Yes, because we should be bitter about government not pretending to our misunderstanding of economics. And inflicting massive pain on tens of millions of people is OK. It is for a GOOD cause: decreasing the debt, which is ALWAYS BAD.
Rich economies are rich. One of the side effect of being rich is that you can pile on proportionately more debt. Which is completely fine, and in any case an infinitely better use of money than bullion in vaults.
If you are paying interests below inflation, you should pile up debt, if possible long term, as much as you can. In fact, this is a clever way to cheaply roll over older, more expensive debt.
Also, in a semi-depressed economy, any kind of spending by the government, even on inane things, will turn out to help recovery, provided enough people get to dip in. Of course if you spend on unemployment benefits and on re-training of workers, you get much more immediate returns.
More than that: according to his logic, an "investment" should only count as such it is is successful. I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine how you can possibly decide that, and when.
Ahhh, yes, Libertards, the people who believe there is no such thing as an externality, and no such thing as collective preference. Who claim markets are magic -- indeed bargaining, rigidities and information asymmetries are irrelevant -- and always get to optimal pricing instantly. Apparently, they also live in an alternative universe where "Keynesian" US is currently undergoing a triple-dip depression, whereas "austere" Europe is adding jobs and growth month-on-month.
In that alternate universe Mr. Hawley is called "Hawly", too. Presumably, it is also a magical universe where gold supplies automatically match the production of goods and services.
It's not the byte size. It's the number of objects. Also you forgot, senders. status (can be fairly complicated -- where is the data, for example), attachments. Threads. Lists.
Oh, and the full text should be indexed. We live in 2013 after all.
Basically, unless you are going to confine yourself to the performance and possibilities of pine, you have to do what the KDE guys did. And yes, it is harder and takes longer to debug.
Do you have any idea how many mails one can have? Indexed file based storage does not scale. Although to be fair, akonadi does not care what the underlying storage is, it simply acts as a cache.
A cache to access structured relational data. Lots of it.
A database.
People just _think_ databases are really heavy objects, but really, they are just faster than reading files:) I strongly suspect that if instead of saying "this is a separate app/utility" the kde pim people had just hidden the stuff inside of kontact, no-one would have complained. They would just have said "gee kmail is faster now!"
I actually works well for me and has for a while. It used to be that first-time-loading of IMAP folder was slow, but now, even very large folder load just fine on my netbook.
It's not perfect, though: replied/attachment state of emails stored on an MS exchange IMAP server gets lost. Oh, well, they are aware, and it will get fixed.
If your desktop software performance depends on cache optimisation, you are either doing heavy-duty multimedia editing, or doing something spectacularly wrong.
Also rant: cache sizes have been going down to make place for more processors. I personally do numerical calculations, and I find this trend to be a disaster. At this point, my only hope is that eventually, with thousands of cores on chips, we'll be back to something which looks like a vector processor.
And indeed, in the case of the much-maligned akonadi, of course, having a file based storage is faster, for the first hundred or so mails.
But when you accounts have tens of thousands, or hundred of thousands of mails, a database is a requirement. Either you are coding industrial-strength stuff, or you are building a toy:)
But GP is right. I would also not buy a laptop now. I refuse to buy something with less pixels than what I had 10 years ago. Fuck them. Also, If you go for super-cheap because consumers have no money, remember this: people with no money have none to spend when credit is depressed as it is now.
The netbook market might have thrived, but clearly MS and Intel deemed it too disruptive, and killed it off by forcing windows on underpowered devices and forcing small screens on atoms. Of course "small screens" in an era were "HD" is considered tolerable is laughable.
I find that there is a link between transparency and outsourcing. This is because your typical government is much, much less opaque than your average corporation. So you can see all the shit that goes on. The waste, the graft, the inneficiencies.
Now these are the same in corporations. Frequently way, way worse. But you can't see them. And the sad fact is that people don't really want efficiency, and quality and all those things. They want the image thereof. Thus, as a politician, the faster method to get to that point is to outsource to a corporation which will hide the shit away.
So you should fight for transparency -- with the explicit goal of fixing the problems you find within government. Otherwise, you are just a useful idiot helping the sell-off of critical infrastructure to for-profit entities.
