It's the price of rock-solid stability. If you want "latest-greatest", then run Debian unstable. Just because its called unstable doesn't mean that its definitely going to be unstable, but running Debian stable definitely means that you are running one pure rock-solid stable and secure Linux.
If I was going to show Linux off to my friends, I would show them Debian stable. Tons of great easily installed free software, all ontop of an ultra stable, ultra secure OS.
Crashing or getting hacked doesn't make for a great first impression.
The next logical step would be to run around having gay anal sex! After that, it would be with animals! And of course, this is all a gateway into hardcore drug abuse of crack-cocaine. Oh, what about the children, the poor children?
Seriously for a second, if anything is going to go wrong with society, with regards to cloning, it will be all of these weirdo anti-cloning people who will not treat clones as real humans with the same rights of sperms.
So having sex makes the act of creating people, a moral act, while not having sex, makes the act of creating people, an immoral act?
Thats the thesis of your arguement. Now hopefully you will start arguing down that "natural = moral" path. That one always leads to a deadend.
For the record, we have long since found ways to create people without the need to have sexual intercourse.
I also find it interesting that you think that creating by having sex is un-God-like, while creating by any other means is God-like. This weirdo psuedo-religious arguement falls flat on its face. I mean, if I was to take your strange "god" arguement, I could claim that we are supposed to use God as a role model and not something or someone other than God.
Why not go a step further and try to be even more like God and create a world of love and peace? According to your "god" arguement, such a "step further" would be immoral. So either its moral, or God isn't all about love and peace. Who is your God anyway?
"Possibly implies" and "Necessarily implies" are two different things. Repeated use of "Possibly implies" taking you from proposition A to B, and then concluding A "Necessarily implies" B is what makes something a slippery slope fallacy. See "modal logic" if you still don't get it. Both philosphical and mathematical accounts of modal logic will show you your error.
If you are talking to most Americans, then no, they haven't seen Ariel Sharon for what he is, the latest Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, Slobodan Milosevic, or Saddam Hussein.
Sharon is guilty of mass genocide. Outside of the USA, where the media and government aren't so heavily Israeli biased, Sharon is known as the butcher of Beirut - because back in 1982 he had 1000s of innocent civilian women and chilren rounded up into a camp and brutally killed. Not only that, but international committees have recognized that Sharon has committed crimes against humantiy... however, for some reason, Israel is above the law... Sharon is never going to appear in a War Crimes Tribunal, even though he should. Not only that, but Israel has continued to neglect to respect a decades old UN ruling that it must allow the Palestinians to return to their homes. What is a people supposed to do when the legal avenues are all blocked?
Need I remind you what "sparked" this latest conflict? You can even found this out on CNN, a very biased news source in this entire conflict. It started when Sharon visited a Muslim holy place. Again, in case you don't get it, this would be the equivalent of Hitler visiting the wailing wall.
And all the while, this Israel v Palestine conflict is shown on TV (in my home, the USA)... Arafat is the bad guy and Sharon is the good guy. Black, white. My side, your side. Alpha, Omega. True, False. Tit, tat. Eye for an eye. Life for a life. War for peace?
Oh please, its a splippery slope fallacy because each of its steps commit the non-sequitur fallacy. Furthermore, claiming that "it could happen" as an explanation is a sure sign of a slippery slope fallacy.
Plain and simple, you must be blind, incapable of using Google, or you haven't read a GNUtella News site for years.
Xolox is a GNUtella client for Windows that has supported swarming, resume, mirror searching, and many other useful features for a long time now. So long in fact, that this great GNUtella client is no longer being actively developed.
Seriously, I know I am sounding harsh, but either you are lying or... well, you are in serious need of being informed. Give Xolox a try. You will have tons of content available to you, if you give Xolox a few minutes to establish itself within the GNUtella network. Searching for and downloading popular content is fast and easy, while searching for rare obscure content is slower and more tedious.
After that, search the net, using Google, for Xolox. Pay attention to dates of the sites/pages were created, pay attention to the numerous news articles and reviews and their dates, and ask yourself how you could be so blind... how you could have been out of the loop for the past couple of years. How the hell could you have not stumbled upon Xolox, the best GNUtella client, even after being no longer being developed for months?!? I think that you checked out Bearshare, Limewire, and formed your opinion. Either that, or you haven't even used GNUtella.
