Ago (both who work at Splunk BTW) are three original founders of Grub. We are now helping Wikia out with getting it up and running, and explaining how things work (or don't) and will continue spending a bit of time helping out where we can as the project matures.
I would like to point out that Grub itself isn't all that interesting right now. About all it does is distribute jobs that consist of URLs to crawl. Yes, something similar could be done with BOINK. Yes, nothing is being done with the crawled data. Yes, it breaks occasionally and it's full of bugs.
However, it's a start. It's the first pass at fully distributing the job of search, and putting it where it belongs - in the commons. Search doesn't belong to Google, or Wikia, it belongs to everyone. It's your data, and it should be your search engine crawling, indexing and searching that data - not some monolithic profit hungry company.
Go and read the page on search over at Wikia: http://search.wikia.com/ [wikia.com] - Jer Miller (worked on Jabber) explains what they have in mind for Atlas. It's a fully distributed, OS, open protocol dream of making better search. Like Wikipedia (which is non-profit), Jimmy Wales wants search to be open, and community driven/managed - it's not about making gobs of money off your CPU/Bandwidth - it's about making better search for everyone.
Ideally the current Grub clients/server will go away, and be replaced with something better. For now, you have to crawl before you walk, and you have to walk before you run. Given time, and support from the OS community, I'm sure Wikia will do the right thing here.
If you want to get involved and help out, start by hitting the wiki and contributing your thoughts. We are going to need coders working on different aspects of the project as well, so think about volunteering in your particular area of expertise.
Great (Score:2)
Is it worth it to you? (Score:2)
Wow, that's confusing. (Score:1)
What I want to know is, will Grub be released under the *same* open-source
boot loader (Score:1)
You've got your wires crossed again...