But which of these issues do you blame Linux associated development for? Where Open Office can't do the job, then yeah, I'd blame Open Office. And that is Linux associated. But really is it to blame, or is Microsoft to blame for trying to destroy compatibility?
Well, mostly I agree, but you could have picked a better question than "is Microsoft to blame for trying to destroy compatibility", as it is they are - not only them of course, but they indeed do that.
Writing apps for the Linux Desktop actually can make money. One the apps are there, people will use it. But you need to get the apps there, first. And even companies like Adobe just aren't even capable of writing portable code at all.
I'm, personally, rather glad that new distros keep popping up. I'm glad the world didn't stabilise on Debian or Redhat or Slackware or whatever, since I like Arch. And I'm watching the new Bedrock linux with interest, too.
Same here because I like Debian, I used to like Fedora - formerly known as Red Hat, and I don't know what I will prefer in five years but I do know that not everyone likes Fedora or Debian but something else - and there is likely bound to be a good option for them too available. It's a large part of why people who like Linux like it:)
Nothing wrong, but you are wrong - there are plenty of us who believe that Linux / FOSS has a chance to be beneficial to everyone, and should be too... Now, things aren't nearly as bad as some people here like to think, but there is improvement to make still - to keep Linux hacker friendly but yet to serve average end users even better.
Now there is nothing wrong if you don't want to spend time on that, but still there are those of us who do.
And yes, I am speaking as someone who has successfully shipped prebuild binary linux programs. I built them on one system (ubuntu 10.04) and so far they have proven to work on every other system I've tried them on so far.
This. This thread is based on bullshit FUD claims. I also didn't recognize the need to re-compile programs after slight library or even kernel changes from my early Linux years when large number of programs I wanted still needed to be compiled from sources - only proprietary video drivers and vmware kernel drivers after kernel upgrades.
This babbling here is nothing but FUD.
If the penalty for attracting app developers like you is to make it more Android/Windows/iOS like, then please, stay well away for ever.
Let these industries fall by the wayside so we can build something better and make real progress.
The GP's point is that tearing the patent system down before you have some idea about what to replace it with is moronic, same is true for democratic governments. ie: "Throwing out the baby with the bathwater". Sure cavemen didn't have any concept of intellectual property, but they also shat in the woods and didn't have a global economy that was already heavily dependent on IP.
You would be surprised of how many came up with fire but didn't publish the information because they were afraid others would just steal their idea - and thus fire was really invented only after patent laws were set.
Those are your claims, as I see them in your post. Am I misinterpreting something there?
You sure are, because in your interpretation Apple would not rule nor (samsung|anyone-challenging-or-challenged-by-apple) suck, thus you must be wrong.
None of them, no matter how horrible things happened in pretty much all of them, comes even close to exploitation and destruction of life and culture which happened in Africa - it's a very dark and brutal history even from the views of places like India or Mexico in time of colonization.
In many places nothing was ever given or left behind either, only destroyed. Now an average Somalian, for example, would have zero clue where even to begin with changing things for better, what having never even seen a newspaper, let alone being able to read it - and the war lords stealing from what little people have, they have more pressing things, like staying alive today, than better future of the country to think about. We 1st world people have it good and can easily blame them for not making their now independent countries better - it's hard for us to understand that most of them have zero means to do so.
I agree on that colonization is not cause of all problems of colonized nations, but other than that - man you paint a rosy picture of colonizations effect, it just doesn't fit the before/after situations... And Africa is far worse case than any other of colonization in name of ripping off the land, the people, etc. and total destruction of original culture and civilization. There used to be some awesome civilizations there that were totally wiped away - wiped away like no other place, including those in Mexico.
There is quite a load of sh*t that can be blamed on colonization, including long-term suffering still affecting people today - in India.
You should learn more detailed information on history before, during and after colonization of these places - it's not pretty, and it paints it loud and clear that the suffering it has caused has been very long lasting. Sure, some places can't claim long-term suffering - in the same way that people of Hiroshima can't claim long term suffering.
In fact, according to article, everyone else involved distinguished it from a real threat just fine also - but then the case ended up on big media, everything was blown out of proportions and now we have a bunch of tools defending the system for acting like total jackasses and actually claiming that the threat was realistic.
Reading the article, seems that pretty much nobody took the "threat" seriously. Had it been "sufficiently realistic", I'd assume people would take it a bit more seriously.
The primary reason why it is possible to ensure that the gun control is so incredibly lax in the US, is by harping on the ramifications of the Second Amendment and the idea that it provides some kind of hypothetical balance of power against the US Government. Sure. Try forming a militia, go somewhere and rebel - see how that works out for your group and the crater that would surround it.
But that argument, so incredibly separated from reality, is the primary argument against gun control - and that is possible because the Constitution is turning into something people are supposed to have faith in, in the religious sense, rather than a document that should appeal to rationality.
