Let me know when she starts running around with the KKK. Let me know when she wants to put yellow armbands on members of a certain race. Let me know when she joins a Hispanic Superiority club. Let me know when she does anything more than assert that someone's racial background makes a fucking difference to their life.
This is the most pathetic manufactured scandal since the spotted owl. I can't believe the Republicans decided to take it and run with it. It does nothing but make them look bad, and it won't affect her confirmation in the slightest.
Every single eee PC available (with Atom processors) on the market is x86, to my knowledge.
That is correct, but I can't imagine why it's relevant. Did you mean to distinguish them from x86-64 or IA64? Or are you saying that all Atom-powered Eee's are not powered by ARM processors? That seems to be a vacuous truth.
And for those of you skeptical of the speed:
When the first Snapdragon-based devices hit the market later this year, they will have a 1GHz Arm processor core but that will increase to 1.3GHz next year, with the release of Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8650A, Pineda said.
If the Netburst architecture taught us anything, it was that clock speed isn't everything.
Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?
Why would this would be any different than how it's handled in any other linux-based OS?
You seem excited by the thought of a handheld computer. I have to ask, why do you want one? I don't think there's any market for them. We've had PDAs and many other more specialized handheld devices before, and there is certainly a niche for the 'smartphone' class of devices, but what would be the point of a general-purpose computer smaller than an Eee? Touchscreen or no, anything with a keyboard smaller than about seven inches is useful for SMS-length messages only. So unless you're going to invent a radically new method of user input, the market is already segmented based on that design decision. We either already have what you're talking about as far as a 'handheld computer', or it's not likely to happen.
No irritation at all! I am not an engineer or a scientist, and I was just wondering whether you knew better than I what the proper usage was. But which topic is it, exactly, that you are new to?
Is it still appropriate to capitalize LASER? I note that neither Wikipedia nor Merriam-Webster do so, and it does not appear to be the convention on arxiv.org, nor of any other place or context that I am aware of. Certainly it is not capitalized in the common parlance.
That's relatively true, and I understand that there are reactor designs that minimize both the radioactive wastes produced by nuclear fission and the chance (never very high) of a runaway reaction. However, nuclear fuel supplies are finite, and though they may last hundreds or even thousands of years, they will certainly not be viable for anywhere near the amount of time that solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources will last.
I believe Nuclear power should be considered as an option only where other energy sources are not suitable. Humanity seems to have a tendency to treat any resource of great quantity as actually being infinite; that thinking is in large part responsible for the energy and environmental crisis we currently find ourselves in. We should prefer renewable sources to finite ones, and anything over burning coal or oil.
As to which light bulbs we use, I suspect that LEDs or OLEDs will end up seeing more use than either CFLs or incandescent lights, but I think the entire debate is probably extremely ill-informed. Most here seem to be repeating the same few talking points as the last time a story on light bulbs was posted. Incandescent lights seem like a fundamentally stupid idea for lighting: most of their energy is wasted as heat. CFLs pollute if not disposed of properly; no one is taking the time to educate people or set up facilities to dispose of them properly. It seems to me that the latter situation is fixable, the former is not, despite the content of today's article.
Packages don't have uninstallers, that's the package manager's job. If your package manager won't remove packages, that would be a problem, but not an unsolvable problem. You might download a different package manager to fix it, but what you're talking about is extremely unlikely.
So the linux approach would be to use a standard method of installing and uninstalling software, so that you don't run into those issues. If you really needed to, you could get the list of installed files and pipe them to rm. From a ten second google search, that would look something like rpm -ql foo | rm
Mac OS X, I believe, will also give you a list of installed files for you to attack from the command line. OS X is equally susceptible to the issue of a broken uninstallation script, but at least you don't have to scour the net for an executable file that may or may not be infected and which may or may not fix the issue. Heck, you're assuming that the program you want even exists!
I've been using linux for about five months. It is pleasantly free from many issues that plague other operating systems, but comes with its own share of quirks and bugs. Two things have been impressed upon me by that experience. The first is that linux is fixable. It is completely open, designed with tinkering in mind, and if things go wrong, you have options: man pages, bug reports, google, and if you really need to (and have that ability---I do not!) you can write your own code to fix the issue.
However, the more I use linux, there is a feeling of despair and anguish that grows in me, and a question that gnaws at my thoughts: Why can't Microsoft make a good operating system? How is it that Vista cost six billion and failed? It's beyond my comprehension. I just hope that Windows 7 will be a relatively painless alternative to other OS's.
In order to spread like a virus, you need to behave like a virus...do you want your computer playing irritating sounds and spamming the internet? What exactly distinguishes Conficker and a 'benign' botnet?
