1) If you can find one example where the rule does not apply, it doesn't disprove statistical correlation. I could say - "I know the guy A who never drinks and does poorly in science." but that wouldn't mean a lot, would it?
2) Perhaps your prof would do much better at proving things, if he was sober.
Who modded him troll?!? It is easier to copy-paste solution than follow vague graphical solution.
If someone asks "how do I change may IP address provider from dhcp to static on my linux box?" How do you answer?
First of all, you have no idea what windows manager does this person uses, thus if you live in KDE your instructions will be worth crap on GNOME environment.
If you do know the window manager, you do not know the localization the user uses. Whenever someone gives me graphical instructions, I have to translate them into English and hope I got it right (Yes, I use localized linux).
Not all CLI based advices works on all distributions, but this is as close as it can get.
you need to divorce yourself from the thought of "dying."
You don't believe in reincarnation, now do you? Nor do you feel like a part of something grater, where your life holds no special value. Joy of death is nothing new. I don't talk about spawn kills (that is how infants in India must feel like), I am talking about a) honourable death; b) natural death.
a) Dying in battle for greater good is quite a popular theme. Freedom fighters with suicidal tactics comes to mind. And Valhalla is not always necessary.
b) Not everybody thinks of the death as the ultimate horror. Maybe for some the thought of respawning seems natural (And who knows, maybe they do), in this frame of mind death is soothing.
Self test: if you were sure you would reincarnate and would find yourself in tough battle for something you hold valuable, would you not "enjoy" it?
It's said that 50% of drivers break urban speed limits. 20% to 65% of employees admit to various degrees of theft at work. Sounds like it's time to change those laws too?
Bad analogy. Speeding is tolerated because usually law doesn't handle special cases. It is not possible that safe speed is always the one noted on the speed limit. The driver decides, what is safe. Thus usually only maniacal speeding is punished.
The point is that if something is illegal, but is acceptable to some degree, it should go unpunished.
Some may, but I imagine the majority think more about the price than any righteous belief that "information wants to be free."
So what? Should a law be passed only when majority believes it is righteous, or maybe we can do this when it benefits 6'000'000 and maybe hurts few thousand?
Also, we might not yet fully understand why information should be free. So far it has been more or less free and things were more or less ok. If this freedom is lost, only then can we see its value. From this perspective maybe Britain should pioneer this "war against culture" (never mind why I call it so) so we could appreciate what we have.
Why do you believe the share is fair? They have lion share not fair share. The elephant nobody wants to see is that fairness is not absolute. If there is consensus that copying for private use is fair and just, then it is fair! Sweden anyone? They believe it is ok to share (not sure, but for the sake of an argument), should their belief be considered unfair?
Lock-in with gates opened wide? Sounds interesting. Ultimate goal of business is to get money (roughly), usually it comes from costumers. Thus having costumer is a good thing, locking in costumers is one way to do so. There are other ways to get/keep costumers, thus lock-in is not a primary nor secondary goal. As tertiary goal it can be omitted, for it contradicts other tertiary goal - getting new costumers.
I have a vague feeling that vendor lock-in is only possible in low competition environment. This might be the reason MS is doing so well.
On XP, to install software you download an.msi and run it. To add a peripheral, you plug it in and perhaps load a manufacturer-supplied CD-ROM and click Next a few times. If I had to guess, the year of the Linux Desktop will probably be whenever the same processes become roughly as simple and foolproof as on XP.
Never had diver problems with windows? What is the mean time when driver disk gets lost? Usually quite fast. After a year you are sure to be on net searching. In linux you don't even have to press 'next':). The amount of drivers is valid point, though.
And quite often hardware suppliers like to ship drivers with crapware. Haven't seen such things on linux
Installing software is quite easy in linux (ubuntu, fedora). Search the catalogue, check what you want, say 'please' and it is there. Even searching for appropriate software is included in service.
