1. The people who say "X is not for you" are frequently right.
2. Why are you concerned about "converting" people and seeing the "installed base grow"? If you want to get behind something with lots of users, there's always Windows. But when dealing with people on IRC or forums, most people would rather deal with people who are friendly and have a clue, rather than just rack up one more user:)
Re:Definition of sourcecode of graphics files.
on
Revising the GPL
·
· Score: 1
I'd think it's fair to say that for the most part (and if you're sensible), images and such are "merely aggregated" with your program, not a part of it. Using a GPL tool certainly doesn't impose any license on your graphics, and distributing them together with your program doesn't either. In the case that you actually link icons together with your program (as resources or XPMs), things get a little more complicated, but it should still be possible to come up with a reasonable solution that's not too restrictive to be practical.
Or good photography practices, like taking 200+ RAW photos and then deleting most of them. Sure, you do your absolute best to make sure nothing goes wrong, but sometimes it does. So you use exposure bracketing, you take lots of similar shots if you can, and see which ones look good after the fact. Why? Because you're not paying for every shot you take. Later on, if you delete 5 of every 6, you know the ones you kept are the best.
The thinking is "we could control hardware, but we don't have control of this software. So we need to either gain complete control of the software development process (trusted computing) or effectively ban software that could potentially be used in any way we don't like (DMCA).
Anything that moves control from specialized hardware to software running generalized hardware, is a target for the wrath of various organizations.
Under is defined by 'down'. Down, for our purposes, is the direction that's towards the Earth. There are a number of radar satellites in geosync orbit, pointed at Earth. The object passed inside (closer to Earth than) geosync orbit.
So arguably, it did literally go "under the radar." But of course, the usual connotation of "under the radar" is that you're low enough to avoid radar detection, which certainly doesn't apply to satellites looking down. So it's still silly.
Yeah, LCDs have direct driving for each of the pixels. And there are a zillion of them. And you have to connect each of those zillion pixels to the controller. That spells complexity, which is why they're not cheap.
That's not very truly random. Don't you remember the security announcements a while back about how ssh in keyboard-interactive auth mode could be sniffed for keypress timings to try to recover your password? But radioactive decay and atmospheric noise are pretty serious sources.
Indeed. Noteedit is all I was really after, too, and Rosegarden turned out to be way too big and complex for what I needed. If only a few of the more serious bugs in Noteedit were fixed, I'd be quite happy with it. Maybe it's time to see if I can decipher the code. I know me some C++, but nothing about KDE internals.
Re:Seriously... Why would you use this?
on
GIMP 2.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
You picked the wrong feature to cite: GIMP will perfectly happily save and load PSD files, although unfortunately it will throw out layer effects that it doesn't understand.
Yeah -- the "new Rosegarden", which is commonly known as Rosegarden 4, is miles ahead of the "old Rosegarden", Rosegarden 2. It's basically a complete rewrite, with all of the nifty features carried over (and then some), but brought into the modern age. I like! Looks like it ought to give Noteedit a run for its money.
By collecting random information such as radioactive decay timings and hard drive read timings, and thoroughly whitening them using cryptographically strong hashes, to extract every bit of available entropy.
Yeah... let's tell off all those people yelling about how open-source software is lower quality, by making sure every schmuck can make apps that are every bit as bad as most VB apps! That'll be really, um, competetive!
For slashdot to link to month-old "news" as usual. Also, the headline is incorrect, as the linked material doesn't have anything to do with music by any definition that I've seen.
There's a package out on the net somewhere -- sorry, I don't recall where -- that will do this automatically, generating a random 256-bit key, setting up swap with it, and then scrubbing the key, complete with boot scripts for everyone's favorite distributions, keyed on special lines in/etc/fstab. Google would probably be of use here.
Slashdot Mirror
The real money is in Rear Admiral (lower half) Computers.
and also by the parent post's own words, everything the grandparent post said was wrong, except for possibly the etcetera.
I'm betting the percentage of slashdot users who get an email summary is considerably closer to 5% than "most".
Except for two important points.
