Plus I think Nye is committing the usual fallacy of conflating the equivalent of being familiar with the lastest Papal Bull with "knowing science". This is more about being able to repeat the current appeal to authority fad than it is actual science.
All of the current talking heads seem to replicate that fallacy.
The only advantage that BSD has is the ability to piss off developers. People describe the GPL as some sort of communist crusade but it really came about because of rather practical considerations.
Most charitable people don't want to feel they have been taken advantage of.
Beyond that, the Toddler's Dilemma really impacts very few people. Most people (and even companies) don't see the need to pretend that someone else's work is their exclusive property.
> Hardly. The "year of Linux on the desktop" is indeed understood to mean some form of market dominance.
So? Apple managed fine without this.
It's a DOS centric mindset that demands that a successful consumer microcomputing product must WIPE OUT all of the other options. Although it does nicely frame the problem that any alternative faces.
> I'm in a similar situation with similar requirements, which is why I use OSX.
Unfortunately, that means that you have to use Mac hardware. That's not really a good tradeoff at all. That's especially true if you are ignoring the parts that are most often used by anyone else.
If you can destroy a competitors device in this fashion then it's clearly broken. All of this whining about vandalism and "bush league" sabotage is really just glossing over the sad fact that such "sabotage" is even possible to begin with.
It seems that this guy only did what anyone else at the expo was able to do.
It should not be that easy to destroy a washer... even a prototype.
> The simple fact of the matter is that Systemd does everything, that other init systems do, at least as well,
No it doesn't. Many of us already have systems that have been broken by this new shit. Meanwhile, we really don't care about these alleged things that systemd is supposed to be able to do that init can't.
Also don't kid yoursef. systemd would have been rejected in the dawn of day for breaking the design philosophy of Unix.
That is these "ideological grounds" you speak of. Bad design. Poorly thought through.
> While it all sounds nice, you do realize 99.99% of the population just sort of wants their computer to work.
Exactly!
Messing around with a fundemental low level part of the system when it is simply not broken is retarded.
It is true that many of us want our systems to "just work". The problem is that the replacements for initd DON'T DO THAT. They come of as the work of bored children that need a distraction.
If you want to go on some sort of crusade, actually find something that's an actual problem.
That's just priceless. We've gone from completely ignoring the fact that RDP has taken the world by storm in the last 20 years to really stupid alternate approaches.
You could't create more Unix fragmentation if that's what you were actually trying for.
No. The WTO deals with anything that a foreign corporation views as a threat to their profits. It doesn't need to be the least bit "protective". Online gambling laws in the US and it's various sub-jurisdictions are a great example of this.
I am not sure I would ever do something like this by hand. I would be inclined to use an application that already handles these details. Probably just use a standard file transfer tool.
Ironically enough they probably don't "feel welcome" because of how shabbily companies like IBM treat their talent.
It also doesn't help that nerds are shat on in popular culture and the communications and journalism majors never pass up an opportunity to dump on nerds even more. This article and your response is another fine example.
When measured up to "lawyer babes" and "doctor babes", how can STEM hope to captivate a crowd that is still quite honestly still in the thrall Vogue and Glamour?
So? They're still there and open for abuse either by some hacker or by the company that put those features there to begin with.
The most secure web server is the one that's not even installed.
The whole point of this nonsense is that these devices aren't in our control. We can't burn this stuff to the ground. The best we can do is set a flag somewhere. It's like "uninstalling" Internet Exploder from Windows.
Lack of good intelligence helped start the nuclear arms race. We took Kruschev at his word regarding his missile program without understanding the full implications of the blusterous comments he was making.
>> Phones are inconvenient compared to a fitness tracker.
> Only in some circumstances.
That's kind of the ENTIRE point. All that is required is ONE use case for which the phone is woefully inappropriate and the advantage goes to the dedicated device.
Any scheme like this should look a little like the payment screen for the humble bundle with some upstream highlights (or perhaps even some randomly generated choices) so that you can divide your money amongst worthy projects actually doing the real work.
A little for the kernel... A little for the FSF... A little for X... Mebbe throw some back at the mother distro...
No. Changing your mind today rightfully puts into question the claims you are making today. Intuitively even the idiots understand that if you were wrong yesterday, then you're probably wrong today.
USB storage has "just worked" on Linux for a very long time now. Whatever has been added recently to "fix it" clearly isn't making it better. Meanwhile, it's also more complex apparently.
Again, Linux has gotten mature enough that things that really aren't broken are being fixed by bored children that need some sort of distraction.
The "abstractions" aren't any easier. They might have the virtue of being better automated WHEN THEY ACTUALLY WORK. Beyond that, they are more complicated and thus LESS usable when something doesn't go precisely to plan.
The "abstractions" do less well when you wander off the reservation and Linux has always been about wandering off the reservation.
Linux is mature enough that people are now trying to fix things that really aren't broken and they are breaking them in the process.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with the argument is that it tries to distort the situation and ignores any useful discussion of the market value of the item in question.
What is the single value of an impression? How does that relate to the value of a single broadcast? How does that relate to the value of a single?
Most of these headlines are loud whining that depend on general innumeracy.
What chip? It's a useful distinction that actual exists now in the real world. It's relevant to the discussion.
Performers don't get paid for radio airplay but songwriters do.
Plus I think Nye is committing the usual fallacy of conflating the equivalent of being familiar with the lastest Papal Bull with "knowing science". This is more about being able to repeat the current appeal to authority fad than it is actual science.
All of the current talking heads seem to replicate that fallacy.