By setting up your own you're destroying the networking aspect.
A private site for friends will never have the pull of a world-wide LOOK AT MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE site.
Accurate, insightful.
If that's what you want, great, go for it. But I seriously doubt that's what Google has in mind. They want all of your data, and this is just another tool for them to get at it.
Controversial point. Trying to spread fear, whether or not it's justified. The following couple of paragraphs present some interesting speculation.
Regardless of function or intention, my comment still stands (despite being modded troll by Googs) - the layout shown is hideous and provides nothing but total information overload.
If there's anything in your post to warrant a troll mod, this is it.
You post here a lot, and you don't trouble yourself to be terribly civil. Not that that's uncommon, but I think it's a shame. Your ideas seem generally worthwhile, but your attitude probably limits their discussion. Geeks and engineers are probably more likely than most to pay attention to the factual accuracy of any statement instead of the emotional context; the opposite is the rule in other circles. If I may offer some advice: if you're going to be callous, be right, and even if you are right, don't bitch about the troll mods.
These people are hackers. Mostly that means good things.
Pushing the bounds of technology is one of the most ancient and noble occupations. Many geeks also manage to push the bounds of reason, good taste, and hygiene, but creativity in tool-using is perhaps the defining element of humanity. Certainly the drive to tinker is responsible for the majority of our progress as a species.
Slashdot is where that impulse goes to die:) Stay tuned for beowulf clusters of linux-running hot grits overlords.
Can we all agree never to use the word 'polish' when evaluating an OS, ever again?
It does not convey any information beyond a vague dissatisfaction with UI elements; It's not a useful term. It can mean anything from, "I think brown is ugly." to "The clipboard widget has obscene error messages."
At least try to distinguish between aesthetic and technical issues. "Polish" has become a catch-all term for anything that someone dislikes about linux. The worst part of this is that it's distro-specific, or specific to one desktop environment, or specific to one WM/UI. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, Enlightenment, Ubuntu Netbook Remix, and the Moblin UI are all 'linux desktops', and presumably all have varying degrees of 'polish'. All of them behave differently and look differently: the only common interface in linux is the terminal.
I think it would be extremely fair to call the terminal a very 'polished' interface, and I hope that idea will dissuade you from using the term in the future:)
No. Every place in the universe can be considered the origin point of the big bang. The universe is fundamentally four-dimensional, at least until the string theorists tell us otherwise.
Yes, it would be wonderful if he had presented a finger painting as print-quality art. The colors would be richer, the level of control would be greater, the image would almost certainly be more expressive, and you would have things like fingerprints incorporated in the work, bringing a wonderful depth to the picture, the canvas serving as a gateway to the artist rather than just a representation of a scene.
Instead, we have a bad digital sketch, from someone using a bad tool. Anyone who can imagine the output of an iPhone as "print-quality commercial art" knows nothing of commercial art nor of printing. As a sketch, it's far from unique: you can find thousands of them on the internet: conceptart.org has many people who work in a very similar style. This painter, in addition to choosing one of the least expressive media possible (the nintendo DS at least has pressure sensitivity) has a demonstrated lack of skill. The color palette is flat and inexpressive, the composition is uninteresting, the brushwork is no better than what could be obtained by using a Photoshop filter, and the whole piece displays an utter insensitivity to value. It is bad, boring, and unoriginal.
The only thing going for it is the shallow novelty of being produced on an iPhone. The iPhone is many things to a varying degree of quality, but as an artistic platform it is completely worthless. I did not and will not dispute the classification of Jorge Colombo's work as Art, but I will vigorously defend it as an example of bad art.
All LCDs are not created equal. If you're printing something, it matters what colors you use, and the colors you use are going to be the ones you see. So if they are not accurately represented on your screen, it's going to look bad in print.
Also, web browsers are generally terrible at displaying color, which doesn't matter because the people viewing on the web have color-inaccurate LCD screens...it's enough to make your eyes bleed.
And we're just barely scratching the surface of how bad computers and printers are at color reproduction. Compare any print of any oil painting to the original. Alternately, compare this hack finger painter to a real artist...
I don't care if the music is listened to on an mp3 player or gramophone, as long as it was mastered for vinyl and not compressed to the limits of the digital format. From mp3s, radio, and car stereos, deliver us, O lord!
You may snort in derision of this audiophile nonsense, and assert that "No one can actually hear the difference!" but I'd challenge you to a little experiment. There are LP rips of beatles albums on TPB, and probably also the Beatles One album. Find a common track and compare them.
