This law is for music (and I believe movies) only. Not for software. Further: There is a semi-government institution that collects the money and gives as little as possible of it to actual artists, while keeping millions with themselves and "rewarding" their directors big time.
It's a matter of definition; Priority in its normal sense should be interpreted as the order of importance for/all projects/. However you, as is customary (to be able to present primary-colours-only pie charts to dim-lighted management) do/not/ order all projects, but instead make a very limited number of classes (low, normal, high), and allow an increasing share of the projects to "migrate" to the "high" class. That way you yourself are defeating the very concept of prioritizing. Either prioritize each project in the full set (so for 100 projects, you have priorities 1-100), or only allow a maximum number of projects in each class.
After reading only the title, I was too shocked already to read the rest. Developers, lowly-intelligent and lowly-educated as almost all of them are, are themselves amongst the people that deliver the worst imaginable bug reports. Give me a normal "user" anyday; their lack of developer arrogance makes them a functional partner in getting the report right. Developers on the other hand tend to mistakenly concentrate on technicalities, their own warped view of "what users want", or even already on what they "know is the solution". Have a nice day!:)
I feel skipping version numbers is only one step removed from the absolute worst versioning system of using random, not necessarily increasing numbers for each new update. Were these guys drunk or so?
When will people stop calling engineers scientists. Engineering is not science, but craft, not unlike woodworking or cooking. I might agree with calling typical engineering a "craft+" or so, but again, engineering has nothing to do with science.
I almost cried of happiness when I saw they fixed the position of the URL info. It is behavioiur that is in stark contrast with that of e.g. Gnome, which never listens to "user uprisings", or Ubuntu, which moved the 3 window title buttons to the wrong location and, despite fully justified comments on this, never even thought of correcting that bug. Good to see there are still development teams that listen to reason.
On my system, the tabs ONLY go to the title bar when the whole window is maximized. Possibily because some drunk developer thought we would only need the extra vertical space if we indicated we would need extra spcae by maximizing the whole window? Another bad choice. Far worse is that I always have my browser vertically maximized only, because I'm specifically missing VERTICAL space. But this braindead behaviour only gives me the extra vertical space if I also horizontally maximize my window (so the result is total maximalization).
"I remember laughing years ago when I would see users who had modified their user agent string with some sort of defiant pro-privacy message, without realizing that their action made them uniquely identifiable out of hundreds of thousands of others."
Mr Taco must have laughed the laugh of a naive person.
These people made a/statement/,/trading/ this little aspect of their privacy in the process. Seeing they were at least smart enough to see there is a thorny privacy issue with the user agent string, it's also logical to assume they were very much aware of this trade.
Just a character with a serial number. All other information can either be automatically gathered, and thus should be, or belongs in an administrative CMDB. And b.t.w. the same holds for servers. Really: just a number. If you don't do that you shoot yourself in the foot with having to maintain information in a place where it is inconvenient to maintain, AND you risk administering the same information twice, which is a burden, and a source for errors.
I cannot now remember the name of the specific emulator. But I have seen these effects implemented many years ago already with one of the Commodore 64 emulators I was then tinkering with. And it really made the experience a LOT nicer:)
Ehrm, what/is/ "Blogger"? I know of a lot of Google services, but this one I don't. Perhaps it's just not interesting enough a service to put much effort into.
Can anybody give arguments against using Truecrypt on one partition on a stick and a Truecrypt encrypted volume on a second partition which takes up the rest of the stick? Then you have portable, open source encryption. What more is necessary?
I have Iceweasel 2.0.0.11 on Debian. It doesn't even show me the option to change to the full interface. Just "This is the classic interface; this works best for you." Yeah, right. What a crap. And I have to use it for my MSDN goodies:(
Let me put it this way; if a service like Google Apps becomes available in my country, I will switch to that provider. It is not necessarily Google I mistrust, even with such a clause. Rather is is the completely corrupt and Corporate-owned American democracy I'm afraid of.
Shouldn't the article title really have been "New AACS hack fixed in a day"? I mean, it was broken intentionally by the makers with an ugly hack, and its functionality swiftly fixed by the community.
Adding to that, as I ponder my remark, I think it would be a very good political step to rename Testing to something like Uptodate or so. And it would make the list of three distributions more understandable for first-time Debian tryers, e.g.: - Stable, Uptodate, Testing Sounds more logical to me than the current: - Stable, Testing, Unstable as the latter seems to imply to first-time users that there's two distributions you don't want, one because it's in the testing phase (which makes you expect it to be unstable), and one which is unstable (perhaps because it's in the testing phase?) Then people try Stable and become disappointed.:-)
I think one opportunity that Debian continuously fails to see is to make very clear that Testing is always uptodate and always usable. Basically Ubuntu = Debian Testing with a few tweaks. I've tried to use Ubuntu a few times. When it did not fail to install properly (it fails often and spuriously) I ended up with a system that hardly differed from Debian Testing. And where it did it was mostly in the colouring. Functionally I never found a reason to use it instead of Debian Testing. A short while ago the same happened with Ubuntu 6.10. I already returned to Testing again.
Slashdot Mirror
During my study I thoroughly enjoyed this leisurely paced introduction to Lie groups:
http://books.google.co.id/books/about/Representations_of_Compact_Lie_Groups.html?id=AfBzWL5bIIQC&redir_esc=y
This law is for music (and I believe movies) only. Not for software.