Re:New to Linux world (please be gentle)
on
KDE 3.0 is Out
·
· Score: 2
In addition, there is a distinction between a window manager and a desktop. Examples of Linux desktops are KDE and Gnome. Desktops are a collection of common applications for managing your computer, such as filesystem explorers, web browsers, task bars, clocks, icons, sounds, in addition to a window manager. So from the end user's point of view, you are concerned with what desktop you want. Window managers are really of a more low-level concern, while desktops are of a high-level end user concern. A desktop contains a window manager, while a window manager does not contain a desktop... if that makes any sense.
If you were using Debian Linux...
on
KDE 3.0 is Out
·
· Score: 2
If you were using Debian Linux, installing KDE would be as difficult as typing: apt-get update
apt-get install kdebase
This causes apt-get to automatically search for the required software packages, and then it installs them in the correct order - automatically.
But for some reason, people think that using a Redhat based distro is easier and more user-friendly. They are wrong. Of course, apt-get exists for Redhat based distros, but because it doesn't rely on the Debian community, policies, and package sources... its not as good.
Just a little competition and we have cheap ultra high performance CPUs! Back in the 80s, no one would dream of computer hardware with such performance.
One monopoly in the OS market and we have restrictive bloated ultra expensive insecure operating systems! Back in the 80s, I wonder if this is what people were dreaming about...
Ask users what they want, because they will use the installer for installing the OS.
Ask developers what they want, because they will be writing code, modules, extensions, and keeping the installer up-to-date with newer hardware. If you don't take developers past, present, and future into consideration, then you will end up with an installer that noone wants to maintain, extend, tweak, polish, etc... In addition, hardware developers should also be consulted, because they will be making the hardware that is to be autodetected and configured. Companies that support Linux by providing specs, drivers, and such, should be companies whose hardware is correctly autodetected and autoconfigured by the installer.
Ignoring developers would be one of the most ignorant and just plain stupid things that you could do when designing a Linux installer. My point is that, in fact, the developers will be dealing with the installer far more than the users because they will be writing code or fabricating hardware, all of which must correctly and easily integrate with the installer.
Furhermore, asking users should mean asking and supporting different types of users: Joe Six-pack users, power users, and most importantly, system administrators and system integrators. How many MS Windows users installed their copy of windows? Yeah, very little, so why ask Joe Six-pack what he wants when he most likely won't ever install an OS? Its more important to ask the target groups that will be installing operating systems: OEMs (aka system integrators), system administrators, and power users.
Having an installer that can be used by any idiot off the street might seem like a good idea, but you will be ignoring your target audience.
Truely, for Linux to "make it on the desktop", requires that OEMs start shipping PDAs, laptops, desktop PCs, and workstations with Linux on them. Otherwise, you will be making a Linux-for-Dummies installer for a group of people who will never use it. You want Linux to end up on more desktops? Ask Dell, Compaq, and HP what they want from a Debian Linux installer. Also, note that an automated patch application utility such as apt-get makes support oh so much easier, as long as it is setup to run at 2AM every night or something like that. OEMs should think about that. No more workstations 3 service packs behind means far fewer people with rooted web servers, desktops, etc... (ala Code Red and Nimda).
Finally, some flamebait, but it must be said: Most HCI or CHI people are the wrost types of Software Engineers and Computer Scientists... even worse than those AI guys (most of whom don't even understand the basic limitations of formal, i.e. computational systems: incompleteness, undecidability, diagnalization). I mean, most things that the HCI research guys find out is common sense, and when its not, its most likely misleading, "dumb down the world" advice, like the parent post. Users can mean developers in one situation (OS installers, if OEM system integrators and sys-admins are considered developers) and other times it can mean Joe-sixpack (Web Browsers, IM, Media Players). But not so if you ask the HCI croud... to them, everything should be dumbed down. Any retard should be able to carry out any task. I am still waiting for the HCI croud to start writing papers on making open heart surgery more user-friendly and easier to carry out by Joe-sixpack. We have all seen what happens when you dumb down system administration. You dumb down the security of the internet. I mean, any idiot can admin a server right? Microsoft preaches so, but is it a good idea?
