What losing battle? Open source software hasn't been as prevalent as it is now since proprietary software first arose. Linux, in particular, is in the strongest position it's ever been in, and it looks like 2013 will be a very big year for Linux. Sure, there are always setbacks like this, but look: it's been just over 3 months since Windows 8 began to be sold, and the problem is already almost completely solved.
But in the spirit of openness, hopefully bootloaders for NetBSD, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD will also be eventually signed.
So you have time to whinge, but none to RTFA:
A signed pre-bootloader will allow for chain-loading of boot-loader of any other operating system thereby enabling users to install non-signed Linux distros on Windows 8 UEFI hardware.
Everyone should be able to install and run whatever they want on their own computers.
Yes, but not everyone should be able to install or run whatever they want on your computer. In fairness, UEFI goes some way towards securing your PC. Microsoft did well for the consumer in that respect. They're also a fairly ruthless company, and they're not going to go out of their way to make sure you can install rival operating systems from day 1. But today, at about day 100, the problem is a long way towards being solved. Get over it.
A clever combination of light trolling and misdirection, but you won't distract me from the fact that you haven't addressed my points at all. Complain about Unity when it's relevant, and then, talk specifically about what's wrong with it. Otherwise, people who need to hear won't listen. That, drankr, is my message to you. Take it or leave it.
This is a line by the Dude in The Big Lebowski. It was a joke, never mind. I'm European too, and I express my opinions. I shall proceed to do so thusly:
Complaining about Unity in this comments thread is: + Off-topic, because the article is about moving to a rolling release system. Unity has no greater significance to this point than any other package in Ubuntu. + Flamebait, because it will provoke a strong negative response, and it won't create interesting, informative or insightful commentary. + Retarded, because if you want somebody to take your criticism seriously, you do it at an appropriate time and in an appropriate manner.
Will mods please raise this comment to +5? The GP clearly didn't RTFA or didn't understand the situation, FFS. If there actually were a 4% shrinkage over less than a hundred years, then how big was the proton hundreds of millions of years ago? How about 13.7 billion years ago? Use your heads, please!
Is there anything that precludes this as a possibility?
Yes. That would mean a continuous growth, not a sudden change when a different method is used. Not to mention that a 4% change in a few years would mean that the proton was enormous around the time of the dinosaurs, even. If the proton was shrinking that quickly relative to collections of atoms, we would need an overhaul of a great deal of the current body of science.
people just take it for granted that some government agency can prevent a business from opening wherever
How do you know that people take it for granted? Do you live in Ireland? No, it's quite clear that you don't.
All planning permission is obtained through An Bord Pleanála. Anyone can appeal the issue of planning permission or bring to attention the lack thereof. How exactly do you propose that a company like Intel would buy or lease enough private property in Leixlip to create 4,300 jobs without getting permission?
Your comment is rightly scored at -1. While I'm on the subject, I read through the first few "comments worth making" and they are also correctly scored. The irony of you posting this as your sig is that manyofthereplies effectively point out the madness in the original post. Clearly, roman_mir is trying to help people, but is so ill-informed and impervious to reason that he's just posting the same old nonsense over and over again without questioning himself.
Anyway people who for some reason feel the need to defend this shell online seem far more angry and aggressive than its detractors.
Well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
But besides, you're missing the point: it's not about whether Unity is good or not (I don't like it). The point is that it's so easy even for a n00b to install something else that it's just annoying and boring to see every Ubuntu-related article filled with discussions about Unity as if it mattered.
It seems there's much more than humans that it doesn't apply to. Check out the plot of Mortality Rate to Mass at the end of the article. The "researchers" might see a linear relationship, but I certainly don't. There's so much variation that the statement that "size seems to predict lifespan" is only true in the most anecdotal sense.
'Fractal dimension' seems like a cool buzzword which will make it easier to get research noticed
Well, maybe it is, but you can't actually fault them for using it. The term "fractal dimension" is as old as the study of fractals, and is taught in university mathematics courses. It is a useful concept, as you'll see if you read the wikipedia page. It's also consistent with the traditional geometric idea of dimension.
I've only skimmed through the paper so far, but they've directly calculated the FD from its definition. The data looks pretty good. From what I've seen in the paper, I would say it's all legit.
