Why cant any one make a freaking working music player for linux just like winamp classic is?
I have enough karma, so I'll go ahead and say it: People with proper creative vision are repelled by the whole "Linux desktop" morass. I have to wonder if anyone who worked on Amarok 1.x felt they had been undermined; I know a lot of KDE users did.
If the US is doing such a bad job compared to all these countries, why are they still coming here to study and work? The US isn't perfect, but we're not bad, either.
Two factors I can think of off the top of my head:
1) Colleges receive higher tuition payments for international students.
2) US students are raised in a culture of intense distraction.
And what if plutocrats want ongoing massive surveillance? You vote-with-your-money types forget the money is mostly "theirs" not "ours"; I'd say that money-voting mindset is largely how society got into the ditch it is today.
Services exist that are both anonymized and decentralized, two of the required qualities needed to avoid surveillance and attack. I2P-Bote is one of them.
Then you don't pay attention to birth control in our foreign policy, or how the US prefers to play kingmaker within its client/supplier states using far-right religious factions almost exclusively.
One of the main reasons Latin America is moving away from the Catholic Church is that the women there are fed up with being regarded as baby-making machines and want more career choices in life. The trend is no thanks to Uncle Sam.
Internet and iPads notwithstanding, we're not advancing here in the US. For one thing, we seem to think it high-minded to discuss this type of sub-topic without the contributions of philosophy ever occuring to anyone. The rest of you Anglophones are being dragged behind us into the same morass of mawkish religion and consumerism (the worst of both materialism and metaphysics).
As for religion, it has an ability to short-circut the process of questioning and preventing the digestion of new data. As such, its a major contributor to overpopulation and other forms of ecological distress. That won't pan out well over multiple generations in constrained artificial environments.
Physics and sociology would be the major factors with such a space outpost. I think the physics say 'yes' while social factors say 'definite Maybe'.
The wealthy habitually promote the idea of the Earth being endlessly exploitable without fear of enviromental repercussions. They even tell us that pollution = good. So...... how do such people learn to live in a space vessel where limits are glaringly obvious and all waste must be dealt with or else risk their environment quickly becoming nonviable?
Their exploitation mindset may set them up to fail at life in space. Or, they may grow more ecologically conscious before their separatist project becomes set in stone. Or they might internalize some combination of values that allow them to become complete Space Nazis.
...because none of these actors^H^H^H^H^H^Hclowns care about where the factories and the jobs are located. This is about politicians granting favors to extremely rich corporations, who in turn help the politicans pay for their campaigns and give them and their appointees revolving-door jobs.
And may never be. 'BBV' was a common tag on Slashdot for years, and with good reason: There will always be major obstacles to auditing the machines even after you open source the software. Mountains worth of logic still reside within the ICs and there is no way to just pop the hood and see what logic gates affect which bits of output.
IMO, the closest thing anyone has gotten to a properly verifiable computerized voting system is one where the ballots are printed out with the voters' choices in easily readable form and then must be submitted by hand. OTOH, I think this method wastes time and it is better to use pre-printed forms that can be scanned; the voters do not have to wait for delays in printing or the voters checking the printed selections before the submit.
'Computerized voting' is acutally backwards voting with the list of priorities turned upside-down. Let the computers help with scanning the votes after they are made in a sensible way... not have it "help" create the votes themselves and then cough out facsimilies.
This is a sure way to reveal your IP address to an attacker. The only proxy switcher ever deemed safe to use with Tor was TorButton... the rest allowed cache and history-based attacks. Even so, Tor project recommends the entire browser now be customized for Tor and not used for any in-the-clear web access.
I2P encourages bittorrent and has been growing for years. Its also designed to be less exploitable than Tor (its less centralized) and hidden I2P sites generally assume you have Javascript turned off.
Its independent and doesn't slow my browser down like Ghostery does. The latter isn't really written with users in mind... its primary purpose is to give the ad industry a 'self-compliance' fig leaf.
The keyboard failure actually involves a PS/2 keyboard on a USB adapter, connected to a USB hub. I am also using a Colemak (built-in) layout. Waking the system from sleep, just over 50% of the time it seems to allow me to type my password to unlock... however it doesn't respond to Enter and when I use the mouse instead it says the password is incorrect. I have to click on Switch User and enter my password on that screen to get back to my desktop.
