so THAT'S why xenu used DC-10s as transports... after all, they were going to die at the end of the trip, what's the problem with a few deaths along the way?
what's that you say? he used DC-8s? oh... my bad. carry on.
we're talking about standards, not vendors. the whole point of this is that there aren't very many vendors because the sheer amount of competing standards makes trying to support linux an unattractive choice for companies that are in it for the most money and the least effort possible.
also, microsoft is hardly the only company that follows that type of business practice - businesses are usually made to make money, not to make people feel all warm inside by playing nice with competing products.
There are some moral standards to lose sleep over, however, compared to some of the things done in this world, I do not see how using the right programming tool for the job - whether it is free or not - would be something that will torture your eternal soul.
uh, the Foundation series was written by Isaac Asimov... could you explain what you meant by "The Foundation series clearly identifies him as a man who knew history"?
so since when has the fact that war sucks for the grunts ever stopped an actual war? seriously, go ahead and use robots for the frontlines, that way there aren't any poor bastards that have to die for their countries just because the people in charge don't like the other people in charge.
well, with these green lasers you get to see the entire beam, unlike with a red keychain laser where once the endpoint is far away enough you can't see it. this was essentially a long green stick that you could move instantly and see where it was going. it seems like it would be extremely easy to hit a helicopter with that.
isn't the act of failing to install what is supposed to be the most user-friendly linux distro proof that it isn't user-friendly enough for the mass market?
seriously, the best analogy I can think of at the moment for what you told the GP is if someone tries to turn on a car yet fails because they could not figure out how to do it, then they cannot talk about what it's like to use the car because they never drove it in the street, which makes no sense because they did try to use the car, the problem was the shitty design that prevented them from getting past step one to actually driving the thing.
and I realize that this is just one person that couldn't install linux, but then again, history tends to repeats itself. want proof? go look at some noob linux forums.
yeah, microsoft has the resources to do that, but then they have that shit-ton of managers to deal with... who, btw, are the ones that decide to partake in the FUD, and get in the way of anyone trying to make a good product by 'managing.'
eh, it happens. although I got it as soon as I read that it was supposed to be a joke, instead of being serious. see, kids? that's what stereotypes can do to you!
why? natural selection is only one of several factors that can cause evolution. in fact, you mention another in your next sentence: non-random mating. natural selection is based on the fitness of your genotypes, non-random mating on phenotypes (the physical representation of your genes, in case anyone didn't know). sure, the handsome dullard might get laid more, but in a world with no technology, the dullard and his offspring will die off quickly, leaving only the smart ugly guys left. however, this is not true in the modern world: the dullard just works until he dies of old age, and so do his children. so as I said before, evolution is acting on humans, but natural selection is not - when an organism's fitness to survive does in almost no way (yeah, there are exceptions to every rule) determine if he will live, it is no longer 'natural' selection.
uh, I'm gonna have to disagree with you again... natural selection does not improve a species. what it does is get rid of those who can't survive, leaving an abundance of those who can survive, which changes the population into an improved version of it's earlier self.
no offense, but bastard of subhumani doesn't seem to get that the selection of those cows was artifical, just like the dogs. and in our modern society, those two examples of his have the same fitness, in that they will both survive because of technology.
for some reason, mdarksbane believes that altering your environment with tools so that more people can survive is natural. it isn't, what is natural is fitting into the environment, not shaping it to your own specs. in his second point, he fails to take into account something called love. I'm not gonna get into that, however.
as for drskwid, look at my reply to him, and then come back.
thanks, although I prefer to think of it as if several people disagreed with me, and the moderators naturally chose to up my post because I am right, and they'd rather just agree with the correct person and show the world that than post several times against the wrong ones. see, this is a playing field where the correct post is the only one left for others to read, unless they (the others) wish to look back in time (or a lower threshold, whatever) to see the posts that were wrong and failed to compete well enough to survive.
mna, have we strayed from the original topic... dvd to darwin. lol. but this is fun!
where have I EVER said anything about just physical fitness? look around. stupid people are surviving, and worse, thriving. I see now that there was something that I didn't catch last night (was tired, sorry): it's that you are equating natural selection to evolution, and I am not. evolution is happening to humans, but not as much as is would be if we didn't have technology (I remember an article here on slashdot a while ago talking about how chimps have evolved more than humans). my argument is that NATURAL SELECTION is no longer really being applied to humans, because we are no longer held completely at nature's mercy. really, is there any reason to get that mad? we're two people having a discussion. there's no need to freak out.
Slashdot Mirror
He wants to Kill Bill, after all.
so THAT'S why xenu used DC-10s as transports ... after all, they were going to die at the end of the trip, what's the problem with a few deaths along the way?
what's that you say? he used DC-8s? oh... my bad. carry on.
we're talking about standards, not vendors. the whole point of this is that there aren't very many vendors because the sheer amount of competing standards makes trying to support linux an unattractive choice for companies that are in it for the most money and the least effort possible.
also, microsoft is hardly the only company that follows that type of business practice - businesses are usually made to make money, not to make people feel all warm inside by playing nice with competing products.
