Is there any way to copy out the full contents of the CVS repository itself into another archive? The full development (and not just the latest version of it) is valuable to programmers who wish to learn more about the development process itself that went into Entropy.
Lemon laws are there to protect consumers, mostly from negligence and fraud on the part of device manufacturers, and usually the term applies to vehicles which are dangerously defective.
Are you going to correct me, or are you going to sit there and pretend to be an expert, you fucking tool?
If the original cause is the spontaneous formation of prions, then the primary cause of infection is the spontaneous formation of prions in cattle and not the subsequent transmission by feeding them their own dead bits. I.e.: bad habits are bad, but fixing them won't eliminate mad-cow, as many people wrongly believe. That was more my point.
Actually he didn't "ravage" China. The conquering of China was accomplished by Kublai and his sons not through direct confrontation, but more by diplomacy and the threat of war.
After they took over, they instituted health care for the masses and many advanced education centres!
I'd hardly call that "savaging." Fair justice for the common peasants? That's not "savaging."
Ghenghis Khan and his immediate descendants did not savagely rape and pillage. They happened to set up one of the most civilised golden ages in history and invented the movable type press. Oh, you thought Gutenberg was The Man? No--he invented a mechanism for mass-producing books. The Mongols beat him to the basic press by decades and out of simple necessity!
The Mongols designed a written language which was capable of forming all the syllables of their subjugated nations.
Genghis was one of the first (and only) conquerors to allow his subjugated peoples to practice their own religions, spared and freed everyone who surrendered immediately, destroyed powerful nations (such as the Caliphate of what is now Iraq) as a result of barbarous behaviour visited upon his diplomats, was one of the only rulers ever to base promotion and reward *purely on merit* and not familial ties nor nobility, invented modern warfare and perfected siege technique, created tremendous surplus and prosperity and justice for all who lived inside the Mongol empire, and visited total destruction on all who refused to submit.
Genghis Khan and his successors conquered more people, more land, with fewer warriors and in less time than anyone else ever has in recorded history. Alexander the Great was a gnat by comparison. Attila the Hun, a nobody. The Roman Empire, a blemish on the ass-cheeks of one of Genghis' concubines. Hitler killed fewer people and conquered less land--even with those death-camps and all the Schlieffen plans he wanted to dream up. Stalin was a punk-ass backstabber rat.
Genghis could travel faster and further with 50,000 horse-mounted warriors, could defeat larger armies, and destroy or conquer countries better and with fewer Mongol casualties, than anyone else prior to or since.
The only nation that Genghis' descendents failed spectacularly in conquering was Japan, and that was only because a nasty storm whipped up and destroyed their invading ships every single time they tried to take the islands.
One of the more terrible things that came about from Genghis' subjugation of pretty much all of Asia and Europe was the Black Plague, the spread of which was facilitated by the active overland trade routes the Mongols built.
The Mongols prized engineers, craftsman, and skilled workers above *all* others because of their unique abilities.
The Mongols also forced advanced education on and provided health care and doctors to, their subjugated nations.
Say what you will about them, they were the impetus which dredged us inexorably towards modern civilisation, kicking and screaming, and without whom we probably wouldn't be as advanced socially and technologically as we are today.
Most of those savageries attributed to Genghis are simply lies: propaganda whipped up before the Mongols even arrived by jittery European scribes who bought into the pre-invasion panic the Mongols liked to sow.
Prions occur naturally and not necessarily through cow byproduct feed; so, while that seems to be the most popularized transmission method, it is apparently not the primary cause of the spread of mad cow.
They don't need to be, unless their decision affects actual lives, or the safety of some vital component.
Are you honestly going to sit there and insist that a normal, home PC is somehow worthy of lemon laws which are designed to protect the lives of citizens like you and me?
What about the firmware in your PS2? The software sitting on the hard drive of your XBox? PCs are so important they deserve the kinds of regulations and protections that vehicles do (which kill many thousands of people yearly.)
Negligence in one doesn't translate to negligence in the other, you fucking twit.