Choice, options, control... they should all be taken away from the user, no matter who that user is. For according to HCI types, we should pander to the lowest common denominator: Joe sixpack and Soccer Mom. They LOVE installing operating systems. Its part of or at least could and should be part of their everyday life.
While the HCI research community has a few nice apples, most are bad apples that just couldn't cut it in their Computational Theory 101 class or Algorithms 101 class. So they spend their entire life writing papers on common sense topics and idiotic topics. Whoever gives them funding is wasting their money.
Lynx? Why use something like Lynx?
on
Qt For The Console
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Lynx is second rate compared to the Links command-line web browser, which I use regularly under Linux... and I am using right now. It supports SSL, tables, and many other common web technologies. Oh, and did I mention that it uses less than 1MB of RAM? Its uber fast, and perfect for reading sites like slashdot. Navigation is a breeze... no mouse needed here. Also, since Links doesn't download the overboard graphics that many websites use, sites load far quicker than in other browsers because of the smaller download. Sure there is less eye-and-ear-candy, but the net is still full of content... and Links gives you access to that content.
I love what Hotmail says, when I log in with Links. It says that my browser won't let me use Hotmails advanced features or something... whatever...
I can just see it now. Environmentalist fanatics running around cities like 1980s gang members with spray paint cans, spraying grafitti on anything and everything... all in the name of polutionless electricity.
The source of recursion is useful...
on
Deep Algorithms?
·
· Score: 2
Therefore I nominate the least fixed-point of the lambda-calculus: \x(xx)
Wait, is that always terminate on all inputs? If so, according to that criteria, a Java Virtual Machine isn't an algorithm. Nor is any universal (in the sense of Turing) programming language interpreter. Apply the diagonalization method, and its pretty obvious.
I always thought that Kleene's partial recursive functions were a good enough description of "algorithm".
So there are no apps for Debian Linux? Maybe that explains why software is so easy to install, uninstall, and update on Debian... its because none of it really exists.
Lets face it, the LSB is not an objective standard but a crappy attempt at a standard that has succeeded in nothing more than giving Redhat a supposed stamp of approval as not only the defacto Linux standard, but the dejure Linux standard. Why not just ditch the LSB and replace it with a sentence that says, "Must be Redhat compatible"? At least people wouldn't be kidding themselves.
It is like trading Hitler for Stalin! Look ma! Free... errr... wait, actually its not free as in freedom. The purist of pure OSS user uses Debian Linux.
I live in America, born here... stayed here. I love this place, but I see the problems it has. Just watching the news, local or national (e.g. CNN)... again and again, the Palestinian killers are referred to as "terrorists", while the Israeli killers are referred to as "military". A subtle bias? I think not.
Furthermore, in the USA, to criticize Israel is antisemitic - an exercise of neo-nazism. Taboo? It is extremely taboo to criticize Israel, and its backing philosophy: Zionism. Even when an Israeli Zionist Jew, Noam Chomsky criticizes Israel, he is a "neo-nazi"!
So yes, while many things in the USA work correctly (e.g. I can say "George W Bush is an idiot".) - when it comes to Israel, Zionism, Jews - well those are for some irrational reason, above critique no matter how true, just, and needed.
We should condemn Reuter's unequivocally for refusing, for reasons of political correctness and timidness, to accurately label those who commit acts of violence with civilian targets as the _intentional_ victims. There is no excuse for it. Violence justifies violence in some cases, and resisting armed occupation is one thing. Resisting an oppressive government generally falls under "civil disobedience" and sometimes is justified, and sometimes is not.
By the textbook definition of "terrorist", we could correctly call Israel a terrorist, facist, racist state of apartheid which is guilty of ethnic clensing and genocide. Reuter's attempt is to not label one side as the good guys and the other as the bad guys, which is something that, say, CNN does every day.
Have you ever considered how biased our (USA) media is? In the whole Israel vs Pal conflict, Israelis are never called terrorists, even though the UN has recognized that Israel targets Palestinian civilians with violence. So the entire USA gets a light brainwashing everytime they watch the news. Palestinians are terrorists, and the Israelis are just using military action in self defense.