In the mean time, I hope to start building prototype "seed factory" hardware this year. A seed factory is the minimal starter set of machines to start building *other* machines, which in turn becomes your industrial base. Think of it like a bootstrap compiler for hardware. Feed it plans for other machines, it starts making parts. I'm aiming for making 85% of the 2nd generation machines, because 100% is too hard a goal. The other 15% you just buy.
This bit is a joke. An actual joke. There's literally zero chance that DanielRavenNest believes this.
I can't believe I got this far through the comments before somebody mentioned this. All this "FUD" and "flawed assumptions" and other speculation is absolutely pointless. From TFA:
If Munich had stayed with Windows XP combined with Office 2003 instead of choosing Linux combined with OpenOffice.org, it would have saved money, the study apparently claimed.
That is the comparison being made: XP to Linux. XP is no longer a supported OS, and will eventually be too out-of-date to keep using. In other words, the study compares changing software to putting off changing software. The study found that putting off a switch or upgrade means short-term savings. We know this, and it's not beneficial to Microsoft for this to be known. There may be a lack of rigour, flawed assumptions or other problems with it, but even on the face of it, this is not a study to go waving about for Microsoft
The other solution is dual-booting. I don't know how easy that still is, whether Windows 8 gets in the way of shortening a partition.
I think if Windows 8 computers do start to be sold in huge quantities, the fact that Valve is investing in Linux means that the problems will be short-lived. It will get done or they'll pay for it to get done.
First of all, Fluxbox is little more than a window manager, so that's not really comparable to Gnome, KDE, Xfce, LXDE or Unity, which are full desktop environments.
Personally, I like Xfce. Here are some reasons: 1. It's much lighter on resources than Gnome 2/3, KDE or Unity, and a lot snappier. 2. It does have a (fairly limited) compositor, which gives you transparency and shadow options. This doesn't add much in terms of "eye candy", but I'm not really interested in that, and I find these features far more useful than the fancy compiz stuff. 3. I find that Xfce programs play nicely with things outside of Xfce. You don't, for example, get the likes of nautilus starting up a whole load of other services when you actually just want a file manager. 4. Xfce programs have a greater tendency to let you customise things by inserting terminal commands than Gnome or KDE. As a result, I find the Xfce panel easier to work with than the KDE or Gnome ones. 5. I prefer the look of Xfce to any of the others, with the possible exception of Gnome 3. I know it looks more dated, but I like it anyway. 6. It's the only one of them for which I've never thought an "upgrade" was actually a downgrade.
So there you go. That's why. I should add, though, that some of the Xfce programs (e.g. Midori, Squeeze, Ristretto) are of low quality and have to be substituted, but then again, I would never use Konqueror or Epiphany anyway. From what little time I've spent LXDE, I've found it suffers even more from this (I don't even like the terminal emulator).
FTFY. Famous people are those who are known by many more people than they know personally. It is entirely reasonable that such people should need greater protection from unsolicited messaging.
Well, I'll start by admitting I've never even been to America. I've heard it from many people who have worked in America as well as in Ireland (where I'm from) and/or other European countries. We Irish know and admit that we're lazy sods; it still amazes people how little gets done in American white-collar jobs. Anecdotal evidence, YMMV, etc, etc. But look at the poster I'm replying to - it's at least as bad.
I've worked in Sweden too, my brother's worked in Norway, and I know other people who've worked in Scandinavian countries, Netherlands and Germany. Let me tell you: in these countries, (in average white-collar jobs it is the tendency that) the hours are very reasonable, but it's a genuine faux pas among co-workers to be slacking off. It's not frantic, but work time is work time.
I think I phrased a lot of my comment badly, in that I mean to talk of typical workplaces in each country. It's true that you can't make generalisations across the board, but you certainly can talk about workplace attitudes and expectations. Please note that I haven't said that all Americans are slackers, that those struggling are not working hard, that Americans don't work long hours, etc. I'm just saying that there seems to be some problem with inefficiency at work, which many non-Americans have remarked on to me. Confirmation bias, perhaps? Maybe a bit of that, but it couldn't possibly account for how frequently I hear the point made. It is quite possible that the people I know worked at particularly inefficient companies.