You wanna start regulating the quality of the writing in books? How about the quality of a hanging piece of art on the wall? That's *exactly* the same thing. Moron. There's a reason why software is protected speech and why people who write it call it "art": because that's exactly what it is. Software IS art. There are thus so many subjective opinions as to what "good" software is that regulating it would be a complete, speech-stifling waste of fucking time.
No, it's not bound to happen eventually, and you had better hope it doesn't. Software is software: if lives depend on it, then there are extra contractual clauses and certifications that can be used to force vendors to comply with safety regulations. You can make them guarantee or indemnify their products.
Otherwise, software is like any other art: you can't put a stupid blanket regulation in to make people write better software, the same way you can't force artists to create better art: what is "better" is so subjective as to make the imposition of external limits a stupid, speech-stifling waste of time.
In the world I live in, email is customer data (in the sense that the customer owns the data or expects to have access to the information contained therein and even pays for the privilege) and if the main mail server dies or must be moved to a new system, a qmail installation would prevent this from happening, and thus the mail queues would be lost.
Sure-last I looked, qmail mail queues are tied to the inode of the disk they're on. Try moving them around to a new location or a new machine. At the time I had to do it with sendmail, I learned very graphically that one of the sister machines (running qmail) required very careful handling. Obviously it's not impossible, nothing's impossible, but with sendmail it was *easy* and *painless.*
Also, without extensive patching the base qmail doesn't do virtual mail hosting so well. There are no support utilities and the delivery mechanism leaves.. a little to be desired.
I mean, sure, you can talk about the base qmail being ultra-secure: but then what can the *base* qmail actually accomplish? Very little for an enterprise. That's why nobody big uses the base qmail at all--it's all qmail+patch, or postfix or exim or sendmail.
Until one day you suddenly realise that you've traded a pile of required functionality for some extra security and the onerous distribution clauses that guy attaches to his software.
There have already been four or five distinct situation in which, had I been running qmail, large volumes of customer data would have to have been destroyed.
Comaptibility with the majority of name servers is crucial--name one name server software daemon which is entirely compatible with BIND, offers its own set of features and functionality that is superior to BIND, and is open source.
Riiiight. You realize, of course, that high-yield strains of plants and chemical fertilizers are responsible for our current ability to feed ourselves, right? Oh, you want to go back to 1800s food yields?
Let's say that he sprays all of his land with RoundUp so that the only thing left is 100% patented plants. Legal? Of course.
What crack are you smoking? This has nothing to do with this case, tard.
The Supreme Court didn't rule on this foolish hypothetical situation you just pulled out your arse--they ruled on THIS PARTICULAR CASE, and laid down clear groundrules for what would constitute deliberate abuse and use in the future, so your "Legal? Of course" crap is already dealt with and answered.
Hey. Moron. This is crop sabotage. If it can be proven that the farmer bought seed and non-Monsanto crops from another source (ie: he kept his receipts) and suddenly his whole field is filled with Monsanto genetics, the Supreme Court has said that that farmer is innocent.
Besides that, if it were ever linked back to Monsanto (and the effort involved in infecting entire fields of crops would be fucking horrendous and thus much more easily traceable) they'd be crucified.
If you'll stop and think for a moment: the Supreme Court of Canada wouldn't just do something this stupid. What, you think they're the American Supreme Court or something?
No, the reason is the farmer held back seed and replanted, basing his argument on the fact that even though Monsanto held a patent on the gene itself, it wasn't allowed to control the use of the resulting PLANT and SEEDS.
Which of course is ridiculous. I've already posted the link to the decision itself twice, and I'm sure other people have as well. Check it out, and let your faith in Canadian Justice be restored.
I dare you or your other granola-eaters to set all those fields alight. No, really, go on, do it. See what happens! All the people who depend on that food will have a field day stripping people just like you of any rights you thought you had, and we'll turn on you like a pack of starving wolves. You thought you had no sympathy before? Try fucking with our food supply.
