It grows on you, really. It actually works well: usually, recently used and favourites are all you use, and the rest is fine to go look for apps at random.
Because if you know vaguely what you are looking for, the search will help you much more.
Of course there is alt-F2 which is much more powerful than the KDE3 version ever was:)
Re:Caizen is actually spelt with a K
on
KDE 4.3 Released
·
· Score: 1
About your sig: Yes, it says that the other nations of the world will actually rewrite/update their constitutions to get it right instead of appending "amendments".
Those are called "revisions".
It says a lot about your world view that you think a) everyone should know what those amendments are about and b) that you consider it a good thing that freedom of speech was added as an afterthought.
Re:Per-desktop activities assignments
on
KDE 4.3 Released
·
· Score: 1
It works like that: you used to have a single desktop. And then it became apparent apps can be grouped by sets of activities, for example, email-messaging a set of konsoles for admin, ide + browser for dev and so on.
But in many case, especially with a large screen, you might want a wholly different desktop, perhaps displaying a different directory (even remote in the case of KDE4 -- how cool is that?) Perhaps in your "comm" desktop you want many clocks bacause you communicate with people around the world, which are useless on the other desktops.
And so for notes, and so on.
So it is the level beyond the desktop. And it is a good idea in practise.
Re:I'm unmoved (Re:making progress)
on
KDE 4.3 Released
·
· Score: 1
There is no reason to follow the settings of a different environment. The various apps should follow the old settings, depending on whether your distro kept the same config directory or not.
KDE3 security bugs are still accepted and fixed. Feature requests no. especially not if the feature exist in KDE4 -- can't have your cake and eat it, too.
Also, there will be no KDE5 until quite a few years. from which one must conclude from your configuration comment you are amazingly incompetent and should not be allowed near a computer.
Uhhh, see, he is Alan Cox. He is the one doing intel a favour. So basically, yeah, they can terminate him. It'll be bad for them (can't retain great engineers) and he'll be employed again within the week.
This "do what you're told, or else" only applies to the mediocre employees. You depend too much on the really good ones -- and if you can't realise that, you'll go bust.
Of course Brussels is virtually french-speaking (80%) and richer than both. If the country broke up, it would join the Walloons (if you let people choose, that is). But Flemish don't like to be reminded of that.
As someone living in Switzerland, where everything is in three languages (yes, all the food items you buy in the supermarket are multiply-labelled, and administration is possible in all languages), I have no sympathy for people trying to force other people to speak another language when they already speak a language of the country the live in.
Having more than one language is a good thing. Embrace the other language, support multiple language labels. Support administration in multiple language, and people, feeling more relaxed, will maybe learn Dutch. But forced? You'll get nowhere.
And Flemish "territorial integrity" ?! Who the _fuck_ are you to decide where your fellow countrymen can reside?
This explains why we just had a raft of news about how KDE innovates too much... In fact, FOSS can innovate much more than proprietary software because there is no incentive other than to provide a functionality the dev desires.
Because there is no real cost associated to changing things (except getting insulted by change-adverse users) it does happen, and can be dramatic. If, in the proprietary world, you depend on having users to stay financially aloft, you better be sure that your changes will get you more users than what you lost by alienating your existing user base!
Of course, if you are microsoft, you don't care, you can force your users to by your crap anyway:). And I suppose that if you are Apple, the SJDF will save you.
The thing is, there is consensus. The debate is essentially purely fabricated, because for the sake of "balance" the press feels it is necessary to present counter-opinions.
Scientists do prove their discoveries. Simply, it has become very difficult for the vast majority of the public to be able to decide for themselves. Because understanding requires vast amounts of knowledge, understanding of fairly deep mathematics, and the availability of a big supercomputer. And a lab, and funding for a vast array of independent measures.
The saying about magic and advanced technology? We have gone beyond that a long time ago. "technology" is now essentially a synonym for "process by which are achieved amazing feats" -- magic. We all accept the marvels of our mobile phones, computers, satnavs, nuclear medicine -- we do not wonder how it all works. Some of us do, some of us even actually understand at least the basic concepts. The specialists know, of course.