You realise of course that since everyone (give or take) is simultaneously parent and child, your criticism makes no sense?
You should be a slave to future you: that way, you will exercise and invest carefully and lead a productive life. Now you wants an extra beer with that third doughnut.
And then there is the idea that this is a Ponzi scheme: if each level of the pyramid is the same size as the preceding, you have a perfectly good and stable system, not a nefarious scheme. And as the population tends to grow slowly, through children and immigration, you even get profit out of it!
I never understood what kind of person treated the government and its institution as if they were part of the last generation on Earth...
Firefox draws some widgets using GTK, but really it is XUL underneath, which they did so they could have plugins which would be cross-platform in ways which are not possible with C or C++. Also, what part of a project dating from way back is not legacy?
As for your bizarre love of G_OBJECT... I don't know how to react to that... It's a bit like a priest admitting a really nasty kink whilst preaching to a group of nuns. You want objects and inheritance and introspection ? Use a language which supports that. C is not meant to be used that way. You like GTK? use gtkmm. Also, the GNOME core team knows this. And because they have decided c++ is anathema, they keep coming up with new languages-of-the-day each sold as the standard for future GNOME apps. There was C# and mono. These days it is Vala. Of course, it'll never work, because you have to pick a language which is not yours (so Vala won't work) and which is not tainted (C# won't work). Basically, you have C, C++, and possibly Java. They picked the one not-OO language.
But yes, KDE clearly has the best tech. It's not like they survived, and in fact strived, whilst ever having the support of whatever distro was dominant at the time. So if it is not corporate backing, what is it? It is libraries and design so good that a collection of individual contributors' contributions can be harnessed into a desktop which is preferred by the majority of users. In the open source world, tech always wins in the long run.
I have to disagree on one point. I use KDE both on a very powerful desktop with huge screens and on a tiny eeepc from 3 years ago. And it is fine on both, although the work done on optimising each release is much more visible on the tiny one:)
One important thing, though, which shows the power of the plasma desktop, is that I could configure the layout both for 3800 pixels and for 800, including doing exotic stuff like forcing maximising windows and removing window decorations.
If the linux user choice awards are any indication, although KDE has not regained their 75% commanding share -- which they had despite having no major corporate backers, they have regained the majority of linux users.
They have by far the best tech. Some high profile projects use GTK, but this is nearly always for historical reasons. Any new project with some ambition is with Qt, and thus in the KDE world, because integrating with KDE when you have a Qt base is trivial. In general, GNOME has always been, and will always be this second-rate project with a very nice initial configuration which is kept alive through payroll contributions by distribution wishing to keep control of their desktop offering. In the long term, GNOME is losing, despite their having had a chance when SC 4 was released.
XFCE is a single-digit desktop, and will always be. If you went from KDE3 to XFCE, you lost a ton of functionality, coming from GNOME 2, I guess you lose much less, so that at least makes some sense. Comparing the plasma desktop to XFCE only shows you have no idea what a DE does. Really. You probably launch apps from an xterm, which is stupid for at least two reasons: one, because using the CL as an app launcher is a waste of potential (the KDE alt-F2 launcher does that and so much more; a CL replacement it is not, though) and two because xterm is a horrid terminal compared with every single other terminal there is, except perhaps the default in OSX 10.0.
The parties are different. If you think the various parties are the same, please do not go voting! Of course they are different! This whole austerity madness is the exact opposite of the policies the Brown started for example. And unlike the poor saps in the Eurozone, England gets to print money when she likes...
It is not just a matter of flavour: the Conservatives are really in power solely for the benefits of their banker friends (heck, Cameron's goal in life is to be created a Duke when he retires), and Labour truly believes in social justice (albeit with a big dose of market freedom). The Lib Dems clearly hold personal freedom slightly less dear than what one would have hoped, but one shivers when one thinking about what would have happened if the Conservatives had run completely unchecked.
Are the various parties good at achieving their aims? Who knows, we don't have a super-competent control gvt to compare with. But they sure are different.
This is not the way this works. If you are publishing "news" and want to be protected under the freedom of press -- which is distinct from the freedom of speech -- then you register as a news organisation.