Whether we should or should not listen to our music on vinyl as opposed to iPods is something I'll not debate, but our music would sound better if it were the former.
The Bush Administration was terrifyingly effective. They conspired with other nations to start wars in two countries, created the Department of Homeland Security, did shady things with electronic voting machines, tortured people, eroded civil rights, created controversies over evolution, global warming, and stem cell research. They spied on the american public, outed covert operatives for the basest of political purposes, and created prison camps in foreign countries to hold people without trial for years. They spent trillions of dollars and killed more than a million people, including 4,300 American soldiers.
You have a vastly inflated idea of how much money NASA actually has. The space shuttle development cost ~18B, and if you want you can look up how much the shuttle OS cost, but it's not going to be close to the six billion dollars that Microsoft spent to develop Vista.
Microsoft is vastly bigger than NASA. Apple has twice as many employees. You were saying...?
Intel-compatible in this context means anything x86 compatible. Just in case you don't know, that also includes AMD
Also do note that the quote you disparage is a legal finding of fact, and was confirmed by a federal appeals court. That would be a big clue that you haven't correctly understood the quote.
Incidentally, the corresponding conclusion of law ordered Microsoft to be broken up as an illegal monopoly. Would that that had happened. Instead, Microsoft went to work...the resulting settlement was an almost pathetic slap on the wrist.
Odd phrase. Intel did some bad stuff to AMD, and they deserved that fine entirely. However, unlike Redmond, Intel makes good products, so we like them.
This is open source software. If you don't like Intel's direction, you can fork their project. However, given that they are paying some very talented people to work on this project, I'm fine with them having control over it.
You're not afraid of anything in particular; there's nothing to be afraid of. You are just bitter and harbouring a grudge against Intel and/or monopolistic companies in general. Same with whoever modded you insightful.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me know when she starts running around with the KKK. Let me know when she wants to put yellow armbands on members of a certain race. Let me know when she joins a Hispanic Superiority club. Let me know when she does anything more than assert that someone's racial background makes a fucking difference to their life.
This is the most pathetic manufactured scandal since the spotted owl. I can't believe the Republicans decided to take it and run with it. It does nothing but make them look bad, and it won't affect her confirmation in the slightest.
Every single eee PC available (with Atom processors) on the market is x86, to my knowledge.
That is correct, but I can't imagine why it's relevant. Did you mean to distinguish them from x86-64 or IA64? Or are you saying that all Atom-powered Eee's are not powered by ARM processors? That seems to be a vacuous truth.
And for those of you skeptical of the speed:
When the first Snapdragon-based devices hit the market later this year, they will have a 1GHz Arm processor core but that will increase to 1.3GHz next year, with the release of Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8650A, Pineda said.
If the Netburst architecture taught us anything, it was that clock speed isn't everything.
Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?
Why would this would be any different than how it's handled in any other linux-based OS?
You seem excited by the thought of a handheld computer. I have to ask, why do you want one? I don't think there's any market for them. We've had PDAs and many other more specialized handheld devices before, and there is certainly a niche for the 'smartphone' class of devices, but what would be the point of a general-purpose computer smaller than an Eee? Touchscreen or no, anything with a keyboard smaller than about seven inches is useful for SMS-length messages only. So unless you're going to invent a radically new method of user input, the market is already segmented based on that design decision. We either already have what you're talking about as far as a 'handheld computer', or it's not likely to happen.
No irritation at all! I am not an engineer or a scientist, and I was just wondering whether you knew better than I what the proper usage was. But which topic is it, exactly, that you are new to?
What's an XP license? :P
Is it still appropriate to capitalize LASER? I note that neither Wikipedia nor Merriam-Webster do so, and it does not appear to be the convention on arxiv.org, nor of any other place or context that I am aware of. Certainly it is not capitalized in the common parlance.
That's relatively true, and I understand that there are reactor designs that minimize both the radioactive wastes produced by nuclear fission and the chance (never very high) of a runaway reaction. However, nuclear fuel supplies are finite, and though they may last hundreds or even thousands of years, they will certainly not be viable for anywhere near the amount of time that solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources will last.
I believe Nuclear power should be considered as an option only where other energy sources are not suitable. Humanity seems to have a tendency to treat any resource of great quantity as actually being infinite; that thinking is in large part responsible for the energy and environmental crisis we currently find ourselves in. We should prefer renewable sources to finite ones, and anything over burning coal or oil.
