I buy Chinese productions every damn day and I buy them a lot, because I am a Chinese and I live in China. By your argument I support oppression, which I don't, by means of making myself heard whenever possible.
It's just the market at work -- we buy cheap shit (or put it in another way, we are reasonable enough to keep our demands satisfied with the least expensive goods available). IMHO it sounds pretty un-American to base one's marketing decisions upon ideological matters like this -- indeed it's so un-American that I have a compelling reason to call you a terrorist and report your comments to the NSA;) </sarcasm>
You either like it or not, but it's how things turn out to be working. I can understand your strong feeling about an oppressive regime; I just don't think one's economy decision could by any means be an indicator of moral integrity.
BTW I don't care that much about English grammar/spellings 'coz I'm not a native speaker. Honestly I'm not very fluent in it. If you find any grammatical errors in my posts, it means I just didn't bother checking, and that you can mod me down if you like.
I recently had to submit my thesis to the college library under IE6 + WINE. The library's file submission web-app didn't work with any other browser except IE, and IE6 was well supported under WINE. I hated it but I had to do it anyway...
But why are Linux enthusiasts hoping for a future of Linux on the Desktop (TM)?
I mean, I am the one of the mystic, claimed-by-some-to-be-nonexistent "Linux-exclusive" users you've heard of, and I like it with a passion. However I don't understand why people like me are busy trying to push Linux to the Joe Q. Users. Is it because that a Linux future must be better than something else? But how do we know for sure? Even if we were, then why should we be pushing it for some global acceptance?
And yes, I know the technical advantages of Linux that could be beneficial to average users. I know the ideals for which Linux claims to stand and I think they are fine, but on the other hand something being fine doesn't necessarily imply that we should be pushing it everywhere. You may want to share your joyful experience with your new shiny $DISTRO desktop but everyone has his/her own definition of joyfulness.
In other words, I value a future of Everyone Happy with His/Her Own Fucking Favorate Operating System far greater than one of "Linux on the Desktop". It's all about choice, huh? We are supposed to be the more technical-savvy group so we should have understood our own needs (which means I need what I need but I don't necessarily need what $BIG_GREED_CORPORATION tells me to need), AND that ours are not necessarily shared by others, right?
Thanks for listening to my rant. I apology for the time I made you wasted in reading this post.
I'm coding a Berkeley DB application in an MPI environment like crazy. I have a horde of tabs open for the DB manual open and I'm running out of coffee..
Wake me up when they come up with "Manga Guide to Berkeley DB". I'll buy one.;)
Well, on a second thought, I don't think there's copyright infringement. When I made my above comment I was thinking of Phorm who injects ads into HTTP traffic at the ISP level. This was, IMO, an infringement of copyright -- modification of contents without the consent of their owners.
I used to think that the ad blockers did a similar job but instead of adding contents, they were removing them. However, I realised the contents was NOT removed in this particular case -- the contents, in the form of HTTP messages, were being delivered as usual, just not rendered by the layout engine at the client side. Ad blockers don't redistribute site contents. That's all.
Anyway, IANAL, so don't take my mumbles seriously.
... but if I remember it correctly, Rydberg molecules have been found in interstellar clouds where both matter density and temperature are very low compared to on-Earth laboratory environments. In space, they are not subjected to frequent interaction with other atoms, which could easily destroy their fragile Rydberg states.
I don't know whether it's evil. To me it's just pointless.
Speaking as a Chinese, I'm surprised that in TFS those hackers were called "patriot". Being patriot means doing the right thing for your country, rather than being driven by nationalistic fits.
On the other hand, I doubt whether nationalism is the real one motivation behind hacking activities. Nationalism is best used as a disguise, and this has been practised by politicians and demagogues for ages. The real motivation may be sheer profitability lying under the disguise of "patriotism". In China many, many just want a job in the government for a stable income and (supposedly) better social status. I guess working as a government-sponsored hacker is just some nerd's way of "getting a life".
I once setup a home Linux server running squid for my roomie. The proxy server required authentication unless used from the server itself. I gave the login credentials to that guy and instructed him about the firefox settings, etc. After a while I found in the server logs that his Google updater was connecting to the proxy without sending the login credentials (didn't know if it was misconfiguration or a bug) and was getting 407s constantly. The problem was that the darned thing kept polling the server four times in a second, continuously, without a pause, until the client shut down.
It not only puts a burden on the client but also the server. Maybe the Google overlords controlling their ueber-l33t server farms won't care, but everybody between them and the clients does have a reason to care: server load, traffic, etc..
From the article it seems that the software could be activated whenever its masters behind the scenes wish so, which is not quite easy if it has to be manually triggered by insiders (workers could get fired, etc..). TFA also said "Intelligence officials worry about cyber attackers taking control of electrical facilities, a nuclear power plant or financial networks via the Internet."
Slashdot Mirror
I buy Chinese productions every damn day and I buy them a lot, because I am a Chinese and I live in China. By your argument I support oppression, which I don't, by means of making myself heard whenever possible.
It's just the market at work -- we buy cheap shit (or put it in another way, we are reasonable enough to keep our demands satisfied with the least expensive goods available). IMHO it sounds pretty un-American to base one's marketing decisions upon ideological matters like this -- indeed it's so un-American that I have a compelling reason to call you a terrorist and report your comments to the NSA ;) </sarcasm>
You either like it or not, but it's how things turn out to be working. I can understand your strong feeling about an oppressive regime; I just don't think one's economy decision could by any means be an indicator of moral integrity.