Do you see the bias? What about on September 11th, when the entire USA is shown some footage of 5 or 6 Palestinian teens dancing in the streets upon the news of the WTC attacks? This is a textbook case of taking something way out of context! Yeah, all of those tanks, heliocopters, missiles, bullets, etc, which have been used by Israel to kill everyone of those Palestinians were all made in the USA and given to Israel. In fact, the USA has supported Israel since the begining, with large amounts of money and weapons. Oh, and checking history shows that Israel has been illegaly occupying Palestinian land, using military force by the way, for several decades. So our lovely unbiased news "just reports" how these kids are dancing in the streets, but neglects to give the viewer any context. Knowing how the american educational system works, the average viewer doesn't know a thing about the history behind that conflict, and therefore, showing the USA a short clip of Pal teens dancing in the streets will serve the purpose of labelling the Pals as the "bad guys" - lumped together with the WTC terrorists.
My point is that, first of all, al Quaeda and the Palestinians are two separate issues. Furthurmore, all sides are guilty of murder or aiding murder! The important thing to realize is that what a nation supports and does is NOT what a person in that nation supports and does. The smartest thing would be to form a UN meeting amongst the common citizens of these nations, the ones that don't have "military action" as one of their solutions... have those people come up with a solution. Otherwise, each side will continue to choose and support leaders that have "military action" as their solution for international problems, and we will all continue to kill each other ad infinitum.
Also, some more food for thought on the whole Palestinian vs Israel conflict. If the USA is pissed off at Iran because Iran gives weapons to Palestine, then why is it ok that the USA gives weapons to Israel? Seems like a double standard. Or how bout the fact that Iran building nuclear weapons, is bad (even though they are doing it to protect their nation against Iraq, their not-best-friend of a neighboring nation), while the USA's stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction isn't bad. Yet again, another "bad guys" & "good guys" philosophy used by our nations leaders.
I think everyone in the USA needs to really get introspective, and see if they are brainwashed (oh no you think, the our media is pure truth, not an instrament of social engineering). See if they have chosen a side a priori. Because choosing sides, choosing military solutions - these things will only furthur the violence, furthur the hatred.
Slashdot Mirror
Buying the first run of consoles isn't the best idea. The first versions of consoles tend to be less stable.
I bet this new Playstation2 will generate far less heat.
If you are interested in trying Debian out, but are afraid of installing it, then try out PGI, the graphical autohardware detection Debian installer. Make sure to check out the screenshots.
In my opinion, once the default Debian installer becomes idiot-proof, Debian will take over as the lead Linux distro.
It's the price of rock-solid stability. If you want "latest-greatest", then run Debian unstable. Just because its called unstable doesn't mean that its definitely going to be unstable, but running Debian stable definitely means that you are running one pure rock-solid stable and secure Linux.
If I was going to show Linux off to my friends, I would show them Debian stable. Tons of great easily installed free software, all ontop of an ultra stable, ultra secure OS.
Crashing or getting hacked doesn't make for a great first impression.
Hey guys, I am having trouble seeing this Kodak's page in both Lynx and Links. Whats up?
The next logical step would be to run around having gay anal sex! After that, it would be with animals! And of course, this is all a gateway into hardcore drug abuse of crack-cocaine. Oh, what about the children, the poor children?
Seriously for a second, if anything is going to go wrong with society, with regards to cloning, it will be all of these weirdo anti-cloning people who will not treat clones as real humans with the same rights of sperms.
So having sex makes the act of creating people, a moral act, while not having sex, makes the act of creating people, an immoral act?
Thats the thesis of your arguement. Now hopefully you will start arguing down that "natural = moral" path. That one always leads to a deadend.
For the record, we have long since found ways to create people without the need to have sexual intercourse.
I also find it interesting that you think that creating by having sex is un-God-like, while creating by any other means is God-like. This weirdo psuedo-religious arguement falls flat on its face. I mean, if I was to take your strange "god" arguement, I could claim that we are supposed to use God as a role model and not something or someone other than God.
Why not go a step further and try to be even more like God and create a world of love and peace? According to your "god" arguement, such a "step further" would be immoral. So either its moral, or God isn't all about love and peace. Who is your God anyway?