As to which light bulbs we use, I suspect that LEDs or OLEDs will end up seeing more use than either CFLs or incandescent lights, but I think the entire debate is probably extremely ill-informed. Most here seem to be repeating the same few talking points as the last time a story on light bulbs was posted. Incandescent lights seem like a fundamentally stupid idea for lighting: most of their energy is wasted as heat. CFLs pollute if not disposed of properly; no one is taking the time to educate people or set up facilities to dispose of them properly. It seems to me that the latter situation is fixable, the former is not, despite the content of today's article.
Packages don't have uninstallers, that's the package manager's job. If your package manager won't remove packages, that would be a problem, but not an unsolvable problem. You might download a different package manager to fix it, but what you're talking about is extremely unlikely.
So the linux approach would be to use a standard method of installing and uninstalling software, so that you don't run into those issues. If you really needed to, you could get the list of installed files and pipe them to rm. From a ten second google search, that would look something like rpm -ql foo | rm
Mac OS X, I believe, will also give you a list of installed files for you to attack from the command line. OS X is equally susceptible to the issue of a broken uninstallation script, but at least you don't have to scour the net for an executable file that may or may not be infected and which may or may not fix the issue. Heck, you're assuming that the program you want even exists!
I've been using linux for about five months. It is pleasantly free from many issues that plague other operating systems, but comes with its own share of quirks and bugs. Two things have been impressed upon me by that experience. The first is that linux is fixable. It is completely open, designed with tinkering in mind, and if things go wrong, you have options: man pages, bug reports, google, and if you really need to (and have that ability---I do not!) you can write your own code to fix the issue.
However, the more I use linux, there is a feeling of despair and anguish that grows in me, and a question that gnaws at my thoughts: Why can't Microsoft make a good operating system? How is it that Vista cost six billion and failed? It's beyond my comprehension. I just hope that Windows 7 will be a relatively painless alternative to other OS's.
Uh...Regard that, I suck cocks?
In order to spread like a virus, you need to behave like a virus...do you want your computer playing irritating sounds and spamming the internet? What exactly distinguishes Conficker and a 'benign' botnet?
Indeed. But Microsoft has a long way to go to catch up to linux in boot time.
By setting up your own you're destroying the networking aspect.
A private site for friends will never have the pull of a world-wide LOOK AT MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE site.
Accurate, insightful.
If that's what you want, great, go for it. But I seriously doubt that's what Google has in mind. They want all of your data, and this is just another tool for them to get at it.
Controversial point. Trying to spread fear, whether or not it's justified. The following couple of paragraphs present some interesting speculation.
Regardless of function or intention, my comment still stands (despite being modded troll by Googs) - the layout shown is hideous and provides nothing but total information overload.
If there's anything in your post to warrant a troll mod, this is it.
You post here a lot, and you don't trouble yourself to be terribly civil. Not that that's uncommon, but I think it's a shame. Your ideas seem generally worthwhile, but your attitude probably limits their discussion. Geeks and engineers are probably more likely than most to pay attention to the factual accuracy of any statement instead of the emotional context; the opposite is the rule in other circles. If I may offer some advice: if you're going to be callous, be right, and even if you are right, don't bitch about the troll mods.
Respectfully yours,
-T
These people are hackers. Mostly that means good things.
Pushing the bounds of technology is one of the most ancient and noble occupations. Many geeks also manage to push the bounds of reason, good taste, and hygiene, but creativity in tool-using is perhaps the defining element of humanity. Certainly the drive to tinker is responsible for the majority of our progress as a species.
Slashdot is where that impulse goes to die :) Stay tuned for beowulf clusters of linux-running hot grits overlords.
Can we all agree never to use the word 'polish' when evaluating an OS, ever again?
It does not convey any information beyond a vague dissatisfaction with UI elements; It's not a useful term. It can mean anything from, "I think brown is ugly." to "The clipboard widget has obscene error messages."
At least try to distinguish between aesthetic and technical issues. "Polish" has become a catch-all term for anything that someone dislikes about linux. The worst part of this is that it's distro-specific, or specific to one desktop environment, or specific to one WM/UI. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, Enlightenment, Ubuntu Netbook Remix, and the Moblin UI are all 'linux desktops', and presumably all have varying degrees of 'polish'. All of them behave differently and look differently: the only common interface in linux is the terminal.
I think it would be extremely fair to call the terminal a very 'polished' interface, and I hope that idea will dissuade you from using the term in the future :)
I tried the Ubuntu Netbook Remix, Easy Peasy, Fedora 11 beta, Moblin 2 alpha and Moblin 2 beta on my Eee.
UNR and the Moblin 2b UI are both trying to solve the same problem, but I think Moblin does it better. It also boots in less than a fifth of the time.
