Are you serious or are you trolling? Because if your serious, that's the most offensive thing I've seen on Slashdot, and I've seen a LOT of offensive shit here.
Race is a myth. There is as much genetic variation between individuals within a so-called race as there is between races.
Shared libraries are either bundled with the OS (with guarantees covering how the versioning will work), Right. So, application A is developed for system library libFoo1.2.3. But the library has a bug in it. So app A developers write a work around. Now, the system library is patched in an update. Application B is written for this new version, without the workaround. Which do you run, A or B? Because you can't run both. All you've done here is to show your ignorance of the issue. And you don't help matters by claiming "Waste lots of memory" is an answer. Either you are using statically linked libraries and wasting memory, or, even though applications might have bundled shared libraries, if you get two applications that have different versions of the same bundled library, you have problems when you try to run them both because only the first version loaded will be used.
The funny thing is that you think the Mac way of doing things is somehow new or different, and therefore the problems can't happen on a Mac, when all you've done is described the way everyone has been doing things for decades.
Funny how you make up your own definition of socialism to include anything you don't like, and exclude anything you do. Fire departments, police, the roads, the military, farm subsidies, military subsidies: which of these is socialism? Where do you actually draw the line?
Yes, I've used a mac. And libraries are versioned under all operating systems. That doesn't always help. Sometimes minor version numbers aren't minor. The interface changes (when it shouldn't for a minor number change). Old bugs are fixed, breaking things that depend on them. New bugs are introduced.
Bundles are great, but we are talking about shared libraries! If each package has its own version of the library, they aren't shared, are they? If each program loads it's own version and doesn't look at what is already loaded, that's a shared library in name only. If it does look at the loaded version, then you have potential incompatibility issues. Which program starts first determines what version is loaded, and that can lead to really, really gnarly bugs.
You obviously don't understand how libraries work, and are spouting the Apple line, "It's all solved! There are no issues! Bundles! Bundles! BUNDLES!" Understand how things work before spouting your fanboyisms.
And I never will again. He's as bad as the people he is criticizing, if not worse. He does exactly what he accuses the "Microsoft shills" of doing. From another article on the site: "I explained that he could just drag the application to the trash, and that in the Mac OS there are no DLL files to worry about."
Riiight. Mac OS doesn't have libraries. There are no possible library mismatch issues on Mac OS. Okay, buddy, whatever.
How is this going to protect you from sharks with fricken' lasers on their heads? Or even ill-tempered sea bass with lasers on their heads. Oh, wait, this scheme isn't designed with sea bass in mind. Or sharks. Or keyloggers. It's designed to protect against cross site scripting.
Right, this only applies to them, people who currently have press credentials. If you don't have press credentials and are not seeking them, this does not impact you. I suppose they could say, "No one can blog in our games." But that isn't what they are saying here. They are saying, "If you have press credentials, and want to keep them, there will be limits to the live blogging." Pure bastardism, but well within their rights.
Well I felt like an idiot because I looked, and sure enough there was a post above mine making the same point. It wasn't there when I posted the reply, I swear.
A car analogy is automatically redundant nowadays? You know you are going to get your mod privileges revoked in meta mod with petty moderations like that, and you can't touch my karma; I was here before the cap.
This is like bringing your car in for repair with a body in the trunk. Part of a repair person's job is to look things over, if they stumble on something blatantly illegal while doing so, well, don't be so stupid.
Not only are Clippy and Bob so incredibly horrible that they will be remembered forever in the annals of stupid computing, Microsoft stole the ideas behind them from Brenda Laurel, and got them all wrong.
It works, what can I say. It has worked since 800BC, and many people the world over find immense value in the system. You can say, "It doesn't sound like it would work," But guess what? It not only has worked for billions of people throughout history, you can see if it works for yourself.