"Possibly implies" and "Necessarily implies" are two different things. Repeated use of "Possibly implies" taking you from proposition A to B, and then concluding A "Necessarily implies" B is what makes something a slippery slope fallacy. See "modal logic" if you still don't get it. Both philosphical and mathematical accounts of modal logic will show you your error.
If you are talking to most Americans, then no, they haven't seen Ariel Sharon for what he is, the latest Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, Slobodan Milosevic, or Saddam Hussein.
Sharon is guilty of mass genocide. Outside of the USA, where the media and government aren't so heavily Israeli biased, Sharon is known as the butcher of Beirut - because back in 1982 he had 1000s of innocent civilian women and chilren rounded up into a camp and brutally killed. Not only that, but international committees have recognized that Sharon has committed crimes against humantiy... however, for some reason, Israel is above the law... Sharon is never going to appear in a War Crimes Tribunal, even though he should. Not only that, but Israel has continued to neglect to respect a decades old UN ruling that it must allow the Palestinians to return to their homes. What is a people supposed to do when the legal avenues are all blocked?
Need I remind you what "sparked" this latest conflict? You can even found this out on CNN, a very biased news source in this entire conflict. It started when Sharon visited a Muslim holy place. Again, in case you don't get it, this would be the equivalent of Hitler visiting the wailing wall.
And all the while, this Israel v Palestine conflict is shown on TV (in my home, the USA)... Arafat is the bad guy and Sharon is the good guy. Black, white. My side, your side. Alpha, Omega. True, False. Tit, tat. Eye for an eye. Life for a life. War for peace?
He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.
Oh please, its a splippery slope fallacy because each of its steps commit the non-sequitur fallacy. Furthermore, claiming that "it could happen" as an explanation is a sure sign of a slippery slope fallacy.
Xolox can be run under x86 Linux using Wine. You are the ignorant muther fucker... ya must feel like an idiot now. I feel sorry for you.
Plain and simple, you must be blind, incapable of using Google, or you haven't read a GNUtella News site for years.
... well, you are in serious need of being informed. Give Xolox a try. You will have tons of content available to you, if you give Xolox a few minutes to establish itself within the GNUtella network. Searching for and downloading popular content is fast and easy, while searching for rare obscure content is slower and more tedious.
Xolox is a GNUtella client for Windows that has supported swarming, resume, mirror searching, and many other useful features for a long time now. So long in fact, that this great GNUtella client is no longer being actively developed.
Seriously, I know I am sounding harsh, but either you are lying or
After that, search the net, using Google, for Xolox. Pay attention to dates of the sites/pages were created, pay attention to the numerous news articles and reviews and their dates, and ask yourself how you could be so blind... how you could have been out of the loop for the past couple of years. How the hell could you have not stumbled upon Xolox, the best GNUtella client, even after being no longer being developed for months?!? I think that you checked out Bearshare, Limewire, and formed your opinion. Either that, or you haven't even used GNUtella.
In addition, there is a distinction between a window manager and a desktop. Examples of Linux desktops are KDE and Gnome. Desktops are a collection of common applications for managing your computer, such as filesystem explorers, web browsers, task bars, clocks, icons, sounds, in addition to a window manager. So from the end user's point of view, you are concerned with what desktop you want. Window managers are really of a more low-level concern, while desktops are of a high-level end user concern. A desktop contains a window manager, while a window manager does not contain a desktop... if that makes any sense.
If you were using Debian Linux, installing KDE would be as difficult as typing:
apt-get update
apt-get install kdebase
This causes apt-get to automatically search for the required software packages, and then it installs them in the correct order - automatically.
But for some reason, people think that using a Redhat based distro is easier and more user-friendly. They are wrong. Of course, apt-get exists for Redhat based distros, but because it doesn't rely on the Debian community, policies, and package sources... its not as good.
Just a little competition and we have cheap ultra high performance CPUs! Back in the 80s, no one would dream of computer hardware with such performance.
One monopoly in the OS market and we have restrictive bloated ultra expensive insecure operating systems! Back in the 80s, I wonder if this is what people were dreaming about...
You missed the point.
Ask users what they want, because they will use the installer for installing the OS.
