The only times I've seen a Windows system that was so fucked up I couldn't fix it, was when it had been abused and neglected for years on end
Your lack of experience with various Windows machines does not change the facts. It happens very often. I saw it happen with multiple workstations every year, sometimes the same ones twice per year. The whole idea of a registry is flawed, and the actual implementation is worse than you could possibly imagine.
Seriously -- what happens if you install every sort of incompatible shitware on your linux box, then uninstall it by deleting whatever you see that happens to have a remotely-similar name? I'd bet the results are no prettier than they are with Windows.
In fact, the results are far, FAR better. If your kernel and/bin partition hasn't been corrupted, your system can be recovered. Removing all traces of improperly deleted packages is easy enough, as is reinstalling any you actually want from CD or network. And an intermediate user can do it, whereas Windows can't be fixed even by the best experts.
Your ranting about your anecdotal experiences are completely pointless. I've maintained both Windows and Unix systems for years, and I can tell you my experience is hard earned, based on much blood sweat and tears struggling with Windows workstations and servers (and fixing Unix workstations and Servers).
I guess we can only assume the value of the vehicle is somewhere between $22k and $35k. Halfway between is about $28.5k. [...] Also note that the lowest of all possible low end prices that you chose is more than $20k. Which corroborates my original claim that the car is worth more than $20k.
Completely and totally wrong. I chose 2006 and "good condition" to be as generous as possible. The story doesn't state any such information, and I would generally assume the worst case.
The price couldn't be any higher than you list, but it could EASILY be far, far lower.
When someone says "Why don't they just", it usually means they have no idea how it's being done, and is just taking that opportunity to show what they know, even though they have no idea if it's applicable.
I can't say I blame them. TFA was so light on actual details that the old equipment could include a rat on a wheel, for all we know.
I don't disagree that if you know what you're doing, it is much easier to fix a broken Linux than it is to fix a broken Windows. But the key here is that most people don't know what they're doing.
I'd say the important part is that when something goes wrong with a Unix system, it CAN be fixed, AT ALL.
It's not some anecdote that Windows users have to reinstall all the time... There really is no other way to fix serious problems in Windows. Even after 10 years of experience, and extensive knowledge of Windows, there are still regular fuck-ups with Windows that I and anyone else can't possibly fix.
Maybe it's some driver that refuses to uninstall, so much so that even removing all references to it in the registry, and all (text) files across the entire filesystem, still doesn't remove or disable. Maybe it's some of the registry hives getting so unbelievably corrupted that you can't delete, add, replace entries anymore. Maybe it's some system file that gets corrupted, and the original from disc is entirely incompatible because of updates, etc., etc. With a Unix system, there is no problem that can't be fixed. With Windows, even after all these years, there are still a huge number that force restoring the FULL system from backup, or often completely reinstalling.
It's not that there are a lot of libertarian nerds, it's just that the libertarians shout the loudest and, well, most dense, as they ignore all rational arguments that might discredit their views.
You're probably right about the affluence argument though, a disproportionate number seem to be the "I got mine" crowd, who know that they will be on the top of the pyramid, benefiting rather than suffering from the vast inequality that libertarianism will cause.
Just remember that Communism won the second world war without help.
Gee, by far the largest country in the world managed to defeat the tiny nation of Germany, and merely by throwing wave after wave of it's own men to be slaughtered in the millions.
And even with that, I still seriously doubt the USSR would have won the war on it's own. You're completely dismissing the aid the USSR received, and amount of effort the Axis put into fighting the other Allies. England and the US weren't on the ground in Europe as early, but they were bombing the hell out of Germany, fighting in Africa, and destroying the Axis navies. If nothing else, lots planes, bombs and V1s and V2s were sent towards England, rather than Russia.
And if Japan had joined in the war attacking the USSR, instead of the USA? The "Communists" may well have run out of human chattel to throw under the tanks before the war's end.
You mean to tell me it spends more on this than on defense? Not even close! Defense used to be 20% of the whole budget in non war years.
That's just completely and totally wrong.
I picked 2000 to fit your critera. Name a year if you want to actually argue anything.
Federal: 15% National Defense 22% Social Security 11% Medicare 6% Medicaid 6% Reserved for Social Security
That puts social programs at 45% (more for education, et al.), over 3X the spending on National Defense.