Americans remind me of my sister with regards to talking about work: when it's useful in the conversation to be the hardest worker, that's who you are; when it's useful to talk about how little work you do, that's what you talk about.
In actual fact, I believe both. Americans definitely do work more than most Europeans (except eastern Europeans). The holidays are shorter and usually involve some contact with the workplace, employer or clients. However, I have noticed that, outside of the best and worst jobs, lack of productivity seems to be a serious problem in America. Your average office worker spends a sizable portion of the day browsing the internet (correct me if I'm wrong!). Believe it or not, this does not happen in many European countries. Still, though:
3-hour lunches or month-long vacations
what
On the whole, the problems you describe:
making $7.25/hr no job security or benefits couldn't afford a hospital stay afraid you would get laid off if you took a vacation
Are a result of the lack of socialism in America. Haters can fucking deal with that, because it's true. Socialist policies are generally good for 99% of the population. It's good for society, doncha know.
Good point, but I want to point out that even a 50% chance of protection does not mean you're just as well off to not get the vaccine. I'm not sure if that's what you were saying, and sorry if it's not.
No I won't actually. I'm happy to admit that I was wrong about the flu shot, in that it possibly doesn't have a great ROI. I say that because of comments such as kkwst2's and the first AC's. They're good comments, and they criticise mine in a persuasive and rational manner. Your comment, on the other hand...
no proven efficacy
Which is not at all true of vaccines, even the flu shot.
Colonoscopes for 10 year olds? After all there are recorded cases.... Pre-emptive Gall Bladder removal? Cheaper and safer to do when you are not ill after all.
I'd call this a straw man, but it's actually just completely irrelevant to what I was saying.
Did you support the NY drink ban? How about we make fatty food illegal?
No, they should be taxed and fresh fruit and veg should be subsidised. Fast food and sugary drinks should not be the foods with the best value.
How about we add just plain injury to that? Motorcycles, gone. Extreme Sports, gone. Cars, gone.
People don't actively enjoy not-getting-vaccines in the way they enjoy fun stuff. The two are not comparable.
How about Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness any damn way I want without your boot on my neck?
Just try to calm down, please. An employer requiring you to stick to a vaccination policy is not a human rights issue.
Does your opinion change if they are deathly afraid of needles or seeing their own blood?
No.
medicine that shows no efficacy
Once again, that's simply not true. You can argue over whether it's adequately effective, but not whether it's effective at all.
Stick to the facts, don't argue by strained analogies and try to rage less. You do yourself no favours by writing a comment like that.
A good point well made. Many people treat these questions as if they have obvious answers, but they don't.
However, I would like to add my voice in favour of mandatory vaccinations. This may seem like a severe position to take, but I simply do not see any rational argument for allowing someone to refuse it. - Vaccines work. Nobody can deny this. There are years of data in various countries showing that getting your flu shot is statistically a good idea. - If at some point, our understanding of the subject is good enough that we can say, "don't take vaccine X if you have gene Y or condition Z", then that must be factored in. At present, if we don't have such information, the best guess we can make is that the vaccine is a good idea for the person. - One must raise the question of whether anyone has the right to risk getting an illness themselves. i.e., can I refuse the MMR shot and risk getting measles, mumps or rubella? Me getting a serious illness, needlessly, is just a waste of resources, which could be put towards patients with unavoidable ailments. I don't see why I should be allowed, without a damn good reason. - Is there any good reason? The article says that the vaccine was refused on religious grounds. What religious grounds, exactly? "Religion" is not a method for making arbitrary personal decisions. - Finally, if a valid argument can not be produced for why someone should be allowed to refuse it, I believe the remark:
there is no evidence showing that vaccinated workers are less likely to transmit virus
should also be considered as
there is no evidence showing that vaccinated workers are more likely to transmit virus
Slashdot Mirror
the losing battle for openness
What losing battle? Open source software hasn't been as prevalent as it is now since proprietary software first arose. Linux, in particular, is in the strongest position it's ever been in, and it looks like 2013 will be a very big year for Linux. Sure, there are always setbacks like this, but look: it's been just over 3 months since Windows 8 began to be sold, and the problem is already almost completely solved.
