Ah, but screen lets you reattach to what you left running and isn't limited to batch scripts.
For instance, I once had to run a modified "finch" to act as a gateway between a demo and an IM network and I found it very useful to not be obliged to keep a terminal window opened AND be able to check it from anywhere, anytime, through an SSH connection.
"(...) meaning if less than 1% of the voters in certain states had changed their mind to the other candidate the outcome of the election would have been different."
...or:
(...) meaning if less than 1% of the voters in certain states had their ballots changed to the other candidate the outcome of the election would have been different.
(Translation from Bullian to English:) "Actually, I don't think he was saying that using Monty Python references is bad. Just the neverending continuation of the joke."
Nevertheless, I laughed at the sequence, but thank you for your suggestion anyway. I'm sure that we'll all think about it.
I just happened to read all the references (surprise!) and there are updates on the blog post from the author explaining how his theory doesn't hold. Could be nice to mention it on/.'s article.
...except that it's *not* over. That was a pre-print and it's still evolving. Check the latest comments on Noncommutative Geometry's blog, which is the last URL in the original post.
I used to do that kind of stuff as a kid, but I wouldn't have grown up if my mom didn't give me a heck of a lecture on how I was like a criminal for doing that and how she was ashamed of me and herself.
I hope you took the time to do the same with yours.
Looks like nobody's really seeing his point, maybe because of a misinterpretation of "human problem".
From my understanding, he's not advocating that physical human problems can't be solved by technology. He's saying that behavioral problems should be solved by the person itself, not by watchdogs.
In other words, help in solving the behavioral problem is welcome, if you can find it. But workarounds aren't because they worsen the said problem.
...or you can put RFID tags in every possible movable object and never have to worry about being organized:) Next step: teleport desired object from pile of junk.
Not true. It suffice to let the late ones board last. They're the exception, not the rule. It's still incredibly (and obviously, at least to me) faster to order everyone from tail to head. It takes an eternity when everyone has to wait for the first rows to store their carry-ons before being able to move ahead.
Traveling together? No sweat. Earlier ones go with later ones and everyone's happy.
I've been to a flight from Aeromexico where they did just that (tail to head sorting). Worked like a charm. An attendant asked everyone to line themselves and helped them find their right place in the line.
Can't understand why most airlines make everyone suffer a chaotic line like they do.
What worries me the most is that the "God is behind it" argument can be used to explain anything, while it doesn't really help us live our lives.
Instead of trying to prove or disprove God, people should concentrate on trying to understand what we have around us so that we can better interact with it, and that's what I think Science tries to.
By contrast, Intelligent Design, Creationism and such just concentrate on disproving what Science comes up with so to prove that "God is behind it".
If there was ever a God, He certainly should expect us to walk on our own feet someday instead of keeping asking for His Holy help.
This NCSE session sounds like a good step onto that direction as an enlightenment of how life is supposed to work when exposed to environmental challenges.
I also find the proposed argument completely out of focus. The perception of "free" as having no value has nothing to do with it.
It's all about compatibility, how easy it is to share your work with others and (mis)information.
People don't want to worry about "save as"/"export" to be able to have his document compatible with his pal's MS Word. They also won't hear about not being able to use a "plug and play" webcam because its CD won't install on non-Windows PCs. Support on non-Windows PCs? Go ask Videotron or Bell Canada about it and see what you'll get.
And then there's the aggressive marketing done by MS. My brother was watching me use Firefox and said something in the lines of "interesting how Microsoft innovates and everyone runs after it, copying it. Just like web browsers."... He has zero clue about how it happens for real, because his first contacts are always with MS products. Because they are shipped with new computers. Because all his office is run on MS software.
It's not easy to compete with a profitable company when your motivation is not earning money and without clear compromises. For that matter, I think that Mozilla makes miracles with Firefox, but its add-ons will have to be more easily accessible from the main product to turn it into an irresistible hit.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, but screen lets you reattach to what you left running and isn't limited to batch scripts.
For instance, I once had to run a modified "finch" to act as a gateway between a demo and an IM network and I found it very useful to not be obliged to keep a terminal window opened AND be able to check it from anywhere, anytime, through an SSH connection.