BTW I don't care that much about English grammar/spellings 'coz I'm not a native speaker. Honestly I'm not very fluent in it. If you find any grammatical errors in my posts, it means I just didn't bother checking, and that you can mod me down if you like.
I recently had to submit my thesis to the college library under IE6 + WINE. The library's file submission web-app didn't work with any other browser except IE, and IE6 was well supported under WINE. I hated it but I had to do it anyway...
Vim with a bunch of addons has been good enough for me.
I'll give you a Useless Use of Cat award for that.
Hi,
You may find lftp a good cli client! Very handy tab-completion and shell integration. I use it whenever possible.
http://www.jwz.org/doc/x-cut-and-paste.html
But why are Linux enthusiasts hoping for a future of Linux on the Desktop (TM)?
I mean, I am the one of the mystic, claimed-by-some-to-be-nonexistent "Linux-exclusive" users you've heard of, and I like it with a passion. However I don't understand why people like me are busy trying to push Linux to the Joe Q. Users. Is it because that a Linux future must be better than something else? But how do we know for sure? Even if we were, then why should we be pushing it for some global acceptance?
And yes, I know the technical advantages of Linux that could be beneficial to average users. I know the ideals for which Linux claims to stand and I think they are fine, but on the other hand something being fine doesn't necessarily imply that we should be pushing it everywhere. You may want to share your joyful experience with your new shiny $DISTRO desktop but everyone has his/her own definition of joyfulness.
In other words, I value a future of Everyone Happy with His/Her Own Fucking Favorate Operating System far greater than one of "Linux on the Desktop". It's all about choice, huh? We are supposed to be the more technical-savvy group so we should have understood our own needs (which means I need what I need but I don't necessarily need what $BIG_GREED_CORPORATION tells me to need), AND that ours are not necessarily shared by others, right?
Thanks for listening to my rant. I apology for the time I made you wasted in reading this post.
ddclient
Not exactly secure though..
What you were referring to was the mode (the most frequent value of a set of data), not the median.
I'm coding a Berkeley DB application in an MPI environment like crazy. I have a horde of tabs open for the DB manual open and I'm running out of coffee..
Wake me up when they come up with "Manga Guide to Berkeley DB". I'll buy one. ;)
Well, on a second thought, I don't think there's copyright infringement. When I made my above comment I was thinking of Phorm who injects ads into HTTP traffic at the ISP level. This was, IMO, an infringement of copyright -- modification of contents without the consent of their owners.
I used to think that the ad blockers did a similar job but instead of adding contents, they were removing them. However, I realised the contents was NOT removed in this particular case -- the contents, in the form of HTTP messages, were being delivered as usual, just not rendered by the layout engine at the client side. Ad blockers don't redistribute site contents. That's all.
Anyway, IANAL, so don't take my mumbles seriously.
I don't think AdBlock is displaying malicious intent here. But then again, does it amount to copyright infringement?
That's $28 million/month in total!!!!!!
That's why I don't recommend "vdiff" as a replacement of the vanilla diff.
... but if I remember it correctly, Rydberg molecules have been found in interstellar clouds where both matter density and temperature are very low compared to on-Earth laboratory environments. In space, they are not subjected to frequent interaction with other atoms, which could easily destroy their fragile Rydberg states.
> it's all evil, it all must be defeated
I don't know whether it's evil. To me it's just pointless.
Speaking as a Chinese, I'm surprised that in TFS those hackers were called "patriot". Being patriot means doing the right thing for your country, rather than being driven by nationalistic fits.
On the other hand, I doubt whether nationalism is the real one motivation behind hacking activities. Nationalism is best used as a disguise, and this has been practised by politicians and demagogues for ages. The real motivation may be sheer profitability lying under the disguise of "patriotism". In China many, many just want a job in the government for a stable income and (supposedly) better social status. I guess working as a government-sponsored hacker is just some nerd's way of "getting a life".
You see, every time a similar story is posted, it generates a lot of discussion/traffic/ad hits. That's how /. works, isn't it?
setting +i on the proc filesystem is indeed impossible.
Better integration with Google's advertisement services.
There's a Tibetan input method built on top of SCIM. According to my experience SCIM works with fairly well with most DEs.
yum install tibetan-machine-uni-fonts
Of course you may hate YUM but the package is available for other distros as well. Even if you are using Windows (download the font from the url: http://www.thlib.org/tools/#wiki=/access/wiki/site/26a34146-33a6-48ce-001e-f16ce7908a6a/tibetan%20machine%20uni.html)
I once setup a home Linux server running squid for my roomie. The proxy server required authentication unless used from the server itself. I gave the login credentials to that guy and instructed him about the firefox settings, etc. After a while I found in the server logs that his Google updater was connecting to the proxy without sending the login credentials (didn't know if it was misconfiguration or a bug) and was getting 407s constantly. The problem was that the darned thing kept polling the server four times in a second, continuously, without a pause, until the client shut down.
It not only puts a burden on the client but also the server. Maybe the Google overlords controlling their ueber-l33t server farms won't care, but everybody between them and the clients does have a reason to care: server load, traffic, etc..
n/t
And binary code is just plain byte sequence.
From the article it seems that the software could be activated whenever its masters behind the scenes wish so, which is not quite easy if it has to be manually triggered by insiders (workers could get fired, etc..). TFA also said "Intelligence officials worry about cyber attackers taking control of electrical facilities, a nuclear power plant or financial networks via the Internet."