These were the main selling points for me to switch to linux. It was like someone thought of what was in my interests
What are the differences between XP and Gnome UI average user will have pain to learn? The menu is alike and most will learn quite quickly there the applications are. With KDE it is even more familiar. I don't buy it that most people stick with one OS or another because they don't have interest or mental capacity to learn where applications are.
Are you two sure you're talking about the same thing?
AC said that RMS doesn't give a shit about what people think of him, and that this is good thing (talking with stupid people is waste of time). Maybe this is not very deep analysis, but he has a point. If I ware to defend RMS, I'd say something like: * RMS is truthful to culture he comes from - the geek culture. Meaning ideas and deeds are more valuable than appearance. * Wearing suit would mean that he betrays geeks and becomes what they despise, and yet he would gain nothing, for he'd become just another suit wearing... something. * If people would be repulsed from his appearance, they would not be the ones to see the idea behind the man. And RMS is not interested to convert anyone who doesn't seek the light.
You attack AC on slightly different grounds (aka straw man): * Quote: Professionalism can essentially be boiled down to the art of dealing with stupid people. End quote. If you would just care to prove this statement. While waiting for the proof, consider this: "Professionalism: the expertness characteristic of a professional person" -- wordnet.princeton.edu How refusal to deal with idiots contradict this characteristic? * Quote: Here in the real world, what stupid people say is far from meaningless. End quote. If you write good quality driver and some idiot looks upon it and says it is crap, should you care what he says? Should professional programmer care? You make general and unproven statement and hope that it is suitable for RMS case. Unless I see how his dress code hurts him, I consider your argument quite weak. If you say "Indulging stupid people might convert some of them to Free Software movement" I will say "This time could be spent actually doing something, or at least having productive conversations with those who listen". * Quote: Would you really argue that George Bush's opinions over the last 8 years have had no effect? End quote. Should RMS listen to George Bush's opinions? Would you like to see his ideas impact work of RMS?
In my personal opinion, RMS is bearer of idea. And as such he needs not to indulge others. Is being prophet a profession? How should I know?
Who was the ignorant mod-kiddy, who gave this Cato +1 Insightful? History is repeating itself again. This comment-at-each-article must be stopped before the reign of C++ devours us all!
BSA tends to do raids accompanied by law enforcements. Or was it the other way around? Not sure, but the legal part is on police side, expertise is on BSA side. Prosecution doesn't take place on site. If police gets suspicious, the ugly part starts (confiscation of hardware, thorough examination etc.). Ideally, BSA trains police to do this on their own, thus ripping costumers indirectly. N.B. This is how it works in Latvia (In EU? The state nobody knows about? Never mind). I doubt it differs much from rest of Europe.
Shortest joke in soviet union: "present generation will live in Communism", which was the ultimate goal in USSR. It was funny because we never did.
The plan was similar to this: Goal: no bad people; Action: kill all bad people. The killing is so called transition period.
The USSR was supposed to have this transition period for less than one generation. But the plan had the same flaw the example had - it was stupid.
From wikipwdia: Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production.
This was the ideal, this could not be done with present mind set, in community larger than a village and on all aspects of society.
Off topic: This works great in software world, that's why I really don't mind when someone calls free software "communistic", in fact, this is when I claim I am communist:)
Remember that socialism works quite well in Sweden (that pirate country everybody is talking about). And communism has never been implemented (soviet union had socialism). I have heard of a tribe or something in Israel that works that way, but I don't have my facts with me.
WITPOUAATTDIKPWIWNBUITSEA - What is the point of using ad-hoc acronym, then to dereference it, knowing perfectly well it will never be used in that sense ever again?
The film's purpose is primarily to field test, develop and showcase the capabilities of open source software, demonstrating what can be done with such tools in the field of organizing and producing quality content for films.
It was technical demonstration, so don't feel too surprised it had a crapy plot. As far as video quality goes, I found this video quite nice.