If you do not want to, you are not a news organisation, and anything you say in public may be construed as slander. Your choice:
- You restrain yourself from slander (like now!)
- Or you register and you try to make sure of your sources, and you get to exercise freedom of the press!
And in any case, if you think the government doesn't know exactly who is the author of any blog with not-insignificant following, you are deluded. At least, now, it's open, and the registration is transparent.
I know the problem. However, if something demonstrably false has been said about you or your organisation, you should be able to seek redress. The people reading lies thing is truly toxic, and this should be very clear to an American for the 10th anniversary of the Iraq war.
Now you will tell me something about how this can be used to silence people, because trials are costly. This is true, but a uniquely American problem (and a national disgrace of yours).
It is surprisingly easy to bribe 50 million people. It's called advertising. Also the British press is largely dominated by News Corps, which means that direct democracy would quickly to either people learning very fast to think about their decisions, or to some fascist state.
Direct democracy can work, but it depends on the political culture. And the political culture is largely the result of the way news are written. If outrageous claims and posturing works, you get that:(
How so? you mean the MPs in Westminster had no one voting for them? Or that government should only be allowed to form if magically everyone (including crazy Dan down the street) agrees on a unique perfect solution?
The bunch of upper-class twits in power were elected by the people, largely I suspect because it had been too long and people had forgotten why you should not vote for the nasty party. But elected they were. And when asked whether the FPTP system ought to be amended (and it really, really should) the people said no!
You misunderstand the notion of the rule of law and separation of powers. Even in Switzerland, a very direct democracy, the sovereign (aka the people) is still subject to the constitution, itself subordinated to international agreements and obligations, has no executive power and the interpretation of the laws is the job of professional judges.
This is how you get democracy without a dictatorship of the majority. Interestingly, this process is most easily perverted when the media is owned by a restricted clique (I am not thinking about any Australian billionaire, here), thus the need for regulation.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, because we should be bitter about government not pretending to our misunderstanding of economics. And inflicting massive pain on tens of millions of people is OK. It is for a GOOD cause: decreasing the debt, which is ALWAYS BAD.
Rich economies are rich. One of the side effect of being rich is that you can pile on proportionately more debt. Which is completely fine, and in any case an infinitely better use of money than bullion in vaults.
If you are paying interests below inflation, you should pile up debt, if possible long term, as much as you can. In fact, this is a clever way to cheaply roll over older, more expensive debt.
Also, in a semi-depressed economy, any kind of spending by the government, even on inane things, will turn out to help recovery, provided enough people get to dip in. Of course if you spend on unemployment benefits and on re-training of workers, you get much more immediate returns.
More than that: according to his logic, an "investment" should only count as such it is is successful. I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine how you can possibly decide that, and when.
Ahhh, yes, Libertards, the people who believe there is no such thing as an externality, and no such thing as collective preference. Who claim markets are magic -- indeed bargaining, rigidities and information asymmetries are irrelevant -- and always get to optimal pricing instantly. Apparently, they also live in an alternative universe where "Keynesian" US is currently undergoing a triple-dip depression, whereas "austere" Europe is adding jobs and growth month-on-month.
In that alternate universe Mr. Hawley is called "Hawly", too. Presumably, it is also a magical universe where gold supplies automatically match the production of goods and services.
You are entitled opinions, but not facts.
'cause that is clearly a desktop-oriented application...
The point is that the file-based indexing is the wrong thing. Of course everything ends up being stored in a file.
The key is not the storage, but the indexing. And that is where DBs are vastly superior to flat files.
It's not the byte size. It's the number of objects. Also you forgot, senders. status (can be fairly complicated -- where is the data, for example), attachments. Threads. Lists.
Oh, and the full text should be indexed. We live in 2013 after all.
Basically, unless you are going to confine yourself to the performance and possibilities of pine, you have to do what the KDE guys did. And yes, it is harder and takes longer to debug.
Do you have any idea how many mails one can have? Indexed file based storage does not scale. Although to be fair, akonadi does not care what the underlying storage is, it simply acts as a cache.
A cache to access structured relational data. Lots of it.
A database.
People just _think_ databases are really heavy objects, but really, they are just faster than reading files :) I strongly suspect that if instead of saying "this is a separate app/utility" the kde pim people had just hidden the stuff inside of kontact, no-one would have complained. They would just have said "gee kmail is faster now!"