But if I had to restart civilisation, basically, I would have it back to the 18th century, with a head start on the more advanced concepts. Because everything is so amazingly complex.
And so it goes with climate science. It is so complex only the actual researchers know with some certainty how correct it is. And although we can delude ourselves by thinking we ought to be sceptical -- and we should -- the fact is we cannot know individually without 4-10 years of actual study.
Provided you have a good scientific background, and the ability. So although it sounds like religion, you should just believe the consensus. It is not religion because you should know and be aware this consensus is built on the current state of knowledge and will evolve. No definitive truth here. Just the best bet -- which essentially means the only bet you should take, unless you insist on being irrational.
Wonderful. Now climate change is communism. See, I am a scientist. An actual one. My field, however is in no way related to climatology. I have, however a good idea on how consensus is formed, how it might be right or wrong.
I also know how jerks knowing nothing can invent an infinite stream of objections to anything they don't like (yet know nothing about) and demand careful debunking of each. And will whine if their demands are not met.
This has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with the fact that ignorance is not a valid opinion. If you don't know and aren't qualified, you should believe the consensus. Because as far as you can tell it is the best current bet.
Because the alternative is that all mainstream scientists in the field are lying. Possible, yes, but silly.
Be ready for the consensus to change however -- it is not a fixed thing -- but change is rarely dramatic. Only once in a century do we have deeply unsettling changes in consensus (think quantum mechanics). But the observations, they do not change...
Oh, and I love your Luddite "you'll never know". But then, seeing your wonderful grasp of the process of science, this is unsurprising.
From your comment, I can tell you are not a scientist.
Of course, there is a consensus. On most things, even. It is the "shoulders of giants" Newton was talking about. There are disagreement on points, some of which might not be trivial.
But there is mostly consensus: otherwise, one would create theories fully formed, complete, ab nihilo -- which doesn't happen.
For climate change, there is a consensus. Deal with it. The consensus might be wrong, sure, but unless you are a climatologist, as far as you know, it is the (accepted) truth. If your opinion differs, and yet you are in no way qualified to form an opinion on this highly technical subject, what does that make you?
Not a heretic, nor a resistant, nor illuminated by some higher truth. Just a jerk with no clue.
So basically, the old version needs fixing, but the new ones too.
So you cannot use either the old or the new. So what is it you are complaining about? That you find a program which you considered broken to be still broken?
Re:Promising? Yes. Usable? not really
on
KDE 4.2.4 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
1. Works for me. Something broken in your setup. did you report the bug? 2. same. 3. Could not try -- but might be linked... 4. same as 1-2 5. Yeah, people complain a lot about the NM applet. this thing is obviously not finished. 6. Really? Always found it to work fine. You are aware there are 2 clipboards?
If it worked in KDE3, it must work in KDE4. It must either be obvious how to do this, or it must be in a FAQ somewhere.
This is idiotic: it is different code. Eventually, if a given feature is needed, it'll be "back", in the sense that it will have been added again, with the experience and knowledge of the previous system.
better than 3.5 in some aspects, and worse in others.
Like having no bluetooth. The ways in which it was better are irrelevant when you're missing basic functionality like my fucking mouse.
See, this has nothing to do with KDE. This is a low(er)-level hardware issue, and if you expect your DE to tackle it, I sure hope you are not architecturing software. Desktop integration is all fine and good for, say bluetooth phones, but your mouse should Just Workâ and no GUI should be required.
4.2 was pretty much on par, with some things much better, and some missing pieces
Missing pieces like WPA support.
The things that are much better are, honestly, things I can live without. They're cool, they make me more productive, but I can live without them.
I cannot live without such obscure things as working wireless.
The things that keep getting dropped on the floor are not obscure, they are major pieces of functionality that you could not sell a computer, regardless of OS, without some support for.