Slashdot Mirror
So? The problem with ice is that it damages cells. In this environment living is harder than in warm water, but still much nicer than in crystal one.
1) If you can find one example where the rule does not apply, it doesn't disprove statistical correlation. I could say - "I know the guy A who never drinks and does poorly in science." but that wouldn't mean a lot, would it?
2) Perhaps your prof would do much better at proving things, if he was sober.
Where are you from? Europe?
Don't kids (the human type) have the same effect?
Who modded him troll?!? It is easier to copy-paste solution than follow vague graphical solution.
If someone asks "how do I change may IP address provider from dhcp to static on my linux box?" How do you answer?
First of all, you have no idea what windows manager does this person uses, thus if you live in KDE your instructions will be worth crap on GNOME environment.
If you do know the window manager, you do not know the localization the user uses. Whenever someone gives me graphical instructions, I have to translate them into English and hope I got it right (Yes, I use localized linux).
Not all CLI based advices works on all distributions, but this is as close as it can get.
You don't believe in reincarnation, now do you? Nor do you feel like a part of something grater, where your life holds no special value. Joy of death is nothing new. I don't talk about spawn kills (that is how infants in India must feel like), I am talking about a) honourable death; b) natural death.
a) Dying in battle for greater good is quite a popular theme. Freedom fighters with suicidal tactics comes to mind. And Valhalla is not always necessary.
b) Not everybody thinks of the death as the ultimate horror. Maybe for some the thought of respawning seems natural (And who knows, maybe they do), in this frame of mind death is soothing.
Self test: if you were sure you would reincarnate and would find yourself in tough battle for something you hold valuable, would you not "enjoy" it?
Bad analogy. Speeding is tolerated because usually law doesn't handle special cases. It is not possible that safe speed is always the one noted on the speed limit. The driver decides, what is safe. Thus usually only maniacal speeding is punished.
The point is that if something is illegal, but is acceptable to some degree, it should go unpunished.
And yes, theft analogy is bad. :)
So what? Should a law be passed only when majority believes it is righteous, or maybe we can do this when it benefits 6'000'000 and maybe hurts few thousand?
Also, we might not yet fully understand why information should be free. So far it has been more or less free and things were more or less ok. If this freedom is lost, only then can we see its value. From this perspective maybe Britain should pioneer this "war against culture" (never mind why I call it so) so we could appreciate what we have.
Unless you have port forwarding (or how do you kids call it these days)
Why do you believe the share is fair? They have lion share not fair share. The elephant nobody wants to see is that fairness is not absolute. If there is consensus that copying for private use is fair and just, then it is fair! Sweden anyone? They believe it is ok to share (not sure, but for the sake of an argument), should their belief be considered unfair?
...thus solving the problem once and for all.
Trying to DoS Google? Good luck with that!
Try certificate authentication - a bit harder to crack.
Lock-in with gates opened wide? Sounds interesting.
Ultimate goal of business is to get money (roughly), usually it comes from costumers. Thus having costumer is a good thing, locking in costumers is one way to do so. There are other ways to get/keep costumers, thus lock-in is not a primary nor secondary goal. As tertiary goal it can be omitted, for it contradicts other tertiary goal - getting new costumers.
I have a vague feeling that vendor lock-in is only possible in low competition environment. This might be the reason MS is doing so well.
Never had diver problems with windows? What is the mean time when driver disk gets lost? Usually quite fast. After a year you are sure to be on net searching. In linux you don't even have to press 'next' :). The amount of drivers is valid point, though.
And quite often hardware suppliers like to ship drivers with crapware. Haven't seen such things on linux
Installing software is quite easy in linux (ubuntu, fedora). Search the catalogue, check what you want, say 'please' and it is there. Even searching for appropriate software is included in service.
