Yeah just look at all of my adoring fans. You render your own lousy point moot, because so far you've been the only one responding to me, and you're just arguing in favor of huge media conglomerates.
You don't see any Republican politicians out there fighting for net neutrality, and when a Democrat does, the Republicans can't seem to come up with anything but personal insults and FUD to make their case. Corporate stooges, every last one of them.
Just installed it, having the same concern, and am happy to report that the program doesn't look obviously bloated (just some new options for the firewall), and it's consuming about the same amount of RAM as before. On my machine it usually consumed 4600K, and not it's at about 4800K. Not bad at all, really.
Yeah the OP didn't say it was bad, just that it had "little to no value to end users". Another person upthread claimed this will "kill the project". I realize he didn't say "This is bad", but saying it will "kill the project" or offers "little to no value", isn't exactly merely "not really caring".
"In accordance with the Debian Social Contract, we acknowledge that some users require the use of works that do not conform to the DFSG and that those works might include non-free firmware bits. For the time being, we have added to the "non-free" area of our archives alternative installation images and additional packages for Debian Squeeze, that include non-free firmware bits needed to enable specific pieces of hardware. They are not part of Debian, they should be looked for explicitly by interested users, and we cannot support them to the same extent of Free firmware as we do not have access to the corresponding source code. We encourage hardware manufacturers to release only DFSG-free firmware and we cannot accept other kind of firmware as part of Debian."
Hawaii has released his birth certificate, moron. The one they released is the exact same copy anyone born in Hawaii would get if they requested one. FFS the Republican governor of Hawaii even said this is a silly non-issue. For you to believe this bullshit, you also have to believe that they put his birth announcement in the local paper, as part of their grand conspiracy to get the first black man elected President. It doesn't pass the smell test. It's bullshit. You're an idiot for actually believing it. Birthers don's deserve a seat at the table, because your questions come from a place of irrational stupidity!
Yes I would, because that's exactly what they have thrown their support toward. If they wanted to end those things, they would have. You're making the mistake of attaching your personal self to a political party. Of course not all rank-and-file Democratic voters want those things, but the people who actually run the party do, so thus, the Democrats support that crap.
br.
Political parties stand for the things they actually do. If you disagree with what the Republicans stand for, why support them? Same goes for Democrats!
Well let's take an issue that actually has been debated on Fox News. The issue of Obama's birth. The people who "get to decide" that one side of this "debate" are wrong, are the people who look at the evidence, and form their opinions on where the facts lead them. The ones that proclaim, without any evidence, that Obama is a Kenyan citizen are wrong. Period. There is no nuance here. There isn't two equally valid sides that can debate in good faith. One set of people base their opinions on the evidence, and the others just make shit up.
There are actually facts, in the real world. You're playing a semantics game that isn't rooted in common sense. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.
This might be surprising, but not every issue has two equally valid sides to debate from. If one side is just wrong, it doesn't deserve a voice in a debate. Is it bad to deny creationists a seat at the table when it comes to discussing evolutionary biology?
When "some of the people" is the people in charge of the party, and all of their prominent politicians, including Governors and their Presidential candidate, I think it's fair to say "the Republicans".
Does this mean they'll start focusing on story and character development, instead of special effects now? Wait this is hollywood, prepare for more remakes of movies made 15 years ago, "reboots" of movies made 5 years ago, and plenty of sequels.
I think an insurance mandate is. I think universal healthcare (single payer) is the way forward. I was against insurance mandates in the 90's, and I still am.
Feel better? It always helps me to argue strawmen with myself too. The fact is that the Democrats are as big as hypocrites as the Republicans. That's why they now support mandates after opposing them for a decade. Hence why my subject said "Partisan politics sucks"...
The Emergency Room isn't the best way to provide health care to all, and under "Obamacare" (which was called RomneyCare back when the Republicans loved this style of plan) you can still go to the emergency room if you need it.
Anyone with a memory better than a gold fish can laugh with me as I recall that insurance mandates were originally the Republican plan. Republicans loved the idea of a mandate, and Democrats hated it.
Now? The Democrats folded like a cheap suit, gave the Republicans what they had been calling for for 15 years, and suddenly the Republicans hate the idea of a mandate.
You're ignoring the fact that the people who lobbied for the DMCA to be enshrined in law were companies like Sony!
They don't want a truly free market, because no one forces them to use DRM and yet they do it on their own. You can whine about "tyrannical" legislation, however you're blaming only part of the problem. I don't think companies like Sony were lobbying against the DMCA...
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah just look at all of my adoring fans. You render your own lousy point moot, because so far you've been the only one responding to me, and you're just arguing in favor of huge media conglomerates.
Only kooks dismiss net neutrality because they hate Al Franken. Lay off the Fox News.
You don't see any Republican politicians out there fighting for net neutrality, and when a Democrat does, the Republicans can't seem to come up with anything but personal insults and FUD to make their case. Corporate stooges, every last one of them.