I'm basing this on a great book by Temple Gradin, Animals in Translation. Temple is an animal behaviorist and severely autistic. Her autism means her neo-cortex is the same size as ours, but it isn't well connected to the rest of her brain. Therefore, she experiences the world in a way closer to how animals do, with their smaller neo-cortex. She doesn't have the same emotional triggers due to pain that she hears other people talking about. She feels it, but differently, less intense. She also cites studies, MRI and other types, that seem to back up her experiences.
So no, it's not a massive assumption, but thanks for giving me the opportunity to present my evidence.
I was being a bit confrontational, I'll admit. But you misunderstand me. Escape is not the answer, that's another form of desire. And hope is just a bandage, it does not solve anything. I don't need to hope, I have the present moment, in all it's pain and glory, confusion and wonder, anger and joy. These things exist, why should I judge them? In language perhaps more familiar to you, who am I to judge God's plan? God created this moment, whatever it is, who am I to turn down that gift? Yet that's what we do when we say, "This is good, and this other thing is bad." Take joy, feel pain, but don't judge. If you can fully inhabit, feel, experience this moment, without judging or holding back, then you are in Heaven, a.k.a Nirvana. But you, the ego self that mistakenly feels competent to judge God's works, that part must die to get there. I hope that way of wording it is a little more accessible.
You don't get it at all. And I'm now tired of pointing at the moon, saying "Moon!" and having a bunch of nitwits point at my finger and go, "Moon?" No, that's not the moon, it's my damn finger.
Buddhists have fought oppression with every fiber of their beings, going so far as to starve themselves to death or burn themselves alive to fight it. Buddhism is founded on the idea that suffering exists but there is a way out of it. You are deliberately twisting the idea into something it is not in order to justify your attachment to your ego. Pain would be 'real' even in a simulation, to the inhabitants.
You have no idea if I experience red the way you do, and no way to find out. You can ask me, but what would my answers really mean? Maybe I am a philosophical zombie, with no internal experience whatsoever. You have no way of knowing. A robot could be built that showed identical signs to the experience of read, equating it with fire, passion, etc. when questioned, and doing everything else humans do when experiencing red. But would it have internal experiences? We don't know.
But that is all beside the point. Those internal experiences exist. But there need not be a conscious observer having them. They just exist. The 'you' that you think is observing them is just another observation.
Extreme bodily sensations are still unpleasant. I am talking about the emotional component of pain. That is suffering, and that is what I think animals don't have. We feel powerless over our pain, and that powerlessness over something so simple confronts our egos in a way that there is no defense against.
Meditation can also give you some degree of control over not just the emotions, but the sensations themselves. The mind can learn to dissociate from the sensory inputs.
I think most Buddhists gain pleasure from as many things as they can, including breathing and just being. Most Buddhists I have known have been actively engaged in making the world a better place. Some have specifically told me that meditation helps them focus and do more with their limited time to help the world. I think one of the long term goals of Buddhism is to build a Utopian world, because that would reduce suffering, and help people towards enlightenment. Easier to worry about enlightenment on a full belly, after all.
I try to manage positive and negative emotions. It's easy to become attached to positive feelings, and this does more than create negative feelings in their absence. It creates a compulsion to work for those positive feelings. I relish the good feelings but try not to let them rule me, and motivate myself based on what I believe rather than what I feel.
But I don't try to control my emotions, per se. Buddhism has a phrase for that, "Like trying to stir the dirt out of muddy water." if the water is muddy, leave it alone and the dirt will settle out. Trying to control feelings means you are placing value judgments on the moment.
Basically, your value judgments made in the past are your past life karma. That karma determines your present life, the present moment, Meaning, for example, I have chosen to feel negatively in past situations. A similar situation arises. I am predisposed to feel negatively about it, and if I don't check that impulse, it only reinforces things. The next time a similar situation comes around, I will have slightly less freedom of choice in how to view it. In the "karma metaphor," my choices in my past lives (individual moments) determine my present life karma, and my choices in my present life determine my future karma.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you serious or are you trolling? Because if your serious, that's the most offensive thing I've seen on Slashdot, and I've seen a LOT of offensive shit here.