Past versions of Ubuntu didn't have this problem (although they were on older systems); QubesOS doesn't have this problem; Windows didn't have this problem. OS X with the same hub and keyboard never had a similar problem.
I can get around the problem. The really rotten thing is that its emblematic of the kind of failures people have on Linux distros with basic user interface hardware... There's always going to be audio, graphics or input that fails on some level.
When I think back at some of the distros that came before Ubuntu, I feel I cannot agree with you there.
Mandrake/Mandriva Xandros SuSE Linspire
What made Ubuntu different was that it raised a fully free (gratis) distro to the hardware-detection prowess that some of the above distros had, and they were one of the first easy distros to have a Live CD. Plus it didn't hurt to have naked people in its marketing publications.
Linux desktops never gained the market share to really support your claim about "a whole lot of people" using it, however.
It behooves us to also consider whether Shuttleworth's track record and vision are impacting the level of enthusiasm. The Ubuntu desktop isn't exactly a breathtaking achievement in the eyes of most computer users. I use it daily, and I like some of the changes they are making in BAU for Linux desktops. But Unity is a dog's breakfast just laying there waiting to slip-up users as soon as they step foot over the threshold.
The other major fault from the standpoint of the consumer is they are still a "distro" and as such have what I call distro-itis. They are expected to sit in front of Ubuntu/Mint/Fedora/etc and think, "Hey I'm using Linux!" Then comes the inevitable schooling on different package formats, staying away from apps not coded for your "flavor"s UI toolkit and DE, and the lovely excuses about regression defects causing visual, audio and even keyboard failures are fault of "upstream, not us". I'm dealing with one such keyboard failure in the Ubuntu 13.04 lock screen now, on a Linux certified Thinkpad no less. (Keyboard failures I've had with Windows and Mac over the decades are absolutely zero.)
If I were to give advice to anyone wanting to create a consumer-level OS using FOSS, I would tell them to regard the existing software base as a "gift" of sorts, but by all means take full responsibility for the vision and finished product. And also banish "Linux" from any marketing description of the OS: When I buy a car, I do not want to see the brand of transmission or fuel injectors mixed-in with the branding of my prospective vehicles... save that for the spec sheets.
1,960 architects and engineers disagree with you and consider the official story to be questionable. Modern steel skyscrapers don't fall because of small fires, even if they burn for hours. The idea that an unplanned mishap would result in such a buiding's freefall--with no internal resistance--is an absurdity.
Yes, and hundreds of scientists have petitioned for getting rid of the evolution theory. You know what's the logical conclusion? You can find a small percentage of loonies anywhere. The mere impossibility of counting them with your fingers doesn't change the fact that they are simply perplexed.
Then, like the debate over evolution, you should ask yourself who is making self-referential arguments. Creationists ritually call evolutionists bad names, too.
The official take on WTC7 boils down to this: 'Despite what engineers are taught, a small fire could bring down that building because that's what we say happened.' Your side not only asserts this logical fallacy, but also resorts to ad hominem with great frequency.
I don't even deny that some of the people who reject the official account of 9-11 are loonies; some people will latch onto virtually any conspiracy theory. But its becoming apparent that there are a great deal more lunatics in the official church of 9-11 who prefer baying for blood and trashing enlightenment principles. So at the very least, its pot meet kettle.
1,960 architects and engineers disagree with you and consider the official story to be questionable. Modern steel skyscrapers don't fall because of small fires, even if they burn for hours. The idea that an unplanned mishap would result in such a buiding's freefall--with no internal resistance--is an absurdity.
1,960 architects and engineers disagree with you and consider the official story to be questionable. Modern steel skyscrapers don't fall because of small fires, even if they burn for hours. The idea that an unplanned mishap would result in such a buiding's freefall--with no internal resistance--is an absurdity.
Slashdot Mirror
Why cant any one make a freaking working music player for linux just like winamp classic is?
I have enough karma, so I'll go ahead and say it: People with proper creative vision are repelled by the whole "Linux desktop" morass. I have to wonder if anyone who worked on Amarok 1.x felt they had been undermined; I know a lot of KDE users did.
If the US is doing such a bad job compared to all these countries, why are they still coming here to study and work? The US isn't perfect, but we're not bad, either.
Two factors I can think of off the top of my head:
1) Colleges receive higher tuition payments for international students.