Further: There is a semi-government institution that collects the money and gives as little as possible of it to actual artists, while keeping millions with themselves and "rewarding" their directors big time.
Yes, I have noticed. No, it is not what I want.
It's a matter of definition; Priority in its normal sense should be interpreted as the order of importance for /all projects/. /not/ order all projects, but instead make a very limited number of classes (low, normal, high), and allow an increasing share of the projects to "migrate" to the "high" class.
However you, as is customary (to be able to present primary-colours-only pie charts to dim-lighted management) do
That way you yourself are defeating the very concept of prioritizing.
Either prioritize each project in the full set (so for 100 projects, you have priorities 1-100), or only allow a maximum number of projects in each class.
You mean bumfuck USA?
After reading only the title, I was too shocked already to read the rest. :)
Developers, lowly-intelligent and lowly-educated as almost all of them are, are themselves amongst the people that deliver the worst imaginable bug reports. Give me a normal "user" anyday; their lack of developer arrogance makes them a functional partner in getting the report right. Developers on the other hand tend to mistakenly concentrate on technicalities, their own warped view of "what users want", or even already on what they "know is the solution".
Have a nice day!
"Hello, compuuuu-terrrr!"
Hmmm, interesting. Would that indicate that skipping version numbers is somehow connected to producing non-standard, totally crappy user interfaces? :p
I feel skipping version numbers is only one step removed from the absolute worst versioning system of using random, not necessarily increasing numbers for each new update. Were these guys drunk or so?
I have 3.1.10 and thought I was quite up to date :s. Did I miss a whole version?
When will people stop calling engineers scientists. Engineering is not science, but craft, not unlike woodworking or cooking.
I might agree with calling typical engineering a "craft+" or so, but again, engineering has nothing to do with science.
I almost cried of happiness when I saw they fixed the position of the URL info.
It is behavioiur that is in stark contrast with that of e.g. Gnome, which never listens to "user uprisings", or Ubuntu, which moved the 3 window title buttons to the wrong location and, despite fully justified comments on this, never even thought of correcting that bug.
Good to see there are still development teams that listen to reason.
On my system, the tabs ONLY go to the title bar when the whole window is maximized. Possibily because some drunk developer thought we would only need the extra vertical space if we indicated we would need extra spcae by maximizing the whole window?
Another bad choice.
Far worse is that I always have my browser vertically maximized only, because I'm specifically missing VERTICAL space. But this braindead behaviour only gives me the extra vertical space if I also horizontally maximize my window (so the result is total maximalization).
What The Fuck?
"I remember laughing years ago when I would see users who had modified their user agent string with some sort of defiant pro-privacy message, without realizing that their action made them uniquely identifiable out of hundreds of thousands of others."
Mr Taco must have laughed the laugh of a naive person.
These people made a /statement/, /trading/ this little aspect of their privacy in the process. Seeing they were at least smart enough to see there is a thorny privacy issue with the user agent string, it's also logical to assume they were very much aware of this trade.
Just a character with a serial number.
All other information can either be automatically gathered, and thus should be, or belongs in an administrative CMDB. And b.t.w. the same holds for servers.
Really: just a number. If you don't do that you shoot yourself in the foot with having to maintain information in a place where it is inconvenient to maintain, AND you risk administering the same information twice, which is a burden, and a source for errors.
I cannot now remember the name of the specific emulator. But I have seen these effects implemented many years ago already with one of the Commodore 64 emulators I was then tinkering with. :)
And it really made the experience a LOT nicer
Ehrm, what /is/ "Blogger"? I know of a lot of Google services, but this one I don't. Perhaps it's just not interesting enough a service to put much effort into.
Can anybody give arguments against using Truecrypt on one partition on a stick and a Truecrypt encrypted volume on a second partition which takes up the rest of the stick?
Then you have portable, open source encryption. What more is necessary?
I have Iceweasel 2.0.0.11 on Debian. :(
It doesn't even show me the option to change to the full interface.
Just "This is the classic interface; this works best for you."
Yeah, right. What a crap. And I have to use it for my MSDN goodies
Let me put it this way; if a service like Google Apps becomes available in my country, I will switch to that provider. It is not necessarily Google I mistrust, even with such a clause.
Rather is is the completely corrupt and Corporate-owned American democracy I'm afraid of.
Shouldn't the article title really have been "New AACS hack fixed in a day"?
I mean, it was broken intentionally by the makers with an ugly hack, and its functionality swiftly fixed by the community.
April 1st, really ...
Adding to that, as I ponder my remark, I think it would be a very good political step to rename Testing to something like Uptodate or so. :-)
And it would make the list of three distributions more understandable for first-time Debian tryers, e.g.:
- Stable, Uptodate, Testing
Sounds more logical to me than the current:
- Stable, Testing, Unstable
as the latter seems to imply to first-time users that there's two distributions you don't want, one because it's in the testing phase (which makes you expect it to be unstable), and one which is unstable (perhaps because it's in the testing phase?)
Then people try Stable and become disappointed.
I think one opportunity that Debian continuously fails to see is to make very clear that Testing is always uptodate and always usable.
Basically Ubuntu = Debian Testing with a few tweaks.
I've tried to use Ubuntu a few times. When it did not fail to install properly (it fails often and spuriously) I ended up with a system that hardly differed from Debian Testing. And where it did it was mostly in the colouring.
Functionally I never found a reason to use it instead of Debian Testing. A short while ago the same happened with Ubuntu 6.10. I already returned to Testing again.