You're wrong. The farmer knew he was saving seed and replanting roundup-ready Monsanto Canola. It's NOT a question of simple cross-pollination and innocent intent. Try reading the fucking decision, granola-eater. It's right here
At Lexum
Something I never quite understood was the willingness to shout doomsday without so much as a shred of hard evidence: people like you are the reason why the media can whip the public into a frenzy over stupid things and turn something into a political cause which has no right to be so.
Why don't you take up arms against the (in my view) illegal practice of refusing to allow organic farmers to label their foods as non-GM and leave stories like this to the facts?
Tests of their 1998 canola crop revealed that 95-98 per cent was Roundup Ready Canola.
I hardly think that seed "infected" the farmer's crop. If more than 90% of the Canola seeds were genetically modified, it seems obvious to me (as it was to the courts) that the farmer knew or ought to have known that the seeds he was using were the roundup-ready variety created by Monsanto.
I was shocked to consider the possibility that the Canadian Supreme Courts (whose opinions I find I've almost always agreed with after reading the decision) would do such a thing, and was relieved to find that Slashdot was, yet again, being Slashdot and over-sensationalising the issue.
I would also like to note that the patent does NOT cover the plant, only the specific gene involved, and that, according to the decision, the farmer may have had available to him a useful defense of innocent intention. Read:
Thus, a defendant in possession of a patented invention in commercial circumstances may rebut the presumption of use by bringing credible evidence that the invention was neither used, nor intended to be used, even by exploiting its stand-by utility.
Seems obvious to me.
The cool part was that the farmer didn't have to pay Monsanto's significant legal expenses.
Move to Canada--we're free here, and our courts don't fuck us unless we fuck someone else first!
A superior string of tests would be to simulate, to as close a degree as possible, a real, live high-use environment such as a scaled-up Perforce server, a supremely busy mail server, a giant busy database, or a massive web server.
A single process running through 10,000 files isn't particularly realistic: since when does a scaled-up server sit there and hammer the filesystem with just a single process? What about contention? Caching?
And what about recovery from errors? I didn't once see what happens if something blorts over random parts of the filesystems.. how does Reiser handle this? Ext3? XFS? Are there recovery tools in case of catastrophe?
What about these file systems stuffed into RAID volumes of various stripe sizes and configurations?
Straight deletes, creates, or modifications are useless because the only time you're going to be doing something like that is when you rm -rf * or building a new environment for.. something. Daily use, however, which eats up far more time (and thus would save the most user time if improved) is something which should been better accounted-for.
The poster I replied to was talking about stuffing a supercharger into his Cam SS to pull it down into the 3's, and then comparing this with a stock WRX. That's what you call apples to apples?
If you think those kind of options are stock, let's talk more about the STi.
Still, there is no comparison. That's precisely what my point was. There is no comparison to make. The SS shouldn't even bother on a winter track, and the WRX shouldn't even bother on the drag strip. Seems simple enough to me.
I'd still be happy to race you on a mountain, winter, and/or gravel course in my stock WRX. *shrug* It'd be no contest, and I think we both know that.
I've personally seen STi timesheets w/ 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5. Course, that's tearing out the rear seats, everything in the trunk, the passenger seat, etc.. still, that's quite a difference for only a hundred pounds or so. Without that he pulls in 4.6 - 4.7--still a good deal better than the 4.88 quoted literature.
Anyway the stock 2001 Camaro SS does 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. That's stock. So you have a 4.6 0-60, a top speed of 160mph and you only get a 13.0 1/4 mile? Yikes. Long gears, dude.
Anyway, if you want to talk suspension upgrades to get your 1G skid, I'll pull out APS or Vishnu and wave bye-bye to you with my taillights.
(BTW: I have a chevy smallblock at home, so.. calm down.)
Slashdot Mirror
Is there any way to copy out the full contents of the CVS repository itself into another archive? The full development (and not just the latest version of it) is valuable to programmers who wish to learn more about the development process itself that went into Entropy.
Since when did GW promote freedom of religion, universal health care, and promotion based solely on merit and not familial ties?