Uhh, sorry, but that is a distro issue. Nothing prevents you from launching any of the other NM frontends which work... Don't blame KDE for shoddy integration on the distro's part.
4.3 is basically better than 3.5 in almost all respects.
It damn well better be.
Because frankly, this is like XP vs Vista. When Vista was in beta testing, the apologists said, "It's a beta! Expect it to be broken!" When it was released, they said, "Everyone knows you don't buy MS software until SP1!" Well, Vista SP2 is out, and many people seem convinced it's on par with XP in most ways.
The fact that KDE4 is behind Vista is just really fucking sad, and I want to like KDE.
Giant disclaimer: I run Kubuntu, which is widely acknowledged by the KDE people as being the worst KDE-based distro ever. It's served me well in the 3.x line, but for some reason, the 4.x releases have just pulled random experimental nightly builds, incorporated them into the release...
I mean, the bluetooth issue was known about, and they put it as a "known issue", and went ahead and released, and didn't fix it for at least, oh, two months. WTF?
To anyone who hasn't tried KDE4: Don't. Wait for 4.3, maybe it'll be ready then. Or use a distro other than Ubuntu, but expect large things to break.
Kubuntu was always broken, not due to lack of dedication, but from lack of manpower. On the other hand, they have gone out of their way to actually break KDE at times... It just happens that the previous kind of brokenness did not affect you and the new does.
Much of your comment basically boils down to "my distro did not do the basic minimum amount of QA one would expect from even free software hobbyists. I blame the upstream"
You have cognitive dissonance, and I cannot help you with that.
As for KDE being behind Vista, you are right. If the race is towards higher levels of suckiness. But KDE4 is not broken. It is in fact nicer to use than KDE3, and smoother, and more beautiful, and more powerful. Free software, fortunately or unfortunately is more used, by people who think that it is some product in finished form. It is not. It is a process, and at some point along the way, a given project reaches a stage where it is also as good as a finished product. But to reach that stage, it must be tested, and that means pain for the early adopters, but also the satisfaction of participating in the creation of the tools you use.
See, "ready for users" is undefined. For me, KDE trunk is ready for me, and Vista is not.
For many people it is the reverse.
For me OSX is not ready: the dev tools it bundles are basically a joke, and the WM sucks. But many people find it the ultimate user experience.
4.0 was not a user release, but 4.1 was. Imperfect, yes, but better than 3.5 in some aspects, and worse in others. 4.2 was pretty much on par, with some things much better, and some missing pieces -- which you might miss and I don't, or the reverse.
4.3 is basically better than 3.5 in almost all respects. Surely a couple things are missing that I have not noticed. And no doubts there will be trolls arguing that "OMG I cannot independently configure the transparency gradient of all plasma widgets! This is a deal breaker for me, I go back to gnome" -- incidentally, you can, but you need to draw you own theme;)
And the apps are almost all there, I am still missing the tellico port, but it is advancing fast.
Actually, there is a very good reason to support The Pirate Bay. It hurts the *AA.
And we need to get those reduced to oblivion so copyright can once again be a reasonable tradeof between the authors and the consumers.
Because when laws get passed on behalf of single companies (Disney, I'm looking at you), then there is something deeply rotten. And bankruptcy of those media companies would be a good thing. So anything along that path is a good idea.
There is also this thing that laws which are stupid or inapplicable need to be exposed. In the hope that those who passed them get voted out of office (yeah, I'm an optimist).
Unfortunately, TPB also helps pirate software, which in turn helps the likes of Microsoft, because of the network effect. So nothing is perfect, I guess.
No more, no less. In fact more, because there are now bug-triageing projects.
But they now also have cool technology to show-off. So they do.
Technically, they had that before, but it used to be that when GNOME issued press-releases for getting more or less the features KDE had years before AND getting all the good press. So now KDE announces its features.
So people notice that they are the most advanced environment...
The council is made up of the ministers of the various governments of Europe. Which are democratic.