Ironically, the idea that the Constitution is immutable really does remove freedom of self-determination from the people - subverting the intent of the document.
This must be the most intelligent argument one way or another about the US constitution, thanks:)
Re:I Guess This Is What Happens When I Don't Watch
on
The Case Against DNA
·
· Score: 1
Thanks to fast-paced television crime shows such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, we have come to regard DNA evidence as uncontestable.
Why is an unrealistic American television show being referenced about a case in Liverpool by a UK news source? Is horrible American television that prevalent? I'm not seeing The Mighty Boosh referenced in The New York Times in regards to the legalization of marijuana. And who cares if a television show makes the public think DNA evidence is incontestable? That xenophobic vapid televisions series 24 appears to be proof positive justification for torture and Judge Dread style murder but that should not alter the way our courts rule.
"should not" being the key words here - it's quite obvious that the writer believing that this (TV affecting how people are judged) is happening believes it "should not" either. Is he/she right is another matter entirely, but as far as "should or should not" goes, you're agreeing with him/her.
What was the word used to describe people who go around asking questions such as "can an omnipotent god create a rock so large it can't lift it" again? And I don't mean "jackass", even though very appropriate;)
(oh and some sort of Plasma explosion can in no way shape or form prove that a Big Bang Occurred)
There is no proof that there has been any Beginning. Ever. If there ever was, then what before that? Of course the thought of there not being Beginning nor End hurts our brain just as much.
I don't recall scientist making a claim that Big Bang was beginning of everything and that there wasn't anything before.
Anyway, I empathize with Lot's wife, and like I said, this story made me realize that I don't want to follow a god that is so petty and vindictive that he would do such a heinous thing. If that means I'm going to hell, then so be it. Spending eternity slavishly following such a spiteful creature seems like just another definition of hell.
I wish more christians would think like this - I have no doubt that if there is a good righteous god, it won't pay much respects to christians defending their past life with "I was just following orders."
Slashdot Mirror
*applause*
But which of these issues do you blame Linux associated development for? Where Open Office can't do the job, then yeah, I'd blame Open Office. And that is Linux associated. But really is it to blame, or is Microsoft to blame for trying to destroy compatibility?
Well, mostly I agree, but you could have picked a better question than "is Microsoft to blame for trying to destroy compatibility", as it is they are - not only them of course, but they indeed do that.
Writing apps for the Linux Desktop actually can make money. One the apps are there, people will use it. But you need to get the apps there, first. And even companies like Adobe just aren't even capable of writing portable code at all.
I'm with you.
So?
As much as I hate Apple, despise Microsoft, love Linux, adore BSD, etc...
This post is bullshit. Mostly.
Thank you, I needed this :)
I'm, personally, rather glad that new distros keep popping up. I'm glad the world didn't stabilise on Debian or Redhat or Slackware or whatever, since I like Arch. And I'm watching the new Bedrock linux with interest, too.
Same here because I like Debian, I used to like Fedora - formerly known as Red Hat, and I don't know what I will prefer in five years but I do know that not everyone likes Fedora or Debian but something else - and there is likely bound to be a good option for them too available. It's a large part of why people who like Linux like it :)
Nothing wrong, but you are wrong - there are plenty of us who believe that Linux / FOSS has a chance to be beneficial to everyone, and should be too... Now, things aren't nearly as bad as some people here like to think, but there is improvement to make still - to keep Linux hacker friendly but yet to serve average end users even better.
Now there is nothing wrong if you don't want to spend time on that, but still there are those of us who do.
And yes, I am speaking as someone who has successfully shipped prebuild binary linux programs. I built them on one system (ubuntu 10.04) and so far they have proven to work on every other system I've tried them on so far.
This. This thread is based on bullshit FUD claims. I also didn't recognize the need to re-compile programs after slight library or even kernel changes from my early Linux years when large number of programs I wanted still needed to be compiled from sources - only proprietary video drivers and vmware kernel drivers after kernel upgrades.
This babbling here is nothing but FUD.
If the penalty for attracting app developers like you is to make it more Android/Windows/iOS like, then please, stay well away for ever.
Amen to that.
There's no burden on the user, thanks to repositories, packet managers and dependencies.
It is, in fact, less of a burden than with any other system which don't deliver a proper repository systems for software.
Let these industries fall by the wayside so we can build something better and make real progress.
The GP's point is that tearing the patent system down before you have some idea about what to replace it with is moronic, same is true for democratic governments. ie: "Throwing out the baby with the bathwater". Sure cavemen didn't have any concept of intellectual property, but they also shat in the woods and didn't have a global economy that was already heavily dependent on IP.
You would be surprised of how many came up with fire but didn't publish the information because they were afraid others would just steal their idea - and thus fire was really invented only after patent laws were set.
It's not advancing state of the art, other than perhaps how to cut corners
You mean how to round corners, don't you?