In that case, Linux is doomed. There's gotta be some way to compromise freedom and standardization.
There are some moral standards to lose sleep over, however, compared to some of the things done in this world, I do not see how using the right programming tool for the job - whether it is free or not - would be something that will torture your eternal soul.
atrazine isn't pest control, it's an herbicide
yeah? go shoot up some heroin once, see how you feel afterwards, and then come back and defend your last statement.
Somehow I doubt that will happen, considering their usage of unlicensed private investigators.
seems like it. look at the faqs page.
uh, the Foundation series was written by Isaac Asimov... could you explain what you meant by "The Foundation series clearly identifies him as a man who knew history"?
plus, close it off at both ends and you have a convienient way of eating a pizza... hmm, where have I heard of that before? oh yeah, pizza rolls!
so since when has the fact that war sucks for the grunts ever stopped an actual war? seriously, go ahead and use robots for the frontlines, that way there aren't any poor bastards that have to die for their countries just because the people in charge don't like the other people in charge.
oh, trust me, I've seen monitors taking a few punches from angry non-windows users too...
well, with these green lasers you get to see the entire beam, unlike with a red keychain laser where once the endpoint is far away enough you can't see it. this was essentially a long green stick that you could move instantly and see where it was going. it seems like it would be extremely easy to hit a helicopter with that.
they've not gone and completely blamed games only. Ol' boy Jack would have a field day with it then.
because it's good start, right?
isn't the act of failing to install what is supposed to be the most user-friendly linux distro proof that it isn't user-friendly enough for the mass market?
seriously, the best analogy I can think of at the moment for what you told the GP is if someone tries to turn on a car yet fails because they could not figure out how to do it, then they cannot talk about what it's like to use the car because they never drove it in the street, which makes no sense because they did try to use the car, the problem was the shitty design that prevented them from getting past step one to actually driving the thing.
and I realize that this is just one person that couldn't install linux, but then again, history tends to repeats itself. want proof? go look at some noob linux forums.
impressed, or enslaved? ;)
interestingly, this was put on xkcd.com yesterday: http://xkcd.com/293/
think 'shouting match.' but really just an argument of any sort, it doesn't have to involve shouting.
yeah, microsoft has the resources to do that, but then they have that shit-ton of managers to deal with... who, btw, are the ones that decide to partake in the FUD, and get in the way of anyone trying to make a good product by 'managing.'
dude, you seriously want to have a party with a bunch of /.ers? that could possibly be one of the most uncomfortable things I have ever imagined...
wait a second... someone on /. has a wife?!?!
*brain explodes*
eh, it happens. although I got it as soon as I read that it was supposed to be a joke, instead of being serious. see, kids? that's what stereotypes can do to you!
why? natural selection is only one of several factors that can cause evolution. in fact, you mention another in your next sentence: non-random mating. natural selection is based on the fitness of your genotypes, non-random mating on phenotypes (the physical representation of your genes, in case anyone didn't know). sure, the handsome dullard might get laid more, but in a world with no technology, the dullard and his offspring will die off quickly, leaving only the smart ugly guys left. however, this is not true in the modern world: the dullard just works until he dies of old age, and so do his children. so as I said before, evolution is acting on humans, but natural selection is not - when an organism's fitness to survive does in almost no way (yeah, there are exceptions to every rule) determine if he will live, it is no longer 'natural' selection.
uh, I'm gonna have to disagree with you again... natural selection does not improve a species. what it does is get rid of those who can't survive, leaving an abundance of those who can survive, which changes the population into an improved version of it's earlier self.
no offense, but bastard of subhumani doesn't seem to get that the selection of those cows was artifical, just like the dogs. and in our modern society, those two examples of his have the same fitness, in that they will both survive because of technology.
for some reason, mdarksbane believes that altering your environment with tools so that more people can survive is natural. it isn't, what is natural is fitting into the environment, not shaping it to your own specs. in his second point, he fails to take into account something called love. I'm not gonna get into that, however.
as for drskwid, look at my reply to him, and then come back.
thanks, although I prefer to think of it as if several people disagreed with me, and the moderators naturally chose to up my post because I am right, and they'd rather just agree with the correct person and show the world that than post several times against the wrong ones. see, this is a playing field where the correct post is the only one left for others to read, unless they (the others) wish to look back in time (or a lower threshold, whatever) to see the posts that were wrong and failed to compete well enough to survive.
mna, have we strayed from the original topic... dvd to darwin. lol. but this is fun!
where have I EVER said anything about just physical fitness? look around. stupid people are surviving, and worse, thriving. I see now that there was something that I didn't catch last night (was tired, sorry): it's that you are equating natural selection to evolution, and I am not. evolution is happening to humans, but not as much as is would be if we didn't have technology (I remember an article here on slashdot a while ago talking about how chimps have evolved more than humans). my argument is that NATURAL SELECTION is no longer really being applied to humans, because we are no longer held completely at nature's mercy. really, is there any reason to get that mad? we're two people having a discussion. there's no need to freak out.