"(...) meaning if less than 1% of the voters in certain states had changed their mind to the other candidate the outcome of the election would have been different."
(...) meaning if less than 1% of the voters in certain states had their ballots changed to the other candidate the outcome of the election would have been different.
Someone please rate the above post as a 5?
(Translation from Bullian to English:)
"Actually, I don't think he was saying that using Monty Python references is bad. Just the neverending continuation of the joke."
Nevertheless, I laughed at the sequence, but thank you for your suggestion anyway. I'm sure that we'll all think about it.
I just happened to read all the references (surprise!) and there are updates on the blog post from the author explaining how his theory doesn't hold. Could be nice to mention it on /.'s article.
...except that it's *not* over. That was a pre-print and it's still evolving. Check the latest comments on Noncommutative Geometry's blog, which is the last URL in the original post.
I used to do that kind of stuff as a kid, but I wouldn't have grown up if my mom didn't give me a heck of a lecture on how I was like a criminal for doing that and how she was ashamed of me and herself.
I hope you took the time to do the same with yours.
Looks like nobody's really seeing his point, maybe because of a misinterpretation of "human problem".
From my understanding, he's not advocating that physical human problems can't be solved by technology. He's saying that behavioral problems should be solved by the person itself, not by watchdogs.
In other words, help in solving the behavioral problem is welcome, if you can find it. But workarounds aren't because they worsen the said problem.
...or you can put RFID tags in every possible movable object and never have to worry about being organized :) Next step: teleport desired object from pile of junk.
Thank you, really, for shedding light on that "detail". I was caught in the GPL -> OSS leap and didn't have the slightest suspicion of that.
Not true. It suffice to let the late ones board last. They're the exception, not the rule. It's still incredibly (and obviously, at least to me) faster to order everyone from tail to head. It takes an eternity when everyone has to wait for the first rows to store their carry-ons before being able to move ahead.
Traveling together? No sweat. Earlier ones go with later ones and everyone's happy.
I've been to a flight from Aeromexico where they did just that (tail to head sorting). Worked like a charm. An attendant asked everyone to line themselves and helped them find their right place in the line.
Can't understand why most airlines make everyone suffer a chaotic line like they do.
I suppose that your post getting a +5 Insightful and posts like those you mentioned getting -1 is just to prove you wrong.
/.'s moderation than any yadda-yadda from Ballmer. But hey, I'm a /. reader. But hey, you too!
I have more faith in
What worries me the most is that the "God is behind it" argument can be used to explain anything, while it doesn't really help us live our lives.
Instead of trying to prove or disprove God, people should concentrate on trying to understand what we have around us so that we can better interact with it, and that's what I think Science tries to.
By contrast, Intelligent Design, Creationism and such just concentrate on disproving what Science comes up with so to prove that "God is behind it".
If there was ever a God, He certainly should expect us to walk on our own feet someday instead of keeping asking for His Holy help.
This NCSE session sounds like a good step onto that direction as an enlightenment of how life is supposed to work when exposed to environmental challenges.
I also find the proposed argument completely out of focus. The perception of "free" as having no value has nothing to do with it. It's all about compatibility, how easy it is to share your work with others and (mis)information. People don't want to worry about "save as"/"export" to be able to have his document compatible with his pal's MS Word. They also won't hear about not being able to use a "plug and play" webcam because its CD won't install on non-Windows PCs. Support on non-Windows PCs? Go ask Videotron or Bell Canada about it and see what you'll get. And then there's the aggressive marketing done by MS. My brother was watching me use Firefox and said something in the lines of "interesting how Microsoft innovates and everyone runs after it, copying it. Just like web browsers."... He has zero clue about how it happens for real, because his first contacts are always with MS products. Because they are shipped with new computers. Because all his office is run on MS software. It's not easy to compete with a profitable company when your motivation is not earning money and without clear compromises. For that matter, I think that Mozilla makes miracles with Firefox, but its add-ons will have to be more easily accessible from the main product to turn it into an irresistible hit.