2) US students are raised in a culture of intense distraction.
I doubt that freeways will be straight enough to let a 600MPH vehicle move properly. Does hyperloop come with inertial dampeners?
And what if plutocrats want ongoing massive surveillance? You vote-with-your-money types forget the money is mostly "theirs" not "ours"; I'd say that money-voting mindset is largely how society got into the ditch it is today.
Services exist that are both anonymized and decentralized, two of the required qualities needed to avoid surveillance and attack. I2P-Bote is one of them.
Then you don't pay attention to birth control in our foreign policy, or how the US prefers to play kingmaker within its client/supplier states using far-right religious factions almost exclusively.
One of the main reasons Latin America is moving away from the Catholic Church is that the women there are fed up with being regarded as baby-making machines and want more career choices in life. The trend is no thanks to Uncle Sam.
Internet and iPads notwithstanding, we're not advancing here in the US. For one thing, we seem to think it high-minded to discuss this type of sub-topic without the contributions of philosophy ever occuring to anyone. The rest of you Anglophones are being dragged behind us into the same morass of mawkish religion and consumerism (the worst of both materialism and metaphysics).
As for religion, it has an ability to short-circut the process of questioning and preventing the digestion of new data. As such, its a major contributor to overpopulation and other forms of ecological distress. That won't pan out well over multiple generations in constrained artificial environments.
Physics and sociology would be the major factors with such a space outpost. I think the physics say 'yes' while social factors say 'definite Maybe'.
The wealthy habitually promote the idea of the Earth being endlessly exploitable without fear of enviromental repercussions. They even tell us that pollution = good. So...... how do such people learn to live in a space vessel where limits are glaringly obvious and all waste must be dealt with or else risk their environment quickly becoming nonviable?
Their exploitation mindset may set them up to fail at life in space. Or, they may grow more ecologically conscious before their separatist project becomes set in stone. Or they might internalize some combination of values that allow them to become complete Space Nazis.
Anti Evil Maid is an implementation of a TPM-based static trusted boot with a primary goal to prevent Evil Maid attacks.
http://theinvisiblethings.blogspot.com/2011/09/anti-evil-maid.html
...because none of these actors^H^H^H^H^H^Hclowns care about where the factories and the jobs are located. This is about politicians granting favors to extremely rich corporations, who in turn help the politicans pay for their campaigns and give them and their appointees revolving-door jobs.
And may never be. 'BBV' was a common tag on Slashdot for years, and with good reason: There will always be major obstacles to auditing the machines even after you open source the software. Mountains worth of logic still reside within the ICs and there is no way to just pop the hood and see what logic gates affect which bits of output.
IMO, the closest thing anyone has gotten to a properly verifiable computerized voting system is one where the ballots are printed out with the voters' choices in easily readable form and then must be submitted by hand. OTOH, I think this method wastes time and it is better to use pre-printed forms that can be scanned; the voters do not have to wait for delays in printing or the voters checking the printed selections before the submit.
'Computerized voting' is acutally backwards voting with the list of priorities turned upside-down. Let the computers help with scanning the votes after they are made in a sensible way... not have it "help" create the votes themselves and then cough out facsimilies.
Or you could just add the TorVM package to QubesOS where all apps are transparently virtualized.
This is a sure way to reveal your IP address to an attacker. The only proxy switcher ever deemed safe to use with Tor was TorButton... the rest allowed cache and history-based attacks. Even so, Tor project recommends the entire browser now be customized for Tor and not used for any in-the-clear web access.
I2P encourages bittorrent and has been growing for years. Its also designed to be less exploitable than Tor (its less centralized) and hidden I2P sites generally assume you have Javascript turned off.
But this is one reason why I2P is so much better than TOR: There is next-to-zero expectation from I2P sites for you to allow Javascript.
OTOH, Javascript is turned on by default in the TORBrowser.
Its independent and doesn't slow my browser down like Ghostery does. The latter isn't really written with users in mind... its primary purpose is to give the ad industry a 'self-compliance' fig leaf.
BTW, that is not from Google Translate ;)
The keyboard failure actually involves a PS/2 keyboard on a USB adapter, connected to a USB hub. I am also using a Colemak (built-in) layout. Waking the system from sleep, just over 50% of the time it seems to allow me to type my password to unlock... however it doesn't respond to Enter and when I use the mouse instead it says the password is incorrect. I have to click on Switch User and enter my password on that screen to get back to my desktop.