What's more, only an idiot would just compare the federal dollars. You see, in the US we have a little something called STATES. Now, these "states" spend very, very little of their money on "defense" since that's almost entirely a federal issue. These "states" however spend a huge percentage of their state revenues on social programs, and is where 90% of the money for education comes from. If you just look at federal taxes, you'd think we don't spend anything on education, but you'd be completely wrong... and you, in fact, are.
Well it will be a pity if the world's big countries can't collaborate on this - and leave a space at the table for the Chinese too while you're at it
Design by committee, and lowest common denominator is bad. That's why the ISS has been such a mess.
While you're suggesting a big international government project, things are actually going towards specialization, commercialization, etc., etc.
but it does strike me as a little ironic that the Americans are rolling up their sleeves to re-invent the Apollo spacecraft as the big step forward.
There's only so many ways a spacecraft can look. Why aren't you complaining that Airbus' jets look just like Boeing's jets? Aerodynamics imposes severe restrictions on the designs of high speed vehicles. The only mistake was the nonsensical bureaucratic design of the shuttle in the first place.
You go invent antigravity, then aerospace designs will be able to change. Until then, every vehicle designed to do the same thing, is going to look roughly the same as the rest.
I suppose the earlier Russian (Soviet) plans were based on quite a bit of hardware which is tried and tested (apart from the N1 rocket).
Probably true. And it's that mentality of never making improvements to existing equipment that has held back the Russian space program so much.
A bit off-topic, but have you heard they're going to be tracking cell-phone signals to monitor traffic patterns? It's amazing! Why doesn't Slashdot ever accept a story on the subject?
Your idea of "right to your code" seems to mean ownership and control of what other people do with it, the right to tell someone else what to do or not do. My idea of rights to code is what you and everyone else can do with it without having to ask someone for permission.
There is only one definition of rights, no matter what you make think.
I read somewhere that most game show winners of "free cars" end up selling them to cover the taxes.
"Gifts" and contest "winnings" are taxed for about 1/3rd of their value, as I hear it.
That's why when a family member wants to give you a car, it's far better to say you sold it for $1, instead of paying the taxes on a free gift.
With this trade, however, it's not a free gift, nor a contest winning, so it'll be taxed like any other income. I don't expect him to have to pay more than $100 to the IRS. License and registration is also probably $150. If anything will kill him, it's trying to get insurance for a $20,000 car, as a minor, who hasn't been driving for 3+ years. I could see that easily being several thousand dollars.
Unless it's trashed and has huge mileage, a use 350Z is almost certainly worth more than $20k.
I checked Kelly's Blue Book. A 2006, 25,000 mile, 350Z coupe in Excellent condition is officially ~$22,000. If it's any older or less perfect than that (and you can stretch the just a bit), he can get it, and his 3 iPhones, in under $20,000, without trouble.
You can do anything with it but make it proprietary or let someone else make it proprietary.
Really? I can change the license to something I like more, so long as that license doesn't let anyone make proprietary software?
I can link with differently licensed code, including, perhaps, my own changes?
Use it, share it, display it, perform it, mangle it, build on it, etc.
Again, that's disclaiming all of your rights to it. In fact, public domain is considered disclaiming all right to your code, and yet, the GPL is even more restrictive.
Yes, that's why it's news... The sheer irony of it all.
If Real would have endorsed or adopted such copying capabilities into their player circa 2000, they might have had a chance of staying relevant through the years. Now, when there are hundreds of other programs that can easily do the same thing, it's not even a notable feature, except for the ironic aspect.
Assuming he doesn't have a full-time job we haven't heard about, or a massive trust-fund, taxes are entirely a non-issue. He'd have to earn more than approx. $20,000 in a year to have to pay taxes. A used car is well below that limit. Maybe he'll have to work his way through the form, but that's about it.
What? Disclaim all rights to their code? I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that's not what the GPL says.
You get attribution rights, of course, but other than that, you certainly do lose all other possible rights you'd have to that code, under copyright.
You must make your own code freely available, you aren't allowed to link your own code with GPL-incompatible code, you aren't allowed to stop anyone else from redistributing either source code or binaries of your work, etc., etc. You effectively can't sell your code, because of the above issues.
What rights can you think of that the GPL leaves you?
But the copyright notice wasn't removed, only the BSD license information was removed.
The BSD license is part of the copyright text.
And if you choose to use it under the GPL, then you're not required to keep the BSD license text. Right?