Then there is the commission, which is vetted by the EP, and selected by the national governments. (see point 1) You don't vote for ministers, usually.
Actually, the EU structure is more democratic than say, that of the UK! If the national government were held to the standards of the EU, the world would be more democratic indeed.
It is a myth that there is an overflow. The volume of waste is in fact very small: the stuff is really dense.
But solar panels are nasty. I mean really toxic-nasty. You do not want highly dispersed, decentralised energy production based on toxic chemistry. At least, nuclear powerplants are small and localised.
Wind, were it not so fickle would be a nice solution. Though I sometimes wonder haw much we humans could disrupt the flow of the prevailing winds around the planet.
You really want nuclear powerplants. And you also want fast breeders so the "waste" is not waste but extra energy.
And yes, better energy usage. But although you can encourage society evolution, sometimes even attempt to mandate change, you should first try to find solutions not requiring humans to spontaneously behave the "right way". Because it is better to bet on good engineering and sloth, than a sudden increase in human intelligence and awareness.
The problem _is_ the distribution. Actually, under SuSE, there is the reverse problem: only the application function/type is displayed and the name appears on hover.
For those of us long-time linux users, this is a tad annoying... But then, changing the behaviour is two clicks away:)
You are a happy KDE 3.5.10 user. Presumably, you prefer it to GNOME.
KDE releases 4.0. You do not like it. So you switch to GNOME instead of your preferred KDE 3.5.
This makes no sense. Unless of course you have assumed that upon the release of KDE 4, the devs sacrificed many chickens and magically erased all previous versions in hard drives throughout the world. And you acted on that belief.
See, the problem might not lie with the KDE devs...
Slashdot Mirror
It grows on you, really. It actually works well: usually, recently used and favourites are all you use, and the rest is fine to go look for apps at random.
Because if you know vaguely what you are looking for, the search will help you much more.
Of course there is alt-F2 which is much more powerful than the KDE3 version ever was :)
About your sig: Yes, it says that the other nations of the world will actually rewrite/update their constitutions to get it right instead of appending "amendments".
Those are called "revisions".
It says a lot about your world view that you think a) everyone should know what those amendments are about and b) that you consider it a good thing that freedom of speech was added as an afterthought.
It works like that: you used to have a single desktop. And then it became apparent apps can be grouped by sets of activities, for example, email-messaging a set of konsoles for admin, ide + browser for dev and so on.
But in many case, especially with a large screen, you might want a wholly different desktop, perhaps displaying a different directory (even remote in the case of KDE4 -- how cool is that?) Perhaps in your "comm" desktop you want many clocks bacause you communicate with people around the world, which are useless on the other desktops.
And so for notes, and so on.
So it is the level beyond the desktop. And it is a good idea in practise.
There is no reason to follow the settings of a different environment. The various apps should follow the old settings, depending on whether your distro kept the same config directory or not.
KDE3 security bugs are still accepted and fixed. Feature requests no. especially not if the feature exist in KDE4 -- can't have your cake and eat it, too.
Also, there will be no KDE5 until quite a few years. from which one must conclude from your configuration comment you are amazingly incompetent and should not be allowed near a computer.
Uhhh, see, he is Alan Cox. He is the one doing intel a favour. So basically, yeah, they can terminate him. It'll be bad for them (can't retain great engineers) and he'll be employed again within the week.
This "do what you're told, or else" only applies to the mediocre employees. You depend too much on the really good ones -- and if you can't realise that, you'll go bust.
Of course Brussels is virtually french-speaking (80%) and richer than both. If the country broke up, it would join the Walloons (if you let people choose, that is). But Flemish don't like to be reminded of that.
As someone living in Switzerland, where everything is in three languages (yes, all the food items you buy in the supermarket are multiply-labelled, and administration is possible in all languages), I have no sympathy for people trying to force other people to speak another language when they already speak a language of the country the live in.
Having more than one language is a good thing. Embrace the other language, support multiple language labels. Support administration in multiple language, and people, feeling more relaxed, will maybe learn Dutch. But forced? You'll get nowhere.