I notice you don't actually correct me;
Lemon laws are there to protect consumers, mostly from negligence and fraud on the part of device manufacturers, and usually the term applies to vehicles which are dangerously defective.
Are you going to correct me, or are you going to sit there and pretend to be an expert, you fucking tool?
If the original cause is the spontaneous formation of prions, then the primary cause of infection is the spontaneous formation of prions in cattle and not the subsequent transmission by feeding them their own dead bits. I.e.: bad habits are bad, but fixing them won't eliminate mad-cow, as many people wrongly believe. That was more my point.
Actually he didn't "ravage" China. The conquering of China was accomplished by Kublai and his sons not through direct confrontation, but more by diplomacy and the threat of war.
After they took over, they instituted health care for the masses and many advanced education centres!
I'd hardly call that "savaging." Fair justice for the common peasants? That's not "savaging."
Ghenghis Khan and his immediate descendants did not savagely rape and pillage. They happened to set up one of the most civilised golden ages in history and invented the movable type press. Oh, you thought Gutenberg was The Man? No--he invented a mechanism for mass-producing books. The Mongols beat him to the basic press by decades and out of simple necessity!
The Mongols designed a written language which was capable of forming all the syllables of their subjugated nations.
Genghis was one of the first (and only) conquerors to allow his subjugated peoples to practice their own religions, spared and freed everyone who surrendered immediately, destroyed powerful nations (such as the Caliphate of what is now Iraq) as a result of barbarous behaviour visited upon his diplomats, was one of the only rulers ever to base promotion and reward *purely on merit* and not familial ties nor nobility, invented modern warfare and perfected siege technique, created tremendous surplus and prosperity and justice for all who lived inside the Mongol empire, and visited total destruction on all who refused to submit.
Genghis Khan and his successors conquered more people, more land, with fewer warriors and in less time than anyone else ever has in recorded history. Alexander the Great was a gnat by comparison. Attila the Hun, a nobody. The Roman Empire, a blemish on the ass-cheeks of one of Genghis' concubines. Hitler killed fewer people and conquered less land--even with those death-camps and all the Schlieffen plans he wanted to dream up. Stalin was a punk-ass backstabber rat.
Genghis could travel faster and further with 50,000 horse-mounted warriors, could defeat larger armies, and destroy or conquer countries better and with fewer Mongol casualties, than anyone else prior to or since.
The only nation that Genghis' descendents failed spectacularly in conquering was Japan, and that was only because a nasty storm whipped up and destroyed their invading ships every single time they tried to take the islands.
One of the more terrible things that came about from Genghis' subjugation of pretty much all of Asia and Europe was the Black Plague, the spread of which was facilitated by the active overland trade routes the Mongols built.
The Mongols prized engineers, craftsman, and skilled workers above *all* others because of their unique abilities.
The Mongols also forced advanced education on and provided health care and doctors to, their subjugated nations.
Say what you will about them, they were the impetus which dredged us inexorably towards modern civilisation, kicking and screaming, and without whom we probably wouldn't be as advanced socially and technologically as we are today.
Most of those savageries attributed to Genghis are simply lies: propaganda whipped up before the Mongols even arrived by jittery European scribes who bought into the pre-invasion panic the Mongols liked to sow.
Prions occur naturally and not necessarily through cow byproduct feed; so, while that seems to be the most popularized transmission method, it is apparently not the primary cause of the spread of mad cow.
They don't need to be, unless their decision affects actual lives, or the safety of some vital component.
Are you honestly going to sit there and insist that a normal, home PC is somehow worthy of lemon laws which are designed to protect the lives of citizens like you and me?
What about the firmware in your PS2? The software sitting on the hard drive of your XBox? PCs are so important they deserve the kinds of regulations and protections that vehicles do (which kill many thousands of people yearly.)
Negligence in one doesn't translate to negligence in the other, you fucking twit.
You wanna start regulating the quality of the writing in books? How about the quality of a hanging piece of art on the wall? That's *exactly* the same thing. Moron. There's a reason why software is protected speech and why people who write it call it "art": because that's exactly what it is. Software IS art. There are thus so many subjective opinions as to what "good" software is that regulating it would be a complete, speech-stifling waste of fucking time.
