Yes, I know later people were able to do it. But phoronix being unable to do it for a while is proof that the question being asked:
Is that easy on all UEFI implementations?
Does not have an answer "yes". For sane values of "easy".
And this question being asked does not have anything to do with SecureBoot, so I have no idea why you deemed it necessary to bring it up here. (U)EFI , or at least its particular implementation, is the problem, as you yourself mention.
Again, the "male gaze" remains the best name even if both men and women use it, because they are both practicing the gazing at (objectifying) of women.
So, "women" is the only common thing between males gazing and females gazing. Why is it then called "male gaze"? Doesn't make sense at all, though you set out to prove that it makes any sense.
What stops set-top PC manufacturers from shipping Debian?
The fact that Debian needs to be configured (1) to be able to run Steam, making it not set-top PC any more? You need to be told this much too?
We aren't talking about console users here. We're talking about people who (are supposed to) know enough to load and troubleshoot SteamOS onto the machines.
Why aren't you talking about console users here? Only an idiot would talk about people who (are supposed to) know enough to load and troubleshoot SteamOS onto the machines "here", in this context.
(1) : adding repositories with drivers. Signing into Steam. Possibly applying realtime related kernel patches
I guess you would agree Phoronix is qualified to install the first beta of a Linux based OS? How about they being unable to boot anything but Windows 8 (.1) on hardware with UEFI after lot of trying?
Too many different charges can cause confusopoly,which is worse than a monopoly. Monopoly at least has the advantage of non duplication of effort, confusopoly needs a huge effort to keep going.
Effect on customer is the same - lack of the ability to choose. Regulations have to be equally serious about both - which sometimes involves telling businesses what they can charge their customers.
Two points : 1. Ubuntu, any, is not the right choice for such deployments because 5 years is not enough support period. You need rolling release, or CENTOS like support -minimum 7 years, frequently stretching to 10.
2. Linux, with at least 2 snapshotting filesystems, is much better placed than windows in recovering from bad updates. The rollback, being at a filesystem level, is much cleaner.
Yes, it really matters. In the middle ages, there were mathematical formulas which described the planets and sun revolving around the earth. The math worked very well even though the theory was proven to be very wrong.
There is nothing "wrong" with most of them. Except some of those that had slight mismatch between theory and observation that were fixed by taking relativity into account, most of the theory was not "wrong". Some were wrong because of insisting on circular orbits instead of elliptical. But geocentricity by itself never was "wrong".
Geocentricity does make lot of calculations so complex as to be not doable without computer assistance that came much later into wide acceptance of heliocentricism. That also leads to inaccuracies in calculations.
I repeat - while heliocentricism is preferable, geocentricism is not "wrong".
Lizards won't walk on a leash, and won't come when you call them. What does that prove? That lizards are smarter than most 6 year olds, and most dogs ?
1. Supposingly peer review should block such kind of "trivial paper".
The idea is that the most trivial paper peer review passes, can be used to achieve an infinite "score" by your formula.
2. The formula can be adjusted to (a+1)/(b+1) or something similar. Then the initial score will be (0+1)/(3+1)=1/4, while the traded score will be 11/14
Evidence? A three letter abbreviation for something somewhere on the net? WTF is XDA? Is it a crack site?
See for yourself. I can at least tell you, most content is largely legal as per laws of most countries.
Also I named that phone - once waaaay above in a post you did not bother reply to and now directly above
No, if this is what you call naming, it is wrong. Name the exact model. Somebody else replied with a simple way to flash the only phone matching *pocket* to your comment, I didn't want to embarrass you further.
3 is exactly what I asked YOU for.
You asked me for 3? You have been corrected way more than thrice by me already. Not sure 3 of what more you want from me.
No, just an opnionated fool with wrong and baseless opinions.
WTF is the point of you sudggesting such when nobody else is reading and we both know you are a liar just looking for attention
I don't believe any such thing. If you think so, why are you giving the "attention" to me? And why do you have to start the abuse as soon as you lose an argument all over again ?
1. I have presented the evidence (XDA). You haven't, because you can't. Though your evidence (if it existed) would be much simpler - name of a single phone).
Great. How about finding the name of a single locked HTC or Samsung Android phone released in last 2 years as an answer to my 50+ phones cited via XDA ?
Pointing to pirate bay and finding a movie proves that the movie is not "unpiratable". Pointing to a movie piracy instructions website (which is XDA is more akin to, except the illegality) and seeing that working instructions don't involve voodoo proves that movie was not "voodoo-locked" against piracy.
Pointing to XDA, where procedure for flashing alternate ROM doesn't involve exploiting vulnerability of the device / OS proves that the bootloader was not locked.
What didn't seem real? Why? What link do you need to visit XDA ?
"Others" didn't ask for any "link". There weren't even really wrong, so why would I respond to them the same way as I respond to you who are clearly wrong?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I know later people were able to do it. But phoronix being unable to do it for a while is proof that the question being asked :
Is that easy on all UEFI implementations?
Does not have an answer "yes". For sane values of "easy".
And this question being asked does not have anything to do with SecureBoot, so I have no idea why you deemed it necessary to bring it up here. (U)EFI , or at least its particular implementation, is the problem, as you yourself mention.
Then Steam OS IS Debian.
That doesn't explain why
"the "male gaze" remains the best name".
Are you admitting that "male gaze" is not the best name, and retracting your earlier statement ?
Again, the "male gaze" remains the best name even if both men and women use it, because they are both practicing the gazing at (objectifying) of women.
So, "women" is the only common thing between males gazing and females gazing. Why is it then called "male gaze"? Doesn't make sense at all, though you set out to prove that it makes any sense.