Completely wrong. You NEVER change an existing copyright notice. You may chose whichever license you want to use, but that absolutely doesn't extend to changing the copyright notice.
it appears that the original file was dual licensed to BSD and GPLv2. What exactly is this article about?
You can use BSD licensed code under the GPL, no problem. But on of the very few restrictions the BSD license imposes is that you can't remove the copyright notice, which is what happened.
If some company stripped the GPL license headers from the code they use, even if they were using it, and making changes available as per the GPL, there'd be plenty of public outcry over the license violation.
BSD preserves the right to restrict freedoms plus all the other rights GPL preserves.
The BSD license "preserves" no rights, other than the copyright notice itself. On the contrary, it disclaims nearly all rights and restrictions.
GPL restricts the right to restrict freedoms, and otherwise preserves the same rights as BSD.
The GPL forces everyone who uses that code, to also disclaim all rights to their code. A notable restriction.
I don't think anyone would consider selling your code (that has to be linked to open source code), without allowing your end users to re-sell your work to others without paying you anything, "restricting freedoms" of others, though in the strictest of anarchist senses, it is.
The original implementation was dual licensed BSD/GPL.
The submitter changed some bits and decided to pick the GPL license (both would have been allowed).
Using BSD-licensed code under the GPL is just fine.
CHANGING OR REMOVING A COPYRIGHT NOTICE is illegal, one of the very few clear restrictions imposed by the BSD license. It's one of the things you just don't ever do.
Isn't that what public libraries do? They have bookshelves stacked with (mostly) copyrighted books, they generally have one or more public-use Xerox machines right next to said bookshelves, and they open their doors to the public.
Yes, that is what libraries do...
And cops on duty exceed the posted speed limit all the time...
Both libraries and cops have specific, legal exceptions to certain laws. As a member of the public, you can't just open your front door, post a sign, and start letting people copy your books.
And music is also very different from books for that matter... Know of any libraries with pay-per-use CD recorders for the public?
You're buying into the MHz myth again, and even more sadly, getting modded up for it. I admit I got sucked into the same thing, TWICE. Once with Cyrix, and again with VIA a while back.
VIA chips are far more comparable to AMD/Intel CPUs at about half the MHz rating. VIA's statements about the relative performance of their chips, borders on fraud. Even Apple in the old PPC days would be envious.
If you want a low powered processor with good performance, I'd strongly suggest a single-core Turion CPU... NewEgg had a 2GHz model for $90 a while back. With a max of 25W, and aggressive power savings for much lower power when idle or just not maxed out, you'd really do even better than any of VIA's solutions, with plenty of performance to spare. And you don't need VIA's expensive proprietary mini motherboards either, just a $50 Socket 754 mobo that can support the lower voltage.
For slightly less performance, look at Geode CPUs. AMD's NX line of Geode CPUs are also very high performance (up to 1750+ and completely wipe the floor with the fastest VIA has to offer) and work in any old Socket A system that can support low voltages. MiniITX Mobo+CPU combo can be found on eBay for $200.
Intel had some good solutions in the past, like their 933MHz LV Pentium 3, but they're getting hard to find, and the price is going way up. Getting a motherboard that will accept their lower power mobile CPUs is just too expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
Your lack of experience with various Windows machines does not change the facts. It happens very often. I saw it happen with multiple workstations every year, sometimes the same ones twice per year. The whole idea of a registry is flawed, and the actual implementation is worse than you could possibly imagine.
In fact, the results are far, FAR better. If your kernel and
Your ranting about your anecdotal experiences are completely pointless. I've maintained both Windows and Unix systems for years, and I can tell you my experience is hard earned, based on much blood sweat and tears struggling with Windows workstations and servers (and fixing Unix workstations and Servers).
Completely and totally wrong. I chose 2006 and "good condition" to be as generous as possible. The story doesn't state any such information, and I would generally assume the worst case.
The price couldn't be any higher than you list, but it could EASILY be far, far lower.
I can't say I blame them. TFA was so light on actual details that the old equipment could include a rat on a wheel, for all we know.
I'd say the important part is that when something goes wrong with a Unix system, it CAN be fixed, AT ALL.
It's not some anecdote that Windows users have to reinstall all the time... There really is no other way to fix serious problems in Windows. Even after 10 years of experience, and extensive knowledge of Windows, there are still regular fuck-ups with Windows that I and anyone else can't possibly fix.