Race is a myth. There is as much genetic variation between individuals within a so-called race as there is between races.
The funny thing is that you think the Mac way of doing things is somehow new or different, and therefore the problems can't happen on a Mac, when all you've done is described the way everyone has been doing things for decades.
Funny how you make up your own definition of socialism to include anything you don't like, and exclude anything you do. Fire departments, police, the roads, the military, farm subsidies, military subsidies: which of these is socialism? Where do you actually draw the line?
Yes, I've used a mac. And libraries are versioned under all operating systems. That doesn't always help. Sometimes minor version numbers aren't minor. The interface changes (when it shouldn't for a minor number change). Old bugs are fixed, breaking things that depend on them. New bugs are introduced.
Bundles are great, but we are talking about shared libraries! If each package has its own version of the library, they aren't shared, are they? If each program loads it's own version and doesn't look at what is already loaded, that's a shared library in name only. If it does look at the loaded version, then you have potential incompatibility issues. Which program starts first determines what version is loaded, and that can lead to really, really gnarly bugs.
You obviously don't understand how libraries work, and are spouting the Apple line, "It's all solved! There are no issues! Bundles! Bundles! BUNDLES!" Understand how things work before spouting your fanboyisms.
Where the heck have you been recently? Anyway, glad you are back. More Mars press releases, please!
And I never will again. He's as bad as the people he is criticizing, if not worse. He does exactly what he accuses the "Microsoft shills" of doing. From another article on the site: "I explained that he could just drag the application to the trash, and that in the Mac OS there are no DLL files to worry about."
Riiight. Mac OS doesn't have libraries. There are no possible library mismatch issues on Mac OS. Okay, buddy, whatever.
How is this going to protect you from sharks with fricken' lasers on their heads? Or even ill-tempered sea bass with lasers on their heads. Oh, wait, this scheme isn't designed with sea bass in mind. Or sharks. Or keyloggers. It's designed to protect against cross site scripting.
Right, this only applies to them, people who currently have press credentials. If you don't have press credentials and are not seeking them, this does not impact you. I suppose they could say, "No one can blog in our games." But that isn't what they are saying here. They are saying, "If you have press credentials, and want to keep them, there will be limits to the live blogging." Pure bastardism, but well within their rights.
Well I felt like an idiot because I looked, and sure enough there was a post above mine making the same point. It wasn't there when I posted the reply, I swear.
A car analogy is automatically redundant nowadays? You know you are going to get your mod privileges revoked in meta mod with petty moderations like that, and you can't touch my karma; I was here before the cap.
This is like bringing your car in for repair with a body in the trunk. Part of a repair person's job is to look things over, if they stumble on something blatantly illegal while doing so, well, don't be so stupid.
Not only are Clippy and Bob so incredibly horrible that they will be remembered forever in the annals of stupid computing, Microsoft stole the ideas behind them from Brenda Laurel, and got them all wrong.
Thanks. Wish you had posted with a moniker or something instead of AC.
This only applies to the big boys who want to receive press credentials. This does not apply to some fan blogging from the stands.
I had a friend who sent his cat to the vet with a pointer. Silly beast ran full speed into a wall chasing it.
They want everyone to pay every time they listen to or even think of a song. Hookers and blow aren't cheap.
I think I see what you are saying. In a way, the ego is separate, because it sees the world in terms of symbols, not as it is. Something like that?
It works, what can I say. It has worked since 800BC, and many people the world over find immense value in the system. You can say, "It doesn't sound like it would work," But guess what? It not only has worked for billions of people throughout history, you can see if it works for yourself.