And Flemish "territorial integrity" ?! Who the _fuck_ are you to decide where your fellow countrymen can reside?
This explains why we just had a raft of news about how KDE innovates too much... In fact, FOSS can innovate much more than proprietary software because there is no incentive other than to provide a functionality the dev desires.
Because there is no real cost associated to changing things (except getting insulted by change-adverse users) it does happen, and can be dramatic. If, in the proprietary world, you depend on having users to stay financially aloft, you better be sure that your changes will get you more users than what you lost by alienating your existing user base!
Of course, if you are microsoft, you don't care, you can force your users to by your crap anyway :). And I suppose that if you are Apple, the SJDF will save you.
Except that this is in fact not a contentious issue. Otherwise, yes, of course, you should not dismiss the alternative schools as irrelevant.
Unless, of course, if they try to deny the experimental evidence...
The thing is, there is consensus. The debate is essentially purely fabricated, because for the sake of "balance" the press feels it is necessary to present counter-opinions.
Scientists do prove their discoveries. Simply, it has become very difficult for the vast majority of the public to be able to decide for themselves. Because understanding requires vast amounts of knowledge, understanding of fairly deep mathematics, and the availability of a big supercomputer. And a lab, and funding for a vast array of independent measures.
The saying about magic and advanced technology? We have gone beyond that a long time ago. "technology" is now essentially a synonym for "process by which are achieved amazing feats" -- magic. We all accept the marvels of our mobile phones, computers, satnavs, nuclear medicine -- we do not wonder how it all works. Some of us do, some of us even actually understand at least the basic concepts. The specialists know, of course.
But if I had to restart civilisation, basically, I would have it back to the 18th century, with a head start on the more advanced concepts. Because everything is so amazingly complex.
And so it goes with climate science. It is so complex only the actual researchers know with some certainty how correct it is. And although we can delude ourselves by thinking we ought to be sceptical -- and we should -- the fact is we cannot know individually without 4-10 years of actual study.
Provided you have a good scientific background, and the ability. So although it sounds like religion, you should just believe the consensus. It is not religion because you should know and be aware this consensus is built on the current state of knowledge and will evolve. No definitive truth here. Just the best bet -- which essentially means the only bet you should take, unless you insist on being irrational.
Wonderful. Now climate change is communism. See, I am a scientist. An actual one. My field, however is in no way related to climatology. I have, however a good idea on how consensus is formed, how it might be right or wrong.
I also know how jerks knowing nothing can invent an infinite stream of objections to anything they don't like (yet know nothing about) and demand careful debunking of each. And will whine if their demands are not met.
This has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with the fact that ignorance is not a valid opinion. If you don't know and aren't qualified, you should believe the consensus. Because as far as you can tell it is the best current bet.
Because the alternative is that all mainstream scientists in the field are lying. Possible, yes, but silly.
Be ready for the consensus to change however -- it is not a fixed thing -- but change is rarely dramatic. Only once in a century do we have deeply unsettling changes in consensus (think quantum mechanics). But the observations, they do not change...
Oh, and I love your Luddite "you'll never know". But then, seeing your wonderful grasp of the process of science, this is unsurprising.
From your comment, I can tell you are not a scientist.
Of course, there is a consensus. On most things, even. It is the "shoulders of giants" Newton was talking about. There are disagreement on points, some of which might not be trivial.
But there is mostly consensus: otherwise, one would create theories fully formed, complete, ab nihilo -- which doesn't happen.
For climate change, there is a consensus. Deal with it. The consensus might be wrong, sure, but unless you are a climatologist, as far as you know, it is the (accepted) truth. If your opinion differs, and yet you are in no way qualified to form an opinion on this highly technical subject, what does that make you?
Not a heretic, nor a resistant, nor illuminated by some higher truth. Just a jerk with no clue.
What is release quality depends on what you are using.
If you are a free software dev, then to know what your users are using, you _need_ to release.