These were the main selling points for me to switch to linux. It was like someone thought of what was in my interests
What are the differences between XP and Gnome UI average user will have pain to learn? The menu is alike and most will learn quite quickly there the applications are. With KDE it is even more familiar. I don't buy it that most people stick with one OS or another because they don't have interest or mental capacity to learn where applications are.
Are you two sure you're talking about the same thing?
AC said that RMS doesn't give a shit about what people think of him, and that this is good thing (talking with stupid people is waste of time). Maybe this is not very deep analysis, but he has a point. If I ware to defend RMS, I'd say something like:
* RMS is truthful to culture he comes from - the geek culture. Meaning ideas and deeds are more valuable than appearance.
* Wearing suit would mean that he betrays geeks and becomes what they despise, and yet he would gain nothing, for he'd become just another suit wearing... something.
* If people would be repulsed from his appearance, they would not be the ones to see the idea behind the man. And RMS is not interested to convert anyone who doesn't seek the light.
You attack AC on slightly different grounds (aka straw man):
* Quote: Professionalism can essentially be boiled down to the art of dealing with stupid people. End quote.
If you would just care to prove this statement. While waiting for the proof, consider this: "Professionalism: the expertness characteristic of a professional person" -- wordnet.princeton.edu
How refusal to deal with idiots contradict this characteristic?
* Quote: Here in the real world, what stupid people say is far from meaningless. End quote.
If you write good quality driver and some idiot looks upon it and says it is crap, should you care what he says? Should professional programmer care?
You make general and unproven statement and hope that it is suitable for RMS case. Unless I see how his dress code hurts him, I consider your argument quite weak.
If you say "Indulging stupid people might convert some of them to Free Software movement" I will say "This time could be spent actually doing something, or at least having productive conversations with those who listen".
* Quote: Would you really argue that George Bush's opinions over the last 8 years have had no effect? End quote.
Should RMS listen to George Bush's opinions? Would you like to see his ideas impact work of RMS?
In my personal opinion, RMS is bearer of idea. And as such he needs not to indulge others. Is being prophet a profession? How should I know?
Vista facts for those, who don't have silverlight.
Who was the ignorant mod-kiddy, who gave this Cato +1 Insightful? History is repeating itself again. This comment-at-each-article must be stopped before the reign of C++ devours us all!
BSA tends to do raids accompanied by law enforcements. Or was it the other way around? Not sure, but the legal part is on police side, expertise is on BSA side.
Prosecution doesn't take place on site. If police gets suspicious, the ugly part starts (confiscation of hardware, thorough examination etc.).
Ideally, BSA trains police to do this on their own, thus ripping costumers indirectly.
N.B. This is how it works in Latvia (In EU? The state nobody knows about? Never mind). I doubt it differs much from rest of Europe.
Shortest joke in soviet union: "present generation will live in Communism", which was the ultimate goal in USSR. It was funny because we never did.
:)
The plan was similar to this:
Goal: no bad people;
Action: kill all bad people.
The killing is so called transition period.
The USSR was supposed to have this transition period for less than one generation. But the plan had the same flaw the example had - it was stupid.
From wikipwdia:
Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production.
This was the ideal, this could not be done with present mind set, in community larger than a village and on all aspects of society.
Off topic:
This works great in software world, that's why I really don't mind when someone calls free software "communistic", in fact, this is when I claim I am communist
Remember that socialism works quite well in Sweden (that pirate country everybody is talking about).
And communism has never been implemented (soviet union had socialism). I have heard of a tribe or something in Israel that works that way, but I don't have my facts with me.
WITPOUAATTDIKPWIWNBUITSEA - What is the point of using ad-hoc acronym, then to dereference it, knowing perfectly well it will never be used in that sense ever again?
It was technical demonstration, so don't feel too surprised it had a crapy plot. As far as video quality goes, I found this video quite nice.
More about it here
First implementation? Surely the first browser confirmed to the whatever specs were there.
But then I hope the point was not to go back to HTML 1.0.