Past versions of Ubuntu didn't have this problem (although they were on older systems); QubesOS doesn't have this problem; Windows didn't have this problem. OS X with the same hub and keyboard never had a similar problem.
I can get around the problem. The really rotten thing is that its emblematic of the kind of failures people have on Linux distros with basic user interface hardware... There's always going to be audio, graphics or input that fails on some level.
When I think back at some of the distros that came before Ubuntu, I feel I cannot agree with you there.
Mandrake/Mandriva
Xandros
SuSE
Linspire
What made Ubuntu different was that it raised a fully free (gratis) distro to the hardware-detection prowess that some of the above distros had, and they were one of the first easy distros to have a Live CD. Plus it didn't hurt to have naked people in its marketing publications.
Linux desktops never gained the market share to really support your claim about "a whole lot of people" using it, however.
It behooves us to also consider whether Shuttleworth's track record and vision are impacting the level of enthusiasm. The Ubuntu desktop isn't exactly a breathtaking achievement in the eyes of most computer users. I use it daily, and I like some of the changes they are making in BAU for Linux desktops. But Unity is a dog's breakfast just laying there waiting to slip-up users as soon as they step foot over the threshold.
The other major fault from the standpoint of the consumer is they are still a "distro" and as such have what I call distro-itis. They are expected to sit in front of Ubuntu/Mint/Fedora/etc and think, "Hey I'm using Linux!" Then comes the inevitable schooling on different package formats, staying away from apps not coded for your "flavor"s UI toolkit and DE, and the lovely excuses about regression defects causing visual, audio and even keyboard failures are fault of "upstream, not us". I'm dealing with one such keyboard failure in the Ubuntu 13.04 lock screen now, on a Linux certified Thinkpad no less. (Keyboard failures I've had with Windows and Mac over the decades are absolutely zero.)
If I were to give advice to anyone wanting to create a consumer-level OS using FOSS, I would tell them to regard the existing software base as a "gift" of sorts, but by all means take full responsibility for the vision and finished product. And also banish "Linux" from any marketing description of the OS: When I buy a car, I do not want to see the brand of transmission or fuel injectors mixed-in with the branding of my prospective vehicles... save that for the spec sheets.
1,960 architects and engineers disagree with you and consider the official story to be questionable. Modern steel skyscrapers don't fall because of small fires, even if they burn for hours. The idea that an unplanned mishap would result in such a buiding's freefall--with no internal resistance--is an absurdity.
Hello ModTroll...
I should have said "TrollMods". :)
1,960 architects and engineers disagree with you
Yes, and hundreds of scientists have petitioned for getting rid of the evolution theory. You know what's the logical conclusion? You can find a small percentage of loonies anywhere. The mere impossibility of counting them with your fingers doesn't change the fact that they are simply perplexed.
Then, like the debate over evolution, you should ask yourself who is making self-referential arguments. Creationists ritually call evolutionists bad names, too.
The official take on WTC7 boils down to this: 'Despite what engineers are taught, a small fire could bring down that building because that's what we say happened.' Your side not only asserts this logical fallacy, but also resorts to ad hominem with great frequency.
I don't even deny that some of the people who reject the official account of 9-11 are loonies; some people will latch onto virtually any conspiracy theory. But its becoming apparent that there are a great deal more lunatics in the official church of 9-11 who prefer baying for blood and trashing enlightenment principles. So at the very least, its pot meet kettle.
1,960 architects and engineers disagree with you and consider the official story to be questionable. Modern steel skyscrapers don't fall because of small fires, even if they burn for hours. The idea that an unplanned mishap would result in such a buiding's freefall--with no internal resistance--is an absurdity.
Hello ModTroll...
1,960 architects and engineers disagree with you and consider the official story to be questionable. Modern steel skyscrapers don't fall because of small fires, even if they burn for hours. The idea that an unplanned mishap would result in such a buiding's freefall--with no internal resistance--is an absurdity.
Why would someone who is already retired or close to retirement want their employer to start a fund for employees who haven't even been hired yet?
Why would a postal employee with years of service ahead want to see service cut back because a crisis was manufactured in the above manner?
Its completely irrational to support such a scheme, unless your goal was to undermine public services and send the business to greedy corporations.