Maybe it's some driver that refuses to uninstall, so much so that even removing all references to it in the registry, and all (text) files across the entire filesystem, still doesn't remove or disable. Maybe it's some of the registry hives getting so unbelievably corrupted that you can't delete, add, replace entries anymore. Maybe it's some system file that gets corrupted, and the original from disc is entirely incompatible because of updates, etc., etc. With a Unix system, there is no problem that can't be fixed. With Windows, even after all these years, there are still a huge number that force restoring the FULL system from backup, or often completely reinstalling.
It's not that there are a lot of libertarian nerds, it's just that the libertarians shout the loudest and, well, most dense, as they ignore all rational arguments that might discredit their views.
You're probably right about the affluence argument though, a disproportionate number seem to be the "I got mine" crowd, who know that they will be on the top of the pyramid, benefiting rather than suffering from the vast inequality that libertarianism will cause.
Not at all. Libertarianism leaves a power vacuum, into which large corporations would be only too happy to become the authorities.
Looks like skeletor... I mean Maria is getting a bit friendly. The Governator better watch out for this guy: http://picasaweb.google.com/chademeng/PoliticalLea ders/photo#5070138831866093442
a ders/photo#5057603753740198978
Then again... http://picasaweb.google.com/chademeng/PoliticalLe
Gee, by far the largest country in the world managed to defeat the tiny nation of Germany, and merely by throwing wave after wave of it's own men to be slaughtered in the millions.
And even with that, I still seriously doubt the USSR would have won the war on it's own. You're completely dismissing the aid the USSR received, and amount of effort the Axis put into fighting the other Allies. England and the US weren't on the ground in Europe as early, but they were bombing the hell out of Germany, fighting in Africa, and destroying the Axis navies. If nothing else, lots planes, bombs and V1s and V2s were sent towards England, rather than Russia.
And if Japan had joined in the war attacking the USSR, instead of the USA? The "Communists" may well have run out of human chattel to throw under the tanks before the war's end.
That's just completely and totally wrong.
I picked 2000 to fit your critera. Name a year if you want to actually argue anything.
Federal:
15% National Defense
22% Social Security
11% Medicare
6% Medicaid
6% Reserved for Social Security
That puts social programs at 45% (more for education, et al.), over 3X the spending on National Defense.
What's more, only an idiot would just compare the federal dollars. You see, in the US we have a little something called STATES. Now, these "states" spend very, very little of their money on "defense" since that's almost entirely a federal issue. These "states" however spend a huge percentage of their state revenues on social programs, and is where 90% of the money for education comes from. If you just look at federal taxes, you'd think we don't spend anything on education, but you'd be completely wrong... and you, in fact, are.
Design by committee, and lowest common denominator is bad. That's why the ISS has been such a mess.
While you're suggesting a big international government project, things are actually going towards specialization, commercialization, etc., etc.
There's only so many ways a spacecraft can look. Why aren't you complaining that Airbus' jets look just like Boeing's jets? Aerodynamics imposes severe restrictions on the designs of high speed vehicles. The only mistake was the nonsensical bureaucratic design of the shuttle in the first place.
You go invent antigravity, then aerospace designs will be able to change. Until then, every vehicle designed to do the same thing, is going to look roughly the same as the rest.
Probably true. And it's that mentality of never making improvements to existing equipment that has held back the Russian space program so much.
A bit off-topic, but have you heard they're going to be tracking cell-phone signals to monitor traffic patterns? It's amazing! Why doesn't Slashdot ever accept a story on the subject?
7
4 8
1
7
4 7
2 9
5 9
You can read more here:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/19/14324
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/19/07452
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/01/15924
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/16/07621
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/30/12432
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/13/04282
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/10/23372
There, that's better. Hopefully, one day they'll come to their senses, and post a story or two on the subject.
There is only one definition of rights, no matter what you make think.
"Gifts" and contest "winnings" are taxed for about 1/3rd of their value, as I hear it.
That's why when a family member wants to give you a car, it's far better to say you sold it for $1, instead of paying the taxes on a free gift.
With this trade, however, it's not a free gift, nor a contest winning, so it'll be taxed like any other income. I don't expect him to have to pay more than $100 to the IRS. License and registration is also probably $150. If anything will kill him, it's trying to get insurance for a $20,000 car, as a minor, who hasn't been driving for 3+ years. I could see that easily being several thousand dollars.
