Why would anyone even care who looks smart? It might win you a debate, but you're still ignorant and wrong. macromorgan's point is that there is no need to even discuss with the other side, because discussion does not lead to scientific evidence. They are free to prove their theories on their own with facts, but they cannot.
If you're going to correct people on basic economics, consider that the swag they get greatly exceeds the cost of the conference. It literally costs nothing. Now if you want to include hotel, airfare, that's another story, but it doesn't apply to every attendee.
What magic? Is this year 1? You look at the ID, and then you check if it matches what is written on the ticket. People can be fucking stupid sometimes...
Yeah, it'll be just like network routers and switch that always bring down the whole network with them! If only there was some way to prevent single points of failure...
Of course there needs to be a difference between technical documentation and user documentation. Both work well as wikis (FAQs being a sneaky form of wikis)
Well I'm sorry if you live like this, but I don't and I have a sane definition of 'the real world', where your girlfriend won't be an expert shell user just because she spent her time playing WoW in the basement.
Physical CDs are completely unrelated to this you moron, we're talking about mounting an ISO via command-line versus GUI. Medievalist brought up the fact that Linux can automount physical CD drives which had nothing to do with the discussion, something you appear to be unable to grasp as well as you drool all over the keyboard in rage to call me a dipshit.
You're insulting someone who does the same thing as you, idiot. If I were flipping burgers I wouldn't be arguing about usability on Slashdot. Go back to preschool.
To me, learning the shell is useful because I spend a lot of time on my computer. For my roommates, learning the shell is a skill that they'll have to actively maintain just so that the one time they try and do something esoteric, it takes them 10 seconds less to do it. A complete waste of time.
Okay, I'm going to admit I didn't read your entire post because we seem to agree. Unless you have incredible typing speeds or that for some reason you aren't starting with the.iso right in front of you (99% of normal users will start this way, either after a web browser download or a copy operation from a friend), double-click or right-click -> mount will be faster than terminal shenanigans.
This, irrelevant of how fast some other operations can be when using command-line, is the point I maintain.
So your Linux box automatically mounts any ISO on your hard drive, and if you cd to an.iso file, it changes directory to it as if it was mounted? Because we aren't talking about mounting CDs or DVDs here, Windows has been doing that for a lot of years already.
But learning English is actually useful to most people, while learning shell is fucking useless. When you drive in to your garage, the mechanic doesn't laugh at you for not knowing how to undertake complex maintenance repair on your vehicle, he understands that you're paying for his services because you simply do not give a shit about learning something that is only useful to you about once a year.
You're right, but we're not talking about an article titled "Windows 8 Features With Linux Antecedents for techies". Otherwise they would've brought up TeraCopy when talking about the copy dialog.:)
The right-click option is going to be slower, don't kid yourself. Unless you're in the same directory as the iso you're trying to mount and you have a very, very quick typing speed, right-clicking and pressing mount should take just about a second. Compare this with opening a terminal (no one ever has a terminal open except power users), typing the command, adding the flag, then typing two successive paths and there's just no contest. Even if you already have the terminal open, I think you're the one with the crippling injury if you right-click THAT slow (keep in mind that generally you'll be doing this with an ISO you just browsed to. We're not comparing clicking through file hiearchies to typing cd here).
So you're agreeing with me then? That is, don't pretend just because the CLI option exists and that you know it by heart from years of experience that the average user is going to prefer using it over a double-click.
The remote thing doesn't even matter to this discussion, it's not like millions of Windows 8 users are going to ssh into their remote hosts... but yes if you really care, that's one use of the CLI out of many.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm confused. How does the shit go from the bag to the 'shitbirds' of The Wire in this process?
People in general could stand to be more like Spock when it comes to debates.
They threw me out of the debate club after I started strangling people and defending my actions by claiming I was emotionally compromised.
Good job on the completely irrelevant point. I guess that's how you do nowadays when you have no clue what you want to say.