And not betas, because don't attract nearly as much users.
That way, there is pain in the beginning, but in the end, it works much, much better.
So basically, the old version needs fixing, but the new ones too.
So you cannot use either the old or the new. So what is it you are complaining about? That you find a program which you considered broken to be still broken?
1. Works for me. Something broken in your setup. did you report the bug?
2. same.
3. Could not try -- but might be linked...
4. same as 1-2
5. Yeah, people complain a lot about the NM applet. this thing is obviously not finished.
6. Really? Always found it to work fine. You are aware there are 2 clipboards?
I did not know GNOME used kioslaves...
See, "ready for users" is undefined.
I would define it pretty clearly:
If it worked in KDE3, it must work in KDE4. It must either be obvious how to do this, or it must be in a FAQ somewhere.
This is idiotic: it is different code. Eventually, if a given feature is needed, it'll be "back", in the sense that it will have been added again, with the experience and knowledge of the previous system.
better than 3.5 in some aspects, and worse in others.
Like having no bluetooth. The ways in which it was better are irrelevant when you're missing basic functionality like my fucking mouse.
See, this has nothing to do with KDE. This is a low(er)-level hardware issue, and if you expect your DE to tackle it, I sure hope you are not architecturing software. Desktop integration is all fine and good for, say bluetooth phones, but your mouse should Just Workâ and no GUI should be required.
4.2 was pretty much on par, with some things much better, and some missing pieces
Missing pieces like WPA support.
The things that are much better are, honestly, things I can live without. They're cool, they make me more productive, but I can live without them.
I cannot live without such obscure things as working wireless.
The things that keep getting dropped on the floor are not obscure, they are major pieces of functionality that you could not sell a computer, regardless of OS, without some support for.
Uhh, sorry, but that is a distro issue. Nothing prevents you from launching any of the other NM frontends which work... Don't blame KDE for shoddy integration on the distro's part.
4.3 is basically better than 3.5 in almost all respects.
It damn well better be.
Because frankly, this is like XP vs Vista. When Vista was in beta testing, the apologists said, "It's a beta! Expect it to be broken!" When it was released, they said, "Everyone knows you don't buy MS software until SP1!" Well, Vista SP2 is out, and many people seem convinced it's on par with XP in most ways.
The fact that KDE4 is behind Vista is just really fucking sad, and I want to like KDE.
Giant disclaimer: I run Kubuntu, which is widely acknowledged by the KDE people as being the worst KDE-based distro ever. It's served me well in the 3.x line, but for some reason, the 4.x releases have just pulled random experimental nightly builds, incorporated them into the release...
I mean, the bluetooth issue was known about, and they put it as a "known issue", and went ahead and released, and didn't fix it for at least, oh, two months. WTF?
To anyone who hasn't tried KDE4: Don't. Wait for 4.3, maybe it'll be ready then. Or use a distro other than Ubuntu, but expect large things to break.
Kubuntu was always broken, not due to lack of dedication, but from lack of manpower. On the other hand, they have gone out of their way to actually break KDE at times... It just happens that the previous kind of brokenness did not affect you and the new does.
Much of your comment basically boils down to "my distro did not do the basic minimum amount of QA one would expect from even free software hobbyists. I blame the upstream"
You have cognitive dissonance, and I cannot help you with that.
As for KDE being behind Vista, you are right. If the race is towards higher levels of suckiness. But KDE4 is not broken. It is in fact nicer to use than KDE3, and smoother, and more beautiful, and more powerful. Free software, fortunately or unfortunately is more used, by people who think that it is some product in finished form. It is not. It is a process, and at some point along the way, a given project reaches a stage where it is also as good as a finished product. But to reach that stage, it must be tested, and that means pain for the early adopters, but also the satisfaction of participating in the creation of the tools you use.
gcc is not a joke, xcode is. I hate it. I always go back to vi after 5 mins of intense frustration. When using OSX, that is.