I'm basing this on a great book by Temple Gradin, Animals in Translation. Temple is an animal behaviorist and severely autistic. Her autism means her neo-cortex is the same size as ours, but it isn't well connected to the rest of her brain. Therefore, she experiences the world in a way closer to how animals do, with their smaller neo-cortex. She doesn't have the same emotional triggers due to pain that she hears other people talking about. She feels it, but differently, less intense. She also cites studies, MRI and other types, that seem to back up her experiences.
So no, it's not a massive assumption, but thanks for giving me the opportunity to present my evidence.
I was being a bit confrontational, I'll admit. But you misunderstand me. Escape is not the answer, that's another form of desire. And hope is just a bandage, it does not solve anything. I don't need to hope, I have the present moment, in all it's pain and glory, confusion and wonder, anger and joy. These things exist, why should I judge them? In language perhaps more familiar to you, who am I to judge God's plan? God created this moment, whatever it is, who am I to turn down that gift? Yet that's what we do when we say, "This is good, and this other thing is bad." Take joy, feel pain, but don't judge. If you can fully inhabit, feel, experience this moment, without judging or holding back, then you are in Heaven, a.k.a Nirvana. But you, the ego self that mistakenly feels competent to judge God's works, that part must die to get there. I hope that way of wording it is a little more accessible.
I'll shake my cane at them while the rest of you hightail it back to my lawn. Quickly now! My boring pointless stories can only hold them for so long!
You don't get it at all. And I'm now tired of pointing at the moon, saying "Moon!" and having a bunch of nitwits point at my finger and go, "Moon?" No, that's not the moon, it's my damn finger.
Buddhists have fought oppression with every fiber of their beings, going so far as to starve themselves to death or burn themselves alive to fight it. Buddhism is founded on the idea that suffering exists but there is a way out of it. You are deliberately twisting the idea into something it is not in order to justify your attachment to your ego. Pain would be 'real' even in a simulation, to the inhabitants.
You have no idea if I experience red the way you do, and no way to find out. You can ask me, but what would my answers really mean? Maybe I am a philosophical zombie, with no internal experience whatsoever. You have no way of knowing. A robot could be built that showed identical signs to the experience of read, equating it with fire, passion, etc. when questioned, and doing everything else humans do when experiencing red. But would it have internal experiences? We don't know.
But that is all beside the point. Those internal experiences exist. But there need not be a conscious observer having them. They just exist. The 'you' that you think is observing them is just another observation.
Extreme bodily sensations are still unpleasant. I am talking about the emotional component of pain. That is suffering, and that is what I think animals don't have. We feel powerless over our pain, and that powerlessness over something so simple confronts our egos in a way that there is no defense against.
Meditation can also give you some degree of control over not just the emotions, but the sensations themselves. The mind can learn to dissociate from the sensory inputs.
I think most Buddhists gain pleasure from as many things as they can, including breathing and just being. Most Buddhists I have known have been actively engaged in making the world a better place. Some have specifically told me that meditation helps them focus and do more with their limited time to help the world. I think one of the long term goals of Buddhism is to build a Utopian world, because that would reduce suffering, and help people towards enlightenment. Easier to worry about enlightenment on a full belly, after all.
I try to manage positive and negative emotions. It's easy to become attached to positive feelings, and this does more than create negative feelings in their absence. It creates a compulsion to work for those positive feelings. I relish the good feelings but try not to let them rule me, and motivate myself based on what I believe rather than what I feel.
But I don't try to control my emotions, per se. Buddhism has a phrase for that, "Like trying to stir the dirt out of muddy water." if the water is muddy, leave it alone and the dirt will settle out. Trying to control feelings means you are placing value judgments on the moment.
Basically, your value judgments made in the past are your past life karma. That karma determines your present life, the present moment, Meaning, for example, I have chosen to feel negatively in past situations. A similar situation arises. I am predisposed to feel negatively about it, and if I don't check that impulse, it only reinforces things. The next time a similar situation comes around, I will have slightly less freedom of choice in how to view it. In the "karma metaphor," my choices in my past lives (individual moments) determine my present life karma, and my choices in my present life determine my future karma.