Ask developers what they want, because they will be writing code, modules, extensions, and keeping the installer up-to-date with newer hardware. If you don't take developers past, present, and future into consideration, then you will end up with an installer that noone wants to maintain, extend, tweak, polish, etc... In addition, hardware developers should also be consulted, because they will be making the hardware that is to be autodetected and configured. Companies that support Linux by providing specs, drivers, and such, should be companies whose hardware is correctly autodetected and autoconfigured by the installer.
Ignoring developers would be one of the most ignorant and just plain stupid things that you could do when designing a Linux installer. My point is that, in fact, the developers will be dealing with the installer far more than the users because they will be writing code or fabricating hardware, all of which must correctly and easily integrate with the installer.
Furhermore, asking users should mean asking and supporting different types of users: Joe Six-pack users, power users, and most importantly, system administrators and system integrators. How many MS Windows users installed their copy of windows? Yeah, very little, so why ask Joe Six-pack what he wants when he most likely won't ever install an OS? Its more important to ask the target groups that will be installing operating systems: OEMs (aka system integrators), system administrators, and power users.
Having an installer that can be used by any idiot off the street might seem like a good idea, but you will be ignoring your target audience.
Truely, for Linux to "make it on the desktop", requires that OEMs start shipping PDAs, laptops, desktop PCs, and workstations with Linux on them. Otherwise, you will be making a Linux-for-Dummies installer for a group of people who will never use it. You want Linux to end up on more desktops? Ask Dell, Compaq, and HP what they want from a Debian Linux installer. Also, note that an automated patch application utility such as apt-get makes support oh so much easier, as long as it is setup to run at 2AM every night or something like that. OEMs should think about that. No more workstations 3 service packs behind means far fewer people with rooted web servers, desktops, etc... (ala Code Red and Nimda).
Finally, some flamebait, but it must be said: Most HCI or CHI people are the wrost types of Software Engineers and Computer Scientists... even worse than those AI guys (most of whom don't even understand the basic limitations of formal, i.e. computational systems: incompleteness, undecidability, diagnalization). I mean, most things that the HCI research guys find out is common sense, and when its not, its most likely misleading, "dumb down the world" advice, like the parent post. Users can mean developers in one situation (OS installers, if OEM system integrators and sys-admins are considered developers) and other times it can mean Joe-sixpack (Web Browsers, IM, Media Players). But not so if you ask the HCI croud... to them, everything should be dumbed down. Any retard should be able to carry out any task. I am still waiting for the HCI croud to start writing papers on making open heart surgery more user-friendly and easier to carry out by Joe-sixpack. We have all seen what happens when you dumb down system administration. You dumb down the security of the internet. I mean, any idiot can admin a server right? Microsoft preaches so, but is it a good idea?
Choice, options, control... they should all be taken away from the user, no matter who that user is. For according to HCI types, we should pander to the lowest common denominator: Joe sixpack and Soccer Mom. They LOVE installing operating systems. Its part of or at least could and should be part of their everyday life.
While the HCI research community has a few nice apples, most are bad apples that just couldn't cut it in their Computational Theory 101 class or Algorithms 101 class. So they spend their entire life writing papers on common sense topics and idiotic topics. Whoever gives them funding is wasting their money.
Lynx is second rate compared to the Links command-line web browser, which I use regularly under Linux... and I am using right now. It supports SSL, tables, and many other common web technologies. Oh, and did I mention that it uses less than 1MB of RAM? Its uber fast, and perfect for reading sites like slashdot. Navigation is a breeze... no mouse needed here. Also, since Links doesn't download the overboard graphics that many websites use, sites load far quicker than in other browsers because of the smaller download. Sure there is less eye-and-ear-candy, but the net is still full of content... and Links gives you access to that content.
I love what Hotmail says, when I log in with Links. It says that my browser won't let me use Hotmails advanced features or something... whatever...
I can just see it now. Environmentalist fanatics running around cities like 1980s gang members with spray paint cans, spraying grafitti on anything and everything... all in the name of polutionless electricity.
Therefore I nominate the least fixed-point of the lambda-calculus:
\x(xx)
Wait, is that always terminate on all inputs? If so, according to that criteria, a Java Virtual Machine isn't an algorithm. Nor is any universal (in the sense of Turing) programming language interpreter. Apply the diagonalization method, and its pretty obvious.
I always thought that Kleene's partial recursive functions were a good enough description of "algorithm".