Because it is. Faster.
I actually works well for me and has for a while. It used to be that first-time-loading of IMAP folder was slow, but now, even very large folder load just fine on my netbook.
It's not perfect, though: replied/attachment state of emails stored on an MS exchange IMAP server gets lost. Oh, well, they are aware, and it will get fixed.
If your desktop software performance depends on cache optimisation, you are either doing heavy-duty multimedia editing, or doing something spectacularly wrong.
Also rant: cache sizes have been going down to make place for more processors. I personally do numerical calculations, and I find this trend to be a disaster. At this point, my only hope is that eventually, with thousands of cores on chips, we'll be back to something which looks like a vector processor.
And indeed, in the case of the much-maligned akonadi, of course, having a file based storage is faster, for the first hundred or so mails.
But when you accounts have tens of thousands, or hundred of thousands of mails, a database is a requirement. Either you are coding industrial-strength stuff, or you are building a toy :)
But GP is right. I would also not buy a laptop now. I refuse to buy something with less pixels than what I had 10 years ago. Fuck them. Also, If you go for super-cheap because consumers have no money, remember this: people with no money have none to spend when credit is depressed as it is now.
The netbook market might have thrived, but clearly MS and Intel deemed it too disruptive, and killed it off by forcing windows on underpowered devices and forcing small screens on atoms. Of course "small screens" in an era were "HD" is considered tolerable is laughable.
I find that there is a link between transparency and outsourcing. This is because your typical government is much, much less opaque than your average corporation. So you can see all the shit that goes on. The waste, the graft, the inneficiencies.
Now these are the same in corporations. Frequently way, way worse. But you can't see them. And the sad fact is that people don't really want efficiency, and quality and all those things. They want the image thereof. Thus, as a politician, the faster method to get to that point is to outsource to a corporation which will hide the shit away.
So you should fight for transparency -- with the explicit goal of fixing the problems you find within government. Otherwise, you are just a useful idiot helping the sell-off of critical infrastructure to for-profit entities.
You realise of course that since everyone (give or take) is simultaneously parent and child, your criticism makes no sense?
You should be a slave to future you: that way, you will exercise and invest carefully and lead a productive life. Now you wants an extra beer with that third doughnut.
And then there is the idea that this is a Ponzi scheme: if each level of the pyramid is the same size as the preceding, you have a perfectly good and stable system, not a nefarious scheme. And as the population tends to grow slowly, through children and immigration, you even get profit out of it!
I never understood what kind of person treated the government and its institution as if they were part of the last generation on Earth...
Then use Kmail and behold the power of akonadi and nepomuk. searching in the later versions is fast -- and I have a very large number of mails.
It turns out that for large enough collections you _do_ need a DB :)
Firefox draws some widgets using GTK, but really it is XUL underneath, which they did so they could have plugins which would be cross-platform in ways which are not possible with C or C++. Also, what part of a project dating from way back is not legacy?
As for your bizarre love of G_OBJECT... I don't know how to react to that... It's a bit like a priest admitting a really nasty kink whilst preaching to a group of nuns. You want objects and inheritance and introspection ? Use a language which supports that. C is not meant to be used that way. You like GTK? use gtkmm. Also, the GNOME core team knows this. And because they have decided c++ is anathema, they keep coming up with new languages-of-the-day each sold as the standard for future GNOME apps. There was C# and mono. These days it is Vala. Of course, it'll never work, because you have to pick a language which is not yours (so Vala won't work) and which is not tainted (C# won't work). Basically, you have C, C++, and possibly Java. They picked the one not-OO language.
But yes, KDE clearly has the best tech. It's not like they survived, and in fact strived, whilst ever having the support of whatever distro was dominant at the time. So if it is not corporate backing, what is it? It is libraries and design so good that a collection of individual contributors' contributions can be harnessed into a desktop which is preferred by the majority of users. In the open source world, tech always wins in the long run.
I have to disagree on one point. I use KDE both on a very powerful desktop with huge screens and on a tiny eeepc from 3 years ago. And it is fine on both, although the work done on optimising each release is much more visible on the tiny one :)
One important thing, though, which shows the power of the plasma desktop, is that I could configure the layout both for 3800 pixels and for 800, including doing exotic stuff like forcing maximising windows and removing window decorations.