You apple fanbois will babble just any gibberish to claim you're master is right and others are wrong, won't you?
Those are your claims, as I see them in your post. Am I misinterpreting something there?
You sure are, because in your interpretation Apple would not rule nor (samsung|anyone-challenging-or-challenged-by-apple) suck, thus you must be wrong.
Other than that: well said.
None of them, no matter how horrible things happened in pretty much all of them, comes even close to exploitation and destruction of life and culture which happened in Africa - it's a very dark and brutal history even from the views of places like India or Mexico in time of colonization.
In many places nothing was ever given or left behind either, only destroyed. Now an average Somalian, for example, would have zero clue where even to begin with changing things for better, what having never even seen a newspaper, let alone being able to read it - and the war lords stealing from what little people have, they have more pressing things, like staying alive today, than better future of the country to think about.
We 1st world people have it good and can easily blame them for not making their now independent countries better - it's hard for us to understand that most of them have zero means to do so.
I agree on that colonization is not cause of all problems of colonized nations, but other than that - man you paint a rosy picture of colonizations effect, it just doesn't fit the before/after situations... And Africa is far worse case than any other of colonization in name of ripping off the land, the people, etc. and total destruction of original culture and civilization. There used to be some awesome civilizations there that were totally wiped away - wiped away like no other place, including those in Mexico.
There is quite a load of sh*t that can be blamed on colonization, including long-term suffering still affecting people today - in India.
You should learn more detailed information on history before, during and after colonization of these places - it's not pretty, and it paints it loud and clear that the suffering it has caused has been very long lasting. Sure, some places can't claim long-term suffering - in the same way that people of Hiroshima can't claim long term suffering.
Works fine for Finland and other Nordic welfare states, thank you.
We have a wish-to-be-loud minority of nutjobs like you though, but nobody is really taking them seriously.
In fact, according to article, everyone else involved distinguished it from a real threat just fine also - but then the case ended up on big media, everything was blown out of proportions and now we have a bunch of tools defending the system for acting like total jackasses and actually claiming that the threat was realistic.
...and you didn't actually read the article, now did you?
Reading the article, seems that pretty much nobody took the "threat" seriously. Had it been "sufficiently realistic", I'd assume people would take it a bit more seriously.
The primary reason why it is possible to ensure that the gun control is so incredibly lax in the US, is by harping on the ramifications of the Second Amendment and the idea that it provides some kind of hypothetical balance of power against the US Government. Sure. Try forming a militia, go somewhere and rebel - see how that works out for your group and the crater that would surround it.
But that argument, so incredibly separated from reality, is the primary argument against gun control - and that is possible because the Constitution is turning into something people are supposed to have faith in, in the religious sense, rather than a document that should appeal to rationality.
Ironically, the idea that the Constitution is immutable really does remove freedom of self-determination from the people - subverting the intent of the document.
This must be the most intelligent argument one way or another about the US constitution, thanks :)
Thanks to fast-paced television crime shows such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, we have come to regard DNA evidence as uncontestable.
Why is an unrealistic American television show being referenced about a case in Liverpool by a UK news source? Is horrible American television that prevalent? I'm not seeing The Mighty Boosh referenced in The New York Times in regards to the legalization of marijuana. And who cares if a television show makes the public think DNA evidence is incontestable? That xenophobic vapid televisions series 24 appears to be proof positive justification for torture and Judge Dread style murder but that should not alter the way our courts rule.
"should not" being the key words here - it's quite obvious that the writer believing that this (TV affecting how people are judged) is happening believes it "should not" either. Is he/she right is another matter entirely, but as far as "should or should not" goes, you're agreeing with him/her.
You imply that big bang theory claims "The Bang" happened "all or a sudden" without any reason - no such claim.
Religious lunatics are the best when it comes to bashing scientific theories on not even having a clue of what the actual theory is.
What was the word used to describe people who go around asking questions such as "can an omnipotent god create a rock so large it can't lift it" again? And I don't mean "jackass", even though very appropriate ;)
Every Scientist needs to start assuming
In The Beginning [GOD|BANG]
and then go from there.
(oh and some sort of Plasma explosion can in no way shape or form prove that a Big Bang Occurred)
There is no proof that there has been any Beginning. Ever. If there ever was, then what before that? Of course the thought of there not being Beginning nor End hurts our brain just as much.
I don't recall scientist making a claim that Big Bang was beginning of everything and that there wasn't anything before.
Anyway, I empathize with Lot's wife, and like I said, this story made me realize that I don't want to follow a god that is so petty and vindictive that he would do such a heinous thing. If that means I'm going to hell, then so be it. Spending eternity slavishly following such a spiteful creature seems like just another definition of hell.
I wish more christians would think like this - I have no doubt that if there is a good righteous god, it won't pay much respects to christians defending their past life with "I was just following orders."