They actually had a Simpsons episode about how Microsoft does business.
apt-get isn't all there is to the ease of application installtion on Debian. The entire Debian package policy plays a big part.
So there are no apps for Debian Linux? Maybe that explains why software is so easy to install, uninstall, and update on Debian... its because none of it really exists.
Lets face it, the LSB is not an objective standard but a crappy attempt at a standard that has succeeded in nothing more than giving Redhat a supposed stamp of approval as not only the defacto Linux standard, but the dejure Linux standard. Why not just ditch the LSB and replace it with a sentence that says, "Must be Redhat compatible"? At least people wouldn't be kidding themselves.
It is like trading Hitler for Stalin! Look ma! Free... errr... wait, actually its not free as in freedom. The purist of pure OSS user uses Debian Linux.
I live in America, born here... stayed here. I love this place, but I see the problems it has. Just watching the news, local or national (e.g. CNN)... again and again, the Palestinian killers are referred to as "terrorists", while the Israeli killers are referred to as "military". A subtle bias? I think not.
Furthermore, in the USA, to criticize Israel is antisemitic - an exercise of neo-nazism. Taboo? It is extremely taboo to criticize Israel, and its backing philosophy: Zionism. Even when an Israeli Zionist Jew, Noam Chomsky criticizes Israel, he is a "neo-nazi"!
So yes, while many things in the USA work correctly (e.g. I can say "George W Bush is an idiot".) - when it comes to Israel, Zionism, Jews - well those are for some irrational reason, above critique no matter how true, just, and needed.
By the textbook definition of "terrorist", we could correctly call Israel a terrorist, facist, racist state of apartheid which is guilty of ethnic clensing and genocide. Reuter's attempt is to not label one side as the good guys and the other as the bad guys, which is something that, say, CNN does every day.
Have you ever considered how biased our (USA) media is? In the whole Israel vs Pal conflict, Israelis are never called terrorists, even though the UN has recognized that Israel targets Palestinian civilians with violence. So the entire USA gets a light brainwashing everytime they watch the news. Palestinians are terrorists, and the Israelis are just using military action in self defense.
Do you see the bias? What about on September 11th, when the entire USA is shown some footage of 5 or 6 Palestinian teens dancing in the streets upon the news of the WTC attacks? This is a textbook case of taking something way out of context! Yeah, all of those tanks, heliocopters, missiles, bullets, etc, which have been used by Israel to kill everyone of those Palestinians were all made in the USA and given to Israel. In fact, the USA has supported Israel since the begining, with large amounts of money and weapons. Oh, and checking history shows that Israel has been illegaly occupying Palestinian land, using military force by the way, for several decades. So our lovely unbiased news "just reports" how these kids are dancing in the streets, but neglects to give the viewer any context. Knowing how the american educational system works, the average viewer doesn't know a thing about the history behind that conflict, and therefore, showing the USA a short clip of Pal teens dancing in the streets will serve the purpose of labelling the Pals as the "bad guys" - lumped together with the WTC terrorists.
My point is that, first of all, al Quaeda and the Palestinians are two separate issues. Furthurmore, all sides are guilty of murder or aiding murder! The important thing to realize is that what a nation supports and does is NOT what a person in that nation supports and does. The smartest thing would be to form a UN meeting amongst the common citizens of these nations, the ones that don't have "military action" as one of their solutions... have those people come up with a solution. Otherwise, each side will continue to choose and support leaders that have "military action" as their solution for international problems, and we will all continue to kill each other ad infinitum.
Also, some more food for thought on the whole Palestinian vs Israel conflict. If the USA is pissed off at Iran because Iran gives weapons to Palestine, then why is it ok that the USA gives weapons to Israel? Seems like a double standard. Or how bout the fact that Iran building nuclear weapons, is bad (even though they are doing it to protect their nation against Iraq, their not-best-friend of a neighboring nation), while the USA's stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction isn't bad. Yet again, another "bad guys" & "good guys" philosophy used by our nations leaders.
I think everyone in the USA needs to really get introspective, and see if they are brainwashed (oh no you think, the our media is pure truth, not an instrament of social engineering). See if they have chosen a side a priori. Because choosing sides, choosing military solutions - these things will only furthur the violence, furthur the hatred.