But in the spirit of openness, hopefully bootloaders for NetBSD, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD will also be eventually signed.
So you have time to whinge, but none to RTFA:
A signed pre-bootloader will allow for chain-loading of boot-loader of any other operating system thereby enabling users to install non-signed Linux distros on Windows 8 UEFI hardware.
Everyone should be able to install and run whatever they want on their own computers.
Yes, but not everyone should be able to install or run whatever they want on your computer. In fairness, UEFI goes some way towards securing your PC. Microsoft did well for the consumer in that respect. They're also a fairly ruthless company, and they're not going to go out of their way to make sure you can install rival operating systems from day 1. But today, at about day 100, the problem is a long way towards being solved. Get over it.
A clever combination of light trolling and misdirection, but you won't distract me from the fact that you haven't addressed my points at all.
Complain about Unity when it's relevant, and then, talk specifically about what's wrong with it. Otherwise, people who need to hear won't listen.
That, drankr, is my message to you. Take it or leave it.
Well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
This is a line by the Dude in The Big Lebowski. It was a joke, never mind. I'm European too, and I express my opinions. I shall proceed to do so thusly:
Complaining about Unity in this comments thread is:
+ Off-topic, because the article is about moving to a rolling release system. Unity has no greater significance to this point than any other package in Ubuntu.
+ Flamebait, because it will provoke a strong negative response, and it won't create interesting, informative or insightful commentary.
+ Retarded, because if you want somebody to take your criticism seriously, you do it at an appropriate time and in an appropriate manner.
Will mods please raise this comment to +5? The GP clearly didn't RTFA or didn't understand the situation, FFS.
If there actually were a 4% shrinkage over less than a hundred years, then how big was the proton hundreds of millions of years ago? How about 13.7 billion years ago? Use your heads, please!
Is there anything that precludes this as a possibility?
Yes. That would mean a continuous growth, not a sudden change when a different method is used. Not to mention that a 4% change in a few years would mean that the proton was enormous around the time of the dinosaurs, even. If the proton was shrinking that quickly relative to collections of atoms, we would need an overhaul of a great deal of the current body of science.
people just take it for granted that some government agency can prevent a business from opening wherever
How do you know that people take it for granted? Do you live in Ireland? No, it's quite clear that you don't.
All planning permission is obtained through An Bord Pleanála. Anyone can appeal the issue of planning permission or bring to attention the lack thereof. How exactly do you propose that a company like Intel would buy or lease enough private property in Leixlip to create 4,300 jobs without getting permission?
Your comment is rightly scored at -1. While I'm on the subject, I read through the first few "comments worth making" and they are also correctly scored. The irony of you posting this as your sig is that many of the replies effectively point out the madness in the original post. Clearly, roman_mir is trying to help people, but is so ill-informed and impervious to reason that he's just posting the same old nonsense over and over again without questioning himself.
Anyway people who for some reason feel the need to defend this shell online seem far more angry and aggressive than its detractors.
Well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
But besides, you're missing the point: it's not about whether Unity is good or not (I don't like it). The point is that it's so easy even for a n00b to install something else that it's just annoying and boring to see every Ubuntu-related article filled with discussions about Unity as if it mattered.
how did the parent get modded 5 insightful?
Because so many mods think they know what a good comment looks like, even if they have no idea of its factual accuracy.
Thanks, by the way.
It seems there's much more than humans that it doesn't apply to. Check out the plot of Mortality Rate to Mass at the end of the article. The "researchers" might see a linear relationship, but I certainly don't. There's so much variation that the statement that "size seems to predict lifespan" is only true in the most anecdotal sense.
Very poor article.
That makes two of you.
'Fractal dimension' seems like a cool buzzword which will make it easier to get research noticed
Well, maybe it is, but you can't actually fault them for using it. The term "fractal dimension" is as old as the study of fractals, and is taught in university mathematics courses. It is a useful concept, as you'll see if you read the wikipedia page. It's also consistent with the traditional geometric idea of dimension.
I've only skimmed through the paper so far, but they've directly calculated the FD from its definition. The data looks pretty good. From what I've seen in the paper, I would say it's all legit.