:)
1. The people who say "X is not for you" are frequently right.
2. Why are you concerned about "converting" people and seeing the "installed base grow"? If you want to get behind something with lots of users, there's always Windows. But when dealing with people on IRC or forums, most people would rather deal with people who are friendly and have a clue, rather than just rack up one more user
I'd think it's fair to say that for the most part (and if you're sensible), images and such are "merely aggregated" with your program, not a part of it. Using a GPL tool certainly doesn't impose any license on your graphics, and distributing them together with your program doesn't either. In the case that you actually link icons together with your program (as resources or XPMs), things get a little more complicated, but it should still be possible to come up with a reasonable solution that's not too restrictive to be practical.
Or good photography practices, like taking 200+ RAW photos and then deleting most of them. Sure, you do your absolute best to make sure nothing goes wrong, but sometimes it does. So you use exposure bracketing, you take lots of similar shots if you can, and see which ones look good after the fact. Why? Because you're not paying for every shot you take. Later on, if you delete 5 of every 6, you know the ones you kept are the best.
Pay attention. That was the point.
The thinking is "we could control hardware, but we don't have control of this software. So we need to either gain complete control of the software development process (trusted computing) or effectively ban software that could potentially be used in any way we don't like (DMCA).
Anything that moves control from specialized hardware to software running generalized hardware, is a target for the wrath of various organizations.
... who read that as "Free Windows Solitaire?"
I guess we all know what Windows really gets used for. Oh, so many man-hours lost to that game.
Or we're talking about different things. But I still like mine better. Best... Shatner... Ever!
along with Lyndon LaRouche, right?
Well
Under is defined by 'down'.
Down, for our purposes, is the direction that's towards the Earth.
There are a number of radar satellites in geosync orbit, pointed at Earth.
The object passed inside (closer to Earth than) geosync orbit.
So arguably, it did literally go "under the radar." But of course, the usual connotation of "under the radar" is that you're low enough to avoid radar detection, which certainly doesn't apply to satellites looking down. So it's still silly.
4. Thank you. Apparently slashdot editors' definition of "freenet-like" is "almost, but not entirely, unlike freenet."
Yeah, LCDs have direct driving for each of the pixels. And there are a zillion of them. And you have to connect each of those zillion pixels to the controller. That spells complexity, which is why they're not cheap.
That's not very truly random. Don't you remember the security announcements a while back about how ssh in keyboard-interactive auth mode could be sniffed for keypress timings to try to recover your password? But radioactive decay and atmospheric noise are pretty serious sources.
Indeed. Noteedit is all I was really after, too, and Rosegarden turned out to be way too big and complex for what I needed. If only a few of the more serious bugs in Noteedit were fixed, I'd be quite happy with it. Maybe it's time to see if I can decipher the code. I know me some C++, but nothing about KDE internals.
You picked the wrong feature to cite: GIMP will perfectly happily save and load PSD files, although unfortunately it will throw out layer effects that it doesn't understand.
They still haven't managed to get the open dialog up to the quality it was with GTK 1.2. It was lightweight, fast, easy, and came with tab completion!
Yeah -- the "new Rosegarden", which is commonly known as Rosegarden 4, is miles ahead of the "old Rosegarden", Rosegarden 2. It's basically a complete rewrite, with all of the nifty features carried over (and then some), but brought into the modern age. I like! Looks like it ought to give Noteedit a run for its money.
Programs can specify that for themselves. GnuPG does.
By collecting random information such as radioactive decay timings and hard drive read timings, and thoroughly whitening them using cryptographically strong hashes, to extract every bit of available entropy.
Yeah... let's tell off all those people yelling about how open-source software is lower quality, by making sure every schmuck can make apps that are every bit as bad as most VB apps! That'll be really, um, competetive!
For slashdot to link to month-old "news" as usual. Also, the headline is incorrect, as the linked material doesn't have anything to do with music by any definition that I've seen.
There's a package out on the net somewhere -- sorry, I don't recall where -- that will do this automatically, generating a random 256-bit key, setting up swap with it, and then scrubbing the key, complete with boot scripts for everyone's favorite distributions, keyed on special lines in /etc/fstab. Google would probably be of use here.
and such?