Why would anyone even care who looks smart? It might win you a debate, but you're still ignorant and wrong. macromorgan's point is that there is no need to even discuss with the other side, because discussion does not lead to scientific evidence. They are free to prove their theories on their own with facts, but they cannot.
If you're going to correct people on basic economics, consider that the swag they get greatly exceeds the cost of the conference. It literally costs nothing. Now if you want to include hotel, airfare, that's another story, but it doesn't apply to every attendee.
What magic? Is this year 1? You look at the ID, and then you check if it matches what is written on the ticket. People can be fucking stupid sometimes...
Yep, I'm not sure why you quoted me rather than the OP but I don't understand why he doesn't get this.
Yeah, it'll be just like network routers and switch that always bring down the whole network with them! If only there was some way to prevent single points of failure...
Of course there needs to be a difference between technical documentation and user documentation. Both work well as wikis (FAQs being a sneaky form of wikis)
They must have lots, lots of fibre.
Well I'm sorry if you live like this, but I don't and I have a sane definition of 'the real world', where your girlfriend won't be an expert shell user just because she spent her time playing WoW in the basement.
I meant the trolling... but you probably knew that.
Too obvious..
Physical CDs are completely unrelated to this you moron, we're talking about mounting an ISO via command-line versus GUI. Medievalist brought up the fact that Linux can automount physical CD drives which had nothing to do with the discussion, something you appear to be unable to grasp as well as you drool all over the keyboard in rage to call me a dipshit.
You're insulting someone who does the same thing as you, idiot. If I were flipping burgers I wouldn't be arguing about usability on Slashdot. Go back to preschool.
I don't know, why would you?
Why are you even talking about physical CDs? You're right, this is definitely way too complicated for you.
To me, learning the shell is useful because I spend a lot of time on my computer. For my roommates, learning the shell is a skill that they'll have to actively maintain just so that the one time they try and do something esoteric, it takes them 10 seconds less to do it. A complete waste of time.
Okay, I'm going to admit I didn't read your entire post because we seem to agree. Unless you have incredible typing speeds or that for some reason you aren't starting with the .iso right in front of you (99% of normal users will start this way, either after a web browser download or a copy operation from a friend), double-click or right-click -> mount will be faster than terminal shenanigans.
This, irrelevant of how fast some other operations can be when using command-line, is the point I maintain.
So your Linux box automatically mounts any ISO on your hard drive, and if you cd to an .iso file, it changes directory to it as if it was mounted? Because we aren't talking about mounting CDs or DVDs here, Windows has been doing that for a lot of years already.
But learning English is actually useful to most people, while learning shell is fucking useless. When you drive in to your garage, the mechanic doesn't laugh at you for not knowing how to undertake complex maintenance repair on your vehicle, he understands that you're paying for his services because you simply do not give a shit about learning something that is only useful to you about once a year.
You're right, but we're not talking about an article titled "Windows 8 Features With Linux Antecedents for techies". Otherwise they would've brought up TeraCopy when talking about the copy dialog. :)
No why, did she do it to you? I'm so, so sorry.
The right-click option is going to be slower, don't kid yourself. Unless you're in the same directory as the iso you're trying to mount and you have a very, very quick typing speed, right-clicking and pressing mount should take just about a second. Compare this with opening a terminal (no one ever has a terminal open except power users), typing the command, adding the flag, then typing two successive paths and there's just no contest. Even if you already have the terminal open, I think you're the one with the crippling injury if you right-click THAT slow (keep in mind that generally you'll be doing this with an ISO you just browsed to. We're not comparing clicking through file hiearchies to typing cd here).
So you're agreeing with me then? That is, don't pretend just because the CLI option exists and that you know it by heart from years of experience that the average user is going to prefer using it over a double-click.
The remote thing doesn't even matter to this discussion, it's not like millions of Windows 8 users are going to ssh into their remote hosts... but yes if you really care, that's one use of the CLI out of many.