Just installed it, having the same concern, and am happy to report that the program doesn't look obviously bloated (just some new options for the firewall), and it's consuming about the same amount of RAM as before. On my machine it usually consumed 4600K, and not it's at about 4800K. Not bad at all, really.
Should we not allow other minorities in the military because there are racists in it? Your argument is tired and hollow.
Yeah the OP didn't say it was bad, just that it had "little to no value to end users". Another person upthread claimed this will "kill the project". I realize he didn't say "This is bad", but saying it will "kill the project" or offers "little to no value", isn't exactly merely "not really caring".
Yep it's totally dead. It can't boot, and no one wants to waste time on it.
http://www.archhurd.org/
Oh wait... Nevermind...
It could also be said that the only people who will look at this as a bad thing are ideologues...
From the Debian site:
"In accordance with the Debian Social Contract, we acknowledge that some users require the use of works that do not conform to the DFSG and that those works might include non-free firmware bits. For the time being, we have added to the "non-free" area of our archives alternative installation images and additional packages for Debian Squeeze, that include non-free firmware bits needed to enable specific pieces of hardware. They are not part of Debian, they should be looked for explicitly by interested users, and we cannot support them to the same extent of Free firmware as we do not have access to the corresponding source code. We encourage hardware manufacturers to release only DFSG-free firmware and we cannot accept other kind of firmware as part of Debian."
The sky is, in fact, not falling...
Hawaii has released his birth certificate, moron. The one they released is the exact same copy anyone born in Hawaii would get if they requested one. FFS the Republican governor of Hawaii even said this is a silly non-issue. For you to believe this bullshit, you also have to believe that they put his birth announcement in the local paper, as part of their grand conspiracy to get the first black man elected President. It doesn't pass the smell test. It's bullshit. You're an idiot for actually believing it. Birthers don's deserve a seat at the table, because your questions come from a place of irrational stupidity!
Yes I would, because that's exactly what they have thrown their support toward. If they wanted to end those things, they would have. You're making the mistake of attaching your personal self to a political party. Of course not all rank-and-file Democratic voters want those things, but the people who actually run the party do, so thus, the Democrats support that crap.
br. Political parties stand for the things they actually do. If you disagree with what the Republicans stand for, why support them? Same goes for Democrats!
Well let's take an issue that actually has been debated on Fox News. The issue of Obama's birth. The people who "get to decide" that one side of this "debate" are wrong, are the people who look at the evidence, and form their opinions on where the facts lead them. The ones that proclaim, without any evidence, that Obama is a Kenyan citizen are wrong. Period. There is no nuance here. There isn't two equally valid sides that can debate in good faith. One set of people base their opinions on the evidence, and the others just make shit up.
There are actually facts, in the real world. You're playing a semantics game that isn't rooted in common sense. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.
This might be surprising, but not every issue has two equally valid sides to debate from. If one side is just wrong, it doesn't deserve a voice in a debate. Is it bad to deny creationists a seat at the table when it comes to discussing evolutionary biology?
When "some of the people" is the people in charge of the party, and all of their prominent politicians, including Governors and their Presidential candidate, I think it's fair to say "the Republicans".
Does this mean they'll start focusing on story and character development, instead of special effects now? Wait this is hollywood, prepare for more remakes of movies made 15 years ago, "reboots" of movies made 5 years ago, and plenty of sequels.
It's not my fault you're ignorant about Republicans. Look up RomneyCare sometime. Or better yet, look up the Bob Dole health care plan of the 90's.
I think an insurance mandate is. I think universal healthcare (single payer) is the way forward. I was against insurance mandates in the 90's, and I still am.
Feel better? It always helps me to argue strawmen with myself too. The fact is that the Democrats are as big as hypocrites as the Republicans. That's why they now support mandates after opposing them for a decade. Hence why my subject said "Partisan politics sucks"...
The Emergency Room isn't the best way to provide health care to all, and under "Obamacare" (which was called RomneyCare back when the Republicans loved this style of plan) you can still go to the emergency room if you need it.
Anyone with a memory better than a gold fish can laugh with me as I recall that insurance mandates were originally the Republican plan. Republicans loved the idea of a mandate, and Democrats hated it.
Now? The Democrats folded like a cheap suit, gave the Republicans what they had been calling for for 15 years, and suddenly the Republicans hate the idea of a mandate.
I'm sticking with Firefox. I trust the Mozilla Foundation more than I trust Google.
Iran proved that.
You're ignoring the fact that the people who lobbied for the DMCA to be enshrined in law were companies like Sony!
They don't want a truly free market, because no one forces them to use DRM and yet they do it on their own. You can whine about "tyrannical" legislation, however you're blaming only part of the problem. I don't think companies like Sony were lobbying against the DMCA...
So then don't use a rolling release, if it doesn't suit your needs! Those of us running desktop systems, can still have our fun, right?
This is news for nerds, not news for morons who reject science...