In the mean time, I hope to start building prototype "seed factory" hardware this year. A seed factory is the minimal starter set of machines to start building *other* machines, which in turn becomes your industrial base. Think of it like a bootstrap compiler for hardware. Feed it plans for other machines, it starts making parts. I'm aiming for making 85% of the 2nd generation machines, because 100% is too hard a goal. The other 15% you just buy.
This bit is a joke. An actual joke. There's literally zero chance that DanielRavenNest believes this.
Hilarious stuff. You're all way too gullible.
I can't believe I got this far through the comments before somebody mentioned this.
All this "FUD" and "flawed assumptions" and other speculation is absolutely pointless. From TFA:
If Munich had stayed with Windows XP combined with Office 2003 instead of choosing Linux combined with OpenOffice.org, it would have saved money, the study apparently claimed.
That is the comparison being made: XP to Linux. XP is no longer a supported OS, and will eventually be too out-of-date to keep using. In other words, the study compares changing software to putting off changing software. The study found that putting off a switch or upgrade means short-term savings. We know this, and it's not beneficial to Microsoft for this to be known. There may be a lack of rigour, flawed assumptions or other problems with it, but even on the face of it, this is not a study to go waving about for Microsoft
The other solution is dual-booting. I don't know how easy that still is, whether Windows 8 gets in the way of shortening a partition.
I think if Windows 8 computers do start to be sold in huge quantities, the fact that Valve is investing in Linux means that the problems will be short-lived.
It will get done or they'll pay for it to get done.
(I don't even like the terminal emulator)
Just in case anyone takes me up on this, I just tried LXTerminal again now, and I can't for the life of me remember what I didn't like about it.
First of all, Fluxbox is little more than a window manager, so that's not really comparable to Gnome, KDE, Xfce, LXDE or Unity, which are full desktop environments.
Personally, I like Xfce. Here are some reasons:
1. It's much lighter on resources than Gnome 2/3, KDE or Unity, and a lot snappier.
2. It does have a (fairly limited) compositor, which gives you transparency and shadow options. This doesn't add much in terms of "eye candy", but I'm not really interested in that, and I find these features far more useful than the fancy compiz stuff.
3. I find that Xfce programs play nicely with things outside of Xfce. You don't, for example, get the likes of nautilus starting up a whole load of other services when you actually just want a file manager.
4. Xfce programs have a greater tendency to let you customise things by inserting terminal commands than Gnome or KDE. As a result, I find the Xfce panel easier to work with than the KDE or Gnome ones.
5. I prefer the look of Xfce to any of the others, with the possible exception of Gnome 3. I know it looks more dated, but I like it anyway.
6. It's the only one of them for which I've never thought an "upgrade" was actually a downgrade.
So there you go. That's why. I should add, though, that some of the Xfce programs (e.g. Midori, Squeeze, Ristretto) are of low quality and have to be substituted, but then again, I would never use Konqueror or Epiphany anyway. From what little time I've spent LXDE, I've found it suffers even more from this (I don't even like the terminal emulator).
Yeah, it can't be that good a telescope. Let it burn.
Well, they don't claim to be International Geographic.
"cool" (i.e. famous)
FTFY. Famous people are those who are known by many more people than they know personally. It is entirely reasonable that such people should need greater protection from unsolicited messaging.
Well, I'll start by admitting I've never even been to America. I've heard it from many people who have worked in America as well as in Ireland (where I'm from) and/or other European countries. We Irish know and admit that we're lazy sods; it still amazes people how little gets done in American white-collar jobs. Anecdotal evidence, YMMV, etc, etc. But look at the poster I'm replying to - it's at least as bad.
I've worked in Sweden too, my brother's worked in Norway, and I know other people who've worked in Scandinavian countries, Netherlands and Germany. Let me tell you: in these countries, (in average white-collar jobs it is the tendency that) the hours are very reasonable, but it's a genuine faux pas among co-workers to be slacking off. It's not frantic, but work time is work time.
I think I phrased a lot of my comment badly, in that I mean to talk of typical workplaces in each country. It's true that you can't make generalisations across the board, but you certainly can talk about workplace attitudes and expectations. Please note that I haven't said that all Americans are slackers, that those struggling are not working hard, that Americans don't work long hours, etc. I'm just saying that there seems to be some problem with inefficiency at work, which many non-Americans have remarked on to me.