So why are you even fucking arguing about it?
No, it's not bound to happen eventually, and you had better hope it doesn't. Software is software: if lives depend on it, then there are extra contractual clauses and certifications that can be used to force vendors to comply with safety regulations. You can make them guarantee or indemnify their products.
Otherwise, software is like any other art: you can't put a stupid blanket regulation in to make people write better software, the same way you can't force artists to create better art: what is "better" is so subjective as to make the imposition of external limits a stupid, speech-stifling waste of time.
Dumbass.
In the world I live in, email is customer data (in the sense that the customer owns the data or expects to have access to the information contained therein and even pays for the privilege) and if the main mail server dies or must be moved to a new system, a qmail installation would prevent this from happening, and thus the mail queues would be lost.
This is not a good thing.
Sure-last I looked, qmail mail queues are tied to the inode of the disk they're on. Try moving them around to a new location or a new machine. At the time I had to do it with sendmail, I learned very graphically that one of the sister machines (running qmail) required very careful handling. Obviously it's not impossible, nothing's impossible, but with sendmail it was *easy* and *painless.*
Also, without extensive patching the base qmail doesn't do virtual mail hosting so well. There are no support utilities and the delivery mechanism leaves.. a little to be desired.
I mean, sure, you can talk about the base qmail being ultra-secure: but then what can the *base* qmail actually accomplish? Very little for an enterprise. That's why nobody big uses the base qmail at all--it's all qmail+patch, or postfix or exim or sendmail.
Until one day you suddenly realise that you've traded a pile of required functionality for some extra security and the onerous distribution clauses that guy attaches to his software.
There have already been four or five distinct situation in which, had I been running qmail, large volumes of customer data would have to have been destroyed.
No, thanks.
Comaptibility with the majority of name servers is crucial--name one name server software daemon which is entirely compatible with BIND, offers its own set of features and functionality that is superior to BIND, and is open source.
They're not allowed to pull stunts like that here.
Riiiight. You realize, of course, that high-yield strains of plants and chemical fertilizers are responsible for our current ability to feed ourselves, right? Oh, you want to go back to 1800s food yields?
Hello, mass starvation.
Let's say that he sprays all of his land with RoundUp so that the only thing left is 100% patented plants. Legal? Of course.
What crack are you smoking? This has nothing to do with this case, tard.
The Supreme Court didn't rule on this foolish hypothetical situation you just pulled out your arse--they ruled on THIS PARTICULAR CASE, and laid down clear groundrules for what would constitute deliberate abuse and use in the future, so your "Legal? Of course" crap is already dealt with and answered.
Have you even read the decision yet?
What total bullshit indeed. Go read the fucking decision, here: Lexum, Montreal
... and stop making up your fool mind about things without getting actual facts instead of regurgitated-twice headlines.
Hey. Moron. This is crop sabotage. If it can be proven that the farmer bought seed and non-Monsanto crops from another source (ie: he kept his receipts) and suddenly his whole field is filled with Monsanto genetics, the Supreme Court has said that that farmer is innocent.
Besides that, if it were ever linked back to Monsanto (and the effort involved in infecting entire fields of crops would be fucking horrendous and thus much more easily traceable) they'd be crucified.
If you'll stop and think for a moment: the Supreme Court of Canada wouldn't just do something this stupid. What, you think they're the American Supreme Court or something?
No, the reason is the farmer held back seed and replanted, basing his argument on the fact that even though Monsanto held a patent on the gene itself, it wasn't allowed to control the use of the resulting PLANT and SEEDS.
Which of course is ridiculous. I've already posted the link to the decision itself twice, and I'm sure other people have as well. Check it out, and let your faith in Canadian Justice be restored.
I dare you or your other granola-eaters to set all those fields alight. No, really, go on, do it. See what happens! All the people who depend on that food will have a field day stripping people just like you of any rights you thought you had, and we'll turn on you like a pack of starving wolves. You thought you had no sympathy before? Try fucking with our food supply.