Currently Moblin has a somewhat sparse set of repositories, but it's based on Fedora and the Fedora repos can be enabled. Check it out, it's neat.
No. Every place in the universe can be considered the origin point of the big bang. The universe is fundamentally four-dimensional, at least until the string theorists tell us otherwise.
How long before Google offically becomes a religion and starts defining reality/
The future is already here, it's just not very evenly distibuted.
Yes, it would be wonderful if he had presented a finger painting as print-quality art. The colors would be richer, the level of control would be greater, the image would almost certainly be more expressive, and you would have things like fingerprints incorporated in the work, bringing a wonderful depth to the picture, the canvas serving as a gateway to the artist rather than just a representation of a scene.
Instead, we have a bad digital sketch, from someone using a bad tool. Anyone who can imagine the output of an iPhone as "print-quality commercial art" knows nothing of commercial art nor of printing. As a sketch, it's far from unique: you can find thousands of them on the internet: conceptart.org has many people who work in a very similar style. This painter, in addition to choosing one of the least expressive media possible (the nintendo DS at least has pressure sensitivity) has a demonstrated lack of skill. The color palette is flat and inexpressive, the composition is uninteresting, the brushwork is no better than what could be obtained by using a Photoshop filter, and the whole piece displays an utter insensitivity to value. It is bad, boring, and unoriginal.
The only thing going for it is the shallow novelty of being produced on an iPhone. The iPhone is many things to a varying degree of quality, but as an artistic platform it is completely worthless. I did not and will not dispute the classification of Jorge Colombo's work as Art, but I will vigorously defend it as an example of bad art.
All LCDs are not created equal. If you're printing something, it matters what colors you use, and the colors you use are going to be the ones you see. So if they are not accurately represented on your screen, it's going to look bad in print.
Also, web browsers are generally terrible at displaying color, which doesn't matter because the people viewing on the web have color-inaccurate LCD screens...it's enough to make your eyes bleed.
And we're just barely scratching the surface of how bad computers and printers are at color reproduction. Compare any print of any oil painting to the original. Alternately, compare this hack finger painter to a real artist...
I don't care if the music is listened to on an mp3 player or gramophone, as long as it was mastered for vinyl and not compressed to the limits of the digital format. From mp3s, radio, and car stereos, deliver us, O lord!
You may snort in derision of this audiophile nonsense, and assert that "No one can actually hear the difference!" but I'd challenge you to a little experiment. There are LP rips of beatles albums on TPB, and probably also the Beatles One album. Find a common track and compare them.
Whether we should or should not listen to our music on vinyl as opposed to iPods is something I'll not debate, but our music would sound better if it were the former.
No, the rise of volume levels and dynamic range compression has rekindled a love for vinyl. See 'loudness war' on Wikipedia.
No. You were not paying attention.
The Bush Administration was terrifyingly effective. They conspired with other nations to start wars in two countries, created the Department of Homeland Security, did shady things with electronic voting machines, tortured people, eroded civil rights, created controversies over evolution, global warming, and stem cell research. They spied on the american public, outed covert operatives for the basest of political purposes, and created prison camps in foreign countries to hold people without trial for years. They spent trillions of dollars and killed more than a million people, including 4,300 American soldiers.
Where the fuck were you?
And in the fifties we instigated this whole mess by taking over their country.
The long-term consequences of that act are only beginning to be appreciated.
You have a vastly inflated idea of how much money NASA actually has. The space shuttle development cost ~18B, and if you want you can look up how much the shuttle OS cost, but it's not going to be close to the six billion dollars that Microsoft spent to develop Vista.
Microsoft is vastly bigger than NASA. Apple has twice as many employees. You were saying...?
Really?
Intel-compatible in this context means anything x86 compatible. Just in case you don't know, that also includes AMD
Also do note that the quote you disparage is a legal finding of fact, and was confirmed by a federal appeals court. That would be a big clue that you haven't correctly understood the quote.
Incidentally, the corresponding conclusion of law ordered Microsoft to be broken up as an illegal monopoly. Would that that had happened. Instead, Microsoft went to work...the resulting settlement was an almost pathetic slap on the wrist.
Odd phrase. Intel did some bad stuff to AMD, and they deserved that fine entirely. However, unlike Redmond, Intel makes good products, so we like them.
This is open source software. If you don't like Intel's direction, you can fork their project. However, given that they are paying some very talented people to work on this project, I'm fine with them having control over it.
You're not afraid of anything in particular; there's nothing to be afraid of. You are just bitter and harbouring a grudge against Intel and/or monopolistic companies in general. Same with whoever modded you insightful.