Confirmation bias, perhaps? Maybe a bit of that, but it couldn't possibly account for how frequently I hear the point made. It is quite possible that the people I know worked at particularly inefficient companies.
Americans remind me of my sister with regards to talking about work: when it's useful in the conversation to be the hardest worker, that's who you are; when it's useful to talk about how little work you do, that's what you talk about.
In actual fact, I believe both. Americans definitely do work more than most Europeans (except eastern Europeans). The holidays are shorter and usually involve some contact with the workplace, employer or clients. However, I have noticed that, outside of the best and worst jobs, lack of productivity seems to be a serious problem in America. Your average office worker spends a sizable portion of the day browsing the internet (correct me if I'm wrong!). Believe it or not, this does not happen in many European countries. Still, though:
3-hour lunches or month-long vacations
what
On the whole, the problems you describe:
making $7.25/hr
no job security or benefits
couldn't afford a hospital stay
afraid you would get laid off if you took a vacation
Are a result of the lack of socialism in America. Haters can fucking deal with that, because it's true. Socialist policies are generally good for 99% of the population. It's good for society, doncha know.
Good point, but I want to point out that even a 50% chance of protection does not mean you're just as well off to not get the vaccine. I'm not sure if that's what you were saying, and sorry if it's not.
No I won't actually. I'm happy to admit that I was wrong about the flu shot, in that it possibly doesn't have a great ROI. I say that because of comments such as kkwst2's and the first AC's. They're good comments, and they criticise mine in a persuasive and rational manner. Your comment, on the other hand...
no proven efficacy
Which is not at all true of vaccines, even the flu shot.
Colonoscopes for 10 year olds? After all there are recorded cases.... Pre-emptive Gall Bladder removal? Cheaper and safer to do when you are not ill after all.
I'd call this a straw man, but it's actually just completely irrelevant to what I was saying.
Did you support the NY drink ban? How about we make fatty food illegal?
No, they should be taxed and fresh fruit and veg should be subsidised. Fast food and sugary drinks should not be the foods with the best value.
How about we add just plain injury to that? Motorcycles, gone. Extreme Sports, gone. Cars, gone.
People don't actively enjoy not-getting-vaccines in the way they enjoy fun stuff. The two are not comparable.
How about Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness any damn way I want without your boot on my neck?
Just try to calm down, please. An employer requiring you to stick to a vaccination policy is not a human rights issue.
Does your opinion change if they are deathly afraid of needles or seeing their own blood?
No.
medicine that shows no efficacy
Once again, that's simply not true. You can argue over whether it's adequately effective, but not whether it's effective at all.
Stick to the facts, don't argue by strained analogies and try to rage less. You do yourself no favours by writing a comment like that.
Your sig just makes your hysterical comment all the more amusing.
A good point well made. Many people treat these questions as if they have obvious answers, but they don't.
However, I would like to add my voice in favour of mandatory vaccinations. This may seem like a severe position to take, but I simply do not see any rational argument for allowing someone to refuse it.
- Vaccines work. Nobody can deny this. There are years of data in various countries showing that getting your flu shot is statistically a good idea.
- If at some point, our understanding of the subject is good enough that we can say, "don't take vaccine X if you have gene Y or condition Z", then that must be factored in. At present, if we don't have such information, the best guess we can make is that the vaccine is a good idea for the person.
- One must raise the question of whether anyone has the right to risk getting an illness themselves. i.e., can I refuse the MMR shot and risk getting measles, mumps or rubella? Me getting a serious illness, needlessly, is just a waste of resources, which could be put towards patients with unavoidable ailments. I don't see why I should be allowed, without a damn good reason.
- Is there any good reason? The article says that the vaccine was refused on religious grounds. What religious grounds, exactly? "Religion" is not a method for making arbitrary personal decisions.
- Finally, if a valid argument can not be produced for why someone should be allowed to refuse it, I believe the remark:
there is no evidence showing that vaccinated workers are less likely to transmit virus
should also be considered as
there is no evidence showing that vaccinated workers are more likely to transmit virus