If the linux user choice awards are any indication, although KDE has not regained their 75% commanding share -- which they had despite having no major corporate backers, they have regained the majority of linux users.
They have by far the best tech. Some high profile projects use GTK, but this is nearly always for historical reasons. Any new project with some ambition is with Qt, and thus in the KDE world, because integrating with KDE when you have a Qt base is trivial. In general, GNOME has always been, and will always be this second-rate project with a very nice initial configuration which is kept alive through payroll contributions by distribution wishing to keep control of their desktop offering. In the long term, GNOME is losing, despite their having had a chance when SC 4 was released.
XFCE is a single-digit desktop, and will always be. If you went from KDE3 to XFCE, you lost a ton of functionality, coming from GNOME 2, I guess you lose much less, so that at least makes some sense. Comparing the plasma desktop to XFCE only shows you have no idea what a DE does. Really. You probably launch apps from an xterm, which is stupid for at least two reasons: one, because using the CL as an app launcher is a waste of potential (the KDE alt-F2 launcher does that and so much more; a CL replacement it is not, though) and two because xterm is a horrid terminal compared with every single other terminal there is, except perhaps the default in OSX 10.0.
The parties are different. If you think the various parties are the same, please do not go voting! Of course they are different! This whole austerity madness is the exact opposite of the policies the Brown started for example. And unlike the poor saps in the Eurozone, England gets to print money when she likes...
It is not just a matter of flavour: the Conservatives are really in power solely for the benefits of their banker friends (heck, Cameron's goal in life is to be created a Duke when he retires), and Labour truly believes in social justice (albeit with a big dose of market freedom). The Lib Dems clearly hold personal freedom slightly less dear than what one would have hoped, but one shivers when one thinking about what would have happened if the Conservatives had run completely unchecked.
Are the various parties good at achieving their aims? Who knows, we don't have a super-competent control gvt to compare with. But they sure are different.
This is not the way this works. If you are publishing "news" and want to be protected under the freedom of press -- which is distinct from the freedom of speech -- then you register as a news organisation.
If you do not want to, you are not a news organisation, and anything you say in public may be construed as slander. Your choice:
- You restrain yourself from slander (like now!)
- Or you register and you try to make sure of your sources, and you get to exercise freedom of the press!
And in any case, if you think the government doesn't know exactly who is the author of any blog with not-insignificant following, you are deluded. At least, now, it's open, and the registration is transparent.
I know the problem. However, if something demonstrably false has been said about you or your organisation, you should be able to seek redress. The people reading lies thing is truly toxic, and this should be very clear to an American for the 10th anniversary of the Iraq war.
Now you will tell me something about how this can be used to silence people, because trials are costly. This is true, but a uniquely American problem (and a national disgrace of yours).
It is surprisingly easy to bribe 50 million people. It's called advertising. Also the British press is largely dominated by News Corps, which means that direct democracy would quickly to either people learning very fast to think about their decisions, or to some fascist state.
Direct democracy can work, but it depends on the political culture. And the political culture is largely the result of the way news are written. If outrageous claims and posturing works, you get that :(
How so? you mean the MPs in Westminster had no one voting for them? Or that government should only be allowed to form if magically everyone (including crazy Dan down the street) agrees on a unique perfect solution?
The bunch of upper-class twits in power were elected by the people, largely I suspect because it had been too long and people had forgotten why you should not vote for the nasty party. But elected they were. And when asked whether the FPTP system ought to be amended (and it really, really should) the people said no!
Because the debate was long and vigorous? What is it, the government must shut down when you go to sleep?
You misunderstand the notion of the rule of law and separation of powers. Even in Switzerland, a very direct democracy, the sovereign (aka the people) is still subject to the constitution, itself subordinated to international agreements and obligations, has no executive power and the interpretation of the laws is the job of professional judges.
This is how you get democracy without a dictatorship of the majority. Interestingly, this process is most easily perverted when the media is owned by a restricted clique (I am not thinking about any Australian billionaire, here), thus the need for regulation.
Checks and balances FTW!