> The nuts and bolts of computer architecture isn't in the scope of computer science.
It is in the ACM curriculum. Whether or not your ITT "computer science" degree included it is another matter.
Someone should be answering to a judge over this.
If the DA won't do it then it's up to those "sleazy ambulance chasers".
The only advantage that BSD has is the ability to piss off developers. People describe the GPL as some sort of communist crusade but it really came about because of rather practical considerations.
Most charitable people don't want to feel they have been taken advantage of.
Beyond that, the Toddler's Dilemma really impacts very few people. Most people (and even companies) don't see the need to pretend that someone else's work is their exclusive property.
That's funny because any time I install Linux from scratch it "just works". Whenever I try this with Windows, it NEVER does.
I can't imagine a normal consumer going through all of that trouble on their own.
The only reason that Windows "works" for anyone (or MacOS for that matter) is that it's already preloaded and ready to go.
> Hardly. The "year of Linux on the desktop" is indeed understood to mean some form of market dominance.
So? Apple managed fine without this.
It's a DOS centric mindset that demands that a successful consumer microcomputing product must WIPE OUT all of the other options. Although it does nicely frame the problem that any alternative faces.
> I'm in a similar situation with similar requirements, which is why I use OSX.
Unfortunately, that means that you have to use Mac hardware. That's not really a good tradeoff at all. That's especially true if you are ignoring the parts that are most often used by anyone else.
If you can destroy a competitors device in this fashion then it's clearly broken. All of this whining about vandalism and "bush league" sabotage is really just glossing over the sad fact that such "sabotage" is even possible to begin with.
It seems that this guy only did what anyone else at the expo was able to do.
It should not be that easy to destroy a washer... even a prototype.
> The simple fact of the matter is that Systemd does everything, that other init systems do, at least as well,
No it doesn't. Many of us already have systems that have been broken by this new shit. Meanwhile, we really don't care about these alleged things that systemd is supposed to be able to do that init can't.
Also don't kid yoursef. systemd would have been rejected in the dawn of day for breaking the design philosophy of Unix.
That is these "ideological grounds" you speak of. Bad design. Poorly thought through.
> While it all sounds nice, you do realize 99.99% of the population just sort of wants their computer to work.
Exactly!
Messing around with a fundemental low level part of the system when it is simply not broken is retarded.
It is true that many of us want our systems to "just work". The problem is that the replacements for initd DON'T DO THAT. They come of as the work of bored children that need a distraction.
If you want to go on some sort of crusade, actually find something that's an actual problem.
That's just priceless. We've gone from completely ignoring the fact that RDP has taken the world by storm in the last 20 years to really stupid alternate approaches.
You could't create more Unix fragmentation if that's what you were actually trying for.
WMware has been around for a long time. Your 15 year snark might not be that hard to achieve actually...
A 15 year old datafile or binary doesn't sound nearly as impressive as it used to.
No. The WTO deals with anything that a foreign corporation views as a threat to their profits. It doesn't need to be the least bit "protective". Online gambling laws in the US and it's various sub-jurisdictions are a great example of this.
I am not sure I would ever do something like this by hand. I would be inclined to use an application that already handles these details. Probably just use a standard file transfer tool.
Ironically enough they probably don't "feel welcome" because of how shabbily companies like IBM treat their talent.
It also doesn't help that nerds are shat on in popular culture and the communications and journalism majors never pass up an opportunity to dump on nerds even more. This article and your response is another fine example.
When measured up to "lawyer babes" and "doctor babes", how can STEM hope to captivate a crowd that is still quite honestly still in the thrall Vogue and Glamour?
> They aren't manditory.
So? They're still there and open for abuse either by some hacker or by the company that put those features there to begin with.
The most secure web server is the one that's not even installed.
The whole point of this nonsense is that these devices aren't in our control. We can't burn this stuff to the ground. The best we can do is set a flag somewhere. It's like "uninstalling" Internet Exploder from Windows.
Lack of good intelligence helped start the nuclear arms race. We took Kruschev at his word regarding his missile program without understanding the full implications of the blusterous comments he was making.
>> Phones are inconvenient compared to a fitness tracker.
> Only in some circumstances.
That's kind of the ENTIRE point. All that is required is ONE use case for which the phone is woefully inappropriate and the advantage goes to the dedicated device.
Any scheme like this should look a little like the payment screen for the humble bundle with some upstream highlights (or perhaps even some randomly generated choices) so that you can divide your money amongst worthy projects actually doing the real work.
A little for the kernel...
A little for the FSF...
A little for X...
Mebbe throw some back at the mother distro...
No. Changing your mind today rightfully puts into question the claims you are making today. Intuitively even the idiots understand that if you were wrong yesterday, then you're probably wrong today.
> You know, if you had done just a little critical thinking, and perhaps a touch of research yourself then you would
Then you could just ignore all of the journalists, and ignore the government, turn your back on society in general and just become a doomsday prepper.
USB storage has "just worked" on Linux for a very long time now. Whatever has been added recently to "fix it" clearly isn't making it better. Meanwhile, it's also more complex apparently.
Again, Linux has gotten mature enough that things that really aren't broken are being fixed by bored children that need some sort of distraction.
The "abstractions" aren't any easier. They might have the virtue of being better automated WHEN THEY ACTUALLY WORK. Beyond that, they are more complicated and thus LESS usable when something doesn't go precisely to plan.
The "abstractions" do less well when you wander off the reservation and Linux has always been about wandering off the reservation.
Linux is mature enough that people are now trying to fix things that really aren't broken and they are breaking them in the process.