Under linux I use kate/kdevelop, so I'm not much of a pure-command-line guy.
And then there is the dismal WM...
See, "ready for users" is undefined. For me, KDE trunk is ready for me, and Vista is not.
For many people it is the reverse.
For me OSX is not ready: the dev tools it bundles are basically a joke, and the WM sucks. But many people find it the ultimate user experience.
4.0 was not a user release, but 4.1 was. Imperfect, yes, but better than 3.5 in some aspects, and worse in others. 4.2 was pretty much on par, with some things much better, and some missing pieces -- which you might miss and I don't, or the reverse.
4.3 is basically better than 3.5 in almost all respects. Surely a couple things are missing that I have not noticed. And no doubts there will be trolls arguing that "OMG I cannot independently configure the transparency gradient of all plasma widgets! This is a deal breaker for me, I go back to gnome" -- incidentally, you can, but you need to draw you own theme ;)
And the apps are almost all there, I am still missing the tellico port, but it is advancing fast.
That is, only if you don't count as an "act of violence" pushing someone to commit suicide...
CoS is one of the most ruthless or around.
Actually, there is a very good reason to support The Pirate Bay. It hurts the *AA.
And we need to get those reduced to oblivion so copyright can once again be a reasonable tradeof between the authors and the consumers.
Because when laws get passed on behalf of single companies (Disney, I'm looking at you), then there is something deeply rotten. And bankruptcy of those media companies would be a good thing. So anything along that path is a good idea.
There is also this thing that laws which are stupid or inapplicable need to be exposed. In the hope that those who passed them get voted out of office (yeah, I'm an optimist).
Unfortunately, TPB also helps pirate software, which in turn helps the likes of Microsoft, because of the network effect. So nothing is perfect, I guess.
No more, no less. In fact more, because there are now bug-triageing projects.
But they now also have cool technology to show-off. So they do.
Technically, they had that before, but it used to be that when GNOME issued press-releases for getting more or less the features KDE had years before AND getting all the good press. So now KDE announces its features.
So people notice that they are the most advanced environment...
The EP is elected.
The council is made up of the ministers of the various governments of Europe. Which are democratic.
Then there is the commission, which is vetted by the EP, and selected by the national governments. (see point 1) You don't vote for ministers, usually.
Actually, the EU structure is more democratic than say, that of the UK! If the national government were held to the standards of the EU, the world would be more democratic indeed.
It is a myth that there is an overflow. The volume of waste is in fact very small: the stuff is really dense.
But solar panels are nasty. I mean really toxic-nasty. You do not want highly dispersed, decentralised energy production based on toxic chemistry. At least, nuclear powerplants are small and localised.
Wind, were it not so fickle would be a nice solution. Though I sometimes wonder haw much we humans could disrupt the flow of the prevailing winds around the planet.
You really want nuclear powerplants. And you also want fast breeders so the "waste" is not waste but extra energy.
And yes, better energy usage. But although you can encourage society evolution, sometimes even attempt to mandate change, you should first try to find solutions not requiring humans to spontaneously behave the "right way". Because it is better to bet on good engineering and sloth, than a sudden increase in human intelligence and awareness.
The problem _is_ the distribution. Actually, under SuSE, there is the reverse problem: only the application function/type is displayed and the name appears on hover.
For those of us long-time linux users, this is a tad annoying... But then, changing the behaviour is two clicks away :)
Yes, you are missing the fact, that him being a windows/photoshop fanboy, he only read want he wanted to read.
And the amazing thing is that a debate was launched on the merits of a phrase not even written...
Uh... Let me get this straight.
You are a happy KDE 3.5.10 user. Presumably, you prefer it to GNOME.
KDE releases 4.0. You do not like it. So you switch to GNOME instead of your preferred KDE 3.5.
This makes no sense. Unless of course you have assumed that upon the release of KDE 4, the devs sacrificed many chickens and magically erased all previous versions in hard drives throughout the world. And you acted on that belief.
See, the problem might not lie with the KDE devs...