You'll have to prove that a general saying can be reduced by your limited imagination. I am not seeing it.
Then why did you?
I apologize, you being ignorant was an option I missed to mention.
What stops set-top PC manufacturers from shipping Debian?
The fact that Debian needs to be configured (1) to be able to run Steam, making it not set-top PC any more? You need to be told this much too?
We aren't talking about console users here. We're talking about people who (are supposed to) know enough to load and troubleshoot SteamOS onto the machines.
Why aren't you talking about console users here? Only an idiot would talk about people who (are supposed to) know enough to load and troubleshoot SteamOS onto the machines "here", in this context.
(1) : adding repositories with drivers. Signing into Steam. Possibly applying realtime related kernel patches
Depends on who that someone is. How about Phoronix ?
I guess you would agree Phoronix is qualified to install the first beta of a Linux based OS? How about they being unable to boot anything but Windows 8 (.1) on hardware with UEFI after lot of trying?
Too many different charges can cause confusopoly,which is worse than a monopoly. Monopoly at least has the advantage of non duplication of effort, confusopoly needs a huge effort to keep going.
Effect on customer is the same - lack of the ability to choose. Regulations have to be equally serious about both - which sometimes involves telling businesses what they can charge their customers.
Two points :
1. Ubuntu, any, is not the right choice for such deployments because 5 years is not enough support period. You need rolling release, or CENTOS like support -minimum 7 years, frequently stretching to 10.
2. Linux, with at least 2 snapshotting filesystems, is much better placed than windows in recovering from bad updates. The rollback, being at a filesystem level, is much cleaner.
Yes, it really matters. In the middle ages, there were mathematical formulas which described the planets and sun revolving around the earth. The math worked very well even though the theory was proven to be very wrong.
There is nothing "wrong" with most of them. Except some of those that had slight mismatch between theory and observation that were fixed by taking relativity into account, most of the theory was not "wrong". Some were wrong because of insisting on circular orbits instead of elliptical. But geocentricity by itself never was "wrong".
Geocentricity does make lot of calculations so complex as to be not doable without computer assistance that came much later into wide acceptance of heliocentricism. That also leads to inaccuracies in calculations.
I repeat - while heliocentricism is preferable, geocentricism is not "wrong".
What did Google tell you?
I say again - WTF is XDA?
It is what this comment of your own was addressing :
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4493665&cid=45638701
Idiots can mistake it to be a "crack site" so you are spot on for your level.
Why pretend to be so stupid? Do I have to dumb the question down even more? Draw in crayon?
So, now this question is to you. If you reacted like that to "XDA" earlier, how come you suddenly forgot what XDA is ?
I'm going to regurgitate this content free thread the next time I catch you picking on somebody for fun. Acting dumb isn't so fun now is it?
Great. Though it is you that are acting dumb, but sure, go ahead.
Lizards won't walk on a leash, and won't come when you call them. What does that prove? That lizards are smarter than most 6 year olds, and most dogs ?
Asking again - what link do you need to visit XDA ?
1. Supposingly peer review should block such kind of "trivial paper".
The idea is that the most trivial paper peer review passes, can be used to achieve an infinite "score" by your formula.
2. The formula can be adjusted to (a+1)/(b+1) or something similar. Then the initial score will be (0+1)/(3+1)=1/4, while the traded score will be 11/14
(11/14) > (1/4)
Evidence? A three letter abbreviation for something somewhere on the net? WTF is XDA? Is it a crack site?
See for yourself. I can at least tell you, most content is largely legal as per laws of most countries.
Also I named that phone - once waaaay above in a post you did not bother reply to and now directly above
No, if this is what you call naming, it is wrong. Name the exact model. Somebody else replied with a simple way to flash the only phone matching *pocket* to your comment, I didn't want to embarrass you further.
3 is exactly what I asked YOU for.
You asked me for 3? You have been corrected way more than thrice by me already. Not sure 3 of what more you want from me.
2 - who are those others?
Same "others" as you keep invoking. E.g. here :
definition to others. It doesn't
Am I part of some tinfoil conspiracy?
No, just an opnionated fool with wrong and baseless opinions.
WTF is the point of you sudggesting such when nobody else is reading and we both know you are a liar just looking for attention
I don't believe any such thing. If you think so, why are you giving the "attention" to me? And why do you have to start the abuse as soon as you lose an argument all over again ?
1. I have presented the evidence (XDA). You haven't, because you can't. Though your evidence (if it existed) would be much simpler - name of a single phone).
2. Why do you have to hide behind "others" ?
3. Put up, or shut up, weak pussy.
Great. How about finding the name of a single locked HTC or Samsung Android phone released in last 2 years as an answer to my 50+ phones cited via XDA ?
Second half is precisely the one that doesn't sound very fair. Would it have been legal if laws weren't in corporations' pockets?
Why are you taking the bait?
I have pointed to lots of unlocked phones via XDA, where is your single locked recent Android Samsung phone?
Pointing to pirate bay and finding a movie proves that the movie is not "unpiratable". Pointing to a movie piracy instructions website (which is XDA is more akin to, except the illegality) and seeing that working instructions don't involve voodoo proves that movie was not "voodoo-locked" against piracy.
Pointing to XDA, where procedure for flashing alternate ROM doesn't involve exploiting vulnerability of the device / OS proves that the bootloader was not locked.
What didn't seem real? Why? What link do you need to visit XDA ?
"Others" didn't ask for any "link". There weren't even really wrong, so why would I respond to them the same way as I respond to you who are clearly wrong?