Moron.
You're wrong. The farmer knew he was saving seed and replanting roundup-ready Monsanto Canola. It's NOT a question of simple cross-pollination and innocent intent. Try reading the fucking decision, granola-eater. It's right here At Lexum
Something I never quite understood was the willingness to shout doomsday without so much as a shred of hard evidence: people like you are the reason why the media can whip the public into a frenzy over stupid things and turn something into a political cause which has no right to be so.
Why don't you take up arms against the (in my view) illegal practice of refusing to allow organic farmers to label their foods as non-GM and leave stories like this to the facts?
According to the actual Supreme Court decision, which you can read at the following location:
Here at Lexum
Tests of their 1998 canola crop revealed that 95-98 per cent was Roundup Ready Canola.
I hardly think that seed "infected" the farmer's crop. If more than 90% of the Canola seeds were genetically modified, it seems obvious to me (as it was to the courts) that the farmer knew or ought to have known that the seeds he was using were the roundup-ready variety created by Monsanto.
I was shocked to consider the possibility that the Canadian Supreme Courts (whose opinions I find I've almost always agreed with after reading the decision) would do such a thing, and was relieved to find that Slashdot was, yet again, being Slashdot and over-sensationalising the issue.
I would also like to note that the patent does NOT cover the plant, only the specific gene involved, and that, according to the decision, the farmer may have had available to him a useful defense of innocent intention. Read:
Thus, a defendant in possession of a patented invention in commercial circumstances may rebut the presumption of use by bringing credible evidence that the invention was neither used, nor intended to be used, even by exploiting its stand-by utility.
Seems obvious to me.
The cool part was that the farmer didn't have to pay Monsanto's significant legal expenses.
Move to Canada--we're free here, and our courts don't fuck us unless we fuck someone else first!
A superior string of tests would be to simulate, to as close a degree as possible, a real, live high-use environment such as a scaled-up Perforce server, a supremely busy mail server, a giant busy database, or a massive web server.
A single process running through 10,000 files isn't particularly realistic: since when does a scaled-up server sit there and hammer the filesystem with just a single process? What about contention? Caching?
And what about recovery from errors? I didn't once see what happens if something blorts over random parts of the filesystems.. how does Reiser handle this? Ext3? XFS? Are there recovery tools in case of catastrophe?
What about these file systems stuffed into RAID volumes of various stripe sizes and configurations?
Straight deletes, creates, or modifications are useless because the only time you're going to be doing something like that is when you rm -rf * or building a new environment for.. something. Daily use, however, which eats up far more time (and thus would save the most user time if improved) is something which should been better accounted-for.
Uhh.. no.. stock WRX does 5.4, so *that* would be neck and neck with a stock SS right off the line. The stock STi would be blasting it. :)
The poster I replied to was talking about stuffing a supercharger into his Cam SS to pull it down into the 3's, and then comparing this with a stock WRX. That's what you call apples to apples?
If you think those kind of options are stock, let's talk more about the STi.
Still, there is no comparison. That's precisely what my point was. There is no comparison to make. The SS shouldn't even bother on a winter track, and the WRX shouldn't even bother on the drag strip. Seems simple enough to me.
I'd still be happy to race you on a mountain, winter, and/or gravel course in my stock WRX. *shrug* It'd be no contest, and I think we both know that.
I've personally seen STi timesheets w/ 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5. Course, that's tearing out the rear seats, everything in the trunk, the passenger seat, etc.. still, that's quite a difference for only a hundred pounds or so. Without that he pulls in 4.6 - 4.7--still a good deal better than the 4.88 quoted literature.
Anyway the stock 2001 Camaro SS does 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. That's stock. So you have a 4.6 0-60, a top speed of 160mph and you only get a 13.0 1/4 mile? Yikes. Long gears, dude.
Anyway, if you want to talk suspension upgrades to get your 1G skid, I'll pull out APS or Vishnu and wave bye-bye to you with my taillights.
(BTW: I have a chevy smallblock at home, so.. calm down.)