I checked Kelly's Blue Book. A 2006, 25,000 mile, 350Z coupe in Excellent condition is officially ~$22,000. If it's any older or less perfect than that (and you can stretch the just a bit), he can get it, and his 3 iPhones, in under $20,000, without trouble.
Really? I can change the license to something I like more, so long as that license doesn't let anyone make proprietary software?
I can link with differently licensed code, including, perhaps, my own changes?
Again, that's disclaiming all of your rights to it. In fact, public domain is considered disclaiming all right to your code, and yet, the GPL is even more restrictive.
Yes, that's why it's news... The sheer irony of it all.
If Real would have endorsed or adopted such copying capabilities into their player circa 2000, they might have had a chance of staying relevant through the years. Now, when there are hundreds of other programs that can easily do the same thing, it's not even a notable feature, except for the ironic aspect.
Assuming he doesn't have a full-time job we haven't heard about, or a massive trust-fund, taxes are entirely a non-issue. He'd have to earn more than approx. $20,000 in a year to have to pay taxes. A used car is well below that limit. Maybe he'll have to work his way through the form, but that's about it.
You get attribution rights, of course, but other than that, you certainly do lose all other possible rights you'd have to that code, under copyright.
You must make your own code freely available, you aren't allowed to link your own code with GPL-incompatible code, you aren't allowed to stop anyone else from redistributing either source code or binaries of your work, etc., etc. You effectively can't sell your code, because of the above issues.
What rights can you think of that the GPL leaves you?
The BSD license is part of the copyright text.
Completely wrong. You NEVER change an existing copyright notice. You may chose whichever license you want to use, but that absolutely doesn't extend to changing the copyright notice.
You can use BSD licensed code under the GPL, no problem. But on of the very few restrictions the BSD license imposes is that you can't remove the copyright notice, which is what happened.
If some company stripped the GPL license headers from the code they use, even if they were using it, and making changes available as per the GPL, there'd be plenty of public outcry over the license violation.
The BSD license "preserves" no rights, other than the copyright notice itself. On the contrary, it disclaims nearly all rights and restrictions.
The GPL forces everyone who uses that code, to also disclaim all rights to their code. A notable restriction.
I don't think anyone would consider selling your code (that has to be linked to open source code), without allowing your end users to re-sell your work to others without paying you anything, "restricting freedoms" of others, though in the strictest of anarchist senses, it is.
Using BSD-licensed code under the GPL is just fine.
CHANGING OR REMOVING A COPYRIGHT NOTICE is illegal, one of the very few clear restrictions imposed by the BSD license. It's one of the things you just don't ever do.
root# ntpdate us.pool.ntp.org
On Windows XP or better, double-click the time in the task bar and select your web server. For older versions of Windows, NetTime (on sourceforge).
On Unix systems, you can chose between xNTPd with complex setup of ntp.conf, or open ntp and a quick ntpd -S $server.
Yes, that is what libraries do...
And cops on duty exceed the posted speed limit all the time...
Both libraries and cops have specific, legal exceptions to certain laws. As a member of the public, you can't just open your front door, post a sign, and start letting people copy your books.
And music is also very different from books for that matter... Know of any libraries with pay-per-use CD recorders for the public?
You're buying into the MHz myth again, and even more sadly, getting modded up for it. I admit I got sucked into the same thing, TWICE. Once with Cyrix, and again with VIA a while back.
VIA chips are far more comparable to AMD/Intel CPUs at about half the MHz rating. VIA's statements about the relative performance of their chips, borders on fraud. Even Apple in the old PPC days would be envious.
If you want a low powered processor with good performance, I'd strongly suggest a single-core Turion CPU... NewEgg had a 2GHz model for $90 a while back. With a max of 25W, and aggressive power savings for much lower power when idle or just not maxed out, you'd really do even better than any of VIA's solutions, with plenty of performance to spare. And you don't need VIA's expensive proprietary mini motherboards either, just a $50 Socket 754 mobo that can support the lower voltage.
For slightly less performance, look at Geode CPUs. AMD's NX line of Geode CPUs are also very high performance (up to 1750+ and completely wipe the floor with the fastest VIA has to offer) and work in any old Socket A system that can support low voltages. MiniITX Mobo+CPU combo can be found on eBay for $200.
Intel had some good solutions in the past, like their 933MHz LV Pentium 3, but they're getting hard to find, and the price is going way up. Getting a motherboard that will accept their lower power mobile CPUs is just too expensive.